Answers to Objections, 59

Objection 59: The Millerites thought they found in Daniel 8:14 proof that the Second Advent would take place on October 22, 1844. After the disappointment, the founders of Seventh-day Adventism arrived at a different interpretation of that passage that enabled them to maintain that the prophecy was indeed fulfilled in 1844, but by an event that took place in heaven. Hence Seventh-day Adventism was born from a solution to a theological dilemma.

We will not here take time to discuss the validity of the Seventh-day Adventist interpretation of Daniel 8:14, which is presented at length in our denominational literature. We confine ourselves to the “dilemma” feature.

Many other movements could be criticized for having solved a theological dilemma, including Protestantism. Luther had to admit the awful fact of sin and the imperative of redemption. But he denied that the church’s penances and good works could redeem the sinner, so he solved the dilemma by “inventing” a new formula for salvation: Faith in the grace of Christ alone.

Per our discussion of the previous objection, the Christian church is the result of a dilemma: The disciples had to admit they were mistaken in their belief that Christ was going to establish an earthly kingdom, so they revised their preaching and invented the story that He had arisen and ascended and was ministering for us in heaven above, from whence He would return to set up His kingdom.

Other illustrations might be given from the religious world, but these suffice to show that the charge of a dilemma origin does not necessarily prove anything. The strict logic of such a charge demands that a person or a movement at the outset must have either the whole truth or none of it, that it is not possible to have part of the truth at the outset and to gain the remainder in the school of disappointing experience.

When the matter is stated in this form, the unreasonableness of the charge becomes evident. Our critics, along with us, must admit that they have learned new truths at times as a result of disappointing experiences, even dilemmas, that have confronted them. And if these critics believe that God is guiding their lives, they will also have to admit that some of the dilemmas have clearly been permitted by God, if not ordained of Him, for their spiritual good.