Who Is "the Restrainer" In 2 Thess. 2:6-7

[ATP]

Brother, if you think it was easy to go to the Cross, then you have absolutely no concept of what Jesus went through. Of course He prevailed by might, the might and power of His Father to Whom He clung when every ounce of His flesh wanted to run away from the Cross, to the point that "His sweat was as it were great drops of blood." Of course He was assailed by every weapon of Hell as He hung their dying, not able to see through the portal of the tomb, but had only the promises of His Father to cling to, as He was mocked and derided, and abandoned by everyone. Yes, The greatest victory in the history of the Universe was won on that day, when the Confirmation of the New Covenant of Grace was finished and God is even now accepting applicants to partake of His glorious New Covenant, which is according to Scripture His law written on the hearts of men. The Jesuits hate that too, that's why they have led countless unwary Christians into weekly Sun worship on Sunday.

..and yet, after all that suffering and blood we can still lose our salvation. Ain't that right Phone. You preach Grace, but have no idea what it is.

 

[michaelvpardo]

No, they are very related to the future 70th week of Dan 9:27 NIV. They are called birth pains. Matt 24:4-8 NIV.

Thanks. I prefer the word "travail" used in the original King James, but you just don't hear the word used much anymore.

 

[Phoneman777]

You're obfuscating; you're not answering the questions. I'm not interested in two people I've never heard of nor your particular take on Preterism.

Here are three events which happen after the sixty-two 'sevens'.
Daniel 9:26 Then after the sixty- two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.
What does "its end" refer to?

If only at the Last Supper did Jesus make a New Covenant - which you agreed happened -

1. What prior covenant did Jesus ever make in Scripture? Show the passage/verse(s) which state that.
2. Which covenant did Jesus shore up? The Abrahamic or Davidic?

Since the New Covenant at the Last Supper is the only covenant Jesus made -

1. What was the subsequent midpoint abomination?
2. Who had God's desolations poured out on them?

So leave your conspiracy laden preaching aside and try to have an actual debate.

I assure you that Historicism identified the Papacy as Antichrist followed decades later by Jesuits Alcazar and Ribera who fabricated Preterism and Futurism respectively. There's no need to be willfully ignorant of church history. All you need do is take a casual glance at the issues of the Protestant Reformation to see what I'm telling you is truth, my friend.

I've already told you what covenant Jesus made: It's the NEW COVENANT in Jeremiah 31:31 KJV. Countless verses point to the pre-incarnate Jesus as the God of the O.T. Paul says Jesus came to "confirm the promises (made) to the fathers", the New Covenant of salvation being the most precious to all of us, of course.

This New Covenant of salvation Jesus came to confirm for seven years, 3 1/2 years in Person and then 3 1/2 years through His disciples:
"How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation, which at the first began to be spoken of by the Lord and then was confirmed to us by them that heard Him." Hebrews 2:3 KJV

The desolations were poured out upon the Jews and Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

 

[Phoneman777]

Yes, He died 3.5 years after the 69 weeks. That doesn't minimize the fact that there is still a gap. Otherwise, Daniel would of put Jesus death in Dan 9:27. Even if Jesus died 3.5 years after the 483rd year, it still would not matter if God chose to stop the clock and add a gap for the antichrist, peace treaty and abomination of desolation to occur.


I agree, but as I stated above God has the authority to stop the clock. Besides, the scriptures below all point to future especially Dan 12, 2 Thess 2, Revelation, and completely annihilate any argument you have Phone. Dan 12, Matt 24 chapter is titled "The End Times" and 2 Thess 2 chapter is titled "The Man of Lawlessness" for crying out loud.

Dan 12:11-12 NIV, Matt 24:15 NIV, 2 Thess 2:3-4 NIV - Antichrist, third temple and the abomination of desolation is future.
Dan 12:11-12 NIV, Rev 11:2-3 NIV, Rev 12:6 NIV, Rev 12:14 NIV, Rev 13:5 NIV - 1260, 1290, 1335 days is future.

What verse in Scripture states that God inserted a gap?

 

[Phoneman777]

You don't sound like you're even willing to debate anything.

You sound frighteningly dogmatic in your take-it-or-leave-it approach.

There are several nuances in counting the seventy 'sevens' which you seem to have overlooked... which makes you less a lay Bible scholar and more of a cultist in your approach.

Sorry Charlie, only the best tuna will do.

What nuances? How difficult is it to locate 457 B.C. and then count to the end of 69 weeks (27 A.D.) where we find "Messiah the Prince" being baptized this lone year when Tiberius, Herod, and Pilate reigned together, after which during the last 7 year week He is crucified? Truth requires no debate, only a willingness to accept it, which you appear to lack.

 

[Phoneman777]

The seven and the sixty-two ‘sevens’ describe the first part of the timeline. They are connected by a conjunction in the Hebrew, so can be thought to run concurrently. The first seven ‘sevens’ represents the rebuilding timeframe for Jerusalem and the second set of ‘sevens’ represents the waiting period until the Messiah comes. In accounting for the prophecy three problem areas arise: the start date; the time itself; and the final point when the Messiah can be said to have come.

The start is revealed as the issuing of the decree to restore Jerusalem. Unfortunately this extremely important date is not totally clear. There are three times which can be used as a ‘starting’ point, and there is some fog in saying exactly which year between scholars.

• The first decree of Cyrus the Great around 537/6.
• The seventh year of Artaxerxes I around 458/7 B.C.
• The commission of King Artaxerxes to Nehemiah in 444/5/6 B.C.

The second problem is the manner of counting years. The typical manner Western man would use is totally foreign to Daniel and the Jewish culture; solar years. If one uses the Hebrew system of lunar years, the time is variable because of the inclusion of leap year months so it does not advance the months ahead of the solar cycle of seasons. Lastly, because it is prophecy, is the idea of using “prophetic” years by including a simplified time keeping method derived from the book of Revelation. These counting methods are as follows.

• Solar years, which is the Roman calendar of 28, (29,) 30, and 31 days per month, years of 365 days, with a leap year of 366 every four years (except on century years that are not divisible by 400).
• Lunar years, which is the Semantic calendar of 29.5 days per month and variable days in a year, usually 354, with leap years of 384 +/- 1, by which the addition of, marries with the solar calendar every 19 years.
• Prophetic years, which are based on a 30 day month and 360 days per year.

Then if that were not enough complexity, there are then three instances which Jesus could be said to have arrived:

• The first is his birth which the Magi observed.
• The second instance would be the start of Jesus’ Ministry.
• The third would be the Triumphal Entry which Jesus stressed as important:
........LK 19:40 "I tell you," he replied, "if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out."

One more layer of complexity comes in the Western system of year keeping. Eschewing the humanistic, secular cultural mores of “common period”, the basic division of years in the West hinges on Jesus’ domination as King. The European method of counting actually reflects an older method shared by the ancients in Biblical times: the year of a King. However, while the Roman Calendar, as modified by Julius Caesar was the basis for months and days, the numbering of years by Christ’s dominion was not universally recognized for several centuries. The modern system of counting years owes its invention to Dionysius Exiguus (Dennis the short) in early in the sixth century, but it was not fully accepted throughout Europe until about the twelfth century, and the Julian calendar was modified for leap years by Pope Gregory in the sixteenth century.

In the ‘Year of our Lord’, or Anno Domino system, there is no year zero. This has less to do with the fact that “0” was not included in the Roman numbering system, but because of the manner of keeping track of the year of the king. Thus when a king took office, it was his first year, even though its anniversary had not yet been reached. Years prior would be stated as the nth year of the prior king. To state prior years by the current king, like the entire first year is year 1, counting backwards is also the first year before the king became king.

In calculating the first Year of our Lord, Dennis the Short came up short. Modern scholars, using the Anno Domino system, date the death of Herod the Great, who ordered the infants in Bethlehem killed, as having died in the spring of the 4th year before Christ was born. Thus, the discrepancy: Jesus’ first year, 1 A.D., would have to be fixed between 6 B.C. and 4 B.C., since Herod’s decree was to eliminate the future King who had already been born: Jesus. Counting backwards on limited resources, Dionysius was off by about 1% considering his calculations were 500 years after Jesus’ first Advent.

• The first possibility might be found in the first decree of Cyrus the Great. However, this decree was only for the Temple, not the city.
• The second possible date may be in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I around 457 B.C. This established the Temple and its practices.
• The third possibility might be the commission of King Artaxerxes to Nehemiah in 446 B.C. This decree specifically calls for building the walls of Jerusalem.

Starting with Cyrus, none of the counting methods yields a date close to Christ’s birth, however, some Jewish and Christian scholars have set a terminus a quo, or beginning point in the reign of Cyrus which align with the Savior’s birth. (Know Therefore and Understand: A Biblical Explication of the First 69 Weeks of Daniel 9, by T. T. Schlegel.) Going by the second listed decree, Artaxerxes' first, can yield a date using solar or lunar years to align with Jesus' Baptism. Using the third decree with the first two counting methods overshoots the accepted range of dates for Jesus' first Advent using either solar or lunar year counting systems, but it can, when prophetic years are used, yield a reasonable date for the Messiah’s “coming” with Palm Sunday.

Concerning Jesus' birth, none of the possible methods point to it using Daniel 9:25. The interesting fact that the Magi had determined His birth leaves one to wonder if they hadn’t used some other method to arrive at Christ’s birth between 6 and 4 B.C. One could allow that the Magi may have had some other prophecies of Daniel in Babylon that might explain their arrival being timed correctly. Or, alternately, they may have used an additional celestial test such as the conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn or eclipses of the moon, and Jupiter. Jupiter, being the “kingly” planet, had such overtones in astrology that its appearance out from behind a conjunction may have signaled the arrival of the “King”. Several such astronomical signs occurred in this time period, but which one may have been interpreted as determining the Savior’s birth is not known. However, despite how they came to determine Jesus’ birth, however, the sign they followed was in the heavens (sky) and the Gospel accounts testify that they did arrive.

So the problem is three-fold, finding the actual start date, correctly calculating the intervening years, and finally, establishing the proper end date. It is important to note that because of the error in the start of the Year of our Lord counting system, that any date rendering of Jesus’ “coming” being fixated with His Baptism with this prophecy being the basis around 26/7 A.D.; would not conflict the Gospel account that He was around 30 at the time.

Depending on actual birth year, even in 26 A.D., Jesus would have been 30 to 32 at the time.

• Using the first decree of Cyrus has a problem in that its date is too “early” to have any alignment with the Messiah’s first Advent no matter in which manner you count the years. Furthermore, it does not comport with the prophecy in Daniel because it did not address the city.
• Using the second decree, Artaxerxes’ first, counting in straight solar years, would put the coming of the Messiah as his baptism in A.D. 26/7 and would conform to Jesus being crucified around A.D. 30/1. However, this decree too, does not address the rebuilding of the city, which must include its defenses to be complete.
• The third seems too recent because that would push the coming of the Messiah to A.D. 38 when counting in straight solar years. It is, however, the only decree to comport with the language of Daniel 9:25 to rebuild the city, and that fact is confirmed by the actions written in the book of Nehemiah. The problem of the late date is rectified, however, if one counts in prophetic years. This method then renders the “coming” of the Messiah as happening in early A.D. 31 which would coincide with Jesus' arrival on Palm Sunday rather than His Baptism.

It is important to note that the Western fascination with dates was not shared by the culture of the Jews in Biblical times. They were not so preoccupied by anniversaries as a way to mark the calendar, but by the fact that an event had transpired. Thus, there is no celebration of Jesus’ birthdate, only His Birth. Nor do we have any hard date evidence for Jesus’ birth other than a reference to a census in Luke which scholars tie to Quirinius, the Governor of Syria. He is the only known Roman ruler who ordered a taxation census of non-Roman citizens. The funny aspect to this is that the only known census he performed is dated 6-7 A.D., ten years after Herod the Great died. Thus, a clue in translation may be with protos whereby Luke describes the census which calls David to Bethlehem Quirinius’ first, because why would Luke say his first if there was only one? This then points to an early census than the only one recognized.

In conclusion, while other methods can yield similar results which approximate a reasonable time frame for Jesus’ first Advent, key factors must be weighed. In that regard, one method among the twenty seven (3 times 3 times 3) ways of ordering start dates, intervening years, and end dates has the strongest Biblical backing and also yields a reasonable time frame pointing to Jesus’ first Advent:

• The third decree because it rebuilds the city
• The use of prophetic years as revealed in Revelation
• The “coming” of the Lord on Palm Sunday as emphasized by Jesus.

What do you mean "this extremely important date is not totally clear?" 457 B.C. has been said authoritatively to be the most solid date in all of Scripture! We know beyond the shadow of a doubt that the seventh year reign of Artaxerxes was in 457 B.C. proven by extra-Biblical archaeology so much so that if you get down Grandma or Grandpa's old Bible with margins, you will find that very date in the margin. It is only now in a time that the whole world is wondering after the Papal Beast that what was so clear in the past is now "clouded in mystery". Cyrus' decree was limited to the temple, Darius' also was limited to the temple, but Artaxerxes' went well beyond just rebuilding the temple, and the angel told Daniel that the command was "to restore and build Jerusalem", not just the temple. So, which decree should we go with?

My confused friend, the decree went forth in 457 B.C. Jesus was baptized 483 years later, and then crucified 3 1/2 years after that. No if's, and's or gaps.

 

[Phoneman777]

I've shown you plenty of scripture. The Antichrist is called the "Covenant of Death". He's also the deceiver Phone.


Ironic how you also fail to get right even the most fundamental aspect of Christianity.

You believe you can't earn salvation, but you have to earn it to keep it? lol. opcorn:

No, you are wrong. You keep it the same way you obtain it: by surrendering to Jesus. However, you are free to return the gift of eternal life and run back to Satan any time you want, because God is not a cosmic rapist who forces others into an unwanted relationship with Him.

 

[Phoneman777]

..and yet, after all that suffering and blood we can still lose our salvation. Ain't that right Phone. You preach Grace, but have no idea what it is.

Yes, you may walk away from eternal life any time you wish, ATP. Only those who "abide in the Vine" will not find themselves branches cast forth into the fire. As for me, I choose to retain the grace of God purchased not with gold or silver, but with the precious blood of my Savior by abiding in Him in faithfulness to His commandments. How about you?

 

[ATP]

This New Covenant of salvation Jesus came to confirm for seven years, 3 1/2 years in Person and then 3 1/2 years through His disciples:
"How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation, which at the first began to be spoken of by the Lord and then was confirmed to us by them that heard Him." Hebrews 2:3 KJV

The New Covenant spoken of in the NT is the Covenant of Grace. This covenant has been active from the time of Pentecost to now. Not 7 years, rather 2000 years.

The desolations were poured out upon the Jews and Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

I don't deny that the abomination of desolation existed in biblical times, but it will also occur in the future.

What verse in Scripture states that God inserted a gap?

All of them. The abomination of desolation is not just an event that came to pass 2000 years ago. God put it in future prophecy also. Are you also denying the titles of the chapters? In what part of history do you believe "end times" exists? Why would Jesus set up an abomination??

Dan 12:11-12 NIV, Matt 24:15 NIV, 2 Thess 2:3-4 NIV - Antichrist, third temple and the abomination of desolation is future.
Dan 12:11-12 NIV, Rev 11:2-3 NIV, Rev 12:6 NIV, Rev 12:14 NIV, Rev 13:5 NIV - 1260, 1290, 1335 days is future.

The three "he's" reflects the characteristic of the same person, the antichrist...Dan 9:27 NIV 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 at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him."

No, you are wrong. You keep it the same way you obtain it: by surrendering to Jesus. However, you are free to return the gift of eternal life and run back to Satan any time you want, because God is not a cosmic rapist who forces others into an unwanted relationship with Him.

Rape is sin Phone. God's love brings life, not death. The fact that you have a distorted view of grace tells me you are either not born again or you are still a babe in Christ. Which is it?

Yes, you may walk away from eternal life any time you wish, ATP. Only those who "abide in the Vine" will not find themselves branches cast forth into the fire. As for me, I choose to retain the grace of God purchased not with gold or silver, but with the precious blood of my Savior by abiding in Him in faithfulness to His commandments. How about you?

The only reason you're still abiding in Him is because He's allowing you by His unfailing Grace, no matter how much you wanna take credit.

Isa 64:6 NIV All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

I assure you that Historicism identified the Papacy as Antichrist followed decades later by Jesuits Alcazar and Ribera who fabricated Preterism and Futurism respectively. There's no need to be willfully ignorant of church history. All you need do is take a casual glance at the issues of the Protestant Reformation to see what I'm telling you is truth, my friend.

Your conspiracy theories have nothing to do with the subject at hand. Your speculation is foolishness.

I've already told you what covenant Jesus made: It's the NEW COVENANT in Jeremiah 31:31 KJV. Countless verses point to the pre-incarnate Jesus as the God of the O.T. Paul says Jesus came to "confirm the promises (made) to the fathers", the New Covenant of salvation being the most precious to all of us, of course.

The one 'seven' is not confirmed. That is a poor translation at best and you totally misconstrue the language by going from the Hebrew gabar (to prevail) to the Greek bebaioō which actually does mean to confirm as we use it.

Earth to Phoneman777: Paul didn't write Hebrews. No one knows who did.
You seem to know a lot of things no one else knows, like the exact years of Jesus' birth, ministry, death, and the stoning of Stephen.

This New Covenant of salvation Jesus came to confirm for seven years, 3 1/2 years in Person and then 3 1/2 years through His disciples:

Jesus did not make a covenant until the last part of His First Advent.

Hebrews 2:3 is talking about personal salvation.
People were saved during Jesus' Ministry; the Apostles were among the first.
The unknown author is saying that they came to believe when they heard Jesus.
Personal salvation does not make a covenant.

Hebrews 2:3 is not stating that Jesus prevailed a limited, seven-year covenant.
Hebrews 2:3 is not stating that Jesus confirmed a limited, seven-year covenant.
Hebrews 2:3 is not an eschatological verse.

Using Hebrews 2:3 in this manner is a misapplication of the Bible based solely on one word: confirm.
This ugly exegesis reflects sloppy scholarship which totally ignores the context of the passage to make their point at all costs.

The desolations were poured out upon the Jews and Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

So you want to say that Jesus "confirmed" salvation twice: once at the beginning, and confirmed a covenant at the midpoint.
And you adamantly say there is no "gap".
But here you say the end of the one 'seven' is forty years later!

This is why Preterism falls apart so often. It can't put it all together.

And nobody knows the year Stephen was stoned.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

What verse in Scripture states that God inserted a gap?

Daniel 9:26

Then after the sixty- two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.

1. the Messiah will be cut off
Jesus' crucifixion on the cross is after the sixty-two 'sevens'.
Nowhere in this verse in Daniel, does Gabriel indicate, at least with first two points here, that what happens after the sixty-two 'sevens', happens within the one 'seven'.
By inference, Gabiel says "the end" that comes after the sixty-two 'sevens' is also the end of the one 'seven' though.

The verb "cut off" comes from kārat.
kārat cut off a part of the body, e.g. head, hand, foreskin; cut down trees, idols; cut out, eliminate, kill; cut (make) a covenant. - Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.

kārat is quite different than gabar, which as a verb means to prevail.
kārat is what Jesus did.
Jesus did not prevail a covenant by might, especially by military might which is a connotation within the definition one can make about the action of prevailing in verse 27.
Jesus cut a covenant with His shed Blood on the Cross.
And He formally declared that covenant the evening prior, which in Hebrew terms, would be on the same day.

2. the people will destroy the city and the sanctuary
This event takes place some 40 years later with the First Jewish Revolt.
We cannot say it was 38 years later because nobody knows the year that Jesus was crucified.

The Second Jewish Revolt resulted in the Romans completely exiling the Jews and renaming their country Palestine.
It is interesting that both Jewish Revolts are not termed as wars.
It is also interesting that both Jewish Revolts occur during the Roman "peace," or Pax Romana.

Gabriel does not identify who these people were outright.
However, history provides the answer: the Romans.

2a. (of the prince who is to come)
This is the prepositional phrase which modifies "the people".
While the people are not identified - they identify national source the second person of Daniel 9:26.
The Romans are therefore identified the source for the prince who is to come.

This "prince" is not the Messiah.
The subject of the verb kārat is mashiyach, or messiah in transliteration. This refers to our Lord, Jesus.
The object of the prepositional phrase is nagiyd, which means leader, ruler, captain, prince. This refers to the future anti-Christ.

3. And its end will come with a flood
I asked you before what is "its end" and you obfuscated and never answered.

The answer to what is "its end" in Daniel 9:26 is: it is the end of the seventy-sevens.

The end of the seventy-'sevens' is first identified in verse 26. All Gabriel gives us and Daniel at this point, is that the end comes like a flood.
While Gabriel gives no details about the one 'seven' at this point, nevertheless, he names the end of both the seventy-'sevens' and the one 'seven'.

The context of this passage is the seventy-'sevens' which Daniel has figured out by reading Leviticus 26:18.
The reason Gabriel is giving Daniel this passage is to reward his effort in seeking God's Plan and to impart an important fact of eschatology to us.

Does the end come with a flood?
No, because of the Covenant God made with Noah; the world will not be destroyed by water.

So this is not a literal flood.
So how it is like a flood?

Well after a very long time, it will come very quickly.
This is a figurative use of the word "flood".

This usage is like how a river bed in the desert is dry for years and then one day, it suddenly becomes a raging torrent of water, mud, and all kinds of debris swept along from some distant rain storm. It might not even have rained where the people are encamped in the river bank for shade, but suddenly, they are swept up by this powerful surge, and pummeled to death amidst the debris and being dashed against the rocky bed as the flood takes them downstream.

3a. even to the end there will be war
This is the most important delay which inserts a gap into Daniel 9:26 between the end of the sixty-two 'sevens' and the end of the one 'seven'.

There are two battles which happen on the Day of the Lord.
The first is at Jerusalem and the second in the Valley of Decision.

There is a war which happens in conjunction with God's desolations: the sixth Trumpet which kills a third of the mankind who lives until then.

Then there is the final battle which completes the war whereby Man has risen up in defiance (actually another connotation within the word gabar) against God at Armageddon.
In this final battle, the anti-Christ, the prince who is to come, is defeated, captured alive, and Jesus is victorious - having smashed the Roman toes and obliterating the entire statue of Nebuchadnezzar.

So war happens IN the one 'seven' which ends this current state of man's affairs whereby the nations (which has a spiritual component of a beast of a dragon which is an entity unto itself) and allows a transition to the Millennium reign of Christ Jesus with an iron rod.

Besides these battles and wars described within the one 'seven', war has been a continual state of Man since Jesus rose to Heaven.
It is this third condition described by Gabriel which dictates an ongoing gap between the sixty-two 'sevens' and the one 'seven'.

3b. desolations are determined.
This is an interesting fact.
Gabriel indicates nearly 500 years before Jesus' First Advent that plans are underway for the end.

Where are these plans stored?
An interesting question... Kings usually have their decrees written down for future reference.

Allow me to surmise that the desolations that God has determined are encased within and without the Scroll whose Seals only Jesus can break.
_______________________________________

The gap need not be explicitly stated:
Gabriel did not need to state, "Now, I am going to insert a gap between the sixty-two 'sevens' and the one 'seven'."
Gabriel said three things come between the sixty-two 'sevens' and the end of the seventy 'sevens'.

Eschatology is not mother's milk. It is not for the simple. It is real meat, and it takes wisdom to understand it.
If you have to have it all spelled out for you - you do not have the wisdom to discern what God has in plan.

 

[ATP]

Eschatology is not mother's milk. It is not for the simple. It is real meat, and it takes wisdom to understand it.
If you have to have it all spelled out for you - you do not have the wisdom to discern what God has in plan.

Would you also agree that the person proving the 70th week is past would also have to prove..

Dan 12:11-12 NIV, Matt 24:15 NIV, 2 Thess 2:3-4 NIV, Rev 11:2-3 NIV, Rev 12:6 NIV, Rev 12:14 NIV, Rev 13:5 NIV...

is also past?

p.s. awesome post Marc O.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Yes. They are all related, and what God conveys in the inspired Word in just a few verses, takes reams of paper to study and that much more to expound upon.

Shakespeare said: "Brevity is the soul of wit." How much more is God than us when the original Message is so succinct?

 

[Phoneman777]

Daniel 9:26

Then after the sixty- two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.

1. the Messiah will be cut off
Jesus' crucifixion on the cross is after the sixty-two 'sevens'.
Nowhere in this verse in Daniel, does Gabriel indicate, at least with first two points here, that what happens after the sixty-two 'sevens', happens within the one 'seven'.
By inference, Gabiel says "the end" that comes after the sixty-two 'sevens' is also the end of the one 'seven' though.

The verb "cut off" comes from kārat.
kārat cut off a part of the body, e.g. head, hand, foreskin; cut down trees, idols; cut out, eliminate, kill; cut (make) a covenant. - Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.

kārat is quite different than gabar, which as a verb means to prevail.
kārat is what Jesus did.
Jesus did not prevail a covenant by might, especially by military might which is a connotation within the definition one can make about the action of prevailing in verse 27.
Jesus cut a covenant with His shed Blood on the Cross.
And He formally declared that covenant the evening prior, which in Hebrew terms, would be on the same day.

2. the people will destroy the city and the sanctuary
This event takes place some 40 years later with the First Jewish Revolt.
We cannot say it was 38 years later because nobody knows the year that Jesus was crucified.

The Second Jewish Revolt resulted in the Romans completely exiling the Jews and renaming their country Palestine.
It is interesting that both Jewish Revolts are not termed as wars.
It is also interesting that both Jewish Revolts occur during the Roman "peace," or Pax Romana.

Gabriel does not identify who these people were outright.
However, history provides the answer: the Romans.

2a. (of the prince who is to come)
This is the prepositional phrase which modifies "the people".
While the people are not identified - they identify national source the second person of Daniel 9:26.
The Romans are therefore identified the source for the prince who is to come.

This "prince" is not the Messiah.
The subject of the verb kārat is mashiyach, or messiah in transliteration. This refers to our Lord, Jesus.
The object of the prepositional phrase is nagiyd, which means leader, ruler, captain, prince. This refers to the future anti-Christ.

3. And its end will come with a flood
I asked you before what is "its end" and you obfuscated and never answered.

The answer to what is "its end" in Daniel 9:26 is: it is the end of the seventy-sevens.

The end of the seventy-'sevens' is first identified in verse 26. All Gabriel gives us and Daniel at this point, is that the end comes like a flood.
While Gabriel gives no details about the one 'seven' at this point, nevertheless, he names the end of both the seventy-'sevens' and the one 'seven'.

The context of this passage is the seventy-'sevens' which Daniel has figured out by reading Leviticus 26:18.
The reason Gabriel is giving Daniel this passage is to reward his effort in seeking God's Plan and to impart an important fact of eschatology to us.

Does the end come with a flood?
No, because of the Covenant God made with Noah; the world will not be destroyed by water.

So this is not a literal flood.
So how it is like a flood?

Well after a very long time, it will come very quickly.
This is a figurative use of the word "flood".

This usage is like how a river bed in the desert is dry for years and then one day, it suddenly becomes a raging torrent of water, mud, and all kinds of debris swept along from some distant rain storm. It might not even have rained where the people are encamped in the river bank for shade, but suddenly, they are swept up by this powerful surge, and pummeled to death amidst the debris and being dashed against the rocky bed as the flood takes them downstream.

3a. even to the end there will be war
This is the most important delay which inserts a gap into Daniel 9:26 between the end of the sixty-two 'sevens' and the end of the one 'seven'.

There are two battles which happen on the Day of the Lord.
The first is at Jerusalem and the second in the Valley of Decision.

There is a war which happens in conjunction with God's desolations: the sixth Trumpet which kills a third of the mankind who lives until then.

Then there is the final battle which completes the war whereby Man has risen up in defiance (actually another connotation within the word gabar) against God at Armageddon.
In this final battle, the anti-Christ, the prince who is to come, is defeated, captured alive, and Jesus is victorious - having smashed the Roman toes and obliterating the entire statue of Nebuchadnezzar.

So war happens IN the one 'seven' which ends this current state of man's affairs whereby the nations (which has a spiritual component of a beast of a dragon which is an entity unto itself) and allows a transition to the Millennium reign of Christ Jesus with an iron rod.

Besides these battles and wars described within the one 'seven', war has been a continual state of Man since Jesus rose to Heaven.
It is this third condition described by Gabriel which dictates an ongoing gap between the sixty-two 'sevens' and the one 'seven'.

3b. desolations are determined.
This is an interesting fact.
Gabriel indicates nearly 500 years before Jesus' First Advent that plans are underway for the end.

Where are these plans stored?
An interesting question... Kings usually have their decrees written down for future reference.

Allow me to surmise that the desolations that God has determined are encased within and without the Scroll whose Seals only Jesus can break.
_______________________________________

The gap need not be explicitly stated:
Gabriel did not need to state, "Now, I am going to insert a gap between the sixty-two 'sevens' and the one 'seven'."
Gabriel said three things come between the sixty-two 'sevens' and the end of the seventy 'sevens'.

Eschatology is not mother's milk. It is not for the simple. It is real meat, and it takes wisdom to understand it.
If you have to have it all spelled out for you - you do not have the wisdom to discern what God has in p

We'll just have to agree to disagree. It is crystal clear that Messiah is cut off after the 69 Weeks which can only be during the 70th Week.

The whole 70 Weeks are "determined" or "amputated", not just the 70th Week. It is amputated from the 2,300 Days prophecy.

Whether you identify the "prince" with the Romans or the Jews, Jesus being Messiah the Prince, no where is here represented Antichrist. Jesus made the New Covenant in the OT and came to confirm it in His flesh.

No where does the prophecy say the wars have to take place during the 70 Weeks. Any claim of this is mere inference, and incorrect at that.

The 70 Weeks were a "last chance" test for the Israelites to get their act together in time for the arrival of the Messiah, which they failed to do and that is why they are no longer pertinent to the fulfillment of end time prophecy, though Jesuit Futurism disagrees. The idea that a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem with a re-established sacrificial system is to be called the "the Temple of God" when such a temple would be a collective national middle finger in the face of God, is just silly. God would never refer to such a temple as that. The Antichrist has been sitting in the "temple" (Gr. "naos") church since 538 A.D. and spreading Jesuit Futurism since the 16th century.

 

[Phoneman777]

Would you also agree that the person proving the 70th week is past would also have to prove..

Dan 12:11-12 NIV, Matt 24:15 NIV, 2 Thess 2:3-4 NIV, Rev 11:2-3 NIV, Rev 12:6 NIV, Rev 12:14 NIV, Rev 13:5 NIV...

is also past?

p.s. awesome post Marc O.

The only proof you need that the 70th week is past is to count 490 years from the decree in 457 B.C. God knows the number of hairs on your head, yet you believe He doesn't know how to count years and found it necessary to insert a "gap"?

Simple math will disprove your theory:

490 =/= 483 + 2000 + 7
490 =/= 2,490

You see, 490 does not equal 2,490, bro. Unless you are using Common Core math, then maybe.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

It is crystal clear that Messiah is cut off after the 69 Weeks which can only be during the 70th Week.

Anytime someone says it is "clear", I am sure what I am about to hear (or read) is their conclusion.

Likewise, while the text only says Jesus' karat comes after the sixty-two 'sevens'; it is your conclusion that it can only be during the one 'seven'.

That is not so, and it is not the only conclusion which can be drawn. It is however one you can allow in your narrow way of thinking which disavows even of your Preterist leanings.

I also find it interestingly manifest that you revert to your mantra rather than answer the difficult parts of Gabriel's message to Daniel which inserts a broad time period before the end of the seventy 'sevens'.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

Jesus made the New Covenant in the OT and came to confirm it in His flesh.

This blanket statement misrepresents Scripture.

Where did Jesus make the New Covenant in the Old Testament? Provide chapter and verse or be called a charlatan.

Secondly, Jesus "CUT" the New Covenant, He did not prevail by military might a limited-time covenant which ran out before the Gospels were even written!

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

No where does the prophecy say the wars have to take place during the 70 Weeks. Any claim of this is mere inference, and incorrect at that.

Again, this is direct contradiction of what Gabriel said by a person of little understanding.

Gabriel said:
even to the end there will be war;

That end is in reference to the time for Daniel's people, (and Daniel is a member of more than one group: i.e., he is also a person who is in the Book of Life) and his city, Jerusalem, which is still in existence - which is the whole of the seventy 'sevens': the seven and the sixty-two 'sevens' and even unto the end of the one 'seven'!

Logically, the one 'seven' must run its course until there is an end!

Now I know math is hard for some people and logic is hard for others - but in this case, it goes over the heads of some quite easily.

ATP posted some related verses, Mt 24:15, for instance. In that passage, Jesus gives us no less than five events in their sequence order which start at the midpoint abomination, further stating it is in the Holy Place, which specifically references the Temple in the Bible, and leads up to the sun/moon/star event which presages the Day of the Lord.

The sun/moon/star event is closely connected with two battles which are fought on the Day of the Lord in Joel as well other other book of the Prophets in the Old Testament.

• To state that nowhere does prophecy say the wars have to take place during the 70 Weeks is an utter falsehood.
• To state that it is mere inference manifests the authors' inability to read for understanding.
• To state that it is incorrect is an outright falsehood again.

 

[ATP]

The only proof you need that the 70th week is past is to count 490 years from the decree in 457 B.C. God knows the number of hairs on your head, yet you believe He doesn't know how to count years and found it necessary to insert a "gap"?

Simple math will disprove your theory:

490 =/= 483 + 2000 + 7
490 =/= 2,490

You see, 490 does not equal 2,490, bro. Unless you are using Common Core math, then maybe.

If it's ok to ask. How many years have you been in Christ. Do you know the year you came to faith.

 

[Marcus O'Reillius]

The only proof you need that the 70th week is past is to count 490 years from the decree in 457 B.C.

So simple a caveman could do it.

Of course, when challenged, you fail to rise to it and answer questions and counterpoints head on. You didn't tackle ANY of the related verses ATP pointed out!

As far as proof:
You have provided none!

You count Jesus' Baptism as the "confirmation" of covenant made before -
YET - you cannot provide any evidence where Jesus made that "confirmation" -
NOR - can you tell me which covenant was "confirmed".
(In Daniel 9:27, the prince prevails a covenant; he "confirms" nothing.)

When you finally admit that Jesus only made the New Covenant at the end of His First Advent -
- You fail to update your eschatology
- AND you cannot reconcile how Jesus' New Covenant somehow expired so that we cannot enjoy its rewards!

When pinned down on when the desolations fall during the one 'seven' -
- You point to A.D. 70 which is decades later
- AND you cannot even recognize the irony in the dichotomy where you insist there is no gap and then you put one in!

Proof? You have none.
Preterism is the weakest eschatology.