I do love these amateur Hebraists who speak with such confidence, and with such nonsense. 'achar is originally a verb meaning 'delay'. Thus it does not have the sense of immediacy but of delay. From this verb comes the adverb used in Dan 9.26 which simply means 'some time afterwards. after a delay'. It does not have a sense of immediacy. (Almost all Hebrew words, whether nouns, adverbs, prepositions or pronouns are derived from verbs, thus it is the verb which gives the sense of the root idea). So all this sentence tells us is that some time after the end of the 69th seven He will be cut off. It cannot be made to mean immediately afterwards. Compare its use in Gen 6.4; 22.1. It often has the vague sense of 'some time afterwards.'
Thus your argument falls at the first hurdle.
˒ahar (אַחַר, 310), “behind; after(wards).” A cognate of this word occurs in Ugaritic. ˒Ahar appears about 713 times in biblical Hebrew and in all periods.
One adverbial use of ˒ahar has a local-spatial emphasis that means “behind”: “The singers went before, the players on instruments followed after …” (Ps. 68:25). Another adverbial usage has a temporal emphasis that can mean “afterwards”: “And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; after that ye shall pass on …” (Gen. 18:5).
So we see that this person is not being completely honest in what he says, This alone should let us know. anything he says is suspect. But I will give him the benefit of the doubt (before you start slamming on someone's language skills, you better make sure they do not have any resources at their hand to test what your saying)
Second, I used biblical reasoning. THE OT prophets state how messiah will be introduced to Israel as her messiah, He will enter on a donkey,
see Zech 9: [SUP]
9 [/SUP]
“Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your King is coming to you; He is just and having salvation, Lowly and riding on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey
And just in case you doubt, It is recorded for all to see in Matt 21:
Matt 21:[SUP]
4 [/SUP]All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying:[SUP]
5 [/SUP]“Tell the daughter of Zion, ‘
Behold, your King is coming to you, Lowly, and sitting on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey.’” [SUP]
6 [/SUP]So the disciples went and did as Jesus commanded them. [SUP]
7 [/SUP]They brought the donkey and the colt, laid their clothes on them, and set
Him on them. [SUP]
8 [/SUP]And a very great multitude spread their clothes on the road; others cut down branches from the trees and spread
them on the road. [SUP]
9 [/SUP]Then the multitudes who went before and those who followed cried out, saying:
“
So in context. from going forth of command to restore CITY until messiah the prince is 7 plus 62 weeks.
Messiah was cut off literally 1 week of days later. so the term after fits. Even your so called interpretation of it, since it was not immediately. A lot of things happened in those days after Jesus entered Jerusalem.
so your reasoning behind your words my argument falls at the first hurdle is destroyed.
That's funny, 'to the day is not in my Bible. It says 'some time after the sixty ninth seven.' And the word in mind was not man's decree but the going forth of God's word, the word that went forth in verse 23. Inconvenient but true.
See my last paragraph. From command to rebuild until messiah it means the messiah will be introduced at the end of the 7 + 62 week period.
it does not say some time after. That's your faulty interpretation of vs 25 of Daniel 9
I am not sure how it was literally fulfilled when Jesus entered into Jerusalem on a donkey. I see no mention of a donkey. But no I realise what you mean when you talk of taking the Bible 'literally'. You simply mean in accordance with your own ideas.
I already posted it to you.
Prophesy is an ongoing thing, we must take ALL prophesy together, not just one aspect of it, it is one of the checks and balances we can use to keep people from forming their own opinion of what the prophets are saying.
But NOWHERE does it say that this occurs within the seventy sevens!!!!! That is just your assumption. It is an added remark commenting on something that will happen. It does not say that it will happen within the seventy sevens.
But suppose some intelligent person asked when this took place. He would look at the text and realise the answer immediately. It was when the sacrifices and oblations were cut off in the midst of the seventieth seven. That is referring to the Temple ceasing to be effective, clearly because it has been destroyed. To ignore the similarity between the two statements in such a limited context would be criminal. It would show interpretation gone wild. Thus it tells us that half a 'seven' can be seen as forty years.
Well maybe a normal person who has not studied, But for those of us who study, we would know it would not be in the middle of the week (you already have a major flaw here because you have this occurring some 40 years after messiah the prince was cut off) but a person who studied would know the sacrifices were stopped because the sanctuary was made unclean by the abomination that caused desolation. And not the destruction.
So any intelligent person who studied would know it could not be in 70 AD when the sacrifices stopped according to the prophecy.
Ah well, bang goes the 'seven = seven years' doctrine, and thank God for that. Now we don't have to play around with history in order to make it fit our pattern. We can let the Spirit guide us into its true meaning.
ah well, Your wrong so far on all accounts, So I do not know which spirit is showing you which truth.
As I am sure you are aware this verse is 'loose Hebrew' and can be translated any number of ways (whichever suits our theories lol). A more accurate translation is 'to the end wars and desolations are determined' which is exactly what Jesus said would happen after His coming and death and after the destruction of the Temple (Matt 24).
Yep. Wars and rumors of wars. Nations rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom. All have occurred after these things, But as jesus said, the end is not near yet
Still From the time Jesus was on earth until even today, Jerusalem and the temple mount is in Gentiles hands.
So the prophesy fits. and is confirmed as true. (of Course, God spoke it through the angel, so of course it is true)
well I suppose that depends on how you define 'desolate'. I am not sure the Israelis would agree with you. It is a built up and proud city. But why let facts get in the way of a theory.
The Dome of the rock sits on the temple mount, I would consider that (as would all jews) to be desolate.
Thank you.
Of course it is. Like the seventy years, the seventy sevens were to be consecutive without a gap. There is no justification for seeing it otherwise. If our theory inserts a gap it proves our theory is wrong, WRONG.
You should not assume things, Many prophesies have gaps included in them. I think it has been proven well to be in reason.
Yes starting from His death and the destruction of the Temple
That would be wrong, Unless you believe he already came. Because the wars were just the start of the birth pangs, There were no wars and rumors of wars and kingdom rising up against kingdom between his death and 70 AD.
you have to be careful when you think things out, you have to study and see all things. or you make mistakes.
The antecedent to 'he' is either the Messiah, the people of the Messiah, or God Himself. The covenant of God is confirmed with His people until the end comes,
Again, this is a mistake in interpretation
the he confirms a covent
The he commits the abomination of desolation (which makes the inner sanctum unclean and stops sacrifice)
the he is allowed to rule for only a certain time period (see all of daniels prophesies which go hand in hand)
the he is destroyed by the return of Christ.
So has Christ returned yet? I thought so. the HE is yet future.
By crucifying the Messiah and destroying the Temple. The two ideas are linked in the New Testament.
Yet Israel is still in sin, and jerusalem and the temple still lies desolate. And messiah has not yet returned. and so on and so forth.
Again, You need to study prophesy as a whole Even the disciples understood. the end of time, when you return.
It says nothing about God's wrath. Nor of 'great tribulation'. Why should it be the time of Jacob's trouble. It is speaking of the history of the world as outlined by Jesus.
matt 24: [SUP]
15 [/SUP]“Therefore
when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’[SUP][c][/SUP] spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand), [SUP]
16 [/SUP]“then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. [SUP]
17 [/SUP]Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. [SUP]
18 [/SUP]And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. [SUP]
19 [/SUP]But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! [SUP]
20 [/SUP]And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. [SUP]
21 [/SUP]For
then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. [SUP]22 [/SUP]And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.
Jesus put it in context. as did other prophets..
Again, Study prophesy as a whole. not as a part. It will help you understand better
