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

I explained on that page why '62 at the end of the 7' does not work. The two relevant phrases in v25 and v26 cannot point to the same time. One points to the beginning of His ministry, and the other points to the end of it.

I read the KJV. It does not say Jesus sets up any abomination. It says because of widespread abomination, Jesus will make the city desolate. The abomination has dual prophetic application, the one in 70 A.D. when the Romans defiled the holy ground of the city with their Sun god standards, and end times application, when the Antichrist sets up in the church that which the Sun god has always taken to himself to be his premiere symbol.

Therefore, Daniel 9:27 is saying Jesus is going to confirm His New Covenant for one week - 3 1/2 years in Person and 3 1/2 years "through them that heard Him" (Hebrews 2:3 KJV), and in the midst of the 70th Week His death is going to cause the sacrifices to mean zilch to God from then on out...and for widespread abomination, He's going to allow the Romans to come in and level the place in 70 A.D. because they "knew not the hour of their visitation".

Which one points to the beginning of His ministry? It seems verse 25 does by saying it happens after the 7 and 62

The claim that all prophecy has been fulfilled has a serious problem: Daniel 7 says the saints do not inherit the literal kingdom of God until after the Judgment.

"The Judgment was set and the books were opened." I'm pretty sure that the great Judgment Day has not come upon the Earth, unless one is willing to argue that after Judgment Day, the wicked are still going to be around doing their dirt.

beginning ---> v25 'unto...'
end ---> v26 '...cut off'

v25 'unto...' ---> baptism
v26 '...cut off' ---> death / cross

But what about the ending of sacrifices, the destruction of the city and the temple? That is mentioned in Daniel 9.

The anti-christ is the roman emperors that bring about these things.

Disagree. Historicism = NFL Pro Bowl team. Futurism = company picnic half drunk flag football squad...but OK.
That's so naive. We all know full well that God's past organizations became polluted with enemies of the truth...just ask Ezekiel about God's priests joining the fraternity of Sun worship in chapter 8 - and God was right there patiently putting up with their nonsense. Likewise, the Papacy moved in and set itself up over the church for centuries and today "protestants" like you who no longer protest defend Jesuit ideas for them. The KGB coined the phrase "useful idiots" and though I don't think of you as such (just a confused student of prophecy), you can bet your sweet aspartame that the Papacy considers all of you as such.
It's like shooting fish in a barrel. First of all, "sacrifice" is italicized - not in the original. The "daily" refers to the entire sanctuary ministry of sacrifice, intercession, the cleansing of, etc. Second, if you would stick to the established prophetic timeline of Daniel, which you have not, you would know this period of time is referring to the Papacy which has by then polluted the Heavenly Sanctuary by robbing our High Priest Jesus of His names, titles, attributes, and prerogatives, and claims to "take the place" of Christ ("Antichrist") -- the "arms" that stand for these enemies of God is the secular power united with the Catholic church (this unity is the very definition of the Papacy) with the church calling the shots...just as Satan worshiper Jezebel controlled Ahab, the head of State.
Everyone knows the AoD has a dual application: 1) When the Romans set up their Sun god standards on the holy ground surrounding the city, it was as abominable in the sight of God as when His priests committed the "greatest" abomination in Ezekiel 9 when their backs were to Him and they worshiped the Sun. In the end times, this abomination is repeated, with the premiere Sun god symbol ever set up in the church, and will cause God to destroy every last hypocrite from the midst of His commandment keeping people.
Let's compare notes: I've can show you several Scriptures where this same Paul refers specifically and explicitly to the saints as the "temple of God" - you've got zero verses showing where God regards the bankrupt opinions of unbelieving Jews about what is and ain't His temple. Can you see the scales of evidence just tipping all the way over in favor of Historicism on this?

Nehemiah6 said:

Now it becomes clear that the Antichrist (the Man of Sin) desecrates a future temple in Jerusalem in two ways (1) he sets up an image of himself -- an animated idol -- which is called the Abomination of Desolation because idols are an abomination to God, and (2) he also sits in that temple and claims that he is God. While both these things are preposterous and abominable, he succeeds because God sends a strong delusion upon the earth for 3 1/2 years. Which takes us to Revelation 13:6,14,15:

Click to expand...

Jesuit Futurism is about as clear as a black suit covered in coffee grinds at midnight. The "future" temple to Paul was the church in which the Papacy reigned on Earth while doing Satan's bidding. You looking for "idols"? One of the "3 horns" uprooted by the Papal "Little Horn" was the Vandals...ever heard of VANDALISM? The Vandals were known for going through the kingdom and breaking down the idols that the papacy dragged into the church and baptized so that, for instance, "Apollo" became Peter...they just changed the nameplates. Peter's got one heckuva horn sticking out of his forehead in one such idol, but never saw that in the Bible.
Want a textbook Biblical definition for "blasphemy"? Luke 5:21 KJV and John 10:33 KJV. See that? It's BLASPHEMY for a man to 1) make himself God, and 2) claim the power to forgive sin. Does the papacy claim that?

"We hold on this Earth the place of God Almighty". Pope Leo X

"Thou art the Shepherd, thou art the Physician, thou art the Ruler, thou art the Husbandman, thou art, finally, another God on Earth." - Archbishop Marcellus, to the Pope. For this blasphemy, the Pope rewarded him with the title, "Noble lord of Venice".


"And God Himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of His priests, and either not to pardon or to pardon, according as they refuse or give absolution...the sentence of the priest precedes, and God subscribed to it." - Dignities and Duties of the Priest

The Romans didn't cease any sacrifices, just elaborate Jewish Barbeques. It was Jesus' death which became the final sacrifice for all time, was it not?
What does "Antichrist" mean? The Greek "Anti-Christos":

• "Anti" - means, "in place of, instead of, in behalf of, for"
• "Christos" - of course, "Christ"

So, what have we learned? "Antichrist" is that which claims to "take the place of Christ". Now, although Caesars claimed to be "god", which of them claimed to "take the place of Christ"? Not a one. If anything, they fancied themselves SUPERIOR to Christ. Now, does the Papacy claim to take the place of Christ? Since it's inception in 538 A.D. Here's one of many quotes that evidence this:

"The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ, Himself, hidden under the veil of flesh." - Catholic National, 1895

According to history and archaeology, 457 B.C. begins the starting point of the 490, with the completion of the work marking the end of the first 49 and the beginning of the 434, which ends in 27 A.D. in the River Jordan, at which time the final 70th Week begins. It that similar to what you believe?

Great article

similar but not exact

Got to go. If y'all want to see more - go to mywebsite.us - click on 'Study' (at left) - look at the pages you find there.

@Phoneman-777:

Go look at the 'Time Line' page.

But there is also mention that the city of Jerusalem would be destroyed and also the sanctuary. Did not the Romans do this?

The chief priests chose the anti-christ as their king.

John 19:14-15
“Here is your king [Jesus],” Pilate said to the Jews.
But they shouted, “Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!”
“Shall I crucify your king?” Pilate asked.
“We have no king but Caesar,” the chief priests answered.

Are you saying the Pope is the anti-christ?

If the prophecy says the rebuilding would take 49 years, I'm unclear as to why you claim that period took 52 years.

Counting 62 Weeks from the end of the 7 Weeks brings us to 27 A.D. which is which is the year of Jesus' "anointing" in the Jordan as "Messiah the Prince", according to Luke 3:21, Luke 3:1, and the Syro-Macedonian calendar which everyone, and surely Luke as well, was using in that region and time.

He was crucified in 31 A.D. and the prophecy ended 3 1/2 years later with Paul taking the Gospel to the Gentiles.

Yes, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D. which did deprive the Jews of their ability to sacrifice according to the Law...that's got nothing to do with the 70 Weeks prophecy which details Christ's mission, not Jewish cacophony of confusion. It was Christ's death that rendered all sacrifices thereafter worthless. Jesus was crucified in the middle of the 70th Week "and in the midst of the week He shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease."
As I stated earlier, "ANTI-CHRIST" MEANS "TAKE THE PLACE OF CHRIST". You ever heard of "antibiotic" or "antipasta"? What about "antitype"?

An antibiotic is a weakened form of a healthy bug that a doctor gives you IN PLACE OF the healthy bug, so that your body can develop immunity to the healthy bug without you getting sick.

Antipasta is served INSTEAD OF pasta.

In the Bible, the Antitype is that which TAKES THE PLACE OF of the Type.

ANTICHRIST IS THAT WHICH TAKES THE PLACE OF CHRIST. THE CAESARS DID NO SUCH THING NOR CLAIMED TO DO THAT...THE PAPACY HAS CLAIMED TO BE THE "ANTICHRIST" SINCE THE 6TH CENTURY A.D.

Another two individuals that had a large influence in 19th Century futurism was Manuel De Lacunza who in 1812 published a book in
Spanish titled The coming of the Messiah in glory and majesty. The book was published under the pen name of Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra
He was also a Jesuit and admirer of Ribera's Revelation Commentary. I leave it to others to explain why he didnt use his own name!.

His book was translated into English by Edward Irving who was is credited as being the founder of the Pentecostal Movement.
A copy of his two volume translation can be bought on Amazon

Because he anticipated this nonsense about Jesuits creating Futurism.

It is interesting that people would rather resort to talking about past writers rather than focusing on the Scriptures themselves. The very fact that the Second Coming of Christ has not occurred should be sufficient to establish the validity of Futurism.

BTW those writers you quoted made some good observations based on Scripture.

. . . gives you an impossible situation - which I explain on the web page.

The 62 weeks (v26) runs from the middle of the 8th week until the middle of the 70th week.