Daniel 9

[EarlyActs]

Agreed. Zealotry and its role in first-century Israel's end times is often ignored or not even recognized.


Also agreed. Christ was the "messenger of the covenant" (Malachi 3:1) who confirmed that New covenant with many during His earthly ministry which took place in the 70th week.

The "people" of Christ the Messiah prince who was to come (Christ's fellow Israelites - the Zealot factions and their leaders in particular) were the ones destined to destroy the city Jerusalem and the sanctuary, according to God's plans revealed to Daniel.

Hi eclipse, I am now enjoying several of your posts here. I didn’t see these views before.

 

[EarlyActs]

This "implication" is imaginary. A prophesied 70 week time period with "implied" time gaps in between is a useless tool to measure time with. It turns the 70-week prophecy into an elastic yardstick which becomes a pointless exercise with no practical benefit. Anybody can make the prophecy mean anything whatever by this means. Not a good procedure.

I don’t know where Eclipse explained a 2nd gap. It does seem that if the cutting off is in the middle of the 70th , the end of the 70th is 3.5 years later. An exception might be allowed in the phrase ‘war will continue til the end’ to draw it out further.

But there may be 7 years after the cutting off. The new covenant and the cessation of offerings is within that, but war continues on.

I would like to see again what Eclipse means about a 2nd gap. I do think symmetry is important, but have never found a role for it in this vision.

 

[EarlyActs]

I read multiple translations, and favor the literal translations such as the YLT. And I use the Septuagint most often, and try as far as possible to defer to the original languages' intent. And nowhere is a gap referred to in scripture for this 70-week period. Gaps are a convenient tool for anybody to insert their own private interpretations into the events this 70-week prophecy predicted for ethnic Israel's latter days as a people and the end of the physical temple's existence in AD 70. "Gaps" are not a "proper interpretation" if scripture does not say anything about them.

Re The break at seven weeks into the sequence :

I know of a comment that this means it was way, way overdue. That the punishment should have come 7 weeks in bc this is the 2nd time Israel had failed completely , the first being punished in 586 BC.

The extra 62 were 1, Gods patience with Israel or recognition of the value of the resistance to paganism in the IT period. And 2, the method for matching the span of time needed for the 4 kingdoms of Dan 2 to elapse , which end with Rome, when the detailed events of 9:26-27 happen.

 

[EarlyActs]

Here is why I can't find symmetry in the 70 weeks. There is 7 then 62 and then 1. This string is not symmetrical.

If we convert to years and keep the 'war til the end' in mind we are closer:
49 // 434 // 49

With the 'cutting off' at the end of the 434 in 30 AD, we would then need to go out to 79 AD. This is closer...it includes the Masada event in 72 but not the last gasp revolt of bar-Cochba. There are problems.

It does not seem that a symmetry is in mind.

 

[Rufus]

The prophecy was NOT fulfilled in 70 AD. Far from it. There are 3 groups of weeks AND 2 gaps. Those 2 gaps are also groups of 7 weeks of years long. It is a pattern; a blueprint; a mathematical formula for the specific time carved out dealing with Jerusalem and the temple. That is what Gabriel specifically states is what the prophecy is about.

Those "gaps" are man-made fictions. Nowhere in scripture when a period of time is stipulated is there ever any gap interposed. The period of time is always continuous and uninterrupted. The only reason a gap is artifically imposed upon any text is to make the text conform to a man-made theological agenda.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

Those "gaps" are man-made fictions. Nowhere in scripture when a period of time is stipulated is there ever any gap interposed. The period of time is always continuous and uninterrupted. The only reason a gap is artifically imposed upon any text is to make the text conform to a man-made theological agenda.

I already dealt with this erroneous view several posts ago.

 

[Rufus]

I already dealt with this erroneous view several posts ago.

What I stated is a fact. You will not be able to provide any other passage that provides that kind of precedent. But feel free to give me the post number. I would certainly give the courteous of my time in reading it.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Re The break at seven weeks into the sequence :

I know of a comment that this means it was way, way overdue. That the punishment should have come 7 weeks in bc this is the 2nd time Israel had failed completely , the first being punished in 586 BC.

The extra 62 were 1, Gods patience with Israel or recognition of the value of the resistance to paganism in the IT period. And 2, the method for matching the span of time needed for the 4 kingdoms of Dan 2 to elapse , which end with Rome, when the detailed events of 9:26-27 happen.

The purpose of stipulating the specific blocks of 7, then 62, then 1 week of years within the 70 weeks of years was to predict the exact year that Messiah the Prince would come, and also the year in which He would die and be "cut off" in the middle of the last 1 week of years.

This division of the 70 weeks of years into 7, 62, and 1 was not meant to be symmetrical. Because the Jews for the most part rejected Jesus as being their revealed Messiah the Prince that Daniel predicted to come, their future punishment was prophesied and "sealed up" within the 70 weeks of years as a predicted punishment reserved for their "latter end".

It was not a necessary part of Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy that this punishment be doled out within the 70 weeks period. The requirement was that the prophecy of that future punishment would be given and "sealed up" within the 70 weeks of years as a reserved, promised event - one which was certain to be fulfilled later on before that first-century generation had passed away.

 

[EarlyActs]

The purpose of stipulating the specific blocks of 7, then 62, then 1 week of years within the 70 weeks of years was to predict the exact year that Messiah the Prince would come, and also the year in which He would die and be "cut off" in the middle of the last 1 week of years.

This division of the 70 weeks of years into 7, 62, and 1 was not meant to be symmetrical. Because the Jews for the most part rejected Jesus as being their revealed Messiah the Prince that Daniel predicted to come, their future punishment was prophesied and "sealed up" within the 70 weeks of years as a predicted punishment reserved for their "latter end".

It was not a necessary part of Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy that this punishment be doled out within the 70 weeks period. The requirement was that the prophecy of that future punishment would be given and "sealed up" within the 70 weeks of years as a reserved, promised event - one which was certain to be fulfilled later on before that first-century generation had passed away.

Yes this is good, thanks!

I think another use of sealed up that illustrates this is in Daniel. I’d have to dig the detail out.

 

[EarlyActs]

I already dealt with this erroneous view several posts ago.

Eclipse, do you have a short summary of your logo ?

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

Eclipse, do you have a short summary of your logo ?

My logo is a diagram of the 70 Weeks that Gabriel outlined to Daniel. The 3 yellow bars are the 3 groups of weeks: 7 weeks, 62 weeks and 1 week. The 2 purple bars are the 2 gaps between - also made up of groups of weeks: 14 weeks and 290 weeks (assumed).
This total time period also matches Ezekiel's 430 day prophecy time period exactly. These corroborate each other and illustrate God's requirement that there be at least 2 witnesses to establish a matter.

The start and end points of the groups of weeks are also marked in time by "eclipse event signs". This is a term I've coined for this phenomenon which I've discovered. This phenomenon also corroborates the timeline of the prophecy. It is all combined together as an intricate series of cogs in the rhythms of prophecy.

 

[EarlyActs]

Why isn’t more made of the Mt 1 scheme of 14x3 and then 7?

Re Ezekiel 430 days.
Please send a reference. Neither 430 nor four hundred nor thirty show results in a search in Ezekiel.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

Why isn’t more made of the Mt 1 scheme of 14x3 and then 7?

Re Ezekiel 430 days.
Please send a reference. Neither 430 nor four hundred nor thirty show results in a search in Ezekiel.

Simple addition. Ezekiel 4.

 

[EarlyActs]

Simple addition. Ezekiel 4.

Where is this referenced authoritatively by the NT?

 

[EarlyActs]

Simple addition. Ezekiel 4.

This was when:
“This is how the people of Israel will eat their unclean food among the nations[t] where I will banish them.”

There were actually several arrangements between occupying powers and Judaism during the IT.

 

[Mr GLee]

Obviously not at all what is being referred to by Gabriel in the prophecy. It's spiritualizing like this that keeps most people ignorant of what God is really doing throughout history.

Searching the unseen spiritual gospel understanding is needed . Its is not a reflection of people ignorant of God

In that way we are to compare the spiritual unseen etrenal things of God to the same . Not the literal historical to the same .They must be mixed
Jesus said. . . it is unredeemed mankind that seeks after the temporal dying thing seen(signs) Rather than Faith the power of God to the same Faith of God . . . . . called the gosple in Romans 1

Many say God needs no faith or power

1 Corinthians 2:13-14 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[EarlyActs]

My treatment (about a page) of the Dan 9 vision as a miniature of NT history is at #258.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

My treatment (about a page) of the Dan 9 vision as a miniature of NT history is at #258.

Unlike you, I read your information on your post. It's very easy to disprove as false. Gabriel says the 70 weeks has specifically "... been determined for your people and for your holy city". It has nothing whatsoever do with Christians or the church. Nothing.

 

[EarlyActs]

I just spent 10 mins trying to find my treatment of Dan 9 but no luck, so I will store this here and under Daniel 9 (the thread).

As v24 says the 7 redemptive accomplishments of Messiah are completed in the 70 weeks. It is intriguing that this period also includes closing up prophecy, which is why Christ said in Acts 1 that 'we are not to know' about "the kingdom of Israel." And why no further discussion is found in Acts.

Christ's redemptive death (see v24) is after the 69th week, which is of course the 70th. Half of this week is the redemptive Gospel, half is destructive (of Israel). His title here is the Anointed One, meshiach.

The next person mentioned is 'the ruler who will come (and his people)' of v26. This is from the earlier visions of ch 2, but is not the horrible desolating person who is mentioned last and finally. The "ruler who will come" is Rome.

Notice the imperfect tense of 'war will continue to the end' as though it had been going on before the 70th. Quite true. There were various skirmishes (see discussion in Acts 5), but the end of this conflict would be 'like a 'dabar' (destructive flood).' Notice that this is confined to Israel even though the term from Genesis is used.

The term "desolations" gets mentioned before the evil desolator.

The major interpretive difficulty now shows itself--the antecedent of He in v27a. Remember, the horrible desolating person has not yet been mentioned. He is Christ. "Confirm" is a positive, favorable word choice; a good thing. Daniel is referring to the new covenant, the one that contains the redemptive treasures of v24. It is for the "many" in the same sense as Is 53's "He will justify many." From the start of Christ's ministry to the solidification of the apostle's teaching is roughly 7 years, and that is the "confirming."

The middle of the final 7 is v27b and is the Gospel event, like v24 said, which puts an end to sin (as debt), accomplishes atonement, and brings righteousness in Christ. That's what the first line of v25 meant about 'after' the 69th. The letter to Hebrews makes full discharge of 'an end of sacrifice and offering.'

Ironically, the zealots who took over the temple in the Jewish War ended its sacrifices to save on food; a sort of desperate mirror image "ending of sacrifice" a la Judaizing! It's so tragic! All that death for a system that had been ended!

Then we have 27c and it does have a new antecedent, as you can see from the commentaries. At the temple, the horrible desolator would be running the show, and he is the abomination and finally his end overcomes him. Thus Mk 13 and Mt 24 tell us "Let the reader understand" that this is about the zealots who captured Jerusalem and the Temple as a fort. This is the only NT quote of Dan 9 and it is about the desolator.

He is the desolator of Israel because he insists on fighting the 'ruler who is to come' instead of submitting to God's plan in Dan 2 where the new kingdom comes like a flying stone that turns all worldly kingdoms into a dust that becomes a great new mountain (not Zion) on which the world can worship God.

The NET's notes bt and bu in v27c explain the shift of antecedent found in the Hebrew; it is the most extensively noted translation:

On the wing[bt] of abominations will come[bu] one who destroys,
until the decreed end is poured out on the one who destroys.”

This person is not the ruler to come, because 'the rebellion/abomination (Dan 8:13) that desolates' contains its own explanation: it is the rebellion or abomination that desolates the place, even though another army is involved.

The NET shift of antecedent is a better translation than the NIV.

Notice that the desolator is the one whose time is ended, not the ruler who is to come of ch 2.

This is why any overview of the NT must state that the zealot movement is responsible for desolating the country. It's agenda was quite the opposite of the spread of the Gospel of Messiah seen in v24. In Luke, Jesus gave warning after warning to Israel about agitating Rome (chs 11, 13, 15, 17, 19!, 21). At the same time he wanted them to become missionaries of His Gospel. And he tried to do so with 2-3 Galilean zealots, where open revolt had started when he was a child.

Daniel 9's vision is justifiable called the miniature of NT history.

In my own re-read of this treatment (by me), I should have mentioned latency more. This has to do with a delayed realization or manifestation.

One way this matter is reading the 6 accomplishments by Messiah--the righteousness, atonement, confirmation, etc. God raised up Paul after the historic events of Christ to explain these things. This is why Paul wrote, biographically, "at one time we knew Christ in the usual sense, but now we know that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself."
We can see something of this in Jn 2:
21 But Jesus[ar] was speaking about the temple of his body.[as] 22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture[at] and the saying[au] that Jesus had spoken.

A 2nd way this factors is in expressions like 'an end to sacrifice and offering.' The atonement of Christ was in his death, which Daniel calls the cutting off. But then Daniel says some years later that an end of sacrifice goes into effect. He does not mean that if you showed up at the temple 3.5 years exactly after the crucifixion that no sacrifices would be performed. This is partly due to Christian Jews realizing of impact of all that had taken place.

There may a 'double' entendre here. In v27a, the new covenant's confirmation and the end of the sacrifices are set beside each other in a parallelism, which we would normally put together toward the same target. None of this is about the desolating person, 27b and those people, 26a. But oddly enough during the worst of the revolt, the leader of that desolating revolt, John of Gischala, did stop the sacrificial system to conserve food during the siege. This means that the sacrifice system was being kept to impress their 'Messiah' (their view of) so that he would intervene in the struggle against Rome.

Anyone in the country could see that the Daniel line 'there will be destructive war until the end' was pretty much a done deal. Thus one translation of Acts 13's synagogue ruler's invite to Paul is 'Is there anything encouraging to say?' due to the dismay about the direction of the country. This direction is fully sketched by Jesus in Luke, in scenes in 13, 15, 17, 19, 21. From Mt 20-24, the destruction is mentioned in various parables and teachings.

 

[EarlyActs]

In my own re-read of this treatment (by me), I should have mentioned latency more. This has to do with a delayed realization or manifestation.

One way this matter is reading the 6 accomplishments by Messiah--the righteousness, atonement, confirmation, etc. God raised up Paul after the historic events of Christ to explain these things. This is why Paul wrote, biographically, "at one time we knew Christ in the usual sense, but now we know that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself."
We can see something of this in Jn 2:
21 But Jesus[ar] was speaking about the temple of his body.[as] 22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture[at] and the saying[au] that Jesus had spoken.

A 2nd way this factors is in expressions like 'an end to sacrifice and offering.' The atonement of Christ was in his death, which Daniel calls the cutting off. But then Daniel says some years later that an end of sacrifice goes into effect. He does not mean that if you showed up at the temple 3.5 years exactly after the crucifixion that no sacrifices would be performed. This is partly due to Christian Jews realizing of impact of all that had taken place.

There may a 'double' entendre here. In v27a, the new covenant's confirmation and the end of the sacrifices are set beside each other in a parallelism, which we would normally put together toward the same target. None of this is about the desolating person, 27b and those people, 26a. But oddly enough during the worst of the revolt, the leader of that desolating revolt, John of Gischala, did stop the sacrificial system to conserve food during the siege. This means that the sacrifice system was being kept to impress their 'Messiah' (their view of) so that he would intervene in the struggle against Rome.

Anyone in the country could see that the Daniel line 'there will be destructive war until the end' was pretty much a done deal. Thus one translation of Acts 13's synagogue ruler's invite to Paul is 'Is there anything encouraging to say?' due to the dismay about the direction of the country. This direction is fully sketched by Jesus in Luke, in scenes in 13, 15, 17, 19, 21. From Mt 20-24, the destruction is mentioned in various parables and teachings.

Corr: last line, Mt 21-24