After having published in this blog, 31 articles related to the Adventist interpretation of the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, it has become evident that we have serious fissures in the prophetic interpretation of those books, particularly chapters 7, 8. 9, 11, and 12 of Daniel; and chapter 13 of Revelation. The main problem with our prophetic interpretation is that it is not based on the Scriptures, but on the writings of Ellen G. White, which leads to questions that we cannot answer objectively and satisfactorily. The two main inconsistencies in our prophetic interpretation of the book of Daniel are: 1- Stating that the prophecy of Daniel 8 began in the year 457 B.C. with the desecration of the sanctuary by the little horn, and ended in the year 1,844 of our era with the purification, or rather the vindication of the sanctuary; after 2,300 evenings and mornings or “years” of being subjected to the abuse of the infamous little horn. The inevitable question at this point is, What power does the little horn of Daniel 8 represent? Surprisingly, our theologians still do not have a categorical answer to that question; and in the best case, they generally affirm that the papacy represents the little horn both in Daniel 8 and Daniel 7. This assertion leads us to ask ourselves: If the papacy represented the little horn, which according to Daniel 8:11 cast down the sanctuary: How could the papacy desecrate the sanctuary in 457 B.C. during the Persian Empire, approximately 800 years before its emergence as a religious institution officially established in the 4th century? Given the difficulty of answering the previous question, our scholars also claim that pagan Rome represented the little horn of Daniel 8; which again leads us to ask: How could pagan Rome represent the Little horn that desecrated the sanctuary in 457 B.C. during the Persian Empire, if that nation emerged after the Greek Empire, approximately 300 years after the desecration of the sanctuary in the previously mentioned year? We must not forget that we cannot dismiss the year 457 B.C. as the year of the beginning of the prophecy of the 2,300 evenings and mornings or 2,300 years, because if we do, the prophecy could not end in 1,844. We are trapped in our traditional interpretation, which seeks to explain the prophecy of Daniel 8, but cannot identify the power that desecrated the sanctuary in 457 B.C.; especially due to the temporal impossibility for both the papacy and pagan Rome to have represented the little horn of Daniel 8. The previous, difficult to answer questions, back us into a corner, so we try to avoid them, because they undermine our traditional interpretation. If we cannot categorically demonstrate that the prophecy began in 457 B.C., we cannot assert that the prophecy of the 2,300 evenings and mornings ended in 1,844. Given the interpretative difficulties just mentioned, our theologians engage in exegetical gymnastics, deliberately ignoring what is clearly revealed in Daniel 8, and proposing that Ezra’s journey to Jerusalem in 457 B.C. marks the beginning of the prophecy. It is a fact that Ezra’s journey to Jerusalem in 457 B.C. is historically verifiable, but there is no biblical record stating that he was expressly ordered to rebuild the city and its walls, much less that this journey initiated the work supposedly entrusted to him. Our entire argument, which seeks to link the beginning of the prophecy of Daniel 8 with Ezra’s journey to Jerusalem, is based on assumptions and deductions of what is recorded in chapters 4, 6, and 7 of the book of Ezra. An example of this is the third decree of Artaxerxes recorded in Ezra 6:14-15 which has no relation to the construction of the walls of Jerusalem and the city, but rather to the building of the temple, which was completed approximately fifty years before 457 B.C. 2- Affirming that the prophecy of the 1,260 days, or time, times, and half a time of Daniel 7, began in the year 538, with the persecution and crushing of the saints, persecution that supposedly ended in 1,798; due to the capture and exile of Pope Pius VI; is nothing more than another conjecture that we have accommodated to our temporal interpretative convenience; because in Revelation 13, we find in verse 3, that the mortal wound to the beast rising from the sea was inflicted BEFORE it was granted authority (verse 5) and allowed to make war against the saints and conquer them (verse 7); so the persecution of the saints should have occurred AFTER the mortal wound, and not before as we have erroneously interpreted. Due to time and space constraints, we will not mention other inconsistencies and contradictions in our prophetic interpretation. The aforementioned cases are sufficient to motivate the start of a review of what we have believed prophetically, in order to proceed with an honorable rectification. It is possible that some of us may downplay the importance of prophetic interpretation, suggesting that we should focus on the core message of the Scriptures, which is the good news of the Gospel. This would make sense if we were referring to a Baptist, Evangelical, or Methodist denomination, which believe they are just another agency of God to reach the world. Our problem is that the interpretation of the prophecies of Daniel that we have held for almost 200 years has made us believe that we are a prophetic, unique, exclusive church that arose in 1,844, which generates in us a sense of self-sufficiency that makes us look down upon other denominations. It is time to begin a review of what we have believed prophetically; and the sooner we do it, the better; because if we do not, we will be heading towards an inevitable dispersion into different currents within the church, which has already begun, and we will not be able to stop. Sooner rather than later, the brotherhood will discover that their trust and unconditional loyalty has been abused, allowing erroneous interpretations to be taught and accepted, leading them to seek to gather in other denominations that are less pretentious and more in line with Scripture and history. I reiterate: it is time to rectify, and the sooner, the better, because later on it may be too late. Blessings.
Comments