This discussion has at times gotten pretty technical. So, for the benefit of the average reader it may be best to get back to discussing some of the more basic problems with the JW "Daniel 4 = 1914" interpretation.
JW's currently maintain that Christ returned invisibly in the year 1914. They believe this to be so based upon their understanding of the fourth chapter of Daniel. However, their interpretation of Daniel chapter 4 has more holes than a 500 pound block of Swiss cheese. Here are some of the "holes."
The Society's interpretation maintains that Nebuchadnezzar was removed from Babylon's throne for 7 years. And that those 7 years were "prophetic years" of 360 days each, totaling 2,520 days. And they say that each of those 2,520 days was meant to picture an ordinary "non-prophetic" solar year of 365.2425 days each. And they say that this prophecy was meant to indicate that the time of Christ's return can be determined by counting forward in time 2,520 years from the time of Jerusalem's destruction by Babylon, which they say occurred in the year 607 BC.
This understanding is based on a long series of highly questionable assumptions. And if any one of those assumptions is wrong, then so is the whole interpretation.
First, the history of Nebuchadnezzar's reign is very well documented in the scriptures and in extrabiblical sources. A thorough review of all of this information shows that it is impossible to find a period of 7 years within his reign of 43 years when Nebuchadnezzar was absent from his throne or inactive as ruler. With this in mind, it seems unlikely that the "7 times" could have referred to a period of 7 years.
Second, the idea that the "times" which were really years referred to "prophetic years" of 360 days each is based on the belief that the "1260 days" spoken of in Rev. 12:6 are equated with the "3 1/2 times" spoken of in Rev. 12:14. This is not necessarily so. ( For instance, the 1260 days in Rev. 12:6 may have referred to the time when Christianity was protected after the time of Christ's ascension and before the time the Spirit was poured out on the Gentiles in 36 AD. Then, when the good news began to be preached to all national groups Christianity took off, as though it had wings of eagles, and was thereafter protected for a second longer period of time. This second period of protection was the "3 1/2 times" spoken of in Rev. 12:14. This "3 1/2 times" would then be understood to be the period of time from 36 AD until the time of Christ's return.) Since some interpretations of Rev. 12, such as this one, say that the "1260 days" and the "3 1/2 times" spoken of in Rev. 12 do not refer to the same period of time, it is only an assumption and quite likely a wrong one, that the concept of a 360 day "prophetic year" even exists in the Bible.
Third, it seems contradictory that each of the 360 days in each of these 7 "prophetic years" was meant to picture a solar year containing 365.2425 days, even if we were on sound footing so far which we are not. For if days were meant to be understood as years, then it would follow that days in prophetic years ought to be understood as an equal number of "prophetic years," not an equal number of solar years.
Fourth, even if Christ did have in mind a period of 2,520 years when he referred to "the times of the Gentiles," the idea that such a period of time was meant to be counted from the time of Jerusalem's destruction by Babylon is itself highly questionable. For instance, why would it not have begun to be counted when Nebuchadnezzar took king Jehoiachin as his prisoner to Babylon and then appointed a man of his own choosing, Zedekiah, to act as his servant while occupying Jerusalem's throne?
Fifth, and one of the biggest "holes" in this piece of "Swiss cheese" is that it is internally inconsistent with both Daniel and Revelation. The Watchtower's interpretation of Daniel 4 tells us that its "7 times" = 2,520 years. We are told the cryptic word "times" clearly indicates a greater meaning than just "7 years." But when the term "3 and 1/2 times" (half of 7 times) is used in both Daniel and Revelation (Dan. 7:25; Rev.12:14) the Watchtower does not say those "3 and 1/2 times" = 1,260 years, half of 2,520 years. To do so would certainly be consistent with their Daniel 4 interpretation. But no, the Watchtower does not do something so obviously sensible. Instead they tell us that when the term "3 and 1/2 times" appears in the Bible it simply means 3 and 1/2 years and nothing more.
And, sixth, as has been discussed here many times, the historical and biblical evidence is overwhelming that Jerusalem was not destroyed by Babylon in 607 BC. Rather, as all history books tell us, that event took place in 587/6 BC.
One final important point that should be made is that Daniel chapter 4 does not need any interpretation by us today. Nebuchadnezzar had a dream and asked Daniel to interpret it, which he did quite well in verses 20-28. The interpretation Daniel gave seemed quite thorough, and it said nothing about the year 1914. Neither is there any place else in the Bible which indicates that Daniel's interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream was either incorrect or incomplete. Thus, there exists no reason to believe that God intended for us to understand Nebuchadnezzar's dream any differently than Daniel interpreted it.
This it not to say that a secondary, larger fulfillment of Nebuchadnezzar's dream may not be possible. But if there really is a secondary, larger fulfillment of Daniel 4, the correct understanding of it might be totally different from the one JW's have suggested. And since Daniel himself interpreted the dream and he did not indicate that there existed a then unexplained secondary, larger fulfillment of that dream, how can we say for sure that there is one? And even if there is one, how can we say for sure what it is?
Now JW's all say the larger fulfillment seems obvious to them. But I believe that if it does, it is only because their thinking has been conditioned to understand Daniel 4 in the way they now do. To illustrate this point, I'll here suggest another possibility that could just as well be the real "greater fulfillment" of Daniel 4, if indeed there is one. ( I could suggest several interpretations which all make just as much sense as the Watchtower's interpretation. But, for now, to make my point I'll offer just one.)
Satan the devil was pictured by that tree. Like that Daniel 4 tree, Satan's rule and influence fills the whole earth. And like that tree, the Bible tells us that Satan's rule and influence will one day be cut down and bound. The tree in Daniel 4 was bound with metal bands. Satan will be bound with metal "chains." That Nebuchadnezzar was used to play the small scale role of Satan seems quite fitting. Nebuchadnezzar was, after all, a king who had persecuted and enslaved God's people. The tree was banded for "7 times." Satan will be chained for 1,000 years. How do "7 times" equal 1,000 years? As the Watchtower has done, we will speculate that it is God's intention to restore earth to a paradise 7,000 years after Adam's rebellion in Eden. So, everything in this speculative interpretation is based on this speculative 7,000 year period of time. Since 7 X ("7 times") 1,000 years = 7,000 years, the "7 times" spoken of in Daniel chapter 4 should be understood to equal 1,000 years. After those 1,000 years have passed Satan will be released from his chains just as the tree was unbanded. Then, just as Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged God's sovereignty after 7 times had passed over him, Satan will be forced to bend his knee to God before he is finally destroyed. For as the Bible says, "Every knee will bow." (In the initial small "scale fulfillment" of this interpretation of Daniel 4 Nebuchadnezzar was removed from his throne for 1,000 days, a day for each year of the "large scale" fulfillment. History does allow Nebuchadnezzar a 1,000 day absence from his throne but not a 7 year absence.)
The point is, with a little imagination, we can come up with many other possible "larger" fulfillment's of Daniel chapter 4, all of them just as good if not better, than the Watchtower's interpretation. But since Daniel already gave us the correct interpretation of the prophecy, and since nowhere in the Bible does it indicate that there is, in fact, another correct interpretation of it, we cannot say for sure that there is one, or if there is one, what exactly it is.
Clearly, the Watchtower's 1914 doctrine is not Bible interpretation. It is Bible manipulation.
Edited by - aChristian on 4 February 2003 20:57:22