Featured Why does the SDA see Ellen White as a prophetess?

In those 1260 years (Historicist view of Protestant Reformers) the Bible is persecuted in sackcloth and ashes - banned proscribed for 1260 years - in the dark ages.

At the end of that time the printing press is invented and the Bible is translated into the language of the people - no longer possible for the papacy to ban it.

For 3.5 years during the French revolution - atheism not the Bible was the religion declared by the nations laws.

 

What is the justification for converting days to years?

How do we impose a "banning" on the Two Witnesses when this 1260 day period is said to be one of empowerment...not a lessening of power.

And how do you get 1260 years of "dark ages" to fulfill the interpretation?


Revelation 11

King James Version (KJV)

3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.


The 1260 days are an empowerment during which time the Two Witnesses prophesy. There is no "banning" of the Word of God here, in fact...


Revelation 11

King James Version (KJV)


5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.


...the Two Witnesses are invincible during this time, which can only mean that for 1260 years, according to your interpretation, the Word of God flourished in that which it speaks forth.

But Revelation 11 describes the Two Witnesses as being empowered, not banned during the 1260 days.

The interpretation has the exact opposite in view.

And this is the period where the Word of God would be dead fro 3 1/2 days/years.

But you have the Word of God made ineffectual in both periods.

The interpretation would at least have to have the Word of God flourishing with an invincible nature for the 1260 days before dying, which brings me to the next question...

...are you really saying you believe the French had the power to kill the Word of God?

And no, I don't allow anything French into my house. Not even the mustard.




God bless.

 

Try to think through your beliefs; excelling in regurgitating SDA mantras is not wisdom.

1. AFTER 3.5 years, the two witnesses are resurrected and taken up to heaven meaning they are not on earth. So the earth was left without the Bible

2. They were given power for 1260 days meaning they were either non-existent before or powerless

Can any serious thinking primate associate these two with scriptures for ANY part of history?
We all know Revelation is full of symbols but surely stretching illogic this far and ascribing it to Jesus is blasphemy

 

You are off topic here. I was only demonstrating the silliness of your logic.

OB said: Scripture is inspired, therefore it is relevant to me.
That is like saying, Because God spoke to Moses in a burning bush (inspired Scripture), he can speak in a burning bush to me; (it is just as relevant to me). And that is why you claim prophecy. That is the relevance. It has no relevance. Just as there is no relevance of God speaking in a burning bush to you there is no relevance in you have the prophetic gift which ceased in the first century.
Both are irrelevant.
"Because it is inspired; it is relevant," is one of the silliest arguments I have heard.

Likewise Bob you said a similar thing:
It is in the NT; therefore it is applicable. Nonsense!
Walking on water is in the NT. So walk on water Bob. It is applicable, just as applicable as claiming the prophetic gift. Both are not applicable. You do not have the prophetic gift (and neither did EGW). She had the prophetic like she had the power to walk on water. Both are in the NT Bob.

Your logic is astounding!!!

 

The SDA contains many conservative, evangelical beliefs. The problems I have with the SDA are: Their teaching that Sunday worship is or will be the mark of the beast. EW's "prophecies" that seemed made only to legitimize the distinctive beliefs of the Adventists. Had it not been for these supposed prophecies, the Adventist movement would never have recovered from the William Miller failure. These teachings are peculiar to the Adventists. I can find no trace of then in all of Christin history, or scripture.

Plus, if they are right about Sabbath worship, then that condemns the vast majority of Christians to perdition.

I think Bob is a good man. This is not meant as anything personal against him.

 

For SDAs,EGW is their authority and they will move heavens, lie, play dumb, reimagine history...and basically ANYTHING to avoid contradicting her. Don't be deluded by the countless verses they paste; all those are 'proof texts' they have in hand to support EGW lunacy

While an average Protestant has 24 Prophets to look to for inspiration from Scriptures, an SDA has 25 the 25th being EGW.

So when you see BobRyan an otherwise intelligent man spewing nonsense (such as preFlood genetic engineering) it is because he dreads defying that woman. Resisting her is resisting God. Imagine rejecting Pauline doctrine of justification.

 

Thank you for your post - your views are always welcome and never taken as ad hominem but always as sincere Christian observation.

I have started an entire thread dedicated to your question -- #1

We don't say Sunday observance is the mark of the beast rather we say it will be in the future.

If our prediction for the future does not pan out then we were wrong - but how can you present proof that the future does not include this fact - before that time?

If you have found one single doctrine in the Adventist church that was given to them by Ellen White - that too would be good to show.

So far no one one this thread has come up with one where they show that history actually supports their claim.

It would not take 5 minutes to come up with such an example with Mormons - so this should be a pretty easy test.

It the Protesting Luther were right it would condemn the majority of christians in his day - in the RCC.

If the Christian Paul were right - then it would condemn the majority of Bible believing people of his day in the Jewish faith.

If Noah were right in his day - it would condemn the majority of humanity of his day.

At what point is that argument - one that is conclusive against the minority view?

BTW- I don't take that sort of opposing view as a personal issue in fact I thank you for sharing it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

you have presented your vast knowledge of events pre-flood and God's prophet Ellen White presented what God showed her regarding the Gen 6 fact that "all flesh was corrupt" before the flood Gen 6:11-12

11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.


Some here on this board argued for the GMO amalgamation between species -- Angels - and -women in Gen 6 -- supposedly creating a new species of giants -- and of course that is nonsense.


you offer your own vast knowledge of that preflood time - and that is pretty much nonsense as well as we all know by now.


So now we have God showing us amalgamation of some sort corrupts all flesh before the flood ... and you claim this this proof that your vast knowledge of pre-flood conditions is the best.


To each his own.


in Christ,


Bob

 

That is the Historicist view and it is THE View of the Protestant reformation held for 300 years by Protestants.

One excellent example of this - showing why it was done is found in Dan 9 - the 70 weeks = 490 days - = 490 years of Dan 9 accurately predicted the first coming of Christ. So the day-for-year model has been tested and found to be accurate.

We see that same apocalyptic time-rule in apocalyptic literature such as Dan 7 , Rev11, Rev 12, Rev 13 -- all of them point to that same 1260 year period of dark ages.

During that 1260 year period we have this.

And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months. 3 And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.” 4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth.


They are prophesying under persecution - clothed in sackcloth.

DHK quotes Robertson admitting that this 1260 day period is the same in Dan 7, Rev 11, Rev 12, Rev 13
[FONT=&quot]DHK quotes Robertson
. Forty and two months (mênas tesserakonta kai duo). Accusative of extent of time. This period in Da 7:25; 12:7. It occurs in three forms in the Apocalypse (forty-two months, here and Re 13:5; 1260 days, Re 11:3; 12:6; time, times and half a time or 3 1/2 years, Re 12:14 and so in Daniel). [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Robertson -
"This period, however its length may be construed, covers the duration of the triumph of the Gentiles, of the prophesying of the two witnesses, of the sojourn of the woman in the wilderness." [/FONT]

in Christ,

Bob

 

Yes, I am aware of that, what I am asking though...is how it is justified.

From a Biblical perspective.

The following does nothing but present the views men have given.

Hate to say this, but I am not one profoundly impressed by the Reformation.

For one thing, Luther never intended a revolution, but a reform of the Catholic Church. And that is precisely what happened.

No sir, sorry, but there is a reason why the times in Daniel 9 are given a different length than a "week." That is due to the fact that "week" was the translation given to shabuwa` , which properly means "seventy sevens," and when Daniel understands the Biblical use of "seventy" in the first part of the chapter:


Daniel 9

King James Version (KJV)

1 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;

2 In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.


Daniel knew that it was seventy years in view. When we get to God's judgment here...


Daniel 9:24

King James Version (KJV)

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.


...in view are seventy sevens. Not seventy "weeks."

Another way we Biblically define this word is to compare it's usage, and I don't think we could find a better example than...


Genesis 29:27

King James Version (KJV)

27 Fulfil her week, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me yet seven other years.


Wouldn't you agree?

Doesn't this make more sense than trying to make figurative use meet a criteria that is not in the text?

While we might impose an understanding of seventy seven day periods by comparison of it's use, it doesn't make much sense to do so.

Seventy seven year periods make the best sense, and there is no way of creating a conversion formula by which we can change days into years. When Scripture gives a specific time, unless the text demands another interpretation, then we stick with what it says. And that the various methods of stating three and a half years also indicates the sevens as seven year periods doesn't hurt either.

Actually they make reference to three and a half year periods.

And I will focus on the reference to Daniel 7:


Daniel 7:25

King James Version (KJV)

25 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.


When we compare that with Chapter 9 we see...


Daniel 9:27

King James Version (KJV)

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


...we see that the same time is given to the Antichrist's breaking of the confirmation of the Covenant (which I view as the Covenant of Law).

The "week" is a seven year period and the final week, the Seventieth Week establishes that Antichrist will at the mid-point change his position in regards to the Covenant in view.

This correlates to another passage in Daniel:


Daniel 12:6-7

King James Version (KJV)

6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?

7 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.


Which correlates to all of these:


Revelation 11

King James Version (KJV)

1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.

2 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.

3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.


Revelation 12:6 and 14

King James Version (KJV)

6 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.


14 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.


Revelation 13:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

5 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.





The problem with making these time frames days and years is that you just can't do that and remain consistent.

No way to make "forty and two months" into over a millennia of time.

And all of these events are given in detail as occurring at the same time, so we see conflict with the interpretation, which is easily harmonized by keeping all of them as they were given which presents a timeline that goes like this:


The Tribulation is seven years, and is Daniel's Seventieth Week.

In the first 3 1/2 years we see Antichrist supporting the Covenant (which is without question the Covenant of Law as sacrifice and oblation are mentioned) and the Two Witnesses ministering.

When, as according to both Daniel and the Lord, the Abomination of Desolation stands where it ought not, that is, in the Temple, we have the death of the Two Witnesses and Antichrist demanding worship.

Part of Israel is preserved in the wilderness for 3 1/2 years while Satan and Antichrist persecute her.

That is the only interpretation that brings all prophecy involved into harmony.



Continued...

 

No, Bob, they are invincible:



Revelation 11

King James Version (KJV)


3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.

6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.


That they wear sackcloth is not because of persecution, it is over grief at the condition of the world.

They are the persecutors during the first half of the Tribulation:


Revelation 11:10

King James Version (KJV)

10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.

Which Robertson?

And am I to suppose that Robertson takes precedence over what Scripture states?

And...not trying to be a smart-aleck.

Because Robertson admits something...it is true?

Looks like he views it as three and a half years to me.

I would have to correct Robertson: the Ministry of the Two Witnesses and the preservation of the Children of Israel in the Wilderness...are not concurrent.

It is not until the Witnesses are killed that the restraint he is under is removed.

The Gentiles do not have triumph over the Two Witnesses, and the Temple is not defiled so long as their ministry endures.

And this correlates to Christ's teaching in Matthew 24, where the Abomination of Desolation is shown to be the catalyst for Israel's flight:


Matthew 24:15-16

King James Version (KJV)

15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:


We cannot impose the Ministry of the Two Witnesses at this point. It's impossible to have the Abomination of Desolation standing in the Holy Place and...Antichrist also tormented by the two Witnesses.

Sorry, but I view this as fanciful Catholic Doctrine.

And I might be being a little bit facetious on that, though still not trying to be a smart-aleck, lol.

Men don't confirm truth in Scripture, Scripture confirms truth in men, and there is not one of these men I see as having an authority above that which is found in Scripture.

God bless.

 

This is the Historicist view and it is THE View of the Protestant reformation held for 300 years by Protestants.

One excellent example of this - showing why it was done is found in Dan 9 - the 70 weeks = 490 days - = 490 years of Dan 9 accurately predicted the first coming of Christ. So the day-for-year model has been tested and found to be accurate.

We see that same apocalyptic time-rule in apocalyptic literature such as Dan 7 , Rev11, Rev 12, Rev 13 -- all of them point to that same 1260 year period of dark ages.


During that 1260 year period we have this.

And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months. 3 And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.” 4 These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth.


They are prophesying under persecution - clothed in sackcloth.

DHK quotes Robertson admitting that this 1260 day period is the same in Dan 7, Rev 11, Rev 12, Rev 13
[FONT=&quot]DHK quotes Robertson
. Forty and two months (mênas tesserakonta kai duo). Accusative of extent of time. This period in Da 7:25; 12:7. It occurs in three forms in the Apocalypse (forty-two months, here and Re 13:5; 1260 days, Re 11:3; 12:6; time, times and half a time or 3 1/2 years, Re 12:14 and so in Daniel). [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Robertson -
"This period, however its length may be construed, covers the duration of the triumph of the Gentiles, of the prophesying of the two witnesses, of the sojourn of the woman in the wilderness." [/FONT]


====================================

Day Year – and Methodists. Adam Clarke etc.

Methodists

Adam Clarke's commentary published in 1831 supports the interpretation that the little horn is Papal Rome by this comment "Among Protestant writers this is considered to be the popedom."[15]
He stated that the 1260-year period should commence in 755, the year Pepin the Short actually invaded Lombard territory, resulting in the Pope's elevation from a subject of the Byzantine Empire to an independent head of state.[16] The Donation of Pepin, which first occurred in 754 and again in 756 gave to the Pope temporal power of the Papal States. His time line, which began in 755 will end in 2015. But his introductory comments on Daniel 7 added 756 as an alternative commencement date [17] Based on this, commentators anticipate the end of the Papacy in 2016:
“As the date of the prevalence and reign of antichrist must, according to the principles here laid down, be fixed at A.D. 756, therefore the end of this period of his reign must be A.D. 756 added to 1260; equal to 2016, the year of the Christian era set by infinite wisdom for this long-prayed-for event. Amen and amen!" [18][19]

History

This view was recognized by the Jews[5] as seen in Daniel 9:24-27, and as seen in Jesus' use of the day-year principle in Luke 13 verses 31-33, and in the early church.[6] The day-year principle was first used in Christian exposition in 380 AD by Tychonius, who interpreted the three and a half days of Revelation 11:9 as three and a half years, writing 'three days and a half; that is, three years and six months' ('dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex').[7] In the 5th century Faustus of Riez gave the same interpretation of Revelation 11:9, writing 'three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months' ('Tres et dimidius dies tribus annis et sex mensibus respondent),[8] and in c. 550 Primasius also gave the same interpretation, writing 'it is possible to understand the three days and a half as three years and six months' ('Tres dies et dimidium possumus intelligere tres annos et sex menses').[8] The same interpretation of Revelation 11:9 was given by the later Christian expositors Bede (730 AD), as well as Anspert, Arethas, Haymo[disambiguation needed], and Berengaud (all of the ninth century).[8] Primasius appears to have been the first to appeal directly to previous Biblical passages in order to substantiate the principle, referring to Numbers 14:34 in support of his interpretation of the three and a half days of Revelation 11:9

.[9] Haymo and Bruno Astensis "justify it by the parallel case of Ezekiel lying on his side 390 days, to signify 390 years ; — i. e. a day for a year. — ".[10] Protestant Reformers were well established on the day/year principle and it was also accepted by many Christian groups, ministers, and theologians.[11][12][13]

Others who expounded the Historicist interpretation are John Wycliffe, John Knox, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, Phillip Melanchthon, Sir Isaac Newton, Jan Huss, John Foxe, John Wesley, Jonathan Edwards,[14] George Whitefield, Charles Finney, C. H. Spurgeon, Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Albert Barnes, E. B. Elliot, H. Grattan Guinness, and Bishop Thomas Newton as exponents of this school.[15]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-year_principle

============================================

how is it that all of these classic Protestants

John Wycliffe, John Knox, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, Phillip Melanchthon, Sir Isaac Newton, Jan Huss, John Foxe, John Wesley, Jonathan Edwards,[14] George Whitefield, Charles Finney, C. H. Spurgeon, Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Albert Barnes, E. B. Elliot, H. Grattan Guinness, and Bishop Thomas Newto

are "catholic" in your view?

Do you have some actual historic source showing that Catholics hold to historicism that points to the Catholic church as the beast and persecuting power for 1260 years of the dark ages??

I find your logic "illusive" at that point.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Do you really want to skip the content of the last two posts and play link pong concerning my view that Historicism is Catholic in nature?

God bless.

 

I am not deluded, I assure you. I was simply pointing out that the SDA do hold some views in common with conservative evangelicals.

 

That is the Word of God according to scripture in Zech 4.

And the Word of God is invincible - though burned banned and proscribed during the dark ages.



Quote:
[FONT=&quot]Rev 11[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3 ""And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for twelve hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.''[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]4 These are the [/FONT][FONT=&quot]two olive trees[/FONT][FONT=&quot] and the [/FONT][FONT=&quot]two lampstands[/FONT][FONT=&quot] that stand before the Lord of the earth.[/FONT]



[FONT=&quot]The two witnesses are the two lampstands.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Two lampstands are the Word of God (OT and the NT[/FONT][FONT=&quot]).[/FONT]

Quote:
[FONT=&quot] Zech 4[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2[/FONT][FONT=&quot] He said to me, "What do you see?" And I said, "I see, and behold, a lampstand all of gold with its bowl on the top of it, and its seven lamps on it with seven spouts belonging to each of the lamps which are on the top of it;
3 also [/FONT][FONT=&quot]two olive trees[/FONT][FONT=&quot] by it, one on the right side of the bowl and the other on its left side."
4 Then I said to the angel who was speaking with me saying, "What are these, my lord?"
5 So the angel who was speaking with me answered and said to me, "Do you not know what these are?" And I said, "No, my lord."
6 Then he said to me, "[/FONT][FONT=&quot]This is the word of the LORD[/FONT][FONT=&quot] to Zerubbabel saying, 'Not [/FONT][FONT=&quot]by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,' says the LORD of hosts.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
…[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]11[/FONT][FONT=&quot] Then I said to him, "[/FONT][FONT=&quot]What are these two olive trees[/FONT][FONT=&quot] on the right of the lampstand and on its left?"
12 And I answered the second time and said to him, "What are the two olive branches which are beside the two golden pipes, which empty the golden oil from themselves?"
13 So he answered me, saying, "Do you not know what these are?" And I said, "No, my lord."
14 Then he said, "[/FONT][FONT=&quot]These are the two anointed ones [/FONT][FONT=&quot]who are standing by the Lord of the whole earth."[/FONT]

Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/robertsons-word-pictures/


A.T. Robertson, a renowned scholar of the Greek New Testament, takes through the New Testament, verse by verse, painting word pictures from the Greek to bring to light the words and actions of Jesus and the early Christians.

----------------------

the point is that DHK does not quote Robertson as if "Robertson is catholic" and I do not quote him as though he is SDA.

These positions are simply the view of some of the best evangelical and protestant scholarship that is known to mankind.

You are free to differ with it - that is not my point. Just that trying to isolate it to "Well that is all Catholic" or "that is just SDA" does not meet the test of historic fact.

in Christ,

Bob

 

You claimed it was Catholic - I don't see any post where you actually prove that claim to be true.

I have not had time to respond to each and every post and point - I just saw that statement and wondered what you had by way of historic fact to show that Catholics invented historicist interpretations that point to themselves as the great persecuting beast of the 1260 years of dark ages.

Perhaps you were thinking of "preterism" and mistakenly confused it with the classic Protestant "Historicist" model of prophetic interpretation. An easy mistake to make if just look at 'the words'

 

Bob, if Sunday observance will be the mark of the beast in the future, that still means the SDA condemns to perdition those who worship on Sunday in the future. So, what's the difference? Just a temporarily deferred condemnation.

Ellen White gave the Adventists the doctrine of investigative judgment, did she not?

Let me say that I have been treated better by the SDA members I have met in person than the members of some other denominations, Baptist included.

 

Adventists claim that the majority of the saints are outside of the SDA church - in the protestant and evangelical churches -- keeping sunday.

That is our official position - the claim is that in the future this becomes a big deal when God calls people to take a stand on this issue.

See this thread for details as i have quoted your question there and provided some non-SDA views on the details as to how this fits with Revelation.

#1

in Christ,

Bob

 

There is no mistake, Bob, because I view the Historicist view as just another error which stems from Catholicism. And it evidences a Catholic nature in it's adherents, who often, and most frequently quote men rather than Scripture to try to justify their doctrine.

Taken from the Catholic Biblical Apologetics, © Copyright 1985-1997, Paul Flanagan and Robert Schihl on catholicapologetics.org:



Millennialism: A Thousand Year Reign

There exists among many Evangelical Protestants a dogma based on some passages in the Bible called millennialism which means a "thousand year reign." The basis for millennialism is found in the Book of Revelation.

Rev 20:1-15 Then I saw an angel come down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the abyss and a heavy chain. He seized the dragon, the ancient serpent, which is the Devil or Satan, and tied it up for a thousand years and threw it into the abyss, which he locked over it and sealed, so that it could no longer lead the nations astray until the thousand years are completed. After this, it is to be released for a short time. Then I saw thrones; those who sat on them were entrusted with judgment. I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, and who had not worshipped the beast or its image nor had accepted its mark on their foreheads or hands. They came to life and they reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were over. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over these; they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for (the) thousand years. When the thousand years are completed, Satan will be released from his prison. He will go out to deceive the nations at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea. They invaded the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the holy ones and the beloved city. But fire came down from heaven and consumed them. The Devil who had led them astray was thrown into the pool of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet were. There they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. Next I saw a large white throne and the one who was sitting on it. The earth and the sky fled from his presence and there was no place for them. I saw the dead, the great and the lowly, standing before the throne, and scrolls were opened. Then another scroll was opened, the book of life. The dead were judged according to their deeds, by what was written in the scrolls. The sea gave up its dead; then Death and Hades gave up their dead. All the dead were judged according to their deeds. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the pool of fire. (This pool of fire is the second death. ) Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the pool of fire.
The Magisterium of the Church has never commented on a thousand year reign of Christ. Rather, as is already clear from what is covered in these notes, the Church does not see the Second Coming of Christ at any other time than at the general judgment of all men and women which is the same as the resurrection of the dead followed by definitive reward or punishment for souls.

The Church interprets the expression "a thousand years" not literally but according to the literature in which it appears--prophetic and apocalyptic. In apocalyptic literature, a thousand years would simply indicate a long period of time, in this case, the time period before the Second Coming of Christ. Apocalyptic literature is not to be taken literally.


Sound familiar?

Your turn.


God bless.

 

A lot of non-SDAs have that view of it I would agree to that. But in actual history Ellen White did not come to the SDA or Millerite church saying "Hey I have a new doctrine for you just given to me in vision - consider if you will what I call the Investigative Judgment - God gave this to me in vision please take a look and accept it if you agree that I am a prophet".

Nothing like that happened. Rather it was other men in our group that argued for it from the Bible - and later Ellen White claimed to have a visioin where God also speaks of it to her. But at no point do SDAs make the case "Well Ellen White was shown this in vision so I believe in the Investigative Judgment because it is was given to us in vision by God to Ellen White".


The whole thing either works as tested 'sola scriptura' or it does not.

in Christ,

Bob