Dan. 9:27

[FlamingZword]

Hi Flaming, The passage reads as follows:
Daniel 9:27
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.


Now we know that the "one week" equals 7 yrs. Whether one believes it is a new covenant or the confirming of an existing covenant doesn't matter. The scriptures limit it to a "one week" period. No aspect of any covenant Christ was connected to had such limitation, thus the "new covenant" is NOT the covenant being spoken of here which leads to the obvious conclusion that Christ is not the one pictured in this prophecy. Now exactly, how is this misread?

There is nothing in here to indicate that the covenant will last 7 years, nothing at all.
Yes Jesus made a new covenant, it is an everlasting covenant.
Jesus did confirm the covenant for one week.
3 and a half years of his ministry.
3 and a half years of the Church to the Jews.
at the end of those 7 years Cornelious became the first gentile convert thus ending the one week of the confirmation.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

You have a date for when 1. Jesus began His ministry, 2. When He was crucified, and 3. when Cornelious converted which I can verify from the Bible there flaming?

No, I didn't think so.

 

[Phoneman777]

You have a date for when 1. Jesus began His ministry, 2. When He was crucified, and 3. when Cornelious converted which I can verify from the Bible there flaming?

No, I didn't think so.

If you count 483 years from the decree of Artaxerxes of 457 B.C., you come to 27 A.D., the year Jesus was baptized according to the Syro-Macedonian calendar that Luke employed elsewhere and likely employed to reckon the 15th year reign of Tiberius. The 483 began with the decree and ended with His baptism, which immediately commenced the 70th week. You cannot slice off the last week of the prophecy and send it down to the end of time and still call it a "70 week prophecy".

 

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, Phoneman777.

If you count 483 years from the decree of Artaxerxes of 457 B.C., you come to 27 A.D., the year Jesus was baptized according to the Syro-Macedonian calendar that Luke employed elsewhere and likely employed to reckon the 15th year reign of Tiberius. The 483 began with the decree and ended with His baptism, which immediately commenced the 70th week. You cannot slice off the last week of the prophecy and send it down to the end of time and still call it a "70 week prophecy".

Actually, you can. See, Yeshua` (Jesus) Himself split the final Seven in half:

Matthew 23:37-39
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you DESOLATE.
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, TILL ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
KJV

Because of the rejection that the tribe of Y'hudah (Judah) showed to the Messiah of God - the overspreading of their abominations - Yeshua` "left them DESOLATE until the consummation,” a partial fulfillment of Daniel 9:27. The children of Israel would not see Him from that point on UNTIL they could say, “Baruwkh haba’ b-shem YHWH,” the Hebrew of the last phrase “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the LORD,” from Psalm 118:26. The phrase literally means “Welcome, Comer on the authority of YHWH."

I agree with you about the completion of the 62 Sevens in 27 A.D; however, only the FIRST half of the final Seven was fulfilled in the “ministry” (the offer of the Kingdom to Israel) of Yeshua` haMashiach (Jesus the Messiah or Jesus the Christ). The final half of the final Seven won’t take place until Yeshua` returns to offer that Kingdom to the children of Israel again. It was Yeshua` HIMSELF who split the Seven and put in the gap of the Tribulation or the Time of Jacob’s Trouble.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Another tortured word association used to justify a Preterist position.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Phoneman, Your words: "If you count 483 years from the decree of Artaxerxes of 457 B.C., you come to 27 A.D., the year Jesus was baptized according to the Syro-Macedonian calendar that Luke employed elsewhere and likely employed to reckon the 15th year reign of Tiberius. The 483 began with the decree and ended with His baptism, which immediately commenced the 70th week. You cannot slice off the last week of the prophecy and send it down to the end of time and still call it a "70 week prophecy"

I guess it depends on the accuracy of one's resources. For instance my resource dates the decree at 444B.C. and 483 years brings it to A.D. 33 which is the year of His triumphal entry. We shouldn't count His 3 1/2 yr. ministry at all. When the Messiah comes is NOT at the beginning of His ministry but when He fulfills the prophecy of Zech. 9:9 - "Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass."

So you see, zero parts of the 70th week have been fulfilled because He was "cut off" at the end of the 69th as the scripture plainly reads. Those that can't see this obvious gap and the scriptural reasons for it are deluding themselves from the truth with false fulfillments based on a desire to falsely claim the papacy as having more importance than it deserves.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Correct.

Jesus never "confirmed" any limited time covenant.
Nor was Jesus the abomination - which Biblically, overwhelmingly refers to idolatry.

The Messiah comes, and then is cut off: at least a few days later.
Then the Temple is destroyed - some 40 years later (so much for the seventy 'sevens' happening without a break).
War continues (and has been continuous ever since) until the end of the one 'seven.'

Proving once again that the one 'seven' has not run its course.

Furthermore, the one 'seven' only starts (is "forced" by military might from the verb gabar which means to prevail not confirm) with a covenant (any agreement with reciprocal requirements) by a ruler who will come - who comes from the people who destroyed the Temple in A.D. 70!

So the trouble with any Preterist rendering of the seventy 'sevens' entirely to the past is that there is a huge internal inconsistency with its contention and the text. It did not run concurrently with the seven and sixty-two 'sevens' because what is said of it did not happen. Furthermore, there is no linkage to Jesus for the start, middle and end of the one 'seven' - other than that He has a definite hand in its end as revealed in Revelation chapters 19 and 20.