THE CLOCK-DIAL VISION by J. H. Waggoner

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 23, 1868

“THE CLOCK-DIAL VISION.”

By J. H. Waggoner

In a recently-published article under this head, Mr. H. E. Carver endeavors to show that there was at least an apparent discrepancy in the visions of Sr. White on the time of the commencement of the Sabbath. We notice this for two reasons: 1st, the article, from its appearance of candor and professed desire to state the truth, is well calculated to deceive by its misstatements. 2nd, erroneous statements have so often been made, in regard to the above point, that we fear many of the friends of truth have been led to look upon the circumstances in a wrong light. The article opens as follows:

“There has been a belief in the minds of some, including ourself, that by means of a clock face with the hands pointing to six o’clock, seen by Mrs. E. G. White in vision, the former practice of our brethren in keeping the Sabbath from six to six o’clock, instead of from sunset to sunset, was confirmed. We are satisfied now, from the evidence we have, that this is a mistake; and that Mrs. White never had any such vision, and we cheerfully proceed to correct the error by a statement of the facts in the case.”

So far as a retraction of a former error is concerned, this is right; had the writer left it there without adding other errors, it would have been all right. He says:

“In the same year [1847,] Mrs. W. professedly had a vision, in which she was shown that sunrise was the wrong time to begin the Sabbath, but was not shown that sunset was the right time. She merely heard these words repeated: ‘From even to even shall ye celebrate your Sabbaths.’ Eld. Bates was present, and succeeded in satisfying all present that ‘even’ was six o’clock.”

The reader will mark that the vision only repeated the words of Scripture, “From even to even,” &c., and left it there, without defining “even;” so, of course, directing them to the Bible for their faith and practice. Now it is claimed that a subsequent vision gives another view. This is the statement:

“During all this time, however [till 1855], the subject was more or less discussed, until finally the agitation became such, that fears were entertained of a division among the adherents of Eld. White and wife, and Eld. Andrews finally decided, at Eld. White’s request, to devote his time to the subject, till he ascertained what the Bible taught in regard to it. The result was, a general belief that the Bible taught sunset time, Eld. Bates, and some others, however, were not satisfied, it seems, with the evidence, and then Mrs. White had a vision for their benefit, to save them from being lost, or, at least, out of harmony with the body, and that vision was that sunset time was the right time.”

This is not correct. Being present when that vision was given, and, also, at its relation, I can certify that no mention was made of “sunset time.” As in the previous vision, the words of Scripture were repeated, with the additional remarks that we were to take the Bible to learn what “even” was. Bro. Bates’ argument on which we had rested, being based on astronomy, not on the Bible, I cannot see how even a fault-finder can discover any appearance of discrepancy here, the words of the two visions being precisely the same.

But, as if aware that the objection on what the vision said was not very strong, the writer proceeds to find fault with its omissions, because it did not definitely state that sunset time was the right time, and because an error in practice was not corrected when he should judge it would be most appropriate. Believing that the visions were from the Lord, we have no explanations to make; we rest it upon his will and pleasure. But will the objector be kind enough to explain why the Lord suffered Israel to go on in idolatry till the prophets of Baal and of the groves were numbered by hundreds, and only one prophet of the Lord was left? Would it not have been better to have checked this idolatrous spirit in Israel sooner? Was not the Reformation needed as much three hundred years before Luther as it was in his time? If it was ordered of Heaven why was it not commenced in a more appropriate time? Why did the providence of God suffer the Sabbath truth to lie so far concealed for ages past, and so recently open a work of reform on this subject. Or, to sum up, Why has not the Lord carried on his work in all ages more in accordance with our views of fitness, and utility? It surely could not be because none could be found to suggest improvements on his plans, and works, for there have always been enough to mark out a better mode of action (to their minds,) than that which the Lord chose.

But the writer has brought in one scripture to illustrate and enforce his objection; as appropriate, probably, as any he could find, but most unfortunate for himself. He urges that the Seventh-day Adventists, and Sr. White with the rest, were left in error, for a period of eight years, on this subject. And says:

“When the prophet Daniel made a mistake as to what the angel of God told him, an angel was commissioned to ‘fly swiftly’ in order to correct that misunderstanding.”

When was this angel commissioned to fly swiftly to correct Daniel’s misunderstanding of what the angel had told him? About fifteen years after the misunderstanding arose! He was not caused to fly swiftly because of Daniel’s misunderstanding of his words, but because of his prayer to God. Said the angel, “At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to show thee.” So it was with God’s people in 1855. When they humbled themselves before God, and sought his face by prayer, he directed them anew to the truth of his word, and instructed them to read its pages with more carefulness, with the assurance of his blessing on their efforts, and a promise of clemency for past weaknesses and errors. Bless the Lord for his goodness! How carefully and tenderly he led us along when we were few and weak! How exactly has his dealing with us corresponded with his “goodness and his wonderful works toward the children of men,” in all ages. And though we are brought in a way different from what we should choose or mark out—“a way we knew not”—in this we rejoice, that he has not yet left us to follow our own way, and to walk after the imagination of our own heart, but corrects us to profit, and chastens us to teach us the way of righteousness.

J. H. WAGGONER. Battle Creek, June 16, 1868.