Doomsday Date

[Raphael]

Dear family in Christ,

The Bible states that we will know the time of His second coming by the signs of the seasons, something like knowing rainy seasons but not the exact second when the lightning strikes.

So I have been thinking about the age of our world at around six thousand years... 2012 minus the 4 years of Roman calendar mistake on Christ's birth year would put us at the correct 2008. Meaning 8 years over the 6 thousand figure.. am I correct? Please help out..

The commencement of the 6 figure duration kicks in at the time Adam & Eve fell into sin or perhaps at their first lamb sacrifice, which for certain occurs after spending several sinless years in Eden.

Due to that we would have to add the the number of Adam's sinless years to the our corrected number of 2008. The number of Adam's years of innocence can be roughly estimated from Genesis 5. An SDA missionary friend of mine puts it at around 30 to 50 years that needs to be added to the timetable, predicting the end of days to be around 2030 to 2050.

Any further help, please?

[BobRyan]

Ellen White said that the earth had been in a state of sin for 4000 years at the birth of Christ.

[Naomi]

Quote:

we can spend our time trying to figure out time lines

and date but I think we would be spinning our wheels--

the bible also says that the angels are holding back

the winds (of strife)

lets let GOD do HIS time schedule

Excellent dgrimm

[ClubV12]

How would your missionary friend estimate 30 to 50 years in the garden before sin? Personally I believe Adams listed age, some 900 years, is counted from the time he fell and left the garden, not while he was IN the garden. While in the garden he had immortality. "Time", other than the seventh day, the Sabbath, would not have been a consideration worthy of note.

Why not 300 to 500 years, or even milleniums before sin? We KNOW, from Sister White, that a tree of knowledge of good and evil STILL exists on the other created planets. The inhabitants could STILL eat of that tree today! Of course they never have, for thousands, even 10 thousands of years, likely for eon's of time before the creation of this world!

On a side note, it's not "doomsday" in my thinking.

It's the rescue day, time to leave, and good riddance.

[Kevin H]

We need to be very careful with the 7,000 year theory. This is some information I learned from AUC, Andrews and Loma Linda, official teaching arms of the church about this theory:

The text from which we add up the ages to get 6,000 years are very ancient texts and had been updated in language much over the centuries (thus giving evidence of the authenticity of those parts of scripture being historical) but with all the translating the numbers have become very hard to read, the ages we have are basically estimates, which gets to about 6,000 to 10,000 years. When looked at the 3 ancient families, the Palestinian text (the Bible Jesus used) the best know and best complete is the Dead Sea Scrolls, had the earth become 7,000 years old when Jesus came the first time. The Egyptian family (the Bible Paul used) the best known is the Septuant, different manuscripts has the earth now 7,000 to 10,000 years old. It was the Babylonian family (the Bible of those who stayed in Babylon after the exile) of texts from which we got the masseritic text and the 6,000 years (and there were 2 reasons why we got this to be our Bible. First there was a Rabbi who was originally from Babylon and came to Jerusalem and became a famous Rabbi and he liked the Bible he grew up with. Second, shortly before Jesus, a Rabbi, using the Palestinian Text counting up the ages figured that the word would soon reach the 7,000 year mark and equated the days of creation to the 7,000 years that he believed the world was about to turn so he said that the 7,000 year would be the age of the messiah. When Jesus claimed to be the messiah and Jews rejected him they wanted to push the 7,000th year farther into the future and so they took the Babylonian text so that they could say that the world was only 4,000 years old and thus Jesus could not fulfill what the Rabbi taught about the messiah coming when the world was 7,000 years)

You can look up this reference in the March 1984 issue of Ministry mag. In ancient manuscripts they are unfortunately not consecutive generations. The culture was to list the important people in the line. When Genesis 5:12-14 talks about Cainan and Mahalaleel, for the ancient manuscripts it would mean that when Cainan was 75 years old he had a child. That child was either Mahalaleel, or else a child who was the direct ancester to Mahalaleel.

Some things about Mrs. White and the 6,000 years:

The Mrs. White quote from Spirit of Prophecy "And many who profess to believe the Bible record are at a loss to account for wonderful things which are found in the earth, with the view that creation week was only seven literal days, and that the world is now only about six thousand years old. These, to free themselves from difficulties thrown in their way by infidel geologists, adopt the view that the six days of creation were six vast, indefinite periods, and the day of God’s rest was another indefinite period; making senseless the fourth commandment of God’s holy law. Some eagerly receive this position; for it destroys the force of the fourth commandment, and they feel a freedom from its claims upon them. They have limited ideas of the size of men, animals, and trees, before the flood, and of the great changes which then took place in the earth."

Notice, this does not have Mrs. White herself saying that the world is 6,000 years old, but just that people who want to believe the Bible are saying that 6,000 is too short so they turn to making the literal days to be longer periods of time instead of holding to the literal week. And she basically says that we don't know enough about the Bible or enough understanding of these changes, that the changes took place a lot faster than the evolutionists theorize. (i.e. Mrs. White has a fast evolution dealing with the 2 events, the entrance of sin and the changes after the flood, rather than the gradual evolution that the evolutionists teach)

Also, when Mrs. White was expanding her earlier writings into Patriarchs and Prophets, she came across a passage where she said that the earth was 6,000 years old, she crossed it out and put her initials by the cross out and [and please forgive me that I have forgotten the reference, I had it memorized for a few years, I actually read this; in the summer of 1984 taking a class on Biblical Archaeology, we were required to walk over to the White Estate vault with the reference and see this evidence in person because the professor knew that we would not believe him if he told us... sadly I have to tell you, but this is not repeating what a professor or pastor said, but we were actually sent to hold the first hand evidence in our hands and read it] Mrs. White wrote an article where she down plays the 6,000 years. She does argue strongly that Creation week was indeed a literal week, and she argues strongly that the earth is fairly young, however she said that we don't need to hold tightly to the strict 6,000 years, that what ever age we hold for the world just needs to be fair to the Bible.

There are many passages where she says things like "for about 6,000 years" "for almost 6,000 years" "for over 6,0000 years" Now while they all keep referring to 6,000 years, she is not discussing the age of the earth in these passages but uses it for a term meaning the sweep of the great controversy. Second, it was her editors who made them all read 6,000 years, the passages in her own handwriting uses different numbers with in a couple thousand year period, she is not consistant, showing that she does not see the age as being that big a deal otherwise she herself would have written the exact number consistantly and would not need her editors to make them uniformally read 6,000 years.

I am again sorry that I do not have the reference for the article that Mrs. White wrote that down plays the 6,000 years. But these are things that have been pointed out to me from the teaching arm of the Seventh-day Adventist church, much of it being what we had to go to the libarary to get the first hand reference. These are just pieces of evidence that we should keep in a corner of our mind as we study this topic, and we need to be very careful with the 7,000 year theory, which comes from Rabinical tradition, and from a Rabbi who believe that the world was about to turn 7,000 years in the near future to him. When nothing happened but that some Jews were saying that Jesus was the Messiah, the other Jews wanted to push the 7,000 year theory (which Jesus and the disciples could have used as a key text but refused to) far away from Jesus so they picked a text that made the world only 4,000 years when Jesus came, and it comes from reading in a Greek interpetation of the geneologies rather than allowing the geneologys to reflect their culture.

[Naomi]

You are most welcome. I tend to forget that our time is not God's time.

[Kevin H]

Thank you too Dgrimm60, the important sign is "When the Gospel is preached into all the world then shall the end come"

[wayfinder]

Raphael. If you are truly interested in seeking an understanding of time, in the context of the end of days, check out my website, go to web.me.com/spiritoftruth.

Near the bottom of the Homepage you will see a link to the "timeing chart of the end". There is also an explaination of the process I used. I am not saying that this is correct, but saying that this is a logical association of the time- periods God has given in the prophecies that concern the end of time. You will notice right away that the first, and longest, time-period begins on July 11 2012, that is the 1335 days, found in Daniel 12:12.

[phkrause]

RAPHAEL

the bible does say time is short---the bible also say

no man(people) knows the hour---

we can spend our time trying to figure out time lines

and date but I think we would be spinning our wheels--

the bible also says that the angels are holding back

the winds (of strife)

lets let GOD do HIS time schedule

dgrimm60

[wayfinder]

Matthew 24:36"But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.

The Israelites followed a specific process from the proposal for matrimony to the marriage feast or wedding. The one individual whose right it was to set the day and hour for the marriage feast, was the father of the bridegroom. Clearly, the Son of God used this process as the context for His going away and return, His words to His dicsiples confirm this, ie if I go away I will come back for you. In My Fathers house are many rooms. If I do not go I cannot come back. I will send My Spirit as a sign of this promise. In Revelation we see the bride of the Lamb prepared to meet her Husband. So Jesus statement about the knowledge of the day and hour does not imply that this knowledge will never be made known, otherwise how would He know when He may go and get His bride?

A little known fact of this process was this, that the bride must be ready when the bridegroom arrived at her door. This presented a problem, because the bride could not maintain readiness for more than one day. To resolve this issue, the bride would send her bridesmaids out along the road her bridegroom would use to come to her house. The bridegroom would tell his servants the day and hour of his wedding and they would go on ahead of him a tell the bridesmaids the bridegroom was on his way. The bridesmaids would go the the bride's house and prepare her to meet her bridegroom. That way the bride would be ready when her bridegroom arrived at her door. The most important part of this process is readiness. The servants of the groom must be ready to hear the bridegroom voice in giving them the day and hour. The bridesmaids must be ready to go immeadiatly when they see the servants of the bridegroom. If not there will never be a wedding.

This process is defined as follows:

The announcement of the day and hour by the Bridegroom and understood by His bondservants.

Matthew 24:42 "Therefore be on the alert, for you do not know which day your Lord is coming.43"But be sure of this, that if the head of the house had known at what time of the night the thief was coming, he would have been on the alert and would not have allowed his house to be broken into.

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place ; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John

The announcement to bridesmaids "the Bridegroom is on His way.

Matthew 25:1,6 "Then the kingdom of heaven will be comparable to ten virgins, who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. "But at midnight there was a shout, 'Behold, the bridegroom! Come out to meet him.'

The information contained in the Revelation describes the preparation of the bride. Revelation 19:7 "Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready."

What stands to reason is this, the Father does not keep the day and hour of the wedding a secret forever, otherwise there well never be a wedding. At some point in the the Son will be told when He can go get His bride, at that time the Son of God will know the day and hour. There is a text which would indicate that the Bridegroom (Son of God) knows the day and hour of the wedding.

Matthew 25:5"Now while the bridegroom was delaying, they all got drowsy and began to sleep.

It is the bridegroom that is delaying the day and hour of the wedding. If the bridegroom did not know the day and hour, then how could HE be the one delaying it?

The servants of the bridegroom are here on earth at the time the wedding feast is ready, so there must be some way these servants understand the day and hour, for they are ready when their Master arrives on His way to get His bride. The servants are not the bride nor are the bridesmaids the bride; but servants, bridesmaids, and bride all are present at the marriage feast, although at different times.

[Guest]

You will notice right away that the first, and longest, time-period begins on July 11 2012, that is the 1335 days, found in Daniel 12:12.

You seem to have changed your time line somewhat, as time setting goes.

[BobRyan]

Also, when Mrs. White was expanding her earlier writings into Patriarchs and Prophets, she came across a passage where she said that the earth was 6,000 years old, she crossed it out and put her initials by the cross out and [and please forgive me that I have forgotten the reference, I had it memorized for a few years, I actually read this; in the summer of 1984 taking a class on Biblical Archaeology, we were required to walk over to the White Estate vault with the reference and see this evidence in person because the professor knew that we would not believe him if he told us... sadly I have to tell you, but this is not repeating what a professor or pastor said, but we were actually sent to hold the first hand evidence in our hands and read it] Mrs. White wrote an article where she down plays the 6,000 years. She does argue strongly that Creation week was indeed a literal week, and she argues strongly that the earth is fairly young, however she said that we don't need to hold tightly to the strict 6,000 years, that what ever age we hold for the world just needs to be fair to the Bible.

There are many passages where she says things like "for about 6,000 years" "for almost 6,000 years" "for over 6,0000 years" Now while they all keep referring to 6,000 years, she is not discussing the age of the earth in these passages but uses it for a term meaning the sweep of the great controversy. Second, it was her editors who made them all read 6,000 years, the passages in her own handwriting uses different numbers with in a couple thousand year period, she is not consistant, showing that she does not see the age as being that big a deal otherwise she herself would have written the exact number consistantly and would not need her editors to make them uniformally read 6,000 years.

I am again sorry that I do not have the reference for the article that Mrs. White wrote that down plays the 6,000 years.

A lot of your point rides on material that you say you cannot remember or point to in reference.

The primary EGW books that reference 6000 years, and "almost 6000" and "about 6000 years" were all in print long before she died. If her intent were to make sure that the number was a vague reference to something that is really 10,000 years or "almost 10,000 years" she had many years of opportunity to make that case and or correction.

By contrast - consider the case for the moons of Jupiter. Even though influential people around Ellen White were arguing dogmatically that she had seen the moons of Jupiter - - not once does she retell the vision claiming that God showed her Jupiter or the moons of Jupiter.

in Christ,

Bob

[wayfinder]

This is the date I have had on my chart for the last eight years. This last summer I said I thought I "heard" a date in a dream, but that it may only have been in my head, as it turned out that was all it was. The July 11 2012 date does not come from anything I heard, but what I see in the endtime prophecies. I am not saying that this date is a sure thing, only that I followed a logical process in understanding how the time periods are to be understood.

[Kevin H]

A lot of your point rides on material that you say you cannot remember or point to in reference.

The primary EGW books that reference 6000 years, and "almost 6000" and "about 6000 years" were all in print long before she died. If her intent were to make sure that the number was a vague reference to something that is really 10,000 years or "almost 10,000 years" she had many years of opportunity to make that case and or correction.

By contrast - consider the case for the moons of Jupiter. Even though influential people around Ellen White were arguing dogmatically that she had seen the moons of Jupiter - - not once does she retell the vision claiming that God showed her Jupiter or the moons of Jupiter.

in Christ,

Bob

No, only one point on that one article that we were required to go to the White Estate and read, that I read the summer of 1984 that over the years since then I do not remember what I could write down so that you can go and read that article, but the article is still there. Would it be safe for me to assume that you remember every reference you had to read 27 years ago?

And yes, the printed books in her life time has been consistantly printed as 6,000 years, however her handwritten manuscripts that they used to print does NOT consistanly read 6,000 years. Her own handwriting gives different ages all meaning the same thing, the sweep of the great controversy. Yes,the printing all reads 6,000 but her handwritten copies did not all read 6,000.

You can study into commentaries and linguistic studies over the difficulties in translating the ages of the geneologies. And there is the spring (March) 1984 issue of Ministry.

[ClubV12]

Wayfinder, I don't put a lot of stock in the 1335 YEARS (NOT days) being applied in the future. I know some folks do, I'm just not one of them. I've studied this issue closely, and those various groups who hold various views on the 1335. I call them "1335 Futurists". Not to be confused with your typical "Futurists", the "1335 Futurists" are Adventists (or for the most part former Adventists) who are appealing specifically to other Adventists.

#1. The 1335 year period, without a shadow of doubt, has passed, it happened, done. The question is: Can it, will it, happen again in the future, this time as "days"? I don't think so, while allowing SOME room for such an application. IF that is the case, this issue should be brought to the "Brethren", the General Conference, the Bible Institute, for due consideration. It has been! At this time, the "Brethren" find no light in it. Therefore, I have set it aside, as Sister White suggests we are to do when issues like this divide rather than draw us closer. I will wait upon the Lord for further light on the subject, IF and WHEN.

Kevin, "unto all the world" IS one of the signs. But consider this: The gospel WAS preached unto all the world in the early New Testament church. If anything, were looking for ANOTHER, a second, fulfillment of that aspect of prophecy.

I don't have a problem with any of Sister Whites comments concerning the "approximate" age of the earth one way or the other. 6, 7, 10, whatever number you like, I'm OK with that. Myself, I like the 6,000 year number for a basic application.

[Raphael]

Thank you Kevin for such in-depth information and also thanks to all for your posts. Still, I feel certain that searching for the season or the general time of Christ's second coming is something alright to be done. For example we can without doubt throw away the idea that it could take another thousand years for the 2nd coming to transpire. But the idea here is to hone it down to further details of say, the general range of years it should happen. The term "Doomsday Date" I use for the title of this thread is just prose. So for convenience lets not discuss what 6,000 years implies because everyone seems to understand the matter clearly already and just focus on when this 6,000 years end.

Gen 5:3 [KJV] "And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth." Adam had a son called Seth at the age of 130. We know he had Cain and Abel prior to that, making us certain that it didn't take Adam over 128 years to live in sinless Eden. Also gathering from the Gen 5:3, it states that Adam lived 130.., which should naturally include his years of sinless living in Eden and not just his years of living outside Eden.

Adam at 130 begat Seth

Seth at 105 begat Enos

Enos at 90 begat Cainan

Cainan at 70 begat Mahalael

Mahalael at 65 begat Jared

Jared at 162 begat Enoch

Enoch at 65 begat Methuselah

Methuselah at 187 begat Lamech

Lamech at 182 begat Noah

We can somehow guess that since the antediluvians started having children from the age of 65 to 187, we can omit the thought that they had children before the age of 50. So, give and take, Adam must had his first-born child after 50, which would put the amount of sinless years in Eden to be not too far from that figure.

Genesis 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

I have an interesting question, how much time would it consume to name every creature (in search of a help) in the world even though they were brought to you (instead of you going out to find them). I am certain that the naming job was not hurried and time-oriented as how we value time nowadays and instead it would be very relaxing with perhaps only one animal species a day.

And then after finding that there was no suitable help among the creatures presented, Eve was formed from Adam's rib where I'm sure there should be some time-frame between the moment of their sin and their "marriage" (which should be some kind of honeymoon). So where does that put the "range of sinless time" in Eden, perhaps from 30 or 50 to a hundred years? It also gets me wondering how people in those days handled family planning or perhaps there were no such things, but how could they have children only after the age of 65 to 187?

[ClubV12]

"....which should naturally include his years of sinless living in Eden and not just his years of living outside Eden."

NATURALLY should include his years in the garden? Nothing "natural" about such wild speculation, it's a pure guess, at best.

It's just "natural" that the length of Adams life measured in years wouldn't have begun until he LOST immortality.

[Raphael]

Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image and called his name Seth: 4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters. 5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

No speculations.

[ClubV12]

It's total speculation!!

We don't have a shred of evidence that suggests when the days of Adam began. Before or after the fall. Not one thing from the bible or the Spirit of Prophecy. Speculation and best guess is all you've got.

I too can speculate: I believe Adam lived 930 years after the fall. Can you show a SINGLE bible or SOP referrence that disagree's with that concept?

[Dr. Rich]

RAPHAEL

the bible does say time is short---the bible also say

no man(people) knows the hour---

we can spend our time trying to figure out time lines

and date but I think we would be spinning our wheels--

the bible also says that the angels are holding back

the winds (of strife)

lets let GOD do HIS time schedule

dgrimm60

Not so fast. Jesus said that no man or angels or even that He didn't know when He was coming back (Matt. 24:36) but DID say that the Father DID know. Right?

Well then, have not you read Rev. 1:1 where it says that the Father now told the Son when He will come back, so that the Son has now given this SAME information to His bond servants that will be living during the last generation, by the way of an angel so that John could write it down. Problem is, it takes insight to understand and IF you are wicked you will never be able to understand. (Dan. 12:10)

Therefore, the 144k will know and will be ready. They will wake up the ten virgins (the SDA church) after Jesus comes like a thief (not the same event as in the clouds) because NONE of them will be awake (sprirtually) when this happens between June 10, 2012 and the Spring Equinox of 2016-the 1335 day period.

[BobRyan]

A lot of your point rides on material that you say you cannot remember or point to in reference.

The primary EGW books that reference 6000 years, and "almost 6000" and "about 6000 years" were all in print long before she died. If her intent were to make sure that the number was a vague reference to something that is really 10,000 years or "almost 10,000 years" she had many years of opportunity to make that case and or correction.

By contrast - consider the case for the moons of Jupiter. Even though influential people around Ellen White were arguing dogmatically that she had seen the moons of Jupiter - - not once does she retell the vision claiming that God showed her Jupiter or the moons of Jupiter.

[Raphael]

Genesis 5:5 5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

"All the days that Adam lived were ..." Where & how can I learn that this simply means the days Adam lived as a sinful outcast else it is as the bible states ... the entire days of Adam's life was ... that would naturally include his sinless life in Eden.

Yes, I have read EGW's writings and have seen multiple entries of her 6,000 figure.

[BobRyan]

It makes more sense to conclude that these were "all the days that Adam lived" rather than "some of the days that Adam lived".

In Genesis 1 we know that "time" was being kept - weeks, seasons, months, years etc before sin. So "in context" it is not unreasonable just to stick with that point of consistency when you come to Genesis 5:5

So it is at least a reasonable solution.

in Christ,

Bob

[Kevin H]

Bobryan: I realize that I do not remember how to send you to the one source but I let people know it is out there, and not remembering the source does not give us an excuse to reject Mrs. White's counsel in that article. There are others out there who know the source. The class we had to read it for was Archaeology and the Bible taught by Dr. Larry Geraty, I know he is sometimes considered liberal, but don't forget he sent us to the exact place in the White Estate Vault where the article is located, it is Ellen White who wrote the article.

There are others who know the article too. in the 1990's I was attending an Adventist Theological Society convention in Loma Linda. They talked about a future convention where they were going to talk about evidence of the world being a lot younger and using the word 6,000 years a lot. While there I ran into: and again please forgive my memory, but it was either Niels-Erik Andreasen, Robert Olsen, an Elder Anderson it was someone with a good Scandinavian name that I heard a lot in the church publications. I mentioned this article to him and he replied by first quoting from memory paragraphs of that article. Then he said "The way I understand it is that the Lord showed her that the dates in the Septuagint are the correct dates and the Masseritic text are incorrect dates. From the Septuagint you end up about 1,000 years older, or that the world is about 7,000 years. But since 7,000 is a lot closer to 6,000, I say that the world is 'about' 6,000 years old."

So there are other people who know what the reference is. It is not like I am the only person on earth who went to the Ellen White Estate and read those words, but yet you are using the fact that I don't remember the reference 27 1/2 years later as a reason to refuse the information.

Now I gave the reference for the March (or at least a spring issue) 1984 of Ministry Magazine. There is evidence there that you can find easier.

Are we going to be fair to the evidence or are we going to stick our heads in the sand to protect our favorite theories?

And Raphael: Once again, if you were to look at Mrs. White's hand written manuscrips, they do not all read 6,000 years. She writes down different numbers, but when it got to the publishing house the publishing house changed them all to 6,000 years. Mrs. White beieved in a younger earth but was not a stickler for the 6,000 years, but the publishing house was.

[ToTEDave]

How do we get from Gen 5 that Adam lived 30-40 years before he sinned? Dave