Charlie744

I am quite confused with your response! Benjamin Netenyahu has nothing to do with whether the Jews accept or reject Jesus. He is a secular government head of Israel. Certainly he has a very important purpose / mission to fulfill and thank God he has put him in his position, but we are ALL in a spiritual war. We can either trust and put our faith and obedience in Him or not... the world is going to take its course—- just as it has for the past almost 6,000 years. I think Daniel has told us all we need to know (or almost most)... God showed us how man treats man without Him (details of first 3 kingdoms). He doesn’t have to continue revealing the next 20, 50 or 100 kingdoms, rulers or power hungry evil men that would continue to do the same as Babylon or Greece. But He did reveal what will happen during the next 2,000 years (regardless of the power), with the knowledge of the One True God. We must continue to go through the world (no different than before the Cross) since man will never change, however, now we have Him as our King, our Savior and our Lord SHOULD we call on Him! So the world will continue to spin no different than before and our ONLY responsibility is to do His work— And I believe He said it simply, “Obey My commandments and believe in Me”). I believe that something in the future (near future?) will occur that will indeed cause the Jews to realize that Jesus was their Messiah... and it will have to be something that WE are NOT doing now. The Gentiles are going to change how they obey or worship God which will get their attention and draw them to search and find Jesus. I don’t know what that would look like but if I had to guess, it might be that the Gentiles will somehow come to believe the Sabbath is indeed one of His 10 commandments that must be kept. The Jews would not even consider discussing Jesus as their Messiah GIVEN we don’t honor His commandments (10 not 9). If I was a Jew, and I absolutely knew we (Israel) worshipped the One True God, and then someone told me this Jesus was their Messiah BUT He allowed or condoned or accepted the changing of the Sabbath, I would not give you the time of day! Why? Because the True Coming Messiah would NEVER disobey any one of God’s Laws, therefore, Jesus could not possibly be the Messiah. But that is just my opinion. But there is one thing I have noticed since my brief study of Daniel only 13 months ago- from 9:24 to chapter 11, and all the discussion of Revelation on this site, it is clear to me that almost 99% are attempting to interpret these verses / books in a purely secular manner. Once again, the 4th kingdom (beginning with the Roman Empire, and which will continue in one form or another until His second coming), will have all the wars and conflicts that we can take, but the true conflict is the one where we battle for our eternal future. This means we should try and interpret His messages and prophecies that will occur during the 4th kingdom and that are given to us to ensure we see the real enemy and battlefield and will be successful. Which will f course requires us to interpret 9:24... and chapter 11, and Revelation in a non-secular manner. Chapter 11 is NOT about AE or the Ptolemy rulers. It speaks to the 4th kingdom and the actors and events identified in Daniel 7. Just as in Daniel 11, Revelation is not a summary or detail listing of some of man’s future kingdoms and conflicts and their enemies- no Islam, China or Russia, Turkey, etc, this is the way MAN tries to interpret things- God is trying to reveal His Plan of Salvation as He sees it.. He is not interested in this typical war or conflict within the 4th kingdom- whether it occurs during the Roman Empire or during our time... Anyway, just my thoughts, and have a safe and enjoyable Labor Day, Charlie

Thank you for your response! I think those verses tell me there was a very large individual (who also had bothers and most likely other relatives) who fought against Israel. I don’t see how we can make the leap that he was a product of an angel and a woman. There are other interpretations that do not support angels are the result of their size, etc. In addition to the other interpretations (non-angels involvement), one might contend that God purposely included “those giants” in verses AFTER the flood to confirm they are / were NOT a product of angels. Only 8 were in the Ark and none would have made anyone’s basketball team — I don’t see anything that would speak of angels getting kinky with mankind after the flood. Charlie

I don’t want to change the direction or original purpose of this topic but I have seen MANY that accept the view that angels (corrupted) had relations with mankind before the flood (and would also have had AFTER the flood given only 8 were saved in the Ark), which created giants or mutants or something like that... I don’t believe God had given angels any ability to procreate! I think there had simply been a translation error.... Thanks, Charlie

And in this corner— when Jesus died on the Cross didn’t He destroy all sin - both past and future? Unlike the sacrificial system which “covered” man’ sin, Jesus removed all sin for those that placed their faith and trust in Him? ... same for everlasting righteousness by Jesus... Also, don’t you think that Israel has already been punished? They have the exact same opportunity to be reconciled with God as anyone else! All they have to do with to accept Jesus as the “One they pierced” - that He is their Messiah and He will remove their sins forever! Thanks, Charlie

Sister.... your good!!!! Now why didn’t I think of that? No way. Thank you very much, Charlie

Why is God described as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as opposed to the God of Abraham? And can you see your answer within your interpretations of Revelation?

Just curious... is it possible the “covenant with many” refers to the New Covenant mentioned in Jeremiah and fulfilled by the Messiah for those who would accept Him as their Messiah and Saviour (of course, ther would always be those who would continue to reject Him as the Messiah? Thank you, Charlie

Well, I am fairly certain you are aware of my opinion on Daniel’s 70 weeks or 490 years of his prophecy; that all 70 weeks were indeed completed with the most important week, the last week beginning at His Baptism. Despite His crucifixion in the midst of the week, He indeed fulfilled ALL the 6 requirements identified in chapter 9. Regardless of one’s interpretation of 9:27, there really should not be any need to distinguish between Jew and Gentile- NT clearly tells us that God sacrificed His life for ALL who believed in Him. The New Covenant applies to ALL. At the end times there will be only two groups( those that have put their trust and salvation in Jesus and those that did not! God is not interested in one’s ancestry or religion. Although both Jew and Gentile will inherit the Kingdom of God, it will be because of their faith in Jesus. But there is one important thing the Jews are yet to accomplish; that Jesus will return when the Jews recognize that He was indeed the One they have pierced. Thanks, Charlie

Ok and thanks ! Here is my take and please comment if you will.... There are 6 requirements mentioned in 9 in addition to the confirmation of the new covenant. These 6 are to be completed in the 3rd section of Daniel’s 3 separated sections of the 490 years, and the Messiah is the only One who can complete them... if He did not fulfill them during the last 7 years, when were these completed— in the future? Charlie

Thank you but no. I believe you say the 69th week ended with the birth of Jesus... but at the end of your post you say the 70th week begins at the crucifixion. That doesn’t make sense to me... the end of the 69th week is just one day before the beginning of the 70th week... If no 30 year gap... what happened to those 30 years between His birth and the crucifixion? Thanks, Charlie

Thank you very much! I certainly just looked at this verse so I have no opinion as yet, but one thing that might be something to consider is that Jesus would not go out to conquer... My initial thought is this group of 4 may represent the “deceiver - white horse / Little horn, and the results of his deception brings the other 3... Charlie

Da Peppers, help! I am confused. I believe you said the end of the 69th week is when the Messiah would be born? And I have it that the end of the 69th week the Messiah will be anointed/baptized. This would mean He was to complete everything He wanted to in / during the last week or 7 years of Daniel’s prophecy. But of course He would be “cut off” in the midst of the last week. But He still would complete His mission and the last 3.5 years have no purpose or relevance.... If I understand your view, the 69th week begins the birth of Jesus but He would not begin His ministry for another 30 years. Doesn’t this disturb the 490 year period? Are you saying there is a 30 year gap between the last two sections of Daniel’s 70 weeks before the final week begins with His Baptism? Thank you, Charlie

I am going to have to agree..Adam only has a 6,000 year lease, and based on how we have mistreated His property, Adam would not want to renew his lease unless God does some major capital improvements... and I have it on good authority, He has other way plans for this property, Charlie

I really don’t like reading all of these more talented and knowledgeable folks within this forum and finding my interpretations are either quite different (some extremely different), or just alittle different (example being we agree on exactly who “he” is but might see the “covenant” and or there is a “3.5 year period” yet to be addressed. However, there clearly are so many neat thoughts and interpretations—and I know for sure that God is pleased with all of this attention! Sorry to repeat myself so many times but I seem to get tangled up after I read/go back into this discussion and it appears to me there is a kink in the straight line AS I SEE IT (right for me). 1) For me, the “covenant” represents the one from Jeremiah. Not sure about this next statement but this MAYBE the 7th and also the last covenant between God and mankind, and I believe the 7th of any seven anything’s is the most important in His Words. In any event, this covenant would be fulfilled by His crucifixion, not by His Baptism. And the proof of this MAYBE He sent His Holy Spirit to us at Pentecost (it wasn’t a delayed covenant or one that would take effect some 2,000 years later. His Baptism would confirm the timing of the coming of the “Anointed One”... (after 69 weeks.. then the Messiah). This had to be fulfilled or Daniel’s prophecies (all of his book) would be false. 2) He was indeed Baptized on day one of the 70th week, but He would not be able to serve as our High Priest UNTIL He would defeat the devils temptations in the desert. 3) Upon His first visit to the Temple, Jesus found the Temple was defiled by the Jews (money changers), and declared it “unclean. This would be on accordance to the laws of Leviticus where the High Priest would visit the Temple one week prior to the Passover. If unclean, it had to be cleansed OR the stones would have to be torn down and thrown outside the gates (and this is exactly what happened when Jesus attended the last Passover (His crucifixion), and indeed He (Stone the builders rejected was thrown outside the gates in Calvery). 4) So the Messiah began the 70th week with His Baptism, He would fulfill all 6 requirements found in Daniel (not 3 but all 6), and fulfill the Covenant with His crucifixion “in the midst of the week or 3.5 years into the 7 year period (last week of Daniel). 5) He fulfilled everything written about Him in Daniel, Jeremiah, Isaiah, etc. DURING the last week of Daniel. Additionally, He fulfilled 4 of the 7 Jewish Feasts leaving only the Fall Feasts to be completed. I am certainly NO authority on the Fall Feasts but I don’t believe they include any activity or covenant making type events— the 6 requirements of the New Covenant was completed, now the events of the Fall Feasts take center stage (hope someone can drill down and possibly confirm this thought). 6) Consequently, Jesus declared “it is finished” on the Cross... it would not seem appropriate to me to claim He did NOT fulfill His Covenant after He told us so right before His death. Therefore, everything that was prophecized was completed DURING the last week and there is NO reason we need to try and “identify or fill” the remaining 3.5 years of the last week - He told us in 9:27 THIS TOO would happen... that’s it, it is finished! 7) So, despite the preposition “for” in 9:27, this verse can NOT be interpreted as a 7 year covenant ... it completely conflicts with the many prophecies in the Scriptures (especially Chapter 9). The Jews were waiting for their Messiah to come and they were aware He would bring in a New Covenant, but they could not possibly interpret the crucifixion and it’s timing in the midst of the last week. But because we are on this side of the Cross, we should have NO business NOT clearly see how perfectly these prophecies/verses speak of no one but the Messiah. 8) So the crucifixion (abomination) - the most horrendous act in mankind’ history, would indeed cause a significant punishment for their rejection of Him; the prince of the people in 9:26 (Titus), would serve as His agent to cause desolation upon Israel. 9) Regarding the continuation of the sacrificial system AFTER His crucifixion (until 70 AD), this is a meaningless exercise (not to those Jews who did not believe Jesus was their Messiah), since His death eliminated all “types and shadows” - offerings, sacrifices, other ceremonies,etc. Consequently, they are no longer relevant to or within His Plan of Salvation- there is a completely new plan or covenant to be honored by man. Therefore, an “abomination” found in Daniel, the NT and certainly in Revelation can NOT refer to ANY event, damage, denigration or unholy activity to either Temple- the one at 70 AD OR a 3rd Temple that might be built by the Jews in the future. It would not be a Holy building no matter how much the Jews would want it to be— only God can make something Holy and that “system” and associated physical characteristics have been replaced. Now for me, this seems to work... it tells the story of the coming Messiah- it is and should be ALL about Him! But if we change or interpret “he” as “he” and contend the preposition “for” must represent a perfect or the intended translation (despite its conflicts with the rest of the chapter and those Scriptures supporting the coming Messiah, then it would be easy to construct a very different interpretation AND carry it forward to severely corrupt our interpretation of Revelation. Just my thoughts and thanks, Charlie

Sister, this is something I have never thought of... I have always heard of the 4 horses, but nevee associated the white horse with the RCC. I can now see the symbolism... Revelation is going to be very difficult... but so rewarding !! Thank you very much again and I will certainly seek this forum throughout this study... many bright and knowledgeable people here! Charlie

I totally agree... it can be no other than the Messiah but I also believe the more common translations show the word “for” as in “for a 7 year covenant”. That does not work for me and contradicts so much in the Scriptures (Jeremiah and all of chapter 9). Thsnks and I will contact Retrobyter! Charlie

Willa, I don’t believe the SDA honor the Sabbath because that would ensure they go to heaven... thus everyone else who doesn’t does not reach heaven. I think they honor the Sabbath because it is one of the 10 commandments which of course we all must obey. Also, God created the 7th day AND it is the only day He made Holy. It has nothing to do with the Cross. Charlie

That is interesting... if it is not too long, if not to much trouble, is there a possibility this could be tied to the “witnesses” in Revelation? Spiritually? BTW, and in an unrelated topic... IF you are able to read Hebrew, can you please translate the first sentence in Daniel 9:27? I have seen two different translations from two different Jewish translations. The issue focuses on if the word “for” is in fact correct or pushed. Thank you, Charlie

Thank you Canada... I may not have been very clear... the Word, which was given to Moses was given 3,500 years ago if one uses a “day is like a 1,000 years” for God... as I mentioned, just a thought that surfaced when I saw the word “witness” used more than once ... Charlie

Ok, I am jumping into the deep end and I can not swim... Last week I asked everyone to offer their opinions on the “white horse”. I ran through the first 5 chapters and assumed the identification of this person would be the first difficult interpretation in Revelation... maybe not. Today I started with 1:1 and even though I am aware the 2 witnesses are mentioned in the later chapters and where they are killed, resurrected in 3.5 days, what do you think if the 2 witnesses are identified here in the first 5 verses of chapter 1? The 2 witnesses are God and the Messiah... Perhaps more specifically, the 2 witnesses represent the Word of God given at MT. Sinai and the Word made flesh in the form of the Messiah.... The Word was lying in Jerusalem for 3.5 days meaning 3,500 years since a day is like a 1,000 years to God and the Torah was given ~3,500 years ago... Again, just started Revelation and this came to my mind.. Look forward to your responses, Charlie

Leah, the things you mentioned are true but God, not man, told us to obey the Sabbath and then doubled down after He created the 7th day making it Holy, by writing it in stone. This is not a hurdle or punishment or one of “thall shout not’s....”, but this day is supposed to be a blessing to/for us. This is a set apart day where we know exactly where He will be... In the Gospels Jesus Himself performed “acts”which many including the Pharisees condemned Him for doing “work” on the Sabbath... but they were not “work”. These “acts” were not secular in nature, they did not put coin in His pocket, etc. And you are so right, God knows what is in your heart- not man! Just my thoughts, Charlie

This makes sense... this white horse does not use military type force but he deceives and twists His Word... and God would not allow him to have access to any arrows (like Job, God would not allow Satan to physically harm him). And yes, the white color of the first horse is also part of his deception... our first view of him might be one of a “good guy” coming to our aid... no one on a white horse can be a bad guy,.. and the first horse would/could also signify he will be right there at the beginning of man... I believe Revelation is going to be exponentially more difficult than Daniel. Thanks for your thoughts, Charlie

Spock, very kind of you and Justin Adams to offer your “thumbs up” and kind words! Best wishes always and Happy Sabbath! Charlie

Thank you both for your thoughts and opinions .. and it is abundantly clear that the majority (maybe something near 90%) of Christians are also worshipping on the first day of the week. And that is their right! For me, I have presented my thoughts on keeping the Sabbath— whether it is due to the creation events, by their inclusion / confirmation in the 10 commandments, or Jesus telling us to “keep my commandments”, or the apostles and Paul honoring the Sabbath... so we are all good! We are all free to do what is right in our own heart. Thanks for all your comments, Charlie

Please see the previous posts above ... thanks.