PDA

View Full Version : Daniel's 70th Week - Ellis Skolfield



MattHenry
May 9th 2006, 07:30 PM
This is a view of Daniel's 70th week that members here may not be familiar with pasted with permission of the author. The 69 weeks of Daniel were covered under the "Mathematical Perfection of Bible Prophecy" thread and those weeks closed at the Cross with mathematical perfection. http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529



"Sometimes we simple-minded Christians expect our sovereign God to be
just as simple-minded. In no place is that more glaringly obvious than
in our interpretation of Daniel's 70th Week. Many believe that week to
be about a Seven Year tribulation at the end of the Christian Era, but
it's about something else entirely."

Daniel's 70th Week

LOCATING the foundations of the Solomonic temple on the old
temple platform in Jerusalem, about 300 feet north of the Islamic
Dome of the Rock, may be one of the most important
archeological discoveries of the last century. Since that discovery,
some researchers, probably for doctrinal reasons, have been trying
to prove that the temple of Solomon was once where the Dome of
the Rock now stands. Those researchers are not farmers, or from
the Scripture alone they would have seen their error:

2Ch 3:1 Then Solomon began to build the house of the Lord
in Jerusalem on Mount Moriah, where the Lord had
appeared to his father David, at the place that David had
prepared, on the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.

The temple was built over a threshing floor. Note that Scripture
calls it a "floor". Floors are flat. Anyone who knows anything at all
about threshing grain knows that threshing floors have to be flat.
As-Sakhra, the craggy stone over which the Dome of the Rock now
stands is as prickly as a porcupine. No farmer in his right mind
would have attempted to thresh grain there, particularly when
there was an absolutely flat rock, just perfect for threshing, only
300 feet away. So rest assured, the temple was NOT built where
the Dome of the Rock now is.

But since the discovery of the original foundations of the
Solomonic temple (see Biblical Archeology Review, Mar 1983), the
Moslems have tried to hide all evidence of its existence by
cementing over the holes in the bedrock spaced on the sacred
cubit. Some researchers have also written lengthy arguments
defending As-Sakhra as the temple's location, but it's still an
impossibility, both scripturally and agriculturally.
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54566

2

So who cares? Is knowing the exact location of the old temple
that important? You bet it is. Recognizing that the Holy of Holies
in the Temple of Solomon was actually 300 feet North of the
Dome of the Rock1 is the key to understanding the day-years of
Revelation 11:2 and understanding those day-years enables us to
understand Daniel's 70th Week.

UPON A WING OF WHAT?

Most students of Bible prophecy recognize the 69 Weeks of Dan
9:24 as sixty-nine weeks of years that were fulfilled at Jesus.
crucifixion2. But the 70th "week" doesn't fit the events
surrounding the crucifixion, so in the late 1800s, John Darby of
the Plymouth Brethren theorized that the 70th "week" was actually
a Seven-Year tribulation that would take place at the end of the
Christian Era. Darby then imagined a 2000 year gap between the
69th and 70th weeks to make it fit his prophetic scheme of things.
Darby also figured that the day-years of both Daniel and
Revelation were the first or last half of his so-called Great
Tribulation.

It all sounds very reasonable, and many believe it, but the view
is really unsupportable, both biblically and historically. As you
have read in The False Prophet, all the day-years in the Bible were
fulfilled during the construction of the Dome of the Rock in 688AD
or in new Israel in 1948 and 1967.
So where do we go from here? Well, to view Daniel's 70th
Week correctly we need to remember that the Dome of the Rock
______________________________________

1 For details on the importance of knowing the temple's exact location, read Ch.
5 of The False Prophet. That book can currently be downloaded, free of charge, from
www.EllisSkolfield.com (http://www.EllisSkolfield.com)
2 As covered in The False Prophet, when Hebrew day-years are converted into solar
years, they exactly fit from the decree of Artaxerxes I (444BC) that authorized
Nehemiah to rebuild Jerusalem until the Cross of Jesus (32-34AD) 483 Hebrew
years = 396 solar years - 444 = 32AD.
____________________________________

3

is Daniel's Abomination of Desolation. Once we acknowledge that
fact, then the 70th "week" can be viewed in a more rational way.
Let's look at Dan 9:26-27 once again. For those who do not
read Hebrew (and that includes me), Green's Interlinear, literal,
word-for-word translation could be helpful. We need to see if
there's a different sentence structure that makes the intent of the
author more understandable. There are no punctuation marks in
the quote below because none appear in the original Hebrew text:

Dan 9:26-27 (Green's) and its end with the flood and until
end war are determined desolations and he shall confirm a
covenant with the many week one and in the half of the
week he shall make cease sacrifice and offering and upon a
wing abominations a desolator even until end and that
which was decreed shall pour out on the desolator.

The underlining is mine, but read the above quote carefully.
What is Gabriel saying? If you hadn't already read the KJV or the
NAS, or been told what those verses mean, what would "upon a
wing abominations a desolator" mean to you?
Hard to tell, isn't it? But when we put a pause after "wing".
look at what happens "Upon a wing . . . abominations a
desolator". Now we can ask ourselves: "Upon a wing of what is an
abomination that makes desolate going to be placed?" The translators
of the NIV saw a very reasonable possibility and rendered
the passage as follows:3

Dan 9:26-27 (NIV) ...And its end will come with a flood;
even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.
But He will confirm a covenant with many for one
seven, but in the middle of that seven, he will put an end to
sacrifice and offering, and one who causes desolations will
_________________________________

2 Though it does not effect this passage, evidence is mounting that the NT of modern
English Bibles like NIV and NAS were translated from Greek texts that were corrupted
in the 3rd Century by Gnostics. Under UV inspection, it appears that codex Aleph, codex
Bezae, and Papyrus 75 etc. (used in Wescott & Hart's edition of the Greek NT) were
altered for doctrinal reasons. The KJV and the NKJV are still probably the most accurate
translations available in the English language today.
_____________________________________

4

place abominations on a wing of the temple, until the end
that is decreed is poured out on him.

Again, the underlining is mine, but look; sometime in Daniel's
future, an Abomination that makes Desolate could be placed .on
a wing of the temple.. Now that makes some sense. Sacrifices took
place at the temple, so if sacrifices were going to be abolished, the
temple site would be where that would happen.

SHIQQOTS HA SHAMEN

Now let's compare Dan 9:27 with Dan 12:11. In these two verses,
the Lord not only the identifies the Abomination that makes
Desolate, but also gives Daniel the exact time frame of major
events in Jerusalem's future:

Dan 9:27 . . . (NIV) and one who causes desolations
(shamen) will place abominations (shiqqots) on a wing of the
temple, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.
Dan 12:11 (KJV) And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be
taken away, and the abomination (shiqqots) that maketh
desolate (shamen) set up, there shall be a thousand two
hundred and ninety days.

The Hebrew word for "abomination" is shiqqots (Strong's No.
8251), and the Hebrew word for "desolation" is shamen (Strong's
No. 8074). Shiqqots and shamen appears in both verses and since
they do:

Both verses are about an Abomination that makes Desolate!
Since we already know that the abomination is the Dome of
the Rock, then both verses are about the Dome of the Rock!
Once we see that Daniel's 70th Week is really about the Dome
of the Rock, then all support for a future Seven-Year tribulation
collapses because Dan 9:27 is the ONLY verse in the whole Bible
from which anyone could even conjure up such an idea. The
identification of the Dome of the Rock as the Abomination of
Desolation is confirmed by the day-years of Rev 11:2-3 and 12:6,

5

and 13:5. The dates are historically unassailable, and the
mathematical fit incontestible. Which leads to the next point:

If the Dome of the Rock is the Abomination that makes
Desolate, and Daniel's 70th Week is about that dome, then the
70th week has to stretch into the past and future from 688AD
when the dome was constructed.

So how long can the 70th week be? Well, Daniel was placed in
Babylon at the beginning of the time of the Gentiles for a
particular reason. The Lord used Daniel to show the Jews and the
surrounding nations a prophetic picture of the time that Gentile
nations will control the Holy Land.

Since that was Daniel's mission, an interpretation of the 70th
Week that fits the history of the Jewish people during the time of
the Gentiles would be most appropriate. Unlikely as it may sound,
Daniel's 70th Week may be a 57 word prophetic picture of the
total time of the Gentiles. The key is hidden in the Hebrew word,
shavuim. Shavuim is a unique plural form of the Hebrew word
Shavua, which is defined as a seven or a week.

SHAVUOT AND SHAVUIM

What follows may be a bit technical, but it's a "one brick at a
Time" empirical argument. All the evidence needs to be in place
before the conclusions we can draw from them make any sense.
Everywhere in the Old Testament, except in the book of Daniel,
the Hebrew words shavuot or shavua are used to express a seven
or a week. However, in Daniel an unusual word for seven is used:
shavuim, the masculine plural form of shavuot. This plural form
appears ONLY in Daniel and even here, shavuim is used only four
times, three of which are in the 70 Weeks! So why is an unusual
plural form of the word for seven used here?
Because it is meant to be a plural, that's why!

6

The 70th Week is not just one week of years -- it is a plural of
weeks of years or a multiple of weeks of years. In The Covenant,
The Holocaust & The 70th Week, Dr. David Lurie (a Messianic Jew
and Hebrew scholar) concludes that since shavuim is plural, then
the 70th Week must represent an unknown multiple of sevens.
According to Dr. Lurie, the plural form of shavuim demands that
it be multiplied by something. So if the 70th Week requires a
multiplier, what is the multiplier? Let's look at the Scriptures
Daniel knew and see what we can find out about biblical multiples
in general.

All the way back to creation, there were weeks. The Lord
created the Earth in six days followed by a Sabbath day of rest
(Gen 2:2-3). Then in Exodus the Lord established a week of years.
(Six working years, followed by a Sabbatical year, Exo 23:10).
Daniel knew about both kinds of weeks. Being raised under the
Levitical code, he was equally familiar with weeks of days and
weeks of years.

Then further in the Levitical code, the Lord initiated a cycle of
50 years. Seven weeks of years (for 49 years) followed by a special
year of the Jubilee. Within that cycle, each seventh year was a
sabbatical year. The Jubilee year followed the 49th sabbatical year
as an extra sabbatical year! The Jubilee year was an additional 360
days of rest, Lev 25:8-10. Without question, Daniel knew about
this 50 year cycle, and the year of the Jubilee:

THE LEVITICAL CODE

1st: Seven years.
2nd: Seven weeks of years.
3rd: One unique year of the Jubilee.
Seven years, seven weeks of years, and the year of the Jubilee,
were plainly spelled out for Daniel by Moses. That 50 year cycle
repeated itself on down through Jewish history. Now compare
that Levitical code with the new cycle that Gabriel gives Daniel in
the 70 Weeks:

7

DANIEL'S 70 SEVENS

1st: Seven weeks of years, seven Shavuim.
2nd: 62 more weeks of years, 62 Shavuim.
3rd: One unique multiple week, one Shavuim.

Note the similar structures. Of course that resemblance was
obvious to Daniel. Seven shavuim, then a multiple of shavuim,
followed by one shavuim . all requiring multipliers. This new
series of weeks was just like the Levitical code that Daniel knew,
but now it was a series of 70 Weeks not just 50 years.

As Daniel saw it, first there was the well understood seven
weeks of years, for 49 years. But instead of those 49 years being
followed by a Jubilee (as he would have expected), the Jubilee
was deferred while the Lord gave Daniel 62 more weeks of years.
Those 69 weeks of years were then followed by one special
kind of week, a shavuim, or plural week of years. What could that
mean? Though the numbers are different, the numeric progression
in the Levitical code and in Daniel's 70 Weeks are identical. Please
look at the comparison below:

1st: A Seven.
2nd: A multiple of sevens.
3rd: A unique Jubilee.
1st: Seven Sevens
2nd: 62 Sevens
3rd: A plural of Seven. The Jubilee was a unique year
so this 70th Week would also be a unique plural!

Daniel would have recognized the 70th Week as being unique,
different in kind from the prior 69, but still similar to the Jubilee.
Daniel was a brilliant man, and the Lord had given him the gift of
interpreting dreams. If we slow Christian folk can see this parallel
progression 2500 years down the line, then Daniel would have
seen it with his eyes shut.

The next question is this: In what way was the 70th Week
similar to the Jubilee? Well, what was the year of the Jubilee like?
It was a special sabbatical year for every living thing in the land:

8

Lev 25:10 And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim
liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof:
it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto
his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family. A
jubilee shall that fiftieth year be unto you: ye shall not sow,
neither reap that which groweth of itself in it, nor gather the
grapes in it of thy vine undressed. For it is the jubilee; it shall be
holy unto you: ye shall eat the increase thereof out of the field.
Besides the forgiving of debts, Jubilee was treated as a year of
complete rest for every man and beast, a special kind of super
Sabbatical year. For all practical purposes, Jubilee was an additional
year of rest with 360 Sabbaths!

Since the 70th Week linguistically suggests a multiplier of some
kind, could every day of this 70th Week actually represent a year?
If the 360 day Hebrew Year is our multiplier, then 7 x 360 = 2520
Hebrew Years. Since our history is written in solar years we
convert 2520 x .9857 = 2484 (2483.95).

Dan 9:26-27 (NIV) ...And its end will come with a flood;
even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.
But He will confirm a covenant with many for one
seven, but in the middle of that seven, he will put an end to
sacrifice and offering, and one who causes desolations will
place abominations on a wing of the temple, until the end
that is decreed is poured out on him.

(Illistration included here. Found in this link in PDF http://www.ellisskolfield.com/pdf/Daniels70thWeek.pdf )

The Dome of the Rock is "on a wing" of the temple. The "Middle
of the week" is not a precise time. When used to describe 2484
years; 706AD is also in the "middle of the week."

9

2484 - 536BC = 1948AD
½ of 2484 is 1242 - 536BC = 706AD

1. From Cyrus. decree to return to the land in 536BC to
new Israel in 1948AD is exactly 2484 solar years!
2. The exact middle of that time is 706AD, one year after
the completion of Islamic work on the temple mount!

From the above, it appears that the Lord intended the 70th
week of Dan 9:27 to be an overview of the time that Gentiles
would control the Holy Land. If that is correct, then the 70th
Week is over, and all support for a future Seven-Year Great-
Tribulation disappears into thin air!4
______________________________________

4 This is not the only place in prophecy where the Lord used imprecise terms to
describe general areas of time. In Dan 7:12,God used "a season and a time. to
describe 1260 years. This unusual usage is documented in Ch 8 of The False
Prophet.
________________________________________

Teke
May 10th 2006, 07:45 PM
Aaalllrrriigghhttyy then.:lol:

Thats some new mathematics I haven't seen before. And in reference to the dome of the rock.:confused

All seventy weeks were fulfilled in THE ROCK, Christ. There are threads here in this forum on it and sites with apologetics explaining all the weeks of the Messiah. :spin:

MattHenry
May 10th 2006, 08:37 PM
Aaalllrrriigghhttyy then.:lol:

Thats some new mathematics I haven't seen before. And in reference to the dome of the rock.:confused
All seventy weeks were fulfilled in THE ROCK, Christ.That is not correct. The first 69 weeks of Daniel were closed at the Cross, as the mathematics of those weeks demonstrate with absolute perfection, exact to the year. http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529
There are threads here in this forum on it and sites with apologetics explaining all the weeks of the Messiah. :spin:This thread is about Daniel's 70th week - not the first 69 - and the 70th week closes in 1948, and is centered around the Dome of the Rock - The Abomination of Desolation.
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54566
http://www.66619.org/thequran.htm

wpm
May 10th 2006, 10:01 PM
That is not correct. The first 69 weeks of Daniel were closed at the Cross, as the mathematics of those weeks demonstrate with absolute perfection, exact to the year. http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529 This thread is about Daniel's 70th week - not the first 69 - and the 70th week closes in 1948, and is centered around the Dome of the Rock - The Abomination of Desolation.
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54566
http://www.66619.org/thequran.htm

Matt

Can I give you a bit of advice? You should stop quoting this man extensively and search the Word for yourself. He might hold a lot of truth, but he holds a lot I disagree with, as can be seen above. You quote him more than Jesus. That is unwise and unscriptural and sends out a wrong message to those who follow your posts.

Paul

MattHenry
May 10th 2006, 10:28 PM
Matt Can I give you a bit of advice? If you feel compelled to.
You should stop quoting this man extensively
and search the Word for yourself.In various chat rooms I have
seen the fruit of many who believe they can sit in a vacuum and then feel they are guided by the Holy Spirit in their understanding of Scripture, when it becomes so quickly and painfully obvious they are not.

I try to take advantage of those of the former age, and their fathers, as the Bible instructs, as well as those who write today using Scripture, rather than doctrine, to explain scripture. Mr. Skolfield doesn't have all the answers, nor does he claim to.

He might hold a lot of truth, but he holds a lot of nonsense, as can be
seen above.Are you going to be specific?
You quote
him more than Jesus. That is unwise and unscripturalPlease support what I bolded.
and sends out a
wrong message to those who follow your posts.
PaulWhat is this wrong message I am sending? I am trying to introduce Mr. Skolfield here, which is difficult because his book is really best started at the beginning. While many are threatened by it, Mr. Skolfield's book is simply a Bible study, not a doctrine. Mr. Skolfield's study is also very supported not only by Scripture and history, but especially by the events that are happening in the world today. If you haven't read it I am surprised you would comment on it.

It would help if you can be specific about which part, is "a lot of nonsense, as can be seen above".

wpm
May 10th 2006, 11:01 PM
If you feel compelled to. In various chat rooms I have
seen the fruit of many who believe they can sit in a vacuum and then feel they are guided by the Holy Spirit in their understanding of Scripture, when it becomes so quickly and painfully obvious they are not.

I try to take advantage of those of the former age, and their fathers, as the Bible instructs, as well as those who write today using Scripture, rather than doctrine, to explain scripture. Mr. Skolfield doesn't have all the answers, nor does he claim to. Are you going to be specific? Please support what I bolded. What is this wrong message I am sending? I am trying to introduce Mr. Skolfield here, which is difficult because his book is really best started at the beginning. While many are threatened by it, Mr. Skolfield's book is simply a Bible study, not a doctrine. Mr. Skolfield's study is also very supported not only by Scripture and history, but especially by the events that are happening in the world today. If you haven't read it I am surprised you would comment on it.

It would help if you can be specific about which part, is "a lot of nonsense, as can be seen above".

Matt,

I want to discuss with you. You seem to have some constructive arguments, but I have no interest in developing Mr. Skolfield's arguments as he isn't here to defend them. We could all post long quotes from those that agree with us, but discussion would come to a standstill. If I want to find out what Mr. Skolfield believes I can go to his site, I want to hear what Matt believes. Frankly, I circumvent most of his quotes. I'm sure most people are the same. His views above re the 70 weeks sees him trying the fit history into Scripture, instaed of the other way round. However, he is not here to defend it, so I have no interest engaging in it. As a rule, I only discuss with those that articulate their own thoughts - as they can be developed for the good of all. This is not a personal attack but constructive advice.

Paul

MattHenry
May 11th 2006, 01:53 AM
Matt, I want to discuss with you. You seem to have some constructive arguments, but I have no interest in developing Mr. Skolfield's arguments as he isn't here to defend them. We could all post long quotes from those that agree with us, but discussion would come to a standstill. If I want to find out what Mr. Skolfield believes I can go to his site, I want to hear what Matt believes. Frankly, I circumvent most of his quotes. I'm sure most people are the same. His views above re the 70 weeks sees him trying the fit history into Scripture, instaed of the other way round. Why not work it in one direction and then take a look back in another? I don't believe that Scripture should necessarily, or even wisely, be considered in a historical vacuum, do you?
However, he is not here to defend it, so I have no interest engaging in it. As a rule, I only discuss with those that articulate their own thoughts - as they can be developed for the good of all. This is not a personal attack but constructive advice. Paul
You didn't seem to be too shy when it came to attacking Skolfield's material, but now defer when it comes to articulating your contention; "but he holds a lot of nonsense, as can be seen above".

Scripture gives us quite a bit of math to puzzle. Sometimes it works to start with the scripture that offers the problem, then do the math and see how it fits back through scripture. Nor do I see a problem with trying a mathematical "what if", particularly when some of the method was known to and considered by those of "the former age and their fathers".

I have posted Skolfield's comments and have done my best to answer questions that have been raised. As far as I know I left none unanswered except one poster's questions that seemed to be heavily rooted in Catholic doctrine of which I am not, nor will I be, versed (particularly having recently read Fox's), and I didn't want to appear as though I was trying to flame the Catholic Church in response.

Why don't we start with Daniel's 69 weeks, and if I don't believe I can defend Skolfield I will let you know. You said "I want to hear what Matt believes" and this is what I believe. I would not have posted any of the material if it wasn't. The following thread is somewhat of a paraphrase, by me, anyway. Let's try it. http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529

wpm
May 11th 2006, 03:05 PM
Why not work it in one direction and then take a look back in another? I don't believe that Scripture should necessarily, or even wisely, be considered in a historical vacuum, do you?
You didn't seem to be too shy when it came to attacking Skolfield's material, but now defer when it comes to articulating your contention; "but he holds a lot of nonsense, as can be seen above".

Scripture gives us quite a bit of math to puzzle. Sometimes it works to start with the scripture that offers the problem, then do the math and see how it fits back through scripture. Nor do I see a problem with trying a mathematical "what if", particularly when some of the method was known to and considered by those of "the former age and their fathers".

I have posted Skolfield's comments and have done my best to answer questions that have been raised. As far as I know I left none unanswered except one poster's questions that seemed to be heavily rooted in Catholic doctrine of which I am not, nor will I be, versed (particularly having recently read Fox's), and I didn't want to appear as though I was trying to flame the Catholic Church in response.

Why don't we start with Daniel's 69 weeks, and if I don't believe I can defend Skolfield I will let you know. You said "I want to hear what Matt believes" and this is what I believe. I would not have posted any of the material if it wasn't. The following thread is somewhat of a paraphrase, by me, anyway. Let's try it. http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529

Matt

I wanted to private message you or email you, but that facility was not available on your profile. That is why I responded here. I would have preferred to speak private. I certainly have no desire to undermine your personal posts. My issue is not with your writing. I enjoy and concur with most of your arguments. I just find it difficult reading long quotes from someone that is not here to discuss it. I apologise if I have caused you any hurt or embarassment. I have re-worded my description of his views so as not to cause offence.

Paul

MattHenry
May 11th 2006, 03:18 PM
Matt

I wanted to private message you or email you, but that facility was not available on your profile.That is funny. I tried to do the very same and also found the very same.
That is why I responded here. I would have preferred to speak private. I certainly have no desire to undermine your personal posts. My issue is not with your writing. I enjoy and concur with most of your arguments. I just find it difficult reading long quotes from someone that is not here to discuss it. The reason they are long is to include the context so it doesn't take a lot of back and forth. The reader can then select (to choose not to read it or) the parts that they have questions with. I am here to discuss the posts and have, in each and every question raised, as far as I know (including the one that I earlier mentioned excluding). I post chapters as well in order to hopefully tease folks into reading the book.

Part of my purpose is to post what Ellis teaches in order to be put in a position of having to defend the material. I was a futurist up until a few months ago when I was led out of that valley by Mr. Skolfield's writings, so I desire desperately to view all the sides of Skolfield's Bible study and this is the perfect type of format, and this forum contains some of the most versed Bible students, that I have encountered (yourself perhaps at the top). Please just pretend that I am Ellis Skolfield. Perhaps that should have been my username. Please treat my posts as such.

Take a look at the antichrist thread for another example. I believe I am surviving well in spite of some serious attempts to flame what was posted.
I apologise if I have caused you any hurt or embarassment.

PaulNot at all. I just wish you would reply to the posts so I could learn more, and so I can be confronted with questions that have not occurred to me yet. I also desperately want you and everybody else to read The False Prophet. It is absolutely free (not even a login required) so how can it cause injury? To get the gist start with Daniel's 69 weeks "mathematical perfection" thread and take issue with the math.
http://www.ellisskolfield.com/downloadable-books.shtml

I titled the thread "the wrong rock" badly (I think I should have named it Abomination of Desolation) but did you see it? http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54566

Teke
May 11th 2006, 05:10 PM
Here is a site with info on Daniel. It explains the three popular views of Daniels seventy weeks (chart toward botttom of page).
http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_daniel.html#8.2


I tend to agree with the third one in ref. to the second (Christs ministry). As I see Nebs dream of the tree relating also to the church. I posted on that subject in this thread. http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=26743&highlight=acts+to+tree

MattHenry
May 11th 2006, 06:01 PM
Here is a site with info on Daniel. It explains the three popular views of Daniels seventy weeks (chart toward botttom of page).
http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_daniel.html#8.2


I tend to agree with the third one in ref. to the second (Christs ministry). As I see Nebs dream of the tree relating also to the church. I posted on that subject in this thread. http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=26743&highlight=acts+to+tree

From how long ago do you suppose these views might have come?

matthew94
May 11th 2006, 06:02 PM
As I've stated many times in this forum, I think the most honest view of the 70 weeks is to keep them attached to eachother. There's nothing in the text itself that would make me think to add a gap. Only reading certain commentaries would give me that idea. The NT is literally full of the fulfillment of all 70, so why try to cast the fulfillment further into the future? I guess the only reason would be a self-centered method of interpretation that equates most prophecy with our own times. People have been doing this for thousands of years, so I guess we should not be surprised that it continues.

Teke
May 11th 2006, 06:18 PM
From how long ago do you suppose these views might have come?

Does what the historical church (the people of God) believes and teaches, mean anything to you?
That is only a small amount of the historical teachings of the Church. They are the ones that don't change. Secular views change with the times. The Revelation of Christ never changes. And is what the Church is to preach.

So, are you a progressive revelationist (revelaltion continually changing with the times) of systematic theology (mostly mathematical in this instance)?

I'm not bashing you. I've just seen my share of speculation by man. The bible is not a book of mathematics, although the numbers written of have significance. That significance belonged to the era (Hebrew thought) it was written in, not our present age.

MattHenry
May 11th 2006, 06:36 PM
Does what the historical church (the people of God) believes and teaches, mean anything to you? Lately that is a tough question for me as I was saved about 2-1/2 years ago in the Church that I still attend that holds futurist and pre-trib doctrine.

That is only a small amount of the historical teachings of the Church. To what are you referring is only a small amount? eschatology? I agree. I am also grateful that our salvation doesn't depend on getting our understanding of prophecy correct or we would surely all be hellbound.

So what is "the Church"? Greek Orthodox? Catholic? For New Testament saints the Church is inside of us isn't it?
They are the ones that don't change. You are going to have to be very specific here. What Church hasn't changed?
Secular views change with the times. The Revelation of Christ never changes. And is what the Church is to preach.

So, are you a progressive revelationist (revelaltion continually changing with the times) of systematic theology (mostly mathematical in this instance)?
Did you look at some of the math? Does Scripture include it in order for us to ignore?

I'm not bashing you. I've just seen my share of speculation by man. The bible is not a book of mathematics, although the numbers written of have significance. That significance belonged to the era (Hebrew thought) it was written in, not our present age.Now I wonder if you have pondered these verses in regard to the value of Church teaching/tradition in respect to the book of Daniel:

Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

Dan 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words [are] closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

Here God Himself guarantees that Daniel did indeed succeed in sealing the book of Daniel - until the "time of the end". What do you make of that?

wpm
May 11th 2006, 06:46 PM
Matt

Let me present a few questions.

What event do you believe did/will

(1) "finish the transgression"?
(2) "make an end of sins"?
(3) "make reconciliation for iniquity"?
(4) "bring in everlasting righteousness"?
(5) "seal up the vision and prophecy"?
(6) "anoint the most Holy”?

And exactly in what way did/will this be accomplished?

Paul

Teke
May 11th 2006, 06:56 PM
Here God Himself guarantees that Daniel did indeed succeed in sealing the book of Daniel - until the "time of the end". What do you make of that?


We read at the end of the whole book/bible, in Revelation, the Lamb is worthy to open the seals. There is nothing sealed from Him, and He reveals the truth to His Body/Church. No scripture is of private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20).

Amo 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

Here is a study you might look at and understand that numbers of scripture do not just mean anything we wish to make them mean for our time.
This one is on 666.
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Religions/Numerics/six.html

MattHenry
May 11th 2006, 07:13 PM
Matt

Let me present a few questions.

What event do you believe did/will

(1) "finish the transgression"?
(2) "make an end of sins"?
(3) "make reconciliation for iniquity"?
(4) "bring in everlasting righteousness"?
(5) "seal up the vision and prophecy"?
(6) "anoint the most Holy”?

And exactly in what way did/will this be accomplished?

Paul Except for the "sealing up the vision and prophecy" wasn't the rest of this laundry list accomplished with Jesus shed blood on the Cross?

MattHenry
May 11th 2006, 09:19 PM
We read at the end of the whole book/bible, in Revelation, the Lamb is worthy to open the seals. There is nothing sealed from Him, and He reveals the truth to His Body/Church.This didn't go very far in explaining the verses I quoted.
No scripture is of private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20).

Amo 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.
He did reveal it to His prophets and they did in turn write it down.

Here is a study you might look at and understand that numbers of scripture do not just mean anything we wish to make them mean for our time.
This one is on 666.
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Religions/Numerics/six.html
What a funny coincidence. Muslims are antichrist, follow a false prophet, but the number 666 they carry is a coincidence that the Bible doesn't detail?

While your source suggests an apology for it it is not like the understanding of the number as 666 is new or private.

Interestingly I don't remember ever seeing the actual number in any translation until I just went to Green's Greek interlinear:

(Greek/English Interlinear (tr) NT) Revelation 13:18 wde <5602> h <3588> {HERE} sofia <4678> {WISDOM} estin <2076> (5748) {IS.} o <3588> {HE WHO} ecwn <2192> (5723) ton <3588> {HAS} noun <3563> {UNDERSTANDING} yhfisatw <5585> (5657) {LET HIM COUNT} ton <3588> {THE} ariqmon <706> {NUMBER} tou <3588> {OF THE} qhriou <2342> {BEAST:} ariqmoV <706> gar <1063> {FOR NUMBER} anqrwpou <444> {A MAN'S} estin <2076> (5748) {IT IS;} kai <2532> {AND} o <3588> ariqmoV <706> autou <846> {ITS NUMBER } cxV <5516> {<666>.}

[I] Behold ye among the heathen, and regard, and wonder marvelously: for I will work a work in your days, which ye will not believe, though it be told you.
HAB 1:5

7Trumpets
May 11th 2006, 10:04 PM
Notice what the world-famous Bible commentary written by Mathew Henry says about Daniel 9:27

“By offering himself a sacrifice once and for all he [Jesus] shall put an end to all the Levitical sacrifices.”
Thus Matthew Henry applied Daniel 9:27 to Christ, not to an antichrist.

Another famous commentary written by British Methodist Adam Clarke says that during Daniel 9:27’s

“term of seven years,” Jesus Himself would “confirm or ratify the new covenant with mankind.”
Another dusty Bible commentary reveals;

“He shall confirm the covenant--Christ. The confirmation of the covenant is assigned to Him.” (Jamieson, Fausset, Brown Commentary)
Here’s one more statement from a book called, Christ and Antichrist, author Samuel Cassel, published in 1846 by the Presbyterian Board of Publication in Philadelphia. On page 2, under Recommendations, are endorsements from many Presbyterian, Methodist, and Baptist ministers, including an official representative of the Southern Baptist Convention. Commenting on the final week of Daniel 9:27, that ancient volume states:

“…sometime during the remaining seven, he [the Messiah] was to die as a sacrifice for sin, and thus bring in “everlasting righteousness,” Here are allusions to events so palpable, that one would think, the people among whom they occurred, could not possibly have misapplied the prophecy.”
Okay, here we go. The following ten points provide logical and convincing evidence that Daniel’s famous 70th week has no application to any future seven-year tribulation at all. Rather, this great prophetic period was definitely fulfilled nearly two thousand years ago.

1. The entire prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 covers a period of “seventy weeks” Logic requires that “seventy weeks” refers to one consecutive block of time, in other words, to seventy STRAIGHT SEQUENTIAL WEEKS. The truth is, there is no example in Scripture (or anywhere else!) of a stated time period starting, stopping and then starting again. ALL biblical references to time are consecutive: 40 days, and 40 nights (See Genesis 7:4) 400 years in Egypt (see Genesis 15:13) 70 years of captivity (see Daniel 9:2) etc. In Daniel’s prophecy, the “seventy weeks” were to begin during the reign of Persia and continue to the time of the Messiah.

2. Logic also requires that the 70th week follow immediately after the 69th week. If it doesn’t then it cannot properly be called the 70th week.

3. It is illogical to insert a 3000 year gap between the 69th and 70th week. No hint of a gap is found in the prophecy itself. There is no gap between the first seven weeks and the following sixty-two weeks, so why insert one between the 60th and 70th week?

Note: If you told your child to be in bed in 70 minutes you obviously would mean 70 consecutive minutes. What if five hours later your fully awake son said, “But dad, I know 69 minutes have passed, but the 70th minute hasn’t started yet!?” After receiving an appropriate punishment, he would be swiftly sent to bed.

4. Daniel 9:27 says nothing about a seven-year period of “tribulation”, during which there is a “rebuilt” Jewish temple, or any “antichrist”.

5. The stated focus of this prophecy is the Messiah, not the antichrist. After the Messiah is “cut off” (referring to Christ’s death) the text says, “And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” [This destruction is NOT mentioned as part of the 70 weeks, it comes after the 70 weeks.] In the past, this has been consistently applied to the destruction of Jerusalem and the second temple by Roman armies led by Prince Titus in A.D. 70.

6. “He shall confirm the covenant.”

Paul said “the covenant” was “confirmed before by God in Christ” (Galatians 3:17)
Jesus Christ came “to confirm, the promises made to the fathers” (Romans 15:8)
In the King James Version, Daniel 9:27 doesn’t say “A covenant” or peace treaty, but “THE covenant”, which applies to the New Covenant. Nowhere in the Bible does the antichrist make, confirm, or break a covenant with anyone. The word “covenant” is Messianic and ALWAYS applies to the Messiah, not the antichrist.

7. “He shall confirm the covenant with many.” Jesus Christ said, “This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many…” Matt. 26:28) Behold a perfect fit! Jesus was quoting Daniel 9:27

8. “For the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate.” “The abomination of desolation” (see Matthew 24:15) is not a simple subject, yet we know that Jesus clearly applied this event to the time when His followers were to flee from Jerusalem before the destruction of the second temple in A.D. 70. In a parallel text to Matthew 24:15, Jesus told His disciples, “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies [Roman armies led by Prince Titus], then know that its desolation is near” (Luke 21:20)

The disciples did “see” those very events. Because of the “abominations” of the Pharisees, Jesus told them, “See! Your house is left to you desolate” (Matthew 23:38)
Thus Gabriel’s statement in Daniel 9:27 about Jerusalem becoming “desolate” was perfectly fulfilled in A.D. 70.

10. Gabriel said that the 70 week prophecy specifically applied to the Jewish people (see Daniel 9:24) During the period of Christ’s public ministry of three and half years, the Master’s focus was largely upon “the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 10:6) After His resurrection and then for another three and a half years, His disciples preached mostly to Jews (see Acts 1-6)

After that second three and a half year period, in 34 A.D. the bold Stephen was stoned by the Jewish Sanhedrin (see Acts 7). This famous deed marked the then ruling Jewish leaders’ final, official rejection of the gospel of our Saviour. THEN the gospel went to the Gentiles.
In Acts 9, Saul became Paul, the “apostle to the Gentiles” (Romans 11:13).
In Acts 10, God gave Peter a vision revealing it was NOW TIME to preach to the Gentiles (see Acts 10)
Read also Acts 13:46. Thus approximately three and a half years after the crucifixion-- and at the end of the 70 week prophecy given for the Jewish people-- the gospel shifted to the Gentiles EXACTLY as predicted in BIBLE PROPHECY.

-------

The explosive evidence is overwhelming! Point by point the events of Daniel’s 70th week have been fulfilled in the past. These eight words found in Daniel 9:27

“confirm…covenant…many…midst…sacrifec…cease…abomin ations…desolate” all find perfect fulfillment in Jesus Christ and early Christian history.

In the words of the 1846 Presbyterian publication, “Christ and Antichrist” by Cassels,

“The seventy weeks of Daniel therefore, have certainly ended many centuries ago. We are not to look to the future for the fulfillment of these predications. We must look to the past. And if the past; where is there one who can have any adequate claims to being the subject of these prophecies, but JESUS? He, and he ONLY can claim them; and to him they most certainly refer.

…one would think, the people [the Jews] among whom [these events] occurred, could not possibly have misapplied the prophecy.
But they did, in fact, one major reason why the Jewish nation as a whole failed to receive its Messiah was because its scholars misinterpreted Daniel 9:27. They failed to see Jesus Christ as the predicted One who would die in the midst of the 70th week! Amazingly, the exact same thing is happening today. Sincere Christian scholars are now misapplying the very same prophecy.

MattHenry
May 11th 2006, 11:17 PM
“The abomination of desolation” (see Matthew 24:15) is not a simple subject,.........

The explosive evidence is overwhelming! Point by point the events of Daniel’s 70th week have been fulfilled in the past. These eight words found in Daniel 9:27

“confirm…covenant…many…midst…sacrifec…cease…abomin ations…desolate” all find perfect fulfillment in Jesus Christ and early Christian history.

A little inconsistent here. I do agree that the 69 weeks are a fit to the Cross exactly, confirmed by the mathematics that Daniel prophesied with perfection.
The mathematical perfection includes the first 7 weeks, (before the 3 score and 2 weeks) which closed the Old Testament prophecy, with the completion of the book of Malachi, exact to the year.

Daniel nailed two bulls eyes in one verse.
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529

As for the abomination of desolation, we have an eye witness account:

"Jerry Landay in his book, The Dome of the Rock (Newsweek, New York, NY, 1972)
p. 18, records that when Khalifah Omar entered Jerusalem in 639AD, he was met
by Sophronius, Bishop of the Jerusalem Church, who showed him around the city.
Seeing the temple mount (then in rubble), Omar declared that he was going to
build a memorial to Muhammad on the original site of the temple of God.
Sophronius exclaimed in horror, “Verily, this is the Abomination of Desolation as
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, and it now stands in the holy place.” Though
Sophronius was a very old man of about 80, Khalifah Omar put him in prison and
to forced labor, the severities of which killed him.
The Dome of the Rock being the Abomination that maketh Desolate is not a
new theology. It’s a truth that’s been with the Church for over 1300 years, but
somehow we have managed to forget the prophetic words of Sophronius, Bishop
of the Jerusalem Church."

See this thread "The Wrong Rock"
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54566

Teke
May 12th 2006, 12:03 AM
Note the similar structures. Of course that resemblance was
obvious to Daniel. Seven shavuim, then a multiple of shavuim,
followed by one shavuim . all requiring multipliers. This new
series of weeks was just like the Levitical code that Daniel knew,
but now it was a series of 70 Weeks not just 50 years.

As Daniel saw it, first there was the well understood seven
weeks of years, for 49 years. But instead of those 49 years being
followed by a Jubilee (as he would have expected), the Jubilee
was deferred while the Lord gave Daniel 62 more weeks of years.
Those 69 weeks of years were then followed by one special
kind of week, a shavuim, or plural week of years. What could that
mean? Though the numbers are different, the numeric progression
in the Levitical code and in Daniel's 70 Weeks are identical. Please
look at the comparison below:

1st: A Seven.
2nd: A multiple of sevens.
3rd: A unique Jubilee.
1st: Seven Sevens
2nd: 62 Sevens
3rd: A plural of Seven. The Jubilee was a unique year
so this 70th Week would also be a unique plural!

Daniel would have recognized the 70th Week as being unique,
different in kind from the prior 69, but still similar to the Jubilee.
Daniel was a brilliant man, and the Lord had given him the gift of
interpreting dreams. If we slow Christian folk can see this parallel
progression 2500 years down the line, then Daniel would have
seen it with his eyes shut.

So Mr Skofield is saying that Daniels prophecy changed the 50 yr cycle to a 70 yr cycle ( a new cycle????)?
What would the evidence be for that?
And what is the 62 sevens?

For now, I'll just comment that none of the numbers are agreeing with what God set up with Israel, the priesthood and sacrifice according to scripture, not me.

MattHenry
May 12th 2006, 01:05 AM
For now, I'll just comment that none of the numbers are agreeing with what God set up with Israel, the priesthood and sacrifice according to scripture, not me. Perhaps if you familiarize me with this scripture first it will help me iunderstand how you misunderstood what Mr. Skolfield wrote. Also your understanding of Daniel's 69 weeks before the 70th would help.

Teke
May 12th 2006, 01:33 AM
Perhaps if you familiarize me with this scripture first it will help me iunderstand how you misunderstood what Mr. Skolfield wrote. Also your understanding of Daniel's 69 weeks before the 70th would help.

My understanding of Daniels 70 weeks is that they were all fulfilled and are completed. Daniels vision was of the end of the Mosaic age and the beginning of the Messianic. Which is the present age of the Church, the Messianic.

I quoted what Skofield wrote ( I presume your quoting him) that I am questioning in my post. Since I've posted much in the past on this subject, as well as many other members have also, before posting more repeats of long posts, I'd like some answers first.
I asked a couple direct questions, can you answer them?

Lou M.
May 12th 2006, 03:52 AM
As for the abomination of desolation, we have an eye witness account:
"Jerry Landay in his book, The Dome of the Rock.....

Something just don't quite add up here. The Dome of The Rock is presently occupying the part of the Temple which would have then been known as the Outer Court.
Jesus said that the "abomination of desolation" would be seen "standing in the Holy Place", which is where the daily (i.e. morning and evening, Numbers 28:1-10) sacrifice was offered. The Holy Place was separated from the Most Holy Place or Holy of Holies by the vail.
Given this information I fail to see how the Dome of the Rock is the abomination of desolation spoken of by Jesus.

Teke
May 12th 2006, 12:18 PM
Something just don't quite add up here. The Dome of The Rock is presently occupying the part of the Temple which would have then been known as the Outer Court.
Jesus said that the "abomination of desolation" would be seen "standing in the Holy Place", which is where the daily (i.e. morning and evening, Numbers 28:1-10) sacrifice was offered. The Holy Place was separated from the Most Holy Place or Holy of Holies by the vail.
Given this information I fail to see how the Dome of the Rock is the abomination of desolation spoken of by Jesus.


Hey Lou,:)
I agree there are a few things that don't add up.
My take on the abomination has always been toward the thought of murders in the temple. Thereby desolating it. The lies of the murderers are also what tramples the truth.
Daniel 8:11-13 looks like a clear picture of this happening. The host being the host of the temple.
It was these same type who conspired and killed our Lord. And although I know its controversial, I believe John the Baptist father (a priest) was murdered by them as well, in the temple. The place of His sanctuary (Dan. 8:11) could only be cast down by its host, and (continue to) practice and prosper.

I'd say it was surely time to cleanse the sanctuary. :2cents:

MattHenry
May 12th 2006, 01:06 PM
Something just don't quite add up here. The Dome of The Rock is presently occupying the part of the Temple which would have then been known as the Outer Court.
Jesus said that the "abomination of desolation" would be seen "standing in the Holy Place", which is where the daily (i.e. morning and evening, Numbers 28:1-10) sacrifice was offered. The Holy Place was separated from the Most Holy Place or Holy of Holies by the vail.
Given this information I fail to see how the Dome of the Rock is the abomination of desolation spoken of by Jesus.
The Court of the Gentiles was part of the Solomonic temple complex and so was part of the Holy Place as was the temple/sanctuary. Now dig these amazing verses:

Rev 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.

Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty [and] two months.

Could this be the court of the Gentiles? Now what about the 42 months? Let's try using prophetic language of "each day for a year".

The city of Jerusalem was trodden by, or controlled by, Gentiles until the Israelis retook the city that God gave them, in 1967.

There is an average of 30.44 days in a month, multiplied by 42 months = 1278.5 days (as years). Subtracting this from 1967 we arrive at….688.5, the beginning year of the construction of the Dome of the Rock. Muslim control (they took Jerusalem in I think 637) and construction at the mount (beginning 688) made this area too dangerous for Christians or Jews to worship at. Is the math demonstration of prophetic perfection or what? Are we to believe that this is some crazy accident? This is not about some prediction of some future fable.

As far as day=year, besides the fact that this math works out perfectly, it is drawing on those of the former age and their fathers, not some new pop doctrine: Job 8:8 For enquire, I pray thee, of the former age, and prepare thyself to the search of their fathers: 9 (For we [are but of] yesterday, and know nothing, because our days upon earth [are] a shadow)

Quoting from "The False Prophet": "In 1569, the great Anabaptist theologian, Thieleman van Braght, wrote the following in Martyrs Mirror, pages 21-24: 'a thousand two hundred and threescore days, which reckoned according to prophetic language means as many years… let it be reckoned as it may, say we, as a very long period of time.'

Two hunderd years later, Matthew Henry, in his 'Commentary of the Whole Bible', came to the same conclusion (Vol VI, page 1157 column 1, para. 2): '….if the beginning of that interval could be ascertained, this number of prophetic days, taking a day for a year, would give us a prospect of when the end might be.'"

Also A. R. Faucett commentary - "..... in the wilderness "a thousand two hundred and threescore days." In the wider sense, we may either adopt the year-day theory of 1260 years..."

Is the above amazing fulfillment of prophecy or what? One of my favorite portions of scripture. Is it conceivable that this math and scripture are an accident? When we use prophetic language there are many more problems that confirm with equally accurate results.

For more on the Abomination of Desolation:

http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54566

Here is another mathematical "accident" that a 10 year old could solve:

Revelation 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred [and] threescore days.

Most will agree that Israel is the "woman" in the context of this verse. If we start with a presumption that the end of the 1260 days was when Israel came out of "the wilderness", returning home and declaring her independence in 1948, and subtract 1260 years ("each day for a year"), we arrive exactly at..... 688, once again.

Teke
May 12th 2006, 01:58 PM
I believe you have to be on the inside looking out, not the outside looking in. Gentiles would not have been in the sanctuary. Even Revelation makes clear they can only tread to the door (narthex) of the sanctuary, not inside it. That is/was the rules of the temple and worship. Orthodox pattern their churchs after this also. But different in that the nave (where the faithful worhsip) is not seperated from the sanctuary (where the clergy preside), its round shape. In ancient times this was more strictly observed, as one who wished to be a christian could only come to the narthex and not into the nave (also representive of Noahs ark).

John146
May 12th 2006, 02:44 PM
A little inconsistent here. I do agree that the 69 weeks are a fit to the Cross exactly, confirmed by the mathematics that Daniel prophesied with perfection.
The mathematical perfection includes the first 7 weeks, (before the 3 score and 2 weeks) which closed the Old Testament prophecy, with the completion of the book of Malachi, exact to the year.

Daniel nailed two bulls eyes in one verse.
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529

As for the abomination of desolation, we have an eye witness account:

"Jerry Landay in his book, The Dome of the Rock (Newsweek, New York, NY, 1972)
p. 18, records that when Khalifah Omar entered Jerusalem in 639AD, he was met
by Sophronius, Bishop of the Jerusalem Church, who showed him around the city.
Seeing the temple mount (then in rubble), Omar declared that he was going to
build a memorial to Muhammad on the original site of the temple of God.
Sophronius exclaimed in horror, “Verily, this is the Abomination of Desolation as
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, and it now stands in the holy place.” Though
Sophronius was a very old man of about 80, Khalifah Omar put him in prison and
to forced labor, the severities of which killed him.
The Dome of the Rock being the Abomination that maketh Desolate is not a
new theology. It’s a truth that’s been with the Church for over 1300 years, but
somehow we have managed to forget the prophetic words of Sophronius, Bishop
of the Jerusalem Church."

See this thread "The Wrong Rock"
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54566

I just read through Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21. Something struck me when I read Luke 21.

20"When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. - Luke 21:20-24 (NIV)

As you can see from this passage, Jerusalem being surrounded by armies is a description of the abomination that causes desolation. The Dome of the Rock has nothing to do with this. It has to do with Jerusalem being destroyed and taken over by Gentiles. When did that happen? Didn't it happen in AD 70 when Jerusalem was taken over and the temple was destroyed? Also, it says that the Jews would be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Were the Jews not scattered throughout the world after AD 70?

What's interesting then is when I read the second half of verse 24. It says Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. Well, we know that Jerusalem is no longer being trampled on by the Gentiles as it belongs to Israel again. So can we conclude that the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled? It seems so. When I read further in Luke 21 it indicates to me that when the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled, then the return of Jesus Christ is very near.

David Taylor
May 12th 2006, 03:02 PM
Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

Dan 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words [are] closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

Here God Himself guarantees that Daniel did indeed succeed in sealing the book of Daniel - until the "time of the end". What do you make of that?

Matt,
remember Daniel was written roughly 500 years before Christ came, and roughly 600 years before the NT was finished.

The fulfillment of what was hidden and closed up and sealed, ended with the canon of the NT. It tells us that all has been revealed and answerd (through it)!

Matthew 10:26 "Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."

Matthew 11:25 "At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes."

Mark 4:22 "For there is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad. If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."

I Corinthians 2:9 "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God."

Ephesians 3:3 "How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit"

Colossians 1:26 "Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints"

Revelation 22:10 "And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand."

David Taylor
May 12th 2006, 03:23 PM
Except for the "sealing up the vision and prophecy" wasn't the rest of this laundry list accomplished with Jesus shed blood on the Cross?

Matt,
If the context of 'the rest of the laundry list' was accomplished at the Cross....

then why wouldn't the same context of fulfillment at the Cross apply to 'sealing up the vision and prophecy'?

What about these verses which affirm that?

Luke 24:27 "And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, Jesus expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things."


Matthew
1:22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled
2:15 that it might be fulfilled
2:17 Then was fulfilled
2:23 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets
3:15 to fulfil all righteousness
4:14 That it might be fulfilled
5:17 I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
8:17 That it might be fulfilled
12:17 That it might be fulfilled
13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy
13:35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet
21:4 All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet
26:56 all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled
27:9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken
27:35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet

Mark
1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled
15:28 And the scripture was fulfilled

Luke
4:21 This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.
21:22 that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

John
12:38 That the saying of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled
13:18 that the scripture may be fulfilled
15:25 But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law
17:12 that the scripture might be fulfilled.
18:9 That the saying might be fulfilled
18:32 That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled
19:24 that the scripture might be fulfilled
19:28 Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled
19:36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled

Acts
1:16 Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled
3:18 But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.
9:23 And after that many days were fulfilled
13:22 he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave their testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will.
13:27 yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him
13:29 And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.
13:32 the promise which was made unto the fathers,
13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus

James
2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith

7Trumpets
May 12th 2006, 05:41 PM
This is the prophecy that was fulfilled which should be applied to the destruction of Jerusalem. It is precisely clear and no questions need be asked about it.

And he[Jesus, see Matt 26:28] 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. Daniel 9:27


Notice how Mark wrote about the “abomination of desolation” [AOD] for short:

But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains. Mark 13:14

And Luke used other words:

And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Luke 21:20

Recall what Matthew 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) Matthew 24:15


VERY IMPORTANT POINT
Notice something here. They all speak of the same event, but use different words. Matthew says the AOD stands in the holy place; Mark says it stands where it ought not and Luke says “Jerusalem surrounded by armies.” What we will now prove is that they all mean the same thing, they applied in AD 66 – AD 70 [and they will apply to the end times]. Furthermore, it does not mean a pig sacrificed INSIDE the temple, although that is an abomination.

:idea: Standing where it ought not = Jerusalem compassed with armies = stand in the holy place

To understand this point, we go to Nehemiah, to find what this holy place really is.

Nehemiah 13:15-21 (NKJV)

15 In those days I saw people in Judah treading wine presses on the Sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and loading donkeys with wine, grapes, figs, and all kinds of burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the Sabbath day. And I warned them about the day on which they were selling provisions. 16 Men of Tyre dwelt there also, who brought in fish and all kinds of goods, and sold them on the Sabbath to the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem. 17 Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said to them, “What evil thing is this that you do, by which you profane the Sabbath day? 18 Did not your fathers do thus, and did not our God bring all this disaster on us and on this city? Yet you bring added wrath on Israel by profaning the Sabbath.” 19 So it was, at the gates of Jerusalem, as it began to be dark before the Sabbath, that I commanded the gates to be shut, and charged that they must not be opened till after the Sabbath. Then I posted some of my servants at the gates, so that no burdens would be brought in on the Sabbath day. 20 Now the merchants and sellers of all kinds of wares lodged outside Jerusalem once or twice. 21 Then I warned them, and said to them, “Why do you spend the night around the wall? If you do so again, I will lay hands on you!” From that time on they came no more on the Sabbath. 22 And I commanded the Levites that they should cleanse themselves, and that they should go and guard the gates, to sanctify the Sabbath day.

No buying or selling on the Sabbath

And if the people of the land bring ware or any victuals on the Sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy it of them on the Sabbath, or on the holy day: and that we would leave the seventh year, and the exaction of every debt. Nehemiah 10:31

Commentary
After the captivity, the people were quickly returning to the same abominations that caused Jerusalem to be destroyed. They were treading the winepresses on the Sabbath and buying and selling (very important to remember). Nehemiah tried to warn them and finally had to resort to force. Notice now verse 13:20, 21 “Now the merchants and sellers of all kinds of wares lodged outside Jerusalem once or twice. Then I warned them, and said to them, “Why do you spend the night around the wall? If you do so again, I will lay hands on you!” From that time on they came no more on the Sabbath.”

Nehemiah designated a certain precinct outside the walls of Jerusalem as a holy place. Once the traders came to buy or sell on the Sabbath, if they set foot in that “holy place” then action could be taken. If they stayed further away, then they were out of his reach. This was later to be called “Sabbath Ground” {I am not too sure if this is the proper name}

The warning Jesus gave to His disciples was well understood. They all knew the area Nehemiah called the holy place, for it was where the traders would surround the walls of Jerusalem to sell their wares. Nehemiah then made it difficult to lodge there on the Sabbath day. Now notice what Jesus had said in context:

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. 15 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) 16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: 17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: 18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. 19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! 20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day:Matt 24:14-21

As you can see, the abomination of desolation was related to the Sabbath day. If all the disciples were in church (synagogue) on the Sabbath, then if the Roman armies surrounded Jrusalem that time, they will all be cornered and killed. But on a day other than the Sabbath, they would most likely be elsewhere (even outside Jerusalem) and it would easier to flee. This is what one informed person wrote:

When the idolatrous standards of the Romans should be set up in the holy ground, which extended some furlongs outside the city walls, then the followers of Christ were to find safety in flight. When the warning sign should be seen, those who would escape must make no delay. Throughout the land of Judea, as well as in Jerusalem itself, the signal for flight must be immediately obeyed… They must not hesitate a moment, lest they be involved in the general destruction. Great Controversy page 21
This was of course related to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Recall what Jesus had said to the murderous Jews:

36Verily I say unto you, all these things shall come upon this generation. 37O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. 39For I say unto you, ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. Matt 23:36-39

What almost all of you fail to realise is that it was always JEWISH abominations that led to desolation of their city and temple. So it was in the first time their temple and city were destroyed:

21 Thus saith the LORD; Take heed to yourselves, and bear no burden on the Sabbath day, nor bring it in by the gates of Jerusalem; 22 Neither carry forth a burden out of your houses on the Sabbath day, neither do ye any work, but hallow ye the Sabbath day, as I commanded your fathers. 23 But they obeyed not, neither inclined their ear, but made their neck stiff, that they might not hear, nor receive instruction. 24 And it shall come to pass, if ye diligently hearken unto me, saith the LORD, to bring in no burden through the gates of this city on the Sabbath day, but hallow the Sabbath day, to do no work therein; 25 Then shall there enter into the gates of this city kings and princes sitting upon the throne of David, riding in chariots and on horses, they, and their princes, the men of Judah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem: and this city shall remain for ever. 26 And they shall come from the cities of Judah, and from the places about Jerusalem, and from the land of Benjamin, and from the plain, and from the mountains, and from the south, bringing burnt offerings, and sacrifices, and meat offerings, and incense, and bringing sacrifices of praise, unto the house of the LORD. 27 But if ye will not hearken unto me to hallow the Sabbath day, and not to bear a burden, even entering in at the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched. Jeremiah 17:21-27

In summary, do not violate the Sabbath or else Jerusalem will be burnt. Nevertheless they did violate the Sabbath and Nebuchadnezzar did burn their city down. Read 2 Chronicles 36:14-19 for the fulfillment.

14 Moreover all the chief of the priests, and the people, transgressed very much after all the abominations of the heathen; and polluted the house of the LORD which he had hallowed in Jerusalem. 15 And the LORD God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, rising up betimes, and sending; because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place: 16 But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose against his people, till there was no remedy. 17 Therefore he brought upon them the king of the Chaldees, who slew their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no compassion upon young man or maiden, old man, or him that stooped for age: he gave them all into his hand. 18 And all the vessels of the house of God, great and small, and the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king, and of his princes; all these he brought to Babylon. 19 And they burnt the house of God, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem, and burnt all the palaces thereof with fire, and destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof. 2 Chronicles 36:14-19

Compare the similarities of this overview of their conditions to what Jesus said in Matthew 23. This is like a "covenant lawsuit" where the ABOMINATIONS (crimes) of the JEWISH people are outlined, then the sentence is pronounced: DESOLATION.

Many people come up with rather fanciful speculations of what is the abomination of desolation, failing to consult the BIBLE's definition. I hope you do not continue to make that mistake. Now hear what the author said about Jerusalem:

Not one Christian perished in the destruction of Jerusalem. Christ had given His disciples warning, and all who believed His words watched for the promised sign. "When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies," said Jesus, "then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out." Luke 21:20, 21. After the Romans under Cestius had surrounded the city, they unexpectedly abandoned the siege when everything seemed favorable for an immediate attack. The besieged, despairing of successful resistance, were on the point of surrender, when the Roman general withdrew his forces without the least apparent reason. But God's merciful providence was directing events for the good of His own people. The promised sign had been given to the waiting Christians, and now an opportunity was offered for all who would, to obey the Saviour's warning. Events were so overruled that neither Jews nor Romans should hinder the flight of the Christians. Upon the retreat of Cestius, the Jews, sallying from Jerusalem, pursued after his retiring army; and while both forces were thus fully engaged, the Christians had an opportunity to leave the city. At this time the country also had been cleared of enemies who might have endeavored to intercept them. At the time of the siege, the Jews were assembled at Jerusalem to keep the Feast of Tabernacles, and thus the Christians throughout the land were able to make their escape unmolested. Without delay they fled to a place of safety--the city of Pella, in the land of Perea, beyond Jordan. The Jewish forces, pursuing after Cestius and his army, fell upon their rear with such fierceness as to threaten them with total destruction. It was with great difficulty that the Romans succeeded in making their retreat. The Jews escaped almost without loss, and with their spoils returned in triumph to Jerusalem. Yet this apparent success brought them only evil. It inspired them with that spirit of stubborn resistance to the Romans which speedily brought unutterable woe upon the doomed city. Great Controversy page 31
Now I hope you understand properly and are able to leave from the speculations.

MattHenry
May 13th 2006, 12:36 AM
My understanding of Daniels 70 weeks is that they were all fulfilled and are completed. Daniels vision was of the end of the Mosaic age and the beginning of the Messianic. Which is the present age of the Church, the Messianic. I agree with this right up until the end of the 69th week which I believe closes at the Cross and mathematical perfection confirms this.

But where do you put the 70th week?
I quoted what Skofield wrote ( I presume your quoting him) that I am questioning in my post. Since I've posted much in the past on this subject, as well as many other members have also, before posting more repeats of long posts, I'd like some answers first. I asked a couple direct questions, can you answer them?Please accept my apology for not being more responsive and I see now how rude my post was.

You seemed to suggest that Mr. Skolfield was saying that Daniel was exchanging the Jubilee year from 50 to 70 weeks. Instead what he is saying is that Daniel could well have understood, or seen, a similarity or pattern or relationship, between the Levitical calendar with which he was obviously well familiar, and the same "flow" if you will, in the words that the Angel gave him. Kinda like rhyming verse, or poetry.

In fact the repeated series of verses that we all well recognize in Daniel and Revelation as well as Isiah are called bifids. The Jewish poets would say something and then repeat it again in slightly different words. Also Daniel and Revelation use a form bifid that is also chiasmic. A chiasm is repeated but in a step up and then step down fashion. For example a bifid may progress as 1234, 1234 the chiasmic form would go 1234, 4321. I am just saying that Daniel was clearly not unfamiliar with poetry. An absolutely fascinating paper on bifids and chiasms can be read free in this PDF: http://www.ellisskolfield.com/pdf/Bifids_Chiasms.pdf This understanding is really pretty essential for in depth study of particularly the apocalyptic books of the Bible.

Skolfield was simply suggesting that - What if Daniel recognized the similarity in the pattern between the Levitical calendar and the progression in the prophecy that the the Angel gave Daniel, as even Skolfield himself recognized. Scofield then did a calculation on that basis and it happened to work out exactly to the year in conjunction with verses of Scripture as well as historical record. Maybe this isn't what the Lord intended for the book of Daniel to convey but it is interesting to ponder, and certainly one terrific accident if it wasn't.

I also believe that portions of Daniel were witheld until "the time of the end" so some of our understanding may not have been revealed to us until this last generation. In other words perhaps in this particular case the Lord left some for us to figure out ourselves without the advantage of looking to the "former age" and "their fathers".

The mathematics, for example, could never have before been checked for accuracy because the dates of 1948 and 1967 had to have passed in order for us to be able to verify the problems backwards through time and thus prove prophetic perfection, through the ages AFTER IT HAS COME TO PASS.

Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Dan 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words [are] closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

I am not trying to jam my beliefs down anybody's throat. Mr. Skolfield's writings led me out of the valley of futurist doctrine just a few months ago. What he writes he supports substantially with scripture but the world around us add confirmation, right down to the nightly news.

Ellis was trained in Columbia seminary in dispensationalism and preached it wholeheartedly for years. He then sought to support the foundation of what he had been taught to believe, and found instead that the foundation was wanting. He is a dear sweet 78 year old everyday saint who has been immersed in scripture most of his life. Read him as simply another commentator or a person to study scripture with. He makes no claims of franchise on the truth, rather to the contrary. However, what he writes is about prophecy THAT HAS BEEN FULFILLED, and how the world has and continues to prove it, and not that much about speculating about what will be. He leaves that to Lindsay, Van Impe, and Hinn.

MattHenry
May 13th 2006, 12:57 AM
I just read through Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21. Something struck me when I read Luke 21.

20"When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near.Note NEAR. We're on God's time and as you rightly point out this verse takes us from that destruction until 1967 (end Gentile trodding).
21Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. - Luke 21:20-24 (NIV)


As you can see from this passage, Jerusalem being surrounded by armies is a description of the abomination that causes desolation. The Dome of the Rock has nothing to do with this. It has to do with Jerusalem being destroyed and taken over by Gentiles. When did that happen? Didn't it happen in AD 70 when Jerusalem was taken over and the temple was destroyed? Also, it says that the Jews would be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Were the Jews not scattered throughout the world after AD 70?
Perhaps not as scattered as killed!:
"Titus destroyed Jerusalem in 70AD. According to Tacitus, the city was crowded with 600,000 visitors. After five months the walls were battered down, the Temple burned, and the city was put to the sword. Josephus states that over 1,000,000 Jews were killed and 95,000 taken captive. Henry Halley, Haley's Bible Handbook
(Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan, 1965) pp. 655-656. However, Eusebius writes, "On
the other hand, the people of the church in Jerusalem, were commanded by oracle
given by revelation to those in the city who were worthy of it, to depart and dwell
in one of the cities of Perea, which they called Pella.: Ecclesiastical History, Book
3, v. 5, ln. 3-4."
The Chrisitans knew the prophecy and hightailed it: "The Christians in the city were aware of Jesus. prophecy, so
just prior to that city's destruction they fled Jerusalem in haste.
Early church records assert that no Christians were left in the city,
and that no Christian lives were lost during the ensuing massacre."

What's interesting then is when I read the second half of verse 24. It says Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. Well, we know that Jerusalem is no longer being trampled on by the Gentiles as it belongs to Israel again. So can we conclude that the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled? It seems so. When I read further in Luke 21 it indicates to me that when the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled, then the return of Jesus Christ is very near.Try this link from where these quotes are from, if you haven't read it yet it is one of my favorite chapters in the book: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54566

Work the math from another direction:'

Daniel 12:11 And from the time [that] the daily [sacrifice] shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, [there shall be] a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

Quoting again from "The False prophet":
"Sacrifices were suspended three times in the Old Testament: once before Daniel (Chronicles 28:24-25), once during the Babylonian captivity in 583 BC (Chronicles 36:19 and Ezra 3:6), and once, about four hundred years later, by the Greek king Antiochus Epiphanies. So to which event do you suppose the Lord might be referring? Well, to whom was this prophecy given? To Daniel. Result: we have every reason to believe that the Lord was referring to sacrifices that were abolished during Daniel's own lifetime: to an abolition of sacrifices to which Daniel could relate!"

These Old Testament day/years would also be something that Daniel could relate to or 1290 - 360 day - Hebrew years, each year being equal to .9857 solar year (our historical record is in solar years thus the adjustment).

1290x.9857=1271.5 solar years. Subtracting 583 (because it is BC) we get....688.5. Again, the Dome of the Rock.

ShirleyFord
May 13th 2006, 01:12 AM
I agree with this right up until the end of the 69th week which I believe closes at the Cross and mathematical perfection confirms this.

But where do you put the 70th week?

Hi Matt,

Where do you put the 70th week? After the 69th week.

Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks (7 weeks + 62 weeks = 69weeks) shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:

Jesus went to cross, when?

Notice, the Scripture here states here that He was cut off after, not at the end of. Cut off after what? The 69 weeks and not at the end of 69 weeks.

What comes after 69?

Now it's been a long time since I was in school, but I was taught that 70 comes after 69.

Just a thought. :)

Shirley

MattHenry
May 13th 2006, 01:25 AM
Hi Matt,

Where do you put the 70th week? After the 69th week.

Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks (7 weeks + 62 weeks = 69weeks) shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:

Jesus went to cross, when?

Notice, the Scripture here states here that He was cut off after, not at the end of. Cut off after what? The 69 weeks and not at the end of 69 weeks.

What comes after 69?

Now it's been a long time since I was in school, but I was taught that 70 comes after 69.

Just a thought. :)

Shirley I don't know if you noticed this thread, but both the 7 weeks and the 69 weeks work out with amazing precision, in both the prophecy in scripture, and the mathematically: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529

ShirleyFord
May 13th 2006, 01:57 AM
I don't know if you noticed this thread, but both the 7 weeks and the 69 weeks work out with amazing precision, in both the prophecy in scripture, and the mathematically: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529

Hi Matt,

Yes, I read it.

But do you agree that Daniel 9:26 says after the 69 weeks was Messiah cut off, crucified? Now, if Jesus was crucified after the 69 weeks, He was crucified during the 70th week.

Shirley

MattHenry
May 13th 2006, 02:30 AM
Hi Matt,

Yes, I read it.

But do you agree that Daniel 9:26 says after the 69 weeks was Messiah cut off, crucified? Now, if Jesus was crucified after the 69 weeks, He was crucified during the 70th week.

Shirley Yes I believe that means after. As in after the completion of the 69th week. This is exactly when Jesus was crucified. Not some roughly into the 70th week. I don't believe these time frames were given to us to be imprecise, particularly when the mathematics work out so precisely and repeatedly.

ShirleyFord
May 13th 2006, 02:57 AM
Yes I believe that means after. As in after the completion of the 69th week. This is exactly when Jesus was crucified. Not some roughly into the 70th week.

Daniel 9:25 says, "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."

Do you agree that the first week of the 62 weeks of years was after the completion of the seven weeks of years? It would have been the 8th week of years; not still in the 7th week of years.

Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:

Now, what is the difference here between the 8th week coming after or at the completion of the 7th week and the Messiah being cut off during the 70th week coming after or at the completion of the 69th week?

Shirley

Lou M.
May 13th 2006, 07:16 AM
To understand this point, we go to Nehemiah, to find what this holy place really is.......Now I hope you understand properly and are able to leave from the speculations.

Speculations? Any child could see what and where the Holy Place is simply by reading God's Inscription about it.

Tabernacle:
"....Internally it was divided by a veil into two chambers, the exterior of which was called the holy place, also "the sanctuary" (Heb. 9:2) and the "first tabernacle" (6.); and the interior, the holy of holies, "the holy place," "the Holiest," the "second tabernacle" (Ex. 28:29; Heb. 9:3, 7)...."


"And thou shalt hang up the vail under the taches, that thou mayest bring in thither within the vail the ark of the testimony: and the vail shall divide unto you between the holy place and the most holy."

"And Aaron shall bear the names of the children of Israel in the breastplate of judgment upon his heart, when he goeth in unto the holy place, for a memorial before the Lord continually."

"And it shall be upon Aaron to minister: and his sound shall be heard when he goeth in unto the holy place before the Lord, and when he cometh out, that he die not."

"And they shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in unto the tabernacle of the congregation, or when they come near unto the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die: it shall be a statute for ever unto him and his seed after him."

(etc... for the 27 other occurences in the Law.)

How about Ezekiel?

"When the priests enter therein, then shall they not go out of the holy place into the outer court, but there they shall lay their garments wherein they minister; for they are holy; and shall put on other garments, and shall approach to those things which are for the people."

Hebrews tell us of the holy place in Christ's Priestly Work:

"Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us."

"For Christ is not entered into the holy place made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:"

Barclay states:
"There are in the New Testament two words which are translated Temple, and rightly so, but there is a clear distinction between them. The Temple itself is called the naos (GSN3485). It was a comparatively small building, and contained the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies into which only the High Priest might enter, and he only on the great Day of Atonement. But the naos (GSN3485) itself was surrounded by a vast space which was occupied by successive and ascending courtyards. First there was the Court of the Gentiles, into which anyone might come, and beyond which it was death for a Gentile to penetrate. Then there came the Court of the Women, entered by the Beautiful Gate of the Temple, into which any Israelite might come. Next there came the Court of the Israelites, entered by the gate called Nicanor's Gate, a great gate of Corinthian bronze which needed twenty men to open and shut it. It was in this court that the people assembled for the Temple services."

"The phrase 'the abomination of desolation', the profanation that appals, originally described the heathen image and all that accompanied it with which Antiochus" (Epiphanes) "desecrated the Temple" (168 BC). "Jesus prophesies that the same kind of thing is going to happen again. It very nearly happened in the year A.D. 40. Caligula was then Roman Emperor. He was an epileptic and mad. But he insisted that he was a god. He heard of the imageless worship of the Temple of Jerusalem and planned to set up his own statue in the Holy Place. His advisers besought him not to do so, for they knew that, if he did, a bloody civil war would result. He was obstinate, but fortunately he died in A.D. 41 before he could carry out his plan of desecration."

The funny thing is that about ten years later, Paul was still warning of this very thing:
"Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.".....A thing that has never been reported by anyone as occuring, to this day.

Speculation?
It takes far more 'speculation' when we assume to count the 490 years of Daniel's prophecy in a way that is different from how Daniel counted the 70 years of Jeremiah's prophecy.


The truth is, there is no example in Scripture (or anywhere else!) of a stated time period starting, stopping and then starting again.

The truth? Really?

Gray's Bible Commentary-

"Cycles of Years:
To take another illustration, God's dealings with Israel are in cycles of 490 years. (1) The period from Abram to Exodus was 490 years, plus the fifteen years during which the bondwoman and her child (Hagar and Ismael) dominated in Abram's tent, and which are not counted.
(2) The period from Exodus to the dedication of Solomon's temple was 490 years, plus the 131 years of captivity in the time of the Judges, which are not counted. (3) From the dedication to the return from Babylon was 490 years, plus the seventy years of that captivity not counted. (4) From the return from Babylon to the beginning of the millennial age is 490 years, plus the dispensation in which Israel is dispersed, and which is not counted. When God Does Not Count Time Prophetically speaking, God does not count time with reference to Israel while she is in captivity, or dispersion, or dominated by any other nation. In evidence of this, note that in 1 Kings 6:1 mention is made of the fourth year of Solomon as being 480 years after the Exodus. But we know from Numbers 14:33 that they were forty years in the wilderness; then, according to the Book of Joshua, they were thirty-seven years in conquering Canaan and up until the period of the Judges; Acts 13:20 shows that they were 450 years under the Judges; then they were forty years under Saul (Acts 13:21), and forty years under David (2 Sam. 5:4, 5). These periods foot up 607 years, to which should be added the four years of Solomon referred to, making a total of 611 years. How shall we explain this discrepancy, of which infidels and others have made so much? The answer has been stated above, that God does not count time prophetically while Israel is in captivity. For example, seven captivities are mentioned in the Book of Judges, one of eight years (3:8); eighteen years (3:14); twenty years (4:3); seven years (6:1); eighteen years (10:8); forty years (13:1), and twenty years (1 Sam. 7:2), making a total of precisely 131 years. The above is a sufficient illustration of the principle."

MattHenry
May 13th 2006, 10:24 AM
Daniel 9:25 says, "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."

Do you agree that the first week of the 62 weeks of years was after the completion of the seven weeks of years? It would have been the 8th week of years; not still in the 7th week of years.

Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:

Now, what is the difference here between the 8th week coming after or at the completion of the 7th week and the Messiah being cut off during the 70th week coming after or at the completion of the 69th week?

ShirleyIt is the 7 that works, the same way that the 69 works, with the scripture and the math. The first week closes the old testament prophecy. The the total of the 7 and 62 pegs the Messiah being cut off.

ShirleyFord
May 13th 2006, 02:57 PM
It is the 7 that works, the same way that the 69 works, with the scripture and the math. The first week closes the old testament prophecy. The the total of the 7 and 62 pegs the Messiah being cut off.

The only math in this prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 which complies with the Scripture of this prophecy is 70 weeks of years, broken down in three sections:

7 weeks ( 49 yrs.) +
62 weeks (434 yrs.) +
1 weeks ( 7 yrs.) =
_____________
70 weeks - 490 yrs.

There is no gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks, "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" (v. 25) So Jesus came the first time during the 483rd year (7 wks + 62 weeks or 49 years + 434 years) after the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem.

According to v. 26, the Messiah Jesus would be cut off after the 483rd year, "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off,"

So if Jesus was crucified after the 483rd year, he couldn't have been crucified during the 483rd year or during the 69th week, now could he? The 484th year follows 483rd year, wouldn't you agree? And the 484th year is in the 70th week not the 69th week. So Jesus would have had to have been crucified sometime during that 70th week.

We find the 70th week in v. 27.

Daniel 9:27 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.

Who do you believe he is in this verse?

Shirley

MattHenry
May 13th 2006, 05:39 PM
The only math in this prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 which complies with the Scripture of this prophecy is 70 weeks of years, broken down in three sections:

7 weeks ( 49 yrs.) +
62 weeks (434 yrs.) +
1 weeks ( 7 yrs.) =
_____________
70 weeks - 490 yrs.
Do you believe that old testament prophecy was written in solar years or Hebrew years?

There is no gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks, "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" (v. 25) So Jesus came the first time during the 483rd year (7 wks + 62 weeks or 49 years + 434 years) after the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem.
What year do you believe this was?

According to v. 26, the Messiah Jesus would be cut off after the 483rd year, "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off,"

So if Jesus was crucified after the 483rd year, he couldn't have been crucified during the 483rd year or during the 69th week, now could he? The 484th year follows 483rd year, wouldn't you agree? And the 484th year is in the 70th week not the 69th week. So Jesus would have had to have been crucified sometime during that 70th week.
We find the 70th week in v. 27.

Daniel 9:27 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.

Who do you believe he is in this verse?

Shirley

ShirleyFord
May 13th 2006, 07:34 PM
Do you believe that old testament prophecy was written in solar years or Hebrew years?

Matt, I think we must work within the 70 weeks of 490 concecutive years laid out in the framework of this prophecy. We can get into all kinds of wild speculations calculating by this system or that system, or by this calender or that calender, that is nowhere supported by Scripture. We must stick with what the Bible says over what man says regardless of his scholarship and acedemia, regardless of how much or how long he has studied the Bible, and regardless of what a rigtheous godly man he is.

There is no mystery here that God has left it up to us to figure out. The focus of this entire prophecy is the coming of Jesus, Israel's promised Messiah Prince and God letting the children of Israel know the exact time when He would come. And of course, Daniel 9:24 sums up all that He would do when He came, and He accomplished all of those 6 things in v. 24 during the 70th week:

Daniel 9:24 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.

The important thing is that the Jews would know the exact timing of the coming of their Messiah so they could be ready to receive their King when He came. But only a few did until after His death, burial, resurrection and ascension back into Heaven, and until Penticost and onward.


What year do you believe this was?

Jesus was born during the 69th week of the 70 weeks prophecy. (v. 25)
He was crucified after the 69th week (v. 26) in the midst of the 70th week. (v. 27)

At His baptism at the beginning of His public ministry, He was anointed by God, "and to anoint the most Holy" (v. 24) and introduced to Israel by John the Baptist.

Acts 4:27 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,

Acts 10:38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

Hebrews 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.




John 1:19 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?

John 1:20 And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.

John 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.

John 1:22 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself?

John 1:23 He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias.

John 1:24 And they which were sent were of the Pharisees.

John 1:25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

John 1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;

John 1:27 He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.

John 1:28 These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing.

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

John 1:30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

John 1:31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

John 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

John 1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

John 1:34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

John 1:35 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his disciples;
John 1:36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!



Matthew 3:13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.

Matthew 3:14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?

Matthew 3:15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

Matthew 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.


Shirley

MattHenry
May 13th 2006, 07:43 PM
On what date was the order to rebuild Jerusalem and it's walls given?

ShirleyFord
May 13th 2006, 08:03 PM
Matt,

The only thing I can be honestly sure of is that God told Daniel via the angel Gabiel, which Daniel wrote down for his people, was the 70 weeks of 490 years. Nowhere does the Bible give an exact date when the order to rebuild Jerusalem and it's walls given.

I could cite several who have done the calculations. But I must stick with what the Bible says and believe it.

Shirley

Lou M.
May 13th 2006, 08:09 PM
There is no gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks, "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" (v. 25) So Jesus came the first time during the 483rd year (7 wks + 62 weeks or 49 years + 434 years) after the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem.

I wouldn't be so quick to judge that.
Don't we understand that we a dealing with God, Who is far above us? Where is our reverance and fear and awe of His way's?
God's Word is written in a way that we cannot put Him in a box and say, "This and this alone is His way."
For instance; have you ever considered this about the current subject:

"Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word (dabar) to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time."

Now, Jeremiah chapters 32-33 are repleat with GOD's WORD to Jeremiah promising the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem (587 BC "tenth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, which was the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar."). Interestingly, exactly 49 years (seven sevens) later (538 BC) an "anointed one" (Cyrus, "God's annointed" {Isaiah 45:1}) defeated the Babylonians brining to an end the captivity of Israel.

Should we think it a coincidence that the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel come together so precisely?

Study and discuss? Yes.
Search out every possibility? Definately.
Tell God that He has to do things the way we understand them?
Not advisable.

MattHenry
May 13th 2006, 08:27 PM
Matt,

The only thing I can be honestly sure of is that God told Daniel via the angel Gabiel, which Daniel wrote down for his people, was the 70 weeks of 490 years. Nowhere does the Bible give an exact date when the order to rebuild Jerusalem and it's walls given.

I could cite several who have done the calculations. But I must stick with what the Bible says and believe it.

Shirley I wasn't asking for a calculation, I was asking for historical record of when the order was given to rebuild Jerusalem so we could agree on a starting point. Try a Yahoo search and I suspect you will be comfortable with 444 or 445 but I am more than willing to consider your date. Try this: http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=date+444+445+rebuild+jerusalem+artaxerxes&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&x=wrt

Allthingsnew
May 13th 2006, 10:02 PM
One quick question.

Does anyone on here happen to know what year or approx what year John wrote the book of Revelation?

matthew94
May 13th 2006, 10:11 PM
There are 2 schools of thought

1. Most believe it was written around AD95
2. A minority believe it was written in the early 60's

Allthingsnew
May 13th 2006, 10:18 PM
Thanks.

Hey how do you copy and paste on here. this is the only site I can't paste to.

ScottJohnson
May 13th 2006, 10:18 PM
I'm a minority.

Allthingsnew
May 13th 2006, 10:40 PM
I have a question that I'm sure there will be an answer for, but here goes.

If Rev. 20 is talking about what Christ did at calvary (binding satan) then why would God have John write it down in a book of prophecy of things which must shortly come to pass, when it happen 50 to 60 years earlier?

Thats not prophecy thats history.

There are several more verses that you believe were fulfilled years before John wrote them also. But John sees them in his vision of future events.

Just curious. You guys got me thinking.

ShirleyFord
May 13th 2006, 10:44 PM
I wouldn't be so quick to judge that.
Don't we understand that we a dealing with God, Who is far above us? Where is our reverance and fear and awe of His way's?
God's Word is written in a way that we cannot put Him in a box and say, "This and this alone is His way."

I haven't done any of these things you are accusing me of.



For instance; have you ever considered this about the current subject:

"Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word (dabar) to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time."

You must have a different Bible than me. What you have quoted makes no sense to me whatsoever plus it completely leaves Jesus out.

And then you go on to interpret this strange quote:


Now, Jeremiah chapters 32-33 are repleat with GOD's WORD to Jeremiah promising the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem (587 BC "tenth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, which was the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar."). Interestingly, exactly 49 years (seven sevens) later (538 BC) an "anointed one" (Cyrus, "God's annointed" {Isaiah 45:1}) defeated the Babylonians brining to an end the captivity of Israel.

.....by placing Cyrus in the place of the Messiah Jesus!

and then ask:


Should we think it a coincidence that the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel come together so precisely?


Study and discuss? Yes.
Search out every possibility? Definately.
Tell God that He has to do things the way we understand them?
Not advisable.

Where do you find me telling God that He has to do things the way I understand them?

Shirley

ScottJohnson
May 13th 2006, 11:34 PM
I have a question that I'm sure there will be an answer for, but here goes.

If Rev. 20 is talking about what Christ did at calvary (binding satan) then why would God have John write it down in a book of prophecy of things which must shortly come to pass, when it happen 50 to 60 years earlier?

Thats not prophecy thats history.
Wouldn't Chapter 12 of the Book of Revelation be history as well?

Why is there no mention of a 1,000 years reign of Christ on Earth anywhere in the entire bible other than the Book of Revelation?

Allthingsnew
May 13th 2006, 11:43 PM
Wouldn't Chapter 12 of the Book of Revelation be history as well?



Why is there no mention of a 1,000 years reign of Christ on Earth anywhere in the entire bible other than the Book of Revelation?
Because God didn't give John the vision of what shortly must come to pass until he was imprisoned on the isle of Patmos.

Rev. 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John
Rev 1:2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw

ScottJohnson
May 14th 2006, 12:03 AM
Because God didn't give John the vision of what shortly must come to pass until he was imprisoned on the isle of Patmos.

Rev. 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John
Rev 1:2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw
Hmmm. So if God was giving John a prophecy of what shortly must come to pass, over 1900 years ago, how would one define "shortly come to pass"? I know if my wife asked me to clean out the garage and I said that I would do it soon, but then still didn't have it done 1900 years later.....she'd be mad.

How about Rev 12. Is that History or prophecy ?

Allthingsnew
May 14th 2006, 12:23 AM
Hmmm. So if God was giving John a prophecy of what shortly must come to pass, over 1900 years ago, how would one define "shortly come to pass"? I know if my wife asked me to clean out the garage and I said that I would do it soon, but then still didn't have it done 1900 years later.....she'd be mad.

How about Rev 12. Is that History or prophecy ?

I have to study on this. Thats why I'm asking questions.

Its just strange to me why John writing about things he's seeing in a vision from God. That he witnessed firsthand 50 to 60 years earlier.

To me it appears that he'd describing who he's talking about, in a way that we will know who he's talking about. and then telling what they are doing in the future.

I may be wrong and probably am. But I'm trying to learn all I can.

ShirleyFord
May 14th 2006, 12:34 AM
I'm a minority.

Me too, Scott.

Shirley

MattHenry
May 14th 2006, 12:57 AM
Thanks.

Hey how do you copy and paste on here. this is the only site I can't paste to.
You have to hit the underlined italicized A in the upper corner of the post form before you can copy or paste from or into the text you are typing.

ShirleyFord
May 14th 2006, 06:10 AM
I wasn't asking for a calculation, I was asking for historical record of when the order was given to rebuild Jerusalem so we could agree on a starting point. Try a Yahoo search and I suspect you will be comfortable with 444 or 445 but I am more than willing to consider your date. Try this: http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=date+444+445+rebuild+jerusalem+artaxerxes&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&x=wrt

Hi Matt,

Finding an accurate historical record, first of all, stating the year when the order was given to rebuild Jerusalem nearly 2500 would be mere speculative calculations of man.

I have looked and considered many historical records as to the exact year over the last 40 years since I became a Christian. While such data is certainly quite interesting to read, I've wasted far too much time during my walk with the Lord in such things. Plus it provides nothing that would help us to understand the Bible better or the meaning of the 70th week of Daniel.

Btw, I asked you a question that you haven't answered yet, Who do you believe the he is of Daniel 9:27?

Shirley

Allthingsnew
May 14th 2006, 01:10 PM
Hmmm. So if God was giving John a prophecy of what shortly must come to pass, over 1900 years ago, how would one define "shortly come to pass"? I know if my wife asked me to clean out the garage and I said that I would do it soon, but then still didn't have it done 1900 years later.....she'd be mad.

God's timing is not our timing, God is not bound by time, so to Him 1900 years is nothing. He is eternal.

All I know is Rev. 1:1 DOES NOT say: The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things that have already happen years ago.

ScottJohnson
May 14th 2006, 01:26 PM
Hi Matt,

Finding an accurate historical record, first of all, stating the year when the order was given to rebuild Jerusalem nearly 2500 would be mere speculative calculations of man.

I have looked and considered many historical records as to the exact year over the last 40 years since I became a Christian. While such data is certainly quite interesting to read, I've wasted far too much time during my walk with the Lord in such things. Plus it provides nothing that would help us to understand the Bible better or the meaning of the 70th week of Daniel.

I agree with this Shirley. I've seen all sorts of formulas from all perpsectives, that have a date to begin the rebuilding of the city and extend to either the baptism of Christ, Christ's triumphant entry or the Crucifixion, and now the building of the dome of the rock. Most seem to take a myriad of twist and turns through Jubilee years, Sabatical years, Lunar years, Solar years yada, yada, yada.

I'm in the same camp as Philip Mauro who said, the dates aren't important, the fulfillment can be seen in the works of Christ in the New Testament. It's the fulfillment, and not the when, of Daniel's prophecy that is important.

ShirleyFord
May 14th 2006, 02:35 PM
I agree with this Shirley. I've seen all sorts of formulas from all perpsectives, that have a date to begin the rebuilding of the city and extend to either the baptism of Christ, Christ's triumphant entry or the Crucifixion, and now the building of the dome of the rock. Most seem to take a myriad of twist and turns through Jubilee years, Sabatical years, Lunar years, Solar years yada, yada, yada.

I know Scott. It gives me a headache just thinking about the many hours I've spent trying to figure out all of these twists and turns and then determine who was correct, since none of the historians agreed on every point. Then a lady in the Sunday School class I was teaching years ago got my attention when she asked me, "Why would any Christian need to know the exact dates for, to prove that Jesus is the Messiah? Isn't believing that Jesus is the Messiah part of becoming a Christian?"

I don't remember giving her an answer. But her questions did cause me to begin searching for the reason Christians would believe it so important to know the exact dates of the happenings in Daniel's prophecy. In 1999, I finally began to see that for the most part, it was the Pretribulationalists leaders who believed it so important since they used such dates to support their theory that Jesus didn't fulfill the 70th week at Calvary.




I'm in the same camp as Philip Mauro who said, the dates aren't important, the fulfillment can be seen in the works of Christ in the New Testament. It's the fulfillment, and not the when, of Daniel's prophecy that is important.

Amen! :)

Shirley

ScottJohnson
May 14th 2006, 08:57 PM
All I know is Rev. 1:1 DOES NOT say: The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things that have already happen years ago.

Didn't the birth and ascension of Christ occur before the writing of Revelation? By what you state above, it would have had to happen after John wrote the book.

And a great sign was seen in the heavens, a woman having been clothed with the sun, and the moon was underneath her feet; and on her head a crown of twelve stars; and having a babe in womb. She cries, being in labor, and having been distressed to bear. And another sign was seen in the heavens. And, behold, a great red dragon having seven heads and ten horns! And on his heads were seven diadems, and his tail drew the third part of the stars of the heaven, and he throws them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman being about to bear, so that when she bears he might devour her child. And she bore a son, a male, who is going to shepherd all the nations with an iron staff. And her child was caught away to God, and to His throne.
(Rev 12:1-5)

Allthingsnew
May 14th 2006, 10:46 PM
Didn't the birth and ascension of Christ occur before the writing of Revelation? By what you state above, it would have had to happen after John wrote the book.

And a great sign was seen in the heavens, a woman having been clothed with the sun, and the moon was underneath her feet; and on her head a crown of twelve stars; and having a babe in womb. She cries, being in labor, and having been distressed to bear. And another sign was seen in the heavens. And, behold, a great red dragon having seven heads and ten horns! And on his heads were seven diadems, and his tail drew the third part of the stars of the heaven, and he throws them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman being about to bear, so that when she bears he might devour her child. And she bore a son, a male, who is going to shepherd all the nations with an iron staff. And her child was caught away to God, and to His throne.
(Rev 12:1-5)
Yes thats right, but what I'm asking is, is John writing this so we will know WHO he is talking about, or is John saying this also is an event that shortly must come to pass.

It certainly is not an event that must shortly come to pass. Agreed?

And if its something that happened 50 to 60 years earlier then why did God choose to put it in a book of future events?

This is what I don't understand. What parts are history and what parts are future.

If most of the book of Revelation has already happened then I don't understand why Rev. 1:1 says: that these things must shortly come to pass.

wpm
May 14th 2006, 11:03 PM
Yes thats right, but what I'm asking is, is John writing this so we will know WHO he is talking about, or is John saying this also is an event that shortly must come to pass.

It certainly is not an event that must shortly come to pass. Agreed?

And if its something that happened 50 to 60 years earlier then why did God choose to put it in a book of future events?

This is what I don't understand. What parts are history and what parts are future.

If most of the book of Revelation has already happened then I don't understand why Rev. 1:1 says: that these things must shortly come to pass.

It is not just a book of future events.

Whilst many misinformed Christians try to squeeze the bulk of Revelation (chapters 5 – 19) into the last seven years of history they do wrongly exegete the figurative record before them. This prophetic account relates mainly to the unique unseen spiritual conflict relating to the Church from the time of Christ to His Second Coming.

Revelation 1:19 records John being instructed, “Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter.”

This often overlooked reading reveals the wide scope of this prophecy and wide time period intended in its relevance. It therefore embodies the past, present and future.

1. The things which thou hast seen - PAST
2. The things which are - PRESENT
3. The things which shall be hereafter – FUTURE

Here, we conclusively see that the Revelation received by John related to his day – which was the present – and extended from “hereafter” to our day and on into the future. It is therefore as relevant to us today as it was to John and the seven actual churches in Asia in his day. Revelation is therefore a relevant book for the Christian Church – period right up until the consummating Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul

Allthingsnew
May 14th 2006, 11:29 PM
It is not just a book of future events.

Whilst many misinformed Christians try to squeeze the bulk of Revelation (chapters 5 – 19) into the last seven years of history they do wrongly exegete the figurative record before them. This prophetic account relates mainly to the unique unseen spiritual conflict relating to the Church from the time of Christ to His Second Coming.

Revelation 1:19 records John being instructed, “Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter.”

This often overlooked reading reveals the wide scope of this prophecy and wide time period intended in its relevance. It therefore embodies the past, present and future.

1. The things which thou hast seen - PAST
2. The things which are - PRESENT
3. The things which shall be hereafter – FUTURE

Here, we conclusively see that the Revelation received by John related to his day – which was the present – and extended from “hereafter” to our day and on into the future. It is therefore as relevant to us today as it was to John and the seven actual churches in Asia in his day. Revelation is therefore a relevant book for the Christian Church – period right up until the consummating Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul

Thanks, Paul

I sorry to all on here, if I came across as argumentative and ask for your forgiveness. I guess sometimes I let my flesh show when my faith is in question. And I know that you all are my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ and none of us know it all and never will although sometimes we think we do.

It reminds me of something my pastor says often at church before a service:
"Their are no super saints here, none of us has arrived, we are all on a journey."

Jeff

MattHenry
May 15th 2006, 12:18 AM
Matt,
If the context of 'the rest of the laundry list' was accomplished at the Cross....

then why wouldn't the same context of fulfillment at the Cross apply to 'sealing up the vision and prophecy'?

What about these verses which affirm that? I believe the "sealing up" was accomplished within the same prophetic verse. The rest of the list was clearly accomplished at the Cross. But why was the first 7-weeks, labeled separately from the 62 weeks, to total the 69? The very perfect answer to this is that the Old Testament Prophecy closed mathematically to the year, at the end of this first 7 weeks. I guess the answer is that we can do even better than adding it to the laundry list as an approximate end of Old Testament prophecy.

As this thread calculates:
http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54529

Lou M.
May 15th 2006, 12:34 AM
You must have a different Bible than me. What you have quoted makes no sense to me whatsoever plus it completely leaves Jesus out.

That was the Revised Standard version which relies on the Masoretic text. Jesus is not left out, He came after the sixty-two sevens just as the prophecy said He would.


.....by placing Cyrus in the place of the Messiah Jesus!

Not at all. It was God Who called Cyrus, "His annointed" (mashiyach: messiah) in Isaiah 45:1, not me.
Did you actually read and reference what I wrote?


Where do you find me telling God that He has to do things the way I understand them?

I'm sorry. This was not a statement directed at you personally, but all of us generally. Myself included.
However, you personaly seem to have your mind made up that, 1) "There is no gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks.." and 2), The first messiah that is spoken of in Daniel 9:25 is Jesus Christ (i.e., ".....by placing Cyrus in the place of the Messiah Jesus!").

.

MattHenry
May 15th 2006, 12:35 AM
Hi Matt,

Finding an accurate historical record, first of all, stating the year when the order was given to rebuild Jerusalem nearly 2500 would be mere speculative calculations of man.

I have looked and considered many historical records as to the exact year over the last 40 years since I became a Christian. While such data is certainly quite interesting to read, I've wasted far too much time during my walk with the Lord in such things. Plus it provides nothing that would help us to understand the Bible better or the meaning of the 70th week of Daniel.

Btw, I asked you a question that you haven't answered yet, Who do you believe the he is of Daniel 9:27?

Shirley I believe the he is the antichrist false prophet Mohammed with Satan who joins him in his demise because I believe that the Abomination of Desolation is the Dome of the Rock - on the wing of the temple - in the holy place - in the Solomnic court of the gentiles.

Were I still a futurist of itching ears I would say the he is the boogieman of the Left Behind series.

ShirleyFord
May 15th 2006, 01:41 AM
That was the Revised Standard version which relies on the Masoretic text. Jesus is not left out, He came after the sixty-two sevens just as the prophecy said He would.


Not at all. It was God Who called Cyrus, "His annointed" (mashiyach: messiah) in Isaiah 45:1, not me.
Did you actually read and reference what I wrote?

Yes I did:

"Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word (dabar) to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time."

Now, Jeremiah chapters 32-33 are repleat with GOD's WORD to Jeremiah promising the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem (587 BC "tenth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, which was the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar."). Interestingly, exactly 49 years (seven sevens) later (538 BC) an "anointed one" (Cyrus, "God's annointed" {Isaiah 45:1}) defeated the Babylonians brining to an end the captivity of Israel."

Then you end your latest post:


The first messiah that is spoken of in Daniel 9:25 is Jesus Christ.

But Lou, there is not but one Messiah mentioned in Daniel 9:25.

Daniel 9:25 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. (KJV)

Your version - "Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word (dabar) to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time."

Where do you see more than one Messiah in either version?

And you claim that the only Messiah who is mentioned in v. 25 is Cyrus!

Shirley

Lou M.
May 15th 2006, 01:59 AM
Then you end your latest post:

Quote:
The first messiah that is spoken of in Daniel 9:25 is Jesus Christ.



That was a quote from you. I'll go back and place the quote.

ShirleyFord
May 15th 2006, 02:06 AM
I believe the he is the antichrist false prophet Mohammed with Satan who joins him in his demise because I believe that the Abomination of Desolation is the Dome of the Rock - on the wing of the temple - in the holy place - in the Solomnic court of the gentiles.

Were I still a futurist of itching ears I would say the he is the boogieman of the Left Behind series.

Dearest Matt,

My heart goes out to you. You zeal for the truth of God's Word really inspires me. I so appreciate you kind attitude and your willingness in reaching out to others.

But Brother, you are being so deceived by someone's theory that you are accepting as the truth. He has convinced you that the he in Daniel 9:27, which is our dear Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Name above all Names, is "Mohammed with Satan".

Please Matt, look at what the Scriptures are saying and rely on the Holy Spirit to teach you the truth of His precious Word.

Shirley

ShirleyFord
May 15th 2006, 02:29 AM
That was a quote from you. I'll go back and place the quote.

That is incorrect.

This is the entire post of what I posted:

#53 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=810767&postcount=53) http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/reputation.gif (http://bibleforums.org/reputation.php?p=810767)
http://bibleforums.org/images/statusicon/post_old.gif Yesterday, 06:44 PM
ShirleyFord (http://bibleforums.org/member.php?u=15509) http://bibleforums.org/images/statusicon/user_online.gif
Member
Decided for Christ: 20+ years ago
*
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 26
http://bibleforums.org/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gif
http://bibleforums.org/images/misc/im_aim.gif (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=54575&page=4#)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lou M.
I wouldn't be so quick to judge that.
Don't we understand that we a dealing with God, Who is far above us? Where is our reverance and fear and awe of His way's?
God's Word is written in a way that we cannot put Him in a box and say, "This and this alone is His way."


I haven't done any of these things you are accusing me of.


Quote:
For instance; have you ever considered this about the current subject:

"Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word (dabar) to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time."

You must have a different Bible than me. What you have quoted makes no sense to me whatsoever plus it completely leaves Jesus out.

And then you go on to interpret this strange quote:

Quote:
Now, Jeremiah chapters 32-33 are repleat with GOD's WORD to Jeremiah promising the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem (587 BC "tenth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, which was the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar."). Interestingly, exactly 49 years (seven sevens) later (538 BC) an "anointed one" (Cyrus, "God's annointed" {Isaiah 45:1}) defeated the Babylonians brining to an end the captivity of Israel.

.....by placing Cyrus in the place of the Messiah Jesus!

and then ask:

Quote:
Should we think it a coincidence that the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel come together so precisely?

Quote:
Study and discuss? Yes.
Search out every possibility? Definately.
Tell God that He has to do things the way we understand them?
Not advisable.

Where do you find me telling God that He has to do things the way I understand them?


************************************************** ***

And this is the entire post you posted




#69 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=811544&postcount=69) http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/reputation.gif (http://bibleforums.org/reputation.php?p=811544) http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/report.gif (http://bibleforums.org/report.php?p=811544)
http://bibleforums.org/images/statusicon/post_old.gif Today, 08:34 PM
Lou M. (http://bibleforums.org/member.php?u=9194) http://bibleforums.org/images/statusicon/user_online.gif
Veteran
Decided for Christ:
*****
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 682
http://bibleforums.org/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://bibleforums.org/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://bibleforums.org/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://bibleforums.org/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gif


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirley
You must have a different Bible than me. What you have quoted makes no sense to me whatsoever plus it completely leaves Jesus out.


That was the Revised Standard version which relies on the Masoretic text. Jesus is not left out, He came after the sixty-two sevens just as the prophecy said He would.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirley
.....by placing Cyrus in the place of the Messiah Jesus!


Not at all. It was God Who called Cyrus, "His annointed" (mashiyach: messiah) in Isaiah 45:1, not me.
Did you actually read and reference what I wrote?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirley
Where do you find me telling God that He has to do things the way I understand them?


I'm sorry. This was not a statement directed at you personally, but all of us generally. Myself included.
However, you personaly seem to have your mind made up that, 1) "There is no gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks.." and 2), The first messiah that is spoken of in Daniel 9:25 is Jesus Christ (i.e., ".....by placing Cyrus in the place of the Messiah Jesus!").

************************************************** *****

I do hope this clears up any confusion you may have.

Shirley

Lou M.
May 15th 2006, 03:28 AM
And you claim that the only Messiah who is mentioned in v. 25 is Cyrus!

No, I'm simply pointing out the other possibilities.

It was GOD Who called Cyrus "His messiah"!


"Thus saith the Lord to His anointed (messiah), to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him;.." (Isaiah 45:1)

"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..."

I realize that when a Christian reads the word "messiah" he/she usually thinks of Jesus, but such is not always the case. (1 Sam.2:10, 1 Sam.16:6, 1 Sam.24:6, etc.).

In Jeremiah 32-33 we see GOD proclaiming His Word to Jeremiah of the rebuilding and restoring of Jerusalem (587 BC). It was exactly 49 years (seven weeks) later that Cyrus ("God's messiah") delivered Israel from the Babalonian captivity (538 BC).

"...and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times."

This was the actual time of Jerusalem's restoration and rebuilding.

" And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:..."

This speaks of Jesus' crucifixion after the 62 weeks.

But lets go back to Daniel 9:25
"seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks:"

In the whole of Scripture, this is the only time such a format of a timeframe is used. Why not say simply 'threescore and nine weeks'?

"....all the souls were threescore and six... threescore and ten." (Genesis 46:26,27)

"and the Egyptians mourned for him threescore and ten days." (Gen. 50:3)

" and threescore and ten palm trees"

" threescore and fifteen shekels"

" threescore and six days."

"threescore and thirteen."

"threescore and eight;"

Even in Daniel, "threescore and two years old."

This numbering of the weeks of Daniel 9:25 may be one of those grammer/sentance errors we all hear about within the King James Version as reflected in other manuscripts:

Revised Standard:
"Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time."

The New English Bible :
"from the time that the word went forth that Jerusalem should be restored and rebuilt, seven weeks shall pass till the appearance of one anointed, a prince; then for sixty-two weeks it shall remain restored, rebuilt with streets and conduits."

There is an athnach (period, or a break in thought) after the words "seven weeks", in the original Hebrew Text.

You can ask any competant Jewish Rabbi and they will tell you something like:

"By treating the sixty-two weeks as a distinct period, this verse, in the original Hebrew, shows that the sixty-two weeks mentioned in verse 25 are correctly separated from the seven weeks by the 'atnach. Hence, two anointed ones are spoken of in this chapter, one of whom comes after seven weeks, and the other after a further period of sixty-two weeks." (Rabbi Moss)

The Jewish translation from the Hebrew text reads:

Daniel 9:25-26
"And you should know and understand that, from the emergence of the word to restore and build Jerusalem until an anointed ruler, shall be seven weeks; and in sixty-two weeks it will be restored and be built, street and moat, but in troubled times. And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more; and the city and the Sanctuary will be destroyed by people of the coming ruler, and his end will come about like a flood; and by end of the war, there will be desolation."

This is all I was trying to show. It seems that everyone is focused on the word of a king in the earth who 'issued a command' to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, rather than the Word that came from The Father to Jeremiah; which by the way, Daniel was studying.

"In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem."

Lou M.
May 15th 2006, 03:34 AM
I do hope this clears up any confusion you may have.

This will:

Originally Posted by Shirley
.....by placing Cyrus in the place of the Messiah Jesus!

To which I paraphrased you here:

"The first messiah that is spoken of in Daniel 9:25 is Jesus Christ"(i.e., ".....by placing Cyrus in the place of the Messiah Jesus!").

ShirleyFord
May 15th 2006, 12:32 PM
Lou,

Whatever you are trying to do will not work.

I already presented the evidence of what the real truth is.

Shirley

matthew94
May 15th 2006, 01:03 PM
I have a question that I'm sure there will be an answer for, but here goes.

If Rev. 20 is talking about what Christ did at calvary (binding satan) then why would God have John write it down in a book of prophecy of things which must shortly come to pass, when it happen 50 to 60 years earlier?

Thats not prophecy thats history.

There are several more verses that you believe were fulfilled years before John wrote them also. But John sees them in his vision of future events.

Just curious. You guys got me thinking.

Good question. The NT is very clear that Satan was defeated by the cross of Christ. That is really not up for debate for any Bible believing Christian. But it WAS up for debate for any believer between AD30 and AD70. It seemed, at times, like satan was triumphing through persecution. The believers probably wondered if their sect would survive!

The revelation that John gave helped the early Christians to realize that satan truly had been defeated and that even those who had been martyrd were reigning with Jesus from heaven. Revelation helped them to see that their main persecuturs (the jews) had very little time left, but that Christianity would continue for a really long time.

Also, it must be remembered that most of the Revelation 20 content is future. The binding is simply the initiation of the millennial reign. For the recipiants of the prophecy, they were not far removed from that initiation.

In a limited sense, one could argue that the millennium did not begin, practically, until AD70 for this is when the physical temple was visibly replaced by the spiritual temple. Any Spirit filled Christian already recognized the transition I'm sure, but the visible illustration helped.

Allthingsnew
May 15th 2006, 01:50 PM
Good question. The NT is very clear that Satan was defeated by the cross of Christ. That is really not up for debate for any Bible believing Christian. But it WAS up for debate for any believer between AD30 and AD70. It seemed, at times, like satan was triumphing through persecution. The believers probably wondered if their sect would survive!

The revelation that John gave helped the early Christians to realize that satan truly had been defeated and that even those who had been martyrd were reigning with Jesus from heaven. Revelation helped them to see that their main persecuturs (the jews) had very little time left, but that Christianity would continue for a really long time.

Also, it must be remembered that most of the Revelation 20 content is future. The binding is simply the initiation of the millennial reign. For the recipiants of the prophecy, they were not far removed from that initiation.

In a limited sense, one could argue that the millennium did not begin, practically, until AD70 for this is when the physical temple was visibly replaced by the spiritual temple. Any Spirit filled Christian already recognized the transition I'm sure, but the visible illustration helped.

Thanks Matthew,

Things are starting to come together in my mind about certain things.
I'm now not totally 100% pre or post.

And when looking at it in either perspective it still appears to me that Jesus is coming soon. I'm not going to drive myself crazy trying to figure it all out, because ultimately I do not believe anyone can know for sure that they are 100% correct. I believe that this is a mystery and no one will solve it, I believe Jesus will reveal it.
But until my Lord returns, I am going to keep the faith, and let His light shine through my life that others will see Him through me, and want what I have, Thats the IMPORTANT thing.

I guess you could call me a Pan-trib because I know its all going to pan out in the end. :lol:

Teke
May 15th 2006, 05:41 PM
I have a question that I'm sure there will be an answer for, but here goes.

If Rev. 20 is talking about what Christ did at calvary (binding satan) then why would God have John write it down in a book of prophecy of things which must shortly come to pass, when it happen 50 to 60 years earlier?

Thats not prophecy thats history.

There are several more verses that you believe were fulfilled years before John wrote them also. But John sees them in his vision of future events.

Just curious. You guys got me thinking.


A historical view of satans binding, is that it is the gospel he is bound from. The devil cannot stop nor hinder the gospel of the Church. Or in other words, Christs work of salvation. It was prophetic in that time, it is historic in our time. :)

Allthingsnew
May 15th 2006, 05:51 PM
A historical view of satans binding, is that it is the gospel he is bound from. The devil cannot stop nor hinder the gospel of the Church. Or in other words, Christs work of salvation. It was prophetic in that time, it is historic in our time. :)

Thanks Teke.

ybiC,
Jeff

David Taylor
May 15th 2006, 06:29 PM
I have a question that I'm sure there will be an answer for, but here goes.

If Rev. 20 is talking about what Christ did at calvary (binding satan) then why would God have John write it down in a book of prophecy of things which must shortly come to pass, when it happen 50 to 60 years earlier?

Thats not prophecy thats history.

There are several more verses that you believe were fulfilled years before John wrote them also. But John sees them in his vision of future events.

Just curious. You guys got me thinking.

Adding to what Matthew94 said, remember that not all of Revelation is 'future'.

What did John say?

John 1:19 "Write the things
which thou hast seen, (which have occurred in the past)
and the things which are, (which are occuring as you write)
and the things which shall be hereafter" (which occur in your future)

Here is how Revelation 20 fits that intent.

Color key:
Past
Present
(Present & Future)
Future

20:1 And (Past) I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, (Present and Future)till the thousand years should be fulfilled: (future)and after that he must be loosed a little season.
20:4 (Present and Future)And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
20:5 (Future)But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. (Present and Future)This is the first resurrection.
20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
20:7 (Future)And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Allthingsnew
May 15th 2006, 06:53 PM
Adding to what Matthew94 said, remember that not all of Revelation is 'future'.

What did John say?

John 1:19 "Write the things
which thou hast seen, (which have occurred in the past)
and the things which are, (which are occuring as you write)
and the things which shall be hereafter" (which occur in your future)

Here is how Revelation 20 fits that intent.

Color key:
Past
Present
(Present & Future)
Future

20:1 And (Past) I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, (Present and Future)till the thousand years should be fulfilled: (future)and after that he must be loosed a little season.
20:4 (Present and Future)And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
20:5 (Future)But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. (Present and Future)This is the first resurrection.
20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
20:7 (Future)And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Wow, thanks David.

ShirleyFord
May 19th 2006, 04:12 PM
Ten things missing in Revelation 20 ..........

1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.

2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,


.....which the Premillennium view claims in the millennial kingdom:

1. Jesus in the millennial kingdom

2. David's throne

3. a rebuilt physical stone temple

4. Jerusalem

5. the nation of Israel

6. Jews

7. Jewish priests offering sacrifices

8. screaming animals being slaughtered by the priests

9. earth

10. the land of Israel divided among the 12 tribes

Eeclasia Angelos
Sep 1st 2006, 08:26 PM
Well I've been studying the word of God for about 10 years. Not that this means anything, but I also have a ThD in Hebrew and and Greek, Now the thing about Daniel is that part of it was written in Aramaic and the other part in Hebrew. Doesn't matter to you what part, but just know that it's not all in Hebrew so when you start cross-referencing certain key words using a Young's or a Strong's or what have you, then you will not find many words that Skofield uses to count the 70 weeks, but he is right. I came to the same conclusion even before I read what he wrote about the 70 weeks of Daniel. Sure I can tell you why, but I don't care to. As God's word says in Revelation 21:

10 Then he told me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near. 11 Let him who does wrong continue to do wrong; let him who is vile continue to be vile; let him who does right continue to do right; and let him who is holy continue to be holy."

MattHenry
Sep 1st 2006, 09:02 PM
Does what the historical church (the people of God) believes and teaches, mean anything to you? They do an I often quote them.

That is only a small amount of the historical teachings of the Church. They are the ones that don't change. Secular views change with the times. The Revelation of Christ never changes. And is what the Church is to preach.

So, are you a progressive revelationist (revelaltion continually changing with the times) of systematic theology (mostly mathematical in this instance)?
Are you suggesting that the mathematic of prophecy are of no importance?

I'm not bashing you. I've just seen my share of speculation by man. The bible is not a book of mathematics, although the numbers written of have significance.Then what are their significance. Tell me what the historical church position of Daniel's 1290 and 1330 days taught you.
That significance belonged to the era (Hebrew thought) it was written in, not our present age.But God guaranteed that the book of Daniel would remain sealed until the "time of the end". To quote a couple of the former age in regard to this:

Isaac Newton understood it pretty well:

"This Prophecy is called the Revelation, with respect to the scripture of truth, which Daniel was commanded to shut up and seal, till the time of the end. Daniel sealed it until the time of the end; {Dan. 10:21; 12:4, 9.} and until that time comes, the Lamb is opening the seals:....
All which is as much as to say, that these Prophecies of Daniel and John should not be understood till the time of the end: .... But in the very end, the Prophecy should be so far interpreted as to convince many."
(Part II. Observations Upon the Apocalypse of St. John. Chap 1)
Where does your eschatological doctrine date from?

Matthew Henry too:

"VI. That this prophecy of those times, though sealed up now, would be of great use to those that should live then, v. 4. Daniel must now shut up the words and seal the book because the time would be long ere these things would be accomplished: and it was some comfort that the Jewish nation, though, in the infancy of their return from Babylon, while they were few and weak, they met with obstructions in their work, were not persecuted for their religion till a long time after, when they had grown to some strength and maturity. He must seal the book because it would not be understood, and therefore would not be regarded, till the things contained in it were accomplished; but he must keep it safely, as a treasure of great value, laid up for the ages to come, to whom it would be of great service; for many shall then run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. Then this hidden treasure shall be opened, and many shall search into it, and dig for the knowledge of it, as for silver. They shall run to and fro, to enquire out copies of it, shall collate them, and see that they be true and authentic. They shall read it over and over, shall meditate upon it, and run it over in their minds; discurrent—they shall discourse of it, and talk it over among themselves, and compare notes about it, if by any means they may sift out the meaning of it; and thus knowledge shall be increased. By consulting this prophecy on this occasion they shall be led to search other scriptures, which shall contribute much to their advancement in useful knowledge; for then shall we know if we follow on to know the Lord, Hos. 6:3. Those that would have their knowledge increased must take pains, must not sit still in slothfulness and bare wishes but run to and fro, must make use of all the means of knowledge and improve all opportunities of getting their mistakes rectified, their doubts resolved, and their acquaintance with the things of God improved, to know more and to know better what they do know. And let us here see reason to hope that, 1. Those things of God which are now dark and obscure will hereafter be made clear, and easy to be understood. Truth is the daughter of time. Scripture prophecies will be expounded by the accomplishment of them; therefore they are given, and for that explication they are reserved. Therefore they are told us before, that, when they do come to pass, we may believe. 2. Those things of God which are despised and neglected, and thrown by as useless, shall be brought into reputation, shall be found to be of great service, and be brought into request; for divine revelation, however slighted for a time, shall be magnified and made honourable, and, above all, in the judgment of the great day, when the books shall be opened, and that book among the rest."

MattHenry
Sep 1st 2006, 09:04 PM
Well I've been studying the word of God for about 10 years. Not that this means anything, but I also have a ThD in Hebrew and and Greek, Now the thing about Daniel is that part of it was written in Aramaic and the other part in Hebrew. Doesn't matter to you what part, but just know that it's not all in Hebrew so when you start cross-referencing certain key words using a Young's or a Strong's or what have you, then you will not find many words that Skofield uses to count the 70 weeks, but he is right. I came to the same conclusion even before I read what he wrote about the 70 weeks of Daniel. Sure I can tell you why, but I don't care to. As God's word says in Revelation 21:

10 Then he told me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near. 11 Let him who does wrong continue to do wrong; let him who is vile continue to be vile; let him who does right continue to do right; and let him who is holy continue to be holy."May God continue to richly bless your studies. He sure has mine.
Matt

Allthingsnew
Sep 1st 2006, 09:30 PM
Hey Matthenry,
I just want you to know that I resisted and resisted reading ES's book you posted (over and over).

But I have been driven lately, so I read it. And quite honestly I can't quit reading it.

Now that being said, I'm not sure I agree with 100% of what he says, but I am pretty amazed.

It's very hard to face that what one has been taught all his life, may be wrong. (Now I'm not saying that just yet, but its not looking good).

ybiC,
Jeff

MattHenry
Sep 2nd 2006, 01:02 AM
Hey Matthenry,
I just want you to know that I resisted and resisted reading ES's book you posted (over and over).

But I have been driven lately, so I read it. And quite honestly I can't quit reading it.

Now that being said, I'm not sure I agree with 100% of what he says, but I am pretty amazed.
Even Ellis would agree with you that he does not agree with 100% of what he wrote. The book is under revision. The Lord is constantly leading us to greater and fuller understanding if we are ready to hold His hand and follow His lead. With that willingness He will guide us more fully and deeply into His Holy Word. Folks that are stuck defending doctrine never get this opportunity. They miss the blessing. That's the problem with the Church, and why we are warned in the second chapter of Revelation to overcome it. Look at Church websites and it says "WE BELIEVE...." period - that's it.

It's very hard to face that what one has been taught all his life, may be wrong. (Now I'm not saying that just yet, but its not looking good).

ybiC,
JeffTrust me Jeff, "it's looking" great. I was a futurist until last spring. Jack Van Impe for a decade. Calvary Chapel for a Church home where I was saved a couple of years ago. Jack and Pastor Bob are wonderful dear saints in Jesus Christ with big hearts. That doesn't mean their eschatology is right. It's just what they were taught, and taught how to teach.

I don't imagine that there is a more difficult thing for a person to ask of themself than to come to an understanding that a deeply held eschatological religious belief could be nearly entirely wrong, yet partial preterists must believe futurists to be nearly 100% wrong and futurists must believe partial preterists to be nearly 100% wrong.

The funny part is that both camps agree that First Coming prophecy was fulfilled as that age developed. Instead of expecting the same of Second Coming prophecy, which is what was the generally accepted view throughout most of the Christian era, all of a sudden in the 20th century Revelation had to all have been fulfilled before 70 AD, or not a bit of it can be fulfilled until some future period. Isn't that bizarre? Eyes to see the truth really have to come from the Lord opening them.

I was rewriting a paper on the latter days and finding all these goofy things that couldn't be supported in scripture, or even logic, and it particularly bugged me when I went to "the former age and their fathers" and found a vacuum when it came to what I believed. But the biggest issue was a stinging on my heart for my very devout Jewish friends and their fate.

God then powerfully picked me up and drove me hard 12 to 14 hours a day, and I was never before and have never since had that kind of direct power exercised over me. I was only the hands - out of control. Two weeks into it I found myself in the "Timeless Covenant", "Times" and "One more Time" chapters of The False Prophet and I cried out, and wept. I only then realized the very specific purpose of the two weeks journey, without even realizing it while I was on it - the very specific answer to the very specific question I had asked two weeks prior.

The best thing about Ellis's book is he teaches you how to study, and exegete Scripture through hermeneutics. The same method works for literature, poetry and even legal documents. Sound hermeneutics destroys false doctrine right out of the gate.

Now that your eyes and heart are open, look at the antichrist thread in here if you haven't yet. It is so simple a child could follow it. Indeed it wasn't until I was working that thread, that my understanding developed further, as I was struck by the perfect parallels.

The Lord has given you a Berean heart Jeff. You are on a new and very exciting journey in Christ Jesus. Once you finish the book, even when the evening news comes on, your eyes will be wide open. You will be blessed like you never have been in your life. You won't be mad about anything anymore because you will understand it. The only sad part is that it is a lonely walk in a sea of false doctrine.

If you really want to get straight into Ellis's heart, read Shining Man With Hurt Hands, which is about he and his wife's internet ministry where they restored people that suffered from multiple personality disorder to their monominds - in internet chat format. It moved me more deeply than anything I have ever read. Also a free book: http://www.fish-house.com/pdf/ShiningMan.pdf

May God continue to richly bless your studies in Christ Jesus Jeff.
Your Brother in Christ Jesus,
Matt

For those posters that are unafraid to read a FREE book/Bible study here is the 2 part PDF. Try a chapter!:
http://www.ellisskolfield.com/pdf/TFPChapters1-9.pdf
http://www.ellisskolfield.com/pdf/TFPChapters10-17.pdf

Allthingsnew
Sep 2nd 2006, 09:04 PM
Hey Matt,

Yes, I woke up this morning with certain verses on my mind, got up set down read them, read them to my wife and she agreed with my take of them.

By the way I have other friends (strong Christians)that I have asked to help me, by reading the false prophet as well.

When I explained to one what it was mainly about he got chills, he first was a little in shock when I told him we (pretribs) may be wrong. And I showed him what I meant by scripture. So I would imagine he's probably sitting at home right now reading it. I can't wait until tuesday when I get back to work, to find out what he thinks about it.

ybiC,
Jeff

MattHenry
Sep 2nd 2006, 09:32 PM
Hey Matt,

Yes, I woke up this morning with certain verses on my mind, got up set down read them, read them to my wife and she agreed with my take of them.

By the way I have other friends (strong Christians)that I have asked to help me, by reading the false prophet as well.

When I explained to one what it was mainly about he got chills, he first was a little in shock when I told him we (pretribs) may be wrong. And I showed him what I meant by scripture. So I would imagine he's probably sitting at home right now reading it. I can't wait until tuesday when I get back to work, to find out what he thinks about it.

ybiC,
JeffThat must be great! Sadly my wife has been going to an Anglican Catholic Church (raised Catholic) (since we left the Episcopal Church (compromise I wasn't ever comfortable with thus the Jack Van Impe connection)) and isn't inclined to share our faith with each other as regards Bible study.

Do read Shining Man. It is amazing.

papaearl
Jul 22nd 2007, 06:19 PM
The answer to #6 is: In Acts 10:37-38 and Luke 3:22-23, at age 30, the Messiah is anointed. This event occurs at the end of the first 4000 year period of time. And, to to rest of your questions the answer is simple. Daniel 9:25 is a complete overview of the Messiah's earthly mission; and, is not related to the 70 weeks of Daniel 9:24. Those 70 years were completed at the end of the Babylonian captivy; and, the entire 70 years were spent in desolation of Jerusalem (being the 70 years spent in Babylonian captivity). The Messiah was anointed at the end of the 69 weeks (483 years) after the end of the Babylonian captivity.

quiet dove
Jul 22nd 2007, 07:39 PM
papaearl,

Since you have replied to a rather ancient thread the participants may or may not still be around posting. I have closed this one, not because you did anything wrong. You are more than welcome to start another thread on the same subject and therefore current posters and yourself may debate the subject.

Thanks - quiet dove :)