Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Ellen White Comments on October 22, 1844

Ellen White Comments on October 22, 1844

Ratings: (0)|Views: 74|Likes:
Published by frankllyfrank
Statements and writings from actual witnesses who were part of the Seventh Month Movement place no doubt in my mind of the validity of the Kairite reckoning as it relates to October 22, as the literal Day of Atonement in 1844, but a question has been put forward, “what sayeth Sister White”?
Statements and writings from actual witnesses who were part of the Seventh Month Movement place no doubt in my mind of the validity of the Kairite reckoning as it relates to October 22, as the literal Day of Atonement in 1844, but a question has been put forward, “what sayeth Sister White”?

More info:

Published by: frankllyfrank on Sep 05, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/06/2012

pdf

text

original

 
Ellen White Comments on October 22, 1844
by Frank Klin
 
Today more and more people are rediscovering what the early Millerite and Adventist
believers began to understand through Scripture study, that following Jesus’ literal
movements in the literal heavenly sanctuary through its literal cycle of services andappointments is the key that unlocks past and future prophetic waymarks. There areothers, even some Adventists, who have challenged the validity of this understandingespecially as it relates to October 22, 1844 and the Day of Atonement. The question is
raised, “did Jesus lit
erally move into His Most Holy Place ministry on the literal Day of 
 Atonement in 1844?”
 We realize the Millerites had an incorrect understanding of the event associated with theend of the 2300 day prophecy. Voices that have discounted the specific date entirelyare saying that because the event was wrong, so is the date. It is inferred that God waswilling to allow this fault among the Millerites because truth is gradual, and since theydid not even keep Sabbath at the time, how could they be accurate about the date of the Day of Atonement or the actual end of the 2300 day prophecy?Would Jesus allow himself to enter into the Most Holy on a date chosen by man if theKairite reckoning of when a month begins, and October 22 was not actually the Day of  Atonement in 1844? Does the day and year even matter as long as we get the eventright? These are valid and important questions. Our answer to these questions could besignificant as it relates to the truth we hold dear of the literal Father and Son, our understanding of prophecy, its relation to the rules of interpretation, and how wedetermine the new moon with the appointed times.In the study I prepared,The Seventh Month Movement and Validity of October 22,1844,there are links to statements and writings from actual witnesses who were part of the Seventh Month Movement that places no doubt in my mind of the validity of theKairite reckoning as it relates to October 22, 1844, but a question has been put forward,
“what sayeth Sister White”?
 Searching her writings on CD Rom
I could not find “October 22, 1844”
mentionedspecifically. Putting various combinations in the search engine I did discover shementions the date specifically in another way. That statement is included along withothers that help identify whether Sister White thought the year 1844 and the actual dateof October 22 was valid for the Day, or if she simply believed the Day of Atonementitself was merely the event of importance, not the date.
Of all the great religious movements since the days of the apostles, none havebeen more free from human imperfection and the wiles of Satan than was that ofthe autumn of 1844.
Even now, after the lapse of nearly half a century, all who shared
 
in that movement and who have stood firm upon the platform of truth, still feel the holy
influence of that blessed work, and bear witness that it was of God.” {GC88 401.1}
 
 As the priest entered the most holy once a year to cleanse the earthly sanctuary, soJesus entered the most holy of the heavenly, at the end of the 2300 days of Daniel 8, in1844, to make a final atonement for all who could be benefited by His mediation, andthus to cleanse the sanctuary.
{EW 253.1}
The tenth day of the seventh month, the great day of atonement, the time of thecleansing of the sanctuary, which in the year 1844 fell upon the 22d of October
,
was regarded as the time of the Lord's coming
. This was in harmony with the proofsalready presented that the 2300 days would terminate in the autumn, and theconclusion seemed irresistible.
{GC88 399.3}
The preaching of a definite time for the Judgment, in the giving of the first message,was ordered of God.
The computation of the prophetic periods on which thatmessage was based, placing the close of the 2300 days in the autumn of 1844,stands without impeachment.
The repeated efforts to find new dates for the beginningand close of the prophetic periods, and the unsound reasoning necessary to sustainthese positions, not only lead minds away from the present truth, but throw contemptupon all efforts to explain the prophecies.
{GC88 456.2}
The mistake had not been in the reckoning of the prophetic periods
, but in theevent to take place at the end of the 2300 days. Through this error the believers hadsuffered disappointment, yet all that was foretold by the prophecy, and all that they hadany Scripture warrant to expect, had been accomplished. At the very time when theywere lamenting the failure of their hopes, the event had taken place which was foretoldby the message, and which must be fulfilled before the Lord could appear to givereward to his servants.
{GC88 423.2}
Many rashly cut the knot of difficulty by denying that the 2300 days ended in 1844. Noreason could be given for this, except that Christ had not come at the time theyexpected him. They argued that if the prophetic days had ended in 1844, Christ wouldthen 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… {GC88 409.2}
 
To deny that the days ended at that time was to involve the whole question inconfusion, and to renounce positions which had been established by unmistakablefulfillments of prophecy.
{GC88 409.3}
Though many abandoned their former reckoning of the prophetic periods, anddenied the correctness of the movement based thereon, others were unwilling torenounce points of faith and experience that were sustained by the Scriptures

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->