THE TIMEISTS by R. F. C.

Publishing Committee · Battle Creek, Mich. · Dec 29, 1859

THE TIMEISTS.

By R. F. C.

THIS class of professed Advent believers have had three disappointments the present year, at the time of the Passover, of the Pentecost, and of the Atonement, and still have fixed upon another definite day for the Lord's coming—the twenty-fourth day of the ninth Jewish month, which, they say, cannot be later than the 20th of Dec., 1859. This last time will be passed, and their fourth disappointment, for the present year, will be experienced, before this paper will reach the readers of the Review.

We might admire their persistency in this fruitless course, were it not for its tendency to prejudice people against the truth, and destroy faith in the Advent movement. They claim an increase of light—that their pathway shines more and more, while, with a strong hand, they overthrow their past work since 1854, and prove that their boasted light on the commencement of the 2300 days, which they have enjoyed for the past five years, was total darkness. They have seemed to discover a new starting-point from which to reckon the 2300 days, and of their former one they speak thus:

"In regard to the decree in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes to Nehemiah which has so much been relied upon in '64 and since, the most that can be said about it is, that it was a mere consent or permission to Nehemiah to go up and repair the walls and gates which had been partially broken down and burned since they were first built up by Zerubbabel and Joshua. Let any one read carefully the first and second chapters of Nehemiah, and they will readily see that all that was done by Artaxerxes was to simply grant Nehemiah his request, which differs very widely from giving a command to restore and build Jerusalem. In every sense in which it can be looked at, the permission granted to Nehemiah comes very far short of a command. That the walls of Jerusalem had been previously built up, since the return of the Jews to Jerusalem, and subsequently thrown down again between the seventh and twentieth years of Artaxerxes, is not only proved by Josephus, but it is sufficiently proved by Nehemiah himself. For how could Nehemiah be so much surprised on hearing that the wall was broken down and the gates burned with fire, if they had never been re-built since Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, an event which Nehemiah could not have been ignorant of from the earliest period of his recollection. Josephus shows in book xi, chap. v, sec. 6, that the breaking down of the walls and burning of the gates, which surprised Nehemiah so much to hear about, was done by the neighboring nations, who did a great deal of mischief to the Jews, overrunning the country and pillaging it, and carrying off many of the Jews into captivity, even out of Jerusalem itself: and Josephus locates this event between the seventh and twentieth of Artaxerxes."

Such reasoning as this they would not hear in 1854 and onward; but now having received more light upon the point, the light which they then had was no light. Again, during the present year, as in years past, they have been looking to the feasts of the law, in order to fix upon a definite day for the coming of Christ. The first point of expectation this year was the Passover. That passing, they claimed he must surely come at the Pentecost. Then the increasing light showed that the day of the Atonement was the day. But since they have failed here, they have discovered that as "we are under the new covenant, we have been in great error in looking for the coming of Jesus at any point of time, fixed by his law for the fulfillment of any of its types." In this respect, then, their past light has been darkness.

When will these infatuated individuals cease their work of folly? Will they cease, or will they continue to set the day again and again for the coming of Christ, while they neglect the necessary preparation to meet that swiftly approaching day in peace? Will they ever have humility enough to return to the original dates as proclaimed in 1844—learn that the 2300 days ended there, receive the true light upon the cleansing of the Sanctuary, and see and keep the commandments of God contained in that true Sanctuary? Would that they might. They bear bravely the cross of all their disappointments. Would that they might as bravely bear the true cross of Christ. Would that they might see and acknowledge that the true time message was preached in 1844, and following down the track of prophecy lay hold on the present truth—the third angel's message? Then would they indeed see an increase of light upon the pathway, a light that would not prove the more feeble light of the past to be darkness itself.

They speak of the "mighty movement that was produced by time preaching, its effects on those who embraced it," &c., as a proof that they are right in preaching time over and over again, till, according to their own representation, there is "but one here and there" that has any confidence in it. Why not see that the mighty effect of preaching time in 1844 proves that God was in the work, and, consequently, that the time then preached was the true time. God does not set his seal to error; and if the time then preached was false, the whole movement was false, and was not carried on by the Spirit of God.

But admitting that the true time message was then given, and that the Sanctuary to be cleansed was the heavenly; that the work of cleansing is the Atonement typified in the law; and we pass down the track of prophecy to the third and last message, which alone can prepare us for Christ's coming. Thus the light shines more and more unto the perfect day.

R. F. C.