EGW on Daniel and Revelation

[ReturntoDar]

It was Ellen Whites idea to have "Thoughts on Revelation" (1863) and "Thoughts on Daniel" (1875, as I recall?) combined into one book, "Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation".

She noted that the sincere seeker of truth would NOT be detained by minor errors in the book. In a similar manner, a seeker of truth will not be detained by minor errors in her own writings.

On two occasions in she endorsed what the pioneers were teaching/preaching SPECIFICALLY on Daniel 11:45, the "Eastern Question". This book (Daniel and Revelation) should be in all our schools. The "Eastern Question" was presented not only from the pulpit but in the Sabbath School lesson and Bible Reading for the Home. What IS the "Eastern Question"? The king of the north is Turkey. The pioneers understood as early as the 1850's that Daniel 11:44 was fulfilled by the Crimean War. There was only one verse left before Michael stood up and probation would close.

From the 1850's until the time of her death, 1915, she NEVER ONCE recounted, adjusted, made changes to the official position of the Church on the correct interpretations of both Daniel and of Revelation. These interpretations were not the fruit of one man, they resulted from a large study group in Battle Creek that set out to understand and these two books. That study group met for ten years!! James White was the appointed scribe to write out their findings. He began with the book of Revelation, up to about chapter 12. Then due to his busy schedule, Uriah Smith was called upon to finish the book, "Thoughts on Revelation". He would continue with the book of Daniel.

The identity of the king of the north is no minor issue. Daniel 11:45 is the ONLY verse in the Bible that gives us specific and detailed information as to when the close of probation is on the very door step. When the first part of this verse is fulfilled (Turkey conquers Palestine, "Israel" today) this is the equivalent of the animals going into the Ark in Noah's day. When Turkey "comes to his end" (verse 45 part 2) then Michael stands up.

Verse 45, part one WILL BE FULFILLED BEFORE the Sunday law takes place. The great bulk of Adventists today will deny it is a fulfillment. They deny the pioneers views today, they will continue to do so, in spite of seeing it with their own eyes. It could then be said, "Though one rose from the dead, they would not believe".

[GHansen]

9 hours ago, ReturntoDar said:

These interpretations were not the fruit of one man, they resulted from a large study group in Battle Creek that set out to understand and these two books. That study group met for ten years!! James White was the appointed scribe to write out their findings. He began with the book of Revelation, up to about chapter 12. Then due to his busy schedule, Uriah Smith was called upon to finish the book, "Thoughts on Revelation". He would continue with the book of Daniel.

Any idea who was on this committee? Where does this information come from?

 

[ReturntoDar]

I have searched for names of this study group, which met for about TEN YEARS!!! I suspect some came in, others dropped out over that time. I can find no record of specific names, but for sure James White and Uriah Smith played major roles. This group was formed fairly early on in Adventist history. It was the first time they took a very serious look at prophecy in detail. Revelation first, which was so successful (God led them!) they then moved onto Daniel.

There are many, many statements from Sister White endorsing "Thoughts on Daniel and Revelation". She says it should be in all our schools. Ministers should study it. There is no doubt this book was highly regarded. Very interesting that this information was not given to the prophet: instead (and this is awesome) it was given to the CHURCH!! I think that is profound. God could have certainly given the correct interpretations of prophecy (Daniel and Revelation) to the prophet, but honored His people in their desire to understand the prophecies.

We, as a people, have lost much because of our recurring doubts, and disputes over this book. Think about it: Thoughts on Revelation, published 1863. Ellen White had the rest of her life (to 1915) to correct, counsel, point out whatever needed correction. What did she say? DO NOT EDIT THE BOOK!! Leave it as is, minor mistakes and all. WHY? Because, she continues, IF we begin to edit it, it will lessen confidence and cause confusion. I'm looking at the 1944 edition, which is "OK", but in my opinion, the early editions (1897 and 1912) are the only ones specifically endorsed by the prophet.

Daniel 11:44, fulfilled in the Crimean War of 1856. Let that sink in! Sister White never, not once, refuted that position! Today? It is almost universally disregarded and considered error. The result? Mass confusion on the prophecies, multiple theories, hardly one commentator is in agreement on: Daniel 11 in general, Revelation 12 is another BIG mistake in our modern SDA Church. Revelation 17 is another huge mistake. You want the truth on prophecy? Accept the counsel of the prophet as to where to find it!

[GHansen]

3 hours ago, ReturntoDar said:

I have searched for names of this study group, which met for about TEN YEARS!!! I suspect some came in, others dropped out over that time. I can find no record of specific names, but for sure James White and Uriah Smith played major roles. This group was formed fairly early on in Adventist history. It was the first time they took a very serious look at prophecy in detail.

I'd still like to know what your source is for this information. I've heard of the Daniel committee which met for several years in more modern times. It included Ray Cottrell, Don Neufeld, Earle Higgert and others. It met for several years, disbanded and published nothing. In earlier times, W.W. Prescott wrote a tract on the "daily" in which he challenged SDA scholarship in the fields of history and Biblical languages. If you can't find out who was on the committee to which you refer, how do you know it existed?  

[ReturntoDar]

Research the "The Sabbath Conferences" of 1848 to 1850, about twenty of them. Those who largely comprised this group would have very likely been the same ones who followed those conferences up with the first serious study of Revelation. Which was followed by our first serious study of Daniel. Bates, Elder Edson, James White of course were among these men. Ellen White reports that during the "Sabbath Conference" meetings her mind was "locked", she could not understand the brethren. However, she would be taken off in vision and then report back to the group to guide them when they were in error. She says of this time, it was the saddest in her life. She so wanted to participate, but she could not. In a similar manner, so it was with our first studies of Revelation, followed by Daniel, she did not take part in these studies, but her husband did. Count it, she was closely watching and waiting for their discoveries and James was in the thick of it.

Since these studies began in the 1850's it is reasonable that many of the same men involved in the Sabbath Conferences were also those who spear headed the early studies on the prophecies. The first fruit was "Thoughts on Revelation", 1863. James White was among the first to report that Daniel 11:44 was fulfilled in 1856. That official position of the Church began to come under attack in the 1940's and very much has now changed, been rebutted, disagreement is on every hand. Whereas the pioneers were united on the prophecies. When, in 1877, James refuted Uriah over verse 45, he was very carefully told to shut up by his wife, the prophet! Imagine being married to a prophet, whew... you can't hide anything!

“The books ‘Daniel and Revelation’ and ‘The Great Controversy’ are the books which above all others, should be in circulation now. Give them to the people. Light and truth they must have.” 21MR, 452

"God used the author of this book [Daniel and the Revelation] as a channel through which to communicate light to direct minds to the truth." 4MR, 152

[ReturntoDar]

By the way, all though the 1944 edition of "DaR" suggests that it was only speculation the pioneers offered on this verse, as the CIRCUMSTANCES of Russia invading and driving the Turk out his homeland: not so fast! I do not discount that potential outcome even today!

Russia wants Turkey because of the "Straits" which give them access to their homeland through the Black Sea. They STILL want it! Is that what will drive the Turk to declare war on Israel? Hmmm, maybe not. Turkey wants Jerusalem as badly as Russian wants Turkey. The Turks don't need a reason to attack Israel, when the time is right, they will indeed take back what they consider "their homeland". The Turk declares, openly, often and today, that Jerusalem is for the Muslims, it belongs to them, not the Jews. They owned it for centuries, they want it back. Verse 45 says, they shall have it!

How? Under what circumstances? When? Ah, these are the questions! It WILL happen, on this, we have the "sure word of prophecy". Keep watching, at some point, the "animals will go into the Ark" (the Turk will conquer Israel) and the end of all things will be on our very door step!