The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, vol. 4

VI. Opponents Disagree Fatally Among Themselves

Next, in a carefully prepared “Address to the Opposers of Our Hope,” ²³ the Millerite leaders speak of prophecy’s molding influence on the minds of men. At the very outset they reaffirm the fact that the basic point of difference remains unchanged by the Disappointment-namely, the premillennial advent as the next predicted event. On this main point, and on the time, they “differ from the great body of the church and the world.” ²⁴ PFF4 866.2

That such positions should affect their fellowship with the evangelical churches-especially since this had been the general belief of the early church and of many through the centuries—had not at first occurred to them. And they had expected that if there were actual errors in their positions or reasoning, the “theological giants of these days would at once expose their fallacy, and unravel the sophistries by which they were supported.” But they waited in vain for any serious refutation of premillennialism. At first the question was considered “unworthy and beneath the notice” of the theologians. However, as it began to be “received into favor by the people,” many of the clergy became disturbed. Nevertheless, instead of being “met by argument,” the entire question was usually treated with “scorn and ridicule.” ²⁵ PFF4 866.3

Then, as the public became increasingly interested, “various individuals attempted to show its fallacy, and various arguments and theories were advanced to disprove it,” without giving their views “a fair and impartial examination.” And of the conflicting reactions advanced the Millerites say: “Your views have been so various that you have often been more opposed to the views of each other, than you have to our own.” And just what positions, they inquire, are they asked to give up? And what positions are they to accept from the opponents of the advent faith? The “contradictory opinions” of ten well-known religious leaders are next listed. PFF4 866.4

HAZEN and DIMMICK give differing reasons why the proclaimed imminence of the advent is all a “false alarm.” BOWLING applies the year-day principle to the 70 weeks and the 1260 days, but makes the 2300 days only 1150 literal days. STUART, on the other hand, makes the 2300 and 1260 days literal, applying Daniel’s leading prophecies to Antiochus, and John’s to Nero. MORRIS admits the 1260 but not the 2300 were year-days; and to him the fourth prophetic empire is Rome, but to CHASE, it is the kingdom of Antiochus, not Rome, with the 2300 as half days and the 1260 simply as whole days. PFF4 867.1

WEEKS alleges there are 160 Millerite mistakes, without setting forth any contrasting positions of truth. JARVIS admits that the Millerite application of the prophetic symbols and the year-day reckoning is correct, but denies there is any clue to the chronological timing of the prophetic periods. BUSH, likewise admitting the general soundness of the principles and the imminence of the crisis hour of earth’s history and the kingdom, argues that the Millerites are mistaken in the nature of the events to take place. HINTON also admits that each of Daniel’s visions extends to the setting up of God’s everlasting kingdom, and that the 2300 days and other time periods symbolize years in fulfillment-and expire about the very time set forth-but insists that they are not immediately followed by the personal coming of Christ and the literal end of the world, but rather by a gradual changing process. ²⁶ PFF4 867.2

Now, in the light of this bewildering and conflicting medley, the Millerite leaders pointedly ask: PFF4 868.1

“When doctors disagree, who shall decide? Amid such varied and contradictory views, which shall we choose? Thus in comparing your respective opinions with each other, and with our own, we have found no harmonious views of the Scriptures in which even yourselves can agree.” ²⁷ PFF4 868.2