Why Daniel's 70th Week does NOT support Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism

TheDivineWatermark · Jul 2, 2020

^ For the readers who may not have the capacity to click on that LINK I had supplied (previous post), here is a small portion of what you would find there, for the "H7620 - shabua - Week/Weeks - 'a period of seven'" word (per Bible Hub):

[quoting]

"[H7620] Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
seven, week
Or shabuan {shaw-boo'-ah}; also (feminine) shbu.ah {sheb-oo-aw'}; properly, passive participle of shaba' as a denominative of sheba'; literal, sevened, i.e. A week (specifically, of years) -- seven, week."

[and, same link]

B-D-B -
"2 heptad or seven of years, late, Daniel 9:24,25,26,27 (twice in verse). — שֻׁבֻעוֺת Ezekiel 21:28 [I think they mean v.23!] see שָׁבַע [H7650]

[end quoting; bold and underline mine; bracketed inserts mine; parentheses original]

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7620.htm "H7620 - shabua - Week/Weeks - 'a period of seven'"

TheDivineWatermark · Jul 2, 2020

FWIW, the way I see it (like many "futurists" do, as well) is that the first beast ('beast...out of the sea' v.1,5-7) is both a "kingdom" and a "king [/individual person]" (as in, "governmental" ruling, like Babylon/Neb as head of gold [aligning with Dan7:20-25], etc)... and it is the second beast ('beast...out of the earth' vv.11-17... with 'horns like a lamb, and spake as a dragon') that is more of the "religious"[religious-type-leader-(Pope-like, you could say)-] side of the equation. That's kind of how I see it.

[...but that both of these issues "fit" WITHIN the future Rev1:1 "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" time period, i.e. the "FUTURE" aspects of the Book of Rev (in contrast to "the things WHICH ARE" which do NOT take place "IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]," by contrast, per Rev1:19c / 4:1 / 1:1 (7:3), and which is the "7-yr trib" that leads UP TO Christ's Second Coming to the earth Rev19 (FOR the promised and prophesied EARTHLY Millennial Kingdom, that follows that)]

TheDivineWatermark · Jul 2, 2020

^ This being the second "beast" ('beast...out of the earth' vv.11-17), here (in the bold):

"[And the beast was captured (<--this is the first beast, "out of the sea" v.1),] and with him the false prophet, the one having done the signs [G4592] before him [/in his presence], by which he deceived those having received the mark of the beast and those worshiping its image. The two were cast living into the lake of fire burning with brimstone." - Revelation 19:20 (re: "signs [G4592]" of Rev13:13 and 14, said of the second beast ['beast...out of the earth' vv.11-17]).

Jackson123 · Jul 2, 2020

Nehemiah6 said:

1 john 2
18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the[d] Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

According to apostle john, antichrist has been around in his time, 2000 years ago
I think you confused between when the antichrist come and when the antichrist rule the whole world

John say there are antichrist when he live, and rev basically on the last 3 1/2 year before the second coming, one of the antichrist will rule the world/ power monopoly
So, it was there 2000 years ago, but not rule the whole world till the last 3 1/2 years before second coming.
So I agree with Martin Luther pope is antichrist though not in ultimate power yet

Nehemiah6 · Jul 2, 2020

Jackson123 said:

There are multiple other biblical reasons why the pope or papacy cannot be the Antichrist.

However, if you wish to continue believing that, just don't tell that to the Catholics.

Jackson123 · Jul 2, 2020

Nehemiah6 said:

And what is that reason

Phoneman-777 · Jul 2, 2020

TheDivineWatermark said:

What you are saying here ^ makes no sense to me.

I've already pointed out the PARALLEL of Rev13:5-7,1 is found in Daniel 7:20-25 where (esp. in v.24) "kingdom" is clearly distinguished from "king [/an individual]". (BOTH being in this text.)

It's your choice to not acknowledge this fact.

The prophecy distinctly states "FROM... UNTO the Messiah the Prince shall be 7 'periods of seven' and 62 'periods of seven' [aka '69 'periods of seven' TOTAL]". (We both agree that this equals 483 YEARS [and I would say, "'483 YEARS' of 360-days each"]).

We know it was YEARS by viewing/understanding the context; but also by understanding the options of what "PERIOD/S OF SEVEN" can apply to, literally, and the CHOICES are:

--a 'period of seven' DAYS; OR

--a 'period of seven' YEARS [we both agree that this LATTER option "FITS" better than the 'period of seven' DAYS option--but BOTH OPTIONS are "literal"... either "LITERAL DAYS" *or* "LITERAL YEARS" (for the "shabua/heptad/'period of seven' [H7620])]

These BOTH (both CHOICES) are "LITERAL". Either literal DAYS or literal YEARS ('period/s of seven'), and the latter choice "fits" time-wise.

It is NOT that we see the H7620 word translated "days" (it ISN'T) and that we therefore must MAKE IT "symbolical" to actually *mean* YEARS. No.

The word actually MEANS "a period of seven [DAYS... LITERAL DAYS]" OR "a period of seven [YEARS... LITERAL YEARS]"... either choice IS LITERAL. No need to use ANY form of SYMBOLISM for this WORD, as it works JUST FINE *literally* !

The Hebrew word for "days" is NOT in the text here.

And the word for "WEEKS" ('a period of seven') can refer to EITHER "days" OR "years" IN A LITERAL SENSE.

It's up to the reader to ascertain just WHICH of these TWO OPTIONS "fits" (the 'a period of seven YEARS" is what "FITS"... and fits LITERALLY).

I find that many places where a specific number is used along with it, it is actually QUITE PRECISE!

There are even other "time-stamps / time-markers" in Revelation that are not as explicit, but are ascertained by knowing what Scripture states ELSEWHERE about something, for example, the "kings [go/] went out to war" at a VERY SPECIFIC time/day of the year, in OT history [think Rev19], so when all of these factors are examined together, the "timeline" (of ['future'] Rev events) can be laid out on a calendar, so to speak (showing how precise these actually are, and have been "further supplied" IN The Revelation [well after His "resurrection/ascension"], written around 95ad).

Except, "WEEKS" means "a period of seven"... it does not mean "day/days"... there is a DIFFERENT Hebrew word for that.

This word (H7620) means "a period of seven" (whether 'a period of seven' [literal] DAYS, *OR* 'a period of seven' [literal] YEARS, both being LITERAL in meaning... no need to make "symbolism" out of anything here!)

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7620.htm

THAT *IS* being CONSISTENT!

"Sha-vu-...ah" is translated "week" 19 times and "year" only once.

TheDivineWatermark · Jul 2, 2020

Phoneman-777 said:

Where is it ever translated "year"?

The word doesn't mean "year".

The word means "a period of seven" (whether 'a period of seven' years or 'a period of seven' days is determined by context); but the word itself does not *mean* "YEARS". There is a different Hebrew word for "year/years". Not this word.

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_7620.htm - LIST of 20x

Phoneman-777 · Jul 2, 2020

TheDivineWatermark said:

sorry, i meant "seven" once. The Bible writers clearly understood the word to refer to "days of a week" not "sevens of years".

Phoneman-777 · Jul 3, 2020

TheDivineWatermark said:

Hi again

I just wanted to add that on top of the fact that the majority use of the work "shabuwah" is not "sevens" but "days", did you know there's a very important reason for why those "Seventy Weeks" cannot possibly refer to "sevens of years", but must be "Seventy Weeks of Days"? Please follow:

In chapter 8, Daniel understands everything he sees except the last part of the vision, or "mareh", which is the "2,300 Days". He asks around for clarification "but none understood it". So, he prays...and the angel Gabriel appears to him in chapter 9 and says he's there to give Daniel "skill and understanding" and says "understand the matter and consider the vision ('mareh')" which is a link to the 2,300 Days. The angel clearly has come to clear up Daniel's confusion about the 2,300 Days...and what words does he immediately begin to speak as the means by which to clear up that confusion? "Seventy Weeks are determined..." Again, we see evidence linking the 70 Weeks prophecy to the 2,300 Days of the previous chapter, because the 70 are being used to explain the meaning of the 2,300.

Now, I had to say that to say this: The Seventy Weeks are "determined" or "amputated" from something, right? Since the Seventy Weeks is a time prophecy, what can be the only thing from which it can be amputated? Another time prophecy...and what is the only other time prophecy that we're dealing with, the one that has Daniel so confused, the one that Gabriel has come to explain away Daniel's confusion which resulted from it? The 2,300 Days prophecy.

QUESTION: If the "Seventy Weeks" are really "seventy sevens of years", how could that have possibly been amputated from a mere "2,300 DAYS"? The only way the prophecies harmonize is if the 2,300 Days are in fact days and the Seventy Weeks are also days - 490 of them. You can't "amputate" 490 years from 2,300 Days, right or wrong?

Thus, the 70 Weeks must be days which are cut off from the 2,300 Days, and both employ the "day/year" principle because Messiah didn't come 490 days, but years, after the decree in 457 B.C.

Phoneman-777 · Jul 3, 2020

For anyone paying attention, the "70 Weeks" cannot be "seventy sevens of years" as claimed by DWM, because the 70 Weeks are "determined" which means "amputated" - amputated from that which can be only another time prophecy, and the only other time prophecy in question is the 2,300 Days...and you can't cut off 490 years from 2,300 Days. See post #170 for more info

TheDivineWatermark · Jul 3, 2020

Phoneman-777 said:

Well, let me just say (and I know you will not agree

), the TEXT ITSELF in Dan8:14 does not use the word "DAYS" (there is a Hebrew word for "days," but it is not present IN THIS TEXT); the text itself states "2300 evenings mornings" (referring to a reference elsewhere to the times when the "evening morning" OFFERINGS were presented...).

I believe, IN VIEW OF THIS, the amount EQUALS "1150 days" total (that being, "2300 evenings mornings" [i.e. which pertained to 2300 "offerings" (1st one in the evening, 2nd in the morning, and so forth counting to 2300 of those, total!) when those were presented]) RATHER THAN [totaling] "2300 DAYS" (the word "DAYS" is not in the text!)

I have ideas of how these may "connect" to the other prophecy [esp where the word "CLEANSED/CLEANSE" is used in two places re: prophetic/prophesied events, incl'g this 8:14 verse], but won't go into that in this post. = )

Phoneman-777 · Jul 4, 2020

TheDivineWatermark said:

My dear Christian friend, please allow me to remind you that you've claimed the 70 Weeks does not employ the "day/year principle" b/c the Hebrew "shabuwah" should be translated "70 sevens of years" without symbolism -- and my response was this:

The 70 Weeks and the 2,300 Days are connected:

The only thing from which the 70 Weeks time prophecy can be amputated is another time prophecy.
The 2,300 Days prophecy is antecedent to the 70 Weeks prophecy.
In Daniel 8:16;26-27, the Hebrew "mareh" ("vision") is used exclusively to refer to the 2,300 Days and Gabriel specifically tells Daniel in chapter 9 to "understand the matter and consider the "mareh" when he comes to give Daniel "skill and understanding" regarding his confusion over the 2,300 Days.
The 70 Weeks prophecy is that which Gabriel immediately begins his explanation of the 2,300 Days: "...understand the matter and consider the "mareh". Seventy Weeks are determined upon thy people..."

The 70 Weeks CANNOT be translated "seventy sevens of years" as you and many other claim:

It is impossible to amputate "seventy sevens of years" (490 years) from 2,300 Days or even your 1,000 Days.
It is entirely possible to amputate "seventy sevens of days" from 2,300 Days.
Your 1,100 Days idea is an entirely subjective - Genesis plainly says an "evening and the morning" is a "day".

Thus, the "Day/Year Principle" is established:

Since the 2,300 Days are days and the 70 Weeks are amputated from them, both prophecies are given in symbolic days which refer to literal years: the very definition of the "Day/Year Principle".
Correctly interpreted, the two prophecies begin at the same time when the decree of Artaxerxes goes forth - 457 B.C. - and the 490 years are completed at the time of Messiah's advent while the rest of the prophecy continues on down the stream of time and has to do with our High Priest Jesus' work of cleansing the Heavenly Sanctuary at the antitypical "Day of Atonement" of which the Old Testament "Day of Atonement" was a type and shadow.

TheDivineWatermark · Jul 4, 2020

Phoneman-777 said:

Yes, they are / have been.

Daniel 9:24 -

"Seventy weeks are determined / have been decreed [H2852 - nehtak / chathak - PERFECT tense] upon thy [Daniel's] people, and upon thy [Daniel's] holy people..."

H2852 - nehtak / chathak -

"Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
determine
A primitive root; properly, to cut off, i.e. (figuratively) to decree -- determine."

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/2852.htm

TheDivineWatermark · Jul 4, 2020

^ EDIT: oops... another typo (

) ... the second part of the verse should read... "and upon thy [Daniel's] holy city"

Phoneman-777 · Jul 4, 2020

TheDivineWatermark said:

The primary meaning of "Chathak" means "cut off". The 16th century translators of the KJV did not understand what the prophecies were about because they were sealed "unto the time of the end". They didn't understand about Christ's High Priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary, and the anti-typical Day of Atonement which would happen at the end of the 2,300 Days.

Per the explanation of the 2,300 Days, the 70 Weeks have been "cut off" from the rest of the prophecy and pertain to Daniel's people and city. "Determined" and "decreed" are both secondary and USELESS and have nothing to do with explaining the 2,300 Days, which is exactly what Gabriel began to do when he opened his mouth and began to speak about the 70 Weeks.

Prycejosh1987 · Jul 22, 2020

Phoneman-777 said:

I dont believe the Antichrist will be a Roman, what religion is the fastest growing in the world today. How do they kill unbelievers and what is on the temple mount where the 3rd temple is supposed to be. Over time things will start to unfold i could be wrong but i highly doubt it, a lot of people would agree with me, well at least a lot of preachers.

Phoneman-777 · Jul 24, 2020

Prycejosh1987 said:

Islam has got nothing to do with end times prophecy. Go down the list of identifying marks of Antichrist and see if Islam fits them. They don't. For instance, Antichrist was prophesied to arise "within" the ranks of the faithful. Islam is OUTSIDE, not inside. Also, Islam has never changed God's times or laws, never reigned for a "time, times, and half a time" which is 1,260 years, before receiving a "deadly wound" but the Roman Papacy fits all these, and many more identifying marks.

A rebuilt temple in which lambs would be sacrificed would be a middle finger in the face of God, would it not? So, would God refer to such a temple as "the temple of God"? Of course not. The "temple" in prophecy refers to something else - the church. Paul over and over uses "NAOS" which means "temple" to refer to His church.

Scribe · Jul 24, 2020

Phoneman-777 said:

How are things going in New Orleans Phoneman-777? Staying Hydrated? The last time I was in there I was staying in a little house in Little Woods in July without AC and I felt like I was dying. Salt stains on my shirt from sweating. I swore I would never visit New Orleans in July again.

Phoneman-777 · Jul 24, 2020

Scribe said:

LITTLE WOODS???? For crying out loud, you are lucky to be alive! We've got a "SLC hut" (sub loop carrier) that's in a very secluded area around Little Woods that we affectionately call the "murder hut" because a few years ago a technician was murdered by the local savages. If you're ever around here and need a place to stay, you BETTER get in toucn with Phoneman!

Why Daniel's 70th Week does NOT support Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Well-known member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Banned

Scribe

Guest

Banned