The Fatal Flaw in Dispensationalism

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Naturally, you would think your interpretation is the correct one.

No. No interpretation by man is permitted. What God Means, God Breathed / Inspired Himself, and never permits private interpretation. It is written. It is so.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Not those who obey the Father. He says Scripture is NOT OPEN to private interpretation, ever.

Peter was specifically talking about interpretation of prophecy. The utterings and the indications that they had been fulfilled by later writers was always guided by the Holy Spirit.

That being said, it makes no sense to accept any and all interpretations of scripture. However, the scriptures are written so we can understand them as Paul wrote. It is the untaught and evil who twist them for their own purposes, Peter says.

 

[Guojing]

He never preached about an earthly kingdom. He uses the terms, "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God" exclusively, indicating that the realm of the kingdom was NEVER intended to be earthly. And then there is of course the matter of him explicitly saying that it was not of this earth. There is no evidence that he made any change at all in his teaching on this. In fact, after he was raised from the dead, he mocked two of his disciples for thinking that there was ever any doubt as to what was to take place.

Luke 24:25,26
Then He said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?” 27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.




This is a stretching of the text to attempt meeting a pre-conceived narrative.

The problem with interpreting Acts 3:17-20 as being some sort of attempt to extend an olive branch and establish an earthly kingdom is that there was never any mention or promise of an earthly kingdom by Jesus or the prophecies. Also, you have the problem of the the sermon on the Day of Pentecost where Peter explains that it was foretold that Jesus would sit on the throne, not on earth but in heaven. He's preaching to Jews, the same Jews who crucified Christ and he doesn't offer them membership in an earthly kingdom but a heavenly one. He's explaining why it is they were wrong in their own interpretation of the scriptures and this explanation causes thousands to repent, obey and become Christians.

Jesus pointed out that scripture was not speaking of earthly things before he was crucified. As he points out at the end of Luke's gospel, it was always known that many Jews would reject his kingdom. Not a surprise, not unplanned for. They were given 33 years to submit and then God destroyed their earthly kingdom. Modern Israel is not any sort of re-establishment of God's people. That cow left the barn.



It was never going to be a physical kingdom and it never will be.

You are not a Jew so you are not familiar with the prophetic promises in the OT.

If you are convinced there will never be a physical kingdom, you will naturally interpret those promises differently. That is fine.

 

[Guojing]

No. No interpretation by man is permitted. What God Means, God Breathed / Inspired Himself, and never permits private interpretation. It is written. It is so.

So could you accept that your view may not be the correct one?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Most criticism of Dispensationalism has centered on the Rapture, the most well known belief of Dispensationalists. Much criticism has been focused on their treatment of Jews and Israel, which sometimes sets up a two-tiered scheme of salvation. A lot of criticism has been focused on Dispensationalism as a surprisingly recent belief system. Dispensationalists are extreme literalists but this doesn't mean that they agree with other literalists.

As we shall see, the Dispensationalists say that the crucifixion of Christ and the entire church age that followed, is only a "parenthesis" in God's plan. God's original plan is on hold. Most Christians find this rather jarring, considering the emphasis that Paul put on "Christ crucified." A critic would say that the whole notion of a parenthesis is only needed to make their end-of-the-world calculations come out right.

This thread focuses on the most basic idea of Dispensationalism, besides dispensations. Dispensationalism claims that God offered the Jews a chance to make Jesus their earthly King. Jesus would then have overthrown the Romans and established Israel as a theocratic Kingdom, eventually covering the world. Since this was God's original plan, Christianity came about when the Jews rejected the Kingship of Jesus. God went to Plan B, which included the (crucifixion), the (resurrection), the (ascension), (Pentecost), and the (church age).

"This offer of the kingdom which was extended through Christ, John, and the disciples to the nation [Israel] was rejected by that nation, notwithstanding the fact that it was in complete fulfillment of every divinely given prediction. It was a bona fide offer and, had they received Him as their King, the nation's hope would have been realized."

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. The Collected Works of Lewis Sperry Chafer - Seven books in one. Jawbone Digital. Kindle Edition. The Kingdom in History and Prophecy, Chapter V: The Kingdom Rejected and Postponed, Kindle location 3470-3473.

Chafer (1871-1952) founded the Dallas Theological Seminary. He is one of the most frequently quoted Dispensationalists. According to Chafer, there are seven Dispensations in the Bible. Other interpreters have added or subtracted from this. More conventional theologians say there are only two, the Old Testament and the New Testament.

The claim of a Kingdom offer made by Chafer and other Dispensationalists is flatly contrary to the Bible. It also leaves Christian theology in chaos.

"14 After the people saw the sign Jesus performed, they began to say, “Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world.” 15 Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself."
John 6: 14-15 NIV

According to John, it was not the Jews who rejected the offer of a Kingdom, but Jesus who fled from those who wanted to make Him a King. Jesus did not intend to lead a revolt against Rome and local monarchs like Herod.

There are other Gospel verses that contradict Chafer's notion of Jesus setting up a theocratic Jewish kingdom.

20 Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, 21 nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.”[c]
Luke 17:20-21 NIV
c:Luke 17:21 Or is within you

20 Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God was coming, he answered them, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; 21 nor will they say, ‘Lo, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.”[c]
Luke 17: 20-21 RSV
c: Luke 17:21 Or within you

When the Pharisees ask when is the Kingdom coming, Jesus doesn't say that the Jews have to accept a theocratic kingdom for it to happen. Instead He says that the Kingdom of Heaven is more subtle than the one they are expecting.

Rev. Chafer's notion that the crucifixion wasn't planed from the beginning is apparently contradicted by this verse.

70 Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” 71 He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the twelve, was to betray him.
John 6:70-71 RSV

It looks like Judas was chosen as an Apostle precisely because the crucifixion was the plan from the beginning.

Well, I am not a hardcore Dispensationalist whereby I believe every little thing they say. I do not believe all Dispensationalists believe the same thing, either. On God's prophetic clock: I believe we are in an "Age of Grace" or a "Gap of Time." Clearly the the 69th week has already transpired, and the 70th week has not happened yet. There is a gap of time given to us by Jesus Himself. Jesus talked about His 1st coming in Isaiah, and then He closed the book right at the point where the Scripture talks about His 2nd coming.

17 "And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down."
(Luke 4:17-20).

1 "The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;" (Isaiah 61:1-2).

The day of vengeance of our God is the Lord Jesus Christ's return.

"For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled."
(Luke 21:22).

Context:

25 "And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken." (Luke 21:25-26).

I am pretty sure verse 26 has not happened yet. What event in history describes verse 26?
I don't see that at all.

I am also pretty sure none of the things in Revelation have happened yet, either.
Demons coming up, and darkness, 1/4th of the planet killed, etc.

Jesus makes it clear that this tribulation is sooo bad that it will be unlike any other bad event in history and it will be the last really really bad event.

"For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be." (Matthew 24:21).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I do also believe that the New Covenant officially begins with Jesus Christ's death, as well. Jesus celebrated the Lord's supper and said the cup of the fruit of the vine represents His shed blood of the New Testament (i.e. New Covenant) (Luke 22:20). Also, the temple veil was torn from top to bottom (Matthew 27:51); This lets us know that the laws on the priesthood and the animal sacrifices had ended. Meaning: The Old Law is no more (Please see: 2 Corinthians 3:7-11, 2 Corinthians 3:14, Romans 7:4, Romans 7:6, Colossians 2:14, Colossians 2:16-17, Colossians 2:20-23, Ephesians 2:15, Hebrews 7:18, Hebrews 8:13, Hebrews 9:9-10, Hebrews 9:15, Hebrews 9:16-17, Hebrews 10:8-9, Matthew 26:27-28, Matthew 27:50-51, Acts of the Apostles 15:1, Acts of the Apostles 15:5, Acts of the Apostles 15:24).

For when Jesus died: The Old Testament Law of Moses (the 613) had ended, and a New Covenant with new laws was instituted. For the Law has changed (Hebrews 7:12). We are now under the Law of Christ (Galatians 6:2), the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:2), the Royal Law (James 2:8), and the Perfect Law of Liberty (James 1:25).

For the Law came by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ (John 1:17).

 

[Al Touthentop]

You are not a Jew so you are not familiar with the prophetic promises in the OT.

If you are convinced there will never be a physical kingdom, you will naturally interpret those promises differently. That is fine.

I'm convinced because the author of those prophecies came and told us what they meant and told us that the kingdom was not of this earth. And he "opened the hearts" of the apostles to the meaning of those prophecies. Then they preached a spiritual kingdom and wrote the meaning of those prophecies in books.

But I *am* a Jew, having been born into that spiritual kingdom of Israel and circumcised with the circumcision not made with hands. "Thus all Israel will be saved." I have been grafted into the spiritual kingdom of Israel along with the remnant who accepted the Messiah's teachings.

 

[Guojing]

I'm convinced because the author of those prophecies came and told us what they meant and told us that the kingdom was not of this earth. And he "opened the hearts" of the apostles to the meaning of those prophecies. Then they preached a spiritual kingdom and wrote the meaning of those prophecies in books.

But I *am* a Jew, having been born into that spiritual kingdom of Israel and circumcised with the circumcision not made with hands. "Thus all Israel will be saved." I have been grafted into the spiritual kingdom of Israel along with the remnant who accepted the Messiah's teachings.

If you reject dispensationalism and instead embrace replacement theology, it is understandable why you would come to those beliefs.

 

[Guojing]

I do also believe that the New Covenant officially begins with Jesus Christ's death, as well. Jesus celebrated the Lord's supper and said the cup of the fruit of the vine represents His shed blood of the New Testament (i.e. New Covenant) (Luke 22:20). Also, the temple veil was torn from top to bottom (Matthew 27:51); This lets us know that the laws on the priesthood and the animal sacrifices had ended. Meaning: The Old Law is no more

This is a very popular view but unfortunately not born by Scripture. Animal sacrifices continued on even throughout the book of Acts.

The resurrected Christ, in the most popular version of the Great Commission, told the 12 to preach to others that "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you". (Matthew 28:20)

Even as late as Acts 21, those who believe were all zealous for the Law. (v20)

Someone forgot to tell them?

 

[Al Touthentop]

Clearly the the 69th week has already transpired, and the 70th week has not happened yet.

Given that God through the angel Gabriel said that the time of the prophecy would be 70 weeks rather than 69, and the Messiah came in the period prophesied, in the 70th week, the only way one can say we're in the 70th week now (or maybe some later time) is to say that the Messiah hasn't actually yet come, that Gabriel was mistaken. The covenant was to be made in the 70th week. Every other week in the prophecy happened in regular measure (7 years per week) but the last week, rather than being 7 years long has stretched out past 2000 years.

"and he will confirm a covenant with many for one week," - adding up the weeks that have elapsed in the prophecy, the time of the covenant's confirmation is the 70th week.

Did Jesus not really come and confirm his covenant? Do you see how absurd this doctrine is to those of us who accept that Jesus came and made a covenant and sealed it with his crucifixion and resurrection? We are asked to believe that prophecy was not actually fulfilled in the time allotted for its completion by God, his angel and his prophet.

 

[Al Touthentop]

If you reject dispensationalism and instead embrace replacement theology, it is understandable why you would come to those beliefs.

Thanks captain Obvious but I don't really care what it is called. I don't believe a doctrine because of its label but because it was taught by Jesus and his apostles.

The reason I believe what I do, is because I read the scriptures and accept them as the truth. Jesus, a Jew, taught that his kingdom was not earthly. Paul taught that the real Jews were those who accepted and believed Jesus and lived by this faith. That makes me and the rest of Jesus' disciples, spiritual Jews according to the scriptures.

Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all.

 

[Al Touthentop]

This is a very popular view but unfortunately not born by Scripture. Animal sacrifices continued on even throughout the book of Acts.

The resurrected Christ, in the most popular version of the Great Commission, told the 12 to preach to others that "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you". (Matthew 28:20)

Even as late as Acts 21, those who believe were all zealous for the Law. (v20)

Someone forgot to tell them?

The law of Christ.

Hebrews must have been written before 70 AD because the author (likely Paul) references that at the time of the writing, sacrifices were still being performed "daily."

But he said the sacrifices did nothing and could not because the ultimate sacrifice had already been made by Jesus. Going back to that covenant would accomplish nothing. No remission could occur.

Heb 10:11
And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.

Even then, before the temple's destruction, the law was no longer in effect. It had been done away with when Jesus said, "It is finished." The fact that those who rejected Christ still practiced animal sacrifice is not of any consequence to the Gospel. Jesus taught that the law would pass away (but that those under the law while it was still in effect must obey it), prophesied that the temple would be destroyed and taught his apostles the Lord's supper and baptism among other things, things that would become binding after "the death of the testator."

It's obvious too from the council in Jerusalem that they were not teaching Gentiles to take on the Mosaic law. Christians were not taking animals to the temple as sin offerings. We don't see Peter or John or Paul teaching Christians that they must adhere to the Mosaic law. The opposite is true. They taught that the old law was dead and that Christians were to follow the law of Christ.

 

[Guojing]

It's obvious too from the council in Jerusalem that they were not teaching Gentiles to take on the Mosaic law. Christians were not taking animals to the temple as sin offerings. We don't see Peter or John or Paul teaching Christians that they must adhere to the Mosaic law. The opposite is true. They taught that the old law was dead and that Christians were to follow the law of Christ.

The entire Acts 10 account, Peter was horrified to eat anything unclean and to be associated with the Gentiles.

The Acts 15 council only excused gentile believers from the Law of Moses, the Jewish believers were still expected to follow it, and it was confirmed by James and the elders in Acts 21.

 

[Guojing]

Thanks captain Obvious but I don't really care what it is called. I don't believe a doctrine because of its label but because it was taught by Jesus and his apostles.

The reason I believe what I do, is because I read the scriptures and accept them as the truth. Jesus, a Jew, taught that his kingdom was not earthly. Paul taught that the real Jews were those who accepted and believed Jesus and lived by this faith. That makes me and the rest of Jesus' disciples, spiritual Jews according to the scriptures.

You did not "read the scriptures and accept them as the truth". You read the scriptures and interpreted them as saying what you think is the truth.

That is an important difference.

 

[Dave L]

Dispensationalism does not come from the bible. It comes from a theory about what the bible would say if there was a gap of an untold number of years between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks. A gap scripture never mentions. So if there were a gap, Jesus who fulfilled the contiguous 70 weeks would become Antichrist. And a new Roman Empire would need to exist since the 70th week is set in that environment. There would needs be another great tribulation and a new Temple offering up animal sacrifices for the Antchrist to put an end to, etc.

And so they have a scavenger hunt looking for scriptures, when taken out of context will support their claims. They have Russia, because it sounds like Rosh, marching on Israel, not to steal their cattle, using wooden spears and the like, as Ezekiel suggests happened (see the book of Esther). But they turn these into nuclear weapons, Horses into tanks, etc. All of course is false prophecy based on a GAP scripture never mentions.

 

[GOD Shines Forth!]

Well, I am not a hardcore Dispensationalist whereby I believe every little thing they say. I do not believe all Dispensationalists believe the same thing, either.

This.

 

[GOD Shines Forth!]

This is a very popular view but unfortunately not born by Scripture. Animal sacrifices continued on even throughout the book of Acts.

The resurrected Christ, in the most popular version of the Great Commission, told the 12 to preach to others that "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you". (Matthew 28:20)

Even as late as Acts 21, those who believe were all zealous for the Law. (v20)

Someone forgot to tell them?

Yes, lots of little details are overlooked by those who spend energy hating "Dispensationalism". I prefer "right division" as so much of it is just letting Scripture explain itself and its differences. Seems like the revelation of the mystery is ignored or pooh-poohed on these threads (as if "no big whup"). That God HID that until he revealed it to Paul is huge and a key to why he made that offer to Israel, which in HIS secret foreknowledge and plan He knew they would reject (stiff-necked people). NO ONE knew the Gentiles would be FELLOW HEIRS (not just "grafted in" to provoke Israel). A "one new man" as described in Ephesians? No, sorry. Many are stuck back in the Gospel/Acts era when there was as yet new information to be had. Or they take the new information for granted and read it back in to everything in the past.

When Paul said "If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness..." (1 Timothy 6:3) many minds go right back to the red letters, but I think he's speaking of the doctrine the Lord Jesus Christ personally revealed to him (and shared in the letters). That IS Jesus speaking to us, those ARE His sound words (for us, Gentiles).

We are a very spiritually spoiled era, with SO much information at our fingertips. I think of Bullinger, just one "dispensasionalist" from the past who was truly brilliant. He gets tarred with "Bullingerism" by people who have never read his work. He wasn't right about everything, but when you look at the deep seriousness of his approach to Scripture it makes us all look like kids in a sandbox. And the kids all yell "Kooky dispensationalist!!! WE know more than YOU!!!" Spoiled brats! We skim the cream off the work of so many before us and like the leech's two daughters cry "Give! Give!"

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Given that God through the angel Gabriel said that the time of the prophecy would be 70 weeks rather than 69, and the Messiah came in the period prophesied, in the 70th week, the only way one can say we're in the 70th week now (or maybe some later time) is to say that the Messiah hasn't actually yet come, that Gabriel was mistaken. The covenant was to be made in the 70th week. Every other week in the prophecy happened in regular measure (7 years per week) but the last week, rather than being 7 years long has stretched out past 2000 years.

"and he will confirm a covenant with many for one week," - adding up the weeks that have elapsed in the prophecy, the time of the covenant's confirmation is the 70th week.

Did Jesus not really come and confirm his covenant? Do you see how absurd this doctrine is to those of us who accept that Jesus came and made a covenant and sealed it with his crucifixion and resurrection? We are asked to believe that prophecy was not actually fulfilled in the time allotted for its completion by God, his angel and his prophet.

My Commentary on Daniel 9:24-27:

24 "Seventy weeks [70 weeks] are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks [7 weeks], and threescore and two weeks [62 weeks]: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks [62 weeks] shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself [The Messiah is Jesus who is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the entire world]: and the people of the prince [the people of the prince of the power of the air, i.e. the devil - see: Ephesians 2:2] that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary [i.e. the Romans destroyed the Jewish temple in 70AD]; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he [The "he" is the "prince" of the people mentioned in verse 26] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week [make a treaty with the Jews and others in the final 7 years]: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease [this prince will stop the Jewish sacrifices in the temple], and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."
(Daniel 9:24-27).

After 7 weeks (49 days /49 years) = Temple Rebuilt (verse 25).

+ (Plus)

After 62 weeks (69 weeks) =

(Gap of time or Age of Grace: The War (verse 26), or Spiritual Time of Battle for the Cause of Christ in Spreading the Gospel)

(a) Christ dying for our sins
(b) 70AD Temple destruction.
(Verse 26).

+ (Plus)

The last 1 week (7 days/7 years) = Tribulation period (verse 27).

7 + 62 + 1 = 70 Weeks.
​

This passage sets the backdrop or framework for Daniels 70 Week Prophecy (verse 24).


Side Note 1:

If you were to carefully look at the text, it states that there are things that happen in the gap like a.... "war" until the end. Also, Christ dies, and the temple is destroyed also within the gap of time that is not accounted for within the 70 weeks, as well. The text is actually saying that things are happening within the gap of the 69th week, and the 70th week.

Side Note 2:

The texts in brackets in blue and red in the Daniel 9 passage is my personal commentary on the text.

 

[Dave L]

My Commentary to Daniel 9:24-27:

24 "Seventy weeks [70 weeks] are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks [7 weeks], and threescore and two weeks [62 weeks]: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks [62 weeks] shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself [The Messiah is Jesus who is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the entire world]: and the people of the prince [the people of the prince of the power of the air, i.e. the devil - see: Ephesians 2:2] that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary [i.e. the Romans destroyed the Jewish temple in 70AD]; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he [The "he" is the "prince" of the people mentioned in verse 26] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week [make a treaty with the Jews and others in the final 7 years]: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease [this prince will stop the Jewish sacrifices in the temple], and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."
(Daniel 9:24-27).

After 7 weeks (49 days /49 years) = Temple Rebuilt (verse 25).

+ (Plus)

After 62 weeks = (a) Christ dying for our sins (b) 70AD Temple destruction.
(Verse 26).

(Gap of time or Age of Grace: The War (verse 26), or Spiritual Time of Battle for the Cause of Christ in Spreading the Gospel)

+ (Plus)

The last 1 week (7 days/7 years) = Tribulation period (verse 27).

7 + 62 + 1 = 70 Weeks.
​

This passage sets the backdrop or framework for Daniels 70 Week Prophecy (verse 24).


Side Note 1:

If you were to carefully look at the text, it states that there are things that happen in the gap like a.... "war" until the end. Also, Christ dies, and the temple is destroyed also within the gap of time that is not accounted for within the 70 weeks, as well. The text is actually saying that things are happening within the gap of the 69th week, and the 70th week.

Side Note 2:

The texts in brackets in blue and red in the Daniel 9 passage is my personal commentary on the text.

Where's the gap mentioned in scripture?

 

[His student]

I don't get this. Is it a double reverse negative?

No - simply a statement of my opinion.

People say that just referring to Jesus' statement that His Kingdom is not (now) of this world negates dispensational teaching. It does not.

Most knowledgeable dispensationalists theologians deal with verses like that quite well and then move on to presenting their case.

That was my point. Sorry it confused you.

So ?

See my reply to HardHead above.