Seventh-day Adventists use the historical-grammatical approach for the interpretation of Scripture. This approach, which accepts Scripture as the authoritative Word of God, takes the self-testimony and the claims of the Bible seriously and exegetes the text carefully.
The books of Daniel and Revelation have occasioned a greater variety of interpretations than any other books in the Bible. It is the purpose of this chapter to provide an outline of the major systems of interpretation used for understanding these books and to summarize the Adventist understanding of the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation.
The Historicist School – This is the oldest school of interpretation and until the nineteenth century it was the dominant one. It can be traced back to some of the church fathers such as Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Jerome.
The historical-grammatical approach, also called the historical-biblical method, acknowledges the self-testimony of the Bible that God revealed His truths to the biblical authors and inspired them to share His messages in the Scriptures (2 Tim 3:16; 1 Pet 1:10-12; 2 Pet 1:19-21). It takes the historical background and the literary features of the text seriously and exegetes it accordingly.
Historicists believe in the divine inspiration of the books of Daniel and Revelation. They believe that the book of Daniel was written by the prophet Daniel in the sixth century BC and that its main prophecies cover the period from the Babylonian Empire to the second coming of Christ. They believe that the apostle John wrote the book of Revelation and that its prophecies cover the period from John’s day to the end of the millennium. They generally see the antichrist—portrayed under the symbols of Daniel’s little horn, and John’s first beast in Revelation 13, as the papacy. Seventh-day Adventists use the historicist method in interpreting Daniel and Revelation.
The Historic-Preterist School – The historical roots of preterism go back to the time of the Counter-Reformation. When the Protestant Reformers identified the papacy with the prophesied antichrist in the books of Daniel and Revelation, the Spanish Jesuit Luis de Alcazar (1554-1613) claimed that these prophecies were already fulfilled in the time of the Roman Empire. Thus, the papacy could not be the antichrist.
Interpreters of the historic-preterist school consider the book of Daniel as a revelation from God but generally limit the fulfillment of its prophecies to the time period that runs from the time of Daniel in the sixth century BC to the first coming of Christ. They apply the book of Revelation to the beginning of the Christian era. They view the antichrist, therefore, as a persecuting Roman emperor in the past.
The Historical-Critical or Modern-Preterist School – The roots of this school of interpretation go back to Porphyry, a philosopher in the third century AD, who taught that the book of Daniel was written by an unknown Jew in the second century BC Daniel’s prophecies, therefore, are vaticinia ex eventu (Latin for “prophecies written after the event”). This view was revived in the age of the Enlightenment and Rationalism in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Modern preterists see the book of Daniel as a reflection of the political and religious situation of the Jewish people under the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who persecuted the Jews. Not accepting the existence of true prophecies, modern preterists believe that the prophecies of the book of Revelation refer to historical events in the time of the Roman Empire, especially in the first century.
The Futurist-Dispensational School – One of the defenders of the papacy against the Reformers’ identification of the pope with the antichrist was the Spanish Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1537-1591), who applied most of the prophecies in the books of Daniel and Revelation to the future.
Futurist-dispensationalist interpreters, like historicists and historic preterists, accept Daniel’s authorship of the book in the sixth century BC, but unlike historicists, they generally do not apply the figure of the antichrist to the papacy or another power in the past. Rather, they expect that a personal antichrist will appear in the time of the end and continue in power for three and a half years and fulfill what is said of the little horn in Daniel and of the beast-antichrist in the book of Revelation.
The Idealist School – This is a fairly modern system of interpretation. It does not attempt to find specific historical fulfillments of the prophecies in the books Daniel and Revelation, but simply takes these prophecies as depicting the spiritual conflict between Christ and Satan in all ages. Fulfillment of the prophecies is, therefore, seen either “as entirely spiritual or as recurrent, finding representative expressions in historical events throughout the age, rather than in one-time, specific fulfillments.”1 Thus the antichrist in the time of John was the Roman Empire as a representative of all antichristian governments throughout history.
The Eclectic School – The eclectic approach, a modified version of the idealist approach, usually combines some elements from all the above-mentioned schools of interpretation. Some elements in the books Daniel and Revelation are clearly future (the resurrection and the Second Coming, at least); others are seen as having been fulfilled in the past (e.g., most of the prophecies of Daniel and the messages to the seven churches in Rev 1-3); and some prophecies symbolically portray events throughout history, though most eclectic commentators will not identify specific historical events. The basic problem with this approach is to determine which elements belong to which category.
When we compare the various schools of interpretation, taking note of the fact that the specific angelic interpretations in the book of Daniel are along historicist lines (Dan 8:20, 21), we come to the conclusion that historicism is the only method that satisfies all the data.
The year-day principle, in which one day in prophecy is counted as one year in history, constitutes the backbone of the historicist interpretation of apocalyptic prophecy. During the nineteenth century, modern preterism and futurism replaced historicism, and with this change the year-day principle fell into disrepute. Today, Seventh-day Adventists are the only major Christian church still using historicism and the year-day principle.
The biblical evidence – The main points in support of the year-day principle from Scripture can be summarized as follows:
1. Since the visions in Daniel and Revelation are largely symbolic, with a number of different beasts representing important historical empires (Dan 7:3-7; 8:3-5, 20, 21; Rev 13:1, 11), the time periods (Dan 7:25; 8:14; Rev 12:6, 14; 13:5) should also be seen as symbolic.
2. The fact that the visions in the book of Daniel deal with the rise and fall of known empires in history that existed for hundreds of years indicates that the prophetic time periods must also cover long time periods.
3. In Daniel 7 the four beasts that together account for a reign of at least one thousand years are followed by the little horn power. It is the focus of the vision since it is most directly in opposition to God. Three and a half literal years for the struggle between the little horn and the Most High are out of proportion to the comprehensive scope of salvation history portrayed in this vision. The same applies to Revelation 12:6 and 14, in which the one thousand and two hundred and sixty days or three and a half times cover most of the history between the First and Second Advents.
“As early as the third century B.C.E., the 70 weeks of Daniel 9 were understood to be ‘70 weeks of years,’ i.e., 70 x 7 = 490 years. The LXX [the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures in the 3rd century BC], in translating the Hebrew for ‘weeks’ in Dan 7:25-27, inserted the additional phrase ‘of years,’ providing the first published example of what would later be called the ‘year-day principle.’… Not until enough centuries had passed to make such long ages of prophecy comprehensible, were the longer prophecies of 1290 days, 1335 days, and 2300 days understood as years. Thus Rabbi Nahawendi in the early ninth century C.E. was the first to recognize the year-day principle as operative in the 1290 and 2300 days” (Jerry Moon, “The Year-Day Principle and the 2300 Days,” http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm, accessed Nov. 2, 2009).
4. The peculiar, distinctive way in which the time periods are expressed indicates that they should not be taken literally. According to the context, the expressions “time, times, and half a time” (Dan 7:25; 12:7; Rev 12:14), “forty-two months” (Rev 11:2; 13:5), and “one thousand two hundred and sixty days” (Rev 11:3; 12:6) all apply to the same time period, but the natural expression “three years and six months” is not used once.
The Holy Spirit seems, in a manner, to exhaust all the phrases by which the interval could be expressed, excluding always that one form which would be used of course in ordinary writing, and is used invariably in Scripture on other occasions, to denote the literal period. This variation is most significant if we accept the year-day principle, but quite inexplicable on the other view.2
5. The prophecies in Daniel 7-8, and 10-12 lead up to the “time of the end” (8:17; 11:35, 40; 12:4, 9), which is followed by the resurrection (12:2) and the setting up of God’s everlasting kingdom (7:27). Considering the more than twenty-five hundred years since the sixth century BC, literal time periods of only 3 ½ to 6 ½ years are not capable of reaching anywhere near the time of the end. These prophetic time periods, therefore, should be seen as symbolic, standing for long periods of actual time.
6. In Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6 God deliberately used the day for a year principle as a teaching device. And the 70-week time prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27 met its fulfillment at the exact time if we use the year-day principle to interpret it. Many interpreters, who in other apocalyptic texts do not use the year-day principle, recognize that the 70 weeks are in fact “weeks of years” reaching from the Persian period to the time of Christ. Thus, the pragmatic test in Daniel 9 confirms the validity of the year-day principle.
7. The reason why the year-day principle is applied to some prophecies in the apocalyptic writings (such as the 70 weeks of Dan 9:24-27) and not to others (such as the 70 years of Dan 9:2) is well explained by the concept of “miniature symbolization.”3 According to this concept, the year-day principle is applicable only to those symbolic prophecies in which its main entity (person, animal, or horn) is a representation of a larger reality (nation, kingdom, or power). Thus, in apocalyptic settings, both the main entity and the time involved have to be interpreted on a larger scale. The time element has to be viewed from a year-day perspective.
Today, the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the largest church that still uses the historicist principle of interpretation as did all the Reformers. Accordingly, Seventh-day Adventists understand the four empires of Daniel 2 and 7 to represent the kingdoms of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. They identify the stone in Daniel 2 as the Second Coming and the little horn in Daniel 7 as a symbol for the papacy. On the basis of the year-day principle,4 they see the 1260 days in 7:25 as representing the 1260-year time period from 538 to 17985 and the changing of “times and laws” as referring to the change of the fourth commandment from Sabbath to Sunday.
In Daniel 8, the ram and the goat are symbols for Me-do-Persia and Greece (vv. 20, 21) and the little horn is again identified with the papacy. Daniel 8:1-14 describes the last and most important symbolic vision in the book. In what follows, from 8:15 until the end of the book, the angelic interpreter explains in detail and in non-symbolic language different aspects of the vision; e.g., in Daniel 9 the angel explains that the 2300 days in Daniel 8:14 begin at the same time as the 70 weeks in 9:24, namely at 457 BC6 The focus of the prophecy in 9:24-27 is Jesus Christ who fulfilled it during His life here on earth. Seventh-day Adventists understand the cleansing of the sanctuary in 8:14, which began in 1844 at the end of the 2300 years, as a reference to the pre-Advent judgment going on in heaven now. The last vision of the book in chapters 10-12, like the sanctuary vision in chapter 8, begins in the days of the Medo-Persian kingdom and reaches to the time of the end (12:4).
All the prophecies of Daniel cover essentially the same ground from the time of the ancient kingdoms of Babylon and Medo-Persia to the Second Advent.
Summary – All the prophecies of Daniel cover essentially the same ground from the time of the ancient kingdoms of Babylon and Medo-Persia to the Second Advent:
| a. Daniel 2 | Babylon to Second Advent (stone kingdom) |
| b. Daniel 7 | Babylon to Second Advent (kingdom given to the saints) |
| c. Daniel 8 & 9 | Medo-Persia to Second Advent (little horn is broken) |
| d. Daniel 10-12 | Medo-Persia to Second Advent (resurrection) |
Each vision has its special focus, and later visions enlarge upon and provide further explanations for earlier visions. The book of Daniel clearly shows that the principle of recapitulation, according to which each vision covers approximately the same historical era but focuses on different aspects of the events depicted, is a valid principle of prophetic interpretation.
Gerhard Pfandl
Although the Book of Revelation contains apocalyptic prophecy, it begins and ends like a letter (Revelation 1-3 and 22:6-20). One is almost reminded of a Pauline epistle. Yet there are also differences from other letters: (1) the messages in Revelation 2 and 3 are coming directly from Jesus, not from a human author; (2) the entire Apocalypse, not just the seven messages, is addressed to the seven churches.
The letter frame of the book resembles somewhat more classical prophecy than apocalyptic prophecy. Classical prophecy is found in the major and minor prophets of the Old Testament. It contains straightforward predictions that are normally conditional and at times may have more than one fulfillment. By contrast, apocalyptic prophecy uses extensive symbolism; frequently it contains visions and dreams and has a cosmic sweep as well as a strong eschatological emphasis. Apocalyptic prophecy also contains striking contrasts such as the seal of God and the mark of the beast, the marriage supper of God and the birds’ supper of humans, and the woman and the harlot. Most importantly, apocalyptic prophecy is not conditional in nature and has only one fulfillment.
Apocalyptic prophecy is not conditional in nature and does not contain more than one fulfillment.
That the letter frame of Revelation may be closer to classical prophecy is evident from the vocabulary. Revelation 1-3 and 22:6-20 have fewer symbols and must frequently be interpreted literally. Here are two examples: whereas Jesus appears throughout the apocalyptic part of the book as the “lamb” (28 times), the name most often used for Jesus in Revelation, this word is not found in the letter frame. On the other hand, the term ekklesia (church) is found only in the letter frame of the Apocalypse and not at all in the apocalyptic part of the book. There the church appears as the woman clothed with the sun, as the bride, and as the 144,000.
Despite the differences between the letter frame and the apocalyptic part of Revelation, the two are integrally related. The messages to the seven churches point forward to and anticipate the rest of the book.
In the interpretation of the book, the interpreter must take note of:
1. The Old and New Testament background of the book – The book of Revelation is the climax of both the Old and the New Testament. Thus, one needs to have a good knowledge of the Bible in order to understand Revelation. Although Revelation does not contain a single quoted verse from the Old or New Testament, the book is filled with allusions especially to the Old Testament but also to the New Testament. For instance, the background of Revelation 4 is Ezekiel 1 and 10, and the background of Revelation 6 is Zechariah 1 and Matthew 24.
Although Revelation does not contain a single quoted verse from the Old or New Testaments, the book is filled with allusions, especially to the Old Testament.
2. The symbolism of the book – Generally speaking, we should interpret the Bible literally. Jesus’ approach to Scripture, as well as that of the apostles’, points to a literal interpretation. However, in Revelation the symbolic understanding is predominant. This may be indicated in Revelation 1:1 by the word semaino (“signify” [KJV]; “make known” [NIV]), which points to Jesus as “symbolizing” the book of Revelation to John. We should carefully study the indicators in the text in order to notice when a shift from the symbolic to the literal understanding takes place. For instance, the comparison of the sun with sackcloth and the falling of the stars with the falling of the figs from the fig tree in the sixth seal (Rev 6:12, 13) indicates that the author switches from a symbolic to a literal depiction of events.
3. The historical nature of the prophecies – The book of Revelation seems also to demand the historicist approach mentioned above in connection with the interpretation of the book of Daniel. In Revelation 12 a woman, the church, gives birth to the Messiah, the Messiah is taken to heaven, Satan persecutes the woman, and finally Satan makes war against the remnant of her offspring. Revelation 13 further describes this final war. The vision ends with a depiction of Christ’s second coming (Rev 14:14-20). Thus the center of the book clearly points out that the book refers to events at the beginning of the first century AD, runs through historical times, and ends with the final consummation. The time periods in the Apocalypse further underline this view. The 1260 days, 42 months, or three and a half times refer back to Daniel 7 and 12 and must be interpreted according to the year-day-principle as covering more than a millennium, an extensive period of time, which has already passed by.
4. The principle of recapitulation – In the book of Daniel we have four visions that cover basically the same historical period but each from a different perspective and with different emphases. The book of Revelation resembles the book of Daniel in using this principle of recapitulation or repetition. For example, the seven seals, the seven trumpets, and the vision of the satanic trinity in Revelation 12-14 all describe events beginning in the first century AD and reaching to the final consummation.
After the general introduction to the book (Rev 1:1-8) John describes a vision of Jesus that forms the introduction (1:9-20) to the seven letters (ch. 2-3). There is a clear-cut end to this first set of “sevens” in Revelation 3:22. A new section begins with Revelation 4:1, although 3:21 already prepares the way for it. In Revelation 4:1 John is told, “Come up here [to heaven], and I will show you what must take place after these things.”
The vision of the six seals (Rev 4-8:1) focuses on the time period from the first century AD to the final consummation. It begins with the slaughtered Lamb, the crucified Christ, who appears before God the Father, and with events on earth in the first century AD The sixth seal takes us to the cosmic signs of the time of the end, the Second Coming and the redeemed in heaven (6:12-7:17), and the seventh seal to the time beyond (8:1). The seven trumpets (8:2-11:18) contain the time period of 1260 days (11:2, 3) equaling 1260 years, according to the year-day principle. This time period covers most of church history and takes us to the time of the end. Revelation 12-14 again covers the time period from the time of Jesus (12:5) to the Second Advent and the harvest of the earth (14:14-20). Thus, these visions are a clear case of the principle of recapitulation.
While the first part of Revelation (1-14) is primarily historical, dealing with events from the time of John to the end of the world’s history, the second part of Revelation deals only with final events (15-22). This part begins with the seven last plagues, which are still future from our present perspective (Rev 15-16). Chapters 17-19 are a more detailed description of the sixth and seventh plagues shown to John by one of the angels carrying bowls. They portray the fall of Babylon, first as harlot (ch. 17) and then as the great city (ch. 18), before they depict the marriage supper of the Lamb and the supper of the birds (ch. 19) in connection with Armageddon. Revelation 20 follows the Second Coming, describing the Millennium and the executive judgment before finally revealing a new heaven and a new earth with a New Jerusalem and God’s immediate presence.
The book’s focus – The many symbolic and sometimes disturbing images must not distract from the main focus of the book. Revelation is a book about God the Father and Jesus Christ. It is the Revelation of Jesus Christ (Rev 1:1). Therefore, we should interpret it in a Christ-centered way. The book is also a book about the bride of the Lamb, the church and the remnant. The message to the church must be heard.
“It was Victorinus of Pettau (d. ca. 304) who introduced the principle of recapitulation in Revelation that has been followed with some modification by subsequent interpreters… . The application of the recapitulative principle can be very helpful to the interpreter of Revelation. Information and insight obtained from clear passages may unlock the theological meaning of parallel difficult ones. For instance, Revelation 7 may be the clue for understanding chapters 10-11, particularly with regard to the two witnesses. Also, one can notice that the seven trumpets and the seven-bowl-plagues series are deliberately parallel in terms of their language and content” (R. Stefanovic, Revelation of Jesus Christ [Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2002], 28).
The book makes an immense eschatological contribution, furnishing detailed information about end-time events. It portrays the great controversy theme in a way that no other biblical book does.
Ekkehardt Mueller
1 Steve Gregg, Revelation: Four Views (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1997), 3.
2 Thomas R. Birks, First Elements of Sacred Prophecy (London: William E. Painter, 1843), 352.
3 See Alberto R. Timm, “The Miniature Symbolization and the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation,” Andrews University Seminary Studies 42.1 (Spring 2004): 149-167.
4 Among the smaller churches that still use the year-day principle are the Church of God (Seventh-day) with ca. 125,000 members and the Advent Christian Church with ca. 25,000 members.
5 In A.D. 538, the Ostrogoths abandoned the siege of Rome, and the bishop of Rome, released from Arian control, was free to exercise the prerogatives of Justinian’s decree of 533. Exactly 1260 years later (1798), at the command of Napoleon, Berthier, with a French army, entered Rome, proclaimed the political rule of the papacy at an end and took the pope prisoner, carrying him off to France, where he died in exile.
6 The text says that the 70 weeks are cut off from a longer time period. In view of the connections between Daniel 8 and 9, the 70 weeks are cut off from the longer period of the 2300 evenings and mornings in Daniel 8:14.
When the books of Daniel and
Revelation are better understood,
believers will have an entirely different
religious experience.
TM 114