Case by Casebolt: The Midnight Cry

Ask an educated Mormon if they are embarrassed by the evidence that ancient Israelites never migrated to South America becoming the Inca/Mayan/etc population there.

Ask an educated Catholic why they believe that a cracker becomes the literal body of Jesus when by all evidence, it is still just a cracker.

Ask a Muslim why they believe that Muhammad literally flew across the night sky on a flying horse.

Ask a fundamentalist why they continue to believe in inerrancy when the claim of an ancient mariner with a floating zoo riding upon waves above the tallest mountains becomes impossible to defend. Do they become Episcopalians or what?

For some reason, otherwise intelligent people are able to hold cognitive dissonance and remain in a group dedicated to an ideology which is demonstrably false. Is it family ties? Social ties? Fear to act on one’s knowledge which is at odds with childhood indoctrination? Comfort?


It appears that EGW created a narrative that justified the great disappointment. I can only hope that she will be removed from her prophetic office, as a fabricator.


Just one more in a long line of failed apocalyptic prophets.


We should understand that historicism, in the form that we inherited it, is a child of its times. It ruled protestant prophetic interpretation for about 200 years from Joseph Mede (1650) and Sir Isaac Newton to William Miller and Samuel S. Snow. Especially the British and the North Americans had an appetite for the mysteries of apocalyptic beasts and horns, or the complicated synchronization of prophetic times and historical events. There were dozens if not hundreds of British and American laymen, pastors, theologians, and bishops who took it upon themselves to unlock the prophetic symbols of Daniel and the Revelation. A scientific pursuit, many of them believed.

Miller and Snow had the dubious honor of bringing it all to and end. The date of the Parousia was like a time-bomb, which not only blew up the Millerite revival but also the dominant prophetic hermeneutic. However, looking at the tables of L.E. Froom’s massive Prophetic Faith one finds tens of other calculations and dates set for approximately the same time. It could be a small comfort to us that had Millerism failed to grow, there would have been some other revival with the same end, maybe M’Corkleism (1847), Faberism (1864), Gillism or Scottism (1866). Options are too numerous to list. What I find mildly funny is that Miller’s date was earlier than that of the others. Clever man.

After the disappointment almost no one dared to speak about prophecies, and if someone did, their typical opening statement was: I do not believe what Mr. Miller did. The poor old man became a theological leper. Everyone kept their distance to his teaching and methods, and washed their hands to avoid contamination. This paved the way for Darbyan dispensationalism which in a few decades took over Protestant prophetic interpretation.

However, after the initial shock, the old hermeneutic still worked for the Adventists when the majority of other protestants had rejected it. The culture and thinking of people had not changed, and the interpretation of Daniel and Revelation continued to be a major gateway into the Adventist Church. But the tragedy is, that things are different now. For several decades our favourite prophecies have turned people away from our church rather than bringing them in. 70 years ago my father filled the best meeting hall in town to capacity with minimal advertising on Revelation’s beasts, while today, a million dollars on advertising would not, I think, bring more than a handful people. Postmodern westerners may envision dragons or four-headed leopards as entertainment, but their use as valid symbols of historical realities is nonsense to them. What is worse, is that Wikipedia or easily available scholarly histories do not endorse many of the dates we have fixed as prophetically foretold key events or important turning points in history.

This is one of the reasons why Adventist Church has grown weaker in the Western world. The church’s successes are now in the developing countries, but it may not take long before postmodernism reaches them, and spoils our advance. What is really sad is our inability to do any serious discussion on our methods or interpretations. The Bible is still relevant, and there are people with spiritual needs all around us, but we insist on scratching where it itched a hundred years ago…


delegates at GC 2022 voted to affirm egw to a tune of 85%, right behind their vote on the bible of 89%…egw isn’t going anywhere…i think the bigger question is what were 15% of delegates doing at an SDA GC session if they couldn’t vote for egw or the bible (assuming no abstentions):

All the prognosticators would have benefited by the wisdom of the sage, Yogi Berra, who famously said, “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future”.

True. Even for the Bible prophets future predictions were difficult - the fulfillment of their simplest statements are usually surprising and never word for word. Therefore, if EGW’s every prophetic statement were literally fulfilled, I would be much more skeptical of her gift than I am now.

But if writing an exact description of the future was so difficult for the prophets, we as a Church or as pastors or laymen should be weary of trying to map out a “one and only” possible scenario of future events.

There may also be an element of “emperor’s new clothes” - lot’s of people know the ideology is false, but don’t know that their fellow co-religionaires also believe it to be false, so they pretend it is true.

My first experience was as a youth of about 18 or 19 when I first expressed doubts about EGW’s writings being inspired. To my surprise, almost half the youth group then expressed similar doubts - each individually harboured these views, but for the sake of conformity pretended to toe the party line.


I got this far, found much that seems reasonable, but then got to this; a statement of faith with absolutely no substantiation.

In what way is a 2,000 year old book of any importance to anyone other than an eisegete who finds a way read himself into all the magical stories and unfulfilled prophecies?


Maybe 15% critical thinkers, the rest just sheep or using a more modern gaming term lemmings!!!

but likely happy lemmings…my hunch is that the 15% critical thinkers are unhappy and disconsolate…

Ha ha your probably right

1 Like

EGW, Lemming Whisperer?

Or The Pied Piper of Happy People?


Why is this true ? please explain.

You’ll remember the lesson better if you figure it out for yourself.

In its attempts to apply rules to understanding the symbols and time periods and events that can be compared to actual historical fulfilment or non-fulfillment - the hermeneutic is a scientific approach

So the point is what ? Enoch is a disconfirmation of prophecy?

What do you think the fulfillment of any prophecy confirms?

That the purportedly omniscient god of the Bible truly exists?

That EGW was the last true messenger of that god?

If you do not understand that the second two assumptions do not reasonably follow from the first, a refresher course in applied logic is suggested rather than insisting that others join you in making an irrational leap of faith.

No, the point is that the book of Revelation was of the same genre as the Book of Enoch and partially used it as a source for the content of the “visions”. The 1838 version of Enoch which was widely disseminated also appears to be a source for EGW’s “inspiration”. Her early hallucinations seem to mirror its themes and apocalyptic expectations. It is curious that of all the Biblical characters, she claims to have seen Enoch on another planet.


Isn’t a certain lack of curiosity at the heart of all religious thinking?

That is, doesn’t the credulous person conclude, “It’s a miracle of an omniscient god.” when a magician pulls a rabbit out of his hat, or if a fortune teller “reads his mind”, and then go blissfully-if ignorantly-on to his next misconception?

This while a curious person says, “How’d he do that?” until such time as a more reasonable explanation is provided?

Just sayin….