Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | "Two witnesses." When? Who? | Rev 11:3 | Morant61 | 54945 | ||
Greetings Stokeyhk! Thanks for the response my friend! Our posts illustrate the difficulty of trying to pin down ancient dates! :-) MacArthur lists three possible starting dates for the seven 'sevens'. 1) The decree of Cyrus (Ezra 1:1-4 at about 536 B.C.) 2) The first decree of Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:11-26 about 458 B.C.) and 3) The second decree of Artaxerxes (Neh. 2:1 about 445 B.C. Of course, it all depends on whose dates one goes by! :-) Apparently we differ on the identity of the ruler in Dan. 9:27. I found a quote in a commentary that seems to touch on some of your positions, though I don't know if you are amillenial or not. I just included this for information, not accustation! :-) ************************************ "This covenant could not have been made or confirmed by Christ at His First Advent, as amillenarians teach, because: (a) His ministry did not last seven years, (b) His death did not stop sacrifices and offerings, (c) He did not set up “the abomination that causes desolation” (Matt. 24:15). Amillenarians suggest that Christ confirmed (in the sense of fulfilling) the Abrahamic Covenant but the Gospels give no indication He did that in His First Advent. As stated, the Antichrist will break his covenant with Israel at the beginning of the second half of the 70th “seven,” that is, it will be broken for three and one-half years. This is called “a time, times, and half a time” (Dan. 7:25; 12:7; Rev. 12:14). The fact that this is the same as the three and one-half years, which in turn are equated with 1,260 days (Rev. 11:3; 12:6) and with 42 months (Rev. 11:2; 13:5), means that in Jewish reckoning each month has 30 days and each year 360 days. This confirms the 360-day Jewish year used in the calculations in the chart, “The 483 Years in the Jewish and Gregorian Calendars” (near Dan. 9:26a). Since the events in the 69 sevens (vv. 24-26) were fulfilled literally, the 70th “seven,” yet unfulfilled, must likewise be fulfilled literally." Source: The Bible Knowledge Commentary on Dan. 9:27. **********************************************\ This quote does raise some interesting questions about your position. 1) Christ did not minister for seven years, so how could His ministry be the covenant referred to in Dan. 9:27? 2) Sacrifices did not cease at the death of Christ, but almost 40 years later. So, how could the death of Christ fit the middle of the week? 3) The destruction of the temple and abomination did not occur at the same time as the death of Christ, but almost 40 years later. So, how could the death of Christ be the middle of the 70th week? Just some questions for dicussion my friend! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | "Two witnesses." When? Who? | Rev 11:3 | stokeyhk | 54950 | ||
First, Daniel says its Jersualem the city not the temple that would be restored. This was in the "twentieth year" of Artaxerxes. Nehemiah's concerned with the rebuilding of the city. (Nehemiah 2:5) The ruler in Daniel 9:26, 27 is Cestius Gallus whose army desolates the temple. He was permitted to do this by God as mentioned in Matthew 23:38 and Daniel 9:26, 27. (Luke 21:20) 1) Its true Christ didn't minister for 7 years. Daniel doesn't require him to. It mentions a 3.5 year ministry. 2) Its true sacrifices didn't cease to be offered by unbelieving Jews until 70 AD. However, this doesn't mean they had God's approval and further no faithful follower of Jesus did so. (Hebrews 10:12-14; 13:10-14) Just as the Law covenant was terminated at Jesus' death, so were the sacrifices. But this didn't mean the unbelieving Jews ceased to follow these arrangements, even as they continue to follow them partially today! But, clearly, it has no acceptance or validity before God. 3) Daniel doesn't mention the desolating of the temple as part of the events taking place during the 70th week, but rather as a consequence of them. Your commentary states: "The Gospels give no indication that He did that in his First Advent." Do you agree with that? Luke 1:54, 55, 67-75 seems to contradict that! (Galatians 3:16-18, 26-29) If we don't resort to philosophical arguments to evade the clear statements of truth in the Bible, we won't have difficulty pinning down ancient dates, but will be guided by Bible truth and put our trust in it first and foremost. (1 Thessalonians 5:21; 1 John 4:1) Stokeyhk. |
||||||
3 | "Two witnesses." When? Who? | Rev 11:3 | Morant61 | 54967 | ||
Greetings Stokeyhk! Sorry about that, I meant to say the city, but I said the Temple! :-) Let me touch briefly on your numbered points! 1) Dan. 9:27 says that he will confirm a covenant for one 'seven', but from Dan. 9:26 it would appear that the Annointed on had already been cut off prior to the last 'seven'. 2) But, Dan. 9:26 says that this ruler will destroy the city and the temple, then he will make a covenant, and then he will cause the sacrifices to cease. If the "he" here is Christ, then He died, by dying He cause the sacrifices to cease, and then the city was destroyed 40 years later. That seems to mix up the sequence quite a bit. However, if the 'he' of Dan. 9:27 is the anti-christ, then the city is destroyed, later rebuilt, he makes a covenant with Israel for 7 years, and then in the middle sets up the Abomination. This would seem to fit the sequence of Dan. 9 better (IMHO)! :-) 3) This one seems pretty clear. Here are some representative translations of Dan. 9:27: "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." KJV "And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate." NASB "He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.” NIV All of these seem to indicate that the Abmonination is part of the events which occur in the middle of the week. 4) Luke 1 and Gal. 3 never say that the Abrahamic covenant was fufilled by Christ during His first advent, but they say that God remembered His covenant. 5) I'm not sure what you were trying to say with your last paragraph my friend. To which philosphical argument were you referring? And, which Bible verse provides us with the B.C. date of Artaxerses rule? ;-) The dates that historians have guessed at our not Scripture! :-) This is an interesting discussion! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | "Two witnesses." When? Who? | Rev 11:3 | stokeyhk | 55018 | ||
Hi, Tim 1) Any breaks in the 70-week period would mean that its no longer a 70-week period. Its true the "Anointed One" is cut off SOMETIME "after the sixty-two 'sevens.'" As I mentioned before, this was 3.5 years after. This corresponds with "the middle of the week." (Daniel 9:27) 2) The purpose of the 70 weeks is mentioned in verse 24. There seems to be confusion about the identity of certain individuals in verses 26 and 27. I think I said that the "he" of verse 27 was God. But actually its the "Anointed One." Sorry for the confusion. Why can we say the "he" is Jesus? Well notice verse 26. "The PEOPLE of a ruler [General Titus] who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary." Why? Because their house was abandoned for rejecting and 'cutting off' the Messiah as mentioned. Who is "he" in verse 27? Is it "the ruler who will come," General Titus? Or, is it "the Anointed One, the ruler," Jesus? Let's reason on the matter. a) A 70-week period having no breaks would point to Jesus. (See Luke 1:67-75; Acts 3:25, 26; Galatians 3:8, 9, 14, 16, 26-29) The Messiah's coming would in fact confirm the Abrahamic covenant with "the many," the Jews. b) Remember the purpose of the 70 weeks as mentioned in verse 24: "To finish transgression." "To put an end to sin." "To atone for wickedness." "To bring in everlasting righteousness." "To seal up vision and prophecy." "To anoint the most holy." How were these things accomplished? By the destruction of the temple, the city, the interrupting of the offering of literal sacrifices by unbelieving Jews, by a covenant made with unbelieving Israel for 7 years by a pagan Roman General? Impossible! These things could only be accomplished by Jesus' death and resurrection. Jesus is the one who confirmed God's covenant with Abraham with the Jews for 7 years, 29-36 AD. He is the "seed" of Abraham, and it wasn't until Acts 10:37-48 that Gentiles began to benefit from Abraham's seed! (Galatians 3:16, 26-29) c) Its true General Titus' army destroyed the temple thereby preventing the unbelieving Jews from offering sacrifices there. Jesus said the "abomination [the Roman armies, Luke 21:20] that causes desolation" would come before the destruction of the temple. (Matthew 24:15-21) This "standing in the holy place" was in 66 AD, so was not "set up" in the "middle" of anything. The 'desolations that have been decreed' and "the end that is decreed" rule out any rebuilding of a physical temple on earth and such has been the case. Do the events of Daniel 9:26, 27 HAVE TO BE in sequence? 4) Daniel doesn't say the Abrahamic covenant is "fulfilled." Rather it is "confirmed." It isn't fulfilled until the end of the 1,000 years. (Revelation 20-22) 5) To philosophical arguments in some Bible dictionaries. The Bible doesn't follow calendars invented by men, such as the Gregorian or Julian calendars which didn't exist until after the Bible was completed. Obviously, then, the Bible wouldn't give BC or AD dates for anything. It states clearly the times: "the twentieth year" of Artaxerxes twice; "the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar"; the "seventy years" of desolation three times, etc. Astronomical dates are very accurate. Many of these historians are very quick to dismiss the Bible when it doesn't agree with their interpretation of matters. Which is better? To put our faith in human guesses and speculations or in the infallible word of God? Stokeyhk. |
||||||