Adventist Online

I have been looking at supposed SDA online sites. Unfortunately I am getting more and more confused with who is I find this guy teaching a 2520 prophecy..and all accounts he is an SDA layman.

How many more are amongst us? Do you ever think you are reading an SDA site when in fact it's not of our teaching?


A Review of Jeff Pippenger’s teachings - Norman McNulty, M.D.



*** Adventist Online Admin Note ***
Since this discussion is the top search result on Google for the term "Jeff Pippenger", we have seen a 'round up the troops' movement of Pippenger supporters.  They come here to defend beliefs which the Seventh-day Adventist Church has found to be baseless.  Beliefs which have lead these same supporters of Jeff Pippenger to leave the Seventh-day Adventist Church.  This is a web site for Seventh-day Adventists by Seventh-day Adventists.  Each new member must answer "Yes" to the following question to create a profile here:  "Do you agree to uphold the principles and beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist church in your conduct on this site and follow the Site Rules & Guidelines?"

Our Site Rules & Guidelines includes the following rule:

12. This is a site by Seventh-day Adventists for Seventh-day Adventists.  We welcome all seekers of God's truth here.  We believe that God will continue to reveal His truth to His people as time progresses.  Thus we are constantly seeking a better understanding of God and His word.  We welcome all that are doing the same. That said, if it becomes apparent that your purpose in being a member of this site is to promote a different agenda and/or sow discord among the brethren, your ability to interact with this site may be restricted.

We ask that all members uphold the pledge they made when joining this site.

Views: 33205

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion


This is the type of rhetoric against which I write. There are these claims about 'new light' from our opponents but I have not seen it. Smearing us with the same brush as Shepherds' Rod, et al. is patently unfair and misleading. I for one have no interest in starting a new movement or in leading people away from Adventism. I do not see how the understanding of the 2520 inherently does that. (It may be true that there are a few who believe the 2520 that lean in that direction but it cannot be attributed to the 2520 teaching.)

I do not believe in conspiracies.

I am only interested in Biblical arguments.

I think that people have always had differing views within Adventism and do not suggest that these are solely due to a persons spiritual condition. Ideas are one thing; obedience to God is another.

I am opposed to the misrepresentation of character that goes on within our church, no matter where it comes from. I do not believe in party spirit. The work of those who put together the website are doing a work that is harmful to the church. It stifles honest searching and pits brother against brother.

As Jackson notes above, James white endorsed the 2520 in the Review at the time Sister White Made the above statement. It seems deceptive to use Ellen white's endorsement of her husband's writing in the Review and apply it to something he wrote 13 years later and not apply it to a contemporary article. Note the dates...

“Then I saw that the paper [Review and Herald] would go and that it would be the means of bringing souls to a knowledge of the truth. I saw that James had not borne the burden alone but that the angels of God had assisted and had oversight of the paper.”  {13MR 299.1}  (Written December 25, 1850, at Paris, Maine.)

"Our minds were directed to that point of time, from the fact that dating the several prophetic periods from those years in which the best chronologers assign the fulfilment of those events which were to mark their commencement, they all seemed to terminate that year. This was, however, only apparent. We date the "seven times" or 2520 years, from the captivity of Manasseh, which is, with great unanimity, placed by chronologers B. C. 677. This date is the only one we have ever reckoned from, for the commencement of this period; and subtracting B. C. 677 from 2520 years, there remained but A. D. 1843. We, however, did not observe, that as it would require 677 full years B. C. and 1843 full years A. D. to complete 2520 years, that it would also oblige us to extend this period as far into A. D. 1844, as it might have commenced after the beginning of B. C. 677. The same was also true of the other periods. The great jubilee of 2450 years, commencing with the captivity of Jehoiakim B. C. 607; and the 2300 days, commencing with the 70 weeks B. C. 457, would respectively require 1843 full years after Christ added to as many full years before Christ, as the years in which we have always respectively commenced each period, to complete the number of years in each; and as subtracting from each period the date B. C. of its commencement, there would remain A. D. 1843, no reference whatever was made to the fraction of the year, which, in each case, had transpired from its commencement, and which would require that each period should extend as much beyond the expiration of A. D. 1843, as they respectively began after the commencement of the year B. C. from which they are dated." {December 1850 JWe, ARSH 13.20}

A question for you or Jackson.  Can you give me date that James White wrote his comments in "ND JW, PARA 7.1"?  I don't have that publication.  (I can only find it quoted on sites promoting 2520 beliefs.)

I think it would be helpful for all to see the timeline of the progression of Truth in our church.

Just because we considered an issue at one time does not make it truth for today.  Putting dates on the Church founders quotes used to support the 2520 will show that quite clearly.


Part of the issue dealing with the Ellen white quote endorsing James white's writing in the Review is that it occurred at the time of the quote ND JW, PARA 7.1. That is, Sister White endorsed James writing when he was writing in favour of the 2520. When He wrote his article rejecting the 2520 13 years later, she claims he was "unfit for study or for writing".

 "I was shown that our testimony was still needed in the church, and that we should labor to save ourselves trials and cares, and that we should preserve a devotional frame of mind. It is duty for those in the Office to tax their brains more, and my husband tax his less. Much time is spent by him upon various matters which confuse and weary his mind, and unfit him for study, or for writing, and hinder his light from shining in the Review as it should." { June 6, 1863 PH159 14.1}

As you say, it is important to put these quotes in their historical context.

What is the date of "ND JW, PARA 7.1"?

What is the actual publication?

Where can I read the it in it's entirety to get context?

It doesn't look like it was James White that said/wrote that quotation at all.  The ONLY places I can find that say James White said it are sites promoting this 2520 falsehood.

It looks to me like this quote is from THE ADVENT HERALD, AND SIGNS OF THE TIMES REPORTER [HIMES], VOL. 8 - November 13, 1844.

It is not attributed to James White but to the editors of that publication:  J. V. Himes, S. Bliss, & A. Hale.

Here is a link to the full issue.  You will find the quote half way down the page in the article “The Lord is at Hand.” BOSTON, NOVEMBER, 13 1844."  See the section '1843'.

This was something written immediately after the great disappointment by the editors of the Advent Herald.  Am I wrong about that?

If I'm not wrong, why are we being misled and told that these are James White's words?  To bolster the claim that he was confused?  To attempt to show he contradicted himself?  Yes, false quotes will do that.  ;-)

Jackson?  Theodore?

I just read it! You're right Vicenzo. Egw's quotes are being misapplied also on here! James White was not confused in 1863 or 64. He was completely in his right mind and his wife supported what he did.

Vince, yes you are correct. James white was quoting but that does not change the fact that he was agreeing with the quote. James White in reviewing our history states, "In reviewing the past, we shall quote largely from the writings of the leaders in the advent cause, and show that they once boldly advocated, and published to the world, the same position, relative to the fulfilment of Prophecy in the great leading advent movements in our past experience, that we now occupy; and that when the advent host were all united in 1844, they looked upon these movements in the same light in which we now view them, and thus show who have "LEFT THE ORIGINAL FAITH."" {August 1850 JWe, ADRE 1.6} 

Can you link to that publication.  (Are you looking at primary sources or just other pro-2520 websites?)

Vince, I find my quotes by reading the work of the pioneers. I have not taken a single quote from "pro-2520 websites". 

OK... then please supply the links:

August 1850 JWe, ADRE 1.6


I've already proven that your claim that James White wrote the last one is false by showing where it really came from.  That is why I am skeptical that you read the source.  (Where did you get the idea that James White wrote that if not from pro-2520 websites?)

Vince you need to read the whole article.


Site Sponsors


Adventist Single?
Meet other Single
Adventists here:
Join Free

USA members:

Support AO by
using this link:


© 2021   Created by Clark P.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service