Daniel 9 - Seventy Weeks

[rhutchin]

We have--


24 “Seventy weeks are determined For your people and for your holy city, To finish the transgression, To make an end of sins, To make reconciliation for iniquity, To bring in everlasting righteousness, To seal up vision and prophecy, And to anoint the Most Holy.
25 “Know therefore and understand, That from the going forth of the command To restore and build Jerusalem Until Messiah the Prince, There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; The street shall be built again, and the wall, Even in troublesome times.
26 “And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; And the people of the prince who is to come Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, And till the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 Then [the Messiah] shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.”

People seem to agree that a "week" is 7 years and 70 weeks would be 70 weeks of years or 490 years. That seems OK with me. Consequently, people can draw the following conclusions--

1. The seventy weeks to make an end of sins in v24 is a 490 year period that ends at the crucifixion of Christ.

2. The 7 weeks and 62 weeks to Messiah the Prince is two periods of time that ends at the baptism of Christ and the beginning of His earthly ministry.

3. The last week of v27 has the crucifixion in the middle of the week. It first half of the week apparently begins with the baptism of Christ and ends 3 and 1/2 years later with His crucifixion. The last half of the week is somewhat mysterious.

4. The last half of the final week is difficult. If it is 3 and 1/2 years as the first half, it seems to go nowhere. the Bible does not mention anything 3 and 1/2 years after the death of Christ that is important. Some have said that the last half is 3 and 1/2 years and this is 1260 days (360 days in the year as the Bible supposedly reackons a year) and this is to be identified with the 1,260 days of Revelation--


3 “And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.”

6 Then the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there one thousand two hundred and sixty days.

Sounds plausible.

Is there concensus on the 70 weeks (490 years) ending at the crucifixion and the 7 weeks/62 weeks ending at the baptism of Christ?

What do others make of the second half of the final week?

[Berean Todd]

Actually if you do the math, the dating of the 7 and 62 weeks ends at the triumphal entrrance of Christ during Passion week. The 70th week has been put on hold, being the coming Tribulation period that has not yet commenced.

[rhutchin]

Actually if you do the math, the dating of the 7 and 62 weeks ends at the triumphal entrance of Christ during Passion week. The 70th week has been put on hold, being the coming Tribulation period that has not yet commenced.

Yes, somewhere in that timeframe. Obviously, it ties in to the ministry of Christ in some manner. Most people seem to pick an event in Christ's ministry (His baptism, the passion week) and work backwards instead of picking an event in 500 or so BC and working forward.

However, in the middle of the 70th week, Christ is crucified is He not? That seems to be the meaning of v27 - "...in the middle of the week [Christ] shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering." Most people seem to agree that sacrifice and offering lost their importance when Christ was crucified. So, something unusual happens in the last half of the 70th week. Whether it is put on hold or takes on a whole new meaning seems to depend on a person's eschatological preferences. Regardless the last half of the 70th week is mysterious.

[zemogger]

I found this website very helpful on the subject of Daniel's 70 weeks.. Check it out and see what you think.


http://www.biblicalstudies.com/bstudy/eschatology/daniel.htm

[rhutchin]

I found this website very helpful on the subject of Daniel's 70 weeks.. Check it out and see what you think.


http://www.biblicalstudies.com/bstudy/eschatology/daniel.htm

I am not too sure about the conclusions of this study. I am biased in that I think the OT prophecies relate to Christ or to his work. The cited study basically removes Christ from the Daniel 9 prophecy. I don't really think that is the direction in which we should go in trying to understand Daniel 9.

[Berean Todd]

Yes, somewhere in that timeframe. Obviously, it ties in to the ministry of Christ in some manner. Most people seem to pick an event in Christ's ministry (His baptism, the passion week) and work backwards instead of picking an event in 500 or so BC and working forward.

No, we don't work backwords. You have to first figure out when the clock started ticking (there are 3 or 4 possible starting points), then you count forward, while adjusting for callendar changes/differences. You come to Passion Week.

However, in the middle of the 70th week, Christ is crucified is He not?

No, the 70th week has not begun. Christ is cut off at the end of the 69th week. You put the 69th week as his baptism, but that can not be, for look at Daniel 9:26

Dan 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.

At what point after Christ's baptism, and before his crucifiction was Christ "cut-off"? And more importantly at what point in that time frame did the "people of the prince" come and destroy both the city and the temple. You see that only happened AFTER the 69 weeks, verse 27 is the start of the 70th week.

That seems to be the meaning of v27 - "...in the middle of the week [Christ] shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering." Most people seem to agree that sacrifice and offering lost their importance when Christ was crucified.

Again, your meaning of vs. 27 can not be right, because as I pointed out the temple was not destroyed, nor was Christ cut off at the proper point in your time-line.

So, something unusual happens in the last half of the 70th week. Whether it is put on hold or takes on a whole new meaning seems to depend on a person's eschatological preferences. Regardless the last half of the 70th week is mysterious.

You are right that a person's eschatological preference plays a role, but the testimony of Scripture is that none of this 70th week has begun yet. It is all future still.

[rhutchin]

rhutchin
Yes, somewhere in that timeframe. Obviously, it ties in to the ministry of Christ in some manner. Most people seem to pick an event in Christ's ministry (His baptism, the passion week) and work backwards instead of picking an event in 500 or so BC and working forward.

Berean Todd
No, we don't work backwords. You have to first figure out when the clock started ticking (there are 3 or 4 possible starting points), then you count forward, while adjusting for callendar changes/differences. You come to Passion Week.

My suspicion is that people first decide where they want to end and then work back to see where it begins. Given that there are several starting points, maybe people just use that starting point that gives them the end point they want.


rhutchin
However, in the middle of the 70th week, Christ is crucified is He not?

Berean Todd
No, the 70th week has not begun. Christ is cut off at the end of the 69th week. You put the 69th week as his baptism, but that can not be, for look at Daniel 9:26

Dan 9:26Then 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.

At what point after Christ's baptism, and before his crucifiction was Christ "cut-off"? And more importantly at what point in that time frame did the "people of the prince" come and destroy both the city and the temple. You see that only happened AFTER the 69 weeks, verse 27 is the start of the 70th week.

Dan 9:26 says "after" the sixty-two weeks. That would seem to put the crucifixion in the 70th week or perhaps you are suggesting some limbo timeframe. The prince to come would seem to be the same prince in v25. At least, there is nothing that suggests otherwise.


rhutchin
That seems to be the meaning of v27 - "...in the middle of the week [Christ] shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering." Most people seem to agree that sacrifice and offering lost their importance when Christ was crucified.

Berean Todd
Again, your meaning of vs. 27 can not be right, because as I pointed out the temple was not destroyed, nor was Christ cut off at the proper point in your time-line.

It seems to say that Christ would bring an end to sacrifice and offering. That was the effect of the crucifixion, wasn't it?


rhutchin
So, something unusual happens in the last half of the 70th week. Whether it is put on hold or takes on a whole new meaning seems to depend on a person's eschatological preferences. Regardless the last half of the 70th week is mysterious.

Berean Todd
You are right that a person's eschatological preference plays a role, but the testimony of Scripture is that none of this 70th week has begun yet. It is all future still.

Except for Christ being crucified from what I read.

[Berean Todd]

It seems to say that Christ would bring an end to sacrifice and offering. That was the effect of the crucifixion, wasn't it?

No, sacrifices did not stop with the cross, the temple worship continued on until AD 70. There is no more sacrifice now, because there is no more temple now, but there will again be one, and there will again be sacrifice.

[dizzle]

That doesn't mean He didn't bring an end to it. It no longer had any place in the true faith.

[dizzle]

Actually if you do the math, the dating of the 7 and 62 weeks ends at the triumphal entrrance of Christ during Passion week. The 70th week has been put on hold, being the coming Tribulation period that has not yet commenced.

That is a horrible interpretation. Why? Because you place the Cross outside of the seventy weeks, the very event that makes any of the goals seventy weeks possible. If "seventy weeks are determined" to certain things - if you put the clock on hold (I bet many a false prophet has tried that trick, and how could you say they were wrong?) at the triumphal entry, then the Cross falls in the gap. That is abysmal theology.

[dizzle]

Is there concensus on the 70 weeks (490 years) ending at the crucifixion and the 7 weeks/62 weeks ending at the baptism of Christ?

No, the 69th week ended at the baptism, you are correct, but the crucifixion was in the middle of the 70th week. I think that is what you meant to say.

What do others make of the second half of the final week?

I believe it is the period of time following the crucifixion and ascension when evangelism was still primarily to the Jews and in Jerusalem. It ends with the events after the stoning of Stephen -

Acts 8:4
Therefore those who were scattered went everywhere preaching the word.

[zemogger]

Being of a premillenial disposition here's how I see Daniel 9:24-27.

This is a summary of work referred to in the link in my earlier post. One thing a person notices in the Daniel 9 passage is that the seventy weeks are broken down into three periods. There are those who lump together the first and second periods, concentrate on the 69 weeks and then the seventieth. But there must be some significance to the seventy weeks being explained this way. Why separate the first seven weeks from the next sixty-two if there were not some good reason?

Here's my time line:

Seven weeks (49)
"From the issuing of the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed one, a prince arrives there will be a period of seven weeks...." (Daniel 9:25, NET)

587BC: Jeremiah gets word from God (Jeremiah 32). This is the command to rebuild.

"until an anointed one, a prince arrives,..." 49 years later,

538BC: Cyrus the Persian comes on the scene and allows the Jews to return and rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple. In Isaiah's prophecy God calls Cyrus “my anointed”. (Isaiah 45:1)

Now I don't think it's unreasonable to allow a gap of time here. Many times OT prophecies referred not only to events in the times they were made but also a more distant messianic fulfillments. Although false prophets have been known to tinker with the time in order to try to make their prophecies work, I don't believe that gaps here do harm to proper exegesis of this passage, IMHO.

OK then, the sixty two weeks (434):

440 BC: Nehemiah travels to Jerusalem to rebuild the walls.
"...and sixty-two weeks. It will again be built, with plaza and moat, but in distressful times." (Daniel 9:25)
69 X 7 = 434

440 - 434 = 6BC
Now you have another prince, but this one is Jesus Christ. The key that refers to this second prince being Christ is found in verse 26:

“Now after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one will be cut off and have nothing.”

The next section I believe refers not only partially to Titus in 70AD but also to the coming Antichrist, “the coming prince”, in future fulfillment.

“As for the city and the sanctuary, the people of the coming prince will destroy them.” (v.27)

Then later in verse 27, the focus is on the future Antichrist and the seventieth week. This seven year period is divided into two 3 ½ year periods, the second half is the Great Tribulation. The Tribulation culminates in the defeat of the Antichrist and brings in the millennial reign of Jesus Christ.

“He will confirm a covenant with many for one week. But in the middle of that week he will bring sacrifices and offerings to a halt. On the wing of abominations will come one who destroys,until the decreed end is poured out on the one who destroys."

I know there are those here who will disagree with me and some will consider that I'm tinkering with numbers to make it work.I honestly don't think I have but have followed the flow of the text as best I could. For brevity's sake I've not gone into as much detail as I would have liked but that's basically how a pre-mil like me sees the passage.

Finally, trying to determine exactly how prophecies will be fulfilled is complicated by the fact that we can not know for certain how all the details will sort themselves out. But we can take comfort in God who does know all the details and who we can trust to make it all happen according to His will.

[rhutchin]

Being of a premillenial disposition here's how I see Daniel 9:24-27.

This is a summary of work referred to in the link in my earlier post. One thing a person notices in the Daniel 9 passage is that the seventy weeks are broken down into three periods....

I think you basically went through the explanation that the cited passage followed. Are you the author of the cited work?

v25 refers to "Messiah, the prince." You can render it, "the annointed one, the prince," but the effect is the same. I think you have to have a good argument for this not to be Christ and I don't see that.

Jesus said to the Pharisees,--


39 “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.

The Scriptures testify of Christ. I don't see any reason to diverge from that objective in Dan 9 especially v24-27. These verses should be viewed as testifying of Christ.

Of course, you can go off in other directions if you want.

Just an aside, a week (7 years) could refer to the seven year sabbath year period. Seven weeks (or sevens) could refer to seven sabbath years that would then be followed by a jubilee year. Maybe the seven weeks precedes a jubilee year and the sixty-two weeks pick up after the jubilee year. I think I saw that somewhere (it's not original with me).

[rhutchin]

rhutchin
Is there concensus on the 70 weeks (490 years) ending at the crucifixion and the 7 weeks/62 weeks ending at the baptism of Christ?

Darth Xena
No, the 69th week ended at the baptism, you are correct, but the crucifixion was in the middle of the 70th week. I think that is what you meant to say.

I was thinking of the 490 year period identified in v24. That 490 years would end with the crucifixion. The second pathway (7 years/62 years) would end at the baptism of Jesus and then be followed by the 70th week.


rhutchin
What do others make of the second half of the final week?

Darth Xena
I believe it is the period of time following the crucifixion and ascension when evangelism was still primarily to the Jews and in Jerusalem. It ends with the events after the stoning of Stephen -

Acts 8:4
Therefore those who were scattered went everywhere preaching the word.

Hadn't heard that before. I am not sure what significance we should attach to Stephen's death. I am inclined to relate everything to Christ, either His first coming or His second.

[rhutchin]

rhutchin
It seems to say that Christ would bring an end to sacrifice and offering. That was the effect of the crucifixion, wasn't it?

Berean Todd
No, sacrifices did not stop with the cross, the temple worship continued on until AD 70. There is no more sacrifice now, because there is no more temple now, but there will again be one, and there will again be sacrifice.

God instituted a system of sacrifices and offerings so that people could atone for sin. That purpose ended with the cross. Temple worship may have continued after the cross, but that worship now became a pagan ritual. If the temple is rebuilt, it will be the symbol of that same pagan religion. I don't think God cares for pagan rituals and I don't see any significance to the religious practices of the Jews after the cross.

Why do you think that the Jewish religious practices would still be important afer the cross?

[dizzle]

God instituted a system of sacrifices and offerings so that people could atone for sin. That purpose ended with the cross. Temple worship may have continued after the cross, but that worship now became a pagan ritual. If the temple is rebuilt, it will be the symbol of that same pagan religion. I don't think God cares for pagan rituals and I don't see any significance to the religious practices of the Jews after the cross.

Why do you think that the Jewish religious practices would still be important afer the cross?

Exactly.

[dizzle]

Hadn't heard that before. I am not sure what significance we should attach to Stephen's death. I am inclined to relate everything to Christ, either His first coming or His second.

It is not Stephen's death, I just used that as an important event we could all latch onto, but the event is the persecution and scattering the early believers out of Jerusalem and into the Gentiles.

I do not believe we have exegetical warrant to make the 490 years a different period of time than the 7+62+1

[dizzle]

Just an aside, a week (7 years) could refer to the seven year sabbath year period. Seven weeks (or sevens) could refer to seven sabbath years that would then be followed by a jubilee year. Maybe the seven weeks precedes a jubilee year and the sixty-two weeks pick up after the jubilee year. I think I saw that somewhere (it's not original with me).

The whole prophecy is a Jubilee prophecy. Kenneth Gentry has done some excellent work on that angle.

[Ted]

3. The last week of v27 has the crucifixion in the middle of the week. It first half of the week apparently begins with the baptism of Christ and ends 3 and 1/2 years later with His crucifixion. The last half of the week is somewhat mysterious.

4. The last half of the final week is difficult. If it is 3 and 1/2 years as the first half, it seems to go nowhere. the Bible does not mention anything 3 and 1/2 years after the death of Christ that is important. Some have said that the last half is 3 and 1/2 years and this is 1260 days (360 days in the year as the Bible supposedly reackons a year) and this is to be identified with the 1,260 days of Revelation—
Let me deal with the last item first. Hebrew years are never 360 days long. A 12-month year is 353-355 days long, and a 13-month year is 383-385 days long. On average, they are 365 1/4 days long. 7 of 19 years there is an intercalated 13th month to keep the spring festivals in the spring and the fall festivals in the fall. Since those years have been observed for about 3,500 years, and the festivals are still in sync with the seasons, we can be quite confident of that conclusion.

Revelation 11-13 echoes Daniel 7:25 and 12:7 (actually quoting the LXX of 12:7) to show not that there are 360 days in a year, but that the period in view is actually 1,260 YEARS, since the Hebrew calendar is so complicated and can’t be used by itself to tell how long a year is.

As for the second half of the 70th week, the Bible is actually quite clear. The solution is very simple. We have to start with the language of Daniel 9:24. It lists 6 conditions for the Jews to meet. It’s probationary language. If they don’t meet the conditions, consequences will result. Go back to the prayer. The Jews suffered desolation and exile due to breaking the covenant. The conditions (which God would help them bring in!) are covenant conditions. In particular, the first three are tightly linked with the Atonement in Leviticus 16:16. That’s the center of the covenant.

Daniel 9:27 specifically says that Jesus will “strengthen the covenant” with the Jews for seven years. The Hebrew is explicit. Jesus died halfway through the seven years. For the next 3 1/2 years, the apostles ministered in Judea. At the end of this period, God brought a covenant lawsuit against the Jews using Stephen as prosecuting attorney. The Jews were guilty, and their birthright blessing was removed. The gospel went thereafter to the Gentiles in an affirmative manner.

Note that the Israelites were God’s “first born” (Exod 4:22). Thus they had the birthright blessing of position in the crossroads of the world (they could be stay-at-home missionaries – See Deat 28:1-14), God’s presence with them in the tabernacle, the ministry of prophets and miracles. This blessing left them after Acts 7. All of the remaining blessings traveled with the apostles to the distributed church.

Zemogger,
The website of Fred Zaspel isn’t bad, but it misses a nuance of Hebrew. The decree is to restore Jerusalem. That either means ownership of the city, or it means the return of the people to autonomy. There are no other biblical options. Verb-object agreement requires either a decree that restores ownership and sets up reconstruction or one the restores autonomy to the people (of God) and builds up the people of God. The only decree that exists is the decree in Ezra 7, and it is listed in full, in Aramaic, and fulfills the latter criteria in spades. It was issued in 458BC, but “went forth” in the summer of 457BC. Thus, Jesus was baptized in AD27, exactly 483 years later, died in AD31, and Stephen was stoned in AD34. BTW, the story of the magi in Matthew 2 is impossible unless this chronology is correct.

No, the 70th week has not begun. Christ is cut off at the end of the 69th week. You put the 69th week as his baptism, but that can not be, for look at Daniel 9:26

Dan 9:26Then 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.

At what point after Christ's baptism, and before his crucifiction was Christ "cut-off"? And more importantly at what point in that time frame did the "people of the prince" come and destroy both the city and the temple. You see that only happened AFTER the 69 weeks, verse 27 is the start of the 70th week.
Unfortunately, your starting assumption is incorrect. The Hebrew translated “after” implies a significant gap between the end of the 69th week and the cross. The length of the gap is supplied in verse 27. As I noted above, Jesus is the one who strengthens the covenant, and it’s his people who destroy the city. No, they didn’t pull down the walls, but they are responsible. Again read the prayer. Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem in 586BC, but the Jews are responsible.

It’s important to see that the destruction of the city CANNOT be within the 70 weeks. That’s part of the execution of the verdict of “guilty” in the covenant lawsuit. And that can’t happen until the 70 weeks are over.

It seems to say that Christ would bring an end to sacrifice and offering. That was the effect of the crucifixion, wasn't it?
Exactly.

No, sacrifices did not stop with the cross, the temple worship continued on until AD 70. There is no more sacrifice now, because there is no more temple now, but there will again be one, and there will again be sacrifice.
You don’t read Hebrews very well. When Jesus died, it was the last sacrifice in God’s economy. He became our high priest when the Torah was changed. Hebrews 7 and 9 are quite emphatic on this point, and Hebrews 7 is exceedingly emphatic that the change is permanent.

Ted

[Berean Todd]

God instituted a system of sacrifices and offerings so that people could atone for sin. That purpose ended with the cross. Temple worship may have continued after the cross, but that worship now became a pagan ritual. If the temple is rebuilt, it will be the symbol of that same pagan religion. I don't think God cares for pagan rituals and I don't see any significance to the religious practices of the Jews after the cross.

Why do you think that the Jewish religious practices would still be important afer the cross?

My question for you would be, "Did the sacrifices of the temple ever have any atoning purpose/ability in and of itself?"

The answer of course is that no, they did not. Salvation has always been by faith alone, atonement has always been attached to faith and faithfullness. In the OT, long before Christ came and ended the sacrificial system God said that He hated the sacrifices, and he despised their festivals. Hebrews (from a Christian perspective) tells us that the blood of bulls and rams was NEVER able to bring atonement.

[rhutchin]

rhutchin
God instituted a system of sacrifices and offerings so that people could atone for sin. That purpose ended with the cross. Temple worship may have continued after the cross, but that worship now became a pagan ritual. If the temple is rebuilt, it will be the symbol of that same pagan religion. I don't think God cares for pagan rituals and I don't see any significance to the religious practices of the Jews after the cross.

Why do you think that the Jewish religious practices would still be important afer the cross?

Berean Todd
My question for you would be, "Did the sacrifices of the temple ever have any atoning purpose/ability in and of itself?"

The answer of course is that no, they did not. Salvation has always been by faith alone, atonement has always been attached to faith and faithfullness. In the OT, long before Christ came and ended the sacrificial system God said that He hated the sacrifices, and he despised their festivals. Hebrews (from a Christian perspective) tells us that the blood of bulls and rams was NEVER able to bring atonement.

The system of offerings and acrifices were instituted by God and we read about them in great detail in Exodus/Leviticus. That system prefigured that which Christ did on the cross and was brought to an end at that time. The system of sacrifices/offerings had an important purpose prior to the cross. After the cross, a sacrifice or offering meant nothing and became a pagan ritual.

Regarding the atonement for sin, we have --


1 Now the LORD called to Moses, and spoke to him from the tabernacle of meeting, saying,
2 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘When any one of you brings an offering to the LORD, you shall bring your offering of the livestock--of the herd and of the flock.
3 ‘If his offering is a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it of his own free will at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD.
4 Then he shall put his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him.

Such begins the book of Leviticus. That and the rest of the book would seem to argue that the answer to your question is, Yes.

However, the issue remains. Why do you think that the Jewish religious practices would still be important afer the cross? What makes them significant after the cross?

[rhutchin]

Berean Todd
No, sacrifices did not stop with the cross, the temple worship continued on until AD 70. There is no more sacrifice now, because there is no more temple now, but there will again be one, and there will again be sacrifice.

Ted
You don’t read Hebrews very well. When Jesus died, it was the last sacrifice in God’s economy. He became our high priest when the Torah was changed. Hebrews 7and 9 are quite emphatic on this point, and Hebrews 7is exceedingly emphatic that the change is permanent.

It is true that the sacrifices continued after the cross. However, even you must admit that they had no purpose after the cross. So, we can ask, if the sacrifices have no purpose now, why would God initiate them again? What would be the significance of starting that system back up? Particularly in light of the argument from Hebrews noted by Ted.

[rhutchin]

rhutchin
Hadn't heard that before. I am not sure what significance we should attach to Stephen's death. I am inclined to relate everything to Christ, either His first coming or His second.

Darth Xena
It is not Stephen's death, I just used that as an important event we could all latch onto, but the event is the persecution and scattering the early believers out of Jerusalem and into the Gentiles.

I do not believe we have exegetical warrant to make the 490 years a different period of time than the 7+62+1

I don't see how the 490 years of v24 can extend past the cross but the 7+62+1 has to do that. I think we are given two different pathways pointing to Christ and one confirms the other.

[zemogger]

Originally posted by rhutchin

I think you basically went through the explanation that the cited passage followed. Are you the author of the cited work?

No I'm not the author. I just briefly summarized it.

[Berean Todd]

Such begins the book of Leviticus. That and the rest of the book would seem to argue that the answer to your question is, Yes.

I disagree, though we may be getting into semantics a bit.

However, the issue remains. Why do you think that the Jewish religious practices would still be important afer the cross? What makes them significant after the cross?

My point is that they never had real signifigance. The only atonement for sin is Christ's death, and the only path for that is faith in Him. No one says that the Jews reinstituting the tribultation temple will be an acceptable sacrifice.

But we are getting a little bit off. Messiah will put an end to sacrifice, but the death on a cross did not do that. Sacrifices continued. And the will begin again at some point in the future. The Jews themselves are preparing for it. The sacrifices will be put an end to when national Israel has the scales pulled back from their eyes and they come in repentence to the Lord Jesus Christ.

[rhutchin]

Such begins the book of Leviticus. That and the rest of the book would seem to argue that the answer to your question is, Yes.

[b]Berean Todd
I disagree, though we may be getting into semantics a bit.

OK, but clearly it was God who established a system of sacrifices and offerings and it was God who brought that system to an end with the death of Christ on the cross. The purpose for the sacrifices and offerings may remain in dispute but we know that purpose ended with the cross.



However, the issue remains. Why do you think that the Jewish religious practices would still be important afer the cross? What makes them significant after the cross?

[b]Berean Todd
My point is that they never had real signifigance. The only atonement for sin is Christ's death, and the only path for that is faith in Him. No one says that the Jews reinstituting the tribultation temple will be an acceptable sacrifice.

But we are getting a little bit off. Messiah will put an end to sacrifice, but the death on a cross did not do that. Sacrifices continued. And the will begin again at some point in the future. The Jews themselves are preparing for it. The sacrifices will be put an end to when national Israel has the scales pulled back from their eyes and they come in repentence to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Given that it was God who established sacrifices and offerings, I do not see how we can conclude that they had no significance. We may not be able to agree on that significance, but God intituted them for a reason and then God brought them to an end on the cross.

From God's perspective, Christ was the last sacrifice. The Jews may have continued sacrifices after the cross, but those sacrifices now had become a pagan ritual by a pagan society that had rejected God (Christ). It may be those pagan sacrifices that are brought to an end when, and if, the Jews come to repentence but that is no different than any other person who gives up their pagan beliefs for Christ. The Jews are no different than the gentiles now as Paul has explained.

It is not enough for you to take the position that we should take notice of the sacrificial offerings of the Jews but you should be able to explain why that is so. Why should we think anything of that which God has declared to have no purpose because of the cross?

[lecoop]

If we understand the God given chronology of John, in the book of Revelation, and compare with Daniel 9, last verse, we see that the entire 70th week is still in our future, with the trumpets sounding in the first half, and the vials poured out in the second half. Daniel said that the abomination would take place in the midst or dividing point of the 7 years, making two each 3 1/2 halves of the 7 years. How amazing! John shows us the exact thing. There are five events in Revelation that start at the midpoint, and go to the end of the week, and in each case, the Holy Spirit saw fit to mention the 3 1/2 years.

First,the two witnesses show up at the midpoint, and testify for 1260 days. Next, the court of the temple is trampled by Gentiles for 42 months. Next, the woman flees into the wilderness (fleeing the abomination, just as Jesus told them to) and is fed and protected for 1260 days, and for time, times and half of time. Finally, the beast is given total authority over this earth for 42 months. These five things all cover the last half of the 70th week. They all start with chapter 11, and to to about chapter 16 (the end of the 70th week).

We see then, that the exact midpoint of the week is clearly marked by the sounding of the 7th trumpet. (Just a few verses later we see the woman fleeing into the wilderness). From this, it is easy to see that the first six trumpets are sounded during the first half of the week. They are warnings by God that worse will come, if men refuse to repent.

When does the 70th week start? A close study of Isaiah 2 and Joel 2, and comparing them with the 6th seal events, shows us that the sixth seal is the final fulfillment of these two prophecies. They both (along with the 6th seal events) point to an immediate start of the day of the Lord, and the 70th week of Daniel. The day of the Lord, then, and the 70th week, will officially start with the 7th seal.

How amazing then, that John breaks from his realtime time line at the 6th seal, and goes into an intermission. And during that intermission, John sees a great crowd, that no man can number, already in heaven! Since God's wrath will start with the 7th seal, the church will escape His wrath.

The entire 70th week, is still future, but not far into the future!

Coop

[TyRockwell]

You ask, what to make of the second half of the 70th week of Daniel. It was the three and one-half year seige and destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, 66-70 AD.

[rhutchin]

You ask, what to make of the second half of the 70th week of Daniel. It was the three and one-half year siege and destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, 66-70 AD.

Is that just your opinion or can you get the Bible to say that?

[rhutchin]

If we understand the God given chronology of John, in the book of Revelation, and compare with Daniel 9, last verse, we see that the entire 70th week is still in our future,...


27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.

So who/what is--

1. The "he" who confirms the covenant? If not Christ, who else in the Bible?
2. What is that covenant? If not the covenant of grace, what other covenant and where is it described in the Bible.
3. Who are the "many" with whom it is made? If not the elect, then who?
4. What does it mean that "sacrifice and offering" are brought to an end. If not the crucifixion of Christ, then what?

[TyRockwell]

Is that just your opinion or can you get the Bible to say that?
Jesus, said it, and Isaiah 61said it. In Luke 21:20-22 he speaks of the time of wrath, "in fulfillment of all that has been written." Before that, in Luke 4, Jesus read from Isaiah 61:1-2, but stopped in the middle of the 2nd verse, because his 3 and a half year ministry ended the 1st half of the 70th week. The second half of Isaiah 61:2 was the second half of the 70th week, the "day of vengeanceof our God." Same vengeanceof Hebrews 10:29.

[lecoop]

27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate.

So who/what is--

1. The "he" who confirms the covenant? If not Christ, who else in the Bible?
2. What is that covenant? If not the covenant of grace, what other covenant and where is it described in the Bible.
3. Who are the "many" with whom it is made? If not the elect, then who?
4. What does it mean that "sacrifice and offering" are brought to an end. If not the crucifixion of Christ, then what?

The "he" that comfirms the covenant is the beast of Revelation 13, and 17.

There will be a covenant of peace for Israel. Government leaders have been trying to get it established for years. The beast of chapter 13 will accomplish it.

The "many" are those living in Israel.

The sacrifices will be started again. And the beast of chapter 13 will stop them again.

Coop

[TyRockwell]

That's what has been taught for 170 years, Coop. Danmiel was still sealed at that time.

[timspong]

It is true that the sacrifices continued after the cross. However, even you must admit that they had no purpose after the cross. So, we can ask, if the sacrifices have no purpose now, why would God initiate them again? What would be the significance of starting that system back up? Particularly in light of the argument from Hebrews noted by Ted.

Israel will not recognize Jesus as the messiah until his second coming which is after the rebuilding of the temple and commencement of sacrifices. The re-building of the temple will be initiated by a deceptive gesture by the little horn.

Luk 13:35 Behold, your house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!'"

[TyRockwell]

Israel will not recognize Jesus as the messiah until his second coming which is after the rebuilding of the temple and commencement of sacrifices. The re-building of the temple will be initiated by a deceptive gesture by the little horn.

Luk 13:35 Behold, your house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!'"
The rebuilding of the temple that Dan9:26 references was Zerrubabel's temple, rebuilt after the Jews were released to back and rebuild Jerusalem after Cyrus decree, mentioned in Dan. 9:25, and written in its verbatim in Ezra 6:3-5.

[TyRockwell]

I don't see how the 490 years of v24 can extend past the cross but the 7+62+1 has to do that. I think we are given two different pathways pointing to Christ and one confirms the other.
The 7+62+1 should really be 7+62+1/2+1/2. The first half was Jesus 3 and 1/2 year ministry, the second 1/2 relates to the "day of vengeance of our God," the second half of Isaiah 61:2. The gap in the 70 weeks has precedant in the gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks.

[timspong]

The rebuilding of the temple that Dan9:26 references was Zerrubabel's temple, rebuilt after the Jews were released to back and rebuild Jerusalem after Cyrus decree, mentioned in Dan. 9:25, and written in its verbatim in Ezra 6:3-5.



Okay agreed, but the temple is to be rebuilt again.


What about Ezekiels temple? - there are something like 8 chapters describing a temple in finite detail that is completely different to any temple that has previously been built.

[timspong]

The 7+62+1 should really be 7+62+1/2+1/2. The first half was Jesus 3 and 1/2 year ministry, the second 1/2 relates to the "day of vengeance of our God," the second half of Isaiah 61:2. The gap in the 70 weeks has precedant in the gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks.

I disagree, the whole last week has yet to be fulfilled, the first 69 weeks includes Christs ministry. There are many prophesies that have yet to be fulfilled that relate to 2 subsequent 3.5 year periods that can't be synonymous.

[TyRockwell]

I disagree, the whole last week has yet to be fulfilled, the first 69 weeks includes Christs ministry. There are many prophesies that have yet to be fulfilled that relate to 2 subsequent 3.5 year periods that can't be synonymous.
If you are talking about the 1260 days in Daniel 12, then that referred to the time from the desecration of the temple after Antiochus Epiphanes sacrificed a pig on the alter, in 167 BC, to the rededication of the temple, in 164 BC, celibrated as the Feast of Hannakah. The other 3 and a half years of the two witnesses is a little less easy to nail down. I tend to believe it has to do with the time of the 'until' of Eph.4:13, the maturity of the church. That 3.5 years is probably the fulfillment of Jesus' words, "He that believes in me, the works that I do, he shall do also, and greater works than these shall he do, because I go to the Father." He said it, it will happen. Selah. It hasn't happened yet. Neither of these 3.5 year periods have anything to do with the 70 weeks of Dan.

[rhutchin]

rhutchin
It is true that the sacrifices continued after the cross. However, even you must admit that they had no purpose after the cross. So, we can ask, if the sacrifices have no purpose now, why would God initiate them again? What would be the significance of starting that system back up? Particularly in light of the argument from Hebrews noted by Ted.

timspong
Israel will not recognize Jesus as the messiah until his second coming which is after the rebuilding of the temple and commencement of sacrifices. The re-building of the temple will be initiated by a deceptive gesture by the little horn.

Luk 13:35 Behold, your house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!'"

Fine opinion. Now link Luke 13:35 to the second coming. That which Jesus said to the Pharisees, He has said to all people. We are no different than the Pharisees. Our salvation requires that we say, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!"

However, you want it to identify with the second coming. Show us how you make that link.

[rhutchin]

rhutchin
I don't see how the 490 years of v24 can extend past the cross but the 7+62+1 has to do that. I think we are given two different pathways pointing to Christ and one confirms the other.

TyRockwell
The 7+62+1 should really be 7+62+1/2+1/2. The first half was Jesus 3 and 1/2 year ministry, the second 1/2 relates to the "day of vengeance of our God," the second half of Isaiah 61:2. The gap in the 70 weeks has precedant in the gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks.

OK. That sounds plausible.

The second half of the week is shrouded in mystery, so this is one direction in which we may go.

So, what does the second half of the week represent and what is it's connection to the Day of Vengeance?

[rhutchin]

...that referred to the time from the desecration of the temple after Antiochus Epiphanes sacrificed a pig on the alter, in 167 BC, to the rededication of the temple, in 164 BC, celibrated as the Feast of Hannakah.

Where did you find that in the Bible?

[JonLanceBarker]

he didn't.

it's a credible scholarly position. :teeth:

[TyRockwell]

Where did you find that in the Bible?
The prophecy of Antiochus of Greece abolishing the daily sacrifice, and setting up the abomilation that causes desolation, and the firm resistance by the people of God is in Daniel 11:30-35. History establishes that this happened. There were three abominations of desolation that prophecy foretold. The Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 586 BC, this one by Greece in 167 BC, and the one Dan.9:26 and Jesus foretold in 70 AD.

[TyRockwell]

OK. That sounds plausible.

The second half of the week is shrouded in mystery, so this is one direction in which we may go.

So, what does the second half of the week represent and what is it's connection to the Day of Vengeance?
The 66-70 AD day of vengeance was an apostacy, or rebellion, that was even more serious than the national idolatry prior to the Babylonian judgment. It was the national rejection of Jesus as their Messiah. This was the apostacy, "the great falling away," of 2nd Thess. 2:3-4. Jesus put and end to rebellion, or transgression, as foretold in Dan. 9:24. At the same time he put an end to sin, past present and future, by being made sin on the cross and suffering is penalty.

[TyRockwell]

Okay agreed, but the temple is to be rebuilt again.


What about Ezekiels temple? - there are something like 8 chapters describing a temple in finite detail that is completely different to any temple that has previously been built.
The temple does not have to be rebuilt. The mention of rebuilding the temple in Dan. 9:26 refers to Zerubbabel's Temple the second temple, that was begun after Israel's return from captivity in Babylon. Ezekiel's temple in chapters 40-48 was probably built after the Maccabean revolt and Greece was already on their way out, in 164 BC. After they departed, Israel entered a 101 year period of independence and dominion in their own land, known as the Hasmonean Dynasty, extending their rule to about the same territory held under David's and Solomon's reigns. There is scripture that foretold Israel's restoration, and that they would be better than before Solomon's temple. The prophecy about God blessing them more than before is in Ezekiel 36, the whole chapter. The prophecy that speaks to the glory of their temple attaining the glory of Ezekiel's vision, is in Haggai 2:6-9, where "the glory of this house (Zerrubabel's temple)will be greater than the glory of the former house (Solomon's Temple). That temple was damaged in the Roman invasion in 63 BC. Herod's Temple was an expansion of Zerrubabel's to appease the Jews and to hopefully get them to accept Roman rule.

[rhutchin]

The 66-70 AD day of vengeance was an apostacy, or rebellion, that was even more serious than the national idolatry prior to the Babylonian judgment. It was the national rejection of Jesus as their Messiah. This was the apostacy, "the great falling away," of 2nd Thess. 2:3-4. Jesus put and end to rebellion, or transgression, as foretold in Dan. 9:24. At the same time he put an end to sin, past present and future, by being made sin on the cross and suffering is penalty.

That's one way to look at it, but not the only way from what I understand.

[rhutchin]

TyRockwell
...that referred to the time from the desecration of the temple after Antiochus Epiphanes sacrificed a pig on the alter, in 167 BC, to the rededication of the temple, in 164 BC, celibrated as the Feast of Hannakah.

rhutchin
Where did you find that in the Bible?

Lance Q/Barker
he didn't.

it's a credible scholarly position. :teeth:

Men always consider their theories to be credible because they consider themselves to be so smart.

[JonLanceBarker]

Men always consider their theories to be credible because they consider themselves to be so smart.

usually, there's a good reason for scholars to have that consideration.

[TyRockwell]

That's one way to look at it, but not the only way from what I understand.
I know that it has traditionally been taught that the church becomes weak and apostate and we have to be raptured out of here so that the 'antichrist doesn't kill or silence us all. However that is a position derived from a fear-based interpretation of Revelation. When you can understand that book, it doesn't seem fearful at all. So much fear has been inserted into the Revelation of Jesus Christ, that the greek word for revelation, "apocalypse" has come to mean 'a terrible, disaster' or an awful time of death and horror. The word, in this context really only refers to revealed knowledge of the word of God. Remember Jesus is the word that became flesh. Jesus said he would build his church on knowledge revealed by the Father, in Matthew 16:18. And that the gates of hell would not be able to stand up against his church.

[rhutchin]

I know that it has traditionally been taught that the church becomes weak and apostate and we have to be raptured out of here so that the 'antichrist doesn't kill or silence us all. However that is a position derived from a fear-based interpretation of Revelation. When you can understand that book, it doesn't seem fearful at all. So much fear has been inserted into the Revelation of Jesus Christ, that the greek word for revelation, "apocalypse" has come to mean 'a terrible, disaster' or an awful time of death and horror. The word, in this context really only refers to revealed knowledge of the word of God. Remember Jesus is the word that became flesh. Jesus said he would build his church on knowledge revealed by the Father, in Matthew 16:18. And that the gates of hell would not be able to stand up against his church.

As I have been taught it, the Book of Revelation was written to encourage believers.

[rhutchin]

TyRockwell
...that referred to the time from the desecration of the temple after Antiochus Epiphanes sacrificed a pig on the alter, in 167 BC, to the rededication of the temple, in 164 BC, celibrated as the Feast of Hannakah.

rhutchin
Where did you find that in the Bible?

Lance Q/Barker
he didn't.

it's a credible scholarly position.

rhutchin
Men always consider their theories to be credible because they consider themselves to be so smart.

Lance Q/Barker
usually, there's a good reason for scholars to have that consideration.

When it comes to the prophecies in the Bible, scholarship does not seem to be able to lead a person to the right understanding (at least, no scholar seems to be able to establish his position as right with agreement from all other scholars).

[TyRockwell]

Revelation was written to tell us, at the time of Daniel's Unsealing what has taken place in the fulfillment of prophecy, in regard to the Eternal Purpose of God, so that we can see where we are in the 'time is near,' senario, so we can know what we are to do to in furthering God's Eternal purpose, as told in Ephesians 3:10-11, and Isaiah 46:8-10.

[TyRockwell]

usually, there's a good reason for scholars to have that consideration.
Thanks for your support in what you said about a scholarly position. So many are not willing to consider any other view than what they have been taught. Much of the teaching on the various scenarios has been a continuation of rote learning, without attempting to approach the subject free from preconceptions. Rote learning is defined as a mechanical memorization, without thought.

[lecoop]

That's what has been taught for 170 years, Coop. Danmiel was still sealed at that time.

OF course it is, and it is right. It fits perfectly with John.

Coop

[lecoop]

Okay agreed, but the temple is to be rebuilt again.


What about Ezekiels temple? - there are something like 8 chapters describing a temple in finite detail that is completely different to any temple that has previously been built.

Rev 11: John is told to go and measure the temple. It will be the same temple that will be trampled for 42 months. That is the same 42 months that the beast will be given authority, and that will be the same 1260 days that the two witnesses testify ,and it will be the same 1260 days that the woman will be protected in the wilderness. All these events are still in our future.

Coop

[lecoop]

If you are talking about the 1260 days in Daniel 12, then that referred to the time from the desecration of the temple after Antiochus Epiphanes sacrificed a pig on the alter, in 167 BC, to the rededication of the temple, in 164 BC, celibrated as the Feast of Hannakah. The other 3 and a half years of the two witnesses is a little less easy to nail down. I tend to believe it has to do with the time of the 'until' of Eph.4:13, the maturity of the church. That 3.5 years is probably the fulfillment of Jesus' words, "He that believes in me, the works that I do, he shall do also, and greater works than these shall he do, because I go to the Father." He said it, it will happen. Selah. It hasn't happened yet. Neither of these 3.5 year periods have anything to do with the 70 weeks of Dan.


Yet John mentions the 3.5 years as both 1260 days and as 42 months, five times in all, and each of them referring to events that will start at the midpoint of the 70th week and go to the end. All five of these events are in our future.

Coop

[lecoop]

OK. That sounds plausible.

The second half of the week is shrouded in mystery, so this is one direction in which we may go.

So, what does the second half of the week represent and what is it's connection to the Day of Vengeance?

I disagree that the second half of the week is a mystery. John gave us five different events that will start at the midpoint of the week, and go to the end of the week, and gave us the 3.5 years with each one of them. Then chapter 13 tells us pretty much what the beast will be doing during the second half of the week, and chapter 16 tells us what God will do.

One day when I was reading Daniel 9, last verse, the Holy Spirit came to me saying, "You could find the exact midpoint of the week, in Revelation, 'clearly marked.'" My spirit man answered and ask Him, "how would I find that?' "

He answered and said, "every time I mentioned an event that started at the midpoint of the week, and went to the end of the week, I always included the 3.5 years. When you find the mentions of the 3.5 years, you will be very close to the midpoint of the week. In fact, you could find the entire 70th week, 'clearly marked!' "

I will give one hint: in Rev 12:6 we see the woman fleeing into the wilderness. Jesus said they should flee when they see the abomination. Therefore, the exact midpoint, and the abomination MUST be before Rev. 12:6. BUT - not very far before!

Coop

[lecoop]

The temple does not have to be rebuilt. The mention of rebuilding the temple in Dan. 9:26 refers to Zerubbabel's Temple the second temple, that was begun after Israel's return from captivity in Babylon. Ezekiel's temple in chapters 40-48 was probably built after the Maccabean revolt and Greece was already on their way out, in 164 BC. After they departed, Israel entered a 101 year period of independence and dominion in their own land, known as the Hasmonean Dynasty, extending their rule to about the same territory held under David's and Solomon's reigns. There is scripture that foretold Israel's restoration, and that they would be better than before Solomon's temple. The prophecy about God blessing them more than before is in Ezekiel 36, the whole chapter. The prophecy that speaks to the glory of their temple attaining the glory of Ezekiel's vision, is in Haggai 2:6-9, where "the glory of this house (Zerrubabel's temple)will be greater than the glory of the former house (Solomon's Temple). That temple was damaged in the Roman invasion in 63 BC. Herod's Temple was an expansion of Zerrubabel's to appease the Jews and to hopefully get them to accept Roman rule.

Revelation 11
1And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
2But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles:

Coop

[lecoop]

Thanks for your support in what you said about a scholarly position. So many are not willing to consider any other view than what they have been taught. Much of the teaching on the various scenarios has been a continuation of rote learning, without attempting to approach the subject free from preconceptions. Rote learning is defined as a mechanical memorization, without thought.


I like to say that people read with "preconceived glasses" on. It seems almost impossible for them to understand anything else than their preconceived glasses allow.

Coop

[TyRockwell]

Yet John mentions the 3.5 years as both 1260 days and as 42 months, five times in all, and each of them referring to events that will start at the midpoint of the 70th week and go to the end. All five of these events are in our future.

Coop
I think it is significant that the terms, three and a half years, and the term 42 months are used, to differentiate this time from the 70 weeks of Daniel. We know that each one means the same amount of time, but the seventy weeks of Daniel were written in response to Daniel's prayers and questions about his people. The time, times, and half a time model takes us up to the destruction of the temple, and the abomination of desolation in 70 AD. It was the first 'time of the end,' the end that was decreed, by Jesus, that ended the temple, and Judaism. This second set of 42 months, and 3.5 years points to a fullness of the maturity of the church. These two witnesses depict a church that is future to us, and future to the seventy weeks, but related in that they are said to be olive trees and lampstands. From chapters 1and 2 we see that the lampstands refer to the churches. Olive oil is a depiction of the anointing of the Holy Spirit .Plus they are dressed in sackcloth. This is the only NT mention of people wearing sackcloth. It calls up images of the old covenant, and it is taking place in Israel, in Jerusalem, implying a witness of mature, anointed Christians, who have the culture of old covenant Israel, but are believers, ie, the church. Another aspect that points to this as being saved Hebrews, is the imagery of them as lampstands, which under old covenant Judaism, only priests got to see and have anything to deal with. In the New Covenant, all believers are kings and priests unto God. Also, under the old covenant kings and priests were anointed with olive oil. Here we see the mature, unified church, including Hebrews, inhabitants of Jerusalem. Yes, this is future, but hopefully not very far into the future.

[TyRockwell]

Revelation 11
1And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
2But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles:

Coop
When John is shown a measuring rod and told to measure the temple and the worshippers there, it means the church, who worship God in spirit and in truth. We are in unity with each other, the unity of the faith, see Eph. 4:13. The 'until' there means it will happen, at least a remnant of the church representing the whole, just as Elijah represented the remnant that had not bowed its knees to Baal. The instruction to measure the temple and the worshippers signifies the growth and maturity of the church, while, though in Jerusalem, those outside, in the outer court are not measured, or counted as saved. It means the good news of the kingdom will have been fully preached in all the world, and even in Jerusalem, there will be no excuse to be outside of the church, unsaved. Those not saved will be those who will not be saved. They refuse to accept Jesus, again.

[Noel]

I have a great link which holds a free read of Sir Robert Andersons "The Coming Prince" which is an exegesis on the prophecy of Christ, in particular Daniel chapter 9 and the 70 weeks.

http://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/Voice/The.Coming.Prince.html

God Bless

Noel

[TyRockwell]

I have a great link which holds a free read of Sir Robert Andersons "The Coming Prince" which is an exegesis on the prophecy of Christ, in particular Daniel chapter 9 and the 70 weeks.

http://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/Voice/The.Coming.Prince.html

God Bless

Noel
"the Coming prince" wrongly turns Daniel 9:26 around. It was "the people of the prince," the people being the Romans, and the prince was the Prince (principality) of Roman Empire in 70 AD.

[Zguy28]

I found this article very interesting with regard to the Seventy Weeks.

http://www.historicism.com/Haynes/seventyweeks.pdf

Its by J. L. Haynes.

[TyRockwell]

I found this article very interesting with regard to the Seventy Weeks.

http://www.historicism.com/Haynes/seventyweeks.pdf

Its by J. L. Haynes.
I read the entire article by J.L. Haynes, and I find it to be about 95% correct. And while the differences do not change the outcome to which he correctly arives, it is important to note them, for they bear significantly on the second 'end' in Daniel 12:4, in our near future. It is about the identity of the two "princes." The one in Dan. 9:24 and 25, we agree is the Anointed prince, the Messiah. However, the prince of verse 26, is, as usual, focused upon, and in effect and usage, turns the phrase into, "the prince of the people." It actually says, "the people of the prince, who is to come." Thus, it follows that it was "the people" who destroyed the city and the sanctuary. True, the people of unbelieving Israel, who rejected their Messiah brought this outcome upon themselves, but they did so passively causing it by the more serious "transgression," or "apostacy," of rejecting the Messiah. It was the Roman people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary in 70 AD. The significance of this prince of Dan. 9:26 being the principality of Rome relates precisely to the nature of our struggle, as Paul pointed out, with "principalities, powers, and the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenlies." Eph. 6:12 Remember, that Messiah was cut off in 9:25. It was in a list of the things that he would do. In the second half of verse 26, we find that war will continue to the end, and desolations will have been decreed. Jesus, himself decreed the desolations. In Mathew 23:38, he decreed, "Behold your house, (the temple), is left to you desolate." A few verses later, in reference to the temple, he decreed, "Not one stone will be left standing upon another, every one will be thrown down." As J.L. Haynes pointed out, the word for "prince" in verses 24, 25, and 26, are the same word, 'nagid,' in the original. He as well as other translators capitalized the 'P' in reference to the Messiah, in respect of the Messiah, but it is an error in translation to do so. Take note that the "prince" of Persia is a capitalized "P' as well as the "Prince"of Greece, in chapter 10. It is a different word than 'nagid,' meaning a 'prince on the battlefield.' The capital 'P' Princes of Persia and Greece is the word 'sar,' meaning, a Prince with a dominion. These are evil spirit principalities, like the ones Paul referred to. The reason that the Roman 'prince' of 9:26 is lower case is that the time is AFTER Messiah was cut off. When He rose from the dead, he had been given "all dominion, in heaven and on earth." Matthew 28:18. This lowered the Prince of Rome to a lower case 'p'. At the same time the prince of Rome was slain, and its body thrown into hell. Dan. 7:12-13 Verse 27 of Dan. 9 depicts the result of Messiah's haven been cut off, then given all authority. In so doing he put an end to sacrifice, confirming THE covenant, and his rejection by natural Israel brought about the abomination of desolation, in 70AD. What that means for us, today, is that we still have to deal with the principalities of Babylon, Persia, and Greece, who were stripped of their authority, (dominion) but allowed to live in Dan. 7:13. These are the principalities, combined into one beast, that we see in Rev. 13:2. Jesus said that what he did, those that believe in him would also do, "and greater things than these," in John 14:12. His ministry judged the "prince of this age." John 12:31 The greater things are the 'more' things, the overcoming of the three combined principalities, when the body of Christ reaches full maturity and the unity of the faith.

[lecoop]

When John is shown a measuring rod and told to measure the temple and the worshippers there, it means the church, who worship God in spirit and in truth. We are in unity with each other, the unity of the faith, see Eph. 4:13. The 'until' there means it will happen, at least a remnant of the church representing the whole, just as Elijah represented the remnant that had not bowed its knees to Baal. The instruction to measure the temple and the worshippers signifies the growth and maturity of the church, while, though in Jerusalem, those outside, in the outer court are not measured, or counted as saved. It means the good news of the kingdom will have been fully preached in all the world, and even in Jerusalem, there will be no excuse to be outside of the church, unsaved. Those not saved will be those who will not be saved. They refuse to accept Jesus, again.

How interesting that people want to "spiritualize" what John has written. This is speaking of a real, physical temple, where people come to worship. People don't come physically to people to worship; then come to a physical "temple" to worship. What did Paul say? "Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. There will be a physical temple, and the beast of chapter 13 will come and sit in the temple, and declare that he is God. And that will be the "abomination" that Jesus told people to flee. We see the people fleeing, just as Jesus said, in Rev. 12:6.

Coop

[lecoop]

I think it is significant that the terms, three and a half years, and the term 42 months are used, to differentiate this time from the 70 weeks of Daniel. We know that each one means the same amount of time, but the seventy weeks of Daniel were written in response to Daniel's prayers and questions about his people. The time, times, and half a time model takes us up to the destruction of the temple, and the abomination of desolation in 70 AD. It was the first 'time of the end,' the end that was decreed, by Jesus, that ended the temple, and Judaism. This second set of 42 months, and 3.5 years points to a fullness of the maturity of the church. These two witnesses depict a church that is future to us, and future to the seventy weeks, but related in that they are said to be olive trees and lampstands. From chapters 1and 2 we see that the lampstands refer to the churches. Olive oil is a depiction of the anointing of the Holy Spirit .Plus they are dressed in sackcloth. This is the only NT mention of people wearing sackcloth. It calls up images of the old covenant, and it is taking place in Israel, in Jerusalem, implying a witness of mature, anointed Christians, who have the culture of old covenant Israel, but are believers, ie, the church. Another aspect that points to this as being saved Hebrews, is the imagery of them as lampstands, which under old covenant Judaism, only priests got to see and have anything to deal with. In the New Covenant, all believers are kings and priests unto God. Also, under the old covenant kings and priests were anointed with olive oil. Here we see the mature, unified church, including Hebrews, inhabitants of Jerusalem. Yes, this is future, but hopefully not very far into the future.

We also know that 3 1/2 years is one half of seven years. We know that 1260 days is the same amount of time as 42 months. One day the Holy Spirit came unto me saying, (as I was reading Daniel 9:27) "you could find the exact midpoint of the week, 'clearly marked' in Revelation." My spirit man answered Him: "How would I find that?" He answered back, (Just as if He was the author of Revelation) "Every time I mentioned an event that would start at the midpoint of the week, and go to the end of the week, I always included the 3 1/2 years."

Therefore, each time we read in Revelation of the 1260 days, or the 42 months or the 3 1/2 years, it is always speaking of the last half of the 70th week of Daniel. Therefore, John wrote these time frames, not "to differentiate this time from the 70 weeks of Daniel," but to show us what the last half of the week will be. The readers may note that all seven of the churches mentioned in Revelation were Jewish churches, not Gentile churches. They all disappeared, while the Gentile churches continued to this day. Therefore, there will indeed be a 70th week in our future. John clearly lays it out for us. Two events mark the midpoint of that week: the 7th trumpet is sounded in heaven, and the beast of chapter 13 will enter the temple and declare that he is God.

From this we know that the trumpets will be sounded during the first 1260 days, and the vials will be poured out in the last 1260 days. It may be that it was 3 1/2 years from Jesus baptism to His death. But that is not the same 3 1/2 years spoken of by John, nor was it a part of Daniel's 70th week, which has been clearly delineated for us in Revelation, in my opinion.

Coop

[Zguy28]

We also know that 3 1/2 years is one half of seven years. We know that 1260 days is the same amount of time as 42 months. One day the Holy Spirit came unto me saying, (as I was reading Daniel 9:27) "you could find the exact midpoint of the week, 'clearly marked' in Revelation." My spirit man answered Him: "How would I find that?" He answered back, (Just as if He was the author of Revelation) "Every time I mentioned an event that would start at the midpoint of the week, and go to the end of the week, I always included the 3 1/2 years."

Therefore, each time we read in Revelation of the 1260 days, or the 42 months or the 3 1/2 years, it is always speaking of the last half of the 70th week of Daniel. Therefore, John wrote these time frames, not "to differentiate this time from the 70 weeks of Daniel," but to show us what the last half of the week will be. The readers may note that all seven of the churches mentioned in Revelation were Jewish churches, not Gentile churches. They all disappeared, while the Gentile churches continued to this day. Therefore, there will indeed be a 70th week in our future. John clearly lays it out for us. Two events mark the midpoint of that week: the 7th trumpet is sounded in heaven, and the beast of chapter 13 will enter the temple and declare that he is God.

From this we know that the trumpets will be sounded during the first 1260 days, and the vials will be poured out in the last 1260 days. It may be that it was 3 1/2 years from Jesus baptism to His death. But that is not the same 3 1/2 years spoken of by John, nor was it a part of Daniel's 70th week, which has been clearly delineated for us in Revelation, in my opinion.

CoopSo, is it your opinion or the Holy Spirit's?

[TyRockwell]

So, is it your opinion or the Holy Spirit's?
The fact remains that Dan. 9:27 foretells the 'end,' that is, the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. That destruction was the 3.5 year seige and fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. It followed the 3.5 year ministry of Jesus. There is no more of the seventy weeks left to be fulfilled. Its done.