Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Christian Forums is looking to bring on new moderators to the CF Staff Team! If you have been an active member of CF for at least three months with 200 posts during that time, you're eligible to apply! This is a great way to give back to CF and keep the forums running smoothly! If you're interested, you can submit your application here!
Just because God chose Paul to be the one to reveal the truths of the Body of Christ does not mean that the others who wrote epistles were not also members of the Body of Christ.
I have already answred that. John was sure that he was going to be raptured just like those in the Body of Christ:
"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" (1 Jn.3:2).
The leaders of the Berean Bible Societquote]
Hi Jerry and you have not answered , if you believe the 12 are in the Body !!
When you come to a decision on 1 Cor 15:8 !!
As far as 1 John 3:2 , it is not a Departure/Rapture as 1 Thess 4:17 where we will meet Him in the air .
I John 3:2 is PHANEROO , and Manifestion of His coming which is Matt 24:27-30 and see who they have Prieced .
LOOKS like to different events , is what it is , dan p
Just because God chose Paul to be the one to reveal the truths of the Body of Christ does not mean that the others who wrote epistles were not also members of the Body of Christ.
I have already answred that. John was sure that he was going to be raptured just like those in the Body of Christ:
"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" (1 Jn.3:2).
The leaders of the Berean Bible Societquote]
Hi Jerry and you have not answered , if you believe the 12 are in the Body !!
When you come to a decision on 1 Cor 15:8 !!
As far as 1 John 3:2 , it is not a Departure/Rapture as 1 Thess 4:17 where we will meet Him in the air .
I John 3:2 is PHANEROO , and Manifestion of His coming which is Matt 24:27-30 and see who they have Prieced .
LOOKS like to different events , is what it is , dan p
These are irrelevant semantics, trying to derive interpretation by the usage of different words. That's not exegesis.
For example, John 14:3 concerning the rapture, the Greek word for "come" is "erchomai", while the word "coming" is Parousia in 1 Thess 4:15. Also, "parousia" is used in Matthew 24.
Matthew 24:30 uses the expression "appearing" and "coming" in the same context as both the same event:
"And then shall appear [phaino] the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." (Matthew 24:30)
When Jesus comes back (parousia), He will also "appear" [phaino]. You cannot come (parousia) without also appearing.
We also have "appearing" (Epiphaneia) in 1 Tim 6:14 which states:
"That thou keep [this] commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Tim. 6:14)
This is also the Second Coming, yet a different word is used "epiphaneia".
What people need to understand is that it is wrong to get "hung up" on the fact that different Greek words are utilized. These Greek words are all "synonyms". One more time SYNONYMS!
These words are ALL helpful to describing the same event.
Dispensationalism consistently is inconsistent in its hermeneutical applications of scripture. People need to give up dispenstionalism and their 2-part coming.
It is a deception of monumental proportions, and it emanates straight from the the Jesuits in the Counter Reformation. It is counter-reformation theology, and it must be given up at once if we are not going to be deceived in the last days.
ALL our Protestant fathers were HISTORICISTS!!!!! We must get BACK TO HISTORICISM!!! That is my goal on this board.
It may "look like" different events toyou but Paul used the same exact word here and his reference is to the time when the saints will be caught up to meet the Lord Jesus in the air:As far as 1 John 3:2 , it is not a Departure/Rapture as 1 Thess 4:17 where we will meet Him in the air .
I John 3:2 is PHANEROO , and Manifestion of His coming which is Matt 24:27-30 and see who they have Prieced .
LOOKS like to different events , is what it is , dan p
Paul does not say that he was the only person born out of due time. Besides that, you still not have provided a reasonable answer to what Paul said in the same epistle:Hi Jerry and you have not answered , if you believe the 12 are in the Body !!
When you come to a decision on 1 Cor 15:8 !!
The historicists say that the 70th week of Daniel has already been fulfilled at the Cross. However, Irenaeus, who studied under Polycarp (who was regarded as a disciple of the Apostles themselves), placed the events of the 70th week in the future:ALL our Protestant fathers were HISTORICISTS!!!!! We must get BACK TO HISTORICISM!!! That is my goal on this board.
The historicists say that the 70th week of Daniel has already been fulfilled at the Cross. However, Irenaeus, who studied under Polycarp (who was regarded as a disciple of the Apostles themselves), placed the events of the 70th week in the future:
"And then he (Daniel) points out the time that his tyranny shall last, during which the saints shall be put to flight, they who offer a pure sacrifice unto God: 'And in the midst of the week,' he says, 'the sacrifice and the libation shall be taken away, and the abomination of desolation [shall be brought] into the temple: even unto the consummation of the time shall the desolation be complete.' Now three years and six months constitute the half-week" (Irenaeus,"Against Heresies", Book 5, Section 3, 4).
The earliest commentary on the Seventy Weeks of Daniel was written by Hippolytus, and he believed that the fulfillment of the 70th Week remained in the future:
"Now Daniel will set forth this subject to us. For he says, 'And one week will make a covenant with many, and it shall be that in the midst (half) of the week my sacrifice and oblation shall cease.' By one week, therefore, he meant the last week which is to be at the end of the whole world of which week the two prophets Enoch and Elias will take up the half. For they will preach 1,260 days clothed in sackcloth, proclaiming repentance to the people and to all the nations" [emphasis mine] (Hippolytus, "Treatise on Christ and Antichrist", Section 43).
Yes, I know exactly where they got it from--the Scriptures that speak of the 70th week:Yes, I'm well aware of this. And do you know where Hippolytus and Irenaeus got their disjointed 70th week from?
The Body of Christ is also called the "New Man":What exactly is meant of 'being in the Body of Christ'? Could we say that all believers from Adam are 'in the Body of Christ' yet have a different future role according to which dispensation they lived.
Yes, I know exactly where they got it from--the Scriptures that speak of the 70th week:
"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" (Dan.9:24).
These verses are speaking about what will be the state of affairs in the city of Jerusalem at the end of the 70th week. And common sense dictates that "everlasting righteousness" does not exist there now so therefore the 70th week has not yet been fulfilled.
Let us look at the verse which describes the events which will occur during the seventieth week:
"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" (Dan. 9: 27).
There is no evidence that the Lord Jesus ever confirmed any covenant for a time period of seven years. Therefore the word "he" at the beginning of this verse does not refer to the Lord Jesus.
If the Lord Jesus confirmed the any covenant for seven years, then the Historicists should be able to point to an event that marks the end of that seven year period. After all, the climax of Daniel’s prophecy occurs at the end of the 70th week when Daniel is told that many wonderful things will come upon his people and upon his city, Jerusalem.
The Historicists have deluded their minds into believing that the 70th week of Daniel has already been fulfilled and they expect us to throw our reason to the wind so that we can also believe their fables!
Yes, I know exactly where they got it from--the Scriptures that speak of the 70th week:
"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" (Dan.9:24).
These verses are speaking about what will be the state of affairs in the city of Jerusalem at the end of the 70th week. And common sense dictates that "everlasting righteousness" does not exist there now so therefore the 70th week has not yet been fulfilled.
Let us look at the verse which describes the events which will occur during the seventieth week:
"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" (Dan. 9: 27).
There is no evidence that the Lord Jesus ever confirmed any covenant for a time period of seven years.
Therefore the word "he" at the beginning of this verse does not refer to the Lord Jesus.
If the Lord Jesus confirmed the any covenant for seven years, then the Historicists should be able to point to an event that marks the end of that seven year period. After all, the climax of Daniel’s prophecy occurs at the end of the 70th week when Daniel is told that many wonderful things will come upon his people and upon his city, Jerusalem.
The Historicists have deluded their minds into believing that the 70th week of Daniel has already been fulfilled and they expect us to throw our reason to the wind so that we can also believe their fables!
The Body of Christ is also called the "New Man":
"For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one New Man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one Body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" (Eph.2:14-16).
"And have put on the New Man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all" (Col.3:10-11).
The New Man could not have come into exidstence until the middle wall of partition that separated the Jew from the Gentile was broken down and that did not happen until the Cross:
"For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances" (Eph.2:14-15).
#1. The point is, "you have 70 weeks to do this...bring in everlasting righteousness....if not, you will be cut off". The result? They didn't do it. In other words, "you have this much time cut out for you to get this done...but if not, you the kingdom will be given to a new nation"
#2. Christ fulfilled where Israel failed. "And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him." (Matthew 3:15)
Christ fulfilled this prophecy, but the Jewish Nation did not. Jesus was the true Israel. Hosea 11:1 says "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." Quoting directly from this verse, Matthew shows how Jesus was the fulfillment of true Israel: "And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son." (Matthew 2:15).
Jesus fulfilled "all righteousness", and ratified the "everlasting covenant" (Heb. 13:20)
#3.The vision that was to be sealed was a privilege God was giving Israel--"you have 70 weeks to seal the vision and the prophecy. If not, you will not have accomplished your mission that I have asked you to do, and this world will go on, and I will be forced to move on to new people, a new nation." That is the point of the text. They could have sealed up the vision, but they didn't. The issue is particularly pertaining to the Jews. Not to mention that the 70 weeks are the first portion of the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14. The 70 weeks (490 years) are "cut off" ("determined" = "chathak" = "cut off", according to original Hebrew dictionaries) from the 2300 days (2300 years), so this idea of cutting off the 70th week is erroneous, because the 70 weeks are already cut off of the larger time prophecy (2300 years) for the Jews. That prophecy of the 2300 years of Daniel 8:14 terminates in 1844 (BC 457 - AD 1844 -- when the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary would commence).
#4. God gave Israel a list of things to accomplish. And if they didn't accomplish those things, they would cease to be God's commissioned nation to take the good news of salvation to the whole world. And that's exactly what happened. 34 A.D. was the close of probation for Israel as a nation. Not Jews as individuals (who will now be grafted into the body of Jesus Christ, the Church), but probation was closed for them as a nation when they stoned the last messenger, Stephen, in 34 A.D. This is when the gospel went forth to the gentiles. From Christ's Baptism to the stoning of Stephen, 27 A.D. to 34 AD. is exactly 1 week, or 7 years. Christ was crucified EXACTLY in the midst of that week. The "he" is Jesus Christ, not Antichrist. It is serious business to confuse Jesus Christ for antichrist".
#5. Nowhere does it state that the destruction of Jerusalem must occur at the end of the 70 weeks.
As Dr. Hasel succinctly states:
<B>
"Some also argue that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (mentioned in the prohpecy) requires a termination in A.D. 70 rather than A.D. 34. However, that may be countered with the fact that it is the death of the Messiah (predicted within the prophecy) that sealed the fate of the ceremonial system as well as of the national state. The events of A.D. 70 are simply the subsequent external consequences of the advent and death of the Messiah, the chief foci of the prophecy.</B>
The text simply does not state that the destruction of Jerusalem occurs at the end point of the 70th week. 70 A.D. was a "result", but the handwriting and doom was already on the wall in 31 and 34 A.D. The last half of the week was extended mercy when the Disciples of Christ continued preaching to the Jewish Nation for 3 1/2 more years after Christ's death and ascension. The doom was already pronounced and sealed during the last half of the week from 31 A.D. to 34 A.D. (extended probation, extended mercy to the Jews), but the Jewish Nation sealed their fate as those who would carry the Divine Credentials in 34 A.D. when they stoned the last messenger, Stephen. The Jews then said "lo, we turn to the gentiles!" (Acts 13:46).
While objects can be made to all four of the major interpretations of Daniel 9:24-27, the historical-messianic interpretation does not appear to be subject to the chronological, exegetical, and historical difficulties encountered by other systems. It thus recommends itself as the most adequate of the major interpretations." (Gerhard F. Hasel, 70 Weeks, Leviticus, Nature of Prophecy, p. 28, 29)
The original languages says "make strong the covenant". It is speaking of the fact that Jesus was strengthening the covenant he had already made with the Jews before. He is not making a covenant here. For 1 week, the covenant was being strengthened, from 27 A.D. from Christ's baptism to 34 A.D. until the stoning of Stephen.
The expression higbir, which is applied to the covenant, suggests that the covenant to be made strong was already in existence. The typical word used for making a new covenant is karat. However, higbir is used instead of karat. Kline suggests that the idea expressed by higbir "might have been expressed by the word heqim, 'cause to stand'," which has been used for the conformation of the covenant (Deut 8:18; Lev 26:9; Ezek 16:60,62).
The import of the expression higbir which presupposes an existing covenant, the connection between the covenant in Daniel's prayer (vs. 4) and that of the prophecy (vs. 27), and the view that the Messiah starts making strong a covenant from the beginning of the seventieth week would, strongly point to the Sinaitic covenant as the one in focus in vs. 27. While the "new covenant" is universal, this covenant which starts at the beginning of the Messiah's appearance seems to focus on Daniel's people. However, with the Sinaitic covenant confirmed for Daniel's people, the "new covenant" would have been to them a renewal of the old with new privileges.
Chronologically, the making strong of a covenant (vs. 27) starts after the sixty-nine weeks and at the beginning of the seventieth week when the Messiah the Prince appears. It ends at the termination of the seventieth week.
Once again, I repeat. The detachment of the 70th week is a Jesuit fabrication, which is no more mythical than the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, or Micky Mouse. Ireneaus and Hippolytus are practically, if not the only, early expositors that concocted this myth, and it was because their minds were shaped by Psuedepigraphal myths that had their inspiration in Babylon and Persian Zoroastrian dualism. Futurism is what undermines the Protestant faith. It is the worst CURSE against Christianity, because it takes the heat off the Papacy and provides fuel for the reintroduction of the Dark Ages, and creates a recipe for the world to wonder after the beast once again.
The Protestants gave their LIVES for this view. MILLIONS were burned to death on the steak---and it was their belief that the 70 weeks were consecutive, and that the 1260 years were a present reality in their time, that lead them to point the stern finger at the Papacy as being the Antichrist Beast power. When Futurists accuse Historicists of hanging on to fairy tales concerning these interpretations of the 70 weeks, they are committing adultery with Roman Church State, and preparing the Beast to clench the Protestants in their jaws.
Now I want you to notice verse 26 very carefully:
the people of the prince that shall come Futurists interpret this to mean that the people will come or the armies will come up to the city. However, the grammatical structure is not referring to the people coming. Its really saying .the prince [messiah] that shall come, not the people! There are two ways to interpret it, but in the light of the understanding presented, it HAS to be the Messiah that shall come .based on tons of scriptural references that speak about the coming of the Messiah. This goes marvelously with John 1:11 which says: He came unto his own, and his own received him not.the people of the prince. The prince in verse 26 and the he in verse 27 are both speaking of Jesus Christ, not Antichrist. To read antichrist into these passages forces us to stretch the texts far beyond their simplicity.
Gerhard F. Hasel insightfully states:
Ninth, another serious problem concerns the assumption of an unprecedented covenant-making by antichrist. [A. C. Gaebelein, The Prophet Daniel, (New York, 1911), p. 142; Walvoord, Daniel, pp. 232-236).] The OT (and the NT) contain no hint of any such covenant at all, let alone some earlier one that he could confirm at this point in Dan. 9. [Payne, Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy, p. 389.] The difficulty with this assumption is that it takes a lesser figure, namely the prince that shall come (vs. 26), as the antecedent of the he in verse 27, rather than the dominant figure, the Messiah (vs. 26). The word prince is a subordinate figure in verse 26. It is not even the subject of the clause. The subject of the clause is the people. Therefore, the fitting grammatical antecedent of the he (vs. 27) is the Messiah (vs. 26).
Tenth, the futurists interpreters transform the prince into a future deputy of the devil [Payne, Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy, p. 389.] and a future enemy of the people of Israel. [Ibid.] This interpretation overlooks the fact that the emphasis in verse 26 is not upon the prince but upon the people of the prince. Young points out, This prince, therefore, must be one who rules over these people, . . . he must be their contemporary, alive when they are alive. [Young, pp. 211-212] A prince living 1900 years later than the people is quite contrary to the text. L. Wood replies that the phrase the one coming means from whom will come. This makes the entire phrase read the people from whom will come a prince. [Wood, p. 258.] However, such a reading is not supported by the Hebrew text.
Eleventh, recent study of the poetry of 9:24-27 indicates a very intricate literary structure. [See J. Doukhan, The Seventy Weeks of Daniel 9: An Exegetical Study, AUSS 17 (1979): 1-22; W. H. Shea, The prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27, chap. 3, pp. 75-118 in this volume.] Such a structure binds the entire section together in literary patterns that do not permit the kind of chronological fragmentation demanded by the dispensational system. The literary arrangement supports the idea that the three titlesMessiah Prince (vs. 25), the Messiah (vs. 26a), and the Prince (vs. 26b)refer to the same person who is cut off in the middle of the last week. [Shea, The Prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27, pp. 92-94 in this volume.] (Gerhard F. Hasel, 70 Weeks, Leviticus, Nature of Prophecy, pp. 24, 25)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?