SDA position on the Daily

[M. T. Cross]

It's really too bad bro that you don't embrace the day-for-year principle. You know that you can't be considered a true Adventist in God's eyes by accepting Jesuit teaching?

So you speak for God?

I could possibly understand if you said that he considered a true SDA by the GC or by fellow SDA's.

But its pretty arrogant and condescending for you to speak for your God and what he sees in his eyes.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

But its pretty arrogant and condescending for you to speak for your God and what he sees in his eyes.

Hmmm...I think you are on to something!

[Gibs]

The 70 wks is proven to be in yrs by the fruitition of the prophecy. It proved to be the time allotted to the Jews, and imediately at the end, started the Gospel to the Gentiles.

Also in that last wk of yrs the Redeemer did die in the mid year of that wk of yrs.

This prophecy also proves God that He is one knowing the end from the beginning, it also proves the the further on running of the full 2300 yrs then would reach to the beginning time of the end, our yr 1844.

You can take that home with you, as it is proven to be true, we can now see the end closing in if one is half awake. We can know this has not missed also as we are at the end of 6,000 yrs of man on earth.

The wise of His people will understand, the prophecy is given to them and is Spiritually discerned. His Spirit must be in one to see and understand!

Enjoy the ride now as it is soon to come to the end of the road, ended!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[duane2064]

there is no silver bullet:

neither can you say:

all days are days

nor can you say

all days are years

below: assume prophtic_years(360-days) unles solar_years are stated.

- 70 weeks =490 years + 10 jubilees

     = 500 solar years

- "season_and_a_time" =

     = 450 days

- "1260 days"(rev 11 & 12)

     = 1260 days

- a_time_times_and an half= time_and_times_and_half_a_time= three_days_and_an_half(rev 11 & 12, dan 12)

     = 1260 days

- 42_months("make war with the saints") = time_and_times_and_the_dividing_of_time("made war with the saints")

     = 1260 days

there are three separate 1260s listed above, the first two are consecutive the 3rd start halfway into the 2nd. so the math looks like this:

- 1260+1260+630+450

     = 3600 days or

     = 10 years

- 2300 evening/mornings(masoretic text)

     = 2300 days

- "10 days"(rev 2:10)

     = 10 years

- "1000 years"

     = 1000 years

- 1335 days

     = 1335 days

- 1335-1290(length of 7th seal)

     = 45 days

if you can agree that "about the space of half an hour" is 45 days. then you can say:

about 1_hour = 90 days

2300/24= 95-days

exactly 1_hour = 95 days

2520-2300 = 220 days = "beginning of sorrows" begins with trump_1

then comes 2300 days = "tribulation" begins with trump_2

then comes 630 days = "great tribulation" begins with seal_6

then comes 450 days = "season and a time" begins with vial_7 & angel_7(rev14:19)

- "hour and a month and a day and a year" 95+30+1+360

     = 486 days

[Ted Oplinger]

there is no silver bullet:

neither can you say:

all days are days

nor can you say

all days are years

below: assume prophtic_years(360-days) unles solar_years are stated.

- 70 weeks =490 years + 10 jubilees

     = 500 solar years

- "season_and_a_time" =

     = 450 days

- "1260 days"(rev 11 & 12)

     = 1260 days

- a_time_times_and an half= time_and_times_and_half_a_time= three_days_and_an_half(rev 11 & 12, dan 12)

     = 1260 days

- 42_months("make war with the saints") = time_and_times_and_the_dividing_of_time("made war with the saints")

     = 1260 days

there are three separate 1260s listed above, the first two are consecutive the 3rd start halfway into the 2nd. so the math looks like this

- 2300 evening/mornings(masoretic text)

     = 2300 days

- 1260+1260+630+450

     = 3600 days or

     = 10 years

- "10 days"(rev 2:10)

     = 10 years

- "1000 years"

     = 1000 years

- 1335 days

     = 1335 days

- 1335-1290(length of 7th seal)

     = 45 days

if you can agree that "about the space of half an hour" is 45 days. then you can say:

about 1_hour = 90 days

2300/24= 95-days

exactly 1_hour = 95 days

2520-2300 = 220 days = "beginning of sorrows" begins with trump_1

then comes 2300 days = "tribulation" begins with trump_2

then comes 630 days = "great tribulation" begins with seal_6

then comes 450 days = "season and a time" begins with vial_7 & angel_7(rev14:19)

- "hour and a month and a day and a year" 95+30+1+360

     = 486 days

So...we are questioning now the year/day rule for investigating prophecy?

God told Moses the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years - a year for each day the spies roamed the Promised Land. What was prophecy then was fulfilled 40 years later.

God's own instruction to Moses - Numbers 14:28-34

God told Ezekiel to bear the iniquity of both Israel and Judah, assigning a day for each year of iniquity - Ezekiel 4:4-6

God, by His own authority, assigned the symbolism to prophecy (Numbers) and spiritual meaning (Ezekiel). God then teaches man to use this where God puts the events and symbols within man's understanding. All of the time prophecies have associated events and symbols associated with them. These also come from God's authority, not man's.

In the 1830's, an itinerant Methodist preacher named Josiah Litch used this same assigning of time symbolism from Numbers and Ezekiel to accurately predict the passing of the Islamic Ottoman Empire as a sovereign "Great Nation".

Josiah used the two time prophecies in Revelation 9 to this effect.

Josiah pinpointed the rise of Islam as the blowing of the 5th trumpet, treating Islam as a scourge against a fallen Christianity - and its efforts to assert authority through the remains of the Roman Empire (a thought shared by many in history, including Martin Luther and Sir Isaac Newton).

Using the fall of Nicomedia on July 27, 1299 as the start point, the 5 months (read 150 days to 150 years) put prophetic time at July 27, 1449. During this 5 months/150 years time, Christianity throughout Asia Minor was wiped away as the Islamic warriors consolidated and digested their conquest of Asia Minor. Christians were afflicted in every way during the this 150 years.

The year 1449 saw the Byzantine Empire, headquartered at Constantinople, all but gone. The Ottoman Empire had gone around the city to invade Europe in different areas of the Balkans, yet this fortress still stood tall. The emperor Paleologus died in 1449, leaving no heir. Constantine Deacozes was named to succeed, but would not accept the sovereign title until he had permission from the Ottoman caliph to assume the throne, which he obtained on ~July 27, 1449.

This began the next trumpet's time period - the hour-day-month-year prophecy. Again, using God's assigning of time symbol, Josiah calculated this time to be 15 days + 1 year + 30 years + 360 years = 391 years, 15 days.

July 27, 1449 + 391 years, 15 days = August 11, 1840. Josiah very publicly and unabashedly proclaimed this exact date to see the passing of the Ottoman Empire as a greater sovereign power persecuting the Christian nations. When people - even William Miller - began backpedalling and distancing themselves from Josiah, fearing the ridicule, Josiah stuck with the Biblical prediction.

On August 11, 1840, the Ottoman Empire ceded its sovereignty, placing itself under the Christian nations of Russia, Prussia, France, and England, due to the rising of Egypt as a new (and competing) center of Islamic power.

Josiah Litch was vindicated in his usage of what God assigned in His own authority as a time symbolism for prophetic interpretation and spiritual meaning. The 5 months prophecy, combined with the hour-day=month=year prophecy, saw an exact fulfillment.

This anchored the 5th and 6th trumpets and the 70 weeks prophecies immovably.

This paved the way for the usage of the 2300 morning/evening prophecy (as the extension of the 70 weeks) by William Miller. While that led to the Great Disappointment in 1844, we now know they got the date right, but the event wrong.

The symbolism is by God's assigning and authority, not man's. Where man applies it as God teaches him to, it works every single time.

And..."about the space of an half an hour" is 7 days, according to the time symbol God assigned.

Blessings,

[duane2064]

in daniel 8 the ram pushed south recently when russia moved in to georgia, 100 miles from iran. after that it is all unfulfilled prophecy. all the trumpets and seals and vials are all in the future. so for math, i don't have alot of math pointing back to the past, but here is what i have, first laying out the 70 weeks:

1- 62 weeks ends with Jesus birth

2- 30 years of Jesus non-ministry life

3- 3.5 years of Jesus ministry

4- gap 2000+ years

5- 7 weeks begin on the day of atonement after the six day war

6- jubilee-year begins at the end of the 7 weeks on the day of atonement 2016 which marks the 4th trumpet

7- 3.5 years of Jesus ministry begins with the 5th seal and ends with the 6th seal also the 5th seal ends the first 1260-days(not years)

62*7= 434 +9(jubilees)= 443

so from:

442bc + 443(solar_years)= 2ad(birth of Jesus)

2ad + 30y(Jesus non-ministry life) = 32ad

32+3.5= 35ad(Jesus resurection)

the length of a "little season" is from the 5th seal to the 7th seal. up to the 5th is 1260, and after the 7th is 45, and the length of the trib is 3600. so the math is simple.

3600-1260-45=

2295(little season)

2295*4 = 9180(little year)

since little refers to wormwood shortening the year, then little_year is really:

heavenly_year(9180/360= 25.5py)

80 heavenly_years(25.5py)= 2040py

2040*360/365.25=

2011y(solar years)

so:

2ad + 2011sy = 2013ad

i really don't think i have gotten to anyone, but i have to try. "under present conditions(EW)" i think you should really take a look at my pages:

little season

http://www.saeods.com/season.html

daniel's daily

http://www.saeods.com/dandaily.html

SUN TZU'S 4-HORSE "DESTRUCTION CYCLE"

http://www.saeods.com/four.html

DANIEL'S symbols

http://www.saeods.com/symbols.html

so what is 2040py(prophetic years)

2000 is half of 4000

which is part of 4040 which is part of 5050.5

so 4040. years ago Melchizedek met Abram

4000.0 years, begins with Melchizedek meeting Abram then:

  40.0 years of the shame of judah then

   0.4 begin pretrib then

   0.1 .4+.1=.5 = half a year = 180 days then

  10.0 years of tribulation then

1000.0 years of Jesus reign on earth

breaking down just the 2040

2000 years, begins with Melchizedek meeting Abram then:

2000 years, begins with Jesus birth then

  40 years of the shame of judah

brings you to 2013 ad

its time to wake up people

[Lysimachus]

Quote:

Read Fundamental 24, and you tell me how on earth it is possible to believe in that without the day-year principle. Impossible!

Agreed. Thanks for pointing that out. Does the day-year principle hold true for the millenium (meaning that the millenium with be 360,000 or 365,000 years long)? If not, why not, if the principle holds true for all of the other time-related prophecies in Revelation?

Please take the time to digest the following information and carefully evaluate the arguments:

1. Whenever the time number is tied to "symbols", such as beasts, horns, winds, Jezebel, harlot woman, lions, seven churches (representing time periods) as representing seven golden candlesticks, Olive Trees (as two witnesses), an angel standing on the sea etc. etc., then, the time period is designated to be symbolic if spoken in an unnatural expression.

2. Whenever an "unnatural" use of the time period is employed, in connection with these symbols, it is to be understood as symbolic. For example, "three years and six months" (Luke 4:25; James 5:17)--this is a "natural" use. An "unnatural" use would be "twelve hundred and sixty days" or "forty and two months" or a "time, times, and dividing of time". All these expressions designate a symbolic use of the time period in question. These expressions are not according to standard calendar speech.

3. The expression "one thousand years" in Revelation 20 is a "natural" expression, not an "unnatural expression". Just like the expression "seventy years" in Jeremiah and Daniel.

4. The expression "seventy weeks" is an "unnatural expression". If it were "natural", the angel would have told Gabriel "one year and four months". Also, 2300 evening-mornings would have been stated as being "six years and a quarter", or "three years, two months, two weeks and six days" (if basing it on the 1150 version, which most scholars reject). The "seventy weeks" are also tied to the symbolic vision with symbols given in Daniel 8 as alluded to in Daniel 9:21.

5. The scriptures demand the following of the time period in question:

1. That it be Exactly 42 months (Rev. 11:2; 12:6)

2. That it be Exactly 1260 days (Rev. 11:3; 13:5)

3. That it be Exactly 3.5 years (Dan. 7:25; 12:7; Rev. 12:14)

For 1260 days to be exactly 42 months, this must mean each year in this prophetic formula be exactly 360 days.

But, there is no Solar Year that contains exactly 360 days, and there is no Lunar Year that contains exactly 360 days either. Thus we have a real problem on our hands making this literal time.

If we go by the Solar Year of 365.2422 days, then we must multiply it by 3.5:

365.2422 x 3.5 = 1,278 days... not 1260. That's an 18 day discrepancy!

That being said, 1260 days (which the Bible also calls "42 months") is not actually 42 months, but less than 41 and 1/2 months.

But let's assume we are using a Lunar Calendar then:

A prophecy of 42 months or 1260 days requires that each month be exactly "30 days" in length.

But a Lunar Month is never exactly 30 days long. On average, it is 29.530588 days in length.

That would make each Lunar Year 354.367056 days in length. NOT 360!!

Remember, 360 x 3.5 = 1260!

But no, we must go by the Lunar Calendar as do Futurists, and see what we come up to:

354.367056 x 3.5 = 1240.284696 days! NOT 1260! It gets worse, it's now 20 days off! and LESS!

(you can come to this same calculation if you simply multiply 42 months x 29.530588 days)

We see now why God gave us this time period in 3 definite phrases, where the specification of this prophecy requires the time to be:

1. Exactly "forty and two months" (42 months)

2. Exactly "one thousand two hundred and three score days" (1260 days)

3. Exactly "time, times, and dividing of time" (3.5 years)

With this in mind, we see why symbolic time is the ONLY available option left to make these time units work out with any real time period in Bible prophecy. There is no existing month with exactly 30 days, and there is no existing year with exactly 360 days. It can only be a symbolic time measurement.

The day-year principle, therefore, with this method of time, is demanded and forced upon us.

The expression "one thousand years" however, does not require this. It is a natural expression.

6. As perspicaciously demonstrated by a number of our scholars, we have the following formula:

Literal > Spiritual > Literal

Prior to the New Testament, the focus was on literal Israel, literal Palestine, literal earthly Jerusalem. This was the literal earthly reign under the Mosaic Law.

What starts as literal ends up spiritual during the Christian dispensation, but reverts back to Literal after the millennium. The 1000 years is that dividing line.

After the New Testament was inaugurated by Christ's blood, we entered the Dispensation of Grace. That is, a Kingdom of Grace--which is spiritual based on the Davidic Covenant, as Christ Jesus sits on His throne in heaven ruling this Kingdom of Grace. Now everything went from a literal earthly reign, to a spiritual global reign in Christ's Church.

However, the moment Christ comes crashing through the clouds, the Kingdom of Grace will be terminated (there will be no more grace), and the Kingdom of Glory (a literal kingdom) will be established. Christ will visibly and literally appear, and the kingdom will be literally realized from that point forward.

Beginning in Revelation 20, the bulk of the events described go back to literal.

In previous passages, you have the persecution of God's people, which represent Spiritual Israel and Spiritual Jerusalem. It is global-and-world-wide. Beginning in Revelation 20, however, there will be a literal siege of a literal city.

The same principle that things apply literally after the millennium have a spiritual application before the millennium is seen to operate in the prophetic descriptions concerning Armageddon. As nothing in the Revelator's post-millennial descriptions pertaining to Jerusalem, Israel and her enemies has a literal application before the millennium, the teaching of a pre-millennial literal gathering of nations to Palestine is out of harmony with the teaching of the Scriptures.

The belief of a literal, military gathering to Palestine for a literal "war" before the millennium violates the principle of interpretation which shows that the "war," or "battle," against the literal city of God after the millennium has its spiritual counterpart before the millennium in the gathering of spiritual forces against God's spiritual city, the church. The Revelator's descriptions link together the events concerning spiritual Israel (the spiritual Jerusalem) before the millennium and those concerning the saints in the New Jerusalem after the millennium. The 1,000 years between the events associated with the spiritual Jerusalem at the time of the second advent and those associated with the literal Jerusalem at the third advent are not symbolic years--not 360,000 years, reckoned by the day for a year principle employed in prophetic symbolism--because the spiritual dispensation ends at the second advent.

Confusion prevailing all throughout the religious world to-day concerning last-day prophecies is caused by a failure to understand the prophecies pertaining to "Israel." The Third Angel's Message gives the spiritual meaning of "Israel" and those things pertaining to her, thus showing the spiritual application before the millennium and the literal application after the millennium. What the "Babylonian" theologians expect to literally transpire on earth during the millennium is now being spiritually fulfilled: the literal fulfillment on earth of the prophecies pertaining to Israel takes place after the millennium.

Ellen White made the following statement:

"Many of our people do not realize how firmly the foundation of our faith has been laid." (1 SM, 206)

When she said that, she certainly wasn't kidding. She knew what she meant when she said this.

Conclusion:

No prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation. 2 Peter 1:20.

To depend on our own private interpretation, simply because we "think" we see some "inconsistencies", we end up committing theological suicide, and end up violating the principle of "in a multitude of counsellors, there is safety" (Proverbs 11:14).

More than just praying and asking guidance from the Holy Spirit in our studies---and also also being careful to not rely our own private interpretation, we must also make sure to let God speak to us by taking into consideration what our forefathers taught over the many centuries. We have a great "cloud of witnesses" over the centuries who have experienced the ire of the dragon, and suffered intense persecution. Many Protestant Reformers as well as other Christian sects in the mountains, such as the Waldenses, died on the stakes, guillotines, dungeons, racks, and many other brutal torture devices for their faith. Many of them were "witnesses" to the fierce persecutions whom they themselves identified as the Antichrist power, and testified to the horrors they experienced. I feel that if we just read the scriptures and came only to our own personal interpretations without considering the viewpoints of all these great men and women who gave their lives for the Bible and the truth during these many centuries of persecution and tribulation, we would be placing our judgment and interpretive skill as superior to everyone else's over the great span of centuries. Yet we must know that the same Holy Spirit who is guiding us in our study of the scriptures is the VERY same Holy Spirit that guided them as they earnestly prayed during those years of suffering, sweat, and great agony. Truth is always progressive, but new light never "eclipses" and "erases" the old foundations laid by the old light. Instead, it "adds" and "expands", and brings to view a clearer, and more comprehensive understanding of truth. It is like a puzzle...at the beginning stages, few pieces are put together. Over the centuries, more pieces are added....but never does God come along and say "here is a new puzzle, now throw away ALL the old pieces!". If you know what I mean?Sadly, many in these last days are doing just that. They say, "forget all that! This is how it is!"---and now, as Paul predicted, we have "every wind of doctrine flying to and fro!" (Eph. 4:14). But as we know, "the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth MORE and MORE unto the perfect day!" (Prov 4:18) It shines more and more. If the early stages of "light" were false, then it could not properly be considered "light". Thus, old light is truth. New light only expands upon that old light, and makes it clearer and brighter!

This is precisely why Adventism is so solid, and so powerful. It is not built on flimsy research of Ellen White and a few pioneers. It is built on layers and layers of solid foundations that have been constructed over the last 2 millennia. It is not a "re-write" of the unanimous testimony of the Fathers, rather an elaborate expansion.

Unfortunately, when Dispensationalist and Futurist authors of today come along and erase the day-year principle, they are essentially violating every major principle of prophetic interpretation imaginable (relying on private interpretation), sweeping under the proverbial rug all our forefathers, throwing away the old puzzle, and recreating their own puzzle rather than adding to the puzzle. It's basically saying, "forget what the unanimous voices of our forefathers said over the centuries---we are more right then they, so we will rewrite ALL of prophecy".

To go against the day-for-year principle is, in essence, theological and eschatological suicide on almost every front.

God bless,

Lysimachus

[Guest]

Exactly!

[joeb]

This last post of yours was really good, Lysimachus. I learned from it.

[CoAspen]

Remember...SDA's have their own 'hidden' Bible 'codes'!

All of this number manipulation is mind boggling!!!!!

[Guest]

Yeah, those old SDA's. I know what you mean..

[hch]

So...we are questioning now the year/day rule for investigating prophecy?

It is odd that we as a people would try to make the word of God fit our understanding of it and then limit Him to what we see. It is a "one size fits all" mentality.

Henry Ford used that ideology and it served him well for years. You could purchase a model A or T in any color you wanted as long as it was black (after all black is the presence of all the colors).

One of the characteristics of time is that it is of a defined duration. Time has a standard measurement whether it is a second, minute, or hour.

But in Bible prophecy a day can be symbolic of a year.

Nothing wrong with that principle except the inconsistency with which it is applied.

Example: Revelation 10

setting is that it aligns with the 1844 disappointment.

Then comes the command "time shall be no longer"

long time = day for a year

after 1844 should the time in Revelation be measured in regular time?

There are lots of references to time in Revelation 11, 12, 13, etc. Are they all fulfilled before 1844 as a day for a year?

How about the 42-months of Revelation 13?

day for a year before 1844?

Literal time after 1844 when prophecy has its final fulfillment?

So you want to keep time in Revelation after 1844 as a day for a year?

How long do you suppose that the 1,000 years of Satan's confinement will be?

Where is the consistency?

[Ted Oplinger]

Good question, hch. Where is the consistency?

The consistency is there. Revelation does not flow as a smooth book, as one would pick up a simple story and find a single plot flowing in time from start to finish.

Revelation is a complex detailing of vision; according to some, it was cast in two visions.

The book has several different sections, not necessarily related to the chapter numbers, and not necessarily chronological to each other. Some points (like Chapters 2 & 3) have multiple applications, each entirely plausible, correct, yet distinct from each other.

Many sections contain, or end with, a question which the next section answers.

Confusing? Not really.

hch, do not treat Revelation 6-20 as if all occurs chronologically, one after the other. Chronology is not intended chapter to chapter, as our chapter/verses format are artificial devices put into the Bible long after it was canonized.

Many have studied and seen that the Seals 1-6 of chapter 6 trace over the same time period as Trumpets 1-6 of chapters 8 & 9. Additionally Chapter 10, and much of 11, are seen to answer questions posed in both chapter 6 and chapter 9. Moreover, the 7th Seal, the 7th Trumpet, and the 7th Plague all describe the same event, even though they are chapters and sections apart.

Through it all, there is a very logical placement and sequence of content that is revealed below what looks on the surface to be a jumble of weird scenes and characters.

Revelation 12-14 each stand alone as sections. Chronology breaks at each section, because each section starts with specifically different times.

Revelation 12, for instance, begins chronologically well before Genesis. This chapter provides us a generalized picture of the Great Controversy from the initial rebellion in heaven, through the realizing of the Covenant Promise of the Redeemer, and past John's day to the days when God's Reformation Movement began gathering momentum. The time prophecy within this chapter (verse 14) takes place prior to 1844. No inconsistency there.

Chronologically, Revelation 13 begins where Daniel 7 leaves off. Daniel's 4th beast has the same description as Revelation 13's Sea Beast. They are the same entity. Revelation 13 unfolds more detail of Daniel's prophecy, beginning with Rome, and pursuing the earthly part of the Great Controversy through worldly agencies allied to Satan.

The Sea Beast shows the original 4th beast of Daniel continues to the very end as a key player against God and His people. The time prophecy contained here (verse 5) for the Sea Beast also takes place chronologically before 1844, as the Land Beast has no time prophecy associated with it. The actions of these beasts are detailed through til just prior to Christ's coming. Again, no inconsistent usage with respect to 1844.

Revelation 14 begins where Chapter 12 leaves off. Starting in verses 1-6, it answers the question posed in Revelation 13:4. The vision then breaks again, and takes up chronologically with the Reformation, then proceeding through to the Coming of Christ.

The last 3 messages of mercy are given to the world. There are no time prophecies in here, as this time period also overlaps chapters 10 and 11. The last 3 messages are given energy and momentum by what is happening chronologically elsewhere at that time (6th Seal, 6th Trumpet) AND the fulfillment of the last time prophecies. All time prophecies pertaining to the Gospel work, Old and New Testament, find completion here within this chronological span.

The is why the angel declares "there shall be time no more". There are no more time prophecies pertaining to agencies trying to impede the Covenant God made with mankind.

There is no picking and choosing there.

That leaves the 1,000 years of Chapter 20 as the only period of prophetic time left. However, this prophecy concerns the fate of the wicked, angelic and human, and not to agencies waging war against God (and His Covenant) through attacking His People of every Age.

In Chapter 20, God's people are safely behind New Jerusalem's gates. The Gospel work is already finished by that time. All that remains is the final demonstration of the mystery of iniquity: faced with the choice of eternal extinction, the evil prefer extinction to life submitted to God.

Whether that means the 1,000 years is literally 1,000 years, or 360,000 years, we won't know until after the first 1,000 years. I can see the relevancy of the entire Redeemed needing 360,000 years to sift through all the evidence and issues, to find closure with why sin (and those identifying with sin) must be made extinct, utterly destroyed. I can see that much time needed to sift through all the misinformation and deception we have been subjected to here on earth, and find the truth of how God has so lavished grace on us while we lived life ignorant of it all.

People will be there we thought shouldn't while here on earth. People won't be there whom we thought were shoo-ins to be there. I can concede the point of there being so many issues of "Why?" that require more than cliched answer, that it could possibly take that much time.

Then again, I can also see relevancy where, shortly coming into the Kingdom with perfect brains and characters, what issues remaining that require judgment on taking 1,000 years (or less) to wrap up. Having learned to trust God implicitly here, this extends to trusting Him implicitly there. Little time would be needed to sift through it all, and echo what has already been proclaimed by the angels before us.

Both perspectives have merit to consider.

But will the year/day rule apply then? I cannot say. It may. It may not. The soonest we would know would be at the end of 1,000 literal years, with what happens then. If the rule applies, it takes away nothing from the events and end results happening in Chapter 20. Rather, it expands the time line out. If not, it unfolds as some understand it to.

God will take as much time as the human race needs, to ensure that Nahum 1:9 becomes a perpetual prophecy fulfilled in time - throughout all eternity, sin never again rises to war with our Living God.

Blessings,

[Naomi]

Hello Iron Deacon...if you have been around I missed you, if not...it's great to "see" you again

[phkrause]

That was one awesome post Lysimachus. I've always believed in the day for year principal, but you've made it even clearer and with some really great points.

[Ted Oplinger]

Hello Iron Deacon...if you have been around I missed you, if not...it's great to "see" you again

Hello, Naomi! glad to "see" you too! Went into lurker mode for a long while, and was very busy for a few years.

Oh, and

Blessings!

[Ted Oplinger]

That was one awesome post Lysimachus. I've always believed in the day for year principal, but you've made it even clearer and with some really great points.

Just got time to digest that lengthy post. I agree - awesome post, and a great explanation. Saw hch's question and answered it first. Wish I had time earlier to have read and digest Lysimachus' post earlier.

Blessings,

[hch]

Good question, hch. Where is the consistency?

[Ted Oplinger]

hch,

Quote:

Did you notice that as himself and sacrifice were added to the text by the translators to clarify what they thought it was saying; they MAY also have tweeked <08548> DAILY, which could have been rendered:continually 53, continual 26, continual employment 1.

Does it make a difference if it is daily or related to one who continues?

I did address this point earlier in the thread, in responding to another poster on exactly that point.

When this word is used in the context of the sacrifices, the word is always used in connection to the morning and evening sacrifices. It is usually used in an adjective construction in so doing (see Exodus 29:42; Numbers 28:6, 10, 15, and 23; Ezra 3:5; Nehemiah 10:34, and Ezekiel 46:15); however, in Dan 8:11-13 (as well as Dan. 11:31 and Dan 12:11), it is seen in an adverb construction.

As I pointed out above, the Hebrew usage here is no different than the English use of the word "daily" in the subject heading of this post. You got the meaning, even though the rest of the words were not supplied to specify exactly what "daily" was referring to. To Daniel, the "continual" meant only 1 thing with respect to the sanctuary - the daily morning and evening sacrifices.

As the object of contention in the Daniel 8:11-13 passage is worship, and the antagonist (the Little Horn) seeks to destroy God's appointed means of approach to obtain that worship, semantics are...a bit thin of an argument.

Quote:

You did say Revelation 13 is a continuation of Daniel 7. They both obviously have the same symbolism: sea, lion, bear, leopard, [nondescript beast (Daniel 7 tells of his 10 horns Revelation speaks about its 2 horns)], and earth. But of course the earth in Daniel 7 is supposed to be literal and in Revelation 13, it is supposed to be symbolic. I don't see any consistency in that "slight of hand theology."

If "Revelation 13 begins where Daniel 7 leaves off" then the symbols are symbolic in both and if they are literal in one then they are literal in both. Likewise, Daniel 7 did not leave off with the sea-beasts: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome: "These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth" (Daniel 7:17). The symbolic earth in Revelation 13?

You do forget that the Sea Beast of Revelation is Rome in its final form?

You are wanting consistency, yet you are ignoring the very consistent link between the 4th beast of Daniel, and the Sea Beast of Revelation 13.

You want to attribute the beasts of Daniel 7 as literal, and Revelation 13's beast as symbolic?

In Daniel 7, both beasts and kings in Daniel 7 are symbols. Trying to literalize kings quickly gets one into trouble:

Babylon had three kings during the time God used that kingdom in context of the lion-like beast, not one. Which literal king was God referring to? Nebuchadnezzar, who was converted? or Belshazzar, who rejected God? Nabonidus never was mentioned...

Medo-Persia also had three kings during its symbolism as the bear-like beast, not one. Which literal king is being referred to - Cyrus, who was prophesied in Isaiah as the one to conquer Babylon? or Artaxerxes, through whom God established the Hebrews back in Jerusalem?

Greece had only one emperor (Alexander - he didn't use the word "king" to describe his title), and most of the leopard-like beast's rule was also not by kings, but a kingdom divided up amongst Alexander's generals. Who then gets the nod? Ptolemy? or Seleucid? If you counter this covered by the shattered horns, then you cannot say this represents a literal, single king. You are then more inconsistent here with your word usage than you are deeming me in assigning the 4th beast to be the same as the Sea beast...

Rome had no kings - they had caesars. Rome had an incredible line of Caesars, followed by a long line of Popes. Which Caesar gets the nod? Augustus? Julius? These were never mentioned in Scripture. Tiberius, the Caesar ruling when Christ was born? He was not responsible for the rise of Rome, nor for the take-down of Greece.

Rome also had another caesar mentioned - Nero, who executed Paul. Is he the literal king?

Does the Papacy get the nod?

Are you aware the 4th beast has a different nature - it was "different" from all the other beasts (vss 7, 23)? It was not a kingdom of mere earthly concern; the symbols used in the angelic explanation give the same war against God and His people, from a spiritual point, that can only be found in the Papal form of Rome - and the Sea Beast of Revelation 13.

Furthermore, the angelic explanation of the 4th beast - which Daniel was keenly interested in - is the point I see connecting this time with the chronology of Revelation 13.

If you come back to say the literal "king" is the office the king represents...you have moved into a symbol, and have again undermined your argument of consistency.

I think I will keep 2 Peter 1:20, 21 in mind for now.

The fourth beast has incorporated within itself aspects of the various beasts, as seen in the symbolism of the body parts assigned to the other beast types. The horns of the beast also represent ten kings/kingdoms. In looking at the Fall of the Roman Empire, it is pretty easy to pick up what ten kingdoms are being referred to. But literal kings? Where in Scripture are you going to assign those kings?

No, hch, the kings you want to be literal are but symbols of the nations they represent. It is VERY clear from the angel's explanation in Daniel 7: 8-14, and 23-28, that the fourth beast carries both the same description and the same spiritual warfare against God and His people as the Sea Beast of Revelation 13. Both the 4th beast and the Sea beast end when an action in heaven is taken. The two are one and the same entity.

There is indeed a strong, consistent bond that links these two together.

If I see a certain car of color, model, year, license plate number, and VI number, then go elsewhere, and see a car of the same color, model, year, license plate number, and VI number...I can be reasonably certain I am not only seeing the same car, but by extension, seeing the same person's car.

That is what links the 4th beast to the sea beast. They carry the same identification points.

I will stand by my linkage.

As for time in language usage, see Lysimacus' post above answering that.

Quote:

By being inconsistent, we fail to understand who the kings from the earth are that were like a lion, a bear and a leopard that bonded with the papal beast and we are blinded as to who is the nondescript king from the earth with the two lamblike horns. When Daniel is standing in his lot and the endtime meaning of his word is upon us, we loose our bearing in prophecy so much that we can only see generalized signs but the specifics given for our encouragement are as though they have never been.

You speak of the lamb-like beast in ways that EGW would say has left the established waymarks. Adventists are pretty consistent on who and what that beast is. It is not led by a king...but a President.

Blessings, and

as well.

[duane2064]

i am glad that people are talking about the daily and about prophecy, but i am said that there is mostly misinfo. it was demanded of EW that she pick one of three ideas on "daily". and she did not. she did not because none of them were or are were right, and there is nothing about anything any of what you all are talking about that is any different than the three ideas that were presented to EW. it would have been easy for our Lord to tell EW which one was right. but i am here to tell you none of them were right, and since you all are regurgitating the same old three views you are all wrong too. unless you have something completely different than those three theologians had, then you by default are wrong.

http://www.saeods.com/dandaily.html

[Lysimachus]

Light is progressive indeed! Which is precisely why we, as an Adventist movement, first went from believing the daily was paganism (pre-1844) to believing it was the heavenly sanctuary, after we learned there was a sanctuary in heaven that needed cleansing (post-1844).

I recommend, "The 'Daily' Source Book" by Heidi Heiks. =]

[Lysimachus]

duane2064,

When all the dust was settled, about 1910 or so, Ellen White brought the subject up again, and said that it was time to listen to A.G. Daniels and hear him out and what he had to say about the Daily. This was after their spirits had calmed down, and after A.G. Daniels finally listened to Ellen White to go evangelize in the cities.

[Lysimachus]

Quote:

(Written May 24, 1910, from Sanitarium, California, to Elder and Mrs. S. N. Haskell.)

I have been waiting for the time when there should be an investigation of the doctrines that Brother Daniells and others have been advocating. When is this to be?

If Elder Daniells thinks that some of the interpretations of Scripture that have been held in the past are not correct, our brethren should listen to his reasons, and give candid consideration to his views. All should examine closely their own standing, and by a thorough knowledge of the principles of our faith, be prepared to vindicate the truth.

We must not be inconsistent in this matter. God requires clean hearts, pure minds, and an intelligent belief in the truth. "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." At present there is not that unity that should exist among our brethren, and the Lord says, "Come together." This should be done as soon as possible, for we have no time to lose.

Is not the present a favorable time for you and others of our ministering brethren in this conference to meet with Elder Daniells for a thorough examination of the points of faith regarding which there are different views?

[isaiah 11:1-16; 12:1-6, quoted.]

I am directed to write these Scriptures for the consideration of those who shall assemble for the purpose of blending together under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. "Bind up the testimony, seal the law among My disciples." A special work now rests upon us of solemnly investigating these matters, and in the name of the Lord to unify.--Letter 50, 1910.

Commenting on this letter, Mr. Heiks wrote:

"The fact that Ellen White put the burden of proof on

Elders Haskell, Loughborough and others to consider

Elder Daniells’ ministry position on the “daily” lends itself

to no other conclusion but that the accusations against

Daniells are totally untenable and are a misrepresentation

of Ellen White’s writings. Furthermore, Ellen White, in

encouraging the comparative study of all interpretations

of the “daily” to determine its correct meaning, cannot

be said to have wittingly or unwittingly supported in any

way any so–called spiritualistic positions held by Daniells.

To so believe would be to challenge and undermine the

credibility of God’s prophet."

[ClubV12]

Lysimachus, here Mr. Hieks makes the same serious mistake many have made and still make, including Stephen Bohr. The assumption is that a simple counsel or comment of Ellen White is "twisted" to mean "support" of one position or another. How it is twisted is entirely dependant on your already preconceived position!!! Sister White is simply saying, "Quit being a jerk and consider Daniels position with respect." The truth, on which ever side it lays, can withstand close scrutiny. When Sister White counseled James White to "shut up" concerning his views on Daniel 11 as opposed to Uriah Smiths view she was not saying which of the two men held the right view. This is the serious mistake Stephen Bohr and many others make, ASSUMING Sister White is supporting one or the other view. She is promoting UNITY, James was fostering DISUNITY at the time and place this counsel was given.

Now, having carefully considered AG Daniels and the current populuar position yourself and most other take on the "daily", I do not agree with the "new view". I agree with the pioneer view. In a nut shell, the pioneer view follows a more literal interpretation of scripture, whereas the "new view" requires a spiritual interpretation. I read the bible just as it is written, literal unless the evidence is overwhelming or I am forced into a spiritual application.

To often we force people to take one view or the other. Why is that necessary? Why does it have to be "your way or the highway", THIS is what Sister White was counseling against! A pompous, arrogant, infallible attitude that I'm right and your wrong. I see room for BOTH the old and the new view as it concerns the daily!!! If I am forced to choose, I will side with the pioneers. I reject this idea that "new light" means we can throw out the old light because we are "way smarter" than those old foggies. Arrogant fools that we are... New light is a better understanding that builds on old light, it does not tear it down and replace it.

[hch]

Brother Ted,

I thank you for taking the time to respond to my post, but alas though we both wrote copious amounts of words, there was very little communication.

For example:

You do forget that the Sea Beast of Revelation is Rome in its final form?

Since I clearly asked about Pope John-Paul II as the one head that literally received the wound that was healed in the endtime, my understanding that the Sea Beast in Revelation 13 is the papacy in its final form did not forget any such thing. So why would you make such an assertion? Sometimes when discussing things of which we hold strong views, there is a tendency for self justification. Rather than dialog and share and learn, it becomes a "debate" of ideas. One technique in debating is to say "you don't know what you are talking about." Rather than to look at the idea. Debating techniques attempt to discredit the presenter. If the subject is too hard to reconcile with the point of view being defended, make those that hold the opposing view look stupid.

I don't debate. I present truth as I understand it. I seek feedback and I look at valid Scriptures and Spirit of Prophecy material. But I do not hesitate to let it be known if the interaction appears to be less than honest.

When the 1888 message shone bright from the throne of God, and EGW spoke in favor of Jones and Waggoner, our leadership closed their eyes to the light and set the cause of God back. I have no illusion that the Church today will be fair and unbiased when light is presented. Christ gives the parables of the 10 virgins to warn us that not all of the Church will be ready when the Bridegroom comes. Not that any have to be lost, but there are those who just won't follow truth until they are compelled to see it as it is.

Some examples:

Cain refused to sacrifice a lamb - it was sin. Moses offered sacrifices - it was righteousness. If we were to sacrifice lambs, it would be sin. Present Truth for Cain and Moses is not our Present Truth.

Abraham was told in Genesis that any male that was not circumcised would be cut off from God. Christ was circumcised. Paul taught that the need for circumcision ended at Calvary. As Spiritual Israel, we accept Paul's teaching. Thus the Present Truth for Abraham and Christ is not the Present Truth for those won to Christ by Paul's preaching or for us.

It is up to God's people to follow truth until we arrive at the perfect day.

I am sorry that I gave you so much in my last post. From your response, it is evident that you were overwhelmed.

I may not have been clear. Or I may have stepped on toes. Whatever? Your response was so jumbled up mixing apples and oranges and symbols and literals that my view came back to me so far from what my view is that I can only wonder if your reply was to what you thought I said rather than what I actually said.

So I will break my reply into little bites lest Satan throw the whole discussion into confusion.