Chapter TwoCAN WE SEE OURSELVES IN HISTORY?A well known theologian pointed out some four decades ago that we do not have the luxury of undoing what our fathers have done even though our fathers had the freedom to take another course of action. Thus the past is present with us and has irrevocable finality. The less the past is known the greater the danger we will repeat what should not have been done previously.1 As a church, can we see ourselves in history? The Jews were content to perceive their whole existence in the light of a "nation" that was to make a temporal place for themselves and subdue all others. They hoped Messiah would do for the nation what the nation had not accomplished in many centuries. But their ears did not hear what Messiah said when He arrived. Far too many Seventh-day Adventists are content to see their place as an ever larger church with increasing acceptance around the world. If institutions of fame can be built and maintained and if government sponsorship can be obtained in far-off countries, we hope our place can be assured. Sufficient recognition will certainly prevent us from being classified as a "cult." But we forget Jesus was born in a stable. His humble beginnings would not please the norm of the world. There was a place in prophecy for Him to fill regardless of worldly reputation. His fame would not be built upon standards set by men. His credentials were to be found in His message. In a similar way Adventists were born in poverty. We must fully appreciate our credentials. At a time when we were not yet conceived, even before we were embryonic, but according to God's plan, devout men in different lands simultaneously were quickened to search the Scriptures. Under conviction, they were constrained to study and know about the second advent of Christ.2 The most prominent spokesman in the Western hemisphere was the farmer/preacher, William Miller, who we must claim as our forefather in the Advent faith. He reasoned that if the prophecies which have been fulfilled in the past provide a key to understanding those yet to be fulfilled, there had to be a literal second advent of Christ. And that advent centered around the text in Daniel: "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed" (8:14). The zeal, love and devotion which attended the preaching of the return of Christ in the early 1840s present a picture to be copied and put us to shame. Men of ability, wealth, and educational attainment took their stand with the cause. All moved forward with the firm and definite conviction that on October 22, 1844, Jesus Christ would appear in the clouds, return to this earth and take the righteous saints unto Himself into heaven. But it didn't happen. However, with the bitter disappointment the historical facts stood and nine years later, J. N. Andrews wrote in regard to the date of October 22: "The man does not live who can overthrow the chronological argument which terminates the 2300 days at that time."3 Before Miller took to the public platform, following fourteen years of study, he wrote in one of his many hundred letters his conviction which Adventists should appreciate today: The 1st proof we have, as it respects Christ's 2nd coming as to time, is in Dan'l, 8.14. 'unto 2300 days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed'—by days we are to understand years, sanctuary we under-stand the church; cleansed we may reasonably suppose means that compleat redemption from sin, both soul and body, after the resurrection, when Christ comes the 2nd time 'without sin unto salvation.'4 We should note especially that he says, "by . . . sanctuary we understand the church." This is uniquely important in understanding the final atonement, a work for God's people, the church, the New Jerusalem. Miller's understanding of the "church" came to him out of his Bible study. The DisappointmentHundreds of thousands of tracts, pamphlets and broadsides had been published. The last sermon had been preached. Debts had been paid and all accounts settled. It was October 22, 1844, the day Christ was to return. The morning came, the afternoon, and then the dark night and finally the clock moved past midnight. He did not return. The despair of the believers knew no bounds. Tears flowed freely. Hiram Edson, a leading believer of the time, passed through the experience. In a handwritten account he poured out his grief to be read with great sympathy by those who often glibly refer to the advent in our time. Can we appreciate their despair? Can we put ourselves in this history? Consider his account: The day then passed and our disappointment became a certainty. Our fondest hopes and expectations were blasted, and such a spirit of weeping came over us as I never experienced before. It seemed that the loss of all earthly friends could have been no comparison. We wept, and wept, till the day dawn. I mused in my own heart, saying, my advent experience has been the richest and brightest of all my christian experience. If this had proved a failure, what was the rest of my christian experience worth? Has the Bible proved a failure? Is there no God,—no heaven,—no golden home city,—no paradise? Is all this but a cunningly devised fable? Is there no reality to our fondest hope and expectation of these things? And thus we had something to grieve and weep over, if all our fond hopes were lost. And as I said, we wept till the day dawn.5 After the Disappointment the believers turned with deepened study to what actually happened in 1844—how type and antitype were to be understood. The conviction could not be shaken that God had been with the movement. The evidence had been seen on every hand in the changed lives. On the following morning, October 23rd, Hiram Edson with others, probably Dr. F. B. Hahn and O. R. L. Crosier, were together in prayer asking for light in their distress. Edson portrays their experience with deep meaning: After breakfast I said to one of my brethren, "Let us go and see, and encourage some of the br[ethre]n." We started and while passing through a large field I was stopped about midway of the field. Heaven seemed open to my view, and I saw distinctly, and clearly, that instead of our High Priest coming out of the Most Holy of the heavenly sanctuary to come to this earth on the tenth-day of the seventh month, at the end of the 2300 days, that he for the first time entered on that day the second apartment of that sanctuary; and that he had a work to perform in the Most Holy before coming to this earth, that he came to the marriage at that time; in other words, to the Ancient of days, to receive a kingdom, dominion, and glory; and we must wait for his return from the wedding ; and my mind was directed to the tenth ch[apter] of Rev. where I could see the vision had spoken and did not lie; the seventh angel had begun to sound; we had eaten the little book, it had been sweet in our mouth, it had become bitter in our belly, embittering our whole being. That we must prophecy again &c., and that when the seventh angel began to sound, the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament, &c. While I was thus standing in the midst of the field, my comrade passed on almost beyond speaking distance before missing me. He inquired, Why I was stopping so long? I replied, "The Lord was answering our morning prayer by giving light with regard to our disappointment." I talked these things to my br[ethre]n.6 It is this testimony of a man who went through the Disappointment that turns the Evangelicals off. They call this a "face saving" proposition. But is it reasonable that people who had wept all night because of sanctified grief at not seeing the Lord return should make up a hoax to foist off on their own friends and fellow-believers? Such a charge is illogical, heartless and unjustified. It will not stand up in the face of sacred history and the symbology given to the Jews and confirmed by the True Lamb on Calvary. Their disappointment did not prevent their further study. Fifteen months later, O. R. L. Crosier published in the Day Star Extra of February 7, 1846, a full treatment of the sanctuary services and their meaning. It was to this article that Ellen White made reference on April 21, 1847. She clearly endorsed Crosier's presentation with these words: The Lord shew[ed] me in vision, more than a year ago, that Brother Crosier had the true light, on the cleansing of the Sanctuary, &c; and that it was his will, that Brother C. should write out the view which he gave us in the Day-Star Extra, February 7, 1846. I feel fully authorized by the Lord, to recommend that Extra, to every saint.7 Today Crosier's presentation is known by only a few Adventists. It remains primarily a document in the archives, but it was based soundly upon the Scriptures and the pattern ancient Israel had understood for centuries. It contains a number of deep insights that Adventists need today. How Crosier Saw the LightIf every Adventist would study and grasp the importance of what Crosier said, there would be a revival in the church today. His presentation would cancel the doubt many seem to have about the unique place our church has to fill. Time has only enhanced the value of what he said. His article was over seven pages long, three columns wide and set in small type. Some of his key thoughts are listed here and numbered for easy reference:8
(1) "If the atonement was made on Calvary, by whom was it made? The making of the atonement is the work of a Priest; but who officiated at Calvary? (2) "The slaying of the victim was not making the atonement; the sinner slew the victim, Lev. 4:1-4, 13-15, &c., after that the Priest took the blood and made atonement. Lev. 4:5-15, 16-21. (3) "Christ was the appointed High Priest to make atonement, and he certainly could not have acted in that capacity till after his resurrection, and we have no record of his doing anything on earth after his resurrection, which could be called the atonement. (4) "The atonement was made in the Sanctuary, but Calvary was not such a place. (5) "He could not, according to Heb. 8:4, make the atonement while on earth, 'If he were on earth, he should not be a Priest.' The Levitical was the earthly priesthood; the Divine, the heavenly. (6) "Therefore, he did not begin the work of making atonement, whatever the nature of the work may be, till after his ascension, when by his own blood he entered his heavenly Sanctuary for us."
This article, although published nearly two decades before the Seventh-day Adventist Church was organized in 1863, continues to be of great importance. The increasingly aberrant theology in our church today cannot stand before the well-reasoned, Bible supported view of Crosier and endorsed by Ellen White. There is reason to believe when these fundamentals are understood by the church, it will be able to fill its appointed place—the Bride will "make herself ready" to be married. NOTES:
|
Home | Articles Index | Contents of This Book |