EXPOSÉ ON VARIANT PROPHETIC MISUNDERSTANDINGS  

BY JEFF PIPPENGER

Jeff,   Sometime would you comment on the work of M_ B_? I find it thought provoking, but should I? K.F.-CA

Dear KF.,- I reject the conclusions of M_ B_ and the other similar teachers of the future application of the prophetic periods found in Daniel 12. You should reject their teachings as well. M_ B_ and others of similar ilk attempt to address the timelines of Daniel 12 in one of two ways. They reapply them or present them as a future application. There is a distinction between these two approaches. Their claims in either case, are directly opposed to the Bible, the Spirit of Prophecy and the pioneers.

Notice what Sister White says about Daniel 12: 

WE MUST STUDY CAREFULLY THE OLD WAYMARKS

"I have been deeply impressed by the Spirit of God that we are to pass through severe trials. Everyone's faith will be tested. We must study carefully the old waymarks. These experiences in the past are to be revived. Daniel is to stand out conspicuously with the Revelation given to John on the Isle of Patmos.

"Daniel 12. Read attentively this chapter. Hosea 4: 1.

'Hear the word of the Lord, ye children of Israel: for the Lord hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land, because there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land. By swearing, and lying, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery, they break out, and blood toucheth blood. Therefore shall the land mourn, and everyone that dwelleth therein shall languish, with the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of heaven; yea, the fishes of the sea also shall be taken away. Yet let no man strive, nor reprove another: for thy people are as they that strive with the priest. Therefore shalt thou fall in the day, and the prophet also shall fall with thee in the night, and I will destroy thy mother. My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.' Hosea 4: 1-6.

"There is work to be done. Who will take it up?

"In our experience in these last days we shall meet every conceivable thing that Satan can invent to make of none effect the established points of our faith that have been, in the providence of God, so greatly blessed. These foundation principles are to be held fast unto the end. Read the Word of God." Manuscript Releases, volume 22, 220.

What is the counsel in this passage? It is in reference to studying "the old waymarks." It is about holding onto the "foundation principles." It is a warning that Satan will attempt to remove "the established points of our faith that have been, in the providence of God, so greatly blessed." This warning is about God's "controversy" with His people, and the "controversy" is because His people have" rejected knowledge". The problem addressed in the passage is not about refusing "new light" - it is about rejecting" old light". And the focus of the warning is set within Daniel chapter 12.

Those who place the time prophecies of Daniel 12, at the end of the world are removing the old waymarks, attacking the foundation principles, and seeking to make of none effect- the established points of our faith. This is the work M_ B_ and others are doing!

There are basically two approaches used by those who attempt to apply the timelines of Daniel 12 at the end of the world. Each premise has its own peculiar characteristics.

  Number one is "reapplication": To state that, "the pioneers were correct in their understanding of Daniel 12, but there is to be a second application to these time prophecies."

Very few time setters truly attempt this approach. The reason is two-fold. First, if you truly accept the pioneer position, you recognize, as the pioneers did, that the prophetic periods of Daniel 12 are not subject to reapplication. The second reason this approach would be difficult is in the Biblical rules associated with a true repetition of history or prophecy. We have been instructed that histories and prophecies may repeat, but in so doing all the characteristics of the first fulfillment must be duplicated figuratively, sequentially and mathematically in the second fulfillment.

If you uphold the pioneer position on the timelines in Daniel 12 and then reapply them at the end of the world - they must start at the same figurative point in time in relationship to one another, as was identified in the first fulfillment. The relationships of the truths contained in the timelines would also need to correspond to one another, In William Miller's Rules of Prophetic Interpretation  he states it this way in rule 13:

"To know whether we have the true historical event for the fulfillment of a prophecy. If you find every word of the prophecy (after the figures are understood) is literally fulfilled, then you may know that your history is the true event. But if one word lacks a fulfillment, then you must look for another event, or wait its future development. For God takes care that history and prophecy doth agree, so that the true believing children of God may never be ashamed."

As an example, the pioneers understood that the 1290 and the 1335 started in 508 A.D. The 1260 started in 538 A.D. The 1260 and the 1290 ended together in 1798, while the 1335 ended in 1843. M_ B_'s material changes this sequence. She starts the 1335 alone, then 75 days later she begins the 1260 and 1290 together. This has the 1335 and the 1260 ending at the same time and the 1290 ending 30 days later. Her discrepancies rule out a "reapplication". She also changes the figurative meanings of the terms involved. This is one example why she takes the "future application" approach, instead of the "reapplication" approach when addressing Daniel 12.

Number two is "future application": To state that, "the pioneers (including Ellen White, though usually not openly stated) were wrong about Daniel 12." (Of course, those who take this approach try to demonstrate the pioneers and Ellen White were wrong in such a way as to make it appear as if they still uphold the pioneers and Ellen White.)

THE 1843 CHART

Ellen White upheld the pioneer position on Daniel 12, and all one needs to do in order to ascertain the pioneer position on Daniel 12 is simply study the 1843 pioneer chart. [Future for America has these charts available in English, Spanish, and soon in Russian.] All three timelines of Daniel 12 are represented on the chart. M_ B_ spends a great deal of time and effort to destroy the integrity of the information on the 1843 chart. In fact, it is obvious when your read her material that if the information about the timelines of Daniel 12 represented on the 1843 chart is accurate, then her ideas are erroneous. Her attack on the 1843 chart is primarily built around three items, though there are several interconnected points beyond these three.

One of the three points of her attack on the chart is to first point out that there are errors in the chart, (and there are errors) then, state that the information about the timelines of Daniel 12 on the chart were some of those errors.

Another point of attack is the pioneer understanding of what the" daily" in the book of Daniel symbolized. She attacks this point by saying she agrees with the pioneer understanding, but then amazingly, she defines the pioneer position on the "daily" differently than they believed. I believe this technique is effective, because very few in Adventism understand the pioneer position on the "daily". Generally, even if they know the pioneer definition of the" daily", they do not recognize the strength of the pioneer position. Satan does. This is why the "daily" is the most controversial and wrongly understood item of Adventist prophetic understanding.

A further attack on the 1843 chart is a second profound misrepresentation. She insists that pioneers arrived at the year 508 A.D. as the fulfillment of the" daily" by first calculating the 2300 day prophecy incorrectly, as the pioneers initially did. They initially arrived with the year 1843 as the fulfillment of Daniel 8:14. She then states that based upon the wrong date of 1843 Miller simply subtracted 1335 from that date and arrived at 508 A.D. He then began a search for some historic event that he could use to prop up his random choice of the year 508. Her representation on this subject is as inaccurate as her teaching that the pioneers believed as she does concerning the" daily”.

POINT ONE-THE ERRORS

 Concerning the 1843 chart, we are told in Early Writings 74:

"I have seen that the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and that it should not be altered; that the figures were as He wanted them; that His hand was over and hid a mistake in some of the figures, so that none could see it, until His hand was removed."

Identifying the timelines of Daniel 12 on the 1843 pioneer chart as erroneous is an important point as M_ B_ presents her fallacies. She writes,

"An inspired prophet declared that on that chart [1843] there 'was a mistake in some figures.' The big mistake was the date 1843. Jesus did not come in 1843. From that wrong date, William Miller subtracted 1335, taken from Daniel 12: 12 timeline, given the date 508 A.D. Almost any third grader knows that if you subtract from a wrong figure, your answer will be wrong! Nevertheless, many theologians today have made no corrections and defend the past application, based on wrong data, as if it were sacred doctrine of the Seventh-day Adventist Church." A Declaration of Facts Regarding Contemporary Prophetic Exposition, and The Three Timelines of Daniel 12, page 1, M_ B_.

The mistaken figures in the 1843 chart were as follows: identifying 1843 as the conclusion of the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14; 158 B.C. instead of 161 B.C. as date of league between Jews and Romans; 606 as date for rise of Mohammedanism; minor discrepancies in the dates for certain of the time periods associated with the ten horns of Daniel 7; and 677 B.C. as starting point of the "seven times" of Daniel 5. There were no mistakes in the figures concerning the prophetic periods of Daniel 12. M_ B_ may teach there were mistakes in the timelines of Daniel 12 on the 1843 chart, but the pioneers and Sister White did not believe so.

In the previous statement M_ B_ may be uninformed - but she is bearing false witness and it is totally inexcusable. When you place yourself in a public position through the publication of your ideas, and at the same time lift up and promote your understanding as the correct position in contrast to other positions, it then becomes your moral and ethical responsibility to correctly reflect the positions you are opposing. Several areas of M_ B_'s material are purely false. They totally misrepresent the true positions of the pioneers. Her last statement is one example.

There are no errors connected with the time lines of Daniel 12 on the chart. A proof of this is established by comparing the 1843 pioneer chart with the 1851 pioneer chart.

The 1851 chart was produced based on the very same vision where God commanded James White to begin the Review and Herald magazine. In the vision where Sister White was told to instruct James White to begin the Review, she also was given instruction to tell him to print a new chart. This chart was printed by Otis Nichols in 1851. [Future for America has this chart available in English and soon in Russian.] This chart contains the pioneer understanding of 508, as the starting point for Daniel 12:11-12. There are five vertical columns or the chart.

The first column identifies 1843 with the second angel's message.

The second column provides information about pagan and papal Rome (among other items) and in so doing states, "The pope's dominion over the kings continued 1260 years. It was taken away by France. A.D. 1798, just 1290 years after paganism lost its civil power. Daniel 12:7, 11."

The third column states, "The daily taken away. Daniel 11:31. 508 A.D." The fifth column states, "From the daily taken away, to papacy set up-538 = 30 years." Both charts uphold the year 508 as the historical fulfillment of the" daily" being taken away, and therefore 508 as the starting point for the timelines in Daniel 12:11-12. The pioneers and Ellen White never changed their position on the timelines of Daniel 12.

THE TRUTH MUST BE MADE PLAIN UPON TABLES

"On our return to Brother Nichols' , the Lord gave me a vision and showed me that the truth must be made plain upon tables, and it would cause many to decide for the truth by the three angels' messages, with two former being made plain upon tables." Manuscript Releases, number 16,207.

If the 1843 or 1851 charts demonstrate any repetition concerning the 1290 and 1335 of Daniel 12:11-12, it is that both charts repeat the pioneer position of identifying the year 508 as the starting point for the timelines contained in those verses. This means the 1290 concludes in 1798 and the 1335 concludes in 1843! That is the pioneer position, which is also upheld in the Review and Herald article at the end of this newsletter.

POINT TWO-THE "DAILY"

Throughout her many publications M_ B_ also falsely portrays the pioneer understanding of the "daily". Much of her falsehoods are built upon her erroneous position about the" daily". William Miller identifies the pioneer understanding of the "daily" as follows:

'THE DAILY' MUST MEAN PAGANISM

"I read on, and could find no other case in which if [the daily] was found but in Daniel. I then [by the aid of a concordance] took those words which stood in connection with it, 'take away;' 'he shall take away the daily'; 'from the time that the daily shall be taken away.' I read on and thought I should find no light on the text. Finally I came to 2 Thessalonians 2:7-8, 'For the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way, and then shall that wicked be revealed.' And when I had come to that text, 0, how clear and glorious the truth appeared! There it is! That is 'the daily!' Well, now, what does Paul mean by 'he who now letteth' or hindereth? By 'the Man of Sin,' and the 'wicked,' Popery is meant. Well what is it which hinders Popery from being revealed? Why it is Paganism. Well, then, 'the daily' must mean Paganism." Advent Manual, page 66, William Miller.

M_ B_ teaches the pioneer position was something other than paganism:

"The 'Daily' is a Continuum of Power, Seat, and Authority or 'Sovereignty'

"In a unique sense, as used in the book of Daniel, the 'daily' refers to a continuum of power, seat, and authority in the rise and fall of empires. Power, seat, and authority is the power to rule which originates with God on His throne, and is from everlasting to everlasting." Updated Condensation of WARNING!, page 50, M_ B_.

M_ B_'s definition of the" daily" is different than William Millers. But, Ellen White identified that William Miller and the pioneers had the "correct view". In Adventism today there is a third view, which is by far, the most widely accepted, but it also is incorrect. To deal with that subject is outside the scope of this letter, but M_ B_ also recognizes that the mainline view of the" daily" is false, and is not the view the pioneer's possessed. Confusion magnifies when M_ B_ opposes the false mainline view, but then teaches that her view is - the pioneer view!

"Modern theologians interpret the word 'daily' as used in the book of Daniel to refer to the priesthood of Christ. They refer to this concept as being the 'new view.' However, this is the 'old view' which was used for many centuries until the Bible students of The Great Advent Movement, leading up to 1844, abandoned that view and declared the 'daily' to refer to the transfer of 'power, seat, and authority' from pagan to papal Rome. That view of the 'daily' by the pioneers was proclaimed to be 'the correct view' by the inspired prophet. (See Early Writings, 74-75) However that correct view was abandoned after 1844. A Declaration of Facts Regarding Contemporary Prophetic Exposition, and The Three Timelines of Daniel 12, page 3-4, M_ B_.

Evidently M_ B_ does not have a way in which she feels comfortable in trying to cast an interpretation on Ellen White's sound endorsement of William Miller's definition of the "daily" in the book of Daniel. She therefore uses a different approach than reinterpreting Ellen White's words. She admits the pioneers were correct on the" daily" and even uses Ellen White's endorsement of the pioneer view to make the point. Then disregarding all the historical evidence to the contrary, she proclaims that her definition of the" daily" is the pioneer definition of the" daily". If you don't test her claims - you may even believe her.

The correct view of William Miller was "Paganism." M_ B_'s is "a continuum of power, seat, and authority in the rise and fall of empires." A transfer of power from one kingdom to the next is not the definition that Mr. Webster gives for the word" paganism." In Webster's Dictionary of 1828, the time period of William Miller, the word paganism is defined as - Heathenism; the worship of false gods, or the system of religious opinions and worship maintained by pagans.

POINT THREE-CALCULATING WITH INCORRECT INFORMATION

William Miller did not reach his conclusion of the 1335 days ending in 1843 by subtraction. He projected forward 1335 years from the date he had recognized as the fulfillment of the" daily". That date was 508 B.C [See the article from the 1858 Review and Herald, at the end of the newsletter.]

NOT SACRED DOCTRINES

In a previously cited passage of M_ B_, and in other of her publications, she denies that the pioneer positions on the prophetic periods in Daniel 12 are -" sacred doctrine”. This is consistent with her opinion that the pioneers were wrong about the timelines in Daniel 12, yet in the very first quotation from Ellen White in this letter, we see the Spirit of Prophecy addressing the prophetic periods in Daniel 12 as the foundations, the waymarks, the established points of faith. Through dreams and visions Sister White was warned that the waymarks and foundations would be attacked as time progressed. She also identified that they needed to be defended. To associate the word "sacred" with the truths of Daniel 12 is totally consistent with emphasis placed upon them in the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy!

"I have not been able to sleep since half past one 0' clock. I was bearing to Brother T a message, which the Lord had given me for him. The peculiar views he holds are a mixture of truth and error. If he had passed through the experiences of God's people as He has led them for the past forty years, he would be better prepared to make the correct application of Scripture. The great waymarks of truth, showing us our bearings in prophetic history, are to be carefully guarded, lest they be torn down, and replaced with theories that would bring confusion rather than genuine light. I have been cited to the very erroneous theories that have been presented over and over again. Those who advocated these theories presented Scripture quotations, but they misapplied and misinterpreted them. The theories supposed to be correct were incorrect, and yet many thought them the very theories to be brought before the people. The prophecies of Daniel and John are to be diligently studied.

M_ B_'s description of William Miller's careless approach to prophetic study contrasts greatly from Ellen White's inspired observations:

"Endeavoring to lay aside all preconceived opinions, and dispensing with commentaries, he compared scripture with scripture by the aid of the marginal references and the concordance. He pursued his study in a regular and methodical manner; beginning with Genesis, and reading verse by verse, he proceeded no faster than the meaning of the several passages so unfolded as to leave him free from all embarrassment. When he found anything obscure, it was his custom to compare it with every other text which seemed to have any reference to the matter under consideration. Every word was permitted to have its proper bearing upon the subject of the text, and if his view of it harmonized with every collateral passage, it ceased to be a difficulty. Thus whenever he met with a passage hard to be understood he found an explanation in some other portion of the Scriptures. As he studied with earnest prayer for divine enlightenment, that which had before appeared dark to his understanding was made clear. He experienced the truth of the psalmist's words: 'The entrance of Thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.' Psalm 119:130.

"With intense interest he studied the books of Daniel and the Revelation, employing the same principles of interpretation as in the other scriptures, and found, to his great joy, that the prophetic symbols could be understood. He saw that the prophecies, so far as they had been fulfilled, had been fulfilled literally; that all the various figures, metaphors, parables, similitudes, etc., were either explained in their immediate connection, or the terms in which they were expressed were defined in other scriptures, and when thus explained, were to be literally understood. 'I was thus satisfied,' he says, 'that the Bible is a system of revealed truths, so clearly and simply given that the wayfaring man, though a fool, need not err therein.'-Bliss, page 70. Link after link of the chain of truth rewarded his efforts, as step by step he traced down the great lines of prophecy. Angels of heaven were guiding his mind and opening the Scriptures to his understanding." The Great Controversy. 320.

"There are those now living who, in studying the prophecies of Daniel and John, received great light from God as they passed over the ground where special prophecies were in process of fulfillment in their order. They bore the message of time to the people. The truth shone out clearly as the sun at noonday. Historical events, showing the direct fulfillment of prophecy, were set before the people, and the prophecy was seen to be a figurative delineation of events leading down to the close of this earth's history. The scenes connected with the working of the man of sin are the last features plainly revealed in this earth's history. The people now have a special message to give to the world, the third angel's message. Those who, in their experience, have passed over the ground, and acted a part in the proclamation of the first, second, and third angels' messages, are not so liable to be led into false paths as are those who have not had an experimental knowledge of the people of God." Selected Messages, book 2, 102.

Because of the abundant counsel similar to the previous passage concerning the "tearing down" of "the great waymarks" M_ B_ develops (through down playing the pioneer understanding of the timelines in Daniel 12) a multi-facetted attack designed to allow her to move the timelines of Daniel 12 to another location in history, without appearing to be under the condemnation of the dreams and visions that warn about the attempts to move the landmarks. The approach consists of an attempt to remove confidence in the original pioneer position on prophecy, but also by creating an end-of-the-world category for the timelines of Daniel 12 as opposed to the 1844 time period category for the other timelines in the book of Daniel.

MANUFACTURING A DISTINCTION BETWEEN PROPHETIC PERIODS LITERAL AND SYMBOLIC

An example of one of her attempts to isolate the timelines of Daniel 12 from the other prophetic periods in Daniel is found in her argument about literal and symbolic time. Of course she must establish literal time at the end of the world, for there isn't enough time left for these prophecies to be fulfilled in a day for a year fashion. But her argument over literal and symbolic time also helps her manufacture a distinction between the prophetic periods of Daniel 12 and the other prophetic periods of Daniel's record. M_ B_ emphasizes and lifts up a Biblical rule in an attempt to disavow the year-day principle.

"They [Speaking of modern theologians] ignore the literal language of Daniel 12, in which there are no symbols such as image, beast, heads, horns, eyes, and sea. They ignore this literal context, take the three timelines of Daniel 12 out of their literal setting, and arbitrarily impose a symbolic meaning." "In regard to Daniel 12 timelines, they misapply the Year-Day Principle. Literal language is never to be interpreted." Emphasis in the original. A Declaration of Facts Regarding Contemporary Prophetic Exposition, and The Three Timelines of Daniel 12, page 1 &2, M_ B_.

"No symbols such as image, beast, heads, horns, eyes, and sea." - Smoke and mirrors -. . . The time prophecies in Daniel 12:7, 11-12, are directly associated with the" daily" and the "abomination that maketh desolate.

"And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. Daniel 12: 11-12.

Are we now to understand that the" daily" and the" abomination that maketh desolate" are not symbolic terms? Daniel employs these terms to symbolize pagan and papal Rome! He represents these two powers with the symbolic terms: "daily" and" abomination that maketh desolate." These are definitely symbolic terms. What kind of deception is it to quote a rule as authoritative; then not apply the rule, because it undermines your interpretation; and then act as if you have established your point? The pioneers understood it as follows:

"From the time that the daily shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth and cometh to the thousand three hundred five and thirty days. With the facts before us that the daily is Paganism, that the abomination that maketh desolate is the Papacy, that there was a change from the former to the latter in the Roman power, and by the authority of State we have but to inquire further when this took place in a manner to fulfill the prophecy; for if we can ascertain this, we have the starting point from which the prophetic periods in the text before us are to be dated." Review and Herald, January 28, 1858.

According to the rule pointed out and magnified by M_ B_, the fact that these two symbols are in the passage under consideration - the student should look for a symbolic application of the passage. That would be a day for a year, not a day for a day. M_ B_ and others: Emphasize the rule-to create a diversion-in order to discard the rule-and then accuse those who oppose their false conclusions of not upholding the rule! Wow!

If one possibly concludes that the "daily” and “abomination that maketh desolate" of Daniel 12 are somehow different than when they are used by Daniel in chapters 8 and 11-where is the evidence for this conclusion? Why would Daniel use symbolic words in Daniel 8 and 11, and continue to use those very same terms in Daniel 12, if the same terms in Daniel 12 were to identify something different than when found in Daniel 8 and 11? But, if they are the same symbolic words throughout the book of Daniel, [and they are] then why doesn't M_ B_ apply them as symbolic in Daniel 12? Once again – the pioneers did:

"The true reading is, 'the daily and the transgression of desolation;' daily and transgression being connected together by 'and;' the daily and the transgression of desolation. They are two desolating powers which were to desolate the Sanctuary and the host." Josiah Litch, Review and Herald, January, 1858.

WHEN & WHERE THE PROPHECIES CONCLUDE

 Another approach she attempts in order to isolate the timelines of Daniel 12 from Daniel's other prophecies is selectively amplifying when prophecies conclude.

Remember, according to Manuscript Releases, volume 22, 220 the" prophetic periods" of Daniel 12, are the" foundations principles", the “old waymarks", and the "established points of faith". M_ B_ attempts to make a distinction between which prophetic periods qualify as the foundations. After all, if the timelines of Daniel 12 are fulfilled at the end of the world, then they are not foundational. Confronted with several passages such as the Manuscript Releases quotation, she is forced to isolate and magnify some passages from the Spirit of Prophecy, while ignoring others. This allows her to demonstrate her hypothesis that the prophetic periods contained in the 2300 day prophecy are the focus of the inspired warnings concerning the removing or the attack against the foundations, waymarks, and established points of faith. Notice the following:

"'The preaching of a definite time for the judgment, in the giving of the first message, was ordered by God. The computation of the prophetic periods on which that message was based, placing the close of the 2300 days in the autumn of 1844, stands without impeachment. The repeated efforts to find new dates for the beginning and close of the prophetic periods, and the unsound reasoning necessary to sustain these positions, not only lead minds away from the present truth, but throw contempt upon all efforts to explain,. the prophecies. The more frequently a definite time is set for the second advent, and the more 'widely it is taught, the better it suits the purposes of Satan. After the time has passed, he excites ridicule and contempt of its advocates, and thus casts reproach upon the great advent movement of 1843 and 1844. Those who persist in this error will at last fix upon a date too far in the future for the coming of Christ. Thus they will be led to rest in a false security, and many will not be undeceived until it is too late.' The Great Controversy, 457. "It is self evident that the above quotation had to do with the timelines of Daniel 8, and 9, but not 12. It did not pertain to any other timeline prophecy." Emphasis supplied. Date Setting, Time Setting, Futurism, and Dirty Theology, page 58-59, M_ B_.

Here we are left to believe that when Sister White counseled us in Manuscript Releases" to hold fast to the end" the "waymarks" and "foundations" in "Daniel chapter 12", that somehow The Great Controversy, 457 eliminates that command. M_ B_'s uses that statement to set up a false premise, that only the prophetic periods within the 2300 day prophecy would be subjected to "the repeated efforts to find new dates for the beginning and close of the prophetic periods." She uses this to magnify her false supposition that the timelines of Daniel 12 are only applicable to the end of the world. Even if there were no passages such as the one in Manuscript Releases, the evidence and support for the commentary she draws on the passage from The Great Controversy does not exist within the statement itself. Everything Sister White said in the passage is accurate, but she made no comment whatsoever about Daniel 12! The fifth rule in William Miller's Rules for Prophetic Interpretation reads as follows:

"Scripture must be-its own expositor, since it is a rule of itself. If I depend on a teacher to expound it to me and he should, guess at its meaning, or desire to have it so on account of his sectarian creed or to be thought wise, then his guessing, desire, creed or wisdom is my rule, not the Bible."

This rule obviously applies to the Spirit of Prophecy as well.

The end of the world is an important emphasis for M_ B_'s prophetic interpretations. She uses this theme to establish a principle that the time prophecies Daniel 8 and 9 were fulfilled in the Millerite time period, while the Daniel 12 prophecies were for the Second Coming of Christ.

"'Prophetic Periods" in the Context of "the Eve of the Great Consummation'" "Ellen G. White either contradicted herself or she used the term, 'prophetic periods,' if reference to two different situations. While she was declaring that the 'prophetic periods' of the 2300 timeline of Daniel 8 and 9 ended in 1844, she wrote of other 'prophetic periods' or timelines in the book of Daniel which would extend to the eve of the great consummation!

"'The prophetic periods [timelines] of Daniel [12], extending to the very eve of the great consummation [The Second Coming] throw a flood of light on events then to transpire.'" Review and Herald, September 15, 1883. Emphasis in the original. Date Setting, Time Setting, Futurism, and Dirty Theology, page 58-59, M_ B_. The complete passage reads:

"In the Scriptures are presented truths that relate especially to our own time. To the period just prior to the appearing of the Son of man, the prophecies of Scripture point, and here their warnings and threatenings pre­eminently apply. The prophetic periods of Daniel, extending to the very eve of the great consummation, throw a flood of light upon events then to transpire. The book of Revelation is also replete with warning and instruction for the last generation. The beloved John, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, portrays the fearful and thrilling scenes connected with the close of earth's history, and presents the duties and dangers of God's people. None need remain in ignorance, none need be unprepared for the coming of the day of God." Review and Herald, September 15, 1883.

The information in this passage does not uphold the wresting placed upon it by M_ B_. In the passage the prophetic periods addressed are those found in Daniel, Revelation and the entire Scriptures - not exclusively the timelines of Daniel 12! This is a general statement about prophetic periods. Yet M_ B_ adds her own words into the passage to make the prophetic periods under discussion exclusively the timelines of Daniel 12. She continues:

"The 'prophetic periods' (2300 day-years, 490 years, 482 years, seven years, etc.) of Daniel 8 and 9, all of which were ended by 1844, did not extend to the 'very eve of the great consummation' nor did they 'throw a flood of light on events then to transpire.' Neither did the 1260 timeline of Daniel 7 reach to 'the very eve of the great consummation,' but ended in 1798-over two centuries ago! It is therefore the 1260, 1290, and 1335, three literal day timelines of Daniel 12, which extend to the very eve or 'end' [utmost end], and it is these three timelines which "throw a flood of light on EVENTS then to transpire, but give no date for the second coming." Date Setting, Time Setting, Futurism, and Dirty Theology, page 59, M_ B_.

Once again, selective deduction is employed by M_ B_. Ellen White points to the judgment as the place where the prophecies reach their conclusions, but M_ B_ is seeking to develop a different emphasis than Ellen White:

"The prophecies present a succession of events leading down to the opening of the Judgment. This is especially true of the book of Daniel. But that part of his prophecy which related to the last days, Daniel was bidden to close up and seal 'to the time of the end.' Not till we reach this time could a message concerning the Judgment be proclaimed, based on a fulfillment of these prophecies. But at the time of the end, says the prophet, 'many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.'" The Great Controversy, 356.

In this passage the prophecies, especially those of Daniel lead down to the opening of the judgment, not the Second Coming. So is Sister White contradicting herself? Absolutely not!

"Had Adventists, after the great disappointment in 1844, held fast their faith, and followed on united in the opening providence of God, receiving the message of the third angel and in the power of the Holy Spirit proclaiming it to the world, they would have seen the salvation of God, the Lord would have wrought mightily with their efforts, the work would have been completed, and Christ would have come ere this to receive His people to their reward." Selected Messages, book 1,68.

Had Adventism finished the work in the days of the pioneers the judgment and the Second Coming of Christ would have been very closely related in terms of time. Our disobedience has extended the time, but this "wandering in the wilderness of unbelief" does not diminish the close relationship between the judgment and the Second Coming. Ellen White is not being inconsistent when she identifies the prophecies concluding at the judgment in one place and then states the prophecies reach to the Second Coming in another. They are closely related. The inconsistency lies with M_ B_ as she exclusively emphasizes the Second Coming as the consummation of the prophecies, in order to provide an avenue to sustain her own private interpretations.

Sister White says the prophecies lead "down to the opening of the Judgment". In doing so, she focuses primarily on the prophecies of Daniel. But if we were to be even more discerning about the passage, she is focusing more on one chapter in the book of Daniel, and that chapter is Daniel 12. She quotes directly from Daniel 12 twice in the passage and no other Scripture is quoted.

By context Sister White is teaching that the prophecies of Daniel 12 lead" down to the opening of the Judgment"!

Whether lifting up the "literal symbolic rule" to draw a distinction, or trying to develop a case for certain specific time prophecies to extend to the second coming, M_ B_'s reasoning and application lacks any logical or divine endorsement. Within all of these false premises which we are addressing there have been several other errors that we have not taken up do to the limitations of this newsletter. But one other false teaching connected with the Second Coming needs to be also met.

In M_ B_'s emphasis of the Second Coming she goes to great lengths to identify that her applications of the time prophecies of Daniel 12 do not reach the conclusion of the day and hour of Christ's return. If she were to do that, the warning flag would be to great for many of her devotees to pass by. As she emphasizes that she doesn't predict the day and hour of Christ's return, though she is curiously silent about a specific passage in the Spirit of Prophecy.

CONTINUE PART 2