Why Daniel's 70th week must be in the future

[OldSage]

Dan 9.26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. 27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.

Here is the essence of what is being said, in the bold above. Messiah would come to bring final salvation to Israel. But before that happens, the temple will fall on hard times. Sounds a lot like the Olivet Discourse, in which Jesus surprised the Disciples by saying the temple, instead of bringing deliverance to Israel, would instead be destroyed.

Remember the story in which Israel brought the ark into battle, thinking it would win the war with the Philistines? But instead of winning the war, the undeserving Israelites lost the ark to the Philistines. see 1 Sam 4.

The Jewish Religion could not, without purging, bring deliverance to Israel. The temple would have to be destroyed, and a new "temple" set up whereby faithful Israelites could obtain favor with God while the majority fell away.

So here in this prophecy, Dan 9, we see the temple being rebuilt after the Babylonian Captivity. And instead of saying it would bring final salvation for Israel, Daniel is shown that it too would be desolated, along with Jerusalem. This new "holy of holies" had to be anointed, to usher in final salvation. I speak of Christ. With the old temple, Christ was cut off and had nothing.

The covenant established in the 70th Week fulfills all of the things spoken of in 9.24, which I believe has to do with the Messiah. He accomplished those things, even as the Jews largely fell away, along with their temple. So the final Week of Daniel's 70 Weeks had to do with confirming a covenant with the Jews that could not be fulfilled through the Law and through the temple. It would have to be fulfilled through the cutting off both of Messiah and the temple.

In other words, the final Week consists of Christ confirming the Abrahamic Covenant apart from the temple structure. The last Week consisted of Messiah's life until he is cut off. That is when he confirmed the covenant.

Once we see Christ and the Church as one, the anointed one can be understood as the Church,
which was cut off from apostate Israel before the Roman War. (i.e. run for the hills, get out of Judea).

masiah karat am - an anointed on is cut off from the people

Genesis 17
14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people (karat am); he has broken my covenant.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

That may be at times, but not always. Consider how well that logic holds up in this case.
3 days = 3 24 hour periods, or 72 hours.
Christ rose on the 3rd day. Therefore, Christ rose after 72 hours.

It doesn't always work that way. There were 70 Weeks. The 1st 69 Weeks had to be full 7 Day Weeks. The last Week is still the 70th Week, whether it is a full Week or not.

it was still 7 years

the first 69 weeks ended with the messiah being cut off (the cross)

the only mention of the final week is this covenant confirmed for 1 week

so once when did Jesus confirm this 7 year covenant?

Your sense of this passage is predicated on the false assumption that a 7 years covenant was being predicted. It wasn't. Instead, an eternal covenant was being predicted *for* the last and 70th Week. It was the confirmation of an eternal covenant that the 70th Week would see accomplished.

You don't think so? This is what Daniel prayed:

Dan 9.4 I prayed to the Lord my God and confessed:
“Lord, the great and awesome God, who keeps his covenant of love with those who love him and keep his commandments..."

No, Daniel was being told the process Israel would have to go through to get to this covenant's fulfillment. It would require 70 Weeks. The confirmation of the eternal covenant would come "for" the 70th Week, and would not even require the full Week for this to happen. Jesus' earthly ministry took only half a Week, and he was cut off, bringing to pass the end of sin in Israel, and ushering in his own everlasting righteousness. This is the focus of the prophecy--not prediction of a 7 year Antichristian covenant, which is completely out of place in this passage, and has no real value.

my sense of this passage is as my sense with all prophecy

this WILL HAPPEN.

if prophecy does not happen, if Gods promised answer to prophecy does not happen, then God lied

its not about a 7 year covenant, it’s about what will be at the end of the 70 weeks,

the 70th year is just 1 tiny aspect of the covenant, yet Gabriel says it WILL happen

so I believe it

if you can’t show me it happened, I can’t agree with you that it is completed, I must reject that thinking

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I know of no historicist who has made such a claim.

So you have not seen all the anti rapture threads here?

ammils don’t, they reject that a rapture will happen

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It does not say that.

Yes it does, I showed you it did

talk about me not being interested, you ever think this might be why? You deny what the passage says

 

[eternally-gratefull]

No, that is not what Daniel 9 says.

Sir. You

The key to understanding what this is really saying...



- is - understanding what this is really saying...

Do you?

Not that I see

In daniel 9. We are told in the middle of the week. One will place an abomination (hebrew siqqus - vileness, Vile Idol, Forbidden food, A detestable thing, An abominable object) on the wing of the temple which causes desolation.

In the greek septuagint, The term abomination of desolation is used in Dan 9. Your the only person I ever met who does not think this is an abomination of desolation. Not saying your the only one. But saying something is wrong there Why are you the only one I met?

You need to study deeper my friend.

 

[randyk]

it was still 7 years

the first 69 weeks ended with the messiah being cut off (the cross)

the only mention of the final week is this covenant confirmed for 1 week

so once when did Jesus confirm this 7 year covenant?




my sense of this passage is as my sense with all prophecy

this WILL HAPPEN.

if prophecy does not happen, if Gods promised answer to prophecy does not happen, then God lied

its not about a 7 year covenant, it’s about what will be at the end of the 70 weeks,

the 70th year is just 1 tiny aspect of the covenant, yet Gabriel says it WILL happen

so I believe it

if you can’t show me it happened, I can’t agree with you that it is completed, I must reject that thinking

I have no intention of forcing my own position on anyone. You have to be convinced by your own arguments. But here, you're just asserting--not arguing. So I suppose you just want to believe what you want to believe?

For me, the argument is simple. Daniel is praying for the fulfillment of God's eternal covenant with Israel. God told him the temple structure would be rebuilt, but at the end of a long time, it will be destroyed, along with Jerusalem and the Messiah. This wouldn't be very encouraging except that Daniel is told the Messiah will nevertheless terminate sin in Israel and usher in everlasting righteousness, anointing the most holy place. This was, I think, the anointing of Christ, in place of the temple.

It does seem like an obscure, difficult passage. But I can understand that, since the fulfillment of the covenant with Israel is predicated on the loss of the temple system and on the loss of Messiah. Those who were under the Law at that time could hardly be expected to fully appreciate that Christ would essentially replace the temple system!

 

[randyk]

Once we see Christ and the Church as one, the anointed one can be understood as the Church,
which was cut off from apostate Israel before the Roman War. (i.e. run for the hills, get out of Judea).

masiah karat am - an anointed on is cut off from the people

Genesis 17
14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people (karat am); he has broken my covenant.

I do see the Church as one with Christ. But I don't see the prophecy of Dan 9.26 as referring to the Church, but only to Christ. And so, I see the anointing of the Most Holy in 9.24 as a reference to Christ, as well, and not to the Church. Of course, the value of what Christ did benefits the Church, his Body. But this prophecy identifies Christ as the one performing this work, ushering in everlasting righteousness. The Church puts into application Christ's righteousness, but the work of providing for this righteousness belonged to Christ.

Dan 9.
24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I have no intention of forcing my own position on anyone. You have to be convinced by your own arguments. But here, you're just asserting--not arguing. So I suppose you just want to believe what you want to believe?

For me, the argument is simple. Daniel is praying for the fulfillment of God's eternal covenant with Israel. God told him the temple structure would be rebuilt, but at the end of a long time, it will be destroyed, along with Jerusalem and the Messiah. This wouldn't be very encouraging except that Daniel is told the Messiah will nevertheless terminate sin in Israel and usher in everlasting righteousness, anointing the most holy place. This was, I think, the anointing of Christ, in place of the temple.

I have no intention of forcing my opinion on you also. I supposed you just want to believe what you want to believe (this argument goes both ways my friend)

I can not agree with your argument, Because

1. It is not what Daniel was praying for. He was praying for MERCY of God on his people and Gods holy city.

16 “O Lord, according to all Your righteousness, I pray, let Your anger and Your fury be turned away from Your city Jerusalem, Your holy mountain; because for our sins, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and Your people are a reproach to all those around us.

17 Now therefore, our God, hear the prayer of Your servant, and his supplications, and for the Lord’s sake cause Your face to shine on Your sanctuary, which is desolate.

18 O my God, incline Your ear and hear; open Your eyes and see our desolations, and the city which is called by Your name; for we do not present our supplications before You because of our righteous deeds, but because of Your great mercies. 19 O Lord, hear! O Lord, forgive! O Lord, listen and act! Do not delay for Your own sake, my God, for Your city and Your people are called by Your name.”

There can be no argument. Daniel is praying for Gods mercy on the city of Jerusalem. And the holy mountain. and for his people. Not based on how good they are. but in Daniels own words "because of your great mercies"

Gabriel answered Daniels prayer. His answer is in response to Daniels prayer. Concerning the people and the city.

24. “Seventy weeks are determined For your people and for your holy city,

According to this prophecy, At the end of this 70 weeks. These things WILL happen (not might)

1. To finish the transgression,
2. To make an end of sins,
3. To make reconciliation for iniquity,
4. To bring in everlasting righteousness,
5. To seal up vision and prophecy,
6. And to anoint the Most Holy.

Again, In context of Daniel's prayer. ALL of these things ONLY concern Israel, Jerusalem. The Holy Mountain, And the sanctuary. We can try to make them mean something else. Or try to put the context something other that what daniel prayed for. But that would be taking the prayer and answer out of context.

Take this with MANY other prophecies which proclaim Israel will

1. finish their transgression (repent) (confess Jesus as their lord and they and their fathers sinned great sins, including crucifying christ)
2. Make an end of their sin of playing the harlot with all the false Gods
3. Their iniquity will be reconciled the same way ours is/was
4. their sin will be gone forever. and they will never again fall into the trap. as Jesus himself will rule from Jerusalem in the millenial reign
5. Vision and prophecy concerning Israel and Jerusalem WILL be completed as it will all be fulfilled
6. The most holy place will be anointed, And the temple in Jerusalem will be a house of God with Jesus himself, the son of David fulfilling his promise to David

Now. You do not have to believe this, and I will not try to force you.

But unless you can PROVE to me something different than this. I can not follow the way you believe.






.

 

[OldSage]

I do see the Church as one with Christ. But I don't see the prophecy of Dan 9.26 as referring to the Church, but only to Christ. And so, I see the anointing of the Most Holy in 9.24 as a reference to Christ, as well, and not to the Church. Of course, the value of what Christ did benefits the Church, his Body. But this prophecy identifies Christ as the one performing this work, ushering in everlasting righteousness. The Church puts into application Christ's righteousness, but the work of providing for this righteousness belonged to Christ.

Dan 9.
24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing.

Okay but Karat means:

1. to cut, cut off, cut down, cut off a body part, cut out, eliminate, kill, cut a covenant
   
   and Karat Am therefore means, it would appear, "Cut off from the people"

 

[cv5]

I do see the Church as one with Christ. But I don't see the prophecy of Dan 9.26 as referring to the Church, but only to Christ. And so, I see the anointing of the Most Holy in 9.24 as a reference to Christ, as well, and not to the Church. Of course, the value of what Christ did benefits the Church, his Body. But this prophecy identifies Christ as the one performing this work, ushering in everlasting righteousness. The Church puts into application Christ's righteousness, but the work of providing for this righteousness belonged to Christ.

Dan 9.
24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing.

Sorry man. Allegory simply doesn't fly with Daniels 70 weeks. The Holy Spirit saw fit to eliminate that risk.

 

[OldSage]

I do see the Church as one with Christ. But I don't see the prophecy of Dan 9.26 as referring to the Church, but only to Christ. And so, I see the anointing of the Most Holy in 9.24 as a reference to Christ, as well, and not to the Church. Of course, the value of what Christ did benefits the Church, his Body. But this prophecy identifies Christ as the one performing this work, ushering in everlasting righteousness. The Church puts into application Christ's righteousness, but the work of providing for this righteousness belonged to Christ.

Dan 9.
24 “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

25 “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. 26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing.

We know that if Christ is anointed, then we the body, the Church, share the anointing.
John confirms this:

1 John 2: 20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One

 

[randyk]

I have no intention of forcing my opinion on you also. I supposed you just want to believe what you want to believe (this argument goes both ways my friend)

I can not agree with your argument, Because

1. It is not what Daniel was praying for. He was praying for MERCY of God on his people and Gods holy city.


According to this prophecy, At the end of this 70 weeks. These things WILL happen (not might)

1. To finish the transgression,
2. To make an end of sins,
3. To make reconciliation for iniquity,
4. To bring in everlasting righteousness,
5. To seal up vision and prophecy,
6. And to anoint the Most Holy.

Now. You do not have to believe this, and I will not try to force you.

But unless you can PROVE to me something different than this. I can not follow the way you believe.
.

You said, "this WILL HAPPEN." This is not an argument. I've been engaging in your own arguments, and you have simply been dismissing mine--not arguing the points.

We obviously have 2 very different ways of looking at this. But I'm trying to engage your point here that "It is not what Daniel was praying for." I would argue that it is precisely what Daniel was praying for, namely the fulfillment of God's eternal covenant with Israel, the original covenant He had made with Abraham.

Dan 9.4 I prayed to the Lord my God and confessed:
“Lord, the great and awesome God, who keeps his covenant of love with those who love him and keep his commandments."

It seems quite clear to me that you are wrong, and that this prophecy is entirely about the fulfillment of God's promise with Israel. Instead of proposing the restoration of the temple system as the ultimate answer, the entire temple system ends up desolated, and the Messiah "cut off."

This would be very difficult for Jews to understand in Daniel's time. However, they did understand that the temple system could go corrupt and could be destroyed by God. God's covenant with Israel could be at least temporarily broken.

You keep implying that I've not given you any argument. So when I give you an argument like this, you should address it and not just restate your "faith" in your own wanted position.

To complete the eternal covenant with Israel God is here stating that the Messianic hope is to usher in everlasting righteousness and to atone for sin, despite the complete collapse of Judaism. The focus in on Israel' hope, and has nothing to do with the Antichrist, nor with an Antichristian covenant of 7 years, which is a common interpretation in today' prophetic musings.

 

[randyk]

We know that if Christ is anointed, then we the body, the Church, share the anointing.
John confirms this:

1 John 2: 20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One

That's true, no doubt. But there are places where Christ's work has to be distinguished from our work. We are merely beneficiaries, and not the producers of the work of atonement.

Dan 9.24 speaks of atonement for sin. That is Christ's work, and we are only the beneficiaries.

I wouldn't at all dispute that we are one with Christ, and have Christ's anointing on us. That's certainly true.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

You said, "this WILL HAPPEN." This is not an argument. I've been engaging in your own arguments, and you have simply been dismissing mine--not arguing the points.

We obviously have 2 very different ways of looking at this. But I'm trying to engage your point here that "It is not what Daniel was praying for." I would argue that it is precisely what Daniel was praying for, namely the fulfillment of God's eternal covenant with Israel, the original covenant He had made with Abraham.

Dan 9.4 I prayed to the Lord my God and confessed:
“Lord, the great and awesome God, who keeps his covenant of love with those who love him and keep his commandments."

It seems quite clear to me that you are wrong, and that this prophecy is entirely about the fulfillment of God's promise with Israel. Instead of proposing the restoration of the temple system as the ultimate answer, the entire temple system ends up desolated, and the Messiah "cut off."

This would be very difficult for Jews to understand in Daniel's time. However, they did understand that the temple system could go corrupt and could be destroyed by God. God's covenant with Israel could be at least temporarily broken.

You keep implying that I've not given you any argument. So when I give you an argument like this, you should address it and not just restate your "faith" in your own wanted position.

To complete the eternal covenant with Israel God is here stating that the Messianic hope is to usher in everlasting righteousness and to atone for sin, despite the complete collapse of Judaism. The focus in on Israel' hope, and has nothing to do with the Antichrist, nor with an Antichristian covenant of 7 years, which is a common interpretation in today' prophetic musings.

once again. I can not see it your way. I showed you why, You can continue to disagree with me, and that's fine.

Feel free to believe whatever you want.

Next time, Please stop attaching someone who disagrees with you claiming they are not listening to you. That does not help the discussion,

ps. Abrahams covenant is eternal. Daniel was prayer according to the mosaic covenant. Specifically Lev 26 :

lev 26: 27 ‘And after all this, if you do not obey Me, but walk contrary to Me, 28 then I also will walk contrary to you in fury;
and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. 29 You shall eat the flesh of your sons, and you shall eat the flesh of your daughters. 30 I will destroy your high places, cut down your incense altars, and cast your carcasses on the lifeless forms of your idols;
and My soul shall abhor you. 31 I will lay your cities waste and bring your sanctuaries to desolation, and I will not smell the fragrance of your sweet aromas. 32 I will bring the land to desolation, and your enemies who dwell in it shall be astonished at it. 33 I will scatter you among the nations and draw out a sword after you; your land shall be desolate and your cities waste.

We see this in Daniels own prayer

Dan 9:
11 Yes, all Israel has transgressed Your law, and has departed so as not to obey Your voice; therefore the curse and the oath written in the Law of Moses the servant of God have been poured out on us, because we have sinned against Him. 12 And He has confirmed His words, which He spoke against us and against our judges who judged us, by bringing upon us a great disaster; for under the whole heaven such has never been done as what has been done to Jerusalem.
13 “As it is written in the Law of Moses, all this disaster has come upon us; yet we have not made our prayer before the Lord our God, that we might turn from our iniquities and understand Your truth. 14 Therefore the Lord has kept the disaster in mind, and brought it upon us; for the Lord our God is righteous in all the works which He does, though we have not obeyed His voice.

As I said, You need to study more. Your not going to convince me of looking at your way if you can not read clear written text and understand that it was about Gods destruction concerning the law of moses. specifically Lev 26.

PS. after this final form of discipline.

God said if they repented and confessed their sins and their fathers sins, God would remember the promise

40 ‘But if they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers, with their unfaithfulness in which they were unfaithful to Me, and that they also have walked contrary to Me, 41 and that I also have walked contrary to them and have brought them into the land of their enemies; if their uncircumcised hearts are humbled, and they accept their guilt— 42 then I will remember My covenant with Jacob, and My covenant with Isaac and My covenant with Abraham I will remember; I will remember the land.

THIS is what Daniel is praying about. He was confessing the sins of himself and his fathers as God required. Asking God to remember his covenant. Remember the land. Based on GODS MERCY

 

[randyk]

Please stop attaching someone who disagrees with you claiming they are not listening to you. That does not help the discussion,

ps. Abrahams covenant is eternal. Daniel was prayer according to the mosaic covenant.

Brother, I am not trying to get too "personal," but I was specifically addressing one of your responses to me, in which you made *no argument* at all, but simply *asserted* your belief. This is not a common tactic with me, but I'm quite willing to use it when I see it as a problem.

I'm asking that you address the specific argument, and not just reassert your *faith* in your own argument, claiming that nothing has been argued against it. I have very specific arguments, and I expect you to respond specifically to those arguments if you are serious about discussing them.

Again, saying "this will happen" is not an argument. But I do thank you that you've responded to this very specific last argument I've given you, that this is not just about the city and the temple, but also about the covenant God made with Abraham and Israel.

You're saying that this is the Mosaic Covenant, and not the Abrahamic Covenant. They are not mutually exclusive. The Mosaic Covenant was attached to the Abrahamic Covenant, but could be removed from it without cancelling the Abrahamic Covenant, or as Paul refers to it, the Abrahamic "promise."

If the focus of the 70 Weeks Prophecy is on Messiah's atonement for sin, to fulfill God's promise to Israel, then it is easy to see that the termination of Messiah, Jerusalem, the temple, and the offerings could result in a new form of righteousness, apart from the Law, the temple, and the Holy of Holies.

The covenant for the last week, the 70th Week, was what the ministry of Jesus was all about. It was a half Week, and still "the 70th Week." As in many of the arguments I've given you, you've not addressed this fact. The half Week of Messiah's ministry can still be viewed as the 70th Week. The covenant for the 70th Week can therefore still be a 3.5 years period and not a complete 7 years.

It's fine with me if you don't "see it," and don't wish to "believe it." I'm just giving you my view and trying to answer your own points. Thanks.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Once we see Christ and the Church as one, the anointed one can be understood as the Church,
which was cut off from apostate Israel before the Roman War. (i.e. run for the hills, get out of Judea).

masiah karat am - an anointed on is cut off from the people

Genesis 17
14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people (karat am); he has broken my covenant.

Are you saying that Daniel 9:26 says "masiah karat am" ??

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/daniel/9-26.htm

Where does it say that? (if that's what you meant)

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Brother, I am not trying to get too "personal," but I was specifically addressing one of your responses to me, in which you made *no argument* at all, but simply *asserted* your belief. This is not a common tactic with me, but I'm quite willing to use it when I see it as a problem.

I'm asking that you address the specific argument, and not just reassert your *faith* in your own argument, claiming that nothing has been argued against it. I have very specific arguments, and I expect you to respond specifically to those arguments if you are serious about discussing them.

Again, saying "this will happen" is not an argument. But I do thank you that you've responded to this very specific last argument I've given you, that this is not just about the city and the temple, but also about the covenant God made with Abraham and Israel.

You're saying that this is the Mosaic Covenant, and not the Abrahamic Covenant. They are not mutually exclusive. The Mosaic Covenant was attached to the Abrahamic Covenant, but could be removed from it without cancelling the Abrahamic Covenant, or as Paul refers to it, the Abrahamic "promise."

If the focus of the 70 Weeks Prophecy is on Messiah's atonement for sin, to fulfill God's promise to Israel, then it is easy to see that the termination of Messiah, Jerusalem, the temple, and the offerings could result in a new form of righteousness, apart from the Law, the temple, and the Holy of Holies.

The covenant for the last week, the 70th Week, was what the ministry of Jesus was all about. It was a half Week, and still "the 70th Week." As in many of the arguments I've given you, you've not addressed this fact. The half Week of Messiah's ministry can still be viewed as the 70th Week. The covenant for the 70th Week can therefore still be a 3.5 years period and not a complete 7 years.

It's fine with me if you don't "see it," and don't wish to "believe it." I'm just giving you my view and trying to answer your own points. Thanks.

Brother I already explained this to you

Prophecy is a predicting things that WILL happen.

If you do not agree. this is fine. But it is my argument, to say it is not a valid argument is just baseless.

Deuteronomy 18:22

when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.

God tells us it is through his prophecies he proves he is the one true God. If what he says does not come true. The purpose of his prophesy is destroyed

 

[OldSage]

Are you saying that Daniel 9:26 says "masiah karat am" ??

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/daniel/9-26.htm

Where does it say that? (if that's what you meant)

Yes

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/dan/9/1/t_conc_859026

 

[cv5]

Brother, I am not trying to get too "personal," but I was specifically addressing one of your responses to me, in which you made *no argument* at all, but simply *asserted* your belief. This is not a common tactic with me, but I'm quite willing to use it when I see it as a problem.

I'm asking that you address the specific argument, and not just reassert your *faith* in your own argument, claiming that nothing has been argued against it. I have very specific arguments, and I expect you to respond specifically to those arguments if you are serious about discussing them.

Again, saying "this will happen" is not an argument. But I do thank you that you've responded to this very specific last argument I've given you, that this is not just about the city and the temple, but also about the covenant God made with Abraham and Israel.

You're saying that this is the Mosaic Covenant, and not the Abrahamic Covenant. They are not mutually exclusive. The Mosaic Covenant was attached to the Abrahamic Covenant, but could be removed from it without cancelling the Abrahamic Covenant, or as Paul refers to it, the Abrahamic "promise."

If the focus of the 70 Weeks Prophecy is on Messiah's atonement for sin, to fulfill God's promise to Israel, then it is easy to see that the termination of Messiah, Jerusalem, the temple, and the offerings could result in a new form of righteousness, apart from the Law, the temple, and the Holy of Holies.

The covenant for the last week, the 70th Week, was what the ministry of Jesus was all about. It was a half Week, and still "the 70th Week." As in many of the arguments I've given you, you've not addressed this fact.

It's fine with me if you don't "see it," and don't wish to "believe it." I'm just giving you my view and trying to answer your own points. Thanks.

<<<The half Week of Messiah's ministry can still be viewed as the 70th Week. The covenant for the 70th Week can therefore still be a 3.5 years period and not a complete 7 years.>>>

That's crazy talk right there my friend......

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Yes

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/dan/9/1/t_conc_859026

Okay, so you are thinking that "the people" IS (or is not) connected with the [next word, pretty much...]... H7843 (verb):

"The KJV translates Strong's H7843 in the following manner: destroy (96x), corrupt (22x), mar (7x), destroyer (3x), corrupters (2x), waster (2x), spoilers (2x), battered (1x), corruptly (1x), miscellaneous (11x)."
[--BLB]

1. to destroy, corrupt, go to ruin, decay
   1. (Niphal) to be marred, be spoiled, be corrupted, be corrupt, be injured, be ruined, be rotted
   2. (Piel)
      1. to spoil, ruin
      2. to pervert, corrupt, deal corruptly (morally)
   3. (Hiphil)
      1. to spoil, ruin, destroy
      2. to pervert, corrupt (morally)
      3. destroyer (participle)
   4. (Hophal) spoiled, ruined (participle)

--BlueLetterBible, https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h7843/kjv/wlc/0-1/