7 year tribulation

[Charlie744]

Spock and RM:

the new covenant is mentioned in Jeremiah chapter 31 verses 31 to 34. This is the better covenant established by the Messiah.

In Hebrews chapter 8 verses 1 to 13 speaks of this same “new covenant”. How can anyone say the covenant mentioned in 9:27 is not this same covenant?

God makes covenant with His People... not some anti-Christ character some 2,000 years in the future.

Please read the above and there is so much explanation on this covenant between God and us.

Charlie

[Diaste]

49 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

I am certain you have realized just how many different translations there are.... there at least 10-12 Christian ones (KJ, NKJ, NIV, and so on). I also have been going back and forth with Jewish translations (JPS and two others). 

What has frustrated me from you the beginning of my study on Daniel is just how different they are... words are translated quite differently, verses are rearranged sometimes completely changing the message, on and on.

Sometimes it is necessary to drill down to try and find the correct meaning of a verse... how do you know if YOU or I or someone else has the true meaning????? extremely difficult but that is when it is necessary to step back and look at the context of the verses surrounding / following it / coming after it / does compliment or contradict other verses, and so on. 

That is why 9:27 is, for me, a perfect example of having someone identifying “he” as other than the Messiah. The entire chapter deals with Him... All the verses 9:24 on speak about Daniel’s 70 weeks and the 6 requirements that The Messiah would fulfill. 9:25 clearly mentions the Messiah and the specific 3 sections of those 70 weeks- These 3 sections were designed by God for very specific reasons- if you notice or match up those things that were completed during each of the first two sections, you can then determine what must be completed on the last week- the 70th week of Daniel... it say Messiah the Prince not the anti-Christ!

9:26 specifically tells us the Messiah will be “cut off” AFTER the 69 th week..., which means what comes after 69?

But not for Himself— can anyone deny the Messiah would sacrifice Himself for all of mankind? Could anyone possibly tie this unselfish event to the anti-Christ... I don’t think that is in his character- he takes and lies and destroys!!!

9:26 also tells us the city and the Sanctuary will be destroyed by the people of A prince (pagan Rome), but the reason it would be destroyed is for the punishment of the Jews for rejecting their Messiah AND the Temple and the Sanctuary and the Sacrificial system was no  longer necessary- they were all a type of the coming Messiah. 

9:27 tells us He will make a covenant with many (those that would believe He was the Messiah). All of this flows so smoothly! The covenant can also be traced back to the prophets (Jeremiah for one). Jeremiah is not interested or speaking about an anti-Christ. 

I do agree with you that many translations literally read that “he will make a covenant for one week”. On its face it looks exactly like it is only a 1 week Covenant. 

And this is where the RCC had to corrupt these very complimentary (bad choice of words) words and verses!

Just about all scholars and interpreters prior to the 1500’s accepted the papacy was the little horn— all changed after they had to alter the interpretations of chapter 9. 

So I would ask that you might drill down on the translations of 9:27 both before and after the 1500’s. See if you find the identity and time lines changed. Step back about 30,000 feet and ask yourself if these very specific verses could be speaking of anyone other than the Messiah... Why would ~90% of these last few verses point to the Messiah’s purpose for coming to earth but the “he” is abruptly attributed to someone else? Why is the previous verses specifically speaking of the 3 sections of the 70 weeks only to have someone interpret the most important covenant made by God would represent just a 1 week period? 

If you are willing there are really only a few words or verses within these 9 that have been misinterpreted... I have seen too many verses that have been altered wether intentionally, by translating errors from Hebrew to English, etc.

Take care, Charlie 

 

I would think the Aramaic is accurate and the difference is revealed in the use of the word for Messiah and then the change to the word for prince. 

That is a fact that must be dealt with along with the one week declaration. 

It's certainly unfair to call the motives of God into question. Scripture stands in judgment of us, we do not judge Scripture nor motives.

[Charlie744]

RM, there is absolutely no question that you possess a very strong mind and have an abundance of knowledge about the Scriptures... but...

Is it possible the new covenant in Jeremiah is the one spoken of in Daniel and the same one in Hebrews?

 

Thanks, Charlie 

 

[JoeCanada]

On 8/11/2020 at 3:35 PM, Charlie744 said:

I have been studying Daniel and have found that there are so many folks that refer to a “7 year tribulation” which will occur at the end of time and will center on an “anti-Christ” figure. 

I believe these two beliefs are based on certain verses in Daniel. 

Consequently, would you folks provide your thoughts on the verses and your interpretation of how they speak / identify them as such?

 Thank you very much, Charlie 

Hi Charlie,

Brother....I like your style.

It's good to question popularly held beliefs....some of which started as myths are grew to beliefs. Be a Berean and see if what is taught is actually in the Scriptures.....

I too have questioned the popular view that Daniel's 'he is the anti-christ'.

Daniel9:27.......And he will 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 ^[l]abominations will come one who ^[m]makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who ^[n]makes desolate.”

There is nothing in any of the teachings of Jesus that talks about a peace treaty. Paul's Epistles....nothing in them about a peace treaty....John doesn't mention anything about a peace treaty in Revelations.....in fact, the entire New Testament is silent on the issue of a peace plan before Tribulation. All of Christendom is talking about an end times peace treaty being brought about by the antichrist, yet when the Apostles asked Jesus about end time signs regarding His return, Jesus never mentioned anything about it. 

So...... let's  look at the second part of this scripture:

and on the wing of ^[l]abominations will come one who ^[m]makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who ^[n]makes desolate.”

Scripture provides only one clear sign to watch for....and only one way to identify the antichrist;

Matt 24:15............ " When you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel standing in the holy place...."

This is the same sign that we just saw in Daniel...." on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate"

And who is the complete destruction pored out on?????....... on the same "will come one who makes desolate".....the antichrist!

The antichrist doesn't come until the middle of the 70th week......he doesn't confirm or strengthen any covenant at the beginning of the 70th week.

This - and only this - will be the revealing of the antichrist and the sign that marks the beginning of the Great Tribulation.

 

[Charlie744]

Joe, thank you very thmuch for the kind remarks... based on my comments and interpretations, they will be few and far between... but I expected as much. 

For me, there is no place for attributing “he” to anyone other than the Messiah. 

Regarding the language around the “new covenant”, there can be only two one covenant, His last and greatest covenant mentioned in Jeremiah, here in Daniel 9, and certainly in the NT - Hebrews 8.  

It seems the final issue centers on wether the “7 year” language refers to the length of the covenant (7 years), or if the covenant was entered into in the 7 years or Daniel’s last week of the 70 weeks. For me the translation must be in error since there was is no prior discussion, prophecies in the OT of a 7 year covenant or anything remotely close to it. Also, there is nothing in the NT that is entered into or can be linked to a 7 year covenant. The only interpretation for this language is the new covenant mentioned in Jeremiah will be established during the last 7 years. Re is

There is a mountain of writings over the past 2,000 years on this particular issue and we have access to almost all of it on the net. 

Regarding Matthew 24:15... unfortunately, I have not studied Matthew or Revelation at this time. I do understand that what is interpreted in Daniel can NOT contradict or conflict with those books or any other verses in the NT.... but this can not be said for the current interpretations of 9:27! 

Anyway, thanks for the compliment and please respond to theses discussions on Daniel 9 and 11.... 

Best wishes, Charlie 

 

[Charlie744]

Joe, I was just thinking out loud and remembering your comment about Matthew 24:15...

Now please understand this is just an unsupported comment -certainly NOT an interpretation... but here goes...

My current interpretation for the “ abomination that causes desolation” must be the Messiah: there can be no greater denigration or an abomination than the Jews rejecting their Messiah. As a result of their actions (crucifixion of their Messiah), this WILL cause God to punish the Jews and indeed their Temple, the people themselves and even their land will suffer when the Romans actually salt their land.

Now, based on your Matthew 24:15 references, how would or could I possibly reconcile this to the Messiah reference in Daniel? On it’s face, it doesn’t make sense or supports the other !!!!!!’

Thinking out loud now—- The Messiah can represent the “abomination” figure in Matthew but how does He also meet the remainder of 24:15– when you see Him standing in the Holy Place ????? What is the Holy Place? It can never again be the Temple or Sanctuary, even if the Jews were able to construct a 3rd Temple—- it would NEVER be filled with the Glory of God... it would only have value or importance to the Jews-the same folks who rejected the Messiah.

So try this on and think about it and perhaps give me your thoughts—- Jesus, was the one who was treated as an “abomination” will indeed stand in the Holy Place when He comes back in His second coming BUT He will indeed stand in the clouds / the air (where He is will be the Holy Place. Then He will certainly take His church to be with Him (both the dead in Christ and those still alive in Christ, but those who are alive AND are without Christ will have to get out of Dodge!!

This might satisfy both requirements since it looks back to Daniel to identify just who is or was the “abomination that caused the desolation”, AND the rest of Matthew is met since this will take place at the time of the end.

ANY thoughts or comments are appreciated!!!

Best wishes, Charlie 

 

[iamlamad]

1 hour ago, Charlie744 said:

Joe, thank you very thmuch for the kind remarks... based on my comments and interpretations, they will be few and far between... but I expected as much. 

For me, there is no place for attributing “he” to anyone other than the Messiah. 

Regarding the language around the “new covenant”, there can be only two one covenant, His last and greatest covenant mentioned in Jeremiah, here in Daniel 9, and certainly in the NT - Hebrews 8.  

It seems the final issue centers on wether the “7 year” language refers to the length of the covenant (7 years), or if the covenant was entered into in the 7 years or Daniel’s last week of the 70 weeks. For me the translation must be in error since there was is no prior discussion, prophecies in the OT of a 7 year covenant or anything remotely close to it. Also, there is nothing in the NT that is entered into or can be linked to a 7 year covenant. The only interpretation for this language is the new covenant mentioned in Jeremiah will be established during the last 7 years. Re is

There is a mountain of writings over the past 2,000 years on this particular issue and we have access to almost all of it on the net. 

Regarding Matthew 24:15... unfortunately, I have not studied Matthew or Revelation at this time. I do understand that what is interpreted in Daniel can NOT contradict or conflict with those books or any other verses in the NT.... but this can not be said for the current interpretations of 9:27! 

Anyway, thanks for the compliment and please respond to theses discussions on Daniel 9 and 11.... 

Best wishes, Charlie 

 

Charlie, not only do we have the scriptures in Daniel, we also have Paul telling us the man of sin will enter the Holy of Holies and declare he is God. I suspect he will be a Gentile, but regardless, he will certainly NOT be the high priest. So when He enters the temple, the daily sacrifices must stop, just as they did when Antiochus Epiphanes entered the temple and because a type of the Beast to come. 

Then we have in Revelation John told to go and measure the temple, (very near the midpoint of the future 70th week) and count the worshipers inside worshiping. 

In Revelation John gives us 5 countdowns from the midpoint of the week to the end of the week: two given as 1260 days, two given as 42 months, and one given as time, times and half of time.  John does not really lay out the first half of the week, so many miss where it starts: God has marked this future 70th week with 7's: the 7th seal begins the week, the 7th trumpet marks the midpoint (when the abomination takes place that divides the week) and the 7th vial ends the week. 

Since Revelation shows us all this, it would seem that a 7 year covenant from Daniel 9 is the correct interpretation. 

We know that a prince named TITUS (rather the people under him)  destroyed the temple in 70 AD. He was in the position of a prince of Rome. I think Daniel tells us that ANOTHER prince of Rome will come as the man of sin and will create an abomination that will divide the week.

It is TRUTH: Jesus did not "stop" the daily sacrifices as Antiochus did, and as the future Antichrist Beast will.  Sorry, those verses really do not fit our Messiah.   JMO

[Charlie744]

Very nice and you certainly have much knowledge. — not only Daniel but I would assume the NT !

 I have NOT studied Revelation at all so I can not comment... the only reasonable response is that I need to complete Daniel before I move forward on to Revelation.

It is impossible to reconcile Revelation that is / had been interpreted using much of Daniel when Daniel was interpreted in largely a historical approach. 

As I mentioned to other members on the site is Daniel will drive Revelation and not the other way around. If Daniel’s interpretations using the currently accepted approach (historical), and they fit nicely with Revelation, then game over!

But there is not one interpretation of Revelation that is remotely complete,they all have sizable holes where all skip over, and further, even those that all use the historical approach for Daniel still disagree with each other’s interpretation.

The was only way there could possibly be a 2,000 year gap in Daniel ‘s 70 weeks is of 9:26 “he” is not the Messiah but some mythical anti-Christ figure, the covenant was not a gift from God to us, and the abomination figure is also someone other than the Messiah.... 

Big picture- Daniel is in no way speaking about anyone other than the Messiah —- 9:24 to 9:27  are all about Him... why do people choose not to see Him in His own prophecies? 

Amyway, thank you for your thoughts! Charlie 

[Diaste]

11 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

Spock and RM:

the new covenant is mentioned in Jeremiah chapter 31 verses 31 to 34. This is the better covenant established by the Messiah.

In Hebrews chapter 8 verses 1 to 13 speaks of this same “new covenant”. How can anyone say the covenant mentioned in 9:27 is not this same covenant?

God makes covenant with His People... not some anti-Christ character some 2,000 years in the future.

Please read the above and there is so much explanation on this covenant between God and us.

Charlie

 

The Covenant in Jeremiah and Hebrews is the same. The passage in Hebrews is verbatim from Jeremiah 31.

Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD,when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant  I made with their fathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt— a covenant they broke, though I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD.

“But this is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD. I will put My law in their minds and inscribe it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they will be My people. No longer will each man teach his neighbor or his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ because they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquities and will remember their sins no more.” - Jeremiah 31

Daniel 9:27:

And he will confirm a covenant with many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of the temple will come the abomination that causes desolation, until the decreed destruction is poured out upon him.

Just a casual reading of these side by side shows they are not in any way alike.

Jeremiah Covenant: With Israel and Judah, it's New, no time limit, no ending, law written on hearts and minds, Israel and Judah will know God, sin forgiven and never remembered, covenant maker is eternal.

Daniel Covenant: With many, time limit, an ending, brings an abomination and destruction, the covenant maker is destroyed.

How can these be construed to be the same?

 

 

 

 

[Diaste]

13 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

So I would ask that you might drill down on the translations of 9:27 both before and after the 1500’s. See if you find the identity and time lines changed. Step back about 30,000 feet and ask yourself if these very specific verses could be speaking of anyone other than the Messiah...

What are you saying? That in Dan 9:26 the word for Messiah or anointed is mistranslated?

"מָשִׁיחַ noun masculine anointed; 

1 king of Israel anointed by divine command,

2 high priest of Israel, 

Maybe it's prince you think is wrong?

"נָגִיד noun masculine leader (literally probably one in front), ruler, prince;

1 of king of Israel: of Saul 

2 of a foreign ruler or prince 

3 the title of some high official connected with the temple

13 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

Why would ~90% of these last few verses point to the Messiah’s purpose for coming to earth

Huh? The 70 weeks were laid upon the people to accomplish certain things. "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city,"

All Daniel 9 says about Messiah is: "Know therefore and understand, [that] from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince [shall be] seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: 

13 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

but the “he” is abruptly attributed to someone else? Why is the previous verses specifically speaking of the 3 sections of the 70 weeks only to have someone interpret the most important covenant made by God would represent just a 1 week period? 

So Messiah is cut off and no more and then Messiah makes a 7 year covenant? 

I get that you don't like the idea but that doesn't change the facts. The text in both Hebrew and English literally says 'one week'.

echad: one

shabua: a period of seven (days, years), heptad, week.

I think you should be more careful about the attempt to equate the Jeremiah Covenant with Dan 9:27 since they are nothing alike, except in some wild fantasy world of personal desire.