Understanding the Final One Seven

[Retrobyter]

14 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

No.

And we should not confuse the meaning of gabar, as you attempt to spin the word, when used as an adjective with its meaning when used as a verb.  As you know, but don't elaborate upon in your argument for "confirm" - Hebrew words often do double-duty, and even have triple meanings.  Especially tricky are the numerous times when the original author uses a verbless string of nouns.  Discerning meaning and application at those times is difficult to pinpoint as there may a variety of possibilities, but only one correct answer - which is succinctly expressed by such an array of nouns without specified action or actors.  And as God's Word is extremely brief, we can see His Wisdom in Shakespeare's quote that "Brevity is the soul of wit."  Also, such nebulous messages at times confirms that we are to seek Him; eschatology does not have one concise, include-all, complete rendition for us to instantly know all.

I can understand how the Ammillennial perspective of early 17th century scholars, working in isolation, by candlelight, led them to adopt an archaic definition of "confirm" to gabar.  When they are not looking for a future fulfillment, their interpretation in translating this passage negates any relative translation which would conflict with their basic view that the Kingdom of Christ has been accomplished.  Thus, as Ammillennialism is not future-thinking, but looks at such end-time within a figurative perspective, they can readily dismiss a literal, future application.  Their interpretation of the passage influences their translation of the passage.  Their figurative bias shows itself in their translation of "on wing" as "overspreading".  This actually aided me in my understanding of this prepositional phrase as meaning "quickly."  So not everything in other views is necessarily bad.  However, in a couple of instances, the King James version translators, have 'set the bar' on several key Christian concepts which has led to the formation of a young earth based on six days of creation, and the notion that Jesus somehow confirms a covenant...  We should not put these men on the pedestal of God's Truth and say they were divinely inspired and so accept their version on par with the Gospel.

This is the ONLY place the modern KJV translates this important, critical verb as such.  The other place the original KJV authors did this has been updated in the last century to prevail as well, as people misconstrued the word meaning in the Psalms because we simply don't use 'confirm' in that manner any more.

But gabar in Hebrew, simply does not mean confirm.  There is a perfectly good word that means confirm.  Let me get my concordance to find it, ah yes, here it is: qum, H6965, to arise, stand up; mala, H4390, to be full; and kun, H3559, to be firm.  That last one fits the bill for which you're trying to prevail in how you will spin a word to mean what you want it to say.

Now Gabriel did not use any of those words for the action which initiates the one 'seven'.
_________________________________________

Let's look at how prevail can describe how an evil, Machiavellian politician can rise up from within and cause things to happen which act as the tripwire for God's response.
Coincident with Daniel 9:27's start is the rise of a beast of a nation in Rev 13:2, and the rise of a beast of a man in Rev 13:4.  
He will exercise authority for the first half of the one 'seven' in Rev 13:5, and he will oppress us in Rev 13:7.

In perfect symmetry to Daniel 9:27, after introducing the beast from the land, (Israel) - the false prophet, we see the midpoint abomination as the talking image of the man who would proclaim himself god - the talking idol of Rev 13:14-15.  That this idol speaks! - is the cause for the magnitude of this abomination being emphasized in the Hebrew by its use of the plural suffix.

In perfect symmetry to the Olivet Discourse, because Jesus is the author of both, in Rev 13:15-16 we see the genesis of two laws which make the Great Tribulation so terrible that if God the Father had not shortened those days - none of the Elect (who are all that matter) would survive.  (The wicked are under no such threat of extermination by the anti-Christ and his forces as they willing worship the talking idol and take the mark of the beast.)

In a way, we can say that Revelation chapter 13 CONFIRMS a futuristic reading of Daniel 9:27's first and second clauses: the beginning and midpoint of the one 'seven'.
Scripture cannot be broken.

Also, from the sidebar account within the book of Revelation of 11:1-13, we can see where the Temple is rebuilt with the first half of the one 'seven' so that there is a physical building as Paul describes in 2Th 2, which matches what Jesus said in Mt 24:15 for the "Holy Place" - to be where the talking image of Rev 13 is set.
___________________________________________

All in all, you cannot show by action in Scripture, where Jesus legally fortifies an Old Testament Covenant so as to make it stronger - which would mean it would become the overriding factor for us - for just seven years.

It's not there despite your insistence that this must have been done.  You can't show me chapter and verse which actually says He confirms any OT Covenant.  It's not the affirmation that the Father gives at His Baptism.  That may reflect a Catholic idea of "confirmation" but it does not convey in any sense of the word, a ratification of the OT Covenants.
___________________________________________

Now - Jesus DID RATIFY a Covenant: THE NEW COVENANT - and He did that by the shedding of His Blood on the Cross - He CUT A DEAL when He LAID DOWN HIS LIFE.
His death was NOT an abomination.
The fleeing of the presence of God from the Most Holy Place most certainly left "their house" desolate because now their worship is meaningless.
We, however, have a means to worship in Spirit, through the Counselor - which transcends the OT Covenants - which are still enforce and will be fulfilled through Christ Jesus, our Hero and Savior.

HOWEVER AGAIN - the New Covenant in no way fulfills Daniel 9:27's end clauses for complete destruction (as will result from the Trumpet and Bowl Judgments) and also again being poured out on the very actor who 1. initiates the one 'seven' and 2. causes the midpoint abomination!
___________________________________________

The Preterist view on Daniel 9:27 is warm and fuzzy.  It makes us feel good on a very superficial level.
However, it cannot withstand any real scrutiny for fulfillment with either Scripture or history.

Shalom, Marcus.

Okay, now you're just being purposefully stubborn and short-sighted.

First, let's just get one thing out of the way: The translators of the King James Authorized Version of the Bible were NOT "working in isolation by candlelight!" What? You've never heard of the SUN?! Come into the light, my friend! They were COMMISSIONED by King James I of England to do this work, however long it took! They were being SUPPORTED to work on this project! Therefore, they didn't have to do this when they were doing something else during the day! THIS WAS THEIR JOB! They worked on it IN THE DAYLIGHT! And, they COLLABORATED! They CHECKED EACH OTHER'S WORK! You're painting a word picture of them that isn't true!

Furthermore, they often didn't follow the Anglican belief system if they discovered that their work contradicted the status quo. That's why they formed the word "baptize." The Anglican belief about baptism was that of pouring at the time, not immersion. However, the text used the word "baptizoo," meaning "I immerse!" To stay true to the text and not to offend the king, they TRANSLITERATED the word into "baptize."

The current work to which believers adhered at that time was the Geneva Bible, and as the translators, they had access to that Bible as well as other versions and the earliest known manuscripts at that time to form their translation. You don't know that they were Amillennialists any more than you know they believed in pouring!

The King James Authorized Version was a word-for-word translation effort, not a thought-for-thought translation. They were not as prone to introducing their own beliefs into their translation as you suggest.

"We should not put these men on the pedestal of God's Truth and say they were divinely inspired and so accept their version on par with the Gospel"? Perhaps not, but you cannot deny that this particular version of the Bible has been God's Word to MILLIONS for over 400 years! Like it or not, it was probably the ONLY Bible your parents and grandparents knew! It certainly was for mine! It has been blessed by God to withstand the many audacious claims of men and women from the 17th Century to the 20th Century (and beyond). It was certainly the Bible that was instrumental in my justification by God ("salvation"), and it was probably used for yours, as well (depending on how old you are in Christ).

OT:1396 "gaaVar" ("Gabar") means "to make strong" or "to strengthen." PERIOD. When it is used in a COMPARATIVE way, THEN it means "to prevail (over); to win (over); to be stronger (than)."
OT:3559 "kuwn" ("kun") means "to be erect."
OT:4390 "maalee' " or "maalaa' " ("mala") means "to fill" or "to be full of."
OT:5975 " `aamad" ("amad") means "to stand."
OT:6965 "quwm" ("qum") means "to rise" having to do with "height!"

Whatever word is used, CONTEXT is the key! How is that word being used! Do you know WHY the translators chose "confirm" instead of "prevail?" It's because there was NOTHING in the text which the subject was "overcoming!" And, the noun, by the way, has to be the "Messiah" of verse 26! Don't like it? TOO BAD! The "prince that shall come" is the OBJECT OF A PREPOSITION! IT CANNOT PARTICIPATE AS THE SUBJECT OF THE SENTENCE! (In Hebrew, it is the SUBORDINATE NOUN in the noun construct state! IT ALSO CANNOT PARTICIPATE AS THE SUBJECT OF THE SENTENCE!)

Regarding Matthew 24:15, the words "ye shall see" are translated from "ideete," the future, plural, second-person form of the word "eidoo." He was talking to His disciples STANDING OR SITTING RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF HIM! THEY were the ones who would see this! The contextual clues in the verses to follow suggest the first century! "Fleeing to the hills (mountains) to hide?" "Remaining upon the housetop when one should be getting away?" "Staying in the fields outside the city walls rather than re-entering the city?" NONE of this makes any sense in a modern world! It DID however make sense in THEIR world! And, why should they pray that their escape "not be in the winter" or "ON THE SABBATH DAY?" What difference would THAT make to a non-Jew?

I have no problem with there being a temple when Yeshua` returns. He SAID there would be one when He quoted Psalm 118:26 in Matthew 23:37-39! Kinda hard to welcome Yeshua` "out of the house of the LORD" if there is no house of the LORD! Once again, you're confusing me with a Preterist! I am a FUTURIST, specifically a PREMILLENNIALIST! I just don't claim any of the subcategories, although the POSTMILLENNIAL RAPTURE comes the closest. At worst (best?), I claim to be a "PARTIAL Preterist" only in the sense that I believe that the Olivet Discourse started to be fulfilled in the first century A.D. However, I also believe that Yeshua` said the "tribulation" wouldn't be over until His return!

You said, "All in all, you cannot show by action in Scripture, where Jesus legally fortifies an Old Testament Covenant so as to make it stronger - which would mean it would become the overriding factor for us - for just seven years." YES, I CAN! It is the DAVIDIC COVENANT which was fortified, and Yeshua` did it simply by presenting Himself for immersion by Yochanan! Elohiym His Father said, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased!" This fulfilled the Davidic Covenant when God said,

2 Samuel 7:10-16
10 Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime,
11 And as since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies. Also the Lord telleth thee that he will make thee an house.
12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:
15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.
16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
KJV

1 Chronicles 17:11-14
11 And it shall come to pass, when thy days be expired that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons (PLURAL); and I will establish his kingdom.
12 He shall build me an house, and I will stablish his throne for ever.
13 I will be his father, and he shall be my son: and I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was before thee:
14 But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever: and his throne shall be established for evermore.
KJV

And, this was confirmed in Luke 1:30-33:

Luke 1:30-33
30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
KJV

Did you know that the word for "Seven" ("Week") in Hebrew is "ShaaVuwa`'"?

OT:7620 shaaVuwa` (shaw-boo'-ah); or shaaVua` (shaw-boo'-ah); also (feminine) sheVu`aah (sheb-oo-aw'); properly, passive participle of OT:7650 as a denominative of OT:7651; literal, sevened, i.e. a week (specifically, of years):
KJV - seven, week.

OT:7650 shaaVa` (shaw-bah'); a primitive root; propr. to be complete, but used only as a denominative from OT:7651; to seven oneself, i.e. swear (as if by repeating a declaration seven times):
KJV - adjure, charge (by an oath, with an oath), feed to the full [by mistake for OT:7646], take an oath,  straitly, (cause to, make to) swear.

(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

Psalm 89:3-4
3 I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant,
4 Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations. Selah.
KJV

Acts 2:25-32
25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:
26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:
27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.
29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
KJV

[Marcus O'Reillius]

3 hours ago, ghtan said:

Perhaps you can specify where in Revelation you as a mid-tribber saw the rapture happening and where you see it happening now.

The real key was not the book of Revelation, but the Olivet Discourse.

In it, Jesus gives five specific and unique events which directly leads to our rescue (which is a sixth specific and unique event).

• The midpoint abomination.
• (those in Judea flee - the Jewish Remnant.)
• The Great Tribulation.
• The sun/moon/star event heralding the Day of the Lord.
• The Sign of the Son of Man.
• His Coming on the clouds.
• The Gathering of the Elect.

By necessity, this slips the Rapture past the midpoint.
This is buttressed in the book of Revelation.
_____________________________________

Revelation is a difficult book.
It was not until I formulated a rule to discern the breaks in its parallel account construction that it even made sense to me.

There is quite a bit of parallel construction in Hebrew story-telling, and several examples come to mind.
Parallel accounts like the first and second "creation" accounts of Genesis' first few chapters are the first example.

Whenever an event is repeated, I now look for parallel construction, or in larger portions, parallel accounts.
When Jesus says "...and then the end will come" in the Olivet Discourse of Mt 24:14, He has summed up the preliminary broad overview leading up to the "end".
He then retraces the timeline to the midpoint of the one 'seven' in verse 15, and then goes to the "end" of the Church with the Elect being gathered up in v.31.

So even the Olivet Discourse is set up in parallel.
First we get the broad overview which includes all the first four Seals in verses 4-14
Then we get the detailed parallel account focusing on a lesser time which is of utmost importance in 15-31 = which leads up to the same end.
_____________________________________

The book of Revelation has three ends with a great earthquake, and a fourth that can be discerned without its mention.
In addition, between chapters 11 and 13, there are FIVE mentions of time periods equal to one-half of the one 'seven.'

Now there are not multiple "ends", nor are there 17 1/2 years to the one 'seven'.
So with these repeated events, I look for parallel accounts.
How do I recognize them?

I look for A BREAK IN BOTH SCENE AND FOCUS.

After the introduction in the first Chapter,
Jesus sets the seven Churches in order and type with future promises for each and a lesson to all.

In Chapter 4, there is a break first of focus away from the theme of the Churches, and a direct displacement of John to the Heavenly realm (the scene).
Thus begins the broad overview of the Seal/Scroll Chronology which is like what Jesus gave in the Olivet Discourse whereby we see the first four Seals again.  I think all four Spirits are at work in the world today.
There is no earthly correlation with the fifth Seal.  However, it can relate to the Great Tribulation.  However again, we cannot say for sure whether it is: right before, during, or right as it is about to end.

With the sixth Seal, we see the same sun/moon/star event as Jesus gave, and as God gave the prophets to mark the coming Day of the Lord.
I think the scrolling of the sky IS the Sign of the Son of Man.
And after the 144,000 are sealed, we see for the first time in the scene John described at length before - a new feature: the Great Multitude.
So as to leave no doubt, an Elder asks John a poignant question, and then provides the answer linking these to the same gathering after the Great Tribulation that is in the Olivet Discourse.

Chapters 8 and 9 continue the theme of the Seals which unlock the Scroll.
However, now John alternately describes scenes which take place on the earth.
This does make a break for parallelism: the theme of the chapters 4-11 (exclusive) center on the Seal/Scroll Chronology.

A very big point for me in my eschatology was that the Wrath of God, while mentioned in chapter 6, does not begin in earnest until the first Trumpet sounds.
The reason for this is it is not God who is pronouncing the Wrath of God with the sixth Seal, but the wicked who only fear for their lives at its coming.
But the next thing to happen is not Wrath, but Rescue; Wrath IS COMING, but not at that exact time, nor is it the first thing Jesus does.
However again - when God's Wrath comes, it is after the Elect have been removed to the "barn" of Heaven.
This is not mentioned in the Olivet Discourse, because that is directed to the Church, and we are not suffer God's Wrath.

Chapter 10 marks a break in the narrative John is telling when he is told not to write.
This chapter continues in scene, but the focus jumps to John.
The interlude which begins when John is told not to write brings about the "Sidebar Account".

In chapter 11:1-13, we break with the scene in Heaven centering on John now, going to the earth, and the focus is now on the Temple and the Two Witnesses.The Temple is mentioned first, and while not explicitly stated within, its half is the first half - being necessary for the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy that the abomination spoken of by Daniel be in the "Holy Place."
Likewise, Paul follows Jesus in saying the Man of Lawlessness sets himself up in the Temple.
The Two Witnesses likewise have a half - the second half.
They precede Christ Jesus' parousia.
They also are involved in God's Wrath - which takes place after the Rapture happening at some unknown day immediately after the Great Tribulation.
They are killed by demons unleashed with the fifth Trumpet.
Their Rapture completes the number of the fifth Seal.
Following that - there is the first Great Earthquake, and for the first time, the survivors praise God.  (Up until now, none had repented.)

In verse 11:14, John then relates back to the scene and focus before, retracing his narrative: the second Woe has passed, the third is coming quickly.
Notice John doesn't say WHAT the third Woe is or does, but goes right from the seventh Angel sounding to the proclamation of the "end."
And again, the chapter ends with the same Great Earthquake which ends the sidebar account.  

In Chapter 12, we have the two Twin Parallel Accounts.
Having finished the one 'seven' on earth, there is a switch of scene to Heaven, and the focus changes to the Woman clothed in the sun/moon/stars (Israel = Genesis 37:9-11).
The time reverts from the future end to the birth of Jesus and goes until He ascends to Heaven - and then the second half in which God hides and protects the Woman.  This is reflected by the Remnant Jews fleeing at the midpoint abomination from Judea in the Olivet Discourse.
In verse 7, the second twin parallel account
the scene reverts back to the Spiritual realm and the focus is now on Satan.
This twin account also ends with the same second half protection afforded the woman - so Satan turns his unwanted attention to us - resulting in the Great Tribulation decimating our Elect to near extinction if not for God's timely response when the number of Martyrs meets its set goal minus the final additions - the Two Witnesses (and any other Martyrs left behind who die in between the Rapture and the end of the one 'seven').

In chapter 13, we begin the detailed parallel account to the Seal/Scroll chronology: the Rise and Fall of the anti-Christ in the one 'seven'.
While chapter 12 ended with the second half protection for the Remnant Jews, chapter 13 opens up with origin of the fourth terrible beast of a nation, and the beast of a man who will come to rule it.  
Thus we have a change of scene in time now going backwards to the start, and a change of focus from the Woman/Satan themes to the villains: the dragon beast nation, the anti-Christ and the false prophet.
In addition, a new character is introduced who gave Spielberg the idea for the Sith coming in pairs: the false prophet of the land (Israel).
The "Rise" of the anti-Christ has him given authority (by God) and he oppresses the Saints, and ultimately by intrigue and influence creates through his cohort in crime, a pretense to invade the Holy Land, surrounding Jerusalem only to be elevated to god-like status and crowned with the midpoint abomination: the talking image of himself.
The false prophet, speaking on his behalf and now in open alliance with his master, announces two laws which make the Great Tribulation the worst time ever for the Church.
The chapter ends with an admonishment to never follow these rules.

Chapter 14 changes scene, but not focus because it now begins the fall of the anti-Christ, the false prophet and the fourth terrible dragon beast of a nation.
Chapter 14 is God's response to the events which happen at the midpoint abomination.
The defiance of the anti-Christ is the trip-wire for God's response.
Not said here, but in the Sidebar Account, we can expect the first responders, God's Marines; to make their landing: the Two Witnesses.  These two are unstoppable until their testimony is finished and their time comes to be martyred.
For the first time, God reveals Three Angels who are the source for the wicked fearing for their lives in Chapter 6.
They also complete the Gospel message which Jesus set as a precursor for the end in the broad overview of the end in the Olivet Discourse.
Next, we see the mustering of God's Army: the 144,000.  This is part of the sixth Seal as well.  The stories run parallel here.
Next, we see the same Coming of Jesus on the clouds as He said He would in the Olivet Discourse.
IMMEDIATELY AFTER the Harvest of from the clouds, we see God's Wrath as expressed with the first Trumpet from the Seal/Scroll chronology.
This too is part of the Day of the Lord.

Chapter 15 details a scene in Heaven, but the focus is still on the fall of the anti-Christ.

Chapter 16 details what I think is third Woe - showing the depth of God's Wrath.
Notice this these desolations make a complete destruction of the earth - AS IS TOLD IN DANIEL 9:27.
Notice too, that these desolations are POURED OUT upon the anti-Christ - AS IS TOLD IN DANIEL 9:27 - leading up to the climatic end of the one 'seven' at Armageddon and the Great Earthquake.

Explanatory Chapters 17 and 18 have both a break in scene from the end, and their focus is to explain various figurative characters so as to reveal their meaning.

The Epilogue begins in chapter 19 and runs to the end of Revelation in chapter 22.
The linear narrative of the "end" restarts right before Armageddon in chapter 19, changing the scene.
The focus is on God's Righteous Judgment.
The Great Multitude are heard but not seen.
The 144,000, by definition from Rev 14:4 follow Christ Jesus into battle - just as they were with Him on the Day of the Lord's Wrath (Joel 2).
The Martyrs are made alive with the completion of their number by the addition of the Two Witnesses - finally completing the First Resurrection - which John finally declares a fact.
The 144,000, the Dead in Christ, the Elect, and the Martyrs are rewarded with Eternal Life.
The anti-Christ and the false prophet are judged. - In accordance with the end as pronounced at the end of the Seal/Scroll Chronology in Rev 11:18.

The Millennium follows,
And then the New Heavens and the New Earth
This concludes God's Righteous Judgment in favor of the Saints and (MIllennial) Sheep.
_____________________________________________

Now, you cannot get the sense of time in the Seal/Scroll Chonology.
Nor can the Sidebar Account help place the Rapture.
You CAN discern that the Harvest follows the midpoint abomination of Rev 13:14-15, but how long isn't there at all.
Nothing in the Explanatory chapters helps, 
Nor can we find the Rapture in the Epilogue.

The only real place we can alter the timing of the Rapture is the unknown amount of time it takes for the Great Tribulation to decimate the Elect so as to satisfy a pre-planned number God the Father has - and the only place that information is given is the Olivet Discourse.
_____________________________________________

So a long-winded post - but a short answer: it's not really found in the book of Revelation.
However, by detailing how I discern its basic parallel accounts within it, maybe I've helped someone else's understanding of this very difficult book.

Edited July 4, 2016 by Marcus O'Reillius

[Marcus O'Reillius]

12 minutes ago, Retrobyter said:

Okay, now you're just being purposefully stubborn and short-sighted.

No, I'm not.

And after typing so much for ghtan, I'm not interested in another of your long posts.

The antecedent to the pronoun conjugation of gabar is 'the ruler who will come'.  Your rule cannot be found in Waltke's Hebrew Syntax book.

This assignment of actor is "confirmed" by other narratives in the book of Daniel and the 13th chapter of the book of Revelation pointing to King of the North as the anti-Christ.

Edited July 4, 2016 by Marcus O'Reillius

[ghtan]

6 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

So a long-winded post - but a short answer: it's not really found in the book of Revelation.

However, by detailing how I discern its basic parallel accounts within it, maybe I've helped someone else's understanding of this very difficult book.

Thanks for the long explanation. Your scheme can pass for mid-trib if you did not read Dan 9:27 as end time prophecy. (Maybe this is what you mean by refinement.) I take the traditional view that it refers to AD70. Thus I am able to read Revelation for its own message. Makes it easier to understand too. But to each his own. All the best with your book.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

6 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

You said, "All in all, you cannot show by action in Scripture, where Jesus legally fortifies an Old Testament Covenant so as to make it stronger - which would mean it would become the overriding factor for us - for just seven years."

YES, I CAN! It is the DAVIDIC COVENANT which was fortified, and Yeshua` did it simply by presenting Himself for immersion by Yochanan! Elohiym His Father said, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased!" This fulfilled the Davidic Covenant when God said, and, this was confirmed in Luke 1:30-33:

Did you know that the word for "Seven" ("Week") in Hebrew is "ShaaVuwa`'"?. to be complete, to seven oneself, i.e. swear (as if by repeating a declaration seven times):

Acts 2:25-32 that God had sworn with an oath to him,
32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

NOTE: When I say Preterist: it is the taking of a Preterist position on Daniel 9:27.  This does not mean individuals who maintain they are Futurists aren't, but only that they have adopted, in part, a Preterist eschatology when it comes to this very important outline to God's overall Plan of Salvation - which can only be accomplished by the Lamb: Jesus.  And in that respect, it takes BOTH of His Advents to fulfill Daniel 9:24.
 

It was laid on my heart this morning as I woke up to go past just a simple 'gabar doesn't mean that' argument.  Here is a broader argument refuting a Preterist notion about Daniel 9:27.
Daniel 9:27 was neither fulfilled by Jesus, Vesparian or Titus in the first century in its entirety.  Let's look at Jesus here and go through the clauses in Daniel 9:27:

1. No, you have not shown how Jesus won over, which you put out without a source, for how you want to spin gabar nowadays (We've had this discussion many times in the past on other boards.)
.....- Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic Law by keeping it.
.....- Jesus fulfilled the Abramaic Covenant by bringing in the Gentiles.
.....- Jesus fulfilled the Davidic Covenant by beginning (it's not over yet) a Kingdom.  (I defy to define the Kingdom of Heavens borders or dates.  There are too many conflicting verses to yield a single answer.)
Fulfill does not mean to win over (your definition) nor does it mean to prevail (scholar's definition) of gabar when it is used AS A VERB - not "comparative" - Where do you get these definitions?)

Jesus did NONE of that for seven years! - which in the context of the seventy 'sevens' and the Revelation of Christ Jesus is a period of time.  
The one 'seven' is not just an idle completion accomplished by swearing - no matter where you get your definitions!  

The ONLY Covenant Jesus makes is the New Covenant.
.....- Jesus "confirms" this New Covenant by shedding His Blood {cutting a deal) when He submitted to the Cross.  Yes, He "prevailed" upon the Cross in a sense of the word as we use it today, defying its execution with a show of strength SHOUTING OUT: "IT IS FINISHED!", but typifying our Lord's laying down His Life in this way does not comport to how the Hebrew uses gabar in the Scripture.
.....- The legal agreement resulting in the New Covenant only happened at the end, during His third year of Ministry, right before His Crucifixion - not at the beginning of Jesus' Ministry.
.....- This satisfies the first of three clauses in Daniel 9:26 - that the Messiah is cut off AFTER He comes.
.....- The New Covenant DID NOT END seven years later - NO MATTER HOW YOU WANT TO SPIN THAT.  And you have to spin really hard to make some specious case for it.
.....- The New Covenant cannot satisfy the starting condition for the one 'seven' and have Jesus' Crucifixion be the midpoint at the same time.  There is only the matter of day between the two events.

2. Jesus is neither the abomination, nor the desolation.
.....- No one can give the dates for Jesus' Baptism or His Crucifixion.  We are still guessing at the years.  We cannot even say (as Preterists presume) His First Advent accomplished the first half because we don't even know it was three and a half years long.  His Ministry went into its third year; the Bible record shows that Jesus attended three Passover Feasts making it at least two years long, the end then beginning its third year as folk would count then.  Ministers show how Jesus ran into conflict in the third year of His Ministry, giving the Jews lessons they could not accept.  He weeded out those who were not true disciples.  Christian theology does not teach a fourth year to Jesus' Ministry, which would begin after the completion of three whole years.  It is wholly without Biblical evidence to say Jesus' Ministry lasted more than three years so as to be go into its fourth year as would be required for His Ministry to be three and a half years as dictated by Gabriel.
.....- Yes, the Most Holy Place was left desolate when the Curtain was torn in two - manifesting the evacuation of the Holy Spirit from it - but the word is desolation.
.....- Yes, the city and the Sanctuary were desolated four decades later -
............- but this introduces a gap when Preterists insist on none - and,
............- the destruction is not a Godly desolation on the scale of the Trumpets / Bowls - nothing is effected by land, sea, air, fire, or water being desolated.
............- The ONLY reason this clause is introduced is to contrast this to the rebuilding AND to point out the origin for the 'ruler who will come'!

3. No complete destruction - which God has decreed - can be found in the historical record.
.....- IF you want to say the midpoint came at Jesus' Crucifixion, the Temple was still used for years for sacrifice and offering afterward!
.....- IF you want to say the midpoint came some forty years later - Jerusalem was inhabited for centuries after the First Jewish Revolt!
.....- In neither case do we find a COMPLETE destruction which fulfills the language IF you want to limit it to one city / Temple happening in the past!

4. The historical record does not show how God's desolations were poured out on the desolator.
.....- The actor who causes a covenant to be prevailed upon many is the same actor who causes the midpoint abomination - and THEN - God's desolations are directed at HIM in the end.
.....- Jesus IS NOT the desolator!  To say so would be heresy.
.....- Vesparian had nothing of Godly proportions directed at him.  (Antiochus wasted away suddenly...)
.....- Titus went on to become Caesar.
.....- Stephen's death is not the fulfillment for God's Wrath!  He was martyred because of his Christian testimony!
.....- In fact, none of the acts of warfare in suppressing the Jewish revolt, compare to the least of the first four Trumpets which act in just thirds over the whole earth!
.....- Desolations ARE evidenced with the Trumpet / Bowl Judgments.
.....- The Trumpet / Bowl Judgments are directed AT the anti-Christ and the wicked who are left behind.
.....- The Bowl Judgments are total and they are directed pointedly at the end to the anti-Christ at Armageddon.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

1 hour ago, ghtan said:

Thus I am able to read Revelation for its own message. 

HOW you read Revelation determines WHAT your eschatology will be.

That is why I took so long to explain (the big points) how I look at this most important eschatological book.

[ghtan]

11 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

HOW you read Revelation determines WHAT your eschatology will be.

That's the way it should be. Unfortunately many use other scriptures like Daniel and the Olivet Discourse and try to make Revelation agree with them. It should be the other way around.

[Retrobyter]

On July 4, 2016 at 2:50 AM, Marcus O'Reillius said:

No, I'm not.

And after typing so much for ghtan, I'm not interested in another of your long posts.

The antecedent to the pronoun conjugation of gabar is 'the ruler who will come'.  Your rule cannot be found in Waltke's Hebrew Syntax book.

This assignment of actor is "confirmed" by other narratives in the book of Daniel and the 13th chapter of the book of Revelation pointing to King of the North as the anti-Christ.

Shalom, Marcus.

Okay, obviously I'm not going to change your mind, and a man convinced against his will,....

Whether Bruce K. Waltke's book, "An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax," mentions this rule in relation to the noun construct state or not, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It is, after all, an INTRODUCTION to the syntax. He may not have thought it important enough to mention or he may not have recognized it as a rule, but it IS a rule that Hebrew speakers follow.

You just NEED to have this "ruler (prince) who will come" to be the antecedent for the "he" pronouns in verse 27 to support your eschatological belief-system. It perpetuates the interpretation of Daniel 9:27 to be about the "Antichrist" breaking a 7-year covenant with the Jews, which in turn "supports" the interpretation of Matthew 24:15 to be this 3.5-year-midpoint setting up of an image in the Temple.

That's fine. Rome wasn't built in a day. Anyway, love ya', bro'.

[Marcus O'Reillius]

15 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Whether Bruce K. Waltke's book, "An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax," mentions this rule in relation to the noun construct state or not, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It is, after all, an INTRODUCTION to the syntax. He may not have thought it important enough to mention or he may not have recognized it as a rule, but it IS a rule that Hebrew speakers follow.

Oh, an INTRODUCTION!  Yes, just a Kindergarten book... that's 685 pages long.  A simple Kindergarten book that has 22 pages of Bibliography, a glossary, and three indexes after that totaling over 750 pages.

Bruce K. Waltke is a recognized expert in the Hebrew language, and one of our foremost scholars on the subject of Biblical Hebrew today.  Tell me, while you try to spin the importance of his text to being unimportant, or missing vital components, like you did when you try to spin word meaning making "prevail" into "win" - who is this expert of Hebrew speakers?  What are his or her credentials?  Are they published?  Are they degreed?  Are they recognized as leading in their field?

And I don't NEED to use the antecedent person stand in for the pronoun - it's there.  And the same actor who causes the beginning of the one 'seven', also is the actor in the middle, and in the end - God's desolations are poured out on HIM.  And you can read this basic chronology in Revelation chapters 13-16.

I love ya too Rob, but I vehemently disagree with several of your takes on things.  --Mark.

[Retrobyter]

5 hours ago, Marcus O'Reillius said:

Oh, an INTRODUCTION!  Yes, just a Kindergarten book... that's 685 pages long.  A simple Kindergarten book that has 22 pages of Bibliography, a glossary, and three indexes after that totaling over 750 pages.

Bruce K. Waltke is a recognized expert in the Hebrew language, and one of our foremost scholars on the subject of Biblical Hebrew today.  Tell me, while you try to spin the importance of his text to being unimportant, or missing vital components, like you did when you try to spin word meaning making "prevail" into "win" - who is this expert of Hebrew speakers?  What are his or her credentials?  Are they published?  Are they degreed?  Are they recognized as leading in their field?

And I don't NEED to use the antecedent person stand in for the pronoun - it's there.  And the same actor who causes the beginning of the one 'seven', also is the actor in the middle, and in the end - God's desolations are poured out on HIM.  And you can read this basic chronology in Revelation chapters 13-16.

I love ya too Rob, but I vehemently disagree with several of your takes on things.  --Mark.

Shalom, Marcus (and Romans would have said, "Mar-koose," drawing out the "s" at the end. [Romans LOVED s's.] I loved Latin, too.)

I didn't say it wasn't a worthy book! It is, after all, a TEXTBOOK! However, it is not for an advanced understanding of the Hebrew language. For that, one needs to go to Hebrew University in Jerusalem (or at least take the E level course online).

My teacher is a Sabra (native Israeli) from Haifa and a graduate of the Hebrew University. He GREW UP in Haifa! He has read for us out of the Torah on Simchat Torah, the day to "Celebrate the Torah," the day when the Torah is paraded around the Synagogue and then rewound back to B'reshiyt (Genesis).

You're wrong about the antecedent for the words "he" in verse 27. Those occurrences of "he" go back to the "Messiah" in verse 26. It doesn't reflect what is written in Rev. 13-16 because it's not about the same thing!

Oh, and btw, it's "Roy," not "Rob."