The Eighth is of the Seven - Number One

William Miller based his prophetic message upon the framework of two desolating powers, which he correctly identified as pagan Rome and papal Rome.

The theologians of Adventism acknowledge the fact that Miller’s framework of prophetic application was the two desolating powers of paganism and papalism, even if they only consider it as an analysis of Millerite history, and not as a truth that was given him by God.

“His angel” is identified directly as Gabriel by Sister White.

“Wonderful thought—that the angel who stands next in honor to the Son of God is the one chosen to open the purposes of God” to William Miller’s mind. Not only Gabriel, but angels in the plural guided his understanding of the prophecies “which had ever been dark to God’s people.” Gabriel and other angels led Miller through the Bible consecutively from Genesis onward. He therefore was led to the longest time prophecy in the Bible, which is the “seven times” (twenty-five hundred and twenty years) of Leviticus twenty-six, well before he was led to the twenty-three hundred days of Daniel chapter eight and verse fourteen.

The rule of first mention establishes that the first thing mentioned is of the greatest importance, and the first thing mentioned in Revelation chapter one verse one is the communication process that the Father employs as He gives a message to Jesus, who in turn gives it to His angel, which then gives it to a prophet that then writes it out and sends it to the churches. When Adventism rejected the work and discoveries of William Miller, they not only rejected their foundations, but they also rejected the very communication process which led Miller to in his understandings, and they rejected the process which is the only avenue for men to understand the Revelation of Jesus Christ that is opened up just before probation closes.

Miller was led to understand that the seven times of Leviticus commenced in 677BC. It was not until 1856 that the Lord used Hiram Edson to identify that the scattering of the seven times was also carried out against the northern ten tribes of Israel. The Lord was attempting to develop the understanding of the seven times in agreement with, but well beyond Miller’s foundational discovery of the seven times. But in 1856 the light presented by Hiram Edson came mysteriously to an end, for the eighth article in the series ended with the words of James White, then the Editor of the Review and Herald, “To be continued.” It was to be “continued” but not until post September 11, 2001 when the Lord led his people to the “old paths” and ultimately to the unfinished series of articles penned by Hiram Edson.

We are not currently addressing the rebellion that began shortly after the great disappointment, but to simply point out that even though Miller was led to the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six, it is clear that the Lord purposed to increase the initial understanding of the seven times beyond Miller’s foundational understanding of the subject. He chose Hiram Edson, the same servant from that very history that He had previously chosen to give the vision of Christ moving into the Most Holy Place on October 23, 1844.

This is why I used the Adventist theologian’s words to acknowledge that the framework for all of Miller’s prophetic applications was based upon his understanding of the two desolating powers that in the book of Daniel are represented as the “daily” (paganism), which is always associated with either the “transgression” or “abomination,” both representing different aspects of the desolating power of papalism. Miller’s foundational understanding of the Roman powers has greatly increased since the history he represents.

The angels of God, including Gabriel, led Miller to the understandings he proclaimed. Those understandings included the prophecies he proclaimed, the rules of biblical interpretation he used and also the framework that allowed him to organize the prophecies correctly. Miller was given the framework that the two desolating powers addressed in Daniel were pagan Rome and papal Rome. Future for America was led to the framework of the three desolating powers of the dragon, the beast and false prophet.

Future for America’s framework is built upon Miller’s work, but goes beyond where his work left off. Adventism left his framework and returned to the theology of apostate Protestantism and Rome. The same line of prophecy is taken up in the book of Revelation that is began in the book of Daniel.

Miller could not grasp the prophecies of the book of Revelation, for the line of paganism and papalism that is so firmly identified in Daniel is expanded in the book of Revelation to include the next persecuting power to arrive on the stage of prophetic history.

For Miller the sea beast and earth beast of Revelation thirteen represented pagan Rome followed by papal Rome. Miller also attempted to apply his framework to Revelation seventeen, but the healing of the deadly wound of the papacy, the prophetic role of the United States and the United Nations were outside the divine framework that had been given him by angels. For him the beast that came up out of the earth in Revelation thirteen was the papacy.

Miller was the messenger that was to be used to remove the mantle of Protestantism from the hands of the professed Protestants that had come out of the Dark Ages. The period when the United States would speak as a dragon, when Republicanism turned into a democracy and apostate Protestantism would combine with the apostate government and repeat the combination of church and state that is the image of the papacy was still future to his day. For that reason, he attempted to place the book of Revelation into the divine framework he had been given by angels.

He was chosen to understand the increase of knowledge that was produced in 1798 when the Ulai River vision of Daniel eight and nine was unsealed. Future for America was to understand the vision of the Hiddekel River of Daniel chapters ten through twelve that was unsealed in 1989, when, as described in Daniel eleven, verse forty, the countries representing the former Soviet Union were swept away by the papacy and the United States.

The framework that was given by angels to Future for America was based upon the identification of, and application of prophecy in the context of the three-fold union of the dragon, the beast and false prophet.

The Millerites presented the first and second angel’s message, announcing the opening of the judgment. Future for America is presenting the third angel’s message.

To correctly present the third angel’s message you must also present the first two angels’ messages, for we are informed that there cannot be a third without a first and second. The first and second messages are the foundation and the third is the capstone, but the third message will never deny or contradict the first and second. If it does it is not the genuine message.

There is a very nice observation of Millerite history and our history. The Millerites were the beginning and we are the end. They presented and lived the first and second angel’s messages. We present the third angel. Their unsealed message (the Ulai vision) is found in two chapters of Daniel, and ours (the Hiddekel vision) is found in three chapters. They identified the first and second woes, and lived within the fulfillment of the second woe. We identify and live within the fulfillment of the third woe. Their framework of prophetic application was pagan Rome (the dragon) and papal Rome (the beast). Our framework for prophetic application is modern Rome as a three-fold beast.

As we begin to consider the characteristic of papal Rome in chapter seventeen of Revelation being the eighth that is of the seven it is worthwhile to consider what the Millerites understood of Rome during the foundational history. The third angel will have additional light, but that light will never contradict established truth.

Daniel chapter two, seven, eight, eleven and twelve identify Rome, among other powers. We are considering Rome’s two phases prior to 1798; pagan and papal as the framework for Miller’s prophetic applications. Miller and the pioneers identify that “the robbers of thy people” in Daniel chapter eleven and verse fourteen represents Rome.

There are at least two important points to consider within this verse. The word “vision” in the verse is one of two Hebrew words in the book of Daniel that are translated as “vision.” One of the Hebrew words translated as “vision” is châzôn, and means a dream, or a prophecy or a vision. The word châzôn identifies prophetic history, or a period of time, and it is found ten times in Daniel and always translated as “vision.”

The other Hebrew word that is also translated as “vision” is mar-eh’ and means appearance. The word mar-eh’ is identifying a singular sight, a point in time. The Hebrew word mar-eh’ is found thirteen times in Daniel and it is translated as “vision” six times, four times as “countenance,” twice as “appearance” and once as “well favored.”

The robbers of thy people represent Rome and it is therefore the prophetic subject of Rome that establishes the prophetic “vision” in the book of Daniel. For this reason, it is important to understand the significance of Rome as a prophetic symbol.

Prophetic logic demands that the word “vision” representing prophetic history is the same “vision” that is addressed in the book of Revelation, for inspiration identifies that Daniel and Revelation are the same book, that they complement each other, that they bring each other to perfection and that the same line of prophecy that is located in Daniel is taken up in the Revelation. Those points set forth in the Spirit of Prophecy have already been included in this series of articles, so I won’t include them again. I will add another point that we have also already included from Sister White. That point is that all the books of the Bible meet and end in the book of Revelation. The “vision” of prophetic history (châzôn) that is found in Daniel and is established with the prophetic subject of Rome, represents the vision of prophetic history throughout the Bible. All the books of the Bible meet and end in the Revelation and God never contradicts Himself. Never! If you think He has, you are misunderstanding something. The very same Hebrew word (châzôn) is also translated as vision in the book of Proverbs.

That is the first point to consider about the verse. If we misunderstand Rome, then we cannot establish the vision of prophetic history. That fact essentially defines the efforts of Jesuits and others throughout history who have introduced counterfeit theology to destroy the prophetic subject of Rome. As we consider the foundational understanding of Rome, we should bear this in mind.

If you fail to see the meaning of antichrist (Rome) you will join Rome, and this warning is placed within the context of being able to or not being able to understand the books of Daniel and Revelation. The Millerites built the foundational understanding of Adventism upon their identification of Rome. They understood that Rome was represented by two desolating powers, that both were phases of Rome, but they were not at a place in history to see Rome as a three-fold union as represented in the book of Revelation. Daniel is therefore the foundation represented by the Millerites and Revelation is the capstone represented by Future for America. There is another point from Daniel eleven verse fourteen which we wish to identify.

Miller and the pioneers understood that the image of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream represented the four kingdoms of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome. They could not see beyond the fourth kingdom, for they understood that papal Rome was simply a second phase of Rome and therefore that the fourth kingdom had ended in 1798. From their vantage point of history the only prophetic waymark left was the Second Coming of Christ, where the rock that was cut out of the mountain would strike the feet of the image. The Millerites recognized prophetic distinctions between pagan and papal Rome, but being forced to align 1798 with Christ’s return they could see no further than four kingdoms.

Revelation seventeen is the last identification of the kingdoms of Bible prophecy, and it identifies that seven kingdoms have fallen and that the eighth kingdom is the three-fold union of modern Rome. If the first reference to the kingdoms of Bible prophecy is Daniel chapter two, and it most certainly is; then the last reference should be illustrated by the first reference. How can the four kingdoms of Daniel chapter two agree with eight kingdoms in Revelation seventeen?

Remember therefore as we proceed, the Millerites could not see prophetic events beyond their history. The message they understood and proclaimed identified the Second Coming of Christ as the next waymark of prophetic history. But if the Millerite understanding of Rome as the symbol that establishes the vision of prophetic history and also Daniel chapter two are both Millerite foundational truths, how can this agree with the eight kingdoms of chapter seventeen of Revelation?

If you are uncertain if the image of Daniel two is foundational, all you need to do is consider the 1843 and 1850 pioneer charts. Both have the image of Daniel two portrayed upon them. Just as significantly is that Ellen White identifies that both charts were made by God’s direction and by His design.

Of the 1850 chart she stated:

There is an ancient proverb from the world that states, “Error has many paths, but truth has only one.” There are several various errors that have been employed to prevent people from recognizing that modern Rome in Revelation seventeen is the eighth head that is of the seven. One of those errors which is employed by the theologians of Adventism is a misrepresentation of the kingdoms of history. I am not here referring to the kingdoms of Bible prophecy, these are two different designations. The kingdoms of Bible prophecy are established upon the first mention in Daniel chapter two, but there were kingdoms of history that preceded Babylon. Ellen White clearly identifies who the kingdoms of history were, but the theologians of Adventism ignore the inspired testimony and create a sequence of kingdoms of history that clouds the understanding that Rome always comes up eighth and is of the seven. Yet it is Rome that establishes the vision.

The theologians of Adventism and apostate Protestantism suggest that the kingdoms of history were Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome and on. Sister White informs us that there is a third kingdom of history, which they choose to leave out. Are they leaving out that kingdom, or are they leaving out the Spirit of Prophecy? Both.

This passage has much light for our time, but what I want to point out is that Sister White clearly identifies that the kingdom of history that preceded Babylon was Israel, not Assyria. The kingdoms of history that is used by theologians leave out Israel as a kingdom of history, in spite of the power and glory that was established during the reign of king Solomon, and in spite of inspiration’s direct testimony through Ezekiel and Ellen White that the crown of Israel passed to Babylon.

If we apply the inspired commentary to the kingdoms of history, we find that Israel needs to be counted among those kingdoms. Israel, Assyria and Egypt are kingdoms of history that preceded the first kingdom of Bible prophecy which was Babylon. Therefore, the fourth kingdom of “history” was Babylon, the fifth was Medo-Persia, the sixth was Greece, the seventh was pagan Rome, and the eighth was papal Rome, which was of the seven for it represents the second phase of pagan Rome. With the kingdoms of history papal Rome is the eighth, and is of the seven.

In Daniel seven we have the kingdoms of Bible prophecy represented by beasts. Babylon is the lion that was followed by the bear of Medo-Persia. The third was Greece as the leopard, and then Rome as the “dreadful and terrible” beast that had “iron teeth.” The terrible beast in agreement with the image of Daniel two is Rome, the fourth kingdom of Bible prophecy.

The Millerites understood the fourth kingdom to be Rome, so they understood the characteristics of the terrible beast as such, and simply applied all the prophetic characteristics of the beast unto the fourth kingdom. They saw the distinction between pagan Rome and papal Rome in the passage, but could not see a fifth kingdom of Bible prophecy, for they correctly used the first mention of the kingdoms of Bible prophecy as their point of reference. But the distinction between the two Rome’s is in the passage, which allows us to consider the distinction between the two Rome’s as representing two kingdoms. But this is not the point we are considering.

The fourth kingdom in Daniel two is Rome. The ten horns represent the ten nations that represent the kingdom of pagan Rome, and before papal Rome would take control of the world in 538, three of those kingdoms would be removed, or plucked up. Then the “little” “horn” of verse eight with “eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things,” would arise. If we have ten horns in the fourth kingdom and three are removed in order for the “little horn” to replace those three horns, then when the three horns are removed it leaves seven horns, and the little horn is the eighth, for Rome always comes up eighth and is of the seven. There is much light concerning Rome in its two phases in this chapter, but we are simply here providing a second witness that prophetically as well as historically, Rome comes up eighth and is of the seven.

In chapter eight we find the enlargement of chapter seven. The chapter once again identifies the kingdoms of Bible prophecy but leaves off the first kingdom of Babylon for when Daniel received the vision of chapter eight it was very close to the end of Babylon. In the chapter Medo-Persia is represented by a ram that had two horns. Greece is represented by a goat with one horn that is broken and produces four horns out of the broken horn. Then a “little horn” follows after Greece, and once again the little horn is representing Rome. Though Rome was not a direct descendant from the empire of Greece, the passage portrays the little horn as coming out of one of the four horns that arose in the Greek kingdom after the first horn—representing Alexander the Great—was broken. Rome was not a descendant of the Greeks, but it began its conquering of the world from the area of Greece, and in that sense, it came out of one of those four horns.

We therefore find in chapter eight a second witness to chapter seven. Medo-Persia had two horns, Greece had one and thereafter four more horns. That equals seven horns before Rome’s as the little horn came out of one of Greece’s four horns. Two plus one plus four equals seven, then Rome, the little horn, is the eighth and it is of the seven. It is worth noting that in this passage that identifies that Rome comes out of one of the Greek horns is one of the greatest prophetic arguments that Miller and his co-laborers had to meet in their history.

The Protestants of that history insisted that the little horn of Rome could not be Rome, for the prophecy identifies that the little horn came out from one of the four Grecian horns. They therefore argued that the little horn represented Antiochus Epiphanes who was one of the Seleucid kings that carried on through history after the division of Alexander the Great’s demise. The argument of Millerite history over this issue was so great that on the 1843 chart the argument against the Protestant teaching that was based upon the fact that Daniel saw the little horn come out from one of the four Grecian horns and therefore could not identify Rome, for Rome did not descend from Greece. The argument impacted all the passages in Daniel where Rome is identified. The Protestant position included that the “robbers of thy people” in verse fourteen of Daniel eleven had to be Antiochus Epiphanes. The Millerites therefore included upon the chart that Sister White identified was “directed by the hand of the Lord and should not be altered,” a reference to Antiochus Epiphanes identifying why he could not have been that fourth kingdom. Does Rome establish the vision of prophetic history or did a Seleucid king that died over a hundred years before Christ was born represent the power that stood up against Christ at his crucifixion?

The question that could be raised is, why was Daniel shown Rome coming out of one of the Grecian horns, if Rome was not a direct descendant of Greece? The answer is that the beginning of Rome’s rise to power began in that region which had formerly been Greek territory, but why was the prophecy portrayed in such a way to allow for that confusion?

At least one answer, beyond the importance of noting where Rome began to rise, is that the enigma of Rome always coming up eighth and being of the seven is answered by Rome being associated with the territory of Greece, in order to retain the enigma’s point of Rome being of the seven. The enigma is that important, though the Millerites could never had understood that concept from their vantage point in history. The fact that all the references upon not only the 1843, but also the 1850 chart are illustrations of subjects that are directly addressed in God’s prophetic Word, except for the one reference that emphasizes that Antiochus Epiphanes is not the power that stood against Christ, makes the addition to the chart very significant. How sad is it that when Adventism left their foundations, they find themselves today teaching that the power of verse fourteen of Daniel eleven is Antiochus Epiphanes and not Rome! They now teach what the Millerites opposed so strongly that they represented that controversy upon the 1843 chart!

The kingdoms of history identify that Rome comes up eighth and is of the seven. The “little horn” in chapter seven that speaks “great words against the Most High” comes up eighth and is of the seven. The horns of chapter eight identify that Rome comes up eighth and is of the seven.

In the next article we will consider how modern Rome, as represented in Revelation seventeen comes up eighth and is of the seven. We will then return to Daniel two and identify why Daniel two’s four kingdoms, which is the first mention of the kingdoms of Bible prophecy, is in agreement with Revelation seventeen’s eight kingdoms.