Christ or Antichrist: Who makes a covenant with many in Dan.9:27?

Quasar92

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 7, 2016
3,762
1,943
100
Lexington, KY 40517
Visit site
✟332,574.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate. (Daniel 9:27 NASB)

In this installment I will provide further reasons for a time-gap between the sixty-nine and seventieth weeks and note features from the text that support the interpretation that this seven-year period is the yet to come tribulation period.

Antichrist or Christ?

Right off the bat, the first question that arises in verse 27 is to whom does the pronoun "he" refer to? I believe that "he" must refer to "the prince who is to come" in verse 26. However, opponents of literal interpretation disagree. Preterist, Dr. Kenneth Gentry says, "[T]he indefinite pronoun ‘he’ does not refer back to ‘the prince who is to come’ of verse 26." Fellow preterist, Gary DeMar, insists "it is Jesus who ‘will make a firm covenant with the many,’ not the antichrist." Yet, such an errant interpretation violates the grammar and syntax of the Hebrew text.

In Hebrew grammar, as with most languages, a pronoun would refer to the nearest antecedent, unless there was a contextual reason to think otherwise. In this instance, the nearest antecedent in agreement with "he" is "the prince who is to come" in verse 26. This is recognized by a majority of scholars, including a number of amillennialists such as Kiel and Leupold. Only a priori theological bias could lead a trained interpreter of Scripture to any other conclusion. Robert Culver explains the correct meaning of this text as follows:

The ordinary rules of grammar establish that the leading actor of this verse is the Antichrist, the great evil man of the end time. . . . If the pronoun "he" were present in the Hebrew, a case might possibly be made for the introduction of an entirely new personality into the story at this point. However, there is no pronoun; only the third masculine singular form of the verb indicates that an antecedent is to be sought, and that of necessity in the preceding context. Usually, the last preceding noun that agrees in gender and number and agrees with the sense is the antecedent. This is unquestionably . . . "the coming prince" of verse 26. He is a "coming" prince, that is, one whom the reader would already know as a prince to come, because he is the same as the "little horn" on the fourth beast of chapter 7.

Leon Wood provides a list of further reasons for taking the "he" in verse 27 as a reference to "the prince who is to come" of verse 26.

Second, as noted above, the unusual manner of mention in verse twenty-six regarding that prince calls for just such a further reference as this. There is no reason for the earlier notice unless something further is to be said regarding him, for he does nothing nor plays any part in activities there described. Third, several matters show that what is now said regarding the one in reference does not suit if that reference is to Christ. (a) This person makes a "firm covenant" with people, but Christ made no covenant. God made a Covenant of Grace with people, and Christ fulfilled requirements under it, but this is quite different from Christ's making a covenant. (b) Even if Christ had made a covenant with people during His lifetime, the idea of mentioning it only here in the overall thought of the passage would be unusual, when the subjects of His death and even the destruction of Jerusalem have already been set forth. (c) The idea of the seventieth week, here closely associated with this one, does not fit the life or ministry of Christ, as will be shown presently. (d) The idea that this one causes "sacrifice and offering to cease" does not fit in reference to Christ in this context. The amillennial view holds that these words refer to Christ's supreme sacrifice in death, which made all other sacrifices and offerings of no further use, thus making them to cease in principle. But, if so, what would be the reason for such a statement (true as it is) in view of the purpose of the overall prediction? One could understand a direct statement concerning Christ's providing atonement for sin—though its placing at this point in the general thought order the passage would be strange—because that would be important to sin-bondaged Israelites. But why, if that is the basic thought, should it be expressed so indirectly, in terms of sacrificing and offering being made to cease?

It is safe to conclude that the immediate context of this passage and the book as a whole supports our understanding of this matter. This interpretation would also support a futurist understanding of verse 27.

The Making of a Covenant

What is it that "he" will do? The antichrist will "make a firm covenant with the many for one week," that is seven years. Non-literal interpreters of Daniel’s seventy-week prophecy usually attempt to make this covenant a reference to Christ’s covenant to save His people, usually known as the covenant of grace. "This, then, is a confirming of a covenant already extant, i.e., the covenant of God’s redemptive grace that Christ confirms (Rom. 15:8)," claims Dr. Gentry. Dr. Gentry and those advocating a similar view, must resort to a non-textual, theological interpretation at this point since there was no seven-year covenant made by Christ with the Jewish people at the time of His first coming. They must back off from the specifics of the text in verse 27 and import in a theological interpretation, thus providing us with a classic example of spiritualization or allegorical interpretation.

If this is supposed to be a reference to the covenant of grace, then "it may be observed first that this would be a strange way to express such a thought," notes Dr. Wood. Christ’s salvation covenant is not limited to seven years rather it is an eternal covenant. Daniel 9:27 says the covenant is to be made with "the many." This term always refers in some way to Israel throughout the book of Daniel (Daniel 11:33, 39; 12:3). Thus it is a narrow term, used in a specific context. It is not a broad term, synonymous with the language of global salvation. Further, "it is evident that the covenant is subsequent to the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the City and the Sanctuary, in the twenty-sixth verse; therefore, it could not have been confirmed at the First Advent," says G. H. Pember. Such an interpretation does not fit this text and it does not account for the seven years that Gabriel says this covenant will be in place. Dr. Wood further explains:

Since the word for "covenant" . . . does not carry the article (contrary to the kjv translation), this covenant likely is made at this time for the first time (not a reaffirmation of an old one, then) and probably will concern some type of nonaggression treaty, recognizing mutual rights. Israel’s interest in such a treaty is easy to understand in the light of her desire today for allies to help withstand foes such as Russia and the Arab bloc of nations.

Since a covenant as described in verse 27 has not yet taken place in reference to the nation of Israel, it must therefore follow that this will be a yet to occur future event. This then, demands a postponement of the seventieth week with a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of years.


For One Week

This passage clearly says that the length of the covenant that "he" will make will be for one week or seven years. I suppose that this could mean either that the covenant will be predetermined to last seven years or that it does not specify a length of time when made, but as it turns out, is only in existence for seven years. Many of those who believe that the entire prophecy of the seventy weeks has already been fulfilled around the time of Christ’s first coming teach that the first half of the seventieth week was fulfilled by Christ’s ministry. "We know Christ’s three-and-one-half-year ministry," says Dr. Gentry, "was decidedly focused on the Jews in the first half of the seventieth week (Matt. 10:5b; cf. Matt. 15:24)." G. H. Pember objects to such a view with the following:

if the Messiah could be the subject, and the time that of the First Advent, we should then be plunged into the greatest perplexity; for the Lord did none of the things that are mentioned in the twenty-seventh verse. To fulfil that part of the prophecy, He must have made a covenant with the majority of the Jewish people for seven years, neither more nor less. But there is no hint of such a covenant in the Gospels. And, indeed, one of the prophets has intimated to us, that the Lord, just before His death, suspended all His relations with the Jews, and through them with the whole of the Twelve Tribes. This exactly corresponds to the suspension of His dealings with the Jews at the close of the Four Hundred and Eighty-third Year, and to the facts of history. Still further, the very next verse of Zechariah carries us over the interval, and brings us face to face with the Prince that shall come, the Anti-christ, who will make the seven years' covenant on pretence of being the Shepherd of Israel. Lastly, Christ did not cause sacrifice and offering to cease, when He suffered without the gate: the Temple-services were carried on for nearly forty years longer.

Conclusion

Once again we have seen in this installment on the seventy weeks that the text of this passage supports a gap of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. It is becoming increasingly obvious that the seventieth week is still future to the time in which we now live. "Israel has now been reestablished as a nation (1948), suggesting that the seventieth seven may soon begin." Maranatha!


By Thomas Ice, PhD


Quasar92
 

ByTheSpirit

Come Lord Jesus
May 17, 2011
11,422
4,650
Manhattan, KS
✟186,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I dont agree with the time gap because it doesn't make sense to have a prophecy of 70 7's where the first 69 occur in sequential order and then just stops and inserts a couple millennia in between the 69th and 70th. Nothing in the passage indicates that.

This OP and article are really informative though :)
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Here is an alternative view written by Zachary S. Maxcey, during 2016.
He is an instructor at Providence Theological Seminary, in Tennessee.
This is a fairly new seminary, which views the Bible based on a New Covenant perspective.
His view is close to my own, in many respects.


http://www.ptstn.org/Council 7.19.16. - Seventy Weeks.pdf

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

Below we find the viewpoint 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.

.
 
Upvote 0

Joshua_5

Active Member
Sep 22, 2016
342
124
New Zealand
✟31,422.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I dont agree with the time gap because it doesn't make sense to have a prophecy of 70 7's where the first 69 occur in sequential order and then just stops and inserts a couple millennia in between the 69th and 70th. Nothing in the passage indicates that.

This OP and article are really informative though :)
I think its insulting to believe in a gap in this prophecy. Not much of a prophecy if God doesn't know the timing (we or even the devil could do this, based on what God has already revealled). One purpose of this prophecy is to demonstrate that God is in ultimate control, because He not only knows what will happen, but when it will happen. The timing also confirms for us the New Covenant in Christ, it was not a change of plan or new religion, but something planned for from the beginning.
 
Upvote 0

ByTheSpirit

Come Lord Jesus
May 17, 2011
11,422
4,650
Manhattan, KS
✟186,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think its insulting to believe in a gap in this prophecy. Not much of a prophecy if God doesn't know the timing (we or even the devil could do this, based on what God has already revealled). One purpose of this prophecy is to demonstrate that God is in ultimate control, because He not only knows what will happen, but when it will happen. The timing also confirms for us the New Covenant in Christ, it was not a change of plan or new religion, but something planned for from the beginning.

Good point :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Joshua_5
Upvote 0

precepts

Newbie
Aug 20, 2008
3,094
135
55
United States Virgin Islands
✟24,096.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Rebellion is as witchcraft. And the one thing that binds the workers of iniquity together, is hypocrisy! If they could, they would deceive even the very elect from off the bat when pigs fly. :oldthumbsup:

Isa 5:18 Woe unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart rope:
Isa 5:19 That say, Let him make speed, and hasten his work, that we may see it: and let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come, that we may know it!
Isa 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Isa 5:21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
Isa 5:22 Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink:
Isa 5:23 Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!
Isa 5:24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel.

- The true interpretation is found in the King James version. Your version is watering down the fact that there's an appositive clause in the first verse which proves who the antecedent of the "he" in the previous verse is - a worldwide doctrine, based on a reading comprehension error, in an educated world, is not a mistake. Go figure!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Quasar92

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 7, 2016
3,762
1,943
100
Lexington, KY 40517
Visit site
✟332,574.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I dont agree with the time gap because it doesn't make sense to have a prophecy of 70 7's where the first 69 occur in sequential order and then just stops and inserts a couple millennia in between the 69th and 70th. Nothing in the passage indicates that.

This OP and article are really informative though :)


The first 69 weeks o Dan.9:24-37 consisting of 483 years, is past history. Verse 27 is pro0phecy, which Jesus amplified in His Olivet Discourse in Mt.24; Mk.13 and in Lk.21. I suggest you review the latter for a better understanding of it.

There are many gaps in the Scriptures, al of which pertain to rophecy, such as Isa,7:114, for example, fulfilled in Mt.1:20 and in Lk.1:35.


Quasar92
 
Upvote 0

ByTheSpirit

Come Lord Jesus
May 17, 2011
11,422
4,650
Manhattan, KS
✟186,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The first 69 weeks o Dan.9:24-37 consisting of 483 years, is past history. Verse 27 is pro0phecy, which Jesus amplified in His Olivet Discourse in Mt.24; Mk.13 and in Lk.21. I suggest you review the latter for a better understanding of it.

There are many gaps in the Scriptures, al of which pertain to rophecy, such as Isa,7:114, for example, fulfilled in Mt.1:20 and in Lk.1:35.


Quasar92

What kind of sense does that make? Honestly?

When Daniel received the vision and explanation it was all prophecy. Not a single one of those "7s" had been fulfilled yet. So at the time given it was all in the future, so how can it be now that only 1 "7" is prophecy and the other 69 are not?
 
Upvote 0

Quasar92

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 7, 2016
3,762
1,943
100
Lexington, KY 40517
Visit site
✟332,574.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I think another view worth examining is that the prophecy could have been fulfilled during the time of Antiochus. Unlikely sure but it is possible


Dan.8:27 is the prophecy of Jacob's Trouble, in Jer.30:7, of the coming seven year tribulation, described by Jesus in His Olivet Discourse, in Mt.24; Mk.13 and in Lk.21 See also post #9,


Qusar92
 
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

ByTheSpirit

Come Lord Jesus
May 17, 2011
11,422
4,650
Manhattan, KS
✟186,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Dan.8:27 is the prophecy of Jacob's Trouble, in Jer.30:7, of the coming seven year tribulation, described by Jesus in His Olivet Discourse, in Mt.24; Mk.13 and in Lk.21 See also post #9,


Qusar92

The anointed one need not refer to just Jesus. Zerubabbel and Joshua the High Priest were referred to as "anointed ones" in Zechariah 4:14
 
Upvote 0

Quasar92

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 7, 2016
3,762
1,943
100
Lexington, KY 40517
Visit site
✟332,574.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The anointed one need not refer to just Jesus. Zerubabbel and Joshua the High Priest were referred to as "anointed ones" in Zechariah 4:14


Reference to my quote you posted was a typo, and the Scripture I meant when writing it should have been to Dan.9:27, not to 8:27. Please accept my apology. Reference in Dan.9:27 referring to the Anointed One, is interpreted as the Prince in some translations as well as Messiah the Prince in others. Reference is to Jesus, who was "cut off," in the same verse, The mathematical aspects of the prophecy leave no other options.


Quasar92
 
Upvote 0

ByTheSpirit

Come Lord Jesus
May 17, 2011
11,422
4,650
Manhattan, KS
✟186,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The first 69 weeks o Dan.9:24-37 consisting of 483 years, is past history. Verse 27 is pro0phecy, which Jesus amplified in His Olivet Discourse in Mt.24; Mk.13 and in Lk.21. I suggest you review the latter for a better understanding of it.

There are many gaps in the Scriptures, al of which pertain to rophecy, such as Isa,7:114, for example, fulfilled in Mt.1:20 and in Lk.1:35.


Quasar92

I cannot let you get away without an explanation on this. At the time Daniel had this vision and the explanation given the entire 70 "7s" was in the future, so how can you say the first 69 is past while the last 7 is prophetic, when the entire thing was prophetic at the time of Daniel?
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Joshua_5
Upvote 0

Quasar92

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 7, 2016
3,762
1,943
100
Lexington, KY 40517
Visit site
✟332,574.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I cannot you get away without an explanation on this. At the time Daniel had this vision and the explanation given the entire 70 "7s" was in the future, so how can you say the first 69 is past while the last 7 is prophetic, when the entire thing was prophetic at the time of Daniel?


Daniel himslef lived at the time Nebuchadnezzar took some Israelites as captives, to Babylon in 604 B.C. God gave him the prophecy of the 70 weeks at the completion of the second temple in 516 B.C., 70 years after the first temple had been destroyed, in 586 B.C.

The prophecy God gave him, pertains to the coming of Israel's Messiah and His death, together with the final disposition of Israel. Due to their rejection of Jesus as their Messiah in His first advent and putting Him to death, God decreed them to go through a seven year period of tribulation .

The timing of the prophecy given Daniel, begins with the decree of the Persian king, Artaxerxes, in His 20th year, according to Neh.2:1-8, which was in 445 B.C. The prophecy reveals, after 7 + 62 weeks, the Messiah will come and be cut-off, in verse 26, ending 69 weeks of the prophecy, or 483 years [69 X 7 = 483] Followed by the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

The 70th and final week of the prophecy is the coming seven year tribulation that will be triggered by the Antichrist, immediately following the rapture of the Church, as documented in Jn.14:2-3, 28; 1 Thess.4:16-17 and 2 Thess.2-3 and 7-8.


Hope this helps.


Quasar92
 
Upvote 0

ByTheSpirit

Come Lord Jesus
May 17, 2011
11,422
4,650
Manhattan, KS
✟186,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But you stated that the first 69 7s are past history while the last 7 is prophetic. In context of when it was given it was all prophetic in nature, and with no indication of a set period of time between any of the periods it would indicate the entire 70 7s have already been fulfilled.
 
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

benelchi

INACTIVE
Aug 3, 2011
693
140
✟17,798.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Right off the bat, the first question that arises in verse 27 is to whom does the pronoun "he" refer to? I believe that "he" must refer to "the prince who is to come" in verse 26. However, opponents of literal interpretation disagree. Preterist, Dr. Kenneth Gentry says, "[T]he indefinite pronoun ‘he’ does not refer back to ‘the prince who is to come’ of verse 26." Fellow preterist, Gary DeMar, insists "it is Jesus who ‘will make a firm covenant with the many,’ not the antichrist." Yet, such an errant interpretation violates the grammar and syntax of the Hebrew text.

In Hebrew grammar, as with most languages, a pronoun would refer to the nearest antecedent, unless there was a contextual reason to think otherwise. In this instance, the nearest antecedent in agreement with "he" is "the prince who is to come" in verse 26. This is recognized by a majority of scholars, including a number of amillennialists such as Kiel and Leupold. Only a priori theological bias could lead a trained interpreter of Scripture to any other conclusion. Robert Culver explains the correct meaning of this text as follows:

The ordinary rules of grammar establish that the leading actor of this verse is the Antichrist, the great evil man of the end time. . . . If the pronoun "he" were present in the Hebrew, a case might possibly be made for the introduction of an entirely new personality into the story at this point. However, there is no pronoun; only the third masculine singular form of the verb indicates that an antecedent is to be sought, and that of necessity in the preceding context. Usually, the last preceding noun that agrees in gender and number and agrees with the sense is the antecedent. This is unquestionably . . . "the coming prince" of verse 26. He is a "coming" prince, that is, one whom the reader would already know as a prince to come, because he is the same as the "little horn" on the fourth beast of chapter 7.

While I think there are a number of arguments that support the idea that the antichrist is intended. This is not one of them.


In the preceding verse the antecedent is not "the coming prince" it is "the people of the coming prince" (עַ֣ם נָגִ֤יד הַבָּא). Taking away the construct noun (עַ֣ם) "people of", would be the same as suggesting that if someone said that "The man of God when to the temple and he prayed." That we can simply strip away "man of" and decide that "he" referred to God i.e. that "God prayed."

If we were to strictly follow your rule and assume that the closest antecedent should used to define this pronoun then it is "the people of the coming prince" and not the "coming prince." It is because the antecedent is not clearly indicated in the Hebrew grammar that so many suggestions have been made by scholars.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

jgr

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 25, 2008
9,692
5,007
✟783,467.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
In over 1800 years of the history of the true Christian Church, only Irenaeus, and Hippolytus (his protege), espoused a disembodied 70th week. The Epistle of Barnabas was the first early post-apostolic writing to refer to the week. It was not disembodied therein.
 
Upvote 0

BABerean2

Newbie
Supporter
May 21, 2014
20,614
7,484
North Carolina
✟893,665.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Dan.8:27 is the prophecy of Jacob's Trouble, in Jer.30:7

Jeremiah's Letter to the Exiles (subtitle from e-Sword)

Jer 29:1  Now these are the words of the letter that Jeremiah the prophet sent from Jerusalem unto the residue of the elders which were carried away captives, and to the priests, and to the prophets, and to all the people whom Nebuchadnezzar had carried away captive from Jerusalem to Babylon; 

Jer 29:4  Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, unto all that are carried away captives, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem unto Babylon; 

Jer 29:10  For thus saith the LORD, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. 

Jer 29:22  And of them shall be taken up a curse by all the captivity of Judah which are in Babylon, saying, The LORD make thee like Zedekiah and like Ahab, whom the king of Babylon roasted in the fire; 
Jer 29:23  Because they have committed villany in Israel, and have committed adultery with their neighbours' wives, and have spoken lying words in my name, which I have not commanded them; even I know, and am a witness, saith the LORD. 

Jer 29:28  For therefore he sent unto us in Babylon, saying, This captivity is long: build ye houses, and dwell in them; and plant gardens, and eat the fruit of them. 





Jer 30:1  The word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, 
Jer 30:2  Thus speaketh the LORD God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book. 
Jer 30:3  For, lo, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will bring again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah, saith the LORD: and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it. 
Jer 30:4  And these are the words that the LORD spake concerning Israel and concerning Judah. 
Jer 30:5  For thus saith the LORD; We have heard a voice of trembling, of fear, and not of peace. 
Jer 30:6  Ask ye now, and see whether a man doth travail with child? wherefore do I see every man with his hands on his loins, as a woman in travail, and all faces are turned into paleness? 
Jer 30:7  Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it. 
Jer 30:8  For it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will break his yoke from off thy neck, and will burst thy bonds, and strangers shall no more serve themselves of him: 
Jer 30:9  But they shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them. 
Jer 30:10  Therefore fear thou not, O my servant Jacob, saith the LORD; neither be dismayed, O Israel: for, lo, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid. 


The only way to see "the time of Jacob's trouble", which occurred during the Babylonian captivity, is with a time machine set to return you to the time that Jeremiah lived.

How can Dispensationalists continue to rip this passage out of its historical context in order to make their doctrine work, and think that others will believe them?

.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: jgr and GUANO
Upvote 0

GUANO

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2013
739
324
40
Los Angeles
✟32,324.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Thomas Ice is the Director of a Pre-Trib rapture apologist group which makes his opinion biased and his involvement in any research on the subject a conflict of interest. Based on his school history, he has never been outside of the Futurist bubble and was taught at "the center of modern Dispensational teaching" (Which is where Futurism arose). Thomas makes his whole living writing books about the rapture and Christian Zionism and went to the school where Christian Zionism was being kicked off so to speak. The founder of the school itself could not in good conscience follow the eschatology of the traditional reformers because he would have lost much of his funding and support from the 'greater' christian and Jewish community. I can't think of a single organization (other than the SDA's) that did not officially change their views on the subject in the 1920's. The Gap theory is taught in every theological school and to publicly go against that would put your whole "professional career" as a "servant of God" in jeopardy.

In regards to the Grammatical structure, read it for yourself, it's not as cut and dry as people like to call it: Daniel 9 Interlinear Bible

Here is the folly: "by the mouth of two or three Witnesses shall every word be established"... The entire Futurist doctrine relies on this one single scripture with not a single secondary biblical author or "Witness" to confirm, whereas there are MANY scriptures that confirm that Jesus Christ confirmed a covenant with His people and History confirms that Titus, the Prince of Rome and in direct line of succession to Emperor Vespasian destroyed the city and the sanctuary and that many other 'desolations' (city-abandonments) in Judea took place under his campaign.

You can't just re-interpret hundreds of scriptures based on a single verse that is not confirmed in any way by any other Biblical author. Even the concept of any 'gap' in prophetic day-years (which was confirmed by Ezekiel as the Prophetic measure of time when prophetic days are applied to a city-state) is not seen anywhere else in scripture. Every single futurist interpretation of events lies on this single verse in Daniel which was never argued for literally thousands of years until the 1920's when Christian Zionists were looking for biblical support for a new nation of Israel and a future Antichrist and stumbled upon Catholic propaganda that was written by a Jesuit Priest in the 17th century who was part of the Counter Reformation and wrote a paper combating Protestant Eschatology—here is the funny thing, even the Catholics at the time did not believe in this version of Eschatology, theirs was much different—it was literally written as propaganda and finally accepted by both Protestants and Catholics effectively healing a great religious schism and fulfilling more prophecy directly from the Book of Revelation.
 
Last edited:
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

GUANO

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2013
739
324
40
Los Angeles
✟32,324.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Jeremiah's Letter to the Exiles (subtitle from e-Sword)

Jer 29:1  Now these are the words of the letter that Jeremiah the prophet sent from Jerusalem unto the residue of the elders which were carried away captives, and to the priests, and to the prophets, and to all the people whom Nebuchadnezzar had carried away captive from Jerusalem to Babylon; 

Jer 29:4  Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, unto all that are carried away captives, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem unto Babylon; 

Jer 29:10  For thus saith the LORD, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. 

Jer 29:22  And of them shall be taken up a curse by all the captivity of Judah which are in Babylon, saying, The LORD make thee like Zedekiah and like Ahab, whom the king of Babylon roasted in the fire; 
Jer 29:23  Because they have committed villany in Israel, and have committed adultery with their neighbours' wives, and have spoken lying words in my name, which I have not commanded them; even I know, and am a witness, saith the LORD. 

Jer 29:28  For therefore he sent unto us in Babylon, saying, This captivity is long: build ye houses, and dwell in them; and plant gardens, and eat the fruit of them. 





Jer 30:1  The word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, 
Jer 30:2  Thus speaketh the LORD God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book. 
Jer 30:3  For, lo, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will bring again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah, saith the LORD: and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it. 
Jer 30:4  And these are the words that the LORD spake concerning Israel and concerning Judah. 
Jer 30:5  For thus saith the LORD; We have heard a voice of trembling, of fear, and not of peace. 
Jer 30:6  Ask ye now, and see whether a man doth travail with child? wherefore do I see every man with his hands on his loins, as a woman in travail, and all faces are turned into paleness? 
Jer 30:7  Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it. 
Jer 30:8  For it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will break his yoke from off thy neck, and will burst thy bonds, and strangers shall no more serve themselves of him: 
Jer 30:9  But they shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them. 
Jer 30:10  Therefore fear thou not, O my servant Jacob, saith the LORD; neither be dismayed, O Israel: for, lo, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid. 


The only way to see "the time of Jacob's trouble", which occurred during the Babylonian captivity, is with a time machine set to return you to the time that Jeremiah lived.

How can Dispensationalists continue to rip this passage out of its historical context in order to make their doctrine work, and think that others will believe them?

.
The whole "future" Jacob's Trouble theory is a political scheme. Was it John Hagee that wrote the first book on that? I'm pretty sure it was. Joel Rosenberg was the next influential person to push it hard—Hagee is a charlatan, but Joel Rosenberg is much more insidious as he was a professional political strategist for Netanyahu primarily tasked with drumming up U.S. and European Christian support ($$$$) for Israel. Everyone else that pushes the blood moons and all that crap are just useful idiots to use a Marxist term. At least Hagee and Rosenberg got filthy rich for the price of their souls =)
 
Upvote 0