Gday James,
Just to clear up a few points from the start. William Miller after the great dissappointement of 1843-4 honestly and openly acknowledged his error.
The SDA church after being formed in the 1860s retained the 1844 date and reinterpreted it to be the start of the investigative judgement. Other churches such as the Advent christian church dont have the investigative judgement doctrine.
Other dates such as 1874 were used by second adventists to be the second comming of christ and an invisible presents. Most Adventist churches including the SDAs have never made a time for the second comming.
Anything written on SDA -JW connection and I would be on here in a heartbeat to tell you all about it.
For the purpose of youre question about Millers chronology I will refer to a book recently written by Kai Arasola who is the current president of east Finlands SDA conference. His recent doctoral dissertation from Uppsala University is now making its way through the Adventist scholarly world.
Kai writes, Miller utilised by God,
William Miller was a man of undoubted integrity and a thorough Christian was the founder of the Millerite Movement of the 1840s thet looked for Christs return about 1843-1844.
He insisted that the then current hope for an increasingly better world culminating in a millenium of blessedness was biblicly unfounded. He was correct. The Baptist farmer was . ahead of the theologians.
Miller Mistaken, But Miller accepted prevailing popular views about the interpretation of prophecy using the year-day principle to arrive at significant dates in the christian era and thereby contravened the warnings of Christ in Acts 1-7 and Matthew 24-36.
Millers methods refuted, Kai points out that William Miller had fifteen ways of arriving at 1843-44 as the general time of Christs return, The time prophecy of Daniel 8-14 was only one of Millers proofs and he gave no prominence to it . This is the one used by Adventists.
Bible scholard in Millers time and later looked at Millers fifteen proofs and found them without validity. There were few who could be called bible scholars who were in the Great Dissappointement of 1844.
Kai points out the flimsy nature of Millers chronological pillars. Kai emphasises that the whole scholarly world has repudiated them. He mentions that only Seventh day Adventists, The worldwide church of God and the Jehovahs Witnesses cling to Millers approach in interpreting Prophecy.
When Kai Mentions Seventh Day Adventism he is mainly talking about the traditional SDAs not the scholars of the church.
Critical Quotations,
Firstly and possibly most significantly one can consider what is missing in Millers rules. They make no mention of Christ of salvation or of the gospel. This matches the near total lack of devotional writing in Millers perodicals in spite of the fact that some historicits outside of Millerism sought to interpret prophecies with a Christocentric method only few Millerites expressed any concern about this.
The proofs rest on technical points like biblical and historical chronology which probably gave athe system. Laymen were unable to check the validity of the points themselves and emotional factors and the retoric of the arguement may have led many to decide in favour of Miller.
All of Millers calculations contain a mathematical error. Miller overlooked the non-existence of a year zero which indicates that no Millerite before 1844 did his homework correctly.
Millerites beleived that a multiplication of weak points makes one strong point. Thus the arguement was multiplied into 15 points some of which were justly ridiculed by opponents and brushed aside by supporters.the path of logic
Some of the proofs are not time prophecies at all or their actual intent is turned upside down. The power of religious convictions has rarely followed the paths of logic.
I beleive this book called 'The End of Historicism ' would be as helpfull to JWs as it is to SDAs Barry