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.
...and yet, Paul never uses the "definite article ['the']" when referring to US / the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY as "temple"
[however, both of the references to "the temple of God" [being eschatological references: Rev11:1 and 2Th2:4] DO use the definite article!]
Paul said the Spirit of God lives inside our heart. There is your Temple!
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
If you would study prophecy you would see they build another one
In fact they are very close to starting today. They have everything they need just need a place to put it
Firstly I think you need to understand that Jesus makes the same presentation, in essence, in all three of the so-called 'Olivet' or Temple question and answer sessions. The shape in all three accounts is the same really, notwithstanding certain differences.
The Temple teachings revolve around two related questions -
1) When will the Temple be destroyed
&
2) What is the Sign of it about to happen
with an answer detailing -
1) The series of 'news' events in answer to the when
&
2) The reference to the AoD as the Sign requested by the disciples
However in all three accounts Jesus interpolates between the two part answer an additional piece of material that is both instruction and warning, and that is not specifically an answer to either question. The instruction is that the gospel will be preached during the entirety of the period
the gospel must first be preached to all nations
and the warning is that as a consequence the disciples will be viciously persecuted.
This preaching and persecution message does not really relate to the timing issue, rather the point is that this is an ongoing state of affairs throughout the 34 odd years in view. The other things are specific time markers, sequential events, but the persecution is a constant as the Ministry of the Gospel is a constant, and the Jewish resistance to it is a constant.
So in Luke Jesus says, 'but before all these things' - 'de pro hapas touton' - but the 'pro' (before) here really designates importance. The critical thing in this period is the preaching of the gospel. So 'pro' should really be translated as 'above' or 'more important than'. That is what Jesus is driving at. He is giving them the timings, but he is telling them that their ministry and their response to intense persecution is more important than the timings- Everyone will hate you because of me.
In Matthew Jesus says "then (tote) you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time (tote)....." but 'tote' means then in the sense of 'at that time' rather than 'next in order of time'. So it would be better translated I think as:
At that time you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death and you will be hated by all nations because of me
Matthew is indicating, as in Mark and Luke, the general state of affairs over the 34 years after Jesus's crucifixion, namely
preaching of the Gospel and fierce persecution by the Jews, and the necessity to hold firm 'til the end', as 'the love of most will grow cold'. As in Luke, Jesus is paralleling his narrative on the timeline with the more important matter of the gospel in the face of intense persecution.
But the Prophecy was about it ending, not re-beginning.
Why did it End?
Why did God end the Daily Sacrifice?
Yes. The Levitical Priesthood was abolished on earth in AD70. But the Levitical Priesthood is everlasting, hence we see the 24 Levites in Revelation ministering to God, 8 from the tribe of Ithamar, of which Daniel was one.
1 Chronicles 24
3 With the help of Zadok a descendant of Eleazar and Ahimelek a descendant of Ithamar, David separated them into divisions for their appointed order of ministering. 4 A larger number of leaders were found among Eleazar’s descendants than among Ithamar’s, and they were divided accordingly: sixteen heads of families from Eleazar’s descendants and eight heads of families from Ithamar’s descendants. 5 They divided them impartially by casting lots, for there were officials of the sanctuary and officials of God among the descendants of both Eleazar and Ithamar.
Thanks. I will note that you are unable to (or are purposely disregarding to) address what I've put in Post #617 (bottom half of that post), pg 31.
[besides disagreeing with you on the ID of the "24 elders" in Rev4-5 (who say of themselves "hast redeemed US to God by thy blood out of EVERY..." (not just out of Israel [singular nation])]
Consider:
[quoting from Gaebelein's commentary on Joshua 21, at BibleHub--SEE all of Joshua 21]
"In chapters 13:14, 33 and 14:3, 4 the statement is made that Moses gave no inheritance to the Levites. The Lord was their inheritance. After the tribes had received their allotments the heads of the fathers of the Levites came to Joshua and Eleazar with a petition. They based their petition upon the Word of God spoken to Moses. “Command the children of Israel, that they give unto the Levites of the inheritance of their possession cities to dwell in; and ye shall give also unto the Levites suburbs for the cities round about them” (Numbers 35:2). The people were obedient and gave them cities out of their several inheritances. But the cities were also assigned by lot, so that the Lord assigned them their habitations. How it must have pleased Him to see His Word remembered, obeyed and acted upon! They were scattered throughout the entire domain of Israel. The Kohathites and the children of Aaron had thirteen cities in the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Simeon, and two more in Ephraim, Dan and Manasseh. The Gershonites were placed in cities in eastern Manasseh, Issachar, Asher and Naphtali. The Merarites were in Zebulun and among Gad and Reuben. The divine purpose in scattering them over the land was, no doubt, that they might exercise a beneficent influence in divine things to exhort the tribes to worship Jehovah, to remind them of His goodness and to restrain them from idolatry. At the close of this chapter we read of the faithfulness of the Lord. He gave them the land; He gave them rest; He gave them victory. “There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had spoken.” All God’s promises will be in due time accomplished."
--Gaebelein, Commentary on Joshua 21 - Joshua 21 Gaebelein's Annotated Bible (biblehub.com)
[end quoting; bold and underline mine]
____________
[... if I've understood your point correctly...]
You are once again promulgating ridiculous error. Where are you getting these teachings? Are they teaching this in your Church? I certainly hope not but don't teach it around here....
Daniel was certainly of the tribe of Judah the royal line....
Dan 1:3-6
"both of the royal family and of the nobility, youths without blemish."
That Daniel was of the royal line is also alluded to in 2 Kings 20:16-18 and Isa 39:5-7, where God prophesies that the offspring of Hezekiah will be captives in Babylon.
And yes he was almost certainly a eunuch which disqualifies him from the priesthood anyway.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
No. The prophecy is about Israel fulfilling those things
The man who commits the abomination of desolation ends the sacrifice. You can’t offer sacrifice in a holy place that is rendered desolate By An abomination of desolation
Sacrifice never took away sin most definitely by the evil high priest in Jesus day
Absolutely...
However, it is much easier for the side that accepts the simple straight-forward meaning of a passage than it is for the side that accepts nothing that is not a complex convoluted twisted meaning.
Watsa matta - you can dish it out but you can't take it???
Somehow I am thinking that the insinuations you dished out are much worse than the "ribbing" that you couldn't take.
You don't see me whining about it, do you?
(I generally just consider the source, SMH, and move on...)
Actually, we do not know that.
Either:
~ Jesus said what Luke wrote - and, Matthew and Mark "encrypted" it
or
~ Jesus said what Matthew and Mark wrote - and, Luke "decrypted" it
What we do know is that all three accounts are saying the same thing - because, they are three accounts of the same discourse.
Prophecy scholar cv5 fails to understand that - what the Jew-Christians 'saw' that they immediately recognized as being the thing illustrated in Matthew 24:15 / Mark 13:14 / Luke 21:20 - could not possibly be [directly] associated with the AoD or the Temple.
Too bad about that...
You had it right the first time...
It is not what Daniel prophesied that they would recognize - they knew the AoD had already occurred in 167 B.C.
It was what happened at the 'event' that Daniel prophesied about.
It is an indirect reference to the AoD - using it for illustration.
This is what the parenthetical statements are about.
In effect, the Matthew and Mark accounts are saying:
"When you see [what happened at the AoD] about to happen again - leave quickly!"
They left the city long before any of this could have been realized.