Is the “Daily” the pagan phase of Rome?
The oldest view of the “daily” within Adventism is that the “daily” is the pagan phase of Rome, which was “taken away” by papal Rome in 508 AD. This view was held by William Miller and several other prominent prophecy expositors in Miller’s movement, including Josiah Litch and Joshua Himes.
The “pagan Rome” view was adopted by Uriah Smith in his “Daniel and the Revelation,” which was long the consensus statement on Seventh-day Adventist prophetic interpretation. In more recent decades, however, the “pagan Rome” view has largely been eclipsed by the “new view,” which I will discuss in part 4.
1. The Millerite Roots of Roman Paganism as the “Daily”
Adventists inherited this theory from William Miller, and like much that William Miller taught and believed, it had to do with dates.
Although Adventism grew out of the Millerite movement, William Miller believed and taught things contemporary Seventh-day Adventists do not believe, including Sunday sacredness and the immortality of the soul. The early doctrinal development of Adventism consisted of moving past Miller’s errors, embracing the concept of a heavenly sanctuary to explain the Great Disappointment, and then adding soul sleep from George Storrs, and the Sabbath from Joseph Bates.
Even regarding prophetic interpretation, Adventists have grown away from Miller. For example, Miller believed that the first beast of Revelation 13, the beast from the sea, was a symbol of pagan Rome, whereas modern Adventists believe that this beast, at least after the first verse, symbolizes Rome in its papal phase—the papacy. Miller also believed that the two-horned beast of Revelation 13 was a symbol of the Papacy, whereas modern Adventists view that as the United States, which establishes an “image” to the papacy.
Miller believed that 666 in Revelation 13:18 was a number of prophetic days/literal years, and represented the duration of pagan Rome. Modern Adventists believe that the number 666 is not a date nor a time span of years, but rather a symbolic number, describing the end-time beast power that the United States is, in the future, to set up as an image to the papacy, and which can prevent anyone without its mark from buying and selling.
Miller believed that pagan Rome began in 158 BC and ended in 508 AD, the total lifespan of pagan Rome thus being 666 years. But the Roman Republic dates to 509 BC, and the end of the Western Roman Empire is conventionally dated to 476 AD (the Eastern Roman Empire, the Greek-speaking Byzantine Empire, continued on in some form until 1453 AD). But both the western and Byzantine empires had become Christian long before they fell. Miller’s 666 years as the lifespan of pagan Rome relates solely to his own interpretive theories.
Miller chose 158 BC as the start date for pagan Rome, because that is when (so Miller believed) the Judean leader, Judas Maccabeus, concluded a treaty with Rome called the “Jewish League,” securing an alliance against the Seleucids who had been persecuting the Jews under the by then deceased Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Miller chose this date because he believed what Uriah Smith believed, to wit: “Earthly governments are not introduced into prophecy till they become in some way connected with the people of God.” Hence, the pagan Roman Republic’s prophetic inauguration is 158 BC, when it made contact with the Jews.
2. The “Daily” as Pagan Rome is Driven by the Time Periods of Daniel 12:11-12
Daniel 12:11 states,
“From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days.”
Jesus clearly told his disciples that “the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel” was Jerusalem surrounded by Roman armies (Mat. 24:15-18; Luke 21:20-21; Mark 13:14-15) which then permanently abolished the temple sacrifices by destroying the temple and most of the city of Jerusalem. Some 1.1 million Jews were killed and about 100,000 more were condemned to slavery, causing almost unimaginably intense desolation to the Jewish nation.
But Miller needed the 1,290 days to begin in 508 AD. Why? Because in order to have the 1290 prophetic days end in 1798, the same year the 1260 days end (the 1260 days are also the 42 months and the “time, times, and half a time”—Dan. 7:25; 12:7; Rev. 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5), the 1290 days must start in 508.
But that date was even more important to William Miller because of another time prophecy:
“Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.” Daniel 12:12
Remember that Miller and the Millerites believed that the Lord would return in 1843, and if you add 1,335 to 508 AD, you get 1843. Blessed, indeed, is he that makes it to 1843, because he will see his Savior coming in the clouds of glory!
It is not difficult to understand Miller’s thinking. Under his scheme, the prophetic periods fit together beautifully. You start the 666 years in 158 and they end in 508 AD, which is the beginning of both the 1290 years (which end at the same time as the 1260 years, in 1798) and the 1335 years, which end in 1843, the same year the 2,300 years end (or so Miller thought), which is the year of the Second Coming. It was obviously this confluence of dates that drove Miller’s theory of the “daily.”
So Miller hatched his theory of a 666-year duration for pagan Rome, with the papacy “taking away” pagan Roman and establishing itself in 508 AD.
3. The Thessalonian Connection
Miller’s belief that pagan Rome needed to be “taken away” also relied upon his reading of 2 Thes. 2:3-8, and particularly verse 7 of that passage:
“Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.” 2 Thes. 2:3-8 (emphasis added)
Miller believed, correctly, that this passage refers to the papacy. He interpreted verse seven as meaning that pagan Rome was holding the papacy back, but once pagan Rome was “taken out of the way,” the papacy would be revealed in full flower. Hence, he looked for a time when the papacy would take pagan Rome out of the way.
But unless one agrees with Catholic claims that Peter really was the first pope, the papacy does not go back to the First Century, and was not being “held back” by pagan Rome, and by the time the papacy really achieved power in the early Sixth Century, pagan Rome was long gone.
4. Daniel 8 interpreted by the “Daily as Pagan Rome” School
Given this background material, we are ready to examine how Miller interpreted the “daily” in Daniel eight. Daniel 8:11 is was interpreted as:
“by him [the papacy] the daily [pagan Rome] was taken away, and the place of the sanctuary was cast down.”
It is argued that this was fulfilled when Clovis, king of the Franks, conquered the Visigoths in 507-508 AD; Clovis was Catholic on Christological issues, whereas the Visigoths, like many of the Germanic tribes, were Arian. It is a valid point that Clovis essentially made himself champion of Christologically Catholic orthodoxy, but the Visigoths were neither pagan nor Roman—nor pagan Romans (bringing to mind Voltaire’s quip that the “Holy Roman Empire” was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire). The Visigoths were Germanic Christians with slightly different views on Christology.
It is not clear how “the sanctuary was cast down.” Some proponents of this view have argued that the sanctuary in question is the Pantheon. Although the Pantheon was never “cast down” (it has stood these 19 centuries as a monument to the Romans’ astonishing facility with concrete) the “place of the sanctuary” was the City of Rome, they argue, and it was “cast down,” they argue, when Constantine made Byzantium his capital in 330 AD. But the transfer of the seat of government was not done by the Papacy, nor by Clovis, nor the Visigoths, nor in 508 AD, obviously. (It is hard to believe that this is a serious attempt at prophetic interpretation, but I own a book published just a few years ago that mentions the Pantheon theory.)
Daniel 8:12: “a host was given him [the papacy] against the daily [pagan Rome] by reason of transgression.”
The “host” is interpreted to mean that the Franks were given to the papacy to fight the Visigoths. The transgression and the transgressor are unclear.
5. Problems with the “Daily as Pagan Rome” theory
a. Paganism was Never “Taken Away”
Paganism was never “taken away.” Adventists teach that paganism was incorporated into Roman Catholicism. In Revelation 13:2, we are told that, “the beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion.” Why did the beast of pagan-papal Rome look like Greece, and like Medo-Persia, and also like Babylon? Because it had absorbed the false teachings of those prior kingdoms. Pagan Rome absorbed then, and then pagan Rome gradually morphed into papal Rome, which also absorbed them. This is what Revelation 13:2 is illustrating for us.
This is also a major theme of the Great Controversy:
“Almost imperceptibly the customs of heathenism found their way into the Christian church. The spirit of compromise and conformity was restrained for a time by the fierce persecutions which the church endured under paganism. But as persecution ceased, and Christianity entered the courts and palaces of kings, she laid aside the humble simplicity of Christ and His apostles for the pomp and pride of pagan priests and rulers; and in place of the requirements of God, she substituted human theories and traditions. The nominal conversion of Constantine, in the early part of the fourth century, caused great rejoicing; and the world, cloaked with a form of righteousness, walked into the church. Now the work of corruption rapidly progressed. Paganism, while appearing to be vanquished, became the conqueror. Her spirit controlled the church. Her doctrines, ceremonies, and superstitions were incorporated into the faith and worship of the professed followers of Christ.” Great Controversy, p. 49 (emphasis added).
Paganism was not defeated or “taken away”; to the contrary, paganism was the conqueror! It was absorbed into the papacy, and thereby kept alive within Christendom for many centuries. By contrast, in 70 AD, the daily sacrifice of the Jewish Temple was permanently taken away, never to return.
Bible prophecy emphasizes the continuity between pagan Rome and papal Rome. The one almost undetectably morphs into the other, and we never see a fight between them. When pagan Rome was persecuting, or “fighting,” Christianity, the religion being oppressed was not papal Christianity but real Christianity; the papacy developed after the persecution inflicted on the church by pagan Rome had ended. There was never any conflict between pagan Rome and the papacy.
As Ellen White explains in the passage above, the papacy kept paganism alive. The Roman Empire gave papal Rome her capital city, her pagan religion, and her power and authority. The chief priest of pagan Rome had the title, pontifex maximus, the supreme bridge-builder; the papacy inherited that title. The office of the pagan high priest was thus not taken away but kept alive by the Papacy.
b. Paganism has no Biblically Significant Sanctuary
There is no single “paganism” and paganism does not have a single “sanctuary.” There have been hundreds, probably thousands, of pagan cults, and thousands of pagan temples, none of which are important in Scripture. None would have been of any significance to Daniel, nor should they be to us.
What would have been of tremendous significance to Daniel was the temple in Jerusalem, the preparations for, dimensions, furnishings, and construction of which Scripture specifies and describes at great length (Ex. 25-28; 1 Kings 5-8; 1 Chron. 22; 2 Chron. 2-7). That temple was patterned after a heavenly original (Ex. 25:9; 26:30; Num. 8:4; Acts 7:44; Heb. 8:5).
Any news regarding the temple would have been riveting to Daniel. Contemplating its total destruction, and the fact that the temple sacrifices would be permanently taken away, would have caused Daniel terrible distress, even desolation, and indeed after he was shown these things, he “was worn out” and “lay exhausted for several days.” Dan. 8:27 NIV.
c. Nothing Pertaining to Paganism Occurred in 508
By 508 AD, the Roman empire in the west was long gone; its last pagan emperor, Julian “the Apostate,” died in 363 AD. There is evidence that Theodosius I, who reigned from 379 to 395 AD, really completed the official Christianization of the Empire. Likewise, the Eastern Roman Empire had long been Christianized, and all its emperors were at least nominally Christian, including Anastasius I Dicorus, who was the Byzantine emperor in 508 AD.
Miller and later adherents to the “paganism” school, such as Uriah Smith, have argued that Clovis’ defeat of the Visigoths constitutes the papacy’s defeat of paganism, but, as noted above, the Visigoths of this time were Arian Christians, not pagans. The conflicts of the early 6th Century were between and among branches of Christianity, usually defined by Christology. Additionally, per Adventist consensus, the Visigoths were not one of the three horns uprooted by the little horn; we believe these were the Heruli, the Vandals, and the Ostrogoths. “Uprooting” the Visigoths has nothing to do with Daniel 7:8, and hence nothing to do with the beginning of the papacy.
Miller’s starting date of 158 is probably wrong, as most scholars believe the Jewish League was concluded around 161 BC, not 158, but the starting date is contrived anyway, since it was based upon Miller’s misapprehension of the meaning of “666” as being the duration of pagan Rome, and Miller’s absolute requirement that pagan Rome end in 508 AD.
d. There is No Connection Between “Daily” and Paganism
There is no biblical or logical connection between paganism and the concept of “daily” or “continual.” One could argue that paganism is always with us, but if that is the proposed logical nexus between “daily” or “continual” and paganism, it obviously contradicts the theory that in Daniel 8 paganism is “taken away.” If paganism is always with us, it was not taken away.
By contrast, there is a valid biblical reason not to connect “daily” with paganism. William H. Shea, a highly educated Adventist scholar of Hebrew, said of the Hebrew word tamid (translated as “daily” or “continual”: “Nor is it ever used of pagan worship or the use of idols. It is used almost thirty times in connection with the tabernacle in the wilderness and the temple of Jerusalem—always referring to some action the priest carried out in its courtyard or in the holy place.”
To repeat for emphasis, tamid is typically used in connection with the sanctuary service, or the services of the temples in Jerusalem; the word is used in that context nearly 30 times in the Old Testament. But it is never used in connection with pagan worship or idolatry. The concept of paganism is simply not a good biblical, logical, or linguistic match to the Hebrew word tamid.
6. Where I Agree with Uriah Smith
What often gets lost is the fact that the latter half of Daniel 8 contains an interpretation of, or at least more detail regarding, the first half of Daniel 8. The angel Gabriel is sent to explain the vision to Daniel and help him understand it:
“And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man. And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.” Dan. 8:15-16.
Gabriel then reveals to Daniel that the ram is Medo-Persia, the goat is Greece, and the four horns are four kingdoms that emerge from Alexander’s empire:
“The two-horned ram that you saw represents the kings of Media and Persia. The shaggy goat is the king of Greece, and the large horn between its eyes is the first king. The four horns that replaced the one that was broken off represent four kingdoms that will emerge from his nation but will not have the same power.” Dan. 8:20-22.
Next, Daniel sheds further light on the kingdom that follows four Greek successors to Alexander. Presumably, this portion of the interpretation applies to the events of verses 9-12:
“And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practice, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.” Dan. 8:23-25.
How does Uriah Smith read these verses? He reads them the same as I do, as describing pagan Rome:
This power succeeds to the four divisions of the goat kingdom in the latter time of their kingdom, that is, toward the termination of their career. It is, of course, the same as the little horn of verse 9 and onward. Apply it to Rome, as set forth in remarks on verse 9, and all is harmonious and clear.
“A king of fierce countenance.” Moses, in predicting punishment to come upon the Jews from this same power, calls it “a nation of fierce countenance.” Deuteronomy 28:49, 50. No people made a more formidable appearance in warlike array than the Romans.
“Understanding dark sentences.” Moses, in the scripture just referred to says, “Whose tongue thou shalt not understand.” This could not be said of the Babylonians, Persians, or Greeks, in reference to the Jews; for the Chaldean and Greek languages were used to a greater or less extent in Palestine. This was not the case, however, with Latin.
“When the transgressors are come to the full.” All along, the connection between God’s people and their oppressors is kept in view. It was on account of the transgressions of his people that they were sold into captivity. And their continuance in sin brought more and more severe punishment. At no time were the Jews more corrupt, morally, as a nation, than at the time they came under the jurisdiction of the Romans.
“Mighty, but not by his own power.” The success of the Romans was owing largely to the aid of their allies, and divisions among their enemies, of which they were ever ready to take advantage.
“He shall destroy wonderfully.” The Lord told the Jews by the prophet Ezekiel that he would deliver them to men who were “skillful to destroy.” How full of meaning is such a description, and how applicable to the Romans! In taking Jerusalem, they slew eleven hundred thousand Jews, and made ninety-seven thousand captives. So wonderfully did they destroy this once mighty and holy people. And what they could not accomplish by force, they secured by artifice. Their flatteries, fraud, and corruption were as fatal as their thunderbolts of war.
“And he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes” And Rome, finally, in the person of one of its governors, stood up against the Prince of princes, by giving sentence of death against Jesus Christ.
“But he shall be broken without hand,” an expression which identifies the destruction of this power with the smiting of the image of chapter 2.
Uriah Smith correctly interprets Daniel 8:23-25 as pagan Rome, its execution of Jesus Christ, the Messiah, and its destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. The sentence that begins “He shall destroy wonderfully . . .” ends with “and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people” a clear reference to the Jews. But although Smith does not quote that last clause, he does explain how the Jews were destroyed in 70 AD. Over the course of the three “Jewish Wars” ending with the Bar Kokhba revolt, Rome destroyed the Jewish nation, scattering the survivors to the four winds of heaven.
Smith says that the phrase “broken without hand” refers back to Daniel 2:34-5, 44-5, which points to papal Rome, but that phrase could also refer to the collapse of the Roman Empire from internal decay, not from conquest. The western Roman Empire essentially died of old age and infirmity.
Especially insightful is Smith’s interpretation of Deuteronomy 28:49-57 as prophesying the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem. The description of the “fierce countenance” in Deut. 28:50 is identical to the language in Daniel 8:23 that describes Rome. Note also this language: “The Lord will bring a nation against you from far away, from the ends of the earth, like an eagle swooping down . . .” Deut. 28:49. Wasn’t the eagle the symbol of Rome and the totem of her mighty legions? Deuteronomy 28 even includes the detail of the Jerusalem siege victims being forced into cannibalism (Deut. 28:53-57).
But how can the vision, in verses 10-12, mean that the papacy is taking away paganism, while Gabriel’s explanation of the same vision, in verses 23-25, point to Pagan Rome’s destruction of Jerusalem and the temple? Doesn’t the interpretation of the vision have to . . . well, interpret the vision?
Conclusion
Paganism as the “daily” does not work. Paganism does not linguistically belong to the Hebrew word translated as “daily”, paganism was never taken away, it does not have a biblically significant temple, and nothing happened to paganism in 508 AD. When you get down to it, Miller’s interpretation of the “daily” is not that paganism or pagan Rome were taken away, it was that the Visigoths, a tribe of German Christians, were taken away.
Barrels of ink have been spilled by many well-meaning, sincere Adventist to defend this view, but enough is enough. This is not sound prophetic interpretation. William Miller’s main concern was that 508 AD allows the numbers to fit perfectly with Jesus returning to earth in 1843. But should that be our main concern?
We will discuss the “new view” of the “daily” in part 4 of this series.