Was John talking about Daniel's prophecy?

[visionary]

Compare..
“The next day he saw Yeshua coming toward him, and said, “ Behold,the Lamb of God, who
takes away the sin of the world!”

“Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city …to
make an end of sins.”

His introductory announcement, John’s cry was, “the time is near,” and it was along the same lines as what Yeshua said, “the appointed period of time is fulfilled (completed).”

I know the difference is subtle, but I believe significant. John was the preacher of the sixty-ninth week, whereas Yeshua was the preacher of the seventieth.

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

The one follows the other both prophetically, and in God's calendar time line.

 

[visionary]

‘year of the Lord’s favor’ is a direct reference to the Jubilee prophesied by Isaiah. Daniel’s seventy weeks is a span of ten Jubilee periods and the tenth is the culmination of them all.

Paul seemed to be thinking and teaching along the same lines. “We were in bondage under the elements of the world. But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive adoption as sons.”

When Paul said the "fullness of time" he could have easily said "fullness of weeks" which puts it in line with what Daniel was indicating “until the time appointed of the father,” and with “seventy weeks are determined.”

 

[visionary]

As Paul said “… that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times he might gather together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are on earth in him.”

I say John was referencing Daniel as a prophecy coming truth before his audiences' eyes when he said “The next day he saw Yeshua coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.’ I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.”

This to me is the reference to “taking away sin” taken directly from Daniel’s prophecy.

 

[Humble Penny]

Compare..
“The next day he saw Yeshua coming toward him, and said, “ Behold,the Lamb of God, who
takes away the sin of the world!”

“Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city …to
make an end of sins.”

His introductory announcement, John’s cry was, “the time is near,” and it was along the same lines as what Yeshua said, “the appointed period of time is fulfilled (completed).”

I know the difference is subtle, but I believe significant. John was the preacher of the sixty-ninth week, whereas Yeshua was the preacher of the seventieth.

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

The one follows the other both prophetically, and in God's calendar time line.

Good eye sister visionary. It's great you were able to make that distinction as many people simply just miss it comepletely. While Yeshua definitely fulfilled the 69th Week at His death just like Daniel tells us: He also wants us to know that it is simply a shadow of its true fulfillment where His Second Coming will usher in the 70th Week: which is also a shadow of the mysterious "8th Day": and this represents the True Eternal Sabbath of YHWH where sin will be done away with at the close of the 7,000 Years and the Final Judgment!

 

[Humble Penny]

As Paul said “… that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times he might gather together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are on earth in him.”

I say John was referencing Daniel as a prophecy coming truth before his audiences' eyes when he said “The next day he saw Yeshua coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.’ I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.”

This to me is the reference to “taking away sin” taken directly from Daniel’s prophecy.

Also something I would like to add on what you've already said here is that there are only four places in the Bible which refer to 3 Years 6 Months:

1. Genesis (Man given an extra 1 Week/7 Days before Flood)
2. 1 Kings (No rain for 3 Years 6 Months)
3. Daniel (Great Tribulation in middle of 70th Week)
4. Revelation (Two Witnesses die after 3 Years 6 Months)

Noah and Shem; Moses and Aaron; Elijah and Elisha; John and ???; etc. are all types of the Two Witnesses. And the 3 Years 6 Months are only connected to the second half of Daniel's 70th Week.

While the story of Noah doesn't explicitly mention the 3 Years 6 Months, the fact that YHWH gave mankind an extra 1 Week to repent is no coincience as the earliest type of Daniel's 70th Week. Noah and his wife are types of Christ and the Church, and their sons and daughters represent the Hebrews while the animals represent the nations who are all saved from the Flood; the Flood is a destruction of the old world nand the sinners; the end of the Flood is a type of the New Heavens and the New Earth.

 

[daq]

Compare..
“The next day he saw Yeshua coming toward him, and said, “ Behold,the Lamb of God, who
takes away the sin of the world!”

“Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city …to
make an end of sins.”

His introductory announcement, John’s cry was, “the time is near,” and it was along the same lines as what Yeshua said, “the appointed period of time is fulfilled (completed).”

I know the difference is subtle, but I believe significant. John was the preacher of the sixty-ninth week, whereas Yeshua was the preacher of the seventieth.

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

The one follows the other both prophetically, and in God's calendar time line.

In my understanding, (of the calendar), this entire Gospel account fulfills the time prophecies in Sefer Daniel. The only thing missing is the double cleansing of the sanctuary on the tenth and the eleventh of Abib, which is accounted for in two other Gospel accounts. Matthew 21:9-13 is the tenth of Abib, while Mark 11:10-17 covers two days, the tenth and the eleventh, and the cleansing in Mark takes place on the eleventh.

From the midst of Pesach Sheni in John 6:4, (2/17, Genesis 7:11), to the cleansing of the sanctuary in Mark 11:15, are two thousand three hundred evening-morning yamim, (Daniel 8:14, counting only the seven yamim in a yom in the sacred calendar day).

I count John 6:4 as Pesach Sheni because the Master did not go up to Yerushalem to observe this feast, as commanded for the primary Pesach, but stayed in the Galil. Therefore it is the Pesach Sheni of Numbers 9:9-12, however, the author doesn't need to include that information for one to come to that understanding, for the second could still be called the Pesach or Passover.

 

[Yahudim]

@daq
You seem convinced Y'shua avoided the Passover mentioned in John 6. I am not convinced. Drawing 'nigh' is a relative term and imparts no real time frame. The walk from Tiberius to Jerusalem can be achieved in only a few days at a relatively leisurely pace, depending on the route taken.

 

[daq]

@daq
You seem convinced Y'shua avoided the Passover mentioned in John 6. I am not convinced. Drawing 'nigh' is a relative term and imparts no real time frame. The walk from Tiberius to Jerusalem can be achieved in only a few days at a relatively leisurely pace, depending on the route taken.

What is the reason for mentioning the Passover being nigh, near, at hand, on hand, etc., if that information bears no relationship to what follows in the text?

 

[Yahudim]

What is the reason for mentioning the Passover being nigh, near, at hand, on hand, etc., if that information bears no relationship to what follows in the text?

it could simply be given context. As the Passover draws nigh, large crowds start the pilgrimage to Jerusalem. He was dealing with a large crowd. There is certainly nothing that says it could not be as simple as that.

 

[daq]

it could simply be given context. As the Passover draws nigh, large crowds start the pilgrimage to Jerusalem. He was dealing with a large crowd. There is certainly nothing that says it could not be as simple as that.

After the miracle of the five loaves and two fish, he goes north, not south, for his disciples get into a boat and go across the see, toward Capernaum, John 6:17. He then walks on the sea and meets up with them: then they end up at Capernaum, for others come from Tiberias searching for him, and find him in Capernaum, John 6:23-25.

 

[Yahudim]

I have read those scriptures. And the ones after. In John 7 half of the year has passed. There is no indication that he did not go to observe Pesach or Shavuot either.

 

[Yahudim]

Forgive me brother oh, it is well past my bedtime. I should love to pick this up later.

Be well and be blessed

 

[daq]

I have read those scriptures. And the ones after. In John 7 half of the year has passed. There is no indication that he did not go to observe Pesach or Shavuot either.

Regardless of our respective theories and postulations, the text teaches that he went from Tiberias to Capernaum following the feeding of the five thousand, so I hope to hear your full explanation and that it satisfies what we see written in the relevant passages.

PS: After reviewing the OP and the next two posts, and since Vis did not respond to my first post, I think it better just to leave off at this point, though I stand by what I said in my first post. The reason being because my first post doesn't derail the thread and rather compliments, (imo), what was said in the opening posts. But going into all the finer details, and arguing them out, would take the thread away from the actual original topic, (unless Visionary chimes in on this).

Shalom.

 

[Yahudim]

Regardless of our respective theories and postulations, the text teaches that he went from Tiberias to Capernaum following the feeding of the five thousand, so I hope to hear your full explanation and that it satisfies what we see written in the relevant passages.

PS: After reviewing the OP and the next two posts, and since Vis did not respond to my first post, I think it better just to leave off at this point, though I stand by what I said in my first post. The reason being because my first post doesn't derail the thread and rather compliments, (imo), what was said in the opening posts. But going into all the finer details, and arguing them out, would take the thread away from the actual original topic, (unless Visionary chimes in on this).

Shalom.

Agreed, but with a caveat. Perhaps I should just withdraw. I humbly apologize, as the disruption seems to have been mine.

 

[daq]

Agreed, but with a caveat. Perhaps I should just withdraw. I humbly apologize, as the disruption seems to have been mine.

Nah, I didn't mean it that way, no apology necessary: just so you know, I was rather catching myself after what I had said at first in that same post.

 

[visionary]

Regardless of our respective theories and postulations, the text teaches that he went from Tiberias to Capernaum following the feeding of the five thousand, so I hope to hear your full explanation and that it satisfies what we see written in the relevant passages.

PS: After reviewing the OP and the next two posts, and since Vis did not respond to my first post, I think it better just to leave off at this point, though I stand by what I said in my first post. The reason being because my first post doesn't derail the thread and rather compliments, (imo), what was said in the opening posts. But going into all the finer details, and arguing them out, would take the thread away from the actual original topic, (unless Visionary chimes in on this).

Shalom.

I found a video that may add some details to this discussion.. Nehemiah was a member for a few years as some of you remember.. PART 4/4 - Does John 6:4 Belong in the New Testament - NehemiasWall.com

 

[daq]

I found a video that may add some details to this discussion.. Nehemiah was a member for a few years as some of you remember.. PART 4/4 - Does John 6:4 Belong in the New Testament - NehemiasWall.com

Thanks for this video presentation. His explanation for the feast of John 5 being Sukkot, because of the water libation ceremony, is extremely convincing, except for one catastrophic problem: two rainwater collection pools by the sheep gate have been discovered by archeologists, and they had five colonnades, just as the text in John 5 states. One would necessarily need to ignore what is said in John 5:2 in order to proceed with his interpretation and relocate the event to the pool of Shiloah or Siloam. Sheep Gate « See The Holy Land

Therefore John 5 is, imo, more likely the Pesach, one month before the Pesach Sheni in John 6:4, and therefore, because the Master had already observed the Pesach in John 5, he did not need to go up to Yerushalem in John 6:4 because it was a Pesach Sheni, a month later.

This also is a good reason why the author would leave out the word Pascha, (Pesach or Passover), in John 5, for the reader is being taught by Elohim, and Elohim teaches His children by His Word which begins with the Torah, and therefore the Torah guides our reasoning if we heed all that is written in our formulation of doctrine, and beliefs, and understanding, and our walk.

Howbeit his reasoning for what appears to be his rejection of the statement in John 6:4, as original to the text, appears to be based on his own rejection of the small portion in John 5 regarding the Angel of the Waters, (he is not totally clear about John 6:4 but this appears to be his point at the end of the video).

This is unfortunate because the Angel of the Waters is a very ancient motif. Any source of water from a natural spring that put forth carbonated or sparkling water would have surely been known as mayim chayyim or living water, (as well as, of course, the normal understanding of any running water). But naturally carbonated spring water is naturally infused with carbon dioxide deep underground, more typically in areas known to have an active underground venting system, (volcanic or even merely an active seismic area).

When the naturally infused spring water reaches any area, even underground in a cave system, which is not pressurized, the carbon dioxide immediately begins to separate from the waters. The gas separating from the water represents, in the motif, the Spirit of the Waters, (the carbon dioxide gas itself, separating from the waters: it is used for symbolism). This is no different from when you open a sparkling water or a can of soda, which is under pressure, and as soon as you open it the carbon dioxide gas immediately begins to separate from the waters because it has been exposed to normal atmospheric conditions.

Moreover we do have water poured upon the altar in the case with Eliyah, where he commands the people to fill four earthenware pitchers with water and pour the water upon the ascending offering, and upon the wood upon the altar which he has made, (1 Kings 18:33-34). I only bring this up because of what Nehemiah says about the water libation ceremony (of Sukkot) in the video.

If therefore his reasoning for rejecting John 6:4 is based on the reasoning for why he rejects the small portion in John 5, concerning the Angel of the Waters, then his reasoning for rejecting either one is invalid.

More evidence this is the same Kohen and author:

Revelation 16:5 ASV
5 And I heard the angel of the waters saying, Righteous art thou, who art and who wast, thou Holy One, because thou didst thus judge:

 

[Yahudim]

After the miracle of the five loaves and two fish, he goes north, not south, for his disciples get into a boat and go across the see, toward Capernaum, John 6:17. He then walks on the sea and meets up with them: then they end up at Capernaum, for others come from Tiberias searching for him, and find him in Capernaum, John 6:23-25.

Daq, without something more definitive than, He went north or He went to Capernaum - without any supporting evidence, you will NEVER convince me that Y'shua broke the covenant and skipped Pesach! I cannot even imagine the circumstance where that might be true(.) ← Period! This is my last word on the matter.

 

[daq]

Daq, without something more definitive than, He went north or He went to Capernaum - without any supporting evidence, you will NEVER convince me that Y'shua broke the covenant and skipped Pesach! I cannot even imagine the circumstance where that might be true(.) ← Period! This is my last word on the matter.

That isn't what I said. What I said was that if it is the primary Pesach then he would have been breaking the commandment: therefore it is Pesach Sheni. The author doesn't need to state that it is Pesach Sheni because it is simply called the Pesach in the Torah, (Numbers 9:6-12).

Moreover, for anyone who was not able to observe the primary Pesach, having been away on a far journey, or having been made unclean, etc., etc., Pesach Sheni is indeed the Pesach for that person.

However, if he had already observed the primary Pesach in its appointed time, he does not need to go up to Yerushalem again for Pesach Sheni, and can stay in the Galil, just as he did.

Claiming that I am trying to convince you of something I am not is a strawman. I certainly hope no one ever convinces you that the Master broke or ignored any of the Torah.

 

[Yahudim]

Compare..
“The next day he saw Yeshua coming toward him, and said, “ Behold,the Lamb of God, who
takes away the sin of the world!”

“Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city …to
make an end of sins.”

His introductory announcement, John’s cry was, “the time is near,” and it was along the same lines as what Yeshua said, “the appointed period of time is fulfilled (completed).”

I know the difference is subtle, but I believe significant. John was the preacher of the sixty-ninth week, whereas Yeshua was the preacher of the seventieth.

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

The one follows the other both prophetically, and in God's calendar time line.

‘year of the Lord’s favor’ is a direct reference to the Jubilee prophesied by Isaiah. Daniel’s seventy weeks is a span of ten Jubilee periods and the tenth is the culmination of them all.

Paul seemed to be thinking and teaching along the same lines. “We were in bondage under the elements of the world. But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive adoption as sons.”

When Paul said the "fullness of time" he could have easily said "fullness of weeks" which puts it in line with what Daniel was indicating “until the time appointed of the father,” and with “seventy weeks are determined.”

As Paul said “… that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times he might gather together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are on earth in him.”

I say John was referencing Daniel as a prophecy coming truth before his audiences' eyes when he said “The next day he saw Yeshua coming toward him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.’ I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.”

This to me is the reference to “taking away sin” taken directly from Daniel’s prophecy.

Hi Vis, my dear Sister! So good to engage with you over the Word again!

Consider the story in Luke 1 of the announcement by Gabriel (think Daniel 9) conception of Messiah Y'shua to Mariam and the subsequent events contained therein;
1) These events occurred in the 6th month - the 30 days of teshuva,
2) When she asked how she would conceive, Gabriel said she would be overshadowed by Ruach HaKodesh,
3) Mariam immediately departed for Ein Karem to take care of her elderly and very pregnant cousin Elisabeth, while Zacharias was performing his duties at HaMishkan (which btw start before Yom Teruah),
As soon as Mariam encountered Elisabeth they were both overshadowed by Ruach HaKodesh, which also occurred at or near Yom Teruah (the day the kings of Israel are traditionally announced and since it is the only Moed to start at the sighting of the 'horned moon' was know as 'the day and hour that no man knows but the Father').

To much coincidence for me to ignore.

We are all aware the The Immerser among others, proclaimed Y'shua, 'the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world' and that He was the Lamb slain on Pesach. We know that after His resurrection He was called the 'Firstfruits of the Resurrection' by his talmidim, another reference to the prophetic nature of the events of the week of Pesach. His titles are many - and many infer the prophetic nature of the events of the Exodus. Coincidence?

Consider the day Moshe brought the Ten down from the mountain to be given to man. Shavuot is the 2nd Hag and anniversary of Moshe and the delivery of the Law. Have you ever counted out the days between Yom Teruah and Shavuot on a 'leap year', a year with an intercalary month added? Did you know that the normal gestation of a human is equal to that timeframe?

It seems as though the anniversary of the day when the 'Word' was brought down the mountain to be given to man, that the Word Made Flesh came down from Heaven to dwell with man.

Now go read Daniel again with these things in mind. Yes! I am absolutely certain that John was talking about Daniel's prophecy.

You also brought up Y'shua's declaration of His ministry with an unmistakable allusion to the Jubilee year. What was commanded concerning the Jubilee and what does it most closely resemble? A HUGE increase to cover the Sabbatical years. Forgiving all debts. Return to your proper place. No work, no tilling, planting, pruning - just pick what you want from tree, vine, bush or plant. Remind you of any garden you may have read about?