A Day for a Year

by Hellrider 6 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Hellrider

  The "day for a year"-rule is the basis for some of the fundamental parts of JW-doctrine. The 1914-date is based on the "day for a year"-rule (7 "biblical times" is 2520 days, substituting a day for a year, you get 2520 years from 607 bc - 1914 ad, blah blah, you know the routine). However: WHERE exactly did they get this rule from? Where in the Bible does it say that a day is like a year, in the eyes of God? The Bible says a day is like a thousand years:

  Psalm 90.4: For a thousand years in your sight
  are like a day that has just gone by,
  or like a watch in the night

  and 2 Peter 3.8: But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

  ...but where does the day for a year-rule come from?
• 

  joelbear

  its in Ezekiel somewhere if I recall correctly but it has nothing to do with Jerusalem's Fall or Gentile Times or determining the parousia of Jesus.
• 

  Sheri

  You can find this in:

  Reasoning Book Page 93: Dates on page 97 there is a chart in calculating the Seven Times in which are quoted the scriptures that use a day for a year: Ezekiel 4:6 and Numbers 14:34.

  I read this explanation of the 607 BCE date and shake my head, because at one time I took this all as truth, just didnt realize the rest of the world had a different date that could be support by history not creating a date based on prohectic dates that have various interpretations!

  Peace

  Sheri
• 

  joelbear

  reading the whole scripture or especially the context of the scripture indicates no connection between these scriptures and those in Daniel and Revelation.

  utter nonsense.
• 

  startingover

  More than once in a public talk I got up and referred to this day for a year thing as a "rule". I think I must have gotten that wording from the outline.

  "Rule" is a strong word, surely the context does not warrant the use of it.
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  they also apply it in the genesis creation doctrine. but there has been some pressure lately to extend it to mean an epoch, or longer period of unspecified geologic time span, to come into line with science that does not directly step on joe hoba's toes.
• 

  Hellrider

  Thanks all! Yeah, agreed Joelbear, they have ripped it completely out of context. Hope it wasn`t a dumb question, it`s just one of those things you have swallowed down without ever questioning why. Now that I`ve had it explained, it`s easy to see that it`s just totally retarded. Again, thanks!