EXPOSÉ ON VARIANT PROPHETIC MISUNDERSTANDINGS  4 

We Have Many Many Lessons to Unlearn

“How shall we search the Scriptures? Shall we drive our stakes of doctrine one after another, and then try to make all Scripture meet our established opinions? or shall we take our ideas and views to the Scriptures, and measure our theories on every side by the Scriptures of truth? Many who read and even teach the Bible, do not comprehend the precious truth they are teaching or studying.

“Men entertain errors, when the truth is clearly marked out; and if they would but bring their doctrines to the word of God, and not read the word of God in the light of their doctrines, to prove their ideas right, they would not walk in darkness and blindness, or cherish error. Many give the words of Scripture a meaning that suits their own opinions, and they mislead themselves and deceive others by their misinterpretations of God’s word.

“As we take up the study of God’s word, we should do so with humble hearts. All selfishness, all love of originality, should be laid aside. Long-cherished opinions must not be regarded as infallible. It was the unwillingness of the Jews to give up their long-established traditions that proved their ruin. They were determined not to see any flaw in their own opinions or in their expositions of the Scriptures; but however long men may have entertained certain views, if they are not clearly sustained by the written word, they should be discarded. Those who sincerely desire truth will not be reluctant to lay open their positions for investigation and criticism, and will not be annoyed if their opinions and ideas are crossed. This was the spirit cherished among us forty years ago. . . .

“We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. As long as we hold to our own ideas and opinions with determined persistency, we cannot have the unity for which Christ prayed.” Counsels to Writers and Editors, 36–37. 

KING OF THE NORTH?

In our last two newsletters we have been responding to reader’s questions in order to address issues connected to our current audio series covering chapters ten through twelve in the book of Daniel. In the history of Adventism there are items that have an impact on our understanding of these chapters. One of those items is the disagreement between James White and Uriah Smith about who is the “king of the north” in verse thirty-six and onward in chapter eleven Those who support Smith’s view, point to a time when, they say, Ellen White rebuked her husband for opposing Smith’s new position identifying the “king of the north” as Turkey. They fail to specify that she didn’t rebuke James for an erroneous position, but for contributing to public “contention and variance.”

“My husband had some ideas on some points differing from the views taken by his brethren. I was shown that however true his views were, God did not call for him to put them in front before his brethren and create differences of ideas. While he might hold these views subordinate himself, once [they are] made public, minds would seize [upon them], and just because others believe differently would make these differences the whole burden of the message, and get up contention and variance.

“There are the main pillars of our faith, subjects which are of vital interest, the Sabbath, the keeping of the commandments of God. Speculative ideas should not be agitated; for there are peculiar minds that love to get some point that others do not accept, and argue and attract everything to that one point, urging that point, magnifying that point, when it is really a matter which is not of vital importance, and will be understood differently. Twice I have been shown that everything of a character to cause our brethren to be diverted from the very points now essential for this time, should be kept in the background.

“Christ did not reveal many things that were truth, because it would create a difference of opinion and get up disputations, but young men who have not passed through this experience we have had, would as soon have a brush as not. Nothing would suit them better than a sharp discussion.” Councils to Writers and Editors, 77. 

There is no endorsement for Smith’s new idea in this testimony. The testimony is directed at the need for unity among the leadership. In fact, her main concern was that “young men” [Uriah Smith was the younger in relationship to James White.], “would as soon have a brush as not”. It is totally out of context to use the historical disagreement and the previous testimony as evidence of Inspired support for Smith’s new idea about the “king of the north”.

The following is James White’s presentation on the subject of the “king of the north”, that brought forth the testimony. 

“Where are we? When mariners meet upon the seas, the inquiry is exchanged, ‘Where are we?’ Answers are given as to their latitude and longitude according to their reckoning; and if, after comparing, there is an agreement, confidence is enjoyed by both parties. So with Christian voyagers to the haven of eternal repose. Lines of prophecy containing waymarks, are illustrated by rivers of water, hence the expression that “they show us where we are on the stream of time.”

“We have a very remarkable illustration of this fact in the following from the twelfth chapter of the book of Daniel:

“‘Then I Daniel looked, and, behold, there stood other two, the one on this side of the bank of the river, and the other on that side of the bank of the river. And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river. How long shall it be to the end of these wonders? And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven and swear by Him that liveth forever that it shall be for a time, times, and a half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these thing shall be finished.’ Verses 5–7. In briefly commenting upon these verses we noticed the leading points as follows:

“1. The words, ‘then I Daniel looked.’ show that the line of prophecy, commencing with Persia, passing Grecia and Rome of the eleventh chapter, and reaching to the standing up of Michael, or the coming and kingdom of Christ, the time of trouble, and the resurrection of the dead, had ended, and that a new scene had opened before the prophet of God.

“2. In this new scene three persons appear holding different positions, ‘One on this side of the bank of the river and the other on that side of the bank of the river,’ while a third, clothed in linen, is upon (above, margin), the waters of the river.

“3. The man clothed in linen above the river is the Son of God; one of the two persons beside the river is the angel Gabriel, while there is no means of knowing who the other is. As proof that two of them are Christ and Gabriel we cite the words of the angel to the prophet in chapter 10:21: ‘There is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.’ Michael is the archangel. Jude, verse 9. The archangel is the Lord himself, who descends from Heaven with the trump of God to awaken the righteous dead. 1 Thessalonians 4:16. Jesus Christ and the angel Gabriel are the persons who act in giving these lines of prophecy to Daniel. A third person appears, but says and does nothing. That the words of Gabriel, ‘There is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince,’ may be true, silence is necessary on the part of the third party. The two persons called ‘saints’ in chapter 8:13–14, are the Son of God and the angel of Gabriel. And it is the blessed Christ of the New Testament whose voice is heard from between the banks of the river Ulai giving the imperative order for the benefit of Daniel: ‘Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.’ Verse 10.

“4. Jesus Christ not only gave the prophetic symbols of the several chains of prophecy in the book of Daniel, and also the prophetic numbers two of which reach to the period when he enters the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary and stands before the mercy seat and the ark of God containing the ten commandments but with both hands raised to Heaven be answers with an oath the question of time. ‘How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?’

“5. A flowing river is a most appropriate figure of the lapse of time. Who ever knew a river to become weary and stop to rest? It takes its unwearied course day and night, onward and still onward to its ocean destiny. So time, made up of seconds, minutes, hours, months, and years, is ever passing to the great ocean of eternity. And the man clothed in linen, above the waters of the river, illustrates the position of the Son of God relative to prophetic time, that he is the author of the periods in the book of Daniel. It is true that Christ did say in answer to the inquiry of his disciples, ‘What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?’ Matthew 24:3, that ‘of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of Heaven, but my Father only.’ Verse 36.

“But he also says in the next verse, ‘As in the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.’ The time of the flood was given to the patriarch in years. Genesis 6:3. This brought that family of eight to the time of waiting for further orders relative to entering the ark, the breaking up of the fountains of the great deep, and the opening of the windows of heaven of the rain to descend upon the earth forty days and forty nights. In this waiting, watching position, Noah hears the voice of God saying to him, ‘Come thou and all thy house into the ark:” “for yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth.’ Genesis 7:1, 4.

“The prophetic periods brought us to the especial waiting, watching, praying time, where they terminated. We are not timeists in the sense of looking to some future definite date for the Second Advent. But if holding that the prophetic periods are a portion of the ‘Scriptures given by inspiration of God,’ which are profitable for doctrine, and that they were given by the Son of God for an important object, and that purpose being gained they have terminated, makes a person a timeist, then we are timeists. The writer preached definite time in 1843–4, because he found it in our blessed Bible: but with the clearer view of 1878, that Christ gave those periods and answered the earnest question of the prophet, ‘How long?’ with a most solemn oath, he sees the time revealed to Daniel and John by the Son of God in a clearer and stronger light that he did thirty-four years since. And that the true church might be looking, waiting, and watching for her divine Lord, he not only gave the prophetic symbols of Daniel and John, which reach to the end, and the prophetic numbers connected with them, but he has given signs of his coming in the lights of heaven.

“The sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall fall. We shall not in this article give the evidences that the prophetic words of our Lord respecting the darkening of the sun were fulfilled in the dark day of May 19, 1780, and that the darkening of the moon occurred on the following night, nor that his words respecting the falling stars were fulfilled on the night of November 13, 1833. The facts important to this part of the subject are that Christ has given signs of his coming, and enforces his words by this simple and most impressive illustration: ‘Now learn the parable of the fig-tree. When his branch is yet tender and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh. So like wise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.’ Matthew 24:32–33. When the warmth of spring presses the buds from the leafless branches, and the fields begin to put down their green velvet carpets, and all nature wakes from her winter slumbers, we know that summer is right up on. Should the frost of early spring, or a slight fall of snow, mingle the pure white with the delicate green; still all sane persons would know that summer was near. He, who would take these as tokens of returning winter, would be regarded as a fit subject for the insane retreat. In this figure there is no room for doubt. And as no figure employed in the Sacred Scriptures is stronger that the fact illustrated, the Son of God evidently designed to remove all doubt form the minds of his people, and inspire them with perfect confidence, that they might express themselves in positive terms respecting his soon coming. Immediately following this impressive figure, as if to make the impress till deeper, are these words, ‘Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.’

“We trace down the line of prophecy represented by the metallic image of the second chapter of Daniel, from the golden head, Babylon, the silver breast and arms. Media and Persia, past the sides of brass, Grecia, to the feet and toes, Rome in its divided state, and there we find ourselves waiting the utter destruction of all earthly governments, represented by the stone dashing the image in pieces. What next? Answer: the establishment of the everlasting kingdom of God, which includes the coming of the son of man to destroy his enemies, raises the righteous dead, restore the earth to its Eden glory, and reign with his people upon it ‘forever, even forever and ever.’

“The same field of prophecy is occupied in the seventh chapter of Daniel with the use of another class of symbols, the lion, the bear, the leopard, the beast with ten horns, and the same beast with three horns plucked up by the little horn. The kingdom of Babylon is symbolized by the lion of this chapter, the same as by the golden head of chapter second. Persia by the bear, Grecia by the leopard, and pagan and papal Rome by the two forms or conditions of the great and terrible beast. The specifications of this prophetic chain are more minute that those of chapter second. The time of the persecuting rule of Papal Rome is given in a manner so very plain, its twelve hundred and sixty years bounded at each end, commencing AD 538, and terminating AD 1798 that it can hardly be misunderstood. What next? Answer: The second appearing of Christ, the destruction of the beast, his body given to the burning flames. We have passed all the light houses on the coast of time, and are entering the eternal haven by the light of the judgment fires of the burning day and the blazing glory of the coming of the Son of man.

“Again, the last three of these four universal empires are symbolized in the eighth chapter of Daniel by the ram with two horns. Media and Persia: the goat, Grecia; and the little horn, Rome. This horn was to become exceeding great, stand up against the Prince of princes at his first advent, and be broken without hands at his second advent. We wait the destruction of the man of sin by the brightness of the coming of the King of kings. And there is a line of historic prophecy in chapter eleven, where the symbols are thrown off, beginning with the kings of Persia, and reaching down past Grecia and Rome, to the time when that power “shall come to his end, and none shall help him.”

“If the feet and ten toes of the metallic image are Roman, if the beast with ten horns that was given to the but flames of the great day be the Roman because the little horn which stood up against the Prince of princes be Roman and if the same field distance are covered by these four chains, then the last power of the eleventh chapter, which is to ‘come to his end and none help him,’ is Rome.

“But if this be Turkey as some teach, then the toes of the image of second chapter are Turkish, the beast with horns of the seventh chapter represent Turkey and it was Turkey that stood up against Prince of princes of the eight chapter of Daniel. True, Turkey is bad enough off, but its way to power and its end is the subject of the prophet John and not of Daniel. The fulfillment of these lines of prophecy constitutes signs of the approaching end. Christ said to those who were rejecting him ‘Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of sky; but can ye not discern the signs of times?’ Matthew16:3.

“The prophets of God had foretold the advent of the Just One at his first appearing even the time of that event is given in seventy weeks of the ninth chapter of Daniel. And the fulfillment of these prophecies constituted signs of Christ’s advent. And if words of condemnation fell from the lips of Christ on Jews for rejecting him, because in their blindness they could not see the few and comparatively faint signs of his first advent, those who close their eyes to the tokens of his second advent will be worthy of greater condemnation that the Jews in proportion as the signs of the second advent are more numerous and clearer fulfillments of prophecy than were those of his first advent. While the lines of prophecy in the book Daniel have to do with the four kingdoms, Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome, that of John pertains to the fourth only, Rome.

“The Revelation contains four distinct lines of prophecy measuring the period of the fourth universal empire, covering the history of the church until her Lord shall come. We briefly notice these prophetic chains in the following order:

“1. The seven seals. Prophecy is history advance. The Revelation was a sealed book from the fact that it related to the future. Said the angel to John, ‘Come up hither and I will show thee things which must be here after.’ Revelation 4:1. But as the car of time goes down the track of providence, and the specific conditions of the prophecy are fulfilled, and those marked by the prophetic pencil become a matter of history, the seals are opened in their order. Under the seven seals is the history of the church of Jesus Christ in seven periods, reaching down to the end. The opening of the six seal reveals the special signs of the Second Advent, and opens before us the naked glare the scenes of the last Judgment. ‘And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; and the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely gifs, when she is shaken of a might wind. And the heavens departed as a scroll when it is rolled together, and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. And the kings of the earth, and the great men and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains and rocks, fall on us, and hide us from the face of Him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb; for the great day of his wrath is come and who shall be able to stand?’

“The signs of the Second Advent have been fulfilled, and we now stand under the sixth seal, waiting the coming of the Son of man accompanied by all the holy angels. In their absence from the heavenly courts to escort their Leader and Commander down to earth to raise the righteous dead and change the living just to immortality, every harp and every angel voice will be hushed, and there will be ‘silence in Heaven about the space of a half hour.’ Revelation 8:1. When the ministry of Christ shall be finished, and his blood shall no more be offered to cleanse the sinner of his sins, and the fearful fist of Almighty God will be given, ‘He that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still; and he that is righteous let him be righteous still; and he that is holy let him be holy still; and behold I come quickly, and my reward is with me,’ Revelation 22:11–12; then all the seals will be open. Thus John is borne down the stream of time. And standing where we stand to day, he received this order from the angel, ‘Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book (or regard it no longer a sealed book), for the time is at hand.’ Verse 10.

“2. The seven churches. These also represent seven periods of the church of Christ, reaching down to the time when the over comers shall be seated on their Lord’s throne in the immortal kingdom, as their Living Head overcame, and is no seated with the Father on his throne. See Revelation, chapter 2 and 3. To the sixth church, Philadelphia, meaning brotherly love. Christ says, ‘Behold I come quickly. Hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.’ This church was composed of those who left their creeds and party strife under the proclamation of the second coming of Christ at hand in 1844, left the several organizations of which they were members and united in one happy, loving, brotherhood, looking for Christ’s second appearing. And of these, our adorable Redeemer say, ‘I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it.’ He has the key of David, and is soon to manifest his power and reign on the throne of David. But he says to the last church, Laodicea, ‘Behold I stand at the door and knock. If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.’ Chapter 3:20. These words of significant import represent no common blessing. But before the blessing can be received and enjoyed there is a great work to be done by those addressed. They are represented as lukewarm. They are under the terrible deception of thinking that they are rich and increased with goods, and have need of nothing, while ignorant of the fact that they are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked. They are exhorted to be zealous and repent. But they are not left here. Jesus offers to be their counselor, and exhorts them to buy of him gold and white raiment. He stands at the door and knocks, and promises that if any man will open the door he will come in and sup with him, and he with Christ. ‘Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him and he with me.’

“Here is a work for those addressed to do. Christ will not force his way into the hearts of his people, but when they have prepared the way he will come in and shed his love abroad in their hearts.” James White, Review and Herald, October 3, 1878. 

This sermon by James White was delivered immediately after Uriah Smith had given his presentation identifying Turkey as “the king of the north.” Based on this public disagreement between two leaders Sister White penned the previous testimony about “variance and contention”. Had her rebuke been concerning an erroneous position held by James White he would have stopped presenting his reasons why the “king of the north” was the papacy, yet two years later he was still upholding his position: 

“The field of Daniel’s prophecy embrace five universal kingdoms. These are Babylon, Media Persai, Grecia, Rome, and the eternal kingdom of God. The ground of the four perishable kingdoms, reaching to, and introducing the immortal kingdom, is covered by four distinct lines of prophecy. These are given in chapters two, seven, eight and eleven. The eleventh chapter of Daniel closes with the close of the fourth monarchy, with these words,

“Daniel 11:45–12:3, quoted.” James White, Signs of the Times, July 22, 1880. 

The fact that Smith and White disagreed on the identification of the “king of the north” does not allow us to simply choose sides based on our personal preferences. Yet many have allowed Ellen White’s endorsements of Smith’s book, Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation to become an excuse to avoid personally studying the subject. They choose not to study the passage in the Bible, and not to ascertain the correct understanding of the endorsements for Smith’s book. If the argument was to be settled simply by the endorsements of Smith’s book, in opposition to James White position, then what do we do with the endorsements for James White’s role and position in the Advent movement? 

“In a vision given me at Bordoville, Vermont, December 10, 1871, I was shown that the position of my husband has been a very difficult one. A pressure of care and labor has been upon him. His brethren in the ministry have not had these burdens to bear, and they have not appreciated his labors. The constant pressure upon him has taxed him mentally and physically. I was shown that his relation to the people of God was similar, in some respects, to that of Moses to Israel. There were murmurers against Moses, when in adverse circumstances, and there have been murmurers against him.

“There has been no one in the ranks of Sabbathkeepers who would do as my husband has done. He has devoted his interest almost entirely to the building up of the cause of God, regardless of his own personal interests and at the sacrifice of social enjoyment with his family. In his devotion to the cause he has frequently endangered his health and life. He has been so much pressed with the burden of this work that he has not had suitable time for study, meditation, and prayer. God has not required him to be in this position, even for the interest and progress of the publishing work at Battle Creek. There are other branches of the work, other interests of the cause, that have been neglected through his devotion to this one. God has given us both a testimony which will reach hearts. He has opened before me many channels of light, not only for my benefit, but for the benefit of His people at large. He has also given my husband great light upon Bible subjects, not for himself alone, but for others. I saw that these things should be written and talked out, and that new light would continue to shine upon the word.” Testimonies, volume 3, 85.

James White’s “relation to the people of God was similar, in some respects, to that of Moses” and he was given “great light upon Bible subjects, not for himself alone, but for others.” Those who simply point to the endorsements of Smith’s book usually fail to give the entire testimony on the subject, excluding the testimony about Smith’s book that allows for revisions. If the Spirit of Prophecy allows for revisions in Smith’s book, how can we identify it as flawless? Arthur White comments on this subject: 

“She pointed out that ‘the enemy of our work is pleased when a subject of minor importance is used to divert the minds of our brethren from the great questions that should be the burden of our message,’ and she insisted that as this was not a test question, [and] it should not be treated as such. Then in this connection, obviously speaking of Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation, which she held in high esteem, she wrote:

“‘In some of our important books that have been in print for years, and which have brought many to a knowledge of the truth, there may be found matters of minor importance that call for careful study and correction. Let such matters be considered by those regularly appointed to have the oversight of our publications. Let not these brethren, nor our canvassers, nor our ministers magnify these matters in such a way as to lessen the influence of these good soul-saving books.’ Selected Messages, book 1, 165.” The Elmshaven Years, volume 6, 258. 

The subject Sister White was addressing in this passage was the desire by Elders Daniells and Prescott to insert their new ideas concerning the “Daily” in the book of Daniel into Smith’s book. While allowing for corrections to Smith’s book, (thus acknowledging the presence of minor errors} she was not endorsing Daniells’ and Prescott’s position of what the “Daily” represented, for she was clear about their position when she stated: 

“Now I am to tell them [that] when I was shown this matter, when Elder Daniells was lifting up his voice like a trumpet in advocating his ideas of the ‘Daily,’ the after results were presented. Our people were becoming confused. I saw the result, and then there were given me cautions that if Elder Daniells without respect to the outcome should thus be impressed and let himself believe he was under the inspiration of God, skepticism would be sown among our ranks everywhere, and we should be where Satan would carry his messages. Set unbelief and skepticism would be sown in human minds, and strange crops of evil would take the place of truth.” Manuscript Releases, volume 20, 22. 

The subject of the “Daily” in the book of Daniel is a truth, which Uriah Smith’s book upholds correctly. In spite of this, the true understanding of the “Daily” demonstrates Smith’s view of the final verses of Daniel eleven is incorrect. Though he is correct on the “Daily”, it is the history connected to the “Daily” that destroys Smith’s premises about verse thirty-six and onward in Daniel eleven. It does so in a very simple way. Consider the following: 

“We have no time to lose. Troublous times are before us. The world is stirred with the spirit of war. Soon the scenes of trouble spoken of in the prophecies will take place. The prophecy in the eleventh of Daniel has nearly reached its complete fulfillment. Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated. In the thirtieth verse a power is spoken of that ‘shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: ‘so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant. And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits. And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days. Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries. And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed. And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.’ Daniel 11:30–36.

“Scenes similar to those described in these words will take place. We see evidence that Satan is fast obtaining the control of human minds who have not the fear of God before them. Let all read and understand the prophecies of this book, for we are now entering upon the time of trouble spoken of: Daniel 12:1–4, quoted.” Manuscript Release, volume 13, 394, [Letter 103, 1904].

 In this passage Sister White is clear that the final fulfillment of Daniel eleven will parallel the history of verses 30–36 of Daniel eleven. This is the history of the “Daily”! If we are to understand the last verses of Daniel eleven, we must understand them in a way that parallels the history of the “Daily” time-period.

Pay close attention to the fact that the previous testimony was written in 1904. Smith’s interpretation of the last verses of Daniel eleven teaches that all the verses are fulfilled well before 1904, with the exception of verses forty-five. The only verse left to be fulfilled in 1904, according to Smith, is verse forty-five. 

And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him. Daniel 11:45.

 The history that Smith points to in verse forty-five of Daniel eleven is impossible to align with the history of how paganism gave way to the papacy as represented in the history associated with the “Daily”. Read Smith’s own historical presentation on the transition from pagan to papal Rome as set forth in the book of Daniel in connection with the “Daily” and then compare his historical presentation of verse forty-five in Daniel eleven. The two histories show no parallel. Yet Sister White says, “scenes similar to those described in these words will take place”.

 Friends. If you identify the “king of the north” in verse thirty-six and onward, as did the pioneers and James White, you see the papacy at the end of the world in the same position as it was during the history of verses thirty through thirty-six, when the “Daily” (pagan Rome) ruled the world. At that time the papacy was waiting to ascend the throne of the earth, but, there were obstacles that first needed to be overcome. In that time period there were three horns that needed to be removed.

 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows. And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. Daniel 7:8, 20, 24.

 From the pioneer perspective, in verse forty the “king of the north” overcomes “the king of the south” and then in verse forty-one, he overcomes “the glorious land”, and then in verse forty-two, he overcomes “Egypt”. The parallel Sister White identifies is clearly recognized.

Also, in order for the papacy to be “set up” in the history of 508 to 538, there first needed to be a change in the resistance given the papacy by the pagan powers that had previously resisted the rise of the papal power. The history of how the pagan powers in the fifth and sixth century, changed their profession of paganism to Catholicism, in order to come to the aid of the papacy, is today being paralleled by the USA. The USA first ceases to oppose Catholicism, as it forgets what Protestantism is all about, and it then begins its work of forcing the whole world to worship the first beast of Revelation thirteen. The work of the USA clearly parallels the work of Clovis and other pagan leaders, who first renounced their pagan professions and then placed the papacy into power in 538. And this is the very role Revelation thirteen identifies that the USA will fulfill!

The history of the “Daily” in the verses identified by Sister White also pointed to the persecution that followed the papacies ascent to the throne of the world, paralleling the persecution that takes place in the Sunday law time period.

More simply, verses thirty to thirty-six identify the first time the papacy comes to rule the world, whereas: the final verses of Daniel eleven that Sister White said would parallel that history, identify the last time the papacy comes to rule the world.

The history of the “Daily”, as the pioneers understood it, is the pattern for the final fulfillment of the last six verses of Daniel eleven. Uriah Smith’s interpretation of those verses doesn’t come close to aligning with the pattern.

The pattern is also destroyed when we use the definition of the “Daily” that was introduced into Adventism in 1901 by Prescott and Daniels, but which is today the majority view within Adventism. In either position; the current majority teaching on the “Daily” within Adventism or, Smith’s view of the last verse of Daniel eleven—either the prophetic type (the history of the “Daily”) which Sister White identified, or the antitype (the final verses of Daniel eleven) is destroyed.

Yet the pioneer position on the “Daily” representing paganism and their identification of the “king” in verse thirty-six as the papacy agrees perfectly with the inspired statement that, “scenes similar to those described in these words will take place”.

Consider the pioneer J. N. Andrews thoughts on the subject of the “Daily”. 

Two Desolations in Daniel Eight

“There are two desolations in Daniel eight. This fact is made so plain by Josiah Litch that we present his words:

“‘The daily sacrifice’ is the present reading of the English text. But no such thing as sacrifice is found in the original. This is acknowledged on all hands. It is a gloss or construction put on it by the translators. The true reading is, the daily and the transgression of desolation, daily and transgression being connected together by and; the daily desolation and the transgression of desolation. They are two desolating powers, which were to desolate the sanctuary and the host.’ Prophetic Expositions, volume 1, 127.

“It is plain that the sanctuary and the host were to be trodden under foot by the daily and the transgression of desolation. The careful reading of verse 13 settles this point. And this fact establishes another, viz.: that these two desolations are the two grand forms under which Satan has attempted to overthrow the worship and the cause of Jehovah. Mr. Miller’s remarks on the meaning of these two terms, and the course pursued by himself in ascertaining that meaning, is presented under the following head:

The Two Desolations are Paganism and the Papacy

“‘I read on, and could find no other case in which it [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 way; he shall take away, the daily; from the time the daily shall be taken away, &c. 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,” &c. And when I had come to that text, oh! 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.’ Second Advent Manual, 66.

“It needs no argument to prove that the two grand forms of opposition, by which Satan has desolated the church and trod under foot the sanctuary of the living God, are none other than paganism and popery. It is also a clear point that the change from one of these desolations to the other did occur under the Roman power. Paganism, from the days of the kings of Assyria, down to the period when it became so far modified that it took the name of popery, had been the daily (or, as Professor Whiting renders it, ‘the continual’) desolation, by which Satan had stood up against the cause of Jehovah. And, indeed, in its priests, its altars and its sacrifices, it bore resemblance to the Levitical form of Jehovah’s worship. When the Christian form of worship took the place of the Levitical, a change in Satan’s form of opposition, and counterfeit worship, became necessary, if he would successfully oppose the worship of the great God. And it is in the light of these facts that we are able to understand our Lord’s reference to the abomination of desolation in Matthew 24:15. It is evident that he there cites Daniel 9:26–27. Now, although we do not understand that paganism in the year 70 had given place to popery, we do understand that that same power which then appeared, modified somewhat in name and form, was the very power that should, as the abomination of desolation, wear out the saints of the Most High.

“The language of Paul is to the point: ‘For the mystery of iniquity [popery] 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, whom the Lord shall consume with the Spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.’ 2 Thessalonians 2:7–8. That Paul refers to paganism and popery, none question. And here is direct proof that popery, the abomination of desolation, had in Paul’s day already begun to work. Nor was it a very great change of character when Satan transformed his counterfeit worship from paganism to popery. The same temples, altars, incense, priests and worshipers were ready, with little change, to serve as the appendages of the papal abomination. The statute of Jupiter readily changed to that of Peter, the prince of the apostles; and the Pantheon, which had been the temple of all the gods, without difficulty became the sanctuary of all the saints. Thus the same abomination that desolated Jerusalem, in a degree changed and modified, became the wonderful desolater of the saints and martyrs of Jesus. And in its so-called temple of God, it set at naught and trod under foot the true temple of Jehovah, and he who is its minister, Jesus Christ. The change from paganism to popery is clearly shown in John’s view of the transfer of power from the dragon of Revelation 12, to the beast of Revelation 13. And that they are essentially the same thing, is evident from the fact that both the dragon and the beast are represented with the seven heads; thus showing that, in a certain sense, either may be understood to cover the whole time. And in the same sense we understand that either abomination covers all the period. Christ’s reference to the abomination of desolation (Matthew 24:15; Luke 21:20) is an absolute demonstration that Rome is the little horn of Daniel 8:9–12. Having shown that there are two desolations, by which the sanctuary and the host are trodden down, we now notice the fact that there are two opposing Sanctuaries in Daniel eight.

“To the careful reader this fact will at once appear. They are as follows: First, the sanctuary of the daily desolation. Verse 11; 11:31. Second, the sanctuary which the daily and the transgression of desolation were to tread under foot. Verses 13–14. The one is the sanctuary of Satan; the other is the sanctuary of the Lord of hosts. The one is the dwelling place of “all the gods;” the other is the habitation of the only living and true God. If it be said that a sanctuary is never connected with heathen and idolatrous worship, we cite the direct testimony of the Bible. Heathen Moab had a sanctuary. And that sanctuary was a place of prayer and worship for that heathen nation. Isaiah 16:12. The chapel erected by the king of Israel at Bethel, as a rival to the temple of God at Jerusalem (1 Kings 12:27, 31–33) was called his sanctuary. Amos 7:13, margin. And the places in which idolatrous Israel (the ten tribes) worshiped, are called sanctuaries. Amos 7:9. The same is true of idolatrous Tyre. Ezekiel 28:18. Attention is called to the following from Apollos Hale:

“‘What can be meant by the sanctuary of paganism? Paganism, and error of every kind, have their sanctuaries as well as truth. These are the temples or asylums consecrated to their service. Some particular and renowned temple of paganism may, then, be supposed to be here spoken of. Which of its numerous distinguished temples may it be? One of the most magnificent specimens of classic architecture is called the Pantheon. The name signifies the temple or asylum of all the gods. The place of its location is Rome. The idols of the nations conquered by the Romans were sacredly deposited in some niche or apartment of this temple, and in many cases became objects of worship by the Romans themselves. Could we find a temple of paganism that was more strikingly ‘his sanctuary’? Was Rome, the city or place of the Pantheon, cast down by the authority of the State? Read the following well-known and remarkable facts in history: “The death of the last rival of Constantine had sealed the peace of the empire. Rome was once more the undisputed queen of nations. But, in the hour of elevation and splendor, she had been raised to the edge of a precipice. Her next step was to be downward and irrecoverable. The change of the government to Constantinople still perplexes the historian. Constantine abandoned Rome, the great citadel and throne of the Caesars, for an obscure corner of Thrace, and expended the remainder of his vigorous and ambitious life in the double toil of raising a colony into the capital of his empire, and degrading the capital into the feeble honors and humiliated strength of a colony’”. Second Advent Manual, 68.

“And not only did Satan possess himself of a rival to the sanctuary of Jehovah in the period of pagan worship, but, throughout the Christian dispensation, has that arch fiend possessed a rival temple of God. 2 Thessalonians 2:4. Thus much for the rival sanctuary of Satan. The sanctuary of God remains to be noticed at length. Connected with these two sanctuaries there are two hosts in Daniel 8:9–13.

There are Two Hosts

“The one is the host that was given to the little horn against the daily, when it had filled its measure of transgression; and by the aid of this host, the little horn was able to cast down the truth. Verse 12. This host is mentioned in Dan. 11:31. By this host, the sanctuary of the daily desolation, and its services, were transferred to the transgression, or abomination of desolation. This host is the forces of Satan, and it is intimately associated with his sanctuary. The other host is ‘the host of heaven.’ Verse 10. Michael is the Prince of this host. Daniel 10:21. Against the Prince of this host, the little horn stands up. Verses 11, 25. (Professor Whiting remarks that in the original, ‘Prince of the host’ occurs in Joshua 5:14) None dispute that the host, of whom Michael (Christ) is Prince, is the church of the living God. Daniel 12:1. This host, the true church, is fitly represented by a green olive tree. Jeremiah 11:15–17. And when some of the branches (members of the Jewish church) were broken off through unbelief, others were grafted in from the Gentiles, and thus the host continues to exist. Romans 11:17–20. This host, or church, is the worshipers of God, and is intimately connected with his sanctuary. That sanctuary we are now prepared to consider.

What is the Sanctuary of God?

“Before answering this question, we present the definition of the word sanctuary: ‘A holy place’, Walker. ‘A sacred place’, Webster. ‘A holy or sanctified place a dwelling-place of the Most High’, Cruden. A dwelling-place for God. Exodus 25:8. Thus much for the meaning of the word. We now inquire respecting its application.

“Is the earth the sanctuary? To this question we answer emphatically: It is not. And if we are requested to prove a negative, we offer the following reasons: 1. The word sanctuary is used 145 times in the Bible, and it is not in a single instance applied to the earth. Hence there is no authority for this view, except that of man. 2. Every one knows that the earth is neither a dwelling-place of God, nor yet a holy, or sacred place. Those, therefore, who affirm that is is the sanctuary of God, should know better than to make such a statement. 3. In almost every instance in which the word sanctuary occurs in the Bible (and the exceptions nearly all refer to Satan’s rival sanctuary) it refers directly to another definite object which God calls his sanctuary. Hence, those who teach that the earth is the sanctuary of the Lord of hosts, contradict his positive testimony a hundred times repeated. For the benefit of those who think that the earth will become the sanctuary after it has been cleansed by fire, we add that God does not even then call it his sanctuary, but simply ‘the place’ of its location. Isaiah 60:13; Ezekiel 37:26–28; Revelation 21:1–3. The earth, then, is not the sanctuary, but merely the place where it will be located hereafter.

“Is the church the sanctuary? We answer: It is not. The following reasons in support of this answer are to the point:

1. The Bible never calls the church the sanctuary.

2. In a great number of texts, God has called another object his sanctuary, and has uniformly associated the church with that object, as the worshipers; and that sanctuary itself, as the place of that worship, or toward which their prayer was directed. Psalm 20:2; 28:2, margin; 29:2, margin; 63:2; 68:24; 73:17; 134:2; 150:1; 5:7.

3. The following inference is all that we have ever seen urged in favor of this view. God has many times called the tabernacle or temple, which are the patterns of the true, his sanctuary. And because that the church is spiritually called the temple of God, some have supposed that they were at liberty to call the church the sanctuary.

4. But there is one text that some may urge. It is this: ‘When Israel went out of Egypt, the house of Jacob from a people of strange language; Judah was his sanctuary, and Israel his dominion.’ Psalm 114:1–2. But, at most, this would only prove that one of the twelve tribes was the sanctuary, and that the whole church was not. But if the fact be remembered, that God chose Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 6:6), which was in Judah (Joshua 15:63; Judges 1:8; Zechariah 1:12; Ezra 1:3), as the place of his sanctuary (1 Chronicles 28:9–10; 2 Chronicles 3:1), we think the following from another psalm will fully explain the connection between Judah and the sanctuary of God, and show that Judah was the tribe with which God designed to locate his habitation: ‘But chose the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which he loved. And he built his sanctuary like high palaces [see 1 Chronicles 29:1], like the earth which he hath established forever.’ Psalm 78:68–69. 5. But if a single text could be adduced to prove that the church is called a sanctuary, the following plain fact would prove beyond controversy that it is not the sanctuary of Daniel 8:13–14. The church is represented in Daniel 8:13, by the word ‘host.’ This none will deny. ‘To give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot.’ Then the church and the sanctuary are two things. The church is the host or worshipers; the sanctuary is the place of that worship, or the place toward which it is directed.

“Is the land of Canaan the sanctuary? Of the 145 times in which the word sanctuary occurs in the Bible, only two or three texts have been urged, with any degree of confidence, as referring to the land of Canaan. Yet, strangely enough, men have claimed that the supposed meaning of these two or three texts ought to determine the signification of the word in Daniel 8:13–14, against the plain testimony of more than a hundred texts! For none can deny that in almost every instance in which the word does occur, it refers directly to the typical tabernacle, or else to the true, of which that was but the figure or pattern. But we now inquire whether the two or three texts in question do actually apply the word sanctuary to the land of Canaan. They read as follows: ‘Thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of thine inheritance, in the place, O Lord, which thou hast made for thee to dwell in; in the sanctuary, O Lord, which thy hands have established.’ Exodus 15:17. ‘And he led them on safely, so that they feared not; but the sea overwhelmed their enemies. And he brought them to the border of his sanctuary, even to this mountain, which his right hand had purchased.’ ‘And he built his sanctuary like high palaces, like the earth which he hath established forever.’ Psalm 78:53–54, 69.

“The first of these texts, it will be noticed, is taken from the song of Moses, after the passage of the Red Sea. It is a prediction of what God would do for Israel. The second text was written about five hundred years after the song of Moses. What Moses utters as a prediction, the psalmist records as a matter of history. Hence the psalm is an inspired commentary on the song of Moses. If the first text be read without the other, the idea might be gathered that the mountain was the sanctuary, though it does not directly state this. Even as one might get the idea that the tribe of Judah was Mount Zion, were they to read only the expression, ‘but chose the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which he loved’ (Psalm 78:68), and omit those texts which inform us that Mount Zion was the city of David, a part of Jerusalem (2 Samuel 5:6–7), and was located in Judah, as one of its cities. Ezra 1:3; Psalm 69:35.

“But if the second text be read in connection with the first, it destroys the possibility of such an inference. The psalmist states that the mountain of the inheritance was the border of the sanctuary. And that God, after driving out the heathen before his people, proceeded to build his sanctuary like high palaces. See 1 Chronicles 29:1. 1. The land of Canaan was the mountain of the inheritance. Exodus 15:17. 2. That mountain of the border of the sanctuary. Psalm 78:54. 3. In that border God built his sanctuary. Psalm 78:69. 4. In that sanctuary God dwelt. Psalm 74:7; Exodus 25:8. 5. In that border the people dwelt. Psalm 78:54–55. These facts demonstrate that the same Spirit moved both those “holy men of old.” These texts perfectly harmonize, not only with each other, but with the entire testimony of the Bible, respecting the sanctuary. If the reader still persists in confounding the sanctuary with its border, the land of Canaan, we request him to listen while a king of Judah points out the distinction:

“Art not thou our God, who didst drive out the inhabitants of this land before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of Abraham thy friend forever? And they dwelt therein, and have built thee a sanctuary therein for thy name, saying, If, when evil cometh upon us, as the sword, judgment, or pestilence, or famine, we stand before this house, and in thy presence (for thy name is in this house), and cry unto thee in our affliction, then thou wilt hear and help.’ 2 Chronicles 20:7–9.

“This language is a perfect parallel to that of Psalm 78:54–55, 69. In the clearest manner it points out the distinction between the land of Canaan and the sanctuary which was built therein; and it does clearly teach that that sanctuary was the house erected as the habitation of God.

“But there is another text by which some attempt to prove that Canaan is the sanctuary. ‘The people of thy holiness have possessed it but a little while: our adversaries have trodden down thy sanctuary.’ Isaiah 63:18. No one offers this as direct testimony. As it is only an inference, a few words are all that is needed. 1. When the people of God’s holiness were driven out of the land of Canaan (as here predicted by the prophet, who uses the past tense for the future), not only were they dispossessed of their inheritance, but the sanctuary of God, built in that land, was laid in ruins. This is plainly stated in 2 Chronicles 36:17–20. 2. The next chapter testifies that the prophet had a view of the destruction of God’s sanctuary, as stated in the text quoted from 2 Chronicles. This explains the whole matter. Isaiah 64:10–11; Psalm 74:3, 7; 79:1.

“A fourth text may occur to some minds as conclusive proof that Canaan is the sanctuary. We present it, as it is the only remaining one that has ever been urged in support of this view. ‘The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir tree, the pine tree, and the box together, to beautify the place of my sanctuary; and I will make the place of my feet glorious.’ Isaiah 60:13. This text needs little comment. The place of God’s sanctuary, we fully admit, is the land of Canaan, or the new earth, for Isaiah refers to the glorified state. And as God has promised to set his sanctuary in that place (Ezekiel 37:25–28), the meaning of the text is perfectly plain. But if any still assert that the place of the sanctuary is the sanctuary itself, let them notice that the same text calls the same ‘place’ the place of the Lord’s feet; and hence the same principle would make the land of Canaan the feet of the Lord! The view that Canaan is the sanctuary is too absurd to need further notice. And even were it a sanctuary, it would not even then be the sanctuary of Daniel; for the prophet had his eye upon the habitation of God. Daniel 9. Canaan was only the place of God’s sanctuary or habitation.

“We have found that the earth is not the sanctuary, but simply the territory where it will finally be located; that the church is not the sanctuary, but simply the worshipers connected with the sanctuary; and that the land of Canaan is not the sanctuary, but that it is the place where the typical sanctuary was located.” J. N. Andrews, The Sanctuary and the 2300 Days, 33–45.

 Friends, the pioneers and James White were correct on identifying the king who “comes to his end and none shall help” as the papacy, and they were correct on Daniel selecting the word “Daily” to symbolize paganism. But there is another concept that J. N. Andrews identifies here that is important to note, before we move away from this subject. Part of his burden, in this article, was to identify the distinction between the “church’, the “sanctuary”, the “earth” and the “land of Canaan”. Prophetically, though closely related, the “land of Canaan”, the “sanctuary” and the “church” are three different entities. The church is not the sanctuary, and the sanctuary is not the land of Canaan, and the land of Canaan is not the church. When Andrews penned this article, these prophetic items were a point of misunderstanding and contention, so he took time to be clear on this subject. His reasoning is sound and it has implications for us today in another way.

There are some Adventists today that are correct on the “Daily” and they are also correct on “the king of the north”. But, when they come to verse forty-one of Daniel eleven, they identify “the glorious land” as God’s church. Though closely related, “the glorious land” which is another term for “the land of Canaan” is not “the church”. They are two different entities and to carelessly mix them together is to perform the same type of erroneous reasoning that J. N. Andrews was opposing in his article.

At this point we have responded to most of the questions we raised two newsletters ago, except the question concerning Smith’s position on the “trumpets” in Revelation 8 and 9. That question went like this, “Also, have you looked into the possibility that the 7 Trumpets of Revelation are yet to be fulfilled? Brother Uriah Smith does not really show a Biblical fulfillment of these in his book.”

Smith most certainly shows a Biblical fulfillment in his book. It is set forth in chapters eight and nine of the Revelation presentation. It is the pioneer understanding of the “trumpets”. Many pioneers spoke and wrote on these truths and there was unanimity of understanding. The fact that there are those in Adventism today who have come up with a different interpretation only fulfills the many warnings similar to the following:

 “I saw a company who stood well guarded and firm, giving no countenance to those who would unsettle the established faith of the body. God looked upon them with approbation. I was shown three steps—the first, second, and third angels’ messages. Said my accompanying angel, ‘Woe to him who shall move a block or stir a pin of these messages. The true understanding of these messages is of vital importance. The destiny of souls hangs upon the manner in which they are received.’ I was again brought down through these messages, and saw how dearly the people of God had purchased their experience. It had been obtained through much suffering and severe conflict. God had led them along step by step, until He had placed them upon a solid, immovable platform. I saw individuals approach the platform and examine the foundation. Some with rejoicing immediately stepped upon it. Others commenced to find fault with the foundation. They wished improvements made, and then the platform would be more perfect, and the people much happier. Some stepped off the platform to examine it and declared it to be laid wrong. But I saw that nearly all stood firm upon the platform and exhorted those who had stepped off to cease their complaints; for God was the Master Builder, and they were fighting against Him. They recounted the wonderful work of God, which had led them to the firm platform, and in union raised their eyes to heaven and with a loud voice glorified God. This affected some of those who had complained and left the platform, and they with humble look again stepped upon it.” Early Writings, 258.

 Most Adventist would not argue that Daniel 8:14 is the prophetic foundation for Adventism. This verse is the summation of the message the Millerites took to the world. Yet in one sense the pioneer understanding of the “trumpets”, as identified in Smith’s book, was just as important to the movement itself as was the time prediction in Daniel 8:14. Sister White is clear that the pioneer understanding of the “trumpets” is the truth which empowered the Millerites to proclaim the message with power and authority from 1840 onward. Josiah Litch’s prediction based upon the pioneer understanding of the “trumpets” is what validated beyond argument the “year/day principle” of Bible prophecy. That validation added authority to Miller’s understanding of the 2300 days.

 “In the year 1840 another remarkable fulfillment of prophecy excited widespread interest. Two years before, Josiah Litch, one of the leading ministers preaching the second advent, published an exposition of Revelation 9, predicting the fall of the Ottoman Empire. According to his calculations, this power was to be overthrown ‘in A.D. 1840, sometime in the month of August;’ and only a few days previous to its accomplishment he wrote: ‘Allowing the first period, 150 years, to have been exactly fulfilled before Deacozes ascended the throne by permission of the Turks, and that the 391 years, fifteen days, commenced at the close of the first period, it will end on the 11th of August, 1840, when the Ottoman power in Constantinople may be expected to be broken. And this, I believe, will be found to be the case.’—Josiah Litch, in Signs of the Times, and Expositor of Prophecy, August 1, 1840.

“At the very time specified, Turkey, through her ambassadors, accepted the protection of the allied powers of Europe, and thus placed herself under the control of Christian nations. The event exactly fulfilled the prediction. When it became known, multitudes were convinced of the correctness of the principles of prophetic interpretation adopted by Miller and his associates, and a wonderful impetus was given to the advent movement. Men of learning and position united with Miller, both in preaching and in publishing his views, and from 1840 to 1844 the work rapidly extended.” The Great Controversy, 334–335.

 To discard Smith’s, and in this case, the pioneer’s position on the “trumpets” in Revelation eight and nine, is attack one of the most important “pins” in the “foundation” of Adventism. To attempt this is bring upon oneself the pronouncement that Sister White’s accompanying angel made, when he stated, “Woe to him who shall move a block or stir a pin of these messages. The true understanding of these messages is of vital importance. The destiny of souls hangs upon the manner in which they are received.” We should strive to be among those in her warning who “stood well guarded and firm, giving no countenance to those who would unsettle the established faith of the body”.

 RETURN TO TOC