An Aussie/Kiwi Perspective is Needed on Des Ford

When I am home in the afternoon, I like to watch LSU church. It comes on at
2:15 pm my time, live.


I’m new to the controversy.
If it is possible to do so without opening old wounds, I would like for someone to tell me exactly what was Pastor Ford’s heresy, preferably with a quote from Ford himself to illustrate his heresy.

I’m old to the controversy.
Basically, his “heresy” was that the SDA interpretation of Daniel 8:14 as related to 1844 is not Biblical. The book of Hebrews clearly debunks the SDA teaching about the real facts since Hebrews teaches that when Christ ascended to the Heavens, that was it - He became the High Priest right after the “It’s Finished” experience on the Cross and the resurrection. Therefore, nothing happened in Heaven in 1844 as the SDAs claim.

Maybe his wife Gillian Ford @gford1 will add another paragraph, being even more precise that I in the description of Des’ “heresy.”

Thanks George,
I was an Adventist at the time but didn’t understand the big deal. Now I’ve educated myself and agree with you.

This is the note I’ve put into my personal bible commentary at Dan 8:14 to
explain the disagreement:

Dan 8:14 and Desmond Ford
“Unto 2300 days, then shall the Sanctuary be cleansed”

A traditional Jewish and Christian view of this prophecy is that Dan 8 describes the empires of MedoPersia and Greece, culminating with the rise and fall of the infamous ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES. Apparently, this interpretation fits history well enough that early UnBelievers tried to say that the Book Of Daniel was written after the time of Antiochus E. instead of by Daniel.


Historical Adventist view was that the “CLEANSING OF THE SANCTUARY” referred prophetically to the Second Coming of Jesus 2300 years later in 1844. This interpretation of course utilized the “day for a year” principle of prophetic interpretation. When the year 1844 passed without the predicted Second Coming it was profoundly traumatic and is known in Adventist history to this day

Currently in 2019 the SDA interpretation is that the day for a year principle still applies to Dan 8:14, and the prophecy was fulfilled IN HEAVEN when the HEAVENLY SANCTUARY was CLEANSED in 1844 by Heavenly High Priest Jesus Christ in a Heavenly Day Of Atonement as practiced in OT times. Since the event occurred in Heaven instead of Earth, there is some difficulty in proving whether it did or did not actually occur as believed. It is also believed that the judgement started then in 1844, which generates a question because St Peter implied that judgement was ready to begin at the house of God in his day
instead of 1844, (1 Pet 4:17).

On the other hand the Adventist interpretation is bolstered when the angel says, “at the time of the end shall be the vision”, (Dan 8:17).
This doctrine can be presented much more convincingly if you consult any SDA minister to explain it.
I am somewhat skeptical of the whole idea as being a rather convenient way to get “off the hook” when 1844 failed to produce a parusia. I truly don’t want to imply any intellectual dishonesty, but rather some gullibility and desperation to to resolve a theological/intellectual crisis. These are honest hearted souls who otherwise posses some profoundly insightful theology on Sabbath, unconsciousness in death, and
divine punishment. So I think they should not be reduced in our esteem; after all, every Christian has made some mistakes. And I will allow that their interpretation holds merit as a secondary application, but Antiochus is the primary intent of this prophecy and has the benefit today of validating Holy Scripture.
Bye the way, since this event happened in Heaven it is just as hard for nonBelievers to disprove as it is for the Adventist Believers to prove. Christian love, please.

This 1844 belief has somehow become a pillar of SDA belief with at least one prominent SDA theologian being dismissed from the ministry for questioning this doctrine.
See the case of Pastor Desmond Ford, who remained in the SDA Church all his life after being defrocked, but he never recanted that I’m aware of.

I’m not sure about that. Many pastors can barely parrot what they learned from others, but they are not well versed on the issue. Besides, if one brings up what Hebrews says, it’s very easy to embarrass those pastors and people who pretend to know how to explain Dan. 8:14 “convincingly.”

1 Like

More convincingly than me anyway, cause I’m skeptical of the doctrine.

I was surprised to see here that apparently many of you don’t believe that Armageddon will be a Military battle. I thought that to be a standard belief.
Somebody educate me.

BB –
I don’t know if you are familiar with Norman Gulley.
When I took a class from him in 1963 at Madison he stressed that
Armageddon was a spiritual battle based on the similar sounding name
in Isaiah in Hebrew – Harmagedon. [spelling].
Now in the late '50s when I was at Crusades, it was preached that there
would be a huge battle there in Migeddo between the East and the West.
Gog and Magog, etc.
So when I heard pastor Gulley present his views it was quite new to me.
Later pastor Gulley took a position at Southern in the Religion Department.

As Steve points out, neither does Norman Gulley.
See SS Lesson 12 June 16-22, 2018 Babylon and Amageddon: “However, the Bible gives a totally different picture. Scripture presents Armageddon as the ultimate climax, not between squabbling nations, but between the two sides of the cosmic controversy. It’s a religious struggle, not economic or political, however much economic and political factors might come into play.”

1 Like

Thanks Mel, for the SS lesson reference.
It will be helpful

This topic was automatically closed after 30 days. New replies are no longer allowed.