His Child, I am totally convinced you will be as disappointed as was Harold Camping. When President Obama and Pope Benedict leave office before Jesus returns I hope you will not give up on Jesus.

There is no such thing as the 5th month of the king's reign. The referrence is to the year of the king's reign and the month of the year. The Babylonian and the Hebrew calendar were similar; that's why the Jews, after the Babylonian captivity, adopted the Babylonian names for their months.

Sorry, meant NJK.

I also agree. For the most part. But no one here is setting a date for Jesus to come. And what if when this "clear event" begins, it will be too late for those who already have an opportunity to know, yet refuse? There is no "putting off".

This is why we need to understand the character of God. If we look at Him seeking whom He may destroy, then it's easy to believe He has some arbitrary secret date for the closing of probation and goes, ah ha, you are lost. You missed the cutoff point, too bad. But if we look at Him coming to save as many who are willing, could it be there is no magic cutoff date, but is it possible that the close of probation is different for different people? That is, for those who are hard set and stubborn, when some "clear event" happens, their probation has already closed, but for those who had not yet had the opportunity to know, their probation closes when they make their decision after the persecution starts?

If Ellen White is writing after 1843, and if there are prophecies somewhere in Daniel which should be understood and witness to the world, and will be fulfilled in these last days, which part of Daniel would she be speaking about? Ellen White said it was the vision of the last days when Daniel inquired, what shall be the end of these things. If the last days were done before she wrote this, how could it be fulfilled in the future?

From what I have read EGW did understand “the prophetic time” synonymously with the singular “prophetic period”, however I see that the plural “prophetic periods” refers to the group of prophecies reaching into the 1798-1843-1844 periods as reckoned by William Miller and all included in his chart.

It must be specified that in DA 98.4 she is using the term prophetic period to refer pointed to the 70 Weeks portion of the 2300 days (cf. CET 50.1; GC 351.1) as she fully says:



So I understand EGW’s mention of specific/singular mentions of the/this prophetic time/period to be a pointed reference to the 70 Weeks/2300 days, but a general/plural “prophetic time/periods” mention to be in regards to all



This is understanding surfacely may seem to be contradicted by her statement that:



However, as stated before, the fact that she points out “the longest reckoning” here logically indicates that she had more than one time prophecy in mind. So as she lumps them in with the 2300 days, indeed both “the longest” and the only one reaching to 1844, then it is clear to me that all time prophecies are included.



My question was, where in the Scripture is it being taught that there will be prophetic time after 1844? I.e., contra what EGW, as I see it, meant that the statement in Rev 10:6 meant and fully involved. As I understand this, this means that even if a prophecy is to be refulfilled, or even fulfilled at a first instance after 1844, if it contains a definite time, then that time is not to be reckoned. The prophetic message itself still applies, but its time element is of no application or consequence.

Also I don’t see your subsequent argument as being objectively conclusive because one would have to first think that EGW didn’t mean ‘all time prophecies’ in her statements. So the issue remains with independently clearly demonstrating that, as you are claiming here: EGW taught that: “the 1260, 1290, and 1335-days in Daniel ... relate to the last days - after 1844.”

Also my Theology allows for Christ to have returned very shortly after 1844, even within a year. So there would not have been any conceivable opportunity to claim that the 1260, 1290 1335 days should/could be refulfilled. That only became seen as a possibility as time, was prolonged way beyond the 1844 date and the supposed to be soon fulfilled “Great time of Trouble” (Dan 12:1) never began to materialize date. So people during that prolonging time then began making new and literal reckonings of the times in Dan 12 as their prior ends did not dovetail into the expect soon prophetic consummation. As I understand it, it was pointed against such practices that EGW was instructed to make her statements against the use/reckoning of any prophetic time/period from those 1844 days onward.



Where are you reading/seeing that these people specifically had the 2300 days in mind here? I don’t see this anywhere in the statement’s context.

As I said, I see that this statement by EGW is great proof that she understood “definite time” to involve more than only the time of the 2300 days. It is speaking of probationary time. Which could easily mean, as it manifestly/intuitively does, a claimed 40 year probation from October [22], 1844 to October 1884. That is, the Bible has many examples of God using “40", inherently probationary, years, even days, before executing/or finish execution a previously declared judgement. That is seen in:

-Israel’s declared 40 years of waaderings until all the guilty/responsible ones died off,
-40 years of Jeremiah’s warning ministry until Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians
-40 days until Nineveh was to be destroyed
-ca. 40 years from the time of Christ’s pronouncement of judgement on Jerusalem until it occurred starting in 66 A.D. and completed by 70 A.D.

In all of these periods, there was some form of involved mercy/probation:

-Israel’s 40 Wilderness years was a merciful killing vs. the instantaneous one that had been considered.
-The people of Judah and Jerusalem could have repented and been forgiven under Jeremiah’s preaching
-God granted pardon to Nineveh when they repented, as Jonah himself always knew was a possibility, indeed the likeliest thing to occur with God
-many Jews were saved as they converted to Christianity in the time from Christ’s pronouncement until that judgement came

So it is easy to see that these people in EGW’s day were using this period of 40, deemed applicably as “years” by them to claim that God was allowing a probation of 40 years until he would complete the Second Coming Advent/Judgement. And as EGW met them in Camp Meeting in manifestly 1884, then they were probably SDA’s and probably also accepted the light on the Shut Door that revealed that probation had only been “shut” for those who in ca. 1844 had great light on the Midnight Cry but rejected it. Others who did not have such light still had their probation opened. So these people were probably claiming that this allowed probation would timely come to an end in October 1884.



For the many reasons stated in this thread, including the discussion of each of those statements, and also the present ones in this post, then I see that they are “exegetically” sound (i.e., with all pertinent/contributive things considered) in regards to what EGW actually meant.



For the linguistic and logical statements made in that post, indeed still being determined by what I understand EGW’s post-1844 view to be on prophetic time in general, I think that she meant that ‘he should have been teaching that “the 1335 days were ended”’. As I see it, as shown below, EGW only drew out the symbolic/typical involved in the 1335 days as the relatively short period of time when the Last Plagues and other signs would come as the antichrist power was deposed of and judged.



It is also quite significant to me that EGW quote every word from this Dan 12:10-12, except for vs. 11 which speaks of the definite reckoning of the 1290 days. The 1335 days does not involve such specific indications of when it was to begin. Just an implied understanding that there would be a deliberate delay between the end of the beast power’s reign and authoritative oppositions and the time when “the end” would begin to be consummated. So the wise were here being encouraged to remain faithful and watchful through this extension of time. And as the formal and organized persecutions would have ended there, there may indeed have been a consideration to believe that the Second Coming would not occur and thus stop expecting it and also turn away from preparatory work for fully proclaiming it during this time. It is indeed human natural to think that the end is near during this of adversities and not during times of peace.

So as stated above, I see that she was only gleaning out the spiritual applications involved in those counsels. That symbolically includes the “blessing” for those who endure/remain faithful right through the significant type of the 1843 period. My understanding is that she did not see the 1335 as being literal or involving definite time, but being merely symbolic/exhortational, based upon the Historical lessons.



As stated above, I see the expounding on these passages in Dan 12:1-4 to be merely exhortational and not to involve/or be seeking to involve the definite reckoning of time.



I still don’t see this to mean that any such times should be literally/definitely reckoned. Just that the message itself applies and these time elements, due to the Historical developments they point to, also greatly contribute to the comprehension of these spiritual/prophetic messages.



That what is innately involved in a “proof text”. One has to independently believe what they are claiming the text is corroborating. The only way your cited text support your view is what you are aiming to denounce is “error”. Otherwise they do not apply at all and certainly offer no evidence at all towards understanding EGW’s view on post 1844 prophetic time. So as you had not made your case, and I still see/think that you have not, then mentioning such error texts is really not “impressive” or influential at all in the discussion.



Same comment as just above, for this cited EGW “error” quoting.

I can appreciate/understand your gesture “thanking” to be humble/“honest” here, but all things considered, I am still wondering if you yourself had ever considered/used this “clarification” of yours here. Perhaps you had done so in your book, however, it is because, as shown below, it still does not amount to what the end dates you claim of: “19-days before Yom Kippur 457 BC” (= ca. September 6) that I am seeing that something is still not accurate here.

As seen in the ATS study of the 70 Weeks by Brempong Owusu-Antwi (pp. 295-299), and as it is a historical fact, the Persians (as well as the Jews) reckoned the years of their kings after and accession year period until the calender start of their new year, if applicable, as almost (if not, literally) always, unless the previous king died on exactly the first day, (or would it have to be the day before) their calender’s New Year’s day. For the Persians, New Year’s day was on the First of Nisan (ca. March 15), (as it also was for the Jews, however the Jews reckoned the years of kings according to their fall-to-fall calender which started on Tishri 1 ca. October 15). So here are the possible reckonings for a “Fifth month of Artaxerxes 7th Year, including the fact that, as discussed by Owusu-Antwi, his predecessor Xerxes died on either Dec. 17 or 23/24 in 465 B.C. or Jan 2/3 464 B.C.

-All of these possible death dates, all mean that, for the Persians, Artaxerxes was in his accession, and “0" year from December 465 or January 464 until ca. March 15 (Nisan 1) 464. So his regnal years could only be:

1 - March 464 - March 463
2 - March 463 - March 462
3 - March 462 - March 461
4 - March 461 - March 460
5 - March 460 - March 459
6 - March 459 - March 4587 - March 458 - March 457

So ‘his first to fifth regnal month’ in his seventh year as you claim would be from ca. March 15, 458 to July 15, 458. That is exactly the same as calender months given the actual Persian method.

To claim that the month began from the month of the death of the preceding king, would not only be in gross contradiction of attested Historical reckoning customs of the Persians, but would still not end up in the date that you claim as it would end on either April 17, 23/24 or May 2/3, and that in 458 B.C. from the following regnal years:

1 - December 465 - December 464
2 - December 464 - December 463
3 - December 463 - December 462
4 - December 462 - December 461
5 - December 461 - December 460
6 - December 460 - December 459
7 - December 459 - December 458

For the Jews, who, as proven, used their fall-to-fall calender, if these years were reckoned both according to that calender and not referring to the number of calender numbers, his pertinent regnal years would be:

1 - September 464 - September 463
2 - September 463 - September 462
3 - September 462 - September 461
4 - September 461 - September 460
5 - September 460 - September 459
6 - September 459 - September 4587 - September 458 - September 457

And their reckoned date for Ezra’s trip would be from ca. September 15, 458 to January 15, 457 B.C.

If it was their Spring Calender the those supposedly regnal months were the same as their Calender month and thus also a ca. March 15, 457 to July 15, 457 journey.

So in no conceivable reckoning, even non attested ones is a end date of ca. September 6 (and thus started in ca. May 6)

So hence my, still remaining, and even deeper puzzlement in regards to your prophetic reckoning.

Who says it is yet to be known? A barcode and microchip was showed. That is perfectly known and even utilized technologies. If the aim is to prevent buying and selling (perhaps pointedly ‘spending or making money, thus probably not bartering or ‘working for food and shelter’ (as “slaves”)), then the simple use of presenting an chip protected idea card or credit card with an associated fingerprint/biometric confirmation to buy or sell something should do it. Even if cash is used, the person taking your money would simply just have to validate the transaction by swiping/scanning that encrypted id and/or credit/debit card and confirming their identity. With computer inventories, as merchant can easily be audited to see if all his transactions were “legal”.

Sure a tattooed barcode or implanted chip would be simpler, but as they possibly could be either altered (i.e., a “buying & selling barring” tattoo erased completely and replaced with a copy of a permitting one) or switched (removing through precision and minimal surgery a “barring” chip and replacing it with a provided/lent “permitting one”, allowing for this minimal scarring to disappear and then literally stocking up on provisions before “returning” it) some kind of independent biometric confirmation of the person’s identity would still be required.

All this to say that (1) presently known technologies are sufficient to enforce the Mark of the Beast. And advance technology was to be crucial to the fulfillment of the Mark of the Beast, then how would it have been fulfilled in EGW’s time, as it could/should have and (2) why doesn’t EGW make indicative details of this in her writings.

Seems to me that this is just a popular notion of non-SDA’s in regards to the Mark of the Beast who indeed spiritually glibly think this is a literal marking and thus must be a barcode or microchip.

And what do you think would fulfill a ‘yet to be known mechanism’, which means to me nothing that exists today in any way? Of course, that claim would mean that we don’t know it yet, but my question is what (more) do you think it would technologically take to enforce the Mark of the Beast today or in the future? (Seriously suggested: “mind reading” abilities? And that even beyond the current ability to tangibly utilize one’s brain wave activity to control things.)



America will indeed serve to persecute God’s People however that Biblically does not make their President the Antichrist. The Bible is clear that the Second Beast is only acting as the pawn of the First Beast which is and solely and distinctly is, the antichrist. (See Rev 13:12-17). That is all what is symbolically depicted in Rev 17 as a woman (Apostate Church & antichrist) riding a beast (a controlled civil power).



Does the Loud Cry period figure as part of your definitely reckoned time, which I assume are all within the literal range of 3.5-3.7years/1260-1335 days? Is yes, then how does the by now, up to 4-4.5+ years/1461-1641+ days fit into your prophetic scenario??

As I also prophetically understand it, this would imply that the Sealing, Shaking and also the Latter Rain events would have already transpired in the Church. What’s precisely your view in this regards? (I.e./E.g., partial, spiritual and/or personal fulfillments vs. full, quite manifest and corporal fulfillements).



Is/Was he an SDA? His here cited ‘words/themes to pictures’ associations/identifications don’t suggest so.

On top of the reasons I have posted showing that the reckoning in general is not valid (Post #133953), I also do not see that the claim here from this single verse is conclusive of His child’s claim of “regnal months”, indeed for reasons of being variously both Biblically and Historically “unattested”.

As I understand it, the only way that this occurs is through the fact that the close of probation for SDA’s will occur before the one for the rest of the world. I can only see that this will be during the Sealing of the Church which will be followed by the Shaking. My view in general is that SDA’s have not been advancing with the increasing prophetic light all revolving around the deeper meaning of God’s Sabbath (Isa 58) and its corresponding implications to the Mark of the Beast issue. So while SDA’s think they have it all figured out and e.g., only need to look for the literal passing of a law opposing the letter of the law aspect of the Sabbath, they will miss the actually paramount Spiritual/Fuller Implications and related prophetic developments.

In regards to “putting off”, even only involving non-spiritual/letter-of-the-law predictions as done in EGW’s writings, (though she laid the foundation for the Spiritual understandings. It just was not a present truth for her and her generation), if one has the view that ‘3.5 years of persecution’ must pass before Jesus can return then they obviously not expect him to Return before that. So they are susceptible to miss some “signs” which won’t necessarily be that obvious, if these do not harmonize with their time. False Biblical interpretations/beliefs always lead to some kind of wrong, event fatally deceptive application. That’s what happen to William Miller and led him to reject other more Biblical understandings, and though he will be saved, in the last days, such errors will surely be fully exploited by Satan within his planned overmastering delusion.

Also if Christ returns before that claimed 3.5 years has expired then what was the point at all of having figured out any time.

It is however most crucial in regards to period that extend beyond this believed 3.5 years because people can then easily abandon the faith when they see that their expected time has come and gone and nothing happened. Indeed they had looked for some event in the past to start that reckoning and really would only begin to consider that they had been wrong after 3.5 years had passed. So in that passing time they naturally would have rejected any other movement/sign and could there crucially reject the true light.

And as I said before, calculating a time for the persecution as 3.5 years/1260 days, which Historically was not actually an entire period of persecutions and thus would likewise also not be even in a definite time refulfillment, then if, as in history, persecutions end before that calculated time runs out, yet the end is not yet/immediate but some extra time is allowed to pass, that also would crucially throw off those who have a ‘definite’ and ‘full persecution, 3.5 year time’ belief/interpretation.

And as further seen in Christ’s only sign mention in Matt 16:1-4, because the Spiritual themes involved were not understood, even the specific time hinted by Jesus did not serve to help save most in that generation. In fact that time was also cut short from a potential full 72 hours over 3 full days to ca. 36 hours over parts of 3 inclusive days. Knowing Christ “message” and truth was paramount over even definite time. I think that the same thing will occur in the end.



All throughout the Bible, as indicated by EGW on the topic of the close of probation/shut doors, it always occurs without being precisely known by those affected. Even for completely unaware non-believers. (E.g., LDE 229-231; cf. Matt 24:38, 39ff; ) So then how much more for people who should have been looking to this fulfillment. It is God himself who characterizes his coming as a thief and leaves the responsibility to any person willing to be save to make sure, of themselves that this is not the case for them (1 Thess 5:2-8 = Rev 3:3; 16:15), and that even if it is not God’s will that those genuine believers be lost (1 Thess 5:9, 10).

Also it is what the Bible teaches that dictate what the character of God is/fully entails and not what one may want to see or thinks is to be the case. So in this case, God would see it as perfect and just, for reasons of righteousness by (genuine) faith to not tell someone when their probation will close, or has close, lest they put of repentance until that time and only bother/strive to live righteously only after that time has passed.



I am of the Biblical/SOP understanding that probation “sectionally” closes only on whole groups and not individuals. In this case first SDA’s , the rest of the World (both Christians and non-Christians). There indeed always only are two groups in any such Shut-Doors/Close of Probations.



The close of probation on a group always occurs in relation to the amount of light/warning they had been given. So with non-SDA’s it will collectively come only after the incontrovertible light of the Loud Cry has been given. It surely can come after the persecution of the righteous start, with then joining the ranks of the righteous, but that would not at all involve, or be due to, any reckoned time element.