The 70wks Missing Ingredient.

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,796
3,423
Non-dispensationalist
✟361,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
What does that have to do with Zech 6:13 stating Joshua,. crowned king and high priest, reigned post-Babylon?
It matters because the kings of Israel following king David had to be descendants of David's tribe, Judah, because God made that promise to him. Joshua was of a priest family, the Levites, wrong tribe to rule as king.

Again, what does this have to do with Zech 6:13 stating Joshua reigned? It is what Zech 6:13 specifically states, a fact that can't be denied in a court of law, an open and shut grammatical fact that it is what the text is specifically saying. Why can't you comprehend the fact?

It doesn't say "reigned" past tense in Zechariah 6:13. It says shall reign. It is talking about Jesus reigning, being a priest and king. Crowns plural were to be made and placed on Joshua's head. In modern vernacular, it would be like me saying someone wearing two hats indicating that they were performing two roles.

So why was Joshua crowned instead of Zerubabel the rightful heir, and why was no one crowned ever after him in Israel?

Because it is Joshua's name - the name Joshua - that would be the name of the person called the Branch. Jesus's name in hebrew is the same as Joshua's name in hebrew. Zerubabel's name and Jesus's name are not equivalent. That's why, and.......

There would be no futher legitmate kings of Israel or Judah, following the Babylonian captivity, except the coming messiah (indicated to be in the end times in Hosea 3), because Israel had gone after other gods.

4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:
5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king; and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the latter days.
 
Upvote 0

precepts

Newbie
Aug 20, 2008
3,094
135
56
United States Virgin Islands
✟24,096.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
It matters because the kings of Israel following king David had to be descendants of David's tribe, Judah, because God made that promise to him. Joshua was of a priest family, the Levites, wrong tribe to rule as king.
Does Eze 21:25-26 say the person to come to whom the crown belongs had to be a descendant of David? No!

Jer 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
Jer 23:6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this [is] his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Jer 23:7 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that they shall no more say, The LORD liveth, which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt;
Jer 23:8 But, The LORD liveth, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I had driven them; and they shall dwell in their own land.
This is not future and the "north country" was Babylon, the only two exoduses in Israel's history. The year 1968 was never one.

Psa 87:4 I will make mention of Rahab and Babylon to them that know me: behold Philistia, and Tyre, with Ethiopia; this [man] was born there.
Psa 87:5 And of Zion it shall be said, This and that man was born in her: and the highest himself shall establish her.
Psa 87:6 The LORD shall count, when he writeth up the people, [that] this [man] was born there. Selah.
Psa 87:7 As well the singers as the players on instruments [shall be there]: all my springs [are] in thee.
Again, the context is Zion being established post-Babylon, why the psalmist makes mention of Babylon.

Jer 4:23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, [it was] without form, and void; and the heavens, and they [had] no light.
Jer 4:24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.
Jer 4:25 I beheld, and, lo, [there was] no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.
Jer 4:26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place [was] a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, [and] by his fierce anger.
Jer 4:27 For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.
Jer 4:28 For this shall the earth mourn, and the heavens above be black: because I have spoken [it], I have purposed [it], and will not repent, neither will I turn back from it.
Jer 4:29 The whole city shall flee for the noise of the horsemen and bowmen; they shall go into thickets, and climb up upon the rocks: every city [shall be] forsaken, and not a man dwell therein.
Jer 4:30 And [when] thou [art] spoiled, what wilt thou do? Though thou clothest thyself with crimson, though thou deckest thee with ornaments of gold, though thou rentest thy face with painting, in vain shalt thou make thyself fair; [thy] lovers will despise thee, they will seek thy life.
Jer 4:31 For I have heard a voice as of a woman in travail, [and] the anguish as of her that bringeth forth her first child, the voice of the daughter of Zion, [that] bewaileth herself, [that] spreadeth her hands, [saying], Woe [is] me now! for my soul is wearied because of murderers.
Again, why is God referencing the beginning of the world as beginning after the Babylonian conquest, then mentions a woman in travail? Because the owner of the crown of Israel was born in Babylon, born to lead them out of Babylon and to establish Zion himself!


It doesn't say "reigned" past tense in Zechariah 6:13. It says shall reign.
And what does "shall reign" mean? That he shall not reign? Or using your train of thought, he shall reign symbolically!


It is talking about Jesus reigning, being a priest and king. Crowns plural were to be made and placed on Joshua's head. In modern vernacular, it would be like me saying someone wearing two hats indicating that they were performing two roles.
Your ignorance is showing. There were four others to be crowned with the crowns made. And they weren't symbolic persons either.

You're contradicting the facts, speculating foolishness to fit your false traditional interpretation. In other words, you are making excuses.


Because it is Joshua's name - the name Joshua - that would be the name of the person called the Branch. Jesus's name in hebrew is the same as Joshua's name in hebrew. Zerubabel's name and Jesus's name are not equivalent. That's why, and.......
You are posting foolishness. The text is clear. Joshua ruled as king and high priest post-Babylon, and did rebuild the temple. The counsel of peace was between him and Zerubabel both, the "them" in Zech 6:13 - the fact.


There would be no futher legitmate kings of Israel or Judah, following the Babylonian captivity, except the coming messiah (indicated to be in the end times in Hosea 3), because Israel had gone after other gods.
And Eze 21:25-26, muchless all the verses I posted about God's planting post-Babylon, has nothing to do with why there were no more kings in Israel? What kind of one-sided thinking are you using. It's as if you think your opinion is God. You quote one verse in an attempt to ignore or blot out another.


4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:
5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king; and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the latter days.
Did you even read vs 1. The context is in the days of King Uzz--h, even before the 10 tribes were carried away. Are you that desperate for an excuse?

It's as if Eze 21:25-26, Zech 6:13, and the rest of my verses don't exist in your consciousness.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,796
3,423
Non-dispensationalist
✟361,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Does Eze 21:25-26 say the person to come to whom the crown belongs had to be a descendant of David? No!

If you go one verse further, in verse 27, it says....

27 I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.

No more kings until the messiah comes, who is Jesus, whose right it is to be the king, because in Psalms 2 it says....
God speaking into the future,

Psalms 2:6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

This is not future and the "north country" was Babylon, the only two exoduses in Israel's history. The year 1968 was never one.

For some reason, you are switching to Jeremiah 25:3-8. While those passages are referring to the end times, I have no idea why you are referring to 1968. Jeremiah 25:3-8 was not referred to in my post, which I am saying that Joshua never ruled as the King of Israel. I have no idea what you are trying to prove.

Again, why is God referencing the beginning of the world as beginning after the Babylonian conquest, then mentions a woman in travail? Because the owner of the crown of Israel was born in Babylon, born to lead them out of Babylon and to establish Zion himself!
The bible is not saying that in Jeremiah 4.

There are no kings


And what does "shall reign" mean? That he shall not reign? Or using your train of thought, he shall reign symbolically!
You had claimed that the passage said that Joshua had "reigned" - I was correcting you that the passage does not say "reigned".


Your ignorance is showing. There were four others to be crowned with the crowns made. And they weren't symbolic persons either.
The crowns were ceremonial, not that they would be kings, but they were trying to obey God, and that they would be remembered for taking part in the rebuilding of the temple. " Zechariah 6:14 And the crowns shall be to Helem, and to Tobijah, and to Jedaiah, and to Hen the son of Zephaniah, for a memorial in the temple of the LORD.

You're contradicting the facts, speculating foolishness to fit your false traditional interpretation. In other words, you are making excuses.

Oh, you believe that Joshua was king and priest... and Jesus isn't ?

You are posting foolishness. The text is clear. Joshua ruled as king and high priest post-Babylon, and did rebuild the temple. The counsel of peace was between him and Zerubabel both, the "them" in Zech 6:13 - the fact.
Joshua did not rule as king. The Jews, if you go to their websites do not claim that Joshua ruled as king, either. Joshua never sat on the throne of David. Solomon was the last king of Israel. After Solomon, Israel broke up and there has never been a King over united Israel ever since.

And Eze 21:25-26, muchless all the verses I posted about God's planting post-Babylon, has nothing to do with why there were no more kings in Israel? What kind of one-sided thinking are you using. It's as if you think your opinion is God. You quote one verse in an attempt to ignore or blot out another.

You are erring by not including verse 27. Ezekiel 21:27 I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.


Did you even read vs 1. The context is in the days of King Uzz--h, even before the 10 tribes were carried away. Are you that desperate for an excuse?

The verse says they return, they would go without a king or prince for a long time until, in the latter days.

4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:
5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king; and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the latter days.

And in Zechariah 14, in the latter days, when Jesus returns, as King of kings, and whose right it is to be king of Israel, and his foot touches down on the Mt. of Olives, it splits in half, it says them in Jerusalem escape like in the days of Uzziah by virtue of an earthquake.

Zechariah 14:3Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. 4And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south. 5And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
 
Upvote 0

precepts

Newbie
Aug 20, 2008
3,094
135
56
United States Virgin Islands
✟24,096.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
If you go one verse further, in verse 27, it says....

27 I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.

No more kings until the messiah comes, who is Jesus, whose right it is to be the king, because in Psalms 2 it says....
God speaking into the future,

Psalms 2:6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
You are not naive. What's the reason for Zech 6:13 then? Why, as you say, crown Joshua symbolically instead of just leaving the space blank until Christ? It makes no sense, literal nonsense! Zech 6:13 specifically tells you he reigned and built the temple post-Babylon. Your excuse is but an excuse.


For some reason, you are switching to Jeremiah 25:3-8. While those passages are referring to the end times, I have no idea why you are referring to 1968. Jeremiah 25:3-8 was not referred to in my post, which I am saying that Joshua never ruled as the King of Israel. I have no idea what you are trying to prove.
First of all, I am not switching to anything. Jer 23, not 25, 3-8 is proof Joshua reigned post-Babylon. He is the "righteous branch," in vs. 5, the king that reigns in the earth (again not defined as a son of David):

Jer 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.

- This is supported by the two eagles parable of God planting the "Cedar branch" post-Babylon, to replace the kings of Judah, specifically Zedek!

Jer 23:6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this [is] his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

- This is not future because Christ is not coming back to have a Judah and an Israel dwelling safely in the earth. The context is post-Babylon, and the planting of the "Branch" is the knot that binds them. You are misinterpreting the verse.


The bible is not saying that in Jeremiah 4.

There are no kings
Again I ask why is God referencing the beginning of the world as beginning after Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of the then known world? Why does he mention there was "no light," "no man," in reference to Creation's 1st day of the lights being created, much less a woman travailing (Yahrushalem) right after?

Jer 4:23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, [it was] without form, and void; and the heavens, and they [had] no light.
Jer 4:24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.
Jer 4:25 I beheld, and, lo, [there was] no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.

- There is definitely a reason why God is making this statement, because the "man," the "light" of the world was born to establish the world when Yahrushalem travailed with child! Your stumbling block is not realizing why these verses have double meaning, hence you only interpret them to have to be future without acknowledging the parts that have to be post-Babylon only - such as the exodus from the north country.


You had claimed that the passage said that Joshua had "reigned" - I was correcting you that the passage does not say "reigned".
I wasn't quoting the passage. I was simply telling you what the passage proves, that he reigned and rebuilt the temple post-Babylon which it does say in Zech 6:13.


The crowns were ceremonial, not that they would be kings, but they were trying to obey God, and that they would be remembered for taking part in the rebuilding of the temple. " Zechariah 6:14 And the crowns shall be to Helem, and to Tobijah, and to Jedaiah, and to Hen the son of Zephaniah, for a memorial in the temple of the LORD.
It would be a memorial as long as the temple lasted. Joshua, as Zech 6:13 says, ruled as a priest on His throne and rebuilt the temple, the reason why it is His temple in Mal 3:1..


Oh, you believe that Joshua was king and priest... and Jesus isn't ?
You are not that naive. The premise answered your question, the fact you don't want to accept, the stone you and the builders want to refuse.


Joshua did not rule as king. The Jews, if you go to their websites do not claim that Joshua ruled as king, either. Joshua never sat on the throne of David. Solomon was the last king of Israel. After Solomon, Israel broke up and there has never been a King over united Israel ever since.
The so-called Jews do not accept what scripture says, period. I do. The counsel of peace were between them both. The temple was His (Mal 3:1 & Ex 20:1:6).


You are erring by not including verse 27. Ezekiel 21:27 I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.
Why are you erring in acting as if you're naive? Whose right have I continually posted it is, and what's the premise of this thread? Who did I say came and fulfilled vs. 27 numerous times for you to pull this stunt about me leaving out vs. 27? You're not that naive!


The verse says they return, they would go without a king or prince for a long time until, in the latter days.

4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:
5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king; and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the latter days.

And in Zechariah 14, in the latter days, when Jesus returns, as King of kings, and whose right it is to be king of Israel, and his foot touches down on the Mt. of Olives, it splits in half, it says them in Jerusalem escape like in the days of Uzziah by virtue of an earthquake.

Zechariah 14:3Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. 4And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south. 5And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
Does Eze 21:25-26 or the premise of this thread contradict Hosha 3:1-5? Nope!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,796
3,423
Non-dispensationalist
✟361,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
You are not naive. What's the reason for Zech 6:13 then? Why, as you say, crown Joshua symbolically instead of just leaving the space blank until Christ? It makes no sense, literal nonsense! Zech 6:13 specifically tells you he reigned and built the temple post-Babylon. Your excuse is but an excuse.
Zechariah 6:13 and all of the prophecies about Jesus in the old testament (tanach) were to validate that he is the true messiah..... because God foretold about Jesus ahead of time.... including his (Hebrew) name. But the gospel that Jesus would die for the sins of mankind was sealed from "understanding" until after resurrection - although Jesus told the disciples what would take place ahead of time. We see this in Luke 18.... as they were about to enter Jerusalem that last passover week.

31Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. 32For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on: 33And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again. 34And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken.


An then later after the resurrection, and Jesus appeared to them in his resurrected body, we see in Luke 24, that Jesus opened the disicples "understanding" of what he had told them aforehand. And "understanding" all of the prophecies in the Tanach (which is a Jewish acronymn for the law (the first five books of the bible), the prophets, and the writings (psalms, proverbs).

my comment in brackets...

44And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you [that is, before Jesus being crucified], that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, [the Tanach] concerning me. 45Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, 46And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

So why was everything kept a mystery, that no-one understood ahead of time? Which the Jews (Judaism) still in their objection to Christianity say we don't read anything in our Tanach of the messiah would die for the sins of mankind so that we would have eternal life.

We can only put together the pieces as to why the understanding of the pieces of the prophecies about the messiah were shrouded in a mystery - until after the resurrection and Jesus opened the disciples understanding, by divine power. We are given clues in 1Corinthians2 as to why the mystery.

7But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

So the question becomes who would have thought that they would benefit by Jesus being killed, crucified ?

It is Satan, the chief prince of this world. Satan thought by having Jesus crucified, that would prevent the Kingdom of God from replacing his own kingdom from ruling over the earth. The other question becomes why doesn't God just destroy Satan?

The reason is it appears that Satan basically in the garden of eden got Adam and Eve to fall into sin - as means to keep God from destroying him as he had already rebelled by aspiring to ascend above God. When man fell to sin, that meant by equal justice, God would likewise have to destroy all mankind for our sins as well - if He were to destroy Satan. So Satan by self survival wants to keep man a hostage to sin.

But Satan came out in hindsight to the crucifixion - looking like a fool. The very thing that he had leveraged his survival on -
man being forever guilty of sin - was done away with by Jesus's death taking those sins away from us.

So we can see why the prophecies about Jesus in the Tanach were kept shrouded in a mystery. It was to keep Satan from knowing ahead of time from doing the very thing - that would free God up from carrying out prosecution, judgment, and destruction of Satan - without destroying all of mankind equally for our own sins.

In Revelation 11, the sounding of the 7th trumpet announces the forthcoming procecution of Satan as being prince of this world. He will be cast down to earth, his kingdom overshadowing the earth fallen, has fallen - Babylon has fallen, has fallen.
That event is forthcoming halfway through the final 7 years.

Zechariah 6, as the other prophecies about Jesus in the Tanach, are there to validate that Jesus is the true messiah, that's why they are there. But they have been shrouded in mystery, which by reading from the Tanach only, they can never be understood. And still cannot be understood except by the divine power of the Holy Spirit to understand them.

44And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 45Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, 46And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48And ye are witnesses of these things. 49And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Douggg

anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
May 28, 2009
28,796
3,423
Non-dispensationalist
✟361,852.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
You're not as naive as you're pretending to be. So, I am not even going to read this nonsense! Have a nice day.
Allow me to translate your comments...


th
You're not as naive as you're pretending to be.....

th
So, I am not even going to read this nonsense! ....

th
..... oh brother



th
.....Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ebedmelech

My dog Micah in the pic
Site Supporter
Jul 3, 2012
8,998
678
✟187,689.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Can somebody please explain to me how 70wks to the commandment "to restore and to build Jerusalem" computes to 445 bc? Artaxerxes decree to rebuild the wall comes 94 solar yrs after this Cyrus' decree. How does one conclude the decree to rebuild the city is Artaxerxes' decree and not Cyrus'?

Another fallacy, all the children of Israel, it says here, were in their cities seven months post-Babylon. Yet Antichrist propaganda claims only Judah and Benjamin returned regardless of the historical fact all the nations under Babylon returned to their heritage because Cyrus' decree commanded so because he believed it to be the gods judgement on Babylon for destroying all the nations' gods and temples. He is said to have established the first human rights and freedom of religion act, freeing all the nations under Babylon to go back and worship their own gods instead of being forced to worship their conqueror's god, the first of it's kind. The Antichrist propaganda contradicts the historical facts.

Obviously this is before Nehem--h and Artaxerxes because it's Joshua and Zerubabel still building after the 7 months post-Babylon return.

This wrongly labeled Artaxerxes that causes them to stop building the city and the temple is not Nehem--h's Artaxerxes. According to history, he was an imposter that reign several months claiming to be the son of Cyrus until he was overthrown by Darius who conceded the rebuilding of the temple and city and in whose 6th yr of reign the temple was completed. If only some people would read the scriptures instead of posting foolishness.

This was the fulfillment of Cyrus' decree: to go forth and restore/build the city!

This is 445 bc, 71 yrs after the temple was completed in the 6th year of King Darius' reign, after the city and temple worked ceased during the imposter's reign until the 2nd yr of Darius - obviously the "walls" being rebuilt during the "troublous times."


Nothing in Nehem--h's writings suggest they ever built the city, only the walls. And guess what? They completed their work in 52 days!

Here endeth the lesson!
I've been meaning to get back to this point.

You make a good argument here precepts! I don't mind saying I'm not "hard and fast" with this and I've change my mind a few times about it.

I have to study this a bit closer and really nail it down. It's something that I have to do because Christ anointing starts the 70th week and He is cut of in the middle of the seventieth week.

I did some research and the point that gives me pause to consider your point is Isaiah 44:28:
28 “It is I who says of Cyrus, ‘He is My shepherd! And he will perform all My desire.’ And he declares of Jerusalem, ‘She will be built,’ And of the temple, ‘Your foundation will be laid.’”

I'm going to look at this a bit closer. The one thing I do reject is the popular gap in the seventy weeks! That does not exist and I hold it to be a huge error.

I have to yield to both you and vinsight4u...and do more study!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ebedmelech

My dog Micah in the pic
Site Supporter
Jul 3, 2012
8,998
678
✟187,689.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Don't read the 70 weeks prophecy as just being a straight 70 weeks.
There is a part before the final week that ends the in between section.

unto the end of the war desolations are determined

This desolation time is not part of the 70 weeks themselves.

After the 69 weeks - comes a whole new time of desolation before the final
week will ever get going.

70 weeks -determined
within this overall prophecy by Gabriel was also told - a time of
unto the end of the war desolations are determined

Only the 70 weeks of this time will count as finishing the prophecy by
Jeremiah where the Babylonians caused the desolation.
Jeremiah 25:11////one week remains
Jeremiah 25:12////in limbo

How did Daniel know how long a week represented?
Did Daniel apply this to what he saw in chapter 10 as to the end?
Daniel saw them, understood them, then he mourned for three full weeks.
21 years of time?

605 B.C /Nebuchadnezzar II took captives of the Jews
539 B.C.
final year of Babylon for now, but about 4 years of them ruling the earth remain ahead
first year of Darius/Daniel chapter 9/Daniel wants info as to Jeremiah 25:11-12/Babylon
first year of Cyrus/decree to release the Jews
third year of Cyrus /Daniel 10
Babylon's king will return as the little horn

Daniel 10:2
v2
"In those days I Daniel was mourning for three full weeks."
Why?
Did Daniel see the time of the beginning of sorrows?
In the past, Daniel would be sad if he didn't understand a vision, but this time-
he knew what it meant.
On this vinsight4u, I think you have it wrong. The seventy sevens of Daniel 9 are not even addressed by Jeremiah. You're mixing apples and oranges.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

precepts

Newbie
Aug 20, 2008
3,094
135
56
United States Virgin Islands
✟24,096.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Vinsight4u is a propagandist.

He full well knows scripture doesn't mention any gap in either Daniel or Ram's (Jerem--h's) 70wks/yrs prophecies.

He also knows Cyrus didn't reign after Belshazzar was slain because he's been here long enough to know Belshazzar was slain by Darius the Mede, the same Darius the Mede during whose reign Daniel received the 7wks to the 70wks/yrs prophecy message.

220px-Soay_sheep_lamb.png
 
Upvote 0