Portions of this manuscript are published in Ellen G. White, Manuscript Releases, vol. 6, p. 249. See also The Present Truth, November 1850, pp. 86, 87.

Importance of publishing a periodical; need for prophetic chart; end-time prophecies; errors of Clorinda Minor.1EGWLM 242.3

A vision the Lord gave me October 23, 1850, at the house of Bro. Nichols [Otis Nichols]²

Identity: Only Otis Nichols fits the description given here.

See: Search term “Nichols” in Words of the Pioneers.

in Dorchester, Mass. I saw that we must redouble our efforts now in this gathering time.^{3
Using the language of Ezekiel 34, post-Disappointment Adventists had described the divisions within Adventism following 1844 as the “scattering time” (see second paragraph). By 1849, however, Sabbatarian Adventism had developed a cogent theological platform and was beginning to experience strong membership growth. The new situation was described as the “gathering time.”
See: EGWEnc, s.v. “‘Scattering’ and ‘Gathering’ Times.”} I saw it was a shame for us to refer to the scattering time for examples to govern us now in the gathering time, for if God does no more for us now than He did then, we never shall be gathered. In the scattering Israel were torn and smitten, but now God will heal and bind them up.1EGWLM 242.4

I saw that God had stretched out His hand the second time to recover the remnant of His people.⁴

Cf. Isa. 11:11, 12.

They are those who have been covered up beneath the rubbish since 1844.^{5
An allusion to a widely published dream William Miller had in 1847. Central to the dream were jewels covered in dust and rubbish. A man with a “dirt-brush” entered the room, and brushed away the rubbish, restoring the brilliance of the precious stones. James White published the vision in The Present Truth in 1850. According to White's interpretation, the dust and rubbish represent the “darkness and error” that had covered “the clear light of … the third angel's message.” Ellen White here uses the metaphor to refer to those who accepted the Advent call in 1844 but who had since then been misled by various post-1844 theories. In this situation God was graciously calling these Adventists a “second time” out of error to the light of the third angel's message.
See: “Brother Miller's Dream,” Present Truth, May 1850, p. 75. Also published in James White, ed., Brother Miller's Dream.} I saw that efforts to spread the truth should now be made, such as were put forth in 1843 and ’44. In the scattering, efforts made to spread the truth had but little effect—accomplished little or nothing—but now in the gathering time when God has set His hand to gather His people, efforts to spread the truth will have their designed effect, and all should be zealous and united in the work.1EGWLM 242.5

I saw that a paper was needed and that all should be interested in it. I saw that the burden of the paper was laid on James, and that it is as important to publish the truth as to preach it. I saw that James should not be discouraged if all did not feel the interest in the paper that he did. I saw that Bro. Bates had not the interest in the paper that he should have, and that his lack of interest had discouraged James.⁶

James White later observed that Bates had “refused for one year to write for our little paper, because to publish a paper was to do as others had done who had backslidden.” In December 1849 Bates had written to White forcefully expressing his opposition to the publication of a periodical, a letter which had brought James deep discouragement. Despite Ellen White's vision of January 1850 supporting the paper, it appears that Bates's opposition continued till the autumn of 1850, as evidenced by this manuscript.

George R. Knight surveys this disagreement between White and Bates in Joseph Bates, pp. 162-166. See also Ellen G. White, Ms 14, 1850 (Sept.).

I saw that James should set his face as a flint, and go forward. I saw the flock looking for the paper, and were ready like hungry children to eat the truth published in it.1EGWLM 243.1

I saw that the truth should be made plain on tables,⁷

In another account of the vision, written one week later, Ellen White clarifies the intent of this passage. “God shewed me the necessity of getting out a chart. I saw it was needed and that the truth made plain upon tables would effect much.” The reference here is to a chart showing prophetic symbols from Daniel and Revelation together with time calculations. The expression “plain on tables” was taken from Habakkuk 2:2, 3 and had been applied by the Millerites earlier to their use of prophetic charts. The summons for Sabbatarian Adventists to publish a chart was quickly acted upon. Three months later 300 copies of a prophetic chart prepared by Otis Nichols were ready for distribution.

See: Ellen G. White, Lt 26, 1850 (Nov. 1); “The Chart,” Review, January 1851, p. 38. For a general historical overview of the production of the first chart, see Arthur L. White, Ellen G. White: The Early Years, pp. 184, 185.

that the earth and the fullness thereof is the Lord's, and that necessary means should not be spared to make it plain. I saw that the angels’ messages, made plain, would have effect. I saw that the old chart was directed by the Lord, and that not a peg of it should be altered without inspiration. I saw that the figures on the chart were as God wanted them, and 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.^{8
A parallel account substitutes “1843 chart” for “old chart.” This chart, widely used by the Millerites, displayed calculations that the Second Advent would take place in 1843, not recognizing the computational error involved. The assertion here that God's “hand was over and hid a mistake in some of the figures” has been the occasion of much discussion and debate. On the one hand are those who, like D. M. Canright, exclaim, “God helped them make the mistake!” and who make this a reason to reject the authenticity of the visions. Others, such as F. D. Nichol, point to biblical examples in which God conceals truth from people for a while for purposes of testing. Thus, God concealed the true nature of His purposes from Abraham for some time when he was commanded to take his son to Mount Moriah. This was the position taken by Ellen White. In 1858 she wrote, “I saw that God was in the proclamation of the time in 1843. It was His design to arouse the people, and bring them to a testing point.”
See: D. M. Canright, Seventh-Day Adventism Renounced, p. 68; Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts [vol. 1], p. 133; Francis D. Nichol, Ellen G. White and Her Critics, pp. 342-344.}1EGWLM 243.2

I saw that the two-horned beast⁹

Not until some months later, in May 1851, did a Sabbatarian scholar (J. N. Andrews) first propose that the United States of America be identified with the “two-horned” beast of Revelation 13.

See: J. N. Andrews, “Thoughts on Revelation XIII and XIV,” Review, May 19, 1851, pp. 82-84. For the development of early Sabbatarian interpretation of the two-horned beast, see P. Gerard Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission, pp. 196-203.

had a dragon mouth, and that his power was in his head, and that the decree would go out of his mouth. Then I saw the mother of harlots, that the mother was not the daughters, but separate and distinct from them.^{10
In the main, this exposition of Revelation 17 follows earlier Millerite thinking that after 1843 increasingly identified “Babylon … mother of harlots” with the Roman Catholic Church and her offspring harlots as the apostate Protestant churches. The general identification of “Babylon” with Roman Catholicism had a much longer past, reflecting a common position among Protestant scholars going back to the Reformation.
More specifically, this passage may have been directed against the position taken by James White during the 1850s, which tended to downplay the Roman Catholic identity of “Babylon” in Revelation 17. As pointed out by Damsteegt, White seems to have taken his cue for the identification of “Babylon” in Revelation 17 from his understanding of “Babylon” in the second angel's message of Revelation 14. He insisted that since Millerites had not been called out of the Catholic Church in 1843-1844, but out of the Protestant “nominal” churches, “Babylon” did not include the Catholic Church. Turning to “Babylon” in Revelation 17, in an 1851 article, while paying lip service to the Roman Catholic “Mother” and Protestant “harlots” schema of the Millerites, James White sought to conflate the two, seeing them instead as “a family of harlots”… “symbolical of all the churches.” The assertion in Ms 15 that “the mother … [is] not the daughters, but separate and distinct from them” seems to be a rejection of this approach. Though James White's article in December 1851 cited above was published after the vision recorded in Ms 15, 1850, yet he may well have held the opinions expressed there earlier.
See: James White, “Come out of Babylon!” Review, Dec. 9, 1851, p. 58; P. Gerard Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission, p. 179, note 99. For Millerite and early Sabbatarian interpretations of “Babylon,” see further P. Gerard Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission, pp. 46-48, 179-184; Alberto R. Timm, The Sanctuary and the Three Angels’ Messages, pp. 44-47, 81-83, 182-187; Reinder Bruinsma, Seventh-day Adventist Attitudes Toward Roman Catholicism 1844-1965, pp. 42-45, 62, 63, 89. For a general history of prophetic interpretation, see LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers (see especially vol. 2, pp. 528-532; vol. 3, pp. 252, 253, 744; and vol. 4, pp. 392-401 for summaries of non-Millerite Protestant interpretations of “Babylon”). See also: EGWEnc, s.v. “Babylon in Eschatology.”} She has had her day, and it is past, and her daughters, Protestant sects, were next to come on the stage and act out the same mind that the mother had when she persecuted the saints. I saw that as the mother has been declining in power the daughters have been growing, and soon they will exercise the power once manifested by the mother.1EGWLM 244.1

I saw that the nominal churches and nominal Adventists,¹¹

The term “nominal church” or “nominal churches” was often used by early Sabbathkeeping Adventist writers to indicate Protestant and Roman Catholic churches that had experienced a moral fall through their rejection of the message of an imminent Second Coming. The expression “nominal Adventists,” or some variant thereof, was commonly used to indicate Adventist bodies coming out of the Millerite movement that rejected the Sabbath, the prophetic significance of October 22, 1844, and the continuing gift of prophecy in the church.

See: P. Gerard Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission, pp. 179-192.

like Judas, would betray us to the Catholics, to obtain their influence to come against the saints. The saints will be an obscure people, but little known to the Catholics, but the church and nominal Adventists will know of our faith and customs, and will betray the saints and report them to the Catholics as those who disregard the institution of the pope—that is, they keep the Sabbath and disregard Sunday.1EGWLM 245.1

Then the Catholics bid the Protestants to go forward and issue a decree that all who will not observe the first day of the week instead of the seventh shall be slain,¹²

Based on Revelation 13, these predictions of a future persecution of those refusing to honor Sunday as a day of worship affirmed earlier studies dating back to 1847 and the work of Joseph Bates. Despite the dire predictions made here and elsewhere in Ellen White's writings about the future actions of fallen Christendom, she made a clear distinction between these churches as institutions and the individuals belonging to them. Thus her more complete comments affirm that “in the churches which constitute Babylon, the great body of Christ's true followers are still to be found” and that “there are now true Christians in every church, not excepting the Roman Catholic communion … .”

See: Joseph Bates, The Seventh Day Sabbath: A Perpetual Sign (1847), p. 59; Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, pp. 390, 449.

and the Catholics, whose numbers are large, will stand by the Protestants. The Catholics will give their power to the image of the beast, and then Protestants will work as their mother worked before them to destroy the saints. But before their decrees bring forth or bear fruit, the saints will be delivered by the voice of God.1EGWLM 245.2

Then I saw that Jesus’ work in the sanctuary¹³

See: EGWEnc, s.v. “Doctrine of the Sanctuary.”

was almost finished, almost finished, and after His work there is finished He will come to the door of the tabernacle, or door of the first apartment, and confess the sins of Israel upon the head of the scapegoat.^{14
See: SDAE, s.v. “Scapegoat.”} Then He will put on the garments of vengeance. Then the plagues^{15
See: Ibid., s.v. “Plagues, Seven Last.”} come upon the wicked, and they do not come until Jesus puts on the garments of vengeance and takes His seat upon the great white cloud. Then, while the plagues are falling, the scapegoat is being led away. He makes a mighty struggle to escape, but he is held fast by the hand that bears him away. If he should effect his escape, Israel would be destroyed (or slain). I saw that it would take time to bear him away into the land of forgetfulness after the sins were put upon his head.1EGWLM 245.3

Jesus clothes Himself with the garments of vengeance and takes His place upon the great white cloud¹⁶

Rev. 14:14, 15.

before the plagues are poured out. The great white cloud, I saw, was not in the holy place but entirely separate from the holy and most holy, entirely separate from the sanctuary.1EGWLM 246.1

As Jesus passed through the holy place, or first apartment, to the door to confess the sins of Israel on the scapegoat, an angel said, This apartment is called the sanctuary. Then the angel repeated these words and said this is the time spoken of, and he saw that there was no man and wondered that there was no intercessor; we had no mediator between God and man and the plagues could be withheld no longer, for Jesus had ceased to plead for Israel, and they were covered with the covering of Almighty God and lived in His sight, and those who were not covered felt the plagues, for they had nothing to shelter them.1EGWLM 246.2

I saw that there was a cherub sitting on either end of the mercy seat with their wings spread over the ark. There also stood two angels, one by either end of the ark, with their wings spread out on high and touching each other, while their other wings reached to each side of the apartment. I saw that the wings of the angels did not reach above the Father, for that would bring Him too low. I saw that the Father was in the midst above the cherubims, and His glory is shed down upon the ark, and the train of His glory fills the temple.1EGWLM 246.3

Then I saw the “daily,” that the Lord gave the correct view of it to those who gave the first angel's message. When union existed before 1844, nearly all were united on the correct view of the “daily,” but since, in the confusion, other views have been embraced and darkness has followed.¹⁷

In a parallel account of this vision, published a few weeks later, Ellen White gives a fuller report of this section of the vision: “Then I saw in relation to the ‘daily,’ that the word ‘sacrifice’ was supplied by man's wisdom, and does not belong to the text; and that the Lord gave the correct view of it to those who gave the judgment hour cry. When union existed, before 1844, nearly all were united on the correct view of the ‘daily’; but since 1844, in the confusion, other views have been embraced, and darkness and confusion has followed.” This expanded passage suggests that “the correct view” was that “the word ‘sacrifice’ was supplied by man's wisdom.”

The issue here relates to the activities of the “little horn” power of Daniel 8 by which “the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down” (verse 11). Millerite expositors had opposed the interpretation held by some that the reference here was to Antiochus Epiphanes, who violated the Temple at Jerusalem and stopped Temple sacrifices for a period of about three years in the second century B. C. A common Millerite counterargument was that the word “sacrifice” was not in the original text, but was supplied by the KJV translators.

Ellen White's vision confirms the Millerite view that the word “sacrifice” was supplied “by man's wisdom.” But the vision goes on to lament the fact that “since 1844, in the confusion, other views have been embraced.” Julia Neuffer points out that among those “other views” was the position among emerging Literalist (“age-to-come”) Adventists in the late 1840s and early 1850s that “daily sacrifice” was a reference to the future restoration of Jewish Temple rites in Jerusalem.

In the early twentieth century, considerable controversy arose among church leaders as to whether this passage confirmed the “old” view of “the daily” against the “new” view being argued by Prescott, Daniells, and others.

See: E. G. White, “Dear Brothers and Sisters,” Present Truth, November 1850, p. 87; Julia Neuffer, “The Gathering of Israel,” p. 12. On the controversy over the “old” versus “new” views of “the daily,” see Arthur L. White, Ellen G. White: The Later Elmshaven Years, pp. 246-261.

I saw that God had not made a test of time since 1844, and that time never again will be a test.^{18
For details of the flurry of time-setting among a few Sabbatarian Adventists in 1850 and 1851, see Lt 8, 1851 (Nov. 12), note 8.}1EGWLM 246.4

Then I had a view of Sister Minor [Clorinda S. Minor]¹⁹

Clorinda Minor, former Millerite writer and speaker, adopted a strong Literalist position in the later 1840s and 1850s, actively supporting the emigration of Jews to Palestine and their conversion to Christianity, in preparation for the Second Advent. After a preliminary trip to Palestine in 1849, Mrs. Minor returned to the United States in the spring of 1850 to promote and raise funds for a group of farmer-settlers to go to Palestine to further their Literalist agenda. This is the background for the warnings found in Ellen White's vision, given later the same year.

See: Moshe Davis, America and the Holy Land, p. 173; Barbara Kreiger with Shalom Goldman, Divine Expectations, an American Woman in 19th-Century Palestine; Julia Neuffer, “The Gathering of Israel,” pp. 12, 13; SDAE, s.v. “Clorinda S. Minor.”

and others with her, that their visions were not true, that God had not spoken by them. I saw that if we are to go to Jerusalem, then the truth should not be made plain upon tables, for our minds should be turned towards Jerusalem and our means should be reserved to get the saints to Jerusalem. I saw that the faults and errors of Sister Minor and those with her in past time had not been confessed.^{20
Clorinda Minor was somewhat tainted by her connection to the Gorgas fanaticism of October 1844. Accepting R. C. Gorgas's vision predicting that the Second Advent would take place at 3:00 a.m. on October 22, 1844, she joined in leading an exodus of Millerites out of Philadelphia to await the Advent. Ellen White vividly described a very uncomfortable meeting with Clorinda Minor in 1845, who was portrayed as leaning toward a “spiritual view of Christ's coming.” These may be among the “faults and errors of Sister Minor” that Ellen White alludes to here.
Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts [vol. 2], pp. 72-74; George R. Knight, Millennial Fever, pp. 211, 212; Francis D. Nichol, The Midnight Cry, pp. 321-334.} This is the reason why they have been left to run into great errors. I saw that Bro. Bates must be careful and be willing to receive light that comes in other ways besides through visions. I saw that he was too slow to receive light from his brethren.1EGWLM 247.1

Ms 14, 1850

Unauthenticated