Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Preterist Gap

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DurbanDude
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by jeffweeder View Post
    Its not that The Holy Spirit is confined. How can the confirmation of everlasting righteousness and eternal redemption be confined to a period of time.?

    70 weeks were given regarding Daniels people and then it is ALSO confirmed to the Gentiles by the receiving of the Holy Spirit as they had been.
    God is patient not wanting any Jew or Gentile to perish , but to fill them till the end.
    All very true, but I dont see a covenant being confirmed for 7 years in that scenario. So we will have to agree to disagree.

    When I read Dan 9:27b I'm looking for a dramatic 3.5 period, when the promise of v25, an anointed one to come is confirmed to Israel for 3.5 years.

    That period starts with an abomination and an evil man causing desolation, then 3.5 years later that desolator comes to his end.

    At that point, at the end of the desolator, at the end of the 3.5 year period where the anointed one is confirmed to Israel, there is a dramatic victory for Israel. This is described in v24, 490 years are determined to bring in righteousness etc etc

    That victory is expressed through their national cleansing, no more national sin in Jerusalem, no need for prophets ever again, Mt Zion anointed with God's presence forever. This can easily be seen fulfilled in the multiple prophecies of Israel's repentance and cleansing at the second coming, ushering in the Messianic Age.

    Leave a comment:


  • jeffweeder
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by DurbanDude View Post
    As I said, I have no problem with the concept, but you are claiming the infilling of the Holy Spirit fulfills the final 3.5 years of confirmation.

    That's a big claim, when the Holy Spirit was in no manner confined to 3.5 years. Regarding timing, it does not fit.

    Its not that The Holy Spirit is confined. How can the confirmation of everlasting righteousness and eternal redemption be confined to a period of time.?

    70 weeks were given regarding Daniels people and then it is ALSO confirmed to the Gentiles by the receiving of the Holy Spirit as they had been.
    God is patient not wanting any Jew or Gentile to perish , but to fill them till the end.

    Leave a comment:


  • DurbanDude
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by jeffweeder View Post
    Nothing trumps the Holy Spirit being sent , confirming what Jesus did for us by actually infilling us instead of a brick building. Couldn't be more finished as Jesus blood alone facilitates us being filled with the Spirit of God today.
    As I said, I have no problem with the concept, but you are claiming the infilling of the Holy Spirit fulfills the final 3.5 years of confirmation.

    That's a big claim, when the Holy Spirit was in no manner confined to 3.5 years. Regarding timing, it does not fit.

    Leave a comment:


  • randyk
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by divaD View Post
    The following is a very brief article I found while Googling today. If you care to look at it, I'd be interested to know if there is anything in the article you might agree with. The following is from that article. So I don't see where it is a problem if it's not until the 2nd coming when everlasting righteousness has been fully brought in.

    To bring in everlasting righteousness, God Himself came to earth as our Messiah, lived a righteous life, died for our sins, was resurrected and ascended back into Heaven. This makes it possible for the prophecy to be fulfilled in principle at Christ's first coming, it will be fulfilled in full at His return.(1)
    http://jewishroots.net/library/proph...teousness.html
    I agree that Christ brought in everlasting righteousness in the "legal sense." He enabled us to benefit from it by our exercising it and by our inheriting the eternal life that goes along with it. Of course, it will not be until we are raised from the dead and made immortal that our "everlasting righteousness" will be completed in a different sense.

    But no, I don't think that is the fulfillment of the 70 Weeks. I believe the 70 Weeks was fulfilled at the *1st Coming* of Jesus, and at the Cross. That's where he legally appropriated his "everlasting righteousness" as a gift for us.

    We can immediately begin to exercise his righteousness, which indeed will last forever. We are told that we already have eternal life, and will "never die." This refers to the fact that not only do we presently exercise his righteousness and have eternal life, but at the end of our mortal lives will will continue on in this righteousness, and continue to express it in immortal bodies, after the resurrection.

    So I certainly do believe in the Age to Come, the Messianic Age, or the Millennial Age. This will be the time when those of us who have received "everlasting righteousness" will be raised from the dead and be given immortal bodies to continue to express this righteousness for all time.

    The 70 Weeks, again, only prophesy of the 1st Coming of Jesus, when he appropriated this gift of righteousness for us, which will last forever. There are other, separate prophecies, that speak of the resurrection and of our adoption of immortal bodies. That will be yet another stage of our experience of "everlasting righteousness."

    But the "everlasting righteousness" and "anointing of the Most Holy" refers to Jesus' sanctioning the New Covenant through the Cross. This is not only my opinion, but the consensus view in the Early Church.

    Leave a comment:


  • jeffweeder
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by DurbanDude View Post
    I have no issue with the logic of the Holy Spirit being the confirmation. I do have issues with dates and conclusive events.

    If the Bible had dated a massive Pentecost event to autumn 34 AD then I would agree that it's a valid perspective. But the church is just going about their normal business then, with no significant event. God had determined 490 years for a reason, and a precise conclusion at that time.
    Nothing trumps the Holy Spirit being sent , confirming what Jesus did for us by actually infilling us instead of a brick building. Couldn't be more finished as Jesus blood alone facilitates us being filled with the Spirit of God today.

    Leave a comment:


  • DurbanDude
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by shepherdsword View Post
    The synoptic gospels all record only one year. They record only two passovers. John records three, with the insertion of verse 6:4. That only accounts for two years...so let's count the various passovers and see if your theory is correct.
    Interesting. I had never counted the Passovers before. I must look more into the 3.5 year assumption.

    But Jesus did start his ministry some months before the first Passover, and as you said, John mentions 2 more.

    That's at least, more than 2 years, not one year.

    Leave a comment:


  • shepherdsword
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by DurbanDude View Post
    The reason why the claim exists that Jesus' ministry was 3.5 years long, is due to counting the various Passovers during his ministry. After some months of ministry the first one is the 20th year of Herods rebuilding (passover 27AD), the last one is 30 AD, the crucifixion. Thus his ministry is 3 years and some months long.
    The synoptic gospels all record only one year. They record only two passovers. John records three, with the insertion of verse 6:4. That only accounts for two years...so let's count the various passovers and see if your theory is correct.

    Leave a comment:


  • DurbanDude
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by shepherdsword View Post
    Jesus's ministry was 490 days,when you include the 40 day fast and the post resurrection ministry. Why does everyone force the days into years? All of the early church fathers (until eusibeus came along) stated Jesus' ministry was "about a year". In fact,Jesus Himself told us how long His ministry would be:

    Lk 4:18-19 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

    The only problem I see with it is Jn 6:4. However,that verse doesn't make sense at all. Jesus is feeding the 5000 with leavened bread, why would He do that if passover was close? Why weren't the Jesus males in Jerusalem if passover was close? Why did Jesus go to capernaum if passwover was close? All the rest of the gospels have Jesus going to the feast of tabernacles (just as John does in chapter 7)
    The reason why the claim exists that Jesus' ministry was 3.5 years long, is due to counting the various Passovers during his ministry. After some months of ministry the first one is the 20th year of Herods rebuilding (passover 27AD), the last one is 30 AD, the crucifixion. Thus his ministry is 3 years and some months long.

    Leave a comment:


  • divaD
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by randyk View Post
    I don't mind you being logical, but the conclusion you're drawing is based on your own argument--not arguing against mine. That's fine, though. We're just stating our own positions.

    You started by questioning my own position, and I stated it. It is that all 6 things in Dan 9.24 were fulfilled in the 1st Coming of Christ, and in his redemptive death. That includes "eternal righteousness."

    You define "eternal righteousness" differently, and I get that. But we are just differing over how we interpret "eternal righteousness" in this context. You see the context as being "eternal righteousness" in an eschatological sense. And I see it in a legal sense, as when Christ produced eternal righteousness for us, redemptively.

    So as logical as you are, you don't resolve our differences. You just state your own position. And that's fine.

    As to whether the Early Church and Christians in history held to the idea that the 70 Weeks were completely fulfilled in Christ, I would state that that's exactly what many of them did. They just didn't always know what to do with the last half of the 70th Week, after everything had been completely fulfilled.

    In reality, I think the passage actually does give us an end note to the 70 Weeks prophecy, and it actually extends beyond the period of the 70 Weeks itself. It is the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, which happened 40 years after the expiration of the 70 Weeks prophecy.

    Since the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD was the endpoint of the prophecy, it shows that there was no need for us to deal with the last half of the 70th Week. The 70 Week prophecy was fulfilled in the middle of the 70th Week, and expired the remaining time. The prophecy that followed was what was important--the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

    The following is a very brief article I found while Googling today. If you care to look at it, I'd be interested to know if there is anything in the article you might agree with. The following is from that article. So I don't see where it is a problem if it's not until the 2nd coming when everlasting righteousness has been fully brought in.



    To bring in everlasting righteousness, God Himself came to earth as our Messiah, lived a righteous life, died for our sins, was resurrected and ascended back into Heaven. This makes it possible for the prophecy to be fulfilled in principle at Christ's first coming, it will be fulfilled in full at His return.(1)
    http://jewishroots.net/library/proph...teousness.html

    Leave a comment:


  • shepherdsword
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by divaD View Post
    You're being illogical though. Pretty much everyone knows, thus agrees, 70 weeks equal 490 years. You have them meaning 486.5 years instead. You couldn't possibly be correct. The math doesn't work.
    Jesus's ministry was 490 days,when you include the 40 day fast and the post resurrection ministry. Why does everyone force the days into years? All of the early church fathers (until eusibeus came along) stated Jesus' ministry was "about a year". In fact,Jesus Himself told us how long His ministry would be:

    Lk 4:18-19 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

    The only problem I see with it is Jn 6:4. However,that verse doesn't make sense at all. Jesus is feeding the 5000 with leavened bread, why would He do that if passover was close? Why weren't the Jesus males in Jerusalem if passover was close? Why did Jesus go to capernaum if passwover was close? All the rest of the gospels have Jesus going to the feast of tabernacles (just as John does in chapter 7)

    Leave a comment:


  • DurbanDude
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by jeffweeder View Post
    I see the Holy Spirit being sent in the latter half of the week as an obvious confirmation that Jesus did in fact secure our redemption in the first half of the 70th week through his cross.
    This is the perfect conclusion and confirmation of what was to occur by the one anointed of the Holy Spirit to obtain the redemption of the sins of the whole world and baptize us in that same Holy Spirit.
    I have no issue with the logic of the Holy Spirit being the confirmation. I do have issues with dates and conclusive events.

    If the Bible had dated a massive Pentecost event to autumn 34 AD then I would agree that it's a valid perspective. But the church is just going about their normal business then, with no significant event. God had determined 490 years for a reason, and a precise conclusion at that time.

    Leave a comment:


  • DurbanDude
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    Thanks. The 3 most widely held are:
    1. 7 April 30 This is the view of those who count from Artaxerxes decree in his 7th year.
    2. 28 March 31 This is the view of Adventist groups.
    3. 3 April 33 This is the view of those who use a 360-day calendar from Artaxerxes decree in his 20th year.


    Options #1 and #3 fit the phases of the moon on Passover of those particular years. But the weight of evidence points to the first option.
    Oh really, I would have thought it would be based on historical analysis of the way they used the calendar and the manner in which they dated the Passover.

    In the past I preferred Artaxerxes decree, but more recently I thought the two other dates make more sense :
    1)The wording is to "issue the decree", could mean deliver it, the Artaxerxes decree was only issued to the local administrators of the region in autumn 458 BC

    2) the true restoration of Israel is their national repentance, on 17th Dec 458 BC Ezra issued a decree calling Israel to assemble for a day of repentance.

    I prefer the concept of repentance being the true restoration, but that is 2 months out. At least it's not 6 months out.

    Artaxerxes decree issued in Babylon is also a possibility, all 3 dates being quite close together.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberseeker
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by DurbanDude View Post
    PS we agree on the date of the crucifixion, I knew it as spring/Passover 30 AD, but thanks for giving the actual date. I will remember that being my birthday month.
    Thanks. The 3 most widely held are:
    1. 7 April 30 This is the view of those who count from Artaxerxes decree in his 7th year.
    2. 28 March 31 This is the view of Adventist groups.
    3. 3 April 33 This is the view of those who use a 360-day calendar from Artaxerxes decree in his 20th year.


    Options #1 and #3 fit the phases of the moon on Passover of those particular years. But the weight of evidence points to the first option.

    Leave a comment:


  • randyk
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by divaD View Post
    Here's the way I tend to reason it then. You would think the 70 weeks being fulfilled in it's entirety, that the very day the 70 weeks are finished, this would be a cause for celebration, a day to mark on the calendars. Yet no such thing ever happened in the first century. There is not one writer in the NT, such as Paul, etc, who ever claimed the entire 70 weeks have been fulfilled. So why didn't they if they thought it was? Even Peter apparently didn't think they were finished. You can deduce this by what he said in 2 Peter 3:13.

    2 Peter 3:13*Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

    and to bring in everlasting righteousness(Dan 9:24)

    Which logically comes first? I don't see how it can be the latter if Peter, at the time of him writing that, was still looking for a time and place, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

    But that's just me trying to be logical as usual. I can't seem to help being like that.
    I don't mind you being logical, but the conclusion you're drawing is based on your own argument--not arguing against mine. That's fine, though. We're just stating our own positions.

    You started by questioning my own position, and I stated it. It is that all 6 things in Dan 9.24 were fulfilled in the 1st Coming of Christ, and in his redemptive death. That includes "eternal righteousness."

    You define "eternal righteousness" differently, and I get that. But we are just differing over how we interpret "eternal righteousness" in this context. You see the context as being "eternal righteousness" in an eschatological sense. And I see it in a legal sense, as when Christ produced eternal righteousness for us, redemptively.

    So as logical as you are, you don't resolve our differences. You just state your own position. And that's fine.

    As to whether the Early Church and Christians in history held to the idea that the 70 Weeks were completely fulfilled in Christ, I would state that that's exactly what many of them did. They just didn't always know what to do with the last half of the 70th Week, after everything had been completely fulfilled.

    In reality, I think the passage actually does give us an end note to the 70 Weeks prophecy, and it actually extends beyond the period of the 70 Weeks itself. It is the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, which happened 40 years after the expiration of the 70 Weeks prophecy.

    Since the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD was the endpoint of the prophecy, it shows that there was no need for us to deal with the last half of the 70th Week. The 70 Week prophecy was fulfilled in the middle of the 70th Week, and expired the remaining time. The prophecy that followed was what was important--the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

    Leave a comment:


  • divaD
    replied
    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Originally posted by David Taylor View Post
    All 70 sevens commenced.
    The fulfillment occurred Ďin the midstí the final 70 week.

    There was no need for the the fulfillment to wait to occur at 11:59pm on Dec 31 of the final weeks last year, to accomplish fulfillment.

    Good you mentioned the 70 year Babylonian captivity of Jeremiahís prophecy. It will help you understand the confused sticking point you are having on Danielís prophecy conclusion and fulfill.

    Did the final 70th year release and fulfillment of the Jeremiahís Babylonian 70th year prophecy require them to be held captive the full 12 months and 31 days of the final 70th year, or could they have been released anytime within the final 70th year period for the prophecy to be fulfilled?

    That answer will also tell you why Daniel didnít require the full completion of the last seven period either, only that the fullfillment has to occur anytime during the final 70th period.
    I don't even know why you think you have a valid argument to begin with? Before the 70th week begins we already undeniably know a full entire 69 weeks are obviously fulfilled. So how ever many days 69 weeks equal, every single day of it to the day have to be fulfilled before there can even be a 70th week. Especially if there are not supposed to be any gaps in the 70 weeks, such as some of you are claiming.

    And then according to Dan 9:27, the text indicates that the one meant in verse 27 shall confirm the covenant with many for one week. This is simple math then. 69 weeks + 1 week = 70 weeks. 69 weeks + 1/2 week does not equal 70 weeks, it only equals 69.5 weeks. Not only does that contradict verse 27, it also contradicts verse 24.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X