The Gap (Daniel 11:33-35)

[Covenanter]

To determine if there is a gap between the 69th and the 70th week we need to answer one question:

Have the events that were promised to happen after the 70 weeks occurred or not?

That is the premise of post #49. If Israel is the church, then yes the 70 weeks have been fulfilled because you can apply the promise to the church, spiritually. If the promise is to national Israel, then the weeks have not been fulfilled and there is a gap between the 69th and the 70th week.

Thus the promises given to Israel are at the heart of this discussion, as is also debate over man's free will ( plan A or B ).

You are correctly explaining the difference in understanding, which is key to the "gap theory" versus the straightforward, literal understanding of Dan. 9. We do NOT need to "spiritualise" what Daniel wrote to see the the fulfilment in the saving work of Christ for all God's redeemed people. His finished saving work is thus:

24

Seve

nt

y 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 anoi

nt

the most Holy.

That saving work is finished, & is worked out in the Gospel age for God's redeemed people. That counts in both Jew & Gentile. As Peter told the Jews:

22

For Moses truly said u

nt

o the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up u

nt

o you of your brethren, like u

nt

o me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say u

nt

o you.

23

And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will n

ot

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 covena

nt

which God made with our fathers, saying u

nt

o Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

26

U

nt

o you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, se

nt

him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Notice v. 25 - all nations are counted into the covenant promises. The Gentiles do not replace Jews but become one people of God with believing Jews. No "spiritualisation" is necessary, nor interpretation, just accepting the prophecy Gabriel gave Daniel.

[John81]

Because covenant/preterist theology makes no distinctions between the church and Israel and since this covenant/preterist theology interprets Scripture allegorically and not literally, all prophecies concerning Israel are blurred. These folks will never see a "gap" between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel because they aren't even looking for it.

Israel is not the church, the 70th week of Daniel and the book of Revelation is still future. The church was a mystery in the OT. The church age is "parenthetical"....that "parenthesis" is the "gap" between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel's prophecy.

Well, I'm not coming at this from a covenant or preterist theology, but as one seeking the truth of Scripture. In so doing, if one takes the 70 weeks literally, then the 70th week would literally immediately follow the 69th week just as each of the preceeding weeks immediately followed the previous one.

[Brother Rick]

Well, I'm not coming at this from a covenant or preterist theology, but as one seeking the truth of Scripture. In so doing, if one takes the 70 weeks literally, then the 70th week would literally immediately follow the 69th week just as each of the preceeding weeks immediately followed the previous one.

I don't believe it is an accident that the 70th week is separated from the other weeks in the passage. Throughout Old Testament prophecy it is not uncommon for there to be gaps of time, separated by even a mere punctuation mark. I've illustrated these in the past here. If you're a Preterist, these gaps are about 40 years, if you're a dispensationalist, they are about 2,000 years. The First Coming and the 70 A.D. destruction OR future Second Advent (depends how you look at it) are often times referred to in the same Old Testament prophecy, and yet they are very different. Gaps in Old Testament prophecy are not uncommon.

Like I said, in the end it goes back to whether or not the 70th week has been fulfilled or not, and have the events following the 70 weeks been fulfilled. If they have then so too has John's Revelation, and the land grant promises given throughout the Old Testament are become meaningless.

[John81]

I don't believe it is an accident that the 70th week is separated from the other weeks in the passage. Throughout Old Testament prophecy it is not uncommon for there to be gaps of time, separated by even a mere punctuation mark. I've illustrated these in the past here. If you're a Preterist, these gaps are about 40 years, if you're a dispensationalist, they are about 2,000 years. The First Coming and the 70 A.D. destruction OR future Second Advent (depends how you look at it) are often times referred to in the same Old Testament prophecy, and yet they are very different. Gaps in Old Testament prophecy are not uncommon.

Like I said, in the end it goes back to whether or not the 70th week has been fulfilled or not, and have the events following the 70 weeks been fulfilled. If they have then so too has John's Revelation, and the land grant promises given throughout the Old Testament are become meaningless.

Yes, I can clearly see where a prophecy is made that references two separate events, such as the first and second comings. What I'm not see is where God gives a specific time period but doesn't mean that. Such as when Scripture says the Jews would return from captivity after 70 years, God meant 70 years, not 69 years, followed by an undetermined number of years that don't count and then the year you are released from captivity, that's the 70th year.

The idea that taking the 70 weeks to be literal, yet saying they are only literal up to 69 weeks and then we have a large but undetermined number of weeks that don't count, but eventually one of the weeks will be called the 70th week, doesn't seem to be literal at all and it doesn't seem in keeping with how God uses specific time passages elsewhere in Scripture.

[Brother Rick]

Well, it says that the seventy weeks are "determined" upon God's holy people. It doesn't say that it is guaranteed to happen as it is written. Here is the 70th week:

Dan. 9:27, "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.”

Christ was crucified at the end of the 69th week, so if the 70th week were to concurrently follow the 69th these sort of things should have not only happened in the past, but they should have all occurred within seven years of Christ's death:

1. Someone (God, Antichrist, Caesar, a high priest, someone) should have made a seven year covenant with many people (not just limited to the Jews or it would have said so).
2. Half-way through those seven years the Covenanter (not talking about you, Ian ) breaks the covenant "with many."
3. Animal sacrifices are stopped 3 1/2 years after Christ's crucifixion. If the Covenanter is God, then the animal sacrifices were stopped spiritually at Calvary with the death of the Testator, Jesus Christ. It would be at the end of the 69 weeks, not in the middle of the 70th. No one stopped the physical animal sacrifices until 70 A.D., which would have been about 6 "weeks" later.
4. Lastly we see the abomination of desolations, which Jesus speaks of in Matthew 24:15 as being a future event. Preterists claim that Matthew 24 is solely the destruction of Jerusalem, which would once again put this 70th week 6 weeks after the 69th week if nothing else. Dispensationalists say that Mathew has double application to 70 A.D. and the future Second Advent, which would put it yet in the future.

There's no avoiding the gap between the 69th and 70th week, it just comes down to how big that gap is. Out of the two gaps, I believe the dispensationalist gap makes more sense and ties in better with the rest of Scripture.

The non-dispensational gap creates way too many problems. 3 1/2 years after 70 A.D. everlasting righteousness came to the holy city and the people of God? Huh? If it is to apply spiritually, then everlasting righteousness came at Calvary, not 40 years after Calvary. And where is this holy city? Is it New Jerusalem? How does that work? Also, who made this covenant? The Jewish high priest? Who was the covenant made with, and how did he break it?

Either way, it's hypocritical for non-dispensationalist to go after us over this gap when they have so much to explain in their own gap.

[John81]

Well, it says that the seventy weeks are "determined" upon God's holy people. It doesn't say that it is guaranteed to happen as it is written. Here is the 70th week:

Dan. 9:27, "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.”

Christ was crucified at the end of the 69th week, so if the 70th week were to concurrently follow the 69th these sort of things should have not only happened in the past, but they should have all occurred within seven years of Christ's death:

1. Someone (God, Antichrist, Caesar, a high priest, someone) should have made a seven year covenant with many people (not just limited to the Jews or it would have said so).
2. Half-way through those seven years the Covenanter (not talking about you, Ian ) breaks the covenant "with many."
3. Animal sacrifices are stopped 3 1/2 years after Christ's crucifixion. If the Covenanter is God, then the animal sacrifices were stopped spiritually at Calvary with the death of the Testator, Jesus Christ. It would be at the end of the 69 weeks, not in the middle of the 70th. No one stopped the physical animal sacrifices until 70 A.D., which would have been about 6 "weeks" later.
4. Lastly we see the abomination of desolations, which Jesus speaks of in Matthew 24:15 as being a future event. Preterists claim that Matthew 24 is solely the destruction of Jerusalem, which would once again put this 70th week 6 weeks after the 69th week if nothing else. Dispensationalists say that Mathew has double application to 70 A.D. and the future Second Advent, which would put it yet in the future.

There's no avoiding the gap between the 69th and 70th week, it just comes down to how big that gap is. Out of the two gaps, I believe the dispensationalist gap makes more sense and ties in better with the rest of Scripture.

The non-dispensational gap creates way too many problems. 3 1/2 years after 70 A.D. everlasting righteousness came to the holy city and the people of God? Huh? If it is to apply spiritually, then everlasting righteousness came at Calvary, not 40 years after Calvary. And where is this holy city? Is it New Jerusalem? How does that work? Also, who made this covenant? The Jewish high priest? Who was the covenant made with, and how did he break it?

Either way, it's hypocritical for non-dispensationalist to go after us over this gap when they have so much to explain in their own gap.

Ok, I was sort of following what your reasoning is until the last sentence which I don't understand.

Also, are there only two views to this? I thought I had read of something a bit different somewhere.

[Brother Rick]

I'd love to see some other views on the passage as well.

As far as my last statement goes, dispensationalists get hammered from the other side for claiming there is a gap between the 69th and 70th week. The attack is a unjustified because when you examine the passage in light of what the other side says they have a 6 week gap (about 40 years) they have to contend with as well.

[Covenanter]

Well, it says that the seventy weeks are "determined" upon God's holy people. It doesn't say that it is guaranteed to happen as it is written. Here is the 70th week:

Dan. 9:27, "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.”

Christ was crucified at the end of the 69th week, so if the 70th week were to concurrently follow the 69th these sort of things should have not only happened in the past, but they should have all occurred within seven years of Christ's death:

No - after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off - so some time during the 70th week. Note the anointing is at the dividing point 69/70 - see vs. 25 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 events of the 70th week are the ministry of Jesus, & the preaching of the Apostles, so the 70th week runs from Jesus baptism/anointing through his death & resurrection to the early events of Acts, without any time gap.


1. Someone (God, Antichrist, Caesar, a high priest, someone) should have made a seven year covenant with many people (not just limited to the Jews or it would have said so).
No - Jesus (Messiah) confirms the covenant through the 70th week.

2. Half-way through those seven years the Covenanter (not talking about you, Ian ) breaks the covenant "with many."
My Bible says "confirm" & says nothing about breaking any covenant.

3. Animal sacrifices are stopped 3 1/2 years after Christ's crucifixion. If the Covenanter is God, then the animal sacrifices were stopped spiritually at Calvary with the death of the Testator, Jesus Christ. Agreed. It would be at the end of the 69 weeks, not in the middle of the 70th. Yes. In the middle of the 70th week, at the crucifixion, when Jesus proclaimed. "It is finished." No one stopped the physical animal sacrifices until 70 A.D., which would have been about 6 "weeks" later.
Extra "weeks" are all after threescore and two weeks (+7) - no need for a gap, time runs on.

4. Lastly we see the abomination of desolations, which Jesus speaks of in Matthew 24:15 as being a future event. Preterists claim that Matthew 24 (up to v. 34, after which there is an obvious change) is solely the destruction of Jerusalem, which would once again put this 70th week 6 weeks after the 69th week if nothing else. Dispensationalists say that Mathew has double application to 70 A.D. and the future Second Advent, which would put it yet in the future.
So do almost all schools - preterist, historicist & futurist.

There's no avoiding the gap between the 69th and 70th week, it just comes down to how big that gap is. Out of the two gaps, I believe the dispensationalist gap makes more sense and ties in better with the rest of Scripture.
No - no gap at all. The premil historicist Invicta teaches substantially the same.

The non-dispensational gap creates way too many problems. 3 1/2 years after 70 A.D. everlasting righteousness came to the holy city and the people of God? That is what Calvary was all about. Huh? If it is to apply spiritually, then everlasting righteousness came at Calvary, not 40 years after Calvary. Agreed, to Jew & Gentile as the redeemed people of God. And where is this holy city? Gal. 4, Heb 12. Is it New Jerusalem? Yes. How does that work? Also, who made this covenant? God. The Jewish high priest? Who was the covenant made with, and how did he break it? Father with Son, as our surety - it's everlasting & unbreakable.

Either way, it's hypocritical for non-dispensationalist to go after us over this gap when they have so much to explain in their own gap.
No gap - all readily explained from Scripture without man's inventions.

[Covenanter]

Like I said, in the end it goes back to whether or not the 70th week has been fulfilled or not, and have the events following the 70 weeks been fulfilled. If they have then so too has John's Revelation, and the land grant promises given throughout the Old Testament are become meaningless.

No Scripture is meaningless, & all God's promises are without fail. Perfect covenant fulfilment is seen only in the NH&NE. NOT in a future millennium which sees the progressive failure of Christ's rule in person & a worldwide population just waiting to join Satan for his doomed last assault on Christ & his people, necessitating fiery destruction of the planet.

2 Cor. 1:

20

For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, u

nt

o the glory of God by us.

Lev. 26:

9

For I will have respect u

nt

o you, and make you fruitful, and multiply you, and establish my covena

nt

with you.

10

And ye shall eat old store, and bring forth the old because of the new.

11

And I set my tabernacle among you: and my soul shall n

ot

abhor you.

12

And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.

2 Cor. 6:

16

And what agreeme

nt

hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

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.

[Brother Rick]

1. The Messiah is cut off before the 70th week begins. Verse 25 clearly indicates this and verse 26 solidifies it. This creates problems for the non-dispensational side because now they have to try and put Christ's death in the middle of the 70th week (which the text does not state) or they have to somehow explain animal sacrifices being spiritually or physically stopped 3 1/2 years after Christ's death, of which nether scenario works.

Daniel 9:25-26, "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."

2. The abomination of desolation is to occur during the 70th week and goes hand-in-hand with the sacrifices being stopped. This is not Christ at Calvary, because all of that happened before the 70th week began. Furthermore, Preterists believe that the abomination of desolation spoken of by Jesus in Matthew 24 happened in 70 A.D. which is 6 weeks of years later. To make this work, they have to remove the event from the week and just say it happens at some future undeterminable time, which isn't supported by the passage in Daniel or anywhere else.

Dan. 9:27, "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.”

[Invicta]

Because covenant/preterist theology makes no distinctions between the church and Israel and since this covenant/preterist theology interprets Scripture allegorically and not literally, all prophecies concerning Israel are blurred. These folks will never see a "gap" between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel because they aren't even looking for it.

Israel is not the church, the 70th week of Daniel and the book of Revelation is still future. The church was a mystery in the OT. The church age is "parenthetical"....that "parenthesis" is the "gap" between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel's prophecy.

That, of course is an allegorical interpretation as well as adding to scripture. The church was not a mystery as Paul said Moses spoke of these days, ie the days when Paul was writing. No gap is mentioned in scripture, therefore you are adding to scripture.

[Invicta]

Can God Tell Time? Did God know how long seventy weeks was?

Can God Tell Time?

(Grateful acknowledgments to Don K. Preston)

Everyone admits there are numerous New Testame

nt

passages that say

"The coming of the Lord is

at hand

;"

or in

ot

her ways indicate Christ's return was immine

nt

--and that was almost two thousand years ago! One of the ways men have dealt with the pr

ob

lem is to say "Yes, the Bible said the coming of the Lord was 'at hand' in the first ce

nt

ury, but time doesn't mean anything to God therefore 'at hand' didn't really mean it was immine

nt

."

Do you see the pr

ob

lem? The pr

ob

lem is real and has troubled honest Bible stude

nt

s for ce

nt

uries. The question is "Can God tell time?" As we have seen, when God uses time words he does n

ot

have a special hidden meaning unknowable to man! Prophetic time stateme

nt

s are

n

ot

so "elastic" that the words "near" and "at hand" can encompass hundreds, or even thousands of years! At hand means at hand whether it referred to the coming of the kingdom or the coming of the Lord!

There is no question that "time" is n

ot

hing to God. A thousand years are like yesterday to Him (Psa. 90:4). In II Peter 3:8, we find the stateme

nt

about

"one day being as a thousand years,"

etc. [by the way, please n

ot

e the verse does n

ot

say one day IS a thousand years with the Lord]. In verse 9 we find a forg

ot

ten stateme

nt

:

"The Lord is n

ot

slack concerning his promise, as some men cou

nt

slackness;"

The word "slack" means "slow" [Greek "

braduno

"]. Peter's poi

nt

is that if God sets a time for fulfillme

nt

, God fulfills on time! He is n

ot

slow; God can tell time and knows how to keep his promises on time! This verse asserts in no uncertain terms that God is a God who keeps his promises!

But time is n

ot

hing only to God. When God communicates time to man, He reasons with His creation in a way that man can understand Him. But in the scripture, God spoke to MAN! The time stateme

nt

s about the kingdom's establishme

nt

were made to MAN! The time stateme

nt

s in the Bible were spoken to man to encourage or to warn man. If God did n

ot

mean TIME when he used time words, what did he mean? Since man thinks in time when "a long time" or "at hand" is used, would it n

ot

have been misleading on God's part to say something was n

ot

going to happen for a long time when in fact it was immine

nt

? Conversely, would it n

ot

have been misleading for God to say something was at hand when it was really n

ot

to happen for ce

nt

uries?

The question here is one of communication. Can God communicate with his creation in an understandable way; or does God speak in purposely ambiguous ways? Does the Lord hold out a carr

ot

stick of immine

nt

blessings to his hurting creation while knowing all the time he is n

ot

really going to bring the promises soon? Did God consta

nt

ly threaten nations with immine

nt

judgme

nt

and n

ot

punish them for ce

nt

uries? Where then is the reality of the threat to the wicked? Does God's transcendence over time preve

nt

him from speaking to man in words that convey genuine nearness?

Here is a question to consider: if God is in the practice of saying something is immine

nt

when in reality it may n

ot

transpire for ce

nt

uries, why is there n

ot

one single Old Covena

nt

prophecy of the kingdom that said it was "at hand?" Daniel said the kingdom would be established in the days of the Roman empire; he called it

"the last days"

(Dan.2:28). From Daniel's perspective, it was several hundred years away. From God's perspective of course, it was only a mome

nt

; but that is n

ot

the issue. God was speaking to Daniel about things to happen in man's world--n

ot

in timeless eternity. This is why God did n

ot

cause Daniel to say the kingdom was "near," "at hand," "right at the door," or coming "very, very soon."

It was n

ot

u

nt

il John the Baptist came that the message

"the kingdom of heaven is at hand"

was preached; and the kingdom was established in the very generation that heard John say it was at hand! In

ot

her words, God did n

ot

allow his prophets to say the kingdom was at hand u

nt

il it was REALLY AT HAND! It would have been something less than honest if God had said the kingdom was immine

nt

when it was really hundreds of years away!

Why did Isaiah, who wr

ot

e over 600 years before the birth of the Messiah, never say his coming was at hand? Would it n

ot

have been terribly distressing for the Jews to have heard a consta

nt

message of the imminence of the kingdom and their savior yet hundreds of years roll on and on without fulfillme

nt

? The writer of Proverbs correctly n

ot

ed mankind's attitude toward waiting for fulfillme

nt

of promises

"Hope that is deferred makes the heart sick"

(Prov.13:12).

It is one thing for God to promise something and n

ot

give any indication as to when he would fulfill the promise, for then man has no indication of when to expect fulfillme

nt

. It is an e

nt

irely differe

nt

thing for God to indicate a time frame for fulfillme

nt

and n

ot

bring the promise to fulfillme

nt

in that indicated time frame! This involves a basic attribute of the nature of God.

We are told that prophetic time may INDICATE imminence, when in fact hundreds of years are involved. In order to demonstrate the utter falsity of this concept let us see how God has dealt with time stateme

nt

s in scripture.

In Numbers 24:17-18, Balaam the prophet made a prediction of Christ's coming:

"I see him but n

ot

now, I behold him but n

ot

near."

N

ot

ice he said Christ's coming was N

OT

NEAR; IT WAS N

OT

AT HAND. Why did he say this? Because Christ's coming was over 1400 years away, and 1400 years really is a long time! Here is a concrete example where God referred to a long time as just that.

In Daniel 10-12 is a vision encompassing a period of time from 536 BC to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD; about 600 years. Two times in this text Daniel was told

"the appoi

nt

ed time is long"

and

"the vision refers to many days to come"

(Dan.10:1,14). Remember, this vision was relayed to Daniel from God. While God is n

ot

bound by time, he was communicating to man who is bound to time. God called this 600 year period of time "long;" he said it involved "many days." God can most assuredly tell time and read a calendar!

Daniel co

nt

ains an

ot

her importa

nt

example of how God used time words. Chapter 8 co

nt

ains a prophecy that extends from 530 BC to about 165-164 BC and the death of A

nt

iochus Epiphanes. The time covered is about 365 years. How did God express the prophecy? Did he say it was at hand? Did he say SOME of it was at hand while some of it was for a long time off? No! God viewed the prophecy as a whole. He said the vision

"refers to many days in the future"

(Dan.8:26). Here is a prophecy that covers 365 years and God called it "a long time." Friends, if God called 365 years a long time, how can man say that time, when God is speaking to man, means n

ot

hing?

This is an importa

nt

question in light of the traditional i

nt

erpretations of Revelation. Daniel was told to seal up his vision because the time for its fulfillme

nt

was a long time away--365 years. John was specifically told n

ot

to seal up his vision because what he saw was at hand (Revelation 22:10)! John is told his vision, n

ot

part of his vision, was

"at hand"

and

"must shortly come to pass!"

Reader, did God call the 365 years for the fulfillme

nt

of Daniel's prophecy a "long time" and call the fulfillme

nt

of Revelation, which most say has n

ot

been fulfilled after 2000 years so far, "at hand?" To say the least, this would hardly be consiste

nt

!

In Jeremiah 29:10, Jehovah told his prophet the Babylonian captivity would last for seve

nt

y years. In verse 28, the people complained that Jeremiah had told them

"The exile will be long...."

Here is an example of a prophet specifying a period of time, seve

nt

y years, and the people said the prophet, and remember the prophet was inspired of God, said the captivity would be "long." Why was seve

nt

y years called a long time by Jeremiah? Because to man seve

nt

y years IS A LONG TIME! Thus, God used time words as man would normally understand them. God can tell time when speaking to man!

Many do n

ot

realize the Bible gives an example of man attempting to change the meaning of time words used by God; and God's response. In Ezekiel 7, God said the Day of the Lord was at hand. The Day of the Lord in this co

nt

ext was when God used Babylon to punish Israel for her sin. This is the concept of the Day of the Lord; it is n

ot

an "end of time" idea. It is when God used a nation to punish an

ot

her as it related to his chosen people.

In chapter 11, Israel responded to the threat of coming judgme

nt

. They insisted that although Ezekiel said it was at hand it was really n

ot

. It was time to build houses, n

ot

worry about judgme

nt

. One can almost hear some of those people: "Well, yes, Ezekiel has said the Day of the Lord is at hand, but after all, 'one day is with the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day,' (Psalms 90:4)."

When Israel "elasticized" God's words of imminence i

nt

o relativity, ambiguity and meaning-less-ness, God responded. In Ezekiel 12:21ff, [Please, take the time to get your Bible and read it for yourself!] God told Ezekiel to tell Israel that her days of changing the time for his predictions were over. He had said judgme

nt

was at hand; Israel said it was n

ot

at hand. God would n

ot

tolerate it.

Ezekiel was instructed to tell Israel that in that generation judgme

nt

would fall just as God had indicated when he said it was at hand. [Have you read those verses for yourself yet? If n

ot

, why n

ot

do it right now and see for yourself that what we are saying is true?] What we have, then, is an example of man saying that while God had said something was immine

nt

it really was n

ot

; it was for a long time off. We have God's response; when God said "at hand" he mea

nt

"at hand!" He did n

ot

mean hundreds or thousands of years; he mea

nt

"soon!"

An

ot

her example of man changing the meaning of God's time words is in Amos 6:3. God warned Israel the time had come for her to be judged (Amos 8:2). In spite of the warnings, Israel

"put far off the evil day."

Isaiah 56:12 shows they were saying

"tomorrow shall be as today."

In spite of God's warning that judgme

nt

was at hand they insisted

"All things co

nt

inue as they were,"

II Peter 3:3-4! They refused to believe God mea

nt

"near" when he said "at hand!" As a result God said "Woe" to them!

Reader, what is the practical difference between Israel of Old denying "at hand" mea

nt

"soon," and Bible stude

nt

s today who read the New Testame

nt

time stateme

nt

s and say they did n

ot

mean "soon?" What is the difference between those in Isaiah's day who denied the warnings of immine

nt

judgme

nt

, saying life was going to go on as usual, and those today who read the time stateme

nt

s made in the first ce

nt

ury and say the predicted eve

nt

s were n

ot

truly immine

nt

? Those who deny the first ce

nt

ury application of the at hand time stateme

nt

s of the New Testame

nt

are doing the same thing as the Israelites of Old--denying that "at hand" mea

nt

"soon!"

Has God changed his vocabulary? Is it true that "at hand" once DID mean "at hand" but now it can mean "a long time?" If so, where is the evidence for the change? Surely, the honest stude

nt

can clearly see there has been no such change in God's vocabulary. God can tell time; God can read a calendar. When God says something is at hand it is near. For man to argue

ot

herwise is to reject the inspiration of the scriptures; it is to impugn the faithfulness of God; it is to impugn the ability of God to communicate; it is to do the very thing Israel of old did and for which they were condemned!

Think about this: certain Christians say "Well, you can't take "generation" and "at hand" literally because God's time is n

ot

our time." Then what do they do? They go and i

nt

erpret the thousand years in Revelation as literal! Do you see the pr

ob

lem here?

If, as the amillennialist insists, it is dangerous to deny the time for the coming of the kingdom, why is it n

ot

equally dangerous to deny the time-frame for the coming of the Lord? It is clear to us that to deny either the

fact

or the

time

for the coming of the Lord is to deny the inspiration of the scriptures. This is a serious matter indeed.

This one fact remains. Jesus promised to return in the generation of his disciples. Language could n

ot

be clearer. We have demonstrated above that when God used time words he mea

nt

what the words suggest. "At hand" means "at hand;" a "long time" means a "long time." This being true one must acknowledge

1. Jesus lied
   
   
2. He failed
   
   

• He was mistaken
  
  
  • or
    He came!
    
    
    
    

[Steve Schwenke]

That, of course is an allegorical interpretation as well as adding to scripture. The church was not a mystery as Paul said Moses spoke of these days, ie the days when Paul was writing. No gap is mentioned in scripture, therefore you are adding to scripture.

Please!
There are gaps all through Scripture.
How long from the creation to the fall?
How long did it take for Noah to build the Ark?
There is a gap of 13 years from the time of Ishmael's birth to the time of Isaac's birth.
What I mean by this is that there is a period of time in Scripture that we know absolutely nothing about. The narrative of Genesis 16 ends abruptly with Ishmael's birth, and then we have a "gap" up until Gen. 18 and 19 when Isaac are born. What happened during that time? We don't know, because God didn't consider it important for us to know.
There is a "gap" from Joseph's death until Moses shows up.
There is a gap of 40 years in the desert. We really don't have a whole lot of information about that time - just bits and pieces.
There is a gap between Malachi and Matthew.

Why would anyone think it strange that there might be a gap between the 69th week and the 70th week?

[Brother Rick]

That, of course is an allegorical interpretation as well as adding to scripture. The church was not a mystery as Paul said Moses spoke of these days, ie the days when Paul was writing. No gap is mentioned in scripture, therefore you are adding to scripture.

Allegorize This!

Romans 16:25-26, "Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
26) But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:"

Eph. 3:3-6, "How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4) Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
6) That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:"
7) Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.
8) Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
9) And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:"

[Invicta]

1. The Messiah is cut off before the 70th week begins. Verse 25 clearly indicates this and verse 26 solidifies it. This creates problems for the non-dispensational side because now they have to try and put Christ's death in the middle of the 70th week (which the text does not state) or they have to somehow explain animal sacrifices being spiritually or physically stopped 3 1/2 years after Christ's death, of which nether scenario works.

Daniel 9:25-26, "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."

2. The abomination of desolation is to occur during the 70th week and goes hand-in-hand with the sacrifices being stopped. This is not Christ at Calvary, because all of that happened before the 70th week began. Furthermore, Preterists believe that the abomination of desolation spoken of by Jesus in Matthew 24 happened in 70 A.D. which is 6 weeks of years later. To make this work, they have to remove the event from the week and just say it happens at some future undeterminable time, which isn't supported by the passage in Daniel or anywhere else.

Dan. 9:27, "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.”

Rick, I sometimes wonder if you understand the same English language as others of us. Where does it say the Messiah will be cut off before the 70th week? It doesn't. What it does say is that he will be cut off after the 69 weeks, not at the end of them as some on here keep posting. That is misquoting scripture. In my maths 70 comes after 69 so after 69 means during the 70 weeks. When during the 70th week was Messiah cut off? The following verse tells us, in the midst of the week. The first part of verse 27 refers to the work of Christ when he confirmed the promises (The Covenant) given to the fathers, to those of the circumcision. The last part to his prophecy that all these things would come upon this generation.