adventist historicism reexamined and critiqued basic draft

7/21/2019 Adventist Historicism Reexamined and Critiqued Basic Draft

1/80

Adventist Historicism Reexamined 1

Adventist Historicism Reexamined and CritiquedEduard C. Hanganu

B.A., M.A., Linguistics

Lecturer in English, UE

Draft 78

RevisedMarch 1, 2015

2015


2/80


TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 5

This Documents Intended Purpose.................................................................................. 6

II. Historicism in the SDA Perspective ......................................................................................... 7

Various Definitions for Historicism.................................................................................. 7

The SDA Encyclopedia....................................................................................... 7

The SDA Bible Students Source Book............................................................. 8

William Shea........................................................................................................ 8

Frank B. Holbrook.............................................................................................. 8

Angel Manuel Rodrguez.................................................................................... 9

Desmond Ford..................................................................................................... 9

Le Roy Edwin Froom.......................................................................................... 9

Richard M. Davidson........................................................................................ 10

The Glacier View Theologians......................................................................... 10

Reimar Vetne..................................................................................................... 10

Jon Paulien........................................................................................................ 11

John Noe............................................................................................................ 11

The Historicism Definitions Tabulated ........................................................................... 12

The Historicism Definitions Itemized ............................................................................. 13

The Historicism Definitions Restated ............................................................................. 14

III. Traditional Base for SDA Historicism .................................................................................. 17Adventists and Historicist Tradition ............................................................................... 17

Le Roy Edwin Froom........................................................................................ 17

Richard Davidson.............................................................................................. 17

Gerhard Pfandl................................................................................................. 17

Frank B. Holbrook............................................................................................ 17

Religious Tradition and Its Dangers ............................................................................... 17

HistoricismIts Theological Roots ............................................................................... 18

IV. Historical and Non-Historical Events ................................................................................... 22

Human Events and Historical Records ........................................................................... 22

SDA Historicism and Historical Events ......................................................................... 23

The SDA Historicist Claims Too Tall ............................................................................ 23

Evidence for Historical Fulfillment ................................................................................ 24

Unassailable Facts as True Evidence .............................................................................. 24


3/80


4/80


The Ottoman Empire Prediction..................................................................... 61

Litch Fails With Millers Arithmetic...................................................... 61

Ellen White Treats Failure As Success ................................................... 62

Litch Recognizes His Miscalculation ..................................................... 62

VIII. Diversions That Robbed the Gospel .................................................................................. 64[True Historicism and Salvation]................................................................................ 64

[Daniels Christological Emphasis]............................................................................. 64

[Historicist Traditions Misused].................................................................................. 65

[Honest Historicist Interpretation].............................................................................. 65

[Historicist Claims Need Evidence]............................................................................. 66

[Consensus Failure in Historicism]............................................................................. 66

[Gospel Proclamation Neglected]................................................................................ 66

[Historicism Blocks True Reform].............................................................................. 67

IX. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 68

Definition and Application Issues ................................................................................... 68

No Divine Origin For Historicism .................................................................................. 68

Selective Historical Attestation....................................................................................... 68

Repeated SDA Prediction Failures ................................................................................. 68

Historicist Mania and the Gospel .................................................................................... 69

References ................................................................................................................................... 70


5/80


Adventist Historicism Reexamined and Critiqued

I. Introduction

In his monumental book, Daniel, Ford examined in detail and evaluated the four mainhermeneutical constructs that have defined the prophetic interpretation during the past twomillenniapreterism, idealism, futurism, and historicism,1 and reached the notorious conclusionthat each of the systems [schools] is right in what it affirms and wrong in what it denies.2TheSeventh-day Adventist [further, SDA] Glacier View theologians and scholars declared hisstatement illogical and ridiculed the scholar because, in their view, with this guiding axiomcoupled with the apotelesmatic principle, the author says that all prophetical interpretations by allfour prophetical schools preterists, historicists, futurists, and idealists are correct (ibid.)and alsobecause with its use no positively stated assertion could ever contradict another positively statedassertion.3

Their indictment, though, was based on incomplete information, rushed, and biased. Hadthe esteemed scholars taken time to read what the heretic had presented afterwards, thecontradiction would have been found in their logic, and Fords declaration would have becomeclear, that is, that all hermeneutical constructs or schools were defective and failed to provideadequate and appropriate guidelines for sound prophetic interpretation. To support his informedand critical conclusion, the derided theologian had quoted prominent Christian theologians andscholars who urge us to retain what is right in each system and to avoid what is wrong,4 andthat had been an intelligent and competent suggestion.

Sound empirical evidence demonstrates that the SDA historicism has its own multipleinadequacies and deficiencies, despite the triumphalist and arrogant claims the Glacier Viewscholars have made about this hermeneutical approach.5 In multiple research documents

published onAcademia.edu,6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 I haveexposed certain fundamental flaws that haveaffected the SDA prophetic interpretation for almost two centuries, and I have warned thatunless a radical change occurs in the SDA Churchs anachronistic and unscientific hermeneuticalapproach to prophetic interpretation, the SDA theologians will become more and more isolatedfrom the world theologians, while the SDA sectarian doctrines will appear less and less credibleto the Christian world.

The research documents I have published in Academia.edu have provided rigorous andirrefutable evidence, that (1) the claimed SDA year-day principle has no factual linguistic basisand no biblical support, that (2) Daniel 9 is not an appendix to Daniel 8 and that Gabriel hadcompleted his explanation for the prophetic vision in Daniel 8 and no further explanation was

needed, (3) that the antecedent for the pronoun them in Daniel 8:9 is a stout horn describedin Daniel 8:8 and not a wind, (4) that in Daniel 9 Gabriel had come to give the aged prophetinformation about events related to the deported Israelites return to Palestine, (5) that chathakinDaniel 9 means to determine, and not to cut offbecause the 2300 prophecy in Daniel 8refers to the time period within which Antiochus IV Epiphanes desecrated the Israelite templeand attempted to eradicate the Israelite religion, and (6), that the recorded historical event thatoccurred in 1844 was the Great Disappointment that resulted from William Millers numeralgames about the Second Coming, and not a supposed and implausible celestial event that has


6/80


been assumed based on fantastic and absurd theological SDA speculations for which no humanhistorical evidence has been produced or could ever be produced.

This Documents Intended Purpose

This document is intended to reexamine the SDA historicist prophetic interpretationschool, evaluate it, and show its deficiencies and failures. The main issues that will be examinedare: (1) the fragmented and inconsistent definition for historicism as aprophetic interpretationapproach with guidelines on which the SDA theologians depend in order to decode the

prophetic books, Daniel and Revelation, and which has caused all consequent interpretationerrors, (2) the preposterous and untested claim that God Himself had originated the methodand had used the SDA hermeneutic to compose and interpret the Bible, (3) the selectivehistorical data on which the SDA historicism is claimed to be established as a reliablehermeneutical tool, (4) the multiple and attempted failures to provide authentication for thespeculative hermeneutical approach through solid historical evidence that would indicateindisputable prediction fulfillment and validate the spurious SDA historicist claims, and (5) the

tragic and irreversible collateral damage that the exclusive denominational focus on Daniel andRevelation with their presumed time landmarks and the exaggerated emphasis on the finalevents and the Second Coming has caused to the remnant messagethe Great Commissionreplacement with sectarian triumphalist tall tales and the utter and inexcusable failure to preachthe genuine Gospelthe Bibles Eternal Good Newsto the truth-starved world.


7/80


II. Historicism in the SDA Perspective

LaRondelle, the informed and perceptive Andrews theologian, warns his readers thathistoricism, as a concept of prophetic interpretation, must be defined carefully before we can

discuss its validity and boundaries.1He mentions Froom, the respected Adventist historian, andhis traditional but incomplete definition for historicism:

LeRoy E. Froom provides us one definition of historicism: "the progressive and continuous fulfillment ofprophecy, in unbroken sequence, from Daniel's day and the time of John, on down to the Second Adventand the end of the age."12

Right after he quotes Froom, though, LaRondelle returns and critiques the scholar for hisfailure to define prophetic fulfillmentsand their parameters, and notes that the most importantand relevant factor that should characterize and distinguish historicism as a unique theologicalschool with its indispensable prophetic fulfillment feature is the appropriate alignmentbetween the prophetic intent and the expected prophetic fulfillment. States the accomplishedAndrews theologian:

Froom's definition implies a certain theological exegesis, which he fails to identify as the guideline for hisunderstanding of what constitutes a fulfillment of prophecy. A truthful fulfillment should correspond to theintended meaning of the prophet, and thus requires an exegesis of Scripture in its literary and historicalcontext. Even the Cross is not self-explanatory and needs divine interpretation (see 1 Cor. 1:22-25; 15:3;Rom. 3:25, 26).3

LaRondelles is also confident that a rigorous and dependable biblical interpretation fromthe historicist perspective must be based on the Bible, that is, on the genuine and indisputablescriptural evidence that would and authenticate the historicist hermeneutical school:

This leads us to ask for the biblical origin of historicism; that is, for the prophetic revelation that periodizeshistory in successive epochs which lead up to the establishment of the kingdom of God. That origin, it is

universally agreed, is the apocalyptic book of Daniel, whose visions repeatedly proceed from his own timeto the end of world history, with a consistent focus on salvation history.4

Various Definitions for Historicism

The SDA theologians and scholars have defined historicism in various manners andfrom various perspectives, or have adopted the terms definitions from some non-Adventisthistoricist theologians. Included below are the most common historicism definitions oneencounters in the SDA Church literature:

The SDA Encyclopedia

HISTORICISM. This term is used to describe a school of prophetic interpretation that conceives thefulfillment of the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation as covering the historical period from the time of theprophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. These prophecies were given in visionarycircles that recapitulate the content of the previous vision, adding new information or providing a slightlydifferent perspective of the same historical period. Thus, for instance, Dan. 2, 7, 89, and 1012 are parallelprophecies covering basically the same historical period. In Revelation the same type of recapitulation isemployed in the interpretation of the messages to the seven churches, the seven seals, the seven trumpets,and Rev. 1214.5


8/80


The SDA Bible Students Source Book

[p. 137] The historicist view, sometimes called the continuous-historical view, contends that Revelation is asymbolic presentation of the entire course of the history of the church from the close of the first century tothe end of time. The argument for the view is founded on the fact that two termini are mentioned: the day inwhich John the seer lived, and the ultimate day of Gods victory and the establishment of the Holy City. No

point between them can be identified with certainty as making a break in the sequence; therefore theprocess must be continuous. [p. 138] By this interpretation the various series of the churches, the seals, thetrumpets, and the bowls are made to particular events in the history of the world that are related to thehistory of the church6

[p. 32] The Reformers took over this type of historical interpretation of prophetic truth and found in the

Antichrist a prophecy of the Papacy. Luther at first felt that Revelation was defective in everything which

could be called apostolic or prophetic and was offended by the visions and symbols of the book; but he

came to feel that the prophecy was an outline of the whole course of church history and that the Papacy was

predicted both in chapters 11 and 12 and in the second beast of chapter 13. The number 666 period of papal

domination.7

[p. 43] The interpretation that looks upon the book of Revelation as a forecast, in symbols, of the history ofthe Christian church, is sometimes called, not without reason, the standard Protestant interpretation. Alfordsays that it was the view held by the precursors and upholders of the Reformation, by Wicliffe and his

followers in England, by Luther in Germany, Bullinger in Switzerland, Bishop Bale in Ireland, by Fox themartyrologist by Brighthman, Pareus, and early Protestant expositors generally. 8

William Shea

From the viewpoint of the "continuous" historical school of prophetic interpretation, the prophecies ofDaniel and Revelation provide a divinely inspired, descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the mosttheologically significant events of this era. The Christian Era is seen to stand in continuity with thehistorical description and prophetic evaluation of events in the OT era. The same God has been active in asimilar way in both of these dispensations.

This larger view of God's more comprehensive interaction with human history carries with it the corollarythat the statements about time found in these prophecies cover a more extensive sweep of history than canbe accounted for on a purely literal basis.9

Through the ages several different methods of interpreting Daniel and Revelation have been proposed. Thehistoricist method sees these prophecies as being fulfilled through the course of human history beginning atthe time of the prophets who wrote them. Preterism sees Daniel as focusing on the reign of Antiochus IVEpiphanes, and it sees the book of Revelation as focusing especially on the reign of the emperor Nero. Thusthe preterist school focuses upon the past. In contrast to this, the futurist school places the major emphasisof these two books in the future, yet to be fulfilled. A specially prominent branch of futurism isdispensationalism, which narrows this future fulfillment to the last seven years of earths history.3 10

Frank B. Holbrook

Seventh-day Adventists arrive at their interpretations of Bible prophecy by employing the principles of thehistoricist school of prophetic interpretation. This historicist view (also known as the continuous

historical view) sees the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation unfolding at various points in historical

time, often encompassing the sweep of history from the times of Daniel and John (the human authors ofthese books) to the establishment of God's eternal kingdom.11


9/80


Daniel clearly identified the golden head as symbolizing the empire of Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar(verses 37, 38). It was to be followed by three successive world kingdoms corresponding to the threedifferent metals. History records that these were Medo-Persia, Grecia, and the "iron monarchy" of Rome. Inthe latter part of the fifth century A.D. the empire of Rome in the West was fully broken up. Its parts cameto form the nations of Western Europe symbolized by the strengths and weaknesses of the feet and toescomposed of iron and clay. The "stone," which will ultimately destroy these and all other human, politicalentities, is the eternal kingdom that "the God of heaven will set up" at the end of human history (see verses44, 45, R.S.V.).*

Thus the historicist system of interpretation sees in the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation thehand of Divine Providence moving across the ages, overruling events to bring about the fulfillment ofGod's purposes.12

Angel Manuel Rodrguez

1. In the interpretation of the trumpets, Adventist theologians have almost consistently employed thehistoricist method of prophetic interpretation because it is grounded in Scripture itself. This method wasprovided to the apocalyptic visionaries by the angel interpreter. It has proven to be a valid approach toapocalyptic prophecy as illustrated in its use by Jesus, the apostles, and interpreters throughout Christian

history. While in this article I will not provide all the necessary evidence to support the most importantelements of the historicist method of interpretation,1 I will suggest that the following are indispensable fora proper interpretation of the trumpets:

a. Apocalyptic prophecy covers the whole span of history from the time of the prophet to the very end ofhistory (Dan. 7). In order to be loyal to this methodology, it is necessary to apply it to the apocalypticvisionary cycle of the seven trumpets. When we examine this prophecy from our historical moment, wemust realize that some elements of the prophecy have already been fulfilled while others are in the processof fulfillment or will soon be fulfilled.

b. Hence, the fulfillment of apocalyptic prophecy takes place within the flow of history as a whole.Consequently, it cannot and should not be interpreted along the lines of preterism or futurism or applied toconceptual abstractions disconnected from specific historical events (idealism).13

Desmond Ford

This system of interpretation, also known as the Protestant system because it was cherished during thecenturies surrounding the Reformation, stresses the fact that prophecy has continuity as its chiefcharacteristic and that therefore the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are to be interpreted as signifyingevents commencing at the time of the prophecy but surveying all later centuries until the end of time.

Thus in Dan 2 the prophecy of the image begins with Babylon and continue with Medo-Persia, Greece,Rome, Romes divisions as represented in modern Europe, and finally the return of Christ.

Wrote Alford: Historical interpretershold that the prophecy [Revelation] embraces the wholehistory ofthe church and its foes from the time of its writing to the end of the world. He adds, It seems to me

indisputable that the book does speak of things past, present, and future: that some of its prophecies arealready fulfilled, some are now fulfilling, and others await t heir fulfillment.1214

Le Roy Edwin Froom

From the Reformation stems a long line of prophetic expositions which molded Protestant thinking forcenturies after their day. These were based on what came to be known as the Historical School of propheticinterpretationthe progressive and continuous fulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, fromDaniels day and the time of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age.

15


10/80


Richard M. Davidson

This historicist Adventist interpretation simply builds upon the foundation of the early church and theReformation. The historicist view of prophecy was the view of the early church and of all the Reformers,although today most other major denominations except Seventh-day Adventists have abandoned thisposition in favor of counter-Reformation systems.13

Yet only the historicist view of prophecy does justice to the whole of Daniel. The preterists must say thatprophecy failed, and the futurists must posit a gap where none exists. But the historicists can be consistentwith the whole sweep of the prophetic time prophecies, moving from the prophets day to the eschaton. 1416

The Glacier View Theologians

It is a well-known fact that the historicist school of prophetic interpretation (which looks at prophecy asbeing fulfilled through history from the time of the prophet until the Second Advent, and which is followedby Adventists) has been antagonistic to the preterist school of interpretation (which sees prophecy fulfilledin the past) and the futurist school (which sees fulfillment still in the future). The futurist school, ascurrently espoused in evangelical circles, stands in clear opposition to preterism. Some agreements existbetween historicists and futurists, but not after futurism takes its great leap forward into the future.17

Reimar Vetne

Here is my proposed definition of historicism: Historicism reads historical apocalyptic as prophecyintended by its ancient author to reveal information about real, in-history events in the time span between

his day and the eschaton.

No part of this definition is novel, but some comments may be valuable.

Historicism reads. Notice that the subject of the definition is historicism (the approach) and nothistoricist(the interpreter using the approach), the advantage of which we discussed above.

The next part of the definition, historical apocalypticdeals with the jurisdiction: historicism is a methodlimited to certain types of apocalyptic literature. Most genres found in the Bible are excluded, as areapocalyptic writings where other, heavenly realms are revealed,13rather than future historical events in thisworld. It is the task of the interpreter to argue the case for historical apocalyptic in each individual section.One may hold one section or chapter of Daniel or Revelation to be historical apocalyptic withoutautomatically assuming that all the rest of the material in Daniel and Revelation is likewise intended todescribe future history.

Intended by its ancient author.Given the growing scholarly interest in reader-oriented approaches, it isworth noting that a historicist interpretation is an exegetical task that aims at saying something about theintent of the authorbehind the prophecy. Divine inspiration and revelation behind the text and future eventstruly predictedas Adventists believe of the biblical apocalypsesneed not mean the ancient humanauthors understood every detail of what they were inspired to write. But if one uses the historicist approach,one must assume that the authors somehow understood they were referring to future history.

Because many interpreters in the past combined historicism with unchecked creativity and read manyimaginary prediction-fulfillments into the apocalyptic text, readers have got the false impression thathistoricism conveys merely what is in the eye of the modern beholder. Interpreters using the historicistmethod aim for more than expressing what is in their own minds; they hope to comment on something thatis really in the text, as intended by whatever human and divine agents produced the text.


11/80


Reveal information about real, in-history events.Historicism not only looks for the meaning implied inthe text and intended by the author (as opposed to meaning created in the mind of the reader), but claims tofind authorial attempts at describing real, historical events and developments.

The Apocalypse Group of the SBL Genres Project has defined an apocalypse as revelatory literature witha narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient,disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation,and spatial insofar as it involves another, supernatural world.14Although we might not believe in all therealities depicted in all the various apocalyptic writings from antiquity, few scholars today dispute that theancient authors often intended to describe real events. When the ancient author intended to describe travelsinto heavenly realms or write timeless, a-historical fiction, historicism is not a suitable method to use tounderstand it.

In the time span between his day and the eschaton .The elements in our definition up to this point wouldfit equally well for the preterist and other approaches to apocalyptic literature within the historical-criticaland historical grammatical frameworks. What sets historicism apart is this last phrase. Did the ancientauthor intend to describe events to take place in the time span from the writing up until the eschaton? If webelieve so about a passage, historicism is the approach we take.

If the author of Daniel intended to describe events after his timei.e., after the 6th century (early dating of

the book) or after the 2nd century (late dating), yet before the eschaton, then we have a case calling for ahistoricist approach; likewise if John the Revelator set out to predict events in a span of time after his daysand up to the Parousia.

It is worth observing that one does not have to believe in divine foreknowledge and revelation in order toread a prophecy with a historicist approach. As I have defined it, historicism is not just for the believer.There are several ancient apocalypses around, and none of us believe in the truthfulness of all theseattempted predictions. Historicism as a scholarly method only asks for a likely reconstruction of theoriginal authorial intent of the writing. Whenever we think we see an author of an apocalypse attempting toforetell events placed in the future yet before the end of the world, we take the historicist approachwhether we consider those predictions to be true or not.18

Jon Paulien

The Seventh-day Adventist Church derives its unique witness to Jesus Christ from a historicist reading ofthe apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation. Historicism understands these prophecies to portray arelentless march of God-ordained history leading from the prophets time up to a critical climax at the endof earths history.1 The interpretation of biblical apocalyptic was at the center of Adventist theological

development in the formative years of the Adventist Church and its theology.2 19

John Noe

a.Historicist interpretation. This interpretation was favored by the reformers.It sees in the Revelation aprophecy of the history of the church. But as Ladd indicates, this method can be millenarian . . .nonmillenarian . . . or postmillenarian.57According to Mounce, this historical theory wascreated around

the 12th century by medieval theologians who were followers of Joachim and were growing concernedabout abuses in the Church.58

Thus, historicists see Revelation as depicting specific and identifiable historical events, institutions,movements, and periods that transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. Thesebegan in the first century, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lordsreturn. Preterist Milton S. Terry, however, complained that while historicism presumed that the Book ofRevelation contains detailed predictions of the Roman papacy, the wars of modern Europe, and the fortunesof Napoleon,59he found nowhere in the prophecies of this book a prediction of Turkish armies, or papalbulls, or the German Reformation of the sixteenth century, as has been claimed by some historicists.60 20


12/80


The Historicism Definitions Tabulated

Definitions for Historicism in a Table

The historicism definitions listed above in detail under various theologians and

scholars have been organized also in a table for an overall perspective and ease of comparison:

Historicist Source Historicism Definition

The SDA Encyclopedia HISTORICISM. This term is used to describe a school of prophetic interpretationthat conceives the fulfillment of the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation ascovering the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment ofthe kingdom of God on earth.21

The SDA Bible Students

Source Book[p. 137] The historicist view, sometimes called the continuous-historical view,contends that Revelation is a symbolic presentation of the entire course of thehistory of the church from the close of the first century to the end of time.22

The SDA Bible StudentsSource Book

Luther at first felt that Revelation was defective in everything which could becalled apostolic or prophetic and was offended by the visions and symbols of thebook; but he came to feel that the prophecy was an outline of the whole course of

church history and that the Papacy was predicted both in chapters 11 and 12 and inthe second beast of chapter 13. The number 666 period of papal domination.23

The SDA Bible Students

Source Book[p. 43] The interpretation that looks upon the book of Revelation as a forecast, insymbols, of the history of the Christian church, is sometimes called, not withoutreason, the standard Protestant interpretation.24

William Shea From the viewpoint of the "continuous" historical school of propheticinterpretation, the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation provide a divinely inspired,descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most theologically significantevents of this [Christian] era. The Christian Era is seen to stand in continuity withthe historical description and prophetic evaluation of events in the OT era. Thesame God has been active in a similar way in both of these dispensations.25

William Shea Through the ages several different methods of interpreting Daniel and Revelationhave been proposed. The historicist method sees these prophecies as being fulfilled

through the course of human history beginning at the time of the prophets whowrote them.26

Frank B. Holbrook Seventh-day Adventists arrive at their interpretations of Bible prophecy byemploying the principles of the historicist school of prophetic interpretation. This

historicist view (also known as the continuous historical view) sees the

prophecies of Daniel and Revelation unfolding at various points in historical time,often encompassing the sweep of history from the times of Daniel and John (thehuman authors of these books) to the establishment of God's eternal kingdom.27

Frank B. Holbrook Thus the historicist system of interpretation sees in the apocalyptic prophecies ofDaniel and Revelation the hand of Divine Providence moving across the ages,overruling events to bring about the fulfillment of God's purposes.28

Angel Manuel Rodrguez

a. Apocalyptic prophecy covers the whole span of history from the time of theprophet to the very end of history (Dan. 7)b. Hence, the fulfillment of

apocalyptic prophecy takes place within the flow of history as a whole.29

Desmond Ford This system of interpretation, also known as the Protestant system because it wascherished during the centuries surrounding the Reformation, stresses the fact thatprophecy has continuityas its chief characteristic and that therefore the propheciesof Daniel and Revelation are to be interpreted as signifying events commencing atthe time of the prophecy but surveying all later centuries until the end of time. 30

Le Roy Edwin Froom

From the Reformation stems a long line of prophetic expositions which moldedProtestant thinking for centuries after their day. These were based on what came to


13/80


be known as the Historical School of prophetic interpretationthe progressive andcontinuous fulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and

the time of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age.31

Richard M. Davidson The preterists must say that prophecy failed, and the futurists must posit a gapwhere none exists. But the historicists can be consistent with the whole sweep of

the prophetic time prophecies, moving from the prophets day to the eschaton.

14

32

The Glacier ViewTheologians

It is a well-known fact that the historicist school of prophetic interpretation (whichlooks at prophecy as being fulfilled through history from the time of the prophetuntil the Second Advent, and which is followed by Adventists) has been ntagonisticto the preterist school of interpretation (which sees prophecy fulfilled in the past)and the futurist school (which sees fulfillment still in the future).33

Reimar Vetne

Here is my proposed definition of historicism: Historicism reads historicalapocalyptic as prophecy intended by its ancient author to reveal information about

real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the eschaton.34

Jon Paulien The Seventh-day Adventist Church derives its unique witness to Jesus Christ froma historicist reading of the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation.Historicism understands these prophecies to portray a relentless march of God-ordained history leading from the prophets time up to a critical climax at the end of

earths history.135

John Noe

Thus, historicists see Revelation as depicting specific and identifiable historicalevents, institutions, movements, and periods that transpire in a chronologicalsequence throughout the entire church age. These began in the first century, havecontinued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords return. 36

The Historicism Definitions Itemized

The itemized organization for the historicism definition listed in detail above and thenorganized in a table would provide an even clearer perspective of the claims the SDA historicistsmake about the historicist school:

1. [Historicism is] a school of prophetic interpretation that conceives the fulfillment of theprophecies of Daniel and Revelation as covering the historical period from the time of theprophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth.37

2. The historicist view, sometimes called the continuous-historical view, contends thatRevelation is a symbolic presentation of the entire course of the history of the church from theclose of the first century to the end of time.38

3. Luthercame to feel that the prophecy was an outline of the whole course of church historyand that the Papacy was predicted both in chapters 11 and 12 and in the second beast of chapter13. 39

4. [Historicism is] [t]he interpretation that looks upon the book of Revelation as a forecast, insymbols, of the history of the Christian church.40

5. From the viewpoint of the continuous historical school of prophetic interpretation, theprophecies of Daniel and Revelation provide a divinely inspired, descriptive overview andevaluation of some of the most theologically significant events of this era.41


14/80


6. The historicist method sees these prophecies [in Daniel and Revelation] as being fulfilledthrough the course of human history beginning at the time of the prophets who wrote them.42

7. This historicist view (also known as the continuous historical view) sees the prophecies ofDaniel and Revelation unfolding at various points in historical time, often encompassing the

sweep of history from the times of Daniel and John (the human authors of these books) to theestablishment of God's eternal kingdom.43

8. Thus the historicist system of interpretation sees in the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel andRevelation the hand of Divine Providence moving across the ages, overruling events to bringabout the fulfillment of God's purposes.44

9. Apocalyptic prophecy covers the whole span of history from the time of the prophet to thevery end of history (Dan. 7)b. Hence, the fulfillment of apocalyptic prophecy takes place

within the flow of history as a whole.45

10. This system of interpretationstresses the fact that prophecy has continuity as its chief

characteristic and that therefore the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are to be interpreted assignifying events commencing at the time of the prophecy but surveying all later centuries untilthe end of time. 46

11.the Historical School of prophetic interpretationthe progressive and continuousfulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time of John, on downto the Second Advent and the end of age.47

12. the historicists can be consistent with the whole sweep of the prophetic time prophecies,moving from the prophets day to the eschaton.1448

13. The historicist school of prophetic interpretationlooks at prophecy as being fulfilledthrough history from the time of the prophet until the Second Advent.49

14.Historicism reads historical apocalyptic as prophecy intended by its ancient author to revealinformation about real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the eschaton.

50

15. Historicism understands these prophecies [the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel andRevelation] to portray a relentless march of God-ordained history leading from the prophetstime up to a critical climax at the end of earths history.151

16. Historicists see Revelation as depicting specific and identifiable historical events,institutions, movements, and periods that transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the

entire church age. These began in the first century, have continued through the centuries, andwill eventually lead up to the Lords return.

52

The Historicism Definitions Restated

All the above historicist definitions can be summarized in a few paragraphs that capturethe essential historicist features as the SDA theologians and other scholars define and formulatethem. These features are that historicism conceives the fulfillment of the prophecies of Daniel


15/80


and Revelation as covering the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishmentof the kingdom of God on earth,53 contends that Revelation is a symbolic presentation of theentire course of the history of the church from the close of the first century to the end of time, 54sees the Bible prophecy as an outline of the whole course of church history, 55 looks upon thebook of Revelation as a forecast, in symbols, of the history of the Christian church,56 and

understands the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation [to] provide a divinely inspired,descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most theologically significant events of this[Christian] era57andbeing fulfilled through the course of human history beginning at the timeof the prophets who wrote them.58

Historicism also sees the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation unfolding at variouspoints in historical time, often encompassing the sweep of history from the times of Daniel andJohn (the human authors of these books) to the establishment of God's eternal kingdom,59andidentifies inthese propheciesthe hand of Divine Providence moving across the ages, overrulingevents to bring about the fulfillment of God's purposes.60

The SDA historicist theologians believe that apocalyptic prophecy covers the wholespan of history from the time of the prophet to the very end of history (Dan. 7) ,and that thefulfillment of apocalyptic prophecy takes place within the flow of history as a whole.61Fromthe prophetic time perspective, the SDA historicism emphasizes that prophecy has continuityasits chief characteristic and that therefore the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation are to beinterpreted as signifying events commencing at the time of the prophecy but surveying all latercenturies until the end of time,62 and also demonstrating the progressive and continuousfulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time of John, on downto the Second Advent and the end of age. 63

For the above reasons, the historicists can be consistent with the whole sweep of the prophetictime prophecies, moving from the prophets day to the eschaton,14 64because the historicistschool of prophetic interpretationlooks at prophecy as being fulfilled through history from thetime of the prophet until the Second Advent ,65 which also indicates that historicism readshistorical apocalyptic as prophecy intended by its ancient author to reveal information aboutreal, in-history events in the time span between his day and the eschaton ,66 and understandsthese prophecies [the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation] to portray a relentlessmarch of God-ordained history leading from the prophets time up to a critical climax at the endof earths history.167

For all the theological reasons mentioned before, the SDA and other historicists seeRevelation as depicting specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, andperiods that transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. These beganin the first century, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to theLords return.

68

The common denominator in the above SDA definitions for historicism is historical

fulfillment, that is, historical event solutions to the prophetic forecasts or predictions. As wewill see later in the document, the problem with the SDA historicism is that the definitionapplication is discontinued and negated when non-historical events that should validate the


16/80


predictions are produced as sound evidence for the claimed prophetic fulfillments. While thedefinition requires genuine and verifiable historical events that would authenticate the propheticforecasts or predictions, the SDA theologians and scholars suggest instead speculated, and evenfictional events to support their prophetic fulfillment claims.


17/80


III. Traditional Base for SDA Historicism

The SDA theologians have attempted to defend their reliance on the historicist propheticinterpretation school in their exegetical approach to Daniel and Revelation with arguments fromthe Christian church interpretation tradition. Among the past and current SDA theologians who

have resorted to such arguments are Froom, Davidson, Pfandl, and Holbrook:

Adventists and Historicist Tradition

Le Roy Edwin Froom

From the Reformation stems a long line of prophetic expositions which molded Protestant thinking forcenturies after their day. These were based on what came to be known as the Historical School of propheticinterpretationthe progressive and continuous fulfillment of prophecy, in unbroken sequence, fromDaniels day and the time of John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age.1

Richard Davidson

This historicist Adventist interpretation [of Daniel] simply builds upon the foundation of the early churchand the Reformation. The historicist view of prophecy was the view of the early church and of all thereformers, although today most other major denominations except Seventh-day Adventists have abandonedthis position in favor of counter-Reformation systems.13 2

Gerhard Pfandl

Throughout most of church history these apocalyptic time prophecies [in Daniel and Revelation] wereinterpreted according to the historicist method of interpretation. Only in the last two hundred years haveother systems, such as preterism and futurism, replaced historicism.3

Frank B. Holbrook

The Millerites, the immediate spiritual forebears of Seventh-day Adventists, were historicists; that is, theyinterpreted Daniel and Revelation in harmony with the principles of the historical school of prophetic

interpretation. But the method was by no means original with the Millerites of mid-nineteenth-centuryAmerica; they simply reflected and elaborated upon the labors of many earlier Bible students of theReformationand post-Reformation eras.4

Religious Tradition and Its Dangers

The fact that some ancient, medieval, and modern World Church theologians andscholars have used the now outdated and discarded historicist hermeneutics for prophetic

interpretation in the past, though, is no sound or reliable evidence that the old historicist methodis correct or biblical. Arguments from religious tradition are not worth too much, and are quiteoften the last resort in apologetics. Ellen G White, the claimed prophet and messenger of theSDA church, often warned against doctrinal support from church tradition, against thedisposition to accept the theories and traditions of men instead of the word of God, and againstthose nave and gullible Christian theologians and scholars who are clinging to the customs andtraditions of their fathers in order to promote their own false gospels:


18/80


But truth is no more desired by the majority today than it was by the papists who opposed Luther. There is

the same disposition to accept the theories and traditions of men instead of the word of God as informerages [emphasis added]. Those who present the truth for this time should not expect to be receivedwith greater favor than were earlier reformers. The great controversy between truth and error, betweenChrist and Satan, is to increase in intensity to the close of this world's history.5

There are many at the present day thus clinging to the customs and traditions of their fathers[emphasisadded]. When the Lord sends them additional light, they refuse to accept it, because, not having beengranted to their fathers, it was not received by them. We are not placed where our fathers were;consequently our duties and responsibilities are not the same as theirs. We shall not be approved of God inlooking to the example of our fathers to determine our duty instead of searching the word of truth forourselves. Our responsibility is greater than was that of our ancestors. We are accountable for the lightwhich they received, and which was handed down as an inheritance for us, and we are accountable also forthe additional light which is now shining upon us from the word of God.6

HistoricismIts Theological Roots

For didactic purposes, though, it is good to understand how the historicist interpretationmethod has developed and has been used in the past millennia in order to exegete the main

prophetic books, Daniel and Revelation. Vetne has summarized well and in detail the theologicaltradition for historicism in his research paper on the theological school. He states:

History of Historicism

In the traditional way of defining historicism, as an all-or-nothing school of interpretation, appeals to thehistory of prophetic interpretation often tried to show how details from current Adventist expositions wereshared by interpreters in the past. The whole schoolhad to be justified from history, so to speak.15

If we reduce historicism to one label among many and use it only about events between (not including) theauthors day and the Parousia, all we have to show by appealing to the history of interpretation is that manyhave believed in the possibility of true predictive prophecy and found it in parts of Daniel and Revelation.When the popularity of that has been demonstrated, the interpreter can turn from the history of propheticinterpretation to exegetical studies to show which parts of Daniel and Revelation he thinks specificallypredict history.

The list of prominent interpreters using the historicist approach for at least some part of Daniel orRevelation is quite impressive. Throughout most of history since the writing of Daniel, historicism has beenwidely used.

Jewish Apocalyptic Writings. Many Jewish apocalypses were written in the period 200 BC to 100 AD.Whether we see them as influenced by and commenting upon the biblical book of Daniel or see themmerely as being written at the same time and in the same environment as Daniel, the nature of theseapocalypses throw great light on Daniel. Interestingly, several of these apocalyptic writings clearly attemptpredictions of the futurethe time between their writing and the end of the world (historicist prophecies).

In chapters 91 and 93 of the fifth book of 1 Enoch we find a prophecy of ten consecutive periods, eachlasting one week.16The weeks are obviously symbolical, since events that take longer time than a literalweek are mentioned, like the building of a house and a kingdom in week five (verse 7). John Collinscomments: The substance of this apocalypse is made up not of heavenly cosmology but of an overview ofhistory. The history is highly schematized and organized into periods of weeks.17This division into a setnumber of periods is a common feature of the historicaltype of apocalypse.18

Where does the ancient author see himself in this series of ten periods? Collins thinks that the author sawsix of the periods in the past. In the case of the Apocalypse of Weeks, the time of the real author is


19/80


evidently to be situated in the seventh week.19If Collins is correct in this, these last periods call for thehistoricist approach. In the seventh period the text mentions coming oppression, the Gentiles to beconquered, towers or castles to be overthrown, and many sinners to be destroyed (91:8-11). In the eighthperiod, the week of righteousness, the righteous will prosper over against the oppressors and sinners(91:12-13). In the ninth period, sin will disappear from the earth and moral perfection or uprightness takeover (91:14). Finally, in the tenth period, the day of Gods final judgment takes place, executed by theangels, the first heaven departs and a new heaven appears, and eternity replaces temporality (91:15-17).

In theApocalypse of Abraham chapters 29-30, the writer receives a vision of twelve periods or hoursofhistory that are to take place before the eschaton (29:1-3, 9).20 The events of each period are listed inchapter 30, and the end of the world takes place in chapter 31. The historical axis is divided into twelvehours, a form of periodization that is also found in 2 Baruchs vision.21Where in the series of twelve theauthor of Abraham saw himself is hard to determine. If he intended the twelve periods to be in his future,we need to interpret this apocalypse with the historicist approach.

In 2 Baruch chapter 27 we also find twelve periods of history with different events taking place,22but it isnot clear whether these are meant to cover the time span from the author to the eschaton, or are all part ofthe immediate events surrounding the end of the world itself.

In the fifth vision in chapters 11-12 of 4 Ezra, a symbolic vision of an eagle is given where different parts

of the birds body represent different time periods and reigning kings.23The vision itself is in chapter 11,and the interpretation is given in chapter 12. This writing is clearly meant as an interpretation andelaboration of the biblical book of Daniel. In 12:11-15 the eagle is said to be a more detailed prophecy ofthe fourth kingdom in Daniel. First twelve kings will reign, one after another(12:14), then another eightkings (v. 20), of which the last two will reign until the end (v. 21), when three more kings will appear(v.23). Then a lion will appearGods Messiahand make an end of the eagle with its many kings.

This eagle, explained by Ezra to be the fourth kingdom in Daniel, is interpreted by most scholars, includingCollins, as Rome.24 So the author of 4 Ezra clearly interprets Daniel with the historicist method, readingDaniel as a predictive prophecy about times beyond the days of Daniel. Where in his series of Roman kingsdoes the author of 4 Ezra see his own time? Does he believe the end is imminent, or that many more kingsare to come first? If the latter, then even the prophecy of 4 Ezra itself demands a historicist interpretation.

Other Early Jewish Interpretations. The translators behind the Alexandrian Septuagint (the earlyversion, not the later Theodotian translation) read Daniel with the historicist approach, believing Daniel tocontain predictions about future history. For instance, in Daniel 11:30 the ships of Kittimare interpretedand translated withPothe Romans.25

The Jewish historian Josephus seems to interpret the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2 as the Roman empire andthe stone kingdom as a future power that would overthrow the Romans.26

Jesus and the Synoptics. In Matthew 24:15 Jesus is said to refer to a prediction by Daniel the prophet,interpreting it as a future event. Mark 13:14 contains the same saying, but here only the prediction (clearlytaken from Daniel) is given; the reference to Daniel is omitted. In the parallel account in Luke 21:21, Jesusalso interprets the prophecy in Daniel as a future event and gives an even more detailed interpretation of it.

Whether one takes these sayings as authentic (as most Adventist scholars do) or as a product of the earlyChristian tradition, they are in any case evidence of early historicist readings of Daniel. Some in the earlyChristian church believed that Daniel had predicted events that were to take place after Daniels time andbefore the end of the world.

Early Church Fathers. The early Christian interpretations from the first three hundred years seem to agreeon seeing prophecies in Daniel as reaching past Daniels time and into the Roman era.


20/80


The first chapter of theEpistle of Barnabas appeals to the reader to consider the seriousness of the presentcircumstancesbecause the last stumbling block is at handand cites the fourth beast and the ten horns ofDaniel 7.27

Irenaeus likewise interpreted the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2 and 7 as the present-day Roman empire andbelieved that Rome in Ireneaeusfuture was going to be divided up into smaller kingdoms, as suggested bythe iron mixed with clay (Dan 2) and the ten horns of the fourth beast (Dan 7, Rev 13). 28

Tertullian asked his readers to pray for the stability and unity of the Roman empire in order to delay theprophesied breakup of Rome and thus the coming of the antichrist.29

Clement of Alexandria provided one of the first documented interpretations we have of Daniel 9 predictingthe time of Jesus Christs arrival.30

Eusebius followed the other early Christian writers in identifying the four kingdoms of Daniel 2 and 7 asAssyria/Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome. The seventy weeks of Daniel 9 Eusebius saw as a 490 yearprediction of the timing of Messiah, stretching from the Persian period to the time of Jesus.31

Cyril, the fourth century bishop of Jerusalem, wrote that the fourth kingdom being Rome was a well-established tradition in the church. The fourth beast shall be a fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall

surpass all kingdoms. And that this kingdom is that of the Romans, has been the tradition of the Church sinterpreters.32

Jerome took the prediction-fulfillments a step further, claiming that the time of the break-up of Rome, as hesaw predicted in Daniel 2 and 7, had begun to take place in his time.33He refuted the Pagan Porphyrysproposal that Daniel was written in the second century as an after-the-events-took-place narrative aboutAntiochus Epiphanes.34

More names could be mentioned. The unified voice of the early Christian church, from the Synoptic Jesusto the leading church historians and scholars of the formative years, was that the biblical apocalypses had incertain sections predicted events to take place in history from the time of their writing down to the end ofthe world. Historicism reigned.

Middle Ages. Historicist expositions were less common in the middle ages, due possibly to an increasinguse of allegorical, ahistorical interpretations of Scripture in general and Augustines downplay of a literalsecond Parousia (which the early church had seen in the stone-kingdom replacing the Roman empire in theprophecies of Daniel).

Though no longer in the majority, the list of interpreters using the historicist approach to Daniel andRevelation is also long for the medieval period. One of the best known is Thomas Aquinas, who held thefour kingdoms predicted in Daniel 2 and 7 to be Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Rome, the ten horns as tenfuture kings to come in the time of antichrist, and the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 as 490 (lunar) years predictingthe coming of Jesus.35According to Froom, other lesser known medieval interpreters using the historicist approach were Bruno ofSegni, Anselm of Havelberg, Rupert of Deutz, Andreas of Caesarea, Sargis d Aberga, Berengaud, Pseudo-Methodius, Bede, Robert Grosseteste (identifying the papacy as the antichrist), Peter Comestor, Albertus

Magnus, Joachim of Floris (seven seals and seven trumpets cover the Christian era), Villanova (urgingfellow preachers to preach more on the prophecies, including Daniel 9, which he believed foretold the timeof Jesus first advent), Olivi (who believed the Christian church had become corrupt, as prophesied in thesymbol of Babylon in Revelation, and that the seven seals and seven trumpets are seven periods of churchhistory), Emperor Frederick II (who held the pope to be the predicted antichrist), Eberhard (who claimedthe papal system was predicted in the little horn of Daniel), Dante, Francesco Petrarch, John Milicz, and theWaldensian Christians (who believed the corruption of the Christian church was predicted in the symbolsof the harlot and Babylon of Revelation).36


21/80


Renaissance and Reformation. With the Protestant Reformation we return again to a period of dominancefor the historicist approach. I mention here only two major early writers.

The English Morning Star of the Reformation, John Wyclif (1324-1384), believed strongly that thecorruption of the papacy was the event predicted in the prophecies of the antichrist, the little horn of Daniel7, and the harlot woman of Revelation 17. The four kingdoms of Daniel 2 and 7 were Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome.37

When Martin Luther (14831546) saw what he considered as the hopelessness of reforming the Church ofRome, he became increasingly convinced that it was apostate and that this apostasy was predicted in Danieland Revelation. When Luther burned the popes bull of excommunication, he burned it as the bull of theprophesied antichrist and Babylon.

Luthers view on Daniel was the traditional one. The fourth kingdom was the Roman empire, while thebreak-up of iron into clay in the feet (Daniel 2) predicted the break-up of the Roman empire into smallernations. Luther wrote that it was common knowledge that the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 should be interpretedwith a day for a year and that it predicted the death of Christ.38

This historicist approach to prophecy remained the common and accepted approach among Protestants forthe next three hundred years, to such a degree that scholars sometimes define historicism simply as the

approach to prophecy of Protestants up until the mid-19th century.39

Today the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the only major denomination officially using the historicistapproachthe most common approach during two millennia of biblical apocalyptic interpretation. IfAdventists wish to see the use of historicism increased among other interpreters, it might be necessary tochange the way the approach is communicated. Many scholars do not believe in the possibility of true,predictive prophecy, and the gap between Adventists and these interpreters cannot be closed. Thecommunity of believers who are open to this possibility is large, howeverin our days as it has alwaysbeen. To these people Adventists should demonstrate carefully from the biblical text, case by case, whereand why one sees history in advance.7

The historical record, as Vetne indicates, demonstrates that while in the past historicismwas the preferred and most trusted hermeneutical method for the Christian theologians andscholars, there has been a continual decline during the past centuries in the use of this exegeticalmethod in order to interpret Daniel and Revelation. The scholar appears to think that the reasonfor the decline has been a bad communication problem, and suggests that a change in theapproach through which the SDA historicism is shared with non-Adventist theologians mighthelp increase the number of theologians who would accept the historicist school and its specificguidelines for prophetic interpretation.

The true reason for this permanent and, it seems, irreversible, decline, though, mightreside somewhere elsein the continual absence of factual evidence that would authenticate theSDA historicist interpretation for Daniel and Revelation, and the dependence on numerousassumed, fictional, and even modified historical events in order to support thedisingenuousarguments that have attempted to provide dependable evidence for prophetic fulfillment.8


22/80


IV. Historical and Non-Historical Events

Human Events and Historical Records

This research documents purpose is to establish, based on the historicism definitions

discussed in Section II, clear and unambiguous parameters for the terms so often used in theSDA historitalkthe peculiar language that the SDA historicist theologians and scholars usein their negotiations on historicism, historical or chronological prophecies, and propheticfulfillments, so that later in the document we will be able to evaluate their claims and concludewhether or not the historical events suggested and claimed to demonstrate prophetic fulfillmentin Daniel and Revelation are indeed factual and unquestionable, or manipulated, distorted, andeven invented pseudo-historical facts.

The first step we need to take is to find clear and unambiguous definitions for the Englishlanguage lexical terms history, and historical, and can depend on The Oxford EnglishDictionary [further, OED] for those definitions. According to OED, history is

A written narrative constituting a continuous methodical record, in order of time, of important or publicevents [emphasis added], esp. those connected with a particular country, people, individual[emphasisadded], etc.1

or,

That branch of knowledge which deals with past events, as recorded in writings or otherwiseascertained[emphasis added]; theformal record of the past [emphasis added], esp. of human affairs oractions[emphasis added]; the study of the formation and growth of communities and nations.2

Anderson concurs with these succinct but also explicit enough OED definitions, andstates in hisManual of General Historythat,

History is a narration of the events which have happened among mankind[emphasis added], including anaccount of the rise and fall of nations, as well as of other great changes which have affected the politicaland social conditions of the human race[emphasis added].3

The scholar also mentions chronologythe event-related time or chronological recordsas a branch and integral part of history,and states:

10. Chronology is a department of history which treats of the exact time or date of each event, withreference to some fixed time called an era or epoch. The epoch usually employed in our times amongChristian nations for reckoning dates, is the birth of Christ, called the Christian Era.* All date precedingthis are marked B.C., that is,Before Christ; and all subsequent to it are marked A.D., that is, Anno Domini,which means in the year of our Lord; that is, after the birth of Christ.4

Williams adds that in order to maintain a faithful record of dates and events for thefurther generations, historians depend on the written records that have been created about thehuman situations, circumstances, and events that have occurred:

It is obvious that the materials for the writing of history consist for the most part of written records. It istrue that all manner of monuments, including the ruins of buried cities, remains of ancient walls andhighways, and all other traces of a former civilization, must be allotted their share as records to guide theinvestigator in his attempt to reconstruct past conditions. But for anything like a definite presentation of the


23/80


events of bygone days, it is absolutely essential, as Sir George Cornewall Lewis point out in great detail, tohave access to contemporary written records, either at first hand, or through the medium of copyists, in casethe original records themselves have been destroyed. Lewis reached the conclusion, as the result of hisexhaustive examination of the credibility of early Roman history, that a tradition of a past event is hardlytransmitted orally from generation to generation with anything like accuracy of detail for more than acentury.5

The second English lexical term, historical, is defined in the OED as of or pertainingto history; of the nature or character of history, constituting history; following or in accordancewith history, of, pertaining to, of the nature of history as opposed to fiction or legend, and

relating to or concerned with history or historical events.6

The above two OED lexical terms, history, and historical, indicate that a historicalevent is an important or public event, that is connected with a particular, country, people,

individual, most often a past event that has been recorded in writings or otherwise

ascertained, that is a direct part of the formal record of the past, and that deals with humanaffairs or actions. Such records concern mankind or the human race, and often include the

exact time or date of each event, with reference to some fixed time called an eraor epoch. The

events must be included in written records for their accurate preservation, because oral recordsbecome inaccurate with time and from generation to generation.

SDA Historicism and Historical Events

The various definitions for historicismexamined in the second section of this researchdocument indicate that the SDA theologians and scholars have in view true and verifiable humanevents in their historicist interpretations for the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation. Theprophecies in the above books are claim to cover the historical period from the time of theprophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth,7provide an outline of the wholecourse of church history,

8include a descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most

theologically significant events of this [Christian] era,9

cover the whole span of history fromthe time of the prophet to the very end of history,10and to do this in unbroken sequence, fromDaniels day and the timeof John, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age.11Thehistorical apocalyptic in Daniel and Revelation was intended by its ancient author to revealinformation about real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the eschaton ,12

and to depict specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, and periodsthat transpire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. These began in thefirst century, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lordsreturn.13

The SDA Historicist Claims Too Tall

That the SDA historicist claims are too tall, that is, too good to be true, is obvious whenone takes a closer look at what their substance is:

1. To cover the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of thekingdom of God on earth,

2. To include a descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most theologicallysignificant events of this [Christian] era,


24/80


3. To present such prophetic narrativein unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time ofJohn, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age,

4. To reveal information about real, in-history events in the time span between his day and the

eschaton,and

5. To depict specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, and periods thattranspire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. These began in the firstcentury, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords return.

These five points would require from the SDA theologians and scholars to provideauthentic historical evidence that the entire historical period from the time of the prophet to theestablishment of the kingdom of God on earth is contained in the prophecies in an unbrokensequence, and that some of the most theologically significant events of this [Christian] era,

including for instance, the Reformation, are included in specific and actual events in the Danielicand Apocaliptic prophecies as interpreted from the historicist perspective, to show how thesepredictions reveal information about real, in-history events in the time span between his [the

prophets] day and the eschaton, that is, to present and describe specific and identifiablehistorical events, institutions, movements, and periods that transpire in a chronological sequencethroughout the entire church age that began in the first century, have continued through thecenturies, and will eventually lead up to the Lords return.

Evidence for Historical Fulfillment

The indisputable historical evidence that would defend and support the SDA exegeticalinterpretation for the eschatological prophecies in Daniel and Revelation must be, from Sheasperspective, the pragmatic test of historical fulfillment [emphasis added].14This pragmaticinterpretation test requires that the interpretive results [should] be confirmed fromextrabiblical sources where possible [emphasis added]15 and that the events, institutions,

movements, and periods[emphasis added] suggested and claimed as evidence for historicalfulfillment should be specific and identifiable historical events [emphasis added],16 andtherefore real, and in-history,17 humanevents,and not some assumed, non-human and alsonon-terrestrial, fictional and counterfeited pseudo-events.

Unassailable Facts as True Evidence

Froom raises the apologetic stakes even higher when he expects sound, unassailablefact and not pleasing fables and transitory feelings, or pious hopes and plausibleassumptions as evidence that the SDA theological thought and interpretation is based on soundscience, is rigorous, and is biblical. Examination from time to time would weed out those

assumptions, presupposition, exegetical methods, and creeds and doctrines that cannot stand thescientific and biblical correctness tests. To be complacent about such essential matters and hopethat our logical fallacies, inference errors, and lack of empirical evidence will escape unnoticedand undetected is to act as fools and to provide our opponents with opportunities to denounceand deride our clumsiness and ineptitude. We should never allow such situations to develop andcompromise our theological standards and our reputation among those who disagree with theposition we have taken and maintained on doctrinal issues. States Froom:


25/80


We may well observe

1. That intelligent faith is based on sound, unassailable fact. It is not built on pleasing fables and transitoryfeelings. It is not founded on pious hopes and plausible assumptions. It is not reared upon unreliabletraditions and imaginative folklore. Instead, it is built upon solid, trustworthy, factual evidence.

2. That it is impossible for God to lie, and inconceivable that He should deceive . He never contradicts thelaws of truth and evidence that He has established upon which we are to base our faith and verify ourfindings, and by which we are to evaluate and check all evidence. The truth of God ever accords with thehighest demands of reverent reason, historical fact, and scientific procedure.

3. That truth has nothing to fear either from reverent investigation or from the attacks of hostile perversion. If it be truth, it is bound ultimately to triumph over its detractors. Indeed, the more it is buffeted, thebrighter it shines and the more majestic it stands forth in its towering majesty.

Such observations are pertinent because, along with our increasing growth and the inevitable prominencethat comes as a result, especially as we enter the crisis time of earths last hour, we shall become the center

of the worlds critical and ofttimes hostile scrutiny. Every position we hold will then become the objec t ofbitter attack. It therefore behooves us to know, as never before, the certainty and surety of the foundationsupon which our faith is built. It is imperative for us to be assured and established beyond reasonable

question upon every major fact of our prophetic faith. We are specifically admonished by the Spirit ofprophecyand such counsel is buttressed by our own commons sense that these fundamentals are to beverified beyond a reasonable doubt. We are further told that if we are not so prepared and buttressed, thewisdom of the worlds great ones will be too much for us. 2318


26/80


V. The Incomplete and Selective Records

Divine and Human Historicist Decoders

The SDA theologians and scholars have claimed that the Bible is a historicist bookbecause the angel who interpreted to Daniel the visions in the prophetic book used the historicistschools hermeneutical method for his interpretation, and because Jesus and Paul also interpretedDaniels prophecies and even the whole Bible through the historicist hermeneutics. States theSeventy-day Adventist Bible Encyclopedia [further, SDABE]:

The validity of historicism as a method for the interpretation of Daniel and Revelation is provided by thefact that the angel interpreter in Daniel used this method in explaining the meaning of the visions to theprophet. In a dream he is informed that the dream of the king in Dan. 2 represents four kingdoms that willarise in human history before the kingdom of God is established (verses 3645). The four beasts of Dan. 7represent those same kingdoms, after which God will give the kingdom to the saints (verses 18, 19). Thefirst kingdom was identified as Babylon (verses 3638). In Dan. 8 two animals are used as symbols torepresent the Medo-Persian and Greek empires (verses 1921). The fourth kingdom is not identified inDaniel, but Jesus takes it to be Rome (Matt. 24:15). According to Daniel, this kingdom was to be divided,

and a little horn would exercise political and religious control over the people. In the time of the end thehorn is to be destroyed and Gods kingdom established forever.

Jesus used this method when He interpreted Dan. 9:26, 27 as referring to the future destruction ofJerusalem in A.D. 70 (Luke 21:2022). Paul also speaks about a series of successive prophetic events to befulfilled within history before the second coming of Christ (2 Thess. 2:112). Historicism as a method ofinterpretation is found in the Bible itself, and it provides the key for the interpretation of the apocalypticbooks of Daniel and Revelation.1

LaRondelle agrees with the position the SDA theologians and scholars have taken in theSDABE. For instance, he mentions Jesus and Paul as Bible interpreters from the SDA historicistperspective:

Jesus mentions Daniel by name (Matt. 24:15) and affirms his salvation-historical perspective when Heapplies Daniel's prophecy of the violent death of the Messiah and of Jerusalem's consequent destruction(Dan. 9:26, 27) to the imminent fall of Jerusalem in His own generation (Matt. 23:36; 24:15; Luke 21:20-22). Jesus continuously stresses the Christocentric focus of the church age in His farewell speech ofMatthew 24, when He predicts the coming of false christs and the persecution of His elect (see verses 4,9,14, 23, 24, 27, 30, 31).

Paul also refers to Daniel's prophecy of an oppressor and deceiver of the covenant people, when he appliesDaniel 8 and 11 to a fulfillment during the church age in "the temple of God" (see 2 Thess. 2:4-8). By theexpression, "the temple of God," Paul did not mean the material shrine in Jerusalem but rather theinstitutional church (see 1 Cor. 3:16; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:19-21).2

On the basis of these New Testament applications of Daniel's prophecies to the church age, the Seventh-day

Adventist Encyclopedia concludes: "Historicism as a method of interpretation is found in the Bible itself,and it provides the key for the interpretation of the apocalyptic books of Daniel and Revelation."3 2

The SDA Historicist Claims Repeated

Summarized and repeated here, the claims the SDA theologians and scholars have madeabout the two books, Daniel and Revelation, are that the prophecies in the books:


27/80


1. Cover the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of the kingdomof God on earth.

2. Include a descriptive overview and evaluation of some of the most theologically significantevents of this [Christian] era

3. Present such prophetic narrativein unbroken sequence, from Daniels day and the time ofJohn, on down to the Second Advent and the end of age.

4. Reveal information about real, in-history events in the time span between his day and theeschaton, and

5. Depict specific and identifiable historical events, institutions, movements, and periods thattranspire in a chronological sequence throughout the entire church age. These began in the firstcentury, have continued through the centuries, and will eventually lead up to the Lords return.

The SDA historicists, though, have overreached with their defense and support for thehistoricist method and their interpretation claims. This document section will show that the

historical evidence that would substantiate such disproportionate interpretative arguments cannotbe produced from authentic human historical records and therefore the SDA historicist claimsfail because there is no empirical evidence to support them.

Historical Time Coverage Incomplete

The first SDA historicist claim included above is that the prophecies in Daniel andRevelation cover the historical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of thekingdom of God on earth. The Adventist literature, though, appears to indicate that the claimedfulfillments for Daniels propheciesend no later than the assumed Imperial Romes divisionintothe European states and the Papal Romes divisioninto its Eastern and Western branches, while

those in Revelation seem to end with the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

Prbstle establishes thismatter, for instance, with a historical chart that ends the historical period from the time of theprophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth at the Papal Rome,3and no furtherthan that:

Daniel 7 Daniel 8 Interpretation

lion - Babylon

bear ram Medo-Persia

leopard he-goat Greece

fourth beast - Rome (pagan)

little horn Little horn Rome (papal)

heavenly judgment restoration of the holy eschatological Yom Kippur

Transfer of the kingdom to

Son of man and saints

- Second Coming and

beyond

The Additional Note on [Daniel] Chapter 7 in SDABC could also help the interestedreaders to establish the end time for the Papal Rome, and, therefore the end of the historicalperiod claimed to be coveredin Daniel. That date is 1798, much far behind us:

It is evident from this brief sketch that the rise of papal power was a gradual process covering manycenturies. The same is true of its decline. The former process may be thought of as continuing from about


28/80


A.D. 100 to 756; the latter, from about A.D. 1303 to 1870. The papacy was at the height of its power fromthe time of Gregory VII (107385) to that of Boniface VIII (12941303). It is thus clear that no dates canbe given to mark a sharp transition from insignificance to supremacy, or from supremacy back tocomparative weakness. As is true with all historical processes, the rise and fall of the papacy were bothgradual developments.

However, by 538 the papacy was completely formed and functioning in all significant aspects, and by1798, 1260 years later, it had lost practically all the power it had accumulated over a period of centuries.Inspiration allotted 1260 years to the papacy for a demonstration of its principles, its policies, and itsobjectives. Accordingly these two dates should be considered as marking the beginning and the end of theprophetic period of papal power.4

The SDA historicist interpretation that has argued for the prophetic event fulfillmentsclaimed to have occurred after 1798 is at least vague, if not too speculative, and placedsomewhere in a nebulous future which makes it too implausible to be considered:

Was healed. There was a gradual revival in papal life in the years following the revolution in France. Thepapacy suffered a new setback when in 1870 the Papal States were taken from it. A significant eventoccurred in 1929 when the Lateran Treaty restored temporal power to the pope, who was given the rule of

Vatican City, a section of the city of Rome about 108.7 acres in extent. However, the prophet envisioned amuch greater restoration. He saw the wound completely healed, as the Greek implies. Following thehealing he saw all that dwell upon the earth, except a faithful few, worshiping the beast (v. 8; cf. GC579). This is still future. Though the papacy receives homage from certain groups, vast populations show itno deference. But that is to change. The beast of v. 11 causeth the earth and them which dwell therein toworship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed (v. 12).5

From the strict historical perspective, therefore, Daniel does not seem to cover thehistorical period from the time of the prophet to the establishment of the kingdom of God onearth, but stops its prophetic news coverage in 1798 , and ignores all the human and recordedhistorical events after that date.

Efforts to demonstrate more prophetic fulfillment in order to substantiate the claim thatRevelation also predicts events between the prophets time and the Second Coming seem to haveended with failed attempts to show similar historic fulfillment for events related to the fifth andsixth trumpets in Revelation 9. States SDABC:

One of the first Biblical expositors on record to identify the Turks as the power portrayed under the sixthtrumpet was the Swiss reformer, Heinrich Bullinger (d. A.D. 1575), although Martin Luther had already setforth this trumpet as symbolic of Moslems. However, on the dating of thi