THIS IS A DOCUMENT IN PROGRESS! REVISIONS ARE BEING MADE ON A REGULAR BASIS!! Latest Revision Monday, 19 May 2014 AN EXAMINATION OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST INTERPRETATION OF TWO TIME PROPHECIES IN THE BOOK OF DANIEL - THE 2300 DAYS OF DANIEL 8 AND THE 70 WEEKS OF DANIEL 9. ASSUMPTION 25 The Year-Day “Principle” is a valid Biblical Principle. By FRANK BASTEN NOVEMBER, 1990 Copyright, 1990 Assumption 25 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Purpose of this Assumption 4 2. Method. 4 2.1 The principle generally presented by the SDA pioneers using a mixture of Eze4:6, Num14:34 and Dn9:24 .................................................................... 5 2.1.1 Pre-Millerite Writers ............................................................................. 6 2.2 The Textual Basis of the Year Day Principle .............................................. 27 2.2.1 Numbers 14:33-34: ..............................................................................27 2.2.2 Ezekiel 4: 1-6:......................................................................................28 2.3 Examining Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:4-6............................................. 29 2.3.1 Discussion of the Relationship between Num 14:34 and Eze 4:6. .........29 2.3.2 How many times must symbolic time be treated? .................................50 2.3.3 The ‗Scale‘ not the Context of the phrase ―a day for a year.‖ ................53 2.3.4 ―Bearing the iniquities.‖ .......................................................................53 2.3.5 Are the periods of time recorded in Num 14:34 and Eze 4:6 predictive prophecy? Are they apocalyptic prophecy? ...........................................................55 2.3.6 Summary .............................................................................................67 2.4 Dn9 - Sabbatical years in Dan9: 24-27 ....................................................... 70 2.4.1 A historical defence of the SDA interpretation of the 70 weeks. ..........70 2.4.2 SDA historicists who use Dn9:24-27 to prove the year-day principle ..72 2.4.3 SDA historicists who do not see the year-day principle in Dn9:24-27 .77 2.4.4 Daniel 9:24-27 and the sabbatical year motif .......................................80 2.4.5 Do we read ―sevens‖ or ―weeks‖ for shabû„îm? ..................................83 2.4.6 The Occurrence of Shabu„a in other passages. ................................... 100 2.4.7 The History of the use of the word Hebdomad. .................................. 104 2.5 Other prophetic passages and principles. ................................................. 108 2.5.1 Visionary Object Represents a Literal Day. ........................................ 109 2.5.2 Visionary Object Represents a Literal Year. ....................................... 109 2.5.3 The Three Ribs of Dn7:5.................................................................... 110 2.5.4 The Two Arms and Hands of the Image of Daniel 2 ........................... 111 2.5.5 Two Legs of The Statue represent Rome and Turkey ......................... 111 2.5.6 The Ten Toes of Dn2-The Lord‘s Return in 2991 A.D. or 4076 A.D. 112 2.5.7 Applying the Year-Day Theory to Gen41: The Lord‘s Coming in 3040 A.D. 113 2.5.8 Day for a thousand years (and visa-versa) .......................................... 114 2.5.9 The Proper Principle for Interpreting Prophetic Time Periods ............ 116 2.5.10 Incidence of time periods in the ―literal‖ explanations, not the ―symbolic‖ visions. .......................................................................................................... 116 2.5.11 The ―Season and a Time‖ in Dn7:12 ................................................ 121 2.6 Long Time periods are needed ............................................................... 125 2.6.1 The use of ―times‖ in Daniel .............................................................. 126 2.6.2 3½ Times in Daniel 7– a long time period? ....................................... 133 2.6.3 Daniel 11-12 – 3½ Times and other of time periods –long time periods?137 2.6.4 2300 ‗ereb bôqer in Daniel 8:14 – a long time period? ...................... 142 2.6.5 Summary ........................................................................................... 144 © Frank Basten 1990 Version Date: May 19, 2014 Assumption 25 3 2.7 The Use of “day” in OT........................................................................... 145 2.7.1 Use of Day in historical OT prose ...................................................... 145 2.7.2 Use of ―day‖ in poetic literature ......................................................... 147 2.7.3 The use of ―day‖ as an idiom. ............................................................ 150 2.7.4 The Use of ―Hour‖ as an idiom. ......................................................... 151 2.7.5 The Use of ―day‖ in Sabbatical Year and Jubilee Legislation ............. 152 2.8 The Problem of Misunderstanding the Idiom of Repetition in Hebrew .... 168 2.8.1 Examples of Distributive Sense of Repetition Cited in Gesenius. ....... 169 2.8.2 Some Examples of Similar Time Prophecies by God.......................... 180 2.8.3 Summary ........................................................................................... 182 2.9 Astronomical Significance of the Danielic time periods ............................. 184 De Cheseaux and Adventism. ..................................................................... 186 2.10 Cressener, Guinness and the Proof by Advance Prediction ....................... 191 1. Dr. Henry Grattan Guinness .................................................................... 195 2. Robert Fleming ....................................................................................... 199 2.11 Gen 29 Jacob and Rachel-The Year-Day Principle Here? ......................... 201 2.12 The Quantification of the Time Period .................................................... 206 3. The Conclusion 211 4. Bibliography 217 5 . Appendix 229 © Frank Basten 1990 Version Date: May 19, 2014 Assumption 25 4 1. Purpose of this Assumption The year-day concept is a method of scaling time periods found in prophecies SDA historicists call apocalyptic in Daniel and Revelation. By calculating the days involved in the time period and then assuming those days are ―symbolic” days, the ―literal‖ period involved can be computed. These periods of time are inevitably much longer than those given in the text. This topic is not just a exegetical exercise; rather, historicists tell us it is an issue that people have sacrificed their lives and the lives of their families over in the past. Historicists remind us that it was through the use of the year-day principle that Rome was identified as the Antichrist of the Middle Ages, and resisted by the Protestant movement. One historicist makes this connection between the year-day principle and the sacrifice this belief has cost the church in past ages: As T.R. Birks notes, the Day-Year Principle was the ―first object of attack‖ because it had not only helped identified the Papal Antichrist in Rome but had also showed that the papal antichrist rule would last for 1,260 years, exactly. The rule of the Papacy, in fact, did last for exactly 1,260 years, for Papa‘s rule spanned the time from when the Roman Catholics gained control of Rome after the expulsion of the Ostrogoths as they were driven out of the city in 538 A.D., and afterwards Rome ―made war on the saints‖, and this period of rule extended down to A.D. 1798 when Napoleon‘s army eventually entered Rome under General Berthier and took the Pope captive to France, where he died in exile under house arrest – a period of exactly and precisely 1,260 years! The Futurists, to relieve Rome of any guilt, sweep this heinous history of the ―Dark Ages‖ under the carpet, and point with great gusto to a yet coming, future Antichrist that is yet to arise – they discount the Day-Year Principle whenever Rome or Antichrist or Babylon is discussed.... The Bible, on the other hand, speaks plainly of a present Antichrist making ―war on the saints‖ and ruling for 1,260 years from the ―great city‖ of Rome in Italy according to the Day-Year Principle. Historicists recognize the fearful place that Antichrist has already played in the world‘s history, where for many bloody centuries the Spanish Inquisition and papal armies have killed millions of true Christians, murdered in the name of religion and truth. These saints however did not deny their Christ, and because of the ―word of their testimony‖, they were heinously burnt to a crisp in the fires and Autos-da-f of martyrdom, or hanged, or drowned, stabbed, garrotted, shot to death, blown up with bags of gunpowder tied around their necks, wives and daughters ravished before their eyes, etc.; and, all the while during such persecutions these stalwart men pointed their finger at Rome and boldly declared: ―Thou art Antichrist!‖ I don‘t know of anyone who has died a martyr‘s death defending the pre-Tribulation Rapture. (see extract by H. Frizell Snr in Appendix) Therefore, historicists see the acknowledgement of the fallacy of the year-day principle as akin to betraying the testimony of all the saints before them who raised their voices against the corruptions of Rome. In these historicists‘ eyes it would be a virtual abandonment of all that is truly Protestant. Viewed from this perspective, one can appreciate how emotionally-charged any defence is against an argument that weakens the strength of the year-day theory for SDA historicists. Notwithstanding