The Seventy Weeks of Daniel is one of the most important prophecies of the Old Testament. As we follow the words of the angel Gabriel, we learn about the unfolding of events that will attend the consummation of God's program to redeem mankind. Most noteworthy about the prophecy is the fact that the angel points to a specific future event (future to Daniel's time) from which a measured amount of time will pass until the Messiah first appears. Also important, especially to the study of Revelation and end-times, is the last verse of the prophecy, which reveals details of the seventieth week, the last seven years of the prophecy’s 490 years. One's understanding of that verse determines one's understanding of the events that will precede Christ's second coming, and the chronology of events in the book of Revelation.Daniel's prophecy of the Seventy Weeks is usually interpreted by evangelicals in accordance with either of two major schools of thought: the Reformed view, which usually embraces amillennialism, and Dispensationalism, which teaches premillennialism. While these schools disagree on various points of the prophecy, we will concentrate on the meaning of the prophecy’s last verse regarding its final seven years. The Reformed view sees the final seven years as historical and fulfilled during the first advent of Christ; premillennialism views the entire seven years as future and unfulfilled, and regards these final seven years as the time of the great tribulation. But while the Bible does not mention a seven-year tribulation, it repeatedly references a yet unrealized 3 1/2 year period of tribulation that immediately precedes the promised coming of the Lord (Dan.7:25; 8:13-14; 9:27b; 12:7, 11, 12; Rev. 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, 13:5).A third approachAnother approach, which I call the Reconciliation view, solves the problems inherent in the other two positions. Here we establish that the first half of the seventieth week is historical and fulfilled in the 3 1/2 year public ministry of the Messiah from His baptism to the crucifixion. The second half of the seventieth week is yet future and unfulfilled. This last 3 1/2 years is the time of the great tribulation.Verse 24"Seventy weeks are decreed upon your people and upon your holy city, to finish transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy." The word translated “week” is literally “seven.” Seventy weeks is properly seventy sevens. The sevens should be understood as periods of seven years, and the seventy sevens as 490 years because:• The context of Daniel's prayers and reasoning are in terms of years. (Dan. 9:1-2 cf. Jer. 25:11, 29:10)• When Daniel wants us to understand seven as referring to seven days, a regular week, he uses the word "day" with seven. (Dan. 10:2-3, "three units of seven days", lit. Hebrew)• Other time-significant passages in Daniel that deal with the time equivalent to the last half of the seventieth week are in terms of years. (7:25; 12:7,14)The years of the prophecy are solar years (365.25 days/year). The Hebrew calendar was directly inspired by the Neo-Babylonian calendar which correctly reconciled the difference between lunar and solar years. A year to Daniel, living in the Neo-Babylonian Empire, was solar, not lunar. Some commentators have proposed lunar years (360 days/year). However, there does not seem to be any compelling reason for viewing years in this way.The events listed in verse 24 are all to be fulfilled within the time frame of the 490 years. In other words, each of these events must be fulfilled at some time while the 490-year clock is running: (1) to finish transgression and to make an end of sins; (2) to make reconciliation for iniquity; (3) to bring in everlasting righteousness; (4) to seal up vision and prophecy; and (5) to anoint the Most Holy. As we shall see, some of the errors of understanding occur out of neglect for the sense of this verse. See Illustration: The Seventy Weeks of Daniel. [Reconciliation view]Verse 25 "Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem to Messiah the Prince, shall be seven sevens, and sixty-two sevens: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troubled times." Gabriel tells Daniel when the prophetic clock is to begin running. However, conservative scholars are divided between at least three different decrees as the one meant by Gabriel. The decree of Artaxerxes to Ezra (Ezra 7:11-26, c. 458 B.C.) appears to be the most likely starting point of the 490-year period. This preference is based on the wording of this decree, Ezra's comments (Ezra 9:9), its early date and harmony with dates in the life of Christ. Also proposed are: (1) the decree of Cyrus, 538 B.C. (Ezra 1:2-4; 6:3-5); and (2) the decree of Artaxerxes, 445 B.C. (Neh. 2:5-8, 17-18)."To Messiah the Prince" has been interpreted variously as referring to (1) Christ's birth, (2) the beginning of Christ's public ministry, and (3) Christ's triumphant entry into Jerusalem before His crucifixion. The second one, which cites the beginning of Christ's public ministry at His baptism in A.D. 26, appears to be the most accurate interpretation because it is from this point that:• Jesus is presented, and recognized by some, as Messiah. (John 1:29, 41; 4:25-26; Luke 4:21)• The promised kingdom is presented as being at hand. (Matt. 4:17, 23)• Jesus announces, "the time is fulfilled." (Mark 1:15)• The Father and the Holy Spirit confirm the identity and ministry of Jesus publicly. (Matt. 3:16-17)A total of 483 years (7 sevens and 62 sevens) had to elapse before the appearance of Messiah the Prince. Starting from 458 B.C. and counting 483 years brings one to A.D. 26, the historically accepted year for the baptism of Jesus and beginning of His public ministry. (It is important to note when counting between B.C. and A.D. that there is no year "0" between 1 B.C. and 1 A.D.)The period of 483 years is broken into 49 years (7 sevens) and 434 years (62 sevens) probably because 49 years would elapse from the decree until Jerusalem was completely rebuilt. Then an additional 434 years would elapse before the arrival of Messiah the Prince.Verse 26"And after the sixty-two sevens shall the Messiah be cut off, and shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even to the end shall be war; desolations are determined." "After the sixty-two sevens" logically places the events of this verse sometime in the final seventieth week. Any other proposal violates the plain sense of the text. This is important to note because some expositors insist that the seventy-week clock is interrupted at the end of the sixty-ninth week, leaving the entire seventieth week future and unfulfilled. However, note that “after the sixty-two weeks” is the same as saying "after sixty-nine weeks" (because the sixty-two weeks of years followed seven weeks of years). Also, “after the sixty-ninth week” is logically sometime in the seventieth week, certainly not sometime during or at the end of the sixty-ninth week. ("After" is not the same as "at the end of.") [If you say you will be in town some time after Sunday, then I am expecting you Monday at the soonest!]The events of this verse, Messiah being cut-off (killed), occur after the sixty-ninth week, but certainly within the framework of the seventy weeks because the angel said that "reconciliation for iniquity" would occur during the 490 years. The Messiah made reconciliation for iniquity necessarily in the only remaining time, the seventieth week.The fact that Messiah is cut off in the seventieth week agrees with the statement in verse 27 concerning Messiah putting an end to sacrifice. (See discussion in verse 27).If, as some have proposed, an event of this prophecy occurs after the end of the sixty-ninth week but not in the seventieth week, then such an event logically would fall in a proposed period of time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth week. This would place the event outside the seventy weeks, thus contradicting the angel’s prophecy that the events of verse 24 would occur during the seventy weeks."Shall the Messiah be cut off, and will have nothing" predicts the crucifixion of Jesus."The people of the prince who is to come" is probably a reference to the Roman army which destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70. These people are to be distinguished from the Jews, who are referred to in verse 24 as "your people.""The prince who is to come" is better interpreted "a prince." The reference is indefinite and defined only by the phrase "who is to come." The Roman Emperor, Vespasian, under whose authority Jerusalem would be destroyed, is likely the person in view. To propose that this is the "little horn" of Daniel 7 or the "beast" of Revelation 13 is insensitive to the fact that no points of identity exist either in descriptive words or actions between this "prince" and the little horn or beast."Verse 27And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease; and upon the wing of abominations shall come one that makes desolate; and even to the full end, and that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate.""And he shall make a firm covenant" is probably, "And he shall confirm the covenant" (KJV). "He" refers to the Messiah, the antecedent subject of verses 25-26. Some see "prince who is to come" as the antecedent of "he," understanding both as referring to the little horn or beast. But "prince who is to come" was used in verse 26 to define the people who would destroy the city and sanctuary, and did not form the subject of any part of the preceding verse. Some reject the Messiah as the antecedent of "he" because they are not certain that Jesus made or confirmed any covenants. However, the little horn and beast could be rejected on the same basis since only this verse is used to hypothesize that the little horn or beast will make a covenant. In fact, when Jesus was baptized and began to proclaim that the kingdom was at hand, he was causing to be realized a promised, prophesied, and covenanted event (cf. Isa. 11:1-5, 9:6, 52:13, 53:1-12, Jer. 23:5, Zech. 11:10-12).In Zechariah 11:10-12, the Messiah in His first advent is in view, and the Messiah "breaks" a covenant because of the behavior of the "sheep." In this passage the Messiah is betrayed for thirty pieces of silver and killed (11:13)."Covenant" (Dan. 9:27) is not a newly introduced covenant, but "the covenant" (Hebrew). The fact that the covenant is "confirmed" is further notice that this is a covenant spoken of elsewhere in Scriptures. The proposal that the covenant mentioned here is a covenant made with Israel by the antichrist is a hypothesis, and is not presented or supported in any other Scripture. "In the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease" refers specifically to the Messiah’s stopping all sacrifice when He voluntarily gave himself as a sacrifice for sin. Verse 26 views the Messiah's death from man's point of view, portraying it as murder. Verse 27 views the same event from the Messiah's perspective, an act of His will as He gave His life, putting the legal end to the sacrificial system. The sacrifice of God's lamb, the Messiah, occurred 3 1/2 years after His baptism, bringing the seventy-week prophetic clock to the middle of the seventieth week. The fact that the nation Israel continued to sacrifice after the death of Christ and until the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70 does not argue against the finality of Christ's sacrifice or that He put an end to sacrifice. (Following such reasoning, one may propose that the church was not the temple of the Holy Spirit in the book of Acts because the temple was not destroyed in Jerusalem until A.D. 70.) The middle of the seventieth week arrests our attention unlike any other point in the prophecy. The event that begins the seventieth week, confirming the covenant, coincides with the beginning of Jesus' messianic ministry, covenanted by God to Israel. The event that marks mid-week, the stopping of sacrifice and grain offering, coincides with the crucifixion of Jesus, the Lamb of God, and ultimate end toward which all other sacrifice pointed.In the middle of the seventieth week, when Messiah is executed, the advance of the seventy-week clock is stopped, leaving the last half of the seventieth week some time in the future. This is required by Daniel's repeated prophecies of an unfulfilled 3 1/2 years in the future when the Messiah comes to quell the ambitions of the little horn, accomplishing events of the seventy-week prophecy (7:8-25; 8:9-26; 12:5-13). The clock is stopped in the middle of the seventieth week because the specific accomplishments of the Messiah during the future 3 1/2 years are among those listed by the angel as occurring during the seventy weeks (9:24). "To bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy” (9:24) are events inside the time frame of the seventy weeks. But these grand events are yet future, and follow the end of the 3 1/2 year career of the little horn (7:23-28).There is repeated reference in Scripture to a 3 1/2 year period of time yet future during which the events of the end-times will take place. On the other hand, there is a lack of any prophetic discussion which points to a seven-year period of time or any signal of its beginning."And upon the wing of abominations" begins to describe the last half of the seventieth week. When the Lord Jesus answered His disciples' questions regarding His coming, He pointed to "the abomination of desolation...spoken of through Daniel the prophet" (Matt. 24:15). Conservative scholars generally agree that the appearance of the abomination of desolation marks the beginning of the last half of the seventieth week. But, it is instructive to note (Matt. 24:15) that the Lord pointed to this because the first half of the seventieth week, fulfilled during the 3 1/2 years of His earthly ministry, was about to end with His impending crucifixion. If, as some have asserted, the crucifixion marked the end of the sixty-ninth week, leaving the entire seventieth week in the future, and, if verse 27 describes activities of the antichrist (making a covenant with Israel and then breaking it in the middle of the week), then we would expect Jesus to point to these unfulfilled events in the first half of the seventieth week when He was asked by His disciples for "the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age" (Matt. 24:3). Yet he did not make any such reference, nor did any New Testament writer."One who makes desolate" appears to be a reference to the "little horn" of Daniel (7:8, 8:9), "beast" of Revelation (Rev. 13:11), and "abomination of desolation" referenced by Jesus in the Mount Olivet discourse (Matt. 24:15). It is when the "abomination of desolation" stands in the "holy place" —God's place—that disciples are to recognize the beginning of the end. The apostle Paul refers to the same individual in his second letter to the Thessalonians (2 Thess. 2:3), calling him "man of lawlessness," "son of destruction," "who exalts himself so as to seat himself in the temple of God, displaying himself that he is God.” The position that would make the whole period of the seventy weeks past and fulfilled must deal with the problem that all the events prophesied by the angel have not yet happened, specifically, “to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy."The position that makes the entire seventieth week future has the problem of placing the crucifixion outside any part of the entire seventy-week prophecy, at a time between the sixty-ninth and seventieth week. Consider the following illustration:The Reconciliation position: (1) keeps all of the prophesied events within the seventy weeks; (2) accounts for the repeated reference in Daniel and Revelation to a yet unfulfilled 3 1/2 year period of end-time tribulation; and (3) accounts for the answer of Jesus to His disciples wherein He points them to the abomination of desolation. ConclusionWhen Jesus was crucified, 3 1/2 years of the seventieth week of Daniel’s prophecy were past. The prophetic clock was at the middle of the seventieth week. Jesus told His disciples to look for the abomination of desolation as the sign of His coming because that is all that remained of Daniel’s prophecy. We are therefore not surprised to find repeated reference in the book of Revelation to a future 3 1/2 year period of time that follows a desolation perpetrated by the end-time ruler.samy
The 70 Weeks of Daniel
- Thread starter samy
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
(samy;46117)
The seventy weeks; (2) accounts for the repeated reference in Daniel and Revelation to a yet unfulfilled 3 1/2 year period of end-time tribulation; and (3) accounts for the answer of Jesus to His disciples wherein He points them to the abomination of desolation. ConclusionWhen Jesus was crucified, 3 1/2 years of the seventieth week of Daniel’s prophecy were past. The prophetic clock was at the middle of the seventieth week. Jesus told His disciples to look for the abomination of desolation as the sign of His coming because that is all that remained of Daniel’s prophecy. We are therefore not surprised to find repeated reference in the book of Revelation to a future 3 1/2 year period of time that follows a desolation perpetrated by the end-time ruler.samy
last night at three i woke i could not sleep.i opened the bible for to inspire me .i open to danial 6 threw 9..SO WHERE DO YOU THINK WE TODAY FIT AT THIS TIME.ANY IDEA WHO THE ANTI IS ..ANY IDEA WHO HAS THOUGHT TO CHANGE THE TIMES AND LAWS OF GOD....
The seventy weeks; (2) accounts for the repeated reference in Daniel and Revelation to a yet unfulfilled 3 1/2 year period of end-time tribulation; and (3) accounts for the answer of Jesus to His disciples wherein He points them to the abomination of desolation. ConclusionWhen Jesus was crucified, 3 1/2 years of the seventieth week of Daniel’s prophecy were past. The prophetic clock was at the middle of the seventieth week. Jesus told His disciples to look for the abomination of desolation as the sign of His coming because that is all that remained of Daniel’s prophecy. We are therefore not surprised to find repeated reference in the book of Revelation to a future 3 1/2 year period of time that follows a desolation perpetrated by the end-time ruler.samy
last night at three i woke i could not sleep.i opened the bible for to inspire me .i open to danial 6 threw 9..SO WHERE DO YOU THINK WE TODAY FIT AT THIS TIME.ANY IDEA WHO THE ANTI IS ..ANY IDEA WHO HAS THOUGHT TO CHANGE THE TIMES AND LAWS OF GOD....
(samy;46152)
Who do you have in mind? samy
because i do not want to get into a debate .i beleave what i do and see more proof all the time...but if you have anything or one in mind i would like to hear about it as to see what decoys and who is suggesting that ..not to say you are right or wrong.....i would like to know what time frame we are in ..as far as i see everyone is in the wheel controled by higher powers..when do you get off OR PRACTICE,OR WHAT DO YOU DO WITH THE TRUTH any how,if you do not have to do anything about it...like what good is anything to know ..just be good and believe in jesus...have faith...i believe that the tax department will be part of the beast power whither ,we do it in our system or invaded by anouther...anything is possible at this point..
Who do you have in mind? samy
because i do not want to get into a debate .i beleave what i do and see more proof all the time...but if you have anything or one in mind i would like to hear about it as to see what decoys and who is suggesting that ..not to say you are right or wrong.....i would like to know what time frame we are in ..as far as i see everyone is in the wheel controled by higher powers..when do you get off OR PRACTICE,OR WHAT DO YOU DO WITH THE TRUTH any how,if you do not have to do anything about it...like what good is anything to know ..just be good and believe in jesus...have faith...i believe that the tax department will be part of the beast power whither ,we do it in our system or invaded by anouther...anything is possible at this point..
It is easy to see where I believe the antichrist comes from. Simply go to my web site www.expressright.com He will glorify the worship of man and deny the existence of God. He will be a Jew of Russian descent I believe. samy
The Anti christ is Satan himself as scripture says and as the oldest church teachings taught.................7And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, the dragon is Satan 8And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. He is kicked from heavenLuk 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. 9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 10And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. The accuser is another name of Satan 12Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. 13And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. 14And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. time,times, and half time is 3 1/2 years 17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.The devil went to make war with Saints that keep the commandments of GodNow if you read Eze. 28 and Ish 14 you will see God calls Satan a manhe is the Man of lawlessness,the son of perdition of 2 thess. 3His coming starts the trbulation of the 6th trump, 6th seal ,6th vial the number of his name Lucifer, as decribed in Eze. and IsaSatan, Devil, Dragon ectthis was the teaching of the earliest church
Kriss, the oldest church teachings are the Bible, and the oldest extra-Biblical teachings taught he was to be a man from the tribe of Dan. The bible teaches nowwhere that he is Satan but I would argue that he is empowered by the spirit of Satan. samy
Wrong Some of the first church writters that studied under the apostels Polycarp and his students who's major works were on Apocolaypse taught it was Satan Ive read it and your veiw is just speculation everybody has has an opinion I follow Gods Word and he tells you exactly who it is and there are at least three biblical wittness's as I have pointed out you want follow men or your opinion fine but dont try an act like you know, what you are only guessing at. All you have is an opinion, not based on anything scriptural
Kriss, Your string of assertions without any of them saying what you hoped they say really proves nothing. With your zeal, and obvious love for the Lord Jesus, if you could learn to mount a good argument you would be awesome. Read some books on logic. That would help. samy
thats great coming from someone who just ignores what ever doesnt fit I have given you nothing but scripture and I have more study under my belt than you need to worry about, You just cant push your opinions off on me, I know scripture to well you on the other hand pick and chose what you want ignore what doesnt fit to try to pove your point. This is nothing new its just typical mens teaching. You make a blanket comments like they are facts like "ALL PROCPHECY IS GIVEN IN SOLAR DAY'S" that is a wrong statement to begin with only prophecy concerning God are given in days (solar)Prophecy's concerning judgements, Satan(antichrist are alway given in months (moon) lunar something a novice can figure out. So again I present scripture prove it wrong or show your own proving your point where does it say antichrist is a Jew of Russian descent???????? .......No where. Its just speculation, a guess as I said. I dont deal in guess's. for you to ignore what I have given is to Ignore God your choice but do not be condescending to me for quoting the Word I can prove what I say7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, the dragon is Satan8And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. He is kicked from heavenLuk 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 10And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. The accuser is another name of Satan12Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. 13And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. 14And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. time,times, and half time is 3 1/2 years17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.The devil went to make war with Saints that keep the commandments of GodNow if you read Eze. 28 and Ish 14 you will see God calls Satan a manhe is the Man of lawlessness,the son of perdition of 2 thess. 3I suspect you cant prove my scripture wrong nor prove your veiws in scripture but are set in your ways of men you will refuse to admit the truth even though its right in front of youSo no sense arguing about it the Bible says what it says . Ill take Gods Word over yours
Kriss, I will only deal with specifics with you. I just checked your statement that "God calls Satan a man in Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14" against an exhaustive concordance of the King James Version of the Bible (that is what you use I believe), and the word "Satan" does not occurr anywhere in either Ezekiel or Isaiah. I would say that is not "right in front of me." Then in 2 Thess 3 the son of perdition is not called Satan either, and if you check chapter 2 of that book the man of lawlessness is distinguished from Satan by the qualifying statemant, "whose coming is after the working of Satan." Another case of not quite not "right in front of me." Then in Rev 12 when Satan and his angels are defeated and he is cast down to earth and persecutes the woman, there is no mention that he becomes a man. By the way, Satan means accuser, hater. I was unable to include my footnotes for my statements made in my articles. But I assure you they are well documented and supported. I will quote the antichrist reference in another post. Luke 10:18 does not say that Satan is or became a man. You must have assumed somehow that falling from heaven amounts to becoming a man. I don't know because you HAVE NOT BOTHERED TO MOUNT AN ARGUMENT OR DEFENCE.
RE: Antichrist coming from tribe of Dan. In my footnote from my book Total Eclipse; Christ Returns, in chapter 7, where I discuss the sealing of the 144,000 I have a footnote on my source of my statement regarding the early tradition that the antichrist would come from the tribe of Dan. In that footnote I reference the commentary of Robert Mounce, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1977), p.169-170, and his footnotes. "Irenaeus, writing in the latter part of the second century, noted the omission of Dan was due to a tradition that the Antichrist was to come from that tribe (Adv.Haer. v.30.2)>Hippolytus, writing a few years later, says, "As the Christ was born from the tribe of Judah, so will the Antichrist be born from the tribe of Dan." 9 (De Ant. 14). samy
I suggest you study the names of Satan if your study doesn't go any deeper than that then you are not as biblically literate as you claim what does perdition mean ????????there is only one who is judged to perdition. obviously you do have enough information to understand what I am saying it is in front of your face if you do not understand how God teaches, are you denying Lucifer is Satan also???????? If you don't understand how God uses names to determine a persons characteristics you can not understand scripture the facts are you can not debate me scripturally because you do not have the understanding necessary. You do nothing but have a few facts and put your own spin on them.I dont care what you write if you are so foolish you dont know when Satan is being described you dont know scripture.
Eze.28: Your settings and mountings were made of gold; on the day you were created they were prepared. 14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were on the holy mount of God; you walked among the fiery stones. 15 You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you. Isa.14:14 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! Isa.14:15 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.12 How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! 13 You said in your heart, "I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. [c] 14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High." 15 But you are brought down to the grave, to the depths of the pit. 16 Those who see you stare at you, they ponder your fate: "Is this the man who shook the earth and made kingdoms tremble, If you are going to dare claim these verse are not about Satan you are a liar theres no other way to put it. I am not trying to be insulting those are just the factshttp://www.christianityboard.com/prince-ki...yrus-t6136.html
Here is a list of some of the other names for Satan in the Bible. Satan plays many roles and by knowing them it will give us a better understanding to his method of operation. The Scripture reference is not a complete list of every time these names are used, it is there to give you an example of how it is used in the Bible.Name Reference Definition Abaddon Revelation 9:11 a destroying angel The accuser of our brethren Revelation 12:10 against one in the assembly, i.e. a complaintant at law; specially, Satan The adversary I Peter 5:8 an opponent (in a lawsuit); specially, Satan (as the arch-enemy) Apollyon Revelation 9:11 a destroyer (i.e. Satan) Beelzebub Matthew 12:24 Mark 3:22 Luke 11:15 dung-god; Beelzebul, a name of Satan Belial II Corinthians 6:15 worthlessness; Belial, as an epithet of Satan the Devil Matthew 4:1 a traducer; specially, Satan: false accuser, devil, slanderer. dragon Revelation 12:9 and 20:2 probably from an alternate form of derkomai (to look); a fabulous kind of serpent (perhaps as supposed to fascinate) the enemy Matthew 13:39 from a primary echtho (to hate); hateful (passively, odious, or actively, hostile); usually as a noun, an adversary (especially Satan) father of all lies John 8:44 a falsifier god of this world II Corinthians 4:4 god is used generically and refers to Satan king of Babylon Isaiah 14:4 confusion; Babel (i.e. Babylon), including Babylonia and the Babylonian empire king of Tyrus Ezekiel 28:12 a rock; Tsor, a place in Palestine. Satan is the false rock. Christ is the true Rock. little horn Daniel 7:8 a horn (as projecting); by implication, a flask, cornet; by resembl. an elephant's tooth (i.e. ivory), a corner (of the altar), a peak (of a mountain), a ray (of light); figuratively, power Lucifer Isaiah 14:12 (in the sense of brightness); the morning star: lucifer (the king of Babylon). Satan is the false morning star. Christ is the true morning Star. man of sin II Thessalonians 2:3 Satan was the first to sin. See Ezekiel 28:11-19 that old serpent Revelation 12:9 and 20:2 old = original or primevalserpent = (through the idea of sharpness of vision); a snake, figuratively (as a type of sly cunning) an artful malicious person, especially Satan power of darkness Colossians 1:13 "shade" or a shadow (literally or figuratively [darkness of error or an adumbration]) prince of the power of the air Ephesians 2:2 prince = a first (in rank or power)power = privilege, i.e. (subjectively) force, capacity, competency, freedom, or (objectively) mastery (concretely, magistrate, superhuman, potentate, token of control), delegated influence prince that shall come Daniel 9:26 a commander (as occupying the front), civil, military or religious; generally (abstractly, plural), honorable themes. See II Thessalonians 2:3-4 and Revelation 12:7-9 prince of Tyrus Ezekiel 28:2 a rock; Tsor, a place in Palestine. Satan is the false rock. Christ is the true Rock. prince of this world John 12:31 prince = a first (in rank or power)world = orderly arrangement, i.e. decoration; by implication, the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively [morally]) rulers of the darkness of this world Ephesians 6:12 rulers = a world-ruler, an epithet of Satandarkness = shadiness, i.e. obscurity (literally or figuratively) Satan Job 1:6 an opponent; especially (with the article prefixed) Satan, the arch-enemy of good. serpent Genesis 3:1 properly, to hiss, i.e. whisper a (magic) spell; generally, to prognosticate son of perdition John 17:12II Thessalonians 2:3 ruin or loss (physical, spiritual or eternal) also to destroy fully (reflexively, to perish, or lose), literally or figuratively the tempter Matthew 4:3 to test (objectively), i.e. endeavor, scrutinize, entice, discipline the wicked one Matthew 13:19 hurtful, i.e. evil (properly, in effect or influence) figuratively, calamitous; also (passively) ill, i.e. diseased; but especially (morally) culpable, i.e. derelict, vicious, facinorous; neuter (singular) mischief, malice, or (plural) guilt; masculine (singular) the devil, or (plural) sinners Related Bible Studies:
Kriss, I will only deal with specifics with you. I just checked your statement that "God calls Satan a man in Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14" against an exhaustive concordance of the King James Version of the Bible (that is what you use I believe), and the word "Satan" does not occurr anywhere in either Ezekiel or Isaiah.
Let's go back to this for just a minute samy. Since you have so exhaustedly checked your various reference sources, perhaps you would like to explain who this man is, then? Surely that shouldn't be a problem here.Isaiah 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
In fact, let's go ahead and carry that on down...Isaiah 14:13-
For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
Who then, is Lucifer?I'd love to know exactly how your concordances explain that one away. Clearly, the king of Babylon is merely a type. Study your concordances a little harder and you'll find what the meaning of Babylon is - and why Babylon appears here and why it appears again in Revelation. The ancient site of Babylon is even relevant this very day because it stands in modern Iraq. It is always a type, for the real king of Babylon that comes later.
Then in 2 Thess 3 the son of perdition is not called Satan either, and if you check chapter 2 of that book the man of lawlessness is distinguished from Satan by the qualifying statemant, "whose coming is after the working of Satan."
Whose coming is it talking about? I see the subject of this verse missed quite often, and a reference work won't really help you here.Let's jump back to the Isaiah verses found above:II Thessalonians 2:4
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
What's the continued message here? Does one even really need a concordance for this?I love using a good Strong's and you'll find from my studies that I use it often. However, only the text itself is the ultimate work of God. The letter here is pretty clear on what's going on.And to further Satan being a man, was not he the greatest angel of the Lord at one time? Is not Gabriel called a man?Daniel 9:21
Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.
I don't know because you HAVE NOT BOTHERED TO MOUNT AN ARGUMENT OR DEFENCE.
She's mounted one, but you won't listen. Therefore, I'll rather covertly mount it for her as she is my sister in Christ. Neither one of us is here to chastize or insult, but we want all of our members to look at the Word, regardless of what they believe - in agreement or disagreement.I love the good reference works out there myself, but some obscure statement that that's what it says when the Word clearly and rather eloquently defines it will get any of us into trouble. We all look for things when they're not there sometimes and need a brother or sister in Christ to help.
Let's go back to this for just a minute samy. Since you have so exhaustedly checked your various reference sources, perhaps you would like to explain who this man is, then? Surely that shouldn't be a problem here.Isaiah 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
In fact, let's go ahead and carry that on down...Isaiah 14:13-
For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
Who then, is Lucifer?I'd love to know exactly how your concordances explain that one away. Clearly, the king of Babylon is merely a type. Study your concordances a little harder and you'll find what the meaning of Babylon is - and why Babylon appears here and why it appears again in Revelation. The ancient site of Babylon is even relevant this very day because it stands in modern Iraq. It is always a type, for the real king of Babylon that comes later.
Then in 2 Thess 3 the son of perdition is not called Satan either, and if you check chapter 2 of that book the man of lawlessness is distinguished from Satan by the qualifying statemant, "whose coming is after the working of Satan."
Whose coming is it talking about? I see the subject of this verse missed quite often, and a reference work won't really help you here.Let's jump back to the Isaiah verses found above:II Thessalonians 2:4
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
What's the continued message here? Does one even really need a concordance for this?I love using a good Strong's and you'll find from my studies that I use it often. However, only the text itself is the ultimate work of God. The letter here is pretty clear on what's going on.And to further Satan being a man, was not he the greatest angel of the Lord at one time? Is not Gabriel called a man?Daniel 9:21
Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.
I don't know because you HAVE NOT BOTHERED TO MOUNT AN ARGUMENT OR DEFENCE.
She's mounted one, but you won't listen. Therefore, I'll rather covertly mount it for her as she is my sister in Christ. Neither one of us is here to chastize or insult, but we want all of our members to look at the Word, regardless of what they believe - in agreement or disagreement.I love the good reference works out there myself, but some obscure statement that that's what it says when the Word clearly and rather eloquently defines it will get any of us into trouble. We all look for things when they're not there sometimes and need a brother or sister in Christ to help.
In my footnote from my book Total Eclipse; Christ Returns, in chapter 7
One you wrote or some one else wrote? Please clarify. Thanks.
We should take care not to focus too much on the Antichrist. Our hope lies in the true Christ. Any news about the "man of sin" should only prepare us for the Man of Salvation. As a pre-Tribulationist, I personally have no plans to meet this "son of perdition." Only those who have not repented of their sins and are not living pure lives should expect to meet him personally, or more likely, see him on Larry King.
A passage from an article by Todd Strandberg you can find the rest of the article here:http://www.raptureready.com/rr-antichrist.htmlI think he sums it up pretty well.
One you wrote or some one else wrote? Please clarify. Thanks.
We should take care not to focus too much on the Antichrist. Our hope lies in the true Christ. Any news about the "man of sin" should only prepare us for the Man of Salvation. As a pre-Tribulationist, I personally have no plans to meet this "son of perdition." Only those who have not repented of their sins and are not living pure lives should expect to meet him personally, or more likely, see him on Larry King.
A passage from an article by Todd Strandberg you can find the rest of the article here:http://www.raptureready.com/rr-antichrist.htmlI think he sums it up pretty well.
Well I do not possably see what difference it makes anybody can write a book doesnt mean they know what they are talking about futher more I completly disagree with Todd Strandberg as he is a pre-trib rapture believer and would say that.As anyone doing much investigation into the subject of Antichrist would quickly show that pre-trib rapture is not in the Word of God So he has as much credability as a dish rag
No rapture is really the word cause its not in the bible......at least a word search of my Bible program comes up empty any way...must be a man made word or some thing....
(samy;46208)
RE: Antichrist coming from tribe of Dan. In my footnote from my book Total Eclipse; Christ Returns, in chapter 7, where I discuss the sealing of the 144,000 I have a footnote on my source of my statement regarding the early tradition that the antichrist would come from the tribe of Dan. In that footnote I reference the commentary of Robert Mounce, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1977), p.169-170, and his footnotes. "Irenaeus, writing in the latter part of the second century, noted the omission of Dan was due to a tradition that the Antichrist was to come from that tribe (Adv.Haer. v.30.2)>Hippolytus, writing a few years later, says, "As the Christ was born from the tribe of Judah, so will the Antichrist be born from the tribe of Dan." 9 (De Ant. 14). samy
I frankly could care less about your footnotes or what Mr. Mounce has to say I know what I have read:Irenaeus writes of his teacher Polycarp:"Polycarp also was not only instructed by the apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the church of Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth,for he tarried on earth a very long time,and when a very old man,gloriously, suffered martyrdom, departed this life, he always taught the things which he had learned from the apostels, and which the church has handed down and which alone are true (Against Heresies,lll,4)Irenaes and his student Hippolytus disclose in their writings they believed their obligation as disciples was to master "the Apostolic teaching"and translate it to subsequent generations. They both believed they had accurately been taught those things taught the apostles who received it fromJesus ChristBoth these men taught that the Antichrist is Satan that he will appear as a man he seeks to reign as king over mankindand desires to focus the worship of God on to himself (another words be worshiped as god)they also teach though antichrist may claim to be a Jew he is not, as the church of Smyrna taught.They also taught that he would commit the abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel on the temple Mt in JerusalemThat Antichrist is the "little Horn" of the fourth beast mentioned in Daniel 7 He will slay three of the other horns and reign as the eighth with the remainder of the sevenThat Antichrist during his reign would deceive the majority of the WorldThat Jesus Christ would return to earth at the End of the reign of Antichrist,destroying Satan's kingdomThe resurrection of the just will occur at that timeThey are under the conviction they learned these things handed down from the apostle John to Polycarp to Irenaeus that this was not heresies but the one and only truth.Sense we can agree on the fact that God is well pleased with the teachings of the church of Smyrna, and Polycarp being its Bishop this is the closet we ever get to direct testimony of Jesus Christ, to his Apostle John. Outside scriptureThat accompanied with the proof in scripture I have presented gives one more than just a passing opinion if you can not admit to this the problem is yours for it is the Word of God. As wittnessed in scripture an outside of scripture.Satan, Lucifer, that man of Perdition, the son of Lawlessness, the devil, the king of tyrus, the accuser or what ever other name God uses to describe this personage of Satan he is the Antichrist. He has only had one goal sense he was filled with pride and was the serpant of Eden to place himself above God. It is the message throughout all scripture.
RE: Antichrist coming from tribe of Dan. In my footnote from my book Total Eclipse; Christ Returns, in chapter 7, where I discuss the sealing of the 144,000 I have a footnote on my source of my statement regarding the early tradition that the antichrist would come from the tribe of Dan. In that footnote I reference the commentary of Robert Mounce, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1977), p.169-170, and his footnotes. "Irenaeus, writing in the latter part of the second century, noted the omission of Dan was due to a tradition that the Antichrist was to come from that tribe (Adv.Haer. v.30.2)>Hippolytus, writing a few years later, says, "As the Christ was born from the tribe of Judah, so will the Antichrist be born from the tribe of Dan." 9 (De Ant. 14). samy
I frankly could care less about your footnotes or what Mr. Mounce has to say I know what I have read:Irenaeus writes of his teacher Polycarp:"Polycarp also was not only instructed by the apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the church of Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth,for he tarried on earth a very long time,and when a very old man,gloriously, suffered martyrdom, departed this life, he always taught the things which he had learned from the apostels, and which the church has handed down and which alone are true (Against Heresies,lll,4)Irenaes and his student Hippolytus disclose in their writings they believed their obligation as disciples was to master "the Apostolic teaching"and translate it to subsequent generations. They both believed they had accurately been taught those things taught the apostles who received it fromJesus ChristBoth these men taught that the Antichrist is Satan that he will appear as a man he seeks to reign as king over mankindand desires to focus the worship of God on to himself (another words be worshiped as god)they also teach though antichrist may claim to be a Jew he is not, as the church of Smyrna taught.They also taught that he would commit the abomination of Desolation spoken of by Daniel on the temple Mt in JerusalemThat Antichrist is the "little Horn" of the fourth beast mentioned in Daniel 7 He will slay three of the other horns and reign as the eighth with the remainder of the sevenThat Antichrist during his reign would deceive the majority of the WorldThat Jesus Christ would return to earth at the End of the reign of Antichrist,destroying Satan's kingdomThe resurrection of the just will occur at that timeThey are under the conviction they learned these things handed down from the apostle John to Polycarp to Irenaeus that this was not heresies but the one and only truth.Sense we can agree on the fact that God is well pleased with the teachings of the church of Smyrna, and Polycarp being its Bishop this is the closet we ever get to direct testimony of Jesus Christ, to his Apostle John. Outside scriptureThat accompanied with the proof in scripture I have presented gives one more than just a passing opinion if you can not admit to this the problem is yours for it is the Word of God. As wittnessed in scripture an outside of scripture.Satan, Lucifer, that man of Perdition, the son of Lawlessness, the devil, the king of tyrus, the accuser or what ever other name God uses to describe this personage of Satan he is the Antichrist. He has only had one goal sense he was filled with pride and was the serpant of Eden to place himself above God. It is the message throughout all scripture.
Similar threads
