...
In the same ballpark (forced embedded link to another thread - looks like a new 'feature' - it might prove to be worthwhile):
Daniel's 1260 vs. 1290 vs. 1335 vs. 2300 Days
- Thread starter Researcher
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Thank you @GaryA for the posts about days and years. I will need to study more to give a good response.
You ask really good questions! Let's look at the verse in the KJV:
Indeed the phrase 'daughter of women' is often attributed to Cleopatra I Syra. However, keeping in line with what I wrote earlier, these events are all about what you referenced earlier in the thread:
Here is a quick breakdown of Daniel 11:17:
He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom:
In 168 BC, relying on a false rumor that King Antiochus IV had died in Egypt, the deposed Jewish High Priest Jason launched a coup in Jerusalem. He led 1,000 men to oust his rival, High Priest Menelaus, forcing Menelaus to retreat to the city's citadel. Antiochus, returning humiliated from his Egyptian campaign, interpreted this internal strife as an outright rebellion against his rule. Enraged, he stormed Jerusalem, massacred thousands, reinstated Menelaus, and subsequently enacted decrees that outlawed traditional Jewish practices, triggering the Maccabean Revolt.
...and upright ones with him:
These would be pro Seleucid/Hellenizing factions. In other words, they were Jews on the side of Epiphanes during the Maccabean Revolt.
...thus shall he do: and he shall give him the daughter of women:
The phrase 'daughter of women' would symbolize the Jewish nation or the people of Israel, a common metaphor in the Bible.
...corrupting her:
Here we have the infamous 'swine event', plundering of the Temple as well as other heresies. Note that Menelaus, the High Priest at that time, gained his position through bribery with Antiochus IV Epiphanes and is rumored to have assisted Antiochus IV Epiphanes in plundering the temple. Thus, Antiochus IV Epiphanes is given the 'daughter of women', Judea, for a short time.
...but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him:
Thankfully, Judea will not stand for all of this corruption. They will not be on the side of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, neither will they be for him.
You ask really good questions! Let's look at the verse in the KJV:
Indeed the phrase 'daughter of women' is often attributed to Cleopatra I Syra. However, keeping in line with what I wrote earlier, these events are all about what you referenced earlier in the thread:
Here is a quick breakdown of Daniel 11:17:
He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom:
In 168 BC, relying on a false rumor that King Antiochus IV had died in Egypt, the deposed Jewish High Priest Jason launched a coup in Jerusalem. He led 1,000 men to oust his rival, High Priest Menelaus, forcing Menelaus to retreat to the city's citadel. Antiochus, returning humiliated from his Egyptian campaign, interpreted this internal strife as an outright rebellion against his rule. Enraged, he stormed Jerusalem, massacred thousands, reinstated Menelaus, and subsequently enacted decrees that outlawed traditional Jewish practices, triggering the Maccabean Revolt.
...and upright ones with him:
These would be pro Seleucid/Hellenizing factions. In other words, they were Jews on the side of Epiphanes during the Maccabean Revolt.
...thus shall he do: and he shall give him the daughter of women:
The phrase 'daughter of women' would symbolize the Jewish nation or the people of Israel, a common metaphor in the Bible.
...corrupting her:
Here we have the infamous 'swine event', plundering of the Temple as well as other heresies. Note that Menelaus, the High Priest at that time, gained his position through bribery with Antiochus IV Epiphanes and is rumored to have assisted Antiochus IV Epiphanes in plundering the temple. Thus, Antiochus IV Epiphanes is given the 'daughter of women', Judea, for a short time.
...but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him:
Thankfully, Judea will not stand for all of this corruption. They will not be on the side of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, neither will they be for him.
@GaryA . I'm stunned at how you and I said such similar things!
You posted that like six years ago. That is wild.
You posted that like six years ago. That is wild.
How is this possible?
That is literally what I beleive! I thought I was the only person on the planet that had those viewpoints.
That is literally what I beleive! I thought I was the only person on the planet that had those viewpoints.
Hi @Rob7 .
Part of the reason why I can't post all of my info is that it ties to the chapters you reference. Basically Daniel 11 has so many incredible parallels to chapters 2, 7 and 8 that it would take many posts to go through them all.
Just for the record, I do not connect the Papacy to Daniel. Rome in general, yes.
I have a bit of time tonight to add some more detail to the timeline of Daniel 11. Something that I have noticed is that most scholars are in agreement up to Daniel 11:14. The timeline is fairly straightforward with the various kings of the north and south duking it out.
However, Daniel 11:15 is where a strange split occurs. There is no longer a consensus. Some Seventh Day Adventists for example, interpret Daniel 11:15 as a transition into the Roman Empire:
I found that and other commentaries to be very odd, which led me to formulate my own interpretations of events. That being said, the interpretations you will see from me from Daniel 11:13 onwards will most likely not be found in anything out there currently. However, it is my opinion that they line up *much* better than what the mainstream has to offer.
Let us now look at Daniel 11:13 from a fresh perspective. I believe this is the end of Antiochus III the Great. He was the King of the North at that time:
That was around 200 BC to 198 BC. Antiochus III the Great died around 187 BC. The very next verse then segues into Antiochus IV Epiphanes:
Note the phrase 'and in those times'. The timeline now jumps ahead to somewhere between 170 BC and 160 BC. Many have tried to stand up against the King of the South. The idea here is that much time has passed since the previous verse, which means Antiochus III the Great is now long dead.
Look at the terminology being used. The phrase "robbers of thy people" is very strong. This is Maccabean Revolt language being used. A quick search shows that this is a valid interpretation:
Here is a snippet from an SDA PowerPoint I found:
It appears that the Seventh Day Adventists are on the right track. There is a transition to Rome in these verses. However, my interpretation is a bit different. Also, I don't go hating on the Papacy.
Anyhow, I believe Daniel 11:14 is describing that there will be an attempt to 'establish the vision', i.e., force Daniel's prophecies to come to fruition. Again, This is Maccabean Revolt language being used.
It's as if the verse is warning against trying to force the Abomination of Desolation too early in the timeline.
This scene from the movie Cleopatra is Daniel 11:30:
It describes the famous Battle of Actium:
Octavian (Augustus): King of the North
Mark Antony and Queen Cleopatra VII: King of the South
The 'ships of Chittim' is Rome 'coming against' Mark Antony:
Mark Antony formed an alliance with King Herod the Great:
And now you can see how the next verse in Daniel ties in with Herod's dynasty and the Roman Empire and eventual the setting up of the abomination that maketh desolate, i.e., the Crucifixion.
It describes the famous Battle of Actium:
Octavian (Augustus): King of the North
Mark Antony and Queen Cleopatra VII: King of the South
The 'ships of Chittim' is Rome 'coming against' Mark Antony:
Mark Antony formed an alliance with King Herod the Great:
And now you can see how the next verse in Daniel ties in with Herod's dynasty and the Roman Empire and eventual the setting up of the abomination that maketh desolate, i.e., the Crucifixion.
Daniel 11:18 breakdown and commentary:
After this…:
This is a continuation of verse 15, right after Antiochus Epiphanes IV (King of the North) led his first campaign into Egypt against Ptolemy VI (King of the South). It was around this time that Antiochus Epiphanes IV caused major upheaval in Judea.
…shall he turn his face unto the isles and shall take many…:
Antiochus IV Epiphanes begins his second campaign against Egypt, taking the island of Cyprus and various parts of the coastlands.
…but a prince for his own behalf shall cause the reproach offered by him to cease…:
This was viewed as a 'reproach' or insolence by the Roman Republic. As a result, the Roman ambassador Gaius Popillius Laenas famously forced Antiochus to withdraw his forces by drawing a circle in the sand around the king, demanding a withdrawal before he stepped out.
…without his own reproach he shall cause it to turn upon him.:
Antiochus IV Epiphanes reluctantly withdrew and was bitter. He then turned this bitterness against Judea, ultimately resulting in the Maccabean Revolt. The reproach of Antiochus IV Epiphanes was consequently turned back onto himself.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, the next verse is a prophecy of Antiochus IV Epiphanes falling off of his chariot and eventually passing away:
The narrative then shifts to the 'Legs of Iron' in the overall vision, i.e., the Roman Empire, beginning with Pompey, a 'raiser of taxes':
The Abomination of Desolation is still several verses ahead in the timeline and has nothing to do with Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
After this…:
This is a continuation of verse 15, right after Antiochus Epiphanes IV (King of the North) led his first campaign into Egypt against Ptolemy VI (King of the South). It was around this time that Antiochus Epiphanes IV caused major upheaval in Judea.
…shall he turn his face unto the isles and shall take many…:
Antiochus IV Epiphanes begins his second campaign against Egypt, taking the island of Cyprus and various parts of the coastlands.
…but a prince for his own behalf shall cause the reproach offered by him to cease…:
This was viewed as a 'reproach' or insolence by the Roman Republic. As a result, the Roman ambassador Gaius Popillius Laenas famously forced Antiochus to withdraw his forces by drawing a circle in the sand around the king, demanding a withdrawal before he stepped out.
…without his own reproach he shall cause it to turn upon him.:
Antiochus IV Epiphanes reluctantly withdrew and was bitter. He then turned this bitterness against Judea, ultimately resulting in the Maccabean Revolt. The reproach of Antiochus IV Epiphanes was consequently turned back onto himself.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, the next verse is a prophecy of Antiochus IV Epiphanes falling off of his chariot and eventually passing away:
The narrative then shifts to the 'Legs of Iron' in the overall vision, i.e., the Roman Empire, beginning with Pompey, a 'raiser of taxes':
The Abomination of Desolation is still several verses ahead in the timeline and has nothing to do with Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
There are "very precious few" - that is for sure...
The Historicist vs. Futurist Interpretation of Prophecy
1. The Historic Protestant View
The historic Protestant interpretation of prophecy teaches that Bible prophecy unfolds continuously through history from the prophet's day to the end of time. This was the standard view held by the Protestant Reformers.In this view:
- Daniel 2 shows a sequence of world empires: Babylon → Medo-Persia → Greece → Rome → Divided Rome → God's Kingdom.
- Daniel 7 shows the same sequence, with a "little horn" arising among the divided kingdoms of Rome.
- Revelation 13 shows the same persecuting power under the symbol of the beast.
- 2 Thessalonians 2 identifies the same power as the "man of sin" or "man of lawlessness."
- The 1260 prophetic days are understood by the year-day principle as 1260 literal years.
- The Papacy's prophetic supremacy is dated from AD 538 to AD 1798.
This "falling away" was understood as a gradual apostasy within professed Christianity, culminating in the establishment of the Papal system, which blended pagan and Christian elements:
2. The 1260 Years: 538 AD to 1798 AD
The 1260 prophetic days are interpreted as 1260 literal years, based on the year-day principle found in Scripture:The relevant prophetic passages are:
[th]Passage[/th][th]Expression[/th] [td]Daniel 7:25[/td][td]"a time and times and the dividing of time"[/td] [td]Daniel 12:7[/td][td]"a time, times, and an half"[/td] [td]Revelation 11:2[/td][td]"forty and two months"[/td] [td]Revelation 11:3[/td][td]"a thousand two hundred and threescore days"[/td] [td]Revelation 12:6[/td][td]"a thousand two hundred and threescore days"[/td] [td]Revelation 12:14[/td][td]"a time, and times, and half a time"[/td] [td]Revelation 13:5[/td][td]"forty and two months"[/td]
All of these represent the same period: 1260 prophetic days = 1260 literal years.
Historic dating:
- Start (AD 538): The Papacy gained decisive civil-religious authority after the removal of the Ostrogothic opposition from Rome.
- End (AD 1798): General Berthier, under Napoleon, entered Rome and took the pope prisoner, delivering what historicists call the "deadly wound" of Revelation 13:3.
3. Francisco Ribera and the Futurist Counter-Interpretation
Francisco Ribera (1537–1591) was a Spanish Jesuit theologian. In 1585, he published a commentary on Revelation that placed most of the Antichrist prophecies into a short period at the very end of the world. This became known as futurism.The purpose of futurism was to redirect the prophetic spotlight away from the Papacy. Instead of Antichrist being a long historical power already active in Christian history, Ribera's system made Antichrist a single future individual who would appear near the end of time.
The contrast:
[th]Historicism[/th][th]Futurism[/th] [td]Antichrist is a system that developed within professed Christianity[/td][td]Antichrist is one future individual appearing after the church age[/td] [td]Identifies the Papacy as the little horn / man of sin / beast[/td][td]Diverts attention from Rome and places the Antichrist in the future[/td] [td]Prophecy unfolds continuously through history[/td][td]Most prophecy is deferred to a brief end-time period[/td]
This directly opposed the Protestant Reformation view. Reformers such as Luther, Calvin, Knox, Cranmer, and Tyndale all identified the Papacy as the Antichrist power of prophecy. The Jesuit counter-interpretations were specifically designed to neutralize this Protestant charge.
A second Jesuit, Luis de Alcazar (1554–1613), developed an opposite counter-interpretation called Preterism, which placed all fulfillment of Revelation in the early centuries. Both Futurism and Preterism served the same purpose: removing the Papacy from prophetic focus.
4. Jesus' Own Historic Approach to Prophecy
When Jesus spoke of the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the world in Matthew 24, He directed His followers to Daniel as the interpretive key:Jesus did not teach a disconnected prophetic system where the bulk of prophecy is detached from history. He treated prophecy as a continuous unfolding narrative grounded in real historical events.
The prophetic sequence through history:
- Babylon → 2. Medo-Persia → 3. Greece → 4. Pagan Rome → 5. Papal Rome (during the 1260 years) → 6. Time of the End (after 1798) → 7. Final conflict centered on worship, God's commandments, and the Sabbath.
††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ~~ Blessed Sabbath Folks ~~ ††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††
Ooops ! Here are the tables presented correctly;
In point #2; relevant prophetic passages are:
In Point #3
5. John Nelson Darby and Dispensational Futurism
John Nelson Darby (1800–1882), a Plymouth Brethren teacher, developed a system now called dispensationalism. Darby's system included:- A sharp separation between Israel and the church.
- A secret rapture before a future tribulation.
- A future seven-year tribulation.
- A future personal Antichrist.
- The rebuilding of a Jewish temple.
- The postponement of Daniel's 70th week into the future.
6. The Critical Issue: Daniel 9 and the 70 Weeks
The Prophecy
Daniel 9:24 states:The word "determined" literally means "cut off" — the 70 weeks are cut off as one continuous prophetic period of 490 years.
The Historicist Calculation
The 70 weeks begin with the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. That decree was issued by Artaxerxes Longimanus in 457 BC (Ezra 7).- 69 weeks (483 years) from 457 BC reach to AD 27, the baptism and anointing of Christ.
- The middle of the 70th week (AD 31): The crucifixion of Christ.
The "he" is understood as Christ, not Antichrist. Christ confirmed the covenant. After three and a half years of ministry, He died on the cross, causing the sacrificial system to lose its significance — the veil of the temple was torn in two (Matthew 27:51).
- End of the 70th week (AD 34): The stoning of Stephen marked the final rejection of the gospel by the Jewish nation, and the message went decisively to the Gentiles (Acts 7–8).
Summary Timeline
7. Why the Futurist Gap Theory Was Rejected
Historicists rejected the futurist gap theory for several reasons:1. The text says the 70 weeks are "determined" (cut off) as one unit. There is no biblical statement that the 70th week is separated from the first 69 weeks by thousands of years. The prophecy says "Seventy weeks are determined" — not "Sixty-nine weeks are determined, then a gap of unknown length, then one final week."
2. The "he" in Daniel 9:27 is Christ, not Antichrist. Futurism shifts Daniel 9:27 away from Christ and applies it to a future Antichrist. This distorts one of the strongest Messianic prophecies in Scripture, making the final week about a future deceiver rather than the Messiah.
3. The sacrifice ceasing in the "midst of the week" refers to Christ's death. When Jesus died, the veil of the temple was rent (Matthew 27:51), signifying that the earthly sacrificial system had ended. Futurism assigns this to a future Antichrist stopping sacrifices in a rebuilt temple.
4. It breaks the Christ-centered focus of Daniel 9. Daniel 9 is explicitly about the Messiah — "to make an end of sins," "to make reconciliation for iniquity," "to bring in everlasting righteousness" (verse 24). Reassigning the 70th week to a future Antichrist figure undermines the Messianic focus of the entire passage.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
8. The Papacy as the Antichrist Power
The historic Protestant position identified the Papacy — not pagan Rome, Islam, atheism, or a future individual — as the primary fulfillment of the Antichrist prophecies. This was based on the identifying marks in Daniel 7:
9. The Broader Problem: Diversion from the Real Antichrist System
From the historicist perspective, both Ribera's futurism and Darby's dispensationalism produce the same effect: they move the Antichrist away from the historic Papal system and place him in the future.This trains Christians to look for:
- A future world dictator
- A rebuilt Jewish temple
- A seven-year tribulation
- A secret rapture
- A future covenant with national Israel
10. Summary
The historic Protestant interpretation of prophecy, shared by the Reformers and grounded in Scripture, teaches:- Prophecy unfolds continuously through history. Daniel 2 and 7 trace a succession of world empires from Babylon to the end.
- The 1260 years (AD 538–1798) represent the period of Papal supremacy, drawn from Daniel 7:25, Revelation 11:2-3, 12:6,14, and 13:5, using the year-day principle.
- Francisco Ribera, a Jesuit, developed futurism (c. 1585) as a counter-Reformation interpretation to remove the Papacy from Protestant identification as Antichrist.
- John Nelson Darby later popularized a Protestant version of futurism (dispensationalism), which separated Israel from the church, introduced a secret rapture, and pushed Daniel's 70th week into the future.
- Daniel's 70 weeks (Daniel 9) are one continuous prophetic period of 490 years (457 BC – AD 34), fulfilled in Christ's baptism, death, and the apostolic era. The 70th week belongs to Christ's ministry — not to a future Antichrist.
- Futurism obscures the prophetic identity of the Papacy as the "little horn," the "man of sin," and the beast power, causing believers to look for a future Antichrist while overlooking the system that has already fulfilled every prophetic criterion.
††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ~~ Blessed Sabbath Folks ~~ ††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††
Thanks @Rob7 for sharing your research. Do you interpret the Two Witnesses 1260 days as being symbolic of years?
The Two Witnesses of Revelation 11: Are the Old and New Testaments
I. The Main Passage: Revelation 11:3–12 (AKJV)
II. The Biblical Source: Zechariah 4:2–3, 11–14 (AKJV)
John explicitly connects the witnesses to Zechariah's vision: "These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth" (Revelation 11:4).Both passages use identical imagery — two olive trees and lampstands standing before God, supplied with golden oil (the Holy Spirit), functioning as divine witnesses.
III. Why the Two Witnesses Represent the Old and New Testaments
A. The Requirement of Two Witnesses
Scripture establishes that valid testimony requires two witnesses:God's own legal standard requires two witnesses to establish truth. The Old and New Testaments together constitute God's complete two-fold witness to humanity.
B. The Law and the Prophets — Christ's Own Division
C. The Miraculous Powers Echo Moses and Elijah
Turning water to blood (Moses — the Law):Shutting heaven (Elijah — the Prophets):
Moses represents the Law; Elijah represents the Prophets. Together they embody the entire Old Testament testimony, which the New Testament fulfills and confirms.
D. The Complete Testimony of God
IV. The 1260 Days — Duration, Not Identity
The witnesses prophesy for "a thousand two hundred and threescore days" — the same period the church is nourished in the wilderness:The 1260 days describe the duration of the witnesses' ministry — the period during which God's Word testifies in sackcloth (obscurity and persecution). This timeframe is not the identity of the witnesses but the context of their testimony. During this same period, the true church was sustained by the Scriptures.
V. The Death and Resurrection of the Witnesses
The Beast's Attack
When earthly powers suppress Scripture, forbid its translation, burn Bibles, and persecute those who preach it, the witnesses are effectively "killed." The Word of God is silenced in the public square.
The World's Rejoicing
The world rejoices when God's Word is suppressed because Scripture "torments" the conscience — it condemns sin and demands obedience.
The Resurrection
The Word of God cannot remain dead. After a period of suppression, the Scriptures revive with power. When the Bible was rediscovered, translated, and preached boldly, it "stood upon its feet" again — ascending in glory and authority before its enemies.
VI. God's People Witness Through the Word
VII. Conclusion: The Enduring Word
The two witnesses are the Old and New Testaments — the complete written testimony of God to mankind. This interpretation is grounded in:- The legal requirement of two witnesses — God's standard requires two to establish truth (Deuteronomy 19:15; 2 Corinthians 13:1).
- The two-fold division of Scripture — Jesus identified "the law and the prophets" (Matthew 5:17; Luke 24:44).
- Olive trees and lampstands — Zechariah's vision shows these as sources of light and spiritual power flowing from God through His Word (Zechariah 4:14).
- Moses and Elijah mirrored — The witnesses' miracles echo the Law-giver and the chief Prophet, representing the entire Old Testament, fulfilled by the New.
- Death and resurrection — The Word has been suppressed and attacked throughout history, yet it always revives and prevails.
The two witnesses — the Old and New Testaments — prophesy throughout the 1260 years in sackcloth, are attacked by the beast, appear dead for a season, then rise again in power. God's Word endures forever and triumphs over every attempt to silence it.
††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† ~~ Blessing Folks ~~ ††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††
That's a reasonable interpretation.
Does this mean you believe in the 'late date Exodus' of around 1260 BC?
This day-year principle is bogus. In Daniel's prophecies, a day is literally a day, not a year. 2300 days in Dan. 8 is the time of Greek occupation and desacration, namely by king Antiochus IV, until the restoration of the temple. 1260 days are the timespan of the great ftribulation; 1290 days are the same timespan plus a leap month; 1335 days are the same timespan plus extra 75 days, and those 75 days are the precise gap from the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) to the Feast of Dedication (Hanukkah), and the would be the restoration of the holy temple desacrated by the Antichrist.