Gluder Quispe. 2013. Apocalipsis PDF

A E
THE
POCALYPS
IN SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST
INTERPRETATION
Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por

SHEKINAH BOOKS
Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS
Gluder Quispe

Edited and Printed in:
Peruvian Union University (Universidad Peruana Union)
In its Application Center Editorial Imprenta Union
Km 19 Carretera Central, Ñaña, Lima – Peru
Phones: (01) 618-6300 – 618-6301 Fax: (01) 618-6339- 618-6354
The Apocalypse In Seventh-Day Adventist Interpretation: Three Emphases

Gluder Quispe
______________________________________________________________
Senior Executives:
Maximina Contreras Castro, rector
Víctor Choroco Cárdenas, vice rector
Walter Murillo Antón, general manager
Barito Lazo Rivera, director of student welfare
Editorial Board:
Maximina Contreras Castro
Dónald Jaimes Zubieta
Nidia Montalvo Cárdenas
María Vallejos Atalaya
José Alomía Lozano
______________________________________________________________
Ediciones Universidad Peruana Unión

Chief editor: Dónald Jaimes Zubieta
Associate Editor: Nidia Montalvo Cárdenas
Cover Design: N. Ander Sánchez Aguinaga
Layout: Joel Iparraguirre Maguiña / Doris Sudario Sobrado
Copyright® Gluder Quispe

First Edition: 1000 copies
ISBN: 978-9972-604-28-7
JOB 16326-13
e-mail: preprensa@imprentaunion.com
Legal Deposit made in the National Library of Peru N.° 2013-11599
Printed in Peru
August, 2013

Dedicated to
Silvana,
Yerling, and Harley

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES.........................................................................................................................xi
LIST OF ABBREVATIONS.......................................................................................................xii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT...........................................................................................................xiv
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................1
Three Periods of SDA Interpretation of Apocalypse................................ .2

The Thought on the Revelation Period (1862-1944)..............................2
A Brief Historical Development of Thought
on the Revelation.................................................................................... .3
Factors of Sucess.....................................................................................5
The Sevent-day Adventist Bible Commentary Period
(1944-1970).............................................................................................10
A Brief Historical of the SDA Commentary Period
(1944-1970).......................................................................................10
Factors of Success of the SDA Commentary on
Revelation........................................................................................12
The Multiple Emphases Period (1970- )..............................................14
A Brief Historical Development of Multipled
Emphases Period...........................................................................14
Factors of Diffusion During the Multiple
Emphases Period...........................................................................16
Background of the Problem.............................................................................18
Statement of the Problem................................................................................18
Review of Previous Research...........................................................................19
Purpose and Justification of the Study........................................................20
Scope and Delimitations...................................................................................21
Methodology.........................................................................................................21
2. BIBLICAL-HISTORICAL EMPHASIS.......................................................................47
Background: Millerite and Sabbatarian Adventist View
on Revelation (1832-1862).........................................................................47
Millerite Treament of the Revelation.....................................................47
Principles of Prophecy Interpretation...........................................49

Interpretation of the Trumpets........................................................51
William Miller...................................................................................51
Josiah Litch......................................................................................53
Interpretation of Revelation 12.......................................................55
William Miller...................................................................................55
Josiah Litch......................................................................................57
Sabbatarian Adventist Treatment of the Revelation........................58
Summary..........................................................................................................61
Smith’s Thoughts on the Revelation................................................................62
Principles of Prophecy Interpretation...................................................63
Interpretation of the Trumpets................................................................64
Interpretation of Revelation 12...............................................................65
The Aftermath of Smith’s Boook (1093-1944)...........................................66
Principles of Prophecy Interpretation...................................................66
Interpretation of the Trumpets................................................................68
Interpretation of Revelation 12...............................................................69
Summary..........................................................................................................70
SDA Church’s Definition of Historicism........................................................71
Biblical-Historical Emphasis.............................................................................72
Maxwell’s Place in Adventist History............................................................72
Lectures and Presentations.......................................................................73
God Cares on Revelation.............................................................................75
Content of God Cares Volume 2......................................................75
Literary Structure of the Apocalypse in God Cares...................76
Maxwell’s Definition of Historicism........................................................78
Principle of Prophetic Interpretation............................................79
Analysis of Maxwell’s Interpretation..............................................81
Interpretation of the Trumpets.................................................81
Interpretation of Revelation 12................................................84
Other Expositors on Biblical-Historical Emphasis....................................86
Alberto R. Treiyer...........................................................................................86
Tendencies of Biblical-Historical Emphasis................................................93
Summary and Assessment...............................................................................94
3. BIBLICAL-THEOLOGICAL EMPHASIS................................................................133

Background of the Biblical-Theological Period
(1944-1970)...................................................................................................133
The Role of Luis F. Were............................................................................134
Principles of Prophecy Interpretation........................................136
Five Major Commentaries, 1949-1953................................................138
Interpretation of the Trumpets.....................................................141
Interpretation of Revelation 12....................................................143
The Bible Conference of 1952...............................................................145
Committee for Biblical Study and Research.....................................147
The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary.........................................147
Principles of Prophecy Interpretation.................................................149
Interpretation of the Trumpets...............................................................149
Interpretation of Revelation 12.............................................................150
Summary...............................................................................................................150
SDA Church’s Definition of Historicism.......................................................150
Biblical-Theological Emphasis......................................................................153
LaRondelle’s Place in Adventist History......................................................153
LaRondelle’s Lectures and Presentations...........................................156
How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the Bible................156
Content of How to Understand the
End-Time Prophecies....................................................................157
Literary Structure of the Apocalypse in How to
Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the Bible................158
LaRondelle’s Definition of Historicism..................................................159
Principles of Prophecy Interpretation..........................................160
Analysis of LaRondelle’s Interpretation.......................................161
Interpretation of the Trumpets................................................161
Interpretation of Revelation 12..............................................163
Other Expositors on Biblical-Theological Emphasis..............................165
Roy C. Naden.................................................................................................165
Principles of Prophetic Interpretation.........................................166
Interpretation of the Trumpets.......................................................166
Interpretation of Revelation 12.....................................................168
Tendencies of Biblical-Theological Emphasis...........................................168
Summary and Evaluation................................................................................169
4. BIBLICAL-EXEGETICAL EMPHASIS....................................................................199
Background: Content of the Multiple Emphases Period

(1970- ).........................................................................................................199

The Role of Kenneth A. Strand...............................................................200
Principles of Prophetic Interpretation........................................201
Interpretation of the Trumpets......................................................202
The 1974 Bible Conference......................................................................203
Four Significants Commentaries, 1970-1985....................................204
Principles of Prophetic Interpretation.........................................205
Daniel and Revelation Committee........................................................208
Principles of Prophetic Interpretation........................................209
Major Meetings on Revelation (1992-2013).....................................211
Summary.......................................................................................................211
SDA Church’s Definition of Historicism.....................................................212
Biblical-Exegetical Emphasis.........................................................................215
Paulien’s Place in Adventist History............................................................217
Paulien’s Lectures and Presentations..................................................219
Paulien on Revelation...............................................................................220
Content of His Publications on Revelation...............................221
Literary Structure of the Apocalypse..........................................222
Paulien’s Definition of Historicism.......................................................222
Other Expositors on Biblical-Exegetical Emphasis................................226
Ranko Stefanovič........................................................................................226
Tendencies of Biblical-Exegetical Emphasis............................................229
Summary and Assessment.............................................................................230
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................263
General Summary.............................................................................................263
General Conclusions........................................................................................266
Suggestions for Posible Improvement......................................................272
BIBLIOGRAPHY.............................................................................................................277

LIST OF TABLES
1. Editions of Thoughts on the Revelation................................................................... 4
2. Miller’s and Litch’s Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets.............................. 56
3. Comparison of the Literary Structure of the Apocalypse

between Maxwell and Strand.................................................................................. 78
4. Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets according to

Biblical-Historical Emphasis...................................................................................... 98
5. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to Biblical-Historical

Emphasis.......................................................................................................................... 99
6. Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets according to Five Writers.............. 144
7. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to Five Writers........................... 145

Biblical-Theological Emphasis................................................................................ 173
9. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to Biblical-Theological

Emphasis....................................................................................................................... 174
10. The Structure of the Apocalypse accoding to Jon Paulien......................... 222

Biblical-Exegetical Emphasis.................................................................................. 234
12. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to

Biblical-Exegetical Emphasis.................................................................................. 235
13. Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets in Major Adventist

Commentaries............................................................................................................. 269
14. Interpretation of Revelation 12 in Major Adventist

Commentaries............................................................................................................. 270

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AH Advent Herald
AHer Adventist Heritage
AMs Autograph manuscript
AASS Asia Adventist Seminary Studies
ASC Advent Source Collection, an archival category in the Center for

Adventist Research, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI, USA
AIIAS Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies
AR Adventist Review
AU Andrews University
AUSS Andrews University Seminary Studies
BRI Biblical Research Institute
CAR Center for Adventist Research, James White Library, Andrews

University, Berrien Springs, MI, USA
chap. chapter
EGWE-GC Ellen G. White Estate, General Conference of Seventh-day

Adventists, Silver Spring, MD, USA
EGWE-LLU Ellen G. White Estate Branch Office, Loma Linda University, Loma
Linda, CA, USA
GCA Office of Archives and Statistics, General Conference of Seventh-

day Adventists, Silver Spring, MD, USA
Fld Folder
GCB General Conference Bulletin

JATS Journal of the Adventist Theological Society
JWL James White Library, Andrews University, USA
LUH Lake Union Herald
MC The Midnight Cry
Min Ministry
MS Manuscript
NIV New International Version
RH Review and Herald or Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald or

Advent Review and Sabbath Herald
RSV Revised Standard Version
SDA Seventh-day Adventist
SDABC Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary
SDATS-AU Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University
ST-M Signs of the Times: of the Second Coming of Christ or and Expositor
of Prophecy (Millerite)
ST-SDA Signs of the Times (Seventh-day Adventist)
v. verse
vv. verses
WMC Western Midnight Cry
YI Youth’s Instructor

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
No project of any kind is possible without contributions from many

corners. In this case, the list is headed by God, then by my own family. I have
been blessed to have had significant input, support, and encouragement
from my wife, Silvana, my daughter, Yerling, and my son, Harley.
My sincere gratitude to the members of my committee: they have
been interested and enthralled in the completing of this dissertation. Many
times, we sat down together as a team to build this project. Dr. Jerry Moon,
who supervised, guided, and edited this dissertation, was a chairman of
much inspiration for me. Dr. Denis Fortin and Dr. Thomas Shepherd both
offered me valuable suggestions. Dr. Alberto Timm, the external examiner,
also provided some suggestions.
I also express my thanks to the administration of the Peruvian Union
University, North Peruvian Union, South America Division, and General
Conference for the scholarship awarded to me, without which this research
would have been impossible.
I want to thank also the staff of the Center for Adventist Research
(CAR), headed by Dr. Merlin Burt. The CAR was my second home during
my stay at Andrews University. All the staff were as my second family, offe-
ring always their friendship.

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
S
ince its Millerite origins in the 1840s, the Seventh-day Adventist
(SDA) Church has focused with special interest on the book of
Revelation.1 Not only has it emphasized the last book of the Bible,
but it has also linked it to the book of Daniel. Thus the symbols and time
periods of Daniel and Revelation are “tied inseparably together.”2 Adventist
theologian Richard Lehmann points out, “It is traditional procedure among
Seventh-day Adventists to analyze both books according to their mutual
relationship.”3 The interpretation of the Apocalypse4 has furnished the core
of Adventist identity and mission in the world.5
Throughout history, to Christians under persecution, the
Apocalypse has been a source of encouragement, hope, and comfort. This
book outlines the great conflict between the true church and the false in the
entire Christian Era. The climax of the Apocalypse is that Jesus Christ will
eventually triumph over His enemy and live with His people forever.
Ellen G. White (1827-1915), who, together with Joseph Bates and
James White, has been regarded as one of the founders of Adventism, is still,
through her writings, an authoritative voice among Seventh-day Adventists.
Commenting on the subject of Daniel and Revelation in 1902, she declared
that “there is a need of much closer study of the word of God; especially
should Daniel and the Revelation have attention as never before in the
history of our work.”6 Referring just to the last book of the Bible, she added,
“The book of Revelation opens with an injunction to us to understand the
instruction that it contains. But we do not understand fully the lessons that
1
Introduction
it teaches notwithstanding the injunction we have to search and study it.”7

She went on to say, “In the Revelation all the books of the Bible meet and
end.”8 Regarding the results of a true study of the Apocalypse, White stated
that one thing will certainly be understood–“That the connection between
God and His people is close and decided.”9
THREE PERIODS OF SDA INTERPRETATION OF APOCALYPSE
I suggest that the history of the Seventh-day Adventist interpretation

of the book of Revelation may be divided into three periods: (1) the
Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation period (1862-1944); (2) the Seventh-
day Adventist Bible Commentary period (1944-1970); and (3) the multiple
emphases period (1970- ).
The denomination has always held that the time periods found in
Daniel and Revelation have already been fulfilled throughout history. That
is to say, Adventists in all three periods have used the historical method for
the interpretation of the Apocalypse.10 Thus, in the following section, an
overview of each period will be portrayed with emphasis on the relevant
Revelation commentaries of each period from 1862 to the present.11
The Thoughts on the Revelation Period (1862-1944)12
Nowadays better known as simply Daniel and Revelation, Uriah

Smith’s classic has remained in print for one and a half centuries, becoming
regarded as one of the greatest books,13 except those by Ellen White, that
“Adventists have ever published.”14 Thoughts on the Revelation, its first title,
was the first Seventh-day Adventist verse-by-verse commentary on the
Apocalypse. A brief history of this book prepares the way for a description
of the factors in its success.
2
The Apocalypse in Seventh-day Adventist Interpretation
A Brief Historical Development of

Thoughts on the Revelation
The well-known commentary, Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation,

was repeatedly revised for almost eight decades until it reached its present
form. At the beginning, it was two separate books Thoughts, Critical and
Practical, on the Revelation (1867) and Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on
Daniel (1872). Thoughts on the Revelation first appeared in the Review as
editorials in a twenty-three-part series, between June 3, 1862, and February
3, 1863. However, its origin pre-dated the series in 1862.15 Uriah Smith was
the teacher of a Sabbath school class in the Battle Creek church. After
completing a study of the entire book of Revelation, the class decided to
restudy the book that they had chosen, because it was so spiritually uplifting.
Starting on May 17, 1862, they studied the Apocalypse “free from the spirit of
debate, all coming to the same conclusion on almost every point.”16
One of the members, James White, then proposed to follow the
class study in his editorials under the title “Thoughts on Revelation.” “The
class agreed to study something else if he found it necessary to be away
on any Sabbath.”17 White wrote for just two months until chapter 9 before
his editorials were interrupted by travel.18 After one month of silence in
the Review, Smith resumed the series from Rev 10 on, and completed it on
February 3, 1863.19
“Thoughts on Revelation was written in 1865 for publication in book
form, and was evidently issued in 1867.”20 In April 1867, Smith announced,
through the Review, that Thoughts on the Revelation (330 pages) “is now all
in the hands of the printer,” and would sell for $1.00 clothbound.21 A month
later, it was “completed and ready for orders.”22 This first edition was followed
by others until, ultimately, it was combined with Thoughts on Daniel. Thus,
it may be outlined as shown in table 1.
3
Introduction
Table 1. Editions of Thoughts on the Revelation
Thoughts on the Revelation Daniel and Revelation
1865 [1867] – 1st edition 1881 – 1st edition

1875 – 2nd edition revised 1884 – printed once
1881, – 3rd edition revised and enlarged 1885 – printed twice
1885 – printed from 3rd edition 1887 – printed twice, so far six printings,
1897 – published separately as part II of but no revisions.
Daniel and Revelation 1888 – British edition
1899 – as part II 1889 – printed twice
1903 – as part II 1890 –
1904 – as part II 1891 –
1912 – as part II 1897 – new title, printed twice
1901, 1903, 1906, 1912, 1921, etc.
1941 – new edition revised and
annotated
1944 – last revised edition, which is still
being published.ª
ªFor example, Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation (Hagerstown, MD: Review and
Herald, 2005).
This table shows that Thoughts on the Revelation was not only
revised repeatedly, but became the all-time best-selling books on the
Apocalypse in the Adventist denomination.23 A decade before the last
revised edition in 1944, the Southern Publishing Association appointed
Elder J. E. Shultz, sometime book editor, S. G. Haugher, a research worker
for the editorial department, and Mary H. Moore to be a committee to plan
the revision.24 The result of this committee was the publication of a 5,000-
copy special edition in 1944 with the new title The Prophecies of Daniel and
the Revelation.25
The revision and republishing of this book, however, had already
been considered by the Executive Committee of the General Conference.26
The appointed committee worked from the end of 1940 through 1944, and
the outcome was a new edition with the same title that Southern had given
to the book. This was a cooperative work among three major Adventist
publishers, Review and Herald, Pacific Press, and Southern.
4
The committee brought “the facts, statistics, and quotations of

D&R up to date, without materially altering the prophetic exposition of
the author of the volume.” Thus Smith’s interpretative views of prophecy
were “respected and retained in his own book.”27 Moreover, LeRoy E. Froom
declares,
But where the author’s variant personal theological views on

certain points appeared−such as his Arian concept of the
nature of Christ−these had been eliminated because they
were (1) not an interpretation of prophecy, and (2) were in
conflict with our accepted statement of “Fundamental Beliefs”
of 1931, and its extension in the uniform Baptism Certificate of
1941. But most serious of all, they were (3) still in direct conflict
with numerous statements in the Spirit of Prophecy writings
that were clearly on record in periodical and article and book
form.28
To sum up, Thoughts on the Revelation began with a Sabbath school

class in Battle Creek, Michigan, in 1862, before the Adventist Church
was organized. After its first publication in 1867, many other revised and
enlarged editions were published until 1944.
Factors of Success
At least six major factors led to its being regarded as an almost

official interpretation of the Apocalypse among Adventists. Apparently, the
most important factor in the widespread use of Thoughts on Daniel and the
Revelation was that the earlier editions, which had been recommended by
Ellen G. White, were considered as a significant and opportune commentary
for the world. In 1899, when some people were tempted to cease producing
the book, White urged that “the interest in Daniel and the Revelation [D&R]
is to continue as long as probationary time shall last. God used the author of
this book as a channel through which to communicate light to direct minds
to the truth.”29
In addition to this statement, from her pen the same year came the
5
Introduction
claim that Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation, along with The Great
Controversy and Patriarchs and Prophets, “contain the very message the
people must have, the special light God had given His people.” And then
she added, “The angels of God would prepare the way for these books in the
hearts of the people.”30 Earlier she had declared that Thoughts on Daniel and
the Revelation “should go everywhere. It has its place and will do a grand,
good work.”31
After the death of Uriah Smith, the commentary’s author, White
continued urging the publication not only of D&R, but also two of her
books:
Instruction has been given me that the important books

containing the light that God has given regarding Satan’s
apostasy in heaven should be given a wide circulation just now;
for through them the truth will reach many minds. Patriarchs
and Prophets, Daniel and the Revelation, and The Great
Controversy, are needed now as never before. They should
be widely circulated because the truths they emphasize will
open many blind eyes.32
Another factor in spreading the book Daniel and Revelation was

that its author, Uriah Smith (1832-1903), was an influential thought leader
in the Adventist Church during his lifetime and for almost half a century
thereafter.33 With a service record of some fifty years,34 Smith was called the
“prophetic pathfinder,”35 the “champion of the Advent cause,”36 “the senior
editor,” “the chief weapon in the arsenal of Seventh-day Adventist exegesis,”37
and other complimentary appellations. The first secretary of the Adventist
General Conference and later the first teacher of biblical exegesis at Battle
Creek College, Smith was considered the dean of prophetic interpreters in
Seventh-day Adventist circles.38 Recognized more for his skilled pen than
for the spoken word, Smith edited the Review for a longer time than anyone
else in the history of the Adventist Church.39 He wrote nearly twenty books40
and his most enduring work, the monumental Daniel and Revelation, has
had a decisive influence on SDA prophetic interpretation.41
6
In 1881, George King, who was a skilled salesman rather than an

excellent preacher, proposed to the SDA leaders that they prepare a combined
edition of Smith’s books on Daniel and Revelation in a single volume. The
next year, on March 28, George I. Butler, who was then president of the
General Conference, announced in the Review that this 840-page volume
would come off the press with some additional illustrations and a portrait of
the author, “bound in attractive shape,” “printed on good paper,” “designated
specially for canvassing,” and expecting to reach the general public.42 That
year, they aimed to sell between ten and fifteen thousand.43 Even though the
cover of the 1901 edition claimed it was translated “in five languages–150th
thousand,” it is not possible to ascertain the exact number sold because
in “the destruction of the Review building by fire in 1902, records of sales
were lost.”44 By the mid-twentieth century, Daniel and Revelation had been
translated into many languages, and remained one of the best-selling books
by Adventist publishers.
The fourth element in the diffusion of this book was the support
of pioneer leaders. James White and others agreed that Smith would write
the first commentary on the Apocalypse in the newly organized SDA
Church in the 1860s.45 Moreover, Smith himself would be open to receive
suggestions for any part of the book.46 In 1886, 1887, and 1888, a group of
leaders, including one of E. G. White’s sons, W. C. White, asked Smith to
correct some errors that had become controversial in the otherwise “most
excellent book,” Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation. After defending
“very ably the positions taken in the book,” Uriah Smith, “a very kind and
reasonable man,” was “willing to make corrections when errors were made
plain.” Others, Smith’s friends and advisers, however, took “a very strong
position against making any corrections.”47
The fifth factor in spreading the book D&R was the “Missionary
Reading Circle” plan, whose objective was “to fit the [SDA] members for
active service in the cause of God.” Daniel and Revelation was the text used
in this arrangement.48 With an interruption in the summer of 1900, “Berean
7
Introduction
Library Study,” as the lessons were called, began at the end of November
1899, and finished in May 1901, with a total of fifty-eight lessons. The twenty-
three lessons on Daniel did not have interruption, but on Revelation had an
interlude with a study of the mission work of the church in order to involve
members of the small groups in missionary work. The lessons on Revelation
included an appropriate introduction written by Stephen N. Haskell (1833-
1922), an evangelist and administrator, with a daily reading suggestion,
verses from Revelation, and pages to read from Daniel and Revelation. The
positive effects and achievement of this plan were reported by the Review,
not only in the United States, but also in other countries.49
A final factor was that, from the late nineteenth to the mid-twentieth
century, a letter by Augustin C. Bourdeau circulated in printed form that
Ellen G. White viewed Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation as an inspired
book, and that she had seen an angel standing by the side of Uriah Smith
guiding his hand as he wrote it.
Arthur White, chief trustee of the Ellen G. White Estate, however,
made an exhaustive search of all the evidence bearing upon this query, and
gave at least five arguments to refute the statement:50
1. “In matters of such importance the memory of one witness alone
is not sufficient evidence.”
2. In 1867, only Thoughts on Revelation was printed, but not yet
Thoughts on Daniel (1872).
3. “At the time Thoughts on Revelation was brought out, Elder and
Mrs. White were living in Greenville, Michigan, where Elder White received
and commented on the new book,” but it was later as they were at Bourdeau’s
house (Enosburg, Vermont).51
4. “Smith at that time had not even announced his intention to write
on Daniel.”
5. “There are statements penned by Mrs. White which have a negative
bearing on the inspiration of Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation.”
In support of the last point, one of the canvassing leaders asked Ellen
8
G. White, “You believe they [Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation] are
inspired, do you not? And then she replied ‘You may answer that question,
I shall not.’”52 Even though she recognized that God used Smith in the same
way as both Luther and Miller,53 it does not mean that his writings were
inspired. Thus, in 1890, she underlined that “one of the great troubles with
us has been that we have looked upon men as infallible. But no matter how
high a position a man may hold, it is no reason that he should be looked
upon as incapable of making mistakes.”54 Two years later, she wrote,
There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there

is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of
Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines
have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a
proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into
truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose
anything by close investigation.55
In short, the diffusion of the commentary Daniel and Revelation

inside and outside of the SDA Church was the consequence of at least six
factors.
1. Ellen G. White had the highest regard and esteem for that book,
recommending that it continue being published and read.
2. The author of the commentary, Uriah Smith, was the most
suitable man to write the first Adventist, verse-by-verse commentary on the
Apocalypse.
3. Smith’s book was chosen as the first book sold by colporteurs.
4. Daniel and Revelation was supported by the leaders of the church.
5. The plan “Missionary Readers Circle” was then launched and
Daniel and Revelation was used for study in small groups at home.
6. Finally, a letter had circulated in printed form until past the mid-
twentieth century, indicating that an angel had guided Smith’s hands in
writing Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation. This was refuted by Arthur
White. Ellen G. White herself valued that commentary, but did not regard
it as infallible and encouraged all to study the Scripture more. For nearly
9
Introduction
a hundred years before the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary

appeared, Daniel and Revelation was the predominant book on prophetic
interpretation in the SDA Church.
The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary Period (1944-1970)
The second period of the Adventist interpretation of Revelation was

dominated by the commentary on “The Revelation of St. John the Divine,” in
volume 7 of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary.56 Despite the fact
that this volume was not published until 1957, it resulted from the influence
of the professionalizing of Adventist Bible teachers from 1943 onward.57
Even though other Adventist commentaries on Revelation appeared during
the period from 1953 to 1970,58 the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary
was most influential among Adventists during that period.59 It is relevant,
therefore, to briefly trace the historical development of the Commentary
and the factors of its success.
A Brief History of the Seventh-day

Adventist Bible Commentary
In the early 1940s, John D. Snider (1889-1976), the book department

manager of the Review and Herald (1936-1967), spoke to “many Adventists”
about his idea of publishing an Adventist commentary.60 Regarding an
incessant demand for classical commentaries, which only partly agreed
with Adventist interpretation of Scripture, Snider proposed the project
of publishing an Adventist commentary on the entire Bible.61 Accepting
Snider’s proposal, the board of the Review and Herald chose Francis D.
Nichol (1897-1966), the editor-in-chief of the Review, as the chief editor of
the commentary. Considering his experience and skill, he was the best man
then living to undertake that challenge.62
After accepting the task in 1951, Nichol initiated Commentary
10
planning and assembled the full-time members of the Commentary team:

Raymond F. Cottrell (1911-2003) and Don F. Neufeld as associate editors,
and Julia Neuffer, as assistant editor. Cottrell, who was a Bible teacher at
Pacific Union College for eleven years, started to work on the Commentary
on October 1, 1952, and Neufeld, who was a Bible teacher at Canadian Union
College, started to work in early 1953. Neuffer was already a research worker
at the Review and Herald. In addition, there were six part-time people: Leona
Running, Earle Hilgert, Alger Johns, Herbert Douglass, Bernard Seton, and
James Cox. All of them were chosen both for their editorial skills and their
expertise in Hebrew and Greek.63
Nichol also recruited some thirty-seven contributors who were Bible
teachers and experts in biblical languages, from the Seventh-day Adventist
Theological Seminary and North American colleges. After receiving the
contributors’ drafts, the editors carefully examined them and prepared
them for publication. This project took a little more than five years, from
October 1952 to December 1957.64
Three of the thirty contributors were selected to write on “The
Revelation of St. John the Divine.” Earle Hilgert, professor at the Seventh-
day Adventist Theological Seminary, wrote the commentary on Rev 1-11.
Walter E. Read (1883-1976), then chairman of the General Conference
Biblical Research Committee, wrote the commentary on Rev 12-16. Read
“was selected for this assignment because of his major presentation on
Armageddon at the 1952 Bible Conference.”65 Roland E. Loasby (1890-1974),
chair of the New Testament Department of the Seventh-day Adventist
Theological Seminary, wrote the commentary on Rev 17-22.66
When volume 7 was released, the Review announced that it provided
“the first complete Adventist commentary on the prophecies of the book
of Revelation since Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation, by Uriah
Smith, written about 85 years ago.” Actually, it had been ninety years since
Thoughts on the Revelation came out in 1867. Moreover, the Review added,
“Here you have the best current Adventist thinking on this all-important
11
Introduction
prophecy.”67 Thus, it marked a new period for the interpretation of the book
of Revelation in the SDA Church.
Factors in the Success of the SDA

Commentary on Revelation
At least nine significant factors can be noted in the spreading and

success of the Commentary. That this commentary was the largest Adventist
publishing project to that time, and the first Adventist commentary on the
entire Bible, constituted the first factor of its success. The first volume in 1953
received positive reviews by recognized scholars outside the denomination.68
When completed in 1957, the set of seven volumes with its 7,949 pages became
the “first complete conservative commentary to come out since 1907.”69 At the
beginning, the goal was to sell 5,000 sets, but even before volume 7 was ready,
“23,000 sets had been purchased at the prepublication price of $55.65 for the
seven volumes,” and by the end of 1984 “more than 83,000 complete sets had
been sold, the current price being $147.50.”70 It would be further expanded
with the production of the Commentary on CD-ROM by the Review and
Herald in 1996.71
A second important factor of its success was that at its meeting on
August 18, 1955, the General Conference of SDA voted “to request the Review
and Herald . . . to make available in textbook form for use in our denominational
colleges The Seventh-day Adventist Commentary material on Daniel and the
Revelation.” Following this vote, the Review and Herald then launched the
Commentary on Daniel and Revelation: From the Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Commentary, after publishing volumes 4 and 7.72
A third major factor in the Commentary’s success was translations
into other languages. Pacific Press and Publicaciones Interamericanas united
to publish the first edition in Spanish from 1978 to 1990.73 The first volume of
the SDA Bible Commentary in Korean was released in January 2001. The last
volume was published in 2006, and the complete set was 14 volumes.74
12
A fourth important factor for its success was John D. Snider’s

vision. Snider originated the Commentary in his mind. As was mentioned
above, Snider was bothered by the fact that he had to sell non-Adventist
commentaries to Adventists.75 It is different to have an idea in mind than
to do it. Snider’s great contributions were that he convinced church leaders
to produce the Commentary, he persuaded the Review and Herald to invest
the quarter-million dollars for the project, and finally he found someone
with outstanding abilities as the chief editor.76
A fifth major factor in the Commentary’s success was Francis D.
Nichol, who worked thirty-nine fruitful years at the Review and Herald.77
Even though he wrote other books, the Commentary was his most
remarkable contribution.78 “Among Adventists his dialectical skills were
unsurpassed.”79 Known as a defender of Adventist theology, he won the
respect of both the intellectual community and church members. Elder
Nichol was an extremely demanding editor and felt that “quality was even
more important than time.” Hence, he mentioned that the editorial process
of the Commentary alone “required 11,025 work-hours for each volume, or a
total of 77,175 for all seven.”80
A sixth key factor in the Commentary’s success was the 1952 Bible
Conference. According to Neufeld, Nichol affirmed “repeatedly that if it had
not been for this conference we could not have produced the Commentary.”81
The willingness of the Review and Herald managers and personnel were the
other two important factors.
The last major factor in the Commentary’s success was the content
offered by the contributors and editors reflecting Adventist understanding
of the Bible, as well as the emphasis on deeper Scripture study in the SDA
Church in an atmosphere of dialogue “at the time the Commentary was
written and published.” Cottrell declares that “during the 1950s and 1960s
the open theological climate in the [SDA] church was favorable to the honest
way in which the Commentary editors, in their dedication first to the Bible
and then to the church sought to deal with the Bible and with the teachings
13
Introduction
of the church in relation to the Bible.”82

In short, at least nine factors for the spreading and success of the
Commentary have been described: (1) It was one of the largest projects
ever released by the Review and Herald; (2) the General Conference of
the SDA Church published a volume just with commentaries of Daniel
and Revelation—from the Commentary—to be used as a textbook for the
denominational colleges; (3) the Commentary was translated into other
languages; (4) the 1952 Bible Conference opened the door to a climate of
openness and freedom to study the Bible, as it was demonstrated in the
execution of the Commentary within an atmosphere of open dialogue. Two
remarkable men were key in this project: (5) J. D. Snider, who initiated the
venture, and (6) F. D. Nichol, who carried it through to a successful finale.
Moreover, (7) the support of the Review and Herald, (8) the solid work of
the staff of the Review and Herald, and (9) the emphasis of Adventists on
the study of the Bible were key factors in the Commentary’s success.
Even though the Commentary continues to be in demand to the
present, many newer publications on the Apocalypse have appeared among
Adventists since 1970.
The Multiple Emphases Period (1970- )
Because this third period was not dominated by a single book or

a commentary as the first two were, but was characterized by multiple
emphases, the following discussion will first address major stimuli that
evoked these multiple approaches.
A Brief Historical Development of

the Multiple Emphases Period
Breaking a path for others, Kenneth A. Strand, a professor of the

SDA Seminary at Andrews University, suggested a new structure and
14
hermeneutical guidelines for interpreting the book of Revelation in his

book, The Open Gates of Heaven: A Brief Introduction to Literary Analysis
of the Book of Revelation (1970).83 In 1975, Strand published a companion
volume titled Perspectives in the Book of Revelation: Essays on Apocalyptic
Interpretation.84 In this book, after describing an increasing interest in
the study of the last book of the Bible outside of the denomination and
discussing several important facets of this matter, he encouraged “proper
and modest diligent—indeed, earnest—study of a truly important New
Testament book.”85 Strand’s publications prepared the way for the flowering
of Adventist interpretation of the Apocalypse beginning about 1980.
During the 1970s, the denomination faced many struggles over
biblical interpretation; as a result, the Biblical Research Committee of the
General Conference sponsored and organized the 1974 Bible Conference
focusing on the topic of biblical hermeneutics from a grammatical-historical
perspective.86
Another stimulus to the flowering of Adventist scholarship on
Revelation after 1980 was the meeting held August 10 through 15, 1980, at
Glacier View Ranch, Colorado, to consider Desmond Ford’s interpretation
of portions of Daniel and the Revelation. Ford had already been writing the
manuscript of a commentary on the Apocalypse in 1979, which he would
publish in 1982.87
The Glacier View Conference had at least three immediate outcomes
relating to the interpretation of the Apocalypse. With the aim of fostering
consensus, two Theological Consultations were held in 1980 and 1981. One
of the central topics of discussion was principles of biblical interpretation.88
A second result of the Glacier View Conference was the publication of
eight significant volumes initially planned in 1981 by the Biblical Research
Institute. The final two of the seven volumes were published in 1992.89 After
a decade of activity, the final report of the Daniel and Revelation Committee
(DARCOM) delineated its consensus that “the historical method is the only
procedure consonant with the biblical data.”90 A third result of the Glacier
15
Introduction
View Conference was an official document titled “Methods of Bible Study,”

voted at the 1986 Annual Council of the General Conference, which convened
in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. This document urged Adventists to “avoid relying
on the use of the presuppositions and the resultant deductions associated
with the Historical-critical Method.”91
In short, several stimuli prompted the Multiple Emphases Period
of Adventist publications on Revelation. Even though Kenneth A. Strand
did not write a whole commentary on the Apocalypse, he suggested a
new structure and hermeneutical guidelines for the interpretation of the
Apostle John’s book. In 1974, Bible Conferences were held at three important
schools, prophetic interpretation being one of the more important topics,
with specific articles on Daniel and Revelation. The Glacier View Ranch
Meeting produced immediate outcomes relating to the interpretation of
the Apocalypse.
These developments stimulated an outpouring of Adventist
scholarship on the Revelation during the Multiple Emphases Period beginning
in 1970. Among the many publications in this period, those of three Adventist
scholars are remarkable.
Factors of Diffusion During the

Multiple Emphases Period92
In addition to the DARCOM volumes noted above, the 1980s began a

flood of new Adventist works on Revelation. In 1985, Pacific Press launched
C. Mervyn Maxwell’s bestselling commentary, God Cares: The Message of
Revelation for You and Your Family, volume 2. This commentary and its
volume 1 on Daniel were translated into several languages, including Chinese,
German, Korean, Portuguese, and Spanish.93 Maxwell was a professor of
Church History at the SDA Theological Seminary, Andrews University. He
had accepted the task of writing a new commentary on Daniel (1981) and
Revelation (1985), at the request of Pacific Press around 1976.94 Then the
16
reactions would come. Later, in the 1990s, The Voice of Prophecy radio and
television program offered its audience a correspondence course of twelve
lessons based on Maxwell’s book entitled God Cares: Prophecies from the
Bible Book of Revelation.95
Two years after the release of Maxwell’s commentary on Revelation,
Hans K. LaRondelle, a professor of Theology at the same seminary,
expounded the prophecy of Armageddon in Chariots of Salvation: The
Biblical Drama of Armageddon (1987), on the same topic The Good News
about Armageddon (1990).96 In 1997, he launched his book on Revelation,
How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the Bible.97 At the end of
the twentieth century, he produced a fourth book, titled Light for the Last
Days: Jesus’ End-time Prophecies Made Plain in the Book of Revelation.98 This
volume was designed to be more accessible to the public than the previous
ones written for a more scholarly audience.
A third professor, Jon Paulien, published, in 1987, his dissertation
titled Decoding Revelation’s Trumpets,99 followed by: The Book of Revelation:
Too Good to Be False (1990); What the Bible Says about the End-Time (1994);
The Millennium Bug: Is This the End of the World as We Know It? (1999);
The Deep Things of God (2004); The Gospel from Patmos: Everyday Insights
for Living from the Last Book of the Bible (2007); Armageddon at the Door
(2008);100 and Seven Keys Unlocking the Secrets of Revelation (2009).101
Paulien also published a daily devotional on the Revelation, titled The
Gospel from Patmos: Everyday Insights for Living from the Last Book of the
Bible (2007).102
Other publications from the same period include those of Alberto R.
Treiyer103 and several other authors.104 Among them, two stand out. In 1998,
Alejandro Bullón, Ministerial Secretary of the South American Division,
launched the first edition of his Tercer Milenio: Profecías apocalípticas que
afectarán su vida.105 Written with an evangelistic purpose and translated
into many languages, that book sold over three million copies by early
2010.106 On the other hand, in 2002, Ranko Stefanovič, Religion professor
17
Introduction
at Andrews University, published the first edition of his Revelation of Jesus

Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation. By the time he completed
his revised and updated second edition, in 2009, he was already professor of
New Testament in the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary.107
Noteworthy also are at least sixteen theses and doctoral dissertations
defended at the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews
University.108 Also, at least eight theses and doctoral dissertations were
defended at the Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies,
Theological Seminary, Philippines.109
BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM
In 150 years of publishing on the Apocalypse, Adventists have

produced a growing diversity of views. In the past, a few standard works
represented a consensus of Adventist belief, but for many Adventists today
the variety of published opinion is almost bewildering.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Adventists hold two fundamental presuppositions relating to

the interpretation of the Apocalypse. First, they hold that Scripture is
the supreme norm and its own interpreter. Second, they believe that the
Adventist movement was raised up as part of God’s sovereign plan for the
world, and that through the prophetic gift, Providence has guided (though
not determined or controlled) its overall development. Adventists believe
knowledge of truth is progressive, but they also believe that “new light” builds
on and complements old light, without contradicting its biblical foundations.
Thus when Scripture and the prophetically guided development of Adventist
interpretation are clearly in harmony, Adventists have a sense of certainty and
confidence concerning their message. But when agreement between these
two sources is not clearly apparent, many are unsure what to believe.
18
Thus, in Adventist apocalyptic interpretation, new perspectives are

evaluated from two bases. Because Scripture itself is compared with the
historical interpretation of Scripture, there is a need for an integrated study
of the biblical and historical development of the Adventist interpretation of
the Apocalypse.
REVIEW OF PREVIOUS RESEARCH
Two brief articles have summarized the history of Adventist

interpretation of the Apocalypse. In the Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Commentary, volume 7, is found an article titled “History of the Interpretation
of the Apocalypse” written by LeRoy Froom.110 Froom provided a general
overview of the interpretation of the book of Revelation throughout history.
He uses a few lines to describe the interpretation of the last book of the Bible in
the Seventh-day Adventist Church. His concentration is in the interpretation
of the Millerite movement compared with writers before them. Most of his
perspective can be found in his four volumes of The Prophetic Faith of Our
Fathers.111 His study cannot fulfill the objectives of this present study.
Previous research on the history of the Adventist study of Revelation
was done also in an unpublished fourteen-page paper which Jon Paulien
presented to the meeting of the Adventist Society for Religious Studies in
Boston in 1999, titled “The Book of Revelation at the Crossroads: Where
We’ve Been and Where We’re Going.”112 In just seven pages, Paulien offers
“a few general [and] intuitive comments about the 150 or so years of SDA
study of Revelation.” He recognizes that he “can only be suggestive” in this
study from his “own experience in the process.” Moreover, he adds that “the
footnotes are incomplete and the whole thesis is likely to be flawed.” However,
he encourages a deeper study of “this subject,” which “is worthy of a major
study.”113
Therefore, these two brief articles neither fulfills the objective of the
present study.
19
Introduction
PURPOSE AND JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY
The purpose of the study is to describe, analyze, and assess three

representative interpretations of the book of Revelation that exemplify both
historical and biblical development. All three of the selected expositors
are “historicist” in their basic orientation,114 all recognize Scripture as
the supreme norm, and all are indebted to the work of earlier Adventist
expositors, especially Uriah Smith and Ellen G. White.
Each emphasis will be represented by its major contributor: historical
by C. Mervyn Maxwell (1925–1999), theological by Hans K. LaRondelle
(1929–2011), and exegetical by Jon K. Paulien (1949–). These three professors
taught twenty, twenty-five, and twenty-five years, respectively, at the
Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, where
they influenced a significant number of students, pastors, and Adventist
members through their lectures and writings.115
As noted in the background above, Adventist commentaries on the
Apocalypse may be divided into three periods of development, from Thoughts
on the Revelation, to the SDA Bible Commentary, to the multiple emphases
of the era since 1970. Without oversimplifying the discontinuities, it can be
generalized that Maxwell represents a later development of essentially the
same emphasis used by Uriah Smith in the first period; that LaRondelle
represents a further development of an interpretive emphasis that came to
the fore during the second period; and that Paulien exemplifies an emphasis
that has emerged primarily during the third period of Adventist prophetic
interpretation.
Thus, these three expositors and their methods reflect, respectively,
the three periods of the historical development of Adventist interpretation
of the Apocalypse; and three different theological disciplines: historical,
theological, and exegetical; yet these expositors were also contemporaries,
interacting with and influencing each other, thus making them ideal
subjects for comparison.
20
SCOPE AND DELIMITATIONS
Rather than attempting to encompass the copious minutiae of

Revelation, this study deals with each expositor’s hermeneutical approach
to the broad theme of the Apocalypse. To do this effectively, and to avoid
any distraction from the main purpose of the investigation, the scope will be
further delimited to each period and especially to each expositor’s approach
to two passages, one chosen from chap. 12, to highlight their essential
agreement on the central theme of the book of Revelation,116 and another
chosen from the seven trumpets, as a passage of significant diversity of
views. These two topics will be treated in their main points, not in detail, in
both differences and similarities among the three different emphases.
Even though she wrote major aspects of the great outline prophecies
and their related time periods, Ellen G. White’s writings will not be studied
in this paper. This topic would be worthy of further research, although she
never wrote a whole verse-by-verse commentary on the book of Revelation.
METHODOLOGY
The study makes use of both the published works and available
unpublished documents (papers, transcripts of speeches, correspondence)
of each of the three periods and especially of representative expositors in
the last period, in order to reflect as accurately as possible their approaches
to the interpretation of Revelation in the SDA Church.
In this chapter, I show that the SDA Church has gone through three
different periods in the interpretation of the book of Revelation. I propose,
as well, that three Adventist scholars, Maxwell, LaRondelle, and Paulien,
reflect, respectively, different emphases that predominated in each of the
three periods.
The three central chapters, chaps. 2-4, consider the three archetypal
scholars, each in his context. First of all, the highlights of each period are
21
Introduction
described in a historical overview. For example, chap. 2 highlights the

influence of Millerites, such as William Miller and Josiah Litch, as well
as a pioneer Adventist scholar, Uriah Smith, and other early Adventist
scholars. As the first Adventist to write a commentary on the entire book of
Revelation, and the leading expositor for almost a century, Smith influenced
all later Adventist expositors. Chapter 2 considers the legacy absorbed by
him from earlier interpreters, his presuppositions, and his contributions
that are still influential in the present, as well as some examples of his
interpretations that are no longer held by Adventist scholars. Thus, Smith
provides a reference point to which later scholars can be compared, to show
both biblical and historical development. Next, considering that Adventists
have used the historical method for the interpretation of the Apocalypse, I
have tried to find the definition of historicism in each period.
Then, additional elements are considered for each of the three figures,
including his biographical résumé and historical context (such as his place
in Adventist history, his influence, and his lectures and presentations), to
help readers understand the contribution of each scholar within his own
historical and professional setting and from the perspective of his own
interpretational concerns. Moreover, the study provides the analysis and
assessment of the emphases of Maxwell, LaRondelle, and Paulien. These
elements are determined inductively, from the study of the published and
unpublished works of each of the three representative expositors.
With this background, the study next gives a descriptive summary of
each expositor’s content of his main book on the Apocalypse, the way that
each one understands the literary structure of John’s book, and what is each
scholar’s definition of historicism. Then, the principles of interpretation,
the interpretation of the seven trumpets in Rev 8-9, and the vision of Rev
12 of each professor are pointed out. In both passages, basic conclusions of
the passage are considered. Therefore, in the first case, the conclusions of
the historical application of the seven trumpets, including the “prophetic
periods” of Rev 9:5, 10 (“five months” in the fifth trumpet) and Rev 9:15
22
(“the hour, and a day, and a month, and a year,” in the sixth trumpet) are
analyzed. In the second case, the conclusions of the historical application of
the meaning “the woman,” “the child,” “the great red dragon,” the prophetic
period of 1260 (Rev 12: 6, 14), and “the remnant” (Rev 12:17) are examined.
Following the same analysis last mentioned above, another
contemporary scholar of each one of the emphases in the recent years is
chosen. Thus, Treiyer is in the same emphasis of the interpretation of the
Apocalypse as Maxwell, Naden follows LaRondelle, and Stefanovič follows
Paulien. After describing the interpretation of the book of Revelation in
each one of the emphases, the tendencies of each emphasis (historical,
theological, and exegetical) are pointed out.
Chapter 5 summarizes the three emphases and presents a comparative
assessment of their contributions. This comparison particularly seeks to
determine their enduring legacy and how their emphasis has contributed
to the ongoing development of the Adventist understanding of Revelation,
enriching the Adventist understanding of Scripture, and building on Uriah
Smith’s foundation, but without dismantling the distinctive Adventist
perspective on the Apocalypse. The chapter closes with some suggestions for
the refinement of apocalyptic interpretation in the Adventist understanding
of the book of Revelation
Now we go to chap. 2 and the first period of the Adventist
interpretation of the Apocalypse, beginning with the interpretation of
the Millerites, the work of Uriah Smith, and concluding with its major
twentieth-century representative, C. Mervyn Maxwell.
Endnotes
1. For further study of the Millerite movement see Isaac C. Wellcome,

History of the Second Advent Message (Yarmouth, ME: Isaac C. Wellcome,
1874); Albert C. Johnson, Advent Christian History: A Concise Narrative of the
Origin and Progress, Doctrine and Work of This Body of Believers (Mendota,
IL: Western Advent Christian Publication Society, 1918); Everett N. Dick, “The
23
Introduction
Adventist Crisis of 1843-1844” (PhD dissertation, University of Wisconsin,

1930); Francis D. Nichol, The Midnight Cry (Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1944); LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers: The
Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation, 4 vols. (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1954); David T. Arthur, “Come out of Babylon: A Study of
Millerite Separatism and Denominationalism, 1840-1865” (PhD dissertation,
University of Rochester, 1970); Edwin S. Gaustad, ed., The Rise of Adventism:
Religion and Society in Mid-Nineteenth-Century America (New York: Harper
& Row, 1974); P. Gerard Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist
Message and Mission (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977); David A. Dean,
“Echoes of the Midnight Cry: The Millerite Heritage in the Apologetics of the
Advent Christian Denomination, 1860-1960” (ThD dissertation, Westminster
Theological Seminary, 1977); Clyde E. Hewitt, Midnight and Morning: An
Account of the Adventist Awakening and the Founding of the Advent Christian
Denomination (Charlotte, NC: Venture Books, 1983); David L. Rowe, Thunder
and Trumpets: Millerites and Dissenting Religion in Upstate New York, 1800-1850,
American Academy of Religion Studies in Religion, vol. 38 (Chico, CA: Scholars
Press, 1985); Ruth A. Doan, The Miller Heresy, Millennialism, and American
Culture (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1987); Ronald L. Numbers and
Jonathan M. Butler, eds., The Disappointed: Millerism and Millenarianism in the
Nineteenth Century (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1987); Michael
Barkun, Crucible of the Millennium: The Burned-over District of New York in
the 1840s (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1986); George R. Knight,
Millennial Fever and the End of the World: A Study of Millerite Adventism (Boise,
ID: Pacific Press, 1993); Everett N. Dick, William Miller and the Advent Crisis,
1831-1844, ed. Gary Land (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1994);
Denis Fortin, “L’Adventisme dans les cantons de l’est du Quebec: implantation
et institutionalisation au XIXe siegle” (PhD dissertation, Universite Laval,
Quebec, 1995); Gary Land, ed., Adventism in America, rev. ed. (Berrien
Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1998); David L. Rowe, God’s Strange
Work: William Miller and the End of the World (Grand Rapids, MI: William B.
Eerdmans, 2008).
2. Francis D. Nichol, et al., Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary:

The Holy Bible with Exegetical and Expository Comment, rev. ed., 7 vols.
(Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1980), 7:104.
3. Richard Lehmann, “Relationships between Daniel and Revelation,”

in Symposium on Revelation–Book I, ed. Frank B. Holbrook, Daniel and
Revelation Committee Series (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute,
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 132. Moreover, Lehmann
offers examples to demonstrate the connection between Daniel and Revelation,
“the worship of the image of gold in Daniel 3 and of the image of the beast
in Revelation 13; the vision of Christ in Daniel 10 and Revelation 1; the fall of
24
Babylon in Daniel 5 and Revelation 14; the beasts of Daniel 7 and Revelation 13
and 17; the times of Daniel 7 and Revelation 11, 12, etc.” Ibid., 144. He, therefore,
mentions three characteristics that justify the common study of Daniel and
Revelation: (1) “Ethical quality,” (2) “Chronological characteristics,” and (3)
“The Christ-centered nature of apocalyptic.” Lehmann, “Relationships between
Daniel and Revelation,” 7:141-144. Moreover, Smith claims in the fourth point of
his book’s preface: “The books of Daniel and the Revelation are counterparts of
each other. They naturally stand side by side, and should be studied together.”
Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation: The Response of History to the Voice of
Prophecy A Verse by Verse Study of These Important Books of the Bible (Battle
Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1897), 3.
4. I use the word of Apocalypse or Revelation to refer to the last book

of the Bible.
5. The mission statement of the Seventh-day Adventist Church

emphasizes the book of Revelation: “The mission of the Seventh-day Adventist
Church is to communicate to all peoples the everlasting gospel of God’s love in
the context of the three angels’ messages of Revelation 14:6-12, and as revealed
in the life, death, resurrection, and high priestly ministry of Jesus Christ,
leading them to accept Jesus as personal Savior and Lord and to unite with
his remnant church, and to nurture them in preparation for his soon return.”
Working Policy of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005-2006
ed. (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2005), 29.
6. Ellen G. White, Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers (Boise,

ID: Pacific Press, 1962), 112.
7. Ibid., 113.
8. Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles (Mountain View, CA: Pacific
Press, 1911), 585.
9. White, Testimonies to Ministers, 114.
10. Adventists use the historical method not only for interpreting
Revelation, but also Daniel. See LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of
Our Fathers: The Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation, 4 vols.
(Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1954), passim; Richard W. Lesher and
Frank B. Holbrook, “Appendix C: Daniel and Revelation Committee: Final
Report,” in Symposium on Revelation-Book II, ed. Frank B. Holbrook, Daniel
and Revelation Committee Series (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research
Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 460; Seventh-
day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996 ed., s.v. “Historicism.”; Jon K. Paulien,
25
Introduction
“The Hermeneutics of Biblical Apocalyptic,” in Understanding Scripture: An

Adventist Approach, ed. George W. Reid (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research
Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005), 249.
11. This is a brief historical context, but the summary of the content of
publications, and the connection with the major contributor of each emphasis,
will be described in chapters 2–4.
12. During this period, other works were also published, such as Stephen
N. Haskell, The Story of the Seer of Patmos (Nashville: Southern, 1905); William
A. Spicer, Beacon Lights of Prophecy (Takoma Park, MD: Review and Herald,
1935); and Merlin L. Neff, Victory out of Chaos: Messages from the Book of
Revelation for Today (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1942). Moreover, a 1919
Bible Conference had as its main topic Adventist eschatology, but made no
substantial change in the Adventist interpretation of Revelation. See Michael
W. Campbell, “The 1919 Bible Conference and Its Significance for Seventh-day
Adventist History and Theology” (PhD dissertation, AU, 2008).
13. Arthur L. White to S. A. Bartlett, February 7, 1957; LeRoy Edwin

Froom, Movement of Destiny (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1971), 158,
159; Eugene F. Durand, Yours in the Blessed Hope, Uriah Smith (Washington,
DC: Review and Herald, 1980), 19.
14. Everett N. Dick, “Uriah Smith,” YI, July 18, 1944, 13; Froom, Movement
of Destiny, 158, 159; Durand, Yours . . . , Uriah Smith, 219.
15. On March 12, 1857, Smith did start to focus on the prophecies of
Daniel and Revelation through his editorials in the Review. Those appeared
intermittently until August 5, 1858. Uriah Smith, “The Two-Horned Beast:
Are the United States a Subject of Prophecy?” RH, March 12, 1857, 148; idem,
“Exposition of Daniel 11, 31-44: Or Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream,” RH, April 9, 1857,
177-179; idem, “Exposition of Dan VII: Or the Vision of the Four Beasts,” RH,
April 23, 1857, 194-196; idem, “Daniel Chapters VIII and IX,” RH, April 30, 1857,
202-204; idem, “The Seven Last Plagues,” RH, June 18, 1857, 52-53; idem, “The
Seven Last Plagues: (Concluded),” RH, June 25, 1857, 60-61. A 28−part series
of editorials was titled “Synopsis of the Present Truth.” Idem, “Synopsis of the
Present Truth: No. 1,” RH, November 12, 1857, 4; (No. 2) November 19, 1857,
12; (No. 3) November 26, 1857, 20-21; (No. 4) December 3, 1857, 28-29; (No. 5)
December 10, 1857, 36-37; (No. 6) December 17, 1857, 44-45; (No. 7) December
24, 1857, 52-53; (No. 8) December 31, 1857, 60-61; (No. 9) January 7, 1858, 68;
(No. 10) January 14, 1858, 76-77; (No. 11) January 21, 1858, 84-85; (No. 12) January
28, 1858, 92-93; (No. 13) February 4, 1858, 100; (No. 14) February 11, 1858, 108-
109; (No. 15) February 18, 1858, 116-117; (No. 16) February 25, 1858, 124-125; (No.
17) March 11, 1858, 132; (No. 18) March 18, 1858, 140-141; and (No. 19) March 25,
26
1858, 148; Nos. 20 to 24 focused on the judgment and second coming; (No. 25)
May 20, 1858, 4; (No. 26) May 27, 1858, 12; (No. 27) June 3, 1858, 20; (No.28)
June 10, 1858, 28; idem, “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets Rev. vii, viii, ix,”
RH, July 08, 1858, 57-59; idem, “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets Rev. vii,
viii, ix: Third Trumpet,” RH, July 15, 1858, 65-67; idem, “The Sounding of the
Seven Trumpets Rev. vii, viii, ix: The Fifth Trumpet, or First Wo [sic],” RH, July
22, 1858, 73-75; idem, “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets Rev. vii, viii, ix:
The Torment of the Greeks One Hundred and Fifty Years,” RH, July 29, 1858,
82-84; idem, “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets Rev. vii, viii, ix: When did
Mahommedan Independence in Constantinople Depart,” RH, August 5, 1858.
16. James White, “The Book of Revelation,” RH, June 3, 1862, 4.
17. Merwin R. Thurber, “Uriah Smith and the Charge of Plagiarism,”

Ministry, June 1945, 15.
18. James White, “Thoughts on Revelation,” RH, June 3, 1862, 4-5; June
10, 1862, 12-13; June 17, 1862, 20-21; June 24, 1862, 28; July 1, 1862, 36; July 8, 1862,
44; September 9, 1862, 116; September 16, 1862, 124 (from June 17, 1862, this
series was entitled “Thoughts on the Revelation”).
19. Uriah Smith, “Thoughts on the Revelation,” RH, October 21, 1862,
164-165; October 28, 1862, 172-173; November 4, 1862, 180; November 11, 1862,
188; November 18, 1862, 196-197; November 25, 1862, 204; December 2, 1862, 4-5;
December 9, 1862, 12; December 16, 1862, 20; December 23, 1862, 28; December
30, 1862, 36; January 6, 1863, 44; January 20, 1863, 60; January 27, 1863, 68;
February 3, 1863, 76-77.
20. Froom, Movement of Destiny, 158. Two and one-half years after the
last study on “Thoughts on the Revelation” in the Review, the editor declared
that he had “commenced to revise, and in a great measure re-write, the Thoughts
on [the] Revelation, published in the Review, vols. XX and XXI.” Uriah Smith,
“Thoughts on the Revelation,” RH, July 18, 1865, 52. Smith’s work of writing the
commentary was interrupted for reasons such as health, idem, “By the Way,”
RH, September 26, 1865, 132; for answering objections to Ellen White’s visions,
idem, “[Announcements],” RH, March 13, 1866, 120; idem, “[Announcements],”
RH, April 17, 1866, 160; and for many other responsibilities. After a year of such
frustrations, Smith moved rapidly; idem, “[Announcements],” RH, February
26, 1867, 144.
21. Uriah Smith, “Thoughts on the Revelation,” RH, April 16, 1867, 228.
When Thoughts on the Revelation was first listed among the books for sale by
the Review Office, it had 328 pages. “Our Book List,” RH, June 18, 1867, 15.
27
Introduction
22. “Now Ready,” RH, May 14, 1867, 1867.
23. For editions on Thoughts on the Revelation see: Uriah Smith,

Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Revelation (Battle Creek,
MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1865);
ibid., 2nd ed., rev. (1875); ibid., 3rd ed., rev. and enl. (Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-
day Adventist Publishing Association, 1881 and 1885); idem, Thoughts on the
Prophecies of Revelation: Being Part II of the Combined Volume “Daniel and the
Revelation” Showing the Response of History to the Voice of Prophecy (Battle
Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1987); ibid. (1899, 1903, 1904?, 1912).
Concerning the year of the first edition of Smith’s book, Arthur L.
White, secretary of Ellen G. White Publications, replied to Mary Jane Mitchell,
who worked at the JWL: “Apparently Brother Smith hoped to bring this through
to completion during 1865, and the type was set for part of the book, including
the title page and the preface. Subsequent notices in the Review and Herald
through 1865, 1866 and 1867, indicate clearly that the book was not published
until 1867. Why they did not change the date on the title page I do not know,
but things of this kind do slip by.” Arthur L. White to Mary Jane Mitchell, July
15, 1968, CAR at JWL, AU.
For combined editions of Daniel and Revelation see: Uriah Smith,
Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Daniel and the Revelation:
Being an Exposition, Text by Text, of These Important Portions of the Holy
Scriptures (Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1881); ibid. (1884, 1885, 1887,
1889, 1890); in Britain, Uriah Smith, Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the
Book of Daniel and the Revelation: Being an Exposition, Text by Text, of These
Important Portions of the Holy Scriptures, 6th ed. (London: The Present Truth,
1888); idem, Daniel and the Revelation: The Response of History to the Voice
of Prophecy, A Verse by Verse Study of These Important Books of the Bible
(Watford, England: The Stanborough Press, 1888); idem, Thoughts, Critical
and Practical on the Books of Daniel and the Revelation: Being an Exposition,
Text by Text, of These Important Portions of the Holy Scriptures (Battle Creek,
MI: Review and Herald, 1890); ibid. (1891); idem, Daniel and the Revelation: The
Response of History to the Voice of Prophecy, a Verse by Verse Study of These
Important Books of the Bible (Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1897);
ibid. (1901, etc.); idem, Daniel and the Revelation: The Response of History
to the Voice of Prophecy, a Verse by Verse Study of These Important Books of
the Bible (Nashville: Southern, 1941); idem, The Prophecies of Daniel and the
Revelation (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1944). The 1944 edition was
simultaneously co-published in Washington, DC, by the Review and Herald,
in Mountain View, CA, by Pacific Press; and in Nashville, TN, by the Southern
Publishing Association.
24. Mary H. Moore affirms that she “was the first one who worked on
the revision,” around 1933 or 1934. She claims: “I have been asked a number of
28
times about the scope of the changes made in the revised D&R [abbreviation
of Daniel and Revelation]. . . . As long ago as 1933 or 1934 the House Committee
of the Southern Publishing Association asked me to submit to them a schedule
of suggested revisions of D&R, which I did. These revisions included nothing
whatever but bringing the book up to date. The book had been written before
the days of automobiles, radio, television, etc., and before the two world wars.
It was felt best to bring its allusions and dates up to the present. My list of
suggested changes involved practically no change in literary style of language,
no alteration whatever in doctrine, but only modernizing of facts and dates
about inventions, disasters, wars, or such events.” Mary Hunter Moore, “What
Was the Scope of the Revision of Thoughts on Daniel and Revelation by Uriah
Smith,” CAR.
25. 5,000 copies were “sold to the Carolina Conference to be used by

their colporteurs strictly within the borders of that conference.” Ibid.
26. The report of the process of the new edition of Daniel and the
Revelation was written by the secretary of the “D. and R.” Revision Committee.
Merwin R. Thurber, “New Edition of ‘Daniel and the Revelation,’” Ministry, April,
1945, 13-15; Merwin R. Thurber, “Revised D&R in Relation to Denominational
Doctrine,” Ministry, May, 1945, 3-4, 30; for response to charges of plagiarism, see
Merwin R. Thurber, “Uriah Smith and the Charge of Plagiarism,” Ministry, June
1945, 15-16. For more details, see unpublished materials, General Conference
of Seventh-day Adventists, Most Valuable Documents, 1920-1940s. See also
Froom, Movement of Destiny, 158-159, 422-427.
27. Froom, Movement of Destiny, 424.
28. Ibid., 424.
29. “Especially should the book Daniel and Revelation be brought before
people as the very book for this time. This book contains the message which all
need to read and understand. Translated into many different languages, it will
be a power to enlighten the world. . . . The Lord has shown me that this book
will do a good work in enlightening those who become interested in the truth
for this time. Those who embrace the truth now, who have not shared in the
experiences of those who entered the work in the early history of the message,
should study the instruction given in Daniel and the Revelation, becoming
familiar with the truth it presents.” Ellen G. White, MS 174, 1899, CAR.
30. Ellen G. White to G. A. Irwin, W. Sisley, Uriah Smith, and A. T. Jones,

March 2, 1899, Letter 43, 1899, CAR; idem, Colporteur Ministry (Mountain
View, CA: Pacific Press, 1953), 123, 124.
29
Introduction
31. Ellen G. White to Clement Eldridge, September 8, 1889, Letter 25a,

1889, CAR.
32. Ellen G. White, “A Call for Active Work,” RH, February 16, 1905;
idem, Colporteur Ministry, 21, 123.
33. For more information about the life and work of Uriah Smith see
Dudley Marvin Canright, Life of Mrs. E. G. White: Seventh-day Adventist
Prophet: Her False Claims Refuted (Cincinnati, OH: Standard Publishing Co.,
1919), 225-231; Richard J. Hammond, “The Life and Work of Uriah Smith” (MA
thesis, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, 1944); Arthur W. Spalding,
Footprints of the Pioneers (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1947), 123-129;
Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. (Mountain View, CA: Pacific
Press, 1948), 5:62-84; LeRoy Edwin Froom, Prophetic Faith, 4:999, 1038, 1052-
1053, 1068, 1080-82, and 1109-1127; idem, Pioneer Stories Retold: A Compilation
of Early Experiences in the Advent Movement (Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1956), 178-181; Erwin R. Gane, “The Arian or Anti-Trinitarian Views
Presented in Seventh-day Adventist Literature and the Ellen G. White Answer”
(MA thesis, AU, 1963), 20-29; Albert V. Olson, Through Crisis to Victory, 1888-
1991 (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1966), 92-103; Froom, Movement of
Destiny, 157-166; Eugene F. Durand, “Yours in the Blessed Hope, Uriah Smith”
(PhD dissertation, Washington University, 1978); Durand, Yours in the Blessed
Hope, Uriah Smith; Roy Adams, “The Doctrine of the Sanctuary in the Seventh-
day Adventist Church: Three Approaches” (ThD dissertation, AU, 1980), 15-
94; Edwin H. Zackrison, “Seventh-day Adventists and Original Sin” (PhD
dissertation, AU, 1984), 251-261; Richard W. Schwarz and Floyd Greenleaf, Light
Bearers: A History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church (Nampa, ID: Pacific
Press, 2000), 78, 149, 163, 168, 180, 183-185, and 608-12; Gary Land, Historical
Dictionary of the Seventh-day Adventists, Historical Dictionaries of Religions,
Philosophies, and Movements, vol. 56 (Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press,
2005), 56:276-277.
Also see such articles as “In Memoriam Uriah Smith: Born May 2, 1832,
Died March 6, 1903, Aged 70 Years, 10 Months, and 4 Days,” RH, March 10, 1903,
3-7; John O. Corliss, “The Message and Its Friends—No. 6: Uriah Smith, the
‘Pathfinder,’” RH, September 20, 1923, 4-5; H. W. Carter, “Elder Uriah Smith’s
Missionary Spirit,” RH, February 22, 1940, 19-20; W. A. Spicer, “Notes About
Pioneer Workers and Early Experiences—No. 19: Still New Burden Bearers
Came Pressing In,” RH, June 06, 1940, 8-10; Everett N. Dick, “Uriah Smith,” YI,
July 18, 1944, 6, 13; Stella P. Peterson, “Uriah Smith,” RH, December 28, 1944,
6-8; Arthur W. Spalding, “Heralds of the Blessed Hope—8: The Pen of a Ready
Writer,” STs, June 14, 1949, 8-9; Sharon Boucher, “Pioneer Father,” Record (South
Pacific Division), January 07, 1957, 13-14; Ernest Lloyd, “Memories of Elder
Uriah Smith,” RH, September 06, 1962, 12-13; A. G. Stewart, “Glimpses into Our
Historical Past,” Record (South Pacific Division), August 03, 1964, 12-13; Virgil E.
30
Robinson, “Uriah Smith and His Mighty Pen,” MV Program Kit, July-September
1971, 60-67; “Uriah Smith: Inventor,” Insight, July 04, 1972, 12; Paul J. Stauffer,
“Uriah Smith: Wood Engraver,” AHer 3, no. 1 (Summer 1976): 17-21; Emmett K.
VandeVere, “The Heart of the Lake Union,” LUH, December 07, 1976, 3; Russell
Holt, “Uriah,” Insight, February 22, 1977, 12-15; John O. Waller, “Uriah Smith’s
Small Epic: The Warning Voice of Time and Prophecy,” AHer (Summer 1978):
53-61; Ron Graybill, “Uriah Smith on the Swanee River,” Insight, April 1979, 9-13;
Eugene F. Durand, “Smiling with Uriah Smith,” AR, May 20, 1982, 3-5; Eugene F.
Durand, “Uriah’s Merry Medicine,” AR, February 03, 1983, 4-6.
34. Adams, “The Doctrine of the Sanctuary in the Seventh-day Adventist

Church: Three Approaches,” 23-24.
35. Durand, Yours . . . , Uriah Smith, 202.
36. Arthur W. Spalding, “The Pen of a Ready Writer,” ST, June 14, 1949, 8.
37. Ibid., 9.
38. Durand, Yours in the Blessed Hope, Uriah Smith, 202; Alberto R.
Timm, “Seventh-day Adventist Eschatology, 1844-2004: A Brief Historical
Overview,” in Prophetic Principles: Crucial Exegetical, Theological, Historical &
Practical Insights, ed. Ron du Preez, Scripture Symposium Number I (Lansing,
MI: Michigan Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2007), 165, 166.
39. “His editorship of the Review was largely continuous until his death
in 1903—except for 1868, when J. N. Andrews served as editor. But in 1870 Smith
rejoined the Review staff, as associate to James White. There was another break,
from 1897 to 1901, when A. T. Jones was editor in chief, with the Smith name
appearing second on the editorial masthead. Smith had become seriously ill
while in Syria in 1895. But he served in editorial capacities on the Review for
some 48 years, beginning in March of 1853—the denomination’s record. He was
conspicuously able.” Froom, Movement of Destiny, 157.
40. Until the date of his death, Smith’s four best-known books had
attained a total sale of over one-half million copies in several languages. The
four are: Man’s Nature and Destiny: Or, the State of the Dead, the Reward of
the Righteous, and the End of the Wicked (Battle Creek, MI: Review and
Herald, 1873); The Sanctuary and the Twenty-three Hundred Days of Daniel
VIII, 14 (Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1877); Thoughts, Critical and
Practical, on the Book of Daniel and the Revelation; and The Marvel of Nations:
Our Country: Its Past, Present, and Future and What the Scriptures Say of It
(Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1885). “Editorial: In Memoriam Uriah
Smith,” RH, March 10, 1903, 5. Other books are: The Warning Voice of Time and
31
Introduction
Prophecy: A Word for the Sabbath (Rochester, NY: James White, 1853); Which?
Mortal or Immortal?: Or, An Inquiry into the Present Constitution and Future
Condition of Man (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Review and Herald
Office, 1860); Both Sides on the Sabbath and Law: Review of T. M. Preble (Battle
Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Pub. Association, 1864);
Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Revelation (Battle Creek, MI:
Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1865); The
Visions of Mrs. E. G. White (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-
day Adventist Publishing Association, 1868); The United States in the Light of
Prophecy: Or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17 (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of
the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1872), (1872, later revised
as Marvel of Nations); Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Daniel
(Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing
Association, 1873); Uriah Smith, The Testimony of the Bible on the State of the
Dead (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing
Association, 1873); The State of the Dead and the Destiny of the Wicked (Battle
Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association,
1873); The Biblical Institute: A Synopsis of Lectures on the Principal Doctrines
of Seventh-day Adventists (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day
Adventist Publishing Association, 1878); Synopsis of the Present Truth: A Brief
Exposition of the Views of S. D. Adventists (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of
the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1884); Modern Spiritualism:
A Subject of Prophecy and a Sign of the Times (Battle Creek, MI: Review and
Herald, 1896); Here and Hereafter: Or Man in Life and Death, the Reward of the
Righteous and the Destiny of the Wicked (Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald,
1897); Looking unto Jesus: Or, Christ in Type and Antitype (Battle Creek, MI:
Review and Herald, 1898); and several pamphlets.
41. Jocelyn Fay, “Only Nine Editors in 125 Years,” RH, November 13, 1975,
5.
42. George I. Butler, “Thoughts on Daniel and Revelation,” RH, March

28, 1882, 208.
43. “How to Do It?” RH, June 06, 1882, 368.
44. Hammond, “The Life and Work of Uriah Smith,” 137; Durand, Yours
. . . , Uriah Smith, 219.
45. Hammond, “The Life and Work of Uriah Smith,” 54. Hammond,
moreover, mentions an anecdote obtained in an interview with Grace Amadon,
August 16, 1944, in Takoma Park, Maryland, “Who will write Daniel and
Revelation? You, er I, er Smith? asked James White in the Review Office one day
during an informal conversation with George Amadon and Uriah Smith. Their
32
sense of humor prevailed. ‘You, er I, er Smith.’ Who else could it mean but U-R-
I-A-H Smith.”
When the new book appeared, J. M. Aldrich, associate editor of the
Review, endorsed it, saying “Everybody ought to have a copy of ‘Thoughts on
Revelation’ [sic]. We certainly hope all of our brethren will make haste to supply
themselves with this truly valuable work. No Adventist’s library is complete
without it. Bro. Smith has bestowed much labor and thought on this work,
and this fact alone, is a sufficient recommend[ation] for the book to all who
are conversant with his writings.” J. M. Aldrich, “[Announcements],” RH, July
02, 1867, 48. Two weeks later, James White pointed out, “This . . . is a book of
thoughts, clothed in the author’s happy style, plain, yet critical and practical,
coming down to the spiritual wants of the common people, yet elevated and
dignified. This standard work should be in the library of every believer.” James
White, “Report from Bro. White,” RH, July 16, 1867, 72.
46. Uriah Smith, “Thoughts on the Revelation,” 52.
47. William C. White to A. F. Harrison, June 16, 1910, CAR.
48. L. Flora Plummer, “Missionary Reading Circle,” RH, November 28,

1899, 776.
49. Lessons on Daniel can be found in RH, November 28, 1899, 12;
December 5, 1899, 12; December 12, 1899, 12; December 19, 1899, 12; December
26, 1899, 7; January 2, 1900, 7; January 9, 1900, 7; January 16, 1900, 7; January 23,
1900, 7; January 30, 1900, 7; February 6, 1900, 7; February 13, 1900, 7; February
20, 1900, 7; February 27, 1900, 7; March 6, 1900, 7; March 13, 1900, 7; March 20,
1900, 7; March 27, 1900, 7; April 3, 1900, 7; April 10, 1900, 7; April 17, 1900, 7;
April 24, 1900, 7; and May 1, 1900, 7.
Lessons on Revelation can be found in RH, October 9, 1900, 7; October
16, 1900, 7; October 23, 1900, 6, 7; November 6, 1900, 7; November 13, 1900, 7;
November 20, 1900, 6, 7; December 4, 1900, 7; December 11, 1900, 7 (Review of
chapters 1-7); December 18, 1900, 7; December 25, 1900, 7; January 8, 1901, 7;
January 15, 1901, 7; January 22, 1901, 7; February 5, 1901, 6, 7; February 12, 1901, 7;
February 19, 1901, 7; March 5, 1901, 7 (Review of chapters 8-14); March 12, 1901,
7; March 19, 1901, 7; March 26, 1901, 7; April 9, 1901, 7; April 16, 1901, 7; April
23, 1901, 7; May 7, 1901, 7; May 14, 1901, 7; and May 21, 1901, 7 (Review about the
whole book on Revelation).
Missionary issues (“Study of the Field”): October 2, 1900, 7; October 30,
1900, 7; November 27, 1900, 7; January 1, 1901, 7; January 29, 1901, 7; February 26,
1901, 7; April 2, 1901, 7; April 30, 1901, 7; and May 28, 1901, 5.
50. Arthur L. White, “Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation,”

Ministry, January 1945, 11-13, 46. This article was published separately by the
33
Introduction
Ellen G. White Estate in 1957 and 1966. “Smith, Uriah, ‘Thoughts on Daniel &
Revelation’, Ellen G. White regarding,” Ellen G. White Estates Branch Office
Document File (WDF 233-a), CAR.
51. James White, “Report from Bro. White,” 72.
52. Ellen G. White to Frank Belden, June 8, 1895, Letter 15, 1895, CAR.
53. “Angels of heaven were by his side, and rays of light from the throne
of God revealed the treasures of truth to his understanding.” Ellen G. White,
Great Controversy (Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1939), 122. “God sent His angel to
move upon the heart of a farmer who had not believed the Bible, to lead him
to search the prophecies. Angels of God repeatedly visited that chosen one, to
guide his mind and open to his understanding prophecies which had ever been
dark to God’s people.” Ellen G. White, Early Writings (Washington, DC: Review
and Herald, 1945), 229.
54. Ellen G. White, “Open the Heart to Light,” RH, March 25, 1890, 117.
55. Ellen G. White, “Christ Our Hope,” RH, December 20, 1892, 785; also
in idem, Counsels to Writers and Editors: A Grouping of Messages of Counsel
Addressed to Writers and Editors (Washington, DC: Review and Herald,
1946), 35. “We must not think, ‘Well, we have all the truth, we understand the
main pillars of our faith, and we may rest on this knowledge.’ The truth is an
advancing truth, and we must walk in the increasing light.” Idem, “Open the
Heart to Light,” 117. “We should dig in the mine of God’s word for truth.” Idem,
“The Necessity of Dying to Self,” RH, June 18, 1889, 385.
56. Francis Nichol et al., “The Revelation of St. John the Divine,” SDABC,
7 vols. (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1957), 7:713-899.
57. On the story of the Bible Research Fellowship see Raymond F.

Cottrell, “The Bible Research Fellowship: A Pioneering Seventh-day Adventist
Organization in Retrospect,” AHer 5, no. 1 (Summer 1978): 39-52.
58. For example: Edwin R. Thiele, Outline Studies in Revelation (Berrien

Springs, MI: Emmanuel Missionary College, 1949); Raymond F. Cottrell, The
Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation: Part II—Revelation (Angwin, CA: Pacific
Union College, 1951); George McCready Price, The Greatest of the Prophets: A
New Commentary on Daniel and the Revelation (Loma Linda, CA: The Author,
1951); Taylor G. Bunch, The Revelation ([Loma Linda, CA]: College of Medical
Evangelists, 1952); Roy A. Anderson, Unfolding the Revelation: Evangelistic
Studies for Public Presentation (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1953).
34
59. For more details, see chapter 2. “By the close of 1984 more than
83,000 complete sets had been sold, the current price [1998] being $147.50.”
Raymond F. Cottrell, “The Story of the Bible Commentary,” AHer 18, no. 1
(Summer 1998): 32.
60. Caspar Nannes, “Adventists Issue New Commentary,” Washington

Star, February 10, 1957.
61. For the story of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, see Don
Frank Neufeld, “The SDA Bible Commentary in Retrospect,” CAR; Raymond
F. Cottrell, “The Untold Story of the Bible Commentary,” Spectrum 16, no. 3
(1985): 35–51; and idem, “The Story of the Bible Commentary,” AHer, 26–34.
Snider had already published I Love Books, which became a bestseller.
Snider’s book was printed twenty-one times, with new revised editions and
different titles, from 1942 to 1962. John D. Snider, I Love Books: Why, What,
How, and When We Should Read (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1942);
idem, Highways to Learning: A Guide Through Bookland (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1952); idem, I Love Books: A Guide Through Bookland, new
rev. ed. (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1962). It was part of the Christian
Home Library. John D. Snider, I Love Books: A Guide Through Bookland, rev.
ed. (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1946). A condensed edition is idem,
Booklove: Condensed from I Love Books (Washington, DC: Review and Herald,
1957).
According to Raymond F. Cottrell, I Love Books “sold a quarter of a
million copies and was translated into several languages.” He adds that Snider
had 25,000 volumes in his personal library. Cottrell, “The Story of the Bible
Commentary,” 26-27.
62. Raymond F. Cottrell, “The Untold Story of the Bible Commentary,”

36-37; idem, “The Story of the Bible Commentary,” 26-27; Miriam Wood and
Kenneth H. Wood, His Initials Were F. D. N.: A Life Story of Elder F. D. Nichol,
for Twenty-one Years Editor of the Review and Herald ([Washington, DC]:
Review and Herald, 1967), 154.
63. The six part-time editors “participated variously from a few months
to as much as two years.” Wood and Wood, His Initials Were F. D. N., 142-143;
Raymond F. Cottrell, “The Untold Story of the Bible Commentary,” 37; idem,
“The Story of the Bible Commentary,” 27-28.
64. Though the goal was to publish a volume every six months, that was
not realized. Wood and Wood, His Initials Were F. D. N., 143. Volumes 1 and 2
appeared in 1953, volume 3 in 1954, volume 4 in 1955, and volumes 5 and 6 in
1956. In December 1957, the Review announced that volume 7 was ready for
ordering. RH, December 5, 1957, 31.
35
Introduction

49, 51.
66. Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996 ed., s.v. “Roland E. Loasby,”
67. RH, December 19, 1957, 31. Also see RH, January 2, 1958, 31; January
9, 1958, 30; and January 30, 1958, 30. In February, the Review announced,
“Studies in the Book of Revelation is the subject of the Sabbath school lessons
for the second quarter of 1958. Your SDA Commentary, volume 7, will be an
indispensable aid as the most comprehensive and up-to-date study aid on the
vital themes presented in this important series of lessons.” RH, February 27,
1958, 30.
68. On September 1, 1955, F. D. Nichol, through a letter, responded

to administrators and certain other leaders on the fear some brethren had
expressed before the Commentary was launched that “the denomination did
not possess sufficient scholarly talent to produce a worth-while commentary.”
When his letter was written, the first three volumes were already published.
Nichol attached two positive reviews of H. H. Rowley, a “Modernist Protestant
scholar,” and Viliam Pavloski, a scholar of the Pontifical Biblical Institute in
Rome. Francis D. Nichol, “[The SDA Commentary reviewed by H. H. Rowley
and Viliam Pavloski],” CAR.
69. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary was published in 1907. Caspar

Nannes, “Adventists Issue New Commentary.” One of the classic commentaries
in those days was Robert Jamieson, Andrew R. Fausset, and David Brown,
A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical on the Old and New
Testaments (New York; Philadelphia; Hartford; Cincinnati: S. S. Scranton and
Company, 1873).

46; idem, “The Story of the Bible Commentary,” 32. Nannes reported that “a pre-
publication subscription plan sold 25,000 sets” at the beginning of 1957. Caspar
Nannes, “Adventists Issue New Commentary.” On the other hand, the Review
acclaimed before volume 7 was launched that “nearly 28,000 are receiving the
benefits of this extraordinary help to a more rewarding study of the Bible.” RH,
November 7, 1957, 38. In 1996, the General Conference Ministerial Association
offered 20,000 sets of the Commentary to pastors in third-world countries at a
price of $52.00. “Largest Printing Project Goes to Third World,” South Pacific
Division Record, April 8, 1995, 10; James A. Cress, “Bible Commentaries for the
Third World,” Southwestern Union Record, April 1995, 25.
71. “R&H Launches Bible Commentary on CD-ROM,” AR, April 25,

1996, 22. Also see “21st Century,” South Pacific Division Record, April 20, 1996,
36
4; Cassandra Nesmith, “Bible Commentary Now Available on CD-ROM Discs,”

Gleaner, June 17, 1996, 19; Cassandra Nesmith, “SDA Bible Commentary on CD-
ROM,” Outlook, June, 1996, 27.
72. The commentary on the book of Daniel was released first. Francis
D. Nichol, ed., A Verse-by-Verse Commentary on the Book of Daniel: A Section
of Volume IV of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Washington,
DC: Review and Herald, 1955); idem, ed., A Verse-by-Verse Commentary on
Daniel and Revelation: From the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary
(Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1957, reprinted 1980, 2009).
73. In order to be more affordable in South America, the Casa Editora

Sudamericana, Argentina, launched its own Spanish edition from 1992 to 1996.
Both Spanish editions had 10,000 sets in circulation, making a total of 20,000.
The translation to Spanish was based on the second English edition, published
from 1976 to 1980. Francis D. Nichol, ed., Comentario Bíblico Adventista del
Séptimo Día, 7 vols. (Mountain View, CA: Publicationes Interamericanas and
Pacific Press, 1978-1990); idem, Comentario Bíblico Adventista del Séptimo Día,
7 vols. (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1992-1996). In
addition, the South American Division started a Portuguese translation in
August 2010. The plan is to translate one volume each year. Erton C. Köhler,
“Comienza proyecto de traducción al portugués del Comentario Bíblico
Adventista,” Del escritorio de la presidencia, no. 84, August 20, 2010.
74. Yoon-Ho Son, “A Great Historical Project of the Korean Publishing

House,” News and Views (Northern Asia-Pacific Division), February 2001, 2;
“Bible Commentary in Korea,” Ministry, June 2006, 28.
75. Neufeld claims two reasons why Snider was bothered: “In the first
place, Adventist users of these commentaries would constantly need to separate
the wheat from the chaff, a risky process at best; in the second place, other
publishing houses instead of Adventist houses were reaping the profits from
the sale of the commentaries.” Donald F. Neufeld, “The SDA Bible Commentary
in Retrospect,” 1.
76. Ibid.
77. Nichol worked first as associate editor and twenty-one years as

editor in chief. For a biography of Francis David Nichol, see Wood and Wood,
His Initials Were F. D. N.; “Francis David Nichol 1897-1866,” RH [Extra], June 10,
1966; Gerald Hansel Jones, “Life and Contributions of Francis D. Nichol” (term
paper, AU, Fall 1977); Martin L. Jackson, “The Involvement and Contribution of
F. D. Nichol in the Creation and Evolution Controversy” (term paper, AU, Fall
1977).
37
Introduction
78. Alonzo L. Baker, Francis D. Nichol, and George McCready Price,

Creation Not Evolution (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1926); Francis
D. Nichol, Signs of Christ’s Coming: Current Events Fulfilling Bible Prophecy
(Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1931); idem, God’s Challenge to Modern
Apostasy: A Study of the Three Angels’ Messages and the Sabbath in the Light
of the Modern Apostasy in Christendom, An Endeavor to Show That Revelation
14 Presents the Most Timely Message for the World Today (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1935); idem, The Answer to Modern Religious Thinking:
A Discussion of Current Religious Trends in Their Relation to the Distinctive
Teachings of Seventh-day Adventists (Washington, DC: Review and Herald,
1936); idem, Behold, He Cometh: A Discussion of the Solemn Truth of the
Unexpectedness of Christ’s Coming, a Warning Against the Temptations and
Dangers That Confront the Church Today, and an Appeal to Make Ready to Meet
God Face to Face (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1938); idem, Why I
Am a Seventh-day Adventist: A Personal Clear-cut Answer to a Question That
Is Asked by Many as They Watch the Remarkable Growth and Vigor of This
Religious Movement (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1943); idem, The
Case Against Liquor: A Calm Portrayal of the Facts and a Proposed Solution of
the Age-old Problem of Liquor (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1944);
idem, The Midnight Cry: A Defense of the Character and Conduct of William
and the Millerites (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1944); idem, Let’s
Live Out Beliefs: A Discussion of Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs in Terms of
Their Practical Relation to Everyday Living (Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1947); idem, Reasons for Our Faith: A Discussion of Questions Vital
to the Proper Understanding and Effective Presentation of Certain Seventh-
day Adventist Teachings (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1947); idem,
Certainty of My Faith: A Clear-cut Answer to the Often-asked Question, “Why
Are You a Seventh-day Adventist?” (Washington, DC: Review and Herald,
1948); idem, Letters from Far Lands: Written During an Air Journey to 24 Lands,
Describing Adventist Mission Activities and the Customs, Habits, and Daily Life
of the People in Europe, the Middle East, Egypt and Ethiopia (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1948); idem, Ellen G. White and Her Critics: An Answer
to the Major Charges That Critics Have Brought Against Mrs. Ellen G. White
(Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1951); idem, Questions People Have
Asked Me: The Editor of the Review and Herald Answers Questions on Various
Matters of Interest to Adventists (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1959);
idem, Making Ready for Heaven: A Reprint of Behold He Cometh, Let’s Live Our
Beliefs (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, [196?]); idem, Why I Believe in
Mrs. E. G. White: Some Reasons Why Seventh-day Adventists Believe that Ellen
G. White Possessed the Gift of “the Spirit of Prophecy” (Washington, DC: Review
and Herald, 1964).
79. Neufeld, “The SDA Bible Commentary in Retrospect,” 2.
38
80. “For one person to do all of the writing and the editing, nearly 100
years would have been necessary.” Cottrell, “The Untold Story of the Bible
Commentary,” 40; idem, “The Story of the Bible Commentary,” 29.
81. Neufeld, “The SDA Bible Commentary in Retrospect,” 4.
82. Cottrell, “The Untold Story of the Bible Commentary,” 46; idem,
“The Story of the Bible Commentary,” 33.
83. Kenneth A. Strand, The Open Gates of Heaven: A Brief Introduction

to Literary Analysis of the Book of Revelation (Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor
Publishers, 1970). A second enlarged edition was published in 1972 and the
last revised and enlarged book from The Open Gates of Heaven, Kenneth A.
Strand, Interpreting the Book of Revelation: Hermeneutical Guidelines, with
Brief Introduction to Literary Analysis (Worthington, OH, and Naples, FL: Ann
Arbor Publishers, 1976, 1979, 1986).
84. Kenneth A. Strand, Perspectives in the Book of Revelation: Essays

on Apocalyptic Interpretation (Worthington, OH: Ann Arbor Publishers, 1975).
The first chapter of this book is “a slightly modified reprint of a review article
appearing in AUSS in 1973.” Kenneth A. Strand, “The Book of Revelation: A
Review Article on Some Recent Literature,” AUSS 11, no. 2 (1973): 181-193.
85. Strand, Perspectives in the Book of Revelation, 38.
86. For a report of the Conference, see Kenneth H. Wood, “The 1974
Bible Conference,” RH, August 01, 1974, 2, 18; Gordon M. Hyde, “Church Holds
Historic Bible Conference,” RH, August 15, 1974, 4-6; Robert H. Pierson, “Is
There Any Word from the Lord?” RH, August 15, 1974, 7-9; Craig Scott, “Bible
Conference to Evaluate, Study SDA Bible Doctrines,” Student Movement, May
09, 1974, 1; “Is There Any Word from the Lord?” LUH, June 25, 1974, 4-7.
87. Desmond Ford, A Hermeneutic for Revelation, vol. 1 of Crisis! A

Commentary on the Book of Revelation (Newcastle, CA: Desmond Ford, 1982), v.
88. George R. Knight, A Search for Identity: The Development of Seventh-

day Adventist Beliefs, Adventist Heritage Series (Hagerstown, MD: Review and
Herald, 2000), 190. For more information on these Consultations, see Lawrence
T. Geraty, “First Adventist Theological Consultation between Administrators
and Scholars,” AR, October 16, 1980, 15-17; Warren C. Trenchard, “In the Shadow
of the Sanctuary: The 1980 Theological Consultation,” Spectrum 11, no. 2 (1980):
26-30; Alden Thompson, “Theological Consultation II,” Spectrum 12, no. 2
(1981): 40-52; Neal C. Wilson, “Together for a Finished Work,” AR, December
17, 1981, 4-5.
39
Introduction
89. Frank B. Holbrook, ed., Symposium on Revelation—Book I and Book

II, Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, nos. 6 and 7 (Silver Spring, MD:
Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists,
1992), 7.
90. Ibid., 454.
91. “Methods of Bible Study,” AR, January 22, 1987, 18-20; Ministry, April
1987, 22-24.
92. In the following paragraphs the contributions of these three scholars

are mentioned, but specific analysis of their content is found in chapters 2-4.
93. Mervyn C. Maxwell, God Cares: The Message of Daniel for You and
Your Family, vol. 1 (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1981); idem, God Cares:
The Message of Revelation for You and Your Family, vol. 2 (Mountain View,
CA: Pacific Press, 1985); in Portuguese: Uma nova era segundo as profecias
do Apocalipse, trans. Hélio Luiz Grelmann (Tatuí, São Paulo, Brazil: Casa
Publicadora Brasileira, 2002); in Spanish: idem, Dios revela el futuro, vol. 2
(Boise, ID: Publicationes Interamericanas and Pacific Press, 1989, 2008), 2; in
German: idem, Gott Sorgt: Die Botschaft des Buches Daniel für Dich und Deine
Familie (Krattingen: Advent-Verlag Krattingen, 1987); also translated into
Chinese. Maxwell had already addressed the books of Daniel and Revelation
in his master’s thesis on the prophecy of 1260 days of Dan 7 and Rev 11-13, “An
Exegetical and Historical Examination of the Beginning of the 1260 Days of
Prophecy with Special Attention Given to A.D. 538 and 1798 as Initial and
Terminal Dates” (MA thesis, SDA Theological Seminary, 1951).
94. Jerry Moon, “C. Mervyn Maxwell: An Academic Life Sketch,” JATS
11, no. 1-2 (2000): 4.
95. The Voice of Prophecy, God Cares: Prophecies from the Bible Book of
Revelation, CAR, JWL, AU, Berrien Springs, MI ([199?]).
96. Hans K. LaRondelle, Chariots of Salvation: The Biblical Drama

of Armageddon (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1987); in Portuguese:
idem, Armagedom: o verdadeiro cenário da guerra final (Tatuí, São Paulo,
Brazil: Casa Publicadora Brasileira, 2004); in German: idem, Als Harmagedon:
Ende und Neuer Anfang (Saatkorn-Verlag Hamburg: K. Bangert, 1991); idem,
The Good News About Armageddon (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
1990); in Portuguese: idem, Boas novas sobre o Armagedon, translated by César
Luís Pagani (Tatuí, São Paulo, Brazil: Casa Publicadora Brasileira, 2002); also
translated into German and Korean. However, LaRondelle had already written
on the principles of prophetic interpretation in 1983, idem, The Israel of God in
40
Prophecy: Principles of Prophetic Interpretation (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews

University Press, 1983); Russian (1998), Portuguese (2002), Korean (2005).
97. Hans K. LaRondelle, How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies

of the Bible: The Biblical-Contextual Approach (Sarasota, FL: First Impressions,
1997). A second enlarged edition was published in 2007. Spanish: Las profecías
del fin, trans. David Gullón (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Asociación Casa Editora
Sudamericana, 1999).
98. Hans K. LaRondelle, Light for the Last Days: Jesus’ End-time
Prophecies Made Plain in the Book of Revelation (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press,
1999).
99. Jon K. Paulien, Decoding Revelation’s Trumpets, Andrews University

Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series, vol. 11 (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews
University Press, 1987), 11.
100. Jon K. Paulien, The Book of Revelation: Too Good to Be False

(Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1990); idem, What the Bible Says about
the End-Time (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1994); Korean (1996);
Russian (1999); German (2006); idem, The Millennium Bug: Is This the End of the
World as We Know It? (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1999); German (2000); idem,
The Deep Things of God (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2004); idem, The
Gospel from Patmos: Everyday Insights for Living from the Last Book of the Bible
(Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2007); idem, Armageddon at the Door
(Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2008); in Spanish: idem, El Armagedón
está a las puertas: ¿tienes puesta la armadura? (Madrid, España: Editorial Safeliz,
2009). Moreover, three other books were published for NAD academy textbooks.
Idem, Daniel and Revelation: Student Edition, North American Division Office
of Education, Crossroads Series (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1998); idem, Daniel
and Revelation: Teacher Edition, North American Division Office of Education,
Crossroads Series (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1998); idem, Daniel and Revelation:
Teacher Resource Manual, North American Division Office of Education,
Crossroads Series (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1998).
101. Jon K. Paulien, Seven Keys: Unlocking the Secrets of Revelation

(Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2009).
102. Jon K. Paulien, The Gospel from Patmos: Everyday Insights for
Living from the Last Book of the Bible (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
2007); Korean (2007).
103. Alberto R. Treiyer’s works include: Alberto R. Treiyer, El día
de la expiación: y la purificación del Santuario (Buenos Aires, Argentina:
Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1988); idem, El enigma de los sellos y
41
Introduction
las trompetas: a la luz de la visión del trono y de la recompensa final (Mayagüez,

PR: Proyecciones bíblicas, 1990); idem, The Day of Atonement and the Heavenly
Judgment: from the Pentateuch to Revelation (Siloam Springs, AR: Creation
Enterprises International, 1992); idem, The Final Crisis in Revelation 4-5 (Siloam
Springs, AR: Creation Enterprises International, 1998); idem, The Seals and the
Trumpets: Biblical and Historical Studies (n.p.: 2005); idem, The Apocalyptic
Expectations of the Sanctuary: With Stories and Illustrations (n.p.: A. R. Treiyer,
2008).
104. Máximo Vicuña, Interpretación Histórica del Libro de Apocalipsis

(Lima, Perú: Imprenta Unión de la Universidad Peruana Unión, 1987); Joseph J.
Battistone, Revelation 1-11: God’s Church in a Hostile World (Hagerstown, MD:
Review and Herald, 1989); Lawrence Maxwell, Revelation 12–22: A Refuge from
the Storm (Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1989); Henry Feyerabend, Revelation Verse
by Verse (Berrien Springs, MI: Destiny/Arts International: Miracle Press, 1989);
Loron T. Wade, El futuro del mundo revelado en el Apocalipsis (Buenos Aires,
Argentina: Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1990); Roy Naden, The
Lamb Among the Beasts: A Christological Commentary on the Revelation of John
That Unlocks the Meaning of Its Many Numbers (Hagerstown, MD: Review and
Herald, 1996); Ranko Stefanovič, The Background and Meaning of the Sealed
Book of Revelation 5, Andrews University Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series,
vol. 22 (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1996); Isnard Rocha,
Apocalipse, Evangelho de João e Cartas (Atibaia, São Paulo, Brazil: Ébano Editora,
1997); Donald E. Mansell, Adventists and Armageddon (Boise, ID: Pacific Press,
1999); idem, Apocalypse! Has the Countdown Begun? (Alma Park, Grantham,
Lincolnshire, England: Autumn House, 2000); Mario Veloso, Apocalipsis y el fin
del mundo (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana,
1999); Ángel M. Rodriguez, Future Glory: The Greatest End-Time Prophecies in
the Bible (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2002); Jacques B. Doukhan,
Secrets of Revelation: The Apocalypse Through Hebrew Eyes (Hagerstown, MD:
Review and Herald, 2002); Adekunle A. Alalade, Jesus at the Centre: Sanctuary
Scenes in the Book of Revelation (Ibadan, Nigeria: AGBO AREO Publishers,
2006); Sigve K. Tonstad, Saving God’s Reputation: The Theological Function of
Pistis Iesou in the Cosmic Narratives of Revelation (London: T&T Clark, 2006);
Mike Tucker, Meeting Jesus in the Book of Revelation (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press,
2007); and Larry L. Lichtenwalter, Revelation’s Great Love Story: More Than I
Ever Imagined (Hagerstown, MD: Autumn House, 2008).

105. Alejandro Bullón, Tercer Milenio: Profecías Apocalípticas que afectarán
su vida (Buenos Aires, Argentina: Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1998);
Portuguese: O terceiro milênio e as profecias do Apocalips: como viver sem medo
do futuro (Tatuí, São Paulo, Brazil: Casa Publicadora Brasileira, 1998); English:
The Third Millennium and the Prophecies of Revelation: How to Live without
Fear of the Future (Manila, Philippines: Philippine Publishing House, 2001);
42
Polish: Trzecie tysiąclecie: i proroctwa księgi objawienia, jak żyć nie bojąc się
przyszłości? (Warsaw, [Poland]: Chrzescijanski Instytut Wydawniczy “Znaki
Czasu,” 2004); Russian.
106. According to Alejandro Bullón, by early 2010 the book had already
sold 1,200,000 copies in Russian; 900,000 in Portuguese (Brazil); 700,000 in
Spanish; 200,000 in English (Philippines). Alejandro Bullón, e-mail message to
author, April 14, 2010.
107. Ranko Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the

Book of Revelation (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2002, 2009).
108. Leif I. Hongisto, “The Apocalyptic Discourse in Mark 13: Toward a

Hermeneutic” (MDiv thesis, AU, 1984); Dean Davis, “The Heavenly Court Scene
of Revelation 4-5” (PhD dissertation, AU, 1986); Vel Eric Kotter, “A Study of the
Meaning of ‘Works’ in the Book of Revelation with a Syllabus for Applying the
Findings in Religious Instruction” (DMin dissertation, AU, 1986); Joel Nobel
Musvosvi, “The Concept of Vengeance in the Book of Revelation in Its Old
Testament and Near Eastern Context” (PhD dissertation, AU, 1986); Richard
Fredericks, “A Sequential Study of Revelation 1-14 Emphasizing the Judgment
Motif: With Implications for Seventh-day Adventist Apocalyptic Pedagogy”
(PhD dissertation, AU, 1987); Jon K. Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method,
and the Interpretation of Revelation 8:7-12” (PhD dissertation, AU, 1987);
Wilma Zalabak, “Daniel and Revelation: A Seminar for Healing” (MA thesis,
AU, 1993); Ekkehard Müller, “Microstructural Analysis of Revelation 4-11” (ThD
dissertation, AU, 1994); Edwin Earl Reynolds, “The Sodom, Egypt, Babylon
Motif in the Book of Revelation” (PhD dissertation, AU, 1994); Ranko Stefanovič,
“The Background and Meaning of the Sealed Book of Revelation 5” (PhD
dissertation, AU, 1995); Laszlo I. Hangyas, “The Use and Abuse of Authority:
An Investigation of the [exousia] Passages in Revelation” (PhD dissertation, AU,
1997); William C. Taggart, “The Three Parts of Babylon: Teaching a Historicist
Interpretation of the Leopardlike, Lamblike and Scarlet Beasts (Rev 13 and
16:19 as reflected in Rev 17) Based upon the Douglas Waterhouse Construct”
(PhD dissertation, AU, 1998); Kenneth Jørgensen, “The First Two Trumpets
of Revelation 8: The Origins and Development of Seventh-day Adventist
Historicist Interpretation” (Master’s thesis, AU, 1998); Ian R. Brown, “The Two
Witnesses (Rev 11:3-13) as Two Individuals Appearing Near the End of the Age:
A Selective Literature Review and Issues of Interpretation” (MA thesis, AU,
1999); Leslie N. Pollard, “The Function of loipos in Contexts of Judgment and
Salvation in the Book of Revelation” (PhD dissertation, AU, 2007); Laurenţiu
Florentin Moţ, “The Relationship between the Four Living Creatures and the
Four Riders in Revelation 6:1-8” (MA thesis, AU, 2008). Moreover, at least three
doctoral dissertations were defended out of SDA Theological Seminary at
Andrews University: Rilla Dee Taylor, “A Conceptual Model for the Professional
43
Introduction
Practice of Seventh-day Adventist Educational Administration Based on the

Proclamations of the Three Angels of Revelation 14” (PhD dissertation, AU,
1980); Beatrice S. Neall, “The Concept of Character in the Apocalypse, with
Implications for Character Education” (PhD dissertation, AU, 1981); Richard
Louis Fredericks, “A Sequential Study of Revelation 1-14 Emphasizing the
Judgment Motif: With Implications for Seventh-day Adventist Apocalyptic
Pedagogy” (PhD dissertation, AU, 1988).
109. Edgar Novo Lloren, “The New Jerusalem Motif in Revelation 21:1-
22:5” (PhD dissertation, AIIAS, 1998); Alfredo Agustin, “The Locus of the
Millennial Reign of Christ and the Saints in Rev. 20:1-10” (PhD dissertation,
AIIAS, 2002); Richard Apelles Sabuin, “Repentance in the Book of Revelation”
(PhD dissertation, AIIAS, 2006); Mesfin Mandefro, “An Investigation into the
Motif of Works and Reward in the Letters to the Seven Churches of Revelation”
(MA thesis, AIIAS, 2007); Glenn Jade Mariano, “The Identity and Meaning of the
‘Earth-Dwellers’ in the Book of Revelation” (MA thesis, AIIAS, 2007); Michael
Onyedikachi Akpa, “The Identity and Role of Michael in the Narrative of the
War in Heaven: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Rev 12:7-12” (AIIAS,
2007); Chawngdinpuii J. Tlau, “The Identification and Timing of the Marriage
of the Lamb in Revelation 19:6-8” (PhD dissertation, AIIAS, 2008); Dong-gee
Lyu, “The Use of Jeremiah in the Book of Revelation” (PhD dissertation, AIIAS,
2009).
110. [Froom], “History of the Interpretation of the Apocalypse,” in

SDABC, 7:103-132. The name of the author can be found in Cottrell, “The Untold
Story of the Bible Commentary,” 50.
111. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, passim.
112. Jon K. Paulien, “The Book of Revelation at the Crossroads: Where

We’ve Been and Where We’re Going” (Paper presented to a meeting of the
Adventist Society for Religious Studies, Boston, MA, November 19, 1999).
113. Ibid., 8. Paulien’s paper is apologetic and it is divided into seven

subdivisions: The Distant Past; Two Waves of Scholarly Interest; The Third
Wave of Scholarly Interest; Continuance of the Third Wave; Adventist Study
of Revelation Then; The Hermeneutical Crisis Since 1915; and Adventist
Apocalypse Now. Before proposing my topic for my doctoral dissertation, I had
not read Paulien’s paper.
114. Historicism, as a method of apocalyptic interpretation, is

distinguished from preterism, futurism, and historical criticism. Historicism
“sees Revelation portraying a sequence of events that begins in the Apostolic
Era and continues on step by step until the grand eschatological climax.”
44
Moreover, it “interprets the various visions in Revelation as going over the

same ground from the prophet’s own day until the end-time.” On the other
hand, preterism “has tended to interpret either the entire book of Revelation
or virtually all of it as ancient history.” Futurism “sees the fulfillment of most
of Revelation restricted to a short period of time still future to our own day.”
Kenneth A. Strand, “Foundational Principles of Interpretation,” in Symposium
on Revelation-Book I, ed. Frank B. Holbrook, Daniel and Revelation Committee
Series (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference
of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992) 6:4, 5. Historical criticism of the Bible is a
method of interpretation that does not believe the Bible was inspired by the
Holy Spirit, but treats Scripture as if it were of merely human origin.
115. C. Mervyn Maxwell taught at the Seminary from 1968 to 1988. C.

Mervyn Maxwell, Autobiographical Information, August 25, 1987, CAR, JWL,
AU (Berrien Springs, MI); Lawrence Maxwell, “C. Mervyn Maxwell: Memories
of My Brother,” JATS 11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000): 25; Jerry Moon, “C. Mervyn Maxwell:
An Academic Life Sketch,” 3. LaRondelle taught at the Seminary from 1966 to
1991. Hans K. LaRondelle, Autobiographical Information, October 14, 1991, CAR,
at JWL, AU (Berrien Springs, MI). Paulien began at the Seminary as a contract
teacher from 1982 to 1984, and his full-time appointment was from September
2, 1984, to June 2007. Jon Paulien, e-mail message to author, April 15, 2008.
116. William Johnsson affirms: “From the earliest days of our movement
Seventh-day Adventists have considered Revelation 12-14 a highly significant
passage.” William Johnsson, “The Saints’ End-Time Victory Over the Forces
of Evil,” in Symposium on Revelation-Book II, ed. Frank B. Holbrook, Daniel
and Revelation Committee Series (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research
Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 7:5. With some
variations of verses treated, see Maxwell, God Cares, 2:54-62; LaRondelle, How
to Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the Bible, 105-107; Paulien, The Deep
Things of God, 122-129; Knight, A Search for Identity, 195-196; Naden, The Lamb
Among the Beasts, 19-23; Doukhan, Secrets of Revelation, 9-15.
45
CHAPTER 2
BIBLICAL-HISTORICAL EMPHASIS
T
he Seventh-day Adventist Church is a body “whose roots go down into
the soil of Millerism.”1 It was out of the Millerite movement that the
Seventh-day Adventist Church arose. Therefore, before describing
the historical emphasis taken by C. Mervyn Maxwell to the interpretation
of the Apocalypse, it is necessary to briefly recount the influence of the
interpretation of the Apocalypse from the Millerite movement through the
Sabbatarian Adventists to Uriah Smith’s book. As was mentioned in the first
chapter, the trumpets of Rev 8 and 9 and the vision of Rev 12 will be the
topics of focus.
BACKGROUND: MILLERITE AND SABBATARIAN ADVENTIST VIEWS

ON REVELATION (1832-1862)
As mentioned above, Uriah Smith’s book Thoughts on the Revelation,

or Daniel and Revelation, as it is better known today, was the predominant
book on prophetic interpretation in the SDA Church for nearly a century.
But, who influenced this interpretation of the Apocalypse? What was
the received heritage of the Millerites and Sabbatarian Adventists on the
interpretation of Revelation? How did they interpret the seven trumpets
and the vision of Rev 12? This section responds to these questions.
Millerite Treatment of the Revelation
The Millerite movement was an interconfessional movement and
47
Biblical-Historical Emphasis
gave more study to the book of Daniel than to the Apocalypse.2 Topics on
Revelation, however, can be found in Millerite literature.3 A glance at the
two main periodicals of the Millerite movement, the Signs of the Times
(March 21, 1840–January 31, 1844) and the Midnight Cry (1842–December
1844), reveals the interest of the Millerites in the Apocalypse.4 The leaders in
the Millerite movement wrote little on the seven churches5 and seven seals.6
They were engrossed with the seven trumpets, the two witnesses, the great
controversy of Rev 12-14, the battle of Armageddon, the seven last plagues,
the great Babylon, and the millennium, including the resurrections and the
new Earth.7
Among the leaders of the Millerite movement, two men were
considered the leading “writers on the prophecies,” William Miller and
Josiah Litch.8 In 1832, William Miller (1782-1849) started to publish a series
of sixteen articles for a Baptist weekly, the Vermont Telegraph.9 In 1833, these
articles were incorporated into his first tract of sixty-four pages entitled
Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ about
the Year A.D. 1843, and of His Personal Reign of One Thousand Years.10 In the
Evidence, Miller presented his views on the prophecies of Daniel and the
Revelation.
Before Josiah Litch (1809-1886) and Miller met for first time (1839),
Litch had already written two works on Miller’s views in 1838.11 His first
work, which received wide circulation, a tract of forty-eight pages entitled
The Midnight Cry, or a Review of Mr. Miller’s Lectures on the Second Coming
of Christ, about 1843, summarized Miller’s interpretation on the end of the
world.12 His second work, Probability of the Second Coming of Christ about
A.D. 1843, was a 204-page book that not only expanded Miller’s arguments,
but also added his own arguments.13 In 1842, Litch published a two-volume
work entitled Prophetic Expositions offering a solid understanding of the
prophecies.14
Litch was considered “a deep and original thinker,”15 becoming “one
of the most active pens of the movement,”16 being both an editor and an
48
author. His books and pamphlets got an extensive circulation. He was called
the “leading theologian”17 of the Millerite movement. This prolific writer
“championed the Millerite cause in New England as well as in Philadelphia.”
Since his writings were respected as reliable, Litch’s works were seen as
providing “a scholarly foundation for the work of the Millerites.”18
Litch’s works confirmed, expanded, and corroborated Miller’s views
on prophecy.19 One of his remarkable contributions to the movement was
his interpretation of the sixth trumpet of Rev 9. Unfortunately after 1844,
Litch gradually abandoned his previous convictions.20
Principles of Prophetic Interpretation
William Miller’s affiliation with a Calvinist Baptist church, together

with a mind that had a pronounced methodical bent, led William Miller
to frame his convictions in a logical sequence, which resulted in an overall
expression of his beliefs.21 Thus, after studying the Bible systematically
(1816-1818) using only a Cruden’s Concordance, he recorded the basic
fundamentals of his personal Christian faith, which consisted of twenty
beliefs, on September 5, 1822.22
Later, the written and oral ministry of William Miller led to frequent
requests that he state his bases for biblical interpretation.23 He set forth
fourteen “Rules of Interpretation,”24 with biblical texts to prove or illustrate
them.25 These “Rules” became the most widely publicized of any Adventist
interpreter,26 and were accepted by most other Millerite preachers and
writers. They have also been republished in recent years.27
Based on the presupposition of sola scriptura, Miller’s principles of
interpretation “were a part of the Protestant hermeneutical tradition which
can be traced back to the primitive church.”28 His fourteen rules can be
divided into three sections. The first five rules summarize basic principles
of interpretation for the entire Bible. In the next eight, his focal point is
prophetical interpretation. The last rule was, to him, the “most important
49
rule of all . . . that you must have faith” that would not question or doubt
“any part of God’s word.”29 This fourteenth and final rule “was a spiritual
one, involving willingness, by faith, to make any sacrifice Bible study might
lead to.”30
The eight rules that deal directly with prophetic interpretation are
as follows:
VI. God has revealed things to come, by visions, in figures and

parables; and in this way the same things are often revealed
time and time again, by different visions, or in different figures
and parables. If you wish to understand them, you must
combine them all in one. Proofs. Ps. lxxxix 19. Hos. Xii.10. Hab.
ii.2. Acts ii.7. 1Cor. x.6. Heb. Ix.9,24. Ps. lxxviii.2. Matt. xiii.13,34.
Gen. xli.1-32. Dan. ii.vii. and viii. Acts x.9-16.
VII. Visions are always mentioned as such. Proof. 2Cor. xii.1

[sic].
VIII. Figures always have a figurative meaning, and are used

much in prophecy to represent future things, times and events;
such as mountains, meaning governments; beasts, meaning
kingdoms; Waters, meaning people. Lamp, meaning Word of
God. Day, meaning year. Proofs. Dan. ii. 35, 44. vii.8, 17. Rev.
xvii.1, 15. Ps. cxix.105. Ezek. iv.6.
IX. Parables are used as comparisons to illustrate subject, and

must be explained in the same way as figures, by the subject
and Bible. Mark iv.13. See explanation of the ten virgins, Miller’s
Lectures, No. xvi.
X. 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. 2. Definite, a day for a year. 3.
Day for a thousand years. If you put on the right construction it
will harmonize with the Bible and make good sense, otherwise
it will not. Proofs. Eccles. vii.14. Ezek. iv.6. 2Pet. iii.8.
XI. How to know when a word is used figuratively. If it makes

good sense as it stands, and does no violence to the simple
laws of nature, then it must be understood literally, if not
figuratively. Proofs. Rev. xii.1, 2. xvii. 3-7.
XII. To learn the true meaning of figures, trace your figurative
50
word through your Bible, and where you find it explained, put
it on your figure, and if it makes good sense you need look no
further, if not, look again.
XIII. To know whether we have the true historical event for the
fulfillment of a prophecy. If you find every word of the prophecy
(after the figures are understood) is literally fulfilled, then you
may know that your history is the true event. But if one word
lacks fulfillment, then you must look for another event, or wait
its future development. For God takes care that history and
prophecy doth agree, so that the true believing children of
God may never be ashamed. Proofs. Ps. xxii. 5. Isa. xlv.17, 18,
19. 1 Pet. ii. 6. Rev. xvii.17. Acts iii.18.31
“His thirteenth rule shows how very cautiously Miller searched for
the fulfillment of prophecy in history.”32 Miller, as a historicist, believed
that “God takes care that history and prophecy shall agree, so that the true
believing children of God may never be ashamed.” “He looked in history
for fulfillments of the various features of the visions of John the revelator.”33
Thus, he concluded that John gave an outline of history from his day to the
end of time.
In short, Miller worked within the established Protestant system,
based on the Protestant principle of taking the Bible as its own interpreter,
and emphasizing the principles of analogy and typology. The application
of his rules can be seen in his interpretations of the seven trumpets and of
Rev 12.
Interpretation of the Trumpets
William Miller
Miller, applying the “year-day principle,” understood that the first

four trumpets had “their accomplishment under Rome Pagan,” and the last
three “under Rome Papal.”34 As other interpreters of his time, he interpreted
the first four trumpets as the invasions of Rome by the tribes from northern
51
Europe. Thus, the first trumpet was accomplished “in the destruction of
Jews and their dispersion,” and the second trumpet “in the fall of imperial
Rome.” The third and fourth trumpets referred to “the overthrow of the
Asiatic kingdom,” and “the taking away of Pagan rites and ceremonies.”35
He gave more emphasis to the application of the last three trumpets
than to the others. He claimed that the last three trumpets (the three woes)
“are a description of the judgments that God has sent and will send on this
Papal beast, the abomination of the whole earth.” The expression, “Woe,
woe, woe, to the inhabitants of the earth” of Rev 8:13, to him means “the
worshipers of this Papal beast, the followers of this abomination.”36
In his historical application, Miller concluded that the fifth trumpet
commenced from the foundation of the “Turkish empire in Bithynia, in
the year A. D. 1298, and lasting five prophetic months or 150 years, which
carries us down to the year A. D. 1448.”37 He adds that the rise of the Turkish
Empire “became a check to the Roman power; and from this time we may
reasonably date the declension of Papal authority.”38 Later, Miller, probably
influenced by Litch, changed these dates “according to Gibbon,” from July
27, 1299, to 1449.39
On the sixth trumpet, Miller understood that the four loosed angels
represent “the four nations that had embraced the Mohometan religion,”
that is to say Turks, Tartars, Arabs, and Saracens. Those nations destroyed
and conquered, he said, the third part of Rome Papal in a period of “an hour,
and a day, and a month, and a year” (Rev 9:15, KJV), which by historicist year-
day symbolism totals 391 years and 15 days. The sounding of the trumpet
would end with “the final dissolution of the Turkish empire.”40
On the historical application of this trumpet, Miller adopted different
conclusions. In 1831, Miller concluded that the sixth trumpet began in 1452
and would end in 1843. Later, in 1836, he assigned the period from 1448 to
1839 to this sixth trumpet, while in 1841 he revised it again to reach from
1449 to 1840.41
After the second woe finished, “the third woe comes quickly” (Rev
52
11:14). Miller concluded that with the sounding of the seventh trumpet,
“the mystery of God” (that means the “preaching of the gospel”), would be
finished and the papacy and the kingdoms of the earth would be destroyed.
Thus, the door of mercy would close for those who would not accept the
coming of Jesus Christ.42
On the historical application, Miller, in Evidence, declared only that
the seventh trumpet would begin in 1839.43 In 1841, in his “Chronological
Chart of the World,” he showed that the seventh trumpet would end in 1843.44
Two years later, he affirmed that the period for this trumpet began on August
11, 1840, and would end in 1843.45 In 1845, after the Great Disappointment,
Miller believed that the sounding of the seventh trumpet would occur when
Christ came for the second time.
Josiah Litch
As mentioned above, Litch, after reading Miller’s Lectures and using

his own arguments, wrote a book outlining The Probability (1838), where
first appeared his position on the trumpets.46 In 1842, Joshua Himes (1805-
1895), the promoter of Millerism, published two books by Litch showing
some new positions on the seven trumpets.47 As a historicist, Litch calculated
the time periods associated with each trumpet. He stated that “under the
first four trumpets the two western divisions fell, and under the fifth and
sixth the eastern empire was crushed; but under the seventh trumpet great
Babylon entire will sink to rise no more at all.”48 Thus, he understood the
seven trumpets “to shadow forth the instrumentalities by which the Roman
Empire was to be overthrown and subverted, and finally ruined.” These
conclusions were accomplished after consulting other Bible commentaries
and history books.49
Litch initially began the historical application of the first trumpet
about A.D. 64, “when Nero commenced his persecutions against Christians”
having a “short duration” until his death.50 The second trumpet covered the
53
period from “the persecution of the Christians commenced under Domitian,

A.D. 94, . . . until the days of Constantine, A.D. 312.”51 With the appearance
of the Arian heresy that represented the fall of “a great start” [Rev 8:10], the
fulfillment of the third trumpet began and ceased “about A. D. 538.”52 In the
fourth trumpet, Litch understood that “the sun represents the Gospel, or
New Testament; the moon, the Old Testament; the stars, ministers of the
Gospel.” The period of fulfillment of this trumpet began “about 538.”53
Later, Litch, readjusting his position, concluded that the first
trumpet covered the invasions of the Roman Empire by Goths, starting with
Radagaisus, who was a Gothic king, at the beginning of the fifth century.54
The second trumpet enclosed “the invasions and conquest of Africa, and
afterward of Italy, by the terrible Genseric,” the king of the Valdals, from 429
to 468,55 while the next trumpet covered the invasions of the Roman Empire
by Attila, the ruler of the Huns from 434 to 453.56 The fourth trumpet covered
the fall of the Rome Empire and actions led by Justinian.57
On the fifth trumpet, Litch initially identified the star that “fell from
heaven unto the earth” as Mohommed (from 606); “locus” as Mohommedans
(Saracens); and the period of “five months” (Rev 9:1-11) as 150 years, having
its beginning when Ottoman “invaded the territory of Nicomedia on the 27th
of July, 1299,” and ending with the virtual end of the Greek empire in 1449.58
Later, he did not make major modifications but specified the two periods
of the fifth trumpet following Gibbon’s history: (1) “the general spread
and establishment of Mahomedan religion,” and (2) “the wearing out and
tormenting of the Greek kingdom, under Othman and his successors, but
without conquering it.”59
Litch interpreted that “the four angels” of the sixth trumpet were the
principal cities of the Ottoman Empire, such as Aleppo, Iconium, Damascus,
and Bagdat [sic]. He followed Miller’s connection of the 150 years of the
fifth trumpet and “an hour, a day, a month, and a year” (Rev 9:15, KJV) that
means 391 days and 15 days, adopting initially that it would end “some time
in the month of August,” 1840.60 After more study, he concluded that the
54
end of the sixth trumpet would happen exactly on August 11, 1840.61 Litch
later believed his prediction had an exact fulfillment that encouraged other
Millerites to preach with more conviction the advent near.62 The aftermath
of the fulfillment of Litch’s prediction contributed to both the interest of
self-professed infidels in Bible prophecy and the missionary zeal of the
Millerite movement.63
Litch believed that fulfillment of the seventh trumpet would be the
literal and personal coming of Jesus. “There is no millennium until this
trumpet sounds,” he wrote, affirming that this “woe” meant the world’s
“destruction, not its conversion.”64
In short, in most of his interpretations of the seven trumpets, Litch
followed Miller’s interpretation. They, however, had their differences on
the historical application of the periods of the trumpets. Miller’s greatest
contribution was “to connect, consecutively, the 150 and 391 year periods of
Revelation 9,” whereas Litch predicted the ending of the sixth trumpet as
August 11, 1840.65 Table 2, presents a comparison of the interpretation on the
seven trumpets between Miller and Litch.
I turn now to an analysis of the interpretation of the vision of Rev 12
of the two major contributors in the Millerite movement.
Interpretation of Revelation 12
William Miller
Miller said that by the woman of Rev 12 “we must understand the
people of God, in all ages of the church, whether among the Jew or Gentiles,
she is called a woman because she is the spouse of Christ,” and also because
of “her dependence on Christ for all things.”66 By the red dragon, he
understood that it is “used as a figure to denote Pagan Rome,” and added
“the woman sitting on the scarlet coloured beast” is used to “denote the
church of Rome, or Papal Rome.” Therefore, “both together, civil and papal,
55
makes the anti-christian [sic] abomination.”67

Applying the year-day principle, Miller understood that 1260 years
(v. 6) or “a time, times, and half a time” (v. 14) reached from 538 to 1798,
“during which time a free toleration of religious rights were not permitted
in any of the kingdoms which formerly composed the Rome empire [sic].”68
Table 2. Miller’s and Litch’s interpretation of the seven trumpets
Josiah Litch Josiah Litch

Trumpet William Miller
1838 1840s
Under Rome Pagan
Invasions of
First-Fourth The tribes’ invasions
Roman Empire by
from northern Europe
Barbarians
on Rome
Invasions of Rome
The destruction of Jews
First 64-68 by Goths
and their dispersion
Beginning of 400s
Invasions of Africa,
The fall of imperial
Second 94-312 Italy by Vandals
Rome
429-468
The overthrow of the Invasions of Rome
Third 312-538
Asiatic kingdom by Huns
The taking away
Fall of Roman
Fourth of Pagan rites and 538-
Empire
ceremonies
Under Rome Papal
Fifth-Seventh The description of the
judgments that God
has sent and will send
on this Papal beast
Rise of Turkish Empire Mahomedan Saracens-Turks
Fifth The declension of religion invasions upon
Papal authority 606-1449 Eastern Empire
1298-1448
Five
July 27, 1299-1499 July 27, 1299-1449 July 27, 1299-1449
months
(1842)
Sixth Ottoman Turks Ottoman Turks Ottoman Turks
= 391 years and 15 days
= 391 years and = 391 years and 15
Hour-day- 1452-1843 (1831)
15 days days
month-year 1448-1839 (1836)
1449-Aug 1840 1449-Aug 11, 1840
1449 -1840 (1841)
56
On fighting against the remnant, he grasped that “this war has not yet
come; for it is evident by the expression ‘remnant of her seed,’ that it means
the last of the church.” Moreover, he added that this “battle of the dragon’s
last power will be in America, and if so, it must be mainly in these United
States.” Then, he concluded, this battle would be on “political principles.”69
Josiah Litch
On the basis of Miller’s interpretation, Litch figured that the woman

represents “the true church of Christ.” Whereas Miller interpreted “the
moon” as “the ceremonial law,” and “twelve stars” as “twelve patriarchs,
afterwards the twelve apostles,” Litch saw the moon and stars as symbolizing
“the former dispensation, or Old Testament,” and the “ministers of Christ,”
respectively. But Miller and Litch understood that “the sun” represented
“gospel light.” Furthermore, they agreed with the prophetic period of 1260
years, and the representation of the red dragon.70 To Litch, “remnant of her
seed” means “her true children.”71 Thus, this explication of Rev 12 became
standard among Millerites.72
To sum up, even though the Millerites focused on Daniel more than
Revelation, they laid the groundwork for the prophetic interpretation of
Sabbatarian Adventists, with a historical emphasis. Miller’s rules are relevant
to the framework of the historicist method of prophetic interpretation. They
seem to apply to prophetic exegesis, with repetitive arguments. Using these
rules, both Miller and Litch, in general, arrived at the same conclusion in the
interpretation of the seven trumpets (except in the historical application of
the periods of the trumpets), and of Rev 12 (except for the timing of the
appearance of the remnant).
57
Sabbatarian Adventist Treatment of the Revelation
After the great disappointment, the Millerite movement was

fragmented into many different branches.73 Among them was a small group
of Sabbatarian Adventists who published a twenty-four-page pamphlet, A
Word to the “Little Flock,” in May 1847.74 Since 1860 they have been known
as “Seventh-day Adventists.”
Joseph Bates (1792-1872) started writing his pamphlets before
A Word appeared.75 Justly called “Outrider of the Apocalypse,” “the first
theologian,” “the first historian,” and “the real founder of Seventh-day
Adventism,” he developed a unified eschatological theology centering on
the understanding of Rev 11:19 through 14:20.76 Bates was the acknowledged
leader of the Sabbatarian Adventists in the middle 1840s, whereas James White
(1821-1881) “would be the undisputed head of the Sabbatarian movement” in
the 1850s and 1860s.77
Near the end of the Sabbatarian Adventism period, White declared
that they were “all coming to the same conclusion on almost every point,
and confident that they had found a better harmony than they had before
seen” on the book of Revelation. 78
In June 12, 1855, the Review and Herald published “Rules of

Interpretation,” suggesting to “the student of prophecy place these rules
on a card,” in order to master them when studying “the predictions of the
prophets.”79 Thus, these eleven hermeneutical principles underlined the
system of prophetic interpretation that was used by Sabbatarian Adventists.80
In practice, all Sabbatarian Adventists continued to use Miller’s
principles or method of historicism for prophetic interpretation with some
different conclusions, for example, on the view of the millennium. Whereas
Millerites thought that the earth would be restored before the 1000 years,
58
Sabbatarian Adventists believed that it would be after the millennium.81

Maxwell points out five reasons why the Sabbatarians were further
along in the fuller restoration of biblical truth than the Reformers: They (1)
centered their attention in typology; (2) rejected tradition more extensively;
(3) emphasized the authority of the Bible; (4) used as a hermeneutical tool
the fulfillment of prophecy in their movement; and (5) accepted the spiritual
gifts manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White in the end-time.82
None of the early Sabbatarians developed a systematic exposition

of the seven trumpets. However, in the Sabbatarian Bible conferences
of 1848, they re-affirmed the Millerite prophetic position, according to
LeRoy Froom.83 Hence, the first editor of their magazines, James White,
republished, edited, and enlarged Litch’s work under the title The Sounding
of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation VIII and IX in 1859.84
White’s understanding of the events may point out some important
ideas. (1) Contrary to “prevailing views in the Millerite movement,” except
Litch, but agreeing with other scholars in “both Europe and America,”
White “placed the plagues in the future,” neither in the past nor parallel
to the trumpets.85 (2) He made a difference between “the judgment of
the righteous” and “the judgment of the dead.” The first would follow the
last plagues, and the second would occur during the millennium.86 (3)
He understood that the saints will get their reward when the kingdom of
God will be established in the New Earth, “and that at that very time God
will destroy by the second death all who have corrupted the earth.” (4)
For White, the seventh trumpet ends after the millennium and the second
resurrection.
59
Sabbatarian Adventists did not write a systematic commentary on

Rev 12. They followed the standard views of other Protestant scholars with
little variation. The entire twelfth chapter of the Apocalypse is, in their
view, a history of the true church in her conflict with the dragon. And their
center of attention was on the last verse of the chapter, Rev 12:17.
Sabbatarian Adventists understood that the “woman” represented
the church; the “child” represented Christ; and the “dragon,” imperial Rome.
Applying the year-day principle, they believed that the “one thousand two
hundred and sixty days” of Rev 12:6 and the “time and times and half a time”
of Rev 12:14 were the same period, extending from 538, when Justinian, the
emperor of Rome, “made the bishop of Rome the head of all the churches,”
to 1798, when the French nation conquered Rome, and destroyed the seven-
headed power, or Papal Rome.87
On the interpretation of Rev 12:17, Sabbatarian Adventists considered
themselves “the remnant.” Explaining the meaning of “the remnant,” James
White declared that “they must be the last end of the church; those who live
in the last generation before Christ comes. Sabbath-keepers will understand
it, when they are reviled, and called Jews, fools, fanatics, &c. The dragon is to
make war on the remnant.”88 In 1847, Bates suggested that the “faith of Jesus”
(Rev 14:12) was synonymous with the “testimony of Jesus” (Rev 12:17), saying,
“What he [Jesus] taught his disciples, as in the above last instructions” (Matt
28:19, 20), it is to say, keeping His commandments.89 Then he connected the
sealing of Rev 7 with Isa 8:16, “Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my
disciples,” to show that the sealing message had implications for the remnant
described in Rev 12:17.90
In 1855, a new interpretation of the phrase “testimony of Jesus”
started to come out. The Sabbatarian Adventists began to emphasize the
function and value of spiritual gifts. Knowing that men may define the
phrase “testimony of Jesus” in different ways, James White claimed that “the
60
Bible gives but one answer,” “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”
(Rev 19:10).91 Interpreting Rev 12:17 through this approach, he underlined
the two causes “of the dragon’s wrath”: first because the remnant “keep[s]
the commandments of God,” in other words, keeps “the Decalogue” and,
second, they “have the testimony of Jesus,” namely the remnant have the
spirit of prophecy and this stirs the anger of the dragon.92 Then, James
White pointed out three ways how to know God’s prophet: (1) “By their fruits
ye shall know them” (Matt 7:15-20); (2) “False prophets prophesy [only]
peace” (Ezek 13:9-10; Jer 6:13-14; 14:11-14); (3) “By their teachings they may
be known, the Bible being the standard” (2 Tim 4:1-3; Isa 8:19-20).93 Thus,
the term “spirit of prophecy” “came to be associated with the testimony of
E. G. White.”94
Summary
The Sabbatarian Adventists gave more study to the book of Revelation

than had the Millerites. Among the Millerites, W. Miller and J. Litch were
considered the leading prophetic writers, whereas among the Sabbatarian
Adventists, the main expositors were J. Bates, J. White, U. Smith, J. N.
Andrews, and J. Loughborough. Litch’s works confirmed, expanded, and
corroborated Miller’s on prophecy, while those of the Sabbatarian Adventists
agreed on almost every point.
The rules of interpretation of Miller were used by both Millerites
and Sabbatarian Adventists, although the latter arrived at some different
conclusions. Both Millerites and Sabbatarian Adventists were historicists
who underscored the principles of analogy and typology. On the seven
trumpets, Sabbatarian Adventists followed Litch’s interpretation, but J.
White added his understanding of the seventh trumpet. On Rev 12, both
Millerites and Sabbatarian Adventists arrived at the same conclusion, except
in the application of the remnant.
61
SMITH’S THOUGHTS ON THE REVELATION
The title of the first Seventh-day Adventist commentary on the whole

book of Revelation started with the word “thoughts.” The word Thoughts
was not new among the Sabbatarian Adventists as a starting word in their
articles and at least one booklet. In 1851, John N. Andrews used this word at
the beginning of his article titled “Thoughts on Revelation XIII and XIV.”95
Later, other articles appeared.96 In the same year, Andrews himself used
Thoughts as the first word of a thirty-two-page tract on the true day of rest,
Thoughts on the Sabbath, and the Perpetuity of the Law of God.97
As mentioned above, after the organization of the Seventh-day
Adventist Church (1863) Smith’s book appeared with the same initial word,
Thoughts. James White commented that this book was rightly named
“Thoughts,” as they were not the product of one mind but of many. After
receiving fifty copies of Thoughts on Revelation, an “excellent work,” White
commented,
These thoughts are not the fruit of one brain. In the time of the
end the Revelation was to be unsealed and opened. And from
the open book, light has been shining. Wm. Miller saw much.
Others since have seen more. And as this open book contains
more which bears directly upon the present truth than any
other book of the Bible, its clearest light is reserved for believers
in the time of the third message. . . . Thoughts are expressed
by words, but words do not always express thoughts. The
world is full of books whose thoughts are with difficulty seen,
like mile-posts. This, however, is a book of thoughts, clothed
in the author’s happy style, plain, yet critical and practical,
coming down to the spiritual wants of the common people,
yet elevated and dignified. This standard work should be in
the library of every believer. It is, in its weight of thought, its
beauty of typographical execution upon its white pages, and
in its neat binding, a fitting companion for the “History of the
Sabbath.”98
The sources of Uriah Smith’s exposition of Apocalypse were diverse.

Smith accredited that “J. N. Andrews, with a mind of wonderful clearness
62
and logical power, laid broad and deep the theoretical pillars on which our
system of faith rests.” Among Adventists, Andrews gave the first exposition
of Rev 13, pointing to the United States as the two-horned beast.
James White also influenced Adventist thinking on the Apocalypse
when he wrote eight articles in the Review, covering the first nine chapters
of Revelation, under the general title, “Thoughts on Revelation.” Smith
followed the view of Josiah Litch on the seven trumpets. Others who also
influenced Smith included Joseph Bates, Ellen G. White, R. F. Cottrell, John
Loughborough, and J. H. Waggoner, who had already before 1867 written on
the seal of God and the mark of the beast. Thus, the young church came to
agree on major prophecies of Revelation, “and Uriah Smith’s summary was
accepted as the standard Adventist position except for a few details.”99
However, the work of Smith should not be diminished. “With some
100 commentaries on Daniel and Revelation in his own library,” Durand
declares, “Smith became skilled at drawing on the work of able predecessors
and bringing together their interpretations into a harmonious whole.”100
The last revision of Daniel and Revelation during Smith’s lifetime

was made in 1897.101 Therefore, this edition will be used to find Smith’s
principles of prophetic interpretation, and his views on the two passages
analyzed topics, the seven trumpets and Rev 12. In the preface of that book
appear fifteen points where the author explains his views on Bible prophecy
in general and of those two books in particular.
At least four important conclusions on prophetic interpretation can
be summarized from this introduction. First, Smith heavily supports the
application of the historicist method. He asserts that “the voice of prophecy
began” with Enoch (quoting Jude 14, 15) and this “earliest prophecy reaches
to the end of time. And through all the intervening ages,” he continues,
“other prophecies have covered all the more important events in the great
63
drama of history.” Thus, these great events have been “but the response of
history to what the prophecies had declared” (nos. 1, 2, 3, and 12).102
Smith affirms that the books of Daniel and Revelation naturally
stand side by side and “should be studied together” because “no other books
contain so many chains of prophecy reaching down to the end.” He adds, the
very events of our day are predicted in those inspired books (nos. 4, 5, 9, 11).
Smith’s third major point is to differentiate between the “two general systems
of interpretation,” “the mystical or spiritualizing system invented by Origen”
and “the system of literal interpretation” used by the Reformers. Utilizing the
latter, Smith declares that in the literal method “everything is subject to well-
established and clearly-defined law.” However, there are exceptions “where
the context and the well-known laws of language show that the terms are
figurative, and not literal.” Thus, “whatever is figurative must be explained by
other portions of the Bible which are literal” (nos. 6, 7, and 13).103
Smith’s last important point on the study of prophecy is that it
should not be neglected. According to his understanding of Dan 12:4, “the
fulfillment of the prophecy in the increase of this knowledge, is one of the
pleasing signs of the present time.” Concerning the Revelation, mentioning
the blessing pronounced in Rev 1:1-3 upon those who read this book, Smith
affirms that “no effort to arrive at a correct understanding of the book of the
Revelation needs any apology.” Then, he encourages readers to continue
seeking the truth, saying, “God has not so concealed his truth that it will
elude the search of the humble seeker” (nos. 8, 10, 13, 14, and 15).104
Uriah Smith recommends to his readers Litch’s work, An Exposition

of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation VIII and IX, 1875 edition, as a full
exposition of the seven trumpets, and the best light available on the topic.105
Smith offers his readers some extracts of the referred work to which he feels
he is “chiefly indebted.”106
64
Smith believed that the first four trumpets clearly parallel the
breakup of the old Roman Empire into its ten divisions. The fifth trumpet
and the sixth trumpets portray the Saracens (from July 29, 1299, to 1449) and
the Ottoman Turks (from 1449 to August 11, 1840) respectively. The seventh
trumpet, Smith understood, began to sound in 1844. In the application of
the events of this last trumpet, Smith follows White, who, among Adventists,
was the most fascinated with the trumpets.
On Rev 12, Smith followed the interpretation that had been held for
centuries: the pure woman in white who represents the “true church,” a crown
of twelve stars, “the twelve apostles,” the red dragon, “pagan Rome,” 1260 days,
“1260 years (538-1978),” and the remnant, “the final true church.”
Smith held that the Devil or Satan is not the “same as the dragon of
verses 3 and 4,” because “Satan is not said anywhere in the Bible to be red,
and he is not blessed with the number of heads and horns there stated.” He
finishes his commentary on Rev 12 saying that “according to the testimony
of this chapter, three powers are made use of by the Devil to carry out his
work, and hence are all spoken of as the dragon.” These are “(1) pagan Rome;
(2) papal Rome; (3) the two-horned beast, our own government under the
control of apostate Protestantism.” This last is “the chief agent” in making
war upon those who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony
of Jesus (Rev 12:17). Whereas Smith underlines the first characteristic of the
remnant—“This points to a Sabbath reform to be accomplished in the last
days”—he does not explain the “testimony of Jesus.”107
In short, early Adventists studied together not only Bible doctrine
but also Bible prophecies. As a result, they unitedly sought to place their
views fairly, intelligently, and convincingly before the world. They were then
in agreement over the same principles of prophetic interpretation. Except
for a few details, Smith compiled the standard Adventist position. Hence,
65
during Smith’s lifetime no other verse-by-verse commentary on Revelation

was released by Seventh-day Adventists.
But since 1905, two years after Smith’s death, three other books
appeared on the interpretation of the Apocalypse in the United States.
Interestingly, each one of the three major Adventist publishing houses
published one commentary on Revelation before the last edition of Smith’s
Daniel and Revelation, 1944.
THE AFTERMATH OF SMITH’S BOOK (1903-1944)
In 1905, Southern Publishing launched Haskell’s commentary titled

The Story of the Seer of Patmos.108 Among the three commentaries, Haskell’s
was the most widely distributed.109 This book resulted from the further
development of both introductions written by Haskell to the lessons on
Revelation for the “Missionary Reading Circle.”110
In 1935, the Review and Herald published the book of William A. Spicer
(1865-1952) titled Beacon Lights of Prophecy. Beacon Lights contains the
prophecies of both Daniel and the Apocalypse. The last book in print during
the Thoughts on Revelation period was Merlin Neff’s Victory out of Chaos:
Messages from the Book of Revelation for Today published by Pacific Press in
1942. It was an evangelistic book to warn people that before Jesus comes for
the second time there will be a judgment, but the victory will be for those who
“keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus” (Rev 14:12).
In 1907, the book written by Ludwig R. Conradi, Daniel und die
Offenbarung, had a great influence around the circle of Adventists in
Europe.111
Early Adventists did not make much change to Smith’s hermeneutical

interpretations of prophecy. However, in 1888 and 1889, the Review and
66
Herald released a 35-part series under the title “Principles by Which to

Interpret Prophecy,” written by Daniel T. Bourdeau, an Adventist evangelist
and missionary. At the time of its publication, it was the most extensive
list of principles for prophetic interpretation by an Adventist. Giving
explanations and examples on the application of the principles, he proposes
eighteen principles on how to interpret prophecies. 112
Some of these eighteen principles are worthy of note. The fourth
rule, “Some prophecies embrace type and antitype, and have, to certain
extent, a two-fold application,−a double fulfillment,” is “essential to a full
understanding and correct interpretation of a large portion of the prophetic
word,” affirms Bourdeau. He offers four examples to verify this principle, but
without differentiating between the classic prophecy and the apocalyptic
prophecy.113 He challenges that,
if this principle is correct, as we think it is, we shall find it not

only a key by which to discover new truths and new beauties
in many of the prophecies of the Bible, but also a means of
meeting the oft-repeated objection, “You must be incorrect
in saying that such prophecies are fulfilled in our time, or
will be fulfilled in the future; for they certainly have met their
accomplishment in the history of the past.”114
Bourdeau warns that we must be careful “not to abuse the doctrine

of types” because we can apply erroneously that “a type teaches what it does
not teach” (principle VI). Another principle is regarding “the fulfillment of
prophecies that have already been fulfilled.” If we search for new fulfillment,
we could ruin scriptural harmony, biblical doctrines, and “put off the coming
of Christ” (principle IX). Furthermore, after finishing his thirty-five-article
series, he adds a three-article series to highlight the value of the prophetic
periods in the study of prophecy.115
During the 1919 Bible Conference at Washington Missionary College
in Takoma Park, Maryland, from July 1 through August 9, 1919,116 Milton C.
Wilcox (1858-1935), dean of theology of the College of Medical Evangelists,
one of the more venerable conferees, presented principles of prophetic
67
interpretation. He proposed twenty-one principles.117 After spending “the

largest amount of attention” on some principles, the conferees recommended
“the need for an understanding of biblical languages or, at the very least, a
use of different Bible translations for examining a scriptural passage.”118
On the trumpets, the books The Story of the Seer of Patmos by

Haskell and Beacon Lights of Prophecy by Spicer more closely followed
Uriah Smith’s interpretations than those of William Miller and Josiah
Litch.119 Haskell and Spicer drew their understanding of Rev 8-11 not only
from the same quotations from Keith, Gibbon, Storrs, and Croly that Smith
had used, but also from other sources in order to offer more support to the
traditional Adventist interpretation.
Thus, the break-up of the Western empire was “foretold in symbols
astonishing in their historical detail.”120 The first trumpet was understood
as the Gothic invasions, the next one as the Vandal attack, the third as the
Huns’ incursion, and the fourth as Rome’s imperial glory extinguished.
Then, the next two trumpets are applied to the Moslem invasion upon the
Eastern Empire: the fifth as the Saracens’ incursion, and the sixth as the
Turks’ invasion.121 Whereas Spicer did not mention anything about the
symbolism of “five months” (Rev 9:10) and “hour and day and month and
year” (Rev 9:15), Haskell applied these to the same time periods used by
Litch, Miller, and Smith, namely, July 27, 1299–July 27, 1449, and July 27,
1449–August 11, 1840, respectively. “The little period between 1840 and
1844, during which the message of Rev 10:1-11 was delivered, was the time
between the close of the sixth trumpet and the sounding of the seventh.”122
Both authors held that in 1844 the third woe began, extending into “the end
of the world and the destruction of sin and sinners unprepared for the close
of the judgment hour.”123
How to interpret the fifth and sixth trumpets was debated in the 1919
68
Bible Conference. The debate began with the lecture titled “An Inquiry into
the Integrity of the Date of July 27, 1299” by Jacob N. Anderson (1827-1958),
a minister and Bible teacher.124 In his presentation, Anderson wanted to
defend this date as the ending point of the fifth and the beginning of the
sixth trumpet. “Prescott, however, critiqued Anderson, saying that he had
made a ‘false exegesis’ on two particular points”: first, “the symbol itself was
a misapplication of a reference to the Ottoman empire applied centuries
after the Saracens ceased to be an ‘aggressive power’”; and second “he did
not ‘see how anyone can maintain there was no king of the Mahammadans
[sic] until the end of the thirteenth century.’”125
For his side, Benjamin G. Wilkinson (1872-1968), an administrator
and educator, refuted Prescott’s point of view in his two presentations.
Even though we do not know “how controversial this topic may have been
during the Conference,” Prescott was concerned “that any hermeneutic be
historically accurate.” He thus “concluded his remarks by saying that the
time specified in the fifth trumpet was an unspecific time and that an hour
(the 24th part of a literal day) here was not to be interpreted by the year-day
prophetic typology as the twenty-fourth part of a literal year.”126
Since the early twentieth century, Adventist interpreters have been

agreed on the application of Rev 12. Whereas Haskell held that the red
dragon was the devil (Rev 12:9), Spicer judged that it was pagan Rome.127 On
the 1260 years, Haskell held the fulfillment of this period from 538 through
1798. Spicer, however, did not mention those years, only the persecutions
during the Dark Ages and Reformation.128 Finally, Haskell applied Rev 19:10
for interpreting “testimony of Jesus,” whereas Spicer makes no application.129
The whole chapter of Rev 12 was not directly part of the discussion
in the Conference. But one of the points related to the topic, the prophetic
time of 1260 days, was discussed.130 The issue was the date of the beginning
69
and ending of the fulfillment of the prophecy of 1260 years.

Reactions came from Prescott after Henry S. Prenier (1881-1958),
a Bible teacher, presented his views on Friday, July 11, 1919.131 The next
Sunday, even though Prescott believed in the ending of the prophecy in
1798, he emphasized the beginning in 533 and the ending in 1793 as the
dates for this prophecy. In addition, “the legal basis of the beginning of the
prophecy which was given in 533 was not implemented until 538.”132 Harry
A. Washburn (1872-1952), a history teacher, dominated the remainder of the
discussion.133 Finally, A. G. Daniel declared,
We are getting far more light on these questions. We didn’t,

many of us, possess the history. . . . We are landed right back
to our position that the 1260 years actually date from 538 and
end in 1798. . . . This establishment of papal domination and
the ending of those things didn’t crop up in a night, it took years
and years to come to that. Well, now, what we understand is
that these references to 503, 533, and 1793 don’t destroy our
positions that we held before at all, but they give us light so
to the steps by which we came to those dates. Isn’t that the
idea?134
Summary
Even though other commentaries appeared during the first period

of the interpretation of the book of Revelation in the SDA Church, Smith’s
work was the standard Adventist position. Other major books on the
Apocalypse, by Haskell, Spicer, and Neff, were published by the three major
publishing houses in North America.
Moreover, proposals on principles of prophetic interpretation
appeared, such as Bordeau’s and in the 1919 Bible Conference meetings,
but the Adventists did not make much change in Smith’s hermeneutical
interpretation. The same adherence to Smith occurred in the interpretation
of the seventh trumpet and Rev 12.
70
SDA CHURCH’S DEFINITION OF HISTORICISM
During this period, Adventist interpreters of biblical prophecies

used the historicist method as the only method to interpret Daniel and
Revelation.135 Their definition of historicism seems to follow the general
thought of the Protestant reformers.
The first declaration of fundamental principles of the SDA Church
came out in 1872. The denomination believed that “prophecy is part of God’s
revelation to man.” The seventh principle of twenty-five may be the first
definition of historicism. It says, “That the world’s history from specified
dates in the past, the rise and fall of empires, and chronological succession
of events down to the setting up of God’s everlasting kingdom, are outlined
in numerous great chains of prophecies; and that these prophecies are now
all fulfilled except the closing scenes.”136
In 1897, Smith seems to describe historicism after declaring the
prophecy of Jude 14 and 15 in the following way: “This sublime and earliest
prophecy reaches to the end of time. And through all the intervening ages,
other prophecies have covered all the more important events in the great
drama of history.”137
“The coming to pass of these great events has been but the response
of history to what the prophecies had declared,” he adds. “And thus amid
the ever-present evidences of the short-sightedness of men, and the ever-
recurring failures of human schemes, a voice has continually gone up from
earth to heaven” (italics added).138
In the 1919 Bible Conference, no one significant definition of
historicism was pointed out. Daniells, president of the General Conference,
reported that “the few days of study in the present conference have been all
too short to reach definite conclusions regarding some details of prophetic
interpretation and the comparative value of historic statement.”139 Even
though, during the 1919 Bible Conference, Prescott offered Christ-centered
messages at the beginning of each meeting, this perspective was not
71
incorporated into the interpretation of the Apocalypse until the next period.
BIBLICAL-HISTORICAL EMPHASIS
Though he worked and wrote in the third period, C. Mervyn Maxwell

seems to reflect essentially the same emphasis of the interpretation of the
Apocalypse as did Smith in the first period. The emphasis is distinguished
on the historical meaning in relation to the fulfillment of the Apocalypse
message. This emphasis searches to realize the divine purpose of caring for
His people throughout history until the end-time. Namely, it gives more
space to the interpretation of historical events from John’s time to the end-
time that fits with the interpretation of the book of Revelation.
This emphasis gives little space to theology and exegesis in the
interpretation of Bible prophecy. This is noted not only in Maxwell’s books,
God Cares (interpretations on the books of Daniel and the Revelation), but
also in the books on prophecy from the first period (1862-1944). This type of
interpretation might be named the “Biblical-Historical Emphasis.”
MAXWELL’S PLACE IN ADVENTIST HISTORY
Cyril Mervyn Maxwell (1925-1999) was a prominent church historian,

minister, teacher, theologian, writer, hymn-writer, and editor.140 Mervyn was
the second son of Arthur and Rachel Maxwell. When A. Maxwell received
an invitation to work at Pacific Press as an editor of Signs of the Times,
the Maxwell family moved from Watford, England, to near Pacific Union
College, California, in 1936, when Mervyn was eleven-and-a-half years old.141
After he graduated with a Bachelor in Theology from Pacific Union
College in 1946, he became an intern pastor for the Northern California
Conference (1946-1950). Upon ordination in 1950, he earned a Master’s
degree (1951) from the SDA Theological Seminary, located in Takoma
Park, Maryland.142 From 1951 to 1956, he worked as a senior pastor for the
72
Southeastern California Conference. In 1956, he started class work in New

Testament and early history for a Ph.D. at the University of Chicago, and
defended his dissertation in Church History in 1966.143 After working at
Union College, Lincoln, Nebraska, as a teacher of religion and chairman of
the department (1959-1968), Mervyn joined the SDA Theological Seminary
at Andrews University as a professor and chair of the Church History
Department until he retired (1968-1988).
His contribution as a writer was calculated by the sales of his books,
numbering more than 700,000 copies.144 Maxwell wrote at least seven
books, including the two volumes on Daniel and Revelation, God Cares.145
During forty years of college and university teaching, Maxwell wrote about
200 articles in different magazines and journals of the denomination.146
Furthermore, he was editor of Adventists Affirm and associate editor of the
Journal of the Adventist Theological Society.
His love for the SDA Church was unshakeable.147 Through his
ministry, preaching, teaching, lectures, and actions, he enhanced the truths
found by the pioneers. Maxwell was an active charter member of Adventist
Heritage Ministry.148 His son, Stanley, gives evidence of his father’s love
for the church saying, “The heyday of Walter Rea and Desmond Ford
was perhaps my father’s darkest hour. A cloud seemed to hover over the
household. It was almost as if forces were tearing at him as he fought to
preserve Adventism from destruction.”149
Lectures and Presentations
As mentioned above, Maxwell was a defender of the doctrine,

theology, history, and mission of the SDA Church. “Maxwell found his
lifework, not in theological innovation, but in preserving and articulating
the time-honored truths of the past, especially those of the early Seventh-
day Adventists.”150 “His scholarship was always in the service of the church,
and he did not hesitate to espouse unpopular causes or viewpoints if he
73
perceived that the vitality of the church was at stake.”151 Thus, his lectures,
presentations, and writings were concentrated inside of the denomination,
but not outside.
Maxwell helped found two conservative publications, Adventists
Affirm and Journal of the Adventist Theological Society.152 Adventists Affirm
started under the initiative of a group of scholars at Andrews University,
with one of them being Maxwell.153 The purpose of Affirm was “to address
issues in the church on the basis of the Bible and the writings of Ellen G.
White,” and to reaffirm “the relevance today of Seventh-day Adventist beliefs
and practices.” At the time of his death, he was acting editor of Adventists
Affirm.154
A total of thirty-seven documents were written by Maxwell for
Adventists Affirm; of them, thirty-two were articles.155 The topics of his
articles included were fourteen on prophecy and the great controversy; six
on Adventist doctrine and theology; five against women’s ordination; four
on Christian conduct; and three on Adventist history.
After the first publication of [Adventists] Affirm (spring 1987), the
Adventist Theological Society (ATS) was organized in 1988 at Collegedale,
Tennessee, where Maxwell “played an important role in the genesis” of
this Society.156 “ATS would be an international, professional, nonprofit
organization established to foster biblical, theological, and historical studies
supportive of the spiritual revival and reformation within the Seventh-day
Adventist Church.”157
For the first three issues of the Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society, Maxwell was associate editor and during the rest of his life, served
on the Editorial Executive Committee and Editorial Resource Board.
Moreover, Maxwell wrote five articles for the journal.158 After his death,
JATS published ten articles about Maxwell under the section “A Tribute to
C. Mervyn Maxwell” in its issue on eschatology in 2000.
74
God Cares on Revelation
God Cares, volume 2, appeared when the speculative elements

of futurism “seem to have reached epidemic proportions” in the
denomination.159 It became the first commentary on Revelation during the
multiple emphases period in the 1980s. Stanley Maxwell said of his father,
Mervyn, that God Cares volumes 1 and 2 would “replace Uriah Smith as the
authority on Daniel and Revelation,” ensuring that Mervyn Maxwell “would
be remembered.”160
Since no other commentary on the Apocalypse providing a historical
point of view had been published for a long time, God Cares volume 2 received
praise. For example, Kenneth Strand called it “truly a scholarly production,
even though its popular style might lead a reader at first glance to consider
the publication as only a popular narrative.” He added that “the book also
contains an amazing wealth of carefully researched and well-documented
information that, in my view, makes it also a very useful tool indeed.”161 For
his side, Gerald Dis, an evangelist, declares that though “Maxwell’s book is
designed to appeal to the layman and novice in prophetic studies, it is in no
wise shallow.”162
Content of God Cares Volume 2
Maxwell’s book is divided into two parts. The first part, as an

introduction, examines Jesus’ “Olivet Discourse” as recorded in Matt
24:1-25:46, because of both its references to Daniel’s prophecies and its
apocalyptic elements.163 The second part, the body of the book, analyzes
the Apocalypse chapter by chapter.164 After a brief exposition on the author
and the organization of Revelation, this last part has eleven chapters, where
each one contains four divisions: (1) an introduction, (2) the Bible text as
given in the RSV, (3) a section entitled “The Message of Revelation [chapter
number],” namely the commentary proper, and (4) answers to significant
75
questions frequently raised in connection to the Apocalypse. It also contains

an extensive bibliography and topical and scriptural indexes.165
The book is written in a popular and informal style because its
intended readership is primarily the general public. Hence, its content
includes generous illustrations such as photographs, artists’ drawings,
comparative charts, maps, and tables, many of them in color. God Cares
is of “truly scholarly stature—carefully researched, cognizant of current
discussion of the book of Revelation, and responsive to the major questions
that arise in connection with a study of this Bible book.”166
It is noted that God Cares contains more historical application of the
biblical text than biblical analysis of the text itself. Maxwell is concerned
with the individual reader understanding God’s love. Using his skill as a
storyteller, he appeals to the reader to trust more in God because He cares
about him and his family.
Literary Structure of the Apocalypse in God Cares
Even though many readers see the book of Revelation as the most
disorganized book in the Bible, Maxwell believes that John’s book “may be
the best organized book of its size in the whole Bible!”167 He came to this
conclusion after reading Strand’s book Interpreting the Book of Revelation.168
Although he was “skeptical” before reading Strand’s book,169 Maxwell
considered the literary structure of the Apocalypse a chiasm, beginning
with a prologue and ending with an epilogue,170 though he warns that “we
are dealing with literary similarities, not mechanical ones. Great writers
follow a method but never let their method become more important than
their message.”171
Apart from the prologue and epilogue, there are four parts of inverse
parallelism, he says: (1) 7 churches, Rev 1:10 to 3:22, and New Jerusalem,
Rev 21:9 to 22:9; (2) 7 seals, Rev 4:1 to 8:1, and Millennium, Rev 19:11 to
21:8; (3) 7 trumpets, 8:2 to 11:18, and 7 last plagues, Rev 15:1 to 16:21; (4)
76
Great Controversy, Rev 11:19 to 14:20, and Fall of Babylon, Rev 17:1 to 19:10.172
Moreover, the chiastic structure of John’s book divides the prophecies into
two major groups: (1) historical half, Rev 1:10-14:20 and (2) eschatological
half, Rev 15:1-22:9. Nevertheless, not all of the first group is just history,
neither is the entire second group just eschatological. The first part of
the book deals with the historical sphere and moves to an eschatological
climax.173
One more aspect of Revelation that “Maxwell’s structure underscores
is the almost identical internal arrangement of the four subdivisions and
their subsections: 7 Seals, 7 Trumpets, the Great Controversy, and 7 Last
Plagues (Rev 4:1-16:21). Each of these (1) “begins with a preparatory scene
portraying something in the heavenly sanctuary”; (2) “has an interruption
between item six and seven”; (3) has “parenthetical scenes of end-time
assignment and assurance”; and (4) climaxes with the seventh item (seal,
trumpet, etc.).”174
As was mentioned above, on the literary structure of the book of
Revelation, Maxwell recognizes his debt to Strand’s book Interpreting the
Book of Revelation, but he departs “from Strand only in a number of details.”175
The basic difference of chiastic structure of the book of Revelation between
Maxwell and Strand can be noted in table 3.
The major difference of the division of the structure in both happens
in the second half of Revelation that deals exclusively with the end-time.
Whereas Strand sees a movement from “God’s punishment of the wicked”
(Rev 15:1-16:17) and “judgment of the forces of evil” (Rev 16:18-18:24) to
“God completes his work for man’s salvation” (Rev 19:1-21:4), to the “church
triumphant” (Rev 21:5-22:5),176 Maxwell sees a chiasmus in the eschatological
half. This chiasmus “can be laid out this way,” he says:
A Description: The Plagues. 15:1 to 16:21

B Narration: Circumstances related to the plagues. 17:1 to 19:10
B’ Narration: Circumstances related to the Holy City. 19:11 to 21:8
A’ Description: The Holy City. 21:9 to 22:19177
77
It is also distinguished in the variation of verses in the prologue and

epilogue.
Table 3. Comparison of the literary structure of the Apocalypse between Strand

and Maxwell
Kenneth A. Strand C. Mervyn Maxwell

Description Verses Verses Description
Prologue 1:1-11 1:1-8 Prologue
Church Militant 1:12-3:22 1:10-3:22 7 Churches
Ongoing Activity of God 4:1-8:1 4:1-8:1 7 Seals
Trumpet Warnings to the
8:2-11:18 8:2-11:18 7 Trumpets
Wayward
Evil Powers Oppose God
11:19-14:20 11:19-14:20 Great Controversy
and His People
Vial Plague on the Wicked 15:1-16:17 15:1-16:21 7 Last Plagues
Evil Powers Judged by God 16:18-18:24 17:1-19:10 Fall of Babylon
Judgmental Finale by God 19:1-21:4 21:9-22:9 Millenium
Church Triumphant 21:5-22:5 19:9-22:9 New Jerusalem
Epilogue 22:6-21 22:8-17 Epilogue
Maxwell’s Definition of Historicism
To Maxwell, historicism is the interpretation from scenes of John’s

own days to events yet future. In addition, John, the prophet, “was inspired
to foresee the experience of the Christian church throughout all history in
between.”178 Maxwell argues that the historical method “must be right−for
John’s commission was to write ‘what is [in his own day] and what is to take
place hereafter’ [in the future after his day, emphasis in original] Rev 1:19.”
Moreover, he adds that “the book cannot have been devoted entirely to the
distant future, for the very first verse of the very first chapter says that the
Revelation was given in order to show ‘what must soon take place.’ Verse 3
adds, ‘The time is near.”179
“Some things, but by no means all things, in the book were ‘near’
and ‘soon to take place’ in John’s day.” Taking the reference of Rev 1:1-3 about
78
“soon” and “near,” Maxwell declares that “it is referring to the beginning of
the fulfillment of the predictions found in the book.” He adds, “In John’s
day these prophecies were straining at the leash, eager to get started on their
long journey through history.”180
Maxwell was every bit a historicist as evident throughout his two
volumes of God Cares. His understanding of Revelation’s outline shows
the division of the two parts, the historical half (Rev 1:10-14:20) and the
eschatological half (Rev 15:1-22:9).181 He points out that the Apocalypse
shows a series of prophecies that present a “parallel course from John’s day
to the end.”182 He comprehends that “one key to understanding Revelation
is the book of Daniel.” Then, he adds that “both books present parallel
views of prophetic panoramas that sweep from the prophet’s time to the end
of the world.”183
Unfortunately, in God Cares volumes 1 and 2, the principles of

prophetic interpretation that the author used for his interpretation do not
appear. But later, in March 1989,184 Maxwell presented a paper for DARCOM,
it being published with some added information in the last volume of
DARCOM series, where he presented eight principles of interpretation.185
Using these principles, I will evaluate his use of them in his commentary on
Revelation.
1. “The Bible is an inspired unit and one part of it can be used
legitimately to help explain another part of it.”186 This is applied throughout
his entire commentary, but a specific example occurs in the first part of his
book about the Olivet discourse (Matt 24, 25).187
2. “The themes of Revelation are closely linked to the themes of
Daniel and also to the themes of Matthew 24-25 and 2 Thessalonians 2.
Because the themes of these four portions of the Bible are closely linked,
they are helpful in interpreting Revelation, and vice versa.”188 Hence,
79
Maxwell wrote a commentary on both Daniel and Revelation and includes

interpretations in his God Cares series on these other passages.
3. “Though these prophecies [in Revelation, Daniel, Matt 24-25 and
2 Thess 2] have much in common, they are not identical.”189 For example,
“Revelation 12-14 . . . presents a braid rather than a strand of history,
repeatedly anticipating information that is elaborated later and reviewing
and augmenting information given earlier.”190
4. “The historicist approach is the only justifiable key to interpreting
the prophecies involving many ‘day’ and ‘weeks.’” His application of the
principle of year-day is shown in his commentary in the prophecy of the
1260 days and his historical explanation of the 2300 years.191
5. Dealing “prophetically with major religious and political entities,”
“the Roman Empire occupied the major focus of Daniel’s prophecies
applicable to the first century. But when, in the medieval centuries, the
most dynamic form of Christianity was to be found in western Europe,”
the emphasis of Revelation and the other NT prophecies shifted to western
Europe.192
6. “Appropriate attention should always be paid to the implications
of literary structure.” Because “Revelation, with its numerous ‘sevens,’
marvelous symbols, colorful descriptions, repetitive phrases, and large and
small mirror-like arrangements (‘chiasms’), is obviously a masterpiece.”193
7. “Ellen White’s interpretation of the Bible should be taken
seriously if she has written on the subject under study.” Maxwell advises
that “Seventh-day Adventists ought not to deprive themselves of something
that others prize—especially nowadays, as challenge after challenges serves
to make her inspiration the more apparent.”194
8. “God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34), and prophecy is of no
private interpretation (2 Pet 1:20).” Therefore, Maxwell concludes that “it
follows that prophetic interpretations offered by Bible students in the past
should not be overlooked.” Then he adds, “At the same time, we remember
that human understanding of truth is progressive—and also that some
80
aspects of Daniel’s prophecies were closed by God until the end of the 1260
days (Dan 12; Rev 10).”195
9. To these eight principles I add a ninth major principle found in his
book: “Help from the Old Testament.” “John had Old Testament language
on his mind when he wrote Revelation,” borrowing phrases and ideas
perhaps “a thousand times.”196
Analysis of Maxwell’s Interpretation
The biblical text used by Maxwell is the Revised Standard Version,

which he includes in each section after the introduction and before the
interpretation. The biblical text has added subtitles, according to Maxwell’s
view. As was done above, I will analyze the major points of the seven
trumpets and Rev 12.
Interpretation of the trumpets
Maxwell assigns two chapters of his book, more than eighty pages,
to the interpretation of the trumpets.197 “Like the seven letters and the seven
seals, the seven trumpets are located in the historical half of the Revelation
chiasm,”198he states. Furthermore, he declares that “whereas the seven
letters deal almost exclusively with the Christian church and the seven seals
deal mainly with Western Christianized civilization, the seven trumpets are
concerned with all three of the great world religions that worship the God
of the Bible,” that is to say, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. In Christianity,
the first six trumpets focus, in turn, “on the great Eastern Orthodox Church
as well as on the Western church,” and “the seventh trumpet involves all
mankind.”199
The language that John uses in the seven trumpets is “largely
impressionistic, it is not usually to be taken literally,” says Maxwell. John
has in mind the language of Old Testament passages, especially Joel 1:4-
81
7; 2:2-11, 15-17; Isa 7:18, 19; 10:16-19; Pss 18:7, 8, 13, 14; 11:4-6, he adds.200 He
divides the seven trumpets, under the title “Severe Judgments Warn the
World” (Rev 8:2 to 11:18), into four sections: (1) The “introductory sanctuary
scene” (8:2-5); (2) the “first six trumpets” (8:7 to 9:21); (3) the “scenes of end-
time assignment and assurance” (10:1 to 11:14); and (4) the “consummation,”
the seventh trumpet (11:15-18).201 I will use this structure to describe his
interpretation specifically on the seven trumpets.
On the trumpets, Maxwell establishes five important Bible
principles: (1) “Judgment falls first on apostate people of God”; (2) those
cover the span of Christian history; (3) “the impressionistic language”; (4)
a third of something “represents some specific entity”; and (5) the entities
“involve sizable numbers of God’s people.”202
Therefore, the fulfillment of the first four trumpets was: The first
trumpet is “the epochal destruction of the Jewish nation and the fall of its
capital city Jerusalem in A. D. 70”;203 the second trumpet is the decline of
the western Roman Empire, with the invasion tribes starting from 378 to
eventually its fall in 476;204 the third trumpet is the Middle Ages, when the
true religion of Jesus was polluted by “wormwood” (Satanic) error, especially
as centered in the Church of Rome; and the fourth trumpet is roughly from
538 to 1565, during the Dark Ages, a parallel to “the letter to Thyatira.”205
Maxwell affirms that “the first two trumpets make a pair. In the first,
the Roman Empire devastates the Jewish nation; in the second, invading
tribes devastate the Roman Empire. The third and fourth trumpets also
make a pair. In the third, error pollutes Christ’s church on earth. In the
fourth, error obscures Christ’s work in heaven.”206 Following this line, the
fifth and sixth trumpets make a pair, as well. They represent “a two-phase
invasion by fierce armies.”207
There are some similarities and differences between the fifth and sixth
trumpets, declares Maxwell. First, let’s look at the remarkable similarities.
In both the fifth and sixth trumpets, (1) “large numbers of creatures” (Rev
9:7, horselike locusts, and Rev 9:17, locustlike horses), (2) “each with
82
specialized tails” (Rev 9:10, scorpionlike, and Rev 9:19, serpentlike), (3) “are
aligned with specific time slots” (Rev 9:5, 10, five months, and Rev 9:15, an
hour, day, month, and year), (4) “and emerge out of specific locations” (Rev
9:2, the bottomless pit, and Rev 9:14, “beyond the Euphrates”).208
At least three differences may be noted, states Maxwell. First, the
tails, times, and locations are not identical. Second, “most conspicuously,
the horselike locusts of the fifth trumpet are allowed only to torture people,
whereas the horseback riders of the sixth trumpet are commanded to kill
‘a third of mankind.’” Finally, “only the horseback riders have the ‘three
plagues,’ the fire, smoke, and sulphur, to do the killing with.”209
Under the background of the prophecy of Joel and after showing the
parallelism between the real desert locust and the spread of Islam, Maxwell
concludes that the locusts of the fifth trumpet represent Islamic armies
in their early, Arabic phase of conquest. The star that falls from heaven
onto the earth in Rev 9:1 is “Satan, and the Islamic leaders who served
his purposes.” A bottomless pit represents “Arabia viewed as vast, mostly
uninhabitable wasteland, a place of death.” The grass of the earth and trees
symbolize “people of God whom the Moslems allowed to go on living.” The
five months’ torture signifies “approximately 150 years, probably the years
between the beginning (674) and end (823) of the early series of Islamic
attacks on Constantinople.” And Abaddon or Apollyon (destroyer) of Rev
9:11 represents “the locust king: Mohammed, viewed intentionally from his
bad side.”210
On the interpretation of the sixth trumpet, Maxwell concludes
that the four angels, which were released for a period of time (Rev 9:14-
15), symbolize “Islamic leaders, or, perhaps, demon princes” which were
released for 391 years (1453-1844). Islamic armies were “dominated by Turks
and especially by the Ottoman Turks.”211 Concerning the period of time,
“the hour, and day, and month, and year,” he argues that, regarding the use
of the article the (in the Greek) is only with hour, “setting the ‘hour’ apart
from all the other terms,” the hour refers to “the hour of judgment; that is
83
to say, for a period of judgment extending over a day and month and a year,
symbolic of 391 years,” and not 391 years and 15 days.212
The seventh trumpet is the “consummation, . . . judgment has come!”
declares Maxwell. His emphasis was in Rev 11:18 where “the nations rage” is
“a forecast of the final world war and of Armageddon.”213 “Thy wrath came”
is a reference to the seven last plagues;214 and in the last phase, “Destroyers
of the earth” are finally destroyed (cf. Rev 11:14-18).215
Revelation 12 is situated in the fourth part of Maxwell’s structure on

Revelation, entitled “The Great Controversy: Trials of the True Mother and
Her Children” (Rev 11:19-14:20). This section, in turn, is divided into: (1) The
introductory sanctuary scene (Rev 11:19); (2) The first six great controversy
scenes (Rev 12:1-13:18); (3) Scenes of end-time assignment and assurance
(Rev 14:1-12); and (4) The seventh scene or consummation (14:13-20).216
The first great controversy scene contains the symbols of the
woman, her child, and the dragon. Maxwell first explains the first promise
of salvation found in Gen 3:15, concluding that the word seed means both
“child” and “children.” The child represents Jesus. With this background,
the woman of Rev 12 symbolizes “God’s people as a whole, all of them as a
group . . . the ideal true church” (see Hos 2:19, 20; Isa 54:1-8; Ezek 16:8-14;
2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:21-23; Gal 3:28; Ps 104:2; Mal 4:2; Luke 16:8; 1 Thess 5:5-8).
Jesus Christ, the male child, was “born to the ideal church.” And the great
red dragon represents “Satan but here a symbol of the Roman Empire−and
also a symbol of the Roman Church insofar as it persecuted Christ’s true
followers during the 1260 years.”217
Maxwell divides the second great controversy scene into two parts.
The first part deals with the defeat of the great red dragon (Rev 12:7-9),
which shows the main point in Rev 12, not the beginning of the warfare,
but the fact that “the dragon was defeated.” The second part is the “grand
84
hurrah” which “is located at the very center of Revelation, give or take a
verse or two” (Rev 12:10-12). The great hymn of triumph shows that “Christ’s
authority is established.”218
The last great-controversy scene in Rev 12 is the war of the dragon
against the woman and her “remnant” children. Maxwell spends some pages
on the last verse of Rev 12. He wants to demonstrate who “the remnant of
her seed” is at the end-time, explaining its two characteristics, (1) “which
keep the commandments of God,” (2) “and have the testimony of Jesus
Christ” (v. 17, KJV).
By the second point, Maxwell believes that the phrase “testimony
of Jesus Christ” shows that “the message which the Holy Spirit gives to the
prophet is a message from Jesus.” Namely, comparing theses two phrases,
“the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ” (Rev 1: 2, 9; 20:4,
KJV), he concludes that the expression “the word of God” refers to “the
messages of the Old Testament that prophets came from the spirit of Jesus”
and “the testimony of Jesus Christ” represents “the newly developing body
of sacred literature, the New Testament, which the Holy Spirit was still
inspiring Christ’s apostles to write in John’s day.” Moreover, he underlines
that the “testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy” (Rev 19:10) and that
“Paul spoke of the church waiting for the second advent as ‘not lacking in
any spiritual gift’” (1 Cor 1:7).219
On the word “rest” or “remnant,” he underscores four points:
(1) Use of the word remnant to identify the commandment

keepers in Revelation 12:17 helps us associate the end-
time saints with the grand predictions of the Old Testament
prophets. (2) It helps us perceive the true significance of the
commandment keepers as the group, the seed, that is specially
identified as preserving and restoring God’s true church. (3)
It reaffirms the promise of the group’s ultimate holiness, ‘lame’
and ‘outcast’ though it may appear for a while. Not least
by any means, (4) use of the word remnant in 12:17 reminds
us that in the Bible the preservation and sanctification of the
remnant is an act of God’s transcending grace.220
85
As an Adventist historicist, Maxwell argues that “Seventh-day

Adventists make up the principal end-time group that believes in keeping
the seventh day as the Sabbath. By them, the writings of Ellen G. White
have been regarded as divinely inspired.”221 Finally, he points out that “the
principal actor in [Rev] 12:17 is not really the dragon who makes war but the
Lord Himself who behind the scenes is fulfilling His loving promises.”222
OTHER EXPOSITORS ON BIBLICAL-HISTORICAL EMPHASIS
The biblical-historical emphasis has been used by many other authors

in the multiple emphases period. Because it would be too extensive to
analyze them all,223 I will analyze the writings of Alberto R. Treiyer (1948- ) as
representative.
Alberto R. Treiyer
Alberto R. Treiyer was born in Argentina, on January 25, 1948. In

his home country, he concluded his studies in theology, philosophy, and
pedagogy at Colegio Adventista del Plata, today River Plate Adventist
University. He then worked as a pastor for four years. Later on, he returned
to his alma mater to teach for two years.224 After that he decided to go to
the University of Strasbourg, France, where he attained a doctoral degree
in theology in 1982. His dissertation was titled “Le jour des expiations et la
purification du sanctuaire.”225
Treiyer also taught theology at the Séminaire Adventiste du
Saléve in France, at the Adventist Antillian College in Puerto Rico, at La
Sierra University in California, and Columbia Union College, now called
Washington Adventist University, in Maryland. In recent years, he has
worked as a senior pastor in Atlanta, Georgia, and North Carolina. He
continues to give seminars for both lay members and pastors in English,
Spanish, and French.
86
Basically, Treiyer has been interested in two major topics, the

sanctuary of Israel and the prophecies of the end. These two subjects have
been addressed in his constant evangelistic meetings and writings. He has
written seven books that are translated from Spanish.226 Even though he did
not write a whole commentary on the book of Revelation, he touched on the
relevant themes of the Apocalypse in his writings.
Treiyer uses the historicist principles of interpretation, as did the

pioneers of Adventism. However, in his commentary on the trumpets,
he underlines some important principles. For reasons of order, those will
be mentioned in the next part.227 Overall, he demonstrates, through his
emphasis on historical application, that the Bible prophecies have been
fulfilled throughout history under the control of God.
Before going on to his interpretation of the trumpets, it is important
to describe his view on Revelation and its structure. Treiyer believes that
the Apocalypse is “the book that Jesus sent to the seven churches to reveal
to the Christian world in all future ages, the throne of God and His final
court of judgment.”228 His understanding of the structure of Revelation is
based on this last line. He divides the Apocalypse into two parts: (1) Rev
1-11, a “septet series of visions, each having seven parts” and (2) Rev 12-22,
extending “the nature of the conflict between the blasphemous kingdom
and the persecuted people of God.”229 On the septet series of visions, he
underlines the statement “peals of thunder, rumblings, flashes of lightning”
at the end of every septet sequential prophecy.230 According to him, it means
that “the last level of each septet series is related to the court of judgment and
serves as a bridge to the following series of seven.”231
87
His biblical interpretation and his historical application on the

trumpets are showed in his book The Seal and the Trumpets (2005), which
was translated and enlarged to English fifteen years after the publication
of the Spanish edition (1990). The preface was written by Angel Manuel
Rodriguez, director of Biblical Research Institute.232 Treiyer’s English
version spends 173 pages on the seven trumpets, making it one of the most
extensive treatments of this subject by an Adventist scholar.233 Treiyer’s
commentaries are mixed with apology, trying to defend the traditional
Adventist interpretation on the seven trumpets.234
Treiyer starts with at least ten methodological principles for the
interpretation of the trumpets.235 First, he points out that the images of
the trumpets “were not unilaterally understood, for they were used either
symbolically or literally, to depict God’s judgments over peoples, cities,
armies, and empires.”236 He adds that there is not a “general pattern” to
determine “what is literal and what is symbolic.” Then, how do we interpret
the trumpets? He answers,
No magic formula is to be found or required to interpret the

trumpets. The first step is to get free from any presumable
scientific postulate which imposes foreign logic patterns to the
biblical account. After that, we have to grasp the historical
background projected by the prophecy. When we go, then,
to the historical fulfillment projected by the biblical text, that
very historical event will show us what was literal and what was
symbolic in the foretold event. . . . Consequently, in order to
discover what is symbolic and what is literal, we must start a
dialogue between the historico-prophetic orientation of the
Bible and its historical fulfillment.237
Adding in this issue, he says that “some transcendent descriptions

of the divine interventions are not historically verifiable, because they are
only perceptible for the eyes of ‘those who are wise’ in God (Dan 12:10).” On
this point, he adds,
88
The modern interpreter is thus confronted with a biblical

projection that does not necessarily follow some rigorous
principles imposed by modern interpreters who invoke the
Aristotelian Greek logic principle of ‘no contradiction.’
According to this Greek and scientific logical pattern, one
may interpret the picture of the trumpets as being figurative
or literal there. Unfortunately, such a criterion restrains the
prophetic picture that the divine revelation wants to project,
because this criterion ties the prophecy to postulates of reason
which were not those normally used in the Bible to reveal its
messages.238
Third, he affirms that, even though both the trumpets and the plagues
represent judgments of God, the first represents historical judgments during
“the Christian dispensation,” and the second, literal judgments at the very
end-time.239 Along this same line, he states, fourth, that the trumpets will
not be fulfilled in the future, namely, that they “would not be shed during
the seventh seal, but reviewed or recapitulated at that time in the heavenly
court.”240
A fifth principle for the interpretation of the trumpets that Treiyer
declares is that “there is certain coherence between a literal fulfillment in
the Old Testament, and its spiritual projection in the New Testament.”
Therefore, “those prophecies had a double scope of literal immediate
fulfillment and spiritual far distant typological projection.”241 Sixth,
Treiyer warns us to avoid falling under two extremes in order to interpret
the trumpets. “One of them consists in spiritualizing so much the figures
of judgments as to lose sight of their concrete historical event. The other
extreme resides in looking for historical events without references to their
definite spiritual connection revealed in the prophecy.”242
He points out four more principles for the interpretation of the
trumpets: seventh, that “the apocalyptic visions do not give room for
conditional fulfillments.”243 Eighth, “the trumpets answer the outcry of the
martyrs of the fifth seal. The saints cry for God’s intervention to avenge their
blood unjustly shed by the dwellers of the earth (Rev 6:9-10).”244 Ninth, “all
89
the background of the vision of the trumpets is comprehended within a

context of struggle and resistance to the Word of God.”245 And tenth, “that
which is important in the Bible is what concerns the divine revelation of
the purposes of God for salvation, and not a comprehensive and complete
consideration of all the events of history,” as important as that may be for
historians.246
Treiyer analyzes both the biblical texts about the trumpets and
the history which confirms their fulfillment, reminding readers that “the
trumpets were given as God’s answer to the outcry of those who proclaimed
His Word (Rev 8:2-4, cf. 6:9).” Moreover, the seventh seal introduces the
vision of the seven angels who cause the seven trumpets to sound. This final
seal also introduces “the altar before the throne” (Rev 8:1-5).247
He thus concludes that the first four trumpets show a progressive
weakening of the heathen Roman Empire until its final fall. To him, the
first trumpet does not represent the destruction of Jerusalem by heathen
Rome, because God’s people are not judgments executed by Rome, but it
means the invasion of Rome by the barbarian Visigoths led by Alaric.248 The
following three trumpets he applies to the invasions of the Roman Empire
by the Barbarian tribes such as the Vandals, led by Genseric; Huns, led by
Attila; and Heruli, led by Odoacer, respectively. Thus, the judgments or
punishments of the first four trumpets came on pagan Rome during the
fourth and fifth centuries.249
On the other hand, the judgments of the fifth and sixth trumpets
deal with the punishment of “an apostate and paganized Roman Christian
Church” by the Muslim invasions of the territory of the “Holy Roman
Empire,” using basically the figurative language of the book of Joel. The
fifth and sixth trumpets hence symbolize the two greatest Islamic invasions,
the first by the Saracens and the second by the Ottoman Empire.250
Regarding the “prophetic periods” of the two trumpets, Treiyer uses
the “principle of sliding scale” in reference to the same powers represented
in the prophecy. Namely, “the subsequent military action achieved what
90
was anticipated by the earlier decisions or decrees.”251 Therefore, the period

of five prophetic months, that is to say, 150 literal years, applying the year-
day principle, of the fifth trumpet (Rev 9:5, 10) could apply to double events,
one under the Saracens with the first expansion of Islam (632-782), and
another one under the Ottoman Turks with the first military crusade (July
27, 1299-1453), declares Treiyer, because the fifth trumpet mentions the
scorpions and “the period of 150 years of hunting or harming twice, once at
the beginning (Rev 9:4-5), and again at the end with additional description
of ‘tails’ (Rev 9:10).”252
On the statement of Rev 9:15, “for the hour and day and month and
year,” Treiyer, like Maxwell, points out that because the “hour” has a definite
article, this should be interpreted as “the hour of judgment” assigned to the
sixth trumpet under the Ottoman Turks, lasted “a [prophetic] day, month and
year,” namely, 391 prophetic days or literal years. Using the same “principle
of sliding scale,” and demonstrating with historical events, he concludes
that the two periods are correct. The first is from 1449 to 1840, because 1449
marks the beginning of “Turkish authority over the Christian and European
world” and 1840 scores “the beginning of Christian and European authority
over the Turkish Empire, . . . putting an end to the Turkish domination
in the Mediterranean world.”253 Moreover, he uses the statement of E. G.
White about the prediction of Josiah Litch as a “remarkable fulfillment of
prophecy” in 1840. The second 391 years extends from 1453 to 1844, because
1453 is the date “for the fall of Byzantine Empire” and 1844 reaches a peak
of the reforms about “the abolition of the death penalty to the apostate
Muslims who became Christians.” Furthermore, two other prophecies fit
with 1844, “the 2,300 day-years of Dan 8:14 and the 1335 day-years of Dan
12:12.”254 He thus affirms that “there is no prophecy that points out the Arabs
or Muslims as rising again in a protagonist and united action for the final
events.”255
To him, the seventh trumpet covers Rev 11:15-19, starting from 1844,
the investigative judgment, and ending with the second coming of Jesus.
91
“While the sixth trumpet is focused principally on the altar of incense

(Rev 9:13), the seventh trumpet relates to the opening of the door of the
Most Holy Place with the throne.” The word “throne” is not mentioned in
the seventh trumpet, but “ark.” Then, he says, “the ark was beneath the
throne of God.”256 This trumpet deals with the final battle, Armageddon,
a confrontation between the wrath of the nations and the wrath of God
(Rev 11:18). The wrath of God, namely the last seven plagues (Rev 16), is
poured out without mercy on the earth “to prevent the reestablishment of
the Roman empire,” destroying “the attempt of the prince of this world to
unite the nations under his flag.”257
Even though Treiyer did not write a book focusing exclusively on

Rev 12, his interpretation can be found on his web page and among the lines
in his writings.258 He believes that the woman symbolizes “the church of
Christ and His remnant.”259 The presence of the church or remnant is “a
great sign” that no person or institution can remove, which is “why it is
presented as being in heaven” (Rev 12:1).260
He considers that the symbol of a dragon is Satan, “which represents
at the same time the Roman empire, because the Roman soldiers were the
means through whom the devil tried to destroy the Son of God (Rev 12:4-
5).”261 He affirms that “three tribulations are caused by the dragon (pagan
Rome: Rev 12:4-5, 13), then by the beast which after 1,260 day-years is fatally
wounded (papal Rome: Rev 12:14-16; 13:2, 5-7), and finally by the lamb-like
beast which healed the fatal wound of the leopard-like beast (USA and
papal Rome: Rev 13: 3, 12, 17).”262
Treiyer emphatically declares that “there is only one church that can
justly appropriate the words of Revelation 12:17, the Seventh-day Adventist
Church.” He adds that the SDA Church keeps the Ten Commandments,
even the Sabbath as the seventh day of the week, and has the testimony
92
of Jesus, namely the spirit of prophecy−Ellen G. White as a prophet at the

end-time. In other words, “the Holy Spirit gives the gift of prophecy to the
church so that it knows what Jesus says of himself for that final time.”263
TENDENCIES OF BIBLICAL-HISTORICAL EMPHASIS
After describing the biblical-historical emphasis on Revelation in

the SDA Church, it is possible to mention at least five tendencies of this
approach. The first tendency (and intention) of the biblical-historical
emphasis is to apply the events of history within the context of the correct
prophetic interpretation. In other words, if Adventists accept historicism,
then their apocalyptic interpretation should be strong in historical facts
according to the Bible prophecy.
The second tendency of this emphasis is to underline that God is in
control of history from the perspective of the Great Controversy. This offers
the believer confidence in the Word of God.
The third tendency of this emphasis is its firmness in the application
for compliance with prophecy. There is no room for reapplication of the
fulfillment of the prophecy. The prophecies that applied the year-day
principle are framed within a set period that will not be repeated.264
A fourth tendency of this emphasis is its application of parallel
recapitulation of the events from the prophet’s time to the end-time. In
Revelation, the seven churches of Rev 2 and 3; the seven seals of Rev 4-7; the
seven trumpets of Rev 8-11; and even Rev 12-14 are visions that are repeated
in history, but looked at from different points of view, concluding at the end
of history. Because the prophecies are seen as continuous from the prophet
to the end-time, there is a sense of linear progression.
The last tendency of this emphasis is the sense of an approaching
end. Awareness of the historical fulfillment of the prophet messages of
Revelation (and of Daniel) motivates the reader to share the message with
urgency because the world will have a short existence.
93
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT
In this chapter I described the lineage of Adventist interpretation

of the Apocalypse focusing on the biblical-historical emphasis. This covers
from the roots of the denomination to the last edition of Uriah Smith’s book,
Daniel and Revelation, and the latest scholar to write a full commentary
based on this view, C. Mervin Maxwell. I have shown the major authors
who have influenced Adventist thought on Revelation. In order to come to
this conclusion I have chosen two significant topics: (1) the trumpets, and
(2) Rev 12.
Since its beginning, the SDA Church has interpreted the Bible
prophecies using the historicist method as the method of prophetic
interpretation maintained by the Reformers, and the Millerite movement,
from which the SDA Church eventually arose. Historicism has three basic
features: (1) the apocalyptic prophecies must be interpreted from the
prophet’s day to end-time as an unbroken sequence of history and without
several reapplications of fulfillment; (2) the recapitulation of visions (in this
case the visions of the Apocalypse); and (3) the application of the “year-day”
principle. Under these basic characteristics and during the Thoughts on the
Revelation period (1862-1944), the Adventists used the historical method as
the only method to interpret Daniel and Revelation.
The biblical-historical emphasis uses more space on historical
application than theology and “exegesis,” in order to describe the divine
purpose of caring for His people throughout history until the end-time. With
this clarification, I now summarize and assess the historical development of
the interpretation of the Apocalypse, focusing on this emphasis. I began
with the background of the SDA Church, the Millerite movement, and
Sabbatarian Adventism.
Although the Millerites gave less study to Revelation than did the
Adventists, they considered Miller and Litch as “writers on the prophecies.”
Their writing more on Daniel than the Apocalypse received wide circulation
94
and acceptance among Millerites, including among other writings, Miller

with his Evidences from Scripture and Litch with his Probability. In order to
interpret Bible prophecies, Millerites used Miller’s “fourteen rules.” These
rules were focused on the interpretation of the symbols underlining both
the principles of analogy and typology.
After the great disappointment of October 1844, a small group known
as Sabbatarian Adventists continued to believe in the visible, personal,
and soon coming of Jesus Christ to the earth. They were persistent in the
publication of Christian literature that expressed their beliefs, a key topic
being their understanding of the message of the three angels of Rev 14:6-
12. Moreover, Joseph Bates developed a unified eschatological theology
centering on an understanding of Rev 11:19 through 14:20. Different from the
Millerites, they wrote more on Revelation, coming to the same conclusion
on almost every point. Even though they published eleven principles of
prophetic interpretation in 1855, based on Miller’s rules, they notably moved
beyond the Millerites on the Apocalypse.
In 1863, the SDA Church was organized. Four years later, Thoughts
on the Revelation was launched. Without diminishing the role of Smith, it
was the product of many minds. Thus, it became the standard Adventist
interpretation on the Apocalypse for around eighty years. Smith underlined,
in his last revision of D&R made for himself in 1897, at least four major points
on prophetic interpretation that were later used by others: (1) the heavy
support of the application of the historicist method; (2) the connection of
study between Daniel and Revelation; (3) the difference in the application
of systems between literal and mystical or spiritualizing; and (4) the strong
study of the Apocalypse.
Later, other authors such as Haskell, Spicer, Neff, and Bunch
published interpretations of Revelation. All of them followed the standard
Adventist position except for a few details. Even though the main topic of
the 1919 Bible Conference was Adventist eschatology, it did not change its
main interpretation on Revelation. A major point of reference during the
95
meetings was the Christ-centered sermons.

In the last period of the interpretation of the Apocalypse in the
SDA Church, Maxwell, a defender of the doctrine, theology, history, and
mission of the denomination, continued along the same line as the first
period. His book, God Cares, volume 2, appeared as the first voluminous
commentary on Revelation during this period, based on Strand’s scheme
of literary structure with few changes. God Cares was written in a popular
style, but some students of the Apocalypses have considered it a scholarly
commentary. In this book, Maxwell adds more historical evidences and,
at the same time, differs in some historical applications with the standard
interpretation on Revelation of the first period.
Since Maxwell, other students of the Apocalypse still continue using
the biblical-historical emphasis; among them, Treiyer is worthy of note,
even though he did not write a whole commentary on Revelation.
The biblical-historical emphasis has at least five tendencies. (1) This
emphasis focuses on specific historical events that fulfill prophecy. (2) By
closely linking prophecy with specific fulfillments, this approach shows that
God is in control of history, leading the believer to have confidence in the
Word of God. (3) There is no room for multiple fulfillments of prophecy;
but (4) there is a pattern of recapitulation of visions or series of prophecies.
Finally, (5) the sense of an approaching end leads to the motivation to share
this message with urgency.
It was these tendencies that made historicism, the Reformers’
method of apocalyptic interpretation, the most respected Protestant
method of interpretation at the time of the Adventist pioneers. Obviously,
to use this approach, it is necessary to know both the Scripture and the
history in order to recognize historical events that represent fulfillments of
prophecy. Scholars who use this emphasis believe that God is intimately
involved with His created beings throughout earth’s history; He is not an
absentee landlord. They also believe that Jesus and His apostles used this
method to interpret the apocalyptic prophecies of the Old Testament book
96
of Daniel. Not relegating all the prophetic messages to the future, Jesus
and His apostles spoke of events that were being fulfilled in their day with
respect to the first coming of Christ. Thus history, both sacred and secular,
reveals the providences of God and the machinations of Satan.
I turn now briefly to analyze the conclusions of the major interpreters
who used the biblical-historical emphasis on the trumpets and Rev 12. I start
with the trumpets. Table 4 shows conclusions of five scholars, including two
Millerites, Smith’s book as the standard interpretation of the first period,
and Maxwell and Treiyer as echoes of the first period.
This table shows us that there are some differences in historical
applications among the interpreters who have used the biblical-historical
emphasis. For instance, on the first four trumpets, whereas Maxwell reflects
the same historical interpretation used by Miller, the interpretations of Smith
and Treiyer echo those of Litch. In the fifth and sixth trumpets, leaving aside
Treiyer’s “principle of sliding scale,” application of double events, Maxwell
is the only one who points out dates that differ from the others. Treiyer,
however, agrees with Maxwell in the application of “the hour” as “the hour
of judgment” of Rev 9:15 concluding 391 years, and not plus 15 days, namely
from 1453 to 1844. In the seventh trumpet, the application standard of the
first period has stayed the same so far; logically it differs in detail from the
Millerites. On Rev 12, table 5 presents the conclusion of this emphasis.
97
98
Table 4. Interpretation of the seven trumpets according to biblical-historical emphasis
Scholar 1st trumpet 2nd trumpet 3nd trumpet 4th trumpet 5th trumpet 6th trumpet 7th trumpet
William Jerusalem Fall of Fall of Asiatic The taking Turks Ottoman Second
Miller Fall Roman Kingdom away of July 27, 1299- 1449- Coming
Empire pagan 1449 Aug 11, 1840 1839-1843
rites and
ceremonies
[Dark Ages]
Josiah Goths Vandals Huns Heruli Saracens Ottoman Second
Litch (Alaric) (Genseric) (Attila) (Odoacer) July 27, 1299- 1449- Coming-
Fall of 1449 Aug 11, 1840 Impending
Roman
Empire
Uriah Goths Vandals Huns Heruli Saracens Ottoman 1844-Second
Smith (Alaric) (Genseric) (Attila) (Odoacer) 1299-1449 1449- Coming
Aug 11, 1840

Mervyn Falls of Fall of Middle Dark Ages Islam Ottoman 1844-Second
Maxwell Jerusalem Roman Ages (Thyatira 674-823 1071-1453 or Coming
Empire 476 538-1565) 1453-1844
Alberto Visigoths Vandals Huns Heruli aracens Ottoman 1844-Second
Treiyer (Alaric) (Genseric) (Attila) (Odoacer) 632-782 1449-Aug 11, Coming
July 27, 1299- 1840
1449 1453-1844

Table 5. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to biblical-historical emphasis
Symbol W. Miller J. Litch U. Smith M. Maxwell A. Treiyer

Woman God’s True True God’s God’s
People Church Church People People
Child Chirst Chirst Chirst Chirst Chirst
A Great Pagan Imperial Satan Satan Satan
Red Dragon Rome Rome Pagan Pagan and Pagan and
and Papal Papal Rome Papal Rome
Rome
1260 (vv. 6, 538-1798 538-1798 538-1798 538-1798 538-1798
14)
Remmant America True SDA SDA Church SDA Church
(v. 17) Children Church Sabbath Sabbath
Sabbath Ellen G. Ellen G.
Ellen G. White White
White
This table shows more agreement among the interpreters of this

approach. The major difference is in the interpretation of the remnant
between the Millerites and the SDA Church. Whereas Miller applied the
remnant to America (according to its historical context), and Litch to true
children, which is close to the SDA approach, the students of prophecy in
the early SDA Church apply it to themselves.
I turn now to analysis of the biblical-theological emphasis in the
interpretation of the Apocalypse in the SDA Church.
Endnotes
1. Nichol, The Midnight Cry, 10.
2. The Millerite forefathers, however, had given more study to the book
of Revelation than to Daniel. [Froom], “History of the Interpretation of the
Apocalypse,” SDABC, 7:105. Timm affirms that “Daniel 8:14 was a major focal
point of Millerite eschatological hope.” Alberto R. Timm, “The Sanctuary and
the Three Angels’ Messages, 1844-1863: Integrating Factors in the Development
of Seventh-day Adventist Doctrines” (PhD dissertation, AU, 1995), 24.
99
3. Periodical literature had a dominating role by this time. The

efforts of Joshua Himes, who was called the “Napoleon of the press,” led the
Millerite movement in “an unprecedented media blitz” and “an unprecedented
communications crusade.” Advent Christian Times, February 6, 1872; Nathan
O. Hatch, The Democratization of American Christianity (New Haven, CT:
Yale, 1989), 142, 145. “By May 1844 Himes had produced over five million pieces
of Adventist literature-nearly one for every four persons in the United States.”
Earliest Seventh-day Adventist Periodicals, ed. George R. Knight, Adventist
Classic Library (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2005), ix. For
the Second Advent Movement periodicals see the chart in Froom, The Prophetic
Faith of Our Fathers, 4:624-625
4. Later, both magazines received different names, from Signs of the

Times (Boston) to Advent Herald and Signs of the Times Reporter and from
Midnight Cry (New York) to Morning Watch.
5. Samuel S. Snow, “The Seven Churches of Asia: Definitions,” MC,

May 2, 1844, 331; J. Weston, “The Seven Churches,” MC, September 12, 1844,
73-74; “The Sixth Seal,” ST-M, October 11, 1843, 64; cf. [Froom], “History of the
Interpretation of the Apocalypse,” SDABC, 7:108.
6. William Miller, “Lectures IX: The Seven Seals, as Representing Events

to the End of Time,” MC, December 13, 1842, [3-4]; cf. [Froom], “History of the
Interpretation of the Apocalypse,” SDABC, 7:111.
7. On the trumpets, see: Josiah Litch, “The Three Wo [sic] Trumpets,

Wo! Wo!! Wo!!!: Fall of the Ottoman Empire, or Ottoman Supremacy Departed,
August 11, 1840,” MC, November 24, 1842, [1-3] and idem, “Fall of the Ottoman
Empire.-Concluded,” MC, November 25, 1842, [3-4]; William Miller, “Lecture
VIII: The New Song, Rev. v. 9, 10,” MC, December 12, 1842, [3-4]; idem, “John’s
Visions: To Show Christ’s Servants Things Which Must Shortly Come to Pass,”
MC, February 24, 1843 and March 17, 1843 (57), [9]; Lewis Hersey, “The Seventh
Trumpet, or the Last Wo,” MC, March 31, 1843, 94; “Watchman’s Warning—No.
4: The Trumpets,” MC, June 8, 1843, 103-104, and January 4, 1844, 190-191; “The
Woe Trumpets: Revelation, 9th Chapter,” MC, August 10, 1843, 203-204; “The
Seventh Trumpet,” MC, November 30, 1843., 214 [sic]-126; Jonas Merriam, “The
Seventh Trumpet,” MC, November 7, 1844, 145-146; William Miller, “Exposition
of the Twelfth Chapter of Revelation,” ST-M, October 1, 1841, 19-20; idem, “The
Three Last Trumpets and the Three Woes: Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire,”
ST-M, August 16, 1841, 73; Lewis Hersey, “The Seventh Trumpet or Last Wo
[sic],” ST-M, March 15, 1843, 15.
On the two witnesses, see: William Miller, “Lecture X: The Two
Witnesses, As Having Been Slain in the French Revolution,” MC, December 14,
1842, [3-4]; George Storrs, “Exposition of Revelation XI: The Two Witnesses,”
100
MC, May 4, 1843, 46-48; “The Two Witnesses: Revelation 11th Chapter,” MC,
August 10, 1843, 204-205; “The Two Witnesses,” MC, January 25, 1844, 212; “Literal
Interpretation: Criticism on Rev. XI. 8−True Principles of Bible Interpretation−
By a Bible Reader,” ST-M, October 1, 1840, 97-98; I. P. Labagh, “The Two
Witnesses,” ST-M, February 1, 1841, 162-164; idem, “The Two Witnesses,” ST-
M, February 15, 1841, 171-172; idem, “Two Witnesses,” ST-M, March 1, 1841, 178;
idem, “The Two Witnesses,” ST-M, April 1, 1841, 6-7; William Miller, “The Two
Witnesses: The 1260 Years Explained Rev xi,” ST-M, September 1, 1841, 81-83.
On the great controversy of Rev 12-14, see: William Miller, “Explanation
of the Number 666 in Revelation xiii: and the Three Days Spoken of in Hosea
vi, and Luke xiii,” ST-M, July 15, 1841, 57-58; idem, “Lecture XI: The Woman in
the Wilderness,” RH, December 15, 1842, [3-4]; idem, “Exposition of the Twelfth
Chapter of Revelation,” 97-98; “The Mark of the Beast,” MC, October 26, 1843,
84-85; “The Number of the Beast, Six Hundred Three Score and Six,” MC, June
27, 1844, 395-396.
On the battle of Armageddon, see: [Josiah] L[itch], “The Battle
of Armageddon,” ST-M, September 1, 1840, 85-86; idem, “The Battle of
Armageddon: Concluded,” ST-M, September 15, 1840, 94-95; A. Traveller, “The
Great Battle,” ST-M, September 1, 1840, 85; “Progress of the Battle: Affairs of the
East,” ST-M, November 15, 1840, 128; “Progress of the Battle: Important News
from Syria,” ST-M, December 1, 1840, 138; “Progress of the Battle: Latter from
the East,” ST-M, January 1, 1841, 151-152.
On the seven last plagues see: N. E. Puritan, “The Sixth Vial: Rev xvi.12,”
ST-M, April 6, 1842, 3-4; Levi Fisk, “The Seven Vials,” ST-M, September 14, 1842,
189 [sic] 188; “The Seven Last Plagues,” MC, August 10, 1843, 205-207.
On the great Babylon see: Charles Fitch, “Come Out of Her, My People,”
MC, September 21, 1843, 33-36; David Plumer, “Babylon,” MC, February 1, 1844,
218-219; “Babylon-Rev. 18,” MC, May 30, 1844, 364.
On the millennium and resurrections, see: “The Judgment—The
Millennium,” MC, December 1, 1842, [3]; “The Judgment-The Millennium
No. 2,” MC, December 3, 1842, [2]; George Storrs, “Harmony of Revelation
19th, 20th, 21st.,” MC, March 10, 1843, 43-44, and May 4, 45-46; E. Jacobs,
“The Millennium,” MC, October 5, 1843, 49-51; E. Jacobs, “The Millennium:
Continued,” MC, November 3, 1843, 89-91; J. L. Clapp, “A Dialogue Respecting
the Millennium,” MC, May 23, 1844, 353-354; idem, “A Dialogue Respecting the
Millennium,” MC, May 30, 1844, 361-363; idem, “A Dialogue Respecting the
Millennium,” MC, June 6, 1844, 369-370; E. Canfield, “Inquiries Relative to the
Millennium Revealed in the Bible,” MC, August 15, 1844, 33-44; idem, “Inquiries
Relative to the Millennium Revealed in the Bible,” MC, August 15, 1844, 33-36;
“A Bible Reader on Mr. Miller’s Views of the Millennium,” ST-M, January 15,
1841, 156-157; J. Walstenholme, “The Puritan—The Millennium,” ST-M, May 18,
1842, 50-51; N. E. Puritan, “Spiritual’ Millennium,” ST-M, April 6, 1842, 2-3; B.,
“A Temporal Millennium: a Soul-destroying Doctrine,” ST-M, June 29, 1842, 97-
98; G. F. Cox, “Millennium: the Unanswerable Argument,” ST-M, April 20, 1842,
101
22; “A Word: To the Opposers of Miller and His Theory of the Millennium,” ST-
M, September 6, 1843, 19-20.
For new earth and the resurrection, see Luther Caldwell, “The New
Earth,” MC, November 16, 1843, [105-107] and May 9, 1844, 337-339; William
Miller, “Lecture II: The First Resurrection, Rev. xx. 6,” MC, December 2, 1842,
[4]; T. R. Birks, “The First Resurrection,” MC, July 25, 1844, 9-12; idem, “The
First Resurrection,” MC, August 1, 1844, 17-19; idem, “The First Resurrection,”
MC, August 8, 1844, 25-27.
8. “Signs of the Times,” ST-M, July 1, 1840, 53.
9. Vermont Telegraph, November 6 1832−March 12, 1833; cf. William

Miller, Vermont Telegraph, November 6, 1832.
10. Sylvester Bliss, Memoirs of William Miller, Generally Known as a

Lecturer on the Prophecies, and the Second Coming of Christ (Boston, MA:
Joshua V. Himes, 1853), 106; William Miller, Wm. Miller’s Apology and Defense
(Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes, 1845), 19.
The first edition of Miller’s printed lectures consists of 16 lectures.
William Miller, Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of
Christ about the Year 1843: Exhibited in a Course of Lectures (Troy, NY: Kemble
& Hooper, 1836). This edition is cited in the present study because adding
other lectures in the other editions just changes the number of the lectures,
but not the content. The second edition has two more lectures, William Miller,
Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ about the
Year 1843: Exhibited in a Course of Lectures (Troy, NY: Elias Gates, 1838). The
third and later editions consist of 19 lectures with the same title, but different
publisher. Thus, the third edition of 1840 by B. B. Mussey in Boston, MA; the
next edition of 1841 by Moses A. Dow, in Boston, MA; of 1842 by J. V. Himes,
in Boston, MA; and other republications in 1988 by Leaves-of-Autumn Books,
in Payson, AZ; in 2005 by Teach Services, in Brushton, NY; and in 2008 by
Kessinger Publishing, in Whitefish, MT.
11. For Josiah Litch’s life and his contribution to the SDA Church see
David T. Arthur, “Joshua V. Himes and the Cause of Adventism, 1839-1845”
(M.A. thesis, University of Chicago, 1961); Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our
Fathers, 4, passim; Jerry Moon, “Josiah Litch: Herald of ‘the Advent Near’”
(Unpublished paper, 1973, CAR); Knight, Millennial Fever and the End of the
World, 93-98; Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996 ed., s.v. “Josiah Litch”;
Daniel David Royo, “Josiah Litch: His Life, Work, and Use of His Writings, on
Selected Topics, by Seventh-day Adventist Writers” (MDiv thesis, AU, 2009,
CAR).
12. It is no longer available.
102
13. Josiah Litch, Probability of the Second Coming of Christ about A.D.
1843 (Boston: David H. Ela, 1838).
14. Josiah Litch, Prophetic Expositions: Or a Connected View of the

Testimony of the Prophets Concerning the Kingdom of God and the Time of Its
Establishment, 2 vols. (Boston: Joshua V. Himes, November 21, 1842).
15. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 4:529.
16. Whitney R. Cross, The Burned-Over District: The Social and

Intellectual History of Entusiastic Religion in Western New York, 1800-1850
(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1982), 293.
17. Moon, “Josiah Litch: Herald of ‘the Advent Near,’” 1.
18. Royo, “Josiah Litch: His Life, Work, and Use of His Writings, on
Selected Topics, by Seventh-day Adventist Writers,” 1, 55.
19. “Litch was a pioneer in several points of prophetic interpretation

that later were adopted by Seventh-day Adventists: that there was to be a
‘judicial scene of judgment’ (Address to . . . the Clergy [1841], 38, 39; cf. Prophetic
Expositions [1842], 1:49-54) preceding the resurrection, and separate from the
execution of judgment . . . ; that the seven plagues were still future (Prophetic
Expositions, 1:175).” Neufeld, Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996 ed., s.v.
“Josiah Litch.”
20. See Josiah Litch, The Restitution, Christ’s Kingdom on Earth: The
Return of Israel (Boston: Joshua V. Himes, 1848); idem, Messiah’s Throne and
Millennial Glory (Philadelphia: J. Litch, 1855); idem, The Doctrine of Everlasting
Punishment (Boston, MA: Damrell and Moore, 1859); idem, Prophetic
Significance of Eastern and European Movements: Being a Plain, Literal, and
Grammatical Constitution of the Last Five Chapters of Daniel, Applied to
Passing Events; Showing Conclusively That a Syrian Prince, not Napoleon III.,
is the Antichrist of the Last Days (Boston: J. Litch, 1867); idem, A Complete
Harmony of Daniel and the Apocalypse (Philadelphia: Claxton, Remsen &
Haffelfinger, 1873); and his last work, The Pre-Millennial Advent Vindicated,
Being a Review of Rev. Dr. David Brown’s Post-Millennial Advent of Christ’
(Boston, MA: American Millennial Association, n.d.). Moon affirms, referring
to A Complete Harmony of Daniel and the Apocalypse, that “the distance he
[Litch] has moved theologically since 1844 is most apparent in this 300-page
work. Litch vigorously attacks most of the positions he championed during
1838-1844. First he repudiates the year-day principle, then denies that the
little horns of Daniel 7 and 8 apply to the papacy, and interprets almost every
prophecy of Revelation from chapter four onward as applying to some future
103
time.” Moon, “Josiah Litch: Herald of ‘the Advent Near’,” 30. See also Wellcome,
History of the Second Advent Message, 678.
21. Bliss, Memoirs of William Miller, Generally Known as a Lecturer on

the Prophecies, and the Second Coming of Christ, 77-80. Miller was a man of
no small intelligence, as shown by his reading of “the works of Voltaire, Hume,
Paine, Ethan Allen, and other deistical writers.” Miller, Wm. Miller’s Apology
and Defense, 3.
22. On January 1, 1843, Miller declared his beliefs in fourteen points in

William Miller, “Synopsis of Miller’s Views,” ST-M, January 25, 1843, 145-150;
and later it was republished his whole beliefs in sixteen points in, William
Miller, Synopsis of Miller’s Views (Boston: Joshua V. Himes, 1843); cf. Froom,
The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 4:466-467.
23. Don F. Neufeld, “Biblical Interpretation in the Advent Movement,”

in A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics, ed. Gordon M. Hyde (Washington,
DC: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974), 112. One of the major
problems in studying the principles of prophetic interpretation is that, due to
the lack of copyright laws, it is impossible to determine what views are Miller’s
own and which ones he has borrowed from other sources. Gary Taber, “The
Views of the Trumpets & Seals as Presented by William Miller, Uriah Smith,
These Times” (Term paper, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, AU,
1977), 4.
24. These “Rules” became the most publicized of any Adventist

interpreter. Joshua V. Himes, ed., Views of the Prophecies and Prophetic
Chronology: Selections from Manuscripts of William Miller; with a Memoir of
His Life (Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes, 1841), 20-24; [William Miller], “Rules of
Interpretation,” Second Advent Harbinger, March 16, 1844., 9-10; Bliss, Memoirs
of William Miller, Generally Known as a Lecturer on the Prophecies, and the
Second Coming of Christ, 70-71.
For a critical study of Miller’s hermeneutical principles, see Steen R.
Rasmussen, “Roots of the Prophetic Hermeneutic of William Miller” (MA
thesis, Newbold College, 1983); Kai Arasola, The End of Historicism: Millerite
Hermeneutic of Time Prophecies in the Old Testament (Uppsala, Sweden:
University of Uppsala, 1990). For responses, see Samuel Núñez, The Vision
of Daniel 8: Interpretations from 1700 to 1900, Andrews University Seminary
Doctoral Dissertation Series, vol. 14 (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University
Press, 1989, c. 1987); P. Gerard Damsteegt, “Book Reviews,” review of The End of
Historicism by Kai J. Arasola, AUSS 29, no. 3 (Autumn 1991): 263–264.
25. In 1843, A. Hale published just thirteen rules, leaving aside rule
number 3. Apollos Hale, The Second Advent Manual: In Which the Objections
104
to Calculating the Prophetic Times Are Considered; the Difficulties Connected

with the Calculation Explained; and the Facts and Arguments on Which
Mr. Miller’s Calculations Rest, Are Briefly Stated and Sustained . . . (Boston:
Joshua V. Himes, 1843), 103-106. After analyzing and reorganizing Miller’s 14
rules, Davis found 22 rules, and when analyzing Miller’s writings discovered 7
more, making in effect 29 rules. Dean R. Davis, “Hermeneutical Principles of
Early Adventist Interpreters” (Term paper, Seventh-day Adventist Theological
Seminary, AU, 1976), 5-6.
26. Davis, “Hermeneutical Principles of Early Adventist Interpreters,” 4.
27. Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message

and Mission, 299-300, used the edited version of thirteen rules; John Fletcher
C. Harrison and John Fletcher Clews Harrison, The Second Coming: Popular
Millenarianism, 1780-1850 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1979),
200-201; Arasola, The End of Historicism, 51-53; David L. Rowe, “Millerites,”
Encyclopedia of Millennialism and Millennial Movements, ed. Richard A. Landes
(New York: Routledge, 2000), 268.
28. Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and

Mission, 17.
29. Knight divides them into two sections, rules 1-5 as general principles
of interpretation and 6-14 as the interpretation of “the prophetic writings of the
Bible.” Knight, A Search for Identity, 41.
30. C. Mervyn Maxwell, “A Brief History of Adventist Hermeneutics,”

JATS 4, no. 2 (Autumn 1993): 209–26, 210.
31. Himes, Views of the Prophecies and Prophetic Chronology, 20-

24; Miller, “Rules of Interpretation,” 9-10; Bliss, Memoirs of William Miller,
Generally Known as a Lecturer on the Prophecies, and the Second Coming of
Christ, 70-71. For more explanation of prophetic figures according to Miller, see
Himes, Views of the Prophecies and Prophetic Chronology, 25-32.
32. Maxwell, “A Brief History of Adventist Hermeneutics,” 210.
33. Neufeld, “Biblical Interpretation in the Advent Movement,” 111.
34. Since it is quite obvious that the book of the Apocalypse itself makes
quite a distinction between the first four and the last three trumpets, it might
be easier to understand the message if a similar approach is taken to analyze the
different applications on the trumpets throughout the history of the Adventist
Church in this paper.
105
35. Miller does not specify the nations that are part of the “Asiatic
kingdom.” Miller, Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming
of Christ about the Year 1843, 89. The first known attempt at delving into the
mysteries of Rev 8 and 9 was undertaken by Victorinus, about 304 A. D. He
was to propound what in time became known as the principle of repetition;
that is, he saw the trumpets, the vials, and so forth, as simply covering the same
periods of time up to the end of earth’s history. They would, in effect, then
cover the Christian era. Cf. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 1:460.
36. Miller, Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming
of Christ about the Year 1843, 89-90. Although no uniform teaching was
propounded on the first four trumpets, it could be said of the post-reformation
interpreters, “There was now, for example, almost complete agreement that
the fifth and sixth trumpets represented the Saracens and Turks.” Froom, The
Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 2:533.
37. Miller, Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming
of Christ about the Year 1843, 93. Joachim of Floris (died 1202), who, on the
basis of the year-day principle, saw the “five months” of Rev 9:5, 10 as being 150
literal years, although he did not know where this time period was to be placed
historically. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 1:712.
38. Miller, Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of
Christ about the Year 1843, 90.
39. Miller, “Chronological Chart of the World,” ST-M, May 1, 1841, 20.
There is obviously a print error; instead of 1443 it should be 1449, in ibid., 149;
Miller, Synopsis of Miller’s Views, 31.
40. Applying the year-day principle and using the Jewish calendar, Miller
concluded 1 year (360) + 1 month (30) + 1 day (1) + 1 hour (15 days) total 391 years
and 15 days. Ibid., 94, 97. For applying of expositors prior to the reformation
until Miller’s days on the time of 391 years, see Froom, The Prophetic Faith of
Our Fathers, 4:1123-124. Osgood (1748-1813) pegged the beginning of the 391
years of the sixth trumpet to July 27, 1299, and allotted 391 years and 15 days to
this time. This became the first usage of this date. Ibid., 3:223.
41. William Miller to Truman Hendrix, Hampton, NY, August 9, 1831,

Advent Source Collection, CAR. Idem, Evidence from Scripture and History of
the Second Coming of Christ about the Year 1843, 93, 97; idem, “Chronological
Chart of the World,” 20.
42. [Miller], “Miller’s Letters—No. 8,” ST-M, September 1, 1840, 81.
106
43. Ibid., 97, 166.
44. Miller, “Chronological Chart of the World,” 20.
45. Miller, “Synopsis of Miller’s Views,” 149; idem, Synopsis of Miller’s

Views, 30-31.
46. See also Litch, “The Three Wo [sic] Trumpets, Wo! Wo!! Wo!!!,” [1-
3]; idem, “Fall of the Ottoman Empire-Concluded,” [3-4].
47. The topic of the seven trumpets appears in the second volume of
Litch, Prophetic Expositions. Himes also published another of Litch’s book the
same year, where Litch stresses only the last three trumpets. Idem, Address
to the Public, and Especially the Clergy, on the Near Approach of the Glorious,
Everlasting Kingdom of God on Earth: As Indicated by the Word of God, the
History of the World, and Signs of the Present Times (Boston: Joshua V. Himes,
1842).
48. Litch, Prophetic Expositions, 2:132-133.
49. Litch mentions some sources, besides Miller’s Lectures, that he

used: “The writings of Bishop Newton, and of Faber on the Prophecies, have
furnished some most valuable information. Also, Smith’s Key to Revelations has
been read with deep interest, and has afforded many new ideas of the meaning
of that deeply interesting book. The historical authorities who have been
principally consulted, are Rollin’s Ancient History; Gibbon’s Decline and Fall,
Sabine’s Ecclesiastical History, Mosheim’s Ecclesiastical History; and Milner’s
do. [sic], Life of Napoleon, by an American Citizen; Mignet’s French Revolution;
Hawkins’ Ottoman Empire, &c. Several valuable commentaries have also been
consulted on the subjects here discussed.” Litch, Probability of the Second
Coming of Christ about A.D. 1843, iii-iv. Later, on historical topics, he depended
on Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 7
vols. (London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell, 1776-1788); and “for the most part, . .
. on the first four trumpets, followed Alexander Keith, The Signs of the Times:
As Denoted by the Fulfilment of Historical Predictions: Traced Down from the
Babylonish Captivity to the Present Time, 2 vols. (New York: Jonathan Leavitt,
1832); cf. Litch, Prophetic Expositions, 2:67, 133.
50. Litch, Probability of the Second Coming of Christ about A.D. 1843,
146-147.
147-148.
107
52. Ibid., 148-149.
53. Ibid., 149.
54. Litch, Prophetic Expositions, 2:133-142.
55. Ibid., 2:142-145.
56. Ibid., 2:145-154.
57. Ibid., 2:154-161.
150−155.
59. Litch, “The Nations,” ST-M, February 1, 1841, 161. See also, idem,
Address to the Public, and Especially the Clergy, on the Near Approach of the
Glorious, Everlasting Kingdom of God on Earth: As Indicated by the Word of
God, the History of the World, and Signs of the Present Times (Boston: Joshua V.
Himes, 1842), 112-115; idem, Prophetic Expositions, 2:161-181.
156-157; idem, Address to the Public, and Especially the Clergy, on the Near
Approach of the Glorious, Everlasting Kingdom of God on Earth, 116-117.
61. He predicted this date two weeks before it happened. Litch, “Fall of
the Ottoman Power in Constantinople,” ST-M, August 1, 1840, 70. For a detailed
explanation of his exposition, see idem, Prophetic Expositions, 2:189; also see
idem, “The Three Wo [sic] Trumpets, Wo! Wo!! Wo!!!,” 1−3; idem, “Fall of the
Ottoman Empire—Concluded,” 3-4.
62. Robert Gale, The Urgent Voice (Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1975), 51, 52.
63. For more details on the impact among Millerites on this date, see
Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, passim; Moon, “Josiah Litch: Herald
of ‘the Advent Near,’” 3-8, 12-20; Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day
Adventist Message and Mission, 26-29; Royo, “Josiah Litch: His Life, Work, and
Use of His Writings, on Selected Topics, by Seventh-day Adventist Writers,”
63-86.
64. Josiah Litch, “The Two Witnesses,” The Trumpet of Alarm, April
24, 1843, 13; idem, Probability of the Second Coming of Christ about A.D. 1843,
171; idem, Prophetic Expositions, 225-227; idem, Address to the Public, and
108
Especially the Clergy, on the Near Approach of the Glorious, Everlasting Kingdom
of God on Earth, 132. In 1848, he still believed in the same way, but without
setting a date. Idem, Prophetic Expositions, 179-190. Later, he gave up these
conclusions on the trumpets and believed in both (1) the literal interpretation
and (2) in the future fulfillment. [Litch], “New Year’s Gift to the Herald,” Advent
Herald, December 17, 1853, 404; idem, A Complete Harmony of Daniel and the
Apocalypse, 35-37, 155-189. See also Moon, “Josiah Litch: Herald of ‘the Advent
Near,’” 29-32; Royo, “Josiah Litch: His Life, Work, and Use of His Writings,
on Selected Topics, by Seventh-day Adventist Writers,” 75-78. “In 1838 this
prophecy seemed impossible. Turkey, the center of the Ottoman Empire,
had in the past had some difficulty with Egypt, but that trouble had quieted.
However, in 1839 the two countries did go to war. It dragged on into 1840.
Finally several European nations offered an ultimatum to the Turkish sultan.
When he accepted this ultimatum he, in effect, lost control of his external
affairs. Pasha of Egypt took the message under advisement on August 11, 1840.
The same day the sultan wrote the European power for assurance of their help
if the pasha refused to abide by the ultimatum. From this time onward Turkey
was known as the “sick man of Europe.” Timothy N. Boyd, “Apocalypticism
in Contemporary American Protestantism in Historical Perspective” (PhD
dissertation, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1980), 66, 67.
65. LeRoy Edwin Froom, “Time Phase of Fifth and Sixth Trumpets,”
Ministry, June 1944, 26.
66. Miller’s 13th lecture was devoted to Rev 12. Miller, Evidence from
Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ about the Year 1843, 168.
67. Ibid., 169.
68. Ibid., 171-174.
69. Miller, Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of
Christ about the Year 1843, 175.
70. Ibid., 168-171; Litch, Probability of the Second Coming of Christ

about A.D. 1843, 172-174.
176.
72. [Froom], “History of the Interpretation of the Apocalypse,” SDABC,

7:118.
73. For proposals on the divisions of Millerism after the great
109
disappointment see Merlin D. Burt, “The Historical Background, Interconnected

Development and Integration of the Doctrines of the Sanctuary, the Sabbath,
and Ellen G. White’s Role in Sabbatarian Adventism from 1844 to 1849” (PhD
dissertation, AU, 2002), 60-174; Richard W. Schwarz and Floyd Greenleaf,
Light Bearers: A History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, rev. ed. (Nampa,
ID: Pacific Press, 2000), 54-56; Knight, A Search for Identity, 55-61; Godfrey
T. Anderson, “Sectarianism and Organization 1846-1864,” in Adventism in
America, ed. Gary Land, rev. ed. (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University
Press, 1998), 29-33; Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996, ed. s.v. “Millerite
Movement”; Knight, Millennial Fever and the End of the World, 245-325; Doan,
The Miller Heresy, Millennialism, and American Culture, 202-206; David T.
Arthur, “After the Great Disappointment: To Albany and Beyond,” AHer 1, no.
1 (January 1974): 5-10, 58; Arthur, “Come out of Babylon: A Study of Millerite
Separatism and Denominationalism, 1840-1865,” 85-145; Froom, The Prophetic
Faith of Our Fathers, 4:827-851. In 1855, J. P. Cowles said that there were “some
twenty-five divisions of what was once the ONE Adventist body.” J. P. Cowles,
“Among My Old Friends Again,” Christian Reformer and Signs of the Times, 8
August 1855, [6].
74. James White, ed., A Word to the “Little Flock” (Gorham, ME: [The
Author], 1847). One detailed work on the development of early Sabbatarian
Adventism theology is Burt, “The Historical Background, Interconnected
Development and Integration of the Doctrines of the Sanctuary, the Sabbath,
and Ellen G. White’s Role in Sabbatarian Adventism from 1844 to 1849.” Through
A Word and other periodicals such as The Present Truth (July 1949-November
1850); The Advent Review (August-November 1850); The Advent Review Extra
and the 48-page special edition (September 1850); The Second Advent Review,
and Sabbath Herald (November 1850-June 1851); and The Youth’s Instructor
(August 1852-April 1970), it is possible to know their contribution on the
understanding of the Apocalypse. From August 1851, it was named The Advent
Review and Sabbath Herald and since January 1978 it has been known as the
Adventist Review. The Present Truth and the other magazines were published
in response to a vision by Ellen G. White about the publishing work. The Second
Advent Review, and Sabbath Herald was the result of two combined periodicals
(1) The Present Truth and (2) The Advent Review. At the beginning, The Youth’s
Instructor was essentially a vehicle for providing youth Sabbath school lessons;
later it provided “many added services for a generation that should witness the
literal return of Jesus and the restoration of a sinless world to the universe.”
This publication was replaced in 1970 by Insight.
75. On the Apocalypse, in The Opening Heavens, Bates combats the

teachings of the spiritualizers, focusing on the literal second coming of Jesus
and the New Jerusalem of Rev 22. Joseph Bates, The Opening Heavens: Or a
Connected View of the Testimony of the Prophets and Apostles, Concerning
110
the Opening Heavens Compared with Astronomical Observations, and of the

Present and Future Location of the New Jerusalem, the Paradise of God (New
Bedford, [MA]: Press of Benjamin Lindsey, 1846). In Bates’s second edition of
The Seventh-day Sabbath, he points out the connection between the Sabbath
and the three angels’ message of Rev 14. The three angels are “following each
other in succession” (Rev 14:6-11), he says, and adds that the preaching of the
Sabbath began after the disappointment (v. 12). Others topics on Revelation
that Bates focuses on especially in his second edition are the identification of
Sunday as the mark of the beast (Rev 13, 16, 17); the remnant concept of Rev
12:17; and the great end-time struggle over the commandments of God that
dominates Rev 12:17-14:14. Idem, The Seventh-day Sabbath: A Perpetual Sign
from the Beginning to the Entering into the Gates of the Holy City According to
the Commandment, 2d rev. ed. and enl. (New Bedford, [MA]: Benjamin Lindsey,
1846). In Second Advent Way Marks, Bates comments again on Rev 14:6-12.
Idem, Second Advent Way Marks and High Heaps: or a Connected View of the
Fulfillment of Prophecy, by God’s Peculiar People, from the Year 1840-1847 (New
Bedford, [MA]: Benjamin Lindsey, 1847). In A Vindication of the Seventh-day
Sabbath and A Seal of the Living God, he expands more on the identification of
the sealing process of Rev 7, as well as the rise of the Sabbatarian Adventism as
prophesied in Rev 14:12. Idem, A Vindication of the Seventh-day Sabbath and
the Commandments of God: With a Further History of God’s Peculiar People
from 1847-1848 (New Bedford: Benjamin Lindsey, 1848); idem, A Seal of the
Living God: A Hundred Forty-four Thousand, of the Servants of God Being Sealed,
in 1849 (New Bedford, [MA]: Benjamin Lindsey, 1849). Bates also wrote, An
Explanation of the Typical and Anti-typical Sanctuary, by the Scriptures: With
a Chart (New Bedford, [MA]: Benjamin Lindsey, 1950). For analysis of Bates’s
tracts see George R. Knight, Joseph Bates: The Real Founder of Seventh-day
Adventism (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2004), 107-151; C. Mervyn
Maxwell, “Joseph Bates and Seventh-day Adventist Sabbath Theology,” in The
Sabbath in Scripture and History, ed. Kenneth A. Strand (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1982), 352-363.
76. Godfrey T. Anderson, Outrider of the Apocalypse: Life and Times of

Joseph Bates (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1972); George R. Knight, Joseph
Bates: The Real Founder of Seventh-day Adventism. For the life of Bates see
also Joseph Bates, The Autobiography of Elder Joseph Bates: Embracing a Long
Life on Shipboard, with Sketches of Voyages on the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans,
the Baltic and Mediterranean Seas; also Impressment and Service on Board
British War Ships, Long Confinement in Dartmoor Prison, Early Experience
in Reformatory Movements; Travels in Various Parts of the World and a Brief
Account of the Great Advent Movement of 1840-44 (Battle Creek, MI: Steam
Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Pub. Association, 1868); Virgil Robinson,
Cabin Boy to Advent Crusader (Nashville: Southern, 1960); Jerry E. Daly, “Joseph
Bates’s Logbook of the Brig Empress” (MA thesis, AU, 1981).
111
77. Everett N. Dick, Founders of the Message (Washington, DC: Review

and Herald, 1938), 105; Knight, Joseph Bates., ix, 168; Earliest Seventh-day
Adventist Periodicals, xxii.
78. The Sabbatarian Adventism period refers to the time after the
great disappointment (October 22, 1844) and before the organization of the
SDA Church (May 1863). The small group of Sabbath keeping Adventists also
published some books and/or tracts on the Apocalypse: John N. Loughborough,
The Two-horned Beast of Rev. XIII: A Symbol of the United States (Battle Creek,
MI: Review and Herald Office, 1857); chaps. 11 and 13 titled “The Thousand Years
of Rev. XXI” and “The New Jerusalem” respectively deal with Rev 21 and 22. John
N. Loughborough, The Saints’ Inheritance: The Earth Made New (Battle Creek,
MI: Steam Press of the Review and Herald Office, 1859); R[oswell] F. C[ottrell],
Mark of the Beast, and Seal of the Living God (Battle Creek, MI: James White,
[1859]), this pamphlet appeared as well in RH, July 28, 1859, 77-79; [James
White], The Seven Seals (Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist Publishing
Association, [1862]), this pamphlet also appeared in RH, July 8, 1862, 44; [Uriah
Smith], War and the Sealing: The One Hundred and Forty-four Thousand (Battle
Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, [1862]); this tract is
the result of the fusion of two articles appearing in RH, September 9, 1862, 116-
117. See [J. White], “The Book of Revelation,” 4.
79. “Rules of Interpretation,” RH, June 12, 1855, 245. In 1858 another
article appeared on a related topic extracted from the Voice of the Church, titled
“Principles of Interpretation,” RH, May 20, 1858, 3.
80. The 11 hermeneutical principles appeared in volume 6 of the Review

after Uriah Smith wrote a series of 4 articles on Dan 2, 7, 8, and 9. Smith’s
articles are based on George Storrs’s work published in 1843. [Uriah Smith],
“Exposition of Daniel II, 31-34: Or Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream,” RH, October 31,
1854, 93-95; idem, “Exposition of Daniel VII: Or the Vision of the Four Beasts,”
RH, November 15, 1854, 108-110; idem, “Daniel Chapters VII and IX,” RH,
November 21, 1854, 116-117; and idem, “The Sanctuary,” RH, December 5, 1854,
124. Even though the author Smith is not mentioned in the pamphlet, we know
it from a note in “New Works,” RH, November 21, 1854, 120. These four articles
then appeared under the title, The Four Universal Monarchies of the Prophecy of
Daniel and God’s Everlasting Kingdom (Rochester, NY: Adventist Review Office,
1855), and later revised and enlarged as [Uriah Smith and James White], A Brief
Exposition of Daniel ii, vii, viii, ix, the 2300 Days and the Sanctuary ([Battle
Creek, MI]: n.p., [1857]), announced in “The Power Press,” RH, May 7, 1857, 8,
and also as [Uriah Smith and James White], The Prophecy of Daniel: The Four
Kingdoms, the Sanctuary and the 2300 Days (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of
the Review and Herald Office, 1859); Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996
ed., s.v. “Publishing Work.”
112
81. For a short period Joseph Bates taught the alternate view that God
would restore at His second advent the place on earth where the Holy City
would eventually rest at the end of 1,000 years. James White’s view, however,
prevailed. Probably influenced by E. R. Pinney, a Millerite minister, White had
taught that “the kingdom of God would not be established on the earth until
the end of the millennium.” Bates, The Opening Heavens, 22, 32; James White,
“A Test,” RH, October 16, 1855, 6. Cf. Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996
ed., s.v. “Millennium.” Moreover, “Most certainly the Seventh-day Adventist
pioneers disagreed with Miller [1] on the day to observe the Sabbath, [2] on the
immortality of the soul, and [3] on the location of the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14.”
Maxwell, “A Brief History of Adventist Hermeneutics,” 220.
82. Maxwell, “A Brief History of Adventist Hermeneutics,” 7.
83. “The first four of the seven trumpets were the barbarian scourges
on Western Rome, and the fifth and sixth trumpets, the 150-year and 391-year,
special periods of the Turk, and the latter ending in August, 1840.” Froom, The
Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 4:1038.
84. See J. White, “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation

VIII and IX,” a series of five articles in the RH in 1858, (1) July 8, 57-59; (2) July
15, 65-67; (3) July 22, 73-75; (4) July 29, 82-84; and (5) August 5, 89-90. Later,
[Litch], The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation VIII and IX (Battle
Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Review and Herald Office, 1859), from Litch,
Prophetic Expositions, 2:132-199; in the last two pages of the tract is added an
article of James White, “The Seventh Angel, or Third Wo [sic].” published in
RH, April 21, 1859, 171. Later, it was the same republished from the first, just
different page numbers as [Litch], An Exposition of the Seven Trumpets of
Revelation VIII & IX (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist
Publishing Association, 1866); and [idem], An Exposition of the Seven Trumpets
of Revelation VIII & IX, 3rd ed., rev. and enl. (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the
Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1875). On the seven trumpets,
Rodrigues writes the interpretation of those by James White between 1844 and
1881 in Gerson Rodrigues, “James White and the Seven Trumpets (1844-1881)”
(A paper presented for CHIS686 Development of Prophetic Interpretation, AU,
2006).
85. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 4:1061; cf. [James White],
“The Seven Last Plagues,” in A Word to the “Little Flock,” ed. James White
(Gorham, ME: [The Author], 1847), 1; L[itch], “Events to Succeed the Second
Woe,” ST-M, August 1, 1840, 70.
86. White followed the concept of a trial judgment before the Second
Advent. He said “that judgment has begun at the house of God, that this is,
113
in a certain sense, a period of judgment and decision, we freely admit; but the
judgment, the day of judgment, the time of the dead that they should be judged,
is, evidently, in the future.” James White, “The Seventh Angel,” 52.
87. See some examples in [James White], “The One Hundred and Forty
Four Thousand,” AR, September 1850, 56; Bates, A Seal of the Living God, 19;
White, The Third Angel’s Message, 7; Andrews, Three Messages of Revelation XIV,
6-12, 115-116; Merritt E. Cornell, Miraculous Powers: The Scripture Testimony on
the Perpetuity of Spiritual Gifts (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-
day Adventist Publishing Association, 1862), 24; Joseph Bates, “The Beast with
Seven Heads,” RH, August 5, 1851, 3-4. Cf. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our
Fathers, 4:1045, 1078, 1096.
88. [James White], “Signs of the Times,” RH, September 13, 1853, 75;
cf. James White, “Letter from Bro. White,” The Day-Star, September 6, 1845,
17, 18; White, A Word to the “Little Flock,” 1; idem, [Introduction], The Present
Truth, July 1849. After the disappointment, Adventists who rejected the Advent
movement were called “the synagogue of Satan” (Rev 3:9). Idem, “Letter from
Bro. White,” 17.
89. Joseph Bates, The Seventh Day Sabbath: A Perpetual Sign, from
the Beginning, to the Entering into the Gates of the Holy City, According to
the Commandment, 2d rev. ed. (New Bedford, MA: Benjamin Lindsey, 1847),
59; idem, Second Advent Way Marks and High Heaps, 68-71. “During the
1850s various attempts were made to define the ‘faith of Jesus.’” Damsteegt,
Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission, 194-195.
90. Bates, A Seal of the Living God, 54-56; cf. Damsteegt, Foundations of
the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission, 144.
91. J[ames] W[hite], “The Testimony of Jesus,” RH, December 18, 1855, 92.
92. J[ames] W[hite], “The Testimony of Jesus,” 92.
93. Ibid., 93.
94. Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and

Mission, 195.
95. J[ohn] N. Andrews, “Thoughts on Revelation XIII and XIV,” RH, May
19, 1851, 81-86.
96. Joseph Bates, “Thoughts on the Past Work of William Miller: And
His Adherents, Respecting the True Starting Point of Dan. VIII, 14; IX, 24,
114
25,” RH, February 17, 1853, 156-157; William S. Ingraham, “Thoughts on the
Institution and Perpetuity of the Sabbath,” RH, May 16, 1854, 129-130; J[ohn]
N. A[ndrews], “Thoughts on the Sabbath,” RH, October 31, 1854, 92; M[oses]
Hull, “Thoughts on the Messages,” RH, January 5, 1860, 52-53; a six-series article
starting with U[riah] S[mith]’s, “Thoughts on the Advent,” RH, January 8, 1861,
60; then January 15, 1861, 68; January 29, 1861, 84; February 5, 1861, 92; February
12, 1861, 100; and February 19, 1861, 108; ibid., 192; “Thoughts on the Great
Battle,” RH, January 21, 1862, 69; E. B. Saunder, “Thoughts on the Atonement,”
RH, April 15, 1862, 155. Other articles starting with “A Few Thoughts,” such
as Stephen N. Haskell, “A Few Thoughts on the Philadelphia and Laodicean
Church,” RH, November 6, 1856, 6; E. Everts, “A Few Thoughts on the Cleansing
of the Sanctuary,” RH, June 11, 1857, 45; Issac Sanborn, “A Few Thoughts on the
Moral Law or Ten Commandments of God,” RH, May 26, 1859, 6; M[oses] Hull,
“A Few Thoughts on 2 Cor. V, 1-4,” RH, August 11, 1859, 89.
97. John N. Andrews, Thoughts on the Sabbath, and the Perpetuity of

the Law of God (Paris, ME: James White, 1851); cf. “Publications,” RH, February
3, 1852, 88.
98. White, “Report from Bro. White,” 72.
99. Uriah Smith, Seventh-day Adventists and Their Work (Oakland, CA:
International Tract Society, 1896), 7; Andrews, “Thoughts on Revelation XIII and
XIV,” 81-86; [White], “Thoughts on the Revelation,” 124; [Litch], The Sounding
of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation VIII and IX; Froom, The Prophetic Faith
of Our Fathers, 4:1111; idem, Movement of Destiny, 128; Seventh-day Adventist
Encyclopedia, 1996 ed., s.v. “Smith, Uriah”; Durand, Yours in the Blessed Hope,
Uriah Smith, 205-206.
100. Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996 ed., s.v. “Smith, Uriah”;

cf. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 4:1052-1053, 1109, 1122.
101. Smith, Daniel and the Revelation; cf. Durand, Yours in the Blessed
Hope, Uriah Smith, 203, 222.
102. Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 3, 5.
103. Ibid., 4-6.
104. Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 4-6.
105. [Litch], An Exposition of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation VIII &

IX, 455-487, 505-508. When Smith and White’s lectures appeared in print,
lesson 22 was on the seven trumpets, but this lecture was only a summary of
115
Litch’s view. [James White and Uriah Smith], The Biblical Institute: A Synopsis
of Lectures on the Principal Doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists (Oakland,
CA: Steam Press of the Pacific S. D. A., 1878), 260-267. Later, in 1884, Smith
added new topics, but on the trumpets he used the same lecture of the Biblical
Institute. Uriah Smith, Synopsis of the Present Truth: A Brief Exposition of the
Views of S. D. Adventists (Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist Publishing
Association, 1884), 210-218.
106. Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 455.
107. Smith, Thoughts on the Prophecies of Revelation, 509-519.
108. The advertisement for this book appeared in the Review as “The
Precious Seed and the Sowers,” RH, September 21, 1905, 2.
109. Other publishing houses also released books such as Stephen

N. Haskell, Prophetic Waymarks: The Story of Daniel and the Seer of Patmos
(Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Signs Publishing, 1905); idem, The Story of
the Seer of Patmos (South Lancaster, MA: Central New England Tract Society,
1906); idem, The Story of the Seer of Patmos (Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1908); idem, The Book of Revelation (Altamont, TN: Harvestime Books,
1989); idem, The Story of the Seer of Patmos (Payson, AR: Leaves-of-Autumn
Books, 1990); idem, The Story of the Seer of Patmos (Brushton, NY: TEACH
Services, 2004).
110. Haskell’s articles to “Missionary Reading Circle” appeared when

Alonzo T. Jones (1850-1923) was the chief editor and Smith associate editor of
the Review.
Haskell’s book in the page format and layout had special characteristics:
(1) writing in a narrative style; (2) writing by an old Adventist pioneer; (3) Bible
verses from both the entire Apocalypse and abundant Scripture references
printed on the margins; (4) attractive illustrations; (5) questions for either the
family or the school; and (6) quotations of Ellen G. White writings (the first
Adventist commentary on Revelation to do so). In 1901, Haskell published The
Story of Daniel the Prophet. Before his commentary on Revelation appeared,
Ellen G. White gave him some suggestions,
“The books of Daniel and the Revelation should be bound together and
published. A few explanations of certain portions might be added, but I am
not sure that these would be needed. This is the suggestion that I made to
Elder Haskell which resulted in the book he published. The need is not filled
by this book. It was my idea to have the two books bound together, Revelation
following Daniel, as giving fuller light on the subject dealt with in Daniel. The
object is to bring these books together, showing that they both relate to the
same subjects.” Ellen White, Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers, 117.
116
111. Ludwig R. Conradi, Daniel und die Offenbarung (Hamburg,

Germany: International Traktatgesellschaft, 1907).
112. The first article appeared as an introduction for the rest of the
principles in D. T. Bourdeau, “Principles by Which to Interpret Prophecy—No
1,” RH, November 27, 1888, 736-737. Then, the eighteen principles appeared in
RH, December 4, 1888, 752; December 11, 1888, 769; December 18, 1888, 787-
788; January 1, 1889, 3-4; January 15, 1889, 35-36; January 22, 1889, 51-52; January
29, 1889, 66; February 19, 1889, 114-115; February 26, 1889, 130-131; March 5, 1889,
146-147; March 12, 1889, 163-164; March 19, 1889, 179-180; March 26, 1889, 196;
April 2, 1889, 211-212; April 9, 1889, 227-228; April 19, 1889, 242-243; April 30,
1889, 275-276; May 7, 1889, 290-291; May 14, 1889, 306; May 21, 1889, 322-323;
May 28, 1889, 339; June 4, 1889, 354; June 11, 1889, 371-372; June 18, 1889, 387-
388; June 25, 1889, 403-404; July 2, 1889, 419-420. The next seven articles deal
with examples of prophecies which have a double fulfillment: RH, July 16, 1889,
451-452; July 23, 1889, 468; July 30, 1889, 483-484; August 6, 1889, 498-499;
August 27, 1889, 531-532; September 10, 1889, 562-563; and September 24, 1889,
595.
113. (1) “The promises of land made to the fathers”; (2) “The prophecy of
Nahum”; (3) “Isaiah 13, or the fall of ancient Babylon and the fate of sinners in
the day of God foretold”; and (4) “Isaiah 34, or the fate of Idumea, etc., foretold.”
Bourdeau, “Principles by Which to Interpret Prophecy—No 5,” RH, January 1,
1889, 3-4.
114. Ibid., 3.
115. Bourdeau, “The Value of the Prophetic Periods in the Study of

Prophecy,” RH, 15 October 1889, 643-644; idem, “The Value of the Prophetic
Periods in the Study of Prophecy—No. 2,” RH, October 29, 1889, 675-676; and
idem, “The Value of the Prophetic Periods in the Study of Prophecy—No. 2 [sic,
3],” RH, November 5, 1889, 690.
116. “The Bible and History Teacher’s Council was held simultaneously
with the Bible Conference from July 1 through July 19. The Bible Conference
took place during the day and the teachers met during the evening to discuss
pedagogical issues.” Campbell, “The 1919 Bible Conference and Its Significance
for Seventh-day Adventist History and Theology,” 80. Daniells points out that
the Bible Conference was held “from July 1 to 21.” Arthur G. Daniells, “The
Bible Conference,” RH, August 21, 1919, 3. But the schedule of the Conference
shows a schedule until July 19; see “Report of Bible Conference, Held in
Takoma Park, D.C.,” 1919, 5-6; or http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/RBC/
RBC19190701__B/index.djvu (accessed October 21, 2010).
It was held four years after the death of Ellen G. White and immediately
117
after World War I, which brought heightened interest in the apocalyptic

application. Thus, the main topic of that meeting was Adventist eschatology,
which basically did not change its main interpretation of Revelation. In
addition, the Seventh-day Adventist Church was influenced by the polarization
of Fundamentalism in the area of the inspiration of the Bible, and which also
influenced Adventist views of the inspiration of Ellen G. White’s writings.
Under the circumstances then, Adventists focused on the very soon
return of Jesus Christ. Thus, Adventist leaders drew the attention of the
denomination to three major Fundamentalist prophetic conferences from
1918-1919: (1) Philadelphia (May 28-30, 1918); (2) New York (held November 25-
28, 1918); and (3) one more time in Philadelphia (May 25-30, 1919). Francis
M. Wilcox, “A Significant Religious Gathering: A Bible Conference on the
Return of Our Lord,” RH, June 13, 1918, 2, 4-5; Leon L. Caviness, “The Prophetic
Conference, New York City,” RH, December 12, 1918, 1-2; Leon L. Caviness,
“Notes on the Prophetic Conference,” RH, December 26, 1918, 4-7; Francis M.
Wilcox, “A Conference on Christian Fundamentals,” RH, June 19, 1919, 2; see
also Campbell, “The 1919 Bible Conference and Its Significance for Seventh-day
Adventist History and Theology,” 42-51.
117. (1) “unity of the Word”; (2) “one teaching”; (3) “the law of first mention”;
(4) “the law of comparative mention”; (5) “law of full mention”; (6) “the law of
illustrative mention”; (7) “the Word paramount”; (8) “revealed, not reasoned
out”; (9) “aid of the Spirit”; (10) “not of private interpretation”; (11) “conditional”;
(12) “later light”; (13) “nations and persons”; (14) “double prophecy”; (15) “great
moral principles”; (16) “evidence cumulative”; (17) “willingness to investigate”;
(18) “reasons for prophetic delineation”; (19) “ending of great prophecies”; (20)
“types and symbols small”; and (21) “world dominion not territory.” Milton C.
Wilcox, “Principles of Prophetic Interpretation” (Paper presented for the 1919
Bible Conference, 1919); or “Report of Bible Conference, Held in Takoma Park,
D.C.,” 45-59.
Campbell affirms that “during the afternoon session H. L. Lacey added
two additional laws; (22) the law of context, and (23) law of ancient Eastern
usage.” He adds, “On the following day (July 3) Wilcox accepted these two
additional principles and added one final principle: (24) the law of progressive
development.”
118. On principles 3 and 22, see Campbell, “The 1919 Bible Conference
and Its Significance for Seventh-day Adventist History and Theology,” 109-110;
cf. “Report of Bible Conference, Held in Takoma Park, D.C.,” 90, 87-89, 176.
119. Haskell, The Story of the Seer of Patmos, 142-208; Spicer, Beacon
Lights of Prophecy, 215-267. A. T. Jones published in 1901 what is really a
commentary on chaps. 8, 9, 13, and 14 of the Apocalypse, essentially following
Uriah Smith’s understanding of the trumpets. Alonzo T. Jones, The Great
118
Nations of Today (Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1901).
120. Spicer, Beacon Lights of Prophecy, 215.
121. Haskell, The Story of the Seer of Patmos, 172, 178.
122. Ibid., 204; cf. Spicer, Beacon Lights of Prophecy, 263-267.
123. Ibid., 267; cf. Haskell, The Story of the Seer of Patmos, 205-208.
124. “Report of Bible Conference, Held in Takoma Park, D.C.,” July 17,
1919, 964-978.
125. In a footnote, Campbell mentions that “Prescott notes that he had

been to the Congressional Library to read the original Greek history on the
subject. His conclusion after going ‘over the whole matter’ was that ‘the day
July 27, 1299 is absolutely discredited.’ Some historians cited 1302, 1301, and
1300 as dates. ‘Now all I ask for is that we shall be consistent with ourselves so
that when we stand up before an audience or appear in print we don’t expose
ourselves any longer to that shocking inconsistency of applying the symbols
to two powers.’” Campbell, “The 1919 Bible Conference and Its Significance
for Seventh-day Adventist History and Theology,” 135; cf. “Report of Bible
Conference, Held in Takoma Park, D.C.,” July 17, 1919, 988-991.
126. For more on the seven-trumpet debate, see Campbell, “The 1919
Bible Conference and Its Significance for Seventh-day Adventist History and
Theology,” 133-137. For quotations on the trumpets from other sources, see Box
2, Fld 14, William Warren Prescott Papers (Collection 143), at CAR.
127. Haskell, The Story of the Seer of Patmos, 214; Spicer, Beacon Lights
of Prophecy, 270.
128. Haskell, The Story of the Seer of Patmos, 221-222, 203; Spicer,
Beacon Lights of Prophecy, 273-276.
129. Haskell, The Story of the Seer of Patmos, 222; Spicer, Beacon Lights
of Prophecy, 277.
130. The discussion on the 1260 days was in the context of the
identification of the “ten kingdoms” of Dan 2 and 7.
131. “Report of Bible Conference, Held in Takoma Park, D.C.,” July 11, 1919,
604. For details of the discussion see Campbell, “The 1919 Bible Conference
and Its Significance for Seventh-day Adventist History and Theology,” 130-133.
119
132. Campbell, “The 1919 Bible Conference and Its Significance for
Seventh-day Adventist History and Theology,” 132.
1919, 665-670.
1919, 671-672.
135. In his 1897 edition of Daniel and Revelation, Smith argues against
those who spiritualize prophetic fulfillments. “There are two general systems
of interpretation adopted by different expositors in their efforts to explain the
sacred Scriptures. The first in the mystical or spiritualizing system invented
by Origen, to the shame of sound criticism and the curse of Christendom; the
second is the system of literal interpretation, used by such men as Tyndale,
Luther, and all the Reformers, and furnishing the basis for every advance step
which has thus far been made in the reformation from error to truth as taught
in the Scriptures. According to the first system, every declaration is supposed
to have a mystical or hidden sense, which it is the province of the interpreter to
bring forth; by the second, every declaration is to be taken in its most obvious
and literal sense, except where the context and the well-known laws of language
show that the terms are figurative, and not literal; and whatever is figurative
must be explained by other portions of the Bible which are literal.” Smith,
Daniel and the Revelation, 4.
136. The Seventh-day Adventists, A Declaration of the Fundamental

Principles Taught and Practiced (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-
day Adventist Publishing Association, 1872), 6-7.
137. Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 3.
138. Ibid.
139. Daniells, “The Bible Conference,” 4.
140. For biographical information on C. Mervyn Maxwell see “C.

Mervyn Maxwell,” The Journal Era, Berrien Springs, MI, July 28, 1999, 13; “Of
Writers Articles, and Miscellany. . . . : Great Changes,” RH, April 4, 1968, 30;
“[Biographical Information]: C. Mervyn Maxwell” (CAR at JWL, AU, Berrien
Springs, MI, 1987); “Church Historian Dies,” Record (South Pacific Division),
August 14, 1999, 5; “Historian C. Mervyn Maxwell Dies,” AR, August 19, 1999, 20;
“Church Historian Dies,” Messenger (British Union Conference), September 10,
1999, [16]; Moon, “C. Mervyn Maxwell,” 2-10; William Fagal, “A Life Lived with
120
No Regrets,” JATS 11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000): 11–14; Don Schneider, “He Molded My
Life: Elder C. Maxwell, My Teacher,” JATS 11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000): 15–18; Maxwell,
“C. Mervyn Maxwell,” 19-25; James R. Nix, “Tribute to Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell,”
JATS 11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000): 26-29; Pauline Maxwell, “Pauline’s Testimony,” JATS
11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000): 30; Stanley Maxwell, “Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell, My Father,”
JATS 11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000): 31–39; Samuel Koranteng-Pipim, “‘I Need to Finish
My Work:’ Tribute to Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell,” JATS 11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000): 40-45;
Stephanie Tilly, “One Penny: My Friend Dr. Maxwell,” JATS 11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000):
46–48; P. Gerard Damsteegt, “To Be Like Jesus: Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell’s Life
Ambition: A Tribute to a Professor Emeritus,” JATS 11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000): 49–53.
141. Maxwell, “C. Mervyn Maxwell,” 20.
142. Maxwell, “An Exegetical and Historical Examination of the

Beginning of the 1260 Days of Prophecy with Special Attention Given to A.D.
538 and 1798 and Initial and Terminal Dates.”
143. C. Mervyn Maxwell, “Chrysostom’s Homilies Against the Jews: An

English Translation” (PhD dissertation, University of Chicago, 1966).
144. Moon, “C. Mervyn Maxwell,” 10; Maxwell, “C. Mervyn Maxwell,” 25;
Damsteegt, “To Be Like Jesus,” 50.
145. C. Mervyn Maxwell, Man, What a God! (Mountain View, CA:

Pacific Press, 1970); idem, Look at It This Way: Questions and Answers Selected
from Mervyn Maxwell’s Column in Signs of the Time Magazine (Mountain View,
CA: Pacific Press, 1972); idem, Tell It to the World: The Story of Seventh-day
Adventists (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1976); rev. ed., 1977; 2nd rev. ed.,
1982; Portuguese: História do Adventismo, trans. G. Brito (Santo André, Brazil:
Casa Publicadora Brasileira, 1982); in Spanish: idem, Dilo al mundo: La historia
de los Adventistas del Séptimo Día (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1990);
in Norwegian: idem, Ut i all verden!: historien om Syvendedags-Adventistene
(Oslo: Norsk Bokforlag, 1995); in German: idem, Sagt es der ganzen Welt
(Luneburg, Germany: Advent Verlag, 1997); Korean and Russian. A textbook
for twelfth-grade religion classes was idem, Moving Out: Breakthrough with
God’s Church, unit 4 [12th grade], ed. Joe Engelkemier (Mountain View, CA:
Pacific Press, 1980).
146. Moon, “C. Mervyn Maxwell,” 5.
147. Nix, “Tribute to Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell,” 26.
121
149. Maxwell, “Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell, My Father,” 34.
151. For example, “When a proposal was made to close the Pacific
Press as a full-service publisher, and merge the printing plant with that of the
Review and Herald, Maxwell entered the fray with a tightly reasoned defense
of multiple publishing houses, based on SDA history and Ellen White’s strong
advocacy of the same principle.” Ibid., 9; cf. C. Mervyn Maxwell to Faculty and
Staff of Andrews University, 26 May 1983, at CAR.
152. In its first edition, Spring 1987, its title was simply Affirm.
153. Maxwell was part of the editorial board. The first number of Affirm
was focused on topics against women’s ordination. On the last page of this
edition it says, “Affirm is a publication affirming Seventh-day Adventist beliefs.
It is published on the campus of Andrews University by a group of scholars and
interested friends who wish to reaffirm the confidence of Adventist believers
in the Biblical validity and contemporary relevance of Seventh-day Adventist
beliefs and practices.” “Affirm,” Affirm 1, no. 1 (Spring 1987): 8.
154. “Why Affirm?,” Affirm 1, no. 1 (Spring 1987): 1. Its updated web page
May 9, 2009, mentions that “ADVENTISTS AFFIRM is dedicated to upholding
the fundamental beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and supporting
its leadership in upholding those beliefs.
“Together with many other churches, the Seventh-day Adventist
Church is feeling the impact of liberalizing trends, eroding confidence in the
authority of the Bible in defining belief and practice. The purpose of ADVEN-
TISTS AFFIRM is to address issues involving doctrine and practice faced by the
church, and to do so on the basis of the Bible and the writings of Ellen White.”
Adventists Affirm, Who We Are (Adventists Affirm), http://www.adventistsa-
ffirm.org/article.php?id=6 (accessed November 22, 2010).
He was editor from spring 1997 to spring 1999.
155. C. Mervyn Maxwell, Adventists Affirm 11, no. 2 (Summer 1997): 3–4;
“Fulfilling Prophecies,” Adventists Affirm 11, no. 1 (Spring 1997): 3-4, 25; “A Year
of Anniversaries,” Adventists Affirm 12, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 3-4; “Hang in
There!,” Adventists Affirm 12, no. 3 (Fall 1998): 3-4; “Prayer of a Hungry Believer,”
Adventists Affirm 2, no. 3 (Fall 1988): 58.
156. Ed Christian, “The Editor’s Page,” JATS 11, nos. 1 and 2 (Spring-
Autumn 2000): 1. “The formation of the Adventist Theological Society was in
the development stage for a number of years and crystallized in discussions by
a number of Bible teachers attending a convention in Boston, Massachusetts,
122
in 1987. It was formally organized at a meeting of such teachers in Collegedale,

Tennessee, in 1988, as a professional, international, non-profit organization to
foster Biblical research, to be supportative of spiritual revival, and for fellowship
in prayer, Bible study, and mission. The Society is organized by and for Bible
teachers but also serves administrators, evangelists, pastors, teachers on all
levels, professionals, and Adventist members in general.” Adventist Theological
Society: Information Booklet (Collegedale, TN: Adventist Theological Society
[1988?]), [2].
157. Richard M. Davidson, “The Story behind the ATS: A Personal

Reflection,” Perspective Digest 1, no. 3: 12–15 (accessed January 24, 2011), 13; also
see http://www.atsjats.org/article.php?id=56 (accessed January 24, 2011).
158. C. Mervyn Maxwell, “How to Pick Real Seventh-day Adventists

Out of a Bushel of Christians,” JATS 1, no. 1 (Spring 1990): 103-117; idem,
“Seven Encouraging Things,” JATS 1, no. 2 (Autumn 1990): 88-102; idem, “In
Confirmation of Prophetic Interpretation,” JATS 2, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 139-151;
idem, “A Brief History of Adventist Hermeneutics,” JATS 4, no. 2 (Autumn
1993): 209-226; idem, “Life Sketch [of Gerhard F. Hasel],” JATS 6, no. 1 (Spring
1995): 59-68.
159. Gerard Dis, “Biblio File: God Cares, Volume 2,” Ministry, September
1986, 31.
160. Stanley Maxwell, “Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell, My Father,” JATS 11, nos.
1 & 2 (2000): 31–39.
161. Kenneth A. Strand, “Reviews of God Cares: The Message of Revelation

for You and Your Family, vol. 2 by C. Mervyn Maxwell,” AUSS 24 (1986): 286.
162. Dis, “Biblio File,” 31.
163. Maxwell, God Cares, 13-47.
164. Ibid., 49-540.
165. Ibid., 542-573.
166. Strand, “Review of God Cares, vol. 2,” AUSS 24 (1986): 284-285.
167. Maxwell, God Cares, 45.
168. In March 1983, Maxwell presented his outline of John’s book for
DARCOM before publishing his book. C. Mervyn Maxwell, “The Outline of
123
Revelation: Some Suggestions,” paper prepared for DARCOM, 1983 (CAR

at JWL, AU, Berrien Springs, MI); cf. idem, God Cares, 65. However, Strand
had already presented his literary structure exactly a year before. Kenneth A.
Strand, An Introduction to the Literary Structure and Theology of the Book of
Revelation, paper presented for DARCOM (CAR, 1982).
169. Maxwell, “In Confirmation of Prophetic Interpretation,” 142.
170. Ibid., 55; cf. Strand, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, 44-48.
172. Ibid., 57-61; cf. Strand, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, 52; idem,
“Apocalyptic Prophecy and the Church—1,” Ministry, October 1983, 23.
173. Maxwell, God Cares, 59-60; cf. Strand, Interpreting the Book
of Revelation, 50-51. Strand adds two additional features of apocalyptic: (1)
“vertical continuity” and (2) “horizontal continuity.” On “vertical continuity,”
he affirms that “the ancient Semitic mind says heaven and earth are in very
close touch with each other, a perspective that we in this modern science-
oriented civilization have unfortunately lost to a large extent.” Thus, “the
book of Revelation repeatedly presents heavenly settings in connection with
descriptions of activities that take place on earth.” On “horizontal continuity,”
he declares that “in apocalyptic, history is a continuum that is under God’s
control and that moves ever closer to its glorious consummation wrought by
God’s own special intervention when His kingdom of righteousness will be
established for eternity. . . . This historical-continuum aspect of apocalyptic
prophecy does not pretend to note every feature of history along the way, but
it follows a process that we may refer to as ‘abstraction by typical example.’”
Strand, “Apocalyptic Prophecy and the Church—1,” 21-23.
174. Maxwell, God Cares, 61-62; cf. Strand, Interpreting the Book of
Revelation, 48.
175. See reference number 6, Maxwell, God Cares., 65. See also chapter
5, entitled “A New Literature Analysis,” in Strand, Interpreting the Book of
Revelation, 43-52; cf. Kenneth A. Strand, “Chiastic Structure and Some Motifs
in the Book of Revelation,” AUSS 16, no. 2 (Autumn 1978): 401-408; idem,
“Apocalyptic Prophecy and the Church—1,” 20-23; idem, “Apocalyptic Prophecy
and the Church—2,” Ministry, December 1983, 14-18.
176. Strand, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, 49-52; idem,

“Apocalyptic Prophecy and the Church—1,” 23.
124
178. Ibid., 69.
179. Ibid.
180. Ibid., 70.
181. Ibid., 59-62.
182. Ibid., 70.
183. Ibid., v.
184. In this paper just five principles of interpretation appear to be used.

C. Mervyn Maxwell, The Mark of the Beast, paper presented for DARCOM
(CAR, March 1989), 2.
185. Before describing his eight principle of interpretation, he declares

that “it is wise when undertaking serious Bible study, to review the principles of
interpretation (hermeneutics) under which one intends to operate.” Moreover,
he adds that these eight hermeneutical principles “seem especially appropriate
to this present study [“The Mark of the Beast”].” C. Mervyn Maxwell, “The
Mark of the Beast,” in Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, Symposium on
Revelation-Book II, ed. Frank B. Holbrook (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research
Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 45-47.
186. Ibid., 45; cf. Maxwell, God Cares, 78, 405.
187. Ibid., 13-47.
188. Maxwell, “The Mark of the Beast,” 45.
189. In common: “(a) they stretch from the prophet’s day to the Second
Coming . . . ; (b) they deal mainly but not exclusively with the harsh side of
political and religiopolitical entities; (c) they warn of major apostasy and
persecution; and (d) they promise a Christ-centered outcome with rewards
for the righteous and destruction for the wicked.” Maxwell, “The Mark of the
Beast,” 45-46.
190. Ibid., 46; cf. Maxwell, God Cares, 309-419.
191. For his prophetic application of the 1260 days, see Maxwell, God
Cares, 33, 35, 131, 171-172, 188, 192, 270, 275-281, 299-305, 321, 326-330, 428, 525-
125
526. For his historical application and explanation of Dan 8:14 about 2300 days,
see ibid., 172, 188, 276-280, 300, 305, 353-356, 401, 403, 526. For “three days and
a half” from Rev 11:9, see ibid., 293, 300.
192. Maxwell, “The Mark of the Beast,” 46-47; cf. idem, God Cares. For
the United States in the prophecy, see 128, 130, 132, 286, 340-349, 385, 436, 461,
472, 477, 517-518; for antichrist, mark of the beast, and Babylon, see 32, 58-61,
302, 330, 349, 377-386, 414-473, 494, 516-518, 538 and so on.
193. Maxwell, God Cares, 54-62; idem, “The Mark of the Beast,” 47.
194. Maxwell, “The Mark of the Beast,” 47; cf. idem, God Cares, 135, 371-
373, 405.
195. Maxwell, “The Mark of the Beast,” 47.
197. Ibid., 223-307.
198. Ibid., 225.
200. Ibid., 233-237.
201. Ibid., 223.
202. Ibid., 237-238. The entity could be: “(1) The Jewish nation and its
capital, Jerusalem (or Judaism and its Jerusalem temple), (2) western Roman
Empire and its capital city, Rome, (3) western Christianity as headed up by
the Roman Church, (4) and the kingdom of God, centered in the heavenly
sanctuary. Under the fifth and sixth trumpets, the ‘third of mankind’ may be
understood to represent (5) the Greek Orthodox eastern Roman Empire and its
religious and political capital, Constantinople.” Ibid., 244.
204. Ibid., 238-240.
205. Ibid., 121-126, 241-242.
206. Ibid., 241.
126
207. Ibid., 246.
209. Ibid.
210. The interpretation of the fifth and sixth trumpets, according

to Maxwell, represents Islam in Bible prophecy. Thus, he takes some pages
to explain what Moslems believe; the Islamic expansion; the battle of Tours;
the Moslems attack eastern Europe; the Turks muscle in; the Turks “kill” the
Byzantine Empire; and the Ottoman empire helps the Reformation. Ibid., 245-
251, 259.
212. Maxwell affirms that the conjunction and in Greek is here used
in an explanatory manner, meaning “that is to say.” In other words, Rev 9:15
could read “For the hour of judgment; that is to say, for a period of judgment
extending over a day and a month and a year, symbolic of 391 years.” Ibid., 262-
265.
213. Ibid., 270-271; cf. 442.
214. Ibid., 271; cf. 421.
215. Ibid., 271.
216. This section covers more than 100 pages. Maxwell, God Cares, 309-
419; 310.
217. Ibid., 315-321.
219. Ibid., 324, 403-405; cf. 78, 79.
220. Maxwell use several texts of the Old Testament on “remnant,” such
as Gen 45:7; Isa 4:25; 10:20, 21; 37:31, 32; Mic 4:7; Zeph 3:13-19; Jer 50:20; Obad
17; Joel 2:32. Ibid., 407.
221. Ibid., 405.
222. Ibid., 407.
127
223. The following list of books seems to follow the biblical-historical

emphasis: Máximo Vicuña, Interpretación Histórica del Libro de Apocalipsis
(Lima, Perú: Imprenta Unión de la Universidad Peruana Unión, 1987); Loron T.
Wade, El futuro del mundo revelado en el Apocalipsis (Buenos Aires, Argentina:
Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1990); Joe W. Gresham, Revelation:
God’s Last Message to Earth (Dallas, TX: The Fourth Angel’s Publishing, 1999),
brief explications with 197 pages; Leslie Hardinge, The Lamb, God’s Greatest
Gift: Meditations on the Book of Revelation (Harrisburg, PA: American Cassette
Ministries Book Division, 2005), without bibliography, 480 pages; Patrick M.
Jones, Revelations from Revelation (Brushton, NY: TEACH Services, 2008), a
compilation with 635 pages.
224. For a brief biography of Alberto R. Treiyer, see his own page: http://
www.adventistdistinctivemessages.com/English/biography.html (accessed
February 28, 2011).
225. This was translated into Spanish, and later into English, as Alberto
R. Treiyer, El día de la expiación y la purificación del Santuario (Buenos Aires,
Argentina: Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1988); idem, The Day of
Atonement and the Heavenly Judgment: From the Pentateuch to Revelation
(Siloam Springs, AR: Creation Enterprises International, 1992).
226. In chronological order, his books in Spanish: Treiyer, El día de la

expiación y la purificación del Santuario; El enigma de los sellos y las trompetas: a
la luz de la visión del trono y de la recompensa final (Mayagüez, PR: Proyecciones
bíblicas, 1990); Las promesas gloriosas del santuario: Preguntas y respuestas,
seminario I ([S.l.]: A. R. Treiyer, 1994); Los cumplimientos gloriosos del santuario:
Con historias e illustraciones, seminario III ([S.l.]: A. R. Treiyer, 1997); Jubilee
and Globalization: The Hidden Intention ([S.l.: s.n.], 2000); Las expectaciones
apocalípticas del santuario: Con historias e ilustraciones, seminario III ([S.l.]: A.
R. Treiyer, 2008); in English, The Day of Atonement and the Heavenly Judgment;
The Glorious Promises of the Sanctuary: With Stories and Illustrations. Seminar
I (Siloam Springs, AR: Creation Enterprises International, 1994); The Glorious
Fulfillments of the Sanctuary: With Stories and Illustrations. Seminar II (Siloam
Springs, AR: Creation Enterprises International, 1997); The Final Crisis in
Revelation 4-5 (Siloam Springs, AR: Creation Enterprises International, 1998);
Jubilee and Globalization; The Seals and the Trumpets: Biblical and Historical
Studies ([S.l.: s.n.], 2005); The Apocalyptic Expectations of the Sanctuary: With
Stories and Illustrations ([S.l.]: A. R. Treiyer, 2008).
227. Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets, 209-230.
228. Ibid., 19, italics mine.
128
229. A. Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets, 27.
230. The italics are in the original. Treiyer says that “These words appear
in Revelation:
-in 4:5 as conclusion to the seven churches;
-in 8:5 as conclusion to the seven seals;
-in 11:19 as a conclusion to the seven trumpets;
-in 16:18 as a conclusion to the seven plagues.
-See also the seven thunders in Rev 10:3-4, in connection with the
seventh trumpet.” Treiyer, The Apocalyptic Expectations of the Sanctuary., 302;
cf. idem, The Seals and the Trumpets, 27, 217-226.
231. The italics are in the original. Treiyer, The Apocalyptic Expectations
of the Sanctuary, 303; also see 304-311; idem, The Seals and the Trumpets, 21-27.
232. Rodriguez says, “In this book Alberto R. Treiyer has demonstrated
that the interpretation of Revelation can combine exegetical insight and
historical knowledge in the exposition of the message of that book. He has
carefully examined recent historical studies and found evidence for the
historical fulfillment of the encoded message of the seals and the trumpets.
The reader may disagree with him in some of the details and even in some of
the main applications, but she or he will not be able to overlook the fact that
history continues to be the arena in which God’s prophetic message for us is
being fulfilled.” Ibid., 3-4.
233. A. Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets, 207-380. But, 31 pages (231-
261) were written by Humberto R. Treiyer under the title Excursus III, “History
of Interpretation of the Trumpets (Rev 8-11).” It is a summary from LeRoy E.
Froom’s four volumes, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers.
234. “It is our purpose to return to the historicist legacy of those who
preceded us in relation to the interpretation of the prophecies of the seals and
of the trumpets. Of course, we cannot be satisfied with repeating the ideas of
our ancestors. . . . Our study will not neglect the questionings raised concerning
the work of our predecessors, nor the most recent trends within historicism, if
indeed it can still be called historicism in some cases.” A. Treiyer, The Seals and
the Trumpets, 18.
235. “Since a similar difficulty in finding adequate principles to interpret

the trumpets appears in the study of the seals and other visions of Revelation,
the principles brought out here will serve us, at the same time, to support more
fully our study of the former visions.” Ibid., 209.
236. Ibid., 210.
129
238. A. Treiyer affirms that J. Paulien and R. Stefanovič, on seven trumpets,

start “with literal interpretations” but end “with spiritual interpretations.” A.
Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets, 213, n. 9.
239. Ibid., 210.
240. Ibid., 211.
241. “The prophetic descriptions of wars and judgments in the trumpets

reveal historical realities like those foretold through similar descriptions by
prophets of the Old Testament.” A. Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets, 213, 215.
242. Ibid., 216.
243. Ibid., 217.
244. Ibid., 217, see also 218-226.
245. Ibid., 221.
247. Ibid., 263; 217-218.
248. On the meaning of “a third part of the earth,” A. Treiyer says

that “this does not necessarily mean an exact mathematical proportion. It
simply expresses the punishment of God as not being total…. Even so, it has
been noted that the Roman empire was divided into three capitals: Ravenna,
Constantinople and Rome. Only a third part fell under Alaric, that is Rome, by
then the principal capital of the empire.” A. Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets,
264-270.
249. Ibid., 271-284.
250. See Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets, 285-360.
251. Something similar can be observed in other biblical prophecies

“dealing with prophetic time, such as the 70 years of Babylonian captivity, and
the 1260 and 1290 days-years.” See A. Treiyer, The Day of Atonement and the
Heavenly Judgment, 334-335.
130
252. Treiyer also considers “the first preaching of the Arab prophet” as
applying to the first event. In other words, “the preaching of Mohammed in
612 as its starting point, and the foundation stone of Baghdad, the new Muslim
capital, as its culmination in the year 762,” cover the 150 years announced in the
prophecy. A. Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets, 309-319.
253. Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets, 336.
254. Ibid., 335, 340, 344.
255. Ibid., 324; see also 325-328-346.
256. Treiyer, The Apocalyptic Expectations of the Sanctuary, 309.
257. Treiyer, The Seals and the Trumpets, 361-380.
258. In 2002, he wrote some notes in Spanish commenting on the

Sabbath School lesson of the second quarter. The title of this article is “Estudios
sobre el Apocalipsis” (Studies on Revelation); see lesson 8. Idem, Estudios
sobre el Apocalipsis: Comentarios sobre la Escuela Sabática, http://www.
adventistdistinctivemessages.com/Spanish/articulos.html (accessed March 12,
2011).
260. Treiyer, Estudios sobre el Apocalipsis.
262. Ibid., 222.
263. Treiyer, Estudios sobre el Apocalipsis.
264. For instance: 1260 years, 538–1798; 2300 years, 457 BC – 1844 AD,
and so on.
131
CHAPTER 3
BIBLICAL-THEOLOGICAL EMPHASIS
T
his chapter. explains the contributions of Adventist scholars
during the second period of Adventist interpretation of the book
of Revelation, called the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary
period. The major contributor in this period, Hans K. LaRondelle, focused
on the biblical-theological emphasis. I start with the background of the
content of this period, emphasizing the contribution of Louis F. Were, five
major commentaries on Revelation during this period (1944-1970), the 1952
Bible Conference, and the Commentary. Then, I will describe the roles of
LaRondelle on the interpretation of Revelation, and one other figure who
followed the same theological emphasis in recent years.
BACKGROUND OF THE BIBLICAL-THEOLOGICAL

PERIOD (1944-1970)
In 1934 the denomination opened at Pacific Union College an

advanced school of theology which eventually became the Seventh-day
Adventist Theological Seminary (1937).1 At the beginning, the primary
purpose of the Seminary was to provide graduate studies for religion
teachers in Adventist colleges.2 Dialogues on biblical topics appeared not
only for professional development, but also in response to World War I. On
prophecy, Smith’s Daniel and the Revelation would start being reviewed.
In 1943, the Bible Research Fellowship started its forum of discussion
on major topics of the Bible.3 During the decade of its existence, the
133
Biblical-Theological Emphasis
Fellowship examined almost 120 papers.4 On prophetic interpretation,

the events occurring around World War II (1939-1945) caught its attention,
especially the identity of the king of the north in Dan 11 and the battle of
Armageddon in Rev 16.
Regarding these two topics, from the 1930s to the 1950s, the
publications of Louis F. Were (1896-1967), an Australian minister, became
controversial, because his conclusions were contrary to Smith’s book.
Besides this, other discussions led to at least three major developments:
(1) the creation of the Committee for Biblical Study and Research in 1952,
today known as Biblical Research Institute;5 (2) the 1952 Bible Conference;
and (3) the publication of the seven-volume Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Commentary (1953-1957).
Even though the “Fellowship” was not an official Adventist
organization, its members contributed to all of these developments in
the interpretation of the Apocalypse. Before considering the Seventh-day
Adventist Bible Commentary, I will describe the contribution of Louis F.
Were; five major commentaries written after the last revision of Daniel and
Revelation and before the Commentary on Revelation; and the significant
contributions of the 1952 Bible Conference.
The Role of Louis F. Were
Louis Fitzroy Were was born in Prospect, South Australia, on April

29, 1896.6 He was the fourth child of five of Albert and Maud Were. Even
though Louis and his eldest brother, Albert Jr., refused to serve in the military,
joining their father as conscientious objectors, Louis was impressed by the
First World War, which led him to think of the significance of the events
in the light of Scripture.7 Apparently it was Albert, who, having become
a Seventh-day Adventist, persuaded Louis to accept the same teaching.
After his marriage to Jessie in 1915, Louis enrolled in a course of theological
studies at Avondale College, Cooranbong, Australia, in 1918. Completing
134
his courses, Louis became known as an outstanding gospel preacher with a

“golden voice,” expounding the mysteries of Bible prophecy.8
Early in the1930s, Signs of the Times published a seven-part series
by Were, in which he attacked futurism in general, “but not futurists.”9 In
1932, Albert W. Anderson (1868-1949), then General Field Secretary of the
Australasian Union Conference,10 published two books supporting Smith’s
interpretation. 11 Were openly disagreed with traditional views on Dan 11
and Armageddon. Were taught a non-military, non-Palestinian view of
Armageddon, and argued for Christocentric-typological applications of
the end-time passages of Scripture. These differences of viewpoint, not
only between Were and Anderson, but also with other ministers of the
traditional mold, were never resolved.12 Perhaps, Were’s attitude and lack
of tact, as well as some errors in his view, contributed to antagonism with
his colleagues.13
When those discussions extended nearly ten years, the Australasian
Union Conference set up a “Committee on Special Study,” which in 1941 and
1942 held meetings to examine these differences. Both Anderson and Were
were members of that committee. Were presented his views on Armageddon
and related topics, but the large majority of committee members rejected
his interpretations.14 However, on March 22, 1942, Were began to preach his
views publicly in the Adelaide Town Hall.15
Even though Were’s wife passed away during those meetings in early
1942, he continued to preach in Adelaide.16 The following year, he married
again.17 On March 9, 1943, he was released from denominational employment,
but not disfellowshipped.18 In spite of later attempts to reinstate Were to
ministry, it never happened.19 However, he never separated himself from
the church, but continued preaching and writing his convictions until his
death on April 2, 1967.
Starting in the 1940s, Were’s writings circulated20 not only among
the Australians, but also among American and European Seventh-day
Adventists, on which he exerted a long-term influence.21 Even though his
135
writing style tended to be verbose,22 Were’s writings focused on the Christ-

centered and spiritual aspects of the prophecies of the end-time.
In 1950, after attending the General Conference Session in San
Francisco at his own expense, he attended the summer Bible Teachers’
Council at Pacific Union College. At both meetings, he was just a listener,
but his presence somehow aroused discussion on his favorite topics,
Armageddon and Dan 11, through a “Questionnaire on Divergent Views,”
hurriedly prepared by Cottrell.23
Louis F. Were included principles of prophetic interpretation

throughout his writings, climaxing in 1963 with his Bible Principles of
Interpretation: Establish Truth and Safeguard against Last-day Errors.24 This
pamphlet describes thirteen principles:
(1) The interpretation must reveal Christ and make him the
center. (2) Compare Scripture with Scripture for clearer light.
(3) The things of Israel now below to the church. (4) The
gospel in every passage and prophecy. (5) The law of growth
or development: the principle of repeat and enlarge—the
repetition contains an explanation. (6) The law of the world-
wide symbolized by the local. (7) The law of the significance of
Bible names. (8) The law governing “spiritual” interpretations.
(9) Observe the deep, inner meaning—not alone what is on
the surface. (10) The design of the book of Revelation—all the
laws of interpretation show that the gathering of the nations
to “Armageddon” must commence before probation closes.
(11) New Testament principles determine the interpretation
of the latter portion of Daniel XI. (12) “Double” and “Triple”
application of prophecy: “Rightly dividing the word of truth” (2
Tim 2:15). (13) The principle of the “triple” application revealed
in the apocalypse.25
Analyzing each principle goes beyond the purpose of this research.

These principles are focused on his favorite passages of prophecy, Dan 11 and
Rev 16 (which especially justified his interpretation of Armageddon). Thus,
136
two major points in Were’s hermeneutic need to be underlined because of

their implications for Adventist interpretation on Revelation in the future.
Perhaps the single most basic principle of interpretation of prophecy
to Were was that “the interpretation must reveal Christ and make Him the
center.” He claims, “It should be regarded as certain that interpretations of
prophecies which do not set forth in clearer light the gospel of Christ are
not God-inspired.” And he adds, “Interpretations of prophecies which do
not find their center in Jesus as the Saviour, or as the Destroyer of evil, are
wrong applications of Scripture.”26 He, moreover, declares that “Christ is
‘the centre’ –not the Papacy or Turkey.”27
The second point is his bipartite and tripartite views. “It is vital
for S.D.A. students to be familiar with ‘double’ (or symbolic) and ‘triple’
(literal-symbolic-literal) applications of prophecies concerning Israel and
Jerusalem,” he claims. In order to understand those principles, Were first
laid the foundation in his prior principles, and concluded with a quote
from Ellen G. White, “In the Revelation all the books of the Bible meet
and end.”28 Were affirms that the book of Revelation “must in itself be
interpreted with remembrance” of the Old and New Testaments (Were’s
principle 5).29 Moreover, since “the promises to literal Israel were to be
fulfilled in the experience of the church” (Were’s principle 3),30 then,
likewise, the experiences of literal Israel recorded in the Old Testament
must “be spiritually applied by His church” (Were principle 8).31 Thus “as
things mentioned in the early chapters of the Bible are referred to in later
books,” also, “things mentioned in the early chapters of the Revelation are
later referred to and enlarged upon.”32
On the tripartite view, he declares, “The Revelation deals with the
past, present, and the future,” then “the things of ancient Israel are repeated,
but on a vaster scale.”33 This is to say that all terms related to ancient Israel
(in the past) are literal, but those literal terms are symbolic for the spiritual
church (in the present), and will become a literal reality after the millennium
(in the future); hence the sequence, literal-symbolic-literal.34 To Were, “all
137
the prophetic places, proper names, and designations of the Revelation” in

the present time “are employed symbolically,” even the seven cities in Asia.35
In the late 1940s and early 1950s, as Were’s writings were becoming
more widely known to Adventist Bible scholars in North America, several
important Revelation commentaries appeared.
Five Major Commentaries, 1949-1953
During this period of transition, at least five major commentaries

on Revelation appeared.36 In 1949, Edwin R. Thiele (1895-1986) who taught
at Emmanuel Missionary College, today Andrews University, published
Outline Studies in Revelation, course material, which was republished by
Avondale College in 1974.37 Two years later, two other professors wrote two-
volume commentaries on the books of Daniel and the Revelation. Raymond
F. Cottrell (1911-2003), a theologian, wrote course material entitled The
Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation: Part II—Revelation.38 George
McCready Price (1870-1963), a Canadian scientific geologist, whom Were
39
called the “dean of Seventh-day Adventist writers,”40 circulated for “friendly

criticism and suggestions” a manuscript entitled “The Greatest of the
Prophets: A New Commentary on the Book of Revelation.”41 Price’s volume
on Revelation was never published, but his first volume, on Daniel, was
published.42 In 1952, Bunch enlarged his mimeographed work written about
twenty years earlier.43 Finally, in 1953, Roy Allan Anderson (1895-1985),44 an
Australian evangelist, issued Unfolding the Revelation: Evangelistic Studies
for Public Presentation, which was re-published and revised in 1961 and
1974.45
Thiele’s commentary, more than 300 pages, comprises seventeen
chapters, presented under subdivisions of ten themes of the book of
Revelation.46 Thiele included many quotations from the writings of
Ellen G. White. At the end of each section, moreover, appears a generous
bibliography, which refers to the writings of Bunch, Haskell, and Smith
138
among the Adventist writers.47

Cottrell’s work, a course handout of more than 150 pages, was divided
into thirty-six lessons. Besides the Bible, the author assigned the reading
of Smith’s book and Ellen G. White’s The Great Controversy.48 To Cottrell,
Revelation had two parts; the first half is “now largely in the past” (Rev 1-11)
and “the last half is still mostly future.” There are, moreover, “four major
lines of prophecy”: (1) the seven churches (Rev 1-3); (2) the seven seals (4-7);
(3) the seven trumpets (8-11); and (4) the coming crisis (12-22).49 At the end
of Cottrell’s work, there is an appendix of illustrative charts.
McCready Price’s 245-page unpublished manuscript presented
several innovations, not only in form, but also in interpretation, compared
to other Adventist authors. For example, Price devoted many pages to the
introduction to the Apocalypse, which was unusual among Adventists at
the time (1951).50 The author, moreover, underscores that the structure of
the Apocalypse is “a vital part” for understanding it. He affirms that the
book of Revelation is divided into “two distinct parts” (chaps. 1-11 and 12-22)
with a prologue at the beginning of the first part and an epilogue at the end
of the second.51
Bunch’s commentary, 300 pages mimeographed, includes forty-
four chapters of commentary on Rev 4 to 22 (the author had previously
published a book on Rev 1-3, entitled The Seven Epistles of Christ).52 In The
Seven Epistles, Bunch offered an introduction to his commentary on the
Apocalypse, in which he underlined the Christ-centered focus of the book.
To him, the Apocalypse was “not only figurative but highly dramatic,”—“the
great prophetic drama of the Revelation of Jesus Christ.”53 Except for Ellen
White, he quotes no Adventist authors in his commentaries.54
Anderson’s book, a 216-page document, is the result of “evangelistic
classes” in a verse-by-verse study of the Apocalypse.55 The author proposes
to interpret the book of Revelation by focusing on Jesus Christ, for “His
glory [is] reflected from the many facets of this prophetic jewel.”56 This
commentary followed the chapters of the Apocalypse, but did not comment
139
on the structure of Revelation. The author cited Bunch, Froom, Litch,

Miller, Smith, and Ellen White as reference sources among the Adventists.57
I turn now to the principles of prophetic interpretation of the five
authors mentioned.
First of all, a Christ-centered interpretation of the book of the

Apocalypse is underscored by all five writers mentioned above. Most of
them followed historicist principles of interpretation adopted by the SDA
Church and supported their convictions with quotations from the writings
of Ellen G. White.58 Price, however, would propose new ideas, which would
be echoed in the future.
Under the presupposition that “God’s revelation of truth for His
people is progressive,”59 Price underlines at least six “innovative” principles
of interpretation:60 He emphasized the importance of knowing (1) “the
Apocalypse in the original Greek,” (2) understanding the prophecies of
Ezekiel, Zechariah, and especially Daniel in order to comprehend various
symbols appearing in Revelation,61 and (3) in each series of prophecies,
the last of each prophetic series “is the important part,” whereas the first
parts “are given for identification purposes”62; (4) he held that the symbols
of Rev 13, 17, and others represent more than was seen in the conventional
Adventist interpretation63; (5) he asserted that the literary structure of John’s
book was “a vital part;”64 and (6) the prophecies of the Bible have more than
one fulfillment, namely “the proleptic fulfillment and the apotelesmatic
fulfillment.”65 As a result, “symbolic prophecy is only a special kind of
poetry, and its symbols are to be applied wherever they fit.”66
I turn now to the interpretation of the trumpets and Rev 12 of the
five authors mentioned above.
140
Edwin R. Thiele kept in line with Miller’s approach to the

interpretation of the seven trumpets.67 Later, Maxwell would continue the
same line of interpretation, applying the first four trumpets to the period
from the fall of Jerusalem to the Dark Ages, and the fifth and sixth trumpets
to the Turkish and Ottoman domains.
To Cottrell, the seventh trumpet represented “divine intervention
to prevent apostate Christianity from obliterating the true faith from the
earth.”68 The first four trumpets occurred between AD 395 and 476, and
the last three extended from AD 622 until the kingdom of Christ.69 “The
first six trumpets therefore bridge the 1260 years of papal supremacy and
were designed of God to hold its power in check.”70 Thus, Cottrell followed
Smith’s rather than Miller’s interpretation of the trumpets.
On the first four trumpets, Price accepted Smith’s interpretation,
in “a general way as the best hitherto suggested” (proleptic application), in
other words, “a series of events as judgments upon the apostate civilization
of the Roman empire.” But he saw them applying as well “to any other
series of invasions of old long-established communities” (apotelesmatic
application).71
Relating to Gibbon, Price says,
We must not forget that Gibbon had had a fairly complete

theological training. He was not only expertly familiar with
the Books of Daniel and the Revelation as literature, but he
was also familiar with all the Church Fathers and the other
theologians who had commented on these books. . . . He
used . . . many allusions, or even indirect verbal quotations,
not because he had any thought of their divine inspiration,
but because he knew that the Holy Scriptures had in his day
become household language for all the English-speaking
world for whom he was writing.72
Thus, Price believed that “all that one can show in applying these
141
first four trumpets to the incidents connected with the fall of the Roman
Empire, is merely a series of comparisons, of analogies.” He concludes that
“the prophecies and the history do fit one another, but it is largely by other
lines of reasoning that we finally become convinced that these are the events
actually meant by these predictions.”73
On the fifth trumpet, Price accepted the interpretation referring
to the Saracens, accepted two different applications to the period of “five
months” or 150 literal years (Rev 9:10): (1) from 612 to 762; and (2) from
July 27, 1299, to July 27, 1449. He admitted the realm of the Turks as an
application of the sixth trumpet, interpreting the time period in Rev 9:15 as
391 literal years and 15 days extending from July 27, 1449, to August 11, 1840.74
On the last date, he claimed that because “God Himself set His seal to this
date . . . as the terminal date of this prophecy . . . this ought to be its meaning
for us.”75 Moreover, he adds that while these woes had this first application
(proleptic), “it is probable that their final or their apotelesmatic application
or meaning will be seen in the very last hours of time.”76
Price concluded that the seven trumpets constituted “an interlude,
introduced during the judgment hour, or the first part of the seventh seal,
but recapitulating events during the long centuries of the Christian Age.”
They continue only until the close of probation, “at which point the seven
last plagues, very similar in character,” end with the kingdom of God.77
Taylor G. Bunch, on the first six trumpets, accepted the historical
application based on the successive invasions of the Roman Empire under
Alaric (Goths), Genseric (Vandals), Attila (Huns), and Odoacer (Heruli),
then, after them, of the Saracens and Turks.78 On the period of the five
months (Rev 9:5, 10), Bunch agreed with others, beginning it in 632, but
argued “that the exact date for the close of the period is not essential. It
is enough to know that 150 years covered the crest of the movement of the
Saracens as a tormenting power dangerous to the Roman Empire.”79 On
the prophetic period of the sixth trumpet (Rev 9:15), he argued for 391
literal years and 15 days beginning from July 21, 1326, and ending in the
142
battle of Belgrade on August 16, 1717, maintaining that the “historical fully
corroborates the prediction. Turkey was not a dangerous and destructive
power before 1326 or after 1717.”80 Moreover, he says that “the time periods
of the fifth and sixth trumpets cannot be connected. They cover the crests
of two separate political and military movements.”81
R. A. Anderson generally followed Smith’s interpretation on the
trumpets.82 However, he held that the prophetic periods of the 150 years and
the 391 years, connected with the fifth and sixth trumpets, were “differently
applied, but always . . . associated with this same Mohammedan power.”83
The first application of 150 years would be “from the time the prophet
Mohammed began his public preaching in A.D. 612, to the founding of the
city of Baghdad by Al-Mansur in A.D. 762”; and the second one would be
from July 27, 1299, when Othman invaded Nicomedia, to 1449. The period
of Rev 9:15 could also be applied twice‒from 1449 to August 11, 1840, and from
1453, “the fall of Constantinople,” to 1844, “the hour of God’s judgment.”84
Table 6 shows the conclusions of these five writers.
On Rev 12, the five authors basically agree with the classic Adventist
interpretation, with some added details. 85 For instance, Price, applying the
principle of proleptic and apostelesmatic, believes the flight of the Church
into the “wilderness” “had a primary or first fulfillment in the flight of the
Christian Jews to Pella, before the siege of Jerusalem.”86 Cottrell and Bunch
compare the seven heads of the great red dragon with the exact seven
universal powers that have ruled over all the earth and made war on the
people of God. These are Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece,
Pagan Rome, and Papal Rome.87 Their conclusions can be observed in table
7.
143
144
Table 6. Interpretation of the seven trumpets according to five writers
E. R.E.Thiele
R. R. F. R.
R. A.
A.
Trumpets
Trumpets R. F. Cottrell G.
G. McCready
McCready Price
Price T.T. Bunch
Bunch
Thiele Cottrell Anderson
Anderson
Fall
Fall of
of Goths
Goths Goths
Goths Goths
Goths Visigoths
Visigoths
11stst
Jerusalem
Jerusalem (Alaric)
(Alaric) (Alaric)
(Alaric) (Alaric)
(Alaric) (Alaric)
(Alaric)
Fall
Fall of
of Rome
Rome Vandals
Vandals Vandals
Vandals Vandals
Vandals Vandals
Vandals
22ndnd
Empire
Empire (Genseric)
(Genseric) (Genseric)
(Genseric)
The
The Christian
Christian
Huns
Huns
rd
rd
religion
religion Huns
Huns Huns
Huns Huns
Huns
33 (Attila)
(Attila)
became
became (Attila)
(Attila) (Attila)
(Attila) (Attila)
(Attila)
corrupted
corrupted
Heruli
Heruli Heruli
Heruli Heruli
Heruli Heruli
Heruli
44thth Dark
Dark ages
ages (Odoacer)
(Odoacer) (Odoacer)
(Odoacer) (Odoacer)
(Odoacer) (Odoacer)
(Odoacer)
Turks
Turks Saracens
Saracens
Saracens
Saracens Saracens
Saracens
July
July 27,
27, Saracens
Saracens 612-762
612-762 oror
55thth 622-
622- 632-[782]
632-[782]
1299-
1299- 1299-1449
1299-1449 July
July 27,
27, 1299-
1299-
1449
1449
1449
1449 1449
1449
Ottoman
Ottoman Ottoman
Ottoman
Ottoman
Ottoman Ottoman
Ottoman Ottoman
Ottoman
1449-
1449- 1449-Aug.
1449-Aug.
66thth 1449-1840
1449-1840 1449-
1449- July
July 21,
21, 1326-
1326-
Aug.
Aug. 11,
11, 11,
11, 1840
1840 or
or
Seljuk
Seljuk Turks
Turks Aug.
Aug. 11,
11, 1840
1840 Aug.
Aug. 16,
16, 1717
1717
1840
1840 1453-1844
1453-1844
Close
Close ofof the
the probation
probation andand Christ
Christ
Armageddon:
Armageddon: takes
takes His
His “great
“great power.”
power.”
Second
Second Kingdoms
Kingdoms of of this
this These
These series
series ofof events
events are
are only
only Second
Second 1844-Second
1844-Second
77thth
Coming
Coming world
world become
become proleptic
proleptic applications;
applications; there
there Coming
Coming Coming
Coming

Christ’s
Christ’s are
are other
other series
series of
of events
events of
of
apotelesmatic
apotelesmatic applications.
applications.
Table 7. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to five writers
Symboll E. R.E.Thiele
R. R. F.R. F.
Cottrell G.
G. T.
T. Bunch R.
R. A.
A.
Symboll Thiele Cottrell McCready
McCready Bunch Anderson
Anderson
Price
Price
The
The true
true
God’s
God’s God’s
God’s Wife
Wife of
of
Woman
Woman True
True Church
Church church
church ofof
People
People People
People Christ
Christ Jesus
Jesus Christ
Christ
Child
Child Christ
Christ Christ
Christ Christ
Christ Christ
Christ Christ
Christ
Satan,
Satan,
working
working Satan,
Satan,
through
through working
working
seven
seven through
through
major
major seven
seven major
major
universal
universal universal
universal
Satan
Satan and
and powers:
powers: powers:
powers:
Satan,
Satan, Satan,
Satan,
A
A Great
Great Red
Red his
his early
early Egypt,
Egypt, Egypt,
Egypt,
Rome
Rome earthly
earthly
Dragon
Dragon agent
agent Assyria,
Assyria, Assyria,
Assyria,
Empire
Empire kingdoms
kingdoms
Rome
Rome Babylon,
Babylon, Babylon,
Babylon,
Persia,
Persia, Persia,
Persia,
Greece,
Greece, Greece,
Greece,
Pagan
Pagan Pagan
Pagan
Rome,
Rome, Rome,
Rome, and
and
and
and Papal
Papal Papal
Papal Rome
Rome
Rome
Rome
First
First
fulfillment:
fulfillment:
The
The flight
flight of
of
1260
1260 Papal
Papal
538-1798
538-1798 538-1798
538-1798 the
the Christian
Christian 538-1798
538-1798
(vv.
(vv. 6,
6, 14)
14) domination
domination
Jews
Jews to to
Pella,
Pella,
538-1798
538-1798
SDA
SDA SDA
SDA SDA
SDA Church
Church SDA
SDA Church
Church SDA
SDA Church
Church
Church
Church Church
Church
Remmant
Remmant Sabbath
Sabbath Sabbath
Sabbath Sabbath
Sabbath
Sabbath
Sabbath Sabbath
Sabbath
(v.
(v. 17)
17) Ellen
Ellen G.
G. Gift
Gift of
of Ellen
Ellen G.
G.
Ellen
Ellen G.
G. Ellen
Ellen G.
G. White
White prophecy
prophecy White
White
White
White White
White
The Bible Conference of 1952
The 1952 Bible Conference was held September 1-13, 1952, in the Sligo
Seventh-day Adventist church, in Takoma Park, Maryland, where Taylor G.
Bunch was the newly appointed senior pastor. A variation from the 1919
Bible Conference, which convened behind closed doors,88 this Conference
145
was open to the public, and 498 individuals participated in some of the
82 presentations. Later, after refining versions of the papers presented
at the Conference, two thick volumes were published under the title Our
Firm Foundation.89 These became “authoritative on significant aspects of
Seventh-day Adventist theology.” 90
W. H. Branson, president of the General Conference, enumerated
three reasons for the holding of this conference: (1) to “reaffirm those truths
that have most certainly been believed among us through all our history,”
(2) “to help us all to see how we can present those timeless truths most
effectively in these changing times,” and (3) to “affirm that we walk in the
light‒and thus have a heavenly message for men‒while admitting that there
are truths of God that as yet can be but dimly discerned.”91 Because the 1952
conference offered no opportunity for discussion, not all of the participants
went away satisfied. At the end of the meetings some had unanswered
questions.92
In the early lectures of the conference, in the same way as the 1919
Bible Conference, the preachers urged making Christ the center of every
doctrine preached, as well as emphasizing the need for personal study of
the Scriptures.93 On Revelation, two topics were dealt with: (1) the seven last
plagues, especially the war of Armageddon, arriving at the same conclusion
of Louis F. Were and the members of the Fellowship, presented by W.
E. Read, General Conference field secretary, under the title “The Great
Controversy,”94 and (2) the 144,000, lectured by T. H. Jemison, professor of
Washington Missionary College, under the title “The Companions of the
Lamb.”95
Two major results have been attributed to the 1952 Bible Conference:
(1) the establishment of the “Committee for Biblical Study and Research”
approved on September 24, 1952, at the Autumn Council;96 and (2) a “climate
of openness to study the Bible objectively rather than apologetically”
prepared the way for the production of the Bible Commentary.97
146
Committee for Biblical Study and Research
The Committee for Biblical Study and Research, later known as

“Biblical Research Institute,” was formed “to encourage, organize, and
coordinate this Biblical exegesis and research and then to function as a body
of counsel to give guidance to those who in any part of the world field make
what appear to them to be significant discoveries of truth.” Furthermore its
work was “to receive and examine such manuscripts as may be sent in from
time to time.”98 However, this last part the Committee did not achieve during
the 1950s and 1960s, because the majority of its members were overloaded
with other responsibilities.99 On the other hand, most of them contributed
to the seven volumes of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary—their
greatest contribution to the resolution of the problematic issues.
THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST BIBLE COMMENTARY
As mentioned in the first chapter, “The Revelation of St. John the

Divine” is part of volume 7 of the Commentary, released in 1957.100 The editors
of the seven volumes explained their attitude toward Scripture: “We believe it
to be the living Word and have approached it in awed humility to study the
relationship of its pulsating parts and to understand better the working of the
Divine Spirit that gives to it life, symmetry, and beauty.” Consequently they
had “little room for the higher critic.”101
Notwithstanding that volume 7 of the Commentary deals with the
interpretation of the NT books from Philippians to Revelation, the five general
articles at the outset of that volume all focus on the application of the historicist
interpretation of the book of Revelation: (1) “The Medieval Church,” by Frank
H. Yost (1894-1958); (2) “The Reformation and Onward,” by Daniel Walther
(1902-1985); (3) “John and the Isle of Patmos,” by L. H. Hartwell (1903-1984);
(4) “The Seven Churches of Revelation,” by Siegfried H. Horn (1909-1993); and
(5) “Interpretation of the Apocalypse,” by LeRoy E. Froom (1890-1974).102
147
As do the commentaries on the other biblical books, the introduction

of the commentary on the book of Revelation contains five explanatory
subheads: (1) provenance of the title, (2) authorship, (3) historical setting,
(4) theme, and (5) the outline of the book. Regarding the outline of
Revelation, between the prologue (1:1-3) and epilogue (22:6-21), John’s book
is divided into five sections: (1) “The Letter to the Seven Churches” (1:4 to
3:22), (2) “The Throne of God and the Book with Seven Seals” (4:1-8:1), (3)
“The Judgments of God: The Seven Trumpets” (8:2-11:19), (4) “The Final
Conflict of the Great Controversy” (12:1-20:15), and (5) “The New Earth and
Its Inhabitants” (21:1-22:5).103
The Commentary has at least eight characteristics, (1) “love for the
Bible, a love that expresses itself in a daily study of the Holy Book,”104 (2)
allowance that the Scripture interprets for itself, so it eschews speculation,
(3) understanding the events that have occurred on the Earth are directly
related with the great controversy between Christ and Satan, (4) avoidance
of being dogmatic “on difficult passages” and on matters not essential to
salvation,105 (5) an offer at the close of each chapter of “a cross reference,
or index, to those passages in Ellen G. White’s writings that comment on
the various texts in that chapter,” and, at the end of each volume there are
supplementary comments by Ellen G. White that in 1957 were not yet in
print,106 (6) provision of “the latest archeological findings,”107 (7) presentation
with no thought of “a creed or determining for all time the denominational
interpretation of any passage of Scripture,”108 and (8) writing for Adventist
ministers, Bible instructors, other denominational workers, and Adventist
laity.109
Subsequent to the seventh volume of the Commentary in 1957, no
other significant work on the interpretation of the book of Revelation was
released until the 1970s. Thus the Commentary became almost an official
interpretation of Adventism, while on the other hand its lack of dogmatism
in the interpretation of difficult passages in Revelation gave an opening to
others to produce commentaries. The next paragraphs describe the SDA
148
Bible Commentary’s principles of interpretation as well as its conclusions on

the seven trumpets and Rev 12.
In the Commentary can be found at least five principles of

interpretation to understand the Apocalypse: (1) “in the Revelation all the
books of the Bible meet and end,”110 (2) the Jewish apocalyptic literature
sometimes helps to clarify the symbols, (3) “John’s language is often
descriptive of the Roman Empire and of the experiences of the church
under its sway,” (4) “Revelation was given to guide, comfort, and strengthen
the church, not only in his day, but throughout the Christian Era, to the very
close of time,” namely analogy,111 and (5) “a single prophetic passage may
embrace more than one fulfillment.”112
The Interpretation of the Trumpets
Before interpreting the seven trumpets, the Commentary presented

three different views that still exist today. (1) One view of the trumpets
is futurist, where these are parallel to the seven last plagues. (2) Another
view is “spiritual” (devotional) where the trumpets are symbolic of “the
divine answer to the prayers of God’s suffering people of all ages.” (3) The
view favored by Seventh-day Adventists is “that these trumpets retrace, to
a large extent, the period of Christian history already covered by the seven
churches.”113
The first four trumpets are interpreted in accordance with the
traditional view of the church. The discussion regarding the period of the
fifth and sixth trumpets is not found in the main exposition of chap. 9, but
in an additional note following the main exposition. The main exposition
of Rev 9 does not use any of the typical expressions that appeared in other
parts of the Commentary, such as, “Seventh-day Adventists have generally
149
favored, . . .” but “some” or “most commentators believe . . .” In the additional

note on chap. 9, however, the Commentary recognizes that “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.”114 The Commentary recognizes that “commentators
and theologians have been greatly divided over the meaning of the 5th and
6th trumpets.”115 According to the Commentary, Seventh-day Adventists date
the beginning of the seventh trumpet in 1844.116
The Commentary retains the traditional Adventist interpretation

of Rev 12. The additional note on Rev 12 explains the word “remnant” in
the Bible, concluding that “from the very first, Seventh-day Adventists have
boldly proclaimed the three messages of ch. 14:6-12 as God’s last appeal
to sinners to accept Christ, and have humbly believed their movement to
be the one here designated as the ‘remnant.’”117 Nevertheless, Adventists
“repudiate emphatically and unequivocally any thought that they alone are
children of God and have a claim upon heaven.” They believe that the final
“remnant” is “all who worship God in full sincerity.”118
SUMMARY
Since the 1940s, the writings of Louis F. Were have played an important
role in the interpretation of prophecy in Adventism. Were interpreted the
end-time passages of the Bible on Christ-centered spiritual applications. In
his time, however, this kind of view was not acceptable. He was considered
a “heretic” and released from the Adventist ministy in 1943. He, however,
continued preaching and writing his convictions until his death. His many
publications were spread among Seventh-day Adventists from Australia,
Europe, and the United States.
150
From 1949 to 1953 five major commentaries on Revelation appeared.

Three of them were written by Thiele (1949), Cottrell (1951), and Bunch
(1952), college professors who used these as course materials. In 1951,
Price tried to publish his commentary, but it never happened. Anderson,
however, published the first edition of his commentary in 1953. These
commentaries held at least four things in common: (1) a Christ-centered
way of interpretation of the Apocalypse; (2) the use of quotations from
Ellen G. White’s writings; (3) the use of sources from outside and inside of
Adventism; and (4) the attempt to deepen the study of Revelation, beyond
Smith’s book.
Two important conclusions on Revelation came from the 1952 Bible
Conference. First, the Christ-centered emphasis was adopted, not only
to the interpretation of the Apocalypse, but also to all Bible prophecies.
Second, the Conference’s conclusions on Rev 16 about Armageddon were
similar to those of Louis F. Were and the Bible Fellowship, but different
from Uriah Smith’s book.
“The Revelation of St. John the Divine,” in the seventh volume of
the Commentary, appeared in 1957 as a significant work among Adventists.
Among the most salient features are: (1) the historical application is
interpreted from the perspective of the great controversy between Christ
and Satan; (2) there is an openness to recognizing multiple options in
treating difficult texts; and (3) the inclusion of comments from Ellen G.
White’s writings.
In this period appeared the most massive Adventist research on

historicism, LeRoy E. Froom’s four-volume The Prophetic Faith of Our
Fathers (1946-1954).119 Froom defines historicism as: “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
151
ages.”120 In this line of thought, prophecy serves as the “rainbow of promise,

painted by the finger of God.”121
Froom declares that the historicist interpreters see “that Revelation
had its function first in counseling and encouraging the early Christians in
the vicissitudes through which they were passing, while at the same time,
extending its prophetic pictures beyond their range of vision to the final
victory”; this he names “the double application of the book.”122
During this period, the SDA church continued its original approach
to historicism, but with an aggregate theological emphasis shown in the
1952 Bible Conferences. In his lecture titled “The Advent Message Built
upon the Foundation of Many Generations,” Froom stated that the essence
of the prophecy is “Christ as the central figure, who should ever be kept
foremost in all our study and exposition of prophecy.”123 The Christocentric
interpretation of the prophecy would echo in the future of Adventism.
After the 1952 Bible Conference, the General Conference action
brought into being a Committee on Bible Translations, which presented
principles of biblical interpretation in the book titled Problems in Bible
Translation.124 In its pages, this warning is found:
History may not be used to interpret prophecy; that is,

historical events may not be considered the fulfillment of
prophecy simply because they seem to fit the requirements of
given prediction. Rather, Scripture must be used to interpret
Scripture; that is, the fundamental nature of the prophecy
and its fulfillment must be determined first. Only then may the
specific fulfillment of prophecy be sought in history. Isolated
historical events may never be forced into a preconceived
pattern of interpretation. Rather, objective inquiry is to be
made with respect to the details of prophecy and to the
materials of history which seem to be related to it. Time factors
of prophecy are often basic to a correct interpretation, and
may usually be determined on the basis of internal evidence
within the prophecy itself.125
The SDA Church seemed to have a more open atmosphere and

willingness to investigate new theological views. Moreover, with the
152
publication of Questions on Doctrine in 1957, the fundamental principle for

the understanding of prophecy, the Christological principle, seems to be
clearly spelled out.126
In this second period of Adventist interpretation of the apocalypse,
Hans K. LaRondelle is the representative interpreter, with an approach
called biblical-theological emphasis.
BIBLICAL-THEOLOGICAL EMPHASIS
The biblical-theological emphasis points out the Christ-centered

view in the interpretation of the prophecy, and also highlights the work of
God as the controller of history and protector of His people shown in the
Apocalypse. It portrays the guidance of God with his people from John’s time
to the end-time. The studies of biblical theology focus on blocks of verses.127
It permits less space for the historical application of the interpretation of
the Bible prophecy.
LARONDELLE’S PLACE IN ADVENTIST HISTORY
Hans K. LaRondelle (1929-2011) was professor of theology at the

Theological Seminary of Andrews University from 1966 to his retirement
in 1991. He was born in The Hague, Netherlands, on April 18, 1929. Until
his eighth year, he was raised as a Catholic, then his stepfather sent him
to a Protestant school. At the age of nineteen, he decided to attend the
law school at the University of Leyden; at the same time he began to read
the Bible. When one of his friends gave him, as a birthday present, a book
about the Bible, written by a Dutch Adventist pastor, LaRondelle decided
to switch from law to theology and was baptized in 1949. That same year,
at the age of twenty, supported by his mother but not by his stepfather, he
decided to attend the newly established Adventist Seminary near Utrecht.128
After finishing his training in theology, he served in the North and
153
South Conferences of the Netherlands as pastor-evangelist for the SDA

church. In August 1953, he married Barbara and nine years later he was
ordained as a pastor. Prior to joining the Andrews University faculty in 1966,
he had already written several books, pamphlets, and articles on prophetic
interpretation, biblical meditations, and unity of the Scripture.129
In 1971, LaRondelle received his doctoral degree in Theology and
Ethics with his published dissertation titled Perfection and Perfectionism:
A Dogmatic-Ethical Study of Biblical Perfection and Phenomenal
Perfectionism, under the direction of the distinguished Dutch theologian
Gerrit C. Berkouwer at the Reformed Free University in Amsterdam.130 A
prolific writer, he authored during his teaching years many books which were
translated into other languages, including Righteousness by Faith: Seminary
Lectures in Justification and Sanctification by Faith in Christ (1966); Christ
Our Salvation: What God Does for Us and in Us (1980, translated into eight
other languages); The Israel of God in Prophecy: Principles of Prophetic
Interpretation (1983); Deliverance in the Psalms: Message of Hope for Today
(1983); Chariots of Salvation: The Biblical Drama of Armageddon (1987); and
The Good News about Armageddon (1990).131
After his retirement, LaRondelle wrote four more books. How to
Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the Bible: The Biblical-Contextual
Approach (1997) has been considered perhaps LaRondelle’s best work.132 It
was enlarged in 2007.133 In 1999, this book was published in an inexpensive
format for wide distribution under the title, Light for the Last Days: Jesus’
End-time Prophecies Made Plain in the Book of Revelation.134 That same year
was released Assurance of Salvation.135 The last of LaRondelle’s books was Our
Creator Redeemer: An Introduction to Biblical Covenant Theology (2005).136
He contributed at least sixteen chapters to important works
published by the Biblical Research Institute, SDA Theological Seminary,
Review and Herald, and others. He published eleven articles in academic
journals and more than 100 in professional periodicals. His favorite subjects
for theological writing were prophetic interpretation, Daniel and Revelation,
154
covenant, righteousness by faith, perfectionism, dispensationalism, and

pillars of the Adventist doctrines such as the Sabbath and the Second
Coming of Jesus Christ.
LaRondelle was considered as one of the most influential Adventist
authors in a 1985 questionnaire of North American Adventist lecturers.137 He
was known among his students as a dynamic and seminal lecturer. Before
and after his retirement, he was a member or lecturer of a significant number
of committees for the SDA church such as the 1974 Bible Conference, Daniel
and Revelation, and Conversation with Lutherans.
“LaRondelle is known for his cogent writing and careful theology,
especially in the area of prophetic interpretation.”138 He acknowledged
having been influenced by Louis F. Were, who “demonstrated the
Christocentric nature as well as an end-time orientation of God’s covenant
promises to Israel.” From Gerrit C. Berkouwer, his doctoral dissertation
advisor, he learned to focus on Sola Scriptura as its own expositor, and
Kenneth Strand stimulated him to “search for a better understanding of the
last Bible book.”139
In 2009, the Old Testament Department of the Seventh-day Adventist
Theological Seminary, Andrews University, published a Festschrift to Hans
K. LaRondelle, in recognition of his academic contribution. The book was
edited by Daniel Heinz, Jiří Moskala, and Peter M. van Bemmelen. In the
introduction of that book it is acknowledged:
Since LaRondelle’s theological studies were so enriched by

a number of his professors, he has been gratified to see his
former students and students in other seminaries where he
has lectured continue to develop a Messianic-centered view
of Scripture in their ministries, further academic pursuits, and
publications.140
He taught not only at the SDA Seminary but also inside and outside of
America such courses as “Apocalyptic Interpretation,” “Biblical Eschatology,”
and “Principle of Hermeneutics.” All of them focus on Jesus Christ.
155
LaRondelle’s Lectures and Presentations
In his lectures and presentations, LaRondelle stood out in lifting up

Christ through the Scriptures. A dominant concern was to train Adventist
ministers; for that reason, forty-nine of his published articles—almost one
half his total output—were in Ministry. Thirteen of his articles appeared in
Adventist Review, twelve in Signs of the Times, seven in Adventbode, three in
These Times, two in Liberty, one each in Spectrum and in Spes Christiana.
His academic contribution involved participation in the Adventist
Theological Society and Evangelical Theological Society, publishing three
articles in each one of their journals. Andrews University Seminary Studies
published four of his articles. In 1999, he presented a paper, “My Journey of
Discovery in Apocalyptic Eschatology,” to the Adventist Society for Religious
Studies. One of his last articles, “The Historicist Method in Adventist
Interpretation,” was released in Spes Christiana.141
How to Understand the End-Time

Prophecies of the Bible
How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the Bible was

endorsed on its back cover by several well-known Adventist figures. George
Knight, professor of SDATS-AU, affirmed that LaRondelle has made “an
extremely important contribution to our understanding of Bible prophecy.”
Willmore D. Eva, editor of Ministry, declared that “this book makes a very
pivotal contribution to an absolute crucial need in all Christian churches.”
Norman R. Gulley, professor at Southern Adventist University, pointed
out that “this is biblical scholarship at its best, and . . . should become a
classic, and change the way end-time prophecies are interpreted.” Charles
E. Bradford, retired president of the North America Division of SDA, stated
that “LaRondelle’s approach leads to a more mature faith in Christ.” And
Roy C. Naden, professor emeritus, Andrews University, avowed that “here is
a gold mine of information.”142
156
Content of How to Understand the End-Time

Prophecies of the Bible
LaRondelle claimed that the purpose of How to Understand, a 501-

page work, “is to investigate the theological unity of the Hebrew prophecies
and the Christian gospel of the New Testament . . . [using] consistently the
contextual method of exegesis, both the immediate and the wider contexts
of Scripture.”143 This method implies that “history of the church and the
world must never be allowed to become the norm of biblical exegesis.” Even
though he follows a continuous-historical application using a Christocentric
outlook and rejecting the philosophical principles of literalism, allegorism,
and idealism, he warns that “the historicist interpreter of prophecy needs
self-discipline in his or her declarations of fulfilled prophecy,” testing the
traditional interpretation in an effort “to learn from past mistakes.”144
A glance at the whole work shows that it is divided into twenty-three
chapters, including a few selective passages of prophetic interpretation but
with more attention to Revelation. LaRondelle begins by describing the
first-century context of the Apocalypse and the distinction between classical
and apocalyptic prophecy (chaps. 1 and 2). Then he studies how Christ and
the apostles interpreted biblical prophecies, especially those that appear in
Daniel (3-7). In the rest of the chapters (8-23), he expounds on Revelation.
Chapters 8-11 focus on background principles of how to interpret the
Apocalypse. Chapters 12-23 work through the book, both exegetically and
theologically, starting from Rev 4. At the end of almost every chapter, there
is a list of source materials on the topic studied. There are, moreover, two
articles in the edition of 1997 and seven in the edition of 2007 under the
heading of “Appendices.”
Among the strengths of LaRondelle’s book are: (1) a comprehensive
theological analysis of the meaning of the text “that is as relevant for the
present as for the past or the future”; (2) there is no speculative historical
application, “unless the evidence of the text in its theological context makes
157
a compelling case,” and (3) there are “alternative interpretations which are
rooted in the essential theological message of the book of Revelation.”145
And among its weaknesses, one can still find (1) “inconsistencies,” (2)
“flawed correspondences,” and (3) “some poor choices of citations.”146
Literary Structure of the Apocalypse in How to

Understand the End-Time Prophecies

As did Maxwell, LaRondelle believed that the last Bible book is
“ingeniously constructed, with an exceptional balance in its literary patterns,”
without chance of destroying its unity. This unity can be seen through the
construction of symmetrical patterns, namely chiasms, he adds.147
This inverse parallelism divides Revelation into two main divisions,
suggesting a two-fold theological theme, “the historical era” of the church
(Rev 1-14) and “apocalyptic judgment era” (15-22). This means that “every
prophetic unit must be related to its own division and theological theme,”
either in the historical era or the future judgment era “after probationary
time has ended.”148
LaRondelle presents five patterns of counterparts or parallels
between: (1) the Prologue (1:1-8) and the Epilogue (22:6-21); (2) specific
promises pertaining to “the Church Militant” (2-3) and “the Church
Triumphant” (21-22); (3) the throne visions of Rev 4-6 and of Rev 19-21; (4)
two judgment series, the seven trumpets (8-9) and the seven bowls (Rev 16);
and (5) the prophetic visions of Rev 12 through the judgment on Babylon in
Rev 17-18.149
Then, observing the literary composition of an inverse parallelism,
he affirms that the simplest outline of the Apocalypse is the following
arrangement:
158
A. The Church Militant, Chs. 1-3

B. Christ Begins the war, Chs. 4:1-8:1
C. Trumpets Call to Repent, Chs. 8:2-11:19
D. Overview of the Christian Age, Chs. 12-14
C¹ Probationary Time Ends: Retributive Judgments,
Chs. 15-16
B¹ Christ Ends the War, Chs. 17-20
A¹ The Church Triumphant, Chs. 21-22.150
But his commentary does not divide the Apocalypse this way, but
thematically. He, furthermore, points out that there are different ways of
structuring the Apocalypse, underlining Kenneth A. Strand’s outline as
“the most detailed outline of the chiastic structure of Revelation.”151 In all
outlines, however, “the basic message of the Apocalypse stands out clearly
at the center: Rev. 12-14 (enlarged by the interlude of Rev. 10-11).”152
LaRondelle’s Definition of Historicism
Without offering a definition of historicism, LaRondelle declares

that “it seems mandatory to establish a definition of the historicist method
of prophetic interpretation and what its purpose and focus are.” Even
though Froom suggests an ideal picture of historicism, LaRondelle believes
that the ideal is “frequently tarnished.”153 LaRondelle suggests at least three
important elements to define historicism.
LaRondelle declares that the heart of historicism is the “Christ-
centeredness” of the prophecy, provided “to unlock the truthfulness of
historical fulfillment.”154 For instance, he mentions that “Luther discovered
Christ and his saving gospel before he identified the biblical antichrist.”
In this manner, before we are able to discern the end-time significance of
the antichrist predicted in both Daniel and the Apocalypse, “we need to
focus our attention first on Christ and His saving work.”155 “The essence of
apocalyptic interpretation maintains the covenant history that centers in
the God-sent Messiah and His people.”156
159
Another element in the definition of historicism is “the theological

qualification of a true fulfillment of prophecy.”157 LaRondelle explains that it
is necessary “to define historical ‘fulfillment’ in accordance with the cosmic
controversy theme in Daniel and Revelation.” And the last element in his
definition of historicism is to discover a harmonic literary composition and
its corresponding structural unity in Daniel and the Apocalypse,158 examined
by a contextual exegesis. Therefore, in defining historicism it is necessary
that it contains a Christocentric hermeneutic, and a theological focus on
the great controversy view, as well as a contextual exegesis.159
In chap. 10 of How to Understand, LaRondelle recognizes that the

Apocalypse discloses two specific interpretative keys to unlock its symbolic
images. The first key is that its imagery is borrowed from the older
Testament, the Hebrew Bible.160
Its symbolic images and terms are borrowed from the Old
Testament. There we find the meaning of the apocalyptic
symbols in their original covenant setting and salvation history.
In the Old Testament we find the prototypes in history of what
God will do in the future. God reveals the future by pointing us
to how He acted in the past. He tells the people of Christ that
they have a high calling and a great future, because of what
God promised in the past.161
It implies that God is the Lord of history, “and through Christ He

will bring it to its ordained conclusion,” namely that “God is not a spectator
of world history, He actively guides and directs the flow of history toward its
destiny, whether we help Him or not.”162
The second key to interpret the Apocalypse, according to LaRondelle,
is “the gospel truth found in the four New Testament Gospels: the crucified
and risen Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of prophecy.” In other words,
“the Old Testament terms and images of the old covenant are now recast in
160
the Christ-centered imagery of the new covenant.”163

LaRondelle adds that
the multiple connections of the Apocalypse with the Old

Testament must be studied, not to show how John ingeniously
adapted the Hebrew symbols and prophecies, but in order to
understand in what way the God of Israel will consummate
His promises of the old covenant through Christ and His new-
covenant people.164
Analysis of LaRondelle’s Interpretation
To interpret the Apocalypse, LaRondelle believes that at least the

interpreter should take into account that (1) the pattern of “anticipation
and amplification” of John’s literary style,165 (2) the upward and intensifying
movement of “a spiral staircase” as the whole progresses from “promise to
fulfillment,”166 and (3) the story of apostasy, persecution and deliverance is
repeated first in the seven seals and then in the seven trumpets (Rev 6-9).167
The biblical text used by LaRondelle in How to Understand is the
New International Version. As above, I will describe the major points of the
seven trumpets and Rev 12.
Interpretation of the trumpets
LaRondelle uses two chapters in How to Understand to explain his

interpretation of the trumpets.168 In the first chapter, he describes the
trumpets in their contexts, concluding in at least nine points. (1) The six
trumpets symbolize God’s preliminary judgments during the church age.169
(2) The seventh trumpet or the seven last plagues symbolize judgments
“on the worldwide enemies of Christ and His people.”170 (3) The trumpets
“should not be considered by themselves, in isolation from the larger
context of Revelation, if we want to avoid speculative conclusions.”171 (4)
“The trumpets and the bowls relate to each other as local historical types
161
to the worldwide antitype.”172 (5) Even though the prophetic sequences

of the seals and the trumpets focus on different people, “both series are
complementary. Together they form a more complete picture of the church
age.”173 (6) The trumpets are as “Divine fire ordeals.”174 (7) The literary
resemblance of the trumpets with Egypt’s plagues show “God’s covenant
curses on His enemies.”175 (8) The trumpets “suggest the gradual undoing
of the work of creation. Each trumpet judgment refers to a feature that
corresponds to a day of the creation week.”176 (9) And the fifth and sixth
trumpets are within the larger plan of God, “as developed in the visions of
the end-time in Rev 12-20.”177
Before explaining the historical application of the trumpets,
LaRondelle emphasizes the symbolic nature of the visions in Revelation
saying:
Apocalyptic language should not be forced into literal

descriptions of our modern technocratic society. . . . We reject
both the principles of literalism and allegorism for Revelation’s
apocalyptic language as being speculative approaches. It
is more in harmony with biblical thinking to view the trumpets
as covenant judgments on the covenant breakers. John uses
covenant language and symbols, not secular, soothsaying
descriptions.178
LaRondelle recognizes that the historical application of the trumpets

“is notoriously difficult and controversial.” He adds, “Most commentators
refrain from any concrete application to history.”179 However, with his
focusing on a Christ-centered application, he describes how Christ executes
“His preliminary judgments on the strongholds of the kingdom of darkness”
in the church age.180
To LaRondelle, the symbolism of Christ’s cursing the fig tree on
the road to Jerusalem (Matt 21:19) is a type of the first trumpet, the fall of
Jerusalem.181 The second trumpet announces “not only the fall of Rome but
also the devastation of its economic and social order.”182 The third trumpet
predicts “the apostasy in the Christian church” under Papal Rome.183 The
162
fourth trumpet applies to the “dark ages of the 1000-year supremacy of the
medieval state-church [which] ended with the rise of the great reformers in
the 16th century.”184
Both in their graphic art form and historical application, “the long
descriptions of the fifth and sixth trumpets are bewildering.”185 Regarding
the period of torture of “five months” (Rev 9:5, 10) in the fifth trumpet,
LaRondelle concludes that “while any historical application must remain
tentative, a relevant application can be made to the time when the godless
philosophies of the Renaissance or the Enlightenment swept Western
civilization and caused the agonies of the meaninglessness of this life, and
of the hopelessness for the future.”186
The entire phrase of “the hour and day and month and year” of Rev
9:15 cannot be considered from the biblical phrase as four time periods
separately, but “all members [are] a syntactic unit,” says LaRondelle. “It can
also be legitimately understood as a divinely-appointed moment in time.”187
Therefore, LaRondelle concludes that “in that view the sixth trumpet points
forward to the close of probationary time when the seventh trumpet begins
with its seven last plagues.”188 Namely, the seventh trumpet “implies the
woes of the last plagues of Revelation 16.”189
LaRondelle declares that Rev 12 covers the entire history of the church
of Christ till the end, under the background of Israel’s covenant history, its
purpose being not only to warn the Christian believers against persecution,
but also to present “as its central vision the heavenly acclamation of victory
over Satan, combined with the celebration of the inauguration of Christ as
the rightful King of heaven and earth.”190 Revelation 12, moreover, “centers
in the cross, resurrection and enthronement of Christ.”191
The author of How to Understand divides Rev 12 into four distinct
sections: (1) Israel’s history to the first advent of the King-Messiah, vv. 1-5;
163
(2) the persecution of the church of Christ, vv. 6, 13-16; (3) the irrevocable
defeat of Satan by Christ’s victory on the cross, vv. 7-12; and (4) the end-time
people of God, v. 17.192 Sections 1, 2, and 4 reveal the historical continuum
of the church of Christ, whereas section 3 presents a cosmic war between
heaven and earth.
In the interpretation of the woman, the child, and the red dragon, the
author follows the traditional Adventist interpretation.193 On the prophetic
period of “1260 days” or “3½ times” (Rev 12:6, 14), which establishes a definite
link with Dan 7:25, LaRondelle warns readers not to be “dogmatic about
precise date-fixings in church history,”194 concluding that this period refers
to “the dark Middle Ages when many thousands of people were persecuted
and perished for the alleged crime of ‘heresy.’”195
According to LaRondelle, “most exegetes conclude that ‘the rest’
[KJV “remnant”] defines all believers in Christ. This view implies that there
is no focus on a final remnant people in the Christian age in Rev 12:17.” In
the Apocalypse, the term “rest” is used not only “in the wider sense of the
‘others’ or ‘remaining ones’ (8:13; 9:20; 11:13), but also in the pregnant sense
of a faithful remnant that stands the test of heaven (2:24-25; cf. also 3:4-
5).”196 On the basis of the parallel of Rev 12:17 and 14:12, “God’s remnant
people are at once a spiritual people and an organized church community.
The institutional aspect, however, never has been a guarantee for a spiritual
church.”197
LaRondelle affirms that the two abiding hallmarks or characteristics
of the true church of the ages (Rev 12:17 and 14:12) are “the restoration of the
historic commandments of God” and “the historic testimony of Jesus, that
is, of the everlasting gospel.” On the “testimony of Jesus,” he declares that it
is the Old and New Testaments.198 On the traditional connection between
Rev 12:17 and 19:10 on “the testimony of Jesus,” he points out that “Ellen
White based her providential calling and mission on the prophecy of Joel
2:28-29 as a sufficient and firm foundation. She never appealed to Rev 12:17
to establish her prophetic calling.”199
164
However, he recognizes that “it deserves mentioning that a small group of

former Millerites in Battle Creek, Michigan, resolved in 1861 to associate
themselves in a new church denomination, ‘taking the name, Seventh-day
Adventist, covenanting to keep the commandments of God and the faith of
Jesus Christ.’”200
OTHER EXPOSITORS ON BIBLICAL-THEOLOGICAL EMPHASIS
A Christ-centered theological emphasis has also been used by other

authors in the third period of Adventist interpretation of the Apocalypse.
Roy C. Naden is representative.
Roy C. Naden
Roy C. Naden was born in Australia. In his home country, he gained

his education and started working as pastor, evangelist, musician, and
radio and television speaker to the Australian Division of the Seventh-day
Adventist Church. In 1971, Naden came to the United States to work as
producer of the “Faith for Today” television program. After becoming the
speaker in the “Come Alive” television series for the Southern California
Conference, he also conducted public evangelism and developed a highly
successful seminar approach called “Life Spirit.”201 Before retiring, he served
for fifteen years as professor of religious education at Andrews University.202
Even though he is better known for his contributions to the radio,
television, and video ministry of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, he has
written around fifty articles, and several books on evangelistic, instructive,
prophetic, and Christ-centered topics.203 Specifically on Revelation, he
wrote The Lamb among the Beasts (1996),204 which was a result of his Studies
in Revelation Seminar,205 both of which gained widespread acceptance.
Naden wrote The Lamb among the Beasts “with theological passion
and evangelistic urgency,” having “no time for apocalyptic extremism or
165
prophetic speculation.”206 Two reasons led the author to write. “First is

the fact that little has been written on Revelation with the stated objective
of exploring Christocentricity.” The second reason is to include “a major
emphasis on the vast use of numbers in Revelation.”207 This book, however,
has also been criticized.208 In the second chapter, Naden offers keys to
interpret the Apocalypse.
In his book, Naden mentions five primary principles to interpret

the Apocalypse. (1) The interpreter “must anticipate graphic, symbolic
presentations rather than straightforward, literal presentations, as is the
case with most other books of the Bible.”209 (2) New Testament references to
Old Testament places or people usually illustrate spiritual truths “that can
be seen anywhere in the world, key elements in the great conflict between
Christ and Satan that will be resolved only in the final judgment of the
wicked and the vindication of the family of the Lamb.”210 (3) The numbers
of the Apocalypse are to be “understood first as symbols of qualities rather
than quantities.”211 (4) “Revelation is a symbolic presentation of Jesus’
Olivet address and is [also] based on the writings of Daniel.”212 The last key
to interpret the Apocalypse is the cross of Jesus, which is the symbol of the
Lamb, the central symbol. The interpreter, therefore, “will always seek first
a Christological view of the visions.”213
To Naden, the trumpets (Rev 8 and 9) contain “the most graphic

example of apocalyptic writing in the Bible.”214 They correspond to the second
part of the structure of Jesus’ Olivet address, on the issues of physical attacks
and spiritual corruption.215 In his historical application, the trumpets cover
from the first century to the Second Coming of Jesus, a parallelism with the
166
application of the churches and the seals.216 There is information from the
Old and New Testaments to discover ways in which trumpets have been
used and applied.217 Though there are similarities between the trumpets
and the bowls, they show different periods of application.218 Finally, on the
basis of cosmic conflict, there is a contrary action between the successive
acts of Creation in earth’s first six days and the trumpets. “One builds and
beautifies, whereas the other destroys and despoils.”219
On the historical applications of the first four trumpets, Naden
affirms that the trumpets, churches, and seals are parallel periods to each
other, but from different perspectives.220 Thus, the first trumpet describes
the specific events of “the fall of Jerusalem and the scattering of the Christian
church.”221 The second trumpet refers to “the decline and fall of the Roman
Empire.”222 The third trumpet details “the fall of the church at large.”223 And
the fourth trumpet symbols “the fall of spiritual night.”224
On the parallelism of the historical application between the three
last trumpets and the last three seals and churches, the author of The Lamb
is not as coherent as when discussing the first four trumpets. Hence, the
fifth trumpet covers the fifteenth to the nineteenth centuries, when the
Reformation brought opposition, the same period as the fifth church and
fifth seal. The period of five months of Rev 9:5, 10 is applied as “the notion
of incompleteness” (considering that ten symbolizes completeness), then
“it would indicate that the destruction caused during the fifth trumpet in
the fifth period of history is incomplete, and that only Satan’s final assault .
. . will bring it to completeness.”225
The major difficulty in drawing parallels between the historical
applications of the churches and seals is in the sixth trumpet. The sixth
trumpet covers the time of the end, when the last prediction finds opposition,
a parallelism between “the seventh church [not the sixth church] and the
first half of the sixth seal.” The period of Rev 9:15 is interpreted as “God has
set time limits on Satan,” until the universally significant hour of the close
of probation.226 And the last trumpet begins with the same event of the end
167
of the sixth trumpet and ends with the establishment of the kingdom of
God.227
Regarding the theme of the entire book, Rev 12 is the heart, vv. 10
and 11 being “the central words of the Apocalypse.” Here is proclaimed “the
victory of Jesus over Satan in their great conflict,” says Naden.228 Revelation
12 is divided into three parts: (1) the “birth of the Christian Church” (vv. 1-6);
(2) “Satan begins and loses the great controversy” (vv. 7-12); and (3) “the
Church witnessing to the end” (vv. 13-17).
The woman, the child, and the dragon are interpreted as in the
Adventist traditional view. The 1260 days is interpreted primarily as
“qualitative” and in a general sense “it is the entire period between the first
and second advents of Jesus, when the church undertakes her long journey
from the Egypt of this world to the heavenly Promised Land.”229
The word “remnant” is understood in three dimensions: time, size,
and substance. In terms of time it is “church at the end of time.” In terms of
size, it is small, whereas in terms of substance, it refers to the true church.230
The author gives no specific identification of what church this is.
Tendencies of the Biblical-Theological Emphasis
After looking at the background and expositors of the biblical-

theological emphasis, I will attempt to describe how the tendencies or
intentions of this method differ from those of the biblical-historical
emphasis in the first period. The first tendency (and intention) of biblical-
theological emphasis is to change the interpretational perspective of the
book of Revelation to place the major focus on the cross of Jesus. In other
words, the biblical-theological method seeks first to be Christological,
accenting the role of Christ in prophecy, considering that Jesus is the central
168
theme of the entire Bible.

The biblical-theological emphasis tends to be wary of identifying
specific places and dates as fulfillments of prophecy, because such specifics
have sometimes led to mistaken interpretations. The previous focus on
historical events as specific fulfillments of prophecy depended too much on
the individual interpreter’s knowledge of history. Thus the interpretation
became very subjective.231 “The explanation of symbols employed in the
book [of Revelation was] often derived from newspaper articles and history
books, rather than from the Bible.”232
The biblical-theological approach also tended to see the biblical-
historical emphasis as losing the richness of the biblical message. An
over-concentration on the facts of history could lead the interpreter to
deemphasize the analysis of the original text,233 or even lose sight of the
Christ-centered message of the book of Revelation.234
Another tendency of the biblical-theological view resulted from its
intention to interpret prophecy from the divine perspective. This sometimes
led to an over-emphasis on the “spiritual” (subjective or devotional)
interpretation, to the neglect of the more objective historical application of
the Apocalypse.
SUMMARY AND EVALUATION
This chapter has portrayed the line of interpretation of the book of

Revelation according to a biblical-theological emphasis in the Seventh-day
Adventist Church. It covers from before the appearance of the SDA Bible
Commentary, through Kenneth A. Strand’s proposal on the structure of the
Apocalypse, and the latest scholar to write a full commentary based on this
view, Hans K. LaRondelle. I have described the major authors who have
influenced Adventist thought on the book of Revelation during this period.
During the Seventh-day Bible Commentary period (1944-1970),
Seventh-day Adventists used the historicist method as virtually the only
169
method to interpret Revelation. This generalization is supported, for

example, (1) in Louis Were’s writings; (2) in the five major scholars, who
each wrote a commentary on Revelation; (3) in the 1952 Bible Conference;
(4) in the most massive research of historicism, The Prophetic Faith of Our
Fathers, where Froom tried to define historicism for first time among SDAs;
and (4) in the SDA Bible Commentary on Revelation.
Compared to Froom, LaRondelle does not offer a definition of
historicism, though he affirms this method as the best way to interpret
the Apocalypse. LaRondelle’s major concern is to establish a definition
of the historicist method, as he reveals in his last academic article titled,
“The Historicist Method in Adventist Interpretation.” He asserts that the
heart of historicism is the “Christ-centeredness” of the interpretation of the
prophecy. Another key to the definition of historicism is the theological
qualification of a true fulfillment of prophecy.
The biblical-theological emphasis gives more space to theological
thought than to the exegetical and historical, in order to underline the
Christocentric interpretation of the book of Revelation.
Though he lived during the third period of Adventist interpretation
of the Apocalypse, LaRondelle, a theologian concerned with training
Adventist ministers through his publications, especially in Ministry, seems
to echo the same approach as the second period, underscoring a Christ-
centered view, as well as the work of God as the controller of history and
the protector of His people in the interpretation of the book of Revelation.
LaRondelle acknowledged having been influenced by Louis F. Were. Hence,
until LaRondelle’s death, he continued to republish in English and translate
into German, the works of Were.
LaRondelle’s book, How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies
of the Bible, not only covers the interpretation of the Apocalypse, but also
interprets how Christ, the apostles, and Paul interpreted biblical prophecies,
especially those of Daniel. This commentary is to be understood as a
comprehensive theological analysis of the Apocalypse, where there is no
170
speculative historical application, but lifting up Christ as the center of the

book. On the structure of the Apocalypse, LaRondelle believes in the unity
and symmetrical pattern, chiasmus, which divided Revelation into two
parts: (1) the historical era of the church (Rev 1-14) and (2) the apocalyptic
judgment era (Rev 15-22). These two were further subdivided into seven, of
which Rev 12-14 is the center, because it is an “overview of the Christian age.”
Among other recent students of the book of Revelation using the
biblical-theological emphasis, Roy Naden is noteworthy. Though he wrote
before LaRondelle, his book was not as widely read as LaRondelle’s. Naden
wrote his commentary basically to emphasize (1) a Christ-centered approach
and (2) the use of numbers in the Apocalypse.
On principles of interpretation during this period, Louis Were
proposed thirteen of them, focusing on his favorite topics, Dan 11 and Rev 16
(Armageddon issue). Two of them are innovative: (1) the interpretation as
Christ-centered and (2) the double and triple applications of the prophecies.
Among the five major scholars who wrote a commentary on Revelation, Price
presented an “innovative” principle of interpretation, but really it follows the
principle of Were, saying that the prophecies of Scripture have more than
one fulfillment, introducing the proleptic fulfillment and the apotelesmatic
fulfillment. Even the Commentary hints that “a single prophetic passage
may embrace more than one fulfillment.”235
LaRondelle underlines two main principles to interpret the symbols
in the Apocalypse. The first key to interpret the symbols is to comprehend
it in the context of the rest of the books of the Bible, based on Ellen White’s
quotation, “In the Revelation all the books of the Bible meet and end.” This
statement was also used by other writers as mentioned above. The second
key to interpret the symbols is to understand the Christ-centered imagery
of the new covenant. Naden contributed the insight that the structure and
interpretation of the Apocalypse reflects Christ’s Mount of Olive address
and the book of Daniel.
As was noted above, a major tendency and intention of the biblical-
171
theological emphasis is its focus on a Christ-centered application of the

prophecy. Another tendency is to attempt to interpret the prophecy from
the point of view of God, emphasizing that God is in control of history.
This leads the reader to focus more on a theological belief system than on
the biblical text. Another tendency is an over-emphasis on the “spiritual”
(subjective or devotional) interpretation of prophecy.
These new intentions of the biblical-theological emphasis came
as a reaction to the perceived tendency of the earlier biblical-historical
emphasis to “impose” a “particular viewpoint on Revelation like a
template.”236 Historical-theological interpreters consider that many of the
prophetic interpretations of the Adventist pioneers are still believed, not
because there is conclusive biblical and theological support, but because
these early views became “traditional interpretations” among Adventists.
Reliance on traditional views can obscure the fundamental principle of
interpretation, that the “the text itself teach[es] us how to understand it.”237
Moreover, stressing the events of history can leave out the main character
of the Apocalypse, Jesus Christ. This is potentially a major change in the
interpretation of Revelation, which could lead to a silent neglect of the
Adventist historicist interpretation.
Table 8 on the trumpets shows how the biblical-theological
emphasis differs from the traditional historical application. Whereas the
Commentary follows Smith’s interpretation (and so Litch’s), Price retains
the traditional interpretation as proleptic application, but also applies other
series of events still future as apotelesmatic applications. Theile was the
first to give a different historical application to the trumpets in the SDA
Church. In the historical application of the first four trumpets, LaRondelle
and Naden retain Theile’s historical application. In the last three trumpets,
Theile preserves the traditional interpretation. LaRondelle and Naden,
however, coincide in the general application of the periods. LaRondelle
does not venture to put specific dates for each historical application of the
trumpets, whereas Naden proposes periods for each one of them.
172
Table 8. Interpretation of the seven trumpets according to the biblical-theological

emphasis.
Trumpet E. R. G. SDA Bible H. R. Naden

Thiele McCready Commentary LaRondelle
Price
Fall of
Fall of Goths Goths Fall of
1st Jerusalem
Jerusalem (Alaric) (Alaric) Jerusalem
1st century
Fall of
Fall of Vandals Roman
Vandals Fall of Roman
2nd Rome (Genseric) Empire
(Genseric) Empire
Empire 2nd and 3rd
centuries
The Fall of the
Christian Huns Huns Apostasy church at
3rd religion (Attila) during the large
became (Attila) Papal Rome 4th and 5th
corrupted centuries
Fall of
Dark Ages
Heruli Heruli spiritual night
1000 years,
4th Dark Ages (Odoacer) (Odoacer) on the world
until the
From 6th to
Reformation
15th centuries
Enlightenment Opposition
Turks
Saracens Western to the
July 27, Saracens
5th July 27, 1299- Civilization Reformation
1299-July 1299-1449
July 27, 1449 (no specific From 15th to
27, 1449
date) 19th centuries
Close of Opposition
Ottoman Ottoman
Ottoman Probationary to the last
1449- 1449-
6th 1449- time preaching
Aug. 11, Aug. 11,
Aug. 11, 1840 (no specific The time of
1840 1840
date) the end
Close of the
probation Starting Starting
Second and Christ 1844-Second with the last with the
7th
Coming takes His Coming plagues of close of the
“great Rev 16 probation
power”
173
Table 9. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to biblical-theological emphasis
E. R. G. McCready H.
Symbol Commentary R. Naden
Thiele
Theile Price LaRondelle
God’s
Woman People True Church True Church God’s People God’s People
Child Christ Christ Christ Christ Christ

Satan
and his Satan
A Great Satan Satan
early Satan and Pagan and
Red Pagan and Pagan and
agent Rome Empire Papal Rome
Dragon Rome
Papal Rome Papal Rome
Primarily as
qualitative
Proleptic = The
and as general
flight of the
Dark Middle Age sense =
1260 Christian Jews
538-1798 538-1798 – No dogmatic entire period
(vv. 6, 14) to Pella
date between
Apostelesmatic
1stst and 2nd
nd
= 538-1798
advents of
Jesus
Spiritual people
and SDA Church Three
SDA The historical dimensions:
Final remnant
Church SDA Church commandments Time=end
Remnant = all who
Sabbath Sabbath of God and of the time,
(v. 17) worship God
Ellen G. Ellen G. White the historical size=small, and
in full sincerity
White testimony of substance=the
Jesus true Church
Table 9 on Rev 12 shows complete agreement in the application of

the symbols of the woman, the child, and the great red dragon. Before the
Commentary (1957), Adventist authors interpreted the 1260 prophetic days
as extending from 538 to 1798, according to the year-day principle, though
Price believes that this fulfillment is an apotelesmatic application. Thus,
Price, who absorbed much from Were, manifests his belief in a double
fulfillment of the prophecy. LaRondelle and Naden are not dogmatic in
pointing out specific dates for this prophetic period. Whereas LaRondelle
suggests this refers to the Middle Ages, Naden takes it as the whole period
between the first and second advents of Jesus.
174
Before the Commentary appeared, most Adventist authors applied

the term “remnant” to the SDA Church. But the Commentary broadened
the concept of the remnant, proposing that the final remnant includes all
who worship God in full sincerity. For his part, LaRondelle held that the
remnant includes all spiritual people and Seventh-day Adventists who have
two features: they keep the historical commandments of God and have the
historical testimony of Jesus.
I turn now to analyze the biblical-exegetical emphasis in the
interpretation of the Apocalypse in the SDA Church.
Endnotes
1. Schwarz and Greenleaf, Light Bearers, 391-393.
2. Knight, A Search for Identity, 161; Schwarz and Greenleaf, Light

Bearers, 391.
3. The first attempt, in the summer of 1940, to form a fellowship

among religion teachers of North America called the “College Bible Teachers’
Fellowship,” did not last. But a group of teachers at Pacific Union College formed
an “Eschatology Society,” that later became the “Bible Research Fellowship.”
Cottrell, “The Bible Research Fellowship,” 39-40.
4. Scholars in the Fellowship presented such topics as the two covenants,

the shut door, the jubilee calendar, “this generation,” the chronology of the
Hebrew monarchies, the sealing, Dan 11, Armageddon, the term “daily,” and so
on. Ibid., 43.
5. “The Biblical Research Institute was established as a service department

by action of the General Conference Committee in 1975. The historical roots
of the institute go back to the Defense Literature Committee (established
1943) and the Committee on Biblical Study and Research (established 1952).”
Biblical Research Institute, http://biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/aboutus.
htm#history (accessed August 25, 2010).
6. For biographic information, see J. W. Kent, “A Tribute—L. F. Were,”

Australasian Record, May 15, 1967, 10, 12; Eric Were, The House That Were Built:
The History of the Were Family in Australia 1880-1980, with a Study of Origins
in England and ‘Cousins’ Abroad (Adelaide, Australia: Lutheran Publishing
175
House, 1980), 61-62; Milton R. Hook, Louis Were (CAR at JWL, AU, Berrien
Springs, MI, 1986).
7. Were, The House That Were Built, 47-48.
8. Ibid., 62.
9. Louis F. Were, “Futurism and the Antichrist of Scripture: Futurism

and Law Abolition,” Signs of the Times—Australian, from June 8 to July 20, 1931.
These articles are Were’s reaction to his perception of elements of futurism in
the teachings of the church, specifically on Armageddon and Dan 11. Among
other publications, he cited: Horace G. Franks, The Riddle of the Orient: An
Illuminating Study of the Causes and Results of the Chaotic Conditions Now
Existing in the Far East, the Middle East, and the Near East (Warburton, Victoria,
Australia: Signs Publishing Company, [1922?]); Carlyle B. Haynes, On the Eve of
Armageddon: An Account of the Scriptural Teaching Relating to the Coming War
among the Nations, which Will Engulf Civilization, and Immediately Precede the
Universal and Eternal Kingdom of Peace (Washington, DC: Review and Herald,
1924). Those who teach futurism, Were wrote, are “fighting against the truth,
warring against the Word of God, resisting the testimony of the prophetic
spirit, hindering the work of the Reformation, promoting the progress of the
apostasy, opposing Christ, and helping antichrist.” Louis F. Were, “Futurism
and the Antichrist of Scripture: Unanimity of Early Protestantism,” Signs of
the Times—Australian, June 15, 2011, 15. Later, these articles were reprinted in
tract form, in which he underlined the viewpoint that the Papacy alone was the
Antichrist. Louis F. Were, Futurism and the Antichrist of Scripture (Warburton,
Victoria, Australia: Signs Publishing Company, n.d.).
10. He was also an editorial contributor to Signs of the Times—Australia.
11. Albert W. Anderson, Through Turmoil to Peace: Showing a Wonderful

Divine Plan in Nature and Revelation, Marvellous Divine Overrulings in the
History of Nations, and the Divine Solution of Present-day World Troubles
(Warburton, Australia: Signs Publishing Company, 1932); idem, The World’s
Finale: A Brief Exposition of the Prophecies of the Seven Churches, the Seven
Seals, and the Seven Trumpets of Revelation (Warburton, Victoria, Australia:
Signs Publishing Company, 1932). Anderson was nurtured on Smith’s scenario.
Idem, Some Further Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation: To Be Read in
Conjunction with Daniel and the Revelation by Uriah Smith (Warburton,
Australia: Signs Publishing Company, 1928).
12. Alma Were to Donald E. Mansell, November 23, 1970, Box 1 Fld 9,
Mansell-Armageddon (Collection 198), CAR.
176
13. Louis F. Were, Facts Australian Adventists Should Know (East

Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1954); idem, Armageddon as
Taught Today by Seventh-day Adventists (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F.
Blackman, 1956); idem, The Kings that Come from the Sunrising (East Malvern,
Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1956), 15-20; idem, The Trials and Triumphs
of Truth: My Reply to Misrepresentations (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A.
F. Blackman, 1956), 31-34.
14. According to Hook, pastors Alfred F. John Kranz (1900-1993), a

Bible teacher at Avondale College, and W. M. R. Scragg, president of the South
Australian Conference, were prominent among the few who saw light in some
of Were’s viewpoints. Hook, Louis Were, 7-8.
15. Louis F. Were, Synopsis of Address Given by the Prophetic

Commentator (Mr. L. F. Were): In the Adelaide Town Hall, Sunday, March
22nd, 1942 ([Adelaide, Australia]: [Modern Printing Company], 1942). Were
conducted two more lectures on Sundays, on April 26 and May 17, 1942.
16. Jesse Were died January 6, 1942. “Obituary: Were,” Australasian

Record, February 9, 1942; W. M. R. Scragg, “South Australian,” Australasian
Record, November 23, 1942. Hook adds that “in the context of wartime
speculation and with the Japanese on the brink of invading Australia, Were
conducted three public lectures in the Adelaide Town Hall on Sundays, March
22, April 26, and May 17, 1942. It was hard to get an audience with wartime
‘brown-outs’ in force. People were reluctant to come out in the evenings in
a dimly-lit city. Nevertheless, Were drew an audience by capitalizing on the
imminent Japanese invasion. The theological differences which for years had
simmered between traditionalists and Were were brought into the public arena
at this point. Prior to this the debate was confined among individuals or church
committees.” Hook, Louis Were, 40.
17. Were got married to Miss Alma Belle Preuss, of Victoria, who had
served the church as a Bible worker but was then helping in her family business,
in the Auburn Church, Victoria, on January 25, 1943, by Pastor H. E. Piper.
Hook, Louis Were, 8.
18. The vote says, “Inasmuch as that Pastor L.F. Were, after full
investigation, has been proved guilty of conduct unbecoming to the Gospel
Ministry, VOTED that we regretfully terminate his services as a minister from
this day, March 9th 1943, and that his credentials be cancelled.” Minutes,
South Australian Conference Executive Committee, March 9, 1943. According
to Hook, rumors came out claiming Were was conducting himself immorally.
W. T. Hooper, headquarters youth leader, was dispatched to resolve the rumor;
then the report came saying that Were was seen sitting with a woman “on a
177
park bench seat in the dark.” “Hooper, together with the youth leader of the
South Australian Conference, Ferris, lay wait with flashlights one February
evening during a wartime ‘brown-out.’ These men reported seeing Were and
the estranged woman sitting on a park bench seat in the dark. (Years later
Hooper admitted he saw nothing unbecoming.) Were claimed he was lured
into the situation by the woman, resisting her earlier suggestions to visit her
home and opting instead, on the spur of the moment, to have prayer with her
in the park near her home. She [Mrs. D. E. Jacobs] was jealous that Were had
married a rival and a short time later wrote to Were and Scragg confessing she
had made up stories which started the rumours. ‘God knows he did not break
the moral law but is suffering for something he did not do,’ she wrote afterwards
to Scragg.” Ibid., 9.
19. Minutes, Australian Union Conference, May 18, 1943; Minutes,

Australian Union Conference, Nov. 28, 1954.
20. Louis F. Were, Synopsis of Address Given by the Prophetic

Commentator (Mr. L. F. Were); idem, The Four Horsemen of Revelation
(Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing Company, 1942); idem, Jesus Christ: The
Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last (Adelaide,
Australia: Modern Printing Company, 1942); idem, What Is Armageddon?
(Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing Company, 1942); idem, The Certainty
of the Third Angel’s Message: Proved by Important Principles of Prophetic
Interpretation (Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing Company, 1945); idem,
Armageddon: The Time of Spiritual Israel’s Deliverance (Adelaide, Australia:
Modern Printing Company, 1946); idem, In the Light of His Word (Adelaide,
Australia: Modern Printing Company, 1947); idem, The Life Triumphant
([Adelaide, Australia]: [Modern Printing Company], 1948); idem, Armageddon
and the Advent (Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing Company, 1948); idem,
How to Pray Effectual Prayers ([Adelaide, Australia]: [Modern Printing
Company], 1948); idem, Armageddon: The Battle of That Great Day of God
Almighty (Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing Company, 1948); idem, Europe
and Armageddon (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1949);
idem, The Moral Purpose of Prophecy (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A.
F. Blackman, 1949); idem, The King of the North at Jerusalem (East Malvern,
Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1949); idem, The Deceitfulness of Sin
(East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1949); idem, The Spirit of
Prophecy and Armageddon: Also How God Purifies the Soul (East Malvern,
Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1950); idem, Before Probation Closes (East
Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1951); idem, God Speaks and Israel
Triumphs (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1951); idem, The
Woman and the Resurrected Beast: Why Is the Seventh Head Numbered Eight?
The Mystery of Revelation 17 Solved (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F.
Blackman, 1952); idem, The Fall of Babylon in Type and Antitype (East Malvern,
178
Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1952); idem, Christ’s Last Message to His

Remnant (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, [1953]); idem,
Christ’s Message of Victory: How to Be Clad with Armour for the Final Conflict
(East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1954); idem, Facts Australian
Adventists Should Know; idem, Pastor James White and Unfulfilled Prophecy
(East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1956); idem, Armageddon
as Taught Today by Seventh-day Adventists; idem, The Kings That Come from
the Sunrising; idem, Mrs E. G. White, Uriah Smith, and the King of the North
(East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1956); idem, Preparing for
the Close of Probation (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1957);
idem, The Battle for the Kingship of the World: Will the King of the North Invade
the Holy City? (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1958); idem,
Middle East Ferments and the Antichrist (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A.
F. Blackman, 1958); idem, Power Unlimited: Righteousness by Faith and the
Final Conflict (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1959); idem,
144,000 Sealed (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1960); idem,
The Judgment of the Living (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman,
1961); idem, The Blotting out of Sins as Taught in the Sanctuary Service (East
Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1962); idem, Christ the Center
(East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1967); and idem, The Future
Unveiled by God’s Love (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1968).
21. For example: George McCready Price to Louis F. Were, February

17, 1946; G. F. Wolfkill to Louis F. Were, May 1, 1947; Alma Were to Donald
E. Mansell, November 23, 1970. See also Box 1 Fld 9, Mansell-Armageddon
(Collection 198), CAR; Mansell, Adventists and Armageddon, 84-86. The
following is a testimony of Arthur Patrick, who says, “When I wrote a student
paper on Armageddon in 1954 at Avondale, it was not politically correc[t] for
a Theology student to mention the name of Louis Were or to be seen reading
his books. Looking back on that paper, it more-or-less followed a similar line
of thought to that of Louis Were. Stalwart evangelists like Pastor J. B. Conley
were still vocal in their opposition to Louis Were’s ‘heretical’ ideas. . . . When
I arrived at the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University in 1970, I
soon encountered a quite different attitude toward Louis Were. Indeed, Hans
LaRondelle recommended his books to us as Seminary students, to be read in
conjunction with LaRondelle’s classroom lectures.” Arthur Patrick, e-mail to
author, November 1, 2011.
22. Hook, Louis Were, 70.
23. According to his wife Alma, Were “was a member of the Bible
Research Fellowship, . . . and when he visited America in 1950, some of his
correspondents and friends invited him to a Bible Teachers’ Council.” Alma
Were to Donald E. Mansell, November 23, 1970. Meanwhile, in a paper titled
179
“Louis F. Were at the Bible Teachers’ Council and the Questionnaire on

Controversial Topics,” dated January 11, 1951, Cottrell claims, “The council knew
little if anything whatever of his views [Were’s] and could not therefore have
expressed approval of them, either in whole or in part. So far as I know, no
Bible teacher attending the council expressed such approval to him personally.”
“Louis F. Were at the Bible Teacher’s Council,” Box 5 Fld 8, Donald E. Mansell
Collection (Collection 198) CAR.
24. Louis F. Were, Bible Principles of Interpretation: Establish Truth

and Safeguard against Last-day Errors (East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F.
Blackman, [1963]). It was a revision of Were’s key book, The Certainty of the
Third Angel’s Message, which was the basis for later publications elaborating
some principles.
25. Were, Bible Principles of Interpretation, 3. See also idem, The

Certainty of the Third Angel’s Message.
26. Were, The Certainty of the Third Angel’s Message, 15.
27. Were, Bible Principles of Interpretation, 8.
28. White, The Acts of the Apostles, 583-584.
30. Ibid., 12.
31. Ibid., 34.
33. Ibid.
34. It means “(1) Literal in the days of literal Israel; (2) Symbolical in this
‘dispensation of the Holy Spirit’; (3) Literal in the heavenly kingdom.” Ibid., 64.
35. Ibid., 42.
36. Besides these five major works, others written during this time
included, e.g., W. E. Straw, Studies in the Book of Revelation: Volume 2 (Berrien
Springs, MI: Emmanuel Missionary College, 1943); Dewitt S. Osgood, Syllabus
of Revelation: A Verse by Verse Study of the Apocalypse, A Series of Lectures
Delivered at the Indianapolis North Side Church (Indianapolis, IN: [The
Author], 1946); Edward Heppenstall, Syllabus for the Revelation (Arlington,
180
CA: La Sierra College, 1947); Alonzo J. Wearner, A Brief Syllabus of Revelation:

Introductory Course Lower Division (n.p.: The Author, [195?]); J. J. Williamson,
Commentary and Syllabus on the Book of Revelation (Lincoln, NE: The College
Press, 1954).
37. Thiele, Outline Studies in Revelation (1949); later, this book was
reproduced by Avondale College in two volumes: Edwin R. Thiele, Outline
Studies in Revelation, 2 vols. (Cooranbong, N.S.W, Australia: Avondale College,
1974).
38. Raymond F. Cottrell, The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation:

Part II—Revelation.
39. For the life and contribution of Price see, Larry Arthur Mitchel,
“George McCready Price and the Seventh-day Adventist Church” (Term paper,
Andrews University, 1969); Warren H. Johns, “The Impact of George McCready
Price Outside His Own Church” (Term Paper, AU, 1969); Gordon Edgar Pifher,
“The Major Contribution of George McCready Price” (Term paper, AU, 1971);
Hugh Maynard-Reid, “The Contribution and Impact of George M. Price” (Term
paper, AU, [1974?]); Forrest L. Howe, “Life and Work of George McCready
Price (1870-1963)” (Term paper, AU, 1974); Aecio E. Cairus, “G. McC. Price as a
Trailblazer, Alive and Well in His Successors” (Term paper, Andrews University,
1974).
40. Were, The Kings That Come from the Sunrising, 34-35.
41. Price wants to know from “the critic-reader” if the denomination

needs something of this sort “(when perfected and completed) published in the
regular way by one of our Adventist publication houses.” Price, “The Greatest
of the Prophets: A New Commentary of the Book of Revelation” [Loma Linda,
CA: n.p., 1951], CAR, first “letter page” no number.
42. George McCready Price, The Greatest of the Prophets: A New

Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1955).
43. Taylor G. Bunch, Bible Lessons: The Book of Revelation ([Loma

Linda, CA]: College of Medical Evangelists, [1929]); idem, The Revelation
([Loma Linda, CA]: College of Medical Evangelists, 1952).
44. Juhyeok Nam, “The Life of Roy Allan Anderson, ‘The Chief’ of
Adventist Evangelists” (Term paper, AU, 1995).
45. Anderson, Unfolding the Revelation: Evangelistic Studies for Public

Presentation (1953). With some brief updating, the last revision of Unfolding
181
during Anderson’s lifetime added an appendix and a thematic index in 1974. I

will use the edition of 1953.
46. (1) “Introduction,” Rev 1; (2) “Letter to the Seven Churches,” Rev 2-3;
(3) “The Seven Seals,” Rev 4-8:1; (4) “The Seven Trumpets,” Rev 8:2-9:21, 10:7;
11:15-17; (5) “The Approach of the End,” Rev 10-11:14; (6) “Powers Arrayed against
Heaven,” Rev 12-13; (7) “God’s Final Messages and the Harvest,” Rev 14; (8) “The
Seven Last Plagues,” Rev 15-16; (9) “Doom for the Powers of Darkness,” Rev
17-20; and (10) “The Glorious Inheritance of the Righteous,” Rev 21-22. Thiele,
Outline Studies in Revelation, 1-2.
47. Ibid., 2a, 33, 84-84a, 161-161b, 184-184a, 196, 205, 220,-220a, 234-234a,
250-251, 262, 275, 282, 289-290, 296-299.
48. Cottrell, The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, 2.
49. Ibid., 114.
50. Price uses 21 pages (in A4 paper and probably ten characters per
inch type size) for the introduction, dividing it into eight parts: 1. “The Author”;
2. “The Place”; 3. “The Date”; 4. “The Purpose of the Book”; 5. “Some Principles
for Its Interpretation”; 6. “The Literary Plan of the Book”; 7. “Do the Prophecies
of the Bible Have More Than One Fulfillment?”; and 8. “A Sketch of the History
of the Interpretation of the Apocalypse. The author moreover says that his
commentary does “not pretend to be a grammatico-critical commentary . .
. , but only an exegetical one.” Price, “The Greatest of the Prophets: A New
Commentary on the Book of Revelation,” 3-24.
51. Ibid., 16.
52. Taylor G. Bunch, The Seven Epistles of Christ (Washington, DC:

Review and Herald, 1947); Bunch, The Revelation.
53. Bunch, The Seven Epistles of Christ, 29.
54. Ibid., 255; Bunch, The Revelation, passim.
55. Anderson, Unfolding the Revelation (1953), v.
56. On page 213, Anderson affirms that “every chapter contains its own
revelation of Jesus Christ.” He then presents a list of the ways Jesus Christ
appears in each chapter. Anderson, Unfolding the Revelation (1953), v, 213.
57. Ibid., 216-218.
182
58. Thiele uses many of Ellen White’s quotations to support his

presuppositions; Cottrell, Bunch, and Anderson try to have a balance among
other authors and Ellen White’s quotations; and Price tried to avoid using
Ellen White’s writings. Thiele, Outline Studies in Revelation, 3-14; Cottrell, The
Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, 106-115; Bunch, The Revelation, [i-iii];
idem, The Seven Epistles of Christ, 9-23; Price, “The Greatest of the Prophets,”
3-24.
59. Price, “The Greatest of the Prophets,” 9.
60. Price mentions nine principles of interpretation, but to this number

can be added commentaries listed under the heading “The Literary Plan of the
Book.” I do not mention here all of them, but only those which would influence
other Adventist authors. Ibid., 9-21.
61. Ibid., 9-15.
63. For example, Price affirms, “The two-horned beast is larger than
the United States, just as the leopard beast is bigger than the Roman Church.
Obviously the Greek Church and all the other Eastern churches must be included
in the full picture of the leopard beast also those intolerant coercive Protestant
churches of Europe which have shown the same spirit as the Papacy. Similarly,
all the so called democratic countries of the Occidental world, especially
such countries as England and the British dominions must be included in the
complete picture of the work of this false prophet whose career of deception
and oppression is still chiefly in the future.” Ibid., 12-13.
64. “As for its literary plan or design, it is easily the most complicated
and artistically constructed book in the Bible, if not in all literature. In fact, it
is so complicated in its artistry that most students soon give up in despair, while
very few have ever been able to master its complete literary details.” Ibid., 16.
65. Proleptic means local applications or “the more narrow meaning of

the symbols” in the Apocalypse. Apotelesmatic means “the broader application
of the symbols.” Ibid., 17-18. See also Price, The Greatest of the Prophets: A New
Commentary on the Book of Daniel, 30-31.
66. Price offers a biblical example about a “two-fold application of

prophecy, . . . the horrible details of mothers eating their own children, which
Moses first foretold in Lev 26 and in Deut 28. This was strikingly and literally
fulfilled on three successive occasions”: (1) The siege of Samaria, some 600 years
after Moses (2 Kgs 6:28-29); (2) the taking of Jerusalem by the Babylonians,
183
some 900 years after Moses (Lam 2:20 and 4:10); and (3) the siege of Jerusalem
by Titus, some 1500 years after Moses (as Josephus tells us). Ibid., 18-20.
67. Thiele, Outline Studies in Revelation, 162-188a, 194-196.
68. Cottrell, The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, 119.
69. Ibid., Appendix: “Outline Chart of Revelation 1 to 11,” cf. 138-139, 141-
142, 153, and 176.
70. Ibid., 139.
71. Price, “The Greatest of the Prophets,” 81-91 (emphasis in original).
72. Price, “The Greatest of the Prophets,” 92-93.
73. Ibid., 93 (emphasis in original).
74. Ibid., 94-100.
75. Ibid., 100 (emphasis in original).
77. Ibid., 83.
78. Bunch, The Revelation, 71-118, 127-131.
79. Ibid., 95.
80. Ibid., 104; cf. 100-104.
81. Bunch, The Revelation, 101.
82. Anderson, Unfolding the Revelation (1953), 85-97.
83. Ibid., 95.
84. Ibid.
85. Thiele, Outline Studies in Revelation, 197-205; Cottrell, The

Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, 177, 180-184; Price, “The Greatest of the
Prophets, . . . Revelation,” 122-133; Bunch, The Revelation, 132-156; Anderson,
Unfolding the Revelation (1953), 113-122.
184
87. Cottrell, The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, 182; Bunch,
The Revelation, 139.
88. Michael W. Campbell, “Adventist Theology Comes of Age: The 1952

Bible Conference,” AR, June 23, 2011, 24.
89. Our Firm Foundation. A Report of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible

Conference Held September 1-13, 1952, in the Sligo Seventh-day Adventist Church
Takoma Park, Maryland, 2 vols. (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1953).
90. Richard W. Schwarz, Light Bearers to the Remnant (Boise, ID:

Pacific Press, 1979), 617-618; Schwarz and Greenleaf, Light Bearers, 631-632. To
hear a digital recording of the 1952 Bible Conference, visit adventistarchives.
org/docarchives.asp.
91. Our Firm Foundation, 1:14-18; cf. Schwarz and Greenleaf, Light
Bearers, 631.
92. Schwarz, Light Bearers to the Remnant, 618. One participant at the
conference says, “Topics such as proper interpretation of apocalyptic prophecy,
the nature of the incarnate Christ, a theological balance between justification
and sanctification, and the concept of last generation perfection generated
sometimes brisk differences, but no matter how strongly they differed, the
speakers always exhibited respect and a spirit of collegiality.” George W. Reid,
“From an Eyewitness at the 1952 Bible Conference,” AR, June 23, 2011, 25.
93. In addition, Heppenstall’s lecture contributed to a better

understanding of the covenant, saying that the everlasting covenant includes
both the old and new covenants. Edward Heppenstall, “The Covenants and
the Law,” in Our Firm Foundation: A Report of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Conference Held September 1-13, 1952, in the Sligo Seventh-day Adventist Church
Takoma Park, Maryland, 2 vols. (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1953),
1:435-492.
94. Our Firm Foundation, 2:237-335.
95. Ibid., 2:403-424.
96. Raymond F. Cottrell, Appendix: Twenty-five Years of Cooperative

Research-type Bible Study: A Resume and Evaluation, WFD 2245-b, “Biblical
Research Committee,” CAR (August 31, 1966), 6.
185
97. As one of the editors testified, “Elder Nichol often commented that
except for the 1952 Bible Conference it would not have been possible to produce
the Commentary because the editors could not have operated with sufficient
freedom to make it objective and therefore worthwhile.” Cottrell, “The Story of
the Bible Commentary,” 33.
98. W. E. Read and M. R. Thurber, Committee on Biblical Study and

Research, WDF 2245-b, “Biblical Research Committee,” CAR.
99. “The committee met for the first time on November 30, 1952, and
twice more before the end of the year. It met six times during 1953, four times
during 1954, twice during 1955, and five times in 1956. It did not meet in 1957.
It met once in 1958 following the General Conference, but only to discuss its
own future. It did not meet during 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, or 1964. It met
once in 1965 jointly with the Defense Literature Committee, for an informal
discussion, and once thus far in 1966. It has not met for a working session,
within the area of competence assigned it by the General Conference, since
June 7, 1956.” Cottrell, Appendix: Twenty-five Years of Cooperative Research-type
Bible Study, 7, 10-15.
100. “The Revelation of St. John the Divine,” SDABC, 7:713-899.
101. Ibid., 7:9.
102. “General Article,” SDABC, 7:17-132; for the authors of the articles,
see Cottrell, “The Untold Story of the Bible Commentary,” 50-51.
104. Ibid., 1:9.
105. Ibid., 1:9. “Certainly none of the copyists’ errors that still remain
affect in any way our salvation or prevent us from grasping the meaning of
the great Bible drama that begins with the Garden of Eden and ends with the
descent of the New Jerusalem.” Ibid., 1:15.
106. “To the Reader of this Commentary,” SDABC, 1:15, cf. 10, 1081.
107. Ibid., 1:11.
108. Ibid., 1:18.
109. Ibid., 1:13.
186
110. This is a quotation from White, The Acts of the Apostles, 585. The
Apocalypse contains citations from, or allusions to, “28 of the 39 books of the
OT,” as well as the NT books. SDABC, 7:724-725.
111. “The Revelation of St. John the Divine,” SDABC, 7:725.
112. “Some such prophecies have both an immediate and a more remote
fulfillment, and in addition contain principles that are generally applicable at
all times.” Ibid., 7:726.
113. Ibid., 7:788.
115. “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.” Ibid., 7:796.
116. Ibid., 7:804.
117. Ibid., 7:815.
118. Ibid.
119. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 3:44-45, 252-253, 270-
271, 744-745. From colonial America through the American Revolution (1600-
1825), Froom lists 78 historicist interpreters, whereas from “the Old World”
(1760-1860), he lists 103 historicist interpreters. Shea, “Historicism, the Best
Way to Interpret Prophecy,” 33.
120. Ibid., 1:22-23.
121. Ibid., 4:1173.
122. The characteristics of the prophetic character of the Revelation

according to Froom are (1) “continuity—extending from John’s day to the end
of time,” (2) “comprehensiveness—based on the framework of world events as
these form the setting for the life of the church and accentuate the conflict
between Christ and Antichrist,” and (3) “repetition—going back and covering
the same general outline seven times, through the line of the seven churches,
then the seven seals, the seven trumpets, the two witnesses, the dragon, the
beast, and the mystery woman on the scarlet beast.” Ibid., 1:89, 95.
187
123. LeRoy Edwin Froom, “The Advent Message Built upon the
Foundation of Many Generations,” in Our Firm Foundation: A Report of the
Seventh-day Adventist Bible Conference Held September 1-13, 1952, in the Sligo
Seventh-day Adventist Church Takoma Park, Maryland (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1953), 165, see also 106, 169, 177, 179, 182.
124. General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Committee on

Problems in Bible Translation, Problems in Bible Translation (Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1954).
125. General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventists, Committee on

Problems in Bible Translation, Problems in Bible Translation, 103.
126. This volume argues “Basic Principles of Prophetic Interpretation,”

and offers a great deal of space to a thorough presentation of the Adventist
views on the kingdom prophecies. Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions
on Doctrine: An Explanation of Certain Major Aspects of Seventh-day Adventist
Belief (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1957), 205-243. Republished as
Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine (Berrien Springs, MI:
Andrews University Press, 2003). For studies on Questions on Doctrine, see
Juhyeok Nam, “Reactions to the Seventh-day Adventist Evangelical Conferences
and Questions on Doctrine 1955-1971” (PhD dissertation, AU, 2005); A. Leroy
Moore, Questions on Doctrine Revisited! Keys to the Doctrine of Atonement
and Experience of At-one-ment (Ithaca, MI: AB Publishing, 2005); “Questions
on Doctrine 50th Anniversary Conference,” held at the Seventh-day Adventist
Theological Seminary, Andrews University, October 2007.
127. See more on biblical theology in Grant R. Osborne, The

Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation,
2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006), 347-373.
128. Hans K. LaRondelle, “My Journey of Discoveries in Apocalyptic

Eschatology” (Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Adventist Society
for Religious Studies, 1999), 97. Reedited by Daniel Heinz, Jiří Moskala, and
Peter M. van Bemmelen, eds., Christ, Salvation, and the Eschaton: Essays in
Honor of Hans K. LaRondelle (Berrien Springs, MI: Old Testament Department,
Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 2009), xv,
xvi. Hans K. LaRondelle, interview by author, Berrien Springs, MI, October
24, 2010.
129. Hans K. LaRondelle, “Het Onderzoekend Oordeel in de Heilige

Schrift” (Bachelor’s thesis, Dutch SDA Seminary, 1953); idem, Het Bijbelse
Toekomsbeeld: Profetische Studiën (The Hague, Netherlands: [Private edition,
accepted by SDA leaders in Brussels, Belgium, to be sold to pastors], 1962);
188
idem, The Prophetische Aanspraken van het Wachttoren-Gernootschap (The

Hague, Netherlands: [Private edition, accepted by the Dutch SDA bookstore
in the Hague], 1964), idem, “Unity of the Scripture,” Ministry, May 1965;
Portuguese: Ministério, Jan.-Feb. 1970, 22-23; idem, Paulus’ Brief aan de
Galaten (The Hague, Netherlands: Dutch SDA Publishing, 1966). In 1967 these
meditations were published as nine articles in successive issues in the monthly
Belgian SDA Adventbode (Brussels), from February to November; idem, Geef
Rekenschap (The Hague, Netherlands: Private edition, 1966). On the teachings
of Robert Brinsmead, see LaRondelle, “Studies Presented to the Dutch Pastors’
Convention at Huis ter Heide,” February 1-2, 1966.
130. Hans K. LaRondelle, Perfection and Perfectionism: A Dogmatic-

Ethical Study of Biblical Perfection and Phenomenal Perfectionism, Andrews
University Monographs, vol. 3 (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press,
1971).
131. Hans K. LaRondelle, Righteousness by Faith: Seminary Lectures in

Justification and Sanctification by Faith in Christ (Berrien Springs, MI: [n.p.],
1966); in Portuguese: idem, Justificação-Santificação-Glorificação (São Paulo,
Brazil: [n.p.], 1979); idem, Christ Our Salvation: What God Does for Us and in
Us (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1980); in Spanish: idem, Cristo nuestra
salvación: Lo que Dios ha hecho por nosotros y lo que está dispuesto a hacer
en nosotros (Berrien Springs, MI: First Impressions, 1981), Portuguese (1988),
Finnish (1989), Swedish (1983), Korean (1984), Serbian (1992), and others;
idem, The Israel of God in Prophecy: Principles of Prophetic Interpretation,
Andrews University Monographs, vol. 13 (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews
University Press, 1983, 10th printing, 2003); Russian (1998), Portuguese (2002);
idem, Deliverance in the Psalms: Messages of Hope for Today (Berrien Springs,
MI: First Impressions, 1983); in Korean (1988); idem, Chariots of Salvation: The
Biblical Drama of Armageddon (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1987), in
German (1991); idem, The Good News About Armageddon.
132. Edwin Earl Reynolds, review of How to Understand the End-Time

Prophecies of the Bible, by Hans K. LaRondelle, AASS 2 (1999): 119.
133. Hans K. LaRondelle, How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies

of the Bible: A Biblical-Contextual Approach (Bradenton, FL: First Impressions,
2007).
134. LaRondelle, Light for the Last Days.
135. Hans K. LaRondelle, Assurance of Salvation (Nampa, ID: Pacific

Press, 1999); in Spanish: idem, La Certeza de la Salvación (Buenos Aires,
Argentina: Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1999).
189
136. Hans K. LaRondelle, Our Creator-Redeemer: An Introduction to

Biblical Covenant Theology (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press,
2005).
137. Malcolm Bull and Keith Lockhart, “The Intellectual World of

Adventist Theologians,” Spectrum 18, no. 1 (1987): 34.
138. Reynolds, review of How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies,

118.
139. LaRondelle, “My Journey of Discoveries in Apocalyptic Eschatology,”

97-99.
140. Heinz, Moskala, and van Bemmelen, Christ, Salvation, and the
Eschaton, xxii.
141. Hans K. LaRondelle, “The Historicist Method in Adventist

Interpretation,” Spes Christiana 21 (2010): 79–89.
142. LaRondelle, How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the

Bible.
143. Contextual method of exegesis “means that the New Testament text
must be related to the Old Testament to discover the spiritual heritage of Christ
and the apostolic writers. This counts with peculiar force for the Apocalypse,
which is saturated with Hebrew terms and images.” Ibid., 489.

Bible (2007), vii.
145. Reynolds, “Book Review,” 119.
146. Reynolds has found inconsistent positions in How to Understand,

for instance, “regarding both the 144,000 and the little scroll of Rev 10.” He
argues that “LaRondelle fails to distinguish adequately between the Beast and
its heads, and to distinguish carefully between historical and eschatological
visions.” Ibid., 119-121.

Bible, 82.
148. Ibid., 102.
149. Ibid., 99-103.
190
150. Ibid., 105.
151. Ibid., 106.
152. Ibid.
153. LaRondelle, “The Historicist Method in Adventist Interpretation,”

83; cf. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Father, 1:22-23. “Prophecy has been
understood just as fast as history has fulfilled it, step by step, down through the
passing centuries.” Ibid., 1:15. Rightly understood, prophecy “results in an ever-
radiant optimism” and “assures mankind that the Paradise of Eden is soon to
be restored.” Ibid., 1:1173.
154. Hans K. LaRondelle, “The Heart of Historicism,” Ministry,

September 2005, 23.

84.
156. Ibid., 79.
157. LaRondelle, “The Heart of Historicism,” 23.

86.
159. “Historicism needs the disciplined reflection of exegetical and

systematic theologians for its own theological and exegetical credibility.”
LaRondelle, “The Heart of Historicism,” 23.

Bible, 97.
161. Ibid., 92.
162. Ibid., 93.
163. Ibid., 97.
164. Ibid., 97-98.
165. For instance, Christ’s promises to the conquerors in chaps. 2-3

appear again as fulfillments in chaps. 21-22. “The announcement of Babylon’s
fall in chapter 14 is explained later in chaps. 16-19. The persecuting beast in chap.
191
11:7 is described more fully in chaps. 13 and 17. John thus uses the technique of
interlocking his anticipatory visions in the first half of the book with the end-
oriented narrative in the second half. The Apocalypse is a cohesive body, an
organic whole that shows a beautiful architectural design.” Ibid., 161.
166. “The series of seals, trumpets and bowls all build on each other.
Together they express more adequately the complexity of the church age than
any one of the cycles alone. Each cycle reveals its own emphasis on apostasy,
judgment, and deliverance. This intensifying pattern reinforces the message
of hope for the beleaguered church of Christ. It also counteracts a fatalistic
acceptance of all hostilities.” Ibid., 161-162.
167. “Just as Jesus went twice through the church age in Matthew 24
[(a) vv. 4-14; (b) vv. 15-31], so we observe how the risen Christ repeats the basic
themes of Matthew 24 in the seals and the trumpets. While the seals inform
the reader about the sufferings of the church, the trumpets deal with God’s
preliminary judgments on the enemies of His faithful people.” Ibid., 162.
168. Ibid., 161-195.
169. Ibid., 164. “As the sovereign Lord of history, Christ uses earthly
rulers as His instruments of chastisement, as earlier God had used the kings
of Assyria (Isa. 10:5, 6), of Babylon (Jer. 25:8-11), and of Persia (Isa. 44:28; 45:1)
as His instruments.” However, “these six trumpet judgments do not represent
God as the direct executioner of divine decrees.” Ibid., 179, 193.
170. Ibid., 164.
171. Ibid., 166.
172. Ibid., 168.
173. The seals center on the slain martyrs, and the trumpets focus on the
judgment of the enemies of the people of God. Ibid., 172.
174. Ibid., 173-175.
175. Ibid., 176.
176. Ibid.
177. Ibid., 177.
178. Ibid., 178.
192
179. Ibid., 178.
180. Ibid.
181. Ibid., 180.
182. Ibid., 182.
183. Ibid., 183.
184. Ibid., 185-186.
185. Ibid., 186.
186. Ibid., 189.
187. Ibid., 193.
188. Ibid. LaRondelle agrees with Paulien as Paulien affirms that “if
probation remains open through the sixth trumpet and then closes with the
sounding of the seventh, the sixth trumpet is the exact historical counterpart
of Revelation 7:1-8.” Jon K. Paulien, “Seals and Trumpets: Some Current
Discussions,” in Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, vol. 6, Symposium on
Revelation–Book I, ed. Frank B. Holbrook, 7 vols. (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical
Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 196.

Bible, 234. “One cannot understand the prophecy of the seventh trumpet (Rev
11:15-19) adequately, except in the light of the expanding visions that follow (Rev
12-20).” Ibid., 263.
190. “Only in the light of the victorious death of Christ on the cross
does heaven declare that the war has been won and that the accuser of Christ’s
people ‘has been hurled down’ (Rev 12:10).” Ibid., 265; see also 271-276.
191. Ibid., 273.
192. Ibid., 271-281.
193. Ibid., 274-278.
194. Ibid., 258. LaRondelle presents his position in ibid., 238-258. In

his 2007 edition, he adds: Appendix A, “The Application of Cosmic Signs in
193
the Seventh-day Adventist Tradition: An Evaluation”; Appendix B, “Assessing

the Historical School Interpretation of Revelation XI”; and Appendix C, “The
Historicist Method of Date-Fixings.” Ibid., 361-376.
195. Ibid., 268.
196. Ibid., 279.
197. Ibid., 280.
198. Ibid., 290.
199. Ibid., 496.

Bible, 286.
201. Harold Calkins, “Naden Now Heads Communication,” Pacific

Union Recorder, September 19, 1977, 2.
202. Naden, The Lamb Among the Beasts, back cover.
203. Roy C. Naden, Without a Doubt (Mountain View, CA: Pacific

Press, 1975); idem, How to Live above Suffering and Guilt (Arroyo Grande, CA:
Concerned Communications, 1980); idem, Let Your Sabbath School Come Alive!
(Washington, DC: Sabbath School Department of the General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists, 1982); idem, Life Spirit: A Seminar in the Dynamics of
Christian Living Based upon the Word of God (Siloam Springs, AR: Concerned
Communications, 1989); idem, Your Spiritual Gifts: Making the Great Discovery
(Berrien Springs, MI: Instructional Product Development, 1989); idem, Beyond
the Rush of Living (Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1990); and idem, Reflections of the
Son: A Study of the Gospels and the Distinctly Different Portraits Drawn by the
Four Writers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John (Seattle, WA: N Associates, 2005).
204. Roy C. Naden, The Lamb among the Beasts: Finding Jesus in the Book
of Revelation (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1996). Recommended on
the slipcover by Don Klinger, pastor, Westvale Seventh-day Adventist Church,
Syracuse, New York; Dragutin Matak, academic dean/professor, Adventist
Seminary, Marusevec, Croatia; and Hans K. LaRondelle, professor emeritus,
SDA Theological Seminary, Andrews University.
205. This seminar is one in a series of “Felt Needs Sequence Evangelism

Seminars” featured in Ministry magazine. Roy C. Naden, Studies in Revelation
Seminar (Siloam Springs, AR: Concerned Communications, 1981).
194
206. John M. Fowler, review of The Lamb Among the Beasts, by Roy C.
Naden, AR, February 20, 1997, 29; cf. Naden, The Lamb Among the Beasts, 12:
“As I wrote this work I attempted to be theologically precise, but at the same
time to approach theological discussion and terminology so that it will not
discourage college students and laypeople.”
207. Naden, Lamb Among the Beasts, 12.
208. See Dragutin Matak, book review of The Lamb Among the Beasts,
by Roy C. Naden, AUSS 36, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 148–49; Dragutin Matak, book
review of The Lamb Among the Beasts: Finding Jesus in the Book of Revelation,
Dialogue 10, no. 1 (1998): 31-32.
209. Naden, The Lamb Among the Beasts, 35.
210. Ibid., 36-38.
211. Thus the number 3 is a symbol of unity, 4 is a symbol of universality,

7 is a symbol of rest after labor, 10 is a symbol of completeness, and 12 is a
symbol of the kingdom of God. See ibid., 38-44, 49.
212. There is a structural connection between the Olivet address and

Dan 9 and the book of Revelation. They have an introduction and a conclusion
with three main parts. “In establishing the basic meaning of the broad outlines
of the Apocalypse, the interpreter uses Matthew 24 and 25 and Daniel 9 as
a guide, believing that Matthew 24, and 25 are patterned on Daniel and that
the entire book of Revelation is outworking of the Old and New Testament
presentations.” Naden, The Lamb Among the Beasts, 44-50.
213. Ibid., 49-50.
214. Ibid., 137.
215. Based on his four principles of interpretation.
216. Ibid., 138.
217. Naden presents six important examples such as (1) “a call to war”
(for example Judg 7:19), (2) “the daily sacrifice,” (3) “the fall of Jericho,” (4)
“the feast of trumpets,” (5) “the jubilee celebration,” and (6) “eschatological
significance.” See ibid., 138-140.
218. Ibid., 140-141.
195
219. Naden, The Lamb Among the Beasts, 141-142.
220. First period, the first century; second period, the second and third
centuries; the third period, the fourth and fifth centuries; and the fourth period,
the sixth to the fifteenth centuries.
221. Ibid., 143.
222. Ibid., 144.
223. Ibid., 146.
224. Ibid.
225. Naden, Lamb Among the Beasts, 147-150; on the symbolism of the
number 10, see, 41-42.
226. Ibid., 150-153.
227. Ibid., 153-154, 178.
228. Ibid., 183, 187.
229. Naden, Lamb Among the Beasts, 190.
230. Ibid., 190-191.
231. Stefanovič affirms that “the historicist approach is sometimes

problematic because of the effort to fit every detail to the text into a historical
fulfillment. The exposition of the text for many historicists is based primarily on
the allegorical method, rather than on adequate Old Testament background.”
Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ (2002), 11; cf. idem, Revelation of Jesus
Christ (2009), 14.
232. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ (2002), 11; cf. idem, Revelation
of Jesus Christ (2009), 14.
233. The application of the proof-text method has been heavily critiqued,
especially when William Miller used proof-texts by his “rules of interpretation.”
See Arasola, The End of Historicism, 50-59. For a correct use of the proof-text
method of the Bible study, see Donald F. Neufeld, “What’s Wrong with the
Proof-text Method?” RH, 11 March 1976, 10-11.
196
234. Arasola, The End of Historicism, 59-60.
235. SDABC, 7:726.
236. Paulien, The Deep Things of God, 30.
237. Ibid., 30.
197
CHAPTER 4
BIBLICAL-EXEGETICAL EMPHASIS
T
he primary purpose of this chapter is to describe the contributions
of Adventist scholars who interpret the Apocalypse focusing on the
biblical-exegetical emphasis. The background of this third period,
the Multiple Emphases period of Adventist apocalyptic interpretation,
begins with the role of Kenneth A. Strand, who led in the literary analysis
of the book of Revelation. Other facts of this background include the 1974
Bible Conference, major monographs on Revelation, and the Daniel and
Revelation Committee (DARCOM). This is followed by a presentation on
Jon Paulien, the representative expositor of the period, his understanding
of the Apocalypse, and his influence in recent years.
BACKGROUND: CONTENT OF THE MULTIPLE

EMPHASES PERIOD (1970- )
During this third and latest period, several Adventist Bible scholars
began to appreciate the internal artistry of John’s Apocalypse and to focus their
study on the literary composition of the book and its structural unity. Even
though other scholars were still continuing the historical and theological
emphases, the exegetical emphasis provided “a new standard for evaluating
the exegesis of Daniel and the Revelation by previous historicists.”1 As was
mentioned above, Kenneth A. Strand played an important role in breaking a
path for others. He proposed a chiastic structure of the book of Revelation,
which was accepted by DARCOM as “a valid key for a better understanding
of the book of Revelation.”2
199
Biblical-Exegetical Emphasis
The Role of Kenneth A. Strand
Kenneth A. Strand (1927-1997) was born in Tacoma, Washington.

After his baptism (1945), Strand wanted to be a Seventh-day Adventist
minister instead of an engineer, as he had previously planned. As a result, he
graduated from Emmanuel Missionary College (Andrews University since
1960) in 1952 with a major in religion and minors in history and biology. He
worked as a pastor in the Michigan Conference from 1952 to 1959, during
which he completed a master’s degree (1955) and a Ph.D. (1958) in history
at the University of Michigan. Finally, he taught at Andrews University in
both the undergraduate and graduate schools for thirty-five years (1959-
1994). Even though he was under appointment in the Department of
Church History, he taught courses in all the SDA Theological Seminary
departments.3
As a writer, Strand served as an associate editor, editor, and coeditor
of AUSS during the years 1967-1994.4 He authored some twenty-three books
and edited another five. Moreover, he published well over one hundred
scholarly articles, book chapters, and reviews.5
One of the fields of attention in Strand’s publishing career was the
last book of the Bible. His new idea, among Adventists, of the literary
structure of the Apocalypse was presented openly in book form in 1970.
This book was enlarged and eventually entitled Interpreting the Book of
Revelation in 1979.6 Strand enlarged his overall chiastic pattern in which
the prologue and epilogue are counterparts enclosing eight major prophetic
sequences. He published aspects of this scheme in a variety of Adventist
scholarly publications.7 In 1987, he emphasized “that there are eight
[emphasis in original] major prophetic sequences in the Apocalypse, not
seven, as various interpreters have assumed.”8
He affirmed that the book of Revelation is divided into two major
parts, each containing four visions. The first four visions are part of the
“historical series” and the other four visions are part of the “eschatological-
200
consummation series.” Then, the eight basic visions on the Apocalypse are
(1) “church militant,” (2) “God’s ongoing work of salvation,” (3) “trumpet
warnings,” (4) “evil powers opposing God and His saints,” (5) “bowl plagues,”
(6) “evil powers judged by God,” (7) “God’s judgment finale,” and (8) “church
triumphant.”
At the Theological Seminary, he taught not only Church History
classes but also “Theology of the Book of Revelation.” This last class he
taught for nearly twenty years. I will use his class materials in order to
analyze his understanding of the seven trumpets and the vision of Rev 12.
But I will start with his principles of prophetic interpretation.
Strand presented a three-part series for DARCOM entitled “Toward

a Theology of the Book of Revelation.”9 The first part of this series was
published as “Foundation Principles of Interpretation” in the DARCOM
series, where Strand outlined his principles of prophetic interpretation.10
Those principles will be mentioned later. However, in the second part,
Strand added some basic theological considerations.11
The student of the book of Revelation must consider some parameters
before he turns his “attention to specific theological themes or topics in
Revelation,” Strand said. These considerations are: (1) “The Apocalypse’s
own statement of purpose and theme must be recognized and honored lest
we impose our own parameters‒and our own theology‒upon the Book.”12
(2) “The Book of Revelation must be interpreted in harmony with both its
nature as apocalyptic prophecy and the principles and guidelines deriving
from the literary patterns it has utilized.”13 (3) “A further background aspect
necessary to consider in order to reach proper elucidation of the Apocalypse’s
theology is its close affinity with the Old Testament Book of Daniel.”14 (4)
The “final major consideration which we must note here is the fact that the
topics treated below do not align themselves with the kind of categories
201
commonly used by systematic theologians.”15

This proposal toward a theology of the Apocalypse began with his
treatment on the literary analysis of the last book of the Bible.16 Strand
proposed a new approach, which “may be considered essentially a variation”
of the historicist interpretation of the book of Revelation, which he called
“philosophy of history.”17 He recognized two individuals whose leanings
influenced his approach: (1) Daniel T. Niles’s book entitled As Seeing the
Invisible, and (2) Paul S. Minear’s work entitled I Saw a New Earth.18
This kind of approach correlates “in a certain sense with both
preterist and continuous-historical interpretation, but it does so in a way
that allows for repeated historical fulfillments beyond the writer’s own time
or beyond any other specific time in history.” It makes “the book of Revelation
relevant to all time and even to the individual Christian life. Thus, it carries
interpretation beyond a mere mechanical historical exposition.”19
According to Strand’s chiastic structure of the book of Revelation,

the seven trumpets are part of the third vision within the historical visions.
Strand divided this vision into four blocks: A. “Victorious-introduction
scene” (Rev 8:2-6); B. “Basic prophetic description” (8:7-9:21); C. “Interlude”
(10:1-11:13); and D. “Eschatological culmination” (11:14-18).20
His interpretation of the seven trumpets followed the traditional
historical view of the SDA Church. In his class “Theology of the Revelation,”
he presented conclusions of the historical applications of the seven trumpets
made by Adventist scholars.21 Though his emphasis was on the structure of
John’s book, he added important theological thoughts, affirming that
the section on the seven trumpets in Revelation initiates

a double set of visions . . . the ‘Exodus-from-Egypt’/’Fall-of
Babylon’ motif. As God gave prophetic warnings to Pharaoh
through the ministry of Moses and Aaron and as He also gave
warning to Babylon through His prophets, especially Daniel
202
(see Daniel, chaps. 2, 3, 4, and 5), so here in the trumpet septet

is inaugurated a series of warning messages or prophetic
appeals leading up to and culminating in Christ’s second
coming.22
Strand located Rev 12 in the fourth vision of the structure of the

Apocalypse. That is to say, it is part of the “historical-era visions.” This
agreed with the traditional interpretation of the Seventh-day Adventist
Church. Thus Strand opened the Multiple Emphases period by essentially
reaffirming previously accepted positions among Seventh-day Adventists.
A significant event that helped to shape the Multiple Emphases period of
Adventist apocalyptic interpretation was the 1974 Bible Conference.
The 1974 Bible Conference
The chief purpose of the 1974 Bible Conference was to focus on “the
revelation-inspiration and hermeneutical issues.23 Over the period of May
13 to June 27, three identical Bible conferences were held at three major
Adventist schools of the North American Division. The first was held at
Southern Missionary College, Collegedale, Tennessee, May 13-21; the second
at Andrews University, June 3-11; and the third at Pacific Union College,
Angwin, California, June 17-25. The eight-day conferences were planned for
ministers, Bible teachers, other church workers, and some laypeople and
had a combined attendance of nearly 2,000.
As a background for the Bible Conferences, the Research Committee
of the General Conference prepared A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics
and a notebook titled North American Bible Conference 1974.24 The paper
by Hans K. LaRondelle, “Interpretation of Prophetic and Apocalyptic
Prophecy,” in Symposium, and the presentation by William G. C. Murdoch,
dean of the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University from 1959
203
to 1973, on “Principles of Interpretation of the Prophetic and Apocalyptic

Literature of the Bible,” in the notebook, were helpful for the interpretation
of the Apocalypse with a Christ-centered eschatological emphasis.25 Other
presentations were focused on laws applied by exegesis.26
Four Significant Commentaries, 1970-1985
Before the launching of Maxwell’s major commentary, at least four

other Adventist works on the Apocalypse appeared. In 1976, Julius L. Tucker
(1895-1989), founder of The Quiet Hour, put a series of radio presentations,
“Lessons from the Revelation,” into book form titled Study Notes on the Book
of Revelation.27 Tucker recognized his debt to many authors, but especially
the writings of Taylor G. Bunch, S. N. Haskell, Uriah Smith, and Ellen G.
White.28 One year later, an Adventist woman, Verlene DeWitt Youngberg,
wrote her commentary entitled The Revelation of Jesus Christ to His People.29
Her commentary proposed a double application, including the traditional
interpretation, and an application for the present-day crisis.
The third work, titled Christ of the Revelation, belongs to Jean Rudolf
Zurcher (1918-2003), an Adventist theologian and educator.30 Zurcher focused
his book on a Christ-centered approach, basically analyzing the message of
the seven churches and following the traditional Adventist interpretation of
the Apocalypse. The last commentary published by an Adventist between
1976 and 1982 was Crisis! written by Desmond Ford (1929- ).31 Ford prepared
the manuscript when Pacific Union College gave him sabbatical time during
part of 1979.32 He was dismissed from ministry in the Adventist Church in
1980.33
In the bibliography of his commentary, Ford mentions only three
Adventist authors: Strand, Thiele, and Were.34 With this last author, Ford kept
up a correspondence and taught his ideas of latter-day events.35 Moreover, he
used two words that appeared in the writings of George McCready Price, who
spoke of the proleptic and apotelesmatic fulfillments of prophecy.36
204
Ford argues that idealism, preterism, futurism, and historicism are

all valid approaches for interpreting the book of Revelation. He says, “What
then shall we conclude about the schools of interpretation? We shall thank
God for all of them, but practice eclecticism ourselves. We should see these
various approaches as fragmented reflections of the whole truth. Let us see
again the necessity of affirming what is affirmed but denying the denials.”
He adds, “Let us always begin our exegesis by looking at the times and the
people addressed. But along with that let us acknowledge the wisdom of
Him whose years have no end, and who has promised never to leave nor
forsake His Church.”37
Ford divides the Apocalypse into two halves containing a total of
seven sections.38 The first half, sections 1-3 (Rev 1-11), pictures “the struggle
between the church and the world from an external view, and in general
terms cover[s] the whole terrain.” The second half, sections 4-5 (Rev 12-22),
reveals the hidden background and emphasizes the “eschatological crisis.”39
Thus, the central part of the Revelation is the fourth section, Rev 12-14.
I turn now to the principles of prophetic interpretation, interpretation
of the seven trumpets, and Rev 12 of the four authors mentioned.
Of the four writers just considered, Ford is the only one who expresses
his principles of prophetic interpretation emphasizing the exegetical task.
He considers four distinctive premises of his commentary. (1) “There is no
basic subject in the book of Revelation which is not present in seed-form
in the Olivet sermon. The Revelation is an address to the seven churches
of Turkey, and thus to the church universal.”40 (2) “This sermon of Mk. 13;
Mt. 24-25; Lu. 21 [sic] is but a commentary on Dan. 9:24-27, employing the
same concepts of the destruction of Jerusalem, the suffering of the Messiah,
the coming of the antichrist, and the end of all things.”41 (3) “The key to the
timing of Christ’s return has been given clearly by Him. . . . His return is
205
conditional on the finishing of the Great Commission.”42 His last important

point for understanding Crisis! is that
(4) many of the experiences which will overtake the church

in the last days have happened to the church of each
generation, usually on a scale less in intensity, and always
less in geographical extent. Thus the church through the
centuries has not been left without a guide. Prophecy is
apotelesmatic in nature, repeatedly fulfilling itself until the final
flowering of its consummative accomplishment. This means,
of course, that such prophetic outlines are general rather than
minutely detailed in application. Therefore all interpretations
of the Apocalypse limiting its predictions to specific events
subsequent to John’s generation, and prior to the time of the
end, are erroneous. Only fulfillments in principle are warranted
[emphasis supplied].43
Ford thus rejects the year-day principle. Moreover, Ford’s basic

premises have additional implications for the interpretation of the
Apocalypse. He believes that “any interpretation which would be irrelevant
to the persecuted Christian of the first century is thereby invalidated.”44
Then he adds, “If the things of Israel are now applied to the Christian church
they must thereby automatically have a worldwide application rather than
merely a local.”45 Finally, he says, “a vital principle for any hermeneutic is the
Christ-centered nature of the work, and this in ways beyond the obvious.”46
Before his exegetical exposition on the seven trumpets,47 Ford warns

that “apocalyptic imagery is like that of parables—not each separate item
has special meaning in and of itself. Rather, the whole contributes to the
impression made.”48 He adds that “the incongruous mixture of symbols”
assures that the interpreter is not “to look for a literal fulfillment.”49
Moreover, he affirms,
it is vital that we remember that John records his visions as they

came to him in time, and not as he may have understood their
206
historical significance. The literary format of Revelation must

be distinguished from its chronological import. The seventh
seal unfolds in the seven trumpets, and the seventh trumpet
unfolds in the third woe—the seven last plagues. This does
not mean that the seven trumpets in their fulfillment succeed
the sixth seal in time. The context shows this to be impossible,
for the sixth seal brings to view the end of the world. With the
seventh trumpet, and the seven last plagues, the situation is
different, for we read that the seventh trumpet encompasses
the wrath of God, and the plagues are said to be the fulfilling
of that wrath. They are specially marked out as the “last”
plagues, while the seven trumpets include earlier judgments.50
Thus, using the same terms as George McCready Price, proleptic and
apotelesmatic, Ford concludes that the trumpets, with the exception of the
seventh trumpet, are judgments made by God through age after age. There
is no specific time for the historical application by each trumpet, nor the
prophetic time of the fifth (Rev 9:5, 10) and sixth (Rev 9:15) trumpets. But
his emphasis is that the trumpets point out the reversal of creation, that is to
say, the world running down.51
His application sounds like an idealist interpretation. To him, the
first two trumpets “spoke of judgments on oppressing powers.” The next
two foretell “the judgment that follows apostasy among the people of God.”
The application of the fifth trumpet refers to those who refuse to accept the
Saviour or the Destroyer, while the sixth “points to the last crisis of the world
when men will receive either the message of the gospel from the mouths of
God’s witnesses or the false gospel from the ‘mouths’ of the dragon, the beast,
and the false prophet through the ministry of the spirits of devils (pictured
here as horses from the Euphrates pit or sea. Compare Isa 8:6-8).”52
Ford divides Rev 12 into three parts: (1) “The woman clothed with
the sun” (Rev 12:1-6); (2) “Satan cast out” (Rev 12:7-12); and (3) “War between
Satan and the woman and her Son” (Rev 12:13-17).53 To him, the woman
207
and the child represent “the people of God,” and “the Messiah” respectively,
whereas the dragon symbolizes not only Satan but also the power through
which he works, “including Antiochus Epiphanes, Rome in both its phases,
and the eschatological Antichrist.”54 The 1260 days is an “illustration of the
period of the persecution of the Two Witnesses.”55
To Ford, the remnant “may infer that the church will consist chiefly
of professors rather than confessors at the time of the last conflict.” The
remnant is that group of faithful Christians in the last days who are
condemned to death (Rev 13), but who remain faithful to both law and
gospel. The reference of “the testimony of Jesus” is, throughout all of
Revelation, the message that comes from Jesus, “often via those with the
Spirit of prophecy.”56
Daniel and Revelation Committee
On January 8, 1981, because Adventists were being influenced “by

the non-historicist ‘schools’ of prophetic interpretation,” the Executive
Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists asked
the General Conference Biblical Research Institute (BRI) to form a special
committee to restudy the books of Daniel and Revelation.57 BRI responded
by forming the Daniel and Revelation Committee (DARCOM), chaired by
Richard Lesher, who, at the time, was director of BRI.58 The committee
consisted of twenty-one scholars and eventually peaked at twenty-five,
meeting once and sometimes twice a year.59
After nearly a decade of ongoing study (including Daniel, Leviticus,
and Hebrews), DARCOM concluded its series by publishing two volumes
on Revelation. Symposium on Revelation—Book I basically focused on
principles of prophetic interpretation and exegetical studies on Rev 4-11,
whereas Symposium on Revelation—Book II focused on exegetical studies
on Rev 12-22.60
208
The principles of prophetic interpretation are established in the first

six chapters of book 1.61 However, these are also synthesized in the report
of “Issues in the Book of Revelation,” published in the Adventist Review,
Ministry, and DARCOM series.62
The Daniel and Revelation Committee reaffirmed “the validity of the
historicist approach to these two apocalyptic books [Daniel and Revelation]
as the only sound method to use.” Thus, the year-day principle is “an
integral part of the method inasmuch as it functions to unroll the symbolic
time periods so that we are able to locate the predicted events along the
highway of history.”63
Three more issues are pointed out. First, the literary structure of
the book of Revelation divides it into two major sections: (1) a historical
section (Rev 1-14); (2) and an eschatological (end-time) section (Rev 15-
22).64 Second, since the series of the seals and the trumpets are part of the
historical section of Revelation, the fulfillment of those “should be sought for
in historical time, the Christian Era.”65 Finally, “the prophecies of the seals
and the trumpets have only one prophetic fulfillment.” In the apocalyptic
prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, there is no space for dual or multiple
fulfillments.66 “Dual fulfillment may be present in some general/classic
prophecies in which there are contextual markers indicating such.”67
In its report, the committee underlined five points: (1) “The trumpets
are sequential as evidenced by their occurring one after another in the
vision [neither dual fulfillment nor just before the return of Christ]”; (2)
They appear as warnings of “adverse events to come (cf. Num 10:1-10)”; (3)
“A particular trumpet event may occupy an extensive period of time (Rev
9:5, 15; 10:7)”; (4) “Revelation 10:1-11:13 is an interlude between the sixth and
209
seventh trumpets”; and (5) “The Trumpet events occur in historical time.”68
“The Committee did not wish to foster unnecessary speculations on the
very obscure trumpet series. It chose not to print samples of historicist
interpretations.”69
Jon Paulien wrote on the trumpets in Symposium on Revelation—
Book I.70 His specific analysis of the trumpets consists of four and a half
pages. He warned that the traditional SDA analysis of the trumpets was
not established “on the basis of careful exegesis of the text.” He added that,
“although an understanding of the seals and trumpets may not be critical to
salvation, current realities require that they be given more careful attention
than has been the case in the past.”71
Paulien did not offer specific details (dates) to the historical
application for the fulfillment of each one of the trumpets. However, in the
last paragraph of his article he declared,
The thrust of the evidence brought forth in this chapter is the

recognition that the consensus of the Seventh-day Adventist
pioneers on the seals and trumpets, though marred by
some historical inaccuracies and limited exegetical insights,
nevertheless was accurate in its perception that the seals and
the trumpets were intended by John under inspiration to cover
the entire Christian Age and not just the end of that age.72
William G. Johnsson (1934- ), former editor of the Adventist Review,

wrote on the exegesis of Rev 12 in the DARCOM series.73 He divided Rev
12 into three parts: (1) “The leaders in the struggle between good and evil
(vv. 1-6)”; (2) “Conflict in heaven (vv. 7-12)”; and (3) “The dragon pursues
the woman (vv. 13-17).” The dragon, the woman, and the child portray
respectively Satan (as well as the sea beast of Rev 13:1), God’s people of all
ages, and Christ.
Without mentioning dates, Johnsson penned that “the 1260
days/three and a half times era represents a specific period when God
210
providentially cared for His faithful ones in the face of Satan’s persecutions.
That period does not extend to the Second Coming.”74 There is no analysis
of Rev 12:17, but when Johnsson came to the interpretation of Rev 14, he
clearly identified the Seventh-day Adventist Church as God’s people.75
Major Meetings on Revelation (1992-2013)
Revelation’s topics still captured the interest of Seventh-day

Adventists after DARCOM. For instance, in 1997, in the only number
of that year, the Journal of the Adventist Theological Society published a
special issue on the Revelation and eschatology.76 In 1999, the Adventist
Society for Religious Studies held its annual meeting November 18-20 at the
Sheraton Boston Hotel and Towers, Boston, Massachusetts, with the theme
“The Apocalypse of St. John.” Two additional meetings were held on the
topic of eschatology, but with a good number of papers on Revelation. The
first called “V Simpósio Bíblico-Teológico Sul Americano,” was convened
by the South American Division of the SDA Church at Centro Universitário
Adventista de São Paulo, Brazil, in October, 2002. The second was held by
the Adventist Theological Society at Village SDA Church in Berrien Springs,
Michigan, March 1-3, 2007.
In 2011, an Adventist television network, Three Angels Broadcasting
Network (3ABN), organized the “Symposium on the Seven Trumpets of
Revelation,” on February 18-20. In August 2013, the South America Division
plans the “X Simposio Bíblico Teológico Sudamericano” at Chile Adventist
University.
Summary
At least two major issues on Revelation were proposed by Kenneth A.

Strand. One issue was accepted by DARCOM and the other was not. Since
1970, Strand had focused on his proposal of the chiastic parallels—eight
211
major prophetic sequences—in the structure of the book of Revelation and

its literary analysis, which was accepted by DARCOM. On the other hand,
after teaching nearly twenty years the class “Theology of Revelation” at the
SDA Theological Seminary, his proposal on the theological interpretation
of John’s book was rejected by DARCOM.77
Between 1970 and the publication of Maxwell’s commentary on
Revelation (1985), four major Adventist works on Revelation appeared.
Among them, the commentary of Desmond Ford differed from traditional
interpretation. With his exegetical emphasis, Ford argued that the four
major methods of interpretation—futurism, preterism, idealism, and
historicism—were all valid to interpret the Apocalypse, thereby promoting
an eclectic approach. Instead of using the year-day principle, he applied the
“apotelesmatic principle” that Price had used early in the 1950s.
After working on Daniel, Leviticus, and Hebrews, DARCOM
concluded its study with Revelation. Even though these studies (DARCOM
series) were rich sources of information, the committee encouraged the
Adventist “administrators, pastors, and members to continue studying its
issues addressed.”78
I turn now to the definition of historicism in this last period of the
interpretation of the book of Revelation in the SDA Church.
“For the first 130 years of its existence, the Seventh-day Adventist
church belonged solidly in the school of historicist interpreters. This
picture began to change in 1980 when some arose to offer alternatives.”79
This was as a result of the Glacier View Conference, called in response to
the proposal of Desmond Ford. In the 1980s, some Adventist interpreters
of prophecies focused their interpretation of Daniel and Revelation on the
preterist view.80 In the 1990s, some other Adventist innovators turned to
futurism81 as “an antidote to the preterism” that was the previous center of
212
attention.82 However, the great majority of Seventh-day Adventist students

of the Bible have continued their use of historicism to interpret the biblical
prophecy.
On the definition of historicism, Kenneth Strand, in the 1970s,
proposed a variation of historicism, which he called “philosophy of
history.”83 But in the 1980s, Adventists reaffirmed the traditional meaning
of historicism. “It means an unfolding and fulfillment in historical events
of the Christian era the scenes shown to John until Christ’s return, the
millennium, and the subsequent establishment of the new earth.”84 From
1985 to 1991, Frank W. Hardy offered ninety-eight papers and six supplements
on his own web site, defending the historicist method of interpretation of
the prophecy.85 In 1986 the SDA Church declared the core of its historicist
approach in the statement on “Methods of the Bible Study,” approved by the
1986 General Conference Annual Council in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.86
In the 1990s, the release of Kai Arasola’s, The End of Historicism,
87
brought reactions both pro and con.88 Arasola described historicism
as “the method of prophetic interpretation which dominated British
and American exegesis from late seventeenth century to the middle of
nineteenth century.”89 Later, in its final report, the Daniel and Revelation
Committee defined historicism or the “continuous historicist method
(the hermeneutic of the Protestant Reformation)” as derived “from the
internal data of the prophecies themselves and from the example of Jesus.”
Moreover, influenced by the exegetical emphasis, it added, “Anchored in
the historical times of Daniel/John, the prophecies unroll (find fulfillment)
in a continuous sequence of events down through the centuries until the
establishment of the eternal kingdom.”90 The SDA Encyclopedia (1996)
offers the same definition.91
Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, Adventist Bible
students have centered their attention not only on the definition of
historicism, but also on the proper use of the historicist method to interpret
prophecy.92
213
The major debate on historicism among Adventists started with

an article by William Shea, a retired associate director of the Biblical
Research Institute, titled “Historicism, the Best Way to Interpret Prophecy”
(2003), where he affirmed that historicism cannot be used alongside other
methods.93 The same year, Reimar Vetne, then a Ph.D. student from the
SDATS, and Jon Paulien responded to the article written by Shea. Both
Paulien and his student proposed a combination of approaches to interpret
the Apocalypse. Their main concern was how Adventists can share their
prophetic interpretations with non-Adventist interpreters, if Adventists do
not change their definition of historicism.
Vetne distinguished between two kinds of historicism as “All-or-
Nothing” or as “One-Label-Among-Many.” For the first one, “once you
use the historicist method, everything else you do is by definition also
historicism.” Whereas for the second one, “historicism sees it[self] as one
approach among many that one and the same interpreter might use.”94
He then proposed his own 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.”95
In his two-part article entitled “The End of Historicism? Reflections
on the Adventist Approach to Biblical Apocalyptic,” Paulien suggested that
“a ‘divine reading’ [by Apocalypse] is valid if based on exegesis and proper
attention to genre.”96 Namely, there is a mixture of genres in Revelation as
general prophecy, mystical apocalyptic, historical apocalyptic, epistles, and
narrative. His challenge to the SDA Church is: “If Adventists wish to revive
the historicist approach to Revelation, therefore, they will need to pursue a
thoroughgoing examination of the genre of Revelation’s visionary passages
on a case-by-case basis.”97
In 2008, Richard Sabuin, a professor at the Adventist International
Institute of Advanced Studies, responded to Vetne and Paulien, concluding
that “the Apocalypse of Jesus Christ itself provides literary indicators for
214
historicism.”98 Finally, as mentioned above, LaRondelle (in 2010) urged

the need to define the historicist method. He penned, Adventism “is not
immune to misinterpreting Bible prophecy.” “Adventist Bible scholars are
becoming increasingly convinced that the traditional historicist applications
of God’s Word need to be re-examined and to be more critically evaluated
by a contextual exegesis, guided by Christocentric hermeneutics.”99
BIBLICAL-EXEGETICAL EMPHASIS
In recent years, Adventist Bible students have been urged to interpret

the book of Revelation on the basis of exegesis. But, what is exegesis? To
Grant R. Osborne, a well-known scholar who wrote his voluminous book
entitled The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical
Interpretation,
exegesis means to “draw out of” a text what it means. . . .

The process is complex and forms the heart of hermeneutical
theory, which seeks first to determine the author’s intended
meaning. . . and then to apply it to one’s life. This is a single
task, and the two aspects—meaning and significance—
cannot be separated, since the determination of meaning
(what it meant) is already done from the standpoint of modern
perspectives or significance (what it means).100
However, it should be noted that some Adventist scholars of the

Bible prophecies defined exegesis as the first part of Osborne’s definition.
For instance, Hans K. LaRondelle believes that exegesis is the “science of
the meaning of a text in its own literary and historical contexts.”101 Gerard
Pfandl, a former associate director of the Biblical Research Institute, stated,
“Exegesis is concerned with the original meaning of the text. It focuses
on what the author wanted to say and what the text meant to the original
reader.”102
Jon Paulien, the representative scholar for the biblical-exegetical
215
emphasis, believes that “exegesis is the process of examining a passage

to determine the meaning, in its original setting, of what the author was
saying.” He adds, “In order to accomplish this, the traditional canons of
New Testament exegesis include attention to the meaning of words, to
syntactical relationships, to the literary form and structure of the passage
and its immediate context, and to the relationship the passage has to its
contemporary situation.”103
In his book, The Deep Things of God, Paulien offers a definition of
exegesis “that is kind of fun. It goes like this: ‘Exegesis is the art of learning
how to read the Bible in such a way as to leave open the possibility that you
might learn something.’”104 He maintains his focus on the original readers
of the book.105
In the second edition of his commentary, Ranko Stefanovič adds
“basic steps of biblical exegesis.”106 He defines exegesis as “the process of
deriving meaning from biblical text by bridging the gap between the world of
the Bible at the time of the inspired author and the reader of today.”107 Thus,
“biblical exegesis involves two basic steps. The first involves determining
what the text meant for the time when it was written,” and the second is “to
ask what the text means for the reader today.”108
In brief, LaRondelle, Pfandl, and Paulien seem to limit the definition
of exegesis to analysis of the literary and historical context of the Bible author.
I turn now to the major contributor on the biblical-exegetical emphasis on
the interpretation of Revelation in the SDA Church, Jon Paulien.
216
PAULIEN’S PLACE IN ADVENTIST HISTORY
Jonathan K. Paulien (1949- ), better known as Jon Paulien, is a

specialist in the study of Johannine literature (Gospel of John and the
book of Revelation). Born in New York City, he grew up in a Seventh-day
Adventist home.109 After attending Greater New York Academy, Paulien
earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in theology from Atlantic Union College,
South Lancaster, Massachusetts, in 1972. In December 1975, he finished his
Master of Divinity degree from the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews
University. Prior to concluding it, he worked in both the German Brooklyn
Church in New York City for a short time, and the Eaton Rapids Church in
Michigan for a short time.110
From 1976 to 1981, he served as a pastor in the Greater New York
Conference of SDA. Along with Trevor H. Fraser, Marco A. Valenca, and
N.C. (Ted) Wilson, he received ordination as a pastor for the SDA Church at
a camp meeting of his conference in 1978.111 In 1982, he was invited to serve as
an educator at the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University. Under
the tutelage of Kenneth A. Strand, and after defending his dissertation titled
“Allusions, Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of Revelation 8:7-12,”
he earned his doctoral degree in New Testament from Andrews University
in 1987. Since 2007, he has served as the Dean of the School of Religion
at Loma Linda University. He previously served as the chairman of the
New Testament Department of the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews
University for twenty-five years.
Through 2011,112 he had authored twenty-three books in three main
areas of interest: Revelation, the Gospel of John, and the intersection of
faith and contemporary culture. Most of his books have been translated into
other languages, but only one of his books has been translated into Spanish,
Armageddon at the Door was published by the Adventist publishing house
in Spain.113
Even though Paulien did not write a verse-by-verse commentary
217
on Revelation, in his nearly twenty-five years of study he authored eleven

books on different themes in Revelation.114 He did write verse-by-verse
commentaries on the Gospel of John, including John: Jesus Gives Life to
a New Generation (1995); John and the Devotional Life (1999); and John:
The Beloved Gospel (2003).115 He also authored at least five books on the
intersection of faith with contemporary culture, including Present Truth in
the Real World: The Adventist Struggle to Keep and Share Faith in a Secular
Society (1993); Knowing God in the Real World (2000); The Day That Changed
the World: Seeking God After September 11 (2002); Meet God Again for the
First Time (2003); and Everlasting Gospel, Ever-changing World: Introducing
Jesus to a Skeptical Generation (2008).116
He also wrote articles and parts of other important books, seventeen
in Adventist publications,117 and eighteen in non-Adventist publications.
Among the articles written for non-Adventist publications, Paulien wrote
fourteen articles for The Anchor Bible Dictionary118 and four for other
publications. Among his articles written for Adventist publications are five
in Symposium on Revelation--Book I, three in Meeting the Secular Mind,
two in Understanding Scripture, and one in Lutherans and Adventists in
Conversation: Report and Papers Presented, 1994-1998. In addition, he
contributed to “For You Have Strengthened Me”: Biblical and Theological
Studies in Honor of Gerhard Pfandl in Celebration of His Sixty-Fifth
Birthday; Morning Rounds: Daily Devotional Stories; Christ, Salvation, and
the Eschaton: Essays in Honor of Hans K. LaRondelle; A Man of Passionate
Reflection: A Festschrift Honoring Jerald Whitehouse; and the notes in the
Andrews Study Bible.119
At least six Adventist scholars influenced him most: Gerhard F.
Hasel (1935-1994), Abraham Terian (1942- ), Louis Were, Hans LaRondelle,
George McCready Price, and Desmond Ford.120 The first two encouraged
him to do careful exegesis in all his biblical work.121 Were influenced him
by his “passion for Adventist understanding of prophecy that is gospel
oriented and has value for everyday life.” Whereas Price motived him be an
218
innovator in the areas of prophecy, Ford focused him on the gospel, though
he has come to differ with Ford in a number of areas.122
No doubt, Paulien is recognized as an expert in Revelation. Samuele
Bacchiocchi considered him “the leading Adventist authority on the
prophetic books of the Bible”; and others call him “the Adventist Church’s
most noted Revelation scholar.”123
Paulien’s Lectures and Presentations
In his “publication record,” Paulien lists 379 items, “presentations

and publications.”124 These items show his focus as a bridge between
scholars and lay persons in the church.125 Items to highlight are his 96 blogs,
87 on his web page http://thebattleofarmageddon.com,126 six in the e-mail
newsletter End-time Issues, edited by Samuele Bacchiocchi, and one blog
on the Spectrum web site, www.spectrummagazine.org.
He has published sixty-one articles in Adventist (58) and non-
Adventist periodicals (3). For instance, his articles appear in Adventist Review
(8), Ministry (8), Liberty (8), Perspective Digest (6), Andrews University
Seminary Studies (4), Signs of the Times (4), Journal for Adventist Theological
Society (3), Dialogue (2), South Pacific Record (2), Biblical Research (2), and
others.127 He has also written thirty-two critical book reviews in Andrews
University Seminary Studies (30), Review of Biblical Literature [Society of
Biblical Literature] (1), and Journal of Biblical Literature (1). He also refereed
some forty articles published in Andrews University Seminary Studies (25),
Ministry (8), Journal Adventist Theological Society (3), and others.128
His production was not limited only to written papers, but also
included audio and video productions, for example Keys to the Code:
How to Study Revelation Without Losing Your Mind; Seven Churches and
a Heavenly Vision: The Lamb And His Wayward Saints; The Seals and the
Trumpets: God’s Horror Show; Building to the Final Crisis: Things Get Worse
Before They Get Better; The End of All Things: It’s Worth the Wait; Simply
219
Revelation: A Beginner’s Guide to the Most Challenging Book of the Bible; and
his recent series, produced by the South Pacific Division’s Bible Research
Committee, Revelation, Hope, Meaning, Purpose.129
Paulien has read fifty-eight papers at meetings of Adventist scholars.
Of the twenty-five papers he read at meetings of non-Adventist scholars,
the most (13) were read to the Society of Biblical Literature followed by
the Chicago Society for Biblical Research (5), and others.130 Presenting
papers in non-Adventist meetings was not his first goal, but Gerhard F.
Hasel encouraged him to do it to impact the non-SDA scholarly world.131
On the other hand, in Adventist meetings, he read the same number of
papers in the Adventist Society for Religious Studies, where he is a very
active member,132 and various kinds of meetings at Andrews University (11).
He delivered ten papers at DARCOM and the same number in different
committees of the General Conference of the SDA Church. In addition, he
read three papers at the Australia Union Bible Conference, two each for the
Adventist Theological Society, the National Conference on Innovation, and
the Universidad Adventista Dominicana, and one each in other Adventist
meetings.133 Paulien has traveled extensively, reaching all fifty states of the
United States; in addition he has visited many other countries.134
Paulien on Revelation
As mentioned above, Paulien did not write a verse-by-verse

commentary on the last book of the Bible.135 However, in three books
and a series of DVDs, he offers to his audience a whole panorama of his
understanding of the Apocalypse.
In 2004, the Review and Herald released his book, The Deep Things
of God: An Insider’s Guide to the Book of Revelation,136 and three years later,
The Gospel from Patmos: Everyday Insights for Living from the Last Book
of the Bible. In 2009, Pacific Press published his book titled Seven Keys:
Unlocking the Secrets of Revelation.137 In 2010, the South Pacific Division’s
220
Bible Research Committee launched Revelation: Hope, Meaning, Purpose,

a twenty-four-part DVD series.138 The content of these four titles will be
analyzed briefly in the next part.
Content of His Publications on Revelation
In The Deep Things of God, a 176-page book, Paulien presents how

to read the book of Revelation, from an exegetical emphasis.139 Richard
W. Guldin says that “this book is a masterful description of how to use the
compass—the Old and New Testaments—to find one’s own way through
the landscape of cities, seals, trumpets, and bowls to the earth made new.”140
In the introduction and the first three chapters (more than 40 percent of the
book), the author wants the reader to understand that the best way to read
Revelation is in the language, time, place, and circumstances of John.141 In
the rest of the chapters, 4 to 8, he offers tools to interpret the Apocalypse
from a biblical exegetical emphasis.142
In The Gospel from Patmos, the author offers a unique contribution,
a daily devotional book on Revelation, dedicating one page per day—a 366-
day calendar year (including February 29).143 Each page has a Bible text, an
explanation, and a personal prayer. Each verse is translated by the author,
focusing on the words in boldface each day.144 This book has been translated
into many languages.145
In Seven Keys, a popular 158-page book, the scholar on Revelation
presents three major issues.146 First, he proposes seven keys “to interpret
Revelation consistently and accurately.”147 Second, the author offers a brief
summary of the interpretation of the whole book of the Apocalypse.148 And
third, he suggests eight lessons that we can learn from Revelation.149
In Revelation: Hope, Meaning, Purpose, a 24-part DVD series,
Paulien, together with Graeme Bradford, retired pastor, administrator,
and Avondale lecturer, offers a new evangelistic toolkit as a seminar. The
package is comprehensive but also flexible. It includes handbooks, 12
221
DVDs, advertising resources, 25 presentation notes, 24 extra notes, 24 files

on power point, 23 research guides, 23 presenter’s research guides, a website,
and more.150
Literary Structure of the Apocalypse
To Paulien, the Apocalypse contains “a number of repetitive

structures.”151 As a whole, Revelation functions “as a giant chiasm made up
of seven major parts with a prologue and epilogue.”152 Table 10 shows these
parallels and their climax.
Table 10. The structure of the Apocalypse according to Jon Paulien153
Revelation The Chiasm of Revelation
1:1-8 Prologue
1:9-3:22 The Seven Churches
4:1-8:1 The Seven Seals
8:2-11:18 The Seven Trumpets
11:19-15:4 The Final Crisis
15:5-18:24 The Seven Bowls
19:1-20:15 The Millennium
21:1-22:5 The New Jerusalem
22:6-21 Epilogue
Paulien argues that the center of the center is in Rev 14:6-12, and the
center of the center of the center is Rev 14:7. This is the heart of the chiasm,
he says.154
Paulien’s Definition of Historicism
In 2004, Paulien considered that “historicism portrays a sequence

of history from the time of John until the Second Coming.” Because “the
222
historicist interpretation has often been extremely dry and left people
hungry for real meaning in the book,” Paulien believes that the preterist,
futurist, historicist, and idealist approaches “have validity.” He adds, “I do
not believe that we should impose any particular viewpoint on Revelation
like a template” because, today, “people do not appreciate exclusivism and
consider comments such as ‘I have the truth’ or ‘I belong to the true church’
as out of line.” However, he affirms that “the book of Revelation warns us
that inclusion has its limits.”155
Paulien’s concern about the historicist approach is that “the purpose
of prophecy is not to satisfy our curiosity about the future, but to teach us
how to live today.”156 He argues that “a balanced historicist interpretation
draws its impetus from the biblical text rather than from fashion or from
external assumptions.”157
In 2009, he claimed that historicism is the better method for studying
the Apocalypse. He clarifies that historicism “takes the first-century
standpoint of preterism, the future standpoint of futurism, and the general
interests of idealism as aspects of the book’s purpose, but it doesn’t limit our
understanding to any of those approaches.” Moreover, he says that “some
aspects of the book speak to the beginning of the Christian era.” Thus, he
concludes that “historicism, rightly understood, is the best method because
it allows each text to locate itself in time; it doesn’t limit the meaning in an
arbitrary way as the other approaches do.”158
Using a mixture of theology and philosophy, Paulien proposes

seven principles of prophetic interpretation.159 It is the result of analyzing
four major acts of God looking at the big picture of the Old Testament: (1)
Creation, (2) the Flood, (3) the Exodus, and (4) the return from Babylonian
exile. “Most of the prophecies in the Old Testament concerned one or more
of these four great events,” he affirms. Although this seems to have little
223
to do with the Apocalypse, it provides “the foundation upon which we can

base a sound understanding of Revelation.”160
These seven principles are: (1) “God is consistent,” namely “His
past actions foretell what He will do in His later actions.”161 (2) “God is not
predictable. . . . We must be careful not to put Him in a box,” but let Him
be God.162 (3) “God is creative”; therefore “He is not limited to the details of
His previous patterns.”163 (4) “God meets people where they are,” respecting
their own vocabulary and past experience.164 (5) “There is a spiritualization
of the biblical type,” in other words, “the language of God’s successive actions
alters from literal to spiritual, or symbolic.”165 (6) “God uses the language
of the past to describe the future.”166 Finally, (7) “Prophetic fulfillments are
best recognized after they occur.”167
In addition to the seven principles of prophetic interpretation, he
suggests seven keys to interpret “Revelation consistently and accurately.”168
First, this biblical book is a divine revelation.169 Second, being the climax
of the Bible, the Apocalypse uses the Old Testament extensively by allusion
and echo.170 Third, the essential message of the book of Revelation does
not differ from the gospel of Jesus Christ.171 Fourth, the Apocalypse is a
symbolic book.172 Fifth, taking the principle that God always meets people
where they are, “the more we understand that ancient context, the more
we can understand what John would tell us today.”173 Sixth, Revelation
contains both “historical apocalyptic” and “mystical apocalyptic.”174 Finally,
Revelation has a chiastic structure.175
Applying his principle of “duodirectionality,”176 Paulien argues that

the key to understanding the trumpets is found in the fifth seal and that
the language used in the introduction of the trumpets (Rev 8:2-6) sounds
more like intercession than a call to judgment.177 But in the development of
the seven trumpets, he says “the abusers have already begun to come under
224
God’s judgment.”178 To him, whereas the seven seals are “a form of classical
prophecy,” the trumpets are “the genre known as historical apocalyptic.”179
Therefore, the first trumpet represents the judgment of God on
Jerusalem.180 The second trumpet symbolizes the fall of the Roman Empire
along with its entire social order.181 The third trumpet signifies the apostasy
of the Christian Church.182 The fourth trumpet represents the period of the
Middle Ages or “Dark Ages.”183 The fifth trumpet symbolizes the reign of
secular-atheism, the sixth represents rise of end-time Babylon. Finally, the
seventh trumpet represents final events in motion (events described in Rev
12-22).
As mentioned above, to Paulien it is not important to set a date
on prophecy. He thus does not offer time periods for the fifth and sixth
trumpets.
Paulien observes that “Revelation 12 builds on Daniel throughout.”184

He considers that Rev 12 covers all of Christian history. In Understanding
Scripture, he mentions four stages. Later in Seven Keys he gives just the
last three stages. The zero stage covers “before the time of the vision” (Rev
1-4).185 The first stage covers “the time of Jesus and His disciples” (Rev 12:5,
10-11). The second stage pictures the broad expanse of Christian history—
the church in the desert (Rev 12:14-16). And the third stage introduces the
final phase of the Dragon’s war against the remnant (Rev 12:17).186
The woman represents “God’s true and faithful people”—the church.
The child symbolizes Jesus, and the dragon is “Satan and all his followers
on earth.”187 The remnant offers willing obedience to God (keeping the
commandments of God), and has the gift of prophecy (the testimony of
Jesus) at the end of time.188 Moreover, Paulien believes that “God’s remnant
people will have a message not just for Christians, but also for Jews, for
Muslims, for Buddhists, and for Hindus—for all people.”189
225
OTHER EXPOSITORS ON BIBLICAL-EXEGETICAL EMPHASIS
The biblical-exegetical emphasis has also been used by other

authors.190 One of the remarkable works is written by Ekkehardt Müller.191
However, his recent scholarly commentary on Revelation makes Ranko
Stefanovič a leading representative.
Ranko Stefanovič
Ranko Stefanovič was born in Croatia in 1950. He served as a pastor

in the Yugoslav Conferences of Serbia, Bosnia, and Croatia and also worked
in Turkey, Israel, and at Canadian University College.
Stefanovič recognizes that his approach to the Apocalypse “has
significantly been influenced by the works of the scholars” such as Kenneth
A. Strand, Hans K. LaRondelle, and Jon Paulien.192 His commentary on
Revelation shows that he used sources from Paulien 109 times, LaRondelle
56 times, Ellen G. White 40 times, and Strand 36 times. Recognizing that
no one works in a vacuum, he also used non-Adventist sources in his work.
Among the major ones quoted are: William Barclay 91 times, David Aune 83
times, George Ladd 77 times, and Gregory Beale 55 times.193
In 2002, the Andrews University Press released a 654-page
commentary titled Revelation of Jesus Christ—with a biblical-exegetical
emphasis, written by Stefanovič with some conclusions that differ from the
traditional Adventist interpretation.194 However, his commentary was well
received for attempting to explain in-depth the book of Revelation. Later,
by initiative of the author and after receiving suggestions, the second edition
came out in 2009 with four new recommendations written by Adventist
scholars.195
In the second edition, Stefanovič attempts to move his commentary
closer to the traditional Adventist historicist interpretation. For instance,
(1) he attempts to be clear with the methodological approach saying that
226
historicism is “the most appropriate approach to the book of Revelation,”196

but at the same time, he mentions that all of the various approaches
“have some elements of truth.”197 (2) After the exposition of each one of
the churches (Rev 2 and 3), he includes a nine-to-eleven-line “Historical
Application” that identifies the historical application with specific periods
of church history.198 (3) In the historical application of the seven seals, he
incorporates some facts, making parallels with the seven churches.199 (4) In
the historical application of the 1,260 days to years, he cites the period from
A.D. 538 to A.D. 1798.200
Edwin Reynolds, a professor specializing in the book of Revelation
at Southern Adventist University, points out that some of Stefanovič’s
conclusions are not compatible with traditional Adventist interpretation.201
For example, (1) in addition to the historical application of the Two Witnesses
of Rev 11 in the Bible, Stefanovič suggests another application, “the people of
God and the powers of evil persecuting” the saints.202 (2) “He still tends to
be evasive on the application of the oppressive power during [the prophetic
period of 1,260 years] referring at some points to ‘the church’s religious-
political oppressive power.’”203 (3) “Stefanovič has not accommodated
himself to traditional historicist interpretation in the matter of the number
of the Beast’s name in [Rev] 13:18.”204 However, Reynolds still claims that
Stefanovič’s work is “an excellent commentary, one of the very best on the
market.”205
On the structure of the book of Revelation, Stefanovič suggests two
different structures, a nine-part chiasm adding the prologue and epilogue,206
and the “threefold structure of Revelation” adding the prologue and
epilogue as well. The last is developed in his commentary: (1) Prologue (1:1-
8), (2) “The Messages to the Seven Churches (1:9-3:22),” (3) “The Opening
of the Sealed Scroll (4-11:19),” (4) “The Contents of the Seven-Sealed Scroll
(12-22:5),” and (5) The Epilogue (22:6-21).207 This double structure has been
questioned.208
227
Under the subtitles “How to Interpret the Book of Revelation” and

“Symbolic Nature of Revelation,” one can find three basic principles of
prophetic interpretation that Stefanovič uses in his book. (1) Revelation
1:9‒3:22 “must be understood as essentially forth-telling, although some
texts there contain predictive prophecies.”209 (2) But Revelation 4‒22:5
“concerns events that were to take place in the future, immediate and distant,
from John’s perspective (Rev 4:1).”210 Finally, (3) “the symbolic language of
Revelation can be traced to at least four sources: the Old Testament, Jewish
apocalyptic writings, the first-century Asia Minor setting, and the New
Testament writings.”211
Stefanovič says that the seven trumpets and the seven seals “refer
to the same period of history between the cross and the Second Coming.”
He then concludes that the first trumpet represents the destruction of
Jerusalem.212 The second trumpet symbolizes the “downfall of the Roman
Empire.”213 The third trumpet refers to the apostasy of the Christian
Church. 214
The fourth trumpet describes “the deepening of the prevailing
darkness” under the influence of secularism.215 The fifth trumpet portrays
“the spiritual condition in the secular world and the consequences of such
conditions from the eighteenth century to our time.”216 The next trumpet
refers “clearly to the time of the end.”217 The last trumpet signals “the
consummation of all things.”218
On the period of “five months” (Rev 9:5, 10) of the fifth trumpet, he
points out that “this reminds us of the Genesis Flood that lasted and harmed
the earth for five months (Gen 7:24; 8:3).”219 And on the period of “the hour
and day and month and year” of Rev 9:15, he just quoted LaRondelle’s
conclusion, “a divinely-appointed moment in time.”220
228
Revelation 12, he affirms, contains three scenes: “the birth of the

child” (12:1-6); as a sort of interlude, the “expulsion of Satan from heaven”
(12:7-12); and the persecution by the dragon of the woman and her child
(12:13-17),221 where, the woman represents the people of God of “both the
Old and New Testaments, the bride of Christ.”222 The child symbolizes Jesus
Christ, and the dragon primarily refers to “Satan acting behind the power of
pagan Rome.”223
The prophetic period of 1260 years is “usually dated from A.D. 538
to A.D. 1798,” he affirms. On the remnant, he simply declares that those
are “the end-time followers of Christ.”224 And on “the testimony of Jesus,”
he again quotes LaRondelle saying that it “is not restricted to the end-time
church, but is the essential characteristic of Christ’s faithful followers during
the entire Christian age.”225
TENDENCIES OF BIBLICAL-EXEGETICAL EMPHASIS
After describing the biblical-exegetical emphasis on Revelation in

the SDA Church, I will mention some interpretational tendencies of this
approach. One important tendency is to focus so narrowly on what the
text meant for the original audience as to neglect the historical (historicist)
application of the prophecy.226 For example, it is assumed that because
the Apocalypse was originally written from the Isle of Patmos to the seven
churches that were in Asia Minor, “the more we understand that ancient
context, the more we can understand what John would tell us today.”227
The same principle also applies to work on the Koine (common)
Greek text in which the Apocalypse was written.228 It is widely believed
that John, the author of Revelation, was thinking in Hebrew, but writing
in Greek. “But his solecistic style cannot be wholly explained from its
Hebraistic colouring.”229
229
Other tendencies of this emphasis include making “a careful search

of the Old Testament to find the root sources of the imagery in the passage”
under study,230 considering that the author, the apostle John, was a Jew. Not
only does Revelation contain allusions and echoes from the Old Testament
but also lots of connections to the gospel, the Cross, Christian churches,
and letters of the apostles.
Another tendency of this approach is to emphasize the chiastic
structure of the Apocalypse, thus reinforcing the climax of the book. An
emphatic intention is to find Christ in the book, because it is “the revelation
of Jesus Christ.” All these tendencies lead the reader to focus more on the
first-century context when the book was written, in preference to looking
for a much later fulfillment of the prophecies of the Apocalypse.
A final tendency is to believe that a diversity of approaches, such as
preterist, futurist, historicist, and idealist, all have validity for interpreting
the Apocalypse. As noted above, Paulien says: “I do not believe that we should
impose any particular viewpoint on Revelation like a template” because,
today, “people do not appreciate exclusivism and consider comments such
as ‘I have the truth’ or ‘I belong to the true church’ as out of line.”231 This
sounds like a perspective influenced by postmodernism.
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT
This chapter has described the line of Adventist interpretation of

the Apocalypse using the biblical-exegetical emphasis. This covers the
proposal of Kenneth A. Strand on the literary analysis and structure of the
Apocalypse, through the major author, Jon Paulien, who more recently
proposed the exegetical emphasis to understanding the book of Revelation.
During the multiple emphases period (1970-2013), some Adventist
scholars of Revelation began to question the use of historicism as a method
of interpreting the Apocalypse. Some Adventist scholars turned to futurism,
other scholars to preterism, and still others to an eclectic approach. From
230
1970, Strand proposed his “philosophy of history,” which contained both

preterist and continuous-historical interpretation, but allowed for repeated
“historical fulfillments beyond the writer’s own time.”232 In addition to the
literary analysis of the Apocalypse, Strand also proposed “a theology of the
Book of Revelation.” Desmond Ford, Jon Paulien, and Ranko Stefanovič
affirm that futurism, preterism, idealism, and historicism are all valid
approaches to the Revelation.
At the end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-
first century, Adventist scholars have been troubled to define historicism.
Frank W. Hardy and William Shea defended the traditional definition,
whereas Reimar Vetne and Jon Paulien, concerned with building a dialogue
with non-Adventist scholars, sought to redefine historicism, proposing that
the Apocalypse contains general prophecy, mystical apocalyptic, historical
apocalyptic, epistles, and narrative. Later, Richard A. Sabuin responded by
saying that the Apocalypse of Jesus Christ itself provides literary indicators
for historicism.
The biblical-exegetical emphasis places more weight on literary
analysis and the context of the time when the Apocalypse was written.
Thus, the main tendency of this approach is to focus on what the text
meant for the primary readers, through analysis of the Koine Greek text
of the Apocalypse, and through exploring the linguistic, literary, historical,
geographical, religious, philosophical, and cultural contexts of the time
when the Apocalypse was written.
This approach tends to emphasize the importance of intertextual
parallels, allusions, and echoes with other passages in the Old and New
Testaments. This approach stresses the structure of the book, as well as the
centrality of Christ in the book. A final tendency, which many regard as
dangerous, is to believe that all the methods of interpretation have some
truth in them. This eclecticism tends to detract or detour from the historical
interpretation of the Apocalypse. It is a form of relativism that can strongly
influence how the prophecies are understood.
231
These tendencies come from at least three major sources. First,

beginning in the 1980s, there appeared a resurgence of academic scholarly
literature on Revelation. For instance, David Barr’s advocacy for a more
oral and narrative approach to Revelation, in contrast to its critical analysis
as a historical document, contributed to the opening of literary and
social approaches to the study of Revelation. Second, Adventist scholars’
attendance at the annual Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) meetings put
them in contact with other ways of interpreting the Apocalypse. For instance,
Jon Paulien, while he attended DARCOM meetings, also participated in SBL
meetings such as the “Literary Criticism and the Apocalypse Consultation”
and the “Reading the Apocalypse Seminar.”233 Third, the influence of
postmodernism led interpreters of the Apocalypse to be more open to
eclectic methods of interpretation.
In the last period of the Apocalypse interpretation in the SDA
Church, Jon Paulien, a scholar who is concerned with sharing his view on
Revelation not only with Adventist people, but also with non-Adventists, has
proposed, since the defense of his Ph.D. dissertation on the trumpets in the
Apocalypse, that the best way to interpret the book of Revelation is through
exegesis. Paulien acknowledges that he has been influenced by Louis Were,
George McCready Price, Desmond Ford, Gerhard Hasel, Abraham Terian,
and Hans LaRondelle, among Adventist scholars.
Even though Paulien, an expert in Revelation, did not write a verse-
by-verse commentary, he did write eleven books on the Apocalypse, mainly
for popular readers. His goal is to make a bridge between the best of
scholarship and the lay person in the church. The book where he presents
his proposal on how to read the book of Revelation exegetically is The Deep
Things of God. Later, in Seven Keys: Unlocking the Secrets of Revelation,
Paulien offers not only seven keys to interpret the Apocalypse, but also a
brief summary of the interpretation of all visions of the book of Revelation.
Paulien proposes a chiastic structure of seven major parts with a
prologue and epilogue in the Apocalypse. To him, Rev 14:7 is the center of
232
the center of the center of the book—the heart of the chiasm.

In recent years, the biblical-exegetical emphasis has been used by
other scholars in commentaries and especially in doctoral dissertations.
Among them, Ranko Stefanovič recently published a commentary on
Revelation. Even though Revelation of Jesus Christ is a scholarly commentary
on the Apocalypse, it still has some uncertain points when compared with
the traditional Adventist historicist approach.
On the principles of prophetic interpretation, the followers of
this exegetical emphasis underline: (1) the importance of recognizing the
allusions and echoes that come from the Old Testament; (2) the harmony
with the theology of the other books of New Testament; (3) that the language
of this book is mainly symbolic; (4) the book was first addressed to the literal
church of Asia Minor of the first century; and (5) the interpretation of the
text should be according to the genre. This last principle opens the door for
using futurism, preterism, idealism, and historicism in the interpretation
of Revelation. Table 11 shows a summary of the interpretation of the seven
trumpets according to biblical-exegetical emphasis.
Even though they acknowledge that the best way to interpret the
seven trumpets is the historical application that covers the entire Christian
Age, Table 11 shows the tendency of those scholars of Revelation who focus
on the exegetical emphasis to not mention specific dates in the historical
application. The “prophetic periods” of the fifth and sixth trumpets, such
as Rev 9:5, 10, and 15, are not integrated from the perspective of traditional
historicism, but from a modified or redefined concept of historicism.
Table 12 shows mutual agreement in the application of the symbol
of the woman, but Paulien adds a faithful people. On the application of
the great red dragon, Ford includes Antiochus Epiphanes, Paulien includes
all Satan’s followers on the earth, and Stefanovič includes pagan Rome,
whereas DARCOM follows the traditional interpretation. On the prophecy
of 1260 days, Ford and Paulien do not specify dates, as do DARCOM and
Stefanovič. But Stefanovič adds a word such as “usually” or “commonly.”
233
On the application of the remnant, DARCOM follows the traditional

interpretation, Ford and Stefanovič focus on faithful Christians at the end
of the world, whereas Paulien believes that the remnant includes not only
members of the Adventist Church, but also other Christians, Jews, Muslims,
Buddhists, and Hindus.
Table 11. Interpretation of the seven trumpets according to biblical-exegetical

emphasis
Desmond Jon Ranko

Trumpet DARCOM
Ford Paulien Stefanovič
Cover
Judgments the entire Judgment
Fall of
1st on oppressing Christian Age. of God on
Jerusalem
powers No mention Jerusalem
of dates.
Judgments
Fall of Roman Fall of Roman
2nd on oppressing
Empire Empire
powers
Judgment for
Apostasy
the apostasy Apostasy of
3th of Christian
among God’s Christian Church
Church
people
Darkness came
from influence
Judgment for
of secularism.
the apostasy Middle Ages or
4th The Age of
among God’s Dark Ages
Enlightenment.
people
From 16th to
18th centuries
The spiritual
Judgment on
condition in
those who
Reign of secular- the secular
5th refuse to
atheism world. From
accept the
18th century to
Saviour
today
Crisis of the The time of the
6th The final crisis
world end
The
Second
7th Second Coming consummation
Coming
of all things
234
Table 12. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to biblical-exegetical emphasis
Desmond Jon Ranko

Symbol DARCOM
Ford Paulien Stefanovič
God’s true and
Woman God’s People God’s People God’s People
faithful people
Child Christ Christ Christ Christ
Satan, and Satan and Satan and all his Satan acting
A Great Red Antiochus Rome (the followers on the behind the
Dragon Epiphanes, and best of Rev power of
Rome 13:1) Earth pagan Rome
An illustration
of the period of
Usually dated
1260 the persecution
538-1798 No mention from A.D. 538
(vv. 6, 14) of the Two
to A.D. 1798
Witnesses
The followers
SDA Church
of Christ living
Group of and not just for
SDA Church at the end of
Remnant (v. faithful Christians, but
Sabbath history
17) Christians in the Jews, Muslims,
Ellen G. White Spiritual Gift
last days Buddhists, and
of the entire
Hindus
Christian age
I turn now to offer a general conclusion which includes summary

and general comparison and assessment. Moreover, I will propose some
suggestions for possible improvement in the Seventh-day Adventist
interpretation of the Revelation.
Endnotes
1. Hans K. LaRondelle, “The Historicist Method in Adventist

Interpretation,” Spes Christiana 21 (2010): 79–89, 86.
2. Ibid, 86. DARCOM is the acronym for “Daniel and Revelation

Committee” of the Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists.
3. For biographical references, see George R. Knight, “Kenneth A.

Strand: Editor, Author, Pastor, Teacher, Administrator, and Friend,” AUSS 33,
no. 2 (Autumn 1995): 167-170; and Jerry Moon, “Farewell to Kenneth Strand,
235
1927-1997,” AUSS 36, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 5-6.
4. In 1967, under Siegfried Horn, Strand became an associate editor.

Whereas for 14 years he was the sole editor of AUSS, for 6 years he was coeditor
with George R. Knight (1988-1991) and Nancy J. Vyhmeister (1991-1994).
5. A nearly complete list of his publications can be found in Nancy

J. Vyhmeister and Jennifer Kharbteng, “Bibliography of Kenneth A. Strand
Through 1994,” AUSS 33, no. 2 (Autumn 1995): 171–183.
6. Strand published three books on the Revelation (see chap. 1, notes

82, 83).
7. On his proposal of the literary structure of the Apocalypse, see

Kenneth A. Strand, “Literary Structure: A Key to Interpreting the Revelation,”
Ministry, March 1977; idem, “A Further Note on the Covenantal Form in the
Book of Revelation,” AUSS 21, no. 3 (Autumn 1983): 251-264; idem, “The Eight
Basic Visions in the Book of Revelation,” AUSS 25, no. 1 (Spring 1987): 107-121;
idem, “Overcomer: A Study in the Macrodynamic of Theme Development in
the Book of Revelation,’ AUSS 22, no. 3 (Autumn 1984): 317-325; idem, “The
Victorious-Introduction Scenes in the Visions in the Book of Revelation,” AUSS
25, no. 3 (Autumn 1987): 267-288; idem, “The Eight Basic Visions,” in Daniel
and Revelation Committee Series, vol. 6, Symposium on Revelation–Book I,
ed. Frank B. Holbrook, 7 vols. (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute,
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 35-49; idem, “Victorious
Introduction Scenes,” in Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, vol. 6,
Symposium on Revelation–Book I, ed. Frank B. Holbrook, 7 vols. (Silver Spring,
MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists,
1992), 51-72. For his articles on other topics in the Apocalypse, see idem, “The
Book of Revelation: A Review Article on Some Recent Literature,” AUSS 11, no.
2 (July 1973): 181-193; idem, “Investigative Judgment in the Book of Revelation,”
Pacific Union Recorder, October 13, 1980, 2; idem, “The Two Witnesses of Rev
11:3-12,” AUSS 19, no. 2 (Summer 1981): 27-135; idem, “Two Aspects of Babylon’s
Judgment Portrayed in Revelation 18,” AUSS 20, no. 1 (Spring 1982): 53-60;
idem, “The Two Olive Trees of Zechariah 4 and Revelation 11,” AUSS 20, no.
3 (Autumn 1982): 257-261; idem, “Apocalyptic Prophecy and the Church,”
Ministry (October 1983): 20–23; December 1983, 14-18; idem, “An Overlooked
Old-Testament Background to Revelation 11:1,” AUSS 22, no. 3 (Autumn 1984):
317-125; idem, “Some Modalities of Symbolic Usage in Revelation 18,” AUSS 24,
no. 1 (Spring 1986): 37-46; idem, “Foundational Principle of Interpretation,” in
Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, vol. 6, Symposium on Revelation–Book
I, ed. Frank B. Holbrook, 7 vols. (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute,
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 3-39; and idem, “The
Seven Heads: Do They Represent Roman Emperors?” in Daniel and Revelation
236
Committee Series, Symposium on Revelation—Book II, ed. Frank B. Holbrook

(Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-
day Adventists, 1992), 177-206.
8. “Such interpreters have apparently drawn the conclusion that

because seven is a significant number symbol in Revelation—occurring, for
instance, in four explicit septets: the churches, seals, trumpets, and bowls—
there is also supposed to be a total of seven basic visions. For examples, of
the seven-vision approach, see Ernst Lohmeyer, Die Offenbarung des Johannes
(Tübingen, 1926); John Wick Bowman, The Drama of the Book of Revelation
(Philadelphia, 1955) and ‘Revelation,’ in IDB 4:64-65; and Thomas S. Kepler,
The Book of Revelation (New York, 1957). Lohmeyer and Bowman find septets,
as well, within all of their seven major visions, though they lack agreement
even as to these seven visions themselves. Kepler, on the other hand, finds only
a total of ten subsections (called ‘scenes’) within his seven major visions (major
visions whose textual boundaries vary only slightly from the seven major
visions outlined by Bowman).” Kenneth A. Strand, “The Eight Basic Visions in
the Book of Revelation,” AUSS 25, no. 1 (1987): 107, 109.
9. Kenneth A. Strand, “Toward a Theology of the Book of Revelation,

Part I: The Hermeneutical Foundation” (Paper presented at DARCOM, February
1990); idem, “Toward a Theology of the Book of Revelation Part II: Some Basic
Themes” (Paper presented at DARCOM, February 1990); and idem, “Toward a
Theology of the Book of Revelation Part III: Aspects of Judgment and Reward”
(Paper presented at DARCOM, February 1990); all pre-publication manuscripts
in the DARCOM files in CAR.
10. Strand, “Foundational Principles of Interpretation,” 3-34.
11. Strand, “Toward a Theology of the Book of Revelation, Part II,” 1-42.
12. Ibid., 2.
13. Ibid., 3.
14. Ibid., 3-5.
15. Such as the “Doctrine of God,” the “Doctrine of Revelation and

Inspiration,” “Christology,” “Pneumatology,” “Ecclesiology,” “Anthropology,”
“Hamartology,” “Soteriology,” “Angelology,” and “Eschatology.” He added,
“Categories of this type do not naturally emerge from the Apocalypse, of course,
even though that Book has a richness of material on those topics-material that
readily could be pulled together into valid, helpful, and useful syntheses.” Ibid.,
5-6.
237
16. He said that “perhaps no interpreter can, or even should, be so

thoroughly ‘objective’ as to make himself wholly devoid of any attitude toward
the book of Revelation before undertaking a detailed literary analysis of
it.” Kenneth A. Strand, Interpreting the Book of Revelation: Hermeneutical
Guidelines, with Brief Introduction to Literary Analysis, 2nd ed. (Naples, FL:
Ann Arbor Publishers, 1979), 41.
17. Ibid., 14.
18. Daniel Thambyrajah Niles, As Seeing the Invisible: A Study of the

Book of Revelation (New York: Harper, 1961); Paul Sevier Minear, I Saw a New
Earth: An Introduction to the Visions of the Apocalypse (Washington, DC:
Corpus Books, 1968); cf. Strand, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, 38-40.
19. Strand believed that Ellen G. White used this kind sort of approach,
offering “a striking example” from Acts of the Apostles, pp. 585-589. Moreover,
he said that Edwin R. Thiele pointed out that “an ascription of praise from
Revelation 5 is applied in her [E. White’s] writings at least five different ways or
to five different occasions.” Ibid., 14-16.
20. Strand, “The Eight Basic Visions,” 41-42.
21. Box 16, Fld 2 and 3, Kenneth A. Strand Collection (Collection 192),
CAR.
22. Strand, “Toward a Theology of the Book of Revelation Part II,” 11.
23. Gordon M. Hyde, ed., A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics

(Washington, DC: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974), iv.
24. Two books were published for use by the 2,000 delegates who
attended: Gordon M. Hyde, ed., A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics
(Washington, DC: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974); and
North American Bible Conference, 1974: Notebook Prepared by the General
Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Biblical Research Committee (Washington,
DC: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974). Willis J. Hackett,
“Bible Conference in 1974,” Ministry, April 1974, 37.
25. Hans K. LaRondelle, “Interpretation of Prophetic and Apocalyptic

Prophecy,” in A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics, ed. Gordon M. Hyde
(Washington, DC: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974), 225-
249; William G. C. Murdoch, “Principles of Interpretation of Prophetic and
Apocalyptic Prophecy,” in North American Bible Conference, 1974. In the
preface of the notebook appeared the following declaration: “Although [all]
238
these presentations have been developed within and reviewed by the Biblical
Research Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, they
reflect the views of the individual contributors. Since the Adventist Church has
arrived at its present doctrinal and interpretational positions by a process of
consensus rather than by one of dicta, it is hardly necessary to state that these
Notebook presentations are in no way official pronouncements of the Church.”
North American Bible Conference, 1974, ii.
26. For example: Gerhard F. Hasel, “General Principles of Interpretation,”

in A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics, ed. Gordon M. Hyde (Washington,
DC: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974), 163-193; Bernard E.
Seton, “Interpretation of Biblical History, Wisdom, and Poetry,” in A Symposium
on Biblical Hermeneutics, 195-207; William G. C. Murdoch, “Interpretation
of Symbols, Types, Allegories, and Parables,” in A Symposium on Biblical
Hermeneutics, 209-223; Siegfried H. Horn, “Biblical Archaeology as Aid to
Biblical Exegesis,” in North American Bible Conference, 1974; and Gerhard F.
Hasel, “The Song of the Vineyard: (A Case Study in Biblical Interpretation),” in
North American Bible Conference, 1974.
27. J[ulius] L[afeyette] Tucker, Study Notes on the Book of Revelation

(Redlands, CA: The Quiet Hour, 1976). This writing first appeared in the form
of a handout as J[ulius] L[afeyette] Tucker, “The Quiet Hour”: Study Notes on
the Revelation (Oakland, CA: The Quiet Hour, [1941?]). For Tucker’s biography,
see Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996 ed., s.v. “Julius Lafeyette Tucker.”
28. Tucker, Study Notes on the Book of Revelation, 5.
29. Roy Allan Anderson wrote the foreword. Verlene DeWitt Youngberg,
The Revelation of Jesus Christ to His People (Keene, TX: Southwestern Color
Graphics, Southwestern Union College, 1977).
30. Jean R. Zurcher, Christ of the Revelation (Nashville: Southern

Publishing, 1980). For Zurcher’s biography, see “Jean Zurcher,” AR, January 29,
1981, 2; “Jean Zurcher [obituary citation],” AR, July 24, 2003, 30.
31. Desmond Ford, Crisis! A Commentary on the Book of Revelation, 3

vols. (Newcastle, CA: Desmond Ford Publications, 1982). The first volume is an
introduction, the second volume is the commentary on Revelation, and third
volume is the index prepared by Colin T. Greenlaw. For an apologetic of Ford’s
biography see, Milton R. Hook, Desmond Ford: Reformist Theologian, Gospel
Revivalist (Riverside, CA: Adventist Today Foundation, 2008).
32. Ford, Crisis! 1:v.
239
33. Ford is not a SDA Church member now. Arthur Patrick, e-mail
message to author, January 30, 2012.
34. Ford, Crisis!, 2:834-835. The works listed were Strand, Interpreting
the Book of Revelation.; Edwin R. Thiele, Outline Studies in Revelation; and
Louis F. Were, The Certainty of the Third Angel’s Message: Proved by Important
Principles of Prophetic Interpretation (Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing
Company, 1945).
35. Ford affirmed, “I was much influenced by Were.” Desmond Ford,

e-mail message to author, February 2, 2012; cf. Hook, Desmond Ford, 35, 92,
100-102.
36. Ford, Crisis!, 2:14, 92, 377. In an e-mail to author, February 2, 2012,
Ford wrote, “I don’t remember seeing a commentary by Price on Revelation.”
Of course, Price’s commentary on Revelation was never published, so was more
easily forgotten.
37. Ford, Crisis! 1:164.
38. (1) “Love Letters to an Army on the March” (Rev 1-3); (2) “Warrior-
Horses from the Throne of the Universe” (Rev 4-7); (3) “Trumpet Calls to
Surrender” (Rev 8-11); (4) “Despatches from the Conflict” (Rev 12-14); (5)
“Amnesty Ends, and Court-Martials Begin” (Rev 15-16); (6) “Return of the
Conquerors” (Rev 17-20); (7) “The Spoils: The Pearl of Great Price, and the
Bright and Morning Star” (Rev 21-22).
39. Ibid., 2:506.
40. Ibid., 1:39.
41. Ibid., 1:39-40.
42. Ibid., 1:40.
43. Ibid.
44. Ibid., 1:47.
45. Ibid., 1:50.
46. Ibid., 1:51.
47. “Scripture passages which cast special light on these chapters

include the following‒Joshua 6:3-5; Gen 1; Rev 16:17, 20; Amos 3:6; 1 Cor 15:52;
240
1 Thess 4:16; Mat 24:31; Lev 25:9; 2 Chron 29:25-28; Lev 16:17; Num 10:4-8; Exo
19:19; Num 29:1; Exo 9:8-10, 22-26; Joel 1:14, 15; 2:1-16; Eze 10:2; Psa 62:1, 5.” Ibid.,
2:428.
48. “In apocalyptic, the mind is informed through the eye of the
imagination, and he who treats these images as though formulae will soon be
lost in irrelevancies.” Ibid., 2:428-429.
49. Ibid., 2:435.
50. Ibid., 2:437.
51. Ibid., 2:399-459; 497-500.
52. Ibid., 2:440, 453, 458. Ford affirms that “recent publications on
the Book of Revelation have followed my own commentary (Crisis! published
in 1982) in repudiating August 11, 1840, traditional expositions of the seals
and trumpets, and many other interpretations once held sacred among us.”
Desmond Ford, “Ellen White Was Right: ‘Increasing Light Is to Shine Upon
Us,’” Spectrum 26, no. 4 (January 1998): 60.
53. Ford, Crisis! 2:504.
54. Ford affirms that Rev 12:4 is a reference to Dan 8:10. “It is important
to realize that this chapter, and the next two [Rev 13, 14], have the same theme
as Dan 8:10-14—the war on the people of God, upon the law and the truth of
the holy sanctuary, and the ultimate vindicating judgment.” Ibid., 2:449-551.
55. Ibid., 2:552.
56. Ibid., 2:556.
57. The final report of DARCOM says, “The Committee’s original

assignment dealt with challenges from a preterist/higher-critical perspective
in Daniel. But its more recent studies in Revelation have led it to examine
what might be characterized as variant forms of futurism.” Richard W. Lesher
and Frank B. Holbrook, “Daniel and Revelation Committee Final Report,” in
Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, Symposium on Revelation-Book II,
ed. Frank B. Holbrook (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General
Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 460.
58. William Johnsson wrote, “Although the Daniel and Revelation

Committee is new, its roots are in the Daniel Committee that met from 1962
to 1966. While 45 papers were discussed by the original Daniel Committee,
241
no minutes of meetings were kept, nor was any report eventually submitted,
because the committee could not reach unanimous agreement. The new
committee is wider in scope of subject area, in harmony with Ellen White’s
counsel that Daniel and Revelation should be studied in conjunction.” William
Johnsson, “Theological Committees Meet at Andrews University,” AR, 16 July
1981, 16. “Lesher continued to serve as chairman of the Daniel and Revelation
Committee even after George Reid replaced him as director of BRI upon Lesher’s
becoming president of Andrews University in 1984.” C. Mervyn Maxwell, “In
Confirmation of Prophetic Interpretation,” JATS 2, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 139–51,
139.
59. “W. R. Lesher (chairman), Frank Holbrook (secretary), N. E.

Andreasen, D. D. Baldwin, I. T. Blazen, R. F. Dederen, W. D. Eva, Madelyn
Haldeman, G. F. Hasel, W. G. Johnsson, H. K. LaRondelle, C. M. Maxwell,
James Melancon, Beatrice Neall, Enoch Oliveira, R. W. Olson, Jan Paulsen,
Elbio Pereyra, W. L. Richards, K. A. Strand, and E. E. Zinke.” Johnsson,
“Theological Committees Meet at Andrews University,” 16.
60. “Although the writings of Ellen G. White were carefully considered by

the individual authors, the committee was requested to focus on the Scriptural
basis for belief.” Lesher and Holbrook, “Daniel and Revelation Committee
Final Report,” 452.
61. Frank B. Holbrook, ed., with the collaboration of Richard Lehmann,

Symposium on Revelation–Book I, Daniel and Revelation Committee Series,
vol. 6 (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference
of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), xiv. The articles are: Kenneth A. Strand,
“Foundational Principles of Interpretation,” 3-34; Strand, “The Eight Basic
Visions,” 35-49; Strand, “Victorious-Introduction Scenes,” 51-72; Jon Paulien,
“Interpreting Revelation’s Symbolism,” 73-97; Richard M. Davidson, “Sanctuary
Typology,” 99-130; and Richard Lehmann, “Relationships between Daniel and
Revelation,” 131-144.
62. Richard W. Lesher and Frank B. Holbrook, “Issues in the Book of

Revelation: A Progress Report from the Daniel and Revelation Committee,”
AR, 3 August 1989, 13-15; Frank B. Holbrook, “Issues in the Book of Revelation:
A Consensus by the Daniel and Revelation Committee, Which Is Comprised
of Biblical Scholars from Throughout the World Divisions of the Adventist
Church, on Some Aspects of the Seals and Trumpets,” Ministry, January 1991,
9-11; “Issues in Revelation DARCOM Report,” in Symposium on Revelation–
Book I, 175-181.
63. “Jesus employed the historicist method when He announced the

time of His ministry as a fulfillment of prophecy (Mark 1:15; cf. Dan 9:25), and
242
later, when He referred to the prophesied ruin of Jerusalem and the Temple
(Mat 24:15; cf. Dan 9:26). The Millerites, our immediate forebears, were
historicists, as were also the sixteenth- century Protestant Reformers.” Lesher
and Holbrook, “Issues in the Book of Revelation,” 13; Holbrook, “Issues in the
Book of Revelation,” 9; “Issues in Revelation DARCOM Report,” 175.
64. “Although Bible students differ on the precise point where the
dividing line should be placed, serious study by Adventist scholars such as
Kenneth A. Strand (Interpreting the Book of Revelation, 2nd ed., 1979), C. M.
Maxwell (God Cares, vol. 2, 1985), and W. H. Shea (various articles in Andrews
University Seminary Studies) fully confirms this literary division and its
consequent effect on interpretation.” Lesher and Holbrook, “Issues in the Book
of Revelation,” 14; Holbrook, “Issues in the Book of Revelation,” 10.
65. Lesher and Holbrook, “Issues in the Book of Revelation,” 14;

Holbrook, “Issues in the Book of Revelation,” 10; “Issues in Revelation DARCOM
Report,” 177.
66. After examining the apotelesmatic principle at length, the Sanctuary

Review Committee rejected it in 1980. See “Statement on Desmond Ford
Document,” Ministry, 20-22; also DARCOM in Gerhard F. Hasel, “Fulfillments
of Prophecy,” in Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, 70 Weeks, Leviticus,
Nature of Prophecy, ed. Frank B. Holbrook (Washington, DC: Biblical Research
Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1986), 288-322.
Neither are dual/multiple fulfillments of Daniel and Revelation supported by
Ellen G. White; see General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Biblical
Research Institute, Ellen G. White and the Interpretation of Daniel and
Revelation (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, [1989]).
67. For example, the prophecy of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, Joel
2; the prophecy of the virgin birth, Isa 7. Lesher and Holbrook, “Issues in the
Book of Revelation,” 14; Holbrook, “Issues in the Book of Revelation,” 10; “Issues
in Revelation DARCOM Report,” 177.
68. Lesher and Holbrook, “Issues in the Book of Revelation,” 15;

Holbrook, “Issues in the Book of Revelation,” 11; “Issues in Revelation DARCOM
Report,” 180-181.
69. Holbrook, Symposium on Revelation–Book I, xiv.
70. Jon K. Paulien, “Seals and Trumpets: Some Current Discussions,” in

Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, vol. 6, Symposium on Revelation–Book
I, ed. Frank B. Holbrook, 7 vols. (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute,
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 183-198.
243
71. Ibid., 185.
72. Ibid., 198.
73. Specifically on the exegesis of Rev 12, Johnsson wrote five pages.
William Johnsson, “The Saints’ End-Time Victory Over the Forces of Evil,” in
Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, Symposium on Revelation-Book II,
ed. Frank B. Holbrook (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General
Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992), 15-20.
74. Ibid., 18.
75. Ibid., 36-39.
76. In 2000, JATS again issued one combined number on eschatology.
77. See pp. 210-212, above.
78. Lesher and Holbrook, “Daniel and Revelation Committee Final

Report,” 460.
79. William H. Shea, “Historicism, the Best Way to Interpret Prophecy,”

Adventists Affirm 17, no. 1 (Spring, 2003): 23.
80. Ibid.
81. Examples: Robert W. Hauser, Give Glory to Him: The Sanctuary in

the Book of Revelation (Angwin, CA: R. W. Hauser, 1983); Marian G. Berry, A
Warning (Brushton, NY: TEACH Services, 1990); Larry Wilson, The Revelation
of Jesus, 2nd ed. (Brushton, NY: TEACH Services, 1992).
82. “The [futurist] group’s interpretations of the Book of Revelation

also had problems [as had their interpretations of Daniel]. They advocated
that the 1260 days of Revelation 12:6 were symbolic and to be interpreted by
the year-day principle, but the 3½ times of 12:14, in the same chapter, should
be taken as literal and still in the future. Yet the two verses contain the same
actors (the woman as the church and Satan opposed to her), the same actions
(fleeing from persecution,) and the same locations (the wilderness to which the
woman fled). Therefore, they should be seen as the same prophecy with the
same historical fulfillment. Actually, they form a bracket around the central
great controversy view in Revelation 12:7-9.” William H. Shea, “Historicism, the
Best Way to Interpret Prophecy,” 24.
S. Lawrence Maxwell, as editor of Adventists Affirm, acclaimed that
“unfortunately a few Adventists, in the last couple of decades, have suggested
244
that we should abandon the historicist approach and adopt preterism or

futurism.” S. Lawrence Maxwell, “How Should We Interpret Bible Prophecy?”
Adventists Affirm 17, no. 1 (Spring 2003): 4.
83. Strand, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, 14.
84. Frank B. Holbrook, “Understanding Revelation,” These Times, July 1,

1980, 32; see also idem, “What Prophecy Means to This Church,” Ministry, July
1983, 21.
85. Hardy focused more on Daniel as a result of achieving his master’s

degree (see www.historicism.org). To Hardy, historicism, as the term is used
in his thesis, is “an application to prophecy of a principle whose associations
are quite broad. The application is that Daniel’s prophecies, and Dan 11 in
particular, make a valid claim to represent the course of human history in its
essential features from the time the visions were received until the second
coming of Christ. The principle, on the other hand, is that all of God’s dealings
with mankind are characterized by ongoing involvement and take place within
an extended historical matrix of ordinary experience.” Frank W. Hardy, “An
Historicist Perspective on Daniel 11” (M.A. thesis, SDA Theological Seminary,
AU, 1983), 65.
86. Just mentioning some examples, the interpreter of prophecy should

keep in mind that “the Bible claims God’s power to predict the future (Isa 46:10)”;
“prophecy has a moral purpose. It was not written merely to satisfy curiosity
about the future”; “the focus of much prophecy is on Christ (both His first and
second advents), the church, and the end-time”; “the norms for interpreting
prophecy are found within the Bible itself”; “apocalyptic [prophecy] emphasizes
the sovereignty of God and His control over history”; “apocalyptic prophecy
presents the course of history from the time of the prophet to the end of the
world”; “apocalyptic prophecy is highly symbolic and should be interpreted
accordingly”; and so on. “Actions of General Interest from the 1986 Annual
Council--1,” AR, January 22, 1987, 19.
87. Kai Arasola, The End of Historicism: Millerite Hermeneutic of Time

Prophecies in the Old Testament (Uppsala, Sweden: University of Uppsala,
1990).
88. In his review of the book, Damsteegt affirmed that the end of
historicism “has not been supported by the facts.” P. Gerard Damsteegt, review
of The End of Historicism, by Kai J. Arasola,” AUSS 29, no. 3 (Autumn 1991): 264.
Pfandl declared that “what Arasola says in his dissertation is that historicism
reached its peak with the Millerite movement and then declined.” Gerhard
Pfandl, “Is Historicism Dead?” Record (South Pacific Division), August 22, 1998, 8.
245
89. Arasola, The End of Historicism, 28.
90. Lesher and Holbrook, “Daniel and Revelation Committee Final

Report,” 453.
91. A detail that must be pointed out is that the content under the title
“Historical (Historicist) View of Prophecy” in the editions of 1966 and 1976
of the SDA Encyclopedia is the same—two paragraphs—whereas the content
under the title “Historicism” in the edition of 1996 consists of seven paragraphs.
Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1966 ed., s.v. “Historical (Historicist) View
of Prophecy,” 524; ibid., 1976 ed., s.v. “Historical (Historicist) View of Prophecy,”
587; cf. Historicism “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. . .
. 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.” Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 1996 ed., s.v. “Historicism,”
698-699.
92. For instance: Steve Wohlberg, “Jesuit Futurism or Protestant

Historicism,” Our Firm Foundation, September 2001, 12-15; Joel N. Musvosvi,
“The Issue of Genre and Apocalyptic Prophecy,” Asia Adventist Seminary Studies
5 (2002): 43-60; Shea, “Historicism, the Best Way to Interpret Prophecy,” 22-
34; Reimar Vetne, “A Definition and Short History of Historicism as a Method
for Interpreting Daniel and Revelation,” JATS 14, no. 2 (Fall 2003): 1-14; Jon
Paulien, “The End of Historicism? Reflections on the Adventist Approach
to Biblical Apocalyptic—Part One,” JATS 14, no. 2 (Fall 2003): 15-43; Hans K.
LaRondelle, “The Heart of Historicism,” Ministry, September, 2005, 22-23, 25-
27; John Thomas McLarty, “Intellectual Adventism,” Adventist Today 14, no.
2 (March-April 2006): 18-20; Frank W. Hardy, “Is Historicism Biblically Valid
for Interpreting Revelation? A Study of Revelation 4-5 and 19a,” paper written
August 8, 2006, http://www.historicism.org/Documents/Lecture1Rev4-5.pdf
(accessed March 13, 2010), later modified as Frank W. Hardy, “Historicism and
the Judgment: A Study of Revelation 4-5 and 19a,” Paper modified April 15,
2010, http://www.historicism.org/Documents/Lecture1Rev4-5.pdf (accessed
January 12, 2012); Jon Paulien, “The End of Historicism? The Adventist
Approach to Biblical Apocalyptic—Part Two,” JATS 17, no. 1 (Spring 2006): 180-
208; Richard M. Davidson, “Biblical Principles for Interpreting Apocalyptic
Prophecy,” in Prophetic Principles: Crucial Exegetical, Theological, Historical &
Practical Insights, ed. Ron du Preez (Lansing, MI: Michigan Conference of SDA;
printed, Berrien Springs, MI: Litho Tech Graphic Services, 2007), 43-74; Alberto
246
R. Timm, “Miniature Symbolization and the Year-day Principle,” updated

paper in Prophetic Principles, 233-270, from Alberto R. Timm, “Miniature
Symbolization and the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation,” AUSS
42, no. 1 (Spring 2004): 149-167; Richard A. Sabuin, “Historicism: The Adventist
Approach? A Response to the Challenges to Historicism,” JAAS 11, no. 2 (2008):
159-174; Timothy R. Perenich, “Biblical Prophetic Interpretation: The Case for
Historicism and Exegesis,” paper written on September 8, 2010, at SDATS-AU;
LaRondelle, “The Historicist Method in Adventist Interpretation,” 79-89; and
Darrel Lindensmith, “Desmond Ford and Historicism,” Adventist Today, Spring
2011, 16-17, 29.
93. “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. . . . No combination of these three methods [preterism, futurism,
and historicism] has ever been successful.” Shea, “Historicism, the Best Way to
Interpret Prophecy,” 22.
94. Vetne, “A Definition and Short History of Historicism as a Method

for Interpreting Daniel and Revelation,” 4.
95. Ibid., 7.
96. Paulien, “The End of Historicism? Reflections on the Adventist

Approach to Biblical Apocalyptic—Part One,” 42.
97. “It was felt that the seven letters portion of the book (Rev 2-3)
reads most naturally along the lines of the New Testament epistles; the seven
seals (Rev 6-7) bore the character of classical prophecy, along the lines of Matt
24; and the seven trumpets (Rev 8-11) were the most apocalyptic in nature.
Upon further reflection in light of recent scholarship, I would today classify
the letters as epistles, with some elements of classical prophecy, the seals as
mystical apocalyptic with elements of classical prophecy, and the trumpets as
essentially historical apocalyptic. Further refinement of these categories and
further examination of the evidence is needed.” Ibid., 39.
98. Sabuin presents literary indicators for a historicist interpretation

of the Apocalypse. “Revelation covers ‘a comprehensive sweep of events.’ It
presents (1) events that begin with a local application to the first reader of the
first century A.D. that at the same time cover the timeline of history; (2) events
that happen through the historical timeline from the time of the visionary up
to the eschaton; (3) events that will happen at the end of the history of the old
heaven and earth that continues in eternity.” Sabuin, “Historicism,” 173-174.
247

87; see also LaRondelle, “The Heart of Historicism.”
100. Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive

Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 2006), 57. Gordon Fee, another well-known scholar in New Testament
exegesis, limited the use of the term exegesis in his book “to refer to historical
investigation into the meaning of the biblical text. The presupposition lying
behind this task is that the biblical books had ‘authors’ and ‘readers,’ and that
the authors intended their readers to understand what they wrote. . . . Exegesis
therefore answers the question, What did the biblical author mean? It has
to do both with what he said (the content itself) and why he said it at any
given point (the literal context)—as much as that might be discovered, given
our distance in time, language, and culture. Furthermore, exegesis is primarily
concerned with intentionality: What did the author intend his original readers
to understand?” He adds that “hermeneutics has come to focus more on
meaning as an existential reality. . . . I have chosen to limit any use of the term
to this more restricted sense of ‘contemporary meaning’ or ‘application.’. . .
The immediate aim of the biblical student is to understand the biblical text.
Exegesis, however, should not be an end in itself.” [italics in original].” Gordon
D. Fee, New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors, 3rd ed.
(Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 1.
101. Hans K. LaRondelle, The Israel of God in Prophecy: Principles of

Prophetic Interpretation, Andrews University Monographs, vol. 13 (Berrien
Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1983), xii.
102. Gerhard Pfandl, The Prophetic Gift (Adult Sabbath School Bible
Study Guide) (Silver Spring, MD: The Office of the Adult Bible Study Guide,
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, January–March 2009), 89.
103. “The contemporary situation is elucidated by learning all one can

about the audience and its social setting, about the concerns which prompted
the author to write, and about parallel literature. Of increasing importance
is the evidence that can be gathered from archeology and from historical and
sociological analyses. For Revelation, an examination of other apocalyptic
writings is particularly helpful.” Jon K. Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method,
and the Interpretation of Revelation 8:7-12” (PhD diss., AU, 1987), 157-158.
105. Ibid., 80-87.
248
106. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of

Revelation, 2nd ed., 9-11.
107. Ibid., 9.
108. Ibid., 10-11.
109. His parents are Kurt and Gertrude Paulien.
110. “New Pastors,” The Atlantic Union Gleaner, April 27, 1976, 11-12;
“Newscope: LLU Appoints New Dean for New School of Religion,” Scope, Fall/
Winter 2007-2008, 40.
111. “1978 Greater New York Ordination Services,” The Atlantic Union
Gleaner, 24 October 1978, 8-9.
112. The conclusions on the publications of Jon Paulien are taken from
“Publications Record” (update 2011), sent by Paulien to author.
113. Jon K. Paulien, El Armagedón está a las puertas: ¿tienes puesta la

armadura? (Madrid, España: Editorial Safeliz, 2009). Marcos Blanco, editor-
in-chief of South America Spanish Publishing House, says, “For some reason,
his writings [Paulien] have not been attractive for either ACES [Asociación Casa
Editora Sudamericana] or for APIA [Asociación Publicadora Inter Americana],
or for Pacific Press, which are the major publishers in Spanish.” Marcos Blanco,
e-mail message to author, February 24, 2012.
114. Paulien, The Deep Things of God, 8. For the list of books on
Revelation, see above, chap. 1, fn. 100.
115. Jon K. Paulien, John: Jesus Gives Life to a New Generation, Bible
Amplifier Series, George Knight, ed. (Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1995), Spanish
2001, Korean 2004; NAD academy books: idem, John and the Devotional Life:
Student Edition, North American Division Office of Education, Crossroads
Series (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1999); idem, John and the Devotional Life:
Teacher Edition, North American Division Office of Education, Crossroads
Series (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1999); idem, John and the Devotional Life:
Teacher Resource Manual, North American Division Office of Education,
Crossroads Series (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1999); idem, John: The Beloved
Gospel (Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 2003), Spanish and Japanese (2003).
116. Jon K. Paulien, Present Truth in the Real World: The Adventist
Struggle to Keep and Share Faith in a Secular Society (Boise, ID: Pacific Press,
1993), German 1996, Russian 2000, Czech 2005; idem, Knowing God in the Real
249
World (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2000), Portuguese 2008; idem, The Day That
Changed the World: Seeking God After September 11 (Hagerstown, MD: Review
and Herald, 2002); idem, Meet God Again for the First Time (Hagerstown,
MD: Review and Herald, 2003), Finnish 2003; idem, Everlasting Gospel, Ever-
changing World: Introducing Jesus to a Skeptical Generation (Nampa, ID: Pacific
Press, 2008), German 2008.
117. The count of the number of publications is the result of the list
titled “Paulien’s Publications [by 2011],” sent by Jon Paulien to author.
118. “Ammiel,” “Armageddon,” “Gaddiel,” “Gemalli,” “Mnason,” “Nahbi,”

“Nicodemu,” “Parmenas,” “Prochorus,” “Publius,” “Sodi,” “Timon,” “Trophimus,”
and “Vophsi” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Friedman, 6 vols.
(New York: Doubleday, 1992).
119. In the Andrews Study Bible (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews

University Press, 2010), Paulien authored the study notes for John, 1st and 2nd
Thessalonians, and Revelation.
120. Jon Paulien, interview by author, Berrien Springs, MI, October 24,
2008.
121. Jon Paulien, interview by author, Berrien Springs, MI, October 20,
2011.
122. Jon Paulien, e-mail message to author, February 26, 2012.
123. Samuele Bacchiocchi, “Special Offer on Prof. Jon Paulien’s 5 Albums

(60 CD Disks), called “The Bible Explorer Series on Revelation,” http://www.
biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/et_155.htm, [accessed July 09, 2010];
Kent Kingston and Jarrod Stackelroth, “New Revelation Series Reaps Results,”
Record (South Pacific Division), April 17, 2010.
124. Those include books, articles, reviews, referee for articles,

presentations, blogs, tapes, videos, CDs, DVDs, interviews, presentations on
radio and TV, and others.
125. In his PhD program file, in a 600-word statement, Paulien set a goal
to reach out to lay people. Through the years, he seems to have achieved this
goal. He claims that “I never had the idea of being a great outside scholar and
researcher. I could have done that, but felt that there were a lot more people
doing that than taking the fruits of that and putting it into language that the
common people could understand.” Jon Paulien, e-mail message to author,
February 26, 2012. Ranko Stefanovič says “Jon’s presence in scholarly circles on
250
the Apocalypse has contributed in significant measure to the fact that today
NT scholars take Adventist scholarship on the Apocalypse in a more serious
way.” Ranko Stefanovič, “How an Adventist Scholar Writes a Commentary
on Revelation,” in Adventist Society for Religious Studies: Annual Meeting
(Sheraton Boston Hotel and Towers, 1999), 83.
126. Paulien web page, http://thebattleofarmageddon.com, started

December 2006.
127. One article in each of: The Layworker, College People, Adventist
Professional, Revista Teológica, Our Little Friend, Elder’s Digest, Journal
of Research on Christian Education, Journal of Adventist Education, Sinais
Dos Tempos, Shabbat Shalom, Biblical Research Reflections, Sabbath School
Leadership, Evangelical Missions Quarterly, and Adventisten.
128. One article in each of: DavarLogos, Adventist Review, Spes

Christiana, and International Conference on Creationism.
129. Jon K. Paulien, Keys to the Code: How to Study Revelation Without
Losing Your Mind, 12 lectures on audio-cassette, The Ambassador Group, 1996;
idem, Seven Churches and a Heavenly Vision: The Lamb and His Wayward
Saints, 12 lectures on audio-cassette, The Ambassador Group, 1996; idem, The
Seals and the Trumpets: God’s Horror Show, 12 lectures on audio-cassette, The
Ambassador Group, 1996; idem, Building to the Final Crisis: Things Get Worse
Before They Get Better, 12 lectures on audio-cassette, The Ambassador Group,
1996; idem, The End of All Things: It’s Worth the Wait, 12 lectures on audio-
cassette, The Ambassador Group, 1996; idem, Simply Revelation: A Beginner’s
Guide to the Most Challenging Book of the Bible, Four-hour DVD lecture series
on the Book of Revelation, Biblical Perspectives, 2007; Jon K. Paulien and
Graeme Bradford, Revelation, Hope, Meaning, Purpose, 12 DVDs, with each
DVD featuring 2 episodes, 24-episode Revelation DVD series, Adventist Media
Network, 2010.
130. Once each of: the Evangelical Theological Society, Geological

Society of American, University of Witwatersrand, Indiana University, Triple
Intertextuality of the Epistles Conference, the Pacifica Institute, and University
of Southern Maine.
131. Jon Paulien, e-mail message to author, February 26, 2012.
132. In 2004, he was the president of the Adventist Society for Religious
Studies.
251
133. In Friedensau University, Conference on Ministerial and

Theological Education, Adventist Society for Biblical Research, Seventh-
day Adventist Theological Association of South Africa, and South American
Biblical Theological Symposium.
134. “Newscope,” 40.
135. At the end of 2012, Paulien planned to start two commentaries, “one
for Facebook and the other for Twitter.” He expects that within five years or so,
it will reach 1,000 pages and be “virtually ready for print or e-book publication.”
Jon Paulien, e-mail message to author, February 26, 2012.
136. This is the first volume of a series on the “more scholarly and
apologetic study of the nature and themes of Revelation.” Jon K. Paulien, The
Gospel from Patmos: Everyday Insights for Living from the Last Book of the Bible
(Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2007), 8; idem, Armageddon at the Door
(Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2008).
137. Paulien, The Deep Things of God; idem, The Gospel from Patmos; idem,
Seven Keys: Unlocking the Secrets of Revelation (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2009).
138. Jon K. Paulien and Graeme Bradford. Revelation, Hope, Meaning,

Purpose—a 24-part DVD series ([Cooranbong, Australia]: Biblical Research
Committee of the South Pacific Division of the Seventh-day Adventist Church,
2010).
139. It must be mentioned that, in his dissertation, Paulien proposed

that the “exegetical method” is the best way to interpret the Apocalypse.
Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of Revelation
8:7-12,” 309-416.
140. Richard W. Guldin, review of The Deep Things of God: An Insider’s

Guide to the Book of Revelation, by Jon K. Paulien, AR, April 21, 2005, 29.
141. Paulien presents at least nine signs of the end to demonstrate that
Christians of the first century could conclude that those signs had been fulfilled
within their generation: (1) False messiahs, (2) “wars and rumors of wars,” (3)
famine, (4) earthquakes, (5) signs in the heavens, (6) persecution, (7) false
prophets, (8) preaching to the whole world, and (9) the great tribulation. In
the second chapter, he presents seven principles of prophetic interpretation. In
the third chapter, he evaluates three approaches to the Bible—biblical exegesis,
biblical theology, and systematic theology—concluding that to approach
Revelation it “is critical to begin with the method of exegesis.” Paulien, The
Deep Things of God, 5-78.
252
142. Ibid., 79-176.
143. For a review, see Ekkehard Müller, review of The Gospel from
Patmos: Everyday Insights for Living from the Last Book of the Bible, by Jon K.
Paulien, Ministry, January 2010, 26.
144. Paulien, The Gospel from Patmos, 8.
145. This was translated into Korean (2007), Latvian (2008), Russian
(2009), Chinese (2009), Czech (2009), and Slovak (2010), and republished by
Philippine Publishing House (2009).
146. There are only 5 endnotes in the whole book. Paulien, Seven Keys,
43-44.
147. Ibid., 21-44.
148. Ibid., 46-154.
149. (1) Revelation “is all about the Cross,” (2) “a major point of the
book of Revelation is the role of obedience,” (3) “Revelation is about living
accountably,” (4) “Revelation unmasks evil,” (5) “Revelation teaches us the need
to be discerning,” (6) “Revelation show us that the discernment we will need is
found in the Word of God,” (7) “we learn from Revelation that at the end, God
will have a people faithful to Him, though they may not be a popular people,”
and (8) “the final message of the book of Revelation is that God wins.” Ibid.,
155-158.
150. “Over 3,000 sets of the Revelation materials are being distributed
to the South Pacific Division, Unions and Conferences/Missions, with more
demand coming from the United States and other countries.” Kingston and
Stackelroth, “New Revelation Series Reaps Results,” 7.
151. For instance, groups of seven, the seven trumpets and the seven
bowls. The author also mentions the “duodirectionality,” namely looking both
ways. Paulien, The Deep Things of God, 112-122.
152. Ibid., 122.
153. Ibid., 121-133; Paulien, Seven Keys, 39-44.
154. Ibid., 42-43.
155. Paulien, The Deep Things of God, 28-31.
253
156. Jon K. Paulien, The Gospel from Patmos: Everyday Insights for
Living from the Last Book of the Bible (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
2007), 7; Paulien, The Deep Things of God, 60.
157. Jon Paulien, “The Hermeneutics of Biblical Apocalyptic,” in

Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach, ed. George W. Reid (Silver
Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, 2006), 250.
158. Paulien, Seven Keys, 16-17.
160. Ibid., 34-35.
161. Ibid., 42.
162. Ibid., 42-43.
163. Ibid., 43.
164. Ibid., 43-44.
165. Ibid., 44.
166. Ibid., 61.
167. Ibid.
169. Ibid., 21-24.
170. “In the book of Revelation, there are no citations of the Old
Testament and no quotations. There are only allusions and echoes.” Ibid., 24-
31; see also Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of
Revelation 8:7-12,” 165-194; idem, The Deep Things of God, 134-152.
171. Paulien, Seven Keys, 31-32; see also idem, The Deep Things of God,
153-176.
173. Ibid., 35-37.
254
174. Historical apocalyptic means “a sequence of events symbolized

by animals or metals or various other symbols.” Mystical apocalyptic means
“journeys to heaven and to hell.” Ibid., 37-39; see also Paulien, “The End of
Historicism? Reflections on the Adventist Approach to Biblical Apocalyptic—
Part One,” 34-41; idem, “The End of Historicism?” 180-200.
175. Paulien, Seven Keys, 39-44; see also idem, The Deep Things of God,
112-133.
176. It means “looking both ways,” namely “John embeds the introduction
of the next section into the conclusion of the previous one.” Paulien, Seven
Keys, 58.
177. Ibid., 83-86.
179. At least four clear points indicate that the trumpets are historical
apocalyptic, he says. (1) “The trumpets allude to the Old Testament extensively.”
(2) “They seem to echo the days of Creation.” (3) “They also echo the plagues of
the Exodus and the battle of Jericho.” And (4) “they seem to refer to the Feast of
Trumpets and the jubilee concept.” Paulien, Seven Keys, 90-91. Paulien points
out four characteristics of historical apocalyptic: (1) “Textual sequence markers,
(2) a consistent sequence of symbols and explanation, (3) a comprehensive
sweep of events, and (4) parallels with earlier historical apocalyptic.” Paulien,
“The End of Historicism?” 194.
180. Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of

Revelation 8:7-12,” 378-381.
181. Ibid., 387-389.
182. Ibid., 440-406.
183. Ibid., 414-417.
184. Paulien, “The Hermeneutics of Biblical Apocalyptic,” 262; idem,

“The End of Historicism?” 198.
185. George W. Reid, ed., Understanding Scripture: An Adventist

Approach (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference
of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005), 266.
255
186. Paulien, Seven Keys, 101-104; Reid, ed., Understanding Scripture,

266.
187. Paulien, Seven Keys, 103.
188. Ibid., 108-109.
189. “The final remnant will draw all those who are faithful to God into
one people to meet Jesus when He comes.” Ibid., 117.
190. See doctoral dissertations in chap. 1 at fn. 108 and 109.
191. Ekkehardt Müller, Der Erste und der Latzte: Studien zum Buch der
Offenbarung (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2011).
192. Stefanovič, “How an Adventist Scholar Writes a Commentary on

Revelation,” 83.
193. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 2nd ed., 637-640.
194. For instance, in the interpretation of Rev 1:10, “Lord’s day,” Stefanovič
suggested a twofold meaning. In the prophetic time period of 1260 years, he
did not offer a precise date-fixing in church history. In the interpretation of the
sea beast, he did not mention the papacy, and so on. Cf. Gerhard Pfandl, review
of Revelation of Jesus Christ,” by Ranko Stefanovič, College and University
Dialogue 17, no. 3 (2005): 31, 34.
195. The recommendation of Hans K. LaRondelle continued, but new

recommendations were given by Felix Cortez, Associate Professor of New
Testament Studies at the University of Montemorelos; Denis Fortin, Dean
and Professor at the SDA Theological Seminary, AU; Larry Lichtenwalter,
Senior pastor of Village SDA Church, Berrien Springs, Michigan, and adjunct
professor at SDA Theological Seminary; and Alberto R. Timm, Rector of the
Latin-America Adventist Theological Seminary. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus
Christ, back cover. The intention of Andrews University Press was to ask one
scholar from the Inter-American Division and one scholar from the South
American Division in order to reach out to the members of the SDA Church
of those two Divisions from the SDA Church. Ranko Stefanovič, interview by
author, Berrien Springs, MI, March 1, 2012.
196. In the next two paragraphs, he says, “A good commentary on

Revelation should not impose any particular approach on the text.” Ibid., 14.
In the first edition, he argues, “The exposition of the text for many historicists
is based primarily on the allegorical method, rather than on adequate Old
256
Testament background. . . . The exposition of the text must be controlled by

the intent of its author, who should tell us what we are supposed to find in it.
If the message of the studied text was primarily for John’s day, then it calls for
the preterist or idealist approach. On the other hand, if it discusses the very
end times, then its interpretation calls for a futurist approach. If the studied
text presents the events occurring throughout the course of history, however,
a sound interpretation calls for a historicist approach to the text−[eclectic
approach].” Ranko Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the
Book of Revelation (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2002), 11-12.
197. As a support for this conclusion, he quotes Robert H. Mounce, The

Book of Revelation, The New International Commentary on the New Testament
(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977), 43-44; cf. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus
Christ, 10; Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 2nd ed., 12.
198. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 2nd ed., 121, 125, 131, 136-137,
142, 147, and 155.
199. Ibid., 225, 227, 235, 242, 252, and 254.
200. “Seventh-day Adventists have regarded A.D. 538 as the year when
the church established itself as an ecclesiastical power to mark the beginning
of this prophetic period, and A.D. 1798 as the year to end it.” Ibid., 387; cf. 346,
392, and 411.
201. See, Edwin Earl Reynolds, review of Revelation of Jesus Christ:

Commentary on the Book of Revelation,” by Ranko Stefanovič, AUSS 48, no. 2
(Autumn 2010): 351-355; Edwin Earl Reynolds, “Resources,” Ministry, September,
2010, 27-28.
202. Reynolds, review of Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the

Book of Revelation, 352; cf. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 2nd ed., 354.
203. Reynolds, review of Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the

Book of Revelation, 352; cf. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 2nd ed., 346,
415.
204. “In fact, he has added arguments against the traditional

interpretation (425-426), namely, an identification of the papacy based on
gematria [italics in original], arguing instead for a purely figurative significance
based on a purported triple six, ‘a human number,’ which ‘stands for the satanic
triumvirate in contrast to the triple seven of the Godhead in Revelation 1:4-6.
. . . This leads to the conclusion that the number 666 functions as a parody of
the divine name of perfection’” (437). Reynolds, review of Revelation of Jesus
257
Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation, 353; cf. Stefanovič, Revelation of

Jesus Christ, 2nd ed., 425-428.
205. Reynolds, “Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of

Revelation,” 2nd ed., 355.
206. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 2nd ed., 37.
207. Ibid., 40-46.
208. “Still problematic is Stefanovič’s discussion of the structure of

Revelation. He has made no revision of this section other than to discuss the ‘I
heard’ and ‘I saw’ pattern, which does not affect his structuralizing of the book.
The problem is an inconsistency in the structure he proposes—or perhaps
I should say, in the structures he proposes, since they are not identical. He
begins by arguing that Richard M. Davidson and Jon Paulien ‘have convincingly
shown’ that there is a sevenfold structure in which ‘each of the seven major
divisions is introduced with a sanctuary scene’ (30). He goes on to turn this
sevenfold division into a chiastic structure in which there is a movement ‘from
earth to heaven and then back to earth again’ (31). He concludes, ‘This literary
arrangement indicates that chapters 12-14 form the central portion of the book.’
He further describes how there is ‘a definite progression’ that ‘moves from the
continual daily (tamid); services to the yearly services of the Old Testament
sanctuary’ (32) and how the annual feasts of the Hebrew cultic calendar function
as a model for the structure of the book (33). He concludes by suggesting
an eleven-part chiastic outline of Revelation that synchronizes ‘the chiastic
parallel segments,’ including the prologue and epilogue (37). The problem
is that each time he provides an outline, which he defends or proposes, it is
different in its details, beginning on p. 30 through his final outline ending on
p. 46. When one compares the three major outlines he proposes (31, 37, 43-46),
they do not agree. On p. 31, he proposes a seven-part chiasm based on the seven
introductory visions he identifies. On p. 37, he proposes an eleven-part chiasm,
or a nine-part chiasm if one does not count the prologue and epilogue. The
central section of the chiasm is 11:19-13:18, in contradistinction to his statement
on p. 32 that the seven-part literary arrangement he proposed on p. 31 ‘indicates
that chapters 12-14 form the central portion of the book.’” Reynolds, review of
Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation, 353-354.
210. Ibid.
211. Ibid., 18.
258
212. Ibid., 295.
213. Ibid., 297.
214. Ibid., 300.
215. Ibid., 303.
216. Ibid., 312.
217. Ibid., 320.
218. Ibid., 367.
219. Ibid., 310.
220. Ibid., 317; cf. Hans K. LaRondelle, How to Understand the End-Time
Prophecies of the Bible: The Biblical-Contextual Approach, 193.
222. Ibid., 388.
223. Ibid., 389-390.
224. Ibid., 404.

Bible, 283; cf. Stefanovič, Revelation of Jesus Christ, 2nd ed., 404.
226. See, e.g., 1 Pet 1:10-12.
227. Paulien, The Seven Keys, 37.
228. Scholars have recognized that the Greek of Revelation is the most
difficult of the New Testament. See Grant R. Osborne, Revelation, Baker
Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Academic, 2002), 24. Beale presents a chart showing the most difficult reading
of the manuscript texts, and another chart ranking manuscripts by quality.
George K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text,
The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans, 1999), 106-107. Paulien says, “The Greek of Revelation
comes across like the immature writing on a child’s school tablet. The good
news, though, is that God can use anyone even though they are not an expert
259
in the language of the day. Revelation brought a powerful message to God’s

people even though the style is at times ungrammatical.” Jon K. Paulien, The
Deep Things of God (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2004), 101; see also
Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of Revelation
8:7-12,” 91-93.
“Particularly striking are the many grammatical solecisms, or
irregularities.” D. A. Carson and J. Moo Douglas, An Introduction to the New
Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005), 704. “The most
disputed feature of John’s Greek is the apparent grammatical infelicities or
solecisms, ostensible departures from ‘correct’ Greek Grammar.” David L.
Mathewson, Verbal Aspect in the Book of Revelation: The Function of Greek Verb
Tenses in John’s Apocalypse (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010), 1; “John the Seer used
a unique style, the true character of which no Grammar of the New Testament
has as yet recognized. . . . The language which he adopted in his old age formed
for him no rigid medium of expression. Hence he remodeled its syntax freely,
and created a Greek that is absolutely his own.” R. H. Charles, A Critical and
Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St. John, 2 vols., International
Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1920), x-xi, see also cxvii-clix;
Beale, The Book of Revelation, 100-105. See also David E. Aune, Revelation 1-5,
Word Biblical Commentary 52a (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1997), clx-ccxi.
229. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation

of St. John, 1:x. Moreover, there are fewer extant manuscripts than for any
other New Testament book and a great number of textual difficulties. The
manuscripts are:
Papyri
P18 Rev 1:4-7 (3rd-4th century)
P24 Rev 5:5-8; 6:5-8 (4th century)
P43 Rev 2:12-13; 15:8-16:2 (6th-7th century)
P47 Rev 9:10-11:3; 11:5-16:15; 16:17-17:2 (3rd century)
P85 Rev 9:19-10:1, 5-8 (4th-5th century)
P98 Rev 1:13-20 (? 2nd century)
Uncials
01[‫ ]ﬡ‬whole book 4th century
02[A] whole book 5th century
04[C] lacks Rev 1-2; 3:20-5:14; 7:14-17; 8:5-9:16; 10:10-11:3; 16:13-18:2; 19:5-
end 5
th
century
025A[P] Rev 1:1-16:11; 17:2-19:20:10-22:5 (palimpsest) 9th century
046 whole book 10th century
051A Rev 11:15-13:1; 13:4-22:7; 22:15-21. 10th century
052A Rev 7:16-8:12. 10th century
0163 Rev 16:17-20. 5th century
0169 Rev 3:19-4:3. 4th century
0207 Rev 9:2-15 4th century
260
0229 Rev 18:16-17; 19:4-6 (palimpsest) 8th century

“The bulk of our witnesses are cursive. . . . Another feature of the
manuscript inheritance for the text of Revelation is that editors are dependent
to a large extent on these medieval manuscripts and have few early texts to use.”
The definitive register of Greek New Testament manuscripts lists about 5,000
manuscripts “divided into the conventional, although somewhat arbitrary,
categories of papyri, uncials, cursives and lectionaries.” From this number, “303
manuscripts contain the Book of Revelation.” Only three manuscripts contain
the whole book of Revelation. J. K. Alliott and J. K. Elliott, New Testament Textual
Criticism: The Application of Thoroughgoing Principles: Essays on Manuscripts
and Textual Variation (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010), 145-155; J. K. Elliott, “The
Distinctiveness of the Greek Manuscripts of the Book of Revelation,” Journal of
Theological Studies 48, no. 1 (1997): 116-124.
230. Paulien, “Allusions, Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of

Revelation 8:7-12,” 157.
232. Kenneth A. Strand, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, 14.
233. Paulien, “The Book of Revelation at the Crossroads,” 6-8.
261
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
GENERAL SUMMARY
T
he purpose of this research was to describe and assess three different
emphases of interpretation of the Apocalypse in the Seventh-
day Adventist Church throughout its history. Each emphasis is
represented by a major Adventist scholar in recent years. At the same time,
each scholar reflects predecessors in one or more of the three periods of
the Adventist development of interpretation of the book of Revelation.
Moreover, each one of these three emphases has strengths and weaknesses;
thus they are complementary, sharing basic presuppositions in their
“historicist” orientation.
The first view of Adventist interpretation of the Apocalypse is the
biblical-historical emphasis, which was dominated by Thoughts on the
Revelation written by Uriah Smith in the first period (1862-1944), and later
by God Cares, volume 2, written by C. Mervyn Maxwell in the last period.
This emphasis focuses on the historical application of the prophecy,
understanding that God is in control of history, accepting the recapitulation
and only one fulfillment of the prophecy, and motivating adherents to share
the prophetic message with urgency.
Smith’s commentary was the result of a verse-by-verse study of
the Apocalypse in a Sabbath school class in the Battle Creek church. The
conclusions that appeared in Thoughts on the Revelation came from the
influence of Millerite interpretations and other historicist authors. Even
263
Summary and Conclusions
though this work was revised repeatedly, it became the consensus among
Adventist pioneers.
Commissioned by Pacific Press, Maxwell’s commentary (1985)
appeared when the speculative elements of futurism, differing from the
historicist approach, seemed to be gaining favor in the Adventist interpretation
of prophecy. With minor differences, Maxwell used the basic chiastic literary
structure of the Apocalypse proposed by Kenneth Strand, dividing the book
into two major parts—a historical part (Rev 1:10-14:20) and an eschatological
part (Rev 15:1-22:9)—and four parallel sections. Maxwell, as a defender of
the theology and history of the SDA Church, followed as far as possible
the traditional interpretation of the denomination, with only a few major
differences from the work of Uriah Smith (for examples, see Table 4).
The second view of Adventist interpretation of the Apocalypse is
the biblical-theological emphasis, which was popularized by the Seventh-
day Adventist Bible Commentary during the second period (1944-1970),
and later by Hans LaRondelle’s commentary How to Understand the End-
Time Prophecies of the Bible in the third period. This emphasis adds the
Christ-centered view in the interpretation of the Apocalypse, stressing the
intention to interpret prophecy from the point of view of God, who is in
control of history, and systematically comparing the Old Testament with
the New Testament on themes of the Apocalypse.
Even though other commentaries appeared, “The Revelation of St.
John the Divine,” in volume 7 of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary
(1957), written by three scholars was most influential among Adventists
during the second period. The SDA Bible Commentary resulted from the
idea of John D. Snider to publish an Adventist commentary. One of the
important characteristics of the Commentary was its avoidance of being
dogmatic “on difficult passages” and on matters not essential to salvation.
It thus offers multiple possible historical applications on controverted texts,
opening the door for new emphases, but in general it follows the traditional
Adventist interpretation.
264
LaRondelle’s commentary (1997) appeared to offer a new emphasis

in the interpretation of the Apocalypse in the denomination. Using a
Christocentric hermeneutic and rejecting the philosophical principles of
literalism, allegorism, and idealism, LaRondelle challenged the traditional
interpretation of the prophecy, learning from past mistakes. In How to
Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the Bible, LaRondelle argues that
the essential theological message of the Apocalypse is not rooted in any
speculative historical application. LaRondelle retains the two-fold division
of the book into historical and theological parts, but he proposes an inverse
parallelism of seven subdivisions. LaRondelle, as a trainer of Adventist
ministers, encouraged focusing on Christ as the central part of the prophecy
and investigating the theological unity of the Old and New Testament
prophecies through the contextual method of exegesis.
In the third period of Adventist interpretation of the Apocalypse—
which I have called the Multiple Emphases Period (1970-2013)—the leading
view is the biblical-exegetical emphasis, exemplified in the works of Jon
Paulien. While Paulien has not written a verse-by-verse commentary on
Revelation, his eleven books on the topic show his exegetical emphasis.
His emphasis was introduced in his doctoral dissertation, titled “Allusions,
Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of Revelation 8:7-12,” which he
completed under the tutelage of Kenneth Strand in 1987. This emphasis
adds a focus primarily on the Koine Greek text, and on the original audience
to which the Apocalypse was written. Thus, the interpreter must explore
the linguistic, literary, historical, geographical, religious, philosophical, and
cultural context of that time.
In recent years, apart from Maxwell, LaRondelle, and Paulien—
professors from the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University—who
led each one of these emphases, other scholars have followed the same lines
of thought with some differences such as, for historical emphasis Alberto
Treiyer, for theological emphasis Roy Naden, and for exegetical emphasis
Ranko Stefanovič. One work is remarkable, however, recently written in
265
German by Ekkehardt Müller. Müller’s work covers the biblical-exegetical

and theological emphases. Perhaps, his commentary will have wide
influence among Adventists when it is translated into other languages.1 All
these scholarly expositors make distinct, unique, and essential contributions
to the Adventist understanding of the multi-faceted message of the book of
Revelation.
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
In 150 years of publishing on the Apocalypse, Adventist perspectives

have developed progressively through an emphasis on history, then on
theology, and later on exegesis. All these emphases are still alive. Each
one of the emphases has contributed to the Adventist understanding of the
Apocalypse. The terms history, theology, and exegesis do not indicate a lack
of focus on the Bible itself for the interpretation of the prophecies.
Thus, it can be strongly argued that the three views are not
contradictory or even competing with each other, but rather are
complementary, sharing basic presuppositions, and each making a distinct,
unique, and essential contribution to the Adventist understanding of the
multi-faceted message of the Apocalypse.
But it seems, on one hand, that the historical emphasis tended to
overlook some aspects of the biblical text, and on the other hand, that the
theological and exegetical emphases have tended to overlook some aspects
of the historical application.
To correct this faulty emphasis, some recent scholars have underlined
the use of exegesis to interpret the Revelation. However, there is a major
problem with applying to the Apocalypse the same exegetical principles
used in the interpretation of biblical books that are not apocalyptic.
Exegesis of non-apocalyptic books focuses on the time in which the prophet
lived (analyzing the words, phrases, historical context, geographical
context, etc.), and then applying the meaning for readers today. But, for
266
apocalyptic books, what about the time elapsed between the prophet and
today’s readers? Predictive prophecy is given especially for readers living in
the time of the fulfillment of the prophecy, or else where is the element of
predictive prophecy? Seventh-day Adventist historicists seek to discover the
time of the historical fulfillment of the prophecy, in order to interpret the
prophecy in the context of its historical fulfillment.
Since the organization of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, 150
years ago, Adventist scholars seem to have maintained the general consensus
on the interpretation of the Apocalypse when they had a few “standard
Apocalypse commentaries,” such as D&R and SDABC. It is primarily during
the third period, and especially with the exegetical emphasis, that opinions
are divided. Three authors (Maxwell, LaRondelle, and Paulien) seem to have
influenced this change, though not all of them published a verse-by-verse
commentary on Revelation.
Louis F. Were underlined the Christocentric emphasis of prophecy,
resulting in a greater emphasis on theological and spiritual applications
since the 1940s. Edwin R. Thiele’s commentary combined the perspectives
and quotations of Ellen G. White, other Adventist authors, and authors
from other denominations. George McCready Price in the 1940s and 1950s
introduced a futurist application of the prophecy using the Apotelesmatic
principle. And Kenneth Strand in the 1970s urged the literary analysis
of the Apocalypse, proposing a chiastic structure of the Revelation. As a
result, some Adventist scholars have tended to de-emphasize the historical
application, even without mentioning specific dates.
It is also observed that Adventist authors, after Uriah Smith and
until about 1970, often quoted more of the writings of Ellen G. White. Since
1970 there has been a growing tendency not to point out the Papacy as a
historical fulfillment of prophecy. On the other hand, there is a tendency
to be more Christ-centered, and to put much more emphasis on looking for
allusions, echoes, and images of the Old Testament. This can be observed
in Tables 13 and 14.
267
I have chosen two topics of Revelation (the seven trumpets and

Rev 12) as test cases to compare the historical conclusions of the Adventist
authors. Those conclusions can be seen in Tables 13 and 14. On the
interpretation of the seven trumpets and Rev 12, I have compared the
two major commentaries of the past with the works of the representative
expositors, Maxwell, LaRondelle, and Paulien, in order to construct a
general summary of history of Adventist interpretation on Revelation.
Table 13 shows that on the interpretation of the trumpets, Smith,
the SDA Bible Commentary, and Maxwell all give dates for the periods, but
LaRondelle and Paulien seem to spiritualize their conclusions, losing the
historical meaning. The major disagreement concerns the interpretation of
specific periods within the fifth and sixth trumpets (Rev 9:5, 10, 15).
Table 14 on Rev 12 shows general agreement among all the authors
in the application of the woman, the child, and the Great Red Dragon. A
slightly different nuance comes with Paulien, who identifies the woman
with not only the true Church, but also with other faithful people of God.
In Paulien’s view, the Great Red Dragon represents not only Satan, but also
“all his followers on the Earth.” LaRondelle and Paulien differ with the
others in the application of dates on the 1260 days. On the application of
the remnant, the Commentary, LaRondelle, and Paulien apply it not only to
the SDA Church, but also to members of other religions.
Even though each one of the different emphases summarized in
this paper claims to use the historicist method for the understanding of
Revelation, conclusions vary, especially regarding dates. Since Kenneth
Strand proposed a new “philosophy of history” approach to historicism,
a variety of suggestions have appeared on what is the real meaning of
historicism as a method of prophetic interpretation.
Over the past 150 years of Adventist publishing on the Apocalypse,
each of three emphases has shown different tendencies. The biblical-
historical emphasis focuses on the historical application of the prophecy,
keeping its loyalty to the historicist method
268
Table 13. Interpretation of the seven trumpets in major Adventist commentaries
U. SDA
SDA Bible
Bible M.
M. H.
H. J.
Trumpet
Trumpet U.Smith
Smith J.Paulien
Paulien
Commentary
Commentary Maxwell
Maxwell LaRondelle
LaRondelle
Judgment
Judgment
Goths
Goths Goths
Goths Fall
Fall of
of Fall
Fall of
of
1st
1st of
of God
God on
on
(Alaric)
(Alaric) (Alaric)
(Alaric) Jerusalem
Jerusalem Jerusalem
Jerusalem Jerusalem
Jerusalem
Fall
Fall of
of Fall
Fall of
of
Vandals
Vandals Vandals
Vandals Fall
Fall of
of Roman
Roman
2nd
2nd Roman
Roman Roman
Roman
(Genseric
(Genseric (Genseric)
(Genseric) Empire
Empire
Empire
Empire 476
476 Empire
Empire
Huns
Huns Huns
Huns Apostasy
Apostasy Apostasy
Apostasy
3rd
3rd (Attila)
(Attila) (Attila)
(Attila) Middle
Middle Ages
Ages during
during the
the of
of Christian
Christian
Papal
Papal Rome
Rome Church
Church
Dark
Dark Ages
Ages
Heruli
Heruli Heruli
Heruli Dark
Dark Ages
Ages 1000
1000 years,
years, Middle
Middle Ages
Ages
4th
4th (Odoacer)
(Odoacer) (Odoacer)
(Odoacer) (Thyatira)
(Thyatira) untill
untill the
the or
or Dark
Dark Ages
Ages
538-1565
538-1565 Reformation
Reformation
Enlightenment
Enlightenment
Saracens
Saracens Saracens
Saracens Western
Western Reign
Reign of
of
July
July 27,
27, Islam
Islam
5th
5th July
July 27,
27, 1299-
1299- Civilization
Civilization secular
secular
1299-July
1299-July 674-833
674-833
July
July 27,
27, 1449
1449 (no
(no specific
specific atheism
atheism
27,
27, 1449
1449 date)
date)
Close
Close of
of
Ottoman
Ottoman Ottoman
Ottoman
Ottoman
Ottoman Probationary
Probationary
1449-
1449- 1071-1453
1071-1453 or
or The
The final
final
6th
6th 1449-
1449- time
time
Aug
Aug 11,
11, 1453-1844
1453-1844 crisis
crisis
Aug
Aug 11,
11, 1840
1840 (no
(no specific
specific
1840
1840 date)
date)
Starting
Starting
Second
Second 1844-Second
1844-Second 1844-Second
1844-Second with
with the
the last
last Second
Second
7th
7th Coming
Coming Coming
Coming Coming
Coming plagues
plagues ofof Coming
Coming
Rev
Rev 16
16
269
Table 14. Interpretation of Revelation 12 in major Adventist commentaries
U. SDA Bible M. H. J.
Symbol
Smith Commentary Maxwell LaRondelle Paulien
God’s True God’s true and
Woman True Church God’s People
People Church faithful people
Child Christ Christ Christ Christ Christ
Satan Satan Satan Satan
A Great Satan
Pagan Pagan Pagan and and all his
Red Pagan and
and Papal and Papal Papal Rome followers on the
Dragon Papal Rome
Rome Rome Earth
1260 Dark Middle Age
(vv. 6, 538-1798 538-1798 538-1798 – No dogmatic No mention
14) date
Spiritual people
SDA Church
and SDA Church
SDA SDA and
Final remnant The historical
Church Church not just for
Remnant = all who commandments
Sabbath Sabbath Christians, but
(v. 17) worship God of God and
Ellen G. Ellen G. Jews, Muslims,
in full sincerity the historical
White White Buddhists, and
testimony of
Hindus
Jesus
used by the Reformers. The early Adventists emphasized the historicist

emphasis because it was through this method of interpretation that they
had discovered what they considered the divinely ordered role of Adventism
in preparing the world for the second advent of Christ. (This distinctive
“Adventist message” was especially rooted in Rev 3, 7, 10, and 12-14.)
World Wars I and II and the events surrounding them tended to reinforce
Adventists’ belief in the historicist emphasis. Adventist historicism also
found corroboration in the writings of Ellen G. White. For example, she
agreed with the Reformers that the apocalyptic Babylon is identified with
the Roman Papacy.
The biblical-theological emphasis tends to hold to a Christ-centered
way of interpreting the prophecies. It also agrees with the biblical-exegetical
emphasis, in focusing primarily on the first readers of the Apocalypse and
the first-century historical context. However, the first of these can also
tend toward “spiritualizing” the message of the Apocalypse, something
270
like the idealistic approach. And the second tendency, with a first-century
focus, can resemble the preterist approach. Both emphases, though perhaps
unintentionally, have led away from historicism. The tendency of many
Adventist studies of Revelation in recent years seems to be away from the
historicist method.
Without denying the valuable contributions of the biblical-theological
and biblical-exegetical approaches, it seems that the Adventist identity is
most directly rooted in the historicist interpretation of the prophecies of both
Daniel and Revelation. It is the historicist concreteness of prophecies fulfilled
in specific dates, events, and religious and political powers that grounds the
Adventist identity as a divinely called people with a mission to the world.
Seventh-day Adventists believe they have been divinely raised up to proclaim
the “present truth” to the world, and that this call was confirmed through the
“spirit of prophecy” revealed in Ellen G. White. Conversely, a departure from the
historicist method contributes to the loss of Adventist identity as a people with
a mission to the world. What should Adventists do? In the next few paragraphs,
I will offer some suggestions of what Adventists could do to encourage the
continued use of the historicist method of apocalyptic interpretation.
In the publication of Adventist commentaries on Revelation, it
appears that each administrative Division of the Seventh-day Adventist
Church has the discretion to select what commentaries will be published in
the Division publishing house.2 The result is that in various parts of the world,
some Adventist scholars on Revelation remain largely unknown because their
books are not translated into the local languages.
In recent years some Divisions and some Adventist educational
institutions have shown their interest in fixing the problem by organizing
symposia on the book of Revelation. It seems that in many points of the
interpretation of Revelation, as a church, we need to arrive at consensus. The
three different emphases are on the table, and as a Church we need to create
a balance in the application of the historical method of the interpretation of
the prophecies.
271
SUGGESTIONS FOR POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT

After studying the historical development of the interpretation of
the book of Revelation in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, focusing on
three different emphases, I would like to suggest nine points that may help
to us to improve our understanding of this last book of the Bible. Each of
these nine points could be a fruitful topic for further research.
1. Thirty years have passed since the organization of the Daniel and
Revelation Committee (DARCOM, 1981-1992). I believe it is important that
the Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference organize a new
committee. As shown in chapter 1 above, in recent years Adventists have
produced quite a number of commentaries on Revelation. This plethora of
perspectives underscores the observation of Ekkehardt Müller, an associate
director of the Adventist Biblical Research Institute, that, in spite of the
importance of the book of Revelation to Adventist theology, there currently
exists among Adventists a debate whether Revelation “should be interpreted
in a historicist way or if it is better to use a mixture of preterist, historicist,
idealistic, and futuristic approaches.”3 Among the challenges that Adventists
are facing on interpretation of apocalyptic literature, Müller underlined
at least eight points: “(1) departure from the historicist interpretation, (2)
time setting for the second coming of Jesus Christ, (3) opposition to the
concept of recapitulation, (4) arbitrary switching from symbolic to literal
interpretations, (5) abandonment of the year-day principle, (6) multiple
fulfillments of apocalyptic prophecy, . . . (7) a local geographic scenario,
and (8) interpretations not derived from Scripture.”4
In addition, Alberto Timm, immediate past rector of the Latin-
American Theological Seminary of the denomination’s South American
Division, has identified four contemporary challenges to Adventist prophetic
interpretation, namely the use of “modified versions of the historical-critical
method,” “the so-called apotelesmatic principle,” “certain futuristic” views,
and “elements of postmodernism with its ‘reader-oriented criticism.’”5
272
2. In order to get a balance in our interpretation of the book of

Revelation, I suggest that the SDA Church should produce a commentary
written by interdisciplinary scholars on Revelation such as an exegete, a
theologian, and a historian. As noted above, the SDA Church in the first two
periods of apocalyptic interpretation had less trouble with the interpretation
of the prophecies because both D&R and the SDA Bible Commentary were
the result of consensus.
3. To achieve this goal, it is important to delineate our methodology.
In other words, historicism needs to be defined and systematized, identifying
the principles of prophetic interpretation. If all Adventist writers who were
studied in this dissertation claim to use the historicist method, why do they
arrive at divergent conclusions on the interpretation of the seven trumpets
and Rev 12? Thus, it is urgent to define the methodology of historicism.
The definition of the historicist method should follow the document
“Methods of Bible Study,” which was approved and voted by the Executive
Committee of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists at the
Annual Council Session in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, October 12, 1986. This
definition of historicism should not accept any form of the historical-
critical method.6 It is true that historicism has been largely discredited in
the minds of many. “One reason may be that historicist interpreters have
come up with fanciful ideas that can hardly be justified with the biblical
text.” On the other hand, “historicism requires a high view of Scripture,”7
which not all agree with.
4. To interpret the biblical prophecies, it is also necessary to define
the method of exegesis. Such a definition should be accompanied with
systematic steps to follow in the process of the analysis of the biblical
text, in this case the Apocalypse. As mentioned above, exegetes appear
to be more concerned about the meaning for the original audience than
about the application for the future audience in the time of fulfillment. But
biblical predictive prophecies need to be studied from the context of the
first audience, through history, up to the present.
273
5. It is time for evangelists, pastors, preachers, and scholars to

talk the same language on the interpretation of the Apocalypse.8 Thus,
evangelists should underline what the biblical text says and not focus
only on events. On the other hand, scholars should offer a balance in the
prophetic interpretation, applying the historicist approach (see suggestion
number ten).
6. Professors of Revelation in Adventist seminaries around the
world should view it as an ethical obligation to teach what the SDA Church
believes on Revelation. After that they could offer additional points of view.
This would help to diminish confusion and debate in points where the SDA
Church has a consensus position. But where can one find the “official voice”
of the church on the book of Revelation? I would say in at least five places:
(1) the two volumes of the DARCOM series on Revelation; (2) the SDA Bible
Commentary on Revelation, where, in comparing possible interpretations,
it says “Generally speaking, the Adventist interpretation is . . .”;9 (3) the
web site of the Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference;10
(4) the bulletins of the General Conference sessions; and (5) in the SDA
fundamental beliefs.11
7. It might be well to analyze how Ellen G. White interprets the book
of Revelation. It is clear that we need to understand the role of Ellen G.
White in the interpretation of prophecy. Even though some research has
been published, such as George E. Rice’s “Ellen G. White’s Use of Daniel and
Revelation” and Jon Paulien’s “The Interpreter’s Use of the Writings of Ellen
G. White,” deeper and broader study is needed.12
8. Since the SDA Church uses historicism to interpret the
prophecies, it is important for the Adventist scholar to know history for a
right interpretation of the biblical prophecies.
9. I propose the use of the biblical-historical approach to the
interpretation of the book of Revelation, as well as Daniel.13 This should
not be done in the way it was done in the first period of the Adventist
interpretation of the Apocalypse, when the pioneers gave more emphasis
274
to history than to the biblical text, but it should have a balanced emphasis
on first, the biblical text, and then history.14 The emphasis must be on the
authority of the Bible as the Word of God. My suggestion number three
(above) of defining and systematizing a biblical-historical approach would
also help to get the right interpretation. Moreover, since the Apocalypse
describes the great controversy between God and Satan, it seems that the
Apocalypse could be read theologically, without diminishing the analysis
of the biblical text and the application of the history, so as to interpret the
events of history to the church.
Endnotes
1. Ekkehardt Müller, Der Erste und der Latzte: Studien zum Buch der
Offenbarung. The content of his commentary is: The book of Revelation
and Apocalyptic; Introduction Questions, Methods, and Procedures for
Interpretation; Macrostructure and Microstructure Analysis; Recapitulation
in Revelation 4-11; The Messages to the Seven Churches; The Seven Seals; The
Seven Trumpets; The Two Witnesses of Revelation 11; The Beast of Revelation
17; Theology and Christology of Revelation; The Second Coming of Jesus;
Ecclesiology; The Eschatological Way; Babylon; and The Sanctuary.
2. The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists divides the entire

world field into 13 administrative “divisions,” many of which have their own
publishing houses to produce denominational publications in local languages.
3. Ekkehardt Müller, e-mail message to author, February 4, 2008.
4. Ekkehardt Müller, “Challenges to the Adventist Interpretation of

Apocalyptic Literature,” JAAS 13, no. 1 (2010): 49-70.
5. Alberto R. Timm, “Historical Background of Adventist Biblical

Interpretation,” in Understanding Scripture: An Adventist Approach, ed. George
W. Reid (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists, 2005),
1:10, 11.
6. “Methods of Bible Study,” AR, January 22, 1987, 18-20; Ministry, April
1987, 22-24.
275
7. Müller, “Challenges to the Adventist Interpretation of Apocalyptic

Literature,” 52.
8. See, Martin Weber, Who’s Got the Truth: Making Sense out of Five
Different Adventist Gospels (Silver Spring, MD: Home Study International
Press, 1994); William G. Johnsson, The Fragmenting of Adventism: Ten Issues
Threatening the Church Today: Why the Next Five Years Are Crucial (Boise, ID:
Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1995).
9. See, for example, “Additional Note on Chapter 9,” SDABC, 7:796, last
paragraph; see also “The Revelation of St. John the Divine,” SDABC, 7:842-43,
on Rev 16:12.
10. Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference of Seventh-

day Adventists, Silver Spring, MD. Web site: https://adventistbiblicalresearch.
org/
11. Seventh-day Adventists Believe: An Exposition of the Fundamental

Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, 2nd ed. (Silver Spring, MD:
Ministerial Association of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists,
2005).
12. See Holbrook, ed., Symposium on Revelation—Book I, 145-172; also,

Paulien, “Ellen G. White and Revelation 4-6,” 363-373.
13. Müller proposes to use “the historical-biblical approach” in

“Challenges to the Adventist Interpretation of Apocalyptic Literature,” JAAS 13,
no. 1 (2010): 62-64. It seems to give more emphasis to the history than to the
Bible; even he does not propose it.
14. To be fair to the pioneers, it should be noted that many of them had
almost no access to the biblical text beyond the English King James Version.
Most did not know Greek or Hebrew and had access to only a very limited
number of commentaries. I would submit that they did not intentionally give
more attention to history than to the Bible, and they did first study the text, to
the extent of their resources—which often included not much more than the
KJV Bible and Cruden’s Concordance.
276
BIBLIOGRAPHY
“Actions of General Interest from the 1986 Annual Council-1.” Adventist

Review, January 22, 1987, 17–20.
Adams, Roy. “The Doctrine of the Sanctuary in the Seventh-day Adventist

Church: Three Approaches.” ThD dissertation, Andrews
University, 1980.
Advent Christian Times, [Joshua V. Himes], February 6, 1872.
Adventist Theological Society: Information Booklet. Collegedale, TN:

Adventist Theological Society, [1988?].
Adventists Affirm. “Who We Are.” http://www.adventistsaffirm.org/article.

php?id=6 (accessed November 22, 2010).
“Affirm.” Affirm 1, no. 1 (Spring 1987): 8.
Agustin, Alfredo. “The Locus of the Millennial Reign of Christ and the
Saints in Rev. 20:1-10.” PhD dissertation, Adventist International
Institute of Advanced Studies, Silang, Cavite, Philippines, 2002.
Akpa, Michael Onyedikachi. “The Identity and Role of Michael in the

Narrative of the War in Heaven: An Exegetical and Theological
Study of Rev 12:7-12.” Adventist International Institute of
Advanced Studies, Silang, Cavite, Philippines, 2007.
A[ndrews], J[ohn] N. “Thoughts on the Sabbath.” Review and Herald,

October 31, 1854, 92.
Alalade, Adekunle A. “Adventist Pioneers of the Three Angels’ Messages:

1831-1849.” Term paper, Seventh-day Adventist Theological
Seminary, Andrews University, 1979.
277
Bibliography
________. Jesus at the Centre: Sanctuary Scenes in the Book of Revelation.

Ibadan, Nigeria: AGBO AREO Publishers, 2006.
Aldrich, J. M. “[Announcements].” Review and Herald, July 2, 1867, 48.
Alliott, J. K., & J. K. Elliott. New Testament Textual Criticism: The Application
of Thoroughgoing Principles: Essays on Manuscripts and Textual
Variation. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010.
Álvarez-Valdés, Ariel. “El libro de Apocalipsis: Historia de su interpretación.”

Estudios Bíblicos 63, nos. 2, 3 (2005): 283–311.
Anderson, Albert W. Some Further Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation:

To Be Read in Conjunction with Daniel and the Revelation by Uriah
Smith. Warburton, Australia: Signs Publishing Company, 1928.
________. Through Turmoil to Peace: Showing a Wonderful Divine Plan

in Nature and Revelation, Marvellous Divine Overrulings in the
History of Nations, and the Divine Solution of Present-day World
Troubles. Warburton, Australia: Signs Publishing Company, 1932.
________. The World’s Finale: A Brief Exposition of the Prophecies of the Seven
Churches, the Seven Seals, and the Seven Trumpets of Revelation.
Warburton, Victoria, Australia: Signs Publishing Company, 1932.
Anderson, Godfrey T. Outrider of the Apocalypse: Life and Times of Joseph

Bates. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1972.
________. “Sectarianism and Organization 1846-1864.” In Adventism in

America, edited by Gary Land, 29–52. Rev. ed. Berrien Springs,
MI: Andrews University Press, 1998.
Anderson, Roy A. Unfolding the Revelation: Evangelistic Studies for Public

Presentation. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1953.
________. Unfolding the Revelation: Evangelistic Studies for Public

Presentation. Rev. ed. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1974.
Andrews, John N. “Is the Bible Sufficient as a Rule of Faith and Practice?”
Review and Herald, May 19, 1851, 87–88.
278
________. “Thoughts on Revelation XIII and XIV.” Review and Herald, May
19, 1951, 81–86.
________. Thoughts on the Sabbath, and the Perpetuity of the Law of God.
Paris, ME: James White, 1851.
________. Three Messages of Revelation XIV, 6-12. Rochester, NY: Advent

Library Office, 1855.
Arasola, Kai. The End of Historicism: Millerite Hermeneutic of Time

Prophecies in the Old Testament. Uppsala, Sweden: University of
Uppsala, 1990.
Arthur, David T. “After the Great Disappointment: To Albany and Beyond.”

Adventist Heritage 1, no. 1 (January 1974): 5-10, 58.
________. “Come out of Babylon: A Study of Millerite Separatism and

Denominationalism, 1840-1865.” PhD dissertation, University of
Rochester, 1970.
________. “Joshua V. Himes and the Cause of Adventism, 1839-1845.” M.A.

thesis, University of Chicago, 1961.
Aune, David E. Revelation 1-5. Word Biblical Commentary 52a. Waco, TX:
Word Books, 1997.
“Babylon-Rev. 18.” The Midnight Cry, May 30, 1844, 563 [sic] 364, should be
363.
B. “A Temporal Millennium: a Soul-destroying Doctrine.” Signs of the Times

(Millerite), June 29, 1842, 97–98.
Bacchiocchi, Samuele. “Special Offer on Prof. Jon Paulien’s 5 Albums (60

CD Disks), called The Bible Explorer Series on Revelation.”
http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/et_155.htm
[accessed 2010].
Baker, Alonzo L., Francis D. Nichol, and George McCready Price. Creation
Not Evolution. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1926.
279
Bibliography
Baker, Raymond R. “What Has the Term ‘Three Angels’ Messages’ Meant
through the Years?” Term paper, Seventh-day Adventist
Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 1976.
Barr, David, ed. Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students.
Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.
Barkun, Michael. Crucible of the Millennium: The Burned-over District of

New York in the 1840s. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press,
1986.
Bates, Joseph. The Autobiography of Elder Joseph Bates: Embracing a Long Life
on Shipboard, with Sketches of Voyages on the Atlantic and Pacific
Oceans, the Baltic and Mediterranean Seas; also Impressment
and Service on Board British War Ships, Long Confinement in
Dartmoor Prison, Early Experience in Reformatory Movements;
Travels in Various Parts of the World and a Brief Account of the
Great Advent Movement of 1840-44. Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press
of the Seventh-day Adventist Pub. Association, 1868.
________. “The Beast with Seven Heads.” Review and Herald, August 5, 1851,
3–4.
________. An Explanation of the Typical and Anti-typical Sanctuary, by the

Scriptures: with a Chart. New Bedford, [MA]: Benjamin Lindsey,
1950.
________. The Opening Heavens: Or a Connected View of the Testimony

of the Prophets and Apostles, Concerning the Opening Heavens
Compared with Astronomical Observations, and of the Present
and Future Location of the New Jerusalem, the Paradise of God.
New Bedford, [MA]: Press of Benjamin Lindsey, 1846.
________. A Seal of the Living God: A Hundred Forty-four Thousand, of

the Servants of God Being Sealed, in 1849. New Bedford, [MA]:
Benjamin Lindsey, 1849.
________. The Seventh-day Sabbath: A Perpetual Sign from the Beginning

to the Entering into the Gates of the Holy City According to the
Commandment. New Bedford, [MA]: Benjamin Lindsey, 1846.
280
________. Second Advent Way Marks and High Heaps: Or a Connected View
of the Fulfillment of Prophecy, by God’s Peculiar People, from the
Year 1840-1847. New Bedford, [MA]: Benjamin Lindsey, 1847.
________. The Seventh Day Sabbath: A Perpetual Sign, from the Beginning,
to the Entering into the Gates of the Holy City, According to the
Commandment. 2nd ed, revised. New Bedford, MA: Benjamin
Lindsey, 1847.
________. “Thoughts on the Past Work of William Miller: and His Adherents,
Respecting the True Starting Point of Dan VIII, 14; IX, 24, 25.”
Review and Herald, February 17, 1853, 156–157.
________. A Vindication of the Seventh-day Sabbath and the Commandments

of God: with a Further History of God’s Peculiar People from 1847-
1848. New Bedford, [MA]: Benjamin Lindsey, 1848.
Battistone, Joseph J. Revelation 1-11: God’s Church in a Hostile World.

Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1989.
Beale, George K. The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text.

The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand
Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1999.
Berry, Marian G. A Warning. Brushton, NY: TEACH Services, 1990.
“Bible Commentary in Korea.” Ministry, June 2006, 28.
“A Bible Reader on Mr. Miller’s Views of the Millennium.” Signs of the Times
(Millerite), January 15, 1841, 156–157.
Biblical Research Institute. http://biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.org/

aboutus.htm#history (accessed August 25, 2010).
Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.

Ellen G. White and the Interpretation of Daniel and Revelation.
Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, [1989].
“[Biographical Information]: C. Mervyn Maxwell.” Center for Adventist

Research at James White Library, Andrews University, Berrien
Springs, MI, 1987.
281
Bibliography
Birks, T. R. “The First Resurrection.” The Midnight Cry, July 25, 1844, 9–12.
________. “The First Resurrection.” The Midnight Cry, August 1, 1844, 117–
119.
________. “The First Resurrection.” The Midnight Cry, August 8, 1844, 25–27.
Bliss, Sylvester. Memoirs of William Miller, Generally Known as a Lecturer

on the Prophecies, and the Second Coming of Christ. Boston, MA:
Joshua V. Himes, 1853.
Boucher, Sharon. “Pioneer Father.” Record (South Pacific Division), January

7, 1957, 13–14.
Bourdeau, D. T. “Principles by Which to Interpret Prophecy. −No 1.” Review

and Herald, November 27, 1888, 736–737.
________. “Principles by Which to Interpret Prophecy. −No 2.” Review and

Herald, December 4, 1888, 752.

Herald, December 11, 1888, 769.
________. “Principles by Which to Interpret Prophecy.- −No 4.” Review and

Herald, December 18, 1888, 787–788.

Herald, January 1, 1889, 3–4.



Herald, January 29, 1889, 66.

Herald, February 19, 1889, 114–115.
282

Herald, February 26, 1889, 130–131.

Herald, March 5, 1889, 146–147.

Herald, March 12, 1889, 163–164.
________. “Principles by Which to Interpret Prophecy. −No 12 [13].” Review

and Herald, March 19, 1889, 179–180.

Herald, March 26, 1889, 196.

Herald, April 2, 1889, 211–212.

Herald, April 9, 1889, 227–228.

Herald, April 16, 1889, 242–243.

Herald, April 23, 1889, 258–259.

Herald, April 30, 1889, 275–276.

Herald, May 7, 1889, 290–291.

Herald, May 14, 1889, 306.

Herald, May 21, 1889, 322–323.

Herald, May 28, 1889, 339.
283
Bibliography

Herald, June 4, 1889, 354.

Herald, June 11, 1889, 371–372.

Herald, June 18, 1889, 387–388.

Herald, June 25, 1889, 403–404.

Herald, July 2, 1889, 419–420.

Herald, July 16, 1889, 451–452.

Herald, July 23, 1889, 468.

Herald, July 30, 1889, 483–484.

Herald, August 6, 1889, 498–499.

Herald, August 27, 1889, 531–532.

Herald, September 10, 1889, 562–563.

Herald, September 24, 1889, 595.
________. “The Value of the Prophetic Periods in the Study of Prophecy.”

Review and Herald, October 15, 1889, 643–644.
________. “The Value of the Prophetic Periods in the Study of Prophecy. −No
2.” Review and Herald, October 29, 1889, 675–676.
284
________. “The Value of the Prophetic Periods in the Study of Prophecy. −No
2 [3].” Review and Herald, November 5, 1889, 690.
Box 2, Fld 14, William Warren Prescott Papers (Collection 143). Center for
Adventist Research, James White Library, Andrews University,
Berrien Springs, MI.
Boyd, Timothy N. “Apocalypticism in Contemporary American Protestantism

in Historical Perspective.” PhD dissertation, Southwestern Baptist
Theological Seminary, 1980.
Brown, Ian R. “The Two Witnesses (Rev 11:3-13) as Two Individuals Appearing
Near the End of the Age: A Selective Literature Review and Issues
of Interpretation.” MA thesis, Andrews University, 1999.
Bruinsma, Reinder. Seventh-day Adventist Attitudes Toward Roman

Catholicism 1844-1965. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University
Press, 1994.
Bull, Malcolm, and Lockhart Keith. “The Intellectual World of Adventist

Theologians.” Spectrum 18, no. 1 (1987): 32–37.
Bullón, Alejandro. O terceiro milenio e as profecias do Apocalipse: como viver

sem medo do futuro. Tatuí, Sãu Paulo, Brazil: Casa Publicadora
Brasileira, 1998.
________. Tercer Milenio: Profecías Apocalípticas que afectarán su vida.

Buenos Aires, Argentina: Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana,
1998.
________. The Third Millennium and the Prophecies of Revelation: How to

Live without Fear of the Future. Manila, Philippines: Philippine
Publishing House, 2001.
________. Trzecie tysiąclecie: i proroctwa księgi objawienia, jak żyć nie bojąc
się przyszłości? Warszawa, [Poland]: Chrzescijanski Instytut
Wydawniczy Znaki Czasu, 2004.
Bunch, Taylor G. Bible Lessons: The Book of Revelation. [Loma Linda, CA]:
College of Medical Evangelists, [1929].
285
Bibliography
________. The Seven Epistles of Christ. Washington, DC: Review and Herald,
1947.
________. The Revelation. [Loma Linda, CA]: College of Medical Evangelists,

1952.
Burt, Merlin D. “The Historical Background, Interconnected Development

and Integration of the Doctrines of the Sanctuary, the Sabbath,
and Ellen G. White’s Role in Sabbatarian Adventism from 1844 to
1849.” PhD dissertation, Andrews University, 2002.
Butler, George I. “Thoughts on Daniel and Revelation.” Review and Herald,

March 28, 1882.
C[ottrell], R[oswell] F. Mark of the Beast, and Seal of the Living God. Battle
Creek, MI: James White, [1859].
Cairus, Aecio E. “G. McC. Price as a Trailblazer, Alive and Well in His
Successors.” Term paper, Andrews University, 1974.
Caldwell, Luther. “The New Earth.” The Midnight Cry, November 16, 1843,
[105-107].
________. “The New Earth.” The Midnight Cry, May 9, 1844, 337-339.
Calkins, Harold. “Naden Now Heads Communication.” Pacific Union

Recorder, September 19, 1977, 2.
Campbell, Michael W. “The 1919 Bible Conference and Its Significance for
Seventh-day Adventist History and Theology.” PhD dissertation,
Andrews University, 2008.
________. “Adventist Theology Comes of Age: The 1952 Bible Conference.”

Adventist Review, June 23, 2011, 24–25.
Canfield, E. “Inquiries Relative to the Millennium Revealed in the Bible.”

The Midnight Cry, August 15, 1844, 33–44.
Canright, Dudley Marvin. Life of Mrs. E. G. White: Seventh-day Adventist

Prophet: Her False Claims Refuted. Cincinnati, OH: Standard
Publishing Co., 1919.
286
Carner, Vern, Sakae Kubo, and Curt Rice. “Bibliographical Essay.” In The Rise
of Adventism: Religion and Society in Mid-Nineteenth-Century
America, edited by Edwin S. Gaustad, 207–317. New York: Harper
& Row, 1974.
Carter, H. W. “Elder Uriah Smith’s Missionary Spirit.” Review and Herald,

February 22, 1940, 19–20.
Carson, D. A., and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament.

2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005.
Caviness, Leon L. “Notes on the Prophetic Conference.” Review and Herald,

December 26, 1918, 4–7.
________. “The Prophetic Conference, New York City.” Review and Herald,
December 12, 1918, 1–2.
Charles, R. H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St.

John. 2 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T &
T Clark, 1920.
Christian, Ed. “The Editor’s Page.” Journal of the Adventist Theological

Society 11, nos. 1 and 2 (Spring-Autumn 2000): 1.
“Church Historian Dies.” Messenger (British Union Conference), September

10, 1999, [16].
“Church Historian Dies.” Record (South Pacific Division), August 14, 1999, 5.
Clapp, J. L. “A Dialogue Respecting the Millennium.” Part I and II. The

Midnight Cry, May 23, 1844, 353–354.
________. “A Dialogue Respecting the Millennium.” Part III and IV. The
Midnight Cry, May 30, 1844, 361–363.
________. “A Dialogue Respecting the Millennium: Concluded.” The

Midnight Cry, June 6, 1844, 369–370.
Clark, Robert A. “The Three Angels’ Messages: As Viewed by Early

Adventists.” Term paper, Seventh-day Adventist Theological
Seminary, Andrews University, 1977.
287
Bibliography
“C. Mervyn Maxwell.” The Journal Era, Berrien Springs, MI, July 28, 1999, 13.
Coffman, Carl. “The Development of an Understanding of the Message of

the Third Angel of Revelation 14:9-12 from 1844.” Term paper,
________. “In the Last Days, Three Angels.” Adventist Review, August 5,
1982, 4–5.
Conradi, Ludwig R. Daniel und die Offenbarung. Hamburg, Germany:

International Traktatgesellschaft, 1907.
Corliss, John O. “The Message and Its Friends−No. 6: Uriah Smith, the
‘Pathfinder’.” Review and Herald, 20 September 1923, 4–5.
Cornell, Merritt E. Miraculous Powers: The Scripture Testimony on the

Perpetuity of Spiritual Gifts. Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the
Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1862.
Cottrell, Raymond F. “The Adventist Theological Society: Its Ethos and

Objectives.” Center for Adventist Research, Andrews University,
Berrien Springs, MI, 1991.
________. “The Adventist Theological Society: Its Ethos and Hidden

Agenda.” Center for Adventist Research, James White Library,
Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI, 1992.
________. “The Adventist Theological Society and Its Biblical Hermeneutic.”

Center for Adventist Research, James White Library, Andrews
University, Berrien Springs, MI, [1992].
________. “The Adventist Theological Society and the Church.” Center for
Berrien Springs, MI, [1993].
________. “Appendix: Twenty-five Years of Cooperative Research-type Bible

Study: A Resumè and Evaluation.” WFD 2245-b Biblical Research
Committee, Center for Adventist Research. 1966.
________. “The Bible Research Fellowship: A Pioneering Seventh-day
288
Adventist Organization in Retrospect.” Adventist Heritage 5, no. 1

(Summer 1978): 39–52.
________. The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation: Part II-Revelation.

Angwin, CA: Pacific Union College, 1951.
________. “The Untold Story of the Bible Commentary.” Spectrum 16, no. 3
(1985): 35–51.
________. “The Story of the Bible Commentary.” Adventist Heritage 18, no. 1
(Summer 1998): 26–34.
Cowles, J. P. “Among My Old Friends Again.” Christian Reformer and Signs

of the Times, 8 August 1855, [6].
Cox, G. F. “Millennium: The Unanswerable Argument.” Signs of the Times

(Millerite), April 20, 1842, 22.
Cress, James A. “Bible Commentaries for the Third World.” Southwestern

Union Record, April 1995.
Cross, Whitney R. The Burned-Over District: The Social and Intellectual

History of Enthusiastic Religion in Western New York, 1800-1850.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1982.
Daly, Jerry E. “Joseph Bates’s Logbook of the Brig Empress.” Master’s thesis,
Damsteegt, P. Gerard. Review of The End of Historicism, by Kai J. Arasola.

Andrews University Seminary Studies 29, no. 3 (Autumn 1991):
263–64.
________. Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission.

Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977.
________. “To Be Like Jesus: Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell’s Life Ambition:

A Tribute to a Professor Emeritus.” Journal of the Adventist
Theological Society 11, nos. 1 & 2 (2000): 49–53.
Daniells, Arthur G. “The Bible Conference.” Review and Herald, August 21,
1919, 3–4.
289
Bibliography
Davaney, Sheila Greeve. Historicism: The Once and Future Challenge for
Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006.
Davidson, Richard M. “Biblical Principle for Interpreting Apocalyptic

Prophecy.” In Prophetic Principles: Crucial Exegetical, Theological,
Historical & Practical Insights, edited by Ron du Preez, 43–74.
Lansing, MI: Michigan Conference of Seventh-day Adventists;
printed in Berrien Springs, MI: Litho Tech Graphic Services, 2007.
________. “Principle of Biblical Interpretation.” Seminar paper for OTST940-

002 Seminar in Advanced OT Biblical Exegesis: Hermeneutics,
Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University,
Spring Semester, 2010.
________. “The Story behind the ATS: A Personal Reflection.” Perspective

Digest 1, no. 3: 12–15 (accessed January 24, 2011).
Davis, Dean. “The Heavenly Court Scene of Revelation 4-5.” PhD dissertation,
________. “Hermeneutical Principles of Early Adventist Interpreters.” Term

paper, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews
University, 1976.
Dean, David A. “Echoes of the Midnight Cry: The Millerite Heritage in the
Apologetics of the Advent Christian Denomination, 1860-1960.”
ThD dissertation, Westminster Theological Seminary, 1977.
Declaration of the Fundamental Principles Taught and Practiced by the

Seventh-day Adventists. Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the
Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1872.
Dick, Everett N. “The Adventist Crisis of 1843-1844.” PhD dissertation,

University of Wisconsin, 1930.
________. Founders of the Message. Washington, DC: Review and Herald,

1938.
________. “Uriah Smith.” Youth’s Instructor, July 18, 1944, 6, 13.
290
________. William Miller and the Advent Crisis, 1831-1844. Edited by Gary
Land. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1994.
Dis, Gerard. “Biblio File: God Cares, Volume 2.” Ministry, September 1986,
31.
Doan, Ruth A. The Miller Heresy, Millennialism, and American Culture.

Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 1987.
Douglass, Herbert E. “Hebert E. Douglass.” http://herbdouglass.50megs.

com/ (accessed September 23, 2010).
________. Messenger of the Lord: The Prophetic Ministry of Ellen G. White.

Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1998.
Douglass, Herbert E., Edward Heppenstall, Hans K. LaRondelle, and C.

Mervyn Maxwell. Perfection: The Impossible Possibility. Nashville,
TN: Southern, 1975.
Doukhan, Jacques B. Secrets of Revelation: The Apocalypse Through Hebrew

Eyes. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2002.
Dunton, Hugh I. “The Millerite Adventists and Other Millenarian Groups in

Great Britain, 1830-1860.” PhD dissertation, University of London,
1984.
Durand, Eugene F. “Yours in the Blessed Hope, Uriah Smith.” PhD

dissertation, Washington University, 1978.
________. Yours in the Blessed Hope, Uriah Smith. Washington, DC: Review
and Herald, 1980.
________. “Smiling with Uriah Smith.” Adventist Review, May 20, 1982, 3–5.
________. “Uriah’s Merry Medicine.” Adventist Review, February 3, 1983,

4–6.
Earliest Seventh-day Adventist Periodicals. Edited and introduction by

George R. Knight. Adventist Classic Library. Berrien Springs, MI:
Andrews University Press, 2005.
291
Bibliography
“Editorial: In Memoriam: Uriah Smith.” Review and Herald, March 10, 1903,
3–7.
Elliott, J. K. “The Distinctiveness of the Greek Manuscripts of the Book of
Revelation.” Journal of Theological Studies 48, no. 1 (1997): 116–24.
Everts, E. “A Few Thoughts on the Cleansing of the Sanctuary.” Review and

Herald, June 11, 1857, 45.
Fagal, William. “A Life Lived with No Regrets.” Journal of the Adventist

Theological Society 11, no. 1 (2000): 11–14.
Fay, Jocelyn. “Only Nine Editors in 125 Years.” Review and Herald, November
13, 1975, 5.
Fee, Gordon D. New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and

Pastors. 3rd ed. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press,
2002.
Feyerabend, Henry. Revelation Verse by Verse. Berrien Springs, MI: Destiny/

Arts International: Miracle Press, 1989.
Fisk, Levi. “The Seven Vials.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), September 14,
1842, 189 [sic] 188.
Fitch, Charles. “Come Out of Her, My People.” The Midnight Cry, September
21, 1843, 33–36.
Fortin, Denis. “L‘Adventisme dans les cantons de l‘est du Quebec:

implantation et institutionalisation au XIXe siegle.” PhD
dissertation, Universite Laval, Quebec, 1995.
Fowler, John M. Review of The Lamb Among the Beasts, by Roy C. Naden.
Adventist Review, February 20, 1997, 29.
“Francis David Nichol, 1897-1966.” Review and Herald [Extra], June 10, 1966,
1–8.
Franks, Horace G. The Riddle of the Orient: An Illuminating Study of the

Causes and Results of the Chaotic Conditions Now Existing in the
292
Far East, the Middle East, and the Near East. Warburton, Victoria,
Australia: Signs Publishing Company, 1922[?].
Fredericks, Richard. “A Sequential Study of Revelation 1-14 Emphasizing the

Judgment Motif: With Implications for Seventh-day Adventist
Apocalyptic Pedagogy.” PhD dissertation, Andrews University,
1987.
Froom, LeRoy E. “The Advent Message Built upon the Foundation of Many
Generations.” In Our Firm Foundation: A Report of the Seventh-
day Adventist Bible Conference Held September 1-13, 1952, in the
Sligo Seventh-day Adventist Church Takoma Park, Maryland, 77–
182. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1953.
________. “History of the Interpretation of the Apocalypse.” In The Seventh-

day Adventist Bible Commentary, edited by Francis D. Nichol,
103–132. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1957.
________. Movement of Destiny. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1971.
________. Pioneer Stories Retold: A Compilation of Early Experiences in the

Advent Movement. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1956.
________. The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers: The Historical Development

of Prophetic Interpretation. 4 vols. Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1946-1954.
________. “Time Phase of Fifth and Sixth Trumpets.” Ministry, June 1944,
22-26, 46.
Gale, Robert. The Urgent Voice. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1975.
Gallagher, Catherine, and Stephen Greenblatt. Practicing New Historicism.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
Gane, Erwin R. “The Arian or Anti-Trinitarian Views Presented in Seventh-

day Adventist Literature and the Ellen G. White Answer.” MA
thesis, Andrews University, 1963.
Gaustad, Edwin S., ed. The Rise of Adventism: Religion and Society in Mid-
Nineteenth-Century America. New York: Harper & Row, 1974.
293
Bibliography
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. Most Valuable Documents,

1920-1940s. Center for Adventist Research, James White Library,
Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI.
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Committee on Problems in

Bible Translation. Problems in Bible Translation. Washington,
DC: Review and Herald, 1954.
Gibbon, Edward. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. 7
vols. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell, 1776-1788.
Graybill, Ron. “Uriah Smith on the Swanee River.” Insight, April 1979, 9–13.
Gregg, Steve, ed. Revelation, Four Views: A Parallel Commentary. Nashville,

TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997.
Gresham, Joe W. Revelation: God’s Last Message to Earth. Dallas, TX: The
Fourth Angel’s Publishing, 1999.
Hackett, Willis J. “Bible Conference in 1974.” Ministry, April 1974, 37.
Hale, Apollos. The Second Advent Manual: in Which the Objections to

Calculating the Prophetic Times are Considered; the Difficulties
Connected with the Calculation Explained; and the Facts and
Arguments on Which Mr. Miller’s Calculations Rest, are Briefly
Stated and Sustained . . . Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes, 1843.
Hammond, Richard J. “The Life and Work of Uriah Smith.” MA thesis,

Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, 1944.
Hangyas, Laszlo I. “The Use and Abuse of Authority: An Investigation of

the [exousia] Passages in Revelation.” PhD dissertation, Andrews
University, 1997.
Hardinge, Leslie. The Lamb, God’s Greatest Gift: Meditations on the Book of
Revelation. Harrisburg, PA: American Cassette Ministries Book
Division, 2005.
Hardy, Frank W. Historicism and the Judgment: A Study of Revelation 4-5

and 19a (Paper modified April 15, 2010). http://www.historicism.
org/Documents/Lecture1Rev4-5.pdf (accessed January 12, 2012).
294
________. Is Historicism Biblically Valid for Interpretating Revelation? A

Study of Revelation 4-5 and 19a (Paper written August 8, 2006).
http://www.historicism.org/Documents/Lecture1Rev4-5.pdf
(accessed March 13, 2010).
________. “An Historicist Perspective on Daniel 11.” MA thesis, Seventh-day

Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 1983.
Harrison, John Fletcher C., and John Fletcher Clews Harrison. The Second
Coming: Popular Millenarianism, 1780-1850. New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press, 1979.
Hasel, Gerhard F. “Fulfillments of Prophecy.” In Daniel and Revelation

Committee Series. Vol. 3. In The Seventy Weeks, Leviticus, and the
Nature of Prophecy, edited by Frank B. Holbrook, 288–322. 7 vols.
Washington, DC: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference
of Seventh-day Adventists, 1986.
________. “General Principles of Interpretation.” In A Symposium on Biblical

Hermeneutics, edited by Gordon M. Hyde, 163–193. Washington,
DC: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974.
________. “‘The Song of the Vineyard’: (A Case Study in Biblical

Interpretation).” In North American Bible Conference, 1974:
Notebook Prepared by the General Conference of Seventh-Day
Adventists Biblical Research Committee. Washington, DC:
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974.
Haskell, Stephen N. The Book of Revelation. Altamont, TN: Harvestime

Books, 1989.
________. “A Few Thoughts on the Philadelphia and Laodicean Church.”

Review and Herald, November 6, 1856, 6.
________. Prophetic Waymarks: The Story of Daniel and the Seer of Patmos.
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Signs Publishing, 1905.
________. The Story of the Seer of Patmos. Nashville, TN: Southern

Publishing, 1905.
295
Bibliography
________. The Story of the Seer of Patmos. South Lancaster, MA: Central
New England Tract Society, 1906.
________. The Story of the Seer of Patmos. Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1908.
________. The Story of the Seer of Patmos. Payson, AR: Leaves-of-Autumn

Books, 1990.
________. The Story of the Seer of Patmos. Brushton, NY: TEACH Services,
2004.
Hatch, Nathan O. The Democratization of American Christianity. New Haven,

CT: Yale, 1989.
Hauser, Robert W. Give Glory to Him: The Sanctuary in the Book of Revelation.
Angwin, CA: R. W. Hauser, 1983.
Haynes, Carlyle B. On the Eve of Armageddon: An Account of the Scriptural

Teaching Relating to the Coming War among the Nations, which Will
Engulf Civilization, and Immediately Precede the Universal and Eternal
Kingdom of Peace. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1924.
Heinz, Daniel, Jiří Moskala, and Peter M. van Bemmelen, eds. Christ,
Salvation, and the Eschaton: Essays in Honor of Hans K. LaRondelle.
Berrien Springs, MI: Old Testament Department, Seventh-day
Heppenstall, Edward. “The Covenants and the Law.” In Our Firm Foundation:
A Report of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Conference Held
September 1-13, 1952, in the Sligo Seventh-day Adventist Church,
Takoma Park, Maryland, 435–492. Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1953.
________. Syllabus for the Revelation. Arlington, CA: La Sierra College, 1947.
Hersey, Lewis. “The Seventh Trumpet or Last Wo.” Signs of the Times
(Millerite), March 15, 1843, 15.
________. “The Seventh Trumpet, or the Last Wo.” The Midnight Cry, March
31, 1843, 94.
296
Hewitt, Clyde E. Midnight and Morning: An Account of the Adventist

Awakening and the Founding of the Advent Christian Denomination.
Charlotte, NC: Venture Books, 1983.
Himes, Joshua V., ed. Views of the Prophecies and Prophetic Chronology:
Selections from Manuscripts of William Miller; with a Memoir of
His Life. Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes, 1841.
________. Views of the Prophecies and Prophetic Chronology: Selections

from Manuscripts of William Miller. Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes,
1842.
“Historian C. Mervyn Maxwell Dies.” Adventist Review, August 19, 1999, 20.
Holbrook, Frank B. “Issues in the Book of Revelation: A Consensus by

the Daniel and Revelation Committee, Which Is Comprised of
Biblical Scholars from Throughout the World Divisions of the
Adventist Church, on Some Aspects of the Seals and Trumpets.”
Ministry, January 1991, 9–11.
________. “Understanding Revelation.” These Times, July 1, 1980, 32.
________. “What Prophecy Means to This Church.” Ministry, July 1983, 21-
23, 27.
Holbrook, Frank B., ed. Symposium on Revelation-Book I. Daniel and

Revelation Committee Series. Vol. 6. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical
Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists,
1992.
________. Symposium on Revelation-Book II. Daniel and Revelation

Committee Series. Vol. 7. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research
Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992.
Holmes, C. Raymond. “A Response to Raymond Cottrell’s Critique of the

Adventist Theological Society.” Center for Adventist Research,
James White Library, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI.
Holt, Russell. “Uriah.” Insight, February 22, 1977, 12–15.
297
Bibliography
Hongisto, Leif I. “The Apocalyptic Discourse in Mark 13: Toward a

Hermeneutic.” MDiv thesis, Andrews University, 1984.
Hook, Milton R. Desmond Ford: Reformist Theologian, Gospel Revivalist.

Riverside, CA: Adventist Today Foundation, 2008.
________. Louis Were. Center for Adventist Research, James White Library,
Horn, Siegfried H. “Biblical Archaeology as Aid to Biblical Exegesis.” In

North American Bible Conference, 1974: Notebook Prepared by the
General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists Biblical Research
Committee. Washington, DC: General Conference of Seventh-day
Adventists, 1974.
Hortop, Kerry H. “A Comparison of William Miller and Seventh-day Adventist

Interpretations of the Seals and Trumpets of Revelation.” A term
paper presented for the Course CHIS570 History of the Seventh-
day Adventist Church, Seventh-day Adventist Theological
Seminary, Andrews University, Spring, 1977.
“How to Do It?” Review and Herald, June 6, 1882, 368.
Howe, Forrest L. “Life and Work of George McCready Price (1870-1963).”

Term paper, Andrews University, 1974.
Hull, M[oses]. “A Few Thoughts on 2 Cor. V, 1-4.” Review and Herald, August
11, 1859, 89.
________. “Thoughts on the Messages.” Review and Herald, January 5, 1860,

52–53.
Hyde, Gordon M. “Church Holds Historic Bible Conference.” Review and

Herald, August 15, 1974, 4–6.
Hyde, Gordon M., ed. A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics. Washington,

DC: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1974.
Ingraham, William S. “Thoughts on the Institution and Perpetuity of the

Sabbath.” Review and Herald, May 16, 1854, 129–130.
298
“In Memoriam: Uriah Smith: Born May 2, 1832, Died March 6, 1903, Aged
70 Years, 10 Months, and 4 Days.” Review and Herald, March 10,
1903, 3–7.
“In Remembrance.” Review and Herald, August 7, 1969, 24.
“Is There any Word from the Lord?” Lake Union Herald, June 25, 1974, 4–7.
“Issues in Revelation DARCOM Report.” In Symposium on Revelation–Book

I, edited by Frank B. Holbrook, 6:175–181. Silver Spring, MD:
Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-day
Adventists, 1992.
Jackson, Martin L. “The Involvement and Contribution of F. D. Nichol in

the Creation and Evolution Controversy.” A term paper presented
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the course CHIS570
History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Seventh-day
Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, Fall 1977.
Jacobs, E. “The Millennium.” The Midnight Cry, October 5, 1843, 49–51.
________. “The Millennium: Continued.” The Midnight Cry, November 3,

1843, 89–91.
Jamieson, Robert, Andrew R. Fausset, and David Brown. A Commentary,

Critical, Experimental, and Practical on the Old and New
Testaments. New York; Philadelphia; Hartford; Cincinnati: S. S.
Scranton and Company, 1873.
“Jean Zurcher.” Adventist Review, January 29, 1981, 2.
“Jean Zurcher [Obituary Citation].” Adventist Review, July 24, 2003, 30.
Jemison, Housel T. A Prophet Among You. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press,
1955.
“John’s Visions: To Show Christ’s Servants Things Which Must Shortly Come
to Pass.” The Midnight Cry, February 24, 1843, [9].
“John’s Visions: To Show Christ’s Servants Things Which Must Shortly Come
to Pass.” The Midnight Cry, March 17, 1843, 57.
299
Bibliography
Johns, Warren H. “The Impact of George McCready Price Outside His Own
Church.” Term paper, Andrews University, 1969.
Johnson, Albert C. Advent Christian History: A Concise Narrative of the

Origin and Progress, Doctrine and Work of This Body of Believers.
Mendota, IL: Western Advent Christian Publication Society, 1918.
Johnsson, William. The Fragmenting of Adventism: Ten Issues Threatening

the Church Today: Why the Next Five Years Are Crucial. Boise, ID:
Pacific Press, 1995.
________. “The Saints’ End-Time Victory Over the Forces of Evil.” In

Symposium on Revelation-Book II, edited by Frank B. Holbrook,
3–40. Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. Silver Spring,
MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference of Seventh-
day Adventists, 1992.
Jones, Alonzo T. The Great Nations of Today. Battle Creek, MI: Review and
Herald, 1901.
Jones, Gerald Hansel. “Life and Contributions of Francis D. Nichol.”A term

paper presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
CHIS570 History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Andrews
University, Fall 1977.
Jones, Patrick M. Revelations From Revelation. Brushton, NY: TEACH

Services, 2008.
Jørgensen, Kenneth. “The First Two Trumpets of Revelation 8: The

Origins and Development of Seventh-day Adventist Historicist
Interpretation.” MA thesis, Andrews University, 1998.
“Julius Lafeyette Tucker.” Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia. Edited by

Don F. Neufeld. 2nd rev. ed. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
1996.
“The Judgment−The Millennium.” The Midngiht Cry, December 1, 1842, [3].
“The Judgment−The Millennium No. 2.” The Midnight Cry, December 3,

1842, [2].
300
Keith, Alexander. The Signs of the Times: As Denoted by the Fulfilment

[sic] of Historical Predictions: Traced down from the Babylonish
Captivity to the Present Time. 2 vols. New York: Jonathan Leavitt,
1832.
Kent, J. W. “A Tribute –L. F. Were.” Australasian Record, May 15, 1967, 10, 12.
Knight, George R. Joseph Bates: The Real Founder of Seventh-day Adventism.

Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2004.
________. “Kenneth A. Strand: Editor, Author, Pastor, Teacher, Administrator,

and Friend.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 33, no. 2
(Autumn 1995): 167–70.
________. Millennial Fever and the End of the World: A Study of Millerite
Adventism. Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1993.
________. A Search for Identity: The Development of Seventh-day Adventist

Beliefs. Adventist Heritage Series. Hagerstown, MD: Review and
Herald, 2000.
Köhler, Erton C. “Comienza proyecto de traducción al portugués del

Comentario Bíblico Adventista.” No. 84. Del escritorio del
presidente, August 20, 2010.
Koranteng-Pipim, Samuel. “‘I Need to Finish My Work’: Tribute to Dr. C.

Mervyn Maxwell.” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 11,
no. 1-2 (2000): 40–45.
Kotter, Vel Eric. “A Study of the Meaning of ‘Works’ in the Book of Revelation
with a Syllabus for Applying the Findings in Religious Instruction.”
DMin dissertation, Andrews University, 1986.
Kubo, Sakae, ed. Theological Bibliography: Basic Books for the Minister’s
Library. Berrien Springs, MI: Seminary Student Forum, Andrews
University, 1977.
Litch, Josiah. “The Battle of Armageddon.” Signs of the Times (Millerite),

September 1, 1840, 85–86.
301
Bibliography
________. “The Battle of Armageddon: Concluded.” Signs of the Times

(Millerite), September 15, 1840, 94–95.
________. “Events to Succeed the Second Woe.” Signs of the Times (Millerite),
1 August 1840, 70.
________. An Exposition of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation VIII & IX. Battle
Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing
Association, 1866.
________. An Exposition of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation VIII & IX. 3rd
ed., rev. and enl. Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day
Adventist Publishing Association, 1875.
________. “The Nations.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), 1 February 1841,

161–162.
________. “New Year’s Gift to the Herald.” Advent Herald, 17 December 1853,
404.
________. The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets of Revelation VIII and IX.
Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Review and Herald Office,
1859.
Labagh, I. P. “The Two Witnesses.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), February

1, 1841, 162–164.
________. “The Two Witnesses.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), February 15,
1841, 171–172.
________. “Two Witnesses.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), March 1, 1841, 178.
Laban, J. P. “The Two Witnesses.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), April 1, 1841,
6–7.
Land, Gary. Historical Dictionary of the Seventh-day Adventists. Historical

Dictionaries of Religions, Philosophies, and Movements. Vol. 56.
Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press, 2005.
Land, Gary, ed. Adventism in America. Rev. ed. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews
University Press, 1998.
302
“Largest Printing Project Goes to Third World.” South Pacific Division

Record, April 8, 1995, 6.
LaRondelle, Hans K. Als Harmagedon: Ende und Neuer Anfang. Saatkorn-

Verlag Hamburg: K. Bangert, 1991.
________. “Armageddon in the Bible and in Adventist History.” Paper

presented to DARCOM, 1987, Center for Adventist Research,
________. Armagedom: o verdadeiro cenário da guerra final. Tatuí, São

Paulo, Brazil: Casa Publicadora Brasileira, 2004.
________. Assurance of Salvation. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1999.
________. “Autobiographical Information.” October 14, 1991. Center for

________. Boas novas sobre o Armagedon. Translated by César Luís Pagani.

Tatuí, São Paulo, Brazil: Casa Publicadora Brasileira, 2002.
________. La Certeza de la Salvación. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Asociación

Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1999.
________. Chariots of Salvation: The Biblical Drama of Armageddon.

Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1987.
________. Christ Our Salvation: What God Does for Us and in Us. Mountain
View, CA: Pacific Press, 1980.
________. Cristo nuestra salvación: Lo que Dios ha hecho por nosotros y lo

que está dispuesto a hacer en nosotros. Berrien Springs, MI: First
Impressions, 1981.
________. Deliverance in the Psalms: Messages of Hope for Today. Berrien

Springs, MI: First Impressions, 1983.
________. Geef Rekenschap. The Hague, Netherlands: Private edition, 1966.
303
Bibliography
________. The Good News About Armageddon. Hagerstown, MD: Review

and Herald, 1990.
________. “The Heart of Historicism.” Ministry, September, 2005, 22-23, 25-

27.
________. “Het Onderzoekend Oordeel in de Heilige Schrift.” Bachelor’s

thesis, Dutch SDA Seminary, 1953.
________. Het Bijbelse Toekomsbeeld: Profetische Studiën. The Hague,

Netherlands: [Private edition, accepted by SDA leaders in
Brussels, Bergium, to be sold to pastors], 1962.
________. “The Historicist Method in Adventist Interpretation.” Spes

Christiana 21 (2010): 79–89.
________. How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the Bible: The
Biblical-Contextual Approach. Sarasota, FL: First Impressions,
1997.
________. How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies of the Bible: A

Biblical-Contextual Approach. Bradenton, FL: First Impressions,
2007.
________. “Interpretation of Prophetic and Apocalyptic Prophecy.” In A

Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics, edited by Gordon M. Hyde,
225–249. Washington, DC: General Conference of Seventh-day
Adventist, 1974.
________. The Israel of God in Prophecy: Principles of Prophetic Interpretation.

10th printing. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press,
2003.
________. Justificaçao-Sanctificaçao-Glorificaçao. Sãu Paulo, Brazil: n.p.,

1979.
________. Light for the Last Days: Jesus’ End-Time Prophecies Made Plain in
the Book of Revelation. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 1999.
________. “My Journey of Discoveries in Apocalyptic Eschatology.” Paper

presented at the annual meeting of the Adventist Society for
Religious Studies, 1999.
304
________. Our Creator Redeemer: An Introduction to Biblical Covenant

Theology. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2005.
________. Paulus’ Brief aan de Galaten. The Hague, Netherlands: Dutch

SDA Publishing, 1966.
________. “A People of Prophecy: Beyond Disappointment.” Adventist

Review, June 1, 1989, 8–10.
________. “A People of Prophecy: For Such an Hour.” Adventist Review, June

8, 1989, 10–12.
________. “A People of Prophecy: In the Spirit of Elijah.” Adventist Review,

June 15, 1989, 8–10.
________. “A People of Prophecy: The Final Reformation.” Adventist Review,

June 22, 1989, 12–14.
________. “A People of Prophecy: Announcing the Fall of Babylon.” Adventist

Review, June 29, 1989, 11–13.
________. “A People of Prophecy: The Final Warning.” Adventist Review,

July 6. 1989, 11–13.
________. “A People of Prophecy: The Dying of Euphrates.” Adventist

Review, July 13, 1989, 10–12.
________. “A People of Prophecy: On the Road to Righteousness.” Adventist

Review, July 20, 1989, 8–10.
________. Perfection and Perfectionism: A Dogmatic-Ethical Study of Biblical

Perfection and Phenomenal Perfectionism. Andrews University
Monographs. Vol. 3. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University
Press, 1971.
________. Las profecías del fin. Translated by David Gullón. Buenos Aires,
Argentina: Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1999.
________. The Prophetische Aanspraken van het Wachttoren-Gernootschap.

The Hague, Netherlands: [Private edition, accepted by the Dutch
ABC in the Hague], 1964.
305
Bibliography
________. Righteousness by Faith: Seminary Lectures in Justification and

Sanctification by Faith in Christ. Berrien Springs, MI: n.p., 1966.
________. “Unity of the Scripture.” Ministry, May 1965, 14–15.
Lehmann, Richard. “Relationships between Daniel and Revelation.” In

Symposium on Revelation–Book I, edited by Frank B. Holbrook.
Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, 7 vols. Silver Spring,
Lesher, Richard W., and Frank B. Holbrook. “Daniel and Revelation

Committee Final Report.” In Symposium on Revelation-Book II,
edited by Frank B. Holbrook, 7:451–460. Daniel and Revelation
Committee Series. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute,
________. “Issues in the Book of Revelation: A Progress Report from the

Daniel and Revelation Committee.” Adventist Review, 3 August
1989, 13–15.
Lichtenwalter, Larry L. Revelation’s Great Love Story: More Than I Ever

Imagined. Hagerstown, MD: Autumn House, 2008.
Lindensmith, Darrel. “Desmond Ford and Historicism.” Adventist Today,

Spring 2011, 16-17, 29.
Litch, Josiah. Address to the Public, and Especially the Clergy, on the Near
Approach of the Glorious, Everlasting Kingdom of God on Earth:
As Indicated by the Word of God, the History of the World, and
Signs of the Present Times. Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes, 1842.
________. A Complete Harmony of Daniel and the Apocalypse. Philadelphia,

PA: Claxton, Remsen & Haffelfinger, 1873.
________. The Doctrine of Everlasting Punishment. Boston, MA: Damrell &

Moore, 1859.
________. “Fall of the Ottoman Power in Constantinople.” Signs of the Times

(Millierite), August 1, 1840, 70.
306
________. “Fall of the Ottoman Empire.−Concluded.” The Midnight Cry,

November 25, 1842, [3-4].
________. Messiah’s Throne and Millennial Glory. Philadelphia, PA: J. Litch,

1855.
________. The Pre-Millennial Advent Vindicated, being a Review of Rev. Dr.

David Brown’s ‘Post-Millennial Advent of Christ’. Boston, MA:
American Millennial Association, n.d.
________. Probability of the Second Coming of Christ about A.D. 1843.

Boston, MA: David H. Ela, 1838.
________. Prophetic Expositions: or a Connected View of the Testimony of

the Prophets Concerning the Kingdom of God and the Time of its
Establishment. 2 vols. Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes, 1842.
________. “The Three Wo [sic] Trumpets, Wo! Wo!! Wo!!!: Fall of the
Ottoman Empire, or Ottoman Supremacy Departed, August 11,
1840.” The Midnight Cry, November 24, 1842, [1-3].
________. “The Two Witnesses.” The Trumpet of Alarm, April 24, 1843, 11–13.
________. The Restitution, Christ’s Kingdom on Earth: The Return of Israel.

Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes, 1848.
________. Prophetic Significance of Eastern and European Movements:

Being a Plain, Literal, and Grammatical Constitution of the Last
Five Chapters of Daniel, Applied to Passing Events; Showing
Conclusively that a Syrian Prince, not Napoleon III, is the Antichrist
of the Last Days. Boston, MA: J. Litch, 1867.
“Literal Interpretation: Criticism on Rev. XI. 8−True Principles of Bible

Interpretation− By a Bible Reader.” Signs of the Times (Millerite),
October 1, 1840, 97–98.
“The Judgment−The Millennium: Criticism on Rev. XI. 8−True Principles

of Bible Interpretation−By a Bible Reader.” Signs of the Times
(Millerite), October 1, 1840, 97–98.
307
Bibliography
Lloren, Edgar Novo. “The New Jerusalem Motif in Revelation 21:1-22:5.”

PhD dissertation, Adventist International Institute of Advanced
Studies, Silang, Cavite, Philippines, 1998.
Lloyd, Ernest. “Memories of Elder Uriah Smith.” Review and Herald,

September 6, 1962, 12–13.
Loughborough, John N. “Is the Soul Immortal?” Review and Herald,

September 4, 1855, 33–36.
________. The Two-horned Beast of Rev. XIII: A Symbol of the United States.
Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald Office, 1857.
________. The Saints’ Inheritance, the Earth Made New. Battle Creek, MI:
Steam Press of the Review and Herald Office, 1859.
Lyu, Dong-gee. “The Use of Jeremiah in the Book of Revelation.” PhD

dissertation, Adventist International Institute of Advanced
Mandefro, Mesfin. “An Investigation into the Motif of Works and Reward
in the Letters to the Seven Churches of Revelation.” MA thesis,
Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies, Silang,
Cavite, Philippines, 2007.
Mansell, Donald E. Adventists and Armageddon. Boise, ID: Pacific Press,

1999.
________. Apocalypse! Has the Countdown Begun? Alma Park, Grantham,

Lincolnshire, England: Autumn House, 2000.
Mariano, Glenn Jade. “The Identity and Meaning of the ‘Earth-Dwellers’

in the Book of Revelation.” MA thesis, Adventist International
Institute of Advanced Studies, Silang, Cavite, Philippines, 2007.
“The Mark of the Beast.” The Midnight Cry, October 26, 1843, 84–85.
Matak, Dragutin. “Book Reviews: The Lamb Among the Beasts: Finding
Jesus in the Book of Revelation.” Dialogue, 1998, 31–32.
308
________. Review of The Lamb among the Beasts, by Roy C. Naden. Andrews
University Seminary Studies 36, no. 1 (Spring 1998): 148–49.
Mathewson, David L. Verbal Aspect in the Book of Revelation: The Function of

Greek Verb Tenses in John’s Apocalypse. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010.
Maxwell, C. Mervyn. “Adventist Education—The Difference.” Adventists

Affirm 3, no. 1 (Spring 1989): 7–15.
________. “Autobiographical Information.” August 25, 1987. Center for

________. “Baby Boomers and Moral Leadership.” Adventists Affirm 5, no. 2

(Fall 1991): 5-22, 25-28.
________. “A Brief History of Adventist Hermeneutics.” Journal of the

Adventist Theological Society 4, no. 2 (Autumn 1993): 209–26.
________. “Chrysostom’s Homilies Against the Jews: An English Translation.”

PhD dissertation, University of Chicago, 1966.
________. “A Christian Way to Treat a Difficult Wife.” Adventists Affirm 2,

no. 1 (Spring 1988): 35-36, 39.
________. “The Clearest Signs of the Second Coming.” Adventists Affirm 6,

no. 1 (Spring 1992): 25–34.
________. “In Confirmation of Prophetic Interpretation.” Journal of the

Adventist Theological Society 2, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 139–51.
________. “Contemporary Christian Music.” Adventists Affirm 12, no. 1

(Spring 1998): 3–9.
________. Dilo al mundo: La historia de los Adventistas del Séptimo Día.

Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1990.
________. Dios revela el futuro. Vol. 2. Boise, ID: Publicationes

Interamericanas and Pacific Press, 1989, reprint 2008.
309
Bibliography
________. “Do We Have to Be Holy? And It Is Possible to Be?” Adventists

Affirm 11, no. 3 (Fall 1997): 3–4.
________. [Editorial]. Adventists Affirm 11, no. 2 (Summer 1997): 3–4.
________. “Ellen G. White, Baal Worship, and Loyalty.” Adventists Affirm 7,

no. 1 (Spring 1993): 12-17, 38-39.
________. “An Exegetical and Historical Examination of the Beginning of

the 1260 Days of Prophecy with Special Attention Given to A.D.
538 and 1798 and Initial and Terminal Dates.” MA thesis, Andrews
University, 1951.
________ . “To Faculty and Staff of Andrews University,” Center for Adventist
Research, James White Library, Andrews University, Berrien
Springs, MI, May 26, 1983.
________. “Fulfilling Prophecies.” Adventists Affirm 11, no. 1 (Spring 1997):

3-4, 25.
________. “Gerhard F. Hasel, 1935-1994 Life Sketch.” Adventists Affirm 8, no.

2 (Fall 1994): 54–59.
________. God Cares: The Message of Daniel for You and Your Family. Vol. 1.
Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1981.
________. God Cares: The Message of Revelation for You and Your Family.
Vol. 2. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1985.
________. God and His Sanctuary: What Daniel Can Tell Us about 1844, the
Cleansing of the Sanctuary, and What Jesus Is Now Doing in the
Heavenly Sanctuary. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1980.
________. Gott Sorgt: Die Botschaft des Buches Daniel für Dich und Deine
Familie. Krattingen: Advent-Verlag Krattingen, 1987.
________. “The Great Controversy Story: As It Appears in the Bible.”

Adventists Affirm 12, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 11–12.
________. História do Adventismo. Translated by G. Brito. Santo André,

Brazil: Casa Publicadora Brasileira, 1982.
310
________. “Hang in There!” Adventists Affirm 12, no. 3 (Fall 1998): 3–4.
________. “How to Pick Real Seventh-day Adventists Out of a Bushel of

Christians.” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 1, no. 1
(Spring 1990): 103–17.
________. “I Have the Keys.” Adventists Affirm 11, no. 2 (Summer 1997): 36–
40.
________. “The Investigative Judgment: Its Early Development.” In The

Sanctuary and the Atonement: Biblical, Historical, and Theological
Studies, edited by Arnold V. Wallenkampf and W. Richard Lesher,
________. “The Investigative Judgment: Its Early Development.” In Doctrine

of the Sanctuary: A Historical Survey, edited by Frank B. Holbrook.
7 vols. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General
Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1989.
________. “Joseph Bates and Seventh-day Adventist Theology.” In The

Sabbath in Scripture and History, edited by Kenneth A. Strand,
________. “Let’s Be Serious” Adventists Affirm 3, no. 2 (Fall 1989): 24-32, 40.
________. “Life Sketch [of Gerhard F. Hasel].” Journal of the Adventist

Theological Society 6, no. 1 (Spring 1995): 59–68.
________. Look at It This Way: Questions and Answers Selected from Mervyn
Maxwell’s Common in Signs of the Time Magazine. Mountain
________. Magnificent Disappointment: What Really Happened in 1844 and

Its Meaning for Today. Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1994.
________. “The Mark of the Beast.” Paper presented for Daniel and Revelation
Committee, Center for Adventist Research, James White Library,
________. “The Mark of the Beast.” In Symposium on Revelation-Book

II, edited by Frank B. Holbrook, 41–66. Silver Spring, MD:
311
Bibliography

Adventists, 1992.
________. Man, What a God! Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1970.
________. Moving Out: Breakthrough with God’s Church. Unit 4 [12th grade],
ed. Joe Engelkemier. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1980.
________. “Mutual Submission: What Is It?” Adventists Affirm 1, no. 2 (Fall

1987): 23–26.
________. “The Outline of Revelation: Some Suggestions.” Paper prepared

for Daniel and Revelation Committee, Center for Adventist
Springs, MI, 1983.
________. “Prayer of a Hungry Believer.” Adventists Affirm 2, no. 3 (Fall

1988): 58.
________. “The Remnant in SDA Thought.” Adventists Affirm 2, no. 2 (Fall

1988): 13–20.
________. “Response to NAD President’s Request to Annual Council.”

Adventists Affirm 9, no. 1 (Spring 1995): 30-37, 67.
________. Sagt es der ganzen Welt. Luneburg, Germany: Advent Verlag,

1997.
________. “Sanctuary and Atonement in SDA Theology: An Historical

Survey.” In The Sanctuary and the Atonement: Biblical, Historical,
and Theological Studies, edited by Arnold V. Wallenkampf and W.
Richard Lesher, 516–544. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1981.
________. “Seven Encouraging Things.” Journal of the Adventist Theological

Society 1, no. 2 (Autumn 1990): 88–102.
________. “Take the Bible as It Is.” Adventists Affirm 10, no. 1 (Spring 1996):
26–35.
________. Tell It to the World: The Story of Seventh-day Adventists. Mountain

312
________. Uma nova era segundo as profecias do Apocalipse. Translated by

Hélio Luiz Grelmann. Tatuí, São Paulo, Brazil: Casa Publicadora
Brasileira, 2002.
________. Ut i all verden!: historien om Syvendedags-Adventistene. Oslo:

Norsk Bokforlag, 1995.
________. “A Very Surprising (and Interesting) History.” Adventists Affirm

12, no. 3 (Fall 1998): 18–22.
________. “Victory in the Time of Trouble.” Adventists Affirm 10, no. 3 (Fall
1996): 30–38.
________. “What Difference Does 1844 Make?” Adventists Affirm 6, no. 3

(Fall 1992): 29–35.
________. “What God Hath Joined Together . . .” Adventists Affirm 7, no. 3

(Fall 1993): 14–21.
________. “Why Did You Wait so Long?” Adventists Affirm 9, no. 3 (Fall
1995): 21–29.
________. “A Year of Anniversaries.” Adventists Affirm 12, no. 2 (Summer

1998): 3–4.
________. “1844 and Being like Jesus.” Adventists Affirm 8, no. 3 (Fall 1994):
26-31, 60.
________. “1. The Great Controversy in Revelation 12-14.” Adventists Affirm

12, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 13–14.
________. “2. The Great Controversy in the Old Testament.” Adventists

Affirm 12, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 15–20.
________. “3. Continuation of the Great Controversy in the New Testament.”

________. “4. From Early Church to Remnant Church.” Adventists Affirm 12,
no. 2 (Summer 1998): 23–24.
313
Bibliography
________. “5. Eschatology: How Will the Controversy End?” Adventists

Affirm 12, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 25–28.
________. “6. If Eventually, Why Not Now?” Adventists Affirm 12, no. 2
(Summer 1998): 29–31.
________. “7. General Doctrinal Implications of the Great Controversy.”
________. “8. The Great Controversy and Two Major Doctrines.” Adventists
Affirm 12, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 35–40.
________. “9. Practical Applications of the Great Controversy Story.”

________. “10. The Great Controversy and Ellen G. White.” Adventists Affirm

12, no. 2 (Summer 1998): 44–49.
Maxwell, Lawrence. Revelation 12–22: A Refuge from the Storm. Boise, ID:
________. “C. Mervyn Maxwell: Memories of My Brother.” Journal of the

Adventist Theological Society 11, no. 1-2 (2000): 19–25.
Maxwell, Pauline. “Pauline’s Testimony.” Journal of the Adventist Theological

Society 11, no. 1-2 (2000): 30.
Maxwell, Stanley. “Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell, My Father.” Journal of the

Adventist Theological Society 11, no. 1- 2 (2000): 31–39.
Maynard-Reid, Hugh. “The Contribution and Impact of George M. Price.”

McLarty, John Thomas. “Intellectual Adventism.” Adventist Today 14, no. 2

(March 2006): 18–20.
Merriam, Jonas. “The Seventh Trumpet.” The Midnight Cry, November 7,

1844, 145–146.
“Millennium.” Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia. Edited by Don F.

Neufeld. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1996.
314
Miller, William. Apology and Defence [sic]. Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes,
1845.
________. “Chronological Chart of the World.” Signs of the Times (Millerite),

1 May 1841, 20–21.
________. Evidence from Scriptures and History of the Second Coming of

Christ about the Year 1843: Exhibited in a Course of Lectures. Troy,
NY: Kemble & Hooper, 1836.
________. Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of

Christ about the Year 1843: Exhibited in a Course of Lectures. Troy,
NY: Elias Gates, 1838.
________. “Explanation of the Number 666 in Revelation xiii: and the Three
Days Spoken of in Hosea vi, and Luke xiii.” Signs of the Times
(Millerite), 15 July 1841, 57–58.
________. “Exposition of the Twelfth Chapter of Revelation.” Signs of the

Times (Millerite), October 1, 1841, 97–98.
________. “Lecture II: The First Resurrection, Rev. xx. 6.” The Midnight Cry,
December 2, 1842, [4].
________. “Lecture VIII: The New Song, Rev. v. 9, 10.” The Midnight Cry,
December 12, 1842, [3-4].
________. “Lecture IX: The Seven Seals, as Representing Events to the End
of Time.” The Midnight Cry, December 13, 1842, [3-4].
________. “Lecture X: The Two Witnesses, As Having Been Slain in the

French Revolution.” The Midnight Cry, December 14, 1842, [3-4].
________. “Lecture XI: The Woman in the Wilderness.” The Midnight Cry,
December 15, 1842, [3-4].
________. “Miller’s Letters−No. 8.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), September

1, 1840, 81–82.
________. “Rules of Interpretation.” Second Advent Harbinger, March 16,

1844, 9–10.
315
Bibliography
________. Synopsis of Miller’s Views. Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes, 1843.
________. “Synopsis of Miller’s Views.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), January

25, 1843, 145–150.
________. “The Three Last Trumpets and the Three Woes: Rise and Fall of the
Turkish Empire.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), August 16, 1841, 73.
________. “The Two Witnesses: The 1260 Years Explained in Rev xi.” Signs of
the Times (Millerite), September 1, 1841, 81–83.
________. Vermont Telegraph, November 6, 1832.
________. Wm. Miller’s Apology and Defense. Boston, MA: Joshua V. Himes,
1845.
Miller, William, to Truman Hendrix, Hampton, August 9, 1831.
“Millerite Movement.” Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia. Edited by Don

F. Neufeld. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1996.
Minear, Paul Sevier. I Saw a New Earth: An Introduction to the Visions of the
Apocalypse. Washington, DC: Corpus Books, 1968.
Mitchel, Larry Arthur. “George McCready Price and the Seventh-day

Adventist Church.” Term paper, Andrews University, 1969.
Moon, Jerry. “Josiah Litch: Herald of ‘the Advent Near’.” Unpublished

paper, 1973, Center for Adventist Research, James White Library,
________. “C. Mervyn Maxwell: An Academic Life Sketch.” Journal of the

Adventist Theological Society 11, nos. 1-2 (2000): 2–10.
Moore, Mary Hunter. “What Was the Scope of the Revision of Thoughts
on Daniel and Revelation by Uriah Smith.” Center for Adventist
Springs, MI.
Moţ, Laurenţiu Florentin. “The Relaionship between the Four Living
316
Creatures and the Four Riders in Revelation 6:1-8.” MA thesis,

Mounce, Robert H. The Book of Revelation. The New International

Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1977.
Moyise, Steven, ed. Studies in the Book of Revelation. Edinburgh and New
York: T & T Clark, 2001.
Müller, Ekkehard. “Challenges to the Adventist Interpretation of Apocalyptic

Literature.” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 13, no. 1
(2010): 49-70.
________. Der Erste und der Latzte: Studien zum Buch der Offenbarung.
Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2011.
________. “Microstructural Analysis of Revelation 4-11.” 2 vols. ThD

dissertation, Andrews University, 1994.
________. Review of The Gospel from Patmos: Everyday Insights for Living
from the Last Book of the Bible, by Jon Paulien. Ministry, January
2010, 26.
Murdoch, William G. C. “Interpretation of Prophetic and Apocalyptic

Prophecy.” In A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics, edited
by Gordon M. Hyde. Washington, DC: General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists, 1974.
________. “Principles of Interpretation of Prophetic and Apocalyptic

Prophecy.” In North American Bible Conference, 1974: Notebook
Prepared by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists
Biblical Research Committee. Washington, DC: General
Musvosvi, Joel N. “The Concept of Vengeance in the Book of Revelation in

Its Old Testament and Near Eastern Context.” PhD dissertation,
________. “The Issue of Genre and Apocalyptic Prophecy.” Asia Adventist

Seminary Studies 5 (2002): 43–60.
317
Bibliography
Naden, Roy C. Beyond the Rush of Living. Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1990.
________. How to Live above Suffering and Guilt. Arroyo Grande, CA:
Concerned Communications, 1980.
________. The Lamb Among the Beasts: Finding Jesus in the Book of
Revelation. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1996.
________. Let Your Sabbath School Come Alive! Washington, DC: The
Sabbath School Department of the General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists, 1982.
________. Life Spirit: A Seminar in the Dynamics of Christian Living

Based upon the Word of God. Siloam Springs, AR: Concerned
Communications, 1989.
________. Reflections of the Son: A Study of the Gospels and the Distinctly
Different Portraits Drawn by the Four Writers Matthew Mark Luke
John. Seattle, WA: N Associates, 2005.
________. Studies in Revelation Seminar. Siloam Springs, AR: Concerned

Communications, 1981.
________. Without a Doubt. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1975.
________. Your Spiritual Gifts: Making the Great Discovery. Berrien Springs,
MI: Instructional Product Development, 1989.
Nam, Juhyeok. “The Life of Roy Allan Anderson, ‘The Chief’ of Adventist
Evangelists.” Term paper, Andrews University, 1995.
Nannes, Caspar. “Adventists Issue New Commentary.” Washington Star,

February 10, 1957, [n.p].
Neall, Beatrice S. “The Concept of Character in the Apocalypse, with

Implications for Character Education.” PhD dissertation, Andrews
University, 1981.
Neff, Merlin L. Victory out of Chaos: Messages from the Book of Revelation
for Today. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1942.
318
Nesmith, Cassandra. “SDA Bible Commentary on CD-ROM.” Outlook, June,

1996.
________. “Bible Commentary Now Available on CD-ROM Discs.” Gleaner,

June 17, 1996.
Neufeld, Don F. “Biblical Interpretation in the Advent Movement.” In A

Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics, edited by Gordon M. Hyde,
109–125. Washington, DC: General Conference of Seventh-day
Adventists, 1974.
________. “The SDA Bible Commentary in Retrospect.” Center for Adventist

Springs, MI.
________. “What’s Wrong with the Proof-Text Method?” Review and Herald,
March 11, 1976, 10–11.
Neufeld, Don F., ed. Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia. Commentary

Reference Series. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1996.
“New Works.” Review and Herald, November 21, 1854, 120.
“New Pastors.” Atlantic Union Gleaner, April 27, 1976, 11–12.
“Newscope: LLU Appoints New Dean for New School of Religion.” Scope,
Fall/Winter 2007-2008, 40.
Nichol, Francis D. The Answer to Modern Religious Thinking: A Discussion

of Current Religious Trends in Their Relation to the Distinctive
Teachings of Seventh-day Adventists. Washington, DC: Review
and Herald, 1936.
________. Behold, He Cometh: A Discussion of the Solemn Truth of the

Unexpectedness of Christ’s Coming, a Warning Against the
Temptations and Dangers That Confront the Church Today, and
an Appeal to Make Ready to Meet God Face to Face. Washington,
________. The Case Against Liquor: A Calm Portrayal of the Facts and a
319
Bibliography
Proposed Solution of the Age-old Problem of Liquor. Washington,

________. Certainty of My Faith: A Clear-cut Answer to the Often-asked

Question, “Why Are You a Seventh-day Adventist?” Washington,
________. Ellen G. White and Her Critics: An Answer to the Major

Charges That Critics Have Brought Against Mrs. Ellen G. White.
________. God’s Challenge to Modern Apostasy: A Study of the Three Angels’

Messages and the Sabbath in the Light of the Modern Apostasy in
Christendom. An Endeavor to Show that Revelation 14 Presents
the Most Timely Message for the World Today. Washington, DC:
Review and Herald, 1935.
________. Let’s Live Our Beliefs: A Discussion of Seventh-day Adventist

Beliefs in Terms of Their Practical Relation to Everyday Living.
________. Letters from Far Lands: Written During an Air Journey to 24

Lands, Describing Adventist Mission Activities and the Customs,
Habits, and Daily Life of the People in Europe, the Middle East,
Egypt and Ethiopia. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1948.
________. Making Ready for Heaven: A Reprint of Behold He Cometh. Let’s

Live Our Beliefs. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, [196?].
________. The Midnight Cry: A Defense of the Character and Conduct of

William Miller and the Millerites. Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1944.
________. Questions People Have Asked Me: The Editor of the Review and
Herald Answers Questions on Various Matters of Interest to
Adventists. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1959.
________. Reasons for Our Faith: A Discussion of Questions Vital to the

Proper Understanding and Effective Presentation of Certain
Seventh-day Adventist Teachings. Washington, DC: Review and
Herald, 1947.
320
________. Signs of Christ’s Coming: Current Events Fulfilling Bible Prophecy.

________. Why I Am a Seventh-day Adventist: A Personal Clear-cut Answer to

a Question That Is Asked by Many as They Watch the Remarkable
Growth and Vigor of This Religious Movement. Washington, DC:
________. Why I Believe in Mrs. E. G. White: Some Reasons Why Seventh-day

Adventists Believe That Ellen G. White Possessed the Gift of “the
Spirit of Prophecy.” Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1964.
Nichol, Francis D., et al. The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary:

The Holy Bible with Exegetical and Expository Comment. Vol. 7.
________. The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Vol. 7. Washington,

________. Comentario Bíblico Adventista del Séptimo Día. Chief-translated

by Victor E. Ampuero Matta. 7 vols. Mountain View, CA:
Publicationes Interamericanas and Pacific Press, 1978-1990.
________. Comentario Bíblico Adventista del Séptimo Día. Chief-translated

by Victor E. Ampuero Matta. 7 vols. Buenos Aires, Argentina:
Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1992-1996.
________. A Verse-by-Verse Commentary on the Book of Daniel: A Section

of Volume IV of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary.
________. A Verse-by-Verse Commentary on Daniel and Revelation: From

the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. Hagerstown, MD:
Review and Herald, 1957, reprinted 1980, 2009.
Niles, Daniel Thambyrajah. As Seeing the Invisible: A Study of the Book of

Revelation. New York: Harper, 1961.
Nix, James R. “Tribute to Dr. C. Mervyn Maxwell.” Journal of the Adventist

Theological Society, 11, no. 1-2 (2000): 26–29.
321
Bibliography
North American Bible Conference, 1974: Notebook Prepared by the General

Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists Biblical Research
Committee. Washington, DC: General Conference of Seventh-day
Adventists, 1974.
“Now Ready.” Review and Herald, May 14, 1867, 276.
“The Number of the Beast, Six Hundred Three Score and Six.” The Midnight
Cry, June 27, 1844, 395–396.
Numbers, Ronald L., and Jonathan M. Butler, eds. The Disappointed:

Millerism and Millenarianism in the Nineteenth Century.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1987.
Núñez, Samuel. The Vision of Daniel 8: Interpretations from 1700 to 1900.

Andrews University Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series. Vol.
14. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1989.
“Of Writers, Articles, and Miscellany . . . . Great Changes.” Review and

Herald, April 4, 1968, 30.
Olson, Albert V. Through Crisis to Victory, 1888-1991. Washington, DC:

“1978 Greater New York Ordination Services.” Atlantic Union Gleaner,

October 24, 1978, 8–9.
“Our Book List.” Review and Herald, June 18, 1867, 15.
Osborne, Grant R. Revelation. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New

Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002.
________. The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical

Interpretation. 2nd ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006.
Osgood, Dewitt S. Syllabus of Revelation: A Verse by Verse Study of the

Apocalypse. A Series of Lectures Delivered at the Indianapolis
North Side Church. Indianapolis, IN: [The Author], 1946.
Our Firm Foundation: A Report of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Conference

Held September 1-13, 1952, in the Sligo Seventh-day Adventist
322
Church Takoma Park, Maryland. 2 vols. Washington, DC: Review

and Herald, 1953.
Paulien, Jon K. “Allusions, Exegetical Method, and the Interpretation of

Revelation 8:7-12.” PhD dissertation, Andrews University, 1987.
________. Armageddon at the Door. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
2008.
________. El Armagedón está a las puertas: ¿tienes puesta la armadura?

Madrid, España: Editorial Safeliz, 2009.
________. The Book of Revelation: Too Good to Be False. Washington, DC:

________. “The Book of Revelation at the Crossroads: Where We’ve Been

and Where We’re Going.” Paper presented to a meeting of the
Adventist Society for Religious Studies, Boston, MA, 1999.
________. “Building to the Final Crisis: Things Get Worse Before They
Get Better.” 12 lectures on audio-cassette. Harrisburg, PA: The
Ambassador Group, 1996.
________. Daniel and Revelation: Student Edition. North American Division

Office of Education. Crossroads Series. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press,
1998.
________. Daniel and Revelation: Teacher Edition. North American Division

Office of Education. Crossroads Series. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press,
1998.
________. Daniel and Revelation: Teacher Resource Manual. North American

Division Office of Education. Crossroads Series. Nampa, ID:
________. Decoding Revelation’s Trumpets. Andrews University Seminary
Doctoral Dissertation Series. Vol. 11. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews
University Press, 1987.
________. The Day That Changed the World: Seeking God After September
11. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2002.
323
Bibliography
________. The Deep Things of God. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
2004.
________. “The End of All Things: It’s Worth the Wait.” 12 lectures on audio-
cassette. Harrisburg, PA: The Ambassador Group, 1996.
________. “The End of Historicism? Reflections on the Adventist Approach

to Biblical Apocalyptic—Part One.” Journal of the Adventist
Theological Society 14, no. 2 (Fall 2003): 15–43.
________. “The End of Historicism?: The Adventist Approach to Biblical

Apocalyptic—Part Two.” Journal of the Adventist Theological
Society 17, no. 1 (Spring 2006): 180–208.
________. Everlasting Gospel, Ever-changing World: Introducing Jesus to a

Skeptical Generation. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2008.
________. The Gospel from Patmos: Everyday Insights for Living from the Last
Book of the Bible. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2007.
________. “The Hermeneutics of Biblical Apocalyptic.” In Understanding

Scripture: An Adventist Approach, edited by George W. Reid,
245–270. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General
________. “The Interpreter’s Use of the Writings of Ellen G. White.” In

Symposium on Revelation–Book I, edited by Frank B. Holbrook,
6:163–172. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General
________. John and the Devotional Life: Student Edition. North American
________. John and the Devotional Life: Teacher Edition. North American
________. John and the Devotional Life: Teacher Resource Manual. North
American Division Office of Education. Crossroads Series.
324
________. John: Jesus Gives Life to a New Generation. Bible Amplifier Series.
Edited by George Knight. Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1995.
________. John: The Beloved Gospel. Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 2003.
________. Keys to the Code: How to Study Revelation Without Losing

Your Mind. 12 lectures on audio-cassette. Harrisburg, PA: The
Ambassador Group, 1996.
________. Knowing God in the Real World. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2000.
________. Meet God Again for the First Time. Hagerstown, MD: Review and
Herald, 2003.
________. The Millennium Bug: Is This the End of the World as We Know It?
________. Present Truth in the Real World: The Adventist Struggle to Keep
and Share Faith in a Secular Society. Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1993.
________. “Seals and Trumpets: Some Current Discussions.” In Symposium

on Revelation–Book I, edited by Frank B. Holbrook, 6:183–198.
Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, General Conference
of Seventh-day Adventists, 1992.
________. “Seven Churches and a Heavenly Vision: The Lamb and His
Wayward Saints.” 12 lectures on audio-cassette. Harrisburg, PA:
The Ambassador Group, 1996.
________. Seven Keys: Unlocking the Secrets of Revelation. Nampa, ID:

________. “Simply Revelation: A Beginner’s Guide to the Most Challenging

Book of the Bible.” Four-hour DVD lecture series on the Book of
Revelation. Berrien Springs, MI: Biblical Perspectives, 2007.
________. What the Bible Says about the End-Time. Hagerstown, MD:
325
Bibliography
Paulien, Jon K., and Graeme Bradford. Revelation, Hope, Meaning, Purpose. 12
DVDs, with each DVD featuring 2 episodes, 24 episode Revelation
DVD series. Sydney, Australia: Adventist Media Network, 2010.
Peterson, Stella P. “Uriah Smith.” Review and Herald, December 28, 1944,
6–8.
Pfandl, Gerhard. “Is Historicism Dead?” Record (South Pacific Division),
August 22, 1998, 8.
________. Review of “Revelation of Jesus Christ.” College and University

Dialogue 17, no. 3 (2005): 31, 34.
Pierson, Robert H. “Is There Any Word from the Lord?” Review and Herald,
August 15, 1974, 7–9.
________. “Is There Any Word from the Lord?” Lake Union Herald, June 25,
1974, 4–7.
Pifher, Gordon Edgar. “The Major Contribution of George McCready Price.”

Plumer, David. “Babylon.” The Midnight Cry, February 1, 1844, 218–219.
Plummer, L. Flora. “Missionary Reading Circle.” Review and Herald,

November 28, 1899, 776.
Pollard, Leslie N. “The Function of Loipos in Contexts of Judgment and

Salvation in the Book of Revelation.” PhD dissertation, Andrews
University, 2007.
“The Power Press.” Review and Herald, May 7, 1857, 8.
“The Precious Seed and the Sowers.” Review and Herald, September 21, 1905, 2.
The Present Truth, December 1849, 40.
Price, George McCready. “The Greatest of the Prophets: A New Commentary

on the Revelation.” Unpublished MS. Loma Linda, CA, 1951.
________. The Greatest of the Prophets: A New Commentary on the Book of

Daniel. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1955.
326
________. Time of the End. Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing Association,

1967.
“Principles of Interpretation.” Review and Herald, May 20, 1858, 3.
“Progress of the Battle: Affairs of the East.” Signs of the Times (Millerite),
November 15, 1840, 128.
“Progress of the Battle: Important News from Syria.” Signs of the Times
(Millerite), December 1, 1840, 138.
“Progress of the Battle: Letter from the East.” Signs of the Times (Millerite),
January 1, 1841, 151–152.
“Publications.” Review and Herald, February 3, 1852, 88.
“Publishing Work.” Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia. Edited by Don F.

Puritan, N. E. “Spiritual’ Millennium.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), April

6, 1842, 2–3.
________. “The Sixth Vial: Rev xvi.12.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), April
6, 1842, 3–4.
Rasmussen, Steen R. “Roots of the Prophetic Hermeneutic of William

Miller.” MA thesis, Newbold College, 1983.
Read, Walter E. The Bible, the Spirit of Prophecy, and the Church. Washington,
Read, W. E., and M. R. Thurber. “Committee on Biblical Study and Research.”

WDF 2245-b “Biblical Research Committee,” Center for Adventist
Springs, MI.
Reid, George W. “From an Eyewitness at the 1952 Bible Conference.” Adventist

Review, June 23, 2011, 25.
327
Bibliography
“Report of Bible Conference, Held in Takoma Park, D.C.” 1919. Center for
Reynolds, Edwin Earl. Review of How to Understand the End-Time Prophecies

of the Bible, by Hans K. LaRondelle. Asia Adventist Seminary
Studies 2 (1999): 118–21.
________. Review of Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book

of Revelation, by Ranko Stefanovič. Andrews University Seminary
Studies 48, no. 2 (Autumn 2010): 351–55.
________. Review of Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book

of Revelation, 2nd ed., by Ranko Stefanovič. Ministry, September
2010, 27–28.
________. “The Sodom, Egypt, Babylon Motif in the Book of Revelation.”

PhD dissertation, Andrews University, 1994.
Ricchiuti, Paul B. Arthur S. Maxwell: Remembering Uncle Arthur. Nampa,

ID: Pacific Press, 2009.
Rice, George E. “Ellen G. White’s Use of Daniel and Revelation.” In

Symposium on Revelation–Book I, edited by Frank B. Holbrook,
6:145–161. Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. Silver Spring,
Robinson, Virgil. Cabin Boy to Advent Crusader. Nashville, TN: Southern,

1960.
Robinson, Virgil E. “Uriah Smith and His Mighty Pen.” MV Program Kit,
July-September 1971, 60–67.
Rocha, Isnard. Apocalipse, Evangelho de João e Cartas. Atibaia, São Paulo,

Brazil: Ébano Editora, 1997.
Rodrigues, Gerson. “James White and the Seven Trumpets (1844-1881).”

A paper presented for CHIS 686 Development of Prophetic
Interpretation, Andrews University, 2006.
328
Rodriguez, Ángel M. Future Glory: The Greatest End-Time Prophecies in the

Bible. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2002.
Rowe, David L. God’s Strange Work: William Miller and the End of the World.
Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2008.
________. “Millerites.” Encyclopedia of Millennialism and Millennial

Movements. Edited by Richard A. Landes. New York: Routledge,
2000. 265–270.
________. Thunder and Trumpets: Millerites and Dissenting Religion in

Upstate New York, 1800-1850. American Academy of Religion
Studies in Religion. Vol. 38. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985.
Rowley, H. H. and Viliam Pavloski, review of The Seventh-day Bible

Commentary. Center for Adventist Research, James White
Library, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI.
Royo, Daniel David. “Josiah Litch: His Life, Work, and Use of His Writings,
on Selected Topics, by Seventh-day Adventist Writers.” MDiv
thesis, Andrews University, 2009.
“Rules of Interpretation.” Review and Herald, June 12, 1855, 245.
Sabuin, Richard Apelles. “Repentance in the Book of Revelation.” PhD

dissertation, Adventist International Institute of Advanced
Sanborn, Issac. “A Few Thoughts on the Moral Law or Ten Commandments

of God.” Review and Herald, May 26, 1859, 6.
Sarli, Enilson. “Steps in the Development of the Understanding of the Third

Angel’s Message among Sabbatarian Adventists Between 1845 and
1890.” Term paper, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary,
Satelmajer, Nikolaus. Review of God Cares, Volume 1: The Message of Daniel

for You and Your Family, by Mervin Maxwell. Ministry, May 1983,
32.
329
Bibliography
Saunder, E. B. “Thoughts on the Atonement.” Review and Herald, April 15,

1862, 155.
Schneider, Don. “He Molded My Life: Elder C. M. Maxwell, My Teacher.”

Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 11, no. 1-2 (2000): 15–
18.
Schomburg, William M. “Check List of Seventh-day Adventist Publications
in the United States, 1850-1900, with a Historical Introduction.”
MS thesis, Catholic University of America, 1972.
Schwarz, Richard W. Light Bearers to the Remnant. Boise, ID: Pacific Press,
1979.
Schwarz, Richard W., and Floyd Greenleaf. Light Bearers: A History of the
Seventh-day Adventist Church. Rev. ed. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press,
2000.
Scott, Craig. “Bible Conference to Evaluate, Study SDA Bible Doctrines.”

Student Movement, May 9, 1974, 1.
Scragg, W. M. R. “South Australian.” Australasian Record, November 23,

1942, 7.
Seton, Bernard E. “Interpretation of Biblical History, Wisdom, and Poetry.”

In A Symposium on Biblical Hermeneutics, edited by Gordon M.
Hyde, 195–207. Washington, DC: General Conference of Seventh-
“The Seven Last Plagues.” The Midnight Cry, August 10, 1843, 205–207.
“The Seventh Trumpet.” The Midnight Cry, November 30, 1843, 124–126.
Shea, William H. “Historicism, the Best Way to Interpret Prophecy.”

Adventists Affirm 17, no. 1 (Spring, 2003): 22–34.
________. Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation. Daniel and Revelation

Committee Series. Vol. 1. Washington, DC: Biblical Research
________. Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation. Rev. ed. Daniel

and Revelation Committee Series. Vol. 1. Silver Spring, MD:
330

Adventists, 1992.
“Signs of the Times.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), July 1, 1840, 53.
“The Sixth Seal.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), October 11, 1843, 64.
Smith, Uriah. “[Announcements].” Review and Herald, April 17. 1866, 160.
________. “[Announcements].” Review and Herald, March 13, 1866, 120.
________. “[Announcements].” Review and Herald, February 26, 1867, 144.
________. The Biblical Institute: A Synopsis of Lectures on the Principal

Doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists. Battle Creek, MI: Steam
Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1878.
________. Both Sides on the Sabbath and Law: Review of T. M. Preble.

Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Pub.
Association, 1864.
________. “By the Way.” Review and Herald, September 26, 1865, 132.
________. “Daniel Chapters VII and IX.” Review and Herald, November 21,
1854, 116–117.
________. “Daniel Chapters VIII and IX.” Review and Herald, April 30, 1857,
202–204.
________. Daniel and the Revelation. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
2005.
________. Daniel and the Revelation: The Response of History to the Voice
of Prophecy, A Verse by Verse Study of These Important Books of
the Bible. Watford, England: The Stanborough Press, 1888.
________. Daniel and the Revelation: The Response of History to the Voice of
Prophecy; a Verse by Verse Study of These Important Books of the
Bible. Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1897.
________. Daniel and the Revelation: The Response of History to the Voice of
331
Bibliography
Prophecy, a Verse by Verse Study of These Important Books of the

Bible. Nashville, TN: Southern, 1941.
________. “Exposition of Daniel II, 31-34: Or Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream.”

Review and Herald, October 31, 1854, 93–95.
________. “Exposition of Daniel II, 31-44: Or Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream.”

Review and Herald, April 9, 1857, 177–179.
________. “Exposition of Dan VII: Or the Vision of the Four Beasts.” Review
and Herald, April 23, 1857, 194–196.
________. “Exposition of Daniel VII: Or the Vision of the Four Beasts.”

Review and Herald, November 15, 1854, 108–110.
________. The Four Universal Monarchies of the Prophecy of Daniel and

God’s Everlasting Kingdom. Rochester, NY: Adventist Review
Office, 1855.
________. Here and Hereafter: Or Man in Life and Death, the Reward of the
Righteous and the Destiny of the Wicked. Battle Creek, MI: Review
and Herald, 1897.
________. Man’s Nature and Destiny: Or, the State of the Dead, the Reward
of the Righteous, and the End of the Wicked. Battle Creek, MI:
________. The Marvel of Nations: Our Country: Its Past, Present, and Future
and What the Scriptures Say of It. Battle Creek, MI: Review and
Herald, 1885.
________. “The Ministration of Angels.” Review and Herald, May 16, 1854,
133.
________. “Miscellaneous Observations.” Review and Herald, November 11,

1858, 196.
________. Modern Spiritualism: A Subject of Prophecy and a Sign of the

Times. Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1896.
332
________. Looking unto Jesus: Or, Christ in Type and Antitype. Battle Creek,
MI: Review and Herald, 1898.
________. The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation. Washington, DC:

________. “The Sanctuary.” Review and Herald, December 5, 1854, 124.
________. The Sanctuary and the Twenty-three Hundred Days of Daniel VIII,
14. Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald, 1877.
________. Seventh-day Adventists and Their Work. Oakland, CA:

International Tract Society, 1896.
________. “The Seven Last Plagues.” Review and Herald, June 18, 1857, 52–53.
________. “The Seven Last Plagues: Concluded.” Review and Herald, June
25, 1857, 60–61.
________. “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets Rev. vii, viii, ix.” Review
and Herald, July 8, 1858, 57–59.
________. “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets Rev. vii, viii, ix: Third
Trumpet.” Review and Herald, July 15, 1858, 65–67.
________. “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets Rev. vii, viii, ix: The Fifth
Trumpet, or First Wo.” Review and Herald, July 22, 1858, 73–75.
________. “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets Rev. vii, viii, ix: The
Torment of the Greeks One Hundred and Fifty Years.” Review and
Herald, July 29, 1858, 82–84.
________. “The Sounding of the Seven Trumpets Rev. vii, viii, ix: When did
Mahommedan Independence in Constantinople Depart.” Review
and Herald, August 5, 1858, 89–90.
________. The State of the Dead and the Destiny of the Wicked. Battle
Association, 1873.
333
Bibliography
________. “Synopsis of the Present Truth: No. 1.” Review and Herald,
November 12, 1857, 4.
________. Synopsis of the Present Truth: A Brief Exposition of the Views of S.

D. Adventists. Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist Publishing
Association, 1884.
________. The Testimony of the Bible on the State of the Dead. Battle
Association, 1873.
________. Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Daniel. Battle

Association, 1873.
________. Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Revelation. Battle

Association, 1865.
________. Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Daniel and the
Revelation: Being an Exposition, Text by Text, of These Important
Portions of the Holy Scriptures. Battle Creek, MI: Review and
Herald, 1881.
________. Thoughts, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Daniel and the
Portions of the Holy Scriptures. 6th ed. London, England: The
Present Truth, 1888.
________. Thoughts, Critical and Practical on the Books of Daniel and the
Portions of the Holy Scriptures. Battle Creek, MI: Review and
Herald, 1890.
________. Thoughts on the Prophecies of Revelation: Being Part II of the

Combined Volume “Daniel and the Revelation” Showing the
Response of History to the Voice of Prophecy. Battle Creek, MI:
________. “Thoughts on the Advent.” Review and Herald, January 8, 1861, 60.
334
________. “Thoughts on the Revelation.” Review and Herald, April 16, 1867,
228.
________. “Thoughts on the Revelation.” Review and Herald, July 18, 1865,
52.
________. “The Two-Horned Beast: Are the United States a Subject of

Prophecy?” Review and Herald, March 12, 1857, 148.
________. The United States in the Light of Prophecy: Or, An Exposition of

Rev. 13:11-17. Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day
Adventist Publishing Association, 1872.
________. The Visions of Mrs. E. G. White. Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of
the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1868.
________. The Warning Voice of Time and Prophecy: A Word for the Sabbath.
Rochester, NY: James White, 1853.
________. War and the Sealing the One Hundred and Forty-four Thousand.
Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association,
[1862].
________. Which? Mortal or Immortal?: Or, An Inquiry into the Present

Constitution and Future Condition of Man. Battle Creek, MI:
Steam Press of the Review and Herald Office, 1860.
“Smith, Uriah.” Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia. Edited by Don F.

[Smith, Uriah, and James] White. A Brief Exposition of Daniel ii, vii, viii, ix,
the 2300 Days and the Sanctuary. [Battle Creek, MI]: n.p., [1857].
________. The Prophecy of Daniel: The Four Kingdoms, the Sanctuary and
the 2300 days. Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Review and
Herald Office, 1859.
Snider, John D. Booklove: Condensed from I Love Books. Washington, DC:

335
Bibliography
________. Highways to Learning: A Guide Through Bookland. Washigton,

________. I Love Books: Why, What, How, and When We Should Read.
Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1942.
________. I Love Books: A Guide Through Bookland. Rev. ed. Washington,

________. I Love Books: A Guide Through Bookland. New rev. ed. Washington,
Snow, Samuel S. “The Seven Churches of Asia: Definitions.” The Midnight

Cry, May 2, 1844, 331.
Son, Yoon-Ho. “A Great Historical Project of the Korean Publishing House.”

New and Views (Northern Asia-Pacific Division), February 2001,
8.
Spalding, Arthur W. Footprints of the Pioneers. Washington, DC: Review

and Herald, 1947.
________. “Heralds of the Blessed Hope−8: The Pen of a Ready Writer.” Signs
of the Times (Seventh-day Adventist), June 14, 1949, 8–9.
________. “The Pen of a Ready Writer.” Signs of the Times, 14 June 1949.
Spicer, W. A. “Notes About Pioneer Workers and Early Experiences –No. 19:
Still New Burden Bearers Came Pressing In.” Review and Herald,
June 6, 1940, 8–10.
Spicer, William A. Beacon Lights of Prophecy. Takoma Park, MD: Review

and Herald, 1935.
“Statement on Desmond Ford Document.” Ministry, 20–22.
Stauffer, Paul J. “Uriah Smith: Wood Engraver.” Adventist Heritage 3, no. 1

(Summer 1976): 17–21.
Stefanovič, Ranko. “The Background and Meaning of the Sealed Book of
336
Revelation 5.” PhD dissertation, Andrews University, 1995.
________. The Background and Meaning of the Sealed Book of Revelation 5.

Andrews University Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series. Vol.
22. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1996.
________. “How an Adventist Scholar Writes a Commentary on Revelation.”

In Adventist Society for Religious Studies: Annual Meeting. Paper
presented at Adventist Society for Religious Studies in Sheraton
Boston Hotel and Towers, 1999.
________. Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation.

Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2002.
________. Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation.

2nd ed. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2009.
Stewart, A. G. “Glimpses into Our Historical Past.” Record (South Pacific

Division), August 3, 1964, 12–13.
Storrs, George. “Exposition of Revelation XI: The Two Witnesses.” The

Midnight Cry, 4 May 1843, 46–48.
________. “Harmony of Revelation 19th, 20th, 21st.” The Midnight Cry,

March 10, 1843, 43–44.
________.“Harmony of Revelation 19th, 20th, 21st.” The Midnight Cry, May

4, 45-46.
Strand, Kenneth A. “Apocalyptic Prophecy and the Church−1.” Ministry,

October 1983, 20–23.
________. “Apocalyptic Prophecy and the Church−2.” Ministry, December

1983, 14–18.
________. “The Book of Revelation: A Review Article on Some Recent

Literature.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 11, no. 2 (1973):
181–93.
________. “Chiastic Structure and Some Motifs in the Book of Revelation.”
337
Bibliography

401–08.
________. “The Eight Basic Visions in the Book of Revelation.” Andrews

________. “The Eight Basic Visions.” In Symposium on Revelation–Book

I, edited by Frank B. Holbrook, 6:35–49. Daniel and Revelation
________. “Foundational Principles of Interpretation.” In Symposium on

Revelation-Book II, edited by Frank B. Holbrook, 3–34. Daniel and
Revelation Committee Series. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research
________. “A Further Note on the Covenantal Form in the Book of Revelation.”

251–64.
________. An Introduction to the Literary Structure and Theology of the

Book of Revelation (Paper presented for DARCOM). Center for
Berrien Springs, MI, 1982.
________. Interpreting the Book of Revelation: Hermeneutical Guidelines,

with Brief Introduction to Literary Analysis. 2nd ed. Naples, FL:
Ann Arbor Publishers, 1979.
________. “Investigative Judgment in the Book of Revelation.” Pacific Union

Recorder, 13 October 1980, 2.
________. “Literary Structure: A Key to Interpreting the Revelation.”

Ministry, March 1977, 17–20.
________. The Open Gates of Heaven: A Brief Introduction to Literary

Analysis of the Book of Revelation. 2nd enl. ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Ann
Arbor Publishers, 1972.
________. “‘Overcomer’: A Study in the Macrodynamic of Theme
338
Development in the Book of Revelation.” Andrews University

Seminary Studies 22, no. 3 (Autumn 1984): 317–25.
________. “An Overlooked Old-Testament Background to Revelation 11:1.”

317–25.
________. Perspectives in the Book of Revelation: Essays on Apocalyptic
Interpretation. Worthington, OH: Ann Arbor Publishers, 1975.
________. Review of God Cares, vol. 2: The Message of Revelation for You and
Your Family, by Mervin Maxwell. Andrews University Seminary
Studies 24 (1986): 284–86.
________. “The Seven Heads: Do They Represent Roman Emperors?” In

Symposium on Revelation-Book II, edited by Frank B. Holbrook,
7:177–206. Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. Silver Spring,
________. “Some Modalities of Symbolic Usage in Revelation 18.” Andrews

________. “Toward a Theology of the Book of Revelation, Part I: The

Hermeneutical Foundation.” Paper presented at DARCOM,
February 1990. Center for Adventist Research, James White
Library, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI.
________. “Toward a Theology of the Book of Revelation Part II: Some Basic
Themes.” Paper presented at DARCOM, February 1990. Center
for Adventist Research, James White Library, Andrews University,
________. “Toward a Theology of the Book of Revelation Part III: Aspects of

Judgment and Reward.” Paper presented at DARCOM, February
1990. Center for Adventist Research, James White Library,
________. “Two Aspects of Babylon’s Judgment Portrayed in Revelation 18.”

Andrews University Seminary Studies 20, no. 1 (Spring 1982): 53–
60.
339
Bibliography
________. “The Two Olive Trees of Zechariah 4 and Revelation 11.” Andrews
University Seminary Studies 20, no. 3 (Autumn 1982): 257–61.
________. “The Two Witnesses of Rev 11:3-12.” Andrews University Seminary

Studies 19, no. 2 (Summer 1981): 127–35.
________. “The Victorious-Introduction Scenes in the Visions in the Book
of Revelation.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 25, no. 3
(Autumn 1987): 267–88.
________. “Victorius-Introduccion Scenes.” In Symposium on Revelation–

Book I, edited by Frank B. Holbrook, 51–72. Daniel and Revelation
Straw, W. E. Studies in the Book of Revelation: Volume II. Berrien Springs,

MI: Emmanuel Missionary College, 1943.
Taber, Gary. “The Views of the Trumpets and Seals as Presented by William
Miller, Uriah Smith, and These Times.” Term Paper, Seventh-day
Taggart, William C. “The Three Parts of Babylon: Teaching a Historicist

Interpretation of the Leopardlike, Lamblike and Scarlet Beasts
(Rev 13 and 16:19 as reflected in Rev 17) Based upon the Douglas
Waterhouse Construct.” PhD dissertation, Andrews University,
1998.
Taylor, Rilla Dee. “A Conceptual Model for the Professional Practice of

Seventh-day Adventist Educational Administration Based on
the Proclamations of the Three Angels of Revelation 14.” PhD
“Thoughts on the Great Battle.” Review and Herald, January 21, 1862, 69.
The Voice of Prophecy. God Cares: Prophecies from the Bible Book of
Revelation (Thousand Oaks, CA: Voice of Prophecy, 1986). Center
Thiele, Edwin R. Outline Studies in Revelation. Berrien Springs, MI:

Emmanuel Missionary College, 1949.
340
________. Outline Studies in Revelation. Cooranbong, N.S.W., Australia:

Avondale College, 1974.
Thompson, Alden. “Theological Consultation II.” Spectrum 12, no. 2 (1981):

40–52.
“Thoughts on Daniel and Revelation, Ellen G. White Regarding.” Ellen G.

White Estate Branch Office Document File, WDF 233, Center for
Thurber, Merwin R. “New Edition of ‘Daniel and the Revelation’.” Ministry,

April, 1945, 13–15.
________.“Revised D&R in Relation to Denominational Doctrine.” Ministry,

May, 1945, 3-4, 30.
________. “Uriah Smith and the Charge of Plagiarism.” Ministry, June 1945,
15–16.
Tilly, Stephanie. “One Penny: My Friend Dr. Maxwell.” Journal of the
Adventist Theological Society 11, no. 1-2 (2000): 46–48.
Timm, Alberto R. “Historical Background of Adventist Biblical

Interpretation.” In Understanding Scripture: An Adventist
Approach, edited by George W. Reid, 1–14. Silver Spring, MD:
Adventists, 2005.
________. “Miniature Symbolization & the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic

Interpretation.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 42, no. 1
(Spring 2004): 149–67.
________. “Miniature Symbolization & the Year-Day Principle (revised).” In

Prophetic Principles: Crucial Exegetical, Theological, Historical &
Practical Insights, edited by Ron du Preez, 233–270. Lansing, MI:
Michigan Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2007.
________. “The Sanctuary and the Three Angels’ Messages, 1844-1863:

Integrating Factors in the Development of Seventh-day Adventist
Doctrines.” PhD dissertation, Andrews University, 1995.
341
Bibliography
________. “Seventh-day Adventist Eschatology, 1844-2004: A Brief

Historical Overview.” In Prophetic Principles: Crucial Exegetical,
Theological, Historical & Practical Insights, edited by Ron du
Preez, 151–205. Lansing, MI: Michigan Conference of Seventh-day
Adventists, 2007.
Tlau, Chawngdinpuii J. “The Identification and Timing of the Marriage

of the Lamb in Revelation 19:6-8.” PhD dissertation, Adventist
International Institute of Advanced Studies, Silang, Cavite,
Philippines, 2008.
Tonstad, Sigve K. Saving God’s Reputation: The Theological Function of

Pistis Iesou in the Cosmic Narratives of Revelation. London: T&T
Clark, 2006.
Traveller, A. “The Great Battle.” Signs of the Times (Millerite), 1 September

1840, 85.
Treiyer, Alberto R. The Apocalyptic Expectations of the Sanctuary: With

Stories and Illustrations. N.p.: A. R. Treiyer, 2008.
________. Los cumplimientos gloriosos del santuario: Con historias e

ilustraciones, seminario III. N.p.: A. R. Treiyer, 1997.
________. The Day of Atonement and the Heavenly Judgment: from the
Pentateuch to Revelation. Siloam Springs, AR: Creation Enterprises
International, 1992.
________. El día de la expiación y la purificación del Santuario. Buenos Aires,

________. El enigma de los sellos y las trompetas: a la luz de la visión del

trono y de la recompensa final. Mayagüez, PR: Proyecciones
bíblicas, 1990.
________. Estudios sobre el Apocalipsis: Comentarios sobre la Escuela

Sabática. http://www.adventistdistinctivemessages.com/
Spanish/articulos.html (accessed March 12, 2011).
________. Las expectaciones apocalípticas del santuario: Con historias e

ilustraciones, seminario III. N.p.: A. R. Treiyer, 2008.
342
________. The Final Crisis in Revelation 4-5. Siloam Springs, AR: Creation
Enterprises International, 1998.
________. The Glorious Fulfillments of the Sanctuary: With Stories and

Illustrations. Seminar II. Siloam Springs, AR: Creation Enterprises
________. The Glorious Promises of the Sanctuary: With Stories and

Illustrations. Seminar I. Siloam Springs, AR: Creation Enterprises
________. Jubilee and Globalization: The Hidden Intention. N.p.: 2000.
________. Las promesas gloriosas del santuario: Preguntas y respuestas,

seminario I. N.p.: A. R. Treiyer, 1994.
________. The Seals and the Trumpets: Biblical and Historical Studies. N.p.,
2005.
Trenchard, Warren C. “In the Shadow of the Sanctuary: The 1980 Theological
Consultation.” Spectrum 11, no. 2 (1980): 26–30.
Tucker, J. L. Study Notes on the Book of Revelation. Redlands, CA: The Quiet
Hour, 1976.
Tucker, Mike. Meeting Jesus in the Book of Revelation. Nampa, ID: Pacific
Press, 2007.
“The Two Witnesses.” The Midnight Cry, January 25, 1844, 212.
“The Two Witnesses: Revelation 11th Chapter.” The Midnight Cry, August 10,
1843, 204–205.
“21st Century.” South Pacific Division Record, April 20, 1996, 7.
“Uriah Smith: Inventor.” Insight, July 1972, 12.
VandeVere, Emmett K. “The Heart of the Lake Union.” Lake Union Herald,
December 7, 1976, 3.
343
Bibliography
Veloso, Mario. Apocalipsis y el fin del mundo. Buenos Aires, Argentina:

Asociación Casa Editora Sudamericana, 1999.
Vicuña, Máximo. Interpretación Histórica del Libro de Apocalipsis. Lima,

Perú: Imprenta Unión de la Universidad Peruana Unión, 1987.
“Watchman’s Warning—No. 4: The Trumpets.” The Midnight Cry, 8 June

1843 and 4 January 1844 (190-191), 103–104.
Wade, Loron T. El futuro del mundo revelado en el Apocalipsis. Buenos Aires,

Waller, John O. “Uriah Smith’s Small Epic: The Warning Voice of Time and
Prophecy.” Adventist Heritage (Summer 1978): 53–61.
Walstenholme, J. “The Puritan—The Millennium.” Signs of the Times

(Millerite), May 18, 1842, 50–51.
Wearner, Alonzo J. A Brief Syllabus of Revelation: Introductory Course Lower

Division. N.p.: The Author, 195?
Weber, Martin. Who’s Got the Truth: Making Sense out of Five Different
Adventist Gospels. Silver Spring, MD: Home Study international
Press, 1994.
Wellcome, Isaac C. History of the Second Advent Message. Yarmouth, ME:

Isaac C. Wellcome, 1874.
Were, Eric. The House That Were Built: The History of the Were Family
in Australia 1880-1980. With a Study of Origins in England and
‘Cousins’ Abroad. Adelaide, Australia: Lutheran Publishing
House, 1980.
Were, Louis F. Armageddon and the Advent. Adelaide, Australia: Modern

Printing Company, 1948.
________. Armageddon as Taught Today by Seventh-day Adventists. East

Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1956.
________. Armageddon: The Battle of That Great Day of God Almighty.

Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing Company, 1948.
344
________. Armageddon: The Time of Spiritual Israel’s Deliverance. Adelaide,

Australia: Modern Printing Company, 1946.
________. The Battle for the Kingship of the World: Will the King of the
North Invade the Holy City? East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A.
F. Blackman, 1958.
________. Before Probation Closes. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F.

Blackman, 1951.
________. Bible Principles of Interpretation: Establish Truth and Safeguard

against Last-day Errors. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F.
Blackman, [1963].
________. The Blotting out of Sins as Taught in the Sanctuary Service. East
________. The Certainty of the Third Angel’s Message: Proved by Important

Priciples of Prophetic Interpretation. Adelaide, Australia: Modern
________. Christ the Center. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F.

Blackman, 1967.
________. Christ’s Last Message to His Remnant. East Malvern, Victoria,

Australia: A. F. Blackman, [1953].
________. Christ’s Message of Victory: How to Be Clad with Armour for the
Final Conflict. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman,
1954.
________. The Deceitfulness of Sin. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F.

Blackman, 1949.
________. Europe and Armageddon. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F.

Blackman, 1949.
________. Facts Australian Adventists Should Know. East Malvern, Victoria,

Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1954.
345
Bibliography
________. The Fall of Babylon in Type and Antitype. East Malvern, Victoria,
________. The Four Horsemen of Revelation. Adelaide, Australia: Modern

________. The Future Unveiled by God’s Love. East Malvern, Victoria,

________. Futurism and the Antichrist of Scripture. Warburton, Victoria,

Australia: Signs Publishing Company, n.d.
________. “Futurism and the Antichrist of Scripture: Futurism and Law Abolition.”
Signs of the Times—Australian, from June 8 to 20 July 1931, 9–10.
________. “Futurism and the Antichrist of Scripture: Unanimity of Early

Protestantism.” Signs of the Times—Australian, 15 June 2011, 10,
14-15.
________. God Speaks and Israel Triumphs. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia:
A. F. Blackman, 1951.
________. How to Pray Effectual Prayers. [Adelaide, Australia]: [Modern

Printing Company], 1948.
________. In the Light of His Word. Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing

Company, 1947.
________. The Judgment of the Living. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A.

F. Blackman, 1961.
________. Jesus Christ: The Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End,
the First and the Last. Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing
Company, 1942.
________. The King of the North at Jerusalem. East Malvern, Victoria,

________. The Kings That Come from the Sunrising. East Malvern, Victoria,
346
________. The Life Triumphant. [Adelaide, Australia]: [Modern Printing

Company], 1948.
________. Middle East Ferments and the Antichrist. East Malvern, Victoria,
________. Mrs. E. G. White, Uriah Smith, and the King of the North. East
________. The Moral Purpose of Prophecy. Sarasota, FL: First Impressions,

1998 [first published in 1949].
________. The Moral Purpose of Prophecy. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia:

A. F. Blackman, 1949.
________. Pastor James White and Unfulfilled Prophecy. East Malvern,

Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1956.
________. Power Unlimited: Righteousness by Faith and the Final Conflict.

East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1959.
________. Preparing for the Close of Probation. East Malvern, Victoria,

________. The Spirit of Prophecy and Armageddon: Also How God Purifies
the Soul. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1950.
________. Synopsis of Address Given by the Prophetic Commentator (Mr.

L. F. Were): In the Adelaide Town Hall, Sunday, March 22nd, 1942.
[Adelaide, Australia]: [Modern Printing Company], 1942.
________. The Trials and Triumphs of Truth: My Reply to Misrepresentations.

East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman, 1956.
________. What Is Armageddon? Adelaide, Australia: Modern Printing

Company, 1942.
________. The Woman and the Resurrected Beast: Why Is the Seventh
Head Numbered Eight? The Mystery of Revelation 17 Solved. East
347
Bibliography
________. 144,000 Sealed. East Malvern, Victoria, Australia: A. F. Blackman,

1960.
“Were, [Louis F.],” Obituary. Australasian Record, February 9, 1942, 7.
Westacott, Michael J., ed. The Big Argument: Twenty-Four Scholars Explore
Why Science, Archaeology and Philosophy Haven’t Disproved God.
Sydney, Australia: Strand Publishing, 2005.
Weston, J. “The Seven Churches.” Midnight Cry, September 12, 1844, 73–74.
White, Arthur L. “Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation.” Ministry, January

1945, 11-13, 46.
________ to Mary Jane Mitchell, Washington, DC, July 15, 1968. Center for
White, Ellen G. The Acts of the Apostles. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press,
1911.
________. “The Apostle John in Exile.” Signs of the Times, February 5, 1885,
81–82.
________. “A Call for Active Work.” Review and Herald, February 16, 1905, 12.
________. “Christ Our Hope.” Review and Herald, December 20, 1892, 785–
786.
________ to Clement Eldridge, September 8, 1889, Letter 25a, 1889. Center

________. Christ’s Object Lessons. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,

1941.
________. Colporteur Ministry. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1953.
________. Counsels to Writers and Editors: A Grouping of Messages of

Counsel Addressed to Writers and Editors. Washington, DC:
348
________. The Desire of Ages. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1940.
________. “The Dragon Voice.” Signs of the Times, February 8, 1910, 3–4.
________. Early Writings. Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1945.
________. Education. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1952.
________ to Ellet J. Waggoner, July 7, 1902. Center for Adventist Research,

________ to F. Griggs and Howe, August 25, 1898. MSS G-065, 1898. Center
________ to Frank Belden, June 8, 1895, Letter 15, 1895. Center for Adventist
Springs, MI.
________ to Frank Belden, June 9, 1895. Center for Adventist Research,

________ to G. A. Irwin et al., March 2, 1899, Letter 43, 1899. Center for
________. Great Controversy. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1939.
________. “Lessons from the Life of Solomon—No. 9: The Ark of the

Covenant.” Review and Herald, November 9, 1905, 9–10.
________. Manuscript Releases: From the Files of the Letters and Manuscripts.
21 vols. Silver Spring, MD: Ellen G. White Estate, Inc., 1981-1993.
________, MS 15, 1897. Center for Adventist Research, James White Library,
________, MS 174, 1899. Center for Adventist Research, James White Library,
349
Bibliography
________. “The Necessity of Dying to Self.” Review and Herald, June 18, 1889,
385–386.
________. “Open the Heart to Light.” Review and Herald, March 25, 1890,
177–178.
________. Patriarchs and Prophets. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1958.
________. Prophets and Kings. Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1947.
________. “Prophetic Interpretation.” MS 107, 1897. Center for Adventist

Springs, MI.
________. “The Seal of God: No. 1.” Signs of the Times, November 1, 1899,
707.
________. Selected Messages: From the Writings of Ellen G. White. 3 vols.

Washington, DC: Review and Herald 1958, 1980.
________. The Story of Redemption. Washington, DC: Review and Herald,

1947.
________. Testimonies for the Church. 9 vols. Mountain View, CA: Pacific
Press, 1948.
________. Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers. Mountain View,

CA: Pacific Press, 1923, 1962.
________. “The Uplifted Saviour.” Review and Herald, September 29, 1896,
613–614.
________. “The Work of the Minister.” Review and Herald, September 11,
1888, 577–578.
White, James. “The Angry Nations.” Review and Herald, March 7, 1854, 52–
53.
________. “The Book of Revelation.” Review and Herald, June 3, 1862, 4–5.
350
________. “[Introduction].” The Present Truth, July 1849, 1.
________. “Letter from Bro. White.” The Day-Star, September 6, 1845, 17, 18.
________. “The Mystery of God.” Review and Herald, March 27, 1856, 204–
205.
________. “The One Hundred and Forty-Four Thousand.” Adventist Review,

September 1850, 56–57.
________. “Report from Bro. White.” Review and Herald, July 16, 1867, 72.
________. “The Seven Last Plagues.” In A Word to the “Little Flock,” edited
by James White, 1–4. Gorham, ME: [The Author], 1847.
________. “The Seventh Angel, or Third Wo. [sic].” Review and Herald, April
21, 1859, 171.
________. “The Seventh Angel.” Review and Herald, March 27, 1856, 204.
________. “The Seventh Angel.” Review and Herald, June 9, 1851, 103–104.
________. “The Seventh Angel: Events to Occur During His Sounding.”

Review and Herald, March 7, 1854, 52.
________. The Seven Seals. Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist

Publishing Association, [1862].
________. “Signs of the Times.” Review and Herald, September 13, 1853, 73–
76.
________. “The Temple of God.” In A Word to the “Little Flock,” edited by

James White. Gorham, ME: [The Author], 1847.
________. “A Test.” Review and Herald, October 16, 1855, 61–62.
________. “The Testimony of Jesus.” Review and Herald, December 18, 1855,
92–93.
________. The Third Angel’s Message. N.p., 1850[?].
351
Bibliography
________. “Thoughts on the Revelation: Chapters VIII and IX.” Review and
Herald, September 16, 1862, 124.
________. “Watchman, What of the Night!” The Day-Star, September 20,

1845, 25–26.
White, James, ed. A Word to the “Little Flock.” Gorham, ME: [The Author],
1847.
[White, James, and Uriah] Smith. The Biblical Institute: A Synopsis of

Lectures on the Principal Doctrines of Seventh-day Adventists.
Oakland, CA: Pacific Press, 1878.
White, William C., to A. F. Harrison, June 16, 1910. Center for Adventist
Springs, MI.
“Why Affirm?” Affirm 1, no. 1 (Spring 1987): 1.
Wilcox, Francis M. “A Significant Religious Gathering: A Bible Conference

on the Return of Our Lord.” Review and Herald, June 13, 1918, 2,
4-5.
________. “A Conference on Christian Fundamentals.” Review and Herald,

June 19, 1919, 2.
________. The Testimony of Jesus: A Review of the Work and Teachings of

Mrs. Ellen Gould White. Washington, DC: Review and Herald,
1934.
Wilcox, Milton C. “Principles of Prophetic Interpretation.” Paper presented

for the 1919 Bible Conference, 1919. Center for Adventist Research,
Williamson, J. J. Commentary and Syllabus on the Book of Revelation.

Lincoln, NE: The College Press, 1954.
“The Woe Trumpets: Revelation, 9th Chapter.” The Midnight Cry, August 10,
1843, 203–204.
352
Wilson, Larry. The Revelation of Jesus. 2nd ed. Brushton, NY: TEACH
Services, 1992.
Wohlberg, Steve. “Jesuit Futurism or Protestant Historicism.” Our Firm

Foundation, September 2001, 12–15.
Wood, Kenneth H. “The 1974 Bible Conference.” Review and Herald, August
1, 1974, 2, 18.
Wood, Miriam, and Kenneth H. Wood. His Initials Were F. D. N.: A Life Story
of Elder F. D. Nichol, for Twenty-one Years Editor of the Review and
Herald. [Washington, DC]: Review and Herald, 1967.
“A Word: to the Opposers of Miller and His Theory of the Millennium, by a

Presbyter in the Episcopal Church.” Signs of the Times (Millerite),
September 6, 1843, 19–20.
Working Policy of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. 2005-

2006 edition. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2005.
Youngberg, Verlene DeWitt. The Revelation of Jesus Christ to His People.

Keene, TX: Southwestern Color Graphics, Southwestern Union
College, 1977.
Zackrison, Edwin H. “Seventh-day Adventists and Original Sin.” PhD

Zalabak, Wilma. “Daniel and Revelation: A Seminar for Healing.” MA thesis,

Zivadinovic, Dojcin. “The Apocalyptic War: An Analysis of the Conflict

between Historicism, Preterism, and Futurism in 19th-century
America and Britain.” Term paper for the course GSEM 678 Great
Controversy Tour, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary,
Zurcher, Jean R. Christ of the Revelation. Nashville, TN: Southern, 1980.
353
APOCALYPSE
THE
IN SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST
INTERPRETATION
by Gluder Quispe
Printed on August 16, 2013 in the publishing workshop of the

Application Center of Peruvian Union University (Universidad Peruana Unión)
Lima-Peru.
Edition: 1000 copies

Gluder Quispe. 2013. Apocalipsis PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Gluder Quispe. 2013. Apocalipsis PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A E

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

The Apocalypse In Seventh-Day Adventist Interpretation: Three Emphases

Ediciones Universidad Peruana Unión

Copyright® Gluder Quispe

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

Three Periods of SDA Interpretation of Apocalypse................................ .2

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

Background: Content of the Multiple Emphases Period

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................263

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

1. Editions of Thoughts on the Revelation................................................................... 4

2. Miller’s and Litch’s Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets.............................. 56

3. Comparison of the Literary Structure of the Apocalypse

4. Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets according to

5. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to Biblical-Historical

6. Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets according to Five Writers.............. 144

7. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to Five Writers........................... 145

8. Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets according to

9. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to Biblical-Theological

10. The Structure of the Apocalypse accoding to Jon Paulien......................... 222

11. Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets according to

12. Interpretation of Revelation 12 according to

13. Interpretation of the Seven Trumpets in Major Adventist

14. Interpretation of Revelation 12 in Major Adventist

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

AHer Adventist Heritage

AMs Autograph manuscript

AASS Asia Adventist Seminary Studies

ASC Advent Source Collection, an archival category in the Center for

AIIAS Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies

AUSS Andrews University Seminary Studies

BRI Biblical Research Institute

CAR Center for Adventist Research, James White Library, Andrews

EGWE-GC Ellen G. White Estate, General Conference of Seventh-day

GCA Office of Archives and Statistics, General Conference of Seventh-

GCB General Conference Bulletin

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

JWL James White Library, Andrews University, USA

LUH Lake Union Herald

MC The Midnight Cry

NIV New International Version

RH Review and Herald or Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald or

RSV Revised Standard Version

SDA Seventh-day Adventist

SDABC Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary

SDATS-AU Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University

ST-SDA Signs of the Times (Seventh-day Adventist)

WMC Western Midnight Cry

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

No project of any kind is possible without contributions from many

Escaneado, digitalizado y limpiado por SHEKINAH BOOKS

it teaches notwithstanding the injunction we have to search and study it.”7

THREE PERIODS OF SDA INTERPRETATION OF APOCALYPSE

I suggest that the history of the Seventh-day Adventist interpretation

The Thoughts on the Revelation Period (1862-1944)12

Nowadays better known as simply Daniel and Revelation, Uriah

A Brief Historical Development of

The well-known commentary, Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation,