Ellen G. White Writings

<< Back Forward >>

«Back «Hit «Prev. Pub. «Ch «Pg   Pg» Ch» Next Pub.» Forward»

Ellen G. White: The Later Elmshaven Years: 1905-1915 (vol. 6), Page 254

If they [our brethren] will expound Daniel 8:9-14 by the Scriptures and history they will establish a harmony between the Bible, the testimonies, and history, and this will establish the confidence of many thousands of our people.—AGD to WCW, February 22, 1910.

Study of the Context Important

Concerning this whole matter, W. C. White, after spending a day or two studying it through carefully, on June 1, 1910, wrote to Edson, taking the position that the context of the statement must be considered.

It is evident that the vision of September 23, 1850, as published in Early Writings, 74-76, new edition, under the title “The Gathering Time,” was given to correct the prevalent error of time setting, and to check the fanatical doctrines being taught regarding the return of the Jews to Jerusalem.

The statement concerning the “daily” of Daniel 8:9-14,as published in Early Writings, appeared first in Present Truth, Vol. I, No. 11, dated Paris, Maine, November, 1850. During the same month and in the same place, there was published the first number of Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, which has continued as the church paper of Seventh-day Adventists ever since. In this first number appears an article by Elder Joseph Bates on “The Laodicean Church,” in which he writes at considerable length on the confused state of various bodies of Advent believers, in contrast with the unity that the commandment-keeping Adventists were endeavoring to maintain.

On the point of confusion of many bodies of Adventists, at that period in their history, over the question of prophetic “time,” he declares:

“For six successive years, viz: from the fall of 1844 to the spring and fall of 1850, the most of these leading members have been aiding and assisting each other in changing the chronology, i.e., the world's history, to prove that they were on the true position. What have they gained? Answer, nothing but disappointment and confusion. This, too, in direct opposition to their standard work—Advent Shield. It has not proved to be their

«Back «Hit «Prev. Pub. «Ch «Pg   Pg» Ch» Next Pub.» Forward»