7 - TIME, TIMES & A HALF

[Peter]

http://beholdthebeast.com/time_times_and_half.htm

7 - TIME, TIMES & A HALF

Prior Chapter - Contents - Next Chapter

CHAPTER 7

But if ye turn unto me,
and keep my commandments, and do them;
though there were of you cast out
unto the uttermost part of the heaven,
yet will I gather them from thence,
and will bring them unto the place
that I have chosen to set my name there.
NEHEMIAH 1:9

SO far, we have only studied prophetic days. In every instance we
found them to be years. But day=years are not the only duration
of  prophetic  time  in  the  Bible.  Twice  in  Daniel,  and  once  in
Revelation, there is the expression "time, times, and half a time."
So how long is a time? Look at these times in Daniel:

Daniel 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most
High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and
think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into
his hand until a time and times and the dividing of
time.

Daniel 12:7   And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was
upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand
and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth
for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half;
and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power
of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

Is a time a year like the day=years? One thing for sure, a time is
not a year. Here is how we know. The Hebrew word for day is
yom. The Hebrew and High Syriac words for time (as used in Dan

 Time, Times & a Half  69

7:25 and 12:7) are iddan and moadah.1 Surely, the Creator of the
universe knows the difference between iddan, moadah and yom.
Of course, and He gave us a yom for a year, not an iddan or a
moadah for a year. So  iddan (time), and moadah (time), must
mean something else. Let's call them time durations "X."

And what about the cryptic way in which those words were
used, "time, times, and the dividing of a time?" How many "times"
do we have there? As is true of English, Hebrew is full of idiomatic
language. For instance, the Hebrew idiom "cut off" means to kill.
"Ate the pieces of" means to bring malicious accusations against,
and so on. Is "time, times, and the dividing of a time" also an
idiom? Let's see if there is Scripture to support that hypothesis:

Job 33:14 For God speaketh once,  yea  twice, yet man
perceiveth it not.  

Job 40:5 Once have I spoken; but I will not answer: yea,
twice; but I will proceed no further.

Psalms 62:11 God hath spoken once; twice have I heard this;
that power belongeth unto God.

In the above, once is one, and twice is only one more, for a
total of two: 1+1=2. A singular one followed by a plural twice is
only two. In the same way, a singular time followed by a plural
times might be only two. Only two! The words are different, but
the idiomatic form is the same. If the Lord had said, "time, yea
times" we might have seen it instantly.

Now let's employ the same idiomatic language  to interpret
time, times, and half a time. Time = one; times = one more, for a
total of two times. Add a half a time and we have two and a half
___________________________

1  DAY= H3117. yowm, yome: from an unused root mean. to be hot; a day (as the
warm hours), whether lit. (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next.
TIME= H5732. 'iddan, (Chaldean), id-dawn': from a root corresponding. to that
of H5708; a set time. TIME= H4150. mow'ed, mo-ade'; or mo.ed mo-ade'; or
(feminine) mow'adah  (H2  Chron. 8 :13), mo-aw-daw': from H3259; prop. an
appointment, i.e. a fixed time or season.
___________________________

 70  The False Prophet

times, or 1+1+1/2 = 2-1/2.1 That is pretty  simple, isn't it? So why
have people been saying that "time, times, and half a time" are
three and a half years? Who knows? Probably because it fits the
Seven-Year tribulation scheme. However, Hebrew scholars have
told me their grammar does not support 3-1/2 times as the correct
translation for that idiom.

(Webmaster add-on:  From the Tanach - ...that in the time of [two] times and a half,...)

All right, so "time, times, and half a time" are two and a half
times. But if a time isn't a year, how long is it? Daniel understood
day=years, but he didn't understand time. Why? Because day=
years were defined for him in Old Testament scriptures while time
was  not.  In  fact,  time  was  not  defined  until  late  in  the  New
Testament epistles:

2 Peter 3:8  But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that
one day [Greek word, hemera] is with the Lord as a thousand
years, and a thousand years as one day.

On the surface that sure doesn't look like much of a definition
for time, does it? It certainly doesn't work in English. But some-
thing is wrong here. God has already given us the definition for
day. He gave us a day for a year. Is the Lord changing His
definition of prophetic days here? Not at all. We can prove that
the correct interpretation for prophetic days is still years by the 42
months and 1260 days of Revelation that we just studied.

What we have here is an "X with the Lord is as a thousand
years, and a thousand years is as an X." So how do we solve for
"X"?  By  doing a word study in Greek, which was the original
language of the New Testament. The Greek word translated "day"
in 2 Pe 3:8 is hemera, ( Z:?D").2 Hemera is an ambiguous word
_______________________

1  Sorry about this 1+1 stuff. I know I am getting down on the kindergarten level,
but this seems the easiest way to explain the concept.
2  Strong's No. G2520. hemera, hay-mer.-ah: feminine. (with G5610 implied) of a
der. of hemai (to sit; akin to the base of G1476) several days were usually reckoned
by the Jews as inclusive of the parts of both extremes; fig. a period (always defined
more or less clearly by the context): age, + always, forever, judgment, (day) time,
while, years.
_________________________________

 Time, Times & a Half  71

sometimes translated: period, moment, season, year, and, guess
what ... Time. So what is the correct translation here? In Greek,
context often determines translation, but in the above verse, the
correct translation cannot be established with certainty because
context does not  suggest  the  correct concept. Understandably,
translators went with "day," which is the most common usage, but
that may not be correct. Hemera is translated time in four verses
in the KJV, and twelve verses in the NASB. So time is a very accep-
table  translation.  Is  it possible that duration "X" is a thousand
years?

If time is a thousand years, and we have 2? of them, then
"time, times, and half times" could be 2500 years. Thus far, we
have only a supposition. But that is all we had for day=years until
we started plugging them into history. Let's see if there is an exact
2500 year historic fit that fulfills the Bible's description of these
times right to the year.

After Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon died in 562BC, each of his
three sons ruled for a couple of years.1 The kingdom was very
unstable. Though the archives don't tell us a lot about it, reading
about those Middle Eastern empires from secular sources gives us
a  picture  of  what  must  have  been  going  on  there.  King
Labashi-Marduk was murdered as a mere child. Daniel must have
been walking on eggs to avoid the plots and political intrigue in
the Babylonian court. Many of his fellow rulers in Babylon hated
him and some even plotted his death (Dan 6:4-13). However, the
Lord protected Daniel in that harrowing environment.

Then in 555BC, a nephew  of Nebuchadnezzar named
Nabonidus seized the throne. He proved to be a very able ruler.
However, he couldn't stomach the Babylonian court life, so three
years later, in 552, he chose a close relative, Belshazzar, to rule
______________________________________

1 Nebuchadnezzar was  succeeded by his eldest son Awel-Marduk - the Evil-
Merodach of 2 Kings 25:27-30 (561-560BC). Awel-Marduk was followed by
Neriglissar (560-558 BC), who was succeeded by Labashi-Marduk (557BC).
__________________________

 72  The False Prophet

the empire  for  him.  Then Nabonidus  spent  the  rest  of  his  life
wandering around Arabia, doing archeological digs and writing
lots of poetry.1

During these turbulent times, the Lord gave Daniel the vision
of four great beasts coming up out of the sea.2 Scripture tells us
when this was, right to the year, "In the 1st year of Belshazzar"
(Dan 7:1). In pictorial language, the vision then describes the four
great kingdoms that were to rule in the Holy Land during the time
of the Gentiles. At the end of that prophecy, the Lord tells Daniel
about times:

Daniel 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the Most
High and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and
think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into
his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

Sometimes our doctrines  get messed up because we don't
think about who the Lord is speaking to, or when. In this instance,
the Lord is speaking to Daniel in 552BC.

So in Daniel's day, who spoke out against God? Then, as now,
Satan speaks out against God. Who were the saints in Daniel's
time? The Jews, of course. So from 552BC, when this prophecy
was given, the Lord is telling Daniel that the Jews would be under
satanically controlled Gentile powers for two and a half times, or
possibly 2500 years. That the Holy Land would be ruled by Gentile
strangers far into the future. Now let's run that up and down the
framework of history and see what it fits. Since the definition for
time was given  in the New Testament, we don't even need to
__________________________

1  To date, there is no direct archeological evidence for 552BC being the 1st year
of the Belshazzar's regency. However, that date can be supported by correlating
evidence  about  the  reign  of  Nabonidus.  John Walvoord,  The  Key  to  Prophetic
Revelation (Chicago, Moody Press, 1971) p. 115 accepts a 553BC Belshazzar dating,
and most authorities recognize a one to three year ambiguity in Old Testament
dating.
2  The sea is the peoples of the Earth (Rev 17:15): "The waters which thou sawest
... are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues."
_________________________________________

 Time, Times & a Half  73

convert from Hebrew to solar years to fit our calendar. A simple
subtraction will do just fine:

2500 - 552BC = 1948AD, and new Israel!

Just a lucky hit? If that is not the correct interpretation, then
it has to be one of the most remarkable  coincidences  in  all  of
recorded history. It fits Scripture and history, right to the year. But
remarkable as that fulfillment of prophecy may be, we would still
have only a theory if it was the only 2500 year time period that fit
antiquity.

 GRAPH NUMBER 10



God is so kind. When He takes the blinders off, He gives enough
proof  for us  to know  for sure  that we are headed  in  the right
direction. At the end of Daniel's prophetic ministry, God gave him
another vision containing times. This prophecy also includes the
1290 days which led us to understand that the Dome of the Rock
is the Abomination that makes Desolate. This vision may be dated
to the third year of Cyrus the Persian, or 533BC:

 74  The False Prophet

Daniel 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing
was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called
Belteshazzar .

Daniel was now a very old man. He knew he was going to go
to be with the Lord soon. The temple mount had been abandoned
and sacrifices abolished during his own lifetime. He knew that an
Abomination of Desolation was going to stand on that beloved
temple mount in less than 1300 years. Would the Jews ever
control  Jerusalem  again?  Of  course.  Many  Old  Testament
Scriptures told him so. But when? The Lord told him that as well,
right to the year, but then hid it so that no one would know when
that time would be, until it happened:

Daniel 12:7   And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was
upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand
and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth
for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and half; and when
he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy
people, all these things shall be finished.

Three years earlier, Cyrus had given a decree that would permit
the Jews to return to their homeland. They had begun their trek
back to the Holy land, and soon they would begin to build the 2nd
temple. That temple stood until 70AD, when the Jews were driven
from  the  land  again.  But  God  knew  the  end  of  this  second
dispersion, too. He knew that at the end of it, the Jews would
return  to  the  Holy  Land  one  more  time  and  again  control
Jerusalem. When was the vision given? In 533BC, the third year
of Cyrus. So this "time, times, and half a time" should begin in the
third year of Cyrus:

2500 - 533BC = 1967AD

Jerusalem freed of Gentile control!

 Time, Times & a Half  75

 GRAPH NUMBER 11



Note: When the Jews again took control of Jerusalem in 1967, the "scattering of
the power of the holy people" was over. Daniel was a prophet to the time of the
Gentiles.  Daniel's prophecies were, in the main, fulfilled in 1967AD. This does not
include the last half of Dan 8, which directly states that it is a vision of "the ultimate
time of the end."

The Lord even worded the last phrase of that prophecy in such
a way that it would be difficult to miss His intent: ".... and when he
shall have accomplished to scatter [or shatter, NASB] the power
of the holy people, all these things  shall be finished." As of
1967AD, His holy people, the Jews, were no longer scattered
among the Gentiles. They have their nation again, and their power
is shattered no longer.

A SEASON AND A TIME

There is a third time in Daniel that proves a prophetic "time"
to be a thousand years. The four beasts of Daniel 7 are understood
to be the great Gentile empires that would rule in the Holy Land
during  the  time  of  the  Gentiles.  The  first  three  beasts  were
Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece. The fourth beast, Rome, fell in
476AD (more on these empires in a later chapter). The Moslems

 76  The False Prophet

came on the scene soon after Rome fell, but the Moslems were not
granted world dominion like the empires that came before them;
however, the Lord did permit the Islamic states to rule in the Holy
Land for a "season and a time":

Daniel 7:11-12 I beheld even till the [4th] beast [Rome] was
slain,  and  his  body  destroyed,  and  given  to  the  burning
flame.  As  concerning  the  rest  of  the  beasts [the  Islamic
nations of the Middle East], they had their dominion taken
away: yet their lives [in the holy Land] were prolonged for a
season and time.

If time is 1000 years and there are four seasons, then a season
would  be  1/4th of a time, or  250 years. 1000+250=1250.
Remembering that a season is not an exact number and could
fluctuate a week or two either way, this "season and time" fits
history well, indeed.

New Israel became a nation a "Season and Time,"
(1260 years) after the Dome of the Rock was built.

We  have  seen  three  examples,  from  Daniel  alone,  of  time
fitting history, when time is understood to be a thousand years.
Consequently, it is unrealistic to hold that prophetic times mean
anything else. Brethren, I'll accept time=1000 years as a
coincidence  once,  but  not  three  times.  These  solutions  span
thousands  of  years,  from  historic  events  that  took  place  in
antiquity  to  historic  events  that  have  taken  place  in  our  own
lifetimes. That is a statistical impossibility, so we no longer have
just a theory; we have a sound biblical and historically supportable
doctrine1.
___________________________

1  There is a further message in Dan 12:7: "all these things shall be finished" shows
that all events predicted in Daniel's last vision, including "Michael standing up,"
were fulfilled by 1967.This brings to an end the contention that Dan 11:36-45 is
about some period in our future or about a coming antichrist. These verses are all
fulfilled.
_________________________________

 Time, Times & a Half  77

 GRAPH NUMBER 12



In times and day=years, we have a solid empirical argument, a
prophetic jigsaw puzzle in which all the pieces interlock with each
other. We can argue about the placement, color, or shape of any
one piece, but when the whole puzzle  is put  together, we can
stand back and view a completed picture. It's not so  easy to
discredit a prophetic picture in which all the elements fit perfectly.

 78  The False Prophet

If it is not of God, it will crumble back into its original pieces on its
own; however, if it is of God, it will remain and flourish, no matter
who comes against it (Act 5:35-39).

These day=year and time prophecies are truly remarkable.
They show the sovereignty of a timeless God over the affairs of
men in a way that is difficult to dispute, and they do so over eons
of time. Despite the best efforts of the enemy and the complexity
of 2500 years of history, God not only foreknew what was going
to happen in the Holy Land, but He managed history in such a way
that what the Bible prophesied did take place, right to the year, at
His chosen location, in His chosen time. Astounding.

NEWS BRIEF

Arutz Sheva Israel National Radio, 11/20/2001, 11:18am
The three Shavei Shomron residents who were wounded in
yesterday's  attempted  terrorist  murder  outside  their
community  are  still  hospitalized.  Shimrit  Haibi,  17,  is  in
moderate-to-serious condition, her  father Ya'ir  is  listed  in
moderate condition, and Rabbi Yehoshua Shmidt was lightly
hurt. The three were travelling in a taxi when they were hit
by several rounds of fire. Rabbi Shmidt told Arutz-7 today
that though two bullets passed  through his kippah
(skullcap), "G-d protects us, and my head was only grazed."

[?]

This is very interesting.  I have a ? however.

If Daniel didn't understand time, because it wasn't defined until late in the new testament epistles 2Peter 3:8 then what about a prayer of Moses?  Psalm 90:4 "For a thousand years in thy sight are like yesterday when it passes by, or as a watch in the night."  This pre-dates Daniel doesn't it?  Some say that the Peter verse references this verse.  This seems to contradict the reasoning given.

Thank you.
?

[resistingrexmundi]

This is very interesting.  I have a ? however.

If Daniel didn't understand time, because it wasn't defined until late in the new testament epistles 2Peter 3:8 then what about a prayer of Moses?  Psalm 90:4 "For a thousand years in thy sight are like yesterday when it passes by, or as a watch in the night."  This pre-dates Daniel doesn't it?  Some say that the Peter verse references this verse.  This seems to contradict the reasoning given.

Thank you.
?

The point is that Daniel's prophecy was sealed up until the time of the Gentile's were fulfilled. So no he wouldn't have understood what time, times and an half would have meant. And while it is possible that Peter was referencing that verse you have to consider the word that was used in 2 Peter for day.

hēmera-1) the day, used of the natural day, or the interval between sunrise and sunset, as distinguished from and contrasted with the night

a) in the daytime

b) metaph., "the day" is regarded as the time for abstaining from indulgence, vice, crime, because acts of the sort are perpetrated at night and in darkness

2) of the civil day, or the space of twenty four hours (thus including the night)

a) Eastern usage of this term differs from our western usage. Any part of a day is counted as a whole day, hence the expression "three days and three nights" does not mean literally three whole days, but at least one whole day plus part of two other days.

3) of the last day of this present age, the day Christ will return from heaven, raise the dead, hold the final judgment, and perfect his kingdom

4) used of time in general, i.e. the days of his life.

Quoting from the chapter in question

Hemera is an ambiguous word sometimes translated: period, moment, season, year, and, guess what ... Time. So what is the correct translation here? In Greek, context often determines translation, but in the above verse, the correct translation cannot be established with certainty because
context does not  suggest  the  correct concept. Understandably, translators went with "day," which is the most common usage, but
that may not be correct. Hemera is translated time in four verses in the KJV, and twelve verses in the NASB. So time is a very accep-
table  translation.  Is  it possible that duration "X" is a thousand years?

Admittedly this would not be as convincing if it was a stand alone idea. But once it is seen in light of the prophetic day equals year math of Daniel and Revelation it cannot be coincidence. Have you read those chapters yet? If not I would suggest doing so. In fact if you haven't read "The False Prophet" yet I would suggest reading the whole thing from start to finish. It is not a long or hard to understand book. It certainly requires no stretch of the imagination to believe like "Left Behind" or those other end time books. Be sure to read it in order though so that you receive a full understanding.

Hope this helps,

God bless,

rrm

[Peter]

This is very interesting.  I have a ? however.

If Daniel didn't understand time, because it wasn't defined until late in the new testament epistles 2Peter 3:8 then what about a prayer of Moses?  Psalm 90:4 "For a thousand years in thy sight are like yesterday when it passes by, or as a watch in the night."  This pre-dates Daniel doesn't it?  Some say that the Peter verse references this verse.  This seems to contradict the reasoning given.

Thank you.
?

Hi "?" and welcome to the forum!
Psalms 90:4 references that a day is as a thousand years, not a "time".
I spent a little time, in even a radically "anti-missionary" Jewish forum, and they readily admitted that the Old Testament is silent on what is meant by the "time" idiom that Daniel uses.

It would seem that Daniel's use of this "time" idiom could have been understood until the Christian era, and the mathematics only puzzled over, until confirmed by the Jews being restored to their land in 1948 and to Jerusalem in 1967. Wouldn't this seem to have provided a perfect seal on the book of Daniel, now that the math is apparent in hindsight, perhaps indicating that we are in what Daniel called the "time of the end"?

Daniel 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
God followed this up with a crystal clear statement of fact:
Daniel 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words [are] closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

Here's a blessed passage in terms of this exercise requiring combining scriptures from the old covenant and new covenant. Ezekiel 37 is a prediction of the restoration of scattered Israel to her land.

Ezekiel 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which [is] in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, [even] with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

Here's a link to another forum thread on this subject, that includes links to Google searches and such.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=77.0

Again, welcome to the forum!

[?]

I've read the Islam in the end times book and have the False Prophet book.

I was encouraged by the Daniel 12:7 verse at Chabad.
I was discouraged by the Daniel 7:25 verse at Chabad.

Why doesn't it give the 2 & 1/2 translation for Daniel 7:25?

Please list other translations (Jewish or Christian)  for either of these verses that give the 2 & 1/2.

Thank you.
?

[Peter]

I've read the Islam in the end times book and have the False Prophet book.

I was encouraged by the Daniel 12:7 verse at Chabad.
I was discouraged by the Daniel 7:25 verse at Chabad.

Why doesn't it give the 2 & 1/2 translation for Daniel 7:25?

Please list other translations (Jewish or Christian)  for either of these verses that give the 2 & 1/2.

Thank you.
?

I guess the main point is whether you believe that two different idioms were meant, and the math hitting spot on over 2500 years, is simply an accident. I queried about it at Chabad by email when I made a correction in their translation (third year Cyrus not first as they had it) and the guy I corresponded with, said that he could not say for sure if two different idioms were actually meant, but was sure about the 2-1/2 one in Daniel 12:7.
Also Ellis learned from a Hebrew scholar that both meant 2-1/2.
Also I heard an online sermon by a Messianic Jew who also used 2-1/2 for both, and none of those folks were trying to turn it into anything like these math problems. No dog in the race.

In the verse you cite at Chabad if you just think "of", or just make a large separation at the comma after the "time" it might help understand what may have been originally intended. That is until a time, followed by a more accurate description of the length of that time. Like you might say "a time of 2-1/2 hours". Also the other idiom verses Ellis points out help.
Remember we are 20th century English speaking, not ancient Hebrew speaking.

Or just consider the one problem and skip the other. One thing we can be pretty confident of is that 2-1/2 or 3-1/2 years are not meant since "the time appointed [was] long".
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=77.0

[ExMilitary]

Okay, I have a serious question, and I'm not looking to examine individual bricks in the wall of the historical argument as presented by Ellis Skolfield and others.  What I am looking at appears to be a foundational portion of the argument that pins this to 2500 years.

In Ellis' presentation,Ellis Skolfield on Daniel & Revelation a Bible Prophecy Study Guide 2013 edition, he says the following:

In Ezekiel 4:5-6, God gave us
a prophetic “day,” yom, for a year.
God did NOT give us a prophetic “time”,
an id’-dawn, or a moadah for a year

Also, much is made (and rightly so) of scriptural proximity with regard to identifying symbolic language (i.e. we don't need to go to the OT to find out what the 2 candlesticks of Revelation are because candlesticks are defined within the book of Revelation itself).

Here is my question: Ellis' argument for id'-dawn being 1000 years actually comes from a different book of the Bible.  Whereas, God uses id'-dawn in a symbolic vision (Daniel 4:25) within the same book, and it means a literal year (Daniel 4:23, 34).  When Nebuchadnezzar is the stump that is bound until seven times (id'-dawn) pass over him, it is obvious that Nebuchadnezzar didn't live as a beast in the field for 7000 years... but for just 7.

So here we have a use of id'-dawn in symbolic prophetic language within the same book, meaning literal years, not thousands of years.

I see this as important, because the 2500 years are used to (foundationally) argue the 1948/1967 time frame.

[PeteWaldo]

Okay, I have a serious question, and I'm not looking to examine individual bricks in the wall of the historical argument as presented by Ellis Skolfield and others.  What I am looking at appears to be a foundational portion of the argument that pins this to 2500 years.

In Ellis' presentation,Ellis Skolfield on Daniel & Revelation a Bible Prophecy Study Guide 2013 edition, he says the following:

In Ezekiel 4:5-6, God gave us
a prophetic “day,” yom, for a year.
God did NOT give us a prophetic “time”,
an id’-dawn, or a moadah for a year

Also, much is made (and rightly so) of scriptural proximity with regard to identifying symbolic language (i.e. we don't need to go to the OT to find out what the 2 candlesticks of Revelation are because candlesticks are defined within the book of Revelation itself).

Perhaps not as much as you seem to have made of it. An adjacent hermeneutic is just one rule, and it is a good one. It is where we might find our best answer. It isn't a rigid rule of hermeneutics nor does it preclude our finding a better answer elsewhere.
Or as Ellis put it in the discussion you reference (emphasis mine): "We don't  go  to  the Old Testament  for definitions of New Testament figures when there are New Testament definitions
that fit perfectly!"
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1336.0

So the question is, where do we find the most perfect fit in this example?

Here is my question: Ellis' argument for id'-dawn being 1000 years actually comes from a different book of the Bible.  Whereas, God uses id'-dawn in a symbolic vision (Daniel 4:25) within the same book, and it means a literal year (Daniel 4:23, 34).  When Nebuchadnezzar is the stump that is bound until seven times (id'-dawn) pass over him, it is obvious that Nebuchadnezzar didn't live as a beast in the field for 7000 years... but for just 7.

So here we have a use of id'-dawn in symbolic prophetic language within the same book, meaning literal years, not thousands of years.

I see this as important, because the 2500 years are used to (foundationally) argue the 1948/1967 time frame.

You keep focusing on Ellis, but this is all within the most traditional historic amillennial approach to bible prophecy.

Just yesterday when I was making a video to introduce the new website BeyondTheHarbinger.com I came across this: Quoting from the list of "Time periods of the Book of Daniel" in Halley's Bible Handbook: "'A time, times, and a half' (12:7), denotes the period from Daniel to the time of the end (12:6)." That isn't about Ellis, and the first copyright of that book was 1926 before the "time of the end" or the dates of 1948 and 1967 had come to pass.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17-UfVe57Ng

In chatting with the Hebrew scholars at the counter-missionary education forum (doesn't get much more pro-Judaism anti-Christian than that!) they readily admit that the Old Testament scriptures are silent on just what is meant by a "time" in Daniel's prophecy.

When we find that "hemera" (translated as "day" in 2Peter) is translated as "time" on 3 occasions in the KJV and on 12 occasions in the NASB, then we don't say "well this is the only answer there could be" as much as to consider "what if" the Lord had meant for a "time" to be as a thousand years. Then when we investigate it on that basis, we find that two math problems perfectly pin the dates of 1948 and 1967 while working perfectly together in parallel, over the span of 2500 years. That makes a pretty compelling case. Also perfectly supported by the texts of those verses. I suppose we could deny it, but in the light of the evidence that would be somewhat irrational. What do you suppose the statistical odds are against that being a mathematical accident?

Also it may be a manifestation of:

Eze 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which [is] in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, [even] with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

[ExMilitary]

...much is made (and rightly so) of scriptural proximity with regard to identifying symbolic language (i.e. we don't need to go to the OT to find out what the 2 candlesticks of Revelation are because candlesticks are defined within the book of Revelation itself).

Perhaps not as much as you seem to have made of it. An adjacent hermeneutic is just one rule, and it is a good one. It is where we might find our best answer. It isn't a rigid rule of hermeneutics nor does it preclude our finding a better answer elsewhere.

Understood.  I've considered the fact that Daniel is having different visions at different times, whereas, in Revelation, it seems John (with regard to something like candlesticks) is having one continuous vision (which would better support the continuity of symbolic interpretation).

It also has to be considered that most of what Daniel contains (vision-wise) takes place over long, long periods of time (especially as evidenced in the last chapter)... whereas the vision in chapter 4 is sort of an exception to the norm as far as the whole book goes.

Here is my question: Ellis' argument for id'-dawn being 1000 years...

You keep focusing on Ellis, but this is all within the most traditional historic amillennial approach to bible prophecy.

I'm not necessarily focusing on Ellis.  I understand how this is based within the most traditional historic amillennial approach, but Ellis' presentations are the ones I am using to assist my study.

...Then when we investigate it on that basis, we find that two math problems perfectly pin the dates of 1948 and 1967 while working perfectly together in parallel, over the span of 2500 years. That makes a pretty compelling case. Also perfectly supported by the texts of those verses. I suppose we could deny it, but in the light of the evidence that would be somewhat irrational.

In a way, yes.  The difficulty is that the argument is working backward from the answer to find the math problem that arrives at that answer... like trying to fit the evidence into the framework.

BUT, we must all realize that, at a level, this is the way we operate on a day-to-day basis.  When police arrive at a crime scene, they don't ignore the fact that their 'facts' must eventually line up to provide the answer that is the crime scene.

I see how this is very similar because 1948 and 1967 are significant events... that, when explained, reveal much about the historic context.  So, yes, I get all of this (as much as I understand at this point).

Eze 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which [is] in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, [even] with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

Yes, and this scripture excites me to no end!! 

[PeteWaldo]

In chatting with the Hebrew scholars at the counter-missionary education forum (doesn't get much more pro-Judaism anti-Christian than that!) they readily admit that the Old Testament scriptures are silent on just what is meant by a "time" in Daniel's prophecy.

It had been so long I couldn't remember if I remembered that from a 1 on 1, or if I had asked in the forum (don't think I've logged in in 5 years), so I created a user ID and posed it to "ask the Rabbi". I am leading them in slowly at this link so they could have good reason if they get mad about my asking a question I already knew the answer to. It takes a while as all posts in that particular section have to be approved before posting. So far, two Rabbis express they don't know what how to define a "time".

[PeteWaldo]

...much is made (and rightly so) of scriptural proximity with regard to identifying symbolic language (i.e. we don't need to go to the OT to find out what the 2 candlesticks of Revelation are because candlesticks are defined within the book of Revelation itself).

Perhaps not as much as you seem to have made of it. An adjacent hermeneutic is just one rule, and it is a good one. It is where we might find our best answer. It isn't a rigid rule of hermeneutics nor does it preclude our finding a better answer elsewhere.

Understood.  I've considered the fact that Daniel is having different visions at different times, whereas, in Revelation, it seems John (with regard to something like candlesticks) is having one continuous vision (which would better support the continuity of symbolic interpretation).

Good point.

It also has to be considered that most of what Daniel contains (vision-wise) takes place over long, long periods of time (especially as evidenced in the last chapter)... whereas the vision in chapter 4 is sort of an exception to the norm as far as the whole book goes.

Here is my question: Ellis' argument for id'-dawn being 1000 years...

You keep focusing on Ellis, but this is all within the most traditional historic amillennial approach to bible prophecy.

I'm not necessarily focusing on Ellis.  I understand how this is based within the most traditional historic amillennial approach, but Ellis' presentations are the ones I am using to assist my study.

...Then when we investigate it on that basis, we find that two math problems perfectly pin the dates of 1948 and 1967 while working perfectly together in parallel, over the span of 2500 years. That makes a pretty compelling case. Also perfectly supported by the texts of those verses. I suppose we could deny it, but in the light of the evidence that would be somewhat irrational.

In a way, yes.  The difficulty is that the argument is working backward from the answer to find the math problem that arrives at that answer... like trying to fit the evidence into the framework.

Not as far as brother Halley is concerned, without any kind of mathematical axe to grind. He listed it straight up as one possible interpretation:

Halley's Bible Handbook: "'A time, times, and a half' (12:7), denotes the period from Daniel to the time of the end (12:6)."

On that basis alone it wouldn't be hard to assume that it was a period of 2 and a half thousand years that puts us in the time of the end. Then when we do a search like - first year cyrus 536, there is no shortage of support for 537-536 being the first year of Cyrus. You could say that is backing into the answer from the math, but it doesn't make the matter of historical fact change. Indeed often 537-536 is used (reflecting 1 to 2 years of leeway in dating of the Babylonian period) but as it happens 536 is the date with straight up math, and 537 is correct if we throw in a "zero year". I'd call that pretty spot on!

BUT, we must all realize that, at a level, this is the way we operate on a day-to-day basis.  When police arrive at a crime scene, they don't ignore the fact that their 'facts' must eventually line up to provide the answer that is the crime scene.

And we could call it a coincidence and leave it up to the individual's preference to believe it (in spite of the perfect textual confirmation) if the other "times" problem didn't corroborate it. THAT makes the odds against it being an accident absolutely astronomical!

It is really just as Matthew Henry and Isaac Newton anticipated for the time we live in:
http://www.beyondtheharbinger.com/#henry_newton

I see how this is very similar because 1948 and 1967 are significant events... that, when explained, reveal much about the historic context.  So, yes, I get all of this (as much as I understand at this point).

Eze 37:19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which [is] in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, [even] with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.

Yes, and this scripture excites me to no end!! 

I hope the Rabbis I just asked will become amazed, before it occurs to them to get mad.

[PeteWaldo]

I've read the Islam in the end times book and have the False Prophet book.

I was encouraged by the Daniel 12:7 verse at Chabad.
I was discouraged by the Daniel 7:25 verse at Chabad.

I remembered back to your post after I asked a Rabbi today (after quoting 12:7 I asked): "Can someone please direct me to the scriptures that define what is meant by a "time"?"
Reply: "Its meaning is somewhat obscure, but it basically has the same meaning as in chapter 7 verse 25."

Why doesn't it give the 2 & 1/2 translation for Daniel 7:25?

Please list other translations (Jewish or Christian)  for either of these verses that give the 2 & 1/2.

Thank you.
?

[PeteWaldo]

Questions in another forum.
Daniel's time times
Restoration of Jews to Israel

[ExMilitary]

Questions in another forum.
Daniel's time times
Restoration of Jews to Israel

Fun reading.  Thanks.

[PeteWaldo]

Questions in another forum.
Daniel's time times
Restoration of Jews to Israel

Fun reading.  Thanks.

As a formerly indoctrinated Christian futurist, I understand how a doctrine can completely obscure objective reality like that Muhammad could be THE false prophet, just as their doctrine prevents them from recognizing the stunning reality of the restoration of Jews to Israel.
I did find another quite opposite Jewish forum IN ISRAEL and created a user log in but for some reason it won't allow me to post even though I did the confirmation email and it told me I was a member.
Lots of good stuff in that forum regarding Israel and the so-called Palestinians.
http://www.israelforum.com/board/index.php

[ExMilitary]

I had struggled for a while with the chronology that seemed (to me) to exist in Daniel 7:25, “... and they shall be given into his (little horn) hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.”  I kept thinking to myself that the time they would be given into his hand would be 2500 years, starting from the time they were given into his hand.  And, if the little horn had something to do with the Roman empire, then the 2500 years would place it's fulfillment for a long time after the 1948/1967 time frame... and I just couldn't overcome this chronological thinking.

It just occurred to me, though, to think of the verse this way: “... and they shall be given into his hand until 2500 years.”  (Whereas before, I was thinking of it more like “... and they shall be given into his hand FOR 2500 years).

[Brother John]

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?

[PeteWaldo]

Hello brother John, and welcome to the forum!

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.)

Since John was laboring under the Gregorian calendar, what might we find when we use that (effectively solar) calendar for New Testament prophecy (and 360 day prophetic calendar for OT prophecy)?
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/mathematical_precision_of_prophecy.htm#revelation_1260_days

Before we spend a lot of time with this, could I ask that you consider a study presented as a brick by brick empirical argument, in The False Prophet first? It is absolutely free, and and fast to read, and the author Ellis Skolfield makes it fun reading. It will make things a lot easier for us if you can see more of the picture going into it.
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/the_great_detective.htm

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?

Again, welcome to the forum!

[Brother John]

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.

[Brother John]

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?

[Brother John]

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.

[PeteWaldo]

Sorry bro, I was heading out of town and knew I likely wouldn't have internet access for the duration of the 10 day trip. My time is going to remain somewhat limited in the short term while I play catch up.

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.

Please let me qualify by saying I didn't spend much time with your post as yet.
But for openers Daniel and Revelation are penned in two different languages and written many hundreds of years apart, and as you point out we have the added disadvantage of being English speaking.
Also Ellis was indeed a scholar that was well familiar with the languages of scripture.

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.

You may be making this a bit too much about Ellis Skolfield. Regarding the integrity of his book, you already mentioned you accept 90% of it. It might help if you stand back a little further and first recognize the traditional whole-approach to prophecy that his study falls within.
http://www.christianeschatology.com/historicism.htm

Since there are only 3 such approaches (excluding "Idealism"), first ask yourself about the "integrity" of his approach. Particularly in comparison to the other two approaches popularized during the 20th century.Then move closer in asking the same question. In other words, I don't think a single question is enough to call into question the integrity of his study. Do you?

Particularly since we are joining those great men of God of the Reformation in the "language" of prophecy that would seem to have been so familiar to them, even though they knew they didn't know exactly what to do with it.

[Brother John]

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.

[PeteWaldo]

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

Revelations "times" are also 2500 years. Do they have to be related to the 1260 "days"?
Try revisiting page 91:
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/one_more_time.htm#91

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

[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.