A Serious Concern I have about Dispensationalism

[Micah68]

IMO, this is very interesting.....

Antiquities of the Jews - Book XII
HOW JUDAS OVERTHREW THE FORCES OF APOLLONIUS AND SERON AND KILLED THE GENERALS OF THEIR ARMIES THEMSELVES; AND HOW WHEN, A LITTLE WHILE AFTERWARDS LYSIAS AND GORGIAS WERE BEATEN HE WENT UP TO JERUSALEM AND PURIFIED THE TEMPLE.
6. When therefore the generals of Antiochus's armies had been beaten so often, Judas assembled the people together, and told them, that after these many victories which God had given them, they ought to go up to Jerusalem, and purify the temple, and offer the appointed sacrifices. But as soon as he, with the whole multitude, was come to Jerusalem, and found the temple deserted, and its gates burnt down, and plants growing in the temple of their own accord, on account of its desertion, he and those that were with him began to lament, and were quite confounded at the sight of the temple; so he chose out some of his soldiers, and gave them order to fight against those guards that were in the citadel, until he should have purified the temple. When therefore he had carefully purged it, and had brought in new vessels, the candlestick, the table [of shew-bread], and the altar [of incense], which were made of gold, he hung up the veils at the gates, and added doors to them. He also took down the altar [of burnt-offering], and built a new one of stones that he gathered together, and not of such as were hewn with iron tools. So on the five and twentieth day of the month Casleu, which the Macedonians call Apeliens, they lighted the lamps that were on the candlestick, and offered incense upon the altar [of incense], and laid the loaves upon the table [of shew-bread], and offered burnt-offerings upon the new altar [of burnt-offering]. Now it so fell out, that these things were done on the very same day on which their Divine worship had fallen off, and was reduced to a profane and common use, after three years' time; for so it was, that the temple was made desolate by Antiochus, and so continued for three years. This desolation happened to the temple in the hundred forty and fifth year, on the twenty-fifth day of the month Apeliens, and on the hundred fifty and third olympiad: but it was dedicated anew, on the same day, the twenty-fifth of the month Apeliens, on the hundred and forty-eighth year, and on the hundred and fifty-fourth olympiad. And this desolation came to pass according to the prophecy of Daniel, which was given four hundred and eight years before; for he declared that the Macedonians would dissolve that worship [for some time].
http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-12.htm

 

[holdon]

I'm not advocating that the 69th week began at Bethlehem, I'm just saying that there is significance to the name Messiah the Prince that help us determine when the 69 weeks end and the 70th week began.

Until Messiah it would be 69 weeks. vs.25
After 69 weeks Messiah would be cut off.
Also after the 69 weeks a people would come and destroy city and sanctuary with subsequent wars until the end vs26.
This same people that destroy the city would have a coming prince. This coming prince would confirm a covenant with the masses for a week. (this is the 70th week) vs 27.
We now know that the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the city and the subsequent wars "till the end" were not at the same time. It certainly could never have been in 1 week = 7 years. It is clear then that there is a gap between the 69th and the 70th, marked by these events. But when you come to the end: the last week in vs 27, there is the prince who would come. He is part of the people who destroyed the city etc.. This prince confirms a agreement with the masses (the unbelievers) for a week. Because of the idolatry involved there will be desolations until the consumption (=end of the 70 weeks).

Well, first you said that the desolation described in vs 26 describes the destruction of the tabernacle and City, and that is by the People of the Prince who is (was) to come. The People who destroy the city and the Prince to come are joined together.

No, they are not joined. That prince was yet to come....

(This idea of a restored Roman Empire just to accomplish a different idea of a different prince is much much more out of line than any Parallelism.)

Not for a careful reader or Daniel and Revelation.

Then you would take the future covenant from verse 27 and apply it to a prince in verse 26 who is connected to the people who destroy the tabernacle and city.

It's rather the other way around: the prince to come, announced in vs 26, is the he of vs 27 who, once he has come, will confirm this covenant with the masses. It is absolutely clear.

I see no reason that it should be read chronologically other than to willfully insert the Gap.

It cannot escape any reader that when you see: 1. Messiah cut off, 2. the city and sanctuary destroyed by a foreign people, and 3. consecutive wars and trouble till the end, that this is not happening in 7 years.

The correct subject of the previous sentence is "the people who destroy the city" The "HE" cannot describe the people. In proper english and grammer it would re-introduce 'the prince' as the subject before using a pronoun for him. Those are the rules of grammer. Thus the "He" refers back to Messiah.

??? Of course the subject of vs 26 is "the people". No doubt about that. But the "he" of vs 27 refers to the coming prince. The coming prince is the matching noun immediately before "he" is spoken of. You cannot make it refer to Messiah of two sentences ago.

I'm sorry that it changes things around for you. But this is semi-typical of Hebrew Parallelism in poetry.

Give me a break.

As the one Rabbii said; "it is a very 'forced' perspective.

Of course Rabbi's don't want to hear of a "Messiah being cut off", for obvious reasons.

 

[holdon]

'Then' also translates 'at that time'

I am not understanding your argument.......

Mt 24 says: when you see the abomination in the holy place, then flee. In 70AD when after a long siege, where the Jews were given a chance to give themselves, up, at the very last the Romans entered the temple (the holy place), it was too late. Although Titus had sought to preserve it, some soldier started a fire and the whole place burned and the hiding Jews or burned or killed themselves, or if not were killed by the Romans. Thus to wait till you would see the "abomination" was in fact condemning you to death, instead of giving a chance to flee.
Therefore the signal to flee in Luke 21 is different: when you see the surrounding armies. The Romans were still letting out whoever wanted to get out.

Luke 21 has its application in 70AD, but Mt 24 in the last great tribulation period. First it will be a moment of relative calm: they think a covenant will protect them. The abomination will be set up in the temple and the man of sin will be seated there to be worshipped as God. When that will be seen, Jesus tells them to get out immediately. Because then a sudden destruction will come upon them.

 

[holdon]

So much needs to be considered when reading the Bible, Context, the time and to whom it was written. ​

First the bible, then the newspaper (or history book). Not the other way around. That's what some dispensensationalists do....

 

[Micah68]

First the bible, then the newspaper (or history book). Not the other way around. That's what some dispensensationalists do....

I am Sorry but I would never apply events in the newspaper with the Bible when events ( and newsprint) can be munipulated to fit. As far as a history book goes it would have to be a very Credible historical document that would support and not contradict God's Holy word.

 

[Notrash]

If Christ is the foundation, there could not have been a Church before He came.

Rev 13:8 says that he was the Lamb slaim before the foundation of the world. This coincides with John the Baptist saying; Behold the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Thus, the cornerstone and Justification by faith was laid before the foundation of the world, followed by the prophets (all the types Abel and Noah and of the patriarchs, the types of Joseph, Moses, Joshua, and the types of the tabernacle, etc). and finally the apostles. Christ church is not something new, IMO. The idea that the Ecclesia began at Pentecost is a common thought, but it was the time that the disciples recieved POWER. Jesus had already breathed the Spirit onto them before he ascended, thus signifying his not returning. I feel that Jesus church is the church of the Creator (col 1:16;17) and Redeemer of Souls created in the Fathers image and likeness.
At that time, the Pharisees were beginning to teach various liberal theologies similar to Gap theories in the Creation. Thus Jesus could have been signifying (and I think he was signifying) that his "my church" was not neccessarily something 'new' to begin at some signified time, but rather something seperated from the Pharisees/Sanhedren and Samaritains etc etc. Remember Jesus words to the Samaritain woman. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

Also, you see that both the Jews and the Gentiles are put on this new footing in the Church. Not: the Gentile joined the Jew.

I'm basically in agreement here. If it sounded otherwise, it was percieved incorreclty or written incorrectly. All come under the Lordship, commands, promises and fullness of Christ. Unsaved Jews drop the idolatrous religion to believe in the reality of Christ and unsaved Gentiles drop the emptiness of Godlessness to be replaced by the fullness of Christ and the history of Gods's confirmation of HIM.

 

[Micah68]

Mt 24 says: when you see the abomination in the holy place, then flee.

Christ is giving warning, also to whom is Christ speaking in Matt. 24?

 

[holdon]

Rev 13:8 says that he was the Lamb slaim before the foundation of the world. This coincides with John the Baptist saying; Behold the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Thus, the cornerstone and Justification by faith was laid before the foundation of the world, followed by the prophets (all the types Abel and Noah and of the patriarchs, the types of Joseph, Moses, Joshua, and the types of the tabernacle, etc). and finally the apostles.

Faith in God is as old as Man.

Christ church is not something new, IMO. The idea that the Ecclesia began at Pentecost is a common thought, but it was the time that the disciples recieved POWER.

At Pentecost is when the body of Christ was formed: baptized by the spirit into one body.

Jesus had already breathed the Spirit onto them before he ascended, thus signifying his not returning. I feel that Jesus church is the church of the Creator (col 1:16;17) and Redeemer of Souls created in the Fathers image and likeness.
At that time, the Pharisees were beginning to teach various liberal theologies similar to Gap theories in the Creation.

???

Thus Jesus could have been signifying (and I think he was signifying) that his "my church" was not neccessarily something 'new' to begin at some signified time, but rather something seperated from the Pharisees/Sanhedren and Samaritains etc etc. Remember Jesus words to the Samaritain woman. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

Yes, the true worshippers wouldn't go to Jerusalem anymore, but it would be in Spirit and in Truth. It would be a spiritual thing.

 

[holdon]

I am Sorry but I would never apply events in the newspaper with the Bible when events ( and newsprint) can be munipulated to fit. As far as a history book goes it would have to be a very Credible historical document that would support and not contradict God's Holy word.

That's good.

 

[Notrash]

No doubt about that. But the "he" of vs 27 refers to the coming prince. The coming prince is the matching noun immediately before "he" is spoken of. You cannot make it refer to Messiah of two sentences ago.

In Hebrew Parallelism, not Chronology, the He is only a few phrases or words away from the Messiah.

Give me a break. Of course Rabbi's don't want to hear of a "Messiah being cut off", for obvious reasons.

Actually it's not the Messiah being 'cut off' that is the forced interpretation but the weeks that are 'cut off'. This is the forced interpretation that is recognized by at least a few Rabbii's. Actually they are the ones who would want the weeks to be cut off.

Here it is again.

24"Seventy weeks are determined,
What are those 70 weeks assigned for?

For your people and for your holy city,
What will occur in those 70 weeks through the people and in the holy city? Answer!
To finish the transgression,
To make an end of sins,
To make reconciliation for iniquity,
To bring in everlasting righteousness,
To seal up vision and prophecy,
And to anoint the Most Holy.

NOTICE, the desolation of the city is not referred to or even alluded to within the 70 weeks. The happenings within the 70 weeks are positive. Destroying the city does not bring in 'everlasting righteousness', neither does it accomplish any of the other items.

If you put a period after Holy city, it would appear that the city and the people end, but this is Hebrew Parallelism with all 6 of those events are PARALELL to each other and all happening within the 70 weeks and by the people and in the city.

Question: Why do you not read those happenings Chronologically? Or perhaps you do?..

25"Know therefore and understand,
That from the going forth of the command
To restore and build Jerusalem
Until Messiah the Prince,
There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks;

The entrance or beginning of Messiah the Prince marks the end of the 69 weeks. This is obviously his Baptism since neither His Birth or His crucifiction crown Him as the annointed son of God, although both confirm it. Remember when Jesus said to the Samaritan woman.... He of whom you speaketh, speaketh to you...when she was saying about the Messiah would come. Thus Jesus was confirmed being the Messiah to Her and when reading Isaiah 61 in the temple. There is no other time that marks the end of the 69 weeks and Messiah the Prince other than His Baptism and proclaimation from the Father.

The street shall be built again, and the wall,
Even in troublesome times.

26"And after the sixty-two weeks.

Sometime after the 69th week, (It does not say or imply at the end of the 69th week), but it clearly says AFTER...
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; The 69 weeks are clearly defined between the giving of the command to rebuild the temple and Messiah, (the annointing) of the Prince,... son of God at his Baptism as mentioned above.

We would all recognize that it was 3 1/2 years after his baptism that He was cut off (crucified)

So we would have 3 1/2 years left.

Here is an agreed upon gap signified by the words who is to come. This is either in the final 3 1/2 years or after the 70 weeks are fulfilled.

And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Next verse,
27Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;

Now wait a second..... we only have half a week left...3 1/2 years. How can prince confirm a covenant for 7 years, with only 3 1/2 years left in the 70 weeks? Or would you imply that only 3 1/2 years of this week that the prince confirms a covenant in are part of Daniels 70 weeks?

But in the middle of the week

Is this talking about the middle of the 70th week? or the middle of the princes final week? Which would be at the end of the 70 weeks. WAIT.... something else already happened in the middle of the 70th week.... what was it.... oh yeah.. the Messiah was killed.... Oh well that's a little thing compared to the prince breaking his covenant. Wow, this prince is going to
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. But that was done in 68 AD.??? and also done by Christ in their effectiveness by his Crucifiction.

Hmmm something's not adding up here to read this Chronologically

And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,

Here is another gap signified by the 'wing' of abominations that occur inside the 70 weeks but the desolations are outside the 70 weeks as signified by the words 'shall be'.... But now wait again, The prince made an end to sacrifice and offereing......so would the the Jewish people now desolate the Roman empire because of the abomination of the roman empire ending sacrifices and offereings that were re-instated by the Pharisees??? We know Christ put an end to them and abolished them as told to us in Ephesians 2.
But the Roman Armies because of their Objective, just and fair laws were used by God to judge the PHarisees before!!!??? And now, the desolations and ending of the future cities are all outside the 70 weeks and into the final 3 1/2 weeks of the princes covenant. So that doenst work....Hmmm I think I'll take a break and stick to what I see.

Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate."​

Here is another example of a parralellism. The first 3 lines say parallel things describing the same idea. The next 2 describe the same idea. In Dan 9, it is the 2 verses that are parrallel with each other. If they could be written side by side, it would be eaiser to see. The first part of 26 describes the same happenings as the first part of 27. Likewise the second parts describe events after the 70 weeks that are determined by the 70 weeks.

Zec 9:5 Ashkelon shall see it and fear;
Gaza also shall be very sorrowful;
And Ekron, for He dried up her expectation.
The king shall perish from Gaza,
And Ashkelon shall not be inhabited.

To me, Dan 9; verses 26 and 27 are obviously Parallel and the 70 weeks fulfilled in the preaching of the Gospel in Jerusalem and the final judgement being the rulers and leaders rejection of Christ in the form of the Holy Spirit by Stoning Stephen in about 33 AD. If there is a gap, it would have to be halfway between the 70th week. But it would not fit into What Daniel would have thought or written.

But, I would not go against God if in his wisdom... has an 'all of the above' agenda, or a repeat of the happenings of the Cross and Noah near the consummation of the remaking of the earth into new heavens and new earth, then so be it. As is now my perspective, I dont' see this supported by Dan 9.

 

[Notrash]

At Pentecost is when the body of Christ was formed: baptized by the spirit into one body. ???

Predominately Jews were in the city at that time and at that place.It wasn't till later that Gentiles heard the Gospel. The 'one body of Jew/Gentile didn't begin till Peter preached to the Roman Centurion.

It's not a great point to differ on, but again, Jesus is the lamb slain before the foundation of the world and the Cornerstone was laid then.

Me wonders if the idea of the ecclesia of God begining at Pentacost aids in the seperation of the church/Israel idea.

 

[holdon]

At Pentecost is when the body of Christ was formed: baptized by the spirit into one body. ???

Me wonders if the idea of the ecclesia of God begining at Pentacost aids in the seperation of the church/Israel idea.

Of course. The ground for salvation has always been the same, but God's dealings were different. Before there was the Church, there was Israel. Before there was Israel, there were the patriarchs. Before the patriarchs, there were individuals. That is the point of "dispensationalism".

 

[holdon]

Actually it's not the Messiah being 'cut off' that is the forced interpretation but the weeks that are 'cut off'. This is the forced interpretation that is recognized by at least a few Rabbii's. Actually they are the ones who would want the weeks to be cut off.

Of course, they don't want to hear of a Messiah cut off. But it is "he shall be cut off" and can therefore not mean "the weeks are cut off".

Here it is again.

24"Seventy weeks are determined,
What are those 70 weeks assigned for?

For your people and for your holy city,
What will occur in those 70 weeks through the people and in the holy city? Answer!
To finish the transgression,
To make an end of sins,
To make reconciliation for iniquity,
To bring in everlasting righteousness,
To seal up vision and prophecy,
And to anoint the Most Holy.

NOTICE, the desolation of the city is not referred to or even alluded to within the 70 weeks. The happenings within the 70 weeks are positive. Destroying the city does not bring in 'everlasting righteousness', neither does it accomplish any of the other items.

If you put a period after Holy city, it would appear that the city and the people end, but this is Hebrew Parallelism with all 6 of those events are PARALELL to each other and all happening within the 70 weeks and by the people and in the city.

Question: Why do you not read those happenings Chronologically? Or perhaps you do?..

Yes, I do and the reason is clear: Daniel was given a chronology of things to happen. See vs 24

25"Know therefore and understand,
That from the going forth of the command
To restore and build Jerusalem
Until Messiah the Prince,
There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks;

The entrance or beginning of Messiah the Prince marks the end of the 69 weeks. This is obviously his Baptism since neither His Birth or His crucifiction crown Him as the annointed son of God, although both confirm it. Remember when Jesus said to the Samaritan woman.... He of whom you speaketh, speaketh to you...when she was saying about the Messiah would come. Thus Jesus was confirmed being the Messiah to Her and when reading Isaiah 61 in the temple. There is no other time that marks the end of the 69 weeks and Messiah the Prince other than His Baptism and proclaimation from the Father.

I am not sure it is His baptism, but it could be.

The street shall be built again, and the wall,
Even in troublesome times.

26"And after the sixty-two weeks.

Sometime after the 69th week, (It does not say or imply at the end of the 69th week), but it clearly says AFTER...
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; The 69 weeks are clearly defined between the giving of the command to rebuild the temple and Messiah, (the annointing) of the Prince,... son of God at his Baptism as mentioned above.

Yes, 69 weeks from the decree to Messiah.

We would all recognize that it was 3 1/2 years after his baptism that He was cut off (crucified)

So we would have 3 1/2 years left.

Here is an agreed upon gap signified by the words who is to come. This is either in the final 3 1/2 years or after the 70 weeks are fulfilled.

The Messiah was cut off after 69 weeks. If His baptism was in 30AD and His cut off was in 33AD, it would still be after the 69 weeks evidently. And the city being destroyed is still after that of course.

And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Next verse,
27Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;

Now wait a second..... we only have half a week left...3 1/2 years. How can prince confirm a covenant for 7 years, with only 3 1/2 years left in the 70 weeks? Or would you imply that only 3 1/2 years of this week that the prince confirms a covenant in are part of Daniels 70 weeks?

Because it is nowhere said that the 3 1/2 years of Messiah are part of the 70th week. On the contrary, we are led to believe that the cutting off of Messiah, the destruction of the city and sanctuary and the wars are all not only after 69 weeks but also before the 70th. Because then it is the "he" that would come, who confirms a covenant with the masses. Also, we see worship rituals, which wouldn't be there if the sanctuary was destroyed.

But in the middle of the week

Is this talking about the middle of the 70th week? or the middle of the princes final week?

70th week and final week are the same.

Which would be at the end of the 70 weeks. WAIT.... something else already happened in the middle of the 70th week.... what was it.... oh yeah.. the Messiah was killed....

And where do you get that from?

Oh well that's a little thing compared to the prince breaking his covenant. Wow, this prince is going to
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. But that was done in 68 AD.??? and also done by Christ in their effectiveness by his Crucifiction.

So, which is it: 68AD or the Crucifiction? But the destruction of the city and the sanctuary were before that..... Thereafter would be the prince to come.

 

[Notrash]

Because it is nowhere said that the 3 1/2 years of Messiah are part of the 70th week. On the contrary, we are led to believe that the cutting off of Messiah, the destruction of the city and sanctuary and the wars are all not only after 69 weeks but also before the 70th.

Well that would put the cutting off of Messiah (his death) as something outside of the 70 weeks? The 69 would end at his Baptism, and the 70th week sometime in the distant future.

But in verse 26 again, the Messiah is cut off/crucified, but not for Himself. This signifies his propitiatory death and/or his unjust sentence, which is one in the same. (I John 2:2; 4:10)

Now in verse 24, one of the things that must be accomplished within those 70 weeks is; To make reconciliation for iniquity; Now from what I understand, there is only one way that sin (iniquity is reconciled) The blood of bulls and goats didnt' accomplish it, and Jesus made one sacrifice, once for all. Thus the reconciliation for iniquity of Christ's atoning death must also occur within the 70 week time frame according to Dan 9:24. Unless of course you know of another way that iniquity is reconciled (to God I assume)

Thus, this would dictate that the crucifiction and the 3 1/2 years of Messiah were within the 70 week time frame.

Again NOTICE, in verse 24, the desolation of the city is not referred to or even alluded to within the 70 weeks. The 6 happenings in verse 24 within the 70 weeks are positive. Destroying the city does not bring in 'everlasting righteousness', neither does it accomplish any of the other items

Because then it is the "he" that would come, who confirms a covenant with the masses. Also, we see worship rituals, which wouldn't be there if the sanctuary was destroyed.

Well, my view doesnt' have this problem. The He is the Messiah who confirms God's salvation covenant with 'many from 7 years beginning with his baptism and teaching and through the Holy Spirit.. all to the people and all in the holy city, first. The people of the prince to come are doing the destroying and desolating in both verses. I know this doesnt' jive with your perspective of Revelation, but that's a different issue. Jesus mentioned Daniels prophecy in 'this generation that shall not pass'. But does John mention the prophet Daniels name? There are similar time frames and numbers of days in Rev as there are in Daniel, but that's not the first that has happened either. The most obvious is the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness and the 40 year generation between the cross and the desolation.

70th week and final week are the same

. Agreed

He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.

So, which is it: 68AD or the Crucifiction?

I think it can be that Jesus causes both. At the crucifiction, Christ made
an end to the typology of the sacrifice and offering and they now became officially Idolotrous. They were Idolatrous in their heart for quite some time before.

And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
It is the continued idolatrous sacrifices and offereings that are an abomination to God, and these are the cause of the one who makes the sacrifices desolate and begins the desolation of the city.

 

[Notrash]

Thanks for this iron sharpening iron topic. I think I've exhausted the Hebrew Parallelism view as well as I can without continuing to wrangle about words or go over the same topic time and again.

And thanks for exposing the 'chronological' view.
I dont' intend to leave any discussions open ended or be disrespectful to questions and discussions. But it's been a good study.

God's Peace and God's Love to all who call upon Him.
Not rash

 

[holdon]

Well that would put the cutting off of Messiah (his death) as something outside of the 70 weeks? The 69 would end at his Baptism, and the 70th week sometime in the distant future.

But in verse 26 again, the Messiah is cut off/crucified, but not for Himself. This signifies his propitiatory death and/or his unjust sentence, which is one in the same. (I John 2:2; 4:10)

Now in verse 24, one of the things that must be accomplished within those 70 weeks is; To make reconciliation for iniquity; Now from what I understand, there is only one way that sin (iniquity is reconciled) The blood of bulls and goats didnt' accomplish it, and Jesus made one sacrifice, once for all. Thus the reconciliation for iniquity of Christ's atoning death must also occur within the 70 week time frame according to Dan 9:24. Unless of course you know of another way that iniquity is reconciled (to God I assume)

Thus, this would dictate that the crucifiction and the 3 1/2 years of Messiah were within the 70 week time frame.

Or as we have seen the 70 weeks encompass 69 consecutive weeks then a gap and then the last week. The crucifixion of Messiah falls in that gap, as well as the destruction of the city, the wars. Then you have the 70th week with the coming prince, etc. Gaps are not unusual in prophecy. See Is 61:2 for example.

Well, my view doesnt' have this problem. The He is the Messiah who confirms God's salvation covenant with 'many from 7 years beginning with his baptism and teaching and through the Holy Spirit.. all to the people and all in the holy city, first.

Why would Messiah confirm a covenant for only 7 years? And then only with the "many". (the unfaithful "many" are contrasted with the pious "wise" =maschilim in Daniel).

The people of the prince to come are doing the destroying and desolating in both verses. I know this doesnt' jive with your perspective of Revelation, but that's a different issue.

No, it doesn't jive with these verses in Daniel either.

Jesus mentioned Daniels prophecy in 'this generation that shall not pass'. But does John mention the prophet Daniels name? There are similar time frames and numbers of days in Rev as there are in Daniel, but that's not the first that has happened either. The most obvious is the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness and the 40 year generation between the cross and the desolation.
. Agreed

He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.



I think it can be that Jesus causes both. At the crucifiction, Christ made
an end to the typology of the sacrifice and offering and they now became officially Idolotrous. They were Idolatrous in their heart for quite some time before.

I don't think you see plain idolatry after the babylonic captivity.

And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
It is the continued idolatrous sacrifices and offereings that are an abomination to God, and these are the cause of the one who makes the sacrifices desolate and begins the desolation of the city.

I think it is more that the ally themselves with idolatrous people in the final days, seeking protection from the threat of the overflowing scourge.

 

[holdon]

Thanks for this iron sharpening iron topic. I think I've exhausted the Hebrew Parallelism view as well as I can without continuing to wrangle about words or go over the same topic time and again.

And thanks for exposing the 'chronological' view.
I dont' intend to leave any discussions open ended or be disrespectful to questions and discussions. But it's been a good study.

God's Peace and God's Love to all who call upon Him.
Not rash

Thanks. May God be with you.

 

[Notrash]

Or as we have seen the 70 weeks encompass 69 consecutive weeks then a gap and then the last week. The crucifixion of Messiah falls in that gap, as well as the destruction of the city, the wars. Then you have the 70th week with the coming prince, etc.

But the crucifiction can't be in the gap because one of the things to be accomplished in the 490 years /70 weeks is the reconciliation of iniquity in vs 24. The reconciliation of iniquity (crucifiction) occurs within the 70 wks, 490 years, thus it can't occur in the 'gap'.

If your saying that whatever happens between the Decree of Cyrus and the end of time happens in Daniels 70 weeks....then why would we have a 490 year prophecy at all?. It would not glorify God by seeing it fulfilled. It would be a false prophecy. Also, how would it compare with Jeremiahs 70 year prophecy, or God saying to Abraham that his descendents would be in Egypt for 400 years begining with the 4th generation. Those prophecies show that God was there, knows the future and can accomplish all he will say.

Why would Messiah confirm a covenant for only 7 years?

The covenant is confirmed within the 70 week period. And within the 70 weeks, according to verse 24 the people of Daniel (Jews) and the city are the focus in those 490 years. It was confirmed and supported to the Jews through wonders and miracles and the fulfillment of the types and preaching to the Jew first. After the 70 weeks, 490 years, the effects of the things occuring is free to go outside of Daniels people and the Holy city, as it did. Again, notice that there is nothing negative in vs 24 and nothing referring to any desolation or destruction. Those things occur outside of the 70 week prophecy.

And then only with the "many". (the unfaithful "many" are contrasted with the pious "wise" =maschilim in Daniel).

The Many here are 'many' of Daniels people qualified by 'your people' in verse 24. That is the condition of things happening during the 70 weeks. Daniels people and the Holy city. There is no other modifier indicating they are an 'unfaithful' many anywhere close in Dan 9.

Gaps are not unusual in prophecy. See Is 61:2 for example.

We dealt with Isaiah 2 in a previous post. http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=38626557&postcount=276
Is there a gap in the phrase;
I will bless those who bless you,
and curse those who curse you?

Is the acceptable YEAR of the Lord only for that Year?
Answer: No,
Thus the 'DAY' of Vengence is more than just a certain Day also.
It is in any day that is the acceptable year of the Lord.
No Gap,
Jhn 9:29, And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind. If a person does not have Jesus/God as Lord, they have the wrath of God.

If a person (as biblewriter did) want to know why Jesus stopped midway.... ask, seek, knock....(james 4;2-8) rather than accepting indoctrinated conclusions.

 

[Micah68]

I am curious, in the 2000 years of Christianity, why it took so long for dispensationalism to come having only been around about 200 years? Also, according to dispensationalism, when will the rapture occur? and when will Christ return for the final time. What is the exact length of the the gap between the 69th and 70th week? I really am all confused.

~Micah

 

[holdon]

But the crucifiction can't be in the gap because one of the things to be accomplished in the 490 years /70 weeks is the reconciliation of iniquity in vs 24. The reconciliation of iniquity (crucifiction) occurs within the 70 wks, 490 years, thus it can't occur in the 'gap'.

Why not? Do you think the destruction of the sanctuary and the city is within the 490 years after the decree? If this destruction happened in 70AD, you will have serious trouble finding a decree anywhere close 490 earlier.

If your saying that whatever happens between the Decree of Cyrus and the end of time happens in Daniels 70 weeks....then why would we have a 490 year prophecy at all?.

Why not? Do you think the destruction of the sanctuary and the city is within the 490 years after the decree? If this destruction happened in 70AD (and there is no other I think), you will have serious trouble finding a decree anywhere close 490 years earlier. So, the conclusion must be I think that there is a gap between the 69th and the 70th as is also indicated in the text itself.

It would not glorify God by seeing it fulfilled. It would be a false prophecy. Also, how would it compare with Jeremiahs 70 year prophecy, or God saying to Abraham that his descendents would be in Egypt for 400 years begining with the 4th generation. Those prophecies show that God was there, knows the future and can accomplish all he will say.

Jeremiah's 70 years have nothing to do with this one. 70 years is different from 490 years.

The covenant is confirmed within the 70 week period.

Well, it says it is confirmed for a week.

And within the 70 weeks, according to verse 24 the people of Daniel (Jews) and the city are the focus in those 490 years.

That's exactly right. After Messiah was cut off, because of the people rejecting Christ, the clock re. the Jewish people stopped so to speak. In order that the gentiles may come in.

It was confirmed and supported to the Jews through wonders and miracles and the fulfillment of the types and preaching to the Jew first. After the 70 weeks, 490 years, the effects of the things occuring is free to go outside of Daniels people and the Holy city, as it did. Again, notice that there is nothing negative in vs 24 and nothing referring to any desolation or destruction. Those things occur outside of the 70 week prophecy.

Not if you look at vs 27 and the last week. It is all there in the last week. But the last week ends with Christ's glorious appearing. Then the Jewish people, (that what remains of it) will be God's people again.

We dealt with Isaiah 2 in a previous post. http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=38626557&postcount=276
Is there a gap in the phrase;
I will bless those who bless you,
and curse those who curse you?

Is the acceptable YEAR of the Lord only for that Year?
Answer: No,
Thus the 'DAY' of Vengence is more than just a certain Day also.
It is in any day that is the acceptable year of the Lord.
No Gap,
Jhn 9:29, And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind. If a person does not have Jesus/God as Lord, they have the wrath of God.

If a person (as biblewriter did) want to know why Jesus stopped midway.... ask, seek, knock....(james 4;2-8) rather than accepting indoctrinated conclusions.

Well, Is 61:2 is clear and repeated only half in the gospels, indicating a half fulfillment only. The good part is happening since Jesus first coming. The rest (the worst part) is yet to come at His second coming.