The New Covenant and Daniels 70th week...

BABerean2 said:

What you are saying is the opposite of what we find in the Book of Jeremiah.

There was to be a New Covenant, which would not be like the Sinai Covenant.

They broke the If-Then conditional covenant and therefore God no longer considered them under the Old Covenant.

The whole of the New Testament is about this New Covenant found in the Book of Jeremiah.


Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
(He now puts His Holy Spirit inside of us.)

Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.



Mat 26:28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. (NKJV)

Click to expand...

You keep quoting these verses to prove it was the new covenant that was to be implemented post Babylon, but was it? When Israel returned post Babylon and rebuilt the city and temple, which covenant was used? The old or the new? The old! And Dan 9:27 specifically states the sacrifice and oblation ceased during the middle of the week of confirmation, prophesied as done in Dan 8:11-12 and 11:31-32, which is the fact.

BABerean2 said:

You are confusing the rededication of the temple after Antiochus stopped the temple sacrifices, with the New Covenant that was to come through Yeshua, found in Daniel chapter 9.

There was the abomination of desolation caused by Antiochus in 167 BC and there was the second abomination of desolation that occurred during 70 AD, which was predicted by Christ in the Olivet Discourse.

.

Click to expand...

There is only one AOD and it is defined in Daniel with the definite article "the." Christ did not predict any AOD. He was referring to Daniel's prophecy:

Mat 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mar 13:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

Click to expand...

Again you're using misinterpretations in your conclusions and confusing what Christ said about the AOD.

Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
Luk 21:21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
Luk 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Click to expand...

He wasn't prophesying about a new AOD. He was speaking about Daniel's prophesy being fulfilled in Shalem's desolation.

BABerean2 said:

Do you believe Antiochus Epiphanes set up a statue of Zeus (He had previously claimed to be Zeus.) in the temple and had a pig slaughtered on the altar during 167 BC?

.

Click to expand...

What does that have to do with anything concerning the issue?

BABerean2 said:

Joh_19:30 So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit.

............................................................

Mat_27:51 Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split,

Mar_15:38 Then the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.


Luk_23:45 Then the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was torn in two.

...............................................................

Heb_9:12 Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

Heb_9:24 For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;


Heb_9:25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another—

.

Click to expand...

Dan 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

This is the same 62th or 69th week the Anointed one is cut off after. And, for the umpteenth time, it was done in 445bc.

Dan 9:26 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.

33ad or 70 ad is not the "after the threescore and two weeks" the Anointed One is cut off in:

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Which was done by the Greek little horn, during the Greek empire:

Dan 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.
Dan 8:10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
Dan 8:11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
Dan 8:12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.

Dan 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

Which, as I explained before, was the ending of the direct line of the firstborn sons of Aaron as high priests.

Dan 11:32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.

Which (as I keep explaining) was the government run by the Maccabees, from Antiochus III the Great to the temple destruction. It was because of their forsaking of the covenant with Levi that caused the desolation and the sacrifices and oblation to cease, to not be accepted because of them being done by non Aaronic high priests. I have even given you in the past the verses in Malachi that proves it, Mal 2:1-12

precepts said:

The covenant confirmed is the old covenant, and it's middle of the week was when the AOD was set up by the Greek little horn, the casting down of the "prince of princes," the line of succession of first born sons of Aaron as the high priests.

That is the AOD!

Click to expand...

In another topic thread, you admit that you do not have a date or any historical evidence for your claim that the 'middle of the week' was during the Greek empire. And yet you butt into this topic and make your unfounded assertions again.

May I suggest that you do some serious study of the history of the inter-testament period before pushing misinformation about Daniels 70 weeks?

precepts said:

It is not my perspective. It is what's written.

The Deut 30 prophecy is not a covenant and it being in Daniel's mind has nothing to do with the issue. That and the whatever verb tense is irrelevant to the issue.

This is irrelevant because the covenant that's confirmed in Dan 9 is not the new covenant. It is not the new covenant's middle of the week that the AOD is set up in. It is in the old, reinstated covenant that the AOD is set up in, in Dan 8:11-12 and 11:31-32, by the Greek little horn. A fact that you continue to ignore.

It was the casting down of the "princes of princes," the first born son successors of high priests that were ended by the Greek little horn. The government set up by the Maccabees was a forsaking of the covenant with Levi government, hence their sacrifice and oblation could never be accepted by God, hence sacrifice and oblations ceased spiritually but not physically by the Maccabees.



That was not the middle of the week. It is your false interpretation regardless of Dan 8 and 11 that you are adding here. Nothing in scripture implies that was the middle of the week. Dan 8 and 11 tells you when the AOD was set up in the middle of the week as defined in Dan 9:27


You are misinterpreting scripture. There are numerous errors in your conclusions. First and foremost is the fact the decree given by Cyrus was given in 539bc, and it doesn't add up to 70ad. Secondly, the AOD is defined in Dan 9:27 as being done during the middle of the week, and it's done in Dan 8:11-12 and 11:31-32 during the Greek empire - not during the Roman empire.


The objective of interpretation is to observe all the facts given and draw conclusions based on all the evidence, not to assume facts while ignoring others.


Your verb tense is irrelevant. Dan 9:27 defines what the AOD is and when it happens, during the middle of the week of confirmation. It is prophesied in Dan 8:11-12 and in 11:31-32 to be done by the Greek little horn, the fact that you have yet to address or acknowledge!

Click to expand...

LOL
VERB TENSE IS IRRELAVENT. OK, I got your perspective on THAT. So future, past, present verb tenses are irrelavent also?...or just hiphil?

Deut 30 contains the same new covt of Jer 31 & Ez 34 & 36,37. By saying "I will" is how covts are worded. "I will make a new covt ... etc

Rom 10:5-9 quotes deut 30 as being fulfilled by "the word"; Christ.

Thus the Angel comes to interject 483 yrs between the return from Babylon (vs 5) and the circumcision and new heart of vs(s) 6-19.

The reason no dates come close to 70 AD is because the Hiphil verb tense allows for and instructs that the event in the midst of the 70th week would be the CAUSE which would end the sacrifice and oblation, not be the end of that sacrifice and oblation.

Philip Mauro and Martin Antsey did a work in the 1920's or '30's called the wonders of Bible Chronology. They find 80 yrs difference between bible chronology and Ungers Chronology. It has been unrefuted to my knowledge. They come up to 483 yrs between Cyruses decree and 27 AD. I believe that work can be found free on the internet.

And again the defense and expounding of this truth of the Cause & effect principle is pretty much the theme, scope and purpose of the letter to the Hebrews. I had said that it was summarized in ch 11 into 12. It's ch 12:24-28.

The shaking of the heavens and the removing of the things that are shaken has been described in the letter as the things made by hands (the temple elements and articles 9:24).Christ as the mediator of the new covt was the cause of this yet future (at that time; past to us) shaking.

Search the number of times that the gifts and sacrifices are mentioned in the letter. Ive counted about 5 but there might be more.

For when I(Jesus) came into the world he said sacrifice and offering I would not... ch 10 (ad libbing).

Tertullian taught that 70 AD was the end of the 70 th week, but I believe that he thought there was a 40 yr gap and never understood the hiphil verb tense since they likely read in greek or ?

The previous posts still stand. I answered your objections about Dan 8 & 11, and the reason the new covt didn't come immediately after the return from Babylon. (The 490 yr prophecy interjected between vs 5 & 6 of deut 30.

Dan 9 specifies the time of the CAUSE of the action, not the time of the action.

I'm sorry that you seem to be getting agitated.

I think I've covered the topic pretty well and will likely just be repeating myself to continue. If theres any new questions that I see I can answer or help in; I'll jump in. Thanks for responding thus far; at lest you seem to respect the time of this poster and be reading the posts.

BABerean2 said:

You most certainly have a novel interpretation of these passages from Daniel.

To the best of my knowledge, the greatest Greek and Hebrew scholars have not come up with the same thing.

If they have please, share a source which would confirm your viewpoint.


Daniel’s 70 Weeks
https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/14-daniels-prophecy-of-the-seventy-weeks

Click to expand...

You don't have enough understanding to tell if what I'm saying is true or not and would rather rely on the greatest Greek and Hebrew scholars who have yet to correctly interpret scripture? That makes no sense at all. It means you are quoting and repeating what the scholars are saying without even understanding what they're saying! You just believe whatever they say because they're suppose to be the best of the best?

I don't think you're that naive!

Notrash said:

LOL
VERB TENSE IS IRRELAVENT. OK, I got your perspective on THAT. So future, past, present verb tenses are irrelavent also?...or just hiphil?

Click to expand...

In grammar, yes. But not the way you want to apply it to ignore the context of the message. You want me to accept your interpretation and to ignore the rest of the facts the verify the overall message. The middle of the week was when the desolation was set up, defined in Dan 9:27; and it was done in Dan 8:11-12 and 11:31-32. Nothing in your tenses can change the fact.

Glad to see your spelling's getting better though, just my perspective.

Notrash said:

Deut 30 contains the same new covt of Jer 31 & Ez 34 & 36,37. By saying "I will" is how covts are worded. "I will make a new covt ... etc

Click to expand...

You are making unconventional claims. There was only one covenant and it was the covenant with Israel - Levi, to be more exact.

Notrash said:

Rom 10:5-9 quotes deut 30 as being fulfilled by "the word"; Christ.

Click to expand...

There's nothing in the verse that says Christ fulfilled Duet 30.

Notrash said:

Thus the Angel comes to interject 483 yrs between the return from Babylon (vs 5) and the circumcision and new heart of vs(s) 6-19.

Click to expand...

The covenant reinstated post Babylon was not the new covenant. The new covenant began with Christ in 33ad. The old covenant had to be reinstated and disrupted in the middle of it's week, the 1,260th yr of it's existence. You can't blatantly ignore 539 yrs of old covenant history which includes the sacrifice and oblation being done by the Greek little horn that marks the middle of the week of the confirmation (Dan 9:27).

Notrash said:

The reason no dates come close to 70 AD is because the Hiphil verb tense allows for and instructs that the event in the midst of the 70th week would be the CAUSE which would end the sacrifice and oblation, not be the end of that sacrifice and oblation.

Click to expand...

Dan 8:11-12 and 11:31-32 specifically states when the AOD happened and Dan 9:27 specifically states it happened during the middle of the confirmation week. The week of confirmation wasn't 70ad and it wasn't 7 literal yrs. But then again, this is exactly what I keep saying: the AOD was the ending of the Aaronic priestly line of high priest; so though the Maccabees were offering sacrifices up to 70ad, they weren't accepted. The daily sacrifices and oblations ceased spiritually because God didn't accept them, but not physically because the Maccabees (the forsakers of the covenant) kept making sacrifices.

Notrash said:

Philip Mauro and Martin Antsey did a work in the 1920's or '30's called the wonders of Bible Chronology. They find 80 yrs difference between bible chronology and Ungers Chronology. It has been unrefuted to my knowledge. They come up to 483 yrs between Cyruses decree and 27 AD. I believe that work can be found free on the internet.

Click to expand...

Cyrus' decree, historically documented, was decreed in 539bc. I don't see how your scholars don't know that.

Notrash said:

And again the defense and expounding of this truth of the Cause & effect principle is pretty much the theme, scope and purpose of the letter to the Hebrews. I had said that it was summarized in ch 11 into 12. It's ch 12:24-28.

Click to expand...

There's nothing in Hebrews that relates to what you're talking about. The closest thing that relates to what you're talking about is Luke's account of Shalem being surrounded with armies, meaning "her desolation was near," which supports your verb tense explanation.

Notrash said:

The shaking of the heavens and the removing of the things that are shaken has been described in the letter as the things made by hands (the temple elements and articles 9:24).Christ as the mediator of the new covt was the cause of this yet future (at that time; past to us) shaking.

Search the number of times that the gifts and sacrifices are mentioned in the letter. Ive counted about 5 but there might be more.

For when I(Jesus) came into the world he said sacrifice and offering I would not... ch 10 (ad libbing).

Tertullian taught that 70 AD was the end of the 70 th week, but I believe that he thought there was a 40 yr gap and never understood the hiphil verb tense since they likely read in greek or ?

The previous posts still stand. I answered your objections about Dan 8 & 11, and the reason the new covt didn't come immediately after the return from Babylon. (The 490 yr prophecy interjected between vs 5 & 6 of deut 30.

Click to expand...

You didn't address the facts in Dan 8 and 11. You only explained the verb tense meaning not the end of sacrifices per se but leading to the end, which Dan 8 and 11 is the cause. The fact remains the cause for the desolation was done by the Greek little horn in Dan 8 and 11 and the sacrifices ceased spiritually since the high priests no longer were of the firstborn sons of Aaron. As for the reason being 483 yrs between Babylon and the new covenant, it's pure speculation based on your one point of the verb tense. It is you speculating. With all due respect, your basically making it up!

Notrash said:

Dan 9 specifies the time of the CAUSE of the action, not the time of the action.

Click to expand...

But it does not take away from the fact the CAUSE is done in the middle of the week of the confirmation as defined in Dan 9:27 - what you keep ignoring. The cause is done in the middle of the week of confirmation, done by the Greek little horn in Dan 8 and 11. Thirty three A.D. isn't the middle of the week; when the AOD is done is!

Notrash said:

I'm sorry that you seem to be getting agitated.

I think I've covered the topic pretty well and will likely just be repeating myself to continue. If theres any new questions that I see I can answer or help in; I'll jump in. Thanks for responding thus far; at lest you seem to respect the time of this poster and be reading the posts.

Click to expand...

I'm waiting for your response.

Why don't you read Mauro & Antsey if you wonder why they differ from Unger etc.

This is the first time I've heard of anyo.e sayi.g that there is only one covt, and that to Levi.

Re-read the posts and look up the passages presented. There is your response!

Notrash said:

Why don't you read Mauro & Antsey if you wonder why they differ from Unger etc.

This is the first time I've heard of anyo.e sayi.g that there is only one covt, and that to Levi.

Re-read the posts and look up the passages presented. There is your response!

Click to expand...

I am not feeling you because your response is weak and pet.ty! And just when I thought you were getting serious too.

You go back and read, and address the facts.

BABerean2 said:

When I asked your opinion related to Antiochus Epiphanes setting up a statue in the temple, you did not really answer the question, when you gave the following response.

"What does that have to do with anything concerning the issue?"

I would guess it is because the event discredits your viewpoint.

You have used the term "folly" to describe what is found in the 1599 Geneva Bible.

Your tone seems to be one of condemnation for anyone who dares to differ with your viewpoint.

Maybe your opinion is head and shoulders above the greatest Greek and Hebrew scholars.

It would seem we will never agree on this matter.

Therefore, you go ahead with your efforts to promote your novel viewpoint.

.

Click to expand...

You're not for real. Your excuse is a cop out to avoid the facts and theyare facts that I'm posting. Based on everything I have posted, your question was irrelevant. You just want me to keep repeating myself, and maybe that's the tone of condemnation you're feeling. It has nothing do with "condemning anyone who dares differ with me" but everything to do with logic and common sense purposely ignored.

Now, please tell me how your question discredits my viewpoint.

(If you can't beat them, cop out and quit!)

There's nothing in the verse that fulfilled Duet 30.

Click to expand...

Deut 30:Vs 6 is the new covt; same as Jer 31 & Ez 36. It actually extends through at least vs 14.

Deut 30: Vs 12-14 are quoted by Paul in Rom 10:6-8 as referring to and being fulfilled in faith in Jesus.

Daniel is making the call to rememberence of the curse of the law of Moses in deut 30:1-5 which would effect the call to return to the land. He makes this rememberence of the curse of the law during his prayer in Dan 9. Daniel would or could expect the new covt (circumcision of the heart) to follow immediately after the return to the land, since that is how it is worded in Deut 30:5 & 6. But the angel brings the interjection of 483 yrs between the call to return and begining of the confirming of the new covt prophet (deut18:15-18) by the voice from heaven at Jesus baptizm.

Thus "a covt" is shown by context of Deut 30 to be referring to the coming of the circimcision of the heart via the new law of faith in Jesus and Gods Good transcendance.

This isn't just speculation or guesswork, but I don't expect you to understand right away or just accept my word for it.

I believe that both the greek AOD and the Roman AOD were prophecied in Daniel, but I don't have tge details of which is which right now.

And as presented before, the whole letter of hebrews is basically a legal defense and apologetic supporting the fact that the inaugregation of the new covt would effect (cause) the end of the sacrifice & oblation and demand the lives of the persecutors and persistant in the sacrifice and law after a 40 yr grace period of patience.

Psalm3704 said:

Plan A stands for Abraham?

LOL!









.

Click to expand...

plan A was the lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Revelation 13:8 KJV
And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

A lot of people just don't understand that, as of yet. That does not mean they won't understand it eventually.

BABerean2 said:

What is New Covenant Theology?

It is not Reformed Covenant Theology.
It is not Dispensational Theology.
It is not a hybrid of the two.

Click to expand...

I have just finished listening to Pastor Goodin's explanation of 'New Covenant Theology.' What a wonderfully insightful message! I discarded dispensationalism years ago, and assumed that I must now be 'covenant' but had reservations about that too. Now Ive got a handle. (lol) Ive just ordered the book he recommends by John Reisinger.

Can I suggest that you post this video in the 'Covenant Theology' forum as well. They could do with hearing it.