Events displayed on our nightly screens are foreshadowed in the last verses of Daniel. But hardly anyone seems aware of what those verses are. We are hurtling toward Earth’s final crisis. Very soon people will be frantically rushing to buy oil for their sputtering lamps. For a great many it will be too late. Understanding now, the words of Jesus (“the Man clothed in white linen”), recorded by Daniel in the last six verses of his eponymous book is critically important.

The three distinct time periods mentioned in Daniel chapter 12 (1260, 1290, and 1335 days) have long been a source of confusion. It has been widely assumed that the 1260 days (3½ years) referred to in Daniel 12:7 correspond to those in Daniel 7:25 and the Year-for-a-Day (YDC) “code” has been applied to all the time periods of chapter 12 for consistency’s sake. But while this is quite understandable – and staunchly defended – it is not correct.

The long-held, “Accepted View” is without historical, hermeneutical or logical justification.

All the events described in Daniel 12 occur “at the end of time” (12:9). None of them can be shown to have occurred by 1798, or 1844: Michael has not “stood up”, the unprecedented “time of trouble” hasn’t happened, the dead have not been raised (12:2), “the power of the holy people” has not been scattered/shattered (indeed, the power and influence of Protestant America was greatly on the rise) and they have not been “delivered” from their “Time of Jacob’s Trouble”. Any interpretation of these time periods that posits events preceding 1844 fails irreparably. This criterion is ineluctable. “Years” are impossible to reconcile in this context.

Assuming the argument in order to prove it, by arbitrarily counting backwards from 1843 (Fitch and Hale) in order to establish a starting point for the 1335 days (508 AD) is simply fallacious (Logic 101). Citing the conversion of the Barbarian Frank, King Clovis I to “Roman Catholicism” in 508 AD as justification for concluding the time span ended in 1844, is less than honest. The year 509 is actually the arithmetically correct date. But Clovis converted to the form of Nicene “Christianity” that Constantine employed to conceal his paganism on December 25, 496 AD. The whole process was a mess. But it still forms the basis for the “Accepted Position” today.

The “1335 days” in chapter 12:12 constitute the longest time period among the three. If we interpret the “days” as symbolic of years (YDC) and endeavour to start them at 1798 (the commencement of what has been generally considered to be the “Time of the End”), we would arrive at the year 3133 AD for their fulfilment, thus making a farce of the whole idea of the “Time of the End” and a travesty of Seventh-day Adventism’s raison d’être.

Because Ellen White has made a statement that appears to be categorical in saying there are no time prophecies after 1844, some have concluded that Daniel’s time prophecies in chapter 12 must therefore apply to events before 1844. But Ellen White also makes other, equally explicit statements that seem to contradict her earlier view. Referencing statements of Jesus recorded in the New Testament, White observes, “One saying of the Saviour must not be made to destroy another” (GC 370.2). The same principle applies to her.

In attempting to defend long-held assumptions some well-credentialled and respected academics have disingenuously projected the term “Futurist” onto the emergent understanding that is now gaining traction. This technique verges on the cynical. It conflates the fallacious, Jesuit system of prophetic interpretation, with the future fulfilment of Daniel’s prophecies in chapter 12. Other, emotive techniques used typically in “propaganda”, such as displaying bloated bibliographies and appealing to the work of many traditional scholars, are also employed to supply the want of factual cogency.

‍The conundrum is not resolved by merely choosing one personal preference over another.

The only logical, hermeneutically-consistent and historically-plausible conclusion is that the time periods in Daniel 12 are literal, 24-hour days that occur long after 1844 — which begs the critical question, “What is the starting point of the 1335 day period?” And, if it really is imminent, should we be sitting up and paying the matter serious attention?

Another, vital, and directly-connected consideration is: how to correctly understand the real world, practical meaning of the urgent call, “Come out of her my people!” (Revelation 18:1-5). Inextricably bound up in that question is Jesus’ heartfelt plea, “Be ready!”

The book, “1335 Days”, examines these questions with thoroughly-informed, fresh eyes — using non-academic, accessible language.

It should be carefully noted that nothing in the book is about any form of “time/date setting”.

‍

HOME



‍





‍