Why Daniel's 70th Week does NOT support Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism

I enjoy how indepth many of you get into this topic with your historical record, the Scripture to match, and a bit of each one's personal opinion.

For me, it's rather simple when we know this:

From Irenaeus:
We have the record of the Book of Revelation that John was on the Isle of Patmos (1:9), and there wrote the Apocalypse. In his Against Heresies Book III, at the end of chapter 3, Irenaeus says, “Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.” Trajan began to rule in A.D. 98, and John was alive among the people of Ephesus till that time and perhaps a little while after.

In Against Heresies Book V.30.3, Irenaeus writes (declining to try to identify what the number of the beast signifies), “for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, toward the end of Domitian’s reign.” Domitian died in A.D. 96.

As to John’s actual release from Patmos it would likely have been soon after the death of Domitian, as his edicts – such as banishments – would be voided on his death. But we have no accounts of his release.


From Eusebius:
(Church History III.13.1) and others we are obliged to place the Apostle's banishment to Patmos in the reign of the Emperor Domitian (81-96). After Domitian's death the Apostle returned to Ephesus during the reign of Trajan, and at Ephesus he died about A.D. 100 at a great age.


From Tertullian:
The persecutors under Emperor Domitian (89–96 AD) tried to boil St John in oil in Rome. The Saint miraculously survived and was then exiled to Patmos.


That John factually was put onto Patmos under Domitian's rule around 94 AD where he wrote Revelations.
And when we read the final Chapters of John, we read Judgement, Eternal Punishment, and finally the END!

The End is where logic takes place, that this was not about 70 AD. Because the END is about the prophecies have all been fulfilled and there is no more to write about. Which means, if this happened in 70 AD, we, today, plus the 8 billion other humans on this planet would not be here! And since we are here, we know Revelations was not about 70 AD and proves anyone who believes such baloney is full of baloney!

Christians can TOTALLY IGNORE Jesuits, so that is a non-issue. As to debunking Historicism, it is patently false on the face of it. But my response will be somewhat lengthy to make things clear that everything discussed below pertains to the future.
Paul gives us a very specific context in which "the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition" sits in the temple of God claiming that he is God. Quite obviously that cannot be the Church, since the Church is the temple of the Holy Spirit.

On the other hand Paul's prophecy is directly related to the prophecy of Christ, which was derived from the prophecy of Daniel, and continues in the prophecy of the apostle John in Revelation:

DANIEL 11:31: THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION WILL STAND IN THE SANCTUARY
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.

The daily sacrifice could only be offered in the temple at Jerusalem, which had a Holy Place as well as a Holy of Holies, and was consistently called "the sanctuary".

MATTHEW 24:15: THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION WILL STAND IN THE HOLY PLACE
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)... For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. (v 21)

In the Olivet Discourse, Christ had already predicted the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the 2nd temple in 70 AD. But then He introduced the Abomination of Desolation and connected it to the Great Tribulation (a totally unique event). And since Antiochus Epiphanes desecrated the temple about 200 years BEFORE this prophecy, it is obvious that Christ was not referring to a past event, but was predicting a future event.

2 THESSALONIANS 2:3,4: THE MAN OF SIN SITS IN THE FUTURE TEMPLE OF GOD
Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that Man of Sin be revealed, the Son of Perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. [Note: it is called "the temple of God" for the simple reason that unbelieving Orthodox Jews will regard it as the temple of God, not that God approves of unbelief or a third temple erected in unbelief]

Now it becomes clear that the Antichrist (the Man of Sin) desecrates a future temple in Jerusalem in two ways (1) he sets up an image of himself -- an animated idol -- which is called the Abomination of Desolation because idols are an abomination to God, and (2) he also sits in that temple and claims that he is God. While both these things are preposterous and abominable, he succeeds because God sends a strong delusion upon the earth for 3 1/2 years. Which takes us to Revelation 13:6,14,15:

And he [the Beast, the Antichrist] opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle [the temple of God], and them that dwell in heaven... And [the False Prophet] deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. [Note: it is the False Prophet, the accomplice of the Antichrist, who actually sets up the animated image]

I'm sorry, but comparing what God does and someone being late coming back from lunch, is a terrible comparison. God is perfectly capable of fulfilling part of a prophecy at one time and fulfilling the rest in conjunction with the end of the age.

The reason for the fulfillment of the last seven years as being future, is simply because the characteristics of that last seven years have not be fulfilled. What you and others do is force it to fit by allegorizing, historicizing, bend, twist and mutilate, instead of looking for a literal fulfillment. In Daniel 9:27 you have Jesus as being 'the ruler' of Daniel 9:27 during that last seven years, when the scripture demonstrates that He was cut off (crucified) at the end of the sixty nine sevens. Therefore, Jesus was cut off before the last seven years began and not in the middle of it! In addition, if you claim Jesus as being the 'he' in Dan.9:27, then everything which takes place in that scripture would have to be referring to Him. That said, you would have Jesus as the one setting up the abomination, which is defined as a reeking stench which goes up before God. Below is another example of scripture with a gap in it:

============================================================================
Isaiah 61:1-2
The Spirit of the Lord GOD is on Me, because the LORD has anointed Me to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent Me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and freedom to the prisoners,
to proclaim the year of the LORD’s favor and the day of our God’s vengeance,

Below is Jesus' partial fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy:

The Spirit of the Lord is on Me, because He has anointed Me to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent Me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.

In comparison to Isaiah's prophecy and Jesus fulfillment of it, He left out mid sentence 'and the day of our God's vengeance.'
The reason for this, is because at that time everything contained in Isaiah's prophecy had been fulfilled except for 'the day of our God's vengeance' which had not and still has not been fulfilled. So we have everything mentioned in the prophecy fulfilled, except for the day of God's vengeance, which is still to come. Currently, that would make the last part of Isaiah's prophecy as having approximately a 2700 year gap and counting. For the day of God's vengeance is referring to the Day of the Lord, the time of God's wrath, the time of Jacob's trouble, which will be fulfilled via the seals, trumpets and bowl judgments. Therefore, YES, God is able to fulfill one part of prophecy, while completing the rest at later time.

Amen! Right on!

And it turns out that in order to interpret Scripture according to Historicism, the Bible could not be interpreted as it should -- in its plain literal sense (unless metaphors and symbols were presented). Here is what Got Questions has stated, which is true:

"Historicism looks at the whole of Bible prophecy as a sweeping overview of church history, from Pentecost to the end times. This approach involves interpreting symbols or figures in the Bible as metaphors for actual events, nations, or persons of history. "

We should keep in mind that the Protestant Reformers needed to present the pope in the worst possible light -- as the Antichrist. But that simply does not wash.

Isaiah 61:1,2: The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring good news to the poor; he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound; to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn;

In Luke 4 Jesus himself quoted up to the middle of verse 2 and said that he himself fulfilled this prophecy: he ended with "to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor." Then there is the same 2000 + year gap till the "the day of vengeance of our God".

There are different views of prophecy and you may take whatever view you wish and defend it, but I am somewhat amazed at your method of defending your view here:

The OP has misinterpreted NOTHING.
Unfortunately, Jesuit Futurists can only resort to twisting Scripture
"future Antichrist dude"
it is unbelievably naive to think that would God really inspire Paul to use "temple of God" to refer to a building
somehow Protestantism became "enlightened"

Why don't you just share your interpretation of Scripture instead of using invective language?: that only minimizes your view and makes people doubt your statements! The quotes above really do nothing at all to help your position.

So God, not the antichrist that Cause the sacrificed to cease

Matt 24

14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
15 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
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

When verse 21, great tribulation happen?
It must after verse 14 isn't It?

Did verse 14 happen yet?

Ever heard of Shakespeare's words, "Consistency, thou art a jewel"? Look how nice and consistent this is, as opposed to your Jesuit ideas:

• The year that comes after 2020 is......2021
• The month that comes after June is......July.
• The day that comes after Saturday is......Sunday.
• The hour that comes after 7:00 PM is......8:00 PM.
• The week that comes after the 69th is......the 70th.

Look, if you wanna keep believing that God still needs to see a dead lamb burning on an altar, you go right ahead. I'm not wasting time on such redonkulousness. I assure you Messiah the Prince - Jesus - caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease to have significance forevermore.

I'll admit the OP was rather lengthy, but peeling back layer upon layer of Jesuit lies just ain't gonna happen with the wave of a hand. "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is still tying it's shoe laces", right?

Alas, the only explanation I can see for continued belief in Jesuit Futurism is that people just aren't taking the time to read the principles of Historicism.

The "commandment" given for the restoration of Jerusalem was made by Artaxerxes in 457 B.C., according to God's Word in Ezra 7.
Therefore, the end of the 69 Weeks and the start of the 70th Week would be 483 years later in 27 A.D. -- much much sooner than the 70 A.D. destruction of Jerusalem by Rome.

Oh no what up Phoneman-777 how are you ?

Regarding "the Lamb looking as though it had been slain" is how God showed it to John in the vision. It points the reader to the fact that this description is referring to our Lord who was crucified. In the book of Revelation, one learns to discern between the symbolisms and what is literal, which you seem to lack.

Remember, if you have Jesus as the 'he' of Daniel 9:27, then you would also have Jesus as the one who sets up the abomination. You can't separate the two, for there is only one person spoken of in Daniel 9:27. To be clear, the same one who makes the covenant for one seven, is the same one who sets up the abomination, which according to the word bdelugma translated abomination, is a reeking stench before God. That said, you have Jesus as the one who set up that abomination in the holy place.

I've already showed you that the Isaiah 61 scripture has a 2700 hundred year gap, but you paid no attention to that. Why do you restrict God regarding how He can fulfill prophecy?

You've got Jesus, the Anointed One, performing something in the middle of the last seven years, when the scripture is clear that He is cut off at the very end of the sixty nineth seven, i.e. He is killed before the last seven even begins.

Satan has done his work well:

"For the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires. So they will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths."

You are not tolerating sound doctrine and have gathered around you the teachers of historicism and thereby rejected the truth of God's word. You have wandered away from the truth and turned aside to those myths.

Correction! The decree was made by king Artaxerxes at the request of Nehemiah in 445 BCE.

* Seven year covenant made with Israel by the ruler of the people (antichrist).

* In the middle of the seven years, 'he' the ruler of the people/antichrist, causes the offerings and sacrifices to cease and sets up that abomination in the holy place within the future temple

* He will continue until the decreed destruction is poured out upon him, which will take place when the Lord returns to the earth to end the age where 'he' and the false prophet will be captured and thrown alive into the lake of fire. (2 Thess.2:8, Rev.19:20)

Hi, I would disagree somewhat with the idea that Miller, a Historicist, used a "futurist approach" because at the heart of Jesuit Futurism is the whole idea of a future antichrist centered around Jewish relevancy to end time prophecy fulfillment - neither of which being the case.

I'm not defending Miller's obvious error, but the unfair hearing he's received in the court of public opinion. Miller was not like so many charlatans who prognosticate out of thin air...his date setting of the return of Jesus was a mistake having to do with a wrong interpretation of Daniel 8's 2,300 Days prophecy:

Miller, like many other students of prophecy at that time, mistook the "sanctuary" in Daniel 8:14 to be a prophetic symbol for "the earth", and thus concluded that "unto two thousand, three hundred days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed" meant that "after 2,300 years (1844 A.D.) the Earth is going to be cleansed with fire at the Second Coming." At the time, it seemed perfectly plausible because the entire world was blind to something about which end times prophecy was crystal clear: the Heavenly Sanctuary, where Jesus is our High Priest. Of course, He never appeared and there was a Great Disappointment.

This disappointment seemed to be chronicled in Revelation 10 - in the last days, a "book" was eaten, first sweet in mouth, but bitter in belly, and a voice was heard, "Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings." Only one book was spoken of having to do with the last days that was sealed up "until the time of the end" - Daniel. It was sweet to think that Jesus was coming back in 1844, but so bitter to learn that more work lie ahead of the church for this world before Jesus would indeed appear.

I understand this, but there is a gap between the end of the 69th week and the start of the 70th week.

If not then what happened from 27 AD through 34AD?

Wow, now that's some really powerful exegesis, bro! Aside from a couple minor differences, i think it works well. I'm in favor of counting the 62 at the end of the 7 - I don't see it causing conflict with Messiah being cut off because "Messiah the Prince" refers to Jesus' baptism, not His death. "Messiah" means "anointed" so "Messiah the Prince" must refer to Jesus' anointing as Messiah in the Jordan. It's interesting that He was referred to as "rabbi" up until the evening Jesus said "come and see" but the words which broke the silence of the next morning were "We have found the MESSIAH". The word "messiah" is found only in Daniel, which means Jesus was showing those first disciples Who He was from Daniel's prophecies! What you think, bro?

Here is my definition and understanding of the historicist approach: Biblical prophesy can only be correctly understood after it has been fulfilled, and after it has been correctly matched to the historical record.

Miller's stance on things like the anti-christ may have been based on the historicist approach, but then Miller took it upon himself to make future prediction(s) - and a very bold one(s). In my opinion Miller veered completely off the historicist approach and into his own version of the futurist approach.

Because Miller put a fulfillment date on his prediction all could see his error. Then what people did was group his futurist prediction error(s) to the historicist approach. I adamantly say this is false labeling!!!

The only thing people have learned from Miller, unfortunately, is to not place fulfillment dates on their future predictions. This way no one can ever proof them wrong.

Besides, if Miller was right on the historicist approach he would have recognized that the 2300 days and evenings in Daniel 8 were about the First Roman Jewish War.

You'd be better off to leave the Jesuits out of this discussion. That is simply a red herring.

"A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion. A red herring may be used intentionally" (as in your case).

Antichrist is no where the subject of Daniel 9. It was Jesus Who confirmed the Covenant for the 70th Week, first in Person and then through His disciples (Hebrews 2:3 KJV) and He Who caused the sacrifices to cease - because He is the final sacrifice to which all others pointed.

The Old Testament people looked forward in faith to the Messiah Who was to come and evidenced their faith by sacrificing a lamb...and we New Testament people look back in faith to the Messiah Who came and died for us and we also evidence our faith with our "good works which God ordained that we should walk in them."

The tribulation is at the end of time, but the saints have nothing to fear, just as Daniel was protected in the Lion's Den and the Three Hebrew Worthies in the Fiery Furnace, and Noah's family in the Ark, etc. When the Seven Last Plagues are falling on the wicked, it will be too late to change sides. Gospel preaching will have ceased and nothing will be left to see but the 7 Last Plagues, the 7th of which is Jesus coming to "destroy with the brightness of His coming" the wicked.