Is there a break in Daniel's 70 weeks? (Daniel 9:26)

[eternally-gratefull]

again, it all is so simple. if we just look at it and read what it says, and not try to ADD ANYTHING TO IT. or TWIST WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS to make it say something else.


[SUP]26 [/SUP]“And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;

This occurs after, or at the end of the 69th week. The word after is a noun, It means after, behind, rear end following etc. In other words, at the completion of the 69th week. the messiah will be cut off.

It does not say it will happen some time after, a few years after, many years after, or any other thing, other than following the 69t seven, messiah will get killed.

Also remember. Messiah the prince was to be introduced 69 weeks to the day after the decree (from the going forth of the command To restore and build Jerusalem Until Messiah the Prince,There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks) which was fulfilled literally when Jesus entered jerusalem on the donkey.

if we research, we will see the time period from the command to restor JERUSLAEM PROPER (not the temple. or temple grounds, but the whole city) until messiah the prince. we see this was fulfilled to the T by Christs triumphant entry into jerusalem on a donkey,

Jesus confirms this, when he lamented over Jerusalem, saying they should have KNOWN THIS DATE (if they had only known the time of his coming) But now it would be hidden from them.


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

Fulfilled 70 AD. almost 40 years AFTER messiah was cut off (thus we already have introduced a gap)

The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Daniel is being told that jerusalem will lie desolate (in gentile hands) until the end of war desolations are determined. We are not given a time, but we know Jerusalem is still desolate today. This it is NOT in disagreeing with scripture to understand this time (gap) is still in effect) We can also look at matt 24 to see. Jesus says there will be wars and rumors of wars.. Kingdom will rise against kingdom, and nation against nation, but the end is not yet. This is the same time period.


[SUP]27 [/SUP]Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”

This speaks of Gods wrath, Great tribulation, or jacobs trouble. The desolate are those in opposition to God. The consumation of this time period again is spoken of by Jesus himself. (when you see the son of man coming in the clouds)

At this point, the 70 weeks will be completed. Jerusalem will be restored, It will follow the true God of Isreal (not the gods of the fathers, or the phariseic God it worships today) Israel will have repented, be restored. Given life. Will know God (neighbor will no longer have to teach neighbor, because they ALL know the truth of God) God will have forgiven them. All Israel will have been saved etc etc. as shown in so many OT prophesies and even Pauls prophetic words in Romans 11

It all goes perfect with prophesy. if we just take it word for word.
​

 

[valiant]

again, it all is so simple. if we just look at it and read what it says, and not try to ADD ANYTHING TO IT. or TWIST WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS to make it say something else.​

LOL as long as you listen to eternally gratefull who doesn't of course accept what it Actually says

[SUP]26 [/SUP]“And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;

This occurs after, or at the end of the 69th week. The word after is a noun, It means after, behind, rear end following etc. In other words, at the completion of the 69th week. the messiah will be cut off.

The word 'cher is a preposition and means 'after, following'. It can indicate any time after. So it simply means that sometimes after the end of the sixty ninth 'seven' the Messiah will be cut of.

It does not say it will happen some time after, a few years after, many years after, or any other thing, other than following the 69 seven, messiah will get killed.

I suggest you learn Hebrew LOL

Also remember. Messiah the prince was to be introduced 69 weeks to the day after the decree

(from the going forth of the command To restore and build Jerusalem Until Messiah the Prince,There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks) which was fulfilled literally when Jesus entered jerusalem on the donkey.

it does not mean 'sixty nine sevens to the day'. It means at some time following the sixty nine sevens. But if you fiddle the figures you can make it mean whenever you want.

The word translated decree actually means 'word', and the timing of the word going forth is given (9.23). The going forth of the word was 'at the beginning of the supplication', and thus around 538 BC. But that doesn't fit the theories so they look at lots of earthly decrees and choose the one that its their theory. And they call it 'taking it literally' LOL

if we research, we will see the time period from the command to restor JERUSLAEM PROPER (not the temple. or temple grounds, but the whole city) until messiah the prince. we see this was fulfilled to the T by Christs triumphant entry into jerusalem on a donkey,

But 'the word that went forth- was that in verse 23 IF YOU ACCEPT THE CONTEXT. What you mean is that if you look around and find what suits you, you can fiddle it so that it fits.

Jesus confirms this, when he lamented over Jerusalem, saying they should have KNOWN THIS DATE (if they had only known the time of his coming) But now it would be hidden from them.

This is called, making Scripture say what you want it to say. Jesus said nothing about knowing the day. It is a pure manipulation of Scripture.

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

Fulfilled 70 AD. almost 40 years AFTER messiah was cut off (thus we already have introduced a gap)

But a gap after what? But you are right on one thing. YOU have introduced a gap. The writer hasn't. There are no grounds at all for trying to divide up the seventy sevens. There is no indication that the destruction of Jerusalem was to happen within the seventy sevens unless it happened in the middle of the seventieth seven. It is manipulation in order to fit a theory.

The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Daniel is being told that jerusalem will lie desolate (in gentile hands) until the end of war desolations are determined. We are not given a time, but we know Jerusalem is still desolate today.

Actually Gentiles are not mentioned nor any connection with Jerusalem. This is all in your imagination. It simply says that there will be continual wars and desolations.

This it is NOT in disagreeing with scripture to understand this time (gap) is still in effect)

Of course it is. It is to ignore the obvious for the sake of a theory.

We can also look at matt 24 to see. Jesus says there will be wars and rumors of wars.. Kingdom will rise against kingdom, and nation against nation, but the end is not yet. This is the same time period.

Jesus was talking initially about 1st century AD
​

 

[valiant]

[SUP]27 [/SUP]Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”

This speaks of Gods wrath, Great tribulation, or jacobs trouble.

Funny, I don't see that in the text. You are imagining it. Bringing an end to offerings and sacrifices IN CONTEXT refers to the previously mentioned destruction of Jerusalem and the Sanctuary. Others refer to it referring to the cutting off of the Messiah. To incorporate yet another destruction of the Temple is just the work of a vivid imagination. There are no grounds for it whatsoever. And you call it taking it as meaning what it says. LOL you mean making it mean what you want it to do?


n is spoken of by Jesus himself. (when you see the son of man coming in the clouds)

At this point, the 70 weeks will be completed. Jerusalem will be restored,

Now where does it say that? You seem to be adding in lots of your own ideas. Is this taking it as meaning what it SAYS? It says the desolations will go on til the END.

G

od (neighbor will no longer have to teach neighbor, because they ALL know the truth of God) God will have forgiven them. All Israel will have been saved etc etc. as shown in so many OT prophesies and even Pauls prophetic words in Romans 11

quite extraordinary what you find in the text. But where is it? You are just MAKING IT MEAN WHAT YOU WANT IT TO MEAN.

Besides Romans 11 is talking about the true Israel made up of all believers in the Messiah.

It all goes perfectly with prophesy.

if we just take it word for word.

LOL you mean you make it fit in with your ideas of prophecy and don't take it word for word.

 

[valiant]

1. It does not say the sacrifice will be cut off because it was no more needed, that would be a mistake, because a sacrifice never took away sin,

but it DID atone for sin. It says the offerings and sacrifices will cease. In view of the context we would expect that to connect with the idea of the Temple being destroyed in the previous verse. But it is possible to connect it with the cutting off of Messiah. THERE ARE NO GROUNDS FOR SUGGESTING A FURTHER TEMPLE!!

2. The Holy of Holies had not been in real service forever,

So you think Zacharias the father of John was wasting his time? Why then did the angel appear to him?

the high priest never died entering in, even in sin, because the presence of God had left along time agao (most likely before babylon) and never re-entered after, because Israel was always in sin)

He never died entering because the sacrifices were efficacious. God Himself pointed out that although the second Temple was 'as nothing' He Himself was with them (Haggai 2.4-5). Doesn't sound as though He had deserted them. And He said that He would 'fill THIS house with glory'.

2. Jesus did not stop sacrifice, they kept going on, up until the time the temple was destroyed in 70 AD (even today, they are trying to figure out how to sacrifice again, and rebuild the temple)

Who is THEY? Unbelieving, rejected Israel? Why do you think God has cleverly stopped it happening?

3. The sacrifice is stopped because of the abomination of desolation ( which jesus said will happen at the end of days)

Yes in 70 AD.

so everything you just said is based on a false premis. don;t you think?

well I think that what YOU say is based on false premises.

 

[valiant]

this is wrong.

Jesus was asked three questions.

When will these things be (the destruction of Jeruslaem)

the signs of the end of the age

The sign of your coming.

Jesus answered all three. but spent most of what he said on the last two.

Isn't it strange then that both Mark and Luke concentrated on the FIRST question.? Of course they did not have you to guide them poor things.. Either they are right, or you are. Both cannot be. I vote for the inspired writers

(birth pangs, but end is not yet)

yes mainly occurring in 1st century AD although continuing.

then he gave the sign (first) given, the abomination of desolation spoken of by daniel (daniel 9)

which took place in 70 AD as Luke's account makes clear.

the great tribulation which would follow

yes which began for the Jews in 70 AD and continued on in the dispersion up to the present day.

The return of Christ, to put an end to everything

you've got it. To put an end to EVERYTHING and issue in the EVERLASTING Kingdom.

(make an end of sin fulfil) daniel 9,

this was fulfilled in Christ's sacrifice.

(set up his kingdom to fulfill the rest of prophesy which has yet to be fulfilled)

there is no kingdom to be set up. as you said He came to end EVERYTHING

you miss half of what Jesus said when you only take a small part.

LOL and you miss His point and add what is not there.

 

[valiant]

Originally Posted by valiant

It is quite clear that Daniel himself did not consider there to be a break between the sixty ninth seven and the seventieth seven. He saw the seventy sevens as patterned on the seventy years of Jeremiah. No one would have dreamed of putting a break in the seventy year of Daniel.

Oh, so you were there with Daniel. You spoke to him personally and know what he thought?

I know what he and the angel actually SAID. Daniel was thinking of 70 years and the angel said, 'No, seventy sevens'. What YOU make him say is - 'seventy sevens with a big gap in the middle'.

You make alot of assumptions here.

I assume that Daniel intended to be understood.

And again, You know this how? What made you so smart? or are you listening to men?

No I am listening to God's word. YOUR THEORIES COME FROM MEN

oh wow. now we go to symbolising a seven, which has never been done in prophesy up to the time of Christ. Your going the catholic way. I see. [/quote]

you are such sad case. LOL it is your theory that came from Roman Catholics. Where do you think Darby got it from? Yes, a seven is regularly symbolic. Compare Nebuchadnezzar's period of illness.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

LOL as long as you listen to eternally gratefull who doesn't of course accept what it Actually says

Oh, so I take it literally, and that is wrong.. ok

The word 'cher is a preposition and means 'after, following'. It can indicate any time after. So it simply means that sometimes after the end of the sixty ninth 'seven' the Messiah will be cut of.


I suggest you learn Hebrew LOL

You suggest I learn hebrew? Where do you get your hebrew training from?

The word is


A. Adverb.
˒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).

B. Preposition.
˒ahar (אַחַר, 310), “behind; after.” ˒Ahar as a preposition can have a local-spatial significance, such as “behind”: “And the man said, They are departed hence; for I heard them say, Let us go to Dothan” (Gen. 37:17). As such, it can mean “follow after”: “And also the king that reigneth over you [will] continue following the Lord your God” (1 Sam. 12:14). ˒Ahar can signify “after” with a temporal emphasis: “And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years” (Gen. 9:28, the first biblical occurrence of the word). This same emphasis may occur when ˒ahar appears in the plural (cf. Gen. 19:6—local-spatial; Gen. 17:8—temporal).

C. Conjunction.
˒ahar (אַחַר, 310), “after.” ˒Ahar may be a conjunction, “after,” with a temporal emphasis: “And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years …” (Gen. 5:4).


Vine, W. E., Unger, M. F., & White, W., Jr. (1996). Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Vol. 1, p. 15). Nashville, TN: T. Nelson.

As you can see, Not only can it mean exactly what I said it could mean. (which was just proven, and I can use more if yuo want, I have many lexicons and dictionaries at my disposal) but you also shows your lack of humility and lack of really wanting to discuss anything.

For yuo see, You said it CAN mean something, Not even in the english does that mean it HAS TO MEAN SOMETHING, so your whole argument is against itself.

[/B]it does not mean 'sixty nine sevens to the day'. It means at some time following the sixty nine sevens. But if you fiddle the figures you can make it mean whenever you want.

Unlike you I do not have to fiddle words. Just look at ancient history. Add the days and years up. See that they fit perfectly. and come up with the right conclusion that God knew what he was talking about when he said this is when Messiah will be introduced.

The word translated decree actually means 'word', and the timing of the word going forth is given (9.23). The going forth of the word was 'at the beginning of the supplication', and thus around 538 BC. But that doesn't fit the theories so they look at lots of earthly decrees and choose the one that its their theory. And they call it 'taking it literally' LOL

ok. Now your going all over the place. Why are you going back to vs 23. Talk about twisting a passage to fit your belief.

vs 23 has nothing to do with the "word" as you put it to restore jerusalem.

But 'the word that went forth- was that in verse 23 IF YOU ACCEPT THE CONTEXT. What you mean is that if you look around and find what suits you, you can fiddle it so that it fits.

Babble. come on dude, in no language would the word "command or word" in vs 25 refer to the "word" in vs 23. that is nonsence.

the word in vs 23 concerns everythign Gabrial was giving in the prophesy, including the words, Know and understand, from the time the word to restor jerusalem is given'

This is called, making Scripture say what you want it to say. Jesus said nothing about knowing the day. It is a pure manipulation of Scripture.

Luke 19: [SUP]41 [/SUP]Now as He drew near, He saw the city and wept over it, [SUP]42 [/SUP]saying, “If you had known, even you, especially in this your day, the things that make for your peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes.

Nice try, How could he say they could have known especially in this day, Unless it was possible they would have known.

How else could they know? but to interpret prophesy, which told them what that day was.

But a gap after what? But you are right on one thing. YOU have introduced a gap. The writer hasn't. There are no grounds at all for trying to divide up the seventy sevens. There is no indication that the destruction of Jerusalem was to happen within the seventy sevens unless it happened in the middle of the seventieth seven. It is manipulation in order to fit a theory.

of course you can not see it. you manipulate the text to make you see what you want to see, instread of interpreting the text according to what it says.

The prophet looked forward. and spoke of events. Nothing in the text said it all had to occure all at once. He just looked forward. thats all.

Actually Gentiles are not mentioned nor any connection with Jerusalem. This is all in your imagination. It simply says that there will be continual wars and desolations.

Yep. Continual wars and desolations, which has occured from 70 AD until today, Jerusalem still lies esolate. and many wars have happened over her in those years.

Not imagination, you just proved me right.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

you are such sad case. LOL it is your theory that came from Roman Catholics. Where do you think Darby got it from? Yes, a seven is regularly symbolic. Compare Nebuchadnezzar's period of illness.

Dude, It is obvious you have no desire to discuss anything.

You arrogant pride notwithstanding, Believe what you want, I am done with your crap. you are the problem with christianity, not the solution.

I do not have time to go over your silly nonsense.

You do not even know what catholics believe if you even think this. if you can not show you have a grasp on history. how can we believe anything else you say?

 

[valiant]

Actually the going forth in vs 23 was the command given to go forth and give daniel a prophesy,

I suggest you use an accurate translation and consider it intelligently.

It is only assumed it is the same day it was given, We know other times, the angel was stopped. or hindered by getting to david on the same day, So your first premise is based on unknowns.

Rubbish. you have a vivid imagination. try taking Scripture literally as meaning what it says.

and even if it was the same day, it still does not make what you say true.

of course it does. Let everyone consider it for themselves.

Second. the premise that this would cancel out sevens meaning a literal seven is in error. because it just marks a time when a prophesy was given to give daniel was given, the sevens are part of the command, so has nothing to do with the time at all.

who said anything about it cancelling sevens? It indicates that 'years' are replaced by 'sevens' (periods of God's choosing.

Thats interesting since Daniel even considered a seven to indicate 7 years, as proven by the fact he knew a 70 week prophesy given to jeremiah was about to be completed, and this is what caused him to pray this in the first place.

what nonsense you talk. the angel said, 'not seventy YEARS but seventy SEVENS. The latter says nothing about years. It is INSTEAD OF years.

or we do like you just did, and make your own interpretation of what a seven is, which does not fit historically, Does not fit in hebrew language (interpretation) and does not fit any belief I have ever heard before from any church. (although I could be wrong and some church actually teaches it and I forgot about it because it was so rediculous I never gave it a second thought.)

well try reading Professor Edward Young's studies in Daniel where he defends what I am saying as an expert in Hebrew and Aramaic.

No, Your twisting meanings, interpretions and not taking ANYTHING LITERALLY. which is why you are in trouble

LOL I am actually taking it LITERALLY. You really have a nerve.

 

[valiant]

you are such sad case. LOL it is your theory that came from Roman Catholics. Where do you think Darby got it from? Yes, a seven is regularly symbolic. Compare Nebuchadnezzar's period of illness.

Dude, It is obvious you have no desire to discuss anything.

You arrogant pride notwithstanding, Believe what you want, I am done with your crap. you are the problem with christianity, not the solution.

I do not have time to go over your silly nonsense.

LOL you mean you have no answers ? LOL Don't worry it was written for others, not for you. They must judge.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

Jesus with His life and His own body in the midst of the last week ended the need for any further animal sacrifice and offerings.

Daniel 9:27 "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

Hosea 6:6
For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

Matthew 9:13
But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Here is where it proves Jesus took away the need for animal sacrifice and offerings....

Hebrews 10:1-9 "For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.[SUP]2 [/SUP]For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
[SUP]5 [/SUP]Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
[SUP]6 [/SUP]In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
[SUP]7 [/SUP]Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
[SUP]8 [/SUP]Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
[SUP]9 [/SUP]Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second." (establish the covenant in the last week)

 

[flob]

I know what he and the angel actually SAID. Daniel was thinking of 70 years and the angel said, 'No, seventy sevens'. What YOU make him say is - 'seventy sevens with a big gap in the middle'.

Come come now. That is not fair.
Daniel realized that Jeremiah's 'seventy years' (Jer 25:11-12; Dan 9:2) were fulfilled. For the desolation of Israel.......and for the reign of Babylon. But 'seventy sevens' were new to Daniel (9:24-27). 'Sevens' are not 'years.' (If you're convinced they are, then please share how? If you'd like. Is it 365 or 360 divided by 7, as a unit?)
Further, the sevens are apportioned to Daniel's people for restoring and rebuilding Jerusalem (first). Before desolation Again in
AD 70 (part of the big gap). (For that matter, it is very natural, historically, as well as Biblically, to foresee Jerusalem and its temple being constructed then devastated a third time. It was seemingly miraculous for Israel to reform in 1948, and to win Jerusalem in 1967. All that's 'left,' from country, to city............is temple again.)
Further, 'seventy sevens are apportioned for your people...to close the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make propitiation for iniquity, and to bring in the righteousness of the ages...' That.........has not happened with Daniel's people as a nation. As a nation, we know from other Scripture (also), that 'all Israel will be saved.' The seventy sevens have
one seven remaining to be completed......because God takes one more seven, to especially bring them to Him......as a nation.
Much like Joseph, through God's arrangement, returned to ruling over his own brothers AFTER having taken a Gentile wife and after such a long intermediate time.

The people of the coming prince are the Jews. The coming prince has been described in verse 25. It is because the prince has been cut off that the writer speaks of 'the people of the prince'. The word for prince is nagid which is the prominent term for a Jewish leader.

This is yet another example of the silliness of Mr Young: The Jews came and destroyed the Jews in AD 70. Because the Messiah is the Desolator.

Jesus with His life and His own body in the midst of the last week ended the need for any further animal sacrifice and offerings.

The error with this in regard to Dan 9:27 is 1) that 27 transpires not only long after the crucifixion, but after AD 70 as well.
And 2) that the Antichrist who in 9:27 disrupts the Jewish worship (similar to how in Revelation he disrupts All peoples' religions, by claiming and 'enforcing' that he is God) 'Causes' their sacrificing to cease. Antichrist does not cause any 'Need' for it to end

 

[valiant]

Come come now. That is not fair.
Daniel realized that Jeremiah's 'seventy years' (Jer 25:11-12; Dan 9:2) were fulfilled. For the desolation of Israel.......and for the reign of Babylon. But 'seventy sevens' were new to Daniel (9:24-27). 'Sevens' are not 'years.' (If you're convinced they are, then please share how? If you'd like. Is it 365 or 360 divided by 7, as a unit?)

Of course its fair. I agree seven are not years, neither are they 'seven years'. They are God's equivalent of man's years, perfect, God appointed lengths of time.

Further, the sevens are apportioned to Daniel's people for restoring and rebuilding Jerusalem (first).

Well that is one interpretation.

Before desolation Again in AD 70 (part of the big gap)

There are no grounds at all for postulating a big gap. It is pure invention to fit a theory.

. (For that matter, it is very natural, historically, as well as Biblically, to foresee Jerusalem and its temple being constructed then devastated a third time.

I disagree. God wrote of unbelieving Israel as a nation when He destroyed the Temple. Jesus Christ's church were God's temple on earth. Why should He need another? The Temple is now in heaven (Heb 10.19 ff)

It was seemingly miraculous for Israel to reform in 1948, and to win Jerusalem in 1967

.

Nothing miraculous about it at all. Any more than the rising again of the Islamic state is miraculous. It is irreligious unbelieving men trying to establish their own destiny.

All that's 'left,' from country, to city............is temple again.)

So you thing that a godless, uncompromising band of unbelievers are fulfilling OT prophecy? Think again. When God spoke of a return it was in repentance

Further, 'seventy sevens are apportioned for your people...to close the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make propitiation for iniquity, and to bring in the righteousness of the ages...' That.........has not happened with Daniel's people as a nation.

Don't you think that Jesus accomplished that? It has been accomplished in His believing people.

As a nation, we know from other Scripture (also), that 'all Israel will be saved.'

Yes believing Israel (the election - beloved for the fathers' sakes), not natural Israel (enemies for your skes).

The seventy sevens have
one seven remaining to be completed......because God takes one more seven, to especially bring them to Him......as a nation.

A total ignoring of what Scripture says. The seventieth seven followed immediately after the sixty ninth seven.

Much like Joseph, through God's arrangement, returned to ruling over his own brothers AFTER having taken a Gentile wife and after such a long intermediate time.

LOL reading into Biblical history whatever you want Actually Egypt ruled over Canaan. So he was ruling over them all the time

This is yet another example of the silliness of Mr Young: The Jews came and destroyed the Jews in AD 70. Because the Messiah is the Desolator.

Funnily enough that is exactly what they did. They destroyed themselves. Read Josephus. But not because the Messiah is the desolator, That is YOUR invention.

 

[valiant]

Valiant said : Jesus with His life and His own body in the midst of the last week ended the need for any further animal sacrifice and offerings.

The error with this in regard to Dan 9:27 is 1) that 27 transpires not only long after the crucifixion, but after AD 70 as well.

That is simply your false assumption. Daniel gives no hint as to when the covenant is confirmed. There are no time indications. In fact the 'covenant', which in Daniel is always God's covenant, is 'made strong' (reconfirmed) in some way by God. And that was clearly the consequence of Christ's coming.

And 2) that the Antichrist who in 9:27 disrupts the Jewish worship (similar to how in Revelation he disrupts All peoples' religions, by claiming and 'enforcing' that he is God) 'Causes' their sacrificing to cease. Antichrist does not cause any 'Need' for it to end

Daniel says nothing about an antichrist. That is your invention. If anyone disrupted the Jewish worship (unless it was the cross) it was Titus.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

Jesus with His life and His own body in the midst of the last week ended the need for any further animal sacrifice and offerings.

Daniel 9:27 "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."

Hosea 6:6
For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

Matthew 9:13
But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Here is where it proves Jesus took away the need for animal sacrifice and offerings....

Hebrews 10:1-9 "For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.[SUP]2 [/SUP]For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
[SUP]3 [/SUP]But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
[SUP]5 [/SUP]Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
[SUP]6 [/SUP]In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
[SUP]7 [/SUP]Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
[SUP]8 [/SUP]Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
[SUP]9 [/SUP]Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second." (establish the covenant in the last week)

Many confuse what Jesus did above by causing the need for sacrifice and offering to cease per the old covenant and the bringing in of the new covenant, with what the people of the Prince of this world (Devil) would perform later in taking away the daily sacrifice and fulfilling the prophecy of the AOD by destroying the city and Temple in 70 ad. That prophecy is shown in Daniel 8:11-13 and also in Daniel 11:31 and also in Daniel 12:11.

 

[flob]

Daniel gives no hint as to when the covenant is confirmed. There are no time indications.

To the contrary
'Seventy weeks are apportioned...From...Until...will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks...And After the sixty-two weeks...Will...And...And...will make a firm covenant...for one week; And in the middle of the week he Will...And Will...Until...'

Dan 9:24-27

the 'covenant', which in Daniel is always God's covenant,

To the contrary
'he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week; and in the middle of the week he will cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease and will replace...with abominations'

9:27.


'And profane the sanctuary, establishing the distress and removing the daily sacrifice; and they will set up the abomination that desolates' 11:31.
'the vision concerning the daily sacrifice and the transgression that desolates apply, so that the sanctuary and the host are trampled down' 8:13.
'From the time that the daily sacrifice is removed and the abomination that desolates is set up...' 12:11.
'When you see the abomination of desolation standing where it should Not...' Mark 13:14.
'When you see The abomination of desolation, which was spoken of through Daniel...standing in the holy place' Mt 24:15.
'our Lord Jesus Christ...will not come unless...the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or an object of worship, so that he sits in the temple of God, setting himself forth, saying that he is God' 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4.
'Commanding those who dwell on the earth to make an image of the beast, who had the stroke of the sword and revived. And power was given to him to give breath to the image of the beast that the image of the beast might even speak and cause whoever would not worship the image of the beast to be killed' Revelation 13:14-15.
'And another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand...' 14:9.
'I saw as it were a glassy sea mingled with fire and those who come away victorious from the beast and from his image and from the number of his name...' 15:2.
'The souls of those who had been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and of those who had not worshipped the beast nor his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years' 20:4.

He made a new covenant in the Upper Room...

the 'covenant', which in Daniel is always God's covenant, is 'made strong' (reconfirmed) in some way by God. And that was clearly the consequence of Christ's coming.

Do I understand you accurately?
Christ came, then covenanted in the Upper Room, then confirmed His covenant by coming? The first time?
(Must be, because neither you nor EJ believes Christ will come to earth a second time.)

Daniel says nothing about an antichrist...If anyone disrupted the Jewish worship (unless it was the cross) it was Titus.

So John in Revelation is giving his readers a history lesson about Titus?
If the cross And Titus both disrupted Jewish worship, which one is the disruptor in Daniel 8:13; 9:27; 11:31; and 12:11?
By 'disrupt[or],' do you or EJ mean 'desolator'? As in Jesus the Messiah = the desolator in 9:27?
What is the point about the 'man of lawlessness, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or an object of worship, so that he sits in the temple of God, setting himself forth, saying that he is God' in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4? Is that too distant from Daniel in time, for Daniel (or God) to have been able to prophesy about?
Is there no such thing in the OT as prophecy of a time beyond Titus?
If there is...........is it possible for OT saints, like Daniel or Zechariah or Isaiah or Ezekiel or Malachi, to have prophesied of events still yet to come? If so, is the only prophecy 'permitted' to them that there will be a new heaven and new earth?
If Daniel is particularly given the apportionment of the destiny of Israel to set down (to say nothing of the destinies of Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome as empires), then what's to prevent that apportionment reaching to the end of the New Testament age?

 

[valiant]

Originally Posted by valiant

LOL as long as you listen to eternally gratefull who doesn't of course accept what it Actually says

Oh, so I take it literally, and that is wrong.. ok

LOL read what I said again. You don't take it literally. you take it in line with what you have been taught by heretics.

You suggest I learn hebrew? Where do you get your hebrew training from?

Initially my four year advanced degree, in which I won the Senior Hebrew prize, and then in further scholarly study,

The word is

A. Adverb.
˒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).

B. Preposition.
˒ahar (אַחַר, 310), “behind; after.” ˒Ahar as a preposition can have a local-spatial significance, such as “behind”: “And the man said, They are departed hence; for I heard them say, Let us go to Dothan” (Gen. 37:17). As such, it can mean “follow after”: “And also the king that reigneth over you [will] continue following the Lord your God” (1 Sam. 12:14). ˒Ahar can signify “after” with a temporal emphasis: “And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years” (Gen. 9:28, the first biblical occurrence of the word). This same emphasis may occur when ˒ahar appears in the plural (cf. Gen. 19:6—local-spatial; Gen. 17:8—temporal).

C. Conjunction.
˒ahar (אַחַר, 310), “after.” ˒Ahar may be a conjunction, “after,” with a temporal emphasis: “And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years …” (Gen. 5:4).


Vine, W. E., Unger, M. F., & White, W., Jr. (1996). Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Vol. 1, p. 15). Nashville, TN: T. Nelson.

LOL so where is this NOUN you spoke of? Seems to have gone missing?

yes so it means 'after,afterwards,following. It does not mean 'immediately afterwards'. It is wide in its meaning.

As you can see, Not only can it mean exactly what I said it could mean. (which was just proven, and I can use more if yuo want, I have many lexicons and dictionaries at my disposal) but you also shows your lack of humility and lack of really wanting to discuss anything.

But it does not mean exactly what you said it could mean. It only indicates 'at some point afterwards'. Thus He could have been cut off in the midst of the seventieth seven.

For yuo see, You said it CAN mean something, Not even in the english does that mean it HAS TO MEAN SOMETHING, so your whole argument is against itself.

LOL typical argument by someone arguing a weak case.

Unlike you I do not have to fiddle words. Just look at ancient history. Add the days and years up. See that they fit perfectly. and come up with the right conclusion that God knew what he was talking about when he said this is when Messiah will be introduced.

No you fiddle the whole passage LOL I know all the schemes and they have to be made to fit. Why we don't even know in which year Jesus was crucified. you simply make it up

ok. Now your going all over the place. Why are you going back to vs 23. Talk about twisting a passage to fit your belief.

because verse 23 tells us when 'the word went forth'. In around 538 BC. But of course that doesn't suit you because it doesn't fit your calculations.

vs 23 has nothing to do with the "word" as you put it to restore jerusalem.

of course it does. that's what its talking about. the whole passage is about that.

Babble. come on dude, in no language would the word "command or word" in vs 25 refer to the "word" in vs 23. that is nonsence.

when two parallel phrases are used in the same context it is clear that they are speaking of the same thing.

the word in vs 23 concerns everythign Gabrial was giving in the prophesy, including the words, Know and understand, from the time the word to restor jerusalem is given'

read it again without dark glasses on. Daniel was praying about the end of the desolations of Jerusalem. The angel was speaking about the word going forth to accomplish that. And that is what verse 25 refers to as well.

Luke 19: [SUP]41 [/SUP]Now as He drew near, He saw the city and wept over it, [SUP]42 [/SUP]saying, “If you had known, even you, especially in this your day, the things that make for your peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes.

Nice try, How could he say they could have known especially in this day, Unless it was possible they would have known.

Now where, except in your muddled thinking, does that refer to Daniel 9? By 'in this your day' He meant 'the day in which Messiah is coming to you'. Their time that they had been waiting for had come, and they would miss it. But this has no obvious connection with Dan 9.

How else could they know? but to interpret prophesy, which told them what that day was.

They should have known because they should have recognised the Messiah, not because they had been doing abstruse calculations on Daniel, which would in fact have been beyond them. If Jesus had been pointing to Dan 9 why did He not make it clear? HE could have done the calculations using supernatural knowledge. But He did NOT.

of course you can not see it. you manipulate the text to make you see what you want to see, instread of interpreting the text according to what it says.

you are blind as to what text manipulation is because you do it all the time. I am calling for you to read the text straightforwardly without twisting it to suit a theory.

The prophet looked forward. and spoke of events. Nothing in the text said it all had to occure all at once. He just looked forward. thats all.

well I wouldn't call 'seventy sevens' as at once LOL But it would happen within a consecutive seventy sevens

Yep. Continual wars and desolations, which has occured from 70 AD until today, Jerusalem still lies esolate. and many wars have happened over her in those years.

It is true that there have been many wars. Jesus said that there would be. But Jerusalem has not been desolate.

Have you been to Jerusalem? It is not desolate at all. It is a thriving two communities. You simply imagine what you want.

Not imagination, you just proved me right.

Dream on

 

[valiant]

Many confuse what Jesus did above by causing the need for sacrifice and offering to cease per the old covenant and the bringing in of the new covenant, with what the people of the Prince of this world (Devil) would perform later in taking away the daily sacrifice and fulfilling the prophecy of the AOD by destroying the city and Temple in 70 ad. That prophecy is shown in Daniel 8:11-13 and also in Daniel 11:31 and also in Daniel 12:11.

Daniel 8.11-13 was under Antiochus Epiphanes as was Dan 11.33; 12.11. It has nothing to so with any 'coming prince'

 

[valiant]

Valiant said - Daniel gives no hint as to when the covenant is confirmed. There are no time indications.

To the contrary
'Seventy weeks are apportioned...From...Until...will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks...And After the sixty-two weeks...Will...And...And...will make a firm covenant...for one week; And in the middle of the week he Will...And Will...Until...'

Dan 9:24-27

Now you are either being stupid or deceitful. What I said was in the context of how it fitted in with the cutting off of the Messiah, as you would have known if you had read it properly. In other words the covenant could have been confirmed well before His death.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

Daniel 8.11-13 was under Antiochus Epiphanes as was Dan 11.33; 12.11. It has nothing to so with any 'coming prince'

It's important to notice the wording the people of the Prince that shall come. The Prince that was prophesied to come is the Devil when he was cast out of heaven to earth, and he would be given a host ("people of the Prince.") This is the Prince Jesus spoke of here ....
John 12:31Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

John 14:30
Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.

John 16:11
Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.