70th Week of Daniel

[Bambi]

Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

And he(Christ) shall confirm(Gal 3:17) the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,(Matt 27:50-52, Mark 15:37-39, Luke 23:44-46) and for the overspreading of abominations(Prov 6:16-19; 17:15) he shall make it desolate(Matt 23:37-39, Luke 13:34-35), even until the consummation,(kâlâh kaw-law' From H3615; a completion; adverbially completely; also destruction: - altogether, (be, utterly) consume (-d), consummation (-ption), was determined, (full, utter) end, riddance.(Jerusalem 70 AD), and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.(Jews who rejected Christ during that time between Christ's death and the destruction of the temple and city).

The 70th week of Daniel started at the beginning of Christ ministry. The middle of the seven years was his death on the cross. It ended 3 1/2 years later when the gospel was then sent to the Gentiles. Like Cornelius. The abomination was done against Christ not done by him. Because of the Jews sins the temple was left desolate at the time of the cross when the veil was ripped in two.

 

[james1523]

Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

And he(Christ) shall confirm(Gal 3:17) the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,(Matt 27:50-52, Mark 15:37-39, Luke 23:44-46) and for the overspreading of abominations(Prov 6:16-19; 17:15) he shall make it desolate(Matt 23:37-39, Luke 13:34-35), even until the consummation,(kâlâh kaw-law' From H3615; a completion; adverbially completely; also destruction: - altogether, (be, utterly) consume (-d), consummation (-ption), was determined, (full, utter) end, riddance.(Jerusalem 70 AD), and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.(Jews who rejected Christ during that time between Christ's death and the destruction of the temple and city).

The 70th week of Daniel started at the beginning of Christ ministry. The middle of the seven years was his death on the cross. It ended 3 1/2 years later when the gospel was then sent to the Gentiles. Like Cornelius. The abomination was done against Christ not done by him. Because of the Jews sins the temple was left desolate at the time of the cross when the veil was ripped in two.

The covenant is not Christ's covenant, because He established an eternal covenant, not a covenant for only 1 week. This refers to the 7 year covenant established by the Romans by entering into alliance with the Medes, Parthians, and Armenians in order to destroy Jerusalem. The sacrifices in the temple ceased during the seige by Titus, due to lack of animals to sacrifice and the obvious distress in the city. The Romans made the land of Judea desolate.

 

[Bambi]

The covenant is not Christ's covenant, because He established an eternal covenant, not a covenant for only 1 week. This refers to the 7 year covenant established by the Romans by entering into alliance with the Medes, Parthians, and Armenians in order to destroy Jerusalem. The sacrifices in the temple ceased during the seige by Titus, due to lack of animals to sacrifice and the obvious distress in the city. The Romans made the land of Judea desolate.

The phrase "for one week" doesn't mean for only seven years. It means that the covenant is confirmed in that seven year period. The word "one' in the Hebrew is 'echad. One of the definitions of that word is "certain". Which could say "for a certain week:" instead of one week, as, length of time.

When Christ died on the cross from God's point of view the sacrifices were no longer needed. When Christ says, "It is finish." , the sacrifices were finished too.

So are you saying that there is a 40 year gap between the 69 and the 70th week?

Can you compare scripture with scripture on your interpretation of this passage?

 

[james1523]

The phrase "for one week" doesn't mean for only seven years. It means that the covenant is confirmed in that seven year period. The word "one' in the Hebrew is 'echad. One of the definitions of that word is "certain". Which could say "for a certain week:" instead of one week, as, length of time.

When Christ died on the cross from God's point of view the sacrifices were no longer needed. When Christ says, "It is finish." , the sacrifices were finished too.

So are you saying that there is a 40 year gap between the 69 and the 70th week?

Can you compare scripture with scripture on your interpretation of this passage?

That's true that sacrifices were no longer needed from God's point of view. But the sacrifice of Christ itself did not cause the temple sacrifices to cease, nor did it introduce abominations.

Consider this: Rev 12:11 prophesies about the sacrifice being removed and abomination , and this book was written after the death of Christ. Therefore it cannot refer to Christ.

The one who did this, the "he", is clearly the prince of the Roman Empire, Titus, mentioned in verse 26.

If we compare the many scriptural references about this event, the picture becomes clearer that it is not Christ but Titus (a figure of satan) who is causing the temple sacrifices to cease and introduction abominations:

2 Thess 2:24, Matt 24:21, 24:15, 7:25, 12:7, Rev ,14, 13:5, 14, 11:2-3, 7:21, 12:6, 25, 13:7, 12:11, 13:14-15.

I get much of this from Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible. Gill being, from my point of view, a reliable Calvinist theologian.
I would point out that other commentators and theologians, who say that "he" is Christ, are connected with the Roman Catholic church or her protestant sympathizers (Church of England ) etc, and is no wonder that they would not wish to lay blame on the Roman Empire.

 

[Bambi]

That's true that sacrifices were no longer needed from God's point of view. But the sacrifice of Christ itself did not cause the temple sacrifices to cease, nor did it introduce abominations.

Consider this: Rev 12:11 prophesies about the sacrifice being removed and abomination , and this book was written after the death of Christ. Therefore it cannot refer to Christ.

First thing you should always consider the bible from God's point of view since he inspired it. And Jesus did make all sacrifices after the cross null and void. They were no longer required. Read chapters 8-10 in Hebrews. Second, I never said that the sacrifice of Jesus introduce abominations. I said that abominations were done to him. Third, the words abomination or sacrifices are not found in this passage you gave.

The one who did this, the "he", is clearly the prince of the Roman Empire, Titus, mentioned in verse 26.

I would agree with you that Titus is the he in verse 26 but not verse 27.

If we compare the many scriptural references about this event, the picture becomes clearer that it is not Christ but Titus (a figure of satan) who is causing the temple sacrifices to cease and introduction abominations:

2 Thess 2:24, Matt 24:21, 24:15, 7:25, 12:7, Rev ,14, 13:5, 14, 11:2-3, 7:21, 12:6, 25, 13:7, 12:11, 13:14-15.

Some of these verses don't exist. Like 2 Thess 2:24, Matt 7:25, Rev 7:21, and Rev 12:25. The others say nothing about a covenant that was confirm.

The abomination written by Daniel quote by Christ isn't the one in Daniel 9:27 but in Daniel 12:11. Daniel talks of three abominations, all three are different ones.

I get much of this from Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible. Gill being, from my point of view, a reliable Calvinist theologian.
I would point out that other commentators and theologians, who say that "he" is Christ, are connected with the Roman Catholic church or her protestant sympathizers (Church of England ) etc, and is no wonder that they would not wish to lay blame on the Roman Empire.

I like John Gill, but I don't agree with him here. Just because the Catholic church believes the same thing I believe, doesn't make it wrong. They believe that Jesus is the son of God. Don't you? And there are some cults out there who believe in a future temple and battle of Armageddon. Does that mean you're wrong, I don't think so.

 

[james1523]

I would agree with you that Titus is the he in verse 26 but not verse 27.

There is no basis for this change of context and so your whole doctrine crumbles. In all bible versions where he is not the start of the sentence, the "he" is not capitalised, and some eg New Living Translation translate it as "the ruler " .

That the "he" is Titus is clear from Daniel 11:31, and also makes clear that the abomination is not Christ's death on the cross:
Dan 11:31 "His armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation.

Your view contradicts Dan 11:31. It is the armed force that is abolishing the daily sacrifice, and setting up the abomination, not Christ.

Sorry about the mistake in verse number, that should be 2 Thess 2:2-4, not 2:24. The one sitting in the temple saying they are Christ.. is the anti -Christ.

The abomination cannot be Christ or his sacrifice because He never sat in the temple neither did his sacrifice.

Abominations done to Christ do not "make desolate". It means "desolating sacrilege" . In biblical usage the word abomination in Hebrew means an idol.
So your view is wrong on a number of levels, and biblical commentaries by learned theologians support this.

 

[Bambi]

There is no basis for this change of context and so your whole doctrine crumbles. In all bible versions where he is not the start of the sentence, the "he" is not capitalised, and some eg New Living Translation translate it as "the ruler " .

I don't agree. The prince in verse 26 isn't even the subject in that part of the verse, the people are, if my grammar is correct, the people are the object of a prepositional phrase ...and the people of the prince that shall come... As far as we known reading just this phrase the prince may not even be a part of the battle. The main individual character in verse 26 is the Messiah.

That the "he" is Titus is clear from Daniel 11:31, and also makes clear that the abomination is not Christ's death on the cross:
Dan 11:31 "His armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation.

Your view contradicts Dan 11:31. It is the armed force that is abolishing the daily sacrifice, and setting up the abomination, not Christ.

No the he in Daniel 11 is Antiochus IV of Epiphanes. Read your history and compare chapter 11 of Daniel with that history.

Sorry about the mistake in verse number, that should be 2 Thess 2:2-4, not 2:24. The one sitting in the temple saying they are Christ.. is the anti -Christ.

The abomination cannot be Christ or his sacrifice because He never sat in the temple neither did his sacrifice.

Where in verse 27 of Daniel 9 says anything about sitting in the temple?

Abominations done to Christ do not "make desolate". It means "desolating sacrilege" . In biblical usage the word abomination in Hebrew means an idol.
So your view is wrong on a number of levels, and biblical commentaries by learned theologians support this.

Did you read the verses in Proverbs? Did you read Christ's condemnation against Jerusalem in Matthew and Luke?

Prov 6:16 These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Prov 17:15 He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord.

Proverbs 6 just reeks of what happened to Jesus at his trial and crucifixion, false witnesses, shedding innocent blood, etc. He that justifieth the wicked and condemns the just. Does Barabbas and Jesus ring any bell.

Mat 23:33-39 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
34.Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
35.That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38. Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
39. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Luk 13:34-35 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!
35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

When you read the passage in Matthew Jesus states that all that they did to the prophets and wise men, which includes Christ, makes their house desolate. And when Christ died on the cross the veil was torn in the temple ending the need for sacrifices also showing the shekinah glory departing from the temple.

I'm still wondering where in the scripture do you find Titus confirming a covenant?

 

[james1523]

When you read the passage in Matthew Jesus states that all that they did to the prophets and wise men, which includes Christ, makes their house desolate. And when Christ died on the cross the veil was torn in the temple ending the need for sacrifices also showing the shekinah glory departing from the temple.

If you check your history, the sacrifices did not cease with the veil tearing. The sacrifices ceased when the temple was destroyed. Sacrifices continued for about 40 years after Christ's death. Even the apostle Paul in Acts 21:26 continued to frequent the temple and made an offering. Therefore the one who causes the sacrifices to cease, is the ones who destroyed the temple.

And if the abomination that causes desolation is something to do with Christ's death on the cross, why did Jesus tell them to flee to the mountains?

Matt 24:15 "So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel--let the reader understand--
Matt 24:16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

The historical fact is the Christians did not flee after Christ's death and temple veil being torn, they fled during the time the Roman armies advanced.

 

[Bambi]

If you check your history, the sacrifices did not cease with the veil tearing. The sacrifices ceased when the temple was destroyed. Sacrifices continued for about 40 years after Christ's death. Even the apostle Paul in Acts 21:26 continued to frequent the temple and made an offering. Therefore the one who causes the sacrifices to cease, is the ones who destroyed the temple.

And if the abomination that causes desolation is something to do with Christ's death on the cross, why did Jesus tell them to flee to the mountains?

Matt 24:15 "So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel--let the reader understand--
Matt 24:16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

The historical fact is the Christians did not flee after Christ's death and temple veil being torn, they fled during the time the Roman armies advanced.

You are confusing two different abominations. The abominations in Daniel 12 is about an abomination that occurs during the Roman war with the Jews during the time of Nero. That could not have been Titus either because by the time Titus gets into the temple there is no way to flee Jerusalem. The only opportunity the Christians had to flee the city was when Cestius Gallus was laying seige to Jerusalem then suddenly withdrew his armies. That was before Titus took over. That is what Jesus is referring to in Matt 24.

What I'm talking about is something totally different then what you are referring. You must take into consideration that just because they still did sacrifices didn't mean they were still viable. Paul didn't do it because he had to, he was doing it so not to offend the Jews. Also read Hebrews 8-10, it talks about sacrifices and covenants. The old covenant made of sacrifices was fading away. By the time 70 AD came it was completely gone. But even though the Jews and Paul did the sacrifices the Gentiles did not. The Gentiles did not need to perform sacrifices. Also how did the tearing of the veil affect the sacrificial system? The veil or curtain in the temple divided the Holy of Holies from the rest of the temple. Only the High Priest could enter the Holy of Holies. And since Christ is our High Priest he has done away with the curtain or veil that kept us out of the Holy of Holies. So when Christ died on the cross it ended the need for sacrifices.

 

[james1523]

You are confusing two different abominations. The abominations in Daniel 12 is about an abomination that occurs during the Roman war with the Jews during the time of Nero. That could not have been Titus either because by the time Titus gets into the temple there is no way to flee Jerusalem. The only opportunity the Christians had to flee the city was when Cestius Gallus was laying seige to Jerusalem then suddenly withdrew his armies. That was before Titus took over. That is what Jesus is referring to in Matt 24.

What I'm talking about is something totally different then what you are referring. You must take into consideration that just because they still did sacrifices didn't mean they were still viable. Paul didn't do it because he had to, he was doing it so not to offend the Jews. Also read Hebrews 8-10, it talks about sacrifices and covenants. The old covenant made of sacrifices was fading away. By the time 70 AD came it was completely gone. But even though the Jews and Paul did the sacrifices the Gentiles did not. The Gentiles did not need to perform sacrifices. Also how did the tearing of the veil affect the sacrificial system? The veil or curtain in the temple divided the Holy of Holies from the rest of the temple. Only the High Priest could enter the Holy of Holies. And since Christ is our High Priest he has done away with the curtain or veil that kept us out of the Holy of Holies. So when Christ died on the cross it ended the need for sacrifices.

So in your interpretation, what biblical prophecies are left remaining to be fulfilled?
I believe we are at the 69th week, and only 1 more week is remaining.

 

[Eric E Stahl]

<style> <!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Times; panose-1:2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} @font-face {font-family:Cambria; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} p {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Times; mso-fareast-font-family:Cambria; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Times; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} span.verse {mso-style-name:verse;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style> The Fleeing of Israel

Jesus will come to earth in the middle of the tribulation to make a way of escape for the army of Israel to flee from the devil and his forces when he is cast to the earth.


Zechariah 14:1-5
1 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.

(When the army of Israel flees, it will be to the river ford on the Arnon River 1/3 of the way south on the other side of the dead sea.)

Isaiah 16:1-5
1 Send ye the lamb(Jesus) to the ruler of the land from Sela to the wilderness, unto the mount of the daughter of Zion.
2 For it shall be, that, as a wandering bird cast out of the nest, so the daughters of Moab shall be at the fords of Arnon.
3 Take counsel, execute judgment; make thy shadow as the night in the midst of the noonday(Solar Eclipse); hide the outcasts; bewray not him that wandereth.

4 Let mine outcasts dwell with thee, Moab; be thou a covert to them from the face of the spoiler: for the extortioner is at an end, the spoiler ceaseth, the oppressors are consumed out of the land.
5 And in mercy shall the throne be established: and he(Jesus) shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David, judging, and seeking judgment, and hasting righteousness.

Revelation 12:6-14
6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time(3.5 Years), from the face of the serpent.
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.
17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

When Jesus splits the Mount of Olives and Israel flees from Jerusalem down the valley to the east, the devil and the antichrist will send a flood of armies after them. The Mount of Olives will help Israel by swallowing the armies as the Red Sea swallowed the Egyptians.

Mathew 24:15-22
15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Israel's fleeing is in the middle of the tribulation and that is when the Lord comes to earth to help Israel.

 

[Bambi]

So in your interpretation, what biblical prophecies are left remaining to be fulfilled?
I believe we are at the 69th week, and only 1 more week is remaining.

The second coming of Christ. Which means that he comes here and stays with his church not taken out of the world. The resurrection of the church. The dividing of the sheep from the goats, wheat from the tares. I don't believe that earth and heaven will be destroyed and new ones will take their place. I believe that like believers receiving new bodies the earth will be made like it was in the Garden of Eden, maybe better. Eternity.

The 70th week of Daniel was fulfilled 3 1/2 years after the cross. The book of Revelation mostly was fulfilled by 70 AD. Maybe even all of it, the last three chapters not sure of. There are things written there that lead me to believe that it could have been fulfilled by 70 AD and things that lead me to believe they are still future. The remnant of Jews talked about in Romans were one of two things. There were the 144,000 in Revelation and that was fulfilled by 70 AD. Or the remnant has and is occurring throughout history.

Still studying. Don't know everything, but I do know that I don't believe anymore in a Pre-mil, Pre-Trib Rapture eschatology.

 

[Bambi]

I believe we are at the 69th week, and only 1 more week is remaining.

I just thought of a question to ask you. What happens in your interpretation of the 70th week?

 

[james1523]

I just thought of a question to ask you. What happens in your interpretation of the 70th week?

I believe in the dispensationalist (or futurist) interpretation that there is a gap between the 69th and 70th week, and the 70th week (7 years) will be the tribulation period, including the pre-tribulation rapture, post-tribulation return of Christ, etc. 483 years (69 weeks) time passed between the Jews release from captivity until the Messiah came. Then the temple was destroyed by Romans in AD 70. Now we are in the pause or gap between 69 and 70 weeks which is the church age and the time of Anti-Christ preparation.

This gap is indicated by the last part of Dan 9:26 "....war will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed."

Jesus also indicated there would be a gap, because He made clear that His return, and the end of the world would not be imminent after His death:
Mark 13:7 "And you will hear of wars and threats of wars, but don't panic. Yes, these things must take place, but the end won't follow immediately."

Matthew 24 indicates it will be drawn out, with wars, earthquakes, false Messiah's etc. These are called 'birth pains' (Matt 24:8).

The pain of birth lasts longer than the birth itself, and this also indicates a long drawn out process in time.

Matt 24:14 states the gospel must be preached to the whole world before the end will come.
Then in verse 15 Jesus refers immediately to Daniel's prophecy concerning the abomination.
Clearly, the abomination is related to end-time events, occurring at the time the gospel is preached to the whole world.
This has not happened yet, the world is 70% evangelized, still about 30% to go, so the abomination Jesus speaks of here cannot refer to the past Christ's death on the cross.
To make it even clearer that it is about the end times, it says in vs 29 that the heavenly bodies will be shaken and the moon will not give light and stars will fall from the sky:
Matt 24:29 ""Immediately after the distress of those days "'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'"

 

[Bambi]

I believe in the dispensationalist (or futurist) interpretation that there is a gap between the 69th and 70th week, and the 70th week (7 years) will be the tribulation period, including the pre-tribulation rapture, post-tribulation return of Christ, etc. 483 years (69 weeks) time passed between the Jews release from captivity until the Messiah came. Then the temple was destroyed by Romans in AD 70. Now we are in the pause or gap between 69 and 70 weeks which is the church age and the time of Anti-Christ preparation.

This gap is indicated by the last part of Dan 9:26 "....war will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed."

Jesus also indicated there would be a gap, because He made clear that His return, and the end of the world would not be imminent after His death:
Mark 13:7 "And you will hear of wars and threats of wars, but don't panic. Yes, these things must take place, but the end won't follow immediately."

Matthew 24 indicates it will be drawn out, with wars, earthquakes, false Messiah's etc. These are called 'birth pains' (Matt 24:8).

The pain of birth lasts longer than the birth itself, and this also indicates a long drawn out process in time.

Matt 24:14 states the gospel must be preached to the whole world before the end will come.
Then in verse 15 Jesus refers immediately to Daniel's prophecy concerning the abomination.
Clearly, the abomination is related to end-time events, occurring at the time the gospel is preached to the whole world.
This has not happened yet, the world is 70% evangelized, still about 30% to go, so the abomination Jesus speaks of here cannot refer to the past Christ's death on the cross.
To make it even clearer that it is about the end times, it says in vs 29 that the heavenly bodies will be shaken and the moon will not give light and stars will fall from the sky:
Matt 24:29 ""Immediately after the distress of those days "'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'"

Mark 13:30, Matt 24:34 both say that "this generation will not pass away..." Matt 16:28, Mark 9:1, & Luke 9:27 say, "some standing here will not taste of death...". In those passages he is prophesying about the end of the age. How can a generation not pass away or some not die before these things are to take place? I believe the interpretation of those passages cannot be taken literally. Some of it must be taken figuratively.

Take the moon and stars will fade away and fall from the sky. Joseph has a dream about the sun, moon and stars bowing down at his feet. His father interprets it as, Jacob is the sun, the moon is Leah and the stars are his brothers. The Jewish nation was destroyed in 70AD, a generation since Christ's prophecy. The people who survived were scattered. The Jewish nation is the moon and stars. Even today we use heavenly symbols to describe nations in our flags.

In Romans 10:14-18 talks about the preaching of the gospel. In verse 18 Paul states that the gospel has been preached to the ends of the world. In Luke 2:1, the world is to be taxed. Maybe the world is the known world at that time. The world of the Roman Empire.

These are only a few examples of a different interpretation. I probably will know what your response will be. Myself growing up in a Pre-Mil Pre-Trib, Futurist eschatology. But I myself cannot go back to that way of thinking. And I know you said before you used to believe in a Preterist point of view. In studying Preterist view I'm finding that I don't agree with everything everyone says in the Preterist camp either. I do agree that the Preterist main view is the correct one, Thanks for responding. :smiley:

 

[james1523]

Mark 13:30, Matt 24:34 both say that "this generation will not pass away..." Matt 16:28, Mark 9:1, & Luke 9:27 say, "some standing here will not taste of death...". In those passages he is prophesying about the end of the age. How can a generation not pass away or some not die before these things are to take place? I believe the interpretation of those passages cannot be taken literally. Some of it must be taken figuratively.

Take the moon and stars will fade away and fall from the sky. Joseph has a dream about the sun, moon and stars bowing down at his feet. His father interprets it as, Jacob is the sun, the moon is Leah and the stars are his brothers. The Jewish nation was destroyed in 70AD, a generation since Christ's prophecy. The people who survived were scattered. The Jewish nation is the moon and stars. Even today we use heavenly symbols to describe nations in our flags.

In Romans 10:14-18 talks about the preaching of the gospel. In verse 18 Paul states that the gospel has been preached to the ends of the world. In Luke 2:1, the world is to be taxed. Maybe the world is the known world at that time. The world of the Roman Empire.

These are only a few examples of a different interpretation. I probably will know what your response will be. Myself growing up in a Pre-Mil Pre-Trib, Futurist eschatology. But I myself cannot go back to that way of thinking. And I know you said before you used to believe in a Preterist point of view. In studying Preterist view I'm finding that I don't agree with everything everyone says in the Preterist camp either. I do agree that the Preterist main view is the correct one, Thanks for responding. :smiley:

I like the interpretation of the stars falling etc as you describe it. It could very well be symbolic for Jerusalem.

Let us consider some of the verses you quoted one by one, some are referring to end times, others are not:

"This generation" does not refer to a generation in age or time, but a generation in moral quality:

Jesus referred to generation in terms of quality (not age) a number of times such as Matt 11:16 and also it is the same with Prov 30:11-14
11 There is a generation that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother.
12 There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness.
13 There is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up.
14 There is a generation, whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men.

In other words, in Mark 13:30, Matt 24:34 Jesus is saying that the generation of the evil ones (Prov 30:11-14) will not pass away...


Matt 16:28 on the other hand, refers to the Lord's transfiguration, which the disciples experienced soon after in Matt 17:1-2. At the transfiguration Elijah and Moses represent the law and the prophets of the kingdom.

 

[Bambi]

I like the interpretation of the stars falling etc as you describe it. It could very well be symbolic for Jerusalem.

Let us consider some of the verses you quoted one by one, some are referring to end times, others are not:

"This generation" does not refer to a generation in age or time, but a generation in moral quality:

Jesus referred to generation in terms of quality (not age) a number of times such as Matt 11:16 and also it is the same with Prov 30:11-14
11 There is a generation that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother.
12 There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes, and yet is not washed from their filthiness.
13 There is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up.
14 There is a generation, whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men.

In other words, in Mark 13:30, Matt 24:34 Jesus is saying that the generation of the evil ones (Prov 30:11-14) will not pass away...


Matt 16:28 on the other hand, refers to the Lord's transfiguration, which the disciples experienced soon after in Matt 17:1-2. At the transfiguration Elijah and Moses represent the law and the prophets of the kingdom.

That's a new interpretation to me. Usually, "this generation" refers to a race of people. I would have to disagree with you both.

"Taste death" isn't about the transfiguration it's about Christ's kingdom. Many Futurist Pre-Mil believe we are not in the kingdom, the kingdom is yet to come. The kingdom is here. It started off small like a mustard seed, etc. and is every growing till it consume the whole earth. The kingdom grows every time someone becomes a Christian. Luke 17:20-21.

 

[james1523]

That's a new interpretation to me. Usually, "this generation" refers to a race of people. I would have to disagree with you both.

"Taste death" isn't about the transfiguration it's about Christ's kingdom. Many Futurist Pre-Mil believe we are not in the kingdom, the kingdom is yet to come. The kingdom is here. It started off small like a mustard seed, etc. and is every growing till it consume the whole earth. The kingdom grows every time someone becomes a Christian. Luke 17:20-21.

Both Matthew 16:28 and Mark 9:1 were fulfilled at the Mount of Transfiguration. Unfortunately Matt 16:28 is placed at the end of the chapter, which was not the best choice, but Mark 9:1 associates it with the transfiguration. Mark 9:1 sets the context of the paragraph which is the transfiguration. This is confirmed by 2 Peter 1:16, which says they saw Christ coming in His power. "Coming in His kingdom", means coming with the power and glory of His kingdom. It does not say, Christ is coming into His kingdom. Please consult some good bible commentaries on the verse, it may aid your understanding.

On the kingdom: The kingdom is here now, and growing and it is also yet to come. The kingdom of God is the church, which is here now, it started as a small seed, (starting with the 12 apostles), and is continuing to grow, so many millions of Christians on the earth today. And the kingdom coming, is the Lord returning with all His saints.

 

[lawrenceb]

In the prevailing view of Bible prophecy, the well known passage in Daniel chapter 9 concerning the 70 weeks of Daniel is commonly interpreted to put forth the proposition that the Antichrist will make a 7 year treaty with the Jewish people. But is this proposition actually accurate, and if it is not, what are the implications for the rather large cluster of prophetic interpretations that rest upon this idea of a treaty that will be broken "in the midst of the week?" (Daniel 9:27)

Daniel's 70th week is one of the premier prophetic passages in the entire Bible - but it has been distorted to the point where the interpretation that is popularly offered is so far off from what the text actually says that most believers simply take the interpretation for granted. This traditional interpretation has become so deeply ingrained that study Bibles routinely offer it in their margin notes. Indeed, few people are aware that it is this very text that is the primary passage used to teach the faulty idea of a 7-year tribulation, and the fictional 7-year treaty.

The truth is, there is not one verse in the entire Bible that teaches either concept.

The key to Daniel's 70 Week passage is found in the summary of what is to occur during a period described as "70 weeks." That summary occurs in Daniel 9:24:

"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to

[a] finish the transgression

and to make an end of sins,

[c] and to make reconciliation for iniquity,

[d] and to bring in everlasting righteousness,

[e] and to seal up the vision and prophecy,

[f] and to anoint the most holy."

Various sequential aspects of the prophecy are then detailed, including how long it will be until the coming of "Messiah the prince," and how long His ministry will last. These details are found in verses 25 and 26. Then the prophecy bluntly informs us that after the Messiah has come and gone, an unnamed "people" will come and destroy "the city and the sanctuary." (verse 26)

The last aspect of the prophecy elaborates on the destruction of the sanctuary and the abominations that are to occur. It even describes the reason for the devastation as the text tells us it is "...for the overspreading of abominations [that] he shall make it desolate." (Daniel 9:27)

Once again, it's crucial that we see that Jesus the Messiah is the fulfillment of these prophecies - and the totality of what He accomplishes is in verse 24. One may simply read through the points of verse 24 and ask WHO fulfills each and every aspect of the prophecy? The answer is JESUS CHRIST.

Another way to approach this is to reverse the perspective. Doesthe Antichrist "finish the transgression?" Of course not. Can it be said that the Beast is the one who will "make an end of sins?" Obviously not. Does the Son of Perdition "make reconciliation for iniquity?" The answer is self-evident.

Does the wicked one "seal up the vision and prophecy?" He does not. And does the Antichrist "anoint the most holy?"

Of course not.

The focal point of the entire prophecy is JESUS CHRIST. It may also be instructive to recognize that because we are reading this prophecy so many years after its fulfillment we don't fully appreciate the incredible accuracy in it. We need to point out that Daniel's incredible work was written about 550 years before JESUS was born!

It's worth noting that the coming of the Messiah was always the central hope implied in virtually every prophecy. The belief that God would send a Messiah is the great historic longing that existed in almost every historic time period of Israel and Judah. One of the great wonders of this prophecy is that it not only provided precious details about the arrival of the Messiah, it even included a countdown to the events that would lead to His arrival!

Conversely, the Antichrist is never mentioned. There is no mention of a 7-year treaty, nor a 7-year tribulation. All of those understandings have been artificially attached to the prophecy. The central message in this entire prophecy is the arrival of the Messiah, and what will happen once He arrives. Having said that, let's take it chronologically.

The first part of the prophecy, after the summary in verse 24, breaks down the period into separate components. Verse 25 says that "from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks." Most prophecy teachers have recognized the 'year for a day' principle in this prophetic language. Under this perspective, each "week" is seen as a seven year period. Thus, the first period of "seven weeks" may accurately be depicted as seven seven-year periods - or 49 years. The second period of "threescore and two weeks" (which is 62 weeks) may be +seen as 62 seven-year periods, or 434 years. That totals 69 "weeks" or 483 years - leaving only the third period of one "week" (7 years) for the total of 70 weeks.

What the text is saying is that the commandment to build Jerusalem will trigger three time periods. To offer a rough paraphrase, it's telling us the commandment will be given, then 49 years later something related to the prophecy will happen. Then a period of 434 years will elapse, and then the Messiah will arrive. The last period of 7 years will then elapse. A characterization of the first portion of the prophecy is added when the text tells us the time when the sanctuary is to be rebuilt will be "troublous."

Textual evidence in the historical books of Nehemiah and Ezra suggest that it took about 49 years to rebuild the wall and the temple after the command to construct them was given by the Persian king Cyrus: "Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth; and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah." (Ezra 1:2).

After the initial building period of 49 years elapsed, the second period of 434 years went by with almost nothing occurring that was related to the messianic expectation. This second period is the period between the last book of the Old Testament (Malachi) and the coming of Jesus Christ - and it turns out to be 434 years!

It is at this point that the gigantic error is made in the prophetic interpretation -and it changes the meaning of almost everything.

Because the prophecy is broken up into 3 period (49 years, 434 years, and 7 years), prophecy interpreters claim that the prophecy was "suspended" after the Messiah arrived, and the last 7 year period, which they identify as the tribulation, was pushed far into the future. They then say the Antichrist will emerge and inaugurate that last 7-year period. The problem is, the text never actually says any of that, nor does it even infer a gap between the 69th and 70th week.

The Messiah arrives after the 2nd period of 434 years (62 weeks in the text). There is no reason to believe the unfolding of the timeline stops at that point. Thus, the Messiah arrives at the beginning of the 70th week and it commenced when He arrived. Remember, the focus of the prophecy is on the Messiah who must accomplish everything specified within the 70-week period.

After the Messiah arrives, the text simply continues with the chronological description: "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off...." (Daniel 9:26) This verse is simply saying that after the second period of 434 years (the 62 weeks) has gone by, the Messiah is to be "cut off." It then continues the chronological statement from the point of the 'cutting off' and says that at some unspecified time after the Messiah is cut off, "the city and the sanctuary" will be destroyed.

In the next verse, the prophecy provides us with the details of the cutting off of the Saviour. Again, the focal point of the entire prophecy is the Messiah, so after He arrives, "he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week...." (Daniel 9:27) This is precisely what would be expected as when He arrived, there would be "one week" left to the 70 weeks. The obvious question should be how can the Antichrist suddenly get inserted into this prophecy and "confirm" a covenant that has never been mentioned? Indeed, the Antichrist himself has never been mentioned in the entire text!

Furthermore, it's useful to recognize that the term covenant is not the same term as the word treaty. We separate the Bible into the Old Testament and the New Testament, and the word "testament" is interchangeable with the term covenant (see Hebrews 9:15). On the other hand, a treaty is a political instrument that is used between nations - not a sacred agreement between God and man.

In the Old Testament, God made an agreement with man that if the people will adhere to His "covenant," He will protect and keep them and be their God. This is articulated in Exodus with the children of Israel where God says "Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people...." (Exodus 19:5). In the very passage in question in Daniel, which is prophetic on its face, God further promises that He will bring the Messiah who will confirm the covenant that He has already made.

Although it is a new covenant in that it brings out certain characteristics that were somewhat veiled in the Old Testament, because it is a covenant with Israel, it is actually a renewal of the covenant that God made through Moses. Thus in Jeremiah, God says "Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel...." (Jeremiah 31:31)

Therefore, about 50 years after God promised to Jeremiah that He would remember Israel with another covenant that will build upon the existing covenant, He tells Daniel that "the Messiah the Prince...shall confirm the covenant with many...." (Daniel 9:25, 27).

The New Testament writers recognized this as the Apostle Paul explicitly wrote on the subject when he stated "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after...." (Galatians 3:17) Through this confirmation, we learn that Christ is the heir of all the promises. He is the Seed of Abraham upon whom the blessings are bestowed, and He is the only one who "brings in everlasting righteousness." (Daniel 9:2).

The twist on the truth that has come to dominate the prophetic expectations of so many millions will reap a bitter harvest. As vast numbers of Christians are deceived on this subject, their lives and actions are predicated on a false understanding of the immediate future - and the fruit of it will be dreadful. Very few understand the enormous spiritual ramifications of embracing significant error in our prophetic perspective. Indeed, it was the fact that Israel did not recognize the time of their visitation from God that brought the nation of Israel to "the overspreading of abominations" that were the natural outgrowth of their refusal to recognize Jesus as their promised Messiah.

Literally millions upon millions of believers are now similarly deceived in that the person explicitly described in the scriptures as the MESSIAH is actually seen as the Antichrist. Our Saviour told the Pharisees that attributing the works of God to the Devil was the unpardonable sin (Matthew 12:31). The blind religious leaders of yesteryear claimed the person doing the miracles in their presence was actually a vessel of the Devil. The truth was, that person was Jesus Christ and the Jewish leaders committed blasphemy of the Holy Spirit in their refusal to recognize Jesus was the individual prophesied of in Daniel 9:27.

How is it any different when the modern day Pharisees, the denominational Christians of our time, are now claiming these magnificent prophecies apply to the Antichrist, when the exact opposite is true as these words testify of the awesome truth of "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ?" (Titus 2:13) As the import of this great truth sinks in, it affects practically everything - including the actual identity of the chosen people, our individual standing in Christ, and the immediate future of America in a prophetic context.

The very fact that most "believers" will simply discard this pointed exegesis testifies that it is the organized churches that have perpetrated the great fraud that Christendom finds herself entangled in. And because of their lazy refusal to study the truth of the scriptures on a personal level - instead relying upon the false doctrines of their hireling shepherds -- we will shortly see the big surprise in which so many that thought they were saved will be turned away. The scriptures will not be broken, and they tell us it is "for which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience." (Colossians 3:6)

 

[Bambi]

Both Matthew 16:28 and Mark 9:1 were fulfilled at the Mount of Transfiguration. Unfortunately Matt 16:28 is placed at the end of the chapter, which was not the best choice, but Mark 9:1 associates it with the transfiguration. Mark 9:1 sets the context of the paragraph which is the transfiguration. This is confirmed by 2 Peter 1:16, which says they saw Christ coming in His power. "Coming in His kingdom", means coming with the power and glory of His kingdom. It does not say, Christ is coming into His kingdom. Please consult some good bible commentaries on the verse, it may aid your understanding.

Don't quiet understand what you are saying here, except I still don't agree with you concerning the transfiguration.

On the kingdom: The kingdom is here now, and growing and it is also yet to come. The kingdom of God is the church, which is here now, it started as a small seed, (starting with the 12 apostles), and is continuing to grow, so many millions of Christians on the earth today. And the kingdom coming, is the Lord returning with all His saints.

I agree with you about the kingdom being here. I don't agree with your last sentence. The Lord returns the saints are resurrected.