If there is a gap, Daniel 9:24 becomes a false statement
- Thread starter claninja
- Start date
ThatCanadianDude_88
Active Member
Up until about 1830 - it's been believed that what John was writing about was atually relevant to the people that he wrote Revelation to back BEFORE 70 A.D.
Do you not see any connection to Revelation and Matthew 23 - especially verse 36?
Matthew 23:36 ~ Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.
So your understanding of the 70 weeks looks like this?
Do you see how the premise of this thread is that, if there's a gap in the prophecy of Daniel, then v. 24 becomes false? How can an event occur in a gap of time? Wouldn't the prophetic time clock have begun ticking again with Jesus' crucifixion?
This is the image of the 70 weeks according to the liturgical churches (the non-modern-day theological churches....ie prior to John Darby theology, but continuing):
There is nothing being inserted anywhere. All prophecies serve a purpose and the prophets who receive them see what they are meant to see.
The gap does not nullify verse 24, the problem comes from shifting the meaning of verse 24 so as to make it conflict with the proper viewing of the 70 week prophecy. There is still much prophecy awaiting future fulfillment in addition to the anointing of the Most Holy place. Consummation is what is in view, Israel and Jerusalem's story was not completed in the first century - it will be when Christ returns to establish the kingdom of God.
You are also quoting Daniel 9:27 from a translation that is inaccurate. I have already looked into this view, the Hebrew texts are quite clear. Both the covenant and desolation is not tied to Christ, who is Messiah the Prince. It is tied to the prince who is to come.
Upvote
0
Verse 24 says "seventy weeks are decreed for your people". A simple rule of interpretation is to let Scripture interpret Scripture. Where in the Bible do you see ANY other example of time being split up? How is it "70 weeks" if there's at least thousands of years in between? And - the common timeline for this futurist belief system is one that I shared in my recent post (with Jesus' crucifixion hanging out in thin air during that gap of time where it's taught that the prophetic time clock paused). How is time "paused" when an event - as critical to our faith, as the crucifixion - occurs?
Jesus was who was anointed (He is the Most Holy Place - the true Temple).
His Kingdom is established. Even He is quoted as saying so:
Luke 17:20-21 ~ The Coming of the Kingdom
When asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The kingdom of God will not come with observable signs. Nor will people say, ‘Look, here it is,’ or ‘There it is.’ For you see, the kingdom of God is in your midst.”
He is sitting on His rightful throne - the throne of David. When asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The kingdom of God will not come with observable signs. Nor will people say, ‘Look, here it is,’ or ‘There it is.’ For you see, the kingdom of God is in your midst.”
Acts 2:29-36 ~ "Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. "And so, because he was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE, he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that HE WAS NEITHER ABANDONED TO HADES, NOR DID His flesh SUFFER DECAY. "This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses. "Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear. "For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says: 'THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, "SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET." ' "Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified."
Last edited:
Upvote
0
It was what ALL of Christianity recognized up until the early 1800's when Darby introduced his futurist beliefs. Only then did the schism begin.
Quoting Michael Blume------>
The prince in verse 25 is Jesus and the prince in 26 is not Jesus.
That is a fact.
That is not the question, though. The question is the identity of the "he" in verse 27.
So it is not a question of whether Jesus destroyed the temple and the city according to verse 26. The prince in verse 26, who was responsible for the temple and city destruction of 70 AD, was not Jesus! It was the Roman "prince". The Roman people came and destroyed the temple and City by 70 AD. Jesus and His people did not destroy the temple.
GRAMMAR PROVES CHRIST IS THE "HE"
Analyzing the grammar of verses 25 through 27 shows us that the "he" who confirms a covenant for seven years is Jesus Christ. The subject of the discussion is found in verse 25, and is the Messiah the Prince. Verse 25 mentions a span of time of "seven weeks" and "threescore and two weeks." Seven plus sixty-two is sixty-nine. The Messiah the Prince is on the scene after the first 69 weeks. And we read that after the "threescore and two weeks", Messiah shall be cut off. What is "after" the threescore and two weeks? It is the 70th WEEK! During the time after the 69th week, which is during the 70th week, Messiah is cut off. And this fits perfectly with the sequence of events that occurred in the Biblical texts of the New Testament. Jesus came, and 3.5 years later was crucified, or cut off. The "week" is a week of seven years. All agree with that. And in the midst of the "week", the sacrifice and oblation ceased. God would never again accept sacrifice of blood, since Christ was the final sacrifice God would ever recognize. This refers to the crucifixion where Christ was "cut off" due to an untimely death, as opposed to death by natural old age. He was "cut off" since He was killed. And he was not cut off for Himself! He died for the salvation of humanity! Praise God!
Not only would Christ be cut off after the 69 weeks, but the people of the prince that shall come would destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple). This was fulfilled by the year 70 AD. Desolations were "determined." Jesus Christ referred to the destruction of the Temple, Himself, in Matthew 23.
Matthew 23:37-38 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! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
"Your house is left unto you desolate."
And then we come to the verse in question. After all this information is provided, we suddenly read of "he" who confirms the covenant with many for one week. Grammar demands this "he" simply cannot be the "prince that shall come" in verse 26. The subject in question is the Messiah the Prince of verse 25.
Get the sequence of events.
The Messiah comes and is cut off.
Then a certain people destroy the city and sanctuary.
And "he" confirms the covenant with many for one week. Who? "He." This "he" must be the Messiah of verse 25! It cannot be the "prince that shall come" because this reference to the "prince that shall come" is not the subject in any point of the entire writing! After noting the cutting off of the messiah, we read that a certain people come and destroy the city and temple. And a side note to this temple destruction is that this particular people belong to a "prince that shall come". The point that is stressed, though, is not this "prince that shall come". Reference to this second prince serves only as a side note, telling us who this "people" belong to and what nation they are from.
Saying that the "he" in verse 27 is some antichrist, is similar to misinterpreting the following sentence, "Steven went to the store beside the house owned by Mr. Brown, and he purchased a loaf of bread." To say that the "he" at the end of the phrase is Mr. Brown is to make the same error as do the Futurists when they say that the "he" in verse 27 is antichrist. The "he" in my example of Steven going to the store is of course referring to Steven. It is not Mr. Brown. It cannot be due to the grammar I used. "Steven" is the subject. Mr. Brown is only a side note! And that is exactly the manner in which the prince that shall come is involved in the discussion. He is a side note, and only a clarifier as to the identity of the people who will destroy the city and temple. He is not the subject in any sense of the word. And to make him the grammatical "subject" of Verse 27 is to simply destroy all methods of proper grammar and the association of sentences and their grammatical "subjects" with one another in the context of the particular discussion.
The Bible says nothing about a "prince" other than Jesus who confirms a covenant with anybody for seven years.
The prince in verse 25 is Jesus and the prince in 26 is not Jesus.
That is a fact.
That is not the question, though. The question is the identity of the "he" in verse 27.
So it is not a question of whether Jesus destroyed the temple and the city according to verse 26. The prince in verse 26, who was responsible for the temple and city destruction of 70 AD, was not Jesus! It was the Roman "prince". The Roman people came and destroyed the temple and City by 70 AD. Jesus and His people did not destroy the temple.
GRAMMAR PROVES CHRIST IS THE "HE"
Analyzing the grammar of verses 25 through 27 shows us that the "he" who confirms a covenant for seven years is Jesus Christ. The subject of the discussion is found in verse 25, and is the Messiah the Prince. Verse 25 mentions a span of time of "seven weeks" and "threescore and two weeks." Seven plus sixty-two is sixty-nine. The Messiah the Prince is on the scene after the first 69 weeks. And we read that after the "threescore and two weeks", Messiah shall be cut off. What is "after" the threescore and two weeks? It is the 70th WEEK! During the time after the 69th week, which is during the 70th week, Messiah is cut off. And this fits perfectly with the sequence of events that occurred in the Biblical texts of the New Testament. Jesus came, and 3.5 years later was crucified, or cut off. The "week" is a week of seven years. All agree with that. And in the midst of the "week", the sacrifice and oblation ceased. God would never again accept sacrifice of blood, since Christ was the final sacrifice God would ever recognize. This refers to the crucifixion where Christ was "cut off" due to an untimely death, as opposed to death by natural old age. He was "cut off" since He was killed. And he was not cut off for Himself! He died for the salvation of humanity! Praise God!
Not only would Christ be cut off after the 69 weeks, but the people of the prince that shall come would destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple). This was fulfilled by the year 70 AD. Desolations were "determined." Jesus Christ referred to the destruction of the Temple, Himself, in Matthew 23.
Matthew 23:37-38 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! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
"Your house is left unto you desolate."
And then we come to the verse in question. After all this information is provided, we suddenly read of "he" who confirms the covenant with many for one week. Grammar demands this "he" simply cannot be the "prince that shall come" in verse 26. The subject in question is the Messiah the Prince of verse 25.
Get the sequence of events.
The Messiah comes and is cut off.
Then a certain people destroy the city and sanctuary.
And "he" confirms the covenant with many for one week. Who? "He." This "he" must be the Messiah of verse 25! It cannot be the "prince that shall come" because this reference to the "prince that shall come" is not the subject in any point of the entire writing! After noting the cutting off of the messiah, we read that a certain people come and destroy the city and temple. And a side note to this temple destruction is that this particular people belong to a "prince that shall come". The point that is stressed, though, is not this "prince that shall come". Reference to this second prince serves only as a side note, telling us who this "people" belong to and what nation they are from.
Saying that the "he" in verse 27 is some antichrist, is similar to misinterpreting the following sentence, "Steven went to the store beside the house owned by Mr. Brown, and he purchased a loaf of bread." To say that the "he" at the end of the phrase is Mr. Brown is to make the same error as do the Futurists when they say that the "he" in verse 27 is antichrist. The "he" in my example of Steven going to the store is of course referring to Steven. It is not Mr. Brown. It cannot be due to the grammar I used. "Steven" is the subject. Mr. Brown is only a side note! And that is exactly the manner in which the prince that shall come is involved in the discussion. He is a side note, and only a clarifier as to the identity of the people who will destroy the city and temple. He is not the subject in any sense of the word. And to make him the grammatical "subject" of Verse 27 is to simply destroy all methods of proper grammar and the association of sentences and their grammatical "subjects" with one another in the context of the particular discussion.
The Bible says nothing about a "prince" other than Jesus who confirms a covenant with anybody for seven years.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Messenger 3k
Active Member
- Aug 4, 2018
- 322
- 53
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Silly rule.
You let the Holy Spirit interpret scripture.
How can scripture interpret scripture?
Where do people get these ideas from?
Upvote
0
ThatCanadianDude_88
Active Member
If I may be honest, this is what happens when anyone becomes way too invested in their views, there arises an inability to honestly study and weigh Scripture without any bias or lens.
You are over-spiritualizing the passages in question. The prophecy clearly tells us it pertains to the Holy City and the Sanctuary, and the rest of end-time prophecy abundantly affirms what is going to happen in Jerusalem prior to Christ's return.
You are conflating the spiritual truth of Jesus being the living temple (which is not what is in view here) with the literal sanctuary or "holy place". You are reading a meaning into the text, this is eisegesis.
Upvote
0
There is a similar rule that God seems to confirm throughout Scripture that the number "two" is about truth. Personally, I don't consider God "silly".
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Messenger 3k
Active Member
- Aug 4, 2018
- 322
- 53
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Honestly, that's left to you.
The historian says, "tribulation has already occurred".
The bible scholar says, "I'll be scooped out of tribulation".
The crazy fellow says.....well he isn't saying anything, he's crazy.
Upvote
0
- May 19, 2015
- 125,492
- 28,588
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
You can disagree without being condescending toward another member like you just did.
Statement of Purpose - Eschatology Forum Statement of Purpose
I. Address the post and not the poster
- Address the content of the post and do not specifically attack a member or group of members.
- Goading posts are intentionally or unintentionally baiting other members into responding with a flame.
- Depending on context, the use of smilies may come across as flaming or goading.
- It is not a flame for a member to disagree with another member's argument or opinion on a specific topic.
Members who participate in the Eschatology Forum are expected to treat one another with courtesy and respect at all times, ESPECIALLY when you disagree with each other.
- When you disagree, address the content of the post and not the poster.
- When you disagree with someone's position, you should post evidence and supporting statements for your position. This policy, sometimes referred to as "X means Y because of Z", must be followed especially when posting claims that are widely considered to be controversial.
- When you disagree and you find yourself becoming frustrated and angry, step away from the computer and give yourself time to cool down.
- Always proofread your post before hitting the "Reply" button to make sure you have responded with courtesy and respect.
II. No flaming opposing theological views
The Eschatology forum is for discussing and debating the various theological viewpoints of biblical end times events. All members who participate in Eschatology are self-identified Christians through adherence to the Christian Forums' Statement of Faith and the Trinitarian nature of God. It is expected that people who post in the Eschatology forum will respect all members of the Christian faith.
- Always remember that you are first and foremost brothers and sisters in Christ, regardless of your theological differences on the topic of end time events.
- If you would be offended by a word or phrase applied to your theological viewpoint, then someone of the opposing viewpoint would be offended as well.
- Do not identify a specific member, or a group of members, or a theological viewpoint with a derogatory or inflammatory label.
Divisive, disruptive, and demeaning comments directed towards other members or groups of members will result in violations.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Douggg
anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
- May 28, 2009
- 28,776
- 3,419
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Private
But it doesn't say in the text that the prince who shall come was responsible for the temple and city destroyed.
There are two individuals in Daniel 9:26-27 of such magnitude, on a worldwide scale, in the fulfillment of the mystery of God.
1. Jesus, the Christ.
2. the prince who shall come - the Antichrist.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
There is only one individual identified as a prince in Daniel 9.
It is Messiah. (Daniel 9:25)
The people of the prince (Daniel 9:26) refers to the Roman armies which were Messiah's agents and instruments to accomplish the judgment and destruction which He had prophesied. God's use of such instruments, and His characterization of them as "mine" even though pagan, can be found in several OT instances e.g.:
Jeremiah 25
9 Behold, I will send and take all the families of the north, saith the Lord, and Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will bring them against this land, and against the inhabitants thereof, and against all these nations round about, and will utterly destroy them, and make them an astonishment, and an hissing, and perpetual desolations.
Jeremiah 43
10 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will send and take Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will set his throne upon these stones that I have hid; and he shall spread his royal pavilion over them.
God characterizes the pagan Nebuchadnezzar as "my servant" in using him and his armies against Judah and Egypt.
In the same way as Nebuchadnezzar, though a pagan, was God's servant in executing His judgment, so too were the pagan Roman armies Messiah's people in accomplishing His purposes.
In addition, the Jews themselves, as the historical people of Prince Messiah, were equally responsible for the destruction and suffering. Their own actions in defiling and destroying the buildings and temple prior to the Roman invasion are described by Josephus:
The Lamentation of Josephus
War 5.1.4 19-20
The darts that were thrown by the engines [of the seditious factions] came with that force, that they went over all the buildings and the Temple itself, and fell upon the priests and those that were about the sacred offices; insomuch that many persons who came thither with great zeal from the ends of the earth to offer sacrifices at this celebrated place, which was esteemed holy by all mankind, fell down before their own sacrifices themselves, and sprinkled that altar which was venerable among all men, both Greeks and barbarians, with their own blood. The dead bodies of strangers were mingled together with those of their own country, and those of profane persons with those of the priests, and the blood of all sorts of dead carcasses stood in lakes in the holy courts themselves.
Oh most wretched city, what misery so great as this didst thou suffer from the Romans, when they came to purify thee from thy internal pollutions! For thou couldst be no longer a place fit for God, nor couldst thou longer survive, after thou hadst been a sepulchre for the bodies of thine own people, and hast made the Holy House itself a burying-place in this civil war of thine. Yet mayst thou again grow better, if perchance thou wilt hereafter appease the anger of that God who is the author of thy destruction.
As seen, Josephus recognizes the Jews as complicit agents of their own destruction, and that destruction as Divinely orchestrated.
Contemporary Jewish historians concur:
"The scene was now set for the revolt's final catastrophe. Outside Jerusalem, Roman troops prepared to besiege the city; inside the city, the Jews were engaged in a suicidal civil war. In later generations, the rabbis hyperbolically declared that the revolt's failure, and the Temple's destruction, was due not to Roman military superiority but to causeless hatred (sinat khinam) among the Jews (Yoma 9b). While the Romans would have won the war in any case, the Jewish civil war both hastened their victory and immensely increased the casualties. One horrendous example: In expectation of a Roman siege, Jerusalem's Jews had stockpiled a supply of dry food that could have fed the city for many years. But one of the warring Zealot factions burned the entire supply, apparently hoping that destroying this "security blanket" would compel everyone to participate in the revolt. The starvation resulting from this mad act caused suffering as great as any the Romans inflicted."
The people, both Roman and Jewish, of the prince Messiah who was to come, were Messiah's agents and instruments in accomplishing His purposes of judgment and destruction upon those who had rejected Him.
"Antichrist" is unseen, unsaid, and unknown, either explicitly or implicitly, within the passage. The word "antichrist" or an equivalent was nonexistent in the ancient Hebrew language.
It is Messiah. (Daniel 9:25)
The people of the prince (Daniel 9:26) refers to the Roman armies which were Messiah's agents and instruments to accomplish the judgment and destruction which He had prophesied. God's use of such instruments, and His characterization of them as "mine" even though pagan, can be found in several OT instances e.g.:
Jeremiah 25
9 Behold, I will send and take all the families of the north, saith the Lord, and Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will bring them against this land, and against the inhabitants thereof, and against all these nations round about, and will utterly destroy them, and make them an astonishment, and an hissing, and perpetual desolations.
Jeremiah 43
10 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will send and take Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will set his throne upon these stones that I have hid; and he shall spread his royal pavilion over them.
God characterizes the pagan Nebuchadnezzar as "my servant" in using him and his armies against Judah and Egypt.
In the same way as Nebuchadnezzar, though a pagan, was God's servant in executing His judgment, so too were the pagan Roman armies Messiah's people in accomplishing His purposes.
In addition, the Jews themselves, as the historical people of Prince Messiah, were equally responsible for the destruction and suffering. Their own actions in defiling and destroying the buildings and temple prior to the Roman invasion are described by Josephus:
The Lamentation of Josephus
War 5.1.4 19-20
The darts that were thrown by the engines [of the seditious factions] came with that force, that they went over all the buildings and the Temple itself, and fell upon the priests and those that were about the sacred offices; insomuch that many persons who came thither with great zeal from the ends of the earth to offer sacrifices at this celebrated place, which was esteemed holy by all mankind, fell down before their own sacrifices themselves, and sprinkled that altar which was venerable among all men, both Greeks and barbarians, with their own blood. The dead bodies of strangers were mingled together with those of their own country, and those of profane persons with those of the priests, and the blood of all sorts of dead carcasses stood in lakes in the holy courts themselves.
Oh most wretched city, what misery so great as this didst thou suffer from the Romans, when they came to purify thee from thy internal pollutions! For thou couldst be no longer a place fit for God, nor couldst thou longer survive, after thou hadst been a sepulchre for the bodies of thine own people, and hast made the Holy House itself a burying-place in this civil war of thine. Yet mayst thou again grow better, if perchance thou wilt hereafter appease the anger of that God who is the author of thy destruction.
As seen, Josephus recognizes the Jews as complicit agents of their own destruction, and that destruction as Divinely orchestrated.
Contemporary Jewish historians concur:
"The scene was now set for the revolt's final catastrophe. Outside Jerusalem, Roman troops prepared to besiege the city; inside the city, the Jews were engaged in a suicidal civil war. In later generations, the rabbis hyperbolically declared that the revolt's failure, and the Temple's destruction, was due not to Roman military superiority but to causeless hatred (sinat khinam) among the Jews (Yoma 9b). While the Romans would have won the war in any case, the Jewish civil war both hastened their victory and immensely increased the casualties. One horrendous example: In expectation of a Roman siege, Jerusalem's Jews had stockpiled a supply of dry food that could have fed the city for many years. But one of the warring Zealot factions burned the entire supply, apparently hoping that destroying this "security blanket" would compel everyone to participate in the revolt. The starvation resulting from this mad act caused suffering as great as any the Romans inflicted."
The people, both Roman and Jewish, of the prince Messiah who was to come, were Messiah's agents and instruments in accomplishing His purposes of judgment and destruction upon those who had rejected Him.
"Antichrist" is unseen, unsaid, and unknown, either explicitly or implicitly, within the passage. The word "antichrist" or an equivalent was nonexistent in the ancient Hebrew language.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
iamlamad
Lamad
- Jun 8, 2013
- 9,616
- 744
- 78
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Word of Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
Yes, I agree with the chart you displayed, with the 70th week still future. I think that is what scripture shows us. What you are missing is that the 70th week will be TRIGGERED by the rapture that ends the church age. Did you not notice that Paul wrote of the Day of the Lord just three verses after his classic rapture verse in 1 Thes. 4?Up until about 1830 - it's been believed that what John was writing about was actually relevant to the people that he wrote Revelation to back BEFORE 70 A.D.
Do you not see any connection to Revelation and Matthew 23 - especially verse 36?
Matthew 23:36 ~ Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.
So your understanding of the 70 weeks looks like this?
Do you see how the premise of this thread is that, if there's a gap in the prophecy of Daniel, then v. 24 becomes false? How can an event occur in a gap of time? Wouldn't the prophetic time clock have begun ticking again with Jesus' crucifixion?
This is the image - below - of the 70 weeks according to the liturgical churches (the non-modern-day theological churches....ie prior to John Darby theology, but continuing):
Paul goes on to show is that a moment after the dead in Christ rise, then two groups of people alive and on earth get two different results depending on what they believe: those living in the light of the gospel will be raptured - caught up - while those living in darkness will get sudden destruction - the start of the wrath of God. Make no mistake, Wrath begins the moment those alive and in Christ are caught up.
it will probably be 10 days later that the 7th seal will begin the future 70th week of Daniel (the Ten Days of Awe.)
Verse 24:24 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.
Notice carefully what this verse does NOT say: 24 Seventy CONTIGUOUS 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. No, God did not say that all 70 weeks would be contiguous. But people IMAGINE that is what He said.
Now pay close attention: WHERE does the 69 weeks end?
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:
In other words, the first 69 weeks are over in verse 25. But what comes next? The 70th week? READ:
the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
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. 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:
Notice the text is red comes AFTER the 69 weeks but BEFORE the 70th: in other words GOD HIMSELF caused Daniel to include a gap.
Upvote
0
iamlamad
Lamad
- Jun 8, 2013
- 9,616
- 744
- 78
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Word of Faith
- Marital Status
- Married
We are living in what most church people call the age of grace, or the church age. Judgment has NOT COME yet. Go back and read: are there STILL people being martyred? Of course there are. But John wrote that they must wait for their FULL NUMBER. Judgment is not coming until the last church age martyr is killed. That will not happen UNTIL the rapture ends the church age. it is not "cruel" it is GOD.
Note carefully again: as long as the church age continues, and martyrs are still being killed - judgment is postponed.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Christian Gedge
Well-Known Member
- Nov 29, 2017
- 1,214
- 1,361
- Country
- New Zealand
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
iamlamad said:
The weeks were part of the old Hebrew calendar of that time. A 'week' was like our 'decade' but a bit shorter. So, the people of that time would have understood it to be contiguous.
Calendars don't have gaps.
Upvote
0
Douggg
anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
- May 28, 2009
- 28,776
- 3,419
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Private
There is that expectation down through history. The difference with now is that we have the parable of the fig tree, and Israel being a nation again, and Jerusalem in the hands of the Jews.
The only big sign we are not quiet there yet, as far as the emergence of the Antichrist to precede Jesus's Second Coming, is the ten kings being in place of Daniel 7, which the little horn will be over.
Upvote
0
Douggg
anytime rapture, non-dispensationalist, futurist
- May 28, 2009
- 28,776
- 3,419
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Private
Gedge, we have too many signs, two of them very big, that overshadows previous thoughts of them who believe that the 70 weeks are contiguous.
Israel a nation again. 1948
Jerusalem back in the hands of the Jews. 1967
The parable of the fig tree, which Jesus gave, after he had just referred to the abomination of desolation citing Daniel the prophet. The same Daniel, which the 70 weeks were determined up Daniel people Israel and Jerusalem, in Daniel 9:24.
So we have the two elements - Israel and Jerusalem. And the two fulfillment in 1948 and 1967. And the parable of the fig tree generation.
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.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- May 19, 2015
- 125,492
- 28,588
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Except for one significant difference.....waking up to the sight of the Muslim Gold Dome instead of a Temple of God.......
Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke's Temple/Jerusalem Discourses harmonized
Matthew 24:2
And Jesus said to them, “ are ye not seeing all these?
Amen I am saying to ye,
not no may be being left here stone upon stone, which not shall be being thrown-down<2647>.”
The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD
The Temple now presented little more than a heap of ruins........................................
Before their final demolition, however, Titus took, a. survey of the city and its fortifications ; and, while contemplating their impregnable strength, could not help ascribing his success to the peculiar interposition of the ALMIGHTY HIMSELF. "Had not God himself (exclaimed he) aided out operations, and driven the Jews from their fortresses, it would have been absolutely impossible to have taken them ; for what could men, and the force of engines, have done against such towers as these ?"
After this he commanded that the city should be commanded razed to its foundations, excepting only the three lofty towers Hippocos, Phasael, and Mariamne, which he suffered to remain as evidences of its strength, and as trophies of his victory.
There was left standing, also, a small part of the western wall; as a rampart for a garrison, to keep the surrounding country in subjection. Titus now gave orders that those Jews only who resisted should be slain ; but the soldiers, equally void of pity and remorse, slew even the sick and the aged. The robbers and seditious were all punished with death
=================================
Deuteronomy 28:
65Among these nations you shall find no ease, and there shall be no rest for the sole of your foot: but Yahweh will give you there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and pining of soul; 66and your life shall hang in doubt before you; and you shall fear night and day, and shall have no assurance of your life.
67In the morning you shall say, "I wish it were evening!" and at evening you shall say, "I wish it were morning!" for the fear of your heart which you shall fear, and for the sight of your eyes which you shall see. 68Yahweh will bring you into Egypt again with ships, by the way of which I said to you, You shall see it no more again: and there you shall sell yourselves to your enemies for bondservants and for bondmaids, and no man shall buy you.
=============================
Dome of the Rock | History, Architecture, & Facts
Dome of the Rock, Arabic Qubbat al-Ṣakhrah, shrine in Jerusalem built by the Umayyad caliph ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Marwān in the late 7th century ce.
Upvote
0
