I guess this is an example as to how different people think.
Some lean stronger to what is sometimes termed the left brain dominant approach, (logic, numbers, mathematical formulas) whereas others relate to information more on functional experience etc.

So for some the day/year rests solely on a mathematical stated formula and the outworkings is viewed mainly as confirmation, but not as proof of the principle.

Whereas for others seeing the outworking of the principle is proof, and they then go back to the formula for confirmation.

So yes, the two verses in Numbers and Ezekiel are important in supplying the equation for the principle, but for some in studying Daniel itself, nothing clinches (proves) the day/year principle better than the prophecy of Daniel nine where the principle is obviously functioning.

But that is a sideline --
just to explain why some look to examples as "proof" while others stick to mathematically stated equations.






Yes and no.
I was referring to a symbol being used consistantly throughout the author's message.

Jesus was talking about death and likening it to a sleep from which He, the lifegiver can awaken people, he wasn't using a symbolic word to stand for two different things.
It's a whole different thing.





If we want to see the seven times as symbolic time, won't it be wiser to use the same rule as the rest of the timelines in Daniel?
A "time" is symbolic of a year.
Seven "times" is seven years (comprised of 2520 days) Converted by the day/year princple it becomes 2520 years.
That is -- a day for a year.

Then we would have the 2520 day/years.

Did you know the Millerite chart had a 2520 timeline?
After the disappointment Hiram Edson rethought the 2520 timeline and adapted it to Seventh-day Adventist beliefs.


U.Smith dismissed it as a legitamate timeline and the rest of the pioneers didn't write about 2520 days, and thus it faded out of Adventist belief.

Actually there are people trying to revive it.

You asked why I stated the announcement of the exact time of Christ's second coming would be made during the seventh plague?

Here's the seventh plague:



Now go to Great Controversy chapter 40 which describes God's announcement.

There we see the final death decree is about to be enacted. God steps in and delivers His people.
There we see EGW clearly sets the announcement in the seventh plague.

Sorry I somehow switched two numbers --
GC 367 should read GC 637

I downloaded your file from the link above. It was only eleven pages long, I expected it to be much longer from the comments made.

Is it OK to comment on it there -- it seems that thread came to a standstill in 2009. Was there a reason for that?

Yes, please comment in that thread. It died with the ball in Daryl's court, and he may have forgotten to respond. Bumping it might be good anyhow.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Regarding the 2520, I've heard some explanations of it which I cannot buy. I've heard just one explanation, however, which merits further study and which may be legitimate. Unfortunately, I do not remember it well enough to expound on it.

Regarding the timing of the voice in the seventh plague, I've seen Ellen White use scripture to support unrelated things, so her use of the text is not necessarily foolproof evidence in this case of the applicability to the same voice of announcement which we are talking about. I notice that she says the voice says "It is done." It is quite possible that there is more than one voice, and more than one earthquake. Earthquakes these days seem to be increasing in magnitude successively. Jesus spoke seven times upon the cross, and God may speak multiple times in the final moments.

But here's where I base much of the above: another interpretation. "Earthquake" is symbolic. Remember, the book of Revelation is a highly symbolic book. We can hardly be certain if things there should be taken literally or not. It may be that things have dual application, being both literal and symbolic, but if one or the other is to be counted the more likely, it is the symbolic.

For example, in the New Earth, we are told we will have "no more sea." What can this mean? How can this be matched to the statements regarding the "sea of glass?" What does "sea" represent?

What about no dogs in heaven? What do "dogs" represent? Is this to be taken literally? (Another thread here addressed this very question once before.)

Just as I believe these terms are symbolic, I also view the "earthquakes" as symbolic. In this case, we can go back to "earth" and see what it represents. Remember the earth swallowing up the water cast out of the mouth of the dragon? That picture was obviously not literal. What if the earth quakes?

I believe earthquakes represent upheavals among the heathen and among the nations. Such things as war, rumors of war, economic crises, or anything that causes mass confusion or pandemonium might be included here. For example, the twin towers caused a major string of events with repercussions throughout the world. This would be an example of an "earthquake."

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

She is not just quoting a verse here, she is describing the whole seventh plague, and in the midst of that description she places the announcement made to the saints.

Read the chapter for yourself --
The final death decree is about to be carried out,
God intervenes -- and all nature goes wild.
Yes, I fully believe that earthquake will be literal, though the unsaved will be in great turmoil as well.
Prisons will burst open, God's saints who were lanquishing in them are set free (just like Paul and Silas)
The voice "It is Done"
The special resurrection occurs, including those who crucified Christ.
The saints faces shine.
The hand of God appears in the sky holding the ten commandments and the unsaved realize they have lost out.
Then God announces the day and hour of Christ's coming.

Soon appears that cloud which the saints recognize as the sign of Christ's coming....

It's a most exciting chapter
It's one I suggest everyone read and reread and become very familiar with as it's one that will help carry God's people through terrible time of trouble.

The 2520 days have been a mere curiosity for me as I could not accept all those details as it was presented to me.

The basic form might be useful though.
Miller actually saw two lines of 2520.
One starting with the Northern kingdom of Israel going into captivity.
The other starting with Mannasseh king of Judah going into captivity.

In Miller's words:

"Israel began to be carried away in the days of Hoshea, 722 B. C., and from that time to 1798 after Christ, is exactly 2520 years, or the seven prophetic years. How remarkable, that when the seven years ended, God began to deliver his church from her bondage, which for ages had been made subject to the kings of the earth. In 1798 the church came out of the wilderness, and began to be delivered from her captivity. But the completion of her slavery to the kingdoms of the earth, is reserved for another period. Beginning B. C., 677 years, (When Mannasseh was taken captive) seven prophetic years, or 2520 common years, would end in A. D. 1843. (later changed to 1844 due to missed year 0)

Here's a pastor who's pretty well discounted the 2520.

http://sabbathsermons.com/2011/02/13/why-the-2520-prophecy-is-not-important/

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Hmmm.... well he makes a very good point against people who try to use the timelines to predict events past 1844.

Sounds like someone was using the 2520 to say "in 9/11 supposedly according to a reinterpretation of the trumpets that now in 9/11 supposedly this is when the loud cry started".

But that sort of thing is what people are doing with all the timelines recognized or not.


However, his argument against the original 2520 chart are very weak since the 2520 do NOT go past 1844 and the quotes he gives from EGW don't actually say 2300 was the longest prophecy, only that that "The longest reckoning reaches to the autumn of 1844".

So yes, I agree that, should we use the "7 times" of Daniel four, his arguments on "The longest reckoning reaches to the autumn of 1844" should be taken into consideration.

And yes, I mentioned "U.Smith dismissed it (the 2520) as a legitamate timeline and the rest of the pioneers didn't write about 2520 days, and thus it faded out of Adventist belief.
So I agree with Lemon's statement on that.

However, we have been speaking of Daniel 4 not Lev. 26 and the suggestion has come up that Daniel 4 is a legitamate timeline.