Are you intending to say a jubilee year? Or are you getting at the October 22 date's coincidence in 1844?

Since we have moved on from the Hebrews evidence, I will post another piece of data that is beyond refutation--Jesus did not come in 1843.

Yet Ellen said that the message of 1843 was a heavenly message, arranged by God as a test, and anyone who did not accept it had God's anger kindled against them.


Jesus and all the heavenly host looked with sympathy and love upon those who had with sweet expectation longed to see Him whom their souls loved. Angels were hovering around them, to sustain them in the hour of their trial. Those who had neglected to receive the heavenly message were left in darkness, and God's anger was kindled against them, because they would not receive the light which He had sent them from heaven. Those faithful, disappointed ones, who could not understand why their Lord did not come, were not left in darkness. Again they were led to their Bibles to search the prophetic periods.

{EW 236.1}



So Ellen says that God was behind the false 1843 message and was angry with those who did not accept a time for the Lord's coming.


A later Ellen spoke of the dangers of time-setting.




Many who have called themselves Adventists have been time setters. Time
after time has been set for Christ to come, but repeated failures have been the result. The definite time of our Lord's coming is declared to be beyond
the ken of mortals. Even the angels who minister unto those who shall be
heirs of salvation know not the day nor the hour. "But of that day and hour
knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but My Father only." Because
the times repeatedly set have passed, the world is in a more decided state
of unbelief than before in regard to the near advent of Christ. They look
upon the failures of the time setters with disgust; and because men have been so deceived, they turn from the truth substantiated by the word of God
that the end of all things is at hand. {4T 307.1}
Those who so presumptuously preach definite time, in so doing gratify
the adversary of souls; for they are advancing infidelity rather than
Christianity. They produce Scripture and by false interpretation show a
chain of argument which apparently proves their position. But their failures
show that they are false prophets, that they do not rightly interpret the
language of inspiration. The word of God is truth and verity, but men have
perverted its meaning. These errors have brought the truth of God for these
ast days into disrepute.
Testimonies vol 4, pg 307

Tall, you're last post doesn't seem to have anything to do with the subject at hand. I'm sure people would be happy to discuss this with you, but I think it may be better to do so in a separate topic.

Regarding coincidences, the Litch prediction regarding the Ottoman empire has always amazed me.

The Millerite movement was the basis for the whole Sanctuary teaching. How does it not relate?

However, it may not relate to the Bible study emphasis, since it is largely involving 19th century texts.

I will wait on Daryl to give a go ahead before posting it in another threat though.

Ok, tall, sounds good.

Context, Tall, context. Chapter 19 of The Great Controversy addresses your objections if you bother to read it. [Also chapter 20, pp. 370-372.]


The first attitude of those who leave the church is a need, or better, an obsession, to discredit Ellen White. Tall, I don’t think doing that will help you in any way.


I’m referring to several aspects. To begin with, the period itself.

The system of adjustment of the lunar year with the solar year which was devised by the ancient Babylonian astronomers and is used by modern Jews is the 19-year cycle (metonic cycle). With this system of intercalation, at every 19 years the solar year and the lunar year are brought together with a difference of only two hours. But, in a period of 2299 years (121 metonic cycles) the difference between the lunar year and the solar year would amount to 10.5 days.

The period of 2300 years, however, is an astronomical cycle. This period contains an exact number of lunations, which means that in it the solar year and the lunar month are brought into correspondence with a small difference of just 9 hours. This means if you start on a day of atonement in 457 BC and add the exact number of 2300 years – 840,057 days - you arrive exactly at a day of atonement in 1844 AD.

The anicent babylonians were good astronomers, just like the anicent chinese and mayans.

Go for it!!!

A. The immediate context of Early Writings is found in other sections of Early Writings, not in the Great Controversy. Now if you mean historical context then I would say we have a few more texts to look at.

B.

Feel free to post the relevant sections. I have read them before but don't want to presume which parts you feel defend the position.



Given that the doctrine derived from this historical experience of the founding fathers of Adventism--including EGW, it will in fact have a bearing on the issue.

Now as to reading motives, is that the path we want to go down?

The correctness of the doctrine is the issue.

Moreover Ellen White is a "continuing source of authority" in the church, and a doctrine in her own right. Her statements on this issue then need to be examined.




Were the 2300 years lunar or solar in your view in the original text?

Now as to chapter 19 in the GC, I assume you mean the reference to people not always understanding all that they are proclaiming:


Even the prophets who were favored with the special illumination of the Spirit did not fully comprehend the import of the revelations committed to them. The meaning was to be unfolded from age to age, as the people of God should need the instruction therein contained.

She lists some examples.

There would be no problem with that argument if it were not for the next step that Ellen takes. She says that God was angry with the people who rejected the message in 1843. That message

a. was a false message about Jesus coming that involved time-setting.

b. That message was about the wrong time--1843.

Therefore she is not just saying that people don't always have all the information. She is saying that certain people were CONDEMNED for rightly saying that the time-setting message in 1843 was wrong. They were 100 percent justified in saying that setting a date for the coming of Christ was wrong.

Whatever the truth of the later message the message in 1843 that Miller gave was wrong. Jesus did not come in 1843. And to set a date for Jesus coming was going against the Bible.

But Ellen defends Miller by saying God was angry with those who rejected the un-biblical message. They SHOULD have rejected it.

Whatever message they came to AFTER 44 before that they were preaching untruth. Yet they said that untruth was what God used to test people.

How could a false message of time setting that at one point singled out a day (no man knows the day or the hour) be the test?

Why would God punish people for rightly listening to His word and rejected the date setting?

The most prominent example in that section is the belief of the disciples that Jesus would set up His kingdom immediately on earth. They derived this from a misreading of the Scriptures and a misunderstanding of Jesus' words.

However, for the two accounts to be parallel we would need another element.

Did God condemn those who did not accept the disciples false notion of an earthly reign?

Of course not.

But Ellen says that God's anger was kindled against those who did not accept the mistaken notion of both the time and the event in the message of Miller in 1843.

I don't blame Miller for being wrong in 1843. I think he was sincere. He was just sincerely mistaken.

I don't even blame Ellen for being wrong in 1843. And I think she was sincere too.

But I don't for a second think that God would judge others on their mistakes.