Did God give Miller a false message on purpose?

[djconklin]

Jesus coming in 1843 was the message.

Nope, that was only part of the message.

 

[djconklin]

Jesus coming in 1843 was the message.

Nope, that was only part of the message. The message was in two parts: time and event. The message about the time was right. They got the event wrong.

 

[freeindeed2]

You are assuming that God gave the whole msg. You are assuming that EGW is referring to the whole msg.

Yeah. LOL! I wish you could hear what you're saying.

Where's the proof ab't what God does or doesn't do?

God doesn't give false information to test people! If you believe he does then YOU need to provide the proof.

He hid the errors till the time came that they should be known to reveal who really was sincere and who was not. Those who followed the Bible persevered through the test. Those who followed the crowd and hoped, apparently, to coast in, did not keep the faith because they didn't have faith in God to begin with.

Conklin, those who followed the Bible weren't involved with a date-setting scheme in the first place! Their sincerity doesn't amount to being right. They were sincerely wrong! Those that followed the Bible gave many warnings only to be accused of not having faith! And you and others are still trying to defend it to this very day! Why not just admit it was wrong? Miller did!

In CHRIST alone...

 

[moicherie]

Yeah. LOL! I wish you could hear what you're saying.


God doesn't give false information to test people! If you believe he does then YOU need to provide the proof.


Conklin, those who followed the Bible weren't involved with a date-setting scheme in the first place! Their sincerity doesn't amount to being right. They were sincerely wrong! Those that followed the Bible gave many warnings only to be accused of not having faith! And you and others are still trying to defend it to this very day! Why not just admit it was wrong? Miller did!

In CHRIST alone...

He can't. One cannot admit EGW got some things wrong, when one treats her like Adventist Papacy and views inspiration as divine dictation.

 

[Jimlarmore]

Huh?

My term for he event was that it was a false message.

No Ellen didn't call it a lie. Though she did say that God hid an error.

But it clearly was a false message.

So was the way some took what Christ said about the kingdom of God being at hand yet Christ did not shout it from the roof tops that they were mistaken. The message sent from God was not false, what was false was the interpretation of what event was taking place in Oct of 1844. The way the people took it fulfilled the prophecy given in Rev 10:10. This disappointment was designed by God to go down as it did.

Did or did not Jesus come in 1843? No. He did not. So to say that the message was anything but false is dead wrong.

Is it really? Think about what you are saying. To be dead wrong to me implies the whole message was wrong and I am not prepared or willing to accept that. What was dead wrong was the way the message was interpreted in Dan 8:14 not the message. Something happened in Oct 1844 because it was the end of the 2300 day prophecy. We know definitively when the time line started and ended. That part to me is crystal clear. Based on the sanctuarial service and it's relevance to earthly and heavenly truth and Christ's movement thru it we can conclude some things. One of which is the IJ.

It is just not possible to reason around this passage Jim. She said that God tested people on whether they accepted Miller's message.

Miller's message was WRONG and against the Scriptures.

It wasn't just Miller Tall, you need to remember that. God was testing His people world wide on a truth that He sent in scriptures long ago. They didn't all get it right. They needed to go back and re-think the whole thing and look deeper than they had before. There is a lesson in this experience for all of us I think.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[tall73]

Is it really? Think about what you are saying. To be dead wrong to me implies the whole message was wrong and I am not prepared or willing to accept that.

The message was that Jesus was coming in 1843. That message was dead wrong. This is far enough past 1843 that we are safe in saying that now. You might not be prepared to say that. But the rest of us wonder at you and Ellen's unwillingness to admit the extremely obvious.

 

[tall73]

Those who followed the Bible persevered through the test.

Those who followed the Bible's warnings against time-setting?

 

[mva1985]

I believe that God used William Miller as He intended.

 

[freeindeed2]

I believe that God used William Miller as He intended.

God uses all things as he intends.

 

[tall73]

If I said five years ago that Senator Kerry was going to win the whitehouse in '04, and instead he failed at the white house but won his senate seat back, how many would say that I was right in part of my message?

My message was that he would win the white house in '04. It would have been wrong.

The message was Jesus is coming in '43. He did not. The message was wrong.

 

[tall73]

Compare this statement to the later Ellen White statement:


Yet I saw that many of them could not rise above their severe disappointment to possess that degree of zeal and energy which had marked their faith in 1843. {EW 236.1}

Many had their faith damaged by 1843. This was a symptom of time setting according to Ellen herself:

The definite time of our Lord's coming is declared to be beyond
the ken of mortals. Even the angels who minister unto those who shall be
heirs of salvation know not the day nor the hour. "But of that day and hour
knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but My Father only." Because
the times repeatedly set have passed, the world is in a more decided state
of unbelief than before in regard to the near advent of Christ. They look
upon the failures of the time setters with disgust; and because men have been so deceived, they turn from the truth substantiated by the word of God
that the end of all things is at hand. {4T 307.1}
Those who so presumptuously preach definite time, in so doing gratify
the adversary of souls; for they are advancing infidelity rather than
Christianity.

 

[mva1985]

If I said five years ago that Senator Kerry was going to win the whitehouse in '04, and instead he failed at the white house but won his senate seat back, how many would say that I was right in part of my message?

My message was that he would win the white house in '04. It would have been wrong.

The message was Jesus is coming in '43. He did not. The message was wrong.

Sorry Tall I haven't read the whole thread, but you don't buy into the whole mathematical error with there being no zero year?

 

[mva1985]

This may have been pointed out already but it was the Millerite movement that set a time not the Adventist Church.

 

[tall73]

Sorry Tall I haven't read the whole thread, but you don't buy into the whole mathematical error with there being no zero year?

MVA...she said God was behind the preaching of Jesus coming in 1843. She also believed He was behind the preaching of Jesus coming in 1844.

The issue is that both were false messages. And she claims God TESTED people on those messages, though some she openly admits confronted their false message with Scripture.

 

[tall73]

This may have been pointed out already but it was the Millerite movement that set a time not the Adventist Church.

You need to read the thread.

Ellen said that the message was from HEAVEN.

And this was after the fact.

 

[tall73]

They produce Scripture and by false interpretation show a
chain of argument which apparently proves their position. But their failures
show that they are false prophets, that they do not rightly interpret the
language of inspiration. The word of God is truth and verity, but men have
perverted its meaning. These errors have brought the truth of God for these
last days into disrepute.
Testimonies vol 4, pg 307


If only Ellen would have said this to Miller.

His chain of argument was proven wrong by the failure of the event and the clear words of Scripture that no man knows the day or hour.

 

[Jimlarmore]

The message was that Jesus was coming in 1843. That message was dead wrong. This is far enough past 1843 that we are safe in saying that now. You might not be prepared to say that. But the rest of us wonder at you and Ellen's unwillingness to admit the extremely obvious.

No, the message in Dan 8:14 was that the sanctuary would be cleansed or set right depending on what defintion of the operative word you want to use. We know this happened in 1844. Their false interpretation of what "cleansed" or set right meant was what was wrong. They obviously thought that "cleansed" meant the cleansing of the earthly sanctuary by fire at the second advent. We know now they were wrong, however they were not wrong on the date. The setting of the dates were in line with the day of atonement in the sanctuary in heaven and specific time points which can be confirmed in history.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[Jimlarmore]

The message was that Jesus was coming in 1843. That message was dead wrong. This is far enough past 1843 that we are safe in saying that now. You might not be prepared to say that. But the rest of us wonder at you and Ellen's unwillingness to admit the extremely obvious.

NO, the message under contention here was from Dan 8:14. That message was that the sanctuary would be "cleansed" or set right. Depending on which definition of the operative word you want to accept you can directly apply it to the day of atonement ceremony.

It was their INTERPRETATION of this message that was wrong. Just as some misinterpreted what Christ said about the kingdom of God being at hand back in Christ's day those who lived in the 19th century took what it said and made it say what they wanted it to say so they could believe what they wanted to believe. I believe God allows us to misinterpret the Bible at times to make us dig deeper into what He was trying to tell us all along.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[tall73]

NO, the message under contention here was from Dan 8:14. That message was that the sanctuary would be "cleansed" or set right. Depending on which definition of the operative word you want to accept you can directly apply it to the day of atonement ceremony.

It was their INTERPRETATION of this message that was wrong. Just as some misinterpreted what Christ said about the kingdom of God being at hand back in Christ's day those who lived in the 19th century took what it said and made it say what they wanted it to say so they could believe what they wanted to believe. I believe God allows us to misinterpret the Bible at times to make us dig deeper into what He was trying to tell us all along.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

Your logic here has two problems:

1. What message did Miller actually give? He gave the message that Jesus was coming in 1843. People were tested, according to Ellen, on their reception of Miller's actual message, not the later Adventist revision.

It was specifically the time-setting that folks rejected. Why? Because the Bible says NOT to predict the timing of Jesus COMING. It was the part that involved Jesus coming that caused them to reject it in the first place. They were 100 percent right in rejecting the message that Jesus' coming could be set to a time.

Now if they were 100 percent right to reject that notion then why would God punish them for following what the Bible says?



2. Ellen said God was behind the preaching of time in 1843. That was not even the right year.

I saw that God was in the proclamation of the time in 1843. It was His design to arouse the people and bring them to a testing point, where they should decide for or against the truth.

So BOTH elements of that message were wrong. Both the time and the event were wrong. There was nothing right about it. But Ellen says God was angry with those who rejected this false message.

 

[Jimlarmore]

Your logic here has two problems:

1. What message did Miller actually give? He gave the message that Jesus was coming in 1843. People were tested, according to Ellen, on their reception of Miller's actual message, not the later Adventist revision.

It was specifically the time-setting that folks rejected. Why? Because the Bible says NOT to predict the timing of Jesus COMING. It was the part that involved Jesus coming that caused them to reject it in the first place. They were 100 percent right in rejecting the message that Jesus' coming could be set to a time.

Now if they were 100 percent right to reject that notion then why would God punish them for following what the Bible says?

Most of them only rejected it after the fact. Thousands accepted the misinterpreted message going even so far as to sell land or property to get ready for the second advent.

Punish them for following the Bible? I don't think so, the Bible has many examples of disappointments where God fully allowed the faithful to believe what they wanted to from scripture and were wrong. The disciples are a prime example where they thought and wanted to believe that Christ should be set up as king over Israel. This disappointment was an ongoing delusion on their part that went right up to the time He ascended back to the Father.

2. Ellen said God was behind the preaching of time in 1843. That was not even the right year.

I saw that God was in the proclamation of the time in 1843. It was His design to arouse the people and bring them to a testing point, where they should decide for or against the truth.

So BOTH elements of that message were wrong. Both the time and the event were wrong. There was nothing right about it. But Ellen says God was angry with those who rejected this false message.

Fully God was in the time of 1843 as it is clearly pointed out in Dan 8:14 to be the end point of the 2300 days. And yes that part of the message was fully right. What you don't see her saying here is that God said He would come back in 1843-44. That is where the misinterpretation comes in and the great disappointment eventually happened. She may have initially been caught up in this misinterpretation but eventually the real truth came out after a lot of soul and scriptural searching. The little book was being eaten at this point and the experience of the bitter belly was being fulfilled.

God Bless
Jim Larmore