A Response to the Video:
by Bob Pickle
Her Predictions and Views
#33: She said Christ would return in a few months. She said no such thing. The careful reader will note that her statement merely says that believers will be learning more quickly than they previously did.
Mrs. White attached the date of June 27, 1850, to the vision this quote comes from (Early Writings, p. 64). In 1854 she wrote basically the same thing:
Truths that we have been years learning must be learned in a few months by those who now embrace the Third Angel's Message. We had to search and wait [p. 34] the opening of truth, receiving a ray of light here and a ray there, laboring and pleading for God to reveal truth to us. But now the truth is plain; its rays are brought together. . . . There is no need of milk after souls are convinced of the truth. . . . It is a disgrace for those who have been in the truth for years to talk of feeding souls who have been months in the truth, upon milk. It shows they know little of the leadings of the Spirit of the Lord, and realize not the time we are living in.—Manuscript Releases, vol. 1, p. 33, italics added.
Notice the similarities in thought of this passage and Hebrews 5:11-6:3. According to Mrs. White, it is disgraceful to think that new believers must spend years learning the basics, the milk. Paul likewise urged that believers move on from the "milk" to the "strong meat."
Generally speaking, the new believer learns today in a few months the truths of God's word that took years back then to hammer out. Mrs. White's words are literally true.
Besides, if she were predicting a date for Christ's return, she would be contradicting the statements she made during the same time frame that opposed setting dates for Christ's return (see #14 and #17).
Please note: The video quoted from her September 23, 1850, vision under #17, a vision that opposed date setting. The contributors to the video should have noticed this inconsistency in their logic. To quote from an 1850 vision that was against date setting, and then to unnecessarily portray another 1850 vision as setting dates does not make sense.
One other inconsistency: The statement in question was first published in 1851 in Experience and Views, and was then republished in Early Writings in 1882. Mr. Ratzlaff says on the video that embarrassing material was deleted in later publications (see #52, #53). Why then was this statement still included in Early Writings if it really means what Mr. Cleveland says it means?