Chapter 6
Sure its ’44?
The few words which initiated this
lengthy examination are:
“Until 2300 years then will the
sanctuary be cleansed”.
The grounds for projecting 2300
prophetic years from 457 BC were
submitted in chapters 1-5. If you
accept those propositions you are
confronted with a prophetic time
period that terminates in 1844. The
year 1844 it is not a Seventh-day
Adventist invention. In 1888 Dr. H.
Grattan Guinness (D.D., F.R.A.S)
1888 published his research entitled
‘Light For The Last Days’. He saw
1844 as one of the terminal dates for
the times of the Gentiles. See
www.historicism.com/Guinness/Light/light.htm
In his day Dr Guinness was
apparently regarded as “England’s
greatest teacher of prophecy”.
TABLE 1
DANIEL 2 DANIEL 7
Gold head Lion
Silver breast Bear
Brass girdle Leopard
Iron legs Beast
Feet 10 horns + little horn
Stone Judgment scene
Mountain Kingdom
Please observe the connection
between the judgment scene in Daniel
85
A date so close to our time creates
unease. Modern minds familiar with
the times of Daniel and Cyrus and
Artaxerxes are uneasy about the
prospect of a prophetic time period
terminating so close to our own day
and already 160 years in the past. It
is all too close to home for most of
us. Can we be sure about 1844? Are
there other means of knowing that the
date is ‘on track’ and that it is not the
product of a sanctified imagination?
My date-study here will deliberately
be brief as our emphasis should not
be on the date but rather by what
measure believers rate in the event to
which it points. This is discussed in
the chapters 8 and 9.
Table 1 places the events of Dan
8:13-14 in a ‘ball-park’ time slot,
framed at one end by the end of the
little horn’s reign and Christ’s
Second Advent at the other:
(see chapters 3 - 4)
DANIEL 8 MEANING
- Babylon
Ram Medo-Persia
Goat Greece
Little horn phase 1 Pagan Rome
Little horn phase 2 Papal Rome
Sanctuary scene Christ’s last work
- God’s kingdom
established
7 and the cleansing of the heavenly
sanctuary in Dan 8. The parallelism
85
Chapter 6 86

between Daniel 2, 7 and 8 make it

quite clear that both events occur just
prior to Christ’s return. Understand
this and the shock value in the
terminus of 1844 vaporises because it
is certainly within the broad expanse
contemplated by the vision (chazon)
See chapter 3. Its placement at the
farther end of that expanse is
consistent with an event preceding
the Second Advent.
I submit four additional Bible
evidences which remove the shock
value of 1844:
(1) Prophetic time – Jesus Christ
The first part of Chapter 5 looked at
the grounds that link Daniel 8 and 9.
Dan 9:24 provides another time
prophecy. Its accurate fulfillment
tests both the validity of the Year-day
principle and the accuracy of the 457
BC starting date. It commences with
the words: “Seventy sevens are
determined upon thy people…”.
There has been criticism about
translating the Hebrew word chatak
(here translated “determined”) as “cut
off”. Dr Ford writes:
In the years following 1978
I gave closer attention to Dr
Cottrells’ criticism and found
that he was correct. While the
Hebrew word does literally
mean “cut” (not cut off from)
its meaning is clearly that of
decree or determine or allot1.
It is not known why Daniel chose
chatak to convey the meaning of
‘decreed’ or ‘determined’ as he could
have used other more common
Hebrew words for that purpose. The
word chatak is not used anywhere
else in Scripture, depriving us of
parallel usage. Table 2 however
provides ample evidence that the
word chatak means “to cut off” as
opposed to “cut” (see also p 57-58):

TABLE 2
SOURCE Comment
Mishnah, a Jewish Mishanaic Uses chatak 12 times as a verb. 10 occasions it
Bible commentary Hebrew is refers to the cutting off of parts of the animals
compiled in the first few similar to according to dietary laws.
centuries AD. Biblical Hebrew Uses chatak 19 times as a noun. 18 occasions it
but not means “that which is cut off”.
identical.
Strong’s Concordance The primary root of chatak is “to cut off”
Brown, Driver, Briggs, Standard Defines chatak as “to cut off”
Gesenius Hebrew Hebrew
lexicon. lexicographers
Chalddeao-Rabbinic Stoicus Defines chatak as “to cut” “to cut away”, to cut in
dictionary pieces” to cut or engrave”, “to cut off”
Vulgate Defines chatak as “cutting off”
Septuagint Defines chatak as “cutting off”
Greek vers of Daniel Theodotian Defines chatak as “to cut off”

86
Chapter 6
The 70 sevens time period is “cut
off” from a larger time period. Pages
33-34, 57-58 showed that the vision
(mar’eh) Gabriel now explains in
Daniel 9:22 is the same vision
(mar’eh) he had only partly
explained in 8:26-27. The
unexplained portion had to do with
‘time’ (See pages 57-58). The
linguistic connection between Dan 8
and 9 is unavoidable because of the
chazon/mar’eh distinction, the same
angel Gabriel, the absence of a vision
in Dan 9, the absence of a starting
date for the 2300 period and time was
the only part of the chapter 8 vision
that Gabriel had not explained (Dan
9:23-24).
The answers given to Daniel in 8:14
and 9:24 are disembodied texts
flailing loosely without anchorage
unless they are viewed as part of one
explanation. Various interpretations
have emerged but all require either
textual twisting and turning or
restriction of the sealed prophecy to
Daniel’s contemporary readers.
The former is always objectionable
and the latter upsets the end-time
theme so obvious from Table 1.
Notwithstanding a 17 year gap
between the visions of Daniel 8 and 9
the meaning of chatak and other
reasons already given so far, allow us
to conclude that a time period of 70
sevens (or 70 weeks or 490 years)
was indeed cut off from the larger
time prophecy of 2300 years in Dan
8:14. The shorter period so allotted
(or measured out) to the nation of
Israel allowed it to accomplish those
things described in Dan 9:24. The
starting date in verse 25 has been
looked at in considerable detail in the
previous chapter and the ‘best fit’ in
all the circumstances is 457 BC. It is
not the purpose of this chapter to
examine all the details of the 70
sevens prophecy, as some who reject
the Year-day principle and the 457
BC starting date are then led to limit
the 70 sevens prophecy to only
historical times. Others see that a
Messianic fulfillment of Dan 9:24-26
is unavoidable and so interpret it but
are forced to read “seventy sevens
of years” when the Hebrew makes no
mention of ‘years’. However the
identical Messianic conclusion
emerges when the Year-day principle
and the 457 BC starting date are
accepted. Many denominations hold
that the 70 sevens prophecy foretold
the baptism of Christ in AD 27, His
death in AD 31 and the ending of
Israel’s allotted time as God’s chosen
people in AD 34. Application of a
457 BC starting date that terminates
after 490 years has been adopted by
the following expositors since the
Reformation:
Johann Funck (1566), Georg
Nigrinus (1602), Heinrich
Bullinger (1504-1575), Jacques
Cappel (1557-1624), Sir Isaac
Newton, Ephraim Huit(1644),
Samuel Osgood, William Hales
(1747-1831), Archibald Mason,
J.A Brown, Matthew Haberson,
Edward Bickersteth, Louis
Gaussen, Dr Mason and fourteen
pre-Millerite expositors.
These names are probably not
familiar to most readers and it is
acknowledged that scholars still
differ on 457 BC as the starting date
87
Chapter 6
despite the considerable evidence that
now supports the date as outlined in
chapter 5. The above names however
reveal the starting date of 457 BC for
the 70 sevens prophecy was accepted
by many prior to the emergence of
Adventism in the mid 1800’s. This
does not of itself make the date
correct but it does take away the
suggestion it is an SDA invention.
Dates pertinent to Christ’s baptism
and crucifixion insist on a starting
date in the vicinity of 457 BC and
application of the Year-day principle.
It is true no one knows the precise
dates of either but sufficient is known
about the time of Christ’s ministry to
TABLE 3
KING TYPE DATE ADD 483 yrs
(BC) (69 wks)
Cyrus Decree 538 + 483 years
Darius Decree 520 + 483 years
Artaxerxes 1 Decree 457 + 483 years
Artaxerxes 1 Letters 444 + 483 years
Despite Dr Ford’s concerns2, both the
Year-day principle and a 457 BC
starting date gain validation from the
fulfillment of the 70 sevens prophecy
in the life and death of the Messiah.
It reinforces the platform for 457 BC
as a reliable starting date for the 2300
year time period terminating in 1844.
Those who accept the 70 sevens
prophecy as Messianic foretelling and
88
rule out the decree of Cyrus and the
letters from Artaxerxes to Nehemiah.
Having regard to the considerable
historical material now available
about the times of Caesar Augustus,
Tiberius Caesar, Herod and Pontius
Pilate it is interesting that when the
Messianic prophecy is worked
backwards from the time of Christ by
483 years it does have the effect of
isolating the 457 BC decree of
Artaxerxes as the best fit from the
three alternatives offered in Ezra and
Nehemiah:
TERMINUS ASSESSMENT
55 BC too early (55 years
‘before Christ’).
37 BC too early (37 years
‘before Christ’).
27 AD aligns with approx
dates of Christ’s
ministry.
AD 40 10-13 yrs late for
commence Christ’s
ministry. Places
crucifixion at 44 AD.
who recognize the link between
Daniel 8 and 9 encounter immediate
difficulty in rejecting 1844. That is
to say, by rejecting the Year-day
principle one must deny the 70
sevens prophecy as finding
fulfillment in Christ because the
original Hebrew does not read
“seventy sevens of years”; it reads
“seventy sevens”. Such action leads
to the dismantling of numerous other
88
Chapter 6
positions, the rejection of 1844 being
only one of them.
(2) Prophetic Time – Little Horn
It has been suggested that the little
horn of Daniel 7 and 8 depicts any
religio-political power that persecutes
those who inadvertently violate its
religious directives by following
conscience. For historical Israel it is
said the little horn found limited
fulfillment in Antiochus Epiphanes.
For spiritual Israel it finds more
specific fulfillment in a dark chapter
of the papacy. For God’s people
living at the close of time it finds
specific fulfillment in that
combination of religious and secular
authority which persecutes God’s
people who in following conscience,
violate its authority. It is not my
purpose to discuss in detail the
identity of the little horn except how
it affects Christ’s high priestly
ministry in the heavenly sanctuary.
A time period is expressed in Dan
7:25 as “time, times and dividing of
time”. The key that unlocks this
phrasing is not at man’s whim but is
found elsewhere in Rev 12: 14 and
12:6 where it is equated to 1260 days.
In AD 538 the papacy ran the last
Arian power (the Ostrogoths) out of
Rome giving it political power in that
city (see 121-122). Exactly 1260
years later the pope was taken captive
by the French General Berthier, his
political power was removed and the
pope died in exile. These dates have
been challenged in a similar way to
challenges about the dates for
Christ’s baptism and crucifixion.
There is considerable material on this
subject which will not be addressed
89
here except to make the point that
oddly the 1260 time period does fit
the 538-1798 time frame (whether by
Providence or not) bringing to an end
the little horn’s persecuting reign.
Table 1 shows that the judgment
scene (Dan 7) and cleansing of
sanctuary (Dan 8) occur after the
end of the little horn’s reign in 1798
but prior to the Second Advent of
Christ. The time period associated
with the work of the little horn
validates the Year-day principal.
1844 must be taken seriously as a
date which had to occur after 1798.
If the foregoing is merely the product
of an over-active imagination it is
odd indeed because all the pieces
remarkably fit together. I accept that
this may not satisfy those of extreme
scholarly curiosity but it is beyond
coincidence that the events fit the
foretelling. After all, prophecy is not
intended to make us prophets but that
we may marvel at providential
leading evident from fulfilled events
in the light of prior foretelling. This
is precisely the view adopted in this
chapter and when applied to the 70
sevens and 1260 time periods, past
fulfilled events come into view with
reassuring clarity.
(3) Olivet Discourse
Most denominations see Christ’s
discourse in Matthew 24 as a
dualistic depiction of events
preceding both the destruction of
Jerusalem in AD 70 and events
preceding His return. In Matthew
24:21 Christ associates several
cosmic signs with the period
preceding His second Coming such
as darkening of sun and moon, falling
of stars and shaking of the heavenly
89
Chapter 6
bodies. Gabriel repeatedly instructed
Daniel that the visions depicted in
Daniel 7, 8 and 11 were for the ‘time
of the end’ (Dan 8:19,26; 12:4,9,13).
1844 must fall within a time frame
consistent with the ‘time of the end’
as understood by Scripture. Let it be
etched on our minds that Gabriel’s
definition of the ‘time of the end’ is
when ‘multitudes who sleep in the
dust of the earth shall awake” (Dan
TABLE 4
EVENT
The Great Lisbon Earthquake
The Dark Day (controverted)
End of 1260 year prophecy
Falling of Stars (controverted)
Beginning of judgment in heaven
Some scholars dismiss these cosmic
events and dates as unscientific,
insignificant, unscholarly and overly
simplistic. That may be so but the
point remains that 1798 and 1844 are
two dates surrounded by cosmic
events which also occurred on
closely-proximate dates. This
observation weakens the view held
by some that 1844 is a derivative of
unusual hermeneutics.
Scholarship aside let it be
remembered the speaker on the
Mount is Jesus Christ and that two
thirds of His discourse is devoted to
signs preceding His return. The
signs must be taken seriously. They
are not given to make us prophets,
chronologists or chartists but that we
might maintain a ready expectation of
His return so that deteriorating world
conditions do not discourage us.
90
12:1-2 – clearly a reference to the
resurrection of the righteous.
Cosmic signs such as those Christ
referred to in Matt 24:29 would also
be expected to occur in proximity to
the time when the little horn’s work
ended, namely after 1798:
YEAR
1755
1780
1798
1833
1844
(4) Revelation of Christ
The only reference in the book of
Revelation to a piece of furniture in
the Most Holy Place is the Ark of the
Covenant (Rev 11:19). The scene
coincides with the blowing of the
seventh trumpet (verse 15). Preterist
interpreters cannot offer a tangible
fulfillment for the 7th trumpet in the
time of John. Controversially, some
historicists apply the blowing of the
6th trumpet to the rise of the Ottomon
Turks. Constantinople fell in 1453
AD. By converting the times in verse
15 from ‘day’ to 1, ‘month’ to 30 and
‘year’ to 360, a total of 391 prophetic
years added to 1453 AD terminates in
1844. In that year the ark was
exposed in the Most Holy Place; Rev
11:18. Some will dismiss this on the
basis that if you stared at the clouds
long enough you would see the face
of Santa Claus. That may be true but
90
Chapter 6
I must concede the arithmetic is
interesting if nothing else.
Summing up
This chapter has highlighted four
secondary anchors for 1844. All four
are linked to Christ: daily penitence
and acceptance of Him as our
Messiah and High Priest allows us
to interpret signs preceding His
return in a positive way.
What is the fallout when 1844 is
rejected? It requires that many other
Bible truths be discarded. The extent
of the dismantling is quite severe
which by itself should generate
disquiet. It is in the workings of
Providence that Scriptural truth
interlocks with other truths like leggo
blocks creating considerable
dislocation across the whole when
one part is rejected. When a simple
excision ends up as major bypass
surgery, the alarm should be ringing.
Those hostile to an investigative
judgment doctrine adopt a different
approach to that which I have
employed. Those who find the
doctrine objectionable allow ‘whelan
the wrecker’ loose across any link
that leads to it: 1844, the nexus
between Dan 8 and 9, the nexus
between Dan 8 and Lev 16, the 457
BC starting date, Genesis 1, the
identity of the little horn, the cosmic
events of Olivet discourse etc. That
represents a lot of dismantling by any
standard and should be a wake up call
to take a pause and review. If 1844 is
irrelevant and the Year-day principle
does apply, to what do the 2300
evening mornings point? Dr Ford
now considers they apply to 2300
91
evening morning sacrifices1 despite
the caveats of ‘ereb boqer in Genesis
12 and that morning evenings (not
evening mornings) are associated
with sacrifice.
The approach in this paper has been
the exact opposite. I set out to
determine if 1844 is credible despite
the outcry so critical examination can
focus on the investigative judgment
doctrine without undue angst about
the date.
A sense of urgency is created by an
understanding of 1844. As world
terrorism rages unabated, a date-peg
in the ground develops conviction
that we are in the time of the end,
allowing the gospel message to be
proclaimed with a speed and
enthusiasm hitherto not seen. It
provides the antidote to lethargy and
the dynamic for revival in these most
anxious of times. Although uniquely
Adventist it should not remain so as
the body of Christ is made up of all
genuine believers. It behooves all
believers to cast off denominational
constraints and engage in the
Scriptural notion of ecumenical unity
by embracing present truth.
Recognition of 1844 properly
understood in the context of the great
controversy and the final disposition
of the sin problem is one key to
revival in these Laodecian times
Acceptance of Christ as Messiah
validates His ministry in the heavenly
sanctuary. The two are inseparable
1
Daniel & The Coming King page 285.
2
Theological Wordbook of The Old Testament
(ref 1689a and 274c) by Harris, Archer, Waltke.
91
Chapter 6 92

as it is only our acceptance of what part of the 2300 day prophecy. It

Christ achieved at His first advent
that allows us to view His Second
Advent with genuine hope and joy.
Ancient Israel would have been better
prepared for Christ’s first advent had
they understood the first part of the
2300 day prophecy. Our
preparedness for Christ’s Second
Advent is considerably enhanced by a
willingness to understand the second
does not guarantee salvation but it
does bring into the focus the solemn
times we live in and provides
Adventism with unique credentials
not found elsewhere. It is true the
timing of the Reformation was not
foretold but Adventism’s emergence
out of the events of 1844 is
compelling when linked to the first
angel’s message proclaiming a
judgment had come (Rev 14:7).

1
D. Ford Daniel The Coming King (1996) p. 297 J&M printing, Rocklin, California.
2
D. Ford Dan 8:14 The DA & The IJ (1980) Euangelion Press. page 202

92