Miriam H Daniel seventieth week


http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/sep2013/miriamh916.htm

 

As I read I agreed, then had additional thoughts, then was a bit confused.  I will try to explain.  Hopefully, you will find these things interesting.  Where I say “correct” below means “I agree”.  J

 

I have written here several times regarding the seventieth week being divided by the crucifixion.  The second part to be concluded by Messiah as judge in the great tribulation.  So I agree with this aspect of your writing.  The background of the “conventional” teaching and the error of it is interesting.  Also, you correctly connect the purpose of Daniel’s prayer in Ch 9 with the explanation given by Gabriel therein.

 

I also liked your mention of those watching and waiting for the Messiah at His birth.  While they were in the minority, I agree some must have been watching particularly while Israel was under Roman rule (which attempts to be reborn today).

 

I have to say I disagree with the timing of the prophecy being linked to Nisan.  This is why.  Daniel’s prophecy really is an answer to Daniel’s prayer regarding his people and Jeremiah’s (ch 25) prophecy of the exile and return to Jerusalem.  The prophecy is offered by Gabriel and recorded by Daniel.  Jeremiah described a 70 year exile.  Gabriel explains that this is really 70 “weeks” of years.  These years began when Jerusalem was overcome in the month of Av by the forces of Nebuchadnezzar.  Perhaps a month or so passed before the exile was started?  An exact completion of those years should come to that time, the fall, not Nisan in the spring.  Further, since Messiah was cut off in Nisan, this month is defined as the end of the “half”, or middle of the seven yeears.  Therefore, one must go another six months or so to complete the year that was cut in half.

 

Here is a possible exception in favor of Nisan.  Messiah might return at the time He was “cut off” to resume the last three and a half years.  This would cycle the end of the 70 weeks back to the fall.  We must remember, though, that Jesus/Messiah returning in the clouds is not the same as Him setting foot on Earth.  i.e. Rapture.

 

Completely agree Messiah is the only one that can fulfill “the end of sin” etc.  I will add that because Jesus’ death was the complete atonement and the Holy Spirit offered as a result, that sin was ended at that time.  Not in our daily existence, but spiritually for all who  accept Christ.

 

I am very surprised given your understanding above that you see the “second part” of the prophecy requiring the “7 year” peace treaty.  This is hard to understand.  My question is how you find seven years inside three and a half?  What you have offered in this concept is “conventional” thought, so this is perhaps understandable.  Please consider that there is no need to avoid saying God will allow “bad things” to happen.  Evil itself exists through God’s grace and plan.  As in the past, He will release His hand of restraint and allow evil to achieve His purpose.  Also, judgment is not a pretty thing and He is returning to judge all.  Proclaiming the “evil” that happens to be the power of the Antichrist, not God’s judgment may be creating too much separation.  Messuiah will pour out calamity on the Earth in the end time.  Keeping Messiah the Prince as the subject through verse 9:27 clarifies some things.

 

So, consider Daniel 9:26: “…will destroy the city and the sanctuary.  Its end shall come with a flood…”

I have been searching for years to discern the meaning of the “flood” in this verse.  There was no flood recorded when the second temple was destroyed.  No flood, no Roman destruction in 70 AD.  This verse has to mean something else.  The following are some things we know that might help us to a more complete understanding.

 

In Revelation Jerusalm is referred to as a whore.  The priests were called directly by Jesus as a brood of vipers.  These priests were responsible for Jesus being cut off from His people.  Doesn’t this merit a bit of destruction?  Also, as followers of Christ we know that our bodies are now the “temple of God” as the Holy Spirit dwells in us rather than a building.  The word translated “destroy” more literally means “cast off” and the word translated “city” is from a root H5782 which means “a place guarded by waking or a watch”.  The word translated “flood” not only means an over pouring it also means an outpouring like a broken dam.  And, the Holy Spirit and the people are likened to water.  Therefore, if those who are “awake and watching in the ekklesia” “cast off our mortal bodies at the outgoing of the Holy Spirit we have a flood in the rapture.  Didn’t know Dan 9:26 was a rapture verse did you?

 

Now Dan 9:27: “…And he shall enter into a strong and firm covenant for one week.  And in the midst of the week he shall “cause” the sacrifice and offering to cease:…

Jesus came and coinfirmed the covenant between God and Israel, the subject of the rest of the prophecy.  What else happens in the midst of the week just one verse before?  That  would be, as you have correctly said, the crucifixion.  The ultimate sacrifice having been made, other offereings for sin were no longer accepted by God.  Judaic tradition makes it clear that the red string on the scapegoat never turned white again.  Mind blower-In Isaiah God says He desires “mercy, not sacrifice.”  What if the priests had shown Jesus mercy rather than given Him to the cross?

 

The rest of Dan 9:27: “…and upon the wing or pinnacle of abominations one who makes desolate until the end is poured out on the desolator.”

This is my Amplified, but the KJV puts it this way: .”…(and for the) overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured out on the desolate.”

 

The Amplified relies on tradition here, but the KJV does a better job except for the added words seen in the brackets.  Looking at what comes before the brackets and connecting them we have, “…shall cause the sacrifice and offerings to cease; overspreading of abominations making (it) desolate…”

By noting both translations we get a more complete picture which is intended to be more clear through re-statement, rather than obscure.  The overspreading of abominations are descriptions of the sacrifices and offerings made in the temple after the crucifixion of Christ.  Think of the sacrificial alter in the temple.  This is a large golden table with a trough and bowl for draing blood.  Many early depictions show that at each corner there are upward protruding hook shaped “horns” which point away from the table.  These are to secure the sacrifice onto the table.  The animal  were stretched out/overspread over the table using these “pinnacles”.  So this verse notes the sacrifice and offerings and proceeds to call them abominations.  The verse goes onto say that the location of the temple will be desolate until the consummation.  In other words no building will be filled with the presence of God, nor will sacrifices be accepted through the consummation of the entire prophecy.  God will not recognize any man-made building as a temple of God.

 

Thank you for sharing your message.  You have definitely seen some things the same way I do.  Other things may vary but we are all seeking understanding of the Word, Amen.  Just writing this I gleaned a few more details.  So, thanks again.  In Christ,

GM