All:
The next statement that Steven "Mark" Wohlberg makes that we find on his (SDA) web site is another piece of work unsubstantiated but yet accepted as SDA truth.
++He says the middle of Daniel's 70th week prophecy is when Jesus Christ died.
Steven "Mark" Wohlberg believes that the middle of the 70th week points to the death of Jesus Christ. He states, "after 3-1/2 years of ministry, Jesus death put an end to all sacrifices in God's sight. He (meaning Jesus) is the final sacrifice!"
Here is another example of Wohlberg's use of allegory that comes into play. In another article Steven Wohlberg wrote, Wohlberg speaks of the "literalness" of the "weeks" of Daniel meaning "years". He believes that Jesus' ministry lasted 3-1/2 years. Right after that (3-1/2 years) Jesus was crucified? This is only a partially true statement.
However, what does Wohlberg actually believe regarding the 70 weeks? In a previous article he states about the period of weeks found in Daniel (: "This we have a prophecy about "seventy weeks." Gabriel then subdivided the period into three smaller periods of seven weeks (vs.25), sixty-two weeks (vs.25), and one week (vs.27). 7+62+1=70."
"Seventy weeks = 490 days. A day in prophecy represents a year (See Number 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6). That 490 days are really 490 years. Without going into all the chronological details here (I will get more specific in a later chapter) (Wohlberg's words), the prophecy starts with a direct "commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem" (vs.26) after the Babylonian captivity and reaches down to the first coming of Jesus Christ. After 69 weeks (483 years), "Shall Messiah be cut off" (vs. 26). All Christian scholars apply this to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. After our Lord's agonizing death, "the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary" (vs. 26)." His use of "ALL" above is a blatant lie.
This is double-speak at its best. Certainly false logic is involved as well.
Neither the Numbers nor the Ezekiel passages, which Wohlberg references, represents a hard rule of days equaling years. In both case, God was punishing Israel and chose (because of their sin), to take the many years they had broken His law, and shrink it down to one day for each year. This should not be applied to prophecy uniformly. If you try you will go nuts!
Besides this, its not clear. On one hand Wohlberg seems to be stating that the 69 weeks ended with the first coming of Jesus Christ. We can only assume he is referencing the first Advent, or His actual birth. If this is the case and if one "week" is really seven years, then how is it possible to go from His birth all the way through his life inclduing His public ministry, and then state that "the middle of the week" is referring to Jesus Christ's death? This event occurred roughly 33 years after Jesus' birth. He (Wohlberg) emphatically states that there should be no "gap" between the 69th week and 70th weeks, yet he seems okay with the facts that there is actually a "gap" of about 30 years or so, according to his calculations. He destroys his own premise by that statement.
Wohlberg is convinced that no gap exists between these sets of weeks, yet his math leaves something to be desire, if I understand him correctly. I have read his book four times so I believe I get his "Ma & Pa. Kettle math". Moreover, he asserts that those of the early church never applied a seven-year period to a Tribulation. He comments, "this may shock you, but historically, the vast majority of well-respected Bible scholars have not applied Daniel 9:27 to a seven-year period of Tribulation at all. Neither have they interpreted the "he" as referencing to a future Antichrist (as many do today). Instead, they applied it to Jesus Christ."
There is no surprise here and it does not shock me. If one considers the fact that it was not long after the last apostle died, that "Allegorical" interpretation began to force its way into the interpretative methods of the visible church, then it becomes obvious why the Roman Catholic Church became such a big hit with the people. Unfortunately, through people like Polycarp and Augustine, allegoricalizing Scripture became the normal method of interpretation, especially in prophetic passages, and it has continued to the present day. The problem with viewing Scripture "allegorically" is that the interpreter becomes the sole decision-maker or arbitrator with respect to the meaning of any given portion of Scripture.
Interestingly enough, Wohlberg, a SDA cult member, espouses that the Roman Catholic Church is the "Beast" of Revelation, with the pope as its head! Yet, unfortunately, he uses the same techniques when interpreting passages of prophecy that Augustine and the Reformers used. Though Wohlberg's results are different from theirs, the truth of the matter is that "Allegorical" interpretation is found and heavily perpetrated in both camps. I don't disagree with Steven Wohlberg concering his assessment of Rome, however, his "Allegorical" method of interpretation and meaning when it comes to prophecy is essentially up for grabs when using "Allegory" as the main interpretative tool for eschatology.
I hold the Roman Catholic Church is the Beast but from a different framework construct. I base my views on the hidden role of Freemasonry, infiltrated by the Jesuits. When examinig the Masonic occultism in the layout of Washington, DC, its mirror image of Rome, in the "hidden in plain sight" signs and symbols of Washington, DC; it (Washington, DC) was originally known as "New Rome" when Roman Catholic Jesuit Bishop John Carroll donated the land to George Washington. Rome is the "Beast" and Washington, DC is the "Image of the Beast"
There is so much I could share with about this. I have 75,000 pages of M-a-s-o-n-i-c documents on an external hard drive.
Long ago Rome saw the similarity of the Roman Catholic Church and the book of Revelation, so it set about centuries ago to revise the ancient texts to be less indicting of Rome. Rome is responsible for the "Allegorical" interpretation of Scripture, mainly for deception purposes. Once the "Allegorical" method of interpreting the Bible was well entrenched by the fourth century, Augustine had moved ahead with his views on certain things (regarding his anti-Semitic views, and in the area of eschatology), the Roman Catholic Church began to develop in earnest. Rome became the dominant church in the region because of its geographical "center" as related to the early Christian churches around the Mediterranean region. Rome became the "host" for the yearly gathering of church leaders, bishops, in order to minimize travel from home churches to a gathering location. The idea was to balance travel distance, mode, and time to gather. The rest is history as Rome continued to claim for itself power and privilege since it was the host location.
By the time of the Council of Nicea, the RCC was nearly at peak levels. Over the coming centuries, more and more of orthodoxy morphed into something that was suited to fit RCC beliefs. We all know this ultimately led to the Reformation.
While God certainly used Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and others to correct the wrongs concerning the authentic Gospel and the true salvation found in Jesus Christ alone, other areas, were just as wrong were left alone. Eschatology was one of those issues. This should give you an idea how people believed regarding the end times back then. What does Scripture say about adding to or taking away from the Word?
The most important doctrine is that which is related to the only salvation available, and that is through Christ Jesus. The atonement of Jesus Christ is supremely importnat because if people do not understand that Jesus died on behalf of us, they will recognize their need for a savior to begin with. Moreover, other doctrines, which tie into the doctrine of salvation, are just as important; doctrines such as the Deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, the physical death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, the fact of the Trinity and others. These doctrines are non-negotiable, yet we see in the history of the RCC a perversion of many of these doctrines.
Lucifer wasted no time once the last apostle was gone from the picture before he began to corrupt the truth of God. He did this first with individuals who saw the meaning of Scripture through "Allegorical" interpretation. New interpretations came to the fore and these often pushed the true orthodoxy of the faith to the back burner, so to speak.
I do not believe that God raised up the reformer to change anything with respect to eschatology. It simply does not really matter a that time and has no direct impact on a person's salvation. What matters most is in the area of Soteriology (salvation), and the doctrines specifically connected to it. If a person gets this wrong, eternal life hangs in the balance.
It is incredibly important for people to have a right understanding of just who Jesus of Nazareth is, what He came to accomplish and whether His death, resurrection, and ascension provide eternal life at all. This is what is most important. If people prefer to believe in a Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, Post-Trib or no-Trib. rapture, their salvation is not affected. They are not deceived if they believe in a Pre-Trib Rapture. If I am wrong about that belief, then I am merely wrong, not deceived. I could just as easily accuse Steven "Mark" Wohlberg of being deceived, because in my opinion, his beliefs and arguments do not hold water. I have previously noted problems of his allegorical interpretation, the errors in the text, the errors of use of improper grammar, etc., etc.
Wohlberg's opinions do not stand up to the scrutiny of Scripture, as I understand the Scripture's plain sense reading. I have offered the reader sufficient evidence about the Hebrew text to refute Steven "Mark" Wohlberg's understanding, and those that have bought into his fly-trap. When you view the history of the SDA cult movement, it clearly highlights many errant portions within the framework of their belief system. Since the movement itself began on the wrong foot regarding prophetic discourse, it is difficult to know how it can all of a sudden become correct in its beliefs.
Consider this thought. If Wohlberg is wrong about his understanding, regarding the "he" points of Daniel 9:27, then he (Wohlberg) is actually stating that the Antichrist is Jesus. It appears to me as though he is deceived, solely because of the very methods he uses to interpret, as well as the ramifications of his beliefs, with respect to not only eschatology, but also regarding salvation. SDA theology is "works-based", a caviet of their idea of their idea of salvation. They talk a good game, but hide their faith+works message.
Years ago I went to a prophecy conference at a Pennslyvania SDA church. I went to see what they had to say, even got to know the pastor and went to several sabbath (Saturday) services. At the time I was incognito and I was between pastorates in the United Methodist Church, having been on a sabbatical year for post-graduate research. The SDA message of salvation is unabashedly faith+works. This is at least part of the problem when people decide they are gong to read the Bible for themselves and come up with their own theology. This is one of the tenets of the SDA cult, with SDA-precurser William Miller insisting on it. People today believe that the Holy Spirit will teach everyone the correct theology, so they simply read the Bible, with no understanding of how to read it, and arrive at sound conclusions.
This is certainly not to say the Holy Spirit cannot , nor does not teach us. He most certainly does, but to believe that the Holy Spirit is going to teach me the doctrines and then teach you the same doctrines and then someone else the same doctrines, is to question why God has called teachers and expositors and pastors to the church. If the Holy Spirit is in charge of teaching you and me and all the other Christians individually throughout the world, then aside from fellowship, what is the point of attending a local church? What is the point of listening to a sermon? What is the point of reading a book on some aspect of the Bible? There is no point!
People proudly, smugly condemn those who believe in the Pre-Trib Rapture position for instance, because they accuse us of simply believing the Bible college professors, teachers, and pastors who had delivered the message, but not proven their point. I have approximately twelve years of formal education from college through seminary graduate school programs, all done at academic institutions that held to the "Allegorical" method of interpreting the Bible. Despite all of that "Covenant/Reformed" institutional education rubbish, I came to a conclusion that the "Allegorical" interpretation was nonsense. I came to the conclusion exactly the opposite of the "Allegorical" method of interpretation. I made my own decision that the primary method of understanding the Bible was first, the "Literal" plain-sense understanding. From that I was able to construct my own theological views. Certainly all that I had learned in those liberal "Covenant/Reformed" academic institutions aided me in sorting out the meat from the bones.
These people (swallowing the SDA crap), also proudly point to the fact that they are apparently renaissance men and women. They go directly to the Scriptures themselves to determine what the Bible teaches! Still, they think they know a lick of Greek or Hebrew because they have a concordance or a lexicon, and pontificate by "cherry picking" passages that support an agenda they have defined from having heard from on high. Just because you know how to read a concordance, there is more, much more, to understanding the meaning, intent, and the nuances of the Biblical text. The condescending attackers imply these poor souls like me, who have adopted the Pre-Trib Rapture position have not done so, and they merely absorbed what has been told them by men.
Next time I will deal with points 9 and 10 of my initial list of Steven "Mark" Wohlberg's errant SDA theology. He is so dogmatic and states regularly his "unequivocally" pontification. I'm struck by the arrogance and audacity of those posting at the prophecy forum page that continues to belittle Five Doves and its host. Their arrogance and audacity are exceeded only by their absence of serious Biblical literacy.
Jesus Christ was crucified, not in the middle of the 70th week of Daniel! Jesus was crucified at the end of the 69th week, what do people not understand when it says "the end". You will never gain a deeper understanding of the Word if you continue to try to split hairs. The Bible mentions about Pharisees straining the gnat. He fulfilled the prophecy of Nehemiah when he precisely entered Jerusalem on a donkey, exactly 173,880 days from the commissioning to go forth and rebuild. Do you realize the significance of that fulfillment? As Jesus confidently rode the donkey foal up the Temple Mount, the high priest was coming from the other direction and as the people were crying out Hosanna, the guards were calling for Jesus to have his followers shut their mouths, He told them if He did that the rocks would cry out. Jesus fulfilled the Spring feasts not just to the day but to the very moment and hour of the day. We can look to Him fulfilling the Fall Feasts with similar precision!
FOLKS,YOU ARE LIVING IN THE GAP PERIOD BETWEEN WEEKS 69 and 70. GUESS WHAT? You are going to be "snatched out" of this world just before the 70th week begins. Quit trying to set dates, marvel at the preciseness of God's prophetic Word. I'm hoping that I am still here to finish this series of posts. Chuck this "Allegorical" interpretation crap of the Bible, because, if for no other reason, it attempts to force the text to say something that was neither said or meant by the author. It was a Roman Catholic trick!!!!!
God bless,
Pastor Bob