Daniel's 70 weeks - Need Input

[onemangang]

Hey Daniel Gracely, nice name by the way

If you and the Dispensationalist are right, and there is a 7 year gap, what does that mean? Christ is still yet to return at an unknown date according to your studies right?

If there is a 7 year Gap and you have rightly divided Daniel 9 the 70 weeks, then do you or other Dispensationalist think you can set a date for Christ return?

In other words is that the goal, or just to point to the signs and seasons as a voice crying out in the wilderness so to speak?

Is there anything more to the Dispensational view that Im missing, or does it do as the Catholic Church says in Her creed?

       He will come again in glory
         to judge the living and the dead
          and his kingdom will have no end.

I think you would be hard pressed to find any Christian that thinks Christ already came back, although I have heard some people that call themselves full preterist espouse that view.

You do acknowledge that their are discrepancies in the dating of many of these books from what I gather from your postings? I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but that is something I gleaned from your postings!

I have looked into the 70 weeks of Daniel, certainly not as in depth as you, but none the less I have some thoughts.

I was not a giving up, but when dates (numbers) are not so etched in stone, then it is hard to do proper mathematics. Fuzzy math? No! Its hard to add 490 to something around 445ish or 457ish

So, I have instead, looked to a preconceived notion that I hold. That is, what puts Christ at the center of this Prophesy? So it is not a random notion, but one that relies on the providence of God, knowing Christ is always at the forefront of the prophetic.

Like a previous poster had mentioned, the already, but not yet! I believe the Prophesy has already been fulfilled but not yet. I think these things will continue even to the consummation, when there is no more sin and death! So, for me, did the 490 years come and go? Yes. Was the prophesy fulfilled? Yes. Will it be fulfilled? Yes

I think that the work being done by the dispensationalist and the Preterist is great, whether it be Archeological, Historical, or Grammatical! Anything that gets people to point their focus in the direction of Jesus Christ is good in my book. Keep up the good work!

God bless!

 

[Daniel_Gracely]

Hello onemangang,

My own purpose in showing the Messiah’s rejection and death after 69 weeks is NOT so that I can set any date about Christ’s coming. People have repeatedly shown themselves to be false prophets in trying to do so (such as Harold Camping). Rather, my purpose in discussing Daniel’s prophecy is to prove God’s foreknowledge of the future, and thus show why the Bible is superior to other so-called scriptures held to be sacred or profound. (e.g. the Vedas, the writings of Joseph Smith, etc.)

I’ll admit that Daniel’s prophecy is a difficult subject to grasp for any number or reasons. It is hard to:

(1) add years going from BC to AD;

(2) understand the Julian, Gregorian, and proleptic-Gregorian Calendars, the most former of which astronomers use;

(3) grasp the specific way NASA’s online moon phase chart adds a year “zero” between 1 AD and 1 BC, so that “0” is now 1 BC (or BCE) on their chart, making 99 BC/BCE to equal what is generally held to be 100 BC/BCE;

(4) find information showing how translations erred (and continue to err) in describing the timing of Passion Week, making the gospels appear contradictory when they are not. For example, in one case a common translation reads: “Now on the first Day of Unleaved Bread,” when in fact the phrase is in the Dative, and can be understood as “*For the sake of *the First Day of Unleaved Bread…” which expresses an entirely different timeline during Passion Week;

(5) realize the N.T. narrative re: Mary’s anointing and Judas’ betrayal is a parenthetical compression of the narrative (i.e., not chronological) in two of the gospels. Otherwise one gospel would seem to place Mary’s anointing two days before the Passover, while another gospel puts it *six *days prior;

(6) grasp why Christ believed the Jews should have been expecting Him on the Day of Triumphal Entry. This involves questions about what in Jewish history should have obligated Jews to this knowledge. In turn, IMO this suggests a 69 year Exile the Jews would have observed, and various inferences they should have made from it;

(7) solve the seeming contradiction between the Bible and early Babylonian records. Yet the main discrepancy is resolved once it is understood that the Exilic and post-exilic biblical books (Kings and Chronicles) reckon the anniversaries of kings differently than, for example, Jeremiah and the early Babylonian record. Along these lines is the knowledge necessary to jive historical information about when Cyrus began to rule, as well as exactly when his 1st year of reign would have been reckoned. IMO the Exile can be narrowed down to within a day (either the last day of Cyrus’ 1st year, or the first day of his 2nd year, since in the latter case we are told when the Jews offered a sacrifice upon their return to Jerusalem, despite the absence of a Temple and a rebuilt City;

(8) differentiate what decree constituting the beginning bookend date of Daniel’s prophecy;

(9) resolve EVERY difficulty, but rest relatively content in the general body of evidence. For example, some claim the crucifixion could not have happened on a Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday in 33 AD because of when the crescent of the New Moon would have been first observed, which they belive argues for a ‘Saturday’ or later crucifixion. But in fact the observation itself of the new moon in the 1st century AD does not appear to have been an ironclad, unvarying rule in the establishment of the new month, though generally it played an important part;

(10) know with absolute certainty from archaeological records whether Daniel, who as an old man straddles the time of Jeremiah and Ezra, reckoned the anniversaries of kings according to the Nisan to Nisan system, or the Tishri to Tishri. In fact, strictly from archaeological recoreds we can’t know (presently, at least). But unless he used the latter system, the Exile would have fallen short of 69 years. The only way the biblical and extra-biblical records can jive, is if Daniel used the latter. Otherwise, proving the prophecy true becomes problematic. IMO it is reasonable to assume Daniel used the Tishri to Tishri, since (a) he records events 46 years later that his older contemporary, Jeremiah; and (b) because arguably he wrote his book 2 years after his retirement from public service, somewhere in or after the 3rd year of Cyrus, ca. 535 BC, and therefore would have felt less constrained to record a thing according the the Persian fashion of spring to spring;

(11) understand how the Greek words “kai” and “de” behave, and how they were mistranslated or came to be misunderstood in certain instances.

(12) know why certain atheist arguments, like the argument that numbers in Daniel are rounded off and not meant to be read with micrometer precision, are false.

(13) (last but not least), jive archaeological records to show their accord with Daniel’s prophecy.

Most people are not willing to really investigate such a matter thoroughly, either because they are not gifted to do so (and consequently think it is unimportant that anyone else should do so) or because they are willing to have faith in the general idea of a thing (e.g. concluding that Daniel’s prophecy is *somehow *true), without feeling any particular need to verify it objectively.

Incidentally, I know of no Preterist view that accounts for #13 in the list above. That’s a real sticking point for me. It’s not enough, or I should say, It OUGHT NOT TO BE enough, for someone to simply come up with a system that ‘works’ yet ignores all significant archaeological considerations that bear on the matter.

 

[ryanoneil]

The phrase, “This generation shall not pass away,” is not in the context of Jesus’ contemporaries rejecting him.

I believe it is the context. Just before the discourse Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees hypocrites and pronounced woes on them. Then he ended by saying “Truely, I say to you, all this will come upon this generation.” (Mt 23:36). Jesus was talking to his contemporaries.

Verses in the same chapter (Mt 24) preceding this phrase states that earth would experience many troubles of a natural phenomenon, that the gospel would be preached to every nation, that those who endured to the end would be saved, that a great tribulation would come upon the earth never before or since equaled in its severity, that no flesh would survive it were not those days shortened, that in those days (of the Great Tribulation) the sun will be darkened and the moon not give its light and that even the powers heaven would be shaken, and, finally, that Christ will return.

Please read the verses again and notice how many times Jesus says YOU. He is talking to those who are listening to him first (before we could ever apply his words to a future generation). Also many of the natural phenomenon did take place, but more than that, those phenomenon are apocalyptic language used to describe the downfall of dynasties. Take for example (Isa 13:10-13), which describes the defeat of Babylon in the same terms.

Also, the word “world” means the civilized world which at the time was the Roman Empire. And St. Paul told us that the faith and gospel had been proclaimed in all the world (Rom 1:8, Col 1:5-6).

Then Jesus says to learn a parable of the fig tree, that when it puts forth its leaves you know summer is near. Even so, when you see all these things (the events threatening to extinguish all flesh living contemporaneously with the Great Tribulation) you know that IT (Christ’s Coming) is near. And THEN we have the phrase, “This generation shall not pass away until all is fulfilled.” Again, the natural reading takes its key from verse 22, which says that despite the days which threaten to extinguish all human life on earth—the coming Great Tribulation—the generation that witnesses this shall not pass away without the completion (fulfillment) of all that Christ has predicted. In short, the phrase in context is not referencing Jesus’ contemporaries in the first century AD.

The reading takes it’s key from verses 2-3. Jesus said the Temple would be destroyed and the disciples asked when. When the eight signs appeared and the fig tree put out leaves in the summer, the Son of man’s judgment was at “the very gates” of the rebellious city of Jerusalem. Christians fled like the Lord told them. The great tribulation of the Church started after the burning of Rome in July of 64AD. It progressed for two years in full force (and may have suceeded in stamping out Christianity). But Jerusalem revolted against Rome in Feb 67AD and Rome’s wrath shifted to the Jews. There has never been, nor will there ever be (until the final eschaton) anything that could have smothered out Christianity when it was so small and vulnerable- if Nero had continued any longer or if the Jerusalem Christians had not escaped the seige of Jerusalem.

The destruction of Jerusalem was the unmistakable sign that the rejected Son of man came on the clouds to heaven and was enthroned. Coming on the clouds was used in the OT to represent God’s judgment (often in the form of an invading army).

But Jesus remained silent. The high priest said to him, "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.’“Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” (Mt 26:63-64)

 

[ivebeenshown]

Before anyone mentions some contrived 360-day ‘prophetic year’ again, I will say this:

If you add a ‘year’ to Nisan 1 and do not end up at Nisan 1 the next year, you haven’t really added a year, you’ve added a contrived number of days.

Thank you…

 

[beehumble]

Again, it is “both/and”. Jesus was addressing His contemporaries, and He was also addressing us who would come later and read what He said. It applies to both times - the fulfillment of the Old Covenant and the final fulfillment of the New. (And if one goes back and reads Ezekiel, one will notice the Shekinah Glory [fire of the Holy Spirit] coming to put a mark on those who obeyed God and those without the mark will die, and the Shekinah Glory departed from the Temple, went to the Mount of Olives and ascended. And the words given to Ezekiel mentioned the abomination that causes desolation - the desolation coming when the Shekinah Glory departed from the first temple and the later destruction of the first temple and the captivity into Babylon. Sound familiar? )

So His words applied to 70 AD, to the final coming, AND to the previous time when the first temple was destroyed! These are what Cardinal Newman meant when he spoke of repeating patterns of Salvation history.

So many people argue over this because they do not apply the “both/and”, the “yes and yes” to the problem. Both sides are right but only partially right, since each excludes the other part.

God bless you.

 

[ryanoneil]

Again, it is “both/and”. Jesus was addressing His contemporaries, and He was also addressing us who would come later and read what He said. It applies to both times - the fulfillment of the Old Covenant and the final fulfillment of the New. (And if one goes back and reads Ezekiel, one will notice the Shekinah Glory [fire of the Holy Spirit] coming to put a mark on those who obeyed God and those without the mark will die, and the Shekinah Glory departed from the Temple, went to the Mount of Olives and ascended. And the words given to Ezekiel mentioned the abomination that causes desolation - the desolation coming when the Shekinah Glory departed from the first temple and the later destruction of the first temple and the captivity into Babylon. Sound familiar? )

So His words applied to 70 AD, to the final coming, AND to the previous time when the first temple was destroyed! These are what Cardinal Newman meant when he spoke of repeating patterns of Salvation history.

So many people argue over this because they do not apply the “both/and”, the “yes and yes” to the problem. Both sides are right but only partially right, since each excludes the other part.

God bless you.

Thanks, I agree.

 

[onemangang]

Here is what happens if you remove the possibility of both/and from scripture.

Lets take a scholar in linguistics, who understood syntax better than most, and see what he said in regards to Matthew 24. The statement will clearly point out the reality of the claim, if the olivet discourse is spiritualized, to mean only a future generation, instead of the prima facie statement Jesus said to people standing before him.

C.S. Lewis
“The apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, 'this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else. This is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.” (Essay “The World’s Last Night” (1960), found in The Essential C.S. Lewis, p. 385)

 

[Daniel_Gracely]

I’ve just lost about a half hour of typing in the post-reply field by a few misplaced keystrokes that erased everything. Normally I compose my response in Word and then transfer it, but in haste to write my last comment to this thread I hadn’t bothered. So I just want to make a few closing remarks, since at this point I’m simply repeating arguments, and tire now of what in my view has become a fruitless discussion.

First, one writer claims the “prophetic year” of 360 days is contrived, and that anything besides Nisan 1 to Nisan 1 is wrong. Obviously this person has not read my comments, or not read them carefully. Nor has he read the Bible carefully and in particular Genesis chapters 7 and 8. Instead of actually dealing with the biblical text, he lobs a grenade about the “prophetic year” hoping it will end the discussion. The 150 day interval of Noah’s life mentioned by specific days of specific months cannot be accounted for by either today’s standard solar year, not by the lunar-solar calendar used later by the Jews. Also, if only he had bothered to read the part where I explain why the “prophetic year” is not the best description of the 360-day year. But I’m done with such ‘responses’. I just can’t (okay, won’t) take the time to try to teach someone so committed to his own ideas at the expense of feeling any accountability to the biblical and archaeological records, both of which (reader, take note!) he carefully avoids.

Another person claims Ezekiel discusses the “abomination of desolation.” In fact, Ezekiel does not, but the protagonist here wishes to treat some event as synonymous with it. Moreover, Christ himself states that it was spoken of by Daniel.

Finally, someone quotes C.S. Lewis’s view on the Olivet Discourse. But IMO Lewis was, on the whole, a more brilliant essayist that he was a theologian. And he wasn’t so great a linguist in Greek to understand the nuances in the Greek words “kai” and “de”, both of which are key to peripheral arguments supporting a correct interpretation of Daniel. And so he fails, as does the one here who feels that verses 2 and 3 are the key to the phrase in verse 34 “this generation shall not pass until all is fulfilled,” that the beginning verses of Matthew 24 are not talking about the final destruction of the Temple at the end of the age, which Christ states would come AFTER the gospel had been preached to EVERY nation, which was hardly the case by 70 AD. In fact, one must compare all three accounts of Christ’s teaching on the last days, to realize Luke alone has in view ONLY the 70 AD destruction.

Well, thank you (mostly) for the discussion nonetheless.

 

[beehumble]

Another person claims Ezekiel discusses the “abomination of desolation.” In fact, Ezekiel does not, but the protagonist here wishes to treat some event as synonymous with it. Moreover, Christ himself states that it was spoken of by Daniel.

<snip

I did not use a quoted phrase ‘abomination of desolation’ (please cite posts accurately!)

I said:

…(And if one goes back and reads Ezekiel, one will notice the Shekinah Glory [fire of the Holy Spirit] coming to put a mark on those who obeyed God and those without the mark will die, and the Shekinah Glory departed from the Temple, went to the Mount of Olives and ascended. And the words given to Ezekiel mentioned the abomination that causes desolation - the desolation coming when the Shekinah Glory departed from the first temple and the later destruction of the first temple and the captivity into Babylon. Sound familiar? )…

Actually Ezekiel and Second Chronicles combined cover it, not Ezekiel alone (just as more than one Gospel writer covers the discussion of the end given by Jesus, so there are at least two books in the Old Testament that covers Babylon’s attack on the (first) Temple.

In Ezekeil 1-4, the Shekinah Glory (God) comes to the temple to perform a work of separation, of judgement of the righteous and unrighteous:
1
1 In the thirtieth year, on the fifth day of the fourth month, while I was among the exiles by the river Chebar, the heavens opened, and I saw divine visions.–
2
2 On the fifth day of the month, the fifth year, that is, of King Jehoiachin’s exile,
3
the word of the LORD came to the priest Ezekiel, the son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar.–There the hand of the LORD came upon me.
4
3 As I looked, a stormwind came from the North, a huge cloud with flashing fire (enveloped in brightness), from the midst of which (the midst of the fire) something gleamed like electrum.

The Abominations meriting the judgement are mentioned in Ezekiel 8:

3
1 Spirit lifted me up in the air and brought me in divine visions to Jerusalem, to the entrance of the north gate, where stood the statue of jealousy which stirs up jealousy.
5
2 He said to me: Son of man, look toward the north! I looked toward the north and saw northward of the gate the altar of the statue of jealousy.
6
Son of man, he asked me, do you see what they are doing? Do you see the great **abominations **that the house of Israel is practicing here, so that I must depart from my sanctuary? But you shall see still greater abominations!
7
Then he brought me to the entrance of the court, where I saw there was a hole in the wall.
8
Son of man, he ordered, dig through the wall. I dug through the wall and saw a door.
9
Enter, he said to me, and see the **abominable **evils which they are doing here.
10
3 I entered and saw that all around upon the wall were pictured the figures of all kinds of creeping things and loathsome beasts (all the idols of the house of Israel).
11
Before these stood seventy of the elders of the house of Israel, among whom stood Jaazaniah, son of Shaphan, each of them with his censer in his hand, and the fragrance of the incense was rising upward.
12
Then he said to me: Do you see, son of man, what each of these elders of the house of Israel is doing in his idol room? They think: “The LORD cannot see us; the LORD has forsaken the land.”
13
He continued: You shall see still greater **abominations **that they are practicing.
14
4 Then he brought me to the entrance of the north gate of the temple, and I saw sitting there the women who were weeping for Tammuz.
15
Then he said to me: Do you see this, son of man? You shall see other abominations, greater than these!
16
5 Then he brought me into the inner court of the LORD’S house, and there at the door of the LORD’S temple, between the vestibule and the altar, were about twenty-five men with their backs to the LORD’S temple and their faces toward the east; they were bowing down to the sun.
17
6 Do you see, son of man? he asked me. Is it such a trivial matter for the house of Judah to do the **abominable ****things **they have done here–for they have filled the land with violence, and again and again they have provoked me–that now they must also put the branch to my nose?
18
Therefore I in turn will act furiously: I will not look upon them with pity nor will I show mercy.

Then in Ezekiel 9:1-6 the placing of a cross (Hebrew Taw - letter X) on the foreheads of those to be spared, as in the Book of Revelation. Those spared are hose who groan over the abominations being done:
1
Then he cried loud for me to hear: Come, you scourges of the city!
2
With that I saw six men coming from the direction of the upper gate which faces the north, each with a destroying weapon in his hand. In their midst was a man dressed in linen, with a writer’s case at his waist. They entered and stood beside the bronze altar.
3
Then he called to the man dressed in linen with the writer’s case at his waist,
4
1 saying to him: Pass through the city (through Jerusalem) and mark an X on the foreheads of those who moan and groan over all the **abominations **that are practiced within it.
5
To the others I heard him say: Pass through the city after him and strike! Do not look on them with pity nor show any mercy!
6
Old men, youths and maidens, women and children–wipe them out! But do not touch any marked with the X; begin at my sanctuary. So they began with the men (the elders) who were in front of the temple.

continued…

 

[beehumble]

(continued from previous post)

Then after the work of judgement because of the abominations, the Shekinah Glory stands on the mount of olives (mount to the east of jerusalem) before ascending back to Heaven - it is at this time when the city is forsaken - in Ezekiel 11:22,23 :
22
1 Then the cherubim lifted their wings, and the wheels went along with them, while up above them was the glory of the God of Israel.
23
And the glory of the LORD rose from the city and took a stand on the mountain which is to the east of the city.

And then in 2 Chronicles we have the same events and mentioning of the desolation in 2 Chronicles 14-21, a desolation caused by all those abominations mentioned in Ezekiel chapter 8:

14 Furthermore, all the leaders of Judah, the priests and the people too, added infidelity to infidelity, copying all the shameful practices of the nations and defiling the Temple of Yahweh which he himself had consecrated in Jerusalem.

15 Yahweh, God of their ancestors, continuously sent them word through his messengers because he felt sorry for his people and his dwelling,

16 but they ridiculed the messengers of God, they despised his words, they laughed at his prophets, until Yahweh’s wrath with his people became so fierce that there was no further remedy.

17 So against them he summoned the king of the Chaldaeans and he put their young men to the sword within the very building of their Temple, not sparing young man or girl, or the old and infirm; he put them all at his mercy.

18 All the things belonging to the Temple of God, whether large or small, the treasures of the Temple of Yahweh, the treasures of the king and his officials, everything he took to Babylon.

19 He burned down the temple of God, demolished the walls of Jerusalem, burned all its palaces to the ground and destroyed everything of value in it.

20 And those who had escaped the sword he deported to Babylon, where they were enslaved by him and his descendants until the rise of the kingdom of Persia,

21 to fulfil Yahweh’s prophecy through Jeremiah: Until the country has paid off its Sabbaths, it will lie fallow for all the days of its **desolation **-- until the seventy years are complete.

So abominations led to the destruction of the first Temple and the desolation of the country.

And too, Jesus mentions abomination causing destruction of the second temple and the desolation that will follow, and He points back to Daniel about that (Daniel covered both the destruction of the first and second Temples, and says the people of Israel caused it not mentioned but Daniel means caused it by their abominations - their violations of the Covenant with God, and their refusal to acknowledge the time of their visitation of Jesus with regards the second Temple.)

So we see a pattern repeating as regards both Temples, and so it will be with the ‘third Temple’, which is the People of God living throughout the world in “Jerusalem”, the “City of God”.

God bless you.

 

[Cat_Herder]

So I just want to make a few closing remarks, since at this point I’m simply repeating arguments, and tire now of what in my view has become a fruitless discussion.
… the one here who feels that verses 2 and 3 are the key to the phrase in verse 34 “this generation shall not pass until all is fulfilled,” that the beginning verses of Matthew 24 are not talking about the final destruction of the Temple at the end of the age, which Christ states would come AFTER the gospel had been preached to EVERY nation, which was hardly the case by 70 AD. In fact, one must compare all three accounts of Christ’s teaching on the last days, to realize Luke alone has in view ONLY the 70 AD destruction.

Yes, there are all kinds of ways to try and interpret what “this generation” in the Olivet discourse means. But that’s not all that Jesus said. Elsewhere in the synoptic Gospels, He was a lot more specific than that.

[BIBLEDRB]Mark 8:36-39[/BIBLEDRB]
(note: this is Mark 8:36-9:1 in most Bibles)

Compare that with this from the Olivet discourse:

[BIBLEDRB]Mark 13:26-27[/BIBLEDRB]

In both comings of the Lord, the angels accompany Him and He renders judgment on all men. Because the judgment only occurs once, each passage refers to the same coming.

So there are two things to note:

1. Neither the angels came nor the judgment was rendered at the Transfiguration, or when the Temple was destroyed. So Jesus is not talking only about either of those events–He is talking about the end of the world.
2. In the first passage, He identified “this generation” with the people right in front of Him. He didn’t leave it to you to look at Daniel to figure out which one. If He had meant for you to do that, He would be giving you a way to know the day of the Lord, which is something He does not know. See Mt. 24:36.

As for the people before Him, they are now all dead and the world is still here.

Or are they?

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=1087&pictureid=8197

The Blessed Virgin Mary never suffered death. She was assumed into Heaven at the end of her life like Enoch and Elijah before her. She is still alive and so is “this generation,” which is why the world has not yet been judged. She the missing piece of the puzzle.

But, of course, only the Catholic Church teaches that. Everyone else is stuck with, as C.S. Lewis said, a “delusion” and the “most embarrassing verse in the Bible.”

Come home please.

 

[Daniel_Gracely]

When I wrote the other night, stating it would be my last comment, it was not merely because I was tired of commentators here who professed to know the Bible but who failed repeatedly, when I challenged them, to harmonize biblical history with the archaeological record I had bothered to detail. It was also because of some immediate family health issues that proved too distracting to me to want to engage further, especially if it was only to repeat my charge ad nauseam. But the latest comments of beehumble and Cat Herder compel me to return at least one more response, lest any 3rd party readers suppose their latest comments somehow proved their points.

In short, both beehumble and Cat Herder now employ the logical fallacy of the red herring argument. That is, they attempt to mislead and divert our attention from the real issue, which is their failure to harmonize biblical history with the archaeological record re: Daniel’s prophecy of 69 weeks. For my still unanswered point is that such a harmonization shows that Christ died four days after the completion of the 69th week in the spring of 33 AD, and that therefore (implicitly) there is no logical accounting for a 70th week that would have followed uninterrupted and ended in 40 AD, to bring in such things as Daniel stated, such as the end of transgression, the bringing in of everlasting righteousness, etc. Nor has anyone answered (my lesser point) why Daniel wouldn’t have more naturally stated that Christ died at the beginning of the 70th week, if in fact the 70th week followed the 69th without interruption.

Instead commentators here continue to claim the 70th week has already occurred, at least from some standpoint, like the alleged Enoch Calendar of 364 days which supposedly marks the beginning of Daniel’s prophecy in 458 BC, which, as I pointed out, has neither biblical nor archaeological support. And how should these commentators reply to my giving them a grade of “F”? What else(?), but by showing me why the biblical record and the archaeological record disproves my view that Nisan in 444 BC was within Artaxerxes’ 20th year and was the starting point of Daniel’s prophecy.

But what I have received instead are a bunch of red herring arguments from the gospels’ ‘Olivet Discourse’, Ezekiel, etc. allegedly proving 70th week abominations and desolations, Mary’s assumption into heaven, the meaning of the phrase “this generation shall not pass away until…”, yada yada yada.

And so beehumble and Cat Herder have simply diverted our attention to other passages of the Bible, to read into these whatever assumptions and interpretations will help ‘justify’ their viewpoints of a completed 70th week. This red herring from needing to address the biblical and archaeological records does not impress. And for one of them to say to me “Please come home,” to a Catholicism that, if they themselves faithfully represent it, embraces chimerical ideas about Mary, a third “temple” of flesh, no future antichrist or 70th week, no 360-day year implicit in Creation, etc., all on the basis that their arguments are justified so long as biblical and archaeological evidence can be ignored, and the reader’s attention diverted to other passages, as though their point about the 70th week were already proved, is pathetic. Indeed! I say to them—“Please come home.” Yes, please come home to some feeling of obligation to the Old Testament record in the light of archaeological evidence. Please come home from employing red herring arguments that typify prodigal thinking instead of honest understanding. Please come home to common sense.

***Let the reader beware! *** If commentators here continue to present red herring arguments by barraging the reader with loads of scripture that tend to impress and intimidate the uninformed, remember they have not answered my arguments. They have refused my plea to engage the Old Testament and archaeological records according to sound, evidentiary methods.

So don’t let them fool you into thinking that, should it prove they have the last comment here because I quit the argument, that somehow I was unable to answer their last points. Yet if my comment be the last one given here, be advised their quitting of the argument does nothing to excuse their long-standing failure to reckon with the Old Testament in the light of 5th century BC archaeological history (which, again, I have somewhat detailed in earlier comments). In short, if beehumble and Cat Herder really want to know the truth, the former will actually have to *be *humble, and the latter will need to herd facts instead of felines.

 

[John7]

So don’t let them fool you

ok there, big guy

 

[Cat_Herder]

When I wrote the other night, stating it would be my last comment, it was not merely because I was tired of commentators here who professed to know the Bible but who failed repeatedly, when I challenged them, to harmonize biblical history with the archaeological record I had bothered to detail. It was also because of some immediate family health issues that proved too distracting to me to want to engage further, especially if it was only to repeat my charge ad nauseam. But the latest comments of beehumble and Cat Herder compel me to return at least one more response, lest any 3rd party readers suppose their latest comments somehow proved their points.

In short, both beehumble and Cat Herder now employ the logical fallacy of the red herring argument. That is, they attempt to mislead and divert our attention from the real issue, which is their failure to harmonize biblical history with the archaeological record re: Daniel’s prophecy of 69 weeks.

So you want us to stick to the Bible while you talk about extra-biblical archaeology?

For my still unanswered point is that such a harmonization shows that Christ died four days after the completion of the 69th week in the spring of 33 AD, and that therefore (implicitly) there is no logical accounting for a 70th week that would have followed uninterrupted and ended in 40 AD, to bring in such things as Daniel stated, such as the end of transgression, the bringing in of everlasting righteousness, etc. Nor has anyone answered (my lesser point) why Daniel wouldn’t have more naturally stated that Christ died at the beginning of the 70th week, if in fact the 70th week followed the 69th without interruption.

All of this presupposes that there exists some reason to interrupt the coming of the 70th week. Nowhere in the Bible is such a clock-stopper contemplated. The dispensationalist idea that the Jewish rejection of the Earthly Davidic Kingdom (EDK) stops the clock is irrelevant because did.Jesus The destruction of the Temple was part and parcel of the events surrounding the coming of the Kingdom. It has not yet been completed, nor has that generation passed away.

You may not like this suspense because you want to gaze into the palantir and find out when the day of the Lord is. I suspect that is what this is really all about. But I assure you that anyone on the other side of that palantir is not of the Lord because the Lord does not have that information–only the Father does and He is not telling us out of respect for our free will.

And for one of them to say to me “Please come home,” to a Catholicism that, if they themselves faithfully represent it, embraces chimerical ideas about Mary,

You claim to belong to the Body of Christ. She is the Mother of Christ and is therefore your Mother and there is nothing chimerical about that. There is a commandment about honoring your Mother; Jesus, Who is without sin, obeyed the same. If you claim to be a Christian you need to do as He did.

a third “temple” of flesh,

Nowhere in the Bible is there a promise that the earthly Temple would be rebuilt. On the contrary:

[BIBLEDRB]Revelation 21:22[/BIBLEDRB]

no future antichrist or 70th week,

Inform yourself please

no 360-day year implicit in Creation, etc.

God’s days are not at all like our days:
[BIBLEDRB]Psalm 89:4[/BIBLEDRB]
(Ps. 90 in your Bible.) The Genesis days are not 24-hour periods. That is why there is no conflict between science and Genesis.

all on the basis that their arguments are justified so long as biblical and archaeological evidence can be ignored, and the reader’s attention diverted to other passages, as though their point about the 70th week were already proved, is pathetic. Indeed! I say to them—“Please come home.” Yes, please come home to some feeling of obligation to the Old Testament record in the light of archaeological evidence. Please come home from employing red herring arguments that typify prodigal thinking instead of honest understanding. Please come home to common sense.

Maybe I should stick to dialoguing with Jews. They are certainly not ignorant of the OT or Palestinian archaeology and have never accused me of being so.

 

[beehumble]

hello

 

[ryanoneil]

Instead commentators here continue to claim the 70th week has already occurred, at least from some standpoint, like the alleged Enoch Calendar of 364 days which supposedly marks the beginning of Daniel’s prophecy in 458 BC, which, as I pointed out, has neither biblical nor archaeological support. And how should these commentators reply to my giving them a grade of “F”? What else(?), but by showing me why the biblical record and the archaeological record disproves my view that Nisan in 444 BC was within Artaxerxes’ 20th year and was the starting point of Daniel’s prophecy.

Have you ever considered that Church fathers like Clement of Alexandrea, Origen, Eusebius, and St. Jerome were correct?

They believed that the first and last weeks denote decades, and that Daniel’s weeks did not run chronologically. For instance the first set of seven weeks are forty-nine decades running from 457 BC (The decree to rebuild the city of Jerusalem in Ezra 7:11-26) to 32 AD.

The beginning of the sixty-two weeks starts in 444 BC (not chronological) when the actual rebuilding started. This section denotes years that run from 444 to 10 BC when the Temple was completed (not including the construction of annexes and adjoining buildings).

Most authorities in the early Church held the position that he final week was seven decades (seventy years) from the birth of Christ to the assault on the Temple. The last half of the week going from Christ’s Passion to Nero’s attack on Jerusalem.

Peace!

 

[beehumble]

Typologically, this is very very interesting.

Can you provide some links or titles about this 70 years thing, either here or a PM?

I am very interested in this - the Bible - God has riddled it with typologies and I have been studying a lot of typologies especially those regarding the end times. I already posted how there is a lot of similarities with the end of the first and second temples, how God came and purged it both times, separating out the righteous from the unrighteous, the second time explicitly when Jesus threw out the money changers. Then armies came and burned it and took the people captive.

The end of this age will be similar typologically to those two previous times, excepting that the ‘temple’ is now the People of God since the Kingdom is present ( but not complete). So again a separation is coming, a marking with the cross and with the “beast’s” mark (more figurative/spiritual than literal markings), and a consuming fire will descend (on the world since the temple - the People of God are scattered throughout the world).

God bless you.

 

[ryanoneil]

Typologically, this is very very interesting.

Can you provide some links or titles about this 70 years thing, either here or a PM?

I am very interested in this - the Bible - God has riddled it with typologies and I have been studying a lot of typologies especially those regarding the end times. I already posted how there is a lot of similarities with the end of the first and second temples, how God came and purged it both times, separating out the righteous from the unrighteous, the second time explicitly when Jesus threw out the money changers. Then armies came and burned it and took the people captive.

The end of this age will be similar typologically to those two previous times, excepting that the ‘temple’ is now the People of God since the Kingdom is present ( but not complete). So again a separation is coming, a marking with the cross and with the “beast’s” mark (more figurative/spiritual than literal markings), and a consuming fire will descend (on the world since the temple - the People of God are scattered throughout the world).

God bless you.

I don’t have any weblinks, but David B. Currie’s “Rapture” cites an excerpt from Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel by Gleason, L. Archer Jr. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House 1958) which pretty much says what I posted. The book devotes 24 pages to Daniel’s 70 weeks and almost 70 pages overall about Daniel. It also relates this to the Olivet Discourse and the book of Revelation. I highly recommend it. There is also 3 pages that talks about Isa 7:14 and it’s initial 70 year fulfillement in Isaiah’s day and how it relates to the 70 years between Christ’s birth and the destruction of the second Temple. Currie doesn’t deal very much with future fulfillment stuff but it is a great read.

 

[Sonseeahray]

I grew up in Futurism (Dispensationalism) but abandoned it about 35 years ago in favor of the Amillennial view. For two years now I have challenged the Futurists to name just one of their 10’s of thousands of speculations that have ever come to pass. I have never had even one legitimate answer to this. There aren’t any - not one.

The speculations that they have dated over the decades have all failed. For example:
Was Henry Kissinger the antichrist? Well no. (not to mention hundreds of other candidates)
Has Russia invaded Israel (Ezekiel 38-39) - nope - heard this for the last 55 years.
Was all of Matt 24 fulfilled one generation (40 years) from the formation of Israel. (1988) No
Was all of Matt 24 fulfilled one generation (40 years) from the capture of Jerusalem in 1967(expiration 2007) No
Now they have changed and updated it yet again. Now they say that a generation is 75 years. So now they are covered up until 2023.
Was the credit card the mark of the beast? No
Was the barcode the mark of the beast? No
Was the microchip the mark of the beast? A pending no (until the next new technology comes out - and the newest technology appears to be an electronic tattoo.)

There are none of their prophetic speculations that have ever come to pass in the last 63 years. I use 63 as to avoid the doctrinal quagmire of the formation of Israel in 1948. This event has been the primary drive that has energized and popularized the Dispensational view.

Futurists mix all of Prophesy, that hasn’t been literally fulfilled, and move it to yet our future. They mix the books of Daniel, Zechariah, Ezekiel together with NT prophesy and top it all off with the book of Revelation. Then they try to make connections among all of the exported prophesies. They end up with a highly complicated belief system, which is sensational, exciting, and relevent to our day. Practically all of prophesy has been fulfilled according to my studies. I must admit that my switch from Futurism to Amillennialism was a very anticlimatic experience.

No Jesus was crucified in the middle of the 70th week - it is all in the past. Where in scripture has their ever been a break in a prophetic timeline? Never. I find that if my doctrines get complicated I know that I am on the wrong track because God is simple. Futurists must always keep their predictions in the future as scriptures that have already been fulfilled will not be fulfilled again.

 

[beehumble]

I don’t have any weblinks, but David B. Currie’s “Rapture” cites an excerpt from Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel by Gleason, L. Archer Jr. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House 1958) which pretty much says what I posted. The book devotes 24 pages to Daniel’s 70 weeks and almost 70 pages overall about Daniel. It also relates this to the Olivet Discourse and the book of Revelation. I highly recommend it. There is also 3 pages that talks about Isa 7:14 and it’s initial 70 year fulfillement in Isaiah’s day and how it relates to the 70 years between Christ’s birth and the destruction of the second Temple. Currie doesn’t deal very much with future fulfillment stuff but it is a great read.

Thanks!
I found Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel online
tertullian.org/fathers/jerome_daniel_02_text.htm

and I see where he has this:
“This same Eusebius reports another view as well, which I do not entirely reject (A), that most authorities extend the one [last] week of years to the sum of seventy years, reckoning each year as a ten-year period.”

While I was hoping to find the reason for this, no luck there, as a couple of sentences later it says:
“Yet I am at a loss to know how we can understand the earlier seven weeks and the sixty-two weeks to involve seven years each, and just this last one to involve ten years for each unit of the seven, or seventy years in all.”



I will keep hunting for the rationale for attributing it to decades. It seems plausible on the face of it because Jesus was crucified about halfway between His birth and the First Roman-Jewish War, which would make it ‘mid-week’ per Daniel. I always thought it peculiar how Jesus died in 33 and the war started double that, in 66. And the Temple and Jerusalem were destroyed about 3 1/2 years (1260 days, 42 months, time, times and a half time) of tribulation in Judea after the war started. Interesting.
(And with typology, the ‘week’ and ‘mid-week being cut off’ could have and probably do have several meanings all of which are correct - the ‘yes’ and ‘yes’ . So it could refer to seventy years, and it could also refer to seven years. )

God bless you.