Daniel's A-bomb and the Resurrection.

[Sheepdog]

note that i want this thread to stay on topic, and for the most part i'm only looking for Preterist responses. definitely no hyperprets, as you shouldn't be in this forum anyways. other Nonprets? i ask that if you post to this, please keep it to asking questions and keep it on topic. if you feel so compelled to get on the soapbox, you are free to start your own thread.

in the other thread, James Peter raised a fair point about the Preterist interpretation of Daniel's prophecy. of all the issues he raised, this is the one i couldn't address as a Preterist, and yet it's a critical issue here.

Ok, so the 70 weeks is pretty straight forward, ... this issue comes up a few chapters later. Danno mentions the Abomination again:

His forces will rise up and profane the fortified sanctuary, stopping the daily sacrifice. In its place they will set up the abomination that causes desolation. Daniel 11:31, NET

And then later still, we run into it again:

From the time that the daily sacrifice is removed and the abomination that causes desolation is set in place, there are 1,290 days. Daniel 12:11.

However, in between we find this:

Many of those who sleep
in the dusty ground will awake-
some to everlasting life,
and others to shame and everlasting abhorrence. Daniel 12:2

Yeah. This is a very strong passage for adhering to the bodily resurrection of the dead. In fact, one source i read (i think it was an NET study note) said it was the strongest OT passage for a literal, physical resurrection... and my own readings from the OT seem to confirm that. but, why is this sandwiched together between two passage about the Abomination, if that is a first century thing?

at first, i figured if i looked closer at the context, it would be clearer what is going on. and it is... but if anything it seems that 12:1ff is closely tied to the previous verses in 11. that is they are chronologically related, or at least there is no obvious discontinuity here.

soooo.... what's goin on? time to switch back to Left Behindism? :tongue:

[Solly]

Perhaps you could give us a break down of how you think the whole passage, ie caps 11 and 12 are proceeding. New Bible Commentary puts a pause after 12.4, for instance, and sees vv5f as a conclusion.

[dizzle]

My quick comment (robbing from an old post of mine, only God knows from where)

Now about Daniel 12 and the resurrection mentioned there. I agree with you that the phrase “such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then" is indicating the Great Tribulation spoken of in Matthew 24.
But you see a problem because a “major resurrection” is said to occur in connection with the Great Tribulation. Well first of all, it is pure translators’ bias in our translation which give the necessary impression of a “major resurrection.” The text simply does not say that. It says “many” will be resurrected. “Many” is never used as “all” in the Book of Daniel. A passage from the OT cannot override the clear teaching of the NT that the physical resurrection at the end of temporal history will include ALL who have ever lived NOT just “many.” This event, then, is not the general resurrection. But in Matthew 27:53 we find an event described as a resurrection of “many” which points to this passage:

Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Matthew, in his distinctly Jewish Gospel, is the only one who points this out and uses the same phraseology, “many.” The objection might be had that Daniel also speaks about “many” wicked being resurrected, and I believe that they were, but weren’t given the privilege of going into Jerusalem and appearing to many.

****

SD this is one of the more difficult passages - and the centerpiece of a hyperpret response. But as I say above one cannot use one OT passage to over-ride the New which often dramatically reinterprets the OT. The hyperpret use of this passage reminds me of the Oneness use of Isaiah 9:6 to "prove" that Jesus is the Father.

[Dcn_Athanasius]

soooo.... what's goin on? time to switch back to Left Behindism? :tongue:

Lord have mercy never!

Perhaps the problem is based on the belief that the resurrection referred to is the bodily resurrection, rather than the time when Christ 'led captivity captive' by breaking the gates of Hell and leading the righteous dead to Paradise? We know Moses and the Patriarchs are in Paradise, yet the general resurrection has not occured. Likewise we know some sinners like Dives and Judas and King Saul are lost.

If the event mentioned was referring to Holy Saturday when Christ was in the grave and His Spirit was preaching to those righteous souls formerly held in chains, then the problem would then not exist. :)

Only musing on my part.But never nevr return to left behindism. :)

Peace and grace.

[Abigail]

Matthew, in his distinctly Jewish Gospel, is the only one who points this out and uses the same phraseology, “many.” The objection might be had that Daniel also speaks about “many” wicked being resurrected, and I believe that they were, but weren’t given the privilege of going into Jerusalem and appearing to many.



Which verse in Daniel are you referring to. If it is 12:2, then I dont agree that he is referring to the wicked being resurrected at that time. As far as I read it he is speaking specifically of the ones being raised to everlasting life being raised at that time.

[James Peter]

soooo.... what's goin on? time to switch back to Left Behindism? :tongue:

No. Don't do that. Don't let my actions encourage that....please! :ahem:

I'll be keeping an eye on this thread as it is, as you said, the biggest problem with a preterist explanation of Daniel. I still haven't really decided when I believe Daniel was fulfilled (I guess I'm a partial preterist technically but much more partial than most) except that every theory I've seen has holes in it.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

You are right this is one of the most difficult verses for preterist (but I also think it is difficult for futurist as well).

I agree with Dee Dee that the "many" is the key to differentiating this verse from the general resurrection.

I disagree (but not strongly) with her that this is talking about the partial resurrection in Matthew.

I do not think (but I could be wrong, this is a very difficult verse), that it is talking about a physical resurrection at all.

The best explanation that I have heard of that verse is that it is talking about ethnic Israel. For years they have been spiritually "asleep in the dusty groun". Along comes John the Baptist and later Jesus to call (many of) them to repentance for the Kingdom of God is at hand. Some accept and are saved, some reject and are not.

But that does throw the chronology all out of whack.

:shrug:

That is my opinion, but if one were to ask me which part of my theology I thought it was most likely that I was wrong about, this would at least be in the top 5.

[PaulT]

Folks, where in Dan 12:2 is resurrection mentioned? What my translation reads is those that sleep in the "dust of the earth shall awake". Why, if this is refering to the preaching of the Word by John the Baptist does it throw the chronology out of whack?

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

Folks, where in Dan 12:2 is resurrection mentioned? What my translation reads is those that sleep in the "dust of the earth shall awake". Why, if this is refering to the preaching of the Word by John the Baptist does it throw the chronology out of whack?
The "chronology" out of whack was in response to the OP. Where 11:31 and 12:11 are both talking about the AofD (which most preterist place at AD 70). with John the Baptist in the middle (c. AD 30).

I do not think this is a problem but the OP did.

[Sheepdog]

thank you for the replies so far. i'll have to come back to this later when i'm not so busy (and i'll post a breakdown of Dan. 11-12 as Solly requested).

[Tim C.]

You are right this is one of the most difficult verses for preterist (but I also think it is difficult for futurist as well).

Nah, it fits into our view just perfectly.

http://new.carmforums.org/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=7389&mesg_id=7391&page=15

-Tim

[PaulT]

Interesting, I had always heard that it referred to 2 events, 1 that was committed by Antionchus Epiphanes and then another later event which was part of the events leading up to 70AD.

[dizzle]

You are right this is one of the most difficult verses for preterist (but I also think it is difficult for futurist as well).

It sure is a premill problem despite TimC.


I agree with Dee Dee that the "many" is the key to differentiating this verse from the general resurrection.

Cool.


I disagree (but not strongly) with her that this is talking about the partial resurrection in Matthew.

I am not married to that idea. In fact I am not married to the idea that it is not the general resurrection - notice that the chronology is sequential and thematic - not restricted to a certain period of time by necessity. The reason that I think the Matthew passage is the key is because of Matthew's repition of "many" and the fact that he is the only one to mention it, in the most Jewish of the Gospels.


I do not think (but I could be wrong, this is a very difficult verse), that it is talking about a physical resurrection at all.

If it is thematic, it could be both. Mauro holds that it is not physical.


The best explanation that I have heard of that verse is that it is talking about ethnic Israel. For years they have been spiritually "asleep in the dusty groun". Along comes John the Baptist and later Jesus to call (many of) them to repentance for the Kingdom of God is at hand. Some accept and are saved, some reject and are not.

But that does throw the chronology all out of whack.

:shrug:

It doesn't throw the chronology out of whack at all! Take a close look at Daniel 9. Daniel thematically connecct AD70 with the cross and earthly ministry - they are related, and Daniel, well Gabriel, jumps back and forth between those two time frames.

I am developing, I have said this for a while, a bit of modified preterism that I have been working on in my head for a while, a great deal of it has to do with the "coming" of Christ - I believe He is "coming" for His entire reign. In fact I believe His reign IS His coming which has as its bookends the first and second physical advents. When judgement comes, it is a demonstration of His reign and manifestation of His coming. This to me answers a LOT of questions.

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

It sure is a premill problem despite TimC.

Tim C. never sees any problem with his premill view. This is a problem in and of itself. I find it very difficult to trust the objectivity of any one who sees no problem with thier position.



I am not married to that idea. In fact I am not married to the idea that it is not the general resurrection - notice that the chronology is sequential and thematic - not restricted to a certain period of time by necessity. The reason that I think the Matthew passage is the key is because of Matthew's repition of "many" and the fact that he is the only one to mention it, in the most Jewish of the Gospels.

Nor am I married to my position. It is IMHO the "best" explanation, but certainly not the only possible one. I am far from dogmatic. And I agree about the thematic element of Dan 11-12. The "chronology" mess up was in reference to the OP, and sheepdog's concern of chronology (but since you are the second person to question the "mess up" maybe I misunderstood SD's OP :shrug: )



If it is thematic, it could be both. Mauro holds that it is not physical.

Right. I think I first read about the non-physical interpretation from him. I do not agree 100% with him, but he is sharp on Daniel.





See above. I was not the one who this created chronology problems for. It was SD (or my misinterpretation of SD).

[quote]I am developing, I have said this for a while, a bit of modified preterism that I have been working on in my head for a while, a great deal of it has to do with the "coming" of Christ - I believe He is "coming" for His entire reign. In fact I believe His reign IS His coming which has as its bookends the first and second physical advents. When judgement comes, it is a demonstration of His reign and manifestation of His coming. This to me answers a LOT of questions.

Sounds groovey. :shades:

[Tim C.]

It sure is a premill problem despite TimC.

Nope, no problem for our view at all. It places the resurrection of the righteous at the close of the great tribulation period, advent of Messiah, and establishing of the kingdom. Just as outlined in Daniel's other prophecies, the Olivet Discourse, 2Thessalonians 2, Revelation 20, and etc. Fits like a glove.

-Tim

[dizzle]

Please start your own thread. Thank you.

[PaulT]

Tim,
Why do you deny the finished work of Christ on the cross.

[Sheepdog]

:popcorn:

(sorry, i'm usually sporadic until nighttime, so it won't be until later that i'll get knee deep into this thread again)

[wfaber]

I fail to see any problem with the chronology in Daniel 12.


"And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time." Definitely the destruction of Jerusalem and the invasion of Judea and Galilee by the Romans, AD 67-70.

"...and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued." God spoke through prophets to the Christians (Nazarenes) to flee Jerusalem to the city of Pella, probably when Cestius Gallus withdrew his troops from the city.

"Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt." Yes, but when? Two thousand years later? Doesn't say. Could be three thousand years.

[dizzle]

I agree with the above - that is why I said thematically related. I don't think the passage necessarily requires straightforward sequence nor immediacy. If the consummation began (and that is what I believe, Jesus is reigning and subduing, the final subjugatin is the completion of the consummation) then it is the goal of the consummation.

[Sheepdog]

hmm.

then it could be like the Book of Revelation, where (given the Orthodox Pretererist interpretation) the revelation goes into great detail about the events up to 70 AD, and into some detail about the Final Res and all the stuff after it, but only briefly talks about the "Millenium" in between. this is more sticcato, since it breaks it down into a few passages... leaving out the in between time altogether.

[tizzidale]

Perhaps the problem is based on the belief that the resurrection referred to is the bodily resurrection, rather than the time when Christ 'led captivity captive' by breaking the gates of Hell and leading the righteous dead to Paradise? We know Moses and the Patriarchs are in Paradise, yet the general resurrection has not occured. Likewise we know some sinners like Dives and Judas and King Saul are lost.

If the event mentioned was referring to Holy Saturday when Christ was in the grave and His Spirit was preaching to those righteous souls formerly held in chains, then the problem would then not exist. :)

Only musing on my part.But never nevr return to left behindism. :)

Peace and grace.

I'm paying attention, Fr. Deacon.

rusty

[dizzle]

Which verse in Daniel are you referring to. If it is 12:2, then I dont agree that he is referring to the wicked being resurrected at that time. As far as I read it he is speaking specifically of the ones being raised to everlasting life being raised at that time.

Yes it is 12:2 and it mentions both the righteous and the wicked.

[Abigail]

Yes it is 12:2 Thank you

To anyone who knows Hebrew:

The NASV has the following translation using the words 'these' and 'others' where other translations have 'some' and 'some', so my question is, taking the NASV translation, can verse 12 be understood as follows:

Daniel 12:2 (NASV) "And many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these (ie the ones who awake) to everlasting life, but the others (ie not the 'these' who awake...so presumably those who continue sleeping) to disgrace and everlasting contempt"

[dizzle]

np Abigail, I didn't see your question before - I am not reading as much as I used to.

[Sheepdog]

IMO, the NASV rendering doesn't make too much sense. the last section "the others..." is still qualifying "many who sleep..."

though, it could be that Daniel abbreviated it down, rather than saying, "but those who don't to shame and everlasting contempt."

[John Reece]

Thank you

To anyone who knows Hebrew:

The NASV has the following translation using the words 'these' and 'others' where other translations have 'some' and 'some', so my question is, taking the NASV translation, can verse 12 be understood as follows:

Daniel 12:2 (NASV) "And many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these (ie the ones who awake) to everlasting life, but the others (ie not the 'these' who awake...so presumably those who continue sleeping) to disgrace and everlasting contempt"

Hi Abigail,

In context, there appear to be three groups:
some remain asleep in the dust of the earth;
some awake to everlasting life;
some awake to everlasting abhorrence.

Here is the comment of a Hebrew scholar:


The reference to the exposure of the wicked brings out how verses 1-3 as a whole are concerned with the restoration of life not for its own sake or for the sake of communion with God, but as part of and as a means to vindication . . . .

It is for this reason that the seer speaks of many being awakened, not all: those who were faithful but who lost their lives awake for vindication, those who were wicked but who seemed to triumph awake for condemnation — the regular mass of faithful Israel apparently remaining in Sheol.

Or it may be that the groups raised are the faithful in general and the unpunished wicked, only the already punished wicked remaining in Sheol . . .; while the people of God as a whole is outside the focus of verse 2 just as the gentile world is, verse 13 points to a resurrection of more than the martyrs.

But we need to keep in mind that the passage is handling a specific problem.
The threefold division suggested in the metaphor must not be pressed to yield a coherent total doctrine of the afterlife. — John E. Goldingay, Daniel (WBC) page 308

[John Reece]

IMO, the NASV rendering doesn't make too much sense.

:thumb:

Of those sleeping in the Land of Dust, many will awaken, some to everlasting life, some to shame and everlasting disgrace. (The New Jerusalem Bible)

[Tim C.]

Tim,
Why do you deny the finished work of Christ on the cross.

Whatever, dude.

I think it is obvious Daniel 12 speaks of the bodily resurrection at the close of the Great Tribulation period, return of the Lord, and establishing of the kingdom. Many are raised to life at that time, the others are raised to everlasting contempt. These preterists who deny it refers to bodily resurrection, are only proving that their preterist views force them into strange and unlikely interpretations of other Bible texts. The phrase "slept in the dust" should clue any reader in to the fact that bodily resurrection is in view.

-Tim

[Tim C.]

Tim C. never sees any problem with his premill view. This is a problem in and of itself. I find it very difficult to trust the objectivity of any one who sees no problem with thier position.

Oh, I acknowledge legitimate problems with my position. Its just that Daniel 12:2 is not one of these. Daniel 12:2 fits perfectly into my position, and the chapter is one of my favorite proof-texts.

-Tim

[Tim C.]

Please start your own thread. Thank you.

No. This thread is supposedly for the preterist position only. If ya'all want to criticise the futurist view, then start a new thread. Don't "sneak attack" our view on a preterist thread. Attack our view openly on a new thread, so I can refute you openly. Thank you.

-Tim

[Dcn_Athanasius]

I think it is obvious Daniel 12 speaks of the bodily resurrection at the close of the Great Tribulation period, return of the Lord, and establishing of the kingdom. Many are raised to life at that time, the others are raised to everlasting contempt. These preterists who deny it refers to bodily resurrection, are only proving that their preterist views force them into strange and unlikely interpretations of other Bible texts. The phrase "slept in the dust" should clue any reader in to the fact that bodily resurrection is in view.

-Tim

May peace and grace be with your spirit. Forgive me and grant my weakness some indulgence due to my newness on Tweb if by responding kindly I am breaking some guideline that I am not yet accustomed to. My spirit sinful as it is witnesses some error though my intent here in this response is only to gentle offer a possible answer.

Dear brother, when our Lord spoke of the parable of Dives the rich man and leper Lazarus did He affirm that one was reserved in punichment whilst one was enjoying pleasures? Likewise did not Moses and Elijah appear with our Lord on the Mt of Transfiguration? Likewise is God not the God of the Living? Are we right in assuming that the righteous Patriarchs, the righteous dead, the saints and the martyrs are in Paradise -now- before the Throne of our Lord Jesus Christ, likewise the wiscked dead are suffering a foretaste of what is to come in the general resurrection of the dead? Therefore, since we acknowledge the souls of the righteous are with Christ in Paradise (a token of the eternal heaven to come) and the souls of the wicked are seperated from Christ already in remorse and pain for the token of seperation that they now are experiencing, are we not able to affirm that at the time of the resurrection of our Lord Jesus when he led 'captivity captive" which yes surely refers to death but 'death' is NOT a 'thing" that can be led from the grave as the souls of the righteous dead and sinful dead could and can be. Could we not consider that this major event that is remembered in the Orthodox Churches and a thing mostly forgotten in the Protestants Churches and virtually never preached on or referred to ("That our Lord descended into Hades and preached to the righteous dead in Abraham's Bosom"), May we not consider that major and watershed event as having some importance in the Kingdom and prophecies of Daniel and in some way equaling the statement "many shgall arise who sleep in the dust" noting that this is not yet the ALL shall arise regarding the general resurrection. Who is it that shall remain in the grave at that Resurrection on that Day if not ALL and only -many-? If this is the case (the view I have weakly espoused) then surely this position (which is called Preteriest amongst my brothers the Protestants but Orthodox have not received such a name but certainly have received aspects of the teaching as a part of their Tradition) is not lacking in Biblical support and in no way is a 'strange or unlikely' interpretation of very real events which occurred at the time of our Lord's death and Resurrection, Glory be to His, now and forever unto the Age of all ages. Amen.

Forgive my weakness and any infraction I -may- have committed in this response. Pray for me please.

[Abigail]

Ok, so then if the NASV rendering is not favourable, is there any support to understanding of Daniel 12:2 along these lines:

In Isaiah 29, the prophet tells them that the Lord has 'poured over you a spirit of deep sleep, He has shut your eyes, the prophets; And he has covered your heads the seers.' (29:10). He then goes on to say in verse 18 that a day will come when they will hear and see and come out of the gloom and darkness. Daniel 12:2 speaks of people who sleep in the dust being awoken, so could this be the spiritual awakening that he is talking about ie those who accept the truth get everlasting life and those who reject get everlasting contempt. (I think this fits Acts 2 when Peter is speaking to the people and they all suddenly realise what they have done). These are the first guys who and are going to start to build the church for Christ - see parallels in Ezra, read Ezra 1:5 and Ezra 9:9 "For we are slaves; yet in our bondage our God has not forsaken us, but has extended lovingkindness to us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to give us reviving to raise up the house of our God, to restore its ruins, and to give us a wall in Judah and Jerusalem"

I think Daniel 12:13 is talking about a PHYSICAL resurrection

[Tim C.]

"From the time that the regular sacrifice is abolished and the abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. How blessed is he who keeps waiting and attains to the 1,335 days! But as for you (Daniel), go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion at the end of the age." - Daniel 12:11-13

Here is additional evidence that the resurrection of the righteous (which would include Daniel) was to occur at the close of the Great Tribulation period/end of the age.

-Tim

[Tim C.]

Gee, I guess I've never noticed what a huge problem Daniel 12 is for preterism.

-Tim

[GhostontheNet]

"From the time that the regular sacrifice is abolished and the abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. How blessed is he who keeps waiting and attains to the 1,335 days! But as for you (Daniel), go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion at the end of the age." - Daniel 12:11-13

Here is additional evidence that the resurrection of the righteous (which would include Daniel) was to occur at the close of the Great Tribulation period/end of the age.

-Tim


The problem here is that what you have rendered as "the age" is that same ever-multivalent word that pops up in young-earth/old earth creation debates. From the Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicon;

H3117
יום
yôm
BDB Definition:
1) day, time, year
1a) day (as opposed to night)
1b) day (24 hour period)
1b1) as defined by evening and morning in Genesis 1
1b2) as a division of time
1b2a) a working day, a day’s journey
1c) days, lifetime (plural)
1d) time, period (general)
1e) year
1f) temporal references
1f1) today
1f2) yesterday
1f3) tomorrow
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from an unused root meaning to be hot
Same Word by TWOT Number: 852

So too Strong's;

H3117
יום
yôm
yome
From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literally (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverbially): - age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (. . . live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.

[PaulT]

Great answer, your intrepretation places Daniel 9:24-25 in the future, at least that's what I picked up reading your replies. This seems to me a denial of what Christ did on the cross.

Where in Daniel 12 does it say "bodily ressurection", sleep in the dust = dead, sounds a bit allegorical to me?

[Manasseh]

Great answer, your intrepretation places Daniel 9:24-25 in the future, at least that's what I picked up reading your replies. This seems to me a denial of what Christ did on the cross.

Where in Daniel 12 does it say "bodily ressurection", sleep in the dust = dead, sounds a bit allegorical to me?

You often hear the weak argument above. So I suppose, using the same reasoning, if denying the interpitation of Dan 9:27 being a reference to Christs death on the cross means the denial of what Christ did on the Cross, then your denial of Dan 12 being a literal Resurrection means you deny a resurrection for believers.

[PaulT]

Help me out, Dan 9:24-27 lists several things Christ the Messiah was to accomplish on the cross, did He or didn't He do this? I didn't say Dan 12 wasn't speaking of a "literal" event, I just don't see it saying bodily ressurection. I believe awakening of ones spirit is a very 'literal" event.

[Tim C.]

The problem here is that what you have rendered as "the age" is that same ever-multivalent word that pops up in young-earth/old earth creation debates. From the Brown-Driver-Briggs lexicon;

H3117
יום
yôm
BDB Definition:
1) day, time, year
1a) day (as opposed to night)
1b) day (24 hour period)
1b1) as defined by evening and morning in Genesis 1
1b2) as a division of time
1b2a) a working day, a day’s journey
1c) days, lifetime (plural)
1d) time, period (general)
1e) year
1f) temporal references
1f1) today
1f2) yesterday
1f3) tomorrow
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from an unused root meaning to be hot
Same Word by TWOT Number: 852

So too Strong's;

H3117
יום
yôm
yome
From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literally (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverbially): - age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (. . . live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.

I don't see your point. Daniel was prophesying things concerning the close of the Old Covenant administration for Israel. His prophecies in ch. 2, 7, 9, 12 lead up to the close of the Old Covenant administration, advent of Messiah, and introduction of New Covenant and Messianic Kingdom blessings to Israel. THAT was the "end of the age" in Daniel 12, just as Christ uses it in Matthew 24. Ahhhh... see, so the preterist idea of "end of the age" in Matthew 24 will make their interpretation of Daniel 12 especially difficult.

-Tim

[Tim C.]

Great answer, your intrepretation places Daniel 9:24-25 in the future, at least that's what I picked up reading your replies. This seems to me a denial of what Christ did on the cross.

No, I only place Daniel 9:27 in the future. And v.27 clearly refers to the actions of Antichrist rather than Messiah. Putting a stop to sacrifice (similar to Antiochus IV Epiphanes), placing the abomination of desolation in the holy place (similar to Antiochus IV Epiphanes), performing 3 1/2 years of severe persecution against Israel (similar to Antiochus IV Epiphanes). These themes in Daniel 9:27 clearly refer to the actions of Antichrist, not the atoning sacrifice of Christ at the cross.

Where in Daniel 12 does it say "bodily ressurection", sleep in the dust = dead, sounds a bit allegorical to me?

Its not allegorical at all. Look at the way "sleep" is used of death in the Bible (esp. Matthew 9). It refers to the body. "In the dust" is also a clear reference to the dead body.

-Tim

[PaulT]

Tim,

Thanks, Dan 9:26 says after 69 weeks in the middle of the week following the 69th week which would have been the 70th the Messiah was cut-off, confirmed the covenant with many and put an end to the sacrificial system, this sounds an awful lot like what took place on the cross and encompasses the 70 weeks of the prophecy. When you suggest this has yet to take place you deny what the Messiah was to accomplish.

As far as sleep, please check out Eph 5:14, John 5:25 and tell if is doesn't sound reminiscent of Daniel 12. In addition to what is given above from Isaiah check out 9:2 where it talks about live folks walking in the land of death.

Again, where is bodily resurrection in the text of Dan 12, sounds an awful lot like an allegorical or at least symbolic interpretation of the passage. Careful, you might be accused of spiritualizing.

[Sheepdog]

Great answer, your intrepretation places Daniel 9:24-25 in the future, at least that's what I picked up reading your replies. This seems to me a denial of what Christ did on the cross.

the only explaination i've seen requires a gap between Christ's work in the 69th week and the stuff that happens in the 70th. however, everything we do see in the section indicates that the events of the "last" week are immediately after what happens to the Christ. even if it is not immediate, there is no languistic reason to suppose their is a gap in there which could be as much as 1970+ years.

Where in Daniel 12 does it say "bodily ressurection", sleep in the dust = dead, sounds a bit allegorical to me?

to an extent it is, but the language only allows "liberty" in interpretation to an extent. these "people" awake, some to eternal life. to take it to refer to a strictly spiritial event would be a strain on the text, IMO. this section seems somewhat straight forward, so while the allegorical interpretation is possible, i don't think it is likely.

[Sheepdog]

I don't see your point. Daniel was prophesying things concerning the close of the Old Covenant administration for Israel. His prophecies in ch. 2, 7, 9, 12 lead up to the close of the Old Covenant administration, advent of Messiah, and introduction of New Covenant and Messianic Kingdom blessings to Israel.

this buttresses the Preterist interpretation. The old covenant administration was concluded in AD70, when the Temple was destroyed. Actually, one could say it actually ended when Jesus died on the cross and rose again, atoning for all sin and thus making the Old Covenant means of atonment irrelevant. Personally, I think there is some overlap.

THAT was the "end of the age" in Daniel 12, just as Christ uses it in Matthew 24.

the end of the age of the Old Covenant? that happened long ago. are you arguing against Preterism or for it?

and, Jesus never used the phrase "end of the age" in Matt. 24. never. it was the Disciples who used the phrase, in one of the questions. you seem to have a problem keeping simple facts straight.

Ahhhh... see, so the preterist idea of "end of the age" in Matthew 24 will make their interpretation of Daniel 12 especially difficult.

the point was, the word was ambiguous enough in the original language to simple mean "end of the day," or possibly "last day." To say it HAS to mean the same "end of the age" as the Disciples refer to in Matthew 24 (which is gratuitously missing from Luke's account, BTW) is unwarrented.

Does Daniel ever use this phrase elsewhere in the book of Daniel? (serious question... it's been a long time since i've read Dan. from cover to cover, so maybe you know better than i.)

[Dcn_Athanasius]

"From the time that the regular sacrifice is abolished and the abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. How blessed is he who keeps waiting and attains to the 1,335 days! But as for you (Daniel), go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion at the end of the age." - Daniel 12:11-13

Here is additional evidence that the resurrection of the righteous (which would include Daniel) was to occur at the close of the Great Tribulation period/end of the age.

-Tim


Brother Tim, peace and grace to you.

Did Daniel not rise spiritually with Christ when He led captivity captive, or is the prophet Daniel NOT in Paradise and still in hades in Abrahams Bosom till now?

The Prophets and righteous dead and Patriarchs are with Christ in Paradise now. Their bodies we still have in the graves of course. This verse that you seem to struggle with presents no problems to the spiritual ascension (rise) of all the OT righteous dead who were afore bound by death and could not enter into the Glories of our God until the Cross of our Lord.

Sorry I am not very active on Tweb I am currently overseas in Thailand on Mission and have very limited access to a computer. I am only offering this as a matter to consider and not in any argumentative or authoritarian manner.

[PaulT]

Context is king, verse 3 gives specific attibutes of those that were awakened. They that be wise, shall shine, IMO seems to indicate those who awoke to the truth, of which some helped turn others to truth, doesn't sound like something I will be doing in Glory, but coud very well be an attibute of a disciple who became an apostle.

The problem with the gap is in Dan 9:24-26 would seem to me the term "after" in reference to events that took place beyond the conclusion of the 69th week. In the midst of the week, after 3 score and two, which would have been the 70th, the Messiah was cut off, (check out Is 53 and see how he terms the cross), then the sacrafice would cease, again not much need to cut the throats of Lambs since calvary. It can be fairly well documented that the list of things to accomplish in verse 24 can be credited to the cross.

[Tim C.]

me: I don't see your point. Daniel was prophesying things concerning the close of the Old Covenant administration for Israel. His prophecies in ch. 2, 7, 9, 12 lead up to the close of the Old Covenant administration, advent of Messiah, and introduction of New Covenant and Messianic Kingdom blessings to Israel.

Sheepdog: this buttresses the Preterist interpretation. The old covenant administration was concluded in AD70, when the Temple was destroyed. Actually, one could say it actually ended when Jesus died on the cross and rose again, atoning for all sin and thus making the Old Covenant means of atonment irrelevant. Personally, I think there is some overlap.

I don't see how that buttresses the preterist interpretation, per se. But at least we agree Daniel was refering to the close of the Old Covenant "age" for Israel.

me: THAT was the "end of the age" in Daniel 12, just as Christ uses it in Matthew 24.

Sheepdog: the end of the age of the Old Covenant? that happened long ago. are you arguing against Preterism or for it?

and, Jesus never used the phrase "end of the age" in Matt. 24. never. it was the Disciples who used the phrase, in one of the questions. you seem to have a problem keeping simple facts straight.

Sorry, I meant Matthew 13 rather than Matthew 24.

me: Ahhhh... see, so the preterist idea of "end of the age" in Matthew 24 will make their interpretation of Daniel 12 especially difficult.

Sheepdog: the point was, the word was ambiguous enough in the original language to simple mean "end of the day," or possibly "last day." To say it HAS to mean the same "end of the age" as the Disciples refer to in Matthew 24 (which is gratuitously missing from Luke's account, BTW) is unwarrented.

Isn't it clear that "end of the age" in Daniel 12, refers to the close of the prophecy? Daniel 10-12 contains one huge prophecy which outlines a chronology of events leading up to the close of the age, right? This would be the Old Covenant administration, right?

Does Daniel ever use this phrase elsewhere in the book of Daniel? (serious question... it's been a long time since i've read Dan. from cover to cover, so maybe you know better than i.)

Not that I know of.

-Tim

[Tim C.]

Sorry, I meant Matthew 13 rather than Matthew 24.

Some clarification here. I must've had Matthew 13 in mind when referring to Christ's words, but I did mean to refer to the "end of the age" theme in Matthew 24. Sorry about that.

But would you agree this "end of the age" theme is important in Matthew 24? Do you think the same basic thing was referred to in Matthew 13?

Or would you say "end of the age" in Matthew 24 clearly refers to the close of the Old Covenant era, while in Daniel 12 it refers to the very last period of history before the Lord returns.

-Tim

[Tim C.]

Tim,

Thanks, Dan 9:26 says after 69 weeks in the middle of the week following the 69th week which would have been the 70th the Messiah was cut-off, confirmed the covenant with many and put an end to the sacrificial system,

Its possible, but I still don't really see "after the 62 weeks" and "in the middle of the 70th week" as necessarily referring to the same thing.

It seems to me the destruction of the temple (Daniel 9:26b) is also among the events which occur "after the 62 weeks." Why do you limit it to the "cutting off" of Messiah? And about that last part of v.26, do you believe Gabriel was referring to events of AD 70? If so, then that means v.26 and v.27 contain double coverage of the same events? Is that how you view the passage?

this sounds an awful lot like what took place on the cross and encompasses the 70 weeks of the prophecy. When you suggest this has yet to take place you deny what the Messiah was to accomplish.

I don't deny what the Messiah accomplished. I deny your interpretation of Daniel 9, but that doesn't mean much. I know darn well what the blood of Christ means, and I have a whole slew of passages (better than Daniel 9) which I base my view on.

As far as sleep, please check out Eph 5:14, John 5:25 and tell if is doesn't sound reminiscent of Daniel 12. In addition to what is given above from Isaiah check out 9:2 where it talks about live folks walking in the land of death.

Slept in the dust, slept with the fathers, etc., is a Jewish means of referring to physical death. In Matthew 9, Jesus says the dead girl is not really dead, but only asleep. This description refers to bodily resurrection. The girl "woke up" in a very real way.

Your reference to Ephesians 5:14 is interesting. I suppose it shows an exception to the rule, but I doubt Daniel's prophecy speaks of a "spiritual" awakening. Some of those who wake, are woken up to everlasting shame and contempt.

As far as John 5:25, I think that passage does refer to the bodily resurrection of the righteous.

Again, where is bodily resurrection in the text of Dan 12, sounds an awful lot like an allegorical or at least symbolic interpretation of the passage. Careful, you might be accused of spiritualizing.

As per above, sleeping in the dust, or sleeping with the fathers, or etc., likely refers to physical death.

-Tim

[PaulT]

Tim,
Check out John 5:24, "He that heareth my word, and believeth,(don't know of many folks teaching a second chance) and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life:but is passed from death unto life", seems to me to be talking about the awakening of the soul unto conversion, not physical resurrection. Specific to verse 25, it says, "...The hour is coming, and now is..." This was spoken 2000 years ago, the only resurrection I'm aware of that has ocurred over the last 2000 years is the spiritual awakening that happens when one is saved, unless per chance I missed something and have been left behind.



Regarding Dan 9:24-27, the section starts off talking about 70 weeks are determined for the events cited in verse 24 to be accomplished. Verse 26 tells us what is going to happen to the Messiah after 69 weeks had run their course, 7 weeks in rebuilding 62 weeks from the rebuilding until the time of the Messiah. 1 of the accomplishments cited for the Messiah was to be anointed. Peter tells us in Acts 10:38 that Christ was anointed at the beginning of His ministry, which by the way lasted 3.5 years. The Messiah confirmed the covenant, verse 27 and was cut-off, aka crucified in the midst of the week, aka middle, aka 3.5 years into His ministry. In other words, the events that were prophesied of in verse 24 were accomplished by the cross which occurred in the middle of the 70th week. When folks suggest a gap the deny what Christ accomplished on the cross.

[Tim C.]

Tim,
Check out John 5:24, "He that heareth my word, and believeth,(don't know of many folks teaching a second chance) and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life:but is passed from death unto life", seems to me to be talking about the awakening of the soul unto conversion, not physical resurrection.

It speaks of imputation, and then Christ treats bodily resurrection of the righteous in the following passage. But "coming out of the tomb" most certainly refers to bodily resurrection.

Specific to verse 25, it says, "...The hour is coming, and now is..." This was spoken 2000 years ago

Christ came to Israel offering the Messianic Kingdom. This passage plays into the "kingdom offer" theme.

the only resurrection I'm aware of that has ocurred over the last 2000 years is the spiritual awakening that happens when one is saved, unless per chance I missed something and have been left behind.

"Spiritual awakening" is not resurrection. Your position does not sound orthodox.

But anyway, the original point was that "sleeping in dust," in Jewish thought, most certainly refers to the dead body in the grave. There is no reason to question this interpretation of Daniel's prophecy. And imposing a particular NT text upon this established theme in the OT is not a very steady foundation of interpretation - especially in the case of such passages as John 5, in which many Christians don't agree with your "spiritual" interpretation to begin with.


Regarding Dan 9:24-27, the section starts off talking about 70 weeks are determined for the events cited in verse 24 to be accomplished. Verse 26 tells us what is going to happen to the Messiah after 69 weeks had run their course, 7 weeks in rebuilding 62 weeks from the rebuilding until the time of the Messiah. 1 of the accomplishments cited for the Messiah was to be anointed. Peter tells us in Acts 10:38 that Christ was anointed at the beginning of His ministry, which by the way lasted 3.5 years. The Messiah confirmed the covenant, verse 27 and was cut-off, aka crucified in the midst of the week, aka middle, aka 3.5 years into His ministry. In other words, the events that were prophesied of in verse 24 were accomplished by the cross which occurred in the middle of the 70th week. When folks suggest a gap the deny what Christ accomplished on the cross.

Nah, don't be silly. I have a whole slew of passages, each of them better than Daniel 9, in which I can prove the significance of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. You seem to think your interpretation of Daniel 9 is essential to salvation. I find that disappointing.

-Tim

[PaulT]

Tim,
I guess Paul wasn't very Jewish or maybe even Christian, but he seemed to indicate that before Christ we are dead in trespasses and sins, Eph 2:1. Interesting in the same passage Paul also tells us that we are quickened, aka brought to life by Christ. Which type of folks you think Paul was talking about physically alive or dead? Once you answer this question go back to Dan 12 and tell how the dead and buried folks in verse 2, witness to folks and bring some to life in verse 3.



“Christ came to Israel offering the Messianic Kingdom. This passage plays into the "kingdom offer" theme.”



So now we base our interpretation of Scripture based on our predetermined methodology? Who are you using as your example of orthodoxy? What do you think Christ meant when he said, "He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." In order for someone to pass "from death unto life" it sure seems to me you had to be dead in your prior state. By the way, where is the word “tomb” in verse 25?



My interpretation of Dan 9 isn’t essential to salvation, but it sure wrecks havoc on a Jew still looking for fulfillment of the prophecy, yours fits right into their thinking, but then again, you have their same concept of a Kingdom, which really saddens me.

[GhostontheNet]

I don't see your point. Daniel was prophesying things concerning the close of the Old Covenant administration for Israel. His prophecies in ch. 2, 7, 9, 12 lead up to the close of the Old Covenant administration, advent of Messiah, and introduction of New Covenant and Messianic Kingdom blessings to Israel. THAT was the "end of the age" in Daniel 12, just as Christ uses it in Matthew 24. Ahhhh... see, so the preterist idea of "end of the age" in Matthew 24 will make their interpretation of Daniel 12 especially difficult.

-Tim The point of my lexicon cites were that one can't take the alleged "age" translation and run with it if "the end of days", i.e. the Final Judgment is a fair translation. Though with my variant on the idea of the end of the age, I could cope with such a translation. I haven't stabilized my own interpretation of the whole of Daniel 12, but two tell-tale signs are that so many scholars apply the passage to the Maccabean crisis, and many do not believe Daniel was saying that the resurrections would occur in close proximity to the deliverance, but like 2 Maccabees, to emphasize the resurrection as the martyr's and the faithful's reward.

[Dcn_Athanasius]

Context is king, verse 3 gives specific attibutes of those that were awakened. They that be wise, shall shine, IMO seems to indicate those who awoke to the truth, of which some helped turn others to truth, doesn't sound like something I will be doing in Glory, but coud very well be an attibute of a disciple who became an apostle.



Peace and grace be with your spirit Paul,

Dear brother, in Orthodox theology, the saints in Paradise -are- wise, they -do- shine (example Mt Transfiguration), they -are- awoken to the truth and they -do- help turn others to the truth. So although it does not sound like something you will be doing, it certainly is what -they- are doing right now. By the way your use of 'Glory" points to you thinking of post Last day Heaven, whilst I am speakintg of the Paradise -now-.

The second paragraph of your post I had no issue with so just deleted it unanswered. Basically we agree that Christ's Cross was where the majority of Daniel (and the Isaian reference you quoted) was fulfilled. The daily sacrifice was removed spiritually at Christ's cross and to God, but the physical sacrifice would be continued until the end of the Roman siege in AD 70. I realise the gap presents you some issues, but again this was only the physical removal of it. The spiritual acceptance of the daily sacrifice was done away at Christ's death. Blessed be His Name.

Forgive my sporadic posts I am away frolm home at present in a foreign country and on a foreign computer.

Peace and grace.

[PaulT]

Dcn,



I read through your explanation of Dan 12:2 regarding paradise, it makes sense. However, those that were made wise, the same ones who were awakened also turn “many others to righteousness”, seems to me to be a reference to those walking with God who are witnesses for Him while in a physical presence on earth. Are you suggesting, once someone dies, without Christ they get a second chance and can be saved or as the text says turn to righteousness while in paradise?

Regarding the removal of sacrifice, the cross, and destruction of the temple some 40 years after, I found an interesting story a few years back. Doing some research on the Messianic Jewish movement I stumbled across a debate published by Zondervan. 1 of the individuals in the book cited a story of what occurred at a Jewish council post-70AD to determine how Judaism should proceed. 1 of the Rabbis, non-Christian, observed that for 40 years leading up to the destruction of the temple the process the Jews had developed to determine if God had accepted their atonement sacrifice indicated he hadn’t. Evidently, the priests had developed a system whereby they would have a string colored in red out of one of the temples windows. If God accepted the sacrifice the string would turn white. The Rabbi said during the council that the string had not turned white for the 40 preceding years from 70AD. You can find the story on page 143 of How Jewish is Christianity, 2 views on the Messianic Movement, published by Zondervan.

Although the apostate Jews continued with the cultic practices God did not honor them, because of the work of our Lord on the cross.

Stay safe while out of the country.

In Christ

[PaulT]

Tim,

Dan 9:27, "clearly refers to the actions of Antichrist", maybe clear as mud. Dan 9:27 speaks of 3 things for the Messiah of verse 26, confirm the covenant with many, cause the cessation of sacrifice and oblation and make it desolate.

Is 53, another Messianic prophecy tells us Christ would “bare the sin for many”, verse 12, Matt 20:28 tells us he came “to give his life a ransom for many”. When Christ died on the cross He confirmed the covenant for those he died for, sounds an awful lot like “confirm the covenant with many”

Hebrews 10:9,10 it says, “He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all”. Earlier in the chapter it speaks of the imperfect sacrifice of the Jewish cultic practices. What Christ did on the cross brought and end forever of the requirement for sacrifices and oblations.

Matt 23:38, “Behold, your house is left desolate” and then later in Matt 24:15, he speaks of the abomination desolation spoken of by Daniel, this occurred within the generation of those which he speaking. Dan 9:27 clearly speaks of the accomplishment of Christ on the cross, denying this is denial of what He did. Christ himself tells us that the temple was left desolate and Daniels abomination was approaching. These events are not still to be played out, they happened, this is what is clear about the verse. All the events of Dan 9:24-27 took place within the 70 weeks of the prophecy. Why do you work so hard to deny this prophecy and stretch it into an untold number of weeks.

[PaulT]

Tim,



Regarding the orthodoxy of my position on John 5:25, John Calvin, a real liberal, right, had this to say regarding the verse, "So he,(speaking of Christ) confirms the oath that the voice of the Gospel has power to bring "the dead" back to life. It is generally agreed that Christ is referring to spiritual death here," Calvin goes on to high light the teachings of Paul.

John Gill, another liberal has this to say, “the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live; which may be understood either of a corporeal resurrection, and of some particular instances of it, which should shortly be; and of some persons who would be in the state of the dead, and to whom the voice of Christ would be attended with such power as to cause them to hear and live; as did Jairus's daughter upon his saying "Talitha Cumi", damsel arise, and the widow of Naim's son upon his saying, young man arise, and Lazarus, upon his calling to him, Lazarus come forth; and which is a full proof of his being equal to God that quickens the dead: or rather this is to be understood of a spiritual resurrection, and the rather, because this sense best agrees with the foregoing verse; and a corporeal resurrection is expressed in somewhat different words, and seems to be distinguished from this in (John 5:28,29 (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?passage=joh+5:28,29)) . And besides, the hour, or time of the resurrection of the above particular persons, was not strictly come; nor could they, with propriety, be said to be dead; to which may be added, that the phrase, "they that hear shall live", and none but them, best agrees with this sense: so then by the "dead" are meant such who are dead in trespasses and sins; who are separated from God, alienated from the life of God, and in whom the image of God is defaced; who are dead in all the powers and faculties of their souls, to that which is spiritually good; and are without spiritual breath, sense, feeling, and motion. And by "the voice" of Christ is intended his Gospel, which is a voice of love, grace, and mercy, of life and liberty, of peace, pardon, righteousness, and salvation by him; and which being attended with his power, is the means of quickening dead sinners; who may be said to hear it, when it comes not in word only, but in power, and works effectually in them; and is spirit and life, and the power of God unto salvation to them; when they receive it, understand, believe, and obey it: and such persons "shall live"; comfortably, pleasantly, and delightfully, a life of faith on Christ, a life of communion with him, and shall live eternally with him hereafter.

Not that these men are to be put on a platform, but I believe they are considered by most, conservative evangelicals that understand what rightly dividing the Word of God means, and I ain’t talking dispensations. Understanding this, what is unorthodox about my rendering of the passage? Who are you using to define “orthodox”?

[ross3421]

My quick comment (robbing from an old post of mine, only God knows from where)

Now about Daniel 12 and the resurrection mentioned there. I agree with you that the phrase “such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then" is indicating the Great Tribulation spoken of in Matthew 24.
But you see a problem because a “major resurrection” is said to occur in connection with the Great Tribulation. Well first of all, it is pure translators’ bias in our translation which give the necessary impression of a “major resurrection.” The text simply does not say that. It says “many” will be resurrected. “Many” is never used as “all” in the Book of Daniel. A passage from the OT cannot override the clear teaching of the NT that the physical resurrection at the end of temporal history will include ALL who have ever lived NOT just “many.” This event, then, is not the general resurrection. But in Matthew 27:53 we find an event described as a resurrection of “many” which points to this passage:

Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Matthew, in his distinctly Jewish Gospel, is the only one who points this out and uses the same phraseology, “many.” The objection might be had that Daniel also speaks about “many” wicked being resurrected, and I believe that they were, but weren’t given the privilege of going into Jerusalem and appearing to many.

****

SD this is one of the more difficult passages - and the centerpiece of a hyperpret response. But as I say above one cannot use one OT passage to over-ride the New which often dramatically reinterprets the OT. The hyperpret use of this passage reminds me of the Oneness use of Isaiah 9:6 to "prove" that Jesus is the Father.

Hi,

Within verse one of chapter 12 we do read that "everyone" that is found in the book of life will be delivered at this time.

"At this time" is yes at the end of the Great Tribulation when Michael (Christ) returns.

I believe scripture shows only one resurrection for the believers and one for the unbelievers but both happening the same day.....

John 11:24. "Martha said unto him, I know that he (Lazarus) shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day".

John 12:48. "He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one the judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day”.

So the question still remains if "everyone" found in the book is to be delivered at this time then why would only "many" be resurrected ???.

I believe the Daniel here is making the correlation to the "many" which is seen in chapter 11. Daniel uses this word 8 times for both believer and unbeliever alike. Daniel then continues with this word "many" through chapter 12 as well.

Many is not to be thought of as only "part of" but to as a reference to a people in general......

In Christ, Mark.

[PaulT]

Mark,



How do you know the later part of Dan 12:1 is not in reference to Christ’s work on the cross? Paul tells us he delivered us from darkness and translated us into His kingdom, Col 1:13. Paul also tells us that that Christ bore our sins on the cross, Col 2:14. Finally, John in Revelation chapter 5 seems to provide a beautiful word picture of when Christ ascended into glory after His resurrection and received the book because he had prevailed. Granted there are 40 years between Christ’s ascension and the “time of trouble” or there about, but this doesn’t see to be a huge stretch based on other “gaps” I’m aware of; in any event it all happened within the same generation.



In Christ, Paul

[ross3421]

Mark,



How do you know the later part of Dan 12:1 is not in reference to Christ’s work on the cross? Paul tells us he delivered us from darkness and translated us into His kingdom, Col 1:13. Paul also tells us that that Christ bore our sins on the cross, Col 2:14. Finally, John in Revelation chapter 5 seems to provide a beautiful word picture of when Christ ascended into glory after His resurrection and received the book because he had prevailed. Granted there are 40 years between Christ’s ascension and the “time of trouble” or there about, but this doesn’t see to be a huge stretch based on other “gaps” I’m aware of; in any event it all happened within the same generation.



In Christ, Paul

Paul,

I believe I can answer your question beyond any doubt and show that the last part of Dan. 12:1 is speaking of the latter days and not the crucifiction and the destruction of Israel in 70AD.

"and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book".

"At that time"

First, we see that it will be "at that time" when these things in this verse will occur. We see that "at that time" relates to the verse prior as there will be a "time of trouble" which then relates back to when Michael will also stand up.

And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people:

Chapter 12 starts with the word "and" linking the actions of chpater 11 with those in 12. Thus we see the events in chapter 11 occurring in the latter days, daily sacrifice taken away, abonimations of desolations, on and on....

In addition, the verses following 12:1 speak of the resurrection, tribulation, judgement, and the time of the end.

So to say that the text surrounding 12:1 speaks of FUTURE events but 12:1 speaks of the crucifiction and 70AD is wrong. However, I will continue.

Michael stand up

I believe we are in agreement that Michael the Archangel represents Jesus Christ ( I can prove this if needed ). So when does Michael STAND up. First we need to ask how long will he sit ?

Christ make the comment that after his crucifiction and seperation he will "sit" on the right hand of God.

Lu 22:69 Hereafter * * shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God.

How long will he sit ??? Till he make his enemies his footstool and death is destroyed he will not stand up prior to this....

Heb 1:13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool *

Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool *.

We see that he will reign in heaven and sit on the right hand until the last enemy death is destroyed....

1co 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put * all enemies under his feet.
1co 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

Michael is the achangel in which those in the graves will hear his voice and be resurrected which paralles 12:1-3.

Jude 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel .....

1th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Time of Trouble

Mr 13:8 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows.

This is the reference to this trouble to take place on earth, the wrath of God. We also wee this trouble characterized by that there never was nor has there been and nor there will be a time like this until Michael does stand up.

Mt 24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
Mt 24:8 All * * these are the beginning of sorrows.

Mt 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

One last point, the word "delivered" used in Dan 12:1 is "Neder" # 4422 which means to slip away; escape. Thy people were delivered out not into the hands of their enemy.

I am very concerned with certain teachings of the day, I should have not needed to detail such basic scriptures and understandings.

In Christ, Mark.

[PaulT]

Mark,

"Chapter 12 starts with the word "and" linking the actions of chpater 11 with those in 12. Thus we see the events in chapter 11 occurring in the latter days, daily sacrifice taken away, abonimations of desolations, on and on....


In addition, the verses following 12:1 speak of the resurrection, tribulation, judgement, and the time of the end.



So to say that the text surrounding 12:1 speaks of FUTURE events but 12:1 speaks of the crucifiction and 70AD is wrong. However, I will continue."



How do you know chapter 11 is dealing with future events and not events that occurred during the inter-testament time? If chapter 11 is dealing with inter-testament events then would 12:1 be dealing with the cross?



"I believe we are in agreement that Michael the Archangel represents Jesus Christ ( I can prove this if needed ). So when does Michael STAND up. First we need to ask how long will he sit ?"



Where in the passage does it say Michael sat down? Why do you assume the sense of the verse is someone getting out of a chair and not in the sense of defending or representing someone? The verse says, "..the great prince which standeth for his people.." This sounds to me more the concept of standing up as a representative.



"Mr 13:8 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows."



This is the reference to this trouble to take place on earth, the wrath of God. We also wee this trouble characterized by that there never was nor has there been and nor there will be a time like this until Michael does stand up.



Mt 24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

Mt 24:8 All * * these are the beginning of sorrows.



Mt 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."



Great verses, but I think if you should reread the passage you will see the section begin and end with "this generation". The events you list were prophesied by Christ to occur within the generation; (see Mark 13:4, 30, Matt 23:36, 24:3, and 24:34 bookends specifically given to interpret when what you have listed above would occur) He was speaking. Regarding the great tribulation, do you think those who survive will out number Noah's family members; I think the flood lead to more destruction. You might want to rethink your position.



"One last point, the word "delivered" used in Dan 12:1 is "Neder" # 4422 which means to slip away; escape. Thy people were delivered out not into the hands of their enemy."



Didn't this in a very real sense occur for Christ's people when He bore their sins on the cross, Col 2:13-15. Isn't man without Christ under the enemies control, John 8:44, Eph 2:2? Because of Christ's accomplishment on the cross didn't we escape from the hands of the enemy and are transferred into the Kingdom of light, Eph 2:6, 1 Th 5:5?



"I am very concerned with certain teachings of the day; I should have not needed to detail such basic scriptures and understandings."



I understand, I too have the same concern. False teaching occurs whenever folks apply cut and paste hermeneutics, not taking into account the original audience, context of the passage or what the finished work of Christ has bought us.

In Christ,

Paul

[ross3421]

Mark,

"Chapter 12 starts with the word "and" linking the actions of chpater 11 with those in 12. Thus we see the events in chapter 11 occurring in the latter days, daily sacrifice taken away, abonimations of desolations, on and on....


In addition, the verses following 12:1 speak of the resurrection, tribulation, judgement, and the time of the end.



So to say that the text surrounding 12:1 speaks of FUTURE events but 12:1 speaks of the crucifiction and 70AD is wrong. However, I will continue."



How do you know chapter 11 is dealing with future events and not events that occurred during the inter-testament time? If chapter 11 is dealing with inter-testament events then would 12:1 be dealing with the cross?



"I believe we are in agreement that Michael the Archangel represents Jesus Christ ( I can prove this if needed ). So when does Michael STAND up. First we need to ask how long will he sit ?"



Where in the passage does it say Michael sat down? Why do you assume the sense of the verse is someone getting out of a chair and not in the sense of defending or representing someone? The verse says, "..the great prince which standeth for his people.." This sounds to me more the concept of standing up as a representative.



"Mr 13:8 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines and troubles: these are the beginnings of sorrows."



This is the reference to this trouble to take place on earth, the wrath of God. We also wee this trouble characterized by that there never was nor has there been and nor there will be a time like this until Michael does stand up.



Mt 24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

Mt 24:8 All * * these are the beginning of sorrows.



Mt 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."



Great verses, but I think if you should reread the passage you will see the section begin and end with "this generation". The events you list were prophesied by Christ to occur within the generation; (see Mark 13:4, 30, Matt 23:36, 24:3, and 24:34 bookends specifically given to interpret when what you have listed above would occur) He was speaking. Regarding the great tribulation, do you think those who survive will out number Noah's family members; I think the flood lead to more destruction. You might want to rethink your position.



"One last point, the word "delivered" used in Dan 12:1 is "Neder" # 4422 which means to slip away; escape. Thy people were delivered out not into the hands of their enemy."



Didn't this in a very real sense occur for Christ's people when He bore their sins on the cross, Col 2:13-15. Isn't man without Christ under the enemies control, John 8:44, Eph 2:2? Because of Christ's accomplishment on the cross didn't we escape from the hands of the enemy and are transferred into the Kingdom of light, Eph 2:6, 1 Th 5:5?



"I am very concerned with certain teachings of the day; I should have not needed to detail such basic scriptures and understandings."



I understand, I too have the same concern. False teaching occurs whenever folks apply cut and paste hermeneutics, not taking into account the original audience, context of the passage or what the finished work of Christ has bought us.

In Christ,

Paul


Paul,

I appreciate your knowledge in PAST history however the bible is NOT just a history. Please do not limit the word of God to such it is a dis-service.

As you limit scriptures to mainly the past, your understanding of prophecy is thereby also limited.

In Christ, Mark.

[PaulT]

Mark,



On the contrary, I regard Scripture as sacred and as such work hard to force my dogma into the interpretation of Scripture. I believe if you went back and tracked the formation of most cults you will find they have taken Scripture out of context, forced a dogma into it and have generated a false teaching. A few come to mind, Mormons, JW’s, Branch Dividians, etc. The thing these folks all had in common was there belief that they could take specific events out of Scripture and along with a newspaper render a new teaching. This is the height of Apostasy.

When Daniel prayed and God answered him, do you think God intended to mislead him or answer his prayer, “for thy mercies” and when God answered as to when He would extend the mercy to Israel do you think God’s answer was serious? What gives you the authority to apply the prophecy to some future event when God was answering a specific request of Daniel? I’m not limiting Scriptures to the past, just recognizing that the prophecies given were to real people who had real issues concerning real solutions. This does not mean we cannot apply a Biblical principle today but application of principles is fundamentally different attempting to wrench prophecies out of the context in which they were given and apply them to some future event. No Daniel 9:24-27 was about a time that was fulfilled close to 2000 years ago, the sooner those who deny this recognize their error the more effective the church will be in disciplining the nations, including those in Israel who continue to deny the passage as well.

Would you deny Is 53 did not occur? I think not, How is Dan 9, 10, 11 or 12 any different? Perhaps you should step back and read the passages without any preconceived conditions or rose colored glasses and then anwer the questions I asked.

In Christ,

Paul

[Dcn_Athanasius]

Dcn,



I read through your explanation of Dan 12:2 regarding paradise, it makes sense. However, those that were made wise, the same ones who were awakened also turn “many others to righteousness”, seems to me to be a reference to those walking with God who are witnesses for Him while in a physical presence on earth. Are you suggesting, once someone dies, without Christ they get a second chance and can be saved or as the text says turn to righteousness while in paradise?In Christ

Peace and grace be with you Paul,

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

No brother I am not suggesting that at all. Forgive my delay in responding I just saw this post now. I am not yet conversant with this board and its functions.

As to turning many to righteousness, you have presumed at Paradise end, yet the saints walk amongst us, the angels guard us and interceed for us, on this earth (as it were). So this sentence can and is fulfilled everytime a saint assists one who has asked for their intercessions, or for example when St Mary appears, many are converted and change from evil ways (for example when St Mary appeared over the Coptic Church in Zeitun for two years in 1968, many saw her-Protestants, Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Orthodox and atheists-see here for more:

http://members.aol.com/bjw1106/marian7.htm
which has an actual photo and:

http://www.apparitions.org/zeitun.html
which also has an actual photo and:

http://www.zeitun-eg.org/
Which also has a real photo.

In these events I can say that many were turned to righteousness by the saint who is in Paradise at the time.

Thank you for the information regarding the Rabbis and the Council of Jamnia (90 AD).

Thank you for your kind comments and wishes.

Peace.

[PaulT]

Dcn,

No problem, I understand your frustration with the site, I’m knew as well and still learning my way around. Tell me if I’m wrong, but if I understand your position correctly you think the verse is suggesting the visitation of Saints returning to aide physical beings while on earth? I don’t know that I agree with this, but I need to think through the concept. While I might not agree I don’t see if it is much different than mine, in believing the concept is speaking to spiritual regeneration.

Again, you take care while overseas.

In Christ,

Paul

[PaulT]

To all,

Correction, the idea was not to force a dogma into Scripture. I apologize for the typo.

[Tim C.]

Dan 9:27, "clearly refers to the actions of Antichrist", maybe clear as mud. Dan 9:27 speaks of 3 things for the Messiah of verse 26, confirm the covenant with many, cause the cessation of sacrifice and oblation and make it desolate.

Clear as mud? It was clear to Irenaeus and Hippolytus. Why not to you?

The three themes in 9:27 are:

1.) put a stop to sacrifice

2.) the abomination of desolation

3.) 3 1/2 years of severe persecution

These themes are *defined elsewhere in the book of Daniel, and they are clearly related to the actions of the tyrant - the antichrist. They do not refer to the ministry of Messiah.

Is 53, another Messianic prophecy tells us Christ would "bare the sin for many", verse 12, Matt 20:28 tells us he came "to give his life a ransom for many". When Christ died on the cross He confirmed the covenant for those he died for, sounds an awful lot like "confirm the covenant with many"

That isn't very convincing.

Hebrews 10:9,10 it says, "He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all". Earlier in the chapter it speaks of the imperfect sacrifice of the Jewish cultic practices. What Christ did on the cross brought and end forever of the requirement for sacrifices and oblations.

Hebrews contrasts the New Covenant to the Old Covenant, true, but this does not provide the interpretation of Daniel 9.

Matt 23:38, "Behold, your house is left desolate" and then later in Matt 24:15, he speaks of the abomination desolation spoken of by Daniel, this occurred within the generation of those which he speaking.

Nope. The Great Tribulation period did not occur at AD 67-70, else the early church would've noticed it.

Dan 9:27 clearly speaks of the accomplishment of Christ on the cross

Yeah... clear as mud.

denying this is denial of what He did.

Don't be silly. The NT gospels and epistles give a much better record of what he accomplished. Your non-apostolic interpretation of Daniel 9 is not essential to salvation.

Christ himself tells us that the temple was left desolate and Daniels abomination was approaching. These events are not still to be played out, they happened, this is what is clear about the verse.

How can you sit there and tell me its "clear" when the ancient church didn't interpret the passage as you do? I think your interpretation is strange and unscriptural, and unhistorical.

All the events of Dan 9:24-27 took place within the 70 weeks of the prophecy. Why do you work so hard to deny this prophecy and stretch it into an untold number of weeks.

We don't add weeks to the prophecy. This criticism should be aimed at historicists, not futurists.

-Tim

*For "put a stop to sacrifice" see Daniel 8:11-13, 11:31, 12:11; for "abomination of desolation" see Daniel 11:31, 12:11; for "3 1/2 years of severe persecution" see Daniel 7:25.

[Tim C.]

I guess Paul wasn't very Jewish or maybe even Christian, but he seemed to indicate that before Christ we are dead in trespasses and sins, Eph 2:1. Interesting in the same passage Paul also tells us that we are quickened, aka brought to life by Christ. Which type of folks you think Paul was talking about physically alive or dead? Once you answer this question go back to Dan 12 and tell how the dead and buried folks in verse 2, witness to folks and bring some to life in verse 3.

You want to use Paul's "imputation" passages to water down resurrection passages elsewhere in Scripture? Then why should you believe in any bodily resurrection? It is obvious Paul was illustrating spiritual things in those passages. But Daniel 12 is one of the basic bodily resurrection passages, and many of its features rule out the idea that imputation (or some other spiritual idea) is in view.

"Christ came to Israel offering the Messianic Kingdom. This passage plays into the "kingdom offer" theme."

So now we base our interpretation of Scripture based on our predetermined methodology?

The "kingdom offer" theme is readily apparent in the synoptics and Acts. An extensive Scriptural outline of it has been given in The Theocratic Kingdom, by George N.H. Peters.

Who are you using as your example of orthodoxy? What do you think Christ meant when he said, "He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." In order for someone to pass "from death unto life" it sure seems to me you had to be dead in your prior state.

Those imputation passages do little to explain Daniel 12. Daniel 12 refers to the bodily resurrection and judgment. It concerns those who "sleep" (this is a bodily resurrection theme - see Matthew 9:23-25). They sleep "in the dust" - a clear reference to buried bodies (compare "gathered to the fathers" in OT books). Some who awake are awakened to damnation. This clearly does not refer to "awakening in Spirit regeneration" or "awakening in Christ's righteousness" or etc.

By the way, where is the word "tomb" in verse 25?

"For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes. For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him. Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment." - John 5:21-29

This passage describes the two-fold bodily resurrection and judgment. It doesn't strengthen your abuse of Paul's imputation teaching.

My interpretation of Dan 9 isn’t essential to salvation, but it sure wrecks havoc on a Jew still looking for fulfillment of the prophecy, yours fits right into their thinking

The earliest church was battling Jewish unbelief, yet they held to this futurist interpretation of Daniel 9.

but then again, you have their same concept of a Kingdom, which really saddens me.

Yes, it is a Jewish concept of the kingdom. It is based upon the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants, and their initial fulfillments in the Old Testament. It is a solid Scriptural understanding of the kingdom. Seems to me it is the alleged "spiritual fulfillments of the Covenants" at the present time which is a sad view, especially since it demands that the early church didn't notice they were living in the kingdom age.

-Tim

[PaulT]

Tim,

Welcome back, thought we had lost you.


You want to use Paul's "imputation" passages to water down resurrection passages elsewhere in Scripture?


I guess Paul should have thought of this potential abuse and not used, “And you hath he quickened” and “when we were dead in sins” and finally, “Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light”.

Then why should you believe in any bodily resurrection?

Because Paul tells us the dead in Christ will rise on the last day, 1 Cor 15:15,16. It is obvious that until Christ one is spiritually dead, are you denying this fact.


Those imputation passages do little to explain Daniel 12. Daniel 12 refers to the bodily resurrection and judgment.

Daniel 12:3, tells us the attributes of those who have been awakened from the dust, they go around witnessing and turn many to righteousness. Except for Dcn’s explanation, which seems to be a bit of a stretch that Saints who have gone on to be with the Lord come back and witness to unbelievers I don’t see how you can suggest this describes physically dead folks.





"For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes. For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him. Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment." - John 5:21-29

This passage describes the two-fold bodily resurrection and judgment. It doesn't strengthen your abuse of Paul's imputation teaching.


What theology is the basis to assume someone who is physically dead can hear, expect in the few documented cases called miracles, in the NT. Verse 25 isn’t talking about the 2nd Advent or physical resurrection, because not everyone hears the voice. It is only at the 2nd Advent when some are physically recalled some to eternal life, some to destruction. The precedent is that while physically alive yet spiritually dead some hear the call, this is confirmed by Paul is several places. I don’t know how to be clearer; Scripture describes those responding to the Gospel as rising from the dead. The dead in Daniel 12:1 end up wittnessing, what is the issue? By the way, the tomb isn’t in verse 25.

Are you aware of any conservative theological commentator who doesn't believe the subject of verse 25 is not conversion?



The earliest church was battling Jewish unbelief, yet they held to this futurist interpretation of Daniel 9.


Esc documents ECF who held Dan 9 had been fulfilled.



Yes, it is a Jewish concept of the kingdom. It is based upon the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants, and their initial fulfillments in the Old Testament. It is a solid Scriptural understanding of the kingdom. Seems to me it is the alleged "spiritual fulfillments of the Covenants" at the present time which is a sad view, especially since it demands that the early church didn't notice they were living in the kingdom age.

Not that I think a precedent in the early church is necessary, I’m aware of a few half-baked concepts the early church believed, however I do understand your reasoning for attempting to track your belief back to Apostolic times. Nevertheless, the early church clearly held that the OT prophecies were fulfilled in the church. Esc over on another thread has provided substantial documentation of both an Amill as well as Premill view in the early church. I’m not suggesting a Premill view is wrong, I’m aware of both views held by folks who worshiped together. However, pre 1830 Premill’s viewed the kingdom very differently than dispensationalists do today. Your amalgamation of the concept is in error. The church as always held that it is God’s kingdom, whether or not another 1000 years would be tacked on at the end was up to debate.


By the way, come up with any examples of dual fulfillment?

In Christ,

Paul

[PaulT]

Tim C,


Clear as mud? It was clear to Irenaeus and Hippolytus. Why not to you?

The three themes in 9:27 are:

1.) put a stop to sacrifice

2.) the abomination of desolation

3.) 3 1/2 years of severe persecution

These themes are *defined elsewhere in the book of Daniel, and they are clearly related to the actions of the tyrant - the antichrist. They do not refer to the ministry of Messiah.

So now we are down to debating the writings of ECF. Interesting you should place your stake in someone who reported Christ as being 55 when he died. My understanding is that Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, Julius Africanus, Eusebius, Athanasius, Augustine and the Epistle of Barnabas all held that Daniel 9 was fulfilled in Christ. Evidently your 3 themes weren’t very clear to them.



That isn't very convincing.

Not suprising.



Hebrews contrasts the New Covenant to the Old Covenant, true, but this does not provide the interpretation of Daniel 9.

I didn’t suggest it was an interpretation of Daniel 9. All Hebrews does is confirm what was prophesied for the Messiah to accomplish was indeed accomplished.




Don't be silly. The NT gospels and epistles give a much better record of what he accomplished. Your non-apostolic interpretation of Daniel 9 is not essential to salvation.

Friend, I fear it is you who is being silly. Athanasius is a dispute with the Jews over Daniel 9, similar to what you and I are debating said this, “So the Jews are trifling and the time in question, which they refer to future, is actually come. For when did prophet and vision cease from Israel, save when Christ came, the Holy of Holies? For it is a sign, and an important proof, of the coming of the Word of God, that Jerusalem no longer stands, nor is any prophet raised up nor vision revealed to them” House Divided Bahnsen and Gentry, page 274. What is really interesting is after close to 2000 years the cycle has come full circle, legitimate Christians side with unbelieving Jews and deny a key Messianic prophecy.



How can you sit there and tell me its "clear" when the ancient church didn't interpret the passage as you do? I think your interpretation is strange and unscriptural, and unhistorical.

I don’t believe you have accurately portrayed what the ECF’s believed about the passage.

In Christ,
Paul


We don't add weeks to the prophecy. This criticism should be aimed at historicists, not futurists.

-Tim

*For "put a stop to sacrifice" see Daniel 8:11-13, 11:31, 12:11; for "abomination of desolation" see Daniel 11:31, 12:11; for "3 1/2 years of severe persecution" see Daniel 7:25.

[/QUOTE]