The GOALS of the SEVENTIETH WEEK are KEY TOPICS of the NEW TESTAMENT.

[Zao is life]

You would think, at least to the Jews, the 70 weeks being fulfilled should be a time for celebration. Assuming the 70 weeks ended 3.5 years after Christ died, was anybody celebrating at the time? What was happening 3.5 years later? Jews that converted to Christianity were being persecuted, some even killed. What a way to have the 70 weeks come to a close. If some of you want to believe the 70 weeks have already been fulfilled, you have a right to believe that. That doesn't necessarily make you correct, though. I don't need the 70th week, or at least the latter half, to be future still, in order for there to be a rebuilt temple or any such nonsense as that. The way I tend to view it, the first 69 weeks, or perhaps 69 and 1/2 weeks, this involved the literal, the remaining portion has shifted from the literal to spiritual, as in it involves the 42 month reign of the beast and everything connected with that which includes 2 Thessalonian 2:4, etc.

I believe the latter half of the 70th week is a type of the final 42 months. @DavidPT corrected my wrong English: But the first time the final 42 months saw a growth in believers even in the face of persecution. The second time it will see an apostasy, according to both Matthew 24:10 and 2 Thessalonians 2.

You would think, at least to the Jews, the 70 weeks being fulfilled should be a time for celebration. Assuming the 70 weeks ended 3.5 years after Christ died, was anybody celebrating at the time? What was happening 3.5 years later? Jews that converted to Christianity were being persecuted, some even killed. What a way to have the 70 weeks come to a close.

Now you're beginning to understand the sin of unbelief and what God's gripe against Israel had been from the beginning:

Romans 10
21 But to Israel he says, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

Hebrews 3
9 When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years.
10 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do always go astray in their heart; and they have not known my ways.
11 So I swore in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.)
17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcasses fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom swore he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?
19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

Yes, you'd think they would be celebrating, not persecuting people who believed.

But you'd think they would have crowned Jesus King, not crucify Him.

Though someone come back from the dead ..

 

[Zao is life]

oh ok ... my bad ... its just i supplied the fulfilment verse to the prophecy in post 18 and you did not respond ... anyway your still seeing in part understanding 99.9% plus of mankind throughout the ages including those who call themselves christians do not believe in the one true God Jesus spoke to, and follow after a god of their own reasoning known as the prince of the world or the ruler of the power/authority of the air, and therefor belief in the Truth in this realm is not a prerequisite to being saved .....

Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the most righteous of them all who will never be duped by error?

 

[honey badger]

Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the most righteous of them all who will never be duped by error?

hell hath no fury like a christian told the truth

 

[Zao is life]

If Daniel 9:27 allegedly involves 70 AD, but that Matthew 24:15 doesn't involve 70 AD, and that Luke 21 doesn't even involve an abomination, where then in the NT is there the connection between what is recorded in Daniel 9:27 and an abomination in 70 AD?

Only in all the verses where @Christian Gedge has been trying to get people to understand shows that the apostles and Jesus regarded it as the fulfillment of the 70th week.

 

[Zao is life]

hell hath no fury like a christian told the truth

Oh please. Your boss the accuser was cast down by my God.

 

[honey badger]

Oh please. Your boss the accuser was cast down by my God.

if you believed in the God Jesus spoke to, you would not have cast the first stone ...

 

[Zao is life]

if you believed in the God Jesus spoke to, you would not have cast the first stone ...

No. I never cast any stones. You've been casting stones and implying that @Christian Gedge and myself are following false gods.

You're priceless. Cast stones, accuse, and then get reminded that your boss the accuser was cast down, then falsely accuse others of casting the stones. Really of you.

 

[honey badger]

No. I never cast any stones. You've been casting stones and implying that @Christian Gedge and myself are following false gods.

You're priceless. Cast stones, accuse, and then get reminded that your boss the accuser was cast down, then falsely accuse others of casting the stones. Really of you.

i never made an accusation, i made an observation ... to which you relied to my observation with an accusation ...

 

[Timtofly]

Who said anything about Satan being in control of the throne of Messiah? Daniel 9:24-27 certainly says nothing like that, and that's the text we are talking about.

Jesus is the Prince to come and sit on David's throne in Jerusalem. Matthew 25:31. The only time Satan will be able to sit on any throne is mentioned in Revelation 13.

The throne of the Messiah is in heaven where Jesus is seated at the right hand of God. But Daniel 9:26-27 does speak about the desolation to city and sanctuary that would come as a result of (many) abominations (plural - not only one abomination, as in Matthew 24:15, which is speaking about something else).

Those many abominations, as CG said, were in the form of continued sacrifices for sin after Messiah had brought an end to sacrifice for sin by the once-for-all offering of Himself.

You're the one who's decided that Daniel 9:27 is referring to Satan in control of the throne of Messiah, no one else.

Jesus as Lord sits with God in heaven, Yes. Not the throne as Prince though. That is David's seat in Jerusalem.

But the man of sin mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is the anti-type of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the temple he will seat himself up in is the only Tabernacle of God, i.e the New Testament Temple:

And the king shall do according to his will. And he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper until the fury is fulfilled. For that which is decreed shall be done.
He will not regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god. For he shall magnify himself above all. Daniel 11:36-37

Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For that Day shall not come unless there first comes a falling away, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition,
who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, setting himself forth, that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4

The first two verses above are talking about Antiochus Epiphanes, the last two are talking about the man of sin, the anti-type of Antiochus.

Daniel 8:11; Daniel 11:31, Daniel 11:36-37 and Daniel chapter 12 are referring to Antiochus Epiphanes and the abomination he set up, but Daniel chapter 12 overlaps with the time of the end of this Age and not only refers back to the abomination of desolation set up by Antiochus, but it also projects all of this forward to the end of this Age and the man of sin, showing that Antiochus Epiphanes and his desecration of the holy place is THE type of the man of sin of 2 Thessalonians 2. This is the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet standing in the holy place which Jesus mentioned in Matthew 24:15.

The abominations (plural) mentioned in Daniel 9:27 have nothing to do with the abomination (singular) mentioned in Matthew 24:15, which is referring to the abomination of Desolation mentioned in Daniel 8:11; Daniel 11:31, Daniel 11:36-37 and Daniel chapter 12, which are referring to Antiochus Epiphanes and the abomination he set up, and overlaps with the time of the end of this Age and corresponds with the man of sin.

You seem to have fallen in with the same misconception of others who have joined things together that do not belong together, and gotten their eschatology all wobbly as a result.

Nope. Only one Second Coming. Only one time as Prince. Only one glorious throne in the city of David, Jerusalem. The only throne Satan will ever be handed, and only if there are gleanings after the final harvest, after the Second Coming.

Armageddon is at the end of the 42 months granted to Satan to have control over that throne in Jerusalem. Armageddon is Jesus taking back that throne. Daniel 9:27 is the desolation of the 42 months. Not any other time in history, and definitely, Daniel 9:27 is not talking about the fulness of the Gentiles, the last 1992 years. Not even symbolically as in sitting in the hearts of the redeemed throughout the last 1992 years. Sorry but the gap between the first half of the 70th week is not verse 27. That gap is the 42 months of Satan sitting on that throne in Jerusalem. The gap of the fulness of the Gentiles was just the time after Messiah was cut off and Jesus coming as Prince at the Second Coming. It has not been utter desolation. The fulness of the Gentiles is the harvest of the church, not utter desolation.

The trampling under foot of the Gentiles in Revelation 11 is not the fulness of the Gentiles. That temple has not even been built yet, and will be where the throne is, that Jesus as Prince will sit on.

God only has one Temple today. No building made with human hands will He ever regard as His Temple again, so even if another building gets erected where that temple stood, it matters not who does what in such a man-made temple.

So either you must become a Preterist and place Matthew 24:15 and all the Olivet Discourse and 2 Thessalonians 2 all in 70 A.D and the temple that was destroyed because of the abominations (plural) that were being done in it,

or you must acknowledge, finally (like all Christians should) that the temple made with human hands that was destroyed in 70 A.D ceased being the holy place of the presence of God when the veil that was in it was torn in two from top to bottom, and from then on and forever it would never be God's temple again.

That is because the fulness of the Gentiles is still ongoing. The church will be complete at the 6th Seal, when the Second Coming happens. Then the temple of the body will be closed, and the temple in Jerusalem set up.

70 A.D is indeed in view in Daniel 9:26-27. It mentions the destruction of the city and the temple, which never happened in the 70th week but 40 years later.

The destruction of Jerusalem happened after Jesus was cut off. Verse 27 will not be fulfilled until the 7th Trumpet sounds. Revelation 10:7

"But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets."

Only the 7th Trumpet can bring the 70 weeks to a close. Any one claiming otherwise is Preterist in their eschatology claiming the 7th Trumpet sounded in 70AD. Those 6 promises refer to the 1,000 year reign on earth after the Second Coming when Jesus returns as Prince. That kingdom with those 6 promises will be handed back to God, per 1 Corinthians 15:24

"Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power."

This verse and Revelation 10:7 are the complete fulfillment of Daniel 9. The end cannot happen before the Second Coming. Especially not 1900 years before the Second Coming. The end will be over 1,000 years after the Second Coming.

 

[Zao is life]

i never made an accusation, i made an observation ... to which you relied to my observation with an accusation ...

I see. Now an accusation is an observation and an observation is an accusation. LOL. Though this is funny and entertaining I'll drop it because you clearly need to get off your "observations" in order to find time to actually say where you disagree with anything @Christian Gedge or anyone else has said and debate it. So far you've only managed to throw "observations" into the conversation that don't amount to anything. So I'll ignore anything more you have to say till that time arrives (if it arrives at all).

 

[honey badger]

I see. Now an accusation is an observation and an observation is an accusation. LOL. Though this is funny and entertaining I'll drop it because you clearly need to get off your "observations" in order to find time to actually say where you disagree with anything @Christian Gedge or anyone else has said and debate it. So far you've only managed to throw "observations" into the conversation that don't amount to anything. So I'll ignore anything more you have to say till that time arrives (if it arrives at all).

if my observation has offended you ... then the offence lies with you ....

 

[Zao is life]

Jesus is the Prince to come and sit on David's throne in Jerusalem. Matthew 25:31.

God has highly exalted Him, and has given Him a name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of heavenly ones, and of earthly ones, and of ones under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:9-11).

His glory fills all the universe and you say His glory is only in one city on earth called Jerusalem?

Have you ever heard of the New Jerusalem? Revelation calls it the holy city 4 times but of Babylon the Great Revelation says it's "spiritually called Sodom and Egypt where also our Lord was crucified" (Note: outside the city) and Paul tells us that Jerusalem is in bondage with her children.

The only city where the temple of God is found is in the New Jerusalem.

Ouch you really want to pull the throne of Christ's glory down, don't you?

@Timtofly

Psalm 89
34 I will not break My covenant, nor change the thing that has gone out of My lips.
35 Once I have sworn by My holiness that I will not lie to David.
36 His seed shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before Me.
37 It shall be established forever like the moon, and like a faithful witness in the heavens. Selah.

The throne of David that scripture speaks about is in heaven and in New Jerusalem. The temple of God is in New Jerusalem.

God meant far higher and greater things for Israel's Messiah than they ever dreamed or imagined, though it was told them in scripture. The apostles and disciples were amazed, the rest fell into unbelief.

Timtofly, In Christ God has taken mankind and moved him on an moved him up, but you're trying to drag God backwards and mankind backwards to where he was.

Christ's throne of His glory is not talking about Jerusalem on earth. It's talking about New Jerusalem. The city you're talking about and the throne in the city you're talking about and the temple in the city you're talking about was the type and pattern of New Jerusalem.

 

[Zao is life]

oh ok ... my bad ... its just i supplied the fulfilment verse to the prophecy in post 18 and you did not respond ... anyway your still seeing in part understanding 99.9% plus of mankind throughout the ages including those who call themselves christians do not believe in the one true God Jesus spoke to, and follow after a god of their own reasoning known as the prince of the world or the ruler of the power/authority of the air, and therefor belief in the Truth in this realm is not a prerequisite to being saved .....

if my observation has offended you ... then the offence lies with you ....

Just putting it here for the sake of the mods in case you have reported my posts.

 

[honey badger]

Just putting it here for the sake of the mods in case you have reported my posts.

i am not offended by anything you have said ... for reason i no longer judge Gods first born ... or said another way same truth, i no longer judge according to the flesh ....

 

[Christian Gedge]

My argument is still this. Verse 27, the entire verse, it is pertaining to the 70th week. It is impossible to interpret this without it involving a gap somewhere, in light of, that verse 27, the entire verse, pertains to the 70th week.

The fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the temple did not take place within the actual seventy weeks; the prophet was simply providing information of the aftermath to the weeks in order to explain what the eventual outcome would be.

Why doesn't what I have underlined per your interpretation agree with what is written in the text involving the following?
Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: ) 16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

The abominations (plural) mentioned in Daniel 9:27 have nothing to do with the abomination (singular) mentioned in Matthew 24:15, which is referring to the abomination of Desolation mentioned in Daniel 8:11; Daniel 11:31, Daniel 11:36-37 and Daniel chapter 12, which are referring to Antiochus Epiphanes and the abomination he set up, and overlaps with the time of the end of this Age and corresponds with the man of sin.

Have a good look at post #29 for how the ‘abominations’ fit in. I’ll get back to topic now - how the goals of the 70th week are found in New Testament writings.

 

[Timtofly]

God has highly exalted Him, and has given Him a name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of heavenly ones, and of earthly ones, and of ones under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:9-11).

His glory fills all the universe and you say His glory is only in one city on earth called Jerusalem?

Have you ever heard of the New Jerusalem? Revelation calls it the holy city 4 times but of Babylon the Great Revelation says it's "spiritually called Sodom and Egypt where also our Lord was crucified" (Note: outside the city) and Paul tells us that Jerusalem is in bondage with her children.

The only city where the temple of God is found is in the New Jerusalem.

Ouch you really want to pull the throne of Christ's glory down, don't you?

@Timtofly

Psalm 89
34 I will not break My covenant, nor change the thing that has gone out of My lips.
35 Once I have sworn by My holiness that I will not lie to David.
36 His seed shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before Me.
37 It shall be established forever like the moon, and like a faithful witness in the heavens. Selah.

The throne of David that scripture speaks about is in heaven and in New Jerusalem. The temple of God is in New Jerusalem.

God meant far higher and greater things for Israel's Messiah than they ever dreamed or imagined, though it was told them in scripture. The apostles and disciples were amazed, the rest fell into unbelief.

Timtofly, In Christ God has taken mankind and moved him on an moved him up, but you're trying to drag God backwards and mankind backwards to where he was.

Christ's throne of His glory is not talking about Jerusalem on earth. It's talking about New Jerusalem. The city you're talking about and the throne in the city you're talking about and the temple in the city you're talking about was the type and pattern of New Jerusalem.

Nope.

All you state is true. But you are missing the point about actually reigning on earth. That is not dragging God backwards. Your logic must mean Jesus was never born of a virgin. That was dragging God down into the muck and mire of humanity. So miss the point by a mile.

 

[DavidPT]

Have a good look at post #29 for how the ‘abominations’ fit in. I’ll get back to topic now - how the goals of the 70th week are found in New Testament writings.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.


As far as I can tell the following are the goals that have to be accomplished before the 70 weeks are fully fulfilled.

1) to finish the transgression upon thy people

2) to finish the transgression upon thy holy city

3) to make an end of sins

4) to make reconciliation for iniquity

5) to bring in everlasting righteousness

6) to seal up the vision and prophecy

7) to anoint the most Holy

The way I look at it, unless you can prove with the NT all 7 things above were fulfilled in the first century, and that they were fulfilled within 490 consecutive years, you can't insist the 70 weeks are finished yet. The one I want I want to focus on is 2) above. Prove via the NT that that has been fulfilled. Before we might do that, let's look at verse 26 first.

Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

In this verse there is this---and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.

Is that meaning before or after 2) above is fulfilled?

Does it make good sense for 2) above to chronologically precede this---and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary?

If 2) is meaning after this---and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary---that contradcts that the 490 years are consecutive since 2) above is clearly accomplished within the 70 weeks, not outside of it instead.

The point being, all it takes is just one thing that can't be proved happened within 490 consecutive weeks n order to debunk that the 490 years have been fulfilled, and that they were fulfilled consecutively. Even if you have good NT arguments for some of those 7 things listed in verse 24, do you have good NT arguments for all 7? Do you have a good NT argument for 2) in the list? Does your interpretation of verse 24 agree with or contradictict this---and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary?

Are you even able to be intellectually honest here? Are any of those who insist the 490 years have already been fulfilled consecutively able to be intellectually honest here, in light of 2) in verse 24 and what it says in verse 26---and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary? In order to win a debate one can't do that by being intellectually dishonest about things. If one insists 2) in verse 24 precedes the following---and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary---that tells you all you need to know, that interpreter is not being intellectually honest in that case.

 

[grafted branch]

As far as I can tell the following are the goals that have to be accomplished before the 70 weeks are fully fulfilled.

1) to finish the transgression upon thy people

2) to finish the transgression upon thy holy city

3) to make an end of sins

4) to make reconciliation for iniquity

5) to bring in everlasting righteousness

6) to seal up the vision and prophecy

7) to anoint the most Holy

Intercession for the transgressors was completed at the cross (Isaiah 53:12).

If all literal transgressions or rebellions have to come to an end within the 70 weeks, then the final rebellion after the 1,000 years has to take place in the 70 weeks also.

 

[DavidPT]

Intercession for the transgressors was completed at the cross (Isaiah 53:12).

If that also includes finishing the transgression upon the holy city, why is this meaning post the time of the cross---and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary? Seems strange to me that the transgression concerning the holy city is finished at the cross, then a time post that, the following occurs----and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. It's just not adding up if the transgression concerning the holy city is finished, then at a later time the following happens---and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.

If all literal transgressions or rebellions have to come to an end within the 70 weeks, then the final rebellion after the 1,000 years has to take place in the 70 weeks also.

You might have a valid point here, which, even if you do, that still contradicts a position that sees the thousand years pertaining to the past 2000 years, and satan's little season following that, while at the same time insisting the 70 weeks have already been fulfilled.

 

[grafted branch]

You might have a valid point here, which, even if you do, that still contradicts a position that sees the thousand years pertaining to the past 2000 years, and satan's little season following that, while at the same time insisting the 70 weeks have already been fulfilled.

Agreed, I think that’s why some preterist have the 1,000 years ending at the cross.


Let’s look at the options we have …

1 the transgression is finished at the cross

2 the transgression is finished when NHNE are realized

3 the transgression is finished when Jerusalem is destroyed in AD 70


Do you see any other options that should be added?