Daniel 7 can't support Amil's Timeline Pertaining to Rev 6:9-11, Rev 20:4

[Spiritual Israelite]

In Daniel 7 there are only 5 kingdoms mentioned. And one of them is an everlasting kingdom. There is no kingdom reserved for Israel(ethnic Jews) and another kingdom reserved for the church. Therefore, in Acts 1:6 the kingdom in question has to be the same one Daniel 7:18 is referring to.

The reason it hasn't been restored at that point, IMO, is because the entire 70 weeks had not been fulfilled yet. But not meaning the entire 70th week, but meaning the final half after Christ fulfilled the middle of the 70th week 2K years ago. IOW, there is a gap in Daniel 9:27 after Christ fulfilled the middle of the week.

And this gap is meaning the past 2K years. The final half then being reserved for the 42 month reign of the beast when it rises out of the pit after 2K years of church history have elasped. And the ironic thing about, this appears it could even fit the Amil view except no Amil I know interprets Daniel 9:27 in the manner.

The way it might fit Amil could be like such. Christ fulfills the middle of th week 2K years ago. Then a gap of 2K years follow--thus the millennium. Then at the end of the millennium the beast beast rises from the pit, thus the final half of the 70th week begins, thus satan's little season. Why no Amil would not be arguing that, is beyond me. I certainly would be if I was an Amil.

No Amil argues that because there is no basis whatsoever for inserting a gap after the first half of the 70th week. Absolutely none. There is no indication whatsoever in the prophecy itself that there would be any gaps within any of the 70 weeks. It says that 70 weeks were determined to accomplish the six things listed in Daniel 9:24. So, that's a 70 week or 490 year time period that God determined for those things to be fulfilled by the end of it. But, you have changed that time period since the beginning of it into around 2,500 years instead. That's way past the deadline God determined for those things to be fulfilled. Jesus Christ accomplished those things long ago, as the New Testament confirms. He made reconciliation for iniquity by sacrificing Himself on the cross. He finished the transgression ("It is finished"), He took away the sins of the world with His sacrifice (made an end of sins), He was the most holy who was anointed and so on.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I am an open-minded Amil, @Davidpt, since I have also been a Premil in the past. However, I am also a PAN-mil. That means that I believe that it will all PAN out.

I have come to the conclusion that it's very hard to interpret prophecies until they are fulfilled, and God will do it as he sees fit. Thus, it's not very important in the long run and means that I don't spend much time mulling it over.

I think it is important to understand that Jesus has been reigning since His resurrection so that people understand His place of authority over heaven and earth right now instead of thinking He has just been twiddling His thumbs in heaven the past 2,000 years waiting to receive authority and power. No, He was given all power and authority in heaven and earth after His resurrection (Matthew 28:18, Ephesians 1:19-22). I believe that is very important to understand. Also, I believe it's important to understand that Christ's kingdom did not come with observation (Luke 17:20) and is not of this world (John 18:36). So, it's not a physical, earthly kingdom as Premils believe. I also think it's important for believers to understand the authority we have over our spiritual enemies (Satan and his angels) because of the binding of Satan. So, I respect your choice of how much time to think about these things, but I have to disagree that "it's not very important in the long run".

 

[Davidpt]

No Amil argues that because there is no basis whatsoever for inserting a gap after the first half of the 70th week. Absolutely none. There is no indication whatsoever in the prophecy itself that there would be any gaps within any of the 70 weeks. It says that 70 weeks were determined to accomplish the six things listed in Daniel 9:24. So, that's a 70 week or 490 year time period that God determined for those things to be fulfilled by the end of it. But, you have changed that time period since the beginning of it into around 2,500 years instead. That's way past the deadline God determined for those things to be fulfilled. Jesus Christ accomplished those things long ago, as the New Testament confirms. He made reconciliation for iniquity by sacrificing Himself on the cross. He finished the transgression ("It is finished"), He took away the sins of the world with His sacrifice (made an end of sins), He was the most holy who was anointed and so on.

It doesn't matter anyway since Amil is not the correct view to begin with. Right? Therefore, my point is moot from the get go. But still, it seemed like it could maybe fit Amil, regardless.

 

[Davidpt]

I think it is important to understand that Jesus has been reigning since His resurrection so that people understand His place of authority over heaven and earth right now instead of thinking He has just been twiddling His thumbs in heaven the past 2,000 years waiting to receive authority and power. No, He was given all power and authority in heaven and earth after His resurrection (Matthew 28:18, Ephesians 1:19-22). I believe that is very important to understand. Also, I believe it's important to understand that Christ's kingdom did not come with observation (Luke 17:20) and is not of this world (John 18:36). So, it's not a physical, earthly kingdom as Premils believe. I also think it's important for believers to understand the authority we have over our spiritual enemies (Satan and his angels) because of the binding of Satan. So, I respect your choice of how much time to think about these things, but I have to disagree that "it's not very important in the long run".

You give the impression you pride yourself on understanding Scripture in a certain manner where it is not contradicting other Scripture. Yet, timelines are relevant and that Amils' Timeline doesn't agree with the Timeline in Daniel 7 throughout. Amil gets some of it right. Such as verses 13-14 belongs with the ascension 2K years ago. And some Amils get it right by discerning that verse 22 is a downward coming, therefore, involving the 2nd coming in the end of this age. Then they all of a sudden start being dishonest with the text. Insisting that verse 22 is not echoed in Revelation 20:4, therefore, does not lead to the beginning of the millennium. Why would any honest interpreter do that? They wouldn't. Only someone that puts their doctrinal bias' above Scripture would do that. Imagine that, verse 22 doesn't lead to the beginning of the millennium. And the reason why is simple. If verse 22 is the 2nd coming and leads to the beginning of the millennium, that clearly equals Premil then not Amil.

Some Amils agree that verse 22 leads to the beginning of the millennium. Therefore, they are not being dishonest about the text in regard to that in particular. But the way they try and get around Premil is by insisting verse 22 is not even meaning the 2nd coming. Which then contradicts the 'until' in verse 22 in relation to verse 21, in that case. Anyone being intellectually honest throughout is not going to be causing a contradiction with verse 21 via verse 22, nor causing a contradiction with Revelation 20:4 via verse 22.

 

[grafted branch]

It doesn't matter anyway since Amil is not the correct view to begin with. Right? Therefore, my point is moot from the get go. But still, it seemed like it could maybe fit Amil, regardless.

I think Amill has the rest of the dead being resurrected after Satan’s little season. Revelation 20:5 has the rest of the dead living again after the thousand years.

I had an argument quite some time ago about how Amill places a time gap between the end of the millennium and the GWT concerning the dead, similar to Premill placing a gap in the 70 weeks.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It doesn't matter anyway since Amil is not the correct view to begin with. Right?

Wrong.

Therefore, my point is moot from the get go. But still, it seemed like it could maybe fit Amil, regardless.

It doesn't fit anything because it's a complete twisting of scripture. God determined a time period of 490 years by the end of which all of the things listed in Daniel 9:24 would be fulfilled. That time period started with the decree to rebuild Jerusalem. You have stretched that time period out to around 2,500 years and counting at this point.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I think Amill has the rest of the dead being resurrected after Satan’s little season. Revelation 20:5 has the rest of the dead living again after the thousand years.

I had an argument quite some time ago about how Amill places a time gap between the end of the millennium and the GWT concerning the dead, similar to Premill placing a gap in the 70 weeks.

Can you explain what you're talking about here? Satan's little season comes after the thousand years, so Revelation 20:5 saying the rest of the dead would be resurrected after the thousand years is true. But, the text indicates they are not resurrected immediately when the thousand years ends, but rather after Satan's little season which follows that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You give the impression you pride yourself on understanding Scripture in a certain manner where it is not contradicting other Scripture.

It's always important to interpret any given verse or passage in a way that does not contradict any other scripture. Don't you agree?

Yet, timelines are relevant and that Amils' Timeline doesn't agree with the Timeline in Daniel 7 throughout.

You say that, but I don't see you proving that at all.

Edit: What you're saying may be true of some Amils, but you need to make it clear that you're not talking about Amils any time you say something like that.

Amil gets some of it right. Such as verses 13-14 belongs with the ascension 2K years ago.

I've been trying to get you to answer a question about that. You understand that verses 17-27 contain the angel's interpretation of the visions Daniel had in verses 1-14, right? That means somewhere within verses 17-27 must contain something related to verses 13-14. So, which verses from 17 to 27 do you think relate directly to verses 13-14?

And some Amils get it right by discerning that verse 22 is a downward coming, therefore, involving the 2nd coming in the end of this age. Then they all of a sudden start being dishonest with the text. Insisting that verse 22 is not echoed in Revelation 20:4, therefore, does not lead to the beginning of the millennium.

No, they do not get it right. Verse 22 is part of the explanation of what verses 13 and 14 are about, which is the ascension of Christ and Him being given a kingdom and power and dominion at that time. That is when His people became priests of God the Father and Christ as well (Revelation 1:5-6), so that is what verse 22 is about. It's not about His second coming.

Why would any honest interpreter do that? They wouldn't.

Right. So, I guess some Amils are not consistent with how they interpret Daniel 7 and Revelation 20, but I'm not one of them.

Only someone that puts their doctrinal bias' above Scripture would do that. Imagine that, verse 22 doesn't lead to the beginning of the millennium.

Many Amils, including me, do not claim that.

And the reason why is simple. If verse 22 is the 2nd coming and leads to the beginning of the millennium, that clearly equals Premil then not Amil.

Yes, that would be the case, but Premil has it wrong. Christ's kingdom was established upon His resurrection and ascension, as scripture makes abundantly clear in passages like Matthew 28:16-18 and Ephesians 1:19-23. We need to interpret Daniel 7 and Revelation 20 accordingly instead of causing Daniel 7 and Revelation 20 to contradict those clear, straightforward passages.

Some Amils agree that verse 22 leads to the beginning of the millennium. Therefore, they are not being dishonest about the text in regard to that in particular. But the way they try and get around Premil is by insisting verse 22 is not even meaning the 2nd coming.

How can it be? What you are failing to consider here is that verses 17 to 27 contain the angel's interpretation of Daniel's visions that are described in verses 1-14. Therefore, verses 17 to 27 must refer to Christ's ascension and Him being given a kingdom and dominion at that time somewhere. Why would verse 22 not relate directly to verses 13 and 14? I believe it clearly does.

Which then contradicts the 'until' in verse 22 in relation to verse 21, in that case. Anyone being intellectually honest throughout is not going to be causing a contradiction with verse 21 via verse 22, nor causing a contradiction with Revelation 20:4 via verse 22.

Your argument is with the view of other Amils and not mine, so it's pointless for me to continue addressing this.

 

[grafted branch]

Can you explain what you're talking about here? Satan's little season comes after the thousand years, so Revelation 20:5 saying the rest of the dead would be resurrected after the thousand years is true. But, the text indicates they are not resurrected immediately when the thousand years ends, but rather after Satan's little season which follows that.

Sure, I can explain it.

Premill argues that week 70 comes after week 69 but the text indicates it doesn’t happen immediately after week 69 ends.

Amill argues that the rest of the dead are resurrected after the thousand years but the text indicates it doesn’t happen immediately after the thousand years ends.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Sure, I can explain it.

Premill argues that week 70 comes after week 69 but the text indicates it doesn’t happen immediately after week 69 ends.

Amill argues that the rest of the dead are resurrected after the thousand years but the text indicates it doesn’t happen immediately after the thousand years ends.

Those are not similar arguments. Inserting a gap after the 69th week is entirely different than saying that Satan's little season, which occurs after the thousand years end, occurs first before the rest of the dead are resurrected.

The prophecy in Daniel 9 indicates that 70 weeks were determined for the six things listed in verse 24 to be fulfilled. So, that was a fixed, determined time period of 70 weeks (490 years) during which Jerusalem would be rebuilt and by the end of which the six things listed in verse 24 would be fulfilled. But, premil denies that those things have yet been fulfilled because of adding a gap to the prophecy. In contrast to that, there is nothing that says a thousand years were determined and that by the end of the thousand years the rest of the dead had to be resurrected. It just says they would be resurrected after the thousand years. And that's true. It just so happens that Satan's little season will occur first before that happens.

 

[grafted branch]

Those are not similar arguments. Inserting a gap after the 69th week is entirely different than saying that Satan's little season, which occurs after the thousand years end, occurs first before the rest of the dead are resurrected.

The prophecy in Daniel 9 indicates that 70 weeks were determined for the six things listed in verse 24 to be fulfilled. So, that was a fixed, determined time period of 70 weeks (490 years) during which Jerusalem would be rebuilt and by the end of which the six things listed in verse 24 would be fulfilled. But, premil denies that those things have yet been fulfilled because of adding a gap to the prophecy. In contrast to that, there is nothing that says a thousand years were determined and that by the end of the thousand years the rest of the dead had to be resurrected. It just says they would be resurrected after the thousand years. And that's true. It just so happens that Satan's little season will occur first before that happens.

Well I’m not arguing what the texts indicate, that is a debate between the two views, I’m just pointing out that you both have time gaps.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Well I’m not arguing what the texts indicate, that is a debate between the two views, I’m just pointing out that you both have time gaps.

That's fairly meaningless since one text allows for a time gap and the other doesn't.

 

[grafted branch]

That's fairly meaningless since one text allows for a time gap and the other doesn't.

Oh really …

Premill generally says week 70 happens after week 69 with the times of the Gentiles inserted in between the two.

Amill generally says the GWTJ of the resurrected dead happens after the millennium with Satan’s little season inserted between the two.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Oh really …

Yes, really.

Premill generally says week 70 happens after week 69 with the times of the Gentiles inserted in between the two.

The text of Daniel 9:24-27 does not support that idea at all. Again, it says a 70 weeks (490 years) time period was determined for certain things to occur by the end of it. Those who think the 70th week isn't fulfilled have turned a 490 year prophecy into at least around a 2,500 year prophecy instead.

Amill generally says the GWTJ of the resurrected dead happens after the millennium with Satan’s little season inserted between the two.

So what? Nowhere does it say that the resurrection of the dead had to happen immediately after the thousand years ends.

 

[grafted branch]

So what? Nowhere does it say that the resurrection of the dead had to happen immediately after the thousand years ends.

Are you admitting that sometimes it’s necessary to put a time gap in the scriptures else certain views don’t work, including Amill.

 

[Davidpt]

Premill argues that week 70 comes after week 69 but the text indicates it doesn’t happen immediately after week 69 ends.

Some do, some don't. There are Premils who argue there are no gaps in the 70 weeks. The ones that argue for a gap typically argue it's between the 69th and 70th week. I too argue for a gap. But after Christ fulfills the midst of the 70th week first. Followed by a gap(2K years of NT church history)--then the little season involving 2 Thess 2, where I take that to involve the little season mentioned in Revelation 6, not to be confused with the one in Revelation 20.. Where I take that to mean the 42 month reign of the beast. Which in turn = great tribulation(Matthew 24:15-26)

Amill argues that the rest of the dead are resurrected after the thousand years but the text indicates it doesn’t happen immediately after the thousand years ends.

Actually, that is true of both Amil and Premil. Both views have the millennium ending, then satan's little season(thus the gap between the end of the millennium and the GWTJ). Obviously, no matter how you look at it, the GWTJ can't precede Revelation 20:9 in either view. In both views those in verse 9 are alive during the millennium and alive during satan's little season. Therefore, during the millennium---and the rest of the dead lived not again, until--does not include those in verse 9. Revelation 20:5 is meaning at the beginning of the millennium, that the rest of the dead lived not again, until. Therefore, not all of the dead in their graves bodily rise at the beginning of the millennium

But then there is another group that are neither those reigning with Christ nor any of the rest of the dead. Meaning the ones in verse 8 and 9. Obviously, if they are alive and well after the millennium, they are also alive and well during the millennium. Anyone that is still alive and well does not equal the dead. Amil, IMO, can't explain these in verse 8 and 9. Where one moment they are not causing havoc with the camp of the saints one way or the other. Then the next moment they are. Billions of them perhaps. Who during Amil's millennium apparently were perfect angels(in comparison to what they do after the millennium), then after the millennium they become raging devils. That makes sense per Premil but does not make sense per Amil, that being the point.

To prove my point. Let's assume Amils' millennium ends tomorrow. Do you see any sign today or yesterday, or the months that precede it that give any indication that very soon this is going to be happening among the nations around the globe, in any sense---to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about?

 

[grafted branch]

Actually, that is true of both Amil and Premil. Both views have the millennium ending, then satan's little season(thus the gap between the end of the millennium and the GWTJ).

Well, I’ll say this, at least most Premils (those who do have a gap in the 70 weeks) don’t have a contradiction in how they interpret scriptures.

I don’t know about all the Amills but the ones I’ve talked to absolutely reject having any gaps whatsoever, which contradicts their own view of what happens at the end of the millennium. They have to have a gap and have the rest of the dead live again after Satan’s little season.

 

[Davidpt]

Well, I’ll say this, at least most Premils (those who do have a gap in the 70 weeks) don’t have a contradiction in how they interpret scriptures.

I don’t know about all the Amills but the ones I’ve talked to absolutely reject having any gaps whatsoever, which contradicts their own view of what happens at the end of the millennium. They have to have a gap and have the rest of the dead live again after Satan’s little season.

Good point.

As to Daniel 9, my logic is that the context of verse 27 is the 70th week, meaning the entire verse. The same way the context of verse 25 is the first 63 weeks. Therefore, based on verse 27 it stands to reason that there has to be a gap somewhere in the 70 weeks. If Christ fulfilled the midst of the 70th week, the remainder of verse 27 does not fit the next 3.5 after the cross. It is not reasonable that if the context of verse 27 is the 70th week, that verse 27 neglects to tell us how the 70th week ended. Or should I say ends.

 

[grafted branch]

Good point.

As to Daniel 9, my logic is that the context of verse 27 is the 70th week, meaning the entire verse. The same way the context of verse 25 is the first 63 weeks. Therefore, based on verse 27 it stands to reason that there has to be a gap somewhere in the 70 weeks. If Christ fulfilled the midst of the 70th week, the remainder of verse 27 does not fit the next 3.5 after the cross. It is not reasonable that if the context of verse 27 is the 70th week, that verse 27 neglects to tell us how the 70th week ended. Or should I say ends.

I think the majority of people do put all of Daniel 9:27 as taking place within the 70 weeks. If that is true then I think there is a time gap.

One thing that makes me question if all of Daniel 9:27 should be included in the 70 weeks is the Old Greek version of Daniel. I don’t know if you’ve looked at it but I think it’s worth noting.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Are you admitting that sometimes it’s necessary to put a time gap in the scriptures else certain views don’t work, including Amill.

LOL. Of course there are times when scripture says a certain event will happen after another, but it's not saying immediately after. But, in the case of the 70 weeks, the text indicates that a 70 week time period was determined for certain things to happen. That means those things had to be fulfilled during that continuous time period and not have some of it fulfilled long after that time period is over. Are you unwilling to address what I'm actually saying?