Does Harold Camping remind you of 1844?

[abelisle]

His "spiritual" reinterpretation sounds a little bit like what we did in 1844. But we were right, right?

http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2011/05...nt-camping-says

I guess it's safe to put everything within the spiritual dimension. Who then can dispute it?

Alex

[Dr. Shane]

Are you suggesting we call him a copy cat?

[miz3]

abelisle,

I read the Spectrum article and the comments below the article. I found both very interesting.

Could it be that SDA have clung to a fool's Doctrine all these decades?

Nah! We couldn't be that stupid, right?

The parallels are indeed stunning!

[Tom Wetmore]

It is very hard for most people to simply admit they made a mistake or were wrong. There is almost always an "explanation" rationalizing, minimizing, or attempting to justify and make it less wrong.

Many apologies are greatly weakened by the "Yes, but..." that follows. It's no wonder people think forgiveness is conditional or has strings attached. Our apologies are so frequently subject to conditions and have strings of explanations and self-justifications attached.

Some face saving explanations become so elaborate and so enduring they become the new reality... and established as the new dogma of a group.

Mistake? What mistake?

[BobRyan]

His "spiritual" reinterpretation sounds a little bit like what we did in 1844. But we were right, right?

http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2011/05...nt-camping-says

I guess it's safe to put everything within the spiritual dimension. Who then can dispute it?

Alex

hello -- !

The entire point of the Camping fiasco is to generate "background noise" for the Three Angel's message that will distract minds and increase prejudice.

Surely we all see that bright shiny sign post.

Just as Joseph Smith was raised up just before Ellen White was called to ministry - so as to generate some background noise and "fresh prejudice" against the idea of a modern prophet SO ALSO Camping is being used to generate fresh prejudice against the idea of using Bible timelines to predict the end of time or even to claim that we are "near the end".

In fact it is now morphing to a template that fits even MORE closely to the SDA doctrine on the close of probation and the second coming than BEFORE the May 21 deadline.

This camping counterfeit is being fashioned into the perfect canard.

Camping's post-May-21 spin is designed to present a counterfeit for our close of probation message as it regards Rev 15:8 that takes place some time before the 2nd coming.

A message that is needed now from Camping because SDAs are about to give a lot of attention to the close of probation and judgment issue when circumstances change to the point of NSL legislation as we saw last year being promoted in the EU.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Quote:

Alexander said -

Is Family Radio preacher Harold Camping now just taking cues from the Advent movement's investigative judgment theology playbook?

Quote:

OAKLAND, California (AP) — As crestfallen followers of a California preacher who foresaw the world's end strained to find meaning in their lives, Harold Camping revised his apocalyptic prophecy, saying he was off by five months and the Earth actually will be obliterated on Oct. 21. . . .

Camping, who made a special appearance before the press at the Oakland headquarters of the media empire Monday evening, apologized for not having the dates "worked out as accurately as I could have." Through chatting with a friend over what he acknowledged was a very difficult weekend, the light dawned on him that instead of the biblical Rapture in which the faithful would be swept up to the heavens, May 21 had instead been a "spiritual" Judgment Day, which places the entire world under Christ's judgment, he said. . . .

"We've always said May 21 was the day, but we didn't understand altogether the spiritual meaning," he said.

Does that sound like what another group said in their disappointment over what didn't happen on Oct. 22, 1844? Is this some sort of performance art created for Seventh-day Adventists to reflect on our own history of belief?

..

While the usual left-bent left-tent nothing-conservative thread on spectrum above is much to be expected - I have to affirm Alexander in his thread statement because he is right about the camping fiasco set to mimmick (or more accurately "mock") William Miller's ministry.

in Christ,

Bob

[phkrause]

Some interesting thoughts Bob, I tend to agree.

[Haldog]

Sounds just like William Miller and 1843/1844, with the exception that after his second failure Miller admitted he was wrong and it was Ellen and company who went on to fabricate an "explanation" for the failed prediction. Camping's explanation and new date in October sounds just like Ellen after the "Great Dissapointment".

Date setting for the rapture is not biblical, just as the IJ is not biblical. Both demonstrate a profound lack of understanding of the scriptures and God's plan.

[skyblue888]

When Jesus was crucified, even the disciples failed to understand its meaning. To them the crucifixion meant defeat and it was the end of their hope. They failed to discern that it was God's victory and their greatest hope. The disciples demonstrated a lack of understanding of the Scriptures and of God's plan but did that make the crucifixion a hoax? No. It was the same for Christ's disciples in the 1844 era. They demonstrated a lack of understanding of the Scriptures and of God's plan but did that make the 2,300 day prophecy a hoax? Absolutely not.

sky

[teresaq]

I think what is being left out of the discussion is the, "how we came to that conclusion".

William Miller came to his conclusions based on the 2300 day prophecy. Many of us believe the error was in what he believed would happen at the end of that period. Also, many of us believe the Adventist understanding of prophecy is coherent with one verse generally succeeding the previous, or giving more info to previous verses.

Harold Camping on the other hand, when I have heard him, takes verses out of their context, disregarding what comes before and after and applies them all over the place. For me, common sense alone would say he was definitely "off".

He says Satan was bound for a thousand years back in the past and then let loose-based on what?

My dates may not be accurate on this one, cause, tho I hear him I make no effort to remember and document, what for me, are complete lunacies. I think Camping said it was 1988 that the tribulation began and lasted 23(?) years. Where he gets 23 years from in the bible is a big question mark. One has to listen to a lot of words before one might find out.

Why May 21st? Because Mr. Camping knows the exact date of the flood and counting 700 and something thousand days from that....based on prime number calculations that have some "spiritual" meaning-for him, anyway-brings us to May 21, 2011.

Then there would be 5 months of tribulation that would kill off the lost-a good example of taking a text disregarding what comes before and after the 5 months in Revelation. He doesn't touch on those texts.

Maybe I should have documented his "reasonings"-if I had known something like this would come up. lol

A person calling in asked him, what if May 21st came and nothing happened. His response: then you don't trust the bible, this is all in the bible.

And yes, there do appear to be similarities between our experience and what he is doing, but having heard him I have the definite impression he is very familiar with our beliefs and history.

My 2 cents. :)

[miz3]

Just because Camping seems to be copying SDA and doing a stupid job of it, does not mean that SDA are correct or that what happened in 1844 was valid.

Comparing SDA and Camping does nothing to demonstrate the correctness of the SDA position.

[Gerr]

Just because Camping seems to be copying SDA and doing a stupid job of it, does not mean that SDA are correct or that what happened in 1844 was valid.

Comparing SDA and Camping does nothing to demonstrate the correctness of the SDA position.

So what do you think happened in 1844 at the end of the 2300 yr prophecy?

[miz3]

I am not supporting Camping that is for sure!

I might save my views on 1844 for another time. I do have views.

[BobRyan]

Just because Camping seems to be copying SDA and doing a stupid job of it, does not mean that SDA are correct or that what happened in 1844 was valid.

[BobRyan]

Sounds just like William Miller and 1843/1844, with the exception that after his second failure Miller admitted he was wrong and it was Ellen and company who went on to fabricate an "explanation" for the failed prediction. Camping's explanation and new date in October sounds just like Ellen after the "Great Dissapointment".

Hard to believe people who have been on this board for years could be clueless about our history -- still ...

how is that happening?

in Christ,

Bob

[Gerr]

I am not supporting Camping that is for sure!

I might save my views on 1844 for another time. I do have views.

I look forward to your sharing those views. To me 1844 is a rock solid number because the prophecy specifies when it began. Even if one chooses another commencement date other than 457 BC (there was a series of commands to rebuild Jerusalem), you still end up with a terminus.

[ClubV12]

"Many of us believe the error was in what he (William Miller) believed would happen at the end of that period."

Many of us do, some don't. As far as I can tell William Miller never did conclude WHAT, if anything, was going to happen. He steadfastly maintained it was NOT the 2nd coming. In fact he had to fight an uphill battle on that issue because so many people wanted to believe that's what he was saying. He simply "worked the math" and was a good bible student, who consulted with many others in arriving at the correct time. And worked in concert with OTHERS in revising the time line from 1843 to 1844. It was actually somebody else that came up with 1844 and Miller accepted their position on it, recognizing his own error in that regard.

Miller and Camping are similiar in that neither one claims a 2nd coming! Miller claimed it was some event worthy of note, but did not declare what. Camping, like Miller, does NOT claim this is the 2nd coming! He says this is the "rapture", a distinctly different event than the 2nd coming.

[Guest]

I think that's what you would call revisionist history...

[ClubV12]

What part would you consider "revisionist"? The facts are pretty clear, historically speaking, and they take nothing away from Millers outstanding work. Which in large part could be compared to Ellen Whites work in some areas. She leaned on others, history books and other known facts, in her writings. That doesn't take anything away from HER outstanding work, it just a window as to how some of that work was accomplished. She gets the credit at the end of the day, as does Miller for "his" work.

Samuel S. Snow came up with the 1844 date, not Miller. In that regard, I'm wondering WHO else is behind Camping in setting these various dates? :)

[cardw]

You could almost say that Harold Camping took the pages right out of the Early Adventist/Millerite playbook.

The early Adventists were wrong about Oct 22, 1884 and deflected by saying that Jesus entered the Most Holy Place. This was something that couldn't be verified because it was claimed to occur in heaven. How convenient...

Early Adventists said that it was a test to separate the true believers and continued to set dates clear up to 1851 and would only preach to Millerites, since, according to them, the rest of the churches were the synagog of Satan.

When it became clear that Jesus wasn't coming and Adventists began to have children a way had to be made to justify the existence of the Adventist Church. Again the theology changed to adapt to an obvious conflict.

Adventists say it's the leading of the holy spirit.

I say it's the same fear and nonsense.

[ClubV12]

As far as I can determine any dates set after October 1844 were not taken seriously by those who would later become the genesis of the Seventh-day Adventist faith.

Dates within the 1843 range were reasonable and could be supported by the bible and historic data. Understanding the PARTIAL first and PARTIAL last year of the 2,300 year prophecy added an additional year bringing us to 1844. This new understanding of the correct year was still consistent with the biblical and historic record.

Any dates AFTER 1844 were pure speculation and cannot be supported by the 2,300 prophecy without wild leaps of faith. The early Seventh-day Adventist founders did not seriously consider any date after 1844. While many people wanted, needed and were willing to accept ANY future date simply because they wanted to believe. But their belief was not founded on the bible.

You don't have to be a christian or even a bible believer to understand and trace Daniels prophecy through time and arrive at 1844. It can be done by looking at when, where and how history unfolded and compare that to the prophecy. It's good math, it's good history, it is logical, reasonable and difficult to refute without altering historic events.

[Kountzer]

[miz3]

You could almost say that Harold Camping took the pages right out of the Early Adventist/Millerite playbook.

The early Adventists were wrong about Oct 22, 1884 and deflected by saying that Jesus entered the Most Holy Place. This was something that couldn't be verified because it was claimed to occur in heaven. How convenient...

Early Adventists said that it was a test to separate the true believers and continued to set dates clear up to 1851 and would only preach to Millerites, since, according to them, the rest of the churches were the synagog of Satan.

When it became clear that Jesus wasn't coming and Adventists began to have children a way had to be made to justify the existence of the Adventist Church. Again the theology changed to adapt to an obvious conflict.

Adventists say it's the leading of the holy spirit.

I say it's the same fear and nonsense.

I agree with you in regard to verifying the move from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place. Such a thing is not verifiable in Holy Scripture unless you have an Ellen White bias and SDA pioneer bias that leads you to interpret Scripture in a contorted way.

However, you are wrong as to whether God was indeed in the formation of the SDA Church. Like Israel of old the "first generation" failed because of lack of Faith and Trust in God. SDA have missed the boat entirely in regard to what God had planned for them and it has been to their hurt. They like ancient Israel misunderstand the mandate God intends for them to fulfill! However the Truth lies clearly within SDA Church but they are so blind they do not see it or appreciate the great Gift God has been please to give them.

Pride is at the root of this. Pride that has taken hold right from our beginnings by trying to explain away the "Disappointment" and by trying to create a "gospel" that God never intended to be preached.

Like the Jews of old in Christ's day many will violently oppose my words but that opposition does nothing to change the Truth of what I say.

[Light Fox]

In response to the OP...

In some regards it does, and in some regards it does not remind me of 1844.

Where it does not remind me:

1844 was not a date randomly generated or arrived at via secret or obscure means. It was arrived at via a prophetic timeline that in every other instance, events happened precisely as expected.

Scripture is plain that something was to happen in 1844 to constitute "the cleansing of the sanctuary" as Daniel records it. This is not an argument about SDAs being dishonest or making up prophecies; it's an issue of Biblical prophecy and nothing else. In that regard, the Millerites and the Campingites (?) are a world apart.

Where it does remind me:

Regardless of the means of arriving at the conclusion, SDAs did indeed go through a "Great Disappointment" where we expected Christ to return. He did not return.

Those following Camping are currently undergoing the same experience. In that regard, it does indeed remind me of our earlier experiences. And for that reason, I find it especially hurtful and sad when Adventists of all people lash out and mock those who are currently undergoing exactly where we were 160 years ago, saying the same things that the mockers said to us at that time.

I have great sympathy for those people - not in spite of my belief that they are severely misled, but because of my belief that they are severely misled. I further have great empathy for those people. "I'm right, you're wrong" has no place in the equation. They are undergoing a disappointment, and I think we all ought to be sensitive to that.

[skyblue888]

Very interesting lecture by Stephen Bohr.

This is a must hear about the disappointment in 1844.

The only thing I don't agree with is when he says that at Calvary Jesus was the priest and the victim. He was the victim but not the priest for Heb.8:4 says that while on earth He could not be a priest.

sky