Daniel's 70th Week Future or Fulfilled? Pt1

[GLJCA]

Here is a great article that I found on the web. I can not find it again to post who the author was.

THE SEVENTIETH WEEK FUTURE OR FULFILLED?

Dan 9:24
"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
"Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
"And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the over spreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate" (Daniel 9:24-27).

This great prophecy pertaining to Daniel's people and the city of Jerusalem is linked with a time period of seventy "weeks." Bible students recognize that these seventy weeks or 490 days are symbolic of years, each day representing a year that is, 490 years.
It was this same year-for-a-day principle that was used in Numbers 14:34. Because of unbelief, the Israelites were to wander for 40 years in the wilderness, a year for each day that the spies were absent searching out the land. This same scale was used in Ezekiel 4:4-6: "I have appointed thee a day for a year, a day for a year."
While Christians are generally united in the belief that the "seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks", that is, 69 weeks (483 years) measured unto "Messiah", concerning the final week of the prophecy, the 70th week, there are two entirely different interpretations that are held today, the FUTURIST(Dispensational) interpretation and the FULFILLED interpretation.
The futurist interpretation is that a huge gap of 2,000 years+ separates the 70th week from the other 69 weeks that measured unto Messiah. The fulfilled interpretation is that no gap is to be placed between the 69th week and the 70th-that the 70th week followed the 69th in logical sequence.

The futurist interpretation is that the 70th week refers to the Antichrist who will make a covenant with the Jews. This covenant will allow them to offer sacrifices in a "rebuilt" temple at Jerusalem for seven years, but after three and a half years he will break this covenant and cause the sacrifices to cease.

The fulfilled interpretation, on the other hand, is that the 70th week refers to Christ and that the causing of the sacrifices to cease was accomplished at Calvary when Christ became the final and perfect sacrifice for sin, completely ceasing in AD70 when Jerusalem was destroyed.

What differences exist here! One says the 70th week is future; the other says it is fulfilled! One says there is a huge gap between the 69th and the 70th weeks; the other requires no gap. One says the 70th week pertains to Antichrist; the other to Jesus Christ! In view of such glaring differences, both of these interpretations simply cannot be correct.
We believe the fulfilled interpretation is the correct view; that the 69 weeks measured "unto Messiah"; that in the midst of the 70th week after three and a half years of ministry he was cut off in death; that this sacrifice, being the perfect sacrifice, caused other sacrifices to cease in God' s plan. Let us now notice step by step all of the basic parts of the 70 weeks prophecy and how these things were fulfilled.
I. JERUSALEM WAS TO BE RESTORED. We have already seen the scriptures that explain this.
2. THE STREET AND WALL WERE TO BE REBUILT IN TROUBLOUS TIMES. We have seen in the book of Ezra some of the troubles that confronted the people in those years of rebuilding.
3. THE MOST HOLY WAS TO BE ANOINTED. We believe this reference is to Jesus Christ. Gabriel announced to Mary: "The HOLY thing that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God" (Lk. 1:35). Peter referred to him as "the HOLY ONE" (Acts 3:14). John referred to him as "the HOLY ONE" (1 John 2:20). Even demons had to recognize him as "The HOLY ONE of God" (Mk. 1:24).
David spoke concerning Christ: neither wilt thou suffer thine HOLY ONE to see corruption" (Acts 2:27). In Revelation 3:7 he is called "HOLY" and the heavenly creatures rest not from saying: "HOLY, HOLY, HOLY" before this one "which was, and is, and is to come" (Rev. 4:8).
From the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem unto Messiah was to be 483 years. When this time was fulfilled, those who knew this prophecy, were expecting the appearance of the Messiah, that is, the Christ. (Christ is the Greek form of the Hebrew word Messiah.) Thus when John came baptizing, "the people were in EXPECTATION, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ or not" (Lk. 3:15). John plainly told them that he was not the Christ he was only the forerunner. When Jesus appeared on the scene, John cried: "Behold the Lamb of God"! The time had now come that Jesus should be "made manifest to Israel" (John 1:29 31). He was then baptized and when he had prayed, "the heaven was opened. And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased" (Lk. 3:21,22).
He had appeared to Israel right on time! Thus Jesus, in evident reference to the time prophecy of Daniel, said: "The TIME is fulfilled" (Mk. 1:15) and as the Messiah, the Christ, the "anointed one", he preached the gospel. When he entered the synagogue of Nazareth, he announced: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he hath ANOINTED me" (Lk. 4:18-22). Acts 4:27 mentioned Jesus as the "holy" one that the Lord "ANOINTED." And Peter mentioned that "God ANOINTED Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost... who went about doing good, healing all who were oppressed of the devil" (Acts 10:38).
Daniel's prophecy revealed that the time period unto the Messiah would be 69 weeks (483 years). This measured to the time when Jesus was baptized and anointed to begin his ministry as the Messiah, the Christ, the "Anointed One.
4. MESSIAH WAS TO BE CUT OFF. The 69 weeks (7 plus 62) were to measure unto Messiah "and AFTER" the 69 weeks "shall Messiah be cut off." Now "AFTER" 69 weeks does not and cannot mean "in" or "during" the 69 weeks! If Messiah was to be cut off AFTER the 69 weeks, there is only one week left in which he could have been "cut off"the 70th week! after three and a half years of ministry.
The term "cut off" implies that Messiah would not die a natural death; he would be murdered! So also had Isaiah prophesied using an equivalent word: "He was cut off out of the land of the living" (Isaiah 53:8).
The details about how Messiah was "cut off" are given in the gospels.
5. "TO FINISH THE TRANSGRESSION", or literally, "to finish transgression." As Jesus was dying, he cried: "It is FINISHED." At Calvary, Jesus finished transgression by becoming sin for us. No future sacrifice can ever finish transgression; it was finished at Calvary (Heb. 9:15). "He was wounded for our TRANSGRESSIONS" (Isaiah 53:5).
6. "TO MAKE AN END OF SINS." Here the basic thought is repeated. If we understand the glorious significance of what was accomplished at Calvary, we know that here there was truly an end made of sins.
Jesus, who came "to save his people from their sins", accomplished this when he "put away sin by the sacrifice of himself" (Mt. 1:21; Heb. 9:26). "It is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins... But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever...hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified...And their sins... remember no more" (Heb. 10:4-11). The old system of sacrifices could never make an end of sins, but Christ, by the sacrifice of himself, did make an end of sins, even as the prophecy had said!
John announced him as "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world" (John 1:29). "Christ died for our sins" (1 Cor. 15:3). He "bare our sins in his own body on the tree" (l Peter 2:24) and "hath once suffered for sins" (3:18). "He was manifested to take away our sins" (l John 3:5). This "end of sins" was accomplished at Calvary.
All of this does not mean, of course, that right at this point men quit sinning. This was not the case. But what the scripture does mean is that at Calvary the eternal sacrifice for sin was made, so that any and all past, present, or future who will be forgiven of sins will be forgiven because our Lord' s death almost 2,000 years ago made an "end of sins"!

Part 2 next

 

[GLJCA]

Daniel's 70th Week Future or Fulfilled PT2

7. "TO MAKE RECONCILIATION FOR INIQUITY." The word reconciliation used here is the same word that is used so frequently in the book of Leviticus where it is rendered "to make atonement." This, too, was part of our Lord's redemptive work. Surely "reconciliation" is a present reality because of Calvary!
Jesus, "our merciful and faithful high priest" made "RECONCILIATION for the sins of the people" (Heb. 2:17). "Having made peace through the blood...to RECONCILE all things unto himself...and you, that were sometimes alienated...hath he RECONCILED...through death" (Col. 1:20-22; Eph. 2:16).
"God was in Christ, RECONCILING the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of RECONCILIATION" (2 Cor. 5:19). Plainly, "reconciliation for iniquity" was accomplished by Jesus, for he "gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all INIQUITY" (Titus 2:14), and "the Lord hath laid on him the INIQUITY of us all" (Isaiah 53:6).
8. ''TO BRING IN EVER LASTING RIGHTEOUSNESS." This too was accomplished by the redemptive work of Christ! The great redemption chapter of Isaiah 53 had prophesied: "My righteous servant shall make many RIGHTEOUS." Paul put it this way: "By the righteousness of one...shall many be made RIGHTEOUS... unto eternal life by Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:17-21). He who came "to fulfill all righteousness'' (Mt. 3:15) and who "loved righteousness, and hated iniquity", was "anointed" of God (Heb. 1:9) and made unto us wisdom, and RIGHTEOUSNESS, and sanctification, and redemption" (1 Cor. 1:30). "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto RIGHTEOUSNESS" (1 Peter 2:24). "Even the RIGHTEOUSNESS of God...through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood to declare his RIGHTEOUSNESS for the remission of sins" (Rom. 3:21-26). "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the RIGHTEOUSNESS of God in him" (2 Cor. 5:21). "Everyone that doeth RIGHTEOUSNESS is born of him" (1 John 2:29).
Taking all of these verses into consideration, we ask: Did Christ in his coming to earth provide righteousness through his redemptive work? All Christians acknowledge that he did. We ask then: Was not this righteousness that he brought in everlasting? Of course. Surely no Christians would deny that the righteousness of Christ is "everlasting righteousness."
"By his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained ETERNAL REDEMPTION "everlasting righteousness" for us" (Heb. 9:12). This eternal or everlasting righteousness is contrasted to the old sacrifices under the law which were only of a temporary nature. But Christ, once for all time, offered himselfthus providing, as the prophecy of Daniel had said, "everlasting righteousness."
One only has to read the great redemption passages of Romans, Corinthians, Colossians, Ephesians, and Hebrews to see how an "end" of transgressions and sins, "reconciliation for iniquity", and "everlasting righteousness" were all accomplished at Calvary by our Lord Jesus Christ!
In view of this, we see no basis for the futurist teaching that none of these things have yet been fulfilled, but are to be linked with a supposed seventieth week at the end of the age! To teach such is contradictory and tends to take away from the glory of that great redemption of Calvary which so beautifully and completely fulfilled these prophecies!
9. "TO SEAL UP VISION AND PROPHECY", or literally, "to seal up vision and prophet." The use of the metaphor "to seal" is derived from the ancient custom of attaching a seal to a document to show that it was genuine (See 1 Kings 21:8; Jer. 32:10, 11; cf. John 6:27; 1 Cor. 9:2). Christ "sealed" Old Testament prophecy by fulfilling what was written of him.
Repeatedly we read concerning him: "...that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets." Acts 3:18 says: "Those things which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer he hath so fulfilled:" Truly Jesus fulfilled what was written in the visions and prophecies of the Old Testament concerning him, and thus he "sealed" them and showed that they were genuine. 'They are they", he said, "which testify of me" (John 5:39). "All the prophets and the law prophesied until John" (Mt. 11:13), then John presented Jesus as he that was to be "made manifest to Israel." Jesus was the one that was to comeand we look for none other. He is the fulfillment of vision and prophecy.
10. "HE SHALL CONFIRM THE COVENANT." When Jesus instituted the Lord' s supper, representative of his shed blood for the remission of sins, he said: 'This is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Mt. 26:28). The word "testament" here and the word "covenant" are translated from exactly the same word in the New Testament. "How much more shall the blood of Christ...purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament [covenant]" (Heb.9:14,15).
Jesus is called the "mediator of the new covenant" (Heb. 8:6), the "messenger of the covenant" (Mal. 3:1), and his shed blood is called "the blood of the everlasting covenant" (Heb. 12:24). Our Lord Jesus is the one who confirmed the covenant through his redemptive sacrifice at Calvary. And how beautifully this harmonizes with what we have already seen.
11. "HE SHALL CAUSE THE SACRIFICE AND THE OBLATION TO CEASE." This too was fulfilled in the death of Jesus Christ. In the Old Testament, as we have mentioned, sacrifices were repeatedly made. Each of these was but a mere type looking forward to the time when the perfect sacrifice, the Lamb of God, would be offered. Once this would be accomplished, God would no longer require or accept any other sacrifice.
The perfect sacrifice was Jesus Christ. The old system of repeated sacrifices (types) could only end at Calvary when Christ became the perfect, eternal, and final sacrifice (See Heb. 9 and 10). In addition to Calvary's sacrifice, "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins" (Heb. 10: 18, 26).
For a few more years, the Jews continued their sacrifices, but these were not recognized by God. Such cannot be termed sacrifices in the true scriptural sense of the word, for the death of Christ provided the perfect, and therefore, the final sacrifice for sins forever.
Further proof that this was fulfilled in Christ is seen in the time element, for the prophecy said that sacrifice would cease in the middle of the week, the 70th week. This was when Christ died, for the 69 weeks measured unto Messiah and his death came after a ministry of three and a half years.
That this was the length of our Lord's ministry may be seen by a study of the gospel according to John in which mention is made of four passovers that occurred during our Lord's ministry: John 2:13, 5:1, 6:4, 13:1. Eusebius, a Christian writer of the fourth century, pointed these things out: "Now the whole period of our Saviour's teaching and working of miracles is said to have been three-and-a-half years, which is half a week. John the evangelist, in his Gospel makes this clear to the attentive."
And so, after three and a half years of ministry as the Christ the anointed one Jesus was cut off in death, in the middle of the 70th week of seven years. As Augustine said: "Daniel even defined the time when Christ was to come and suffer by the exact date."

 

[GLJCA]

Daniel's 70th week Future or Fulfilled PT3

Understanding this, we can now see real significance in certain New Testament statements which also speak of a definite established time at which Jesus would die. For example, we read: "They sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come" (John 7:30). In John 2:4, Jesus said, "Mine hour is not yet come." On another occasion, he said, "My time is not yet come" (John 7:6). Then just prior to his betrayal and death, he said, "My time is at hand" (Mt. 26:18), and finally, '"the hour is come" (John 17:1; Mt. 26:45).
These and other verses clearly show that there was a definite time in the plan of God when Jesus would die. He came to fulfill the scriptures, and there is only one Old Testament scripture which predicted the time of his death the prophecy which stated that Messiah would be cut off in the midst of the 70th week at the close of three and a half years of ministry! How perfectly the prophecy was fulfilled in Christ!
But those who say that the confirming of the covenant and causing sacrifices to cease in the midst of the 70th week refers to a future Antichrist, completely destroy this beautiful fulfillment and are at a complete loss to show where in the Old Testament the time of our Lord's death was predicted.
The prophecy of Daniel 9 stated that Messiah would confirm the covenant (or would cause the covenant to prevail) with many of Daniel's people for the "week" or seven years. We ask then, when Christ came, was his ministry directed in a special way to Daniel's people to "Israel " (Dan. 9:20)? Yes!
John introduced him as he "that should be made manifest to ISRAEL" (John 1:31). "I am not sent", Jesus said, "but unto the lost sheep of the house of ISRAEL" (Mt. 15:24). And when he first sent out his apostles, they were directed: "Go not into the way of the Gentiles...go rather to the lost sheep of the house of ISRAEL" (Mt. 10:5,6).
The first half of the "week", the time of our Lord's ministry, was definitely directed toward ISRAEL. But what about the second half the final three and a half years of the prophecy was it also linked with Israel? Did the disciples continue to preach for the duration of the remaining three and a half years (as Christ's representatives) especially to Daniel's people to Israel? Yes, they did!
Jesus had told the disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature (Mk. 16:15; Mt.28:19; Acts 1:8), YET and this is significant after Christ ascended, the disciples still at first preached only to Israel! Why? We know of only one prophecy which would indicate that this was to be the course followed. It is the prophecy of the 70 weeks which implied that after the death of Messiah there would still be three and a half years that pertained to Israel!
Bearing this in mind, we can now understand at least one reason why the gospel went "to the Jew first" and then later to the Gentiles (Rom. 1:16). Peter preached shortly after Pentecost: "Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant... unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities" (Acts 3:25, 26). "It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you" (Acts 13:46).
In person, Christ came to Israel during the first half of the "week" three and a half years. Through the disciples for the three and a half years that remained his message still went to Israel, "the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following" (Mk. 16:20). In a very real sense of the word, the ministry of the disciples was a continuation of the ministry of Christ.
Then came the conversion of Cornelius which completely changed the missionary outreach, outlook, and ministry of the church. Though the New Testament does not give an exact date when this happened, apparently the time for special exclusive blessing upon Daniel's people had drawn to a close. The gospel which had gone first to the Jews was now to take its full mission to be preached to all people of all nations!
This time of changeover was marked by a number of supernatural events. Cornelius received a heavenly visitation. An angel appeared to him and told him to call for Peter "who shall tell thee words whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved" (Acts 11:14). God showed Peter a vision which caused him to know that the gospel was now to go to the Gentiles and not to Israelites only. All of these things were timed perfectly showing that God's hand was accomplishing a definite purpose.
Returning to Jerusalem, Peter explained what had happened. "When they heard these things, they... glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life" (Acts 11:18). From this very point, more and more, there was a turning to the Gentiles with the gospel message. God's measurement of 490 years pertaining in a special way to Israel had obviously been completed.
And finally,
12. THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM AND THE TEMPLE. This part of the prophecy was not dated within the framework of the 70 weeks as was the time of the appearance of Messiah to Israel, the time of his death, etc. Nevertheless, living on this side of the fulfillment, we know that the predicted destruction found fulfillment in 70 A.D. when the armies of Titus brought the city to desolation.

Adam Clarke's Commentary says: "The whole of this prophecy from the times and corresponding events has been fulfilled to the very letter." (Clarke's Commentary, note on Daniel 9)

 

[holdon]

10. "HE SHALL CONFIRM THE COVENANT."

The "he" is without a doubt the "prince" of Daniel 9:26. This prince is of the people who destroy the city and the sanctuary: the Romans. Therefore the "he" of verse 27 cannot be Christ. Nor has it anything to do with the covenant, (new or old) but with a covenant the people make with sheol: see Isaiah 28:15.

And it doesn't say that Messiah was cut off in the 70th week......

9:26 And after the sixty-two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, and shall have nothing; and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with an overflow, and unto the end, war, -- the desolations determined.

9:27 And he shall confirm a covenant with the many for one week; and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and because of the protection of abominations there shall be a desolator, even until that the consumption and what is determined shall be poured out upon the desolate.

 

[JMWHALEN]

1. Background: As you know, "Full" Preterism is the eschatological viewpoint that denies any future fulfillment of the book of Revelation, and teaches that the eschatological events of the Holy Bible were completely fulfilled in A.D. 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem. Thus, the full preterist states that there is no need to look for prophetic events to happen in the future-nothing remains on the "prophetic calendar". That is, the Lord Jesus Christ is not coming back-He already returned in some sort of "spiritual, mystical" way at the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus and his armies in A.D. 70. This view holds that the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ promised in the scriptures has exclusively the destruction of Jerusalem in view, and that A.D. 70 is the end of the ages prophesied by scripture. The Lord Jesus Christ came; the dead were raised; the final judgment took place then; the creation was renewed("new heavens and new earth"-Is. 65:17,66:22; 2 Peter 3:13/"new heaven and new earth"-Rev. 21:1) at that time. Thus, those who expect a visible, bodily,coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, a physical resurrection of the dead, a final judgment, and a cataclysmic destruction of the present creation are mistaken-all is past(preterism comes from the Latin word meaning'past'). Since A.D. 70, we all have been living in "the garden of Eden"-"the regeneration"(Mt. 19:28), "the times of refreshing"(Acts 3:19), "the times of restitution of all things"(Acts 3:21), "the refreshing"(Isaiah 28:12, Exodus 31:17). The inevitable consequence of this conclusion is the denial of the physical redemption of the human body(which happens to be a prominent Gnostic teaching). Preterists contend that the resurrection spoken of in scripture, at least as it pertains to those born "in Adam", is "spiritual", not physical. They propose that when the Lord Jesus Christ returned in A.D. 70, those believers who were alive were changed at that time, and rose to meet the Lord in the air in some "mystical, spiritual" sense only.

The Holy Bible testifies that the physical resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is the pivotal event in all of history, the very linchpin of the Christian faith and apologetics. If it be proven that a fraud, that is, that the Lord Jesus Christ did not literally, physically, rise from the dead, the foundation of the Christian faith is fallacious and "in vain"(1 Cor. 15:2, 17), with the resulting consequences being that preaching is "in vain"(1 Cor. 15:14), Christian witnessing is false, no sins are forgiven(1 Cor. 15:17), and believers have perished without hope(1 Cor 15:18). Paul's inevitable conclusion, if it be true that the Lord Jesus Christ did not rise physically from the dead: Believers are "most miserable"(1 Cor. 15:32), and you might as well "go for all the gusto", "have a good time while you can", "party on, Garth!"

Importantly, the Holy Bible is also very adamant that there is a one-to one correlation between the body that dies with the body that is resurrected. If there is no physical resurrection, then, logically, there is no evidence. If this is denied, then the apostles, and thus the Holy Spirit, that preached that the Lord Jesus Christ rose physically are false witnesses, since the belief in the physical resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is absolutely necessary for salvation. The bedrock of our salvation from the penalty of sin(justification), the power of sin(sanctification), and the presence of sin(glorification), depends on the physical resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. Those who deny the physical resurrection contradict the witness of the word of God, and are preaching "another gospel"(2 Cor. 11:4), an "other gospel"(Gal. 1:9). The Holy Bible is replete with testimony that the Lord Jesus Christ, "...the man Christ Jesus...."(1 Timothy 2:5), both died a physical death("For Christ....being put to death in the flesh...."-1 Peter 3:18), and arose physically from the grave(resurrection means 'to stand'). There is ample testimony to this fact. Those who deny this either cannot read, or are practicing "mental gymnastics".

The content of this post includes focusing on the heretical view that there is no future physical resurrection of the dead( whether that be of the saved or unsaved) at the Rapture, or "...a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust...."(Acts 24:15), the "...quick and dead...."(Acts 10:42, 24:15; 2 Tim. 4:1;1 Peter 4:5),"the resurrection of life"(John 5:29)/"some to everlasting life"(Daniel 12:2)/"the first resurrection"(Rev. 20:6), "the resurrection of the just"(Luke 14:14), or "some to shame and everlasting contempt"(Daniel 12:2)/"the resurrection of the damnation"(John 5:29)/Rev. 20:11-15). And why do I focus on this? For it relates directly to the issue at hand:

Daniel's 70th Week Future or Fulfilled?

I will leave others much more capable than me to address the issue as to whether the historic events of A.D. 70 at Jerusalem, as they pertain to the biblical prophecies of judgment, were fulfilled at that time, as Preterists claim. . However, I suggest it is absolutely critical to address the issue as to whether the view, namely, that "the resurrection" already has taken place, in some "mystical, spiritual sense" is indeed correct.: 1. For this, as I understand scripture, strikes at "the heart" of the gospel of Christ as testified in 1 Cor. 15:1-5. Is not a correct understanding of the nature of the resurrection, critical to a proper and true understanding of the unfolding of God's redemptive plan for all of His creation? Is it not a legitimate "life or death"issue", since the eternal fate of souls depends on the correct understanding of 1 Cor. 15(and related resurrection passages)? 2. For if the resolution to this question is "yes, the resurrection is physical, and is future", then perhaps we can draw conclusions as it pertains to, again, the issue of this thread:

Daniel's 70th Week Future or Fulfilled?


Therefore, the question to consider: Is this(seemingly growing) view and teaching on the nature of the resurrection heretical? I will agree that Christians should not be divided on issues that are unrelated to the issue of our justification before a Holy God("side issues", if you will). But the theme of understanding the nature of the resurrection is woven throughout the Bible, and a proper understanding of this nature, it seems to me, is what separates Christianity from "religion", or "the real dollar bill from the counterfeit". After all, the Jehovah's Witnesses, as do other cults, agree that "Jesus" rose from the dead, but their definition of resurrection is far different from, for the lack of a better phrase, "traditional, historic" Christianity's definition.

A related question would be: Does the eschatological framework of those who deny a physical resurrection, their "interpretive" process , inevitably result in a whole redefining of biblical concepts/terms in order to accommodate or "fit" their "scheme", including a redefinition of "the resurrection"? And is that not the same practice that gives rise to what apologetics refer to as "cults"? Have not cults en devoured to make literal what the "clear sense" of scripture was meant to be figurative/metaphorical, and figurative/metaphorical what scripture meant to be literal? Granted, there will always be disagreement(s) regarding this matter, but a legitimate question arises: what intended sense, by default, literal or figurative, should we allow for scripture to presuppose? How do those who support a "spiritual" resurrection" only("The Jesus Seminar", for example), determine what is or is not figurative/metaphorical, since there are no set rules? Are they not doing "...that which is right in his own eyes"(Judges 21:25)? Statements in holy writ declaring, for example, that the Lord Jesus Christ will return in the clouds, that every eye shall see him, that believers will be "caught up....in the clouds...to meet the Lord in the air....", are now to be viewed as FIGURATIVE, invisible, spiritual clouds, FIGURATIVE eyes, FIGURATIVE air.............? Are the visible signs that are described at the second coming not meant to be visible, in the plain sense of the word? Full preterists, for example, claim that all sorts of signs did take place in A.D. 70-they were "invisible signs"!(Hence, a "spiritual, mystical resurrection" of saints). Is that not a "self-contradicting, commits suicide" definition? A sign, by its very nature, is visible! Is this not merely making up your own dictionary(as cults do), and "playing word games", and "double-speak"? Did we not see this same ploy played out in prime time a few years back? You know, our leader at the time saying "It depends on how you define 'is'"(Bill Clinton)? Are they not going through all types of "mental gymnastics" in an attempt to make plain statements in scripture fit their theological construct, instead of "taking God at His word"(faith), and taking Him literally unless there is a clear, "5th grade English" indication He meant otherwise? Do we really need an "expert", with 15 titles before and after his/her name,to explain to us "unlearned and ignorant"(Acts 4:13), to explain to us "...that is not learned..."(Isaiah 29:12), that "this same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner (emphasis mine)as ye have seen(emphasis mine) him go into heaven"(Acts 1:11), is really not literal, but FIGURATIVE? Do we not have a "reasonable" creator God(Isaiah 1:18), who would have us to understand simple words and sentences?

Doctrinally, in no ambiguous or uncertain terms, the apostle Paul made declared throughout his testimony in scripture, that the Lord Jesus Christ's resurrection to be a model, a pattern of our own resurrection. Indeed, one of the central "pillars" of the gospel of Christ, is that the Lord Jesus Christ "...rose again the third day according to the scriptures...."(1 Cor. 15:4). Paul's whole argument is that the surety of our future physical, bodily resurrection is based on the surety of the physical, bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ-they cannot be separated or divorced from one another. The entire 15th chapter of First Corinthians was written to counter this error:" ...how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?" (15:12). The Lord Jesus Christ died physically, and He rose from the dead physically-this is a fact. And since He did, we will also. The context does not allow for, or justify, a mere "mystical, spiritual, figurative" "standing up", i.e., resurrection.

There are numerous New Testament passages confirming the Lord Jesus Christ's bodily, physical resurrection as "flesh and bones"(notice not "flesh and blood"-Luke 24:39, 1 Cor. 15:50). This doctrine of a future bodily, physical resurrection, not merely some sort of "spiritual" "standing up", is confirmed throughout the Old Testament. A few examples are as follows(bold is my emphasis):

"For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God...." Job 19:25,26

(Stand is a clear reference to physical resurrection)

"If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come." Job 14:14

"The wicked is driven away in his wickedness: but the righteous hath hope in his death." Proverbs 14:32

"Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope. For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." Psalms 16:9,10

"Thou, which hast shewed me great and sore troubles, shalt quicken me again, and shalt bring me up again from the depths of the earth." Psalms 71:20

"I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the LORD." Psalms 118:17

"Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead." Isaiah 26:19

"I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes." Hosea 13:14

"And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." Daniel 12:2

Also notice that 8 "individuals in the OT and NT were "resuscitated" from death( See 1 Kings 17:22; 2 Kings 4:34; 13:20,21; Luke 7:14,15, 8:52-56; John 11:44; Acts 9:40, 20:9-12), besides the "many bodies of the saints" of Mt. 27:52.


The Lord Jesus Christ confirmed that his same physical body would be raised up in John 2:19-21, and this is confirmed in 1 Timothy 2:5, where he is pictured as "....the man Christ Jesus....". In Acts 2:24-28, 31, the body dies-no where do we find in the Holy Bible a reference to the spirit being resurrected. To die, in context to resurrection and being brought back to life, is always relative to the human, physical body. Corruption relates to the physical decay of the body for mortality and fallen humanity. Paul argues that the Lord Jesus Christ did not see corruption(Psalms 16:10, Acts 27)-his physical body was not left to decay in the ground, but was brought out of the ground as "...the firstfruits of them who slept"(1 Cor. 15:20, 23), sleep being a substitute, a euphemism for physical death throughout the Corinthian epistle(11:30; 15:6,18, 20, 51), and elsewhere in scripture(Deut. 31:16; 1 Kings 2:10, 11:21, 11:43; Daniel 12:2; Mt. 27:52; John 11:11-13; Acts 7:60, 13:36; 1 Thessalonians 4:14). Paul then moves to the logical conclusion that, likewise, since("For" in verses 15:21,22) he was the firstfruits, we too will be physically resurrected, and in our "the resurrection of the dead" which we will experience, our physical bodies will be "raised in incorruption"(1 Cor, 15:42).

(continued on next post)

 

[JMWHALEN]

(Continued)

Some final thoughts in this segment: If the view , the contention that the resurrection is only "spiritual", and not physical, is true, then a host of scriptural passages, many of which are designed to exhort, edify, encourage, and inform/teach, seem, at best, unnecessary, and, at worst, "unprofitable"(2 Tim. 3:15), irrational,and delusional. For example:

-What possible meaning can Paul intend to convey when he encourages those already "in Christ", and thus justified from the penalty of sin and saved spiritually, to wait for "...the redemption of our body"(Romans 8:23), "...the redemption of the purchased possession...."(Eph. 1:14), "...the day of redemption"(Eph. 4:30)? Similarly, in 1 Corinthians 15:54, Paul says "So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, 'Death is swallowed up in victory'." What could Paul mean by "this corruptible" and "this mortal" but the fleshly body? He couldn't mean the spirit of a believer, because it is already incorruptible and immortal. He is indicating that when the resurrection occurs, God will transform the bodies of Christians in the graves and those who are alive into glorious spiritual bodies of touchable flesh and bone, just like the Lord Jesus Christ's resurrection body.


-When Paul visited Athens, he was ridiculed, mocked for believing in a physical, bodily resurrection(Acts 17 and 23). No such "dissention"(Acts 23:7) would have logically ensued, had Paul asserted a mere spiritual resurrection. Paul even went as far as to "side" with the Pharisees, who did believe in physical, bodily resurrection(Acts 23:8). And is it not interesting that perhaps Solomon was much wiser than we realize when he penned "... there is no new thing under the sun"(Ecl. 1:9): Full preterists deny the eventual resurrection of the human body - just as the Sadducees did twenty centuries ago (Acts 23:8). And are they not making the same error as Hymenaeus and Philetus did, "...saying the resurrection is past already....(1 Tim. 1;20, 2 Tim. 2:18)?

-What possible reason would there be for the Saviour to make the statement he did in Matthew 22:39, except to charge those who deny the resurrection of the body as being ignorant of both the scriptures and "...the power of God".

2. And now, as the preceding relates to the issue of this thread, I provide this for your consideration-Daniel's resurrection: If it not literal, should we not spiritualize the rest of the Holy Bible="mental gymnastics"?

In Daniel 12:1-3, 13, we learn that the periods of days that occur during the last of the "Seventy Weeks", include the resurrection of Daniel, does it not? In verse 13, Gabriel’s words to Daniel are:

"But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot (my comment added: a reference to Daniel’s portion/inheritance in the land promised to his father Abraham in the Abrahamic covenant) at the end of the days." Daniel 12:13

Resurrection="to stand up" Again, to reemphasize a premise: this doctrine of a future bodily, physical resurrection, is not merely some sort of "spiritual" "standing up", is confirmed throughout the Old Testament. Repeating the previous few examples:

"For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God...." Job 19:25,26

(Stand is a clear reference to resurrection)

"If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come." Job 14:14

"The wicked is driven away in his wickedness: but the righteous hath hope in his death." Proverbs 14:32

"Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope. For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." Psalms 16:9,10

"Thou, which hast shewed me great and sore troubles, shalt quicken me again, and shalt bring me up again from the depths of the earth." Psalms 71:20

"I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the LORD." Psalms 118:17

"Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead." Isaiah 26:19

"I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes." Hosea 13:14

"And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." Daniel 12:2

Again: "For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand(emphasis mine)at the latter day upon the earth..." Job 19:25


How does verse 13 show that the view that the the 70th week of Daniel has already been fulfilled is false? The answer is very simple: the 70th week of Daniel cannot have been fulfilled, because Daniel has not been resurrected. If you take the scripture literally, Daniel will be resurrected at the end of the still-future 70th week, the portion of the Jewish sabbatic calendar that concludes Daniel's prophecy. And here’s the simple reasoning – the seventy weeks are Jewish sabbatic years, and the time interval pertains to the nation of Israel("thy people"-Daniel 9:24). When God temporarily set aside the nation of Israel, as recorded in the book of Acts, the "sabbatical clock" stopped ticking. When the LORD God resumes in the future His dealing with Israel according to His faithful promises, "...the promises made unto the fathers...."(Romans 15:8), this sabbatical clock will resume, and the 70th week (sabbatic year) can, and will resume.

Of course you may discount this literally, suggesting that this is a "spiritual" resurrection, as do "postmillennialists/A-millennialists" today, as Hymenaeus and Philetus did, "...saying the resurrection is past already....(1 Tim. 1;20, 2 Tim. 2:18). You decide, for "...to his own master he standeth or falleth...." Romans 14:4.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Although the following few observations are somewhat off the subject, perhaps they "indirectly" support the previous premise::

As you well know, the OT is the LORD God's "picture book", His object lessons, pointing to some phase of the person or work of the Lord Jesus Christ and our relation to Him. The word "ensample" is from "tupos"-our English word "type." And as most of you know, Joseph is a type of Christ. In Psalms 81:5 we read that Joseph was ordained by the LORD God as a testimony, or a type, in all his Egyptian experiences. I have seen many studies re. the analogous and typical relations between the Lord Jesus Christ and Joseph before(as I am sure you have also), but the following solidifies the millennium viewpoint, and supports the certainty that there will be the Great Tribulation-again refuting the preterist theology. Genesis Chapter 42: In verses 1-3, Joseph's brethren, because of great tribulation, were forced to seek out Joseph for help. Similarly, the Jews, during the Great Tribulation, amid great tribulation, shall call upon Him who is Lord(Deut. 30:1,2 and others). In verse 7,Joseph punished his brethren before he revealed himself to them. Similarly, the Lord Jesus Christ will punish the Jews prior to revealing Himself to them(Mt. 24:21,30 and others). Notice this is in chapter 42 of Genesis- one chapter for each month of the Great Tribulation: Daniel 7:25; Rev. 12:6, 12:14, 13:5.

Also notice that the book of Job( which means "one persecuted"), is a type of the Great Tribulation. It also has 42 chapters. Job is "...upon the ground seven days and seven nights....Job 2:13), one for each year in Daniel's 70th week. Job is in Edom per Lamentations 4:21-this is where Israel will be in the Great Tribulation per Isaiah 34:6 and Isaiah 63:1 and the book of Obadiah . Idumea=Edom=descendants of Esau: Gen. 32:7-"Then Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed...."-This is a picture of "...the time of Jacob's trouble...." of Jer. 30:7, with Esau as a type of the anti-christ pursuing Jacob(Israel) in the Great Tribulation). The one who persecutes Job will be the same one who persecutes Israel during the Great Tribulation.

These "types" of the surety of a future "Great Trib" and 1000 year reign of the Lord Jesus Christ(and thus the false doctrine of the preterist view) are imbedded throughout the Holy Bible.

As usual, be noble, and "check it out in the Book", whether these "... things were so"(Acts 17:11

In Christ and with Christ,

John M. Whalen

 

[Markea]

9:27 And he shall confirm a covenant with the many for one week; and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and because of the protection of abominations there shall be a desolator, even until that the consumption and what is determined shall be poured out upon the desolate.

Recently (yesterday actually) one from the MID-ACTS group has made the claim that the seventieth week (ie, the TRIBULATION) began in the Acts 2 time period.. based upon Peter preaching from the prophet Joel on the day of Pentecost.

 

[JMWHALEN]

"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week...." Daniel 9:27

"10. "HE SHALL CONFIRM THE COVENANT." When Jesus instituted the Lord' s supper, representative of his shed blood for the remission of sins, he said: 'This is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Mt. 26:28). The word "testament" here and the word "covenant" are translated from exactly the same word in the New Testament. "How much more shall the blood of Christ...purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament [covenant]" (Heb.9:14,15).
Jesus is called the "mediator of the new covenant" (Heb. 8:6), the "messenger of the covenant" (Mal. 3:1), and his shed blood is called "the blood of the everlasting covenant" (Heb. 12:24). Our Lord Jesus is the one who confirmed the covenant through his redemptive sacrifice at Calvary. And how beautifully this harmonizes with what we have already seen."


My comment: 1. The Lord Jesus Christ never made a covenant for just one week of "Jewish sabbatic years", so this is not "The New Covenant", and 2. That this is not referencing "The New Covenant" can be seen by Dispy's previous posts(and perhaps my addition to it) as to the contents/effect of the New Covenant(underline is my emphasis):

Dispy:
"First of all, the new covenant that you say we are under, as prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and what you believe to be in effect at the time of Hebrews 8, Is still with the house of Israel, and the house of Judah. If it were in effect at the time of Hebrews 8, I sure that the author would have informed them that they were not included in it.

Now if we believers are "grafted into" Isreal, then Jeremiah 31:33, 34 are in effect. "...I will put the Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall ALL know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord; for I will forgive thier iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

PLEASE ANSWER THIS. If the Law is written on everone's inward parts and their hearts, and teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his borther; Know the Lord: for they ALL shall know me..., Why does Paul write "STUDY to shew theyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (2Tim.215), and say that we are ambassadors for Christ and have the ministry of reconciliation (2Cor.18-20)? Under the new covenant, WHY would that be necessary?................


The New Covenant will be in effect when the nation to whom it was promised will recognize the one who they had pierced."

My addition as to what will be the results of "The New Covenant":

Jeremiah 31- Perhaps the following article I wrote will add to the excellent point made by Dispy....:

____________________________________

Columbo: The Case of the Sinless Man on Earth

or

Evidence there will be literal "thousand year"(Revelation 20:2- 7) reign of the Lord Jesus Christ-"... as the days of heaven upon the earth...."(Deuteronomy 11:21)

By John M. Whalen

All Christians should agree that The Lord Jesus Christ was the only man that has ever walked the earth to this point in time(2005) who had no sin: 2 Cor. 5:21; Hebrews 4:15,7:26; 1 John 3:5; Luke 23:4; John 18:38,19:4-6. Is this not a "basic doctrine" of Christianity, and a pre-requisite for the Lord Jesus Christ being our kinsman-redeemer? Notice:

"Who did no sin, NEITHER WAS GUILE FOUND IN HIS MOUTH(emphasis mine)". 1 Peter 2:22

But notice:

"Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, IN WHOM IS NO GUILE!(emphasis mine)" John 1:47

How is this possible-Nathanael is characterized as a man on earth "in whom is no guile"?

The solution:

Part of the definition of a prophet is "one who speaks for another"(for eg., Moses speaking on behalf of the LORD, Aaron speaking for Moses-Exodus 4:12,15("put words in his mouth"),16("thy spokesman"); 7:1; Deuteronomy 18:18("will put my words in his mouth").

The Lord Jesus Christ was a prophet, "the prophet": Deut. 18:15;Mt. 13:57,21:11;Mk. 6:4; Luke 1:76,4:24,7:16,24:19;John 1:45,4:44,6:14,7:40,9:17; Acts 2:30,3:22,23,7:37. The definition fits the Lord Jesus Christ's own admission:

"Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things." Jn. 8:28

"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." Jn. 12:49-50

"Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works." John 14:10

Thus, the Lord Jesus Christ was fulfilling His role as a/the prophet. He was speaking for His Father in Heaven-the words He spoke were His Father's words, not His(as was true for all the prophets).

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee" John 1:48

And notice if we "...search out a matter...."(Proverbs 25:2):

"And Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, from Dan even to Beersheba, all the days of Solomon." 1 Kings 4:25

" But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it." Micah 4:4

"In that day, saith the LORD of hosts, shall ye call every man his neighbour under the vine and under the fig tree." Zech. 3:10

Thus, in John 1;47, the Lord Jesus Christ, in the context of his office "the Prophet", was looking into the future, and providing a glimpse of the ideal conditions that will exist in forthcoming , and promised, millennium kingdom, a time the scripture refers to as the times of "refreshing"(Exodus 31:17, Isaiah 28:12, Acts 3:19), and of the "restitution of all things"(Acts 3:21). This is the enfolding of the promise that the Lord Jesus Christ shall rule from David's throne(2 Sam. 5-"the Davidic Covenant"-the covenant which God made with David at the time he revealed to him that Solomon would build the Temple, of which the reign of Solomon pre-figures the millennium reign-a type). Is this not what the Lord had in mind when He states that "...thou shalt see greater things than these...."(John 1:50)?

This 1000 year reign will be characterized by the righteous reign of the Lord Jesus Christ, and, as J. Dwight Pentecost summarized , a time of peace, joy, comfort, justice, the removal of the curse, no sickness, healing of the deformed, no immaturity, economic prosperity, and Holiness. This holiness will be manifested through the King and the King's subjects, the JEWS. This holiness, this trait of Jews("an Israelite"-John 1:47) having "...no guile", is realization of the promise of the New Covenant, and this is what the Lord Jesus Christ was alluding to in John.

Indeed, the millennium kingdom will be the fruition, the display, and the fulfillment of 3 covenants promised in The Old Testament-the Abrahamic, the Davidic, and the New Covenant. The Lord Jesus Christ was prophesizing partial fulfillment of the New Covenant in John 1:47. Part of the promise of the New Covenant was that the Jews would be given a new heart, and a new spirit:

"But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people." Jeremiah 31:33

"At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: NEITHER SHALL THEY WALK ANY MORE AFTER THE IMAGINATION OF THEIR EVIL HEART(emphasis mine)." Jeremiah 3:17

"Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I will even gather you from the people, and assemble you out of the countries where ye have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel. And they shall come thither, and they shall take away all the detestable things thereof and all the abominations thereof from thence. And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh: THAT THEY MAY WALK IN MY STATUTES, AND KEEP MINE ORDINANCES, AND DO THEM(emphasis mine): and they shall be my people, and I will be their God." Ezekiel 11:17-20


As Columbo would say, "That clears that up!" "

__________________________________________________________________________________________

The "inward/outward working" of "The New Testament" has not been fulfilled-this pertains to Israel and is future. "the covenant" referenced in Daniel 9:27 is not "The New Covenant."


In Christ,
John M. Whalen

 

[JM]

Recently (yesterday actually) one from the MID-ACTS group has made the claim that the seventieth week (ie, the TRIBULATION) began in the Acts 2 time period.. based upon Peter preaching from the prophet Joel on the day of Pentecost.

I've heard that as well, are you saying "I" made the claim or someone else did? Isn't Joel 2 an end times passage and wasn't it quoted by Peter? I'm a dispey, and not a pretertist, just asking.

 

[GLJCA]

1. Background: As you know, "Full" Preterism is the eschatological viewpoint that denies any future fulfillment of the book of Revelation, and teaches that the eschatological events of the Holy Bible were completely fulfilled in A.D. 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem. Thus, the full preterist states that there is no need to look for prophetic events to happen in the future-nothing remains on the "prophetic calendar". That is, the Lord Jesus Christ is not coming back-He already returned in some sort of "spiritual, mystical" way at the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus and his armies in A.D. 70. This view holds that the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ promised in the scriptures has exclusively the destruction of Jerusalem in view, and that A.D. 70 is the end of the ages prophesied by scripture. The Lord Jesus Christ came; the dead were raised; the final judgment took place then; the creation was renewed("new heavens and new earth"-Is. 65:17,66:22; 2 Peter 3:13/"new heaven and new earth"-Rev. 21:1) at that time. Thus, those who expect a visible, bodily,coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, a physical resurrection of the dead, a final judgment, and a cataclysmic destruction of the present creation are mistaken-all is past(preterism comes from the Latin word meaning'past'). Since A.D. 70, we all have been living in "the garden of Eden"-"the regeneration"(Mt. 19:28), "the times of refreshing"(Acts 3:19), "the times of restitution of all things"(Acts 3:21), "the refreshing"(Isaiah 28:12, Exodus 31:17). The inevitable consequence of this conclusion is the denial of the physical redemption of the human body(which happens to be a prominent Gnostic teaching). Preterists contend that the resurrection spoken of in scripture, at least as it pertains to those born "in Adam", is "spiritual", not physical. They propose that when the Lord Jesus Christ returned in A.D. 70, those believers who were alive were changed at that time, and rose to meet the Lord in the air in some "mystical, spiritual" sense only.

Jim I can appreciate your concern for the false teaching of "Full Preterism" but this article has nothing to do with that. Please be assured I am not teaching nor do I adhere to such false teaching. I would really like to address this article instead of jumping to another subject. Maybe you could start another thread on that subject.

This article is dealing with the differences between the Futurist view of Daniel's 70th week and the Fulfilled view of Partial Preterism. It really has nothing to do with Full Preterism.

GLJCA

 

[GLJCA]

"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week...." Daniel 9:27

"10. "HE SHALL CONFIRM THE COVENANT." When Jesus instituted the Lord' s supper, representative of his shed blood for the remission of sins, he said: 'This is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Mt. 26:28). The word "testament" here and the word "covenant" are translated from exactly the same word in the New Testament. "How much more shall the blood of Christ...purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament [covenant]" (Heb.9:14,15).
Jesus is called the "mediator of the new covenant" (Heb. 8:6), the "messenger of the covenant" (Mal. 3:1), and his shed blood is called "the blood of the everlasting covenant" (Heb. 12:24). Our Lord Jesus is the one who confirmed the covenant through his redemptive sacrifice at Calvary. And how beautifully this harmonizes with what we have already seen."


My comment: 1. The Lord Jesus Christ never made a covenant for just one week of "Jewish sabbatic years", so this is not "The New Covenant", and 2. That this is not referencing "The New Covenant" can be seen by Dispy's previous posts(and perhaps my addition to it) as to the contents/effect of the New Covenant(underline is my emphasis):

Jim, where does this article say that the Lord made a covenant for one week. It says that He confirmed the covenant. He didn't need to make the covenant He already had made it when He said that His blood was the New Testatment in His blood. There was no need to make another everlasting covenant when He had just made the New Covenant.

Tell me what other covenant did Jesus make?

GLJCA

 

[GLJCA]

I've heard that as well, are you saying "I" made the claim or someone else did? Isn't Joel 2 an end times passage and wasn't it quoted by Peter? I'm a dispey, and not a pretertist, just asking.

Peter quoting Joel was not a mistake as was hinted at the other day.
Acts 2:17-21 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

This is exactly what was happening at Pentecost. God was pouring out is spirit on all flesh. The book of Acts is full of all of these Acts of the Apostles and others. The only thing that makes Dispensationalism want to say that this is future is the part about the wonders that God will perform on the earth. Dispensationalists believe this is future because it shows up again in Revelation but it also shows up again several times in the Old Testament.

A study of the Old Testament will show us that this can not be taken literally. Yet what could it mean if it isn't literal?

In Isaiah 13 we read of God's judgement of the very literal city of ancient Babylon by raising up the Medes to conquer them. We know that this event did happen in history. In 539 BC the Medes and Persians conquered Babylon destroyed the Babylonian Empire. In Isaiah 13:10 we read about the conquest of this historic city of Babylon by the Medes and Persians. Isaiah writes of this event "For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine."

This is not some event yet future to us that Isaiah is talking about. No; he is speaking of a time that is now long in the past, the destruction for the ancient Babylonian Empire. We can study this event in history. The prophecy of God's judgement against Babylon was literally fulfilled, but the "stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine" were not literal and these things did not literally happen then. The stars, sun and moon all still continued to shine when Babylon fell to the Medes. So what did the prophet mean by this prophesy?

In Isaiah 34 we read another interesting statement about God's judgement against the descendants of Esau (Idumea or Edom): Isaiah says "And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree. For my sword shall be bathed in heaven: behold, it shall come down upon Idumea, and upon the people of my curse, to judgment."

The descendants of Esau were very severely judged by God and they became a conquered and defeated people, but the apocryphal, prophetic language used by Isaiah was not to be understood as literal. The heavens were not literally rolled up as a scroll, and their host (stars) did not literally fall when Edom was destroyed.

The following quote is an excerpt from the Commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown. They write "When Judah was captive in Babylon, Edom, in every way, insulted over her fallen mistress, killed many of those Jews whom the Chaldeans had left, and hence was held guilty of fratricide by God (Esau, their ancestor, having been brother to Jacob): this was the cause of the denunciations of the prophets against Edom ( Isa. 63:1 &c; Jer 49:7; Eze 25:12-14; 35:3-15; Joe. 1:19; Am 1:11,12; Ob 8,10,12-18; Mal 1:3,4) Nebuchadnezzar humbled Idumea accordingly."

We find in the prophesies of Isaiah very literal event: The judgement of Edom (Idumea) by another nation - Babylon, under the command of Nebuchadnezzar. In this event we find language about the heavens being effected by the earthly collapse of a pagan kingdom.

When read this kind of thing in Scripture we have to ask ourselves an important question. Were the heavens actually rolled together as a scroll when Edom fell to Nebuchadnezzar? The answer to our question is No! The reason is this is symbolic language used in the Scriptures to express the calamity involved in the fall of earthly kingdoms and powers.

If you recall ancient pagan kings were usually seen as the son of a pagan god. To the ancient pagans of the Middle East the sun, moon and stars were god's themselves and the king and his princes were related to them. So when a kingdom fell it was as though the heavenly host of that pagan people were falling.

In Ezekiel 32 we read of God's judgement on Egypt by Babylon. The Babylonians defeated the Egyptians and ruled over them. We know this and it is well documented. From the prophet writings we find that this conquest is an act of divine judgement. This is what God says about His judgement on Egypt. "And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light. All the bright lights of heaven will I make dark over thee, and set darkness upon thy land, saith the Lord GOD." (Eze. 32:7-8)

We know the Egyptians were judged by God and in this judgement we read that the sun, moon and stars are said to go dark and no longer shine on the land. This is hyperbolic, apocryphal language used when the powers that be are shaken to the point of collapse, as Egypt was by the Babylonians and the Babylonians were by the Medes and Persians.

There are other examples like these in the Old Testament. The reason I bring them up is to make a point. This kind of language is found many times in the writings of the Old Testament prophets, but they are not literal and were not meant to be understood literally, yet the prophecies were literally fulfilled in time and history. The nations prophesied against were judged and defeated by their enemies that God raised up to judge them, but the imagery of the stars, sun and moon being darkened, and the sky rolling up like a scroll were not to be understood literally in the modern sense.

Now what could Peter have been alluding to when he quoted Joel in Acts 2? Realizing that this language was used when nations were toppled by God, we should be able to see that Peter was alluding to the toppling of the Jewish nation by God himself. God destroyed Jerusalem in AD70, judged and scattered the Jews at the same time. The same language meant the same thing and the Jews knew exactly what Peter was talking about when he said it. They were not like the modern day Christian that knows nothing of Biblical history. The Jews standing there that day and listening to Peter quoting that passage understood that God was going to judge that nation for crucifying Christ and they repented to escape the coming judgement.


GLJCA

 

[JMWHALEN]

Jim I can appreciate your concern for the false teaching of "Full Preterism" but this article has nothing to do with that. Please be assured I am not teaching nor do I adhere to such false teaching. I would really like to address this article instead of jumping to another subject. Maybe you could start another thread on that subject.

This article is dealing with the differences between the Futurist view of Daniel's 70th week and the Fulfilled view of Partial Preterism. It really has nothing to do with Full Preterism.

GLJCA

___
Please re-read. I clearly indicated that a physical resurrection, not just spiritual, as the Preterists claim, is one of the foundations/tennants of the gospel of Christ. The intent was to "tie" this fact to the scriptural testimony that Daniel will be raised from the dead physically. And thus, the 70th week is yet future, as Daniel as yet has not been raised physically from the dead.

I never said, nor implied, that you supported a mere "spiritual" resurrection. If you read it that way, consider this an apology. However, I will not apologize for stating, in no uncertain terms, that the 70th week is future, because Daniel has not been raised, and this is fact has "everything to do" with the subject of the thread. The backround I provided in my post was provided to anticipate any attempt by anyone, preterist or not, to "explain away" the plain meaning of Daniel 12:13 as some type of "spiritual resurrection."

In Christ,
John M. Whalen

 

[GLJCA]

"First of all, the new covenant that you say we are under, as prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and what you believe to be in effect at the time of Hebrews 8, Is still with the house of Israel, and the house of Judah. If it were in effect at the time of Hebrews 8, I sure that the author would have informed them that they were not included in it.

Now if we believers are "grafted into" Isreal, then Jeremiah 31:33, 34 are in effect. "...I will put the Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall ALL know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord; for I will forgive thier iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

PLEASE ANSWER THIS. If the Law is written on everone's inward parts and their hearts, and teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his borther; Know the Lord: for they ALL shall know me..., Why does Paul write "STUDY to shew theyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (2Tim.215), and say that we are ambassadors for Christ and have the ministry of reconciliation (2Cor.18-20)? Under the new covenant, WHY would that be necessary?................

Under the New Covenant Christ is sitting on His throne and all of His enemies are being made His footstool by the sword coming out of His mouth in Rev. 16. That sword is the gospel, which reconciles Christ's enemies to Him. Remember that you were once an enemy of God but now through believing the gospel of Jesus Christ you are reconciled to God by Christ's blood. Col 1:21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in [your] mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled

Paul was telling Timothy to study the scriptures to show himself approved. What were the only scriptures that they had at that time? Yep the Old Testament scriptures. Were all the Old Testament scriptures considered the law? No but all of the scriptures pointed to Christ and by studying them we could be an approved workman.

After I became a Christian even when I didn't know something was against the law of God the Holy Spirit convinced me of the sin. If His law is in your heart the Spirit will convict of sin. 1 John 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. If we keep His word in our hearts then we know that we are in Him. Does that mean that we will not sin? Absolutely not, but it does mean that when we do sin we will not do it ignorantly.
Hbr 4:12 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Concerning the phrase, ALL WILL KNOW ME. That can not mean that all will be saved. Even the Dispensationalist doesn't believe that because at the end of what you call the 1000 year reign what is going to happen? Yep the devil will be loosed and he will deceive many and they will turn against the Lord and that is in the New Covenant. So what does "know" mean there. Have you ever traveled to another country and found someone who had never heard of Jesus Christ? I haven't! I lived all over northern Mexico for 13 years and never found anyone who had never heard of Jesus Christ and I lived at the end of the road. Granted what they knew of Him was not correct but they knew who He was. I have talked to missionaries from other countries and asked them the same question and they said their people's information was wrong about Jesus, but they knew who he was.

The way we interpret scripture is guided by what we have learned. For many years I learned and interpreted scripture like Dispensationalism told me was the correct way but what I found was that it did not match with scripture. We have to allow scripture to interpret scripture.

GLJCA

 

[JMWHALEN]

Jim, where does this article say that the Lord made a covenant for one week. It says that He confirmed the covenant. He didn't need to make the covenant He already had made it when He said that His blood was the New Testatment in His blood. There was no need to make another everlasting covenant when He had just made the New Covenant.

Tell me what other covenant did Jesus make?

GLJCA

___

"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week...." Daniel 9:27

"10. "HE SHALL CONFIRM THE COVENANT." When Jesus instituted the Lord' s supper, representative of his shed blood for the remission of sins, he said: 'This is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Mt. 26:28). The word "testament" here and the word "covenant" are translated from exactly the same word in the New Testament. "How much more shall the blood of Christ...purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament [covenant]" (Heb.9:14,15).
Jesus is called the "mediator of the new covenant" (Heb. 8:6), the "messenger of the covenant" (Mal. 3:1), and his shed blood is called "the blood of the everlasting covenant" (Heb. 12:24). Our Lord Jesus is the one who confirmed the covenant through his redemptive sacrifice at Calvary. And how beautifully this harmonizes with what we have already seen."

My comment: The article's premise is that 1. "the covenant" of Daniel 9:27 is equivalent to "The New Covenant": " When Jesus instituted the Lord' s supper, representative of his shed blood for the remission of sins, he said: 'This is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins..." and thus 2. "argues" that since "The New Covenant" was confirmed ..... Our Lord Jesus is the one who confirmed the covenant through his redemptive sacrifice at Calvary. And how beautifully this harmonizes with what we have already seen."= it is already past, and awaits no future fulfillment 3. The "he" is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ(see below for a brief comment)


I argued that 1. The Lord Jesus Christ never made a covenant for just one week of "Jewish sabbatic years", so this daniel 9:27 "confirm the covenant", cannot be a reference to "The New Covenant" that the article "tied" to "the Lord's Supper and 2. That this is not referencing "The New Covenant" can be seen by Dispy's previous posts(and perhaps my addition to it) as to the contents/effect of the New Covenant(underline is my emphasis)...The inward/outward working of "The New Covenant" has not been realized, if the Holy Bible's testimony is to be believed.

"Tell me what other covenant did Jesus make?"

My comment: 1. The article's premise is that the "he" of Daniel 9:27 is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ, not mine. The "he" is not the Lord Jesus Christ-the "he" is the anti-Christ. 2.However, even conceding that the "he" is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ(and that is not my premise-it is the writer of the article's erroneous premise!), I merely point out that this could not be a reference to "The New Covenant", as outlined above-1. nowhere in scripture is "The New Covenant" said to last 7 years("for one week"-one week of "Jewish sabbatic years"), and 2.The realization of the inward/outward working of this "The New Covenant" is future in the millennial kingdom. No one can claim that this has been realized today! :


(Underline/bold is my emphasis)


"But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel..." Jeremiah 31:33


Has this been realized?:


"...I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts.... vs. 34


"And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD..." vs. 34


"Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, IN WHOM IS NO GUILE!(emphasis mine)" John 1:47

"And Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, from Dan even to Beersheba, all the days of Solomon." 1 Kings 4:25

" But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it." Micah 4:4

"In that day, saith the LORD of hosts, shall ye call every man his neighbour under the vine and under the fig tree." Zech. 3:10

"At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: NEITHER SHALL THEY WALK ANY MORE AFTER THE IMAGINATION OF THEIR EVIL HEART(emphasis mine)." Jeremiah 3:17



"Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I will even gather you from the people, and assemble you out of the countries where ye have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel. And they shall come thither, and they shall take away all the detestable things thereof and all the abominations thereof from thence. And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh: THAT THEY MAY WALK IN MY STATUTES, AND KEEP MINE ORDINANCES, AND DO THEM(emphasis mine): and they shall be my people, and I will be their God." Ezekiel 11:17-20




"Jim, where does this article say that the Lord made a covenant for one week."

Here is what the writer of the article said:


"HE SHALL CONFIRM THE COVENANT." When Jesus instituted the Lord' s supper, representative of his shed blood for the remission of sins, he said: 'This is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Mt. 26:28). The word "testament" here and the word "covenant" are translated from exactly the same word in the New Testament. "How much more shall the blood of Christ...purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament [covenant]" (Heb.9:14,15).
Jesus is called the "mediator of the new covenant" (Heb. 8:6), the "messenger of the covenant" (Mal. 3:1), and his shed blood is called "the blood of the everlasting covenant" (Heb. 12:24). Our Lord Jesus is the one who confirmed the covenant through his redemptive sacrifice at Calvary. And how beautifully this harmonizes with what we have already seen."

The writer ties "The New Testament" referenced at "The Lord's Supper", and it's confirmation at Calvary, back to the Daniel 9:27 "the covenant....for one week"-not I!



Daniel 9:27: " And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week..."


" It says that He confirmed the covenant."

And I do not contend that the "he" is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ. The article does! And by "tieing it" back to it Daniel 9:27, then "The New Testament" only lasted 7 years?!!!!!


It says he will=future. Granted, this is a moot point, since we both agree(I assume), that at the time of Daniel's writing the prophecy, it foretold of a future event. The debate is to whether this is a reference to "The New Covenant/Testament", and thus the "he" is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ, as the writer and you contend, or a reference to another covenant the anti-Christ makes with "the many", and thus is not a reference to "The New Covenant", as I contend.

" He didn't need to make the covenant He already had made it when He said that His blood was the New Testatment in His blood. There was no need to make another everlasting covenant when He had just made the New Covenant. "


See above, and where does Daniel 9:27 say that this "the covenant" is "everlasting"? "The New Covenant"=7 years?




"WhatI have written I have written..." John 19:22

In Christ,
John M. Whalen

 

[GLJCA]

___
Please re-read. I clearly indicated that a physical resurrection, not just spiritual, as the Preterists claim, is one of the foundations/tennants of the gospel of Christ. The intent was to "tie" this fact to the scriptural testimony that Daniel will be raised from the dead physically. And thus, the 70th week is yet future, as Daniel as yet has not been raised physically from the dead.

I never said, nor implied, that you supported a mere "spiritual" resurrection. If you read it that way, consider this an apology. However, I will not apologize for stating, in no uncertain terms, that the 70th week is future, because Daniel has not been raised, and this is fact has "everything to do" with the subject of the thread. The backround I provided in my post was provided to anticipate any attempt by anyone, preterist or not, to "explain away" the plain meaning of Daniel 12:13 as some type of "spiritual resurrection."

In Christ,
John M. Whalen

Jim, could you tell me when the daily sacrfice was taken away in Daniel 12:11? Wouldn't the beginning of the end have been at the crucifixion and the end at the destruction of the Temple? There have been no sacrifices since that time.

Daniel 12 is not talking about the end of the world because God told Daniel to seal up the words till the time of the end. John revealed those sealed up words in the book of Revelation. When Jesus gave the Revelation to John he told him several times that the time was at hand, signifying that the end was near. Since Daniel was told to seal up the prophecy until the end and John revealed that prophecy in Revelation then it is not hard to see that the end isn't talking about the end of the world. It is talking about the end of the nation of Israel as the people of God. Jesus told the Jews in Matt 12 that the Kingdom was to be taken from them and given to a nation that is bringing forth the fruits required.

Therefore Daniel 12 does not prove that the 70th week is future. In fact I really don't know where ya'll come up with that teaching anyway. There is nothing in scripture that even shows a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks. This gap is a figment of the Dispensational imagination.

GLJCA

 

[GLJCA]

___My comment: The article's premise is that 1. "the covenant" of Daniel 9:27 is equivalent to "The New Covenant": " When Jesus instituted the Lord' s supper, representative of his shed blood for the remission of sins, he said: 'This is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins..." and thus 2. "argues" that since "The New Covenant" was confirmed ..... Our Lord Jesus is the one who confirmed the covenant through his redemptive sacrifice at Calvary. And how beautifully this harmonizes with what we have already seen."= it is already past, and awaits no future fulfillment 3. The "he" is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ(see below for a brief comment)


I argued that 1. The Lord Jesus Christ never made a covenant for just one week of "Jewish sabbatic years", so this daniel 9:27 "confirm the covenant", cannot be a reference to "The New Covenant" that the article "tied" to "the Lord's Supper and 2. That this is not referencing "The New Covenant" can be seen by Dispy's previous posts(and perhaps my addition to it) as to the contents/effect of the New Covenant(underline is my emphasis)...The inward/outward working of "The New Covenant" has not been realized, if the Holy Bible's testimony is to be believed.

You are right the New Testament will not last 7 years because it is an everlasting covenant. I think that your timetable is wrong because you are using Dispensationalisms interpretation of Daniel. There is no need of re-interpretation of what the Bible clearly says. Number 1 the prince that Dispensationalism interprets as the Anti-Christ is defined in the Dan 9:25 as the Messiah the Prince. Yet in Daniel 9:26 when Daniel talks about the Prince he is suddenly interpreted as the Anti-Christ, and for what reason? Who knows other than the fact that if it is prophesying about Jesus it destroys the Dispensational premise.

Now let's add this up. The timetable (483 years) was up to the baptism of Christ which was 69 weeks. How long did Christ's ministry last? It was three and a half years that takes place in the 70th week where Christ confirmed the covenant. So now that uses up 486.5 years. After the death of Christ the disciples for 3.5 years went only to the children of Israel with the gospel, which adds up to 490 years.

GLJCA

 

[eph3Nine]

GLJCA said:

"

Jim, (his name is JOHN, by the way) where does this article say that the Lord made a covenant for one week."

John says...again...

Here is what the writer of the article said:


"HE SHALL CONFIRM THE COVENANT." When Jesus instituted the Lord' s supper, representative of his shed blood for the remission of sins, he said: 'This is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Mt. 26:28). The word "testament" here and the word "covenant" are translated from exactly the same word in the New Testament. "How much more shall the blood of Christ...purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament [covenant]" (Heb.9:14,15).
Jesus is called the "mediator of the new covenant" (Heb. 8:6), the "messenger of the covenant" (Mal. 3:1), and his shed blood is called "the blood of the everlasting covenant" (Heb. 12:24). Our Lord Jesus is the one who confirmed the covenant through his redemptive sacrifice at Calvary. And how beautifully this harmonizes with what we have already seen."

The writer ties "The New Testament" referenced at "The Lord's Supper", and it's confirmation at Calvary, back to the Daniel 9:27 "the covenant....for one week"-not I!



Daniel 9:27: " And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week..."


" It says that He confirmed the covenant."

And I do not contend that the "he" is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ. The article does! And by "tieing it" back to it Daniel 9:27, then "The New Testament" only lasted 7 years?!!!!!


It says he will=future. Granted, this is a moot point, since we both agree(I assume), that at the time of Daniel's writing the prophecy, it foretold of a future event. The debate is to whether this is a reference to "The New Covenant/Testament", and thus the "he" is a reference to the Lord Jesus Christ, as the writer and you contend, or a reference to another covenant the anti-Christ makes with "the many", and thus is not a reference to "The New Covenant", as I contend.

" He didn't need to make the covenant He already had made it when He said that His blood was the New Testatment in His blood. There was no need to make another everlasting covenant when He had just made the New Covenant. "


See above, and where does Daniel 9:27 say that this "the covenant" is "everlasting"? "The New Covenant"=7 years?

It is obvious to me that the persons doing all the arguing in here are PURPOSELY NOT reading what we laboriously provide for them. Good grief...John signs his name on every post and GLGCA calls him "JIM"????? LOL

With all due respect...some here need a course in basis reading. Wink

 

[GLJCA]

GLJCA said:


John says...again...[/font][/font]

It is obvious to me that the persons doing all the arguing in here are PURPOSELY NOT reading what we laboriously provide for them. Good grief...John signs his name on every post and GLGCA calls him "JIM"????? LOL

With all due respect...some here need a course in basis reading. Wink

Very good PHE3nine. Hey tell me what does the LOL stand for, LAUGH OUT LOUD OR LOTS OF LOVE.

My desire is to discuss the scriptures and the validity of Dispensationalism. It seems that you are too afraid of learning that you could be wrong to even discuss so all you do is sit back and take shots at people. I promise I read all of what you say even to the caustic comments that you write. You know the anger that you have for anyone who doesn't believe like you can not be healthy spiritually. Jesus said that whatever you do to His children you do to Him. Oh but wait a minute you don't believe that is speaking to you. Oh well.

GLJCA

 

[JMWHALEN]

Jim, could you tell me when the daily sacrfice was taken away in Daniel 12:11? Wouldn't the beginning of the end have been at the crucifixion and the end at the destruction of the Temple? There have been no sacrifices since that time.

Daniel 12 is not talking about the end of the world because God told Daniel to seal up the words till the time of the end. John revealed those sealed up words in the book of Revelation. When Jesus gave the Revelation to John he told him several times that the time was at hand, signifying that the end was near. Since Daniel was told to seal up the prophecy until the end and John revealed that prophecy in Revelation then it is not hard to see that the end isn't talking about the end of the world. It is talking about the end of the nation of Israel as the people of God. Jesus told the Jews in Matt 12 that the Kingdom was to be taken from them and given to a nation that is bringing forth the fruits required.

Therefore Daniel 12 does not prove that the 70th week is future. In fact I really don't know where ya'll come up with that teaching anyway. There is nothing in scripture that even shows a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks. This gap is a figment of the Dispensational imagination.

GLJCA

__

"Daniel 12 is not talking about the end of the world because God told Daniel to seal up the words till the time of the end. John revealed those sealed up words in the book of Revelation. When Jesus gave the Revelation to John he told him several times that the time was at hand, signifying that the end was near. Since Daniel was told to seal up the prophecy until the end and John revealed that prophecy in Revelation then it is not hard to see that the end isn't talking about the end of the world. It is talking about the end of the nation of Israel as the people of God. Jesus told the Jews in Matt 12 that the Kingdom was to be taken from them and given to a nation that is bringing forth the fruits required."

1. "It is talking about the end of the nation of Israel as the people of God"=You are saying Godis done with Israel-this is your premise. To the contrary, Daniel is a summary of God's ultimate promise to restore the kingdom to Israel-the consumation. The period of days that occur during the last of the "70 weeks" include the resurrection of Daniel. When was he resurrected? The days of Daniel 12 were still future in the Lord Jesus Christ's day, since he referred to the abomination of desolation as still future in Mt. 24:15, and he specifically refers us to Daniel. The events were still future when Paul wrote 2 Thes. 2:3,4. Again, the events of Daniel 12 concerning the abomination of desolation were still future when the Lord Jesus Christ spoke, and the specific days relating to those events were numbered. Daniel was promised to be resurrected at the end of those days in which the abomination of desolation is in place. The article modifying "days", "the", is the article of the previous reference. The "days" of verse 13 refers to the days discussed in the previous verses-Chapter 12 "a time of trouble"="Jer. 30:7="/"at that time thy people" /"seal the book, even to the time of the end"=the end of the Great Trib, when the LORD God will make good on the coventental promises given to the JEWS(thy people"), including LAND:

The time of Jacob's trouble "pre-figured in Gen. 32:7:
"Then Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed..."


"For, lo, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will bring again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah, saith the LORD: and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it. And these are the words that the LORD spake concerning Israel and concerning Judah. For thus saith the LORD; We have heard a voice of trembling, of fear, and not of peace. Ask ye now, and see whether a man doth travail with child? wherefore do I see every man with his hands on his loins, as a woman in travail, and all faces are turned into paleness?Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble, but he shall be saved out of it." Jeremiah 30:4-7


This was not fulfilled in A.D. 70, as the Jews were driven out of the land, scattered, not saved, and fled in terror. This is future.


"and to seal up the vision and prophecy" 9:24
" ...., shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end..." 12:4

"And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end." 12:8-10

"...Many shall be purified....but the wise shall understand..." 12:10/" When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand.." Mt. 24:15 =Future!

"to shut up" means to cause a cessation or to completely fulfill. Thus, the vision and the prophecy are to be completely fulfilled. When was he resurrected? This is a reference to all visions and prophecies recorded in the Holy Bible, and all were revealed to the Jews, and all of it is sealed up in Israel. Daniel was commanded to seal up the book of prophecy until the time of the end, which was not at the cross, which was not at A.D. 70, meaning when the Jews would be returned to the LAND, and have it as their inheritance="stand in thy lot"(12:13).

"Jesus told the Jews in Matt 12 that the Kingdom was to be taken from them and given to a nation that is bringing forth the fruits required." This is "the little flock"-Jews, "the kingdom church". Does "a nation of priests" sound familiar?=Jews! See my post on the fact that the body of Christ is never referred to as a "nation of priest".uThe gospel of the kingdom: a kingdom, a king, and LAND. Not the Body of Christ. This has not happened-it will. The LORD God will fulfill the promises made to the Jews=Romans 11:25-29, 15:8...... =a kingdom, a king, land:

"...as the days of heaven upon the earth...." Deut. 11:21

"to a nation"? The body of Christ is never referred to as such(see my previous article), and our sphere of blessing is the heavenlies, not on earth=land! A kingdom=LAND, or "class dismissed". This is a promise to Jews!

" Jim, could you tell me when the daily sacrfice was taken away in Daniel 12:11? Wouldn't the beginning of the end have been at the crucifixion and the end at the destruction of the Temple? There have been no sacrifices since that time."

I never said it was-it is still future.

"In fact I really don't know where ya'll come up with that teaching anyway. There is nothing in scripture that even shows a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks. This gap is a figment of the Dispensational imagination."


When was Daniel resurrected, and when was he resurrected to be given his "lot"(land inheritance)? Please address this question.

In Christ,
John M. Whalen