"70 Weeks" of lunar years

Acts,

So accurate that the critics all say it was written after the fact.

But evidently not accurate enough to convince futurists that it was even about Antiochus. For they say it was only about the antichrist yet to come.

Postrib,

I wrote: I believe Daniel referred to two different "abominations."...

You asked: Did Jesus? (Matthew 24:15)

No. I believe he referred only to the "abomination" spoken of in Daniel's "70 Weeks" prophecy, Titus aided by Rome's armies. However, since the other "abomination" spoken of in Daniel, Antiochus aided by High Priest Menelaus, probably was meant to prefigure the antichrist who is yet to come, as Titus may have also, it is possible in a larger sense Jesus may have had both of these "abominations" in mind if his words were meant to also have a larger end time application to the antichrist to come. This all gets a bit complicated with "types" and "antitypes" figuring into things. : )

You asked: Who fulfilled or will fulfill Daniel 11:36-39;

I should complain, as I often do, about you asking me to do your homework. But since this a simple cut and paste of something I have previously discussed and saved to disk, I'll let you go this time. However, the Hebrew words I have cited do not reproduce here well. But you should still get the gist of my comments.

Dan. 11:36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods; and he shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished; for that which is determined shall be done.

And the king shall do according to his will; — Julius Caesar assumed the title of "dictator for life" (February 14, 44 BCE) after his successful campaigns against Gaul, Greece, Africa, Egypt, Asia Minor and Spain, which made him the military leader of the world. The text begins with i=l#M#h^ wn{wx)r=k! hc*u*w+ (and he will have done as his will the king), which is similar to verse 11:3, where wn{wx)r=K! hc*u*w+ br^ lv*m=m! lv^m*W rwB)G! i=l#m# dm^u*w+ (and he will have stood king mighty and he will have ruled realm much and he will have done as his will) is used to introduce the reign of Alexander the Great. There is a gap of about 140 years between the rule of Xerxes in verse 11:2 and Alexander's rule in verse 11:3. The gap here between the demise of Antiochus Epiphanes and the rise to power of Julius Caesar is about the same. The expression wN{K^-lu^ (on his place), which is used to show the immediate succession from one king to another (Vs 7, 20, 21), is absent here between verses 35 and 36. In considering only the grammatical form of this verse in context with the rest of the chapter, I conclude that this verse introduces another king.7 The phrase i=l#M#h^ wn{wx)r=k! hc*u*w+, in this verse, which uses the verb hc*u (done), in the perfect state, is describing Caesar's final position of a world dominating leader, which established Rome as a world power. The rest of the 11th chapter proceeds to describe the events that lead up to that condition. Therefore, this verse describes the introduction of another king in a manner similar to that of verse 3.

and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods; — Caesar had held a variety of political positions before he was elected as consul in 60 BCE. In Spain he served as finance minister, chief priest, and also as governor. In Rome he was responsible for all building projects. The Romans had many gods but their chief god was the god of Republicanism, which was the god Caesar would eventually overthrow. Later he had statues made with his image standing on top of a globe; one of these he placed in the temple of Romulus.

and he shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished; for that which is determined shall be done. — Caesar's skillful tactics as a political leader and military commander insured his steady rise to power. The definite article "the" is absent in the original text. It was really an indignation that he would carry out against the Republic and its constitution. The Romans hated the word "rex" (king), yet this is what Caesar would become in the form of a dictator.

37 Neither shall he regard the gods of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall magnify himself above all.

Neither shall he regard the gods of his fathers, — Without regard for the god of Republicanism, Caesar formed an illegal coalition with Pompey and Crassus aimed at gaining military power.

nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall magnify himself above all. — Caesar's desire for conquest left him with little time to engage in the pursuit of women. After Caesar learned that a rumor was circulating alleging that his second wife, Pompeia, had taken a lover, he promptly divorced her (62 BCE). He declared that "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion." Caesar proclaimed that he was a descendant of Aeneas, the son of the goddess Venus. He had no regard for Rome's gods, traditions, or even the true God, Yahweh.

38 But in his place shall he honor the god of fortresses; and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honor with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.

But in his place shall he honor the god of fortresses; — The senate voted for all military dictatorships to be condemned (50 BCE). Shortly afterward, the consul Gaius Marcellus, acting without the authority of the senate, ordered General Pompey to attack Caesar as a public enemy. Pompey prepared his troops for the ensuing battle. Caesar made an offer to relinquish his command on the condition that Pompey do likewise. After his offer was rejected Caesar made his famous march across the Rubicon into Italy. On his way to Rome he acquired the support of Pompey's own forces who had defected. His advance, in the dead of winter, was so swift that he completely overwhelmed the resistance.

and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honor with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things. — Caesar had no regard for the constitution or the decrees of the senate. After entering Rome he set about reorganizing the government and the management of the state treasury. He was now in a position to finance his war effort against Pompey's troops in Spain. He also acquired citizenship for those who came to his aid in the "defense" of Rome.

39 And he shall deal with the strongest fortresses by the help of a foreign god: whosoever acknowledgeth [him] he will increase with glory; and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for a price.

And he shall deal with the strongest fortresses by the help of a foreign god: — Caesar laid siege to Massilia with help from the Germanic cavalry. He left a portion of his army at the city and pressed on with the remainder to defeat Pompey's forces in Spain in little over a month; on his way back to Rome (49 BCE) he accepted the surrender of Massilia. Caesar sailed for Greece in very early 48 BCE, and in the face of overwhelming odds he routed Pompey's superior numbers at Pharsalus. Pompey took flight into Egypt.8

whosoever acknowledgeth [him] he will increase with glory; and he shall cause them to rule over many, — Caesar had appointed those who where loyal to him to important positions; the praetor Lepidus was over the affairs of Rome, Marcus Antonius was governor of Italy and commander of the troops, Curio administered the food supplies from North Africa, and Dolabella and Gaius Antonius guarded Illyria from invasion by Pompey's forces.

and shall divide the land for a price. — During the civil war Rome's economy had suffered severely, and in 48 BCE, when Caesar was elected consul, he set about introducing laws before the senate to relieve the burden of debt and to restore the economy. Caesar also enacted many civil rights laws, restoring to prosperity those who had suffered at the hands of the consul Sulla and General Pompey. It was the creditors who suffered a loss when they were forced to accept land from debtors at pre-war price levels to satisfy their obligations.

You asked: [Who fulfilled or will fulfill] 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 ?

The antichrist to come.

You asked: [Who fulfilled or will fulfill] Revelation 13:5-8, 18 ?

The antichrist to come who will rule over a new one world government, aided by someone called "the false prophet." Maybe this "false prophet" will be some highly respected Christian minister he will appoint to serve as his "minister of free religious expression" to gain Christians' support, before he does an about face and outlaws all religion. Who knows? Who can say? All we can do now is guess. Your guess is as good as mine.

You asked: [Who fulfilled or will fulfill] Revelation 19:19-20 ?

The antichrist to come aided by his "false prophet" again, whoever or whatever that turns out to be.

Our full preterist friends will disagree with my last few answers. I am a partial preterist. For I have found that , like in most areas of dispute, the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle.

Oh, by the way, I agree with you that it is wise for us to be prepared for what might be coming our way. But it can be just as bad as being unprepared or even worse if we are prepared for the wring thing. If, for instance, someone is sure that the antichrist will be a man who gets involved with the political affairs of modern physical Israel, and then fails to recognize the real antichrist because he does not do any such thing, that could be very dangerous. I tend to believe that when the antichrist shows up most Christians will not recognize him as being the antichrist because they will be looking for a different kind of antichrist. Just as most first centuruy Jews did not recognize the Christ because they were looking for a different kind of Christ.

Mike

I think we would both be better off spending our time discussing other matters. For discussing how we believe every verse of Daniel and Revelation will be fulfilled in the future can amount to little more than foolish speculation.

There is, however, one thing I'd be willing to bet my last cent on. That is that no man is ever again going to be sitting down in any rebuilt Jewish temple in Jerusalem. That site is now occupied by the Moslem Dome of the Rock. It is one of the Moslem world's most holy sites. Any attempt to rebuild a Jewish temple there would start World War III. There are also a lot of other reasons it could never happen, which I wont bother discussing here. But the bottom line is, it aint gonna happen! End of story.

GW,

You wrote: Just one thought. I noticed you still think 2 Thess 2:3-7 is future. I believe it is clearly fulfilled.

You may be right.

But I read this passage in a larger way. I believe the "temple" Paul there referred to was the Christian church. For as Paul himself earlier wrote concerning Christians, "We are the temple of God." (1 Cor. 3:16,17; 2 Cor. 6:16)

I believe this passage is primarily referring to the Antichrist who is yet to come, whose coming was then and is now being held back by the Holy Spirit.

Of course, it is also possible that Paul's words were intended to have a minor fulfilment in the first century and a greater fulfilment at a much later date.

GW,

You make a convincing case. I understand and agree with much of what preterists have to say. You seem to be dead on so far as your explanation of 2 Thes. 2:3-8. However, I still believe Paul's words may find a secondary and greater fulfillment in the future.

I was wondering, do you consider yourself to be a full preterist or a partial preterist? Do you believe that Christ will return to judge the Christian world in much the same way he returned to judge the Jewish world in AD 66-70.

GW,

A follow up thought. You wrote: Such a Temple and ministry could not become corrupted unless Jesus Christ the High Priest becomes corrupted.

I disagree. Paul said "We (Christians) are the Temple of God." God was not the Temple in Jerusalem. His presense filled the Temple as evidenced by the Shekinah light. In much the same way God now dwells in us. We are His Temple. But He is not us. God is not His Temple.

We, God's Temple, can become corrupted. Just as God's Temple was corrupted during the days of Antiochus. Between the years 168 and 165 BC Antiochus set up a statue of the Greek God Zeus in Jerusalem's Temple and for three years actually had pigs sacrificed on the Temple's alter. Now tell me that God's Temple cannot become corrupted.

P70,

On earth a "temple" is a place where people go to worship God who resides in heaven. Most Christians understand the verse you quoted from Revelation to be descibing a time when and a place where we will be directly in God's presense. Thus we will then and there have no need of "temples" to worship God. We understand that time to be yet in the future, for those of us still living anyway, and that place to be heaven.

Maybe I should have said "God is not now for us His Temple."

This raises an interesting question. How do preterists, who think all of Revelation stands already fulfilled, harmonize this verse from Revelation with Paul's statements that Christians are now God's Temple? I would guess you say that this verse applies to Those who have already received their heavenly reward.

P70,

You asked: If you do not believe Rev.21:3 describes a present day reality, would you be willing to explain to me why not?

Rev.21:4

GW,

You wrote: [Partial preterists] make the compromise with the creeds and render the apostles fulfilled eschatology as a TYPE of the creedal "end of the world." Follow? I understand their compromise, but I think it's unnecessary.

I understand why it may be unnecessary. Revelation and other parts of scripture can be understood in many ways. But do you see any reason why understanding first century events as a TYPE of a larger end of this world yet to come can not be the correct way of understanding scripture?