XXX

Глава първа
INTRODUCTION
A system of prophetic exegesis captured the imagination of North
America a century and a half ago. It caused more than a little
upheaval in the established churches. It initiated the birth of
several new religious denominations. This apocalyptic revival,
Millerism, generally remembered as a queer, extremist
phenomenon of nineteenth century American religiosity, but what
is not commonly known is the fact that this revival was one of the
turning points in the history of prophetic exegesis.
Millerism represents a Biblical interpretation that not only brought

excitement, inspiration as well as trauma to thousands, but also
marked a watershed in the history of millennialist exegesis. The
inglorious end of Millerism brought disrepute to anyone attempting
to calculate a prophetic time-table for world history. Within a few
years from the widely publicized failure of Millerite expectations,
the centuries-old, well-established historical method of prophetic
exposition lost dominance, and gave way to both
1
dispensationalist futurism and to the more scholarly preterism.
Very few outside of former Millerites dared keep on using the

continuous historical hermeneutic as it was charged with Millerism's
infamous failure. This is the reason for the title The End of
Historicism. However, one should not get the impression that
historicism is dead. There were people who remained faithful to
the old hermeneutic, and the denominations that grew out of
Millerism now have millions of adherents. The change that took
place simply means that within a few decades from Miller
historicism was no more the standard protestant method in the
universities, theological seminaries or in the churches.
1.1 The Problem
http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/1_introduction.htm (1 of 5)12/13/2007 10:38:42 AM

The basic question this research sets out to answer is, "What was
the exegesis like that shook America and upset the established
tradition of prophetic interpretation?" It may well be that some
Millerite viewpoints appear naive to twentieth-century observers,
yet the question is worth asking. Naive or not, Miller marks the end
of one school of exegesis which he developed to its logical
conclusions.
Furthermore, Millerism is a dramatic example of the impact that

prophetic expositions may have. Such episodes must be of interest
to anyone concerned with the history of exegesis. This is so in spite
of the fact that the influence of prophecy on the religious thinking
of past centuries is usually underrated by historians.
By any standards Miller and his revival represent a noteworthy part

of nineteenth-century American history. In fact Millerism is one of
the most widespread apocalyptic revivals ever, and there are still
several million people, Seventh-day Adventists, members of the
Radio Church of God or of the many small Adventist churches and
even Jehovah's Witnesses, that in one way or another have to
2
reckon with William Miller in their spiritual pedegree.
1.2 The scope of the research
While Millerism made its impact in North America there were other
influences which contributed to the end of the historical method
of prophetic interpretation. There was Darbynisim English
counterpart of Millerism, there were the Plymouth Brethren and
people like Scofield who shaped the new hermeneutic of futurism
and of course there was the slowly widening influence of historical,
critical research, all of which contributed to exegetical changes in
the nineteenth century. Such factors catalyzed the impact of
Millerism. They are outside the sphere of this research which is
limited to describing prophetic exegesis within Millerism, and the
background of this exegesis.
Many aspects of Miller's interpretation are discussed only in a

cursory manner. His use of the Bible, his ideas on millennialism and
Zionism are passed over with but a few remarks. The primary focus
of this research has been on time prophecies that Miller related to
a terminus in 1843/4. All of these time calculations, with only a
couple of secondary exceptions, stem from the Old Testament.

Admittedly a major section of interesting and informative

exposition is thus left aside, but this limitation is not only due to lack
of space and time but is also prompted by the writer's personal
interest.
1.3 Comments on methodology
Attempts at organizing and interpreting other people's ideas are

always hazardous. The research has been based on an
investigation of Millerite books and periodicals. All material relating
to time prophesies has been analyzed and classified, under the
headings of Miller's fifteen proofs which cover the essential aspects
of Millerite chronological exegesis.
It is important to be aware from the outset that some Old

Testament texts that the Millerites used do not appear as
prophecies to a modern reader. There are also several
explanations which call for the reaction: This is no exegesis at all.
However, Miller and many of his followers regarded the texts
prophetic (with utter seriousness). Furthermore, the history of
exegesis must deal with what people discovered in a text rather
than what we think they should have found.
It is also appropriate to note that even though the following pages

include phraseology such as Miller "believed" or "liked" or "thought"
or "cherished" or "disapproved" there is no device to measure the
actual beliefs any more than likes or dislikes of a person no more
alive. Here, as in any history of ideas, the only concrete facts are
the writings available. The writing itself does not necessarily prove
that the author himself believed what he wrote, neither does it
usually tell the origin of the idea. The only fact is the text.
Everything else is speculation. This means that every time a word
implying emotion or thought appears in the following pages, it is
not intended to express the actual sentiment of a person but
rather that of a piece of writing.
One of the methodological problems related to the study of

Millerism is the repetitious nature of Millerite writings. There is no
need to read through many Millerite publications before one
realizes that on many subjects the contents are virtually identical
even when different authors are named on the title page. In
addition they loved reprints. Many documents appeared first in
the periodicals, then in pamphlet form. After a year or two several
pamphlets were collected into a book. No effort has been made

to determine who wrote something first.
In a case of similar ideas between Millerites and non Millerites one

can at best suspect dependence, but never prove it unless, of
course, clear reference or ipsissima verba are found. This makes
the background of Miller's exegesis an illustration of similar thinking
rather than a proof of Miller's dependence on earlier exegetes.
The same must hold true also in the case of Miller's impact on later
exegetes.
1.4 An overview of the contents
The fIrst part is a short background on Miller and Millerism.

Historical, political, social, or religious factors that may have
affected the rise of Millerism have been cut out. A short
description of Miller and his revival remains. The historical
background is followed by exegetical background. Chapter three
gives a definition of historicism, describes its the rise and draws
comparisons between Miller and other historicists.
Miller's exegesis is depicted from two angles. Firstly, to show the

foundation of Miller's exegesis his view of the Bible and his
hermeneutical methods are described with examples of non
chronological exegesis. Secondly, there is a description of Miller's
prophetic time-table with a separate chapter on the specific
issues relating to date-setting and typological interpretation of the
final stage of the revival.
1.5 Literature
In historical research the availability of sources is often a

formidable opponent to the researcher. In the case of Millerism
one is in a fortunate position. While numerous valuable sources
have been lost, University Microfilms has published a microfilm
3
collection of rare books and manuscripts on Millerism. These films
include over 1000 titles, Millerite as well as non-Millerite, 110
volumes of periodicals, and over 1000 copies of letters and
manuscripts. The collection is not exhaustive and there has been
frequent need to complement it with other literature, yet it has
been invaluable in providing many of the primary sources for this
research.

The largest collection of original Millerite material is found at

Aurora College, Aurora, Illinois. There are also extensive collections
at Ellen G. White Estate, Tacoma Park, Washington, D.C., and
Heritage Room, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan. In
Europe Newbold College, Bracknell, Berks., England, has a branch
of Ellen G. White research center, with some original and some
copies of Millerite and early Adventist material.
Footnotes
1.
This development was not limited to North America alone, but
took place also in Germany and Great Britain.
2.
Some of these groups (e.g. JWs) are largely unaware of any link
they may have to Milierism.
3.
Hoonstra J. ed. The Millerites And Early Adventists, A MicrofIlm
Collection of Rare Books and Manuscripts, 1978 [MEA].

Глава втора
BACKGROUND
2.1 William Miller
Literature on William Miller is somewhat schizophrenic in picturing

the man. On the one hand he is portrayed as a religious zealot, an
enthusiast, a maniac with a fertile imagination, a man who is
1
certainly literate but scarcely learned. On the other one finds him
described as a farmer of superior virtue: sober, honest,
temperamentally conservative, utterly logical, self-educated with
wide general knowledge, an ingeniously resourceful mind, and
2
careful in relationships to the expressions of religious extremes. The
safe position lies in acknowledging that no one-sided view of the
3
man matches fully with all available data.
There is no need for an extensive treatment of various facets in

Miller's or the revival's historical development, because a wealth of
4
literature on Miller and Millerism is in existence. Miller commanded
some respect in his community. He personifies the talented and
virtuous American, the "self made man" who from common
5
background makes his way into wide recognition. He was
elected to serve as a sheriff and as a justice of peace. In the
recruitment for the War of 1812 he gained sufficient support to
serve as a captain. However, farming remained his primary
6
occupation until Millerism was well consolidated.
2.1.1 Miller and the prophecies

7
In spite of (or perhaps becauseot) his stern religious ,upbringing
8
Miller turned to free-masonry, free-thinking and deism. The events
http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/2_background_1.htm (1 of 18)12/13/2007 10:39:31 AM

of the War of 1812 converted him back to the religion of his

childhood. With the enthusiasm of a new convert and with the
rationalistic method of historicism he set out to explore the
prophesies. He believed that "God in his wisdom had so
interwoven several prophesies, that -- they tell us the same
9
things." Even if deism plays no significant role in Miller's writings, he
may be termed as a an antideist who sought to convince his
10
audience that the Bible was "a feast of reason."'
In his hermeneutic Miller is obviously knowledgeable of and

dependent on the British millenarian tradition. He is familiar with
11
Mede, Newton, Faber, and Gill. However, probably frustrated by
the differing opinions of the commentaries, he decided in 1816 to
launch a Bible study relying solely on the Bible and a Cruden's
concordance. The results of his study show that he was primarily
concerned to harmonize prophetic time periods. He was
confident' that everything made sense. "There never was a book
written that has a better connection and harmony than the
12
Bible."
2.1.2 Miller begins to preach
Miller's solitary studies brought results within two years. In 1818 he

had reached his basic conclusions, but it was not until four years
later, after thorough checking and rechecking of his arguments,
that he felt confident enough to promote his prophetic time-table
in private conversation and correspondence. In 1831 he felt
supernaturally enticed into a career of part-time preaching.
Baptist, Methodist, and Congregational ministers invited him to
13
lecture as his message was useful in their protracted meetings. A
revival was slowly kindled. Miller's theory was convincing because
14
it rested on pietistic assumptions that many protestants shared.
Because his message was appealing, Miller came to be involved
in a series of events that gave bir1lt to one of the most widespread
15
apocalyptic revivals in Christian history. Miller himself accounted
for the success "by supposing that God is supporting the old man's
16
work, wicked, imperfect, and ignorant he is."
2.2 Millerite message
Miller's revival, as Linden has observed, "shared many ideas

rampant in the small communitive groups of ante-bellum

America." It was not only apocalyptic but also "devotional and
17
revivalistic". In a sermon reported in 1840 he said:
Be warned. Repent. Fly, fly for succour to the ark of God

- to Jesus - the Lamb which once was slain, that you
might live, for he is worthy to receive all honor, power
and glory. Believe, and you shall live. Obey his word, his
18
spirit, his calls, his invitations. There is no time to delay.
This quotation and Miller's written confession of faith place him well
within the boundaries of mainstream American Protestantism with
the exception of the dated parousia. He believed in the trinity, in
salvation through satisfactio vicaria and in a somewhat softened
19
version of the Calvinistic concept of salvation for the elect only.
While this is true of Miller himself, matters of dogma, except
eschatology, were of secondary importance to him. He was not
concerned with the Arian views of a sizeable proportion of Millerite
20
spokesmen. Henry Dana Ward sums up Millerite attitudes
conveniently: "Some men are Roman Catholics, some are
Protestants: let them be Catholics or Protestants, only looking for
21
the coming of the Lord according to his word." The revival is
therefore best described as a one idea movement. Its central
theme was the literal second coming of Christ "about the year
22
1843." Miller's strong reliance upon the Bible made his message
appealing and the stage was set for an ecumenical or an
interdenominational revival.
2.3 Mass meetings and publications
There were two agents that the Millerites skillfully employed to

spread their message: Mass meetings and an effective publication
programme. The former catered for the emotional needs of the
23
group while the latter was geared for the intellectual satisfaction
of the Millerites with thousands of pages of tedious theological
24
arguments and apology for Millerism.
Towards the end of the movement several of these large meetings

were organized every month. The camp meetings and the second
25
advent conferences drew audiences of up to ten thousand.
Apart from mass meetings Millerite success must be credited to

the phenomenal publication programme of the movement. In

1843 they had produced an estimated one million copies of
periodicals, but during the culminating year the total number of
26
copies rose to about five million. Some of the titles match the
27
disposition of their camp meeting songs. The flagship of the
publication programme was The Signs of the Times started early in
28
1840 and renamed into The Advent Herald early in 1844. In June
1841 a decision was taken to publish a series of books and
29
pamphlets "that none need be in darkness." These books were
called the Second Advent Library.
2.3.1 The Organization and spread of Millerism
Miller's popularity grew rapidly with the help of publications and

large revival meetings. The printing and distribution of periodicals
as well as the financial and other arrangements for the mass
meetings required organization. Miller himself was a poor
organizer. This lack was compensated for by the fact that several
30
ordained ministers took their stand on the side of Miller. In fact
Miller's role in the progress of the revival has been overemphasized
and misrepresented. He was a figurehead whose ideas kindled
the fire. But the flames soon grew out of his command. As early as
1837 he was no more in control of the movement. Especially
Joshua Himes' organizational ability consolidated Millerism into a
well structured undertaking with a sound financial basis, some
31
property, and a massive production of publications.
2.4 Millerism and American religiosity
Since Jonathan Edward's "Great Awakening" in 1740, North

American Protestantism had had a revivalist temper. Each revival
gave an outlet to the dormant powers of enthusiasm. The new
32
century started with massive waves of revivals followed by
Finney's "new measures" in 1830's. These awakenings sought to
fight back deism and sectarianism, as well as communitarianism.
With hindsight one may say that there was more success in the
battle against deism than in the one against sectarianism.
Geographically Millerism concentrated on the New England

33.
states, "the burned over district." It was around 1840 that the
casual, rural and local movement spread into the cities. In its

culminating year the revival may have had up to 50,000 followers

and probably many times that number of people on the fringe,
34
following events with curious alarm. Cross has aptly described
the revival claiming that no sizeable "group of folk adopted such
35
ideas so wholeheartedly since the early days of Roman Empire."
The main body of Millerites came from Baptist or Methodist
background, but there were also Episcopalians,
Congregationalists, Dutch Reformed, Presbyterians, Lutherans, as
well as a good number from small obscure churches at the fringe
36
of Protestantism.
2.4.1 Popularity of millenarianism
Within nineteenth century North American Protestantism an

interest in the last things was not a fringe phenomenon. There was
intense millenarian speculation by some of the leading theo-
37 38
logians as well as by many popular preachers. Several
ventured to calculate the time of the eschaton. Millennial
convictions were strong among the Shakers. The Mormons
expected a quick end. The spirit of the times is reflected in the
words of John Humphrey Noyes, leader of the Oneida community.
The Millennium was supposed to be very near. I fully

entered into the enthusiasm of the time. -My heart was
fixed on the Millennium and I resolved to live or die for it.
A feeling of expectation on this point lay at the bottom
of that triumphant march of revivals which shook the
land for several years from that time. The Millerites have
since met with unbounded ridicule; but it should be
remembered that all that portion of the churches who
were spiritual, who believed in revivals, and who were
zealous – had a fit of expectation as enthusiastic and
39
almost as fanatical as the Millerites.
Obviously William Miller was not the only one interested in the end
of the world. America was drunk on the millennium. From Miller's
success one may conclude that he is an eloquent representative
of the historicist millennial speculation.
2.5 A significant change in Millerism
Christian enthusiasts have through the ages anticipated an early

millennium. However, only rarely has the anticipation included an

exact date. It is important to note that Miller originally intended no
specific date. He preferred the less pretentious expressions "on or
40
before", and "about the year 1843."
A clear turn in the Millerite movement began at the sixteenth

Millerite general conference, held in Boston in May 1842. One of
the outcomes of this meeting was a stronger advocacy of a
41
definite time. For most Millerites a loosely defined time was
neither emotionally nor intellectually satisfactory. The spirit of
Millerism was, "Here we stand relying on the promises of God", "at
42
the time appointed THE END SHALL BE."
Many Millerites were convinced that a careful application of

prophecies would produce a definite time. As 1843 approached,
the pressure for speculation to find a more exact date increased.
In what has been termed Biblicist naiveté Miller joined the game
and paved the way for the revival's slipping out of his exegetical
43
scheme. Nearly a decade before 1843 he had proposed that
the true Biblical calendar should be based on the Jewish year,
which would bring the consummation of end-time prophecies to
44
between the Spring of 1843 and the Spring of 1844.
In late 1842 and early 1843 they felt a need for defining the Jewish
year more exactly, and Miller's sources "the most approved and
standard chronologers who have never yet been shown to be in
error" indicated that March 21, 1844 would be the last day of the
45
Jewish year AD. 1843. When the time approached others tried to
be even more specific than Miller had been. According to possibly
mistaken information, the Jewish year corresponding to 1843 was
46
claimed to end on April new moon, or April 18, 1844. With the
increasing speculation the emphasis of Millerism was changing.
Instead of the ambiguous "about the year 1843" exact final dates
were being discussed.
After a disappointment in March Miller hazarded no further

announcements to specify the time. Miller himself never
committed himself to the Karaite April date which others
47
advocated, and he regarded the March date more genuine.
He was now content to keep the parousia imminent. However,
many of his supporters were not prepared to settle for

48
immediatism. He was unable to keep the movement on his side.
Millerite mentality preferred an exact date. Millerism was ready for
its last turn.
2.5.1 The seventh-month movement
In February 1844 two men, Samuel Snow and George Storrs began
promoting a typological solution to the problem of time. By the
summer of 1844 they had concluded that October 22, 1844 was
the exact date of the end and in an August camp meeting they
attained massive support for their calculations against feeble
polemic by Miller and his associates. They thus launched the final
fervent phase of the revival, called the "seventh-month
49
movement" or the "midnight cry". In its exegesis as well as its
emphasis this stage of Millerism has to be distinguished from the
earlier revival. Snow and Storrs boosted the revival off to its
50
Waterloo.
Literature on Millerism shows a general confusion in interpreting this

stage of the revival. Miller is unfairly blamed for the failure of the
October calculation in spite of his remaining unsympathetic to it,
51
except for a fortnight before the disappointment. A comparison
between Miller's exegesis and that of the seventh-month
movement compels one to make a clear separation between
original Millerism and this last stage of the revival. The seventh-
month movement singled out one of Miller's many arguments and
exegeted it with a method different from Miller's. Traditional
historicist expositions, developed and advocated by Miller,
became secondary to sanctuary typology. The Levitical festal
calendar was promoted by implication as the most important
prophecy in all of the Bible.
The basic method remained unchanged while emphasis

changed. Because the former leaders of the movement were no
longer in control, as the arguments of Snow and Storrs swayed the
faith and the emotions of the group, this interval in Millerism has
been called a sectarian turn. The adoption of an exact date was
like a built-in explosive for the revival. During the late summer and
early autumn the commitment, zeal, sacrifices, and number of
supporters exceeded everything that had been seen so far in the
history of this revival. The gravity of disappointment was to match
the enthusiasm of expectation. As the morning of October 23

dawned it was again true that "the hour knoweth no man".

Millerism had come to an end. As it died it gave birth to
52
Adventism.
2.6 The aftermath of the disappointment
One can still appreciate the impact the disappointment had on

many Millerites. The few weeks of the seventh-month movement
had meant everything for many of those involved. Many left their
crops unharvested or neglected other secular duties. Many had
donated their savings to spread the "present truth" and all had to
53
bear the ridicule of their neighbors and relatives.
This research does not follow the events of the chaotic

disintegration of the revival. After the initial reactions one finds four
54
main trends:
1. The majority disengaged themselves from the revival,

many probably lost all interest in the apocalyptic.
2. A large Advent Christian group was formed around

William Miller and other prominent Millerite leaders. They
regarded the seventh- month movement and any
further time calcula-tions a mistake. They were satisfied
55
to keep the parousia imminent.
3. Some small groups went on recalculating the

prophetic time-tables and setting new dates for the
parousia.
4. Some endorsed the exegesis of the seventh- month

movement claiming that the time was right but the
event wrong. They advanced the so called "shut door"
theory of Christ having entered the most holy place of
the heavenly sanctuary on Oct 22 and that probation
was closed.
At this juncture one of the oddities of church history took place.

The hard-core Millerites of the last two groups proved the
strongest. The seventh-month adherents adopted sabbatarianism
and grew into Seventh-day Adventism, and through a process
which takes one far from original Millerism the time-setters affected

the birth of the Watchtower. The least popular post-

disappointment options probably involved the deepest
56
convictions.
The birth and the teaching of the diverse Adventist bodies is best
understood when the seventh-month phase of the revival is kept
distinct from early Millerism. This conclusion is supported by Miller's
later evaluation which includes the seventh-month movement,
early sabbatarian Adventism and possibly other Millerite offshoots.
As time has progressed, I have been pained to see

many errors which have been embraced in different
sections of the country by some who have labored with
myself. I have been pained to see a spirit of
sectarianism and bigotry.
Some are disposed to lay stress on the seventh- month

movement which is not warranted by the Word. There
was then a dedication of the heart in view of the Lord's
coming -- at that time; And now to contend that we
were not mistaken is dishonest. We should never be
57
ashamed to frankly confess all our errors.
In Miller's view the sabbatarian Adventists who kept hold of the

seventh-month movement exegesis were illegitimate children of
Millerism.
2.7 Miller's heritage
The seventh-month movement is the real exegetical watershed

that marked the end of historicism and made futurism or preterism
attractive. Sandeen has portrayed the disgust and rejection with
which the Millerite system of interpreting the Bible came to be
regarded after the inglorious climax of the movement. Miller
became an anathema, a theological leper for anyone speaking
or writing on Biblical prophecies. Miller's failure made the inroad of
Darbyism easier. Miller had exhausted the traditional historicist
interpretation of the prophecies. The method which had been
dominant in Protestantism for more than three centuries had but
little room in America after the great disappointment. A similar
development made historicism unpopular in Britain where the
dispensationalist method came to dominate most of the churches
58
supporting a biblical or fundamentalist tradition.

Miller's traditional emphasis and method was retained by

denominations that in one way or an other have their roots in the
Millerite revival. After the disappointment mainstream Millerism
dwindled into various Adventist churches. Evangelical Adventists
became extinct by the first years of this century. The largest
denomination stemming from mainstream Millerism is the Advent
Christian Church, but there are others: The Church of God
(Adventist), The Church of God (Abrahamic Faith), Life and
Advent Union all of which are listed in the Yearbook of American
59
Churches.
However, as has been pointed out earlier, Millerism continued to

grow through offshoots. The widest present day audience for
Millerite type of hermeneutic can today be found in two groups,
the Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses. As these two
groups here are mentioned together it must be emphatically
stated that their development began from thoroughly distinct
groups of zealous Millerites. Subsequently Seventh-day Adventists
generally identify with the Protestant tradition while Jehovah's
Witnesses do not. At the present time their doctrinal differen-ces
are so great that representatives of either group would feel
uncomfortable with any equation between the two. Furthermore,
even in the area of prophetic interpretation, the current
60
hermeneutic of these two denominations is different.
Seventh-day Adventists owe their hermeneutic and emphasis in

particular to the seventh-month movement. They soon left aside
all Millerite calculations except those relating to the books of
Daniel or the Revelation. October 22, 1844 was regarded as a
correct date with a misinterpreted event. After an initial "shut door"
interpretation of the date the prophecy was said to have been
fulfilled in the heavenly sanctuary. Having adopted seventh day
61
sabbatarianism the group launched an aggressive mission.
As indicated earlier, some small splinter groups of Adventists kept

setting new dates for the parousia. N.H. Barbour writes of the first
62
"midnight cry" in 1844, the second in 1860, and the third in 1873.
Barbour together with his associates, J.H.Paton and J.Wendell
greatly influenced the young Charles Taze Russel who came in
contact with them in 1870. Russel familiarized himself with the
message of William Miller and George Storrs, and edited with

63
Barbour some Adventist publications until breaking away to form
the Watchtower society. While Russel shows independent thinking
in believing the parousia to be invisible and in pursuing Arianism
alongside numerous expositions unique to the Jehovah's
Witnesses, the methodology as well as many interpretations are
closer to original Millerism than the teachings of present day
64
Seventh-day Adventists.
2.8 Summary
Early nineteenth-century North America was fertile ground for the

birth of new and extreme religious ideas. The economic,
intellectual, as well as religious, traditions of the day produced
many communitarian or sectarian revivals, and it comes as no
surprise that Millerism appealed to large numbers of people. It is
possible to see it as well as its exegesis as a response to the
sociological and spiritual needs of the time. Apocalypticism was
popular within the mainstream of American Protestantism.
William Miller himself had neither the interest nor ability to handle
the revival he sparked off. Others took over the organizational side
of the revival while Miller remained its figurehead. Miller himself
was reluctant to pinpoint an exact day for! the parousia. But his
reluctance was not shared by his supporters, in particular Samuel
Snow. Snow's insistence on a precise date led to the breakdown
of Millerism. Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses as
well as several small Adventist churches grew up from the remains
of Millerism. Outside of these groups very few ventured to trust the
traditional historicist method of exegesis which Miller had
employed.
Footnotes
1.
E.g. McMaster 1910, 134-141; Sears 1924; Canevin, "Gabriel, Blow
That Horn", AM Nov 1942; RD Jan 1943. The view is usually
documented by quotes from Miller's contemporary opponents,
especially newspaper reports. See e.g. Nichol 1944, 15, 14Of.
2.
E.g. Nichol 1944, 17-74; SDAE 787-9; PFF W, 455-75. Cf. Linden
1978, 36-40; Cross 1965, 291.
3.
A certain interpretative problem will always remain. Compare e.

g. Nichol 1944, 321-354 with Linden 1978, 36-40, or with Sandeen

"Millenialism" in ROA, 112f.
4.
In recent years the writing on Miller has gradually matured from
a simple black or white description. See e.g. Linden 1971 and
1978; Rowe MS 1974; Numbers & Butler 1987. The Bibliography has
a section on Miller and Millerism.
5.
Rowe MS 1974, 6.
6.
For further details see e.g. SDAE, 787.
7.
Rowe MS 1974, 22f, 27, argues for Miller's turn to deism as a
reaction to strict childhood instruction; Cf. Rasmussen MS 1983,
18.
8.
Linden 1978, 37.
9.
Miller, 1838, iv.
10.
Miller 1845, 6.
11.
Cf. ch. 5. Miller "Address to Believers in All Denomina-tions" in
Bliss 1853, 251. Miller 1833, 10, 42 includes a direct quote from Gill.
Cf. Rasmussen MS 1983, 52-57.
12.
Miller 1838, iv.
13.
PFF IV, 461-482. Cross 1965, 292f.
14.
Rowe MS 1974, 6.
15.
Cf. Cross 1950, 287; Linden 1982, 13.
16.
Miller, letter July 21, 1838 to Truman Hendryx, MEA.

17.
Linden 1978, 32.
18.
Excerpt from William Miller's sermon in Miller 1842/b,
19.
Miller's 20 articles of faith. Bliss 1853, 77-80.
20.
0ut of 43 known Millerite preachers 38 had Trinitarian and 5
Arian background. (A ratio of 7 to 1.) Froom 1971, 146f.
21.
Ward "To the Conference of Christians--" ST Jan 1, 1842.
22.
The phrase is typical of Miller's early comments on the date. Cf.
the title Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second
Coming of Christ about the Year 1843 (editions 1833, 1836, 1838,
1840, 1842/b).
23.
The emotional tone of the meetings is reflected in hymns like
"Farewell poor careless sinners too, it grieves my heart to leave you
here, Eternal vengeance waits for you, 0 turn and find your
salvation near" Himes ed. 18431b part I, 21. See also the sulphurous
description of the end in Anon. "A Scene of the Last Day" in Miller
18421c, 99-114.
24.
Millerite argumentation runs often with a set of questions: 1)
W7Jo is the people referred to, 2) what is the sequence of events
and the historical context, and most importantly 3) when is the
fulfillment to be expected. Every question was to be answered
within the framework of Miller's rules of interpretation. See e.g.
Miller 1845, 68; Miller 1844, 14; Miller 1842/a, 8; Miller 1842/b, 191,
286.
25.
In 1842 Millerites are reported to have organized 30, in 1843
about 40, and in 1844 at least 54 camp meetings. Often the
meetings were announced with proviso, "providence permitting,"
or "if time lingers." The audience rarely fell below 4000 and a
couple of times audiences of 10000 to 15000 or 10000 to 12000 are
declared. In 1842 "The Big Tent" was pur-chased to be used in the
protracted meetings. This mammoth tent had the seating
capacity of 5000 to 6000 but was frequently unable to

accommodate the crowds that gathered. PFF W, 645-662. Cf.

Dick, "Advent Camp Meeting" AHer, winter 1977.
26.
PFF W, 624f.
27.
E.g. The Voice of Warning; City Watchman's Alarm; Faithful
Watchman; The Trumpet of Alarm; The Voice of Elijah; The Trump
of Jubilee; The Advent Shield; Watchman's Last Warning. There
were also several publications with rather sober titles like: Bible
Examiner; World's Crisis; Coming of Christ, etc. See PFF W, 626.
28.
See e.g. Nichol 1944, 79.
29.
ST April 15, 1841; Nichol 1944, 91.
30.
PFF W, 503-554.
31.
Especially Froom and Nichol make the revival appear
dependant solely on Miller. See Linden 1978, 45f; Rowe MS 1974, nf.
32.
"The Great Revival" E.g. Handy 1976, 162-8.
33.
Cross1950, 3; 173-184. After each round of Finney's awakening it
proved to be exceedingly difficult to rekindle the enthusiasm
again, a phenomenon which gave rise to the titles "the burned
over district" or the "infected district". It was this area of the United
States that turned out to be particularly receptive to the novel
doctrines of Spiritualism, Mormonism, Millerism and a few years
later Adventism, Christian Science and Jehovah's Witnesses. Thus
revivalism may have played into the hands of sectarianism and
millenarianism.
However, one should note that Cross's conclusions on the burned

over district are not indisputable, because before Finney the same
general area witnessed the rise of The Shakers (founded by Ann
Lee, with emphasis on the literal presence of the Holy Spirit,
around 1774), The Disciples of Christ (formed around the
interesting charismatic personality, Alexander Camp-bell, who
among other teachings rejected the Old Testament, around
1811), and Unitarianism (representing the "liberalism" of the day,

led by the moderate William Channmg, around 1820).
34.
Nichol 1944, 217f gives an estimate of 500 public lecturers some
of whom were ordained ministers. PFF W, 699 gives a figure of 1500-
2000 lecturers during the seventh month movement. See also
Cross 1950, 287; Linden 1978, 63; Sweet1950, 278. It is impossible to
give any accurate figure on the membership of a group that kept
no records and lived as if it were one foot inside the pearly gates.
35.
Cross 1950, 287.
36.
Nichol 1944, 217; Froom 1971, 146f.
37.
Apocalyptic speculation was promoted by e.g. U. Ogden
(rector of Trmity Episcopal Church, Newark NJ), S. Landom
(president of Harvard), Timothy White (president of Yale), O.
Elsbree (professor at Buckland), E. Nott (president of Union
College), Lyman Beecher (president of Lane Theological
Seminary), etc. See PFF IV, 56-133.
38.
E.g. S. M'Corkle (Presbyterian pastor), Father John Thayer,
Jedidah Morse, Morse 1810. Cf. PFF IV, 56-133; Sandeen,
"Millenialism" in ROA, 104-109.
39.
Noyes, Confessions of Religious Experience, 1849, 2, quoted in
Sandeen 1970, 49.
40.
E.g. "Miller's Twenty Articles of Faith," ST May 1, 1841. The phrase
is also typical of Miller's early comments on the date. Cf. the title of
one of the most popular Millerite books: Evidence from Scripture
and History of the Second Coming of Christ about the Year 1843
(Editions 1833, 1836, 1838, 1840, 1842b). Cf. Bliss 1843, 77-80; PFF W,
4O6f, 463, 789; Damsteegt 1977, 35f; Cross 1965, 291.
41.
Arthur "Joshua V. Himes and the Cause of Adventism" in
Numbers & Butler 1987, 43. This was against the wishes of some
leading Millerites like Dr. Henry Dana Ward.
42.
Anon. "Diagram exhibiting the events of prophecy" AH Feb 21,

1844.
43.
Linden 1978, 56-65. Cf. PFF IV, 784-826.
44.
PFF IV, 794.
45.
Miller does not appear to have been aware of the
technicalities of the Jewish calendar. He thought the Jewish year
ran from equinox to equinox. Miller "Synopsis of Miller's Views" MC
June 15, 1843. Cf. anon. "The Time of the End" ST Jan 4, 1843; anon.
"The Vernal Equinox" AH April 3, 1844; PFF IV, 784, 794. Miller, Himes,
Litch, Hale, Fitch and Hawkey objected to determining the exact
date of the parousia.
46.
ST June 21, 1843; PFF IV, 7%f.
47.
Miller, 1845, 24.
48.
Cf. Linden 1978, 60f.
49.
The name "Seventh month movement" comes from the Jewish
calendar that Snow and Storrs utilized in their exegesis, and
"Midnight cry" was derived from the parable of the ten virgins. This
parable was used extensively as a time prophecy (1 night = 1/2
prophetic day = 6 months according to the year/day theory)
which brought the waiting Millerites from spring 1844 to the
autumn of 1844.
50.
Linden 1978, 65.
51.
See e.g. Harrison 1979, 192-206; Damsteegt 1977, 78-135;
Sandeen 1970, 49-55. These authors fail to distinguish the seventh
month movement. The same is often true of SDA literature though
in a different sense. E.g. PFF W 784-876 and Nichol 1944, 217-260
fail to observe the difference there was in both the emphasis and
exegesis of Millerism prior to the spring of 1844.
52.
Linden 1978, 65.

53.
Nichol 1944, 266f.
54.
There is little published research on the period between Oct 22,
1844 and the important Albany conference in April 1845. See e.g.
Linden 1978, 79-81.
55.
Cf. Arthur 1970, 137-9; Rowe MS 1974, 277f.
56.
Carroll 1979, 85-110 presents a psychological theory in
explanation of this development. Unfortunately Carroll's
knowledge of Millerism is superficial.
57.
Miller 1945, 26-28.
58.
Sandeen 1970, 42-102. Cf. Froom's conclusions in PFF IV, 203f.
For the development of dispensationalism see e.g. Cox 1963b;
Turner 1944; Sandeen 1970.
59.
"Adventist Bodies," SDAE, 10.
60.
Jehovah's Witnesses do not commonly acknowledge that their
movement has any connection with Millerism. SDAs are equally
unaware of any link there is between Millerism and the JWs.
61.
E.g. Linden 1982; Damsteegt 1977, 259, 263, 135-164.
62.
Barbour 1871, 30.
63.
The magazines were called The Herald of the Morning
and The Three Worlds Plan of Redemption. Beckford 1975, 2;
Hoekema 1963, 224.
64.
Jehovah's Witnesses in fact retain several of Miller's 15
arguments on prophecy, even though they cannot be regarded
as a direct outgrowth of Millerism. (E.g. 6000 years from the
creation to the end of the world, the year-day method, a

prophecy on the seven times [originally taken from Leviticus 26,

now usually from Daniell, and interpretation of Gog and Magog
that matches that of Miller, etc. Cf. Rees MS 1984, 14.

Глава трета
THE HISTORICAL METHOD

No revival nor exegesis is born in a vacuum. It would make a
fascinating but difficult study to investigate the influence that
certain historical events have had on the exposition of the
Scriptures. Climactic historical occasions have boosted interest in
Biblical prophecies. However, no historical circumstance can
produce exegesis without creative minds, able to adapt the
message of the Bible to a particular setting. But there is a context
to Millerism which is far more important to his exegesis than the
economic or sociological situation in which the revival brooded.
This is the historical method of prophetic interpretation. Miller's
concepts may well have been independent, but they were
certainly not born without information on the conclusion and
presuppositions that go with historicism.
3.1 Protestant apocalypticism
It is an interesting fact of church history that within Protestantism

outbursts of millenarianism have occurred more frequently in the
1
Reformed tradition than in the Lutheran one.
Furthermore, within the Reformed field of influence millenarian

revivals mainly sprung up in the Anglo-Saxon world, England and
America. And, for some reason, early nineteenth century was one
of the periods characterized by widespread millen-nialism.
These observations must, however, be taken with caution. It by no

means follows that the Reformed doctrine and hermeneutic as
such causes millenarianism, or that the national mentality and
sociological circumstances in England and North America were
uniquely suited for producing a harvest of apocalyptic revivalism.
The true reasons for the appearance of millenarian expectations
http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/3_the_historical_method1.htm (1 of 27)12/13/2007 10:40:07 AM

must, of course, be much more complex. After all there were

several millennialist revivals in the Middle Ages without the aid of
2
either the Reformed or Anglo-Saxon heritage.
The exegetical method that most English or American exegetes

used in their prophetic calculations between from late
seventeenth to early nineteenth century is called the historical
method. In this chapter this historicist tradition of prophetic
interpretation is surveyed with references to Miller's exegesis.
3.2 From Reformation to American Biblicism
Millerite exegesis cannot be properly understood without some

insight into the view of the Scriptures it employed. It is a little known
fact of considerable significance that even in the best of
American theological seminaries Francois Turrettini's dogmatics
3
was used as a textbook in the first half of the nineteenth century.
Turrettini's Biblicism dominated theological thought. People were
brought up to believe that they were faithful followers of Luther
and Calvin while they followed the methods of protestant
orthodoxy. The Millerites were no exception. They had but little to
say about the Reformation, but they did claim a share in the best
4
of Protestant tradition.
Superficially, Millerites, like any other group of American

Protestants of the time, can indeed be linked with the
Reformation. They certainly approved the Reformation slogans:
faith in the sufficiency of the Scriptures; the Bible as its own
interpreter, sacra Scriptura sui ipsius interpres, the perspicuity of the
5
Bible, claritas sacrae Scriptuae. In fact such a connection is
made. Miller's method is presented as one which is based solely on
6
the principles of the Protestant Reformation.
An excursus to Reformation hermeneutic serves two purposes.

Firstly, it shows that the above-mentioned view in fact short circuits
the background of Miller's hermeneutic with its partly unfounded
claim on Miller's following the methods of the Reformation.
Secondly, it gives a dimension which will make it easier to
evaluate Miller's exegesis.
3.2.1 Reformation hermeneutic

The change of method after the Reformation can be seen clearly

if Luther's and Calvin's main interpretative point is given. Luther's
7
method was not one of rationalism, it was one of faith. In his view
the crux interpretum and and authority of the Bible was Jesus
8
Christ. "Sacred Scripture is God incarnate." He understood the
9
Bible as the book of Christ and about Christ. Every true
interpretation of the Scripture would lead to Him. "When I have a
text that is like a nut with a hard shell, I im-mediately dash it
10
against the Rock [Christ] and find the sweetest kernel." Without
Christ he felt there was nothing left in the Bible - a viewpoint that
allowed for modest criticism of certain parts of the Bible as well as
11
some untraditional views on authorship. Thus Luther shuns
scholastic Biblicism. It is true that he was also deeply interested in
last day events in the Scriptures, but his focal point was the Biblical
message of Jesus Christ.
For Calvin the Scriptures were less human than for Luther. He
12
believed the Bible had flowed from the very mouth of God. He
made little distinction between various parts of the Bible and
approached it with a "letter-worship" attitude that led him into
13
gross inconsistencies with some parts of the Old Testament. Yet,
in spite of his underlying Biblicism, he was attentive to the natural
historical meaning of texts, emphatic on Christocentricity, and was
thus kept from the many problems and arguments which make
14
later Reformed Biblicism look naive. His hermeneutical key is
expressed in comments on John, "We ought to read the Scriptures
with the express design of finding Christ in them. Whoever shall turn
aside from this object, though he may weary himself throughout
his whole life in learning, will never attain the knowledge of
15
truth." In this fundamental issue Calvin's view is the same as
Luther's. This approach does also give a different meaning for any
16
apocalyptic exegesis or calculations that the reformers did.
3.2.2 The rise of Biblicism
Luther's hermeneutic should have put an end to the old

perfectionistic eschatology based on omens and signs. However,
his Christocentricity was soon forgotten. Protestant scholasticism
preserved all rules the Reformation had brought out on the Bible,

17
but it forgot the foundation on which the rules were based.
Orthodoxy turned the Bible into a repository of information on all
manner of things, including science and history, which then had to
18
be proven correct by the current standards. Reformation
humanism was replaced by scholastic Biblicism, which regarded
the Scriptures as unilaterally inspired. Often the natural meaning of
the text was overlooked in pursuit of an organized pattern of
dogma.
Unilateralism required that apocalyptic prophecies should be

studied with the same interest as the Gospels. Galileo and
Copernicus brought about the dawn of a scientific world view
with mathematics as its foundations. Faith in a mystic inspiration of
the Word made the prophecies particularly intriguing for anyone
willing to apply the science of mathematics to the Scriptures. It
was believed that diligent observation had unraveled the laws of
nature and that similar industrious harmonization of the Bible texts
19
would unfold God's secrets.
One simple way of expressing the change from the Christocentric

hermeneutic of Luther and Calvin to the Biblicism of Protestant
scholasticism is the following: For the Reformers the Bible was
God's word, but for the theologians of orthodoxy the Bible was
20
God's words. Millerite unilateralism, lack of Christocentric content
in expositions, play with Biblical numbers, harmonization, emphasis
on individual words, all stem from protestant orthodoxy.
3.3 Definition of historicism
Miller's method is called historicism. Historicism (also called

continuous historical interpretation and sometimes the historical
messianic interpretation) was a product of Biblicism. For the
purposes of this research historicism is defined as the method of
prophetic interpretation which dominated British and American
exegesis from late seventeenth century to the middle of
nineteenth century. However, fairness to historicism demands the
observation that many individual aspects of this mode of
interpretation had been popular for centuries, and some for a
millennium before there was any protestant orthodoxy. The birth of
historicism was not so much a process of new invention as one of
pulling together separate ideas into a coherent Biblicist system.

The main characteristics of historicism are: 1) The endorsement of

the year/day theory and a preoccupation with prophetic time
periods; 2) continuous historical application of various apocalyptic
symbols and calibrating of all prophecy with history; 3) the
identification of the Papacy as the little horn/antichrist, though not
infrequently Islam was rated on the side as "an eastern antichrist."
4) At the foundation of the method, its distinguishing feature, was
the creation of a coherent system of interdependent
synchronizations between prophecies. The method included a
desire to place every prophecy into an elaborate millennial
timetable. The rationale for this lies in the Biblicist concept of
inspiration. Protestant scholasticism believed that all parts of the
Bible had equal value and that the Bible contained a mystical
network of prophecies to be unfolded and harmonized by rational
processes. It was the Biblicist view of the Bible which empowered
21
historicism. This was alien to Luther's or Calvin's view of Daniel or
22
the Apocalypse.
3.4 An excursus, early background of historicism
In a sense the intentionally obscure language of the book of

23
Daniel suited well historicist interpretations. In his sketch of world
powers the author of Daniel leaves the final power and its
formidable little horn unidentified while the earlier symbols are
interpreted within the book itself. Soon after the Maccabean
24
period Daniel's symbols are already applied to the Romans.
New Testament authors and the church fathers interpreted the

book of Daniel and projected the abomination of desolation as
an event of the future (Mt 24:15). In fact, the Synoptic apo-
calypse is by allusion and quotation based on the book of
25
Daniet.
3.4.1 The church fathers
Among the church fathers Hippolytus in particular expressed keen

interest in the apocalyptic. He was one of the first known to have
26
calculated a time for the parousia - AD. 500 with the help of an
27
early version of the 6000 year theory. More than a millennium
later many historicists would have happily endorsed his words:

Speak with me, 0 blessed Daniel. Give me full

assurance, I beseech thee. Thou dost prophesy
concerning the lioness in Babylon; for thou wast a
captive there. Thou hast unfolded the future regarding
the bear; for thou wast still in the world, and didst see
the things to come pass. Then thou speakest to me of
the leopard; and whence canst thou know this, for thou
art already gone to thy rest? -- The leopard has arisen;
the he goat is come; he has smitten the ram; he hath
broken his horns in pieces; he hath stamped upon him
with his feet. -- Rejoice blessed Daniel. Thou hast not
been in error: all these things have come to pass.
After this again thou hast told me of the beast dreadful

and terrible. It had iron teeth. --Already the iron rules;
already it subdues and breaks all in pieces.-- already
28
we see these things ourselves.
In a milder form Hippolytus' interest in the apocalyptic was shared

by many of his better known predecessors. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus,
Tertullian, and a little later Julius Africanus expressed similar
29
sentiments. With the exception of the anti-Christian Porphury, the
hermeneutic of Daniel in the first Christian centuries can be
regarded as the precursor of later historicism. Beginning with the
church fathers on, Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome were
commonly seen as the four kingdoms. This made it easy for
Europeans to regard Europe with its many nations as the ten horns
30
of Daniel seven.
However, it would be a mistake to identify the patristic exegesis

31
with historicism as Froom does. Three essential elements of
historicism were missing from the early Christian exposition of the
apocalyptic. There was no synchronization or harmonization of
prophecies. There was no papal little horn. Neither was there that
strong emphasis on chronology, which is typical of the continuous
historical exegesis. These features were not developed until a
32
millennium later.
3.4.2 The year-day theory and papal antichrist
Towards the dawn of the second millennium of the Christian era

some Jewish scholars began calculating prophetic time by

counting years for days. This device made it possible to date the
esawton close to the year 1000 when applied to the periods of
1260 days, 1290 days, or 1335 days as found in Daniel. Joachim or
Fiore (1130-1202) is the first Christian who is known to have
employed the year-day method. He applied it on the 1260 days of
the book of Revelation, and his imaginative play with cryptic
33
numbers aroused widespread interest in apocalyptic figures.
Without a change in the exegesis of prophetic times it would have
been difficult to reapply eschatological imagery and keep it
relevant.
Joachim of Fiore can be credited with also another exegetical

invention that was later taken over and developed by historicists.
He believed that the antichrist would usurp the Roman see. Some
late medieval scholars, of whom Eberhard II, archbishop of
Salzburg (1200-1246) and John Wyclif (1324-1384) are examples,
34
identified the little horn with the bishop of Rome. At the time of
the Reformation this became a firmly held doctrine among the
majority of Protestants. Neither Luther nor Calvin had any doubts
35
on this point.
3.5 Joseph Mede
The basic characteristics of historicism had emerged over a long

period of time. What was needed was someone to draw all the
features together. The man who pioneered historicism was Joseph
Mede (1586-1638). Even though Mede, a master of Christ's College
in Cambridge, is only one among many apocalyptic expositors of
his time, he is credited with what has been named "a Copernican
36
revolution in the interpretation of prophecy." The respect he
commanded is indicated by titles like "the father of prophetic
interpretation," and "inspired for the interpretation of the
prophecies," given him by later expositors. His major work Clavis
Apocalyptica or The Key of the Revelation was still in print in the
nineteenth century, and nearly every serious commentary on
37
Daniel or the Apocalypse referred to his name.
Mede's main contribution was a system of synchronism between

various prophetic symbols. Primarily he worked within the
Apocalypse but he did coordinate the key prophecies of Daniel
with those of Revelation. Thus he radically affected the future
exegesis of Daniel. Mede's most far reaching conclusion was that

for equating seven time prophecies which contained time spans

of 3 1/2 years, 1260 days, or 42 months (Dan.7>25; 12:7; Rev.11:2,3;
12:6,14; 13:5). These, he explained must apply to the antichristian
power of papacy. He also labored to link other prophetic time
periods with the time of the antichrist to provide "a sure guide in
38
this holy Labyrinth." This plan he called "that SACRED CALENDAR
and GREAT ALMANAC OF PROPHECY" or "A Prophetical
39
Chronology of Times."
Mede's version of the year-day method was simple. He made one

day in apocalyptic prophecies correspond to a literal solar year.
With this device the 1260 days of the Roman Antichrist would last
1260 years. There were, however, some prophetic periods like Dan
8:14, 2300 evenings and mornings, which Mede interpreted literary
40
to the time of Antiochos Epiphanes.
Mede did also leave the boundaries of Daniel and Revelation

and, writing to Archbishop Ussher, he expressed the increas-ingly
popular concept that the second advent and millennium were to
come at 6000 years anno mundi. Employing the Samaritan
Pentateuch he was able to match the end of 6000 years with his
terminus for the 1260 days/years of papal an-tichrist/little horn - to
41
"Anno Aerae Christianae 1736." Finally, but not least importantly,
Mede placed the coming of Christ right after the ruin of Antichllit
42
at the end of 1260 years, to be followed by the millennium. In this
he initiated a tradition of premillennialism within the historicist
method. Froom classifies this as epochal because it meant
43
repudiation of the Augustinian theory of amillennialism. Indeed
Mede stands out as one who turned the tide in the history of
exegesis for about two centuries until the Millerite disappointment
44
in 1844.
3.6 Sir Isaac Newton
Next in the line of well known historicists, stands Sir Isaac Newton
(1642-1727) who was not only a well known scientist but also a
keen interpreter of prophecies. He applied Mede's rationalistic
method and wished to explain both physical phenomena as well
45
as prophecy with the new mathematics. The Bible he
considered "the dictates of the Holy Ghost" Therefore the
"prophetic dictates" were "histories of things to come -- without

46
ambiguity." Methodologically Newton added little to Mede. His
main contribution was that of confirming the notion that the
historicist, exegesis was scientific, "without ambiguity." The goal of
this discipline was, in his opinion, to undo the obscure prophetic
language. This language, Newton believed, was purposely difficult
to keep the information with true Christians and to prevent it from
"the proud, the self conceited, the presumptuous, the sciolist, the
sceptic." It is quite "certain that the church understanding
47
thereof.
Daniel, Newton claimed, was the key to all other prophecy, and
"to reject his [Daniel's] Prophecies is to reject the Christian reli-
48
gion." In his exegesis he, unlike Mede or many of his
contemporaries, did not give any date or year from which a
terminus could be calculated. Instead "he specified the time
vaguely, at "about the time of the invasion of the Barbarous
nations and their erecting several Kingdoms in the Roman Empire,"
and "it being certain that 1200 of the 1260 years are run out
49
already." The manuscript of this statement has been tentatively
dated around 1680 which places Newton close to Mede (AD.476-
1736). Whatever the case, the great scientist did not want to bind
himself to a single year.
While Newton was not overly specific on the most significant of

apocalyptic time prophecies, his writings set forth a magnificent
profusion of eschatological detail including a mathematical
foundation for calculating prophetic time. Newton made the
parallel between three and a half years (e.g. Dan 7.25) with 42
months (e.g. Rev 13.5) and with 1260 days (e.g. Rev 12.6), which
gives 360 days for each prophetic year and 30 days to a
prophetic month. Thus, unlike Mede, he disassociated prophetic
time from solar or lunar calendars. This model for prophetic
50
time was widely used a century later.
It is of particular interest to note that Newton began counting the

70 years of Daniel 9:25 from Artaxerxes' decree (Ezra7), which he
51
believed was issued in 457 B.C. One cornerstone of Millerism was
thus being laid. Daniel 8.14 meant 2300 years according to
Newton, though without a definite starting point. He strongly
52
opposed any application to Antiochos Epiphanes. Manuel
summarizes Newton's main contribution aptly:

There was nothing left over, no random words still

unexplained, no images that were superfluous. The
system was enclosed, complete, and flawless. Newton
saw his 'methodizing of prophecy' as an ideal scientific
structure, exhibiting the greatest possible simplicity and
53
harmony.
3.7 Thomas Newton
"Thomas Newton, John Gill, and George Stanley Faber would rank
high in any list of eighteenth and nineteenth century exegetes. Of
course many other prominent men who pursued similar solutions to
54
the apocalyptic riddle could be mentioned. However, for our
purposes these three are important because of their likely
55
influence of William Miller.
Bishop Thomas Newton (1704-1782), was dean of St. Paul's in

London and" bishop of Bristol. In nineteenth-century American
literature no other eighteenth-century exegete of prophecies is
56
mentioned more often than he is. Bishop Newton's Dissertations
on the Prophecies (1754) became immensely popular. The book
was translated into German and Danish and it ran through many
English editions. His thesis on prophecy appears to have had a
different purpose from the works of Mede and Sir Isaac Newton
though he operates with the same fundamental premises as his
exegetical predecessors. He begins with Genesis and carefully
maps traditional Messianic or eschatological prophecies. His
fundamental idea, like Miller's, is that the whole Bible presents a
harmonious chain of prophecy on the two advents of Christ.
Daniel and the Revelation are used as keys for unlocking other
parts of the Bible. It would not be surprising if the "Newton" Miller
had in his library was Thomas Newton's book and that it inspired
57
William Miller to try harmonizing all time prophecies of the Bible.
Thomas Newton refined and systemized Mede's and Sir Isaac

Newton's method. However, his ultimate purpose was apologetic.
He advocated prophecy as the main argument against the
increasing infidelity of the age. The prophecies, he believed, were
an exact "summary of the history of the world" when exegeted
58
scientifically.
Part of his prophetic chronology was to expect the dawn of the

millennium at around 6000 Anno Mundi even though biblical

chronology as such does not dominate his thesis. The importance
of the 6000 years for him is apparent from repeated references to
it in the context of apocalyptic time prophecy. For instance he
expressed the idea that the terminus of the 1260 days/years as
well as that of the 2300 evenings and mornings-years coincides
with the terminus of the sixth millennium from the creation.
Emphasis on the 6000 years greatly changed priorities in prophetic

Bible study. It turned any genealogy or any statement on
chronology into a time prophecy of equal importance to the
prophecies of Daniel and John the Revelator. Newton mayor may
not have been the inspiration that sparked Miller off to prepare his
grand eschatological scheme with "15 proofs" on the validity of
1843. Whatever the case, both men believed that the any part of
the Bible is primarily prophetic. Both of them did also create a
harmony of prophecies in order to interlink all of the various lines of
59
prophecies they found.
There is one essential difference that must be noted when Miller

and Newton are compared. While Newton wrote in a manner that
was likely to stimulate chronological speculation he never
ventured to commit himself to any single date. He believed that
the tenninus ad quem can never be seen clearly before the time
60
has come. For the 1260 day/year period he suggested at least
three starting points. The earliest is with Justinian's degree (533 AD),
the second Phocas' degree in 606 (this had the additional benefit
of being also the beginning of Mohammed's rise to power), and
the third the early century when the pope was established as a
61
"temporal prince." The parallel termini, which Newton did not
spell out but which the reader could easily deduce for himself,
were 1793, 1866 and the late twentieth century. Newton's dates
62.
for the 2300 days/years (Dan 8.14) and his theory of the 6000
63
years of the world history match with the last of the options
above. Newton provided the blueprint and left the calculations to
his readers.
3.8 John Gill
John Gill (1697-1771) was another scholar with whom Miller would
64
have been familiar. He commanded great respect within the
Baptist denomination and was called "in some respects the most

learned man that had yet appeared in our denomination. Nor,

indeed, have any equaled him, to the present day, in
65
acquaintance with Hebrew and the Rabbinic literature." Gill's
multi-volume commentaries of the Old and the New Testament
contain thorough expositions of the prophecies.
Gill provided little new for the historicist method. He was a believer
in the year/day method. His terminus a quo for the 1260 years of
Dan 7:25 was AD. 606 which made him conclude the prophecy in
1866. Like Thomas Newton he expected the end of the 2300
evenings and mornings at terminus of the 6000th year from the
creation. Furthermore Gill allows for the possibility that the number
of the beast, 666, might signify years. He did also go beyond the
strict year/day principle and he proposed that the two days of
Hosea 6:2 signify 2000 years after which the restoration of the Jews
will take place. In a modified form Miller included all of these
66
viewpoints into his proofs.
3.9 George Stanley Faber
The most productive exegete of the prophecies among Miller's

contemporaries is George Stanley Faber (1773-1854). According to
Froom he was "the most voluminous religious writer of his
67
generation." There is no certainty as to which of Faber's many
commentaries Miller referred to, when he acknowledged having a
68
"Faber" in his library. It is likely that it was Dissertation on the
Prophecies, originally published in 1804 and distributed in America
in 1808.
Faber's exegesis closely follows that of Mede, the two Newton's

and Gill. He keeps within Daniel and Revelation with the popular
69
terminus of 1866. However, contrary to the Newton's, he
70
believed the little horn of Dan 8 to be Mohammedianism.
Even though Faber comes to a definite year he leaves the actual

events of that year in the shadow. He expected the end of both
Papal and Islamic power, "the western and the eastern antichrist",
but he is ambiguous on whether Christ will then reign literally or
71
spiritually.
3.10 Historicism in popular commentaries

The work of the leading historicists might have been sufficient in

preparing the ground for the nineteenth-century apocalyptic
revivals. There is, however, another group of writings that
established the dominance of this historicist exegesis. Large
numbers of protestant commentary sets were distributed in the first
72
half of the century. Most of these were of British origin.
Froom lists thirteen different Protestant commentaries available in

Miller's time. The grip that historicism had over serious North
American exegesis can be seen in that only one of the thirteen
commentaries makes Antiochos the only fulfillment of the little
horn in Daniel 7, two give an option between Antiochos and
Rome, and the remaining propose the Papacy as the only
73
solution.
While the concordance was regarded as more valuable than a

commentary there are some commentaries which were significant
for the continuous historical method. One of these was the six
volume commentary by Thomas Scott (1747-1821), originally
published 1788-92, and produced in America in 1804-9. At least
eight reprints were made of the American edition. In his comments
Scott follows the two Newtons and Faber. Like them his 1260 years
74
began in 606 AD. and ended in 1866.
Another very influential commentary was Adam Clarke's (1762-

1832) eight volume Commentary and Critical Notes. American
editions of this commentary were produced almost simultaneously
with the British ones (1810-25). Clarke is particularly effective in the
area of chronology. His commentary includes exhaustive
chronological tables and with exact dating for every incident. He
also prints his prophetic times boldly including a count on the
number of years one must wait to see fulfillment. The 1260 years he
began with Pepin's giving power to pope Stephen II in 755, thus
ending in 2015 AD., though he also notes the 1798 date as a
turning point marking the beginn-ing of the downfall of the
papacy. Miller chose the latter date for his terminus of the same
prophecy. In regard to the 2300 years his commentary gives the
75
dates from 334 B.C. to 1966 A.D.
The only important American commentary at the time was that of

William Jenks (1788-1866) Comprehensive Commentary on the
Holy Bible (1834-8) which followed British historicism except in

76
advocating postmillennialism.
3.11 Contemporary British premillennialism
In America Millerism emerged as the largest premillennialist group

of nineteenth century. Several historians have noted the fact that
in Britain there was a contemporary premillennial awakening. This
77
revival was led by Cuninghame, Bickersteth, Birks, and Irving.
The exegesis of these men spread to America, and the timing of
the two revivals and the apparent similarity of their doctrine
tempts one to conclude that there was some kind of
78
interdependence between the two revivals. Such dependence
79
is, however, vigorously denied by Froom. As the evidence is
summed up, one cannot determine with certainty that the British
revivalists and Miller worked out their views unaware of each other.
Rasmussen gives three reasons against Miller's being influenced by

the British views. First, Miller and Millerites do refer to the "standard
Protestant commentators," chiefly Mede, the Newtons, and Gill,
but there is no reference to the nineteenth-century British
premillennialists. Second, Litch, one of Miller's leading assistants,
wrote in 1844 that the British revivalists did not "gain much
attention in this country, until after Mr. Miller had labored for a
80
number of years." Third, Rasmussen mistakenly claims that Miller
expected a heavenly millennium in contrast to the British
premillennialists who believed that Christ would reign on this earth
81
for a thousand years. In reality there is little difference in the
Millennial teaching of the two groups.
Rasmussen's argument is not impeccable. Miller could have

obtained copies of the British millennialist journal, The Christian
Observer which was published from 1802 in London, with
concurrent American editions. After he had formulated his main
ideas, Miller fiercely attacked the millennial concepts of the
"English literalists", thus acknowledging his awareness of their
82
existence and doctrine. There is, however, no direct proof of
early British literalist influence on Miller.
The striking similarity between these British literalists and Miller is in

the timing of the prophecies. Of all the historicists mentioned
earlier in this study no one published the very dates which were

essential for the Millerites. Yet every one of Miller's tennini ad quem
can be found in The Christian Observer. In England the Albury
conferences of the 1820's concluded that the second Advent
would occur in 1843 or 1847. Both of these dates became popular
in America. Edward Irving, and Henry Drummond, William Miller's
83
English counterparts were par-ticipants in these conferences.
Furthermore the French Revolution was claimed to mark the end
of the Papal power and of the 1260 years. Likewise the prophecy
of Dan 8.14 was frequently explained in conjunction with Dan 9.24-
27, a her-meneutical device of great value to Miller. Thus the year
457 B.C. could be proposed as the tenninus a quo of the 2300
84
evenings and mornings or years. Cuninghame also presented a
prophecy on the jubilees, which is another match with Miller's
85
exegesis. Overall there is more than passing resemblance
between the hermeneutic of the two revivals.
Outside of actual British premillennialism one may note that the

writings of enthusiasts like Lacunza and Joseph Wolff were at least
partly available in the English language. Irving himself provided
86
one translation of Lacunza's text. Because John Wesley's had
endorsed Johan Albrecht Bengel's complicated mathematics for
a parousia in 1836 this year was expounded as the year of the
87 88
end. It is likely that also this date was familiar to William Miller.
3.12 American contribution
In North America indigenous time-setting sprang up. Mi!J.er had a

host of contemporaries interested millennialism. Around 1835/6
eight year old Ellen G. Harmon, better known as Ellen G. White, a
visionary and co-founder of Seventh-day Adventism, found a slip
of paper on the street. The paper contained such a calculation.
She was filled with terror at the thought of a soon end to the
89
world. While the origin and details of this time prophecy are
unknown, several individuals counting the years for the eschaton
90
are known. The years were frequently 1843, 1844, 1847, or 1866/8.
The disposition of many was expressed in J.P. Wheethee's words:
"the last sands are dropping from the glass of time; the great time-
91
bell is about to toll the hour of midnight."
3.12.1 Some features of American literature

An examination of early nineteenth-century American literature on

prophecies leaves one in no doubt about the strength of the
historicist exegesis. The names of Mede, the two Newtons or of
Faber are mentioned uncounted times. There is not the slightest
doubt that literally thousands of Miller's contemporaries shared his
method as well as his imaginative approach to the problems of
prophecy. On the sensational side of American exegesis one finds
odd details concerning exact particulars on prophetic termini,
92
including a dated parousia, the eastern question, or the future of
93
Islam, prophetic solutions to the international or domestic politics
94 95
of the day, the return of Jews, peculiar typological prophecies
96
from Israel's sanctuary service or the Jubilees, calculations on the
97
6000 year theory, or like problems.
As far as time prophecies are concerned American expositions

98
have been well tabulated by Froom. The tables are, however,
misleading. They give the impression that everyone was
calculating times for the parousia the way Miller did. There are
99
indeed many calculations but if one searches the available
literature for elements that match with Miller's exegesis the result is
disappointing. Similarities are largely superficial. A high degree of
common outlook can only be found between Miller and the British
apocalyptics.
3.13 Miller's relationship to other historicists
It appears to have been a matter of honor for William Miller and

his supporters to claim that Miller's exegesis was fully original. There
are several distinct statements on Miller's complete
independence. Those involved in the revival were not prepared to
acknowledge their hermeneutical roots. For instance, in 1843
Southard wrote that Miller "never had a commentary in his house,
and did not remember reading any work upon the prophecies
100
except Newton and Faber, about thirty years ago." Miller
himself repeated this claim to originality adding that "all"
preconceived opinions were laid aside when he conducted his
research. His apologists, Nichol, Damsteegt and Froom, interpret
this to mean that Miller was unaware of any parallel interpretation
while unknowingly and unintentionally being in line with "some of
101
the finest minds".

However, from Southhard's comment as well as from the actual

Millerite exegesis one can reasonably draw the conclusion that
when Miller launched his Bible study around 1816 he was at least
aware of Newton's (whether Sir Isaac or Thomas is uncertain) and
Faber's interpretation. This conclusion is confirmed by the
occurrence of other references to the pioneers of historicism. In
another context Miller is quoted mentioning the two Newtons
together with Joseph Mede. Furthermore Miller reveals firsthand
102
familiarity with Gill as he is directly quoted.
Mede, the two Newtons, Faber and Gill are all men whose work
was at the very center of the historicist tradition. Miller worked in
103
no vacuum, and he is known to have been an avid rader and
he may well have studied a number of the well known as well as
the less known exegetes of prophecy. It is possible that he wanted
to improve on the variant interpretations and to create such a
104
harmonious interpretation that it would be above dispute.
3.14 Summary
The elements that made up the historicist interpretation grew up

over a millennium from the early church to the late middle ages.
These included the continuous application of prophetic symbols
from the time of Babylon to the present age, the year day
hermeneutic of prophetic time, and the identification of the
papacy with the little horn. The full package of historicism was
drawn together by Joseph Mede aided by the conceptions and
methods of Protestant scholasticism. The system was refined and
clarified by reputable eighteenth-century scholars whose research
was at the time widely acknowledged. Historicism was the most
Popular method of prophetic exegesis from late seventeenth to
middle nineteenth century.
No North American Protestant interested in Biblical prophecies

in the early half of nineteenth century could avoid
encountering the traditional historical method. The books of
the pioneers of the method were widely available in reprints,
the method was promoted by popular commentary sets, and
by a host of indigenous writers whose basic outlook stemmed
from historicism but who tried to press their own peculiar
notions into the field of apocalyptic interpretation. If one looks
for close equations between Miller and other exegetes, one

has to turn to Gill, the two Newtons as well as the British

premillennial revivalists.
Footnotes
1.
After Stiefel's failure in Lockham (8 AM. Oct 19, 1533) there have
been but few apocalyptic revivals within Lutheranism. There were
individuals who had millenarian ideas: Johann Amos Comenius (-
1670), Johan Albrecht Bengel (-1752), Johann Philipp PetrI (-1792),
L.H. Kelber, Heinrich Richter (-1847) all of whom created millennial
time tables. Some of the Swedish "ropare" child preachers of
1840's, and Abraham Achrenius in Finland can also be added to a
list of Lutheran apocalyptics. A parallel list of persons with
apocalyptic interests within the Reformed tradition would grow
into over a hundred names if picked from PFF II-IV. This was
recognized also in Miller's day. Brooks, the editor of the Investigator
wrote, "Prophecy is not now, in any shape, popular on the
continent" IEP New series 1836, 5n.
2.
See e.g. Cohn 1957, 1-194
3.
Rogers & McKim 1979, xvii-xviii.
4.
See e.g. Rasmussen MS 1983, 52-66.
5.
For a summary of Reformation view of the Scriptures see e.g.
Kraus 1956/1969, 6-18; Farrar 1886, 323-354.
6.
The basic argument of PFF series is that of placing Millerism into
Reformation tradition as far as prophetic interpretation is
concerned. See also Damsteegt 1977, 16-20; Nichol 1944, 89;
Olsen "Hermeneutical Principles and Biblical Authority in
Reformation and Postreformation Eras" SOBH, 109-25. It is typical of
fundamentalists to claim that their her-meneutic is based on the
Reformation. Barr 1977, 20. Cf. e.g. Lindsell 1976, 56-62; Preus "The
View of the Bible Held by the Church: The Early Church through
Luther" in Geisler (ed.) 1980, 372-380. Gerstner, "The View of the
Bible Held by the Church: Calvin and the Westminster Divines" in
Geisler (ed.) 1980, 385-395.
7.
Dillenberger 1960, 30. Cf. Olsen "Hermeneutical Principles and

Biblical Authority in Reformation and Postreformation Eras" SOBH,

53.
8.
LS 3.21 cited in Wood 1969, 176; Rogers & McKim 1979,78. Cf. WA
48,31; Kooinman 1961, 237f.
9.
WA 4.535 cited in Wood 1969, 140; Rogers & McKim
1979, 79.
10.
L W 10.6 cited in Rasmussen MS 1983, 58.
11.
E.g. Seeberg 1964, 300f; Kraus 1956/1969 16-28; Barr 1977, 173f;
Kraeling 1955, 10f. Luther expressed his doubts over the canonicity
of e.g. Esther, Hebrews, James and Revelation for not making the
gospel clear, and he felt free to publicize critical views on the
authorship of Genesis, Ecclesiastes, Jude and the Revelation. He
also preferred Kings as historically more accurate than the
Chronicles.
12.
Calvin Institutes 1:7,5; Farrar 1886/1961, 349.
13.
Farrar 1961, 349f.
14.
See e.g. Rogers & McKim 1979, 114-116.
15.
Calvin, Commentary on John 5.39; CR XLVII, 125; Cf. CR XLV,
817. Rogers & McKim 1979, 107.
16.
E.g. Luther shared in some conjecture on the 6000 years
"Supputatlon Annorum Mundi Emendata" cited in PFF II, 279; Cf.
Melanchton "In Danielem Prophetam Commentarius" in Opera
Corpus Refonnatorum vol 13, cols. 978 quoted in PFF II, 291.
17.
The Reformation had not purged out all of the "old leaven", d.
Berkhof 1960, 28.
18.
Rogers & McKim 1979, xvii; Kraeling 1955, 12.

19.
Ball 1981, 73 points out how people studied prophecies with the
same intensity as the gospels. This was also Miller's conclusion: "I
could not but regard the chronological portions of the Bible as
being as much a portion of the word of God as any other part of
the Scriptures." Miller 1845, 10. For details of development in
America and a description of the turn from Reformation humanism
to scholastic rationalism see Rogers & McKim 1979, 147-199.
20.
Dillenberger 1960, 97; Rasmussen 1983, 59. Rasmussen shows
Miller's involvement in Biblicism. After the disappointment it took
about 40 years for the SDAs to begin with any christocentric
emphasis. White 1898, 211; White 1915a, 315; Arasola MS 1981, 64-
66.
21.
Cf. Dillenberger 1960, 97.
22.
Cf. Sandeen's definition of historicism. Sandeen 1970 36- 39; See
also PFF I, 22f.
23.
Russel 1964, 16.
24.
Babylon, Media, Persia and Greece are mentioned by name
within the book of Daniel (e.g. Dan 2.37-39; 8.20; 11.2; 8.20; 10.20;
11.2.) Rome come in already in thy translation of the LXX which
makes Dan 7.17 four kings into four kingdoms or even more clearly
in Dan 11.30 ships of Kittim, which was translated as the power of
the Romans. Also Josephus clearly applied the fourth power to the
Romans. E.g. Antiquities X,10,4; X,7; Wars of the Jews, VI,2,1 in
Josephus 1886. See also translators notes in Thackeray's and
Marcus translation of the LXX (1926-1943).
25.
0ne can draw several parallels between Matthew 24 and the
book of Daniel: Mt 24.5 - Dan 7.8,25; Mt 24.6,7 – Dan 11.4-27; Mt
24.15 - Dan 9.27; 11.31; Mt 24.21 - Dan 21.1, etc. Nestle's and the
United Bible Societies Greek texts include 24 cross references to
the book of Daniel for the Synoptic apocalypse. This can be
compared with 19 references for Isaiah,
12 for Joel and 9 for the book of Zachariah. However, what is
important is the fact that all of the main themes of the Synoptic
apocalypse can be traced to the book of Daniel. See e.g.

Hongisto MS 1984, 77-100.
26.
Schaff 1882/1910, vol 2, 796f; PFF I, 278.
27.
This theory appears to have a very early background. See e.g.
"the Epistle of Barnabas" ch. 15 in ANF, 283f, "in six thousand years
the Lord shall bring all things to and end." Cf. Irenaeus "Against
Heresies," chs 28:3; 30:4; 33:2, in ANF, 557, 550, 562. Hippolytos' date
for the parousia [500 AD.] was based on the 6000 year theory and
LXX chronology; Hippolytos "Fragments from Commentaries"
fragment 2 on Daniel chs. 4-7, in ANF V, 179. The tradition may
have a Jewish background. See Slavonic Enoch 32.2; 33.1£; PFF I,
195f, 204.
28.Hippolytos "Treatise on Christ and Antichrist" chs. 32f; ANF V, 210;

PFF I, 274.
29.
Justin Martyr expected the parousia soon and takes issue with
Trypho who interprets Daniel's times lasting 100 years. "Dialogue
with Trypho" ch. 31£; ANF I, 209f. Irenaeus writes that "the empire
which now rules shall be partitioned. He [John the Revelator]
teaches us what the ten horns shall be which were seen by
DanieL" "Against Heresies" 5.26; ANF I, 554. Tertullian "On the
Resurrection of the Flesh" ch. 24; ANF III, 563. Julius Africanus
proposed a month for a prophetic day theory to calculate
Daniel's prophecies. "Extant Fragments of the Five Books on the
Chorography of Julius Africanus" fragment 18; ANF VI, 137. Cf. PFF I,
219-282.
30.
The history of the interpretation of Daniel shows a continuous
updating and revitalization of the meaning attached to the
symbols. E.g. the little horn was first applied to Antiochos
Epiphanes, to the Empire of Rome, a few centuries later to Islam,
and at the time of the Reformation to the Papacy. The exception
to this desire of updating the application is the historical critical
method because it looks at what was relevant in the past rather
than in the present.
31.
In his monumental apology for historicism Froom regards
Theodooret as the last correct mterpreter and Augustine as the
originator of a hermeneutical apostasy to be corrected only by

post-Reformation orthodoxy. See e.g. PFF I, 450-543. Augustine's

own comments on Darnel are interesting in contrast with Froom's
comments on his importance. See e.g. Augustine on the crushing
power of the kingdom of God, Tracktate 4 on the Gospel of John,
sec. 4; N&PNF VII, 26. Cf. PFF I, 488f.
32.
Froom fails to see the many variations there have been in the
area of prophetic exegesis. For different efforts of interpreting
prophecies and fmding relevance see e.g. Carrol 1979, 214-9;
Rowley 1947; Koch 1972.
33.
Joachim proposed that from Christ to about 1200 AD. there are
42 generations and 1260 prophetic years. Dempf 1929, 274; PFF I,
695. However, prophetic dates were not paramount in Joachim's
work. Reeves 1969, 4Of, 51-55, 437. See also Reeves 1976; Williams
(ed.) 1980.
34.
0n Eberhard see e.g. PFF I, 796-806. Wyclif leaves no room for
doubt on his position: "--in the seventh chapter of Daniel Antichrist
is forcefully described by a horn arising in the time of the fourth
kingdom. -- For so our clergy foresee the lord pope, as it is said of
the eight blaspheming little head." PFF II, 55.
35.
E.g. PFF II, 241-394; 373-394.
36.
Ball 1981, 193-212; Manuel 1974, 90; Rasmussen MS 1983, 67.
37.
E.g. I. Newton "Fragments from a Treatise on Revelation", in
Manuel 1974, 121; Cf. Manuel 1974, 90; T. Newton 1754, 22, 442 &
passim; Faber 1828, vii, ix, xi-xiii.
38.
Mede 1650 part 1:1.
39.
Mede The Apostasy of Latter Times, 69. PFF II, 545.
40.
Mede Apostasy, 2:806; PFF II, 542-549, 785f; Rasmussen MS 1983,
66,
41.
Mede's tenninus a quo was AD. 476 leading up to 1736, about a

century from his time. Mede, letter to archbishop Ussher, May 22,
1628, in Works 1663-1664, 2:896. Rasmussen MS 1983, 69.
42.
Mede Key to the Revelation, 1:20; 2:122; "A Compendium of Mr.
Mede--" (in Key to the Revelation), no page numbers.
43.
PFF II, 544.
44.
Ball 1981, 216; Ladd 1956, 32; Rasmussen MS 1983, 71.
45.
Dillenberger 1960, 118f, 126; Manuel 1974, 48.
46.
I.Newton "Fragment from a Treatise on Revelation," in Manuel
1974, 113f.
47.
I. Newton "Fragment from a Treatise on Revelation," in Manuel
1974, 107-111, 123, 89.
48.
I. Newton 1733, 16f.
49.
I. Newton "Yahuda" MS 23.6 in Manuel 1974, 99f.
50.
I. Newton's result was 391 years. PFF II, 666. The Millerites added
15 days for the "one hour."
51.
I. Newton 1733, 130f. Johan Funk (1558), Heinrich Bullinger
(1557), and Jaques Cappell (1624) had proposed 457 B.c. as a
starting point for this prophecy. PFF II, 582f, 631£.
52.
I. Newton 1733, 123f; PFF II, 662.
53.
Manuel 1974, 98.
54.
PFF III, 263-639.
55.
See Miller "Address to Believers in All Denominations" in Bliss
1853, 251; Miller 1833, 10, 42 includes a quote from Gill. Cf.
Rasmussen Ms 52-57.

56.
Miller's contemporaries praise T. Newton freely. See e.g.
Anderson 1840, 36; Boudinot 1815, 67; Bush 1842, 6; Pym 1839, 109;
Smith 1808, iii; Starkweather 1843/b, 5; Watkins 1795, 55; etc.
57.
Southard "The Home of Wm Miller" MC Oct 26, 1843.
58.
T. Newton 1833, 715; Rasmussen MS 1983, 75.
59.
For the apocalyptic 6000 years see T. Newton 1833, 221£, 259f.
One of the most peculiar interpretations within Millerism is Miller's
effort to turn Lev 26 into a time prophecy. For an interesting use of
Lev 26 in T. Newton's writings (though in a somewhat different
context from Miller) see e.g. T. Newton 1833, 89, 92, 105.
60.
"But as Irenaeus saith in a like case, it is surer and safer to wait
for the completion of the prophecy than to conjecture and to
divine about It" T. Newton 1933, 222; cf. p. 321.
61.
T. Newton 1933, 221£; PFF II, 685.
62.
He opposed any application to Antiochos, because then the
"sanctuary was not yet cleansed." T. Newton 1833, 259f.
63.
Newton approved of Ussher's popular chronologywhich dated
creation to the year 4004 B.C.
64.
Rasmussen MS 1983, 56.
65.
Cramp 1868, 484.
66.
Gill 1809/10, NT 3:792, aT 6:327, 334. PFF II, 682-684; Rasmussen
1983, 78f.
67.
PFF III, 339.
68.
69.
Faber 1808, 160-79. Faber later revised his calculation on the
1260 days/years to run from 604 to 1864. Faber 1828, 3:487-95.

70.
Faber 1808, 1:211f; Rasmussen MS 1983, 81.
71.
E.g. Faber 1828, l:xx-xxi, 468-71, 487-95. Rasmussen MS
1983, 81.
72.
Commentary sets were used widely especially by the clergy.
For further examples of 19th Century exegetical literature see e.g.
PFF IV, 82-410.
73.
PFF W, 329f. However, it must be noted that Froom is optimistic
in classifying some of these commentators into the historicist
camp. For instance, Matthew Henry (1662-1714) in his six volume
Ifxposition of the Old and New Testament is so terse and guarded
in his comments on apocalyptic prophecy that he cannot be
listed as a supporter of historicism.
74.
Scott 1851.
75.
Clarke n.d., vol IV, 603-613.
76.
Cf. PFF W, 125f.
77. PFF IV, 189-90; Ladd 1965, 35f., 42.
78.
Sandeen, "Millenarianism" in ROA; Sandeen 1970, 50f.
79. PFF IV, 518.
80.
Litch "Rise and Progress of Adventism" ASR, May 1844, pp. 46-93.
81.
Rasmussen MS 1983, 89-91.
82. Miller 18421c, 83-86.
83.
Sandeen 1970, 18-22.
84
For a convenient summary of the hermeneutic in The Christian
Observer see PFF III, 283-97. One of the points frequently debated

in the magazine is whether 2200, 2300, or 2400 is the correct

figure for Dan 8.14.
85.
Cuninghame 184Oa, xiii.
86.
Sandeen 1970, 11, 19. (Lacunza's work was translated by
Edward Irving.)
87.
Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament,
quoted in PFF II, 692-4.
88.
Brinsmead 1979, 19. Cf. PFF II, 709-713.
89.
White 1915, 20.
90.
PFF W, 370-81 mentions Shimeall, McGrecor, Wheeler,
Wheetee, Shannon, and Robinson in support of these dates.
91.
Wheetee, "Letter March 17, 1843" ST Apr 5, 1843; PFF
W,376.
92.
E.g. Pym 1839, 52; Roberts 1828, 71; Rudd 1734, 418;
White 1823, 10f; etc.
93.
E.g. Morse 1810, 6; Rudd 1734, 15; Smith 1811, 101;
White 1823, 10f; True 1834, 6; etc.
94. E.g. Thorp 1841, 82; Thompson 1812, 13f; etc.
95.
Wintrop 1843, 112f; Spalding 1796, 5; White 1806, 19-21 &
passim; Ramsay 1841, 24f; Rudd 1734, 10, 214; etc.
96.
E.g. Dickinson, chart 4.
97.
E.g. Dickinson 1843, 8; Chamberlain 1805, 93.
98.
PFF IV, 392-405.
99.
The amount of speculation on the date of the end is sufficient
to challenge Anderson's conclusion that the dated parousia was a

scandal. A milder word would do better justice to the situation. Cf.

Anderson "The Millerite Use of Prophecy" in Numbers & Butler 1987,
89.
100.
101.
Miller 1845, 6. Bliss 1853, 69f. PFF IV, 462-9; Nichol 1944, 150 fn.,
"-- he came to his conclusions exclusively through a study of the
Bible and reference to a concordance." Cf. Damsteegt 1977, 18 fn.
1O2.
Miller "Address to Believers in Christ in All Denominations", in
Bliss 1853, 251; Miller 1833, 10, 42. Cf. Hawley "The Voice of the
Second Advent Sustained by the Voice of the Church" ST, June
7, 1843.
103. Nichol 1944, 20f.
104.
Cf. Rasmussen MS 1983, 55f; PFF IV 66.

Глава четвърта
MILLER'S VIEW OF
PROPHECY AND HISTORY
4.1 The basic premise of Miller's exegesis
Miller's fundamental aspiration was to create a harmonious and systematic exposition. He

wrote: "God in his wisdom had so interwoven several prophecies, that they tell us the same
1
things. There never was a book written that has a better harmony.' The words "harmony",
and "interwoven" are the key words. For Miller the whole Bible was a coherent system of
truth. Subsequently all Miller's exegesis must be seen as pieces within the consistent design
which he believed to lie behind any subject, whether time prophecy, the rise and fall of
historical kingdoms, millennialism, or the fate of the Jews.
Miller's Biblicism has long been recognized. There is nothing surprising in this because it
2
would be no great exaggeration to say that in this respect he was like everybody else. For
Miller the whole Bible belonged together. The task of the exegete was to find a slot into
which every prophecy fitted. Referring to his long and solitary Bible study he wrote: "I was
thus satisfied that the Bible is a system of revealed truths, so clearly and simply given that the
3
wayfaring man, though a fool, need not err therein." He felt that the pieces of the puzzle
had fallen in place.
4.2 Rules of interpretation
Interpretation was to be guided by proper rules which would provide consistency. William
Miller presented a set of hermeneutical canons which received wide circulation among the
4 5
Millerites. Miller originally published his fourteen rules in 1840. After a few reprints (with minor
modifications) they were edited by Apollos Hale and republished in a streamlined and more
http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/4_miller.htm (1 of 27)12/13/2007 10:40:31 AM

6
logical set of thirteen rules which were printed in the Second Advent Manual. Because of its
early and wide distribution Miller's original version is preferable in spite of its less fluent
sequence.
7
In recent years these rules have been republished several times. However, because
discussion on the ramification of the rules has not yet been exhausted, the rules are
repeated once more with hints on their implications. Miller's rules are a convenient starting
point because they express his method of interpreting the Bible in a concise form. With these
8
rules, Miller claimed, no one need to "err far from the truth." He prefaced the rules with the
words: "Every rule should be well studied, in connexion with the scripture references, if the
Bible student would be at all benefited by them." The Biblical references, or the "proofs" as
they were called, are as follows:
I. Every word must have its proper bearing on the subject presented in the Bible.
Proof. Matt. v.18.
II. All Scripture is necessary, and may be understood by a diligent application and
study. Proofs. 2Tim. iii.15,16,17.
III. Nothing revealed in Scriptures can or will be hid from those who ask in faith,
not wavering. Proofs. Deut. xxix.29. Matt. x. 26, 27. I Cor. ii.l0. Phil. iii.15. Isa. xiv.lI.
Matt. xxi. 22. Joh. xiv. 13, 14. xv.7. James i. 5,6. l John v.13,14,15.
IV. To understand doctrine, bring all the Scriptures together on the subject you
wish to know; then let every word have its proper influence; and if you can form
your theory without a contradiction, you cannot be in error. Proofs. Isa. xxviii.7-29.
xxxv.8. Provo xix.27. Luke xxiv.27,4l,45. Rom. xvi.26. James v.19. 2Pet. i.19,20.
V. Scripture must be its own expositor, since it is a rille in itself. If I depend on a

teacher to expound to me, and he should guess at its mean-ing, or to be thought
wise, then his guessing, desire, creed or wisdom, is my rule, not the Bible.
VI. God has revealed things to come, by visions, in figures and parables; and in
this way the same things are often revealed time and time again, by different
visions, or in different figures and parables. If you wish to understand them, you
must combine them all in one. Proofs. Ps. lxxxix.19. Hos. xii. 10. Hab. ii.2. Acts ii.17.
lCor. x.6. Heb. ix.9,24. Ps. lxxviii.2. Matt. xiii. 13,34. Gen. xli.1-32. Dan. ii.vii. and viii.
Acts x.9-l6.
VII. Visions are always mentioned as such. Proof. 2Cor. xii.I.
VIII. Figures always have a figurative meaning, and are used much in prophecy
to represent future things, times and events; such as mountains, meaning
govemments; beasts, meaning kingdoms; Waters, meaning people. Lamp,

meaning Word of God. Day, meaning year. Proofs. Dan. ii.35,44. vii.8,17. Rev. xvii.
1,15. Ps. em. 105. Ezek. iv.6.
IX. Parables are used as comparisons to illustrate subject, and must be explained
in the same way as figures, by the subject and Bible. Mark iv.13. See explanation
of the ten virgins, Miller's Lectures, No xvi.
X. Figures sometimes have two or more different significations, as day is used in a

figurative sense to represent three different periods of time. 1. Indefinite. 2.
Definite, a day for a year. 3. Day for a thousand years. If you put on the right
construction it will harmonize with the Bible and make good sense, otherwise it will
not. Proofs. Eccles. vii.14. Ezek. iv.6. 2Pet. iii.8.
XI. How to know when a word is used figuratively. If it makes good sense as it
stands, and does no violence to the simple laws of nature, then it must be
understood literally, if not, figuratively. Proofs. Rev. xii.1,2.xvii. 3- 7.
XII. To learn the true meaning of figures, trace your figurative word through your
Bible, and where you find it explained, put it on your figure, and if it makes good
sense you need look no further, if not, look again.
XIII. To know whether we have the true historical event for the fulfillment of a
prophecy. If you find every word of the prophecy (after the figures are
understood) is literally fulfilled, then you may know that your history is the true
event. But if one word lacks fulfillment, then you must look for another event, or
wait its future development. For God takes care that history and prophecy doth
agree, so that the true believing children of God may never be ashamed. Proofs.
Ps. xxii.5. Isa. xlv.17,18,19. 1Pet. ii.6. Rev.xvii.17. Acts iii.18.
XIV. The most important rule of all is that you must have faith. It must be a faith
that requires a sacrifice, and, if tried, would give up the dearest object on earth,
the world and all its desires, character, living, occupation, friends, home,
comforts, and worldly honors. If any of these should hinder our believing any part
of God's word, it would show our faith to be vain. Nor can we ever believe so
long as one of these motives lies lurking in our hearts. We must believe that God
will never forfeit his word. And we can have confidence that he that takes notice
of the sparrow, and numbers the hairs of our head, will guard the translation of his
own word, and throw a barrier around it, and prevent those who sincerely trust in
God, and put implicit confidence in his word, from erring far from the truth,
9
though they may not understand Hebrew or Greek.
These rules reflect the independence, the intellectual level, as well as the type of mind
Millerism catered for. They encourage a do-it-yourself approach to the Scriptures, intended
to provide the active layman with a rationale for believing in the Millerite chronology of the

end.
4.3 Observations on Miller's rules
There are a number of observations that should be made on Miller's rules. Their repetitive
and argumentative style is typical of nineteenth-century religious writing. What is essential is
to note what Miller includes as well as what he omits. Furthermore one must keep in mind
that even though some of the rule seem to apply to general Biblical exegesis, their context
in the Millerite revival presupposes that their primary intention lies within the sphere of
prophetic exegesis. All of the rules, whether they mention prophecy or not, are relevant
within the framework of continuous historical interpretation of prophecy.
4.3.1 Scriptural analogy
10
Several among Miller's hermeneutical precepts encourage Scrip-tural analogy. The idea of
the Bible being its own expositor was the backbone of historicism from its beginning. Mede,
the pioneer of the method, had already been convinced of a need for comparing
"Scripture with Scripture" in order to find "the proper and genuine use of the like Words and
11
Phrases in several passages of Scripture." In practice this exegetical device meant that the
most important tool of the interpreter was a concordance through which he could find
correlating Biblical texts. These "proof texts" were then collected into a cluster to
demonstrate the correct meaning of a word in need of an interpretation.
In practice this meant that for any prophetic word, be it a horn, a lion, a dragon, a day, or
the moon, the exegete's first task was to trace the use of the particular word in the entire
Bible. Then the meaning that was appropriate within the context was chosen. In the
framework of unilateral Biblicism such conclusions are perfectly logical, even though the
original intent of the word, sensus litteralis historicus, was frequently overlooked.
The metaphors were thought of as code words, "decorative substitutes" to be exchanged

12
with the literal, non-symbolic meaning. There are, however, a few instances in which the
actual character of a metaphor is considered. For instance Miller writes about the power
and rule of a lion, the celerity of a leopard, the voraciousness of a bear and the submissive
13
nature of an ox.
This principle meant that the concordance was more important than a commentary for a
truly Biblical interpretation of a text.
Miller was proud of his independent application of Biblical analogy.
I determined to lay aside all my prepossessions, to thoroughly compare Scripture

with Scripture, and to pursue its study in a regular and methodical manner. I
14
commenced with Genesis and read verse by verse.

Virtually every piece of exegetical writing by the Millerites reflects this concordance logic.
The text or the subject under interpretation is clarified by appropriate parallel texts on the
key words of the opening text. When the subject was then surrounded with analogous texts,
the reader was induced to conclude like Sir Isaac Newton in his use of the same principal, "--
15
there is no ground in Scripture for any other interpretation.”
4.3.2. Importance of words
The use of a concordance in this exegeses had a profound impact on Miller's conclusions.
The exegesis of a text was basically an exercise in finding out the meaning of every
16
individual word in the text. Several of Miller's rules reflect this emphasis on single words. It is
no wonder, then, that Millerism centered on words like "Babylon," "day," "sanctuary," "the
cleansing," "the seventh month," and so on.
One fruitage of this was the publication of a small prophetic dictionary. This eight page
glossary, Explanation of prophetic figures had nearly 140 entries. The contents open with
"adultery" and close with "wrath, day of' both of which are interpreted in a prophetic sense.
In the glossary one finds obvious explanations like: "DAY, is one year - revolution of the earth
in its orbit. Num.xiv.34. Eze.iv.5,6. Dan. vii.2,3." "HORN. Kings. Dan. vii.24. viii. 20,21. Rev.
xvii.12,16." SEA. A large body of people. Isa.lvii.20. Dan.vii.3. Rev.vii.2,3." But there are also
many words with no obvious connection with apocalyptic prophecy. For instance: "BELLY.
Practical part. Rom. xvi.18. Job xv.35. Rev. x.9,10. Luke xv.16. John vii.38." "BREASTS.
17
Consolation, word of God. Isa.lxvi.l1." It must have been a challenge to use such meanings
consistently as rule XII suggests.
4.3.3 Unilateralism and literalism
Miller fully identified with what can be termed unilateral Biblicism. He believed that an
answer to a problem in, for instance, the book of Daniel can as naturally be found within the
book of Genesis as in that of Revelation. The fact that he made no distinction between the
various parts of the Bible made his cherished concordance method possible. It is no wonder
that this hermeneutic has also been named the proof text method. However, in Miller's case
the goal was one of finding "proof words" as well as proof texts.
18
Such unilateralism is expressed several times in the rules. This was a time when there were
generally few doubts concerning the absolute uniformity of the Scriptures among American
19
Protestants. This characteristic was combined with a type of literalism. While many pre-
historicist exegetes and even a handful of Miller's contemporaries followed traditions begun
by Origen or Augustine who allegorized Scriptural passages with meanings never intended
by the authors, the Millerites, with other historicists, did their share of violence to the original
intent of the Biblical author by insisting upon a fulfillment, literal to the detail, wherever
20
possible. The Maine Wesleyan Journal gives a contemporary opinion that "Mr. Miller is a

great strider [sic] for literal interpretations; never admitting the figurative, unless absolutely
21
required to make correct sense of meeting the event which is intended to be pointed out."
This was not, however, literalism in the Mopsuestian sense. It was founded on the commonly
accepted concept of a mystical meaning behind Biblical words and it presupposed a
particular view of inspiration. Subsequently, not everyone agrees with the assessment on
Miller's literalism. Because he freely applies Old Testament symbols to Christian doctrine and
history and overlooks a literal application to Jewish history, he has also been rated a spiritual
22
rather than a literal interpreter. Such confusing assessments are due to an ambivalence in
the meaning of the words "literal" and "spiritual." However, no one can deny the fact that
Miller's prophetic interpretations center around concrete historical events and are, in this
23
sense, utterly literalistic.
4.3.4 Millerite view on Biblical languages
The character of Millerite exegesis is made clear by the fact that the rules play down
linguistic study as well as historical or cultural research. This is not done by omission only, but
is clearly stated in rule XIV:
-- he that takes notice of the sparrow, and numbers the hairs of our head, will
guard the translation of his own word, and throw a barrier around it, and prevent
those who sincerely trust in God -- from erring far from the truth, though they may
24
not understand Hebrew or Greek."
This statement could be interpreted as negative evidence on the intellectual level of

Millerism. However, it can also be taken as a clever way of apologizing for the lack of
learned men in Millerite ranks. Or one may also look upon it from the angle that with this rule
Miller exhorts laymen to study the Scriptures for themselves, independently of theologians
who, after all, were likely to discredit Millerite viewpoints. There is an excellent illustration of
this in Miller's debate with Dr. Stuart who published a set of rules with emphasis on the
historical context:
The meaning of the Bible, of any passage thereof, is not to be determined by

modern notions; but we must go back to the times and modes of thinking of the
sacred writers themselves. --Regard must be had to the controversies of the age
25
in which the sacred writers lived and wrote.
Miller comments:
On the first impressions, without variation, I should pronounce it one of the most
26
skeptical works that I have read for twenty years."

Overall Miller's rules demonstrate distrust for accepted creeds as well as for the scholarship
27
of religious teachers.
4.3.5 Resistance to historical critical influence
It will come as no surprise to discover, that the Millerites sided with the majority of American
protestants in their total and highly emotional rejection of "neology," theological research
28
employing the historical critical method. The first reports of German critical Biblical
29
scholarship reached North America in Miller's day. The issues were, of course, especially
sensitive to the Millerites when the authorship or the fulfillment of "prophecies, in particular
the book of Daniel, was in question. Because they believed that their interpretation was the
logical absolute of conservative Christianity, they had reason to suggest that some churches
30
promoted modern notions to counteract Millerism.
It is likely that the name of Antiochos Epiphanes was frequently thrust into the debate
31
because Millerism was so popular. Miller's rules take no direct notice of these theological
controversies, but their disposition is clearly for a conservative, Biblicist view against one
32
where the original historical meaning of a text is sought after.
4.3.6 Lack of Christocentricity
Finally, and possibly most significantly, one can consider what is omitted in Miller's rules. They
make no mention of Christ, of salvation or of the gospel. This matches the near total lack of
33
devotional writing in Millerite periodicals. In spite of the fact that some historicists outside of
34
Millerism sought to interpret prophecies with a Christocentric method only few Millerites
expressed any concern about this. Dr. Henry Dana Ward with the following comment is an
exception rather than the rule:
“The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." No matter where the prophecy is
found, whether in the Old or New Testament, one spirit animates the page; the
testimony it bears is still to Jesus; and that interpretation is to be preferred which
testifies of Jesus. -- The Old Testament ought always to be interpreted in holy
35
conformity to the New Testament.
Dr. Ward, an Episcopalian rector, was a leading figure in the early phases of the Millerite
revival but he was later quieted by zealous time setting and literalism towards the end of the
36
movement. Subsequently it is not surprising to that for some post Millerite groups it took
37
decades to begin a serious discussion on sooteriology.
However, one must not conclude that the lack of Christological content in Miller's rules is a
sign of a lack in personal piety. It is rather an indication of Miller's strong endorsement of the

prevailing Biblicism which made the Bible a collection of truths on all matters. His enthusiasm
on the eschaton crowded out some of the devotional content they certainly believed in.
The general argumentative style of his writing leads him, in almost every document, to prove
points related to prophecy. This left no room for salvific sidesteps.
4.3.7 The influence and function of hermeneutical rules
Proper rules were regarded as keys for unlocking the otherwise mysterious symbols of the
apocalyptic. "PROPHECY, like Science," wrote Faber, "has its own peculiar language. For
understanding the prophecies, therefore, as Sir Isaac Newton justly observes, we are, in the
38
first place, to acquaint ourselves with the figurative language of the prophets." Faber
continues by comparing prophecies to hieroglyphics which can only be deciphered with
correct information, a Rosetta stone, which the historical method provided and expressed in
39
rules like those of Miller's.
Hermeneutical rules were written to remove ambiguity from the interpretation of prophetic
symbols. The laws of the Bible were regarded a replica of those found in nature. The search
for such rules was regarded as a scientific and scholarly enterprise with an exact
40
mathematical foundation. Miller's rules added respectability to his exegesis. Ellen G. White
reported years later that the opponents of Millerism were unable to disprove Miller's
41
conclusions because they were based on such carefully thought out principles. Miller's
rules also had long term consequences. They make it easier to understand some exegetical
or doctrinal conclusions of various Adventist churches or even Jehovah's Witnesses.
The rules show that the Millerites took the task of interpreting the Bible seriously. In his
comments on the Millerites Whitney Cross suggests that they cannot be regarded "victims of
economic change, or hypnotized followers of a maniac, thrown into prominence merely by
freak coincidence" because the larger part of American Protestantism came close to their
beliefs. "Their doctrine," he continues, "was the logical absolute of fundamentalist
42
orthodoxy.
4.4 Millerite confession of faith
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
on which the
SECOND ADVENT CAUSE IS BASED
I.-The word of God teaches that the earth is to be regenerated in the restitution of

all things, and restored to the Eden state as it came from the hand of the Maker
before the fall, and is to be the eternal abode of the righteous in their resurrection
state.
II.-The only Millennium found in the word of God is the 1000 years which are to
intervene between the first and the second resurrections as brought to view in the
20th of Revelations. And the various portions of Scripture which are adduced as
evidence of such a period in time, are to have their fulfillment only in the New
Earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
IlI.-The only restoration of Israel yet future, is the restoration of the Saints to the
new Earth, when the Lord my God shall come, and all his saints with him.
IV.-The signs which were to precede the coming of our Savior, have all been
given; and the prophecies have all been fulfilled but those which relate to the
coming of Christ, the end of this world, and the restitution of all things.
V.-There are none of the prophetic periods, as we understand them, extending

beyond the (Jewish) year 1843.
VI.-The above we shall ever maintain as the immutable truths of the word of
God, and therefore till our Lord come, we shall ever look for his return as the next
43
event in historical prophecy."
These lines were written by the editors of the Signs of the Times as an expression of their
principal viewpoints. After the Spring of 1843 virtually every issue of the Signs of the Times or
The Advent herald carried the "Fundamental principles". Thus it must have been the first
summary that many' people read on the teachings of Millerism. This was the Millerite
confession of faith. Regardless of religious background, everyone who agreed on these
points was accepted in Millerite fellowship, even if there was variance in minor details.
"Fundamental principles" include several factors which are important for understanding
Miller's exegetical conclusions. They show how important premillennialism was for the
Millerites. They claim that "the restoration of the Saints to the new Earth" is the only fulfillment
of prophecies given to Israel. In Miller's case these two ideas are a requisite for his finding
44
several prophecies which lead to 1843. Furthermore they state that the signs of the times
have all been fulfilled and that the next event to be expected is the parousia.
The existence of "Fundamental Principles" did not mean that there was no room for debate
over various Millerite doctrines in their periodicals. Frequent arguments included matters like
45
the return of the Jews and the dating of Daniel's prophecies. Some of this debate is mere
46
promotion of Millente ideas against their opponents while some of it is genuine allowance
47
of differing opinions.

4.5 Return of the Jews
Miller's Old Testament exegesis would never have produced the results it did without one
hermeneutical conclusion. The return, restoration, and/or conversion of the Jews was a most
popular eschatological expectation in early nineteenth century North America. It was an
essential element of the popular postmil-lennialism, but also many premillennialists believed
that something spectacular would happen with the Jews in fulfillment of Old Testament
prophecies on the future glory of Israel. This was looked forward to as the final sign of the
times.
The literalistic enthusiasm with which the return of the Jews was expected made men look
for the ten lost tribes of Israel in various places. Some found them among American Indians.
As a proof it was shown that there were 29 similar words in an Indian dialect and the
Hebrew. Furthermore both the Indians and the Israelites were well known for their
48
intemperance. Others detected them among the Nestorians in Khoordistan or other far
49
away places. A literal return was expected to be literal up to the smallest detail.
Miller did not share these popular notions. Millerite publications make it absolutely clear that
Miller and many of his followers believed it essential to present a different view on the
50
promises made for Israel. He makes the following comment on the topic. The quotation is
also an excellent example of Miller's style of writing:
The substance of the prevailing opinion on this subject is, that the Jews, the literal
descendants of Jacob, are to be gathered from their dispersed condition among
the nations of the earth, and restored to the land of Palestine, where they are to
enjoy an independent, national government and privileges, among the nations
of the earth, never to be dispersed again, to the end of time.
If this doctrine can be supported, it must prove fatal to the doctrine maintained in
these pages. -And it must be confessed that there are many passages of
Scripture which at first view seem to favor the sentiment; and were there no
others to counteract them, or to explain their meaning, we could arrive at no
51
other conclusion than that the Jews must be restored.
One can see the importance of this point in Miller's own words. Faith in the return of the Jews
would prove fatal to his expectation of immediate parousia.Miller did want to have anything
in between the present and the second Advent.

4.5.1 Miller's argument on the promises
Miller's interpretation of "the original promise made to the patriarchs" shows both sharp logic
and a good knowledge of the Bible. He points out that all other Old Testament prophecies
"supposed to refer to the restoration of the Jews" are in fact in agreement with the original
52
promise. He understood that any future fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies must
find it solution in the New Testament.
Miller turns to the book of Hebrews to prove that the "Abrahamic promise" is an everlasting
promise: "For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.
-- But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed
to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city." (Heb 11:10,16) And if the
promise is to be fulfilled in eternity it must apply to those who are Abraham's seed in faith
rather in the flesh. (Rom 2:28-29; 9:6-7) With proof like this it is easy for Miller to conclude that
the promises are not intended for the original recipients but rather for those who believe in
53
Christ, whose second advent will be the ultimate fulfillment of the promises.
4.5.2 Millerite support
In Himes' reprint of Spalding's book there is a skillfully planned case for a Christianization of
Old Testament prophecies. Spalding places side by side Old and New Testament
prophecies on the new earth. He finds numerous examples of Old Testament quotations in
the New with the purpose of proving that both Jew and Gentile have one and the same
54
hope. For many Millerites they not only had the same prophecies for the future but also a
55
similar basis of salvation. Old Testament heroes of faith were regarded Christians. Using Gal
4:22f and Rom 10:12 it was concluded that the Christian believers are the true children of
Abraham and that there is no difference between a Jew and a Gentile. "The Jewish nation
fell from their earthly privileges, and through that fall salvation came to the gentiles." All were
56
on the same platform.
The arguments were repeated in various forms, and at times with pure rhetoric. In the Signs
of the Times an anonymous Millerite wrote that "in all of New Testament there is not one
promise to be found on earthy greatness made to any nation under heaven. There are
promises of infinite value, but they are made to the household of faith, to those that are in
57
Christ” The gathering of Israel (Isa. 11:10-12) was expected to take place under the new
58
covenant with both Jews and Gentiles joining the Christian church.
4.5.3 Literal fulfillment
If someone was unconvinced with the New Testament evidence of Abraham's seed and
promises, Miller tried another approach. His logic demanded that a literal fulfillment must be
literal in every respect. Such a fulfillment, he claimed, was impossible because the ten tribes
are lost. One could also find prophecies on the Jews ruling over the Gentiles. (Dt 30:7; Isa

11:14; 55:7,8,15) This, he continued, would scarcely be palatable to many of those who
59
ardently advocate a literal restoration of the Jews.
4.5.4 The importance of prophecies concerning Israel
It is not easy fully to appreciate the importance of the Millerite hermeneutic on prophecies
concerning Israel and the return of the Jews. While Miller's fourteen rules are an important
but repetitious expression of his Biblicist premises, his view on Israel is equally fundamental for
understanding any aspect of his exegesis. In some respects this concept is the real
powerhouse behind Miller's many interpretations, because it gave him an almost
inexhaustible wealth of material in Old Testament prophecies, history and sanctuary service,
all ready for an es-chatological application outside Palestine. Without this principle much of
Millerite chronology would have collapsed; after all, every one of Miller's key texts came
from the Old Testament. This particular hermeneutical device is in fact more important if for
Miller's system of exegesis than any other single viewpoint that he promoted.
4.6 Premillennialism
While not relating directly to his Old Testament exegesis, premillennialism gave Miller the
framework within which he interpreted all eschatological prophecies whether from the Old
or the New Testament. The pioneers of historicism, Mede, the two Newtons, Gill and Faber
were all premi1lennialists. Towards the end of the eighteenth-century premillenialism began
60
to give way to postmillennialism in Europe as well as America. Postmi1lennialism was
frequently connected with an expectation of the Jews' reinstatement into Palestine as an
inauguration of a millennial period of peace and prosperity. These chiliastic expectations
nurtured seeds of dispensationalism, a system of prophetic exegesis which became
extremely popular towards the last part of the nineteenth century when historicism had run
61
out of favor.
I. Various Millennial Views
A. Amillennialism

Parousia
Present age is
Resurrection
the millennium
Eternity
or there is no
Judgment
millennium
View endorsed by e.g. Augustine, Luther, and Calvin.
B. Postmillennialism:
1000 yrs
Return
Judgment
of the Eternity
Parousia
Jews
View endorsed by e.g. Cocceius, Vitringa, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Finney, Whitby.
C. Premillennialism:
1000 yrs
Parousia Judgment
Millennium Eternity
1st resurrection 2nd resurrection
View endorsed by e.g. Mede, Isaac Newton, Thomas Newton, Gill, Faber, Irvin, Miller.
After the turn of the nineteenth-century premillennialism appears to have had a

62
spontaneous revival in both America and Britain. Millerites endorsed the old but again
63
prevalent premillennialism. This was a recurrent topic in their periodicals. There were also
chapters on the subject under several disguises. Directly on the Millennium, of course, but
64
also under titles related to the resurrection, the judgment, the new earth and so on. The

following chart compares some of the main characteristics of various millennial views:
4.6.1 The Day of the Lord
The key to Miller's thinking lies in his Old Testament concept of the Day of the Lord. He found
two types of Old Testament texts on the subject. One category is on the destruction of the
wicked "Behold the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger; and he
shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it," (Isa 13:9) and the other is on the glory of the saints,
"For behold, the day cometh -- [when] unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of
righteousness arise." (Mal 4:1f.) These two varieties of texts are then interpreted in the light of
Revelation 20 which separates the fIrst and the second resurrection by a millennium. (Rev
20:4,5) This, Miller asserted, means that the Day of the Lord cannot be an ordinary day. The
appearing of the Sun of righteousness "is a plain figure of the coming of Christ," but even if
the sinners are destroyed at the parousia their ultimate destruction cannot be but a
65
thousand years later. (Rev 20:7-15) The Day of the Lord is the Millennium.
This is the day of the Lord, one thousand years. Is this day to be understood a
literal or figurative thousand years? I answer, literal, for it is an explanation of a
66
figure rather than a figure. See 2Pet iii.8: "But, beloved, -- one day is with the
Lord as a thousand years --"
When will the wicked be raised and judged? I answer, when the thousand years
are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, Gog and Magog will come up
on the surface of the earth. Gog and Magog signify the whole host of the wicked
67
which have ever lived on the earth, the opposers of Christ
During the millennium the saints were expected to live in the safety of the New Jerusalem
which "is on the earth, and of course must have come down from heaven at the
68
commencement of the thousand years." Miller was emphatic on an earthly millennium,
possibly because the stone of Daniel 2, in his view, could only mean the establishment of
69
God's eternal kingdom on this earth at the fall of all earthly powers. At the beginning of
the millennium the enemies of God are destroyed, and the "happy period" portrayed by
70
Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Zachariah commences. Miller's main interest was in
connecting the Millennium together with his ideas of prophetic time.
4.6.2 The importance of premillennialism
In the final analysis Miller came to his particular premillennial views because he believed

that Old Testament promises on Israel's future must find their fulfillment in the Christian
church. No other millennial view seemed to provide a slot into which even the most obscure
71
or difficult Old or New Testament texts could be placed. When they ran out of Bible texts
72
the Millerites took the church fathers to witness for premillennialism. They loved proving
73
things. Their attack against postmillennialism was so fierce because they believed that the
tenet of the type of "temporal millennium" in which the world would gradually turn into a
74
place of peace, prosperity, and safety was "a soul destroying doctrine."
4.7 Historical application of the book of Daniel
The books of Daniel and Revelation naturally tend to millennial expectations. Millerism is no
exception. The Millerites loved both of these books. It is typical for a Millerite chart to include
75
words like "Read, Daniel II, VII and VIII. 'Whoso readeth, let him UNDERSTAND!'" And the
76
Millerites certainly believed that they did understand.
I cannot agree with some who tell us that the prophecies cannot be understood.
I consider such language the language of infidelity. What is it but saying -
"Revelation is no Revelation? Revelation is something made known, and, of
course, to be understood. -- I most solemnly believe that God designed every
77
part of the Bible should be under-stood.
The Millerites had little to say on the narrative sections of Daniel. The following is limited to
comments on their views of Daniel's prophecies. The first lesson many Millerites received on
Daniel came from posters that were decorated with a picture of Daniel 2 or of the beasts in
Daniel 7 and 8. These rather grotesque visual aids were often accompanied by time scales
which matched the changes of kingdoms according to the Millerite understanding. The
78
year 1843 was naturally matched with the toes of clay and iron, as well as the final end of
79
the last beast and its little horn.
4.7.1 Sequential fulfillment
Miller explained the prophetic symbols of Daniel in sequence through Babylon, a kingdom
called Medo-Persia (after Dan 8:20), Greece, pagan Rome and finally papal Rome, which
80
includes no surprises for anyone familiar with historical interpretation of prophesies.
There were several aspects in the prophecies of Daniel which were assumed to confirm the
historicist view of the kingdoms. Every vision leads to the establishment of God's kingdom
81
[Dan 2] the judgment [Dan 7] or the time of the end [Dan 8], all of which match the

eschatological setting the Millerites were interested in. Some of the symbolic metals or
beasts had qualities which appeared to portray the kingdom it was attached to. For
instance Babylon was a kingdom of "gold" and Rome displayed the irresistible strength of
"iron." Likewise the clumsy but powerful "bear" and swift "leopard" matched the war
technique that Persia and Macedonia employed.
4.7.2 Details
82
Confirmation of the historical interpretation was searched for in every minute detail. Storrs
commented on the bear's two sides (Dan 7:5): "Representing two lines of kings, one much
83
longer than the other." Similarly the two horns of the ram in Daniel 8:3 were said to be two
84
royal lines in the Medo-Persian kingdom. They were the "meridian glory" of the kingdom.
For every minor feature some kind of historical reality was assumed.
The Bible was used to expand on the meaning of a symbol. George Storrs' Bible Examiner is
one of the most comprehensive commentaries that Millerism ever produced on the book of
Daniel. Storrs' comments on Babylon reflect the desire to find a Biblical and somewhat
mystical meaning for the golden head of the statue in Daniel 2.
Babylon was the first kingdom of universal empire. It was founded by Nimrod, the
great grandson of Noah. See Genesis x.8-10. It lasted near seventeen hundred
years, though under different names; sometimes called Babylon, sometimes
Assyria, and sometimes Chaldea. It extended from Nimrod to Belshazzar, who was
85
its last king.
4.7.3 The horns
From the very first issue of the Signs there begins an ongoing discussion on the exact identity
86
of the ten horns. Historicist exegetes had always had minor variants in their lists of the horns
87
and the Millerites are no exception. These powers were consistently found in Europe. This is
important because it opened a possibility for arriving at an anti-Roman exegesis of the little
horn. The little horn rose from "among them." It appeared "after" the other horns and was
"different" from them, it "blasphemed" God and pushed aside "three horns". (Dan 7:8) The
fulfillment of all this was envisaged in the papacy which, of course, appeared in Europe
after the tribes thought to be represented by the horns. It was different as it was a religious
power, its teachings were blasphemous for the puritan frame of mind. The Millerites identified
the three horns plucked away with the Heruli (476 AD.), the Vandals (534 AD.) and the
Ostrogoths (538 AD.). The defeat of these Arian nations was seen to have been caused by
88
papal manipulation and it was regarded a victory for the bishop of Rome.
The list of parallels between papacy and the little horn is impressive. It included blasphemy,
persecution of the saints, change of times and laws, duration, the description of the rise of
papacy as well as its rule, and finally the end of papacy. Litch's commentary on these

89
qualities includes charges of papal atrocities matching each detail of the description.
Millerite periodicals printed their fiercest exegetical debates with those who objected to
Miller's ideas over the identity of the little horn in Daniel 8. Continuous historical interpretation
had always been fairly unanimous concerning Daniel 2 and 7. However, Daniel 8 had been
interpreted in a variety of ways. Mede solved the problems of this chapter by applying the
prophecy to Antiochos Epiphanes. The two Newtons differed from him by stretching the little
90
horn all the way through pagan Rome to papal Rome. Miller's historicist contemporaries
were at variance on this issue. These differences were caused by the fact that the basic
principles of continuous historical application bring the little horn into the Grecian period as
the symbol of the he-goat is clearly identified within the chapter itself.(Dan 8:21) Yet, on the
other hand, parallelism and synchronization of the little horns of chapters 7 and 8 led some
historicists to apply the horn to the papacy. This was also Miller's conclusion.
4.7.4 The horn of Daniel 8
Millerite periodicals give several reasons for the papal identifica-tion of the little horn in
Daniel 8. It was claimed to be absurd to have a horn symbolize anything but a kingdom
while Antiochos was but one of 26 individuals. The vision claims to take the reader to the
"time of the end," (Dan 8:17) and Antiochos brought no end to the world. The little horn was
said to grow into exceeding greatness, bigger than everything that preceded it, which
would be historically untrue for Antiochos. (Dan 8:9) Furthermore the geographical directions
for the conquests of the little horn: south, east, and the beautiful land (Dan 8:9) presumably
matched more closely with the conquests of Rome than with those of the kingdom of the
Seleucids. As a final point of identification the little horn persecuted the saints, 50 million of
whom were claimed to have been killed by the Roman Catholic church. When compared
91
with this figure Antiochos destruction of a few thousand Jews appeared insignificant.
Colbert, one of Miller's contemporaries, wrote a book on the literal fulfillment of Daniel
which the Millerites took as an anti-Millerite document. The literalness of Colbert's
approximate 1260, 1290, 1335, or 2300 days was ridiculed by the Millerites as anything but
literal. They claimed that three years and ten days (1Mac 1:54; 4:521) is far from the "literal"
92
1260 or even 1150 days. The final and conclusive argument against Antiochos was,
however, that Daniel 8 presents Persia as "great" (Dan 8:4). Then Greece is described as
"very great" (Dan 8:8). Finally the little horn is described as "exceedingly great" (Dan 8:9).
Thus if Antiochos were the fulfillment, he would have had to be greater than Persia or
93
Alexander the Great. Rome, they claimed, would match the description perfectly.

17. Of the ram, he-goat, and this horn, there is a regular gradation. Persia, which extended
from India to Ethiopia, over ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-SEVEN PROVINCES, is simply called
great. Grecia, of which it is said. "the third kingdom shall bear rule OVER ALL THE EARTH," is
called VERY GREAT; But the HORN, which represents the succeeding power, is said to have
waxed EXCEEDING GREAT-even greater than the preceding pow-ers. The natural gradation
would therefore be.
Great. Very Great. Exceeding Greal.
PERSIA. GRECIA. ROME
How absurd and ludicrous would be,
Great. Very Great. Exceeding Great.
PERSIA. GRECIA. ANTIOCHUS.
Sample text: Bliss "Inconsistencies--" MC March 10, 1843
In some of the illustrations the Millerites portrayed the little horn as extremely long in
94
proportion to the goat. This was so because the horn had to represent about two
thousand years of history in the form of pagan as well as papal Rome.
Daniel 8 was vital for Millerism. Its chronology, the 2300 evenings and mornings was decisive
for the fate of the whole revival. This aspect of Daniel 8 will be discussed in the following
chapter. But the basic outline of the chapter was also vital. They believed that they had
interpreted every aspect of this chapter logically according to all available Biblical or
historical information. The identification they gave to the various symbols made it possible for
them to proclaim the time aspects of the chapter with conviction.
4.7.5 Daniel chapter eleven and twelve
As Miller's chronological exegesis is discussed in the following chapter one may pass over
Daniel 9 directly to chapter eleven which includes no time-prophecies. A large part of its
contents relate so directly to Antiochos Epiphanes that historicism never created great
95
enthusiasm about it. From Miller's point of view the main problem of this chapter lies in the
fact that any extensive identification of Antiochos in chapter 11 would erode the conclusion
that the little horn of Daniel 8 marks Rome.
In his few comments on this chapter Miller evades Antiochos in the early part of the
chapter. The important point in his view was the appearance of the Romans on the Jewish

scene in 158 B.C., a date which was important for his chronological exegesis. The dividing
line for him lies in vv. 20 and 21. The tax collector is applied to Augustus (Lk 2:1) and the
anointed prince naturally to Christ himself. The vile person is Tiberius. In the latter half of the
chapter the king of the north was with varying degrees of appropriateness applied to
96
Roman Caesars, the papacy and finally to Napoleon and his Egyptian campaigns.
Millerite exposition is a peculiar combination of literal and symbolic interpretation.
In Daniel 12 besides time-prophecies, there were two interesting points. Because Millerites
believed that Christ was also the Savior of the Jews, Michael (Dan 12:1) was said to be
97
Jesus. The second idea rose from Daniel 12:4 - "many shall run to and fro, and knowledge
shall be increased." The fulfillment of this was seen not only in their "increasing knowledge" of
the book of Daniel but also in the rapidly changing systems of communication [telegraphs,
98
steam engines, etc.] and informa-tion.
Millerism catered for the type of mind that was mainly interested in the end. Because of this
the books of Daniel and Revelation were so important. The historical interpretation of
prophetic symbols appears to have had two functions: it proved the accuracy of prophecy
and pointed out signs of the times. Historical events were seen to run towards a divinely
planned goal.
4.8 The book of Revelation
Miller's exposition of the book of Revelation has not been included in this study. This does not
99
mean that the book of Revelation was unimportant for the Millerites. Even though their
main eschatological calculations were derived from the Old Testament, they, like all
historicists, loved the Apocalypse. For William Miller the book of Revelation was a series of
prophecies which repeated the history of the Christian era from different angles. Every new
vision of the Apocalypse was seen as an enlargement on the latter part of the same history
which they had found in the book of Daniel. The seven churches (Rev 2-3) were seven
epochs of the Christian church. The seven seals (Rev 6-8) and the seven trumpets (Rev 8-9)
were regarded as repetitions of the principal events in the history of the world, illustrating
100
among other things the rise and fall of both Roman Catholicism and Islam. The final
chapters represented last day signs. The seven last plagues were understood to have been
fulfilled with the exception of the seventh, which was expected to come true on the day of
101
the second Advent. In particular chapter 20 was important as it lay at the foundation of
Millerite teaching on premillennialism.
4.9 Summary
The Millerite view of the Bible may not have been unique for nineteenth-century North
America. It views the Bible as a storeroom of information on all manner of things including, of
course, the past and the present. In the case of the Millerites sooteriological issues were left
behind a quest for a divine philosophy of history. This meant painstaking comparisons of

Biblical texts with the help of a concordance. The meanings and symbols of key words was a
vital part of the process. With these tools details of prophecy were explained to cover most
of human history. With the help of two vital principles -premillennialism and an application of
Old Testament prophecies for Israel to the Christian church - Miller built a hermeneutical
structure that supported his ideas on the time in every respect.
Footnotes
1. Miller 1842/b, 4.
2. Sandeen "Millennialism" in ROA, 112f.
3. Bliss 1853, 20.
4. Miller "Miller's Letters No.5. --" ST May 15, 1840. This original version was most exhaustive of
all with every Bible reference printed out and with editorial comments.
5. E.g. Miller "Rules of --" MC Nov 17, 1842. See also VOP 1842/j, 20-24.
6. SAM, 103-6. Cf. Damsteegt 1977, 299f. Hale's version omits rule III and the second sentence
of rule no. X. One should also note that Miller's first effort of creating guidelines is in Evi 1833.
Miller was not the only one to write guidelines for exegesis among the Millerites. See e.g. R.
"Second Coming" ST April 15, 1840. See Appendix I.
7. E.g. Harrison 1979, 200f. Judd "William Miller, Disappointed Prophet" in Number & Butler
1987, 20f. Damsteegt 1977, 299f used the edited version of the rules.
8. Miller "Rules of --" MC Nov 17, 1842.
9. VOP 1842/j, 20-24. Cf. Miller "Miller's Letters No. 5--" ST May 15, 1840; Miller "Rules of --" MC
Nov 17, 1842; Bliss 1853, 70-72; cf. Harrison 1979, 200f. Judd "William Miller, Disappointed
Prophet" in Number & Butler 1987, 20f. See also SAM, 103-6; Damsteegt 1977, 299f.
10. Rules IV, V, VI, IX, X, XII. VOP 1842/j, 20-24. Cf. also Miller 1845, 6.
11. Worthingon "Preface to Mede's Works" in Mede 1663/4, no page numbers; Rasmussen
1983, 71.
12. Porter 1983, ix.
13. Miller 1836, 3f. cr. Damsteegt 1977, 18.
14. Bliss 1853, 6. Cf. Southard "The Home of--" MC Oct 26, 1843.

15. Newton "Fragments from--" in Manuel 1974, 116.
16. Rules I, IV, VIII, X, XI, XII. VOP 18421j, 20-24.
17. VOP 1842/j, 25--31. Cf. Anon. "Mr. Miller" ST May 15 1841.
18. Rules II, IV, V, VI, IX, X, XII. VOP 1842/j, 20-24.
19. Rogers&McKim 1979, 265-322. Sandeen observes that there was virtually no debate over
the absolute authority and infallibility of the Scriptures, "Millennialism" in ROA, 112f.
20. Rule XI. VOP 1842/j, 20-24.
21. "Mr. Miller" Maine Wesleyan Journal, March 20, 1840. Miller agreed with the statement: "I
have found one honest editor." VOP 1842/j, 16.
22. Rowe MS 1974, 196.
23. Cf. Ramm 1970, 241-244.
24. SAM, 106.
25. Miller "Review of 'Hints on Prophecy,' by M. Stuart" ST Nov 23, 1842.
26. Miller "Review of 'Hints on Prophecy,' by M. Stuart" ST Nov 23, 1842.
27. Rules V, XIV. VOP 1842/j, 20-24.
28. Ahlstrom 1975, 277; Clements 1976, 2-8.
29. Millerites regularly reported on new developments. Anon. "The Tendency to German
Neology" ST June 21, 1843 ridicules the conclusions of Semler and Eichorn. See also Whiting
1844.
30. Anon. "The Neology of the Church" AH April 3, 1844; Anon. "The Methodists also on the
Road to German Neology" AH April 17, 1844.
31. See Bush 1842; Colver 1843; Stuart 1842.
32. Rules XIV, XIII, V. vap 1842/j, 20-24.
33. See Appendix II.
34. E.g. Vitringa's canons were published in the Investigator. "The infallible key is the right

knowledge of Jesus Christ--". Vitringa "On the Interpretation of Prophecy," IEP IV: 157-169.
35. Ward 1843, 5.
36. PFF IV 569-576.
37. E.g. SDAs had their sooteriological crisis in 1888. E.G. White supported traditional
protestant values together with E.J. Waggoner and AT. Jones. See Froom 1971; Olsen 1966;
Linden 1982.
38. Faber 1828, 1:2. Cf. Newton 1733, 16.
39. The confidence placed on such rules is obvious in Faber's words. "In the use of this
language there is by no means that obscurity and uncertainty, which some half infidel
objectors would pretend. -- They might just as reasonably throw aside a Chinese inscription,
as incapable of being decyphered. Without a key, neither can be understood: but when a
key is produced, the book will very readily be opened." Faber 1828, 12. Cf. Faber 1828, 2.
40.The laws of the Bible were regarded a replica of those in nature with an exact
mathematical foundation. Manuel 1974, 98.
41. White 1911, 4O5f; 411; "Notes on Travel" RH Nov 21, 1884.
42. Cross 1965, 320.
43. "Fundamental principles" AH Feb 14, 1844. Supplement to the AH 1844 (no. 17) includes a
commentary with a slightly edited text of the "principles".
44. The "signs of the times" in Millerite writings means not only the synoptic apocalypse but
also the books of Daniel and Revelation.
45. See e.g. Miller "Mr. Miller's reply to Cambell, Smith, and others, on the Little Horn in Daniel's
fourth kingdom" ST April 1, 1840; Cambell "Mr. Cambell's reply to Mr. Miller, on the Little horn
in Daniel's fourth kingdom" ST April 15, 1840; Litch, .Mr. Litch's reply to rev. Ethan Smith, and
others on the Little Horn in Daniel's fourth kingdom" ST May 1, 1840. Some of the articles were
collected into pamphlets like Bush 1844.
46. E.g. Bliss 1843/a (first published as a series in ST and MC in the spring of 1843); Miller 1842/
g (first published in ST, autumn 1842.
47. E.g. Cambell was allowed to express freely his prophetic expositions concerning
prophetic chronology and the return of the Jews even though he held views different from
those of Miller. Cambell "Mr. Cambell on the Return of the Jews" ST June 15, 1840. By 1842
attitudes were less relaxed. See e.g. Miller "Miller's reply--" in VOP 1842/j (first published in ST in

the autumn of 1842).
48. Smith 1823, 47-68.
49. Ramsay 1841, 62.
50. For books see e.g.: Bliss 1842/a, 20-35; VOP 1842/j, 85-100; 225-231; Litch 1842/b, 35-76;
Litch 1842/a, 40-56; Litch 1843; Fleming 1844, 9-15; Ward 1843; Cox 1842, 36-43; Sabine 1843,
58-77; Spalding 1841, 156-177. Some examples of representative periodical articles: Miller
"Letter from mr. Miller, No.3, On the Return of the Jews" ST April 15, 1840; Ward "The
Restoration of Israel" ST Sep 1, 1840; Anon. "The Promises to Abraham" ST June 1, 1841; Anon.
"Who are the Israel to whom the Promises Are Made" ST June 1, 1841; W. "Pleroma, or the
Fullness of the Jews" ST Sep 1, 1841; W. "Pleroma, or the Fullness of the Gentiles" ST Sep 15,
1841; Cox "Return of the Jews" ST June 1, 1842; Walstenholme "Conversion of the Jews" ST
Aug 10, 1842; B. "The Return of the Jews" ST Aug 31, 1842; Ward "Prophecy and the Jews" ST
Apr 12, 1843; Coles "The Jews - Roman xi" ST may 17, 1843; Ward, Jars, Russel "Circular - The
Address of the Conference on the Second Advent of the Lord, Convened at Boston Mass.
Oct 14, 1840" ST Nov 1, 1840 includes the following significant comment: "We do not
condemn those who circulate Judaising notion."
51. Miller n.d./a, 4Of.
52. Miller n.d./a, 41.
53. Miller n.d./a, 41-48.
54. Spalding 1841, 167-170.
55. "When Abraham was converted he was circumcised of heart," Anon. "Who are the Israel
to Whom the Promises Are Made" ST June 1, 1841.
56. Anon. "The Promises to Abraham" ST June 1, 1841. Cf. e.g. Cox "Return of the Jews" ST
June 1, 1842; Litch 1842/a, 55- 76.
57. Anon. "The Promises to Abraham" ST June 1, 1841. Cf. Miller "Evidence--" ST May 1, 1841.
58. Miller VOP 1841, 229f. Miller believed that Isa 11:11 and Jer 32:37-40 would prove the new
covenant fulfillment.
59. VOP 1841, 228. Some of Miller's claims were simply bel-ligerent. For instance "How many
will brothers Phelps and Cambell, and others, who are sticklers for the Jew's return, and for a
temporal millennium, be the means of lulling to sleep." VOP 1841, 221. Or he refers to Peter's
words that God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34f). But if God should restore the Jews as
his people, then God would be a respecter of persons and "Peter needed another
conversion." VOP 1841, 221.

60. PFF IV, 391f.
61. Sandeen 1970, 5-7.
62. PFF W, 414f.
63. Within four years there were 61 articles touching the subject in ST, AH and MC [cf.
Appendix IIJ. For representative examples see Anon. "Fundamental Principles' AMDZ May,
1842;
Litch "Review of 'Bible Reader' on Miller's View of the Millennium. No. III" ST July 1, 1841 [This is
part of a series that begin June 1, 1841]; Walstenholme "The Puritan - The Millennium" ST May
1, 1842; B. "A Temporal Millennium a Soul Destroying Doctrine" ST June 29, 1842; Law "A Plain
Exposition of a Plain Passage - Rev xx.4-6" ST June 29, 1842; Collins "Two Resurrections I & II" ST
June 6 & 22, 1842; Anon. "Second Advent of Christ Premillennial" ST Sep 6, 1843.
64. The main sources for the Millerite teaching on the Millennium are Bliss 1842/a, 35-71; Bliss
1843/f, 7; Miller 1842/b, 28-38; Litch 1842/b, 1:38-54, 197-207; Litch 1842/a, 19-39; Fleming
1842, 24-32; Fleming 1844, 6-9, 15-18; Fleming 1840, 18-26; Hervey 1843/a, 68f; Spalding 1841,
54-76. There are also some unclear presentations like Fitch 1841, 14-30; Cox 1842, 5-36.
65. VOP 1842/j, 145-156.
66. Some Millerites advanced ideas of a prophetic millennium lasting 1000 prophetic or
360.000 literal years. Such ideas were not considered too problematic as millennium was
part of eternity. E.g. Allen "On the Designations of Time--" ST Oct 1, 1840.
67. VOP 1842/j, 149f.
68. VOP 1842/j, 151. The British premillennialists Cuninghame, Birks and Irving held views only
slightly different from the Millerites. Rasmussen MS 1983, 82-84 is mistaken on this point
69. Miller 1842/d, 18-24.
70. A Student of Prophecy "Doctrine of the Millennium" ST Feb 1, 1842.
71. See e.g. Miller "Dissertation on the Judgment" ST Jan 15, 1841; B[liss?] "A Temporal
Millennium--" ST June 29, 1842; Pseudonym: A Bible Reader "A Bible Reader on Mr. Miller's
View on the Millennium" ST Jan 15, 1841.
72. Bliss 1842/a cites Barnabas, Papian, Polycarp, Turtullian [sic] and Cyprian as believers in
Christ's literal nllllennial reign on earth.
73. The Millerites loved numbers. On the lighter side of the Millerite reasoning,

premillennialism was supported with an estimate on population density. During the

prosperous circumstances the Millennium with no deaths to be expected E. Jacob claimed
that the earths population would double every 24 years. Thus the then currant 900.000
inhabitants would mushroom into a staggerin 2.638.827.906.662.400.000.000 leaving an
impossible 5.6 million inhabitants for every square yard of the earth. Jacob "The Millennium"
MC Oct 5, 1843.
74. B[liss?] "A Temporal Millennium--" ST Jun 29, 1842.
75. Anon. "Daniel's Visions" MC Feb 3, 1843.
76. Best sources for the Millerite exegesis of Daniel are Bliss 1842/a; Bliss 1843/f, 1-6; VOP 1842/
j, 173-181[Little horn]; Litch 1842!b, 1:77-111 [Little horn]; 2:3-113 [Dan 11 ; Litch 1842/a, 88-110
[Dan 11-12a]; Storrs 1843, 1-53; Articles: The Author of 'A Clue to the Time' "The Endless
Kingdom" ST May 11, 1842 [Dan 2]. See also bibliographical notes on Dan 7 and 8 in the
following chapter.
77. Storrs 1843, 4.
78. The most famous of these charts was designed by Charles Fitch and Apollos Hale in 1843.
In this one the statute of Daniel is separate from the timetable. See Appendix IV. Even their
opponents copied some of these charts. Litch "Daniel's Visions" New York Tribune Extra
March 2, 1843; Trumpet of Alarm Apr 24, 1843.
79. E.g. Storrs 1843, 22-57.
80 E.g. Miller 1833, ch. 1.
81. Bliss 1842/a, 8-14 emphasizes that God's kingdom was not established 1800 years ago
[like many amillennialists and some postmillennialists claimed] because it is not yet
established.
Un the other hand, Bliss continues the "church militant" was existed all the way from Abel.
82. Sometimes parallels were extended to the point of contradiction. E.g. Millerites identified
the ten toes of Nebuchadnezzar's image with the ten kingdoms of Daniel 7. The same
application was also done with the Rev 13.1 and 17.12,16 leaving ten kingdoms into Europe
at the time of the second advent after three had supposedly been plucked away by 538 A.
D. See Storrs "Exposition of Nebuchadnezzar's Dream" MC May 4, 1843.
83. Storrs 1843, 18.
84. Bliss 18421a, 102; Storrs 1843, 18, 31.
85. Storrs 1843, Sf.

86. Miller "Mr. Miller's Reply to Cambell and Others on the Little Horn in Daniel's Fourth
Kingdom" ST Mar 20, 1840. Litch "Mr. Litch's Reply to Ethan Smith and Others on the Little Horn
in Daniel's Fourth Kingdom" ST May 1, 1840.
87. Fleming 1842, 40; SAM 84f; Litch 1842/b, 1:77-111; Bliss 1842/a, 86; give the following
identifications: Bliss [identical with Miller's, Litch's and Hale's list: Huns, Ostrogoths, Visigoths,
Franks, Vandals, Sueves, Burgundians, Heruli, Saxon and Angles, Lombards (Heruli, Vandals
and Ostrogoths were plucked out); Fleming: France, Britain, Spain, Portugal, Naples,
Tuscany, Austria - plus 3 that were plucked out by being given to the pope - Lombardy,
Rome, Ravenna.
88. A detail which was little discussed is the fact that the relationship of the rise of papacy
and the defeat of the Ostrogoths in 538 is not well attested in secular history. Cf. Shea MS
1980, 270-288.
89. Litch 1842/b, 83-91.
90. Newton 1733, 107-127; Newton T. 1803, 285f.
91. Anon "Is Antiochos Epiphanes the Hero of Daniel's

Prophecy" ST Dec 28, 1842. cr. Bliss 1843!d.
92. [Bliss]] "The Inconsistencies of Colver's --" MC March 10, 1843.
93. [Bliss] "The Inconsistencies of Colver's --" MC Mar 10, 1843. Cf. Anon. "Is Antiochos
Epiphanes the Hero of Daniel's Prophecy" ST Dec 28, 1842.
94. Anon "Duration of Earthly Kingdoms" ST May 24, 1843.
95. For diverse interpretations compare Newton, and Newton, T 1803, 301-378.
96. Litch 1842/b, 3-113.
97. Litch 18842/b, 2:114.
98. Pleming 1842, 62f.
99. The best Millerite sources on the book of Revelation are Miller 1842/b, 127-232 [first
chapters of Rev]; Miller 1844 [latter part of Rev]; Litch 1842/b, 1:175-196 [seven last plagues];
and e.g. A Lover of Truth "The Beasts" ST Mar 1, 1842.
100. See e.g. Anon. "End of the 1260 Days" ST July 19, 1843; Litch 1842/b, 2:132-227.
101. Litch 1842/b, 1:175-196.


Глава пета
MILLER'S CHRONOLOGICAL
EXEGESIS
When Miller began studying his Bible he was excited with its predictions about the future. He was amazed at
how literally and specifically the prophecies that had been fulfilled were ac-complished. He admired those
prophecies which he believed to point to specific events in the history of Israel or to the first coming of Christ.
1
These were often presented as the unarguable, Biblical proof of the value of prophecy. Miller was assured
that the ones relating to the second Advent would be likewise fulfilled. He was intrigued at the thought that
God had placed prophecies into the Bible for humans to understand. In particular time-prophecies appealed
to him. "I could but regard the chronological portions of the Bible as being as much a portion of the word of
God, and as much entitled to our serious consideration, as any other portion of the Scriptures." Indeed, he
2
sensed an obligation to understand these passages. "I had no right to pass over the prophetic periods."
The results of his chronological labor were published in sermons, books, pamphlets and periodicals. Synopsis of
Miller's
Views includes the following statement on his final conclusion:
I believe the time can be known by all who desire to understand and to be ready for his coming.
And I am fully convinced that some time between March 21st, 1843, and March 21st, 1844,
according to the Jewish mode of computation of time, Christ will come, and bring all his saints with
3
him; and that then he will reward every man as his works shall be.
The power of Millerism lies in these time calculations. What steam was for an engine, definite times were for
the Millerites. Miller is by no means original in his enthusiasm to create a time table for the eschaton. However,
his creative imagination located chronological prophecies in all parts of the Bible. He brought them together
into a unique combination.
God in his wisdom has so interwoven the several prophecies, that the events foretold are not all told
by one prophet. And although they lived and prophesied in different ages of the world, yet they tell
us the same things; so you take away one, and a link will be wanting. There is a general connection
through the whole; like a well regulated community they all move in unison, speaking the same
things, observing the same rules, so that a Bible reader may almost with propriety suppose, let him
read in what prophecy he may, that he is reading the same prophet, the same author -- therefore
the biblical student must select and bring together every part of the subject he wishes to
4
investigate, from every part of the Bible.
Thus Miller located eschatological time-prophecies in such diverse books of the Bible as Exodus, Leviticus,
Deuteronomy, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea as well as Luke, Hebrews, and the Revelation. Miller's interpretation of
http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/miller5.htm (1 of 38)12/13/2007 10:41:04 AM

Глава пета
these texts is the theme of this chapter.
If Millerite prophetic chronology were to be appraised by today's exegetical criteria one could easily find
reason to criticize his use of the Bible and his conclusions. This would mean imposing modern standards upon
people who worked under ambitions and logic quite different from today's. The purpose of the following
pages is not to claim that Miller's conclusions were sound or unsound. It is simply to describe the evidence that
the' Millerites gave for their prophetic time table. Any evaluation of Miller's exegesis must be done by the his-
toricist criteria. Such evaluation is not, however, important here. The main purpose of this chapter is to give, for
the first time, full picture of the exegesis that shook the life of thousands and that was at least partially
responsible for the end of historicism as a popular method of interpreting prophecies.
5.1 Year-day method
Apocalyptic timekeeping was the heart of Millerite exegesis. For centuries the historicist method had
employed a system which interpreted prophetic times with a simple formula: a prophetic “day” means a
5
literal “year”. This made it possible to interpret apocalyptic prophecies so that they terminated in the modern
era. Miller accepted year/day principle and in his own words found himself in "accordance with the opinions
6
of all the standard Protestant commentators." So popular was the year day idea, that the Millerites had
7
occasion to expound on the subject but rarely.
One of Miller's expositions on the year-day principle shows how the use of a concordance is a prerequisite for
the whole idea. He explains how even a child may take the word "day" to find "what his heavenly father
means by days in a figurative sense for he is satisfied it cannot be literal" as several kingdoms cannot rise and
fall in a time span of 2300 [or 1260] days of Daniel's prophecies.
The first text he lights upon is in Num. xiv.34, "each day for a year." May this not be it? says the child.
He takes hold of it by faith, carries it home, lays it up in his cell of sweets, richer than a lord, and
again goes forth in search of more. He now lights upon Eze. iv.6: I have appointed thee each day
for a year." -- He does not stop to criticize -- and query, and reason himself out of common sense
and reason too; but Abraham-like, he believes, and lays up his treasure at home. I see, says the
8
child, this use of days was so ordained by my Father in two cases, and two witnesses is enough.
This rather emotionally loaded argument for the year-day method continues by an application, which was
considered an ultimate proof of its suitability. Miller applies the year-day device to the "seventy weeks" of Dan
9:25. Like earlier historicists, he believed that a 490 year period leading up to the time of Christ was an
9
unarguable conclusion for any discussion on the year for a day theory.
Miller's use of the year/day method employed the following formula:
1 prophetic day means 1 literal year
1 prophetic month means 30 literal years
1 prophetic year means 360 literal years
This equation was founded upon an idea of a "prophetic calendar" which followed neither lunar nor solar
10
calendars.
The length of a "month" was counted from Mede's equation of Daniel 7:25; 12:7; Rev 11:2; 12:6,14; 13:5. This
11
synchronization made 3 1/2 years equal to 1260 days and 42 months. The Millerites utilized this hermeneutic
to its limits. They applied the formula even to fractions of a day and they believed one prophetic hour to

Глава пета
12
mean fifteen literal days or half an hour to mean a literal week.
The high regard in which the year/day theory was generally held is reflected in the fact that Miller's
opponents rarely objected to it. Dr. Bush in his Reasons for rejecting Mr. Miller's views of the Advent comments:
In taking a day as the prophetical term for a year, I believe you are sustained by the soundest
exegesis, as well as fortified by the high names Mede, Sir I. Newton, Bishop Newton, Kirby, Scott,
13
Keith and a host of others.
5.2 Other methods of counting time
Miller did, however, differ from most historicists in employing more than one formula for the interpretation of
time.
Figures sometimes have two or more different significations, as day is used in a figurative sense to
represent three different periods of time.
1. Indefinite. (Eccles. vii.14)
2. Definite, a day for a year. (Ezek. iv.6)
3. Day for a thousand years. (2Pet. iii.8)
If you put on the right construction it will harmonize with the Bible and make good sense, otherwise
14
it will not.
In another context he clarifies his argument on the meaning of the word "day" by stating that there were three
types of days: natural, lasting 24 hours or one cycle of the earth round its axis; prophetic, meaning a year or
one cycle of the earth round the sun; thousand year days, which due to their length deserved the title "Lord's
day." In addition to using the popular year/day, Miller also employed the thousand years for a day calculation
in some of his interpretations of the date of the parousia. The basis for turning a day into a thousand years was
naturally derived from 2 Pet 3:8,10. King James' translation, "be not ignorant of this one thing," appeared to
15
emphasize the legitimacy of this chronology.
5.3 The scope of Miller's exegesis - problem of literature
Biographical as well as scholarly literature on Millerism gives an erroneous view on Miller's exegetical interests.
Anyone reading literature on Millerism is likely to conclude that Daniel 8:14 was Miller's only and main reason
for expecting the parousia in the year 1843 and that he was interested primarily in the books of Daniel and
Revelation. This is unfortunate, since it fails to do justice to Miller. This chapter describes Miller’s fifteen years of
proving the time of the eschaton, and at the same time it will show that Miller was absorbed in proving the
time with all of the Bible. Miller wanted to present a coherent Biblical broadside on the time of the parousia.
There is no reason to assume that the omissions in the various descriptions on Miller's interpretation were
deliberate. Many of those who have written on Miller have had a Seventh-day Adventist background. The
16
result has been "strongly partisan history" which unintentionally omitted ideas that were no longer relevant
for Sabbatarian Adventism. Again, Miller's original exegesis has been shadow by that of the revival’s last turn,
the Seventh-month movement. The sheer bulk of one sided material on Millerism has hampered judgment and
17
the inaccuracies have been perpetuated in scholarly as well as popular works.
5.3.1 The scope of Miller's exegesis - 15 proofs
Millerite sources confirm that even though Daniel 8:14 may have been an important and popular part of
Miller's argumentation on the end of time, it certainly was not the only one. For instance Miller's lectures were

Глава пета
published in 1833, 1836, 1838, 1840 and 1842. Each time only some of Miller's arguments were published, only
some of his fifteen proofs were chosen. An undated letter explains the reason for this:
I have prepared at the time my lectures were published, lectures of seven different modes on
prophecy which in my humble opinion [sic] proved the time; but the publishers thought three of
them would be enough, they therefore selected out three or four of the most prominent ones and
18
published them left [sic] the rest, which I believe have since been published or are now in prep.
He believed that all possible time-prophecies must be brought together for a true understanding of the Biblical
revelation. He decried using only a few "proofs." Another illustration of this is related to a review of Miller's
lectures in the Maine Wesleyan Journal. Having been allowed space for but five of his fifteen, arguments Miller
19
concludes, "These are only part of the scriptural data by which this theory is established.” Similarly in his
"Address to the Second Advent Conference" in 1841 he mentions most of his arguments, 6Ooo years, 2520
years, 2450 years, 2300 years, 2000 years and 391 years 15 days. Then he makes a point which cannot be
appreciated if one focuses exclusively on Daniel.
You will next inquire, How shall we know when these times will all end? I answer, when you or any
other man can show by scripture rule that they all harmonize and come out in one and the same
20
year, they cannot be far from the truth.
The division of Miller's exegesis into 15 categories stems from a document published in January 1843, the year
he expected Christ to return. This synopsis of his views lists fifteen modes of arriving at 1843 under the heading:
21
"Time proved in Fifteen Different Ways." This document is not the most comprehensive account of any single
22
part of Miller's exegesis, but it is the best available summary of his chronological exegesis."
5.3.2 The scope of Miller's exegesis - an analysis of periodicals
Miller's comments and his books confirm that he himself appreciated all of his fifteen proofs. It must, however,
be noted that these fifteen ways were were not Miller's ways only, but many or all of them were shared by
23
other leading Millerites. This is also indicated by the many chronological charts and articles that they
24
published. None of the charts was prepared by Miller himself, yet most of them included several ways of
adding up prophetic years to the terminus of 1843. However, it must be recognized that all of the fifteen proofs
were not equally popular with other Millerites. Some of them are promoted in books only and are virtually
unmentioned in Millerite periodicals, while others are frequently discussed in both books and periodicals.
The validity of various exegetical points was at times questioned in Millerite periodicals. This is true also for
Miller's argument on Daniel 8:14. In an effort to arrive at a correct definition of Millerite teaching the present
writer analyzed the subject matter of every article in Millerite periodicals between January 1840 and
25
December 1843. This analysis included 685-articls with a minimum length of a third of a page. More than half
of these periodical items, 355, were exegetical in nature, mostly on the Millennium, the resurrection, the
judgment, and the principles of interpretation as well as the prophecies on the return on the Jews. There were
127 articles on time-prophecies out of which 123 were on one or more of Miller's 15 proofs.
The distribution of these articles on time-prophecies gives an interesting insight into the development of
Millerism. In the final count Daniel 8:14 is discussed in 34 separate items, much more frequently than all the
other proofs. However, the result would have been very different had the analysis covered but a few months
shorter period. In the period 1840-1842 the theory of 6000 years was the most frequently discussed way of
26
timing the second Advent. In the year 1843 speculation on the exact time of the end increased and Daniel
8:14 was discussed over and over in several articles. This paved the way for the seventh-month- movement.
Overall the periodicals show that the Millerites had sufficient interest in a number of Miller's fifteen proofs to

Глава пета
make it a gross misrepresentation of Millerism to leave anyone of Miller's fifteen proofs undiscussed. Each one
of the arguments must be taken into consideration for a full summary of Millerite teaching.
5.3.3 Synopsis of Miller's chronology
Miller prepared fifteen proofs which on closer analysis include seven diverse ways of calculating 1843 as the
final year of world's history. The actual sequence in which Miller developed his 15 proofs is unclear because
27
many of them are referred to or found in the earliest written sources. A clue as to the evolution of Miller's
thinking might be available in the Venn ant Telegraph from the early part of 1832, when Miller presented his
view in writing for the first time. These have not been available for this study, but there are other observations
one can make on Miller’s fifteen proofs.
28
Only two of the seven stem from the book of Daniel and none from the Apocalypse. The deduction that
Daniel 8:14 was not the exegetical hub of Millerism is sealed by the observation that in the Synopsis of Miller's
news Miller's comments on Daniel are the shortest of all among the fifteen proofs, and in no way singled out.
29
After the "proofs" he states, "These several ways of prophetic chronology prove the end in 1843.”
Five of the seven time spans were recurrently printed in a short statement on Millerite beliefs on the editorial
30
page of the Advent Herald. All fifteen proofs were published in the leading Millerite periodical, Signs of the
31
TImes, and N. Southard, the editor of Midnight Cry chose the synopsis of the fifteen points to represent
32
Millerite beliefs in a history of various North American denominations. It has been a mistake to limit Miller’s
exegesis of time-prophecies to Daniel and Revelation only. Anyone in doubt should reed those Millerite
sources that endeavored to give a compendium on Millerite kerygma. All of these unhesitatingly interpret
33
several Biblical texts to prove the time of the second advent.
Miller's fifteen points are the subject matter of the rest of this chapter. These time-prophecies are so diverse
that it is difficult to see how they relate to each other without visualization. Appendix III includes a chart on
34
Miller's basic time-prophecies on one page. Copies of some Millerite charts are also included.
5.4. The prophecy of Moses
The "first of the main pillars" of Millerism was the "prophecy of Moses" as Miller called the text he found in Lev.26
And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins.
And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as
brass: And your strength shall be spent in vain: for your land shall not yield her increase, neither shall
the trees of the land yield their fruits.
And if ye walk contrary unto me, and will not hearken unto me; I will bring seven times more
plagues upon you according to your sins. I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you
of your children, and destroy your cattle, and make you few in number; and your high ways shall be
desolate. And if ye will not be reformed by me by these things, but will walk contrary unto me; Then
will I also walk contrary unto you, and will punish you yet seven times for your sins. And I will bring a
sword upon you, that shall avenge the quarrel of my covenant: and when ye are gathered
together within your cities, I will send the pestilence among you; and ye shall be delivered into the
hand of the enemy. And when I have broken the staff of your bread, ten women shall bake your
bread in one oven, and they shall deliver you your bread again by weight: and ye shall eat, and
not be satisfied. And it ye will not for all this hearken unto me, but walk contrary unto me; Then I will
walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. (Lev
26:18-28, KJV)

Глава пета
This "prophecy" is expounded by Miller himself as well as his associates in several books and in a number of
35
periodical articles. The text depicts the exile as a sevenfold punishment for Israel's sins. Due to the King James
translation Miller interpreted this as a time-prophecy: "I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins."(v.28)
36
The word "time" in Millerite vocabulary implied a year, which led him to a prophetic and chronological
interpretation of the text. The year/day method converted the "seven times" into 7 x 360 years, and Miller had
no obstacles for the claim that the "seven times" of Lev 26:18-28 symbolized 2520 years within which "the
37
church has been punished by the kings and rulers of this world."
Miller is not concerned with the obvious exilic context of the text. He believed that Old and New Testament
believers formed one church, one spiritual Israel and that both Old and New Testament times could be
covered with one prophecy. The terminal points of this 2520 year period were located within the Bible. His
general concept of history, enlightened by the book of Daniel, led him to state that this "prophecy" must begin
with Babylon and cover the period of all the great oppressors of "the church": Babylon, "Medo-Persia",
38
"Grecia", and Rome, pagan as well as Papal.
Miller makes the surprising claim that he found the seven times of Lev 26 before he came to Dan 8:14. In a
sermon, recorded by Litch, Miller says: "I was satisfied that the seven times terminated in 1843. Then I came to
39
the 2300 days; they brought me to the same conclusion." However, Miller's terminus a quo is so obscure that
40
one can reasonably assume that, in a manner not unfamiliar to other historicists, Miller first fixed the terminus
ad quem, 1843 AD, subtracted the 2520 years to arrive at the desired starting point 677B.C., and then with the
41.
help of marginal notes in his King James Bible, found the only event dated 677 B.C. The incident with this
date was Manasseh's short arrest by the Assyrians. The text includes the peculiar feature of his being taken to
Babylon rather than Assyria. (2Chr 33:11). Was this not, Miller asked, the time when "the people of God are to
42
be in bondage to the kingdoms of this world; or in Babylon, literal and mystical."
5.4.1 Proof of 677 B.C.
For anyone reading the King James Bible and approving the year-day method, Miller's basic conclusions on
Leviticus 26 were plain. It appears, however, that there was a constant struggle to prove the terminus a quo,
677 B.C. To verify the importance of this episode proof of Manasseh's significance for Israel's future fate had to
be demonstrated. Hale refers to the actual wording of Leviticus, "I will break the pride of your power," (Lev
26:19) and continues: "If the kingly form of civil government is here referred to, it was never "broken" until the
43
captivity of Manasseh." Miller found other texts like Jer 15:4, which states that God punishes Israel because of
44
Manasseh's sins, and that the transgressions of Manasseh were in fact the very ones referred to in the book of
45
Leviticus.
There was a further verification of 677 B.C. Miller asserted that then "the ten tribes were carried away by
46
Esarhaddon, king of Babylon". This puzzling claim is explained in another context where he does refer to Assur
and he writes that the ten tribes of Israel began to be carried away in 722 B.C. but the completion of her
47
slavery did not come until 677 B.C. At a closer look this peculiar idea turns out to be a detail in the Millerite
layout of Old Testament chronology, and again its base lies in the marginal notes of KJV Bibles. The evidence
48
for this date is in Second Advent Manual where Hale points out that Isa 7:8 was dated to the year 742 B.C.
The text prophesies that "within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken." A simple subtraction
produces 677 B.C. giving Biblical conformation for Miller's dating. It was easy for Hale to suggests that
49
Esarhaddon took both Manasseh and the remnant of Israel together into captivity.
II. Illustration of Miller’s proofs 1 and 2

Глава пета
Punishment of Israel 2520 yrs End
677 B.C. 1843
Miller's texts: Lev 26; Dt15:1,2; Jer 34:14
Having presented this evidence concerning the date, Miller explained that "since the days of Manasseh not a
50
moment has she [the church] enjoyed of respite, but has been scattered among the kingdoms of the world."
For Miller Manasseh's time marks the beginning of oppression for God's people. This was the period when
51
Jerusalem was trodden underfoot by Gentiles. On the other hand, in AD. 1843 the "kingdom will be given to
52
the saints of the Most High; mystical Babylon will be destroyed" and the time of "the punishment of the
53
people of God will end."
5.4.2 Comments on the "Prophecy of Moses"
It would be easy but unfair to criticize the hermeneutical construction that Miller built upon Lev 26. The
following remarks are not intended as criticisms but rather as observations. The "first of the main pillars" of
Millerite chronology is an excellent illustration of much of nineteenth century North American exegesis. It
almost totally ignores the original context and combines texts together in a rather flaccid fashion, and It
shows a blind faith in the English translation. On the other hand Miller's interpretation is simple and
straightforward. It includes nothing mystical or difficult to comprehend. For anyone who accepted the King
James version as the genuine Bible text this interpretation may have appeared valid.
Yet even Biblicist or historicist interpreters were not so blind to the original meaning and to the context of a text
that they would have taken Miller's claims without criticism. Prof. G. Bush advised Miller on the correct meaning
of Lev 26, and pointed out that there is no word "time" in the Hebrew, but rather "an intimation of degree"
54
meaning sevenfold, Miller insisted on the superiority of the King James translation as fifty times better to any,
55
however learned, "opinion" on the original text. It is an interesting fact that Miller is not known to have
changed any of his fifteen proofs at any time whether in face of serious objections or even the
56
disappointment of 1844.
Because of the problems that there were in the actual meaning of the "seven times" some Millerites hesitated
in accepting Miller's interpretation. After years of investigation Litch wrote, "I am constrained at length to
57 58
acknowledge it as such." But there was also enthusiastic endorsement. Finally one must note that this
hermeneutic, like every other B.C. to AD. calculation that Miller made, includes an error of one year. This is due
to his taking for granted the existence of a year zero. Correct arithmetic's would have yielded 1844 instead of
59
1843. This mistake was shared by many of Miller's contemporaries.
5.5 Year of release
In the Pentateuch Miller found another text which he believed to demonstrate that a "seven times" or 2520
year period ended in AD. 1843. This was the year of release.
At the end of every seven years thou shalt make a release. And this is the manner of the release:
Every creditor that lendeth ought unto his neighbor shall release it; he shall not exact it of his
neighbour, or of his brother; because it is called the LORD's release. (Dt 15:1,2 KJV)

Глава пета
At the end of seven years let ye go every man his brother a Hebrew, which has been sold unto
thee, and when he has served thee six years, thou shalt let him go free from thee; but your fathers
hearkened not unto me, neither inclined their ear. (Jer 34:14 KJV)
The sources for the Millerite interpretation of these texts are not as numerous as the ones for the prophecy of
60
Moses. The text stems from an old sacral ordinance of letting the land lie fallow and it is here applied to a
61
release from debts and from slavery. Miller's interpretation transformed the text into an allegory of world
history. Like a Hebrew slave who was to be released "at the end of every seven years," the people of God
were to expect the parousia to release them from the slavery of the spiritual Babylon at the end of seven
62
symbolic prophetic years. The time calculated for this prophecy is the same as that of proof number one.
This interpretation emphasized 1843 as the year "when the children of God will be released from all bondage
63
and slavery."
This hermeneutic gave Miller a powerful homiletical base to preach on liberty for all captives at the second
advent. Isa 61:1,2 was one of his key texts.
The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings
unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives,
and the opening of prison to them that are bound; To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,
64
and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn.
The text does mention "the acceptable year" and the "day of vengeance" which in itself implied an
eschatological fulfillment for the Millerites. The prophetic interpretation of the year of release gave Miller the
answer for questions arising from the text: who are the captives and when are they liberated. The captive is
the true church oppressed by the powers mentioned in Daniel, and the time of the liberation is in AD. 1843, at
65
the end of seven symbolic years of slavery and at the dawn of the great antitypical sabbatical year.
This interpretation illustrates Miller's adherence to a kind of magical inspiration where God implants prophecies
of the eschaton into everything there is in the Bible. Miller craves to build everything into a harmonized
typological system where Old Testament events and the whole history of Israel grow into symbols of a grand
plan of world history.
5.6 Gog and Magog
Miller developed a third exegetical design related to the "seven times" or the 2520 year period.
And they that dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth, and shall set on fire and burn the weapons,
both the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows, and the handstaves, and the spears,
and they shall burn them with fire seven years: So that they shall take no wood out of the field,
neither cut down any out of the forests; for they shall spoil those that spoiled them, and rob those
that robbed them, saith the Lord GOD. --And seven months shall the house of Israel be burying of
them, that they may cleanse the land. (Eze 39:9,10,12 KJV)
The prophecy in Ezekiel 39:9,10. mentions a seven year period within which Israel, after the hordes of Gog and
Magog are destroyed, gathers spoil and burns the weapons of her enemies. Millerite publications make only
66
occasional references to this prophecy. Miller's interpretation turns the actual imagery of the prophecy
upside down. He interpreted this seven year period to mean time during which the enemies of God's people
67
oppressed them - seven prophetic years from 677 B.C. to AD. 1843.
The text includes an additional feature in verse 12, a period of seven months for the burial of the dead and for
the cleansing of the land. As far as prophetic time is concerned Miller counted each month as thirty days

Глава пета
68
which in literal time denoted thirty years. Therefore seven months stood for 210 years, which in turn was seen
as a portion of the longer 2520 year period. Miller's idea of this seven-month/210-year time span is curious. He
wrote that during this period the "People of God" were "putting away the rotten carcass of papal power." The
starting point of his calculations was 1588, marked by the Edict of Nantes and the turning of Henry IV, king of
Navarre, against the papal power. Thus 1798, when papacy was believed to have received its deadly would,
69
became the end of this 210 years period. Miller's comments on 1588 are somewhat confused as the four
decades of Huguenot wars began in 1562, Henry of Navarre became the king of France in 1589, and the Edict
of Nantes was not given until 1598.
III. Chart illustrating the time span of Miller's proof no. 3
Burning of or opposition 2520 yrs. End
to enemy weapons 210 yrs. 1843
677 B.C. 1588 A.D. 1798 A.D.
Edict of Nantes End of papacy
Miller's text: Eze 39:9,10,12
One may observe that outside of Millerism Ezekiel's prophecy on Gog and Magog was a popular one. It was a
popular proof text for Zionistic arguments on the return and" future victories of the Jews. Such a concept Miller
70
flatly rejected. Miller's view on a spiritual Israel lies at the foundation of this as well as the previous seven year
interpretations.
5.6.1 Background and impact of the seven times
Several of Miller's historicist forefathers endorsed a seven year prophecy. Miller's three prophetic ways of
counting 2520 years are almost certainly not unique to him although exact parallels have not been located. A
hermeneutic which resembles Miller's is in Burwell's book, published in 1835, at a time when Miller probably had
71
his prophetic ideas fairly well formulated? The most notable supporter of a seven year prophecy was Faber
72
who did base his calculation [657 B.C. to AD. 1864] on Daniel 4. The idea of involving Daniel 4 in the seven
year calculation was not foreign to the Millerites. In fact Miller, Litch and Hale do make Nebuchadnezzar's
73
seven years of insanity a proof of the legitimacy of the seven year calculation.
Whether original or not Miller's view certainly had a strong influence on some Advent believers after the
74
disappointment.
It is more than likely that a key prophecy in Jehovah's Witnesses' eschatology has its background in Miller's
idea. The Watchtower society has recalculated the terminal points of the prophecy, and the emphasis is now
75
on Daniel 4 rather than Leviticus 26, the latter of which is mentioned as a prophecy only in their older books.
5.7 The age of the earth

Глава пета
Fourth among Miller's fifteen points involves the whole Bible.
And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh
day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it;
because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. (Gen 2:2,3 KJV)
For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall
enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he spake
in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his
works. -- There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. (Heb 4:3,4,9 KJV)
And six years thou shalt sow thy land and gather in the fruits thereof: But the seventh year thou shalt
let it rest and lie still; that the poor of thy people may eat: and what they leave the beasts of the
field shall eat. In like manner thou shalt deal with thy vineyard, and with thy olive yard. (Ex 23:10,11
KJV)
It [the Sabbath] is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD
made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed. (Ex 31:17 KJV)
Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit
thereof; But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the LORD;
thou shalt neither sow thy field nor prune thy vineyard. (Lev 25:3,4 KJV)
Moreover also I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might
know that I am the LORD that sanctify them. (Eze 20:12 KJV)
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years,
and a thousand years as one day. (2Pet 3:8 KJV)
Like many before him he believed that "the Sabbath" or rather the weekly cycle is a miniature model and a
prophecy of the world's history, "Christ will also labor six days [1000 years each] in creating the new heavens
76
and earth, and rest on the seventh." Miller explained that Old Testament Israel was given the literal Sabbath
as a "sign," because God had given it expressly for such a purpose. However, the Christian church, observing
77
no literal sabbath, must regard the Sabbath a prophetic sign, a symbol of the coming millennium. At the end
78
of the 6000 years "the Anti-typical Sabbath of a 1000 years will commence," the time of peace and rest for
79
the whole universe,
The popularity of this topic is obvious from the many chronological charts Millerite periodicals and books
80 81
included as well as from the number of articles and books that deal with this interpretation. The main
problem was not one of demonstrating that the weekly cycle is a symbol of world history because a sizeable
portion of Miller's contemporaries already held this concept. The major obstacle for the Millerites was to
overcome the widely approved chronology of archbishop James Ussher. Ussher's Annales Veteri et Novi
Testamenti (1650-4) had dominated the exegesis of Old Testament chronological informa-tion for nearly two
hundred years. Miller was obliged to work diligently and repeatedly with his calculations to push the creation
from Ussher's 4004 B.C. back to 4157 B.C. which, with his one year's arithmetical error, gave 1843 as end of the
82
6000 years.
The book of Judges provided the evidence Miller needed. His basic claim, which had to be modified several
times in the uncounted debates over this issue, was that Ussher made a mistake in assuming overlaps in the
rule of the judges. Ussher's dating for this period of Old Testament history was based on chronological
statements in 1 Kings 6:1 and Judges 11:26 which left only 295 years for the time between Joshua and Samuel.

Глава пета
Miller preferred to explain Ussher's argument away and with little help from Josephus he argued that the
judges were successive with a span of 448 years. This gave the needed 153 years to pull the creation back into
83
4157 B.C. and allowed for the parousia 6000 years later in 1843.
IV Chart illustrating Miller's understanding of the 6000 years
Creation 6000yrs End Eternity
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ l000yrs │
4157 BC 1843 AD
Miller’s text Ex. 31&17
Some Millerite timetables with 6000 years leading up to 1843 were presented as "very clear evidence." The
84
tables often included Anno Mundi dates e.g. 5997 for the "present year." At other times words of caution
were included. "Very well. No one pretends to tell, positively, how long the world has stood, but still it is
believed there are serious reasons for supposing that its age is not far from 6000 years." Anything else, they
85
postulated, would cast a shadow on God.
5.7.1 Extra biblical research
The efforts that the Millerites put forward to interpret the Bible so that 6000 years would run from the creation to
1843 led them further into historical investigation than any other subject. The complexity of problems forced
86
them into repeated recalculations. They needed authority to back up their idea of pushing Archbishop
87
Ussher aside. Sylvester Bliss was the Millerite specialist on chronological problems. He wrote:
Chronology of the Hebrew text; for every period where that has failed us, we have taken the
chronology as given by Dr. Jarvis, and such is the result. Our object has not been to prove this earth
88
is just 6000 years old, but to show from best of evidence that it cannot vary much from it.
Unfortunately Jarvis' chronological studies have not been available for this research. The discussion on the
problems of Biblical chronology gave Miller awareness of different chrono-logical systems that the Samaritan
Pentateuch and the Septuagint followed. Even Chinese, Indian and Roman chronologies are mentioned by
89
him as illustrations. The Millerites appealed to the authority of the church fathers, Irenaeus, Barnabas,
Cyprian, Lactantiys as well as well known scholars like Mede, Clarke or Gibbon or even Bunyan to exhibit the
90
validity of the 6000 year theory.
5.7.2 Popularity and influence of the 6000 year theory
91
Faith in the 6000 year hermeneutic was prevalent in ante bellum America. From Millerite periodicals one can
only infer that the Millerites accepted this concept unanimously. Bliss comments in his Chronology of the Bible:

Глава пета
The coming of Christ would be at the end of the six thousand -years from the creation has been the
92
belief of those who look for the pre-millennial advent, ever since the days of the primitive сhurсh.
An average layman had little possibility of examining critically the detailed charts with hundreds of Bible texts.
Any information in the Bible took precedence over any data available from historical sources. For instance the
93
events of Christ's ministry were dated with the help of the book of Daniel. Yet even by the historicist
94
standards the Millerites should have known better than to place the birth of Christ in year zero. Litch does in
fact make an apology of this detail, but he brushes the hole question aside by pointing out that a correction
95
would make no difference to the final outcome. However, this together with other minor deviations from well
known historical dates like those of the exile, show that Miller’s aim was one of proving the time of the end
rather than that of finding reliable dates. He used historical data when it matched his plan and disregarded it,
even where information was available, if the data did not appear relevant for his goals.
It was on the 6000 years and the age of the earth rather than Dan. 8:14 then the largest remaining Millerite
96
groups invested their energies on after autumn of 1844. It is also more than likely that the slightly modified
97
version of the 6000 year theory Jehovah’s Witnesses stems from William Miller.
5. 8 The Jubilees
One of MiIIer's most imaginative interpretations stems from the book of Leviticus.
And thou shalt number seven Sabbaths of the year unto thee, seven times seven years; and the
space of the seven Sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years. And ye shall hallow
the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty troughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall
be а jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every
man unto his family. А Jubilee shall that fiftieth year be unto you: ye shall not sow; neither reap that
which groweth of itself in it, not gather the grapes in it of thy vine undressed. For it is the jubilee; it
98
shall be holy unto you: yе shall eat the increase thereof out of the field. (Lev 25:8, 10-12 КJV)
Miller's argument runs as follows: "As seven days constitute а Sabbath, so seven kinds of Sabbath form а
99
complete round of Sabbaths, and carry us up to the perfect Sabbath in heaven.” The seven Sabbaths Miller
found were 1) the seventh-day Sabbath, 2) the fiftieth-day Sabbath (Lev 23:15,16), 3) the seventh week
Sabbath (Deut 16:9,10), 4) the seventh month Sabbath (Lev 23:24,25), 5) the seventh year Sabbath (Lev 25:3-
5), 6) “the year fiftieth, Jubilee" (Lev 25:8-13), and 7) the fiftieth Jubilee, which he designated the antitype of all
100
Sabbaths. "The Jews kept but, six Sabbaths; if they had kept the seventh they would have been made
perfect without us; but they broke the seventh 'Therefore there remains а keeping of the Sabbath to the
101
people of God.” (Heb 4:9)
The symbolism of the Jubilees was interpreted in а forthright manner. The Jubilee was thought to mean
consummation and restoration, deliverance “from bondage and corruption" and the time to be “introduced
102
into the glorious liberty of the children of God.” The method of counting the time was uncomplicated. It
included no device for manipulating the time from days to years. “How long,” writes Miller, “is а Jubilee of
103
Jubilees? Ans. 49 times 50 years = 2450 years.
5.8.1 The terminus for the Jubilees
Miller arrives at the terminal points of this "prophecy" with а fascinating argument. He believed there cannot
have been any post exilic Jubilees because the Jubilee belonged to free men and the Jews returned from the

Глава пета
104
exile as slaves and bondsmen and remained so under the kingdoms of Persia, Grecia, and Rome. He
decided to initiate the tally for the fiftieth Jubilee from Josiah's reign when the last Jubilee, as he believed, had
have been celebrated in а free Israel.
For some reason Miller suggested that the Jews ceased keeping the Sabbath as well as Jubilees at the close
of Josiah's reign "the last king of Jerusalem that obeyed the commandments of the Lord, or kept his
105
statutes" His dating made him choose what he believed to be the last year of Josiah's reign, 607 В.С. He
argued that after this date the Jews would not and could not celebrate the Jubilee or the year of release. This
I06
brought Miller's calculation down to 1843 and conveniently reinforced the message of the Millerite revival.
V. А Chart illustrating Miller's view of the fiftieth Jubilee
Josiah 49 Jubilees = 2450yrs End
607 B.C. 1843 A.D.
Miller's text: Lev 25:8-13
5.8.2 Comments on the Jubilees
Miller's argument is somewhat baffling. One may appreciate the Jubilee signifying freedom from slavery and
return of ownership on the land. These features made the Jubilee а frequently acclaimed symbol of the
Second Advent in Miller's time. Yet the idea of а prophetic Jubilee appears somewhat out of place. Miller's
arguments are normally replete with Biblical texts. For obvious reasons he is not able to find а single text
pointing to the f1ftieth Jubilee. The whole idea is based more on а desire to find mathematical order within
the Scriptures than on the usual multitude of proof texts.
Even within historicist ideals Miller should have seen that in his list of the seven Sabbaths the second and the
I07
third Sabbath were one and the same festival, the feast of weeks or the Pentecost. This must be so within
l08
Miller's own Biblicist method which is characterized by harmonization. There is another point that Miller
does not discuss. Contemporary scholars found no agreement upon whether 49 or 50 years should be
I09
counted. Mathematical harmony appears to have been more important for him than а critical look at his
own theories and agreement even with the conservative Biblical scholarship of his time.
Millerite teaching on the typological and prophetic significance of the Jubilees is not fairly appraised,
however, until one acknowledges that the theme of а shortly beginning millennial Jubilee was extremely
popular. Interpretations varied, and while there was probably no other theory like Miller's, those Christians
110
who expected Christ's return accepted that the Jubilee was а familiar symbol of the approaching glory.
In terminology the medieval father of apocalypticism, Jоасhim of Fiore comes close to Miller with his
111
theory of the seventh Sabbath rest in the seventh age.
Towards the end of the revival the Millerites looked for more and more effective means of finding the exact
time of the parousia. The speculative and inexact nature of the beginning of
this "prophecy" may have led to the secondary role that this interpretation played in the Millerite
movement. Its effect on Jehovah's Witness' eschatology would require further study. Their Bible dictionary
gives only а cursory allusion to any symbolic meaning that there may lie in the Jubilee, but it does make а
112
count of seventeen Jubi1ees, the last one of which happens to be dated 607 В.С.
5.9 The third day

Глава пета
Mi11er's proofs number six and ten must be discussed together to avoid unnecessary repetition. They
113
provide а fresh scheme to achieve the target year of 1843.
Come, and let us return unto the LORD: for he hath torn, and be wi11 hеа1 us; be hath smitten,
and he wi11 bind us up. After two days wi11 he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we
shall live in his sight. (Hos. 6:1, 2 КJV)
And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and
to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected. (Lk. 13:32 КJV)
The two texts have nothing in common except that both mention two days followed by а third of а
specia1 character. "In the third day he wi11 raise us up, and we shall live in his sight." Here Mi11er asserts to
have found а prophecy in which every word is full of meaning, "а pearl of great price, lying deep in the
114
waters of prophecy." After God's people have been torn for two prophetic days by world1y powers there
is the time of resurrection and life with the Lord in perfection with the devi1"chained, and cast out of the
115
earth into the pit, and shut up."
These two days of Hosea and Luke cover the same period of time. Mi11er contended that these days
cannot mean natura1 twenty four hour days "for the church has been torn and smitten for more than 48
116
hours." Miller argues that only when the principle of 2 Pet 3:8 is applied, the meaning of Hosea's prophecy
becomes intelligible. As the days are turned into millenniums the prophecy reveals the specific time when all
117
labor will be finished and the millennium of bliss will begin as Rev 20:4,6 and John 14:3 describe it.
The most engaging part in the exposition of this "diamond" of prophecy comes in the method of
determining the terminus а quo. Miller makes а comparison with Hosea's prophecy and the words of Jesus.
"I cast out devils and I do cures to-day and tomorrow, and the third day I shall be perfected."(Luke 13:32,33).
The words are addressed to Herod, "that fox." Miller reminded his readers that Herod was а Roman
appointee, therefore the context, in his view, demanded the beginning of this two thousand year period
with the Romans taking control over Palestine.
VI. А Chart illustrating Miller's interpretation of the two prophetic days from the time of
Roman's to the end
Romans 2001yrs End
158 В.С. 1843A.D
Miller's texts: Hos 6:1-3; Lk 8:32
The actual date for the Roman rule was settled with 1 Maccabees 8 and 9. These chapters describe а
league which the Jews, led by Judas Массаbеus, made with the Romans. Miller's date for this was 158
118
В.с. Two millenniums added to 158 В.C. made in Miller's calculation A.D. 1842. This is, of course, one
year short of 1843, but this one year was claimed to be the proof of the accuracy of this particular
prophecy. This is so because Hosea said, ''After two days he will revive us.--" The first year "after" 1842 is 1843.
Similarly Jesus said that perfection would come "on" the third day, correct for 1843 and thousand years after
119
it. With this explanation Miller proposed the prophecy as another unquestionable proof for the parousia in
1843.
One may note that Miller does not mention the possibility that according to his own literalistic method 1844,
1845, or any year within а millennium wou1d be "after" 1842 or "on" the third millennium since 158 В.С. No

Глава пета
examples of similar exposition have been found in contemporary literature.
5.10 The cleansing of the sanctuary
The prophecy for which Millerism is best remembered is found in the book of Daniel.
Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How
long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give
both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two
thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. (Dan 8:13,14 KJV)
The interpretation of this text was regarded as an important challenge because its exegesis varied more
among historicists than that of any other time-prophecy in the book of Daniel.
Some serious conservative historicists applied Daniel 8 only to Antiochos. Others sought to stretch the time
into the Christian era, but with widely variant starting points and even diverse
lengths of time, 2200, 2300, or 2400 days. The Millerites wrote no books on this prophecy aloe, but it is
discussed extensively in Millers Evidence, Hale's Second Advent Manual, Litch's Prophetic Expositions,
l20
Fleming's Synopsis, and Hawley's Second Advent Doctrine.
The prophecy of Daniel 8 required several definitions to make the Millerite interpretation possible. First of all
the length of time needed discussion. The Millerites were well aware of
Jerome's reading of 2200 evenings and mornings as well as the Septuagint's 2400. Here the Hebrew text was
considered preferable because it must be considered more original, because
no variants were known among the Hebrew manuscripts, and because the "Vatican edition" [Codex
121
Vaticanus?] of the LXX also had the reading 2300. Secondly, the chapter itself gives
l22
no terminus a quo suitable for historicist application. Therefore Miller and his associates tried to prove a
connection between chapters 8 and 9 in Daniel.
5.10.1 Daniel 8 and 9 interpreted together
It was pointed out that in Daniel 9:23 Gabriel came to make Daniel understand "the vision", which, Miller
123
claimed, must mean the one that precedes.
Does not the angel say to Daniel, 9:23, "Therefore understand the matter and consider the vision?"
Yes. Does not the angel then go on and give his instruction concerning the 70 weeks? Yes. Do you
believe the Bible is true? We do. Then if the Bible is true, Daniel's 70 weeks are а part of the vision,
and 490 years were accomplished when the Messiah was cut off and not for himself. Then 1810
124
years afterwards the vision is completed.
The second confirmatory statement was seen in а another reference to а "vision" (Dan 9:24). The seventy
125
weeks were to "seal up the vision." This vision was believed to be that of Daniel 8. The sealing aspect was
strongly advocated by Miller's associate, Apollos Hale, а Methodist minister.
--there can be nothing sealed without something to seal, to which it is made an appendage. As the
70 weeks are the appendage - the seal - to something else called the vision, that vision must, in
nature of the case, be something different from the 70 weeks, even if the 70 weeks could with any
l26
propriety be called а vision.
Miller agrees with Hale but stresses а slightly different view. He wrote, that the sealing meant confirmation on
the fulfillment of Daniel 8 because sealing means fulfillment, and а prophecy cannot be fulfilled without а
127
starting point.
There was а third detail related to the wording of Daniel 9:24 which was used to strengthen the argument on

Глава пета
the unity of Daniel 8 and 9. Litch investigated the Hebrew background of the word "determined" and he
contends that it should have been translated "cut off" or "separated" which, in the framework of prophetic
time, cou1d mean only that the seventy weeks or 490 years of Daniel 9 were "cut off' from the longer period of
128
2300 evenings and mornings or 2300 years.
The case for the oneness of Daniel 8 and 9 was established step by step. Daniel's prayer [сh. 9] provided а
further possibility of pointing out how the two texts belonged together. Daniel was worried over the fate of
the people and he wanted to know the solution to chapter 8 when he prayed. Chapter 9 must therefore be
129
an explanation of chapter 8. For the Millerites the problem was solved. Everybody knew how Daniel 9
must be interpreted. А Christological interpretation was -presupposed even by the marginal notes of the
Bibles. This made the preceding argument crucial for Millerism. Without Daniel 9:25 as а legitimate solution
for the beginning of the 2300 evenings and mornings they would not have had such а terminus а quo that
would bring the conclusion of the prophecy in the region of 1843. The time was to be counted "from, the
going of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem." Miller's interpretation of Daniel 8 cannot be
looked upon in isolation from Daniel 9.
William Miller was not alone in the linking of the 70 weeks and the 2ЗОО days. Already in 1654 Tillinghast
1З0
advocated in England that the 70 weeks were а lesser period within the greater one of 2300 dауs. А
century later in 1768 Johan Petri clearly proposed that the 70 weeks be placed to the first part of the 2300
131
days. By the turn of the nineteenth century this view become increasingly popular even though there
132
were many serious historicists who preferred Antiochos and literal time as the fulfillment of Daniel 8.
5.10.2 When was Jerusalem rebuilt
All throughout the historicist tradition the interpretation of Dan 9 had remained fairly stable. The prophecy of
70 weeks was exegeted as а Messianic prophecy. The time was counted as prophetic years. "The rule is this.
There is nothing said about days at this time by the angel. The Hebrew is seventy heptads, or seventy
IЗЗ
sevens." This means 490 уеars. Christ was the "anointed prince" to be "cut off." (Dan 9:24-27)
lЗ4
Subsequently Cyrus' decree (2 Сrn 36; Ezra 1) was as unsatisfactory as it led nоwhеrе. Therefore several
lЗ5
historicists started this prophetic period some time between 453 and 457 B.C. Miller chose the seventh
year of king Artaxerxes Longimanus. The letter of Artaxerxes in Ezra 7:11-26 was explained to be the final
Royal command concerning the rebuilding of Jerusalem. Most contemporary commentaries followed
lЗ6
Ussher and dated the fifth month of the seventh year of Artaxerxes to 457 B.C.
5.10.3 The date of the crucifixion

137
Because Daniel 9 was regarded а Messianic prophecy, this timing, and the whole design that Miller put
on Daniel 8 and 9 was believed to have been confirmed by events relating to the life of Christ. In the
Millerite version the 490 years of Daniel 9:24 were added to 457 В.С. This led to "Messiah the Prince," or the
crucifixion in АD. 33. Both 457 В.С. and А.D. 33 were conveniently verif1ed by marginal notes in many КJV
lЗ8
- Bibles. This made Miller's interpretation of Daniel 9 appear imрессаblе. Millerism was а Bible
reader's religion.
VII. Chart Illustrating the Мillеritе exegesis on Dan 8 and 9
2300 years

Глава пета
490 years 1810 years
457 B.C. 33 A.D. 1843 A.D.
Ezra's decree Crucifixion Parousia
Miller argued the unity of Daniel 8 & 9 with the following:
1) Daniel did not understand the vision of сh. 8 (Dan 8:27)

2) The two chapters connected in Dan 9:21.
3 "The vision" mentioned in Dan 9:23 and 9:24.
4 (Dan 9:24) was interpreted to mean "cut off' pointing to а shorter time "cut off' from the longer 2300 days.
5) Terminus а quo only unexplained part of Dan 8:14.
In his detailed comments on the chronological combination of Daniel 8 and 9 Litch asserts that А.D. 33 can
be proven to be the date of the crucifixion. Christ was crucified before а paschal full moon and on а
Friday. Passover falls on the first full moon after the equinox. The Sabbath after the crucifixion Friday must
have been the first fun moon of the Passover. Litch continues:
I find by calculation, the only Passover full moon that fen on а Friday, for several years before or
1З9
after the disputed year was; 3rd of April 4746 Julian, 490 after Nehemiah, 33 А.D. This made it
possible for Litch to conclude that the "chronology of the 490 years -- rests on the most solid
140
basis." To complete the exegesis of the 2300 years Miller and his associates were left with the
141
simple task of а further--1810 to A.D. 33 to arrive at 1843.
5.10.4 What is the sanctuary
Having arrived at the desired year of 1843 Miller proceeded to exegete the non-chronological parts of the
prophecy. This exegesis would have been meaningless had not Miller believed that Daniel's cleansing, of the
sanctuary was in fact the parousia.To establish this Miller labored to obtain а clear-cut meaning for the
word "sanctuary". This part of Miller's exegesis is а primary example of the concordance method. With the
help of his Cruden's he found seven possible meanings for the word sanctuary. These were:
1. Jesus Christ (Isa 8:14; Eze 11:16)

2. Heaven (Ps 102:19; 20:2)
3. Judah (Ps 114:28)
4. The temple of the Jews (1 Chr 22:19; Ех 25:8)
5. The holy of holies (1Chr 28:10; Lev 4:6)
6. The earth (Isa 16:13; 1 К 8:27; Rev 5:10; 20:6; Mt 6:10; Ps 32:15; Rev 11:15; Ps 96:6-13)
142
7. The saints (1Cor 3:16,17; 2Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21)
After listing his possibilities Miller sets out to deduce the correct one by а process of elimination. "The
question now arises which of these sanctuaries does Daniel mean?" The next part of the evidence provides
а typical example of Miller's logic and style:
I answer not the first Jesus Christ for he is not impure - not the second heaven for that is not unclean, people,
-- not- the third Judah for literal Judah is cut off as а people,-- not the fourth, the temple, for that is
14З
destroyed and what is not cannot be numЬеrеd.
Naturally the holy of holies could not count either as it was not in existence any more, and Miller was left with
only two appropriate meanings: the earth and the saints, both of which, he claimed, needed and would

Глава пета
l44
receive the cleansing promised by Daniel at the end of the 2300 years.
5.10.5 Comments on the 2300 year prophecy
It is interesting that there was more debate in Millerite publications over the details of Dan 8:14 then any
other issue. Many of these arguments were with non-Millerites who objected to the 2300 evenings and
145
mornings meaning days, or who proposed that the little horn of Daniel 8 was Antiochos Epiphanes. It may
have been that the Millerite editors allowed for' this debate because of their confidence in the correctness
of the opinions they held on Daniel 8.
From the earliest period of Miller's prophetic interest his view on Dan 8:14 emerges as one of his main
arguments for the nearness of the paroиsia. Together with the 6000 year theory it was popular with the
majority of the Millerites. This particular exegesis grew in importance as the end of the Millerite expectation
approached in 1843 and 1844. This may have been due to the fact that this prophecy had been interpreted
to tell the time of the end by numerous historicist exegetes before Miller.
If one tries to look at Miller's exegesis through the eyes of а contemporary, one may assume that this
hermeneutic together with Miller's views on other prophecies in Daniel and the Apocalypse appeared as
regular exegesis, while his teachings on Leviticus, Jubilees or even the 6000 years may at times have
reached the borderlines of propriety.
The increasing popularity of this doctrine among the Millerites may have been caused by the nature of the
prophecy. It allowed for speculation on the exact day of the Second Advent while most of the other
"proofs" (were only good for determining the year. As the time approached this prophecy was interpreted
I46
with increasing resolution to find the exact date. This was against Miller's personally expressed wishes.
-
As one looks at the way Miller's inheritance was shared, it appears that after the disappointment, cased- by
а typological elaboration of this prophecy, most Millerite groups took а rather detached view on Daniel 8,
while Sabbatarian Adventism appeared to stake its life on the typology updated interpretation of this
147
prophesy.
5.11 Time of the end
Miller’s exegesis also included the prophetic period of 1260 days, 42 months, or 3 1/2 years which was one of
the cornerstones of historicism.
And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most
High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and
times and the dividing of time. (Dan 7:25 КJV)
And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his
right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a
time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy
people, all these things shall be finished. (Dan 12:7 КJV)
But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the
Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. And I will give power
unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days,
clothed in sackcloth. (Rev 11:2, 3 КJV)
And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should
feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days. (Rev 12:6 КJV)

Глава пета
And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness,
into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the
serpent. (Rev 12:14 КJV)
And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was
given unto him to continue forty and two months. (Rev 13:5 КJV)
These prophecies are to be found in the books of Daniel and Revelation. They cover the work of the little horn
and one of the beasts of Revelation as well as the period of the scattering and persecution of God's people.
The Millerites frequently discussed both the events and the termini of these prophecies in there books and
148
periodicals.
These prophecies were not exegeted to lead to Miller's year of the end, 1843. Instead they were believed to
indicate the beginning of the "time of the end." One can compare Miller's interpretation of this prophecy to a
backbone in a skeleton. It provided the supportive structure to which several other time prophecies were fixed.
5.11.1 The French revolution
The prophetic significance of the French revolution was underwritten by many commentaries of the early
nineteenth century. For some Americans the news from France may have appeared to mark progress and
reform, but the sudden changes of power, the bloodshed, the attacks against Christianity and the Bible
made many religious people regard the revolution as a somber-sign of the times. These interpretations were
highlighted by the fate of the papacy in the aftermath of the revolution when Napoleon sought to make
the pontiff his puppet. After all, papacy had been the antichrist of prophetic hermeneutic since the
149
Reformation.
150
Miller chose the year 1798 for the termination of the papal domination. At that time Napoleon's troops
entered Rome and he put an end to the pope's political rulership. This was the deadly wound (Rev 13:3) and
the end of the little horn's persecution of the saints
151
(Dan 7:25). The Millerites reminded themselves of the details: "Feb 10, 1798 General Berthier, at the head
of the republican army of France, entered tie city and took it." The pope was imprisoned and taken to
France together with the cardinals and the whole papal system lost its power because it was reorganized by
152
Bonaparte.
Miller was not alone in suggesting that the end of this period was in the year 1798. At this time Miller had
been a lad of 16. The first one to suggest A.D. 1798 as the terminus of Daniel seven and its parallel
prophecies was Samuel M'Corkle who gave the events a prophetic meaning in the very year they took
153
place.
5.11.2 The time of the antichrist
Attacks against the papacy were common in all areas of nineteenth-century American life. In the sphere of
prophecies historicists applied concepts like "antichrist," "little horn," "abomination of desolation," the "beast"
of the book of Revelation and others to the papal power. This outlook was well established by the reformers,
l54
and it had been kept up by the Puritan tradition. Miller approaches these prophecies from a slightly
different angle. He is not overly concerned with the possible papal atrocities used to prove the antichristian
l55
charac-ter of this power. Miller was interested in chronology and in the historical accuracy of the
prophecy.
The easiest aspect of these prophecies was the length of time in question. From its beginning historicism had
presented all 3 1/2 year, 42 month and 1260 day prophecies to mean the same period of 1260 years.

Глава пета
Anyone proposing a different solution would have been regarded unorthodox. Neither was there any
l56
problem with the papal application.
VIII. Chart illustrating Miller's view of the rise and fall of the papacy
Beginning of Papacy 1260yrs End of Papacy
538 A.D. 1798A.D.
Miller's texts: Dan 7:25; Dan 12:6,7; Rev 11:2,3; Rev 12:6,14; Rev 13:5
What required careful explanation was the terminal point of the prophecy. Counting the 1260 years back
from 1798 required 538 as the starting point. The historical event connected with this year was the expulsion
of the Ostrogoths from Rome. This interpretation matched a fairly widely approved view of the ten horns,
three of which were plucked away from before the little horn. (Dan 7:8) Because the Ostrogoths were the
last one of the three the time appeared logical. All details of these events were seen to match those of
Daniel 7. The interpretation was consistent with the method used and information available. The conclusion
was that in AD. 538 the Roman bishop was left dominating the scene with "all" acknowledging his
157
supremacy.
However, the terminus a quo was obscure enough to call for some serious criticism. It is not easy to convince
people of a date which is not generally attested in secular history. The Millerites compensated for this lack of
historical references to AD. 538 with a careful presentation of minor details of the events of AD. 538. At times
158
they also resorted to polemic attacks against opponents.
The minutiae presented in verification of the significance of AD. 538 make Millerite exegesis appear like a
collection of quotations from a history book. Attention was drawn to Belisarius who chose deacon Virgilius
for the papal throne in A.D. 537 because Virgilius had paid him 200 lbs. of gold. In A.D. 538 this fraudulent
arrangement was legalized. The pontiff had received all the accessories of power by this time. The only
problem was an attack by the Arian Ostrogoths in March 538. He was only able to use his powers as the
159
Ostrogoths were driven out later in the same year. The logic was simple. While Goths held the city the
Pope was helpless, but when Belisarius expelled them the Pope was left to defend himself and "Rome was
160
under his power." There was no need to carry the research further. .
5.11.3 Comments on the 1260 years
While Froom's Profetic faith has been criticized for it’s slanted view on the history of prophetic exegesis' and
Millerism, the four volumes do provide an excellent survey of the background of the Millerite type of
hermeneutic for both the 2300 days as well as for the 1260 days. While it may hold true that Miller is no "fiery
comet with a 1000-year tail" and that every millennarian was not necessarily "a forerunner of the New York
161
farmer-preacher," Froom does conclusively show that Miller's exegesis of Daniel 7 and 8 follows widely
accepted historicist standards. It follows naturally that any later historicist inter-pretations of these chapters
are close to Miller's views.
5.12 133
5.12 1335 days/years
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh
desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth,
and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. (Dan 12:11, 12 KJV)

Глава пета
For Millerites these concluding verses of Daniel represented an important scheme of prophetic
interpretation. These prophecies were carefully incorporated into an intricate system which was founded on
the 1260 years and which included the number of the beast as an appendix. The times Daniel 12:11, 12 were
important links in the arrangement. The most detailed expositions of this prophecy are found in Hale's
162
Second Advent Manual in Bliss' answer to Colver and Miller's Reply to Stuart.
5.12.1 Taking away of the daily
First Miller took the prophecy of 1290 days/years. Counting backwards from 1798 he fixed "the time that the
daily sacrifice “shall be taken away” (Dan 12:11) at A.D. 508. For Miller the taking away of the daily sacrifice
163
was identical with the end of pagan Rome. "I have come to this conclusion: that this power, called 'daily
164
sacrifice,' is Rome pagan abomination; the same Christ has reference to in Matt. xxiv.15." At first sight
Miller's conclusion may appear impossible to prove but he certainly made a serious effort of establishing his
point.
The motivation for this exegesis lies in Miller’s unshaken conviction that the little horn of Daniel must mean
the Papacy. Did the papacy take away daily sacrifices? Certainly no Jewish ones, so the "daily" must, he
continues, mean something else, something which was put away by the papacy. Was it not paganism with
its daily sacrifices that lost its strength with the rise of Roman Catholicism, Miller asked. This conclusion
allowed Miller to name two abominations, one in the form of the papal antichrist and the other, represented
by "daily sacrifice," being Satan's continual opposition to God's work in the form of paganism. This was
believed to clarify the enemy's two disguises: pagan and papal Rome. The first alluded to by Christ himself in
reference to the "abomination of desolation" (Mt 24:15; Lk 21:21) and the second by Paul in his prophecy on
165
the "man of sin." (2 Thess 2:3-10)
The destruction of Jerusalem then turned out to be the work of the "daily" or "Rome pagan." This
interpretation made the year 508 AD. appear reasonable. After all, Western Rome had fallen but a few
years earlier. Hale made a further observation on the events of the year AD. 508. "Anastasias sent pope the
title and insignia of patrician and consul and conferred the appellation of August," details which Hale
166
extracted from Gibbon's popular history of the Roman empire.
5.12.2 From daily to the end
From AD. 508 it was easy to proceed to 1843 by adding 1335 years. The cobweb of prophetic lines had
reached the decisive year of the end. More than anything else the prophecy of Dan 12:12, "Blessed is he
that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days," was the ultimate
167
demonstration of the coherence of Biblical prophecies reaching 1843.
IX. Chart illustrating Miller's interpretation of time prophecies that he believed to indicate the
times relative to the papacy.
Dan 12:11 1290 yrs.
1260 yrs.
Dan 7:25
538 1798

Глава пета
1335 yrs.
Dan 12:12 508 1843
Daily removed Rise of papacy Time of the end Second advent
5.13 Number of the beast
Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number
of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. (Rev 13:18 KJV)
Several of Miller's fifteen proofs relate to the book of Revelation. None of these leads to Miller’s Year of the
end, '"1843. They provided supportive structure for what Miller found in the Old Testament. These
interpretations gave timing for the papacy and antichrist dates for Islam, the eastern antichrist, and with
Miller's exposition of the number of the beast the times for ancient Rome. Even though these points fall
outside the main interest of this research they will be included in a summarized form in this and the following
sections.
Miller carried on his exegesis of the "time of the end" and the year 1798 by turning the number of the beast,
l68
666 (Rev 15:18) into a time-prophecy. He believed that this duration stretched from 158 B.C., when Jews
made a "league" with the Romans, until 508 A.D. when he believed the pagan Rome or the daily to have
l69
met its end. Thus the number of the beast confirmed and bound together Miller's idea of the two millennial
days of Hosea 6 and the apocalyptic times of Daniel 7 and 12.
X. Chart illustrating Miller's interpretation of the number of the beast
Rise of Rome 666yrs end of Rome "daily"
158B.C. 508A.D.
Miller's text: Rev 13:18
XI. Litch's numbering of the Greek letters in "the Latin kingdom
β=2
α=1
λ= 30
σ = 200
a=1
ι= 10
τ= 300
η= 8 λ =30
ι= 10
ε=5
ν= 50
ι= 10
η= 8
a=1
Total 666.

Глава пета
This idea of prophetic synchronization is typical for Miller and the Millerites. His view on the 666 was not
however, unanimously accepted by all of his fellow believers. Litch tells how he after initial acceptance later
gave up 666 as a measure of time. "I am now satisfied it was an error." Instead he interpreted this time period
170
as in the more regular historicist fashion pointing to Rome.
5.14 Proof for the year-day theory
And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth, -- And to them it was given that they
should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the
torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man. (Rev 9:3,5)
And the four angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and day, and a month, and a
year, for to slay the third part of men. (Rev 9:15)
One of the most colorful interludes within the short history of MillerisIl1 is the summer and autumn of 1840
when Miller expected the first serious omens of the end. He based these ideas on Revelation 9:5, 15. Usually
the whole episode is credited to Dr. Josiah Litch, but certainly also Miller is involved as well as the editorial
171
staff of the Signs.
172
This interpretation has been called a prophecy which led thousands to believe in Christ, as well as one
173
that gave the Millerites the first bitter taste of frustrated expectation. A perusal of Millerite material shows
that neither interpretation matches fully with the facts. The lack of dramatic events at the expected time
174
prevented Miller's and Litch's ideas from growing into a spectacular advertisement for Millerite exegesis,
neither can the slightly hesitant enthusiasm, with which the "fulfillment" was pronounced, be designated a
disappointment. The Millerites did not realize that the events railed to measure up with their assumptions.
5.14.1 History of Islam
Miller initiated an interpretation of the two verses of Revelation 9 as a time-prophecy which would lead
either to 1839 or 1840. In the locusts he pictured a symbol of the Islamic power, the "Mohammedans," in
particular the remnants of an ailing great power, Ottoman Turkey. This transformed the exegesis of
Revelation 9 into a discussion on a political issue of front page caliber - the Eastern question. The Sultan of
Turkey and his rebellious vassal, Mehemet Ali, the Pasha of Egypt were engaged in a power struggle with
regular involvement of the great powers of Europe. At the end of this period Miller not only expected the fall
of Turkey, but also the breaking loose of an Armageddon and possibly the close of probation. "It is done. The
175
kingdoms of the earth and governments of the world will be carried away."
However, his associates, in particular Litch, did further research into the history of Islam and at first he defined
176
the time to the month of August and later exactly to the day. The prophecy includes two pieces of
chronological information. One of these is five months, which in a regular year for day reckoning stood for
150 years. The other is "an hour, a day, a month, and a year," which was believed to lead on for a further 391
years and 15 days to the fall of the Turkish empire. The beginning of the first of the time periods was
discovered in Gibbon's history, which told that on July 27, 1299 Osman brought the Ottoman Empire into
European consciousness by attacking Greece. The first 150 years of the prophecy were concluded on July
177
27, 1449 and the second period was to finish on August 11, 1840.
5.14.2 Fractions of a prophetic day
The time required a strictly literalistic application of the year day theory. An hour was one 24th part of a day

Глава пета
symbolizing one 24th part of a year or 15 days. The rest was simple arithmetic, a day was taken for a year, a
month for 30 years and a year for 360 years adding up to a total of 391 years plus 15 days. Beginning in the
spring of 1840 there were frequent reminders of the approaching terminus. In April the Signs began printing a
regular column called THE NATIONS. This column incorporated news on political development in the Near
East. The August 1 issue included two articles by Litch. These reviled the very day when the “locust” nation of
178
Turkey could be expected to fall, August 11.
XII. Chart illustrating Miller’s interpretation of Rev 9:5, 15
150 + 391
1299 A.D. 1840 A.D.
July 27 Aug. 11
5:14.3 News from the east
When August 11 passed there was an abrupt pause in Millerite periodicals on the subject. The Millerites
179
waited for news from Turkey with keen interest and expectancy of an Armageddon. For a time there
l80
appears to have been a moment of disquiet. No world war broke out. Nothing spectacular happened.
The editors promised that Miller would later comment on charges that he had falsely expected the close of
181
probation. For a few weeks there was no "THE NATIONS" column in the Signs of the Times. Then steamers
from the Old Continent brought detailed information of events in August and "THE NATIONS" reappeared in
182
the Signs. Litch together with the other editors was able to publish news of prophetic fulfillment around
August 11.
5.14.3.1 Wallah, hillah, tillah
At first the reports were given with caution, and only after several months do they ring with a note of
triumph. In October Litch entitles his article "The Battle Begun" and but he is not yet able to date the
183
fulfillment to the day. Yet the fighting appeared to seal the prophecy. In January it is asserted that on the
very day, August 11, Turkey had brought itself to the brink of a war by imprisoning the special envoy of the
184
allied Western nations in Alexandria. Mehemet Ali had proven unable to accept the conditions placed
on him, instead he had answered:
"Wallah, hillah, tillah" (an oath by God) I will not yield a span of the land I possess, and if war is made
185
against me, I will turn the empire upside down and be buried in its ruins. Mehemet Ali.
The words "Wallah, hillah, tillah" must have appeared exciting to the Millerites as they were repeated
186
numerous times in various articles over the issue. This was the decisive stroke. Litch
concluded that he was now "entirely satisfied that on the 11th day of August -- Ottoman supremacy
187
departed. In spite of the fact that later judgment has failed to single out the
Millerite dates as outstanding for the history of Turkey or of Islam, the Millerites experienced this "fulfillment" as
a boost for their morale and it certainly proved an effective means of creating interest in prophetic time
l88
keeping. For more than a year the Signs frequently included news on the Eastern question in "THE
NATIONS" column.
5.14.4 Comments on the fall of Turkey

Глава пета
Judgment on the impact of this interpretation must be guarded. It would be a mistake to regard this
interpretation as one which converted thousands to Millerism. This idea would not explain Litch's dismay over
189
people's reluctance to accept the events of August 11 as a "convincing" "sign from heaven." Likewise it is
an error to call it a bitter disappointment. No one was to know that in spite of Turkey's troubles and
occasional military skirmishes she was to continue as an independent state and that August 11, 1840 would
not later be one of the important days in Turkish history. Subsequently after initial uncertainty the
interpretation was promoted with reasonable enthusiasm. The fact that there was no strong challenge to
Miller's and Litch's theory indicates that the hesitation and disappointment was not all that serious. In spite of
the fact that Lich later renounced his Turkish interpretation it did add credibility to the whole of Millerite
exegesis. Miller was able to pronounce his view of the year-day method: "That God has used days as figures
I90
of years, none will or can deny." The system of dates and periods was considered sealed and confirmed.
However, one must agree with Anderson that Litch never allowed events to test his theory. It appears that if
Mehemet All overthrew the Sultan, "or if the Sultan maintained his throne with outside help, the prophecy
was still 'fulfilled.' If a general war broke out, or if it did not, the prophecy was still 'fulfilled.' Whether probation
closed on August 11, 1840, or appeared to continue -- the fall of Turkey was still a sign that the door of
191
mercy would close. -- The hypothesis was not falsifiable."
5.15 Observations on Miller's chronological points
Without apocalyptic chronology there would not have been a Millerite revival. Chronological exegesis was
the driving force of the movement. The "burned over district" found something new and exiting in the
complex and intriguing calculations on the date of the parousia. One can give some reflections.
Firstly, as has been stated earlier, the chronology leading to 1843 was based primarily on the Old Testament.
The only New Testament calculation leading to 1843 was that of Luke 13:32; and even that was paralleled
with the text in Hosea 6. It is possible that the Old Testament, due to its great diversity of historical and
prophetic material, suits the Millerite type or prophetic speculation better than the New Testament.
Secondly, the "proofs" rest on technical points like Biblical and historical chronology, which probably gave
an aura of learning to the system. Laymen were unable to check the validity of the points themselves and
emotional factors and the rhetoric of the argument may have led many to decide in favor of Miller.
Thirdly, all of Miller's calculations contain mathematical error. Miller overlooked the non-existence of a year
192
zero witch indicates that no Millerite before 1844 did his homework thoroughly.
193 l94
Fourthly, some of the proofs are not time-prophecies at all, or their actual intent is turned upside down.
The power of religious convictions has rarely followed the paths of logic.
Fifthly, Millerites appear to have believed that a multiplication of weak points makes one strong point. Thus
the argument was multiplied into 15 points some of which were justly ridiculed by opponents and brushed
l95
aside by thoughtful supporters.
Finally, one should observe the strong points of Miller's arguments. They were presented persuasively. There
were no hidden meanings or occult references. The meaning of every symbol, or every important word was
196
argued with biblical texts, often much to the shame of Miller's opponents. The method employed widely
accepted principles of historicism. Millerite study of the Scriptures combined skills in calculation and
detective work - an enterprise that could be taken up without previous expertise or resources of a library,
and yet it provided the hearer with the joy of new discovery. Motivation sprung from the urgent relevancy of
the message. The hermeneutic simplified human history into straightforward phases leading up to the
present. It may be added further that the nearness of the Second Advent gave no time for pondering

Глава пета
197
intellectually knotty problems. The spirit of Miller's work was one of discovery. The following words describe
Miller's experience when he first harmonized Bible prophecies, and it was shared by many of his followers:
The Bible was now a new book. It was indeed a feast of reason: all that was dark, mystical, or obscure to me
in its teachings, had been dissipated: from my mind, before the clear light that now dawned from its sacred
pages; and O how barite and glorious the truth appeared. All
the contradictions and inconsistencies I had before found in the Word were gone; and although there were
many portions of which I was not satisfied I had a full understanding, yet so much light had emanated from
it to the illumination of my before darkened mind, that I felt a delight in studying the Scriptures, which I had
198
not before supposed could be derived from its teachings.
5.16 Summary
Miller's exegesis has been generally misunderstood and misinterpreted in literature. For William Miller it was
extremely important not to base his chronological argument on one text only. The ultimate "proof' for him was
that there were fifteen "proofs". He always preferred to present as many of his chronological expositions as
possible.
For a modern reader many of Miller's chronological claims appear naive, but in the 19th century they were the
logical outcome of the prevalent method. Miller proved himself a master of visual and numerical imagination.
He plays with numbers, years and thousands of years, with sevens and multiples of seven. The interpretations
have a kaleidoscopic quality in which a little change of angle turns on new colors. Among the ideological
followers of Miller Seventh-day Adventists have mainly cherished Millerite views on Daniel and the Apocalypse,
while the Jehovah's Witnesses have kept up a number of Miller's other chronological expositions.
Footnotes
1.
There were several compilations of such prophecies.Hervey 1843/b includes the largest Millerite collection of
prophecies on the fIrst Advent. Bliss 1842/a, 114f. lists time prophecies that were believed to have been
fulfilled: 120 years of Noah (Gen 6:3), 7 days of waiting for the flood (Gen 7:4), 400 and 430 years of Egyptian
bondage (Gen 15:3; Ex 12:41), 40 years in the wilderness (Nu 14:34), 65 xears for the fall of Ephraim (Isa 7:8), 70
years of the exile (Jer 25:11), and 490 years to the death of Christ (Dan 9:24). See also VOP 1842/j, 41-43.
2.
Miller 1845. Cf. VOP 1842/j, 45; Miller 1842/b, 4-5; Nichol 1944, 33. Cf. Rasmussen MS 1983, 34.
3.
SMV, 17f.
4.
Miller 1842/b, 4.
5.
Cf. chapter 5.
6.
Miller 1849, 11. Miller appears to refer in particular to Mede and sir Isaac Newton and Thomas Newton in this
context.
7.
See e.g. Bliss 1853, 2O7f; Miller 1842/g.
8.
Miller 1842/g, 22f.
9.
Miller 1842/_, 23. Cf. Shea 1982, 74-79 for modern argumentation which follows Miller's and old historicist
understanding of the year-day-method.

Глава пета
10.
Some Millerites and some non-Millerites did at times propose variants to the simple 1 day = 1 year
hermeneutic. Flemming, Apoc. Key, 20-22; quoted in Faber 1808, 14, gives an example. The system created a
prophetic calendar in which 1 month is 30 days and a prophetic year equals to 360 days instead of the 365
days of a regular calendar year. This made
prophetic calculation rather impressive: 1260 x 360 : 365 = 453600 : 365 = 1242 + 270 : 365 = 1242 yrs, 270 days.
11. VOP 18421j, 79-81.
12.
E.g. SMV, 27f.
13.
Bush 1844, 6.
14. VOP 18421j, 21£.
15.
VOP 1841, 167. See also Bliss 18421a, 52.
16.
Sandeen 1970, 288.
17.
The birth of Seventh day Adventism was dependant on the Seventh-month moment. SDA writers have
concentrated on the exegesis of this period. With the exception of Bates 1847 this mistake can be traced to
the earliest SDA accounts on Millerism. Bates 1847 highlighted several of Miller's prophetic interpretation:"
However, the desire to give an explanation to the great disappointment at the end of the seventh-month
movement made more prominent writers like J.N.Andrews and J. White narrow the interest down to Daniel
8:14. A concentration of these ideas can be found in e.g. Loughborough 1905, 1909; White 1911, 355-390.
Froom's and Nichol's investigation established the notion. E.g. PFF IV has 400 pages on Millerism, yet only a very
critical reader of pp. 721-737 would realize that Millerites believed in many things that are not elaborated on
at all. Likewise Nichol 1944 leaves some interpretations that Miller cherished to the appendix, pp. 522-524, with
a short comment on "secondary" proofs. Damsteegt [diss.] 1977 makes the same oversight which is also carried
on to non SDA scholarly works on Miller. Cf. Rowe [diss.1 1974. The inadvertent overlooking of things that were
essential for Miller but are irrelevant for Seventh-Day Adventism is repeated in the latest books and articles: E.
g. Maxwell "Preacher of the Advent" AR, Feb 11, 1982; Maxwell "The Legacy of William Miller" AR, Feb 18, 1982;
Reid "From
Despair to Destiny" Min, Apr, 1982; Gale 1975.
18.
Miller, undated [probably 1842] letter to Br. Copeland.
19.
Anon. "Mr. Miller", Maine Wesleyan Journal, Mar 20, 1840, p.2.
20.
Miller 1842/c, 97.
21.
SMV, 18.
22.
Cf. Rasmussen MS 1983, 22-51.
23.
E.g. Litch, Fitch, Bliss, Hervey, Hawley, and Bates published articles and books which included some of

Глава пета
Miller's points.
24.
E.g. ST May 1, 1841; June 1, 1841; April 26, 1843; May 24, 1843. MC Nov 18, 1842; March 17, 1843; June 8,
1843; July 20, 1843; Aug 31, 1843. French "Diagram of Daniel's Visions" ST Mar 1, 1841.
25.
See Appendix ll.
26.
Within Millerism certain ideas were popular at certain times. In 1840 the Eastern question was discussed with
great frequency. Then from the autumn of 1840 on there appear a number of articles on the 6000 years. This
subject was exhausted by the end of 1842 when an increasing number of articles on 2300 evenings and
mornings were printed.
27.
Anon. "Miller" ST May 15, 1840.
28. SMV, 18-30. See Appendix V.
29.
SMV, Cf. Appendix V.
30.
These five are: "I. 6000 years of the Hebrew text-- II. The seven times -- ID. The Great Jubilee -- IV. 2300 days
of Daniel viii -- V. 1335 days of Daniel xii -- We must therefore, if we read the Bible aright, near the termination
of all the prophetic periods." E.g. Anon. "Prophetic time" AH Feb 14, 1844.
31.
Miller, "Time, proved -- " ST Jan 25, 1843.
32.
Southard "Second Advent Believers," in Rupp ed. [1844), 668-691.
33.
The most important SMV's text for Rupp ed. representative summary of 1842/j, 32-53. of these was SMV.
Southard edited 1844, to stand as a scholarly and Millerite Adventism. See also VOP
34.
See Appendix IV
35.The most detailed discussions of the seven times theory are in Miller 1842/b, 250-263; SAM, 33-49 and VOP
1842/j, 32-39; 43-46. See also Miller 1842/e, 16; Litch 1842/b, 2:124-130; Bliss 1843/b, 66; Bliss 1843/f, 6f. Miller
"Reasons for Believing -- " TGC July 4, 1842; Plummer "The prophecy of Moses" ST May 17, 1843.
36.
Cf. Dan 7:25; 4:25 KJV.
37.
Miller 1842/b, 256.
38.
Miller 1842/e, 16-18.
39.
Litch "Rise and Progress of Adventism" ASR May 1844. In Miller 1845, 1, the order is as follows: 1) Seven times;
2) 2300 days, 3) 1335 days.
40.
See e.g. Newton T. [1766], 9-12.
41.
KJV Bibles had Ussher's chronology printed in the margins and 2Chr 33 is dated 677 B.C. Several 19th

Глава пета
Century commentaries and at chronologies also follow this chronology. See e.g. Clarke n.d. II, 691.
42. SMV, 18f. See Appendix V.
43. SAM, 37.
44.
He also refers to Isa 7:8. SMV, 18.
45.
SMV, 18f. Hale makes the following comparison: Lev 26:14,18,27 match 2K 21:9-13, and Lev 26:1,2 equal 2K
21:2-8 and 2Chr 33:2-11. SAM, 38. Cambell created a variant of Miller's ideas. His ideas never reached
popularity among the Millerites, but they serve to illustrate the love they had for counting times. First Cambell
gave exact times for the four sins and punishments, 677 B.c., 607 B.C., 590 B.C., and 584 B.C., all related to
Millerite dates on the exile. He then added 2520 years to each one getting dates, 1843 for the first signs of the
end, 1913, for the battle of Armageddon, 1930 for the conversion of the Jews and finally 1934 for the millennial
jubilee. Cambell "Mr Cambell on the return of the Jews" ST June 15, 1840.
46.
Miller 1842/b, 251-256.
47.
Miller 1842/e, 20. While there is no direct Biblical evidence for such a deportation Ezra 4:2, 10 are cited as a
proof of deportations from the Northern Kingdom after 722 B.C. SAM, 41. Cf. Herrmann 1975, 215f.
48.
Cf. Clark n.d. 4:50-55.
49.
SAM, 38-40.
50.
Miller 1842/b, 256.
51.
Bliss 1843/e, 4; cf. Lk 21:24.
52.
Miller 1842/b, 262.
53.
SMV, 19.
54.
Bush 1844, 10.
55.
"What' suppose I come to you and get your understanding of the original text, will you ensure me that I
receive a better understanding from you alone, than I could have from flfty men, equally as good as yourself,
if not better, who did give us the sense in English, when they gave us the present translation? If you say Yes, I
shall then believe you have as much vanity, as you say the Adventists have assurance. And if you say No, then
when you read the original text only, with your judgment to understand and teach the English sense, and I
read it in the English text, I have fifty times the weight of judgment to yourself." Bush 1844, 9f.
56.
Miller was obliged to admit that something in his chronology was wrong. But he added "With respect to
other features of my views can see no reason to change my belief." Miller 1845, 34, 15. Instead he believed
that his opponents disproved themselves by their conflicting arguments and so confirmed his exegesis. See e.
g. Miller's letter to T.E. Jones, Nov 29, 1844; Bliss 1853, 280; Cf. Rasmussen 1983, 84f.
57.
Litch continues with the idea that the 2300 days of Dan. 8:14"is still the bulwark of the cause. Litch

Глава пета
"Restoration of the Kingdom to Israel" MC Nov 30, 1842,
58.
E.g. SAM, 33, calls the seven times "the fIrst of the prophetic periods, which are considered as main pillars in
the calculations of Mr. Miller." Cf. Anon, "The Seven Times of Lev xxvi: Why are they repeated four times." ST Jan
24, 1844. Bliss 1853, 71.
59.
Froom recognizes the problem and points out that even the marginal notes on Dan 9 in KJV Bibles make
the same mistake. There were also several renowned scholars, including Mr. Hales on, whom Miller heavily
depended in matters of chronology, who made the same error. PFF W, 791.
60.
E.g. SMV 19; Miller 1842/e, 27.
61.
Cf. e.g. Rad 1966, 14.
62.
SMV, 19.
63.
SMV 19.
64.
Miller 1842/e, 3.
65.
There is some inconsistency in the argumentation. This is due to the fact that some texts on the year of
release show six years of labor and release on the seventh (Ex 21:2; 23:10 as well as Jer 34:14b) while others
indicate release after seven years (Dt 15:1,2; Jer 34:14a). The former was applied by Miller to mean six
thousand years of sin with the seventh as freedom in heaven during the Millennium, and the latter to the
period of 2520 years.
66.
E.g. SMV 19f; VOP 1842/j, 67-84.
67.
SMV 19f.
68.
VOP 1842/j, 79-81.
69.
VOP 1842/j, 82f.
70.
See e.g. VOP 1842/j, 85-100.
71.
Burwell 1835, 166-170 has a section on sacred numbers. He bases his seven year prophecy on Leviticus and
begins the time from the fall of Samaria.
72.
Faber 1828 2:33-39.
73.
SAM 33; Miller 1949, 13-16; Litch "Review of Cambell of the Captivity of the Jews" ST Oct 15, 1840. See also
Cambell "Mr Cambell on the return of the Jews" ST June 15, 1840.
74.
See e.g. John Stevenson "God's Measuring Rods" Advent Harbinger and Bible Advocate June 9, 1849. This
article synchronizes the seven times with the 6000 years.

Глава пета
75.
Cf. "Seven" ABU 1234. Cf. Cambell "Mr. Cambell on the Mode of Computing the Time" ST July 15, 1840.
Cambell plays with the figure seven, the number of perfection. He describes seven priests, seven trumpets,
seven days, seven times, and proposes a 6000 year theory which approaches that of the JWs.
76. SMV, 20.
77.
Miller argued that a literal Sabbath should not be kept because all Jewish ordinances were cancelled and
because the Sabbath had become a symbol of the Millennium. VOP 1842/j, 160-162.
78.
SMV, 21.
79.
VOP 1842/j, 156-171; SMV, 20f.
80.
E.g. ST May 1, 1841; June 1, 1841; April 26, 1843; May 24, 1843. MC Nov 18, 1842; March 17, 1843; June 8,
1843; July 20, 1843; Aug 31, 1843. French "Diagram of Daniel's Visions" ST Mar 1, 1841. See also SAM for a chart
that with a combination of literal and prophetic times. Appendix VI.
81.
The main Millerite sources on the 6000 year chronology are SAM, 13-32; Cox 1842, 56-68. VOP 1842/j, 32-39;
157-171; Supplement to Miller 1842/b, 1-4. Especially Bliss was frequently laboring with Old Testament
chronogenealogies. See Bliss 1843/a, 4; 25-28, Bliss 1843/f, 10, and Bliss 1851. Jones "The Kingdom at Hand" ST
June 15, 1840; Litch "Reply" ST June 15, 1840, makes an interesting combination of prophecy and chronology;
Cambell "Mr Cambell on the mode of Computing the Time" ST June 15, 1840. Fleming "Review of Rev Dr.
Week's Lectures against the Chronology of Wm. Miller" ST Apr 12, 1843. One of the most detailed and extensive
articles is Anon. Dr. Jarvis No.4, The Chronology of the Bible" ST Aug 16, 1843. E.B.K. "Theory of Types No.1" ST
Mat 15, 1841 develops 6000 years into a speculative system involving a certain number of generations and
creation days which were believed to be 7 years long. B. "Six thousand years" ST Nov 22, 1843.
82.
Ussher's chronology was printed in many editions of the Bible and various commentaries. The general
nature of chronological speculation is reflected in bishop John Lightfoot's timing 0 the creation. Faithful to
Ussher he placed creation on Oct 22, 4004 B.C. at 9.00 AM., which led Brewter to comment, "Closer than this,
as a cautious scholar, the Vice Chancellor of Cambridge University did not venture to commit himself." Kaiser,
Classical Evangelical Essays, quoted in Geraty "The Genesis Genealogies as an Index of Time" Spectrum vol 6/1.
83.
VOP 1842/j, 36-39.
84.
VOP 1842/j, 170. Cf. ST Dec 15, 1840.
85.
SAM, 13.
86.
The problems of these calculations are reflected in Miller's on one of his charts of world history, "If this
Chronology is not correct, I shall despair of ever getting from the Bible and history, a true account of the age
of the world." Miller "A Bible Chronology from Adam to Christ," in Himes ed. VOP 1842/j, 36-39; MC Nov 22, 1842.
87.
Por the sensitivity of this subject see e.g. H[imes] "Opposition on the M.E. Church-Zion's Herald vs. 'Millerism'"
ST Jan 24, 1844.
88.
B1iss 1843/a, 25.
89.
VOP 1842/j, 170.

Глава пета
90.
Вliss 1843/а, 29f. Anon "Six Thousand Years" ST Nov 22, 1843.
91.
E.g. Chamberlain 1805, 93, expresses the nearness of the 6000 years of history.
92.
Bliss 1943/а, 3.
93.
E.g. SAМ 25-7, counts the crucifixion from the Book of Daniel.
94.
E.g. VOP 1842/j, 39.
95.
Litch 1842/с, 14.
96.
A fascinating example of post disappointment harmonization is in John Stevenson "God's Measuring Rods"
Advent Harbinger and Bible Advocate June 9, 1849. This article advises to take first 7 х 360 = 2520. Then the
result is deducted from the perfect number: 6000 - 2520 = 3480. This is
Anno mundi date for Judah getting into trouble. Then 70 ears more lead to the beginning of the exile, Annо
Mundi 3550. From this one can count forward another 70 years to the end of the exile or 390 years of sin
backward [according to Ez. 4:1, 8] to 3160 Solomon's death and Jeroboam's rebellion against God. With the
help of 1К 6:1,37 one could count further back to the time when the Temple was build and to the time of the
exile etc.
97.
“Chronology” АBU 322-347 looks like а modernized version of Мillеritе discussion on the 6000 years. There
are references of various calendar systems of the ancient Near East. The creation is dated 4026 В.С. the birth
of Christ Oct 1, 2 B.C. and the reader is left to expect the eschaton in 1975 [the article is written in 1969].
98.
There is nо wide selection of sources for the Millerite jubilee interpretation: Miller 1842/е, 28; Spalding 1841,
30; Anon. "The Ordinance of the Year Jubilee" ST May 1, 1841. On the speculative side there is а series of
articles in the Signs by Е.В.K. "Theory of Types Nos. 1-5" ST Mar 15 - Sep 1, 1841, which combines the Jubilees
into world chronology. See also Сambеll "Mr. Саmbеll on the Mode of Computing the Time" ST July 15,
1840, which included as count of world history, seven millenniums in 140 Jubilees.
99.
Miller 18421е, 28.
100.
Miller 18421е, 28; Sмv, 21f.
101.
SMV, 22.
I02.
Anon. “The Ordinance of the Year Jubilee" ST May 1, 1841.
10З.
SMV, 22.
I04.
Miller 18421е, 29f.
I05. SMV, 22.

Глава пета
I06. SMV, 22.
107.
E.g. Clarke n.d. vol 1, 868.
108.
0nly historical critical approach might in а case like this suggest either two originally different feasts, or two
different sources for Miller's proof texts, Lev 23:15,16 and Dt 16:9. Cf. e.g. Driver 1895 [ICC], 195f.
I09.
Cf. e.g. Clarke n.d. vol 1, 606, comments on Lev 25:10.
110.
E.g. Cunningham 1840, xii, makes а time calculation of 3430 years based on the jubilees.
111.
Reeves 1976, 8; Reeves 1969, 40, 86, 89.
112.
АВU 97Н.
11З.
The best Mi11erite sources are e.g. VOP 1842/j, 32-39; Mi11er 1842/с, 45-75; Mi11er "Evidence -- Chapter
IV" ST Ju1y 15, 1841.
114.
Mi11er 18421с, 46.
115. SMV, 26.
116.
Miller 1842/с, 59.
117.
SMV, 22f; 26f.
118.
Miller 1842/с, 56.
119.
Miller 1842/с, 56-73.
120.
Miller 1842/Ь, 39-75; Miller 1842/f; VOP 1842/j, 46-53; Miller 1842/g; SAМ 42-59; Fleming 1842, 39-60; Hawley
1843, 62-93; Litch 1843; Litch 1842/а, 74-87; Litch 1842/с, 22-62; Hervey 1843/а, 40-108; Bliss 1842/а, 101-111;
Litch 1842/Ь, 1:112-144; Bliss 1842/Ь, 26-46; Bliss 1842/с; Bliss 1843/d; Bliss 1843/f, 5f. There are a1so severa1
articles on the subject e.g. Miller "Cleansing of the Sanctuary, А Letter from Wm. Miller" ST Apr 6, 1842; В. "The
70 Weeks and 2300 Days of Daniel" ST June 22, 1842; Anоn. "The Sanctuary" ST Feb 1, 1842. Inquirer "The
Sanctuary" ST Feb 15, 1842, Mar 1, 1842. Anоn. "Is Antiochus Epiphanes the hero of Daniel's Prophecy" ST Dec
28, 1842; Evan "The Prophecy of Daniel" ST Mar 8, 1843; Anоn. "The End of the Prophetic Periods" ST Apr 5, 1843.
Anоn. "Dura-tion of Earthly Kingdoms" ST Мау 29, 1843. Hawley "The Doctrine of the Second Advent
Sustained by the Voice of the Church" ST June 7, 1843.
121.
Litch 1842/Ь, 1:115.
122.
This is reflected in the heavy debates there were over the topic even along the Millerites. See e.g. VOP
1842/j, 47.
123.
Cf. Zevit "Exegetica1 Implications of Daniel 8:1, 9:21" VT vol 28 (1978).
124.
Miller 1836, 47.

Глава пета
125.
VOP 1842/j, 47. Hale suggested that Daniel's reference to Jeremiah's 70 years shows that he misunderstood
Daniel 8 somehow to mean that the 70 years would not terminate at the expected time. Therefore Gabriel
came to explain the matter and to give the correct place for Jeremiah's seventy as wel1 as the 490 and 2300
years. Hale 1846, 43.
126.
Hale 1846, сh. 1.
127.
VOP 1842/j, 47.
128.
"The Hebraists all admit that the word determined, in our English version, does signify 'cut off.' Not one has
disputed it." Litch МС vol 4 nо. 25. In Litch 1842/Ь, 1:133 three "Hebraists," Fu1son, Вush and Seixas, are
mentioned by name. Cf. Bliss 1851, 15.
129.
Litch 1842/Ь, 1:128-137.
1З0.
РFF IV, 209.
131.
PFF IV, 210.
132.
E.g. Mede, the father of historicism.
IЗЗ.
Bliss 1842/а, 103.
1З4.
Сf. e.g. Lacoque 1979, 194f.
135.
Damsteegt 1977, 30.
IЗ6.
Сf. e.g. Clarke n.d. vol II, 732. РFF IV 396f. Litch used "Rollin's chronology" Litch 1842/Ь, 1:135.
137.
This was also used to prove the unsuitability of Antiochos. "It it, however, very evident that Antiochos
Epiphanes could not bе the little horn predicted, for the little horn was to stand against the Prince of Princes,
and Antiochos died 164 years before the Prince of Princes was born." Bliss 1842/а, 104.
IЗ8.
E.g. Miller 1842/Ь, 71.
1З9.
Litсh 1842/Ь, 1:138-140.
140.
Litch 1842/Ь, 1:140.
141.
VOP, 47.
142.
Miller 1842/f, 4-7. Even though Miller again assembled а number of texts to prove his points many of his
proofs [especially under point 6] appear irrelevant on closer examination. After the disappointment the
interpretation of the Sanctuary symbol was hotly debated between mainline Millerites and Sabbatarian
Advent. It was then contested that 145 'times the word "sanctuary" is used and not а single time applied to
the earth. Everyone knows, they claimed, that the earth is neither а dwelling place of God nor yet а holy or
sacred place, and that the sanctuary must be а definite object. Similar argument was repeated against the

Глава пета
church being the sanctuary. A Н Aug 2, 1850, рр. 28-30.
14З.
Мillеr 1842/f, 7f.
144.
Miller 1842/f, 8f.
145.
The debates with Stuart, Colver, Morris, True, Brown and Dowling were reprinted in book form. Miller 1842/g;
Bliss 1843/d; Bliss 1842/а; Litch n.d./d; Litch 1842/с.
146.
Miller objected to the specific date until a fortnight before the time.
147.
E.g. Linden 1984. This prophecy still appears to be of vital significance for Seventh-day Adventism. E.g.
Linden 1982.
148.
Some of the most detailed and thorough discussions of this prophecy are in Miller 1842/b, 86-114; Miller
1842/a, 30-36; Miller 1842/g; Litch 18421a, 57-73; SAM 82-95; Storrs 1843, 1-53; Bliss 18421a 78-101; Bliss 1843/d;
Bliss 1843f, 4f. See also VOP 1842/j, 46-53. Litch 1842/b, 2:121-124; Litch 1842/c, 62-80; Cook 1843, 50-62; Hervey
1843/b, 40-108; Anon. "1260 Years of Papal Triumph" ST Feb 1, 1843; Anon. "End of the 1260 days" ST July 19,
1843.
149.
Sandeen 1970, 5-7, 13. For a Millerite view sees e.g. Miller, "Remarkable Fulfillment of Prophecy, Relating to
France and the two Witnesses" VOP 1842/j, 203-211. PFF IV, 60, 67, 71, 78 etc. Cf. White 191.1, 265-288.
150.
Cf. PFF II 751-782.
151.
Miller 1842/b, 104.
152.
Litch 1842/b, 1:105-109.
153.
PFF Iv, 396.
154.
See e.g. Ball 1981, 199, 208f.
155.
Anti-Roman sentiments had been boosted by the continuously increasing proportion of Roman Catholic
immigrants. See e.g. Gaustad "Introduction" in ROA xi-xx; PFF IV, 275f describes the rise of anti-Catholic
literature and feeling including popular horror stories (like Maria Monk's Awful Disclosures of Six Months in a
Convent) and popular journals.
156.
The Millerites applied the 1260 year time regularly on the papacy. Outside of Millerism several expositors
included Islam into their interpretation. There are only few Millerite examples of this. Anon. "Chronology of the
Mohammedan Power" ST Aug 15, 1840 recalculates 1260 84 years short by some chronological device, then
starts the prophecy with 622 for the beginning of Islam and concludes it in 1843.
157.
Miller 1842/a, 31-36; VOP 1842/j, 49-53; Miller 1836, 72--75; Bliss 1842/a, 79.
158.
E.g. Bliss 1842/a 79-80. Bliss' argument is an excellent illustration of Millerite polemic. Morris had objected to
Miller's date without suggesting another in its place. "Morris does not know when the time begins, so he cannot
know when it does not begin."

Глава пета
159.
Bliss 1842/a, 86-90.
160.
Litch 1842/b, 1:101.
161.
Anderson "The Millerite Use of Prophecy" in Numbers & Butler 1987, 89.
162.
SAM 59-81; Miller 1842/g; Bliss 1843/d. See also VOP 1842/j, 46-53; Litch 18421b, 2:121-124; Litch 18421c, 81-
90; Cox 1842, 48-55.
163.
Miller 18421b, 104; 113.
164.
VOP 18421j, 48. See also Litch 1842/b, 2:128.
165.
VOP 18421j, 48.
166.
SAM 74.
167. VOP 1842/j, 26.
168.
See e.g. Miller 1842/b, 76-85; Miller "Evidence -- Chapter IV' ST July 15, 1841.
169. SMV, 30.
170.
Litch 1842/a, 72.
171.
The main source is Litch 1842/b, 2: 132-227; See also Miller 1842/b, 115-126; Litch 1838; Bliss 18421a, 166-176;
Bliss 1843/f, 8f; Fleming 1842, 71-73; Fitch 1841, 41-49. For Articles see Litch "Fall of the Ottoman Power in
Constantinople" ST Aug 1, 1840; Litch "Events to Succeed the Second Woe" ST Aug 1, 1840; The editorial column
"THE NATIONS" between April 15 and Aug 1, ST 1840; Anon. "The Six Trumpet Period". ST May 1, 1840. Litch "Fall of
the Ottoman Empire, or Ottoman Supremacy Departed" TGC Aug 4, 1842. Anon. "Blow Ye the Trumpet in Zion
Sound an Alarm in My Holy Mountain" ST May 311, 1843.
172.
Arasola 1955, 233.
173.
Anderson "The Millerite Use of Prophecy" Numbers &Butler, 1987, 78.
174.
Litch lamented the lack of interest people showed in the 11th of August. Litch 1842/b, 2:200. Anderson "The
Millerite Use of Prophecy" in Numbers & Butler 1987, 86.
175.
Miller was accused of having predicted the close of probation at this time. His only written comments on
tills subject are ambiguous, even if he was clear on expecting the "Great Battle" in 1839 or 1840. See e.g. Miller
"A Lecture on the Signs of the Present Times" ST Mar 20, 1840, and Miller 1842/b, 115-126, which are reprints of
older texts. He may have done so in his sermons as Lltch is asked "Do you believe with Mr. Miller that the day of
grace will close in the month of August." [Litch] "Events to Succeed the Second Woe" ST Aug'1, 1840. See also
Anon. "The Closing up of the Day of Grace" ST Aug 1, 1840, which comments on the events to be expected in
August: "This must certainly close up the gospel dispensation. In conclusion we solemnly warn our fellow
Christians of all sects and denominations to trim their lamps." See also Anon. "Sixth Vial" ST May 1, 1840.

Глава пета
176.
Litch 1838 is the earliest source which indicates the month of August. "Turkish government should be
overthrown in A.D. 1840 -- some time in the month of August -- The prophecy is the most remarkable and
definite of any in the Bible." He did not publish an exact day until August. Litch 18421a, 111-125. Anderson "The
Millerite Use of Prophecy" in Numbers & Butler 1978, 78-91.
177
SMV, 27. Cf. Anderson "The Millerite Use of Prophecy" in Numbers & Butler 1987, 84.
178.
Litch "Events to Succeed the Second Woe" ST Aug 1, 1840. Litch also had another article in the same issue.
This is less dogmatic on time:" But whenever it is fu1filled, whether 1840, or at a future period --. "Fall of the
Ottoman Power in Constantinople" ST Aug 1, 1840.
179.
L[itch] "The Battle of Armageddon" ST Sep 1, 1840.
180.
E.g. the editors collected some material which reflects embarrassment into Anon. "The Fall of the Ottoman
Power in 1840" ST sep 1, 1840.
181.
Editorial ST Sep 15, 1840. There appears no clear later comments on the issue, but Miller "Miller's Letters
No.8" ST Sep 1, 1840, explains the dilemma with the claim that all that need be said is that mercy must close
before the actual advent.
182.
E.g. "The Nations" ST Oct 1, 1840 describes vividly how "The steamship Britannia with captain Woodruff
arrived" with the news that "Things are fast tending to a general conflict."
183.
His article tells about "alarming intelligence" from the Near East. It claims that "Beyrout" is "in ruins" and that
on Aug 15, "the Sultan, by his ambassador [sic] -- signed the death warrant of the Ottoman power." Litch "The
Battle Begun!" ST Oct 14, 1840.
184.
[Litch] "Turkey and Egypt" ST Jan 15, 1841, Feb 1, 1841.
185.
Litch "The Fall of the Ottoman Power" ST Jan 1, 1842.
186.
E.g. [Litch] "Turkey and Egypt" ST Ian 15, 1841 and Feb 1, 1841. Litch 1842/a, 124.
187.
Litch "The Fall of the Ottoman Power" ST J an 1, 1842.
188.
Litch 1842/a, 115-132. Cf. White 1911, 334f; Smith 1944, 502-7; Arasola 1955, 228-34; SDABC VII, 794-796.
189.
Litch 1842/b, 2:200; MC quoted in The Western Midnight Cry, Jan 20, 1844; Anderson, "The Millerite Use of
Prophecy" in Numbers & Butler 1987, 86.
190. VOP 1842/j, 52f
191.
Anderson “The Millerite Use of Prophecy" in Numbers & Butler 1987, 87.
192.
Samuel Snow, the starter of the seventh-month theory have drawn attention to the mistake.
193.
E.g. Proof I, Lev 26.

Глава пета
194.
E.g. Proof III, Eze 39.
195.
There were Millerites who wondered about the legitimacy of Proof I from Lev 26. E.g. Litch "Restoration of
the Kingdom to Israel" MC Nov 30, 1842.
196.
Cf. e.g. White's later reflections on Miller's persuasive skills. White 1911, 405f.
197.
Cf. Harrison 1979, 202.
198. Miller 1845, 12.

Глава шеста
FESTAL CALENDAR AND
SANCTUARY TYPOLOGY
Miller's original exegesis did not provide any exact day for the parousia. In fact it is
possible that some of Miller's early comments on the time gave a span of four years.
1
He expected the Second Advent between 1843 and 1847. When he began
preaching the definition was narrowed down to "on or before," and "about the year
2
1843." As the time approached Miller specified the time in even greater detail: -
I believe that time can be known by all who desire to understand and to be ready for
his coming. And I am fully convinced that some time between March 21st, 1843, and
March 21st, 1844, according to the Jewish mode of computation of time, Christ will
come, and bring all his saints with him; and that then he will reward every man as his
3.
works shall be.
This general position was followed in practically all early Millerite charts, periodical
4
articles, and books. towards the end of the revival new measures were used to
define the time exactly to the day. It has already been pointed out that this was no
longer Miller's exegesis but rather that of Snow and Storrs. The specific date for the
parousia was October 22 in 1844. It is the purpose of this chapter to outline the
exegesis, which provided such unequivocal measure for Christ's return.
Froom suggests that pressure from opponents forced Miller's scholarly associates to
5
study anew their ideas of the Jewish year. While this may be correct, one should not
overlook the possibility that the Millerites had a great personal interest in studying and
restudying every imaginable prophecy in order to find, if possible, new details on the
6
time. It was no accident that their sixteenth general conference made a decision to
7
place greater emphasis on the time.
http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/Miller6.htm (1 of 19)12/13/2007 10:41:26 AM

6.1 Two Jewish calendars
As attention was drawn to the Jewish year, the first result was a correction in their
previously proclaimed prophetic times. Miller held to the regular rabbinic calendar
with his dates for the termini of the Jewish year March 21. His associates, Bliss, Litch,
Himes, Southard, Hale and Whiting aroused doubts about the correctness of his view.
They submitted the proposition that all prophecies should be counted with the
Karaite dating, the "original Jewish calendar" which followed a lunar-solar year and
8
barley harvests as indicated by the Pentateuch.
Now there is a dispute between the Rabbinical, and the Caraite Jews, as to the
correct time of commencing the year. The former are scattered all over the world,
and cannot observe the time of the ripening of that harvest in Judea. They therefore
regulate the commencement of the year by astronomical calculations, and
commence with the new moon nearest the vernal equinox, when the sun is in Aries.
The Caraite Jews, on the contrary, still adhere to the letter of the Mosaic law, and
commence with the new moon nearest the barley harvest in Judea; and which is one
moon later than the Rabbinical year. The Jewish year of A.D. 1843, as the Caraites
reckon it in accordance with the Mosaic law, therefore commenced this year with
the new moon on the 29th day of April, and the Jewish year 1884 will commence with
the new moon in
9
next April 18/19.
The correctness of this information has later been challenged. Without the sources
that the Millerites used, it is impossible to evaluate properly their information on the
10
Karaite calendar. At any rate many preferred a calendar that began with barley
11
harvest rather than solstice.
The Law of Moses requires that the Passover shall be at the full moon, when the barley
harvest is ripe, which varies from the last of March to the first of May. -- This year the
first full moon came on the 3d of April; and whether the barley was then ripe, and the
true Passover then kept; or whether it was not observed till the following moon, we
have no certain means of knowing. As the first full moon came so late this year, it is
probable the Caraites then observed the Passover unless the harvest was more than
12
usually late.
Miller was never overly keen on changing his views. After a disappointment in March
13
he wanted to tone down the enthusiasm on the time. He was satisfied simply to
keep the

parousia iminent. However, many of his supporters were not prepared to settle for
14
immediatism. He was unable to keep the movement on his side. From late 1842 the
Millerites had been preoccupied with the exact definition of the date, and they
passed through a series of disappointments in the spring of 1844. Millerism was read
for its last turn. The final stage of the
movement sustained prophetic calculations based on the Karaite calendar.
6.2. A correction of the calculations
The movement focused now on chronological problems. Among the Millerites there
were especially two men who bear respon-sibility for much of the discussion on the
various calendars as well as on typology. George Stores and Samuel Snow published
article after article on these subjects.
6.2.1 The time of the crucifixion and 1844
One of the first changes that Snow and Storss suggested was based on a restudy of
Daniel 9 and in particular the date of the crucifixion. (Dan 9.26, 27) Snow put together
Daniel's words, the "Messiah be cut off' and “IN the middle of the week he shall cause
the sacrifice and oblation to cease." His interpretation was that the ceasing of the
sacrifice was a prophecy on the crucifixion. Christ died in the middle of the 70th week
and brought an end to the Jewish sacrificial system. The death of Christ was rebated
15
into 31 A.D.
Snow’s labors with the time of Christ's ministry proved valuable exegesis of Daniel 8:14.
He believed that Christ began his ministry in the autumn of 27 A.D. The crucifixion
would then fall exactly three and a half years later to the spring of 31 A.D. The
confirmation of this, Snow claimed, was found in the chronological work of William
Hales, who had contested that the only Friday Passover within the years of Christ's
16
ministry was in A.D. 31. Snow continues that if the rest of the 70th week is added to
this date the 490 year prophecy ends in the autumn of A.D. 34, a year's correction to
Miller's suggestion 24. This was the time when the persecution of the church was
believed to have begun and the Jewish dispensation came to an end. The Gospel
began to reach the Gentiles.
6.2.2 Correction for the year zero
With his A.D. 34 date for the end of the 490 years Snow had in fact rectified the
mistake that Miller made with the year zero. The terminus of the 2300 years was now
moved to the mathematically correct 1844 instead of 1843. Snow does not show full
awareness of the simplicity of the problem. He uses astronomical charts which give
17
him the correct result in B.C. to A.D. calculations. Snow's conclusions would in fact

have given another full year for the disappointed Millerites. Most of their prophetic
expositions could have been improved to extend from spring 1844 to spring 1845.
However, after the final disappointment in the autumn of 1844 there was no energy
left for further chronological revisions.
6.2.3 Autumn speculation
Snow took his dates for the crucifixion with extreme seriousness. If the middle of the
last prophetic week of Daniel 9 lies in the Spring, then the terminus a quo and the
terminus ad quem must both be in the Autumn. This in turn made it possible for Snow
to time the beginning of the 2300 days from the Autumn of 457 B.C. and its end to the
Autumn of 1844, into the month of Tishri, on to the Day of Atonement, which was
almost to the day half a year from the time of the Passover in Nisan. Snow’s God was
18
"an exact timekeeper." He wanted to make the Millerite prophetic system perfect to
detail.
I believe this argument to be based on correct premises, and to be perfectly sound.

What then is the conclusion? It must certainly be this. -- the remaining part of the 2300
days -- brings us to
19
the autumn of A.D. 1844.
6.2.4 Creation in the autumn
Snow got involved also with other aspects of Miller's theory. He was a firm believer in
Miller's 6000 year theory. He made the suggestion which now appears curious but
which at the time was published in all seriousness. "Now this long period -- the aion of
age of this world began in autumn." In proof of an autumn creation Snow offered
three considerations. First, "it has been the concurrent opinion of chronologers, both
Jewish and Christian." Secondly, man had to subsist on a diet of fruit and seeds (Gen
1:29), and it was only reasonable to assume that these would be ripe in the autumn.
His third reason refers to an Egyptian calendar which had been held "since creation"
20
and the creation to the autumn.
We have the very best of reasons for believing that 6000 years allotted for this world in
21
its present state, began in the month of Tishri.
6.2.5 The seven times
Snow extended his chronological work also to Miller's "prophecy of Moses."
The seven times of Moses, in Lev 26, amount to 2520 full years. They began with the
breaking of the power of Judah, at the captivity of Manasseh (B.C. 677). This is the

time that has always been given as the date of their commencement. In that year, in
fulfillment of the prediction in Hos. v.5, Israel and Judah were both broken. But as it
must necessarily require considerable time to remove the ten tribes, and bring
foreigners to fill their place -- we cannot well date Manasseh's captivity earlier than
autumn of that year. About one half, therefore, of the Jewish Year B.C. 677, must be
left out of the reckoning. This will necessarily extend down the period of the 2520
22
years, down to the autumn of A.D. 1844.
23
Snow found support for his exposition of the seven times. However, the simplicity of
his argument on the seven times reveals a lack of awareness of the complexity of the
problems in Biblical chronology.
6.3 Daniel 8:14 and sanctuary typology
An the exegetical corrections that (Snow) proposed focus on one idea. The parousia
must fall in the Autumn of 1844, to be more exact, between the sunset of October 21 -
and the sunset of October 22. This theorem sprang from a novel typological
interpretation of Daniel 8:14 which must be discussed in greater detail.
6.3.1 Development of Millerite interest in typology
The origin of Millerite typological interest can be found in several sources. One,
though probably not the most important, is Miller's concept of the prophecies relating
to the Jewish rather then Gregorian calendar. This idea involved technical detail
which many Millerites loved. It gave the adherents confidence in the logic and
scientifically sound foundation of their faith. Interest intricate problems of calendars
escalated gradually towards the end of 1843. The Jewish calendar Jewish feasts and
typological and eschatological-meaning of various symbols took more and more
space in Millerite periodicals.
Before Miller had given any serious suggestions on the Jewish Year Himes published a
24
reprint of Spalding's book on prophecy. This not only included detailed expositions
of apocalyptic prophecy and a skillfully prepared argument for the non-return of the
Jews, but it also presented the notion that the Spring feasts of the Jewish year point
forward to the first advent of Christ while the Autumn feasts, the Day of Atonement
and the Feast of Tabernacles, symbolize the second advent.
There is also a third early source on typological interpretation. This is a detailed series
25
of five articles by "E.B.K." These articles speculate on the eschatological meaning of
various elements in the Jewish Sanctuary service. They do not include discussion on
chronological symbolism which was to become so important for Snow yet they entice
the reader to consider the prophetic significance of Levitical institutions.

6.3.2 The autumn feasts
In May 1843, when there were several months to the end of the Jewish year," Miller
brought into the open Spalding's idea on the eschatological import of the Jewish
feasts.
All the ceremonies of the typical law that were observed in the first month, or vernal
equinox, had their fulfillment in Christ's first advent.
The feasts and ceremonies in the seventh month or autumnal equinox can only have
26
their fulfillment at his second advent.
After Miller's comment this hermeneutical idea as frequently discussed and

27
elaborated on in Millerite periodicals. Even though Miller did nothing to pursue the
exegetical implications of the idea it is the real inception of the seventh month
28
movement.
According to this concept the spring feasts, Passover and the feast of weeks, met
their antitypes at the beginning of the Christian era. This had always been the
traditional Christian view: the Passover was accepted as the type of the events
related to the crucifixion, and the feast of weeks as the type of the Pentecost. It is a
fairly logical step forward to regard the autumn feasts, the day of the atonement and
29
the feast of tabernacles, eschatological.
6.3.3 The seventh month
Miller had played his role in introducing an eschatological dimension into the autumn
feasts. Other Millerites began laboring with the Jewish festal calendar. There may
even have been some, who looked with special interest upon the seventh month the
30
Jewish year in 1843. As they did this they were in fact knowingly or unknowingly
borrowing an idea which Sir Isaac Newton had asserted more than a century earlier:
The temple is the scene of the visions, and the visions in the Temple relate to the feast
of the seventh month: for the feasts of the Jews were typical of things to come. The
Passover related to the first coming of Christ, and the feasts of the seventh month to
his second coming: his first coming being therefore over before this Prophecy was
31
given, the feasts of the seventh month are here only alluded unto.
Samuel Snow combined Miller's idea on the meaning of the Jewish feasts with Miller's
well known explanation of Daniel 8:14. In the spring Snow did not propose an exact

32
date but rather the autumn in general. However, in the late summer of 1844 he had
done further research on the festal typoi and he was perfectly convinced that Daniel
8:14 pointed forward to a universal Day of Atonement, the cleansing of the heavenly
33
sanctuary.
XIII. Chart illustrating Snow's typological interpretation of the Levitical

festal calendar
FEASTS
Spring Autumn
Feast of
Day of
Tabernacles
Passover Feast of weeks
Atonement
Millennial
Crucifixion Pentecost Parousia marriage feast
of the la
TYPOLOGICAL MEANING
6.3.4 Details of the sanctuary typos
For some reason Snow or other Millerites never realized that they were no longer
interpret Daniel when they got involved with the festal calendar. The interpretation
was rather that of Leviticus 16. Daniel's prophecy was only secondary. It showed the
year, but the day was indicated by the Jewish festal calendar. Leviticus 16 was
presented as the primary interpreter of Daniel 8, while in fact focus was on an
eschatological Jom Kippurim which was timed with Daniel 8:14.
Proof for this exegesis was found in the King James translation. Dan 8:14 included the
words "then shall the sanctuary be cleansed" and Lev 16:19 describes one of the
rituals of the Day of the Atonement: "And he shall sprinkle of the blood upon it [the
altar] with his finger seven times, and cleanse it, and hallow it from the uncleanness of
the children of Israel." Both texts had a relationship to the sanctuary and both texts
34
mentioned a cleansing.

Snow was simply suggesting that the OT economy of sanctuary services and
especially the feasts were a straightforward prophecy of various aspects of the first or
of the second advent of Christ. He described how the heavenly high priest would
come out of the cleansed sanctuary and bless the waiting congregation exactly on
the Day of Atonement.
The high priest went into the most holy place of the tabernacle presenting
the blood of the victim before the mercy seat, after which on the same day
he came out and blessed the waiting congregation of Israel. -- Now the
important point in this type is the completion of the reconciliation at the
coming of the priest out of the holy place. The high priest was a type of Jesus
our High Priest; the most holy place, a type of heaven itself; and the coming
out of the high priest a type of the coming of Jesus the second time to bless
his waiting people. As this was on the tenth day of the 7th month, so on that
day Jesus will certainly come, because not a single point of the law is to fail.
35
All must be fulfilled.
Snow’s argument had a certain degree of logic. He only needed to ask when the
paschal type was fulfilled. Most of his readers would have agreed readily that it was
on the regular time of the Passover sacrifice in the afternoon with Christ as the
Passover lamb. During the Passover celebration the first fruits of the harvest were
offered on the morning after the Sabbath. This in Snow view was fulfilled with Christ
rising from the dead in the morning. Snow tried to prove that every imaginable
symbol was fulfilled literally also in relationship to time. Likewise the Christian day of
Pentecost with the bestowal of the Holy Spirit and the mass conversion, which was the
first gathering of harvest to the kingdom of God, happened on the literal Jewish
harvest festival, feast of the weeks with events matching those of the type.
The law of Moses contained a shadow of good things to come; a system of figures of
types pointing to Christ and his ~kingdom. See Heb. x.1; Col. ii. 16, 17. Everything
contained in the law was to be fulfilled by him. -- Not the least point will fail, either in
the substance shadowed forth, or in the time so definitely pointed out by the
observance of the types. For God is an exact time keeper. See Acts XVII.26, 31; Job
XXIV. 1; Lev XXlV.-4, 37. These passages show that TIME is an important point in the law
36
of the Lord.
This belief in the exact fulfillment "in regard to time" was taken, were possible, even to
the time of the day.
From the language of Leviticus xxiii.32 [from even unto even shall ye celebrate your
Sabbath], I think the hour of the Advent will be at the evening of the tenth day; thus
God may design to try our faith till the very last moment; and "he that shall endure

37
unto the end, the same shall be saved."
However, they never paused to wonder whether the evening was to be Palestinian or
North American time.
6.4 Objections to Snow typology
XIV. Chart illustrating Snow's view of the typological meaning of the autumnal Jewish
feasts
THE TYPE: ANTITYPE:
Parousia
Day of Atonement 10th of the seventh month, Tishri
October 22, 1844
Marriage feast
of the lamb
Feast of Tabernacles 15th of the seventh month, Tishri
October 27,1844
38
Snow’s ultraistic speculation was slow to catch the support of Millerite leaders. The
Millerite papers admonished their readers to avoid everything foolish and fanatical.
While objections to Snow views were printed in the Advent, Herald Snow and Storrs
began publishing their own paper. Snow and those who backed him regarded the
39
spontaneity of the revival as a certain sign of the work being from the Lord.
Litch published several points to show his disapproval of Snow’s doctrine. He felt that
there are no grounds for claiming that the decree to rebuild Jerusalem was given in
the autumn of 457 B.C. Litch argued further that there was no proof of Christ
beginning his ministry in the autumn as John 2:13 shows that soon after Christ's ministry
had begun there was the Passover. He did not excepted the typology of Snow. As he
pointed out, there was no reason to claim that Christ can only come back at the end
40
of the 2300 days. However valid Litch's counterar-guments may have been, they
did little to turn the tide. One after another the Mi!lerite leaders embraced new
typological interpretation of prophecy. The people were counting time according to
the Jewish calendar. And as the month of Tishri began Miller and Litch also accepted
41
the evidence. Southard published his acceptance in the Advent Herald.
The weight of evidence that the Lord will come on the tenth day of the seventh

month is so strong that I heartily yield to its force, and I intend, by the help of the Lord,
42
to act as if there was no possibility of mistake.
6.5 Midnight Cry
The final crowning point to prove that the argumentation on Leviticus 16 and Daniel 8
was correct came from Matthew 25, the parable of the ten virgins. Christ was not only
presented as the high priest coming out of the sanctuary but according to the
parable as the bridegroom, The bride, the church, had been waiting for - the arrival
of the groom in the spring while he in fact would come in the autumn.
How long the vision? Unto 2300 evening-mornings.' An evening, or 'night,'

then, is half of one of those prophetic days. Here then we have the
'chronology' of Jesus Christ. The tarrying time is just half a year. When did we
go into this time? Last March or April. Then the latter part of July would bring
us to midnight. At that time God put this cry into the harts of some of his
servants, and they saw, from the Bible, that God had given the chronology of
the tarrying time, and its length. There it is, in the 25th of Matthew. 'At
midnight there was a cry made, Behold the Bridegroom cometh; go ye out
to meet him.' "Here we are - the last warning is now sounding. 0 heed it ye
43
virgins. Awake, awake, awake.
Even the waiting time of half a year from spring 1844 to the autumn was seen in
prophecy. The Day of Atonement was a day of waiting and soul searching. In the
morning trumpets were blown, and in the evening the blessing was received. This
formed the final confirmation of the autumn expectation. Morning to evening was
half a day, in prophetic time this was half a year. The spring expectation was the
blowing of trumpets in the morning and the "midnight cry" led to the preparation to
meet the bridegroom/high priest half a year later in the autumn symbolized by the
44
evening.
The exegetical elements, apocalyptic prophecy from Daniel, sanctuary typology, a

parable of Jesus, were all put together into a package which aroused unforeseen
interest in prophetic interpretation. This exegesis is also the trademark of one of the
most memorable disappointments that a large group of people have ever
experienced, and even though it differed in many ways from traditional historicism, it
marks the beginning of decline in the popularity of this system of prophetic exegesis.
6.6 Excursus, background to typology
Typology has a background distinct from that of general historicism. The Christian

church has from its beginning seen many Old Testament images and passages as
45
types and prophecies of Jesus Christ. As one looks back further one finds a pattern
in the writings of the Old Testament. The prophets were the first to use typology. As
Israel was facing national disasters "they looked for a new David, a new Exodus, a
new covenant, a new City of God: the old had become a type of the new and
46
important as pointing forward to it." This pattern was taken up by the NT writers who
saw the Old Testament as a prefiguration of the Christ-event. The number of types
47
found is vast.
48
This view of the types has not passed unchallenged. It presup-poses "the conviction
49
of the unchanging nature of God" as well as an assurance that the past acts of
God "will be repeated on a scale greater and more wonderful than that of the
50 51
past." Such conviction was part of the first Christian faith.
6.6.1 New Testament typology
The typology of the NT is both horizontal, referring to historical fulfillments, and vertical,
illustrating things considered as heavenly realities. An example of horizontal typology
is in 1Cor 10 where Paul regards things from the Exodus and wilderness itinerary as
symbols of various things in Christian experience. "These things happened as types
[tupoi] for us, that we should not crave evil things, as they craved" and "Now these
things happened to them as examples [tupikos] and they were written for our
52
warning, upon whom the end of the ages has come" (w. 6,11). It was this horizontal
typology that Snow employed in his calculations of the day of the end. Some of the
clearest examples of vertical typology are found in the book of Hebrews.
53
Modem scholars usually disassociate itself strongly from this form of typology. There is
no reason to discuss the vertical typology any further as it was not important for the
prophetic calculations in question until the birth of Seventh-day Adventism.
The New Testament thus sowed the seeds for both historical and heavenly antitypes.
It is not necessary here to cover the background of typological hermeneutic through
54
the centuries. The views vary from the illustrious allegories of Origen through the
55
medieval quadrica to the more sober exegesis of the Reformers. During the period
of Protestant orthodoxy "Types were regarded as OT facts which were ordained by
56
God to adumbrate or foreshadow aspects of Christ or the Gospel in the NT." This
view has in succeeding centuries been accepted as
fife traditional understanding of biblical typology. It is still regarded as the true
57
concept on the subject by many with a Biblicist view on the Scriptures.
6.6.2 Cocceius and Marsh

Within protestant Biblicism there were two main lines of prophetic typology. On one
58
extreme there was the so-called Cocceian school with an elaborate and
59
imaginative exegesis "impregnated with typology." Sensus ailegoricus was so
important for Cocceian interpretation of types that Harnack's term
"Biblicalalchemy" [given for Origen's exegesis] suits perfectly some of this fanciful
60
expositions. On the other extreme there was the Marshian typology representing a
61
reaction from the prevalent undisciplined method. Marsh looked for Scriptural
sanction for each type and gained fair scholarly but little popular support for his
62
method. However, Cocceian typology was prominent in Britain and North-America
63
until mid--nineteenth century.
6.6.3 North American concepts
Even though the scholarly nineteenth-century commentaries promoted the sober

Marshian typology, popular books and pamphlets applied typology to any number of
aspects within the sphere of Christian life. It turned the Bible into a "vast volume of
oracles and riddles, a huge book of secret puzzles to which the reader has to find
64
clues." Often little account of actual history was taken.
Another feature of American typology is its interest in the tennini technici of the
sanctuary, the sacrifices of the feasts types which became so important for the
Seventh-month movement and later for Adventism. Yet the literature available for this
research has not provided any examples of Old Testament typology combined with
prophetic exegesis that would parallel with Snow's typological ideas.
Finally it is worth observing that the whole relationship that North American Christians
had to the OT in Miller's time would deserve further study. In many areas of life OT
65
terminology was regularly used. Sunday was called the Sabbath. Several
Pentateuchal laws from tithing to marriage laws and from the treatment of the poor
to the distinction of clean and unclean animals was regarded as normative or
66
valuable by some Christians. With such interest and authority invested in the Old
Testament it is to be expected that a detailed typology of various themes would exist.
6.6.4 Examples of sanctuary typology
The spirit of allegorizing typology is illustrated in words that come from a twentieth-
century fundamentalistic handbook on Messianic prophecies. The claim is that the
detailed "precise measurements and construction of the tabernacle-- with all the
intricate instructions as to the offerings and feasts" repay meditation more amply than
any other section of the Bible. "As we playfully and patiently study them, we find them

full of the deepest teaching concerning Christ and spiritual things, and of the wisest
67
councils for the right ordering of our daily life." The hermeneutic presupposed
spiritualization, a deepening, ethicizing, symbolizing or dematerializing of fairly
68
concrete religious terms.
The importance of sanctuary typology was reinforced with Bengel's observation:

"While two chapters in Genesis are given to tell us how the world was created, there
are sixteen chapters to tell us how the Tabernacle was constructed. For the world was
made for the sake of the Church, and the great object of creation is to glorify God in
69
the redemption and sanctification of His people." The interest frequently led to an
70
ignoring of reality. Earthly occurrences and objects were not only regarded as
foreknown by God but also as expressions of the details of the atonement, "the plan
of salvation," of the exact copy of heavenly things that pre-existed before the,
71
tabernacle and that still continue to exist. "The careful study of the types," claims
Habershon, "leaves no room for doubting that the whole Levitical economy was
divinely instituted to foreshadow the work and person of the Lord Jesus Christ
72
Himself." With this mentality it was natural to combine prophecy with typology.
73
Typological interpretation was also applied to historical narrative. Certain details in
the history of Israel or some individuals were though of as analogies of the life of Christ
74
or of the whole Christian dispensation. As a result numerous typological propositions,
far fetched, trifling or even contrary to the type and its context were presented. This
was due to the fact that the method had no fixed rules to guide its interpretations,
75
which left room on every hand for arbitrariness and caprice to enter.
The seventh-month movement of Millerism employed only a very narrow area of

typology in its prophetic hermeneutic. Many details of this typology can be
compared with the typological
themes that were presented in popular books. Snow’s ideas were criticized by Miller
and some others on the grounds that the principles did not stem from the Bible, in
other words being in line with the Cocceiau method:
6.7 Summary
Towards the end of Millerism a fresh interest in details of Jewish calendar and of
sanctuary typology of was aroused. The time was defined in a complex way which
made it impossible for laymen any more than preachers to control whether the basic
arguments were sound. The Millerite message was focused on a few issues only, in
fact only one issue - whether the Day of Atonement was a type of the Parousia to be
timed with the help of Daniel 8:14.

Such detailed prophetic association with the Pentateuchal sanctuary or the feasts
has a background in the Cocceian typology school of thought. Various Old
Testament types were researched and given historical or theological applications by
numerous contemporaries of Miller. Consequently it is no surprise to find Snow with the
aid of Storss bringing the ideas in and finding the Millerites prepared to accept them.
Footnotes
1.
Ford 1980, A-82.
2.
E.g. "Miller's Twenty Articles of Faith," ST May 1, 1841. The phrase is also typical of
Miller's early comments on the date. Cf. the title of one of the most popular Millerite
books: Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ about the
Year 1843 (Editions 1833, 1836, 1838, 1840, 1842). Cf. Bliss 1853, 77-80; PFF IV, 406f, 463,
789; Damsteegt 1977, 35f; Cross 1965, 291.
3.
SMV, 17f. ST Jan 25, 1843. Cf. PFF IV, 789.
4.
For charts see ST May 1, 1841; June 1, 1841; April 26, 1843; May 24, 1843; MC Nov 18,
1842; March 17, 1843; June 8, 1843; July 20, 1843; Aug 31, 1843. PFF IV, 794.
5. PFF IV, 795.
6.
Linden 1978, 59.
7.
The Conference was held in ""Boston in May 1842. Cf. chapter 2.5.
8. PFF IV, 796. Cf. de Vaux 1961, 189-194.
9.
Editorial ST June 21, 1843. PFF IV, 7%.
10.
E.g. Ford 1980. A-81-86. It would be exceptional for orthodox Jews to have the
beginning of Nisan later than March and the Day of Atonement in late October.
I1.
Cf. Lev 23:5-10.
12.
E.C.C. "The Seventh Month” AH Sep 21, 1844.

13.
Miller, Apology 1845, 24.
14.
Cf. Linden 1978, 60f.
15.
Snow MC May 2, 1844,353.
16. TMC Aug 22, 1844.
17.
Snow MC May 2, 1844, p. 353.
18.
Snow, "Reasons for believing" AH Oct 9, 1844.
19.
Snow MC May 2, 1844, p. 353. C.f. PFF W, 799.
20.
Snow "Prophetic Chronology" AH Aug 14, 1844. Cf. Snow "Reasons for Believing" AH
Oct 9, 1844. Rees MS, 1983, 12-14.
21.
Snow "Prophetic Chronology" AH Aug 14, 1844.
22.
Snow "Prophetic Chronology" AH Aug 14, 1844.
23.
E.g. E.C.C. The Seventh Month" AH Sep 21, 1844 lists with the great enthusiasm
every imaginable Old Testament text on the seventh month in an effort to show some
mystical union between the seven times of Lev 26 and the seventh month assumed to
be related to Daniel 8:14.
24.
Spalding 1796, 1841.
25.
E.B.K. "Theory of Types, Nos. 1-5" ST Mar 15 - Sep 1,1841.
26.
Miller, "Letter May 3, 1843" ST May 17, 1843.
27.
E.g. AH Sep 18, 1844, p. 52; Oct 2, 1844, pp. 70-72; MC Oct 11, 1844, p. 115.
28.
PFF IV, 795.
29.
Miller, "Letter, May 3, 1843" ST "May 17, 1843. Cf. Snow, MC May 2, 1844, 355.

30.
PFF W, 795.
31.
Newton 1733, 255; PFF II, 668.
32.
Snow "Our Position As to Time" ASR May 2, 1844, 125.
33.
Snow "Reasons for Believing AH Oct 9, 1844.
34.
KJV translates the Hebrew word misleadingly "cleansed." This is probably due to
LXX translation καθαρισθ•εται. The use of a concordance may lead to combine Dan
8:14 with Lev 16:19 which mentions the cleansing of the altar on the day of the
atonement.
35.
Snow, TMC August 22, 1844.
36.
Snow "Reasons for believing" AH Oct 9, 1844.
37.
Storrs "Go Ye out to Meet Him" AH Oct 9, 1844.
38.
Linden 1982, 17.
39.
PFF IV, 812-820.
40.
Litch "The Seventh Month" AH Aug 21, 1844.
41. PFF W, 820f.
42.
Southard, editorial MC Oct 3, 1844.
43.
Storrs "Go Ye out to Meet Him" AH Oct 9, 1844.
44.
Storrs "Go Ye out to Meet Him" AH Oct 9, 1844. Cf. PFF IV, 799-826.
45.
Modern Biblical research does not usually agree with the interpretations which
were common before the inroads of historical critical scholarship into OT
interpretation. See e.g. Ringgren 1956, 7.
46.
Por David see e.g. Jer 23.5; 33.15-18; Hosea 3.5; Amos 9.11; Isa 55.3f. Ps 132.11-17;

for Exodus e.g. Isa 52.4-12; Jer 16.14,15; 23.7,8; Hos 8.13; 11.11; Zech 10.10; for a city Ez
45; Dan 9.24-27; Jer 31.23; Isa 60.10. Cf. Rad EOTH, 17-39; Rad "Typologische
Auslegung Alten Testaments" EvT 12 (1952--1953); Rad "Typological Interpretation of
the Old Testament" Int 15 (1961).
47.
Rad EOTH, 34-36; Rad 1965, 363.
48.
Rad's view has been contested by e.g. Bultmann, who considers such thinking
"almost entirely foreign to ancient Israel," see EOTH 19, and Baumgartel, who regards
typology incompatible with modem historical thinking and for whom aT views are
irreconcilable with NT gospel, EOTH 157. Cf. Eichrodt in EOTH 224-245 who in turn gives
some justification for typological considerations; or Lampe 1957, 9-38 on "the
reasonableness of typology." Also Wolff EOTH 160-199; and Wolff "Old Testament in
Controversy: Interpretative Principles and Illustrations" Int 12 (1958), expresses the view
that logical approach is "indispensable." Cf. Barr "Revelation in History" IDBSup 746-749;
DaVidson 1981, 59-73.
49.
Foulkes 1958, 40.
50.
Foulkes 1958, 8.
51.
Bultmann "Prophecy and Fulfillment" in EOTH, 19.
52
Cf. e.g. Rom 5.12-21; 1Pet 3.18-22.
53.
E.g. Rad 1956, 367. "Typological exposition of the kind practiced in Protestantism
from the time of the Reformation down to that of Delitzsch can never be revived. Too
much of what it took for granted, not least its underlying philosophy of history has
proved untenable, and the gulf between It and ourselves has become so wide that
no great profit could be expected from any discussion of it."
54.
See e.g. Fairbairn 1857, ''book first" for an overview of the history of typology.
55.
Luther insisted on taking seriously the literal meaning of the Word and from that
starting point looked for a Christocentric, typological understanding. He believed that
the OT "Pointed- forward to Christ WA 12:275; Althaus 1966, 96. For Calvin see e.g.
Institutes 2.9.3; 2.10.4, Davidson 1981, 31.
56.
Davidson 1981, 32f.

57.
E.g. Lockyer 1973.
58.
After Johannes Cocceius (1603-1669). Fairbairn 1864, 27-
59.
Brown "Hermeneutics" p. 613, quoted in Davidson 1981,
60. Harnack n.d. vol I, 114f.
61.
A Marshian method of typology was named after Herbert Marsh (1757-1839),
bishop of Peterborough. "By what means shall we be able to determine, in any given
instance, that what is alleged as a type was really designed for a type? The only
possible means of knowing that two distant, though similar historical facts were so
connected in the general scheme of Divine Providence that the one designed to
prefigure the other, is the authority of that book in which the scheme of Divine
Providence is unfolded." Marsh himself is pre-critical in his hermeneutic. See Marsh
1828, 372. Cf. Fairbairn 1864, 32-44; Davidson 1981, 33-37.
62
Even Marsh's solution is problematic if one considers the possible "Biblical types":
Adam (Rom 4:11; 1Cor 15:22); Melchizedek (Heb 8); Sarah and Hagar, Ishmael and
Isaac, and by implication Abraham (Gal 4:22-35); Moses (Gal 3:19; Acts 3:22-26);
Jonah (Mt 12:40); David (Ez 32:24; Lk 1:32); Solomon (2Sam 7); Zerubbabel and Joshua
(Zech 3,4; Hag 2:23); preservation of Noah and his family in the ark (lPet 3:20); exodus
(Mt 2:15); the passage through the Red Sea, the giving of manna, Moses veiling his
face, the water flowing from the smitten rock, the serpent lifted up for healing in the
wilderness (lCor 10); Joh 3:14; Rev 2:17). Fairbairn 1864, 40f. Some sacrifices and feasts,
at least the Passover, should be interpreted as "Biblical types". Franks n.d. [19181, 15f.
The OT itself gives no explanation for the various rituals. Cf. Vriezen 1958, 291f; Wallace
1981" 4f.
63.
See e.g. introductions in Habershon n.d. ["The Types not Fanciful"]; Taylor 1635, 1-5;
White [F.] 1877, 1-3.
64.
Lampe 1957, 31.
65.
This is in line with the Calvinistic/Puritan tradition of North America.
66.
Unilateralism lies behind these concepts. Lampe 1957, 17.
67.
Lockyer 1973, 343. Cf. White [F.] 1877, 3, "Every part of the sacred structure, from
the Golden Chest-- down to the smallest pin or cord which fastened the whole to the

ground is replete with instruction."
68
Daly 1978, 4.
69.
Bengel as quoted in White [p.] 1877, 3.
70. Cf. Lockyer 1973, 343-476.
71.
Cf. Harnack n.d. vol I, 320.
72
Hanbershon 1915, 12.
73.
E.g. Guild found no less than forty-nine typical resemblances between Joseph and
Christ, and seventeen between Jacob and Christ. One of these was Jacob's being a
supplanter of his brother which Guild made to represent Christ's supplanting death, sin
and Satan. Guild 1626, quoted in Fairbairn 1864, 30. Cf. e.g. Lampe's comments on
the interpretation that the scarlet cord of Rahab at Jericho served as a token of the
blood of Christ. An example stemming from the church fathers. Lampe 1957, 33.
74.
E.g. Law 1855 (rep. 1967), 97-151; Habershon n.d.; White [F.], 1877, 120 and in
passim.
75.
Fairbairn 1857, 31f.

Глава седма
MILLER'S HERITAGE
CONCLUSIONS
7.1 The power of prophecy
Millerism proves the impact that prophetic exegesis may have. The calculations of a
man whose mind was loaded with historical events and who was able not only to
"repeat almost any passage" of Scripture, but also to "name the exact place, book,
1
chapter and verse" proved convincing to thousands. Miller must be viewed within
the context of historicist exegesis. His interpretations were the logical absolute of
2
popular Biblicism. This gave the revival enormous potential for growth.
7.2 The nature of Miller's exegesis
The partisan character of books on Millerism has kept many aspects of Miller's
exegesis in the dark. It appears that his imagination was even more fertile than has
been recognized. In particular Miller played with one idea: the whole Bible is a
prophecy. Subsequently he found time-prophecies in all parts of the Scriptures from
the Pentateuch all the way to the book of Revelation. Fifteen of these prophecies he
called "proofs" of the parousia around 1843.
A description of these various time-prophecies is the primary contribution of this piece

of research. Miller counted the time of the Advent from Leviticus 26, the "prophecy of
Moses." He found the same length of time also in a typological interpretation of the
year of release, the prophecy of Gog and Magog, as well as that of
Nebuchadnezzar's madness in Daniel 4. The details were filled up with imaginative use
of historical and Biblical data.
One fundamental aspect of prophetic exegesis came from Biblical

chronogenealogies. The weekly cycle was turned into a prophecy of the world lasting
6000 years to be followed by the millennial Sabbath. Detailed compositions on
chronological detail were part of any Millerite's spiritual diet. There is also another

example of a thousand years for a day interpretation in Miller's writings, a pearl lying
3
deep in the waters of prophecy. This came from the two days of Hosea 6:1,2 and ,
Luke 13:32.
Miller also found a typological interpretation of the second advent in the Jubilee
feast. He expected the 50th Jubilee to announce the parousia.
Furthermore there were Miller's better known interpretations of Daniel 7, 8, 9, and 12.
These prophecies Miller combined with a chronological application of the number of
the Beast and turned them into a complex map of prophetic lines all concluding in
1843.
7.3 The Seventh-month movement
When the target year approached concentration on Daniel 8:14 increased with the
result that a polarization took place among the Millerites. The exegesis changed from
regular historicism into a combination of typology and historicism. The developments
that led to the birth of various Adventist churches, the Seventh-day Adventist church
as well as the Watchtower society are related to the attitudes that the various
factions within Millerism took to the seventh month exegesis. The specific date
provided by Snow 22nd of October 1844, is the real exegetical crux that determined
not only the future of the various post-Millerite denominations but also the future of
the historicist method.
7.4 New ways of prophetic exegesis
What is important to the history of exegesis as a whole is the fact that the whole
historicist method appeared to lose much of its appeal as well as its power to kindle
revivals after the great disappointment. Very few wanted to take the risks involved in
fresh time setting and identification with Miller. Those who did take the risk found it
difficult to arouse interest.
The situation in North America after Miller and in England after Irving and his
associates made it easy for John Darby to gain interest in his dispensationalist views.
Darby promoted immediatism referred to as the doctrine of the any-moment coming:
the invisible secret rapture first, and then, after the literal fulfillment of all unfulfilled
prophecies, the final coming of Christ. This expectation of the imminent advent, with
no obstacle in the way of Christ's return has proved to be the greatest attraction of
4
dispensationalist theology. There is no point in describing further details of the
development of historicism or in comparing and contrasting the theories related to
these successive conservative methods of prophetic interpretation. It should be
noted that the rise of dispensationalism was probably more dependant on the shame
of time setting than on clearer logic or more faithful adherence to the intend of the

Biblical writers.
7.5 The end and continuation of Millerism
Millerism had come to an end. With it historicism gradually ceased to be the only
popular method of interpretation. It was largely replaced by futurism and preterism.
Yet one must acknowledge that in fact historicism did not die with Miller. It still lives in
a modified and partly renewed form within the groups that have some roots in
Millerism. The fact that some of these groups are growing rapidly shows that the
method still has vitality. Miller's heritage is twofold. On the one hand he contributed to
the end of a dominant system of exegesis, on the other he is regarded as a spiritual
father by millions of Christians who have taken some parts of the Millerite exegesis as
their raison d'etre. Whether he would be happy to be so regarded is another matter.
Footnotes
1.
Anon. "The Honest Editor again" ST Apr 1, 1841.
2. Cross 1965, 320. Because most of Miller's opponents agreed with his method, and
because of Miller's Scriptural and historical information the clergy was careful not to
approach him but rather fired "their small guns at a distance." Anon. "The Honest
Editor again" ST Apr 1, 1841.
3.
Miller 18421c, 46.
4. Sandeen 1970, 63f.

XXX

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

XXX

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Глава първа

Millerism represents a Biblical interpretation that not only brought

Very few outside of former Millerites dared keep on using the

1.1 The Problem

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/1_introduction.htm (1 of 5)12/13/2007 10:38:42 AM

Furthermore, Millerism is a dramatic example of the impact that

By any standards Miller and his revival represent a noteworthy part

1.2 The scope of the research

Many aspects of Miller's interpretation are discussed only in a

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/1_introduction.htm (2 of 5)12/13/2007 10:38:42 AM

Admittedly a major section of interesting and informative

1.3 Comments on methodology

Attempts at organizing and interpreting other people's ideas are

It is important to be aware from the outset that some Old

It is also appropriate to note that even though the following pages

One of the methodological problems related to the study of

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/1_introduction.htm (3 of 5)12/13/2007 10:38:42 AM

to determine who wrote something first.

In a case of similar ideas between Millerites and non Millerites one

1.4 An overview of the contents

The fIrst part is a short background on Miller and Millerism.

Miller's exegesis is depicted from two angles. Firstly, to show the

In historical research the availability of sources is often a

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/1_introduction.htm (4 of 5)12/13/2007 10:38:42 AM

The largest collection of original Millerite material is found at

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/1_introduction.htm (5 of 5)12/13/2007 10:38:42 AM

Literature on William Miller is somewhat schizophrenic in picturing

There is no need for an extensive treatment of various facets in

2.1.1 Miller and the prophecies

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/2_background_1.htm (1 of 18)12/13/2007 10:39:31 AM

of the War of 1812 converted him back to the religion of his

In his hermeneutic Miller is obviously knowledgeable of and

2.1.2 Miller begins to preach

Miller's solitary studies brought results within two years. In 1818 he

2.2 Millerite message

Miller's revival, as Linden has observed, "shared many ideas

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/2_background_1.htm (2 of 18)12/13/2007 10:39:31 AM

rampant in the small communitive groups of ante-bellum

Be warned. Repent. Fly, fly for succour to the ark of God

2.3 Mass meetings and publications

There were two agents that the Millerites skillfully employed to

Towards the end of the movement several of these large meetings

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/2_background_1.htm (3 of 18)12/13/2007 10:39:31 AM

the phenomenal publication programme of the movement. In

2.3.1 The Organization and spread of Millerism

Miller's popularity grew rapidly with the help of publications and

2.4 Millerism and American religiosity

Since Jonathan Edward's "Great Awakening" in 1740, North

Geographically Millerism concentrated on the New England

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/2_background_1.htm (4 of 18)12/13/2007 10:39:31 AM

culminating year the revival may have had up to 50,000 followers

2.4.1 Popularity of millenarianism

Within nineteenth century North American Protestantism an

The Millennium was supposed to be very near. I fully

2.5 A significant change in Millerism

Christian enthusiasts have through the ages anticipated an early

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/2_background_1.htm (5 of 18)12/13/2007 10:39:31 AM

millennium. However, only rarely has the anticipation included an

A clear turn in the Millerite movement began at the sixteenth

Many Millerites were convinced that a careful application of

After a disappointment in March Miller hazarded no further

http://www.thegreatnews.net/End%20of%20Historicism/2_background_1.htm (6 of 18)12/13/2007 10:39:31 AM

2.5.1 The seventh-month movement