William Miller and Ellen White
Tim O'Donnell
Summary
Miller outlines some of the basis by which he interpreted prophetic sections of the Bible. He regards all biblical prophecy as one interconnected whole, reasoning that God revealed pieces of the same prophetic knowledge to different individuals throughout history. To Miller, the main subject of this wider prophetic knowledge is the first and second coming of Christ. Despite calling prophecy “highly figurative” earlier in the passage, Miller reasons that since some of the prophecies referring to the first coming of Christ were fulfilled literally, the prophecies concerning the second coming of Christ must also be.
The chapter from Ellen White's Christian Education presents an argument for the use of the Bible in an educational setting. Ellen argues that the Bible is worthy of academic study because the Bible contains much of historical value, and also reveals much about the future. Similarly to Miller, White takes a literal approach to interpretation of the Bible. White is concerned with the moral character of her time, and recommends study of the Bible as a protection against moral weakness.
Analysis
Miller starts from an assumption that the Bible is a cohesive whole. He shows this attitude towards Scripture when he writes that “There never was a book written that has a better connection and harmony than the Bible.” The other major assumption that he makes is that since certain parts of this cohesive whole are literally true, that the whole must also be literally true. Miller is concerned with the simple truth of the Bible, reasoning that “the more naked and simple the fact, the stronger the truth appears.” This attitude leads Miller to interpret the Bible in a very literal fashion. At the same time, Miller does interpret some prophetic text less than completely literally, as when he takes the idea of 2300 days to instead mean 2300 years.
White has a similar literal understanding of the Bible to Miller, taking as fact the historical sections of the Bible and holding them up as “a history that opens to us the past centuries”. Where Miller was concerned with physical truths such as the date and time of the second coming of Christ, White is concerned with the moral truths of the Bible and how they can be communicated to young people. Their ultimate goals are the same, however, as the selection from White concludes with passages from the Bible which point to the return of Christ. Miller was concerned with predicting the date where White was concerned with preparing for the return itself.
I think apocalyptic teachings have an appeal because they provide certitude in life. Life is a constant struggle to balance one's priorities, and the belief that the world as we know it is going to come to an end at a definite time throws those priorities into sharp relief. The danger, though, is that the promised apocalypse never comes. I think this is a danger of the study of the Bible, especially in insular groups. A radical interpretation of the text has the potential to take hold of a group and lead them to behave in a manner that might not be completely in line with what the Bible teaches.
Tim O'Donnell
Summary
Miller outlines some of the basis by which he interpreted prophetic sections of the Bible. He regards all biblical prophecy as one interconnected whole, reasoning that God revealed pieces of the same prophetic knowledge to different individuals throughout history. To Miller, the main subject of this wider prophetic knowledge is the first and second coming of Christ. Despite calling prophecy “highly figurative” earlier in the passage, Miller reasons that since some of the prophecies referring to the first coming of Christ were fulfilled literally, the prophecies concerning the second coming of Christ must also be.
The chapter from Ellen White's Christian Education presents an argument for the use of the Bible in an educational setting. Ellen argues that the Bible is worthy of academic study because the Bible contains much of historical value, and also reveals much about the future. Similarly to Miller, White takes a literal approach to interpretation of the Bible. White is concerned with the moral character of her time, and recommends study of the Bible as a protection against moral weakness.
Analysis
Miller starts from an assumption that the Bible is a cohesive whole. He shows this attitude towards Scripture when he writes that “There never was a book written that has a better connection and harmony than the Bible.” The other major assumption that he makes is that since certain parts of this cohesive whole are literally true, that the whole must also be literally true. Miller is concerned with the simple truth of the Bible, reasoning that “the more naked and simple the fact, the stronger the truth appears.” This attitude leads Miller to interpret the Bible in a very literal fashion. At the same time, Miller does interpret some prophetic text less than completely literally, as when he takes the idea of 2300 days to instead mean 2300 years.
White has a similar literal understanding of the Bible to Miller, taking as fact the historical sections of the Bible and holding them up as “a history that opens to us the past centuries”. Where Miller was concerned with physical truths such as the date and time of the second coming of Christ, White is concerned with the moral truths of the Bible and how they can be communicated to young people. Their ultimate goals are the same, however, as the selection from White concludes with passages from the Bible which point to the return of Christ. Miller was concerned with predicting the date where White was concerned with preparing for the return itself.
I think apocalyptic teachings have an appeal because they provide certitude in life. Life is a constant struggle to balance one's priorities, and the belief that the world as we know it is going to come to an end at a definite time throws those priorities into sharp relief. The danger, though, is that the promised apocalypse never comes. I think this is a danger of the study of the Bible, especially in insular groups. A radical interpretation of the text has the potential to take hold of a group and lead them to behave in a manner that might not be completely in line with what the Bible teaches.