More on the 70 weeks

_STEVE7150
Posts: 894
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:38 pm

Post by _STEVE7150 » Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:03 pm

Damon, I responded because i felt that you said the prophecy really s/b read as pointing to Christ's second coming and since many people are unfamiliar with it i thought i'd state what my take was.
As far as your belief about it not allowing for Christ to be "annointed the most holy" because to be Messiah in the eyes of the jews he had to come as a king my understanding is that was a qualified requirement based on the people being righteous. If they were not righteous then Messiah would come riding into Jereusalem on a donkey. And Jesus is a king to those who believe in him as he is "Lord" or master or King to his followers. The jews are not the people of God since Christ but his followers are Spiritual Israel and Christ is this Israel's king. So he did come as a king for the true Israel and he was annointed as the most Holy by God himself at his baptism therefore God did'nt need the ark of the covenant.
Re Dan 9.27 "In the midst of the week the sacrifices will cease ,and the Temple will be desolated again UNTIL THE CONSUMMATION."
I see the desolation first as spiritual desolation happening after Jesus's atonement God no longer recognized Temple sacrifices and the phrase "UNTIL THE CONSUMMATION" to mean the physical destruction of the temple which was the consummation of the spiritual desolation.
If i misunderstood your point or missed some important things you said then if you care to respond in a pleasant manner i'll try to understand.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_Damon
Posts: 387
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:37 pm
Location: Carmel, CA

Post by _Damon » Tue Nov 22, 2005 12:59 pm

Whoa, where did all this come from?

Let's sort some things out, here.

1. My take on Daniel's 70 weeks' prophecy has changed over the course of the past several weeks based on a study that I had been doing. I was posting the results of my ongoing study to the forum.

2. The issues that you're addressing in your most recent post have nothing to do with the TIMING of the 70 weeks' prophecy.

3. Your earlier post which began, "according to my info..." did address timing issues, albeit indirectly.

Let me show exactly what the timing issues are with your earlier post.

First of all, what biblical scholars have done in attempting to decipher Daniel's 70 weeks' prophecy is to start with Christ's ministry and count backwards to try to find a good fit, numerically speaking. Notwithstanding that this is a wrong-headed way of approaching it, they're also using incorrect dates to figure things out. Like I said before, there are no absolute dates in history. One must count back from a known benchmark, often using the regnal years of kings, to figure out when certain events happened. If the benchmark is wrong, the calculation will be wrong. Or, if the regnal years are wrong, the calculation will be wrong. In this case, both are wrong.

Nearly all scholars who study chronology believe that the Greek chronology of the Persian period is correct. The Greek chronology has ten kings (plus a short-lived usurper) reigning for a little over 200 years. However, the Jews (having lived in Israel during this time and thus having local knowledge - which the Greeks did not have!) counted only four kings (again, plus a short-lived usurper) reigning for about half a century.

According to the Greek chronology, there were three different kings named Artaxerxes. The second one, Artaxerxes Longimanus, was the one who gave the decree for the restoration of the city in 444 (or 445) BC, biblical scholars say. Thus, that's where one should begin the count of 69 weeks of years. But this is wrong!

There was no second Artaxerxes (and Artaxerxes is only a title anyway, not a name), because the whole of the Greek chronology is a confused muddle of duplicated kings. One need only read Daniel 11:1-4 to see that there were only four Persian kings (plus a short-lived usurper) prior to the reign of Alexander the Great!

That's why I asked if you had understood what I had written. Whether you agree with my calculation or not, I've proven that "your info" is based on a false premise, and must be revised.

Make sense now?

Now, as far as you saying that my belief regarding Daniel's 70 weeks' prophecy was that it pointed at Christ's second coming, I said various different things at different times. My latest remark was that I saw all of Daniel's prophecies as terminating at 70 AD and then skipping immediately to the Messianic Age. The rest of what you've described of my beliefs is more or less accurate, but I'd prefer to wait until you see this latest reply before I try to answer anything else.

Damon
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_mattrose
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 7:39 pm
Location: Western NY

Post by _mattrose » Tue Nov 22, 2005 3:04 pm

"Make sense now?"

I think this may be one of the lines Steve G. is referring to. You use this line in a high percentage of your posts and it may come across to many (as it does to me) in an arrogant manner.

As much as some of us on the forum frustrate you by our lack of comprehension of your posts, some may be getting equally as frustrated by your lack of understanding of this issue of your apparent tone. It seems an easy thing to change (a few words here and there), yet you haven't.

You may even find that a change in tone increases the quantity & quality of interaction with your posts.

God bless,
matthew
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Hemingway once said: 'The world is a fine place and worth fighting for'

I agree with the second part (se7en)

_Anonymous
Posts: 0
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:03 pm

Post by _Anonymous » Tue Nov 22, 2005 3:31 pm

Er, make sense now? *shrugs*
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

_STEVE7150
Posts: 894
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:38 pm

Post by _STEVE7150 » Wed Nov 23, 2005 8:41 am

Where it came from Damon is how i understand that prophecy ending in 70AD. With regards to your chronology i don't have a clue about the greek chronology being wrong although the point you made about "orthodox" bible scholars working backwards from Christ's crucifixtion strikes me as quite a big assumption about an awful lot of people. I'll check out Dan 11:1-4 and if you previously posted anything about this chronology if you direct me to it i'd like to read it.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_Damon
Posts: 387
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:37 pm
Location: Carmel, CA

Post by _Damon » Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:20 am

Check out this post.

Damon
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

Post Reply

Return to “Essays and Writings”