What if Daniel did have a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#141
#141
Chester said:
Watched enough of this video to have a good chuckle!
He says that premillenialists teach that Jesus intended at his first coming to establish an earthly kingdom, but that Jewish opposition changed God's plan, and so the crucifixion was "Plan B" - !! ?? (Do any premillenianists out there believe this way?)

Here is Daniel 9:26,27 KJV
And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
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.

I keep hearing some say that the text does not say there is a gap after the first 69 sevens. Only if you come to the text with the assumption that there is no gap and then read that assumption into the text.

A straightforward reading of the text gives two things that happen after the 62 sevens:
(1) the cutting off of the Messiah
(2) the destruction of Jerusalem (which happened in AD 70)

Then only in verse 27 is the seventieth week mentioned. Thus the logical assumption from the text is that the 70'th seven begins sometime after 70 AD. So the gap is clearly given in the text.
Click to expand...
I know some do say this, I was taught this, and at one time thought this was true

But I think we see in romans 9 - 11 that the OT prophesied Israel would reject, and a people who were not his would be called his (gentiles) and other things,

I think God knew it all along, The gap in Dan 9 just further proves it was Gods plan all along.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#142
#142
eternally-gratefull said:
Your right

thus there was nothing for anyone to SEE standing in the Holy Place

So we MUST determine, that that aspect of the prophecy has yet to be fulfilled.
Click to expand...
Has already happened.
When the zealots took over the temple and used it as a fortress.
The. Temple was destroyed and will never be again, because Aaron's staff is gone, the Ark of the covenant is gone, the veil is torn too to bottom the Holy of Holies can only exist in Christ. Even if someone built a replica of the temple today it would not be the temple, not would it be sanctified by God. In fact it would be an abomination, so how could an abomination stand in the Holy place if the Holy place is in Christ alone, and can never be outside of Christ?
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#143
#143
Locoponydirtman said:
Has already happened.
When the zealots took over the temple and used it as a fortress.
The. Temple was destroyed and will never be again, because Aaron's staff is gone, the Ark of the covenant is gone, the veil is torn too to bottom the Holy of Holies can only exist in Christ. Even if someone built a replica of the temple today it would not be the temple, not would it be sanctified by God. In fact it would be an abomination, so how could an abomination stand in the Holy place if the Holy place is in Christ alone, and can never be outside of Christ?
Click to expand...
temple being destroyed

and a pagan idol standing in a holy place for all to see

are two different things

Daniel was told both would occur. But not at the same time

and you keep taking this back to a salvation thing, it is not

Prophecy is a look into the future of events that will occur

If it is built again? Scripture says it will.

there is no if..
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#144
#144
eternally-gratefull said:
temple being destroyed

and a pagan idol standing in a holy place for all to see

are two different things

Daniel was told both would occur. But not at the same time

and you keep taking this back to a salvation thing, it is not

Prophecy is a look into the future of events that will occur

If it is built again? Scripture says it will.

there is no if..
Click to expand...
They can build 20 temples there will never be another "Holy place".
From Daniel 70 AD was the future.
The only Holy Temple is the Jesus, and the dwelling of his spirit in us.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#145
#145
Locoponydirtman said:
They can build 20 temples there will never be another "Holy place".
From Daniel 70 AD was the future.
The only Holy Temple is the Jesus, and the dwelling of his spirit in us.
Click to expand...
Yes I know the holy temple is us,

But thats not what we are talking about. We are discussing what God said

again, I am looking at prophecy and what God said will happen AFTER the temple and city is destroyed, which occured in 70 AD. wither the place is literally holy or not. does not concern me, Because it does not matter.

You do whatever you want

If God said a temple will be built. and an idol will be placed into the holy place of that temple. for all to see

I will trust him and take him at his word. Ok?
 
T

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
#146
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
#146
Locoponydirtman said:
In fact it would be an abomination, so how could an abomination stand in the Holy place if the Holy place is in Christ alone, and can never be outside of Christ?
Click to expand...
Yet, you are saying this didn't take place until 70ad... long after "the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom" at the time of Jesus' death, Mark 15:38 (32ad; and in the same year, He ascended up to Heaven).

How do you explain this, in view of what you've put in this post?
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
#147
#147
TheDivineWatermark said:
Yet, you are saying this didn't take place until 70ad... long after "the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom" at the time of Jesus' death, Mark 15:38 (32ad; and in the same year, He ascended up to Heaven).

How do you explain this, in view of what you've put in this post?
Click to expand...
I really don't know why God allowed the temple to stand for 40 more years. Maybe his patience and grace was still giving them time to repent; A full generation of eye witnesses. That generation would recognize that place in the temple as the "Holy Place". But finally in 70AD he took the entire temple from them forever to show that this was the end of the temple age.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#148
#148
Locoponydirtman said:
I really don't know why God allowed the temple to stand for 40 more years. Maybe his patience and grace was still giving them time to repent; A full generation of eye witnesses. That generation would recognize that place in the temple as the "Holy Place". But finally in 70AD he took the entire temple from them forever to show that this was the end of the temple age.
Click to expand...
That holy place was not literally holy for along time. Gods presence had long since departed that place long before jesus was even born, We know. Because when the high priest, Who was not walking in according with Faith in God. enterd, he did not die, and have to be pulled by a rope.

So your line of reasoning is flawed on all facets.

It is A HOLY place. according to jewish tradition.

So when jesus told JEWS that when THEY see the AOD Standing in the HOLY PLACE. He is talking about the Holy Place in THEIR TEMPLE> something THEY WILL understand when it happens.
 
Dave-L

Dave-L

Banned
#149
Jan 17, 2020
4,792
736
113
#149
eternally-gratefull said:
That holy place was not literally holy for along time. Gods presence had long since departed that place long before jesus was even born, We know. Because when the high priest, Who was not walking in according with Faith in God. enterd, he did not die, and have to be pulled by a rope.

So your line of reasoning is flawed on all facets.

It is A HOLY place. according to jewish tradition.

So when jesus told JEWS that when THEY see the AOD Standing in the HOLY PLACE. He is talking about the Holy Place in THEIR TEMPLE> something THEY WILL understand when it happens.
Click to expand...
The Temple in the NT is Christendom. And the Papacy already fulfilled and will continue to fulfill the Antichrist role. A third temple means a return to Judaism and a rejection of Christ's atonement in trade for animal sacrifices. It's not worth going to hell for this theory.
 
T

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
#150
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
#150
Locoponydirtman said:
I really don't know why God allowed the temple to stand for 40 more years. Maybe his patience and grace was still giving them time to repent; A full generation of eye witnesses. That generation would recognize that place in the temple as the "Holy Place". But finally in 70AD he took the entire temple from them forever to show that this was the end of the temple age.
Click to expand...
Two things to consider:

1) Jesus' words in


Matthew 23:38-39 [Jesus, addressing "Jerusalem"] - "Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. 39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord."


Luke 13:35 [Jesus, addressing "Jerusalem"] - "Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord."




2) the SEQUENCE issues in His Olivet Discourse, where:

"SET B [circumstances]" are spelled out in Lk21:8-11 (same as in Matt24:4-8 / Mk13:5-8 -- called "the beginning of birth pangs");

"SET A [circumstances]" are spelled out in Lk21:12-24 (the 70ad events, including v.24's "UNTIL");

we know that is the SEQUENCE [SET A *before* SET B] because of verse 12's "BUT BEFORE all these [BEFORE all "the beginning of birth pangs" just described in vv.8-11]"... BEFORE all those... the "SET A [circumstances (i.e. the 70ad events)]" must take place [BEFORE those (BEFORE "the beginning of birth pangs")]!



"SET B [circumstances]" do not PRECEDE the "SET A [circumstances]"
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#151
#151
Dave-L said:
The Temple in the NT is Christendom. And the Papacy already fulfilled and will continue to fulfill the Antichrist role. A third temple means a return to Judaism and a rejection of Christ's atonement in trade for animal sacrifices. It's not worth going to hell for this theory.
Click to expand...
That has no bearing on What Jesus, and the Angel Gabriel said will happen in the last days concerning a buiding which is in Jerusalem. and an AOD which is seen by ALL to be standing in a holy place.
 
T

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
#152
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
#152
Locoponydirtman said:
There is no gap. At the end of the 69th week is the crucification, and the 70th week begins then at the resurrection.
Click to expand...
How can this be, when each "Week" (of said prophecy) is a duration of "SEVEN YEARS"?

What was the "SEVEN YEARS" that began at His "resurrection" (I assume you meant His)?
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#153
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#153
Dave-L said:
Missing would be everything in scripture between Jesus’ baptism in the autumn of 27 AD., the onset of the 70th week. Running up through Stephen’s martyrdom in the autumn of 34 AD. Which marks the end of the 70th week.

This would mean no Christianity of the 70th week. No savior Jesus. No gospel. No crucifixion. No Pentecost or Holy Spirit. Or anything else that depends on all the missing pieces destroyed in the gap.

It would mean only a future Antichrist, exchanged for Christ in the 70th week. A Temple with Animal sacrifices. A different Messiah than the New Covenant provided. And centuries of wasted lives now in hell from what we would then call the cult of Christendom.
Click to expand...
When Jesus returns, which will be very soon I believe, dispensationalist will think he's the antichrist.
 
T

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
#154
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
#154
KJV1611 said:
When Jesus returns, which will be very soon I believe, dispensationalist will think he's the antichrist.
Click to expand...
LOL.

So NO "dispensationalists" will be "CAUGHT UP/AWAY" ?

[or, do you mean, you do not believe there is any such thing as "caught up/away" at all ?? not even at the very END ?? (I thought that was your view, no ? )]



Sounds a bit "confused," I must say. ;)
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#155
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#155
TheDivineWatermark said:
LOL.

So NO "dispensationalists" will be "CAUGHT UP/AWAY" ?

[or, do you mean, you do not believe there is any such thing as "caught up/away" at all ?? not even at the very END ?? (I thought that was your view, no ? )]



Sounds a bit "confused," I must say. ;)
Click to expand...
The bible's an esoteric book, it's supposed to be confusing on the surface. Honestly I have no idea how the end plays out. I don't know if being caught up in the air is literal or figurative. I mean I can say that I've been caught up spiritually with the Lord and I will always be with him.

I don't have all the answers but I do believe that if there is no physical "catching up" and the Lord just returns, then the dispensationalist wont believe that it's him because they believe the "anitchrist" comes first.
 
T

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
#156
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
#156
KJV1611 said:
I don't have all the answers but I do believe that if there is no physical "catching up" and the Lord just returns, then the dispensationalist wont believe that it's him because they believe the "anitchrist" comes first.
Click to expand...
Who do you believe the following is in reference to?

"...whom the Lord Jesus will consume with the breath of His mouth and will annul by the appearing [G2015] of His coming [G3952]" 2Th2:8b


[someone who is in existence on the earth prior to His "RETURN [to the earth]," no? (Just like in Daniel 7:25,27,20-25 and just like in other passages also)]
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#157
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#157
TheDivineWatermark said:
Who do you believe the following is in reference to?

"...whom the Lord Jesus will consume with the breath of His mouth and will annul by the appearing [G2015] of His coming [G3952]" 2Th2:8b


[someone who is in existence on the earth prior to His "RETURN [to the earth]," no? ]
Click to expand...
It's the guy who sits in the temple of God. For most people that is themselves. There again when Christ came to me that man of sin was dethroned and Christ took his place. That Wicked was destroyed with the brightness of His coming into my life.

The bible is an esoteric book, the meaning is hidden from the world.... you're trying to gain wisdom of the end times by the wisdom of this world.
 
T

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
#158
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
#158
KJV1611 said:
It's the guy who sits in the temple of God. For most people that is themselves. There again when Christ came to me that man of sin was dethroned and Christ took his place. That Wicked was destroyed with the brightness of His coming into my life.

The bible is an esoteric book, the meaning is hidden from the world.... you're trying to gain wisdom of the end times by the wisdom of this world.
Click to expand...
Why, then, does it say of [that one], "WHOSE COMING [/ARRIVAL / ADVENT]"... 2Th2:9a... you would think if it just meant every individual within themselves, that this "WHOSE COMING [/ARRIVAL / ADVENT]" would not be used, but something more like "whose existence" (as in, it's always been there, existing in such a way).

What would you say is the difference ?





P.S. I've already LISTED in past posts the passages IN SCRIPTURE I see as PARALLEL to this, and there are several...

examples:

[quoting old post]


[...] I have made the argument that the following passages are referring to the SAME thing [/SAME individual]:

1) --2Th2:9a [re: the man of sin] - "whose COMING [G3952 - parousia - "3952 (parousía / 'presence') is a "technical term with reference to the visit of a king or some other official, 'a royal visit' " (Souter)" (quoted from BibleHub); or, their ARRIVAL on the scene, so to speak];

2) --Rev6:2 - "he WENT FORTH [G1831 - ex erchomai--from ek/ex G1537 and erchomai G2064] conquering and to conquer";

3) --Dan9:26b - "prince THAT SHALL COME [H935 - 'who is to come']" (which I've pointed out in past posts how the word "THAT SHALL COME" would be superfluous if referring to the prince already mentioned in the previous verse, v.25--no need to say this... saying something like "he" or "the prince" would suffice, IF referring to the SAME person; Not to mention the SEQUENCE issues of this passage [vv.24-27], which verse 27a/b/c I've demonstrated is PARALLEL to the passage of 2Th2:3-9a, i.e. in its "BEGINNING," its "MIDDLE," *and* its "END"--BOTH passages covering ALL SEVEN YEARS! [as do a few other related passages/sections of scripture]);

4) --Daniel 7:27,25,20-24, esp. v.20 "and of the other [horn] which CAME UP [H5559 - [סְלֵק] verb come up (Aramaic loan-word in Biblical Hebrew, q. v.)]" (parallel to the TIMING also in Dan12:11 I referred to in another recent thread [which chpt has DAY-AMOUNTS which CONCLUDE/END with Daniel being resurrected to stand again on the earth (v.13), which did not happen in 70ad ; ) ]), and which verse 7:20 also supplies a DESCRIPTION: "whose look is more stout than his fellows";

5) --Matt24:4 / Mk13:5 "G5100 - tis - 'A CERTAIN ONE ['a certain one' bringing deception],'" because (take note) the following verses (Matt24:5/Mk13:6) is saying "FOR many shall come [G2064]... saying, 'I am ____'"... so this is saying "many SHALL COME [G2064]" but for them to "take heed lest 'A CERTAIN ONE [G5100 - tis]' deceive you"--that is, DISTINGUISHING "A CERTAIN ONE [IN PARTICULAR]" from "the many" that shall [also] come [G2064] "saying..."
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#159
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#159
Got do some outside work be back later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.