Adventist Historicism Reexamined and Critiqued Final Draft

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 1
Adventist Historicism Reexamined and Critiqued

Eduard C. Hanganu
B.A., M.A., Linguistics
Lecturer in English, UE
Draft 98
Revised April 5, 2015
2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 5
Square Claims and Mistaken Denials ............................................................................... 5
Prophetic Schools Noted and Critiqued ............................................................................ 5
The Four Prophetic Schools Described................................................................. 5
The Preterist School ................................................................................ 5
The Futurist School................................................................................. 6
The Idealist School .................................................................................. 6
The Historicist School ............................................................................. 6
The Four Prophetic Schools Critiqued .................................................................. 7
The Preterist School ................................................................................ 7
The Futurist School ................................................................................ 7
The Idealist School .................................................................................. 7
The Historicist School ............................................................................. 7
Blended Perspectives and Interpretation ........................................................................... 7
Present Adventists The Last Historicists ....................................................................... 9
The SDA Church Sold To Historicism ............................................................................ 9
Gerhard Pfandl ................................................................................................... 9
Richard M. Davidson .......................................................................................... 9
ngel M. Rodrguez ............................................................................................ 9
The Dogmatic and Exclusive Position ............................................................................ 10
Historicism The Failed Hermeneutics ......................................................................... 10
This Documents Intended Purpose ................................................................................ 10
II. Historicism in the SDA Perspective ....................................................................................... 12
Various Definitions for Historicism................................................................................ 12
The SDA Encyclopedia ..................................................................................... 12
The SDA Bible Students Source Book ........................................................... 13
William Shea...................................................................................................... 13
Frank B. Holbrook ............................................................................................ 13
Angel Manuel Rodrguez .................................................................................. 14
Desmond Ford ................................................................................................... 14
Le Roy Edwin Froom........................................................................................ 14
Richard M. Davidson ........................................................................................ 15
The Glacier View Theologians ......................................................................... 15
Reimar Vetne ..................................................................................................... 15
Jon Paulien ........................................................................................................ 16

John Noe ............................................................................................................ 16
The Historicism Definitions Tabulated ........................................................................... 17
The Historicism Definitions Itemized ............................................................................. 18
The Historicism Definitions Restated ............................................................................. 19
III. Traditional Base for SDA Historicism .................................................................................. 22
Adventists and Historicist Tradition ............................................................................... 22
Le Roy Edwin Froom........................................................................................ 22
Richard Davidson.............................................................................................. 22
Gerhard Pfandl ................................................................................................. 22
Frank B. Holbrook ............................................................................................ 22
Religious Tradition and Its Dangers ............................................................................... 22
Historicism Its Theological Roots ............................................................................... 23
IV. Historical and Non-Historical Events ................................................................................... 27
Human Events and Historical Records ........................................................................... 27
SDA Historicism and Historical Events ......................................................................... 28
The SDA Historicist Claims Too Tall ............................................................................ 28
Evidence for Historical Fulfillment ................................................................................ 29
Unassailable Facts as True Evidence .............................................................................. 29
V. The Incomplete and Selective Records .................................................................................. 31
Divine and Human Historicist Decoders ........................................................................ 31
The SDA Historicist Claims Repeated ........................................................................... 31
Historical Time Coverage Incomplete ............................................................................ 32
World Empires Never Mentioned ....................................................................... 35
Significant Religious Events Also Absent ...................................................................... 36
Ten Momentous Events in the Church................................................................ 36
The Unbroken Sequence Claim False ............................................................................. 39
VI. Historicist Charts and Historic Spans ................................................................................... 40
Millers Deceptive Time Computations.......................................................................... 40
The Fitch and Hale Prophetic Diagram .......................................................................... 40
The Rhodes and Nichols Revised Chart ......................................................................... 44
Time Gaps In The Historical Narratives ......................................................................... 47
VII. Failed SDA Historicist Predictions ..................................................................................... 48
Bold Predictions And Dreadful Failures ......................................................................... 48
The Sun, Moon, and the Stars ......................................................................... 48
Sure Signs But Mistaken Interpretation .................................................. 49
LaRondelle Disputes Whites Claims ..................................................... 51

Historicist End Time Predictions False................................................... 54
Papal Oppression for 1260 Years .................................................................... 54
Smiths Historicist Persecution Claim .................................................... 54
Ellen White Confirms Smiths Claim ..................................................... 55
Adventist Theologians Oppose White .................................................... 55
Bacchiocchi Contends For Earlier Date .................................................. 57
The Longest Prophetic Period ......................................................................... 59
Millers Bold Extrapolation Miscarries .................................................. 59
Miller Acknowledges His Grave Errors ................................................. 60
The Millerites Lose Purpose and Drive .................................................. 60
Certain Millerites Still Preserve Hope .................................................... 61
Hiram Edsons Aaronic Tabernacle ........................................................ 61
Ellen White In Consent With Edson ....................................................... 63
An Untenable Theological Position ........................................................ 64
Historical Records Fail the 1844 Date .................................................... 65
The Ottoman Empire Prediction ..................................................................... 66
Litch Fails With Millers Arithmetic ...................................................... 66
Ellen White Treats Failure As Success ................................................... 67
Litch Recognizes His Miscalculation ..................................................... 67
VIII. Diversions That Robbed the Gospel .................................................................................. 69
[True Historicism and Salvation] ................................................................................ 69
[Daniels Christological Emphasis] ............................................................................. 69
[Historicist Traditions Misused] .................................................................................. 70
[Honest Historicist Interpretation] .............................................................................. 70
[Historicist Claims Need Evidence] ............................................................................. 71
[Consensus Failure in Historicism] ............................................................................. 71
[Gospel Proclamation Neglected] ................................................................................ 71
[Historicism Blocks True Reform] .............................................................................. 72
IX. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 73
Definition and Application Issues ................................................................................... 73
No Divine Origin For Historicism .................................................................................. 73
Selective Historical Attestation....................................................................................... 73
Repeated SDA Prediction Failures ................................................................................. 73
Historicist Mania and the Gospel .................................................................................... 74
References ................................................................................................................................... 75
Adventist Historicism Reexamined and Critiqued

I. Introduction
Square Claims and Mistaken Denials
In his monumental book, Daniel, Ford examined in detail and evaluated the four main
hermeneutical constructs that have defined the prophetic interpretation during the past two
millenniapreterism, idealism, futurism, and historicism,1 and reached the notorious conclusion
that each of the systems [schools] is right in what it affirms and wrong in what it denies.2 The
Seventh-day Adventist [further, SDA] Glacier View theologians and scholars declared his
statement illogical and ridiculed the scholar because, in their view, with this guiding axiom
coupled with the apotelesmatic principle, the author says that all prophetical interpretations by all
four prophetical schools preterists, historicists, futurists, and idealists are correct (ibid.) and also
because with its use no positively stated assertion could ever contradict another positively stated
assertion.3
Their indictment, though, was based on incomplete theological information, rushed, and
biased. Had the esteemed scholars taken time to read what the heretic had presented
afterwards, the contradiction would have been found in their logic, and Fords declaration would
have become clear, that is, that all hermeneutical constructs or schools were imperfect and
deficient and had failed to provide adequate and appropriate guidelines for sound prophetic
interpretation. To support his informed and critical conclusion, the derided theologian had quoted
prominent Christian theologians and scholars who had urged the exegetes to retain what is right
in each system and to avoid what is wrong,4 and that proposition had been an intelligent and
competent recommendation.
Prophetic Schools Noted and Critiqued
Fords data on the four prophetic interpretation schools is worth our attention because the
scholar is quite familiar with them as a first class academic and scholar in the SDA Church, and
as the Religion Department Head at the Avondale College in Australia, and condenses well the
strengths and weaknesses that characterize these hermeneutical constructs. Below are his
summaries on the four prophetic schools:
The Four Prophetic Schools Described
Ford begins his evaluation of the four prophetic schools with their description, and
related to the readers the most pertinent information about the schools and their perspectives on
Daniel and Revelation:
The Preterist School
This system views the apocalyptic prophecies as having a contemporary or near-contemporary fulfillment.
Those who view Daniel as being written in the second century BC are obviously preterist in interpreting the
book. Thus the vast majority of modern commentaries fall into this category.
Not all preterists are antisupernaturalists. Some accept the late dating for Daniel, yet believe it to be an
inspired volume. They hold that the Old Testament God, while employing an apocalyptic style speaking of
the past as though it were future, also reveals divine insights regarding days to come. Most commentators
on the Book of Revelation who are preterist believe that book to have been chiefly fulfilled in the first
century of our era.
The empires of Dan 2 and 7 are usually understood by Preterists as Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece.
The little horns of chapters 7 and 8 are believed to be indentical, namely Antiochus Epiphanes. Even the
prophecy of the seventy weeks is made to terminate in the days of the Syrian antichrist. The preterist
interpreter, to understand Daniel, always looks to the pastthe days prior to and including the times of
Antiochus IV.5
The Futurist School

As the name implies, this system of interpretation is practically the reverse of the former. It projects either
all or important sections of prophecy to the future, on the basis that such books as Daniel and Revelation
concern the final crises and therefore contain a vast lacuna in their portrayal of the centuries. Most futurists
say, for example, that the symbols employed by historicists as applying to the Papacy will have their true
fulfillment in a future antichrist. These interpreters believe that all the great lines of prophecy in Daniel,
including the seventy weeks, break off at the cross and resume by portraying the end of the age. Thus there
would be in Daniel and Revelation no great prophetic waymarks for the guidance of the church during the
Christian dispensation whereby believers might know where they stood in the stream of history and
whether they were approaching the great denouement.6
Protestantism generally has come to adopt the futurist system. It is interesting to trace the change. In the
mid-nineteenth century, historicist interpreters who proclaimed the approaching end of the 2300 years of
Dan 8:14 encountered some who believed that a thousand years of peace must precede the coming of the
Lord. The latter group spiritualized Rev 20 so as to make the first resurrection of verses 4 and 5 a great
revival on earth. In response to this, some believers in the near advent of Christ began to stress literal
interpretation of prophecy in contrast to the historical system which had emphasized the symbolic nature of
prophecy.2 7
The Idealist School

This school of interpreters cuts the Gordian knot of the problem of finding historical events to fulfill the
prophecies. It is rather contended that it is not the purpose of prophecy to inform the church regarding
future events. Instead, prophecy is to be understood as purely a symbolic form of instruction regarding
eternal truths about good and evil. Most idealists are preterists. Milligans well-known commentary on
Revelation is a typical example of this type of approach. 8
The Historicist School

This system of interpretation, also known as the Protestant system because it was cherished during the
centuries surrounding the Reformation, stresses the fact that prophecy has continuity as its chief
characteristic and that therefore the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are to be interpreted as signifying
events commencing at the time of the prophecy but surveying all later centuries until the end of time. Thus
in Dan 2 the prophecy of the image begins with Babylon and continues with Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome,
Romes division as represented in modern Europe, and finally the return of Christ.
Wrote Alford: Historical Interpretershold that the prophecy [Revelation] embraces the whole history of
the church and its foes from the time of its writing to the end of the world. He adds, It seems to me
indisputable that the book does speak of things past, present, and future: that some of its prophecies are
already fulfilled, some are now fulfilling, and others await their fulfillment. 9
The Four Prophetic Schools Critiqued

The next step Ford takes is to critique each hermeneutical school and reveal its fragile
points in order to show how all these schools fail to provide a scientific and well-balanced
approach to the interpretation of Daniel and Revelation. The scholar starts with the perspective
that truth must be sought, held, and defended above all hermeneutical schools or theological
constructs, and is not afraid to state:
Having now viewed the respective systems as wholes, what counsel can be given to one who comes to the
task of exegesis with the sole intent of discovering truth regardless of whether it supports or wrecks
systems?
It must be said that each of the systems is right in what it affirms and wrong in what it denies. 10
The theologian then continues his discussion and demonstrates how each prophetic
school or theological construct fails in its hermeneutical task to interpret Daniel, Revelation, and
the whole Bible:
The Preterist School
Preterism is right when it says that prophecy has something to say to the people living at the time of the
prophecy, but it is wrong when it asserts that that something is the whole intent of the visions of the
seer.11
The Futurist School

Futurism is right when it affirms that the final crisis, the impending conflict awaiting the world, is a central
focus of prophecy, but it is wrong when it denies that the prophetic pictures have meaning for prior crises. 12
The Idealist School

Idealism is right in affirming that prophets symbolically illustrate the principles governing the great
controversy between good and evil. It is wrong in denying that specific events are foretold. The very nature
of apocalyptic was concerned with those events in history which foreshadowed the coming of the kingdom
of God.13
The Historicist School

Historicists are right in looking for the prophetic scroll to be gradually unrolled, having meaning for its first
and last readers and those in-between. But they are wrong if they minimize the stress of the future climactic
struggle that the prophetic word emphasizes.14
Blended Perspectives and Interpretation

The solution to the conundrum, and the most reasonable approach that could eliminate
and avoid serious interpretation errors and provide a solid empirical basis for biblical and
prophetic exegesis, states Ford, is a mixture between the four schools that would retain and use
the best features that characterize each school:
The following scholars urge us to retain what is right in each system and to avoid what is wrong.
Undoubtedly this counsel springs from a deep study of the weaknesses and strengths of the respective
prophetic approaches, and we would all do well to heed it. It should be noticed that these statements imply
the correctness of the apotelesmatic principle:
The final conclusion on the chronological methods of interpretation is that all contain some elements of
truth, and that all are in a measure overstrained.
Having regard for the fact that equal scholarship and spirituality may be found among the advocates of all
these interpretations, it is difficult to believe that one of them must be right and three of them wrong. The
Book is too big to be crushed into the mould of any one interpretation, and no one school of interpreters has
a monopoly of insight and understanding.
The studies of men like Tyconius, Grotius, De Wette, Ewald, Bleek, Farrar, Vitrings, Newton, Bengel,
Elliott, B. Wordsworth, Alford, Guinness, Bullinger, Milligan, Boyd Carpenter, Lee, and many others,
cannot be set aside in the interests of the view of any of them, but rather, we must look for the common
elements of truth in their various system of interpretation.
In his Advancement of Learning, quoted by Angus, Bacon has said that Divine prophecies have springing
and germinant accomplishment throughout many ages, though the height or fullness of them may refer to
some one age; and Bishop Boyd Carpenter, to like purpose: The Preterist may be right in finding early
fulfillments, and the Futurist in expecting undeveloped ones, and the Historical interpreter is
unquestionably right in looking for them along the whole line of history, for the words of God mean more
than one man or one school of thought can compass. The visions of the Book do find counterparts in the
occurrences of human history. They have had these, and they will yet have these fulfillments, and these
fulfillments belong neither wholly to the past, nor wholly to the future. The prophecies of God are written
in a language which can be read by more than one generation.
In other words, no one of these interpretations is by itself adequate. It is by a synthesis of them that we
approach to the truth. History is the fulfillment of prophecy throughout the length of it, and there is good
ground for believing that at the end of this age there will be a crisis-period in which all the characteristics
of the present dispensation will be gathered up, accentuated, and consummated. 17
With the Idealists, I am willing enough to see, in the apocalyptic visions and symbols, vivid illustrations of
spiritual principles, struggles, and issues, even though these are not the first interpretation of the book.
With the Preterists I readily see in the precursors and crash which ended the apostolic era a fulfillment, a
kind of advance fulfillment, even though not the final fulfillment; just as our Lords predictions in Matthew
xxiv. 4-31 all had a fulfillment then except the actual return of our Lord Himself. With the Historicists I
can see recurrent correspondences and fulfillments all through the present age, inasmuch as history repeats
itself, and God has overruled events to adumbrate and lead onward to the ultimate fulfillment.18
None of the views has proved completely satisfying, and it is probable that a true view would combine
elements from more than one of them. The outstanding merit of preterist views is that they give the book
meaning for the men of the day in which it was written, and, whatever else we may say of the book, this
insight must be retained. Historicist views similarly see the book as giving light on the Church throughout
its history, and this cannot be surrendered. Futurist views take with the greatest seriousness the language of
the book about the end-time. The book does emphasize the ultimate triumph of God and the events
associated with it. Nor can the idealist view be abandoned, for the book does bring before us a stirring
challenge to live for God in days when the opposition is fierce. Moreover, the Christian must always
welcome the assurance that Gods triumph is sure.19
An understanding of the truths suggested in these statements will save us not only from errors of
interpretation but also from errors in charity when we discern an item in an exegetes commentary that
seems to reflect an element of some system we have been accustomed to rejecting in toto.15
Present Adventists The Last Historicists

The current Adventists have their theological and hermeneutical roots in the notorious
Millerite movement and its historicist approach to the Bible and the interpretation of Daniel and
Revelationand that even without a name change. This fact is denied in the SDA theological
circles but affirmed in the Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia [further, SDAE], where the
scholars confirm the truth that the Millerites actually called themselves Adventists, but were
popularly known by the name of their leading exponent, William Miller.16 From the Millerite
historicists, the new Adventists have imported their botched interpretation principles, and have
continued to interpret Daniel and Revelation in the same flawed and outdated manner.
The SDA Church Sold To Historicism
That what has been stated above about the present Adventists and their Millerite
hermeneutics is an undeniable fact confirmed in the current SDA theological and folkloric
literature, although the direct connection with Miller and his notorious movement is not affirmed
in an open and direct manner, but skipped. What is brought to the forefront is the church
interpretation tradition that favored at some time in the past the historicist approach to Daniel
and Revelation. Among the SDA theologians who make sure that this fact is well established are
Pfandl, Davidson, and Rodriguez:
Gerhard Pfandl
Throughout most of church history these apocalyptic time prophecies [in Daniel and Revelation] were
interpreted according to the historicist method of interpretation. Only in the last two hundred years have
other systems, such as Preterism and futurism, replaced historicism.17
Richard M. Davidson
This historicist Adventist interpretation simply builds upon the foundation of the early church and the
Reformation. The historicist view of prophecy was the view of the early church and of all the Reformers,
although today most other major denominations except Seventh-day Adventists have abandoned this
position in favor of counter-Reformation systems.13
Yet only the historicist view of prophecy does justice to the whole of Daniel. The preterists must say that
prophecy failed, and the futurists must posit a gap where none exists. But the historicists can be consistent
with the whole sweep of the prophetic time prophecies, moving from the prophets day to the eschaton. 14 18
ngel M. Rodrguez
In the interpretation of the trumpets, Adventist theologians have almost consistently employed the
historicist method of prophetic interpretation because it is grounded in Scripture itself. This method was
provided to the apocalyptic visionaries by the angel interpreter. It has proven to be a valid approach to
apocalyptic prophecy as illustrated in its use by Jesus, the apostles, and interpreters throughout Christian
history.19
The Dogmatic and Exclusive Position

For the SDA Church and its dogmatic theologians and scholars, the historicist
hermeneutic is indispensable as a prophetic interpretation method, although few outside the
denomination share the approach, and it seems hard even to get others to understand the
Adventist position.20 What seems to make it hard for non-Adventist theologians is the exclusive
position the SDA theologians hold on historicism as an interpretation school. States Vetne:
Historicism as School-of-Interpretation. The traditional way Adventists use the term historicism (in
relation to interpretation of biblical prophecy) is as a comprehensive system or school of interpretation.
Historicism is here seen as exclusive [emphasis added] (an interpreter using historicism for some parts of
Daniel or Revelation cannot use another approach, like preterism or futurism, for other parts) and personal
(it presupposes a one-to-one relationship between interpreter and method, so that an interpreter uses only
one approach and thus can be identified as a historicist, preterist, or futurist).21
Historicism The Failed Hermeneutics

Sound empirical evidence demonstrates that the SDA historicism has its own multiple
inadequacies and deficiencies, despite the bombastic and triumphalist claims the Glacier View
scholars have made about this hermeneutical approach.22 In multiple research documents
published on Academia.edu, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 I have exposed certain fundamental flaws that
have affected the SDA prophetic interpretation for almost two centuries, and I have warned that
unless a radical change occurs in the SDA Churchs anachronistic and unscientific hermeneutical
approach to prophetic interpretation, the SDA theologians will become more and more isolated
from the world theologians, while the SDA sectarian doctrines will appear less and less credible
to the Christian world.
The research documents I have published in Academia.edu have provided rigorous and
irrefutable evidence, that (1) the claimed SDA year-day principle has no factual linguistic basis
and no biblical support, that (2) Daniel 9 is not an appendix to Daniel 8 and that Gabriel had
completed his explanation for the prophetic vision in Daniel 8 and no further explanation was
needed, (3) that the antecedent for the pronoun them in Daniel 8:9 is a stout horn described
in Daniel 8:8 and not a wind, (4) that in Daniel 9 Gabriel had come to give the aged prophet
information about events related to the deported Israelites return to Palestine, (5) that chathak in
Daniel 9 means to determine, and not to cut off because the 2300 prophecy in Daniel 8
refers to the time period within which Antiochus IV Epiphanes desecrated the Israelite temple
and attempted to eradicate the Israelite religion, and (6), that the recorded historical event that
occurred in 1844 was the Great Disappointment that resulted from William Millers numeral
games about the Second Coming, and not a supposed and implausible celestial event that has
been assumed based on fantastic and absurd theological SDA speculations for which no human
historical evidence has been produced or could ever be produced.
This Documents Intended Purpose
This document is intended to reexamine the SDA historicist prophetic interpretation
school, evaluate it, and show its deficiencies and failures. The main issues that will be examined
are: (1) the fragmented and inconsistent definition for historicism as a prophetic interpretation
approach with guidelines on which the SDA theologians depend in order to decode the
prophetic books, Daniel and Revelation, and which has caused all consequent interpretation
errors, (2) the preposterous and untested claim that God Himself had originated the method
and had used the SDA hermeneutic to compose and interpret the Bible, (3) the selective
historical data on which the SDA historicism is claimed to be established as a reliable
hermeneutical tool, (4) the multiple and attempted failures to provide authentication for the
speculative hermeneutical approach through solid historical evidence that would indicate
indisputable prediction fulfillment and validate the spurious SDA historicist claims, and (5) the
tragic and irreversible collateral damage that the misguided and exclusive denominational
focus on Daniel and Revelation with their presumed time landmarks and the exaggerated and
overinflated emphasis on the final events and the Second Coming has caused to the remnant
messagethe fact that the Great Commission has been replaced with sectarian triumphalist tall
tales while the SDA church has failed to preach the genuine Gospelthe Bibles Eternal Good
Newsto the truth-starved world.
II. Historicism in the SDA Perspective

LaRondelle, the informed and perceptive Andrews theologian, warns his readers that
historicism, as a concept of prophetic interpretation, must be defined carefully before we can
discuss its validity and boundaries.1 He mentions Froom, the respected Adventist historian, and
his traditional but incomplete definition for historicism:
LeRoy E. Froom provides us one definition of historicism: "the progressive and continuous fulfillment of
prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from Daniel's day and the time of John, on down to the Second Advent
and the end of the age."12
Right after he quotes Froom, though, LaRondelle returns and critiques the scholar for his
failure to define prophetic fulfillments and their parameters, and notes that the most important
and relevant factor that should characterize and distinguish historicism as a unique theological
school with its indispensable prophetic fulfillment feature is the appropriate alignment
between the prophetic intent and the expected prophetic fulfillment. States the accomplished
Andrews theologian:
Froom's definition implies a certain theological exegesis, which he fails to identify as the guideline for his
understanding of what constitutes a fulfillment of prophecy. A truthful fulfillment should correspond to the
intended meaning of the prophet, and thus requires an exegesis of Scripture in its literary and historical
context. Even the Cross is not self-explanatory and needs divine interpretation (see 1 Cor. 1:22-25; 15:3;
Rom. 3:25, 26).3
LaRondelle is also confident that a rigorous and dependable biblical interpretation from
the historicist perspective must be based on the Bible, that is, on genuine and indisputable
scriptural evidence that should authenticate the historicist hermeneutical school:
This leads us to ask for the biblical origin of historicism; that is, for the prophetic revelation that periodizes
history in successive epochs which lead up to the establishment of the kingdom of God. That origin, it is
universally agreed, is the apocalyptic book of Daniel, whose visions repeatedly proceed from his own time
to the end of world history, with a consistent focus on salvation history. 4
Various Definitions for Historicism

The SDA theologians and scholars have defined historicism in various manners and
from various perspectives, or have adopted the terms definitions from some non-Adventist
historicist theologians. Included below are the most common historicism definitions one
encounters in the SDA Church literature:
The SDA Encyclopedia
HISTORICISM. This term is used to describe a school of prophetic interpretation that conceives the
fulfillment of the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation as covering the historical period from the time of the
prophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. These prophecies were given in visionary
circles that recapitulate the content of the previous vision, adding new information or providing a slightly
different perspective of the same historical period. Thus, for instance, Dan. 2, 7, 89, and 1012 are parallel
prophecies covering basically the same historical period. In Revelation the same type of recapitulation is
employed in the interpretation of the messages to the seven churches, the seven seals, the seven trumpets,
and Rev. 1214.5
The SDA Bible Students Source Book

[p. 137] The historicist view, sometimes called the continuous-historical view, contends that Revelation is a
symbolic presentation of the entire course of the history of the church from the close of the first century to
the end of time. The argument for the view is founded on the fact that two termini are mentioned: the day in
which John the seer lived, and the ultimate day of Gods victory and the establishment of the Holy City. No
point between them can be identified with certainty as making a break in the sequence; therefore the
process must be continuous. [p. 138] By this interpretation the various series of the churches, the seals, the
trumpets, and the bowls are made to particular events in the history of the world that are related to the
history of the church6
[p. 32] The Reformers took over this type of historical interpretation of prophetic truth and found in the
Antichrist a prophecy of the Papacy. Luther at first felt that Revelation was defective in everything which
could be called apostolic or prophetic and was offended by the visions and symbols of the book; but he
came to feel that the prophecy was an outline of the whole course of church history and that the Papacy was
predicted both in chapters 11 and 12 and in the second beast of chapter 13. The number 666 period of papal
domination.7
[p. 43] The interpretation that looks upon the book of Revelation as a forecast, in symbols, of the history of
the Christian church, is sometimes called, not without reason, the standard Protestant interpretation. Alford
says that it was the view held by the precursors and upholders of the Reformation, by Wicliffe and his
followers in England, by Luther in Germany, Bullinger in Switzerland, Bishop Bale in Ireland, by Fox the
martyrologist by Brighthman, Pareus, and early Protestant expositors generally. 8
William Shea
From the viewpoint of the "continuous" historical school of prophetic interpretation, the prophecies of
Daniel and Revelation provide a divinely inspired, descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most
theologically significant events of this era. The Christian Era is seen to stand in continuity with the
historical description and prophetic evaluation of events in the OT era. The same God has been active in a
similar way in both of these dispensations.
This larger view of God's more comprehensive interaction with human history carries with it the corollary
that the statements about time found in these prophecies cover a more extensive sweep of history than can
be accounted for on a purely literal basis.9
Through the ages several different methods of interpreting Daniel and Revelation have been proposed. The
historicist method sees these prophecies as being fulfilled through the course of human history beginning at
the time of the prophets who wrote them. Preterism sees Daniel as focusing on the reign of Antiochus IV
Epiphanes, and it sees the book of Revelation as focusing especially on the reign of the emperor Nero. Thus
the preterist school focuses upon the past. In contrast to this, the futurist school places the major emphasis
of these two books in the future, yet to be fulfilled. A specially prominent branch of futurism is
dispensationalism, which narrows this future fulfillment to the last seven years of earths history.3 10
Frank B. Holbrook
Seventh-day Adventists arrive at their interpretations of Bible prophecy by employing the principles of the
historicist school of prophetic interpretation. This historicist view (also known as the continuous
historical view) sees the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation unfolding at various points in historical
time, often encompassing the sweep of history from the times of Daniel and John (the human authors of
these books) to the establishment of God's eternal kingdom. 11
Daniel clearly identified the golden head as symbolizing the empire of Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar
(verses 37, 38). It was to be followed by three successive world kingdoms corresponding to the three
different metals. History records that these were Medo-Persia, Grecia, and the "iron monarchy" of Rome. In
the latter part of the fifth century A.D. the empire of Rome in the West was fully broken up. Its parts came
to form the nations of Western Europe symbolized by the strengths and weaknesses of the feet and toes
composed of iron and clay. The "stone," which will ultimately destroy these and all other human, political
entities, is the eternal kingdom that "the God of heaven will set up" at the end of human history (see verses
44, 45, R.S.V.).*
Thus the historicist system of interpretation sees in the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation the
hand of Divine Providence moving across the ages, overruling events to bring about the fulfillment of
God's purposes.12
Angel Manuel Rodrguez

1. In the interpretation of the trumpets, Adventist theologians have almost consistently employed the
historicist method of prophetic interpretation because it is grounded in Scripture itself. This method was
provided to the apocalyptic visionaries by the angel interpreter. It has proven to be a valid approach to
apocalyptic prophecy as illustrated in its use by Jesus, the apostles, and interpreters throughout Christian
history. While in this article I will not provide all the necessary evidence to support the most important
elements of the historicist method of interpretation,1 I will suggest that the following are indispensable for a
proper interpretation of the trumpets:
a. Apocalyptic prophecy covers the whole span of history from the time of the prophet to the very end of
history (Dan. 7). In order to be loyal to this methodology, it is necessary to apply it to the apocalyptic
visionary cycle of the seven trumpets. When we examine this prophecy from our historical moment, we
must realize that some elements of the prophecy have already been fulfilled while others are in the process
of fulfillment or will soon be fulfilled.
b. Hence, the fulfillment of apocalyptic prophecy takes place within the flow of history as a whole.
Consequently, it cannot and should not be interpreted along the lines of preterism or futurism or applied to
conceptual abstractions disconnected from specific historical events (idealism). 13
Desmond Ford
This system of interpretation, also known as the Protestant system because it was cherished during the
centuries surrounding the Reformation, stresses the fact that prophecy has continuity as its chief
characteristic and that therefore the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are to be interpreted as signifying
events commencing at the time of the prophecy but surveying all later centuries until the end of time.
Thus in Dan 2 the prophecy of the image begins with Babylon and continue with Medo-Persia, Greece,
Rome, Romes divisions as represented in modern Europe, and finally the return of Christ.
Wrote Alford: Historical interpretershold that the prophecy [Revelation] embraces the whole history of
the church and its foes from the time of its writing to the end of the world. He adds, It seems to me
indisputable that the book does speak of things past, present, and future: that some of its prophecies are
already fulfilled, some are now fulfilling, and others await their fulfillment. 12 14
Le Roy Edwin Froom

From the Reformation stems a long line of prophetic expositions which molded Protestant thinking for
centuries after their day. These were based on what came to be known as the Historical School of prophetic
interpretationthe progressive and continuous fulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from
Daniels day and the time of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age.15
Richard M. Davidson
This historicist Adventist interpretation simply builds upon the foundation of the early church and the
Reformation. The historicist view of prophecy was the view of the early church and of all the Reformers,
although today most other major denominations except Seventh-day Adventists have abandoned this
position in favor of counter-Reformation systems.13
Yet only the historicist view of prophecy does justice to the whole of Daniel. The preterists must say that
prophecy failed, and the futurists must posit a gap where none exists. But the historicists can be consistent
with the whole sweep of the prophetic time prophecies, moving from the prophets day to the eschaton. 14 16
The Glacier View Theologians

It is a well-known fact that the historicist school of prophetic interpretation (which looks at prophecy as
being fulfilled through history from the time of the prophet until the Second Advent, and which is followed
by Adventists) has been antagonistic to the preterist school of interpretation (which sees prophecy fulfilled
in the past) and the futurist school (which sees fulfillment still in the future). The futurist school, as
currently espoused in evangelical circles, stands in clear opposition to preterism. Some agreements exist
between historicists and futurists, but not after futurism takes its great leap forward into the future.17
Reimar Vetne
Here is my proposed definition of historicism: Historicism reads historical apocalyptic as prophecy
intended by its ancient author to reveal information about real, in-history events in the time span between
his day and the eschaton.
No part of this definition is novel, but some comments may be valuable.
Historicism reads. Notice that the subject of the definition is historicism (the approach) and not
historicist (the interpreter using the approach), the advantage of which we discussed above.
The next part of the definition, historical apocalyptic deals with the jurisdiction: historicism is a method
limited to certain types of apocalyptic literature. Most genres found in the Bible are excluded, as are
apocalyptic writings where other, heavenly realms are revealed,13 rather than future historical events in this
world. It is the task of the interpreter to argue the case for historical apocalyptic in each individual section.
One may hold one section or chapter of Daniel or Revelation to be historical apocalyptic without
automatically assuming that all the rest of the material in Daniel and Revelation is likewise intended to
describe future history.
Intended by its ancient author. Given the growing scholarly interest in reader-oriented approaches, it is
worth noting that a historicist interpretation is an exegetical task that aims at saying something about the
intent of the author behind the prophecy. Divine inspiration and revelation behind the text and future events
truly predictedas Adventists believe of the biblical apocalypsesneed not mean the ancient human
authors understood every detail of what they were inspired to write. But if one uses the historicist approach,
one must assume that the authors somehow understood they were referring to future history.
Because many interpreters in the past combined historicism with unchecked creativity and read many
imaginary prediction-fulfillments into the apocalyptic text, readers have got the false impression that
historicism conveys merely what is in the eye of the modern beholder. Interpreters using the historicist
method aim for more than expressing what is in their own minds; they hope to comment on something that
is really in the text, as intended by whatever human and divine agents produced the text.
Reveal information about real, in-history events. Historicism not only looks for the meaning implied in
the text and intended by the author (as opposed to meaning created in the mind of the reader), but claims to
find authorial attempts at describing real, historical events and developments.
The Apocalypse Group of the SBL Genres Project has defined an apocalypse as revelatory literature with
a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient,
disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation,
and spatial insofar as it involves another, supernatural world.14 Although we might not believe in all the
realities depicted in all the various apocalyptic writings from antiquity, few scholars today dispute that the
ancient authors often intended to describe real events. When the ancient author intended to describe travels
into heavenly realms or write timeless, a-historical fiction, historicism is not a suitable method to use to
understand it.
In the time span between his day and the eschaton. The elements in our definition up to this point would
fit equally well for the preterist and other approaches to apocalyptic literature within the historical-critical
and historical grammatical frameworks. What sets historicism apart is this last phrase. Did the ancient
author intend to describe events to take place in the time span from the writing up until the eschaton? If we
believe so about a passage, historicism is the approach we take.
If the author of Daniel intended to describe events after his timei.e., after the 6th century (early dating of
the book) or after the 2nd century (late dating), yet before the eschaton, then we have a case calling for a
historicist approach; likewise if John the Revelator set out to predict events in a span of time after his days
and up to the Parousia.
It is worth observing that one does not have to believe in divine foreknowledge and revelation in order to
read a prophecy with a historicist approach. As I have defined it, historicism is not just for the believer.
There are several ancient apocalypses around, and none of us believe in the truthfulness of all these
attempted predictions. Historicism as a scholarly method only asks for a likely reconstruction of the
original authorial intent of the writing. Whenever we think we see an author of an apocalypse attempting to
foretell events placed in the future yet before the end of the world, we take the historicist approach
whether we consider those predictions to be true or not.18
Jon Paulien
The Seventh-day Adventist Church derives its unique witness to Jesus Christ from a historicist reading of
the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation. Historicism understands these prophecies to portray a
relentless march of God-ordained history leading from the prophets time up to a critical climax at the end
of earths history.1 The interpretation of biblical apocalyptic was at the center of Adventist theological
development in the formative years of the Adventist Church and its theology. 2 19
John Noe
a. Historicist interpretation. This interpretation was favored by the reformers. It sees in the Revelation a
prophecy of the history of the church. But as Ladd indicates, this method can be millenarian . . .
nonmillenarian . . . or postmillenarian.57 According to Mounce, this historical theory was created around
the 12th century by medieval theologians who were followers of Joachim and were growing concerned
about abuses in the Church.58
Thus, historicists see Revelation as depicting specific and identifiable historical events, institutions,
movements, and periods that transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. These
began in the first century, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords
return. Preterist Milton S. Terry, however, complained that while historicism presumed that the Book of
Revelation contains detailed predictions of the Roman papacy, the wars of modern Europe, and the fortunes
of Napoleon,59 he found nowhere in the prophecies of this book a prediction of Turkish armies, or papal
bulls, or the German Reformation of the sixteenth century, as has been claimed by some historicists.60 20
The Historicism Definitions Tabulated

Definitions for Historicism in a Table
The historicism definitions listed above in detail under various theologians and
scholars have been organized also in a table for an overall perspective and ease of comparison:
Historicist Source
The SDA Encyclopedia
The SDA Bible Students

Source Book
Source Book

Source Book
William Shea
William Shea
Frank B. Holbrook
Frank B. Holbrook
Angel Manuel Rodrguez
Historicism Definition
HISTORICISM. This term is used to describe a school of prophetic interpretation
that conceives the fulfillment of the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation as
covering the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of
the kingdom of God on earth.21
[p. 137] The historicist view, sometimes called the continuous-historical view,
contends that Revelation is a symbolic presentation of the entire course of the
history of the church from the close of the first century to the end of time. 22
Luther at first felt that Revelation was defective in everything which could be
called apostolic or prophetic and was offended by the visions and symbols of the
book; but he came to feel that the prophecy was an outline of the whole course of
church history and that the Papacy was predicted both in chapters 11 and 12 and in
the second beast of chapter 13. The number 666 period of papal domination.23
[p. 43] The interpretation that looks upon the book of Revelation as a forecast, in
symbols, of the history of the Christian church, is sometimes called, not without
reason, the standard Protestant interpretation.24
From the viewpoint of the "continuous" historical school of prophetic
interpretation, the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation provide a divinely inspired,
descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most theologically significant
events of this [Christian] era. The Christian Era is seen to stand in continuity with
the historical description and prophetic evaluation of events in the OT era. The
same God has been active in a similar way in both of these dispensations. 25
Through the ages several different methods of interpreting Daniel and Revelation
have been proposed. The historicist method sees these prophecies as being fulfilled
through the course of human history beginning at the time of the prophets who
wrote them.26
Seventh-day Adventists arrive at their interpretations of Bible prophecy by
employing the principles of the historicist school of prophetic interpretation. This
historicist view (also known as the continuous historical view) sees the
prophecies of Daniel and Revelation unfolding at various points in historical time,
often encompassing the sweep of history from the times of Daniel and John (the
human authors of these books) to the establishment of God's eternal kingdom. 27
Thus the historicist system of interpretation sees in the apocalyptic prophecies of
Daniel and Revelation the hand of Divine Providence moving across the ages,
overruling events to bring about the fulfillment of God's purposes. 28
a. Apocalyptic prophecy covers the whole span of history from the time of the
prophet to the very end of history (Dan. 7)b. Hence, the fulfillment of
apocalyptic prophecy takes place within the flow of history as a whole. 29
Desmond Ford
This system of interpretation, also known as the Protestant system because it was
cherished during the centuries surrounding the Reformation, stresses the fact that
prophecy has continuity as its chief characteristic and that therefore the prophecies
of Daniel and Revelation are to be interpreted as signifying events commencing at
the time of the prophecy but surveying all later centuries until the end of time. 30
Le Roy Edwin Froom
From the Reformation stems a long line of prophetic expositions which molded
Protestant thinking for centuries after their day. These were based on what came to
be known as the Historical School of prophetic interpretationthe progressive and

continuous fulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and
the time of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age.31
Richard M. Davidson
The Glacier View

Theologians
Reimar Vetne
Jon Paulien
John Noe
The preterists must say that prophecy failed, and the futurists must posit a gap
where none exists. But the historicists can be consistent with the whole sweep of
the prophetic time prophecies, moving from the prophets day to the eschaton. 14 32
It is a well-known fact that the historicist school of prophetic interpretation (which
looks at prophecy as being fulfilled through history from the time of the prophet
until the Second Advent, and which is followed by Adventists) has been ntagonistic
to the preterist school of interpretation (which sees prophecy fulfilled in the past)
and the futurist school (which sees fulfillment still in the future). 33
Here is my proposed definition of historicism: Historicism reads historical
apocalyptic as prophecy intended by its ancient author to reveal information about
real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the eschaton. 34
The Seventh-day Adventist Church derives its unique witness to Jesus Christ from
a historicist reading of the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation.
Historicism understands these prophecies to portray a relentless march of Godordained history leading from the prophets time up to a critical climax at the end of
earths history.135
Thus, historicists see Revelation as depicting specific and identifiable historical
events, institutions, movements, and periods that transpire in a chronological
sequence throughout the entire church age. These began in the first century, have
continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords return. 36
The Historicism Definitions Itemized

The itemized organization for the historicism definition listed in detail above and then
organized in a table would provide an even clearer perspective of the claims the SDA historicists
make about the historicist school:
1. [Historicism is] a school of prophetic interpretation that conceives the fulfillment of the
prophecies of Daniel and Revelation as covering the historical period from the time of the
prophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth.37
2. The historicist view, sometimes called the continuous-historical view, contends that
Revelation is a symbolic presentation of the entire course of the history of the church from the
close of the first century to the end of time.38
3. Luthercame to feel that the prophecy was an outline of the whole course of church history
and that the Papacy was predicted both in chapters 11 and 12 and in the second beast of chapter
13. 39
4. [Historicism is] [t]he interpretation that looks upon the book of Revelation as a forecast, in
symbols, of the history of the Christian church.40
5. From the viewpoint of the continuous historical school of prophetic interpretation, the
prophecies of Daniel and Revelation provide a divinely inspired, descriptive overview and
evaluation of some of the most theologically significant events of this era.41
6. The historicist method sees these prophecies [in Daniel and Revelation] as being fulfilled
through the course of human history beginning at the time of the prophets who wrote them.42
7. This historicist view (also known as the continuous historical view) sees the prophecies of
Daniel and Revelation unfolding at various points in historical time, often encompassing the
sweep of history from the times of Daniel and John (the human authors of these books) to the
establishment of God's eternal kingdom.43
8. Thus the historicist system of interpretation sees in the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and
Revelation the hand of Divine Providence moving across the ages, overruling events to bring
about the fulfillment of God's purposes.44
9. Apocalyptic prophecy covers the whole span of history from the time of the prophet to the
very end of history (Dan. 7)b. Hence, the fulfillment of apocalyptic prophecy takes place
within the flow of history as a whole.45
10. This system of interpretationstresses the fact that prophecy has continuity as its chief
characteristic and that therefore the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are to be interpreted as
signifying events commencing at the time of the prophecy but surveying all later centuries until
the end of time. 46
11.the Historical School of prophetic interpretationthe progressive and continuous
fulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time of John, on down
to the Second Advent and the end of age.47
12. the historicists can be consistent with the whole sweep of the prophetic time prophecies,
moving from the prophets day to the eschaton.14 48
13. The historicist school of prophetic interpretationlooks at prophecy as being fulfilled
through history from the time of the prophet until the Second Advent.49
14. Historicism reads historical apocalyptic as prophecy intended by its ancient author to reveal
information about real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the eschaton.50
15. Historicism understands these prophecies [the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and
Revelation] to portray a relentless march of God-ordained history leading from the prophets
time up to a critical climax at the end of earths history.151
16. Historicists see Revelation as depicting specific and identifiable historical events,
institutions, movements, and periods that transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the
entire church age. These began in the first century, have continued through the centuries, and
will eventually lead up to the Lords return.52
The Historicism Definitions Restated
All the above historicist definitions can be summarized in a few paragraphs that capture
the essential historicist features as the SDA theologians and other scholars define and formulate
them. These features are that historicism conceives the fulfillment of the prophecies of Daniel
and Revelation as covering the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment
of the kingdom of God on earth,53 contends that Revelation is a symbolic presentation of the
entire course of the history of the church from the close of the first century to the end of time,54
sees the Bible prophecy as an outline of the whole course of church history, 55 looks upon the
book of Revelation as a forecast, in symbols, of the history of the Christian church,56 and
understands the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation [to] provide a divinely inspired,
descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most theologically significant events of this
[Christian] era57 and being fulfilled through the course of human history beginning at the time
of the prophets who wrote them.58
Historicism also sees the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation unfolding at various
points in historical time, often encompassing the sweep of history from the times of Daniel and
John (the human authors of these books) to the establishment of God's eternal kingdom,59 and
identifies in these prophecies the hand of Divine Providence moving across the ages, overruling
events to bring about the fulfillment of God's purposes.60
The SDA historicist theologians believe that apocalyptic prophecy covers the whole
span of history from the time of the prophet to the very end of history (Dan. 7), and that the
fulfillment of apocalyptic prophecy takes place within the flow of history as a whole.61 From
the prophetic time perspective, the SDA historicism emphasizes that prophecy has continuity as
its chief characteristic and that therefore the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are to be
interpreted as signifying events commencing at the time of the prophecy but surveying all later
centuries until the end of time,62 and also demonstrating the progressive and continuous
fulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time of John, on down
to the Second Advent and the end of age. 63
For the above reasons, the historicists can be consistent with the whole sweep of the
prophetic time prophecies, moving from the prophets day to the eschaton,14 64 because the
historicist school of prophetic interpretationlooks at prophecy as being fulfilled through
history from the time of the prophet until the Second Advent,65 that is, that historicism reads
historical apocalyptic as prophecy intended by its ancient author to reveal information about
real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the eschaton,66 and understands
these prophecies [the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation] to portray a relentless
march of God-ordained history leading from the prophets time up to a critical climax at the end
of earths history.167
For all the theological reasons mentioned before, the SDA and other historicists see
Revelation as depicting specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, and
periods that transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. These began
in the first century, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the
Lords return. 68
The common denominator in the above SDA definitions for historicism is historical
fulfillment, that is, historical event solutions to the prophetic forecasts or predictions. As we
will see later in the document, the problem with the SDA historicism is that the definition
application is discontinued and negated when non-historical events that should validate the
predictions are produced as sound evidence for the claimed prophetic fulfillments. While the
definition requires genuine and verifiable historical events that would authenticate the prophetic
forecasts or predictions, the SDA theologians and scholars suggest instead speculated, and even
fictional events to support their prophetic fulfillment claims.
III. Traditional Base for SDA Historicism

The SDA theologians have attempted to defend their reliance on the historicist prophetic
interpretation school in their exegetical approach to Daniel and Revelation with arguments from
the Christian church interpretation tradition. Among the past and current SDA theologians who
have resorted to such arguments are Froom, Davidson, Pfandl, and Holbrook:
Adventists and Historicist Tradition
Le Roy Edwin Froom
From the Reformation stems a long line of prophetic expositions which molded Protestant thinking for
centuries after their day. These were based on what came to be known as the Historical School of prophetic
interpretationthe progressive and continuous fulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from
Daniels day and the time of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age. 1
Richard Davidson
This historicist Adventist interpretation [of Daniel] simply builds upon the foundation of the early church
and the Reformation. The historicist view of prophecy was the view of the early church and of all the
reformers, although today most other major denominations except Seventh-day Adventists have abandoned
this position in favor of counter-Reformation systems.13 2
Gerhard Pfandl
Throughout most of church history these apocalyptic time prophecies [in Daniel and Revelation] were
interpreted according to the historicist method of interpretation. Only in the last two hundred years have
other systems, such as preterism and futurism, replaced historicism. 3
Frank B. Holbrook
The Millerites, the immediate spiritual forebears of Seventh-day Adventists, were historicists; that is, they
interpreted Daniel and Revelation in harmony with the principles of the historical school of prophetic
interpretation. But the method was by no means original with the Millerites of mid-nineteenth-century
America; they simply reflected and elaborated upon the labors of many earlier Bible students of the
Reformationand post-Reformation eras.4
Religious Tradition and Its Dangers

The fact that some ancient, medieval, and modern World Church theologians and
scholars have used the now outdated and discarded historicist hermeneutics for prophetic
interpretation in the past, though, is no sound or reliable evidence that the old historicist method
is correct or biblical. Arguments from religious tradition are not worth too much, and are quite
often the last resort in apologetics. Ellen G White, the claimed prophet and messenger of the
SDA church, often warned against doctrinal support from church tradition, against the
disposition to accept the theories and traditions of men instead of the word of God, and against
those nave and gullible Christian theologians and scholars who are clinging to the customs and
traditions of their fathers in order to promote their own false gospels:
But truth is no more desired by the majority today than it was by the papists who opposed Luther. There is
the same disposition to accept the theories and traditions of men instead of the word of God as in
former ages [emphasis added]. Those who present the truth for this time should not expect to be received
with greater favor than were earlier reformers. The great controversy between truth and error, between
Christ and Satan, is to increase in intensity to the close of this world's history.5
There are many at the present day thus clinging to the customs and traditions of their fathers [emphasis
added]. When the Lord sends them additional light, they refuse to accept it, because, not having been
granted to their fathers, it was not received by them. We are not placed where our fathers were;
consequently our duties and responsibilities are not the same as theirs. We shall not be approved of God in
looking to the example of our fathers to determine our duty instead of searching the word of truth for
ourselves. Our responsibility is greater than was that of our ancestors. We are accountable for the light
which they received, and which was handed down as an inheritance for us, and we are accountable also for
the additional light which is now shining upon us from the word of God.6
Historicism Its Theological Roots

For didactic purposes, though, it is good to understand how the historicist interpretation
method has developed and has been used in the past millennia in order to exegete the main
prophetic books, Daniel and Revelation. Vetne has summarized well and in detail the theological
tradition for historicism in his research paper on the theological school. He states:
History of Historicism
In the traditional way of defining historicism, as an all-or-nothing school of interpretation, appeals to the
history of prophetic interpretation often tried to show how details from current Adventist expositions were
shared by interpreters in the past. The whole school had to be justified from history, so to speak.15
If we reduce historicism to one label among many and use it only about events between (not including) the
authors day and the Parousia, all we have to show by appealing to the history of interpretation is that many
have believed in the possibility of true predictive prophecy and found it in parts of Daniel and Revelation.
When the popularity of that has been demonstrated, the interpreter can turn from the history of prophetic
interpretation to exegetical studies to show which parts of Daniel and Revelation he thinks specifically
predict history.
The list of prominent interpreters using the historicist approach for at least some part of Daniel or
Revelation is quite impressive. Throughout most of history since the writing of Daniel, historicism has been
widely used.
Jewish Apocalyptic Writings. Many Jewish apocalypses were written in the period 200 BC to 100 AD.
Whether we see them as influenced by and commenting upon the biblical book of Daniel or see them
merely as being written at the same time and in the same environment as Daniel, the nature of these
apocalypses throw great light on Daniel. Interestingly, several of these apocalyptic writings clearly attempt
predictions of the futurethe time between their writing and the end of the world (historicist prophecies).
In chapters 91 and 93 of the fifth book of 1 Enoch we find a prophecy of ten consecutive periods, each
lasting one week.16 The weeks are obviously symbolical, since events that take longer time than a literal
week are mentioned, like the building of a house and a kingdom in week five (verse 7). John Collins
comments: The substance of this apocalypse is made up not of heavenly cosmology but of an overview of
history. The history is highly schematized and organized into periods of weeks.17 This division into a set
number of periods is a common feature of the historical type of apocalypse.18
Where does the ancient author see himself in this series of ten periods? Collins thinks that the author saw
six of the periods in the past. In the case of the Apocalypse of Weeks, the time of the real author is
evidently to be situated in the seventh week.19 If Collins is correct in this, these last periods call for the
historicist approach. In the seventh period the text mentions coming oppression, the Gentiles to be
conquered, towers or castles to be overthrown, and many sinners to be destroyed (91:8-11). In the eighth
period, the week of righteousness, the righteous will prosper over against the oppressors and sinners
(91:12-13). In the ninth period, sin will disappear from the earth and moral perfection or uprightness take
over (91:14). Finally, in the tenth period, the day of Gods final judgment takes place, executed by the
angels, the first heaven departs and a new heaven appears, and eternity replaces temporality (91:15-17).
In the Apocalypse of Abraham chapters 29-30, the writer receives a vision of twelve periods or hours of
history that are to take place before the eschaton (29:1-3, 9).20 The events of each period are listed in
chapter 30, and the end of the world takes place in chapter 31. The historical axis is divided into twelve
hours, a form of periodization that is also found in 2 Baruchs vision.21 Where in the series of twelve the
author of Abraham saw himself is hard to determine. If he intended the twelve periods to be in his future,
we need to interpret this apocalypse with the historicist approach.
In 2 Baruch chapter 27 we also find twelve periods of history with different events taking place,22 but it is
not clear whether these are meant to cover the time span from the author to the eschaton, or are all part of
the immediate events surrounding the end of the world itself.
In the fifth vision in chapters 11-12 of 4 Ezra, a symbolic vision of an eagle is given where different parts
of the birds body represent different time periods and reigning kings.23 The vision itself is in chapter 11,
and the interpretation is given in chapter 12. This writing is clearly meant as an interpretation and
elaboration of the biblical book of Daniel. In 12:11-15 the eagle is said to be a more detailed prophecy of
the fourth kingdom in Daniel. First twelve kings will reign, one after another (12:14), then another eight
kings (v. 20), of which the last two will reign until the end (v. 21), when three more kings will appear
(v.23). Then a lion will appearGods Messiahand make an end of the eagle with its many kings.
This eagle, explained by Ezra to be the fourth kingdom in Daniel, is interpreted by most scholars, including
Collins, as Rome.24 So the author of 4 Ezra clearly interprets Daniel with the historicist method, reading
Daniel as a predictive prophecy about times beyond the days of Daniel. Where in his series of Roman kings
does the author of 4 Ezra see his own time? Does he believe the end is imminent, or that many more kings
are to come first? If the latter, then even the prophecy of 4 Ezra itself demands a historicist interpretation.
Other Early Jewish Interpretations. The translators behind the Alexandrian Septuagint (the early
version, not the later Theodotian translation) read Daniel with the historicist approach, believing Daniel to
contain predictions about future history. For instance, in Daniel 11:30 the ships of Kittim are interpreted
and translated with Pothe Romans.25
The Jewish historian Josephus seems to interpret the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2 as the Roman empire and
the stone kingdom as a future power that would overthrow the Romans.26
Jesus and the Synoptics. In Matthew 24:15 Jesus is said to refer to a prediction by Daniel the prophet,
interpreting it as a future event. Mark 13:14 contains the same saying, but here only the prediction (clearly
taken from Daniel) is given; the reference to Daniel is omitted. In the parallel account in Luke 21:21, Jesus
also interprets the prophecy in Daniel as a future event and gives an even more detailed interpretation of it.
Whether one takes these sayings as authentic (as most Adventist scholars do) or as a product of the early
Christian tradition, they are in any case evidence of early historicist readings of Daniel. Some in the early
Christian church believed that Daniel had predicted events that were to take place after Daniels time and
before the end of the world.
Early Church Fathers. The early Christian interpretations from the first three hundred years seem to agree
on seeing prophecies in Daniel as reaching past Daniels time and into the Roman era.
The first chapter of the Epistle of Barnabas appeals to the reader to consider the seriousness of the present
circumstances because the last stumbling block is at hand and cites the fourth beast and the ten horns of
Daniel 7.27
Irenaeus likewise interpreted the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2 and 7 as the present-day Roman empire and
believed that Rome in Ireneaeus future was going to be divided up into smaller kingdoms, as suggested by
the iron mixed with clay (Dan 2) and the ten horns of the fourth beast (Dan 7, Rev 13).28
Tertullian asked his readers to pray for the stability and unity of the Roman empire in order to delay the
prophesied breakup of Rome and thus the coming of the antichrist.29
Clement of Alexandria provided one of the first documented interpretations we have of Daniel 9 predicting
the time of Jesus Christs arrival.30
Eusebius followed the other early Christian writers in identifying the four kingdoms of Daniel 2 and 7 as
Assyria/Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome. The seventy weeks of Daniel 9 Eusebius saw as a 490 year
prediction of the timing of Messiah, stretching from the Persian period to the time of Jesus. 31
Cyril, the fourth century bishop of Jerusalem, wrote that the fourth kingdom being Rome was a wellestablished tradition in the church. The fourth beast shall be a fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall
surpass all kingdoms. And that this kingdom is that of the Romans, has been the tradition of the Churchs
interpreters.32
Jerome took the prediction-fulfillments a step further, claiming that the time of the break-up of Rome, as he
saw predicted in Daniel 2 and 7, had begun to take place in his time.33 He refuted the Pagan Porphyrys
proposal that Daniel was written in the second century as an after-the-events-took-place narrative about
Antiochus Epiphanes.34
More names could be mentioned. The unified voice of the early Christian church, from the Synoptic Jesus
to the leading church historians and scholars of the formative years, was that the biblical apocalypses had in
certain sections predicted events to take place in history from the time of their writing down to the end of
the world. Historicism reigned.
Middle Ages. Historicist expositions were less common in the middle ages, due possibly to an increasing
use of allegorical, ahistorical interpretations of Scripture in general and Augustines downplay of a literal
second Parousia (which the early church had seen in the stone-kingdom replacing the Roman empire in the
prophecies of Daniel).
Though no longer in the majority, the list of interpreters using the historicist approach to Daniel and
Revelation is also long for the medieval period. One of the best known is Thomas Aquinas, who held the
four kingdoms predicted in Daniel 2 and 7 to be Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome, the ten horns as ten
future kings to come in the time of antichrist, and the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 as 490 (lunar) years predicting
the coming of Jesus.35
According to Froom, other lesser known medieval interpreters using the historicist approach were Bruno of
Segni, Anselm of Havelberg, Rupert of Deutz, Andreas of Caesarea, Sargis dAberga, Berengaud, PseudoMethodius, Bede, Robert Grosseteste (identifying the papacy as the antichrist), Peter Comestor, Albertus
Magnus, Joachim of Floris (seven seals and seven trumpets cover the Christian era), Villanova (urging
fellow preachers to preach more on the prophecies, including Daniel 9, which he believed foretold the time
of Jesus first advent), Olivi (who believed the Christian church had become corrupt, as prophesied in the
symbol of Babylon in Revelation, and that the seven seals and seven trumpets are seven periods of church
history), Emperor Frederick II (who held the pope to be the predicted antichrist), Eberhard (who claimed
the papal system was predicted in the little horn of Daniel), Dante, Francesco Petrarch, John Milicz, and the
Waldensian Christians (who believed the corruption of the Christian church was predicted in the symbols
of the harlot and Babylon of Revelation).36
Renaissance and Reformation. With the Protestant Reformation we return again to a period of dominance
for the historicist approach. I mention here only two major early writers.
The English Morning Star of the Reformation, John Wyclif (1324-1384), believed strongly that the
corruption of the papacy was the event predicted in the prophecies of the antichrist, the little horn of Daniel
7, and the harlot woman of Revelation 17. The four kingdoms of Daniel 2 and 7 were Babylon, MedoPersia, Greece, and Rome.37
When Martin Luther (14831546) saw what he considered as the hopelessness of reforming the Church of
Rome, he became increasingly convinced that it was apostate and that this apostasy was predicted in Daniel
and Revelation. When Luther burned the popes bull of excommunication, he burned it as the bull of the
prophesied antichrist and Babylon.
Luthers view on Daniel was the traditional one. The fourth kingdom was the Roman empire, while the
break-up of iron into clay in the feet (Daniel 2) predicted the break-up of the Roman empire into smaller
nations. Luther wrote that it was common knowledge that the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 should be interpreted
with a day for a year and that it predicted the death of Christ. 38
This historicist approach to prophecy remained the common and accepted approach among Protestants for
the next three hundred years, to such a degree that scholars sometimes define historicism simply as the
approach to prophecy of Protestants up until the mid-19th century.39
Today the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the only major denomination officially using the historicist
approachthe most common approach during two millennia of biblical apocalyptic interpretation. If
Adventists wish to see the use of historicism increased among other interpreters, it might be necessary to
change the way the approach is communicated. Many scholars do not believe in the possibility of true,
predictive prophecy, and the gap between Adventists and these interpreters cannot be closed. The
community of believers who are open to this possibility is large, howeverin our days as it has always
been. To these people Adventists should demonstrate carefully from the biblical text, case by case, where
and why one sees history in advance.7
The historical record, as Vetne indicates, demonstrates that while in the past historicism
was the preferred and most trusted hermeneutical method for the Christian theologians and
scholars, there has been a continual decline during the past centuries in the use of this exegetical
method in order to interpret Daniel and Revelation. The scholar appears to think that the reason
for the decline has been a bad communication problem, and suggests that a change in the
approach through which the SDA historicism is shared with non-Adventist theologians might
help increase the number of theologians who would accept the historicist school and its specific
guidelines for prophetic interpretation.
The true reason for this permanent and, it seems, irreversible, decline, though, might
reside somewhere elsein the continual absence of factual evidence that would authenticate the
SDA historicist interpretation for Daniel and Revelation, and the dependence on numerous
assumed, fictional, and even modified historical events in order to support the disingenuous
arguments that have attempted to provide dependable evidence for prophetic fulfillment.8
IV. Historical and Non-Historical Events

Human Events and Historical Records
This research documents purpose is to establish, based on the historicism definitions
discussed in Section II, clear and unambiguous parameters for the terms so often used in the
SDA historitalkthe peculiar language that the SDA historicist theologians and scholars use
in their negotiations on historicism, historical or chronological prophecies, and prophetic
fulfillments, so that later in the document we will be able to evaluate their claims and conclude
whether or not the historical events suggested and claimed to demonstrate prophetic fulfillment
in Daniel and Revelation are indeed factual and unquestionable, or manipulated, distorted, and
even invented pseudo-historical facts.
The first step we need to take is to find clear and unambiguous definitions for the English
language lexical terms history, and historical, and can depend on The Oxford English
Dictionary [further, OED] for those definitions. According to OED, history is
A written narrative constituting a continuous methodical record, in order of time, of important or public
events [emphasis added], esp. those connected with a particular country, people, individual [emphasis
added], etc.1
or,
That branch of knowledge which deals with past events, as recorded in writings or otherwise
ascertained [emphasis added]; the formal record of the past [emphasis added], esp. of human affairs or
actions [emphasis added]; the study of the formation and growth of communities and nations. 2
Anderson concurs with these succinct but also explicit enough OED definitions, and
states in his Manual of General History that,
History is a narration of the events which have happened among mankind [emphasis added], including an
account of the rise and fall of nations, as well as of other great changes which have affected the political
and social conditions of the human race [emphasis added].3
The scholar also mentions chronologythe event-related time or chronological records

as a branch and integral part of history, and states:
10. Chronology is a department of history which treats of the exact time or date of each event, with
reference to some fixed time called an era or epoch. The epoch usually employed in our times among
Christian nations for reckoning dates, is the birth of Christ, called the Christian Era.* All dates preceding
this are marked B.C., that is, Before Christ; and all subsequent to it are marked A.D., that is, Anno Domini,
which means in the year of our Lord; that is, after the birth of Christ.4
Williams adds that in order to maintain a faithful record of dates and events for the
further generations, historians depend on the written records that have been created about the
human situations, circumstances, and events that have occurred:
It is obvious that the materials for the writing of history consist for the most part of written records. It is
true that all manner of monuments, including the ruins of buried cities, remains of ancient walls and
highways, and all other traces of a former civilization, must be allotted their share as records to guide the
investigator in his attempt to reconstruct past conditions. But for anything like a definite presentation of the
events of bygone days, it is absolutely essential, as Sir George Cornewall Lewis points out in great detail,
to have access to contemporary written records, either at first hand, or through the medium of copyists, in
case the original records themselves have been destroyed. Lewis reached the conclusion, as the result of his
exhaustive examination of the credibility of early Roman history, that a tradition of a past event is hardly
transmitted orally from generation to generation with anything like accuracy of detail for more than a
century.5
The second English lexical term, historical, is defined in the OED as of or pertaining
to history; of the nature or character of history, constituting history; following or in accordance
with history, of, pertaining to, of the nature of history as opposed to fiction or legend, and
relating to or concerned with history or historical events.6
The above two OED lexical terms, history, and historical, indicate that a historical
event is an important or public event, that is connected with a particular country, people,
individual, most often a past event that has been recorded in writings or otherwise
ascertained, that is a direct part of the formal record of the past, and that deals with human
affairs or actions. Such records concern mankind or the human race, and often include the
exact time or date of each event, with reference to some fixed time called an era or epoch. The
events must be included in written records for their accurate preservation, because oral records
become inaccurate with time and from generation to generation.
SDA Historicism and Historical Events
The various definitions for historicism examined in the second section of this research
document indicate that the SDA theologians and scholars have in view true and verifiable human
events in their historicist interpretations for the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation. The
prophecies in the above books are claimed to cover the historical period from the time of the
prophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth,7 provide an outline of the whole
course of church history,8 include a descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most
theologically significant events of this [Christian] era,9 cover the whole span of history from
the time of the prophet to the very end of history,10 and to do this in unbroken sequence, from
Daniels day and the time of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age.11 The
historical apocalyptic in Daniel and Revelation was intended by its ancient author to reveal
information about real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the eschaton,12
and to depict specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, and periods
that transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. These began in the
first century, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords
return.13
The SDA Historicist Claims Too Tall
That the SDA historicist claims are too tall, that is, too good to be true, is obvious when
one takes a closer look at what their substance is:
1. To cover the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of the
kingdom of God on earth,
2. To include a descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most theologically
significant events of this [Christian] era,
3. To present such prophetic narrative in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time of
John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age,
4. To reveal information about real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the
eschaton,and
5. To depict specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, and periods that
transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. These began in the first
century, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords return.
These five points would require from the SDA theologians and scholars to provide
authentic historical evidence that the entire historical period from the time of the prophet to the
establishment of the kingdom of God on earth is contained in the prophecies in an unbroken
sequence, and that some of the most theologically significant events of this [Christian] era,
including for instance, the Reformation, are included in specific and actual events in the Danielic
and Apocaliptic prophecies as interpreted from the historicist perspective, to show how these
predictions reveal information about real, in-history events in the time span between his [the
prophets] day and the eschaton, that is, to present and describe specific and identifiable
historical events, institutions, movements, and periods that transpire in a chronological sequence
throughout the entire church age that began in the first century, have continued through the
centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords return.
Evidence for Historical Fulfillment
The indisputable historical evidence that would defend and support the SDA exegetical
interpretation for the eschatological prophecies in Daniel and Revelation must be, from Sheas
perspective, the pragmatic test of historical fulfillment [emphasis added].14 This pragmatic
interpretation test requires that the interpretive results [should] be confirmed from
extrabiblical sources where possible [emphasis added]15 and that the events, institutions,
movements, and periods [emphasis added] suggested and claimed as evidence for historical
fulfillment should be specific and identifiable historical events [emphasis added],16 and
therefore real, and in-history,17 human events, and not some assumed, non-human and also
non-terrestrial, fictional and counterfeited pseudo-events.
Unassailable Facts as True Evidence
Froom raises the apologetic stakes even higher when he expects sound, unassailable
fact and not pleasing fables and transitory feelings, or pious hopes and plausible
assumptions as evidence that the SDA theological thought and interpretation is based on sound
science, is rigorous, and is biblical. Examination from time to time would weed out those
assumptions, presupposition, exegetical methods, and creeds and doctrines that cannot stand the
scientific and biblical correctness tests. To be complacent about such essential matters and hope
that our logical fallacies, inference errors, and lack of empirical evidence will escape unnoticed
and undetected is to act as fools and to provide our opponents with opportunities to denounce
and deride our clumsiness and ineptitude. We should never allow such situations to develop and
compromise our theological standards and our reputation among those who disagree with the
position we have taken and maintained on doctrinal issues. States Froom:
We may well observe

1. That intelligent faith is based on sound, unassailable fact. It is not built on pleasing fables and transitory
feelings. It is not founded on pious hopes and plausible assumptions. It is not reared upon unreliable
traditions and imaginative folklore. Instead, it is built upon solid, trustworthy, factual evidence.
2. That it is impossible for God to lie, and inconceivable that He should deceive. He never contradicts the
laws of truth and evidence that He has established upon which we are to base our faith and verify our
findings, and by which we are to evaluate and check all evidence. The truth of God ever accords with the
highest demands of reverent reason, historical fact, and scientific procedure.
3. That truth has nothing to fear either from reverent investigation or from the attacks of hostile perversion.
If it be truth, it is bound ultimately to triumph over its detractors. Indeed, the more it is buffeted, the
brighter it shines and the more majestic it stands forth in its towering majesty.
Such observations are pertinent because, along with our increasing growth and the inevitable prominence
that comes as a result, especially as we enter the crisis time of earths last hour, we shall become the center
of the worlds critical and ofttimes hostile scrutiny. Every position we hold will then become the object of
bitter attack. It therefore behooves us to know, as never before, the certainty and surety of the foundations
upon which our faith is built. It is imperative for us to be assured and established beyond reasonable
question upon every major fact of our prophetic faith. We are specifically admonished by the Spirit of
prophecy and such counsel is buttressed by our own commons sense that these fundamentals are to be
verified beyond a reasonable doubt. We are further told that if we are not so prepared and buttressed, the
wisdom of the worlds great ones will be too much for us. 23 18
V. The Incomplete and Selective Records

Divine and Human Historicist Decoders
The SDA theologians and scholars have claimed that the Bible is a historicist book
because the angel who interpreted to Daniel the visions in the prophetic book used the historicist
schools hermeneutical method for his interpretation, and because Jesus and Paul also interpreted
Daniels prophecies and even the whole Bible through the historicist hermeneutics. States the
Seventy-day Adventist Bible Encyclopedia [further, SDABE]:
The validity of historicism as a method for the interpretation of Daniel and Revelation is provided by the
fact that the angel interpreter in Daniel used this method in explaining the meaning of the visions to the
prophet. In a dream he is informed that the dream of the king in Dan. 2 represents four kingdoms that will
arise in human history before the kingdom of God is established (verses 3645). The four beasts of Dan. 7
represent those same kingdoms, after which God will give the kingdom to the saints (verses 18, 19). The
first kingdom was identified as Babylon (verses 3638). In Dan. 8 two animals are used as symbols to
represent the Medo-Persian and Greek empires (verses 1921). The fourth kingdom is not identified in
Daniel, but Jesus takes it to be Rome (Matt. 24:15). According to Daniel, this kingdom was to be divided,
and a little horn would exercise political and religious control over the people. In the time of the end the
horn is to be destroyed and Gods kingdom established forever.
Jesus used this method when He interpreted Dan. 9:26, 27 as referring to the future destruction of
Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (Luke 21:2022). Paul also speaks about a series of successive prophetic events to be
fulfilled within history before the second coming of Christ (2 Thess. 2:112). Historicism as a method of
interpretation is found in the Bible itself, and it provides the key for the interpretation of the apocalyptic
books of Daniel and Revelation.1
LaRondelle agrees with the position the SDA theologians and scholars have taken in the
SDABE. For instance, he mentions Jesus and Paul as Bible interpreters from the SDA historicist
perspective:
Jesus mentions Daniel by name (Matt. 24:15) and affirms his salvation-historical perspective when He
applies Daniel's prophecy of the violent death of the Messiah and of Jerusalem's consequent destruction
(Dan. 9:26, 27) to the imminent fall of Jerusalem in His own generation (Matt. 23:36; 24:15; Luke 21:2022). Jesus continuously stresses the Christocentric focus of the church age in His farewell speech of
Matthew 24, when He predicts the coming of false christs and the persecution of His elect (see verses 4,
9,14, 23, 24, 27, 30, 31).
Paul also refers to Daniel's prophecy of an oppressor and deceiver of the covenant people, when he applies
Daniel 8 and 11 to a fulfillment during the church age in "the temple of God" (see 2 Thess. 2:4-8). By the
expression, "the temple of God," Paul did not mean the material shrine in Jerusalem but rather the
institutional church (see 1 Cor. 3:16; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:19-21).2
On the basis of these New Testament applications of Daniel's prophecies to the church age, the Seventh-day
Adventist Encyclopedia concludes: "Historicism as a method of interpretation is found in the Bible itself,
and it provides the key for the interpretation of the apocalyptic books of Daniel and Revelation." 3 2
The SDA Historicist Claims Repeated

Summarized and repeated here, the claims the SDA theologians and scholars have made
about the two books, Daniel and Revelation, are that the prophecies in the books:
1. Cover the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of the kingdom
of God on earth.
2. Include a descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most theologically significant
events of this [Christian] era
3. Present such prophetic narrative in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time of
John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age.
4. Reveal information about real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the
eschaton, and
5. Depict specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, and periods that
transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. These began in the first
century, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords return.
The SDA historicists, though, have overreached with their defense and support for the
historicist method and their interpretation claims. This document section will show that the
historical evidence that would substantiate such disproportionate interpretative arguments cannot
be produced from authentic human historical records and therefore the SDA historicist claims
fail because there is no empirical evidence to support them.
Historical Time Coverage Incomplete
The first SDA historicist claim included above is that the prophecies in Daniel and
Revelation cover the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of the
kingdom of God on earth. The Adventist literature, though, appears to indicate that the claimed
fulfillments for Daniels prophecies end no later than the assumed Imperial Romes division into
the European states and the Papal Romes division into its Eastern and Western branches, while
those in Revelation seem to end with the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Prbstle establishes this
matter, for instance, with a historical chart that ends the historical period from the time of the
prophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth at the Papal Rome,3 and no further
than that:
Daniel 7
lion
bear
leopard
fourth beast
little horn
heavenly judgment
Transfer of the kingdom to
Son of man and saints
Daniel 8
ram
he-goat
Little horn
restoration of the holy
-
Interpretation
Babylon
Medo-Persia
Greece
Rome (pagan)
Rome (papal)
eschatological Yom Kippur
Second Coming and
beyond
The Additional Note on [Daniel] Chapter 7 in SDABC could also help the interested
readers to establish the end time for the Papal Rome, and, therefore the end of the historical
period claimed to be covered in Daniel. That date is 1798, much far behind us:
It is evident from this brief sketch that the rise of papal power was a gradual process covering many
centuries. The same is true of its decline. The former process may be thought of as continuing from about
A.D. 100 to 756; the latter, from about A.D. 1303 to 1870. The papacy was at the height of its power from
the time of Gregory VII (107385) to that of Boniface VIII (12941303). It is thus clear that no dates can
be given to mark a sharp transition from insignificance to supremacy, or from supremacy back to
comparative weakness. As is true with all historical processes, the rise and fall of the papacy were both
gradual developments.
However, by 538 the papacy was completely formed and functioning in all significant aspects, and by
1798, 1260 years later, it had lost practically all the power it had accumulated over a period of centuries.
Inspiration allotted 1260 years to the papacy for a demonstration of its principles, its policies, and its
objectives. Accordingly these two dates should be considered as marking the beginning and the end of the
prophetic period of papal power.4
The SDA historicist interpretation that has argued for the prophetic event fulfillments
claimed to have occurred after 1798 is at least vague, if not too speculative, and placed
somewhere in a nebulous future which makes it too implausible to be considered:
Was healed. There was a gradual revival in papal life in the years following the revolution in France. The
papacy suffered a new setback when in 1870 the Papal States were taken from it. A significant event
occurred in 1929 when the Lateran Treaty restored temporal power to the pope, who was given the rule of
Vatican City, a section of the city of Rome about 108.7 acres in extent. However, the prophet envisioned a
much greater restoration. He saw the wound completely healed, as the Greek implies. Following the
healing he saw all that dwell upon the earth, except a faithful few, worshiping the beast (v. 8; cf. GC
579). This is still future. Though the papacy receives homage from certain groups, vast populations show it
no deference. But that is to change. The beast of v. 11 causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to
worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed (v. 12). 5
From the strict historical perspective, therefore, Daniel does not seem to cover the
historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on
earth, but stops its prophetic news coverage in 1798, and ignores all the human and recorded
historical events after that date.
Efforts to demonstrate more prophetic fulfillment in order to substantiate the claim that
Revelation also predicts events between the prophets time and the Second Coming seem to have
ended with failed attempts to show similar historic fulfillment for events related to the fifth and
sixth trumpets in Revelation 9. States SDABC:
One of the first Biblical expositors on record to identify the Turks as the power portrayed under the sixth
trumpet was the Swiss reformer, Heinrich Bullinger (d. A.D. 1575), although Martin Luther had already set
forth this trumpet as symbolic of Moslems. However, on the dating of this trumpet, as of the fifth,
commentators have shown wide divergence, although the decided majority of expositors have assigned
dates for the fifth trumpet during the period in which the Saracens were in the ascendancy, and for the sixth
trumpet during the heyday of either the Seljuk or the Ottoman Turks.
In 1832 William Miller made a new approach to the dating of these trumpets by connecting them
chronologically (in the fifth of a series of articles in the Vermont Telegraph). On the basis of the year-day
principle (see on Dan. 7:25), Miller calculated the five months of the fifth trumpet (Rev. 9:5) to be 150
literal years, and the hour, day, month, and year of the sixth to be 391 years and 15 days. Many expositors
before Miller had adopted these same calculations, but they had not connected the two periods
chronologically. Miller set forth the view that the time period of the sixth trumpet followed immediately
upon that of the fifth, so as to make the entire period one of 541 years and 15 days. This period he dated
from A.D. 1298, when he considered the first attack by the Ottoman Turks on the Byzantine Empire
occurred, to 1839. Thus, according to his view, both trumpets represented the Ottoman Turks, the fifth,
their rise and the sixth, their period of domination.
In 1838 Josiah Litch, one of Millers associates in the second advent movement in America, revised
Millers dates to A.D. 1299 to 1449 for the fifth trumpet, and 1449 to 1840 for the sixth. Litch accepted the
date July 27, 1299, for the battle of Bapheum, near Nicomedia, which he took as the first attack by the
Ottoman Turks on the Byzantine Empire. He saw the date 1449 as significant of the collapse of Byzantine
power, for toward the end of 1448 a new Byzantine emperor, Constantine Palaeologus, had requested
permission of the Turkish sultan Murad II before daring to ascend his throne, and he did not, in fact,
receive the crown until January 6, 1449, after such permission had been granted. Litch believed that this
150-year period constituted the time during which the Ottoman Turks tormented (see v. 5) the Byzantine
Empire.
As already stated, Litch set 1299 as the beginning of the fifth trumpet, to be more exact, July 27, 1299, his
date for the battle of Bapheum. He gave to this fifth trumpet a period of 150 years. This brought him to July
27, 1449, for the beginning of the sixth trumpet. Adding on 391 years brought him to July 27, 1840. The 15
days carried him over into the month of August of that year. He predicted that in that month the power of
the Turkish Empire would be overthrown. However, at the outset he did not fix on a precise day in August.
A short time before the expiration of this period he declared that the Turkish Empire would be broken
August 11, which is exactly 15 days beyond July 27, 1840.
At that time world attention was directed to events taking place in the Turkish Empire. In June, 1839,
Mohammed Ali, pasha of Egypt and nominally a vassal of the sultan, had rebelled against his overlord. He
defeated the Turks and captured their navy. At this juncture Mahmud II, the sultan, died, and the ministers
of his successor, Abdul Mejid, proposed a settlement to Mohammed Ali by which he would receive the
hereditary pashalik of Egypt, and his son Ibrahim, the rulership of Syria. However, Britain, France, Austria,
Prussia, and Russia, who all had interests in the Near East, intervened at this point and insisted that no
agreement between the Turks and Mohammed Ali be made without their consultation. Negotiations were
protracted until the summer of 1840, when, on July 15, Britain, Austria, Prussia, and Russia signed the
Treaty of London, proposing to back with force the terms suggested the previous year by the Turks. It was
about this time that Litch announced that he anticipated Turkish power to come to an end on August 11. On
that day the Turkish emissary, Rifat Bey, arrived at Alexandria with the terms of the London Convention.
On that day also the ambassadors of the four powers received a communication from the sultan inquiring as
to what measures were to be taken in reference to a circumstance vitally affecting his empire. He was told
that provision had been made, but he could not know what it was. Litch interpreted these events as a
recognition by the Turkish government that its independent power was gone.
These events, coming at the specified time of Litchs prediction, exercised a wide influence upon the
thinking of those in America who were interested in the Millerite movement. Indeed, this prediction by
Litch went far to give credence to other, as yet unfulfilled, time propheciesparticularly that of the 2300
dayswhich were being preached by the Millerites. Thus this occurrence in 1840 was a significant factor
in building up the expectation of the second advent three years later (see GC 334, 335).
It should be made clear, however, that commentators and theologians in general have been greatly divided
over the meaning of the 5th and 6th trumpets. This has been due principally to problems in three areas: (1)
the meaning of the symbolism itself; (2) the meaning of the Greek; (3) the historical events and dates
involved. But to canvass adequately these problems would carry us beyond the space limits permissible in
this commentary.
Generally speaking, the Seventh-day Adventist interpretation of the fifth and sixth trumpets, particularly as
touching the time period involved, is essentially that of Josiah Litch.6
The conclusion that the readers can draw from this discussion is that, again, even the
most strenuous SDA historicist interpretations for the prophecies in Revelation fail to extend the
historical time further than 1840which is a long time ago. Those prophecies are no more
significant and relevant for the present generation, and that is clear and indisputable evidence
that the SDA historicism fails to deliver on its excessive claims.
Since 1840the last historical time that the SDA theologians and scholars have
proposed as fulfillment for a prediction that has not materializeda lot has happened, but Daniel
and Revelation are silent about the modern times and contain no information about world powers
and empires that have appeared, developed, and reshaped the world after that date. Paul
discusses those empires in short strokes, but the information he delivers is enough to provide the
readers with evidence that the SDA historicist claim that Daniel and Revelation cover the
historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on
earth is incorrect and overstated. Below is a short table that contains some information about
those empires never mentioned in the prophetic books mentioned above:
World Empires Never Mentioned
The Modern Period World Empires7
World Empire
Portuguese Empire
Spanish Empire
Russian Empire (USSR)
Swedish Empire
Dutch Empire
British Empire
French Empire
Modern Chinese Empire
Austro-Hungarian Empire
US Empire
Brazilian Empire
German Empire 1
German Empire 2
Japanese Empire
Italian Empire
Time Period
1450-1975
1492-1898
1552-1991
1560-1660
1660-1962
1607-1980
1611-1980
1644-1911
1700-1918
1776-Present
1822-1889
1871-1918
1939-1945
1871-1945
1889-1942
Prophesied in Daniel
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Prophesied in Revelation
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Historicist assumption
No
No
No
No
No
The historical records indicate, therefore, that the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation
have not provided a prophetic narrative in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time
of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age. All the modern empires are absent
in those prophecies, so that the secular historical sequence is broken down to the Second
Advent and the end of age. The natural SDA apologetic response to the data presented above
would be that the secular empires mentioned above, except the United States Empire that seems
to be described in Revelation 13 have had little or no influence on the Christian Religions. That
might be true, but further data suggests that significant religious events that had powerful and
lasting impact on the World Christian Religion are also absent from the eschatological
prophecies in Daniel and Revelation, as shown below.
Significant Religious Events Also Absent

The second claim the SDA historicists make about the prophecies in Daniel and
Revelation is that these prophecies include a descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the
most theologically significant events of this [Christian] era. This claim also seems to lack the
evidence that would back it. Some theologically significant events of this [Christian] era are
also not included in Daniel and Revelation. These remarkable historical events, though, have
changed the course of the Christian Church, and their utter absence from the prophetic record
that the SDA historicists have claimed to be a prophetic narrative in unbroken sequence, from
Daniels day and the time of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age are
obvious and indisputable evidence that the high claim for an unbroken human historical
sequence in Daniel and Revelation cannot be supported with historical facts. States Miller:
Perhaps we couldnt draw a detailed map for every mile of the churchs journey, but we could sketch the
most significant landmarks, milestones, and turns in the road. The Council of Nicea, Luthers posting of
The Ninety-Five Theses, John and Charles Wesleys conversionsthese events clearly changed the
course of church history [emphasis added]. In highlighting these key events, we hoped, we could help
people see the big picture, the development and change of the Christian church over time. The project
would be an adventure, but we felt it was worth the risk. 8
Ten Momentous Events in the Church

The table below contains ten momentous past, modern, and recent historical events that
occurred in the Christian Church and that have had a tremendous and incalculable impact on the
direction the church took during the centuries:
Important Events in the Christian Church9
Event
The Destruction of
Jerusalem
Date
A.D. 70
Significance
In Luke 21:20 Jesus predicted that Jerusalem would be surrounded
and destroyed. This prediction was fulfilled in A.D. 70 when the
Roman general Titus sacked Jerusalem and destroyed its Temple.
The ramifications of this event were huge. It marked the end of the
Jewish state until recent times and ended the sacrificial system of the
Jews. The destruction also signaled a shift in the power structure of
the church. The mostly Jewish church quickly became Gentile. Plus,
many in the church also viewed this tragedy as God's judgment upon
the Jews and evidence that the church had become the new Israel.
The Edict of Milan
A.D. 313
Before 313 Christianity was a religion on the run as persecution

made staying alive a top priority for the followers of Christ. This
changed, though, when the two Roman emperors--Constantine of the
West and Lucinius of the East agreed to allow Christianity to
function as a tolerated religion. But not only did the Edict of Milan
allow Christianity to function without hindrance, by the end of the
century Christianity became the dominant religion of the Roman
Empire. Thus the Edict of Milan helped lead to the merger between
the Christian religion and the state--a union that has existed until the
last few decades.
The Council of Nicea
A.D. 325
This first of the four great ecumenical councils tackled the explosive
issue of whether Jesus Christ was equal to God the Father. Arius
argued that Jesus was a created being who was of a similar substance
as the Father. His opponent, Athanasius of Alexandria, however,
asserted that Jesus was not a created being. He argued that Jesus was
of the same substance as the Father. After a long debate, all but two
of the nearly 300 bishops at the council agreed with Athanasius that
Jesus was true God. Although debate oncerning the person of Jesus
would continue, this was a significant victory for the orthodox view
of the person of Christ.
Athanasius Defines the New

Testament Canon
A.D. 367
Others had mentioned the canonical books of the New Testament in

their writings, but Athanasius, in his Thirty-ninth Festal Letter,
was the first person to list all 27 books that now make up our New
Testament. Noticeably left out by Athansisus were the Epistle of
Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas. Included were the debated
books of 2 Peter and Revelation. Referring to these 27 books of
the New Testament, Athanasius declared, In these alone the
teaching of godliness is proclaimed. No one may add to them, and
nothing may be taken from them. This closed canon, as declared
by Athanasius, was recognized by the Christian church from this
point onward.
The Council of Chalcedon
A.D. 451
This fourth and last of the great ecumenical councils solidified the
orthodox view of the person of Christ. Attended by 150 bishops,
Chalcedon affirmed that Christ had two natures--human and divine,
and that these two natures existed within one person without being
blurred.
East/West Schism
A.D. 1054
Although the parting of the ways between East and West began much
earlier, 1054 is often viewed as the official date for the separation
between Western Christians (Roman Catholics) and Eastern
Christians (Eastern Orthodox). Several religious and political factors
were at play in the division between Western and Eastern Christians,
yet two stand out. First, the Western Church asserted that the pope's
authority extended over the entire church, including the East. The
Eastern Church, however, rejected papal authority. Second, the
Western church argued that the Holy Spirit proceeded from both the
Father and the Son. The East said that the Holy Spirit proceeded only
from the Father. These differences could not be overcome and thus
the Eastern and Western churches parted ways.

Guttenberg Produces
First Printed Bible
the
A.D. 1456
Johann Gutenberg's invention of the printing press and the first Bible
were nothing short of revolutionary, both politically and religiously.
For the first time, books could now be mass-produced and not kept
only as the property of the state. Without this invention, the
Protestant reformation may never have taken root. But with it, the
Bible was put into the hands of the common people. As a result, the
Protestant belief of the priesthood of all believers could now also be
joined with a Bible in the hands of all believers. Gutenberg's
invention of the printing press was so revolutionary that Biography
of the Millennium on the A&E channel listed him as the most
important person of the millennium.
Luther Posts
Theses"
His
"95
A.D. 1517
On October 31, 1517 Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses on the

door of the Castle Church at Wittenberg. At issue for Luther was the
sale of indulgences by the Catholic Church. The ramifications of this
event were huge both politically and religiously as Luthers posting
began the Protestant Reformation. When asked why he did it, Luther
said he was bound by Scripture and reason. Luther was condemned
as a heretic and sentenced to die. He escaped and the Protestant
Reformation spread.
Council of Trent Begins
A.D. 1545
The Protestant Reformation was met by what theologians have called

the Catholic Counter Reformation. In 1545, the Council of Trent,
consisting of 255 leaders, met to address internal clergy corruption
and deal with the Protestant threat. As a result, indulgences were
banned and clergy corruption was curtailed. Most importantly,
though, the Roman Catholic Church solidified its doctrines in the
face of the Protestant challenge. The Protestant doctrines of
scripture alone and justification by faith alone were condemned
and curses were pronounced on those who believed these doctrines.
The findings of the Council of Trent, which relied heavily on the
teachings of Thomas Aquinas, characterized Roman Catholicism
until the 1960s.
Vatican II Council Begins
A.D. 1962
The winds of change were in the air on October 12, 1962 when
twenty-four hundred Roman Catholic bishops met in Rome to
discuss what direction the Catholic Church would take for the
Modern Era. Some of the results of the Council included: (1) a shift
in emphasis from the church as a monarchical structure organized
under the primacy of the pope to the collegial union of bishops; (2) a
positive view of the role of non-Christian religions; (3) an admittance
that both Catholics and Protestants were to blame for the division
during the Reformation and that Protestants are now to be considered
"separated brethren"; and (4) an acceptance of the use of vernacular

language in the liturgy. Although not officially rejecting the decrees
of Trent, Vatican II offered a more gracious approach to nonCatholics and in doing so set a different tone for the church heading
into a new millennium.
The above are some events that have shaped the Christian Church during the current era
and that have not been included or even alluded to in Daniel and Revelation. There are numerous
other events and situations that have shaped the church during the past two millennia and have
never been featured in the eschatological prophecies that were claimed, from the SDA historicist
perspective, to present in detail the historical period from the time of the prophet to the
establishment of the kingdom of God on earth, include a descriptive overview and evaluation
of some of the most theologically significant events of this [Christian] era, contain these
extended and detailed prophetic narratives in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the
time of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age, provide information about
real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the eschaton, and also define and
describe specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, and periods that
transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age.
The Unbroken Sequence Claim False
The evidence is clear, then, that the SDA historicism has failed to demonstrate that the
eschatological prophecies in Daniel and Revelation present in unbroken sequence those
significant events that have occurred in the Christian Church during our Era, and describe
specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, and periods as time has
advanced towards the Second Coming. There are serious historical event gaps, both secular and
religious in the historical sequences contained in Daniel and Revelation which leads to the
logical conclusion that the events, institutions, movements, and periods described in these
prophetic books are not general and sequential but selective and particular. God has not designed
the Bible as time almanac, and the time prophecies in Daniel and Revelation are not sequential
and complete human historical records.
VI. Historicist Charts and Historic Spans

Millers Deceptive Time Computations
Miller and the Millerites, Ellen White included, were more than confident that the world
would end in 1843. The biblical evidence seemed to be certain and indisputable because
Miller had proven his facts through multiple time formulas, which, the amateur theologian
believed, were based on actual and unquestionable biblical texts. States Arasola:
Miller did, however, differ from most historicists in employing more than one formula for the interpretation
of time:
Figures sometimes have two or more different significations, as day is used in a figurative sense to
represent three different periods of time.
1. Indefinite (Eccles. vii.14)
2. Definite, a day for a year (Ezek. iv.6)
3. Day for a thousand years (2Pet. iii.8)
If you put on the right construction it will harmonize with the Bible and make good sense, otherwise it will
not.14
In another context he clarifies his argument on the meaning of the word day by stating that there were
three types of days: natural, lasting 24 hours or one cycle of the earth round its axis; prophetic, meaning a
year or one cycle of the earth round the sun; thousand year days, which due to their length deserved the title
Lords day. In addition to using the popular year/day method Miller also employed the thousand years for
a day calculation in some of his interpretations of the date of the parousia. The basis for turning a day into
a thousand years was naturally derived from 2 Pet 3:8, 10. King James translation, be not ignorant of this
one thing, appeared to emphasize the legitimacy of this chronology. 151
Miller had 15 different proofs, with seven different calculations that backed his time
prediction that the end of the world was at the door. These erroneous computations were more
than enough to assure his ardent but gullible followers that he was, indeed, correct in his
prophetic interpretation. States again Arasola:
Miller prepared fifteen proofs which on closer analysis include seven diverse ways of calculating 1843
as the final year of worlds history [emphasis added]. The actual sequence in which Miller developed his
15 proofs is unclear because many of them are referred to or found in the earliest written sources.27 A clue
as to the evolution of Millers thinking might be available in the Vermont Telegraph from the early part of
1832, when Miller presented his view in writing for the first time. These have not been available for this
study, but there are other observations one can make on Millers fifteen proofs. 2
The Fitch and Hale Prophetic Diagram

Based on Millers flawed time calculations, Fitch and Hale produced in 1842 a detailed
prophetic chart3 that would indicate the current prophetic landmark and the last anticipated
world empirethe Mahometans. The worlds end would come, without doubt, in 1843. There
was no expectation for more historical developments further than 1843 in their prophetic chart
because the evidence Miller had presented through his time computations based on various
biblical texts appeared indisputable and incontrovertible, and to doubt all that light would
show a weak faith and mistrust the Divine providence. The historical record was set in Fitch and
Hales chart, and what was left for the believers to do was to prepare for Christs Second
Coming, to preach the First and Second Angelic Messages, and to work hard in order to persuade
the unbelievers to come and unite with those who were eager to see their Lord descend from
the heavens for them.
Froom provides an interesting and detailed explanation for the Millerite chart that Fitch
and Hale had produced. He includes information about the charts authors, the date when the
writers created it, when it was used, what was the charts uniqueness and significance, and
mentions Ellen Whites approval for the prophetic document. States the famous SDA historian:
The famous 1843 chart, devised in 1842 by Charles Fitch and Apollos Hale, was a mighty factor in
proclaiming the advent message at that time. Its publication was authorized by the eleventh general
conference of the Millerite movement, which convened at Boston on May 24, 1842. (Signs of the Times,
May 18, 1842, p. 56; June 1, p. 68; June 22, p. 96.) A few months earlier, Fitch visited Springfield,
Massachusetts, with his handpainted cloth chart. His course of lectures stirred the city, as he stressed
Habakkuk 2:2. Write the vision, and make it plain, as calling for and being fulfilled in the chart.
Three hundred copies, 3 feet 4 inches by 4 feet 7 inches, were lithographed at Boston, and used in the
earlier 1843 phase of the movement. The name of Joshua V. Himes appeared as the publisher. These 1843
charts were not used, however, in the climaxing seventh-month movement or true midnight cry phase,
from July to October, 1844. The Jewish year 1843 had expired in April, 1844 (civil time), and the
Adventists were now consciously living in the Jewish sacred year 1844, and looking for the antitypical day
of atonement the tenth day of the Jewish month Tishrito come on October 22, when they all expected
the great High Priest to emerge from the heavenly sanctuary to bless His waiting people.
This was not the first and only prophetic chart which was employed in proclaiming the first angel's
message, and which appeared in the Millerite papers. Various charts designed by William Miller, Calvin
French, J. V. Himes, Apollos Hale, and others, had appeared. (For example, see Signs of the Times, May I,
1840, p. 24; May 1, 1841, p. 21; etc.) But this notable 1843 Chronological Chart of the Visions of Daniel
and John, devised by Charles Fitch, was a distinct advance over all these previous charts, correcting
certain former inaccuracies, and omitting a number of untenable positions, though retaining certain
mistakes in some of the figures. All of these figures focalized on the Jewish year 1843 as the erroneous
terminal date, instead of 1844, which was later clearly recognized by all in the summer of 1844.
The vital place of the 1843 chart in the developing advent movement was clearly recognized and attested
by Ellen White in 1850, in the Present Truth. This statement was written in the midst of nominal
Adventism's repudiation of divine leading in the first and second angels' messages, owing to their bitter
disappointment and the resultant denial that the 2300-year period had yet terminated. Rejecting the
advancing light on the sanctuary, Sabbath, and the Spirit of prophecywhich alone could, and would,
explain the disappointmentthey contended that the spirit that had led them was mesmerism, instead of the
Spirit of God. In the midst of all this repudiation, divine attestation was given to the guiding hand of God,
despite some of the mistakes and misconceptions in both the 1843 and the 1844 phases of the movement.
Thus the 1843 chart came in the providence of God, and had its appointed place.
The following notations give, in condensed, tabular form, the essential scope of the 1843 chart, its
noteworthy advances and revisions over previous Millerite charts, its conspicuous omissions of positions
previously set forth, and certain mistakes retained in some of the figures of the 1843 chart, as alluded to
by Ellen G. White. Then follows the list of documented excerpts for students.
Notes on the "1843 Chart" Details
A. SCOPE OF THE "1843 CHART"
I. Image of Daniel 2.
II. Division of feet and toes.
III. Beasts of Daniel 7, and papal little horn.
IV. Ram, he-goat, and horn of Daniel 8.
V. Crucifixion in midst of seventieth week.
VI. Pagan dragon of Revelation 12.
VII. Papal beast of Revelation 13.
VIII. Fifth and sixth trumpets of Revelation 9.
IX. The various prophetic periodsthe 1260, 1290, 1335, and 2300 days, the 5 months, and the 7 times of
the Gentiles.
B. ADVANCED POSITIONS TAKEN ON 1843 CHART
I. Ten kingdomsthe feet and toes, not simply toes. (Notice the Lombards.)
II. Three horns plucked upthe Ostrogoths, Vandals, and Heruli. (Differing from the Miller list.)
III. -1260 years of the little hornfrom Justinian's elevation of the Roman Bishop. (Not from the uprooting
of the third opposing horn.)
IV. Notable horn of Daniel 8Rome, pagan and papal. (Not Antiochus Epiphanes, or Mohammedanism.)
V. First beast of Revelation 13papal Rome. (Not pagan Rome, as in earlier charts.)
VI. 150 years of fifth trumpetfrom 1299 to 1449, when the sixth trumpet begins. (No mention of specific
ending date of sixth trumpet.)
VII. Authorities cited: Josephus, Whelpley, Marchiaval. Bishop Lloyd, Doctor Hales.
C. OMISSIONS OF PREVIOUS POSITIONS OF FORMER CHARTS
NOTE: This chart bears the marks of careful revision, to eliminate certain suppositions and conjectures
such as had appeared on half a dozen earlier charts.
I. 33 A. D. for date of cross not mentioned, as had appeared on all previous charts. (Hales, sponsor of the
31 A. D. cross mentioned, but the 31 crucifixion not yet agreed upon.)
II. Second beast of Revelation 13 omitted. (Previously cited as Papacy, or as France.)
III. 666 as years of pagan or imperial Rome omitted. (Differing from Miller's uniform position and from
previous charts.)
IV. "Daily" nowhere identified as paganism, as on former charts. (Fitch, designer of 1843 chart, in first
letter to Miller in 1838, questioned his position.)
V. Ten kings to reign thirty years not mentioned.
D. MISTAKE RETAINED IN "SOME OF THE FIGURES" (PLURAL). (See Early Writings, p. 74.)
NOTE: This 1843 chart not used in the seventh-month movement, which climaxed with October 22, 1844.
I. 158 B. C. as date of league between Jews and Romans retained. (Should be 161 B. C.)
II. 1843, the old terminus of the 2300 years.(This was before the correction to 1844.)
III. 606 as date for rise of Mohammedanism.
IV. Numerous minor discrepancies in other dates, such as for certain of the ten horns, 490 A. D. for the
breakup of Rome, and the "7 times" as from 677 B. C., etc.
Documentation on 1843
Chart and First Message
1. PRESENTED BY FITCH AND AUTHORIZED BY CONFERENCE
In May, 1842, a general conference was again convened in Boston, Massachusetts. At the opening of this
meeting Brethren Charles Fitch and A. Hale, of Haverhill, presented us the visions of Daniel and John
which they had painted on cloth, with the prophetic numbers and ending of the vision, which they called a
chart. Brother Fitch, in explaining the subject, said in substance, as follows: He had been turning it over in
his mind, and felt that if something of this kind could be done, it would simplify the subject, and make it
much easier for him to present it to the people. Here new light seemed to spring up. These brethren had
fulfilled a prophecy given by Habakkuk 2,468 years before, where it says, And the Lord answered me, and
said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it. This thing now
became so plain to all that it was unanimously voted to have three hundred of these charts lithographed
forthwith, that those who felt the message may read and run with it.Second Advent Way Marks and
High Heafs, Joseph Bates, New Bedford, 1847, pp. 10, n. (See also Life of Joseph Bates, 1878, p. 272.)
2. PROPHETIC CHART PUBLICIZED
Chronological Chart of the Visions of Daniel and John. It is now nearly finished, and will be ready for
delivery in a few days. Price, $2.50 a copy to subscribers. Published at No. 14 Devonshire Street, upstairs.
Subscribers may send or call soon."Signs of the Times, June 22, 1842, p. 96.
3. MIGHTY INFLUENCE OF THE CHART
You who participated in this first angel's message, and felt its power and glory, and saw its effects on the
people, just go back with me to the camp meetings, conferences, and other meetings where the time, 1843,
was proclaimed from the [1843] chart. With what solemnity, zeal, and holy confidence the servants of the
Lord proclaimed the time. And O, how their words fell upon the people, melting the hardest sinners heart;
for God was with them, and His Spirit attended the solemn message.James White in Present Truth,
April, 1850, p. 65.
4. JAMES WHITE USES CHART ON FIRST PREACHING TOUR
In October, 1842, an advent camp meeting was held in Exeter, Maine, which I attended. The meeting was
large, tents numerous, preaching clear and powerful, and the singing of second advent melodies possessed a
power such as I had never before witnessed in sacred songs. My second advent experience was greatly
deepened at this meeting, and at its close I felt that I must immediately go out into the great harvest field,
and do what I could in sounding the warning. I therefore prepared three lectures, one to remove such
objections as the time of the advent not to be known, and the temporal millennium, one on the signs of the
times, and one on the prophecy of Daniel.
I had neither horse, saddle, bridle, nor money, yet felt that I must go. I had used my past winter's earnings
in necessary clothing, in attending second advent meetings, and in the purchase of books and the chart. But
my father offered me the use of a horse for the winter, and Elder Polley gave me a saddle with both pads
torn off, and several pieces of an old bridle. I gladly accepted these, and cheerfully placed the saddle on a
beech log and nailed on the pads, fastened the pieces of the bridle together with malleable nails, folded my
chart, with a few pamphlets on the subject of the advent over my breast, snugly buttoned up in my coat, and
left my fathers house on horseback. I gave from three to six lectures in four different towns around
Palmyra. Life Incidents, by James White, 1868, pp.71, 73.
5. WHITTIER'S DESCRIPTION OF THE CHARTS
John Greenleaf Whittier, describing one of the giant Adventist camp meetingsat East Kingston, New
Hampshire (June 29-July 5, 1842)of which Apollos Hale was secretary, thus described the prophetic
chart used, which was doubtless the original canvas chart from which the lithographed copies were made:
Suspended from the front of the rude pulpit were two broad sheets of canvas, upon one of which was the
figure of a manthe head of gold, the breast and arms of silver, the belly of brass, the legs of iron, and feet
of claythe dream of Nebuchadnezzar! On the other were depicted the wonders of the apocalyptic
visionthe beaststhe dragonsthe scarlet woman seen by the seer of PatmosOriental types and
figures and mystic symbols translated into staring Yankee realities, and exhibited like the beasts of a
traveling menagerie. One horrible image, with its hideous heads and scaly caudal extremity, reminded me
of the tremendous line of Milton, who, in speaking of the same evil dragon, describes him as
Swingeing the scaly horrors of his folded tail.
To an imaginative mind the scene was full of novel interest. The white circle of tentsthe dim wood
archesthe upturned, earnest facesthe loud voices of the speakers, burdened with the awful symbolic
language of the Bible. Quoted in "Life of William Miller" SylvesterBliss, Boston. 1853. p. 166.
6. CHART SUGGESTED TO FITCH BY HABAKKUK 2:2.
As early as 1842, the direction given in this prophecy, to write the vision, and make it plain upon tables,
that he may run that readeth it. had suggested to Charles Fitch the preparation of a prophetic chart to
illustrate the visions of Daniel and the Revelation. The publication of this chart was regarded as a
fulfillment of the command given by Habakkuk. No one, however, then noticed that an apparent delay in
the accomplishment of the visiona tarrying timeis presented in the same prophecy."Ellen G. White
"The Great Controversy, 1911, p. 392.
NOTE: The tarrying time was clearly recognized and stressed following the ending of the Jewish sacred
year "1843," in April, 1844 (civil time). Consciously living thereafter in 1844. the Adventists did not use
this famous chart in this later movement to herald the October, 1844 expectation.
7. GOD'S HAND HID MISTAKE IN FIGURES
The Lord showed me that the 1843 chart was directed by His hand, and that no part of it should be altered;
that the figures were as He wanted them. 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.E. G. White, in Present Truth, Nov., 1850, p. 87,
col. I. L. E. F.4
The Rhodes and Nichols Revised Chart

The 1843 Millerite prophetic time chart, whose authors were Fitch and Hale, was
replaced in 1850 with The Earliest Sabbatarian Chart. This time the designer was Rhodes, and
the engraver Nichols. In his monumental Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, volume IV, Froom
provides also a detailed and impressive discussion on this prophetic chart that James White
converted into an improved, cloth-backed prophetic chart for the use of the Sabbatarian
ministers and for Bible studies in the home,5 and that was recognized soon as the standard
[prophetic] exposition for the SDAs.
The 1850 Earliest Sabbatarian Chart6 is rather similar to the Millerite version because
the basic Millerite prophetic interpretation remains almost the same in the 1850 updated and
improved Adventist chart, with a few minor differences. For instance, in this chart the last world
power is shown to be the Ottoman Empire, but the worlds end remains close. This is not too
hard to understand when we remember that the Adventists saw the Second Coming as imminent
and immediate in their life time. States Froom about the Rhodes-Nichols prophetic chart:
Ardent and energetic Samuel W. Rhodes2 of Oswego, New York, was one of the publishing committee of
five responsible for the Advent Review issued throughout 1850. More than that, he has the distinction of
designing the first illustrated prophetic chart on the symbols of Daniel and the Revelation, issued by the
Sabbatarian Adventists. He showed it to the Whites in August, 1850. They were highly pleased with it, and
encouraged its publication.3 So this early venture had representative backing.
Then Otis Nichols,4 engraver of Dorchester, Massachusetts, a Boston suburb, published this first pictorial
chart to be brought out after the Disappointment. Lithographed at Boston, in December, 1850,5 it differs but
little in general outline from the positions of the Millerites taught during the seventh-month movement
except in the expanded treatment of the sanctuary and the flight of the third angel. About 30 by 44 inches, it
is arranged in four vertical columns. The second column, which is rather narrow, is confined to
chronological data, while the three larger ones deal systematically with the symbols. (Facsimile
reproduction appears on opposite page.)
Here were its features: The metallic image of Daniel 2, at the left, is matched on its right by the four beasts
of Daniel 7 (both symbolizing the prophetic series of the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Grecian, and pagan
Roman empires). The Little Horn of Daniel 7 is papal Rome, with its 1260 years terminating in 17989, just 1290 years after paganism lost its CIVIL POWER. Then appear the three flying angels of
Revelation 14:6-12 (respectively dated 1837, 1843, and 1844), followed by the coming of Christ in the
clouds with a sickle in hand. An angel issues from the temple crying, Thrust in Thy sickle and reap,
while a second angel comes with a sickle, and a third bears the commission to gather the grapes of wrath
for the wine press of God. There is also inserted a pictorial diagram of the two apartments of the sanctuary
and their appurtenances, as TYPES of the Ministration of our great High Priest in the heavenly holy
places.
The second column begins with the 7 times beginning in 677 B .C., previously stressed by the Millerites.
Then follow the 2300 years, beginning jointly with the 70 weeks in 457 B .C.; the league between the Jews
and the Romans (still mistakenly given as 158 B .C.; the cross, in the midst of the seventieth week, dated
A .D . 31, and the related close of the 70 weeks placed in A .D . 34; the daily taken away in A .D . 508,
and the Papacy set up in 538, with the papal dominion taken away in 1798; and the 2300 years ending in
1844, with the close of the first phase of Christs ministration, that in the holy place. The third column
begins the 2300 years in the time of the Persian ram, followed by the Grecian goat, with the exceeding
great horn that developed as Rome in its pagan and papal phases. Then follow the seven-headed great red
dragon of Revelation 12, pagan Rome, and the ten-horned beast from the sea, papal Rome. But the twohorned beast from the earth is here called the image of Papacy. Its two horns, originally designated as
papist and protestant, are revised to REPUBLICANISM & PROTESTANTISM.6 The 666, however,
is still curiously represented as connected with the second beast, with reference to the enforcement of its
mark, which is not here explicitly defined.
In the last column are pictured the three angels heralding the three woe trumpets. The firstinvolving the
Mahometansdated 1299 to 1449; and the second woe as the Ottoman supremacy for 391 years and 15
days, extends to August 11, 1840. The second woe being past, the third woe would come quickly,
following 1844, which woe would, in turn, bring on the seven last plagues. And then the kingdoms of this
world would become the kingdom of Christ the Lord.
The closing explanation pertains to the year-day principle; a prophetic year or time is 360 days denoting,
yearsthe 7 times are 2520 years, and the three and one half times constitute 1260 years. The seven
times of the Gentiles (2520 years) are again dated from 677 B .C. to A .D .1843, and the daily is recorded
as ending in 508-9 (which also dates the beginning of the 1290 years). And after an interval of 30 years,
the 1260 years are noted as leading to 1798-9, with the additional 45 years (of the 1335 years) from
1798-9 to 1844.7
Produced in this formative transition hour, this Rhodes-Nichols chart reflected certain still doubtful dates
and periods which were soon droppedsuch as the seven times, 158 B .C . for the date of the league
between the Jews and the Romans, and particularly the number 666 as covering the two beasts. But it
was the first attempt, and served all the Sabbatarian Adventist preachers for a time. Corrections came
gradually in a work of this kind.7
Froom then continues his discussion about The Earliest Sabbatarian Chart with Otis
Nichols Interpretation of Key Positions in the chart that he and Rhodes had produced. The
historicist scholars comments follow the charts sequence of publication, between 1851 and
1853. 8 States the remarkable historian:
II. Otis Nichols Interpretation of Key Positions
The development of Revelation 13-17 in detail as the special new area of study and emphasis is seen in
these points discussed by Nichols according to the sequence of publication, between 1851 and 1853.
1. REVELATION 13CRISIS FROM IMAGE YET FUTURE.In 1851 he explicitly explains the twohorned beast of Revelation 13:11-18 as the Protestant Republic of the United States. This was his
explanation of the two beasts, after the chart had been produced:
The burden of the loud voice, so far as the worship of the image is concerned, is yet future. The 'image
is an institution which receives its life and power from the two-horned beast, the Protestant Republic of the
United States. It is an image, or a likeness to the beast which received a wound by the sword.
The beast that received a deadly wound is called the first beast. Rev. xiii, 12. It is described briefly in
verses 5-10. It was the union of the ecclesiastical and civil bodies, under a supreme ecclesiastical head, the
Pope; or, in other words, it was the Papal church instituted with the supremacy, the highest authority, or
dominion. 8
2 . BABYLON CATHOLIC MOTHER AND HER DAUGHTERS.In discussing an 1844 article from
the Voice of Truth on mother Babylon and her Protestant daughters, he speaks of this mother-and-daughter
relationship:
The great city I understand symbolizes the church incorporated, and united to the state. Both the
Catholic and Protestant are included. Its primitive existence commenced with the Catholic church, the
mother. The Catholic church as a mother, or parent, exercised its authority during its appointed time,
1260 years. Then her daughters came on the stage, and as her children have been growing in strength,
influence and power, the mothers power has been diminishing, as our parents naturally do, through
enfeeblement by age. Take them as a whole, mother and children, they are one family, that great city,
Babylon Rev. xviii.
3. POWER VESTED IN PAPACY DURING 1260 YEARS.Nichols contends for the papal control of the
European nations during the 1260 years.
During this period of time, [the 1260 years] the woman was seated upon the beast, held the reins, dictated,
guided, and was the mouth of the beast, (chap. xiii, 5,) had the dominion and reigned over the (ten) kings
of the earth. The history of the Catholic church proves this to be literally true. She did actually have
dominion over the crowned kings and emperors.10
4. REVELATION 17 HATING THE WHORE ANTEDATES REVOLUTION.The hating of the
apostate church is thought to be before 1798:
Rev. xvii, 16, 17, shows conclusively the chronology of the whore seated upon the beast, as it is
described in verses 3-6, to be previous to 1798. The ten horns shall hate the whore, make her desolate,
&[c]. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfill his will. This has been literally true with regard to the Papal
church supremacy. For the last 50 years the ten kingdoms have hated the temporal dominion of the Pope
who is the head of the Catholic church. The reign of Napoleon made her desolate and naked; for God put
in their hearts, to do this, to fulfill his will. 11
5. REVELATION 12JUSTINIAN CONFERS SEAT, POWER, AUTHORITY. Justinians part in the
spiritual establishment of the Papacy in 538 was this:
The Emperor Justinian became the head of the civil and ecclesiastical governments, and consequently was
the instrumentality, and mouth of the dragon, that gave the beast his seat, and power, and great authority . .
The dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. Chap. xii, 2, 5, 7. The Emperor
Justinian (who was the chief executive of the eastern empire of Rome) made the bishop of Rome the head
of all the churches, in A.D. 538; and he gave him his seat, (Rome,) and the supreme authority over the
church in all nations, and tongues, to dictate and discipline, according to his will, in matters of religion,
and chastise or put to death such as would not obey the dictates of the church of Rome; and the civil
governments were subservient in executing the mandates of the Pope.12
6. DANIEL 11 VERSES 40-45 APPLIED TO EUROPE . The prime place occupied by the Papacy in
European affairs throughout the Middle Ages and up to the closing scenes, but involving France, is put in
this way:
Since the days of Pagan Rome, the little horn, Papacy, has been the principal noted power referred to in
the prophecy of Daniel's visions. Chapters vii, viii, xi, 32-89. Verses 40-45 refer more particularly to the
doings of France, as that nation had the ascendency from the time of the end in A.D. 1798, and effected
the reversion of the Papal power, and subjected the Pope to its dictation. . . . Thus France has been the
principal acting power in all the important events that have affected the little horn. And it remains to be
seen whether France, under the reign of Napoleon III, in confederacy with the Pope and his priesthood, will
be the principal actors, on the one part, in the closing scenes of the little horn that waxed exceeding great,
when it shall come to its end with none to help. Dan. xi, 44, 45.13
7. DANIEL 11:45ENGLAND BELIEVED KING OF NORTH.Nichols differed from most of the
early Sabbatarians in suggesting Protestant England as the specific king of the north, with papal France as
king of the south:
As the empire of France, under Napoleon III, is viewed with alarm and jealousy by England and Russia,
the northern and eastern powers of Europe, it is not improbable that tidings out of the east and out of the
north may trouble him; [verse 44,] the French empire confederate with the Pope. England stands at the
head of the Protestants in Europe, the king of the north, France now stands as the head of the Papal
power, the king of the south, and Russia is the power of the Greek church in the east,the three divided
parts of the great city, Babylon.149
Time Gaps in the Historical Narratives

The Millerite and earlier SDA prophetic charts provide further indisputable evidence that
the SDA historicist prophetic interpretation fails to produce factual evidence that the prophecies
in Daniel and Revelation cover the historical period from the time of the prophet to the
establishment of the kingdom of God on earth, include a descriptive overview and evaluation
of some of the most theologically significant events of this [Christian] era, and present such
prophetic narrative in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time of John, on down to
the Second Advent and the end of age. The time gaps in the human, that is, terrestrial historical
narrative are obvious and need no further elaboration.
VII. Failed SDA Historicist Predictions

The simple and undeniable truth for the SDA historicist theologians and scholars is that
even those events, institutions, movements, and periods claimed to have been selected from
Daniel and Revelation as specific and identifiable have not been authenticated with historical
data and fail Sheas pragmatic test of historical fulfillment [emphasis added],1 that demands
that the interpretive results [should] be confirmed from extrabiblical sources where
possible [emphasis added]2 and that all the events, institutions, movements, and periods
[emphasis added] claimed as evidence for historical fulfillment should be specific and
identifiable historical events [emphasis added],3 that is, real, and in-history [emphasis
added]4 human events, and not manufactured, fictitious, and non-terrestrial, pseudo-events.
Bold Predictions and Dreadful Failures
This section will evaluate and challenge some claimed SDA historicist predictions based
on the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation, and their assumed historical fulfillments, and
provide evidence that the SDA theologians and scholars have little or nothing to show in this
matter because those predictions have depended on misread, misinterpreted and distorted
prophetic texts, and because the events that have been claimed to confirm the historical
fulfillments are manufactured, fictional, or even worseassumed non-terrestrial and unverifiable
non-historical and non-human occurrences, and not some specific and identifiable historical
events, institutions, movements, and periods that [have] transpire[d] in a chronological sequence
throughout the entire church age, that began in the first century, and have continued through
the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords return.
The Sun, Moon, and the Stars
Millers absolute conviction based on his multiple and convoluted number computations
that the Second Coming would occur in 1843 had a powerful impact on the manner in which the
Millerites read and interpreted the Bible. It seemed that there were texts all over the Scriptures
that pointed to the immediate Return event. Such were, for instance, the biblical prophetic
passages in Luke 21:25 and Mark 13:24-26:
Lk 21:25 KJV
And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress
of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
Mk 13:24 KJV
But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her
light,
25
And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
26
And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
Sure Signs But Mistaken Interpretation

Ellen White (or rather Frances Bolton or Marian Davis) has a full discussion about these
two biblical texts which she declares as the certain signs that would announce and precede
Christs Second Coming and the worlds end. She states:
Prophecy not only foretells the manner and object of Christ's coming, but presents tokens by which men are
to know when it is near. Said Jesus: There shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars.
Luke 21:25. The sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars of heaven shall
fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in
the clouds with great power and glory. Mark 13:24-26. The revelator thus describes the first of the signs to
precede the second advent: There was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair,
and the moon became as blood. Revelation 6:12.
These signs were witnessed before the opening of the nineteenth century. In fulfillment of this prophecy
there occurred, in the year 1755, the most terrible earthquake that has ever been recorded. Though
commonly known as the earthquake of Lisbon, it extended to the greater part of Europe, Africa, and
America. It was felt in Greenland, in the West Indies, in the island of Madeira, in Norway and Sweden,
Great Britain and Ireland. It pervaded an extent of not less than four million square miles. In Africa the
shock was almost as severe as in Europe. A great part of Algiers was destroyed; and a short distance from
Morocco, a village containing eight or ten thousand inhabitants was swallowed up. A vast wave swept over
the coast of Spain and Africa engulfing cities and causing great destruction.
It was in Spain and Portugal that the shock manifested its extreme violence. At Cadiz the inflowing wave
was said to be sixty feet high. Mountains, some of the largest in Portugal, were impetuously shaken, as it
were, from their very foundations, and some of them opened at their summits, which were split and rent in
a wonderful manner, huge masses of them being thrown down into the adjacent valleys. Flames are related
to have issued from these mountains. Sir Charles Lyell, Principles of Geology, page 495.
At Lisbon a sound of thunder was heard underground, and immediately afterwards a violent shock threw
down the greater part of that city. In the course of about six minutes sixty thousand persons perished. The
sea first retired, and laid the bar dry; it then rolled in, rising fifty feet or more above its ordinary level.
Among other extraordinary events related to have occurred at Lisbon during the catastrophe, was the
subsidence of a new quay, built entirely of marble, at an immense expense. A great concourse of people
had collected there for safety, as a spot where they might be beyond the reach of falling ruins; but suddenly
the quay sank down with all the people on it, and not one of the dead bodies ever floated to the surface.
Ibid., page 495.
The shock of the earthquake was instantly followed by the fall of every church and convent, almost all
the large public buildings, and more than one fourth of the houses. In about two hours after the shock, fires
broke out in different quarters, and raged with such violence for the space of nearly three days, that the city
was completely desolated. The earthquake happened on a holyday, when the churches and convents were
full of people, very few of whom escaped. Encyclopedia Americana, art. Lisbon, note (ed. 1831). "The
terror of the people was beyond description. Nobody wept; it was beyond tears. They ran hither and thither,
delirious with horror and astonishment, beating their faces and breasts, crying, Misericordia! The World's
at an end! Mothers forgot their children, and ran about loaded with crucifixed images. Unfortunately,
many ran to the churches for protection; but in vain was the sacrament exposed; in vain did the poor
creatures embrace the altars; images, priests, and people were buried in one common ruin. It has been
estimated that ninety thousand persons lost their lives on that fatal day.
Twenty-five years later appeared the next sign mentioned in the prophecythe darkening of the sun and
moon. What rendered this more striking was the fact that the time of its fulfillment had been definitely
pointed out. In the Saviour's conversation with His disciples upon Olivet, after describing the long period of
trial for the church,the 1260 years of papal persecution, concerning which He had promised that the
tribulation should be shortened,He thus mentioned certain events to precede His coming, and fixed the
time when the first of these should be witnessed: In those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be
darkened, and the moon shall not give her light. Mark 13:24. The 1260 days, or years, terminated in 1798.
A quarter of a century earlier, persecution had almost wholly ceased. Following this persecution, according
to the words of Christ, the sun was to be darkened. On the 19th of May, 1780, this prophecy was fulfilled.
Almost, if not altogether alone, as the most mysterious and as yet unexplained phenomenon of its kind, . . .
stands the dark day of May 19, 1780,a most unaccountable darkening of the whole visible heavens and
atmosphere in New England.R. M. Devens, Our First Century, page 89.
An eyewitness living in Massachusetts describes the event as follows: In the morning the sun rose clear,
but was soon overcast. The clouds became lowery, and from them, black and ominous, as they soon
appeared, lightning flashed, thunder rolled, and a little rain fell. Toward nine oclock, the clouds became
thinner, and assumed a brassy or coppery appearance, and earth, rocks, trees, buildings, water, and persons
were changed by this strange, unearthly light. A few minutes later, a heavy black cloud spread over the
entire sky except a narrow rim at the horizon, and it was as dark as it usually is at nine o'clock on a summer
evening. . . . Fear, anxiety, and awe gradually filled the minds of the people. Women stood at the door,
looking out upon the dark landscape; men returned from their labor in the fields; the carpenter left his tools,
the blacksmith his forge, the tradesman his counter. Schools were dismissed, and tremblingly the children
fled homeward. Travelers put up at the nearest farmhouse. What is coming? queried every lip and heart. It
seemed as if a hurricane was about to dash across the land, or as if it was the day of the consummation of
all things.
Candles were used; and hearth fires shone as brightly as on a moonless evening in autumn. . . . Fowls
retired to their roosts and went to sleep, cattle gathered at the pasture bars and lowed, frogs peeped, birds
sang their evening songs, and bats flew about. But the human knew that night had not come. . . .
Dr. Nathanael Whittaker, pastor of the Tabernacle church in Salem, held religious services in the meetinghouse, and preached a sermon in which he maintained that the darkness was supernatural. Congregations
came together in many other places. The texts for the extemporaneous sermons were invariably those that
seemed to indicate that the darkness was consonant with Scriptural prophecy. . . . The darkness was most
dense shortly after eleven o'clock. The Essex Antiquarian, April, 1899, vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 53, 54. In most
parts of the country it was so great in the daytime, that the people could not tell the hour by either watch or
clock, nor dine, nor manage their domestic business, without the light of candles. . . .
The extent of this darkness was extraordinary. It was observed as far east as Falmouth. To the westward it
reached to the farthest part of Connecticut, and to Albany. To the southward, it was observed along the
seacoasts; and to the north as far as the American settlements extend.William Gordon, History of the
Rise, Progress, and Establishment of the Independence of the U.S.A., vol. 3, p. 57.
The intense darkness of the day was succeeded, an hour or two before evening, by a partially clear sky, and
the sun appeared, though it was still obscured by the black, heavy mist. After sundown, the clouds came
again overhead, and it grew dark very fast. Nor was the darkness of the night less uncommon and
terrifying than that of the day; notwithstanding there was almost a full moon, no object was discernible but
by the help of some artificial light, which, when seen from the neighboring houses and other places at a
distance, appeared through a kind of Egyptian darkness which seemed almost impervious to the rays.
Isaiah Thomas, Massachusetts Spy; or, American Oracle of Liberty, vol. 10, No. 472 (May 25, 1780). Said
an eyewitness of the scene: I could not help conceiving at the time, that if every luminous body in the
universe had been shrouded in impenetrable shades, or struck out of existence, the darkness could not have
been more complete.Letter by Dr. Samuel Tenney, of Exeter, New Hampshire, December, 1785 (in
Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, 1792, 1st series, vol. 1, p. 97). Though at nine o'clock that
night the moon rose to the full, it had not the least effect to dispel the deathlike shadows. After midnight
the darkness disappeared, and the moon, when first visible, had the appearance of blood.
May 19, 1780, stands in history as The Dark Day. Since the time of Moses no period of darkness of equal
density, extent, and duration, has ever been recorded. The description of this event, as given by
eyewitnesses, is but an echo of the words of the Lord, recorded by the prophet Joel, twenty-five hundred
years previous to their fulfillment: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before
the great and terrible day of the Lord come. Joel 2:31.
Christ had bidden His people watch for the signs of His advent and rejoice as they should behold the tokens
of their coming King. When these things begin to come to pass, He said, then look up, and lift up your
heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. He pointed His followers to the budding trees of spring, and
said: When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.
So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.
Luke 21:28, 30, 31.5
LaRondelle Disputes Whites Claims

LaRondelle, though, questions the extent to which the above natural phenomena
impacted the world, shows that those events and casualties were far from exceptional and
miraculous, disputes the excessive relevance attributed to them, and demonstrates that Ellen
Whites conclusions were based on erroneous hermeneutics and were uninformed, and false:
Seventh-day Adventists saw in the historic earth quake of Lisbon, Portugal, on November 1, 1755, a
fulfillment of the sixth seal of Revelation 6:12-17. They further accepted the inexplicable darkening of
the sunlight on May 19, 1780, for a few hours in some eastern states along the American seacoast as
fulfilling the prediction: The sun turned black (Rev. 6:12). The meteor shower on the morning of
November 13, 1833, seen across North America, was seen as a spectacular sign from heaven to warn
humanity of the imminent coming of Christ. Ellen White considered this event the last of the cosmic signs
predicted in Matthew 24 and Revelation 6, and the forerunner of the coming Judgment Day.1 She declared
that all three upheavals in nature the Lisbon quake, the dark day, and the meteor shower were fulfillments
of Christ's predictions in Matthew 24:29 and Revelation 6:12, 13.2 It seemed to her a surety that she was
living in the last generation on earth.3
In retrospect, can we, today (in some cases centuries after the events) maintain the same understanding of
these phenomena, especially since they are no longer inexplicable supernatural happenings but are known
to be the results of specific laws and predictable movements in nature?
Signs in the heavens
Adventist expositors persistently ascribed the darkening of the sun and moon in 1780 to a supernatural
cosmic end-time sign. However, later evidence indicated that the darkening may have come as the result of
forest fires. The smoke had eclipsed the sun, covering 25,000 square miles in the eastern part of North
America and Canada. Such a regional event lasting for only a few hours can hardly qualify as the cosmic
happening prophesied in the New Testament. C. Mervyn Maxwell and others acknowledge that the socalled dark day of May 19, 1780, was not precipitated by a direct act of omnipotent intervention but by
natural causes.4
The apocalyptic earthquake
The Lisbon quake in 1755, possibly 8.5 on the Richter scale, was nevertheless a regional quake, even if the
shock covered 1,300,000 square miles; more than one third of Europe. The loss of life is estimated to have
been between 15,000 and 30,000, coming largely from 30 churches filled that morning for All Saints Day
mass.
That earthquake had a lasting effect on eighteenth-century philosophy, culture, and science. One modern
author states: No dramatist could have established the moment of time for this catastrophe with greater
effect.5 This natural disaster actually changed the world,6 in the light of the prevailing philosophy of
Leibnitz. The very foundations of Western thought and culture were profoundly shaken.... The selfassured stride of the Age of Reason acquired a permanent limp after the Lisbon earthquake (B. Walker).7
Yet scientists report that throughout the centuries earthquakes have killed on average some 15,000 people
every year. Before 1755, three earthquakes were of even greater intensity: the 1456 earthquake of Naples,
Italy (30,000 dead); the 1556, Shensu earthquake in China (820,000 dead); the 1737 earthquake of Calcutta
(300,000 dead). After 1755, the Tokyo quake took 200,000 lives in 1803; in 1920 the quake of Kansu, left
180,000 dead in China; and the 1923 quake of Kwanto, Japan, killed 140,000. In 1976 earthquakes caused
650,000 deaths in China alone.
On both sides of the Atlantic, however, the Lisbon quake was explained by Protestants as a sign of the
approaching advent of Christ. In the light of the quake, the Anglican Church proclaimed a special day of
fasting for February 6, 1756. In Boston, the Lisbon quake was interpreted as a forerunner of the destruction
of the world, as mentioned by Christ in Matthew 24:7. In 1756 the Congregational minister, Charles
Chauncy, compared the loss of trade caused by the quake to the condition predicted in Revelation 18 and
cited it as a warning to repent or experience similar judgments.8 Boston Puritan pastor Jonathan Mayhew
explained that the Lisbon quake was a harbinger of the woes and plagues culminating in the great last
earthquake to be visited upon Babylon.9
The apocalyptic meteor shower
On the night of November 13,1833, an observer stated that the stars were falling as thick snowflakes.
Estimates for the fall range from 10,000 to more than 60,000 meteors per hour. The year 1833 is now
regarded as the birth of meteor astronomy. Observers noticed that the meteors all seemed to stream from
the constellation Leo. Gerald S. Hawkins, astronomer at Boston University, says that: If the scientists were
bewildered by the Leonid storm, we can easily imagine how the nonscientists felt. We do not know exactly
how many deaths from heart failures and suicide could be directly attributed to the Leonids, but many
people in the southern states were panic-stricken, thinking that the Day of Judgment had surely arrived.10
Later the American astronomer H. A. Newton of Yale discovered the natural cause of the Leonid meteor
shower. Searching older records, he found that a Leonid shower had been seen practically every 33 years,
starting in A.D. 902, the year of the stars. In the same year, an Italian observer in Salerno stated that it
was the fulfillment of Luke 21:25. Outstanding Leonid storms had also been recorded in the years 1202,
1366, 1533, 1766, and 1799. Newton suggested that the Leonids might return in 1866; he was correct: A
beautiful shower of meteors radiated from the constellation of Leo that year at the rate of about 6,000 per
hour. Because of this scientific prediction, there was no widespread excitement. It was shown that the
Leonid storm, in various degrees of intensity, was recurring in a natural cycle along its large elliptic orbit
around the sun. In 1866 Wilhelm Temple in France discovered that a comet later named the TempleTuttle comet was responsible for the meteor showers from Leo when its tail of meteor particles entered the
earth's atmosphere. Because the comet passed close to Jupiter in the year 1899, the gravitational pull of this
planet deflected the course of the comet so that it missed the earth, and the celestial display did not occur.
Many Adventist expositors today do not deny the natural cause of the celestial phenomena but stress the
intensity of the Leonid storm of 1833. However, on November 17, 1966, a record number of meteors
streaked over North America, seen best in the mountain states, with a visual rate of about 1 million per
hour! 12 The 1992 Guinness Book of Records declares: The greatest shower on record occurred on the
night of 16-17 Nov. 1966, when the Leonid meteors (which recur every 33 years) were visible between
North America and the eastern USSR.13
We must remember that many who experienced the sudden impact of those historic phenomena were
deeply impressed, seeing them as the hand of God in judgment or in preparation for final judgment. These
signs brought some to repentance and to an apocalyptical sense of their accountability to God. We must
honor them for that and acknowledge that the signs they observed in nature some 200 years ago were not
only helpful to them but were also to become preparatory or precursory to the final worldwide cosmic signs
yet to arrive under the seven last plagues. Further, the signs that they saw as indicative of the nearness of
Christs second coming played a role in calling attention to the final signs yet to come. Thus they created
the potential for those final signs to have a more dramatic impact on those living through them, looking for
the coming of Jesus. It is only the eschatological, cosmic signs, however, which will play the role of
actually ushering in the second coming of Christ.
New trend in Adventist evangelism
In light of these facts, some conservative Adventist expositors are now convinced that the traditional
Adventist interpretation of these historical phenomena has lost its convincing power. Samuele Bacchiocchi,
in The Advent Hope for Human Hopelessness (1986), omits the traditional view about 1755, 1780, and
1833. The unanimous voice of conviction in Adventism regarding the prophetic significance of these
phenomena has disappeared. Lost is the sense of self evidence that used to accompany these events as
supernatural signs.
On what basis, then, does traditional Adventism still defend the idea of a role in God's eschatalogical plan
for these specific disasters and natural events?
The appeal today is to the timing and the sequence of such occurrences: Their appearance in connection
with the closing years of the 1260 years of papal suppression both before and after 1798.14 C. M. Maxwell
explains: As a series they came in the right order and at the proper time.15 The series of signs [Matt.
24:29] that were to take place immediately after the tribulation of those days has evidently been
fulfilled.16 This conclusion is based on an exegesis of two passages: Mark 13:24 (rather than Matt. 24:29)
and Revelation 12:6. But in those days, following that distress, the sun will be darkened and the moon
will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky (Mark 13:24). The woman fled into the desert to a
place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days (Rev. 12:6).
Though it is assumed to be self-evident that both passages deal with the 1260 year-days (counted from A.D.
538-1798), that fact is not so self-evident. The context of Mark 13:18-25 (and of Matt. 24:20-30) connects
the days of distress for Christ's followers from A.D. 70 until the cosmic signs introduce the Second
Advent. Nothing in the Mount Olivet forecast restricts the times of distress to 1260 years. Jesus also
includes the end time distress under the antichrist, because He referred specifically to Daniel 12:1 when He
announced that the coming great distress would be unequaled from the beginning of the world until now
and never to be equaled again (Matt. 24:21; see also Mark 13:19). Daniel had declared that at the end of
the unprecedented time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then,
Michael would arise and the resurrection of the dead would take place (12:1, 2). Jesus referred to that endtime distress of Daniel 12 in His prophetic discourse and therefore did not restrict those days of Mark
13:24 to the Middle Ages (see also Matt. 24:22). Jesus thus rather indicated that the sun and the moon
would be darkened after the end time distress of Daniel 12:1. This fits the description of the supernatural,
world-wide darkening during the last plagues in Revelation 16 (verses 10, 11). There is therefore no
justification for the assumption that the days of distress spoken of in Mark 13:24 are identical with the
1260 days of Revelation 12:6.
Further, the Adventist application of the falling stars in Mark 13:24,25 to 1833 is not fully consistent with
its premise that the timing for the celestial signs must come within those days, if those days are
reckoned to be from 538 till 1798. The meteor shower of 1833 clearly came beyond those days.
The exegesis of Jesus reference to those days, following that distress (Mark 13:24) must take into
account the total picture of the days of distress, as presented in the fifth seal of Revelation 6:9-11 and in
12:17; 13:15-17; 17:12-14. White robes are given to all who have come out of the great tribulation
(Rev. 7:14; also 6:11). This distress is, of course, not restricted to the Middle Ages or to the 1260 years
(ending in 1798). More than that, Revelation 12:17 points specifically to the end-time distress of the
remnant church, a distress further enlarged in Revelation 13:15-17 and 17:12-14. This distress will be cut
short by Christs divine intervention during the seven last plagues with the sudden darkening of the entire
earth (Rev. 16:10) and the cosmic universal earthquake (Rev. 16:18-21). This is impressively described by
Ellen G. White in chapter 40 in The Great Controversy (636, 637). The future cosmic signs during the last
plagues fulfill precisely the proper timing and function of cutting short the universal distress of Gods
people in the entire world.
Conclusion
A number of contemporary Adventist expositors admit the exegetical problems with the old interpretation
of the cosmic signs. Todays point to the increasing global influence of the papacy and of America; to the
intensification of destructive disasters in the world and to the stage-setting for the final crisis and last
distress for Gods people. (See Marvin Moore, The Crisis of the End Time, Boise, Idaho: Pacific Press Pub.
Assn., 1992, chap. 4; S. Bacchiocchi, The Advent Hope for Human Hopelessness, Berrien Springs, Midi.:,
1986, chaps. 8-10.). These books no longer articulate the traditional application of the cosmic signs. In his
recent book What the Bible Says About The End-Time, Jon Paulien urges: We need a sane approach to
current events. He understands our inclination to date-setting and doom-saying: Natural disasters are so
gripping that it is almost instinctive for human beings to invest them with cosmic significance.18 In fact, it
has become traditional to interpret the many signs of disaster in Matthew 24 as signs of the coming end.
Paulien offers this challenging exegesis: The famines, pestilences, earthquakes, wars, and rumors of wars
are not listed as signs of the end in Matthew 24. Instead they are signs of the age, events that would occur
throughout the interim between Jesus earthly ministry and the end. Jesus did not want those who observe
such events to calculate their significance for the timing of the end. Instead, He wanted those who observe
wars, earthquakes, and famines to keep watch.19
The latest Adventist exposition of Matthew 24 by George R. Knight explains that the role of the signs in
Matthew 24 is to reassure us that the faithful, covenant keeping God has not yet finished the plan of
salvation .... They are signs that the end is coming, but they are not the real signs of the end.... The pattern
of Matthew 24 appears to be that the real signs are not signs of nearness but signs of coming.20
These results of a serious and responsible exegesis of the prophetic Word do not warrant a hasty rejection
or condemnation; instead they are a call to a new reflection on the clarity of Scripture and its power to
explain itself by means of its immediate and wider contexts. Traditional applications of the prophetic signs
of the age are not part of any pillar or landmark of Seventh-day Adventism.21 Truth progresses; so
should we [emphasis added].6
Historicist End Time Predictions False

The SDA traditional prediction, based on historicist hermeneutics, that the biblical
passages from Luke 21:25 and Mark 13:24-26 indicate the end time and the Second Coming
are, therefore, demonstrated to be incorrect and fail to show prophetic fulfillment, in opposition
to Ellen Whites and the official SDA position on those biblical passages.
Papal Oppression for 1260 Years
The traditional SDA historicist interpretation reads into Daniel 7:25, the claimed papal
oppression assumed to have lasted for a time, times, and the dividing of time, or 1260 years
(Daniel 7:25; Revelation 12:6 and Revelation 13:5-7), from 538 A.D. to 1798 A.D., and that
brought into Europe the Dark Ages. States Uriah Smith:
Smiths Historicist Persecution Claim
4. And they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. The pronoun they
embraces the saints, the times, and the laws just mentioned. How long a time were they to be given into the
hands of this power? A time, as we have seen from the chapter 4:23, is one year; two times, the least that
could be denoted by the plural, two years, and the dividing of time, or half a time (Sept.,) half a year.
Gesenius also gives ...., Chald. a half. Dan.7:25. We thus have three years and a half for the continuance
of this power. The Hebrew, or rather the Chaldaic, word for time in the text before us, is iddan, which
Gesenius defines thus: Time. Spec. in prophetic language for a year. Dan.7:25 for a year, also two years
and half a year; i.e., for three years and a half; comp. Jos.B.J.1.1.1.
We must now consider that we are in the midst of symbolic prophecy; hence in this measurement the time
is not literal, but symbolic also. The inquiry then arises, How long a period is denoted by the three years
and a half of prophetic time? The rule given us in the Bible is, that when a day is used as a symbol, it stands
for a year. Eze.4:6; Num.14:34. Under the Hebrew word for day, (yom), Gesenius has this remark: 3.
Sometimes [Yamim] marks a definite space of time; viz., a year; as also Syr. and Chald. [iddan] denotes
both time and year; and as in English several words signifying time, weight, measure, are likewise used to
denote certain specified times, weights, and measures. The ordinary Jewish year, which must be used as
the basis of reckoning, contained three hundred and sixty days. Three years and a half contained twelve
hundred and sixty days. As each day stands for a year, we have twelve hundred and sixty years for the
continuation of the supremacy of this horn.
Did the papacy possess dominion that length of time? The answer again is, Yes. The edict of the emperor
Justinian, dated A.D.533, made the bishop of Rome the head of all the churches. But this edict could not go
into effect until the Arian Ostrogoths, the last of the three horns that were plucked up to make room for the
papacy, were driven from Rome; and this was not accomplished, as already shown, till A.D.538. The edict
would have been of no effect had this latter event not been accomplished; hence from this latter year we are
to reckon, as this was the earliest point where the saints were in reality in the hand of this power. From this
point did the papacy hold supremacy for twelve hundred and sixty years? - Exactly. For 538 + 1260 =
1798; and in the year 1798, Berthier, with a French army, entered Rome, proclaimed a republic, took the
pope prisoner, and for a time abolished the papacy. It has never since enjoyed the privileges and immunities
which it possessed before. Thus again this power fulfils to the very letter the specifications of the prophecy,
which proves beyond question that the application is correct. 7
Ellen White Confirms Smiths Claim

Ellen White (or rather Frances Bolton or Marian Davis) is in full agreement with Uriah
Smith about the claimed Papal domination and persecution from 538 A.D. to 1798 A.D., and
states:
In the sixth century the papacy had become firmly established. Its seat of power was fixed in the imperial
city, and the bishop of Rome was declared to be the head over the entire church. Paganism had given place
to the papacy. The dragon had given to the beast his power, and his seat, and great authority. Revelation
13:2. And now began the 1260 years of papal oppression foretold in the prophecies of Daniel and the
Revelation. Daniel 7:25; Revelation 13:5-7. (See Appendix.) Christians were forced to choose either to
yield their integrity and accept the papal ceremonies and worship, or to wear away their lives in dungeons
or suffer death by the rack, the fagot, or the headsman's ax. Now were fulfilled the words of Jesus: Ye
shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they
cause to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for My name's sake. Luke 21:16, 17. Persecution
opened upon the faithful with greater fury than ever before, became a vast battlefield. For hundreds of years
the church of Christ found refuge in seclusion and obscurity. Thus says the prophet: "The woman fled into
the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two
hundred and three-score days." Revelation 12:6.8
Adventist Theologians Oppose White

The SDABC, though, disputes Ellen Whites claim that the Papal persecution lasted for
more than a millennium, and provides ample evidence that, in fact, the Pope had oppressive
powers in Europe for less than two centuries:
The pontificate of Pope Gregory I (the Great, d. 604), first of the medieval prelates of the church, marks the
transition from ancient to medieval times. Gregory boldly assumed the role, though not the title, of emperor
in the West. He laid the basis for papal power throughout the Middle Ages, and it is from his administration
in particular that later claims to papal absolutism date. Extensive missionary efforts begun by Gregory the
Great greatly extended the influence and authority of Rome.
When, more than a century later, the Lombards threatened to overrun Italy, the pope appealed to Pepin,
king of the Franks, to come to his assistance. Complying with the request, Pepin thoroughly defeated the
Lombards and, in 756, presented the pope with the territory he had taken from them. This grant, commonly
known as the Donation of Pepin, marks the origin of the Papal States and the formal beginning of the
temporal rule of the pope.
From the seventh to the eleventh centuries papal power was, generally speaking, at ebb tide. The next great
pope, and one of the greatest of them all, was Gregory VII (d. 1085). He proclaimed that the Roman
Church had never erred and could never err, that the pope is supreme judge, that he may be judged by none,
that there is no appeal from his decision, that he alone is entitled to the homage of all princes, and that he
alone may depose kings and emperors.
For two centuries there was a running struggle between pope and emperor for supremacy, with sometimes
one and sometimes the other achieving temporary success. The pontificate of Innocent III (d. 1216) found
the papacy at the height of its power, and during the next century it was at the very zenith of its glory.
Claiming to be the vicar of Christ, Innocent III exercised all the prerogatives claimed by Gregory a century
and more earlier.
A century after Innocent III, the ideal medieval pope, Boniface VIII (d. 1303) attempted unsuccessfully to
rule as his illustrious predecessors had ruled before him. He was the last pope to attempt to exercise
universal authority as asserted by Gregory VII and maintained by Innocent III. The waning power of the
papacy became fully evident during the so-called Babylonian Captivity (130977), when the French
forcibly removed the seat of the papacy from Rome to Avignon, in France. Soon after the return to Rome,
what is known as the Great Schism (13781417) broke out. During this time there were at least two, and
sometimes three, rival popes, each denouncing and excommunicating his rivals and claiming to be the true
pope. As a result the papacy suffered irreparable loss of prestige in the eyes of the peoples of Europe. Long
before Reformation times many voices within and without the Catholic Church were raised in criticism of
its arrogant claims and its many abuses of both secular and spiritual power. The rebirth of learning
(Renaissance) in Western Europe, the age of discovery, the growth of strong national states, the invention
of printing, and various other factors contributed to the gradual loss of papal power. By the time of Martin
Luther much had already been done to undermine the authority of Rome.
The Reformation commonly thought of as beginning in 1517, with the posting of the Ninety-five Theses,
saw papal power driven from large areas of Northern Europe. Efforts of the papacy to combat the
Reformation took such forms as the Inquisition, the Index, and the organization of the Jesuit order. The
Jesuits became the intellectual and spiritual army of the church for the extermination of Protestantism. For
nearly three centuries the Church of Rome carried on a vigorous but gradually losing struggle against the
forces battling for civil and religious freedom.
Finally, during the course of the French Revolution, the Catholic Church was outlawed in Francethe first
nation of Europe to espouse its cause, the nation that had, for more than twelve centuries, championed its
claims and fought its battles, the nation where papal principles had been tested more fully than in any other
land, and had been found wanting. In 1798 the French Government ordered the army operating in Italy
under Berthier to take the pope prisoner. Though the papacy continued, its power was shorn, and it has
never since wielded the same kind or measure of power that it did in former days. In 1870 the Papal States
were completely absorbed into the united kingdom of Italy, the temporal power the papacy had formally
exercised for more than 1,000 years came to an end, and the pope voluntarily became the prisoner of the
Vatican until his temporal power was restored in 1929. See on ch. 7:25.
It is evident from this brief sketch that the rise of papal power was a gradual process covering many
centuries. The same is true of its decline. The former process may be thought of as continuing from about
A.D. 100 to 756; the latter, from about A.D. 1303 to 1870. The papacy was at the height of its power from
the time of Gregory VII (107385) to that of Boniface VIII (12941303). It is thus clear that no dates can
be given to mark a sharp transition from insignificance to supremacy, or from supremacy back to
comparative weakness. As is true with all historical processes, the rise and fall of the papacy were both
gradual developments.
However, by 538 the papacy was completely formed and functioning in all significant aspects, and by
1798, 1260 years later, it had lost practically all the power it had accumulated over a period of centuries.
Inspiration allotted 1260 years to the papacy for a demonstration of its principles, its policies, and its
objectives. Accordingly these two dates should be considered as marking the beginning and the end of the
prophetic period of papal power.9
Bacchiocchi Contends For Earlier Date

Bacchiocchi goes even further, and contends that the 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. dates that
are claimed to mark the Papal Powers rise and fall are incorrect. He provides irrefutable
historical evidence that the development of the supremacy of the papacy is a gradual process
that can hardly be dated from 538, because the process began already in the second century as
the primacy of Bishop of Rome was widely recognized and accepted, and that it is also
inaccurate to state that the Papal power was abolished or had a downfall in 1798 because
historical evidence does not support such a claim:
A look at some of the changes that were made in the 1911 revision of The Great Controversy, will help us
determine whether the changes were substantive or peripheral, as my critics contend. W. C. White
provides us with a few examples. For the sake of brevity we shall consider only those statements relative to
the 1260 days prophecy, since much of the criticism of my last essay revolves around my proposed new
interpretation of this prophecy. We shall see that the changes made are substantive, not peripheral.
On page 266 of the Old Edition of The Great Controversy, Ellen White wrote: The 1260 years of papal
supremacy began with the establishment of the papacy in A. D. 538, and would therefore terminate on
179816 The statement is modified in the New Edition to read: The 1260 years of papal supremacy began
in A. D. 538, and would terminate in 1798.17
The key phrase that was removed is the establishment of the papacy. It is evident that the editors were
made aware of the fact that the establishment of the papacy did not begin in 538. In my dissertation I
have shown that the development of the papal primacy began already in the second century, when the Pope
exercised his ecumenical authority by imposing on Christian churches at large Easter-Sunday, weekly
Sunday, and by condemning various movements like the Montanists.
The same phrase is found in page 439 of the Old Edition which reads: This period, as stated in the
preceding chapters, began with the establishment of the papacy, A. D. 538, and terminated in 1798. At that
time, when the papacy was abolished and the pope was made captive by the French army, the papal power
received its deadly wound, and the prediction was fulfilled, 'He that leadeth into captivity shall go into
captivity.18
A significant correction was made to the New Edition which reads: This period, as stated in preceding
chapters, began with the supremacy of the papacy, A. D. 538, and terminated in 1798. At that time, the
pope was made captive by the French army, the papal power received its deadly wound, and the prediction
was fulfilled, He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity.19
Significant Corrections
The correction that was made in the New Edition is by no means peripheral. The editors recognized the
glaring mistake that Ellen White made in the Old Edition, when she wrote that the papacy was established
in 538 and abolished in 1798. Unfortunately she repeats the same mistake on page 579 of the Old Edition:
The infliction of the deadly wound points to the abolition of the papacy in 1798.20 The statement was
corrected in the New Edition to read: The infliction of the deadly wound points to the downfall of the
papacy in 1798.21
The historical reality is that the papacy was not established in 538, nor was it abolished in 1798. The
corrected reading of the New Edition is a noticeable improvement, but it is still inaccurate. The reason is
that 538 hardly marks the beginning of the supremacy of the papacy, nor does 1798 signal the downfall
of the papacy. It is evident that the editorial workers who helped Ellen White to make the necessary
corrections, knew little about the history of the papacy.
The development of the supremacy of the papacy began long before 538. In his book on The History of
the Christian Church which has served for many years as the standard text book for church history
classesWilliston Walker devotes chapter 6 to the Growth of the Papacy during the fourth and fifth
centuries. He points out that during this period there were influential popes like Damasus (366-384),
Innocent I (402-417), and Leo I, called the Great (440-461), who greatly advanced both the spiritual and
temporal power of the papacy.22
For example, the last Pope mentioned, Leo I, known as Leo the Great, greatly increased the political
prestige of the papacy by threatening with hell fire Attila the Hun, when he was approaching Rome in 451
with his terrifying soldiers. Attila obeyed the Pope and withdrew beyond the Danube. Later Pope Leo
secured concessions from the Vandals when they took Rome in 452. He is called Leo the Great for
advancing and consolidating the power of the papacy.
The development of the supremacy of the papacy is a gradual process that can hardly be dated from 538.
The process began already in the second century as the primacy of Bishop of Rome was widely recognized
and accepted. Over the centuries various popes contributed to strengthen the supremacy of the papacy, both
as a religious and political power.
But it was not until 756 that the temporal sovereignty of the papacy began, when the Frankish King Pepin
waged two military campaigns against the Lombards who had extended their occupation to central Italy.
Pepin liberated the territories of Central Italy, and donated them to the pope. To justify the legitimate right
of the papacy to rule these territories, the famous document of the Donation of Constantine was fabricated
at this time. The document claims that Constantine donated to the Pope the whole of Italy and other western
countries. For the next thousand years this false document served to boost the temporal power of the
papacy.
In 756 began the history of The States of the Church, that is, the temporal supremacy of the papacy that
was to last until 1870. In that year, Victor Emmanuel II, King of Sardinia and later of Italy, with the help of
enthusiastic voluntary troops who were fighting for national unity, succeeded in taking over the papal
territories of central Italy and thus to unify all the land of Italy into one nation.
Inadequate Corrections
What is true for 538 is also true for 1798. In both instances the corrections are inadequate. The change in
the 1911 edition of The Great Controversy from the abolishment to the downfall of the papacy, is a
noticeable improvement, but it is still inadequate. Why? Simply because 1798 does not signal the downfall
of the papacy. The taking of Pope Pius VI, as a prisoner by the French General Berthier, marked a
temporary humiliation of the papacy, but not its downfall. When Pius VI left Rome on February 20, 1798,
he was an old, dying man who still functioned as Pope, though in a limited scale. He found refuge first in
Siena and then near Florence, where a small Curia was organized to administer the church. In fact, before
his death he planned for the election of his successor.
The imprisonment of Pope Paul VI was condemned by Russia and Austria. Both nations decided to join
forces to restore the Pope to his Pontifical throne in Rome. When the French government was confronted
with this new coalition and with popular uprisings, it decided to transfer the Pope to Valence, in France,
where he died 40 days later, on August 29, 1799.
The death of Pius VI can hardly be seen as the abolishment" or the downfall of the Papacy. It was
simply a temporary humiliation of the prestige of the Papacy. In fact, Pius VI was able to give directives for
the election of his successor. Few months after his death, the Cardinals met in Venice on December 8,
1799, and elected Barnaba Chiaramonti, who took the name of Pious VII, in deference to his predecessor.
The new Pope was able to negotiate with Napoleon the Concordat in 1801 and the Organic Articles in
1802. These treatises restored to the Pope some of the territories of the States of the Church and regulated
the extent of the Papal authority in France.
The following years marked, not the downfall, but the resurgence of papal authority, especially under the
Pontificate of Pius IX (1846-1878). In 1854, Pius IX promulgated the Dogma of the Immaculate
Conception of Mary. In 1864 he issued the famous Syllabus of Errors, known also as "INDEX," which for
many years listed all the political ideologies, religious beliefs, and publications to be rejected by Catholics
(Even our Adventist books have been listed in the INDEX. I learned it the hard way while working as a
literature evangelist in Italy).
The crowning event of Pius IX's pontificate was the convening of the First Vatican Council on December 8,
1869. It had a remarkable large attendance from all over the Roman world and on July 18, 1870, the
Council promulgated the dogma of Papal Infallibility. This dogma has greatly enhanced the authority of the
Pope, and discredits any attempt to attribute to 1798 the downfall of the papacy.
This brief outline of events suffices to show that it is inaccurate to speak of the abolishment or
downfall of the Papacy in 1798. The historical reality is that the Papacy was still very much alive and
soon regained her prestige and power after a temporary humiliation of few months.10
The cherished SDA historicist claim that the Papal Power oppressed Gods people for
more than a millennium also proves to be incorrect and cannot be supported with adequate
historical facts. The SDABC indicates that the Papal Seat was at its height for less than three
centuries, while Bacchiocchi disputes even the 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. dates and shows that
reliable historical evidence demonstrates a slower growth and development for the Papal Rome
that began in the first centuries A.D., and contends that the simple fact the French General
Berthier took prisoner Pope Pius VI is not enough evidence to claim that the Papal Kingdom had
a downfall and ended its religious and political roles in Europe.
The Longest Prophetic Period
Millers Bold Extrapolation Miscarries
Miller had predicted the worlds end in 1843, but his fanciful and unbiblical computation
had failed. What remained behind was The Great Disappointment. Froom describes the sad event
and the profound despair and deep gloom that took over the crowd that had expected the worlds
end and Christs Second Coming:
Let us now go back to the Disappointment. All over the land, on that fateful day of October 22, the
Adventist believers had gathered in their homes, in churches or in halls, or wherever they might find refuge
from the mockers and the mobs. They had closed their businesses, abandoned their crops, and had wound
up their earthly affairs. They had confessed their sins, made right all wrongs, and now pressed together in
the bonds of Christian hope and fervent expectancy. It was the day of great expectancy and ardent longing.
They were waiting for their Redeemer.
But the sun passed its zenith, and declined toward its setting. The cloud of shining glory for which they
strained their eyes, and which they believed would bring their Lord, did not appear. No lightning rent the
sky, no earthquake shook the land, no trumpet smote the ear. The westering sun went down silently but
relentlessly upon their disappearing hopes. Darkness covered the land, and gloomirrepressible gloom
settled down upon the waiting, watching host. Grief and despair overwhelmed them all. Men and women
wept unashamedly, for their Lord had not come. 11
Miller Acknowledges His Grave Errors

The prediction failure had to be acknowledged, and Miller recognized that he had made
errors in his time calculations, but also stated that his hope in the Second Coming remained alive
and strong. The historical sequence in Daniel had to end with the fourth empire, and that notion
could not be disputed. Froom quotes Miller in his statement about the predictive calculations
mistakes he had made about the Second Coming and about his position on the worlds imminent
end as he believed to be forecast in the prophetic book:
That I have been mistaken in the time, I freely confess; and I have no desire to defend my course any
further than I have been actuated by pure motives, and it has resulted to Gods glory. My mistakes and
errors God, I trust, will forgive. I cannot, however, reproach myself for having preached definite time; for
as I believe that whatsoever was written aforetime was written for our learning, the prophetic periods are as
much a subject of investigation, as any other portion of the Word. . . .
But while I frankly acknowledge my disappointment in the exact time, I wish to enquire whether my
teachings have been thereby materially affected. My view of exact time depended entirely upon the
accuracy of chronology': of this I had no absolute demonstration. . . . Other chronologers had assigned later
dates for the events from which I reckoned; and if they are correct, we are only brought into a circle of a
few years, during which we may rationally look for the Lords appearing. As the prophetic periods,
counting from the dates from which I have reckoned, have not brought us to the end; and as I cannot tell the
exact time that chronology may vary from my calculations, I can only live in continual expectation of the
event. I am persuaded that I cannot be far out of the way, and I believe that God will still justify my
preaching to the world.
With respect to other features of my views, I can see no reason to change my belief. We are living under
the last form of the divided fourth kingdom, which brings us to the end. The prophecies which were to be
fulfilled previous to the end, have been so far fulfilled that I find nothing in them to delay the Lords
coming. The signs of the times thicken on every hand; and the prophetic periods I think must certainly have
brought us into the neighborhood of the events. 17 12
The Millerites Lose Purpose and Drive

The time calculation error, though, still remained and could not be ignored and much less
forgotten. Christ had not come in 1843, and the prediction had failed. The Millerite group
seemed to have lost the reason for its existence and should be disbanded:
The world at large took for granted that, after the collapse of the October 22 expectancy, Millerite
Adventism would soon be regarded as a completely discredited chapter in the fabulous forties, a religious
frenzy that had ended in disillusionment and disaster, unworthy of place or record in the legitimate history
of the church. In fact, opponents expected the whole movement to disintegrate and come to nought. Small
wonder that many adherents fell away, in whom the Word of God with its prophecies had taken but shallow
root. And most of the leaders were not in a position to meet the fanaticism and false philosophies that soon
sprang up in certain quarters.13
Certain Millerites Still Preserve Hope

There were still some disappointed Millerites who would not give up on their faith and
hope. Their group was small at first, but then grew and took precedence over the other groups
that had resulted from the disintegration that had occurred in the Millerite movement. Comments
Froom about this group:
3. THIRD GROUP REJECTS BOTH FORMALISM AND FANATICISM. This brings us to the
third division of the former great Millerite body, which will be the subject of our continuing study in Part
III. It was smaller than the first, or Albany Conference, group, but soon became larger than the second, or
fanatical, wing. In this third segment the most conspicuous preachers were Joseph Bates, who had played a
rather prominent part in the Millerite movement, James White, also a Millerite evangelist, Hiram Edson,
and others. This segment held to the validity of the seventh-month movement, adopted Edsons new view
of the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary as explaining the Disappointment, and became the nucleus of the
Sabbatarian Adventists.25 They clashed sharply with Turner and his followers and other extremists.26 So
this group, small at first, was confronted on the one hand by coldness and opposition from those Adventists
who repudiated the seventh-month movement, and on the other hand by those fiery extremists who held
that they had already entered the millennium, and other types of fanaticism. Theirs was a difficult position.
This group, holding to the validity of the 1844 movement of those who were willing to make every
sacrifice to be ready to meet their Lord, and then to hold their faith in the face of bitter disappointment.
They insisted that the working of the Holy Spirit on the hearts of the participants in that movement had
been proof that the Lord was in it; and consequently they felt that those who declared it all a mistake were
repudiating the leading of God, and murmuring against the path in which He had led them.
Accepting the fulfillment of the 2300 days, and the true Midnight Cry of the parable, they, like Miller
and others, thought at first that their work for the world was done. It seemed that the world, which had
scorned their message, and was still reviling them, would shortly see the coming of the Saviour, for which
it had refused to prepare.14
Hiram Edsons Aaronic Tabernacle

From this group, Hiram Edson found the solution to Millers computational mistake
about 1843-1844, and understood that the prophetic message in Daniel 8 had not been about
Christs return to the Earth but about some ritual change in Christs Aaronic work that took place
in the celestial tabernacle. In 1844, it appears, Christ had moved from the first compartment into
the second compartment in the Aaronic celestial tabernacle. Froom describes in detail the
specific events that lead to the new theological perspective and the theological reasons for the
new Adventist movement:
I. New Concept of Sanctuary Explains Disappointment
At Port Gibson, New York, on the old Erie Canal, midway between Syracuse and Buffalo, Hiram Edson
was leader of the advent believers of the community. His farmhouse, a mile south of town, was frequently
their meeting place when they did not have access to the district schoolhouse, likewise a mile from the
village. Dr. Franklin B. Hahn, physician of Canandaigua, New Yorkabout fifteen miles distant on Lake
Canandaiguawas another prominent member of the Adventist company in that region. And yet another
was Owen R. L. Crosier, an orphan youth whom Edson and Hahn had befriended. Between them he had
been provided with a home, and had now developed into a keen Bible student and a promising writer. The
three of them joined in publishing a small paper called the Day-Dawn, printed at Canandaiguaone of the
group of Adventist journals issued following the Disappointment. And Crosier served as editor.
Like thousands of other Adventist groups large and small scattered over the land, the Port Gibson believers
met on October 22 waiting for Christ to appear in glory. Edson invited the people to come to that last
meeting, and bade good-by to those who declined, never expecting to meet them again. Fervent prayer and
hymns marked that climactic day, together with exhortations and expectation. They reviewed the
evidences, and lived in hope as the hours passed slowly away. Spalding phrases it impressively:
Would it be in the morning? The frost of the dawn melted under the rising sun. Might it be at noon? The
meridian was reached, and the sun began to decline. Surely the evening! But the shades of night fell
lowering. Still there was hope: For ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at
midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning.1
The neighborhood company of believers expected to meet their Lord at any moment. Says Edson:
We looked for our coming Lord until the clock tolled 12 at midnight. The day had then passed, and our
disappointment became a certainty. Our fondest hopes and expectations were blasted.2
But Edson kept musing in his heart, My advent experience has been the richest and brightest of all my
Christian experience. . . . Has the Bible proved a failure? Is there no God, no heaven, no golden city, no
Paradise?8
After waiting and weeping until dawn, many of the advent believers slipped away to their desolate homes.
To some of those who remained Edson said, Let us go to the barn and pray. They went into the almost
empty granary, for the corn had not been husked, but still stood in shocks in the field. They shut the door
behind them and poured out their souls in anguished supplication before God, that He would hear their
cries. They pleaded that He would not desert them in their hour of supreme need, nor forsake them in their
utter extremity. Edson was the leader of this praying circle.
They prayed until the conviction came that their prayers had been heard and accepted, that light would be
given and their disappointment explained. Edson was reassured that truly there is a God, and that His Word
is true and sure. He had blessed them graciously in their advent experience, and He would surely make
known to them the nature of their mistake and reveal His leading and His purpose. The cause of our
perplexity will become as plain as day, he said. Have faith in God!
After breakfast Edson said to one of his companions, Let us go and see and encourage some of our
br[ethre]n. (According to Loughborough this second man was Crosier.) They shunned the road, for Edson
did not want to meet people, as he did not yet know what to say to them.* So they struck off across Edsons
field, where the corn was still in the shock and the pumpkins on the vines. They walked along silently, with
bowed heads and meditative hearts, more or less oblivious of each other. Suddenly Edson stopped, as if by
a hand laid upon his shoulder. He stood, deep in meditation, his face upturned wistfully toward the mottled
gray skies, praying for light. He pondered the Bible evidence on the ministering Priest, Christ Jesus, in
Gods antitypical sanctuary in heaven, and how they had expected Him to emerge, on that antitypical Day
of Atonement, to bless His waiting people. Edson was waiting for an answer to his perplexity. Suddenly
there burst upon his mind the thought that there were two phases to Christs ministry in the heaven of
heavens, just as in the earthly sanctuary of old. In his own words, an overwhelming conviction came over
him
that instead of our High Priest coming out of the Most Holy of the heavenly sanctuary to come to this earth
on the tenth day of the seventh month, at the end of the 2300 days, he for the first time entered on that day
the second apartment of that sanctuary and that he had a work to perform in the Most Holy before coming
to this earth. 5
II. Significance of the Bitter-Sweet Book
This came upon Edson as an inescapable conviction, like a beam of glorious light illuminating the whole
question, clarifying their disappointment, and dispelling the darkness and confusion. He saw, he tells us,
how Christ, the Bridegroom of the parable, must have come to the marriage at that time; in other words, to
the Ancient of days, to receive a kingdom, dominion, and glory; and we must wait for his return from thewedding. 6 The sanctuary to be cleansed, he adds, was clearly the heavenly sanctuary, and not this earth at
all. The thought was like a message from heaven. It was a new idea, a precious truth, a wondrous
discovery. His prayer was answered.
In addition to this clarifying thought, Edson writes, My mind was directed to the tenth ch[apter] of
Revelation] where I could see the vision had spoken and did not lie. This chapter presents the symbol of
the sweet and then bitter book. The advent experience had indeed been as honey in their mouths. Now, in
the aftermath, it had suddenly become as bitter as gall. (Rev. 10:9, 10.) The prophecy also seemed to
indicate that they must testify again. But how was that to be? Who would listen? And then the thought
likewise came to him that the ark of the New Testament was to be seen in heaven. (Rev.11:19.) These were
the principal thoughts that coursed through Edsons mind as he stood there in rapt meditation. Meantime
his companionevidently Crosierwho had been striding along, likewise deep in study, suddenly noticed
that Edson had stopped. He called back, asking why he had paused. And Edson responded, The Lord was
answering our morning prayer, giving light with regard to our disappointment. 7
Joining each other again, they walked along slowly, discussing this forgotten phase of the sanctuary service
and recalling what they could of the Biblical record of the ancient types given to Israel. Then they hastened
from home to home, telling their brethren the good news that Christ's priestly ministry in heaven was now
somehow fulfilling another aspect of the ancient Mosaic typethat our heavenly High Priest had just
entered into, instead of coming out of, the most holy, as they had formerly held. That much was clear. This,
then, must be but the beginning, not the ending, of the great antitypical Day of Atonement. That
revolutionary concept threw a shaft of clarifying light upon their disappointment. Christ had indeed
fulfilled what the type had actually called for. It would be awhile before He would complete this cleansing
of the sanctuary, and not until then would He come forth as King. This was new light indeed. But it was
only the beginning of what was to be a long period of continuous study and developing understanding and
conviction.15
Ellen White In Consent With Edson

Ellen White (that is, Frances Bolton or Marian Davis) is in total agreement with Hiram
Edsons new perception about what happened in 1844, that is, that the event Miller and his
followers had expected to take place on the earth as a human historical event had in fact occurred
in an Aaronic celestial tabernacle:
The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and the central pillar of the advent faith
was the declaration: Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
Daniel 8:14. These had been familiar words to all believers in the Lord's soon coming. By the lips of
thousands was this prophecy repeated as the watchword of their faith. All felt that upon the events therein
foretold depended their brightest expectations and most cherished hopes. These prophetic days had been
shown to terminate in the autumn of 1844. In common with the rest of the Christian world, Adventists then
held that the earth, or some portion of it, was the sanctuary. They understood that the cleansing of the
sanctuary was the purification of the earth by the fires of the last great day, and that this would take place at
the Second Advent. Hence the conclusion that Christ would return to the earth in 1844.
But the appointed time had passed, and the Lord had not appeared. The believers knew that God's word
could not fail; their interpretation of the prophecy must be at fault; but where was the mistake? Many rashly
cut the knot of difficulty by denying that the 2300 days ended in 1844. No reason could be given for this
except that Christ had not come at the time they expected Him. They argued that if the prophetic days had
ended in 1844, Christ would then have returned to cleanse the sanctuary by the purification of the earth by
fire; and that since He had not come, the days could not have ended.
To accept this conclusion was to renounce the former reckoning of the prophetic periods. The 2300 days
had been found to begin when the commandment of Artaxerxes for the restoration and building of
Jerusalem went into effect, in the autumn of 457 B.C. Taking this as the starting point, there was perfect
harmony in the application of all the events foretold in the explanation of that period in Daniel 9:25-27.
Sixty-nine weeks, the first 483 of the 2300 years, were to reach to the Messiah, the Anointed One; and
Christ's baptism and anointing by the Holy Spirit, A.D. 27, exactly fulfilled the specification. In the midst
of the seventieth week, Messiah was to be cut off. Three and a half years after His baptism, Christ was
crucified, in the spring of A.D. 31. The seventy weeks, or 490 years, were to pertain especially to the Jews.
At the expiration of this period the nation sealed its rejection of Christ by the persecution of His disciples,
and the apostles turned to the Gentiles, A.D. 34. The first 490 years of the 2300 having then ended, 1810
years would remain. From A.D. 34, 1810 years extend to 1844. Then, said the angel, shall the sanctuary
be cleansed. All the preceding specifications of the prophecy had been unquestionably fulfilled at the time
appointed.16
An Untenable Theological Position

This new concept appears at first to be, indeed, the answer to the question that
perplexed the Millerites when Christ failed to appear for His Second Coming in 1844, but the
texts needed to validate this peculiar SDA historicist interpretation cannot be found and will
not be found in the Bible. In order to confirm such a theological position the SDA scholars must
demonstrate that:
1. The claimed SDA historicist year-day principle is based on indisputable empirical linguistic
evidence and can be supported with the Bible.
In the research document The Year-Day Principle Reexamined I have provided ample evidence
that this is not the case, that there is no empirical linguistic evidence for a year=day rule, and
that no biblical texts support an assumed equation between the terms day and year in the
Bible.17
2. That the angel Gabriel did not complete his interpretation for the vision in Daniel 8 because
the prophet had fainted, and therefore had to return almost a decade later to finish the
explanation for the time element involved, in Daniel 8:14.18
In the two documents Daniel 9 Is Not an Appendix to Daniel 8,19 and The Referents for
Vision in Daniel 9:21 and Daniel 9:23,20 I have demonstrated that Daniel 9 is not an appendix to
Daniel 8, that Gabriel had completed his interpretation for the vision in Daniel 8 before he had
left, and that the prophet Daniel got sick after the angel had completed his explanation and not
during the explanation, and therefore he could not have interrupted Gabriels comments. I have
also shown that Daniel 9 does not continue to discuss the topic included in Daniel 8, but
introduces a new topicthe deported Israelites return to Palestine after 70 years.
3. That the antecedent for the pronoun them in Daniel 8:9 is a wind, and not the stout horn
described in Daniel 8:8.
In the research document, Anaphora Resolution in a Biblical Passage,21I have provided reliable
linguistic evidence that the antecedent for the pronoun them in Daniel 8:9 is the stout horn
described in Daniel 8:8 and not a wind, which means that the little horn in Daniel 8 is not
Rome, but Antiochus IV Epiphanes.22
4. That chathak in Daniel 9 means to cut off, and not to determine and that the 490 years in
Daniel 9:24 must be cut off from the 2300 evenings-mornings in Daniel 8:14.
In the research paper The Meaning of chathak in Daniel 9:24 I showed that the Hebrew term
chathak in Daniel 9 means to determine, and not to cut off because the 2300 prophecy in
Daniel 8 refers to the time period within which Antiochus IV Epiphanes desecrated the Israelite
temple and attempted to eradicate the Israelite religion,23 and not to more than two millennia that
would describe the Imperial and Papal Romes historical developments and political and
religious ascendancies and supremacies.
5. That the event that occurred in 1844 was a human historical event, and not an assumed and
implausible celestial event based on bizarre SDA historicist theological speculations for which
no true historical evidence has been produced or could ever be produced.
Historical Records Fail the 1844 Date
That the SDA historicist theologians and scholars cannot provide a factual and recorded
human historical event in order to substantiate their erroneous claims about 1844 is a recognized
fact in the SDA theological circles. States Gane:
Why dont more people accept the eschatological aspects of sanctuary teaching, including a pre-Advent
judgment taking place now? Here are a few possible reasons:
1. Abandonment of the Reformation view regarding the Church of Rome, in favor of ecumenism and
political correctness. Without including the Church of Rome in fulfillment of the little horn, it is
impossible to accurately interpret the time prophecy of Daniel 8:14.
2. Abandonment of historicism by most Christians after the disappointment of 1844, when William Miller
and his associates predicted Christs Second Coming on the basis of Daniel 8:14, mistakenly interpreting
the cleansing of the sanctuary after 2,300 days = years as the cleansing of the world by fire. Other
exegetical mistakes and excesses by historicists have not helped the cause of historicism. Well-trained
Adventist scholars are now being much more careful and cautious, utilizing all the rich exegetical resources
at their disposal, but the stigma is still strong.44
3. The misconception that the Adventist teaching that Christ began a new phase of heavenly sanctuary
ministry in 1844, namely, participation in a pre-Advent judgment in heaven, is simply a face-saving
strategy of reinterpretation for disappointed Millerites. 45 Of course, we know that the same kind of
argument was long ago directed against the reality of Christs Resurrection.
4. The fact that nothing happened on earth in 1844 to prove the beginning of a new phase of salvation
in heaven. Acceptance of this, as with other Christian beliefs, is based on faith in the biblical evidence
alone [emphasis added].24
The Ottoman Empire Prediction

Litch Fails With Millers Arithmetic
Based on his Millerite historicist hermeneutics for the fifth and the sixth Revelation
trumpets, Litch made in 1838 the attempt to predict that the Ottoman or Turkish Empire would
collapse, or its power would be broken on August 11, 1840.25 State the SDABC authors:
One of the first Biblical expositors on record to identify the Turks as the power portrayed under the sixth
trumpet was the Swiss reformer, Heinrich Bullinger (d. A.D. 1575), although Martin Luther had already set
forth this trumpet as symbolic of Moslems. However, on the dating of this trumpet, as of the fifth,
commentators have shown wide divergence, although the decided majority of expositors have assigned
dates for the fifth trumpet during the period in which the Saracens were in the ascendancy, and for the sixth
trumpet during the heyday of either the Seljuk or the Ottoman Turks.
In 1832 William Miller made a new approach to the dating of these trumpets by connecting them
chronologically (in the fifth of a series of articles in the Vermont Telegraph). On the basis of the year-day
principle (see on Dan. 7:25), Miller calculated the five months of the fifth trumpet (Rev. 9:5) to be 150
literal years, and the hour, day, month, and year of the sixth to be 391 years and 15 days. Many expositors
before Miller had adopted these same calculations, but they had not connected the two periods
chronologically. Miller set forth the view that the time period of the sixth trumpet followed immediately
upon that of the fifth, so as to make the entire period one of 541 years and 15 days. This period he dated
from A.D. 1298, when he considered the first attack by the Ottoman Turks on the Byzantine Empire
occurred, to 1839. Thus, according to his view, both trumpets represented the Ottoman Turks, the fifth,
their rise and the sixth, their period of domination.
In 1838 Josiah Litch, one of Millers associates in the second advent movement in America, revised
Millers dates to A.D. 1299 to 1449 for the fifth trumpet, and 1449 to 1840 for the sixth. Litch accepted the
date July 27, 1299, for the battle of Bapheum, near Nicomedia, which he took as the first attack by the
Ottoman Turks on the Byzantine Empire. He saw the date 1449 as significant of the collapse of Byzantine
power, for toward the end of 1448 a new Byzantine emperor, Constantine Palaeologus, had requested
permission of the Turkish sultan Murad II before daring to ascend his throne, and he did not, in fact,
receive the crown until January 6, 1449, after such permission had been granted. Litch believed that this
150-year period constituted the time during which the Ottoman Turks tormented (see v. 5) the Byzantine
Empire.
As already stated, Litch set 1299 as the beginning of the fifth trumpet, to be more exact, July 27, 1299, his
date for the battle of Bapheum. He gave to this fifth trumpet a period of 150 years. This brought him to July
27, 1449, for the beginning of the sixth trumpet. Adding on 391 years brought him to July 27, 1840. The 15
days carried him over into the month of August of that year. He predicted that in that month the power of
the Turkish Empire would be overthrown. However, at the outset he did not fix on a precise day in August.
A short time before the expiration of this period he declared that the Turkish Empire would be broken
August 11, which is exactly 15 days beyond July 27, 1840.
At that time world attention was directed to events taking place in the Turkish Empire. In June, 1839,
Mohammed Ali, pasha of Egypt and nominally a vassal of the sultan, had rebelled against his overlord. He
defeated the Turks and captured their navy. At this juncture Mahmud II, the sultan, died, and the ministers
of his successor, Abdul Mejid, proposed a settlement to Mohammed Ali by which he would receive the
hereditary pashalik of Egypt, and his son Ibrahim, the rulership of Syria. However, Britain, France, Austria,
Prussia, and Russia, who all had interests in the Near East, intervened at this point and insisted that no
agreement between the Turks and Mohammed Ali be made without their consultation. Negotiations were
protracted until the summer of 1840, when, on July 15, Britain, Austria, Prussia, and Russia signed the
Treaty of London, proposing to back with force the terms suggested the previous year by the Turks. It was
about this time that Litch announced that he anticipated Turkish power to come to an end on August 11. On
that day the Turkish emissary, Rifat Bey, arrived at Alexandria with the terms of the London Convention.
On that day also the ambassadors of the four powers received a communication from the sultan inquiring as
to what measures were to be taken in reference to a circumstance vitally affecting his empire. He was told
that provision had been made, but he could not know what it was. Litch interpreted these events as a
recognition by the Turkish government that its independent power was gone.
These events, coming at the specified time of Litchs prediction, exercised a wide influence upon the
thinking of those in America who were interested in the Millerite movement. Indeed, this prediction by
Litch went far to give credence to other, as yet unfulfilled, time propheciesparticularly that of the 2300
dayswhich were being preached by the Millerites. Thus this occurrence in 1840 was a significant factor
in building up the expectation of the second advent three years later (see GC 334, 335).
It should be made clear, however, that commentators and theologians in general have been greatly divided
over the meaning of the 5th and 6th trumpets. This has been due principally to problems in three areas: (1)
the meaning of the symbolism itself; (2) the meaning of the Greek; (3) the historical events and dates
involved. But to canvass adequately these problems would carry us beyond the space limits permissible in
this commentary.
Generally speaking, the Seventh-day Adventist interpretation of the fifth and sixth trumpets, particularly as
touching the time period involved, is essentially that of Josiah Litch. 26
Ellen White Treats Failure As Success

Ellen White (rather Frances Bolton or Marian Davis) named the prediction Litch had
made a prediction success, applauded it as another remarkable fulfillment of prophecy, and
promoted it as an impressive confirmation for the historicist hermeneutics. She stated:
In the year 1840, another remarkable fulfillment of prophecy excited widespread interest [emphasis
added]. 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, and specifying not only
the day but the year when this would take place. According to this exposition, which was purely a matter of
calculation on the prophetic periods of Scripture, the Turkish government would surrender its independence
on the eleventh day of August, 1840.
The prediction was widely published and thousands watched the course of events with eager interest. 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 [emphasis added]. 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
publishing his views, and from 1840 to 1844 the work rapidly extended. 27
Litch Recognizes His Miscalculation

Litch, though, had been wrong about his prediction. Nothing had happened to the
Ottoman Empire on August 11, 1840, and Litch acknowledged his prediction failure later in his
life. So, the claim that the events Litch had predicted had been fulfilled was false. States
Anderson:
The truth of the matter is that the month of August, 1840, came and passed without any evidence of Turkey
falling. This placed Litch in a quandary. He waited until November, and then came out with a statement
saying that Turkey's rejection of a European peace offer on August 15, 1840, assured war with Europe, and
doomed the Ottomon Empire. However, by early 1841, it became evident that war was not going to happen.
So, Litch came up with a new story, arguing that the fulfillment of prophecy had occurred exactly on
August 11, 1840, as predicted. The fall of Turkey consisted of a voluntary surrender of Turkish
supremacy in Constantinople to Christian influence. He claimed the Turkish ruler was now a puppet of
the great Christian powers of Europe.
Many Christians questioned Litch's new story. In 1840 the Ottoman Empire covered a vast territory,
including a large part of North Africa, Arabia, Palestine, Iraq, southern Russia, and most of the European
Balkan states. The Millerite critic Reverend O.E. Daggett argued that Turkey did not fall in August of
1840. James Hazen, a Massachusetts clergyman, said the European intervention had kept Turkey from
falling. Hazen said the argument that in accepting European aid Turkey fell was "ridiculous."2 28
The error Litch had committed and that had caused the prediction failure was that he had
borrowed Millers mistaken interpretation of the prophetic time expression hour and day and
month and year in Revelation 9:15. Miller had calculated the five months of the fifth trumpet
(Rev. 9:5) to be 150 literal years, and the hour, day, month, and year of the sixth to be 391 years
and 15 days.29 Litch revised Millers dates to A.D. 1299 to 1449 for the fifth trumpet, and 1449
to 1840 for the sixth, and then he predicted that in that month the power of the Turkish Empire
would be overthrown.30 The much claimed pragmatic test failed because the time expression
hour and day and month and year in Revelation 9:15 expresses a point in time, not a time
period in the New Testament Greek.
The above relevant examples indicate that the SDA historicist theologians and scholars
have failed to produce reliable historical evidence that demonstrates without doubt that
historicism is based in the Bible, that it is established on valid and authentic hermeneutics, and
that it can produce interpretations for Daniel and Revelation that can stand the scientific and
biblical test. The fact is that the SDA historicism fails to deliver because it is a deductive
theological construct that has no solid basis in science and in the Bible.
VIII. Diversions That Robbed the Gospel

LaRondelle argues without equivocation that the SDA historicism should have at its core
the Christian salvation as it has been presented in the entire BibleDaniel and Revelation
included. The truth is, though, that the excessive and undue emphasis that the SDA historicist
theologians, scholars, pastors, and missionaries have placed on Daniel and Revelation all through
the almost two centuries since the church came into existence has caused a resource diversion
and has produced negative effects on the SDA Gospel mission and work. States the scholar:
[True Historicism and Salvation]
Historicism is a concept of prophetic interpretation. It needs to be defined carefully before we can discuss
its validity and boundaries. LeRoy E. Froom provides us one definition of historicism: the progressive and
continuous fulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from Daniel's day and the time of John, on down
to the Second Advent and the end of the age.1
Froom's definition implies a certain theological exegesis, which he fails to identify as the guideline for his
understanding of what constitutes a fulfillment of prophecy. A truthful fulfillment should correspond to the
intended meaning of the prophet, and thus requires an exegesis of Scripture in its literary and historical
context. Even the Cross is not self-explanatory and needs divine interpretation (see 1 Cor. 1:22-25; 15:3;
Rom. 3:25, 26).
This leads us to ask for the biblical origin of historicism; that is, for the prophetic revelation that periodizes
history in successive epochs which lead up to the establishment of the kingdom of God. That origin, it is
universally agreed, is the apocalyptic book of Daniel, whose visions repeatedly proceed from his own time
to the end of world history, with a consistent focus on salvation history [emphasis added].1
[Daniels Christological Emphasis]

With increasing emphasis, Daniel affirms that the God of heaven, who rules world history, is the God of
his fathers (Dan. 1:1, 2; 2:20-23; 3:28; etc.). Daniel bases his view of history on Israel's redemption
history. Chapters 7-12 especially sharpen the focus on Israel, on her sanctuary worship in the holy city,
and on its devastation by Israel's sacrilegious enemy (8:11-13; 9:25-27; 11:44, 45). Michael is sent to
Daniel with the message, Now I have come to explain to you what will happen to your people in the
future, for the vision concerns a time yet to come (10:14, NIV). Daniel's prophecies focus on Israel as
Gods covenant people and on their future experiences. Daniel himself thus provides the theological
criterion by which a fulfillment of prophecy must be assessed.
Jesus mentions Daniel by name (Matt. 24:15) and affirms his salvation-historical perspective when He
applies Daniels prophecy of the violent death of the Messiah and of Jerusalems consequent destruction
(Dan. 9:26, 27) to the imminent fall of Jerusalem in His own generation (Matt. 23:36; 24:15; Luke 21:2022). Jesus continuously stresses the Christocentric focus of the church age in His farewell speech of
Matthew 24, when He predicts the coming of false christs and the persecution of His elect (see verses 4,
9,14, 23, 24, 27, 30, 31).
Paul also refers to Daniel's prophecy of an oppressor and deceiver of the covenant people, when he applies
Daniel 8 and 11 to a fulfillment during the church age in the temple of God (see 2 Thess. 2:4-8). By the
expression, the temple of God, Paul did not mean the material shrine in Jerusalem but rather the
institutional church (see 1 Cor. 3:16; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:19-21).2
On the basis of these New Testament applications of Daniel's prophecies to the church age, the Seventh-day
Adventist Encyclopedia concludes: Historicism as a method of interpretation is found in the Bible itself,
and it provides the key for the interpretation of the apocalyptic books of Daniel and Revelation.3
What then is this hermeneutical key that Scripture itself provides? It is a key that needs to be carefully
defined through a responsible exegesis of Scripture so that all believers can be aware of the biblical norm
for interpreting prophecies and of the truthfulness of our historical applications. Not only Jesus and Paul
but also Johns writings re-orient Daniel's covenant people theologically to the God-sent Messiah and to
His people, and consequently to their persecuting enemies (see 1 John 1, 2; Rev. 12-14). Accordingly,
fulfillments of prophecy during the church age must be determined by their Christ-centeredness. That
Christological center of prophecy is the key the Bible itself provides to unlock the truthfulness of a
historical fulfillment. Only fulfillments that pertain to Christ and His new-covenant people will increase our
knowledge of Daniel and Revelation (cf. Dan. 12:4).2
[Historicist Traditions Misused]

How does one assess the truthfulness of the different historicist applications of the past? Those traditions
have to be tested on the grounds of their exegetical truthfulness in accordance with the biblical perspective
of history. Regarding any fulfillment of the predicted apostasy, or of the true remnant people, or of the
cosmic signs during the church age, the New Testament insists from start till finish on a Christocentric
fulfillment in relation to the new-covenant people of God.4 This theological qualification of a true
fulfillment of prophecy should be acknowledged as the primary responsibility of historicism.
A second point of concern to be taken seriously is the possible misuse of earlier historicist traditions when
these are appealed to as the final interpreter of prophecies. If we profess the sola Scriptura principle that
the Bible interprets itself, how can we at the same time claim that history as such is the true and final
interpreter?5
Israels prophets, Jesus, and His apostles all relate their promises and warnings to God's covenant people or
to their enemies. In short, Bible prophecy is fundamentally different from secular soothsaying in its focus
on salvation history: past, present, and future. The visions of both Daniel and John reveal this broader
theological perspective that connects all predictive prophecies in one coherent framework of Messianic
redemption as its biblical criterion for fulfillment (see Dan. 2:44, 45; 7:27; 12:1-3; Rev. 5).
Johns Apocalypse sums up the proclamation of the risen Christ: I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First
and the Last, the Beginning and the End" (Rev. 22:13). This sovereign title of the risen Lord proclaims that
Christ is the meaning for human history, being the Alpha" of Genesis till the Omega of Revelation.6 3
[Honest Historicist Interpretation]

Our trust in the proper exegetical foundation of historicist interpretations of Scripture cannot be taken for
granted. To give account for our prophetic interpretations is a biblical mandate to accept individual
responsibility for their truthfulness (see 1 Peter 3:15). Paul places all Spirit manifestations in the church
under the need for testing on their truthfulness: Do not treat prophecies with contempt. Test everything.
Hold on to the good" (1 Thess. 5:20, 21, NIV).
Of critical importance for establishing a truthful fulfillment of prophecy in history is the crossing over of
the old-covenant people of God to the new-covenant people of Christ Jesus. This cross point, marked by
the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ in the fullness of time (Mark 1:15; Gal. 4:4), has crucial
hermeneutical significance in determining a true fulfillment. That is to say, the beginning of the Messianic
age transforms the biblical definition of the Israel of God into a Messianic Israel, and consequently also the
definition of her antagonists, as the book of Acts testifies (see the application of Israel and her enemies of
Psalm 2 in Acts 4:23-28; 13:32, 40, 46-48).
On the Day of Pentecost, Peter proclaims that Joels prophecy of the fullness of the Spirit of God has been
fulfilled in the Christ-believing Jews at Jerusalem (Joel 2:28-32). Here Peter publicly introduces the new
paradigm of a Christocentric fulfillment of the end-time prophecies. Filled with the Spirit of God, he
declares that now the last days have begun (Acts 2:17), because the risen Messiah has been enthroned in
heaven as the Lord of Israel (Acts 2:33, 36). Later he adds that these days will last until Jesus shall return in
glory to accomplish the universal restoration (Acts 3:21, NRSV; apokatastasis panton was the Jewish
expression for the Messianic "Jubilee Year" for the restoration of all Israel; Acts 1:6 has its verbal form7). 4
[Historicist Claims Need Evidence]

If salvation history is the focus of apocalyptic prophecies, we must test and purify historicism by the
biblical perspective of covenant history. We need to define historical fulfillment in accordance with the
cosmic controversy theme in Daniel and Revelation. The New Testament hands us the Christological norm
by which we are to test every historical application of prophecy. Applying this Christ centered norm
engenders credibility to our public proclamations of the divine intentions of prophecy.
If we are disinterested or uninformed by the biblical covenant history, we cannot assess the truthfulness of
past historicist claims. It is our duty as Christian interpreters to reexamine our method of prophetic
interpretation and application, and to define a conscious and consistent Christocentric hermeneutic.
Historicism needs the disciplined reflection of exegetical and systematic theologians for its own theological
and exegetical credibility. Bible truth is not established by a majority view of pious interpreters but by a
truthful, contextual exegesis of Scripture. This calls for a cooperation of all theological disciplines of the
church so that all seekers after truth may experience a progressive understanding of prophecy, based on the
gospel principles of the New Testament.5
[Consensus Failure in Historicism]

One of the perceived weaknesses of historicism is the inability of its advocates to agree upon the specific
fulfillments of the prophecies.12 This assessment oversimplifies the problem by overlooking some
common agreements of historicists since the early church in their understanding of imperial and papal
Rome as fulfillment of Daniel's visions (in chapters 2 and 7).13 The critique remains valid, however, in
regard to some sensational, private interpretations that attach prophetic significance to current political
events.
Such popular claims elevate current events as the guiding norm for prophetic interpretation. In spite of
speculative interpretations, the new apocalyptic movements expressed their sincere longing for restoring
the Christian hope and the simple Christian life of the apostolic church. Unfortunately, such imminency
expectations of Christ's advent were based on some problematic calculations of Daniel's prophetic time
periods.6
[Gospel Proclamation Neglected]

The priority of apocalyptic interpretations in the Adventist self-understanding never intended to overrule or
obscure the everlasting gospel. Ellen White tried to keep the apocalyptic teachings united with the gospel
preaching, warning against the threat of a Christless historicism: Ministers should present the sure word of
prophecy as the foundation of the faith of Seventh-day Adventists. The prophecies of Daniel and the
Revelation should be carefully studied, and in connection with them the words, Behold the Lamb of God,
which taketh away the sin of the world.18
However, the sad fact remains that the formative years of Adventism (1844-1888) did embody a neglect
of the centrality of the gospel of justifying grace when it came to proclaiming this end-time witness.
Doctrinal beliefs about the law of God, a pre-Advent investigative judgment, and the appeal to leave
apostate Christianity as the end-time Babylon became the dominant truths through which people tended
to identify the remnant" church, while the gospel tended to suffer neglect.
The Advent movement was absolutely convinced it was a movement of destiny, raised up to fulfill the
prophecies of Revelation 12:17 and 14:6-12. Yet it was not united on fundamental Christian beliefs, such as
the Holy Trinity, the deity of Christ, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and even on righteousness by faith
as the way of salvation. By its deliberate isolation from historic Christianity, Adventism developed its own
doctrinal belief system independent from the historic Christian creeds. Adventist indifference to the
Protestant Reformation Confessions led periodically to a crisis about what is Christian in Adventism,
especially in regard to the affirmation of the basic Protestant axioms sola fide, sola gratia, and sola
Scriptura.19 7
[Historicism Blocks True Reform]

The biblical connection of the apostolic gospel and apocalyptic interpretations remains the critical issue for
Adventist historicism. Is the gospel allowed to have a transforming influence on our apocalyptic
interpretations? If the gospel priority is overlooked in prophetic interpretation, the pitfall of literalism can
hardly be avoided. Literalism, recognizable by its ethnic and geographic Middle East applications of
prophecy, immediately usurps the primary place of Christ as the decisive norm for prophetic interpretation.
This modern hermeneutical threat calls for renewed vigilance by each generation to safeguard the priority
of the everlasting gospel in apocalyptic interpretations (see Rev. 12:17; 14:12; 20:4).
The task of honest examination of sound exegesis of Scripture has only begun. The core issue remains a
definition of the New Testament principles of Scripture interpretation that apply equally to fulfilled and
unfulfilled prophecies. Such a testing of our traditional assumptions and applications can lead to a more
biblical and credible proclamation that will stir the hearts again. Some leading Adventist theologians have
begun to reaffirm the motivating principle of Protestantism: ecdesia reformata semper reformanda,
meaning a reform which is never completed once-and for-all, but which is renewed and reapplied from
generation to generation in the light of Scripture.26 8
IX. Conclusion
This research document has provided extensive and reliable biblical and historical
evidence that the SDA historicism, like the other three main hermeneutical schools that have
failed the scientific and biblical test for adequate and reliable biblical and prophetic
interpretationpreterism, idealism, and futurismhas failed in its attempt to define and
establish itself as a valid and reliable interpretation school for the predictive and eschatological
prophecies in Daniel and Revelation. The fundamental and severe issues that have confronted
and still confront the SDA historicism are as follows:
Definition and Application Issues
Factual evidence indicates that the SDA definition for historicism is fragmented into various and
uneven formulations that as a whole present an inconsistent hermeneutical perspective. This
fragmentation has produced uneven prophetic interpretations and incorrect exegetical
applications to Daniel and Revelation due the intentional or non-intentional confusion between
human historical events and assumed fictional or non-terrestrial events. Some claimed and
assumed events also appear to have been concocted and reshaped from real event distortion
and misinterpretation.
No Divine Origin for Historicism
The SDA theologians have claimed that God himself has originated the historicist hermeneutics
and that the Bible has been written from a historicist perspective. Another assumed but
undocumented SDA claim is that Daniel, John, Jesus, Paul, and other Bible writers have written
their books as historicists. All these claims are assumptions derived from an excessive
theological focus on historicism as a method and the attempt to obtain a pre-established
deductive conclusion that cannot be substantiated with biblical and historical evidence and fails
to demonstrate authentic and reliable fulfillments for the SDA assumptive and erroneous time
and event predictions.
Selective Historical Attestation
The SDA historicist theologians have used selective, tendentious, and therefore biased historical
data to establish false claims for prophetic fulfillments, a fallacious and non-scientific
approach to data authentication. Based on these deceptive proofs the SDA theologians have
argued for untenable and irresponsible prophetic interpretation positions on Daniel and
Revelation. Such excesses have weakened and discredited the SDA historicism in the Christian
World and have made the historicist hermeneutics impossible to consider and accept.
Repeated SDA Prediction Failures
The fact that William Miller, the amateur historicist and preacher has committed multiple
interpretation and logical errors while he computed the prophetic time for the assumed Second
Coming in 1844 is well known. What is less known and ignored is the fact that the SDA pioneers
and also the present SDA theologians and scholars are still dependent on Millers hermeneutics
and worldview in their Daniel and Revelation interpretations. There were multiple attempts for
time setting during the Millerite effervescent period and also multiple prophetic fulfillment
errors, and these errors have been adopted in the SDA theological circles as true and self-evident
prophetic fulfillments. This research document has provided the most relevant examples that
demonstrate the repeated Adventist failures to provide verification for the speculative
hermeneutical approach through solid historical evidence that would indicate indisputable
prediction fulfillment and validate the spurious SDA historicist claims.
Historicist Mania and the Gospel
The SDA fixation or rather obsession with the eschatological prophecies in Daniel and
Revelation has caused a backlash effect and collateral damage in the Adventist circles. The true
fact is that almost all Adventist church members have noticed that most Net Seminars or local
Evangelistic Meetings appear to have a singular focus, and that is not the Gospel but the strange
beasts in Daniel and Revelation. One other item that is promoted and circulated in an excessive
manner and on a regular basis in the SDA evangelistic meetings is the one related to the
presumed time landmarks or the words end countdown. The obsessive denominational focus
on Daniel and Revelation associated with the excessive preaching from the two prophetic books
together with the bombastic and triumphalist emphasis on the final events and the imminent
Second Coming which is considered the remnant message or the present truth has replaced
the Christian Gospel with fantastic and implausible tall tales and has caused the almost complete
and inexcusable failure to preach the genuine Gospel, the Bibles Good News of salvation to the
truth-starved world.
References
I. Introduction
1
Desmond Ford, Daniel (Nashville, Tennessee: Southern Publishing Association, 1978), 65-72.
Ibid., 68.
J. Robert Spangler, (Editor), Christ and His High Priestly Ministry, Ministry, Special
Sanctuary Issue, October 1980, 21.
4
Desmond Ford, Daniel (Nashville, Tennessee: Southern Publishing Association, 1978), 69.
Ibid., 65.
Ibid.
Ibid., 66.
Ibid., 68.
Ibid.
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid., 69.
12
Ibid.
13
Ibid.
14
Ibid.
15
Ibid., 69-70.
16
Francis D. Nichol, The Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia (Washington, DC: Review and
Herald Publishing Association,1978), Millerite Movement.
17
Gerhard Pfandl, The Pre-Advent Judgment: Fact or Fiction? (part one), Ministry, December
2003, 22.
18
Richard M. Davidson, The Second Advent and the Fullness of Time, Ministry, June-July
2000, 44.
19
ngel M. Rodrguez, Issues in the Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation,

Ministry, January 2012, 6.
20
Reimar Vetne, A Definition and Short History of Historicism as a Method for Interpreting
Daniel and Revelation, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 14/2 (Fall 2003), 1.
21
Ibid., 1-2.
22
23
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, June 4). Daniel 9 Is Not an Appendix to Daniel 8. Academia.edu.
http://www.academia.edu/.
24
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, June 11). The Referents for Vision in Daniel 9:21 and Daniel
9:23. Academia.edu. http://www.academia.edu/.
25
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, July 21). The Meaning of Chathak in Daniel 9:24. Academia.edu.
26
Eduard C. Hanganu (2013, December 18). The Year-Day Principle Reexamined.

Academia.edu. http://www.academia.edu/.
27
Eduard C. Hanganu (2013, December 28). The Year-Day Principle Reexamined SHORT.
28
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, March 12). Antiochus IV and Daniels Little Horn Reexamined.
29
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, November 25). Antiochus IV Epiphanes in Cartea lui Daniel.
30
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, December 19). Anaphora Resolution in a Biblical Passage.

II. Historicism in the SDA Perspective

1
Hans K. LaRondelle, The Heart of Historicism, Ministry, September 2005, 22.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Francis D. Nichol, The Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia (Washington, D.C.: Review and
Herald Publishing Association, 1978), Historicism.
6
Merrill C. Tenney, Interpreting Revelation (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1957), pp. 137, 138. Quoted in Neufeld, Don F., Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Students Source Book, (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association) 1962.
George Eldon Ladd, The Blessed Hope (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1956), pp. 3234. Quoted in Neufeld, Don F., Seventh-day Adventist Bible Students
Source Book, (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association) 1962.
8
Albertus Pieters, Studies in the Revelation of St. John (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1950),
pp. 43, 45, 46. Quoted in Neufeld, Don F., Seventh-day Adventist Bible Students Source Book,
(Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association) 1962.
9
William H. Shea, Year-Day Principle Part 1, Daniel and Revelation Committee Series
volume 1: Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation, Revised Edition. Editor Frank B.
Holbrook (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1992), 68-69.
10
William H. Shea, Historicism: The Best Way to Interpret Prophecy, Adventists Affirm
(Spring 2003), 22.
11
Frank B. Holbrook, What Prophecy Means to This Church, Ministry, July 1983, 21.
12
Ibid.
13
Angel Manuel Rodriguez, Issues in the Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation,
14
Desmond Ford, Daniel 8:14, the Day of Atonement, and The Investigative Judgment
(Casselberry, FL: Euangelion Press, 1980), 68.
15
Le Roy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Volume 1 (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1950), 22-23.
16
2000, 44.
17
18
Daniel and Revelation, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 14/2 (Fall 2003), 7-8.
19
Jon Paulien, The End of Historicism? Reflections on the Adventist Approach to Biblical
ApocalypticPart One, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 14/2 (Fall 2003), 15.
20
John Noe, An Exegetical Basis for a Preterist-Idealist Understanding of the Book of

Revelation, JETS, 49/4 (December 2006), 774.
21
Herald Publishing Association,1978), Historicism.
22
Merrill C. Tenney, Interpreting Revelation (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans

Publishing Company, 1957), pp. 137, 138. Quoted in Neufeld, Don F., Seventh-day Adventist
Bible Students Source Book, (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association)
1962.
23
24
25
26
(Spring 2003), 22.
27
28
Ibid.
29
30
31
32
2000, 44.
33
34
35
ApocalypticPart One, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 14/2 (Fall 2003), 15.
36

37
38

1962.
39
40
41
42
(Spring 2003), 22.
43
44
Ibid.
45
46
47
48
2000, 44.
49
50
51
ApocalypticPart One Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 14/2 (Fall 2003), 15.
52

53
54

1962.
55
56
57
58
(Spring 2003), 22.
59
60
Ibid.
61
62
63
64
2000, 44.
65
66
67
ApocalypticPart One Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 14/2 (Fall 2003), 15.
68

III. Traditional Base for SDA Historicism

1
2
2000, 44.
3
Gerhard Pfandl, The Pre-Advent Judgment: Fact or Fiction? (part one), Ministry, December
2003, 22:1.
4
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy (Boise, ID: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1950),
107.
6
Ibid., 122.
8
Hans K. LaRondelle The Heart of Historicism, Ministry, September 2005, 22.
IV. Historical and Non-Historical Events

1
John A. Simpson and Edmund S. C. Weiner (Co-editors), The Oxford English Dictionary,
second edition on CD-ROM (v.4.0) (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009) - history.
2
Ibid.
John J. Anderson, A Manual of General History: Being an Outline History of the World From
the Creation to the Present Time (New York: Clark & Maynard Publishers, 1876), 3.
4
Ibid., 5.
Henry Smith Williams, The Historians History of the World (New York: The History
Association, 1907), 5.
6
John A. Simpson and Edmund S. C. Weiner (Co-editors), The Oxford English Dictionary,
second edition on CD-ROM (v.4.0) (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009) historical.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

14
Holbrook (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1992), 100.
15
Ibid.
16

17
18
L. E. Froom, The Advent Message Built Upon The Foundations of Many Generations, in
Our Firm Foundation, volume II (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association,
1953), 102-103.
V. The Incomplete and Selective Records

1
2
Hans K. LaRondelle The Heart of Historicism, Ministry, September 2005, 22.
Martin Prbstle, Where God and I Meet (Hagerstown, MD: The Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 2013), 104.
4
Francis D. Nichol, The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Washington, DC: Review and
Herald Publishing Association, 1978), Daniel 7.
5
Ibid., Revelation 13:3.
Ibid., Revelation 9.
James A. Paul (2005, October), Empires in World History: Modern Period. Retrieved on
February 18, 2015 from https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/155/25992.html
8
Kevin A. Miller, 100 Most Important Events in Church History Retrieved on February 29,
2015 from https://www.christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/issue/100-most-important-eventsin-church-history/.
9
Global Christian Center, The 10 Most Important Dates in Church History, Retrieved on
February 20, 2015 from http://globalchristiancenter.com/bible-and-theology/academicresearch/24543-the-10-most-important-dates-in-church-history
VI. Historicist Charts and Historic Spans

1
Kai Arasola, The End of Historicism: Millerite Hermeneutic of Time Prophecies in the Old
Testament (Sigtuna: Datem Publishing, 1990), 88-89.
2
Ibid., 94.
The Original 1843 Prophecy Chart Retrieved

http://the2520.com/original_1843_prophecy_chart.htm.
4
on
February
22,
2015
Le Roy Edwin Froom, Historical Data in 1843 Chart, Ministry, May 1942, 23-26.
from
Le Roy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Volume IV (Washington, DC:
6
Earliest Sabbatarian Chart 1850. Retrieved on February

http://pathofthejust.org/the-foundation-of-seventh-day-adventism.
22,
2015
from
8
Ibid., 1075.
Ibid., 1075-1077.
VII. Failed SDA Historicist Predictions

1
Holbrook (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1992), 100.
2
Ibid., 100.

4
5
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy (Boise, Idaho: Pacific Press Publishing Association,
1950), 304-309.
6
Hans K. LaRondelle, The Application of Cosmic Signs in the Adventist Tradition, Ministry,
September 1998, 25-27.
7
Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation (Washington, DC: Review & Herald Publishing Assn.,
1907), 159-160.
8
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy (Boise, Idaho: Pacific Press Publishing Association,
1950), 54-55.
9
Francis D. Nichol, The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Washington, DC: Review and
Herald Publishing Association, 1978), Daniel 7.
10
Samuele Bacchiocchi (2002, August 1) A Reply to Criticism: Part I: The Use of E. G. Whites
Writings in Interpreting Scripture EndTime Issues No. 87. Retrieved on February 23, 2015 from
http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/eti_87.html.
11
Review and Herald, 1954), 855.
12
Ibid.
13
Ibid., 856.
14
Ibid., 840-841.
15
Ibid., 877-884.
16
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy (Boise, ID: Pacific Press Publishing Association,
1950), 409-410.
17
Eduard C. Hanganu (2013, December 18). The Year-Day Principle Reexamined.

18
Francis D. Nichol, The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Washington, DC: Review
and Herald Publishing Association, 1978), Daniel 9:21.
19
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, June 4). Daniel 9 Is Not an Appendix to Daniel 8. Academia.edu.
20
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, June 11). The Referents for Vision in Daniel 9:21 and Daniel
9:23. Academia.edu. http://www.academia.edu/.
21
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, December 19). Anaphora Resolution in a Biblical Passage.

22
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, March 12). Antiochus IV and Daniels Little Horn Reexamined.
23
Eduard C. Hanganu (2014, July 21). The Meaning of Chathak in Daniel 9:24. Academia.edu.
24
Roy E. Gane, Christ at His Sanctuary Toward Adventist-Evangelical Dialogue, Paper

presented at dialogue with World Evangelical Alliance, Andrews University, August 6, 2007, 16.
25
Francis D. Nichol Ed., The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 4 (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1976), CD-ROM version, Additional Note on [Revelation] chapter 9.
26
27
Ibid.
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy (Oakland, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Company,
1888), 334-335.
28
Eric Anderson, The Millerite Use of Prophecy, in Ronald L. Numbers, editor, and Jonathan
M. Butler, contributor, The Disappointed: Millerism Millerarianism (Knoxville: University of
Tennessee Press, 1993), 86-87.
29
Francis D. Nichol Ed., The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 4 (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1976), CD-ROM version, Additional Note on [Revelation] chapter 9.
30
Ibid.
VIII. Diversions That Robbed the Gospel

1
Ibid., 22-23.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid., 25.
Ibid., 26.
Ibid., 26-27.

Adventist Historicism Reexamined and Critiqued Final Draft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adventist Historicism Reexamined and Critiqued Final Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 1

Adventist Historicism Reexamined and Critiqued

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 2

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 3

Jon Paulien ........................................................................................................ 16

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 4

LaRondelle Disputes Whites Claims ..................................................... 51

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 5

Adventist Historicism Reexamined and Critiqued

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 6

The Futurist School

The Idealist School

The Historicist School

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 7

The Four Prophetic Schools Critiqued

The Futurist School

The Idealist School

The Historicist School

Blended Perspectives and Interpretation

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 8

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 9

Present Adventists The Last Historicists

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 10

The Dogmatic and Exclusive Position

Historicism The Failed Hermeneutics

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 11

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 12

II. Historicism in the SDA Perspective

Various Definitions for Historicism

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 13

The SDA Bible Students Source Book

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 14

Angel Manuel Rodrguez

Le Roy Edwin Froom

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 15

The Glacier View Theologians

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 16

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 17

The Historicism Definitions Tabulated

The SDA Bible Students

The SDA Bible Students

Angel Manuel Rodrguez

Le Roy Edwin Froom

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 18

be known as the Historical School of prophetic interpretationthe progressive and

The Glacier View

The Historicism Definitions Itemized

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 19

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 20

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 21

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 22

III. Traditional Base for SDA Historicism

Religious Tradition and Its Dangers

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 23

Historicism Its Theological Roots

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 24

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 25

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 26

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 27

IV. Historical and Non-Historical Events

The scholar also mentions chronologythe event-related time or chronological records

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 28

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 29

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 30