One Day at a Time

BIBLE-CHRONOLOGY (Overview & Critique) - Derek Walker

1. History

A. Sir Edward Denney-the discovery of JUBILEE-principle which combined with UNRECKONED TIME formed the basis for the REDEMPTION CHRONOLOGY as the controlling structure of time.

It also revealed the way 490 year cycles are compatible with the fundamental structure of ONE DAY = 1000 years. Denney also gave

us the correct understanding of Daniel’s SEVENTY WEEKS.

Denney therefore laid the foundations for the subject.

B. Gratten Guinness developed the typological application of the

7 TIMES prophecy, establishing some key end-time dates for the ending of the Times of the Gentiles. Although his dates were a pre-fulfilment

to the final dates of 1948 and 1967, they pointed out 1933 as a key year which led to the further discoveries by A.E. WARE and his team.

C. A.W and his team were led to mark the key date of June 12th as the cutting off of the Gentiles (Romans 11), thereby marking the end of a major cycle of time that began with the cutting off of Israel in 33 AD, 1900 years before. Aware of 2000 years =4x490 year cycles (+40 Jubilees), it was deduced that God must have measured these Gentile Times in the basic 354 day year. This led to a starting date of the 1960 years at October 11th 33AD, and thus the cutting off of Israel was the day before (October 10th)-all dates Gregorian. Being about 6 months after the Cross this agreed well with the Luke 13 measurement of Jesus ministry.

Assuming a fundamental Bible Year of 354 years they tried to use this as for the basis for a complete Bible Chronology, only departing from it for the time of Israel where the Bible made it clear that a luni-solar year was used. Thus from Creation to the Exodus a 354 day year was used.

Now we can accept this because 33-1933 indicates God measures Gentile years in 354 day years. Moreover before the Flood the lack of seasonal variation meant a solar year was not needed. Likewise a solar year was only really needed by God’s people from the Exodus. Now it is possible that a luni-solar year was also in operation, but it is a reasonable assumption that God measured this Gentile time in 354 day years.

Then when He separated Israel He gave them a distinct luni-solar calendar based on the Jubilee Cycle (not the Metonic Cycle) - as cited by Julius. Africanus. Based on these concepts they were able to construct a remarkably accurate chronology of the Bible back to the date of Creation.

Even if they were not always right, AW and his team broke much new ground and massively moved the BC forward by developing many of the ways of thinking necessary to getting exact calendar dates for the Bible.

The corrections we make, although important, are of the nature of fine-tuning a engine that they developed. However this engine needs these adjustments or it will never work properly. It has personally taken me many years (on and off) to reach the point of sufficiently understanding the inner workings of this engine and how it was put together, to feel able and competent to try and take it apart and put it back together as it should be. The end result will show if this venture is successful or not.

Problems: However despite their claims that they had found a perfect chronology there remained obvious problems and incompleteness.

1. Understanding the nature of time after 1933 became difficult and involved mystical interpretations why the rapture did not happen then. Attempts to make predictions were mostly unsuccessful.

2. Daniel’s 70 Weeks do not work out to the day, unlike apparently the more popular, but inferior Anderson calculation (which has now been shown to be in error by 4 days and by a month). We expect the correct chronology to have the 70 Weeks ending at Christ’s death & resurrection.

3. They had to adjust the start of Daniel’s 70 Weeks by 14 years from well-established history of the time (444BC-458BC). This was corrected by Martin Thompson (MT) who modelled their chronology with a computer program, having deduced they used the Jubilee based luni-solar calendar rather than the later Metonic system. He found an error in one of the intercalated months. He also realised from strong biblical reasons that the starting point was Ezra’s decree in 458BC not Nehemiah’s

in 444BC (which AW dated to 458BC against historical evidence).

This was Nisan 1, 458BC, and combined with a more precise modelling of the calendar led to a refined and simplified model of the chronology of Christ, whose winning advantage was an agreement with the times in Daniel 12 concerning the Tribulation re-run (1260+1260+75=2595 days). However it lost a key revelation of AW concerning the week after His baptism. Neither did it solve other problems with AW’s model such as the age of Christ at His baptism was not 30, the fact that He would break the law during his 40 day temptation, and maintaining AW’s assumption that His calendar was 354 days meant other problems remained. However these issues did not affect the large scale chronology much. Also MT helpfully clarified the key distinction between calendars & chronologies. Without MT’s computer model further progress on the chronology in developing improvements and testing them would not have been possible.

4. Other things difficult to explain and justify were also incorporated by AW, which bore the marks of trying to make something work that was not quite right, which is not the mark of Divine Perfection. The most obvious was the unreckoned time of 147 days of the Flood when the Bible clearly states otherwise (150/151 days). This unsatisfactory contradiction of scripture drove me (DW) to find a resolution.

What would be the effect of 3 or 4 more unreckoned days?

I also noticed a problem with AW’s 4 extra unreckoned days at the time of the Exodus that required a mystical explanation. Perhaps one error produced the other. Together with MT the solution was found.

There were 4 extra unreckoned days at the Exodus, and 4 less unreckoned days before the Exodus, so that the overall chronology was unaffected. The effect was basically to move Abraham’s birth from 11/7 to 15/7 - a definite improvement as well as a simplification. It also solved the problem of the use of the 360 day year during the Flood. This is a special year only used during times of worldwide judgment such as the Tribulation. However this adds 3 days to the normal year of the Flood, unless the remaining months were 29 days each (but see later for how even this works for good in solving another problem).

5. AW’s 6,000 Julian years of the Chronology of Man to June 12th 1933 (omitting the Time of Messiah, from John to the Ascension) can’t be quite right, as AW had to start it on the 9th day (an obvious fiddle). However in MT’s changes this Chronology starts after Creation Week (the 8th day) which makes more sense. However MT has to end the Time of Messiah at Pentecost instead of the Ascension but this can be justified.

DW (who does not like Julian years) proposes the 6,000 years of Man should more consistently be measured from the Fall (AW described this time as a Probation). This works if we use a luni-solar Calendar!

(by omitting John-Pentecost as MT does).

6. There was also the problem of a messy calendar change at the Exodus (and the need to stop the DC at the Flood even though it is a Calendar,

not a chronology), which was exposed when MT did the computer model. This was caused by AW only starting his Divine/Civil Calendar after the Fall of man, even though his Messiah’s Calendar started 40 days before. This strange decision was motivated (as far as I can tell) by the need to get a lunar alignment at the Flood (17/2). However, this was a false criteria as a true lunar year was not in use and so the Bible never requires or implies the moon to be 17 days old. Moreover if 17/2 was aligned then 17/7 would be out of alignment. DW suggested the problem is resolved by starting the Calendar after Creation week, so that the Divine/Civil Calendar (DC/CC) at that time is identical to the Messiah’s Calendar. In that case the Divine Calendar at the month of the Exodus is (1,7), leading to an exact 6 month adjustment to (1,1) for the start of Israel’s luni-solar calendar at the Exodus. As well as being neat, this also provides a wonderful confirmation to the Bible Chronology as it explains the well-known fact that a 6 month correction in the year-starts happened at some point in the past (causing the Jews later on to think in terms of two year starts-Nisan 1 and Tishri 1). The only effect of this change is to move the dates of the Flood back 40 days.

7. This in turn led to a realisation of a better way of thinking about the Calendars. AW’s Messiah Calendar (354 day) is simply the initial Calendar used by God, and would better be called the Gentile Calendar as it has no special messianic significance. This agrees with the use of this year from 33-1933AD. At the Exodus it did not stop but continued. It is just that as the anointing moved to Israel as His representatives, then the Divine Calendar switched to Israel’s luni-solar calendar which started at that time (hence the 6 month change). This luni-solar calendar was operating from Creation (Gen 1:14), but the Divine-Calendar was not according to it. This led to the thought that the Church (as a distinct people of God from Israel and the Gentiles) also ought to have its own calendar starting at AD33 which would be solar (AW had detected this, but did not apply its significance). Thus there are 3 calendars with 3 different kinds of year working together corresponding to the 3 peoples (Gentiles, Israel and the Church), and the DC moves between them depending on who are His anointed representatives. This makes thinking about calendars and transitional times much easier. This also solves the problem of why the rapture did not happen in 1933 and the nature of the present time: The DC and Redemption Chronology since AD 33 have (naturally) been in phase with the solar church calendar, NOT the Gentile (Messiah) Calendar (which completed its 2000 years in 1933).

Nevertheless AW’s 6000 years ending in 1933 was valid, only it was not the Redemption Chronology (RC) but the Favour Chronology, which measured the transfer of favour between Israel and the (Gentile) Nations

(as described in Romans 11), but does not involve the Church which is distinct group called out from all nations without affecting national distinctions. June 12th 1933 marked the end of 6000 years of the Favour Chronology for Israel and the Gentile Nations and we are now on unreckoned time on this Chronology until Israel is anointed again after the Rapture to be God’s witnesses in the Tribulation (the 144,000),

and also for the Millennium (the 7 years Tribulation are a re-run of the

7 years of special Favour to Israel in AD26-33 which they rejected).

After the Rapture the remaining apostate church is rejected by Christ as His witnesses for He will spew it out of His mouth as He warns in Revelation 3. Israel must be God’s representatives after the Rapture and they must be under Gentile dominion because it is rerun of AD 26-33.

Thus God’s anointed now is the Church alone, and the RC, which is still in operation (and not on unreckoned time) is measured by the Church and must have been since its Birth in AD33. Now the Rapture did not happen in 1993 after 1960 solar years. This implies the 2 Days of RC must be 2000 years (not 1960 years). This is confirmed by the fact that the Millennium being 1000 years not 980 years (Revelation 20:1-6).

The reason for this is that since the Cross the Jubilee has been fulfilled.

In the Tribulation a special 360 day world-wide judgement Calendar will also be in use according to Daniel and Revelation (as it was at the Flood) In the Millennium the DC will probably operate according to Israel’s

luni-solar calendar as Isaiah suggests in his reference to new-moons.

8. I also developed a revision of the Times of the Gentiles (see ‘The 7 Times of the Gentiles’) which showed how they end in 1948 and 1967 when correctly understood. This also shows the correspondence between the historical 7 Times and the Tribulation, leading to a reconstruction of the Tribulation with 34 days at Middle-Tribulation:

1260 (2 Witnesses) +4 (death and resurrection of the 2 witnesses) +30 (escape of the remnant to Petra after the Abomination and 7th Trumpet) +1260 (antichrist) +1 (Second Coming, the Great and Terrible Day of

the Lord) +40 days (leading up to the official start of the Kingdom).

I developed this structure before the further revisions described later in this document. I was pleased to discover that these revisions (especially the use of a solar year for the Time of Messiah) offer strong support for this chronology of the Tribulation. Understanding the Tribulation is essential for future projections, as well as for understanding how the Times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

*9. So far these were issues raised, shared and discussed with MT before 2007, and I had thought this was probably all the revision of the Bible Chronology that was needed. But at the turn of the year of 2007, I came to realise that there were still serious problems that had to be dealt with, before we could claim it was manifestly correct. There were a whole set of things ‘hard to believe’ that were unique to the AW chronology and that were without good biblical or historical support (and often against the evidence) that required a number of steps of faith in AW’s inspiration. These ‘strange’ things (which are readily identifiable to a student of chronology) felt like ‘sticky-plaster’ that has to hold something together that is a bit out of position; it needs to be added to make something work that has not been put together quite right. They indicate that the AW chronology is not perfect, for the true chronology should carry the marks of Divine perfection (the elements of a well built, fine-tuned engine will fit together and work together perfectly without the need for special devices to make it work properly). These things are not clearly taught by scripture, but are essentially of the nature of special ‘revelations’ or inventions of AW, discovered by him in the process of trying to make the details work out OK. Anyone following the chronology is required to believe them on the basis of AW’s authority, rather than other evidence.

This set of problems creates a sense of unease and uncertainty about the correctness of the chronology and makes it hard to fully understand, receive and teach, and the errors they represent and signal explain why God could not release the chronology on a large-scale. Many followers of AW’s chronology knew about these ‘special features’, but took them on faith in AW’s authority in the area, and because they could tell that AW had understood many things right and they knew the spiritual value and blessing of the AW chronology. It seemed that these features were all connected and intrinsic to the chronology and so rejecting them would mean rejecting the whole thing. So not wanting to throw the baby out with the bathwater, we felt we had to receive it all and override our unease at certain features. However if it is possible to discard these problems without destroying the overall AW chronology, these improvements should be welcomed.

It should be noted that in analysing and critiquing AW’s work (including his mistakes), we are acknowledging the great work he did with his team

in moving the Bible Chronology forward, and without their work we would not be anywhere close to where we are in understanding BC.

We are not destroying it and starting again, but we are trying to purify, preserve and promote his good work. Unless this is done it will never reach the body of Christ as it should. We believe AW in heaven would be pleased with this project. Although AW expressed great authority and certainty, he would not claim infallibility. Reading many of his writings with the advantage of hindsight reveals errors in terms of date-setting and interpretation of the times we live in. So my position is that AW was called of God and often heard from God, and I witness to the basic value and correctness of his work, but also that it was not complete and contained a handful of errors that spoilt its perfection. Our project is to identify and correct these errors and bring BC to perfection. I believe that we should accept what AW claims the Lord clearly told Him, but that we should not necessarily accept AW’s interpretations and deductions, but test them. We have the advantage over AW of: (1) hindsight - being able to look back and see another 50 years of end-time history, (2) having access to modern technology (computers) and astronomical knowledge of lunations & equinoxes, and (3) developments in understanding the prophetic scriptures. This puts us in a good position to revise his work.

The same 4 questionable issues would be listed by anyone who has studied AW’s work. (They primarily relate to the chronology of Christ‘s life, but they also have a small effect on the overall chronology):