Mark, the angel told John not to record the seven thunders, right? However, Ellen says the Millerites experienced them during their movement, right?

That's the issue. Should we take Ellen White's statements as meaning the thunders were fulfilled?

I think so. However, is it possible the final generation will experience something similar (minus the error)?

Here's another obscure statement indicating that the seven seals that lock the contents of the scroll of Rev 5 are not unsealed yet. If the scroll is not unrolled can the seven thunders be unsealed?:

While Ellen White spoke highly of Smith's Daniel and the Revelation to the day of her death, it's clear that his book did not fulfill the need of the church for greater light. The above statement that "our own people need to have the light placed before them in clearer lines" was made more than 10 years after Daniel and the Revelation was published. Her plea to place the prophecies in clearer lines was also repeated to the day of her death and never fulfilled.

Referring to Haskell's work on Daniel she indicated his work also did not meet the need. The all-caps portion below is an editorial comment inserted by the White Estate to explain what Ellen White is referring to.

The White Estate insertion calls Haskell’s book on Daniel a "brief comment", but according to the prophet, it was not the "brief comment" Ellen White had in mind. And if his first volume didn't satisfy the need how could his second which followed the same format?

Since her death others have attempted to fulfill this need but in my view, it's never been done. Why? Because the subsequent books published by the denomination have all followed the same Smith/Haskell/Maxwell format - they repeat the same orthodoxy and don't let the 'obscure" SOP statements and scripture have their true weight.

More recently, Marian Berry published a book called Daniel and Revelation Bound Together and several other books on prophecy. The title of this first book is a paraphrase of Ellen White’s plea to the church and while it makes some progress towards placing the prophecies in their true end-time context, it also doesn’t meet the need. Dr. Franklin Fowler and his associates at Prophecy Research Institute have also published several books on prophecy. But in my view these also don’t meet the need. Whereas earlier authors stick to the orthodox view, the more recent ones who do see many of the end-time, primary applications tend to make the message time-dependant and inject their own views to such an extent that the "brief comments" specified by Ellen White become commentaries and undermine the force and simplicity of the message. These end time truths are simple and direct. Daniel and Revelation can interpret themselves with very little commentary.

The need that Ellen White saw will be met eventually. Who will do it? Maybe it’s being done now. The book she envisioned may be rolling off the press. Any book that does fulfill this need will be part of the Two Witnesses' testimony. In fulfillment of Habakkuk's prophesy, many who are searching for truth will see it and run with it:

Another similar statement is found on 5BC 1103.

Can I make a suggestion here?

We know that many events repeat in the future. For example, the three angels' messages were proclaimed in the 1840s. However, they will be proclaimed again. This time around, they will be proclaimed worldwide in the context of the latter rain and loud cry. Such a proclamation will be orders of magnitude beyond anything the world has ever seen.

We also know that future persecution will also go beyond what has happened in the past, including a universal death decree and the complete scattering of God's people.

If all of this is so, then it seems fair to ask what the primary fulfillment of a prophecy is. Is it past, or future?

There are cases where EGW says that the past fulfillment is only a shadow of the future. For example, in reference to the destruction of Jerusalem, she says this:





If the worldwide proclamation of the three angels' messages during the loud cry period is yet future, and the seven thunders relate to events that occur during this time (1MR 99), then why can't the seven thunders be as yet partially sealed?

By "partially sealed" I mean that the events represented by the seven thunders will be repeated, and the previous occurrence is "shadowy" or vague, just as the quotes above suggest in another context.

A related point here is whether the Bible prophecies were primarily aimed at past generations, or at the final generation presumably living today.

Note for example this quote:

My pertinent studies on the Seven Thunders (as the relate to the eschatological fullfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecies) and the “Unrolling of (relatedly) the Rev 10=Rev5=Dan 11=prophecies of Ezekiel Scroll) should be helpful in this discussion.

Good point Glen. The scroll is partially unsealed now and so are the trumpets. But if the trumpets 'relate to future events which will be disclosed in their order' as Ellen White says, then we have to wait and see what additional information we'll understand about them and the mark of the beast when the scroll is unrolled further in the future.

There have been people who have put forward lists of events corresponding to the seven thunders in the 1840s. But there's no consensus on what those events were.

The same is true in other areas. For example, among SDA commentators who hold to a standard view of the historical trumpets, there is no consensus on the first trumpet. Some would say that it refers to Alaric around 396 A.D., and others say that it depicts the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

I think we have to ask a very hard question about just what the primary fulfillment of a prophecy really is. This principle cuts across a lot of the prophecies that we consider.

For example, we know that Joel 2:28-32 was fulfilled in the past, and will have another, infinitely larger, fulfillment in the future.

If one fulfillment is a shadow of a larger fulfillment yet to come, then we might be mislead if we focus primarily on the shadow.