Seventy Weeks Are Determined Upon Thy People!

Quasar92 said:

Very well done. Yes, I saw this previously and thought I would add some factual evidence to support it.

Click to expand...

Any and all support is appreciated.

parousia70 said:

Please explain how a modern day stone building, built by modern day Christ rejectors, who have no covenant relationship with the Living God, would be any more of a "Holy Place" than the Islamic Dome of the Rock that stands there now.

Click to expand...

It's right here, Jesus prophesied He will only return when the Jews will look for Him longing for their messiah.

Matthew 23:37-39King James Version (KJV)
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

It's also prophesied in Hosea the Jews will once again look for their messiah after two thousand years.

Hosea 6:1-2King James Version (KJV)
1 Come, and let us return unto the Lord: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up.
2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.

Jesus will not return till the Jews call upon their messiah. They just don't know it's Jesus but when He rescues them during the great tribulation, they will finally know.

So let them build their temple in preparation and expectation so Jesus will return. It's in the best interest for everyone that Jesus returns.

You should help them build this temple as God also commands them to build it in the entire book of Haggai because finally after 2000 years, the Jews are once again looking for Him.

parousia70 said:

Because the 70 weeks reached their completion with the stoning of Stephen and the freeing of the Gospel to the gentiles.

Click to expand...

Well geez I always thought Daniel's 70th week ends after the return of Christ. So does millions of other Christians because it's mentioned numerous times throughout the bible.

No one ever told me Daniel's 70th ended at the stoning of Stephen. So I guess Jesus don't need to return and save the Jews because they've already been saved by Stephen?

Douggg said:

That part I could see from what Irenaeus taught. The problem I have is when quoting Irenaeus, by someone like Ice, he should state Irenaeus was talking about the "great tribulation", the second half of the 70th week (James, did Irenaeus believe in a forthcomng 70th week?

And Irenaeus's view would be before the great tribulation the rapture would happen.

But to me Iranaeus's comment of the rapture being after the "Antichrist's" destruction of nations - I am not so sure he is talking about after the second half - but the first half, when the person had not yet become the beast. I am thinking Irenaeus's reasoning, he was taking from Isaiah 14:16-17.... the person being killed before being brought back to life as the beast.

16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

Which if Irenaeus was sandwiching the rapture between the first half and second half - would be mid-tribulation as you say.
___________________________________________________________

Is Ice himself stating that Irenaeus did not preach a pre-tribulation (pre-70th week) rapture in Ice's own words?

_____________________________________________________________

Next question, James. What if anything Irenaeus teach about the learn a parable of a fig tree in what we call Matthew 24?

Click to expand...

In defense of Ice, all he said was that Irenaeus was not teaching the pre-trib rapture. And he never even hinted at the idea that Irenaeus was not teaching Dispensationalism.

And as long as by "the pre-trib rapture," you mean the doctrine as it is commonly taught today, Ice was right. and I do not remember Irenaeus saying anything abut the fig tree. He was definitely not teaching imminence, for he taught that these things would be completed at earth's six thousandth year. And as the Old Testament he was using was the Septuagint, that meant he was expecting the rapture a few hundred years from his own time.

BABerean2 said:

The following response is from former Dispensationalist, Jerry Johnson.

Click to expand...

You and others can lie all day about what we teach. But we actually know what we teach, so no amount of lying can change us in any way.

Biblewriter said:

In defense of Ice, all he said was that Irenaeus was not teaching the pre-trib rapture. And he never even hinted at the idea that Irenaeus was not teaching Dispensationalism.

Click to expand...

Did Dr. Ice call you with a cease and desist order?

If Irenaeus was not teaching a pretrib rapture, what other dispensational doctrines was he teaching?

Biblewriter said:

You and others can lie all day about what we teach. But we actually know what we teach, so no amount of lying can change us in any way.

Click to expand...

You accuse various individuals on these forums of lies and lying, with considerable abandon.

You yourself continually insist that Darby did not invent dispensationalism, and in particular, pretribulationism.

Based on the following, are you not lying?


"From the time of his convalescence, Darby developed a theology that taught and supported a dispensational, premillennial, pretribulationism."

"It would take at least another decade for Darby to develop full confidence in his new views and their implications."

"Darby possessed the intellect, education, and capability needed for original thinking, and the discipline to develop ideas into a system."

"...the development of Darby's own theology, in spite of how he remembers it, was from 1827 to even as late as 1843 in a largely formative stage."

"As his thought developed during the 1830s, this principle of interpretation became the lynchpin of his system."

"On the other hand, Darby most likely thought of and then developed the idea of pretribulationism in the process of shifting to futurism."

It seems that even Dispensationalists cannot agree on the history of their doctrine.

Look at the following article on Dispensationalism from Wikipedia.

The chart of its history posted at Wikipedia starts with Darby.

Dispensationalism - Wikipedia

.

Getting back to the OP for a second---

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.


Obviously the 70 weeks has a starting point and an ending point. Even though there is some dispute as to the starting point, the starting point can still be determined. As to the ending of this 70 weeks, that should be able to be determined as well. And as major as these 70 weeks are, it makes no sense that these 70 weeks just end, yet no one is even celebrating at the time nor even aware that it actually had ended---it just quietly ends. Yet another good reason to reject the idea that the 70 weeks have all been fulfilled.

And like I have already mentioned, it's not logical that the transgression against the holy city is finished, then a few decades later the holy city is basically destroyed. Not to mention, the holy city is back among us today, and it hardly looks like the transgression against it is finished, with all the war and threat of war in that region, and the fact Jerusalem is mainly controlled by unbelieving Jews. But I thought the transgression against Jerusalem was supposed to be finshed though? Can contradictions actually be the truth? If yes, since when?

DavidPT said:

But I thought the transgression against Jerusalem was supposed to be finshed though?

Click to expand...

Gal 3:19　 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator.　


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.　


He finished paying for the transgressions before He died, and announced it with His last three words on the Cross.

.

BABerean2 said:

Gal 3:19　 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator.　


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.　


He finished paying for the transgressions before He died, and announced it with His last three words on the Cross.

.

Click to expand...

Keep in mind, we're talking about transgression against the holy city here. I don't see anything in your post that addresses that.

If some of the reasons why some of you can't accept that the 70th week is still future is because to agree is to agree with Dispensationalism and Pretrib, well I can't blame you there. Yet at the same time, I conclude the 70th week is still future, and that I don't need to subscribe to Dispensationalism and Pretrib in order to do so. The 70th week doesn't involve a literal temple in Jerusalem with animal sacrificing resuming then being put to an end again in the midst of the 70th week. That's preposterous. But the 70th week does involve the beasts in Revelation 13 though.

DavidPT said:

Keep in mind, we're talking about transgression against the holy city here. I don't see anything in your post that addresses that.

Click to expand...

Does the 70 weeks prophecy announce the coming New Covenant Messiah as its main theme?

Were the transgressions for all people, for all time, paid for outside the city gates of Jerusalem?

Gal 3:19　 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.　

.....................................................................
From the 1599 Geneva Bible


Daniel 9:27

And he (a) 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 (b) cease, (c) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

(a) By the preaching of the Gospel he affirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles.

(b) Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection.

(c) Meaning that Jerusalem and the sanctuary would be utterly destroyed because of their rebellion against God, and their idolatry: or as some read, that the plague will be so great, that they will all be astonished at them.

.

BABerean2 said:

Does the 70 weeks prophecy announce the coming New Covenant Messiah as its main theme?

Were the transgressions for all people, for all time, paid for outside the city gates of Jerusalem?

Gal 3:19　 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.　

.....................................................................
From the 1599 Geneva Bible


Daniel 9:27

And he (a) 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 (b) cease, (c) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

(a) By the preaching of the Gospel he affirmed his promise, first to the Jews, and after to the Gentiles.

(b) Christ accomplished this by his death and resurrection.

(c) Meaning that Jerusalem and the sanctuary would be utterly destroyed because of their rebellion against God, and their idolatry: or as some read, that the plague will be so great, that they will all be astonished at them.

.

Click to expand...

The fact Jerusalem is once again inhabited in our day and age, what happens to it in the future eventually? If unbelieving Jews are currently in control of it, doesn't that also add up to rebellion against God? But if this transgression has already been taken care of and is finished, why is Jerusalem in the state it is today? Before we come to any final conclusions about anything, is it not a good idea to first compare things with reality and what's happening in the real world?

DavidPT said:

The fact Jerusalem is once again inhabited in our day and age, what happens to it in the future eventually? If unbelieving Jews are currently in control of it, doesn't that also add up to rebellion against God? But if this transgression has already been taken care of and is finished, why is Jerusalem in the state it is today? Before we come to any final conclusions about anything, is it not a good idea to first compare things with reality and what's happening in the real world?

Click to expand...

Rev 11:8　 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.　

Rev 2:9　 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.　

Rev 3:9　 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.　

Joh 4:21　 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.　

Rom 2:28　 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:　
Rom 2:29　 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.　

Gal 6:15　 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.　(a New Creation.)
Gal 6:16　 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.　


The modern State of Israel was established through the Balfour Agreement, which is found in a letter between Lord Rothschild and the British Government.

The following comes from a speech given by a Jewish Christian many years ago.


What is the difference between the Israelites who worshipped Baal and those of our time who have rejected God's Son?

(1 John 2:22-23)

Quasar92 said:

Detractors of pretribulationism often want to say or imply that our view cannot be found in the pages of the Bible and must have come from a deviant source. Of course, we strongly object to such a notion, and have taken great pains over the years to show that the New Testament not only teaches pretribulationism, but holds it forth as our "blessed hope," a central focus of faith. It is also clear to me that when the church recognizes the four biblical foundations supporting pretribulationism (consistent literal interpretation, premillennialism, futurism, and a distinction between Israel and the church), that the biblical view of pretribulationism is recognized.

As believers in the imminent return of Christ, we need to let this precious truth and hope impact our daily lives as we anticipate our Lord's return. We, like those who have gone before us, need to realize that such a blessed hope should teach us that we should live chaste lives, giving ourselves to evangelism and world missions until the bride hears her groom shout, "come up here!" Church historian Kurt Aland characterizes the impact that belief in an imminent coming of our Lord (a key element of pretribulationism) had in the life of the early church:

Up until the middle of the second century, and even later, Christians did not live in and for the present, but they lived in and for the future; and this was in such a way that the future flowed into the present, that future and present became one-a future which obviously stood under the sign of the Lord's presence. It was the confident expectation of the first generations that the end of the world was not only near, but that it had really already come. It was the definite conviction not only of Paul, but of all Christians of that time, that they themselves would experience the return of the Lord."

Aland then contrasts it with the condition of the church in our own day and at another time when she is not motivated by the imminent return of Christ: At first, people looked at it as only a brief postponement, as the Shepherd of Hermas clearly expresses. But soon, as the end of the world did not occur, it was conceived of as a longer and longer period, until finally-this is today's situation-nothing but the thought of a postponement exists in people's consciousness. Hardly any longer is there the thought of the possibility of an imminent

Parousia. Today we live with the presumption - I would almost say from the presumption-that this world is going to continue; it dominates our consciousness. Practically, we no longer speak about a postponement, but only seldom does the idea of the end of the world and the Lord's return for judgment even occur to us; rather, it is pushed aside as annoying and disturbing-in contrast to the times when faith was alive. It is very characteristic that in ages when the church flourishes, the expectation of the end revives-we think of Luther; we think of Pietism. If we judge our present time by its expectation of the future, our judgment can only be a very negative one.

... Only when the imminent expectation of the Parousia diminishes, only when life is no longer lived in constant reference to the Last Day and no longer takes its direction from the Last Day was an organization of the church as an institution even possible or necessary. This took place in the second half of the second century."

While Brethren theologian J.N. Darby may have restored the pretribulational rapture doctrine into the life of the church, he did not originate it. Pretribulationism is found first in the New Testament and at times throughout the history of the church. Oh that we would recapture for the church in our day this "blessed hope" which would help stir her to life with the mighty implications of such a truth. This cannot be accomplished when there are those who are disturbing the faith of some by the misuse of the history of the rapture. Maranatha!"

By Thomas Ice, PhD

Click to expand...

I'm attempting, so far unsuccessfully, to locate this article on the Pre-Trib Research Center site. Can you provide a link? Thanks.

BABerean2 said:

What is the difference between the Israelites who worshipped Baal and those of our time who have rejected God's Son?

(1 John 2:22-23)

Click to expand...

The only difference I know of, is that the Israelites who worshippped Baal had a verifiable genetic link to Abraham.

No "Jew" alive today has that.

Other than that, there is no difference.

jgr said:

You accuse various individuals on these forums of lies and lying, with considerable abandon.

You yourself continually insist that Darby did not invent dispensationalism, and in particular, pretribulationism.

Based on the following, are you not lying?


"From the time of his convalescence, Darby developed a theology that taught and supported a dispensational, premillennial, pretribulationism."

"It would take at least another decade for Darby to develop full confidence in his new views and their implications."

"Darby possessed the intellect, education, and capability needed for original thinking, and the discipline to develop ideas into a system."

"...the development of Darby's own theology, in spite of how he remembers it, was from 1827 to even as late as 1843 in a largely formative stage."

"As his thought developed during the 1830s, this principle of interpretation became the lynchpin of his system."

"On the other hand, Darby most likely thought of and then developed the idea of pretribulationism in the process of shifting to futurism."

Click to expand...

I will give just two examples from the many I have collected:

Joseph Mede wrote in 1672:
"I will add this more, namely, what may be conceived to be the cause of this rapture of the saints on high to meet the Lord in the clouds, rather than to wait his coming to earth....What if it be, that they may be preserved during the Conflagration of the earth and the works thereof, 2 Pet.3:10, that as Noah and his family were preserved from the Deluge by being lift up above the waters in the Ark; so should the saints at the Conflagration be lift up in the clouds unto their Ark, Christ, to be preserved there from the deluge of fire, wherein the wicked shall be consumed?" ("The Works of Joseph Mede," 1672, London edition, Book IV, p.776)
Notice That Mede used the word "rapture" and cited 1 Thess.4, the analogy of Noah, and proposed that its purpose might be that the saints “may be preserved during the Conflagration of the earth and the works thereof.” This is clearly a proposal of at least the possibility of a pre-tribulation rapture.

In 1748 the famous Baptist theologian Dr. John Gill wrote:
“1 Thessalonians 4:17
“Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up;
suddenly, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, and with force and power; by the power of Christ, and by the ministry and means of the holy angels; and to which rapture will contribute, the agility which the bodies both of the raised and changed saints will have: and this rapture of the living saints will be
“together with them;
with the dead in Christ, that will then be raised; so that the one will not come before the other, or the one be sooner with Christ than the other; but the one being raised and the other changed, they will be joined in one company and general assembly, and be caught up together:
“in the clouds;
the same clouds perhaps in which Christ will come, will be let down to take them up; these will be the chariots, in which they will be carried up to him; and thus, as at our Lord's ascension a cloud received him, and in it he was carried up out of the sight of men, so at this time will all the saints ride up in the clouds of heaven:
“to meet the Lord in the air;
whither he will descend, and will then clear the regions of the air of Satan, and his posse of devils, which now rove about there, watching all opportunities, and taking all advantages to do mischief on earth; these shall then fall like lightning from heaven, and be bound and shut up in the bottomless pit, till the thousand years are ended: here Christ will stop, and will be visible to all, and as easily discerned by all, good and bad, as the body of the sun at noonday; as yet he will not descend on earth, because it is not fit to receive him; but when that and its works are burnt up, and it is purged and purified by fire, and become a new earth, he will descend upon it, and dwell with his saints in it: and this suggests another reason why he will stay in the air, and his saints shall meet him there, and whom he will take up with him into the third heaven, till the general conflagration and burning of the world is over, and to preserve them from it; and then shall all the elect of God descend from heaven as a bride adorned for her husband, and he with them, and the tabernacle of God shall be with men; see ( Revelation 21:1-3 ) ...
“and so shall we ever be with the Lord;
now the saints are with him at times, and have communion with him, but not always; but then they shall be ever with him; wherever he is; first in the air, where they shall meet him; then in the third heaven, where they shall go up with him; then on earth, where they shall descend and reign with him a thousand years; and then in the ultimate glory to all eternity: and this will be the issue and accomplishment of the counsel and covenant of grace, of the sufferings and death of Christ, and of his preparations and prayers.”
This can be read online at:
1 Thessalonians 4:17 Commentary - John Gill's Exposition of the Bible
So Dr. John Gill explicitly called the Lord’s coming for his own the “rapture,” and explicitly said it would occur “suddenly,” and that the Lord “will stay in the air, and his saints shall meet him there, and whom he will take up with him into the third heaven, till the general conflagration and burning of the world is over.” There is no way to represent this as anything but a pre-tribulation rapture.

I regret that supposedly well informed men could be so misinformed. But just these two quotations, by themselves, are HARD PROOF that John Nelson Darby did not invent the doctrine of a pre tribulation rapture. For the first of these was written 128 years before 1800, when Darby was born, and the other was written 52 years before he was born. And yet these are only two out of many that I have found.