Posted on 10/05/2009 12:40:05 PM PDT by topcat54
Are The Seventy Weeks of Daniel Consecutive?
The idea which we have discussed in our last chapter, namely that Daniel 9:27 refers not to Christ but to antichrist is usually coupled with, another, also of a very radical sort, namely, that the 70th week of Gabriel's prophecy does not come where we would naturally expect to find it, that is, immediately after the 69th week, but that it is detached from the other 69, is separated from them by many centuries, is yet in the future, and will be found at the very end of this present age. The extent to which these ideas have found acceptance in our day makes it a matter of importance to inquire very carefully into the reasons that have been given in support thereof.
We do not know just when or how these ideas sprang up. That is not, of course, a reason for rejecting them; for God is pleased from time to time to give new light from His Word. But it is a reason for subjecting them to a rigid scrutiny. This we have sought to do, and the result is we have come to the conclusion that, not only are they destitute of support in the Word of God, but they are directly contrary thereto. This we shall endeavor to make clear.
(Excerpt) Read more at theologue.org ...
The Lord Jesus The Christ is the author and finisher of my faith.
However, I’m not a Calvinist.
I thought you’d have known that.
Non-Calvinists don’t save themselves either :~)
I’ve never said I saved myself.
Which part of
JESUS THE CHRIST IS THE AUTHOR AND FINISHER OF MY FAITH
is unclear?
You don’t even have to go that far.
Go back to John Nelson Darby writings of about 120-150 years ago.
He was clearly expecting a future reestablishment of Israel as a nation, IN UNBELIEF, by the way, since that fits the Scripture.
What happened then in 1948? Israel of course.
Preterism was dealt a lethal blow, since most Christians then realized that God was working mightily.
So why is preterism so popular now?
Because the existence of Israel has LOST ITS NOVELTY.
A preterist preacher now has an audience that has no past history perspective............
EXCELLENT POINTS, IMHO.
Thanks.
I do not have to deny anything, except the flawed interpretation of the dispensational system.
I'm honored to have a preeminent defender of a fundamentally non-Reformed system comment here.
Which makes it all the more necessary for to give BibChr's words a second look.
26 After the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. 27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him."
Are you saying that the Messiah sets up an abomination that causes desolation? It's the same "he" in verse 27. The "Annointed One" is "cut off" way back in verse 26.
Ah yes. Stupid Reason #3.
“But it is a reason for subjecting them to a rigid scrutiny. This we have sought to do, and the result is we have come to the conclusion that, not only are they destitute of support in the Word of God, but they are directly contrary thereto. This we shall endeavor to make clear.”
“For we are bound to reject any and every interpretation which is not supported by the Scriptures.”
“The interpretation we are discussing has no basis whatever in the Scriptures. It is entirely a work of the imagination, resting upon nothing but unprovable assumptions”
The writer then sets out his rule governing his interpretation of the importance of sequential time periods.
“Where periods of time are given beforehand in the prophecies of the Bible they always mean that the time-units composing the period named are continuous. This must be so, else the prediction would serve only to deceive those who believed it. We have no other way of describing and limiting a period of time than by stating the number of time-units (hours, days, months, or years) contained therein. It is therefore a necessary law of language that the time- units be understood as being connected together without a break”.
However during the course of his polemic he recognizes he has a major problem that could destroy his whole argument so he separates the destruction of Jerusalem:
“The words "for the overspreading of abominations" are very obscure, and many suggestions as to their meaning have been offered. We shall not discuss these, for the reason that the Septuagint translation gives a clear rendering, and our Lord's adoption of it puts the authoritative stamp of His approval upon it. According to that version "the abomination of desolation" was to be upon (or to come against) the temple, that is, for its destruction. In other words there was to come an agency or force (which God terms an "abomination", which was to make the place a "desolation."
“The Lord Jesus Christ used the same expression when, in warning His disciples of the approaching destruction of Jerusalem by the armies of Titus, He said: "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place (whoso readeth, let him understand), then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountain, " etc,”
from the crucifixion by two pages in his manuscript hoping, I suppose, the reader has a short term memory problem or is not really focused after wading through the previous nonsense:
“At this point in our exposition it appears desirable to notice a question which has arisen in the minds of some in regard to the fraction of the seventieth week remaining after the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ, whereby the predictions of verse 24 (of Daniel 9), as well as those of the first half of verse 27, were fulfilled. To some it seems that our exposition leaves three and a half years not accounted for if, however, we give attention to the terms of the prophecy we will clearly see that it affords no warrant for such a question. Those who ask it have evidently failed to take into consideration the fact that, in this prophecy, the unit of the time measure is a heptad, not a year. If we think of the Seventieth "Week" as a period of seven years, then it would indeed appear as if there were three years and over which were not accounted for by the exposition. But if, on the other hand, we take the prophecy as it is given, that is to say, in heptads, not years, then it will be clearly seen that all the seventy heptads are accounted for. For our exposition simply follows the terms of the prophecy, which are quite plain and which locate certain events "in the midst of" the last heptad, but do not locate any events at the end thereof. If, therefore, any part of the determined period is unaccounted for, it is the prophecy itself, and not this writer's exposition thereof, that is chargeable. But the fact is that the prophecy accounts first for sixty-nine heptads (which reached "unto the Messiah") and then it accounts specifically for the one remaining heptad, and for the whole of it, by telling what was to happen in the midst thereof. Thus the prophecy (and the exposition which simply follows it) leaves no part of tile prophetic period unaccounted for.”
Let’s see now, if Messiah is cut off in the middle of the 70th “heptad” (30 A.D.) and Jerusalem is destroyed sometime during the 70th “heptad” (70 A.D.) that would mean that this writer’s “heptad” has an unaccounted for gap or it means anything he wants it to mean or its Daniel’s fault.
It is customary and proper to give credit to your quotations, unless they are your own work of course, which is probably not the case here, since I doubt you are that old.
Never-mind I see that it is part of the original text. My bad.
However, I’m not a Calvinist.
So somewhere in that salvation equation you are inserting your self?
Perhaps The Lord Jesus The Christ is the author and finisher of my faith but I was smart enough to tag along?
I understand your argument.
There are mysteries involved.
I don’t buy your argument.
Scripture is on both sides of the issue.
Calvinists only cling to one side of such sets of Scriptures. I don’t buy that.
I insist on the whole counsel of God in Scripture.
Nice try.
I hope you and family are well.
Is there any sense where you are in any of the Christian circles you brush up against . . . or . . . co-worker circles . . . of looming anythings of a dramatic nature?
There MUST be . . . amongst your network there . . . but knowing who and what they know or sense might be tricky to ferret out without delicate . . . communications.
LOL.
GOOD POINTS.
It is good to see you are still arounf my FRiend.
I am safe and secure in Germany. There does seem to be a spiritual fog among the locals that matches the one outside my window.
No comments about the Jihadi public assertions that they are going to attack Germany on a Sunday in Oct???
Things are quiet where we are.
Let’s see now, if Messiah is cut off in the middle of the 70th “heptad” (30 A.D.) and Jerusalem is destroyed sometime during the 70th “heptad” (70 A.D.)
In adddition to making that "heptad" meaningless, it also says that he's off the mark with his "continuous time" theory.
” it also says that he’s off the mark with his “continuous time” theory”
“Parenthesis” can really mess up your tight eschatology almost as bad as “they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”
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.