No, of course ALL THE PROPHECIES are not ended in 1844.
But the TIMELINES are.

The timelines -
1260 (538-1798) of papal oppression.
1290 (508 - 1798) when the papacy gained the support of the armies of the Franks to start implimenting its oppression, and covering the 1260 years as well.
1335 (508 -1843) takes us to the proclamation of three three angel's messages.

Daniel's prophecies, while beginning with four kingdoms, have their main focus on the papal horn or papal period of oppression, and that God's judgment will sit and that the horns blaspheme's claim to "keys" have no bearing on God's people, for the heavenly judgment sits and Christ and His followers receive the kingdom, while the beast with it's horn is destroyed.

Of course there is much revealed, especially in Revelation, that show the revival of the papal system of oppression in the last days (after the timelines have taken us to "the time of the end") with the mark of the beast, and the legislation of worship.

From what I've observed this MAIN THRUST in the prophecies is lost in all the new attempts to re-interpret them.


PS. That link only briefly mentioned preterest, historicist, and futurist in passing, the MAIN points were on the 1260, 1290, 1335 day prophecies. That's the problem in posting links -- people seem to miss why they were posted by other information.

Are you saying the sticking to the historicist method of interpreting prophecy is a "tradition of men"?

That method of interpreting prophecy is the foundation of the reformation and break from papal oppression.

In disregarding it not only do we break from the reformation understanding, we also break from the whole "Great Controversy" picture of the endtime events.

In disregarding the historicist understanding Protestantism as a whole has lost it's protest and is stretching out their hands to honor the papacy as the leading MORAL AUTHORITY in the world.

Is the time period recorded in Daniel 12 literal or prophet?

Historically, Adventists believed that these time periods are prophetic time, each day standing for a literal year. Both the 1290 and 1335 day/years began in A.D. 508 when Clovis, King of the Franks, converted to Catholicism and the Franks became the arm of strength or army often used by the Papacy to enforce its religious and policatical agendas. This agrees with Daniel's words saying "an army was given him". (8:12, 11:31)
The 1290 year period ended in A.D. 1798 when the same power (the Franks) now under Napolean, broke the Papacy's political power. The 1335 days ending 1843/1844.

In more recent years, several independant people have been challenging that understanding, suggesting these time lines are not prophetic, that is, the day/year principle is not to be applied to them, but rather literal outlining some future event.

A quote by Ellen White has been found where she mentions the 1335 days. This quote emphatically states there is error in either putting the 1335 days in the future or in the past. The only problem is that the syntax of the sentence is unclear as to which concept is the error.




What did they tell him? To correct his error did they tell him the 1335 days were ended, or are they saying that he was in error for teaching the 1335 days were ended?

Notice it wasn't Ellen White alone trying to reason with this man. The "we" is in contrast to the later statement that "I" said a few words. The "I" refers to Ellen White, so who is this "we" that countered Hewitts error?

The one who is most likely speaking is James White, telling Hewitt of his errors. Now we must ask, Why would James White, with the approval of his wife, reprove Bro. Hewitt of believing something he himself believed and taught? That is, if Hewitt's error was believing the 1335 days were past? James White and most of the other pioneers would have had to join Hewitt in confession and repentance if that were the case. We know from his writings that James White (as well as the other pioneers) believed and taught that the 1335 years were ended in 1843/1844.

We also know from this paragraph written by EGW that Hewitt's idea was ERROR!

Ellen White, herself, wrote several times that "there will never again be a message for the people of God that will be based on time".{1SM 188.1}

.

REJECTING THE DAY/YEAR PRINCIPLE

Most of the independant preachers who have adopted this future, non-prophetic literal time interpretation will try to convince others that their position does not hurt the day/year principle. Yet, while they maintain that the 2300 days of Daniel 8 are prophetic time leading to 1844, by turning around and saying the 1260, 1290 and 3350 days are not prophetic time, they destroy the rules that enable the day/year principle.

Daniel 12:6 and Daniel 12:9 are quoted in which Daniel speaks about "the end".

"How long shall it be until the end" 12:6
"the words are sealed unto the time of the end" 12:9
See- they say, Daniel is asking about the END not things that happen in 1844.
Thus they don't acknowledge that we are IN THE TIME OF THE END since 1844.

Daniel 8 uses the same terminology!
"The vision is for the time of the end." Dan.8:17
So, that same argument would destroy the 2300 day/years. When we destroy one and say it is not prophetic time pointing to the judgment, we destroy the other as well.

And in destroying them we destroy the whole Adventist interpretation of prophecy.
And EGW must then be considered false in her endtime outline, influenced by her own time, but out of touch with what constitutes the events of the endtimes. (As many now seem to want to look at her -- which leaves them open to the delusions about to come upon the world)





When we lose sight of that -- we lose sight of the real issues that will present themselves at the end and we will be swept into the delusion of what appears to be truth that the world will see as the solution to its problems.

In context it means that until those timelines ended people didn't understand about the "judgment hour" that was to take place during the "time of the end" just prior to Christ's coming. Notice the NEWLY underlined and colored sentence in the quote.
Once the judgment hour began, time could have ended rapidly -- we have no more reason to say "oh it will be another three years, or five years or..."

I'd disagree with that. However, maybe you should define "timeline". I have a future timeline in mind I think you'd agree with.

No, I'm saying that saying something is good because it's traditional is a "tradition of men".

You may want to get a more complete definition of Preterists, Futurists, and Historicists.


Literal -vs- prophetic. Is that the correct juxtaposition? Cannot literal time be prophetic time?
Consider Daniel 4.

Look at the top of the page -- the long timelines are there defined:
The timelines -
1260 (538-1798) of papal oppression.
1290 (508 - 1798) when the papacy gained the support of the armies of the Franks to start implimenting its oppression, and covering the 1260 years as well.
1335 (508 -1843) takes us to the proclamation of three three angel's messages.
And of course:
2300 - 457 BC to 1844 AD.




The historiciest interpretion sees prophecy covering time from the prophet's day right through to the final restoration.

Admittedly I'm not about to try and fully explain futurism or preterism. Futurism unfortunetely reigns preeminent in the western Christian world today. They take the 70 week prophecy and obviously some of it is in the past concerning Israel, but they stop the clock and the final week is pushed into the future. Most will apply the day for a year to Daniel nine, but then refuse to apply it to the other long range timelines in the same book --at least not in any way that it would relate to the history of the Christian church.
The seventy weeks are the key showing that Daniel's prophetic times (days) are to be seen as years.

Both preterist and futurist omit the "church age". There is a vaccum from about 70 A.D. till about 1967 A.D.
This leads to failure or denial to recognize the horn/beast etc. as the papal power WITHIN the Christian world, as the founder, authority and future reinstator, along with his associate, the "false prophet" of the whole false worship system in Revelation.
Not all of course have fully left the protestant stand, but even groups who were once very opposed to Papal authority are now shifting their view of the papacy.



Prophetic (symbolic) time is a LITERAL year for each prophecied day.

Daniel four is a prediction concerning a man and what would happen in his life, it is not a prophecy outlining the events of earth's then future history.
(Though all the stories in Daniel also have powerful lessons preparing our thoughts to comprehend the visions)


We are living in the "time of the end"
the long timelines are finished, the endtime crises is only held back by the four angels of Rev. seven, waiting till all God's people are sealed.

Dedication,

The longest timeline in the Bible is not yet finished. It reaches all the way from the Creation to the Second Advent and beyond to the Millennium. Mrs. White herself gave the 6000-year figure in numerous places, but the figure is biblical. There are two distinct prophecies in the Bible, which I have found, that give the full 7000-year figure.

Furthermore, Mrs. White tells us the precise event which will close the Millennium. I should think, then, that the Millennium has both a precise starting point and finish point. I do not know if this is the timeline to which kland may have been referring, but I do know that said timeline is still future.

The historicist view does not preclude yet-unfulfilled prophecies. It simply seeks to join such prophetic times with actual events on earth.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Right you are Green.

Prophesy again.

Neither the six thousand years nor the millenium are part of the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation predicting the length of time when evil reigns upon the earth.

The six thousand years come from Jubilee cycles of the Old testament and have been the speculative field for a number of time settings that have failed. The whole concept is based on the seven day week (six days plus the seventh which is the day of rest) this was expanded into the six year plus the seventh year as the year of rest for the land, and then further to Jubilee year.

Personally I think the world is already more than six thousand years old (the creation date keeps getting set later as predictions of the end keep failing). We are in the "waiting" time, the time of the end.

The Millennium occurs after the earth has completed it's roughly six thousand years so it's not part of the timelines pointing to "endtime".

The "prophecy again" came in 1844 when the disappointed ones were commissioned to restudy the prophecies and find the true meaning of the "cleansing of the sanctuary", "time of the end" the "hour of His judgement" which occurs before the second coming.

Yes, God knows the precise time when Christ will come, but He has NOT given that information to humanity.