what does the seventy weeks of Dan 9 mean? [Archive]

View Full Version : what does the seventy weeks of Dan 9 mean?

Lion

March 26th 2005, 02:36 PM

wfaber

March 26th 2005, 03:41 PM

Now's as good a time as any to get myself into a heap of trouble.

Yes, I'm a preterist (partial), a conservative Christian; I believe in the divine Inspiration of the Book of Daniel; I believe it was written by Daniel around the end of the Babylonian captivity.

But I don't believe the prophecy of the seventy weeks refers to the coming of Jesus Christ. I take the view that the seventieth week refers to the persecution of the Jews under Antiochus Epiphanes, beginning with the death of Onias III, the high priest, the covenant with high priests Jason and Menelaus to Hellenize the Jews in 171 BC, the abolition of the Jewish religion, the sacrifice of a pig on the altar, the desolation of Jerusalem that followed in 167 BC, and the restoration of the daily sacrifice and rededication of the altar by Judas Maccabeus in December, 164 BC.

Hitch

March 26th 2005, 07:52 PM

'Sincere' christian believe what God says when spoken through His prophets and do their utmost to refrain from addition or substraction.

rogero

March 26th 2005, 08:18 PM

'Sincere' christian believe what God says when spoken through His prophets and do their utmost to refrain from addition or substraction.

So, what's your answer to Lion's question regarding the week 70 of Daniel -- "without adding or subtracting" as you said? Does week 70 refer in some way to the Parousia or was it something fulfilled in the time of the Maccabees -- or is it something else? Do you have a clear unambiguous interpretation you could share with us?

Dynasty

March 27th 2005, 08:44 AM

Famous last words...

But I don't believe the prophecy of the seventy weeks refers to the coming of Jesus Christ.

On the contrary, I beg to differ. I absolutely believe that the 70 prophetic weeks refer to the coming of the "Messiah", later identified as Jesus Christ.

The 70 prophetic weeks are equivalent to 490 years.

The 70 weeks are obviously not 70 literal weeks, since that would be just over a year. Rather, for it to be of any prophetical value, it would have to be longer. So how is 490 years extracted from the 70 weeks in Daniel 9? Well, if we applicate the formula found in Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6, which states: "A day for a year, a day for a year" we are able to determine what the seventy weeks is figurative to. Here is a formula to examine:

70 Weeks = 490 literal days + "A day for a year, a day for a year" = 490 years

Now the above has been established, several questions are raised:

- When in biblical chronology does the 490 years start and finish?
- Can there be a perfect reconciliation of the 70 prophetic weeks and the Christ?

When does the 490 years start and finish?

Daniel 9:25 states: "And you should know and have the insight [that] from the going forth of [the] word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Mes·si´ah [the] Leader, there will be seven weeks, also sixty-two weeks. She will return and be actually rebuilt, with a public square and moat, but in the straits of the times."

Therefore, from the above scripture we can deduct that the seventy prophetic weeks began "from the going forth of [the] word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem". However, what was the date of this "word" so that we can begin the chronological countdown of the "seventy weeks"? The answer can be found in the book of Nehemiah:

In Nisan (March-April) of the 20th year of Artaxerxes’ rule (455 B.C.E.), Nehemiah petitioned the king: “If your servant seems good before you, . . . send me to Judah, to the city of the burial places of my forefathers, that I may rebuild it.” (Ne 2:1, 5) The king granted permission, and Nehemiah made the long journey from Shushan to Jerusalem. On about the fourth of Ab (July-August), after making a night inspection of the walls, Nehemiah gave the command to the Jews: “Come and let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, that we may no longer continue to be a reproach.” (Ne 2:11-18) Thus, “the going forth of the word” to rebuild Jerusalem, as authorized by Artaxerxes, was put into effect by Nehemiah in Jerusalem that same year. This clearly establishes 455 B.C.E.as the year from which the 70 weeks would begin to count.

Furthermore, according to the angel’s words, the “seventy weeks” would be divided into three periods: (1) “seven weeks,” (2) “sixty-two weeks,” and (3) one week. That would be 49 years, 434 years, and 7 years—totaling 490 years.

The first "seven weeks" comprised of the rebuilding of the Jerusalem wall. The work was evidently completed to the extent necessary by about 406 B.C.E.—within the “seven weeks,” or 49 years. Additionally, a period of 62 weeks, or 434 years, would follow. After that time period, the long-promised Messiah would appear. Counting 483 years (49 plus 434) from 455 B.C.E. brings us to 29 C.E. What happened at that time? The Gospel writer Luke tells us: “In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was district ruler of Galilee, . . . God’s declaration came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness. So he came into all the country around the Jordan, preaching baptism in symbol of repentance for forgiveness of sins.” John was not the promised Messiah. But concerning what he witnessed at the baptism of Jesus of Nazareth, in the fall of 29 C.E., John said: “I viewed the spirit coming down as a dove out of heaven, and it remained upon him. Even I did not know him, but the very One who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ‘Whoever it is upon whom you see the spirit coming down and remaining, this is the one that baptizes in holy spirit.’ And I have seen it, and I have borne witness that this one is the Son of God.” (John 1:32-34) At his baptism, Jesus became the Anointed One—the Messiah, or Christ. Shortly thereafter, John’s disciple Andrew met the anointed Jesus and then told Simon Peter: “We have found the Messiah.” (John 1:41) Thus, “Messiah the Leader” appeared exactly on time—at the end of 69 weeks!

However, we have not yet completely fulfilled Daniel 9, since the "cutting off" (the death) of the Messiah is still yet to come. To keep things brief, I will outline what happens next in a simplified chart I've drawn up:

A SIMPLIFIED CHRONOLOGY OF THE SEVENTY WEEKS

455 B.C.E. The order to rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25; Ne 2:1, 5)

406 B.C.E. The first seven weeks are fulfilled (49 years) of rebuilding the J. wall.

29 C.E. The "62 weeks" (434 years) are fulfilled. (Daniel 9:25)

29 C.E. The "Messiah", Jesus Christ, is baptized. (Luke 1:1-3)

33 C.E. The Messiah (Jesus Christ) is cut off at the "half-week" and impaled (Daniel 9:26a, 27a) -

36 C.E. The seventy weeks end and the gentiles are given God's favour. (Acts 10)

If anybody has any questions, feel free to fire away.

Dynasty

rogero

March 27th 2005, 10:29 AM

Famous last words...

On the contrary, I beg to differ. I absolutely believe that the 70 prophetic weeks refer to the coming of the "Messiah", later identified as Jesus Christ.

The 70 prophetic weeks are equivalent to 490 years.

The 70 weeks are obviously not 70 literal weeks, since that would be just over a year. Rather, for it to be of any prophetical value, it would have to be longer. So how is 490 years extracted from the 70 weeks in Daniel 9? Well, if we applicate the formula found in Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6, which states: "A day for a year, a day for a year" we are able to determine what the seventy weeks is figurative to. Here is a formula to examine:

70 Weeks = 490 literal days + "A day for a year, a day for a year" = 490 years

Now the above has been established, several questions are raised:

Interesting interpretation based using Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6 as axioms to read a week as seven years. Thanks for sharing it, Dynasty! So, we now have three completely different interpretations of week 70, and one non-answer that we "have to believe what God says through the prophets."

I've never been much for prophecy, since I trust that God has it all figured you and I wouldn't be able to change things anyway. After this brief, I'm even less interested in it, as it appears to be no one "correct" way to interpret (at least the 70th week of Daniel.) And, if interpretations conflict, at most one of these can be correct.

Hitch

March 27th 2005, 01:51 PM

So, what's your answer to Lion's question regarding the week 70 of Daniel -- "without adding or subtracting" as you said? Does week 70 refer in some way to the Parousia or was it something fulfilled in the time of the Maccabees -- or is it something else? Do you have a clear unambiguous interpretation you could share with us?
Yes. The pattern is established between weeks one and two. Two follows one directly. This pattern continues to the end of the prophecy, meaning as two follows one seventy follows sixty-nine.

Consider Jesus who often quoted Dan;

Mark 1:14-15
14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
(KJV)

Take care

H

Dynasty

March 27th 2005, 02:24 PM

Interesting interpretation based using Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6 as axioms to read a week as seven years. Thanks for sharing it, Dynasty!

The axioms in Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:36 are much more than just an educated interpretation on my part, but rather, also widely accepted among Jewish theologians on the Hebrew scriptures:
"1) a period of seven days, week...2) "year week", a period of seven years, septennate (the jubilee being divided into seven septennates); also the seventh year, Sabbatical year"
SOURCE (http://www.christian-thinktank.com/q70weeks.html)

After this brief, I'm even less interested in it, as it appears to be no one "correct" way to interpret (at least the 70th week of Daniel.) And, if interpretations conflict, at most one of these can be correct.

Furthermore, another piece of evidence to back my original chronology is the following:

Luke 3:15 "Now as the people were in expectation and all were reasoning in their hearts about John: “May he perhaps be the Christ?"

Interestingly, some historians and scholars suggest that the reason why the people were in expectation (more so than any other period) of the Christ was exactly because of the prophecies of Daniel and his "70 week" chronology. The events in Luke 3:15 were in the 15th of Tiberius Caeser, which was 29 C.E. - exactly matching the chronology I stated earlier.

rogero

March 27th 2005, 04:53 PM

The axioms in Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:36 are much more than just an educated interpretation on my part, but rather, also widely accepted among Jewish theologians on the Hebrew scriptures:

SOURCE (http://www.christian-thinktank.com/q70weeks.html)

Thanks!

Furthermore, another piece of evidence to back my original chronology is the following:

Luke 3:15 "Now as the people were in expectation and all were reasoning in their hearts about John: “May he perhaps be the Christ?"

Interestingly, some historians and scholars suggest that the reason why the people were in expectation (more so than any other period) of the Christ was exactly because of the prophecies of Daniel and his "70 week" chronology. The events in Luke 3:15 were in the 15th of Tiberius Caeser, which was 29 C.E. - exactly matching the chronology I stated earlier.

This seems a justifiable interpretation.

Yes. The pattern is established between weeks one and two. Two follows one directly. This pattern continues to the end of the prophecy, meaning as two follows one seventy follows sixty-nine.

Consider Jesus who often quoted Dan;

Mark 1:14-15
14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
(KJV)

Take care

H

Thanks. I wouldn't have guessed this from your first post. So, you basically agree with Dynasty that "weeks" = years?

To get the "pattern" you appear to be working backwards from Jesus' implication of fulfilled prophecy in Mark 1:14-15 to get the 490 years back to the time of the Captivity, no? -- rather than working forward from week 1 --> 2, ..., 69 --> 70 as you said in the first paragraph above. I am understanding you correctly?

I just want to be clear about this.

R

Lion

March 28th 2005, 01:19 PM

Dan. 9:24 ¶ “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place.
Dan. 9:25 “So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.
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. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.
Dan. 9:27 “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 abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

This is the entire seventy weeks prophecy. This looks like an easy prophecy to discuss, except for some false ideas that have crept in. So let’s begin.

There are six things that were to be accomplished in that seventy week period. There is no need to discuss the fact the seventy weeks are weeks of years, since we are agreed on the point, or 490 years.

1. to finish the transgression,
The Hebrew word is pesha which means rebellion
The Jews were to fill up their cup of iniquity by rebelling aganst the messiah.

2. to make an end of sin,
The Hebrew word is chattath, which means sin offerings. To make an end of sin offerings. There would no further need for sin offerings forever. The sacrificial system would end, never to be reinstated.

3. to make atonement for iniquity,
The Hebrew word is kaphar, meaning to cover over, to atone for sin.

4. to bring in everlasting righteousness,
Righteousness means right doing

5. to seal up vision and prophecy
To verify the accuracy of the prophecy by fulfilling it

6. to anoint the most holy place.
The Hebrew words qodesh qodesh means most holy place. It is used commonly in levitical books to refer to holy places, never to people. In this instance it refers to the most holy place in the Hebrew temple. Actually there is a heavenly temple referred to in the book of Revelation.

Dan. 9:25 “So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.

The word translated moat is charuts, which really means decison making, since Jerusalem was on a hill and a moat was impossible. The town plaza was commonly the place for settling disputes and making contracts.

The decree giving autonomy to Jerusalem is mentioned in Ezra 7 and was dated in the seventh year of Artaxerxes. Comparing king lists establishes that the date was the autumn of 457 BC. Now that we have established the starting point, the rest should be easy.

Seven weeks and sixty two weeks is 69 weeks, or 483 years. Adding -457 to 483 gives AD 26 but we have to remember there was no year zero so the date is AD 27, the year Christ was baptized in Jordan by John. This was the Messiah the prince.

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. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.

Now here we have to be careful. The text said messiah the prince. Who was the prince just referred to? The messiah. Then who were the people of the prince that shall come? THE JEWS, NOBODY ELSE.

Dan. 9:27 “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 abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

Now who made a firm covenant for one week? The messiah. How long did Christ labor? Three and a half years and was crucified. When Christ died the veil in the temple was torn from the top to the bottom, showing that the way for forgiveness was open. No more animal sacrifices needed Christ ascended about forty days later. But there is half a week left. How do we account for that? The disciples labored for the Jews mostly in Jerusalem for another three and a half years until the sanhedrin called Steven before the council. The result was that Steven was stoned. The Jews formally rejected Christ. They pronounced a curse on anyone who tries to figure out the meaning of Daniel 9.

But we left something hanging. We referred to the idea that the Jews destroyed the city and the temple. Now there is some room for the undisputed fact that Titus did destroy the temple and he was a prince of Rome and did eventually become emperor.

How can we resolve the dispute? Fortunately we have an eyewitness to the whole affair. Josephus, the Jewish historian, was captured when the Romans laid siege to another town and was in the Roman camp for the whole affair. Josephus had contact with the Roman officers. Actually, Vespasian was in charge of the effort to pacify the Jews. But Vespasian delayed attacking Jerusalem because there were three factions of zealots that were fighting to the death in the city. Vespasian reasoned that if Jews were killing Jews, there would be fewerJews to kill when he did attack. As it turned out he was right.

In the meantime word came that Nero died and Vespasian was next in line so that left Titus in charge. The other towns had been pacified and Titus looked for a way into Jerusalem. He managed to break a small hole but it led into a warren where nobody could fight and the zealots were above so he backed out.

One of the zealot factions occupied the temple but had no place to bury the dead, so the temple eventually had so many dead they actually had to walk on dead bodies, Another faction got drunk and careless with fire and five years supply of grain was burned. Starvation was emminent. The bodies were stacked up like cordwood. One gatekeeper counted over 85,000 bodies stacked up with no place to bury them. The temple was full of bodies. All before the Roman army entered.

The question is, who destroyed the temple and the city? Yes the Romans finished the job. but the zealots did most of the job.

Hitch

March 28th 2005, 11:37 PM

Thanks. I wouldn't have guessed this from your first post. So, you basically agree with Dynasty that "weeks" = years?

To get the "pattern" you appear to be working backwards from Jesus' implication of fulfilled prophecy in Mark 1:14-15 to get the 490 years back to the time of the Captivity, no? -- rather than working forward from week 1 --> 2, ..., 69 --> 70 as you said in the first paragraph above. I am understanding you correctly?

I just want to be clear about this.

R If the pattern is correct it will work in either direction. WRT the quote from our Lord; I dont know of any other Messianic prophecy timed out so carefully, or to put it another way, What other 'time fulfilled' would Jesus be speaking of? What better Source of OT interpretation could there be?

Jesus spoke often of his kingdom and I dont know of a single reference in which he defines it as or even alludes to it as a temporal, geo-political entity, as the futirists contend, clouding the meaning of Dan's work.

Eric C.

March 30th 2005, 05:55 PM

Famous last words...

SNIP
Therefore, from the above scripture we can deduct that the seventy prophetic weeks began "from the going forth of [the] word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem". However, what was the date of this "word" so that we can begin the chronological countdown of the "seventy weeks"? The answer can be found in the book of Nehemiah:

In Nisan (March-April) of the 20th year of Artaxerxes’ rule (455 B.C.E.), Nehemiah petitioned the king: “If your servant seems good before you, . . . send me to Judah, to the city of the burial places of my forefathers, that I may rebuild it.” (Ne 2:1, 5) The king granted permission, and Nehemiah made the long journey from Shushan to Jerusalem. On about the fourth of Ab (July-August), after making a night inspection of the walls, Nehemiah gave the command to the Jews: “Come and let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, that we may no longer continue to be a reproach.” (Ne 2:11-18) Thus, “the going forth of the word” to rebuild Jerusalem, as authorized by Artaxerxes, was put into effect by Nehemiah in Jerusalem that same year. This clearly establishes 455 B.C.E.as the year from which the 70 weeks would begin to count.

SNIP

If anybody has any questions, feel free to fire away.

Dynasty

Uh Dynasty, there isn't a SINGLE historical chronology that I've EVER seen which has Artaxerxes reign beginning in 474 BC. Care to share where you get your "info"? All chronolgies I've seen have Artaxerxes' reign beginning in 465/464, which would make the 20th year 445/4 BC.

It really doesn't matter though, since the 70 weeks begin counting in 536 BC, as the Bible makes implicitly clear.

Cheers,

Eric

Ted

March 31st 2005, 11:30 AM

To all,

The following is from chapter 3 of my book, I Want to be Left Behind. References to "Anderson" are to Sir Robert Anderson's book The Coming Prince.

Ted

“So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.”

This verse is probably the most badly translated verse in all of Scripture. Almost all of the difficulties in understanding this prophecy revolve around this problem. Futurists accept the read-ing of the NASB as accurate in the sense that it refers to the “re-building” of the city of Jerusalem. This focus leads Futurists to Nehemiah 2, where Nehemiah seeks permission from Artaxerxes to go to Jerusalem to build the city, since its walls and gates have been burned. Anderson quotes Nehemiah 2:5 to highlight what he considers the structural emphasis of the prophecy.

“If it please the king, and if thy servant hath found favour in thy sight, that thou wouldest send me unto Judah, unto THE CITY of my fathers’ sepulchres, THAT I MAY BUILD IT.”

The permission granted to him is the only royal act in the pertinent era involving construction in Jerusalem. As such, it seems to be a good fit with the prophecy. However, it has some serious problems.

First, there is no decree in the text. Nehemiah presents his request (Neh 2:3, 5) and the king consents (2:6). There is no record of a royal pronouncement. Nehemiah has to make a special request for letters of safe passage and provision (2:7–8) that would be unnecessary if a decree had been issued.

Daniel 9:25 states that there will be “seven weeks and sixty-two weeks.” It is commonly suggested that forty-nine years was the period of rebuilding Jerusalem. But Nehemiah completed his task of repairing the gates and walls in fifty-two days (Neh 6:15). Since “(t)here can be no loose reckoning in a Divine chronology” (Anderson, 122), another answer must be sought.

The decree is specified in Hebrew with two hiphil infinitives. These two verbs cause an event to take place on their common object: Jerusalem. This creates a major problem for the Futurist view. If Jerusalem is to be rebuilt, Jerusalem must also be restored. This may not seem to be a difficulty to the modern mind, but it is a severe problem in Hebrew. We think of restoration projects involving historical buildings, but in Hebrew, the verb shuv has no such uses. In over a thousand biblical cases, shuv never applies directly to physical objects. A town or other property may be “restored,” but that action refers to restoring owner-ship and control, not rebuilding structures. Every biblical use of the word revolves around the primary thought of turning, and is an action by or on people. Thus, the restored Jerusalem cannot be the physical city unless the ownership and control of the city is in view.

No decree exists that restores control of the city to the exiles and also directs its rebuilding. But Anderson suggests the rebuilding of the walls and gates under Nehemiah “was nothing less than the restoration of the autonomy of Judah.” This is asserted because a city without intact walls was supposedly incapable of autonomous existence. While this may potentially be true, we must reject this idea, since there is no decree in view and the autonomy is inferred, not conferred.

Any candidate decree must first be a decree, and then it must restore Jerusalem, either by explicitly returning its autonomy or returning the people, or both. But more than that, a true restoration must reverse the desolation God inflicted on Jerusalem in the person of Nebuchadnezzar when that king destroyed the temple and removed its sacred vessels to Babylon. Since “the religion of the Jew knows no worship apart from the hill of Zion” (Anderson, 62), it must restore the ability of the Jews to properly worship in Jerusalem. Preconditions for this include the presence of people in Jerusalem and a rebuilt temple.

The second action which must take place is “building” Jerusa-lem. We have already found that no candidate decree exists which satisfies the restoration requirement as well as commanding the rebuilding of the city. This suggests that God got the prophecy wrong, but there is another legitimate translation possible for the Hebrew verb banah, usually translated “build.”

If we accept the perspective on restoration that focuses on the people of Jerusalem, we would have a decree that “builds” people. This is obviously nonsense, but it is possible to “build up” people. And the word used, banah, would be the same. This exact usage appears in Jeremiah’s prophecy regarding the exile to Babylon.

Thus says the LORD concerning all My wicked neighbors who strike at the inheritance with which I have endowed My people Israel, “Behold I am about to uproot them from their land and will uproot the house of Judah from among them. And it will come about that after I have uprooted them, I will again have compassion on them; and I will bring them back, each one to his inheritance and each one to his land. Then it will come about that if they will really learn the ways of My people, to swear by My name, ‘As the LORD lives,’ even as they taught My people to swear by Baal, then they will be built up [banah] in the midst of My people.” (Jer 12:14–16; emphasis added)

Those who would return to God’s ways would be “built up.” This expression indicates permanence and prominence. Four times in the Old Testament this expression is used regarding in-dividuals to be built (up). This word occurs six times in reference to families. Fourteen times we find that God would banah a “house” for someone. These figurative statements speak of dy-nasties God would establish for the king in question. Since they did not yet exist, it is appropriate to say that they would be “built” from nothing, but at the same time, since the emphasis is on the enduring nature of the “house,” it is also legitimate to translate the word in the passages as “built up,” as the translators have done in some cases. On ten occasions banah is used eschatologically. In these passages, various expressions are used to describe the ultimate prominence of God’s kingdom, from build-ing the temple to building up Judah. Because of the prophetic focus on the greatness and permanence of the “house of God,” banah can be legitimately understood in the sense of “build up” in these texts.

With this mass of lexical evidence, it is proper to suggest an alternate to the standard translation of “to restore and to build Jerusalem.” Remaining completely faithful to the Hebrew we may read this passage as “to restore and to build up Jerusalem.” This then identifies Jerusalem as the people, where the name is used pars pro toto. The proper decree to fulfill the prophecy will be one which restores the people to Israel with self-government and also restores the house of God with its sacred vessels and worship.

Only three legitimate candidate decrees exist. In the first (Ezra 1), Cyrus frees the exiles to return to Judea, and sends with them a substantial part of the furnishings of the temple taken by Nebuchadnezzar. Instructions are given that the temple should be rebuilt. This decree is the first step in the restoration of Yah-weh’s good name. The destruction of the temple and removal of sacred vessels have in effect said that Nabu, Bel, and Sin are stronger than Yahweh. But this decree is insufficient to meet the specifications, since it includes no provision for autonomy.

As the returning exiles begin to rebuild, surrounding satraps become upset and prevail on Artaxerxes (Ezra 4) to order that work be stopped. When Darius ascends the throne, Zerubbabel leads in the rebuilding of the temple (Ezra 5). There is again opposition, which leads to a search of the archives. Darius then reis-sues the decree of Cyrus. As with the original decree of Cyrus, Scripture includes considerable detail, but it does not meet the specifications of Daniel 9:25.

The final decree is found in Ezra 7. In the seventh year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, after the temple is completed (6:15), Ezra is granted a decree allowing any Israelite in the Medo-Persian empire to return to Jerusalem (7:13). The king “freely offered to the God of Israel” gold and silver (7:15) as well as the last of the sacred vessels taken by Nebuchadnezzar. Other offerings are in-cluded from “all the silver and gold which you shall find in the whole province of Babylon” (7:16). These are to be “offered on the altar of the house of God which is in Jerusalem” (7:17). Other specifics are included which add up to a full restoration of the worship of God in a fully furnished temple. Artaxerxes then continues with a full restoration of civil authority for the returned exiles. Magistrates and judges are to be appointed to apply the law of God in Judea (7:25–26). He even provides for teachers of the law.

This decree fully restores Jerusalem. The autonomy of the city is explicitly re-established under the laws of God. The rebuilt temple can now be properly used for the worship of God, complete with all the sacred vessels. Artaxerxes further indicates his submission to God by providing gifts for the temple from both the royal treasury and the people of the land. Even the treasurers of neighboring provinces (7:21–22) are required to contribute. But most important is the reason stated in the decree.

Whatever is commanded by the God of heaven, let it be done with zeal for the house of the God of heaven, lest there be wrath against the kingdom of the king and his sons. (Ezra 7:23)

Artaxerxes makes it clear that he is submitting his authority to the God of heaven. By all the related actions in the decree he makes it clear that all of his subordinates are to respect Yahweh as well. Ezra confirms this effect (7:28). In this way Jerusalem becomes more prominent in the world. It is “built up.” This is a complete and exact match to the specifications given by Gabriel. Artaxerxes has issued the decree “to restore and to build up Jeru-salem.” As a final note, Ezra identifies this decree as something God has put in the king’s heart (7:27), suggesting that Ezra understands its prophetic significance.

Daniel 9:25 says Jerusalem will be “restored and built up.” We do not need to revisit the derivation of this language, since it is identical to what we have just covered. But the next phrase does require attention. The KJV says the restoration will be “with streets and a wall.” The NASB reads “with plaza and moat.” The first word, rehob, means a wide place. Since streets were generally narrow, “plaza” or “square” (RSV) is the preferred reading. The second word is one we have seen before: charats.

The root meaning of charats is “to cut.” Thus we find that the NASB and NIV indicate that there will be a moat or trench. But Jerusalem has never had a moat, and the Old Testament only uses charats in the concrete sense once. Its primary usage is with regard to decision-making. In Old Testament times civil decisions were carried out in the square near the city gate. If we read this phrase as “square and decision making,” then we have encountered an idiom which describes having both the place and power of independent civil authority. This is a perfect description of the civil autonomy granted in the decree of Ezra 7. No further search is necessary. When properly translated, the specifications in Daniel 9:25 are matched in exacting detail by the decree given by Artaxerxes in his seventh year.

“Until Messiah the Prince”
The first segment of the decree is seven weeks or forty-nine years. Some have suggested that this was the time required to re-build Jerusalem. As we have already seen, this was not the intent of the decree. Also, since no city is ever fully completed, we should not expect to find any record of completion, and none exists. Instead, this is the length of the jubilee cycle. In part, the Babylonian captivity was a result of the failure to observe the land sabbaths and jubilees (2 Chron 36:21). The restoration might then be expected to fall on the jubilee, and it does. The returnees with Ezra arrived in Judea in August of 457 BC. They were able then to present the decree to the Babylonian officials in the province just in time to celebrate the fall feasts with the Jews who had returned to Jerusalem before them. This allowed them to an-nounce the freedom from slavery to Babylon as the jubilee, precisely at the time that all slaves should be freed (Lev 25:8–10, 13). Seven weeks of years later would be the next jubilee, and would be a celebration not of rebuilding, but of accomplished restoration and building up.

It is now relatively simple to calculate the time when the Mes-siah should arrive. At the end of seven weeks of years and sixty-two weeks of years, Daniel is told (483 actual years), “Messiah the Prince” will begin his ministry. Beginning with 457 BC, a period of 483 years takes us to 27 AD. Luke supplies the next piece of chronological data by locating Jesus’ baptism in the “fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar” (Luke 3:1). By the Roman calendar, this would be in a twelve month period beginning August 19, 28 AD. But Luke was born in a part of the empire which used the Syrian calendar and royal chronology. He was also a convert to Christi-anity, which used the Jewish calendar and royal chronology. Both of these methods place the fifteenth year in the twelve months beginning Tishri 1, 27 AD. The other VIPs in Luke’s discussion fit this timing. Jesus’ baptism was in the fall of 27 AD, precisely as predicted by the prophecy, giving us a firm anchor for the chronology of Jesus’ ministry.

ross3421

April 11th 2005, 01:39 AM

There is a belief being preached that the seventieth week of Daniel 9 was cut off from the other 69 and will be some time in the near future. The main beliefs are that the saints wil be raptured, suddenly disappear. The rest of us will be left beind. This is the basis of the “Left Behind” series of books by Tim LaHaye. The rest of the teaching is briefly that the Hebrew temple will be rebuilt and the Jews will once again offer animal sacrifices. Three and a half years later the antichrist wil appear and stop the sacrifices. Somehow there will be a mass conversion of the Jews and then Satan will be bound for a thousand years of peace. What is the truth of all this? Didn’t Jesus say His coming would be visible to everyone?

This teaching has serious implications for the sincere Christian. What do you think?

To All,

I agree that Daniel 9 speaks of the coming of the Messiah, also that this passage has nothing to do with the Gentiles.

I utmost disagree with the preterist viewpoint that these events point towards the past. None of the 70 weeks has yet occurred.

Thus scripture shows that the current teaching of weeks = years is incorrect. 70 weeks are 490 days.........

The seventieth week is THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES in which the Jews read the Law of Moses and celebrate the building of the temple in their land. I have written a report suppoting the above which I have attached. Below are the highlights....

Cut off

Refers to the Spirit of Truth in the latter days not the crusifiction. We see the inhabinats running "to and fro" to find it however they are unable.....

Joel 1:5 “Awake ye drunkards, weep; and howl, all ye drinkers of wine; because of the “new wine”; for it is cut off from your mouth“.

Joel 1:15 “Alas for the day! for the day of the Lord is at hand, and destruction from the almighty shall it come”.

Amos 8:12 “Behold, the days come saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst of water, but of hearing the words of the Lord: And they shall wander from sea to sea and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it”.

Amos 9:5 “And the Lord God of hosts is he that toucheth the land, and it shall melt, and all that dwell therein shall mourn...”.

Jer. 5:1,2 “Run ye to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, and see now, and know, and seek in the broad places thereof, if ye can find a man, if there be any that executed judgment, that seeketh the truth; and I will pardon it.”

Dan 12:4 “But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even till the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased”.

This "cut off" is also seen in the parable of the ten virgins......

The Mosaic Covenant is confirmed

It is absurd to interject some seven year "peace treaty" notion. Scripture claims a "covenant" which is confirmed. When did Satan make a covenant previously which now he is confirming. It obvious, read the first part of Dan. 9 in which he speaks of the Mosaic Covenant. How can everyone miss this ??

Dan 9:11-13 “Yea, all of Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him. And he hath CONFIRMED his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem. As it is written in the Law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before the Lord our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth”.

The sacrifice ceases in midst of the week

Generally thought as the "daily" sacrifice in which the Antichrist stops as he claims to be Christ. However this does not relate to this as it is not daily but the Lord's sacrifice upon his return.

Is. 34:6-8 “The sword of the Lord is filled with blood, it is made fat with fatness, and with the blood of lambs and goats, with the fat of the kidneys of rams: for the Lord hath a sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great slaughter in the land of Idumea. And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness. For it is the day of the Lord’s vengeance, and the year of recompenses for the controversy of Zion”.

Ez. 39:17 “And, thou son of man, thus saith the Lord God; speak unto every feathered fowl, and to every beast of the field, assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to my sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, even a great sacrifice upon the mountains of Israel, that ye may eat flesh and drink blood”.

Zeph. 1:7 “Hold thy peace at thy presence of the Lord God: for the day of the Lord is at hand: for the Lord hath prepared a sacrifice, he hath bid his guests”.

Rev. 19:17 “And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a load voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God, that ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great”.

Why does it cease ?????

Matt. 24:22 “And except those days be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened”.

Romans 9:28,29 “For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make on the earth. And as Isaiah said before, except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodom and Gomorrah” (Is. 1:9).

One Week = 7 days

Does the term 70 “weeks” actually 70/sevens of years which would come up to 490 years? First of all, “sevens” could mean seven of anything not just years. Secondly, does the Hebrew language use the word “year”? Then why in the world would the Hebrew scholars use a totally different word here in Dan. 9:24 if they meant something else. The Hebrew text should give deeper understanding not change the meaning. This is an absolute perversion of God’s word!!!!

The Hebrew word for “week” #07620 (shabuwa) which the Strong Concordance uses in Dan 9 as known to mean “seven” or in the plural form “sevens”, so we have seventy sevens. The Hebrew text is telling us that the word "week" consists or has a characteristic of “seven”. Do years have a reference to seven? No. A week of course is made up of seven days !!

Furthermore, the Hebrew text uses this same word (shabuwa) in chapter 10:2. Are we to believe that Daniel did not eat for three years ?? Moreover look close…you see that Daniel prefaces this word in chapter 10 by using “full week”. Why does Daniel now need to make this distinction? Because the previous week he had mentioned (the 70th week in chapter 9 ) was cut short, not completed due to the return of everlasting righteousness.

Please read the attached for further evidence that the current teaching of weeks = years is incorrect.

In Christ, Mark

PaulT

April 13th 2005, 05:12 AM

Mark,

Below is an explanation for why the weeks are years not days. You also need to reflect back on what Daniel had prayed for in verse 19 of the chapter. Remember from an historical perspective Israel was in exile. Jeremiah had told the people the exile would last 70 years. Daniel knew the end of the 70 years was approaching. The prophecy in 9:24-27 is God's answer to Daniel's question, how long would the exile last. After reading the complete chapter 9 plus Gill's explanation I would like to hear your comments. Also, I would like to hear your answer for my questions regarding Dan 12:1.

In Christ, Paul

The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible</B>

http://studylight.org/images/www/newtopleft.gifSearch This Resource http://studylight.org/images/www/1/newtopleft2.gifNavigatorPreviousNext Verse 23 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=023)
Chapter 8 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=008&verse=024)
Verse 25 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=025)
Chapter 10 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=010&verse=024)

http://studylight.org/images/icon_print.gif Printer friendly version (http://studylight.org/com/geb/print.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024) http://studylight.org/images/www/newtopleft.gifAdditional Resources • Adam Clark Commentary (http://studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Adam Clark Commentary (http://studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Adam Clark Commentary (http://studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Adam Clark Commentary (http://studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Burton Coffman (http://studylight.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Geneva Study Bible (http://studylight.org/com/gsb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Jamieson, Fausset, Brown (http://studylight.org/com/jfb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Matthew Henry Complete (http://studylight.org/com/mhc-com/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Matthew Henry Concise (http://studylight.org/com/mhc-con/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Scofield Reference Notes (http://studylight.org/com/srn/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Treasury of Scripture (http://studylight.org/com/tsk/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
• Wesley's Explanatory Notes (http://studylight.org/com/wen/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#Da9_24)
Daniel 9:24

Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy
holy city…
. Or, "concerning thy people, and concerning thy holy city" F19 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#s); that is, such a space of time is fixed upon; "cut out" F20 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#t), as the word signifies; or appointed of God for the accomplishment of certain events, relative to the temporal good of the city and people of the Jews; as the rebuilding of their city and temple; the continuance of them as a people, and of their city; the coming of the Messiah to them, to obtain spiritual blessings for them, and for all the people of God; who also were Daniel's people and city in a spiritual sense, to which he belonged; and likewise what was relative to the utter ruin and destruction of the Jews as a people, and of their city: and this space of "seventy" weeks is not to be understood of weeks of days; which is too short a time for the fulfilment of so many events as are mentioned; nor were they fulfilled within such a space of time; but of weeks of years, and make up four hundred and ninety years; within which time, beginning from a date after mentioned, all the things prophesied of were accomplished; and this way of reckoning of years by days is not unusual in the sacred writings; see (Genesis 29:27 (http://studylight.org/desk/?query=ge+29:27)) (Leviticus 25:8 (http://studylight.org/desk/?query=le+25:8)) (Ezekiel 4:4,5 (http://studylight.org/desk/?query=eze+4:4,5)) (Revelation 12:6 (http://studylight.org/desk/?query=re+12:6)) (13:5 (http://studylight.org/desk/?query=re+13:5)) . The verb used is singular, and, joined with the noun plural, shows that every week was cut out and appointed for some event or another; and the word, as it signifies "to cut", aptly expresses the division, or section of these weeks into distinct periods, as seven, sixty two, and one. The first events mentioned are spiritual ones, and are not ascribed to any particular period; but are what should be done within this compass of time in general, and were done toward the close of it; and are first observed because of the greatest importance, and are as follow: to finish the transgression;
not the transgression of Adam, or original sin, which, though took away by Christ from his people, yet not from all men; nor the actual transgression of man in general, which never more abounded than in the age in which Christ lived; but rather the transgressions of his people he undertook to satisfy for, and which were laid on him, and bore by him, and carried away, so as not to be seen more, or to have no damning power over them. The word used signifies "to restrain" F21 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#u); now, though sin greatly abounded, both among Jews and Gentiles, in the age of the Messiah; yet there never was an age in which greater restraints were laid on it than in this, by the ministry of John the Baptist, and of Christ in Judea and by the apostles in the Gentile world: and to make an end of sins;
so that they shall be no more, but put away and abolished by the sacrifice and satisfaction of Christ for them, as to guilt and punishment; so that those, for whose sins satisfaction is made, no charge can be brought against them, nor the curse of the law reach them, nor any sentence of it be executed, or any punishment inflicted on them; but are entirely and completely saved from all their sins, and the sad effects of them. Our version follows the marginal reading; but the textual writing is, "to seal up sins" F23 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#w); which is expressive of the pardon of them procured by Christ; for things sealed are hid and covered, and so are sins forgiven, (Psalms 32:1 (http://studylight.org/desk/?query=ps+32:1)) , and to make reconciliation for iniquity:
to expiate it, and make atonement for it; which was made by the sacrifice of Christ, by his sufferings and death; whereby the law and justice of God were fully satisfied, full reparation being made for the injury done by sin; and this was made for all kind of sin, expressed here by several words; and for all the sins, iniquities, and transgressions of the Lord's people; to do which was the grand end of Christ's coming into the world; see (Hebrews 2:17 (http://studylight.org/desk/?query=heb+2:17)) : and to bring in everlasting righteousness; which is true only of the righteousness of Christ, by which the law is magnified and made honourable, justice satisfied, and all that believe in him justified from all their sins: this Christ, by his obedience, sufferings, and death, has wrought out, and brought into the world; and which phase designs, not the manifestation of it in the Gospel; nor the act of imputation of it, which is Jehovah the Father's act; nor the application of it, which is by the Spirit of God; but Christ's actual working of it out by obeying the precept and bearing the penalty of the law: and this may be truly called "everlasting", or "the righteousness of ages" F24 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#x), of ages past; the righteousness by which the saints in all ages from the beginning of the world are justified; and which endures, and will endure, throughout all ages, to the justification of all that believe; it is a robe of righteousness that will never wear out; its virtue to justify will ever continue, being perfect; it will answer for the justified ones in a time to come, and has eternal life connected with it: and to seal up the vision and prophecy;
not to shut it up out of sight; rather to set a mark on it, by which it might be more clearly known; but to consummate and fulfil it: all prophecy is sealed up in Christ, and by him; he is the sum and substance of it; the visions and prophecies of the Old Testament relate to him, and have their accomplishment in him; some relate to his person and office; others to his coming into the world, the time, place, and manner of it; others to the great work of redemption and salvation he came about; and others to his miracles, sufferings, and death, and the glory that should follow; all which have been fulfilled: or, "to seal up the vision and prophet" F25 (http://studylight.org/com/geb/view.cgi?book=da&chapter=009&verse=024#y); the prophets were until John, and then to cease, and have ceased ever since the times of Jesus; there has been no prophet among the Jews, they themselves do not deny it; Christ is come, the last and great Prophet of all, with a full revelation of the divine will, and no other is to be expected; all that pretend to set up a new scheme of things, either as to doctrine or worship, through pretended vision or prophecy, are to be disregarded: and to anoint the most Holy;
not literally the most holy place in the temple; figuratively, either heaven itself, anointed, and prepared for his people by the Messiah's ascension thither, and entrance into it; or rather most holy persons, the church and people of God, typified by the sanctuary, the temple of God; and in a comparative sense are most holy, and absolutely so, as washed in the blood of Christ, clothed with his righteousness, and sanctified by his Spirit; and by whom they are anointed, some in an extraordinary and others in an ordinary way, and all by the grace of Christ: or it may be best of all to understand this of the Messiah, as Aben Ezra and others do; who is holy in his person, in both his natures, human and divine; sanctified and set apart to his office, and holy in the execution of it; equal in holiness to the Father and the Spirit; superior in it to angels and men, who have all their holiness from him, and by whom they are sanctified; and of whom the sanctuary or temple was a type; and who was anointed with the Holy Ghost as man, at his incarnation, baptism, and ascension to heaven; and Abarbinel owns it may be interpreted of the Messiah, who may be called the Holy of holies, because he is holier than all other Israelites. FOOTNOTES:

F19 (Kme le) "de populo tuo", Helvicus.
F20 (Kthn) "decisae", Pagninus: Montanus, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Cocceius, Michaelis.
F21 (alkl) "cohibendo", Junius & Tremellius; "ad cohibendum", Piscator, Gejerus, Michaelis; "ad coercendum", Cocceius.
F23 (Mtxl) "obsignando", Junius & Tremellius; "ad sigilandum", Montanus; "ut obsignet", Piscator.
F24 (Mymlwe qdu) "justitiam seculorum", Pagninus, Montanus, Vatablus, Michaelis.
F25 (aybnw) "et prophetam", Pagninus, Montanus, Munster, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator, Cocceius, Michaelis.

Online Bible ("]Copyright Statement[/url]
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernised and adapted for the computer by Larry Pierce of [url="http://www.online-bible.com/). All Rightes Reserved, Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855

Bibliography Information ("")

Mickey

April 14th 2005, 12:42 PM

The "prophetic year" was 360 days.So the period between the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem and Messiah the Prince was exactly 69 weeks of 360 days.This comes to 173,880 days.

The decree to rebuild Jerusalem was given on Nisan 6,444BC (March 9,Julian).Exactly 173,880 days later the Lord Jesus rode into Jerusalem on Palms Sunday,and said:

"If thou also hadst known,even on this day,the things which belong to thy peace,but now they are hidden from thine eyes"(Lk.19:39,40).

This happened on Nisan 10th,33 AD (March 29,Julian).

In Christ,

Mickey

PaulT

April 14th 2005, 03:37 PM

Mickey,

Dan 9:25 says it would be 69 weeks unto Messiah, this when Christ was anointed by God, Acts 10:38, at the beginning of His ministry when John baptized Christ. Dan 9:27 says the Messiah will be cut-off in the middle of the week. 3.5 years after His anointing Christ was crucified. Where are you getting your dates?

In Christ,

Paul

PaulT

April 14th 2005, 07:40 PM

Mickey,

For what it is worth, Ussher places the day of commencement of the prophecy in 454 BC, Ne 2:1-6. He also places the date of the 1 day of the 70 week at 30 AD, John 2:13, when the public ministry begins. Again, most folks believe His ministry laste 3.5 years which would seem to confirm Dan 9 when it tells us in the middle of the week the Messiah will be cut-off. This seems fairly close to me considering all the days lost in calendar changes and the difference in recording time between various cultures.

Mickey

April 14th 2005, 08:08 PM

Mickey,
Dan 9:25 says it would be 69 weeks unto Messiah, this when Christ was anointed by God, Acts 10:38, at the beginning of His ministry when John baptized Christ.
PaulT,

The Scriptures say "unto Messiah the Prince".And it was Palms Sunday when the Lord was publicly hailed as the Messiah.No other day fits the words of Daniel as well as this day.
Dan 9:27 says the Messiah will be cut-off in the middle of the week. 3.5 years after His anointing Christ was crucified. Where are you getting your dates?
That is not what the Scriptures say.They say that He is cut off at the end of the 69th week.

I get my dates by using MoonCalc.That is the way that the Jews determined the beginning of the months,by the first appearance of the new moon.The Lord Jesus was crucified on the 15th Nisan,and He entered the city of Jerusalem riding on a donkey the Sunday before He was crucified,which was Nisan 10th (March 29,33 AD).

If you go back from that date exactly 173,740 days (which is 69 weeks of prophetic years) you come to Nisan 6 (March 9,444 BC).

The commandment to rebuild Jerusalem was given in the 20th year of the reign of Artaxerxes in the month of Nisan.He began to rule in late 465 BC.Using the "accession-year" mode of reckoning (Fall to Fall) that brings the issuing of the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem to Nisan,444 BC.

In Christ,

Mickey

PaulT

April 14th 2005, 08:53 PM

Mickey,

Help me, if when he rode in on Palm Sunday which according to mooncalc. was the very last day of the 69th week doesn't this mean He was cut-off in the 70th week? Let me ask you, when Christ was born was He not honored as a "prince". The events recorded in verse 26 are what the Messiah was to do during the 70th week, again 69 had expired when He came. Verse 27 says, "he shall confirm a covenant with many, (sounds a lot like Is 53:12): and in the midst,(aka middle) of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, (sounds a lot like Heb 10:12). I understand the Jews didn’t appreciate this, but when Christ bore our sin on the cross he forever caused the cessation of blood sacrifice.

Mickey

April 15th 2005, 12:11 AM

Mickey,

Help me, if when he rode in on Palm Sunday which according to mooncalc. was the very last day of the 69th week doesn't this mean He was cut-off in the 70th week?
If the 70th week was to follow directly after the 69th then it was necessary for Israel to accept the Lord Jesus as her promised Messiah.The kingdom would come "if" the nation believed that the Baptist was Elijiah,who was to herald in the kingdom:

"And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come"(Mt.11:14).

Since the Jews killed the Baptist it is certain that they did not receive him.The same can be said about the offer on the kingdom made to the Jews on the day of Pentecost:

"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, that the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you"(Acts3:19,20).

The Jews did not repent,so the times of refreshing has been put on hold.After the Jews rejected the offer of the kingdom the Lord chose Paul to bring in a dispensation that had not been prophesised--"the dispensation of the mystery"(Eph.3:9).

Sometimes after the present dispensation comes to a close at the rapture then the Lord will resume His dealings with Israel and the 70 weeks will resume.
Let me ask you, when Christ was born was He not honored as a "prince". The events recorded in verse 26 are what the Messiah was to do during the 70th week, again 69 had expired when He came. Verse 27 says, "[b]he shall confirm a covenant with many'/b], (sounds a lot like Is 53:12): and in the midst,(aka middle) of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, (sounds a lot like Heb 10:12).
What "covenant" did the Lord Jesus Christ confirm for "seven years"?

The Hebrew word translated "confirm" means "to make strong,give strength".
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/1/1113534365-8535.html

Which Covenant did the Lord Jesus give strength to while He was walking the earth,before the Cross?

And besides,the person who confirms a treaty with many is the same person whose people will destroy Jerusalem.If this is in regard to the Lord Jesus then we must believe that it will be the Jews who will destroy the city.And the prophetic Scriptures make it plain that it will be foreign nations that will destroy Jerusalem--not the Jews.

In Christ,

Mickey

Lion

April 15th 2005, 01:43 PM

I think you are getting your starting point wrong.

Dan. 9:25 “So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.

When was the decree giving autonomy to Jerusalem issued? There was a decree by Cyrus to rebuild the temple in 536 BC (Ezra 1:1-4) but this date would fall many years short of reaching the christian era The next decree was by Darius in 519 BC to restore permission to work which had been hindered. (Ezra 6:1-12) The next decree was to Ezra in 457 BC by Artaxerxes Longimanus. This was the effective decree. From -457 BC to 490 years later is AD34 (there was no year zero) from 69 weeks (483 years) takes us to AD 27., the year of Christ’s baptism.

Dan. 9:26 “Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing,

Christ worked for three and a half years and was crucified. when he died the veil in the temple was torn from the top to the bottom, showing there was no more need for animal sacrfices or grain offerings.

and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.

The question arises, who was the prince that was to come? Was it Christ or Titus? Some would have us think it was Titus. Let history decide. When Vestavian looked at the situation in Palestine, he found that Jerusalem was infested with rival factions of Jewish Zealots He decided not to attack the city because it was too hard to get into. If the rival factions were killing each other, there would be fewer zealots to kill. In the meantime he got word Nero had died and he was next in line, so he left Titus in charge.

With Vestavian gone, Titus finished the job of pacifying Galilee and surveyed what could be done at Jerusalem. He went around the city to survey the best way to attack. He decided to attack at what appeared to be an easy way in, but it turned out to lead into a warren of narrow lanes where the Romans could not fight and the zealots were above so he had to retreat.

In the meantime there were three factions of zealots fighting among themselves. One faction held the temple. Unfortunately, when one of the men in the temple was killed, there was no way out to bury th dead, so the bodies just laid there and rotted. it got so bad that the entire floor was covered and men had to step on bodies to move around. The entire temple was a vast charnel house.

The third faction was apparently a bunch of drunks. They got careless with fire and the grain warehouses caught fire and burned a five year supply of grain. Starvation was immenent.
the result was that one gatekeeper counted 85,000 bodies carried out with no place to bury them. They were just stacked up on top of each other. All this was before a single Roman entered the city. Titus surveyed the heaps of rottiing bodies and raised his hands to heaven and swore it was not his fault. This is from Josephus wars of the Jews, books 4,5, and 6.

So who destroyed the city and the temple? It was the Jews, the people of messiah the prince. The Romans finished the job but the Jews had destroyed the city and the temple and there was no more will to fight.

And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.

The will to fight was gone and the Romans plundered everythng.

Dan. 9:27 “And he (the messiah, the prince that shall come) 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; (He was crucified) and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate,(Not Titus, but the zealots) even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

PaulT

April 15th 2005, 03:04 PM

If the 70th week was to follow directly after the 69th then it was necessary for Israel to accept the Lord Jesus as her promised Messiah.
The kingdom would come "if" the nation believed that the Baptist was Elijiah,who was to herald in the kingdom:

"And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come"(Mt.11:14).

Since the Jews killed the Baptist it is certain that they did not receive him.The same can be said about the offer on the kingdom made to the Jews on the day of Pentecost:

"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, that the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you"(Acts3:19,20).

The Jews did not repent,so the times of refreshing has been put on hold.After the Jews rejected the offer of the kingdom the Lord chose Paul to bring in a dispensation that had not been prophesised--"the dispensation of the mystery"(Eph.3:9).

Now I have heard it all. The Sovereign Lord, creator of the universe, author and finisher of our faith was subject to the whims of a people who were by definition His enemies, Ro 3:9-18. What a ridiculous conclusion based on 1 conclusion. Do you think we should as well baptize for the dead? Get real.

Sometimes after the present dispensation comes to a close at the rapture then the Lord will resume His dealings with Israel and the 70 weeks will resume.

To bad Daniel wasn't clued into the concept. Where in chapter 9 do you see, “IF the Jews do this then I will do this?” What I see is Daniel praying for God’s mercy because of his and his peoples sin, v 21, then Gabriel shows and says “Seventy weeks are determined” do you see “69 weeks are determined, then based on IF the people accept the Kingdom the 70th will follow” I don’t think so.

What "covenant" did the Lord Jesus Christ confirm for "seven years"?
Again, I'm not an expert in the original language but my understanding is that the word "for" is not in the original language. The covenant Christ confirmed, made strong, established was our salvation by the shedding of His blood on the cross, Matt 26:28, 20:28, Heb 10:29.

My understanding is that the Septuagint version of Dan 9:27 reads as such, “And one week shall establish the covenant with many; and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink offering shall be taken away;…”

And besides,the person who confirms a treaty with many is the same person whose people will destroy Jerusalem.If this is in regard to the Lord Jesus then we must believe that it will be the Jews who will destroy the city.And the prophetic Scriptures make it plain that it will be foreign nations that will destroy Jerusalem--not the Jews.

You might want to check out the historical accounts of what occurred leading up to 70AD. Sounds like the Jews wreaked havoc on both themselves and the city. The Jews actions resulted in the Roman assault that led to the destruction of the city, this seems to me to be similar to the blame Peter attributes to the death of Christ in that while the Jews didn’t physically put Him on the cross, because of their manipulation of the situation were nevertheless considered His murders.

In Christ,

Paul

Mickey

April 15th 2005, 03:26 PM

ross3421

April 15th 2005, 04:31 PM

Lion,

There was never a decree to rebuild Jerusalem until it was given to Nehemia in the month of Nisan in the 20th year of the reign of king Artaxerxes:

"And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that wine was before him: and I took up the wine, and gave it unto the king...And I said unto the king, If it please the king, and if thy servant have found favour in thy sight, that thou wouldest send me unto Judah, unto the city of my fathers' sepulchres, that I may build it...And the king granted me,according to the good hand of my God upon me"(Neh.2:1,5,8).

When Nehemia arrived in Jerusalem that city remained in ruins.Nehemia said that "Jerusalem lieth waste and its gates are burned with fire"(Neh.2:17).If there was a commandment to rebuild Jerusalem years earlier then the city would not have remained in ruins.There had been a decree to rebuild the Temple,but that is not the same thing as a decree to rebuild the city.

In fact,earlier the Jews had attempted to rebuild the walls,but they were stopped from doing that (5:16,23).

So the only decree to rebuild Jerusalem occured in the 20th year of the reign of Artaxerxes.All of your ideas are based on the false idea that a decree to that effect was issued earlier.

In Christ,

Mickey

Guys,

This is why there is much confusion with the current teachings of the years = weeks, the gap, starting point so on and so on.

First, as I pointed out the term "cutoff" does not mean the crusifiction...

Messiah shall be “cut off”

Messiah “unattainable” not killed

The traditional teaching is that this phrase “cut off” is speaking of Jesus' death upon the cross, however is this correct? After studying scripture we will see that the term “cut off” means to be “separated from”, “unreachable, unattainable”. First, let’s study the word “cut off” and how it is used and referred to in scripture;

Gen 9:11 - speaks of “flesh”, individuals cut off, killed at the time of the flood.
Gen 17:14- speaks of ones “soul” being cut off from his, the Lord’s people,
Lev 22:3 - speaks of one being cut off from the presence of the Lord.
Joshua 3:16- the sea is cut off.
Job 8:14 - speaks of ones “hope” being cut off.
Psalm 31:22- speaks of David being cut off from the eyes of the Lord
Psalm 88:16- speaks the same as above.
Jer 7:28 - speaks of “truth” being cut off from thy mouths.
Jer 49:26 - the men of war are cut off, killed, at the Lord’s return.

Though there are many references to “cut off” relating to physical death, as seen above is not always the case. Scholars have been quick to assume that this phrase “cut off” in Daniel relates to Christ’s death and has become a main piece to support the 490 year theory. However, does scripture support this? Let’s continue and gain the true understand of the term “cut off” spoken in Daniel chapter 9 using scripture once again to prove itself.

Joel 1:5 “Awake ye drunkards, weep; and howl, all ye drinkers of wine; because of the “new wine”; for it is cut off from your mouth“.

Joel 1:15 “Alas for the day! for the day of the Lord is at hand, and destruction from the almighty shall it come”.

We see above that it is the, “new wine”, the Spirit of Truth which is cut off from mankind not Christ himself physically. Also, shortly after as seen in verse fifteen the Lord comes to destroy the earth and it’s inhabitants which aligns with the sequence of events in Daniel chapter nine; cut off (V26), destruction (V27).

We also see below these inhabitants searching “to and fro” for this “truth“ however they are unable to find it and then again comes destruction. It is also important to see in the verse from Jeremiah that this is taking place in Jerusalem. Furthermore “to and fro” is not a reference to people traveling across the earth as some falsely teach. Also note the famine of hearing the Spirit of Truth as it has been “cut off” from the inhabitants.

Amos 8:12 “Behold, the days come saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst of water, but of hearing the words of the Lord: And they shall wander from sea to sea and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it”.

Amos 9:5 “And the Lord God of hosts is he that toucheth the land, and it shall melt, and all that dwell therein shall mourn...”.

Jer. 5:1,2 “Run ye to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, and see now, and know, and seek in the broad places thereof, if ye can find a man, if there be any that executed judgment, that seeketh the truth; and I will pardon it.”

Dan 12:4 “But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even till the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased”.

With the understanding that the phrase “cut off” in Daniel nine has nothing to do with the common teaching of the crucifixion, the weeks for years theory begins to crumble.

The opened and closed door; Jesus Christ

We see the Lord represented as “thee door” however we see this door shut and those being locked out, “cut off “ from him for ever”. Once this door is shut for evermore it represents the Lord, the Spirit of Truth, being “cut off” from creation as mentioned in the book of Daniel.

John 10:7 “Then Jesus said unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep”.

Luke 11:9,10 “And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.”

However, we see in Revelation that this door is already “opened” to all those who would come to him during a day in which all the world is to be tried. What mercy, he himself has opened the door!!

Rev 3:8 “I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it....”

We now see during this trial that Jesus not only has opened the door we are to knock but comes knocking on “our” door, oh what mercy, what love has the Lord for his creation before it is too late!!

Rev 3:18-20 “I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eye salve, that thou mayest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten; be zealous therefore and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and he with me.”

Below, prior to Christ’s return, sadly we see this “door” shut for evermore. This represents the Messiah being “cut off”.

Luke 13:25,28 “When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are: V28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.”

Matt 25:10 “And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. Afterwards came also the other virgins, saying Lord Lord, open to us. But he answered and said , Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of Man cometh”.

Your conversation should indicate that there is something amiss.....

In Christ, Mark

Mickey

April 15th 2005, 05:37 PM

Now I have heard it all. The Sovereign Lord, creator of the universe, author and finisher of our faith was subject to the whims of a people who were by definition His enemies, Ro 3:9-18. What a ridiculous conclusion based on 1 conclusion.
Paul,

The verses which I provided demonstrate that the coming of the kingdom was "conditional".Instead of addressing those verses you think up an idea that I never sanctioned.The Lord was not subject to the whims of anyone.His purpose was to offer the kingdom to Israel,and that is exactly what happened.
To bad Daniel wasn't clued into the concept. Where in chapter 9 do you see, “IF the Jews do this then I will do this?” What I see is Daniel praying for God’s mercy because of his and his peoples sin, v 21, then Gabriel shows and says “Seventy weeks are determined” do you see “69 weeks are determined, then based on IF the people accept the Kingdom the 70th will follow” I don’t think so.
The words of Daniel at chapter 9 were in regard to the kingdom coming to that nation.And the words of Peter on the day of Pentecost demonstrate that the nation must first repent and be converted before the Lord Jesus would be sent back.I guess you would want us to believe that even though that nation did not repent that the offer was fulfilled just the same.
Again, I'm not an expert in the original language but my understanding is that the word "for" is not in the original language. The covenant Christ confirmed, made strong, established was our salvation by the shedding of His blood on the cross, Matt 26:28, 20:28, Heb 10:29.
The covenant of which you speak is called the "New Covenant" by the author of Hebrews.And that same author says that that Covenant had no strength at all until the Cross and that it was not in force until the Cross (Heb.9:16,17).

So if the Lord Jesus strenghtened that covenant before the Cross why would the author of Hebrews say that it had no strength at all until the death of Jesus Christ?
You might want to check out the historical accounts of what occurred leading up to 70AD. Sounds like the Jews wreaked havoc on both themselves and the city. The Jews actions resulted in the Roman assault that led to the destruction of the city, this seems to me to be similar to the blame Peter attributes to the death of Christ in that while the Jews didn’t physically put Him on the cross, because of their manipulation of the situation were nevertheless considered His murders.
You might want to check out what the Scriptures reveal about the "great tribulation".If you would do this you will see that the circumstances in regard to the "great tribulation" do not match the things which happened in 70 AD.

Preterists admit that the 12th,13th and 14th chapters of Zechariah are escribing the "great tribulation".There we see that it is the "nations" that come against Jerusalem (Zech.14:2).There we also see that during this time that the Lord will "defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem" and "destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem"(Zech.12:8,9).

That did not happen in 70 AD.Read what the historical record is in regard to 70 AD,and there is not a shred of evidence that the Lord Jesus defended the inhabitants of Jerusalem nor that He destroyed all the nations that came against that city.

In Christ,

Mickey

PaulT

April 15th 2005, 06:38 PM

Mickey,

I'm leaving on business over the weekend and will respond Monday.

PaulT

April 17th 2005, 02:53 AM

The verses which I provided demonstrate that the coming of the kingdom was "conditional".Instead of addressing those verses you think up an idea that I never sanctioned.The Lord was not subject to the whims of anyone.His purpose was to offer the kingdom to Israel,and that is exactly what happened.
I apologize, you are absolutely correct. I should have addressed your assumption that the kingdom was considered in Daniel 9:24-27, instead of the erroneous conclusion you provided based on 2 verses. You might attempt to side-step the obvious conclusion of you’re your assertion, that Israel rejected the offer of the kingdom,(how does anyone have the ability to deter something God has determined to do?) which flies in the face of several fundamental Christian teachings. Your use of the 2 verses listed is the same methodology used by the Mormons for 1 Cor 15:29 to insist on baptism for the dead, but this is not the subject of this thread.

I again apologize, but frankly I was so flabbergasted that someone would attempt to suggest this obvious error that I completely missed the point, where is the mention of the kingdom in Daniel 9, let alone a rejection of said offer? Can you cite me the specific verse that indicates a kingdom is to be offered? The way I read Daniel 9, I understand Daniel was praying for his people in exile, God tells Daniel 70 weeks have been determined to rebuild the city, the Messiah to come and accomplish a bunch of stuff, and then the rebuilt city is to be destroyed again. I don’t see anything about the “offer” of a kingdom. Which verse tells there will be an “offer” and then it will be rejected?

The words of Daniel at chapter 9 were in regard to the kingdom coming to that nation.And the words of Peter on the day of Pentecost demonstrate that the nation must first repent and be converted before the Lord Jesus would be sent back.I guess you would want us to believe that even though that nation did not repent that the offer was fulfilled just the same.

Where is the discussion of any kingdom? Again, I see 70 weeks which entail the rebuilding of a city, the Messiah to come and do a bunch of stuff, that by the way is all confirmed He did in the NT, then after all this is accomplished the rebuilt city will be destroyed again. Where does it talk about the kingdom?

The covenant of which you speak is called the "New Covenant" by the author of Hebrews.And that same author says that that Covenant had no strength at all until the Cross and that it was not in force until the Cross (Heb.9:16,17).
So if the Lord Jesus strenghtened that covenant before the Cross why would the author of Hebrews say that it had no strength at all until the death of Jesus Christ?

Help understand where you confusion comes from. After 69 weeks the Messiah comes, that means He is doing his stuff during the 70th week. During this week, in the middle, (3.5 yrs) matter of fact, He died on the cross. When He died on the cross He confirmed/established the covenant. Where does it say He confirmed/established the covenant before the cross?

You might want to check out what the Scriptures reveal about the "great tribulation".If you would do this you will see that the circumstances in regard to the "great tribulation" do not match the things which happened in 70 AD.

What does the “great tribulation” have to do with Daniel 9? Where is the reference to a “great tribulation” in Daniel 9?

Preterists admit that the 12th,13th and 14th chapters of Zechariah are escribing the "great tribulation".There we see that it is the "nations" that come against Jerusalem (Zech.14:2).There we also see that during this time that the Lord will "defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem" and "destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem"(Zech.12:8,9).

So what, I don’t really care what Preterists say, I care what Daniel 9 says. What do the last 3 chapters of Zechariah have to do with the 70 weeks of Daniel? God determined 70 weeks to rebuild the city, send Messiah and then again destroy the city. It is a matter of historical record that all these things happened? Why are you attempting to side-step the issue.

In Christ,

Paul

Mickey

April 17th 2005, 02:26 PM

God determined 70 weeks to rebuild the city, send Messiah and then again destroy the city.
No,the 70 weeks are not in regard to rebuilding the city of Jerusalem.The city was rebuilt long before events that are described at the conclusion of the 70th week come into being.

And we can read that at the end of the 70th week that "everlasting righteousness" will be brought unto Jerusalem:

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

If "everlasting righteousness" is brought into Jerusalem at the end of the 70th week then it is certain that the city will not again be destroyed.If it was destroyed after the end of the 70th week then it is clear that "everlasting righteousness" was never brought in in the first place.
Where is the discussion of any kingdom? Again, I see 70 weeks which entail the rebuilding of a city, the Messiah to come and do a bunch of stuff, that by the way is all confirmed He did in the NT, then after all this is accomplished the rebuilt city will be destroyed again. Where does it talk about the kingdom?
The Jews understood that the verses at Daniel 9:24 are in regard to the time that the Lord Jesus would rule the earth.This verse is decribing the conditions that will exist in Jerusalem during the kingdom.Surely you do not believe that those conditions exist now in Jerusalem,do you?

These conditions are the conditions decribed by the prophets when the LOrd will return and He will pour on Jerusalem the Spirit of grace (Zech.12:10) and:

"In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness"(Zech.13:1).

This is when Jerusalem will see the conditions described at Daniel 9:24 come to pass--"and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity".
You might attempt to side-step the obvious conclusion of you’re your assertion, that Israel rejected the offer of the kingdom,(how does anyone have the ability to deter something God has determined to do?) which flies in the face of several fundamental Christian teachings.
Again,the Lord determined that the kingdom would be offered to Israel on the day of Pentecost.And that is exactly what happened.Israel had their own will,and she decided not to believe that the Lord Jesus is their promised Messiah.The Lord Jesus said the following to the Jews:

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"(Mt.23:37).
Help understand where you confusion comes from. After 69 weeks the Messiah comes, that means He is doing his stuff during the 70th week. During this week, in the middle, (3.5 yrs) matter of fact, He died on the cross. When He died on the cross He confirmed/established the covenant. Where does it say He confirmed/established the covenant before the cross?
Do you not say that He confirmed the New Covenant before His death?

How is that possible,since the New Covenant was not in force and it was without strength before His death?
What does the “great tribulation” have to do with Daniel 9? Where is the reference to a “great tribulation” in Daniel 9?
In Daniel 9 we read about the abomination of desolation (Dan.9:27) that happens in the middle of the 70th week,and in the Olivet Discouse the LOrd reveals that the setting up of the "abomination of desolation" will occur just before the "great tribulation" (Mt.24:15-21).
What do the last 3 chapters of Zechariah have to do with the 70 weeks of Daniel? God determined 70 weeks to rebuild the city, send Messiah and then again destroy the city. It is a matter of historical record that all these things happened? Why are you attempting to side-step the issue.
Again,the city of Jerusalem was rebuilt before the end of the 69 weeks.And it is not 70 weeks "unto Messiah the Prince"(Dan.9:25),but instead 69 weeks.And I am not attempting to side-step anything.You prove that you do not even have a basic understanding when you say that it was to be 70 weeks to rebuild the city and "unto Messiah the Prince".

And no,there is no historical evidence that "everlasting righteousness" was ever brought unto Jerusalem.If "everlasting righteousness" was brought to that city in the past then it is impossible that all the violence would exist now.

In Christ,

Mickey

Hitch

April 17th 2005, 03:48 PM

Christ's righteousness is less than everlasting?

KantankerousKid

April 18th 2005, 12:44 AM

ross3421

April 18th 2005, 01:58 AM

I have learned that the Jewish people never fully used an exact numbers when they wrote the numbers of the book in the Bible. They rounded it off like we do. Therefore, we cannot fully use the timetable or outline to prove that that prophesy has been talking about Jesus.

I do believe that Dan 9 is talking about Jesus finishing the covenant though. Not the anti-christ. Which also means no Pre-trib, Mid-trib, or Post-trib becasue there are no 7 specific year.

Kid,

You are correct on two points; the covenant is a God thing not AC. Second "one week" does not mean 7 years nor is their a 7 year trib period.

The Mosaic Covenant - The promise/ commitment

Dan 9:4 “And I (Daniel) prayed unto the Lord my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments”.

Above we see God faithful to his promise. We also see a reference to those who “keep his commandments” the faithful seed of Israel which is also mentioned in the book of Revelation (Rev 12:17, 14:12, 22:14). Below, we see those who have been unfaithful and the curse poured out upon them confirming the covenant.

Dan 9:11-13 “Yea, all of Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him. And he hath CONFIRMED his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem. As it is written in the Law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before the Lord our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth”.

We see that it’s the Mosaic Covenant which is being confirmed; the covenant between God and Israel and the promise given to Moses and the law (Ex 34), the blood sacrifice (Heb 9:19.20) which sealed the agreement. We see the blessing of obeying and the warning of breaking the covenant (Deut 28 & 29).

Satan’s reign not a “week” / 7 years

It is taught as a universal fact within the Christian Community that the tribulation is a seven year period and that Satan reigns for that seven years. Does the bible make this claim?

The only supposed reference of a seven year period is this word “week” found in Daniel which incorrectly is being taught to mean years. The only other way to come up with “seven years” is to add a combination of events and verses to come up with a total of seven. Is this proper math?

It will be shown that the reign of the AC is 42 months in which we see the following events; The daily sacrifice taken away, The abomination set up, The Holy City todden down, the Two witnesses prophesy, and the protection of the “woman” (remnant of Israel), all culminating with "great tribulation" the wrath of God poured out.

After which, the "week" a 7-day celebration of God's covenant to his people and a return to their land. It is the Feast of Tabernacles.

In Christ, Mark.

Mickey

April 18th 2005, 11:39 AM

Christ's righteousness is less than everlasting?
Hitch,

The subject of Daniel 9:24 is in regard to what was "determined" by the Lord to happen to the city of Jerusalem at the end of the 70 weeks of years.And one of the things that will happen to that city is that "everlasting righteousness" will be brought in:

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

Anyone who is the least bit familiar with the history of Jerusalem knows that "everlasting righteousness" was not brought unto that city in 70 AD.So the 70th week remains in the future.

In Christ,

Mickey

PaulT

April 18th 2005, 01:36 PM

Mickey,

The question was, “Can you cite me the specific verse that indicates a kingdom is to be offered?” Nice attempt at dodging, but please answer the question.

No,the 70 weeks are not in regard to rebuilding the city of Jerusalem.The city was rebuilt long before events that are described at the conclusion of the 70th week come into being.

I didn’t say just to rebuild the city, I said, “I understand Daniel was praying for his people in exile, God tells Daniel 70 weeks have been determined to rebuild the city, the Messiah to come and accomplish a bunch of stuff, and then the rebuilt city is to be destroyed again.” The 70 weeks, verse 24, encompassed all this stuff. The prophecy is broken into 3 sections of time, 7 weeks for the rebuilding of the city, verse 25, 62 weeks from the completion of the rebuilding until Messiah shows up. This equates to 69 weeks. After the 69th week, this means during the Seventieth week. (By the way, I never saw your answer to, “Help me, if when he rode in on Palm Sunday which according to mooncalc was the very last day of the 69th week doesn't this mean He was cut-off in the 70th week?”) The Messiah is cut-off which accomplishes, the finishing of the transgression, puts an end to sins, provides reconciliation for iniquity and yes, ushers in everlasting righteousness. Contained within the same verse about the Messiah being cut-off is the explanation that the city which was rebuilt in verse 25 is again destroyed which was to occur after the Messiah was cut-off, again, after the 69th week.

If "everlasting righteousness" is brought into Jerusalem at the end of the 70th week then it is certain that the city will not again be destroyed.If it was destroyed after the end of the 70th week then it is clear that "everlasting righteousness" was never brought in in the first place.

Which verse says the city will not be destroyed in the Jews accept the offer of a kingdom? Who respects Scritpure?
I don’t understand how any Christian can doubt that everlasting righteousness is here. Clearly we are told that through Christ’s shed blood the Christian is given a robe of righteousness, Eph 4:24. The Christian has been washed pure and is able to boldly come into the presence of the righteous God by the blood of the Messiah, Heb 10:19,22. Christ has given the believer His righteousness which lasts forever, 2 Cor 9:9. Mickey, Christ truly brought in everlasting righteousness.

The Jews understood that the verses at Daniel 9:24 are in regard to the time that the Lord Jesus would rule the earth.
Please don’t ever attempt to play hurt because I accuse you of using Jewish hermeneutics. Your statement above seems to me to clearly explain where you are coming from. Who cares what the Jews understood, they killed Christ. They, like you are still looking for a carnal kingdom, Lk 17:20, but Christ told them His kingdom was not of this world, Lk 17:21. How is it you are still looking for the kingdom of the Jews when Christ told them “the kingdom of God cometh not with observation”. Understand now why I suggested you are using the same hermeneutics the Jews who deny Christ use?

Do you not say that He confirmed the New Covenant before His death?

No, I say He confirmed the covenant with His death. What about this picture are you not getting?

And no,there is no historical evidence that "everlasting righteousness" was ever brought unto Jerusalem.If "everlasting righteousness" was brought to that city in the past then it is impossible that all the violence would exist now.

Do you consider the NT as historical evidence?

In Christ,

Paul

Mickey

April 18th 2005, 02:24 PM

They, like you are still looking for a carnal kingdom, Lk 17:20, but Christ told them His kingdom was not of this world, Lk 17:21.
The Lord Jesus said "but now is My kingdom not from here"(Jn.18:36).

The Apostles,after spending numerous of days with the Lord Jesus after His resurrection and being taught about the things of the kingdom (Acts 1:3) thought that the kingdom would be set up on earth.Peter asked the Lord Jesus,"Wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?"(Acts1:6).

If you are correct then we are supposed to believe that the Apostles had spent much time with the Lord while He opened up the Scriptures to their understanding (Lk.24:45) and spoke of the things concerning the kingdom but yet they did not even understand that there would be no kingdom set up on the earth?
The question was, “Can you cite me the specific verse that indicates a kingdom is to be offered?” Nice attempt at dodging, but please answer the question.
What I said was not a "dodge",but it may seem that way to someone who has not a clue to the meaning of the "times of refreshing" and the "presence of the Lord".

Peter told the Jews that if they would repent and turn to the Lord then the Father would send back the Lord Jesus and He would be in their presence and all the prophecies concerning the kingdom would be fuilfilled.

The Messiah is cut-off which accomplishes, the finishing of the transgression, puts an end to sins, provides reconciliation for iniquity and yes, ushers in everlasting righteousness.
The words of in Daniel makes it as plain as possible that the "end of sins" and bringing in "everlasting righteousness" is in regard to bringing those things unto the city of Jerusalem.You need to read Daniel 9:24 again.
Contained within the same verse about the Messiah being cut-off is the explanation that the city which was rebuilt in verse 25 is again destroyed which was to occur after the Messiah was cut-off, again, after the 69th week.
Please explain how the year 70 AD (when Jerusalem was invaded) fits into the 70th seven.Give me the year that the Lord Jesus was "cut off" and then explain how the year 70 AD fits in your timeline.

In Christ,

Mickey

PaulT

April 18th 2005, 04:05 PM

The Lord Jesus said "but now is My kingdom not from here"(Jn.18:36).

Leaving words out? My translation reads, “Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world” When is Christ’s kingdom ever defended with armies? His authority issues directly from heaven and has no need now or ever for earthly armies to defend the kingdom.

The Apostles,after spending numerous of days with the Lord Jesus after His resurrection and being taught about the things of the kingdom (Acts 1:3) thought that the kingdom would be set up on earth.Peter asked the Lord Jesus,"Wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?"(Acts1:6).

If you are correct then we are supposed to believe that the Apostles had spent much time with the Lord while He opened up the Scriptures to their understanding (Lk.24:45) and spoke of the things concerning the kingdom but yet they did not even understand that there would be no kingdom set up on the earth?

Right, notice He doesn’t answer their erroneous question, He goes onto explain that they will receive the Holy Spirit who will fuel worldwide evangelism. Once the Apostles receive the witness of the Holy Spirit do they ever ask this question again? Does Peter tell the Jews that, wait a minute you guys were right just turn to Christ and he will come and set up the Davidic kingdom? No, Peter tells them David is dead and buried, but Christ is King, has ascended to the throne and currently sits at the right hand of God and will remain there until He brings His enemies under His footstool. Christ is currently reigning from heaven, 1 Cor 15:25, and will until the end, 1 Cor 15:24.

What I said was not a "dodge",but it may seem that way to someone who has not a clue to the meaning of the "times of refreshing" and the "presence of the Lord".

No you simply didn’t answer the question, actually I do understand times of refreshing, this is a great description of what it felt like when I was saved. Daily I commune in the presence of the Lord, I would be lost without this. I’m sorry you don’t have the same experience.

The words of in Daniel makes it as plain as possible that the "end of sins" and bringing in "everlasting righteousness" is in regard to bringing those things unto the city of Jerusalem.You need to read Daniel 9:24 again.

No the words of Daniel, validated in the NT are specific to what Christ was to accomplish on the cross. As discussed, Christ brought in everlasting righteousness for His people, He also put an end to sin for them, Heb 9:26, 28 “…but now one in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by sacrifice of himself…So Christ was once offered to bear the sin of many…” This is clearly what Daniels prophecy was about and it is just as clear that it was accomplished.

Please explain how the year 70 AD (when Jerusalem was invaded) fits into the 70th seven.Give me the year that the Lord Jesus was "cut off" and then explain how the year 70 AD fits in your timeline.

When you tell me which verse in Daniel 9:24-27 says the kingdom would be offered and rejected.

In Christ,

Paul

Mickey

April 18th 2005, 08:18 PM

Leaving words out?
I thought that you were using a KJV,which is translated from the "Received Text".And that text has the Greek word "nun" (now) in that verse.Click on the following link and scrolldown to the verse and under that you will see Greek configurations and the English words:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/c/1113864115-8082.html#36
My translation reads, “Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world” When is Christ’s kingdom ever defended with armies? His authority issues directly from heaven and has no need now or ever for earthly armies to defend the kingdom.
Who said that His kingdom will be defended by armies?
Right, notice He doesn’t answer their erroneous question, He goes onto explain that they will receive the Holy Spirit who will fuel worldwide evangelism.
So you can somehow throw your reason to the wind and believe that the Apostles had been with Him many days while He opened their eyes to the OT Scriptures and told them about the kingsdom,and yet they were mistaken when they believed that the kingdom would be set up on earth.

And the Lord does not say that they are wrong when they asked a question in regards to the kingdom being set up on the earth,but instead He tells them that they are not to know "when" it will happen.
Once the Apostles receive the witness of the Holy Spirit do they ever ask this question again? Does Peter tell the Jews that, wait a minute you guys were right just turn to Christ and he will come and set up the Davidic kingdom? No, Peter tells them David is dead and buried, but Christ is King, has ascended to the throne and currently sits at the right hand of God and will remain there until He brings His enemies under His footstool. Christ is currently reigning from heaven, 1 Cor 15:25, and will until the end, 1 Cor 15:24.
Peter talks about the Lord Jesus reigning from "the throne of David"--"to sit on his (David's) throne".

This throne is an earthly throne,the same throne on which Solomon sat (1Ki.2:12).

But back to what I said before.It is inconceivable that the Apostles would be in error for thinking that the kingdom would be set up on earth.For many days they had been with the Lord Jesus after His resurrection while He spoke "of things pertaining to the kingdom"(Acts1:3).He had opened their understanding to the OT Scriptures,and there are numerous instances of references to the kingdom in those Scriptures.So if you will use your brain you will know that the Apostles expected that the Kingdom would be restored to Israel and the reason that they knew that was because they had studied the things of the Kingdom under the tutelage of the Lord Jesus Himself!
No you simply didn’t answer the question, actually I do understand times of refreshing, this is a great description of what it felt like when I was saved.
We are not talking about your ideas of the meaning of those words,but the Bibical meaning.You seem to be able to "spiritualize" away any verse that does not match your ideas,and you seem to have any interest in learning the truth.

The times of refreshing of which Peter speaks of is in regard to the Father sending back the Lord Jesus to earth and Him being present on the earth:

"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you"(Acts3:19-20).

The Bibical "times of refreshing" is dependent on the "physical" presence of the Lord Jesus--"And He shall send Jesus Christ".
Daily I commune in the presence of the Lord, I would be lost without this. I’m sorry you don’t have the same experience.
You do not even know me but you have the temerity to say that I do not commune in the presence of the Lord.However,the Bibical "times of refreshing" is in regard to the bodily presence of the Lord Jesus upon the earth.
No the words of Daniel, validated in the NT are specific to what Christ was to accomplish on the cross. As discussed, Christ brought in everlasting righteousness for His people, He also put an end to sin for them, Heb 9:26, 28
Again,you do not even know or you do not want to know what the verse actually says.Hee it is:

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

Can you see the words "unto thy holy city"?Do you see the words "everlasting righteousness"?According to this verse "everlasting righteousness" will be brought "unto thy holy city" (Jerusalem) at the end of the seventy weeks of years.Since "everlasting righteousness" was not brought into Jerusalem in the past it remains in the future.

I have answerednumerous of your questions,and then I ask you to answer one of mine:
Please explain how the year 70 AD (when Jerusalem was invaded) fits into the 70th seven.Give me the year that the Lord Jesus was "cut off" and then explain how the year 70 AD fits in your timeline.

But you refuse,saying:
When you tell me which verse in Daniel 9:24-27 says the kingdom would be offered and rejected.

In Christ,

Mickey

PaulT

April 19th 2005, 08:30 AM

Mickey,

I thought that you were using a KJV,which is translated from the "Received Text".And that text has the Greek word "nun" (now) in that verse.Click on the following link and scrolldown to the verse and under that you will see Greek configurations and the English words:

I am, which is why I pointed out you were leaving words out. The verse starts off, “Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world,” It is clear to me, you chose to leave this out of equation, which based on the subject at hand, would seem key to the discussion.

Like I’ve said, I not skilled on the original language, but the Greek Lexicon I have tells me the word translated now is mostly used to contrast the current situation to the past. This makes sense in that Christ was answering Pilate, a Roman who would have been concerned about political ramifications, uprisings and revolutions. In Pilates way of thinking a King would have military armies and be a real and present threat. Christ clearly tells Pilate this is not the case, nor due to the aorist tense of the word, would it ever.

Who said that His kingdom will be defended by armies?
Christ did, the verse reads, “Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.” This is in answer to Pilate inquiring as to Christ’s status, is He King.

This was the concern of Pilate and what Christ answers in the part of the verse you choose to leave out. IMO Christ is explaining His kingdom is different from any other kingdom Pilate has ever heard of or contemplated. This has nothing to do with a contrast of current versus future state.

So you can somehow throw your reason to the wind and believe that the Apostles had been with Him many days while He opened their eyes to the OT Scriptures and told them about the kingsdom,and yet they were mistaken when they believed that the kingdom would be set up on earth.

No, I’m not throwing reason to the wind, as you say, just not reading a dogma into the passage. Truly, the disciples were confused as to the make-up of that kingdom. They had been raised by Jews who looked for a carnal kingdom, which as Christ had previously pointed out was wrong. In fact, I believe, 1 of their members had come out of the sect known as zealots which called for a physical overthrow of Roman authority. Yes they were mistaken, they had not yet been in dwelt with the Holy Spirit, nor been given their Apostolic revelation so yes they were still looking for the carnal kingdom.

And the Lord does not say that they are wrong when they asked a question in regards to the kingdom being set up on the earth,but instead He tells them that they are not to know "when" it will happen.
Peter talks about the Lord Jesus reigning from "the throne of David"--"to sit on his (David's) throne".

True, he changes the subject and moves on to speak of what the kingdom really was/is. Soon after this encounter the Apostles are given, as promised, the Holy Spirit and never ask the question again, nor do they tell the Jews that what they had traditionally been taught about the kingdom was true, all you need do is recognize Christ and He will come back and set up the Davidic kingdom, they tell the Jews that He has already ascended to the throne, “For David is not ascended into the heavens…God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord,(aka King) and Christ.

Peter talks about the Lord Jesus reigning from "the throne of David"--"to sit on his (David's) throne".

Right, reigning, currently going on to continue forever, until His enemies are made His footstool. Paul says the same thing, 1 Cor 15:24, “Then cometh the end, when he(Christ) shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he,(Christ) must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.” Don’t see mention of His returning to reconstitute Israel, set up a throne and rule, because He already is.

But back to what I said before.It is inconceivable that the Apostles would be in error for thinking that the kingdom would be set up on earth.For many days they had been with the Lord Jesus after His resurrection while He spoke "of things pertaining to the kingdom"(Acts1:3).He had opened their understanding to the OT Scriptures,and there are numerous instances of references to the kingdom in those Scriptures.So if you will use your brain you will know that the Apostles expected that the Kingdom would be restored to Israel and the reason that they knew that was because they had studied the things of the Kingdom under the tutelage of the Lord Jesus Himself!

You’re big on definitions, 1 of the definitions of reason is, “the thing that makes some fact intelligible.” This is what you sorely lack in your argument. True, the Apostles up until the time of their indwelling believed in a carnal kingdom, just like those who killed Christ, and just like those who still deny Him today. The thing that is missing from your argument that would make your dogma intelligible is the thing Christ did not say, nor is ever mentioned after the point in time of the Apostles indwelling. Can you point to a verse where Christ explains to His disciples that He will return, once Israel makes up its mind to accept Him and then He will set up the Davidic kingdom, reestablish the temple along with the sacrificial system and along with the Jews rule the world?

The times of refreshing of which Peter speaks of is in regard to the Father sending back the Lord Jesus to earth and Him being present on the earth:

"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you"(Acts3:19-20).

The Bibical "times of refreshing" is dependent on the "physical" prese