After having considered the origin and development of our traditional interpretation of Daniel 8, and very particularly the human assumptions upon which the setting of October 22, 1844, as the date when the 2,300 evenings and mornings prophecy ended was based; some readers may conclude that this blog intends to attack the church, discrediting our traditional interpretations of Daniel 7, 8 and 9; instead of realizing that it is an attempt to help it, in order to start a revision of what we have believed and taught regarding the prophecies of Daniel; and if necessary, proceed to an honorable correction. In the following articles, we will consider what Mrs. White wrote about the 2,300 evenings and mornings prophecy, and the myths and assumptions that arose before, during, and after October 22, 1844.
The first myth we will try to clarify is related to the prophetic vision received by Hiram Edson in the early hours of October 23; in which it was revealed to him that the Lord Jesus did not come to earth to purify it with fire; but instead, on that date, He passed from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place, to begin its purification; from our sins. In order to validate or invalidate the aforementioned, we will review what has recently been written by our authors. Marvin Moore in his book “The Challenges of the Remnant,” p. 140, writes the following: “In the past, some Adventists thought that Edson had a vision, but the evidence does not support that conclusion. His experience seems to have been more of a momentary intuition.” Mervyn Maxwell, in his book “Tell It to the World,” p. 49 l., asks: “Did Hiram Edson, as some suggest, have a prophetic vision in the cornfield?… in a different account, he makes no allusion to ‘seeing’ something, but rather heard a voice speaking to him… Hiram Edson was cutting across a cornfield with a friend when suddenly, light dawned in his mind…” George Knight in his book “Meeting Ellen G. White,” p. 23-24, writes the following: “The first glimpse of understanding in accordance with this came through a perception of Hiram Edson… years later he revealed that on that date, he understood for the first time… that our High Priest… entered for the first time on that day, the second compartment of the sanctuary…” Herbert Douglas in his book “Messenger of the Lord,” p. 497-498, mentions that both Hiram Edson and Joseph Bates, after 1844, continued to wait each year for the Lord’s coming until 1851. The aforementioned is revealing and shows that Hiram Edson did not receive any vision that the Lord Jesus passed from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place to begin the purification of the sanctuary; because if he had received it, he would not have waited every year until 1851 for His second coming.
The second myth is related to the assertion that Sister White was revealed in the first vision and subsequent ones about what had happened in 1844, what she should share with the disappointed Millerites. Two of our authors, considering the first vision given to Sister White in December 1884, comment that Sister White was shown that some Adventists recklessly denied the light shining behind them, saying that it was not God who had led them there. They argued that the 2,300 years were unimportant and that October 22 was a mistake. For them, the light went out and they were left in complete darkness. Another contemporary writer of Sister White; commenting on the first vision, wrote: “… this message… confirmed the certainty of the fulfillment on October 22, 1844, of the prophecy of Daniel 8:14.” Again, we will review what has recently been written on this matter. George Knight in the book “Meeting Ellen G. White,” p. 28; and Herbert Douglas in the book “Messenger of the Lord,” p. 504, inform us that Ellen Harmon and James White again waited until September of the year 1845 for the Lord’s second coming in October of that year. Subsequently, she confirmed the aforementioned, by writing the following: “Many were expecting the Lord to come in the seventh month (October) of 1845. We firmly believed that the Lord would come then.” It is important to highlight here that by January 1847, more than two years after the disappointment; Sister White had still not written anything related to what had happened in 1844. It was not until February of that year that she wrote that Brother Russell Crosier had the true light regarding the sanctuary’s purification.
All the aforementioned invalidates the myths that Hiram Edson received a prophetic vision on October 23, 1844; and that Sister White received a vision in December of the same year, in which she was revealed what had happened in that year; which dismisses the assumption of a divine intervention confirming that what happened on October 22 fulfilled what was prophesied in Daniel 8:14. On the other hand, it also shows that our current interpretation of what happened on the aforementioned date, that the Lord passed from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place to purify it, does not come from a divine vision revealed to Sister White, but rather from the conclusion reached by Rousell Crosier, trying to understand what happened in the year under consideration. Unfortunately, a few years later, Crosier retracted his interpretation because he considered it lacked biblical foundation; an interpretation that the church adopted and has maintained to this day.
In conclusion, it is important to note that in the more than two thousand dreams and visions that Sister White had, she did not receive a clear and categorical vision that the Lord Jesus, on that date, passed from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place. The closest thing to that interpretation is the vision she received in Exeter at the beginning of 1845 where she mentions: “I saw the Father rise from His throne… go into the Most Holy Place within the veil… there were angels surrounding the chariot… when it arrived where Jesus was, He stepped in and was carried in the Most Holy Place, where the Father was seated. Then I beheld Jesus as He stood before the Father as our great High Priest.
” The issue with using this vision to suggest that it referred to the Lord moving from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place in 1844 is that this vision was given in mid-February 1845, a year in which Sister White still hoped that the Lord Jesus would return in October; which indicates that at the beginning of that year, she could not believe what has been insinuated to have been revealed in the mentioned vision. Furthermore, in that vision and other similar ones she received, there is no direct mention linking them to the year 1844. At best, we can relate them to the mentioned date based on assumptions that can be subjective and highly debatable.
What she wrote about it was based on the beliefs of William Miller and the interpretation of Russell Crosier, who approximately fifty years later wrote that the ignorance that existed in the Scriptures at that time; was such that it gave an importance that was not deserved to the mistaken interpretation he proposed, which he later retracted. Over time, Crosier ended up being a successful Christian publisher, who attended a Seventh-day Unitarian church. The aforementioned is recorded in our literature, which shows that some of our current beliefs related to the year 1844 are nothing but myths and unfounded assumptions. Blessings.
Comments