The Gap (Daniel 11:33-35)

[LindaR]

Daniel 11:33 And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.

Daniel 11:34 Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries.

Daniel 11:35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.

We live in "the gap" between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel. This passage is a summary of the events during that gap.

[Eric Stahl]

I agree LindaR.

[John81]

Why is the 70th week viewed so differently from the other 69 weeks? Why is not each "week" consistent, why is one only symbolic?

[Brother Rick]

The 70th week was clearly separated in the Daniel 9 passage from the other 69 weeks. I believe this is because it was conditional upon certain events happening for the 70th week to occur. I believe it could have happened in the past if thing would have gone differently, but they did not. Jesus and the Apostles would not have offered Jesus Christ to the nation of Israel, to be accepted as their Messiah, without there being a plan in place if they had actually accepted Him.

[John81]

The 70th week was clearly separated in the Daniel 9 passage from the other 69 weeks. I believe this is because it was conditional upon certain events happening for the 70th week to occur. I believe it could have happened in the past if thing would have gone differently, but they did not. Jesus and the Apostles would not have offered Jesus Christ to the nation of Israel, to be accepted as their Messiah, without there being a plan in place if they had actually accepted Him.

This sounds like one of those "plan B" theories which basically puts forth that God had two plans set in place just in case one didn't work He could go to the backup plan. However, since God knows all, why have two plans when only one was necessary?

Also, I don't see the "clearly" aspect you alude to so if you would care to expand upon that, please do so.

[Brother Rick]

A "Plan B" option is exactly what I believe it is. I don't think God makes a habit of forcing people or nations to do anything, and so when He offers something He is genuine about it. God isn't surprised by anything though, so it's not as though He didn't see it coming. But because of His genuineness when it comes to the invitation I believe there is always an alternate plan.

We don't understand God, He works in mysterious ways. We can understand things about His nature though. As a rule of thumb He leads, He doesn't force. He guides, He doesn't rush. He draws people to Him, He doesn't make them obey. That's one of my beefs with Calvinism: Irresistible Grace. It’s one thing to say God makes people knowing they will reject Him, but it's another to make people and to by proxy force them to reject Him.

That's where I'm coming from. I believe when God offers something to people, it's for real and it is fully legitimate. God offered the Messiah to the nation of Israel, and they had the option choose Him (even through the book of Acts). Therefore, if God offered the Messiah to Israel, even though He knew they would not accept Him, by offering the Messiah God has obligated Himself to having a plan in place in case they had accepted Him.

[John81]

A "Plan B" option is exactly what I believe it is. I don't think God makes a habit of forcing people or nations to do anything, and so when He offers something He is genuine about it. God isn't surprised by anything though, so it's not as though He didn't see it coming. But because of His genuineness when it comes to the invitation I believe there is always an alternate plan.

We don't understand God, He works in mysterious ways. We can understand things about His nature though. As a rule of thumb He leads, He doesn't force. He guides, He doesn't rush. He draws people to Him, He doesn't make them obey. That's one of my beefs with Calvinism: Irresistible Grace. It’s one thing to say God makes people knowing they will reject Him, but it's another to make people and to by proxy force them to reject Him.

That's where I'm coming from. I believe when God offers something to people, it's for real and it is fully legitimate. God offered the Messiah to the nation of Israel, and they had the option choose Him (even through the book of Acts). Therefore, if God offered the Messiah to Israel, even though He knew they would not accept Him, by offering the Messiah God has obligated Himself to having a plan in place in case they had accepted Him.

What about the verses which state God kept the people from understanding and where Jesus said He spoke in parables so the people wouldn't understand?

If God had already ordained form the foundation of the world that Christ would come, die, be resurrected, there would be a time of the Gentiles and the end times would come about, all of which was foretold throughout the Old Testament, including the fact Christ would be rejected and of His second coming, why would there be a need for some alternate plan?

[anime4christ]

It's useless John. Dispensationalism is by definition plan b theology..it contains gaps and chunks and everything that the bible doesn't..and they call us heretics when we stick to theology from the time of the apostles and the reformation and refuse to innovate theology..I see more evidence for baby sprinkling than a colon meaning a gap in Daniel 9..is that really what it comes to? Inserting a gap of several thousand years because of a punctuation mark? Lemme start inserting aliens after every comma..no wait, ruckman already does that..

[LindaR]

anime4christ,

What does Peter Ruckman have to do with this topic? His name was never mentioned. So why are you bringing him up?

[anime4christ]

Because very strange teachings come from inserting gaps where the Bible doesn't. Peter Ruckman is dispensational as well. I just don't understand how people get the boldness to tamper with God's word like this.

[LindaR]

Dispensational theology isn't about the people who believe it and teach it, it's about what the Bible LITERALLY teaches. It does not "tamper" with God's word, it interprets it. Dispensational theology makes distinctions between Israel and the Church. The "gap" in Daniel is NOT inserted, it's already there. There are many Messianic prophecies which have a double fulfillment and the text used in this video (Daniel 11:33-35) is one of them.

The allegorical method of interpreting biblical prophecies "blurs" the distinction between Israel and the Church. The result is obvious. The "gap" doesn't exist for those who allegorize and spiritualize Bible prophecy. And you say dispensational theology "tampers" with God's Word?

[John81]

There is already a clear distinction between the church and Israel in Scripture without having to create several "dispensations" (whether 7, 9 or another number of them, which dispensationalists can't even agree upon).

Also, considering the original texts of Scripture were without punctuation, we know the "gap creating" colon was placed there by man in his attempt to make the reading of the Word easier not because divine inspiration already had it there.

Again, why are first 69 "weeks" interpreted as being literal years while the 70th week is given special interpretation so that it's not literally the 70the week?

As well, you do realize there are those who hold to basically the same end times views (pre-mil rapture, tribulation, etc.) that reject dispensationalism, right? Holding to one of the dispensational theories isn't even required in order to come to the end times conclusion you do.

[anime4christ]

As well, you do realize there are those who hold to basically the same end times views (pre-mil rapture, tribulation, etc.) that reject dispensationalism, right? Holding to one of the dispensational theories isn't even required in order to come to the end times conclusion you do.

There are premil postrib believers who are not dispensational, but pretrib rapture is unique to dispensationalism.

[Covenanter]

Dispensational theology isn't about the people who believe it and teach it, it's about what the Bible LITERALLY teaches. It does not "tamper" with God's word, it interprets it. Dispensational theology makes distinctions between Israel and the Church. The "gap" in Daniel is NOT inserted, it's already there.

There are keys to dispensational misunderstanding in that statement, Linda. The moment you INTERPRET the Bible, you have departed from its LITERAL teaching.

Also, the NT does not make such distinctions - it emphasises the unity of all believers. (e.g. Eph. 1, Romans 15) Paul in R15 quotes the OT to stress that that unity is prophesied.

I'll come to the GAP later. We are going out to welcome a new baby in our church family - Christian (?) Mum & Sikh father. Pray for us.

[Steve Schwenke]

This sounds like one of those "plan B" theories which basically puts forth that God had two plans set in place just in case one didn't work He could go to the backup plan. However, since God knows all, why have two plans when only one was necessary?

Also, I don't see the "clearly" aspect you alude to so if you would care to expand upon that, please do so.

So then what you are saying is that God INTENTIONALLY created Adam with the specific purpose in mind that Adam would fall? God purposefully made mankind, purposefully let them fall?
What were God's intentions for His creation anyway? This sin-riddled universe?
Not so.
God's intentions were that Adam and Eve would obey Him BY FAITH, and not eat of the forbidden fruit.
God's intentions were that Adam and Eve would have children, and then rule over the world (see Gen. 2).
But they didn't.
So "plan B" (as you call it) calls for death, destruction, sin, curse, etc., and then ultimately the death of Jesus Christ (and His resurrection) to make an atonement for sin.
Now, the end result is the New Heaven and New Earth, but there is a huge "gap" between Genesis 2 and Revelation 21 that is a direct result of Adam's sin. God did not FORCE Adam to sin. God allowed Adam to make a choice, and then God worked out His plan around Adam's choice.
So it is with Israel. God gave them a choice.
When you state that Jesus Christ spoke in parables to hide the truth from them, you are overlooking the nature of self-righteous mankind. Romans 1 details this for us. When a sinner willfully rejects God's message, God turns them over to their own lusts, and lets them have their own way. This is exactly what happened to Israel in the gospels. The elders, priests, Pharisees, and Saducees were not interested in hearing or believing anything Jesus Christ had to say. So AFTER they had received a clear straight message, and they WILLFULLY rejeceted it, THEN and ONLY THEN did Jesus Christ begin to speak in parables.