Misguided Zeal 
A Written Dispute Concerning The Date Of  The Rapture

 Compiled by
Timothy S. Morton




As usual our addition to our website, The Rapture In October?, has raised the ire of some of the brethen. One brother in particular who felt led to "straighten me out" and "show me the truth" sent me a lengthy email "critique" of my article. I welcome any critique that uses the Scriptures as a bases for judgment, but unfortunately, this brother took a lot for granted and relied little on Scripture.

The main disagreement between us was—can the very day of the rapture be determined. As mentioned in my article my contention is believers have no scriptural basis or precedent to seek a date. They are told to watch and wait for a person, Christ, not a predetermined date. Brother Mark felt otherwise and his zeal for his position went much farther than the Scriptures will allow. If you want to see the antics of some of the brethren read on. He starts like a house on fire, ridiculing and mocking, and ends in a whimper.

Below is our correspondence in its entirety. His words will be in blue while mine are in black. He initially sent me two emails which I will put together.



Correspondence 1


Dear Mr. Morton,
 
I have taken great pains and much time answering (about two hours).  Please prayerfully consider. RE:http://members.citynet.net/morton/rapture.htm
    
Material from your web site in
BLACK
  
one of the most notable date setters in the not too distant past was Baptist, William Miller.
 
Miller's problem was the fact there was no Israel.  Obvious error.
 
Miller later formed the "Seventh Day Adventist" denomination.
  
Check your sources:
  
1. Ellen G. White was the founder of the Seventh-day Adventist church.

Answer: The Seventh-day Adventist church was founded by Joseph Bates, Ellen G. White, and James White (not Ellen G. White alone).Resources: Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, vol. 10, 1996 ed., p. 170; vol. 11, pp. 873, 890.
 
Heretics all three.
  
Russell was founder of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society

 
JW.  Another heretic.
 
I hope you can see the problem here.  You are citing heretics.  Naturally they would not know the correct date as the Holy Spirit would not be instructing them.  HELLO?
  
Now you do have a fine web site.  Your doctrine is superb.  You are even a KJV defender!  Outstanding.
 
I cannot find one error in your doctrine except the date setting prohibition.
 
Although i surmise you are a Baptist, which likely means you are against alcohol consumption.  A prohibition which is socially good but not biblical. So that would be one doctrinal error.  But that is not my interest here.
  
Van Impe,  Whisenant,  Paul and Jan Crouch et. al.   ..... merchandisers.
  
Harold Camping,
  heretic
 
Peter Ruckman  him I don't know except he is KJVO.
 
Well, that's your list.  I wouldn't quote any of them for support for or against doctrine. That is your error.
  
On the other hand if you look more carefully, you may find good men who made errors in calculating a return date.  Does that mean it is wrong to seek the date?  Does it?
 
What is your scriptural support to not seek a date?
  
 
The Formula Analyzed

My reply to this email was, I do not place much confidence in the various timelines and dates that some of the brethren dwell on.

  
You cited no brethren that I see.
 
Question:  Do you place much confidence in the Bible?
 
If so then why not argue from Scripture?
 
A brief look at Cobb's formula reveals many potential variables.

Over and over again the Bible says the time the Israelites wandered in the wilderness was 40 years, not 14000 days [Ex. 16:35; Num 14:33-34, 32:23; Deut. 2:7; Acts 7:36, 42; etc.].

 
Ex:16:35: And the children of Israel did eat manna forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat manna, until they came unto the borders of the land of Canaan.
 
Verse 35 says nothing about wandering.  It says they ate manna 40 years, which is correct. Actually 40 years and 10 days.
  
Num 14:33-34 does say 40 years  More below.
  
De:2:7: For the LORD thy God hath blessed thee in all the works of thy hand: he knoweth thy walking through this great wilderness: these forty years the LORD thy God hath been with thee; thou hast lacked nothing.
 
Verse 7 says nothing about wandering as a result of punishment, nothing about a generation.
 
Ac:7:36: He brought them out, after that he had shewed wonders and signs in the land of Egypt, and in the Red sea, and in the wilderness forty years.
 
Verse 36 says He shewed wonders and signs forty years, which He did.  There were signs and wonders before the wandering.
  
Ac:7:42: Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness?
  
Verse 42 says nothing about wandering. Yes they were there 40 years but they wandered because of disobedience 38.8 years.  They were disobedient before the wandering when they made the golden calf as well. Which golden calf making was before God's punishment for not entering in at the first.  And was not part of the generation curse.
 
Therefore Numbers 14:33,34 is your strongest evidence from scripture.  But is easily answered.  God merely included the time already spent in the desert.  Much like a judge credits time served today.  Nevertheless the generation is still defined as 14,000 days.
  
Now I don't know this Cobb fellow ( I got this info in another place), but if you're going to rebut him you need to do it on solid foundation.
 
 Although there is some consensus that March 15, 445 BC was the day the decree was given to rebuild Jerusalem Neh. 2:6-7; Dan. 9:25], it is not certain.
 
Question... what do you believe?  Is that date correct in your opinion?
  
Likewise it is by no means certain that April 6, 32 AD was the day Christ road into Jerusalem
 
If you accept the first date you must accept the second.....just so you know.
 
Most do agree that the date of the destruction of Jerusalem was August 5, 70 AD, but so what? Its not 14000 days from anything significant.
  
Get your head out of the sand man!  Coincidence is not a Kosher word!  It's 14,000 days from April 6th, 32 A.D.  Is it that you do not want to see? (Not a sarcastic question:see way below)
  
True the Israeli military recaptured Jerusalem on June 6, 1967, but what does this mean?

  
Nothing unless you're considering Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
 
This is a dual fulfillment.  First the desolation of 70 A.D.  then the Abomination of Desolation yet future.
 
But the date of June 6, 1967 is the date Jerusalem was compassed with armies.
  
any unbiased observer can see the Gentiles are still in power and in control of the world.
   
Yep.  But scripture is talking about Jerusalem, not the world.  Unless you are one of those Kingdom Now people.   PLEASE say you're not.
 
What does a Jewish feast called Rosh-Hashana have to do with the Body of Christ? Nothing. The 7 feasts belong to the Jews.

 
Well, MY boss is a JEWISH carpenter.  And my JEWISH boss is head of the Church.  Do you see a connection?
 
Jesus fulfilled each feast on the exact day, in order.  The Feast of Trumpets is next in line.
  
It Turns Believers From Faith to Sight
Instead of living a life pleasing to God because of what He has done for them and because of faith in the truth of the Scriptures, date-setting leads people to trust in viable signs. There would be little living by faith. Also, if the rapture is not going to meet the Lord until a certain date in the future, there is little incentive to "get right" until that time gets close.


LOL.....viable signs?  You don't believe them...and you're a Christian!
  
WAY BELOW:RIGHT HERE:
 
Quite the reverse actually.  My wife didn't want to hear about the 14,000 day thing.  She wants grandchildren before the Lord returns.  She was very upset. She didn't want to believe it.  After a season, she came to realize that knowing Oct 4th is a strong possiblilty for the Lord's return, she said it caused Jesus' return to be more real to her.  The return was not some ethereal event that would happen sometime in a land far, far away.   It was REAL.  And it could be here SOON.  She is making ready for the Lord's return.  She is even cleaning up the attic (as well as her life situations, the attic was just amusing to me),  so anyone left will not think she was a poor housekeeper and have that reflect badly on Christ!
 
It Turns From Hope to Disappointment
The failures of the Date-Setters causes some to become doubtful and disappointed. They were built up for a huge event and then become dejected when it fails to come to pass.

 
Fear of failure is no excuse.   Be a Berean.  Acts 17:11. Do these date setters espouse good doctrine?  Are they qualified to teach? What does Scripture say and argue from Scripture.
 
It Causes God's Word to Be Mocked And Ridiculed

 
That's a new one.  When did this start?  And pray tell me sir, are you mocking God's Word?  Be careful....if 14,000 is right...then you may be.
  
It Distracts Believers From What They Should Be Doing
Instead of inventing elaborate schemes to "predict" the rapture, believers should spend their time doing what the Scriptures clearly say for them to do: pray, study doctrine, seek lost souls, and help the needy.
 
 
This is your most foolish statement.  How many times does the Scripture tell us to "watch"?   HMMM?  I count 17 in the NT.
 
Elaborate schemes?  Please, there is none so blind....
  
Bible Believers have always rightly contended that the rapture was imminent. Prophetically nothing else must occur before the Lord comes FOR His saints.
 
LOL.....true but you get annoyed when an actual date comes up.
 
As another said, "This verse strongly emphasizes that our focus is upon waiting for Christ, which would exclude knowing the time of His arrival. For if the time of His coming could be known, then we would be waiting for a certain day or hour. Instead, eager waiting for a person implies that timing is not known."
 
That's just nonsense.  Do you get up at a certain time in the morning just for fun or do you get up at a certain time in the morning because you have to up that early to do what is necessary and still be able to get to work ON TIME?  A set time for the day?
 
And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

How much plainer do you want it? We are to wait on Christ, not wrath.

 
You waiting for wrath?   Not me.  I'm exiting stage UP!
 
Our Blessed Hope is the imminent return of Christ in the rapture. We are to look for Christ Himself, not signs relating to His coming.
 
This is just draining.  I hope you've read this far.  Why would you not want to know when?  The early Christians were constantly looking for WHEN.  You don't want to be as the early Church?   
  
I'm exhaused.  God bless and open your eyes
 
Mark


 
Mark's second initial email


Before the rapture there will be a resurrection and before the resurrection there will be a shout and a blast from a trumpet. All of this will probably not take more than 30 seconds.

 
HERESY.
  
Where did you get this 30 seconds? 
 
NOT FROM SCRIPTURE.
 
THE TRUTH:
 
1Co:15:52: In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
  
Be not offended young man, even Peter was withstood and rebuked to his face by Paul the Apostle.
 
I am not Paul, but the principle holds.
  
Mark

 
 
 
These are the kind of letters I get from time to time. A lot of talk but little substance. Brother Mark misrepresented my position in two key places in his critique. One you will find in my reply, below, and the other I didn't mention. [He accused me of looking for "wrath" right after quoting my statement that said we are to look for Christ.] Furthermore, in his second letter he accused me of spreading heresy, but he did have a Scriptural reference which I deal with in my reply.

When people are fast and loose with the facts and misrepresent other people or myself, I usually don't spend much time with them. I have found most are not seeking the truth of the Scriptures, they have an agenda.

My first reply.
 
 

 
I consider all my email until I have a good reason not to, which you provided me with your first words. You intentionally misquote and thus misrepresent me and my position by using a partial quote to make it look like I said,  

"Miller later formed the "Seventh Day Adventist" denomination."
 
when I actually said, "Those who followed Miller later formed the "Seventh Day Adventist"

I suppose the statement, "Those who followed Mark [you] later robbed a bank" really means "Mark [you] later robbed a bank"
denomination."
 
If you can't deal with such a simple statement without distorting it to support your view, I don't have any more time to waste on the rest of your words.
 
In Christ,
Tim Morton
Morton Publications
 
   
My reply to his second initial letter.


More of the same.
 
Boy you are quick to imply someone is a heretic even when they make an obvious statement of opinion. As for the 30 seconds, it was a maximum guess. 10 seconds or one microsecond is less and would fit my statement. Furthermore, the context [something you apparently don't consider] of 1 Cor. 15:51-52 is being "changed" into an incorruptible body, not the rapture in itself. 1 Thes. 4:13-18 which does deal with the resurrection and rapture specifically clearly indicates a time period between the two with "the dead in Christ shall rise FIRST" in vs 16 and the word "then" in vs. 17. So comparing the two passages tells us believer's bodies, both those dead and alive, will be changed instantaneously when they are changed, and that the resurrection will occur a short, undefined time before the rapture. That is, the dead in Christ will be instantaneously changed shortly before the living believers are instantaneously changed, and then they will meet in the air.
 
By the way, my grandchildren don't think I am that young.   
 
In Christ,
Tim Morton
Morton Publications

 
I answered his second letter, but concerning his first letter I truly don't have the time to debate with people who misrepresent facts and statements. Mark, however, didn't take this too well. You can tell in his next letter.
 
  
Obviously you need the more "genteel" touch.
 
Hike up your panties and gird your loins like a man.
 
You didn't answer anything else because you can't.  At least biblically.
 
As to the "young man" comment...your picture on the web appears quite young...unless I was perhaps looking at your son?  Or a very old picture?
 
Those "who followed" Miller?   Okay I'll give you that one...I was wrong...though you weren't clear...I was still wrong.
 
All better?
  
I thought not.
 
People easily offended are themselves immature...morally and in their walk.  Unless you were having a particularly bad day.....death of loved one (that would totally excuse you), migraine (I get those so that would qualify) , (XYZ?),  was there anything that prevented you from answering biblically?
 
C'mon is that the best you have to offer?  Grandpa?  Too old to cut the mustard?  (I don't even know what that means, I just used to hear it as a child, it sounds challenging so I'll use it)
  
Please tell me you're not one of those pacifist, Crystal Cathedral Christians.
 
If you put out a web page for the whole world to see, you should be ready to defend your beliefs.
  
1Pe:3:15: But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
  
AS FOR MYSELF:  Ga:4:18: But it is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing,
  
Now will I know if you walk the talk, so also the angels in heaven who desire to look into these things.
  
Mark

 
If you have never seen someone who wants to pick a fight, here is one. It is filled with ridicule, judgmentalism, and condescending rhetoric. I wasn't in the least "offended" but he pretends I am. However, since he did admit he twisted my words I answered his claims.

[There are a couple factual mistakes in my letter which I correct with this color [...] type]

 
 
My my, the letters I get. If I had a nickel for every insecure "macho man" like you who seems to have plenty of time on his hands to cruise the Internet searching for someone to argue with, I would take a long vacation somewhere. What is it? Can't get anyone else to listen to you? That is usually the case. By the way your letter did not offend me. I have been called everything, including the Antichrist, and that didn't offend me either. I just don't have time for people who are so shoddy with truth and facts.

Since you did admit you misquoted me and twisted my words and also jumped to conclusions about my age [your track record is not very good so far], I will deal a little with your "questions." However, I will have to take it easy because apparently third grade English is not very clear to you.

After all you ramblings in your first letter your first question is,

"Does that mean it is wrong to seek the date?  Does it? What is your scriptural support to not seek a date?"

There is no command or precedent in the Bible for any believer to seek the date of Christ's return in the rapture. Paul. Peter, John, etc., did not instruct anyone to try and find the date neither did they seek it
themselves. One reason is it is variable. Christ could have returned in Acts if the Jews would have received Him. Read my book "The Difference Is In The Dispensations" for more info. All you have to do is show me from Scripture where Christians are to actively seek the DATE of the rapture to prove me wrong.

Your next question is,
"Do you place much confidence in the Bible? If so then why not argue from Scripture?"

One can make just as an effective argument from what the Bible does not say as well as from what it does say. For instance, the Bible does not say Simon Peter shot his mother-in-law with a 44 magnum revolver, so I guess it is alright for people like you to say that he did if it suits them. After you try to explain away the Bible references that mention 40 years you ask another question about March 15, 445 BC 
"what do you believe?  Is that date correct in your opinion?"

There you opened a can of worms. Your whole system is based upon that date and you failed to prove it from Scripture. You didn't even mention a Scripture. Since you don't seem to know, the burden of proof is upon YOU to prove that date is correct from Scripture. It is not on me to disprove it.
You are the one making the claims. Just to show you what kind of mess you have got consider this:

There are three possible dates the statement in Daniel 9:25 can refer to,

. 538 B.C. - Cyrus, King of Persia, issued a decree to Zerubbabel to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-3; and Ezra 6:1-5).
. 457 B.C. - Artaxerxes, King of Persia, issued a decree to Ezra authorizing him to reinstitute the Temple services, appoint judges and magistrates, and teach the Law (Ezra 7:11-26).
. 445 B.C. - Artaxerxes issued a decree to Nehemiah to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 2:1-8).

Most pick the last date simply because it fits there scheme. If one of the other two fit better they would pick it. Furthermore, neither of these dates are "written in stone" because yet today people can't verify them. Actually, if you compare Daniel 9:25 with Neh. 2 they don't fit very well. Daniel speaks of a "commandment to restore and build Jerusalem" while in Neh. 2:1-8 there is no commandment. Artaxerxes simply allows Nehemiah to go. Furthermore, the only thing written down were letters for people to "convey" him over there and to provide him timber to build with.

Anyway, to answer your question do I accept the date? No. I can't prove any date from Scripture and you can't either.

Although you didn't ask a question you made a very ignorant statement concerning 445 BC and April 2, 32 AD,

"If you accept the first date you must accept the second.....just so you know."

Hogwash. If I was a gambling man I would bet that you never figured those dates out for yourself. You just heard it somewhere and repeated it. Boy, talk about being gullible. I will tell you where those dates first come from so you'll know. They came from Sir Robert Anderson's book, The Coming Prince, published in 1894. Have you read the book? Are you familiar with the "mathematical gymnastics" Anderson used to get to those dates? A lot of believers over the years have swallowed it, but it has been disproved.

For instance, you probably swallowed "hook line and sinker" Anderson's claim that the years in Daniel's 70th week are "prophetic years" of 360 days. That's one of the details Anderson had to invent to get his system to work. However, if you will just check into it you will find that the Jews had solar, 365 day years just like today. They have lunar months and solar years. Every few years they ad an extra month to the year to make up the difference. [The Babylonians did the same]. Otherwise, they would be having summer in the winter months after a few decades. Check it out. Some people just don't think. Daniel speaks of "weeks" that represent years, and every year is a true solar, 365 day year. Prove me wrong from the Bible, big boy. Yes, I know about the 2520
[1260] days in Revelation, so spare me.

Also, Jewish months always begin with a full moon
[new moon] and this fact alone knocks 32AD out of contention for the year of the crucifixion unless you want Christ to be crucified on a Monday. This can be easily checked. Passover is dated from the first of the month [new moon] and Nissan 14 of 32 AD is a Monday/Tuesday. [Check the US Naval Observatory for proof unless you are chicken,http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/SpringPhenom.html ]. However, it is a Tue./Wed. in 31 AD. That fits much better. It allows for the full 3 days and three nights before the resurrection on Sunday [first day of the week]. You have a lot to overcome.

Also, did you ever count the days between March 14, 445 BC and April 6, 32 AD? Well, there are more than 173,880 days. It is actually 173,883 days. Check it with any date conversion calculator. This is something computers are good at. Anderson saw this discrepancy as well and invented 3 days from
supposed leap years to take off so he could get what he wanted. However, when counting days leap years are not involved. It just gets deeper and deeper. Want more? Check here,
http://www.raptureready.com/featured/reagan/dr31.html and here
http://www.hissheep.org/messages/when_was_the_crucifixion.html

You say, "But the date of June 6, 1967 is the date Jerusalem was compassed with armies."

Nonsense. That was 70 AD when Jerusalem was ransacked by those armies. Luke 21:20 says when Jerusalem is compassed by armies its desolation was "nigh." Jerusalem was not left in desolation in June of 1967. What Jews fled to the mountains then? What "days of vengeance" took place?

I don't have any more time for this. As I said I believe the coming of Christ is imminent-He can come any time. He may come in October and He may come today. All believers are to watch and work until He does come. There is no precedent in the Bible for them to promote elaborate schemes to "predict" the date of His return. They are to "occupy" until He does come.

In Christ,
Tim Morton
Morton Publications



As I said the burden of proof is on him to prove his claims, but he doesn't try. He gets impatient and send me another email trying to provoke me to argue with him before he gets the one above.

 
You know,  I reread my last email and I thought it was a little over the top. 
 
I was prepared to apologize.
 
But I just can't have any respect for someone who pretends to know things and show them to the world and refuse to support such opinion with scripture.
 
So you can just sit there with your arms crossed and a pouty look on your face, and give me the dreaded silent treatment.
 
Is that how you got your way with your mama?
 
I really was going to lighten up, but you give me no reason.
 
BTW, heresy is any incorrect doctrine.  And your 30 seconds is incorrect doctrine.  Yeah, technically it's not doctrine, but the unwashed don't know that. And you put it out there for all to see.  Along with your opinions without foundation.
 
I'll bet you're even staring. 

When you are a child, you act as a child, speak (or not) as a child,  when you put away childish things, you will answer.  Grow up.
 
 
Mark



After he sent this he got my reply above and below is his response.


My my, the letters I get. If I had a nickel for every insecure "macho man"
 
AHHH....now THAT'S MORE LIKE IT.
 
You have some spunk after all.
  
 just don't have time for people who are so shoddy with truth and  facts.


EXAMPLE?  Show me my good fellow.
   
However, I will have to take it easy because apparently third grade English is not very clear to you.

LOL.....Good....I'm liking you more all the time.
   
There is no command or precedent in the Bible for any believer to seek the date of Christ's return in the rapture. Paul. Peter, John, etc., did not  instruct anyone to try and find the date neither did they seek it themselves. 
 
Yes, but you're arguing from silence...do better.
   
Christ could have returned in Acts if the Jews would have received Him. Read my book "The Difference Is In The Dispensations" for more info. All you have to do is show me from Scripture where Christians are to actively seek the DATE of the rapture to prove me wrong.

 
You wrote a book? 
 
"actively seek the DATE"? 
 
...... you ask a question using a word not found in the Bible...very clever. 
 
So I will answer using the closest approximation to the idea of seeking a "date".
 
M't:24:42: Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
M't:25:13: Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.
M'r:13:37: And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.
1Co:16:13: Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong.
 
BTW, this last scripture instruction justifies my being tough on you.  Quit you like men!
 
And for a second source (I know you'll want confirmation)...1Sa:26:15: And David said to Abner, Art not thou a valiant man? 
 
Valiant being in italics...so literally "art not thou a man?"
 
And a third....and fourth....Job:38:3: Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Job:40:7: Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
 
Now that's out of the way.....I would say we are commanded to WATCH.....so what do we watch for but Jesus' coming?
 
One can make just as an effective argument from what the Bible does not say  as well as from what it does say. For instance, the Bible does not say Simon  Peter shot his mother-in-law with a 44 magnum revolver, so I guess it is  alright for people like you to say that he did if it suits them.
 
What are you talking about?  I'm making no argument from silence...and you already have by saying there is no command to seek a date. (But I answered that already since the word "date" is not in the Bible).
  
There you opened a can of worms. Your whole system is based upon that date and you failed to prove it from Scripture. You didn't even mention a Scripture. Since you don't seem to know, the burden of proof is upon YOU to prove that date is correct from Scripture
 
Huh?   Cobb is correct.  You posted the scriptures yourself, though you dismissed them without scriptural refutation.

There are three possible dates the statement in Daniel 9:25 can refer to,
 
So which one do YOU believe?  I asked you that before.
   
Most pick the last date simply because it fits there scheme. If one of the other two fit better they would pick it.
 
But you wouldn't pick the last date because it does fit?  Or because you're a non-conformist?
 
Your own source says:
 
• 445 B.C. — Artaxerxes issued a decree to Nehemiah to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 2:1-8).

On the surface, the third decree, the one issued to Nehemiah, seems to be the most obvious candidate for the starting date of the prophecy, for it is the only one that specifically relates to the rebuilding of the city. For that reason, most commentators have selected it as the beginning of the 70 weeks of years.
 
Although you didn't ask a question you made a very ignorant statement concerning 445 BC and April 2, 32 AD,

"If you accept the first date you must accept the second.....just so you know."

Hogwash. If I was a gambling man I would bet that you never figured those dates out for yourself. You just heard it somewhere and repeated it. Boy, talk about being gullible. I will tell you where those dates first come from so you'll know. They came from Sir Robert Anderson's book, The Coming Prince, published in 1894. Have you read the book? Are you familiar with the "mathematical gymnastics" Anderson used to get to those dates? A lot of believers over the years have swallowed it, but it has been disproved.
 
For instance, you probably swallowed "hook line and sinker" Anderson's claim that the years in Daniel's 70th week are "prophetic years" of 360 days. That's one of the details Anderson had to invent to get his system to work. However, if you will just check into it you will find that the Jews had solar, 365 day years just like today. They have lunar months and solar years. Every few years they ad an extra month to the year to make up the difference. [The Babylonians did the same]. Otherwise, they would be having summer in the winter months after a few decades. Check it out.
  
Yep.  365 day years.  After 701 B.C.  At 701 B.C. the Jews, Romans, Chaldeans, Greeks, Chinese, etc....all changed their calendars to accommodate the extra 5+ days.
 
Now a learned man such as yourself has surely heard of the Mars - Earth wars?
 
Missler (thou not perfect himself and not the only source),  has some good information on this.
 
The Earth was created and set in orbit to make one circuit every 360 days.  Until 701 B.C.  In case you're interested the link is below.  the first and third parts are the most interesting.
 
http://www.khouse.org/6640/BP047/
   
Also, Jewish months always begin with a full moon and this fact alone knocks 32AD out of contention for the year of the crucifixion unless you want Christ to be crucified on a Monday. This can be easily checked. Passover is dated from the first of the month [new moon] and Nissan 14 of 32 AD is a Monday/Tuesday. [Check the US Naval Observatory for proof unless you are chicken, http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/SpringPhenom.html ]. However, it is a Tue./Wed. in 31 AD. That fits much better. It allows for the full 3 days and three nights before the resurrection on Sunday [first day of the week]. You have a lot to overcome.
  
Always?  What about cloudy days? Or a string of them?  How did they know?
 
Yes I've read (some) of Anderson.  It's on the net.

For example, in A.D. 32, the date of the true new moon, by which the Passover was regulated, was the night (10h 57m) of the 29th March. The ostensible date of the 1st Nisan, therefore, according to the phases, was the 31st March. It may have been delayed, however, till the 1st April; and in that case the 15th Nisan should apparently have fallen on Tuesday the 15th April. But the calendar may have been further disturbed by intercalation. According to the scheme of the eight years' cycle, the embolismal month was inserted in the third, sixth, and eighth years, and an examination of the calendars from A.D. 22 to A D. 45 will show that A.D. 32 was the third year of such a cycle. As, therefore, the difference between the solar year and the lunar is 11 days, it would amount in three years to 33 3/4 days, and the intercalation of a thirteenth month (Ve-adar) of thirty days would leave an epact still remaining of 3 3/4 days; and the "ecclesiastical moon" being that much before the real moon, the feast day would have fallen on the Friday (11th April), exactly as the narrative of the Gospels requires.[18]
 
Also, did you ever count the days between March 14, 445 BC and April 6, 32 AD? Well, there are more than 173,880 days. It is actually 173,883 days. Check it with any date conversion calculator. This is something computers are good at. Anderson saw this discrepancy as well and invented 3 days from
supposed leap years to take off so he could get what he wanted. However, when counting days leap years are not involved. It just gets deeper and deeper.

 
Okay then, your first source (Reagan) does not solve the 3 day problem.  And he ignores "the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times". as indicative of the start date.  Though he says earlier that seems to be the most obvious candidate for the starting date of the prophecy, for it is the only one that specifically relates to the rebuilding of the city.
 
The reasons he doesn't like it is 1), the day of crucifixion is off if set at 32 A.D.  and 2), it sets a Friday day of crucifixion and that doesn't square with his idea of three full days and three full nights in the ground.
  
So as to #1, the Jewish leaders were in a state of apostacy.  Even members of the ruling councils were Sadducees who didn't believe in the resurrection or angels!  It would be no surprise that they would have adjusted the day to fit their purposes (that is so as not to interfere with their commerce).  Also no surprise if they had cloudy weather and could not tell the day and simply made their best guess with straight faces.
  
As to #2, the three days and nights is from Matt 12:40 and is not speaking of Jesus' burial.  It speaks of his ministry.  Three summers and three winters in the heart of the earth (Israel)
   
Pastor Art, your second source doesn't even have Anderson's calculations correct.  Art says Anderson used 365 day years which he clearly did not.
  
I can't find a calculator that counts B.C. to A.D.  
 
Could you recommend one?
   
> You say,

"But the date of June 6, 1967 is the date Jerusalem was compassed with armies."

Nonsense. That was 70 AD when Jerusalem was ransacked by those armies. Luke 21:20 says when Jerusalem is compassed by armies its desolation was "nigh." Jerusalem was not left in desolation in June of 1967. What Jews fled to the mountains then? What "days of vengeance" took place?

 
Are you denying the possiblity of dual fulfillment?
 
The second desolation will be of the temple during the days of vengeance aka the tribulation, ushered in by the generation that sees these things draw nigh.
 
Now is not 6/6/1967 EXACTLY 14,000 days from 10/4/05 ?  Oh yes.
 
Is not the 4th the Feast of Trumpets.   Oh yes.
 
Is there not many who hold that Jesus will return (rapture) on this feast?  Oh yes.
 
Even Messianic Jews?  Oh yes.   One would be Edward Chumney. Ever read him?
  
Question:  why do you object?  Your grounds are based on saying this is wrong and that is wrong and this other may be correct.  But it is all supposition.  Why do you so vigorously kick against the goads?
  
Did not Jesus fulfill each and every Jewish feast on the feast day?
 
And as I stated earlier, Jesus is a Jew.  A Jew who is head of the church.  Jesus will never NOT be a Jew.  We will be the bride of a Jew.  That's what the Jewish feast days have to do with it.
  
I'm surprised you didn't bring up the old nugget "no man knoweth the day".
 
M't:24:36: But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
 
I suppose it is because you already know it is a Jewish idiom for Rosh HaShanah.  And also an allusion to the Jewish wedding festival. 
 
Feast of Trumpets aka Yom Hakeseh -  the hidden day.  Or the day of hiding.
 
Isa:26:20: Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast.
 
Here is a perfect example of a verse that has a dual fufillment.
 
Jesus prepared a place for us.  At the rapture he says come, we enter into our chambers, we hide ourselves (Yom Hakeseh) until the indignation be overpast (Jesus' indignation and pouring out of his wrath.
 
Second fulfillment:  At the abomination of desolation the Jews are to flee to the mountains, that is Petra and hide themselves (Yom Hakeseh) in the chambers in the walls until Jesus comes in power.
  
> I don't have any more time for this. As I said I believe the coming of
> Christ is imminent
  
But you don't like the idea of date setting?  God is a date setter.
 
30 seconds (where have I heard that?) at the link below should suffice.
 
http://www.linkjesus.com/future.htm
 
Many, many believe the Feasts of Trumpets is when the Lord will return.  It's just a matter of figuring out which year.
  
He may come in October and He may come today. All believers are to watch

 
 Watch?  Does that mean we are to... look...for a day?
   
There is no precedent in the Bible for them to promote elaborate schemes to "predict" the date of His return.
 
Let me get this straight.  We are to watch, watch for the day, but not seek the day?
 
Now that's silly.
   
Again I apologize for the email from my other mailbox. 
 
I'm so glad you answered.  It's about time.
  
Mark


Here is my response to the above letter.



>EXAMPLE?  Show me my good fellow.

What a short memory you have. You were shoddy with what I said about William
Miller.

>Yes, but you're arguing from silence...do better.

So you want me to add words to the Bible?

>...... you ask a question using a word not found in the Bible...very clever.

OK, since you couldn't handle my second grade English, let me rephrase the question. All you have to do is show me from Scripture  where Christians are to actively seek the DAY of the rapture to prove me wrong. "Day" is a Bible word, isn't it?

>So I will answer using the closest approximation to the idea of seeking a "date". Now that's out of the way.....I would say we are commanded to WATCH.....so what do we watch for but Jesus' coming?


That's no answer at all. I said all along believers are to watch and as Matt. 24:13 says "for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh." What do you know, I answered my own question about seeking a "day."  We are to watch for Christ as people watch for loved ones who go on a long trip without any definite date of return-like mothers, wives, and children who watch for a son, husband, or father who had gone off to war. At the most they only have a general idea when he may return, but they watch the highway everyday hoping to see him walk home . We are to watch the sky. Get back to reality man, and leave your fantasy world. In Bible times there were very limited and very slow means of communication.

>Huh?   Cobb is correct.  You posted the scriptures yourself, though you dismissed them without scriptural refutation.

You must be seeing things. Maybe spending too much time on Mars? I did not post any Scriptures of Cobb's argument, not ONE scripture. I just summarized what he said about a 14000 day generation. I then showed how Moses, Joshua, Stephen, and Paul said the time period was 40 years.

>So which one do YOU believe?  I asked you that before.


Yes, and I answered I didn't know for sure, but the 457 BC date looks better than 445 BC. Of course, you omit that this is the date Regan liked, too. Bullinger insists it should be 454 BC. By the way what does it matter what I believe? If you have the facts produce them!

>Now a learned man such as yourself has surely heard of the Mars - Earth >wars?

Yes, I've heard of it, but not from reading the Scriptures.

>Always?  What about cloudy days? Or a string of them?  How did they know?


They counted the days just like today. How do you think people publish calendars with the full moons listed? The Jews knew a lunar cycle was 29.5 days. Unless you live above the arctic circle you can tell day from night even on cloudy day, can't you? What, do you think they were idiots?

>So as to #1, the Jewish leaders were in a state of apostasy.  Even members of the ruling councils were Sadducees who didn't believe in the resurrection or angels!  It would be no surprise that they would have
adjusted the day to fit their purposes (that is so as not to interfere with their commerce).  Also no surprise if they had cloudy weather and could not tell the day and simply made their best guess with straight faces.


If I added enough ifs, buts, and maybes to my wallet I could call myself a millionaire. Is that the best you have?

>As to #2, the three days and nights is from Matt 12:40 and is not speaking of Jesus' burial.  It speaks of his ministry.  Three summers and three winters in the heart of the earth (Israel)


I will have to say this is the first time I have heard this. You completely ignore Christ's comparison in the same passage, Jonah. Jonah was inside the whale, but since you only take the verses you want at face value you might claim Jonah rode on top of the whale or maybe on top of Israel. Maybe he was riding a jet-ski. When one refuses to take passages literally he can make them say whatever he want. Just like the heart of man is within him [Hos. 7:8], the heart of the depths is in the sea [Ex. 15:8], the heart of the
earth means within it. Where in the Scriptures does it say heart means Israel? And you call me a heretic?

>I can't find a calculator that counts B.C. to A.D.  Could you recommend one?

This one works good for all dates and major calendars, http://www.geditcom.com/DateCalculator/classic.html Here is one online, http://www.rosettacalendar.com/

>The second desolation will be of the temple during the days of vengeance aka the tribulation, ushered in by the generation that sees these things draw nigh.

What has drawn nigh in the last 38 years? Nothing much with Israel has changed. "Nigh" means "very close." If someone is nigh to death, death is very near. When the armies were around Jerusalem in 70 AD it destruction was hours away.

>Is there not many who hold that Jesus will return (rapture) on this feast? Oh yes.

So what? Many believe in evolution, Santa Claus, and the Boogy Man too.

>Question:  why do you object?

Because the Scriptures do not give us the day of Christ's return.

>Did not Jesus fulfill each and every Jewish feast on the feast day?

He kept the feasts being an obedient Jew.

>And as I stated earlier, Jesus is a Jew.  A Jew who is head of the church. Jesus will never NOT be a Jew.  We will be the bride of a Jew.  That's what the Jewish feast days have to do with it.

So, I'll always be an American throughout eternity?

>I suppose it is because you already know it is a Jewish idiom for Rosh Hashanah.  And also an allusion to the Jewish wedding festival.


I've heard all this before, just prove it to me from the Bible.You do have a problem taking Scripture at face value, don't you? Idioms here, idioms there, just prove your idiom from the Scriptures.

>Watch?  Does that mean we are to... look...for a day?


No, it means we are to look for a person, Christ!

If you want to convince me, do this:

1. Prove from the Bible the decree in Daniel 9:25 occurred on March 14, 445 BC

2. Prove that Neh. 2 is the right decree above the one in Ezra.

3. Prove from the Bible the crucifixion was on April 6, 32 AD. I noticed you really struggle with this one and rightly so. You quote Anderson's work which is full of holes. He is off by three days, he got the date of the new moon wrong, he used 360 day years, etc. As another said his work is an adventure in "mathematical gymnastics." The Naval Observatory says the accuracy of there calculations is within 1 to 2 hours, thus Passover in 32 AD would have been on a Monday. Even if it was cloudy the Jews couldn't have
been more than a day off. Regardless 32 AD is impossible for the crucifixion.

4. Squeeze 483 real 365 day years into your system.

5. Prove from the Bible June 6, 1967 has any significance.

6. Prove from the Bible there is such a feast as Rosh-Hashanah or whatever it's called.

7. Prove your supposed idiom from the Bible that "the day nor the hour" refers to any type of Jewish anything. Show me how it alludes to a Jewish wedding from the Scriptures. You whole argument is based upon the Jewish traditions of men!

The reason I don't agree with this 14000 generation thing is it simply doesn't fit, and the way you and others will try to force it to fit at the expense of the Scriptures is sickening. Answer these 7 challenges from
Scripture and well discus more. You are the one making the claim to know something.


In Christ,
Tim Morton
Morton Publications


Mark's first response to my above letter.

>And you call me a heretic?

Stop right there.  Now your letting your emotions rule your reason.  If you can't do battle with language without losing your faculities then don't fight.  Just patiently respond.

I never called you a heretic.

I said heresy.  The 30 second teaching was heresy. I don't know you well enough to call you an heretick.  In fact, according to your web page information, you are far and away ahead of most Christians in correct
doctrine.

I don't get why you are angry.  I don't take myself that seriously, which is why I can laugh at some of your comments.  I thought you would get this by now.

I did say you had "spunk".  Which BTW, is a compliment.

 You don't really take yourself that seriously?

Anyway, I hope not.  But I am serious about the Feast of Trumpets return.

Now I'll go thru this last email completely and respond.  I couldn't let the "heretic" thing go on for another minute.


Mark


Strange. He openly accuses me of spreading "heresy," but insists he never called me a "heretic." He is trying to "strain at a gnat" and split hairs.

Here is his second response to my above letter.


Mr. Morton,

I think it best we end this conversation.

I had no idea you would become so upset.

I keep pointing out things and you keep saying there's nothing there.  Sort
of like when the Jews were listening to the parables, they just didn't get
it.  Or didn't want to.

Email me on Oct 5th at sundown (Jerusalem time) and gloat over my
foolishness.

Betcha don't get the chance.


Mark


My, how he has changed his attitude! In his first letters he was all "gung ho" and chomping at the bit" to prove me wrong, now after I asked him to scripturally prove the basic tenants of his position he wants to end it. He uses the excuse that I am upset. Hardly. I get letters like this often. People think I am upset when I challenge them to prove their claims.  However, I will admit I do get "perturbed" with people who teach tradition, opinion, or speculation for Bible doctrine and sometimes season my words pretty heavy with "salt" [Col. 4:6].

Here is my reply along with an email and picture Cobb sent me.


Brother,
 
What, me upset, hardly. I usually give back what I get, though.
 
Do these words sound familiar?
 
"Hike up your panties and gird your loins like a man.
You didn't answer anything else because you can't.  At least biblically"
 
Give me Scripture? You haven't given me any Scripture other than what we have in common, that is to watch. I gave you 7 problems I had with your position yet in all this correspondence you haven't addressed one of them from Scripture.
 
In your first email that you say you "took great pains" to write, you only give me two [ 2, dos] Bible references and one of them was about being a Berean. A far cry from you proving your case from Scripture.
 
In you second email you say I promote "heresy" and give one Bible reference which I dealt with in a reply. 
 
In your third email, filled with sarcasm and bitterness, you are very generous and give me two more references about giving an answer and being zealously affected, but they had absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand.
 
In your fourth email which you told me to overlook [but which expressed you sentiments], you didn't feel the need to provide any Scripture.
 
In your fifth letter other than the repeated "watch" verses [which I dealt with in my article] and three references on being valiant, you only present two other references. One on not knowing the day or the hour and one in Isa. Ah, but there was plenty of idioms, allusions, speculation, guesses, and "ifs."
 
Do these words sound familiar?
 
"But I just can't have any respect for someone who pretends to know things and show them to the world and refuse to support such opinion with scripture. So you can just sit there with your arms crossed and a pouty look on your face, and give me the dreaded silent treatment. Is that how you got your way with your mama?"
 
Brother, You, Cobb and a handful of others are the ones making these claims. You are the ones picking the fight. Cobb wrote me first; I didn't write him. You wrote me first; I didn't write you. Both of you ridiculed me because I don't share your opinion. I asked him and I asked you to prove your claims from Scripture and neither one of you have even attempted it. Your theory is NOT based on Scripture or you would have proved it by now. It is based upon Jewish tradition, questionable dates, distorted years, an impossible crucifixion date, and human reasoning. Scripture is only used as a garnish around the edges of the plate. Cobb was very much dismayed that the leading premillennial prophecy teachers of the day [Hunt, Ice, Lindsay, etc.] would not swallow his claims. Could it be that they may see something he and you don't?  
 
I have no malice towards you, Brother. All I want you to do is prove your claims. Now, you have clammed up on me. Face the 7 questions like a man, not like a shy schoolgirl. You should have no problem with this kind of talk since you use it so freely. By the way I can be quite sarcastic, too. As you have probably noticed. But it is usually not until I'm provoked.
 
Below I have included one of Cobb's emails to me with a photo he put together. I thought it was kind of funny. Childish but funny. Your side needs some better spokespersons. He later apologized for it, though.
 
In Christ,
Tim Morton
Morton Publications
 
  
Cobb's email:
 
"No man knows the day or hour" 
"No man knows the day or hour"
"No Man knows the day or hour"
Squawk!  Squawk! Squawk!
 
Will these squawking parrots ever learn what they are saying is in fact the Feast of Rosh-Hashanah?
 
Will these squawking parrots ever realize they are the "Last Day Mockers" who have mocked and scoffed at fellow believers who have tried to discern the end of the Church Age?
 
Will these squawking parrots ever understand the 14000 Day Generation clearly laid in scripture they should have been able to discern on June 6, 1967?
 
 
 

Here is Mark's anemic reply.


here it is
  
You want me to prove the date of April 6th 32 AD. I cannot, but neither can you disprove it. Nor prove any other date.
 
You want me to prove the date Artaxerxes decree. I cannot, but neither can you disprove it. Nor prove any other date.
 
Yet we both believe Jesus did enter Jerusalem to be crucified.
 
We both believe there was a decree.
 
Now since neither can be proved,  whose beliefs concerning the dates fit the model best?
 
You don't like the idea of Anderson's using 360 day years?  Why then does God use 360 day years in Revelation?  Does God not know it's 365+ days a year on this Earth?
 
Tell me the meaning of this scripture. The answer is easy.  However, make sure your answer does not contradict any other scripture.  If you are correct, I will continue.  If your answer is incomplete or wrong, I will take it as a sign we are not to continue.
 
M't:24:22: And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
 
 
Mark



Notice he didn't try to prove anything, because he can't. My response is below.


 
>You want me to prove the date of April 6th 32 AD. I cannot, but neither can you disprove it.
 
Finally, you admit your theory is based at least partially on speculation and assumption. However, this is likely the easiest part of your theory to disprove as I mentioned before. The universe is God's clock. Our measurement of time is based upon the movement of elements of the universe, particularly the sun and moon [Gen. 1:14]. They move by God's direction in very precise manner and barring any intervention by God [Joshua's long day, etc.], they are trustworthy to measure by. The Naval Observatory merely measures these movements and has calculated the 32 AD Passover according to Ex. 12:6. The Bible states specifically Christ arose on the first day of the week [Sunday]. The 32 AD Passover could have not been earlier than Sunday. Unless there was strong evidence God intervened in the length of days since then, this evidence would stand up in court. 
 
>Nor prove any other date.
 
I don't have to prove anything, the burden is upon you.
 
>You want me to prove the date Artaxerxes decree. I cannot, but neither can you disprove it. Nor prove any other date.
 
Again, I don't have to.
 
>Yet we both believe Jesus did enter Jerusalem to be crucified.
 
Yes.
 
>We both believe there was a decree.
 
Yes.
 
>Now since neither can be proved,  whose beliefs concerning the dates fit the model best?
 
Ah, now it gets subjective. Who designs the model and how many models can their be?
 
>You don't like the idea of Anderson's using 360 day years?  Why then does God use 360 day years in Revelation?  Does God not know it's 365+ days a year on this Earth?
 
There you go getting sarcastic and condescending again. The first mention of "year" in the Bible [Gen 1:14] deals with the measurement of time. Where does God use 360 day years in Revelation? Nowhere, the time periods in Revelation concerning the Tribulation are marked by "days" [11:3, 12:6], "months" [11:2, 13:5], and "times" [12:14]. The Lord purposely did not wish to use years to describe the time periods because they are flexible. [The time periods in Daniel are not "years" either.] However, He does use years when defining the length of the Millennium [20:2-7]. Think about that a few days before you jump to conclusions. 
 
>Tell me the meaning of this scripture. The answer is easy.  However, make sure your answer does not contradict any other scripture.  If you are correct, I will continue.  If your answer is incomplete or wrong, I will take it as a sign we are not to continue.
 
>M't:24:22: And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
 
Well, I'm sure my answer won't match yours if you read this verse like you do Matt. 2:40. Furthermore, your arrogance is evident since you deem only your answer as "correct" and contend you are well equipped to judge mine. However, Matt. 24 is one of the most difficult chapters in the Bible to unravel. All one can do is take it at face value the way we should all Scripture. The context is the tribulation [vs. 21], thus the days of the Tribulation must be shortened to ensure the "elect" [Jews, Isa. 45:4, 65:9, Rom. 11:28] will be saved through. This, again, indicates the time period is variable. Daniel also shows how it can be variable by listing different time periods for Tribulation events: 1260 days in Dan. 7:25; 1290 days in 12:11; 1335 days in 12:12; 2300 days in 8:14. I have never read anyone who could explain all these differences.
 
Matt. 24:22 is evidence that the time periods of prophecy concerning the Tribulation are not fixed. It is set up for seven years but it will be less than that. This is nothing new. What if Israel would have accepted Christ and not crucified Him? Things would have been entirely different. The Lord, however, had a contingency plan, the Church.
 
By the way, I am thinking about putting this correspondence in its entirety on my website for all to see. What do you think? I don't need your permission, but I will ask anyway. If you are as confident as you claim then you shouldn't care. You should actually jump at the chance to get more exposure for your theory. If you are afraid I will just leave your name off of it and make it anonymous. I think it would be helpful to people to see the methods, attitude, and reasoning of people who hold your position. You should expect this. I always do when I write. I have seen my words from articles to emails on several websites I've never heard of. One guy actually took some of my material and put his name to it. He also told people he was a buddy of mine. I never heard of him. 
 
What say ye? How sure are you of your words? The odds are quite high you will write back even though I wasn't "correct" in my answer. I understand human nature, because I got one.
 
In Christ,
Tim Morton
Morton Publications
 
Mark's final letter is below.


What say ye? How sure are you of your words? The odds are quite high you will write back even though I wasn't "correct" in my answer. I understand human nature, because I got one.
 
Oh it's quite evident you have a human nature. Your threats and tantrums testify thereto.
 
However it would be unkind of me not to give you the correct answer, less you think you bested me, leaving you to continue in your unlearned state.
   
Your answer is incorrect.
 
The number of days is not variable.
 
The days are fixed.
 
The bible definition of a "day" is an evening and a morning.
 
The time between the evening and the morning will be shortened.
 
A day will be shortened to a number less than 24 hours. 
  
This concludes our discussion.
  
Mark
   
P.S.
 
Do not blame me for your musings being posted on someone else's web site.  What have I to do with that?
 
As to your threats....  they are unseemly for someone who claims to be in Christ.  But if you must give in to your lower nature, post our emails in their entirety so that each man may judge for himself.  And use my name as you have threatened.  As you stated, you don't need my permission anyway.



His explaination of Matt. 24:22 is full of holes. In addition to what I state below consider this,
  • The first mention of a "day" in the Bible [Gen. 1:5] defines it as the daylight period.
  • The legal or civil Jewish day is measured from dusk to dusk [Lev. 23:32].
  • Christ said, "Are there not twelve hours in the day?" [John 11:9]
  • The "time between evening and morning" as Mark used it is actually night time. Is Mark saying only the nights will get shorter? I doubt it.
  • If a day [one earth rotation] is shortened then it would take more than 365.25 days to make a year. [Remember, a year is the time it takes the earth to orbit the sun, not a certain number of days.] This appears to be the opposite of what Mark wants. He implies a 360 day year during the Tribulation. However, to get that by adjusting the length of the day, each day must be lengthened so there are only 360 days during a year [earth orbit of the sun]. The easiest way to get this is keep the days the same length and speed the earth up slightly in its orbit around the sun to shave off 5.25 days.  Check here for more details. 
  • A day cannot be less than 24 hours because the definition of an hour is "one twenty fourth part of the natural day." If the day is shortened then the hours are shortened as well. In Bible times the actual daylight period was divided into 12 hours [John 11:9] and the length of the hours varied with the length of the day.
Notice how Mark's zeal has caused him to act smug and arrogant about something that is riddled with error. He has zeal, "but not according to knowledge" [Rom. 10:2].

And here is my final letter to him.


Brother,
 
One thing that always amazes me is how people can be blind to their own behavior. You threatened me if I did not read your mind and come up with your answer, [which is pure speculation like most of your other contentions]. If I failed you threatened to cut me off from your immense learning. Of course your don't even address the Scripture I gave for my answer [which is pretty much speculation as well]. That is your way. Your letters from the first are laced with sarcastic, condescending rhetoric, and you talk about me? My, my. Who has the thin skin?
 
I'll drop you a line in a couple months, that is, if the Lord doesn't come in the next few days.
 
Oh, by the way, "days" in the Bible often refers to a single period of time, "last days," "days of Noah," "tribulation of those days," so if the "days" are shortened [not "day"], the time period is shortened. As usual you distort Scripture to conform to your view. I'm curious, if a day is only between "evening and morning" [night] as you use the phrase, what is the time period between morning and evening, the actual daylight period? Christ called this period "day" [Luke 18:7, etc.] Is this a mystery for the "Twilight Zone?" 
 
One more thing. I found the web site of the person who is supposed to be the first to develop the 14,000 day generation thing, http://wonderful1.com/wst_page3.html, and he said,
 
"I am is no way saying something will happen...as you read this, please remember, anything discussed here which is in the future is all speculation."
 
That is the right attitude.
 
In Christ,
Tim Morton
Morton Publications
 
 
  
Concluding Remarks

It's clear Mark has zeal, even an honorable zeal. He wants to see the Lord return, and that is most honorable. The problem arises when Mark and others like him begin to insist on the date of the Lord's return. There their zeal takes them beyond the Scriptures into the realm of speculation. Mark, very hesitantly, admitted to this speculation.

One of the main faults of the date-setters is they state either directly or indirectly that the Lord can only come on the day[s] they set. This is plainly contrary to the Bible. The early Christians were looking for the eminent return of the Lord and thus should we. The Bible simply does not specify a "day" the Lord will return.

The only certainty of the 14,000 day generation theory is it is exactly 14,000 days from June 6, 1967 to October 4, 2005. Everything else is questionable or disproved. I will readily concede the Lord very well may return on October 4th or 5th 2005, but He may return on any another day, before or after. That is what eminency means.

Dear Reader, is the coming of the Lord in the rapture your prevailing anticipation? Is that what you want to see more than anything? I doubt that is true for most believers. Their behavior betrays them. As an incentive the Lord will even give a crown to those who truly love His soon appearing [2Tim. 4:8], but believers should want to see Him and worship Him for all He has done for them, not for a reward. The crown is just icing on the cake. Nevertheless, the Lord will come, and He will come at a time of His own choosing. The question is will you be "ashamed" at His appearing [John 2:28]? It is entirely up to each of us.

Amen!