Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Calendars, Counting and 1260 Days

The 1260 day prophecy, as advanced by some, particularly members of the Seventh Day Adventist community, seems to be built upon the premise that the Jewish year is 360 days long.

The theory (in a nutshell) is that the 'time and times and the dividing of time' of Dan 7:25 is 1260 days (three and a half years, assuming a 12 month 30 day per month year) correspond to the exact 1260 year period (also assuming a 'year for a day' principle) between the papacy assuming direct political control over some of the collapsing Roman Empire, 538AD and the Losing of that political control when Napolean arrested the Pope 1798AD.

In looking into the Jewish calendar, it appears that the Jewish year, according to the observational principles laid out in scripture, or based on calculations related in the mishnah, is NEVER 360 days long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_calendar

Since the Hebrew Calendar is primarily based on the lunar calendar (the length of months is directly linked to the phases of the moon), months are an average of 29.5 days long. Most being either 29 or 30, with the possibility of some exceptions outside that range, but when that is so, other months are adjusted to compensate back to the phases of the moon. Under the calculated method it is always 29 or 30

Thus the length of the regular Hebrew year is 12 x 29.5 = 354 days, not the 360 assumed above.

Further, it appears that, under the Jewish calendar, almost invariably, at least one out of every three years has an additional month. This is done to ensure that Passover is always in the spring. Under the calculated method this month is always 30 days.

So 'time, times and half time would be either

354 x 3.5 = 1239
or
354 x 3.5 + 30 1269
or possibly, if one is going simply by scripture and not using the calculated method
354 x 3.5 + 29 = 1268

And if there were 2 'leap' years in a three and a half year period, those numbers would be bigger again, but still not 1260.

Even were we to assume (as the proponents of this theory do) that every month be counted as 30 days (even though roughly half are 29) the 'time, times, and half a time' spoken of in Daniel 7 would count to (at least) 43 months, and therefore 1290 days, not the 1260 proposed by advocates of this theory.

Dan 12:11 ... a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

The people who push this theory, (and I've been in conversation with quite a few recently) put it forth as proof positive that the Catholic Church is the Anti-Christ (some variations say the Papacy and/or the Beast)

Seems like quite a stretch to me, if they have to fudge the numbers that much to make it fit the history.

Monday, August 1, 2011

Pattern Recognition, Paganism, and the Catholic Church

Just a short while ago, my mother posted the following on facebook ...

"AOCDRNICG TO RSCHEEARCH AT CMABRIGDE UINERVTISY, IT DSENO'T MTAETR WAHT OERDR THE LTTERES IN A WROD ARE, THE OLNY IPROAMTNT TIHNG IS TAHT THE FRSIT AND LSAT LTEETR BE IN THE RGHIT PCLAE. TIHS IS BCUSEAE THE HUAMN MNID DEOS NOT RAED ERVEY LTETER BY ISTLEF, BUT THE WROD AS A WLOHE."

Can you make sense out of it? I can. As human beings we generally have a great capacity to recognise patterns, sometimes (like the above) where those patterns aren't even there.

What do I mean? Ask yourself, 'what is the first word in the quotation above'?

If you answered 'According', you'd be wrong!
If you answered 'Aocdrnicg', you'd also be wrong!
The correct answer is 'To'.

Am I being a little pedantic in making that point? Yes. Unfortunately one must to make the point I'm trying to make.

Our brains have the ability to recognise 'Aocdrnicg' as 'According', even though IT ISN'T!

A very similar thing often happens when people attack the Catholic Church, or traditional Christianity in general with charges that "Easter is a Pagan celebration", Christians worship on Sundays, and a great deal of other things.

What they do, is point out the similarity between, for example, the pagan practice of worshipping on Sunday, and the Christian practice of worshipping on Sunday, and then ASSUME that because they can recognise the similarity, that they are indeed the same thing, when in point of fact, they are not.

Sabbath, Six days, and the International Date Line

Several of my friends advocate that the 'Sabbath' can only be observed on the traditional hebrew seventh day. They claim this day as, what on modern calendars would be sundown on Friday, to sundown on Saturday.

A short while ago, one of these stated quite firmly "Sundown tonight at 8:16 pm begins Sabbath"

What piqued my interest, was that, since the author of the statement lives in California, U.S.A, and I am in Victoria, Australia, at the time she stated it, it was already around 10AM on Saturday. For her it was still Friday afternoon, but for me, '8:16 tonight' was a two hours and twenty six minutes after sunset on Saturday night.

This got me thinking about time zones, and the International Date Line (IDL)

The IDL is an artificial line based upon where different countries choose to set their time zones an calendars. By convention it is around 180 degrees longitude (directly opposite the prime meridian which runs through the royal observatory in Greenwich England), though it wanders and weaves around individual countries and groups of islands from about +170 degrees to around -150 degrees.

If their argument is right, and the sabbath MUST be observed on THE seventh day, then, if the IDL is not in the right spot, if God's 'date line' is in a different location than that determined as a legacy of the British Empire. Then even they are celebrating the 'seventh day' on the wrong day since a country, in deciding what side of they line they are on, are deciding what day of the week it is.

If we assume that the Jews still hold the correct day, and that God's 'date line' doesn't lie between Iraq (the traditionally held location of the Garden of Eden) and Israel, even still over half the planet could be celebrating the 'Day of the Lord' on the wrong day.

So what does the bible say about the location of God's 'date line'? Absolutely nothing! If we're forced to rely on the bible, we're left floundering with no way of determining whether we (who don't live between Israel and Iraq) were observing the sabbath on the correct day or not.

But what of those who, in our modern day, travel across the IDL? The commandment, as written in the book of Exodus reads as follows ...

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Exo 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

I see nothing in there that says 'if thou shalt cross the IDL in one direction then thou shalt work only five days and rest on the sixth which is the day CALLED seventh by others, and if thou shalt cross in the other direction then thou shalt work seven days and rest on the eighth, which is the day CALLED seventh by others, unless of course thou shalt cross the IDL from the west in the hour before sunset of the sixth day from either the Line islands or from Tonga, for then thou shalt work twelve days and rest on the thirteenth, which is the day CALLED seventh by others.

As a Catholic, I'm often accused by misinformed people of 'leaving out' commandments or parts of commandments', so I find your dismissal of what the commandment actually says in favor of the appearance of keeping the commandment quite ironic.

Crossing the IDL or not, six days is still six days, and the seventh is the day that comes after six days, not after five, or seven, or twelve.

If their interpretation of the commandment can't be defended by scripture, then either their interpretation of the commandment is wrong, or the principle of Sola Scripura on which their interpretation is based is wrong, or (I think) both.