7 year peace treaty, what 7 year peace treaty?

[Douggg]

God's Word plainly says that the Old Sinai Covenant has been made obsolete. Hebrews 8:13

The Antichrist doesn't care what Hebrews says, nor any other passage in the New Testament. The Antichrist opposes Jesus and Christianity.

The Jews don't care what the New Testament says either. They are going by the Mt. Sinai covenant. And the Jews don't care whether you or anyone else says their covenant is obsolete or not.

The 70 weeks are determined on Israel and Jerusalem. They don't care about the new testament. And because the prince who shall come is the person who becomes the Antichrist, Judaism's perceived messiah, it is that covenant that gets confirmed for the 7 year cycle per Deuteronomy 39:9-13 - in Daniel 9:27.

The Antichrist breaks, transgresses that covenant, when he claims to have achieved God-hood in the middle part of the 7 year cycle. The Jews have to go through the time of hard knocks of the Antichrist, to finally believe that Jesus is the messiah and the new covenant in him.

What has to be the biggest conflict in understanding bible prophecy is to think the Antichrist is going to tout the new covenant in Jesus.

You are confusing apologetic's with eschatology. That's what I told you before, you're preaching Jesus is the messiah to the choir - but that is not eschatology.

In eschatology,

1. is the little horn in Daniel 7 who persecutes the saints for a time, time, and a half times - Jesus?

2. is the little horn in Daniel 8 who stops the daily sacrifice, and makes war on the Prince of princes, is that little horn - Jesus?

3. is the beast in Revelation who makes war on and persecutes the saints for 42 months - Jesus?

If the answer is "no", then why would you think that the person in Daniel 9:27 who stops the daily sacrifice in the middle of the week - Jesus?

What covenant initiated the daily sacrifices, the new covenant in Jesus, or the Mt. Sinai covenant? It will be by the Mt. Sinai covenant that sacrifices are done again, once there is a temple structure - and once started, approxomately 3 years later the Antichrist will stop them.

 

[precepts]

Subordinating conjunctions
A subordinating conjunction is a word that introduces an adverb clause. Here are some subordinating conjunctions:

after
although
as
as soon as
because
before
by the time
even if
even though
every time
if
in case
in the event that
just in case
now that
once
only if
since
since
the first time
though
unless
until
when
whenever
whereas
whether or not
while
while

You might be right, and I might be wrong on this, but four independent clauses are never joined by a colon, and that's what you're claiming. They are appositive clauses, and as I have proven they do exist.

 

[precepts]

Daniel 9:26 is not talking about the 1st temple destruction. The destruction of the temple (sanctuary) and city takes place after the messiah has been cutoff.

I never said it did, and the text is specifically saying the sanctuary and city destruction is when the Mess--h was cut off - the reason why I told you the Mess--h cutting off is not physical one. It is referencing the covenant that he confirmed before it was interrupted by the Egyptian-Greek revolt that Nehem had to rebuild after, recorded in Neh 9:38 and 10:1, their sealing of a new covenant after that destruction.

The 70 weeks count don't even begin until near the end of the Babylonian captivity.

The 70wks prophecy specifically states the walls and streets were to be rebuilt in "troublous times" after the sixty and two weeks, which was rebuilt after the Egyptian-Greek revolt in 445 bc, after the "sixty and two weeks" (Neh 6:15), exactly 100yrs from Cyrus' decree. So, how do you make sense of that and the weeks being 7 years each?

 

[precepts]

-

What? Jesus did not die on the cross. That's not his being cutoff?

You really do have a reading comprehension problem. How many times have I explained the facts to you?

See if you can comprehend and address the fact 490yrs from Cyrus' decree in 539 bc does not add up to the crucifixion.

 

[precepts]

The "and" at the start of verse 26 does two things: (1) it connects verse 26 the sentence to verse 25 (2) it connects the messiah to the messiah in verse 25.

The word "and" is a conjunction as its definition. A subordinating conjunction introduces an adverb clause. There are no adverb clauses in Daniel 9:26.

Following the colon are three independent noun clauses - each an item in a list of things that happen after the messiah is cutoff.

They are appositive clauses. The only clause that follows a colon, according to the rules of the use of a colon, is an appositive clause. Even if it is in the form of a list, it still has to give greater details about the clause before it. It cannot be just another sentence or another thought. It has to be in reference to, explaining the same thing as, the clause before it - in apposition to - the reason why it's not talking about what happens after the Mess--h's cutting off. It can only be talking about what happens during.

To write the so-called 4 independent clauses as individual sentences gives them a different meaning than intended, meaning the colon isn't necessary.

So in closing, colons do not connect independent clauses. They connect appositive clauses only, something you didn't know about until I provided the links.

 

[BABerean2]

1. is the little horn in Daniel 7 who persecutes the saints for a time, time, and a half times - Jesus?

2. is the little horn in Daniel 8 who stops the daily sacrifice, and makes war on the Prince of princes, is that little horn - Jesus?

No. It was Antiochus Epiphanies. He sacrificed a pig on the altar and had a statue set up in the Jewish temple, during 167 BC. He also killed thousands of Daniel's people and stopped the temple sacrifices for about three years.

After the forces of Antiochus were defeated by the Maccabees, the temple was cleansed and rededicated.

It is the reason Hanukkah was celebrated during the time of Christ, as seen in the verse below.

Joh_10:22 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.


Daniel’s Prophecy of Antiochus Epiphanies
https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1191-daniels-prophecy-of-antiochus-epiphanies

The prophecies came to fruition in the past, exactly as Daniel had predicted.

For some strange reason, Dispensationalists do not seem to know anything about Antiochus Epiphanies.

But I do realize you are not a Dispensationalist, as you have clearly stated in the past...

 

[Douggg]

You might be right, and I might be wrong on this, but four independent clauses are never joined by a colon, and that's what you're claiming. They are appositive clauses, and as I have proven they do exist.

Do you realize what you wrote in blue? As I stated before: colons, semicolons, commas are punctuation marks which function to separate. They separate parts of a sentence from other parts, not join. The conjunctions are words , which join... such as, with joining nouns or noun clauses with the conjunction "and".

A comma, for example, functions to separate an introductory prepositional phrase from the body of a sentence. Such as....
In the middle ages, there were not any cars.

The four independent clauses aren't joined by a colon punctuation mark (a colon doesn't join anything), but the word "and" in front of each independent clause.

Verse 9:26 is a sentence. The four possible types of sentences are a simple sentence, a compound sentence, a complex sentence, a compound complex sentence. In the case of verse 9:26, it is a compound sentence - with a colon denoting a list internal to the sentence, separating the list from the lead-in independent clause of the messiah being cutoff.

Within that list, the three independent (noun, because each is an item in the list) clauses are separated from each other by the punctuation marks . First by a semicolon, then a by comma. Please take a look at the verse and you will see the semicolon and then the comma (in red). The lead-in independent clause I put in blue.

26 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.

I will rewrite the verse to illustrate the structure better.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: item 1 ; item 2, item 3.

btw, when, or should I, I end up being right on something, I don't rub it in - because I don't want to be a jerk. I want good relations.

 

[Douggg]

No. It was Antiochus Epiphanies. He sacrificed a pig on the altar and had a statue set up in the Jewish temple, during 167 BC. He also killed thousands of Daniel's people and stopped the temple sacrifices for about three years.

After the forces of Antiochus were defeated by the Maccabees, the temple was cleansed and rededicated.

It is the reason Hanukkah was celebrated during the time of Christ, as seen in the verse below.

Joh_10:22 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.


Daniel’s Prophecy of Antiochus Epiphanies
https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1191-daniels-prophecy-of-antiochus-epiphanies

The prophecies came to fruition in the past, exactly as Daniel had predicted.

For some strange reason, Dispensationalists do not seem to know anything about Antiochus Epiphanies.

But I do realize you are not a Dispensationalist, as you have clearly stated in the past...

regardless whether I think the little horn in Daniel 8 is Antiochus or the end times Antichrist - the point is that you don't think that person who stops the daily sacrifice in Daniel 8 is Jesus. So why would you think the person in Daniel 9:27 who confirms the covenant for seven years, then stops the daily sacrifice is Jesus?

 

[BABerean2]

regardless whether I think the little horn in Daniel 8 is Antiochus or the end times Antichrist - the point is that you don't think that person who stops the daily sacrifice in Daniel 8 is Jesus. So why would you think the person in Daniel 9:27 who confirms the covenant for seven years, then stops the daily sacrifice is Jesus?[/QUOTE]

Because it is what is indicated in God's Word.

Why do you think God ripped the temple veil in half, at the same moment that His Son completed the ultimate sacrifice at Calvary, which brought the New Blood Covenant into effect and made the Old Covenant "obsolete"?

Mat_27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

Mar_15:38 And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

Luk_23:45 And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.

.

 

[Douggg]

Because it is what is indicated in God's Word.

Why do you think God ripped the temple veil in half, at the same moment that His Son completed the ultimate sacrifice at Calvary, which brought the New Blood Covenant into effect and made the Old Covenant "obsolete"?

Mat_27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

Mar_15:38 And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

Luk_23:45 And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.

.

bab2, that is not an eschatology issue. Eschatology is a the study of the end times, not whether Jesus is the messiah or not.

Jesus did not stop the daily sacrifice in his day. The daily sacrifice continued to be done after Jesus left this world... until the temple was destroyed in 70 AD.

The Antichrist reveals that he is the man of sin when he goes into the temple and claims to be God - so there has to be a temple forthcoming for that to happen. And since there will be a temple, there will be the daily sacrifice. That daily sacrifice will be stopped when the man of sin claims to be God.

Since Paul wrote 2thessalonians2:3-4 after Jesus's time, the man of sin sitting on the seat of God, in the temple, and the daily sacrifice that goes along with a temple are also after Jesus's time.

 

[Luke17:37]

He must invent a time machine and travel about 2,000 years into the future, based on your interpretation...

.

Do you remember how Jesus stood up in the synagogue and quoted from Isaiah? He only quoted the parts dealing with His first coming (bold). (Luke 4:16-30)

Isaiah 61:1-3
“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me, because the Lord has anointed Me to preach good tidings to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound; 2 to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn, 3 to console those who mourn in Zion, to give them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they may be called trees of righteousness,
the planting of the Lord, that He may be glorified.”

This one chapter (Isaiah 61) of prophecy spans both comings of Messiah... more than two thousand years are between the middle of the third verse, but it's about the same person.

I'm in a Jews for Jesus Bible study of Isaiah (I'm not Jewish, I'm just fascinated with the Jewish roots of our faith). The teacher frequently explains how prophecy (especially in Isaiah) is like looking at peaks and mountain ranges of now; soon; further future; near the the end of the world future. It jumps back and forth and it is up to us to study the context carefully to determine what period the prophecies fall under. There can be a great valley between two mountain ranges, but from a distance, they can appear very close or as one range.

Your interpretation remains unconvincing to me. I had considered the possibility before, but Daniel 9 sure sounds like Daniel 11, which is clearly about an evil figure. Scripture interprets Scripture, and that seems to be the most straightforward explanation.

Daniel 11:30-31
30 For ships from Cyprus shall come against him; therefore he shall be grieved, and return in rage against the holy covenant, and do damage.
“So he shall return and show regard for those who forsake the holy covenant. 31 And forces shall be mustered by him, and they shall defile the sanctuary fortress; then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation.

Daniel 9:26-37
26 “And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
{end of 69th week}

And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 Then he shall confirm a covenant twith many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”

In the beginning of the vision, it says this vision is for Daniel's people, that is, the Jewish people. I know there have always been Jewish elect, but for the most part, the hearts of Jewish people have been hardened while the Gentiles enjoy salvation. Jesus in Luke 21:24 refers to an end of the time of the Gentiles before His return. Paul also refers to it in Romans 9-11.

Romans 11:25-26 (edited)
25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written:
“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”

Let me be clear: Jews can still accept Christ during the time of the Gentiles and Gentiles can probably still accept Christ during the time of the Jews (unless they already have the mark of the beast). The times are characterized by who is primarily being saved. And even in Jesus' kingdom, people will be born. They won't have Satan bothering them until the end, but they would still be sinners who need to repent and believe Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins. For this reason, I see no problem with a 2000+ year gap, just as I see no problem with the gap in Isaiah 61.

 

[Luke17:37]

No one is saying a colon is a conjunction. The word "and" is the conjunction at the start of each of the independent clauses, in the text of Daniel 9:26.

copy and paste definition of a colon:

The colon is a punctuation mark consisting of two equally sized dots centered on the same vertical line. A colon precedes an explanation, or an enumeration or list.

1. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: (<=colon)

Following the colon in clause 1 is the list of things that happen in verse 26 after the messiah is cutoff. The list of those things are:

2. and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;(<=semi-colon)

3. and the end thereof [of the seventy weeks] shall be with a flood, (<=comma)

4. and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Colons, semi-colons, commas are punctuation marks that separate.

In the list above, following the colon in the first independent clause, each item is separated from the other. The first item in the list, clause 2, is followed by a semi-colon which separates it from clause 3. Clause 3 in turn is separated from clause 4 by a comma.
___________________________________________________________
Clause 2 in the list is followed by a semi-colon and not a comma, because the contents of clause 2, the destruction the temple and city (70 AD) are closer in historical time following the messiah cutoff (33 AD) - but more distant (year wise) from the contents of clause 3 and 4 (which are end times).

3. and the end thereof [of the seventy weeks] shall be with a flood,

4. and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Clauses 3 and 4, beginning "with the end thereof" (of the seventy weeks) are with a flood - in other words, the end time events will happen quickly when they start.

Once the end time events start to end the seventy weeks, there will be wars and abominations (the abomination of transgression in Daniel 8 and the abomination of desolation in Daniel 12). The "unto the end of the war" is talking about the 70 weeks culminating with the war of Armageddon and the Return of Jesus in Revelation 19.

Do you guys realize that the Hebrew doesn't have the grammatical constructs you are arguing about? (Hebrew does have grammar rules, though.)

 

[Goodbook]

Jesus would have read right to the end in the syngague reading of the passage, but as the gospel was according to luke of course those who studied acripture would know what Isaiah was referring to.

Its not that Jesus deliberately stopped quoting that passage at that point. Scripture cannot be broken. In other gospels some things are elaborated in that are missing in part of the other gospels which were just alluded to.

 

[Goodbook]

In hebrew there would have been no colons or semi coloms or whatever it is you want to argue, it was a continous scroll with no gaps beween. Especially no 2000 year gaps.

Of course every eye is going to see Jesus, he is the alpha and the omega, those of us raised to eternal life, and those to everlasting fire that will be judged. Of course he is going to return, theres no disputing that.

 

[Goodbook]

It does seem some people are being led astray by false teaching and inserted viewpoints in scripture that make it seem like God forgot about his chosen people and then plays favourites between jews and gentiles like a back and forth match. No it is not like that. Salvation is first to the jew then the gentile. But Jesus brought us both together, it is in Ephesians, making us one in Him.

 

[Luke17:37]

Jesus would have read right to the end in the syngague reading of the passage, but as the gospel was according to luke of course those who studied acripture would know what Isaiah was referring to.

Its not that Jesus deliberately stopped quoting that passage at that point. Scripture cannot be broken. In other gospels some things are elaborated in that are missing in part of the other gospels which were just alluded to.

No, Jesus stopped speaking because He hadn't fulfilled that Scripture yet.

 

[Luke17:37]

In hebrew there would have been no colons or semi coloms or whatever it is you want to argue, it was a continous scroll with no gaps beween. Especially no 2000 year gaps.

Of course every eye is going to see Jesus, he is the alpha and the omega, those of us raised to eternal life, and those to everlasting fire that will be judged. Of course he is going to return, theres no disputing that.

I gave an example a 2000(+) year gap in Biblical prophecy. Isaiah 61.

As I said to BABerean2, Scripture interprets Scripture. Daniel 11:30-31 about taking away the daily sacrifices and placing and abomination of desolation is clearly done by a wicked person. It is very consistent with the latter portions of Daniel 9:26-27. I can't read these side by side and believe that Daniel 9:26-27 is entirely about Jesus.

I'm not going to get into a big debate with you. That's all I'm going to say.

 

[Luke17:37]

It does seem some people are being led astray by false teaching and inserted viewpoints in scripture that make it seem like God forgot about his chosen people and then plays favourites between jews and gentiles like a back and forth match. No it is not like that. Salvation is first to the jew then the gentile. But Jesus brought us both together, it is in Ephesians, making us one in Him.

I get the slam. I know that there is one Church made up of Jews and Gentiles. But the partial hardening of the Jews for a time is a Scriptural reality (Romans 9-11). This is not a false teaching. And no, God did not forget about His chosen people. There have always been a remnant who serve the LORD.

 

[Douggg]

Do you guys realize that the Hebrew doesn't have the grammatical constructs you are arguing about? (Hebrew does have grammar rules, though.)

Yes. But most of us here can not read or speak hebrew. And I don't recall off hand if Daniel 9 were written in hebrew or Aramaic. Some of the chapters in Daniel were written in Aramaic instead of Hebrew. Plus the palo-hebrew has no vowels.

For a Jewish translation into English, the Jews have a translation at their Chabad.org site. Keep in mind, Jews don't consider Daniel a prophet, and list the book of Daniel under scriptures (writings), not prophets.

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/63255/jewish/The-Bible-with-Rashi.htm

26And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more, and the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation.

Also keep in mind that biblical Hebrew was not a specific of a language as Greek. So there can be more variance in the way the text is translated. The Jews claims that the KJV has a bias built in. I personally think some of their translation has a bias built-in to avoid the text looking like it refers to Jesus, like the way they translate the prophecies of being born of a virgin, the Jews translate as "a young woman".

So what it all boils down to, for us, and our study of eschatology, the KJV is the best available because it has gone through scrutiny more than any other translation.

Also the debate precepts and I have gone through in this thread is a good review of English grammar, which to me is a win-win.

 

[precepts]

Do you realize what you wrote in blue? As I stated before: colons, semicolons, commas are punctuation marks which function to separate. They separate parts of a sentence from other parts, not join. The conjunctions are words , which join... such as, with joining nouns or noun clauses with the conjunction "and".

A comma, for example, functions to separate an introductory prepositional phrase from the body of a sentence. Such as....
In the middle ages, there were not any cars.

The four independent clauses aren't joined by a colon punctuation mark (a colon doesn't join anything), but the word "and" in front of each independent clause.

And that is exactly what I'm trying to tell you. The word / conjunction "and" cannot be joining anything if it's preceded by a colon. You are ignoring the fact there's a colon before the "and" which makes the "and" part of an appositive clause and not a conjunction connecting it's clause with the clause ending with the colon.

This is what I keep trying to tell you, the reason I keep telling you the colon is not a conjunction. The "and" is not joining it's clause to the colon's clause because then it would be a compound sentence and it's not. The "and" following the conjunction is no longer functioning as a conjunction to the main clause because the colon is not part of a compound sentence, is not part of a conjunction as the semicolon is.

A clause beginning with "and" that follows a colon is not a compound sentence with the main clause, and that is what you keep claiming! It is an appositive clause. A list, even, following a colon still has to be in apposition to what's before the colon. That is the purpose of the colon. The colon does not list events that can be written as independent clauses because then it wouldn't be needed. The purpose of the colon is to show that what follows it is giving greater details of what is said before it.

Verse 9:26 is a sentence. The four possible types of sentences are a simple sentence, a compound sentence, a complex sentence, a compound complex sentence. In the case of verse 9:26, it is a compound sentence - with a colon denoting a list internal to the sentence, separating the list from the lead-in independent clause of the messiah being cutoff.

It is not a compound sentence because the colon is not a conjunction. It would only be a compound sentence without the colon. It can't be a compound sentence with and without the colon. If you say it's a compound sentence with the colon, it's because you're ignoring the presence of the colon and assuming it functions as the semicolon does in forming a conjunction - a semicolon and a pure conjunction. The colon followed by "and" does not function like the semicolon when it's followed by the conjunction "and".

Within that list, the three independent (noun, because each is an item in the list) clauses are separated from each other by the punctuation marks . First by a semicolon, then a by comma. Please take a look at the verse and you will see the semicolon and then the comma (in red). The lead-in independent clause I put in blue.

26 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.

I will rewrite the verse to illustrate the structure better.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: item 1 ; item 2, item 3.

btw, when, or should I, I end up being right on something, I don't rub it in - because I don't want to be a jerk. I want good relations.

And I do not act wrong and strong. I admit when I am wrong or mistaken. The conjunction "and" after a colon doesn't not constitute a compound sentence. If there is a compound sentence in vs 26, then it's the appositive clauses that are compounded. You are wrong.

If you are going to write four independent clauses from vs 26, it is because you're ignoring the purpose of the colon, which is exactly what you're doing when you're claiming the events happen after the cutting off.
The intent of the colon is to let the reader know that these are the events that causes the cutting off by going into greater detail. The colon is a side note to the reader about the previous statement preceding the colon.