Page 1 of 17 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 243

Thread: The Preterist Gap

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,833
    Blog Entries
    5

    The Preterist Gap

    I’ve been somewhat surprised to learn that some Preterists finish Daniels 70th week in AD 70. They postulate a 40 year gap between the “cutting off of Messiah in the midst of the week” and the destruction of the temple in AD 70. We might expect this kind of theory from full Preterists, but it comes from part-Preterists as well.


    However, in so doing Preterists are being hypocritical when condemning Futurists for doing exactly the same thing by inserting a 2000 year gap. The only difference is length – but a gap nonetheless.


    The proper explanation is simple. The 70 weeks finished 3 1/2 years after the crucifixion. Can someone explain why they believe the 70th week ends in AD 70? I suspect it is to do with verse 26 of Dan. 9. But there is a better way of interpreting that verse.
    "Your name and renown
    is the desire of our hearts."
    (Isaiah 26:8)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    5,209
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    I’ve been somewhat surprised to learn that some Preterists finish Daniels 70th week in AD 70. They postulate a 40 year gap between the “cutting off of Messiah in the midst of the week” and the destruction of the temple in AD 70. We might expect this kind of theory from full Preterists, but it comes from part-Preterists as well.


    However, in so doing Preterists are being hypocritical when condemning Futurists for doing exactly the same thing by inserting a 2000 year gap. The only difference is length – but a gap nonetheless.


    The proper explanation is simple. The 70 weeks finished 3 1/2 years after the crucifixion. Can someone explain why they believe the 70th week ends in AD 70? I suspect it is to do with verse 26 of Dan. 9. But there is a better way of interpreting that verse.
    Although I consider myself a partial preterist I agree with you about inserting a 40 year time gap I don’t though I see the 70th week being completed back in the time of the Maccabees

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    11,658

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    I’ve been somewhat surprised to learn that some Preterists finish Daniels 70th week in AD 70. They postulate a 40 year gap between the “cutting off of Messiah in the midst of the week” and the destruction of the temple in AD 70. We might expect this kind of theory from full Preterists, but it comes from part-Preterists as well.


    However, in so doing Preterists are being hypocritical when condemning Futurists for doing exactly the same thing by inserting a 2000 year gap. The only difference is length – but a gap nonetheless.


    The proper explanation is simple. The 70 weeks finished 3 1/2 years after the crucifixion. Can someone explain why they believe the 70th week ends in AD 70? I suspect it is to do with verse 26 of Dan. 9. But there is a better way of interpreting that verse.
    Good point. However, I would reassert my own view, that the 70th Week was not meant to be a full week. It ended in the midst of the Week, at the crucifixion of Christ.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,833
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Hmm, but Daniel said "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people to finish ..." It was a very specific statement.
    "Your name and renown
    is the desire of our hearts."
    (Isaiah 26:8)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    11,658

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Not 70 *whole* Weeks, but 70 linear weeks. When the 70th Week was reached, the period was fulfilled--it doesn't matter if it was only half a week. It was still the 70th consecutive week reached.

    What completed the 70 Weeks was not the destruction of the temple, but the thing that completed the final Week. And that was the confirmation of the Covenant. That period of confirmation was completed in only a half week, which in effect ended the 70th Week period.

    The destruction of the temple was to *follow* the confirmation of the Covenant. Jesus said the temple would be destroyed in his own generation, which was immediately after the fulfillment of the 70 Weeks. And that's exactly what happened in history. In 70 AD, 40 years after the crucifixion, the temple was destroyed.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,833
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Hey Gabriel, did you mean "linear weeks?" No Daniel, I meant "weeks" as in blocks of Sabbatical years.
    "Your name and renown
    is the desire of our hearts."
    (Isaiah 26:8)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    11,658

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    Hey Gabriel, did you mean "linear weeks?" No Daniel, I meant "weeks" as in blocks of Sabbatical years.
    Yea, I get that all the time. No consideration of the *possibility* of this version--just a treatment of what is thought the *likelihood* of this version. I don't really know, but it makes honest sense to me. If you don't want to treat it honestly, be my guest and insult what you don't like.

    1) My version has the 70 Weeks end with the 6 accomplishments in the time of Messiah.
    2) My version has the 70th Week coinciding with the confirmation, by Messiah, of the Covenant with the Jews.
    3) My version has the New Covenant beginning in the *middle* of the 70th Week.
    4) Thus, the 70 Weeks was a linear time period meant to lead to the confirmation of the Covenant by Christ. And the 70th Week was just a half Week, at the point where Christ was crucified, initiating the New Covenant.

    You can't ask Gabriel. You can only use your noodle. No offense--I'm just turning the humor back on you...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    11,658

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Hey Gabriel, did you mean a full 7 years ministry of Christ to confirm God's covenant with the Jews? No Daniel, I meant approx. 3.5 years ministry, because the full 70th Week would not be needed.

    Did Christ have to spend a full 3 days and nights in the Grave? No, rising in the morning on the 3rd day gave him credit for the entire 3rd day.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,833
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk

    1) My version has the 70 Weeks end with the 6 accomplishments in the time of Messiah.
    The 6th (last) accomplishment was to "anoint the most holy." Old Testament typology pictures this as the anointing of the tabernacle, the temple, or the new temple. The New Covenant identifies this as Christ's church.

    So Randy, was the new temple raised up and anointed at the Cross or at Pentecost? How do you see it?
    "Your name and renown
    is the desire of our hearts."
    (Isaiah 26:8)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    5,209
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    What would the Jews living in the times of the Maccabees of thought?

    They saw the beast Antiochus epehanies bring war to Jerusalem stop the sacrifices and desecrate the temple with his abominations. They also saw the anointed priest Onias murdered by Antiochus

    They knew that the anointed one Joshua was already sent back by king Cyrus to rebuild the city.

    Daniels 70th would give them hope and when Antiochus died and the temple sacrifices were reset up would they not think that Daniels 70th week was about them?

    I’m not sure why the current church always thinks that revelation and Daniels 70th weeks are all about us

    Gabriel’s 70 week prophecy to Daniel was an answer to Daniels prayer for his people at his time

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Coastal Mountains
    Posts
    8,609

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Given that no significant end of the age of the Jews occurred at any event that can be dated to 3.5 years after the crucifixion, a gap view becomes something to consider.

    Knowing that Jesus' focus was specifically for the Jews until the crucifixion that literally opened the way of salvation to non-Jews,one can see an interruption of the Jewish timeline at year 486.5

    Then there is a great victory of our testimony 3.5 years before the end according to Rev 12. We know that the goal of the gospel is to make disciples of every nation. Surely this being the victorious goal, this is what is meant by that great victory? The nations receive the gospel, they have reached their fullness, there is victory, Satan has just 3.5 years left in Rev 12, during which Israel is protected.

    Yet at the fullness of the nations the blindness of Israel is lifted according to Romans 11:25. So for the final 3.5 years God's focus is the spiritual revival of Israel, they were the first nation to receive the truth (3.5 years of Jesus ministry) and they will be the last (3.5 years of revival and protection during the great tribulation).

    We are now in the age of the gospel mandate to preach the gospel to the nations. Not everyone will agree, but that is one way of looking at the 490 specifically Jewish years, split by the gospel spread to the nations, and 3.5 years left.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Coastal Mountains
    Posts
    8,609

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    What would the Jews living in the times of the Maccabees of thought?

    They saw the beast Antiochus epehanies bring war to Jerusalem stop the sacrifices and desecrate the temple with his abominations. They also saw the anointed priest Onias murdered by Antiochus

    They knew that the anointed one Joshua was already sent back by king Cyrus to rebuild the city.

    Daniels 70th would give them hope and when Antiochus died and the temple sacrifices were reset up would they not think that Daniels 70th week was about them?

    I’m not sure why the current church always thinks that revelation and Daniels 70th weeks are all about us

    Gabriel’s 70 week prophecy to Daniel was an answer to Daniels prayer for his people at his time
    There are problems with that view :
    1) which decree occurred 486.5 years earlier?
    2) what 3.5 year period applies to Antiochus

    Antiochus matches the 2300 evenings and mornings of Daniel 8 (1150 days). But not 3.5 years, half of seven of Dan 9. The period of the Antiochus desecration was likely 3 years plus 2 extra Adar months, plus 10 days.

    1080 + 60 + 10 = 1150 days as per Daniel 8.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    6,164

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberseeker View Post
    I’ve been somewhat surprised to learn that some Preterists finish Daniels 70th week in AD 70. They postulate a 40 year gap between the “cutting off of Messiah in the midst of the week” and the destruction of the temple in AD 70. We might expect this kind of theory from full Preterists, but it comes from part-Preterists as well.


    However, in so doing Preterists are being hypocritical when condemning Futurists for doing exactly the same thing by inserting a 2000 year gap. The only difference is length – but a gap nonetheless.


    The proper explanation is simple. The 70 weeks finished 3 1/2 years after the crucifixion. Can someone explain why they believe the 70th week ends in AD 70? I suspect it is to do with verse 26 of Dan. 9. But there is a better way of interpreting that verse.
    There is one glaring reason that this theory exists. Note it when you read the various answers. They state, CONTRARY to scripture, that the Lord's death occurred in the 70th seven. But what does the text say? Daniel 9:24-26

    24 "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
    25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
    26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."


    The death of our Lord Jesus has nothing to do with the 70th seven. Our Lord was slain "AFTER" 69 sevens, but NOT in the 70th seven. And AFTER Messiah is cut off verse 26 the "END" is twice mentioned. (1) As the "END THEREOF". According to grammar the "thereof" must describe "the people" who destroy the city and sanctuary - the Romans. (2) As the "END OF THE WAR". Which war? It does not matter because it is a war connected with the 69th seven. The 70th seven is only introduced in the next verse, verse 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."

    The correct understanding is again by normal grammatical rules. It all revolves around who the "he" is in this verse. "HE" can only be one of TWO PERSONS:
    1. "HE" could be "Messiah"
    2. "HE" could be the Prince of the Romans who will come

    The rules of grammar say that "HE" must be the last mentioned subject - the FUTURE Roman Prince. Added to this, what does the evidence point to? This "HE" will "confirm" or "strengthen" a Covenant that contains the daily oblation. This could not be our Lord Jesus because;
    • He is cut off
    • when our Lord Jesus comes He does not "confirm" or "strengthen" THE (existing) Covenant that contains the daily oblation. HE MAKES A NEW COVENANT WITH ISRAEL CONTAINING THESE LAWS (Jer.31:31-33)
    • The NEW COVENANT is not for ONE WEEK. It is EVERLASTING (Jer.32:40; Ezek.37:26)
    • Our Lord Jesus does not stop that part of the Covenant that contains the daily oblation "till heaven and earth pass" (Matt.5:17-18)
    • Our Lord Jesus, far from stopping the oblation, will feat the PASSOVER ANNUALLY when He returns (Ex.12:14, 17 , 24; Lk.22:15-16)
    • He does not "make abomination"
    • He returns AFTER the "abomination of desolation" is seen in Judah
    • He advises Judaeans to flee when it occurs but He gathers Israel when He returns

    The evidence is not only overwhelming, but exclusive. The "GAP" between the 69th seven and the 70th seven is from the death of Jesus until a future Roman Prince allows Israel to institute their daily oblation. And THAT .... can only happen when a Temple is standing in Jerusalem. The oblation is intimately connected with the Temple.
    Last edited by Walls; Oct 8th 2019 at 12:49 PM.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Outside of the box. Where else?
    Posts
    18,200

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Hey Gabriel, did you mean a full 7 years ministry of Christ to confirm God's covenant with the Jews? No Daniel, I meant approx. 3.5 years ministry, because the full 70th Week would not be needed.

    .

    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.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,638

    Re: The Preterist Gap

    Quote 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.
    At least Randy is closer in his 70 weeks (partial not full) approach of 3.5 years short (cut off in the midst of the final week 70), than Premillennialism is by bloating the 70 weeks into an unnatural and unliteral ever growing 2,490+ish year 70 weeks.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Please Help Preterist fallacies? or not?
    By Aijalon in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: Dec 31st 2015, 11:48 PM
  2. New here Pentecostal, Unitarian, Preterist
    By AdamPastor in forum Introductions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Jul 11th 2013, 12:36 AM
  3. Why I Am Not A Preterist
    By Daniel Gracely in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: Jun 19th 2012, 12:25 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •