It Shall Be An Everlasting Covenant With Them

[beameup]

 

You missed one.

 

Luke 21:20 ¶  And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

 

No Jesus was not confused, he was speaking of the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem.

 

Edited to add.

 

Antiochus did desecrate the temple but he was not an abomination of desolation.  That was the Roman army. Josephus mentions two desolations in his history of Jerusalem, First by Nebuchadnezzar, Second by Titus.

 

Apples and oranges.  Jesus just told you that the abomination of desolation would "stand" in the holy place. 

It is recorded in Matthew 24:3-51 and is a "private briefing" to his inner circle of disciples.

OBviously "whoso readeth, let him understand" is not "understood" in your case.

 

For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.  Mt 24:21

[Invicta]

You misrepresent my words entirely.

 

In the midst of the week - I meant the 70th week - as I have said already in other places - I could have been more precise in my wording.

 

And I NEVER said that His death did not end the validity of the sacrifice - the PASSAGE does not talk about the validity of the sacrifice, but the ending of the actual sacrifice. This did not occur until the destruction of the temple.

 

You need to show proof that His baptism ended the 69th week - the Passage says He is CUT OFF not baptised after 69 weeks.

And the order of events includes things which happen - significant things - after Messiah is cut off(after 69 weeks) and BEFORE the covenant is confirmed for a week - that week is the 70th week.

There are events that happen between the end of 69 and the start of 70.

It is not me saying it - the passage says it.

And the events of the CUTTING OFF of Messiah - not Baptism - and the ending of the sacrifice and OBlation are not the same thing - the order of event, and the events mentioned between these two things make it such that it can not be so.

 

And to make it PERFECTLY CLEAR - again - the passage says the sacrifice and OBlation will cease - not that they would be made innefective. This did not happen at the death of Christ - the Jews continued the sacrifice and OBlation while the temple stood - and claim today that they will recommence the sacrifice and OBlation if the Temple is ever rebuilt. 

If you talk to a Jew today, they will tell you the ONLY reason they do not do the sacrifice today is because there is no temple.

 

Of course the sacrifice and OBlation are ineffective, but they will still do it if the temple is rebuilt - and they continued them until the temple was destroyed.

 

I can't believe you guys get so hung up on "he" in this passage, but totally ignore the plain language that says the actual sacrifice will cease, instead reading that it will be made ineffective.

It does not say "make ineffective - it says "cease".

 

Sorry Bro,

 

He does not say it will cease, but  that "he will Cause it to cease."  

[DaveW]

Sorry Bro,

 

He does not say it will cease, but  that "he will Cause it to cease."  

Ummmm...... yeah...... cease - not  become ineffective...........

 

Doesn't change it one little bit - "cease" is not "make ineffective" - not at all all...... in any way...... the two things mean different things.

 

And the sacrifice and OBlation clearly did not cease at the death of Christ - which is what happened when the 69th week ended (death of Christ) - nowhere does the passage indicate, intimate, or otherwise suggest anything about the baptism of Christ. But the sacrifice and OBlation "are caused to cease" in the midst of the 70th week, which happens after the war that happens after Messiah is cut off - the order is plain and clear, and the cutting off of Messiah, and the ceasing of the sacrifice have events between them.

Regardless of who "he" is.

[Invicta]

 

Apples and oranges.  Jesus just told you that the abomination of desolation would "stand" in the holy place. 

It is recorded in Matthew 24:3-51 and is a "private briefing" to his inner circle of disciples.

OBviously "whoso readeth, let him understand" is not "understood" in your case.

 

For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.  Mt 24:21

 

 

Not so. All three gospel writers were speaking of the same thing and the believers had to escape from Jerusalem when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies.  Matthew and Mark were circumspect when speaking of Rome as it was not wise to draw attention to prophecies regarding Rome.  Paul was likewise when speaking of the fall of Rome in 2. Thess. 2:7.  Josephus likewise is circumspect when speaking of Rome in Daniel's prophecies.  He says "Rome is also mentioned here, but let any who is interested read it for himself."

[Invicta]

Ummmm...... yeah...... cease - not  become ineffective...........

 

Doesn't change it one little bit - "cease" is not "make ineffective" - not at all all...... in any way...... the two things mean different things.

 

And the sacrifice and OBlation clearly did not cease at the death of Christ - which is what happened when the 69th week ended (death of Christ) - nowhere does the passage indicate, intimate, or otherwise suggest anything about the baptism of Christ. But the sacrifice and OBlation "are caused to cease" in the midst of the 70th week, which happens after the war that happens after Messiah is cut off - the order is plain and clear, and the cutting off of Messiah, and the ceasing of the sacrifice have events between them.

Regardless of who "he" is.

 

There is nothing except imagination to suggest that the 70th week was divorced from the others any more than the 62 being divorced from the seven.  After the 69th week is the seventieth.  

[beameup]

Not so. All three gospel writers were speaking of the same thing and the believers had to escape from Jerusalem when they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies.  Matthew and Mark were circumspect when speaking of Rome as it was not wise to draw attention to prophecies regarding Rome.  Paul was likewise when speaking of the fall of Rome in 2. Thess. 2:7.  Josephus likewise is circumspect when speaking of Rome in Daniel's prophecies.  He says "Rome is also mentioned here, but let any who is interested read it for himself."

Only a "person" can "stand".  There is no ambiguity unless you force it.

 

The "Temple Proper" is already built and is in storage in Jerusalem awaiting reestablishment on the Temple Mount.

[Genevanpreacher]

Only a "person" can "stand".  There is no ambiguity unless you force it.

 

The "Temple Proper" is already built and is in storage in Jerusalem awaiting reestablishment on the Temple Mount.

 

Where do you get the source for this information -" The "Temple Proper" is already built and is in storage in Jerusalem awaiting reestablishment on the Temple Mount."

[DaveW]

There is nothing except imagination to suggest that the 70th week was divorced from the others any more than the 62 being divorced from the seven.  After the 69th week is the seventieth.  

Even if you take that line, the passage separates the cutting off of Messiah from the ceasing of the sacrifice and OBlation.

And it doesn't mention the anointing or baptism of Messiah at all.

And it DOES have a war between the cutting off of Messiah and the confirming of the covenant.

And it is in the midst of the covenant, which happens after the war, which happens after Messiah is cut off, that the sacrifice ceases.

 

 

 

These things are clear in the passage.

[DaveW]

Only a "person" can "stand".  There is no ambiguity unless you force it.

 

The "Temple Proper" is already built and is in storage in Jerusalem awaiting reestablishment on the Temple Mount.

 

Where is the court of women?

 

There is supposed to be a court of women inside the court of gentiles - the Jews consider gentiles even lower than women....

[Invicta]

I have just come across a book entitled The Destruction of Jerusalem by N Nisbet M.A. published in 1787.  Here is a short excerpt from Part 1.

 

Destruction of Jerusalem — Part 1

It cannot escape the OBservation of any one, in the least conversant with the writings of the Evangelists, that the prophecies, relating to the destruction of Jerusalem, form a very considerable and important part of our blessed Lord’s discourses. Many of his parables have an evident relation to that melancholy event, and were prOBably delivered at an early period of his ministry, when it would have been inconsistent with the great ends of it to have been more explicit.

“In the following places, our Lord uses the parabolic method in speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem.” {#Lu 13:6-29 Mt 22:1-7 Lu 14:17-24 Mt 21:33-46 Mr 12:1-12 Lu 20:9-19 21:11-27 }

Towards the close of his life, he threw aside the parabolic method, and assumed a plainer language upon the subject, both to his own immediate followers, and to the multitude. Bishop Newcome, in his excellent OBservations on our Lord’s conduct as a divine instructor, is of the opinion, that the large discourse, which we have recorded in the 24th of Matthew, and the parallel chapters of Mark and Luke, was delivered but four days before his crucifixion, when Jesus took his final leave of the temple. And it seems to contain the substance of all that is to be met with upon this subject, in the Gospel History.

In the fulfilment of these predictions, as recorded by Josephus, an historian of undoubted credit, who was not only an eye-witness of the transactions of the Jewish war, but bore a considerable share in it, and was an enemy to the christian name; an argument of no small weight arises in favour of the divinity of our Lord’s character and mission; for to allude to what Nicodemus said in the case of miracles, No man could foretell events of such magnitude and importance, and with the precision which he did, unless God was with him. A wise man, says the great writer above-mentioned, may foresee some events, relating to an individual or a nation, which depend on a formed character and a connected train of circumstances; but reason and experience show, that there are likewise events of so contingent and imprOBable a nature, that the foresight of them exceeds the greatest human sagacity.

Of this nature were the predictions of our Saviour concerning the destruction of Jerusalem; upon the completion of which, the very credit and fate of Christianity depended; not in some distant and uncertain period, but in that very generation in which they were delivered. Verily, says Christ, this generation shall not pass away, before all these things be fulfilled. This is not the language of an impostor, but of one who knew that his predictions would be most exactly fulfilled. Dr. Jortin says:

“Christ foretold the total destruction of the city and temple; the coming of false Christs and false prophets; famines, pestilences, earthquakes, fearful sights and great signs from heaven; the persecution of the apostles, the apostasy of some Christians; the preservation of the faith; the spreading of the gospel through the Roman world; the Roman standards defiling the holy place; the city encompassed with armies, walls and trenches; the retiring of the Christians to the mountains; the greatest tribulation that ever was known; the time when these things should happen; the comparative happiness of the barren woman; wars and rumours of wars, nation rising against nation and kingdom against kingdom; the dispersion of the captive Jews through all nations; the continuation of the desolation; a shortening the days of vengeance for the sake of the elect: all which came to pass.” {Jortin’s Remarks on E. Hist. vol. i. }

 

“If the reader is desirous to see in what manner these signs were fulfilled, he may consult Bishop Newton on the Prophecies and the present Bishop of Waterford’s excellent OBservations on our Lord’s conduct as a divine instructor.”

The accomplishment of our Lord’s prophecies of the destruction of Jerusalem, may likewise be considered as a standing monument to all future ages, of the truth of the OBservation of the wise man; that righteousness exalteth a nation, but that sin is eventually, the ruin of any people.

The Jewish nation were favoured with many very extraordinary privileges, both of a civil and religious nature, which, if properly improved, would have distinguished them in an eminent degree above all their surrounding neighbours for national happiness. The whole history of that people, affords ample evidence that they enjoyed prosperity, or suffered affliction, proportioned to their virtuous or vicious conduct. But in our Saviour’s time they were remarkable for their profligacy and wickedness, and their punishment was equally distinguished for its severity. It was such as had no example in former ages, and would never again be repeated.

To give a particular account, says Josephus, as quoted by Dr. Jortin, of all their iniquities, would be endless. Thus much in general, it may suffice to say, that there never was a city which suffered such miseries, nor a race of men, from the beginning of the world, who so abounded in wickedness. I verily believe that if the Romans had delayed to destroy these wicked wretches, the city would either have been swallowed up by the earth, or overwhelmed by the waters, or struck with fire from heaven as another Sodom; for it introduced a far more impious generation than those who suffered such punishments.

 

 

 

[Invicta]

Even if you take that line, the passage separates the cutting off of Messiah from the ceasing of the sacrifice and OBlation.

And it doesn't mention the anointing or baptism of Messiah at all.

And it DOES have a war between the cutting off of Messiah and the confirming of the covenant.

And it is in the midst of the covenant, which happens after the war, which happens after Messiah is cut off, that the sacrifice ceases.

 

 

 

These things are clear in the passage.

 

26  ........ and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; ......

 

Do you deny that the prince did come and destroy the sanctuary?

 

26 continued........and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

 

And that the end came as suddenly as a flood and that desolations continued to the end of the war?

 

In case you did not see the earlier post here is the image from the arch of Titus.

 

" title="External link">http://www.ancient.e...images/1287.jpg

 

There is no other prophecy in the bible that I can think of where we have such a graphic picture of its fulfillment.

 

The leader of the rebellion was taken to Rome and put to death in front of the statue of Jupiter, before Titus could enter Rome in triumph.  It is interesting to note that that same lump of metal is now worshiped in Rome under the name of Peter.

 

Titus was a prince.  His father was Emperor but Josephus constantly refers to Titus as "Caesar" 

[Invicta]

Only a "person" can "stand".  There is no ambiguity unless you force it.

 

Have you never heard of a standing army?

 

If this refers to a person standing in the temple, those in Judea and Jerusalem would not see it unless they were also in the temple.

 

Matt 24:15  When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16  Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17  Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18  Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19  And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20  But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21  For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

 

(whoso readeth, let him understand:) The Christians would understand, Luke did,

 

Luke 21:20 ¶  And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

21  Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

22  For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

 

[No Nicolaitans]

Daniel 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.

 

cease-

 שָׁבַת shabath (shaw-bath') v.

1. to repose, i.e. desist from exertion

 

Thank you Covenanter and Invicta for all of your responses; it helps me to better understand where you are coming from. I believe the meaning of "cease" is clear...it is the stopping of an actual action, not the stopping of an adjective (effectiveness).

 

I humbly bow out of this discussion now. Thanks again...and Invicta, I trust you are feeling better after getting some rest.

[DaveW]

 

26  ........ and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; ......

 

Do you deny that the prince did come and destroy the sanctuary?

 

26 continued........and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

 

And that the end came as suddenly as a flood and that desolations continued to the end of the war?

 

In case you did not see the earlier post here is the image from the arch of Titus.

 

" title="External link">http://www.ancient.e...images/1287.jpg

 

There is no other prophecy in the bible that I can think of where we have such a graphic picture of its fulfillment.

 

The leader of the rebellion was taken to Rome and put to death in front of the statue of Jupiter, before Titus could enter Rome in triumph.  It is interesting to note that that same lump of metal is now worshiped in Rome under the name of Peter.

 

Titus was a prince.  His father was Emperor but Josephus constantly refers to Titus as "Caesar" 

 

 

I am looking at the passage itself and I see the order of events - if you want this to relate only to the AD70 destruction of the Temple it makes no difference to your or my position on the understanding of the order of events - the cutting off of Messiah, but not for Himself is OBviously the Crucifixion of Christ.

Then there is a war.

Then there is a covenant that is confirmed for one week - this implies the beginning of the week starts at the confirmation.

Then the sacrifice and OBlation cease.

 

You can argue about all sorts of side issues, but the order of events is plain, and it with absolute definition separates the death of Messiah from the ceasing of the sacrifice.

 

The 69 weeks ends with the cutting off of Messiah, then there is a war, then the covenant is confirmed for a week - if you can fit a war in between 69 and 70 and still have them continuous, then good for you - I have never heard of  war that lasted for no time at all.

[beameup]

Where is the court of women?

 

There is supposed to be a court of women inside the court of gentiles - the Jews consider gentiles even lower than women....

The Court of Israel was the place for women and children.

 

96 A.D.  - John the Apostle:

And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles

Rev 11:1-2