The False Doctrine of a 7-year Tribulation

[Arial]

What was Daniel's prayer?
"20 While I was still speaking and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and [o]presenting my plea before the Lord my God in behalf of the holy mountain of my God, 21 while I was still speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision [p]previously, [q]came to me [r]in my extreme weariness about the time of the evening offering. 22 And he instructed me and talked with me and said, “Daniel, I have come now to give you insight with understanding. 23 At the beginning of your pleas the [s]command was issued, and I have come to tell you, because you are [t]highly esteemed; so pay attention to the message and gain understanding of the vision."

That wasn't Daniels prayer. His prayer begins in 9:3 and continues through verse 19. The reason he was praying that prayer is given in 1-2 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the lineage of the Medes, who was made king over the realmof the Chaldeans---in the first year of his reign I, Daniel, understood by the books of the number of years specified by the word of the Lord through Jeremiah the prophet, that He would accomplish seventy years in the desolation of Jerusalem. Daniel is in Babylon after the exile. He is lamenting over Jerusalem and its desolation, and confessing his sins and those of God's people.

Here are the words of Jeremiah he refers to.
Jer 25:1-14.

"24 “Seventy [u]weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to [v]finish the wrongdoing, to [w]make an end of sin, to make atonement for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and [x]prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy Place."

It is pretty clear who the seventy weeks are for, and what they are for. It is also kind of clear what Daniel was praying about. The result of the 70 weeks is the answer to Daniel's prayer. So the people of Israel will remain in rebellion, sin, full of guilt and unrighteousness, until the end of the decreed 70 weeks. However, he basically told Daniel, I have heard your pleas, and have an answer, though it will take time.

The 70 weeks does indeed pertain to exiled Judah.What is clear is, that is what Daniel was praying about, so the following understanding that Gabriel gives, is the seventy years they were to be in exile, and the their homeland desolate. That is the first seventy, from which the others follow, which we can look at later. It began when Cyrus issued his decree for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. (And that followed the prayers of Nehemiah that was similar to Daniel's. The mistake dispensationalist make is that they see the prophecy about Israel instead of Christ.

There is a covenantal frame around this prophecy, indicated by the use of the covenant name in covenant renewal and Sabbath language. The aspects of the covenant law are found in Lev concerning the use of sevens and what it represents. This helps us understand the use seven and multiple sevens here. There were Sabbath rests for the land, which is specifically mentioned as a part of the exile duration in 2 Chron 36:21. And in the Year of Jubilee.

 

[Tambora]

If you read Acts and Jesus ascension, you can take it literally.

Or you can take it as other scriptures do by linking "air" to the earth.

It is obvious that meeting Jesus in the air is not speaking of the world as a globe.

Or it links "air" with the earth as other scriptures do.

The idea for Satan is that all of creation is corrupt. There is nothing left unscathed in creation. It is all under Satan's dominion, which is permitted by God, not held over by God. Satan doesn't actually have any power that God did not allow for a time.

The idea is that Satan has domain of the air which is linked to the earth as Eph 2:2 says.
I doubt it means that Satan only had domain where birds fly.

Scripture gives a theological flexible meaning of "air" so we should be cautious to not try and pigeonhole it just because it fails to line up with your interpretation.
To be fair to scripture one should leave both viewpoints on the table.

 

[Eleanor]

The Jews weren't completely wrong, but they so spiritualized prophecy

However the kingdom is not Israel for a thousand years. That is where the disconnect in a dispensationalist view exists. It stops the forward flow of redemption, as though redemption takes a time out to step backwards. A pause to meditate on everything so to speak.
I will deal with the details in response to your other post. Amillennialism is accused of spiritualizing prophecy

And let's not forget about the apostles who did the same thing; e.g.,

1) Ro 9:24-26 - where Paul says that Israel is not the people of God (Hos 1:9), and that the promise to make Israel his people again (Ho 2:23) is fulfilled in the Gentiles.

2) 1 Pe 2:10 - where Peter also says that the promise spoken to Israel (Hos 2:23) applies to the Gentiles.
Both Peter and Paul are "spiritualizing" the OT text of Hos 2:23.

3) Heb 8:6-13, 10:15-18 - where the writer says the promise to Israel of a new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) is fulfilled in the Gentile church, which is the true Israel.

4) Heb 11:10, 13, 16 - where the writer says the everlasting possession promised to Abraham (Ge 17:8) was not earthly land, but a heavenly city (11:13) of eternal life (Jn 11:24-25).
The author of Hebrews is "spiritualizing' the OT texts of Jer 31:31-34 and Ge 17:8.

5) Ac 15:13-18 - where James says the promise (Am 9:11-12) to rebuild David's tent is fulfilled in God taking to himself a people from the Gentiles.
James is "spiritualizing" the OT text of Am 9:11-12.

6) 1 Co 10:1-4 - where Paul says that Israel was baptized in the cloud, the manna was spiritual food, the water from the rock was spiritual drink, and the rock itself was Christ.
Paul is "spiritualizing" the OT texts of Ex 14:22, 16:4, 17:6.

7) Dt 10:16,30:6, Jer 4:4, 9:25-26 - where God says the circumcision of Ge 17:10-14 must be spiritual circumcision.

8) Ro 2:26-29 - where Paul says that only those who are spiritually circumcised (born again by the Spirit, faith in Jesus Christ) are true Jews, that the rest of the Jews were not really Jews in the eyes of God.
Both Paul and God himself are "spiritualizing" the OT text of Ge 17:10-14.

9) 1 Co 9:8-10, 1 Tim 5:17-18 - where Paul says the command (Dt 25:4) not to muzzle the ox when it is treading out the grain is a command that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel (1 Co 9:14).
Paul is "spiritualizing" the OT text of Dt 25:4.

10) Heb 3:7-4:11 - where the writer says going into Canaan was only a partial and temporary entering into God's permanent rest (Dt 12:10, 25:19), that there remains a spiritual entering into God's permanent (salvation) rest through faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ.
The writer of Hebrews is "spiritualizing" the OT texts of Dt 12:10, 25:19, Nu 14:30, Ps 95:7-8, 11.

Objection to "spiritualizing" the text does not have its basis in the Bible, for the NT writers often "spiritualize" the OT texts.
In fact, to the NT writers, a correct understanding of the OT text often required "spiritualizing" the text.
Are we more wise than the NT writers that we should forbid their interpreting the OT spiritually?

order to interpret Rev.by dispensationalist. But this is not what they do. Prophecy is often given in the OT with signs, that is, with word pictures that signify (represent) something else. WHen this is being done, it is obvious in the scriptures that that is being done. In which case, to interpret them, one must find other parts of scripture that use the same images, what they often represent when they are used. This is not spiritualizing but using proper interpretive hermeneutics.

The dispensationalists actually do the spiritualizing when they begin to say hail stones could be satialites, grasshoppers could be black helicopters, the mark could be an implant. But instead of correct interpretive hermeneutics, they use their imaginations and the world, rather than the word of God. And still claim that they interpret Rev literally, when in fact they interpret it literalistically.

 

[Arial]

The 70th week has not happened yet, because the city and the temple were destroyed before the 70th week began. After the 69th week. And that "after the 69th week" covered at least 37 years. From the Messiah being cut off to the city and sanctuary being destroyed in 70 AD. And then it talks of more things happening. Then we are presented with a he, who makes peace. What was some of the other things after the 69th week? "And [ad]its end will come with a flood; even to the end [ae]there will be war; desolations are determined." And then we have someone firming/strengthening a covenant, and then violating that covenant at the mid point, until he is destroyed. It is Christ who strengthens the covenant, but the Antichrist. However, it is before he actually takes the stage as Antichrist. 3 1/2 years into the 70th week, he will be unveiled as the Antichrist when he stands in the temple and declares himself to be god. Then the time of Jacobs trouble begins, that Great Tribulation Jesus said will not be matched in history, or after, and the true tribulation of Israel will begin. (Again, the time of Jacob's trouble.) When it is over, Jesus will personally come to Israel and God will bring an end to the transgression, the sin, make atonement for guilt, and bring in everlasting righteousness.

Zechriah 12
"10 “And I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem [h]the Spirit of grace and of pleading, so that they will look at Me whom they pierced; and they will mourn for Him, like one mourning for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn. 11 On that day the mourning in Jerusalem will be great, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the [i]plain of [j]Megiddo. 12 The land will mourn, every family by itself; the family of the house of David by itself and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself and their wives by themselves; 13 the family of the house of Levi by itself and their wives by themselves; the family of the Shimeites by itself and their wives by themselves; 14 all the families that are left, every family by itself, and their wives by themselves."

All the families that are left. The remnant. The elect that remains at the end will be the only one's that are left.

Zechariah 13
“On that day a fountain will be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for defilement.

2 “And it will come about on that day,” declares the Lord of armies, “that I will eliminate the names of the idols from the land, and they will no longer be remembered; and I will also remove the prophets and the unclean spirit from the land. 3 And if anyone still prophesies, then his father and mother who gave birth to him will say to him, ‘You shall not live, because you have spoken falsely in the name of the Lord’; and his father and mother who gave birth to him shall pierce him through when he prophesies. 4 Also it will come about on that day that the prophets will each be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies, and they will not put on a hairy robe in order to deceive; 5 but he will say, ‘I am not a prophet; I am a cultivator of the ground, because a man [a]sold me as a slave in my youth.’ 6 And someone will say to him, ‘What are these wounds between your [b]arms?’ Then he will say, ‘Those with which I was wounded at the house of [c]my friends.’"

(Consider the above in light of the end result of the 70 weeks...)

What parts of those prophecies pertain to historical events in national Israel, and what parts are forward looking to the ultimate promise fulfillment Gen 3?

 

[Arial]

"24 “Seventy [u]weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to [v]finish the wrongdoing, to [w]make an end of sin, to make atonement for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and [x]prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy Place."

It is pretty clear who the seventy weeks are for, and what they are for. It is also kind of clear what Daniel was praying about. The result of the 70 weeks is the answer to Daniel's prayer. So the people of Israel will remain in rebellion, sin, full of guilt and unrighteousness, until the end of the decreed 70 weeks. However, he basically told Daniel, I have heard your pleas, and have an answer, though it will take time.

The first seventy weeks is the time Israel is in exile before their return to rebuilt Jerusalem. This starts the countdown of seventies and the 62 weeks, that lead to the first advent of Christ, not the second advent. When someone starts shooting numbers at me, my mind tends to wander off, so I won't go through them here to prove my point. I found the information in my study Bible text notes. It is a Reformed study Bible but is faithful to present the predominant views of of difficult passages. I also have a MacArthur (dispensationalist) study Bible and he only presents the dispensational views in his notes and book prefaces, as though it were absolute fact.

Back to the numbers, and you can find the information yourself in whatever way you choose (or don't choose) to look. If the "countdown" begins with the rebuilding of Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile, the counting of the seventy weeks, and the sixty-two weeks arrive at Christ's first advent, His crucifixion, and the church age, also known as the messianic age----this age. The only other age spoken of in Scripture after this age, is the age to come. IOW, not a millennial age, followed by another age to come, the consummation.

The prophecy of Dan 9, as to what it was addressing, is completely fulfilled now in Christ, but not yet fully consummated. The consummation happens at His second advent. The prophecy is messianic, not political or national. There is no seven year "tribulation" period in which judgement is being rent our on the earth and its peoples, prior to the Judgment. There is no literal thousand year reign of Christ in Jerusalem overseeing the animal sacrifices that were ABOLISHED, when He died, rose again, ascended into heaven, ratifying the New Covenant. Christ is victorious over what He came to be victorious over---sin and death---NOW. The only thing remaining to occur is the consummation, when sin and death no longer exist, and heaven comes to earth, and "I will dwell among them. I will be their God, and they will be my people." the promise that ran through every page of Scripture since it was made in Gen 3. The redemptive goal. What Adam did to all mankind and all of creation, undone.

The millennial age, even according to Dan 9, is this age, the time between the two advents of Christ. The judgements in Rev are not consecutive, one following on the heels of the other over a seven year period. They are the judgements that have always been over the earth's sinful people, and have been occurring, are occurring, will be, until Christ returns. They are seen from different perspectives in Rev, and the subject, even in them is Christ. They cover the complete history from the heavenly perspective of what happened on earth concerning Christ and His church. What is, what was, what is yet to be.

If you have not yet learned to recognize tribulation for what it is, and to stand strong in and through it, best be watching and praying and learning what it means to be unmovable. Just as there is no seven years of tribulation, there is no rapture out of it. John, in Revelation, begins his admonishment and encouragement to the churches (congregations) that existed then, with saying,"I John, both our brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ---"

 

[Eleanor]

The Jews weren't completely wrong, but they so spiritualized prophecy (hmm... where have I heard that before) that they missed Jesus first coming.

You've got that backwards. . .the Jews took prophecy so literally, as you take it literally, that they failed to see the kingdom of God when it came (Lk 11:20).

 

[Tambora]

And let's not forget about the apostles who did the same thing; e.g.,

1) Ro 9:24-26 - where Paul says that Israel is not the people of God (Hos 1:9), and that the promise to make Israel his people again (Ho 2:23) is fulfilled in the Gentiles.

2) 1 Pe 2:10 - where Peter also says that the promise spoken to Israel (Hos 2:23) applies to the Gentiles.
Both Peter and Paul are "spiritualizing" the OT text of Hos 2:23.

3) Heb 8:6-13, 10:15-18 - where the writer says the promise to Israel of a new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) is fulfilled in the Gentile church, which is the true Israel.

4) Heb 11:10, 13, 16 - where the writer says the everlasting possession promised to Abraham (Ge 17:8) was not earthly land, but a heavenly city (11:13) of eternal life (Jn 11:24-25).
The author of Hebrews is "spiritualizing' the OT texts of Jer 31:31-34 and Ge 17:8.

5) Ac 15:13-18 - where James says the promise (Am 9:11-12) to rebuild David's tent is fulfilled in God taking to himself a people from the Gentiles.
James is "spiritualizing" the OT text of Am 9:11-12.

6) 1 Co 10:1-4 - where Paul says that Israel was baptized in the cloud, the manna was spiritual food, the water from the rock was spiritual drink, and the rock itself was Christ.
Paul is "spiritualizing" the OT texts of Ex 14:22, 16:4, 17:6.

7) Dt 10:16,30:6, Jer 4:4, 9:25-26 - where God says the circumcision of Ge 17:10-14 must be spiritual circumcision.

8) Ro 2:26-29 - where Paul says that only those who are spiritually circumcised (born again by the Spirit, faith in Jesus Christ) are true Jews, that the rest of the Jews were not really Jews in the eyes of God.
Both Paul and God himself are "spiritualizing" the OT text of Ge 17:10-14.

9) 1 Co 9:8-10, 1 Tim 5:17-18 - where Paul says the command (Dt 25:4) not to muzzle the ox when it is treading out the grain is a command that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel (1 Co 9:14).
Paul is "spiritualizing" the OT text of Dt 25:4.

10) Heb 3:7-4:11 - where the writer says going into Canaan was only a partial and temporary entering into God's permanent rest (Dt 12:10, 25:19), that there remains a spiritual entering into God's permanent (salvation) rest through faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ.
The writer of Hebrews is "spiritualizing" the OT texts of Dt 12:10, 25:19, Nu 14:30, Ps 95:7-8, 11.

Objection to "spiritualizing" the text does not have its basis in the Bible, for the NT writers often "spiritualize" the OT texts.
In fact, to the NT writers, a correct understanding of the OT text often required "spiritualizing" the text.
Are we more wise than the NT writers that we should forbid their interpreting the OT spiritually?

Agreed.
Many times the NT writers will change the literal aspect of OT writings into a pattern/type of what the OT literally spoke of.

Another example is when the NT writers express that a fulfilment, such as "Out of Egypt I called my son" is about a single person (Christ) rather than the literal whole nation of Israel as the OT text literally has.
The NT writers use the nation of Israel was used as a pattern/type of something else entirely.

This is why I take exception to some of dispensational teaching in that they readily see that Christ fulfills patterns/types (such as David, temple, serpent on a pole, etc. etc. etc.), but will close their eyes to literal Israel also being a pattern/type of something other than what the OT scriptures literally talks about.

 

[Arial]

Again, the 70 weeks is about Israel's rebellion/treason. It is tailored specifically for Israel. This is why it isn't 70 continuous weeks. The redemption of the Gentiles had to fit in somewhere

The first 70, the seventy years until the Jews would return to Israel from Babylonian captivity, the thing Daniel was praying about, that had been prophesied by Jeremiah. In 2 Chron we learn that the time period of captivity was related to the number of sevens that Israel did not give the land rest. This law of sevens is given in Lev 25. Every seventh year, the land was to rest. Every multiple of seven years, seven sevens, (49 years) was a year when slaves were released, debt was canceled, those who had lost their land due to poverty, received it back. The 49th year ushered in the Year of Jubilee.

Why is that important in interpreting Dan 9? It lets us see the convenantle structure of it. The first---Daniel's prayer is a deep heart sorrow over the breaking of the covenant by rebellious Israel, and a plea for God to renew the covenant.

What the dispensationalists do with all OT prophecy, and here is no exception, is make it always and only pertaining to a national, political entity. It forgets entirely the unity with a covenant given to Abraham. One aspect pertaining to their possession of a specific land mass, and God as their God; the other pertaining to the complete, eternal and ultimate goal of redemption (the Covenant of Redemption) through Israel. The land grant covenant of Law, was never about Israel as a political power. It was about Israel as a representative to the world, of Himself, and what it means to bear His image and likeness. In all our doings. The covenant with Israel as a nation did not annul the covenant of promise. It was always still there. Israel did not do what they were intended to do. In the resurrected and ascended Christ, God gave the commision as witness to the gospel and our lives as a witness, to His church, which included Gentiles.

God always intended to do this. Not to replace Israel, but to make of Jew and Gentile one people of God. To redeem His whole world from the effects of Adam's fall. The OT prophecies quite often have a historic application to national Israel,(what was happening historically with them) and also a future application(s) that pertained to the forward moving Covenant of Redemption. This is true in Dan 9, but the future portion of it does not pertain to the second advent of Christ but the first.

It coincides either with His birth or the beginning of His ministry, depending on which event one is using in interpreting the start of the timeline of the end of the seventy year exile. (Ezra or Nehemiah). Either way, the 7 seventies, mark a year of Jubilee. Which in a word, can be described as deliverance. And here is the announcement, when Jesus stood up in the synagogue and read from Is. The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor. Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing."

To the Jews He was heard as saying He is the long awaited Messiah. Which He was. But He was also the promised Seed who would destroy sin and death (crush the serpent's head). He did not come to deliver a national political Israel. He came to deliver the world! The ultimate Jubilee. And Jesus did this in His death on the cross, His resurrection, His ascension. Now we await the consummation.

 

[Arial]

Again, the 70 weeks is about Israel's rebellion/treason. It is tailored specifically for Israel. This is why it isn't 70 continuous weeks. The redemption of the Gentiles had to fit in somewhere. Again, Paul explains this all in Romans 11. By Israel's disobedience in rejection of the Messiah, the Gentiles received the gospel which they accepted in obedience. This so that Israel might become jealous, and in the end, also become obedient and accept the Messiah. The end of the passage is that God has locked up all in disobedience so He might have mercy on all. In the end, all the elect are saved, and Jews and Gentiles become one in Christ entering the Kingdom.

Yes, but what part of Israel's rebellion? Suppose, as I have said previously, that first seventy weeks is the particular thing Daniel has been praying about? Which was a plea for God to renew the covenant they had broken, (the judgement being exile under the rule of Babylon). And suppose the answer to that prayer "When will it be?" was what Gabrielle answered first. And then the prophec moves forward, counting sevens
to future events?

And suppose the period of time covered is not to Christ's second advent, but His first. Making the time of the end of the age, not seven years of tribulation in which the Jews are converted, the church is absent, and a visible eathly national Israel is preeminent, with Christ presiding as King. Suppose instead it is the time period between the first and second advents.

Romans 11 can be a difficult chapter to interpret. It is made easier by connecting it to chapters 8,9, and 10, as one continuous flow---which is the way it was written. It is a letter. If one approaches it with dispensational presuppositions, and also interpreting Rev though that same lens, it can be made to present two separate, unrelated, aspects of redemption. Or not completely unrelated, but a forward, backward, forward again,backward, then forward, then consummation. A type of two step approach. In the process, this view arrives at their conclusions that the seven years is about the Jews, and the find in the scriptures a way to get the Gentile and Jewish believers (the church) out of the picture, so God can finish fulfilling all His promises to Israel. The rapture.

The covenant approach also comes to the chapter with presuppositions, but ones that arrive at a different picture. What is taken as back and forth in redemption between Gentile and Jew in those chapters, is about blessings, not dispensational movements. Israel brings blessings to the Gentiles through their Jewish Messiah. The Jews are hardened for a time, this hardening bringing that blessing. The Jews are being judged, but not utterly abandoned. I believe that there is an ethnic Israel blessing, and I believe it comes just before Christ's return. How long before is not told to us. What it will look like in the restored creation, I have no idea. I only know what I think it will not be. And that is the dispensationalist premillennial view, or any view of a rapture, or a literal 1000 year reign.

I believe that when the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, then God will lift the hardening of Israel, and there will be an unprecedented conversion to Jews to trusting in their Messiah.

If one is interpreting from the pov of dispensationalism, and also from a pov of one form or another of free will choice in salvation, it becomes even more difficult to see anything but a restored political/ religious Israel. It becomes difficult to place the phrase until the times of the Gentiles is complete, in proper perspective. From the free will perspective, the number of Gentiles would not be fixed, but random. And the conversion of the Jews would not be connected to the power of God. There would be no absolutes. The phrases concerning God hardening the Jews for a time, would in that view, not really be God.

I do not know if your not responding to my posts is because you are done with the conversation, or because you are busy at real life. I hope it is the latter. I would really appreciate you input regarding the things I have posted.

 

[TMSO]

Why is because it reads that way. It is a historic account of God acting in creation. And you do do that, even though you do so, knowing that it is a part of the whole. You still have national Israel as a focal point, in that, in essence, in your interpretation you have two redemptive eschatologies. One for national Israel and one for the church. That interpretation read into Rev creates a literal thousand years and a visible kingdom of Go, and then a future kingdom.

So, I will ask you this:

Why did God establish Israel and give them the law? How does that relate to the kingdom of God eschatologically coming to the world?

That depends on what you are considering a"part of." I view the entire Bible as a unity, and the eschatological unity begins, as I have said, in Gen 3 with the curse on the serpent and the PROMISE that the seed of the woman would crush his head, even though he would bruise His heel. It is one continuous flow forward to the fulfillment of this promise from that point on. Everything is connected, and nothing is ever isolated from that promise. What we see in the OT as to this promise of the Seed who would crush the serpent's head, is fulfilled in the NT. For the world, not national Israel. It is fulfilled when the one promised arrives, in a manger, in Bethlehem. "Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world!" What does this Seed do, but what not even the natural seed of Abraham, (national Israel) could not do? He deals with and conquers the very root problem. Sin.

Well, why is this? Was it to make/keep a separation? Or was it serving a different and eschatological purpose? What was Israel's purpose in God rescuing them from slavery in Egypt and giving them the land of Canaan?

Also what the majority to be sure, but not all rejected was Jesus being the promised Messiah. The Redeemer to come. Because they too, thought this redemption would be about a political entity. And neither did all the Gentiles believe, but only a remnant.

I was saying you don't interpret the Old Testament using the Old Testament. As a whole, it is the Old and New Testament. The New Testament is the plot of God's story of redemption continuing. The prophecies of the Old Testament are foreshadowing. It becomes understood when the events in the New Testament happen. One doesn't change what the Old Testament says. It is still one continuous narrative. One recognizes the Old Testament in the new (hey, this reminds me of something the Old Testament said...) The Old Testament does not need to be interpreted by the New. Why? Well, if you don't properly understand the New Testament, then you'll make a right ole mess of the Old Testament.

God chose Israel and gave them the Law because they were to be the ones through whom the child of promise would come, making them the people of the promise. (It goes two directions. The promise to Abraham, and the promise of the Messiah. It is interesting that way.) The Law was to establish them as God's chosen people. And at one point, all of Israel followed God. Every last man, woman, and child. There was no remnant, for they were a whole. When the people rebelled, now you have a remnant of people who did not rebel, or would repent. They are what remains of the whole group that once followed God, a remnant. The Gentiles never at any time of history followed God as a whole, so there is no remnant with the Gentiles. Just elect. In Israel, the remnant is the elect. They are synonymous. (Ephesians 1 elect...) Israel as a whole rejected Jesus, but individuals accepted Jesus. Consider the remnant as part of the whole that rejected Jesus, but, like Saul, will repent and be saved, once they behold the truth.

The eschatological purpose appears to be two fold. Salvation of the Gentiles and of the Jews is one. The other is God's reconciliation with His chosen people Israel... the remnant. Bringing them back in to where they had been. The end of the transgression, the end of sin, the atonement for the guilt, the bringing in of everlasting righteousness, etc.

 

[TMSO]

That wasn't Daniels prayer. His prayer begins in 9:3 and continues through verse 19. The reason he was praying that prayer is given in 1-2 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the lineage of the Medes, who was made king over the realmof the Chaldeans---in the first year of his reign I, Daniel, understood by the books of the number of years specified by the word of the Lord through Jeremiah the prophet, that He would accomplish seventy years in the desolation of Jerusalem. Daniel is in Babylon after the exile. He is lamenting over Jerusalem and its desolation, and confessing his sins and those of God's people.

Here are the words of Jeremiah he refers to.
Jer 25:1-14.

The 70 weeks does indeed pertain to exiled Judah.What is clear is, that is what Daniel was praying about, so the following understanding that Gabriel gives, is the seventy years they were to be in exile, and the their homeland desolate. That is the first seventy, from which the others follow, which we can look at later. It began when Cyrus issued his decree for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. (And that followed the prayers of Nehemiah that was similar to Daniel's. The mistake dispensationalist make is that they see the prophecy about Israel instead of Christ.

You are missing something. The 70 weeks are not the time that they are exiled. It is the time that God's face is set against them. How do we know? Read the end result of the 70 weeks. It is a decree, not so much a prophecy, though prophecy makes up the decree. How do we know? 70 weeks are decreed for your people and the holy city. The decree is about Israel, it says it right here. The Messiah is in it, in that He is cut off after the 69 weeks, but before week 70. But why is the 69 weeks broken up as 7 and 62? Are they not contiguous? Why doesn't it say after 69 weeks, but actually say after the 62 weeks? What is the specific reason for keeping the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks separate? And then keeping the 70th week separate?

There is a covenantal frame around this prophecy, indicated by the use of the covenant name in covenant renewal and Sabbath language. The aspects of the covenant law are found in Lev concerning the use of sevens and what it represents. This helps us understand the use seven and multiple sevens here. There were Sabbath rests for the land, which is specifically mentioned as a part of the exile duration in 2 Chron 36:21. And in the Year of Jubilee.

You are forcing a covenantal frame onto the prophecy. I dont' want to even consider a dispy frame, because I don't know enough about dispensationalism. I only deal with the eschatology, not the framework of dispensationalism. Perhaps even more of a leaky dispensationalist then John MacArthur. The sleepy dispensationalist. (I metaphorically slept through the covenant/dispensational part of Revelation class.) I just remember that they both believe in seven divisions of scripture time, which covenant theology refers to as covenants, and dispensationalists refer to as dispensations.

(The same class that asked for a summary of four chapters of Revelation, and I just basically wrote out the four chapters of Revelation... I didn't want to leave anything out.) The 70 years occurred before the 70 weeks began. This alone should show that the 70 weeks are not contiguous time from the time of the prophecy. So the weeks do not have to be contiguous.

 

[Arial]

I was saying you don't interpret the Old Testament using the Old Testament.

I interpret the OT using the OT and proper interpretive hermeneutics.This would include a number of things.

• The type of literature it is.
• If it is historical narrative, then the historical context in which it takes place.
• Who is addressing who and for what reason.
• If it is wisdom literature, it is interpreted as a wise way in which to live, and not absolutes.
• If it is poetry, according to the rules of Hebrew poetry.
• If it is prophecy, particularly apocalyptic prophecy containing symbols and signs, according to the meaning of the same symbols in other OT passages, or the obvious meaning gleaned from the context. (These are often found in the symbols in poetry, but not always.)
• In addition, since we have the whole picture and the original recipients of the OT writings and within the historical context of their lives, did not.
• The end of the story
• Who is the central character in the story and why.
• When does the story begin and with what.

It is these last three, that we find the NT, when it quotes the OT, telling us exactly what it means in its fulfillment in Christ. The prophets in OT prophecy often moved backward and forward in time. There was an immediate application ( interpretation or issue it addressed) and a future application(s). These future events could not be known by the ones being addressed, and could not be fully known until the promised one came and made them a reality. This is how we should read and interpret the OT. From both perspectives.

 

[TMSO]

The first seventy weeks is the time Israel is in exile before their return to rebuilt Jerusalem.

What first 70 weeks. I though II Chronicles said it was 70 years.

This starts the countdown of seventies and the 62 weeks, that lead to the first advent of Christ, not the second advent.

Yes. And Jesus is crucified (cut off) after the 62 weeks. Not at the beginning of or during the 70th week. And then after he is cut off, still just after the 62 weeks (and 7), the city and the sanctuary are destroyed. So that means that from the time the Messiah is cut off, until the time the city and sanctuary are destroyed, all after the 62 weeks

When someone starts shooting numbers at me, my mind tends to wander off, so I won't go through them here to prove my point. I found the information in my study Bible text notes. It is a Reformed study Bible but is faithful to present the predominant views of of difficult passages. I also have a MacArthur (dispensationalist) study Bible and he only presents the dispensational views in his notes and book prefaces, as though it were absolute fact.

He has only been studying 8 hours a day for the past 50+ years. You should check what he has to say. He isn't a dispensationalist, but a "leaky" dispensationalist. He doesn't agree with all of dispensationalism. He kind of sits in the middle. His eschatology is in line with dispensationalism though. Why? Because the Bible speaks of an ultimate gathering in of the Jews at the end of time, something that even RC Sproul ended up accepting (from what I heard from my Dad.) He apparently ultimately rejected partial preterism.

Back to the numbers, and you can find the information yourself in whatever way you choose (or don't choose) to look. If the "countdown" begins with the rebuilding of Jerusalem after the Babylonian exile, the counting of the seventy weeks, and the sixty-two weeks arrive at Christ's first advent, His crucifixion, and the church age, also known as the messianic age----this age. The only other age spoken of in Scripture after this age, is the age to come. IOW, not a millennial age, followed by another age to come, the consummation.

If you see two ages coming, one of them is the millennial kingdom. The consummation is when everything is destroyed, and we have a new heavens and new earth. Of this, Jesus had no signs to give.

The prophecy of Dan 9, as to what it was addressing, is completely fulfilled now in Christ, but not yet fully consummated. The consummation happens at His second advent. The prophecy is messianic, not political or national. There is no seven year "tribulation" period in which judgement is being rent our on the earth and its peoples, prior to the Judgment.

No, the Great Tribulation is 3 1/2 years. The tribulation that people think of is persecution against the church. No one wants to face pain, so they look to a rapture to avoid it. However, the Great Tribulation is God pouring out His wrath on Earth in judgment. Revelation is God dealing with the world, with Satan, and Israel. Hence, Israel being mentioned directly in Revelation. Everything is taken care of in Revelation. All loose ends are tied up.

There is no literal thousand year reign of Christ in Jerusalem overseeing the animal sacrifices that were ABOLISHED, when He died, rose again, ascended into heaven, ratifying the New Covenant. Christ is victorious over what He came to be victorious over---sin and death---NOW. The only thing remaining to occur is the consummation, when sin and death no longer exist, and heaven comes to earth, and "I will dwell among them. I will be their God, and they will be my people." the promise that ran through every page of Scripture since it was made in Gen 3. The redemptive goal. What Adam did to all mankind and all of creation, undone.

This is a serious question to the way you put this. Have you actually read about what you are asking. There is a literal thousand year reign (though the length is questionable) in Jerusalem, but the sacrifices were abolished by the antichrist at the start of the Great Tribulation, and not started again. Now, perhaps there are sacrifices of thanksgiving and those things, but no more sin sacrifices.

The millennial age, even according to Dan 9, is this age, the time between the two advents of Christ. The judgements in Rev are not consecutive, one following on the heels of the other over a seven year period. They are the judgements that have always been over the earth's sinful people, and have been occurring, are occurring, will be, until Christ returns. They are seen from different perspectives in Rev, and the subject, even in them is Christ. They cover the complete history from the heavenly perspective of what happened on earth concerning Christ and His church. What is, what was, what is yet to be.

That would be great if there were actual evidence for this.

If you have not yet learned to recognize tribulation for what it is, and to stand strong in and through it, best be watching and praying and learning what it means to be unmovable. Just as there is no seven years of tribulation, there is no rapture out of it. John, in Revelation, begins his admonishment and encouragement to the churches (congregations) that existed then, with saying,"I John, both our brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ---"

Jesus told us what the Great Tribulation would be. There would be no match for it, or anything greater prior to the great tribulation, and nothing after that would be greater. And this great tribulation would be so great that if it wasn't shortened, Earth would have a population of ZERO, according to Jesus. There would be no flesh left on Earth. Can you think of any event like that? Not even the holocaust, which is considered one of the worst things humanity has done to itself, comes close to what Jesus is talking about. Not WW I. Not WW II. Not even the civil war which had the highest casualties of any war in American history.

 

[TMSO]

I interpret the OT using the OT and proper interpretive hermeneutics.This would include a number of things.

• The type of literature it is.
• If it is historical narrative, then the historical context in which it takes place.
• Who is addressing who and for what reason.
• If it is wisdom literature, it is interpreted as a wise way in which to live, and not absolutes.
• If it is poetry, according to the rules of Hebrew poetry.
• If it is prophecy, particularly apocalyptic prophecy containing symbols and signs, according to the meaning of the same symbols in other OT passages, or the obvious meaning gleaned from the context. (These are often found in the symbols in poetry, but not always.)
• In addition, since we have the whole picture and the original recipients of the OT writings and within the historical context of their lives, did not.
• The end of the story
• Who is the central character in the story and why.
• When does the story begin and with what.

It is these last three, that we find the NT, when it quotes the OT, telling us exactly what it means in its fulfillment in Christ. The prophets in OT prophecy often moved backward and forward in time. There was an immediate application ( interpretation or issue it addressed) and a future application(s). These future events could not be known by the ones being addressed, and could not be fully known until the promised one came and made them a reality. This is how we should read and interpret the OT. From both perspectives.

Be careful lest you fall into the same trap as the Jews. Why did they miss Jesus' first coming? The Messiah would be a conquering hero, not a suffering servant. The idea of suffering servant never came to mind? Why? They spiritualized it away, and said that it is Israel, not the Messiah, that is the suffering servant. So all those prophecies were about Israel, not the Messiah. This completely changed Isaiah 56.

Stop spiritualizing prophecy. The Jews got the second coming of Christ down pat, except to them, that was actually the first coming, since they spiritualized/allegorized away the first coming. Notice how Jesus never said the disciples were wrong about the coming Kingdom in Jerusalem. All He did was correct the problems that came from not understanding the first coming of the Messiah and the purpose of the first coming of the Messiah.

 

[TMSO]

Yes, but what part of Israel's rebellion? Suppose, as I have said previously, that first seventy weeks is the particular thing Daniel has been praying about? Which was a plea for God to renew the covenant they had broken, (the judgement being exile under the rule of Babylon). And suppose the answer to that prayer "When will it be?" was what Gabrielle answered first. And then the prophec moves forward, counting sevens
to future events?

Why are you talking about a first 70 weeks?

And suppose the period of time covered is not to Christ's second advent, but His first. Making the time of the end of the age, not seven years of tribulation in which the Jews are converted, the church is absent, and a visible eathly national Israel is preeminent, with Christ presiding as King. Suppose instead it is the time period between the first and second advents.

The point is the 62 and 7 weeks end right before Jesus is crucified. (Since the Messiah is cut off after 62 weeks.) And then almost 50 years pass before the next event that occurred after 62 weeks, and before the final week. Time not covered by any weeks. Why? The events are not geared towards the final resolution of the 70 weeks. Why not? While Israel stands in defiance and rebellion of God, and in rejection of the Messiah, those events cannot occur. But the more obvious reason would be from the New Testament. The time of the Gentiles. So the focus is actually on the Gentiles. Hence the game clock/prophecy clock is on hold until we get back to the game, that is, until the focus comes back to Israel. That would be once the fulness of the Gentiles has come in, according to Paul.

Romans 11 can be a difficult chapter to interpret. It is made easier by connecting it to chapters 8,9, and 10, as one continuous flow---which is the way it was written. It is a letter. If one approaches it with dispensational presuppositions, and also interpreting Rev though that same lens, it can be made to present two separate, unrelated, aspects of redemption. Or not completely unrelated, but a forward, backward, forward again,backward, then forward, then consummation. A type of two step approach. In the process, this view arrives at their conclusions that the seven years is about the Jews, and the find in the scriptures a way to get the Gentile and Jewish believers (the church) out of the picture, so God can finish fulfilling all His promises to Israel. The rapture.

Why not ask me? Why do you assume dispensational presuppositions without apparently knowing what they are? I have already explained. Romans 11 wraps everything up by going back to the beginning (that is, to Jesus, His death, and the rejection of the Jews), through the salvation of the Gentiles, and finally, the final salvation of the remnant of the Jews. Romans 11 is the consummation of all the he talked about prior. Romans 11 is not difficult at all. It is actually pretty straight forward. The last week is the whole world, however, it is also the 70th week, the last week of the prophecy decreed for Israel, so the focus is going to be there. The judgment for the whole world ends when the whole world that is for the beast, comes to destroy Jerusalem, but Jesus and His armies destroy them first.

The covenant approach also comes to the chapter with presuppositions, but ones that arrive at a different picture. What is taken as back and forth in redemption between Gentile and Jew in those chapters, is about blessings, not dispensational movements. Israel brings blessings to the Gentiles through their Jewish Messiah. The Jews are hardened for a time, this hardening bringing that blessing. The Jews are being judged, but not utterly abandoned. I believe that there is an ethnic Israel blessing, and I believe it comes just before Christ's return. How long before is not told to us. What it will look like in the restored creation, I have no idea. I only know what I think it will not be. And that is the dispensationalist premillennial view, or any view of a rapture, or a literal 1000 year reign.

It is not movements back and forth. It is all one direction. Jesus came, Jesus died, the Jews rejected, the Gentiles accepted, and then in the end, God shows mercy on the Jews and they are saved. It is all very straight forward. It is not back and forth. The disobedience of the Jews becomes the obedience of the Gentiles, and by that obedience of the once disobedient Gentiles, mercy comes to the disobedient Jews, and thus all Israel is saved. (The remnant.) The ending of the hardness of Israel is at the end of Revelation 19. It is covered by Jesus in the Olivet discourse, and by Zechariah in Zechariah 12 and 13. At Jesus return, the nations of the world will see Him and weep. In Zechariah 12 and 13, it speaks of Jesus coming to Israel, and then they recognize Him and weep. They recognize Him as the Messiah they rejected, and they weep.

I believe that when the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, then God will lift the hardening of Israel, and there will be an unprecedented conversion to Jews to trusting in their Messiah.

Wait. That is dispensational premillennialism. It isn't that the trust the Messiah though. This will be after Jesus protects Jerusalem from the armies of the world, and comes to Israel and visits those who survive. (I believe all who survive will be the remnant). They will look upon Him whom they have pierced, and they will recognize the Messiah for who He is. They will mourn over Him. God will save them all, through Christ the Messiah, just like with Saul. They will see Him for who He is, and it will break them.

If one is interpreting from the pov of dispensationalism, and also from a pov of one form or another of free will choice in salvation, it becomes even more difficult to see anything but a restored political/ religious Israel.

That technically has to come first. They aren't saved though. What you are missing is that before the end, Israel will become a nation again. (think 1948). Then, if you follow the early church fathers, the temple will be rebuilt. The Antichrist, who is not yet revealed as antichrist, will strengthen a covenant with the many, which will protect Israel as is. Half way through the week, the Antichrist will enter into the temple, and declare himself to be god. At this point all religions in the world will be stopped. The sacrificial system of the Jews will be taken away. The Great Tribulation Jesus spoke of will begin. The Jews will be heavily persecuted, as will any who do not worship the beast and his image. At the end of the 3 1/2 years, all the armies of the kings of the earth, and the beast and his image will gather to march on and destroy Jerusalem/Israel. Jesus and His heavenly armies will come down from heaven and wipe them all out. He will then present Himself to Israel, who will recognize Him for who He is, their true Messiah, and they will be broken, will mourn for him, and will be forgiven and saved. Zechariah 12 and 13 are beautiful.

It becomes difficult to place the phrase until the times of the Gentiles is complete, in proper perspective. From the free will perspective, the number of Gentiles would not be fixed, but random. And the conversion of the Jews would not be connected to the power of God. There would be no absolutes. The phrases concerning God hardening the Jews for a time, would in that view, not really be God.

It isn't impossible, and the number is fixed. The elect Peter is speaking about, whom God does not wish to see perish, will be saved, and then comes the end.

I do not know if your not responding to my posts is because you are done with the conversation, or because you are busy at real life. I hope it is the latter. I would really appreciate you input regarding the things I have posted.

Life. I work nights with 12 hour shifts.

I AM NOT trying to say you are wrong. I am presenting another view that may slowly change your understanding of a different pov. You may also polish/put shape to, dull, ragged points that I have not dealt with.

 

[Arial]

As a whole, it is the Old and New Testament. The New Testament is the plot of God's story of redemption continuing.

Yes.

The prophecies of the Old Testament are foreshadowing. It becomes understood when the events in the New Testament happen.

That is what is meant by the NT interpreting the OT. Which means one must not do the reverse, and it must take into consideration the whole story of redemption, not read in the light of a presupposition that has already been read into the OT.

One doesn't change what the Old Testament says. It is still one continuous narrative. One recognizes the Old Testament in the new (hey, this reminds me of something the Old Testament said...) The Old Testament does not need to be interpreted by the New. Why? Well, if you don't properly understand the New Testament, then you'll make a right ole mess of the Old Testament.

Covenant theology does not change what the OT says. It changes what you think the OT says because of your Dispensational presuppositions.

That last statement actually doesn't make any sense. If you don't understand the NT properly, you will indeed make a mess of the OT, but that does not mean that the NT does not interpret things that were shadows or a mystery in the OT.

God chose Israel and gave them the Law because they were to be the ones through whom the child of promise would come, making them the people of the promise. (It goes two directions. The promise to Abraham, and the promise of the Messiah. It is interesting that way.) The Law was to establish them as God's chosen people.

That is only a part of the reason. And I have been saying all along that the two covenants are simultaneously progressing. The creation of ethnic Israel and the giving of the Law, and possession of a specific portion of land, and the promise of redemption given in Gen 3. I don't know how many times I have pointed an arrow at Gen 3, only to have it completely ignored. It is necessary to get that and move forward through the historical aspects of redemption from that point. Not ethnic Israel. That part of redemption came in the middle so to speak.

And here, my post may get a little long, but I do not know how else to put Israel into its proper perspective.

Israel became God's people by election. It is important to remember that too, because salvation is always by election. And they were not elected for ultimate redemption unto eternal life through the giving of the Law and the land, but to teach righteousness, reveal Himself, point squarely to the need of a substitute to deal with the problem of sin. Within the OT scriptures, and especially in the Prophets, it is this Redeemer that is promised as Messiah.

They were elected and established in the land as a nation, with God as their God, as a witness to those around them, (all who worshiped many gods and did not even know of God. These many gods were deaf and dumb and could not act. In the plagues in Egypt, God revealed Himself as the one true and living God, who acts in history, not only to Egypt, but to the descendants of Abraham as well. They had been living in a pagan society for over four hundred years. And it was not just for themselves. And the covenant was not just law, but also grace. It was grace to all creation---all people---in that it was done in view of all the nations surrounding Israel. It was grace to Israel in that He was present with them as their God.

Israel was to be a witness to the world. "This is the one true God, who is sovereign over all, and governs it. Who made everything that is. This is us, (Israel) who are His people, and this is what He does for us. He is our King. This is how His people live as obedient subjects. (In short, the Ten Commandments.) It is in their mission that they failed, and instead became like all the nations around them.

The Law was not to establish them as His chosen people. It was to teach them righteousness. What it did was put them, and everyone else under the same condemnation.

And at one point, all of Israel followed God. Every last man, woman, and child. There was no remnant, for they were a whole. When the people rebelled, now you have a remnant of people who did not rebel, or would repent. They are what remains of the whole group that once followed God, a remnant.

That is not true. They began to rebel almost at once, and there was never a time when the whole was faithful. Not even one person, if we look at the bigger picture. Every last one of them was a sinner born in Adam. No amount of blood shed from rams and bulls could change that. That would only be dealt with when the Seed promised in Gen 3 came---the Messiah. The end game of redemption is the destruction of sin and death in humanity and creation. That is what Messiah did on the cross. The remnant then, and the remnant now, are those God elects and gives to Christ through faith. Same with the remnant of Gentiles who are saved.

The eschatological purpose appears to be two fold. Salvation of the Gentiles and of the Jews is one. The other is God's reconciliation with His chosen people Israel... the remnant. Bringing them back in to where they had been. The end of the transgression, the end of sin, the atonement for the guilt, the bringing in of everlasting righteousness, etc.

They are both reconciled to God in the same way. God does not have to deal with Israel separately in a national sense. And if they are taken back to where they were---read your Bible----they will be returning to unfaithfulness. They will be returning to Adam. All of the redeemed are God's people, not just ethnic Israel. All are saved in the same way. By election through faith. All are saved by the Jewish Messiah. They are in Him---in true Israel. God does not need to take believing Jews and Gentiles out of the picture (through a secret rapture) in order to remove the hardening of ethnic Israel ---which Scripture tells us is why they do not believe now---- (and I believe just before Christ's return He will do this, when the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.) And when He does that all the promises that were made to ethnic Israel are realized in the risen Christ as they hear His voice and come to Him. Even that tiny area that was given to them, will be restored as Jesus returns, and the new Jerusalem comes down from heaven and God again dwells with us. The enemy, sin and its resultant death, are gone for all eternity. That is the redemption that was promise in Gen 3.

 

[Arial]

Wait. That is dispensational premillennialism.

No. It. Isn't. Have you not paid attention to anything I have said---even in the post that prompted this?! it is reading the presupposition into even what I say What I said comes before His return and does not involve a following 1000-years, of God fulfilling His promises to ethnic Israel. Rather, it has them fulfilled in Christ. The millennium is the time period between the two advents.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

That wasn't Daniels prayer. His prayer begins in 9:3 and continues through verse 19. The reason he was praying that prayer is given in 1-2 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the lineage of the Medes, who was made king over the realmof the Chaldeans---in the first year of his reign I, Daniel, understood by the books of the number of years specified by the word of the Lord through Jeremiah the prophet, that He would accomplish seventy years in the desolation of Jerusalem. Daniel is in Babylon after the exile. He is lamenting over Jerusalem and its desolation, and confessing his sins and those of God's people.

Here are the words of Jeremiah he refers to.
Jer 25:1-14.

The 70 weeks does indeed pertain to exiled Judah.What is clear is, that is what Daniel was praying about, so the following understanding that Gabriel gives, is the seventy years they were to be in exile, and the their homeland desolate. That is the first seventy, from which the others follow, which we can look at later. It began when Cyrus issued his decree for Jerusalem to be rebuilt. (And that followed the prayers of Nehemiah that was similar to Daniel's. The mistake dispensationalist make is that they see the prophecy about Israel instead of Christ.

There is a covenantal frame around this prophecy, indicated by the use of the covenant name in covenant renewal and Sabbath language. The aspects of the covenant law are found in Lev concerning the use of sevens and what it represents. This helps us understand the use seven and multiple sevens here. There were Sabbath rests for the land, which is specifically mentioned as a part of the exile duration in 2 Chron 36:21. And in the Year of Jubilee.

The FACT that you (and most everyone else) never understands from the (English) text is that the Jewish exile to Babylon was not 70 years. Neither does Jeremiah ever talk about a period of exile of 70 years. It just does not exist. It never happened. Until and unless that FACT is realized, the entire discussion and a proper understanding of the 70 Weeks of Years is just plain incorrect.

 

[Arial]

You are missing something. The 70 weeks are not the time that they are exiled.

I didn't say it was. I said the end of that 70 year exile, the exiles return to Jerusalem and the rebuilding begins, is when the counting begins.

You are forcing a covenantal frame onto the prophecy.

I am not forcing it onto the prophecy, it is in the prophecy. The entire chapter is based on the Mosaic covenant. Daniel was under the Mosaic covenant. Israel was in covenant with God. They were in exiled because they broke it. Read Daniels prayer, (not just the last few words of it) and tell me it isn't all based on covenant. It is the covenant Daniel is pleading for God to restore. You can't have it both ways. It is about Israel but it is not about the covenant.

I only deal with the eschatology, not the framework of dispensationalism. Perhaps even more of a leaky dispensationalist then John MacArthur. The sleepy dispensationalist. (I metaphorically slept through the covenant/dispensational part of Revelation class.) I just remember that they both believe in seven divisions of scripture time, which covenant theology refers to as covenants, and dispensationalists refer to as dispensations.

It is the eschatology we are dealing with, which d'ist typically consider the end of the end times, whereas the entire Bible is eschatological. And therein lies much of the problem. MacArthur is not Reformed, he is a Calvinist. If you want me to explain the difference, I will. And I think you are sleeping through my posts also, and what kind of outcome are we expected to have if you are going to be sloppy about it?

Why? Because the Bible speaks of an ultimate gathering in of the Jews at the end of time, something that even RC Sproul ended up accepting (from what I heard from my Dad.) He apparently ultimately rejected partial preterism.

Amillennialism does not exclude a gathering of the Jews at the end. They just have the millennium in a different place, therefore the end in a different place than dispensationalists. I don't know what Sprouls view was, but as he was a Reformed Presbyterian, I would guess he was always amil, and never a preterist partial or otherwise. Most likely idealist and there are places where the two, (partial pret) and idealist overlap.

 

[Arial]

@TMSO

How Does An Amillennialist Interpret Daniel 9?​

February 24, 2016 David Murray 6 comments
How does an amillennialist interpret Daniel 9:24-27?

Daniel 9:24-27 is apocalyptic literature that uses figurative language to predict the nature, timing and consequences of Christ’s work at His first coming.

Daniel 9:24-27

Daniel was written for the Israelites who had been living as captives in Babylon for almost seventy years. It was about 540 BC and it looked as if the Babylonian gods had defeated the God of Israel and the Israel of God. Eighty-two-year-old Daniel wrote to correct this false impression. The structure of the book is:

• Chapters 1-6: Faithful living in evil times (historical narratives about Daniel’s godly life in Babylon)
• Chapters 7-12: Forward looking in evil times (dreams and visions about the future)

One day, as Daniel was reading the prophecy of Jeremiah about a seventy-year exile for Israel (Jeremiah 25:8-11; 29:10-14), the angel Gabriel appeared to him with a message about another seventy. In effect, Gabriel said, “Daniel,you’ve been thinking about the seventy years of exile for God’s people. Well that’s not the only seventy in God’s program for Jerusalem. In seventy periods of seven, Jerusalem will witness even greater things.”

is apocalyptic literature…

Ezekiel, Daniel and Revelation are full of apocalyptic language, characterized by symbolism, visions, allegories, parables, and symbolic actions. Usually there is a sharp distinction between the heavenly and earthly spheres. The literature takes a pessimistic view of the earthly sphere, and usually centers hope in the heavenly realm, from which salvation will come.

that uses figurative language…

The Bible uses “seven” as a figure of perfection, and “ten” as a figure of completion. Therefore, Daniel’s “seventy sevens” is a perfect and complete period of time. Just as forgiving seventy times seven is a figure for complete and perfect forgiveness, so Daniel’s “seventy sevens” is the “decreed” period in which the greatest work of God is brought to complete perfection.

to predict the nature…of Christ’s work at His first coming.

Daniel portrays this greatest work of God, Christ’s redemption, with three negatives and three positives (Daniel 9:24).

The negatives are:

• To finish the transgression: Sin will brought under control so that it no longer reigns to the same extent.
• To make an end of (lit. seal up) sins: Sin will be securely locked up.
• To make reconciliation for (lit. cover) iniquity: When sin is covered it is atoned for.

The positives are:

• To bring in everlasting righteousness: God will being in a righteousness from without, eternal in origin and duration.
• To seal up (lit. authenticate) the vision and prophecy: God’s Word will be accredited and attested by these events.
• To anoint the Most Holy: God will qualify and enable His Son, the “Holy of Holies” for his central role and huge responsibilities in this great work of redemption.

…to predict the timing…of Christ’s work at His first coming

Daniel divides the “seventy sevens” into three divisions (vv. 25-27):

7 sevens: A medium period of time (@ 460 to 410 BC) which began when Artarxerxes gave the command to rebuild Jerusalem. Daniel describes this as “the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem.” This restoration and rebuilding occurred under Ezra and Nehemiah.

62 sevens: A much longer period of time (@ 410 BC to 30 AD) which began with Jerusalem rebuilt and restored, and finished with Christ’s first coming and, more specifically, with the beginning of His public ministry.

1 seven: A relatively short period of time (@ 30 AD) which began with Christ’s first coming (especially the beginning of His public ministry) and included His life, death and resurrection.

…and to predict the consequences of Christ’s work at His first coming.

After 7 + 62 sevens (69 sevens), or in the middle of the seventieth seven, “Messiah will be cut off” (v. 26), a phrase used both for death and for ratifying a covenant. This “cutting off” will be for the benefit of others, “not for himself,” and it will “confirm the covenant with many.”

The covenant of grace, as revealed through the covenants with Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David, and as further prophesied by Jeremiah, will be fulfilled by the Messiah.

In the middle of the seventieth seven, Messiah will cause the whole temple worship to cease, to be rendered unnecessary by His death and resurrection (v. 27).

The temple sacrifices did not actually cease until Jerusalem was desolated by Titus in 70 AD, but that was really just the outward manifestation of what had already happened in God’s eyes. In God’s eyes, Christ’s death rendered the sacrificial system unnecessary and over.

So, although the Jews continued to reject Christ’s sacrifice and offer animal sacrifices, God viewed this as “the overspreading of abominations” (v. 27) for which He would punish them with desolation. “The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary: and the end thereof shall be with a flood” (Daniel 9:26).

Daniel 9:24-27 is apocalyptic literature that uses figurative language to predict the nature, timing and consequences of Christ’s work at His first coming.


The Daniel 9 prophecy is about the first advent of Christ, not the second.