SURVEY

OF
CONTROVERSIAL STATEMENTS
AND
CONCEPTS
THEODORE JAMES TURNER
 LIST OF TOPICS
 INTRODUCTION

 EZEKIEL AND THE METONIC CYCLE

 THE BIBLICAL CALENDAR

 USSHER’S 360-DAY YEAR AND 30-DAY MONTH ASSUMPTION

 THE EXODUS

 THE MISUSE OF THE TERM ‘INCLUSIVE RECKONING’

 THE MISUSE OF ‘FULLNESS OF THE YEAR’

 SAMUEL SNOW’S LETTERS

 CONCLUSION OF THE MATTER

INTRODUCTION
On April 22, 2018, Elder Jeff Pippenger requested that I write a response to the various points of
controversy that have been created by some of my statements, mostly, on biblical chronology. We had a
three hour discussion, where he tried to bring to mind the various points that have been brought to his
attention. This paper is an attempt to recall objections that certain individuals have regarding my views
and give an explanation of how I came to that understanding.
While chronology is a difficult topic for some, I have always endeavoured to simplify my
presentations. There is a great deal of detail that is left out. This can lead some to make assumptions
about my methods. I will try to provide some of that detail here.
As well, there are many things I have had to unlearn, as I dug deeper into biblical chronology.
There are many things that we believe, and that we have used as arguments, that I discovered were not
well founded. I have never set out to be iconoclastic in my study. I have simply followed where the
inspired testimony has led. As well, I am not adamant about some of these points. Some things cannot
be proved. I simply give them as an option.
There is no doubt that a correct understanding of chronology is important to this movement, as it
was to the Millerites. The September 2017 SOTP classes were an attempt to lay a foundation so that the
chronology of Samuel Snow’s letters could be better understood. It was not meant to be a
comprehensive presentation on biblical chronology. Also, the studies got a little sidetracked, when the
issue of the weaning of Isaac was addressed.
It is my suggestion that anyone interested in sorting through the chronology take time watch the
videos and study the material. If they have some difficulty in understanding why I present some point
or make some argument (or fail to make an argument), they can always direct their questions to me at
theodorejamesturner@gmail.com.
It is always my endeavour to represent Christ in all that I do. If I need to be corrected, in any way, I
will gladly accept correction.

Theodore Turner, May 4, 2018.

EZEKIEL AND THE METONIC CYCLE
The Metonic cycle came up in a presentation where I was explaining why the date given in
Ezekiel 1:1-2 (the fifth day of the fourth month, abbreviated as 5D 4M, in the fifth year of Jehoiachin’s
captivity, it being July 21, 592 BC), and the date given in Ezekiel 40:1 (the tenth day of the seventh
month, abbreviated as 10D 7M, in the twenty-fifth year of Jehoiachin’s captivity, it being October 22,
573 BC) are 19 years apart or one Metonic cycle.
First, we can see that the year of Jehoiachin’s captivity, like the years of his reign, would have to
run fall to fall, if we are to count 19 years, since the fifth year to the twenty-fifth, on the surface, appears
to be twenty years. We know that Jehoiachin was taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar on March 16, 597
BC, after reigning for only three months and ten days. The Bible marks the captivity as occurring in the
seventh year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar,1 which ran spring to spring. According to
Nebuchadnezzar’s own records, this was on the second day of the twelfth month Addaru.2 It was not
until the next month, in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, that Zedekiah was placed on the
throne by Nebuchadnezzar.3 Ezekiel appears to be counting the captivity of Jehoiachin so that what we
would normally call the first year is considered an accession year. Since Ezekiel 40:1 says that it is the
twenty-fifth year of the captivity, in the tenth day of Rosh Hashanah, it is specifically the start of the
twenty-fifth year. Ezekiel also tells us that it is the fourteenth year since the city was smitten, with the
first year being 586 BC. The tenth day and seventh month in the twenty-fifth year of Jehoiachin’s
captivity and the fourteenth year since the city was smitten is October 22. 573 BC. That is, the first and
last recorded visions in Ezekiel are 19 years and 3 months apart.

It should be noted that Ezekiel counts Zedekiah's reign spring to spring4, even though from Josiah
to Jehoiachin the reigns were counted fall to fall. This is simply because, since Nebuchadnezzar is the
one who placed Zedekiah on the throne, he counts Zedekiah's reign in the Babylonian fashion spring to
spring. This also means that since Zedekiah was placed on the throne after the new year had started in
the spring, the year 597 is the accession year of Zedekiah and not the first year. Zedekiah's first year
begins in the spring of 596 BC. This means that when Jerusalem falls in the eleventh year of Zedekiah 5,
it is in 586 BC.6

1
This is the people whom Nebuchadrezzar carried away captive: in the seventh year three thousand Jews and three and twenty:
(Jeremiah 52:28)
2
In the seventh year [598/597], the month of Kislîmu [9th month], the king of Akkad mustered his troops, marched to the Hatti-land,
and besieged the city of Judah and on the second day of the month of Addaru he seized the city and captured the king.
3
And when the year was expired [the return of the year], king Nebuchadnezzar sent, and brought him to Babylon, with the goodly
vessels of the house of the LORD, and made Zedekiah his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem. (2 Chronicles 36:10)
4
Every commentator either applies spring to spring or fall to fall to all of Ezekiel’s dates. The idea that the dates of the captivity are
fall to fall and align with the years of Jehoiachin’s reign, while the years of Zedekiah’s reign are counted spring to spring, was
discovered in the summer of 2016. It was the only way to reconcile the dates given in Jeremiah and Ezekiel. This solution was given
to me in a dream. After my waking, I found that it worked.
5
And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadrezzar king of
Babylon came, he and all his army, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it, and built forts against it round about. So the city was
besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah. (Jeremiah 52:4-5 KJV)
6
Generally, those who have a fall to fall reign for Zedekiah place the fall of Jerusalem in 586 and those who have a spring to spring,
 We can see that the dates on the Julian calendar for the 5D 4M (July 21, 592) and the 10D 7M
(October 22, 573) are the same days on the Gregorian calendar for these Hebrew dates in 1844. This is
because the 1D 1M is April 19 on the Julian calendar in the years 592 and 573 BC, just as the 1D 1M is
April 19 on the Gregorian calendar in 1844. Simply put, every 19 years the biblical calendar repeats.
This is just a fact of the lunar solar calendar. It is not 100% accurate but 99.99% of the time it is. This
fact was noted by the Babylonians, though it was never used to calculate dates. Since it was Meton that
formalized the fact, we refer to it as the Metonic cycle.
I find it interesting the kind of things that people find objection to. For some reason, reference to
the Metonic cycle is singled out by some as evidence of Greek thinking. We can happily refer to other
simple mathematical facts, such as, (3.24159or(1.61803399),without calling a person a heretic.
Why would we do this with the Metonic cycle?

PIONEER STATEMENTS REGARDING THE METONIC CYCLE

It has been suggested that the pioneers condemned the Metonic cycle. Here is what the pioneers
say about it.

Meton, a celebrated astronomer, b. c. 430, discovered that an intercallation of seven
lunations in nineteen lunar years, made them correspond very nearly to nineteen solar
years, varying a day only once in three hundred and twelve years. His discovery was
inscribed by the Greeks on a marble pillar, in letters of gold. Hence the current years of
this cycle are called the "Golden Number."7

“As the course of the moon was thus made the foundation for determining the time
of Easter, the lunar cycle of Meton was taken for this purpose; according to which the
year contains 365 1/4 days, and the new moons, after a period of 19 years, return on the
same days as before.” Taken from Encyclopedia Americana, Art., Calendar.8

Again he says:-- "Of the attempts which had been made to come at such a cycle by
the Dieteris," etc., "and how they all failed hereof mention has been already made. The
last came nearest to it of any; the author whereof was Meto, an Athenian, who published
it at Athens in the year B. C 432," etc. "But Meto having reckoned that 19 years of his

except me, place the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BC.

7
Silvester Bliss, Analysis of Sacred Chronology (1850) 9.
8
Uriah Smith, Review and Herald , August 5, 1858, 96.
 cycle contained just 6940 days, it was found, after 100 years usage of it, that in this
computation he had overshot what he aimed at by a quarter of a day." Again, "To mend
this fault, Calippus invented his cycle, or period of 76 years," "in the year B. C. 360" Again
he adds, "This," after saying it is most likely the Jews borrowed this cycle--"they used till
Rabbi Hillel's reformation of their calendar, which was about A. D. 360; during all which
time they must necessarily have made some interpolations for the correcting of those
excesses whereby one of those luminaries did overrun the other according to that cycle;
for otherwise the phases or the appearing of the new moons and full moons, would have
contradicted the calculations of it to every man's view. But what these interpolations
were, or how or when they were used, we have no account, any where given us."--
Hist.Jews,vol.ii.p.155--6.9

Originally, the Jewish year, as shown by Dr. Prideaux, was entirely inartificial, and
continued thus so long as they remained in their own land, before their enemies began
to reign over them. A few hundred years before Christ, they used an astronomical cycle
of 84 years, with a certain number of intercalary years, containing thirteen moons each,
instead of twelve, the usual number. This was found to be faulty, and Meto's cycle of 19
years, was substituted for it. To remedy its defects the Jewish calendar in its persent
shape was struck out by Rabbi Samuel without its being perfected; it was improved upon
by Rabbi Adda, and afterwards perfected by Rabbi Hillel, about A. D. 360. (See Prideaux
Con. vol. I, pp. 49-54.) According to this calendar, the Jewish year ends with the first new
moon after the vernal equinox, which this year is March 21st. But according to the
Caraite Jews, the true year cannot commence till the appearance of the next new moon in
April. 10

As one can see, the issue with the Metonic cycle revolved around its application to the calculation
of the Hebrew calendar. What ever cycle one might devise, it would not match the observed calendar
100% of the time. The cycle of Meton contained 6940 days, in 19 years.11 Even though it is a close
approximation of the lunar solar calendar of the Bible, it was not used by the Jews until the fourth
century AD. For calculating biblical dates, it is of no use. For those who use the proleptic Jewish
calendar to find biblical dates, they will find little agreement with reality.
The suggestion that I use the Metonic cycle is a misapprehension. I may have referred to it but
have never used it to establish a single biblical date. Every date is based upon observance of the first
visible crescent. I will explain this more, as we look at the differences between the biblical calendar and
the Karaite calendar.

THE BIBLICAL CALENDAR

Often I make reference to the biblical calendar in contrast to the modern Jewish and Karaite
calendars, to the consternation of some people. For one, what is the true biblical calendar? Is it not the
Karaite calendar? Did not the Millerite’s use the Karaite calendar in establishing October 22, 1844 as
the tenth day of the seventh Jewish month?
What we can all agree upon is that modern Judaism uses a calendar not endorsed by the
Scriptures. This is a calendar that is based upon the Metonic cycle and was instituted by Rabbi Hillel
about 360 AD. Based upon this calendar, the tenth day of the seventh month would have been
September 23, in 1844. The 1D 1M would have been March 21, instead of April 19. It was not until 1843
that the Millerites, in trying to refine their dates, came to even address the question of the Karaite

9
Joshua V. Himes, Signs of the Times, March 27, 1844, 61.
10
Joshua V. Himes, Signs of the Times, March 20, 1844, 52.
11
The difficulty is determining which seven of the nineteen years are leap years. Was this based upon placing the new moon nearest
the spring equinox to start the year or the new moon after the equinox?
 calendar. In December of 1842, Miller, for the first time, revised his prediction. Instead of the year 1843
being the Gregorian year, January 1, 1843 to December 31, 1843, he determined it to be the Jewish year
ending on March 21, 1844. This adjustment was made a full seven months after the publication of the
1843 chart. It is clear that when the chart was published that they understood the year 1843 to be the
Gregorian year. This new idea of Miller’s – that the year was to be reckoned on the Hebrew calendar –
opened the door to new study. That new study focused upon determining the correct calendar for the
calculation of the prophetic periods.

Now there is at dispute between the Rabinical [sic], and the Caraite [sic] Jews, as to
the correct time of commencing the year. The former are scattered all over the world,
and cannot observe the time of the ripening of that harvest in Judea. They therefore
regulate the commencement of the year by astronomical calculations, and commence
with the first day of the new moon nearest the vernal equinox, when the sun is in Aries.
The Caraite Jews on the contrary, still adhere to the letter of the Mosiac [sic] law, and
commence with the new moon nearest the barley harvest in Judea; and which is one
moon later than the Rabinical year. The Jewish year of A D 1843, as the Caraites reckon it
in accordance with the Mosaic law, therefore commenced this year with the new moon
on the 29th, day of April and the Jewish year 1844, will commence with the new moon in
next April, when 1843 and 2300 days, according to their computation, will expire. But
according to the Rabinical Jews, it began with the new moon the first of last April,12 and
will expire with the new moon in the month of March next.13

This was the first introduction that the Millerite movement had to the Karaite calendar. However,
their understanding of the Karaite calendar is fraught with difficulties. First, it is not true that the
Karaite Jews commence the year one moon later than the Rabbinical year. This can happen but only
rarely, and never as late in the year as April 19. Also, the Karaite’s, in 1843 did not begin the year with
the new moon on April 29; they began the year began on April 2 in 1843. Neither did they commence
the year in 1844 on April 19 but on March 21. They observed the Day of Atonement on September 23 in
1844. Based upon the barley harvest in 1844, the year would have commenced in March and not April.
That is, by April 5, 1844 (the day of the wave sheaf offering) there would have been plenty of ripe grain.
As noted, the Karaite’s never commenced the year as late as it was by the Millerites in 1844, since
they tied the start of the year to the barley harvest and not the equinox. The connexion of the barley
harvest to the start of the year is a Karaite notion but it is not a biblical one. The Karaites depart from
the Bible in many other areas, as well. As an example, they always have the day of Pentecost on the
Sunday. This is in direct opposition to Inspiration that tells us that, “Fifty days from the offering of first
fruits, came the Pentecost, called also the feast of harvest and the feast of weeks.”14 On the Biblical
calendar Pentecost is always the sixth day of Sivan (6D 3M). For the Karaites, Pentecost can be
anywhere from the sixth to the twelfth day of Sivan.
More importantly, though the Millerites failed to understand the biblical calendar, they still arrived
at the correct date. None of the Millerites had the correct date for the crucifixion. Prior to Snow, the
Millerites believed that Jesus was crucified in 33 AD. Samuel Snow came to understand that Jesus was
crucified in the midst of the seventieth week in 31 AD. He came to this conclusion in a roundabout way
and by using a suspect source. First, he chose William Hales chronology, placing Christ’s crucifixion in
31 AD. The exact date that Hales gives for the crucifixion is Tuesday, March 27, 31 AD. Snow also uses
the spurious Death Warrant of Jesus Christ.15 In this document the year is not explicitly stated but it

12
It is interesting to note that according to the Rabbinic calendar Nisan 1 was April 1 in 1843. However, based upon observance of the
visible crescent, it would have been April 2. This is an example where using the Metonic cycle will give dates that do not agree with
observation.
13
Joshua V. Himes, Signs of the Times, June 21, 1843, 123.
14
Patriarchs and Prophets, 540.
15
I have addressed this in detail in a paper entitled, The Death Warrant of Jesus Christ: A Review.
 does give the date March 25.16 Just as there was a thirteenth month added in 1844, so too would there
have been a thirteenth month in 31 AD, since a March 25 Passover date would mean the year
commenced on March 11,17 much too early for a barley harvest. However, these details were not
worked out by the Millerites. They worked under a time constraint and without the resources and
access to information that we now have.
Another point that they failed to take into account is that they believed that the biblical calendar,
like that of the Karaites, observed the first crescent for each month of the year. In calculating the tenth
day of the seventh month in 1844, they believed that this was determined by the new moon in October.
This is why some initially chose October 23, recognising that October 22 would only be the ninth day of
the seventh Jewish month, if the moon was observed correctly. However they settled on the October 22
date by believing that the day after the astronomical new moon would be the first day of the seventh
month. They then marked October 13 as the first day of the seventh month. However, the first crescent
would not have been visible until the evening of October 13. This would mean that the fourteenth
would have been the first day of the seventh month, based upon the observance of the moon. What they
did not know is that, according the biblical calendar, the tenth day of the seventh month is always 187th
day from the first day of the first month. That is, for the first six months on the biblical calendar the
months alternate 30 and 29 days. For the rest of the year, the start of each month is based upon the
observance of the first visible crescent. If the Millerites had followed Karaite practice correctly, in
regards to the commencement of the seventh month, they would not have chosen October 22 as the
tenth day of the seventh month.
Simply, the Karaite calendar is not the correct calendar to use. Even though the Millerites believed
that they were using the Karaite reckoning, they were not. However, we now can reverse engineer the
correct calendar, knowing that God gave the correct dates. The understanding of the biblical calendar
comes from a reconciling of all the chronological information in the Bible. We have not used any
authority, other than the Bible, to come to understand the biblical calendar. We have found that there is
external testimony that agrees with our assessment, such as that documented in the writings of Grace
Amadon.18 However, the conclusions listed below come from the study of the Bible and the Spirit of
Prophecy alone.

LIST OF “RULES” FOR THE BIBLICAL CALENDAR

1. The first day of the first month commences on the evening that the first visible crescent can be
sighted, following the spring equinox.
2. The equinox, as with the full moon, is determined to have started at sunset after it has already
occurred.
3. The first crescent is only looked for on the evening of the twenty-ninth day of Adar or Ve’Adar.
4. If the first crescent is sighted, the following day is the first day of the year. If it is not, the next
day is the thirtieth, with the day after being the first day of the year.
5. The length of the first sixth months of the year follow the pattern 30, 29 days. The seventh to
twelfth months (or thirteenth if needed) can be either 30 or 29 days.
6. The months are always numbered from the spring with the new moon after the spring equinox
always being the start of the first month.
7. The beginning of the year in the spring is called Teshuva19 Hashanah the “return of the year”.

16
March 25, 31 AD would be a Sunday. Later versions of the story, after 1844, change it to March 27 (a Tuesday).
17
The correct Julian date for a Passover in 31 AD (if the Jewish calendar is followed) is March 24, if we place the Passover on the 14.
This is recognising that March 25 is the proleptic Gregorian date for the Passover in 31 AD, if the Passover occurs on Nisan 15. What
Snow fails to address is why the Passover would be on a Tuesday, or even a Sunday, based upon these dates, instead of a Friday.
18
For Miss Amadon’s description of the biblical calendar see the various articles in Ministry Magazine
https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1944/03/ancient-jewish-calendar-constructionno.-1
19
Literally, Teshuva means the returning. The Jews apply this term to the period of repentance between Rosh Hashanah and Yom
Kippur.
 8. The civil year that begins in the fall is called Rosh Hashanah or the “head of the year” and
begins with the seventh month.
9. The Jews also observe the anomaly of the moon. That is, on rare occasions the start of the year
is delayed to allow for the full moon to precede the Passover. That is, the Passover is always the
day after the full moon. If the moon is in apogee at the “correct” time of the month, there will be
a longer transition between the visible crescent and the full moon. This occurs about 6% of the
time. That is, even in years where it appears there should be only 29 days in the last day of the
year, a thirtieth day will be added so the full moon is not “too late”. In fact, this is what probably
occurred in 31 AD.20 It should also be noted that moon is only considered full when it is full by
sunset. We, however, determine a moon to be full, at the point were it is directly on the
opposite side of the earth from the sun. That is, our full moon is one of calculation, whereas the
Hebrews full moon is determined by observation.

USSHER’S 360-DAY YEAR AND 30-DAY MONTH ASSUMPTION

Other objections have arisen in my seeming attack upon Ussher’s chronology. These relate to the
calendar used at the time of the flood, among other things. Though we appreciate Ussher’s contribution
to biblical chronology, we must note that there are a few errors in his chronology that create
contradictions in God’s Word. If Ussher is wrong about the 360 day and 30 month calendar, how do we
support the application of the 360 days in a prophetic year and 30 days in a prophetic month? What
about the 220 day period of Noah that marks restoration? If we reject the calendar of Ussher, are we not
weakening support for many of our positions?

USSHER’S CALENDAR EXAMINED

Let us first look at Ussher’s calendar and how he applies it to the year of the flood. He assumed
that the Bible used a year of twelve thirty-day months, with five or six days added to complete the year.
This is basically the Egyptian calendar.21 The basis for this is partly found in his interpretation of the
year of Noah’s flood, in that he assumed the 150 day period that is mentioned commenced on the
seventeenth day of the second month and ended on the seventeenth day of the seventh month. He
believed that this would be 150 days, if the months were 30 days each. However, when we consider the
counting of the spans in Genesis 7 and 8, consistency would suggest that the period should be counted
as 151 days. That is, they do not count the first day of a period as the zeroth day but as the first day. As
well, a careful reading shows that there are two periods of 150 days mentioned. The first period is for
the waters prevailing and the second is for the waters abating. That is, it rained for 40 days, followed by
a period of 150 days that the water prevailed and then another period of 150 days that the water
abated. This means that from the seventeenth day of the second month to the first day of the first
month is 340 days. This can only occur in a biblical calendar of thirteen months. That is, the year of the
flood was actually 385 days long.
In the year of the flood, each month is observed (or calculated) based upon the first visible
crescent. At that time, the months were still unnumbered, except as they reference events. For instance,
when the Bible says that the rains began on the seventeenth day of the second month in the six
hundredth year of Noah’s life, this is not the second month of the Exodus calendar but is literally the
second month of Noah’s six hundredth year of life. We find then that when, in Exodus, God declares that
the month Abib is to be the beginning of months22 that this is the first time that the months are

20
One of the reasons that most scholars reject 31 AD as a possible year for a Friday crucifixion is that the astronomical new moon
occurred at 2:00 pm on Tuesday, April 10. The first visible crescent would have been seen on the evening of Thursday April 12,
making the Friday the 1D 1M and the fourteenth of Nisan a Thursday and not a Friday. However, there are at least two solutions to
this problem. The first is to recognise that the full moon would have occurred after sunset, about 10:30 pm, on the night of Wednesday
April 25. This would mean that it would not be until the evening of April 26, that the lamb could be slain. Another, different, solution
is to recognise that it would merely be the result of poor weather that the commencement of the year was delayed by one day.
21
Though Ussher ties the commencement of the year to the Autumnal equinox rather than to the rising of the Sothic star (Sirius).
22
Exodus 12:2 This month shall be unto you the beginning [rosh or head] of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you.
 numbered in a fixed pattern. We would also have to assume that this is when the 30, 29 day pattern for
the length of the first six months began.
Another oddity of Ussher is that he believed that the year began with the autumnal equinox. His
date for the first day of creation as being Sunday October 23, 4004 BC was based upon the fact that, at
that time, the fall equinox fell on October 23 on the Julian calendar. Other years that could have served
the same purpose were 3986, 3992, 3998, 4010, 4014 BC, with each of these years having the fall
equinox falling on the Sunday. What many people fail to realise is that some of Ussher’s choices were
made so that he could align 4004 BC with the start of the world. For instance, he chose to count the 480
years of 1 Kings 6:1 as spanning the period from the Exodus proper (rather than from the point where
the Israelites had fully come out of Egypt prior to the crossing of the Jordan) to the laying of the
foundation of Solomon’s temple in 1012 BC. Also, some of his choices in the reign of the kings of Judah
are inexplicable, unless you are intentionally trying to shorten the period of the kings by a few years.
For instance, He has 588 BC for the destruction of Jerusalem (the actual date being 586 BC). The
chronology of the kings clearly marks 391 years and six months for the kings of Judah. This would have
placed the dividing of the kingdom as 979 BC. Ussher somehow has it as 975 BC (the actual date being
977 BC). This is again odd, in that, if the kingdom is divided in 975 BC, he should have the laying of the
foundation of Solomon’s temple as 1011 BC (36 years later) not 1012 BC.
It should also be noted that Ussher has 467 BC for the seventh year of Artaxerxes, since he places
Artaxerxes’ first year as 474 BC and not 464 BC, as most scholars do now. None of this should be taken
as a criticism of Ussher. He did the best he could, which is far more than anyone could have with such
limited resources.

HOW DO WE SUPPORT THE PROPHETIC YEAR?

The objection that if we reject a 360 day year and a 30 day month we have no basis for the
prophetic year of 360 days and the prophetic month of 30 days is easily answered. We have plenty of
testimony from prophecy that 3 ½ years are equal to 42 months and 1260 days. We do not need to
assume a year of 360 days or a month of thirty days as having existed as the original calendar. Even
when you look at it, Ussher had a year of 365 or 366 days. Even we, who have a calendar where months
can be 28, 29, 30 or 31 days, still think of a month as 30 days.
There are some who suggest that the year was actually 360 days, though this is not what was
believed by Ussher. The suggestion is that at the time of the flood the changes to the earth caused the
length of the day to change, thus affecting the apparent length of the year in its relation to the day. That
is, if the day was about 21 minutes longer, there would have been 360 days in a year, without an actual
change to the revolution rate of the earth around the sun. However, the apparent length of the month
would be shorter than the 29.53 days that it is presently, nearly 29 days only, in length. The
impossibility of having a 360 day year and also having a 30 day month, while maintaining the relative
size of the sun and moon in the sky, which is needed for a solar eclipse, and all the other aspects of time
keeping that this clock provides, is sufficient reason to abandon this theory.
The sun/earth/moon relationship is given in Genesis 1 as the basis for keeping time. There is no
indication that God has changed this clock. If the year is a different length, how would we relate this to
prophetic years? That one prophetic day equals one solar year, one prophetic month equals thirty solar
years and one prophetic year equals three hundred and sixty solar years is an established point of
prophecy. It is not dependent upon there ever having been an actual year of 360 days.

THE 220 DAYS

Based upon a thirty day month calendar, it is assumed that there would be 220 days from the
seventeenth day of the seventh month of Noah’s six hundredth year to the twenty-seventh day of the
second month of Noah’s six hundredth and first year. The idea is that these 220 days from the time that
the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat until Noah and his family left the ark is a period of 220
days that becomes a symbol of restoration. Even if we left out the added five or six days that Ussher
 adds to the end of the year, there would actually be 221 days, if we were counting as they do in Genesis
7 and 8. As well, we could not have the two periods of 150 days. In the calendar that I believe to be the
correct one for the flood, there are 220 days from the day the flood began until the day that the tops of
the mountains are seen. These 220 days serve the same purpose symbolically.

OCTOBER 22, 2391 BC

Another confirmation that it is the biblical calendar being used in giving the dates and spans for
the account of the flood is the fact that when we examine the cycle of the moon for that year, the best fit
is to place the seventeenth day of the second month of Noah’s six hundredth year of life as the seventh
month of the Exodus calendar. This would mean that the day the door of the ark was closed was the
tenth day of the Tishri or Ethanim. This could be the basis for the tenth day of the seventh month being
the Day of Atonement. Also, when that date is placed on the Julian calendar, it is October 22, 2391 BC. Of
course, all of this could merely be coincidence. It is not necessary, for any reason I know of, that this be
true. It is not an argument that is needed. It is merely a confirmation that this chronology may be on the
right track. I also do not think it is wise to merely dismiss it, unless we have good reasons to do so.
There are also more coincidences of interest. First, the first day of the seventh month would have
been the first full day after the autumnal equinox, something that aligns with Ussher’s hunch about the
start of the year. This would have been a recreation of the earth by water. Also, the Day of Atonement
falls upon the weekly Sabbath, if this is the correct alignment of the calendar. In fact, when we align the
calendar with the second month of Noah’s six hundredth year being the seventh month of the biblical
calendar, the five periods of seven days all align with the biblical week ending with the Sabbath.

Elu 1 2 3 4 5 Tis 1 2 3 Hes 115

6 Sep 13 14 15 16 17
7 Oct 13 14 15
3 8 Nov 12
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 5 6 7 8 9 101 216 317 418 519 620 721 822
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 116 217 318 419 520 621 722 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 112 123 134 145 156 167 171 923 1024 1125 1226 1327 1428 1529
25 26 27 28 29 30 1 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 182 193 204 215 226 237 248 1630 1731 1832 1933 2034 2135 2236
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 27 28 29 30 1 2 3
27 28 29 30 259 2610 2711 2812 2913 3014 2337 2438 2539 2640 2741 2842 2943
9 10 11 12
1 6 7 8 9 10 11
2 4 5 6 7 18 29 310

144 245 346 447 548 649 750 Tev 174 275 376 477 578 She 1103 2104 3105 4106
411 512 613 714 815 916 1017
10 Jan 3410 3511 3612 3713 3814
11 Feb 638 649 6510 6611

851 952 1053 1154 1255 1356 1457 679 780 881 982 1083 1184 1285 5107 6108 7109 8110 9111 10112 11113
1118 1219 1320 1421 1522 1623 1724 3915 4016 4117 4218 4319 4420 4521 6712 6813 6914 7015 7116 7217 7318

1558 1659 1760 1861 1962 2063 2164 1386 1487 1588 1689 1790 1891 1992 12114 13115 14116 15117 16118 17119 18120
1825 1926 2027 2128 2229 2330 2431 4622 4723 4824 4925 5026 5127 5228 7415 7520 7621 7722 7823 7924 8025

2265 2366 2467 2568 2669 2770 2871 2093 2194 2295 2396 2497 2598 2699 19121 20122 21123 22124 23125 24126 25127
251 262 273 284 295 306 317 5329 5430 5531 561 572 583 594 8126 8227 8328 841 852 863 874

2972 3073 Kev 27100 28101 29102 26128 27129 28130 29131 30132
328 339 Jan
9 4 605 616 627
5 885 896 907 918 929
6
 Ada 1133 2134 VeA 1162 30191 1192 2193 3194 4195 5196 6197
12 Mar 9310 9411
8 13 Apr 1228 71 82 93 104 115 126 137
3135 4136 5137 6138 7139 8140 9141 2163 3164 4165 5166 6167 7168 8169 7198 8199 9200 10201 11202 12203 13204
9512 9613 9714 9815 9916 10017 10118 1239 12410 12511 12612 12713 12814 12915 148 159 1610 1711 1812 1913 2014
10142 11143 12144 13145 14146 15147 16148 9170 10171 11172 12173 13174 14175 15176 14205 15206 16207 17208 18209 19210 20211
10219 10320 10421 10522 10623 10724 10825 13016 13117 13218 13319 13420 13521 13622 2115 2216 2317 2418 2519 2620 2721
17149 18150 19151 20152 21153 22154 23155 16177 17178 18179 19180 20181 21182 22183 21212 22213 23214 24215 25216 26217 27218
10926 11027 11128 11229 11330 11431 1151 13723 13824 13925 14026 14127 14228 14329 2822 2923 3024 3125 126 227 328
24156 25157 26158 27159 28160 29161 23184 24185 25186 26187 27188 28189 29190 28219 29220 Nis
1162 1173 1184 1195 1206 1217
7 14430 1451 1462 1473 1484 1495
150
6 429 530
1 Jun
9
221 222 223 224 225 250 251 252 253 280
Iya 1 2 3 4 5 Siv 1 2 3 4 Tam 1 2281
2 Jun 631 732 833 934 1035
3 Jul 560 661 762 863
12 4 Aug 490 591
6226 7227 8228 9229 10230 11231 12232 5254 6255 7256 8257 9258 10259 11260 3282 4283 5284 6285 7286 8287 9288
1136 1237 1338 1439 1540 1641 1742 964 1065 1166 1267 1368 1469 1570 692 793 894 995 1096 1197 1298
13233 14234 15235 16236 17237 18238 19239 12261 13262 14263 15264 16265 17266 18267 10289 11290 12291 13292 14293 15294 16295
1843 1944 2045 2146 2247 2348 2449 1671 1772 1873 1974 2075 2176 2277 1399 14100 15101 16102 17103 18104 19105
20240 21241 22242 23243 24244 25245 26246 19268 20269 21270 22271 23272 24273 25274 17296 18297 19298 20299 21300 22301 23302
2550 2651 2752 2853 2954 3055 156 2378 2479 2580 2681 2782 2883 2984 20106 21107 22108 23109 24110 25111 26112
27247 28248 29249 26275 27276 28277 29278 30279 24303 25304 26305 27306 28307 29308 30309
257 358 459
10 3085 3186 187 288 389
11 27113 27114 28115 30116 31117 1118 2119
1310 2311 3312 4313 5314 6315 7316 Elu 1340 2341 3342 4343 5344 Tis 1369 2370 3371 4372
3120 4121 5122 6123 7124 8125 9126
6 Oct 3150 4 5 6 7
7 Nov 1 2 3 4
8317 9318 10319 11320 12321 13322 14323 6345 7346 8347 9348 10349 11350 12351 5373 6374 7375 8376 9377 10378 11379
10127 11128 12129 13130 14131 15132 16133 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
15324 16325 17326 18327 19328 20329 21330 13352 14353 15354 16355 17356 18357 19358 12380 13381 14382 15383 16384 17385 18386
17134 18135 19136 20137 21138 22139 23140 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
22331 23332 24333 25334 26335 27336 28337 20359 21360 22361 23362 24363 25364 26365 19387 20388 21389 22390 23391 24392 25393
24141 25142 26143 27144 28145 29146 30147 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
29338 30339 Av 27366 28367 29368 26394 27395 28396 29397 30398
1148 2149 Oct
5 13 29 30 31
1 26 27 24 25 26
2

THE EXODUS
One of the ways that the correct biblical calendar can be demonstrated is in the chronology of the
Exodus. The inverse is also true. With a correct understanding of the biblical calendar, the correct
understanding of the chronology of the Exodus is confirmed and strengthened.
If we place the Exodus at the time that Ussher does, we have several problems that arise. Ussher
gives 1492 BC for the year of the Exodus. Since Ussher assumed that the Israelites did not use a lunar
solar calendar but, rather, a calendar based solely upon a solar year, he did not need to consider the
timing of the moon in connexion with the Passover. Nor did he seem to consider upon which day of the
week the events of the Exodus fell. We do, however. When we examine the year 1492 BC, it could not
have been the year of the Exodus. First the first day of the first month falls on a Wednesday, making the
events of the Exodus fall one day too early in the week. For instance, the Spirit of Prophecy, in
commenting on Exodus 24:16-1823, tells us that the first day of the forty days that Moses spent in the
mount was a Sabbath.

Upon the seventh day, which was the Sabbath, Moses was called up into the cloud.
The thick cloud opened in the sight of all Israel, and the glory of the Lord broke forth like
devouring fire. “And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the
mount; and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.” The forty days’ tarry in
the mount did not include the six days of preparation. During the six days Joshua was
with Moses, and together they ate of the manna and drank of “the brook that descended

23
And the glory of the LORD abode upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day he called unto Moses
out of the midst of the cloud. And the sight of the glory of the LORD was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the
children of Israel. And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount: and Moses was in the mount forty days
and forty nights. (Exodus 24:16-18 KJV)
 out of the mount.” But Joshua did not enter with Moses into the cloud. He remained
without, and continued to eat and drink daily while awaiting the return of Moses, but
Moses fasted during the entire forty days.24

We also know that the fifteenth day of the second month was a Sabbath, as seen in connexion with
the giving of the manna.25 Both these days would be on the Friday, instead of the Sabbath in 1492 BC.
As noted earlier, Ussher assumed that the coming out of the land of Egypt referred to in 1 Kings 6:1
was the Exodus proper. Some may argue that this is the natural sense of the expression, since this is the
same exact expression employed in Numbers 1:1, 9:1 and 33:38. “And it came to pass in the four
hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the
fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to
build the house of the LORD.” (1 Kings 6:1) The point is that in Numbers they are not looking at this
event 520 years later, as they are in 1 Kings 6. While in the wilderness, the coming out of Egypt would
have been the events of the Exodus. After the crossing of the Jordan, however, the events of the
wilderness wandering would be conflated with that of the Exodus proper. Taking the 480 years as
referring to the time when they are fully out of Egypt and now on the borders of the Promised Land
agrees with Deuteronomy 4:45-46.

These are the testimonies, and the statutes, and the judgments, which Moses spake
unto the children of Israel, after they came forth out of Egypt, On this side Jordan,
in the valley over against Bethpeor, in the land of Sihon king of the Amorites, who dwelt
at Heshbon, whom Moses and the children of Israel smote, after they were come forth
out of Egypt.

Being “on this side Jordan” refers to the east of the Jordan River, as the Israelites, in approaching
the Promised Land, do so from the east, having travelled up from the south through the steppes of
Moab. Also, when we read Numbers 33 carefully, the whole chapter is the account of their travels in
“going out” (YLT) of Egypt to possess the Promised Land.
Also, the year 1533 BC fits the calendar needed for the Exodus. Ussher’s date of 1492 BC for the
Exodus was based upon the year of the laying of the foundation of Solomon’s temple as being 1012 BC.
If we accept the 490 years of transgression of the Sabbatical cycle that leads to the 70 years of the
Babylonian captivity beginning in 607 BC, the fourth year of Solomon’s reign would be 1013 BC, 84
years after the anointing of Saul in 1097 BC. If we chose 1493 BC for the Exodus, we still have a year in
which the Sabbaths of the Exodus would not align with the calendar.

RON WYATT’S THEORIES

Other issues have also arisen in regard to the chronology of the Exodus. Many people have adopted
the theories of Ron Wyatt. His work is popular, because it seems to confirm the biblical record.
However, his theories contradict the Bible in many places, while his research is not supported by
verifiable evidence.
He abandons the traditional Red Sea crossing site located at the upper tip of the Gulf of Suez and
claims that pillars at either side of the Gulf of Aqaba mark the palace where the Israelites crossed. I will
not take the time to examine all of Wyatt’s claims. However, the idea that the Israelites were trapped on
Nuweiba Beach on the west side of the Gulf of Aquaba is impossible. First, the valley that leads onto the
beach is so narrow that it would take up to three weeks for two million Israelites to assemble on its
shores. Also, Numbers gives us this account of their crossing of the Red Sea, “And they departed from
Succoth, and pitched in Etham, which is in the edge of the wilderness. And they removed from
Etham, and turned again unto Pihahiroth, which is before Baalzephon: and they pitched before Migdol.

24
Patriarchs and Prophets, 313.
25
See Exodus 16:ff
 And they departed from before Pihahiroth, and passed through the midst of the sea into the
wilderness, and went three days' journey in the wilderness of Etham, and pitched in Marah.
(Numbers 33:6-8) What becomes clear, in reading this abbreviated account of the Red Sea crossing, is
that prior to crossing the Red Sea they camp in the wilderness of Etham and after crossing the Red Sea
continue travelling in the same wilderness. This accords extremely well with the traditional site of the
Red Sea crossing, in that the wilderness of Etham is to the east of the Gulf of Suez running north and
south. The Israelites first came to the edge of the wildness but were commanded by God to turn back. If
they had continued on their course, the Egyptians would have caught up with them. By turning back
and camping between Migdol and the western bank of the Red Sea, they would then be able to cross
back into the wilderness of Etham, with God providentially destroying the armies of the Egyptians that
pursued them. The Gulf of Aqaba crossing would provide no such opportunity to be in the wilderness of
Etham, cross and then be back in the wilderness of Etham.
Other problems that Wyatt’s claim presents are the speed of travel it would take to reach Nuweiba
beach in two weeks, even discounting the fact that the valley is too narrow for two million Israelites to
travel. From Rameses in the land of Goshen it is about 500 km to the Nuweiba beach. The stopping
places on their journey to the Red Sea from Rameses are; Succoth, Etham and Pihahiroth between
Migdol and the sea. After crossing the Red Sea and journeying to Sinai, they went three days' journey in
the wilderness of Etham, and pitched in Marah, then Elim, the Red sea, Sin, Dophkah, Alush, Rephidim,
and Sinai. The distance from the Nuweiba beach to mount Jebel al Lawz is about 150 km. The overall
distance of more than 650 km is too far for the two million Israelites to travel. Believing that the
Israelites used three stopping places for 500 km in two weeks and ten stopping places to travel 150 km
in five weeks makes no sense. The Israelites would have had to travel over 50 km per day to get to the
Red Sea crossing.26 The total distance for the traditional route is about 350 km, with roughly 150 km to
the Red Sea crossing and another 200 km to Mount Sinai.

SOLAR ECLIPSE OF MAY 9, 1533 BC

Another interesting feature of the Exodus chronology is that the evening of the Red Sea crossing
provides for a rare event in Egyptian history. On Wednesday May 9, 1533 BC at 6:03 p.m., a total solar
eclipse occurred over the land of Egypt, being about 25 minutes before sunset. This would have been
about the time that the Egyptians had the Israelites shut in and that it was dark in the camp of the
Egyptians. The path of the eclipse is very nearly the place where the Israelites crossed.

26
The idea that the Israelites could travel 50 km per day is assuming the impossible. The maximum distance that could have been
travelled in a day is 15 km.
THE MISUSE OF THE TERM ‘INCLUSIVE RECKONING’
This is more a problem that I have with others that they have with me. We often see the term
inclusive reckoning being used when we are simply speaking of ordinal numbers. Here is an example,
“Nisan 14 commenced at sunset on the fourteenth night, counted “inclusively,” after the official
announcement of the crescent.”27 Mervin Maxwell should know that there is nothing inclusive about
calling the fourteenth day of the month the fourteenth. Inclusive reckoning is the counting of parts of
days (or years) as whole days (or years) and expressed in cardinal terms. For instance, in Mark 8:31
states that Jesus would be killed and rise again after three days. We would naturally assume that this
means three whole days have elapsed. The parallel passage in Matthew 16:21 says Jesus would be killed
and the third day rise again. Here we have simply ordinal counting. While it is true that in ordinal
counting only parts of days (or years) are often counted, it is written in a way that this is assumed.
However with inclusive reckoning, it is written so that it appears whole years or days are intended,
while they are not.

THE MISUSE OF ‘FULLNESS OF THE YEAR’

A more important issue lies in a misunderstanding regarding the initial mistake in the reckoning of
the prophetic periods. It is often promoted that the expression “zero year mistake” is wrong and that
the Millerites made a mistake in their application of the fullness of the year. In reality, these are two
different things, though they are related. The confusion is understandable, in that even the Millerites
were often confused in regard to calculating the precise ending of the prophetic periods.
It is clear that Miller did initially neglect to recognise that there was no zero year between the
years 1 BC and 1 AD. We know this since his calculations for the seventy weeks began in the spring of
457 BC and ended in the spring of 33 AD, making, he supposed, "exactly four hundred and ninety years,
or seventy sevens of years of the vision."28 He is not using any kind of “inclusive reckoning” here; he is
simply counting a zero year where there is none. The problem is addressed by Himes in the May 3, 1843
issue of The Signs of the Times. That is, he notes that in going from BC to AD dates that it is only one full
year from a date in 1 BC to the same date in 1 AD. This is another way of illustrating that there is no
zero year between 1 BC and 1 AD. His first response was to move the commencement of the seventy
weeks and the 2300 days from 457 to 458 BC.

It is true that from a given point in the year B. C, 457, to the same point in A. D.
1843, would be but 2299 years. We therefore find that some date the decree of
Artexerxes Longimanus B. C. 458, and which is undoubtedly correct. And if the 70
weeks terminated as all admit A. D. 33, then the 2300 days must terminate in 1810 years
from that point, which would be in A. D. 1843.29

As you can see, the recognition of the mistake in 1843 created a new problem. It was not as simple
as extending the 2300 days and the 2520 years from being fulfilled in 1843 to being fulfilled in 1844.
First, Miller had understood that the seventy weeks were fulfilled at the end of the seventieth week, as
we noted earlier, in the spring of 33 AD. He could not just simply move the fulfilment of the seventy
weeks to 34 AD, for obvious reasons. Also, the chart published in May of 1842, which was their primary
visual aid in presenting the message of the soon coming of Christ, had the date 1843 for the end of the
prophetic periods. As we noted earlier, Miller had already understood that the Jewish year 1843 ended
in the spring of 1844 by December of 1842. Yet, it is not clear whether or not Miller understood the
something was amiss with his calculations. Though Himes understood and articulated the problem in
the summer of 1843, his solution took a while to sort out.
The solution to move the commencement of the 70 weeks to 458 BC was intended to preserve the

27
Mervin Maxwell. God Cares, Volume I, 260.
28
The Memoirs of William Miller, 208.
29
Himes’ Signs of the Times, May 3, 1843, 69.
 33 AD date for the end of the seventy weeks. Six weeks later, he thought better of it and returned to the
belief that the 2300 days commenced in 457 BC.

To make out 2300 full years, it is necessary that there should be 457 full years, B. C.
and 1843 full years after Christ. It is evident that from a given point in the year 1 B. C, to
the same point A. D. 1, would be but one entire year. Upon the same principle, from a
given point in the year 457 B. C to the same point A. D. 1843, would be but 2299
entire years; it is minus one year of 2300 full years. The year 1843 is not 1843 years
from the birth of Christ, (vulgar era) but only the 1843rd year, which at its
commencement was but 1842 years from that era. This is upon the principle that a child
is on one year old when it enters upon its second year a man is not one and twenty till he
enters his 22nd year. If, therefore, the 2300 years began at a given point in the year 457
B. C. they will not end till the same point is reached A. D. 1844.30

The suggestion here is that the periods mark events that occur within the final year and not at
their complete termination.

It may then be asked why we are now to look for the coming of the Lord, if we
are but just entered the last of the 2300 years?
It is upon this principle. If the 70 weeks were fulfilled at the ascension of our Lord
A. D. 33, and began B. C. 457, then they must have been fulfilled in the
commencement of the 490th year, and which would not end till the commencement of
A. D. 34
Where events have been predicted by a given number of days, they have been
fulfilled not at the end of the last day, but at any time within the last day. Thus the three
days that our Savior was to be in the tomb, were not fulfilled in three full days, but within
the last day, even at the earliest morning hour. As the time would be fulfilled any time
within the last day, then if a year is a prophetic day, we may look for the
consummation of all things at any time within after the commencement of the
2300th prophetic day or year. And as we are now as late in the last of the 2300 years
as the ascension of our Savior was in the 490th year, there having been 1810 full years
since that event, it follows that we should live in continual expectation of his
appearing.31

Since Miller understood that the going forth of the commandment in 457 BC was on the first day of
the first month, Himes also understood that only 489 full years had passed from any given point in 457
BC to any given point in 33 AD and that the first day of the first month in 33 AD was not 490 years but
only 489 from the going forth of the decree of Artaxerxes.

April, A. D. '33, was not at the end of the Jewish year '33 from the vulgar era, but in
the year '33--the first month, so that but 32 full years from the vulgar era had passed. If
the seventy weeks did not commence till the beginning of the 457, B. C. they would not
end till the end of A. D. '33: and 1810 years from A. D. '33, completes the 2300 and brings
us to the end of 1843: and the vision may end at any time between this and March 21st,
1844, as in the Synopsis of Miller's Views.32

It seems that for the Millerites in 1843 and early 1844, the belief was that they were to tarry until,

30
Himes, Signs of the Times, June 21, 1843, 123.
31
Ibid.
32
Himes, Signs of the Times, July 12, 1843, 148.
 at the latest, the end of the prophetic periods that would terminate in the spring of 1844. It is in this
context that Samuel Snow came to apply the full year to the 2520 and determined that since it must
have commenced in the fall of 677 BC, it would terminate 2520 full years later in the fall of 1844.

The seven times of Moses, in Lev. 26, amount to 2520 full years. They began with
the breaking of the power of Judah, at the captivity of Manasseh, B. C. 677. This is the
time that has always been given as the date of their commencement. But there has been
an error in supposing them to terminate in 1843, as I shall now show. Had they
begun with Jan. 1, B. C. 677, they would not have ended before Jan. 1, A. D. 1844. Or
had they begun with the first day of the Jewish year, in 677, they could not end
before the first day of the Jewish year, 1844. For it is evident that it requires 677 and
1843 entire years to make up the full period of 2520. But any point within B. C. 677, is
only in the 676th year before Christ. Reckoning back from the Christian era, we do not
obtain 677 full years, till we arrive at the extreme point, i. e. the first day of B. C. 677. So
also, reckoning forward from the commencement of the Christian era, we do not obtain
1843 full years, till we arrive at the extreme point, i. e. the end of A. D. 1843, or the first
day of A. D. 1844. If, then, the captivity of Manasseh did not occur as early as the
first day of the Jewish year, B. C. 677, the 2520 years cannot terminate till after the
expiration of the present Jewish year. Now it is evident that Manasseh was not taken
in the early part of the year, from the fact that Esarhaddon and the Assyrians were
employed in carrying away the ten tribes out of their land, and placing foreigners in their
stead, in the same year, and before the invasion of Judah. We find the history of this in 2
Kings, xvii. 20--24. The prophecy concerning it we find in Isa. vii. 8. The date of this
prophecy is B. C. 742. From this date count the sixty-five years, and it brings us to B. C
677. In that year, in fulfillment of the prediction in Hos. v. 5, Israel and Judah were both
broken. But as it must necessarily require considerable time to remove the ten-tribes,
and bring foreigners to fill their place--we cannot well date Manasseh’s captivity
earlier than the autumn of that year. About one half, therefore, of the Jewish year B. C.
677, must be left out of the reckoning. This will necessarily extend the period of the
2520 years, down to the autumn of A. D. 1844.33

Of course, this article is not an explanation of the whole understanding of the Millerites’
determination of the end of the prophetic periods. What I have illustrated is that the idea of the full
year was already used a year before the first disappointment. The first disappointment resulted from
the Millerites initial failure to recognise that in counting from BC to AD there was no zero year, while
the math used contained a zero. When adding BC and AD dates, we simply need to subtract 1 in our
calculations. When subtracting BC and AD dates, we need simply to add 1. The use of full years really
has nothing to do with it. They used it to retain the year 1843 on the charts and the year 33 AD for the
crucifixion of Christ. Samuel Snow saw, however, that if the commencement of either the 2520 or the
2300 days was latter than the start of the Jewish year 457 BC, then the termination of these periods
would extend beyond the spring of 1844.
The mistake then cannot rightly be characterised as the “fullness of the year mistake”. It is best to
call it the “zero year” mistake. What we must also recognise is that the disappointment in the spring of
1843 was not as simple as merely failing to recognise that there was no zero year. This has been
misrepresented within Adventism.

SAMUEL SNOW’S LETTERS

The relationship of Samuel Snow’s letters to the Prediction Before Midnight (PBM) has created
controversy on several fronts. Some objected to the chronology itself, though it seems they had no clear
33
Samuel Snow, The Midnight Cry! February 22, 1844
 idea of what the particular problems were. Some objected to my application of the PBM, as they saw it,
to the July 18 letter, rather than the May 2 letter. There was some suggestion that I was failing to
recognise 9/11 as April 19, since I saw Elder Jeff’s reference to Russia in the summer of 2016 as parallel
to Miller’s May 3, 1843 letter Concerning the 7th Jewish Month.34 The problem being Miller’s comments
occur before April 19, 1844, while Jeff’s comments are after 9/11, which is typified by April 19. Finally,
some objected to my interpretation of the two Passovers in 1844 as representing two classes – the
wheat and the tares.

THE CHRONOLOGY OF SNOW’S LETTERS

I would think that the supposed problem with the chronology was that it was not based upon what
some considered the true biblical calendar. It could be that they had imagined I used the Metonic cycle,
or some such thing, to derive the dates. How do we know, for instance, that February 22, 1844 (the date
for the publication of Snow’s first letter) is actually the 3D 12M on the biblical calendar?
The answer is as simple as recognising that since April 19 in 1844 follows a thirteenth month, we
need to simply recognise how to count the twelfth and thirteenth months for the end of the Jewish year
1843. As noted in footnote 12 of this paper, if we go back to the beginning of the Jewish year 1843,
according to the Rabbinic calendar Nisan 1 was April 1 in 1843 but, based upon observance of the
visible crescent, it would have been April 2. If we simply follow the Rabbinic practise of counting 30, 29
days for each month, starting with April 1 as the 1D 1M in 1843, February 22, is the 2D 12M. However,
both the biblical method and the Karaite method recognise that it is the first visible crescent that
determines the start of the twelfth month. Since the first crescent would have been visible in Jerusalem
on the evening of February 19, the 22 would have been the 3D 12M.
The importance here is that the 3D 12M ties the publication of the Snow’s letter to the dedication
of the temple in 515 BC, which was the 3D 12M of the Jewish year 515 BC.35 There is further
significance in the fact that this date on the Julian calendar was March 12, 516 BC, tying the Julian and
the biblical calendars together, in that we would describe March 12 as 3M 12D, which is an inversion of
the biblical date. This kind of thing becomes significant throughout the chronology of Snow’s letters, it
ties Snow’s letters to the rebuilding of the temple and it confirms the biblical calendar.
Also, the account in Ezra 6:15, 19 connects the dedication of the temple to the Passover that
follows one month and eleven days later on the 14D 1M (or one month and nine days later on the Julian
calendar) or April 21, 515 BC. In 1844, the Passover that follows the publication of Snow’s letter
is also the date for its republication, with a disclaimer, in the April 3, Signs of the Times. This date was
the day that both the Rabbinic and Karaite Jews observed the Passover in 1844. The correct date of the
Passover in 1844 was May 2 and is also the publication date of Snow’s second letter addressing the
chronology of the prophetic periods.36 I will later address how these two Passovers have significance in
the separation of the two classes.

JULY 18, 1844 AND THE PBM

It was established by Elder Thabo that three days are symbolic of the PBM. This he shows in the
story of the butler and baker, Ezra’s trip from Babylon, etc. That the last letter of Snow’s is published
three days before his presentation of the midnight cry at the Boston Tabernacle on July 21, 1844, should
not, for us, lose its significance. However, it is wrong, in my estimation, to dismiss the entire structure of
the four letters and simply see it as choosing which letter fits the bill for the PBM.

34
Published in Signs of the Times, May 17, 1844.
35
I count Jewish years as spanning spring to spring. Thus, the 3D 12M of 516 BC is March 12, 516 BC, on our calendar.
36
There is also a letter by Snow that was published on May 1 in the Signs of the Times. This letter is a defence against the false
accusations of those who were opposing the Millerite movement after the passing of Miller’s years 1843. I tend not to include it in
Snow’s letters, as it is not related to the calculation of the end of the prophetic periods, as are all of his other letters written and
published in 1844. However, this letter is significant, in that it relates in our time to the opposition that is exercised within this
movement, in that many of the accusations made against Millerism are being made against FFA.
 After prayerfully examining all of the dates for the writing and publication of these four letters, I
was shown the underlying chiastic structure. I have already addressed the fact that the first letter is
published and republished on significant dates. With the May 2 letter, we have seen that this letter was
published on Passover. The topic was the midst of the week, showing that Christ was crucified in 31 AD.
It is this understanding that allows us to see the final week as a chiasm, with the cross of Christ in the
middle, as is later depicted on the 1863 chart. The third letter is written on June 22, 1844 and
published in the Midnight Cry of June 27, 1844. The date of its writing accords with the 6D 3M and is
the day of Pentecost. Its publication date is 11D 3M. I know of no significance to this date on the biblical
calendar. However, a doubling of the date yields 22D 6M, which we would interpret on our calendar as
June 22. This Gordian knot is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance, especially as it is a common
feature within the structure of Snow’s letters.
This principal of doubling dates was actually discovered earlier, as I puzzled over the date of the
writing of the first letter. What was the significance of February 16? On the biblical calendar its date of
26D 11M held no special significance that I could determine. After puzzling over this for days, I had a
dream in which I tried every possibility. After expending every effort a voice in my dream told me to
“double it”. February 16 can be represented as 2M 16D. If I add two months to February 16, I get April
16. If I add the 16 days to that, I arrive at May 2, the date that Elder Thabo promoted as the PBM. I then
added 2M 16D to May 2. This gives us the date of the publication of Snow’s final letter on July 18, 1844.
It was my final conclusion that it is the whole of Snow’s four letters that is the PBM and that it is a
progressive unfolding of light. To try to single out any one letter is a mistake. May 2, Elder Thabo’s
choice for the PBM, is seen as the centre of this chiasm.

1. Dear Bro. Southard – February 16, 1844; MC, Feb 22, 1844; HST April 3, 1844
2. Dear Brethren of the Advent Faith – MC, May 2, 1844
3. Dear Bro. Southard – June 22, 1844; MC June 27, 1844 (June 27 – 11d 3m x 2 = 22d 6m – June 22)
4. Confirming the Covenant – June 29, 1844; MC July 18, 1844 (June 29 = 6d 3m 457 BC)

9/11 AND APRIL 19

Since Samuel Snow’s letters fashion a structure that spans April 19, there is a significance that
goes beyond the reform line that they are contained within. The temptation of some to separate 9/11
from April 19 in our line is a mistake that comes from a misapplication of Snow’s letters. I have shown
that each of our waymarks is expressed in Ezekiel. As noted earlier, Ezekiel’s first recorded vision is at
midnight. Ezekiel represents this movement or, more specifically, the priests. Samuel Snow’s letters
represent the unfolding light of the PBM that the priests are to give to the Levities. While many people
have arisen claiming to be represented by Samuel Snow, it is clear that anyone in this movement who is
involved in proclaiming the PBM is Samuel Snow.
I personally think it is a mistake to take some date (let’s say 2014) and try to apply the PBM to that
date. While 2014 is significant, in that it is the termination for the 126 and the 151 shekels, it is not the
PBM. At the least, we can recognise that it is the start of the separation of the wheat and the tares. The
dates for Snow’s letters cannot simply be laid over our line. In Millerite history, April 19 is sunset, if
Snow’s declaration that July 21 is midnight. We should have no problem recognising that 9/11 is
 sunset, since it is typified by April 19. However, the key to understanding the significance of Snow’s
letters is to recognise that these are a special case. They are symbolic of the light that is unfolding from
the letters themselves. If we want to know where we are in Snow’s letters, we must detach them from
the overall line and see them as directly relating to PBM and the PBM only. We do not need, in fact it is
simply wrong, to correct the lines. These are given to us by Inspiration. We need now to study and
understand them.

THE TWO PASSOVERS

Everything in Millerite history connected to Snow’s letters is an illustration of the separation of
two classes of worshipers. This should be the simplest thing for us to see and understand. We all know
that Passover separated Judas from the disciples. The two Passover’s in Millerite history separated
those who received the light of the midnight cry from those that did not. The Millerites who had only
accepted Miller’s initial understanding of the termination of the prophetic periods, but did not receive
the advancing light that extended these to the fall of 1844, were left in darkness. Their door closed prior
to April 19. Many of them left the movement on March 21, when Miller’s Jewish year 1843 had expired.
Some may have clung to the remainder of the year, until April 18 had passed but, after that, they
mocked those who continued to wait while the Bridegroom tarried.

It was not the proclamation of the second advent that created fanaticism and
division. These appeared in the summer of 1844, when Adventists were in a state of
doubt and perplexity concerning their real position. The preaching of the first angel's
message and of the “midnight cry” tended directly to repress fanaticism and dissension.
Those who participated in these solemn movements were in harmony; their hearts
were filled with love for one another, and for Jesus, whom they expected soon to see.
The one faith, the one blessed hope, lifted them above the control of any human
influence, and proved a shield against the assaults of Satan.
“While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. And at
midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet
him. Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.” [Matthew 25:5-7.] In the
summer of 1844, midway between the time when it had been first thought that the
2300 days would end, and the autumn of the same year, to which it was afterward
found that they extended, the message was proclaimed, in the very words of Scripture,
“Behold, the Bridegroom cometh!”
That which led to this movement was the discovery that the decree of
Artaxerxes for the restoration of Jerusalem, which formed the starting-point for the
period of the 2300 days, went into effect in the autumn of the year B. C. 457, and not
at the beginning of the year, as had been formerly believed. Reckoning from the
autumn of 457, the 2300 years terminate in the autumn of 1844.37

It is easy to see our parallel in the history presented above. What we can anticipate is that the next
event in the chronology of Snow’s letters is Pentecost. This history accords with the work of
organisation that we are presently engaged in. We are to be brought in harmony, with hearts filled with
love towards one another, and for Jesus. Only then will we be able to give a message able to draw those
who are bound to their Laodicean condition into a church victorious.

CONCLUSION OF THE MATTER

While chronology plays a major role in our understanding of Millerite history, the prophetic
periods and certain aspects of this movement, we should not be so bold as to imagine that everything
we have understood so far is all of the truth. We will need to be corrected, from time to time. Though I
37
The Great Controversy, 398.
believe that God has led in this movement and that certain things, such as the lines, are immoveable, I
do not imagine that my understanding, therefore, is without fault. There is more light to be unfolded.
That certain individuals have set themselves against this movement, and have been picking at
flecks, while ignoring that vast store of revelation unfolding within its ranks, are a clear fulfillment of
the parallel to Millerite history. I am not the only one whose views have been attacked. We should not
look at an attack of this message as a problem with the individuals within this message. We should be
pressing together. This is not the time for a party spirit to prevail. These attacks serve their main
purpose in scattering the flock, at the very time that it is to be united. If there are any faults to be
recognised, it is our own, as these are the only ones that we have any control over.
Whoever happens to read this paper may find faults with it. If so, I suggest that they write me first
for clarification. I welcome correction. As well, we cannot allow our feelings for the individual, whether
good or bad, to be a deciding influence in accepting or rejecting what they present. Everything must be
brought to the examination of the Word of God.
The light that comes from chronology has been my particular burden to bear. It has not been a
pleasant one. Though it has utilised some of my natural abilities and interests, it has forced me to
exercise patience and perseverance beyond my natural tendencies. I had always hoped that the LORD
would have someone else take up this burden. At the least, I ask for the help of all those interested in
chronology to share any insights they may have. Together, we can weed out any errors and find new
light in old.