Ready for 2012?

[TheForgiven]

Hello all.

Just wondering, is everyone ready for 2012?

http://aseemrastogi2.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/224440_main.jpg

I've noticed that the Dispensational Teachers are not quite as vocal regarding this subject. I've tried searching for forums on how many actually believe that 2012 could very well be the end of the world. :lol:

Months ago, Jack Vanempie believed that 2012 could very well be the last of mankind's existence on earth. He does not claim to have developed this belief, but he does endorse it with his latest books/DVD video. Check out this YouTube video of Jack Van Impi, and see just how wrong his belief system is. He quotes James claiming that he (St. James) was referring to our economical hardships as being applicable to today. Gee! I had no idea that St. James was writing his letter to the church, but speaking about us some 2000 years later. I guess Jack failed to read the initial opening in St. Jame's chapter 1:1, "TO THE TWELVE TRIBES SCATTER ABROAD...."

Why would James write a letter to the 12 Tribes of Israel (which no longer exist by the way), and somehow warn them of the future rich who would weep and wail for the misery that's coming upon us? It makes no sense at all. Jack Van Impe is a classic example of false interpretations of the Bible. He may have a good memory with verses, but his application/interpretation of those verse are so liberal, he's be more Democratic than President Obamo.

Here's a link to his video....Oh, and according to Jack, Obamo is the EU's newest puppy to enforce the One World government.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZrM8G7Reik

A commenter on the Youtube nailed it right on the head! "Fear" is how the Dispensational system sales. They can't promote Christianity into the hearts, and minds of the unsaved; they have to scare them into the pews.

Anyone interested in talking about this subject?

Joe

[Edward Goodie]

Hello all.

Just wondering, is everyone ready for 2012?

http://aseemrastogi2.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/224440_main.jpg

I've noticed that the Dispensational Teachers are not quite as vocal regarding this subject. I've tried searching for forums on how many actually believe that 2012 could very well be the end of the world. :lol:

Months ago, Jack Vanempie believed that 2012 could very well be the last of mankind's existence on earth. He does not claim to have developed this belief, but he does endorse it with his latest books/DVD video. Check out this YouTube video of Jack Van Impi, and see just how wrong his belief system is. He quotes James claiming that he (St. James) was referring to our economical hardships as being applicable to today. Gee! I had no idea that St. James was writing his letter to the church, but speaking about us some 2000 years later. I guess Jack failed to read the initial opening in St. Jame's chapter 1:1, "TO THE TWELVE TRIBES SCATTER ABROAD...."

Why would James write a letter to the 12 Tribes of Israel (which no longer exist by the way), and somehow warn them of the future rich who would weep and wail for the misery that's coming upon us? It makes no sense at all. Jack Van Impe is a classic example of false interpretations of the Bible. He may have a good memory with verses, but his application/interpretation of those verse are so liberal, he's be more Democratic than President Obamo.

Here's a link to his video....Oh, and according to Jack, Obamo is the EU's newest puppy to enforce the One World government.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZrM8G7Reik

A commenter on the Youtube nailed it right on the head! "Fear" is how the Dispensational system sales. They can't promote Christianity into the hearts, and minds of the unsaved; they have to scare them into the pews.

Anyone interested in talking about this subject?

Joe

Let's see...am I ready for 2012...yep, I am.

However, according to the Rapture Index (http://www.raptureready.com/rap2.html) I might not be. Oh, dear, I am so confused. :confused:

[Rose]

Hello all.

Just wondering, is everyone ready for 2012?

http://aseemrastogi2.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/224440_main.jpg

I've noticed that the Dispensational Teachers are not quite as vocal regarding this subject. I've tried searching for forums on how many actually believe that 2012 could very well be the end of the world. :lol:

Months ago, Jack Vanempie believed that 2012 could very well be the last of mankind's existence on earth. He does not claim to have developed this belief, but he does endorse it with his latest books/DVD video. Check out this YouTube video of Jack Van Impi, and see just how wrong his belief system is. He quotes James claiming that he (St. James) was referring to our economical hardships as being applicable to today. Gee! I had no idea that St. James was writing his letter to the church, but speaking about us some 2000 years later. I guess Jack failed to read the initial opening in St. Jame's chapter 1:1, "TO THE TWELVE TRIBES SCATTER ABROAD...."

Why would James write a letter to the 12 Tribes of Israel (which no longer exist by the way), and somehow warn them of the future rich who would weep and wail for the misery that's coming upon us? It makes no sense at all. Jack Van Impe is a classic example of false interpretations of the Bible. He may have a good memory with verses, but his application/interpretation of those verse are so liberal, he's be more Democratic than President Obamo.

Here's a link to his video....Oh, and according to Jack, Obamo is the EU's newest puppy to enforce the One World government.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZrM8G7Reik

A commenter on the Youtube nailed it right on the head! "Fear" is how the Dispensational system sales. They can't promote Christianity into the hearts, and minds of the unsaved; they have to scare them into the pews.

Anyone interested in talking about this subject?

Joe

Hey Joe,

I'm ready......to see all those poor deceived souls who will be weeping and wailing :bawl: when 2012 comes and goes with the world still spinning round and round :hysterical:

Rose

[TheForgiven]

Let's see...am I ready for 2012...yep, I am.

However, according to the Rapture Index I might not be. Oh, dear, I am so confused.

I'm just as confused as you are brother TruthSeeker. I fail to see how Jack Van Impe can imply that the rapture could happen sometime before the end of the world in 2012. Then again, I think he's a Pre-Tribulation teacher; for he believes that the Saints will be "raptured" off the earth before the final 3 1/2 years of the earths destruction. Of course I could be mistaken, as he may be a teacher that believes Saints will be raptured before the final 7 years of mans doomed destiny begins. I'll never understand the radical interpretations of the Dispensational teachers. Actually, I understand what they teach, and how they arrive at their conclusions. But Jacks misapplication of the scriptures is a classic example of Futurist dogma misinterpreting the Bible.

2012 will be another Y2K conspiracy come and gone, with no end-of-the-world in sight. I'd better be careful though, before they start accusing me of mocking the Lord's return.

See folks? That's the difference between Preterist and first century Jews. The first century Jews who rejected Christ as the Messiah mocked the Christians during Nero's persecution for not coming to save them. It is THEY of whom Peter was talking about; not Preterist's, or atheists, etc. Besides, we Preterist's do not mock the Lord's return; we believe He kept His promise as he delivered unto the Apostles prior to His crucifixion.

The Lord was certainly not slack in keeping His promise, but showed his great patients as of a 1000 years of tolerance, and gave them (Jews) time to repent and accept Him as the Messiah; and not just them (Jews), but Gentiles as well. And at the right time, the Lord returned with his beloved Kingdom, poured out His righteous indignation upon the heathen abiding in Apostate Israel, and all throughout the Roman world.

Long live the Israel of God; His Holy Church.

Joe

[TheForgiven]

Hey Joe,

I'm ready......to see all those poor deceived souls who will be weeping and wailing when 2012 comes and goes with the world still spinning round and round

Rose

:lol: I hear ya. The awful thing is people wept more during the middle ages as there were many folks dying of diseases, and suffering extreme poverty, if only they had simple bread to eat. Our Country may be suffering a slight set-back from economical problems, but no where near as it did in the 1920's, when the stock market crashed.

Sort of makes you wonder how many stock markets have to crash before the Dispensational teachers understand the truths behind the Lord's return.

Oh well, the world will never know.....

Joe

[basilfo]

Oh, the above reminds me.....they're running a Twilight Zone marathon today on the SciFi network. :eek:

Happy New Year everyone!

Dave

**********************edited**************

Sorry Joe. The post I was referring to was removed. Didn't mean yours! It was something about astrology and 1988 I think. Wacky stuff. Maybe Richard took it down. Disregard my Ron Serling reference.

[Ron Ben Yaakov]

The Apostle Paul penned these Scriptures to his prize student, Timothy: "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron..." [1 Timothy 4:1-2].

This false prophecy, stating the end of the world will take place in 2012, definitely falls into the category of "doctrines of demons" who are led by Satan, the god of this world. For Jack Van Impe to say that the year, 2012 is the end of the world, is to deny the book of Revelation, which teaches about the one-thousand year reign of Messiah which commences once He returns and destroys the Antichrist and his armies. If the year of 2012 ushers in the destruction of the world, then, when will Daniel's Seventieth Week take place, consisting of the Tribulation Period, the Great Tribulation (Jacob's Trouble), and God's wrath?

If the year 2012 ushers in the destruction of the world, then, antichrist's armies need not be destroyed; the Sheep and Goat Judgment need not take place, nor does the LORD need to set up His one-thousand year reign, as well as to send fire down from Heaven and destroy the armies of Satan when Satan is loosed at the end of the one-thousand year reign. There will be no need to usher up the dead from Hell, then, cast them into the Lake of Fire during the Great White Throne Judgment. Much more could be said!

Anyone who adds to or takes away from the book of Revelation is in deep trouble: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book; and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book" [Revelation 22:18-19]. Is this serious, or is it not? Think about it!

Regarding Jack Van Impe, there are many others who follow in rank such as Benny Hinn, John Hagee, Jerry Jenkins, Tim LaHaye, and a host of others, too numerous to list here - all are false teachers! They are all anti-Semites who deny the existence of the State of Israel, as well as the 12 tribes of Israel. Anyone who says that the 12 tribes of Israel no longer exist is to call Yeshua/Jesus a liar since He is the Source of the book of Revelation [Revelation 1:1], including chapter 7:4-8, giving us a full list of the 12 tribes of Israel. Have you noticed how many within the modern church are preaching that the Church is the New Spiritual Israel, that God has given up on the Jews? Nothing could be further from the truth. The same people who are proclaiming these lies, are possessed by the same demonic strongholds that possessed Hitler and his gang of cut-throats.

I challenge anyone who makes statements as such, to show anyone on this forum the Scriptures stating that the 12 tribes no longer exist!

My wife and I are Israelis, and we know quite well that the PLO, along with the United Nations preach that Israel and the Jewish people never existed. This doctrine of demons is strongly promoted within the walls of the modern churches around the world. It's not hard to recognize an anti-Semite who denies Israel and the 12 tribes of Israel. All you have to do is read the Word of God, from Genesis to Revelation, and you'll soon find out that all the tribes named in the Bible are still in God's plan.

We have too many ignorant people voicing their opinions; those who twist the Scriptures to their own destruction [2 Peter 3:16-17]. Hence, this is why I encourage all of my brothers and sisters on this forum to exercise the discernment the Holy Spirit has anointed you with so you will recognize false teaching when it comes your way.

Blessings in Messiah Yeshua,

Ron Ben Yaakov

Open Thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy Torah - Psalm 119:18 .

[Richard Amiel McGough]

This false prophecy, stating the end of the world will take place in 2012, definitely falls into the category of "doctrines of demons" who are led by Satan, the god of this world. For Jack Van Impe to say that the year, 2012 is the end of the world, is to deny the book of Revelation, which teaches about the one-thousand year reign of Messiah which commences once He returns and destroys the Antichrist and his armies. If the year of 2012 ushers in the destruction of the world, then, when will Daniel's Seventieth Week take place, consisting of the Tribulation Period, the Great Tribulation (Jacob's Trouble), and God's wrath?

Wow! That is a very densely packed post Ron. I agree completely that Van Impe's doctrines are false, but his primary errors lie not in predictions about 2012. Rather, his primary errors lie in his futurism that denies Daniel's 70th week was fulfilled when God said it would be fulfilled in 70 AD.

The doctrine of the 2000+ year gap between the 69th and 70th week has absolutely no foundation in Scripture. Indeed, it directly contradicts the plain meaning of Daniel's 70 Weeks in which God revealed how much time until the consummation. If you add 2000+ years in Daniel's 490 years, then we get 2,490+ years and the prophecy no longer tells us anything about how much time before the fulfillment, and that defeats the purpose of the prophecy.

There are many other fundamental problems with the futurist theories that you present. The doctrine of the a future "Antichrist" world dictator has no foundation in the Bible. The word "antichrist" is defined as anyone who teaches either of two heresies: 1) That Jesus was not Messiah (Christ), or 2) that Jesus did not come in the flesh. Scripture says nothing about an "antichrist" that would be a world dictator defeated by Christ. For that matter, the word "world" in prophecy almost always refers to the land of Israel and surrounding nations. It very rarely refers to the globe of planet earth. It corresponds to the "eretz" of the OT. Almost all futurists fail to understand this important point.

The fundamental error of futurism is that it denies the plain meaning of the Bible on hundreds of points. Most specifically, Christ declared that the events of Revelation would happen "soon" for the "time" was at hand back then, in the first century. Nearly every book of the NT confirms His Words. John declared that it was the "last hour" in the first century! Paul declared that the "end times" were happening in the first century. Christ said everything would happen during the lives of his audience whom He addressed as "this generation." And so on and on and on - the testimony of the NT is uniform from beginning to end: the End Times happened in the destruction of Jerusalem in the first century.

I very much look forward to diligently working with you to discern what the Bible really teaches on these matters.

Many blessings in Messiah,

Richard

[Ron Ben Yaakov]

Hi Richard:

I have to disagree with your statement about the "antichrist" not being involved in the end time events that will take place during Daniel's Seventieth Week. A large majority describe this period as the Tribulation Period, consisting of 7 years, but this is not true. Daniel's Seventieth Week is divided into 3 parts: 1) The Tribulation Period. 2) The Great Tribulation (Jacob's Trouble). 3) God's Wrath.

If I understand you correctly, you don't believe there will be a man come on the scene called "antichrist" in the days ahead. He will be a strong charismatic figure that approaches Israel with his three-nation coalition to deceive Israel into signing a Death Covenant for a period of 7 years.

If this be the case, that you deny this biblical teaching, then, I'm wasting my time on this forum. Again, the book of Revelation, along with the book of Daniel, including Yeshua's teaching in Matthew, Mark and Luke are specific about this person called "antichrist" "the abomination of desolation" "the son of perdition" and other titles.

Please remove me from being a participant on your forum. Thank you.

Ron Ben Yaakov

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Richard:

I have to disagree with your statement about the "antichrist" not being involved in the end time events that will take place during Daniel's Seventieth Week. A large majority describe this period as the Tribulation Period, consisting of 7 years, but this is not true. Daniel's Seventieth Week is divided into 3 parts: 1) The Tribulation Period. 2) The Great Tribulation (Jacob's Trouble). 3) God's Wrath.

If I understand you correctly, you don't believe there will be a man come on the scene called "antichrist" in the days ahead. He will be a strong charismatic figure that approaches Israel with his three-nation coalition to deceive Israel into signing a Death Covenant for a period of 7 years.

If this be the case, that you deny this biblical teaching, then, I'm wasting my time on this forum. Again, the book of Revelation, along with the book of Daniel, including Yeshua's teaching in Matthew, Mark and Luke are specific about this person called "antichrist" "the abomination of desolation" "the son of perdition" and other titles.

Please remove me from being a participant on your forum. Thank you.

Ron Ben Yaakov
Hi Ron,

I would be very sorry if you chose to quit the conversation so quickly. I don't know why you would feel a need to quit. I would never kick you off the forum merely because you hold non-Biblical views about eschatology. On the contrary, I delight in digging deep into what the Bible really teaches with folks who see things differently.

Your reaction to my post seems to indicate that you have never seriously studied eschatology. I say this because anyone who has seriously studied what the Bible really teaches about the end times knows that the most straightforward and literal reading of Scripture leads to the preterist position. But it seems that you simply reject the plain teaching of Scripture in favor of unfounded futurist theories about an "antichrist" global dictator and a 2000+ year gap in Daniel, etc. Those theories are not taught anywhere in the Bible. The Bible plainly and explicitly teaches that the Great Tribulation would happen during the lives of the first century Christians, and history has confirmed this with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. It is the greatest witness to the divine origin of the Bible and the truth of predictive prophecy. Futurist doctrines deny the fulfillment of God's Word and so destroy its witness to God's Truth.

I truly hope that you will attempt to support your doctrines from the Bible. I have been trying to discuss eschatology with futurists for years but they usually just quit and leave when they realize that I demand they establish their doctrines on what the Bible really says. Would you not be doing the world a great service if you at least attempted to establish your doctrines on what the Bible really says?

All the very best,

Richard

[Rose]

Hi Richard:

I have to disagree with your statement about the "antichrist" not being involved in the end time events that will take place during Daniel's Seventieth Week. A large majority describe this period as the Tribulation Period, consisting of 7 years, but this is not true. Daniel's Seventieth Week is divided into 3 parts: 1) The Tribulation Period. 2) The Great Tribulation (Jacob's Trouble). 3) God's Wrath.

If I understand you correctly, you don't believe there will be a man come on the scene called "antichrist" in the days ahead. He will be a strong charismatic figure that approaches Israel with his three-nation coalition to deceive Israel into signing a Death Covenant for a period of 7 years.

If this be the case, that you deny this biblical teaching, then, I'm wasting my time on this forum. Again, the book of Revelation, along with the book of Daniel, including Yeshua's teaching in Matthew, Mark and Luke are specific about this person called "antichrist" "the abomination of desolation" "the son of perdition" and other titles.

Please remove me from being a participant on your forum. Thank you.

Ron Ben Yaakov

Hey there Ron,

I'm sorry you have reacted so hastily in your decision to leave...:confused: We are very open here to discuss all sides of Biblical issues.

The one point I would like to reiterate concerning the 70 weeks of Daniel that Richard mentioned, is the keeping of the integrity of the prophecy. A specific time period is spoken of as a unit to complete the requirements, ending with the anointing of Messiah.
Dan.9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

The period given is of 70 weeks of 7 days (1 week), it is very important to keep the structural integrity of that number because of its symbolic representation, and the clear wording of the time period determined until the anointing of Messiah.

Remember when Jesus answered Peter's question of how many time one should forgive his brother: "seventy times seven".... we see from His response how very important it is when interpreting portions of Scripture to not alter its symbolic meaning by inserting our own alterations, but to try and discern its true meaning.

I hope you change your mind and decide to stay, but either way I wish you all the best in your journey to find the Truth.

Many Blessings

Rose

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Wouldn't the 'Anti'-Christ be a mentality or belief, rather an individual?

That is exactly correct. The Bible defines "antichrist" as anyone who holds to either of two heresies (false beliefs):


1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. There is no other Biblical definition of "antichrist." The idea of a "antichrist global dictator" has no foundation in the Bible.



Christ 'Within' - Unlocking the DNA Within.

Governments poison our vaccines, water, food, culture, etc. to keep our DNA in a damaged state. Thus, keeping us wandering for a 'Savior', where the Savior is our DNA (Christ-Within). I've never seen a Bird wage a plan of 'Eugenics' on another group of Birds.

This doesn't make any sense to me at all. There was no governmental poisoning of "vaccines, water, food" in the first century, and there is nothing in the Bible that connects a "Christ within" with DNA.



Animals kill animals for food; not thrills (ie Fallen Angels/ Dark DNA)

Ever seen a cat play with a mouse? We have lots of cats. They often kill for "thrills" without bothering to eat the mouse when they are done.



His name was Jesus of Nazareth; Not Jesus 'Christ'. He was Jesus: the Christ. But not having the surname, "Christ". There is no one with a surname/last name, "Christ". Peasants had no last name.

You are correct that the title "Christ" was not a "surname" but that's not what the Bible means when it identifies Him as "Jesus Christ." And since the Bible calls Him "Jesus Christ" why should we not?

[TheForgiven]

I challenge anyone who makes statements as such, to show anyone on this forum the Scriptures stating that the 12 tribes no longer exist!

My wife and I are Israelis, and we know quite well that the PLO, along with the United Nations preach that Israel and the Jewish people never existed. This doctrine of demons is strongly promoted within the walls of the modern churches around the world. It's not hard to recognize an anti-Semite who denies Israel and the 12 tribes of Israel.

Hello Ron. I'm glad that you stated a few things you wish to talk about. It's unfortunate that you were offended at my statement regarding the 12 Tribes no longer in existence. I seek proof that they still exist. Those born in geographical Israel today cannot prove that they are indeed based from the 12 Tribes. If you don't mind me asking, since you proudly claim to be Israeli, what Tribe (based on the Old Testament) does your family descendant originate?

1. Judah
2. Reuben
3. Gad
4. Asher
5. Naphtali
6. Manasseh
7. Simeon
8. Levi
9. Issachar
10. Zebulun
11. Joseph
12. Benjamin

There were other Tribes mentioned but these were taken out of Revelation.

You don't have to answer this question, as this was not a way to trap you. Instead, I'd like to point out that although you are an Israeli, this does not mean anything UNLESS you are a Christian, as I'm sure you are based on your zeal for God. But before you take offense to my post, let me ask you another question. Is me (or anyone else) being a non-Israeli a bad thing? Is my salvation secondary to yours or anyone else who is an Israeli? As St. Paul teaches, a Jew is a Jew who is born inwardly by the Holy Spirit (which you have as well) from God; through the Holy Spirit we become children/descendants of Abraham. Therefore, which birth is more important to you? Spiritual, or physical?

The reason why I'm asking is you seem to be offended that anyone would teach that God's Israel is Spiritual, and not physical. Let the truth be known that physical Israel has not existed for a very long time now. And when I say "Physical Israel", I'm referring to Tribal blood lines.

Finally, you are wrong when you say that God has set aside the Jews. That is a unfair statement made by those who divide Israel and the Church. The Church is a completely new body compared to the original assembly as established by God through Moses. That assembly was based on Tribes as was important for the sake of the coming Messiah's birth. The ultimate goal of God was not to establish a singular race to dominate the human species. Instead, God chose a race of slaves to bless them, thereby showing the world through them that God's grace is given to those who humble themselves; this is a clear New Testament teaching. Unfortunately, the first century Jews were looking for God to restore them to national power, and that is not what God had intended. His goal was to create a new body/kingdom for Himself which was established through Christ Jesus; a body not based on racial discrimination, but on grace. Thus, no matter where you are born, God's grace is available to all on the basis of faith, and not flesh. Thus, as Paul states, "IN THIS WAY will Israel be saved..." IN what way? By grafting flesh of all kinds, on the basis of faith, into one new body, assembly, and Kingdom.....this is called the Church of Christ, or Assembly of Christ.

Therefore, whether you are physically an Israeli apart from the Tribes, or an American apart from the Tribes, neither are important. What matters is a New Creation, which is why the Holy Spirit abides in us, in order to conform us to His Image; His creation.

I bid you peace and farewell should you decide to leave. But if you are offended because of my statement, then please accept my deepest apologies. Only, consider this. You are an Israeli, and I am an American. Is one better than the other in the eyes of God? Think about it.

Joe

[Edward Goodie]

Rather, his primary errors lie in his futurism that denies Daniel's 70th week was fulfilled when God said it would be fulfilled in 70 AD.

The doctrine of the 2000+ year gap between the 69th and 70th week has absolutely no foundation in Scripture. Indeed, it directly contradicts the plain meaning of Daniel's 70 Weeks in which God revealed how much time until the consummation. If you add 2000+ years in Daniel's 490 years, then we get 2,490+ years and the prophecy no longer tells us anything about how much time before the fulfillment, and that defeats the purpose of the prophecy.



Richard, I have always thought it odd that we preterists complain bitterly about a 2,000 year gap in between the 69th and 70th week and yet it seems that you, yourself, believe in an approximate 30 year gap between the 69th and 70 week... If the first 69 weeks represent 483 years (69 X 7), then why, all of a sudden, does the 70th week represent roughly a period of 40 years? I do not deny that 70 AD is spoken of within Daniel's prophecy, but, to me, it represents a future statement within his prophecy:

"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 unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

To me, that phrase is a future insertion because the next verse (27), to me, continues with the original line of thought (the Messiah prince) from verse 25.

You don't accept a 2,000 year gap and I don't accept any gap.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard, I have always thought it odd that we preterists complain bitterly about a 2,000 year gap in between the 69th and 70th week and yet it seems that you, yourself, believe in an approximate 30 year gap between the 69th and 70 week... If the first 69 weeks represent 483 years (69 X 7), then why, all of a sudden, does the 70th week represent roughly a period of 40 years? I do not deny that 70 AD is spoken of within Daniel's prophecy, but, to me, it represents a future statement within his prophecy:

"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 unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

To me, that phrase is a future insertion because the next verse (27), to me, continues with the original line of thought (the Messiah prince) from verse 25.

You don't accept a 2,000 year gap and I don't accept any gap.
Hey there TS,

Very good questions, but I think there has been a misunderstanding. I do not believe that the 70th week lasted 40 years, and as far as I know, I have never said such a thing (though it is interesting that Rose and I have been discussing this possibility for the last couple days and she leans in that direction).

As I see it, there are four possibilities (I believe the first is probably correct):

1) Christ was crucified in the "midst of the week" and his sacrifice put a spiritual end to the Temple sacrifices, symbolized by the rending of the veil in the Temple. The physical destruction of the Temple followed from that about 40 years later. In this scenario, the 70th week ends a few years after Christ's death.

2) Christ was crucified after the 69th week during a gap, and the prophecy of the end of Temple sacrifice in the midst of the 70th week was fulfilled in 70 AD. In this scenario the 70th week begins with the siege in 66 AD.

3) The weeks do not represents "time" but rather "temporal units" - the first 69 correlate well with the day for a year idea, but the 70th week represents a span of roughly 70 or 40 years depending if it begins with the birth or the baptism of Christ. Rose is currently finding this position appealing.

4) There is a 2000+ year gap and the prophecy does not apply to the first century temple at all, but rather to a yet future Third Temple. I see this as an absolutely untenable position, not merely because of the huge gap, but also because it ignores the primary event of the destruction of the first century Temple.

From what you wrote, it seem like we agree with position #1. Is that correct? Or do you believe that the prophecy is yet to be fulfilled in a future rebuilt temple?

Richard

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard, I have always thought it odd that we preterists complain bitterly about a 2,000 year gap in between the 69th and 70th week ...
If the complaint seems "bitter" it is because the 2000+ year gap theory is part of a large-scale egregious and inexcusable error. Regardless of how we handle the details of the 70th week, the prophecy unambiguously declares that Messiah would be killed and then the Temple would be destroyed. This was confirmed by Christ in the Olivet Discourse when he said that the destruction of the Temple would mark the fulfillment of his prophecies, and history confirms this as an incontrovertible fact. The "2000+ year gap theory" ignores the first century fulfillment and thereby completely destroys this most powerful witness to the prophetic truth of God's Word and the fact that Jesus was indeed the prophesied Messiah.

This is just one part of a large-scale complex system of errors. I was listening to Chuck Missler yesterday and heard him repeat one of the core "proofs" of the 2000+ year gap theory. He noted that in Luke 4:19 Christ stopped "at a comma" in his quotation of this prophecy from Isaiah:
Isaiah 61:1-2 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;
Missler says that Christ stopped just before the red text because the "day of vengeance" was not fulfilled in the first century and is still future. It is impossible for me to believe this error was an accident. Anyone who knows anything about the Bible knows that Christ spoke of the "day of vengeance" in the Olivet Discourse, and that this was fulfilled in the first century:
Luke 21:20-22 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
We know that Jerusalem was compassed with the Roman armies in 66 AD and was desolated by them in 70 AD. Those were the "days of vengeance" prophesied by Isaiah and Christ. The argument for a "2000+ year gap" based on Luke 4:19 is absurd and Biblically ignorant. Errors like this saturate futuristic eschatology. There is no excuse for them.

All the best,

Richard

[Edward Goodie]

If the complaint seems "bitter" it is because the 2000+ year gap theory is part of a large-scale egregious and inexcusable error. Regardless of how we handle the details of the 70th week, the prophecy unambiguously declares that Messiah would be killed and then the Temple would be destroyed. This was confirmed by Christ in the Olivet Discourse when he said that the destruction of the Temple would mark the fulfillment of his prophecies, and history confirms this as an incontrovertible fact. The "2000+ year gap theory" ignores the first century fulfillment and thereby completely destroys this most powerful witness to the prophetic truth of God's Word and the fact that Jesus was indeed the prophesied Messiah.

This is just one part of a large-scale complex system of errors. I was listening to Chuck Missler yesterday and heard him repeat one of the core "proofs" of the 2000+ year gap theory. He noted that in Luke 4:19 Christ stopped "at a comma" in his quotation of this prophecy from Isaiah:
Isaiah 61:1-2 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;
Missler says that Christ stopped just before the red text because the "day of vengeance" was not fulfilled in the first century and is still future. It is impossible for me to believe this error was an accident. Anyone who knows anything about the Bible knows that Christ spoke of the "day of vengeance" in the Olivet Discourse, and that this was fulfilled in the first century:
Luke 21:20-22 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. 21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
We know that Jerusalem was compassed with the Roman armies in 66 AD and was desolated by them in 70 AD. Those were the "days of vengeance" prophesied by Isaiah and Christ. The argument for a "2000+ year gap" based on Luke 4:19 is absurd and Biblically ignorant. Errors like this saturate futuristic eschatology. There is no excuse for them.

All the best,

Richard

Richard,

You speak to me as if I disagreed with you on the 2,000 year gap theory. I do not. What I do disagree with is the gap you seem to place before the 69th and 70th week - albeit it much SMALLER. You never once addressed this and you don't have to because I never asked you to. I just simply stated that you do have a gap in between the 69th and 70th week. I would like you to address this because Don Preston believes this also. I think this is the wrong way to go. What good is our saying the 2,000 year gap is no good but a 40 year gap is somehow acceptable? I guess I am a "no gap" preterist...:lol: I don't believe in the Baby Gap either :winking0071:

Anyway, what you said about the temple prophecy was something that "peaked" my ears greatly. You mentioned that "the prophecy unambiguously declares that Messiah would be killed and then the Temple would be destroyed." Now, is that just in relation to Luke 21 and Isaiah 61 or does it relate in more ways to dispensational theology being in error. I got the impression that you were stating just one example. Is there more? I would gladly welcome more!

[Edward Goodie]

Hey there TS,

Very good questions, but I think there has been a misunderstanding. I do not believe that the 70th week lasted 40 years, and as far as I know, I have never said such a thing (though it is interesting that Rose and I have been discussing this possibility for the last couple days and she leans in that direction).

As I see it, there are four possibilities (I believe the first is probably correct):

1) Christ was crucified in the "midst of the week" and his sacrifice put a spiritual end to the Temple sacrifices, symbolized by the rending of the veil in the Temple. The physical destruction of the Temple followed from that about 40 years later. In this scenario, the 70th week ends a few years after Christ's death.

2) Christ was crucified after the 69th week during a gap, and the prophecy of the end of Temple sacrifice in the midst of the 70th week was fulfilled in 70 AD. In this scenario the 70th week begins with the siege in 66 AD.

3) The weeks do not represents "time" but rather "temporal units" - the first 69 correlate well with the day for a year idea, but the 70th week represents a span of roughly 70 or 40 years depending if it begins with the birth or the baptism of Christ. Rose is currently finding this position appealing.

4) There is a 2000+ year gap and the prophecy does not apply to the first century temple at all, but rather to a yet future Third Temple. I see this as an absolutely untenable position, not merely because of the huge gap, but also because it ignores the primary event of the destruction of the first century Temple.

From what you wrote, it seem like we agree with position #1. Is that correct? Or do you believe that the prophecy is yet to be fulfilled in a future rebuilt temple?

Richard

Hi Richard,

You may have to ignore my follow-up response (SOURCE (http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?p=17027#post17027)) because I did not see this one of yours.

But now I am confused (what else is new?). You said in this most recent post "I do not believe that the 70th week lasted 40 years" yet in the post I questioned you said "Rather, his primary errors lie in his futurism that denies Daniel's 70th week was fulfilled when God said it would be fulfilled in 70 AD."

In order for Daniel's 70th week to take place in 70 AD, the "week" (a seven year period for all the other weeks) has to be stretched into a 40 year period. How would "in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease" be explained in relation to 70AD being the end of the 70th week? I have always related "in the midst of the week" to be Calvary when he was "cut off" AFTER the 69th week (another thing dispensationalists completely ignore). The "confirming of the covenant for one week" to me, is the time from Christ's baptism to the death of Stephen...

Do you now understand why I asked for further clarification (questioning)?

And, of course, as a preterist, there is no future physical temple...we are that temple and Christ is our Cornerstone of that temple.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,

You speak to me as if I disagreed with you on the 2,000 year gap theory. I do not.

Hello my friend, :yo:

I can see why you might get the impression I was speaking to you as if you believed in the 2000+ year gap theory, but that was not my intent. I was speaking more generally about that error in and of itself. But thanks for clarifying your position.


What I do disagree with is the gap you seem to place before the 69th and 70th week - albeit it much SMALLER. You never once addressed this and you don't have to because I never asked you to. I just simply stated that you do have a gap in between the 69th and 70th week. I would like you to address this because Don Preston believes this also. I think this is the wrong way to go. What good is our saying the 2,000 year gap is no good but a 40 year gap is somehow acceptable? I guess I am a "no gap" preterist...:lol: I don't believe in the Baby Gap either :winking0071:

I'm ambivalent about the gap. For the most part, I am satisfied with the sacrifice of Christ in the midst of the 70th week as marking the end of the Jewish sacrificial system, but there is a strong tension that pulls towards the last half of the week (3.5 years) as corresponding to the 3.5 years of Revelation which describes the destruction of Jerusalem 66-70AD which would imply a gap of about 40 years. It's an odd thing - Dan 9:24-27 is an extremely powerful witness but the precise details of the 70th week are ambiguous. :dontknow: So I settle with my current view as the best that I have seen, but it's not completely satisfying.



Anyway, what you said about the temple prophecy was something that "peaked" my ears greatly. You mentioned that "the prophecy unambiguously declares that Messiah would be killed and then the Temple would be destroyed." Now, is that just in relation to Luke 21 and Isaiah 61 or does it relate in more ways to dispensational theology being in error. I got the impression that you were stating just one example. Is there more? I would gladly welcome more!
I think you meant piqued (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/piqued). :p

Yes, there is MUCH more. For example, the entire dispensational system depends upon a continuation of the first covenant to define "Israel" as separate from the Church and to justify their theories that the Temple will be re-built and bloody sacrifices will be re-instituted so the re-built Temple can be re-desolated by the re-vived Roman empire. These ideas profoundly contradict the message of Scripture on many points. The first covenant ended when the Testator (Christ) died. This was followed by the destruction of the Temple which was the outward manifestation of the "fading away" of the Law and the fulfillment of Daniel 12:7 which marked the end of the prophecies by the scattering of the power of the holy people (Jews under the first covenant). I could go on, but I see you posted another comment that I think I should answer first.

Great chatting!

Richard

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Richard,

You may have to ignore my follow-up response (SOURCE (http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?p=17027#post17027)) because I did not see this one of yours.

But now I am confused (what else is new?). You said in this most recent post "I do not believe that the 70th week lasted 40 years" yet in the post I questioned you said "Rather, his primary errors lie in his futurism that denies Daniel's 70th week was fulfilled when God said it would be fulfilled in 70 AD."

In order for Daniel's 70th week to take place in 70 AD, the "week" (a seven year period for all the other weeks) has to be stretched into a 40 year period. How would "in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease" be explained in relation to 70AD being the end of the 70th week? I have always related "in the midst of the week" to be Calvary when he was "cut off" AFTER the 69th week (another thing dispensationalists completely ignore). The "confirming of the covenant for one week" to me, is the time from Christ's baptism to the death of Stephen...

Do you now understand why I asked for further clarification (questioning)?

And, of course, as a preterist, there is no future physical temple...we are that temple and Christ is our Cornerstone of that temple.
Yes, I understand. That was a "slip of my keyboard." In general, I see 70 AD as the fulfillment of Revelation in which the Great Harlot (Apostate Jerusalem) was desolated and all the blood of the saints was found in her in fulfillment of Christ's prophecy in Matthew 23. I accidentally conflated this with the prophecy of the 70 weeks which were fulfilled when Christ was killed and resurrected. The reason for the conflation is pretty simple - the physical destruction of the Temple was implicit in its desolation when the veil was torn so in a sense the ultimate fulfillment of the 70th week was in 70 AD, though it was actually fulfilled around 30 AD when Christ died.

This is the primary challenge of the 70 weeks prophecy. There is some real ambiguity as detailed in my previous post. It would be good if we can clarify it more.

Thanks for reading my posts carefully. That is very encouraging.

Richard

[TheForgiven]

Greetings TruthSeeker and Richard. It's sooooo nice to see you guys active again on the Biblewheel....especially you, my beloved stranger Richard who likes playing ghost from time-to-time. :lol:

We spoke about this before some years ago (or moths if I'm not mistaken). Based on my research, I concluded that the 70th week of Daniel's prophesy was NOT fulfilled in 70AD, but much earlier than that.

The 69th week ended with the Baptism of Christ, for that was when He was anointed (the dove testifies to this anointing). Jesus Himself also testifies when he explained that Isaiah's prophesy was fulfilled in their hearing; this is when they first rejected Him as the Messiah. But only "HE" who was anointed could heal the sick, cast out demons, restore sight to the blind, etc. Thus, the 69th week ended at His Baptism, and thus begins the 70th week.

Jesus begins His ministry at the beginning of the 70th week (or end of the 69th week). Roughly 3 1/2 years later (in the middle of the final week), The Messiah is killed (Cut-Off), and Israel is without a Messiah. This leaves a remainder of the 70th week (about 3 1/2 years). This time was used by the Apostles to first preach the gospel of salvation to the Jews first. Some speculate this ended (70th week) with the stoning of Steven. I myself do not know, but I am certain the 70th week expired when the gospel was then presented to the Gentiles.

Now Daniel is never told that the temple had to be destroyed DURING the 70th week, or at the end of the 70th week. Daniel is merely told that his people and city would have 70 sevens:

24 Seventy weeks have been determined upon thy people, and upon the holy city, for sin to be ended, and to seal up transgressions, and to blot out the iniquities, and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the Most Holy.

Thus, as you can see, the destruction of the temple was not part of the Seventy Sevens. Rather, the destruction of the temple was a bi-product of Daniel's seventy sevens.

Here is a scenario.

My son was caught steeling from the store. When I was notified of his steeling, I approached him after school as said, "I'm giving you until 5:00 PM tonight to tell me the truth. If you do not tell me the truth, then I'm going to give you a spanking..." At 5:00 PM I ask him if he stole the candy from the store. His reply was "NO, I didn't father". I then show him proof (let's just say a video tape from the store's security recorder) that shows him stealing the candy. Now that he's been told the truth, I instruct him to go to his room and prepare for a spanking, and I'll be there in just a few minutes. "Now! Go to your room!"

Did I have to spank him at 5:00 PM? No, but I gave him until that time to tell me the truth, of which he refused. His spanking would take place after that.

The same with Daniel's seventy sevens. They would have that time through with the following would occur according to verse 24:

1. sin to be ended
2. seal up transgressions
3. blot out the iniquities
4. make atonement for iniquities
5. bring in everlasting righteousness
6. seal the vision and the prophet
7. anoint the Most Holy

As shown in verse 24, nothing is mentioned about a destruction of the temple being included within Daniel's seventy sevens. As stated, the destruction of the temple and city was the "Spanking" that occurred because of their dead-line, or time-limit. But the Day of the Lord would come as a Thief in the night. As we all know, the Great Day of God's wrath would not occur within a projected time-frame. The only clue they (Apostles) were given was recorded in Matthew 24, and the gospels of Luke and Mark.

In conclusion, the 70th week ended when the gospel departed Israel, and went to the Gentiles. This represented the 40 year wandering in the wilderness before the promised land would be delivered. The promised land would not be delivered until the land had been purged of evil; just as the days of Joshua. The purging came with the destruction of Apostate Israel, symbolic of the destruction during Noah's days.

Hope this helps.

Joe

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Greetings TruthSeeker and Richard. It's sooooo nice to see you guys active again on the Biblewheel....especially you, my beloved stranger Richard who likes playing ghost from time-to-time. :lol:

Hello my friend!

It's good to be missed! :hug:



We spoke about this before some years ago (or moths if I'm not mistaken). Based on my research, I concluded that the 70th week of Daniel's prophesy was NOT fulfilled in 70AD, but much earlier than that.

The 69th week ended with the Baptism of Christ, for that was when He was anointed (the dove testifies to this anointing). Jesus Himself also testifies when he explained that Isaiah's prophesy was fulfilled in their hearing; this is when they first rejected Him as the Messiah. But only "HE" who was anointed could heal the sick, cast out demons, restore sight to the blind, etc. Thus, the 69th week ended at His Baptism, and thus begins the 70th week.

Jesus begins His ministry at the beginning of the 70th week (or end of the 69th week). Roughly 3 1/2 years later (in the middle of the final week), The Messiah is killed (Cut-Off), and Israel is without a Messiah. This leaves a remainder of the 70th week (about 3 1/2 years). This time was used by the Apostles to first preach the gospel of salvation to the Jews first. Some speculate this ended (70th week) with the stoning of Steven. I myself do not know, but I am certain the 70th week expired when the gospel was then presented to the Gentiles.

I agree with most of that, but I don't feel a need to account for every "day" of the 70th "week." Consider Jeremiah's prophecy of the 70 years of the Babylonian captivity. It ended in the 70th year. But when exactly did it end? Do we have to account for every day of the 70th year? No. It ended sometime in the "midst" of the 70th year. We don't need to account for the time that remained after the fulfillment. I think the same thing goes for the 70th week. Christ was crucified in its midst, and the prophecy was fulfilled.



Now Daniel is never told that the temple had to be destroyed DURING the 70th week, or at the end of the 70th week. Daniel is merely told that his people and city would have 70 sevens:

24 Seventy weeks have been determined upon thy people, and upon the holy city, for sin to be ended, and to seal up transgressions, and to blot out the iniquities, and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the Most Holy.

Thus, as you can see, the destruction of the temple was not part of the Seventy Sevens. Rather, the destruction of the temple was a bi-product of Daniel's seventy sevens.

Here is a scenario.

My son was caught steeling from the store. When I was notified of his steeling, I approached him after school as said, "I'm giving you until 5:00 PM tonight to tell me the truth. If you do not tell me the truth, then I'm going to give you a spanking..." At 5:00 PM I ask him if he stole the candy from the store. His reply was "NO, I didn't father". I then show him proof (let's just say a video tape from the store's security recorder) that shows him stealing the candy. Now that he's been told the truth, I instruct him to go to his room and prepare for a spanking, and I'll be there in just a few minutes. "Now! Go to your room!"

Did I have to spank him at 5:00 PM? No, but I gave him until that time to tell me the truth, of which he refused. His spanking would take place after that.

The same with Daniel's seventy sevens. They would have that time through with the following would occur according to verse 24:

1. sin to be ended
2. seal up transgressions
3. blot out the iniquities
4. make atonement for iniquities
5. bring in everlasting righteousness
6. seal the vision and the prophet
7. anoint the Most Holy

As shown in verse 24, nothing is mentioned about a destruction of the temple being included within Daniel's seventy sevens. As stated, the destruction of the temple and city was the "Spanking" that occurred because of their dead-line, or time-limit. But the Day of the Lord would come as a Thief in the night. As we all know, the Great Day of God's wrath would not occur within a projected time-frame. The only clue they (Apostles) were given was recorded in Matthew 24, and the gospels of Luke and Mark.

In conclusion, the 70th week ended when the gospel departed Israel, and went to the Gentiles. This represented the 40 year wandering in the wilderness before the promised land would be delivered. The promised land would not be delivered until the land had been purged of evil; just as the days of Joshua. The purging came with the destruction of Apostate Israel, symbolic of the destruction during Noah's days.

Hope this helps.

Joe
I agree with all of that, and I think the analogy is a good one. But there is a strong tug towards the idea that the 70th week was fulfilled in the destruction in 70 AD, but I can not find a way to make all the pieces fit in that scenario. If we follow the day for a year idea, we seem forced to have the 70th week fulfilled around 33 AD. An alternative is to toss out the day for a year idea (which is not explicitly in the text anyway) and suppose that the 70 weeks are 70 indeterminate temporal periods. Rose is strongly impressed by this idea since it allows us to see the prophecies of the death of Messiah and the destruction of Jerusalem all in the 70th week.

Talk more soon,

Richard

[Edward Goodie]

Greetings TruthSeeker and Richard. It's sooooo nice to see you guys active again on the Biblewheel....especially you, my beloved stranger Richard who likes playing ghost from time-to-time. :lol:

We spoke about this before some years ago (or moths if I'm not mistaken). Based on my research, I concluded that the 70th week of Daniel's prophesy was NOT fulfilled in 70AD, but much earlier than that.

The 69th week ended with the Baptism of Christ, for that was when He was anointed (the dove testifies to this anointing). Jesus Himself also testifies when he explained that Isaiah's prophesy was fulfilled in their hearing; this is when they first rejected Him as the Messiah. But only "HE" who was anointed could heal the sick, cast out demons, restore sight to the blind, etc. Thus, the 69th week ended at His Baptism, and thus begins the 70th week.

Jesus begins His ministry at the beginning of the 70th week (or end of the 69th week). Roughly 3 1/2 years later (in the middle of the final week), The Messiah is killed (Cut-Off), and Israel is without a Messiah. This leaves a remainder of the 70th week (about 3 1/2 years). This time was used by the Apostles to first preach the gospel of salvation to the Jews first. Some speculate this ended (70th week) with the stoning of Steven. I myself do not know, but I am certain the 70th week expired when the gospel was then presented to the Gentiles.

Now Daniel is never told that the temple had to be destroyed DURING the 70th week, or at the end of the 70th week. Daniel is merely told that his people and city would have 70 sevens:

24 Seventy weeks have been determined upon thy people, and upon the holy city, for sin to be ended, and to seal up transgressions, and to blot out the iniquities, and to make atonement for iniquities, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal the vision and the prophet, and to anoint the Most Holy.

Thus, as you can see, the destruction of the temple was not part of the Seventy Sevens. Rather, the destruction of the temple was a bi-product of Daniel's seventy sevens.

Here is a scenario.

My son was caught steeling from the store. When I was notified of his steeling, I approached him after school as said, "I'm giving you until 5:00 PM tonight to tell me the truth. If you do not tell me the truth, then I'm going to give you a spanking..." At 5:00 PM I ask him if he stole the candy from the store. His reply was "NO, I didn't father". I then show him proof (let's just say a video tape from the store's security recorder) that shows him stealing the candy. Now that he's been told the truth, I instruct him to go to his room and prepare for a spanking, and I'll be there in just a few minutes. "Now! Go to your room!"

Did I have to spank him at 5:00 PM? No, but I gave him until that time to tell me the truth, of which he refused. His spanking would take place after that.

The same with Daniel's seventy sevens. They would have that time through with the following would occur according to verse 24:

1. sin to be ended
2. seal up transgressions
3. blot out the iniquities
4. make atonement for iniquities
5. bring in everlasting righteousness
6. seal the vision and the prophet
7. anoint the Most Holy

As shown in verse 24, nothing is mentioned about a destruction of the temple being included within Daniel's seventy sevens. As stated, the destruction of the temple and city was the "Spanking" that occurred because of their dead-line, or time-limit. But the Day of the Lord would come as a Thief in the night. As we all know, the Great Day of God's wrath would not occur within a projected time-frame. The only clue they (Apostles) were given was recorded in Matthew 24, and the gospels of Luke and Mark.

In conclusion, the 70th week ended when the gospel departed Israel, and went to the Gentiles. This represented the 40 year wandering in the wilderness before the promised land would be delivered. The promised land would not be delivered until the land had been purged of evil; just as the days of Joshua. The purging came with the destruction of Apostate Israel, symbolic of the destruction during Noah's days.

Hope this helps.

Joe

Hey Joe,

I think that is a really good point about the NON-mention of temple destruction in those 6 points of Daniel 9:24. It would be along the same lines of why the Jerusalem (and temple) destruction with hundreds of thousands of Jews slaughtered and many more carried off into captivity (the worse most obvious event in Israel's history) was not mentioned by John the Revelator IF the late date of the writing of Revelation is to be accepted...

There are some preterists (likely those that have 70AD occurring within the 70 weeks) that say the "anointing of the most holy" was the destruction of Jerusalem...I would say this is very weak indeed.

[CWH]

Joe will love this :D How's that, my Star War friend?:


Mon, Dec 27, 2010
The Korea Herald/Asia News Network


3 giant spaceships will attack Earth in 2012: researchers

A report by the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) in the United States said that there are three giant spaceships which are heading towards Earth.

According to the Russian Pravda news, the SETI, a non-commercial organization said that the largest one of the three spaceships is 240 kilometers wide, and the two others are smaller.

It further stated that currently, the objects are beyond the orbit of Pluto and will reach Earth in December 2012.



The report claims that the spaceships were detected by the HAARP search system, based in Alaska, which is designed to study the phenomenon of northern lights.

According to the SETI researchers the objects are nothing but extraterrestrial spaceships, and will be visible in optical telescopes as soon as they reach Mars' orbit, reported the Pravda news.

It's a hoax folks...a heap of nonsense....spaceship travelling near the speed of light don't take a year to reach us from beyond the orbit of Pluto; they can reach us in 7 hours.

Many Blessings for the New Year.