Islam, Muslim / Christian Forum - Welcome All

In "the False Prophet", it is argued that if a "time" is 1000 years, then a "season" is one quarter of that, or 250 years. If a "season and a time" is 1250 years, then to the nearest year, it is the average of 1260 years using the solar calendar, and 1260 years using the 360 day calendar. (The latter equates to 1241.9 solar years.) Therefore, I suggest the 1250 years is not an approximation of 1260 years, but a precise number allowing for the fulfilment of "times, time and half  a time" using either (or both) the solar and 360 day calendars.

Yes Pete,

I would have done better to put my point about no year zero as a question. It is a few years since I read "The False Prophet", and I recall now that Ellis did provide an explanation for why he ignored the missing year. It does depend on who one is writing for, and how the Spirit leads. My own practice is to factor in the missing year, and try to ensure the reader understands what I am doing. Ellis was writing for the general public, and I respect his decision to simplify the calculations.

It was nice to learn something about his life serving our Lord.

Yours in Christ,
Brother John

Pete,

Thanks for the link. I read page 91 and thought the fit with the year 1776 was interesting.

I am sorry if this seems pedantic, but there clearly is a connection in Revelation between the 1260 "days" and the "times". It is just a question of the nature of that connection. I have quoted the two verses below, highlighting certain words in bold font to show that both verses refer to the same event. If we accept they are saying the same thing then the "times" must equal 1260 days.

Rev 12:6 (NASB) - 1,260 years
Then the woman fled into the wilderness where she had a place prepared by God, so that there she would be nourished for 1,260 days.

Rev 12:14 (NASB) - 1,260 years
But the two wings of the great eagle were given to the woman, so that she could fly into the wilderness to her place, where she was nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent.

The only solution I see that would allow the "times" to be interpreted as 2500 years is to replace the implied preposition "for" with the implied preposition "until", as illustrated below. Can you confirm that this is what you are arguing?

Rev 12:14 (NASB) - 2500 years
But the two wings of the great eagle were given to the woman, so that she could fly into the wilderness to her place, where she was nourished until a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent.

Pete,

I regret my choice of words. I did not mean to suggest that Ellis' book lacked integrity. On the contrary, I recommend it to those reading this post. The apocalyptic of books of Daniel and Revelation are so full of mystery that anyone who begins to make sense of them deserves a lot of respect.

What I was actually referring to was the consistency of his argument. The suggestion that "a time, times and half a time" means 2500 years needs to work for all 3 instances of the phrase. I agree that  it does work but for Daniel 7:25 and 12:7. The point of earlier post was that it does not appear to work easily with Revelation 12:14. The parallel with the 1260 days in the latter, as well as the Greek text, argues for an interpretation in that verse of 3.5 times.

Here is another possible solution: Just as there are so often multiple meanings in Daniel, as well as double fulfillments that work with both the solar and 360 day calendars, perhaps the phrase "time, times and a half" has two meanings as follows:

Daniel: "a time of times and half a time" = 2.5 times
Revelation: "a time and times and half a time" = 3.5 times

Instead of "integrity", I should have used the word "discrepancy". This is discrepancy that still needs to be addressed.

In his books "The False Prophet" and "Islam in the End Times", Ellis Skolfield is fairly persuasive in arguing that "a time, times and half a time" is to be interpreted as a period of 2500 years, at least in the book of Daniel. He suggests Daniel's visions are perfectly fulfilled as follows in the restoration of Israel:

552 BC + 2500 = 1948 AD
533 BC + 2500 = 1967 AD

However, there is a minor problem that he has overlooked. Indeed, it seems to be a problem in all the date calculations on this website which transcend the birth of Christ, and most prophecy websites make the same error. This is not a criticism but a correction, because it is a point I also once overlooked.

The issue is that there is NO YEAR ZERO in the calendar. The year 1 BC is followed by the year 1 AD. That means that from, say, 100 BC to 100 AD, there are only 199 (not 200) years. It means for the above prophecies to be fulfilled after a precise 2500 years, it is necessary to push back the 1st year of Belshazzar and the 3rd year of Cyrus by one year. (This is not unreasonable given the small uncertainty that exists in fixing the first year of kings of the time.)

We cannot use Hebrew inclusive counting to fill the "missing year" because the time units for counting are millennia, not years. So, perhaps this website (and eventually the books) need to be updated to reflect these dates:

553 BC + 2500 = 1948 AD
534 BC + 2500 = 1967 AD

I need to correct and apologise for my previous post (#19). My error was in misunderstanding the format of the Blue Letter Bible. Using an interlinear Bible, the Greek phrase in Revelation 12:14 is:

kairon kai kairous kai hemisy kairou

The second instance of the noun kairos is indeed plural. Similarly in Daniel, the second instances are not singular, but double. Therefore my earlier argument based on the number of the noun is wrong.

However, as others have observed, this still leaves room for the interpretation, as in the Tanach, of “a time of two times and half a time”, or 2.5 times.

There may be further support for interpreting " a time, times and half a time" as "2.5 times" when we look at the Greek. I am no Greek scholar, but I find it interesting that the original text for the phrase in Revelation 12:14 is:

kairos kai kairos kai hemisys kairos

The conjunction kai is translated as "and" which implies addition. What strikes me is the word kairos, translated "time" in the first instance, and "times" in the second, is the singular form. (The plural form is kairoi.) In other words, the translation should be "a time and a time and half a time", or 2.5 times! The construction of the Aramaic in Daniel 7:25 is similar:

`ad `iddan `iddan  pelag `iddan

Again the same form of the word is used for the first and second instances. Checking the phrase in Daniel 12:7, where the Hebrew uses words of Chaldean origin, we have:

mow`ed  mow`ed  chetsiy

In summary, the phrase is used in three Bible verses, each in a different original language. Yet in each case, the apparently singular form of the word translated "time" is exactly the same as that translated "times". In each case, an interpretation of "2.5 times" is indicated or is at least possible, while an interpretation of "3.5 times" seems impossible. However, lacking knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, I can't be certain. Can someone with such knowledge advise?

Thanks Pete,

I downloaded and read "The False Prophet" several years ago. It is a wonderfully insightful book and I found myself accepting at least 90% of the claimed fulfilments of Biblical prophecy. I accept the proposition of the book that the 1260 days refer to the period from 688 AD to 1948 AD. I also checked the links in your above reply. Neither of those articles addresses the apparent equivalence of "1260 days" and "time, times and half a time" in Revelation 12:6 and 12:14.

Much depends on how we interpret the preposition `ad  (Strong's H5705) in Daniel 7:25. If translated as "for", then 1260 years fits better. However, the KJV uses the more common translation of "until", and this fits with 2500 years. In Revelation 12:6 and 12:14 there is no preposition, and ekei should be translated "there" or "in that place".

It seems to me the only way 12:6 and 12:14 can refer to different periods of time is if we imply the preposition "for" in the case of 12:6, while implying the preposition "until" in the case of 12:14. Not exactly a strong argument.

I realize this question is potentially time-consuming, and that as administrator, you have other responsibilities. However, the integrity of Ellis Skolfield's book depends on honestly addressing this. Perhaps he has an answer.

Pete,

Your article http://www.beholdthebeast.com/time_times_and_half.htm presents what, at face value, is a compelling argument (on the basis of prophetic fulfilment), that the phrase "times, time and half a time" actually means two and a half times.

However, what appears to work for Daniel doesn't work for Revelation. In the fourteenth verse of the twelfth chapter, we read that a woman (representing Israel or the people of God) is taken care of in the wilderness for a “time, times, and half a time”. Yet in the sixth verse of the same chapter, the woman in the wilderness is taken care of for “1,260 days”. So it seems clear. In Revelation at least, a "time, times, and half a time" is equal to 1,260 prophetic days. Now 1,260 / 2.5 = 504, a meaningless number. However 1,260 / 3.5 = 360 prophetic days, which agrees with 42 prophetic months, and is interpreted as 1260 years of history, not 2500 years. (Note that the woman gave birth to the child (Jesus) less than 2500 years ago.)

Unless God intends the phrase to be ambiguous, so that it can interpreted as 2.5 times or 3.5 times, I cannot reconcile Revelation with your article. Do you have an explanation?