Where is the Evidence of a Gap in the 70 weeks of Dan 9?

[sparow]

When Jesus was cut off half of the seventieth week had passed with half still remaining; there is a time line which involves Him being cut off with the covenant being half confirmed; when Jesus returns that time line will continue as though the gap (the account off which is Revelation) did not exist; with those who pierced Him still alive.

 

[jgr]

I am not sure if I have participated on this thread before or not but now looking at the last few posts the tread seems to be off topic, so I'll try and bring it back.

Preterism and Futurism were both gimmicks created by Jesuit Priests during the council of Trent (which have since evolved) to elude the accusations of the Papacy being the anti-Christ; both preterism and Futurism place the RCC out side the time frame of the Beasts etc.

Futurism requires a gap after the 69th week not supported by scripture.

However there is a gap, not specifically mentioned, between the comings of Christ; from when He is cut off until He returns.

gap
/ɡap/
noun

an unfilled space or interval; a break in continuity.


There is no unfilled space or interval or break in continuity between Jesus' first and second comings. Rather, it is His Chosen Time filled with building of His New Covenant Temple, comprised of His New Covenant Chosen People, His Church. (1 Corinthians 3:16,17; 1 Corinthians 6:19; Ephesians 2:19-22)

 

[keras]

When Jesus was cut off half of the seventieth week had passed with half still remaining; there is a time line which involves Him being cut off with the covenant being half confirmed; when Jesus returns that time line will continue as though the gap (the account off which is Revelation) did not exist; with those who pierced Him still alive.

This is a blatant mis-reading of Daniel 9:26-27.
It is plain that the covenant [treaty; nothing to do with the New Covenant] is made with the many, at the commencement of the final 'week'. [seven years]
Then, when half is spent, the final half of 3 1/2 years; Daniel 12:7 and the parallel time periods in Revelation, which all refer to the last half, is over; then Jesus will Return.

 

[Biblewriter]

I am not sure if I have participated on this thread before or not but now looking at the last few posts the tread seems to be off topic, so I'll try and bring it back.

Preterism and Futurism were both gimmicks created by Jesuit Priests during the council of Trent (which have since evolved) to elude the accusations of the Papacy being the anti-Christ; both preterism and Futurism place the RCC out side the time frame of the Beasts etc.

Futurism requires a gap after the 69th week not supported by scripture.

However there is a gap, not specifically mentioned, between the comings of Christ; from when He is cut off until He returns.

Actually, futurism was the standard doctrine of the early church. This was the position held by Papias, Justyn Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Lactantius, Victorinus, Nepos, and other ancient writers. It was, in fact, so standard that in the fifth century, Jerome called it "the traditional interpretation of all the commentators of the Christian Church."

 

[jgr]

Actually, futurism was the standard doctrine of the early church. This was the position held by Papias, Justyn Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Lactantius, Victorinus, Nepos, and other ancient writers. It was, in fact, so standard that in the fifth century, Jerome called it "the traditional interpretation of all the commentators of the Christian Church."

They couldn't have known how imminent the fulfillments of their futurism regarding antichrist would be.

Had they survived to the Reformation, they would have.

 

[sparow]

gap
/ɡap/
noun

an unfilled space or interval; a break in continuity.


There is no unfilled space or interval or break in continuity between Jesus' first and second comings. Rather, it is His Chosen Time filled with building of His New Covenant Temple, comprised of His New Covenant Chosen People, His Church. (1 Corinthians 3:16,17; 1 Corinthians 6:19; Ephesians 2:19-22)

An interval is a period of time and there is a period of time between the first and second coming.

The quotes from Paul may support your statement but your statement does not agree with me. Jesus is the Temple; the new Jerusalem is constructed (metaphorically) with chosen people of which Jesus is the first and the last.

 

[sparow]

This is a blatant mis-reading of Daniel 9:26-27.
It is plain that the covenant [treaty; nothing to do with the New Covenant] is made with the many, at the commencement of the final 'week'. [seven years]
Then, when half is spent, the final half of 3 1/2 years; Daniel 12:7 and all the time periods in Revelation, is over; then Jesus will Return.

You must realise how difficult this is for me seeing we do not have any common ground. I have admit Dan 9:26-27 does confuse me somewhat; but you also seem to be confused with out being aware of that.

Dan 9:24-25 gives Judah 69-70 weeks to confirm their part in the covenant, which they failed to do and the kingdom of God was from them.

Dan 9:24, seventy weeks to make the way straight.
Dan 9:25, 69 weeks until the Messiah.

So far so good.

Dan 9:26, after 62 weeks the Messiah is cut off. This seems to precede cutting off in the middle of the week and must refer to something different a week (seven years) before Jesus begins His ministry.

 

[sparow]

Actually, futurism was the standard doctrine of the early church. This was the position held by Papias, Justyn Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Lactantius, Victorinus, Nepos, and other ancient writers. It was, in fact, so standard that in the fifth century, Jerome called it "the traditional interpretation of all the commentators of the Christian Church."

I do not believe what you are sayin is true; if it were that would mean no one at the council of Trent knew about it and Ribera plagiarized it.

 

[Biblewriter]

I do not believe what you are sayin is true; if it were that would mean no one at the council of Trent knew about it and Ribera plagiarized it.

Ribera did not "plagiarize" anything. He simply went back to the scriptures, like many both before and after him did. This attempt to credit the rise of futurism to the Catholic church is blatantly false.

I have spent literally years studying the writings of the so-called "Early Church Fathers" and have written extensively on the subject. I will post links to some threads here. But I am far from the only researcher that has discovered this. It is well known and widely reported.

Dispensationalism in Ancient Christian Writings

Dispensationalist Only - Ancient teaching of a rapture before the great tribulation.

In addition to all of these, there was a veritable explosion of futuristic, and yes, even Dispensational, teaching in England shortly after the publication of the King James version of the Bible in 1611. This had, for the first time in history, made Bibles readily available at prices ordinary people could afford. And about 40 years later, in the last half of the seventeenth century, MANY Christian writers began to teach on these subjects. This is traced at length in the book "Dispensationalism before Darby," by William C. Watson. On page 178 of this book he even lists two dozen writers who taught a pre-tribulation rapture in the 1600s and 1700s.

My own studies in this matter have been published in the book "Ancient Dispensational Truth," by James C. Morris (me) and available online from Dispensational Publishing House.

But both of these books, as well as the links I have provided, deal only with that particular branch of futurism that is called Dispensationalism. When this subject is expanded to all forms of futurism, the list becomes MUCH longer.

 

[Biblewriter]

They couldn't have known how imminent the fulfillments of their futurism regarding antichrist would be.

Had they survived to the Reformation, they would have.

They knew the scriptures too well to have been deceived by that.

 

[BABerean2]

This is traced at length in the book "Dispensationalism before Darby," by William C. Watson. On page 178 of this book he even lists two dozen writers who taught a pre-tribulation rapture in the 1600s and 1700s.

I purchased the book by Watson and found the above statement to be completely false.
Like many other Dispensationalists, Watson takes great liberty in claiming a pretrib teaching by earlier authors.

Watson says those who claim a removal of the Church, before a "conflagration", believe in a pretrib removal.
I believe in a removal of the Church before a "conflagration", but totally reject the pretrib doctrine.

This is one more example of Dispensationalists attempting to revise the history of their doctrine found in the paper below.


PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418

.

 

[Biblewriter]

I purchased the book by Watson and found the above statement to be completely false.
Like many other Dispensationalists, Watson takes great liberty in claiming a pretrib teaching by earlier authors.

Watson says those who claim a removal of the Church, before a "conflagration", believe in a pretrib removal.
I believe in a removal of the Church before a "conflagration", but totally reject the pretrib doctrine.

This is one more example of Dispensationalists attempting to revise the history of their doctrine found in the paper below.


PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418

.

Some of the writers quoted by Watson only used the word "conflagration." But numerous others used the word "tribulation." I see them as having basically the same meaning.

But I am curious about your claim that you believe in a rapture "before a conflagration." What do you mean by that?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I purchased the book by Watson and found the above statement to be completely false.
Like many other Dispensationalists, Watson takes great liberty in claiming a pretrib teaching by earlier authors.

Watson says those who claim a removal of the Church, before a "conflagration", believe in a pretrib removal.
I believe in a removal of the Church before a "conflagration", but totally reject the pretrib doctrine.

This is one more example of Dispensationalists attempting to revise the history of their doctrine found in the paper below.

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418

Some of the writers quoted by Watson only used the word "conflagration." But numerous others used the word "tribulation." I see them as having basically the same meaning.

But I am curious about your claim that you believe in a rapture "before a conflagration." What do you mean by that?

I do have a question.
What is the difference between Matthew 24's use of the word #2347 and Luke 21's use of the word #318?
And are both those the fulfillment of Daniel 12:1 in 70ad? Thanks

Daniel 12:1
"In that time Michael shall stand-up, the chief/prince, the great, the one, standing over sons of thy people.
And time of distress<06869>, which not occurred since to become of a nation, until that time.
And in that time, thy people escape, every the one being found being written in Scroll.

06869 tsarah from 06862; TWOT - 1973c,1974b; n f
AV - trouble 44, distress 8, affliction 7, adversity 5, anguish 5, tribulation 3, adversary 1; 73
1) straits, distress, trouble 2) vexer, rival wife
H6869 occurs 73 times in 72 verses

Matthew 24:21 uses the word for "tribulation":

Matthew 24:21
for then shall be great Tribulation<2347> , such as was not from the beginning of world till now, no, nor may be becoming [Daniel 12:1 Revelation 7:14]

2347. thlipsis thlip'-sis from 2346;
pressure (literally or figuratively):--afflicted(-tion), anguish, burdened, persecution, tribulation, trouble. Occurs 45 times in 43 verse

Luke 21:23 uses a different word #318 "distress":

Luke 21:23
“But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great Distress<318> in the land and wrath upon this people.

318. anagke from 303 and the base of 43;
constraint (literally or figuratively); by implication, distress, must needs, (of) necessity(-sary), needeth, needful. Occurs 18 times in 18 verses

The phrase "great Tribulation" only occurs in 2 other verses in the NT.
1 verse concerning Jezebel

Revelation 2:22
“Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with Her into great Tribulation, unless they repent of their[fn] deeds.

And the other one concerning the conquering Saints who come out of the "great Tribulation" of Matthew 21:21

Revelation 7:14
And I said to Him, “Sir,[fn] you know.” So He said to me,
“These are the ones who come out of the great Tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Are Daniel 12:1 and Luke 21:23 same event?

1. *
   Yes
   6 vote(s)
   54.5%
2. No
   3 vote(s)
   27.3%
3. Maybe
   2 vote(s)
   18.2%
4. Never thought about it
   0 vote(s)
   0.0%
5. I don't know but am willing to learn
   0 vote(s)
   0.0%
6. Other [please explain]
   0 vote(s)
   0.0%

.

 

[Erik Nelson]

I do have a question.
What is the difference between Matthew 24's use of the word #2347 and Luke 21's use of the word #318?
And are both those the fulfillment of Daniel 12:1 in 70ad? Thanks

Daniel 12:1
"In that time Michael shall stand-up, the chief/prince, the great, the one, standing over sons of thy people.
And time of distress<06869>, which not occurred since to become of a nation, until that time.
And in that time, thy people escape, every the one being found being written in Scroll.

06869 tsarah from 06862; TWOT - 1973c,1974b; n f
AV - trouble 44, distress 8, affliction 7, adversity 5, anguish 5, tribulation 3, adversary 1; 73
1) straits, distress, trouble 2) vexer, rival wife
H6869 occurs 73 times in 72 verses

Matthew 24:21 uses the word for "tribulation":

Matthew 24:21
for then shall be great Tribulation<2347> , such as was not from the beginning of world till now, no, nor may be becoming [Daniel 12:1 Revelation 7:14]

2347. thlipsis thlip'-sis from 2346;
pressure (literally or figuratively):--afflicted(-tion), anguish, burdened, persecution, tribulation, trouble. Occurs 45 times in 43 verse

Luke 21:23 uses a different word #318 "distress":

Luke 21:23
“But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great Distress<318> in the land and wrath upon this people.

318. anagke from 303 and the base of 43;
constraint (literally or figuratively); by implication, distress, must needs, (of) necessity(-sary), needeth, needful. Occurs 18 times in 18 verses

The phrase "great Tribulation" only occurs in 2 other verses in the NT.
1 verse concerning Jezebel

Revelation 2:22
“Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with Her into great Tribulation, unless they repent of their[fn] deeds.

And the other one concerning the conquering Saints who come out of the "great Tribulation" of Matthew 21:21

Revelation 7:14
And I said to Him, “Sir,[fn] you know.” So He said to me,
“These are the ones who come out of the great Tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

Are Daniel 12:1 and Luke 21:23 same event?

1. *
   Yes
   6 vote(s)
   54.5%
2. No
   3 vote(s)
   27.3%
3. Maybe
   2 vote(s)
   18.2%
4. Never thought about it
   0 vote(s)
   0.0%
5. I don't know but am willing to learn
   0 vote(s)
   0.0%
6. Other [please explain]
   0 vote(s)
   0.0%

.

LXX Daniel 12:1 uses G2347 = Matthew 24:21

according to the Apostolic Bible Polyglot

 

[jgr]

They knew the scriptures too well to have been deceived by that.

In the Reformation, one was either a Reformer, or a papist.

I'm very confident that they would not have been found in the latter camp.

 

[sparow]

Ribera did not "plagiarize" anything. He simply went back to the scriptures, like many both before and after him did. This attempt to credit the rise of futurism to the Catholic church is blatantly false.

I have spent literally years studying the writings of the so-called "Early Church Fathers" and have written extensively on the subject. I will post links to some threads here. But I am far from the only researcher that has discovered this. It is well known and widely reported.

Dispensationalism in Ancient Christian Writings

Dispensationalist Only - Ancient teaching of a rapture before the great tribulation.

In addition to all of these, there was a veritable explosion of futuristic, and yes, even Dispensational, teaching in England shortly after the publication of the King James version of the Bible in 1611. This had, for the first time in history, made Bibles readily available at prices ordinary people could afford. And about 40 years later, in the last half of the seventeenth century, MANY Christian writers began to teach on these subjects. This is traced at length in the book "Dispensationalism before Darby," by William C. Watson. On page 178 of this book he even lists two dozen writers who taught a pre-tribulation rapture in the 1600s and 1700s.

My own studies in this matter have been published in the book "Ancient Dispensational Truth," by James C. Morris (me) and available online from Dispensational Publishing House.

But both of these books, as well as the links I have provided, deal only with that particular branch of futurism that is called Dispensationalism. When this subject is expanded to all forms of futurism, the list becomes MUCH longer.

I have to say I do not believe any of what you say but I understand that you believe it.

My favourite Pentecostal was Ivan Panin who died during ww2 although not as a result of ww2. Panin was literate in the Biblical languages and had Harvard degrees in English literature and Mathematics; Panin would not have a bar of dispensationalism; he concluded, "dispensationalism require a new Gospel, a new kingdom, and a new Bible", and dispensationalism has all of these.

 

[Douggg]

It is plain that the covenant [treaty; nothing to do with the New Covenant] is made with the many, at the commencement of the final 'week'. [seven years]
Then, when half is spent, the final half of 3 1/2 years; Daniel 12:7 and the parallel time periods in Revelation, which all refer to the last half, is over; then Jesus will Return.

Keras, I highlighted part of your text. This is a good point.

 

[BABerean2]

Some of the writers quoted by Watson only used the word "conflagration." But numerous others used the word "tribulation." I see them as having basically the same meaning.

But I am curious about your claim that you believe in a rapture "before a conflagration." What do you mean by that?

2Th 1:7 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels,
2Th 1:8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2Th 1:9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,
2Th 1:10 when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe, because our testimony among you was believed.


Rev_1:9 I, John, both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.
(The word "tribulation" does not always mean 'tribulation period'.)
.

 

[Biblewriter]

I have to say I do not believe any of what you say but I understand that you believe it.

My favourite Pentecostal was Ivan Panin who died during ww2 although not as a result of ww2. Panin was literate in the Biblical languages and had Harvard degrees in English literature and Mathematics; Panin would not have a bar of dispensationalism; he concluded, "dispensationalism require a new Gospel, a new kingdom, and a new Bible", and dispensationalism has all of these.

Believe what you wish, that has zero bearing on the facts, which have been proven beyond rational debate.

But anyone who thinks dispensationalism requires "a new kingdom, and a new Bible." has basically zero understanding of the doctrine, or of what it implies. In actual fact, the very basis of dispensationalism is simply believing what the Bible explicitly says is going to happen. That is, it is a matter of putting more faith in what God explicitly said than in man's interpretation of what His sayings mean.

 

[sparow]

Believe what you wish, that has zero bearing on the facts, which have been proven beyond rational debate.

But anyone who thinks dispensationalism requires "a new kingdom, and a new Bible." has basically zero understanding of the doctrine, or of what it implies. In actual fact, the very basis of dispensationalism is simply believing what the Bible explicitly says is going to happen. That is, it is a matter of putting more faith in what God explicitly said than in man's interpretation of what His sayings mean.

What you seem to be saying is that you do not have a personal relationship with God and without the Bible you would not know God exists. The Bible rarely specifically says anything the Bible is mostly abstract. The times God is specific you do not believe it: God specifically wrote the ten commandments on stone and Jesus said the Law, which means the whole covenant may not be changed.

Dispensationalism is a concoction made by men.