Response to Ricky

[RandyPNW]

#1
A Response to Ricky's documents.
What is the Rapture of the Church? https://www.gotquestions.org/rapture-of-the-church.html

The word rapture does not occur in the Bible. The term comes from a Latin word meaning “a carrying off, a transport, or a snatching away.” The concept of the “carrying off” or the rapture of the church is clearly taught in Scripture.

Response: Nobody here is questioning the "rapture of the Church," to take place at Christ's Coming. The question concerning us is the *timing* of this event. Historically, the "Rapture" is viewed as taking place at Christ's 2nd Coming.

Dispensationalists today, ie followers of John N. Darby, believe that the 2nd Coming takes place by a strained definition, separating a "secret coming for the Church" from the "2nd Coming" itself, where the Church comes back with Christ from heaven in a glorious, manifest way.

The rapture of the church is the event in which God “snatches away” all believers from the earth in order to make way for His righteous judgment to be poured out on the earth during the tribulation period.

Response: This is not proven. While it is true that God's final Judgment is not directed at believers it is also true that believers are here on earth during times when God has poured out His wrath on unbelievers. Our common dwelling on earth between believers and unbelievers necessitates that all experience some of the negative effects of God's wrath, when it is poured out on unbelievers.

For example, Noah and Lot were rescued from the judgments of their era, but they did experience some of the side effects of their deliverance on earth. On the other hand, the Prophet Jeremiah had his reputation salvaged during his ordeal in Jerusalem but was not spared persecution or death during the time of God's wrath being poured out upon Israel.

In no case is any saint in the Bible delivered from tribulation on earth unless it is at the end of their lives or ministry. There is no sudden, indiscriminate “snatching away” of believers from troublous times in order to experience instant glory.

The rapture is described primarily in 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 and 1 Corinthians 15:50–54. God will resurrect all believers who have died, give them glorified bodies, and take them from the earth, along with all living believers, who will also be given glorified bodies at that time. “For the Lord Himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever” (1 Thessalonians 4:16–17).

Response: Here the order is quite clear. The dead in Christ must be resurrected before the Rapture of the Church can be experienced. If the resurrection of Christians takes place at the end of the age, ie at the 2nd Coming, then the Rapture of the Church may *not* be "Pretribulational."

It is when Christ returns to save those persecuted and martyred by Antichrist that the resurrection of the saints takes place. See Rev 20. It is therefore at that very time that the Rapture of the Church takes place. In sum….

1) Christ returns on last day of age to raise from the dead Christians martyred by Antichrist.

2) The Rapture of the Church *follows* this resurrection of martyrs killed during the "Tribulation."

The rapture is to be distinguished from the second coming. At the rapture, the Lord comes “in the clouds” to meet us “in the air” (1 Thessalonians 4:17). At the second coming, the Lord descends all the way to the earth to stand on the Mount of Olives, resulting in a great earthquake followed by a defeat of God’s enemies (Zechariah 14:3–4).

Response: The idea that Christ comes "secretly" to remove the Church in the clouds is a misrepresentation of what this meant in light of Daniel 7. In that passage Daniel presents the Son of Man as coming with the clouds, indicating he is coming to establish God's Kingdom on earth. The Son of Man does not take his people up to the clouds to remain there, but only to transform them into a heavenly army to participate in his Coming. All of this takes place in the same instant.

The doctrine of the rapture was not taught in the Old Testament, which is why Paul calls it a “mystery” now revealed: “Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed—in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed” (1 Corinthians 15:51–52).

Response: Paul called some of his doctrines a "mystery" because it had not yet been shown, in the OT period, how God would include pagan nations among His "People." The Old Covenant had prohibited Israel from having anything to do with the pagan nations.

Neither was it made clear how God would get past human sin to include us in the glorification of His Son. That became apparent when Christ forgave his People on the cross and promised them resurrection from the dead, as well as participation in his own sinless nature.

That is what the Communion represents, a participation in the Divine Nature of Christ. From the perspective of our sin-contaminated, mortal existence today, that is purely a “mystery.” The glorification of the body is something that will be brand new to our experience.

Paul was not, however, given insight into a doctrine that no other apostle was aware of. Jesus spent 3.5 years with his 12 disciples so that they would be prepared to properly represent him, even in imperfect bodies with imperfect minds. They did not need Paul to tell them what Jesus had already told them. Paul merely confirmed to them what they had already been told.

There is far too much debate over the meaning and scope of the rapture. This is not God’s intent. Rather, the rapture should be a comforting doctrine full of hope; God wants us to “encourage one another with these words” (1 Thessalonians 4:18).

Response: Those who argue for a "Secret Rapture" who then would deny anybody the responsibility of rebuttal are not being fair. We are encouraged in Scriptures to "test everything."

 

[RandyPNW]

*2
What is the Concept of a Secret Rapture? https://www.gotquestions.org/secret-rapture.html

The secret rapture—usually just called the rapture of the church—is the idea that Christ will come to take believers out of the world before His return with them at the second coming. The secret rapture is “secret” in that no one will see Jesus coming except believers; this is in contrast to the second coming of Christ after the tribulation, when “every eye will see him” (Revelation 1:7).

Response: The assertion that Christ will come for his Church "secretly" is not in Scriptures at all. The idea of a "2-stage" Coming of Christ is unbiblical. Christ is depicted as Coming, in Dan 7, as the Son of Man from heaven, descending to earth in order to establish God's Kingdom on earth. Jesus referred to this as the "last day" of the age.

Secret rapture is a term frequently used as a pejorative by those who deny the idea that the rapture of the church is separate from the second coming of Christ.

Response: If non-biblical arguments are being used to "assert things," rather than "prove them from Scriptures, then such assertions should be treated "derisively." They do not deserve a place in Christian teaching.

“One-coming believers” who deny the rapture put themselves in conflict with the Bible and biblical scholarship, as well as the majority of the evangelical world. Among the arguments they pose are that the word rapture doesn’t appear in the Bible. While it is true that the English word rapture doesn’t appear, the concept of the rapture of the church is certainly present.

Response: This is a diversion. Nobody is arguing the word "rapture" is in the Bible. The argument is whether a "Pretrib Rapture" is being taught in the Bible. It is not.

Neither is Pretribulationism the standard Evangelical belief in the Christian world. Evangelicalism began with the Protestant Reformation, and Pretribulationism did not exist until hundreds of years later in the United Kingdom under the teaching of John N. Darby.

Darby’s Dispensationalism, along with Pretribulationism, were exported to the US by his friends who were interested in Futurism, which is not in itself a problem for me. Darby’s cause was helped in particular by his association with Cyrus Scofield who included Pretribulational doctrine in his popular Scofield Reference Bible.

Dispensationalism has therefore filled an important place of interest in Christians who want to understand the "endtimes." Interest in the future is not, in itself, the problem. It was Darby’s version of the future that was the problem.

First Thessalonians 4:16–17 (the definitive passage on the rapture of the church) says that the Lord will descend from heaven and the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive and remain will be “caught up.” The word rapture is derived from rapio (“to catch up or snatch away”), a form of which is found in the Latin Vulgate Bible. To say the rapture won’t happen because the word isn’t found in Scripture is a specious argument. The phrase second coming isn’t found in the Bible, either, but the reality of it certainly is.

Response: What is ignored here is that little phrase "the Lord will descend from heaven." It is *not* being said that the Lord *will not* descend from heaven, or come to the earth. Rather, it is saying he *will* descend from heaven, or come to the earth.

The problem is not whether the word “rapture” is there in the passage. Rather, the question is whether the concept of a Rapture is there in which the Church and Christ do *not* descend from heaven.

If Jesus "descends from heaven" he is coming to the earth. You can't leave heaven unless you land on the earth!

If so, the Rapture of the Church takes place when Christ emerges from heaven to come to the earth. It is a single event, and not spread out over a period of years!

When is the Rapture going to occur in relation to the Tribulation? https://www.gotquestions.org/rapture-tribulation.html

First, it is important to recognize the purpose of the tribulation. According to Daniel 9:27, there is a seventieth “seven” (seven years) that is still yet to come.

Response: This is not true. This is pure conjecture, and it doesn't make sense. A 70 Weeks period was established to lead to an end point at the end of the 70 Weeks. That end point was realized in Jesus’ generation, 70 Weeks of years after the decree of Artaxerxes was given in 457 BC. To extend this period beyond Jesus’ generation into the distant future makes no sense.

The 70 Weeks were intended to lead to the death of Christ, followed by the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, which took place in 70 AD. There is no future element to the 70 Weeks prophecy.

The primary Scripture passage on the rapture is 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. It states that all living believers, along with all believers who have died, will meet the Lord Jesus in the air and will be with Him forever. The rapture is God’s removing of His people from the earth. A few verses later, in 1 Thessalonians 5:9, Paul says, “For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.” The book of Revelation, which deals primarily with the time period of the tribulation, is a prophetic message of how God will pour out His wrath upon the earth during the tribulation. It seems inconsistent for God to promise believers that they will not suffer wrath and then leave them on the earth to suffer through the wrath of the tribulation. The fact that God promises to deliver Christians from wrath shortly after promising to remove His people from the earth seems to link those two events together.

Response: That is not said at all. "Wrath," as defined in Scriptures is an expression of divine anger, and saints are often victims of the period of time in which this "wrath" takes place. To keep people from God's "eternal anger" is a given--we are liberated from eternal judgment. But to avoid the problems of tribulation in this life when we are called to live alongside pagans is beyond the scope of God's promises. Jesus said he will keep us from eternal judgment while we live on this present corrupt earth.

Another crucial passage on the timing of the rapture is Revelation 3:10, in which Christ promises to deliver believers from the “hour of trial” that is going to come upon the earth.

Response: The "hour of trial" took place in the time of the Apostle John. Philadelphia was an historical city where Christians had built a Christian community.

Sometimes Christians in various places are promised deliverance from certain trials. Noah was spared from the judgment of the world of his time. Jesus’ disciples were spared from the Roman judgment of 70 AD. None of this is all-encompassing to include all Christian experiences in history.

And it never involved a Rapture to heaven. The only 2 "raptures to heaven" in the Bible, Enoch and Elijah, were not deliverances, but rather, a testimonial to their faithfulness. It is a reward for the believer, as opposed to an escape hatch.

2 Thes 1 portrays the Coming of Christ for his Church as a vindication, rather than as an "escape hatch." If it is an “escape” at all, it is an escape from the mortality of this life, with its various sufferings, so that we can obtain our eternal hope of immortality.

But it is *not* an escape promised to believers every time God sends down judgments upon this sinful world. Even though we’re saved from God’s wrath as Christians, we continue to suffer God’s judgments upon this fallen world, whether wars, natural disasters, or illnesses and deprivations of various kinds.

 

[RandyPNW]

*3
Will Christians see the Antichrist, or will the rapture occur before then? https://www.gotquestions.org/see-the-antichrist.html

We believe that, after the rapture, the seven-year tribulation period that is described in Daniel and Revelation will begin.

Response: There is no 7 year Tribulation Period mentioned in the Bible at all. The 70th Week of Daniel is *not* a "7 Year Reign of Antichrist!"

Since Christians will be raptured before the beginning of the tribulation, we who are alive during the church age will not see the Antichrist’s rise to power.

Response: There is no Scriptural evidence here that Christians will be raptured before the beginning of the Tribulation. It is simply inserted to be so.

The fact that the Antichrist is not revealed until after the rapture is taught in 2 Thessalonians 2. Speaking of the Day of the Lord, Paul writes that the tribulation will not begin until after the Antichrist is already revealed: “That day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God” (verses 3–4).

Response: 2 Thes 2 does *not* teach that the Rapture *precedes* the revelation of Antichrist! In fact, it is quite the opposite--Christ comes for his Church only *after* the Man of Sin is revealed, and ultimately, is destroyed!

Also, the revelation of the Antichrist must come after something else, because right now there is something “holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time.

Response: The "Restrainer" was taught in the Early Church to represent the Roman imperial rule that was to precede the rise of Antichrist, keeping him delayed until the endtimes.

This document is a statement of personal belief by the authors, and not any kind of proof of their belief from Scriptures. Scriptures are used only to adorn their belief system--not to prove it.

 

[RandyPNW]

*4
What is the Second Coming of Jesus Christ? https://www.gotquestions.org/second-coming-Jesus-Christ.html

The second coming of Jesus Christ is the hope of believers that God is in control of all things, and is faithful to the promises and prophecies in His Word. In His first coming, Jesus Christ came to earth as a baby in a manger in Bethlehem, just as prophesied. Jesus fulfilled many of the prophecies of the Messiah during His birth, life, ministry, death, and resurrection. However, there are some prophecies regarding the Messiah that Jesus has not yet fulfilled. The second coming of Christ will be the return of Christ to fulfill these remaining prophecies. In His first coming, Jesus was the suffering Servant. In His second coming, Jesus will be the conquering King. In His first coming, Jesus arrived in the most humble of circumstances. In His second coming, Jesus will arrive with the armies of heaven at His side.

The Old Testament prophets did not make clearly this distinction between the two comings. This can be seen in Isaiah 7:14, 9:6-7 and Zechariah 14:4. As a result of the prophecies seeming to speak of two individuals, many Jewish scholars believed there would be both a suffering Messiah and a conquering Messiah. What they failed to understand is that there is only one Messiah and He would fulfill both roles. Jesus fulfilled the role of the suffering servant (Isaiah chapter 53) in His first coming. Jesus will fulfill the role of Israel’s deliverer and King in His second coming. Zechariah 12:10 and Revelation 1:7, describing the second coming, look back to Jesus being pierced. Israel, and the whole world, will mourn for not having accepted the Messiah the first time He came.

After Jesus ascended into heaven, the angels declared to the apostles, “‘Men of Galilee,’ they said, ‘why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven’” (Acts 1:11). Zechariah 14:4 identifies the location of the second coming as the Mount of Olives. Matthew 24:30 declares, “At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory.” Titus 2:13 describes the second coming as a “glorious appearing.”

The second coming is spoken of in greatest detail in Revelation 19:11-16, “I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. ‘He will rule them with an iron scepter.’ He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.”

Response: The classic distinction between Jesus' Earthly Coming and his future Heavenly Coming never entailed a 2-stage process involved in the "2nd Coming." That is pure Dispensationalism, originating in around 1830 United Kingdom under the teaching of John N. Darby. Some things he taught were good, such as his Futurism and hope for national Israel. But he combined with his Futurism a mix of personal belief, contaminating it with his own ideas. We need to keep the good and throw out the bad.

 

[Jan001]

There is no 7 year Tribulation Period mentioned in the Bible at all. The 70th Week of Daniel is *not* a "7 Year Reign of Antichrist!"

I agree.

There is no Scriptural evidence here that Christians will be raptured before the beginning of the Tribulation.

The Great Tribulation was experienced by 1st century Christians. The so-called Rapture is at Jesus' second coming.

2 Thes 2 does *not* teach that the Rapture *precedes* the revelation of Antichrist! In fact, it is quite the opposite--Christ comes for his Church only *after* the Man of Sin is revealed, and ultimately, is destroyed!

The man of sin was Caesar Nero (666). The antichrist was Nero. Nero no longer lives.
Christ will come for his church at the end of time.

Response: The "Restrainer" was taught in the Early Church to represent the Roman imperial rule that was to precede the rise of Antichrist, keeping him delayed until the endtimes.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-7 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.
5 Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

Perhaps the Holy Spirit who was the one holding him back until the proper time.

The man of lawlessness was Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus. He was a Roman emperor, reigning from AD 54 until his death in AD 68.

1 John 2:18 My children, it is the last hour! And just as you heard that the Antichrist would come, even now many antichrists have appeared. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.

There will be other deniers of Christ until Jesus' second coming. None will be as evil as Nero.

 

[RandyPNW]

The 70th Week of Daniel began when Jesus died on the cross.

The Great Tribulation was experienced by 1st century Christians. The so-called Rapture is at Jesus' second coming.

The man of sin was Caesar Nero (666). The antichrist was Nero. Nero no longer lives.
Christ will come for his church at the end of time.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-7 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.
5 Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

Perhaps the Holy Spirit who was the one holding him back until the proper time.

The man of lawlessness was Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus. He was a Roman emperor, reigning from AD 54 until his death in AD 68.

1 John 2:18 My children, it is the last hour! And just as you heard that the Antichrist would come, even now many antichrists have appeared. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.

There will be other deniers of Christ until Jesus' second coming. None will be as evil as Nero.

Thanks for sharing your views.

 

[Jan001]

Thanks for sharing your views.

When do you think the 70th Week of Daniel began? Now, I am thinking, after further study, that it was 66 AD at the beginning of the 7-year First Jewish-Roman War (66–73 CE).

 

[RandyPNW]

When do you think the 70th Week of Daniel began? Now, I am thinking, after further study, that it was 66 AD at the beginning of the 7-year First Jewish-Roman War (66–73 CE).

I'm not sure of anything, but my thought is that the 1st 69 Weeks of Dan 9 were from Artaxerxes' Decree in 457 BC to 26 AD. This may have been the start of Jesus' 3.5 year ministry. Jesus' death, then, would've been in the middle of the 70th Week, in 30 AD. Since the cutting off of Temple offerings was to take place in the middle of the 70th Week, it is indicated that the 70th Week actually completed the 70 Weeks prophecy as a half-Week, and not as a full Week.

Some try to add on another 3.5 years after Jesus' death to make a full 70th Week. Some try to export the last half of the 70th Week to the end times, to make it equivalent to the 3.5 years of Antichrist's reign. I don't feel the need to have a full 70th Week at all! We are never told anything about a full 70th Week except that a covenant is made to represent it, which could only indicate when it went into effect or the length of the agreement.

Some think the covenant was made by Christ, and others made by the Roman leadership. I think the latter. Good luck and have blessed studies!

 

[Jan001]

I'm not sure of anything, but my thought is that the 1st 69 Weeks of Dan 9 were from Artaxerxes' Decree in 457 BC to 26 AD. This may have been the start of Jesus' 3.5 year ministry. Jesus' death, then, would've been in the middle of the 70th Week, in 30 AD. Since the cutting off of Temple offerings was to take place in the middle of the 70th Week, it is indicated that the 70th Week actually completed the 70 Weeks prophecy as a half-Week, and not as a full Week.

You already know that my posts are my own opinions. I am a fellow student of the scriptures. I change my views as I learn more clearly.

I did not know these actual years until you explained them. Thank you.

I think Jesus was about 35 when he died. According to some, he died on April 3, 33 AD, and he was born in 3/2 BC.

April 3, AD 33 | Andreas J. Kostenberger

Virtually all scholars believe, for various reasons, that Jesus was crucified in the spring of either a.d. 30 or a.d. 33, with the majority opting for the former. However, we want to set forth our case for the date of Friday, April 3, a.d. 33 as the exact day that Christ died for our sins. . . ...

www.firstthings.com

ALSO: Dating the birth of Jesus

Some try to add on another 3.5 years after Jesus' death to make a full 70th Week. Some try to export the last half of the 70th Week to the end times, to make it equivalent to the 3.5 years of Antichrist's reign. I don't feel the need to have a full 70th Week at all! We are never told anything about a full 70th Week except that a covenant is made to represent it, which could only indicate when it went into effect or the length of the agreement.

I have never been able to transport half of any of my own weeks to a future date, a novel idea, to be sure. I would like to be beamed up to wherever I want to travel, too, but so far that has not happened either.

Some think the covenant was made by Christ, and others made by the Roman leadership. I think the latter. Good luck and have blessed studies!

I think that the covenant is the new covenant that was mediated by Jesus Christ's death on the cross, which most of the Jews rejected. Hebrews 8:7-13

The 70 Weeks Prophecy concerned the building of the second temple and the destruction of the second temple.

Temple worship, animal sacrifices, and the first covenant religious practices ended with the temple's destruction. We Christians are now the temples for the new covenant.

1 Corinthians 3:16 Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives within you?

 

[Jan001]

.......
Some think the covenant was made by Christ, and others made by the Roman leadership. I think the latter. Good luck and have blessed studies!

I've done some more study on this topic and I no longer think it was Jesus who confirmed the covenant. I now think the covenant was between Nero and the Jews.

It seems to me that the following Scripture passage begins with the 70th week in 33 AD, but then ends with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. Jesus said the temple would be destroyed in "this generation," and it did occur within 40 years (one generation).

Daniel 9:26-27 DRA And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain: and the people (Jews) that shall deny him shall not be his. And a people (Romans) with their leader that shall come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary: and the end thereof shall be waste, and after the end of the war the appointed desolation. 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many, in one week: and in the half of the week the victim (animal sacrifice) and the sacrifice (grain offering) shall fall: and there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation (Roman armies): and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation, and to the end (destruction of the temple).

Do you think that the he who confirms the covenant could be Nero?
At first, Nero was favorably disposed toward the Jews, but he changed his mind after the Jews killed his army leader, Cestius Gallus, in 67 AD.

NERO - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

 

[RandyPNW]

I've done some more study on this topic and I no longer think it was Jesus who confirmed the covenant. I now think the covenant was between Nero and the Jews.

It seems to me that the following Scripture passage begins with the 70th week in 33 AD, but then ends with the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. Jesus said the temple would be destroyed in "this generation," and it did occur within 40 years (one generation).

Daniel 9:26-27 DRA And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain: and the people (Jews) that shall deny him shall not be his. And a people (Romans) with their leader that shall come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary: and the end thereof shall be waste, and after the end of the war the appointed desolation. 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many, in one week: and in the half of the week the victim (animal sacrifice) and the sacrifice (grain offering) shall fall: and there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation (Roman armies): and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation, and to the end (destruction of the temple).

Do you think that the he who confirms the covenant could be Nero?
At first, Nero was favorably disposed toward the Jews, but he changed his mind after the Jews killed his army leader, Cestius Gallus, in 67 AD.

NERO - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

I don't think it was Nero, personally, because my logic is as follows. The theme is the fate of the Temple. In Daniel's time the Babylonian Captivity was ending, and there had been a prophecy that the Temple would be rebuilt. The 70 Weeks Prophecy indicates that the city and the temple would be rebuilt, and that from the decree to do these things until 6 Messianic things would be accomplished would be 70 Weeks (of years). The 70th Week would be only a half Week because in the midst of that Week the Temple offerings would be terminated, which I think took place when God ripped the veil of the Temple in half.

The 70th Week would be followed by the destruction of the Temple by the people (Army) of the prince to come. The general in charge of the Army was Titus.

The 70th Week would be characterized by the "confirmation" of a covenant, which is not necessarily *making* a covenant. To "confirm" a covenant all one has to do is do things that confirm what God had promised would happen. So when the Roman leader, Pilate, had Jesus killed, he confirmed God's promise that Messiah would die for the sins of the people. It was a confirmation of the covenant of Law, which had depicted Israel's need for a better sacrifice.

So I agree with you that it is not Jesus who makes a covenant, but rather, the Roman ruler (at the time) who "confirms" a covenant that God had promised the Jews. I most assuredly am not telling you I'm sure that this is the correct interpretation. However, I've held to a number of different positions on this, and after listening to criticisms and various beliefs in history this is the product. You'll have to decide for yourself--it certainly won't cost you your Salvation if you get it wrong!

 

[Jan001]

I don't think it was Nero, personally, because my logic is as follows. The theme is the fate of the Temple. In Daniel's time the Babylonian Captivity was ending, and there had been a prophecy that the Temple would be rebuilt. The 70 Weeks Prophecy indicates that the city and the temple would be rebuilt, and that from the decree to do these things until 6 Messianic things would be accomplished would be 70 Weeks (of years). The 70th Week would be only a half Week because in the midst of that Week the Temple offerings would be terminated, which I think took place when God ripped the veil of the Temple in half.

The 70th Week would be followed by the destruction of the Temple by the people (Army) of the prince to come. The general in charge of the Army was Titus.

The 70th Week would be characterized by the "confirmation" of a covenant, which is not necessarily *making* a covenant. To "confirm" a covenant all one has to do is do things that confirm what God had promised would happen. So when the Roman leader, Pilate, had Jesus killed, he confirmed God's promise that Messiah would die for the sins of the people. It was a confirmation of the covenant of Law, which had depicted Israel's need for a better sacrifice.

So I agree with you that it is not Jesus who makes a covenant, but rather, the Roman ruler (at the time) who "confirms" a covenant that God had promised the Jews. I most assuredly am not telling you I'm sure that this is the correct interpretation. However, I've held to a number of different positions on this, and after listening to criticisms and various beliefs in history this is the product. You'll have to decide for yourself--it certainly won't cost you your Salvation if you get it wrong!

I understand what you are saying. So far, your explanation makes the most sense of anything I have heard.

 

[Jan001]

The 70th Week would be only a half Week because in the midst of that Week the Temple offerings would be terminated, which I think took place when God ripped the veil of the Temple in half.

Makes sense. The value of the OT temple sacrifices and offerings was made obsolete by Jesus' NT sacrificial offering of himself on the cross, once and for all time.