Why Daniel's 70th week must be in the future
- Thread starter Nehemiah6
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The suffering by the Jews was nowhere close to the suffering of African slaves being caught by their own peoples and then sold into slavery to the Europeans.
The suffering of 70 A.D. by the Jews is nowhere close to the 7 million Jews brutally captured, baked alive in ovens, sprayed with acid through the water sprinklers of the prison, forced to bury their own dead in Nazi Germany.
The suffering of the Jews was not as equal to 1099 when the English Crusaders wiped out 40 to 70 THOUSAND of them in Jerusalem.
YOU, are going off the writings of Josephus which has been proven on several points to be EXAGGERATED and FALSE!
So it is YOU who are [choosing] this LIE to believe.
I am enjoying this conversation and have already learned something new.
Now the question begins, when the New Testament teaches we are the temple and the temple was destroyed: Can a temple built by unsaved people today be considered HOLY?
And if someone believes it is talking about us as the temple, it is no problem finding out what an abomination could be, could be a repeat of the Judas thing, but the issue becomes the part that says sacrifices will cease, as within us, no sacrifices happen and no sacrifices happen in churches either (Unless you are catholic), these happen only in the temple. I believe that is the most natural reading of the text, but I struggle to see it as HOLY today.
Now the question begins, when the New Testament teaches we are the temple and the temple was destroyed: Can a temple built by unsaved people today be considered HOLY?
And if someone believes it is talking about us as the temple, it is no problem finding out what an abomination could be, could be a repeat of the Judas thing, but the issue becomes the part that says sacrifices will cease, as within us, no sacrifices happen and no sacrifices happen in churches either (Unless you are catholic), these happen only in the temple. I believe that is the most natural reading of the text, but I struggle to see it as HOLY today.
The True Facts that we do have:
1. Josephus EXAGGERATED [another word for LIED] about what took place in 70 A.D. [and what else would we expect from a TRAITOR]?
2. Josephus never wrote about the Sun becoming black as night, the moon turning dark and blood, the stars would appear to be falling from the sky.
3. Josephus never wrote about the Abomination standing in the Temple proclaiming to be God.
4. Josephus never wrote about Lightning being seen from the East to the West and then the physical appearance of the Second Coming of Christ.
All of these things indicate the Great Tribulation had taken place and was ended. But not a single word from Josephus concerning any of it.
So once again, why are we using Josephus to back 70 A.D. as the Great Tribulation when what he did write turned out to be a LIE, and then he missed the most important part concerning the End of Tribulation which IMMEDIATELY leads to Christ's Second Coming.
Am I missing something here or just reading idiocracies from a few who are following a false prophet?
1. Josephus EXAGGERATED [another word for LIED] about what took place in 70 A.D. [and what else would we expect from a TRAITOR]?
2. Josephus never wrote about the Sun becoming black as night, the moon turning dark and blood, the stars would appear to be falling from the sky.
3. Josephus never wrote about the Abomination standing in the Temple proclaiming to be God.
4. Josephus never wrote about Lightning being seen from the East to the West and then the physical appearance of the Second Coming of Christ.
All of these things indicate the Great Tribulation had taken place and was ended. But not a single word from Josephus concerning any of it.
So once again, why are we using Josephus to back 70 A.D. as the Great Tribulation when what he did write turned out to be a LIE, and then he missed the most important part concerning the End of Tribulation which IMMEDIATELY leads to Christ's Second Coming.
Am I missing something here or just reading idiocracies from a few who are following a false prophet?
I'm sorry you are angry.
I'll try and answer.
What Jesus and the disciples spoke about right before his execution was the destruction of the temple,
and the separating of the sheep and the goats, the Church and Apostate Israel (who rejected Jesus).
It was a very important event.
Josephus is simply a historical witness to what Jesus prophesied.
The idea that Josephus was unreliable does not worry me personally.
I mean he wasn't writing fiction, there just may be a valid question about his accuracy.
It's hard for me to get agitated about this issue - he was a translator at the siege of Jerusalem
and therefore was uniquely positioned to hear many many first-hand Jewish tales.
I think at the start of one of his works he laments that he cannot sugar-coat what his people, the Jews, have got up to.
He really had little pressure from that direction.
Maybe he had pressure as an adopted Roman.....
I'll try and answer.
What Jesus and the disciples spoke about right before his execution was the destruction of the temple,
and the separating of the sheep and the goats, the Church and Apostate Israel (who rejected Jesus).
It was a very important event.
Josephus is simply a historical witness to what Jesus prophesied.
The idea that Josephus was unreliable does not worry me personally.
I mean he wasn't writing fiction, there just may be a valid question about his accuracy.
It's hard for me to get agitated about this issue - he was a translator at the siege of Jerusalem
and therefore was uniquely positioned to hear many many first-hand Jewish tales.
I think at the start of one of his works he laments that he cannot sugar-coat what his people, the Jews, have got up to.
He really had little pressure from that direction.
Maybe he had pressure as an adopted Roman.....
It's not that I am angry, it's on that other site whenever you have opposing viewpoints with certain members, a specific Mod, will suddenly give you Warning Points. But on this platform, it should be a fair discussion. But it is interesting watching how restrained certain Members are here in this discussion that over there are blatantly attacking so you will respond and get into issues with site Mods.
Yes, I agree portions of Matthew 24 are pertaining to 70 A.D. But some are relating it to the Great Tribulation. If that is true, why does not Josephus write about the signs that would happen and Christ returning? If 70 A.D. was the factual Great Tribulation, Christ said [Immediately Following] that Great Tribulation, signs would appear Sun to darkness, Moon blackened and blood [Joel 2], Stars appear falling from the skies, and then like Lightning from East to West He returns. If this happened, why did Josephus leave that out?
My understanding is that the Great Tribulation is not just the seven years of the Roman Judea war,
AD67-73, but the consequent punishment also.
The Old Covenant is actually several covenants; there is a Levitical Covenant, the covenant at Sinai, and the Covenant added at Moab. [ And for covenant experts, I suppose there are also a Davidic Covenant, and one with Noah as well]
Anyhow, within the covenants, there are punishments, curses, for disobedience. The Jews didn't just have their country
overrun and torched by their colonial masters, they were then sent into a very long period of diaspora.
Over the last two thousand years, the Jews have suffered a lot of persecution, and this I personally understand as
all being part and parcel of the Mega Thlipsis - the great suffering.
AD67-73, but the consequent punishment also.
The Old Covenant is actually several covenants; there is a Levitical Covenant, the covenant at Sinai, and the Covenant added at Moab. [ And for covenant experts, I suppose there are also a Davidic Covenant, and one with Noah as well]
Anyhow, within the covenants, there are punishments, curses, for disobedience. The Jews didn't just have their country
overrun and torched by their colonial masters, they were then sent into a very long period of diaspora.
Over the last two thousand years, the Jews have suffered a lot of persecution, and this I personally understand as
all being part and parcel of the Mega Thlipsis - the great suffering.
-
1
- Show all
It is not Christian perception or divine perception as to the future temple being regarded as holy. If in the minds of Orthodox Jews it is holy, then that settles the matter. They will have a Holy Place within, as prophesied by Christ. And the Antichrist will desecrate it with the Abomination of Desolation. This has nothing to do with the Church as the temple of God (which is an entirely different matter).
And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. (Dan 11:31)
When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)... (Mt 24:15)
Before saying this, Christ has already predicted the destruction of the second temple. And we know that this prophecy was not fulfilled at that time. Therefore a future temple will be erected in Jerusalem and this prophecy will be fulfilled. The Jews in Israel already have plans completed for this temple.
And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. (Dan 11:31)
When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)... (Mt 24:15)
Before saying this, Christ has already predicted the destruction of the second temple. And we know that this prophecy was not fulfilled at that time. Therefore a future temple will be erected in Jerusalem and this prophecy will be fulfilled. The Jews in Israel already have plans completed for this temple.
So, you're claiming the Great Tribulation began with the 70 A.D. Event and is continuing until that Tribulation is fulfilled by which then Matthew 24:
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
will fulfill it's Prophecy?
You are not claiming we are in the Mill Reign now, but currently in the Great Tribulation [or the Jews are]?
I wasn't clear on some of what you said, but generally, you're right. The misinterpretation of Daniel's 70th Week has caused enormous problem with prophecy interpreters.
I agree with you that a simple rendering of it from the historical pov makes more sense and was the way most of the Church Fathers saw it. It is also seemingly the way Jesus' Olivet Discourse sees it.
There is no 7 year Great Tribulation period in the endtime--I believe that the Antichrist reigns, unchallenged for 1260 days, and then the world mobilizes to Armageddon. I don't believe there is any 7 year Antichristian treaty. I don't believe Antichrist is the Abomination of Desolation, although it may indeed have been a foreshadowing of him. For the most part, we agree. Thanks.
I agree with you that a simple rendering of it from the historical pov makes more sense and was the way most of the Church Fathers saw it. It is also seemingly the way Jesus' Olivet Discourse sees it.
There is no 7 year Great Tribulation period in the endtime--I believe that the Antichrist reigns, unchallenged for 1260 days, and then the world mobilizes to Armageddon. I don't believe there is any 7 year Antichristian treaty. I don't believe Antichrist is the Abomination of Desolation, although it may indeed have been a foreshadowing of him. For the most part, we agree. Thanks.
-
2
- Show all
Sorry, I disagree that a full week is necessarily being implied. It is, in my view, simply a statement that in the last week a confirmation of the covenant of Abraham is made.
And that took place during Jesus' earthly ministry, which I think lasted only 3.5 years and ended at the cross. That is, he confirmed the covenant of Law in the 70th Week, and died in the midst of the week. That's when OT offerings were no longer accepted by God.
And that took place during Jesus' earthly ministry, which I think lasted only 3.5 years and ended at the cross. That is, he confirmed the covenant of Law in the 70th Week, and died in the midst of the week. That's when OT offerings were no longer accepted by God.
-
1
- Show all
You're rushing past my argument. I said that everlasting righteousness can be defined in different ways, but that the *context* determines which definition to use. At least that was my implication.
Since the context requires a linear 70 Week period, "everlasting righteousness" must be defined by Christ's earthly ministry, completed at the cross. One cannot separate the 70th Week from the previous 69 Weeks and still call it a "70 Week period!"
Since the context requires a linear 70 Week period, "everlasting righteousness" must be defined by Christ's earthly ministry, completed at the cross. One cannot separate the 70th Week from the previous 69 Weeks and still call it a "70 Week period!"
-
2
-
1
- Show all