Interesting.. I have studied this myself well over 30 years. I guess studying for years does not mean a thing since we both came up with different conclusions.
It depends on what those conclusions are based on. Mine are based solely on study of the Scriptures, and secondarily history and archaeology. I was deeply indoctrinated into dispensationalism when I first became a Christian, back in the days of Hal Lindsey's "Late Great Planet Earth," but after several years of painful soul-searching the Lord brought me out of that darkness. And I can honestly say I have not read a book or heard a cd or visited a website on eschatology since those early days. I learned not to trust men but rely on the Lord's guidance. I may be completely wrong on everything I believe, but my conclusions are all the fruit of my own personal study and I know they are based solely on Scripture.
1. You said I was wrong, because it said Jesus came after the 62 week. I showed you where I was right.
2. History shows that the time from the command to rebuild the CITY (not the temple or anything else) to the time Jesus entered jeruslaem on a donkey (messiah the prince) was exactly 69 weeks.
But that's not what the Scripture actually says. It says from the going forth of the command to restore and rebuild the city until Messiah "the prince" would be 69 weeks. And the reference to the wall being built even in troubled times was talking about the third wall that the Jews hurriedly built after they revolted from Rome, to try to shore up the city's defenses on the north side, the most vulnerable area as the city was bordered by deep valleys on the other three sides.
Jesus being cut off was to happen after 62 weeks. These are not the same things, which is why one was to happen after 69 weeks, and the other after 62 weeks. Jesus being crucified happened 40 years before he drew his sword and took vengeance on his enemies.
Nor was it 7 days from the time Jesus' triumphant entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday. He was crucified on Friday so it was only 5 days after.
Oh but Jesus own words would show this to be in error. Jesus said I did not come to judge (punish) I came to save. He came as suffering servant, not as king messiah, that was the mystery paul spoke of. and why the jews did not get it. they were looking for king messiah, they did not comprehend the suffering servant myst come first.. or else king messiah would have no kingdom to rule (there would never be forgiveness of sin)
Actually that's not true. The development of the doctrine of two messiahs was of a post-Christian date. Before that time, and at the time of Jesus, the Messiah was not the focus of Rabbinic theology. He was, to put it bluntly, a means to an end. It was the restoration of the Davidic kingdom that the Jews lived in hopes of, the messiah was just the person who was going to bring it to pass. Much of what later became associated with messiah was previously viewed as the ministry of the forerunner, including things like raising the dead.
But as for Jesus' words, yes, he came to lay down his life a ransom. And he accomplished that. But then he took his life back up again and conquered hell, death, and the grave. You have to realize there is a "the rest of the story" to this, and you're leaving out a big part.
The problem the Jews had, and I believe the dispensationalists have the same blindness, is that you don't understand what "kingdom" Jesus came to lay down his life to establish. It isn't an earthly kingdom of dust and stone. The kingdom which Jesus' death opened the way into is the kingdom of Heaven, God's kingdom, an eternal kingdom where there is no sin or sickness or suffering or weeping or death. That's where the Jews missed it. Their eyes were and still are so fixed on and blinded by the glory of an earthly kingdom that they cannot or will not lift their eyes to heaven to see that kingdom that Abraham longed for and now dwells in. Remember Jesus told the Jews not to lay up treasures on earth, but to lay up treasures in heaven. That's why the Jewish religious authorities hated Jesus, because he didn't deliver them from Rome and set them up as rulers over all the earth as they were expecting the Messiah to do.
1. The spilt blood of an animal never took away sin, read hebrews
I am very well acquainted with Hebrews and I must say I disagree with your view of the efficacy of the Mosaic sacrifices. They most certainly did cleanse men of their sin, but to quote Paul, "for the blood of bulls and goats sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh." In other words, the cleansing afforded by the Mosaic sacrifices was only skin deep, but it was enough that they made the flesh clean because it was of the flesh of Israel that Jesus was born, his spirit was all of God.
2. God allowed it for over 40 years after he tore the veil in two.
Of course, it was a period of grace God allowed to the Jewish people. They first had to be given the opportunity to hear the Gospel and be saved from the judgement that was coming. That's why Jesus told his disciples to go first to Jerusalem and then Judea, and then Samaria and then to the outermost parts of the earth. The Gospel was to the Jew first, and only after all of Israel had heard the Gospel did the end come and the nation was judged and destroyed.
3. Just because the jews rebuild the temple, and sacrifice it again does nt mean God will accept it for a sacrifice and forgive their sins. They are still in sin, thats why they do it.
But that's just the point. Either you believe it is God's "plan" to have a rebuilt temple and reinstitution of the Mosaic sacrifices or not. I do not believe that is God's plan at all. Those things were types and figures which foreshadowed Jesus' sacrificial death and now that the true has come and the shadows have passed away I don't believe for a moment that God will allow what would be a repudiation of His Son's atoning death.
I have no issue with salvation. Salvation is by faith alone in the work of Christ, Who sits at the right hand of God as my mediator. We are not discussing this. we are discussing events in human history (past present or future) as shown by God in prophesy. The coming and the cutting off of messiah just happened to be two events in that prophesy.
But that's just it, that's the whole point of human history. It has been engineered by God for the purpose of glorifying Jesus. Without that pivotal event in history, to which the Old looked forward, and to which the New looks back, there wouldn't be any point to human history, it would just be what the evolutionists say, blind accidents of nature without meaning or purpose.
The Scriptures says everything in the whole creation was not only made by Jesus, and through Jesus, but that it was made "for" Jesus. He is the reason the world was created, why man fell, why the angels rebelled, and why every moment of history has happened just the way it has happened ... "for Jesus."
The Cross stands at the center of time and history. Everything before it looked forward to it. And everything since flows from it. It divided time in half, B.C. + A.D. Jesus isn't just the reason for the season, Jesus is the reason for everything.
In Christ,
Pilgrimer
