Home > Radical Islam, Theology and Eschatology, Wars and Rumors of War > Daniel 9:27 Redux: Will Antichrist Make A False 7-Year Peace Treaty With Israel?

Daniel 9:27 Redux: Will Antichrist Make A False 7-Year Peace Treaty With Israel?


By ICA

Proverbs 27:17, “As iron sharpens iron, so a friend sharpens a friend.”

Also see the complementary article titled “Daniel 9:27 And The Confirmation Of The Covenant – A Peace Treaty?” for an in-depth examination of Daniel’s 70th week …

BookOfDanielOne of the most commonly held positions by many premillennial Christians today asserts that the time leading up to the Second Coming of Christ will be immediately preceded by a seven-year “peace treaty” signed between Antichrist and Israel. While I had at one time held to this position myself, subsequent studies have lead me to conclude that there is no solid Biblical basis for this view, only interpretative assumptions. Years of personal study as it relates to Biblical eschatology has also made it apparent to me that, even though we’d all love to believe we have every aspect of the prophetic texts completely figured out, we still continue to see as through a glass darkly. With as many opinions regarding secondary doctrines as there are Christian denominations, one obvious reality is that there is not a single pastor or teacher or author who has a complete and perfect understanding of Scripture or that is free from error, myself included, indicating that one interpretative method or hermeneutical approach alone cannot provide all the answers that we so often seek as students of Scripture.

As brothers and sisters in Christ, we can vigorously debate secondary doctrines (these must never be allowed to divide us) yet remain united on the essentials of our faith. Recently, I had the pleasure of engaging in a spirited debate regarding the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 with Joel Richardson, author of “Mideast Beast” (which I highly recommend) and a brother in Christ whom I esteem highly. Following our debate, Joel felt it was necessary to defend the view which posits an upcoming seven-year peace treaty between Israel and Antichrist by writing a subsequent article titled “The Antichrist’s False Peace Treaty” and offering a number of reasons why he believed it to be a sound, tenable position. What I present to you, however, are reasons why I believe it is not.

In his article, Joel begins sharing reasons why he believes in a seven-year peace treaty by writing that:

The notion of Israel entering into a deceptive covenant with the Antichrist is inferred in several other passages, but is directly referred to by Isaiah:

Therefore, hear the word of the LORD, O scoffers, who rule this people who are in Jerusalem, because you have said, “We have made a covenant with death, and with Sheol we have made a pact. The overwhelming scourge will not reach us when it passes by, for we have made falsehood our refuge and we have concealed ourselves with deception. Therefore thus says the Lord GOD, ‘Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone, a costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed. He who believes in it will not be disturbed.’ … Your covenant with death will be canceled, and your pact with Sheol will not stand; When the overwhelming scourge passes through, then you become its trampling place. (Isaiah 28:14-16, 18)

One question we should ask ourselves when reading this portion of Isaiah is whether or not a seven-year peace treaty is mentioned in the text. From the passage itself, it is evident that no such peace treaty is mentioned. In order for one to see a seven-year peace treaty in this chapter, one must first assume a seven-year peace treaty to begin with and then superimpose it into Isaiah’s words. Given the context of Isaiah 28 itself, however, what can be ascertained is the fact that Isaiah is referring to the sin of Ephraim’s false “priests and prophets” who have rejected God and have stumbled in their drunkenness and pride. (Ephraim is completely left out of the list of the 12 tribes of Israel in Revelation 7 because of their disbelief and idolatry, cf. Deut 29:18-21; Hosea 5:9, 11). Isaiah later describes Ephraim’s religious leaders in Jerusalem as making a “covenant with death” — a rejection of God that is in stark contrast to the “covenant of peace and life” made between God and the priests of Levi in Malachi 2:5 who revered and feared the Lord. The rebellion of Ephraim in Isaiah 28 would see them become like a fading flower, for in rejecting God’s covenant these so-called “priests and the prophets” deceived themselves through false visions and stumbling judgments into believing that the wages of their sin would not scourge them. The wages of sin, of course, have always been — and will always be — death.

Satan had the power of death (Hebrews 2:14) and for Ephraim’s religious leaders to reject the Father of Heaven was to embrace the Father of Lies (cf. John 8:44). Fortunately, God sent us His Truth. He sent Messiah — the Cornerstone that the builders rejected (Psalm 118:22) and the Rock of our Salvation (1 Corinthians 10:4) — who would swallow up death and be victorious over it, promising all those who believe in the covenant that He Himself confirmed with His blood (Matthew 26:28) to never taste the death of which He speaks (John 3:16; John 8:52). In my opinion, this appears to be the ultimate focus of Isaiah 28, not a false seven-year peace treaty with Antichrist.

1 Corinthians 15:55-57, “Death, where is your sting? She’ol, where is your victory? The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Yeshua the Messiah” (HNV).

Romans 6:23, “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Messiah Yeshua our Lord” (HNV).

Elsewhere, Isaiah reveals that after being scourged and trampled, Israel will repent of their misplaced trust. No longer will they trust or rely on the Antichrist (which this passage in Isaiah refers to as “the Assyrian”) for their security. Instead “in that day” they will rely solely on the Lord:

Now in that day the remnant of Israel, and those of the house of Jacob who have escaped, will never again rely on the one who struck them, but will truly rely on the LORD, the Holy One of Israel. (Isaiah 10:20)

Any imagined scenario of the future that is informed by Scripture must include the reality that Israel will come to “rely on the one who struck them.”

As before, there is no mention of a seven-year peace treaty in the text, only an assumed treaty that is once again superimposed into it. The emphasis in the above quote to “never again rely on the one who struck them” itself assumes that to “rely” on “the Assyrian” must somehow mean that a seven-year peace treaty had already been signed between Israel and Antichrist and subsequently broken. But the text says no such thing and need not be the case at all. In fact, for the sake of argument, it could very easily mean to rely or depend upon “the Assyrian” in the sense that they were hoping to make peace with him, not that they had already experienced a broken seven-year peace deal before. The Islamic nations and terror organizations surrounding Israel have repeatedly struck against the Jewish state time and again, and continue with plans to do so again this very minute, even after the Camp David and Oslo accords. Yet because of regional realities, Israel is today still being forced to rely on the surrounding “Religion of Peace” nations to actually agree to peace year after year. Israel has no other choice right now but to depend on genocidal enemies who wish nothing more than the complete and total destruction of the Jewish state. As these nations continue to grow increasingly hostile toward Israel, it is also becoming increasingly clear that they will never agree to peace with Israel. True peace will only be achieved when Christ returns as Deliverer:

Micah 5:2,5, “But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity… This One will be our peace. When the Assyrian invades our land, When he tramples on our citadels …”

Romans 11:26, “And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob‘”

Next, the article likens the punishing “flood” that Ephraim is promised to suffer in Isaiah 28 to the “flood” of Revelation 12:15 and Daniel 9:26, even though he agrees that words must be scrutinized more closely in their immediate contexts. While the “flood” of Daniel 9:26 could be equated with the “flood” of Revelation 12:15 contextually they cannot be equated with the flood of Isaiah 28, notwithstanding the fact that Ephraim is completely left out of the list of the tribes of Israel in Revelation 7.

So also does Paul refer to the misplaced trust Israel will place in the covenant with the Antichrist just before the time of Jacob’s Trouble (labor pains):

While they are saying, “Peace and safety!” then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape. (1 Thessalonians 5:3)

If Scripture does not teach that Israel will engage in a deceptive covenant or peace treaty, then where did Paul get this idea that just before the birth pains (Jacob’s Trouble – the last 3.5 years) Israel would be saying, “Peace and Safety” (or alternately “peace and security)?

The quote above presumes that it is Israel who is saying “peace and safety.” In my humble opinion, this is a common misconception. 1 Thessalonians 5:3 is quoted, but it is the previous verse that identifies when the destruction happens, and thus upon whom the destruction comes. While “Allah” and his false “prophet” are themselves responsible for the never-ending death and destruction running rampant all throughout the Muslim world, the Muslim world blames Israel as the primary source of all the ills that plague them, a claim often echoed by Islamic clerics and Muslim leaders worldwide. They have deceived themselves into believing that in order for there to be peace and safety anywhere upon the earth Israel must first be destroyed. And “peace and safety” (or alternately “peace and security”) is precisely what Israel’s enemies expect to finally achieve as they are gathering together under “Allah’s” divine mandate to come up against Jerusalem, anticipating that Israel will finally be a nation no more in fulfillment of their own false Islamic “prophecies.” But it is not “Allah” that will be gathering them. It is Yahweh. And it is not Israel that will be destroyed. It will be them:

1 Thessalonians 5:2-6, “For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when THEY shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon THEM, as travail upon a woman with child; and THEY shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as [do] others; but let us watch and be sober.”

Verse 2 puts the destruction as occurring on the day of the Lord, which occurs at the Second Coming of Christ according to Scripture. A future seven-year tribulation, however, would require that we stretch the day of the Lord to include the entire seven years, despite the fact that there are passages that absolutely forbid the day of the Lord from overlapping into the tribulation. The two are mutually exclusive. Here are five examples (courtesy of Tim Warner):

1. Throughout the Old Testament, very specific “celestial signs” are associated with the coming of the Day of the Lord. The darkening of the sun and moon will usher in that day (Isa 13:9,10, Isa 24:19-23, Joel 3:13-15). Here is one example.

Joel 2:31, “The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD.

Matthew 24:29, “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.”

These verses establish a clear sequence of events. They place the cosmic signs, the darkening of the sun and moon, between the end of the tribulation and the beginning of the day of the Lord. This absolutely forbids any overlapping of the tribulation into the day of the Lord. They are distinct events. No other interpretation is possible.

2. The very first time the day of the Lord is mentioned in the Bible, the text clearly forbids associating it with the tribulation. Isaiah describes the “day of the Lord” as follows:

Isaiah 2:10-19, “Enter into the rock, and hide in the dust, From the terror of the LORD And the glory of His majesty. The lofty looks of man shall be humbled, The haughtiness of men shall be bowed down, And the LORD alone shall be exalted in that day. For the day of the LORD of hosts Shall come upon everything proud and lofty, Upon everything lifted up — And it shall be brought low — Upon all the cedars of Lebanon that are high and lifted up, And upon all the oaks of Bashan; Upon all the high mountains, And upon all the hills that are lifted up; Upon every high tower, And upon every fortified wall; Upon all the ships of Tarshish, And upon all the beautiful sloops. The loftiness of man shall be bowed down, And the haughtiness of men shall be brought low; The LORD alone will be exalted in that day, But the idols He shall utterly abolish. They shall go into the holes of the rocks, And into the caves of the earth, From the terror of the LORD And the glory of His majesty, When He arises to shake the earth mightily.”

Twice these verses indicate that the Lord alone will be exalted in the Day of the Lord. This is an exclusive statement. No one else can be exalted or worshipped during the day of the Lord. Yet, during the tribulation, Antichrist is worshipped as God (Rev 13:3-8,14, 2 Thess 2:4) and the image of the Beast will be worshipped as well. Isaiah’s statements about the Lord alone being exalted, and the idols being abolished during the day of the Lord forbids any overlapping with the tribulation and reign of Antichrist.

3. Zechariah 14:7 indicates that the day of the Lord may just be one literal day. The Hebrew text says “one day”:

Zechariah 14:1,7, “Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee… But it shall be one day (echad yowm) which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, [that] at evening time it shall be light.”

Also see Isaiah 10:17:

Isaiah 10:17, “And the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame: and it shall burn and devour his thorns and his briers in one day (echad yowm)”

4. In Isaiah 13:9, Joel 2:1 and Zech 14:1 we read in each of these verses that “the day of the Lord cometh”, and in each verse the text immediately begins to describe the battle of Armageddon. The word “cometh” or “at hand” is the Hebrew word “bow” and it means “to come” or “arrive”, and it implies the beginning of the day of the Lord. In each case the arrival of the day of the Lord brings about the battle of Armageddon.

5. Joel 3:9-17 describes the gathering of the armies of the nations around Jerusalem for the battle of Armageddon, the cosmic signs, and the coming of the Lord. After the armies are gathered, but before the cosmic signs, Joel wrote that the day of the Lord is “near.” The Hebrew word means “at hand,” “imminent,” or “next in sequence”. The day of the Lord must begin after the surrounding nations are gathered for the battle, which occurs at the end of the tribulation, according to Revelation 16:13-16.

Those who believe in a future seven-years of tribulation assume that Israel is the one saying “peace and safely” years earlier than the day of the Lord, essentially stretching the day of the Lord into a seven-year tribulation which scripture absolutely forbids, as we can see above. But it will be the enemies of Israel who will be the ones declaring “peace and safety” immediately prior to the day of the Lord, the day in which sudden destruction comes upon them. It is impossible for Israel to be declaring “peace and safety” while she is being attacked and surrounded on all sides. Consider some of the following recent quotes, for instance, which are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg:

Turkey’s Erdoğan Blames Israel for Mideast Insecurity, Calls Israel A Threat To Middle East Peace – “Turkey’s prime minister stepped up criticism of Israel on Wednesday and scoffed at remarks by Israel’s prime minister, a sign of escalating distrust between the Jewish state and its only ally in the Muslim world… Erdogan told reporters in Paris that he perceived Israel as the principal threat to Middle East peace…” Read more.

Pakistani Cleric: World Peace Will Be Established Only When All The Jews Are Wiped From The Earth – “Pakistani cleric Pirzada Muhammad Raza Saqib Mustafai argued that world peace will be established only when all the Jews are wiped out from the earth. In the video entitled ‘Yahodi Islam Kay Aur Aman Kay Asal Dushman Hain’ (Jews Are the Real Enemy of Islam and Peace), Muhammad Raza Saqib Mustafai states: ‘And all the troubles that exist around the world are because of the Jews. When the Jews are wiped out, then the world would be purified and the sun of peace would begin to rise on the entire world.’” Read more.

Ground Zero Mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf: For Peace Israel Must Be Destroyed – “Imam Rauf stated that there will not be peace until Israel ceases to exist. He says that Israel is destined to collapse and ‘In a true peace, Israel will, in our lifetimes, become one more Arab country, with a Jewish minority.’ To this day, Rauf has not said that Israel has a right to exist and has chosen to work with those dedicated to the country’s elimination.” Read more.

Former President of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat: Peace For Us Means Israel’s Destruction – “We shall never stop until we can go back home and Israel is destroyed… The goal of our struggle is the end of Israel, and there can be no compromises or mediations… the goal of this violence is the elimination of Zionism from Palestine in all its political, economic and military aspects… Peace for us means Israel’s destruction and nothing else.” Read more.

“For World Peace, Israel Must Be Destroyed” – “‘It is time, Brothers and Sisters, for Al Quds [Jerusalem] to be liberated. For Islam and people of the world who wish to pray there to the one God. And we say here today to you Israel, we see your crimes and we loathe your crimes. And to us your nation does not exist, because it is a criminal injustice against humanity. We want to see Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt go to the borders and stop this now. Liberate Al Quds! March to Al Quds!’” Read more.

Iran: World Forces Must Strive To Annihilate Israel To ‘Solve All The World’s Problems’ – “In a speech published on his website Thursday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the ultimate goal of world forces must be the annihilation of Israel… Ahmadinejad added that ‘liberating Palestine’ would solve all the world’s problems … ‘Qods Day is not merely a strategic solution for the Palestinian problem, as it is to be viewed as a key for solving the world problems … Anyone who loves freedom and justice must strive for the annihilation of the Zionist regime in order to pave the way for world justice and freedom.’” Read more.

Hamas MP: ‘The Jews Are Behind Each And Every Catastrophe On The Face Of The Earth’ – “The Jews are behind each and every catastrophe on the face of the Earth. This is not open to debate. This is not a temporal thing, but goes back to days of yore. They concocted so many conspiracies and betrayed rulers and nations so many times that the people harbor hatred towards them. Throughout history — from Nebuchadnezzar until modern times… They slayed the prophets, and so on. Any catastrophe on the face of this Earth — the Jews must be behind it.” Read more.

Elsewhere, Daniel also speaks of the Antichrist’s use of deceptive peace promises to attain power:

“And through his shrewdness he will cause deceit to succeed by his influence; and he will magnify himself in his heart, and he will destroy many while they are at ease (or feel secure). (Daniel 8:25)

In my opinion, “feeling secure” in no way necessitates that a seven-year peace deal be signed. A friend of mine visited Israel not too long ago and enjoyed it greatly. Israel has prospered and grown immensely since its rebirth and restoration in 1948. Sure, there are certain areas that are under constant watch due to terror threats from Islamic militants (just as there are in the United States and other countries), but overall Israel is a safe place to visit and the defensive wall separating Israel from the Palestinians has reduced suicide bombings by 90%+, so much so that Israel has been able to reduce the amount of soldiers required on security deployments. They feel secure. In fact, I’d be much more at ease visiting virtually any city in Israel than I would visiting many American cities.

“According to a study conducted by the University of Haifa’s Center for the Study of Crime, Law & Society, Israel’s murder rate is one of the world’s lowest, which shows the murder rate in Israel is declining. The murder rate per 100,000 residents has remained virtually unchanged over the past 28 years, and has declined during the past few years. The study says that the crime rates have to be examined in relation to the population size. From this perspective, the research shows that the number of murders per 100,000 people was 2.35 in 1980 and 2.29 in 2006. This data is low compared to other countries. For instance, in Russia, the number of murders per 100,000 people was 18 in 2004, and in the United States, the number of murders per 100,000 people was 7.5 during the same year.” (The Jerusalem Post, June 26, 2008)

Israel is the most secure nation in the Middle East. But, if conditions and events on the ground are any indication, a threat is looming on the horizon. Not a peace treaty.

In conclusion, the idea that the Antichrist will confirm or forcefully make a covenant with Israel does not depend on Daniel 9:27, but is in fact well established in other portions of Scripture.

I respectfully beg to differ with my friend on this topic for a number of reasons:

1. The word “covenant” in Daniel 9 is used in a Messianic context. This suggests that the “covenant” is between God and man, not between nations. Additionally, the word “gabar” in Daniel 9:27 suggests that a covenant already in place is what is strengthened (which would be the Abrahamic covenant), not that a new one is created. How can a covenant be strengthened if it doesn’t already exist?

2. What good is a watchman if they know precisely when destruction is coming yet, instead of telling people to leave in advance, only tells them to flee once it is nearly too late? In Matthew 24:15-20, Jesus tells his readers to flee immediately when they see the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel. Why doesn’t Jesus tell His readers to look for the “seven-year peace treaty” to make sure they were out of harm’s way before the Abomination was set up in the middle of it? Since a seven-year peace treaty would be as observable as any Abomination that causes desolation, would it not have made perfect sense for Jesus to give His readers ample time by instructing them to flee certain trouble up ahead rather than waiting until the last possible moment? If a seven-year peace treaty were in fact true then it certainly begs such questions. But telling them to wait until they see the Abomination that is so horrendous they can’t even return to their homes to retrieve a single item because their very lives now hung in the balance makes absolutely no sense if they could have left much earlier. This seems to point to one inescapable conclusion: Jesus did not mention the “seven-year peace treaty” because no seven-year peace treaty will ever exist.

3. It makes little sense that an Islamic Antichrist, already able to “destroy the city and the sanctuary” (Daniel 9:26), would then develop a sudden change of heart and decide to forcefully impose a seven-year peace treaty with Israel — the very nation that Islam seeks to destroy today — particularly when “the end thereof shall be with a flood” after seeing the city and sanctuary destroyed. If “the end thereof shall be with a flood” of wars and desolations, how can there be “peace” for a full 50% of the time remaining until the Second Coming of Christ?

4. The Hebrew text of Daniel 9:27 says that He confirms the covenant “one” week, not in the sense that the covenant itself only lasts for the duration of “one week”, but rather that the confirmation of the covenant is what happens in the one week. The Hebrew text says “gabar bĕriyth rab echad shabuwa” which means “strengthen covenant many one week”. We cannot say dogmatically that the covenant is confirmed “for” one week (7-years) since “for” isn’t in the original Hebrew text, even though the full futurist view absolutely requires it. Some translations like the Lexham English Bible and the Darby Translation put the word “for” in brackets to let the reader know it isn’t in the original. I understand the need to insert something in there to improve the syntactical or linguistic flow/readability of our receptor language, but we need to be aware that it could just as easily be “in one week” or “for the one week” every bit as much as “for one week.” The LXX renders Daniel 9:27 to say “And one week shall establish the covenant with many”. Douay-Rheims says “And he shall confirm the covenant with many, in one week”. Young’s Literal Translation says “he hath strengthened a covenant with many — one week.”

In conclusion, it is my firm conviction that Isaiah never speaks of a seven-year peace treaty between Israel and the Islamic world. The expectation of “peace and safety” not being declared until the end of tribulation by Israel’s enemies suggests no peace will ever exist between Israel and the Islamic world. The fact that “covenant” in Daniel 9:27 is being used in a Messianic context suggests no peace will exist between Israel and the Islamic world. The fact that Christ pointed to the Abomination of Desolation that takes place in the middle of a supposed seven-year peace treaty and not the peace treaty itself suggests no peace will ever exist between Israel and the Islamic world. The fact that Antichrist will destroy the city and the sanctuary and that wars and desolations would then come like a flood per Danial 9:26 suggests no peace will ever exist between Israel and the Islamic world. Finally, given the fact that we have the 7 weeks plus the 62 weeks plus the 1 week certainly suggests that the covenant is strengthened “during” or “in” or “for the” one week, not “for one week” in the sense that it only lasts for 7 years. The full futurist doctrine that posits a seven-year peace treaty is built around a word (“for”) that isn’t even in the original Hebrew text. Obviously, this is not the best pillar upon which to build an entire doctrine.  But a word that is in the original Hebrew — “gabar” — suggests a covenant that already exists is what is strengthened (the Abrahamic covenant), not that a new covenant is created. Something cannot be strengthened if it does not already exist. When all is said and done, the partial-futurist position that I hold (that we are only waiting upon 3.5 years of great tribulation and not 7-years of tribulation) does not depend upon the understanding that the covenant must be confirmed “during” the one week. The position of hyper-futurists, however, absolutely requires that it be “for” one week, otherwise it crumbles. But don’t take my word for it. Do what all good Bereans must do: Test everything in light of Scripture, and hold fast that which is good …

2 Timothy 3:16, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness …”

Daniel 9:27, “Then he shall confirm a covenant [‘the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ’ (Gal 3:17)] with many [‘this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many’ (Matt 26:28)] for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering [‘For the law … can never with these same sacrifices … make those who approach perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered?’ (Heb 10:1-2)][<– Christ | Antichrist –>] And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate. [‘when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel … then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again (Matt 25:15,21)].”

—————————————————–

Update: December 11, 2013

Joel Richardson has updated his article in response to my critique. I’ll take a moment to comment briefly:

To be fair, my article never says or even infers that Isaiah mentioned “a seven-year peace treaty.” In the world of debate, this is called a straw man argument. It involves misrepresenting your opponent or their argument in a way that is very easy to tear down (like a straw man), and then proceeding to do so.

Brother Richardson’s article did not say that Isaiah 28 wrote about “a seven-year peace treaty” specifically, I agree. However, I disagree strongly that his position is misrepresented by a straw man argument. The reason why is very simple. My friend’s article began by specifically stating that: “Most premillennialists hold that the beginning of the final seven years before the return of Jesus will be marked by some form of deceptively made ‘peace treaty’ or covenant between the Antichrist and the leadership of Israel. Opponents of this view argue that this belief is only found in Daniel 9:27 and no where else. This claim, as we will see, is simply false.” Thus the article itself infers that what it believes to be a seven-year peace treaty in Daniel 9:27 is found elsewhere in Scripture. In the very next paragraph, we read that: “The notion of Israel entering into a deceptive covenant with the Antichrist is inferred in several other passages, but is directly referred to by Isaiah.” Even though Isaiah does not say “a seven-year peace treaty” in those exact words, anyone reading the first two paragraphs of the article alone is given the distinct impression that this is exactly what Isaiah was referring to. No straw man argument was required.

The word used in the text is “covenant”. It is referring to a vey well know historical security alliance that Judah made with Egypt. Instead of acknowledging the historical context of the passage, MW limits the meaning to a mere “rejection of God”. MW states that the meaning of the passage concerns Ephraim’s sins

Even though there existed an historical alliance between Judah and Egypt, Isaiah 28 uses the example of Ephraim to demonstrate the consequence of sin, the futility of rebellion, yet gives the hope of Messiah. In my humble opinion, the context of Isaiah 28 is not merely speaking of a “covenant” between nations, but rather the breaking of a covenant that existed between God and Ephraim. If Isaiah was merely referring to a covenant or security alliance between nations, then why does he point to Christ (Isaiah 28:16-17), the One whom Malachi calls the “messenger of the Covenant” (Malachi 3:1)? “God is speaking to scoffers and boasters when He refers to the Cornerstone — His precious Son — who provides the firm foundation for their lives, if they would but trust in Him. Isaiah uses construction terminology (measuring line and plumb line) to make his point; these are things the people would understand.” (Read more at Got Questions.org). Instead of a covenant with God, they made a “covenant with death” and an “agreement with Sheol” (the grave), but God promises that this covenant with death would one day be annulled (implying, it seems, by a covenant that would never be annulled) and that the agreement with Sheol would be broken (Isaiah 28:18). When Christ confirmed the covenant with His blood for the remission of sins (Matthew 26:28) it was final. Even the law “cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ” (Galatians 3:17). Death no longer had its sting, Sheol no longer its victory (1 Corinthians 15:55-57).

Ephraim is not one of the twelve tribes. Ephraim is not one of Jacob’s 12 sons. Ephraim and Manasseh were the two sons of Joseph.

Ephraim was indeed considered one of the 12 tribes. Joel is, of course, correct that Jacob had 12 sons (Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benjamin, Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher) and that Joseph had two sons (Manasseh and Ephraim). According to Genesis 48:5-6, however, the reason for Ephraim (and Manasseh) being full tribes is due to the fact that Jacob adopted them as if they were his very own sons:

Genesis 48:5-6, “And now your two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine. Your offspring whom you beget after them shall be yours; they will be called by the name of their brothers in their inheritance.”

This is vital. Both Ephraim and Manasseh are now Jacob’s sons, thus the 12 tribes of Israel are: Reuben, Simeon, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Ephraim, Manasseh, Benjamin, Dan, Naphtali, Gad and Asher. Levi was not given an inheritance (Joshua 13:14). This is precisely how the 12 tribes of Israel are listed in Numbers 1:

Numbers 1:1-16, “Now the LORD spoke to Moses in the Wilderness of Sinai … ‘Take a census of all the congregation of the children of Israel, by their families, by their fathers’ houses, according to the number of names, every male individually, from twenty years old and above—all who are able to go to war in Israel. You and Aaron shall number them by their armies. And with you there shall be a man from every tribe, each one the head of his father’s house. These are the names of the men who shall stand with you: from Reuben, Elizur the son of Shedeur; from Simeon, Shelumiel the son of Zurishaddai; from Judah, Nahshon the son of Amminadab; from Issachar, Nethanel the son of Zuar; from Zebulun, Eliab the son of Helon; from the sons of Joseph: from Ephraim, Elishama the son of Ammihud; from Manasseh, Gamaliel the son of Pedahzur; from Benjamin, Abidan the son of Gideoni; from Dan, Ahiezer the son of Ammishaddai; from Asher, Pagiel the son of Ocran; from Gad, Eliasaph the son of Deuel; from Naphtali, Ahira the son of Enan.’ These were chosen from the congregation, leaders of their fathers’ tribes, heads of the divisions in Israel.”

The reason that Ephraim is not included in Rev. 7 is simply because Ephraim is not one of the 12 tribes.

If Ephraim was not included in Revelation 7 simply because Ephraim was not one of the 12 tribes, then why is Manasseh included? If it was simply to replace Dan, why would Manasseh replace Dan and not Ephraim when it was Ephraim who was given favor?

Genesis 48:13-14, 20, “And Joseph took them both, Ephraim with his right hand toward Israel’s left hand, and Manasseh with his left hand toward Israel’s right hand, and brought them near him. Then Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on Ephraim’s head, who was the younger, and his left hand on Manasseh’s head, guiding his hands knowingly, for Manasseh was the firstborn… So he blessed them that day, saying, ‘By you Israel will bless, saying, ‘May God make you as Ephraim and as Manasseh!’ ’ And thus he set Ephraim before Manasseh.”

As we can see above, Ephraim was one of the 12 tribes and is even acknowledged as such by the Lord Himself. Jacob adopted both Ephraim and Manasseh. They are his and therefore received all the inheritance that a natural son would received. God does the same for us when He adopts us into His family through Christ (Ephesians 2). So the question remains, why was Ephraim not included in Revelation 7, but Manasseh was? Given the fact that the “144,000” are sealed servants of God, I think a very good reason why is due to Ephraim’s disbelief and idolatry. This condition does not exist in those who follow Christ:

Hosea 5:9-11, “Ephraim shall be desolate in the day of rebuke; among the tribes of Israel I make known what is sure… Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment, because he willingly walked by human precept.”

Hosea 13:1, “When Ephraim spoke, trembling, he exalted himself in Israel; but when he offended through Baal worship, he died.”

The only tribe not included in Revelation 7 is the tribe of Dan. Manasseh fills his place.

Why is Dan not included? Likely for the same reason as Ephraim. See Judges 18.

The notion that Ephraim is forever rejected, as MW seems to infer by repeatedly stating that they are not included in Rev. 7 is simply refuted by the fact that Ezekiel 37 makes clear that the future unification of “Ephraim” and Judah will take place in the Messianic Kingdom at the resurrection.

Ephraim is not forever rejected, evidenced by Ezekiel 37, as Joel correctly notes. As Coffman’s Commentary of Ezekiel 37 points out, however, “It is significant here that God through Ezekiel did not recognize Ephraim as ‘the Israel of God,’ a title that Ephraim had arrogantly usurped for themselves. He appeared here in his true status as Ephraim with whom certain tribes of Israel were associated. Judah, through whom the great Davidic king would come, was always the true center of the ancient Israel, not Ephraim.” As my article titled “The 144,000 and the Great Multitude – It’s Not What You May Think” points out, the list of the 12 tribes as they appear in Revelation 7 reveal who the Israel of God is.

Not only does MW fail to recognize the difference between the two kingdoms, but he also fails to see the two subjects of chapter 28. Verses 1-13 relate to Ephraim, while verse 14 shifts to speaking about Judah, the Southern Kingdom. The prophetic warning is directed specifically to the rulers of Jerusalem … The “covenant” spoken of in Isaiah 28 is made between the rulers of Judah and Egypt. Ephraim has nothing to do with this portion of the chapter.”

The entire oracle was spoken in the hope that Ephraim’s fall would serve as Judah’s warning, so it seems to me that Judah is addressed from about verses 5 to 13, or possibly 9 to 13. In my view, both are addressed from verse 14 onward. Regardless, my focus is upon the assertion that the covenant of Daniel 9 is spoken of (or equated with) the covenant mentioned in Isaiah 28. Both of these chapters ultimately point to Messiah (Daniel 9:24-27; Isaiah 28:18).

Isaiah 28:14, 16, 18,  “Therefore, hear the word of the LORD, O scoffers, who rule this people who are in Jerusalem … ‘Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone, a costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed. He who believes in it will not be disturbed’ … Your covenant with death will be canceled, and your pact with Sheol will not stand …”

Acts 4:10-11, “[L]et it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’”

Sadly, more outright straw man arguments [regarding MW’s response to Isaiah 10:20]. I never claim that this passage infers a seven year peace treaty. I simply hold that the passage is (1) prophetic and (2) the historical background concerns a security pact, treaty or alliance. Again, anyone can consult any number of solid commentaries on this passage to confirm this.

Again, no straw man argument was needed. Joel’s article specifically stated in the opening paragraphs that: “The notion of Israel entering into a deceptive covenant with the Antichrist is inferred in several other passages, but is directly referred to by Isaiah.” Which “covenant” is Joel referring to? The seven-year peace treaty he believes will be signed between Israel and Antichrist.

Despite the fact that virtually all premillennialists, including the earliest Church writers very much disagree that verse 27 is Messianic (we believe it refers to the Antichrist, who abominates and desolates the Temple) MW never says, “in my opinion” or includes any such qualifier. It simply is Messianic because MW says it is. For those who are not informed about the historical debates surrounding this passage, such comments can be very misleading.

Joel is right, I should state “in my opinion” in areas where we differ. I should also point out, however, something that is not my opinion, but is fact. Teaching the 70th Week of Daniel as still awaiting a full future fulfillment was largely popularized relatively recently, aside from Ireneaus and his student Hippolytus who put a date on Christ’s second coming around 500 AD that has long since come and gone (I presume this is who Brother Joel is referring to when he says “including the earliest Church writers”). The belief that it was anyone other than Christ who confirmed the covenant of Daniel 9:27 is virtually nonexistent prior to the 19th century. We can verify this by reading any pre-19th century books on the matter. If there are any, I will acknowledge it. To date, however, I have not seen any.

The word gabar simply means strong or firm. Once again, MW doesn’t even acknowledge that there are a few very solid possible options as to how to interpret this verse. Some scholars say that it means that “he” will confirm a covenant, as MW holds, while many others understand it to mean that he will, through strength, actually enforce a covenant. Some say that he will make a strong covenant.

I concede with Joel that there are other options. But it means more than just strong or firm. It also means to make strong, to strengthen, to prevail. The word “gabar” has only three Hebrew letters which are, from right to left, the following Paleo Pictograph characters:

Gimmel = Foot or burden-bearer, to gather, carry away.
Beyt = the House of Israel.
Resh = the head of a man, first, beginning, chief ruler.

A Messianic Jew named Maria Merola of Double Portion Inheritance points out that the word “gabar” paints a picture of the Messiah who is the “gimmel” גָּ the one who “bore the burdens” (Psalm 55:22; Isaiah 14:25; Jeremiah 23:33-38; Matthew 11:30) for the “beyt,” בַ the House of Israel, and is the chief ruler, the “resh” ר for the “government shall be upon his shoulder.” Merola also notes that the Hebrew word for “shoulder” in Isaiah 9:6 is “shekem” which literally means “the neck between the shoulders as the place of burdens.” The word “gabar” is therefore synonymous with the words “strengthen” and “prevail.” Thus, as Merola also points out, we could accurately read Daniel 9:27 as, “And he shall strengthen the covenant with MANY for one week …”. If Daniel 9:27 was describing Antichrist, confirming (or strengthening) a covenant with Israel would necessitate that there would already be a covenant in place.

Moreover, “From a grammatical standpoint the pronoun ‘he’ must refer to its antecedent. If we do this it will be immediately plain that it means the Messiah. This will be apparent if we quote the passage again from the 25th verse and connect up the main events pertaining to the Messiah and leave the portion pertaining to the ‘prince’ to its proper place at the end of the chapter. Quote: ‘Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto MESSIAH the Prince shall be seven weeks and threescore and two weeks . . . and after the threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off . . . and He, (the Messiah) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week.’ You will notice mention is made of seven weeks plus sixty-two weeks and last of all one week. This accounts for all seventy. It is after the sixty-ninth week that Messiah is cut off. That fact definitely places it in the seventieth week—that last remaining week of the prophecy. It was during this week that Christ did confirm His covenant with many according to Matt. 26:26-28. On this solemn occasion Christ instituted the most sacred of Christian ordinances, the Lord’s Supper, saying, ‘This is My blood of THE NEW TESTAMENT (literally covenant), which is shed for MANY for the remission of sins.’

Conclusive Proof Links Christ With the Covenant. The death of Christ very definitely instituted the New and Everlasting Covenant, and Christ emphatically confirmed that covenant with many during the three and a half years of His ministry on earth. Even the words of Daniel are almost identical with those of Matthew — ‘He shall confirm the covenant with many’ — ‘this is My blood of the New Testament which is shed for many.’

The evidence is very conclusive. There are 281 references to ‘covenant’ in the Scriptures according to Young’s Analytical Concordance. Not one of these references in any way introduces the idea of a covenant between the Jews and the Anti-Christ. ‘There is not a hint anywhere that such a covenant is suggested, intended, proposed or prophesied at any time. Concerning the covenant between the believers and the Messiah there are many scores of such references. They are found in almost every book in the Bible. The reason is because when the Jews broke the Old Covenant, (see Jer. 31:31-33) then God purposed to make a new and everlasting covenant with His people. Consequently all the prophets refer to it and Daniel foretold that it would be ratified in the 70th week of his prophecy. cp. Heb. 8:7-10.

Even more convincing is the testimony supplied by the Hebrew word for Covenant used in the phrase, ‘He shall confirm the covenant.’ The word for covenant is ‘Bereeth’ according to the Pulpit Commentary ; it is spelled ‘berith’ in Young’s Analytical Concordance. In the Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 29, p. 275, a lengthy exposition points out that ‘Bereeth’ is only used in connection with a Divine Covenant. It is never used to designate a ‘league’ with any other power or force but is always reserved to describe a covenant between God and man. For that reason the covenant cannot apply to anyone except the Messiah. It cannot possibly describe a covenant with the Anti-Christ or any political group involving apostate Jews.” Read more at Historicist.com.

In conclusion, beyond the fairly significant historical and textual errors (ie. confusing the northern and southern kingdoms, and failing to acknowledge the context of the passage as one of a well known historical security alliance), there are also the various straw man arguments

I should have made it more clear that my focus was not upon the history, but upon the theology. If I was not clear enough, the fault is mine.

I would also qualify this discussion by pointing out the my primary reason for arguing my position as I do is because those who interpret verse 27 as Messianic also use this same argument as the basis for replacement theology, a theology that I find outright demonic.

Though I wouldn’t classify replacement theology as “demonic” I am in complete agreement with my friend Joel regarding the err of replacement theology and in fact take it one step further by also rejecting the notion that the New Testament church alone is the Bride of Christ. From what I read in Scripture, it is believing Israel that is the Bride, not the NT church alone. Although I do not adhere to traditional dispensationalism (that replaces the Bride with the NT Church), I also do not adhere to covenant theology that replaces Israel with the Church. I adhere much more closely to progressive dispensationalism because, as Gentile believers, we do not replace the Bride, believing Israel. Rather, we are grafted in to the commonwealth of Israel and are now fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built together as one body per Ephesians 2. In my view, the traditional dispensational understanding is therefore itself another form of replacement theology, which I reject in all its forms. At the end of the day, we should not view believing Jews as being a part of the Church because they believe in Jesus, but rather it is we as Gentiles who are now a part of the Church because we believe in Yeshua.

I am not saying that MW holds to replacement theology, but his hermeneutic of spiritualizing very literal passages is precisely the method used by replacement theologians.

Replacement theology over-spiritualizes many portions of Scripture while ignoring the plain and straightforward teachings of others, such as Ephesians 2. It is my belief, however, that one interpretative method or hermeneutical approach alone cannot provide all the answers that we so often ask as students of Biblical eschatology.

As I replied to a comment yesterday below, given what has happened throughout history to the nation of Israel and to the Church and what is now happening today within the epicenter of prophecy, I decided to approach Scripture in a way similar to those who’ve now developed Progressive Dispensationalism — a refinement of the older Traditional Dispensationalism — by studying other views to appropriate more of a “complementary” or “correlative” hermeneutical framework. By not being confined to one narrow view and carefully studying the work of others and understanding why they believed what they believed, we can adopt what merit other positions have to augment our own understanding. Although some who staunchly maintain a certain eschatological paradigm may feel somewhat apprehensive with this approach much like a Traditional Dispensationalist, for instance, would reject the approach of a Progressive Dispensationalist, keeping the good meat of other views and spitting out the bones does seem to provide answers that other positions in and of themselves do not fully address as it relates to Bible prophecy.

We’ll agree to disagree. It’s ok to not always agree on every point and to have differences of opinion. Truth be told, that’s why Brother Joel is an author, because “Mideast Beast” (which I highly recommend) was a view that was different from the mainstream. And authors rely on differences of opinion.

Update 2: December 12, 2013

Brother Joel has updated his article again, perhaps in response to mine. Instead of saying that Ephraim “was not one of the twelve tribes” he now notes that Ephraim was not one of the “original” twelve tribes. I’m not sure what he means by “original.” Joseph never received a tribe, so the original twelve tribes always included Ephraim as one of the twelve. There is a difference between the twelve tribes of Israel and the twelve sons of Israel.  At any rate, I’ll try to be brief in addressing a few more of his points.

MW’s view although not entirely his (it has also been articulated by 119 Ministries and a few others) is a relatively new view and somewhat unique in that while it is technically Premillennilalist it relies on arguments that are typically made by Amillennialists or Preterists.

It is not just “technically” Premillennialist. It is completely Premillennialist. As for the understanding that it was Messiah who confirmed the covenant of Daniel 9:27, this is a view that has been held almost exclusively by the Church for the first 19 centuries. This is not new. The understanding, however, that the 70th week was “split” into two 3.5 year periods where the second period is still yet awaiting a future fulfillment was, to the best of my knowledge, introduced in the 16th century by Francisco Ribera. As for Amillennialism and Preterism (I prefer the term Historicism over Preterism), though I spit out much of what it teaches, it still has some meat worthy of a good chew.

Those who hold this view most often argue that the expectation of a seven year period is potentially setting up the Church for deception, as there are no genuine signs to look for prior to the Antichrist setting up the Abomination of Desolations.

Personally, I don’t think the Church will be deceived when the Abomination of Desolation is revealed. If there is any genuine sign to look for before the Second Coming, it would be the AoD, not a seven-year peace treaty.

It most often necessitates that the references to the Temple mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, Rev. 11 and four times in Daniel (8:11-14, 9:27, 11:31 12:11) all be taken as spiritual and not literal. This despite the fact that there is no basis within any of these actual passages to understand them in a non-literal sense. Those who espouse this view most often look to various examples in the NT where of the Temple is used in a metaphorical sense as his basis to reinterpret the literal references in the NT to the Temple and retroactively reinterpret passages that speak of the Temple in the OT. The argument is that because the Temple is used in a spiritual sense in some passages, we may now go back and reinterpret passages that were always understood as literal and see them as spiritual. But this is the precisely the hermeneutic of replacement theology.

Remember, keep the meat and spit out the bones. Brother Joel evidently takes issue with separating replacement theology from the understanding that the temple in the eschaton is the Church. However, it needs to be understood that the temple being the Church is not an invention of replacement theology. This is how the temple today is defined for us in the New Testament. In fact, each and every single time the Apostle Paul speaks about the temple of God and uses the Greek word “naos” (G3485) in Scripture he is referring to believers both individually and collectively. He is referring to the Church:

1 Corinthians 3:16, “Do you not know that you are the temple [naos] of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?”

1 Corinthians 3:17, “If anyone defiles the temple [naos] of God, God will destroy him. For the temple [naos] of God is holy, which temple you are.

1 Corinthians 6:19, “Or do you not know that your body is the temple [naos] of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?”

2 Corinthians 6:16, “And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple [naos] of the living God …”

Ephesians 2:19-22, “Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple [naos] in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.”

Even the Apostle Peter agrees in 1 Peter 2, the only time he ever refers to God’s temple:

1 Peter 2:4-5, “Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.”

Every time Paul refers to the temple as the Church he uses the word “naos” (G3485) and always calls it the temple of God or the temple of the Holy Spirit or an equivalent expression. In 2 Thessalonians 2:4 Paul again refers to the temple of God (“naos” ) which, as in each and every other usage of the expression, would in my opinion again be referring to the Church as it always had before, not a physical temple. According the position espoused by Brother Joel and other traditional dispensationalists, however, we’re now being told to believe that in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 Paul suddenly changes what he consistently referred to in previous epistles when speaking about the temple of God. But if Paul spoke of the Church each and every time he wrote about the temple of God before, then it only stands to reason that he was again referring to the Church when writing about the temple of God in his letter to the believers in Thessalonica. In other words, we’re now being told to interpret 2 Thessalonians 2:4 in light of a doctrine, not in light of Scripture. Doing so forces Scripture to conform to our understanding when what we all need to be doing is forcing our understanding to conform to Scripture:

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4, “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple [naos] of God, showing himself that he is God.”

The only other times Paul spoke about a physical temple were in 1 Corinthians 9:13, Acts 25:8 and Acts 17:24. In both 1 Corinthians 9:13 and Acts 25:8 he uses the word “hieron” (G2411) specifically to refer to the physical temple in Jerusalem, not “naos.” In Acts 17:24, however, he uses the word “naos” to refer to physical temples in general, however his entire point was that it was no longer a physical temple in which God dwells. Why? Because the Church was now that temple. In these instances where Paul spoke about a physical temple he never referred to it as “the temple of God” or an equivalent expression.

Acts 17:24, “God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands.”

The unwillingness to accept the New Testament’s explicit definition of the temple of God as being the Church forces one to see inconsistencies when, in my view, inconsistencies do not exist. We’re dealing with types and prophetic foreshadowings of events that took place during the time of Antiochus, Christ and maybe even Titus, and how we can see fulfillment in the eschaton. We’re still seeing through a glass darkly, but if Scripture now defines the temple of God as being the Ekklesia, then it is a definition that I must accept.

If the references in Daniel, 2 Thess and Rev 11 to the Temple are literal however, then it also stands to reason that the Temple must be built before the Antichrist can desecrate it.

Daniel’s prophecies often spoke about the last days leading up to the Second Coming of Christ. As we can see from above, the New Testament tells us that the “temple of God” is the Church and that we, as believers, now offer up the sacrifice of praise (cf. Romans 12:1; Hebrews 13:5; 1 Peter 2:5). Even if the prophet Daniel himself believed the prophecies he received of the end times referred to a physical temple would not change this reality. The revelation that the Church would become the temple of God was progressive and prophets were evidently not always granted a full understanding of the prophecies they were given, which is quite apparent in Daniel 12 itself:

Daniel 12:8-10,Although I heard, I did not understand. Then I said, ‘My lord, what shall be the end of these things?’ And he said, ‘Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, made white, and refined, but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand.'”

Even though Daniel was not always granted full understanding, he was faithful in recording the prophecies he was instructed to write down. Not knowing that the temple of God would one day be the people of God, however, would have conceivably been somewhat bewildering to Daniel if he had himself assumed that it was a physical temple that would be defiled during the time of the end. This could very well have been one of the reasons why Daniel did not understand all that he was receiving. According to the words of the Apostle Paul in Acts 17:24, a physical temple today would be little more than an empty building, void of the presence of God. I am sure that Christ would have known this as well, suggesting that Jesus would in no way have been referring to a physical temple as the “holy place” in Matthew 24:15 when referring to the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel, nor would Paul have depicted an empty rebuilt temple as being the “temple of God” in 2 Thessalonians 2:4.  A building absent of God is just another building. But the “holy temple” that is the Church in which God dwells, however, is a whole other matter. This may have been why Jesus said “let the reader understand” in Matthew 24:15 — because Daniel did not:

Matthew 24:15, “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand–“

Ephesians 2:19-22, “… you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.”

In 2 Thessalonians 2:3-8 we read about the “man of sin” or “lawlessness” setting himself “eis” (in or against) the temple of God, seeking to defile it, and then being destroyed by God at the brightness of His coming. In 1 Corinthians 3:17 Paul stated the exact same thing, saying, “If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.” In my view, this is certainly not a coincidence. Most translations say that before the “man of sin” is destroyed he will “sit” or “take his seat” in the temple of God. The Greek word for “sit” is “kathizō” (G2523) but it means more than to simply sit down physically, as one would sit on a chair. It also means to appoint, or to set or to confer a kingdom on someone. When we say that we have a sitting President or Head of State, for instance, it does not mean that they are physically sitting down. It means that they have taken their seat in office. According to the Greek, it appears that the “man of sin” will likewise be taking his seat or official position, which could possibly be referring to Islam’s Mahdi as he takes his seat as the self-proclaimed “Savior of Humanity” in defiance of Yahweh and His people. Thus the “man of sin” is called the “man of sin” for a very good reason: he sins against God and against His people — the Temple of God — whom he sets himself against once he assumes his “office” as “Savior.” This, of course, would be showing himself as God because according to Yahweh “apart from me there is no savior… I am God, and there is none like me” (Isaiah 43:11, 46:9b).

In Revelation 11 we see what happens when this “man of sin” sets himself against God and against God’s Temple. The following four quick points reinforce why this temple is not physical:

1. The Angel who speaks to John uses the exact same expression in Revelation 11:1, saying, “Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.” Even the word “naos” is used when referring to the temple of God, the same word the Apostle Paul used when referring to the temple of God as the Church, not a temple made of stone.

2. The very first time we find the word “temple” in Revelation is in 3:12a regarding the Church in Philadelphia when Christ says, “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more.” To be made a pillar in the temple of God must mean that the temple in view here is not one made of stone, but rather one that is made of people.

3. Lampstands/candlesticks were important items that were found in the physical temple in the Old Testament, yet John shows us that this time the lampstands/candlesticks in the temple of God are represented by the two witnesses (11:4), which again would indicate that the temple in view is not a physical temple made of stone, but rather one of people.

4. In the Old Testament a priest was one who served within the physical temple. In Revelation 1:6 and 5:10 we are told that anyone who has been washed by the blood of Christ is a priest, and the Christian understanding of this according to 1 Peter 2:5 is that as priests we now “offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” We no longer offer animal sacrifices in a temple made of stone.

Indeed, we are being built together upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Jesus Himself as the chief cornerstone in whom the whole building is fitted together, growing into a holy temple in the Lord for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit (Ephesians 2:19-22). Considering all that we have just learned, could it not therefore stand to reason that when John speaks of the “holy city” being trampled in 11:2 that he is referring directly to God’s people, and not a physical third temple built in Jerusalem? In my opinion, there is no doubt (cf. Psalm 46:4, “There is a river whose streams make glad the city of God, the holy place where the Most High dwells”; also see Matthew 5:14).

This view absolutely requires that Jesus’ ministry last exactly 3.5 years in order to fulfill the first 3.5 years of the final 70th week. The problem however is that very few scholars today believe that Jesus’ ministry lasted more than 3 years. While one can surf the web and find all sorts of online characters offering their views, among those who have genuinely researched the data in a scholarly and responsible fashion, one will not find any support for Jesus’ ministry to have lasted 3.5 years. Briefly, Jesus was crucified on Passover, and there are only three total Passovers mentioned in the Gospel of John. This limits Jesus ministry to roughly two years, certainly less than three years.

Brother Joel prefaces his argument by asserting that anyone who believes Christ’s ministry lasted for 3.5 years must have somehow done so irresponsibly, so let’s consider a few facts ourselves and see if we can come to a responsible conclusion. According to my own studies and research, Tiberius was appointed as co-regent with Augustus in AD 11. In Luke 3:1 we learn that John the Baptist began his ministry about 15 years later, which brings us around 26 AD. Jesus obviously began His ministry sometime thereafter per Luke 3:23, giving us a date of around 26 or 27 AD. During Christ’s ministry, scripture specifically tells us that He attended at least three Passovers (John 2:13, 6:5, 11:55), as Joel notes. Another feast mentioned in John 5:1 was likely also a Passover, the reason being that in John 4:35 we read that it is 4 months till harvest, which take place one month after Passover. No other feasts take place between that time and Passover. Thus, Christ’s ministry would have been between 3 and 4 years. (Also see Luke 13:7. Some commentators/scholars believe this may even allude to Christ’s ministry, indicating it lasted for at least 3 years).

the very notion that Jesus ministry was 3.5 originated with Origen (who was later declared a heretic) and Eusebius (a Roman apologist with strong anti-Semitic supercessionist theology) who specifically argued for this in order to justify their pagan / anti-Semitic / supercessionist understanding of Daniel 9:27.

Joel is correct. However, this has little bearing. Even the heathens can occasionally get something right. Look at Muslims, for instance. They’re monotheistic.

This view absolutely requires that we interpret “the covenant” as taking place “during” rather than “for” one week. If the “covenant” is “for one week” then it cannot be applied to Jesus, as the covenant which he made is eternal and not merely a seven year covenant. The problem with this of course is that not only are there no translations that insert “during,” but all but a few obscure translations do translate it as “for one week”. This view must literally reject as wrong the translations of the KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV, RSV, ASV, NIV, NLT, DBY, WEB, HNV, and several others. This view must stake its entire case on the notion that all of the translations got it wrong.

Obviously, I disagree with my friend’s conclusion. These translations are not in err. What is in err, however, is how we’re likely understanding it in our receptor language. Again, the Hebrew text of Daniel 9:27 says that He confirms the covenant “one” week, not in the sense that the covenant itself only lasts for the duration of “one week”, but rather that the confirmation of the covenant is what happens in the one week. The Hebrew text says “gabar bĕriyth rab echad shabuwa” which means “strengthen covenant many one week”. We cannot say dogmatically that the covenant is confirmed “for” one week (for only seven years) since “for” isn’t in the original Hebrew text, even though the full futurist view absolutely requires it. Some translations like the Lexham English Bible and the Darby Translation put the word “for” in brackets to let the reader know it isn’t in the original. I understand the need to insert something in there to improve the syntactical or linguistic flow/readability of our receptor language, but we need to be aware that it could just as easily be “in one week” or “for the one week” every bit as much as “for one week.” The English translation of the LXX (the Greek version that Christ Himself would have used) renders Daniel 9:27 to say “And one week shall establish the covenant with many”. Douay-Rheims says “And he shall confirm the covenant with many, in one week”. Young’s Literal Translation says “he hath strengthened a covenant with many — one week.” The partial futurist position that I hold does not depend upon the understanding that the covenant must be confirmed “during” the one week. The position of full futurists, however, absolutely requires that it be “for” one week, otherwise it crumbles.

This view divides the final week in half and inserts a 2000 year gap into the middle of the week. Needless to say, this would be a very unusual way to organize the timing of the prophecy, without stating that this was the meaning. Instead, the division of the 70 weeks within the prophecy is broken up into 7 weeks + 62 weeks + 1 week. Notice that it is not broken up into 7 + 62.5 + 3.5.

This is addressed in the original article which can be read here.

This view requires that the 69th week concludes at Jesus’ baptism, ;eating 3.5 years for His ministry. Yet of the four “decrees” which are considered by scholars to fulfill Daniel’s decree, none aligns with 483 years from Jesus’ baptism.

The starting date for the decree to rebuild Jerusalem was announced by Artaxerxes in 457 BC (cf. Ezra 7:13, 20). Others contend that the command to rebuild Jerusalem was already given to the Israelites by Cyrus per Ezra 1:3, however they were commanded to stop rebuilding by Artaxerxes according to Ezra 4:21, 23. Another command was later given by Artaxerxes to begin rebuilding again. According to Daniel 9:24-25 the Messiah would be anointed after 69 weeks had been fulfilled, which is 483 years (69×7). 457 BC plus 483 years brings us to the year 27 AD — which was the year that Jesus was baptized by John and anointed by the Holy Spirit to begin His ministry. This was the beginning of Daniel’s 70th week.

In my view, the decree of Artaxerxes in 457 BC is the best of the four separate decrees we find in Scripture and is, in my opinion, a sound logical deduction (the others are either too early or too late) since this one lines up perfectly with the prophecy. Daniel wrote in 9:25 that “From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One [Messiah], the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’”. Daniel did not say that “from the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Messiah rides into Jerusalem on a donkey” or “until the Messiah is killed”. Jesus had already been well known for a few years prior to His “Triumphal Entry” into Jerusalem. Daniel said “until the Anointed One comes”, which is to say, is made known publicly or is revealed. When did this happen precisely? According to Scripture, it happened the day He was baptized by John the Baptist, when “John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, ‘Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! This is He of whom I said, ‘After me comes a Man who is preferred before me, for He was before me.’” (John 1:29-30). Notice what John says next: “I myself did not know Him, but the reason I came baptizing with water was that He might be revealed to Israel.” (v 31). And indeed, the Messiah [meaning “the Anointed One”] has now come, “And John bore witness, saying, ‘I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and He remained upon Him’” (v 32). The Anointed One is now revealed to Israel in fulfillment of Daniel 9:25.

This view must see the Antichrist as responsible for the Abomination of Desolations and the ceasing of offerings in Daniel 8:11-14, 11:31 and 12:11, while seeing Christ as responsible in 9:27. This view fails to acknowledge the clear connection between these our passages. It interprets 9:27 in an inconsistent manner from the other references to the Abomination that Causes Desolations and the ceasing of offerings.

One of the primary reasons why I ascribe Christ to the one who confirmed the convenant with many, aside from the fact that Christ said His blood was the blood of the covenant that was shed for many, is because the Apostle Paul himself — who was an expert when it came to the Old Testament scriptures — obviously believed that Christ was the One who confirmed the covenant and caused the sacrifices to cease, almost quoting Daniel 9:27a verbatim in Galatians 3:17 and Hebrews 10:2. Why would an expert of the Old Testament do that, unless it was because Christ was indeed the One who confirmed the covenant and caused the sacrifices to cease because Christ Himself was the final sacrifice? We’re dealing with types or prophetic foreshadowings of events that took place during the time of Antiochus, Christ and maybe even Titus, and how we can see fulfillment in the eschaton. Forcing the usage of a hermeneutic that always interprets such passages in a wooden literal sense will make other views seem inconsistent, but we’re still seeing through a glass darkly. If the Apostle Paul clearly believed that Christ confirmed (strengthened)  the promises of the Abrahamic covenant (cf. Galatians 3:14) per Daniel 9:27a, then so must I.

That being said, Daniel 9:26 speaks of two subjects, namely, the Messiah and the “people of the prince that shall come.” Even the original Hebrew of Daniel 9:27 again infers that two separate subjects are in view. Contextually, this would have to be the Messiah and “the people of the prince that shall come” per the preceding verse. As Don Henson of Life, Hope & Truth ministries explains, “a careful reading shows that ‘he’ [of verse 27] does not refer to the prince, but rather to the Messiah. Notice the phrase in verse 26 ‘the people of the prince.’ It is not grammatically correct to assign the singular pronoun ‘he’ in verse 27 to the plural ‘people’ in verse 26. If ‘he’ were to refer to the prince, the phrase should have been stated differently: ‘the prince of the people.’ But since the verse refers to the ‘people of the prince,’ the prince is not the proper antecedent of the pronoun. ‘Messiah’ is the only person mentioned in verse 26 that can be the antecedent of the pronoun he. So the phrase ‘he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week’ refers to the Messiah. (Read more).

This view must reject Jesus’ words according to their normal meaning in Matthew 24:8 as being a reference to birth pangs. For if Jesus used the image of birth pangs to refer to the signs that come before the Abomination of Desolations, then He is seen to be clearly dividing up the signs that precede his coming into two distinct episodes (beginning of birth pangs and actual birth pangs) divided by the Abomination that Causes Desolation.

There are numerous translations that do not render Matthew 24:8 as “birth pains” at all, but rather as “sorrows” or “sufferings” or “troubles.”  For instance, the King James Version, the New King James Version, 21st Century King James Version, Young’s Literal Translation, Webster’s Bible, the Aramaic Bible in Plain English, the Jubilee Bible, the Douay-Rheims Bible, the Geneva Bible, the Wycliffe Bible, Darby, Common English Bible, Contemporary English Version, the Living Bible, the New Life Version, the Revised Standard Version CE and the Worldwide English NT. There are others I’m sure.

According to Strong’s ōdin is defined as “a pang or throe, especially of childbirth” which suggests that even though it usually refers to pains of childbirth, it is not always the case. We have clear proof of this in Acts 2:24 which refers to the “pains ōdin of death”. There is not a single translation I could find that said the “birth pains of death.” Thayer’s notes that ōdin also means “intolerable anguish”, not of childbirth but “in reference to the dire calamities [that] precede the advent of the Messiah.” Vine’s Expository Dictionary defines ōdin as “a birth-pang” as well as just “pain” in general and as “sorrows.”

The only verse where we know that ōdin refers to “birth pains” with absolute certainty is 1 Thessalonians 5:3, but this is referring to the sudden destruction that comes upon the enemies of God on the Day of the Lord. The Day of the Lord is post-tribulational:

1 Thess 5:2-3, “For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.”

Sudden destruction comes upon them on the Day of the Lord like birth pains upon a woman about to deliver. This happens virtually the same day of their destruction. However, if we take the position that ōdin in Matthew 24:8 refers to the beginning of birth pains and that birth pains only “take place at the end, at the conclusion of the pregnancy” according to Joel’s position, then how can birth pains possibly begin at the signing of a 7-year peace treaty or at the AoD, which takes place years before the actual “deliverance”? Unless Joel wishes to believe that birth pains begin much sooner than the day of deliverance, it diminishes his own argument. Regardless, even if ōdin in Matthew 24:8 should be understood as “birth pains” it would still be moot in my opinion considering the fact that it is simply describing what the initial events leading up to the “deliverance” are like, and not what they are.

This view must understand the passage in a way that violates the normal rules of grammar. The subject of a pronoun normally follows its antecedent. This is true in both English and Greek.

If we adhere to the normal rules of grammar, we are forced to identify Messiah as the one who confirms the covenant of Daniel 9:27, and the Antichrist as the one who sets up the Abomination of desolation. “There is another pronoun in verse 27 that also requires an explanation. In the New King James translation we see the phrase ‘one who makes desolate.’ Who or what is this ‘one’? … Obviously the one who is responsible for the ‘appalment’ (desolation) is the evil prince referred to in verse 26… There is an alternating pattern in verses 26-27 that is a common Hebrew usage. The first half of verse 26 refers to the Messiah, the second half to an evil prince. The first half of verse 27 refers to the Messiah and the second half refers to the abomination in the temple introduced by the evil prince.” (Read more).

Daniel 9:26, And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself;
And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.

Daniel 9:27, Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”

To again quote Historicist.com: “From a grammatical standpoint the pronoun ‘he’ must refer to its antecedent. If we do this it will be immediately plain that it means the Messiah. This will be apparent if we quote the passage again from the 25th verse and connect up the main events pertaining to the Messiah and leave the portion pertaining to the ‘prince’ to its proper place at the end of the chapter. Quote: ‘Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto MESSIAH the Prince shall be seven weeks and threescore and two weeks … and after the threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off . . . and He, (the Messiah) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week.’ You will notice mention is made of seven weeks plus sixty-two weeks and last of all one week. This accounts for all seventy. It is after the sixty-ninth week that Messiah is cut off. That fact definitely places it in the seventieth week — that last remaining week of the prophecy. It was during this week that Christ did confirm His covenant with many according to Matt. 26:26-28. On this solemn occasion Christ instituted the most sacred of Christian ordinances, the Lord’s Supper, saying, “This is My blood of THE NEW TESTAMENT (literally covenant), which is shed for MANY for the remission of sins.’

Conclusive Proof Links Christ With the Covenant. The death of Christ very definitely instituted the New and Everlasting Covenant, and Christ emphatically confirmed that covenant with many during the three and a half years of His ministry on earth. Even the words of Daniel are almost identical with those of Matthew — ‘He shall confirm the covenant with many’ — ‘this is My blood of the New Testament which is shed for many.’

The evidence is very conclusive. There are 281 references to ‘covenant’ in the Scriptures according to Young’s Analytical Concordance. Not one of these references in any way introduces the idea of a covenant between the Jews and the Anti-Christ. ‘There is not a hint anywhere that such a covenant is suggested, intended, proposed or prophesied at any time. Concerning the covenant between the believers and the Messiah there are many scores of such references. They are found in almost every book in the Bible. The reason is because when the Jews broke the Old Covenant, (see Jer. 31:31-33) then God purposed to make a new and everlasting covenant with His people. Consequently all the prophets refer to it and Daniel foretold that it would be ratified in the 70th week of his prophecy. cp. Heb. 8:7-10.

Even more convincing is the testimony supplied by the Hebrew word for Covenant used in the phrase, ‘He shall confirm the covenant.’ The word for covenant is ‘Bereeth’ according to the Pulpit Commentary; it is spelled ‘berith’ in Young’s Analytical Concordance. In the Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 29, p. 275, a lengthy exposition points out that ‘Bereeth’ is only used in connection with a Divine Covenant. It is never used to designate a ‘league’ with any other power or force but is always reserved to describe a covenant between God and man. For that reason the covenant cannot apply to anyone except the Messiah. It cannot possibly describe a covenant with the Anti-Christ or any political group involving apostate Jews.

It is further explained that when the covenant is confirmed the sacrifice and oblation ceases. The Massoretic text renders it : ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant to many, and in the middle of the week MY sacrifice and offering shall be taken away.’ The use of the pronoun ‘my’ removes all doubt concerning what sacrifice and oblation is meant. It was the Mosaic sacrifices which God ordained and honored until the death of Christ. That is the only sacrifice God could call ‘MY’ sacrifice.

The death of Christ on Calvary DID institute the New and everlasting covenant and Christ Himself DID confirm that covenant with many during His earthly ministry. When Christ died on the cross the veil of the temple was rent from top to bottom, thus signifying that the old sacrifices and oblations had ceased to have any spiritual or efficacious value. At the best they were but a shadow of good things to come, (Heb. 10:1), and when Christ died on the cross the ‘better covenant was established.’ Heb. 8:6. The old covenant with its sacrifices and oblations became null and void immediately Christ died, and in that sense He caused them to cease.” (Read more).

Update: December 15, 2013

Sadly, Brother Joel had decided to remove his response, stating in part that “Further examination of MidnightWatcher’s rather extensive ‘responses’ prove to use significant portions of plagauiarized (sic) material simply cut-and-pasted from other sources on the internet. After prayerful consideration, I’ve decided to remove my response entirely.” Citing other sources is part and parcel of a healthy debate. In my opinion, our disagreement was not one that was debated in “a spirit of contention.” Naturally, both sides will defend what they’ve come to believe and why they believe it, but differences of opinion in this respect should not be something that allows division. I am saddened to see Joel remove his response and to disengage from the discussion, but that is his prerogative. I wish Brother Joel and his great ministry all the best for many years to come. May our Heavenly Father continue to use him for His glory.

If you have not already done so, I recommend his book titled “Mideast Beast” which can be purchased here.

In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.

Revised 12/15/2013
  1. Susan
    12/30/2013 at 12:32 PM

    Kurt,

    I’m not trying to be reticent. I will share anything I have. I wanted to put it out there first to see if anyone would see the value of it before making a judgment. The website letgodbetrue is very good. I haven’t gone through all of it, but they do have information on the entire book of Daniel. I don’t agree with everything I found, but much of it I do. They hold to the Roman paradigm. Another website I enjoy is herealittletherealittle.net. The history on Daniel 11 came from there. Another, inplainsite.org has many good articles on it. Tim Warner is an excellent scholar, and the people who have him as their pastor are very blessed. He is currently writing a new translation of the N.T. Called the Last Generation Version, and has finished Revelation, which is excellent. He also holds to the Roman paradigm. He has three websites – answersinrevelation.org, oaisischristianchurch.org (check out archives, full of wonderful teachings), and pfrs.org (which stands for Pristine Faith Restoration Society). He is very “firm” in his beliefs, and his “mission” seems to be restoring the “faith once delivered to the saints”. I’m not sure he is quite as willing to bend as he claims. Nevertheless, I respect him and learn from him.

    I don’t know if you have ever heard of Philip Mauro or not. He was born in 1859 and was a well known Supreme Court lawyer. He also was a prolific Christian writer. I found his exposition of the 70 weeks prophecy and Matthew 24. Some people call him a preterist and some a historicist. I don’t think he is a preterist because he clearly believes in the Second Coming of Jesus. It doesn’t matter to me because he explains every detail better than anyone I have ever found. I really treasure his teaching on Daniel and Matthew 24. Recently I ordered a CD of many of his writings, which has just become available. It is being sent from South Africa. I found him through searching on a website called preteristarchive.com. I’m so glad I did.

    I was hoping someone would ask the question you just asked. I believe Philip Mauro has the best answer so here is a quote from his writing:

    [begin quote] Some ask about the fraction of the 70th week that remains after the death, resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus, approximately three and a half years. So I want to talk about that before moving on.

    The unit of the time measure in this prophecy is not a year, but a heptad (a group or set of seven). If we think of the Seventieth “Week” as a period of seven years, then it would appear as if there were three years and over which were not accounted for. But if, on the other hand, we take the prophecy as it is given, that is to say, in heptads, not years, then it will be clearly seen that all the seventy heptads are accounted for. The prophecy locates certain events “in the midst of” the last heptad, but does not locate any events at the end of it. The prophecy accounts first for sixty nine heptads (which reached “unto the Messiah”) and then it accounts specifically for the one remaining heptad, and for the whole of it, by telling what was to happen in the midst of it. Thus the prophecy leaves no part of the prophetic period unaccounted for. The climax of the things in the prophecy – that is to say, the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ – was to take place not at the end of the last heptad, but “in the middle of it” (verse 27).

    According to verse 24, which gives the substance of the prophecy in condensed form, six specified things were to happen within a measured period of seventy heptads. From the fact that seventy heptads are mentioned it would be reasonable to infer that the full number (seventy) would be necessary to the complete fulfillment of the prophecy; and this inference is confirmed and made certain by what immediately follows; for the next verse disposes of sixty nine heptads, which reach only “unto Messiah, the Prince”, leaving all the six predicted things yet to take place. Hence they must take place in the seventieth heptad.

    But there is nothing so far to indicate in what part of the remaining heptad those things were to be accomplished. Therefore, had they happened at the beginning of it, the prophecy would have been perfectly fulfilled, leaving no part of the seventy weeks unaccounted for. For it must be remembered that we are dealing with heptads, not years. But the last verse of the prophecy is more specific. It contains the definite statement that the great events which were to fulfill the predictions of verse 24 would happen “in the midst of” the last heptad. And, in agreement with this, it appears clearly by the Gospel of John that the crucifixion of the Lord took place in the midst of the heptad which began with the baptism of Christ and His manifestation to Israel (John 1:31), which began, in other words, at the end of the sixty nine heptads which reached unto the Messiah. Thus the entire period specified in the prophecy is fully accounted for.

    It is relevant in this connection to point out that the Scriptures habitually disregard fractional remainders of a time unit, whether it be a day, a week, a month, or a year. So, if it were foretold that a thing (such as the return out of Babylon) would happen in a certain year, its occurrence in the first month of that year would be a perfect fulfillment of the prediction, and the remaining eleven months would be simply disregarded as being without significance for the purpose of prophecy.

    Or to take another example, The Lord declared to His disciples concerning His approaching death and resurrection that “in three days,” and “after three days”, He would rise again. If He arose the very first hour of the third day, His prediction was fulfilled, the remaining hours of that day being without significance so far as the prediction is concerned. They do not have to be accounted for.

    You can see that if a prophecy should call for a certain event to happen on a specified day, and the thing were to happen about noon of that day, the prophecy would be perfectly fulfilled, and there would be no question at all as to what becomes of the remaining half day. So it is with the Seventy Sevens, for it obviously makes no difference that the time unit is in this case a “week” instead of a day. The prophecy declares specifically that the things foretold would occur in the midst of the week.[end quote]

    I used to believe there were 3 ½ years left unfulfilled, but I no longer do. I feel so much better about my understanding of Daniel’s prophecies than I ever did. It’s so simple to realize the last two prophecies of Daniel are about his people and his city, and what was going to happen to them after the Babylonian captivity until the end of the nation. It’s a history, written in advance, about them, not us. I believe that the 70 Weeks prophecy is THE most important prophecy in the whole Bible, and if we don’t get it right, it throws everything out of alignment. I think most Christians are waiting for the wrong things to happen. I could be wrong, but I really don’t see how a Jewish temple could ever be rebuilt without starting WWIII. I know that the number 3 ½ is seen also in Revelation. That is why I thought there were 3 ½ years yet unfulfilled, and that the fulfillment of them was found in Revelation. There is something about that number that is in itself symbolic. I don’t know what it means, or why God uses it like He does. But I don’t think it is because those years were left unfulfilled in the 70 Weeks prophecy. I feel like I am on solid ground now in believing the historical fulfillment rather than the gap theory, which is very flaky. That’s where I am at this point..

    I hope Philip Mauro’s teaching on heptads helped you.

    Like

    • 04/22/2014 at 5:56 AM

      Have you considered over a 3.5 year span:
      1260 days is End Unleavened Bread to Atonement,
      1290 days is Trumpets to End Unleavened Bread,
      1335 days is Trumpets to Pentecost
      1240 days (42 months) is solar eclipse 2015 to solar eclipse 2018 (Gentiles trample holy city)
      2300 days is Transit of Venus (Daystar or Lucifer thrown down… Isaiah 14) to Atonement

      On Trumpets 2011 there is a genuine example of “great sign appeared in heaven…” exactly as it did in -2BC except Saturn is standing before the woman and in conjunction with Venus.
      Plus a whole lot more… in fact its getting to that stage that the argument is soon to be over and all that is needed is for a few wise men to once again… “look up”. See my video I recently uploaded on all this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnlbvPCwBoA
      All praise to Yehovah and his son Yeshua.
      Russ

      Like

      • Susan Jones
        04/24/2014 at 6:22 AM

        Russell:

        I watched your video. I have never heard that interpretation of Daniel’s 70 Weeks prophecy before. Since you posted a comment, I assume you’ve read the discussion about this prophecy we had here on this forum. There is nothing more that I can say about it, because this was quite an exhaustive discussion. If I heard you correctly on the video, you start the countdown of the 70 Weeks Prophecy sometime around the Six Days War. I can’t understand why you would take a prophecy given to Daniel and his people which foretold what was going to befall them from the time of restoration of the city and sanctuary AFTER the Babylonian captivity until Messiah, and turn it into a prophecy about the 20-21st Century. I come up against this tendency to “lug” the prophecies into the 21st Century all the time. You’re not alone. But each time I do, it blows my mind. What would make you (and others) think that it is “all about us”. Was all prophecy written for us who are living in the 21st Century only? This tendency is very wrong, for all the reasons I stated in this forum.

        I think your work on the Feasts is good.

        The Mazzaroth is not important. It is pagan. The Gospel was not written in the stars. The Word of God declares the Gospel. The Mazzaroth, the Hebrew Roots Movement, the Sacred Name Movement, etc. etc. etc. are end-time deceptions in my opinion. You kept saying how “complicated” the subject of end time prophecy is. Something is wrong when only a few “wise men” can figure it out.

        I replied to acknowledge your comments, but I am not going to get into a discussion about it. Everything I had to say I said already. That took a lot of my time, and I do not want to repeat it. I do want to thank you, though, for sharing it.

        Susan

        Like

        • 04/25/2014 at 5:50 PM

          Love the discussions you and everyone else have had on this forum, Susan! And “YES!” I am including ICA, and all the other people that commented. I don’t always get a chance to follow the entire conversation as I’ve been very limited with time of late. However, your comment about prophecy NOT pertaining to the 20-21st Century IS very true. ONLY a thorough understanding of Scripture WILL reveal it’s (prophecy) Wisdom.

          (I love that word…”WILL”…as I always write it in CAPITALS as it is ALWAYS “…God’s WILL be done!”)

          Like

  2. Mike
    12/30/2013 at 2:56 PM

    Kurt, or Susan or Sharon, putting aside dates and dating for a moment, what is your explanation for what actually happens at the end of the 62 weeks period? “the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing”… ??

    How can that be referring to Jesus? How can his death be considered being “cut off” when it is through His death that others begin eternal life? And how can it be referring to Jerusalem since the destruction of Jerusalem and Jesus’ death are separate events separated by 30+ years?

    And “having nothing”? The New Testament portion of the “church” began with 12 disciples, then 200…then 3000 and has become the world’s most widespread and influential faith. How is that “having nothing?”

    And if your view as I understand it (that Dan 9-12 has already been fulfilled), how do you explain other Scriptures that have always fit very well with them as parallels like Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 24:15 about the abomination of desolation, which He links to Dan 9:27? Matthew 24:3-31 have always been seen as unfulfilled, future prophesy, and here Jesus is placing Dan 9:27 right in a time period that is future to that time period.

    Dual fulfillment is an uncommon but legitimate phenomenon in the Scriptures. For example, Joel 2:28-32 having dual fulfillment in Acts 2. Or, David being spoken of in Psalm 2:7 but in another sense it is looking forward to fulfillment in Christ, or Isaiah 28:11 describing the Babylonian conquest of the holy land yet Paul uses it as fulfillment of Pentecost in 1 Cor 14:21. Couldn’t Dan 9-12 have a dual fulfillment in the end times just prior to Jesus’ return?

    Like

    • Sharon
      12/31/2013 at 9:32 PM

      Mike,

      I see that Messiah was “cut off” meaning He literally was stopped; interrupted in what would usually in our reckoning be the “prime of life.” His life ended. He had no offspring, not that the Messiah would have had offspring but it was a way of describing His life was finished, with nothing more in the human side of things.

      The church is not in this prophecy – only in that once Messiah was the sacrifice, He made the way possible for the Church to become “heirs according to the promise” along with faithful Jews who did recognise and accept their Messiah.”

      The question of the 30+ years left I think is aptly answered in Susan’s post before yours where she quotes Philip Mauro in the heptads understanding. Jerusalem was indeed destroyed 30+ years later but that is not what the prophecy is referring to in my opinion. The abomination of desolations was indeed done to the temple in that Jesus was not seen as the Messiah they were waiting for by the priests and leaders of the nation and was thus rejected when they should have known who He was (I believe they did indeed know who He was) therefore as the absolute abomination of desolations (Messiah rejected by the nation, leaders and people) it was left only to carry out the final destruction at a later time. I may be wrong in this particular thinking and please comment if you disagree.

      We have an abomination of desolations of sorts today in that the “church” does not “know” the time of her visitation and will misinterpret the tribulation a huge number of Christians around the world are going through right now because they are looking for a “peace treaty” starting off a 7 year period supposedly heralding the antichrist. They also still “see” the “revived Roman Empire” as the 4th beast and are failing to understand the importance and horror of Islam being the true 4th and final beast. Goodness – even the 4 horsemen of Revelation are coloured as any Islamic flag displays! Black, red, white and green, or either one or more of these 4 colours. Worth thought. A caliph of Islam only ever wore a green turban and that will possibly be the colour of antichrist’s turban. They are colours which describe Islam perfectly.

      The true church or “Israel of God” has the Holy Spirit within. Any belief which denies Messiah His true place in our thinking I believe is an abomination of desolations akin to Israel of old rejecting their Messiah. Chrislam is an example – the “church” is getting into bed with Islam having already got into bed with Roman Catholisim. The “church” has lost it’s way and is in danger of losing its way altogether as did Israel at the time of Jesus.

      Your last paragraph – no I do not believe there is a dual interpretation of this prophecy. It was for the Jews and the holy city as it quite clearly says in verse 24. I fail to see how the church can fit into it except for the reasons as I have said earlier in that Messiah’s sacrifice made the way for “the many” to be counted in the covenant which was “established.”

      Like

  3. 12/30/2013 at 4:05 PM

    Mike,

    I’ve always thought (at least for several years, see here that the abomination of desolation is of the destruction of the temple and old covenant and Jerusalem in 70 AD, so I don’t see a conflict between what Jesus is saying in Mt 24 and Lk 21.

    As far as “cut off and have nothing” (NASB), perhaps that’s not a good translation. For instance:

    Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself (NKJV)

    cut off is Messiah, and the city and the holy place are not his (YLT)

    the Anointed One will be killed, appearing to have accomplished nothing (NLT)

    The Hebrew is not real clear, see here

    All three have quite different meanings than the NASB (NIV is similar to NASB), but are plausible. The “cut off and have nothing” is an issue no matter if you adhere to a future AoD or a past one.

    Thanks Susan for posting some of the other links. I found those too, but ICA allows only 2 links per comment without his approval. More comments later.

    Kurt

    Like

    • ICA
      12/30/2013 at 4:57 PM

      The two links per post is to try and limit spam that doesn’t always get filtered out. I’ll approve non-spam with more than two links when I see them awaiting moderation. Feel free to share multiple links.

      Like

  4. Sharon
    12/30/2013 at 7:27 PM

    Mike,

    Am really keen to answer you what I think but being in the middle of the day (new year’s eve day) I am home from work to grab a bite to eat then back to work. Out again tonight! Will write when I can. This is of great interest to me and the postings have been very interesting. Susan has done a superb job and so glad for those sources from her.

    Susan, the question Kurt asked was upper most in my mind regarding the half way cutting off of the Messiah too so am very glad he asked it. Your response with the piece about heptads was astonishing and am keen to look into that but it does make sense. I am really keen to buy that book by Tim Warner as well.

    Sharon

    Like

  5. Susan
    12/31/2013 at 8:02 AM

    Mike,

    I will try to answer your questions. Your first question was “What actually happens at the end of the 62 week period?” “The Messiah will be cut off and have nothing”…??? How can that be referring to Jesus?

    Messiah was to be cut off after the 7 + 62 weeks, or after 69 weeks or after 483 years have become history. That is, Messiah will be cut off sometime in the final or 70th week of the prophecy. “Cutting off” of Messiah refers to his death on the cross. “He was taken from prison and judgment, and who shall declare his generation? For he was CUT OFF out of the land of the living for the transgression of my people was he stricken.” (Isaiah 53:8).

    The Jews were looking for their Messiah. They were expecting him to destroy the Romans, and exalt Israel over the nations. There are many prophecies about this in the Bible. The problem was, it was not to be fulfilled at that time. Instead, Messiah Jesus was “cut off” and had nothing. No crown, no thrown, no kingdom…….not at that time, but He will, at the time of His Second Coming. He was “cut off out of the land of the living for the transgression of my people.” His first coming was as the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world. His Second Coming is as the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

    Your second question was “how can it be referring to Jerusalem, since the destruction of Jerusalem and Jesus’ death are separate events separated by 30+ years? The 70 Weeks Prophecy of Daniel 9 does mention the destruction of Jerusalem in the second half of verse 26. The 490 years that were “decreed” or “marked off” by God in which six things were to take place ended in the middle of the 70th week when Messiah was cut off. The remainder of the verse, “the people of the prince that is yet to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary” is additional information. It is not part of the 490 years. And, yes, it happened 40 years later. Jesus prayed from the cross, “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do”. God answered His prayer and he gave the Jews 40 more years to repent and believe the Gospel. After that probationary period judgment came. The Jews continued to reject the message of the Apostles and to persecute the Church. The apostle Paul was one of those messengers who thus suffered at their hands. Speaking of this wickedness of the Jews he said:

    “Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men; forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved TO FILL UP THEIR SINS ALWAYS; FOR THE WRATH IS COME UPON THEM TO THE UTTERMOST”. I Thess. 2:16

    Your third question was “And if your view as I understand it (that Daniel 9-12 has already been fulfilled), how do you explain other Scriptures that have always fit very well with them as parallels like Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 24:15 about the abomination of desolation, which He links to Daniel 9:27?”

    The disciples pointed out the magnificent stones the temple is built of . Jesus tells them that not one stone will be left standing, all will be thrown down. The disciples asked two questions:

    Tell us when shall these things be,

    What shall be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the world?

    Then Jesus continued to explain what he meant by that statement. He told his disciples about all the hardships and persecutions that were coming upon them, of the deceptions, the wars, famines, diseases and earthquakes (Matthew 24:1-14). Then in the last sentence of verse 14 Jesus says “It is then that the end will come”. The end of what? The end of the Jewish state, the destruction of the temple and the city. He’s talking about the events of A.D. 70. He referred to it in Verse 15 as the “abomination that causes desolation spoken of through Daniel the prophet (Dan. 9:27)”. The reference in Daniel 9:27 is the one Jesus is referring to. It is described in that verse as “the people of a prince yet to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary” sometime after Messiah is “cut off”. The abomination of desolation means the Roman armies, and is so explained by Luke 21:20 “However, when you see Jerusalem surrounded with armies, then you are to understand that she is about to be destroyed”. Luke goes on to say “For these are the days of vengeance, when everything that has been written will come true…….For there will be great distress in the land and judgment on this people. Some will fall by the edge of the sword, others will be carried into all the countries of the Gentiles, and Jerusalem will be trampled down by the Gentiles until the age of the Gentiles has run its course.” (Luke 21:22-24)

    He answered their question by giving them all the details of what would lead up to that destruction and what they should do to avoid it. He said “when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies then know that the desolation is near”. Jesus did answer that first question very thoroughly. If they paid attention to what he said they could not miss it. It was very clear. They were not told the day or the hour, but they were given all the signs to watch for. Josephus says that not one Christian lost their life during the siege because when they saw the armies surrounding, they got out of town, quickly.

    Most of the prophecy Jesus gave pertained to the coming destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD. However, those 1st century events did not completely fulfill the prophecy found in Matthew 24, and specifically verses 29-31. These verses link completely to the Sixth Seal of Revelation and describe the Day of the Lord.

    The disciples had asked him about the “signs of his coming and the end of the age”. He answered that question by saying it would be like lightning flashing from east to west and lighting up the whole sky. He will come in a rapid and unexpected manner, like lightning. In a moment it would blaze in an unexpected part and shine at once to the other part. The coming of the Lord will be a plain, unmistakable fact, like the lightning which lightens both ends of the heaven at once, and is seen by all. There will be no doubt about Christ’s coming when he does come, no discussion. It will be manifest to all. His coming would be rapid and unexpected (Luke 10:18, Zechariah 9:14). He said in verse 37-41 that his coming would be as it was in the days of Noah. People were eating and drinking, taking wives and becoming wives, working in the fields, grinding flour at the mill. In other words, he could come suddenly on any ordinary day and no one would be expecting him. He warned them (and us) to be ready, to stay alert and watch because no one knows the day or hour. With his coming, comes the end of the world as we have known it.

    The cosmic events Jesus describes are the same cosmic events under the 6th Seal in the Book of Revelation. In fact, this cosmic event is the most repeated event in the Bible of Christ’s coming. The Bible is very clear on the timing of it. It is “Immediately after the tribulation of those days” (Matthew 24:29). And, it is right “before the Great and Notable Day of the Lord” begins (Joel 2:31). Cosmic events announce The Day of the Lord. When the cosmic events come that tells us the Day of the Lord is near.

    It should not be overlooked that in Matthew’s account, we have the word “immediately”; for he says “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened….” We know that immediately after the destruction of the city in A.D. 70, the Second Coming of the Lord did not occur. We have to remember he has already answered their first question, and it was a lengthy and detailed answer. He is now answering their second question and he is not going to go into great detail, BECAUSE he wanted them to heed His warnings of the terrible events coming on that generation. He did not want them to be thinking about His Second Coming and relating that to what was about to happen. Mark says, “But in those days, after that tribulation”….(Mark 13:24).
    Luke says, “There will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth dismay among nations”….(Luke 21:25).

    The tribulation Jesus is talking about in Verse 29 is the tribulation that will be at the end of the age. There will be much “tribulation” for mankind, and many “distresses” and “woes,” in the end time of this present age, to be followed by the outpouring of the vials in which is “filled up the wrath of God” (Rev. 15:1). But regardless of the nature and severity of the afflictions which are yet to come, that particular “tribulation” the Lord spoke of as the “great tribulation,” (Matt 24:21) and as “the days of vengeance” (Luke 21:22) was the execution of Divine judgment upon Daniel’s people and his holy city, for which God used the Roman armies under Titus in A.D. 70.

    After examining Matthew 24 carefully, I think it becomes clear that the Lord divides the future into two distinct periods:

    1. The first of these extended from the time then present to the destruction of Jerusalem (Mark 13:1-23).
    2. The second from the destruction of Jerusalem to His own second advent (Mark 13:24-37).

    In the first period Christ is speaking to His disciples concerning the invasion of Judea and the siege of Jerusalem and complete desolation of the city and sanctuary by the Roman armies. His purpose was to give them explicit information about what was coming and what to do about it in order to survive; for those things were to happen in that generation. This first division ends with the words “But take heed; behold I have foretold you all things” (Mark 13:23), and with it he answered their first question – “When will these things happen?”

    In the second period concerning his second coming, instead of giving them definite information, and giving a “sign” whereby His people might be warned of the approaching end, He speaks only in the most general terms, and He makes plain only one thing, namely, that no immediately preceding signs would be given whereby His people would know that His advent was near. This feature of His coming again – its unexpectedness – is stated in so many different ways, and is so emphatically stated and illustrated (Mark 13:32-37) that it cannot be misinterpreted, not only in the Matthew 24, but in every other prophecy relating to the second coming of Christ. Again here is the contrast:

    1. The first event was then close at hand; it was to happen with that generation and it would be immediately preceded by a sign, which His disciples could not fail to recognize (Jerusalem surrounded by armies).

    2. The second event (His own coming) would be at a time unknown even to Himself, and there would be no sign to warn His people of its approach, for which reason He impressed it upon them that they were to watch at “every season”(Luke 21:36).

    Concerning the first event He said, “Behold I have foretold you all things”, but of the second He said, “But of that day and hour knows no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” And then Jesus confirmed what he was saying through two parables (Mark 13:28-31 and Mark 13:32-37.

    Mike, your last statement was about “dual fulfillment”. Jewish prophecy is “a pattern that repeats, multiple fulfillments with one ultimate fulfillment,” or multiple “rehearsals” for the ultimate fulfillment. Something similar to the tribulation of 70 AD is going to happen again in Israel, only the outcome is going to be very different. 70 AD was the wrath and judgment of God, to the uttermost. The last 3 ½ years of the age will be the wrath of a satanically inspired Antichrist. Jesus will personally show up. He will save the remnant of Israel and fight against those nations that have surrounded her. That is what the Christ rejecting, unbelieving Jews were expecting in 70 AD. They did not understand “the time of their visitation” and the purpose of Messiah’s first coming, so they rejected and killed Him. A believing remnant in the future will “look upon Him whom they pierced and mourn for Him, and be in bitterness for Him” when he comes to save them from their enemies. It will be glorious.

    Like

  6. Mike
    12/31/2013 at 10:05 AM

    Kurt J, with respect, I don’t think the Holy Spirit intends to convey truth through one translation when it is convenient for our favorite view, and then some other translation for some other view. I don’t believe the Holy Spirit reveals truth by pitting one translation against another.

    In Dan 9:27 there is a breaking of, or cessation of a covenant. I hold to a view that it is a covenant similar (or could be actually) the dhimmi covenant based on the Pact of Umar. But let us for a moment consider the alternative, that it is a covenant that Jesus makes.

    When did Jesus ever break a covenant or cause a covenant to end? Jesus made covenant with Jews (not Christians), so any covenant He would have made to them would be valid today, unbroken. And what kind of person would break a covenant? A dishonest person. That sounds more like an antichrist than the Lord Jesus Christ. I think you will agree.

    When did Jesus ever prohibit or stop sacrifice and worship in the temple? Never! And after the temple was destroyed in 70AD, sacrifices and worship still continued.

    We see in Dan 9:27 a week, a period of 7 years that are broken in half. So when did Jesus ever divide His ministry into two equal parts of 3.5 years? Never!

    But in the Revelation, we DO see two equal parts of 3.5 years (Rev 12) and that is describing the actions of satan against Christians (“those who hold the testimony of Jesus” vss 12:11,17)

    The “people of the prince to come” are Arabs and Syrian mercenaries who constituted the bulk of the aggressor force against Jerusalem in AD70, We know this from contemporary reports from Josephus and others. This makes the “prince” to be of Arab or muslim origin. The “he” then is referring to that person of Arab or muslim origin. “He” is who it is that breaks a covenant and brings worship to a desolate silence (Dan 9:27). The expected parallel in the Revelation is found in Rev 13:34 where we see the antichrist desiring worship.

    Like

  7. Sharon
    12/31/2013 at 8:07 PM

    Mike,

    With all due respect; to quote you: “In Dan 9:27 there is a breaking of, or cessation of a covenant.” No! It says no such thing! Read it again. It says (quoting from the Septuagint) “And one week shall establish the covenant with many …” Establish does not mean breaking. This is a prophecy about Messiah and the Jews. It is not about any end time antichrist.

    The covenant Messiah established was that of which it was said at the beginning of the prophecy in verse 24: “Seventy weeks have been determined upon thy people, and upon the holy city, for sin to be ended, and to seal up transgressions, and to blot out the iniquities, and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the Most Holy.” THIS is what the covenant established. Messiah did all of that with His sacrifice. HE was the atonement for iniquities. HE brought in righteousness and all the rest of those things in verse 24 so that you and I and anyone else be they Jew or Gentile should be able to be saved. This was the covenant which was established and “the many” were the “you and I and anyone else be they Jew or Gentile” who call upon the name of Jesus. The specific 70 weeks vision was sealed at the end of the 70 weeks. The prophet vindicated. By the time the abomination of desolations was achieved it was finished. It was over.

    Susan posted a piece where she mentioned someone who talked about heptads. I have not looked into that as yet but the thought is compelling as this is indeed how the Jews reckon “days” etc. We too do the same thing in declaring a day to be that which includes only a part of for the purposes of counting times.

    Susan also gave a very good post where she talked about the need to understand the importance of the desolations of AD 70. The “church” today gives no credence to the total desolation of this time by their stating the prophecy is dealing with antichrist from verse 26 and 27. It is totally misunderstanding God’s whole dealing with the nation of Israel and the purpose of Messiah’s coming.

    Jews may have sacrificed as you say in your post after the destruction of the temple, I am not sure of that, but as far as God was concerned their sacrifices were as dirty rags in His sight. The ultimate sacrifice of whom the whole sacrificial system pointed had been made on the cross. After that there was no more sacrifice for sin. Jesus said Himself “It is done.”

    I see a parallel in that at the time Jesus came very few people in Israel were looking for Him and so they “did not know the time of their visitation” and missed their Messiah. After all that had happened – prophecies, prophets etc they missed it. Today we see the “church” also missing what God in His grace has made known to us in that we have the whole of the Scriptures with us at this time with history before us and still it is missed except by very few who are searching and watching for His coming with eyes wide open so as not to miss anything. Thank God for people like Susan and ICA and you and Kurt J and some others who are willing to speak and debate about these things and not take it at face value but look deep into these things as the Bereans did.

    I am indebted to Susan for making those sources available especially Philip Mauro and Tim Warner – very valuable but the most valuable of all is the Word from God. Precious!

    Sharon

    Like

  8. Sharon
    12/31/2013 at 9:36 PM

    Mike, I commented on your questions at the end of that post – at 112/30/2013 at 2.56pm #2 in case you miss it! This is as well as the post I just made above this to your latest post. Sorry, I should have done it here as with all the posts I quite agree with whoever said it – it is hard to see the post.

    Like

  9. Mike
    12/31/2013 at 9:58 PM

    Sharon and Susan, thank you both for your erudite and informative replies. It is much to digest, and much to research further. Your analysis of Matthew 24 is interesting has piqued my interest, however I will remain agnostic on the issue of Dan 9:26-27 but consider all hypotheses. Thank you and GOD bless you all, (Kurt and ICA too).

    (Mar 13:37) And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

    Like

  10. 01/01/2014 at 2:17 PM

    In a previous comment I incorrectly attributed the Dan 9:25 decree to “restore and rebuild Jerusalem” of 457 BC to Cyrus rather than Artexerxes (Arta-Cyrus). Cyrus did give a decree but the math of the 490 years does not work. Here is a good, short explanation of the timeline that arrives at 27 AD as the beginning of Christ’s ministry and the 15th year of Tiberius per Luke 3:5: http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/457.html

    Artexerxes’ command begins in Ezra 7:11, giving the Jews autonomy to conduct their affairs in Jerusalem: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezra%207&version=NASB

    Like

  11. Willard
    01/01/2014 at 9:21 PM

    The Cyrus decree in 536 BC works if we look to the future up to 1948 or – 2520 biblical years to begin the rebuilding of Jerusalem

    Isa 44:28 who says of Cyrus, ‘He is my shepherd and will accomplish all that I please; he will say of Jerusalem, “Let it be rebuilt,” and of the temple, “Let its foundations be laid

    Like

  12. Mike
    01/01/2014 at 9:47 PM

    Susan, so if I understand you correctly, you see a break in Matthew 24 at verse 14, not at verse 4? Matt 24:1-14 are referring to the AD70 destruction of Jerusalem and verses 15-31 pertain to the time just prior to Jesus’ return? I just want to understand correctly.

    I would be interested to see how you would resolve the apparent parallels between Matthew 24 and the Revelation. This was originally posted in another of ICA’s posts by author Jack Smith. It assumes an islamic antichrist perspective and that islam is what the horses of the apocalypse are describing. The action begins at Matthew 24:5.

    Parallel 1:
    * Matthew 24:5 — Many will come in Christ’s name and deceive many.
    * Revelation 6:2 — The 1st Seal – White horse and rider with bow who is given a crown; went out conquering and to conquer. (We know that Christ is God, the Prince of Peace, and although Mohammed and his followers acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah and claimed to be following the true faith of God — which they call the “religion of peace” — his teachings also deny Christ’s divinity and deny the Triunity of One God while claiming to be the final prophet of God).

    Parallel 2:
    * Matthew 24:6-7 — Wars, nation against nation, kingdom against kingdom.
    * Revelation 6:3-4 — The 2nd Seal – Red horse to take peace from the earth.

    Parallel 3:
    * Matthew 24:7 — Famines and earthquakes.
    * Revelation 6:5-6 — The 3rd Seal – Black horse bringing famine.

    Parallel 4:
    * Matthew 24:15 — The Anti-Christ and the Abomination of Desolation.
    * Revelation 6:7-8 — The 4th Seal – Pale (Green) horse with Death and Hell. Green is the official color of Islam. He has power over 1/4 of the earth to kill by sword, famine, death and “wild beasts”.

    Parallel 5:
    * Matthew 24:9-13, 15-22 — Great Tribulation. Many are delivered up to be afflicted and killed. Many fall away from the faith.
    * Revelation 6:9-11 — The 5th Seal – Saints in heaven are told that fellow servants are to be killed.

    Now notice the 6th Parallel. I’ll include some verses and break it down into individual parts:
    Parallel 6a:
    * Matthew 24:29, “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken”

    This corresponds with:
    * Revelation 6:12-13, “And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood, And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth …”

    Parallel 6b:
    * Matthew 24:30, “And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”

    This corresponds with:

    * Revelation 6:15-17, “And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains, And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?”

    Parallel 6c:
    * Matthew 24:31, “And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”
    This corresponds with:

    * Revelation 7:1-4,9,14 “And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God … Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. And I heard the number of them which were sealed: [and there were] sealed an hundred [and] forty [and] four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel … After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands … these are the ones who come out of the great tribulation.”

    In Revelation 7 “And after these things I saw …” is a continuation of the post-trib signs that John witnessed at the 6th Seal a few verses earlier (the text is inspired but chapter and verse divisions were added later by men). After John sees the post-trib cosmic signs he then witnesses the gathering of the elect — the 144,000 and then the great multitude that the angel says in Rev 7:14 “are the ones who come out of the great tribulation”.

    Like

  13. Sharon
    01/01/2014 at 10:37 PM

    Willard,

    I believe this is a prophecy which is end to end, in other words it is contiguous – no gaps and it was well finished by the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. The rebuilding of Jerusalem refers to the decree by Artexerxes in 457BC after work had been interrupted and a question was asked in Ezra 4:21: “Now I give the command to make these men cease, that this city may not be built until the command is given by me. Take heed now that you do not fail to do this. Why should damage increase to the hurt of the kings?” The question was answered in Ezra 7:13 “I issue that all those of the people of Israel and the priests and Levites in my realm, who volunteer to go up to Jerusalem, may go up with you.” And so the rebuilding was given the command to go ahead. 457BC. This calculates as 489 years to Messiah the prince at which time the final “week” or heptad commences. That makes then 490 years. The last week or heptad concerned the focus of the Scriptures – Messiah, His ministry and His being “cut off” – the sacrifice which as in verse 24 finished all the things there specified. Thence followed the foretelling of the “abomination of desolations” and subsequent destruction of the temple and city.

    The prophecy was well finished by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

    Like

  14. Willard
    01/02/2014 at 1:21 PM

    Isa 44:28 who says of Cyrus, ‘He is my shepherd and will accomplish all that I please; he will say of Jerusalem, “Let it be rebuilt,” and of the temple, “Let its foundations be laid

    Isaiah is very clear even before Cyrus was born he gives the credit for the rebuilding of Jerusalem to Cyrus not Artexerxes – This prophecy is not fully fulfilled yet as Babylon which was over thrown by Persia has not been made desolate forever yet – it has not been destroyed like Sodom and Gomorrah either – I have been there – Saddam was in the process of re-building it before his fall – Alexander ruled from there and it was still a major place of influence in the early days of Rome

    Jer 25:11 This whole country will become a desolate wasteland, and these nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years.
    Jer 25:12 “But when the seventy years are fulfilled, I will punish the king of Babylon l and his nation, the land of the Babylonians, for their guilt,” declares the LORD, “and will make it desolate forever

    Isa 13:19 Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms, the glory of the Babylonians’ pride, will be overthrown by God like Sodom and Gomorrah

    Like

  15. ICA
    01/02/2014 at 2:17 PM

    Willard, “Isaiah is very clear even before Cyrus was born he gives the credit for the rebuilding of Jerusalem to Cyrus not Artexerxes”

    It was the conciliatory policy of Cyrus that provided the foundation upon which the actual decrees by Darius and then by Artaxerxes to rebuild the city were subsequently made. As the following article on the Patmos Papers points out, “it is essential to pay close attention to the words of the text. We are looking for a command [as per Daniel 9:25] to ‘restore and to build Jerusalem.’ The decree of Cyrus, recorded in Ezra 1, gave instruction only for the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem. It said nothing about restoring the whole city. The decree of Darius, recorded in Ezra 6, was simply his endorsement of the decree of Cyrus. It mentioned only the building of the ‘house of God.’ But in the decree of Artaxerxes, recorded in Ezra 7, provision is made for the complete restoration of the Jewish state, including the right to appoint magistrates and judges, hold trials, and pass and execute sentence upon violators of their own national laws.

    This was clearly understood to be an authorization for the full reestablishment of Jerusalem and the Jewish nation; for shortly after this the enemies of the Jews wrote to the king complaining that ‘the Jews which came up from thee to us are come unto Jerusalem, building the rebellious and the bad city, and have set up the walls thereof, and joined the foundations’ Ezra 4:12. That the walls had been completely set up was obviously an exaggeration, as verse 13 reveals. Yet this incident shows that for the first time there was actual work being done to rebuild the city. This had not been the case under the previous decrees.” (Read more).

    Like

  16. 01/02/2014 at 4:25 PM

    A few verses jumped out at me this morning when rereading Daniel 9, which I will share below, but first I would like to say I think we do ourselves a disservice by reading Dan 9:24-27 in isolation (as I have been guilty of doing). We need to remember the context. That said, observe:

    Dan 9:2, “…in the first year of his [Darius’] reign, I, Daniel, observed in the books the number of the years which was revealed as the word of the Lord to Jeremiah the prophet for the completion of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy years.”

    It is important to note that “desolations” are nearly always in association with the city of Jerusalem. In fact no verse comes to mind that includes a description of the “abomination of desolation” (AoD) that isn’t connected to Jerusalem. So in Daniel’s day, at the end of the 70 years of captivity Jerusalem was desolate.

    Next:

    Dan 9:16,“O Lord, in accordance with all Your righteous acts, let now Your anger and Your wrath turn away from Your city Jerusalem, Your holy mountain; for because of our sins and the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and Your people have become a reproach to all those around us.”

    Daniel prays for the removal of God’s wrath on Jerusalem, connected with and precipitating its desolation – the people were taken off into captivity and the city ransacked.

    Dan 9:17,“So now, our God, listen to the prayer of Your servant and to his supplications, and for Your sake, O Lord, let Your face shine on Your desolate sanctuary.”

    Again, there is a desolation in Daniel’s day in addition to the future desolation he will prophesy at the end of the chapter.

    Dan 9:17,“O my God, incline Your ear and hear! Open Your eyes and see our desolations and the city which is called by Your name; for we are not presenting our supplications before You on account of any merits of our own, but on account of Your great compassion.”

    Desolation is connected with a city, Jerusalem.

    Dan 9:24,“Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city…”

    Jesus predicts desolation for Jerusalem in Mt 23:37-38, prior to the better-know Mt 24 chapter. When Jesus prophesied destruction and desolation on Jerusalem in Mt 24 (and don’t forget Lk 21!!) He was predicting it to occur to the people to which He was talking – that they would still be alive, that the generation would not pass away (it was 40 years from 30 AD, Jesus’ crucifixion to 70 AD, the total destruction of the temple and over 1.1 million people killed).

    Now one might protest that Jesus’ words that “For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will” preclude 70 AD fulfilling this prophecy since, for instance, 6 million Jews died in WW II, however look at Daniel’s words describing the desolation of Jerusalem that was ongoing in his own day, back in Daniel 9:

    Dan 9:17,“Thus He has confirmed His words which He had spoken against us and against our rulers who ruled us, to bring on us great calamity; for under the whole heaven there has not been done anything like what was done to Jerusalem.

    I think we need to understand what is being communicated is how severe, how aweful the event is, not in an absolute, objective, comparing-the-numbers literality… Very hard for western, non-imaginative Christians to do, I think. Most bible-believing Christians are completely missing the monumental nature of the shift that occurred when the old covenant system was forever torn down. I would not say there won’t be a future AoD, but it is not going to be of a wood and stone temple in Jerusalem, but the people of God. I also completely reject the Preterist interpretation that Jesus returned in 70 AD and we are now in the fulness of the kingdom of God.

    I remain a Premillennial believer – Jesus will reign as a glorified human (fully God) on this earth – hallelujah!

    Like

    • Mike
      01/02/2014 at 6:16 PM

      Kurt that’s very interesting, thanks for posting those insights.

      I’m trying to understand this. Are you people suggesting that there is no end times link to Dan 9:26-27? That Dan 9:26-27 was solely pertaining to AD70?

      Thanks

      Like

  17. 01/02/2014 at 7:11 PM

    Yes, I think the desolation occurred in 70 AD and that the 490 years ended about 3-4 years after the resurrection with the stoning of Stephen/the gospel going out to the Gentiles. That being said, there is clearly a time of great suffering ahead: I would put the break between what is past and what is future between Mt 24:22 and Mt 24:23 and between Luke 21:24 and 21:25. The tribulation ahead is also described in 2 Thes 2:3-12, Rev 6:12-16 and Rev 16.

    At this point I differ from ICA on the timing of the AoD and all 70 weeks being past, but maybe not for long? ;-)

    Like

  18. Sharon
    01/02/2014 at 8:00 PM

    Hi there!

    Kurt I thoroughly agree with you. This is what Susan and I have been posting. Susan added a very interesting post earlier which was about heptads written by I think Philip Mauro, in one of her previous posts which gives much food for thought about calculations of the 490 years. As you say the “week” can be divided up into 2 x 3.5 years to fit the criteria but I am very much leaning towards the heptad understanding. Whichever – I do believe the desolations of Jerusalem were done and finished by AD 70. The whole prophecy as you say showed what was to happen. It was awful (and aweful).

    I liked your running through Daniel again and the way you said you re-read it to get continuity. It is good to do that as it is so easy to get absolutely focused on one part and miss the greater picture. I particularly love to read it in the LXX as I have stated here before. I am more and more appreciating the impact and importance this prophecy had on the Jewish nation as Susan pointed out in her first post. Daniel must have appreciated that too when he said in Daniel 9:17, as you posted “Thus He has confirmed His words which He had spoken against us and against our rulers who ruled us, to bring on us great calamity; for under the whole heaven there has not been done anything like what was done to Jerusalem.“ He saw the city ruined. He understood that the nation had angered God hence the 70 years in Babylon but he also saw that there were greater desolations to come for the nation and Jerusalem. After AD 70 it was over. As Susan said, other prophecies about Jerusalem hold out mercy for Jerusalem in the end.

    You say you remain a premillennial believer. I too believe Jesus will return pre the millennium and set up His kingdom. I fail to see how anyone could believe otherwise!

    Like

  19. Sharon
    01/02/2014 at 8:03 PM

    Willard,
    Your comments re Cyrus being responsible for the Jerusalem foundations as per Isaiah does not take into account that although Cyrus gave permission in 536BC to go ahead, and this is what Isaiah prophecied, it was interrupted due to interference by “adversaries” around the Jews. It was in fact Artexerxes who gave the final permission for the rebuild to continue. ICA gave a good post upholding this just a few postings back. It is worth reading.

    Like

  20. Susan
    01/03/2014 at 7:00 AM

    Hi Mike,

    I see a historical fulfillment in Matthew 24:4-28. This answers the disciples first question.

    I see a future fulfillment in Matthew 24:29-31. This answers the disciples second question.

    Then followed two parables which confirmed both:

    Matthew 24:32-35 (about the imminent destruction of the city and temple in 70 AD).
    Matthew 24:36-51 (about the details of Jesus’ Second Coming).

    I am aware of the similarities between Matthew 24 and the Seven Seals; however, I don’t believe they are describing the same events. The problem is that most interpret Matthew 24:4-28 to be events that are going to happen right before the Lord’s second coming. They put all of it into the future, and I believe that’s wrong.

    Consider this – The greatest calamity of Israel’s history was about to happen. Realize what this meant. It was the end of the Jewish nation. It was the end of the Jewish religion. It was the end of Jerusalem and the Temple. It was the end of the entire O.T. System of sacrifices. It was the end of the feasts. All of it was about to be destroyed. I have a very, very hard time believing that Jesus was skipping over this momentous event to prophesy to those who would not yet be living for thousands of years into the future about an antichrist and his activities at the end of the age! I believe Jesus cared about his own disciples and the believers who were alive with him at that time. He is fully aware of the horrors coming on the Jewish nation. He wanted them to survive. He is telling them what is the sign to watch for (armies surrounding Jerusalem). He is telling them what to do when they see it.

    It is my feeling that the main reason for accepting it as a prophecy of the future is because of the ignorance of the historical fulfillment. We can’t get the future right until we first get the past right! So now instead of understanding the historical fulfillment of Matthew 24, and instead of understanding the historical fulfillment of the 70 Weeks prophecy of Daniel, we have this whole new eschatology that has developed which involves a so-called seven year covenant between Israel and the Antichrist, which gets broken in the middle. And we have a rebuilt Jewish temple with the old covenant sacrifices re-instituted. This is a wrong eschatology. The 70 Weeks prophecy was a prophecy about Messiah, a precise time line of His appearance in Israel. But that prophecy has been hijacked, and made to apply to the Antichrist. It has NOTHING to do with the Antichrist. The 490 years were completely fulfilled and accounted for. It is the same here in Matthew 24. Verses 4-28 were fulfilled in history, and only verses 29-31 are concerning the future. I’ll ask it again. Do we really think that what was going to happen a couple of thousand years into the future really mattered most at that moment in Matthew 24? I think it is so arrogant for Christians to think that all prophecy is for the time in which WE are living. There are plenty of prophecies that concern our day, but Matthew 24 and Daniel 9 are not two of them.

    The deceptions, wars, famines, diseases, death and persecution of Christians talked about in Matthew 24 took place just as Jesus predicted. I think it is important to see this, so I have copied a portion of my notes that offers fulfillment of this (from various sources):

    Matt. 24:4-6 “Yeshua replied, Watch out! Don’t let anyone fool you! For many will come in my name, saying, I am the Messiah! And they will lead many astray”. “You will hear the noise of wars nearby and the news of wars far off; see to it that you don’t become frightened. Such things must happen, but the end is yet to come.”

    The particular deception against which He warned them was the false resistance to the Romans by the confident expectation of a miraculous deliverance. There was a general expectation among the Jews of a Messiah who should arise and deliver them from the Roman yoke.

    Josephus informs us that there were many who pretended to be divinely inspired, who deceived the people, leading out numbers of them into the desert. Josephus says “The land was overrun with magicians, seducers, and impostors, who drew people after them in multitudes into deserts to see the signs and miracles which they promised to show by the power of God”. Among these are mentioned Dositheus, the Samaritan, who pretended that he was the Christ foretold by Moses; Simon Magus, pretended to be the great power of God (Acts 8:9-10); and Theudas, who persuaded many to go with him to the river Jordan, to see the waters divided. The Lord, therefore, took great pains that His own disciples should not share this deception. And He continued this sort of warning down to the end of verse 14, cautioning them also that they were not to take such things as wars, rumors of wars, famines, diseases, and earthquakes, as signs of His coming. And Christ purposed to give them a sure sign, whereby they might know with certainty that the hour had come for them to flee from Jerusalem and Judea. Jesus said, “but the end is not yet”. The destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple will not immediately follow. Do not be afraid when you hear of those commotions. Other signs will warn you when it is time to get out and flee the city.

    Matt. 24:7-8 “For peoples will fight each other, nations will fight each other, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various parts of the world; all this is but the beginning of the birth-pains.”

    The Jews and those of other nations, who dwelt in the same cities together slaughtered one another. At Caesarea the Jews and Syrians fought over right to the city, which ended in the total expulsion of the Jews and more than 20,000 killed. The Jewish nation burned and plundered the neighboring cities and villages of the Syrians, killing a great number of the people. The Syrians, in return, destroyed not a less number of the Jews. At Scythopolis they murdered upwards of 13,000. At Ascalon they killed 2,500. At Ptolemais they killed 2,000 and made many prisoners. The Tyrians also put many Jews to death, and imprisoned more. The people of Gadara did likewise, and all the other cities of Syria in proportion, as they hated or feared the Jews. At Alexandria the Jews and heathens fought, and 50,000 of the Jews were killed. The people of Damascus conspired against the Jews of that city, and assaulting them unarmed, killed 10,000. (Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible).

    And there shall be famines – There was a famine foretold by Agabus (Acts 11:28), which is mentioned by the historians Tacitus, Suetonius, and Eusebius; which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar, and was so severe in Jerusalem, Josephus says, that many people perished for lack of food. Four times in the reign of Claudius famine prevailed in Rome, Palestine, and Greece. (Barnes Notes on the Bible)

    Pestilences – Raging epidemic diseases usually caused by famine.

    Earthquakes in many places – There were several in those times. One at Crete in the reign of Claudius, one at Smyrna, Miletus, Chios, Samos. One at Rome, one at Laodicea in the reign of Nero, in which the city was overthrown, as were Hierapolis and Colosse. Another at Rome in the reign of Galba, and a dreadful one in Judea mentioned by Josephus accompanied by a dreadful tempest, violent winds, violent showers, and continual lightnings and thunders; which led many to believe that these things signaled some uncommon calamity. (Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible)

    All these are the beginning of the birth-pangs – Far heavier calamities are yet to come before the end.

    Matt. 24:9 “At that time you will be arrested and handed over to be punished and put to death, and all peoples will hate you because of me.”

    The disciples were looking for a temporal kingdom, and worldly grandeur, and quite contrary to their expectations, Jesus assures them of afflictions, persecutions, and death.

    “They shall deliver you up to councils” – the Sanhedrin, which was fulfilled when Peter and John were brought before the council (Acts 4:5-7). Mark 13:9 says that they should be delivered to synagogues and to prisons, to be beaten, and should be brought before rulers and kings for his name’s sake. All this was fulfilled. Peter and John were imprisoned (Acts 4:3), Paul and Silas were imprisoned (Acts 16:24), and also beaten (Acts 16:23), Paul was brought before Gallia (Acts 18:12), before Felix (Acts 24:24), Festes, and before Agrippa (Acts 25:23).

    “To be punished and put to death” – Stephen was stoned (Acts 7:59); James was killed by Herod (Acts 12:2), and, in addition, the persecution under Nero took place before the destruction of Jerusalem, in which were put to death, with thousands of others, Peter and Paul. Most of the apostles, it is believed, died by persecution. Tertulian, one of the early church fathers, called it a “war against the very name”. So true were the Lord’s words, that they would be hated for his name sake.
    Matt 24:10-12 “At that time many will be trapped into betraying and hating each other, many false prophets will appear and fool many people, and many people’s love will grow cold because of iniquity”.

    Many “false prophets” to declare that help would be given to the people from heaven. This was done to prevent them from attempting to desert, and to inspire confidence in God. No such help ever came.

    Also raised up were false apostles (II Cor. 11:13), who were deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. Such also were Hymeneus and Philetus (II Tim 2:17-18).

    Clarke’s Commentary says “The love of many shall wax cold – by reason of these trials and persecutions from without, and those apostasies and false prophets from within, the love of many to Christ and his doctrine, and to one another, shall grow cold. Some openly deserting the faith, as Matthew 24:10; others corrupting it, as Matthew 24:11, and others growing indifferent about it, Matthew 24:12. Even at this early period there seems to have been a very considerable defection in several Christian Churches (see Galatians 3:1-4, II Thess. 3:1, II Tim. 1:15).

    Matt. 24:13-14 “But whoever holds out until the end will be delivered. And this Good News about the Kingdom will be announced throughout the whole world as a witness to all the Gentiles. It is then that the end will come.”
    Luke 21:19 adds further: In your patience possess you your souls – that is, keep your souls “patient”; keep proper possession of patience as your own.

    Paul declares that it was preached to every creature under heaven (Colossians 1:6, 1:23; that the faith of the Romans was spoken of throughout the whole world (Romans 1:8); that he preached in Arabia (Galatians 1:17), and at Jerusalem, and round about Illyricum(Romans 15:19). We know also that he traveled through Asia Minor, Greece, and Crete; that he was in Italy, and probably in Spain and Gaul (Romans 15:24-28). At the same time, the other apostles were not idle; and there is full proof that within thirty years after this prophecy was spoken, churches were established in all these regions (Barnes). “For a witness unto all nations” – Up to this point the blessing of revelation had been confined to the Jews. They were the special people of God. His messages had been sent to them only. When, therefore, God sent the gospel to all other people, it was proof, or “a witness unto them,” that the special Jewish economy was at an end.

    “It is then that the end will come” – The end of the Jewish nation; the destruction of the temple and the city.

    As far as the Seven Seals, I believe the First Seal is Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. The “large sword” of the Second Seal is conquest by jihad, and the famines, disease, death and bondage of the Third and Fourth Seals are the result of Islam. That’s what it brings to those forced to submit. The Fifth Seal, the martyrs crying out for vengeance. I agree with ICA that it’s open now and many are experiencing severe persecution and death, especially in Islamic lands, which grows worse by the day. The Sixth Seal marks the end of the tribulation (the last 3 ½ years of the age) and the beginning of The Day of The Lord. In the Seventh Seal, the final judgments under the trumpets and bowls. When the Censer is turned upside down and thrown to the earth in answer to the prayers of the saints, it signifies the falling of judgments in the earth and upon mankind. At the last trumpet the dead in Christ rise, and then those that are alive in Christ rise, and will meet Him in the air.

    Like

    • Mike
      09/22/2014 at 2:36 PM

      Susan, as I remember our last communication had me interested but unconvinced of your view. The problem for me was Matthew 24:29, since Jesus did not return “immediately” after the tribulation of “those days”, those being predicted in Matt 24:3-29 and fulfilled in the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish temple. However, I recently came across, quite by accident, an entry in the Expositor’s Bible Commentary for Matt 24:29 that piqued my interest and has caused me to re-asses my earlier disagreement with your view.

      The word “immediately” has given rise to much difficulty, on account of the hasty conclusion to which some have come that “immediately after the tribulation of those days” must mean immediately after the destruction of Jerusalem; according to Which all this must have taken place long ago. It is, indeed, sufficiently obvious that the tribulation of those days began with the destruction, or rather with the besieging, of Jerusalem. But when did it end? As soon as the city was destroyed? Nay.

      If we wish to get some idea of the duration of those days of tribulation, let us turn to the same place in the same prophecy as given by St. Luke, (Luk_21:23-24) where it clearly appears that it embraces the whole period of the Jewish dispersion and of the standing of the Gentile Church. “The tribulation of those days” is going on still, and therefore the events of these verses are still future. We look forward to the Day of the Lord of which that terrible day of judgment, to which their thoughts were first turned, was only a dim foreshadowing-a Day far more august in its nature, far more awful in its accompaniments, far more terrible in its aspect to those who are unprepared for it, yet full of glory and of joy to those who “love His appearing.”

      Expositor’s Bible Commentary entry for Matt 24:29

      Luke 21:23-24 says…

      (Luk 21:23) “Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people;

      (Luk 21:24) and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

      Obviously Jews and Jerusalem are still being trampled on by Gentiles, falling by the sword (if they’re in Muslim majority countries), have been held captive in many nations in the last 1900+ years and the ‘times of the Gentiles’ has not been fulfilled. It is no great leap of logic to conclude that the “immediately” of Matt 24:29 is referring to “immediately” after the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled, not immediately after the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem.

      This seems to buttress your view and has resolved my only major objection to it. By the way, I ordered and have since read the ‘History of the Destruction Of The City And Temple Of Jerusalem, And of The Ruin And Dispersion Of The Jewish Nation” by Brown, Priestley and Levi. Though difficult due to letter recognition software not getting the right letters for some words, but overall a fascinating read.

      Like

  21. William
    01/03/2014 at 7:47 AM

    ICA’s comments:

    The apostle Paul attributed Christ as the one who confirmed the covenant (Galatians 3:17) and who caused the sacrifices/offerings to cease (Hebrews 10:2). Christ Himself said His blood was the blood of the covenant that would be shed for many for the remission of sins (Matthew 26:28). On what basis should we ignore these three, nearly verbatim, references to Daniel 9:27?

    ICA must have read these verses too hastily. Neither Gal. 3:17 or Hebrews 10:2 has anything to do with Daniel 9:27. Look at them:

    What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise. —Galatians 3:17

    The covenant previously ratified here is not talking about the New Covenant that Jesus made. Instead Paul is referring to the Abrahamic Covenant that had been previously (before the Mosaic Covenant) ratified by God. This has nothing to do with Daniel 9:27

    For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins? —Hebrews 10:2

    First of all, Paul is not saying that the offerings ceased. Hebrews was written in 63 or 64 A.D. Which was years before the Temple was destroyed. Paul is saying that if the offerings had ever truly made a person clean, then they would not have taken place year after year. They would have ceased. ICA has misread both passages. There is nothing even close to any “verbatim” quotes of Daniel 9:27

    Like

  22. ICA
    01/03/2014 at 1:13 PM

    William, “ICA must have read these verses too hastily. Neither Gal. 3:17 or Hebrews 10:2 has anything to do with Daniel 9:27 … The covenant previously ratified here is not talking about the New Covenant that Jesus made. Instead Paul is referring to the Abrahamic Covenant …”

    Hi William, the New Covenant is the ratification of the promises made under the Abrahamic Covenant. Jesus came “to confirm the promises made to the fathers” (Romans 15:8) and is the Seed of Abraham upon whom the blessings are bestowed. Paul is clear to note just a few verses earlier in Galatians 3:14 that receiving the Holy Spirit is fulfillment of the covenant that God made with Abraham. When did we receive the Holy Spirit? After Christ confirmed (strengthened) the Abrahamic Covenant upon His death (Gal 3:17; Matt 26:28; Dan 9:27a; cf. John 16:7), thus mediating a superior New Covenant (Heb 7:22; 8:6; 12:24). Also see Malachi 3:1.

    William, “Paul is not saying that the offerings ceased. Hebrews was written in 63 or 64 A.D. Which was years before the Temple was destroyed. Paul is saying that if the offerings had ever truly made a person clean, then they would not have taken place year after year. They would have ceased.”

    Paul’s focus is upon the Messiah and what the Messiah did, not upon what Jews who had rejected Him continued to do. Because of Christ’s sacrifice, the sacrifices and oblations (offerings) of the old law ceased. The “efficacy” of animal sacrifices was now abrogated through Messiah’s sacrificial death once and for all and would no longer be acceptable to God. This is a major point that Paul is making in Hebrews 10 — that sacrifices under the old covenant were merely a shadow of what was to come (Jesus) and that now through Christ’s sacrifice the old sacrifices ceased from being offered (10:2) because of the new covenant (10:16) that was confirmed by Christ (Galatians 3:17). It was now incumbent upon all to focus on the substance, not upon the shadow.

    Hebrews 10:12-18, “… this Man [Christ], after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God … For by one offering He [Christ] has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before, ‘This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them’, then He adds, ‘Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.’ Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.

    Like

  23. Mike
    01/03/2014 at 9:58 PM

    Susan, thank you for detailed reply. I must say, it is fascinating and compelling and disturbing at the same time. I realize that eschatology is not established with the rigidity of science, but I would like to do further research and come to my own conclusions based on the preponderance of evidence.

    Can you recommend any historical sources that would affirm your point-by-point correlation of the events described in Matthew 24:1-26 as being events related to Jerusalem and Jews and not to end time Christian believers? A bibliography of sorts or perhaps some book that ties it all together?

    I am also relieved to see that you are not on the pre-7 year tribulation rapture bandwagon. That’s got to be one of the biggest and most destructive heresies in church history.

    Some brief observations…With your view, I can see the distinctly Jewish references, which should clue the reader that it is not talking about a distinctly non-Jewish Jerusalem, but a Jerusalem at a time of real, authentic Jews.

    For example…

    (Mat 24:20) “But pray that your flight will not be in the winter, or on a Sabbath.

    With your view, I think the break occurs more convincingly at verse 26, where Jesus warns them about those who claim Christ is in the wilderness or inner rooms…

    (Mat 24:26) “So if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out, or, ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe them.

    and then seemingly (and rather curiously) without pause, Jesus goes right into a brief description of the signs just prior to His return.

    (Mat 24:27) “For just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes even to the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be.

    etc etc.

    Why would He give them this information about His return, a return that they would not actually experience?

    I’m wondering too about the reference to the elect back in verses 22 and 24

    (Mat 24:22) “Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.

    (Mat 24:24) “For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.

    Yet from other Scriptures, we know that the “elect” are the entire group of genuine believers, the ekklesia/assembly. Titus 1:1,Col 3:12, 1 Pet 1:1-2,1 Pet 2:9 all describe Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians as being the “elect”, which together is the “church” and the “bride”.

    If Matthew 24:1-26 is directed to Jews about the destruction of Jerusalem, why do we see these references to the “elect”, which is a reference to Christians? If it is Jews being killed in Jerusalem, but Christians had already vacated Jerusalem just prior to AD70, why would the cutting short of that devastation benefit the sake of the elect/ Christians?

    and a question about…

    (Mat 24:13) “But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved…”

    I understand that Christians by and large deserted Jerusalem prior to AD70, but there doesn’t seem to be an indication from any other part of the text (except the reference to the “elect”) that this could be referring to Christians. So in what sense would a Jewish person be saved by enduring to the end?

    Like

  24. FX
    01/04/2014 at 9:32 AM

    Bonjour Suzan (and the others!), shabbat Shalom!

    Thank you for sharing with great lenght and clarity your very interesting insights. Lots of food for thoughts! There remain a few questions (like the ones Mike asks in his precedent post), but overall your approach seems to make a lot of sense.

    If you were to come up with a possible scenario for what is next on the world agenda before the return of Yeshua/Jesus. What do you think it could be?

    In terms of timeline, where would you put Yeshua’s return?

    What do you make of the coming tetrads falling on the Biblical Feats in 2014 and 2015?

    I would be curious to have your opinions on the above.

    Thank you very much in advance.

    Blessings from France!

    FX

    Like

  25. 01/04/2014 at 4:52 PM

    Willard said in post #16, 01-02-2014 at 1:21 PM : –

    Isaiah is very clear even before Cyrus was born he gives the credit for the rebuilding of Jerusalem to Cyrus not Artexerxes – This prophecy is not fully fulfilled yet as Babylon which was over thrown by Persia has not been made desolate forever yet – it has not been destroyed like Sodom and Gomorrah either – I have been there – Saddam was in the process of re-building it before his fall – Alexander ruled from there and it was still a major place of influence in the early days of Rome

    Sadly, he is in error because of his understanding/acceptance of the verse’s translation

    Jer 25:12: – Then after seventy years are completed, I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, the land of the Chaldeans, for their iniquity, says the LORD, making the land an everlasting waste.

    The understanding given here does not match the meaning of the Hebrew word “<l³ou” which Strong defines as:

    OT:5769 <l*ou `owlam (o-lawm'); or `olam (o-lawm'); from OT:5956; properly, concealed, i.e. the vanishing point; generally, time out of mind (past or future), i.e. (practically) eternity; frequentatively, adverbial (especially with prepositional prefix) always:

    It would be better to understand the Hebrew word here as “for a prolonged period of time” where no qualifier of the time span is provided. In both Isaiah 13;20 and Jeremiah 50:39 we are told that the period of time that Babylon will be desolated will be for two ages or for around 2000 years.

    A better translation would be, “making the land a waste for a prolonged period of time.”

    Willard has visited the land of the Chaldeans after it was restored which occurred after WW1. To then declare that Jeremiah 25;12 has not yet been fulfilled demonstrates a translator’s error in the “traditional” Bibles that we all read.

    Shalom

    Jay

    Like

  26. Sharon
    01/05/2014 at 12:32 AM

    Mike, Hi there,

    Your questions are interesting and I am waiting for Susan’s reply.

    I must say this whole thread has been thrilling for me and such a learning curve. My whole eschatology has been overturned as I now see Daniel’s 70 weeks in its proper place and also Matthew 24 is now in the right context.

    Being “underneath” all of you I log in with anticipation each morning these days for more information. Susan’s sources have been valuable.

    Hallo FX in France! Your questions are also interesting and provocative. I am looking forward to Susan’s reply to them too . She is perceptive and reading her posts is very worthwhile. I have learned a lot.

    Sharon

    Like

  27. Susan
    01/05/2014 at 9:05 AM

    MIKE and FX:

    Hello to both of you. You have some good questions. There are several historical writings I turn to most – Josephus, Eusebius, and a book I found during some research I was doing online which was published in 1825 called The History of the Destruction of the City and Temple of Jerusalem and of The Ruin and Dispersion of the Jewish Nation by Thomas Brown. It is 362 pages and I was able to download it as a pdf. A caption under the title says “Being a narrative of the calamities which befell the Jews within about 40 years after their crucifixion of Jesus Christ. With a continuation of the calamitous history of their persecution, and sufferings from the time of their dispersion to the present day. Showing, more clearly than has probably ever been done before, how exactly the predictions of Jesus Christ, with those of Moses and the Prophets have been fulfilled relating to those people.” I haven’t finished it yet, but it is really good. At the end he has a section on the persecution of Christians during the same time period. Thomas Brown is called “a preterist”. That seems to be a “dirty word” for anyone who acknowledges a historical fulfillment, including myself.

    Josephus was a Jewish scholar and historian, and a Roman citizen. He was actually part of the first Jewish rebellion, but surrendered. He worked with Prince Titus during the siege of Jerusalem and tried to convince the Jews to surrender before the city and temple were destroyed. It is interesting, but one fact about Titus that is rarely talked about. He was actually known as a humanitarian. This became obvious to me when reading Josephus. Titus tried over and over again to get the Jews to surrender so the war could end. He offered them safe passage on numerous occasions. He really did not want to destroy the city and the temple. Josephus was unable to convince the rebels to surrender, and when it became clear that they would not surrender under any circumstances, Titus laid the city and temple level with the ground. Josephus watched the second destruction of the Temple and the defeat of the Jewish nation. He was a very credible and respected eye witness. He was there!

    I am currently reading Eusebius, The History of the Church. Eusebius makes references to Josephus and to the early Church Fathers. It is a very easy read, and so interesting. These can all be found online.

    Mike, you made a very good observation about Matthew 24:20. It is obviously addressed to an audience of a time when the strict Rabbinical rules concerning the distance that might be traveled on the Sabbath day would be still in force. That remark fixes the time with certainty as previous to the destruction of Jerusalem. Those strict Rabbinical rules have not been in force for thousands of years, and there is no reason to suppose that they will ever be revived.

    Mike, you said “I think the break occurs more convincingly at verse 26-27, where Jesus warns them about those who claim Christ is in the wilderness or inner rooms…”. Jesus tells them that his coming will be like lightning flashing from east to west and lighting up the entire sky. You asked “Why would He give them this information about His return, a return that they would not actually experience?” Because Jesus is making a comparison between the deception that was then rampant (he’s in the wilderness, he’s in the inner rooms) to his real appearing. He’s saying when I come no one will have to be told “the wilderness or the inner rooms”, because it will be obvious to ALL, from one end of heaven to the other. Then, he finishes by saying “Where the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together”. The term carcass well represents the totally corrupted Jewish state. It was as a dead, putrid carcass. The eagles gathered to devour it is a fit symbol of the Roman armies, whose ensign was the eagle; these will come, seize upon them, and take them and devour them, as they did.

    “But for the sake of those who have been chosen, its length will be limited” – This literally happened. The siege of Jerusalem went on for some time. It ended in a most unexpected way. The rebels were suddenly stricken with fear and panic, and instead of fleeing into the towers of Hippocos, Phasael or Mariam-ne, which were yet untaken, and so strong that nothing but famine could have subdued them, they ran like madmen towards Shiloah, trying to escape out of the city. They didn’t succeed but were all found and killed (about 2,000). Here is a quote from the book by Thomas Brown which I think is very interesting. “Before Titus left Jerusalem to return to Rome, he took a survey of the miserable city, and its fortifications; and, while contemplating their impregnable strength, could not help ascribing his success to the peculiar interposition of the Almighty, “had not God,” he exclaimed, aided our operations, and driven the Jews from their fortresses, it would have been absolutely impossible to have taken them; for what could men, and the force of engines, have done against such towers as these.” So, what is being said is that the Jews abandoned their fortresses to flee. This was a great surprise to Titus, because as he said above, it was impossible to defeat them as long as they were in their fortresses, except by starvation. Titus believed God put the fear in them to flee so the war could end. Many more would have been killed had the war gone on.

    Yes, the Church is the entire group of genuine believers, the ekklesia. You asked “if Matthew 24:1-26 is directed to Jews about the destruction of Jerusalem, why do we see these references to the “elect”, which is a reference to Christians? Christ was speaking to His disciples and to all the Believers who were alive at that time. He was warning THEM of what was coming because He wanted THEM to survive. He is not only warning of the destruction coming upon the city and the sanctuary, he is warning them of the terrible persecution that is about to come on them. In verse 9 he said “then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted and shall kill you and you shall be hated by all nations for my names sake. The Christians did not perish in Jerusalem along with the Jews, but they did perish in great numbers from being persecuted by the Jews as well as by the Gentiles.

    If’ you’ll take the time to read either Josephus or Eusebius you will get a very good picture of what was taking place during the years before and after the destruction of the city and sanctuary. The unbelieving Jews were destroyed under God’s judgment. The Christians did not suffer under God’s judgment, but they did suffer terribly from persecutions. Jesus gave ample warning throughout the N.T. of what was coming. Many fell away. Many were deceived. Those who “endured steadfast in their faith and love for Christ to the end of their lives were saved”. It will be the same way in the end of the age. Believers will not suffer under the wrath of God (they are sealed and marked for protection), but they will be killed by the AC. Daniel plainly says so in his vision of the four beasts … “he shall wear out the saints of God and they shall be given into his hands for 3 ½ years.”

    Matthew 24 was written to Christians, not Jews. Yes, Jesus was telling them about the destruction that was coming and what to do to survive, but he was also telling them about the persecution that was coming on them. They did escape the destruction of the city and temple, they did not escape the persecution. The persecution under Nero took place before the destruction of Jerusalem, in which thousands were put to death along with Peter and Paul. Most of the apostles, it is believed, died by persecution.

    The disciples had it fixed in their minds that the Lord was coming again when Jerusalem was destroyed, and His kingdom would be established. Remember when they spoke with him after his resurrection – “When they therefore had come together, they asked of Him, saying, “Lord, wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6). In Matthew 24 he was warning them not to expect the Kingdom, but to expect persecution and trials of their faith.

    There were so many crosses, the Romans ran out of room and they ran out of wood to make crosses. Christians were on those crosses dying because of their faith. If the war did not end, none of the nation would have been preserved alive. All the inhabitants of Judea would have perished. The war, the famine, and the diseases would have entirely destroyed them. It was cut short, very unexpectedly, not for the sake of the Jews, but for the sake of God’s elect.

    FX, you asked about “a possible scenario for what is next on the world agenda before the return of Jesus”.

    The article on this website by ICA “Unsealed: A closer look at Revelation 6…..” was a real eye opener for me. I believed the same about the Seals for the most part, but the realization that we are somewhere in the 5th Seal NOW was a “jolting” experience for me, because I recognized the truth of what he was saying. I was tracking persecution before, but since reading the article, I am paying very close attention to all of the persecution against Christians going on right now, especially in Muslim lands. I’ve even done some statistical research, and it overwhelmingly confirms the truth of ICA’s article.

    Many significant things are shaping up in the ME right now. I have believed for some time that AC will be an Islamic extremist of the worst kind. A few years ago I couldn’t understand how the extremists would gain the upper hand in the region, but due to recent events, it is getting easier to see how this could happen. I especially am watching the group known as ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria). They are brutal and are gaining territory very quickly. The Christians need our prayers and financial support more than ever right now. (You won’t find out what’s really going on in the Middle East from the evening news out of the US. You’ll have to go out on the web each day to find out what is happening).

    I believe the persecution will continue to get worse and worse. I look for the AC to come out of the territory of the Syrian Division of the old Grecian Empire (Syria, northern Iraq). I don’t know how close we are to that, but when things do begin to happen, they are going to happen in very rapid succession. AC only has 3 ½ years. The Day of the Lord (6th Seal) will be next. I don’t think it is far away. I can’t see how things can hold together in the ME for many more years. I think it is important to keep studying prophecy and to seek the Lord for as much understanding as we can get.

    I don’t know enough about the coming tetrads to comment. It is a fairly new study for me and I have a lot to look into.

    Hope this helps.

    Like

  28. FX
    01/05/2014 at 11:21 AM

    Merci Suzan ! Thank you for your answer and insights.

    If you want to further dive into the coming tetrad, here’s a link to a very interesting article from David Dolan. It’s called SIGNS OF THE TIMES and is really worth reading as it puts things into perspective when compared with the previous tetrads : http://www.ddolan.com/updates.asp?updateid=203

    Also, the following may be of interest to you and the others…It is a short video from a sister called Bonnie Harvey : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI52bjXD6T4

    Here’s a short presentation of her video:

    “The signs in the sun, moon, and stars from 2011-2018 are striking – from a tetrad of blood moons to solar eclipses, from a sky similar to Yeshua’s first advent to a Transit of Venus -and all of that is just the beginning.

    Any ONE of these signs is unusual. Some who are studying the stars observe that what occurred at Yom Teruah, 2011, has not happened in over 2000 years. Transits of Venus occur in pairs eight years apart every 243 years. Since the upcoming Transit is the second in the pair, no more Transits will be seen for 243 years. At first glance, blood moon tetrads (4 blood moons in a row at equal intervals, i.e., 6 months apart) occur at random.

    Upon closer look, we notice that this set will be the eighth set since Yeshua walked the earth. Eight is the number of new beginnings. Is that significant? Additionally, all the tetrads have occurred on or about Feast days as if they are special messages to God’s people. Additionally, there does appear to be a pattern to the tetrads. Two have occurred 18 years apart, two 45 years, apart and two 400-500 years apart. The upcoming tetrad will be the third set since 1948. If the pattern is true, the next tetrad won’t occur for at least 400 years.

    If any ONE of these heavenly signs is significant, what is the import of ALL of them occurring within an 8 year period?

    This is a 15-minute presentation wherein I try to pull together much of what is occurring in a comprehensive, short presentation. I wish to thank Luis Vega, the professor/graphic artist whose timelines are incorporated herein and who so graciously makes them available.

    The occurrences in the heavenlies are what they are. The bottom line is: what do they mean to the beholder? I offer that it is time to be on high alert and to seek our Redeemer as never before. The Almighty is calling from the sky”.

    In this video, she uses some very well done charts from Luis Vega. You can download them as PDFs here: http://www.sonoma.edu/users/v/vegalu/eschatology

    The above is very very interesting and worth looking at!

    Future will tell how things are going to unfold!

    Let’s be watching and getting ready for the return of our King!

    Blessings from France to ya’ll!

    FX

    Like

    • 04/22/2014 at 5:48 AM

      Thanks for the Link! I completely independently have had these revelations in the link you provided and have recently produced a 3D timeline model and video on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnlbvPCwBoA
      Have you considered over a 3.5 year span:
      1260 days is End Unleavened Bread to Atonement,
      1290 days is Trumpets to End Unleavened Bread,
      1335 days is Trumpets to Pentecost
      1240 days (42 months) is solar eclipse 2015 to solar eclipse 2018 (Gentiles trample holy city)
      2300 days is Transit of Venus (Daystar or Lucifer… Isaiah 14) to Atonement

      If I was a betting man I would sell everything … and put my money on these utterly unique interconnecting timespans in my video. Daniel longed to look into these matters! I’d go as far as to conjecture something is soon to present itself in Jerusalem on the temple mount calling itself Jesus (Ye Zeus) instead of Yeshua, with sons of light… causing Judah to flee and the two witnesses to be stand and protect both the physical and spiritual location known as the “temple”.
      Strong delusion is almost upon us folks… Repent oh sons of Israel (inc “Jews”) and seek your Messiah for he is returning, not as a innocent lamb, but as a roaring lion of Judah.

      Yehovah has prepared 4 very strong witnesses for this day and hour so “his friends know what he is doing”:
      The Word,
      Mazzaroth (Yeshua’s story in the heavens),
      Appointed Times,
      Ruak HaKodesh

      Shalom
      Russ from New Zealand (“The uttermost isles”)

      Like

  29. Susan
    01/05/2014 at 1:45 PM

    FX

    Thank you so much for the links. Luis Vega’s work is pretty amazing. I went directly to one of the charts called The Islamic Crusades on the current civil war in Syria. He’s got it right 100% as to what is “really” going on in Syria. It is a shame that we hear so little of the truth on the news media here in the US.

    I plan to read everything as soon as possible. It looks very interesting and I’m grateful you sent it.

    Blessings,

    Susan

    Like

  30. FX
    01/05/2014 at 2:34 PM

    Bonsoir Suzan,

    Glad you liked the links!

    Luis Vega has many many charts to share. The ones regarding the signs in the sky are the following:

    – Solar Eclipse Pattern
    – Lunar Tetrad Pattern for Israel
    – Tetrad Analysis
    – The Blood Moon Tetrads

    Not too sure about a lot of the others as Luis seems to believe in the New World Order end of time scenario: the conspiracy theory where a minority operating behind the curtains is responsible of all things in the world…and one day they will subjugate the whole wide world etc. In my opinion the very elects who believe such things are being DECEIVED by Satan. This conspiracy theory, together with the pre-rib rapture and a lot of other end of time scenario (the antichrist coming from Rome, the rebuilt of the Temple etc.) are nothing but deception from the adversary to have people look in the wrong direction and expect things that will never ever happen.

    The only New World Order that the Bible talks about will be established by Yeshua when He comes back! Praise Yah!

    Blessings & shalom!

    FX

    Like

  31. Mike
    01/05/2014 at 6:11 PM

    Susan, thank you for taking the time to exposit your view and the historical sources it is based on. I have likewise downloaded Brown’s work in PDF file. I found it at Preterist Archive. Though Brown is called a preterist by others, I think the view you have put forth is neither partial and certainly not full preterist in scope, but simply a re-interpretation of a protestant eschatology that is due for a significant challenge. There is some very interesting historical material available at the Preterist Archive and I will be investigating it further, not preterism per se, but the historical material that affirms this view you have put forth which has preterist elements obviously, but still looks forward to future event fulfillment.

    Preterists may have started out right, but they got it wrong in the end as long as they remained within a papal/Rome paradigm. Obviously they have left much good material for others to study upon which to reinterpret once flawed interpretations in light of the unveiling of new interpretations that may fit better.

    As for me, I believe there will be a future return of Christ, a future Jewish repentance, a future destruction of muslim countries surrounding and in vicinity of Israel…among other notable future fulfillments. The Christian world need to adjust their eschatology away from this troublesome “papal Rome” or “revived Roman empire” view with its odd, secular antichrist, and begin to interpret end times through the lens of an islamic paradigm. Sadly political and multicultural correctness, the fear of man and a love for the things of the world has been an insulating membrane, protecting the cancerous blight of islam from critique.

    I have read Eusebeus’ History of the Church, but many years ago, and through the lens of (so ashamed to say it) pre-tribulation rapture theology. It was interesting history but I did not make any eschatological connections. It’s still on my shelf. Perhaps it’s due for a second look.

    I’m not well-read with Josephus, only the material that I use to defend Jesus’ life, death and resurrection when in discussions with muslims.

    Now to your comments:

    In reply to me, you said…”Matthew 24:20. It is obviously addressed to an audience of a time when the strict Rabbinical rules concerning the distance that might be traveled on the Sabbath day would be still in force. That remark fixes the time with certainty as previous to the destruction of Jerusalem.”

    Yes, I agree, but even the text says as much, pertaining to the temple’s future destruction. However, if this warning about the destruction of Jerusalem was intended for Christians, why include a Rabbinical Jewish custom like the number of hours to travel on a Sabbath? Perhaps instead of that verse implying that it was directed to Jews, I think perhaps it was directed to Christians who may have still kept some Jewish traditions or laws.

    Adam Clarke’s Commentary has a compelling explanation as well.

    “That you may not raise the indignation of the Jews by travelling on that day, and so suffer that death out of the city which you had endeavored to escape from within. Besides, on the Sabbath-days the Jews not only kept within doors, but the gates of all the cities and towns in every place were kept shut and barred; so that their flight should be on a Sabbath, they could not expect admission into any place of security in the land.”

    A verse that compliments your view here is Luke 19:43. Adam Clarke’s Commentary reads..

    In Luk_19:43, our Lord says of Jerusalem, Thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side.

    Accordingly, Titus, having made several assaults without success, resolved to surround the city with a wall, which was, with incredible speed, completed in three days! The wall was thirty-nine furlongs in length, and was strengthened with thirteen forts at proper distances, so that all hope of safety was cut off; none could make his escape from the city, and no provisions could be brought into it. See Josephus, War, book v. c. 12.

    Though other views are interesting, I think your view of the “carcass and eagles” of Matthew 24:28 is compelling and supports this view.

    A problem seems to arise with the next verse though…

    (Mat 24:29) “But immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

    If verse 29 is a summary conclusion of the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish religion, then what do we make of verse 30, which heralds the Lord’s return as something that happens “immediately after the tribulation of those days”. Obviously Jesus did not return, nor did many other prophesied events fulfilled “immediately after the tribulation of those days”. What seems to be missing is a distinct separation in the text, something to separate one time period from another.

    You say here…

    “There were so many crosses, the Romans ran out of room and they ran out of wood to make crosses. Christians were on those crosses dying because of their faith. If the war did not end, none of the nation would have been preserved alive. ”

    Earlier you intimated that it was Jews who would die at Jerusalem, while Christians would suffer and die persecution deaths before AD70. The Jews are not the elect. At that time and in that region, the only ones who would qualify as being the elect would be Christians from Jewish backgrounds who were (presumably) from Jerusalem.

    But you seem to be linking “the war” with Christian (elect) deaths, in that if the war had not ended, then all (the elect) would have died. But Christians were not in Jerusalem in AD70. According to multiple sources including Eusebeus, they had already fled to Pella.

    According to this view, and please correct me if I am wrong, Matthew 24:22 seems to be planted within the context of the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Jewish religion. The only thing I can think of to make this work, is to consider Matthew 24:22 to mean that Christians who had already fled Jerusalem were under a much greater persecution during that time of war against the Jews in Jerusalem than before AD70. When the war with the Jews stopped, then there may have been a time of relief for the Christians in Pella and some lives, a remnant of the elect in Pella, would have been saved.

    I will do research on this.

    I will look into this view more. It may require making adjustments to my previously held view to form a cohesive, uniformly Scriptural/historical case for it.. And what about other portions of Daniel? Dan 7:7, 8, 21, 25, Dan 8:25, Dan 11:37 all can find a corollary in an islamic end times perspective and therefore remain remain unaffected, still supportive of an islamic antichrist paradigm that is rapidly approaching.

    I still hold the correlations between Matthew 24 and portions of the Revelation to be very compelling, at least as examples of dual fulfillment. It is within the realm of possibility that events occurring to Christians in first century Palestine and events from a muslim antichrist against Christians in a middle eastern context would appear with resounding similarity to what Matthew 24:4-26 describes, so I’m not ready to let that go just yet.

    I also monitor persecution and recently finished reading Raymond Ibrahim’s new book “Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War On Christians”. It’s very thorough, and still doesn’t due the topic justice to 1400 years of Christian persecution and atrocities. Though not written with eschatology in mind, one can easily make correlations between satan’s desire to eliminate Christ and all who follow Him (and put himself in the place of God in people’s hearts through sharia implemented modern day dhimmitude).

    We are told in the Revelation that which overcomes satan.

    (Rev 12:11) “And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even when faced with death.

    This is the antithetical core elements of dhimmitude. It is more important to Islamists (and by extension, satan) to bring Christianity under submission with the hopeless goal of eliminating the blood (the atoning work of the cross), the testimony (evangelizing of the gospel and worship of YHWH God), to steal the Christian’s ability to not love their life even when faced with death (to die to self and live for Christ).

    Like

  32. 01/06/2014 at 10:33 AM

    A few months after Israel left Egypt Moses received the law on Mt Sinai. Forty years later, after wandering in the wilderness, they crossed the Jordan River into the promised land, essentially marking the beginning of national Israel. When Christ was crucified he fulfilled the law and ended the sacrificial system, becoming the final sacrifice that satisfied the law forever. He is the door, the way into the promised land, reconciliation & relationship with God. Assuming He was crucified on Passover in 30 AD, forty years later in the Spring/Summer of 70 AD, Jerusalem and the temple was destroyed and most Jews were dispersed, ending national Israel.

    Its interesting that at the inception and end of the law there was a 40 year transitionary period. Also, at the beginning of Christ’s ministry there was a 40 day fast. These periods seem to be more than coincidence. Does anyone have more to add along these lines? Is there biblical support for this observation or further significance I’m missing?

    Like

  33. Susan
    01/06/2014 at 4:35 PM

    Mike, you asked about Matthew 24:20 “why include a Rabbinical Jewish custom like the number of hours to travel on a Sabbath?” Jesus had not yet gone to the cross. The Law was still in force. He warned them with language they would understand. They didn’t yet understand the New Covenant. The N.T. makes it clear that there was a definite transition time they went through. They didn’t instantly understand all that Jesus’ death meant.

    You asked about Matthew 24:29. I have already answered that specific question in an earlier post. The disciples had asked him two questions. He completely and thoroughly answered the first. Now here in verse 29 he is answering their second question. You said “what seems to be missing is a distinct separation in the text, something to separate one time period from another.” This is not unusual in Jewish prophecy. Here’s a good example:

    “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me, because the Lord hath anointed Me to preach good tidings unto the meek. He hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound,To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn, to appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness, that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that He might be glorified. And they shall build the wastes of old, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations……….” Isaiah 61:1-4

    You know the story. Jesus was handed the book of Isaiah and found this place. He read only part of the verse. He ended at “to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord”. Then he closed the book and sat down. Why did he stop reading? Because what he read had to do with his 1st coming and what he didn’t read had to do with his 2nd coming, yet there they were seamlessly together in the same verse. He said “Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your ears”, that is, the part that he read. The second part was not fulfilled in their ears because the day of vengeance was not until the end of the age at His second coming.

    So the fact that Jesus went from question one to question two in the next breath, does not surprise me. We Westerners want everything neatly separated and tightly packaged. It isn’t that way, and that is one of the challenges for us when we study prophecy.

    We can become so caught up in the many intricacies or details that we miss the bigger picture. It’s easy to become so engrossed in one particular passage that the larger story is missed. I kind of feel like you are bordering on that.

    You asked “Earlier you intimated that it was Jews who would die at Jerusalem, while Christians would suffer and die persecution deaths before AD70. The Jews are not the elect……the only ones who would qualify as being the elect would be Christians from Jewish backgrounds who were presumably from Jerusalem.”

    Mike, I think I answered your questions very clearly, yet you still aren’t satisfied. I feel like now I am going in circles. I think maybe you should re-read everything I have written to you. I took time to make it as clear as I could.

    For me, I have weighed the evidence and made my decision. I feel I am on much sounder ground now than I was before. I have settled the past, and now I can look to the future. I am no longer taking Scriptures that were historically fulfilled and forcing them into a future scenario. That is not sound theology. Those that hold to the future view have had to mutilate certain Scriptures, and what they have ended up with is not the truth (in my opinion). To take Messiah the Prince out of Daniel’s 70 Weeks prophecy and insert “a seven year peace treaty and an antichrist” along with a 2,000 year gap is to mutilate the Scriptures. That was intended to give the Jewish people a time line for when to expect their Messiah. After all, many were looking for him! Some understood this prophecy and recognized him even when he was yet a baby.

    You have to continue to weigh the evidence as you find it and make a decision of your own. You make many good points, and I have no doubt you’ll find an answer you’re satisfied with.

    Take care,

    Like

  34. Mike
    01/06/2014 at 7:21 PM

    Susan, thank you for your detailed reply.The reason I have continued to ask the most difficult questions I can think of is to test this view, which is what all Christians should do about many things. In context, this passage is pertaining to testing prophetic utterances, but I believe the principle remains and can be extended to other things.

    (1Th 5:21-22) But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil.

    I think all followers of this thread have gained much from your insight and research. You’ve made a good case for this view. For me, it is fascinating, and has been an inspiration to do more research, including making up a side-by-side commentary of Matthew 24:1-29 with correlations similar to what you have shared earlier. This will take time and no less than a few re-readings of all that you have presented, including doing research from other sources and further testing.

    This is all rather new to me, so I am proceeding carefully. Thank you so much for all that you have shared, and God bless you.

    Like

  35. Sharon
    01/07/2014 at 2:41 AM

    Susan,
    I too, as Mike has written, want to thank you for your input here – it has been so valuable and I am sure given many readers food for much thought. I know it would have taken a lot of your time to write all that you did but I am so very grateful you took the time to do so as it has been such a help to me.
    God bless you in your continuing studies and I look forward to reading more of your posts from time to time.
    Sharon

    Like

  36. Mike
    01/21/2014 at 2:24 PM

    Still researching this

    Like

  37. Mike
    01/28/2014 at 12:48 AM

    Susan, after careful deliberation and additional study and though you make a very interesting and compelling case for your view, I cannot resolve Matt 24:29 with your view and with other, lesser issues I brought up earlier.

    (Mat 24:29) “But immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

    You have indicated that in your view Matthew 24;1-28 was historically fulfilled in AD70 Jerusalem. But in verse 29, Jesus says “But IMMEDIATELY AFTER the tribulation of THOSE days…..”

    What days? According to your view, the days of Jerusalem’s destruction in AD70. We both agree that Jesus did not return IMMEDIATELY AFTER the tribulation of THOSE days (or at all), so I think there is a major problem here that history, or your view is able to resolve.

    I grant that Matthew 24:1-28 has support for AD70 fulfillment from historical sources. But it also has support for dual fulfillment in a later great tribulation. The great tribulation for Jews and Jerusalem was at the time, perhaps the greatest tribulation the regional area (their world) had ever seen. But a great tribulation that the world has not seen yet may yet occur just prior to the Lord’s return.

    If this is a case of dual fulfillment, then verse 29 must be the break, since that would apply to the later fulfillment, not the AD70 fulfillment. If dual fulfillment is true, then the Matthew 24 to Rev 6 correlations would still hold and we should still be expecting a great tribulation in the middle east with economic, social, governmental and military repercussions felt in other parts of the world.

    Like

    • Susan
      01/28/2014 at 11:36 AM

      Mike,

      I went back through all of what I wrote to you, and I don’t find anything that I said that would disagree with what you just wrote. I don’t think we are saying different things. Here is a brief copy/paste of four statements I made. It’s not different from what you are saying:

      1. “Most of the prophecy Jesus gave pertained to the coming destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD. However, those 1st century events did not completely fulfill the prophecy found in Matthew 24, and specifically verses 29-31. These verses link completely to the Sixth Seal of Revelation and describe the Day of the Lord.”

      2. “The tribulation Jesus is talking about in Verse 29 is the tribulation that will be at the end of the age. There will be much “tribulation” for mankind, and many “distresses” and “woes” in the end time of this present age, to be followed by the outpouring of the vials in which is “filled up the wrath of God” (Rev. 15:1). But regardless of the nature and severity of the afflictions which are yet to come, that particular “tribulation” the Lord spoke of as the “great tribulation,” (Matt 24:21) and as “the days of vengeance” (Luke 21:22) was the execution of Divine judgment upon Daniel’s people and his holy city, for which God used the Roman armies under Titus in A.D. 70.”

      3. “The cosmic events Jesus describes are the same cosmic events under the 6th Seal in the Book of Revelation. In fact, this cosmic event is the most repeated event in the Bible of Christ’s coming. The Bible is very clear on the timing of it. It is “Immediately after the tribulation of those days” (Matthew 24:29). And, it is right “before the Great and Notable Day of the Lord” begins (Joel 2:31). Cosmic events announce The Day of the Lord. When the cosmic events come that tells us the Day of the Lord is near.”

      4. “Jewish prophecy is “a pattern that repeats, multiple fulfillments with one ultimate fulfillment,” or multiple “rehearsals” for the ultimate fulfillment. Something similar to the tribulation of 70 AD is going to happen again in Israel, only the outcome is going to be very different. 70 AD was the wrath and judgment of God, to the uttermost. The last 3 ½ years of the age will be the wrath of a satanically inspired Antichrist.”
      I think this fourth quote from what I wrote earlier says that I believe in dual or multiple fulfillments. You can see I said “something similar to the tribulation of 70 AD is going to happen again in Israel.” And yes, I agree that there will be global ramifications to this tribulation. Dual/multiple fulfillments is a characteristic of Jewish prophecy. Look at Antiochus IV in Daniel 8. Someone in the future called the Antichrist is going to be like Antiochus was and he will do similar things. That is why God took some time to point him out to us. God tells us, and then he tells us again and again. Rehearsals. It’s Jewish prophecy.

      You are still bothered by Matthew 24:29. As you said in one of your earlier posts, “what seems to be missing is a distinct separation in the text, something to separate one time period from another.” We Westerners expect that, but everything isn’t neatly separated for us all the time. I gave you the example of Isaiah 61:1-4. Here we have a prophecy about the two comings of the Lord Jesus all in ONE sentence. It sounds like “the acceptable year of the Lord” and “the day of vengeance of our God” are all happening on the same day. There is no “break” that clues us in to the fact that the two comings were going to be separated by thousands of years. The only indication we get is the fact that The Lord stopped right in the middle of a sentence, closed the book and sat down. He didn’t finish the sentence. But there it is Mike. One sentence, two comings, nothing to separate one time period from another, no break.

      So, back to Matthew 24. Verse 28 ends his answering of their first question. Verse 29 goes right into their second question with no break. That bothers you, and that’s okay. It doesn’t bother me for the reasons just stated. As far as I can see, that is the only place where we see things differently.

      Blessings,
      Susan

      Like

  38. Mike
    01/28/2014 at 1:34 PM

    Hi Susan

    Yes, it seems we are in agreement for the most part, since I understand now that you are open to dual fulfillment of Matthew 24:4-28. Still, verse 29 is problematic for me. With verse 29, there is no cue, nothing at all in verse 29 to suggest it is referring back to their second question about the end of the age. It seems like one has to impose on the verse what Jesus did with Isaiah 60:1-4. Perhaps that would be more compelling if that type of literary practice was used in more than just one occasion, more than just Jesus’ referring to Isaiah 60:1-4.

    And I agree with your example of Isaiah 61:1-4. Jesus’ stopping in the middle of His quoting of Isaiah 60:1-4 provided the contextual cue for his audience to understand He was referring to Himself. But there is no pause between Matthew 28 & 29, so it is easy to think that it is referring to the “those days” of the verses that preceded it, the AD70 destruction tribulation and not some future tribulation.

    I agree, that Matthew 24:4-29 would be an easier read if it was neatly put together in perfect narrative storyline order. This is how it would appear, to me. It would start with verse 3’s first question, followed by verses 4-28, then the parable of the fig tree and then capped off with verse 28 (where the corpse is, vultures will gather).

    And then a verse for their second question about the end of the age would be followed by verses 36-51, then concluded with verses 29 & 30,

    I can also see how the parable of the fig tree matches with the destruction of Jerusalem and the parables and illustrations Jesus used that follows it refers to His coming at the end of the age. An interesting observation is that they are placed in the same order as the two questions they asked in verse 3. Perhaps this is a model for looking back at the earlier verses, but I think that is not the intention of the Holy Spirit to make it so cryptic and disjointed.

    Well it’s been an interesting and I think fruitful time of study and contemplation. Thank you for your gracious and insightful responses. GOD bless.

    Like

  39. Chris
    02/16/2014 at 6:33 PM

    HI there!
    After much prayer and study, I remain in agreement with the original post on this thread. A number of years ago, read this book by Jerome Gerbasi: “Prophetic Harmony of the Lamp of God” (available free pdf link attached). It’s phenomenal and would challenge you all to check it out. God’s parallels with overlaying his 7 feast holy days on the menorah is terrific. Regarding all the details of God’s return, let us each be humbled, loving, active in growing/producing the fruits of the spirit and being hopeful and joyful as the world gets darker. Best, -C

    http://goo.gl/lhFmpu

    God bless you all with all grace and peace in the manner only the Holy Spirit can give. -C

    Like

  40. 03/16/2014 at 10:11 AM

    Douay-Rheims Bible Daniel 9:27
    And he shall confirm the covenant with many, IN one week: and in the half of the week the victim and the sacrifice shall fall:

    Change “for” to “in” as it should be above and the changes the whole picture !!

    Jubilee 26th 27th 28th 29th 30th 31th 32th
    Years 49 49 49 49 49 49 49
    Date 142 BC 92 BC 44 BC 6 AD 55 AD 104 AD 153 AD

    Each Jubilee is a “Week” There are 70 “weeks” from Exodus 1416 BC to end 2015 AD
    1416 BC add 2015 AD ( minus 1 year – no year zero ) divided by 49 years equals 70.

    Jesus was born in 2 BC
    Dan 9:26 “cut off in middle of one week” – (“Week” or Jubilee 30 to be precise)
    6+24.5 =30.5- Jesus died in 31 AD
    Regards Pat

    Like

Comment pages
  1. No trackbacks yet.

The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of MidnightWatcher's Blogspot. Although differences of opinion are welcomed, please refrain from personal attacks and inappropriate language. This blog reserves the right to edit or delete any comments that fail to do so.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: