Skip to comments.Fall into the 'Gap' ... Dispensational style
Posted on 12/03/2011 2:52:32 PM PST by Iggles Phan
Last week we explored Dispensationalism's reversal of Daniel's 70th Week from Jesus Christ to the Devil. I think many on this chat page were astonished by this exposition.
Today, we will explore how Dispensationalism took this lie and formed another: the Parenthesis Gap Theory.
This 'gap' was 'unknown and unforeseen' to Christianity until Darby and Scofield 'uncovered' it in the 19th century. But is it really there? Let's read carefully:
24: Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. 25: Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. 26: 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.
| ..... 69 Weeks (Messiah) ..... | 70th Week (Messiah) |
Modernist Dispensational Timeline
| ..... 69 Weeks (Messiah) ..... | /\/\/\ parenthetical 'running gap' /\/\/\ | 70th Week (Antichrist) |
Christian ... Which timeline looks literal, and which timeline looks contrived?
Both views agree that the Seventy Weeks refers to 70 weeks-of-years or 490 years (70 weeks x 7 years-of-weeks = 490 years). However, those who say that the Bible should be taken in its 'literal' meaning (i.e. dispensationalists) are the very ones who insist that there are now already nearly 2,000 years between the 69th and 70th weeks.
If the grammar of Daniel 9: 24 means what it says, and says what it means, then the 70th Week must immediately follow the 69th. While the subject of this verse (seventy weeks) is plural, the verb translated as determined is SINGULAR. This means that the 70 Weeks must be considered COLLECTIVELY as in an uninterrupted period of time. Daniel 9: 24 literally says that Seventy Weeks are determined. It does not say, 70 + 'gap' + 1 are determined. Therefore, the correct literal timeline for this passage is the Historic view which is continuous. The Modernist (dispensational) timeline is fragmented and not literal.
It is also interesting to take notice of Darbys personal reinterpretation of this verse. In the Darby Bible (1890) he rewrote this Scripture, Seventy weeks are apportioned out upon thy people . Here he took the literal meaning of determined in its natural singular form, and imposed his non-literal apportioned out to denote plural separation. ... What kind of conceit is this?
Christian Of what use would Daniels prophecy of 490 years be to the faithful waiting in expectation, if it were later construed to mean a delay of 2,400+ years and running elastically ad infinitum? It would be of no useful prophetic value whatsoever! Worse yet, it would be a false prophecy because it says that God really cant tell time correctly.
I often find it ironic that Dispensational adherents, who criticize their secular humanist counterparts for being relativists, are they themselves the ones who practice the ultimate form of relativism by employing this type of sliding time scale. This is a cunning Scriptural manipulation.
Falling into the 'Gap'
So, no such gap is mentioned anywhere in Daniel 9, or anywhere else in the Bible for that matter. Therefore, when Scofield imposes the parenthesis gap between the 69th and 70th week and says that it is a period 'not fixed nor foreseen or foretold by the prophets', he does great violence to the word of God. This unscriptural gap doctrine imputes Antichrist, instead of Jesus Christ, into the center of the 70h Week. This is not merely a difference in doctrine or interpretation, as some would argue, because THE CROSS OF CHRIST IS INVOLVED! Dispensational doctrine excludes the Cross of Christ from Daniel's 70 Weeks by 'stopping the prophecy clock' at the foot of the Cross, and inserting this parenthesis 'gap'.
Christian Is this skipping-over-Calvary trick not a subtle denial, in essence and in fact, that Jesus is the Messiah and the living God by saying that the 70th Week (which was the time of Christ's ministry, death and resurrection) is still yet future?
Christian ... Why is Christ not the fulfillment of this 70th Week, when He is the entire focus of the previous 69 Weeks? Why the sudden reversal? This is to say that Christ never came in fulfillment of prophecy, and shed His atoning Blood for the sins of the world!
Do not take this point lightly.
Put on your flame proof armor because it is comin’ in.
What’s the point? That the 70 weeks are gone? Now what? Thousand year reign? But, wouldn’t that be over, as well? So, now why are we still here and the purpose of life if not awaiting Christ’s return?
The author of this piece has about the worst systematic hermeneutical skills of anyone I’ve ever read.
“Whats the point? That the 70 weeks are gone? Now what? Thousand year reign?”
Answer: The New Testament of the New Covenant. We are to grow the Kingdom of God by the preaching of the Gospel.
“So, now why are we still here and the purpose of life if not awaiting Christs return?”
Answer: The purpose is as Saint Paul said, ‘to be more than conquerers’. We are to evangelize the entire world (i.e. conquer with His Gospel) until Christ’s return.
The scripture nowhere, ever, says that Christ's return is dependent on Christians "bringing in the kingdom."
Answer: The purpose is as Saint Paul said, to be more than conquerers. We are to evangelize the entire world (i.e. conquer with His Gospel) until Christs return.
Except that that phrase is taken completely out of context. In fact, when Paul said Christians are "more than conquerors," he was talking about the personal victory that each Christian has over persecution, death, etc, through the salvific power of Christ. This verse has absolutely nothing to do with "conquering the world for Christ." Indeed, the Scripture says that the only conquering taking place is at the point when Christ returns, and He does it Himself.
“The scripture nowhere, ever, says that Christ’s return is dependent on Christians “bringing in the kingdom.””
Where did I ever say this was a dependency?
Are you deliberately trying to put words into my mouth, or are you reading too much in to my reply?
This is a joke, right? I mean, it’s gotta be a joke because it certainly isn’t truth.
So, you’re an amillenialist.
“bringing in the kingdom”
Christians can’t “bring in” something that is here already.
Jesus is reigning over His Kingdom this very momment.
hopefully everyone reading this has been delivered from the dominion of darkness and been transferred to THE KINGDOM OF HIS BELOVED SON.
see Colossians 1:11-14.
My FRiends...Daniel was written by Jews for Jews. I suggest you learn the Jewish view if you want the proper exegesis of Daniel.
My FRiends, Daniel was written by Israel for Israel. I suggest you learn who Israel is if you want the proper exegesis of Daniel.
Israel = heirs to the promise made to Abraham.
and if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise.
“Jesus is reigning over His Kingdom this very momment.”
And it is growing every day with every new believer. Thanks.
“and if you are Christs, then you are Abrahams offspring, heirs according to the promise.”
I couldn’t agree more. Thanks.
you are a great addition to FR.
please ignore all these “nooobie” comments from the previous thread.
dispensationalism is just another 19th century false teaching, up there with SDA, JW’S, Mormons, Christian Science, etc.
“dispensationalism is just another 19th century false teaching, up there with SDA, JWS, Mormons, Christian Science, etc.”
It is interesting to note also that these 19th century teachings (SDA, JWS, Mormons, Christian Science, etc.) are ALL Dispensationalist in some form or another.
You see, when Darby opened the door in subverting the New Testament by instituting ‘Dispensations’ that are not even mentioned in the Bible, a whole cottage industry of ‘New-Found’ interpretations soon followed.
These cults are all based on carnalism, not the Gospel of Grace.
Thank you very much indeed for your encouragement too!
For a long time I didn’t really “get” the problems with dispensationalism. I thought dispensationalism led people to unhealthy obsessions about end-times events and was wrong but mostly harmless. But after reading more about it and about historical Christianity, I see the dangers of dispensationalism. It is a type of Gnosticism, with its view that the Bible is a book of secret codes that only a “special” person can decode. It uses numerology, which is a backdoor to occultism. It teaches that Christ is not sufficient, because sacrifices will be done again in the millennial temple to atone for sins. This insufficient Christ is not the Christ of the Bible.
I believe it teaches that Israel will rebuild the temple and begin sacrificing, not that Christ is insufficient or those sacrifices are in any way efficacious.
“But after reading more about it and about historical Christianity, I see the dangers of dispensationalism.”
Wilhelm, good observations.
I am trying to inform sincere people of some of these horrible teachings. Any teaching that reverses Christ at the Cross for a ‘future Antichrist’ is dangerous and should be immediately suspect. Any teaching that excludes Christ at the Cross from the 70 Weeks has denied Him and His atonement.
You are correct. Thanks.
Galations 3 is a perfect example of Paul A) being ignorant of Jewish Law or B) Lost his mind.
He totally mischaracterizes Abraham in verse 6, totally inventing a new meaning of "And Abraham believed" and a hermeutical travesty concerning the meaning of "seed" and "cursed" .
Paul then dreams up the following lie.
23 But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. 24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
This is utter nonsense. "Kept under the law...being shut up to faith? Crazy...In order to serve G-d as he has asked us, we must believe and faith in the first place! For people to observe the law they are by definition are "of faith".
There is not one verse in all of Tanach (OT) that says the law will be a tutor to some new faith in a messiah. NOT ONE. On the contrary when the messianic era in discussed in the Tanach, it speaks of the Jewish people returning to the law, statutes and commands forever! And the gentiles will comes to learn of G-d and the law. (Isaiah 2:2, Jer 16:19-21)
Therefore Pauls contention that gentiles become heirs to the promise of Abraham through Jesus could not be more wrong!
“I believe it teaches that Israel will rebuild the temple and begin sacrificing ...”
Where in the Bible does it say anything about a ‘re-built’ temple forward of the one that was to be built in Nehemiah and Ezra’s day (5th century BC)?
“Therefore Pauls contention that gentiles become heirs to the promise of Abraham through Jesus could not be more wrong!”
Although I wholey disagree with him, at least this Dispensationalist is honest about his direct denial of the Scriptures.
All other Dispensationalists ought to take immediate heed of his statement here, because this is where their doctrine will ultimately lead them.
The church age was inserted before the 70th week began and when the church age ends with the Pre-trib rapture, the Trib. will begin which is the last week of Daniel's 70 'weeks'
Matches exactly with scripture and the facts of history.
“The 70th week of Daniel deals with the time of Jacobs trouble (Jer.30:7), which is the Tribulation period of the anti-Christ.”
Where in Jer 30: 7 does it say that Jacob’s Trouble is the 70th Week? Look here:
Jer 30:7 - Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob’s trouble; but he shall be saved out of it.
Answer: Nowhere. You made this up.
Where in the Bible does it say any of this?
Answer: Nowhere. Again you made all of this up out of whole cloth.
“Matches exactly with scripture and the facts of history.”
Oh really? Well you are first going to have to come up with some Sciptures and history to convice anyone of that.
2 Thessalonians 2:34 (NKJV) 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
“Christian ... Why is Christ not the fulfillment of this 70th Week, when He is the entire focus of the previous 69 Weeks? Why the sudden reversal? “
Matthew 24:15 - Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (whoever reads, let him understand),
When does Daniel speak of the abomination of desolation? In verse 9:27, the verse about the 70th week. What did Jesus say would happen then? Great tribulation (Matthew 24:21) and false christs and prophets (24:23-24).
That’s why the sudden reversal - Jesus said he’s not the focus ofthe 70th week. He comes after that that time of tribulation (24:29-31)
This quote is one of the least educated statements ever typed at FR.
You guys just don't want to compare scripure with scripture.
Question: Where in the Bible does it say any of this? Answer: Nowhere. Again you made all of this up out of whole cloth.
Actually that is what the Bible teaches by simply comparing scripture with scripture and believing what the scripture says and not trying to make everything you don't understand symbolic.
Again, I do not see any reference to a ‘re-built’ temple in the verse that you provided.
I think you are reading too much into this.
Your timing of the 70th Week in reference to the overspreading of abominations is actually in verse 27b.
To be accurate, nowhere in this 27b passage is the overspreading of abominations confined within the 70 Weeks. Read it again - please.
Only verse 27a (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,) is confined to the 70th Week.
Therefore, the only constraint on 27b (abomination of desolations) is that it occurs sometime after the 69th Week.
If the overspreading of abominations happened during the time of the Roman siege of Jerusalem (circa 67-70 A.D.), then indeed it happened sometime after the 69th Week, meeting the Scriptural requirement. No other explanation is needed.
No gimmicks like gaps, and reversals, and carnal kingdom, and revived empires, and all of the other clever Dispensational tricks are needed to ‘make the scheme work’.
The second point.
Nowhere in Daniel 9 does it talk about a seven year ‘tribulation’.
Again, I think you are reading your personal interpretation into this verse. Read it carefully and slowly.
“[The church age was inserted before the 70th week began and when the church age ends with the Pre-trib rapture, the Trib. will begin which is the last week of Daniels 70 weeks]”
OK. Then for the second time, please show me a verse in the Scriptures that says that a Temporary Church Age will be ‘inserted’.
Again, you cannot find this and hence it is becoming obvious that you have made this up as your personal interpretation.
“No one made anything up, the time of Jacobs trouble is the tribulation period.
You guys just don’t want to compare scripure with scripture.”
I wrote out the verse that you quoted (Jer 30: 7) and proved that your point was wrong. Nowhere in this verse does it say that Jacobs Trouble is the 70th Week like you had previously proclaimed.
Please do yourself a favor and read it correctly before making wild associations that induce violence to God’s Word.
Daniel's 70th week is that period, when the Anti-Christ comes into power and in the second half of the week, sits in the Temple, saying that he is God.
This lines up with the events in Rev. 13.
None of this has happened yet, but will when the Church Age ends and the final week (the time of Jacob's trouble) begins.
“The time of Jacob’s trouble is the time that Christ is referring to in Matthew 24, the Tribulation. Daniel’s 70th week is that period, when the Anti-Christ comes into power and in the second half of the week, sits in the Temple, saying that he is God.
This lines up with the events in Rev. 13.”
That’s what you say. But as we proved before the text of Jer 30, Matthew 24, and Rev 13 make no such associations.
There is no 7 year ‘tribulation’ anywhere in Revelation. In fact, there is no 7 year ‘anything’ in Revelation.
So, all of these associations are tricks that you employ to justify your unscriptural ‘gap’ theory.
“None of this has happened yet, but will when the Church Age ends and the final week (the time of Jacob’s trouble) begins.”
a) Daniel’s 70th Week was complete in Christ. The entire purpose of the 70 Weeks was to finish transgressions. Antichrist can do that?
b) Nowhere in the Bible is there a so-called temporary ‘Church Age’. That is the trick that Scofield used to put the ‘gap’ in place. To him, it was never seen by any prophet, and as Jesus was hanging on the Cross, it faked Him out, so He had to make this ‘gap’ up to fill 2,000 years now. What artificial bunk!
c) Jesus only told us about two dispensations, this age, and the age to come. We know these as the Old Covenant of the Old Testament, and the New Covenant of the New Testament. Dispensationalists invented five, seven, or eight dispensations which were never mentioned in the Bible. These dispensational ‘ages’ are unscriptural.
d) Moreover, the Church is not a ‘temporary age’ as dispensationalists like to say. Saint Paul clearly showed us that it is an Eternal Age in Ephesians 3:21:
“Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.”
You have clearly erred by tampering with God’s word and the Cross of Christ.
I pray that you repent of your Dispensational sin.
Scofield note on Daniel 9:24
In the seven weeks == 49 years, Jerusalem was to be rebuilt in "troublous times." This was fulfilled, as Ezra and Nehemiah record. Sixty-two weeks == 434 years, thereafter Messiah was to come (Da 9:25).
This was fulfilled in the birth and manifestation of Christ. Da 9:26 26 is obviously an indeterminate period.
The date of the crucifixion is not fixed. It is only said to be "after" the threescore and two weeks. It is the first event in Da 9:26. The second event is the destruction of the city, fulfilled A.D. 70.
Then, "unto the end," a period not fixed, but which has already lasted nearly 2000 years. To Daniel was revealed only that wars and desolations should continue (cf. Mt 24:6-14.)
The N.T. reveals, that which was hidden from the O.T. prophets Mt 13:11-17; Eph 3:1-10 that during this period should be accomplished the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven Mt 13:1-50 and the out-calling of the Church Mt 16:18; Ro 11:25.
When the Church- age will end, and the seventieth week begin, is nowhere revealed. Its duration can be but seven years. To make it more violates the principle of interpretation already confirmed by fulfilment. Da 9:27 deals with the last week.
The "he" of Da 9:27 is the "prince that shall come" of Da 9:26, whose people (Rome) destroyed the temple, A.D. 70. He is the same with the "little horn" of chapter 7. He will covenant with the Jews to restore their temple sacrifices for one week (seven years), but in the middle of that time he will break the covenant and fulfil Da 12:11; 2Th 2:3-4. Between the sixty-ninth week, after which Messiah was cut off, and the seventieth week, within which the "little horn" of Da 7. will run his awful course, intervenes this entire Church-age.
Da 9:27 deals with the last three and a half years of the seven, which are identical with the "great tribulation." Mt 24:15-28 "time of trouble" Da 12:1 hour of temptation" Re 3:10. (see "Tribulation," Ps 2:5; Re 7:14). Cmt. on Ps 2:5. Cmt. on Ex 7:14.
“No, the church isn’t a eternal age, Eph.3:21 is speaking of the church (using a metophor) being a temple (1Co.6:19)not the age, which will end with the pre-trib rapture”
Ephesians 3 says nothing of the kind about a temple.
You have deliberately misrepresented God’s word here.
“Scofield note on Daniel 9:24
This proves the entire point of my article.
Dispensationalists place more authority in the corrupt writings of Scofield than they do on the plain text of God.
I pray that you will repent of your Dispensational sin.
Observation: cheeky noob thinks you’re a dispensationalist, lol.
Check the scriptures and you will see that is so.
I read the wrong scripture, Eph.2:21 states the church is a temple.
Eph.3:21 simply says that the church will have glory throughout the ages.
So save your phony pious yapping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.