Where in Revelation is a Rapture Mentioned?

[Major1]

Obviously not. That isn't my contention.
At present, we have Christian believers in every nation, incl Israel and the State of Israel occupies a part of the holy Land.
Bible prophecy tells us there is coming a dramatic change to the world and the Lord is coming in a judgement of fire. Isaiah 66:15-17, Zephaniah 3:8, 2 Peter 3:7
Here is God's future program for Judah:
Isaiah 3:1-9 The Lord is about to strip Judah of every prop and support, all of their leaders, generals and counsellors will lose their positions. I shall appoint inexperienced people to positions of authority. Oppression and arrogance will stalk the Land and there will be severe shortages of food and water.
Judah is brought low, for in word and deed, they defy the Lord. The look on their faces testifies against them. Like Sodom, they parade their sins. Woe betide them, they have earned the disaster that will strike them.

Isaiah 3:10-11 Happy are the righteous. [Christians] All goes well with them. Woe to the wicked, disaster is upon them. My people, those who guide you are leading you astray.

Isaiah 3:13-26 The Lord stands up to judge His people. He opens the indictment against the elders and leaders; it is you who have ruined My vineyard. You have crushed My people and oppressed the poor.
You women of Zion; I will take away your finery, instead of coifed hair, you will be bald.
Your men will fall by the sword of the Lord, as in battle. Judah’s defenses are stripped bare, laid flat to the ground. [Isaiah 22:2 & 8…your slain did not fall by the sword, as in battle….and the mainstays of Judah’s defenses are removed.]
The entire Middle East area is prophesied to be cleared and cleansed. Jeremiah 10:18, Ezekiel 30:2-5, Isaiah 22:14
THEN all of the holy Land will be repopulated by the Lord's people, true Christians. Isaiah 66:18b-21, Ezekiel 34:11-21, Revelation 7:1-14 Great will be that time!

This is why CONTEXT means everything in Bible study.

You see, you just pulled out some verses that you think will support your false teaching.

Isaiah 3 actually took place (Archer pg. 614) when Manasseh came to the throne at the age of 12 and he had a long and wicked rule.

In Isaiah 3 what we see is that the utter failure of the make leadership naturally led it to be replaced by female leadership and incompetent children.

 

[Douggg]

In the past I have read that there are two interpretations of “the covenant;”.

There's the problem right there.... I am relaying to you something new by referring to Deuteronomy 31:9-13.

Which of those noted commentators you are relying on has ever addressed Deuteronomy 31:9-13 specifically the requirement Moses made as not being relevant to Daniel 9:26-27 ?

2). But the word “covenant” does not apply to any such agreement, but rather to a covenant with God. That would be the position you seem to be supporting.

And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week (make a firm covenant, ASV).

The language higbir from gabar, "be strong" does not signify confirmation of a covenant but causation of a firm covenant. And he shall cause to prevail is an excellent translation. The most natural antecedent for he, the subject of the clause, is the wicked "prince" of verse 26.

This is the nearest noun in grammatical agreement, and it fits the sense. The many here, as elsewhere, is a reference to the Hebrew people, the subject of discussion throughout chapter 9 (cf. vv. 2,12,18,19, esp. 24, "thy people ... thy holy city"). Evidently the covenant is to be made between Antichrist and Israel when the Jews are back in their homeland in the last days. The exact nature of the covenant is unknown.(The Deal of Daniel 9:27)

Major, what established the daily sacrifice? Which the person is going to cause to stop in the middle part of the week? That's the covenant he confirms for one week - which the confirming of the Mt. Sinai covenant is a requirement right in the text of the bible, in Deuteronomy 31:9-13 - established the daily sacrifice, not a peace treaty.

You are hanging your hat on the massaging of one hebrew word - seeking an interpretation different from the interpreters of the KJ bible - which apparently you are saying they got it wrong. You would also have to change "the" covenant to "a" covenant. "the" covenant refers to the covenant Daniel's prayer centered on before Gabriel came in God's response to his prayer.

The only covenant spoken of in Daniel 9, which I gave all the text of Daniel praying in regards to that covenant is the Mt. Sinai covenant. And following Gog/Magog, there is no reason for a peace treaty for Israel - because all of her enemies will have been annihilated.

And Israel will be saying peace and safety because she will think she has entered the messianic age. And the great falling away in Christianity will be because many Christians will think the Jews had it right all along in their claim about Jesus not being the messiah. What are you saying is going to cause the great falling away? Based on someone making a peace treaty? I don't think so.

 

[Major1]

Phew. What an interesting thread!

I think one thing is clear - the pre-tribbers and the non-pre-tribbers have not come to agreement. Is anyone surprised?

I think that for the readers of this thread who are not sure of their beliefs in the rapture, you can glean the following:
1. It is a complex issue.
2. Highly intelligent, strong Christians often have opposing views on this.
3. Despite what some Rapturists say, it is NOT important to your salvation whether you believe in the Rapture.

One other thing for the readers of this thread - - - a pre-trib rapture belief is not one held by the majority of Protestant Churches worldwide. It appears to be, in general, mostly confined to Churches in the USA. I assume most of the pre-trib Rapturists who have posted here are from the USA. Please speak up if I have this wrong...

To lay my cards on the table, I would say I espouse very similar views to Last Seven on this issue. As such I am a partial preterist (don't confuse this with Full Preterism --> that's heresy).

One last comment - I'm not convinced that those of similar beliefs to mine have sufficiently understood the role of ethnic Israel in the Church. Obviously from may passages (not the least being Rom 11) both ethnic Jews and non-Jews are part of the Body, which is one group called the Church. I wouldn't call this "replacement theology", as non-Jews are not replacing ethnic Jews; Salvation is now for all. Perhaps it should be called "Inclusive Theology" or something else? Anyway, there still seems to be some sense of "specialness" (to coin a phrase) for ethnic Jews. I'm 99%+ convinced that the pre-tribbers have gone too far the other way, but the partial preterists which are my guys are not 100% right, to be fair.

Hello my brother. May I say to you that you have every right to believe as you choose to do so.

I respect your choices but you already know I think that I do not agree with any form of Preterism, partial or full.

According to partial preterism that you lean toward, there is no rapture, and passages describing the tribulation and the Antichrist are actually referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the Roman emperor Titus.

Partial preterists do believe in the return of Christ to earth and a future resurrection and judgment, but they do not teach a millennial kingdom or that Israel as a nation has a place in God’s future plan. According to partial preterists, the Bible’s references to “the last days” are speaking of the last days of the Old Jewish Covenant, not the last days of the earth itself.

Is that what you are believing in????

Now I do not want to argue with anyone but in order for partial preterists to maintain their position, you must insist that the book of Revelation was written early, before AD 70.
That MUST be done so as to make the theology fit with the destruction in 70 AD simply because John would have known of that event.

You should also understand that you must use an inconsistent hermeneutic when interpreting prophetic passages. According to the preterist view you have chosen of the end times, chapters 6—18 of Revelation are highly symbolic, and do not describe any literal events.

Since the destruction of Jerusalem did not involve the wholesale destruction of sea life as seen in Revelation 16:3, or agonizing darkness in verse 10, these judgments are interpreted by the preterist as purely allegorical.

However, according to preterists, chapter 19 is to be understood literally—Jesus Christ will physically return. But chapter 20 is again interpreted allegorically by preterists, while chapters 21—22 are understood literally, at least in part, in that there will truly be a new heaven and new earth.

Now, not to disrespect you or anyone else, but I for one am just not smart enough to be able to do that kind of distinguishing between what is LITERAL and what is MAKE BELIEVE. That is why I have said and still say that Preterism in any form is false and wrong.

No one denies that Revelation contains amazing and sometimes confusing visions. No one denies that Revelation describes many things figuratively—that’s the nature of apocalyptic literature. However, to arbitrarily deny the literal nature of select portions of Revelation is to destroy the basis of interpreting any of the book literally. If the plagues, witnesses, beast, false prophet, millennial kingdom, etc., are all allegorical, then on what basis do we claim that the second coming of Christ and the new earth are literal? That is the failure of preterism—it leaves the interpretation of Revelation to the opinions of the interpreter.

Anytime we take the stance that we can make the Scriptures say what we want them to say to support our thinking........we have made a grave mistake. NO ONE has that kind of ability.

Blessing to you and I hope you understand that I am note attacking YOU in anyway, just posting the reality of your chosen position.

 

[Major1]

There's the problem right there.... I am relaying to you something new by referring to Deuteronomy 31:9-13.

Which of those noted commentators you are relying on has ever addressed Deuteronomy 31:9-13 specifically the requirement Moses made as not being relevant to Daniel 9:26-27 ?


Major, what established the daily sacrifice? Which the person is going to cause to stop in the middle part of the week? That's the covenant he confirms for one week - which the confirming of the Mt. Sinai covenant is a requirement right in the text of the bible, in Deuteronomy 31:9-13 - established the daily sacrifice, not a peace treaty.

You are hanging your hat on the massaging of one hebrew word - seeking an interpretation different from the interpreters of the KJ bible - which apparently you are saying they got it wrong. You would also have to change "the" covenant to "a" covenant. "the" covenant refers to the covenant Daniel's prayer centered on before Gabriel came in God's response to his prayer.

The only covenant spoken of in Daniel 9, which I gave all the text of Daniel praying in regards to that covenant is the Mt. Sinai covenant. And following Gog/Magog, there is no reason for a peace treaty for Israel - because all of her enemies will have been annihilated.

And Israel will be saying peace and safety because she will think she has entered the messianic age. And the great falling away in Christianity will be because many Christians will think the Jews had it right all along in their claim about Jesus not being the messiah. What are you saying is going to cause the great falling away? Based on someone making a peace treaty? I don't think so.

I have no problem with your thinking. It is your choice to do so.

I however believe that the "covenant" spoken of in 9:27 will be an agreement to establish peace.

I see the Gog/Magog conflict as the war which will require a "peace treaty/agreement".

When I read Daniel 9:27, it seems clear to me that The “prince” then makes a firm covenant with the masses for “a week” (or 7 years). This covenant/agreement seems to put men at ease and gives them a false sense of confidence and security. In the middle of this time period, however, the “prince” breaks his covenant, putting a stop to the regular sacrifices and offerings. This prince comes “on the wing of abominations” and makes everything he comes into contact with desolate. He will bring about destruction. This destruction comes about by divine permission because it is a part of the divine plan.

Now, is it a judgment from God because they break the Mt. Sinai covenant. Could be.
It could also be a judgment from God to Israel because they did not obey the Sabbath Law for 490 years which equals 70 Sabbaths when 360 prophetic days are used.

 

[Douggg]

I have no problem with your thinking. It is your choice to do so.

I however believe that the "covenant" spoken of in 9:27 will be an agreement to establish peace.

I see the Gog/Magog conflict as the war which will require a "peace treaty/agreement".

When I read Daniel 9:27, it seems clear to me that The “prince” then makes a firm covenant with the masses for “a week” (or 7 years). This covenant/agreement seems to put men at ease and gives them a false sense of confidence and security. In the middle of this time period, however, the “prince” breaks his covenant, putting a stop to the regular sacrifices and offerings. This prince comes “on the wing of abominations” and makes everything he comes into contact with desolate. He will bring about destruction. This destruction comes about by divine permission because it is a part of the divine plan.

Now, is it a judgment from God because they break the Mt. Sinai covenant. Could be.
It could also be a judgment from God to Israel because they did not obey the Sabbath Law for 490 years which equals 70 Sabbaths when 360 prophetic days are used.

So when does the person become the Antichrist in your view ? And what does the term "the" Christ mean to you - which the prefix "Anti" can be attached?

okay, maybe I am being presumptuous in my questions. Do you view the prince who shall come as being the Antichrist person?

 

[Major1]

So when does the person become the Antichrist in your view ? And what does the term "the" Christ mean to you - which the prefix "Anti" can be attached?

okay, maybe I am being presumptuous in my questions. Do you view the prince who shall come as being the Antichrist person?

YES.

The grammar makes the last masculine noun in Daniel 9:26 as “the prince that shall come,”.
I know what some think but grammar my friend does not think or postulate. It just is and no more and we can no more change it that we can the spots on a leopard.

So in my opinion, the "HE" not the Messiah. The prince that shall come is the “he” of Daniel 9:27 and refers to the Antichrist. This becomes clearer when we read what this “he” does. We read that he causes the sacrifice to cease and the abomination of desolation. Jesus did not cause sacrifices to cease but rather He was the ultimate sacrifice.

The crucifixion of Christ did not cause People to stop making a sacrifice after the death of Jesus Christ. Jesus’ death took away God’s acceptance of animal sacrifices BUT it did not decree that animal sacrifices could no longer be made. Jesus also did not commit the abomination of desolation.

 

[Douggg]

YES.

The grammar makes the last masculine noun in Daniel 9:26 as “the prince that shall come,”.
I know what some think but grammar my friend does not think or postulate. It just is and no more and we can no more change it that we can the spots on a leopard.

So in my opinion, the "HE" not the Messiah. The prince that shall come is the “he” of Daniel 9:27 and refers to the Antichrist. This becomes clearer when we read what this “he” does. We read that he causes the sacrifice to cease and the abomination of desolation. Jesus did not cause sacrifices to cease but rather He was the ultimate sacrifice.

The crucifixion of Christ did not cause People to stop making a sacrifice after the death of Jesus Christ. Jesus’ death took away God’s acceptance of animal sacrifices BUT it did not decree that animal sacrifices could no longer be made. Jesus also did not commit the abomination of desolation.

okay, so the prince who shall come will be the Antichrist.

So when does the person become the Antichrist in your view ? And what does the term "the" Christ mean to you - which the prefix "Anti" can be attached?

 

[Major1]

okay, so the prince who shall come will be the Antichrist.

So when does the person become the Antichrist in your view ? And what does the term "the" Christ mean to you - which the prefix "Anti" can be attached?

HE will be the Little Horn of Daniel 7:8 who will emerge from the fourth, or Roman Empire.

When does he become the Antichrist???? When Satan overpowers him would be my thought.

I really do not know what you are looking for in your question.

 

[Douggg]

HE will be the Little Horn of Daniel 7:8 who will emerge from the fourth, or Roman Empire.

When does he become the Antichrist???? When Satan overpowers him would be my thought.

I really do not know what you are looking for in your question.

Okay, fair enough that you can't read my mind. What I am looking for from you is that "the" Christ in the framework of God's promise to Israel - is a great King of Israel, descended from David. So the "Anti" of the Christ, is the person who is coming who will be anointed the King of Israel, instead of Jesus.

The person is not the Antichrist on the basis of being the little horn. Or anyone who enacts or brokers a peace treaty. The person has to be anointed the King of Israel in order to be the Antichrist.

It is imperative therefore to understand what "the" Christ actually means before a person can understand what "the" Anti-Christ is. The understanding of all the end times bible prophecies hinge on this understanding of what it actually means to be "the" Antichrist.

So first, here are verses of what Christ means, and Christ being the greek word for messiah - which it has to be understood that "the" messiah is the King of Israel - who God promised he would send to the Jews.

Mark 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.

Jon 4:25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

So my point being that if the person in Daniel 9:26-27 confirms the covenant - and he is the Antichrist when he does so, he has to be the King of Israel to be the Antichrist. Which being the King of Israel, he would not be making a peace deal with himself as the leader of the Jews.

What this requires is a complete rethink - from the Antichrist being just the most ruthless tyrant the world will ever know.... in sheep's clothing. To someone who the Jews will have reason to believe that the person is their long awaited the messiah.

Which I would suggest to you - to go to Judaism101.com, and read up on the mashiach.

Judaism 101: Mashiach: The Messiah

 

[Major1]

Okay, fair enough that you can't read my mind. What I am looking for from you is that "the" Christ in the framework of God's promise to Israel - is a great King of Israel, descended from David. So the "Anti" of the Christ, is the person who is coming who will be anointed the King of Israel, instead of Jesus.

The person is not the Antichrist on the basis of being the little horn. Or anyone who enacts or brokers a peace treaty. The person has to be anointed the King of Israel in order to be the Antichrist.

It is imperative therefore to understand what "the" Christ actually means before a person can understand what "the" Anti-Christ is. The understanding of all the end times bible prophecies hinge on this understanding of what it actually means to be "the" Antichrist.

So first, here are verses of what Christ means, and Christ being the greek word for messiah - which it has to be understood that "the" messiah is the King of Israel - who God promised he would send to the Jews.

Mark 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.

Jon 4:25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

So my point being that if the person in Daniel 9:26-27 confirms the covenant - and he is the Antichrist when he does so, he has to be the King of Israel to be the Antichrist. Which being the King of Israel, he would not be making a peace deal with himself as the leader of the Jews.

What this requires is a complete rethink - from the Antichrist being just the most ruthless tyrant the world will ever know.... in sheep's clothing. To someone who the Jews will have reason to believe that the person is their long awaited the messiah.

Which I would suggest to you - to go to Judaism101.com, and read up on the mashiach.

Judaism 101: Mashiach: The Messiah

Now that you have been more direct I understand what you are proposing.

According to Daniel, the Antichrist will come from among the people who destroyed the Temple. Therefore, it seems pretty clear to me that the Antichrist will come from among the Roman people.

However, coming from among the Roman people does not automatically mean that the Antichrist will be of Italian heritage or Roman ethnicity. It simply means he must come from among the people who were part of the Roman Empire at that time. From an ethnic standpoint, this leaves the door open to countless possibilities.

Will the Antichrist Jewish? Although there is no definitive answer, two Bible verses provide good reason to believe he will be. The first appears in the book of Genesis, where God prophesies the coming of Israel's Messiah and Satan's Antichrist.

Gen. 3:15.........
"From now on, you and the woman will be enemies, and your offspring and her offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel".

Later, when Jacob is blessing his sons, he makes this prophecy about Dan:

In Genesis 49:16-17..........
"Dan will govern his people like any other tribe in Israel. He will be a snake beside the road, a poisonous viper along the path, that bites the horse's heels so the rider is thrown off".

This reference to a serpent striking a heel may indicate that the Antichrist will be a Jew from the tribe of Dan, but it isn't certain, and many reasonable people are divided on this issue.

ON top of that, when you consider that in the Revelation, the Tribe of Dan is not listed among the 12.

In addition to this reference to the tribe of Dan, Daniel points out that the Antichrist will worship himself above all else:

Dan. 11:37..........
"Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all".

This passage is often referenced by those who believe the Antichrist will be of Jewish heritage. The fact that he will have no regard "for the God of his fathers" is viewed as a reference to the monotheistic God of the Jews.

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[Riberra]

Riberra, the 70 weeks are leading up to the stoning of Stephen? What about the 70 weeks leading up to the Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, Lord of Lords, King of Kings to destroy the wicked, heal the earth, bring in the Kingdom of God, reward the saints, raise the dead, establish worldwide knowledge of the One True God, make the crooked paths straight, end famine and disease.... I could go no, but surely you get the point.

What you point above is about the Second Coming of Jesus.

Daniel 9:23-27 is about the FIRST Coming of Jesus...and the consequence for the Jews in the generation who have rejected the prophesied Messiah.

So here again you must understand that the 490 years (Daniel 9:23-27) allowed by God to the Jews living in Israel nearly 2,000 years to accept Jesus as their messiah and to cease their iniquity [and the consequence that will happen if the Jews refuse the commandment made by God in the allowed 490 years [the 490 years countdown started at the moment that Daniel received the Vision.] have been fulfilled in the generation who have rejected Messiah.

Scripture clearly shows us how the 70th week of Daniel was fulfilled, as Messiah and His Apostles confirmed with the Jews that He is their promised Messiah.

Which does not mean that the Prophecies related to the SECOND COMING HAVE BEEN FULIFILLED.
Obviously the events mentioned in Revelation 6:12-21 through Revelation 19 have NOT been fulfilled.


So again read the reference given below which demonstrate that Daniel 9:23-27 WHO CONCERNS THE FIRST COMING OF JESUS HAVE BEEN FULFILLED in the time of the apostles.

Understanding the seven years of the 70th week of Daniel is very important, because of the truth about their fulfillment, and the deceptions which are based on them.

The truth is that the 70th week of Daniel started when Messiah was baptized at age 30, and anointed by the Spirit.

Messiah’s ministry took place during the first half of the 7 years; so it’s not possible that it is yet future.

The truth is that the covenant of Daniel 9:27 is not just a 7-year covenant, as we’ve been led to believe.

It is the everlasting covenant, the same one that Abraham was saved by, as he believed by faith that the Father would provide a Lamb to atone for his sins.

The truth is that Messiah and His Disciples fulfilled the 70th week of Daniel, from 27-34 A.D., when they confirmed with the Jews for 7 years that He is the promised Messiah, who ratified the everlasting covenant with His blood as the Passover Lamb.

Messiah confirmed that He was the promised Messiah through His miracles, His wisdom, His knowledge of the Hebrew letters, His fulfillment of prophecy, and by His resurrection.

After Messiah’s ascension, the Apostles continued to confirm to the Jews that He is the promised Messiah, by proclaiming how He fulfilled prophecy and how He rose again.

On Pentecost, 3,000 Jews were saved from the witness of the Apostles being filled with the Spirit, and preaching the Gospel in their languages. The Church of Messiah is built on a foundation of Jews, who accepted Messiah as their Savior.

Paul proclaimed Jew first, and so it was. The seven years ended when the Jewish leaders stoned the Apostle Stephen to death, when he proclaimed that they had killed their promised Messiah.

Immediately after Stephen’s death, the Gospel was also shared with the Gentiles. The disciples were scattered throughout Judea and preached the Gospel. Philip was led to the Ethiopian Eunuch, who was saved. Saul was converted to be the Apostle to Gentiles. Peter was given the vision of the unclean animals, which represented that the everlasting covenant was to be preached to the Gentile nations. The Samaritans received salvation and the Spirit of the Father.

Scripture clearly shows us how the 70th week of Daniel was fulfilled, as Messiah and His Apostles confirmed with the Jews that He is their promised Messiah.

Some accepted Him and were saved, but most rejected Him and were condemned.

 

[Douggg]

What you point above is about the Second Coming of Jesus.

Daniel 9:23-27 is about the FIRST Coming of Jesus...and the consequence for the Jews in the generation who have rejected the prophesied Messiah.

So here again you must understand that the 490 years (Daniel 9:23-27) allowed by God to the Jews living in Israel nearly 2,000 years to accept Jesus as their messiah and to cease their iniquity [and the consequence that will happen if the Jews refuse the commandment made by God in the allowed 490 years [the 490 years countdown started at the moment that Daniel received the Vision.] have been fulfilled in the generation who have rejected Messiah.

Scripture clearly shows us how the 70th week of Daniel was fulfilled, as Messiah and His Apostles confirmed with the Jews that He is their promised Messiah.

Which does not mean that the Prophecies related to the SECOND COMING HAVE BEEN FULIFILLED.
Obviously the events mentioned in Revelation 6:12-21 through Revelation 19 have NOT been fulfilled.


So again read the reference given below which demonstrate that Daniel 9:23-27 WHO CONCERNS THE FIRST COMING OF JESUS HAVE BEEN FULFILLED in the time of the apostles.

Understanding the seven years of the 70th week of Daniel is very important, because of the truth about their fulfillment, and the deceptions which are based on them.

The truth is that the 70th week of Daniel started when Messiah was baptized at age 30, and anointed by the Spirit.

Messiah’s ministry took place during the first half of the 7 years; so it’s not possible that it is yet future.

The truth is that the covenant of Daniel 9:27 is not just a 7-year covenant, as we’ve been led to believe.

It is the everlasting covenant, the same one that Abraham was saved by, as he believed by faith that the Father would provide a Lamb to atone for his sins.

The truth is that Messiah and His Disciples fulfilled the 70th week of Daniel, from 27-34 A.D., when they confirmed with the Jews for 7 years that He is the promised Messiah, who ratified the everlasting covenant with His blood as the Passover Lamb.

Messiah confirmed that He was the promised Messiah through His miracles, His wisdom, His knowledge of the Hebrew letters, His fulfillment of prophecy, and by His resurrection.

After Messiah’s ascension, the Apostles continued to confirm to the Jews that He is the promised Messiah, by proclaiming how He fulfilled prophecy and how He rose again.

On Pentecost, 3,000 Jews were saved from the witness of the Apostles being filled with the Spirit, and preaching the Gospel in their languages. The Church of Messiah is built on a foundation of Jews, who accepted Messiah as their Savior.

Paul proclaimed Jew first, and so it was. The seven years ended when the Jewish leaders stoned the Apostle Stephen to death, when he proclaimed that they had killed their promised Messiah.

Immediately after Stephen’s death, the Gospel was also shared with the Gentiles. The disciples were scattered throughout Judea and preached the Gospel. Philip was led to the Ethiopian Eunuch, who was saved. Saul was converted to be the Apostle to Gentiles. Peter was given the vision of the unclean animals, which represented that the everlasting covenant was to be preached to the Gentile nations. The Samaritans received salvation and the Spirit of the Father.

Scripture clearly shows us how the 70th week of Daniel was fulfilled, as Messiah and His Apostles confirmed with the Jews that He is their promised Messiah.

Some accepted Him and were saved, but most rejected Him and were condemned.

So Gabriel could have said to Daniel - 70 weeks (of years) are determined upon your people and Jerusalem till Stephen is stoned. Really, Rivera, really?

How about 70 weeks (of years) are determined upon your people and Jerusalem till the Kingdom of God is brought to earth, the messiah is reigning and ruling in Jerusalem, and evil has been put down, and Satan has been bound up?

 

[Riberra]

So Gabriel could have said to Daniel - 70 weeks (of years) are determined upon your people and Jerusalem till Stephen is stoned. Really, Rivera, really?

How about 70 weeks (of years) are determined upon your people and Jerusalem till the Kingdom of God is brought to earth, the messiah is reigning and ruling in Jerusalem, and evil has been put down, and Satan has been bound up?

The truth is that Messiah and His Disciples fulfilled the 70th week of Daniel, from 27-34 A.D., when they confirmed with the Jews for 7 years that He is the promised Messiah, who ratified the everlasting covenant with His blood as the Passover Lamb.



The final act showing that the Jews have rejected Messiah is that they have killed Jesus in the middle of the 70th week


The seven years ended when the Jewish leaders stoned the Apostle Stephen to death, when he proclaimed that they had killed their promised Messiah.

End of the allowed 490 years.....The Punishment upon the Jews happened in the generation who have rejected Messiah ie destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD.

The Jews who have converted to Christ have fled Jerusalem and went in the wilderness as Jesus have warned them in Luke 21:20-23 which is a parallel verse of Matthew 24:1-19

The Church in Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:5-12) | cofcnet

Growth in Jerusalem the first days of the Kingdom was phenomenal! Truly the "time was fulfilled". Within days the church numbered near 10,000 and was drawing incredible attention, which is good for growth but now the persecution promised by Christ has begun. Stephen has given his life for the cause of Christ and a young zealous Pharisee named Saul has emerged on the scene as the chief antagonist of the Church. But instead of smothering Christianity, it serves only to fan the flame though the entire Judean world.

Leaving Jerusalem (Acts 8:1-4):
Time
Stephen's Death - thought to be around A.D. 34 or 35
"At that time" - does not refer to the particular day of Stephen's death, but the general time frame
The "spreading" believed to have occurred around A.D. 37
Great persecution drives Christians from Jerusalem (Acts 8:1)
Many were taken from home and brought into prisons (Acts 8:3)
Many were put to death (Acts 22:4; Acts 26:10)
The Jews would beat them in attempts to get them to blaspheme (Acts 26:11)
This persecution was at the direction of the chief priests (Acts 9:14; Acts 26:10)
To avoid persecution, Christians spread throughout all of Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:1)
Samaria was north of Judea and south of Galilee
Apostles remained in Jerusalem - not told why at this point
Some went as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch (Acts 11:19)
Some may have gone as far as Rome (Romans 16:7) - Andronicus and Junia were in Christ before Paul
They went everywhere preaching the word (Acts 8:4)
At this point, Gentiles were still kept from the kingdom
They were preaching to the Jews only (Acts 11:19)
What seemed to be a horrible tragedy was actually God's providence providing for the world to be taught the Gospel!
When we become discouraged about the task of spreading the Gospel, think of the daunting task facing the early Church!
Philip in Samaria (Acts 8:5-25)
Philip the evangelist, not the apostle
This couldn't have been Philip the apostle because the apostles remained in Jerusalem (Acts 8:1)
This was Philip the evangelist (Acts 21:8), the same one that was one of the seven named to care for the widows in Acts 6:3-6
Acts 8:14 also seems to speak of the apostles as not including Philip ("Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John")
When named one of the seven, the apostles laid hands on Philip, giving him the power to perform the miracles that are mentioned in this chapter (Acts 8:6)
The Samaritans
Samaria was a country, but also a city (many refer to as Sebaste)
Although it was north of Jerusalem, it was at a lower elevation (which explains the fact that Philip went down to Samaria)
Samaritans were bitter enemies of the Jews (John 4:9 ". . . the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.") They were half-breeds, Jews that had been intermingled with heathen peoples.
In what has been called the limited commission, Jesus had earlier instructed the disciples to not preach in the cities of the Samaritans, but only to the "the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matt. 10:5-6)
But Jesus, after his resurrection, had said the Gospel would be preached in all Judaea and in Samaria (Acts 1:8)
Some Samaritans had heard the word taught before by Jesus and many believed (John 4:39-42),
Nevertheless, the Samaritans had never heard the Gospel after the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus until Philip (and many still held to the view that the Messiah would come and establish a kingdom and rebuild the temple on Mount Gerazim) (John 4:25)
We know that these particular individuals were under the delusions of an impostor known as Simon (Acts 8:9-11)
Some have said this work of Philip in Samaria was the stepping stone to the work among the Gentiles.
The success of the Gospel in Samaria
The people readily and unanimously accepted the word (Acts 8:6)
The purpose of miracles for the early church was revealed, as the Samaritans were led to believe, at least in part, based on seeing the miracles Philip performed (Acts 8:6-7)
These miracles may have been particularly needful to expose the fraud of Simon (Acts 8:9-11)
When they believed, they were baptized (Acts 8:12) (the natural response to belief - Acts 2:38 and many other examples in Acts)
Great joy came to the city (Acts 8:8)
The apostles Peter and John came from Jerusalem to Samaria to encourage the believers in Samaria and confer the Holy Ghost upon them (Acts 8:14-17).
It appears that Philip, while having the power to perform miracles, did not have the power to confer gifts to others. It was necessary that the apostles come for this task.
The Samaritans had been baptized, receiving the remission of sins, but not miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:16)
Disappointment in Samaria - Simon
Simon had deceived the people of Samaria for some time, passing himself off as some kind of divine power (Acts 8:9-11)
He also believed the teaching of Philip and was baptized (Acts 8:13)
He was amazed at the miracles which Philip did (Acts 8:13 - the meaning of the word translated "wondered" carries the meaning of amazement at the miracles and signs). Contrasted with his own phony act, Simon was amazed at one that truly performed these miracles.
This fascination with the power given to Philip is one sign of the trouble that was to fall upon Simon. Nevertheless, there is nothing from which we could conclude that Simon's belief or baptism was insincere. In fact, the Bible said he believed!
Thus Simon, like the other believing Samaritans, was a baptized believer enjoying God's forgiveness. An amazing triumph for the early church!
Simon, however, was the unfortunate early example of our ability to fall away from God's grace and of how to return to God
Simon wanted to buy the power to bestow the gifts of the Holy Ghost to others (Acts 8:18-19)
Given his background, it is perhaps not too surprising that Satan would attack the heart of Simon in this way
Peter tells Simon in stern language that he is in sin and has no right to this power
God's plan for Fallen Christians
Peter told Simon his heart was not right in God's sight (Acts 8:21)
He told him to repent of his wickedness and pray God for forgiveness
This same plan is given in other parts of God's word (2 Tim 2:24-26; I John 1:8-10)
Simon gives a sign of his repentance by asking Peter to pray for him (Acts 8:24)
Peter and John preach in other villages of the Samaritans on the way back to Jerusalem
Lessons from Samaria
God's word was effective in bringing together former enemies
God's word was effective in turning around the life of a former impostor that falsely claimed divine power
While preaching the Gospel, seeming triumphs may end in disappointment (Matt. 10:20-22 - the parable of the sower). Nevertheless, one need not get down and must continue to preach to others as did Peter and John returning to Jerusalem.
Christians can be forgiven for sins after baptism by repentance and prayer
The Church in Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:5-12) | cofcnet

 

[Douggg]

The final act showing that the Jews have rejected Messiah is that they have killed Jesus in the middle of the 70th week

The fnal act? The Jews to this day reject that Jesus is the Messiah. The end of the 70 weeks of years is not about the Jews rejecting Jesus. The 7 years of the 70th week are in Revelation 12. Revelation 12 is the 70th week relevant to Israel. The first five verses identify the woman in the chapter as being Israel.

The first half of the 7 years is in Revelation 12:6, that the woman is in the wilderness because near the end of the 1260 day testimony time of the two witnesses (Revelation 11:3), Israel's messiah, thought-to-be (the prince who shall come in Daniel 9:26), will have betrayed them, killed, comeback to life, and the AoD image made - that the Jews flee into the wilderness near the end of the 1260 days.

When the two witnesses are killed, and ascend, there is the war in heaven (the second heaven) Revelation 12:7-12.

Satan, after he is cast down, has a time, times, and half time left in Revelation 12:14, the second half of the seven years; which during that time, part of Israel is in the wilderness, the other part who did not flee in time are persecuted by the beast and Satan until the day Jesus returns - ending the 70th week. That's the truth regarding the 70th week. Not the stoning of Stephen.

The 70th week ends with the Jews having received Jesus as their Lord, Savior, messiah.

 

[Riberra]

The fnal act? The Jews to this day reject that Jesus is the Messiah. The end of the 70 weeks of years is not about the Jews rejecting Jesus. The 7 years of the 70th week are in Revelation 12. Revelation 12 is the 70th week relevant to Israel. The first five verses identify the woman in the chapter as being Israel.

The first half of the 7 years is in Revelation 12:6, that the woman is in the wilderness because near the end of the 1260 day testimony time of the two witnesses (Revelation 11:3), Israel's messiah, thought-to-be (the prince who shall come in Daniel 9:26), will have betrayed them, killed, comeback to life, and the AoD image made - that the Jews flee into the wilderness near the end of the 1260 days.

When the two witnesses are killed, and ascend, there is the war in heaven (the second heaven) Revelation 12:7-12.

Satan, after he is cast down, has a time, times, and half time left in Revelation 12:14, the second half of the seven years; which during that time, part of Israel is in the wilderness, the other part who did not flee in time are persecuted by the beast and Satan until the day Jesus returns - ending the 70th week. That's the truth regarding the 70th week. Not the stoning of Stephen.

The 70 weeks of Daniel 9:23-27 correspond to a 490 years consecutive time period (no gap) that were allowed to the Jews to cease their transgression and to anoint the Messiah [First Coming] ....


What you describe above is about the little horn/beast/antichrist/man of sin/son of perdition mentioned in Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 /Revelation 12 and Revelation 13 and Revelation 17- who will happen in the last 42 months (3 1/2 years) preceding the SECOND COMING of Jesus.

The man of sin will be revealed and take power during 42 months (3 1/2 years) [Revelation 13]....and after Jesus will Come on the Earth to establish His millennial Kingdom.

 

[Douggg]

What you describe above is about the little horn/beast/antichrist/man of sin/son of perdition mentioned in Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 /Revelation 12 and Revelation 13 who will happen in the last 42 months (3 1/2 years) preceding the SECOND COMING of Jesus.

Revelaton 13 is the second half of the 70th week after the two witnesses are gone.

But Revelation 12 is the full 70th week. The 1260 days is the first half and the time, times, half times ,the second half.

And I can prove it - by the crowns being on the heads in Revelation 12, but no crowns on the heads in Revelation 13.

With the full seven years left - there are crowns on the heads.
With only 42 months left - there are no crowns on the heads.