The Confessing Seventh-day Adventist

Greetings,

I have recently begun reading The Ends of Time, published herein by Eugene Shubert. I am very intrigued! I will study it in depth, with as open a mind as I can have--based on my experience and learning to date.

My interest in the interpretation of Daniel (and the Revelation) has led me to this forum, as I have stated in my "intro" posting on the Administration forum.

I would like to begin an ongoing dialogue (thread) with Eugene--or any others interested--concerning the work mentioned above, and I have some initial, specific questions. I considered waiting until completing my study of the publication, but decided that I would ask questions as I go. I have read through chapter 9, "A Commentary on Daniel 8" at this time.

1) In A Formal Introduction to Daniel's Eschatology, under the subtopic 'Historicism / Futurism,' Eugene states: "1. They universally ignore the fact that Daniel eventually understood the vision given him. See Da 10:1." (emphasis mine.)
My question follows: My understanding is that the "vision," was seen in Dan. 10 of a "man clothed in linen," etc. while Dan. 11-12 was an angelic explanation of future history. Does Dan. 12:8 (Daniel's lack of understanding) refer back to Dan. 11-12's 'explanation,' or only to Dan. 12:6-7 (and following), and why?

2) Can the theses, especially regarding the Sanctuary, articulated in chapter 9, "A Commentary on Daniel 8" be harmonized with chapter 23 of "The Great Controversy," entitled "What Is the Sanctuary?" Even if they can not be harmonized, I am still interested in your view. 'The Ends of Time' has brought together other things that I could not bring togther satisfactorally!

3) Eugene: is "The Ends of Time" a living document, in that you update it periodically as you study, or is it as it stands, as copywritten in 1986?

Please pardon me if these topics were covered elsewhere.

God bless all, and thank you--
Steve

Steve wrote:Eugene states: "Daniel eventually understood the vision given him. See Da 10:1." (emphasis mine.)
My question follows: My understanding is that the "vision," was seen in Dan. 10 of a "man clothed in linen," etc. while Dan. 11-12 was an angelic explanation of future history. Does Dan. 12:8 (Daniel's lack of understanding) refer back to Dan. 11-12's 'explanation,' or only to Dan. 12:6-7 (and following), and why?

Steve, There are several different Hebrew words translated vision in Daniel 10. The Hebrew word translated vision in Daniel 10:1 is identical to the word translated vision in Daniel 8:15,16,26,27 and Daniel 9:23. Likewise, the word translated vision in Daniel 10:14 is the word translated vision in Daniel 1:17; Daniel 8:1,2,13,15,17,26; Daniel 9:21,24 and Daniel 11:14. (There's some overlapping there, in some of those verses, where two different Hebrew words for vision occur in the same verse). The verses that refer to the appearance of a "man clothed in linen" use a different Hebrew word (Daniel 10:7,8,16). In those instances, it means "sight, phenomenon, spectacle."

I hope you've noticed the many times that the Hebrew words chazown and mar'eh (both meaning vision) are used interchangeably in Daniel 8. Unless there's evidence to the contrary, it's reasonable to believe that chazown and mar'eh are synonymous in Daniel 10 also.

Consider these texts:

"Now I have come to give you an understanding of what will happen to your people in the latter days, for the vision pertains to the days yet future" (Daniel 10:14).

"In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a message was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshazzar; and the message was true and one of great conflict, but he understood the message and had an understanding of the vision" (Daniel 10:1).

I think we both agree that "the appearing" is intimately connected with the heavenly messenger coming to Daniel for the purpose of communicating an unfolding of future history.

Consider this phrase in Daniel 10:1, "the message was true and one of great conflict." I believe it's clear that the great struggle referred to here is the prophetic age-long depiction of war (Daniel 11-12) or Daniel's life-long struggle to understand the prophecies (Daniel 7:28, 8:27, 9:2,3, 10:12), not in any sense of fighting against heavenly beings.

I'm happy to answer your questions.

1. What did the prophet not understand in Daniel 12:8?

We can't be certain of Daniel's thoughts but the text clearly implies that Daniel desired a straightforward explanation to the outcome (or, final end) of the revelation. My guess is that Daniel wanted greater clarity on the last part (12:5-7). The response to Daniel's inquiry was that the words of the message were concealed and sealed up until the end time. My point is that Daniel 10-12 is a single happening and that Daniel 10:1 is a commentary on the whole experience. In that brief preface, Daniel said very clearly that "he understood the message and had an understanding of the vision" (Daniel 10:1). I take that to mean that Daniel did grasp the essence of the vision.

Steve wrote:2) Can the theses, especially regarding the Sanctuary, articulated in chapter 9, "A Commentary on Daniel 8" be harmonized with chapter 23 of "The Great Controversy," entitled "What Is the Sanctuary?"

It all depends on the measure you use. William Miller heard the "Adventist" explanation and rejected it. My sympathies are with William Miller. I agree with the essence of his message and I expect him to be vindicated.

Steve wrote:3) Eugene: is "The Ends of Time" a living document, in that you update it periodically as you study, or is it as it stands, as copywritten in 1986?

The most dramatic change to the document since 1986 was in my translation of Daniel 9:26. I replaced the phrase "but not for himself" (KJV) with "and have nothing" (NASB). The commentary has stayed the same. I plan on using this forum for revisions. One afterthought to the Ends of Time book can be found in the thread, The Hebrew of Daniel 8:14. There I ask if the Hebrew of Daniel 8:14 can be translated, “Then shall holiness be vindicated.” My exegesis of Daniel 8 cries out for that translation but I haven't as yet received a believable, authoritative comment on that viewpoint.

There's more to my book than you see. I never posted my full set of notes on Revelation. I want to simplify everything I have and communicate it in conversation style on this board. The link on the index page titled, The Essence of Seventh-day Adventist Eschatology is to an enjoyable exchange I had with a non-Adventist on SDA eschatology, dated Oct-Dec 2002.

Correction: October 23, 2004. My paper is so dusty, distant and unimproved that I forgot that I added some material from an Adventist Review Insert p. 7, dated September 1994. See EOT pp. 51-52.

Hello Gene, and all,

I am happy to be able to 'stop by for a moment.' It has been a while since my first posts. I hope you are all well.

A Few Words:

Firstly, thank you very much, Eugene, for your prompt answers (above) to my "initial, specific questions." They were certainly well thought-through; and I immediately read them with great interest. I will post a follow-on response and (of course) more questions regarding your answers, when the time is appropriate.

To all fellow Seventh-day Adventists (and all interested in the last events of this great world), I offer two quotes from Ellen White to you for mental and spiritual ingestion and internalization, when considering Gene's book "The Ends of Time:"

1) "A spirit of pharisaism has been coming in upon the people who claim to believe the truth for these last days. They are self-satisfied. They have said, 'We have the truth. There is no more light for the people of God.' But we are not safe when we take a position that we will not accept anything else than that upon which we have settled as truth. We should take the Bible and investigate it closely for ourselves. We should dig in the mine of God's word for truth" (Review and Herald, June 18, 1889).

2) "There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible" (ibid., Dec. 20, 1892). (Both texts as quoted from Lee Gugliotto's tremendous "Handbook for Bible Study," but emphases are mine.)

A Brief Update:

When I first Googled upon your site and Ministry, I was searching specifically on "interpretation of Daniel 11." Having been dropped by hyperlink into the heart of "The Ends of Time," I jumped around from chapter to chapter, reading bits and pieces (and probably 80% of the document, although haphazardly), and truly wondering at the things inside. I wasn't expecting what I found--poking around on the Web for information as part of serious study so often leads to worthless material; this site certainly appeared to be anything but that. I determined then that I would read the whole book through quickly, and decide whether or not it was worth spending more time for an in-depth study of it. My first posts were written at this time, after I had finished chapter 9, as stated above. Since then, I have read through the entire book in a fairly cursory fashion, and have now begun a thorough study. At this time, I'm in chapter 9 once again. It seems to be a good stopping point for me to let the material settle in, before taking in more information. So Gene: I'm not a transient who ran from the site, after you gave me answers to my questions that were not 'smooth words.' I am here to seek the truth, and an understanding of your theology.

A Progress Report:

Here are some things that I have learned:

"The Ends of Time" IS AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT BOOK. I cannot stress this enough. It is a book that must be read slowly, carefully, deeply, critically and prayerfully; but with an open mind. I have read every word, every referenced Bible text--and more. If I have found things that are 'hard to understand' or that I may not agree with (which I have), I stop and restudy again and again. There is an extreme depth to this work and its concepts, that may not be grasped at first, second or even more readings. I have read the segments on Gene's experiences, and the not-fully-fulfilled dream of William Miller (both several times)--and it seems to me that I am beginning to recognize the hallmarks of God working in all these matters. In fact, I keep feeling that there may be Godly revelations in the book that are as seminal as William Miller's concepts, and possibly moreso. I am very excited! Gene, I don't know where I will end up after I finish my detailed study (I find it difficult to believe that I would harmonize completely with your--or anyone's--theology) but even at that, I am extremely grateful that you listened to God during those three weeks in your young college life. I am even more thankful that you have chosen to publish these things and discuss them--even if it only succeeds in helping to knock the church out of its Laodicean, dying state.

The result: I now am now, once again, consumed with the study of God's word. I have a renewed passion. I am thrilled with the workings of God throughout history. At times I see and feel things, as when I was initially consumed with studying "The Great Controversy" while a young man in my early college years, coming out of Catholicism. I can't even stop studying to ask the hundreds of questions that I want to ask. I see God's leading in specific situations in my life to enhance my understanding of Him and His word.

Therefore, I'll keep on. Gene, I'll start the questions flowing again for an ongoing discourse at the right time. I need to be able to ask rational questions, based on the totality of the study.

Lastly, a couple suggestions: hardcopy publish "The Ends of Time," and online publish those things 'peeked at' concerning the book of Revelation. Regarding Revelation: if we the Forum members have to come up with all the questions needed to understand the Infilling that God gave you all those years ago, in "conversation style," we may all be dead of old age; or far better--Jesus will have arrived. Hallelujah!

Take care & God bless--
Steve