How Can Bible Numbers Be Made to “Prove” Almost Anything?
In the first study, we established an important principle:
You can do the math correctly and still interpret the Bible incorrectly.
Now let's see how that happens.
Suppose someone finds a number in biblical prophecy.
The number is real.
The arithmetic is real.
The historical dates may be real.
And the final calculation may work perfectly.
It can look impressive.
But before accepting the conclusion, we need to ask:
Where did each part of the calculation come from?
That is where things get interesting.
Let's Build a Prophecy Calculation
Suppose we begin with a biblical period of:
1,260 days.
That's easy enough.
The number really does occur in Revelation.
But now we make our first decision:
The 1,260 days actually mean 1,260 years.
Now we need a starting point.
Perhaps we choose the beginning of a kingdom.
Or the decree of a ruler.
Or the destruction of a city.
Or the establishment of a religious institution.
Or some other important historical event.
Suppose we select a date.
Now we add 1,260 years.
And there it is:
A prophetic date.
The arithmetic works.
But have we proved anything?
Not yet.
Look at What We Added
The Bible gave us:
1,260 days.
But we supplied:
Days = years.
Then we supplied:
The historical event from which to begin counting.
Then we supplied:
The date assigned to that event.
Then perhaps we supplied:
The calendar to use.
And finally we supplied:
The event we expect at the end of the calculation.
Suddenly our “biblical calculation” contains quite a bit of information that didn't actually come from the biblical passage.
That's the danger.
Change One Assumption
Now let's change only one thing.
Keep the same biblical number:
1,260.
But choose a different starting event.
We get a different ending date.
Choose another reasonable historical starting point.
We get another date.
Change days into literal days rather than years.
Another result.
Use another calendar.
Another result.
Combine the number with another prophecy.
Another result.
The mathematics hasn't failed.
The assumptions changed.
And when the assumptions change, the prophecy changes with them.
This Is Why Almost Anything Can Look Convincing
Numbers have psychological power.
A statement such as:
“I think this prophecy refers to a future event”
sounds like an interpretation.
But:
1,260 + 538 = 1798
looks like proof.
The equation gives the interpretation an appearance of mathematical certainty.
But mathematics can prove only what follows from the numbers and assumptions we put into it.
The equation cannot prove that 538 is the correct starting date.
It cannot prove that 1,260 days means 1,260 years.
And it cannot prove what prophetic event the resulting date represents.
Those are questions of interpretation.
The calculator cannot answer them.
This Is Where We Need an “Audit”
You may sometimes hear someone say that a prophetic interpretation needs to be “audited.”
What does that mean?
An audit is simply a careful examination.
In business, an auditor doesn't merely look at the final number and say:
“That looks impressive.”
The auditor asks:
Where did these figures come from?
What records support them?
Were the rules applied consistently?
Can every important step be verified?
We can do something similar with a prophecy calculation.
But our audit must begin with Scripture.
Audit the Assumptions, Not Just the Arithmetic
Suppose someone presents a long calculation ending in a particular prophetic date.
Don't begin by checking the addition.
The arithmetic may be flawless.
Ask instead:
Where did the starting date come from?
Where does the passage say a day represents a year?
Why was this historical event chosen rather than another?
Why are these two prophecies being combined?
Where does Scripture say the resulting date concerns the Second Coming or rapture?
Would the original readers have had the information necessary to make this calculation?
Those questions audit the interpretation.
And that is far more important than checking the calculator.
Watch for Hidden Assumptions
An assumption is not necessarily wrong.
We make assumptions constantly when interpreting anything.
The problem comes when an assumption is treated as though the Bible explicitly stated it.
Consider the difference:
The Bible says:
1,260 days.
The interpreter says:
Those days represent 1,260 years.
Those are not the same statement.
Perhaps the interpretation can be demonstrated.
Perhaps it cannot.
But the interpreter must show us why the text requires—or at least supports—that conclusion.
We should never quietly move an interpretation into the Bible and then quote it as though God put it there.
Several Assumptions Can Multiply the Problem
One unsupported assumption may produce a questionable conclusion.
But prophecy calculations often require several assumptions.
For example:
This number represents years rather than days.
This particular historical event starts the countdown.
This particular date for that event is correct.
This calendar should be used.
This other prophecy covers the same period.
These numbers should therefore be combined.
The ending date identifies an event connected with Christ's return.
Perhaps every assumption is correct.
But notice what has happened.
The final conclusion depends not upon one proposition, but upon a chain of propositions.
If one important link fails, the conclusion may fail with it.
That is why complicated calculations require especially careful exegesis.
We Can Demonstrate the Problem Ourselves
Imagine that we wanted to “discover” a prophetic date.
We could begin with one of the many numbers in Daniel or Revelation.
Then search history for a significant event that gives us a useful starting point.
If the resulting date doesn't work, choose another event.
If necessary, change the way the prophetic number is interpreted.
Combine it with another number.
Try another calendar.
Eventually we may discover a combination that lands near some dramatic historical event.
Then we can work backward and explain why every step was meaningful.
It can look astonishing.
But what have we actually demonstrated?
Perhaps nothing more than our ability to find patterns.
Humans Are Very Good at Finding Patterns
We naturally look for connections.
That ability is useful.
It helps us recognize genuine patterns in Scripture.
But it can also fool us.
Once we begin looking for a particular result, we notice numbers and events that support it while overlooking hundreds that don't.
The more numbers we have available, the more combinations we can try.
Daniel and Revelation provide plenty.
History provides thousands of possible starting dates.
With enough choices, interesting numerical coincidences are inevitable.
A coincidence becomes biblical interpretation only when the text itself gives us reason to make the connection.
This Is Eisegesis at Work
Remember the distinction from our first study.
Exegesis draws meaning from the text.
Eisegesis brings meaning into the text.
Here's how eisegesis can work with prophecy:
Begin with an event we want to predict.
Search for a biblical number.
Choose a starting point.
Develop a calculation that reaches the desired destination.
Then return to Scripture and use the calculation to prove the conclusion.
The process has been reversed.
We didn't begin with the text and discover its meaning.
We began with the destination and found a road to it.
Exegesis Runs the Other Direction
Exegesis begins without demanding a particular ending.
It asks:
What is happening in this passage?
What question is being answered?
What does the writer tell us?
How is the number used?
What does the surrounding vision mean?
What explanation does Scripture provide?
What would the original readers have understood?
Then—and only then—we ask what conclusions follow.
That method may not produce an exciting date.
But it has a much better chance of producing the meaning the biblical writer intended.
A Good Test
Whenever a biblical calculation produces a precise date, try this:
Remove everything the interpreter supplied.
Leave only what the biblical passage actually says.
What remains?
Can you still reach the same date?
If you cannot, then the date isn't coming from Scripture alone.
It is coming from Scripture plus a set of interpretive assumptions.
Those assumptions now need to be demonstrated.
Don't Be Intimidated by the Math
A complicated chart can look overwhelming.
Long calculations can create the impression that the person presenting them must know something we don't.
But you don't have to be a mathematician to test the interpretation.
Ask simple questions.
Where does the Bible say that?
Why did you begin there?
Why does this number mean that?
Why are those two passages being combined?
What did this mean to the people who first received it?
Those questions can be more revealing than pages of calculations.
The Best Audit Begins With the Text
Biblical prophecy does not need protection from careful examination.
If an interpretation is correct, examining its assumptions should strengthen it.
So audit the calculation.
But don't merely audit the arithmetic.
Audit the interpretation.
Separate what Scripture actually says from what the interpreter has supplied.
Then ask whether each added assumption can be demonstrated from the text.
Because once again:
You can do the math correctly and still interpret the Bible incorrectly.
And with enough numbers, enough starting dates, and enough assumptions, we can make the Bible appear to predict things the biblical writers never intended to predict.
The answer is not better numerology.
The answer is better Bible study.
Exegesis before calculation.
Text before assumptions.
Meaning before mathematics.
Read First. Conclude Later.