2 Thess. 2:11

[CadyandZoe]

No Christ comes after 69 weeks.

Doesn't 70 come after 69? Wasn't the messiah cut off in the middle of the 70th week?

[Jesuslovesus]

Doesn't 70 come after 69?

Doesn't 2 come after 1? If i say he was killed after 1 would you assume the person was murdered at 2:30(i mean it is after 1 right)?

Wasn't the messiah cut off in the middle of the 70th week?

I thought he was cut off after the 69th week.

Daniel 9:25

Now 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 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off,

7+62 = 69

69x7=483.(after year 483 Messiah will be cut off)

Then Messiah shall come and be Cut off.

Your trying to claim Messiah was Cut off after 70 weeks but this is not stated in the passage.

7x70= 490(after year 490 messiah will be cut off)

But i didn't want to get into this Debate at all. My only point was that this Post-trib fallacy (The last trumpet is the 7th) only supports post-trib if you believe all the time periods mentioned in Rev 11-13 coincide.

[CadyandZoe]

Doesn't 2 come after 1? If i say he was killed after 1 would you assume the person was murdered at 2:30(i mean it is after 1 right)?

I wouldn't assume anything. Which is the point.

I thought he was cut off in the middle of the 69th week.

Daniel 9:25

Now 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 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off,

No, he was cut off after the threescore and two weeks. Not during the threescore and two weeks.

Your trying to claim Messiah was Cut off after 70 weeks but this is not stated in the passage.

No, as I said, the messiah was cut off in the middle of week 70.

But i didn't want to get into this Debate at all. My only point was that this Post-trib fallacy (The last trumpet is the 7th) only supports post-trib if you believe all the time periods mentioned in Rev 11-13 coincide.

Obviously Jesus returns after the Tribulation period. He says so explicitly.

[Jesuslovesus]

I wouldn't assume anything. Which is the point.

Dont assume anything.

I didn't know what was the point you were making..

No, he was cut off after the threescore and two weeks. Not during the threescore and two weeks.
No, as I said, the messiah was cut off in the middle of week 70.

Correct after 69 weeks(483 years) not after 70 weeks(490 years) and not during week 70 (486.5 years) not during 69 weeks (480.5).

Obviously Jesus returns after the Tribulation period. He says so explicitly.

Not sure why we are stating obvious things or what it has to do with my statement... but i'll take a turn *When the Sun is up we call this period Day* the bible says so explicitly.

[randyk]

No Christ comes after 69 weeks.
He doesn't come after 70 weeks.

I have *never* said Christ comes *after 70 Weeks!* I have *always* said that Christ comes *in the 70th Week.* What I mean by this is not that Jesus is actually *born* during the 70th Week, but that his *earthly ministry* is what initiates the 70th Week, and lasts for *half of the 70th Week.* What is it about this that keeps us from understanding one another? Are we there now?

I came after 12 O'clock

Not after 1 O'clock

Once more this prophesy was concerning the Jewish people and Their City. The angel didn't claim 70 weeks are declared upon the Messiah.

Once again, the Messiah is indeed included in this prophecy. The prophecy includes both! It includes prophecy concerning the Jewish People and Jerusalem. And it concerns the Messiah. It is not one to the exclusion of the other. Both are included.

Correct

We disagree but at least you admit there are other possiblities for vs 27.

Of course. Many of my views are subject to correction. They are not "set in stone." There are a lot smarter people than me out there--a lot more educated people than me. My purpose is to be as *honest* as possible, and to do due diligence, viewing many opinions--not just a few.

Yes clearly we have different views on this- Lets just leave it there.

Yes, interpreting Dan 9.26-27 is very difficult. My sole point was that the 70th Week has long been fulfilled in the *time* of Christ. The math is easy. From Artaxerxes' Decree, counting 490 (or less) years, we come to the time of Christ. This means that the 70th Week *cannot* be the Reign of Antichrist. I know that many want the "Abomination of Desolation," mentioned in vs. 27, to be the Antichrist. I know many want the "Abomination of Desolation," mentioned in the Olivet Discourse, to be the Antichrist. But I believe this is false. The AoD had to have been the 66-70 AD destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. That is exactly what Daniel describes in vs 26, the "destruction of the city and the sanctuary." And that is exactly what Jesus described, with "every stone being removed from the temple."

This is an assumption.

Everything is an "assumption." But there are assumptions based on the explicit wording, and assumptions disregarding or adding to the wording. It is entirely logical to assume that the Reign of Antichrist refers only to a *single* period of 3.5 years because that is explicitly denoted in Dan 7! To say Antichrist reigns for 3.5 years is *not* to say that he reigns for *7 years!* To assume it is 7 when it says 3.5 is to *add to* the wording.

Yes which is why you are post-trib.
We agree on this a 7 year tribulation is not mentioned in the book of Rev.

Thank you!

Pretty sure i didn't add any words..
Thats exactly what it does.
This logic is not sound- Sounds like your just running your mouth making accusations.
Please show me what words am i adding to the text? I see two periods of time mentioned and i don't assume the happen simulations (not sure how this is an addition to the text) please explain...
Pretty sure i didn't add any words to the text.
But if you believe i wrote a personal bible and added the word 7 year tribulation to the text of my bible (specifically in the book of Rev) you would be incorrect.
So please stop with the accusations i'm telling you now i did not rewrite the book of Rev and add the words 7 year tribulation to any part

This is what *Scripture* says--not just me. The Scripture says don't add to the Revelation. That's what you're doing when you say that it teaches a 7 year tribulation. It does not add two periods of 3.5 years together. It does not refer to a 7 year tribulation. And yet you *add* to the Revelation by changing a 3.5 year reign of Antichrist to a 7 year period of Tribulation. That is *adding to the text.* And Scripture prohibits that.

Say anything you want, but don't add words to the text. There is nothing in there about a 7 year Tribulation Period!

[Trivalee]

We are then having a problem with semantics--with defining the word "judgment" and how it is used biblically. I personally believe biblical "judgments" do not have all of the restrictions you seem to impose upon them. It's a rather general word, applying in a variety of situations, and is restricted only by the specific context.

If, for example, a judgment takes place in the 3.5 years "Tribulation" (as you define it), it may not be an apocalyptic judgment, but it is certainly a *judgment.* It may not be Armageddon and the end of the world, but it is certainly an act of divine judgment upon the world.

I do define, therefore, every act of divine punishment for sin as an act of "judgment." And I do not reserve the word "judgment" only for the *punishment of Antichrist* or for the day Armageddon takes place. Nor do I define "judgment" only in the sense of the Great White Throne Judgment. For me, "judgment" takes on its own form as determined by the specific context in which it is used.

"Judgments" for me take place all through the age. God is involved in punishing sin constantly, in all men everywhere. It can take the form of disciplining His children, or God may be putting someone to death, in war, by accident, or by any method He chooses. Everything is in God's hands, and as such, everything is a *divine judgment.*

But we associated judgment not with "discretion," but with the discretion aimed at punishing sin. And so, "judgment" for me takes place all through history, and including the Tribulation period during Antichrist's Reign. The judgment to occur at Armageddon and at the GWT judgment are simply judgments defined by their own contexts. They are a specific *kind* of judgment.

I accept that God's actions to reprove sin is a judgment, however, for the purpose of end time discussion I would like to use 'judgment' sparingly and exclusively for when Christ returns. I accept your use of the word wherever you see fit

Yes, and I explained why this is so. The OT era specifically limited the scope to the Jewish People and to the Israeli Nation. Was Jesus "limiting his scope" when he said that Gentiles need to beg, like dogs, for bread? No, he began with Israel, and limited his scope to them, with the specific purpose of setting the stage for a future expansion. Without the initial limitation there could not have been a future expansion! So this period of time, during which Jesus gave his Olivet Discourse, was indeed limited to the Jewish experience, in my opinion. This is what the Jews specifically would go through in the NT period. But it included both Christians and nonChristians among the Jewish People.

The Olivet Discourse started specifically with oncoming events that will befall the Jews and quickly broadened to events that will have a worldwide implication. As I pointed out earlier, you can't possibly limit Matt 24:8-13 exclusively to the Jewish experience. So in my view, Jesus Christ' warnings at the Olivet Discourse can best be described as being on the cusp of the two covenants.

I don't know why you emphasize it? It is simply not true! This was the OT era--an era that God had specifically commanded be oriented towards the Jews exclusively!

Of course you would be right in saying that the period of time referred to--the NT era--does not exclude Christians in other countries. But the point is that this Discourse specifically is oriented to the Jewish experience during this time--not other Christians that would later learn from it. What Jewish Christians would go through would be similar to what later Gentile Christians would go through in their own national experiences.

I think you are mistaking those (Jews) who heard Jesus Christ directly with those who Jesus actually had in mind and whose His words would affect in generations to come. For example, in the Gospels, Jesus addressed mostly Jews, but his messages continue to impact the lives of the church far beyond those who heard it first hand.

I was referring to the fact *you* identified the GT as an *endtime event.* I was not saying that's my position--obviously not! I see the GT as an age-long event, and not strictly as a 3.5 year endtime event. You said there is no such thing as an "endtime Jewish Tribulation." Again, I'm not arguing that there is! It is rather an age-long Jewish Tribulation.

But as to how the "Great" part of the "Great Tribulation" is to be Scripturally defined is a legitimate object of research. I don't know how you conclude that "Great" cannot be defined as I define it? I define it as an era of Hebrew suffering, taking place over a long period of time. There have been several of them, and often they are named. There is the "Egyptian Captivity," extending 400 years. There is the Babylonian Captivity, lasting 70 years. There is the intertestamental period, including the desolation of the temple by Antiochus 4 and the coming of Messiah, lasting 490 years.

And so, for me, a "greater" Tribulation period would be represented by Jewish suffering for a longer period of time, which counting from the 70 AD disaster would represent approx. 2000 years in duration! This is "greater" as a tribulation not just in time duration, but also in effect. The Jews were almost exterminated by the Persians during Esther's reign. But in reality, the extermination did not happen.

However, Masada was real, and the dispersion of the Jews by the Romans long-lasting. The Jewish Diaspora still continues to this day! Israel is not fully recovered, in a biblical sense! Israel must not only have a nation in the land of Israel, but the nation must be spiritually restored at the coming of Messiah!

And the exterminations done in Russian pogroms, and in Hitler's Germany, really were executed. 7 million Jews died, as you know. And Antichrist may even do worse--I don't know.

The bottom line is, no matter how you define "great" in the "Great Tribulation," my definition of it fits an age-long homeless wandering of the Jews in the NT period. Not only that, but that's what Luke 21 explicitly says! And I choose to believe that definition of the word "great!"

We are both repeating what have already been said before, wouldn't you agree? Where my understanding differs from yours is that while you make it a protracted exclusive Jewish Tribulation, I hold that the GT is separated from what has transpired over the ages. It is an exclusive end-time catastrophe that will happen during the 3.5 years reign of the AC. Furthermore, it is incorrect to call it a Jewish Tribulation, it is rather a GT against the Saints (elect) Jew and Gentile, whom Jesus will cause to end it so lives.

It is also described as "Great" because it will be unprecedented and unsurpassed.

[Jesuslovesus]

I have *never* said Christ comes *after 70 Weeks!* I have *always* said that Christ comes *in the 70th Week.* What I mean by this is not that Jesus is actually *born* during the 70th Week, but that his *earthly ministry* is what initiates the 70th Week, and lasts for *half of the 70th Week.* What is it about this that keeps us from understanding one another? Are we there now?

I mean i'm starting to understand your postion but maybe it would be Easier if you used Year amount instead of saying *in the 70 week*.

According to the Prophesy Jesus the prince will come after 69 weeks (483 years) and be cut off.

Your claiming his ministry begins in Year 484(the 70th week) and he dies 3.5 years later in Year 487.5?

Is this correct?

I'm claiming that after year 483 this happened- He comes to Jerusalem(which once more is part of the prophesy) Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city

"Most of the crowd spread their cloaks on the road, and others cut branches from the trees and spread them on the road. 9 And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, “Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!” 10 And when he entered Jerusalem, the whole city was stirred up, saying, “Who is this?” 11 And the crowds said, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee.”"


And he was then Killed and the rest of the events mentioned in vs 26 followed after- And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed.

Once again, the Messiah is indeed included in this prophecy. The prophecy includes both! It includes prophecy concerning the Jewish People and Jerusalem. And it concerns the Messiah. It is not one to the exclusion of the other. Both are included.

Of course Messiah is in the prophesy its concerns his Coming- But no where in the prophesy does it claim the Messiah will fulfill verse 24 this is for the People and their City to do.

Of course. Many of my views are subject to correction. They are not "set in stone." There are a lot smarter people than me out there--a lot more educated people than me. My purpose is to be as *honest* as possible, and to do due diligence, viewing many opinions--not just a few.

Same here.

Yes, interpreting Dan 9.26-27 is very difficult. My sole point was that the 70th Week has long been fulfilled in the *time* of Christ. The math is easy. From Artaxerxes' Decree, counting 490 (or less) years, we come to the time of Christ.

This would mean you believe Christ comes after 70 weeks if we use the number 490, According to the Prophesy Messiah the prince will come after 483 years.

Everything is an "assumption." But there are assumptions based on the explicit wording, and assumptions disregarding or adding to the wording. It is entirely logical to assume that the Reign of Antichrist refers only to a *single* period of 3.5 years because that is explicitly denoted in Dan 7!

Like i stated your argument is basically that your assumption is better then mine

To say Antichrist reigns for 3.5 years is *not* to say that he reigns for *7 years!* To assume it is 7 when it says 3.5 is to *add to* the wording.

Who assumes its 7? I have no seen anyone yet claim the Beast reigns for 7 years not 3.5.

This is what *Scripture* says--not just me. The Scripture says don't add to the Revelation.

Yes it clearly says this.

That's what you're doing when you say that it teaches a 7 year tribulation.

I don't believe i claimed this anywhere.

It does not add two periods of 3.5 years together.

Once more this is an assumption

It does not refer to a 7 year tribulation.

Pretty sure i agreed about this.

And yet you *add* to the Revelation by changing a 3.5 year reign of Antichrist to a 7 year period of Tribulation. That is *adding to the text.* And Scripture prohibits that. Say anything you want, but don't add words to the text. There is nothing in there about a 7 year Tribulation Period!

This is a lie i have never once stated that the 3.5 year reign of the Beast was actually a period of 7 years. So please once more stop with this false accuation or quote where i said this statement you keep accusing me of making.

[CadyandZoe]

Dont assume anything.

I didn't know what was the point you were making..

Correct after 69 weeks(483 years) not after 70 weeks(490 years) and not during week 70 (486.5 years) not during 69 weeks (480.5).

Not sure why we are stating obvious things or what it has to do with my statement... but i'll take a turn *When the Sun is up we call this period Day* the bible says so explicitly.

Wow. Okay. Good luck with that.

[Jesuslovesus]

Wow. Okay. Good luck with that.

Cady you are my favorite post-tribber on this site but sometimes i'm confused by how you engage(randomly) disengage(just as randomly) certain debates.

Like this one- but if its not to much to ask can you show me in Daniel 9 where it says Messiah will be Cut off in the Middle of the 70th week?

Also thanks for the luck

[CadyandZoe]

Cady you are my favorite post-tribber on this site but sometimes i'm confused by how you engage(randomly) disengage(just as randomly) certain debates.

Like this one- but if its not to much to ask can you show me in Daniel 9 where it says Messiah will be Cut off in the Middle of the 70th week?

Also thanks for the luck

24 “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place. 25 So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress. 26 Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

Here is what I hear Gabriel tell Daniel. Daniel's people have 70 weeks of years to complete a set of tasks. Assuming these are consecutive, this adds up to 490 years. Israel is allowed to have a capital city and a temple as long as they work toward the following goals.

1. to finish the transgression,
2. to make an end of sin,
3. to make atonement for iniquity,
4. to bring in everlasting righteousness,
5. to seal up vision and prophecy and
6. to anoint the most holy place.

His people were unsuccessful; they did not accomplish this list within the 70-year time period.

The only thing on the list that his people accomplished was number 3: to make atonement for iniquity.

Decree to Messiah:
Decree [0<------ 69 weeks -------->483] Messiah
Year 484 = Baptism of Jesus, beginning of ministry

Strengthen the Covenant:
Baptism of Jesus [484 <------- one week ------->490]Stoning of Stephen

Year 487-1/2
Messiah cut off,
stop to sacrifice and grain offering

Week 70 ends with the stoning of Stephen and only one item on the list accomplished. Therefore judgment.

and on the wing of abominations
Wing = limit. When the abominations have reached a limit that God could no longer ignore, he brings the Romans to destroy the city and the temple.

will come one who makes desolate
Titus and the Romans.

even until a complete destruction
Destroys the city and the temple.

one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”
Those who destroyed the temple were themselves destroyed.

This is how I see Daniel 9.

[Jesuslovesus]

24 “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place. 25 So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress. 26 Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

Here is what I hear Gabriel tell Daniel. Daniel's people have 70 weeks of years to complete a set of tasks. Assuming these are consecutive, this adds up to 490 years. Israel is allowed to have a capital city and a temple as long as they work toward the following goals.

1. to finish the transgression,
2. to make an end of sin,
3. to make atonement for iniquity,
4. to bring in everlasting righteousness,
5. to seal up vision and prophecy and
6. to anoint the most holy place.

His people were unsuccessful; they did not accomplish this list within the 70-year time period.

The only thing on the list that his people accomplished was number 3: to make atonement for iniquity.

Decree to Messiah:
Decree [0<------ 69 weeks -------->483] Messiah
Year 484 = Baptism of Jesus, beginning of ministry

Strengthen the Covenant:
Baptism of Jesus [484 <------- one week ------->490]Stoning of Stephen

Year 487-1/2
Messiah cut off,
stop to sacrifice and grain offering

Week 70 ends with the stoning of Stephen and only one item on the list accomplished. Therefore judgment.

and on the wing of abominations
Wing = limit. When the abominations have reached a limit that God could no longer ignore, he brings the Romans to destroy the city and the temple.

will come one who makes desolate
Titus and the Romans.

even until a complete destruction
Destroys the city and the temple.

one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”
Those who destroyed the temple were themselves destroyed.

This is how I see Daniel 9.

Thanks-

I see now why we disagree

I believe the Passage is saying there will be 69 weeks until the Coming of the Messiah (To the City Jeselem the Subject of Daniel 9:25) Messiah comes after 483 Years

Then Afterwards the events that Follow---> Death, Burial, Resurrections
And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing.

After 62 Weeks Jesus Comes to the City (Jerusalem the subject of this whole passage) is Killed.

And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.[Titus and the Romans Come to Destroy The temple and Jerusalem]


Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war.[Describing the Subsequent Wars]


Desolations are decreed. [The Decrees made by Jesus Concerning Jerusalem]

To put it shortly i don't really understand why you are interpreting Jesus ministry by Daniel 9:27.

Nor Where you how you see this passage specifically as stating Jesus will die 3.5 years after he begins his Ministry [for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering].

But tbh to me it seems like i usually can't get on board when people mesh multiple passages together to Create doctrine (so this might be a personal problem).

[jeffweeder]

Thanks-

I see now why we disagree

I believe the Passage is saying there will be 69 weeks until the Coming of the Messiah (To the City Jeselem the Subject of Daniel 9:25) Messiah comes after 483 Years

Then Afterwards the events that Follow---> Death, Burial, Resurrections
And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing.

After 62 Weeks Jesus Comes to the City (Jerusalem the subject of this whole passage) is Killed.

And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.[Titus and the Romans Come to Destroy The temple and Jerusalem]


Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war.[Describing the Subsequent Wars]


Desolations are decreed. [The Decrees made by Jesus Concerning Jerusalem]

To put it shortly i don't really understand why you are interpreting Jesus ministry by Daniel 9:27.

Nor Where you how you see this passage specifically as stating Jesus will die 3.5 years after he begins his Ministry [for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering].

But tbh to me it seems like i usually can't get on board when people mesh multiple passages together to Create doctrine (so this might be a personal problem).

I would love to give my 2 cents on the 70 weeks...If someone wants to start a thread.

[CadyandZoe]

To put it shortly i don't really understand why you are interpreting Jesus ministry by Daniel 9:27.

In my judgment, the first half of Daniel 9:27 is a recapitulation of 9:26.

Nor Where you how you see this passage specifically as stating Jesus will die 3.5 years after he begins his Ministry [for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering].

The strengthening of the covenant takes seven years. In the middle of those seven years he is crucified and thus ends the need for the Day of Atonement. The rest of the 70th year is dedicated to the Jewish believers living in Jerusalem until the stoning of Stephen. After this point, the church begins to suffer persecution.

This is a bit of speculation on my part but I am taking my cues from a statement in Acts where it says,

Acts 13:46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.This appears to be a pivotal moment in the Jewish experience.

[Jesuslovesus]

In my judgment, the first half of Daniel 9:27 is a recapitulation of 9:26.

I understand this View.

Sometimes on the Boards or in church or interactions with other Christians they tell you things that when you actually go to the passage you usually don't find.

Sometimes you even find People railing against a certain View you've never Heard of or thought was a false doctrine or Hersey ect.

My only point being-

I never noticed that people who take your view don't really fully acknowledge that Daniel 9:26 specifically could be fulfilled as written even without a Recapitulation recited in Daniel 9:27(and therefore an explanation is needed about Jesus having Fulfilled specifically a 3.5 year ministry).

The strengthening of the covenant takes seven years. In the middle of those seven years he is crucified and thus ends the need for the Day of Atonement. The rest of the 70th year is dedicated to the Jewish believers living in Jerusalem until the stoning of Stephen. After this point, the church begins to suffer persecution.

This is a bit of speculation on my part but I am taking my cues from a statement in Acts where it says,

Acts 13:46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.This appears to be a pivotal moment in the Jewish experience.

I understand how this argument is formed But to me it addresses something i don't believe i personally need explained

- How Jesus fulfilled Daniel 9:27 -

But if you want to show how you believe the second Part of Daniel 9:26 was fullfilled

the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.

It would be nice to see =).

[randyk]

I accept that God's actions to reprove sin is a judgment, however, for the purpose of end time discussion I would like to use 'judgment' sparingly and exclusively for when Christ returns. I accept your use of the word wherever you see fit

The Olivet Discourse started specifically with oncoming events that will befall the Jews and quickly broadened to events that will have a worldwide implication. As I pointed out earlier, you can't possibly limit Matt 24:8-13 exclusively to the Jewish experience. So in my view, Jesus Christ' warnings at the Olivet Discourse can best be described as being on the cusp of the two covenants.

Well yes and no. I'm not trying to explain how a future era, being described, involves a NT era, which necessarily includes both Israel and the Church. Rather, I'm trying to describe, narrowly, how this *Discourse* takes place exclusively in the OT era. Jesus had *not yet* gone to the cross. The NT era had *not yet* begun when this Discourse was given.

So for me, this is the point I'm trying to drive home. If this Discourse is taking place within the OT era, then Jesus' perspective is limited to the exclusively Jewish focus of the OT era. Under the Law only the Jewish People were in focus as the People of God. Only Israel was God's nation at that time.

As such Jesus could refer to the Gentiles as pagans, or "dogs." Israel represented the "children" who were to be given their bread, whereas the "dogs" had to wait for the crumbs. And if so, if only Israel was being viewed as God's People at the time of the giving of this Discourse, then Jesus was still viewing the Jewish People exclusively, even though he was referring to a future time that would include Gentile expansion, or the international Church.

In this respect, Jesus was not denying that this future era would include what may be viewed as Christianity. But again, he was only looking at the time at *Jewish Christianity.* And Jewish Christianity would be extremely narrow in the context of a largely apostate Israeli nation. The nation would go into captivity, while Jewish Christians would suffer as a result--not just from the loss of national protection, but also from the persecution of those in Israel who would reject them.

None of this denies the development of the international Church in this time. It just doesn't deal with it in any detail. From Jesus' perspective at that time, the Great Commission had not yet even started, even if it was in his mind. His purpose, therefore, at that time was to predict the Jewish experience, since he was here speaking only to Jews. The only benefit future Christians outside Israel would benefit from this would be by identifying with what Jewish Christians would go through.

I think you are mistaking those (Jews) who heard Jesus Christ directly with those who Jesus actually had in mind and whose His words would affect in generations to come. For example, in the Gospels, Jesus addressed mostly Jews, but his messages continue to impact the lives of the church far beyond those who heard it first hand.

Again, I'm not questioning Jesus' perceptiveness in recognizing that there would be an international Church who would benefit from the Olivet Discourse. Rather, my argument is that Jesus let this Discourse speak to future generations of Christians not directly but through the vehicle of the *Jewish Christian* experience. After all, most of the OT Scriptures speak to Christians this way.

1 Cor 10.11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Again, take the example of Jesus' comments about Gentiles being pagan "dogs." He obviously was not addressing the future addition of the Gentiles to God's People. At that time he was speaking of Israel as God's People and of Gentiles as Not God's People because at that time Israel was under the Law and Gentiles were not under the Law. Jesus could hardly have spoken to future generations of Gentiles by recognizing Gentiles as legitimate heirs in their pagan status! Rather, he had to speak to them from the pov of Israel being under God's laws in order to validate them as God's People.

We are both repeating what have already been said before, wouldn't you agree? Where my understanding differs from yours is that while you make it a protracted exclusive Jewish Tribulation, I hold that the GT is separated from what has transpired over the ages. It is an exclusive end-time catastrophe that will happen during the 3.5 years reign of the AC. Furthermore, it is incorrect to call it a Jewish Tribulation, it is rather a GT against the Saints (elect) Jew and Gentile, whom Jesus will cause to end it so lives.

It is also described as "Great" because it will be unprecedented and unsurpassed.

Yes, my intention is not to repeat until I drive it into you. I'm just trying to make the point as clear as possible, pointing out that my argument is based on Scripture, and not at all an illegitimate interpretation of how Jesus used "Great Tribulation." The idea there is a 3.5 year period of time that some love to call the "Great Tribulation" today is beyond question. I call it the "Reign of Antichrist," but there is little doubt in my mind that this 3.5 year period will take place, distinct from other periods similarly described.

I think the 3.5 year Reign of Antichrist is part of the age-long Tribulation that Jesus said would happen to the Jews. It is the last 3.5 years of the age, just prior to the restoration of the Jewish People. So I think it will be a tough time for Jews as well as for Christians.

You think the 3.5 year period is distinct from the age-long distress Jesus referred to--the "dispersion" mentioned in Luke 21? Oh well. We do agree there will be a 3.5 year period of Antichristian rule that is primarily characterized by the persecution of Christians--not the wrath of God. And if you think the Wrath, or Judgment, of God takes place at the end of it all, whether at Armageddon or at the GSTJ, we agree on this. This is true eschatological judgment--the last day of the age, and the final determination of our place in eternity.

Lest I continue to repeat myself, I'll try to move on now...