Was Miller a False Prophet/Teacher?

[FaithfulPilgrim]

William Miller was a Baptist preacher who predicted that Christ's Second Coming would occur in the year 1844. Once the day and year arrived, nothing happened, and many people left the Millerite movement, and this event became known as the Great Disappointment.

However, a man by the name of Hiram Edson claimed to have had a vision and said that Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the place. According to Edson, 1844 was not the time of Christ's return, but rather the beginning of the next phase where he moved to the Most Holy Place, where the investigative judgment began. Many Christians, particularly those of the Evangelical variety of Christianity criticize this doctrine as lacking its origins from Scripture and instead invented as a way for the Millerites to save face. Since that time, Adventists have produced work defending the investigative judgment and the sanctuary doctrine purely with Scripture.

William Miller himself admitted he was wrong, but still believed that Christ's return was soon.

Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift? To me, if he was a false teacher or prophet, he seems to have repented from that, and is therefore safe from destruction.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

 

[brinny]

William Miller was a Baptist preacher who predicted that Christ's Second Coming would occur in the year 1844. Once the day and year arrived, nothing happened, and many people left the Millerite movement, and this event became known as the Great Disappointment.

However, a man by the name of Hiram Edson claimed to have had a vision and said that Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the place. According to Edson, 1844 was not the time of Christ's return, but rather the beginning of the next phase where he moved to the Most Holy Place, where the investigative judgment began. Many Christians, particularly those of the Evangelical variety of Christianity criticize this doctrine as lacking its origins from Scripture and instead invented as a way for the Millerites to save face. Since that time, Adventists have produced work defending the investigative judgment and the sanctuary doctrine purely with Scripture.

William Miller himself admitted he was wrong, but still believed that Christ's return was soon.

Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift? To me, if he was a false teacher or prophet, he seems to have repented from that, and is therefore safe from destruction.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

It is written that no one knows the time or date, but that Christ's second coming will be as a thief in the night.

Amen?

 

[disciple1]

William Miller was a Baptist preacher who predicted that Christ's Second Coming would occur in the year 1844. Once the day and year arrived, nothing happened, and many people left the Millerite movement, and this event became known as the Great Disappointment.

However, a man by the name of Hiram Edson claimed to have had a vision and said that Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the place. According to Edson, 1844 was not the time of Christ's return, but rather the beginning of the next phase where he moved to the Most Holy Place, where the investigative judgment began. Many Christians, particularly those of the Evangelical variety of Christianity criticize this doctrine as lacking its origins from Scripture and instead invented as a way for the Millerites to save face. Since that time, Adventists have produced work defending the investigative judgment and the sanctuary doctrine purely with Scripture.

William Miller himself admitted he was wrong, but still believed that Christ's return was soon.

Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift? To me, if he was a false teacher or prophet, he seems to have repented from that, and is therefore safe from destruction.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

predicted that Christ's Second Coming would occur in the year 1844.

That alone says he's a false prophet.

 

[Albion]

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

Others added up the chronology given in the OT and came up with dates similar to Miller's calculations, but although some other Adventist churches still exist, the SDA is the largest by far of the churches still holding onto this belief. Now, however, it's necessary to say that the end started but didn't finish and we didn't recognize it visually. The JWs do much the same thing.

 

[A_Thinker]

William Miller was a Baptist preacher who predicted that Christ's Second Coming would occur in the year 1844. Once the day and year arrived, nothing happened, and many people left the Millerite movement, and this event became known as the Great Disappointment.

However, a man by the name of Hiram Edson claimed to have had a vision and said that Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the place. According to Edson, 1844 was not the time of Christ's return, but rather the beginning of the next phase where he moved to the Most Holy Place, where the investigative judgment began. Many Christians, particularly those of the Evangelical variety of Christianity criticize this doctrine as lacking its origins from Scripture and instead invented as a way for the Millerites to save face. Since that time, Adventists have produced work defending the investigative judgment and the sanctuary doctrine purely with Scripture.

William Miller himself admitted he was wrong, but still believed that Christ's return was soon.

Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift? To me, if he was a false teacher or prophet, he seems to have repented from that, and is therefore safe from destruction.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

We're all prone to error.

That's why, as teachers of the Word, we are to take great care.

Miller admitted his error and repented, I'd presume ...

 

[Albion]

That alone says he's a false prophet.

Would you be a 'false prophet,' technically, if you merely argued that a certain passage in the Bible that we all accept as the word of God meant something other than what was commonly supposed??

 

[Dave-W]

There is always a problem when we try to take scripture and project dates into the future. It never works.

 

[eleos1954]

William Miller was a Baptist preacher who predicted that Christ's Second Coming would occur in the year 1844. Once the day and year arrived, nothing happened, and many people left the Millerite movement, and this event became known as the Great Disappointment.

However, a man by the name of Hiram Edson claimed to have had a vision and said that Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the place. According to Edson, 1844 was not the time of Christ's return, but rather the beginning of the next phase where he moved to the Most Holy Place, where the investigative judgment began. Many Christians, particularly those of the Evangelical variety of Christianity criticize this doctrine as lacking its origins from Scripture and instead invented as a way for the Millerites to save face. Since that time, Adventists have produced work defending the investigative judgment and the sanctuary doctrine purely with Scripture.

William Miller himself admitted he was wrong, but still believed that Christ's return was soon.

Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift? To me, if he was a false teacher or prophet, he seems to have repented from that, and is therefore safe from destruction.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

I follow the Seventh Day Adventitsts teachings, along with many others. A couple of things you mentioned and my understanding of their teachings.

"Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the place"

My understanding here is Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the event." The event .... now representing the start of the investigative judgement, which is unique to Seventh Day Adventists.

"Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? No, even the Apostles themselves misunderstood and needed clarifications "wrong" about Jesus teachings at times. They grew in their understanding.

"Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift?"

Yes, good intentions ..... destruction does not come to people with good or bad intensions. I'm sure he was a repentant man. Like you said, even stated publicly he was wrong.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

They believe in the Bible and Bible only and that the Bible interprets itself. They do include events in history and historical documents, archeology etc. in support of many of their teachings. They are strictly against tradition when a tradition conflicts with biblical teachings of import. Example: It was Daniels custom or tradition to pray 3 times daily.... they would not and do not disagree with that type of a tradition. Now with that they have the writings of Ellen White, but even with that as with any writings or any writer ... the writings must be in harmony with scripture. Some within the Seventh Day Adventist believe Ellen White was a prophet . But who knows about that. I will say writings I've read of hers are very informative. Her writings entirely? ...I don't know, haven't read them all. Prophet? Don't know. She describes herself as a messenger of God. They use her writings .... but so far I haven't seen her "taught specifically" as a prophet.

Seventh Day Adventists are Huge on Jesus and Huge on prophesy.

"William Miller himself admitted he was wrong, but still believed that Christ's return was soon." The definite "wrong" was setting a date for Christ's return ... no one knows but my Father in Heaven.

"Since that time, Adventists have produced work defending the investigative judgment and the sanctuary doctrine purely with Scripture."

These 2 are unique teachings of Seventh Day Adventists. However they are really very interesting.

Throughout history, now and continuing into the future..... "knowledge will increase"
until His 2nd coming ... soon? In relation to eternity? Only God the father knows. Point is He will return ... be ready at any time. ;o)

Great Disappointment - This is a good read. Very extensive.
Great Disappointment - Wikipedia

Also, studying the Reformation and the counter Reformation is very informative as well.

In the end ... people believe what they believe and are free to do so. Agree and disagree and we have conversations sometimes we agree, sometimes not.

Anyway to the best of my understanding to this point. Always best to "go to the horses mouth" so to speak ... so when reading about any faith or belief make sure you are on a site that is "their site" and not someones site that are "interpreting" or giving their opinion of a particular faith or belief. Including myself LOL

God Bless.

 

[Dale]

William Miller was a Baptist preacher who predicted that Christ's Second Coming would occur in the year 1844. Once the day and year arrived, nothing happened, and many people left the Millerite movement, and this event became known as the Great Disappointment.

However, a man by the name of Hiram Edson claimed to have had a vision and said that Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the place. According to Edson, 1844 was not the time of Christ's return, but rather the beginning of the next phase where he moved to the Most Holy Place, where the investigative judgment began. Many Christians, particularly those of the Evangelical variety of Christianity criticize this doctrine as lacking its origins from Scripture and instead invented as a way for the Millerites to save face. Since that time, Adventists have produced work defending the investigative judgment and the sanctuary doctrine purely with Scripture.

William Miller himself admitted he was wrong, but still believed that Christ's return was soon.

Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift? To me, if he was a false teacher or prophet, he seems to have repented from that, and is therefore safe from destruction.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

I am not aware of anyone today who believes that William Miller should be our guide. The problem is that they don't always know when the ideas they have been taught go back to William Miller.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

William Miller was a Baptist preacher who predicted that Christ's Second Coming would occur in the year 1844. Once the day and year arrived, nothing happened, and many people left the Millerite movement, and this event became known as the Great Disappointment.

However, a man by the name of Hiram Edson claimed to have had a vision and said that Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the place. According to Edson, 1844 was not the time of Christ's return, but rather the beginning of the next phase where he moved to the Most Holy Place, where the investigative judgment began. Many Christians, particularly those of the Evangelical variety of Christianity criticize this doctrine as lacking its origins from Scripture and instead invented as a way for the Millerites to save face. Since that time, Adventists have produced work defending the investigative judgment and the sanctuary doctrine purely with Scripture.

William Miller himself admitted he was wrong, but still believed that Christ's return was soon.

Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift? To me, if he was a false teacher or prophet, he seems to have repented from that, and is therefore safe from destruction.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

I do not think He ever claimed to be a prophet, just basing his claim on studying the scriptures, thus in that requard he was a false teacher.

 

[FireDragon76]

"False prophet" is strong language. I would just say these were hyped-up enthusiasts drunk on religion. This religious movement grew on the frontier, theological acumen was low and there was a sense that in a new land, the institutional church norms of the old-line Presbyterians, Baptists, and Methodists must give way to a new religious sentiment driven purely by individual intuitions and pietism, there were burnt-over districts full of dime-a-dozen preachers who confused God with their own hopes and expectations.

 

[bbbbbbb]

There is no doubt at all that Mr. Miller's predictions were erroneous, as were those of his follower, Ellen White.

 

[Bob Crowley]

Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift? To me, if he was a false teacher or prophet, he seems to have repented from that, and is therefore safe from destruction.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

To begin with, I'm Catholic, and although an ex-Protestant, I've never been Seventh Day Adventist either. So no doubt i"m "biased". As a Catholic, I can state we cop a lot of rubbish from some Adventists. Mind you I've met some very sincere Christian Adventists, some of whom do a lot of "good works".

Moreover until you mentioned this bloke William Miller, I'd never heard of him.

To answer the last question first, Miller's prediction had no basis in Scripture, history or tradition. It was purely his personal conjecture, and he was wrong. He's not the first either and he won't be the last.

One of the clearest statements in Scripture is there will be a Second Coming, and equally, no man knows the day or the hour. Christ admitted even He didn't know.

So Miller was in some form deceived.

To get onto the first question about "false prophet", I'm hesitant to call a man who was guilty of misplaced Christian enthusiasm a "false prophet". He made a major blunder, would have copped a lot of criticism and personal embarrassment over it, seems to have repented of his mistake, and has since faded into the woodwork as far as human and Church history is concerned. If other people keep trying to promulgate his error as truth, that's their problem.

I'll leave the judgment to God.

 

[brakelite]

Consider this. It is the early 1800s. For almost 2000 years the teaching of the second coming has been lost and forgotten except for the odd partial inference among some of the reformers. On the whole, the teachings of the second coming have been lost in a sea of error, superstition, and unbelief.
Then on several different continents, without any reference to one another or correspondence, a number of preachers from a variety of faith backgrounds begin to study prophecy, and in particular Daniel. From these studies they all came to the same conclusion. That Christ was returning to the earth soon. Many of them agreed even to the time...sometime around 1840. How did they all arrive at this date, and why would they all agree as to the event then so imminent? Were they really deceived? Or were they all, including Miller, simply relating what God had taught them through His Spirit in order to wake up His sleeping peope and give the church a giant shove forward in order to make them aware of the times and season in which they lived?
God wanted to, needed to give the church time to organise itself into some semblance of order in order to deliver the final messages of hope to mankind before He came in power and glory to take as many home with Him as possible. The only way was a shock tactic. That He hid for a time the real event, the date nevertheless was the real thing. Prophecy unerringly points to October 1844 as a date of significance. That He hid the real event for a time had its effect. Read the history of the great awakening. So what that people were mistaken? It wake them up to eternal realities...it brought the church into a place which resulted in genuine heartfelt intense prayer, Bible study, evangelism, repentance. And it also made the church aware of the times in which we today much better understand as being the end times. After 1844, the adventists set no further times or dates, though they did believe the second coming was going to be in their lifetime. Nothing wrong with that. So did Paul.
Miller never proclaimed himself as a prophet, nor did anyone else. He was just a humble farmer who heeded God's calling upon his life and against great odds, opposition, and persecution, called people to repentance. Just as Wolfe did in the Middle East and in the US...just as others did in Africa, Australia, Europe, and South America. All with God's message..."wake up for I am coming". But for that message, perhaps wrongly attributed to a date that was later better understood, the church today would likely still be slumbering, lifeless, and in a state of worldliness and lethargy. The Great awakening was what the world-wide church desperately needed. And eventually brought to us a greater understanding of Bible prophecy and through a correct interpretation of the event of 1844 an understanding of the ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary and a more deeper appreciation of the atonement and the grace and mercy God has for us.

 

[brakelite]

I think we need to look at the big picture. God allowed a mistake, even deliberately, in order to accomplish a greater purpose. What effect would He have had on a sleeping church if He had brought a message that pronounced His impending arrival in 180 years?

 

[Truth7t7]

I follow the Seventh Day Adventitsts teachings, along with many others. A couple of things you mentioned and my understanding of their teachings.

"Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the place"

My understanding here is Miller was right about the date, but wrong about the event." The event .... now representing the start of the investigative judgement, which is unique to Seventh Day Adventists.

"Was Miller a false teacher or prophet? No, even the Apostles themselves misunderstood and needed clarifications "wrong" about Jesus teachings at times. They grew in their understanding.

"Did he have good intentions or would his destruction have been swift?"

Yes, good intentions ..... destruction does not come to people with good or bad intensions. I'm sure he was a repentant man. Like you said, even stated publicly he was wrong.

Does this Adventist doctrine have any basis in Scripture, history or tradition, or is it a uniquely Adventist invention?

They believe in the Bible and Bible only and that the Bible interprets itself. They do include events in history and historical documents, archeology etc. in support of many of their teachings. They are strictly against tradition when a tradition conflicts with biblical teachings of import. Example: It was Daniels custom or tradition to pray 3 times daily.... they would not and do not disagree with that type of a tradition. Now with that they have the writings of Ellen White, but even with that as with any writings or any writer ... the writings must be in harmony with scripture. Some within the Seventh Day Adventist believe Ellen White was a prophet . But who knows about that. I will say writings I've read of hers are very informative. Her writings entirely? ...I don't know, haven't read them all. Prophet? Don't know. She describes herself as a messenger of God. They use her writings .... but so far I haven't seen her "taught specifically" as a prophet.

Seventh Day Adventists are Huge on Jesus and Huge on prophesy.

"William Miller himself admitted he was wrong, but still believed that Christ's return was soon." The definite "wrong" was setting a date for Christ's return ... no one knows but my Father in Heaven.

"Since that time, Adventists have produced work defending the investigative judgment and the sanctuary doctrine purely with Scripture."

These 2 are unique teachings of Seventh Day Adventists. However they are really very interesting.

Throughout history, now and continuing into the future..... "knowledge will increase"
until His 2nd coming ... soon? In relation to eternity? Only God the father knows. Point is He will return ... be ready at any time. ;o)

Great Disappointment - This is a good read. Very extensive.
Great Disappointment - Wikipedia

Also, studying the Reformation and the counter Reformation is very informative as well.

In the end ... people believe what they believe and are free to do so. Agree and disagree and we have conversations sometimes we agree, sometimes not.

Anyway to the best of my understanding to this point. Always best to "go to the horses mouth" so to speak ... so when reading about any faith or belief make sure you are on a site that is "their site" and not someones site that are "interpreting" or giving their opinion of a particular faith or belief. Including myself LOL

God Bless.

Do you believe "Sunday" observance is the mark of the beast?

 

[Truth7t7]

Consider this. It is the early 1800s. For almost 2000 years the teaching of the second coming has been lost and forgotten except for the odd partial inference among some of the reformers. On the whole, the teachings of the second coming have been lost in a sea of error, superstition, and unbelief.
Then on several different continents, without any reference to one another or correspondence, a number of preachers from a variety of faith backgrounds begin to study prophecy, and in particular Daniel. From these studies they all came to the same conclusion. That Christ was returning to the earth soon. Many of them agreed even to the time...sometime around 1840. How did they all arrive at this date, and why would they all agree as to the event then so imminent? Were they really deceived? Or were they all, including Miller, simply relating what God had taught them through His Spirit in order to wake up His sleeping peope and give the church a giant shove forward in order to make them aware of the times and season in which they lived?
God wanted to, needed to give the church time to organise itself into some semblance of order in order to deliver the final messages of hope to mankind before He came in power and glory to take as many home with Him as possible. The only way was a shock tactic. That He hid for a time the real event, the date nevertheless was the real thing. Prophecy unerringly points to October 1844 as a date of significance. That He hid the real event for a time had its effect. Read the history of the great awakening. So what that people were mistaken? It wake them up to eternal realities...it brought the church into a place which resulted in genuine heartfelt intense prayer, Bible study, evangelism, repentance. And it also made the church aware of the times in which we today much better understand as being the end times. After 1844, the adventists set no further times or dates, though they did believe the second coming was going to be in their lifetime. Nothing wrong with that. So did Paul.
Miller never proclaimed himself as a prophet, nor did anyone else. He was just a humble farmer who heeded God's calling upon his life and against great odds, opposition, and persecution, called people to repentance. Just as Wolfe did in the Middle East and in the US...just as others did in Africa, Australia, Europe, and South America. All with God's message..."wake up for I am coming". But for that message, perhaps wrongly attributed to a date that was later better understood, the church today would likely still be slumbering, lifeless, and in a state of worldliness and lethargy. The Great awakening was what the world-wide church desperately needed. And eventually brought to us a greater understanding of Bible prophecy and through a correct interpretation of the event of 1844 an understanding of the ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary and a more deeper appreciation of the atonement and the grace and mercy God has for us.

Ellen made many false predictions, like at the conference in 1856 below, Jesus didnt return in their life time.

Same false predictions as Miller some 12 years earlier.

EGW: "I was shown the company present at the Conference, Said the angel: "Some food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus." Ellen G. White, 1 Testimonies, p. 131-132. May 27, 1856.

 

[Albion]

Consider this. It is the early 1800s. For almost 2000 years the teaching of the second coming has been lost and forgotten except for the odd partial inference among some of the reformers. On the whole, the teachings of the second coming have been lost in a sea of error, superstition, and unbelief.

This not historically accurate. Therefore, the remedies that you go on to speak of are not meaningful.

Then on several different continents, without any reference to one another or correspondence, a number of preachers from a variety of faith backgrounds begin to study prophecy, and in particular Daniel. From these studies they all came to the same conclusion. That Christ was returning to the earth soon. Many of them agreed even to the time...sometime around 1840. How did they all arrive at this date

Actually, not even Wm Miller settled on one date. He changed his mind several times. But that fact is not the whole of the story. Other people who lived at about the same time as Miller and predicted the return of Christ put the date at approximately 100 years earlier or at 80 years later!

 

[bbbbbbb]

This not historically accurate. Therefore, the remedies that you go on to speak of are not meaningful.

Actually, not even Wm Miller settled on one date. He changed his mind several times. But that fact is not the whole of the story. Other people who lived at about the same time as Miller and predicted the return of Christ put the date at approximately 100 years earlier or at 80 years later!

The basic assertion that eschatology assumed a much higher level of interest in the early nineteenth century is accurate. This was part of the general interest in restoring the Church to its apostolic roots. Miller's sect was really quite tiny in comparison to groups such as the Campbellites (later to become the Churches of Christ, Christian Churches, and Disciples of Christ), The Catholic Apostolic Church (commonly known as Irvingites), the Plymouth Brethren, and the sect founded by Joseph Smith (now the LDS, the RLDS, the FLDS, etc.). None of these primary groups predicted the return of Jesus Christ in the 1840's. Thus, your response to his post is accurate.

 

[Albion]

Right. And Thanks. I chose not to go into all the detail that you did, but it is certainly correct. The 19th century was very lively in many areas, including religious speculation. Much of the latter dealt with the idea, in one way or another, of getting back the ancient church's origins.