Why does the SDA see Ellen White as a prophetess?

There are still no days in Daniel 9:24-27.

Only periods of sevens.


God bless.

 

Hmmm... Convert years into months into days and then make the days into years?

Why stop at 1260? Why not convert them into days and get 453,600 days or 453,600 years?

Is it not interesting how BobRyan can quote all history to support this yet has absolutely NOTHING supporting Investigative Judgement?

 

All the commentaries admit that it is "seventy weeks" - and the Protestant Reformers as well.

Is it your claim that "70 weeks" is not 490 days?

OR that we simply "should not notice" it??

In any case - I did not invent the Historicist model - the Protestant Reformers did not invent it either - but it is the heart and soul of Protestant Reformation Prophetic interpretation - I will take that.

I think it is obvious - but I don't deny anyone free will to choose as they wish.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[FONT=&quot]

As Robertson notes

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]Robertson:
. Forty and two months (mênas tesserakonta kai duo). Accusative of extent of time. This period in Da 7:25; 12:7. It occurs in three forms in the Apocalypse
(forty-two months, here and Re 13:5;
1260 days, Re 11:3; 12:6;
time, times and half a time or 3 1/2 years, Re 12:14
and so in Daniel 7). [/FONT]

[/FONT]

Until you read Daniel 7.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[FONT=&quot]Adam Clarke Commentary[/FONT][FONT=&quot] –

Dan 7:25
Until a time and times and the dividing of time.
In prophetic language a time signifies a year; and a prophetic year has a year for each day. Three years and a half (a day standing for a year, as in Daniel 9:24) will amount to one thousand two hundred and sixty years, if we reckon thirty days to each month, as the Jews do.
If we knew precisely when the papal power began to exert itself in the antichristian way, then we could at once fix the time of its destruction.

hint - 1798[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]Adam Clarke's commentary published in 1831 supports the interpretation that the little horn is Papal Rome by this comment "Among Protestant writers this is considered to be the popedom."[15]
He stated that the 1260-year period should commence in 755, the year Pepin the Short actually invaded Lombard territory, resulting in the Pope's elevation from a subject of the Byzantine Empire to an independent head of state.[16] The Donation of Pepin, which first occurred in 754 and again in 756 gave to the Pope temporal power of the Papal States. His time line, which began in 755 will end in 2015. But his introductory comments on Daniel 7 added 756 as an alternative commencement date [17] Based on this, commentators anticipate the end of the Papacy in 2016:
“As the date of the prevalence and reign of antichrist must, according to the principles here laid down, be fixed at A.D. 756, therefore the end of this period of his reign must be A.D. 756 added to 1260; equal to 2016, the year of the Christian era set by infinite wisdom for this long-prayed-for event. Amen and amen!" [18][19][/FONT]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot].[9] Haymo and Bruno Astensis "justify it by the parallel case of Ezekiel lying on his side 390 days, to signify 390 years ; — i. e. a day for a year. — ".[10] Protestant Reformers were well established on the day/year principle and it was also accepted by many Christian groups, ministers, and theologians.[11][12][13][/FONT][/FONT]


[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]1. In that quote - they admit that the apocalyptic time of 3.5 years/42 months/1260 days are all the same unit of time being mentioned by 3 different names/terms in chapters 11, 12 and 13 of Revelation and also in Dan 7.[/FONT][/FONT]

 

Let's look at what Robertson really "notes," or says just using Revelation alone:

This is the part from which you quoted.
Notice that Robertson says they are interpreted as years. They could be. Their actual duration depends on their context. Your interpretation is being forced into the book of Revelation.

Telling isn't it? Can a man wear sackcloth much more than 1,260 days? Or would he be wearing that sackcloth for over a thousand years Bob??

This is a long quote. But Robertson must come to the conclusion that the verse means exactly what it says, ergo: 31/2 = 31/2 days.
There is no other possible interpretation. All the people of every nation saw their dead bodies lie in the streets for 3 1/2 days. After that many days they would soon rot. But instead God's spirit entered into them and they ascended back into heaven to the astonishment of all.

Perhaps there is no comment here because it is already explained. The meaning is self explanatory. Days means days, and the days were few, just three and a half.

Your interpretation makes no sense at all. If I looked at all the other scripture that Robertson used I am sure I would find other inconsistencies.
It seems, Bob, that you have selectively quoted Robertson for your own agenda. You have been deceitful in your quotations of him making it look as if he believed something that he doesn't. Sad that you resort to this kind of thing.

So, if Robertson, in his introduction is going to be consistent, that all the aforementioned terms mean the same in the duration, and that he has established that 31/2 definitely means days, then what is the only conclusion one can come to when considering 1,260 when considering its length?

 

[FONT=&quot]DHK quotes Robertson
. Forty and two months (mênas tesserakonta kai duo). Accusative of extent of time. This period in Da 7:25; 12:7. It occurs in three forms in the Apocalypse (forty-two months, here and Re 13:5; 1260 days, Re 11:3; 12:6; time, times and half a time or 3 1/2 years, Re 12:14 and so in Daniel).
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]This period, however its length may be construed, covers the duration of the triumph of the Gentiles, of the prophesying of the two witnesses(Rev 11), of the sojourn of the woman in the wilderness. (Rev 12)
[/FONT]
Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament

http://www.biblestudytools.com/comme...ion-12-14.html

Revelation 12:14
There were given ([FONT=&quot]edoqhsan[/FONT]). As in Revelation 8:2 ; Rev 9:1 Rev 9:3 . The two wings of the great eagle ([FONT=&quot]ai duo pteruge tou aetou tou megalou[/FONT]). Not the eagle of Revelation 8:13 , but the generic use of the article. Every eagle had two wings. Probably here, as in Matthew 24:28 , the griffon or vulture rather than the true eagle is pictured. For the eagle in the O.T. see Exodus 19:4 ; Isaiah 40:31 ; Job 9:26 ; Pr 24:54. That she might fly ([FONT=&quot]ina pethtai[/FONT]). Purpose clause with [FONT=&quot]ina[/FONT] and present middle subjunctive of [FONT=&quot]petomai[/FONT], old verb, to fly, in N.T. only in the Apocalypse ( Job 4:7 ; Job 8:13 ; Job 12:14 ; Job 14:6 ; Job 19:17 ). Resumption of the details in verse Job 12:6 (which see) about the "wilderness," her "place," the redundant [FONT=&quot]ekei[/FONT] with [FONT=&quot]opou[/FONT], the "time and times, and half a time" ([FONT=&quot]kairon kai kairou kai hmisu[/FONT]), 1260 days
[FONT=&quot]http://www.biblestudytools.com/comme...ion-12-14.html[/FONT]

In that quote we find this "detail"

1. "time and times, and half a time" ([FONT=&quot]kairon kai kairou kai hmisu[/FONT]), 1260 days

[FONT=&quot]This period in Da 7:25; 12:7. It occurs in three forms in the Apocalypse 2. (forty-two months, here and Re 13:5;
[FONT=&quot]3[FONT=&quot]. [/FONT][/FONT]1260 days, Re 11:3; 12:6;
[FONT=&quot]4. [/FONT]time, times and half a time or 3 1/2 years, Re 12:14

and so in Daniel).

[FONT=&quot]5. Both the events of Rev 11 [FONT=&quot]AND the [FONT=&quot]post-cross events of Rev 12 take place in that same peri[FONT=&quot]od [FONT=&quot]according to Robertson - and of [FONT=&quot]course we all know that the dark ages happened between the resurrection and today -- and they were not merely 3.5 literal years.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[/FONT]

It is easy enough to see what he just said.

The first irrefutable point is that the times translate out and they are all equal

3.5 years = 42 months = 1260 days --- all of them equal.

All of them pointing to the same length of time.

The historicist model of the Protestant Reformers shows that in apocalyptic text - prophetic timelines - the day for year method is used - and is proven to be correct in Dan 9 where the 490 days translates to 490 years and accurately predicts the first coming, ministry of Christ, death of Christ etc.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[FONT=&quot]History

This view was recognized by the Jews[5] as seen in Daniel 9:24-27, and as seen in Jesus' use of the day-year principle in Luke 13 verses 31-33, and in the early church.[6] The day-year principle was first used in Christian exposition in 380 AD by Tychonius, who interpreted the three and a half days of Revelation 11:9 as three and a half years, writing 'three days and a half; that is, three years and six months' ('dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex').[7] In the 5th century Faustus of Riez gave the same interpretation of Revelation 11:9, writing 'three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months' ('Tres et dimidius dies tribus annis et sex mensibus respondent),[8] and in c. 550 Primasius also gave the same interpretation, writing 'it is possible to understand the three days and a half as three years and six months' ('Tres dies et dimidium possumus intelligere tres annos et sex menses').[8] The same interpretation of Revelation 11:9 was given by the later Christian expositors Bede (730 AD), as well as Anspert, Arethas, Haymo[disambiguation needed], and Berengaud (all of the ninth century).[8] Primasius appears to have been the first to appeal directly to previous Biblical passages in order to substantiate the principle, referring to Numbers 14:34 in support of his interpretation of the three and a half days of Revelation 11:9


Others who expounded the Historicist interpretation are
John Wycliffe,
John Knox,
William Tyndale,
Martin Luther,
John Calvin,
Ulrich Zwingli,
Phillip Melanchthon,
Sir Isaac Newton,
Jan Huss,
John Foxe,
John Wesley,
Jonathan Edwards,[14]
George Whitefield,
Charles Finney,
C. H. Spurgeon,
Matthew Henry,
Adam Clarke,
Albert Barnes,
E. B. Elliot,
H. Grattan Guinness,
and Bishop Thomas Newton as exponents of this school.[15]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-year_principle[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

Jamieson Fausset Brown
Dan 7:25

The 1260 years of papal misrule in the name of Christ may be represented by three and a half years of open Antichristianity and persecution before the millennium. Witnessing churches may be succeeded by witnessing individuals, the former occupying the longer, the latter the shorter period (Re 11:3). The beginning of the 1260 years is by ELLIOTT set at A.D. 529 or 533, when Justinian's edict acknowledged Pope John II to be head of the Church; by LUTHER, at 606, when Phocas confirmed Justinian's grant. But 752 is the most likely date, when the temporal dominion of the popes began by Pepin's grant to Stephen II (for Zachary, his predecessor's recognition of his title to France), confirmed by Charlemagne. For it was then first that the little horn plucked up three horns, and so became the prolongation of the fourth secular kingdom [NEWTON]. This would bring us down to about A.D. 2000, or the seventh thousand millenary from creation. But CLINTON makes about 1862 the seventh millenary, which may favor the dating from A.D. 529.


Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Dan 7:25
a time
That is, three years and a half, or, reckoning thirty days to a month, 1,260 days, equal to the same number of years in prophetic language; which, dated from the decree of Phocas constituting him the supreme head of the church, A.D. 606, terminated in 1866.[/FONT]

 

1. It cannot be argued that all protestant reformers are deceitful because they admit to the obvious Bible principle of historicism as proven beyond all doubt in Dan 9 for all to see.

2. It cannot be nonsensically argued that I have used Robertson for anything other than showing the equating of the Rev 11, 12 units of time and that the woman (church) fleeing in the wilderness is the same time that is covered in Rev 11, 12.

So then those are statements that were made 'in real life'.

But as so often happens with false accusations of the sort you offer - "real life" events are insufficient to justify the accusation.

Hence my signature line.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Your allegorical interpretation is shot down when other scripture is interpreted literally, as it should be:

Revelation 11:9 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.

After 31/2 days bodies begin to rot. As the time of gloating begins to cease, and the people begin preparations to put these bodies into graves they are startled that suddenly they come to life and ascend into heaven. A body doesn't lie in the street for hundreds or thousands of years, whatever your allegorical interpretation adds up to here. Days means days, and months mean months. It is a literal interpretation, and the period of time is obviously a seven year period for The Tribulation as these numbers indicate. Denial is not a very good sign.

 

In Daniel 9:24-27 the word "weeks" is literally not used, neither is months or days, etc. The Hebrew word simply means "groups of seven." Thus it can be referred to a group of seven days, or months, or years.
But in passages like Revelation 11, such words are not used and the meanings are very specific having specific meanings. Thus your method of interpretation is wrong.

 

Is is the commentaries - the Bible translations like KJV, NKJV, and the Protestant Reformers that all admit to the "Seventy WEEKS" language.

I think we can all see that.

And it is your own Robertson quote that tells us that the 3.5 years of Dan 7, and the 3.5 years of Revelation - 1260 days and also 42 months are all the same unit of time.

It is your own Robertson quote that says -

[FONT=&quot] Forty and two months (mênas tesserakonta kai duo). Accusative of extent of time. This period in Da 7:25; 12:7. It occurs in three forms in the Apocalypse (forty-two months, here and Re 13:5; 1260 days, Re 11:3; 12:6; time, times and half a time or 3 1/2 years, Re 12:14
and so in Daniel). [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]"This period in Da 7:25; 12:7. It occurs in three forms in the Apocalypse 1. (forty-two months, here and Re 13:5;
[FONT=&quot]2[FONT=&quot]. [/FONT][/FONT]1260 days, Re 11:3; 12:6;
[FONT=&quot]3. [/FONT]time, times and half a time or 3 1/2 years, Re 12:14"

[FONT=&quot]you don't have to a[FONT=&quot]gree wi[FONT=&quot]th our own source - or me - but you can't blame this particular detail on "evil SDAs" as [FONT=&quot]is so often the ha[FONT=&quot]bbit "of some" purs[FONT=&quot]u[FONT=&quot]ing[/FONT] th[FONT=&quot]e model [/FONT]described in my sig.[/FONT]

I am just stating the obvious.

[FONT=&quot]in Christ,

[FONT=&quot]Bob[/FONT] [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[/FONT]

 

[FONT=&quot]This day-for-year 70 weeks - 490 year, having just one contiguous (unbroken) timeline view for Dan 9 - predicting [FONT=&quot]e[FONT=&quot]vents [FONT=&quot]at the first coming of Christ - [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT] is not a new one at all, but used to be the majority view. Most commentators and writers up until about two centuries ago saw all these pronouns (or, at the very least, most) to refer to Messiah, not antichrist. Neither did they see a gap of many centuries between the 69th and 70th week. Here is a good sampling of writers, modern and not-so-modern, who believe along these lines:

Barnes, Albert: Barnes Notes on the Old Testament (ca 1942)
Calvin, John: Calvin's Commentaries (mid 1500's)
Clarke, A: Clarke's Commentary: Daniel (ca 1850's)
Gill, John: Exposition of the Old and New Testaments (ca mid-1700's)
Henry, Matthew: Matthew Henry's commentary on the whole Bible (1706)
Jamieson, R., Fausset, & Brown: A commentary, critical and explanatory (1871)
Keil, C. F., & Delitzsch, F: Commentary on the Old Testament (1866-1891)
Young, E J: The Prophecy of Daniel (1949)
Geneva Study Bible: Study Notes (1599)
Mauro, Philip: The Seventy Weeks and the Great Tribulation (1921)
Leupold, H. C.: Exposition of Daniel (Baker Book House, 1949)

The above authors represent a wide range of Protestant denominations: Presbyterian, Anglican, Lutheran, Baptist, Methodist, etc. This general belief in the chronological integrity of 70 weeks, and in the Christ-centeredness of it, was widely held by a variety of Christians.[/FONT]

 

You are free to oppose the Protestant Reformation in that manner when it comes to the Historicist day for year model in apocalyptic timelines where "the city" in Rev 11 is "Sodom AND EGYPT" so then obviously symbolic...

Each person has free will - I just choose not to oppose 300 years of the Protestant Reformation on that point that is so clear in the Bible itself.

Which is why I referenced this --

==============================================

[FONT=&quot]
History

This view was recognized by the Jews[5] as seen in Daniel 9:24-27, and as seen in Jesus' use of the day-year principle in Luke 13 verses 31-33, and in the early church.[6] The day-year principle was first used in Christian exposition in 380 AD by Tychonius, who interpreted the three and a half days of Revelation 11:9 as three and a half years, writing 'three days and a half; that is, three years and six months' ('dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex').[7] In the 5th century Faustus of Riez gave the same interpretation of Revelation 11:9, writing 'three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months' ('Tres et dimidius dies tribus annis et sex mensibus respondent),[8] and in c. 550 Primasius also gave the same interpretation, writing 'it is possible to understand the three days and a half as three years and six months' ('Tres dies et dimidium possumus intelligere tres annos et sex menses').[8] The same interpretation of Revelation 11:9 was given by the later Christian expositors Bede (730 AD), as well as Anspert, Arethas, Haymo[disambiguation needed], and Berengaud (all of the ninth century).[8] Primasius appears to have been the first to appeal directly to previous Biblical passages in order to substantiate the principle, referring to Numbers 14:34 in support of his interpretation of the three and a half days of Revelation 11:9


Others who expounded the Historicist interpretation are
John Wycliffe,
John Knox,
William Tyndale,
Martin Luther,
John Calvin,
Ulrich Zwingli,
Phillip Melanchthon,
Sir Isaac Newton,
Jan Huss,
John Foxe,
John Wesley,
Jonathan Edwards,[14]
George Whitefield,
Charles Finney,
C. H. Spurgeon,
Matthew Henry,
Adam Clarke,
Albert Barnes,
E. B. Elliot,
H. Grattan Guinness,
and Bishop Thomas Newton as exponents of this school.[15]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-year_principle[/FONT]


in Christ,

Bob

 

BobRyan,
What does the same 300years of Protestant Reformation say about Daniel 7 judgements? Does ANY of these suppose that the saints were judged?

You are a serial hypocrite, just like Ellen White your godess:tonofbricks:

 

did you run out of things to say so soon vooks??

When reason vacates in regard to a given subject, the only weapons of argument left are in the hands of emotion. The simplest emotional weapons to wield are name-calling ,disparaging remarks, vitriol and acrimony for those deemed adversaries. All such ad hominem tactics provide nothing of persuasive substance, except to those whose reason has also been vacated on that same subject.

 

Agreed.

And "for the record" I think it is a mistake for those who are opposing SDAs to drive this discussion to a battle against the Protestant Reformation's Historicist principle denying the 1260 years of dark ages is predicted in the Bible, denying 300 years of solid prophetic interpretation used even by the Protestant Reformers and many many others -- where SDAs would be on the side of the Protestant Reformers, and some extremists here would oppose the Protestant Reformers.

That just seems like a bad light to cast on the opposing-SDA side.

Might want to pick another tactic.

(just a suggestion -- you guys don't have to take it if you don't want to - but I am starting to feel sorry for the group here.)

in Christ,

Bob

 

BobRyan,
You are adept at Protestant history and completely deaf and dumb on IJ among the same, especially on Daniel 7 judgement which ONLY Ellen White believes was judgement of the saints.

Barnes on Daniel 7:22

Gill's

Cambridge

 

I have no problem with the word "week." You do. A week is a group of seven. Tell me, what is the "year of jubilee"?

Fausett's Bible Dictionary.
--A week is a group of seven. The context tells you what group of seven "the week" is referring to. The seventieth week of Daniel is one week of years. The rest of that passage is to be interpreted accordingly.
But that same method is not to be used throughout the rest of the Bible is it?
John did not employ the same method. When John wrote week he meant one week of days, or when he wrote day he meant a 24 hour day.

--John 1:28 These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing.
29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
--Was John talking about the next "year" or the very next day that Jesus came?
The same person that wrote the gospel wrote the book of Revelation.

The time periods of Daniel have little to do with this.
As noted, John uses a literal approach.

Your not stating the obvious at all.
You have yet to reconcile the 3 1/2 days in Revelation 11:9,11.
Their bodies lie in the streets for 3 1/2 days not years, didn't they?
If you can't reconcile this and admit it is literal your whole scheme falls apart.

 

ok so "Seventy weeks" in Dan 9 is ok with you.

Me too.

Let me guess - you are looking for a text that calls the Year of Jubilee "a week".

or "A week of years".

Keeping looking.

Yes he did. Apocalyptic timelines always use that form.

No bible scholar assigns the Gospel accounts -- or even the Gospel of John to the category of "Apocalyptic writing" -- and I think everyone on this board knows it.

next.

Until you notice (like every Bible scholar on the planet) that part of the book of Daniel is also apocalyptic writing. which means that Dan 7, 8, 9, 12 etc are all using the same model for time as does Rev 11, 12, 13 when they predict events. But when they quote an author of non-apocalyptic text they use the normal day-for-day as in the case of Daniel quoting Jeremiah or referencing Jeremiah's timeline.

Just stating the obvious.

3.5 years - the time where the Christian nation symbolized by 'Sodom AND Egypt" Passes laws abolishing the Bible adopting atheism until they finally restore Christian worship without threat of punishment.

I don't understand this point why do you think this does not fit the day-for-year Historicist model??

in Christ,

Bob