BroMatt

Debate - Prophecy in Daniel 9

37 posts in this topic

Login or register for removal of this advertisement.

My opening remarks are simply a re-posting of the original posting with which I started my thread entitled, "Concerning Daniel 9:24-27."  The only change that I have made to this original posting is an addition in the introduction of a questions that must be answered in relation to the passage and the debate concerning a right understanding of the passage.

_____________________________________________________________

 

The following list of questions must be considered in order to formulate a right understanding of Daniel 9:24-29 in relation to the debate between the preteristic (or, partial-preteristic) understanding  and the futuristic understanding of the passage.

1.  Toward whom is this prophetic utterance focused in its fulfillment?
2.  What specific measurement of time do the “seventy weeks” represent?
3.  Are the six-fold purpose statements for these “seventy weeks,” as presented in verse 24, to be fulfilled immediately upon the completion of these “seventy weeks,” or not?
4.  What are the meanings for each of these six-fold purpose statements?
5.  What specific event in Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry is intended to be referenced by the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” as presented in verse 25?
6.  What is the specific timing for the events of verse 26 – (1) immediately at the close of the sixty-ninth “week,” (2) after the sixty-ninth “week,” but before the start of the seventieth week (that is – between the sixty-ninth “week” and seventieth “week,” creating a separation of time between the sixty-ninth “week” and seventieth “week”), (3) during the seventieth “week,” or (4) during and/or after the seventieth “week”?
7.  Who specifically are the people of the prince that shall come?
8.  Who specifically is the prince that shall come?
9.  Who specifically is the “he” of verse 29?
10.  What specifically is “the covenant” that the “he” of verse 29 confirms with the “many”?
11.  Who specifically are the “many” of verse 29, with whom the “he” of the verse will confirm this covenant?
12.  What does the phrase “for one week” mean in relation to to the confirming of this covenant that the “he” of the verse makes with the “many” of the verse?
13.  What does it mean for the “he” of the verse to “cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease”?
14.  What is the meaning of the phrase, “for the overspreading of abominations”?
15.  To what does the phrase, “the consummation,” refer?

 

Concerning Daniel 9:24-27 –

“Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

As the context of Daniel 9 reveals, this prophetic utterance was delivered unto Daniel, who had been confessing the sins of his people Israel and praying for the Lord’s mercy upon his people Israel.  Indeed, when the angel Gabriel delivered this prophetic utterance unto Daniel, he specifically indicated that the focus of its revelation concerned Daniel’s people Israel and Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem, as per the opening line of verse 24 – “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy [that is – Daniel’s] people and upon thy [that is – Daniel’s] holy city [Jerusalem].”  Furthermore, the angel revealed that these “seventy weeks” were determined by the Lord God upon Daniel’s people, the Israelites, and upon Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem, for a six-fold purpose as signaled by the six infinitive phrases that complete verse 24. 

This six-fold purpose of the Lord our God concerning Daniel’s people, the Israelites, and Daniel’s holy city, Jerusalem, are as follows:

1.  “To finish the transgression” – Herein the word “transgression” is singular, indicating that it refers unto the entire rebellion of the Israelites against the Lord their God as a single unit of sinful fault.  Indeed, the Hebrew word that is translated by the English word “transgression” indicates a breaking away (or, departure) from a relationship or covenant with another.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about a completion to the sinful departure of the Israelites away from Him.  As such, we could expect that after these “seventy weeks” are concluded, the Israelites will never again depart from the Lord.

2.  “To make an end of sins” – Herein the word “sins” is plural, indicating that it refers unto the individual activities of sin that the Israelites might commit against the Lord their God.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about a completion to the sinful activities of the Israelites against Him.  As such, we could expect that after these “seventy weeks “ are concluded, the Israelites will never again commit sins against the Lord.

3.  “To make reconciliation for iniquity” – Herein the word “reconciliation” indicates the ideas of atonement and forgiveness and of reconciliation thereby.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about His forgiveness upon the Israelites for their sinful departure from Him and for their sinful activities against Him, and to bring about thereby the reconciliation of the Israelites unto Himself and unto His blessed fellowship.

4.  “To bring in everlasting righteousness” – Herein the phrase “everlasting righteousness” reveals the spiritual condition into which the Lord God intends to bring the Israelites through His work of reconciliation.  He intends to bring them into a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness,” not into a condition of righteousness from which they might again fall, but into a condition of righteousness from which they will never fall again.  Indeed, this is the spiritual condition into which the Lord God will bring the Israelites at the completion of these “seventy weeks.”

5.  “To seal up the vision and prophecy” – This phrase appears to indicate that all of the Lord’s prophetic utterances concerning the Israelites (especially concerning His judgments upon the Israelites) will be brought to their conclusion through the completion of these “seventy weeks.”

6.  “To anoint the most Holy” – Herein the phrase “the most Holy” refers to the Most Holy One, the promised Messiah of Israel.  According to the New Testament Scriptures, we learn that this Most Holy One, that the Messiah, is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about the literal anointing of the Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords over all the earth.  As such, we could expect that the literal return of our Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords (See Revelation 19) will occur at the completion of these “seventy weeks.”

Now, in this context the phrase “seventy weeks” may be literally understood as “seventy sevens,” wherein the English word “weeks” is employed for the idea of “sevens.”  The reason that the English word “weeks” is so employed is because a week is the most natural grouping of seven when we encounter the element of time sequences.  However, the Hebrew idea of “sevens” is not limited only to a group of seven days, but can refer to any grouping of sevens within the sequence of time.  With this understanding in mind, we move to verse 25, wherein greater detail is revealed concerning the first sixty-nine of these “seventy weeks” (or, seventy sevens).

The opening portion of verse 25 reveals that the first sixty-nine of these “seventy weeks” will encompass the time period “from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince.”  Thus these first sixty-nine sevens will begin with “the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem” after their seventy years of captivity by the hand of the Babylonians (See Ezra & Nehemiah).  Thus also these first sixty-nine sevens will conclude with the coming of “the Messiah the Prince.”  Now, the distance of time between these events are known by historical record to be greater than a period of sixty-nine literal weeks.  Rather, we understand by the historical record that the distance of time between these events encompassed a multitude of years (indeed, 483 years).  Therefore, we are brought to understand that the “seventy sevens” of this context are a reference unto seventy groupings of seven years each.

Now, the report of verse 25 is not presented with a simple designation of threescore (sixty) and nine “weeks” (sevens), but with the dividing of two parts, the first being “seven weeks” (seven sevens) and the second being “threescore and two weeks” (sixty-two sevens).  This seems to indicate that something of significance will also occur at the completion of the first “seven weeks” (or, forty-nine years) of these sixty-nine weeks (sevens).  Even so, the closing line of verse 25 appears to reveal what this “thing” of significance is – “The street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.”

Since verse 25 has recorded the beginning and the ending for the first sixty-nine “weeks” of the “seventy weeks,” we would now logically expect verse 26 to report the events of the seventieth and final “week” of these “seventy weeks.”  Indeed, human logic would move us to expect that the seventieth and final “week” of these “seventy weeks” would follow immediately after the first sixty-nine “weeks” are completed (since the number seventy does follow immediately after the number sixty-nine).  However, this seventieth and final “week” of these “seventy weeks” is not actually and specifically mentioned until verse 27.  Rather, verse 26 gives a report concerning events that occur “after” the “threescore and two weeks” (after the first sixty-nine “weeks”) without making any specific reference to the seventieth and final week.

What then are these events that occur after the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years), without any specific indication that they fall in the seventieth and final “week” (7 years)?  Verse 26 appears to give report concerning three things, saying, “And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”  Herein the preposition “after” does not indicate that these things occur at the end of the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years), but indicates that these things occur after the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years) are already concluded.  Furthermore, it is worthy of notice that verse 25 did not specifically state that the first sixty-nine “weeks” would conclude with the cutting off of the Messiah the Prince.  Rather, verse 25 simply indicated that the first sixty-nine “weeks” would extend “unto the Messiah the Prince” (and thereby conclude), without specifying the activity of the Messiah the Prince to which it was referring.  (Personally, I believe that verse 25 is referring to the beginning of our Lord Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry as initiated by His baptism.)

So then, what are the three things which verse 26 indicates occur after the conclusion of the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years)? 

1.  The Messiah will be cut off in death, not for His own sake, but for the sake of others.  According to the New Testament Scriptures, this would be a prophetically refer unto the crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the cross. 

2.  “The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city [that is – Daniel’s holy city, Jersusalem, as per the contextual statement with which verse 24 began] and the sanctuary [that is – the temple in Jerusalem].”  Now, in this statement there are two elements of information that are worthy of notice in relation to the context.  The first of these elements of information is that there is “a prince that shall come” unto the Israelites and unto the city of Jerusalem who is not referenced as their Messiah.  The second of these elements of information is that this “prince that shall come” is not the one himself who comes against Jerusalem in the event of verse 26 to destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple) therein.  Rather, it is the people of which he will be a part that come against Jerusalem in the event of verse 26 to destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple) therein.

3.  “The end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”  This statement appears to indicate that the destroying of the city Jerusalem and of the temple in Jerusalem will end with utter the utter desolation of the Israelites, and that the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem will continue to suffer ongoing desolations thereafter.

Finally, with verse 27 we come to the concluding verse of this prophetic utterance and to the specific reference to the seventieth and final “week” (7 years) of these “seventy weeks.”  The opening line of this verse indicates that some “he” will “confirm” some “covenant with many” (apparently among the Israelites, since that is the focus of this prophetic utterance as per the opening statement of verse 24).  In fact, this “he” will “confirm” this “covenant” with these Israelites for a period of “one week” (that is – a period of one seven, or of seven years).  Then this verse indicates that in the middle of this seven year period (after 3.5 years), this “he” will “cause the sacrifice and oblation” of the Israelites “to cease” (apparently ending his seven year “covenant” with the Israelites).  Finally, this verse indicates that this “he” will bring a form of desolation upon the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem, and that this “he” will do so for the purpose of “the overspreading of abominations” upon the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem.  Indeed, this verse indicates that this desolation will continue upon the Israelites and the city of Jerusalem “until the consummation” (until the completion) of the seventieth “week,” and thereby of the “seventy weeks.”

So then, who is this “he” of verse 27?  Grammatically, the closest antecedent to this pronoun in the context is “the prince that shall come” who was mentioned in verse 26.  Furthermore, in the context there is no other reference to “the prince that shall come” of verse 26 in order to explain who he is and why he matters and was mentioned at all in verse 26.  As such, I would contend according to these principles of grammar and context that the “he” of verse 27 is “the prince that shall come” of verse 26.  Now, it is again worthy of note that this “prince” is not referenced in verse 26 as being the Messiah, but that he is in some way related to the people who would destroy the city of Jerusalem and the sanctuary (temple) therein in the destroying event that is prophesied in verse 26.

In conclusion, let us consider the grammatical and contextual gap that is presented in this passage between the conclusion of the sixty-nine “weeks” and the beginning of the seventieth “week.”  Verse 25 clearly speaks concerning the beginning and conclusion of the first sixty-nine “weeks,” and verse 27 clearly speaks concerning the beginning of the seventieth “week.”  However, the events of verse 26 are presented between these other two records.  Indeed, as we have already noted, verse 26 does specifically indicate that the events which it records occur after the sixty-nine “weeks.”  Yet verse 26 makes no specific reference whatsoever to the seventieth “week.”  Furthermore, verse 27 specifically makes reference to the beginning of the seventieth week, and then reports concerning events that will proceed from that point.  Yet verse 27 does not specifically indicate that the events which are recorded in verse 26 are included in that seventieth “week.”  As such, we may understand from the flow of the grammar and the context that there is some form of gap in time between the first sixty-nine “weeks” (483 years) as recorded in verse 25 and the seventieth and final “week” (7 years) as recorded in verse 27, and that the events of verse 26 will fall within that gap in time.

(Note: Often when I post and then later read what I have posted, I find spelling and grammatical errors therein.  In such cases, I use the edit function to correct these errors.  However, under the boundaries of this debate forum, I will not be able to perform such edits.  Therefore, I request grace from the readers concerning any such errors that might be encountered.  Thank you.)

 

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
For grammatical errors, strikeouts have been employed to signal such edits.
Invicta, 1Timothy115, Alan and 2 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am posting without reading Scott's opening post, although I did read & reply to it at the time of the previous discussion - which occasioned this debate. That puts me at a slight disadvantage, as I haven't got a single post to repost as an intro to the debate. Nevertheless ..... 

Dan. 9:1 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;
In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.
And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes:
And I prayed unto the Lord my God, and made my confession,
.....
21 Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.
22 And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding.
23 At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Daniel believes the prophets & believes in a faithful God, a God who has called a people to honour & magnify his name on earth, & has ordained priests & prophets to instruct & rebuke the people, & generally to guide them on the path of blessing. 

God was just & faithful in judging the nation 70 years before, & will be just & faithful in restoring the people & returning  them to the promised land. We need to learn to pray as Daniel - to claim the promises of God in his Word, while acknowledging our sin against his Word, & his righteous chastisement for our sin. 

A thousand years before God promised a Messiah - like Moses, with a promise & a warning:

Deut. 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 
19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

Now the LORD is very specific in this 70 weeks prophecy. All agree that that means 490 years. 70 weeks of exile have just concluded, & the people will return to rebuild Jerusalem for Messiah. In 70x7 years his work will be finished.

I will outline my understanding of the prophecy, rather than develop it at length.

Verse 24 details the saving work Messiah will accomplish - his finished work at Calvary. The old covenant prophecies will be realised in Messiah. 

Verse 25 speaks of the rebuilding through times of trouble - as we read about in Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Zechariah & Haggai. The 7+62 weeks takes us to the anointing of Messiah - the most Holy - which took place at his baptism. 

Verse 26 speaks of things happening AFTER the 69th week, possibly, but not necessarily during the 70th week. We have the advantage of the Gospels & Acts to see how the details work out. We see the prophesied crucifixion, & the resultant destruction as prophesied by Jesus in his Olivet prophecy. 

In verse 27, during the 70th week,  Messiah confirms the covenant, and brings to an end sacrifice & oblation - FINISHED by his sacrifice - the crucifixion - in the midst of the week. Those who reject the covenant - now the new covenant in Messiah's blood - will suffer desolation & destruction. 

The cross & resurrection of Messiah complete his work under the old covenant. He lived as the Son of man under the old covenant, keeping every detail to perfection, & all for his people & their/our salvation. He has been confirming the covenant with those who received him during the 3 years (half week) of his earthly ministry, & through his Apostles proclaiming his finished work & full salvation confirms the covenant - now the new covenant in Jesus blood - by the Gospel. Many thousands, including priests, respond to that glorious Gospel by repentance & baptism in Jesus name. Down the ages we honour that new covenant as we share the bread & wine in Jesus name. 

The 70 weeks finished about 3 years after Calvary. The desolation & destruction under the invading Roman prince took place in AD 70. All that remains is the consummation - the glorious return of our Lord Jesus Christ for resurrection & judgement, & to bring about the new heaven & new earth, when all the covenant promises will be realised to perfection. 

 

 

 

 

 

Invicta likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Often when engaged in discussion-debates such as this, I will seek quickly to acknowledge the points of agreement between my “opponent” and myself.  First, I do this in order to demonstrate that my “opponent” and I are not in complete disagreement on every point.  Second, I do this in order to remove these points of agreement from being a unnecessary distraction within the debate itself.  Third, I do this in order to focus the discussion-debate upon the actual points of disagreement.

In addition, often I will present my understanding of my “opponent’s” position, seeking from my “opponent” for confirmation that my understanding is correct, clarification on any points that need further detail, or correction on any point wherein my understanding of my “opponent’s” position is incorrect.  First, I do this in order to demonstrate respect unto my “opponent” as an individual, granting my “opponent” an honest hearing and consideration of his or her position.  Second, I do this in order to discern the primary point (the “premise points”) of disagreement between my “opponent’s” position and my own; for these “premise points” are the foundation turning points out of which the rest of the disagreement flows.  Third, I do this in order to engage the actual position of my “opponent,” rather than some misunderstanding of that position; for to engage a misunderstanding of my “opponent’s” position is not to engage my “opponent’s” actual position at all.

Even so, the following posting is present for these purposes.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Brother “Covenanter,”

(Note:  Might I know your given last name in order that I might engage you respectfully thereby.  If you have revealed this to me already in the past, I do regretfully and apologetically admit that I do not recall it.)

Daniel believes the prophets & believes in a faithful God, a God who has called a people to honour & magnify his name on earth, & has ordained priests & prophets to instruct & rebuke the people, & generally to guide them on the path of blessing.

1.  We are in full agreement concerning these introductory comments.

God was just & faithful in judging the nation 70 years before, & will be just & faithful in restoring the people & returning them to the promised land. We need to learn to pray as Daniel - to claim the promises of God in his Word, while acknowledging our sin against his Word, & his righteous chastisement for our sin.

2.  We are in full agreement concerning these introductory comments.

A thousand years before God promised a Messiah - like Moses, with a promise & a warning:

Deut. 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.


19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

3.  We are in full agreement that the Lord God had promised His coming Messiah through this prophetic utterance of Moses in Deuteronomy 18:18-19.

Now the LORD is very specific in this 70 weeks prophecy. All agree that that means 490 years.

4.  We are in full agreement that the “70 weeks” of Daniel 9:24-27 represent 70 groupings of 7 years each, thereby encompassing a time period of 490 years.

70 weeks of exile have just concluded, & the people will return to rebuild Jerusalem for Messiah. In 70x7 years his work will be finished.

5.  This is the point at which I believe your typographical corrective was intended – that you intended to state “70 years,” rather than “70 weeks.”  If I am correct concerning this “corrected” understanding, then we are in agreement that the 70 years of punishment in exile as prophesied by Jeremiah (as per Daniel’s Biblical meditations according to Daniel 9:1-2) were drawing to a close, and that the decree to rebuild the city Jerusalem (and the temple therein) would soon go forth. 

However, there are two points of disagreement that I would present concerning this statement.  First, I would have disagreement with your use of the prepositional phrase, “for Messiah,” at the end of the first sentence.  I am not aware of any indication throughout the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 that Jerusalem would be rebuild specifically “for Messiah.”  To me this appears to be an imprecise addition concerning the purpose for the rebuilding of Jerusalem.  Second, I would have disagreement with the entirety of your second statement.  I am not aware of any indication in the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 that these “70 weeks” (70 x 7 years) are intended to bring about the completion (the “finishing”) of the Messiah’s work.  (Grammatically, the antecedent for your word “his” in your second statement appears to be the word “Messiah” with which your first statement ends.  If my understanding concerning this wrong, please correct me.)

I will outline my understanding of the prophecy, rather than develop it at length.

Verse 24 details the saving work Messiah will accomplish - his finished work at Calvary. The old covenant prophecies will be realised in Messiah. 

6.  Herein we find our first significant point of disagreement, about which I desire to engage through future postings.

Verse 25 speaks of the rebuilding through times of trouble - as we read about in Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Zechariah & Haggai. The 7+62 weeks takes us to the anointing of Messiah - the most Holy - which took place at his baptism.

7.  We are in full agreement that the “70 weeks” begin with the decree to rebuild Jerusalem, and that this rebuilding proceeds through times of trouble as recorded in the Biblical record of Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Haggai, and Zechariah.  Furthermore, we are in agreement that the first “69 weeks” (“7 weeks” + “62 weeks”) end with some event concerning “Messiah the Prince.”  Indeed, we are in agreement that this event is the baptism of our Lord Jesus Christ at the hand of John the Baptist. 

However, I would have disagreement with your use of the phrase, “the anointing of Messiah,” in your second statement.  Daniel 9:25 does not employ the term “anointing” at all; therefore, it is imprecise to declare that the phrase, “unto Messiah the Prince,” as employed in the verse refers to “the anointing of Messiah.”  It is true that Daniel 9:24 makes reference unto the anointing of “the most Holy.”  It is also agreed that the phrase, “the most Holy,” does refer in context to “Messiah the Prince” (that these titles refer unto one and the same individual, who is indeed our Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ).  However, that the anointing of Messiah, the most Holy, as referenced in verse 24 is the same event as that which is referenced in verse 25 concerning Messiah, the most Holy, cannot simply be assumed.  It must first be demonstrated through some grammatical, contextual, or Biblical means.  Indeed, I myself would contend that these two events are not the same event at all.

Verse 26 speaks of things happening AFTER the 69th week, possibly, but not necessarily during the 70th week. We have the advantage of the Gospels & Acts to see how the details work out. We see the prophesied crucifixion, & the resultant destruction as prophesied by Jesus in his Olivet prophecy.

8.  We are in agreement that the prophetic events of Daniel 9:26 occur AFTER the completion of the “69th week,” and not necessarily during the “70th week.”  Indeed, I myself would contend that these events occur during an unspecified period of time between the “69th week” and the “70th week.”  Furthermore, we are in agreement that these prophetic events include the crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ and the destruction of the city Jerusalem and of the temple therein in 70 AD by the armies of Rome.  However, although I do agree that some portion of our Lord’s “Olivet Discourse” does make reference unto this destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD, I do not agree with the amount of the “Olivet Discourse” that you yourself would apply to that event (as per my understanding of your position through other discussions about it).

In verse 27, during the 70th week, Messiah confirms the covenant, and brings to an end sacrifice & oblation - FINISHED by his sacrifice - the crucifixion - in the midst of the week. Those who reject the covenant - now the new covenant in Messiah's blood - will suffer desolation & destruction.

9.  Concerning Daniel 9:27, we would stand in complete disagreement concerning every point that you expressed in the above statement.  Again, it is my desire to engage the elements of this disagreement through future postings.

The cross & resurrection of Messiah complete his work under the old covenant. He lived as the Son of man under the old covenant, keeping every detail to perfection, & all for his people & their/our salvation. He has been confirming the covenant with those who received him during the 3 years (half week) of his earthly ministry, & through his Apostles proclaiming his finished work & full salvation confirms the covenant - now the new covenant in Jesus blood - by the Gospel. Many thousands, including priests, respond to that glorious Gospel by repentance & baptism in Jesus name. Down the ages we honour that new covenant as we share the bread & wine in Jesus name.

The 70 weeks finished about 3 years after Calvary. The desolation & destruction under the invading Roman prince took place in AD 70. All that remains is the consummation - the glorious return of our Lord Jesus Christ for resurrection & judgement, & to bring about the new heaven & new earth, when all the covenant promises will be realised to perfection.

10.  Since we have such a significant disagreement concerning Daniel 9:27, there is much within your concluding statements (which are founded upon your understanding of Daniel 9:27) with which I would have disagreement also.  Yet these are disagreements of conclusion points due to our disagreements of foundational points (“premise points”).  Therefore, focusing upon these disagreements of conclusion points is of no value until we have engaged our disagreements of foundational points.

 

At this point, I would ask -- Am I understanding your position correctly in those areas wherein I have expressed agreement.  If this is the case, then we can focus the remaining of our discussion-debate upon those areas wherein we have a point of disagreement.  On my part, I would seek to begin this with our disagreements concerning the six-fold purpose statements of Daniel 9:24.

 

 

Invicta, 1Timothy115 and Alan like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My name is Ian Day

I did reply in detail to every point of your OP in the Understanding Daniel thread. It was locked before you could comment. 

Thanks for that carefully reasoned attempt to understand my position. It's close enough to proceed, though perhaps the basic points of difference are that you focus the prophecy on the nation of Israel, whereas I focus it on Jesus and his saving work.

  1. OT prophecy concerning Israel is fulfilled in and by Jesus and his saving work at Calvary. In Dan 9, you see Israel as a nation benefiting from Dan. 9:24 which necessarily requires separation of the 70th week to the future. I see the finished work of Christ at Calvary. The benefits follow as sinners respond to the Gospel. Many thousands of Israel did respond, as recorded in Acts. 
  2. Our understanding of covenants is different. Daniel begins his prayer by acknowledging God's faithfulness to the Covenant, and Israel's failure. 9:4-5 The Old Covenant was conditional on man's obedience. e.g. Exo. 19:5-6 The New Covenant in Jesus' blood is secured by Jesus' obedience, and is everlasting. Heb. 13:20-21 
  3. Under the New Covenant, all the blessings of Dan. 9:24 are confirmed by Messiah in the 70th week, but do not end. The Gospel proclamation begins at Jerusalem, and progresses to the uttermost part of the earth until Jesus returns.  Acts 1:8
  4. The New and everlasting Covenant blessings are for all mankind, conditional on repentance and faith in Christ, including Israel as a people - my people. 
  5. The NH&NE will see the perfect fulfilment of all God's Covenant promises. Rev. 21:1-3 
  6. Thus the whole prophecy concerns Jesus Christ and his saving work, but includes the subsequent consequences of his rejection. The 70 weeks comprise 490 years without a gap. 

I hope that is clear. I can't handle quotes and insertions with this system. 

Invicta likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, the first foundational point of difference in our understanding of Daniel 9:24-27 concerns the six purpose statements of Daniel 9:24.  Let us then begin the focus of our discussion-debate with these statements.

Grammatically, this verse presents a main statement of four words, and then a series of modifiers to that main statement. 

1.  The main statement – “Seventy weeks are determined . . .”

The subject of this main statement provides us with an established period of time for the prophetic utterance.  This established period of time is “seventy weeks” (or, seventy “sevens”), which we both agree means 70 times 7 years (or, 490 years).  The verb for this main statement also indicates that this established period of time (490 years) is “determined” by the authority of the Lord God Himself, such that nothing can alter its flow and fulfillment.

2.  The first modifying phrase – “. . . upon thy people and upon thy holy city . . .”  

This modifying phrase actually encompasses two prepositional phrases that modify the verb “are determined.”  These two prepositional phrases are joined by the coordinating conjunction “and,” which indicates that grammatically they stand on equal ground as modifiers for the verb.  Even so, the first of these two prepositional phrases indicates that the 490 year period of time was determined by the Lord’s authority to occur specifically “upon [Daniel’s] people.”  (Note: The context of verses 21-23 clearly reveals that the angel Gabriel was speaking to Daniel in delivering this prophetic utterance from the Lord.)  Thus this modifying phrase indicates that Daniel’s people (the children of Israel) would be a focal point for the events of this 490 year period, such that each of the events of this 490 year period, as revealed in this prophetic utterance, would happen “upon” them.  In addition, the second of the two modifying prepositional phrases indicates that this 490 year period was also determined by the Lord’s authority to occur specifically “upon [Daniel’s] holy city.”  Now Daniel’s “holy city” would certainly be the city of Jerusalem.  Thus this modifying phrase indicates, not only that the children of Israel, but also that the city of Jerusalem would be a focal point for the events of this 490 year period.  Indeed, the events of this 490 year period, as revealed in this prophetic utterance, would happen “upon” the children of Israel and “upon” the city of Jerusalem.  As such, any understanding for the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 that does not maintain the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem as a focal point for the events of this prophetic utterance misses the revealed and determined purpose of the Lord our God for this prophetic utterance concerning this 490 year period.

3.  The second modifying phrase – “. . . to finish the transgression . . .”

This second modifying phrase is the first of six infinitive phrases that also modify the verb “are determined.”  As such, each of these six infinitive phrases reveals either the intended purpose or the consequential result for the 490 year period that the Lord God had determined upon the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.  Now, at this point a question must be considered concerning these six purpose or result statements (the six infinitive phrases).  Are these phrases indicating that these six purposes or results will be brought to complete fulfillment at the end of this 490 year period, through the events of this 490 year period?  Or, are these phrases indicating that this 490 year period and the events of this period are simply are a part of the process by which these six purposes or results will be carried forward unto their fulfillment, such that other “parts of the process of fulfillment” will follow this “490 year process”?  Is this 490 year period itself the means to the fulfillment for these six purposes or results; or is this 490 year period just a necessary part of the process for their fulfillment, to which other parts must be added thereafter?  I myself would contend that the grammatical flow of thought more naturally lends itself to the first of these understandings.  Even so, I would also contend that any understanding for the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 that does not end with the complete fulfillment of these six purpose or results statements is not accurate to this more natural flow of the thought.

So then, what does this first purpose or result statement mean?  Grammatically, this first infinitive clause includes two parts – first, the infinitive itself (“to finish”) and second, the direct object of that infinitive (“the transgression”).  The infinitive itself indicates that this first purpose or result for the 490 year period is “to finish” (or, to bring about the completion) of something.  The direct object reveals that the “something” that is to be finished (or, to be brought unto completion) is “the transgression.”  So then, what does it mean for a transgression to be finished, to be brought unto a completion?  It means that the given transgression is stopped, such that it does not continue forward after the stopping point. 

Yet what “transgression” and/or whose “transgression” is to be finished, is to be brought to completion, through and at the end of this 490 year period?  Is there anything in the context of Daniel 9 that might direct us unto an answer for this question?  I myself would contend that there is a contextual answer to be found in Daniel 9:5-11, wherein Daniel confessed the transgression of his people, the children of Israel, saying, “We have sinned, and have committed iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from thy precepts and from thy judgments: neither have we hearkened unto thy servants the prophets, which spake in thy name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, and to all the people of the land.  O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off, through all the countries whither thou hast driven them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against thee.  O Lord, to us belongeth confusion of face, to our kings, to our princes, and to our fathers, because we have sinned against thee.  To the Lord our God belong mercies and forgivenesses, though we have rebelled against him; neither have we obeyed the voice of the LORD our God, to walk in his laws, which he set before us by his servants the prophets.  Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.”  Even so, I myself would contend that “the transgression” (notice that the definite article “the” is presented to indicate that a definite “transgression” is in mind) that this 490 year period will bring to a finish, to a completion, is “the transgression” of “the men of Judah,” and “the inhabitants of Jerusalem,” and the children of “all Israel” wherein they have departed from and rebelled against the authority of the Lord their God.

A directed question to Brother Ian:  It is my understanding concerning your position that you would attribute this first purpose or result statement unto the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ in His crucifixion and resurrection, such that this purpose or result statement is fulfilled therein.  Upon the ground of that understanding concerning your position, I would ask the following –  (1) In what manner did or does our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work bring about a completely stopped finish of “the transgression”?  (2) What specific “transgression” did or does our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work bring to such a completely stopped finish?  (3) Whose specific “transgression” did or does our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work bring to a completely stopped finish?  (4) At what time did or does our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work bring about this completely stopped finish to “the transgression”?

4.  The third modifying phrase – “. . . and to make an end of sins . . .”

This third modifying phrase is the second infinite clause that modifies the verb “are determined” and that reveals the intended purpose or consequential result for the 490 year period that the Lord God had determined upon the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.  Grammatically, this second infinitive clause also includes two parts – first, the infinitive and its accompanying object (“to make an end”) and second, a modifying preposition phrase (“of sins”).  As in the previous infinite clause, this infinitive clause also indicates that something will be brought to a point of completion.  Indeed, this infinite clause indicates that this second purpose or result for the 490 year period is “to make an end” of something.  Then the modifying prepositional phrase reveals the “something” of which the 490 year period to bring about the completion.  It is to bring about the completion “of sins.”  Even so, again we are brought to the question – What “sins” and/or whose “sins” are to be made to end through and at the end of this 490 year period?  And again I myself would contend, from the context of Daniel 9:5-11, that it is the “sins” of the children of Israel.  Indeed, this infinitive clause presents a parallel truth to that of the previous infinitive clause.  The one significant difference between the two clauses is that the word “transgression” in the first clause is delivered in the singular, whereas the word “sins” in the second clause is delivered in the plural.  This appears to indicate that the first infinitive clause concerns the overall spirit and transgression of departure and rebellion that the children Israel committed against the Lord and that the second infinitive clause concerns the multitude of individual sins that the children of Israel committed against the Lord within their spirit of rebellion.

A directed question to Brother Ian:  It is my understanding concerning your position that you would again attribute this second purpose or result statement unto the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ in His crucifixion and resurrection, such that this purpose or result statement is fulfilled therein.  Upon the ground of that understanding concerning your position, I would ask the following –  (1) In what manner did or does our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work bring about a complete end “of sins”?  (2) What “sins” did or does our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work bring to such a complete end?  (3) Whose “sins” did or does our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work bring to a complete end?  (4) At what time did or does our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work bring about this complete end “of sins”?

5.  The fourth modifying phrase – “. . . and to make reconciliation for iniquity . . .”

This fourth modifying phrase is the third infinite clause that modifies the verb “are determined” and that reveals the intended purpose or consequential result for the 490 year period that the Lord God had determined upon the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.  Grammatically, this third infinitive clause also includes two parts – first, the infinitive and its accompanying object (“to make reconciliation”) and second, a modifying preposition phrase (“for iniquity”).  The infinitive and its accompanying object indicate that this third purpose or result for the 490 year period is to bring about a “reconciliation” between two parties.  Herein the Hebrew word that is translated by the English word “reconciliation” indicates some form of atonement for an offending party, that provides that offending party with forgiveness of the offense and thereby provides for a reconciliation between the offending party and the offended party.  In addition, this infinitive clause further indicates that this “reconciliation” is made “for iniquity.”  I myself would contend that this “iniquity” refers to the guiltiness of the offense that was created by “the transgression” and the “sins” which were mentioned in the previous two infinitive clauses. 

Furthermore, I myself would contend that by this we begin to see a progression of thought emerging through the order of these infinitive clauses of purpose or result.  In the first infinitive clause, we encounter “the transgression,” that is – the spirit of departure and rebellion against the Lord.  Then in the second infinitive clause, we encounter the “sins,” that is – the multitude of sinful activities that occur upon the ground of this spirit of departure and rebellion.  Then in the third infinitive clause, we encounter the “iniquity,” that is – the guiltiness that is created by this spirit of departure and rebellion and by the multitude of sins that this rebellious spirit produces.  Even so, the first infinitive clause speaks concerning the finishing of this rebellious spirit.  Then upon the ground of this finishing, the second infinitive clause speaks concerning the end of the sinful activities.  Then upon the ground of this finishing and this ending, the third infinitive clause speaks concerning the reconciliation whereby the rebellious spirit, the sinful activities, and the resulting guiltiness are all removed, such that the offending party and the offended party will be brought back into a right relationship with one another.  Finally, I would contend that according to the full context of Daniel 9, the offending party for this clause is the children of Israel; and the offended party is the Lord their God.

A directed question to Brother Ian:  It is my understanding concerning your position that you would again attribute this second purpose or result statement unto the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ in His crucifixion and resurrection, such that this purpose or result statement is fulfilled therein.  (In fact, I myself would agree that the atoning, saving, and reconciling work of our Lord Jesus Christ provide in His crucifixion and resurrection provides the grounds for this reconciliation between the children of Israel and the Lord their God.)  Upon the ground of that understanding concerning your position, I would ask the following –  (1) In what manner are the children of Israel fully reconciled with the Lord their God?  (2) At what time are the children of Israel fully reconciled with the Lord their God?

6.  The fifth modifying phrase – “. . . and to bring in everlasting righteousness . . .”

This fifth modifying phrase is the fourth infinite clause that modifies the verb “are determined” and that reveals the intended purpose or consequential result for the 490 year period that the Lord God had determined upon the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.  Grammatically, this fourth infinitive clause also includes two parts – first, the infinitive and its accompanying adverb (“to bring in”) and second, the direct object of that infinitive (“everlasting righteousness”).  The infinitive and its accompanying adverb indicate that this fourth purpose or result for the 490 year period is “to bring in” a circumstantial condition that had not previously been present.  Then the direct object reveals that the circumstantial condition which is to be brought in is “everlasting righteousness.”  The phrase “everlasting righteousness” would refer to a spiritual condition of righteousness that never at any moment whatsoever into the future ceases to be in existence.  Even so, whatever group of individuals that this purpose or result statement is intended to apply shall experience a condition of righteousness, such that there will be righteousness only, with not even a movement back-and-forth between righteousness and unrighteousness.  So then, unto what group of individuals does this purpose or result statement apply?  I myself would contend that it contextually applies unto the same group as is intended for the first three infinitive phrases of purpose or result.  Even so, I myself would contend that this purpose or result statement refers unto a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness” for the children of Israel, such as is referenced in Isaiah 1:24-27; Jeremiah 3:15-19; 31:31-37; 32:36-42; Ezekiel 36:24-38; 37:21-28.

A directed question to Brother Ian:  It is my understanding concerning your position that you would again attribute this second purpose or result statement unto the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ in His crucifixion and resurrection, such that this purpose or result statement is fulfilled therein.  (Indeed, I would further surmise concerning your position that you view this “everlasting righteousness” as being that righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ which is imputed to the spiritual account of whosoever believes on Christ as Savior from sin.)  Upon the ground of that understanding concerning your position, I would ask the following –  (1) Does this condition of “everlasting righteousness” allow for moments of unrighteous character and unrighteous conduct?  (2) In what manner is this condition of “everlasting righteousness” brought in for whomever it is to be applied?  (3) At what time is this condition of “everlasting righteousness” brought in for whomever it is to be applied?  (4) To what group of individuals is this promised condition of “everlasting righteousness” intended to be applied within the context of Daniel 9:24-27.

7.  The sixth modifying phrase – “. . . and to seal up the vision and prophecy . . .”

This sixth modifying phrase is the fifth infinite clause that modifies the verb “are determined” and that reveals the intended purpose or consequential result for the 490 year period that the Lord God had determined upon the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.  Grammatically, this fifth infinitive clause also includes two parts – first, the infinitive and its accompanying adverb (“to seal up”) and second, the compound direct object of that infinitive (“the vision and prophecy”).  The infinitive and its accompanying adverb indicate that this fifth purpose or result for the 490 year period is “to seal up” something.  This phrase appears to be employed as a figure of speech to indicate the conclusion of a particular matter.  Then the compound direct object of the infinitive reveals that the matter which is to be sealed up and concluded is “the vision and prophecy.”  Since this compound direct object is encompassed under a single definite article, it appears that we are to view this compound direct object, not as two separate entities, but as a single unit that encompasses two different aspects.  (I myself would contend that the two different aspects are prophetic revelations that were delivered through both visual means and verbal means.)  In addition, since the two nouns of this compound direct object are both presented in the singular, it appears that we are to understand that this compound direct object refers, not to the visual and verbal prophetic utterances in the multitude of their individual deliverances, but to all of the visual and verbal prophetic utterances as a single unit of divinely revealed truth concerning the future. 

So then, what particular matter of prophetic utterance is to be understood by this reference in this context.  I myself would contend that the matter of prophetic utterance about which this compound direct object speaks concerns the same group of individuals about which the previous infinitive phrases were speaking.  Even so, I myself would contend that this compound direct object refers to the matter of all prophetic utterances that concern the children of Israel.  As such, I would contend that this 490 year period is intended by the Lord our God to bring about the conclusion of His prophetic utterances concerning the children of Israel.  Furthermore, I would contend that this conclusion of the prophetic utterances concerning the children of Israel will be founded upon the progression of the previous four statements of purpose or result.  First, there will be a finishing of a rebellious spirit against the Lord.  Then upon the ground of this finishing, there will be an end of the sinful activities against the Lord.  Then upon the ground of this finishing and this ending, there will be a reconciliation whereby the rebellious spirit, the sinful activities, and the resulting guiltiness are all removed, such that the offending party and the offended party will be brought back into a right relationship with one another.  Then upon the ground of this finishing, this ending, and this reconciling, there will be a bringing in of a spiritual condition of everlasting righteousness.  Then through the fulfillment of this finishing, this ending, this reconciling, and this bringing of everlasting righteousness, there will be a completion concerning the matter of prophetic utterance.  Finally, this completion of prophetic utterance will climax with the final statement of purpose or result – the anointing “of the most Holy.”

8.  The seventh and final modifying phrase – “. . . to anoint the most Holy.”

This seventh and final modifying phrase is the sixth and final infinite clause that modifies the verb “are determined” and that reveals the intended purpose or consequential result for the 490 year period that the Lord God had determined upon the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.  Grammatically, this sixth infinitive clause also includes two parts – first, the infinitive itself (“to anoint”) and second, the direct object of that infinitive (“the most Holy”).  The infinitive itself indicates that this sixth and final purpose or result for the 490 year period is “to anoint” someone or something.  The direct object reveals that the someone or something that is to be anointed is “the most Holy.”  At this time, I myself would contend that this phrase, “the most Holy,” is a reference unto “the Messiah the Prince,” our Lord Jesus the Christ.

Yet the question remains – What is the event of our Lord Jesus Christ’s anointing?  Throughout God’s Word two events appear to present themselves as “anointing events” for our Lord Jesus Christ, wherein God the Father anointed Him for a particular role.  The first of these is the event of our Lord’s baptism, wherein He was anointed with the Holy Spirit for His earthly ministry of preaching, teaching, healing, and doing good as referenced in Isaiah 61:1-3, which our Lord Jesus Christ applied unto Himself in Luke 4:17-21, and as referenced by the apostle Peter in Acts 10:34-38.  (Note: Acts 4:27 might also be a reference to this “anointing event” of Christ’s baptism.)  The second of these “anointing events” for our Lord Jesus Christ appears to be the event of our Lord’s ascension and exaltation to sit in full sovereignty at the right hand of God the Father, as referenced in Psalm 2:2-9, wherein the Lord God’s Anointed is revealed to be God the Son, and as referenced Psalm 45:1-8, which is applied unto our Lord Jesus Christ in Hebrews 1:8-9. 

Now, of these two “anointing events” for our Lord Jesus Christ, I would contend that Daniel 9:24 is referring to the “anointing event” wherein He was anointed as King of kings and Lord of lords.  I would contend for this on the ground that the “anointing event” of Daniel 9:24 is mentioned at the end of the progression of purpose or result statements as presented in Daniel 9:24.  As such, I would contend that by the contextual flow of thought in this progression, the “anointing event” of Daniel 9:24 is presented THE concluding purpose or result that brings the other purposes or results unto their point of climax.  Even so, I would contend that the anointing of our Lord’s baptism was an event of beginning for His earthly ministry, not an event of conclusion and climax.  On the other hand, I would further contend that the anointing of our Lord’s exaltation was an event of conclusion and climax to His earthly ministry and saving work.  Finally, I would contend that the anointing of our Lord’s exaltation will have its full acknowledgement by and application to the children of Israel and to all the inhabitants of the world at our Lord’s Second Coming as King of kings and Lord of lords to rule physically and literally over all.

A directed question to Brother Ian:  It is my understanding concerning your position that you would attribute this final purpose or result statement unto the event of our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism.  Upon the ground of that understanding concerning your position, I would ask the following – (1) How does that understanding fit with the progression and flow of thought in the six purpose or result statements of Daniel 9:24, wherein this anointing is presented as the last of these six purpose or result statements?

Alan and DaveW like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The following list of questions must be considered in order to formulate a right understanding of Daniel 9:24-29 in relation to the debate between the preteristic (or, partial-preteristic) understanding  and the futuristic understanding of the passage.

1.  Toward whom is this prophetic utterance focused in its fulfillment?
2.  What specific measurement of time do the “seventy weeks” represent?
3.  Are the six-fold purpose statements for these “seventy weeks,” as presented in verse 24, to be fulfilled immediately upon the completion of these “seventy weeks,” or not?
4.  What are the meanings for each of these six-fold purpose statements?
5.  What specific event in Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry is intended to be referenced by the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” as presented in verse 25?
6.  What is the specific timing for the events of verse 26 – (1) immediately at the close of the sixty-ninth “week,” (2) after the sixty-ninth “week,” but before the start of the seventieth week (that is – between the sixty-ninth “week” and seventieth “week,” creating a separation of time between the sixty-ninth “week” and seventieth “week”), (3) during the seventieth “week,” or (4) during and/or after the seventieth “week”?
7.  Who specifically are the people of the prince that shall come?
8.  Who specifically is the prince that shall come?
9.  Who specifically is the “he” of verse 29?
10.  What specifically is “the covenant” that the “he” of verse 29 confirms with the “many”?
11.  Who specifically are the “many” of verse 29, with whom the “he” of the verse will confirm this covenant?
12.  What does the phrase “for one week” mean in relation to to the confirming of this covenant that the “he” of the verse makes with the “many” of the verse?
13.  What does it mean for the “he” of the verse to “cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease”?
14.  What is the meaning of the phrase, “for the overspreading of abominations”?
15.  To what does the phrase, “the consummation,” refer?

The following list of questions must be considered in order to formulate a right understanding of Daniel 9:24-29 in relation to the debate between the preteristic (or, partial-preteristic) understanding  and the futuristic understanding of the passage.

My understanding of Scripture is best described as "Covenant Theology" with a partial preterist interpretation of prophecy. But don't look up web sites for what I believe. I don't follow a "system."

Understanding - interpretation of Scripture requires understanding in the literal sense, bearing in mind Scripture is often clear statements, poetical, figurative, prophetic or for direct obedience.  In all cases it has a context, so that we need to consider why it is written, how it applies to writer & immediate readers, & as general Scripture & Messianic Scripture. Also no Scripture stands alone - there are always related Scriptures. 

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

1.  Toward whom is this prophetic utterance focused in its fulfillment?

The immediate understanding is "thy people & thy holy city" meaning the descendants of Abraham, aka "my people Israel" & Jerusalem. The first promise to Abram included blessing as a great nation & blessing for "all families on earth." ( Gen. 12:1-3 ) The prophecy cannot be exclusively intended for Israel, but as wide in scope as the promise to Abram. 

Isaiah in his servant prophecies speaks of Messiah as "my servant Israel" and declares:

 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth. Isa. 49:6 

Those prophecies include Isaiah 53 when Jesus as the suffering servant is revealed, & Isaiah 52, which introduces the suffering servant, says: all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God.

The aspects of Messiah's saving work were spelled out in Isaiah 53, & Gabriel & Daniel were aware of those Scriptures, as they are summarised in 9:24, as they were aware of Jeremiah & his 70 years.  This saving work is to be completed in 70 weeks, which we understand as 70x7 years, corresponding to the 70 years exile just completed. 

Notice God often refers to "my people Israel" with the covenant relationship "I will be your God, & you will be my people" which relationship persists into the NH&NE of Rev. 21. It is a covenant-redemption relationship.

2.  What specific measurement of time do the “seventy weeks” represent?

We agree the 70 weeks represent 490 years, so we can expect the prophecy to be completed within that period, with all the weeks contiguous. However, as the prophecy was delivered about 2,500 years ago, there has to be a period AFTER the completion of the 70 weeks for the outworking of certain details.

3.  Are the six-fold purpose statements for these “seventy weeks,” as presented in verse 24, to be fulfilled immediately upon the completion of these “seventy weeks,” or not?  

They are, or the 70 weeks becomes meaningless. Any attempt to split the weeks nullifies the prophecy. As the prophesy concerns Messiah - Jesus - the time for fulfilment is time of Jesus' ministry, death & resurrection. 70 weeks takes us to about 35 AD. Clearly the saving work of Messiah is detailed in verse 24, as it is in Isaiah 53, & in the New Covenant Scriptures. 

4.  What are the meanings for each of these six-fold purpose statements?

These specifically concern the saving work of Jesus at Calvary. All believers can thank God for that wonderful provision for our salvation - see e.g. Isaiah 53. We do have "everlasting righteousness" , and all the promises & prophecies focus on Messiah. His coming, & all his saving work was the fulfilment of prophecy, as he explained on the Emmaus road & to the Apostles in Luke 24.  

and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.   

That applies to Jesus, fulfilling & being the end of prophecy & being anointed by the Holy Spirit for his ministry.

25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Now Gabriel gives further details. The 69 weeks will be troublous times but Jerusalem will be rebuilt ready for Messiah the Prince to come.

5.  What specific event in Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry is intended to be referenced by the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” as presented in verse 25?
That takes us to Jesus' baptism, when he was anointed by the Holy Spirit for his ministry.   

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

6.  What is the specific timing for the events of verse 26 – (1) immediately at the close of the sixty-ninth “week,” (2) after the sixty-ninth “week,” but before the start of the seventieth week (that is – between the sixty-ninth “week” and seventieth “week,” creating a separation of time between the sixty-ninth “week” and seventieth “week”), (3) during the seventieth “week,” or (4) during and/or after the seventieth “week”?  

That is best answered by looking at the fulfilment of the prophecy in the Gospels & Acts. "After" is not defined, but it is clear that the crucifixion is prophesied, so "cut off" is during the 70th week, as Jesus' earthly ministry lasted around 3 years. We know also from Jesus' Olivet prophecy & the warnings in Acts that the consequences of rejected Messiah were to be destruction of the city & sanctuary.  That destruction did not happen during the time of Acts, so must be after the 70th week, with is also after the 69th week. 
7.  Who specifically are the people of the prince that shall come?
8.  Who specifically is the prince that shall come?

The consequence of rejection is the destruction, so the Roman armies are intended the prince being either the army commander, or the emperor.  

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

9.  Who specifically is the “he” of verse 29?
10.  What specifically is “the covenant” that the “he” of verse 29 confirms with the “many”?
11.  Who specifically are the “many” of verse 29, with whom the “he” of the verse will confirm this covenant?
12.  What does the phrase “for one week” mean in relation to to the confirming of this covenant that the “he” of the verse makes with the “many” of the verse?
13.  What does it mean for the “he” of the verse to “cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease”?
14.  What is the meaning of the phrase, “for the overspreading of abominations”?
15.  To what does the phrase, “the consummation,” refer? 

I'll take these together. The subject of the whole passage is the Messiah, & his saving work. Daniel is concerned with God's covenant & Israel's failure to keep it. Dan. 9:4-5 Jesus was born under the old covenant in order to keep it to perfection & so redeem Israel. I recommend reading the songs of Mary, Zechariah, the angels & Simeon to see the way he was to honour the covenant for his people: Luke 1:68-79

  Every aspect of the old covenant required sacrifice. Jesus was the final sacrifice, in the midst of the 70th week, after which all animal sacrifices were worthless. They didn't stop, even though the temple veil was rent top to bottom. Seems they just mended it & carried on with the sacrifices, which, offered in defiance of God were abominations. See Isaiah 1. Jesus was busy during his ministry confirming the covenant with as many as received him, and for the remainder of the 70th week his Apostles were preaching the Gospel, whereby all the blessings of Dan. 9:24 were received. Many thousands of the repentant Jews, including priests,  responded to the Gospel, all round the Roman empire They recognised the fulfilment of prophecy in Jesus. Acts 3:18-26

Sadly, the Jewish leaders persistently rejected their Messiah, to the extent that they were denounced as "uncircumcised" by the Holy Spirit speaking through Stephen. Acts 7:51  

In the context, the "consummation" is the AD 70 destruction, when the wrath of God was poured out on those who rejected first their Messiah, then the Gospel of salvation through his saving work. That is according to many prophecies, including Deut. 18:18-19   Mal. 4:5-6  Acts 3:22-23  That destruction effectively ended (sealed up) the Old Covenant prophecies concerning Israel. Jesus gave them & us the New Covenant in his blood, which Jeremiah speaks of in Jer. 31.   

Happily that dreadful consummation is not God's last word to Israel, though it was to the generation "this generation" that rejected him. The Gospel is freely available to every repentance sinner, including the Jews & will be until Jesus returns.

After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; 10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. (Rev. 7)

16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. 17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. (Rev. 22)

    

   

  . 

  

 

 

Invicta likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the prophesy concerns Messiah - Jesus - the time for fulfilment is time of Jesus' ministry, death & resurrection. 

Brother Ian, 

Throughout your above posting, you present many "authoritative declarations" without providing grammatical, contextual, or Biblical support for those declarations.  This leaves me and the audience with only the option to accept these declarations upon the authority of your, Brother Ian's, word.  Yet in the realm of Bible study, the authority of a human's word is of little value in understanding God's truth.  Rather, we must find our authority in the grammatical, contextual, and Biblical evidences of God's own Word.

The most significant of these "authoritative declarations" that you present concerns your underlying premise in relation the passage, as represented in the quoted statement above.  Again and again you make an "authoritative declaration" to the effect that the entire prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 primarily concerns the Messiah (our Lord Jesus Christ) and is to be fulfilled in the saving work of His crucifixion and resurrection.  Indeed, this underlying premise governs every other aspect of your understanding concerning the passage.  Yet you do not provide grammatical, contextual, or Biblical evidence for this underlying premise.  Now, if your underlying premise is wrong, then the entire rest of your understanding that is built upon that premise would lack foundation and would also be found faulty.  So then, I am presenting a challenge that you substantiate your underlying premise through grammatical, contextual, and Biblical evidence, specifically in relation to the direct statements of God's Word that are found in Daniel 9:24-27.

Now, I will grant that you appear to make some attempt at substantiating your underlying premise through your answer to my first question concerning the passage, as follows:

 

1.  Toward whom is this prophetic utterance focused in its fulfillment?

The immediate understanding is "thy people & thy holy city" meaning the descendants of Abraham, aka "my people Israel" & Jerusalem. The first promise to Abram included blessing as a great nation & blessing for "all families on earth." ( Gen. 12:1-3 ) The prophecy cannot be exclusively intended for Israel, but as wide in scope as the promise to Abram. 

Isaiah in his servant prophecies speaks of Messiah as "my servant Israel" and declares:

 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth. Isa. 49:6 

Those prophecies include Isaiah 53 when Jesus as the suffering servant is revealed, & Isaiah 52, which introduces the suffering servant, says: all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God.

The aspects of Messiah's saving work were spelled out in Isaiah 53, & Gabriel & Daniel were aware of those Scriptures, as they are summarised in 9:24, as they were aware of Jeremiah & his 70 years.  This saving work is to be completed in 70 weeks, which we understand as 70x7 years, corresponding to the 70 years exile just completed. 

Notice God often refers to "my people Israel" with the covenant relationship "I will be your God, & you will be my people" which relationship persists into the NH&NE of Rev. 21. It is a covenant-redemption relationship.

In the answer that you have provided above to my opening question, I find it quite interesting how you made the following progression:

From the "thy people" phrase of Daniel 9:24 ---- to "the descendants of Abraham" ---- to "my people Israel" ---- to the Messiah as "my servant Israel."

The most interesting aspect for this presentation is that you made it without providing grammatical, contextual, or Biblical evidence for each step in your progression.  Yet then you appear to take up the conclusion of this progression as the underlying premise for your entire understanding of Daniel 9:24-27.  

Allow me then to focus upon the first "authoritative declaration" that you make in presenting this progression of thought -- "The immediate understanding is "thy people & thy holy city" meaning the descendants of Abraham, aka "my people Israel" & Jerusalem."  You have provided no grammatical, contextual, or Biblical evidence for the statement that the phrase "thy people" in Daniel 9:24 means "the descendants of Abraham."  On the other hand, the grammatical and contextual flow of thought does appear to be quite clear concerning the phrase "thy people" in Daniel 9:24.  From Daniel 9:21 we learn that "the man" (the angel) Gabriel was sent by the Lord God unto Daniel, and from Daniel 9:22 we learn that the purpose for the Lord God in sending Gabriel to Daniel was in order to give Daniel "skill and understanding."  In fact, the grammar of the passage indicates that throughout Daniel 9:22-27, the angel Gabriel is the one doing the speaking.  Furthermore, the context of the passage indicates that throughout Daniel 9:22-27, Daniel is the one to whom the angel Gabriel is speaking.  Therefore, when the angel Gabriel employs the phrase, "thy people," in Daniel 9:24, while speaking directly to Daniel, the phrase must grammatically and contextually mean, "Daniel's people."  In this context, the pronoun "thy" finds its antecedent in Daniel himself.  

So then, who specifically were "Daniel's people"?  Let us not guess.  Let us find the answer in the context.  In the opening half of Daniel 9:20, Daniel himself has already made the declaration, "And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel . . ."  In addition, in Daniel 9:7 Daniel himself had already made the declaration, "O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off, through all the countries whither thou hast driven them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against thee."  So then, the "thy people" of Daniel 9:24 is not contextually to be understood as "the descendants of Abraham," but as "the men of Judah," and "the inhabitants of Jerusalem," and all the children of Israel.  This is the authority of the grammar and context of God's own Word.  There is no grammatical or contextual authority for viewing the phrase "thy people" in Daniel 9:24 as being a reference to the Messiah.  Rather, there is only grammatical and contextual authority for viewing the phrase "thy people" in Daniel 9:24 as being a reference to a specific body of people, people who had committed sinful wickedness and rebellion against the Lord their God.

DaveW, Alan and Jim_Alaska like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure where we are going in this discussion. I'm not convinced that your grammatical analysis leads to a proper understanding of the prophecy, or whether it actually obscures the clear meaning of the prophecy. 

The full scope of the prophecy is verse 24, the remaining verses adding details. 

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

However we analyse the grammar, the arithmetic stands - 70 weeks, or 490 years to the fulfilment of the prophecy. That we agree takes us to the baptism & ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ. Your grammatical interpretation makes the prophecy relate to some yet future date, 350 weeks and counting, so in effect it destroys the prophecy. I think in this case, the 70 weeks is so clearly specific that simple arithmetic overrules complicated grammar. The timing indicates the Lord Jesus' saving ministry. I think everyone agrees that, but there are suggestions as to whether 69 weeks takes us to Jesus' baptism, his triumphant entry or the cross & resurrection. 

We should judge prophecy both by its faithfulness to the Word, & by its fulfilment, not by grammatical analysis. There is a danger of being Pharisaical. Also, we have the mind of Christ - 1 Cor. 2:16 - so we can look at prophecy with an new covenant, spiritual, Spirit-aided understanding. 

One point of grammar is that in a list of prophetic events, the sequence is not necessarily chronological; they may be concurrent or in order of importance, etc. Also, as they are prophesied to take place in 70 weeks, those events cannot be absolute in the sense of your grammatical analysis. Transgression, sins & iniquity continue until our Lord returns in glory to bring into being  new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. 2 Peter 3

  The question I need to answer are:
in what sense WAS Dan. 9:24 fulfilled within the 70 weeks?

The question you need to answer is:
If v. 24 was not fulfilled in 70 weeks, & is not yet fulfilled in 350 weeks, what does the 70 weeks prophecy mean when Gabriel declared the prophecy so plainly? 

The prophecy was fulfilled in the 70 weeks - we can see ALL the answers in Isaiah 53 -  he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities ... he bare the sin of many. 
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

In Christ all believers are no longer transgressors, nor sinners & our iniquities are fully reconciled. We have everlasting righteousness imputed in Christ. Luke 22:37 Luke 24:47 Acts 3:26 Rom 5:17 We benefit from that fulfilled prophecy. 

Our most Holy Saviour was anointed at his baptism - Luke 3:22 Luke 4:18 and again at his ascension - Heb. 1:8-9 Also Acts 4:24-30 quoting Psalm 2:1-3 

Reference to Scripture, rather than grammar, shows that the 70 weeks prophecy was fulfilled perfectly in 490 years. Arguments to insert an indefinite "gap" between 69 & 70 are a denial of the prophecy & make 70 weeks meaningless. 

 

 

Invicta and Genevanpreacher like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure where we are going in this discussion. 

Brother Day,

This discussion is a debate-discussion.  Therefore, we are engaging in a debate between two opposing views concerning the correct understanding of Daniel 9:24-27.  Even so, the first step of such a debate would be to determine the specific areas wherein the two opposing views actually possess disagreement.  The second step would be for one of the sides to take up one of the points of disagreement, presenting the position of that side and providing the evidence and support for that position.  The third step would be for the other side to take up that point of disagreement, presenting the position of that side in opposition to the other side, providing the evidence and support for that position, and producing arguments against the supporting evidences of the opposing side. 

In my first posting of this thread, I provided an overview (as an opening statement, just as we were required to provide) of my position concerning Daniel 9:24-27.  In my second posting of this thread, I engaged in a process whereby we could determine the specific areas of disagreement between our two opposing positions, and especially whereby we could determine the primary areas of disagreement of our two opposing positions (with a recognition that a disagreement at a point of foundational premise is the reason for disagreements over additional details).  In my third posting of this thread, I took up one of the foundational points of disagreement between our two positions (that concerning the meaning of Daniel 9:24, with a particular focus upon the purpose statements of that verse), presenting my position and providing a significant amount of grammatical and contextual support and evidence for that position. 

My expectation in the debate was that you would engage this third posting of mine by presenting your opposing position, by providing evidence and support for your opposing position, and by producing arguments against that which I provided as the evidence and support for my position.  Instead, your next posting focused upon providing your answers to the 15 questions that I had presented at the beginning of my opening post.  Therefore, in my fourth posting, I engaged your presentation and answers with a challenge against the evidence and support that you provided for it.  In fact, I specifically confronted your presentation and answers by presenting the challenge that you made many “authoritative declarations” without providing any grammatical, contextual, or Biblical support whatsoever at all for them.  Involved in this challenge, I pointed out that when you make “authoritative declarations” without providing any grammatical, contextual, or Biblical support, you found your declarations upon your own authority.  Furthermore, I pointed out that in the realm of Bible study, your own authority is of no value for determining God’s truth.  Now, in my fourth posting I did not handle the content of your previous posting in detail, revealing point-by-point wherein you did or did not provide evidence and support.  Rather, I simply took up the very first of the “authoritative declarations” that you made without providing evidence and support; and I provided the grammatical and contextual evidences whereby my position on the phrase “my people” in Daniel 9:24 has Biblical support and foundation.  Thus my argument against your position on this point was as follows:

1.  You presented a position through “authoritative declaration,” but provided no support.
2.  I presented an opposing position through the evidences of grammatical and contextual support.

Your position is this – “The prophecy cannot be exclusively intended for Israel, but as wide in scope as the promise to Abram.” 

Your first evidence is this – “The immediate understanding is "thy people & thy holy city" meaning the descendants of Abraham, aka "my people Israel" & Jerusalem.”  This is simply an “authoritative declaration” on your own part that the “thy people” phrase means “the descendants of Abraham,” an “authoritative declaration that you make without providing any evidence or support.  So then, are we required to accept this position simply because you said so? 

Your second evidence is this – “The first promise to Abram included blessing as a great nation & blessing for "all families on earth." ( Gen. 12:1-3 )”  Herein you do provide the evidence of Genesis 12:1-3.  However, you do not then proceed to give evidence concerning whether the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 concerns “the descendants of Abraham” specifically in relation to the “great nation” aspect of the blessing (which is singular, and thereby refers only to one national group), or specifically in relation to the “all families on earth” aspect of the blessing. 

Rather, you simply then proceed with the “authoritative declaration” of your conclusion – “The prophecy cannot be exclusively intended for Israel, but as wide in scope as the promise to Abram.”  Indeed, this is an “authoritative declaration” that allows no room for any other option (employing the phrase, “cannot be exclusively intended”).  Yet you have provided no grammatical, contextual, or Biblical evidence for each of the steps by which you came to this conclusion.  So then again I ask – Are we required to accept this position simply because you said so?

_______________________________________________________________________

 

Now, in your most previous posting, you did present an opposition to the grammatical and contextual evidences and support that I have provided for my position on Daniel 9:24.  Indeed, your presented opposition appears to be delivered with the following statements:

I'm not convinced that your grammatical analysis leads to a proper understanding of the prophecy, or whether it actually obscures the clear meaning of the prophecy. 

I'm not convinced that your grammatical analysis leads to a proper understanding of the prophecy, or whether it actually obscures the clear meaning of the prophecy. 

Reference to Scripture, rather than grammar . . .

We should judge prophecy both by its faithfulness to the Word, & by its fulfilment, not by grammatical analysis. There is a danger of being Pharisaical. Also, we have the mind of Christ - 1 Cor. 2:16 - so we can look at prophecy with an new covenant, spiritual, Spirit-aided understanding. 

I think in this case, the 70 weeks is so clearly specific that simple arithmetic overrules complicated grammar. 

However we analyse the grammar . . . 

Herein you appear to reveal another premise against which I will have significant contention and opposition.  It is the premise that grammatical analysis of a passage is not really a help, but is actually a hindrance in Bible study, especially in relation to prophetic utterance.  In opposition to this premise, I would contend that grammatical analysis is the arithmetic of communication.  By definition, grammar deals with the meaning of individual words, the meaning of grouped words by phrases and sentences, and the meaning of contextual statements within paragraphs.  Grammar is the very means by which words, phrases, and sentences have precise meaning in communication.  

For example, can we discern any real meaning from the following set of words –

“world whosoever Son life him he God the only his everlasting begotten should perish loved have gave believeth that that so not for but in”

On the other hand, can we discern real meaning from the following set and structuring of words –

 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

No, in the first presentation for this set of words, we cannot discern any real meaning.  On the other hand, in the second presentation for this set of words, we can indeed discern real meaning, and that a very precise meaning.  The reason that we can do this in the second presentation is specifically due to the grammatical structuring by which the words are presented.  Grammar is the very means by which word structuring provides meaning.  To deny grammatical analysis is to deny the precise meaning of any given statement. 

Indeed, to do deny grammatical analysis for a statement of God’s Holy Word is to deny the precise meaning of that statement as inspired by God the Holy Spirit in God’s Holy Word.  The Lord our God chose to communicate His truth and wisdom unto us by means of the words of His Holy Word and the grammatical structuring of those words, as inspired by God the Holy Spirit.  Thus God’s Holy Word is not simply inspired by God the Holy Spirit word-by-word, but also grammatical construction-by-grammatical construction.  Therefore, to deny the grammatical construction of any statement in God’s Holy Word is to deny the inspired meaning and communication of God the Holy Spirit with that statement. 

Furthermore, grammar is not only the very means by which word structuring provides meaning, but is also the very means by which statements are narrowed in their application.  For example –

If I simply employ the word “ball,” then the application is quite broad (although the definition of the word, which is also a point of grammar, does narrow the intention from not including such things as birds, cars, pinwheels, etc.). 

On the hand, if I employ the grammatical phrase, “the ball,” then the application is now more narrow, not referring to any ball in general, but to one specific ball.  (In fact, this use of a the definite article “the” is the very grammatical construction by which you yourself argue that the “covenant” of Daniel 9:27 cannot be just any covenant, but must be some definitely specific covenant.  Even so, I would challenge you that if you do not wish to focus upon grammar as a means to Biblical understanding, then you need to quit pushing this point.)

Now, if I employ the grammatical phrase, “the ball in the car,” then the application is now even more narrow, not referring to the ball in the house, or in the field, or under the car, or beside the car, but to the ball that is to be found in the car.  Grammatically, each modifying phrase narrows the application for the meaning of any given statement.  So then, to deny a modifying phrase that God the Holy Spirit inspired for any given statement is to deny the correct understanding and application that God the Holy Spirit intended for that statement.

Grammatical analysis is not a hindrance to understanding God’s Holy Word correctly, for grammar is the means by which the Lord our God communicated to us in His Holy Word by the inspiration of His Holy Spirit.  Indeed, grammatical analysis is the means by which we can correctly understand that which the Lord our God has communicated unto us through His Holy Word by the inspiration of His Holy Spirit.

____________________________________________________________________

 

Now I wish to handle your most previous posting point-by-point in detail.

I'm not convinced that your grammatical analysis leads to a proper understanding of the prophecy, or whether it actually obscures the clear meaning of the prophecy. 

Actually, grammatical analysis is the very means by which we can understand “the clear meaning” for any statement of God’s Holy Word.

The full scope of the prophecy is verse 24, the remaining verses adding details. 

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

Indeed, grammatically this verse reveals (1) the time period for the prophetic utterance, (2) the applicational focus for the prophetic utterance, and (3) the six-fold purpose for the prophetic utterance.

However we analyse the grammar, the arithmetic stands - 70 weeks, or 490 years to the fulfilment of the prophecy.

Actually, it is not “70 weeks,” or 490 years to the fulfillment of the prophecy.  Rather, it is “70 weeks,” or 490 years are determined for the fulfillment of the prophecy.  Daniel 9:24 does not specifically state that these 490 years must be consecutive.  It just indicates that they must and will occur by the determination of God, and that they must and will occur “upon” the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.  If there is or is not a gap anywhere within the 490 year period, it will be revealed by the further details of Daniel 9:25-27.

That we agree takes us to the baptism & ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Actually, we do not agree that the 490 years takes us to the baptism of our Lord Jesus Christ.  Rather, we might agree that the first 49 + 434 years (483 years) takes us to the baptism of our Lord Jesus Christ, since I do indeed believe that the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” in Daniel 9:25 is a reference unto our Lord’s baptism, by which His earthly ministry began.

Your grammatical interpretation makes the prophecy relate to some yet future date, 350 weeks and counting, so in effect it destroys the prophecy.

Yes, my grammatical interpretation, not of Daniel 9:24, but specifcally of Daniel 9:26-27 does indeed relate the last 7 years of the 490 years “to some yet future date.”  Yet this does not destroy the prophecy.  The last “week,” or 7 years is still determined by the authority of God, just as Daniel 9:24 precisely states, and will still be fulfilled “upon” the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem, just as Daniel 9:24 precisely states.

I think in this case, the 70 weeks is so clearly specific that simple arithmetic overrules complicated grammar.

Grammar is not complicated.  Rather, it is the very means by which reading comprehension occurs.  Furthermore, the grammar and the arithmetic are precisely the same.  The grammar is that “seventy weeks are determined.”  The arithmetic is that 70 x 7 equals 490 years.  There is no contradiction.  However, neither the grammar concerning the “seventy weeks” that “are determined” nor the arithmetic that “490 years” is what “70 x 7 equals” automatically indicate that this “seventy weeks” or this 490 years must be continuous and contiguous.  Certainly, natural human logic would lead us to this conclusion; and without any contextual indication otherwise, we could accept this without argument.  However, if the grammar and context of God’s own Word from Daniel 9:26-27 (which explain further details for Daniel 9:24) reveals something different than we would conclude with our human logic, then we should follow the revelation of God’s own Word instead of the conclusion of our human logic.

The timing indicates the Lord Jesus' saving ministry. I think everyone agrees that, but there are suggestions as to whether 69 weeks takes us to Jesus' baptism, his triumphant entry or the cross & resurrection. 

Yes, the timing for the first 69 “weeks,” or 483 years, does bring us to our Lord Jesus Christ’s first coming and first earthly ministry.  And yes, there is a dispute over whether the precise timing is Jesus’ birth, baptism, triumphant entry, or crucifixion and resurrection.  However, you and I are in agreement that it is our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism.

We should judge prophecy both by its faithfulness to the Word, & by its fulfilment, not by grammatical analysis. There is a danger of being Pharisaical. Also, we have the mind of Christ - 1 Cor. 2:16 - so we can look at prophecy with an new covenant, spiritual, Spirit-aided understanding. 

Yes, we should indeed judge prophet utterances by their faithfulness to God’s Word and by the precision of their fulfillment.  However, we cannot determine their faithfulness or their precise fulfillment without considering a grammatical analysis; for it is directly by grammatical analysis that we are able to determine the precise meaning of a given prophetic statement.  Furthermore, there is no danger “of being Pharisaical.”  There is only a danger of being precisely correct.  Finally, I would agree that we now possess “the mind of Christ” through the indwelling Holy Spirit, whereby the indwelling Holy Spirit is present to guide and aid our understanding of the very Word of God that He Himself inspired.  Yet God the Holy Spirit will only ever guide us and aid us to understand the Word that He Himself inspired in perfect union with the very words and grammar that He Himself inspired.  On the other hand, if our understanding departs from the very words and grammar that God the Holy Spirit inspired, then we can be certain that we are not actually following the guidance and aid of God the Holy Spirit for that understanding.

One point of grammar is that in a list of prophetic events, the sequence is not necessarily chronological; they may be concurrent or in order of importance, etc.

It is true that grammar does not require for a simple listing of events of any kind to be automatically presented as a listing in chronological order.  However, certain grammatical and contextual structurings certainly do reveal a chronological order to a given list.  Even so, in my third posting (the one concerning Daniel 9:24), I provided evidence that there does indeed appear to be an ordering (whether logical or chronological) to the six purpose or result statements that are presented in Daniel 9:24.  Now by the manner of debate, it would be your responsibility, not simply to state that an ordering is not necessarily true, but further to provide arguments against my evidence and to provide evidence for your position.

 Also, as they are prophesied to take place in 70 weeks, those events cannot be absolute in the sense of your grammatical analysis. Transgression, sins & iniquity continue until our Lord returns in glory to bring into being  new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. 2 Peter 3

So then, while you are accusing me of presenting a position wherein this prophetic utterance is not precisely fulfilled in the matter of time, you yourself are presenting a position wherein this prophetic utterance is not precisely fulfilled in the matter of content.  In fact, by presenting a position wherein “the transgression” and “sins” do not actually “finish” and “end” by the end of the 490 years, but only sometime in the distant future thereafter, you present a position that is also not precisely fulfilled in the matter of time.

Actually, in my position this prophetic utterance will indeed be fulfilled precisely in the matter of content and in the matter of time.  My position simply places an indefinite gap of time between the end of the first “69 weeks,” or 483 years, and the occurrence of the last “week,” or 7 years.  In my position, this indefinite gap of time has nothing directly to do with the “70 weeks” that “are determined” specifically “upon” the children of Israel and the city of Jerusalem.  Furthermore, in my position the six purpose or result statements of Daniel 9:24 will be fulfilled at the end of this last “week,” or 7 years, with absolute precision.

The question you need to answer is:
If v. 24 was not fulfilled in 70 weeks, & is not yet fulfilled in 350 weeks, what does the 70 weeks prophecy mean when Gabriel declared the prophecy so plainly?

  The question I need to answer are:
in what sense WAS Dan. 9:24 fulfilled within the 70 weeks?

No, the question that both of us need to answer is – What is the precise meaning of each phrase and statement that God the Holy Spirit inspired in Daniel 9:24-27? 

The prophecy was fulfilled in the 70 weeks - we can see ALL the answers in Isaiah 53 -  he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities ... he bare the sin of many. 
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

No, the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24 was not precisely fulfilled in the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection.  As you yourself have admitted above, transgressions, sins, and iniquity still continue.  They have not come to a complete finish or end for any individual or group of individuals upon the earth.

In Christ all believers are no longer transgressors, nor sinners & our iniquities are fully reconciled. We have everlasting righteousness imputed in Christ. Luke 22:37Luke 24:47 Acts 3:26 Rom 5:17 We benefit from that fulfilled prophecy. 

Actually, believers on the earth certainly are still transgressors who commit transgressions against the Lord their God and Savior.  Actually, believers on the earth certainly are still sinners who commit sins against the Lord their God and Savior.  Indeed, we believers do have eternal reconciliation with the Lord our God, such that we are and ever shall be dear children in His eternal family.  Yet it is also true that when we as believers commit transgression and sin in our daily walk, we must yet experience daily reconciliation with the Lord our God in order that we might be restored unto a walk of daily fellowship with Him.  Indeed again, we believers do have eternal justification from and before the Lord our God, specifically because the eternal righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ has been eternally imputed onto our account in the record of heaven.  Yet it is also true that we believers do not walk in everlasting righteousness in our daily walk upon this earth, but that we do yet regularly commit transgression and sin against the Lord our God and Savior.

Our most Holy Saviour was anointed at his baptism - Luke 3:22 Luke 4:18 and again at his ascension - Heb. 1:8-9 Also Acts 4:24-30 quoting Psalm 2:1-3 

Indeed, God’s Word presents two different events wherein our Lord Jesus Christ was baptized.  In your position you have “authoritatively declared” that the anointing event of Daniel 9:24 must refer to the anointing of Jesus’ baptism.  Yet there are, as you have just acknowledged, two different possibilities.  As such, before you can legitimately make such an “authoritative declaration,” you must provide some form of evidence whereby one of these two options is legitimately discarded and the other is legitimately chosen.  If you do not provide any such evidence, but continue to make your “authoritative declaration,” then you leave me to ask the question – Are we simply to accept this on the authority of your own word?

Reference to Scripture, rather than grammar . . .

Actually, reference to the grammar is a reference to Scripture, since it is a reference to the very grammatical structuring that God the Holy Spirit inspired as the Scripture of Daniel 9:24-27.

Reference to Scripture, rather than grammar, shows that the 70 weeks prophecy was fulfilled perfectly in 490 years. Arguments to insert an indefinite "gap" between 69 & 70 are a denial of the prophecy & make 70 weeks meaningless.

This is actually one of the points under question in the debate, a point that is located, not in the general declaration of Daniel 9:24, but in the greater details of Daniel 9:26-27.  As such, this point requires us precisely to understand the statements and points that precede it in the context of Daniel 9:24-25, and then precisely to understand the statements and points that govern it in the actual statements of Daniel 9:26-27.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother Ian, 

Throughout your above posting, you present many "authoritative declarations" without providing grammatical, contextual, or Biblical support for those declarations.  This leaves me and the audience with only the option to accept these declarations upon the authority of your, Brother Ian's, word.  Yet in the realm of Bible study, the authority of a human's word is of little value in understanding God's truth.  Rather, we must find our authority in the grammatical, contextual, and Biblical evidences of God's own Word.

.....................

Allow me then to focus upon the first "authoritative declaration" that you make in presenting this progression of thought -- "The immediate understanding is "thy people & thy holy city" meaning the descendants of Abraham, aka "my people Israel" & Jerusalem."  You have provided no grammatical, contextual, or Biblical evidence for the statement that the phrase "thy people" in Daniel 9:24 means "the descendants of Abraham."  On the other hand, the grammatical and contextual flow of thought does appear to be quite clear concerning the phrase "thy people" in Daniel 9:24.  From Daniel 9:21 we learn that "the man" (the angel) Gabriel was sent by the Lord God unto Daniel, and from Daniel 9:22 we learn that the purpose for the Lord God in sending Gabriel to Daniel was in order to give Daniel "skill and understanding."  In fact, the grammar of the passage indicates that throughout Daniel 9:22-27, the angel Gabriel is the one doing the speaking.  Furthermore, the context of the passage indicates that throughout Daniel 9:22-27, Daniel is the one to whom the angel Gabriel is speaking.  Therefore, when the angel Gabriel employs the phrase, "thy people," in Daniel 9:24, while speaking directly to Daniel, the phrase must grammatically and contextually mean, "Daniel's people."  In this context, the pronoun "thy" finds its antecedent in Daniel himself.  

So then, who specifically were "Daniel's people"?  Let us not guess.  Let us find the answer in the context.  In the opening half of Daniel 9:20, Daniel himself has already made the declaration, "And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel . . ."  In addition, in Daniel 9:7 Daniel himself had already made the declaration, "O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off, through all the countries whither thou hast driven them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against thee."  So then, the "thy people" of Daniel 9:24 is not contextually to be understood as "the descendants of Abraham," but as "the men of Judah," and "the inhabitants of Jerusalem," and all the children of Israel.  This is the authority of the grammar and context of God's own Word.  There is no grammatical or contextual authority for viewing the phrase "thy people" in Daniel 9:24 as being a reference to the Messiah.  Rather, there is only grammatical and contextual authority for viewing the phrase "thy people" in Daniel 9:24 as being a reference to a specific body of people, people who had committed sinful wickedness and rebellion against the Lord their God.

Brother Scott, my "author​itative declarations" are generally statements directly based on the relevant Scriptures, with a knowledge of related Scriptures. It CANNOT be in question that Daniel's people are the people of Israel. Nor can it be in question that the people of Israel are the descendants of Abraham. That's what the whole OT (the old covenant Scripture) is all about. Nor can it be in question that the history of Israel was repeated periods of apostasy followed by repentance. The captivity in Babylon was the culmination of persistent apostasy & the rejection of the warnings of the prophets. I recommend you read Nehemiah's prayer (Neh. 9) alongside Daniel's. Note his references to "covenant." 

To assert, as a result of your own grammatical analysis, that Daniel's people comprise "a specific body of people, people who had committed sinful wickedness and rebellion against the Lord their God" is not valid. Those specific people were dead - 70 years was long enough for all those corrupt leaders to die. Most of the second generation would also be dead. The third generation would be the ones who would return, but the promise to "thy people" was to apply in 70 "weeks", nearly 14 generations hence. Mat. 1:17 

The Gospels relate the events of the life of Jesus - the  3 1/2 years following the completion of the 69 weeks, & the last 31 years of the 69 weeks, with the conception & birth narratives of John & Jesus. They also show that there was great expectation in Israel around the time of the birth of John & Jesus. Even the chief priests & scribes were able to advise the wise men; also Simeon & Anna were prepared. It is possible that the maths had been done - 69 weeks of years pointed to the year the Messiah would reach 30 & so begin his ministry, so these events 30 years before would be seen to have that significance. The prophecy of a senior priest who had had a vision in the temple before  the whole multitude of the people Luke 1:10 was very significant. Luke 1:67-79 Thirty years later they flocked to Jordan to hear & be baptised by John. 

No. I do not recognise the validity of your complex grammatical analysis. I believe the Scriptures, & the straightforward grammar we actually read there.

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Genevanpreacher likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother Scott, my "author​itative declarations" are generally statements directly based on the relevant Scriptures, with a knowledge of related Scriptures.

 Brother Day,

Actually, the majority of your “authoritative declarations” are presented without the support of any “relevant Scriptures,” but only on the ground of your own human assumptions.  (Indeed, I am capable of revealing this methodically, point-by-point in your presentations if it becomes necessary for the discussion-debate.)  Grammatical and contextual evidence is of great value in Bible study and Biblical understanding, since the grammar and context are directly inspired by God the Holy Spirit in accord with His absolutely divine authority.  Human assumptions may or may not be found to be accurate in relation to the grammatical and contextual evidence; however, human assumption carries no weight of authority whatsoever in the realm of Bible study and Biblical understanding.

It CANNOT be in question that Daniel's people are the people of Israel.

Certainly, we are in definite agreement with this Biblical truth.  Indeed, I myself have not presented anything thus far in my postings that would stand in conflict with this truth.  In fact, I have even presented grammatical and contextual evidences from Daniel 9 in order to support this truth in relation to our understanding of Daniel 9:24.  On the other hand, you yourself have presented at least one statement in conflict with this truth, as per your “authoritative declaration” – “The prophecy cannot be exclusively intended for Israel, but as wide in scope as the promise to Abram.”  On the one hand, you declare that Daniel’s people, for whom the “seventy weeks” are “determined” according to Daniel 9:24, must be without question “the people of Israel.”  On the other hand, you declare that the prophecy of Daniel 9:24 “cannot be exclusively intended for Israel.”  Is there a self-contradiction here in your position?

Nor can it be in question that the people of Israel are the descendants of Abraham.

Actually, this statement can be brought into question.  The phrase, “the descendants of Abraham” (which is not actually a phrase found in the King James translation, since the word “descendants” is not even found in the King James translation), refers the those who have descended from Abraham through physical biology.  Certainly, it is accurate to assert that “the children of Israel” are “descendants of Abraham” through physical biology, as through the line of Isaac and then of Jacob (whose name was changed by the Lord God unto Israel).  However, it is not accurate to assert that the phrase, “the descendants of Abraham,” and the phrase, “the children of Israel,” are strictly equivalent phrases.  In the mathematics of the case, the phrase, “the children of Israel,” only presents a sub-set of the greater set that is presented by the phrase, “the descendants of Abraham.”  In fact, the greater set of the phrase, “the descendants of Abraham,” also at least includes the following:

1.  The Ishmaelites – the descendants of Abraham through his son Ishmael (by Hagar).
2.  The Midianites – the descendants of Abraham through his son Midian (by Keturah).
3.  The Edomites – the descendants of Abraham through his grandson Esau (the son of Isaac).
4.  The Israelites – the descendants of Abraham through his grandson Jacob (the son of Isaac).

In the mathematics of the case, the sub-set of “the children of Israel” can be described legitimately as a part of the greater set of “the descendants of Abraham;” but the sub-set of “the children of Israel” cannot be made wholly equivalent to the greater set of “the descendants of Abraham.” 

So then, is Daniel 9:24, in referencing Daniel’s people through the phrase, “the people,” speaking concerning the whole of the greater set of “the descendants of Abraham” (as you have asserted with your unsupported “authoritative declaration”)?  Or, is Daniel 9:24, in referencing Daniel’s people through the phrase, “the people,” speaking concerning only of the sub-set of “the children of Israel”?  The answer between these two option appears fairly clear, since Daniel’s people do not include the other sub-sets of the greater set, “the descendants of Abraham.”  Indeed, the context appears to grant evidence to this fairly clear answer, since Daniel himself in the very context of Daniel 9 defined his people in Daniel 9:7 and Daniel 9:20.

That's what the whole OT (the old covenant Scripture) is all about.

Indeed, the majority of the Old Testament Scriptures is about the Lord God’s dealings with the sub-set of “the descendants of Abraham” that is to be defined as “the children of Israel.”

Nor can it be in question that the history of Israel was repeated periods of apostasy followed by repentance. The captivity in Babylon was the culmination of persistent apostasy & the rejection of the warnings of the prophets.

I am not aware of anything that I have presented that would be in dispute or disagreement with this.

I recommend you read Nehemiah's prayer (Neh. 9) alongside Daniel's. Note his references to "covenant."

I am not sure why you presented this passage, unless it was simply to give evidence for your statements concerning “the history of Israel.”  If that was the reason, then again I pronounce that we are not in any dispute or disagreement concerning this matter.  Concerning the “covenant” references in Nehemiah 9, we find three – Nehemiah 9:8, 32, 38.  Nehemiah 9:8 references the covenant that the Lord God made with Abraham, with a very specific focus upon the land-promise aspects of that covenant.  Nehemiah 9:32 references the Lord God as a God “who keepeth covenant and mercy,” thus revealing the character of the Lord our God as being faithful in keeping the covenants that He makes.  Nehemiah 9:38 references the renewed covenant that the children of Israel under the leadership of Nehemiah were making with the Lord their God.  Again, concerning how you intended this passage to inform our understanding of Daniel 9:24-27, I remain uncertain.

To assert, as a result of your own grammatical analysis, that Daniel's people comprise "a specific body of people, people who had committed sinful wickedness and rebellion against the Lord their God" is not valid.

Apparently, Daniel himself and the Holy Spirit of God who inspired Daniel to include Daniel 9 in the Holy Scriptures does not agree with you.  (Or, maybe it would be better to say that you do not agree with Daniel and with the Holy Spirit of God who inspired Daniel.)  Indeed, the Holy Spirit inspired Scriptures, as communicated through Daniel in Daniel 9:3-20, state –

And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes: and I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments; we have sinned, and have committed iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebelled, even by departing from thy precepts and from thy judgments: neither have we hearkened unto thy servants the prophets, which spake in thy name to our kings, our princes, and our fathers, and to all the people of the land.  O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confusion of faces, as at this day; to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off, through all the countries whither thou hast driven them, because of their trespass that they have trespassed against thee.  O Lord, to us belongeth confusion of face, to our kings, to our princes, and to our fathers, because we have sinned against thee.  To the Lord our God belong mercies and forgivenesses, though we have rebelled against him; neither have we obeyed the voice of the LORD our God, to walk in his laws, which he set before us by his servants the prophets. Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.  And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem.  As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before the LORD our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth.  Therefore hath the LORD watched upon the evil, and brought it upon us: for the LORD our God is righteous in all his works which he doeth: for we obeyed not his voice.  And now, O Lord our God, that hast brought thy people forth out of the land of Egypt with a mighty hand, and hast gotten thee renown, as at this day; we have sinned, we have done wickedly.  O Lord, according to all thy righteousness, I beseech thee, let thine anger and thy fury be turned away from thy city Jerusalem, thy holy mountain: because for our sins, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and thy people are become a reproach to all that are about us.  Now therefore, O our God, hear the prayer of thy servant, and his supplications, and cause thy face to shine upon thy sanctuary that is desolate, for the Lord’s sake. O my God, incline thine ear, and hear; open thine eyes, and behold our desolations, and the city which is called by thy name: for we do not present our supplications before thee for our righteousnesses, but for thy great mercies.  O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, hearken and do; defer not, for thine own sake, O my God: for thy city and thy people are called by thy name.  And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God . . .”

I am not sure how much more straightforwardly I can present the straightforward grammar of the passage than actually and directly to quote the straightforward, Holy Spirit inspired grammar, emboldening the relevant grammatical structures.  Apparently, Daniel (and the Holy Spirit of God who inspired Daniel) was not at all adverse to including the generation of the children of Israel who were alive at that very time in his prayer of confession for the sinful wickedness of the children of Israel.  Indeed, Daniel was not even at all adverse to including himself in that confession of sin. (See the specific declaration of Daniel in Daniel 9:20)   In fact, Daniel did recognize the difference between his present generation and the past generations of “the fathers;” yet he still included both in his prayer of confession. (See the specific declaration of Daniel in Daniel 9:16).

To assert, as a result of your own grammatical analysis, that Daniel's people comprise "a specific body of people, people who had committed sinful wickedness and rebellion against the Lord their God" is not valid.  Those specific people were dead - 70 years was long enough for all those corrupt leaders to die. Most of the second generation would also be dead. The third generation would be the ones who would return, but the promise to "thy people" was to apply in 70 "weeks", nearly 14 generations hence. Mat. 1:17

Furthermore, these statements reveal that you have a misunderstanding concerning my position.  My position is not that Daniel’s people comprise a specific generational body of people.  Rather, my position is that Daniel’s people comprise a specific national body of people.  The “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24 is not to be defined as one specific generation of the children of Israel.  Rather, the “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24 is to be defined as the nation of the children of Israel throughout all generations.  (Indeed, it is worthy of notice that Nehemiah 9, the very passage that you instructed me to consider and to compare unto Daniel 9, actually references the ongoing generations of the children of Israel, from the time of their deliverance from Egypt unto the time that was present for Nehemiah in Nehemiah 9.)

The Gospels relate the events of the life of Jesus - the  3 1/2 years following the completion of the 69 weeks, & the last 31 years of the 69 weeks, with the conception & birth narratives of John & Jesus. They also show that there was great expectation in Israel around the time of the birth of John & Jesus. Even the chief priests & scribes were able to advise the wise men; also Simeon & Anna were prepared. It is possible that the maths had been done - 69 weeks of years pointed to the year the Messiah would reach 30 & so begin his ministry, so these events 30 years before would be seen to have that significance. The prophecy of a senior priest who had had a vision in the temple before  the whole multitude of the people Luke 1:10 was very significant. Luke 1:67-79 Thirty years later they flocked to Jordan to hear & be baptised by John.

Not much disagreement between us here.

No. I do not recognise the validity of your complex grammatical analysis. I believe the Scriptures, & the straightforward grammar we actually read there.

So then, are you acknowledging that the actual, "straightforward" grammar of any given statement in God’s Holy Word is of significance to a correct understanding for that statement?  If so, then that is good; for my supposedly “complex grammatical analysis” of Daniel 9:24 actually is “the straightforward grammar” that God the Holy Spirit inspired for the sentence structure of that statement in God’s Holy Word.  Even so, allow me to attempt yet again in a slightly different format to present the “straightforward grammar” for Daniel 9:24 –

Seventy [an adjective that modifies the word “weeks”] weeks [a noun that serves as the subject for the main/independent clause of the sentence] are determined [a present, passive verb that serves as the verb for the main/independent clause of the sentence] upon [a preposition that initiates a prepositional phrase that modifies the verb “are determined”] thy [an adjective that modifies the word “people”] people [a noun that serves as the object for the preposition “upon”] and [a coordinating conjunction that joins two prepositional phrases] upon [a preposition that initiates a prepositional phrase that modifies the verb “are determined”] thy [an adjective that modifies the word “city”]  holy [an adjective that modifies the word “city”] city [a noun that serves as the object for the second preposition “upon”], to finish [an infinitive that initiates a infinitive phrase] the [the definite article used as an adjective that modifies the word “transgression” and makes it definite in its scope] transgression [a noun that serves as the direct object for the infinitive “to finish”], and [a coordinating conjunction that joins two infinitive phrases] to make [an infinitive that initiates a infinitive phrase] an [an indefinite article used as an adjective to modify the word “end”] end [a noun that serves as the direct object for the infinitive “to make”] of [a preposition that initiates a prepositional phrase that modifies the noun “end”] sins [a noun that serves as the object for the preposition “of”], and [a coordinating conjunction that joins two infinitive phrases] to make [an infinitive that initiates a infinitive phrase] reconciliation [a noun that serves as the direct object for the infinitive “to make”] for [a preposition that initiates a prepositional phrase that modifies the infinitive “to make”] iniquity [a noun that serves as the object for the preposition “for”], and [a coordinating conjunction that joins two infinitive phrases] to bring [an infinitive that initiates a infinitive phrase] in [a preposition that initiates a prepositional phrase that modifies the infinitive “to bring”] everlasting [an adjective that modifies the noun “righteousness] righteousness [a noun that serves as the object for the preposition “in”], and [a coordinating conjunction that joins two infinitive phrases] to seal [an infinitive that initiates a infinitive phrase] up [an adverb that modifies the infinitive “to seal”] the [the definite article used as an adjective that modifies the words “vision” and “prophecy” and makes them definite in their scope] vision [a noun that serves as the first of a compound direct object for the infinitive “to seal”] and [a coordinating conjunction that joins the two nouns “vision” and “prophecy”] prophecy [a noun that serves as the second of a compound direct object for the infinitive “to seal”], and [a coordinating conjunction that joins two infinitive phrases] to anoint [an infinitive that initiates a infinitive phrase] the [the definite article used as an adjective that modifies the word “Holy” and makes it definite in its scope] most [an adjective that modifies the word “Holy”] Holy [an adjective that is used as a substantive and is thus to be grammatically handled as a noun].”

In the grammatical structure of any given sentence, every word in that sentence has a specific place and usage in that sentence.  Even so, understanding the specific place and usage for each word in any given sentence is “the straightforward grammar” for that sentence. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

 

In the first portion of this posting, I presented my response to your previous posting.  In the latter portion of this posting, I intend to proceed with the truths of Daniel 9:25 and with our point of disagreement concerning the statement of that verse.  Since we actually have little disagreement concerning this verse, I will not break down the statement of this verse with quite as much grammatical detail. 

We are in agreement concerning the teaching of this verse that from the decree of the Persians to rebuild Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity unto “the Messiah the Prince” would be 7 “weeks,” or 49 years, plus 62 “weeks,” or 434 years, which equals a total of 69 “weeks,” or 483 years. 

We are in agreement that this first 69 “weeks” of the 70 “weeks,” or 483 years, is a continuous and contiguous period of time.  In fact, I myself would even provide grammatical evidence for this position, in that the main verb of the first sentence of the verse, “shall be,” is modified by the two prepositional phrases, “from the going forth” and “unto the Messiah the Prince.”  Indeed, the prepositional phrase, “from the going forth,” grammatically indicates the exact starting point for this period of time; and the prepositional phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” indicates the exact ending point for this period of time.  Furthermore, the grammatical use of both of the prepositional phrases to modify the same verb indicates that there will be no break anywhere throughout this period of time.

We (you and I specifically, although this may not be true for other members of Online Baptist who are in the audience and who might agree with my side of the discussion-debate overall) are in agreement that the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” as employed in Daniel 9:25 is a reference unto our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism, by which His earthly preaching ministry was initiated.

We are in agreement that the rebuilding of Jerusalem occurred during a time of trouble for the children of Israel who were engaged in that rebuilding process, as recorded in such Old Testament books as Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah.

However, we are in disagreement over one specific point concerning Daniel 9:25.  Actually, it is a disagreement concerning the relationship between a phrase in Daniel 9:24 and a phrase in Daniel 9:25.  With your position you have asserted that the phrase, “to anoint the most Holy,” in Daniel 9:24 is to be viewed as referring unto the same event in our Lord Jesus Christ’s ministry as is referenced in the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” in Daniel 9:25.  Now, you and I do agree that both the phrase, “the most Holy,” and the phrase, “the Messiah the Prince,” refer unto the same person, that is – our Lord Jesus Christ.  Yet I would contend that viewing both of these two phrases as referring to the same event is not accurate to the mathematics of the context.  On the one hand, the phrase, “to anoint the most Holy,” is grammatically presented as a purpose or result for the entire 70 “weeks,” or 490 years.  On the other hand, the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” is grammatically presented as the event by which the first 69 “weeks” is brought to a conclusion.  Thus the mathematics of the context would be as follows:

1.  The anointing event for “the most Holy” in Daniel 9:24 is fulfilled at the end of 70 “weeks.”
2.  The event for “the Messiah the Prince” in Daniel 9:25 occurs at the end of 69 “weeks.”

Even so, it appears fairly clear from the mathematics of the context that these two events cannot be the same event, but must be different events, since their timing is separated by one whole “week,” or 7 seven years.  Now, you and I agree that the event for “the Messiah the Prince” that is presented in Daniel 9:25 is the baptism of our Lord Jesus Christ, “the most Holy,” “the Messiah the Prince.”  Furthermore, you and I agree that our Lord’s baptism is described in God’s Holy Word as an anointing event for our Lord Jesus Christ, wherein He was anointed by the Holy Spirit for His preaching, teaching, healing, and saving-work ministry.  However, we also agree that God’s Holy Word also presents a second anointing event for our Lord Jesus Christ, that is – at His ascension and exaltation to the throne of heaven to sit at the right hand of God the Father, wherein He was anointed by God the Father for His sovereign kingship ministry.  So then, since the mathematics of the context does not appear to allow the anointing event for “the most Holy” in Daniel 9:24 to be the same event as that for “the Messiah the Prince” in Daniel 9:25, and since we agree that the event for “the Messiah the Prince” in Daniel 9:25 is the anointing event of our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism, then I would contend that the anointing event of Daniel 9:24 must be the anointing event of His exaltation, whereby He was anointed for His sovereign kingship ministry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 Brother Day,

 

Actually, the majority of your “authoritative declarations” are presented without the support of any “relevant Scriptures,” but only on the ground of your own human assumptions.  (Indeed, I am capable of revealing this methodically, point-by-point in your presentations if it becomes necessary for the discussion-debate.)  Grammatical and contextual evidence is of great value in Bible study and Biblical understanding, since the grammar and context are directly inspired by God the Holy Spirit in accord with His absolutely divine authority.  Human assumptions may or may not be found to be accurate in relation to the grammatical and contextual evidence; however, human assumption carries no weight of authority whatsoever in the realm of Bible study and Biblical understanding.

Certainly, we are in definite agreement with this Biblical truth.  Indeed, I myself have not presented anything thus far in my postings that would stand in conflict with this truth.  In fact, I have even presented grammatical and contextual evidences from Daniel 9 in order to support this truth in relation to our understanding of Daniel 9:24.  On the other hand, you yourself have presented at least one statement in conflict with this truth, as per your “authoritative declaration” – “The prophecy cannot be exclusively intended for Israel, but as wide in scope as the promise to Abram.”  On the one hand, you declare that Daniel’s people, for whom the “seventy weeks” are “determined” according to Daniel 9:24, must be without question “the people of Israel.”  On the other hand, you declare that the prophecy of Daniel 9:24 “cannot be exclusively intended for Israel.”  Is there a self-contradiction here in your position?

...........................

Indeed, the majority of the Old Testament Scriptures is about the Lord God’s dealings with the sub-set of “the descendants of Abraham” that is to be defined as “the children of Israel.”

I am not aware of anything that I have presented that would be in dispute or disagreement with this.

 

Nehemiah 9 prayer

I am not sure why you presented this passage, unless it was simply to give evidence for your statements concerning “the history of Israel.”  If that was the reason, then again I pronounce that we are not in any dispute or disagreement concerning this matter.  Concerning the “covenant” references in Nehemiah 9, we find three – Nehemiah 9:8, 32, 38Nehemiah 9:8 references the covenant that the Lord God made with Abraham, with a very specific focus upon the land-promise aspects of that covenant.  Nehemiah 9:32 references the Lord God as a God “who keepeth covenant and mercy,” thus revealing the character of the Lord our God as being faithful in keeping the covenants that He makes.  Nehemiah 9:38 references the renewed covenant that the children of Israel under the leadership of Nehemiah were making with the Lord their God.  Again, concerning how you intended this passage to inform our understanding of Daniel 9:24-27, I remain uncertain.

I referred to Nehemiah 9 as a prayer similar in scope & purpose to Daniel 9, somewhat later, but we agree that Nehemiah & others record the troublous times prophesied by Gabriel. He appeals to the LORD who chose Abram, & made a covenant with him. The prophets & other leaders do not stand alone, but constantly refer back to the LORD, the God of Abraham & his promises to his people, descended through Isaac & Jacob.

Daniel could only pray - he was a very old man after 70 years exile. Nehemiah's concern was to prayerfully do all in his power & authority to guide the restoration into godly ways. Presumably he knew Daniel's prophecy. He certainly trusted the LORD & led the people into a renewed covenant for the provision, service & maintenance of the temple.   

As quoted by Bro Scott:

 

 

You misquote me to make your point - my full statement was:

 

 

 

Apparently, Daniel himself and the Holy Spirit of God who inspired Daniel to include Daniel 9 in the Holy Scriptures does not agree with you.  (Or, maybe it would be better to say that you do not agree with Daniel and with the Holy Spirit of God who inspired Daniel.)  Indeed, the Holy Spirit inspired Scriptures, as communicated through Daniel in Daniel 9:3-20, state –

...................

Furthermore, these statements reveal that you have a misunderstanding concerning my position.  My position is not that Daniel’s people comprise a specific generational body of people.  Rather, my position is that Daniel’s people comprise a specific national body of people.  The “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24 is not to be defined as one specific generation of the children of Israel.  Rather, the “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24 is to be defined as the nation of the children of Israel throughout all generations.  (Indeed, it is worthy of notice that Nehemiah 9, the very passage that you instructed me to consider and to compare unto Daniel 9, actually references the ongoing generations of the children of Israel, from the time of their deliverance from Egypt unto the time that was present for Nehemiah in Nehemiah 9.)

Not much disagreement between us here.

I hope you can see why I misunderstood your position when you wrote: "a specific body of people, people who had committed sinful wickedness and rebellion against the Lord their God." I read that as a statement that those who had caused the exile were the specific body in question, rather than the nation as a whole. 

No significant disagreement regarding this aspect of the prophecy. 

 

So then, are you acknowledging that the actual, "straightforward" grammar of any given statement in God’s Holy Word is of significance to a correct understanding for that statement?

Of course! 

___________________________________________________________________ 

In the first portion of this posting, I presented my response to your previous posting.  In the latter portion of this posting, I intend to proceed with the truths of Daniel 9:25 and with our point of disagreement concerning the statement of that verse.  Since we actually have little disagreement concerning this verse, I will not break down the statement of this verse with quite as much grammatical detail. 

 

We are in agreement concerning the teaching of this verse that from the decree of the Persians to rebuild Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity unto “the Messiah the Prince” would be 7 “weeks,” or 49 years, plus 62 “weeks,” or 434 years, which equals a total of 69 “weeks,” or 483 years. 

 

We are in agreement that this first 69 “weeks” of the 70 “weeks,” or 483 years, is a continuous and contiguous period of time.  In fact, I myself would even provide grammatical evidence for this position, in that the main verb of the first sentence of the verse, “shall be,” is modified by the two prepositional phrases, “from the going forth” and “unto the Messiah the Prince.”  Indeed, the prepositional phrase, “from the going forth,” grammatically indicates the exact starting point for this period of time; and the prepositional phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” indicates the exact ending point for this period of time.  Furthermore, the grammatical use of both of the prepositional phrases to modify the same verb indicates that there will be no break anywhere throughout this period of time.

 

We (you and I specifically, although this may not be true for other members of Online Baptist who are in the audience and who might agree with my side of the discussion-debate overall) are in agreement that the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” as employed in Daniel 9:25 is a reference unto our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism, by which His earthly preaching ministry was initiated.

 

We are in agreement that the rebuilding of Jerusalem occurred during a time of trouble for the children of Israel who were engaged in that rebuilding process, as recorded in such Old Testament books as Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah.

 

However, we are in disagreement over one specific point concerning Daniel 9:25.  Actually, it is a disagreement concerning the relationship between a phrase in Daniel 9:24 and a phrase in Daniel 9:25.  With your position you have asserted that the phrase, “to anoint the most Holy,” in Daniel 9:24 is to be viewed as referring unto the same event in our Lord Jesus Christ’s ministry as is referenced in the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” in Daniel 9:25.  Now, you and I do agree that both the phrase, “the most Holy,” and the phrase, “the Messiah the Prince,” refer unto the same person, that is – our Lord Jesus Christ.  Yet I would contend that viewing both of these two phrases as referring to the same event is not accurate to the mathematics of the context.  On the one hand, the phrase, “to anoint the most Holy,” is grammatically presented as a purpose or result for the entire 70 “weeks,” or 490 years.  On the other hand, the phrase, “unto the Messiah the Prince,” is grammatically presented as the event by which the first 69 “weeks” is brought to a conclusion.  Thus the mathematics of the context would be as follows:

 

1.  The anointing event for “the most Holy” in Daniel 9:24 is fulfilled at the end of 70 “weeks.”
2.  The event for “the Messiah the Prince” in Daniel 9:25 occurs at the end of 69 “weeks.”

 

Even so, it appears fairly clear from the mathematics of the context that these two events cannot be the same event, but must be different events, since their timing is separated by one whole “week,” or 7 seven years.  Now, you and I agree that the event for “the Messiah the Prince” that is presented in Daniel 9:25 is the baptism of our Lord Jesus Christ, “the most Holy,” “the Messiah the Prince.”  Furthermore, you and I agree that our Lord’s baptism is described in God’s Holy Word as an anointing event for our Lord Jesus Christ, wherein He was anointed by the Holy Spirit for His preaching, teaching, healing, and saving-work ministry.  However, we also agree that God’s Holy Word also presents a second anointing event for our Lord Jesus Christ, that is – at His ascension and exaltation to the throne of heaven to sit at the right hand of God the Father, wherein He was anointed by God the Father for His sovereign kingship ministry.  So then, since the mathematics of the context does not appear to allow the anointing event for “the most Holy” in Daniel 9:24 to be the same event as that for “the Messiah the Prince” in Daniel 9:25, and since we agree that the event for “the Messiah the Prince” in Daniel 9:25 is the anointing event of our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism, then I would contend that the anointing event of Daniel 9:24 must be the anointing event of His exaltation, whereby He was anointed for His sovereign kingship ministry.

 

 

​Dan. 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

I understand & appreciate your point about the the two anointings, at Jesus' baptism & his ascension to his heavenly throne. As Jesus' baptism & ascension took place within the 70 weeks, & 69 weeks is within the 70, it's not a point we need argue. We agree both anointings took place, & that Jesus is now seated on the heavenly throne at God's right hand.  Acts 2:29-39  Heb. 1:8  Heb. 8:1  Heb. 12:2 

That appears to bring us to full agreement, that the v. 24 anointing took place within 7 years of Jesus' baptism, prophesied in v. 25. 

 

Bro. Scott

...  since we agree that the event for “the Messiah the Prince” in Daniel 9:25 is the anointing event of our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism, then I would contend that the anointing event of Daniel 9:24 must be the anointing event of His exaltation, whereby He was anointed for His sovereign kingship ministry.

Yet I understand you believe the 70th week is still to come, even though you affirm that the anointing has taken place. 

We have further agreed (on the comment thread) that the events of Calvary are the basis for the blessings of v. 24.

 

Ian:

Regardless of how the debate proceeds, my present understanding is that the blessings listed in Dan. 9:24 correspond to Isaiah 53, the full salvation accomplished at Calvary. Whatever our thoughts on prophecy, Jesus' atoning sufferings are the basis for the eternal blessings for Israel & all the redeemed. 

To which Bro. Scott replied, quoting only the second sentence:

 

Amen!  I certainly would agree that our Lord Jesus Christ's atoning and saving work in His shed blood, sacrificial death, and bodily resurrection are THE foundational basis for the blessings of eternal atonement and eternal salvation unto any and all believers, whether they be Israelite or Gentile, whether they are converted as individual persons or as a national group.

I would like to think that brings the debate to a close with virtually complete agreement, but somehow I think that may not be the case. 

From your first post:

1.  “To finish the transgression” – Herein the word “transgression” is singular, indicating that it refers unto the entire rebellion of the Israelites against the Lord their God as a single unit of sinful fault.  Indeed, the Hebrew word that is translated by the English word “transgression” indicates a breaking away (or, departure) from a relationship or covenant with another.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about a completion to the sinful departure of the Israelites away from Him.  As such, we could expect that after these “seventy weeks” are concluded, the Israelites will never again depart from the Lord.

2.  “To make an end of sins” – Herein the word “sins” is plural, indicating that it refers unto the individual activities of sin that the Israelites might commit against the Lord their God.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about a completion to the sinful activities of the Israelites against Him.  As such, we could expect that after these “seventy weeks “ are concluded, the Israelites will never again commit sins against the Lord.

3. “To make reconciliation for iniquity” – Herein the word “reconciliation” indicates the ideas of atonement and forgiveness and of reconciliation thereby.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about His forgiveness upon the Israelites for their sinful departure from Him and for their sinful activities against Him, and to bring about thereby the reconciliation of the Israelites unto Himself and unto His blessed fellowship.

4.  “To bring in everlasting righteousness” – Herein the phrase “everlasting righteousness” reveals the spiritual condition into which the Lord God intends to bring the Israelites through His work of reconciliation.  He intends to bring them into a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness,” not into a condition of righteousness from which they might again fall, but into a condition of righteousness from which they will never fall again.  Indeed, this is the spiritual condition into which the Lord God will bring the Israelites at the completion of these “seventy weeks.”

5.  “To seal up the vision and prophecy” – This phrase appears to indicate that all of the Lord’s prophetic utterances concerning the Israelites (especially concerning His judgments upon the Israelites) will be brought to their conclusion through the completion of these “seventy weeks.”

6.  “To anoint the most Holy” – Herein the phrase “the most Holy” refers to the Most Holy One, the promised Messiah of Israel.  According to the New Testament Scriptures, we learn that this Most Holy One, that the Messiah, is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.  Thus these “seventy weeks” are determined by the Lord God in order to bring about the literal anointing of the Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords over all the earth.  As such, we could expect that the literal return of our Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords (See Revelation 19) will occur at the completion of these “seventy weeks.

Can we understand  - to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, - as accomplished - FINISHED - at Calvary, within the 70 weeks, or are we still waiting, as Pastor Scott asserts, & for the 70th week to arrive 350 weeks or more after the prophecy? We all (I hope) understand Isaiah 53 as referring to Calvary, & that chapter describes Jesus' suffering to redeem sinners to God. 

Do the new covenant writers see the declared purpose of v. 24 as fulfilled at Calvary? 

Finish the transgression:

 

And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.  Heb. 9:15

Make an end of sins:
28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. Heb. 9:28 

Bring in everlasting righteousness: John shows that our present state before God & in practice is righteousness:
1 John 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. 
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 
And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure. 
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. 
And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

John makes amazing statements - present tense statements that show that as believers in Christ, as children of God, we do not transgress, nor sin, but are righteous. We look at ourselves & disagree, but God sees us as redeemed in & by the Lord Jesus Christ. We live by faith as children of our Father God, we walk with our Saviour God who has redeemed us, guided by the indwelling Holy Spirit. 

No, we are not waiting for week 70 to arrive - our Saviour came as promised. Like the Emmaus road disciples we may wonder if it had been he which should have redeemed Israel. Jesus answer was to open the Scriptures ... and to open their understanding. Luke 24. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Covenanter
Last paragraph punctuation "-" added
Genevanpreacher likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot compete with Bro. Scott with grammatical analysis, but I do read & understand. My replies may appear simplistic, but they are carefully considered & reasoned before writing. With a debate/discussion of this nature it is easy to make statements that I consider self-evident, but can be questioned as inaccurate by detailed analysis. e.g. When I wrote "the people of Israel are the descendants of Abraham" I was challenged, as other races were descended from Abraham.

Would anyone be confused by what I wrote? Does the extra "the" change the reasoning?

In an “external” thread (here), Brother Day made the above statements and asked the above questions of the general audience.  To begin this posting, I desire to make a response.  (Note: I have chosen to make my response in this discussion-debate thread with the following reasoning.  When Brother Day made the above statements and asked the above questions, he was communicating with the general audience.  Therefore, it was quite appropriate for him to do so on an “external” thread.  However, if I had responded in that “external” thread, I would have been engaging in the discussion-debate between us for which this thread was specifically created.  I did not believe that this was appropriate; therefore, I have chosen to bring Brother Day’s statements and questions into this thread in order to response to them herein.)

Brother Day,

Within a general context of general communication, your statement that “the people of Israel are the descendants of Israel Abraham” would not have generated any conflict from me (even with the inclusion of the definite article “the” in front of the word “descendants”).  However, within the specific context of this discussion-debate, I was definitely moved to express a conflict with your statement.  The reason that I was moved to express conflict is because you employed the idea that “the people of Israel are the descendants of Israel Abraham” as an open door in order to move unto the blessings of the Lord’s covenant with Abraham.  Then from that ground you presented your conclusion that the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 “cannot be exclusively intended for Israel, but as wide in scope as the promise to Abram.”  By this means you created the following set of equivalencies –

The “thy people” phrase in Daniel 9:24 = the children of Israel = the descendants of Abraham = the blessings of the Lord’s covenant with Abraham = a wider scope than just the children of Israel.

Certainly then, I am moved to contend against this set of equivalencies; for they are not accurate, especially in relation to the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27.  Rather than follow your proposed set of equivalencies, I believe that it would be far better to remain with the actual, straightforward terminology that God the Holy Spirit inspired Daniel to include in Daniel 9.  On the one hand, God the Holy Spirit did not inspire Daniel to include any reference whatsoever at all unto Abraham.  On the other hand, God the Holy Spirit did inspire Daniel, in defining his (Daniel's) people, to include the phrase in Daniel 9:20, “my people, Israel.”  Furthermore, God the Holy Spirit inspired Daniel to include the phrase in Daniel 9:7, “to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off.”  Brother Day, if you continue to put me into a position where I must choose between God the Holy Spirit’s terminology and your own terminology, I will certainly choose and contend for God the Holy Spirit’s terminology.

Even so, according to the terminology of God the Holy Spirit, the “seventy weeks” of Daniel 9:24-27 have been authoritatively determined by the Lord God specifically “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel as a national group.  As such, the six-fold purposes and results for which the Lord God has determined these “seventy weeks” will occur for the specific benefit of Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.

________________________________________________

 

I understand & appreciate your point about the the two anointings, at Jesus' baptism & his ascension to his heavenly throne. As Jesus' baptism & ascension took place within the 70 weeks, & 69 weeks is within the 70, it's not a point we need argue. We agree both anointings took place, & that Jesus is now seated on the heavenly throne at God's right hand.  Acts 2:29-39  Heb. 1:8  Heb. 8:1  Heb. 12:2

That appears to bring us to full agreement, that the v. 24 anointing took place within 7 years of Jesus' baptism, prophesied in v. 25.

Yet I understand you believe the 70th week is still to come, even though you affirm that the anointing has taken place.

We have further agreed (on the comment thread) that the events of Calvary are the basis for the blessings of v. 24.

I would like to think that brings the debate to a close with virtually complete agreement, but somehow I think that may not be the case.

You are correct; we are not now in “virtually complete agreement” concerning the truth and details of Daniel 9:24-27. 

First, although I certainly agree that our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work in His crucifixion and resurrection are the foundational basis for the blessings of eternal atonement and eternal salvation (including those of Daniel 9:24), I would contend that Daniel 9:24 is not speaking concerning the foundational provision of those blessings, but concerning the actual application of those blessings.  I would contend that Daniel 9:24 is not speaking concerning the event whereby those blessings were foundationally provided in the crucifixion and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.  Rather, I would contend that Daniel 9:24 is speaking concerning the event wherein those blessings shall be actually applied unto and upon a specific group, that is -- Daniel’s people, the children of Israel as a national group.

Allow me to illustrate, through the testimony of my own case, my understanding concerning the difference between this provision and this application.  At our Lord Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection, He foundationally provided for my personal and eternal salvation, justification, regeneration, etc.  However, my salvation, justification, regeneration, etc. was not actually applied unto me personally until 1975, when I placed my heart-faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as my personal Savior from my sinfulness.  Even so, the two events occurred at a different time.  The foundational provision occurred approximately 2000 years ago.  The actual application in my own case occurred only 39 years ago.

In like manner, I would contend that there is a difference for Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, concerning the foundational provision of the Daniel 9:24 blessings and concerning the actual application of those Daniel 9:24 blessings.  Furthermore, I would contend that the six-fold  purpose and result statements of Daniel 9:24 are speaking concerning the event of the actual application of those blessings “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Indeed, I would contend that the event of this actual application of those blessings has not yet occurred “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, but is yet to occur “upon” them sometime in the future.

Second, concerning the second anointing of our Lord Jesus Christ at His exaltation to the right hand of God the Father, I would contend that while this anointing is indeed a heavenly reality, it will not have its earthly application until the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords over the whole earth.  Throughout God’s Word anointing is for the purpose of some service and ministry unto God.  At our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism, He was anointed with the Holy Spirit for a ministry of preaching, teaching, healing, and helping (as per Isaiah 61:1-3; Luke 4:17-21; Acts 10:34-38).  Biblically, this could be understood to be our Lord Jesus Christ’s ministry as a Prophet. 

At our Lord Jesus Christ’s exaltation to the right hand of God the Father, He experienced a second anointing (as per Psalm 2:2-9; Psalm 45:1-8; Hebrews 1:8-9).  According to these passages, it appears that this anointing was for our Lord Jesus Christ’s ministry as King.  Even so, Psalm 2:7-9 appears to reveal that this kingship ministry will have its fulfilled application as follows – “I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.  Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.  Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.”  However, at our Lord’s exaltation to the right hand of God the Father, He did not immediately engage in the administration of that kingship ministry upon and over the whole earth.  Rather, according to the teaching of the book of Hebrews, our Lord Jesus Christ is presently engaged in His ministry as High Priest.  Indeed, Hebrews 10:12-13 appears to indicate that our Lord Jesus Christ is yet waiting for the earthly application of His kingship ministry – “But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.”

So then, when will the earthly application of our Lord Jesus Christ’s kingship ministry occur?  Revelation 19:11-16 gives answer, saying, “And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.  His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.  And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.  And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.  And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.”  To this Revelation 20:1-4 adds, “And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.  And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”

Even so, I would contend that the phrase, “to anoint the most Holy,” in Daniel 9:24 is a reference unto the event of the earthly application of our Lord Jesus Christ’s kingship ministry, that is – unto the event of His Second Coming as King of kings and Lord of lords.  However, I will acknowledge that this particular point of my position is a point of weakness in my position, since I do not possess any portion of Scripture wherein the word “anoint” (or any of its cognates) is employed in relation to the event of our Lord’s Second Coming.  As such, I would further acknowledge that in the context of this discussion-debate, it would be unto your advantage for you to exploit this particular point of weakness in my position.

________________________________________________

 

Can we understand  - to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, - as accomplished - FINISHED - at Calvary, within the 70 weeks, or are we still waiting, as Pastor Scott asserts, & for the 70th week to arrive 350 weeks or more after the prophecy? We all (I hope) understand Isaiah 53 as referring to Calvary, & that chapter describes Jesus' suffering to redeem sinners to God.

 

 

Brother Day,

I have noticed that on a number of occasions, both in this discussion-debate and in “external” threads, that you have proposed Isaiah 53 as a companion passage of Scripture to the purpose-result statements of Daniel 9:24.  Certainly, I would agree that Isaiah 53 refers to the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ in His crucifixion and resurrection.  Certainly also, I would agree that the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ (as presented in Isaiah 53, or in any other passage of Scripture) is the foundational basis for the blessings of eternal atonement and eternal salvation, including those of Daniel 9:24 (even as I have presented above).  However, I would contend that the purpose-result statements of Daniel 9:24 and the declarations of Isaiah 53 are not specifically parallel or equivalent to one another

With the first four purpose-result statements of Daniel 9:24, we have the following:

1.  “To finish the transgression
2.  “To make an end of sins
3.  “To make reconciliation for iniquity
4.  “To bring in everlasting righteousness

In relation to the first of these points, concerning transgression, Isaiah 53 presents the following:

1.  “But he was wounded for our transgressions” (v. 5)
2.  “For the transgress of my people was he stricken” (v. 8)
3.  “He . . . made intercession for the transgressors” (v. 12)

Whereas Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning the complete finishing of transgression, Isaiah 53 only speaks concerning a wounding and a being struck for transgressions and an intercession for transgressors.  These truths are not strictly parallel or equivalent. 

In relation to the second of these points, concerning sins, Isaiah 53 presents the following:

1.  “When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin” (v. 10)
2.  “And he bare the sin of many” (v. 12)

Whereas Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning the complete ending of sins, Isaiah 53 only speaks concerning an offering for sin and a bearing of sin.  Again these truths are not strictly parallel or equivalent.

In relation to the third of these points, concerning iniquity, Isaiah 53 presents the following:

1.  “And the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all” (v. 6)

Wherein Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning a reconciliation (through atonement) for iniquity, Isaiah 53 speaks concerning iniquity being laid upon another who was given in sacrifice.  Thus on this point Daniel 9:24 and Isaiah 53 are closer in parallel, at least concerning a sacrifice of atonement whereby the possibility of reconciliation is provided.  However, the actual reconciliation between the Lord God and any given sinner does not occur until the specific moment wherein the atoning sacrifice is specifically applied (not just provided) unto that sinner.  Even so, I would contend that whereas Isaiah 53 is speaking concerning the provision for reconciliation, Daniel 9:24 is speaking concerning the actual application and experience of reconciliation.

In relation to the fourth of these points, concerning everlasting righteousness, Isaiah 53 does not employ either the word “everlasting” or the word “righteousness” at all whatsoever.

On the other hand, if we recognize that the intent of the Lord our God is for the “seventy weeks” of Daniel 9:24-27 to be administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, then we would expect the six-fold purpose and result statements of Daniel 9:24 to occur in relation to the children of Israel.  Even so, if we expect the six-fold purpose and result statements of Daniel 9:24 to occur in relation to the children of Israel as a national group, then the following passages would provide a better correspondence to Daniel 9:24 -- Isaiah 1:24-27; Jeremiah 3:15-19; 31:31-37; 32:36-42; Ezekiel 36:24-38; 37:21-28.

Indeed, in these passages we find such declarations as the following:

And I will restore thy judges as at the first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning: afterward thou shalt be called, The city of righteousness, the faithful city.” (Isaiah 1:26)

At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart.” (Jeremiah 3:17)

But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.” (Jeremiah 31:33)

And I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them: and I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.” (Jeremiah 32:39-40)

A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.  And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.” (Ezekiel 36:26-27)

Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.  And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.” (Ezekiel 37:23-24)

In each of the passages listed above (Isaiah 1:24-27; Jeremiah 3:15-19; 31:31-37; 32:36-42; Ezekiel 36:24-38; 37:21-28), we find a prophetic utterance that specifically concerns the children of Israel, even as the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 is to be fulfilled specifically “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Furthermore, in each of these passages, we find a prophetic promise that the Lord God will bring the children of Israel as a national group into a spiritual condition of righteousness and obedience, wherein they will never again depart from Him or defile themselves in transgression and sins.  Even so, these passages provide a significant correspondence to the purpose-result statements of Daniel 9:24.

Do the new covenant writers see the declared purpose of v. 24 as fulfilled at Calvary?

Finish the transgression:

And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.  Heb. 9:15

Again we find two statements that are not strictly parallel and equivalent.  Whereas Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning the complete finishing of transgression, Hebrews 9:15 only speaks concerning the death of Christ whereby He paid the redemption price of transgressions.

Make an end of sins:

28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. Heb. 9:28

Yet again we find two statements that are not strictly parallel or equivalent.  Whereas Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning the complete ending of sins, Hebrews 9:28 only speaks concerning a bearing of sins.

Bring in everlasting righteousness: John shows that our present state before God & in practice is righteousness:

1 John 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.

7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

John makes amazing statements - present tense statements that show that as believers in Christ, as children of God, we do not transgress, nor sin, but are righteous. We look at ourselves & disagree, but God sees us as redeemed in & by the Lord Jesus Christ. We live by faith as children of our Father God, we walk with our Saviour God who has redeemed us, guided by the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Certainly, John reveals in 1 John 3:9, under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, that that part of us believers which has been “born of God” does not ever engage in the commission of sin.  Before an individual’s salvation, that individual’s spirit was spiritually “dead in trespasses and sins” (see Ephesians 2:1-3), being completed “alienated from the life of God” (see Ephesians 5:18) and from any walk of fellowship with God.  However, at the moment of faith in Christ as Savior, that individual’s spiritually dead spirit was crucified with Christ and thereby eradicated (see Romans 6:6).  In addition, that individual was raised up with Christ unto “newness of life” (see Romans 4), having his spirit regenerated (spiritually born again) as a new creature in Christ Jesus (see 2 Corinthians 5:15), such that his regenerate spirit is now created after God’s own nature in “righteousness and true holiness” (see Ephesians 4:24).  In this manner, the regenerate spirit of the believer has indeed entered a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness.”

However, the believer as a whole person has not yet entered a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness.”  Indeed, the character of the believer’s soul (that is – the character of the believer’s inner man, including the thoughts of his mind, the attitudes of his emotion, the priorities of his motivation, the determinations of his will, etc.) are yet in need of spiritual transformation unto the perfectly righteous image of Christ (see Romans 12:2; 2 Corinthians 3:18).  In fact, one particular aspect of the believer’s soul (of the believer’s inner man), which is entitled the “flesh” in Romans 7-8 and Galatians 5-6, is completely without even the smallest characteristic of righteousness (see Romans 7:18).  For this very reason, if a believer upon the earth claims to be without any sin in his or her character, then that believer is self-deceived and does not possess an understanding of the truth (see 1 John 1:8).  Yes, the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ in His crucifixion and resurrection has indeed provided for our complete and future glorification in spirit, soul, and body unto “everlasting righteousness.”  However, no single individual or group of individuals upon the earth is yet living in that complete spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness.”

No, we are not waiting for week 70 to arrive - our Saviour came as promised.

Yes, I would continue to contend that we are yet waiting for the seventieth and final “week” to be fulfilled, although I certainly do agree that our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, God the Son in the flesh, did indeed come in His first coming just as promised.  However, I would again contend (even as I have above) that our Lord’s first coming as the Savior of the world is not that coming about which Daniel 9:24 is speaking.

 

(Note to all:  I had originally intended at the end of this posting to advance the discussion-debate to Daniel 9:26.  However, I have determined that this posting is long enough as it presently stands.  Therefore, I will reserve my comments on Daniel 9:26 for a future posting.)

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
Because Brother Day pointed out a confusing miscommunication and misquotation.
Alan and DaveW like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope my Word formatting persists when I post in the debate. My quotes from previous posts are indented & marked – Emphasis in your posts is mine.
Covenanter quote:

I cannot compete with Bro. Scott with grammatical analysis, but I do read & understand. My replies may appear simplistic, but they are carefully considered & reasoned before writing. With a debate/discussion of this nature it is easy to make statements that I consider self-evident, but can be questioned as inaccurate by detailed analysis. e.g. When I wrote "the people of Israel are the descendants of Abraham" I was challenged, as other races were descended from Abraham.

Would anyone be confused by what I wrote? Does the extra "the" change the reasoning?

Within a general context of general communication, your statement that “the people of Israel are the descendants of Israel” would not have generated any conflict from me (even with the inclusion of the definite article “the” in front of the word “descendants”).  However, within the specific context of this discussion-debate, I was definitely moved to express a conflict with your statement.  The reason that I was moved to express conflict is because you employed the idea that “the people of Israel are the descendants of Israel” as an open door in order to move unto the blessings of the Lord’s covenant with Abraham.  Then from that ground you presented your conclusion that the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 “cannot be exclusively intended for Israel, but as wide in scope as the promise to Abram.”  By this means you created the following set of equivalencies –

Now those misquotes ARE very silly & potentially confusing.

The “thy people” phrase in Daniel 9:24 = the children of Israel = the descendants of Abraham = the blessings of the Lord’s covenant with Abraham = a wider scope than just the children of Israel.

That is my understanding, based on a range of Scriptures beginning with Gen. 12:1-3. God makes his redemptive purposes very clear in Isaiah 49:1-8. Please read & re-read that inspired passage. It was written before the captivity & Gabriel would certainly have been aware of it, & its implications when he explained to Daniel the future God had determined for Israel.

Certainly then, I am moved to contend against this set of equivalencies; for they are not accurate, especially in relation to the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27.  Rather than follow your proposed set of equivalencies, I believe that it would be far better to remain with the actual, straightforward terminology that God the Holy Spirit inspired Daniel to include in Daniel 9.  On the one hand, God the Holy Spirit did not inspire Daniel to include any reference whatsoever at all unto Abraham.  On the other hand, God the Holy Spirit did inspire Daniel, in defining his (Daniel's) people, to include the phrase in Daniel 9:20, “my people, Israel.”  Furthermore, God the Holy Spirit inspired Daniel to include the phrase in Daniel 9:7, “to the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off.”  Brother Day, if you continue to put me into a position where I must choose between God the Holy Spirit’s terminology and your own terminology, I will certainly choose and contend for God the Holy Spirit’s terminology.

Even so, according to the terminology of God the Holy Spirit, the “seventy weeks” of Daniel 9:24-27 have been authoritatively determined by the Lord God specifically “upon Daniel’s people, the children of Israel as a national group.  As such, the six-fold purposes and results for which the Lord God has determined these “seventy weeks” will occur for the specific benefit of Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.

I recommend a search on blueletterbible.org for “nation israel” - 13 verses, only one in the NT – Rom. 10:19 – and none in Daniel.
& “people israel” - 270 verses including 59 exact phrases, including 2 in the birth narratives – Mat. 2:6 Luke 2:29-32. There is also the reference to “thy people” Luke 1:62 in Zechariah's prophecy.

Israel as a nation has relevant references: Exo. 19:6 which is quoted by Peter & applied to the church. 1 Peter 2:9 & Jer. 31:31-36 which relates to the new covenant promise in Hebrews 8, & Eze. 37:22 where the tribes are gathered as one nation & so they become “my people & I will be their God.” Note Jer. 31:34 which relates to Dan. 9:24

It is adding & wrongly interpreting what the Holy Spirit has inspired when you assert that the prophecy relates specifically to:Daniel’s people, the children of Israel as a national group especially in the light of Isaiah 49 quoted by Simeon & Paul. Isa. 42:6 Acts 13:47 Acts 26:23 The teaching of Scripture overrides your grammatical analysis.

Scripture makes it very clear that God's blessings are for all the nations of the earth Gen. 22:18, repeated to Isaac Gen. 26:4 & Jacob Gen. 28:14 so when Gabriel answers Daniel's prayer with the words:
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
he is stating prophecy relating to God eternal declared purposes. The people of Israel will be blessed according to God's declared prophecy, as they respond in faith & obedience. The nations & families of the earth will also be blessed as they respond to God & the message of the Messiah.

Gabriel is declaring the completion of God's redemptive purposes by the Messiah, with specific details of the outworking of the prophecy. I will focus later in this post on one aspect that is spelled out in the epistles: to bring in everlasting righteousness

Daniel was obviously familiar with Jeremiah's prophecies. Note Jer. 23:5-8 & Jer. 33:14-18 Now, those prophecies were delivered during the captivity. Is Israel still waiting, waiting, waiting, for a Davidic king to reign Acts 2:29-31 , & Levitical priests to offer sacrifices? Sacrifices which can NEVER take away sins? Heb. 10:11

The question that worries Paul is that Israel as a nation rejected their Messiah. Romans 9-11. He asserts that they are welcomed by the Gospel if they abide not still in unbelief. Salvation is on a personal basis by faith, & believers become a holy nation.

God may yet have plans for the salvation of Israelites on a massive scale, and of course in the NH&NE the number of them will be as the stars & the sand. God's promises & prophecies will certainly be fulfilled. Gabriel says nothing about a future millennium fulfilment. He speaks of 70 weeks & that timescale takes us to about 3 1/2 years after Calvary, after Jesus' saving work was FINISHED and the Gospel of salvation proclaimed to Israel.

The leaders of the nation of Israel rejected their Messiah, but did Israel as a people, the people of God, reject him? They did not, as Acts records. 3,000 on the day of Pentecost, 5,000 a few days later, a great company of priests ( Acts 6:7 ) those who did respond to the preaching of the Apostles & those who returned to the homes after Pentecost, & were scattered by persecution. In spite of persecution, the Jerusalem church leaders reported many thousands. Believing Israel comprised many thousands – many more than the 7,000 the LORD reported to Elijah when he thought he was alone.

________________________________________________

You are correct; we are not now in “virtually complete agreement” concerning the truth and details of Daniel 9:24-27

First, although I certainly agree that our Lord Jesus Christ’s saving work in His crucifixion and resurrection are the foundational basis for the blessings of eternal atonement and eternal salvation (including those of Daniel 9:24), I would contend that Daniel 9:24 is not speaking concerning the foundational provision of those blessings, but concerning the actual application of those blessings.  I would contend that Daniel 9:24 is not speaking concerning the event whereby those blessings were foundationally provided in the crucifixion and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.  Rather, I would contend that Daniel 9:24 is speaking concerning the event wherein those blessings shall be actually applied unto and upon a specific group, that is -- Daniel’s people, the children of Israel as a national group.

Allow me to illustrate, through the testimony of my own case, my understanding concerning the difference between this provision and this application.  At our Lord Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection, He foundationally provided for my personal and eternal salvation, justification, regeneration, etc.  However, my salvation, justification, regeneration, etc. was not actually applied unto me personally until 1975, when I placed my heart-faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as my personal Savior from my sinfulness.  Even so, the two events occurred at a different time.  The foundational provision occurred approximately 2000 years ago.  The actual application in my own case occurred only 39 years ago.

In like manner, I would contend that there is a difference for Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, concerning the foundational provision of the Daniel 9:24 blessings and concerning the actual application of those Daniel 9:24 blessings.  Furthermore, I would contend that the six-fold  purpose and result statements of Daniel 9:24 are speaking concerning the event of the actual application of those blessings “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Indeed, I would contend that the event of this actual application of those blessings has not yet occurred “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, but is yet to occur “upon” them sometime in the future.

The saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ was FINISHED at Calvary, with his death & resurrection, followed by his ascension. That was in the middle of week 70, assuming that 70 follows 69. Did Jesus then bring in everlasting righteousness? Paul discusses this in great detail in Romans. You are contending that the actual application of those blessings is yet future as it must be absolute, perfectly realised, so that week 70 is totally separated from week 69. That is an assumption imposed by your grammatical interpretation, not a straightforward reading of Scripture.

When Abraham believed in the LORD, & he counted it to him for righteousness, did Abraham immediately become sinless? No, but he did become righteous. We also become righteous by faith, as Paul explains in Romans 3 & 4. The righteousness we have by faith in Christ is everlasting righteousness. I don't think you will dispute that Jesus at Calvary made reconciliation for iniquity, so did he not also finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins? Yes! Rom. 6:22-23 Micah 7:18-20 Isa. 44:22-23 Acts 3:19

Every believer, both in the OT & the NT, possess everlasting righteousness, because we have the righteousness of faith in Christ. Rom. 9:30 Phil. 3:9 Hab. 2:4

Personal salvation takes place in time, but Jesus' saving work was FINISHED during the 70th week. And many thousands of Israel believed in their Messiah within the 70 weeks.

Second, concerning the second anointing of our Lord Jesus Christ at His exaltation to the right hand of God the Father, I would contend that while this anointing is indeed a heavenly reality, it will not have its earthly application until the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords over the whole earth.  Throughout God’s Word anointing is for the purpose of some service and ministry unto God.  At our Lord Jesus Christ’s baptism, He was anointed with the Holy Spirit for a ministry of preaching, teaching, healing, and helping (as per Isaiah 61:1-3Luke 4:17-21Acts 10:34-38).  Biblically, this could be understood to be our Lord Jesus Christ’s ministry as a Prophet. 

At our Lord Jesus Christ’s exaltation to the right hand of God the Father, He experienced a second anointing (as per Psalm 2:2-9Psalm 45:1-8Hebrews 1:8-9).  According to these passages, it appears that this anointing was for our Lord Jesus Christ’s ministry as King.  Even so, Psalm 2:7-9 appears to reveal that this kingship ministry will have its fulfilled application as follows – “I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.  Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.  Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” 

When was Psalm 2:7 fulfilled? Paul tells us it was at the resurrection. Rom. 1:4 Peter alludes to this in Acts 2:30-32 Peter also applies Psalm 2 to those who crucified the Messiah, both Jewish leaders & Gentiles in his prayer. Acts 4:24-31 He is ascended to his heavenly throne as the anointed One. Heb. 1:1-14

However, at our Lord’s exaltation to the right hand of God the Father, He did not immediately engage in the administration of that kingship ministry upon and over the whole earth.  Rather, according to the teaching of the book of Hebrews, our Lord Jesus Christ is presently engaged in His ministry as High Priest.  Indeed, Hebrews 10:12-13 appears to indicate that our Lord Jesus Christ is yet waiting for the earthly application of His kingship ministry – “But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.”

Not at all. Read Heb. 1 before you read Heb. 10. Peter explains what is happening & why there appears to be a slowness to God fulfilling his promises – 2 Peter 3:3-9 Note Mat. 28:18-20 ALL power.

Hebrews, in Heb. 7:1-3 explains Jesus' status as great high Priest & King in his teaching about Melchisedec who was the only Priest-King in the OT, not only a type of Christ, but Christ himself, the LORD, the most high God. Gen. 14:18-22 .....

So then, when will the earthly application of our Lord Jesus Christ’s kingship ministry occur?  Revelation 19:11-16 gives answer, saying, “And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.  His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.  And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.  And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.  And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.”  To this Revelation 20:1-4 adds, “And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.  And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”

I don't propose to get involved with the interpretation of Revelation in this thread. Certainly Jesus will at his coming gather out of his kingdom all things that offend ... Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Mat. 13:36-43

Even so, I would contend that the phrase, “to anoint the most Holy,” in Daniel 9:24 is a reference unto the event of the earthly application of our Lord Jesus Christ’s kingship ministry, that is – unto the event of His Second Coming as King of kings and Lord of lords.  However, I will acknowledge that this particular point of my position is a point of weakness in my position, since I do not possess any portion of Scripture wherein the word “anoint” (or any of its cognates) is employed in relation to the event of our Lord’s Second Coming.  As such, I would further acknowledge that in the context of this discussion-debate, it would be unto your advantage for you to exploit this particular point of weakness in my position.

I'll just accept it as a weakness in your position.

________________________________________________

Brother Day,

I have noticed that on a number of occasions, both in this discussion-debate and in “external” threads, that you have proposed Isaiah 53 as a companion passage of Scripture to the purpose-result statements of Daniel 9:24.  Certainly, I would agree that Isaiah 53 refers to the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ in His crucifixion and resurrection.  Certainly also, I would agree that the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ (as presented in Isaiah 53, or in any other passage of Scripture) is the foundational basis for the blessings of eternal atonement and eternal salvation, including those of Daniel 9:24 (even as I have presented above).  However, I would contend that the purpose-result statements of Daniel 9:24 and the declarations of Isaiah 53 are not specifically parallel or equivalent to one another

With the first four purpose-result statements of Daniel 9:24, we have the following:

1.  “To finish the transgression
2.  “
To make an end of sins
3.  “
To make reconciliation for iniquity
4.  “
To bring in everlasting righteousness

In relation to the first of these points, concerning transgression, Isaiah 53 presents the following:

1.  “But he was wounded for our transgressions” (v. 5)
2.  “
For the transgress of my people was he stricken” (v. 8)
3.  “
He . . . made intercession for the transgressors” (v. 12)

Whereas Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning the complete finishing of transgression, Isaiah 53 only speaks concerning a wounding and a being struck for transgressions and an intercession for transgressors.  These truths are not strictly parallel or equivalent. 

In relation to the second of these points, concerning sins, Isaiah 53 presents the following:

1.  “When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin” (v. 10)
2.  “
And he bare the sin of many” (v. 12)

Whereas Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning the complete ending of sins, Isaiah 53 only speaks concerning an offering for sin and a bearing of sin.  Again these truths are not strictly parallel or equivalent.

In relation to the third of these points, concerning iniquity, Isaiah 53 presents the following:

1.  “And the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all” (v. 6)

Wherein Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning a reconciliation (through atonement) for iniquity, Isaiah 53 speaks concerning iniquity being laid upon another who was given in sacrifice.  Thus on this point Daniel 9:24 and Isaiah 53 are closer in parallel, at least concerning a sacrifice of atonement whereby the possibility of reconciliation is provided.  However, the actual reconciliation between the Lord God and any given sinner does not occur until the specific moment wherein the atoning sacrifice is specifically applied (not just provided) unto that sinner.  Even so, I would contend that whereas Isaiah 53 is speaking concerning the provision for reconciliation, Daniel 9:24 is speaking concerning the actual application and experience of reconciliation.

In relation to the fourth of these points, concerning everlasting righteousness, Isaiah 53 does not employ either the word “everlasting” or the word “righteousness” at all whatsoever.

So, when did Isaiah 53 occur? Certainly at Calvary, where Jesus saving work was FINISHED. Your attempt to divide Scripture is not “right dividing” but detracts from Jesus' glorious saving work, FINISHED at Calvary. Isaiah 53 is not an isolated Scripture - read Isa. 51:1-7 to see further teaching about personal righteousness – for ever.

On the other hand, if we recognize that the intent of the Lord our God is for the “seventy weeks” of Daniel 9:24-27 to be administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, then we would expect the six-fold purpose and result statements of Daniel 9:24 to occur in relation to the children of Israel.  Even so, if we expect the six-fold purpose and result statements of Daniel 9:24 to occur in relation to the children of Israel as a national group, then the following passages would provide a better correspondence to Daniel 9:24 -- Isaiah 1:24-27Jeremiah 3:15-1931:31-3732:36-42Ezekiel 36:24-3837:21-28.

A national group – again you are adding to Scripture.

Indeed, in these passages we find such declarations as the following:

And I will restore thy judges as at the first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning: afterward thou shalt be called, The city of righteousness, the faithful city.” (Isaiah 1:26)

At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart.” (Jeremiah 3:17)

But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.” (Jeremiah 31:33)

And I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them: and I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.” (Jeremiah 32:39-40)

A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.  And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.” (Ezekiel 36:26-27)

Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.  And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes, and do them.” (Ezekiel 37:23-24)

These are New Covenant blessings, as Paul explains, for citizens of Jerusalem above. Gal. 4. At present, true Jerusalem is a heavenly city, not the present earthly Jerusalem, still in bondage. Gal. 4:21-31 Heb. 11:9-16 Heb. 12:22-24 not forgetting John 4:21-24

In each of the passages listed above (Isaiah 1:24-27Jeremiah 3:15-1931:31-3732:36-42Ezekiel 36:24-3837:21-28), we find a prophetic utterance that specifically concerns the children of Israel, even as the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 is to be fulfilled specifically “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Furthermore, in each of these passages, we find a prophetic promise that the Lord God will bring the children of Israel as a national group into a spiritual condition of righteousness and obedience, wherein they will never again depart from Him or defile themselves in transgression and sins.  Even so, these passages provide a significant correspondence to the purpose-result statements of Daniel 9:24.

Your focus on “Israel as a national group” rather than Israel as God's people is a serious division between us. I take the guidance for understanding OT prophecy from the NT writers. The prophecies have a fulfilment in Christ, as Jesus himself explained on the Emmaus road & to the eleven.

The OT prophecies are given in terms of Israel, as descendants of Abraham, through Isaac & Jacob, & the promises to the patriarchs include the nations. When Jesus explained his fulfilment of “the Law of Moses, & in the Prophets, & in the Psalms, concerning me” he stated that “repentance & remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” Restoring the kingdom to Israel may have been in his disciples thoughts, but he immediately assured them he had other priorities - “unto the uttermost parts of the earth.” We never hear again of the kingdom of Israel. What we do read of is the kingdom of God, & of Christ.

Again we find two statements that are not strictly parallel and equivalent.  Whereas Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning the complete finishing of transgression, Hebrews 9:15 only speaks concerning the death of Christ whereby He paid the redemption price of transgressions.

Yet again we find two statements that are not strictly parallel or equivalent.  Whereas Daniel 9:24 speaks concerning the complete ending of sins, Hebrews 9:28 only speaks concerning a bearing of sins.

Again you are adding “complete” to the Scripture to make your argument. Note that just before Heb. 9:28 comes Heb. 9:26 – once in the end of the world he appeared to put away sin. Compare that with Dan. 9:24 – make an end of sins.

Certainly, John reveals in 1 John 3:9, under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, that that part of us believers which has been “born of God” does not ever engage in the commission of sin.  Before an individual’s salvation, that individual’s spirit was spiritually “dead in trespasses and sins” (see Ephesians 2:1-3), being completed “alienated from the life of God” (see Ephesians 5:18) and from any walk of fellowship with God.  However, at the moment of faith in Christ as Savior, that individual’s spiritually dead spirit was crucified with Christ and thereby eradicated (see Romans 6:6).  In addition, that individual was raised up with Christ unto “newness of life” (see Romans 4), having his spirit regenerated (spiritually born again) as a new creature in Christ Jesus (see 2 Corinthians 5:15), such that his regenerate spirit is now created after God’s own nature in “righteousness and true holiness” (see Ephesians 4:24).  In this manner, the regenerate spirit of the believer has indeed entered a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness.”

Again you are adding to the Scripture to make your argument. Where in Rom. 6:6 do we read that our (previously) spiritually dead spirit is eradicated? The body of sin (aka the flesh) is indeed destroyed but our spirit is regenerated. We have new life freed from sin.

I think that last sentence is actually saying that “the regenerated believer is in the spiritual condition of everlasting righteousness.” I hope that means we are in agreement, but again I fear that may not be the case.

That last point may bring us to Romans 7 for a further disagreement. What is wonderful is that in this whole discussion we have to cover a wide range of Scripture just to focus on 4 verses.

However, the believer as a whole person has not yet entered a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness.”  Indeed, the character of the believer’s soul (that is – the character of the believer’s inner man, including the thoughts of his mind, the attitudes of his emotion, the priorities of his motivation, the determinations of his will, etc.) are yet in need of spiritual transformation unto the perfectly righteous image of Christ (see Romans 12:22 Corinthians 3:18).  In fact, one particular aspect of the believer’s soul (of the believer’s inner man), which is entitled the “flesh” in Romans 7-8 and Galatians 5-6, is completely without even the smallest characteristic of righteousness (see Romans 7:18).  For this very reason, if a believer upon the earth claims to be without any sin in his or her character, then that believer is self-deceived and does not possess an understanding of the truth (see 1 John 1:8).  Yes, the saving work of our Lord Jesus Christ in His crucifixion and resurrection has indeed provided for our complete and future glorification in spirit, soul, and body unto “everlasting righteousness.”  However, no single individual or group of individuals upon the earth is yet living in that complete spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness.”

I understand what you are saying, & of course agree that in this life we continue to sin, unwillingly, as we are being conformed to the image of Christ. Rom. 8:29 We are growing in grace. But that does not mean that our present redeemed status in Christ is not “everlasting righteousness.” We are righteous in God's sight by faith in Christ.

Is Romans 7 describing the ongoing spiritual condition of the believer? Paul appears to write as if it is his personal condition, unable to comply with the Law. We need to read the whole chapter, & read on into Rom. 8. If we try to live by the Law, we fail & are condemned as sinners, dead in sin. Happily, as believers in Christ, we are dead to the law & married to Christ, serving in newness of spirit. The law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin & death. Rom. 8:1-4

Yes, I would continue to contend that we are yet waiting for the seventieth and final “week” to be fulfilled, although I certainly do agree that our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, God the Son in the flesh, did indeed come in His first coming just as promised.  However, I would again contend (even as I have above) that our Lord’s first coming as the Savior of the world is not that coming about which Daniel 9:24 is speaking.

I have shown that your arguments against a straightforward 70 continuous weeks understanding require additions to Scripture, & imposed interpretations that take us beyond the basic meaning as we read it. We need better reasons than you have advanced so far to separate the 69 & 70 weeks. I repeat, we agree that 69 weeks takes us to the baptism/anointing of Christ at the commencement of his ministry on earth. We disagree concerning the saving work detailed in v. 24. I maintain, & have shown from Scripture, that that was FINISHED at Calvary. That every believer is in that happy spiritual status, secure in Christ, as we live by faith, possessing the righteousness that is by faith in Christ.

(Note to all:  I had originally intended at the end of this posting to advance the discussion-debate to Daniel 9:26.  However, I have determined that this posting is long enough as it presently stands.  Therefore, I will reserve my comments on Daniel 9:26 for a future posting.)

Coming to verse 26...

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

I believe we should understand prophecy, as far as possible, by its fulfilment, OT prophecy may be fulfilled in the OT (or in inter-testamental history), but in this case,as it concerns Messiah, we should look in the NT.

We know Jesus' ministry continued for about 3 years, which is after the 69th week, but in the middle of the 70th week. That agrees perfectly with: after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.

We know also that the city & the sanctuary were not destroyed within that 70th week, but about 35 years later. That, of course, is also after threescore and two weeks. Jesus prophesied that dreadful event in his Olivet prophecy. Mat. 24, Mark 13 & Luke 21, & at other times towards the end of his ministry.

Also the people of the prince that shall come did destroy the city and the sanctuary in AD 70. Titus & his Roman legions. “Flood” does not necessarily mean a watery deluge, but an overwhelming army. e.g. Isa. 59:19 History records the desolations.

That brings us to verse 27.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother Day,

One quick question -- To whom was the angel Gabriel speaking when he delivered the message of Daniel 9:24?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother Day,

One quick question -- To whom was the angel Gabriel speaking when he delivered the message of Daniel 9:24?

​See Dan. 9:21-23 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​See Dan. 9:21-23 

​Indeed, Daniel 9:21-23 reads as follows:

"Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.  And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding.  At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision."

​It appears from those portions of Daniel 9:21-23 which I have emboldened that the angel Gabriel was speaking to Daniel himself when he (the angel) delivered the message of Daniel 9:24.

Brother Day, would you agree with this conclusion?

DaveW likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple answer is that Gabriel is speaking to Daniel, but any message to a prophet is also for the people he serves, & as the product is Scripture, it is for all God's people to read & understand, & also to apply as appropriate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother Day,

The word "thy" is a first person  second person, singular personal pronoun of possession.  While delivering his message to Daniel (the simple, contextually straightforward truth), the angel Gabriel uses this pronoun twice in Daniel 9:24, once in the phrase, "upon thy people," and once in the phrase, "upon thy holy city."

Considering that the simple (contextually straightforward) truth is that the angel Gabriel was speaking to Daniel when he delivered the message of Daniel 9:24, when the angel Gabriel used the pronoun "thy" in this message, to what specific, singular individual was the angel Gabriel making reference?

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
Some days my brain is just a little off center.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro Scott wrote:
"Brother Day,

The word "thy" is a first person, singular personal pronoun of possession.  While delivering his message to Daniel (the simple, contextually straightforward truth), the angel Gabriel uses this pronoun twice in Daniel 9:24, once in the phrase, "upon thy people," and once in the phrase, "upon thy holy city."

Considering that the simple (contextually straightforward) truth is that the angel Gabriel was speaking to Daniel when he delivered the message of Daniel 9:24, when the angel Gabriel used the pronoun "thy" in this message, to what specific, singular individual was the angel Gabriel making reference?”

I have answered your question twice. I presume you are making some grammatical point that was not answered by quoting the relevant Scripture, nor by the answer I gave:

The simple answer is that Gabriel is speaking to Daniel, but any message to a prophet is also for the people he serves, & as the product is Scripture, it is for all God's people to read & understand, & also to apply as appropriate.

Time to move on. I will begin by reposting my understanding of v.26 & continue with v. 27.

Coming to verse 26...

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

I believe we should understand prophecy, as far as possible, by its fulfilment, OT prophecy may be fulfilled in the OT (or in intertestamental history), but in this case,as it concerns Messiah, we should look in the NT.

We know Jesus' ministry continued for about 3 years, which is after the 69th week, but in the middle of the 70th week. That agrees perfectly with: after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.

We know also that the city & the sanctuary were not destroyed within that 70th week, but about 35 years later. That, of course, is after threescore and two weeks. Jesus prophesied that dreadful event in his Olivet prophecy. Mat. 24, Mark 13 & Luke 21, & at other times towards the end of his ministry.

Also the people of the prince that shall come did destroy the city and the sanctuary. Titus & his Roman legions. “Flood” does not necessarily mean a watery deluge, but an overwhelming army. e.g. Isa. 59:19 History records the desolations.

Before I leave v. 26 I will point out that the “the” occurring twice in “the people of the prince that shall come” is the definite article, indicating specific people & a specific prince, identified as “shall come” & recognised by their actions. Further, “the city and the sanctuary” are previously identified & prayed for – Jerusalem & the temple. Dan. 9:16-19

An extraordinary aspect of the prophecy is the despite Daniel's wonderful & faithful prayer, the answer includes destruction of the city & the sanctuary, NOT the everlasting political blessings prophesied by other prophets. e.g. Isa. 1:24-28 Yet Gabriel declares:

Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

Once Messiah has completed his reconciliatory work, the city & the sanctuary are no longer included in God's prophetic purposes. As he shouted from the cross “It is FINISHED!

Judgement of those who rejected their Messiah was included in God's prophecy of the Messiah in Deut. 18:18-19. It was also stated in the closing chapter of the OT. Mal.4:4-6

In Acts 3, when Messiah has come & fulfilled his saving work “to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness,” Peter repeats Moses' warning:

22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.
25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.
26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Peter speaks of “these days.” God graciously allowed time for repentance, before that destruction would take place. Jesus warned “this generation” while Hebrews, quoting Psalm 95, warns of 40 years. 40 days was more than enough for Nineveh.

===================

So to verse 27:

And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Note Dan. 9:4:

And I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;

It is God who keeps the covenant. He makes the covenant, for the mercy & blessing of those who love him & keep his commandments. The word “covenant” occurs about 300 times in Scripture, often the synonym “testament” is used in the Gospels & Epistles. The concept of God's covenant relationship with the believer is a theme that runs throughout Scripture. A special aspect of the covenant is detailed in Lev. 26:

9 For I will have respect unto you, and make you fruitful, and multiply you, and establish my covenant with you.
10 And ye shall eat old store, and bring forth the old because of the new.
11 And I will set my tabernacle among you: and my soul shall not abhor you.
12 And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.

Note vs.11-12. That promise is repeated many times in Scripture, & is to be perfectly fulfilled in the NH&NE:

Rev. 21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

In the Daniel 9 context, Messiah is the primary subject, who will complete God's purposes upon thy people and upon thy holy city. Messiah – God the Son – confirms the covenant. He does this by becoming the surety for God's people, by his incarnation under the covenant strictures, & fulfilling every detail of God's requirements for man under the covenant. The old covenant was based on laws that demanded perfect obedience. Deu. 27:26 While God provided sacrifices for sin, & accepted imperfect obedience, the perfect sacrifice of Christ was needed to fulfil the terms of the covenant from man's side.

Daniel 9 begins with reference to Jeremiah's 70 year prophecy (Jer. 29). In Jer. 31 we see prophecy concerning 2 covenants, including the glorious prophecy of a new covenant. Jer. 31:31-34

31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

It is worthwhile quoting that old covenant from Exodus 19:

5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him.
8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.

That covenant was ratified with blood:

Exo. 24:6 And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar.
7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.
8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.

Jesus makes the new covenant/testament in his own blood at Calvary. Hebrews takes up the prophecy in Jer. 31 in Heb. 8, showing how under the new covenant, the law is within & effected by God the Holy Spirit in the hearts of his people. Heb. 8:10 The old covenant was confirmed by Jesus' perfect obedience, & ended at Calvary. During the final, 70th “week”, from Jesus' baptism to 3 1/2 years after Calvary Jesus was confirming the old covenant with those who received him, & making the new & everlasting covenant in his own blood. The Apostolic Gospel was indeed confirmed with many during that 70th week, 3,000 on the day of Pentecost, & 5,000 a few days later. Before the martyrdom of Stephen, the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. The old covenant was powerless, because it required the obedience of man, whereas the new covenant is effective, as it is based on Jesus' perfect obedience. The covenant was confirmed & superceded at Calvary.

Once Jesus finished his saving work, the old covenant was ready to vanish away. Heb. 8:13. The focus of the old covenant, the temple with all its rituals & sacrifices was redundant. It did indeed vanish away before the generation that rejected their Messiah had passed. Mat. 24:34

I'll give Paul the last word:

Gal. 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Surely Paul was aware of Dan. 9:27 when he wrote: the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

All that remained for those who rejected their Messiah was the prophesied desolation.


 

Genevanpreacher and Invicta like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bro Scott wrote:
"Brother Day,

The word "thy" is a first person, singular personal pronoun of possession.  While delivering his message to Daniel (the simple, contextually straightforward truth), the angel Gabriel uses this pronoun twice in Daniel 9:24, once in the phrase, "upon thy people," and once in the phrase, "upon thy holy city."

Considering that the simple (contextually straightforward) truth is that the angel Gabriel was speaking to Daniel when he delivered the message of Daniel 9:24, when the angel Gabriel used the pronoun "thy" in this message, to what specific, singular individual was the angel Gabriel making reference?”

I have answered your question twice. I presume you are making some grammatical point that was not answered by quoting the relevant Scripture, nor by the answer I gave:

The simple answer is that Gabriel is speaking to Daniel, but any message to a prophet is also for the people he serves, & as the product is Scripture, it is for all God's people to read & understand, & also to apply as appropriate.

Brother Day,

Since you appear to acknowledge that the pronoun "thy" in Daniel 9:24 is a reference to Daniel himself, would you agree that it is legitimate to explain the "thy people" phrase of Daniel 9:24 as being a reference to Daniel's people? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother Day,

Since you appear to acknowledge that the pronoun "thy" in Daniel 9:24 is a reference to Daniel himself, would you agree that it is legitimate to explain the "thy people" phrase of Daniel 9:24 as being a reference to Daniel's people? 

20 And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God;

Consider the grammar carefully, & God is Daniel's God, & Israel comprises Daniel's people. 

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

As the prophecy proceeds, "thy holy city" is Jerusalem, but "thy people" are not further identified, though we can recognise the "many" with whom the covenant is confirmed as "my people Israel", aka "thy people," these being the many thousands converted during Jesus' earthly ministry, & during the first few years after Pentecost. That's within the 70 weeks. Further conversion of Jews has continued down the ages.

To what extent are they Daniel's people & city? He acknowledges them as his people - he is an Israelite & he does not disassociate himself from those who were disobedient & caused the exile. Jerusalem is his city, presumably of birth, & certainly as a Jew in exile he considered Jerusalem as his city. 

Are disobedient, rebellious Israel "my people?" See Hosea, written over 100 years before Daniel. 

9 Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be yourGod.

Happily their disobedience does not annul the promises to the Patriarchs, nor the purposes of God for his people which are fulfilled in Christ by the Gospel. 

 

Genevanpreacher likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God;

Consider the grammar carefully, & God is Daniel's God, & Israel comprises Daniel's people. (emphasis added by Pastor Scott Markle)

​Brother Day,

Thank you for your answer.

Indeed, the “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24 can be legitimately understood as a reference unto Daniel’s people; and indeed, Daniel’s people are the people of Israel, as per your reference to the contextual information in Daniel 9:20 (to which might also be added Daniel 9:7 & Daniel 9:11).

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

As the prophecy proceeds, "thy holy city" is Jerusalem, but "thy people" are not further identified, . . .

Although the “thy people” have already been identified in the previous context of Daniel 9.

. . . though we can recognise the "many" with whom the covenant is confirmed as "my people Israel", aka "thy people," . . .

Herein we are agree – In this context the “many” of Daniel 9:27, with whom the “he” of the verse confirms “the covenant” of the verse, would be a reference to Daniel’s people Israel.

. . . these being the many thousands converted during Jesus' earthly ministry, & during the first few years after Pentecost. That's within the 70 weeks. Further conversion of Jews has continued down the ages.

Herein we are not agreed – due to a number of disagreements that we have over various of the details in Daniel 9:27.

Are disobedient, rebellious Israel "my people?" See Hosea, written over 100 years before Daniel. 

9 Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be yourGod.

With which we should also consider the two verses that immediately follow Hosea 1:9, that is – Hosea 1:10-11:

Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.  Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel.”

(It is also worthy of notice that within the immediate context of Hosea 1, as per Hosea 1:4-7, the statement of Hosea 1:9 only applied specifically to “the house of Israel” in contrast to “the house of Judah.”)

Now those misquotes ARE very silly & potentially confusing.  (Indeed.  As per your corrective, I have corrected my confusing miscommunications and misquotations by the strikeout method.  Even so, the two misquotations should have read – “the people of Israel are the descendants of Abraham.”  Will you forgive me for these miscommunications?)

That is my understanding, based on a range of Scriptures beginning with Gen. 12:1-3. God makes his redemptive purposes very clear in Isaiah 49:1-8. Please read & re-read that inspired passage. It was written before the captivity & Gabriel would certainly have been aware of it, & its implications when he explained to Daniel the future God had determined for Israel.

Since you have brought Genesis 12:1-3 forward on a number of occasions in relation to the “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24, let us consider the correspondence of that passage to Daniel 9:24.  In Genesis 12:1-3 the Lord God delivered his promise of blessing unto Abraham as follows:

Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee: and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”

Herein the Lord God presented five different blessing statements:

1.  And I will make of thee a great nation.”
2.  And I will bless thee, and make thy name great.”
3.  And thou shalt be a blessing.”
4.  And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee.”
5.  And in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”

The first of these blessing statements reveals the Lord God’s promise to make one, single great nation (as per the singular word “nation”) out of Abraham.  As such, this one singular nation (one singular national people group) would be the promised descendants out of Abraham.  On the other hand, the last of these blessing statement reveals the Lord God’s promise to cause the multitude of all the families (people groups) throughout the earth to be blessed in and through Abraham (and his descendants, specifically in and through the Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior for all the world).  Now, in accord with the mathematics of the case, these two promises cannot be made equivalent to one another; for the first promise speaks concerning one singular national people group, whereas the last promise speaks concerning the multitude of all the familial people groups throughout the whole earth.

So then, which of these two blessing statements and promises speaks concerning and corresponds with Daniel’s people Israel from the context of Daniel 9:24?  Are Daniel’s people Israel equivalent to the one singular nation (national people group) that the Lord God promised to make out of Abraham as his descendants?  Or, are Daniel’s people Israel equivalent to all the families (people groups) throughout the whole earth?  To me the answer seems fairly clear.

Now, (1) if the one singular nation (national people group) that the Lord God promised to make out of Abraham as his descendants cannot legitimately be seen as equivalent to all the families throughout the whole earth, and (2) if Daniel’s people Israel can legitimately be seen as equivalent to the one singular nation (national people group) that the Lord God promised to make out of Abraham as his descendants, then we may conclude that the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 can legitimately be narrowed in focus unto Daniel’s people Israel, the one singular national people group that the Lord God promised to make out of Abraham as his descendants.  Even so, the teaching of Genesis 12:1-3 does not actually support, but actually counters your position that Daniel 9:24-27 should be viewed as having “a wider scope than just the children of Israel.”

(Concerning Isaiah 49:1-8, I am not at all understanding your intent in presenting this passage as having a correspondence to Daniel 9:24-27.  Could you provide a more extensive explanation concerning your intentions with this passage?)

_____________________________________________

I recommend a search on blueletterbible.org for “nation israel” - 13 verses, only one in the NTRom. 10:19 – and none in Daniel.
& “people israel” - 270 verses including 59 exact phrases, including 2 in the birth narratives –
Mat. 2:6 Luke 2:29-32. There is also the reference to “thy people” Luke 1:62 in Zechariah's prophecy.

Israel as a nation has relevant references: Exo. 19:6 which is quoted by Peter & applied to the church. 1 Peter 2:9 & Jer. 31:31-36 which relates to the new covenant promise in Hebrews 8, & Eze. 37:22 where the tribes are gathered as one nation & so they become “my people & I will be their God.” Note Jer. 31:34 which relates to Dan. 9:24

It is adding & wrongly interpreting what the Holy Spirit has inspired when you assert that the prophecy relates specifically to: “Daniel’s people, the children of Israel as a national group especially in the light of Isaiah 49 quoted by Simeon & Paul. Isa. 42:6 Acts 13:47 Acts 26:23 The teaching of Scripture overrides your grammatical analysis.

Referring to Daniel’s people Israel as “a national group” (or, as a national people group) is supported first by the Lord God’s promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:2 – “And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing.”  Furthermore, it is supported by the Lord God’s reiteration of that promise unto Jacob (whose name the Lord God had changed to Israel) in Genesis 46:3 – “And he said, I am God, the God of thy father: fear not to go down into Egypt; for I will there make of thee a great nation.”  Indeed, it is supported by various passages throughout the Old Testament, including such passages as Exodus 19:6; Deuteronomy 4:6-8; Deuteronomy 26:5; 2 Samuel 7:23; 1 Chronicles 17:21; Psalm 147:19-20; Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 26:1-2; Jeremiah 31:35-37; Ezekiel 2:3; Ezekiel 37:22.  Finally, it would be of value for us directly to consider one of these passages, Jeremiah 31:35-37 –

Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; the LORD of hosts is his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.  Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.”

So then, have the ordinances of "the sun for a light by day" and "of the moon and of the stars for a light by night" departed from before the Lord?  As best as I could tell last night and this morning, they have not.  Therefore, I am brought to the conclusion, based upon the absolute faithfulness of God's Word, that "the seed of Israel" has also not "ceased from being a nation" before the Lord "for ever." 

 Scripture makes it very clear that God's blessings are for all the nations of the earth Gen. 22:18, repeated to Isaac Gen. 26:4 & Jacob Gen. 28:14 . . .

 Actually, Scripture does not indicate this at all.  In your statement you have applied a plural number of “God’s blessings” unto “all the nations of the earth.”  (By this statement, you may even be implying that the plural number of all “God’s blessings” are for and unto “all the nations of the earth.”)  Yet not a single one of the references that you have provided in support of your assertion actually speaks concerning a plural number of “God’s blessings” being administered unto “all the nations of the earth.”  What these passages actually do say is as follows:

Genesis 22:18 – “And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.”  (That is – in and through Abraham’s seed “all the nations of the earth” would be blessed with some form of blessing from the Lord God.  Yet what that form of blessing would be is not at all specified.  Nor are we even informed that that form of blessing would be plural.)

Genesis 26:4 – “And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.”  (That is – in and through Isaac’s seed “all the nations of the earth” would be blessed with some form of blessing from the Lord God.  Yet what that form of blessing would be is not at all specified.  Nor are we even informed that that form of blessing would be plural.)

Genesis 28:14 – “And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.”  (That is – in and through Jacob’s seed “all the families of the earth” would be blessed with some form of blessing from the Lord God.  Yet what that form of blessing would be is not at all specified.  Nor are we even informed that that form of blessing would be plural.)

. . . so when Gabriel answers Daniel's prayer with the words:
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
he is stating prophecy relating to God eternal declared purposes. The people of Israel will be blessed according to God's declared prophecy, as they respond in faith & obedience. The nations & families of the earth will also be blessed as they respond to God & the message of the Messiah.

 Your above conclusion is built upon your previous foundational premise.  Yet since your previous foundation premise stands faulty, so the conclusion that you have built upon that faulty foundation also stands faulty.  Indeed, “the nations & families of the earth” are not anywhere whatsoever at all mentioned in Daniel 9:24.  Although you continually contend that you are simply following the simple reading of the passage (in opposition to my “complicated grammatical analysis” of the passage), you are the one who is herein adding something to the passage that is not at all present therein.

Alan and DaveW like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why “thy people”? Gabriel the archangel is speaking, so he refers to the people in question as “thy people” whereas if the LORD were speaking, he would have said “my people.” So they are Daniel's people because Daniel is a Jew who identifies himself with God's people Israel.

 

The question of your previous post comes down to:

Is God keeping his promise to Israel as a believing people in the present Gospel age through the redeeming work of the Lord Jesus Christ, or is Israel still waiting to become a godly nation under Jesus as King & David as co-regent?

 

Is God punishing 60 or more generations of the children of Israel when he said “this generation?” Mat. 24:34 Is that the way a faithful God keeps his promises?

 

In Hosea 3:1-5 God tells Israel (as distinct from Judah):

4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:

5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.

Israel did not return when Judah returned. They remained scattered 600 years, not only without a king (like Judah) but without the temple worship. Those who believed were gathered by the Apostolic preaching.

 

The force of the Gospels, and the Apostolic preaching, is that Jesus was born King in David's line Mat. 1:1 Luke 1:32-33 Luke 1:68-79 , was crucified as “King of the Jews” and ascended to David's throne at his Father's right hand. Acts 2:30-36

 

Peter clearly understands the kingdom of priests & the holy nation of Exo. 19:6 to be the church of believers in Jesus 1 Peter 2:9 , & not the unbelievers. 1 Peter 2:7-8 Note that the believers become the prophesied “holy nation.”

 

Hosea saw the disobedient “not my people” of Israel as people to be gathered as “my people” together with Gentiles 1 Peter 1:1 1 Peter 2:10 . The description of Peter's readers in 1 Peter 4:3 is hardly that of children of Israel waiting for the Messiah. Paul uses Hosea to show that the Gentiles (never “my people”) become my people, beloved, children of the living God. Rom. 9:22-26 Don't forget that Romans continues to 16 chapters & includes Rom. 15:8-13 showing that Jesus confirm(ed) the promises made unto the fathers. Isn't that what Gabriel prophesied? He shall confirm the covenant ...

 

God's purposes for his people Israel are fulfilled in & by the Lord Jesus Christ. When they come as sinners to Jesus they are welcomed into the full relationship as redeemed children of Abraham & children of God. Gal. 3:26-29 But they must repent & come, & abide not still in unbelief. There is a glorious new covenant in Jesus' blood.

 

There are 60 generations of Jews who have lived & died in rejection of their Messiah, Jesus. However, during that period countless Jews, beginning with the many thousands recorded in Acts, have believed in their Messiah, Jesus, & been numbered with the strangers & pilgrims rejected by their nation. The church is the continuing children of Israel, children of God. Note that wonderful prophecy of Isaiah 49, Isa. 42:6 echoed by Simeon & Paul: Luke 2:29-32 Acts 13:47 Acts 26:23

Isa. 49:6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

 

The prophecy of Gabriel was gloriously fulfilled by Jesus within the 70 weeks.

 

Those who rejected their Messiah could not annul the prophecy – that rejection & its consequences – destruction & desolation - were also according Gabriel's prophecy. See also Deu. 18:18-19 quoted by Peter in Acts 3:22-26

 

The Gospel is still open, & vast numbers of Jews may yet repent & trust in their presently despised & rejected Messiah.

 

 

 

Invicta and Genevanpreacher like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By BroMatt
      The debators: @Pastor Scott Markle & @Covenanter  (Everyone else will just have viewing privileges) 
      Topic: Prophecy on Daniel 9
      Length: 2 Months (Due to Pastor Markle's ability to post once per week.)
      Debate Rules
      No name calling (No accusations of heresy). No copying and pasting from sources around the internet. (You can copy from your own posts on OB). Each persons begins with opening remarks. After opening remarks. Opening discussions will begin. Can't post back to back comments. Must wait for opposing party to post. Topics can't be edited in anyway after posting.  
      Any other suggestions? If both will now agree, I can set this forum up and we can begin. Thank you. We look forward to following this debate.
       
    • By BroMatt
      @Pastor Scott Markle & @Covenanter Seeing now I have more time, I am willing to set up a forum for discussion on Prophecy. If you both agree to this, what type of format and restrictions would you like applied to this forum for your discussion.
    • By Miss Daisy
      I found a link to watch the debate on Feb. 4 with Bill Nye and Ken Ham live. All is says though for an address is http://debatelive.org/. But when I click to sign up it will say please wait and never goes anywhere else.
    • By Jordan G
      Hi guys! first post.. So im active on a board for fitness and in the non-sense board there is a Christian debate going on. I have posted two replies and im wondering if its worth it.

      In person you can talk to a person and see them, and you are not arguing vs who is better at googling answers etc.

      At the same time, just like hearing someing cussing and using Gods name, watching these threads just drive me mental at the ignorance about what "christians believe".


      What do you think?

      Boards like this between christians learning and sharpening theology I love... but the debate vs an atheist.. fruitful?
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 31 Guests (See full list)