Open and Shut Door
BELIEVE ME OR NOT
[From the Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, Second Revised Edition,
Commentary Reference Series vol. 11 (Hagerstown, Maryland: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 1996), pp. 249-252.]
OPEN AND SHUT DOOR. An expression derived from Rev. 3:7, 8, where Christ is
described as the one "that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and
no man openeth" (an allusion to Isa. 22:22), and as the one who says to the
Philadelphia church, "Behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no
man can shut it." Seventh-day Adventists have applied these texts to the
closing of the first phase and the opening of the second and final phase of
Christ's ministry in heaven, where He has been the Christian's high priest
since His sacrifice on the cross (see Sanctuary). Christ's dual ministry was
prefigured by the service of the ancient high priest, who served "unto the
example and shadow of heavenly things" (Heb. 8:5). In the earthly sanctuary
he served daily in the holy place, the first apartment of the sanctuary, and
once a year in the Most Holy Place, the inner shrine where was the golden
ark in which were the tables of the Ten Commandments and over which appeared
the visible glory of God. This entering into the Holy of Holies took place
on the Day of Atonement in the ceremony of the cleansing of the sanctuary
(Lev. 16).
In applying the type to Christ, Ellen White declared: "Then Jesus rose up
and shut the door in the holy place, and opened the door in the Most Holy,
and passed within the Second Veil, where He now stands by the ark; and where
the faith of Israel now reaches. I saw that Jesus had shut the door in the
holy place, and no man can open it; and that He had opened the door in the
Most Holy and no man can shut it: (Rev. 3:7, 8); and that since Jesus has
opened the door into the Most Holy Place, which contains the ark, the
commandments have been shining out to God's people, and they are being
tested on the Sabbath question" (Present Truth 1:21, August 1849; also Early
Writings, p. 42).
This application corrected, not immediately but eventually, a
misunderstanding of the "shut door" of the parable of the wise and foolish
virgins--a misconception that had been derived from the Millerite movement
of 1844.
The Millerites had based their expectation of the return of Christ
principally on Daniel's prophecy of the cleansing of the sanctuary at the
end of 2300 prophetic days (Dan. 8:14). At the climax of the movement, in
1844, they [p. 250] specifically connected this prophecy with the
purification ceremony of the ancient Day of Atonement as typifying the
ending of Christ's mediation for sins (though they saw the cleansing of the
sanctuary as the purging of the earth in the final fires). At the same time
they gave increased and specific emphasis to the prophetic parable of the
wise and foolish virgins (Matt. 25).
William Miller had likened his message of the expected Second Advent to the
"midnight cry" of the parable ("Behold, the bridegroom cometh"), and had
emphasized the point that the wise virgins, who were ready to meet the
arriving bridegroom, entered with him into the wedding, where the door was
shut after them, leaving the tardy foolish virgins outside. The virgins he
interpreted as those summoned to meet the returning Lord; the wedding, the
eternal kingdom, from which the unready would be forever excluded. "The door
was shut," he said, "implies the closing up of the mediatorial kingdom, and
finishing the gospel period" (William Miller, Evidence . . . of the Second
Coming of Christ [1840], p. 237).
Unlike most others who were then looking for the near advent of Christ (see
Premillennialism), the Millerites placed strong emphasis on the doctrine
that at the coming of Christ every human being would be either ready or
unready to meet Him, and that opportunity for salvation would then cease.
This in theological parlance was called the close of human probation. The
Millerites taught "that the notion of a probation after Christ's coming is a
lure to destruction, entirely contrary to the Word of God, which positively
teaches that when Christ comes the door is shut, and such as are not ready
can never enter in" ("Boston Second Advent Conference," The Signs of the
Times 3:69, June 1, 1842; reprinted in SB, No. 1083).
Because they expected Christ to return at the close of the 2300 prophetic
days, they had emphasized the close of probation at the end of that period.
Therefore, for a short period after the disappointment of October 1844,
Miller and many others thought that their work for the world was done, that
there was only a little "tarrying time" left--perhaps but a few days or
months--until Christ would come. In December 1844 Miller wrote: "We have
done our work in warning sinners, and in trying to awake a formal church.
God, in his providence has shut the door, we can only stir one another up to
be patient; and be diligent to make our calling and election sure. We are
now living in the time specified by Malachi iii:18, also Daniel xii:10, and
Rev. xxii:10-12. In this passage we cannot help but see, that a little while
before Christ should come, there would be a separation between the just and
unjust, the righteous and wicked, between those who love his appearing, and
those who hate it. And never since the days of the apostles, has there been
such a division line drawn as was drawn about the 10th or 23rd day of the
7th Jewish month" (William Miller letter, in Advent Herald, Dec. 11, 1844,
p. 142; reprinted in Western Midnight Cry 4:25, Dec. 21, 1844).
Others expressed themselves similarly at first. But J. V. Himes, Miller's
most prominent colleague, and others held that since Christ had not come,
the 2300-day prophetic period must not have ended in 1844; that it must
extend to some other date in the future, and therefore that the fulfillment
of the "midnight cry" of the parable of the virgins was also still future;
and that the October 1844 movement (see Seventh-Month Movement) was a
mistake, and was not a fulfillment of prophecy. By the spring of 1845 the
main Millerite group, including Miller, had come to this view. This group,
still possessed of the idea that the "door" of the parable of the virgins
was none other than the "door of salvation," argued thus: Since Christ has
not come, the door of salvation is still open; therefore, the parable of the
virgins has not yet met fulfillment. They concluded that anyone who taught
that this parable had been fulfilled must believe that probation had ended,
and must, therefore, be ipso facto a "no-mercy" heretic. The phrase "shut
door" became an epithet.
But a minority continued to hold that the time had been correct; that the
mistake had been in the nature of the prophetic fulfillment; that in October
1844 the 2300 days had ended in the symbolic Day of Atonement and the
parable had been fulfilled (though not in the way that they had expected);
and therefore that the door of the parable--whatever it might mean--had been
shut in fulfillment of the prophecy. To them the phrase "shut door" was
equivalent to the affirmation of belief that the "true midnight cry" had
been the climax of a God-given message and the 1844 movement had been led of
God and permitted, in His providence, as a test of their consecration and
willingness to be ready to meet their Lord. Naturally these regarded the
majority, who had given up "the time," as turning their backs on the truth
and denying the Lord's leading in the "midnight cry."
[p. 251] Some continued to hold--as Miller had taught--that the door was
that of salvation, for they still expected Christ to return very shortly. As
time passed, some held that it was the door of "access" to listeners--that
obstinate and willful individuals had closed their ears to God's message for
that day; in either case there was no chance of winning acceptance of their
message by the world at that time. The unfortunate controversy over the
"shut door" magnified the subject unduly and prolonged the misunderstanding.
As might be expected, feelings ran high in this time of disillusionment and
confusion.
The extremists on the shut-door doctrine declared that Christ had come, not
literally, but "spiritually" (see Spiritualism [1]). But the small group
that formed the nucleus of the future Seventh-day Adventist Church opposed
alike the vagaries of those who declared that Christ had come spiritually
and the position of the majority who "denied their past experience" in the
1844 movement. They retained their confidence in the 1844 fulfillment, and
concluded that the mistake lay in the event they had expected.
They accepted the explanation of the Disappointment that was first advanced
by Hiram Edson on the day after the Disappointment, namely, that the
ministry of Christ as our high priest in the heavenly sanctuary had not
ended with the 2300 days, but had entered another phase, as symbolized (1)
by the high priest's entry into the Holy of Holies, the beginning of the
symbolic cleansing of the sanctuary, and (2) by the coming of the bridegroom
to the wedding (not to the earth); and that the end of this phase,
symbolized by the priest's coming out of the sanctuary and the bridegroom's
return from the wedding (Luke 12:36), was yet to come, and would be followed
by the Second Advent.
Their retention of the belief in the 1844 ending of the 2300 days and their
separating of the Second Advent from that prophetic period saved them from
the error to which the majority group was susceptible--that of seeking
future dates for the end. But it left them with the dilemma of either
accepting the no-mercy doctrine or correcting their view of the "shut door"
from the initial Millerite definition of it. They gradually came to see the
opening of the final phase of Christ's ministry as the shutting of the door
of the holy place and the opening of the door to the Holy of Holies--the
opening of a new message of the Sabbath, and the opening of a broadened
ministry to the world preceding the Second Advent. But this took time.
It is interesting to trace the steps by which the little groups that later
became the Seventh-day Adventists moved out of the shut-door dilemma and
solved the double problem: (1) Is the door shut? and (2) What is the door?
Ellen G. Harmon (later White) was accused of claiming divine revelation for
the no-mercy doctrine. This she denied. She stated later: "With my brethren
and sisters, after the time passed in forty-four I did believe no more
sinners would be converted. But I never had a vision that no more sinners
would be converted. . . . I was shown that there was a great work to be done
in the world for those who had not had the light and rejected it. Our
brethren could not understand this with our faith in the immediate appearing
of Christ" (Letter 2, 1874, in Selected Messages, book 1, p. 74).
Her first vision (December 1844) portrayed the "Advent people" journeying
along a path to the Holy City with the light of the "midnight cry" behind
them, and entering the city at the Second Advent. This, to those who
accepted it, meant reassurance that the 1844 message and movement had not
been a delusion; or to put it another way, that the 2300 days had ended and
the parable, with its "shut door," had been fulfilled, and that very shortly
they would see their Lord, who was delaying His appearance to test their
faith.
Her view in February 1845 was in agreement with Edson's explanation--Christ,
the high priest, going from the holy place to the Most Holy Place, within
the veil, explained as His going to receive the kingdom after which He would
"return from the wedding" to receive His waiting ones at the Second Advent.
In 1847 she connected this entering of the Holy of Holies with the shutting
of the door.
Thus both Hiram Edson and Ellen Harmon taught that Christ's work in the
sanctuary had not ended, but was continuing in another phase. However, they
thought that this phase would represent only a brief period.
When in 1848 she described a vision depicting the future SDA publications as
"streams of light that went clear round the world," the little group could
not comprehend that there was either the time or the possibility for them to
bear a message to the world at large.
In 1849 Ellen White had a vision of the heavenly sanctuary that further
depicted the significance of the "open and shut door," in connection with
the Sabbath message and in connection with Rev. 3:7, 8 (see extract quoted
[p. 252] near the beginning of this article). The shutting of one door meant
the opening of another.
In 1850 James White reported the accession of one man who "had made no
public profession of religion" before 1845. By the next year there was a
noticeable change. In April, White stated that the door was shut to "those
who had heard the everlasting gospel message and rejected it," but he held
that the following classes may be converted: (1) "erring brethren" in the
Laodicean church (the majority group of ex-Millerites), (2) children now
coming to the age of accountability, and (3) "hidden souls" compared with
the biblical "seven thousand" who had "not bowed unto Baal" (1 Kings 19:18),
who would be converted in the future "in His own time," when they hear the
message; but at present, he said, the message was for those in the Laodicean
church (editorial note in Review and Herald 1:64, Apr. 7, 1851).
In September he reported some converts from this third class. In December G.
W. Holt, a fellow minister in New York, wrote that "in some places where but
a few months since there was seemingly no sign of there being one child of
God, they are now springing up." The next February White reported "many,"
and by May "a large portion," of those who had had no connection with the
1844 movement. These accessions seem to have changed the picture. White
wrote in February, setting forth a new view of the "shut door": "It however
represents an important event with which the church is connected, that was
to occur prior to our Lord's return from the wedding. That event shuts out
none of the honest children of God, neither those who have not wickedly
rejected the light of truth, and the influence of the Holy Spirit"
(editorial note 1 in Review and Herald 2:94, Feb. 17, 1852).
After quoting Isa. 22:22 and Rev. 3:7, 8 on the shut and open door, he
continued: "This Open Door we teach, and invite those who have an ear to
hear, to come to it and find salvation through Jesus Christ. There is an
exceeding glory in the view that Jesus has OPENED THE DOOR into the holiest
of all. . . . If it be said that we are of the OPEN DOOR and seventh day
Sabbath theory, we shall not object; for this is our faith" (ibid. 95).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------