The Seventy Weeks of Daniel 9

[Enoch2021]

 

That's still "off the Reservation".  The destruction of Jerusalem and the Sanctuary happens in Verse 26 after the Messiah is executed.  Verse 27 (Daniel's 70th Week) then speaks to the confirming of the Covenant and The Abomination of Desolation....no destruction of the City/Temple mentioned here.

 

Titus (Roman) never confirmed "a covenant" and he surely didn't commit the Abomination of Desolation.   

 

The scenario that you acquiesced to goes:  Confirm a Covenant by Titus------->Destruction of the City and Temple --------> Then to Verse 27 (This is Daniel's 70th Week) -----> Confirm a Another Covenant ?? ----->  Then what?

 

Confirm a Covenant by Titus is Erroneous in Verse 26.

 

The "he" in Verse 27 is a "Type"...the Prince (ac) will come from Old ROMAN Empire....most assuredly from the Eastern Leg of that Empire (The Byzantine) which covered....Assyria; He's an Assyrian.

 

I was not suggesting the Roman figure is Titus; I think the identity of the prince is not important as long as he represents Rome. I think we kid ourselves if we think we have enough information about that time to know exactly who did what. But we can see the results. The covenant might just be an understanding that allowed the Jews to practise their own religion, and that was what Rome did. However, by invading and destroying Jerusalem, Rome broke the agreement. Verse 27 does not follow the destruction of the city - there is no "then" - but explains the circumstances behind the destruction. So there is no need to mention the destruction of the temple in vs 27. Your problem would be to prove that the 'he' in verse 27 is someone else in the future. There is no evidence of that in the text.

 

 

 

==================================================================================================================

 

I was not suggesting the Roman figure is Titus; I think the identity of the prince is not important as long as he represents Rome.

 

 

Agreed.  However, since we do know by virtue of retrospect....it's good to be Precise.

 

 

The covenant might just be an understanding that allowed the Jews to practise their own religion, and that was what Rome did. However, by invading and destroying Jerusalem, Rome broke the agreement.

 

 

Begging The Question (Fallacy)------  What Agreement?  Are you suggesting that Verse 27 (Daniel's 70th Week) already happened?

 

If so, Please Elucidate a Timeline depicting the events of Revelation from 70AD until 73.5 AD.......?  I'll get the popcorn.

 

 

Verse 27 does not follow the destruction of the city - there is no "then" - but explains the circumstances behind the destruction. So there is no need to mention the destruction of the temple in vs 27. Your problem would be to prove that the 'he' in verse 27 is someone else in the future. There is no evidence of that in the text.

 

 

From directly above, Yep you are (SEE: If so....?).  Are ya Kidding?

 

(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."

 

1.  No need to mention it, eh?  As elucidated quite succinctly in my previous post... 

 

The scenario that you acquiesced to, goes:  Confirm a Covenant by Titus------->Destruction of the City and Temple --------> Then to Verse 27 (This is Daniel's 70th Week) -----> Confirm a Another Covenant ?? ----->  Then what?

 

And you're Assuming/Begging The Question (Fallacy) that what led to the Destruction of the City and The Sanctuary (Verse 26, 70 AD) was a "Breaking of the Covenant".  Please show.....?

 

Moreover, Please tell us why the City and The Temple were destroyed in 70 AD....?

 

 

2.  Christ point's you to these specific passages in Daniel as an answer to the "End Times" question in Matthew 24 (The Olivet Discourse).  He specifically points to the Abomination of Desolation as beginning the "Great Tribulation" which lasts:

 

"Time and Times, and a Dividing of Time": Dan 7:25, Dan 12:7, Rev 12:14; "1260 Days": Rev 11:3, Rev 12:6 ; "42 Months": Rev 11:2, Rev 13:5.

 

ERGO...As queried above,  Please Elucidate a Timeline depicting the events of Revelation from 70AD to 73.5 AD.......?  I'll get the popcorn.  

 

Can you also Elucidate the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Sanctuary in the Book of Revelation.....?

[ARGOSY]

I've never been able to understand how the angel came to enlighten Daniel for greater understanding of the meaning of the vision and the vision was completely and fully about what the antichrist (false annointed messiah) would do when he came

 

and somehow theologians have decided Daniel 9:24-27 is a picture of both Jesus and the antichrist

 

 

at the very least, since there is no separation in the passage its either fully about Jesus or fully about the antichrist one or the other! spitting the ownership of verses is bad hermeneutics

 

 

Most translations split the identity. We are so used to the KJV and the NIV that its a barely noticed fact that most Hebrew scholars have two characters and not one. The fact that the wording of the second character fits in so perfectly with the abomination/antichrist descriptions of the NT clarifies that the second character is the antichrist.   The first character appears at the same timing of the coming of the anointed one (end of 69 = beginning of 70). He strengthens a covenant, then 3.5 years later puts an end to sacrifice.   Jesus did exactly that , to look for a second fulfilment is pretty weak when Jesus himself fulfilled these in such a dramatic manner.    Talk about world -changing moments --- Jesus confirms the Messiah sent to earth - fulfilling the expectations of Judaism, then 3.5 years later Jesus gives himself as the final gift of sacrifice giving life to all mankind.

 

27 And he shall enter into a strong and firm covenant with the many for one week [seven years]. And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and offering to cease [for the remaining three and one-half years]; and upon the wing or pinnacle of abominations [shall come] one who makes desolate, until the full determined end is poured out on the desolator.

 

Two characters.....not one.

[ghtan]

 

I was not suggesting the Roman figure is Titus; I think the identity of the prince is not important as long as he represents Rome.

 

 

Agreed.  However, since we do know by virtue of retrospect....it's good to be Precise.

 

 

The covenant might just be an understanding that allowed the Jews to practise their own religion, and that was what Rome did. However, by invading and destroying Jerusalem, Rome broke the agreement.

 

 

Begging The Question (Fallacy)------  What Agreement?  Are you suggesting that Verse 27 (Daniel's 70th Week) already happened?

 

If so, Please Elucidate a Timeline depicting the events of Revelation from 70AD until 73.5 AD.......?  I'll get the popcorn.

 

 

Verse 27 does not follow the destruction of the city - there is no "then" - but explains the circumstances behind the destruction. So there is no need to mention the destruction of the temple in vs 27. Your problem would be to prove that the 'he' in verse 27 is someone else in the future. There is no evidence of that in the text.

 

 

From directly above, Yep you are (SEE: If so....?).  Are ya Kidding?

 

(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."

 

1.  No need to mention it, eh?  As elucidated quite succinctly in my previous post... 

 

The scenario that you acquiesced to, goes:  Confirm a Covenant by Titus------->Destruction of the City and Temple --------> Then to Verse 27 (This is Daniel's 70th Week) -----> Confirm a Another Covenant ?? ----->  Then what?

 

And you're Assuming/Begging The Question (Fallacy) that what led to the Destruction of the City and The Sanctuary (Verse 26, 70 AD) was a "Breaking of the Covenant".  Please show.....?

 

Moreover, Please tell us why the City and The Temple were destroyed in 70 AD....?

 

 

2.  Christ point's you to these specific passages in Daniel as an answer to the "End Times" question in Matthew 24 (The Olivet Discourse).  He specifically points to the Abomination of Desolation as beginning the "Great Tribulation" which lasts:

 

"Time and Times, and a Dividing of Time": Dan 7:25, Dan 12:7, Rev 12:14; "1260 Days": Rev 11:3, Rev 12:6 ; "42 Months": Rev 11:2, Rev 13:5.

 

ERGO...As queried above,  Please Elucidate a Timeline depicting the events of Revelation from 70AD to 73.5 AD.......?  I'll get the popcorn.  

 

Can you also Elucidate the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Sanctuary in the Book of Revelation.....?

 

 

You have got it the wrong way around. The fulfilment of the cutting off of the Anointed One in 9:26 by Jesus' death firmly anchors that verse in the first century. It is therefore natural to read the next verse to also refer to the same time period. This is what I see most of us on this board has done. We may not agree on the exact way that the covenant was confirmed and the sacrifices were ended but we generally agree that it happened in the first century. If you think the story takes a quantum time leap to the end time at this point, the burden is on YOU to prove it. So far, you have not provided anything remotely like proof.

[Enoch2021]

 

 

I was not suggesting the Roman figure is Titus; I think the identity of the prince is not important as long as he represents Rome.

 

 

Agreed.  However, since we do know by virtue of retrospect....it's good to be Precise.

 

 

The covenant might just be an understanding that allowed the Jews to practise their own religion, and that was what Rome did. However, by invading and destroying Jerusalem, Rome broke the agreement.

 

 

Begging The Question (Fallacy)------  What Agreement?  Are you suggesting that Verse 27 (Daniel's 70th Week) already happened?

 

If so, Please Elucidate a Timeline depicting the events of Revelation from 70AD until 73.5 AD.......?  I'll get the popcorn.

 

 

Verse 27 does not follow the destruction of the city - there is no "then" - but explains the circumstances behind the destruction. So there is no need to mention the destruction of the temple in vs 27. Your problem would be to prove that the 'he' in verse 27 is someone else in the future. There is no evidence of that in the text.

 

 

From directly above, Yep you are (SEE: If so....?).  Are ya Kidding?

 

(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."

 

1.  No need to mention it, eh?  As elucidated quite succinctly in my previous post... 

 

The scenario that you acquiesced to, goes:  Confirm a Covenant by Titus------->Destruction of the City and Temple --------> Then to Verse 27 (This is Daniel's 70th Week) -----> Confirm a Another Covenant ?? ----->  Then what?

 

And you're Assuming/Begging The Question (Fallacy) that what led to the Destruction of the City and The Sanctuary (Verse 26, 70 AD) was a "Breaking of the Covenant".  Please show.....?

 

Moreover, Please tell us why the City and The Temple were destroyed in 70 AD....?

 

 

2.  Christ point's you to these specific passages in Daniel as an answer to the "End Times" question in Matthew 24 (The Olivet Discourse).  He specifically points to the Abomination of Desolation as beginning the "Great Tribulation" which lasts:

 

"Time and Times, and a Dividing of Time": Dan 7:25, Dan 12:7, Rev 12:14; "1260 Days": Rev 11:3, Rev 12:6 ; "42 Months": Rev 11:2, Rev 13:5.

 

ERGO...As queried above,  Please Elucidate a Timeline depicting the events of Revelation from 70AD to 73.5 AD.......?  I'll get the popcorn.  

 

Can you also Elucidate the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Sanctuary in the Book of Revelation.....?

 

 

You have got it the wrong way around. The fulfilment of the cutting off of the Anointed One in 9:26 by Jesus' death firmly anchors that verse in the first century. It is therefore natural to read the next verse to also refer to the same time period. This is what I see most of us on this board has done. We may not agree on the exact way that the covenant was confirmed and the sacrifices were ended but we generally agree that it happened in the first century. If you think the story takes a quantum time leap to the end time at this point, the burden is on YOU to prove it. So far, you have not provided anything remotely like proof.

 

 

 

 

 

 

================================================================================================

 

 

 

 

You have got it the wrong way around.

 

 

How so?

 

The fulfilment of the cutting off of the Anointed One in 9:26 by Jesus' death firmly anchors that verse in the first century. It is therefore natural to read the next verse to also refer to the same time period.

 

 

It's Natural?  Except when it's not.  Sure ought to send up caution flags when you're reading PROPHECY in DANIEL concerning End Times (which Christ just told you to go and read) and you've just been given, Two Passages prior (Dan 9:24), A Time Demarcation: "Seventy Weeks are determined upon they people..." the first words of the Prophecy. 

 

 

We may not agree on the exact way that the covenant was confirmed and the sacrifices were ended but we generally agree that it happened in the first century

 

 

Most generally agree?  Then it must be true and hold up to any and all scrutiny and common sense, eh?  You have a Begging The Question (Fallacy) that a covenant was confirmed between Titus and Jews and then Extrapolate that he went back on his covenant by attacking Jerusalem.....which therefore ended the Sacrifice and Oblation----From Verse 27.

 

1.  Please show a "Covenant" confirmed with the many and Titus 3.5 years prior to the attack?

 

2.  You also forgot that Verse 27 also says "abominations he shall make it desolate".... the same Language that Christ used in Matthew 24:15 (Olivet Discourse) to tell you when "great tribulation" will begin in the END TIMES.  Which just so happens to be 3.5 years...."great tribulation": "Time and Times, and a Dividing of Time": Dan 7:25, Dan 12:7, Rev 12:14; "1260 Days": Rev 11:3, Rev 12:6 ; "42 Months": Rev 11:2, Rev 13:5.

 

3. The Abomination of Desolation (Stand in the Holy Place; SEE: Revelation 13:6 that depicts this exact scenario) is the ac Blaspheming and Claiming He is GOD.

 

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

This is the culmination of Daniel's 70 Weeks Prophecy.

 

 

ERGO--- For your position to hold any water whatsoever----- that these are contiguous weeks, which also means Daniel's 70 weeks are in the past....

 

A.  Please show a "Covenant" confirmed with the many and Titus 3.5 years prior to the attack in 70 AD?

 

B.  Please show Titus as the anti-christ AND put him in the Holy of Holy's Blaspheming GOD....that everyone can SEE    -----you know why?  Christ in Matthew 24 makes a Technology Statement....(Matthew 24:15) " When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)"

How can the Jews SEE this event in the Holy of Holy's and flee in 70 AD when only the High Priest can enter and that's only Once a Year!! Let me tell you how they can SEE....CNN!!

 

C.  Please show Specifically the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in Matthew 24 and in Revelation?

 

D.  Please depict the Events of Revelation from 70AD - 73.5 AD......?

 

E.  Please Show the ac's Armies Gathered in Armageddon.....?

 

F.  Please show Christ's Return to the Earth on a White Horse with HIS Bride and Armies to save the Jewish Remnant....?

 

G. Please show the ac and false prophet thrown into the lake of fire and satan being chained for a Thousand Years.....?

 

H.  Please show Ezekiel's Millennial Temple and Christ ruling from Jerusalem on David's Throne with a Rod of Iron.....?

 

I.  Since it's been well over a thousand years since 70AD, Please show satan being loosed, final battle, satan in the lake of fire, and the New Jerusalem coming down from heaven.

 

J. Please show:  Transgression Finished, End of Sins, and the bringing in Everlasting Righteousness. 

 

This is just for Starters!!

 

 

If you think the story takes a quantum time leap to the end time at this point, the burden is on YOU to prove it. So far, you have not provided anything remotely like proof.

 

 

Look Up

 

You see sir, Based on the Law of Non-Contradiction, two Mutually Exclusive events can't happen @ the same time. All that must be accomplished is to SUMMARILY Rule Out One....leading to the other being Ipso Facto TRUE.  

 

 

The only recourse left, to avoid Preposterous Ludicrousness, is to Somehow make Matthew 24 and Luke 21....the same (That's a mirage, read them closely).  Even then, your position has Battleship/Air Craft Carrier size holes in it.

 

regards

[Guest]

Lol you gotta love this guy sense of over dramatisation. ..love it

 

You see sir, Based on the Law of Non-Contradiction, two Mutually Exclusive events can't happen @ the same time. All that must be accomplished is to SUMMARILY Rule Out One....leading to the other being Ipso Facto TRUE.  

The only recourse left, to avoid Preposterous Ludicrousness, is to Somehow make Matthew 24 and Luke 21....the same (That's a mirage, read them closely).  Even then, your position has Battleship/Air Craft Carrier size holes in it.

Your supposition is nothing more than a nanotechnology lost in its own cosmic soup of string theory where Fallacy, phalistine of sophism caught imbibing far to many drinks at the bar

 

~

 

Where's The Beef?

 

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica,

 

in that they received the word with all readiness of mind,

 

and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Acts 17:11

 

Where?

 

Let love be without dissimulation.

 

Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.

 

Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another; Romans 12:9-10

[seandavids]

 

I've never been able to understand how the angel came to enlighten Daniel for greater understanding of the meaning of the vision and the vision was completely and fully about what the antichrist (false annointed messiah) would do when he came

 

and somehow theologians have decided Daniel 9:24-27 is a picture of both Jesus and the antichrist

 

 

at the very least, since there is no separation in the passage its either fully about Jesus or fully about the antichrist one or the other! spitting the ownership of verses is bad hermeneutics

 

 

Most translations split the identity. We are so used to the KJV and the NIV that its a barely noticed fact that most Hebrew scholars have two characters and not one. The fact that the wording of the second character fits in so perfectly with the abomination/antichrist descriptions of the NT clarifies that the second character is the antichrist.   The first character appears at the same timing of the coming of the anointed one (end of 69 = beginning of 70). He strengthens a covenant, then 3.5 years later puts an end to sacrifice.   Jesus did exactly that , to look for a second fulfilment is pretty weak when Jesus himself fulfilled these in such a dramatic manner.    Talk about world -changing moments --- Jesus confirms the Messiah sent to earth - fulfilling the expectations of Judaism, then 3.5 years later Jesus gives himself as the final gift of sacrifice giving life to all mankind.

 

27 And he shall enter into a strong and firm covenant with the many for one week [seven years]. And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and offering to cease [for the remaining three and one-half years]; and upon the wing or pinnacle of abominations [shall come] one who makes desolate, until the full determined end is poured out on the desolator.

 

Two characters.....not one.

 

then again when a second temple is built and the sacrifices are once again reinstated and the Jew's begin to once again practice their historic religion then the whole stopping of the sacrifice by some antichrist character will make perfect sense

 

but what makes even more sense is looking closely at what the ORIGINAL VISION was about! the angel gives Daniel an interpretation that is fully about the antichrist, the angel returns to give Daniel further understanding about THE SAME VISION! the one that was completely about the antichrist

 

the vision had absolutely nothing to do with Jesus and what Jesus would do it was all about the false messiah

 

It would be like taking your lawn mower instruction manual and using it to fix your dish washer

[ghtan]

 

You have got it the wrong way around.

 

 

How so?

 

The fulfilment of the cutting off of the Anointed One in 9:26 by Jesus' death firmly anchors that verse in the first century. It is therefore natural to read the next verse to also refer to the same time period.

 

 

It's Natural?  Except when it's not.  Sure ought to send up caution flags when you're reading PROPHECY in DANIEL concerning End Times (which Christ just told you to go and read) and you've just been given, Two Passages prior (Dan 9:24), A Time Demarcation: "Seventy Weeks are determined upon they people..." the first words of the Prophecy. 

 

 

We may not agree on the exact way that the covenant was confirmed and the sacrifices were ended but we generally agree that it happened in the first century

 

 

Most generally agree?  Then it must be true and hold up to any and all scrutiny and common sense, eh?  You have a Begging The Question (Fallacy) that a covenant was confirmed between Titus and Jews and then Extrapolate that he went back on his covenant by attacking Jerusalem.....which therefore ended the Sacrifice and Oblation----From Verse 27.

 

1.  Please show a "Covenant" confirmed with the many and Titus 3.5 years prior to the attack?

 

2.  You also forgot that Verse 27 also says "abominations he shall make it desolate".... the same Language that Christ used in Matthew 24:15 (Olivet Discourse) to tell you when "great tribulation" will begin in the END TIMES.  Which just so happens to be 3.5 years...."great tribulation": "Time and Times, and a Dividing of Time": Dan 7:25, Dan 12:7, Rev 12:14; "1260 Days": Rev 11:3, Rev 12:6 ; "42 Months": Rev 11:2, Rev 13:5.

 

3. The Abomination of Desolation (Stand in the Holy Place; SEE: Revelation 13:6 that depicts this exact scenario) is the ac Blaspheming and Claiming He is GOD.

 

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

This is the culmination of Daniel's 70 Weeks Prophecy.

 

 

ERGO--- For your position to hold any water whatsoever----- that these are contiguous weeks, which also means Daniel's 70 weeks are in the past....

 

A.  Please show a "Covenant" confirmed with the many and Titus 3.5 years prior to the attack in 70 AD?

 

B.  Please show Titus as the anti-christ AND put him in the Holy of Holy's Blaspheming GOD....that everyone can SEE    -----you know why?  Christ in Matthew 24 makes a Technology Statement....(Matthew 24:15) " When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)"

How can the Jews SEE this event in the Holy of Holy's and flee in 70 AD when only the High Priest can enter and that's only Once a Year!! Let me tell you how they can SEE....CNN!!

 

C.  Please show Specifically the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in Matthew 24 and in Revelation?

 

D.  Please depict the Events of Revelation from 70AD - 73.5 AD......?

 

E.  Please Show the ac's Armies Gathered in Armageddon.....?

 

F.  Please show Christ's Return to the Earth on a White Horse with HIS Bride and Armies to save the Jewish Remnant....?

 

G. Please show the ac and false prophet thrown into the lake of fire and satan being chained for a Thousand Years.....?

 

H.  Please show Ezekiel's Millennial Temple and Christ ruling from Jerusalem on David's Throne with a Rod of Iron.....?

 

I.  Since it's been well over a thousand years since 70AD, Please show satan being loosed, final battle, satan in the lake of fire, and the New Jerusalem coming down from heaven.

 

J. Please show:  Transgression Finished, End of Sins, and the bringing in Everlasting Righteousness. 

 

This is just for Starters!!

 

 

If you think the story takes a quantum time leap to the end time at this point, the burden is on YOU to prove it. So far, you have not provided anything remotely like proof.

 

 

Look Up

 

You see sir, Based on the Law of Non-Contradiction, two Mutually Exclusive events can't happen @ the same time. All that must be accomplished is to SUMMARILY Rule Out One....leading to the other being Ipso Facto TRUE.  

 

 

The only recourse left, to avoid Preposterous Ludicrousness, is to Somehow make Matthew 24 and Luke 21....the same (That's a mirage, read them closely).  Even then, your position has Battleship/Air Craft Carrier size holes in it.

 

regards

 

 

 

From your reply, it is obvious that you cannot find something WITHIN the text of Dan 9 to support your case, otherwise you won't have to resort to Mt 24:15. It is important to recognise this. If one uses a text alien to the passage to support an interpretation, then it had better be a text that undoubtedly says what you claim it says. Unfortunately, Mt 24:15 is far from that, because its interpretation is disputed. Many - I daresay the majority of commentators - understand it to refer to the fall of Jerusalem in AD70. You obviously realise that otherwise you won't mention Luke 21. Luke has indeed rephrased that verse in 21:20 so that his gentile readers - like us too - would understand what the prophecy was referring to, and he understands it to refer to AD70. Even you agree he does. You have to argue that Jesus in Mt and Lk was talking about two different things. Where is the warrant for that? Look at how the words in Luke 21:20-23 are so similar to Mt 24:15-21. Are we to suppose that Jesus repeats himself about the flight of pregnant women and nursing mothers in the same conversation in reference to two different events? Not likely. Therefore, if Luke indicates Dan 9:27 is fulfilled in AD70, that is good enough for me.

[ARGOSY]

 

 

I've never been able to understand how the angel came to enlighten Daniel for greater understanding of the meaning of the vision and the vision was completely and fully about what the antichrist (false annointed messiah) would do when he came

 

and somehow theologians have decided Daniel 9:24-27 is a picture of both Jesus and the antichrist

 

 

at the very least, since there is no separation in the passage its either fully about Jesus or fully about the antichrist one or the other! spitting the ownership of verses is bad hermeneutics

 

 

Most translations split the identity. We are so used to the KJV and the NIV that its a barely noticed fact that most Hebrew scholars have two characters and not one. The fact that the wording of the second character fits in so perfectly with the abomination/antichrist descriptions of the NT clarifies that the second character is the antichrist.   The first character appears at the same timing of the coming of the anointed one (end of 69 = beginning of 70). He strengthens a covenant, then 3.5 years later puts an end to sacrifice.   Jesus did exactly that , to look for a second fulfilment is pretty weak when Jesus himself fulfilled these in such a dramatic manner.    Talk about world -changing moments --- Jesus confirms the Messiah sent to earth - fulfilling the expectations of Judaism, then 3.5 years later Jesus gives himself as the final gift of sacrifice giving life to all mankind.

 

27 And he shall enter into a strong and firm covenant with the many for one week [seven years]. And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and offering to cease [for the remaining three and one-half years]; and upon the wing or pinnacle of abominations [shall come] one who makes desolate, until the full determined end is poured out on the desolator.

 

Two characters.....not one.

 

then again when a second temple is built and the sacrifices are once again reinstated and the Jew's begin to once again practice their historic religion then the whole stopping of the sacrifice by some antichrist character will make perfect sense

 

but what makes even more sense is looking closely at what the ORIGINAL VISION was about! the angel gives Daniel an interpretation that is fully about the antichrist, the angel returns to give Daniel further understanding about THE SAME VISION! the one that was completely about the antichrist

 

the vision had absolutely nothing to do with Jesus and what Jesus would do it was all about the false messiah

 

It would be like taking your lawn mower instruction manual and using it to fix your dish washer

 

 

Well I completely disagree. Its all about Jesus until Daniel 9:27b.  To make your point your must lay out a comparison, showing your understanding of the "Jesus" view, and showing where the "antichrist" view is stronger.

I believe the Jesus view is stronger because the first prince is obviously Jesus (anointed prince) and grammar would favor the second prince being the same character. Furthermore it was Jews from Galilee that morally and physically ruined the temple and the city before the Romans even arrived. The historian Josephus records this clearly. These Jews destroyed buildings, destroyed the economy, and slaughtered the priests.  Jerusalem was in ruin. 

Jesus , at the timing of the coming of the anointed one, confirmed God's promise to send a Messiah (gave strength to the promise). Jesus ministered for 3.5 years and then put an end to sacrifice by being the final sacrifice.  

 

So my view fits perfectly, maybe your view fits perfectly too, explain why your view is superior?

 

 

ps you say the stopping of the sacrifice will make sense per your view. But what if the sacrifices never stop?   Right until the second coming?  The antichrist comes to power as per 2 Thess 2, then deceives the world for 3.5 years until the second coming, including deceiving the Jews. 

Remember the beast only has power for 42 months, not 84 months:

5 And the beast was given the power of speech, uttering boastful and blasphemous words, and he was given freedom to exert his authority and to exercise his will during forty-two months

[Enoch2021]

 

 

You have got it the wrong way around.

 

 

How so?

 

The fulfilment of the cutting off of the Anointed One in 9:26 by Jesus' death firmly anchors that verse in the first century. It is therefore natural to read the next verse to also refer to the same time period.

 

 

It's Natural?  Except when it's not.  Sure ought to send up caution flags when you're reading PROPHECY in DANIEL concerning End Times (which Christ just told you to go and read) and you've just been given, Two Passages prior (Dan 9:24), A Time Demarcation: "Seventy Weeks are determined upon they people..." the first words of the Prophecy. 

 

 

We may not agree on the exact way that the covenant was confirmed and the sacrifices were ended but we generally agree that it happened in the first century

 

 

Most generally agree?  Then it must be true and hold up to any and all scrutiny and common sense, eh?  You have a Begging The Question (Fallacy) that a covenant was confirmed between Titus and Jews and then Extrapolate that he went back on his covenant by attacking Jerusalem.....which therefore ended the Sacrifice and Oblation----From Verse 27.

 

1.  Please show a "Covenant" confirmed with the many and Titus 3.5 years prior to the attack?

 

2.  You also forgot that Verse 27 also says "abominations he shall make it desolate".... the same Language that Christ used in Matthew 24:15 (Olivet Discourse) to tell you when "great tribulation" will begin in the END TIMES.  Which just so happens to be 3.5 years...."great tribulation": "Time and Times, and a Dividing of Time": Dan 7:25, Dan 12:7, Rev 12:14; "1260 Days": Rev 11:3, Rev 12:6 ; "42 Months": Rev 11:2, Rev 13:5.

 

3. The Abomination of Desolation (Stand in the Holy Place; SEE: Revelation 13:6 that depicts this exact scenario) is the ac Blaspheming and Claiming He is GOD.

 

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

This is the culmination of Daniel's 70 Weeks Prophecy.

 

 

ERGO--- For your position to hold any water whatsoever----- that these are contiguous weeks, which also means Daniel's 70 weeks are in the past....

 

A.  Please show a "Covenant" confirmed with the many and Titus 3.5 years prior to the attack in 70 AD?

 

B.  Please show Titus as the anti-christ AND put him in the Holy of Holy's Blaspheming GOD....that everyone can SEE    -----you know why?  Christ in Matthew 24 makes a Technology Statement....(Matthew 24:15) " When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)"

How can the Jews SEE this event in the Holy of Holy's and flee in 70 AD when only the High Priest can enter and that's only Once a Year!! Let me tell you how they can SEE....CNN!!

 

C.  Please show Specifically the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in Matthew 24 and in Revelation?

 

D.  Please depict the Events of Revelation from 70AD - 73.5 AD......?

 

E.  Please Show the ac's Armies Gathered in Armageddon.....?

 

F.  Please show Christ's Return to the Earth on a White Horse with HIS Bride and Armies to save the Jewish Remnant....?

 

G. Please show the ac and false prophet thrown into the lake of fire and satan being chained for a Thousand Years.....?

 

H.  Please show Ezekiel's Millennial Temple and Christ ruling from Jerusalem on David's Throne with a Rod of Iron.....?

 

I.  Since it's been well over a thousand years since 70AD, Please show satan being loosed, final battle, satan in the lake of fire, and the New Jerusalem coming down from heaven.

 

J. Please show:  Transgression Finished, End of Sins, and the bringing in Everlasting Righteousness. 

 

This is just for Starters!!

 

 

If you think the story takes a quantum time leap to the end time at this point, the burden is on YOU to prove it. So far, you have not provided anything remotely like proof.

 

 

Look Up

 

You see sir, Based on the Law of Non-Contradiction, two Mutually Exclusive events can't happen @ the same time. All that must be accomplished is to SUMMARILY Rule Out One....leading to the other being Ipso Facto TRUE.  

 

 

The only recourse left, to avoid Preposterous Ludicrousness, is to Somehow make Matthew 24 and Luke 21....the same (That's a mirage, read them closely).  Even then, your position has Battleship/Air Craft Carrier size holes in it.

 

regards

 

 

 

From your reply, it is obvious that you cannot find something WITHIN the text of Dan 9 to support your case, otherwise you won't have to resort to Mt 24:15. It is important to recognise this. If one uses a text alien to the passage to support an interpretation, then it had better be a text that undoubtedly says what you claim it says. Unfortunately, Mt 24:15 is far from that, because its interpretation is disputed. Many - I daresay the majority of commentators - understand it to refer to the fall of Jerusalem in AD70. You obviously realise that otherwise you won't mention Luke 21. Luke has indeed rephrased that verse in 21:20 so that his gentile readers - like us too - would understand what the prophecy was referring to, and he understands it to refer to AD70. Even you agree he does. You have to argue that Jesus in Mt and Lk was talking about two different things. Where is the warrant for that? Look at how the words in Luke 21:20-23 are so similar to Mt 24:15-21. Are we to suppose that Jesus repeats himself about the flight of pregnant women and nursing mothers in the same conversation in reference to two different events? Not likely. Therefore, if Luke indicates Dan 9:27 is fulfilled in AD70, that is good enough for me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

================================================================================================================

 

 

 

You must have missed these from my last post (you copied them forward but didn't speak to them   )......

 

1.  Please show a "Covenant" confirmed with the many and Titus 3.5 years prior to the attack?

2.  You also forgot that Verse 27 also says "abominations he shall make it desolate".... the same Language that Christ used in Matthew 24:15 (Olivet Discourse) to tell you when "great tribulation" will begin in the END TIMES.  Which just so happens to be 3.5 years...."great tribulation": "Time and Times, and a Dividing of Time": Dan 7:25, Dan 12:7, Rev 12:14; "1260 Days": Rev 11:3, Rev 12:6 ; "42 Months": Rev 11:2, Rev 13:5.

3. The Abomination of Desolation (Stand in the Holy Place; SEE: Revelation 13:6 that depicts this exact scenario) is the ac Blaspheming and Claiming He is GOD.

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

This is the culmination of Daniel's 70 Weeks Prophecy.

ERGO--- For your position to hold any water whatsoever----- that these are contiguous weeks, which also means Daniel's 70 weeks are in the past....

A.  Please show a "Covenant" confirmed with the many and Titus 3.5 years prior to the attack in 70 AD?

B.  Please show Titus as the anti-christ AND put him in the Holy of Holy's Blaspheming GOD....that everyone can SEE   -----you know why?  Christ in Matthew 24 makes a Technology Statement....(Matthew 24:15) " When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)"

How can the Jews SEE this event in the Holy of Holy's and flee in 70 AD when only the High Priest can enter and that's only Once a Year!! Let me tell you how they can SEE....CNN!!

C.  Please show Specifically the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in Matthew 24 and in Revelation?

D.  Please depict the Events of Revelation from 70AD - 73.5 AD......?

E.  Please Show the ac's Armies Gathered in Armageddon.....?

F.  Please show Christ's Return to the Earth on a White Horse with HIS Bride and Armies to save the Jewish Remnant....?

G. Please show the ac and false prophet thrown into the lake of fire and satan being chained for a Thousand Years.....?

H.  Please show Ezekiel's Millennial Temple and Christ ruling from Jerusalem on David's Throne with a Rod of Iron.....?

I.  Since it's been well over a thousand years since 70AD, Please show satan being loosed, final battle, satan in the lake of fire, and the New Jerusalem coming down from heaven.

J. Please show:  Transgression Finished, End of Sins, and the bringing in Everlasting Righteousness.

This is just for Starters!!

 

 

 

 

From your reply, it is obvious that you cannot find something WITHIN the text of Dan 9 to support your case, otherwise you won't have to resort to Mt 24:15. It is important to recognise this. If one uses a text alien to the passage to support an interpretation, then it had better be a text that undoubtedly says what you claim it says.

 

 

Huh?

 

(Matthew 24:15) " When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)"

 

(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."

 

 

 

Mt 24:15 is far from that, because its interpretation is disputed. Many - I daresay the majority of commentators - understand it to refer to the fall of Jerusalem in AD70.

 

 

Here we go again with this "Majority".   Well Consensus (Majority) doesn't = TRUTH and please list this "majority", show names please and CITE References.....?

 

 

You obviously realise that otherwise you won't mention Luke 21.  You have to argue that Jesus in Mt and Lk was talking about two different things. Where is the warrant for that?

 

 

It's not all I have sir, SEE the questions you skipped above....it's Metric Tons.

 

Actually, I knew this was where you were going from the beginning....it's all you "seemingly" have Scripturally to support "Your" theory.  But as I said, it's a mirage (resulting from the lack of attention to detail)....

 

 

 

Luke's Account is in the Temple during the Day apparently between Jesus all the Disciples and followers....

(Luke 21:5-6) "And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,  {6}  As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

(Luke 21:9-12) "But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by.  {10} Then said he unto them,  Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:

{11}  And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.  {12}  BUT BEFORE ALL THESE, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake."

Matthew's Account (Olivet Discourse) is a Private Meeting on the Mount of Olives @ Night between Jesus, Peter, James, John, and Andrew.

(Matthew 24:7-9) " {7}  For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.  {8}  All these are the beginning of sorrows.

{9}  THEN SHALL THEY deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake."

 

The same signs are stated in both accounts; However, after mentioning the same signs, Luke says "Before all these", then an explanation of events; Matthew says "Then shall they".... After.

Luke's Account............ Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. 

Matthew's Account...... End of Days.

 

**Moreover, The Pivotal/Key Event in the Olivet Discourse is the Abomination of Desolation....Please show The Abomination of Desolation in Luke?

 

 

Therefore, if Luke indicates Dan 9:27 is fulfilled in AD70, that is good enough for me.

 

 

Therefore, if Luke 21 Indicates the Destruction of Jerusalem (which it does) and Matthew 24 Indicates the "End Times" (which it does) and both can be differentiated in Time, Space, and Content (which they can, SEE above) your position is Colossally Untenable (which it is) not only without Scripture Support but... Scriptures (Entire Books!) that Literally and Summarily Refute your position IN TOTO.

[seandavids]

 

 

 

I've never been able to understand how the angel came to enlighten Daniel for greater understanding of the meaning of the vision and the vision was completely and fully about what the antichrist (false annointed messiah) would do when he came

 

and somehow theologians have decided Daniel 9:24-27 is a picture of both Jesus and the antichrist

 

 

at the very least, since there is no separation in the passage its either fully about Jesus or fully about the antichrist one or the other! spitting the ownership of verses is bad hermeneutics

 

 

Most translations split the identity. We are so used to the KJV and the NIV that its a barely noticed fact that most Hebrew scholars have two characters and not one. The fact that the wording of the second character fits in so perfectly with the abomination/antichrist descriptions of the NT clarifies that the second character is the antichrist.   The first character appears at the same timing of the coming of the anointed one (end of 69 = beginning of 70). He strengthens a covenant, then 3.5 years later puts an end to sacrifice.   Jesus did exactly that , to look for a second fulfilment is pretty weak when Jesus himself fulfilled these in such a dramatic manner.    Talk about world -changing moments --- Jesus confirms the Messiah sent to earth - fulfilling the expectations of Judaism, then 3.5 years later Jesus gives himself as the final gift of sacrifice giving life to all mankind.

 

27 And he shall enter into a strong and firm covenant with the many for one week [seven years]. And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and offering to cease [for the remaining three and one-half years]; and upon the wing or pinnacle of abominations [shall come] one who makes desolate, until the full determined end is poured out on the desolator.

 

Two characters.....not one.

 

then again when a second temple is built and the sacrifices are once again reinstated and the Jew's begin to once again practice their historic religion then the whole stopping of the sacrifice by some antichrist character will make perfect sense

 

but what makes even more sense is looking closely at what the ORIGINAL VISION was about! the angel gives Daniel an interpretation that is fully about the antichrist, the angel returns to give Daniel further understanding about THE SAME VISION! the one that was completely about the antichrist

 

the vision had absolutely nothing to do with Jesus and what Jesus would do it was all about the false messiah

 

It would be like taking your lawn mower instruction manual and using it to fix your dish washer

 

 

Well I completely disagree. Its all about Jesus until Daniel 9:27b.  To make your point your must lay out a comparison, showing your understanding of the "Jesus" view, and showing where the "antichrist" view is stronger.

I believe the Jesus view is stronger because the first prince is obviously Jesus (anointed prince) and grammar would favor the second prince being the same character. Furthermore it was Jews from Galilee that morally and physically ruined the temple and the city before the Romans even arrived. The historian Josephus records this clearly. These Jews destroyed buildings, destroyed the economy, and slaughtered the priests.  Jerusalem was in ruin. 

Jesus , at the timing of the coming of the anointed one, confirmed God's promise to send a Messiah (gave strength to the promise). Jesus ministered for 3.5 years and then put an end to sacrifice by being the final sacrifice.  

 

So my view fits perfectly, maybe your view fits perfectly too, explain why your view is superior?

 

 

ps you say the stopping of the sacrifice will make sense per your view. But what if the sacrifices never stop?   Right until the second coming?  The antichrist comes to power as per 2 Thess 2, then deceives the world for 3.5 years until the second coming, including deceiving the Jews. 

Remember the beast only has power for 42 months, not 84 months:

5 And the beast was given the power of speech, uttering boastful and blasphemous words, and he was given freedom to exert his authority and to exercise his will during forty-two months

 

well for starters you have needed to change the word weeks to mean years, in my interpretation the weeks actually remain the word given by God, thus you begin your whole interpretation by changing the word of God to fit your theory

 

It should be noted that God calls Cyrus his Anointed and Cyrus was a pagan king

Edited December 11, 2014 by seandavids