Daniel 9 Already Fulfilled

[SomeDisciple]

With respect to Daniel specifically; the text very well could refer to 70. I don't think Rev. does though. I'm not an eschatological preterist. The KJ's "Messiah the Prince" is not a rock solid translation.... the math calculations people do aren't rock-solid either.

What God showed Daniel was that while God was going to keep his promises; most of the next generation of Israel was not going to make the cut. Daniel would never see this temple that was going to be built; or make it to Jerusalem; but it was going to be destroyed again anyway.

I think Daniel was really looking forward to the promises of God; and he wanted good things for his people to happen; and God sent Gabriel to reassure Daniel that even though things were not going to unfold the way he hoped; God still loved Daniel and those exiles who were faithful to God.

 

[Ted01]

do you know what the day of wrath is? Have you heard of it?

I've heard a little about it... mostly from dispensationalists... but don't really understand it as anything other than the "final Judgement" day.

 

[SomeDisciple]

There was no ABOMINATION of desolation in 70 AD. Period

According to Josephus there was... or something very, very, similar- but as you said; and as I've said before- it was too late to flee by the time this occurred. The Romans supposedly made sacrifices to their standards in the temple... but at this time they had already hacked their way through most of the city. It's hard to flee to the mountains when you're dead.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

God's wrath was directed at Israel for killing His Son. That's the whole point of Matthew 21:33-41. God used the Roman army to accomplish His purposes. There was a pause in the Roman seige in the middle of seige where many were able to escape. Then, after Rome was secured the armies returned and continued the seige, eventually destroying Jerusalem.
Jesus did come and was executing His authority. Those of His people who didn't get out were raptured before the final destruction.

Who were the kings of the earth who begged the rocks to fall on them to keep then from the wrath to come?

What kings did this in 70 AD?
sorry, but your explanation does not cover what I spoke of

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

With respect to Daniel specifically; the text very well could refer to 70. I don't think Rev. does though. I'm not an eschatological preterist. The KJ's "Messiah the Prince" is not a rock solid translation.... the math calculations people do aren't rock-solid either.

What God showed Daniel was that while God was going to keep his promises; most of the next generation of Israel was not going to make the cut. Daniel would never see this temple that was going to be built; or make it to Jerusalem; but it was going to be destroyed again anyway.

I think Daniel was really looking forward to the promises of God; and he wanted good things for his people to happen; and God sent Gabriel to reassure Daniel that even though things were not going to unfold the way he hoped; God still loved Daniel and those exiles who were faithful to God.

So God told him things that were going to happen, even though they were not?

Why would God lie?

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

I've heard a little about it... mostly from dispensationalists... but don't really understand it as anything other than the "final Judgement" day.

Or the great tribulation?

 

[SomeDisciple]

So God told him things that were going to happen, even though they were not?

Why would God lie?

So God told him things that were going to happen, even though they were not?

Why would God lie?

No; he told him things that did did unfold.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

According to Josephus there was... or something very, very, similar- but as you said; and as I've said before- it was too late to flee by the time this occurred. The Romans supposedly made sacrifices to their standards in the temple... but at this time they had already hacked their way through most of the city. It's hard to flee to the mountains when you're dead.

Jesus told the people. When you SEE THE ABOMINATION of DSESOLATION STANDING IN THE HLY PLACE.

run..

Please explain how the people could see inside a temple. Inside a holy place deep inside the templ, in 7- AD. To know they need to flee?

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

No; he told him things that did did unfold.

Not all of them have unfolded yet.

And he also said when they are completed. Things will take place. They have not happened yet either.

 

[Cameron143]

Who were the kings of the earth who begged the rocks to fall on them to keep then from the wrath to come?

What kings did this in 70 AD?
sorry, but your explanation does not cover what I spoke of

Don't know . But there are plenty to choose from. And kings there doesn't need to be actual kings...it could be rulers. And there are plenty of those. If I had to guess I suppose I would think it to be religious rulers, as the wrath was against Israel.

 

[Dino246]

Well Jesus said it. So yes, it is a must, Unless Jesus lied. then does it really matter

Since Jesus doesn't say in this passage that "all flesh" includes animals, it is not a must.

I already posted this, how you can say it does not say it. I do not understand

It's not the very next thing that happens.

Now this is true amen.

 

[SomeDisciple]

Not all of them have unfolded yet.

So, anybody's understanding of Dan9 is going to rely alot on how they think it should be translated. As I mentioned earlier the phrase "Messiah the Prince" is not really a good translation... the way people count time- from which "decree" will also have an effect on how you understand the text. And also the phrase "abomination of desolation" appears in only some translations; because, it is not necessarily the best translation either.

Jesus told the people. When you SEE THE ABOMINATION of DSESOLATION STANDING IN THE HLY PLACE.

run..

Please explain how the people could see inside a temple. Inside a holy place deep inside the templ, in 7- AD. To know they need to flee?

Exactly: I agree. 70AD cannot be what Jesus was referring to to his disciples. It doesn't make sense.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Since Jesus doesn't say in this passage that "all flesh" includes animals, it is not a must.

Did he say all jews? did he say all In jersualem? or did he say all flesh?


[quote[It's not the very next thing that happens.[/quote]
Yet it says immediately after the tribulation in those days. You will see the son of man coming in the clouds/ so how can you say it is not the nextt thing?

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

So, anybody's understanding of Dan9 is going to rely alot on how they think it should be translated. As I mentioned earlier the phrase "Messiah the Prince" is not really a good translation... the way people count time- from which "decree" will also have an effect on how you understand the text. And also the phrase "abomination of desolation" appears in only some translations; because, it is not necessarily the best translation either.

Where do you see messiah the prince in dan 9?

the actual words are on the wing of abominations shall me one who makes desolate.

the wing is the sing of the temple.

The abomination is an idol or unclean thing

desolate means to be made desolate or unclean.

Exactly: I agree. 70AD cannot be what Jesus was referring to to his disciples. It doesn't make sense.

amen

 

[GaryA]

That is not the abomination of desolation spoken of in Dan 9 or Matt 24. Which are still a future event.

It is the very same AoD "spoken of" in Matthew 24. There is no AoD "spoken of" (specifically) in Daniel 9.

 

[GaryA]

"Therefore when ye shall see the AOD"... the one spoken of in Daniel 12:11 (AOD singular, singular), which verse says of it, "SET UP [H5414]" (this one in Dan12:11 is not the same one as in Dan11:31 pertaining to Antiochus Epiphanes in 165bc)

The actual AoD event is recorded in Daniel 11. A reference to it is made in Daniel 12. There is no [specific] reference to the AoD in Daniel 9.

 

[GaryA]

Luke 21 speaks of 70 AD. Jerusalem will be destroyed and lay desolate until the times of the gentile is completed

Matt 24 speaks of the end days, where they see the abomination of desolation. After which will be great tribulation such has never been seen before or after. and it will be cut short by the return of Christ.

They are two different events.. One you will know when you see armies surround

the other you will now when you see the abomination of desolation in the temple.

All three accounts of the Olivet Discourse are referring to the same thing - the same event circa 70 A.D.

BTW - it is not the return of Christ that cuts the 'Great Tribulation' short - it is the arrival of the Two Witnesses...

 

[GaryA]

Then why would Christ prophesy about the AoD in 30 AD, and indicate that its setting up will be a future event? Do you see the absurdity?

If you properly understood the parenthetical statements, you would not think it to be absurd; instead, it would make perfect sense.

 

[GaryA]

the actual words are on the wing of abominations shall me one who makes desolate.

Not the actual words - you have a currupted bible version.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The actual AoD event is recorded in Daniel 11. A reference to it is made in Daniel 12. There is no [specific] reference to the AoD in Daniel 9.

May you (and the readers) consider:

--in Daniel 11, there are certain phrases used in several different verses, phrases which particularly indicate a "regime change" (so to speak)... so consider how verse 3 says [quoting from Bible Gateway],


Daniel 11:3

Amplified Bible

3 Then a [a]mighty [warlike, threatening] king will arise who will rule with great authority and do as he pleases.
Read full chapter
Footnotes

1. Daniel 11:3 There are many reasons for identifying this king as Alexander the Great, as well as identifying the other rulers according to their relationship to the events of those times.

[end quoting; underline and size-emphasis mine]




So, noting things [phrases] like this shows us that in verse 36, it is no longer speaking of Antiochus 4 Epiphanes, like verses 21, 22, 23, and 27 were speaking of [see below, quoting again from Bible Gateway for these verses about "A4E" (165bc)--but first notice the "regime change" (so to speak) before him, in verse 16 (also below)]:

v.16 - Antiochus III the Great - "...shall do according to his own will" (note: this phrase does NOT mean that he will eat candy for breakfast, lunch and dinner, against his mommy's better judgment (bad boy!). It is talking about "regime change"... the new guy taking over from the last guy--as a "ruler" type person, see)


[quoting from Bible Gateway]
16 But he (Syria) who comes against him (Egypt) will do exactly as he pleases [/shall do according to his will-kjv], and no one will be able to stand against him; he (Antiochus III the Great) will also stay for a time in the Beautiful and Glorious Land [of Israel], with destruction in his hand.

Daniel 11:17

Amplified Bible

17 He will be determined to come with the power of his entire kingdom, and propose equitable conditions and terms of peace, which he will put into effect [by making an agreement with the king of the South]. He will also give him his [a]daughter (Cleopatra I), in an attempt to overthrow the kingdom, but it will not succeed or be to his advantage.
Read full chapter
Footnotes

1. Daniel 11:17 Cleopatra I, daughter of Antiochus III the Great, king of Syria, was married to Ptolemy V Epiphanes of Egypt. She supported her husband instead of her father during his attempt to conquer Egypt.

[end quoting; underline mine]

-- https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel+11:17&version=AMP



verse 21 - Antiochus 4 Epiphanes - "..."in his estate shall stand up a vile person..." (again, language indicating a "change"--new/different person)

[quoting from Bible Gateway]
Daniel 11:21

Amplified Bible

21 And in his place [in Syria] will arise a [a]despicable and despised person, to whom royal majesty and the honor of kingship have not been conferred, but he will come [without warning] in a time of tranquility and seize the kingdom by intrigue.
Read full chapter
Footnotes

1. Daniel 11:21 This contemptible conqueror is identified as Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the younger son of Antiochus III the Great, king of Syria, and is a type of the final Antichrist referred to in Dan 11:36; 2 Thess 2:3-12; 1 John 4:3; 2 John 7; and Rev 13:5-8. Antiochus IV Epiphanes attempted to destroy the worship of the true God by robbing the temple of its gold and silver treasures related to worship and setting up a statue of Jupiter in the Holy of Holies. He also breached the walls of Jerusalem, ordered a daily sacrifice of pig, forbade circumcision and destroyed all the sacred scrolls he could find (see note 8:10).

-- https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel+11:21&version=AMP



verse 36 is another such "regime-change" language (indicator), where it says, "And the king shall do according to his will" (new "ruler" type person in town, here, not still talking about "A4E" in this verse!), and the very next words in this verse saying that which precisely corresponds with the wording in 2Th2:4a [identifying this "far-future" / "future"-to-when-Paul-wrote-this, person/"man of sin," whom we commonly call "the antichrist," aka the beast of Rev13--individual person aspect--"mouth" (Dan7 "mouth" also)])



Seeing this particular kind of language indicating "regime changes" (so to speak) used in Daniel 11, lets us know that the person starting in Dan11:36 is not [still talking about] "A4E," but corresponds with the [far-future] "man of sin" (2Th2:4a, 9a, 8a), which is at the START of the "7 yr period" (SAME as Matt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8... and Rev6 Seals... and Dan9:27a)...

...whereas 2Th2:4b is at the MID-point of it (SAME as Dan12:1... and 9:27b... and Matt24:15,21... and Rev13:5-7)...

...and v.8b is at the END point of it (SAME as Dan12:12,13... and 9:27c... and Matt24:29-31/Isa27:9,12-13... and Rev19)




And since v.36 isn't still referring to "A4E," neither is the "AOD [singular, singular]" in Dan12:11 ("SET UP") referring BACK to his (that 11:31 DID speak of)