Defense of the Post-Trib / Pre-Wrath Position

[Montana Marv]

When I look at the 70th Week, it is divided at the middle of the Week.  The first half (a time of peace for the leaders, all follow him) is a "tribulation" for those who become 70th Week saints.  The second half (chaos) is the time of "Great Distress" or Great Tribulation" as described in Matt 24:21.  Gods Wrath is poured out (Rev 8:13b - Woe, Woe, Woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the trumpet blasts about to be sounded by the other three angels.) later into the time of "Great Distress".

In Christ

Montana Marv

[Marcus O'Reillius]

23 hours ago, WilliamL said:

And this is where we agree in part, and disagree in part. It is certainly not the Tribulation Period, agreed.

William:

The whole "Trib" issue is fraught with all kinds of speculation, starting with the medieval idea of the four horseman be harbingers of God's desolations, so much so - that they became the symbol of God's desolations.
In my opinion, the four horsemen have been loose for over a century and a half starting with the Industrial Revolution, which made possible the bloodiest century of war in Man's history: the 20th.

23 hours ago, WilliamL said:

However, it has nothing to do with the End Times, being already completely fulfilled within the Jewish War of 66-73 AD: this is where we disagree.

Actually, it has everything to do with the end-times.

Partial Preterism, which is what you're advancing, is not Pre-Wrath, which is also Pre-Millennial.  George could add two additional categories in the never-ending arguing over eschatologies: Defense of Preterism, and Defense of Amillennialism.  
Two more might be Defense of Partial Preterism, and Defense of Post-Millennialism.
And if you ever want to see a knock-down, drag-out, down-and-dirty fight between two Christians calling each other heretic, put a Full Preterist together with a Partial Preterist.

Let's go back to the source for the one 'seven' and the end-times.

Daniel 9:26 Then after the sixty- two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. NASB 

The first verse has three things which after the sixty-two sevens but before "its" end.  This is the "gap" in Daniel 9:24-27.  The "end" relates to the whole seventy 'sevens' - which as a punishment actually comes from Leviticus 26:18.

• The Messiah, not prince, will be cut off.  The word here is karat.  It means to cut off like cutting down a tree.   To those who speculate on an heir to Jesus, the language here can also be used to say that the lineage which resulted in our Kingly Priest stops with Him.  The whole Da Vinci code theory is bunk in my opinion.  karat also means to "cut" a deal, which requires a blood oath.  This Jesus did.
• The people (who define where the prince who shall come from) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.  This happened with the First Jewish Revolt.  (Yes, First, there was a Second.  Neither Israel nor Rome was utterly destroyed in the first century).  This follows the sixty-two 'sevens' by about four decades.  This puts a "gap" into even Preterist eschatology even though they'd like to say it's all been done (which is what Preterism means).  The Romans destroyed the city and the sanctuary in A.D. 70.  This marks the book of Daniel as prophetic.  (Critics say Daniel's near-term prophecy in chapter 11 is actually an historical account written after the fact because it is so accurate: this though, proves Daniel was prophetic.)  It is from the Romans that we can look for the origin of the end-time "prince" which Daniel writes about so much in various forms.
• Wars continue until the end in the second statement of this first verse.  This is a huge statement.  In the Trumpets, there is war.  The final battle in the cosmic war between God and Man happens at Armageddon.  War has been a continual state of Man ever since.  Even the First Jewish Revolt, which Preterists like to say was the worst ever - doesn't even rate a blimp on the radar scope of history - coming during the time referred to as the "Roman Peace" or Pax Romanus.  The "end" comes like a "flood."  This is also the descriptive language used in the latter portion of Daniel 11:40, (after the other reference to abomination/desolation which is the lens of dual focus, shifting from Daniel's near-term with the Ptolemies to the far-term of the end-times) for how the end comes to be.  This has considerable weight with which we might be able to interpret on wing which comes in the next verse.  So war is a continual state, but the end comes very quickly.  In other words, when the anti-Christ gobbles up the whole world, it will be with war but also quite suddenly, all at once.

Now that is my analysis.  I don't know how people can ignore that or just plow on and think it's all happened before based on that.
I am especially flummoxed when Preterists want to say it's all been done by A.D. 70 but then insist there is no gap - when they themselves put a forty-year gap into the end!

Daniel 9:27 And he wll make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate."  NASB

This second verse defines the one 'seven'.
In the first verse cited here, Gabriel takes us from the sixty-two 'sevens' unto the "end" describing it as coming like a flood.
The other fact Gabriel gives us in the first verse is that "desolations have been determined.  This I think, are the Trumpet and Bowl Judgments of the Scroll of Rev 5.
Now, in perfect harmony with Revelation chapter 16, those Bowl Judgments are also poured out on the one who makes desolate - i.e, the anti-Christ culminating at Armageddon.

Some word difficulties in 9:27.

• The verb gabar has been messed up ever since the KJV when they took the verb form of gabar and translated it in line with its adjective form: to be strong.  So many take 'confirm' as a positive from its modern connotation, that they assign it to Jesus.  This is a grave error in my opinion.  As a verb, gabar means to prevail.  Most notably by military might.  In one stem in the Hebrew OT, it is used quite negatively: to stand up in defiance to God!  It is very important to note that Jesus never used His Might to usher in the New Covenant, but shed His Blood (karat) upon the Cross for us.  Nor is the New Covenant limited to seven years, but you can say there is a "last call" to Salvation when the first of three Angels proclaim the Gospel - and then the end shall come as Jesus said in Mt 24:15.  The subject of gabar is expressed in its third-person, singular conjugation.  The implied pronoun 'he' then refers to the last person mentioned - which is the prince who shall come from the people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary.  This is exactly in line with other prophecy contained in Daniel from the Man in Linen for the "King of the North."
• on wing abominations desolation, highlighted, italicized, and underlined in the middle clause is all that is written in that section.  All other verbiage is added as a way of translation to try to make sense of a preposition and three nouns.  Like MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN in Daniel 5, these four words have given Bible version translators fits in trying to decipher.
• As to the first: on wing, the NIV circa 1990 does a horrible job, saying on a wing of the Temple... when there is no physical "wing" to the Temple building - but they do, rightly in my opinion, associate the abomination(s) with the Temple.  The later 2010 NIV version fixes that.  The KJV actually does something good here, but they also miss the point in my opinion.  The KJV takes a symbolic approach and takes on wing to be the overspreading of abominations.  This is because a wing can shelter or cover an area.  This symbolic translation misses the mark though.  Allow me to provide a new idea which the KJV inspired - the end comes quickly - another attribute of a wing.  The end comes like a flood: all at once.  Likewise, on time's winged chariot, is a metaphor for how quickly time passes.  So too, quickly, on wing, the abomination(s) (is set), as Jesus details in the Olivet Discourse - in the Temple, or "Holy Place."
• abominations: the word here is in the plural with the suffix of -im.  While in the Hebrew this means multiple, it also can be interpreted as showing how great, or how terrible in the negative, something is.  An abomination in the Bible relates to idols.  This idol may be multiple, or, conversely, it may be the worst ever.  One dismissal Isaiah taunts pagans with in their idol worship is that their blocks of wood and stone can't speak.   However, in Revelation 13:14-15, we now can relate this abomination(s) to a talking image of a man!  This makes this particular idol, which Jesus says is in the "Holy Place" - or inside the Temple - as being the worst idol ever!  It speaks!
• desolation: this comes from the adjective: desolate.  By adding a prefix me- the Hebrew changes the adjective to a noun: desolation.  Here the NASB says one who makes desolate... which is their attempt to make sense of this third noun without any verbs in the clause to show action.  The word for desolation - mesommen - is also used at the end of the verse as the object upon which God's Judgment is poured out.  Here is an important theological point: God's Judgment is not rendered upon a condition (being desolate) but only upon entities - spirits or souls.  So the NASB rightly points to the same "one" which is their interjection here for a person.  This then helps explain the phrase they used before - they are pointing to God's Judgment being directed at the anti-Christ - the one who is responsible for the abomination in the first place - which is a talking image of himself.  He is the desolator.

While Gabriel already got to "the end" in 9:26, he now goes back a little and in parallel fashion, gives us the "details" of the end with the one 'seven.'  The "end" mentioned in 9:26 is concluded with the end of the 9:27 when God's Judgment is poured out upon the desolator.

This is important: Daniel 9:26 and 9:27 overlap - they both go to the end.

So that the three conditions, Jesus cut off, city and sanctuary destroyed, and war continues - set up a "gap" now of nearly two thousand years.  This "gap" can also be found in Hosea 6:2, along with the Millennium.  This "gap" is the growing season for the Church, allowing for a Great Multitude of souls to come to believe in Him, and so inherit their eternal life in Heaven.

My interpretation of Daniel 9:27
To start the one 'seven', an insider, the little horn of Daniel, rises from within the fourth terrible beast and through military might like how the European-based Western nations have forced Israel along the "Roadmap" to give up the Gaza Strip, will prevail an agreement with many, and ostensibly with Israel.  One of the conditions which we can see resulting from that is the rebuilding of the Temple in accordance with Ezekiel and Revelation 11:1-2.  After the Jews (Christians don't need it) resume their Ritual Worship of YHWH, the false prophet will set up a talking image of the conquering anti-Christ in tribute to him.  This is the trip-wire whereupon "Mikael" arises, and in the end, He destroys (but doesn't immediately kill) the anti-Christ.

Now if you want to say it's all been done, then the onus is on you to show how history comports with Daniel 9:26-27.  I've looked at it.  I've acquired, read, and studies Josepheus' history.  It's not there.  The Preterist position, either Full or Partial, remains the weakest eschatology of all in my opinion.  I do not think this post will change your mind.  I've never seen a person who posts do anything like that.  This post is meant to help the reader understand how a Pre-Wrath student constructs their particular brand of eschatology and it is offered here in defense of Pre-Wrath.

Here is a picture form of Daniel 9:26 showing 9:27 at the end.

 

Edited June 9, 2016 by Marcus O'Reillius

[WilliamL]

3 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

Partial Preterism, which is what you're advancing...

It is no more Preterism to say that the 70th week of Daniel 9 has been fulfilled, than it is Preterism to say that most of Daniel 2's prophecy, Daniel 7's prophecy, and Daniel 11's prophecy have been fulfilled. Or, for that matter, that the first 69 weeks of Daniel have been fulfilled.

Nothing in the 70 weeks prophecy uses overtly End Times' language; people have just assumed it, because other have taught it for so long. You, like Marvin Rosenthal, have correctly reviewed the whole pre-trib argument and correctly found it faulty; but like him, you have neglected to do the same with the 70 weeks prophecy. Instead, you have come into your study with a presumption, and that presumption has led you into a biased reading.

Because I am on a library computer, not my own, from which I can cut and paste, I will get back to this later. Suffice it to say for now that the Hebrew verb tenses connect the person who destroyed Jerusalem and Temple in verse 26 with the person who made the covenant in verse 27: they were the same man who "caused" (Hiphil tense) both.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

55 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

the person who destroyed Jerusalem and Temple in verse 26 with the person who made the covenant in verse 27: they were the same man who "caused" (Hiphil tense) both.

Titus destroyed the city and the sanctuary.  He is not named by Gabriel in the book of Daniel.  He did not prevail a covenant with many by his military might which lasted seven years; that is an historic fact.

Conversely, the people who did destroy the Temple, i.e., Titus and his Legion: the Romans - then dictate the origin for the "ruler who will come."  That would be AFTER A.D. 70, and that is by logic as stated by Gabriel.  It does not depend upon verb stem.  It is this actor after A.D. 70 who prevails a covenant with many, which ostensibly concerns Israel as a nation, and that did not happen before Rome wiped Israel out as a nation with the Second Jewish Revolt, renaming the region, Palestine to boot for good measure; insult following injury - nor has it happened since Israel has been reformed - which is also something never seen before in history.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Furthermore, the wording in Hebrew of Daniel 9:27 (which has siqqusim mesomen: the plural abomination(s) desolation) Daniel 11:31 (which has it as hasiqqus mesomen: the abomination desolation - singular and specific) and Daniel 12:11 (which is written in the most generic fashion siqqus somen: abomination desolate) is cited by Jesus in the Olivet Discourse as preceding His Return.

And if that is not enough, and it never will be with some people, the true nature of the terrible abomination, so great it ranks plurality, is the talking image of the beast from the sea (the Mediterranean, i.e., Europe: Rome) is revealed by Jesus to John some two decades after the First Jewish Revolt.

To try and say the seventy 'sevens' are concluded is not borne out by the totality of Scripture.  Only by taking Daniel piecemeal, can that be said, and prophecy is more linked than not.

[WilliamL]

9:26  וְאַחֲרֵי הַשָּׁבֻעִים שִׁשִּׁים וּשְׁנַיִם יִכָּרֵת מָשִׁיחַ וְאֵין לֹו וְהָעִיר וְהַקֹּדֶשׁ יַשְׁחִית עַם נָגִיד הַבָּא וְקִצֹּו בַשֶּׁטֶף וְעַד קֵץ מִלְחָמָה נֶחֱרֶצֶת שֹׁמֵמֹֽות׃

וְאַחֲרֵי and after  הַשָּׁבֻעִים the heptads/weeks  וּשְׁנַיִם  60 שִׁשִּׁים and 2  יִכָּרֵת shall be cut off [Niphal Imperfect]   מָשִׁיחַ Messiah  וְאֵין but not  לֹו for himself;

And after the 62 weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for himself;

וְהָעִיר and the city  וְהַקֹּדֶשׁ and the sanctuary  יַשְׁחִית he shall cause to destroy [Hiphil/causative Imperfect 3ms: with active voice]  עַם people  נָגִיד leader/ruler/captain/prince  הַבָּא the coming [Qal active participle: verbal adjective]   וְקִצֹּו  and its end  בַשֶּׁטֶף with a flood   וְעַד and unto   קֵץ end  מִלְחָמָה of war  נֶחֱרֶצֶת being decreed/determined [Niphal passive participle]  שֹׁמֵמֹֽות desolations [Qal active Participle, plural]

And the coming ruler shall cause his people to destroy the city and the sanctuary; and its end [shall come] with a flood [of attackers]; and unto [the] end of [the] war desolations being/are decreed.

 

9:27   וְהִגְבִּיר בְּרִית לָרַבִּים שָׁבוּעַ אֶחָד וַחֲצִי הַשָּׁבוּעַ יַשְׁבִּית זֶבַח וּמִנְחָה וְעַל כְּנַף שִׁקּוּצִים מְשֹׁמֵם וְעַד־כָּלָה וְנֶחֱרָצָה תִּתַּךְ עַל־שֹׁמֵֽם׃ פ

וְהִגְבִּיר and he will have caused to confirm/prevail/make firm [Hiphil /causative Perfect/completed action, future 3ms]  בְּרִית a covenant [no the/ה]  לָרַבִּים for many  שָׁבוּעַ heptad/week  אֶחָד one  וַחֲצִי and amidst  הַשָּׁבוּעַ the week  יַשְׁבִּית he will cause to cease [Hiphil Imperfect 3ms]   זֶבַח sacrifice  וּמִנְחָה and oblation  וְעַל and upon  כְּנַף a wing/corner/extremity  שִׁקּוּצִים abominations/idolatries   מְשֹׁמֵם very apalling/desolating/devastating [Polel/intensive participle: verbal adjective]   וְעַד־ even until   כָּלָה a complete end/consummation  וְנֶחֱרָצָה even/which/that having been decreed/determined [Niphal participle]   תִּתַּךְ shall be poured out/forth [Qal Imperfect]   עַל upon   שֹׁמֵֽם a desolating one [Qal active participle: verbal noun].

And he [the coming ruler] will have caused to make firm a covenant for many one week; and mid-week he will cause to cease sacrifice and oblation/offering; and upon a wing/corner/extremity [of the Temple complex] devastating abominations/idolatries [shall occur]; even unto a complete consummation that has been decreed shall be poured out upon a desolator.      

What was this decree, and who decrees it? Jesus:

Matt. 23:29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! ... 35 ...upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 Truly I tell you, all this will come on this generation. ... 38 Behold, your house [i.e. the Temple] is left to you desolate."

Luke 21:20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. ... 22 “For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written [only in Daniel 9:26-27] may be fulfilled."

Who was the coming ruler who was to cause -- that is, to establish the policy of the Roman military occupation of Judea  -- his people to destroy the city and the sanctuary, and to make a covenant with many Jews for one week/7 years? The only possible answer is Vespasian, who commanded precisely all of these things.

What was the covenant he caused to be established? Josephus tells us his policy:

Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War, Preface 8: “[Vespasian] took…some of its [Galilee’s] cities by treaties, and on terms.”  III:ii:4: “…the inhabitants of Sepphoris…the largest city of Galilee…received Vespasian, the Roman general, very kindly, and readily promised that they would assist him…”  III:ix:8: “Now the seniors of the people [of Tiberius]…fell down before Vespasian, to supplicate his favor… Vespasian…accepted of their rights hands by way of security…[and] the citizens opened to him their gates…”]

During the Jewish War of 66-73 AD, Vespasian established the policy of keeping covenant with those of the Jews who rejected the rebellion against Rome, and who would confirm the long-standing Pax Romana in the Holy Land, whereby the Romans were acknowledged to be in control of all civil government.

 

On 6/9/2016 at 1:05 PM, Marcus O'Reillius said:

To try and say the seventy 'sevens' are concluded is not borne out by the totality of Scripture.

On the contrary, the totality of Daniel 9:26-27 is in perfect accord with the precise events that transpired within the Jewish War of 66-73 AD.

 

 

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

The sticking point for me to say that Daniel 9:27 was fulfilled after a gap of 40 years is that it 1. Violates the three conditions Gabriel gives in verse 26, the second of which you pin the end to for v. 27.  The second part of this first complaint is that war continues until the end - of the seventy 'sevens'.  We still have war.   There will be war in the Trumpet Judgments.

2. Jesus links the same midpoint abomination of 9:27 to the Great Tribulation which is immediately followed by (because in my opinion it brings it to a close): the Sun/moon/star event - which precedes the Day of the Lord.

So despite the use of 'desolate' which is not the same as desolator, or desolation, and despite of using an arcane translation of gabar for Vespasian did in managing conquered land, and despite the Hiphel stem which only gives the type of action and does not convey linage to a single actor - I disagree most wholeheartedly.

[Diaste]

4 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

The sticking point for me to say that Daniel 9:27 was fulfilled after a gap of 40 years is that it 1. Violates the three conditions Gabriel gives in verse 26, the second of which you pin the end to for v. 27.  The second part of this first complaint is that war continues until the end - of the seventy 'sevens'.  We still have war.   There will be war in the Trumpet Judgments.

2. Jesus links the same midpoint abomination of 9:27 to the Great Tribulation which is immediately followed by (because in my opinion it brings it to a close): the Sun/moon/star event - which precedes the Day of the Lord.

So despite the use of 'desolate' which is not the same as desolator, or desolation, and despite of using an arcane translation of gabar for Vespasian did in managing conquered land, and despite the Hiphel stem which only gives the type of action and does not convey linage to a single actor - I disagree most wholeheartedly.

I agree. Too many events that have not yet occurred that are closely associated with the A of D for a preterist view to be valid. Most notably, as you said, the Day of the Lord.

[WilliamL]

On 6/11/2016 at 6:55 PM, Diaste said:

 

On 6/11/2016 at 2:06 PM, Marcus O'Reillius said:

The sticking point for me to say that Daniel 9:27 was fulfilled after a gap of 40 years is that it 1. Violates the three conditions Gabriel gives in verse 26, the second of which you pin the end to for v. 27.  The second part of this first complaint is that war continues until the end - of the seventy 'sevens'.  We still have war.   There will be war in the Trumpet Judgments.

2. Jesus links the same midpoint abomination of 9:27 to the Great Tribulation which is immediately followed by (because in my opinion it brings it to a close): the Sun/moon/star event - which precedes the Day of the Lord.

So despite the use of 'desolate' which is not the same as desolator, or desolation, and despite of using an arcane translation of gabar for Vespasian did in managing conquered land, and despite the Hiphel stem which only gives the type of action and does not convey linage to a single actor - I disagree most wholeheartedly.

I agree. Too many events that have not yet occurred that are closely associated with the A of D for a preterist view to be valid. Most notably, as you said, the Day of the Lord.

 

What I wrote has nothing whatsoever to do with a Preterist view: straw man argument.

Marcus, your point #1 is pretty ambiguous. But to say that it takes a prophecy about a specific event -- the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple,, and the events associated with it -- and then interjects into it a prophecy about all time -- the end of war -- is simply not supported by the context.

2. Jesus said nothing at all about any "midpoint": you are adding your own presumption into the Word.

The fact remains that the Hebrew syntax does not allow the "coming ruler" of verse 26 to be separated from being the very one who causes the events of verse 27. The same ruler causes to destroy the city and sanctuary, and also causes to make, or confirm, or make firm a covenant with many in that very same "week."

And the final fact remains that neither of you have shown any real knowledge of Hebrew, apart from what you can glean from lexicons. Since neither of you understand either Hebraic verb parsing or syntax, you are both just interjecting your own presumptions into the text.

[WilliamL]

On 6/9/2016 at 1:05 PM, Marcus O'Reillius said:

Furthermore, the wording in Hebrew of Daniel 9:27 (which has siqqusim mesomen: the plural abomination(s) desolation) Daniel 11:31 (which has it as hasiqqus mesomen: the abomination desolation - singular and specific) and Daniel 12:11 (which is written in the most generic fashion siqqus somen: abomination desolate) is cited by Jesus in the Olivet Discourse as preceding His Return.

Just to clarify:

Daniel 9:27 took place during the 7-year Jewish War of 66-73 AD, and marked the end of the 70 weeks prophecy. Nothing in that prophecy uses any classic End Time terminology.

Daniel 11:31 was fulfilled by Antiochus Epiphanes in 168 BC. The history of that general era, the Seleucid monarchy, is precisely followed from Daniel 11:5 up through verse 32 at the very least. All competent biblical historians acknowledge this.

Daniel 12:11 is the ONLY verse that prophesies about the End Time "abomination of desolation" spoken of by Jesus in Matt. 24:15. Daniel 12:11 is part of an End Time prophecy that begins in 11:40 -- "at the time of the end" -- and NOTHING in the passage up through the end of chapter 12 mentions a Temple in Jerusalem, nor sacrifices and offerings, nor the destruction of the temple or the city. Neither does any other biblical End Time prophecy mention the destruction of Jerusalem and Temple.