The Day to Year Principle in The Book of Daniel

By
Rolando Rodriguez

Background

The Day to Year Principle is one of the most debated points in Biblical prophecy. For

Seventh Day Adventists, the” day to year principle” is crucial in interpreting the prophecies of

Daniel and Revelation. In the Adventist Interpretation, the DTP (day to year principle) when

applied to Daniel 8 and 9 reveals the starting point of two prophetic time periods: The 2,300

days in Daniel 8 and the 70 weeks prophecy in Daniel 9.

It was not until the 19th century, that critical scholars started to question the Historicist

view of prophetic interpretation and as a result the DTP, in favor of an interpretation that put

forth the thesis of literal days and literal weeks. In Adventist circles today, there is a growing

debate on whether the DTP should be applied to the book of Daniel, or if the prophetic time

periods should be interpreted literally. The purpose of this paper is to examine the available

biblical evidence for the Day to Year Principle, and an extrabiblical analysis of how the 70 weeks

prophecy was viewed by the early Jewish people.

DTP In the Bible

In a recent series of Facebook posts titled “Excursus on the Day To Year Principle

“renowned Adventist scholar Dr. Jon Paulien correctly states that the Day to Year Principle :

“Simply stated, the “year-day principle” asserts as follows: “In Bible (apocalyptic) prophecy,

whenever a period of time is described in days, its fulfillment is counted in years.” The

immediate problem with this assertion is that it is found nowhere in the Bible. The two best

candidates, Numbers 14:34 and Ezek 4:6, do not address Bible prophecy as a genre, nor do they
assert anything about a consistent principle that can be applied to other situations. In fact, they

go in opposite directions, Numbers applied a year’s penalty for each day of Israel’s rebellion,

and Ezekiel suffers a day for each year of Israel’s rebellion. So at an exegetical level (what the

text actually states), the principle is not stated anywhere in the Bible.”1

If the DTP is not stated explicitly in the Bible, does there exist implicit evidence of it?

And if there does not exist explicit evidence in the text, should we use the DTP?

Biblical Evidence of Symbolic Time Units

Leviticus 25:1-7

This Bible text deals directly with the Israelite agricultural economy. For six years

farmers could sow the fields, but the seventh-year was a rest year or a sabbath year. William Shea

states that :

“When the command is repeated again in verse 4, it is stated in a slightly different manner:

the seventh year was to be “a sabbath … for the land, a sabbath to the Lord.” The comment was

also added that it was to be a “sabbath of solemn rest (šabbaṯ šabbāṯôn).” When this latter phrase

is repeated in verse 5, the word for “year” occurs in the same position as the word for “sabbath.”

Thus the two statements read, The seventh year:

“shall be a sabbath of solemn rest for the land” (vs. 4)

“shall be a year of solemn rest for the land” (vs. 5)

The grammatical parallelism reemphasizes the identification of that year as a sabbath for the

land to Yahweh.”2

1
Paulien, Jon. “Excursus Year To Day Principle”. Facebook Post.
2
Shea, W. H. (1992). Selected Studies on Prophetic Interpretation. (F. B. Holbrook, Ed.) (Revised Edition, Vol. 1, pp.
83–86). Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists
 Leviticus 25:8:

“`You are also to count off seven sabbaths of years for yourself, seven times seven years, so that

you have the time of the seven sabbaths of years, namely, forty-nine years.”

This passage is understood in the light of the Jubilee year. The second phrase sabbath of

years is to be understood as a time period of seven years. Each day of the week in the jubilee

cycle that ends with a sabbath was understood to stand for a year.3 Shea goes on to state that :

“That the “sabbath” terminology was intended furthermore to stand for “weeks” is evident

from parallel phraseology given two chapters earlier. Reference is made there to the Festival of

Weeks or Pentecost being celebrated after seven “full weeks,” literally, “seven sabbaths, full ones”

(šabbāṯôṯ temîmōṯ, Lev 23:15). Since one must count more than full sabbath “days” to get to the

fiftieth day designated for the celebration of Pentecost, it is evident that “sabbaths” means

“weeks” here, just as it is commonly translated in the various versions of the Bible. This parallel

phraseology pertaining to Pentecost indicates that the “sabbaths” referred to in Leviticus 25:8

with reference to the jubilee period must also mean “weeks.”

Thus, the Sabbath day and the six days that preceded it came to be used as the model by

which the occurrence of the jubilee year was calculated according to divine directions. Each of

these year-days was to extend into the future from the beginning of those cycles to measure off

the coming of the jubilee year.

In prophecy this use of the year-day principle is paralled most directly by Daniel 9:24–27. A

different word (šāḇûʻa) is used in that prophecy, but it means the same thing that the “sabbaths”

3
Ibd.,83-86
mean in Leviticus 25:8, that is, “weeks.” The applicability of the year-day principle to the time

periods of Daniel 9:24–27 is especially evident, therefore, from the parallel construction of the

Levitical instruction on the jubilee year. One could almost say that the time period involved in

Daniel 9:24–27 was modeled after the jubilee legislation.

Since it is legitimate to apply the year-day principle to the days of the weeks of Leviticus

25 to reckon time into the future to the next Jubilee, it is also legitimate to apply that same

year-day principle to the days of the weeks of Daniel 9 to reckon time into the future from the

beginning of their cycle. By extension, this same principle can be reasonably applied also to the

“days” of the other time prophecies in Daniel.”4

Number 14:34

“According to the number of the days in which you spied out the land, forty days, for

each day you shall bear your [a]guilt one year, namely forty years, and you shall know

My [b]rejection.”

This verse is one of two verses where traditional Adventism found support for the DTP. In

this case, God punished Israel because of the lack of faith of the spies sent to scout the land of

Canaan. The punishment was one year for every day that the spies spent in the land, 40 years for

40 days.

Ezequiel 4:6

“And when you have completed them, lie again on your right side; then you shall bear the

iniquity of the house of Judah forty days. I have laid on you a day for each year.”

4
Ibd.,83-86
 This second passage was used by traditional Adventism to support the DTP. Ezequiel

suffers a day for every year of Israel’s Rebellion.

Conclusions:

What we can conclude is that symbolic time periods did exist in Hebrew thought. This

small sampling from Leviticus and Numbers demonstrate that symbolic time periods in terms of

days per year, or “weeks” that symbolized years, especially in reference to jubilee and the Israelite

agricultural economy did in fact exist. What we cannot conclude is that the Bible did not establish

an explicit principle for apocalyptic prophecy that clearly stated a day to year principle.

Furthermore, Adventist scholar Gerhard Pfandl finds support of the DTP and argues that:

“The peculiar way in which the time periods are expressed indicates that they should not be taken

literally. If the “time, times, and half a time” in Daniel 7:25 stands for three and a half literal

years, God would probably have said “three years and six months.” In Luke 4:25 and James 5:17

where three and a half literal years are referred to, each time the phrase is “three years and six

months” Similarly, Paul remained in Corinth “a year and six months” (Acts 18:11), and David

reigned in Hebron “seven years and six months” (2 Sam. 2:11). “5

Time Periods in Daniel 8 and Daniel 9

Daniel 8:14

“And he said to me, “For two thousand three hundred [a]days; then the sanctuary shall be

cleansed.”

This is perhaps the most important bible verse where Seventh -Day Adventists find their

identity as a prophetic movement. Adventists have long interpreted this verse as 2,300 symbolic

5
Pfandl, Gerhard. “The Year-Day Principle.” The Year-Day Principle | Biblical Research Institute, Apr. 2007,
adventistbiblicalresearch.org/materials/prophecy/year-day-principle.
days of years. The Intertestamental school of thought views the evening and mornings as literal

days. Dr. Andre Reis for example identifies the 2,300 days as 1150 literal days pointing to

Antiochus Epiphanes:

“If we consider the desecrations inflicted by Antiochus on the temple in Jerusalem

temple as the most probable fulfilment of these prophecies—per Jewish tradition—the 2,300-

evenings-mornings refers to 1,150 days of two evening-morning sacrifices each, covering

the attack on the sanctuary proper, beginning in ca. October 167 BC through Dec 164 BC 10 (a little

over 3 years), which again seems to match Antiochus IV desecrations.”6

Three major objections presented by Zdrako Stefanovic discourage an interpretation of Antiochus

as the little horn.

1. Antiochus persecution did not begin with a religious cause but rather in order to subdue a

rebellious people.

2. The information about the persecution by Antiochus is mostly legendary.

3. The outlawing of the Jewish cult was confined to Jerusalem and Judea and not other

communities elsewhere.7

Among the arguments that Reis presents for stating that the 2,300 days is a literal and not

a symbolic number is that the time of the end in Daniel 8 is not the eschatological time of the end.

In his study of Daniel 8, he concludes that the time of the end is not eschatological time but, the

6
Reis, Andre. “The Identity of the ‘Little Horn’ of Daniel 8 – An Updated Adventist View.” Academia.edu, 2019,

www.academia.edu/36193347/The_Identity_of_the_Little_Horn_of_Daniel_8_An_Updated_Adventist View
7
“The Vision Of A Ram And Goat.” Daniel Wisdom to the Wise ; Commentary on the Book of Daniel, by Zdravko

Stefanovic, Pacific Press Pub. Association, 2007, p32.

led him to conclude that the “latter days” did not include the eschatological end time.8

Daniel 9: 24-27

This passage has been interpreted by traditional Adventism as a messianic prophecy that

points to Jesus Christ as the messiah. The 70 weeks have been interpreted by using the DTP

converting the weeks into weeks of years. Traditionally, the Adventist position starts at 457 BC-

34 AD. The Intertestamental position applies this as weeks of years with Reis concluding after

studying the Masoretic Text, that there are two messiahs in Daniel 9:24-27 based on the literary

structure of the text.9

Objections to the Intertestamental position of Daniel 8:14

I raise three major objections to the 2,300 evening and mornings as interpretation of 1,150

literal days

1. One Offering: The morning and evening offering in the sanctuary was viewed as one

continual offering and not two. Dividing 2,300 by two to get to 1,150 days is a fallacy that

assumes that the continual morning and evening offering were separate offerings.

2. Ereb Boqer: This is the Hebrew translation of evenings and mornings. It is important to

note that this is inverse from the continual offering of morning and evening sacrifices.

Sacrifices were never started in the evenings and then continued until the morning. Instead

the continual burnt offering was a morning and evening sacrifice (Num 28:3-4). Where do

8
Ibd.,
9
Reis, Andre. “The Waw Clauses in Daniel 9:24–27 and the 70 Weeks.” Academia, 2019,

www.academia.edu/41875268/The_Waw_Clauses_in_Daniel_9_24_27_and_the_70_Weeks.
 we find the same order of evening-mornings (ereb boqer) in the Bible? In the creation story

when a day is called an evening and morning ( Gen 1:5, 7, 13, 19, 23, 31). Thus the 2,300

evenings and mornings should be seen as complete days and not 1,150 days.

3. Earliest Rendering: According to Zdravko Stefanovic, the understanding of this verse by

the Jewish scholars who translated the first and authoritative translation of the Hebrew

Bible into Greek, confirms the reading of 2,300 days.10

Conclusions:

The Intertestamental school believes that the 2,300 days are actually 1,150 days based on

the burnt offering in ancient Israel that had one offering in the morning and one in the evening.

I have offered three reasons why Seventh Day Adventists can reasonably disagree with that

conclusion: The Bible saw the burnt offering as one offering and not two, the position of ereb

boqer is the same as a creation day and inverse from the order of the burnt offering, and the

earliest understanding of the Jewish scholars who translated the Bible into Greek saw them as

2,300 days. Seventh Day Adventists believes that because Daniel is an apocalyptic book and

largely symbolic especially in the chapter of Dan 2, 7, 8, 9 that the time periods in Daniel 8

and 9 should be seen in the light of the day to year principle. Yet it is important to note, we

cannot simply make that determination in Daniel 8:14 without understanding the rest of the

prophecy in Dan 9:24-27. The next section will focus on the earliest historical understanding

of this prophecy by the early Essene, Hellenistic, Pharisaic and Zealot communities.

10
“The Vision Of A Ram And Goat.” Daniel Wisdom to the Wise ; Commentary on the Book of Daniel, by Zdravko
Stefanovic, Pacific Press Pub. Association, 2007, p. 323.
 Messiah and Dan 9:24-27 In Early Jewish Thought

It is important to note that the prevailing view of the Essenes, Pharisees and Zealots of

the 70 weeks prophecy was pertaining to Messiah the Son of David, even though there existed

some non-messianic interpretations. In his journal article, “Daniel 9 and The Date Of Messiah’s

Coming In Essene, Hellenistic, Pharisaic, Zealot And Early Christian Computation”, Robert T.

Beckwith demonstrates that these groups did not expect Messiah -Prince or an “anointed one”

not after 7 weeks but after 7 weeks and 62 weeks chronologically.11

Essene Computation ( Messianic)

The Essene interpretation is first found in The Testament of Levi and the Pseudo-Ezekiel

Document ( 4Q 384-390). The computation worked out before 146 B.C, places the coming of the

Son of David from 2 BC -2 AD. It is believed that the Essenes were the first to put a date to the

end of the 70 weeks.12

Hellenistic Computation (Septuagint /Non- Messianic)

This computation identifies Onias III as the anointed on who was cut off. Since this is an

old interpretation, many modern commentators viewed it as the most accurate. Yet Beckwith

identifies a major problem: he identifies that this last supposition must take into account the

incredible corruption of the text. In this interpretation, the Septuagint scholar takes the 62 weeks

11
Beckwith, Roger T. “DANIEL 9 AND THE DATE OF MESSIAH'S COMING IN ESSENE, HELLENISTIC,
PHARISAIC, ZEALOT AND EARLY CHRISTIAN COMPUTATION.” Revue De Qumrân, vol. 10, no. 4,
Dec. 1981, www.jstor.org/stable/24607004?read-now=1&seq=19#metadata_info_tab_contents. P.521

12
Ibd., 524-524
and the 7 weeks and adds them to the 70 weeks and treats them as years and not weeks to get to

173 or 172 BC, within one year of the murder of Onias.13

Pharisaic Computation (Messianic)

This computation was also chronological in nature, the time weeks would have begun in

249 B.C with the temple repairs by Simon the Just and ending in around 473 A.D.14 Once again

we see a prophecy aimed at the Messiah son of David, chronological and without interruptions.

Josephus Computation (Non-Messianic)

Josephus’ interpretation was spotty as he made different comments about the 70 weeks in

his writings. Yet it seems his interpretation is non-messianic and believed that the 70 weeks

ended in A.D 70 with the murder of the high priest Ananus as the “anointed one”15

Pharisaic Computation 2 Esdras and Pseudo-Philo (Messianic)

Both of these schools of interpretation believed that Messiah the Son of David would

come either in 242 A.D or 473 A.D respectively.16

Hellenistic/Pharisaical Computation- Alexandrian Revolt (Messianic)

An Alexandrian Jew using Josephus’ figures, believed that Messiah son of David would arrive

in 117 or 118 A.D. Many had high hopes for this figure as there were Jewish revolts in

Cyrenaica, Egypt and Cyprus between 115 and 117 A.D.17

13
Ibd., 528
14
Ibd., 531
15
Ibd., 536
16
Ibd., 537
17
Ibd., 538
 Pharisaic Computation ( “Non- Messianic” ?)

Beckwith states that in the form that we have this interpretation in the Seder Olam Rabbah, that

this interpretation is Non-Messianic ending in A.D 70. However, he believes that this was due to

the fact that the Seder Olam Rabbah was written with the benefit of hindsight. The Zealots were

dominated by Messianic expectations, they had identified the fourth kingdom in Daniel 7 with

Rome like Josephus and other Pharisees had done. It is interesting to note that the Zealot revolt

was dominated by Messianic interpretation (66.A.D) in which they calculated the Messiah would

come in A.D 70.18

Pharisaic Computation ( The Bar Kokba Revolt) ( Messianic)

This was the third and last of the great Jewish revolts. It lasted from 132-135 A.D. The

dating of Pharisaic chronology expected the Messiah between 63 and 70. A.D. When this did not

happen, they dated the starting point of the 70 weeks from the end of the exile instead of the

beginning, finishing the 70 weeks and the arrival of the Messiah between 133 A.D and 140. A.D.

Yet when this rebellion was suppressed, it was the beginning of the end of the Messianic

interpretation by the Jewish people.19

Conclusions

As we have seen, the majority of the earliest interpretations of the 70 weeks

prophecy were consecutive and chronological in nature. The majority of the Pharisee and Essene

interpretations centered around the coming of the Messiah the Son of David. Even the non-

messianic schools did not split the 69 weeks into a prophecy concerning two anointed figures.

When did this arise? According to Beckwith after the bar Kokba rebellion and the end of the

18
Ibd., 532
19
Ibd., 539
second century a dejected Judaism devised the interpretation reflected in the Masoretic text with

two anointed ones in different eras.20 Thus, the Masoretes added the punctuation to reflect this

fact, something that was not seen in the original Hebrew text and was not the prevailing view of

the majority of Essene and Pharisaic interpreters in the earliest schools of interpretation. It is

important to note then, that the Masorete punctuation and interpretation comes with anti-messianic

baggage as a result of failed Messianic prophecies and the competing Christian view that identified

Jesus Christ as the Messiah.

We can conclude then the earliest interpretations did not view the 70 weeks as a

chronography like Goldingay and Reis believe, but as chronological time units that run

consecutively. Understanding the literary context of Daniel 9:24-27 through a literary analysis of

only the Masoretic text, without taking into account other aspects of biblical hermeneutics, is a

mistake.

Thus, I conclude that the Seventh Day Adventist understanding of Daniel 8 and Daniel 9

is on solid ground. Chapter 9 of Daniel starts with 70 years in captivity and ends with a prophecy

of 70 weeks. The fact that the 70 weeks of years culminate in ten Jubilees should not be lost

ignored. If we take the Adventist position of 457 B.C -34 A.D we see that Jesus in Luke 4:18-19

reads a Jubilee passage and places himself right at the end of the 69 weeks. Thus with the evidence

of symbolic time periods in the Bible and the chronological historical understanding of the 70

weeks by early Judaism, I believe the day to year principle is applicable and correctly interpreted

by the Seventh Day Adventist Church and at the least, should be considered a serious contender

for the interpretation of the 2,300 days and Daniel 9.

20
Ibd., 541