The Restoration Movement took place during an explosive period of U.S. history—the 1800s and early 1900s. America had declared her independence just 34 years before the turn of the 19th Century, and one year later, in 1801, the Cane Ridge Revival rocked the Christian world in Cane Ridge, KY. It comprised tens of thousands of Baptists, Methodists, and Presbyterians, all congregating in the same area of land. Barton W. Stone arranged the meeting, and it far surpassed his expectations. As many as 30 or 40 ministers took part in the preaching, and many would preach at the same time in various parts of the meeting grounds. Many in the audiences began to have what they called “exercises” such as falling to the ground and remaining motionless, crying out, shrieking. Many experienced “jerks” where their heads would snap back, their bodies would convulse, and some would break into dance.[1]
This ecumenical revival symbolizes the spirit and fervor of the time. This is nothing like the Bible teaches ever happened when the Holy Spirit comes upon a person. In fact, it seems much more closely in line with what demons accomplish in the bodies of their hosts than anything else. But these people were evidently so starved for religion, they grasped on this as a wonderful work of God. Indeed, Barton W. Stone believed it to be a wonderful spiritual event.
If one steps back to examine more fully the religious landscape of the 19th Century, he cannot help but notice a great many new ideas popping suddenly into existence. Those were tough years. Slavery was on the minds of everyone, and the Civil War (1861-1865) tore the country in half, forcing Christians to take a stand in one way or the other. The concept of rugged individualism was in full vigor, giving rise to “muscular Christianity”—yes, it was a thing. Women’s rights advocates such as Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton pushed their agendas hard. During tough times, utopian propositions are ever so sweet and engaging, and several winsome orators took the stage to paint lovely pictures of what God had in store for His people, if they would only work hard enough for it.
Many don’t know that a number of religious sects were born during these frenzied years. Over the next few posts, I will briefly present several of them, including Seventh Day Adventists (Ellen G. White), Mormons (Joseph Smith), Jehovah’s Witnesses (Charles Taze Russell), and Church of Christ Scientists (Mary Baker Eddy). Today, let’s think about how Dispensationalism and the Millerites heavily influenced and inspired many of these religious sects.
Dispensationalism
In 1909, Cyrus I. Scofield published his Scofield reference Bible, which pushed a new idea called “Dispensationalism.” Every Bible student understands the Bible contains various dispensations in the form of time periods, but Dispensationalism pushes seven unique periods of time in which God dealt with His people in different ways. In other words, He has not saved everyone by grace through faith—that belongs to our current (sixth) dispensation. And the seventh is to come, which involves physical Israel reclaiming Jerusalem and Jesus sitting on His earthly throne for 1000 years. Dispensationalism has two distinct peoples of God living side by side in the present—Christians and Jews—and God has separate plans for both. The system claims to rely on a “literal interpretation” of Scriptures. It really took off in 1864/65, and the teachings have become accepted widely among mainstream denominations. The Left Behind series is based on dispensational premillennialism.
Classical Dispensationalism started in the early 1800s with John Nelson Darby (1800–1882), an Irishman best known as an original founder of “The Plymouth Brethren Church,” which intentionally distanced themselves from denominations around, not wanting to be categorized with any one else.
Later, Cyrus Scofield (1843–1921) boosted dispensationalism in a major way when he published his Scofield Reference Bible, KJV containing notes to help readers with dispensational theology. He was heavily involved in Bible conferences and public events where he taught this. He wrote in the introduction to the Scofield Bible, “Great words of scripture…are defined in simple, non-technical terms.” People of the time were seeking religious direction, and the claim to simple, biblical exposition was a mighty hook.
Years later, Charles Ryrie (1925–2016), dean of doctoral studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, published the Ryrie Study Bible through Moody publishers in 1978. He has also published several books on dispensationalism, premillennialism, the rapture, etc.
We should understand that Dispensationalism is relatively new, dating only back to the 1830s.
We should examine our own understandings and teachings to see if (how) we have been affected by dispensational theology.
The Millerites
“In 1831, William Miller [1782-1849] — variously described as an Atheist, a Baptist, or a Deist before this time — began preaching his belief that the world would end around the year 1843 with the Second Coming of Christ. “[1]
Things started slowly, but he finally made a friend of Joshua V. Himes, who helped promote him and his teachings—much of it through the Signs of the Times paper.
Miller first predicted the Second Coming of Christ would be in 1843. Although Miller had between 50,000 and 100,000 followers by then, Jesus didn’t come.
“…his message was actually pretty orthodox for the time; it meshed well with many variations on Christian beliefs in the states. This is because many Christian sects implied and/or taught that the newfound colonies in America were to be the staging grounds for the coming kingdom of Christ, a somewhat arrogant, but appealing, idea that Miller’s message reinforced.”[2]
After about four or five attempts at getting the date right, the movement finally died out. But remnants of his ideas continued on in various other sects.
He was one of the first pushers of the modern version of premillennialism.
If we may believe Ellen G. White’s book, The Great Controversy, she devotes chapter 18 to “An American Reformer”—William Miller. According to her,
“Endeavoring to lay aside all preconceived opinions, and dispensing with commentaries, [Miller] compared scripture with scripture by the aid of the marginal references and the concordance. He pursued his study in a regular and methodical manner… As he studied with earnest prayer for divine enlightenment, that which had before appeared dark to his understanding was made clear… With intense interest he studied the books of Daniel and the Revelation, employing the same principles of interpretations as in the other scriptures, and found, to his great joy, that the prophetic symbols could be understood… Angels of heaven were guiding his mind and opening the Scriptures to his understanding.”[3]
“As with earlier Reformers, the truths which he presented were not received with favor by popular religious teachers. As these could not maintain their position by the Scriptures, they were driven to resort to the sayings and doctrines of men, to the traditions of the Fathers. But the word of God was the only testimony accepted by the preachers of the advent truth. ‘The Bible, and the Bible only,’ was their watchword.”[4]
White argues that “Protestants followed in the steps of Romanists” because they were not accepting the literal word of God—the prophecies so clearly laid out that Miller had discovered.[5] Thus, the Adventists separate themselves from both the Roman Catholic and Protestant branches of Christendom. In other words, they isolate themselves, and they claim their isolation comes from being the only ones to faithfully interpret Scripture as it should be interpreted.
White conveniently ignores the parts of Miller’s history which prove him to be a failed prophet. 1844 came and went without a heavenly fuss. White writes, “As the disciples [of Christ] were mistaken in regard to the kingdom to be set up at the end of the seventy weeks, so Adventists were mistaken in regard to the event to take place at the expiration of the 2300 days… The message was designed for the testing and purification of the church.”[6] The Adventists eventually decided that Christ’s kingdom did come in 1844, but it turned out to be a spiritual return, not a physical. Where’s the literalness in that? They have successfully transformed a non-event into the most spectacular moment of history. But we must accept their word by faith.
The Millerite sect illustrates the willingness of so many people at the time to believe in a new idea, however strange and however unorthodox. They were willing to believe that man was given special revelation, and they believed the United States, land of freedom, was somehow exceptionally blessed by God by way of divine revelation!
Closing Thoughts
Those years were filled with men and women who hungered for some great religious experience that matched the wild spirit of exploration and growth in the United States. Many lent their ears to novel ideas and followed self-proclaimed prophets. Why shouldn’t God reveal hidden mysteries to one person who was digging for them? Why shouldn’t God bring all of history to a crescendo in our days? Americans felt specially blessed, and it’s such a human desire to know something no one else does.
I speak to men in the jail here in Covington, LA, each week, and for some reason jail is a hotbed of conspiracy theories. Many of them are deep believers in premillennial dispensationalism (though they don’t know those words). They constantly insist that Jesus is about to come back. Do you see the wars and rumors of wars? It’s never been this bad. Obviously the end times are upon us. This is what the Jehovah’s Witnesses were saying 100 years ago. This is what the Millerites believed in 1843.
Orthodoxy keeps us grounded. Those who rebel against the creeds (“I believe” statements) of the early Christians and who take a strict just-me-and-my-bible approach will fall into the same traps as Miller, White, Russell, Eddy, and many others who have “discovered” something novel in the Bible and created a following based on it. It’s dangerous.
[1] http://anomalyinfo.com/Stories/1831-1843-william-miller-and-millerites
[2] Ibid.
[3] White, E. G. The Great Controversy. Remnant Publications, Inc., pp. 168-169.
[4] Ibid., p. 177.
[5] Ibid. p. 179.
[6] Ibid. p. 186.
[1] https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/revival-at-cane-ridge