veteran
New Member
Exploring The Dismal Swamp: The Identity of the Anointed One in Daniel 9:24-27
JournalJournal of Biblical Literature PublisherSociety of Biblical Literature ISSN0021-9231 (Print)
1934-3876 (Online) IssueVolume 120, Number 3 / 2001 Pages429-449 Online DateMonday, October 09, 2006
Please be aware that it was Montgomery* who accurately reflected the impossibility of an ancient fulfillment for this end-time prophecy. I merely understand that failure, versus what Scripture intended.
* Ref. Walvoord, "Daniel, The Key to Prophetic Revelation".
And of course, a student of Scripture might also be interested in the following additional aspects:
In his book, John Walvoord writes regarding the interpretation of the seventy “weeks":
1. Per Walvoord: "...Montgomery, for all of his scholarship and knowledge of the history of interpretation, ends up with no reasonable interpretation at all.”, P.218
2. Per Walvoord: "...as Young points out, the word ‘sevens’ is in the masculine plural instead of the usual feminine plural. No clear explanation is given except that Young feels ‘it was for the deliberate purpose of calling attention to the fact that the word “sevens” is employed in an unusual sense.’", P.217
3. Per Walvoord: "...Young finally concludes after some discussion that Keit and Kliefoth are correct when they hold that the word ‘sevens’ does not necessarily mean year-weeks, but an intentionally indefinite designation of a period of time measured by the number seven, which chronological duration must be determined on other grounds.” , P.218
4. Per Montgomery: "... efforts to obtain an exact chronology fitting into the history of Salvation, after these 2,000 years of infinitely varied interpretations, would seem to preclude any use of the 70 Weeks for the determination of a definite prophetic chronology.", P. 217
5. Per Walvoord: "Some amillenarians, however, use a literal year time unit for the first sixty-nine weeks but an indefinite period for the last seven years, as in the case of Philip Mauro...", P. 218
6. Per Montgomery: "... the great Catholic chronographers ... as well as those of all subsequent chronographers (including the great Scalinger and Sir Isaac Newton) have failed.. And Edward Young too, finds no satisfactory conclusion for the seventy sevens ... and leaves it without a satisfactory explanation.", P. 217
7. Per Young, regarding "the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem": [/size]
"This phrase has reference to the issuance of the word, not from a Persian ruler but from God." , P. 224 -
John Wolvoord, "Daniel, The Key to Prophetic Revelation", Moody Press, Chicago, 1971
8. Per Newton: "We avoid also the doing violence to the language of Daniel, by taking the seven weeks and sixty two weeks for one number. Had that been Daniel’s meaning, he would have said sixty and nine weeks, and not seven weeks and sixty two weeks, a way of numbring used by no nation."
Isaac Newton, "Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John (1733)", http://www.isaacnewton.ca/daniel_apocalypse/pt1ch10.html
Veteran, it seems not all is as simple as your commentators present.
BibleScribe
John Wolvoord was a Pre-tribulationalist and a Dispensationalist. I'm not either one, so you've assumed wrong.
As others have also noted on this forum, Pre-tribulationalists consistently create backward and blasphemous heresies against God's Holy Writ just in order to keep their Pre-trib lie.
Are you trying to associate anyone that recognizes there's still "one week" (7 years) to be fulfilled in the prophecy given Daniel means one has to be a Pre-tribulationalist or Dispensationalist? Associations like that are what happens when someone goes around in circles within theological centers instead using simple common sense.