Prophetic Day=Year Principle - Biblical?

[Lysimachus]

After the earth shifted on its axes, we lost the perfect 360 day cycle.

But evening to morning was still according to the proper number of "days".

This is why the Jewish calendar was a "luni/solar" calendar, not exclusively a lunar.

Sound scholarship has gone into all of this. Please read "The Chronology of Ezra 7" by Horn and Wood. Thus far, this scholarship remains undefeated.

The Jews had to update their calendar every few months to keep up with the sun, so while the Lunar Calendar was designed to keep track of the Jewish Sacred Seasonal Festivals, the Solar year was used to calculate "actual" years, and these are the years that are prophetic, as these years are built off the day, which in turn is where our week comes from, which in turn our month is built off of weeks, and in turn years are built off of weeks.

So the 1260 days in Revelation are built off of God's Divine Clock. But each one of those "symbolic days" represent a 365 day year.

The 360 day time frame is no longer applicable to prophecies given after the time of Noah, and it must be based on the 365 day solar year, not the 360 day lunar year. God’s prophetic time would not accord with an outdated 360 day time frame, originally utilized by the Babylonians.

• "numerous chronological statements in Kings and Chronicles, reveal that OT authors used nothing but solar years. This consideration alone ought to be decisive against Anderson's theory of 'prophetic years' of 360 days." [G.L.Archer, "Daniel", Expositors Bible Commentary, ed. F.E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids 1985), p.115]

The irrefutable proof that Solar Years were being employed in Prophetic Symbolism is based on the 70 weeks prophecy. Bob Pickle, has already irrefutably demonstrated how the Lunar Calendar or the 360 day cycle will not make the prophecy work out. Only the Solar Year cycles of years for the 70 weeks will "make the numbers work out". If anyone wants to DARE challenge this, I challenge them FIRST to deal with Pickle's arguments in the following two articles:

http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/sir-robert-anderson.htm

http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/harold-hoehner-70-weeks.htm

And not to mention the fact that the Sabbatical Cycles were based on solar years, not lunar or 360 day:

http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/sir-robert-anderson.htm#sab

http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/sabbatical-years.htm

In footnote 6 of Volume 2 of Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Chapter 13, concerning Whiston's application of the year-day principle, he points out:

• William Whiston, An Essay on the Revelation of St. John (2nd ed., 1744), pp. 2, 3. Whiston explains his method of turning prophetic days into literal years-to reckon by the type of year which would naturally be used at the time of the writing, or the beginning of any given prophetic period. For example, he uses the 365 1/4-day year for John's prophecies, because the Julian calendar was in use in the Roman world in John's time and onward. But he reckons the 2300 days and the 70 weeks of Daniel as 360-day years, because they date from the time of the Persian Empire. Whiston thought that the "Chaldean" year, employed by the Persians, had 360 days. Actually, as proved from contemporary documents discovered by modern archaeology, the Babylonians and Persians-as did the Jews also-used a year of 12 lunar months, about 11 days shorter than the true solar year, which they corrected by inserting an extra month periodically. (See Sidney Smith, "Calendar: Babylonian and Assyrian," Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol. 4, p. 576.) The supposed calendar year of 360 days, used by Whiston and a very few other prophetic writers, is not to be confused with the 360-day "prophetic year" used by later expositors, derived from the equivalence of the prophetic periods of the three and a half times and the 1260 days. With the Biblical interpretation of a "time" as a "year," it can be reckoned that three and a half years (which are also 42 months) are equal to 1260 days, if the months are 30 days each. From tne Jewish writer's point of view, this was reasonable enough, for although he had calendar months of 29 or 30 days, he called the 29-day month "hollow," or deficient, and the 30-day month "full." An ideal or theoretical year of "full" months would be 360 days long. (Even today we often use a theoretical month of 30 days in computing interest.) But it must be remembered that such a 360-day year was symbolic, not literal, even to the writer of the prophecy. The Jewish, Babylonian, and Persian luni solar year would, over a long period, always be equivalent to the same number of true solar years. Those prophetic interpreters who use this 360-day "prophetic year," derived from the periods denoting J260 days, regard it as a symbolic year composed of symbolic days which are equated, according to the year-day principle, with literal, natural years, and therefore they count the fulfillment in true solar years.

(Continued...)

[Lysimachus]

In the latest scholarly production from Professor Edwin de Kock, in his much needed massive 874 page volume, "The Truth About 666 and the Story of the Great Apostasy", we find the following:

Let us begin with a simple question: How many days make up a year? According to the Gregorian calendar, it is 365, except in the case of leap years. The actual number is 365.2422 days. Calculating on this basis, we have the following: 365.2422 x 3½ = 1,278 days; not 1,260 days.

This poses a major problem for Dispensationalists, who identify the 3½ years with half of the prophetic week described in Dan. 9:27. They need to cope with an 18-day discrepancy, though mostly they are unaware of it. Interpreters of the Historical School do not, however, run into such a difficulty; their calculation is as follows: 360 x 3½ (or 42 x 30) = 1,260.

This equation does not depend on ordinary time units. A natural year does not contain exactly 360 days, nor are all months made up of 30 days—not even in the calendar normally used by the Jews, as Tracey R. Rich explained it. This “is based on three astronomical phenomena: the rotation of the Earth about its axis (a day); the revolution of the moon about the Earth (a month); and the revolution of the Earth about the sun (a year).” The Gregorian calendar, which was devised to ensure that Easter would always fall on a Sunday and is used throughout the world, ignores the cycles of the moon, having months of 28, 30, or 31 days. To remain in step with the seasons, however, it is normally adjusted every 4th year, by allocating 29 days to February. In contrast with this, the Jewish months—which have their own names—consist of either 29 or 30 days, because the moon goes round the earth every 29½ days. This calendar, which is only used for religious purposes, has 12 and sometimes 13 months, with seasonal adjustments over a period of 19 years. Additional modifications are made, especially to eliminate problems with festivals, for instance to avoid a Yom Kippur adjacent to a weekly Sabbath. (SOURCE: 23 - Tracey R. Rich, "Jewish Calendar," Judaism 101, www.jewfaq.org, downloaded 05/02/08.)

Such modern Jewish reckoning also cannot explain the 360 x 3½ (or 42 x 30) = 1260 calculation. The latter does, however, agree with the antediluvian calendar, as revealed by a comparison of the data in Gen. 7 and 8. “That the 150 days include the 40 days of vs. 4, 12, 17 [and 24 in ch. 7], and so must be counted from the beginning of that period, is seen from v. 11, and ch. 8:4, where it is said that the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat on the 17th day of the 7th month, exactly 5 months after the beginning of the rain. The reckoning is in terms of 30-days months.” (SOURCE: 24 - SDABC, Vol. I, p. 257)

Archaeologist Siegfried H. Horn pointed out that “no known calendar runs in an unbroken series of 42 30-days months.” Nevertheless, “the idea of a theoretical or ideal month of 30 was logical to the Jews, who called 30 days a ‘full’ month; a 29-day month they spoke of as ‘hollow,’ or ‘deficient.’” (SOURCE: 25 - SDABD, s.v. "Month.")

The equivalence in the Bible of 3½ years with 42 months as well as 1260 is not arbitrary and contrived. It might seem so if only a short stretch of time were taken into consideration. But an astonishing answer emerges when we relate the prophetic periods of the Bible to one another and then link them with astronomy.

Several crucially important time prophecies of Daniel and Revelation begin in different years but are interlinked by their terminal dates. Of the last mentioned, there are only three: 1798 and the spring as well as the fall of 1844. The 1260, 1290, and 1335 year-days are all enclosed within the more comprehensive period of 2300 year-days. A key date for tying them all together is 508.

IV

Concerning the 2300 year-days and their relationship to the 1260 year-days, we interpose the following story, which is both fascinating and true.

In the eighteenth century, a Protestant landowner, mathematician, and astronomer of Switzerland, Jean Philippe Loys de Chéseaux (1718–1751) was doing chronological research. This young man was a correspondent of the Royal Academy of Sciences in Paris as well as a foreign associate of the Academy at Göttingen, Germany. He was a reputable professional with several scientific publications to his name.

Seeking an accurate date for the crucifixion, he turned to the prophecies of Daniel, especially the eighth and the ninth chapters. He began to wonder about the relationship between the 1260 and the 2300 days conceived as years. No doubt he noticed that these periods are linked to one another by the themes of desecration, a treading underfoot, and a sanctuary cleansed. And so he scrutinized these periods from an astronomical point of view, relating them to attempts by scientists who were seeking to harmonize three basic time units, namely the solar day, the solar year, and the lunar month. Of these there were four possible combinations:

1. Harmonizing the solar day and solar year.

2. Harmonizing the solar year and lunar month.

3. Harmonizing the solar day and lunar month.

4. Harmonizing all three—day, month, and year.

(SOURCE: 26 - Froom, PFF, Vol. III, p. 383)

First, de Chéseaux discovered that both the 1260 and the 2300 years of Daniel’s prophecies were remarkably perfect and accurate lunisolar cycles. Each was a harmonization of the second class, i.e., the solar year with the lunar month. No previous astronomer had discovered this relationship.

Continuing his calculations, de Chéseaux eventually tried to discover a cycle of the fourth class (a harmonization of the day, the month, and the year), which up to that time had eluded all astronomers. For this cycle, too, the 1260 years were a good fit, not quite perfect yet with “a remarkably small error.” The 2300 years were even better, the kind of cycle that had long been unsuccessfully sought by astronomers. It was thirty times longer than the ancient Period of Calippus, with only a seventeenth part its error, namely 8h 12N.

Next, de Chéseaux pondered the similarity of the very small error in each case and theorized that the difference between the 1260 and the 2300 years—namely 1040 years—would prove to be a perfect cycle of the fourth kind so long and vainly searched for. And that is exactly what he found!

“This period of 1040 years, indicated indirectly by the Holy Ghost, is a cycle at once solar, lunar, and diurnal or terrestrial of the most perfect accuracy. I subsequently discovered two singular confirmations of this fact, which I will explain presently, when I have adduced all my purely astronomic proofs; may I in the meantime be permitted to give to this new cycle, the name of the DANIEL CYCLE.” (SOURCE: 27 - Philippe Loys de Chéseaux, Memoires posthumes sur divers subjets, d’astronomie et de mathematiques avec de nouvelles tables très exactes (Lausanne: Antoine Chapuis, 1754), trans. and cited by Henry Grattan Guinness, The Approaching End of the Age (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1867), p. 403, qtd. in Froom, PFF, 705 Vol. III, p. 384.)

De Chéseaux believed that this discovery provided absolute proof that the book of Daniel had been divinely inspired. “Such a cycle would never have been chosen by accident. And since it was not accidental, it must have been chosen by Him who timed the movements of the sun and moon in their orbits.” (SOURCE: 28 - Ibid., pp. 383-84.)

Froom said the results were checked and declared astronomically correct by two contemporaries, Messrs. Mairan and Cassini, “celebrated astronomers of the Royal Academy of Sciences of Paris.” (SOURCE: 29 - Ibid., p. 384, footnote.) De Chéseaux recorded his discovery in Remarques historiques, chronologiques, et astronomiques, sur quelques endroits du livre de Daniel (Historical, Chronological, and Astronomical Remarks on Certain Parts of the Book of Daniel). Edited by his sons, this booklet was published in 1754 after his death. (SOURCE: Ibid., p. 383.)

Although he died young, his discoveries about the intermeshing of astronomic with prophetic time had, as we explained in our first book, a great impact on nineteenth-century expositors. (SOURCE: 31 - Edwin de Kock, Christ and Antichrist in Prophecy and History, Vol. I (Edinburg, TX: The Author, 2001), pp. 340-343) Three of these men were British Historicists who strove to defend the year-day principle, which underlay de Chéseaux’s calculations, against an upsurging Futurist-Dispensationalism and specifically referred to him.

The first of them was William Cunningham (1776-1849), a landowner in Scotland who wrote twenty works, both small and large, on prophecy and Biblical chronology. His Dissertation on the Seals and the Trumpets of the Apocalypse (1813) deals chiefly with the 1260 years. (SOURCE: 32 - Froom, PFF, Vol. III, pp. 364-366, 383-385) Thirty years later, Thomas R[awson] Birks (1810–1883), a professor of moral philosophy at Cambridge University, also took up these themes. According to Froom, his First Elements of Sacred Prophecy (1843), was “the most exhaustive and masterly treatise on the year-day principle of the entire nineteenth-century Advent awakening.” (SOURCE: 33 - Ibid., pp. 706-712.) Then there was Henry Grattan Guinness (1835–1910), a mighty Irish preacher, educator, and author—between 1878 and 1905—of nine books on prophecy. According to Froom, in this he was “without a peer in Britain,” a “powerful exponent of the Historical School.” (SOURCE: 34 - Froom, PFF, Vol. IV, pp. 1194-1203.) It was he who translated de Chéseaux. He also further explored the relationship between astronomy and prophecy, though this need not concern us here.

Somebody else impressed by de Chéseaux’s ideas was Auguste Nicolas (1807–1888), a Roman Catholic, for whom Protestants were heretics. Nevertheless, in his 1855 edition of Études philosophiques sur le Christianisme (Philosophic Studies About Christianity), Vol. IV, he marveled at what this young man had been able to accomplish in his short lifetime. Amongst others who shared this admiration, he cited the philosopher Bonnet, who remarked on de Chéseaux’s “rare and abundant knowledge, exalted by modesty, a candor, and a piety that were even more rare.” He also told how the Daniel Cycle had astonished Mairan and Cassini, “the premier astronomers of this century.” (SOURCE: 35 - Auguste Nicolas, Études philosophiques sur le Christianisme, Vol. IV (Paris: Auguste Vaton’s Bookstore of Piety and Education, 1855), pp. 257-258.)

Remarkably Samuele Bacchiocchi, who had given up much of Historicism, preferring Idealistic ideas, dismissed such reckonings and precision. For him, “these time designations (three and a half years, 42 months, 1260 days) have more a qualitative and than [sic] a quantitative significance. In other words, the focus of this prophecy is not on the time of the rule of the Antichrist, but on the nature of its rule, manifested in the persecution of God’s people and in the promotion of false worship.” (SOURCE: 36 - Samuele Bacchiocchi, “Bacchiocchi Responds to False Allegations—Part 3, Endtime Issues Newsletter No. 203, 16 June 08.) Just what, in plain English, is a “qualitative time designation” supposed to be? Such gobbledygook is hardly more meaningful than the sentence Colorless green ideas sleep furiously, which the famous linguist Noam Chomsky concocted in 1957 “as an example of a sentence whose grammar is correct but whose meaning is nonsensical.” (SOURCE: 37 - Wikipedia, s.v. “Colorless green ideas sleep furiously,” www.en.wikipedia.org, downloaded 06/02/08.)

Bacchiocchi seemed to suggest that the Lord, instead of emphasizing a most important point concerned with temporality, repeated this period seven times and in three numerical ways for no sensible reason. Apart from suggesting that God does not mean exactly what he says, this was an attack on the year-day principle.

(SOURCE: Edwin de Kock, The Truth About 666 and the Story of the Great Apostasy, pp. 179-182)

[Lysimachus]

We thus see that the conclusions of Adventist Historicists and their day-year principle are built on the soundest, most advanced mathematical minds.

Those who attempt to topple over the day-year principle of the Adventist reckoning do not know what they are up against. They are mere children, trying to tout their knowledge and understanding of such things, but they are inexperienced little toddlers attempting to refute the irrefutably established, that was built on centuries of intelligent and learned men that were far more learned than most of the superficial researchers of today.

Catholics and Protestants cannot stand up to the soundness of the day-for-year principle if they dare to take on the soundest scholars of times past over a course of centuries, not a handful of Adventist theologians that exist in our present day.

[Lysimachus]

It is also worthy of mention that God knew that eventually, a full year would be that of a solar year. Thus, he wrote the prophecies in a way so that simple minds can understand.

To try and mesh the 1260 days or the 490 days or the 2300 days with 360 day years, God knew that the simple minds of the masses would never be able to mathematically account for this in history, unless they attained a knowledge more than what most have time to do.

Thus, the day-year principle allows the man to compare symbolic prophetic days in accordance with the Jewish Calendar, and compare each one of these days to a full Solar Year.

Thus we have 1260 days = 1260 365-day years. Or just say 365.2422 per each of the 1260 prophetic day-years.

This resolves a host of confusion that must otherwise be dealt with if relying on a literal interpretation, which creates more problems than resolves.

[phkrause]

We thus see that the conclusions of Adventist Historicists and their day-year principle are built on the soundest, most advanced mathematical minds.

Those who attempt to topple over the day-year principle of the Adventist reckoning do not know what they are up against. They are mere children, trying to tout their knowledge and understanding of such things, but they are inexperienced little toddlers attempting to refute the irrefutably established, that was built on centuries of intelligent and learned men that were far more learned than most of the superficial researchers of today.

Catholics and Protestants cannot stand up to the soundness of the day-for-year principle if they dare to take on the soundest scholars of times past over a course of centuries, not a handful of Adventist theologians that exist in our present day.

excellent posts Lysimachus.

[jasd]

>>After the earth shifted on its axes, we lost the perfect 360 day cycle.<<

I too believe there may have been an axial shift - perhaps caused by an anomalous near-pass by Mars, which caused the flood. However, unless one can show from Ezra that the earth directly suffered an axial shift - one is left with the fact that a supposed axial shift would have predated or have been caustive to the flood.

Jesus Christ validated the Torah as the writings of Moses by so often citing them. Moses wrote a great length after the flood, but still sourced and attributed a Noahide calendar. One must assume that Moses (and by extension the COI) was still using same... a calendar recounting afterwards - the events of the flood, rather than one predating it.

>>The 360 day time frame is no longer applicable to prophecies given after the time of Noah, and it must be based on the 365 day solar year, not the 360 day lunar year. God’s prophetic time would not accord with an outdated 360 day time frame, originally utilized by the Babylonians.<<

Indeed, one supposes; however, the Seventh-day Sabbath is still factored using the Babylonian sexagesimal system of numbering (which is 60-based) for our own time-keeping. Jesus Christ also used the Babylonian, "are there not 12 hours...?"

Moreover, the 360/365 may be no more than a synecdoche for prophetic day/year resolutions... else, as you've noted, exactness is lost.

>>...that was built on centuries of intelligent and learned men that were far more learned than most of the superficial researchers of today.

Catholics and Protestants cannot stand up to the soundness of the day-for-year principle if they dare to take on the soundest scholars of times past over a course of centuries,<< [ed.jasd]

Indeed! It is exactly as I have been saying, "They ran when they were not sent."

To bruit their conclusions is to share their mockery of Gd's exlicit proscription that the words of the book of Daniel were sealed to them...

Anyway,

Quote:

Let us begin with a simple question: How many days make up a year? [...]

(SOURCE: Edwin de Kock, The Truth About 666 and the Story of the Great Apostasy, pp. 179-182)

Where is the factum factorum?--the one accomplishment among others?

...an excess of hoo-ahs!, glad-handing and backslapping superlatives - without the expected substantives - resulting in a thin gruel, a very thin gruel indeed.

>>to compare symbolic prophetic days in accordance with the Jewish Calendar,<<

One cannot compare events of the OT, prophetic or otherwise, to the Jewish Calendar. The Jewish Calendar is but a facsimile developed almost four centuries after Jesus Christ.

>>This resolves a host of confusion that must otherwise be dealt with if relying on a literal interpretation, which creates more problems than resolves.<<

"This resolves..."? There has been no framework presented.

Lastly, the matter of the lack of exactness re 'prophetic times' may be settled by acknowledging the use of the synecdoche in Holy Writ; examples of which abound therein.

[Gustave]

Sound scholarship has gone into all of this. Please read "The Chronology of Ezra 7" by Horn and Wood. Thus far, this scholarship remains undefeated.

You've got to be kidding here - who, other than a few SDA's accept Ellen White's 2300 year prophecy?

...You've really outdone yourself with that one Lysimachus.

...When do you claim that the earth's axial tilt "shifted"?

[Lysimachus]

Gustave, it's very simple. First off, I did not mean to imply that the earth's axial tilt shifted from the book "The Chronology of Ezra 7", rather, I meant to say that the book proves that a true Jewish year is in alignment with the sun, not the moon. That the 70 weeks are based on 490 Solar Years, not Lunar. That the 1260 day prophecy is based on 1260 Solar Years, not Lunar.

You have 365 days in one year. That's 5 days longer than 360 where the going up and going down of the sun occurs 5 times more than the Biblical year. The earth wobbles as is, this is why we have the seasons that we do. Are we to imagine that Adam and Eve had the cold winter seasons that we do?

Not in a million years. It is very likely that the earth was uniform in its climate, but after the great flood, the earth's axial tilt shifted. If just ONE Tsunami has shifted the earth by an inch, what can a global flood do? And the most VIOLENT one at best?

The fact that the Jews constantly had to be updating their calendar to keep up with the sun is telling. Would God have originally created an off-beat calendar like this?

Gustave, it would require numerous articles and books to delve into this issue, and I do not have the time or the energy. And I'm sure there are books arguing for why our earth has not shifted. Your questions directed at me are designed to "deflect" from the "overall" big picture here, and I do not intend to do that.

A better question would be, what do you do with all the vast material I have posted? What do you do with Pickle's calculations? What do you do with de Chéseaux's calculations? What do you do with Zuckerman's calculations of the Sabbatical Cycles?

[Samie]

Is the Prophetic Day = Year Principle - Biblical?

My answer is Yes, but only when applied to the Biblical texts where they properly belong, as in Num 14:34 and Ezek 4:6. But when applied to the end-time prophecies in Daniel, my answer would be No. Why? Because of what our Savior Himself said. Let me elucidate.

In response to the question of His disciples relative to the signs of His coming, the Master Teacher Himself indicated that the setting up of the abomination of desolation - spoken of by Daniel the prophet - will trigger a rapid succession of events starting with the Great Tribulation, the occurrence of which God will shorten for the sake of the elect otherwise no one would remain alive, at the end of which unusual celestial phenomena will occur which will then be capped by the 2nd Coming (Mat 24:15-31).

Is it then not incorrect to conclude that all prophecies in Daniel that have something to do with the abomination of desolation must necessarily find fulfillment shortly before the 2nd Coming? Let us first identify what the "abomination of desolation" is. This will give us a hint why the "days" in the end-time prophecies in Daniel CANNOT be "years".

As used in Daniel, the word "abomination" is from the Hebrew "shiqquts". This Hebrew word, used elsewhere in the Old Testament, refers to idols or images representing pagan deities worshiped by their followers (see 1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). Letting the Bible be its own interpreter, the abomination of desolation that will be set up shortly before the 2nd Coming must be an idol or an image, a "shiqquts", representing someone being worshipped by his followers. The Bible speaks of only one such "shiqquts", an image that will cause desolation to the end-time people of God: the image of the beast in Rev 13.

It can be easily proven from Scriptures that the beast of Rev 13 is the man of sin of 2 Thes 2, who also is the vile-person king of Dan 11, who likewise is the little horn and king of fierce countenance of Dan 8, who is the little horn king of Dan 7. It follows that all prophecies where the beast - a human king - has a part to play will all find fulfillment within the human life span (see Ps 90:10), shortly before the 2nd Coming. The picture now gets even clearer as to why the "days" in the end-time prophecies in Daniel cannot be "years".

Some probing questions:

1. Is the beast a man? Yes. The apostle Paul in 2 Thess 2:3 calls him "man of sin" and therefore a man.

2. Is the beast, a person? Yes. He is referred to as a vile person in Dan 11:21 who is the king referred to in v36.

3. Is the beast a king? Yes. He is referred to as such in Dan 7:24, 25 and in Dan 8:23.

Daniel wrote that the abomination of desolation will be set up 1290 days after the 'daily' had been taken away (Dan 12:11). The taking away of the 'daily' is an act attributed to the beast (Dan 8:9-14; 11:31). Therefore the 1290 "days" CANNOT be "years" since 1290 years would be far more than the life span of any person, like the beast, who will still lead the wicked throng against Christ and the armies of heaven at the battle of Armageddon, giving us an indication that the beast is still around when Christ comes again.

Daniel wrote that the taking away of the 'daily' will be preceded by the desecration of the sanctuary, an act attributed likewise to the beast (Dan 11:31; 8:9-14). The period prophesied within which the sanctuary will be desecrated and the 'daily' taken away - acts all attributed to the beast - is 2300 days (Dan 8:13, 14), and must necessarily be within the human life span. Therefore, the 2300 days CANNOT be years; it would be far too long for a person - like the beast - to exist.

Daniel wrote that the giving of the saints into the hands of the beast or the little horn of Dan 7 will be for 3-1/2 times or years (Dan 7:25), equivalent to 42 months which is, at the least, 1260 days. The 3-1/2 years therefore can only be literal years; it CANNOT possibly be at least 1260 years; this would be far greater than the life span of any man, like the beast, a person just like you and me.

Daniel wrote that it is in the middle of the last week of the 70 weeks allotted for Daniel's people that the 'daily' shall be caused to cease or taken away (Dan 9:27), therefore the 70 weeks cannot possibly be 490 years; it would be far more than the life span of a man, like the beast, the person who is responsible for the taking away of the 'daily'.

A simple, child-like belief in the words of the Savior will lead us to the inevitable conclusion that the "year-day principle" CANNOT possibly be applied to the end-time prophecies in Daniel and Revelation. Doing so would lengthen the days of the great tribulation far beyond human lifespan, a position in direct conflict with the words of Christ that unless the days of the great tribulation are shortened no one will remain alive!

With due respect to the proponents of the "year-day principle", a principle which seems to create more problems than it resolves, this position creates an atmosphere of harmony among those who take the Bible and the Bible only as basis for their belief.

Yes, this poster may be branded by the opposite side as among those who "are mere children, trying to tout their knowledge and understanding of such things, but they are inexperienced little toddlers attempting to refute the irrefutably established, that was built on centuries of intelligent and learned men that were far more learned than most of the superficial researchers of today", yet nonetheless, I'd rather be on the side of the Master Teacher Who also said:

Quote:

NIV Luke 10:21 ...I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children...

Scriptures have spoken.

[Lysimachus]

Scriptures have not been spoken.

They have been twisted.

[Lysimachus]

My refutation of the "Man of Sin" being exclusively a single individual in the future:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/72803776/The-Antichrist-Beast-Power-Exclusively-a-Single-Man

Scriptures have not spoken alone, but Scripture with Scripture has.

[Samie]

Scriptures have not been spoken.

They have been twisted.

Yes, Lysi, by those who insist that the "year-day principle" applies to the end-time prophecies in Daniel.

[Ron Amnsn]

Gustave, it's very simple. First off, I did not mean to imply that the earth's axial tilt shifted from the book "The Chronology of Ezra 7", rather, I meant to say that the book proves that a true Jewish year is in alignment with the sun, not the moon. That the 70 weeks are based on 490 Solar Years, not Lunar. That the 1260 day prophecy is based on 1260 Solar Years, not Lunar.

[Umfundize]

Dr Desmond Ford as well as the author of Adventist Alternative has clearly pointed out the REASONS why the year/day principle is INVALID. It is NOT an established hermaneutical directive.

[Johnnboy]

Originally Posted By: Lysimachus

Sound scholarship has gone into all of this. Please read "The Chronology of Ezra 7" by Horn and Wood. Thus far, this scholarship remains undefeated.

You've got to be kidding here - who, other than a few SDA's accept Ellen White's 2300 year prophecy?

...You've really outdone yourself with that one Lysimachus.

...When do you claim that the earth's axial tilt "shifted"?

While E.G. White supports the "prophetic" fulfillment of the 2300 "prophetic days" ending on Tuesday, October 22, 1844, she makes very clear that "prophetic time" ended in 1844. We need to understand what "prophetic time" actually is--"prophetic time" is really a time period that is "prophetic". It is a prophecy in itself of a still future time period, which would be fulfilled in literal time, not "prophetic time".

Approximately 20% of her statements refer to the judgment of 1844, "when the judgment was set and the books were opened,", but about 80% of her statements "when the judgment shall sit and the books shall be opened" place this event in the future.

So it can be clearly seen that her emphasis is placed upon the future fulfillment of the judgment which takes place at the end of 2300 days, which would be a literal 2300 days.

Remember the sanctuary was always cleansed on the Day of Atonement in the typical system of ceremonies. So the complete fulfillment of the Day of Atonement would be at the end of the future 2300 literal days, in a setting agreeing with the prophecies of Moses.

In The Great Controversy, p.399, 400, Ellen White states that the types related to the first advent were fulfilled at the time pointed out in the symbolic service. Then she states that in like manner the types related to the second advent must be fulfilled at the time pointed out in the symbolic service.

It is vitally important for us to make a thorough study of just how the types related to Christ's first advent were fulfilled in their literal 52-day setting.

[Ron Amnsn]

We thus see that the conclusions of Adventist Historicists and their day-year principle are built on the soundest, most advanced mathematical minds.

Those who attempt to topple over the day-year principle of the Adventist reckoning do not know what they are up against. They are mere children, trying to tout their knowledge and understanding of such things, but they are inexperienced little toddlers attempting to refute the irrefutably established, that was built on centuries of intelligent and learned men that were far more learned than most of the superficial researchers of today.

Catholics and Protestants cannot stand up to the soundness of the day-for-year principle if they dare to take on the soundest scholars of times past over a course of centuries, not a handful of Adventist theologians that exist in our present day.

In the beginning God gave humans some specific instructions about the tree in the midst of the garden. The serpent came along and convinced the woman that God didn't really mean what he said, that it would be better in the end to ignore those instructions, that probably God really intended for humans to use their own smarts to figure out what to do with the fruit of the forbidden tree. The serpent was very clever and had a great mind-- one of the greatest minds of that time. The problem was that his cleverness contradicted God's Word.

Over the centuries there have been many very great minds that have espoused a great many things. Many of those things were contrary to God's word. We could ask the Freemasons, for example, what their clever scholars can teach us about the cycles of astronomy and how those relate to Bible prophesy. But we don't need to sit at the feet of the very bright Freemason minds to discover truth because it is rather plain that the result of their teachings is contrary to God's Word. We don't need to waste time refuting the individual prophetic interpretations because the whole system gives faulty results.

In Scripture God gave prophecies to His people. But some very great historicist minds came along and proposed that God didn't really mean what he said. God said 42 months, but we are now being told that God didn't really mean months as determined by the moon. No what God really meant was 30-day periods that we'll call "Prophetic Months" because they match what WE think would be ideal months-- much nicer than the messy 29 or 30-day months that God's moon would mark out for us.

And... God didn't really mean months made of DAYS the way God's moon measures them. No, we are told, what God really meant was YEARS grouped together in groups of thirty to correspond to the "Prophetic Months" which we invented because we didn't like the months God gave us.

And... the same with the 2300 evening-mornings that God prophesied. We are told that God didn't really mean evening-mornings, but that he meant DAYS, but not really days either because what he really meant was YEARS. And not really years as measured by the Moon and the Sun, but years as measured by the Sun alone. In fact, we don't even need the Moon at all any more because we have it all figured out to our satisfaction.

Now I don't think the Millerites meant any harm when they came up with all these variations on what God actually said in Scripture. They had decided that Jesus was going to return in 1844 and to make their their prediction "work" they had to find fulfillments for all the Bible prophecies that happen before the return of Christ. That forced them into the historicist camp of prophetic interpretation. By finding creative meanings and interpretations for certain words they found plausible interpretations for all those prophecies that had to be fulfilled before Christ could return. They were all set now. Unfortunately, the main prediction about the return of Christ in 1844 turned out to be very wrong. At that point they should have gone back and reconsidered the historicist interpretations they had created for all of the other prophecies too. But they didn't. Since then clever and very bright minds have gone back and shored-up the original historicist interpretations.

We could take the time to read through all the books and articles to try to point out where the historicist year-instead-of-a-day scholars went wrong. But we don't need to do that. We can just look at the results of that system of interpretation. When people teach that God really meant years instead of days, do they come up with doctrines that agree with the rest of Scripture? I hear them teaching that God rejected Israel as a nation, which is contrary to the Sinai covenant, the covenant with David, the covenant with the Levites, and the writings of Moses and Paul. I hear them teaching that a "church" was raised up in 1844 to replace the Israelites as God's chosen people, which is contrary to God's Word. I hear them teaching that God didn't really mean what he said (sounds familiar, eh?) when he told Jeremiah that Judah and Israel would be nations before him as long as night and day continue. I hear them teaching that Jeremiah's prophecies were "conditional" and won't be fulfilled, even though God's specified conditions for those prophesies continue to be valid. I hear them teaching that God's Law as given to Moses is now obsolete, which sets aside a large portion of God's Word, without any Scriptural evidence to support that teaching. I hear them teaching that the Temple in Jerusalem is of no consequence, even though Scriptures tell us that Jesus was zealous for that Temple. I hear them teaching that a person who keeps the Law of Moses and teaches others to do so is a misled legalist and a troublemaker, which contradicts what Jesus taught about those people being called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. I hear them teaching that it's impossible to keep the Law of Moses, even though Scripture says it's not too difficult and the New Testament even tells of NT people who kept the Law successfully. When we get results like this from the teachings of the historicist system of interpretation, do we need to take the time to refute all the scholarly theories that have been created to bolster the historicist interpretations? No. The results speak for themselves.

[Samie]

Amen, Ron Amnsn. Well said and nicely put, brother.

...

When we get results like this from the teachings of the historicist system of interpretation, do we need to take the time to refute all the scholarly theories that have been created to bolster the historicist interpretations? No. The results speak for themselves.

And a child-like belief in the words of the Master Teacher will lead us to where He wants us to be: in the side of Truth as revealed in Scriptures.

[Lysimachus]

I'm still waiting for someone to deal with the actual arguments (my strong points) concerning the 70 weeks being in alignment with solar years, and also the hermeneutical principles of de Chéseaux's calculations.

Not much time has transpired since 1844. Only 167 years (that is a smidgen compared to God's grand prophetic clock).

There are yet many future things to transpire. The full remanifestation and restoration of the beast after its deadly wound is fully healed. The resuming of the Great Tribulation that was suspended in 1798 and presently still is. It's resuming is yet future.

The sealing of the 144,000.

The Mark of the Beast.

The Seal of God.

The close of probation.

The 7 last plagues.

etc. etc.

Many "yet future" things are found in the Historicist Paradigm, which represents the PAST, the PRESENT, and the FUTURE.

Only Historicism can properly interpret God's prophetic time tables. Futurism can't, as Futurism ignores 2000 years of human history and gives no attention to those time periods for prophetic time.

Futurism makes God out to be a weak God, unable to predict time periods over vast centuries, but can only determined short time periods, such as 3.5 literal years.

Adventism upholds the Scriptures. Futurism is not supported by the Scriptures.

Jesus' words Stand. Jesus' words do not support only one Abomination of Desolation. They support a continual progression of it since 70 A.D.--- Pagan Rome, Papal Rome, and Revived Papal Rome---analogous to the Three Tribulations. And a reptition, and enlargement of it--shifting from Local/Literal to Global/Spiritual.

Jesus' words are "zoomed in upon" in Revelation, which amplify these details. Jesus' words alone will not solve all the chronological implications. Jesus' words + Daniel + Revelation + the Rest of the Bible will.

The motion is carried. So let it be written. So let it be done.

[Lysimachus]

We have seen that in the seventh chapter of Daniel the little horn, though as such representing only the latter phase of Rome, yet does really represent Rome in both its phases--Rome from beginning to end, because when the time comes that the "little horn" is to be broken and destroyed, it is indeed "the beast" that is "slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame." Thus the thought with which the story of the little horn closes in Daniel 7 is continued in Daniel 8 with reference to the same power. In Daniel 8 the expression "little horn" covers the whole of Rome in both its phases, just as is shown in the closing expressions concerning the "little horn" in Daniel 7; as is shown also by the expressions "the abomination of desolation" and "the transgression of desolation," being applied to Rome in both its phases (Dan. 9:26, 27; Matt. 24:15; Dan. 11:31; 12:11; 8:11, 13); and as is confirmed by the teaching and history of latter Rome itself. It is all one, except only that all that is stated of the former Rome is true and intensified in the latter Rome. (A.T. Jones, The Consecrated Way, p. 50

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: Lysimachus

We thus see that the conclusions of Adventist Historicists and their day-year principle are built on the soundest, most advanced mathematical minds.

Those who attempt to topple over the day-year principle of the Adventist reckoning do not know what they are up against. They are mere children, trying to tout their knowledge and understanding of such things, but they are inexperienced little toddlers attempting to refute the irrefutably established, that was built on centuries of intelligent and learned men that were far more learned than most of the superficial researchers of today.

Catholics and Protestants cannot stand up to the soundness of the day-for-year principle if they dare to take on the soundest scholars of times past over a course of centuries, not a handful of Adventist theologians that exist in our present day.

In the beginning God gave humans some specific instructions about the tree in the midst of the garden. The serpent came along and convinced the woman that God didn't really mean what he said, that it would be better in the end to ignore those instructions, that probably God really intended for humans to use their own smarts to figure out what to do with the fruit of the forbidden tree. The serpent was very clever and had a great mind-- one of the greatest minds of that time. The problem was that his cleverness contradicted God's Word.

Over the centuries there have been many very great minds that have espoused a great many things. Many of those things were contrary to God's word. We could ask the Freemasons, for example, what their clever scholars can teach us about the cycles of astronomy and how those relate to Bible prophesy. But we don't need to sit at the feet of the very bright Freemason minds to discover truth because it is rather plain that the result of their teachings is contrary to God's Word. We don't need to waste time refuting the individual prophetic interpretations because the whole system gives faulty results.

In Scripture God gave prophecies to His people. But some very great historicist minds came along and proposed that God didn't really mean what he said. God said 42 months, but we are now being told that God didn't really mean months as determined by the moon. No what God really meant was 30-day periods that we'll call "Prophetic Months" because they match what WE think would be ideal months-- much nicer than the messy 29 or 30-day months that God's moon would mark out for us.

And... God didn't really mean months made of DAYS the way God's moon measures them. No, we are told, what God really meant was YEARS grouped together in groups of thirty to correspond to the "Prophetic Months" which we invented because we didn't like the months God gave us.

And... the same with the 2300 evening-mornings that God prophesied. We are told that God didn't really mean evening-mornings, but that he meant DAYS, but not really days either because what he really meant was YEARS. And not really years as measured by the Moon and the Sun, but years as measured by the Sun alone. In fact, we don't even need the Moon at all any more because we have it all figured out to our satisfaction.

Now I don't think the Millerites meant any harm when they came up with all these variations on what God actually said in Scripture. They had decided that Jesus was going to return in 1844 and to make their their prediction "work" they had to find fulfillments for all the Bible prophecies that happen before the return of Christ. That forced them into the historicist camp of prophetic interpretation. By finding creative meanings and interpretations for certain words they found plausible interpretations for all those prophecies that had to be fulfilled before Christ could return. They were all set now. Unfortunately, the main prediction about the return of Christ in 1844 turned out to be very wrong. At that point they should have gone back and reconsidered the historicist interpretations they had created for all of the other prophecies too. But they didn't. Since then clever and very bright minds have gone back and shored-up the original historicist interpretations.

We could take the time to read through all the books and articles to try to point out where the historicist year-instead-of-a-day scholars went wrong. But we don't need to do that. We can just look at the results of that system of interpretation. When people teach that God really meant years instead of days, do they come up with doctrines that agree with the rest of Scripture? I hear them teaching that God rejected Israel as a nation, which is contrary to the Sinai covenant, the covenant with David, the covenant with the Levites, and the writings of Moses and Paul. I hear them teaching that a "church" was raised up in 1844 to replace the Israelites as God's chosen people, which is contrary to God's Word. I hear them teaching that God didn't really mean what he said (sounds familiar, eh?) when he told Jeremiah that Judah and Israel would be nations before him as long as night and day continue. I hear them teaching that Jeremiah's prophecies were "conditional" and won't be fulfilled, even though God's specified conditions for those prophesies continue to be valid. I hear them teaching that God's Law as given to Moses is now obsolete, which sets aside a large portion of God's Word, without any Scriptural evidence to support that teaching. I hear them teaching that the Temple in Jerusalem is of no consequence, even though Scriptures tell us that Jesus was zealous for that Temple. I hear them teaching that a person who keeps the Law of Moses and teaches others to do so is a misled legalist and a troublemaker, which contradicts what Jesus taught about those people being called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. I hear them teaching that it's impossible to keep the Law of Moses, even though Scripture says it's not too difficult and the New Testament even tells of NT people who kept the Law successfully. When we get results like this from the teachings of the historicist system of interpretation, do we need to take the time to refute all the scholarly theories that have been created to bolster the historicist interpretations? No. The results speak for themselves.

This would take a book, or more, to refute. I've studied all your arguments over the last 15 years, and I guarantee you, you are wrong. Dead wrong. As wrong as wrong can get.

If you would like a full refutation of the above, that looks at the MUCH bigger picture, I recommend the following two books that deal with every shred of error in your above post:

Prophetic Toolchest for Dismantling the Dispensational Delusion -- see the Table of Contents for all 12 chapters (550 pages), by D.S. Farris

Futurism's Incredible Journey: The Change of the Times and its Implications for Seventh-day Adventist Apocalyptic Interpretation - by Stephen Bohr

The above two articles show how giving up our Historicist Principles proved to be the death-knell against Protestantism. How when the expected events to come in 1844 did not transpire as we had supposed, we threw out the baby with the bathwater, and fell into the trap of Jesuit Futurism.

It was a test. And it's also testing you too Ron. You have been brainswashed by Jesuit Futurism--and it is Demonic and Possessed at best. Futurism, which you have adopted, is an ideology straight from the Pits of Hell.

And so is the perfidious teaching that God still has a covenant with literal Israel.

Now it is SPIRITUAL ISRAEL. The chapter "The Israel of God" by D.S. Farris in the first link above will shred your arguments concerning the covenants to Israel to pieces. It will not stand a chance.

I doubt that you will really take the time to wrestle with this though.

In fact, I'm going to give you 4 radio shows that completely and UTTERLY dismantle your Dispensational garbage, to SHREDS!

The Israel of God - Part 1

The Israel of God - Part 2

The Israel of God - Part 3

The Israel of God - Part 4

These shows, SPECIALIZE, in dealing with the arguments that you, specifically you Ron, produce.

Look back and see where we went wrong?

It was not the day-year-principle where we went wrong!

It was the event!

To give up Historicism would be to basically throw 1500 years of history down the drain, and pretend that Prophecy showed no concern for it.

It has not been that long since 1844 Ron. 167 years since 1844, compared to 1800+ years before 1844 since Christ's death? Not long at all.

Ron, we would have to wait another 500+ years before we could determine that we went wrong somewhere in our historicist calculations.

That's the bottom line.

The entire Christian Church was built on a disappointment.

The disciples were disappointed. They thought he would come as King and sit in Jerusalem on the Throne of David. It didn't happen.

John the Baptist was disappointed. He thought he was going to conquer the Romans. It didn't happen.

The masses of people in Jerusalem thought Jesus was proclaiming himself a literal king in Jerusalem and would conquer the Romans. It didn't happen. Yet one could accuse Christ of "willfully deceiving the masses of people by riding on a colt"--a procession that only someone who was about to be enthroned as king did. Most of these people turned against Christ. There was only a small remnant.

Just like the Christian Church was built on a massive disappointment that transpired around the end of the 70 weeks prophecy, likewise, God's final remnant--body of movement, was built on a massive disappointment at the terminus of the 2300 day prophecy.

The parallels are mind-blowing. Only those who are spiritual will discern it.

[Lysimachus]

THE PRESENT JERUSALEM AND THE OLD COVENANT

"Jerusalem which now is," "is in bondage with her children." Gal. iv. 25. Still more; the covenant from mount Sinai, "which gendereth to bondage," is Hagar; "for this Agar [Hagar] is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children." Every one, therefore, who builds his hopes upon Jerusalem which now exists in the land of Palestine, and who makes every promise of God depend upon the return of the people of God, or any part of them, to that city, is still in the bondage of the old covenant, with the veil still over his face. He is tarrying at mount Sinai, instead of coming to mount Zion, and to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the Living God. {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 210.2}

JERUSALEM OLD AND NEW

Many cities on this earth have suffered almost total destruction by fire, and have been rebuilt, yet that fact is not considered as making any break in the continuity of those cities. Rome, for instance, is still said to have been built seven hundred and fifty years before Christ, although there is scarcely a building in the city that was in existence in the days of Christ, and the city was almost wholly destroyed by fire in the reign of Nero, and has suffered from fire many times before and since. Take the city under consideration, namely Jerusalem. It was laid in ruins, its walls demolished, and its chief buildings burned, by Nebuchadnezzar, and afterwards it suffered still greater ravages by the hands of the Romans under Titus, yet it is always thought and spoken of as the city of David and Solomon. When we speak of Rome and Jerusalem, we do not feel compelled to designate whether we refer to the time before their destruction, or after, since it is Rome and Jerusalem from beginning to end, no matter what vicissitudes they have passed through. Even so it is in the prophecies concerning Jerusalem. The Bible does not always specify, and say that now it refers to the old city, and now to the New Jerusalem, but speaks simply of Jerusalem, leaving the context, and the promises or threatenings, as the case may be, to determine to which state in the history of the city the words apply. The Lord has gone to prepare a place in the heavens, to build up a new city (See John xiv. 1-3; Ps. cii. 16), which is to come down from God out of heaven, to occupy the place now occupied by the city known among men as Jerusalem; and when that city comes down, it will be considered as the old city rebuilt, made new; and so it is always spoken of in the Bible. It may be taken as a fact beyond all contradiction, that there is not a single Bible promise concerning Jerusalem, which applies to Jerusalem in its present condition, or as it has been at any time in its history. Every promise of restoration embraces its being so changed by the Lord as to be incorruptible, imperishable. {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 210.3}

THE BRIDE, THE LAMB'S WIFE

From the very beginning, God has considered Himself as occupying the close relation of husband to His people. Read the prophecies of Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and the whole of Hosea. The third chapter of Jeremiah is especially plain. "Turn, O backsliding children, saith the Lord; for I am married unto you." Verse 14. And then the Lord tells what He will do if they will return, using words that can apply only to the redeemed state. Speaking of the making of the new covenant, God says that His people broke the old covenant, "although I was an husband unto them." Jer. xxxi. 32. So, coming to the New Testament, we read that we are to be married to Him that is raised from the dead, that we may bring forth fruit unto God (Rom. vii. 4); Paul writes, "I have espoused you to one husband, and I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ" (2 Cor. xi. 2); and in the fifth of Ephesians we read that the same close relation exists between Christ and His people that exists between a man and his wife. See verses 22-32. So by a change in the metaphor, or an enlargement of it, the city of God, Jerusalem, is considered as married to Christ. The very land itself where God's people dwell, is married to Him. This is perfectly in harmony with the fact that Christ, who is "the firstborn among many brethren," is also "the everlasting Father." It is not a mixed metaphor, but the expression of a deeper meaning, a more intimate relation, than human minds have conceived. The chapter before us, therefore, presents Jerusalem as a wife forsaken by her husband, and mourning her widowhood and childlessness, but comforted by the assurance that she has not really been cast off, and is not forgotten, but is still owned by her husband, and will be honoured by Him. The time when these promises will be fulfilled is set forth in Rev. xxi.; Zech. xiv. 1-11; and Isa. xlix. 13-23, all of which should be read in this connection. It is the Bible, the Lamb's wife, that is addressed. {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 210.4}

THE DIFFERENT PHASES OF JERUSALEM'S EXPERIENCE

There was a time when the glory of God was seen resting over the temple in Jerusalem, and filling it. 2 Chron. vii. 1-3. God owned that city as His earthly dwelling place, and the promise to its inhabitants was that if they obeyed Him, and refrained from breaking the Sabbath, the city should stand for ever. Jer. xvii. 24, 25. They did not heed His words, and the city was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar; yet a holy seed was left in it, and the promise of restoration accompanied the threat of its destruction. According to the promise, Christ, "the Desire of all nations," came to the city and temple, but was rejected. Then He wept over it, mourning in bitterness of grief, that the city had so persistently refused His gracious calls, and said, "Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." But this was not to be for ever, for He added, "I say unto you, Ye shall not see Me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord." Matt. xxiii. 37-39. The centuries that have passed since that time have been only "a little moment" with Him in whose sight a thousand years are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night. Not for a moment has the Lord forgotten Zion; its walls are continually before Him, and it is graven upon the palms of His hands. Even though the mountains depart, and the hills be removed, yet His kindness and love will not depart from the city which He has chosen, nor from her children. Consequently even today the faithful worshipers of God direct their prayers to Him, and "look up," thus praying with their faces towards Jerusalem. {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 210.5}

THE REBUILING OF JERUSALEM

No; God has not divorced His spouse (Isa. l. 1), nor cast away His people. Rom. xi. 1. He loves them with tender affection. He will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down, and will build again the ruins thereof, and will set it up; that the residue of men may seek after the Lord; and this He will do by the proclamation of the Gospel to the Gentiles; for it is only from the Gentiles, the nations, that Israel is taken. God chose Abraham from among the Gentiles, for there was no such thing as a Jew or an Israelite, in name, until long after the days of that patriarch. He called Israel out of Egypt, that through them His name might be made known in all the earth. Their business was to be missionaries to the heathen; but instead of performing their mission, they were content to settle down in the land of Palestine, around Jerusalem. Instead of enlarging the place of their habitation, to include all the world, they became conservative, which is another name for selfish, and shut everybody else away from the blessings which they enjoyed, and thereby lost the blessings themselves. Whoever would exclude another from the blessings of the Lord, excludes himself. But God's purpose will be carried out. All who are really born from above, having the New Jerusalem for their mother, will make its glories and its power known, until its fame reaches every part of the earth. As a consequence the place that Jerusalem now occupies will be too small; it "shall break forth and spread abroad on the right hand, and on the left" (See Zech. xiv. 4), and its seed "shall inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited." Jerusalem, as it will be when the Lord appears in His glory, will be such a city as the world has never yet seen. {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 211.1} |

JERUSALEM'S BEAUTIFUL STONES

"Thou shalt arise, and have mercy upon Zion; for the time to favour her, yea, the set time, is come. For thy servants take pleasure in her stones, and favour the dust thereof. So shall the heathen fear the name of the Lord, and all the kings of the earth Thy glory." Ps. cii. 13-15. What is there in the dust and stones of Jerusalem, in which one can take pleasure?-Nothing whatever, in "Jerusalem which now is." The stones of old Jerusalem are no better than the stones of any other city, and its dust is as disagreeable as that of Constantinople, or any other Eastern city. The stones in which the children of Jerusalem take pleasure as the sapphires and agates and carbuncles, which are laid in "fair colours." Read the list of them in Rev. xxi. 18-21. The dust of its street is "pure gold, as it were transparent glass." There is something in which to delight; there is a city that will indeed be "the joy of the whole earth." Ps. xlviii. 2. {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 211.2}

THE GATHERING OF ARMED FORCES ABOUT JERUSALEM

The closing portion of this chapter presents a picture that is drawn out more fully in the book of Revelation. We have already seen that the New Jerusalem, prepared in heaven, comes down to this earth; but nothing that has thus far been noted indicates what condition of things it finds when it comes. This we learn from Rev. xx., and incidentally from other Scriptures. The passage before us says that although the city with its inhabitants will be far from oppression, and will be free from fear, yet "they shall surely gather," and that, too, against the city. In the chapter referred to in the Revelation we learn that after the close of the thousand years, during which Satan will be bound, while all the righteous who have ever lived on earth will be in heaven, sitting on thrones of judgment, deciding the penalty due to the wicked (Rev. xx. 3-6; 1 Cor. vi. 2, 3; Ps. cxlix. 4-9), Satan will be loosed, because all the wicked of earth will be raised, and he will go forth among them, to gather them to battle against the Lord. The statement that all the nations thus gathered "went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city; and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them," shows that the beloved city will come down to this earth before the earth has been purified by the fires of the last day, and while the wicked are yet here. As Eden remained on the earth a time after the curse came, so it will come back before the curse is removed. But though the wicked, under the leadership of Satan himself, will gather together against the city of God, they cannot prosper, because they are not gathered by the Lord. No weapon that they can forge against the city will have any effect upon it. No cannon ball will ever be able to touch one of its stones. God Himself has created the smith that blows the coals of fire, in order to manufacture the weapon to destroy, and therefore since the man himself is nothing in comparison with God, the weapon that he makes cannot be anything. When the wicked come against the city, fire comes down from God out of heaven, and devours them, and at the same time melts the earth, while the city of God will ride upon the sea of fire as the ark rode safely upon the waters of the flood. Then will the saints "dwell with the devouring fire," and "with everlasting burnings." Isa. xxx. 15, 16. The saints safe in the city will behold, and see the reward of the wicked, but it will not come nigh them. {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 211.3}

THE SAFETY OF JERUSALEM AND ITS INHABITANTS

What will constitute their safety in that terrible time?-The answer is, "In righteousness shalt thou be established." The righteousness in which they will be established is the righteousness of God, that is by the faith of Jesus Christ. But that righteousness is theirs now. Therefore the lesson that is designed for us to learn from the statement of the things to come is the perfect security that we now have against all the assaults of the devil. Just as safe as the people of God will be in the holy city amid the fires that will destroy the wicked, so safe are they now from every sort of evil that Satan would bring upon them, if they but trust in the Lord, and abide in Him. Satan and all his host cannot forge a weapon of any sort, visible or invisible, whether designed to destroy the body or the soul, which can pierce the armour that is provided for the people of God. "The eternal God is Thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms." {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 211.4}

"Not rocks nor hills could guard so well

Fair Salem's happy ground,

As those eternal arms of love,

That every saint surround." {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 211.5}

And no one can pluck a saint out of those protecting arms. Blessed be the name of the Lord, into which the righteous run, and are safe! {April 5, 1900 EJW, PTUK 211.6}

How can one possibly contend with these arguments?

It simply cannot be done.

Why so?

These men's minds were both spiritual and intellectual giants--minds that could PENETRATE DEEP into the mysteries of God.

Something both you Samie and you Ron completely lack.

[Samie]

No use refuting all over again what the Bible had by its own plain pronouncements already disproved, as shown in earlier posts...

[Samie]

...

How can one possibly contend with these arguments?

It simply cannot be done.

Why so?

These men's minds were both spiritual and intellectual giants--minds that could PENETRATE DEEP into the mysteries of God.

Something both you Samie and you Ron completely lack.

[Johnnboy]

"We cannot be excusable in accepting only the light which our fathers had one hundred years ago. If our God-fearing fathers had seen what we see, and heard what we hear, they would have accepted the light, and walked in it. If we desire to imitate their faithfulness, we must receive the truths open to us, as they received those presented to them; we must do as they would have done, had they lived in our day.” HS 197 EGW

“ For His church in every generation God has a special truth and a special work.” COL 79 EGW

“In every age there is a new development of truth, a message of God to the people of that generation. The old truths are all essential; new truth is not independent of the old, but an unfolding of it. It is only as the old truths are understood that we can comprehend the new. When Christ desired to open to His disciples the truth of His resurrection, He began "at Moses and all the prophets" and "expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning Himself." Luke 24:27. But it is the light which shines in the fresh unfolding of truth that glorifies the old. He who rejects or neglects the new does not really possess the old. For him it loses its vital power and becomes but a lifeless form. COL 127 EGW

[Johnnboy]

"That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past." Ecclesiastes 3:15