The exact date of Ellen White's first vision is unknown. In her July 13, 1847, letter to Joseph Bates, Ellen White gave the date as December 1844. James White gave the same date in his comments about the vision in A Word to the “Little Flock,” published a few weeks earlier. In her autobiography Ellen White described the vision as being received while at the home of Elizabeth Haines in Portland, Maine.

See: Ellen G. White, Lt 3, 1847 (July 13); James White, ed., A Word to the “Little Flock,” p. 22; Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts [vol. 2], p. 30.

Cf. 2 Cor. 4:17, 18. The report of this vision contains many scriptural allusions, only a few of which are noted in the annotations. James White supplied more than 40 references in his reprint of the vision in A Word to the “Little Flock,” pp. 14-18.

The expression “midnight cry” is an allusion to the warning cry “Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him,” given at midnight in the parable of the 10 virgins (Matt. 25:6). As it is used here it refers to the powerful proclamation during the late summer and autumn of 1844 announcing the second coming of Christ on October 22. Even though the predicted Advent failed to materialize, this first vision declares the Midnight Cry to be “a bright light.” No information is given at this stage regarding in what way the seemingly discredited Midnight Cry contained light from God.

Two groups are portrayed here as rejected by God: (1) those who had initially accepted the Second Advent message (“Midnight Cry”) but later rejected it; (2) “all the wicked world,” composed of persons who had never professed a faith in the Second Advent. Although we are not told specifically why God “rejected” the members of the second group, the implication is that like the first group, it was because they had wickedly rejected the Advent message.

Concerning members of the first group—those who at first accepted but later rejected the Midnight Cry—William Miller initially took a view similar to that of this vision. They “were crying for mercy a few days since … [but] are now scoffing and mocking us.” He then added the pointed question “Have not such individuals sinned against the Holy Ghost?” (see William Miller to I. E. Jones, in Advent Herald, Dec. 25, 1844, p. 154). For biblical examples of probation closing on certain classes and groups of people, see Francis D. Nichol, Ellen G. White and Her Critics, pp. 206-210.

Much discussion has ensued through the years as to the extent and size of the second group—“all the wicked world which God had rejected.” Some have held that “the wicked world” refers to the entire population of the world (apart from the loyal Advent believers), since, presumably, in a general sense all humanity is “wicked” and sinful. While this is a reasonable interpretation of the phrase “all the wicked world” taken on its own, the context suggests (as argued above) that “the wicked world” refers to a much more circumscribed group, viz., that which had specifically rejected, maligned, and mocked the Advent proclamation. This would accord with Ellen White's own interpretation of the passage in 1883 when she was called upon to explain its omission in later printings of the vision:

“Two classes are brought to view in the vision—those who declared the light which they had followed a delusion, and the wicked of the world who, having rejected the light, had been rejected of God. No reference is made to those who had not seen the light, and therefore were not guilty of its rejection” (Ms 4, 1883, quoted in Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, book 1, p. 64).

An example of the second, more restricted, interpretation of “wicked world” can be seen in another passage from William Miller: “And the wicked world, who have scoffed at the idea of Christ's second coming … and laughed and ridiculed the servants of Christ … will be silent.” Apollos Hale and Joseph Turner likewise used “world” in a very specific manner when they wrote of “the world” that had “rejected the [Advent] truth” and “turned away their ears with loathing from its warnings and promises.” (See William Miller, Evidence From Scripture and History, p. 188; A. Hale and J. Turner, “Has Not the Savior Come as the Bridegroom?” Advent Mirror, January 1845, pp. 3, 4.)

The bibliography of published comment and debate on “the wicked world” passage is extensive. For contrasting interpretations, see, e.g., Uriah Smith, The Visions of Mrs. E. G. White, pp. 29-31; W. W. Fletcher, The Reasons for My Faith, pp. 188, 205, 206; Francis D. Nichol, Ellen G. White and Her Critics, pp. 212-214; Rolf J. Poehler, “‘… and the Door Was Shut,’” pp. 109, 110, 127, 128; Herbert E. Douglass, Messenger of the Lord, pp. 557, 558.

In A Word to the “Little Flock” James White provides an early discussion of this prediction, contrasting it with Millerite thinking on “the voice of God.” Note that according to the sequence described in this vision, the “day and hour of Jesus’ coming” is announced after the close of probation and apparently only a short time before the Second Advent. When some subsequently alleged that Ellen White claimed to know the day and hour of Jesus’ coming, having been shown it in vision, she responded, “I have not the slightest knowledge as to the time spoken by the voice of God. I heard the hour proclaimed, but had no remembrance of that hour after I came out of vision.”

See: James White, “The Voice of God,” in A Word to the “Little Flock,” pp. 4-8; Ellen G. White, Lt 38, 1888 (Aug. 11).

See: EGWEnc, s.v. “144,000.”

See: EGWEnc, s.v. “Seal of God.”

Cf. Rev. 3:12; Rom. 16:16.

That the saints would experience violent persecution just prior to the Second Coming, as portrayed here, was not featured in Millerite prophetic exposition, at least during the final years of the movement. “An idea is abroad that a great time of persecution and martyrdom is before the church,” wrote Josiah Litch in 1840, “but I cannot find it in the Bible.” Thus, for example, Litch held that the terrors of the seven last plagues would be poured out on the wicked after the Second Advent, when the saints had already been delivered, not before. Hale and Jacobs argued that the “time of trouble” predicted in Daniel 12:1 would not touch the saints, who would be delivered before it started. On the matter of the seven last plagues, major Millerite expositors such as Apollos Hale, Enoch Jacobs, and C. S. Minor agreed with Litch. William Miller had a different view, holding that six of the seven plagues were already past, being symbolic of the judgments of God on the Papacy going back to the Reformation. While he thought the seventh plague was still future, it did not presage any special persecution for the saints other than what they had always had to endure throughout the centuries. Thus on this point the vision given to Ellen Harmon constituted a major departure from mainstream Millerite thinking. This probably explains why, when this vision was included in the pamphlet A Word to the “Little Flock” 16 months later, James White felt it necessary to include a section offering biblical support for the position “that the seven last plagues were all in the future, and that they were all to be poured out before the first resurrection.” For White himself, this represented a reversal of his earlier Millerite position.

See: L. [Josiah Litch], “The Battle of Armageddon (concluded),” Signs of the Times, Sept. 15, 1840, p. 95; Josiah Litch, Prophetic Expositions, p. 175; A. Hale, Herald of the Bridegroom! pp. 23, 29; E. Jacobs, “Seventh Seal,” Midnight Cry, Oct. 26, 1843, p. 82; C. S. M. [C. S. Minor], “His Coming,” Midnight Cry, Sept. 21, 1843, p. 36; William Miller, Evidence From Scripture and History, pp. 219-232; James White, “The Seven Last Plagues,” in James White, ed., A Word to the “Little Flock,” pp. 1-4.

The imagery used here is taken from Revelation 3:9, in which religious opponents of the people of God (“synagogue of Satan”) are finally brought to humbly acknowledge that those they had bitterly opposed were “loved by God.” For further comment, see Lt 2, 1847 (Apr. 21), note 5.

It is interesting to note the positive mention, already in this first vision, of the ancient Christian liturgical practices of foot washing and the “holy kiss.” It marks an early expression of the restorationist ideal which was to become central to Seventh-day Adventist theological development. Following New Testament admonitions to “salute one another with an holy kiss” (Rom. 16:16, etc.) this practice found its way into the worship services of the early church. “Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss,” Justin Martyr reported in the second century (First Apology I. 65). Gradually, however, the “holy kiss” became restricted to a few special ceremonial occasions, such as the consecration of bishops. A somewhat similar historical trajectory can be traced in connection with liturgical foot washing as instituted by Jesus (John 13). With the coming of the Reformation, most Reformers elected not to reinstate these practices; the exception was the Anabaptists, among whom the holy kiss and foot washing were revived. The situation in mid-nineteenth-century America remained largely the same, with only a minority of smaller churches, such as the Mennonites (of the Anabaptist tradition) and the Dunkards, maintaining these practices while the mainline Protestant churches rejected them.

See: The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, s.v. “Kiss of Peace,” by Victor Schultze; Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, s.v. “Feet-Washing,” by G. A. Frank Knight; The Mennonite Encyclopedia, s.v. “Kiss,” by James Reusser. For a recent discussion of the restoration motif in Seventh-day Adventist theology, see Hans K. LaRondelle, “The Remnant and the Three Angels’ Messages,” in Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology, pp. 880-889.

In subsequent printings, the apparent error of “hung” was corrected to “heavy.”

See: Ellen G. Harmon, Ms 1, 1846 (Apr. 6); James White, ed., A Word to the “Little Flock,” p. 15.

The description given in this section leaves no doubt that after the resurrection the saints ascend to heaven, where are “the City,” the tree of life, and the river of life. On this point, in interesting ways the account diverges from mainstream Millerism of the time. William Miller's conclusion, accepted almost universally in his movement, was that at Christ's coming both the “living and raised saints will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air. Then the saints will be judged and presented to the Father without spot or wrinkle. … And while this is being done in the air, the earth will be cleansed by fire. … Then Christ and his people will come down from the heavens, or middle air, and live with his saints on the new earth in a new heaven, or dispensation, forever.” The idea that the saints ascend to heaven after the resurrection is not found in Millerite accounts. The saints are “in the air” or “middle air” awaiting the purification of the earth. The focus is on the earth to which the saints descend with the Holy City once the earth has been cleansed, to spend the millennium and beyond.

The Millerite concept of an earthly millennium was retained in the writings of Joseph Bates as late as 1847. Prior to Christ's “second appearing,” he wrote in 1847, He receives “the Holy City, which is the capital of his kingdom, that he will bring with him and establish here, and it will ever be the capital of all his dominions under the whole heaven” (Second Advent Waymarks, p. 57).

James White likewise maintained in 1846 that “Christ is coming to raise the dead saints and change those who are alive. Christ is coming to restore this earth to its primitive purity. He is coming to set up His everlasting kingdom and reign. Christ is to be king. The Land promised to Abraham and enlarged in Dan. 7: and Isaiah 65: is to be the territory, the spiritual seed of Abram, the subjects, etc.” (In a memory statement made 10 years later, in 1855, James White claimed that the Millerite preacher E. R. Pinney had taught “that the Kingdom of God would not be established on the earth till the close of the seventh millennium,” and that he, White, had “taught the same since 1845.” However, the above extract suggests that it was somewhat later that he took this view.) It would seem, then, that the vision of December 1844 contained hints of a heavenly millennium well before this theme was developed by Sabbatarian Adventists.

See: “Synopsis of Mr. Miller's Views,” Midnight Cry, Nov. 22, 1842, p. [2]; Joseph Bates, Second Advent Waymarks and High Heaps, p. 57; James White to “Brother Collins,” Aug. 26, 1846; J. W. [James White], “A Test,” Review, Oct. 16, 1855, p. 61. For a comparison of Millerite with Seventh-day Adventist views on the millennium, see SDAE, s.v. “Millennium”; Alberto R. Timm, The Sanctuary and the Three Angels’ Messages, pp. 152, 153.

Identity: Charles Fitch (1805-1844) was a prominent Holiness Millerite minister who died on October 14, 1844, less than two weeks before the anticipated date for the Second Coming.

See: SDAE, s.v. “Charles Fitch”; EGWEnc, s.v. “Charles Fitch.”

Identity: Levi Stockman (1812-1844) was a respected Methodist Millerite minister who lived in Maine. He helped Ellen Harmon understand the love of God during her conversion process. He contracted tuberculosis and died before the 1844 disappointment. In this vision Ellen White is taken to the future and meets these men after the second coming of Jesus and the resurrection.

See: SDAE, s.v. “Levi Stockman”; EGWEnc, s.v. “Levi Stockman.”

From this point forward, Ellen White continues with an account of her “new earth” vision that describes the descent of the New Jerusalem to the earth following the millennium and the restoration of the earth to its Edenic state. The “new earth” vision was probably given in late spring or early summer of 1845. In this and her previous Midnight Cry vision she emphasized the tangible aspects of heaven and the new earth. Ellen White vigorously opposed the spiritualizing view of some Millerites who said that they were now spiritually living in the New Jerusalem. See Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts [vol. 2], pp. 52-56.

In his vision of the “holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven” John wrote, “I saw no temple therein” (Rev. 21:10, 22). Likewise, Ellen Harmon saw no temple in the Holy City in the earth made new. She did, however, see a temple on a mount “outside of the city,” although the main function of that temple is not revealed. Since sin and evil have now been eradicated forever, the temple cannot have the soteriological purpose it had served in heaven prior to the eradication of sin. Richard Davidson suggests that “at the consummation of salvation history, the heavenly sanctuary or temple apparently returns to its original doxological function.”

See: Richard M. Davidson, “Sanctuary Typology,” in Symposium on Revelation, pp. 99-130.