Will Christ Return in 2000?

Will Christ return in 2000? Some Seventh-day Adventists believe He will. They reason: "For just as the work of Creation took six days, so human history will last six thousand years."

Just as the Sabbath followed six days of creation, so the millennial sabbath in heaven will follow six thousand years of human history." They see the Creation week as an analogy of the seven thou sand years between Creation and re-creation. They refer to prominent Adventist leaders of the past who taught this view, such as O. R. L. Crosier, ¹ Joseph Bates,² James White,³ T. M. Preble,⁴ W. H. Little John,⁵ S. N. Haskell,6 and J.N. Andrews.⁷

Were the pioneers right in their teaching? By whose authority did they come to this conclusion? Who told them that human history would be only six thousand years? It isn't found in the Bible. Nowhere in Scripture does it say the purpose of Creation week is to in form us about the length of human history. Creation week is history, not prediction. Creation week is about what Christ did and not about what He will do. Scripture is silent on the date for Creation and the Second Advent as well as the length of time between the two. Eschatology is based on prophecies and not on protology, the study of first things like Creation week.

Some see sabbatical years (Lev. 25:1 -7) as a type of the coming millennium. Just as six years were followed by a sabbatical year, so six thousand years of history will be followed by a millennial rest (Rev. 20:1-7). The sabbatical cycles (six years of harvesting the land and one year of rest) were pragmatic, not prophetic. They were for the good of the land and had nothing to do with eschatology. Every fiftieth year was a jubilee, a time of liberty when people and land were freed (Lev. 25:8-55). Some see this jubilee year as a type of the millennium. Pope John Paul II speaks of the year 2000 as a jubilee year.⁸ Will the coming jubilee be the millennial Sabbath? There is no biblical evidence that the jubilee year ever acquired prophetic significance.

Typology cannot be assumed. It cannot be assigned to a passage from an external source like human reason. Biblical typology is always stated within scripture. One is not left to read typology into scripture. The absence of biblical typological statements must not be made up by creative interpretation. Richard M. Davidson says, "The nature of biblical typology remains ambiguous as long as an a priori understanding of its conceptual structure is brought to the biblical text instead of allowing these structures to emerge from careful exegetical analysis."⁹ Unless there is a clear, unequivocal biblical linkage be tween the sabbatical and jubilee years with the six-thousand-year time frame of history and the millennium, there is no sure foundation upon which to build such a hypothesis.

Some would argue that since one thousand years are like a day to God (Ps. 90:4; 2 Pet. 3:7, 8), six days of creation represent six thousand years of history. But this won't do. If these passages are used to argue for seven thousand years of salvation history, it could also be argued that each creation day represents one thousand years, and it took six thousand years to complete Creation. Both arguments are wrong.

Usher's chronology

What about Archbishop Usher's six-thousand-year chronology? R. H. Brown, scientist and specialist in age-dating, and former director of the Geoscience Research Institute, wrote a perceptive article on the question.¹⁰ According to Brown, computations as to when the six-thousand-year period concludes vary radically from A.D. 336 to 1822 to 2037, depending on which factors are taken into consideration. That's a difference of 701 years! This is surely not a good guide for telling us when Christ will come.

So if the Bible is silent on the length of human history, do we get the six thousand year theory from the early church fathers, Usher's chronology, or Ellen White? It is true that many of the early church fathers did speak of the seven-thousand-year time frame. ¹¹ It was "characteristic of the first three centuries" ¹² and taught in subsequent centuries. In A.D. 221, Sextus Julius Africanus believed the earth would last only six thousand years, the millennium to come in A.D. 500, or 254 years from his time¹³ A contemporary, Hippolytus of Rome, in A.D. 234 counted 5,738 years back to Creation, hence the millennium would begin in 262 years from his day. ¹⁴ Lactantius (A.D. 260-330), speaking of the last times, said, "I have already shown above, that when six thousand years shall be completed this change must take place, and that the last day of the extreme conclusion is now drawing near." ¹⁵ These last three church fathers concluded that nearly all of the six thousand years had passed by their time. By contrast Augustine (A.D. 354- 430) said, "There should follow on the completion of six thousand years, as of six days, a kind of seventh-day sabbath in the succeeding thousand years." ¹⁶ He considered the millennium to be from the first coming of Christ until the end of the world, and hence already in progress. ¹⁷ These views about the millennium are all based upon one thousand years for each Creation day. The fact that they varied on when the seventh millennium begins shows their uncertainty of the Creation date.

Ellen White and six thousand years

Perhaps the early Adventist writers were influenced by Usher's chronology. Adventists today looking for the return of Christ in 2000 are doing so perhaps on the basis of statements made by Ellen White. In The Great Controversy she speaks of six thousand years. Concerning time just before Christ's return she says, "For six thousand years the great controversy has been in progress." ¹⁸ Commenting on the controversy after the millennium, she says, "For six thousand years he [Satan] has wrought his will, filling the earth with woe and causing grief throughout the universe." ¹⁹

What do we make of these statements? First, it should be noted that these statements do not specify the year 2000. They merely talk about six thou sand years. They do not use any biblical evidence for their assertion. Was Ellen White using the popular Usher time frame for writing historical sequences in The Great Controversy? The fact that she had no date in mind is seen by her repeated warning against setting a date for the Second Advent.²⁰ Also, soon after 1844 she said Christ could have come by then if the saints had been ready.²¹ There's no mention that He re ally could not come because six thousand years of human history hadn't yet transpired. He delayed because of human unreadiness, not because the year 2000 was still future. So He could have come nearly one hundred fifty years before the year 2000! Of course it could be argued that the six-thousand year statements take all this delay into consideration. Yet even that does not bring us to the year 2000, for no one knows when the six-thousand-year period began.

The last biblical time prophecy ended in 1844 (Dan. 8:14), and Ellen White says, "Our position has been one of waiting and watching, with no time proclamation to intervene between the close of the prophetic periods in 1844 and the time of the Lord's coming."²² Christ said of His coming, "The Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him" (Matt. 24:44; Luke 12:40). So there is always an urgent imminence that transcends any date.

A disappointment in 2000?

What if time goes beyond 2000? Could there be a great disappointment for those who expect Christ to come that year? That is a real possibility, and such a disappointment could cause many to give up as they did in 1844. Calendar dates should have nothing to do with our be lief in Christ's return. Fulfillment of biblical prophecy has everything to do with His coming. That's the only safe place to fix our gaze. We must be people of prophecy and not people of speculation. My latest book, Christ is Coming!, traces the many end-time movements that are rapidly fulfilling prophecy like spiritualism, the charismatic movement, the Christian Coalition, the global power of the Papacy, the uniting of church and state, Dominionists, the New Age movement, the promotion of Sunday, and the uniting of churches. When one looks at the total picture, it provides convincing evidence that Christ could come soon. Imminence and certainty of His coming are what are important. Setting dates and references to the year 2000 are not.