Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Debate - Prophecy in Daniel 9


Recommended Posts

  • Members

​See Dan. 9:21-23 

​Indeed, Daniel 9:21-23 reads as follows:

"Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.  And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding.  At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision."

​It appears from those portions of Daniel 9:21-23 which I have emboldened that the angel Gabriel was speaking to Daniel himself when he (the angel) delivered the message of Daniel 9:24.

Brother Day, would you agree with this conclusion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The simple answer is that Gabriel is speaking to Daniel, but any message to a prophet is also for the people he serves, & as the product is Scripture, it is for all God's people to read & understand, & also to apply as appropriate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Brother Day,

The word "thy" is a first person  second person, singular personal pronoun of possession.  While delivering his message to Daniel (the simple, contextually straightforward truth), the angel Gabriel uses this pronoun twice in Daniel 9:24, once in the phrase, "upon thy people," and once in the phrase, "upon thy holy city."

Considering that the simple (contextually straightforward) truth is that the angel Gabriel was speaking to Daniel when he delivered the message of Daniel 9:24, when the angel Gabriel used the pronoun "thy" in this message, to what specific, singular individual was the angel Gabriel making reference?

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
Some days my brain is just a little off center.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Bro Scott wrote:
"Brother Day,

The word "thy" is a first person, singular personal pronoun of possession.  While delivering his message to Daniel (the simple, contextually straightforward truth), the angel Gabriel uses this pronoun twice in Daniel 9:24, once in the phrase, "upon thy people," and once in the phrase, "upon thy holy city."

Considering that the simple (contextually straightforward) truth is that the angel Gabriel was speaking to Daniel when he delivered the message of Daniel 9:24, when the angel Gabriel used the pronoun "thy" in this message, to what specific, singular individual was the angel Gabriel making reference?”

I have answered your question twice. I presume you are making some grammatical point that was not answered by quoting the relevant Scripture, nor by the answer I gave:

The simple answer is that Gabriel is speaking to Daniel, but any message to a prophet is also for the people he serves, & as the product is Scripture, it is for all God's people to read & understand, & also to apply as appropriate.

Time to move on. I will begin by reposting my understanding of v.26 & continue with v. 27.

Coming to verse 26...

24 Seventy 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 anoint the most Holy.
25 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.
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.”

I believe we should understand prophecy, as far as possible, by its fulfilment, OT prophecy may be fulfilled in the OT (or in intertestamental history), but in this case,as it concerns Messiah, we should look in the NT.

We know Jesus' ministry continued for about 3 years, which is after the 69th week, but in the middle of the 70th week. That agrees perfectly with: after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.

We know also that the city & the sanctuary were not destroyed within that 70th week, but about 35 years later. That, of course, is after threescore and two weeks. Jesus prophesied that dreadful event in his Olivet prophecy. Mat. 24, Mark 13 & Luke 21, & at other times towards the end of his ministry.

Also the people of the prince that shall come did destroy the city and the sanctuary. Titus & his Roman legions. “Flood” does not necessarily mean a watery deluge, but an overwhelming army. e.g. Isa. 59:19 History records the desolations.

Before I leave v. 26 I will point out that the “the” occurring twice in “the people of the prince that shall come” is the definite article, indicating specific people & a specific prince, identified as “shall come” & recognised by their actions. Further, “the city and the sanctuary” are previously identified & prayed for – Jerusalem & the temple. Dan. 9:16-19

An extraordinary aspect of the prophecy is the despite Daniel's wonderful & faithful prayer, the answer includes destruction of the city & the sanctuary, NOT the everlasting political blessings prophesied by other prophets. e.g. Isa. 1:24-28 Yet Gabriel declares:

Seventy 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 anoint the most Holy.

Once Messiah has completed his reconciliatory work, the city & the sanctuary are no longer included in God's prophetic purposes. As he shouted from the cross “It is FINISHED!

Judgement of those who rejected their Messiah was included in God's prophecy of the Messiah in Deut. 18:18-19. It was also stated in the closing chapter of the OT. Mal.4:4-6

In Acts 3, when Messiah has come & fulfilled his saving work “to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness,” Peter repeats Moses' warning:

22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not 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 covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.
26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Peter speaks of “these days.” God graciously allowed time for repentance, before that destruction would take place. Jesus warned “this generation” while Hebrews, quoting Psalm 95, warns of 40 years. 40 days was more than enough for Nineveh.

===================

So to verse 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.

Note Dan. 9:4:

And I prayed unto the LORD my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;

It is God who keeps the covenant. He makes the covenant, for the mercy & blessing of those who love him & keep his commandments. The word “covenant” occurs about 300 times in Scripture, often the synonym “testament” is used in the Gospels & Epistles. The concept of God's covenant relationship with the believer is a theme that runs throughout Scripture. A special aspect of the covenant is detailed in Lev. 26:

9 For I will have respect unto you, and make you fruitful, and multiply you, and establish my covenant with you.
10 And ye shall eat old store, and bring forth the old because of the new.
11 And I will set my tabernacle among you: and my soul shall not abhor you.
12 And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.

Note vs.11-12. That promise is repeated many times in Scripture, & is to be perfectly fulfilled in the NH&NE:

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.

In the Daniel 9 context, Messiah is the primary subject, who will complete God's purposes upon thy people and upon thy holy city. Messiah – God the Son – confirms the covenant. He does this by becoming the surety for God's people, by his incarnation under the covenant strictures, & fulfilling every detail of God's requirements for man under the covenant. The old covenant was based on laws that demanded perfect obedience. Deu. 27:26 While God provided sacrifices for sin, & accepted imperfect obedience, the perfect sacrifice of Christ was needed to fulfil the terms of the covenant from man's side.

Daniel 9 begins with reference to Jeremiah's 70 year prophecy (Jer. 29). In Jer. 31 we see prophecy concerning 2 covenants, including the glorious prophecy of a new covenant. Jer. 31:31-34

31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

It is worthwhile quoting that old covenant from Exodus 19:

5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him.
8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.

That covenant was ratified with blood:

Exo. 24:6 And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar.
7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.
8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.

Jesus makes the new covenant/testament in his own blood at Calvary. Hebrews takes up the prophecy in Jer. 31 in Heb. 8, showing how under the new covenant, the law is within & effected by God the Holy Spirit in the hearts of his people. Heb. 8:10 The old covenant was confirmed by Jesus' perfect obedience, & ended at Calvary. During the final, 70th “week”, from Jesus' baptism to 3 1/2 years after Calvary Jesus was confirming the old covenant with those who received him, & making the new & everlasting covenant in his own blood. The Apostolic Gospel was indeed confirmed with many during that 70th week, 3,000 on the day of Pentecost, & 5,000 a few days later. Before the martyrdom of Stephen, the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. The old covenant was powerless, because it required the obedience of man, whereas the new covenant is effective, as it is based on Jesus' perfect obedience. The covenant was confirmed & superceded at Calvary.

Once Jesus finished his saving work, the old covenant was ready to vanish away. Heb. 8:13. The focus of the old covenant, the temple with all its rituals & sacrifices was redundant. It did indeed vanish away before the generation that rejected their Messiah had passed. Mat. 24:34

I'll give Paul the last word:

Gal. 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

Surely Paul was aware of Dan. 9:27 when he wrote: the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

All that remained for those who rejected their Messiah was the prophesied desolation.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Bro Scott wrote:
"Brother Day,

The word "thy" is a first person, singular personal pronoun of possession.  While delivering his message to Daniel (the simple, contextually straightforward truth), the angel Gabriel uses this pronoun twice in Daniel 9:24, once in the phrase, "upon thy people," and once in the phrase, "upon thy holy city."

Considering that the simple (contextually straightforward) truth is that the angel Gabriel was speaking to Daniel when he delivered the message of Daniel 9:24, when the angel Gabriel used the pronoun "thy" in this message, to what specific, singular individual was the angel Gabriel making reference?”

I have answered your question twice. I presume you are making some grammatical point that was not answered by quoting the relevant Scripture, nor by the answer I gave:

The simple answer is that Gabriel is speaking to Daniel, but any message to a prophet is also for the people he serves, & as the product is Scripture, it is for all God's people to read & understand, & also to apply as appropriate.

Brother Day,

Since you appear to acknowledge that the pronoun "thy" in Daniel 9:24 is a reference to Daniel himself, would you agree that it is legitimate to explain the "thy people" phrase of Daniel 9:24 as being a reference to Daniel's people? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Brother Day,

Since you appear to acknowledge that the pronoun "thy" in Daniel 9:24 is a reference to Daniel himself, would you agree that it is legitimate to explain the "thy people" phrase of Daniel 9:24 as being a reference to Daniel's people? 

20 And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God;

Consider the grammar carefully, & God is Daniel's God, & Israel comprises Daniel's people. 

24 Seventy 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 anoint the most Holy.

As the prophecy proceeds, "thy holy city" is Jerusalem, but "thy people" are not further identified, though we can recognise the "many" with whom the covenant is confirmed as "my people Israel", aka "thy people," these being the many thousands converted during Jesus' earthly ministry, & during the first few years after Pentecost. That's within the 70 weeks. Further conversion of Jews has continued down the ages.

To what extent are they Daniel's people & city? He acknowledges them as his people - he is an Israelite & he does not disassociate himself from those who were disobedient & caused the exile. Jerusalem is his city, presumably of birth, & certainly as a Jew in exile he considered Jerusalem as his city. 

Are disobedient, rebellious Israel "my people?" See Hosea, written over 100 years before Daniel. 

9 Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be yourGod.

Happily their disobedience does not annul the promises to the Patriarchs, nor the purposes of God for his people which are fulfilled in Christ by the Gospel. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

20 And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God;

Consider the grammar carefully, & God is Daniel's God, & Israel comprises Daniel's people. (emphasis added by Pastor Scott Markle)

​Brother Day,

Thank you for your answer.

Indeed, the “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24 can be legitimately understood as a reference unto Daniel’s people; and indeed, Daniel’s people are the people of Israel, as per your reference to the contextual information in Daniel 9:20 (to which might also be added Daniel 9:7 & Daniel 9:11).

24 Seventy 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 anoint the most Holy.

As the prophecy proceeds, "thy holy city" is Jerusalem, but "thy people" are not further identified, . . .

Although the “thy people” have already been identified in the previous context of Daniel 9.

. . . though we can recognise the "many" with whom the covenant is confirmed as "my people Israel", aka "thy people," . . .

Herein we are agree – In this context the “many” of Daniel 9:27, with whom the “he” of the verse confirms “the covenant” of the verse, would be a reference to Daniel’s people Israel.

. . . these being the many thousands converted during Jesus' earthly ministry, & during the first few years after Pentecost. That's within the 70 weeks. Further conversion of Jews has continued down the ages.

Herein we are not agreed – due to a number of disagreements that we have over various of the details in Daniel 9:27.

Are disobedient, rebellious Israel "my people?" See Hosea, written over 100 years before Daniel. 

9 Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be yourGod.

With which we should also consider the two verses that immediately follow Hosea 1:9, that is – Hosea 1:10-11:

Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.  Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel.”

(It is also worthy of notice that within the immediate context of Hosea 1, as per Hosea 1:4-7, the statement of Hosea 1:9 only applied specifically to “the house of Israel” in contrast to “the house of Judah.”)

Now those misquotes ARE very silly & potentially confusing.  (Indeed.  As per your corrective, I have corrected my confusing miscommunications and misquotations by the strikeout method.  Even so, the two misquotations should have read – “the people of Israel are the descendants of Abraham.”  Will you forgive me for these miscommunications?)

That is my understanding, based on a range of Scriptures beginning with Gen. 12:1-3. God makes his redemptive purposes very clear in Isaiah 49:1-8. Please read & re-read that inspired passage. It was written before the captivity & Gabriel would certainly have been aware of it, & its implications when he explained to Daniel the future God had determined for Israel.

Since you have brought Genesis 12:1-3 forward on a number of occasions in relation to the “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24, let us consider the correspondence of that passage to Daniel 9:24.  In Genesis 12:1-3 the Lord God delivered his promise of blessing unto Abraham as follows:

Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee: and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”

Herein the Lord God presented five different blessing statements:

1.  And I will make of thee a great nation.”
2.  And I will bless thee, and make thy name great.”
3.  And thou shalt be a blessing.”
4.  And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee.”
5.  And in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”

The first of these blessing statements reveals the Lord God’s promise to make one, single great nation (as per the singular word “nation”) out of Abraham.  As such, this one singular nation (one singular national people group) would be the promised descendants out of Abraham.  On the other hand, the last of these blessing statement reveals the Lord God’s promise to cause the multitude of all the families (people groups) throughout the earth to be blessed in and through Abraham (and his descendants, specifically in and through the Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior for all the world).  Now, in accord with the mathematics of the case, these two promises cannot be made equivalent to one another; for the first promise speaks concerning one singular national people group, whereas the last promise speaks concerning the multitude of all the familial people groups throughout the whole earth.

So then, which of these two blessing statements and promises speaks concerning and corresponds with Daniel’s people Israel from the context of Daniel 9:24?  Are Daniel’s people Israel equivalent to the one singular nation (national people group) that the Lord God promised to make out of Abraham as his descendants?  Or, are Daniel’s people Israel equivalent to all the families (people groups) throughout the whole earth?  To me the answer seems fairly clear.

Now, (1) if the one singular nation (national people group) that the Lord God promised to make out of Abraham as his descendants cannot legitimately be seen as equivalent to all the families throughout the whole earth, and (2) if Daniel’s people Israel can legitimately be seen as equivalent to the one singular nation (national people group) that the Lord God promised to make out of Abraham as his descendants, then we may conclude that the prophetic utterance of Daniel 9:24-27 can legitimately be narrowed in focus unto Daniel’s people Israel, the one singular national people group that the Lord God promised to make out of Abraham as his descendants.  Even so, the teaching of Genesis 12:1-3 does not actually support, but actually counters your position that Daniel 9:24-27 should be viewed as having “a wider scope than just the children of Israel.”

(Concerning Isaiah 49:1-8, I am not at all understanding your intent in presenting this passage as having a correspondence to Daniel 9:24-27.  Could you provide a more extensive explanation concerning your intentions with this passage?)

_____________________________________________

I recommend a search on blueletterbible.org for “nation israel” - 13 verses, only one in the NTRom. 10:19 – and none in Daniel.
& “people israel” - 270 verses including 59 exact phrases, including 2 in the birth narratives –
Mat. 2:6 Luke 2:29-32. There is also the reference to “thy people” Luke 1:62 in Zechariah's prophecy.

Israel as a nation has relevant references: Exo. 19:6 which is quoted by Peter & applied to the church. 1 Peter 2:9 & Jer. 31:31-36 which relates to the new covenant promise in Hebrews 8, & Eze. 37:22 where the tribes are gathered as one nation & so they become “my people & I will be their God.” Note Jer. 31:34 which relates to Dan. 9:24

It is adding & wrongly interpreting what the Holy Spirit has inspired when you assert that the prophecy relates specifically to: “Daniel’s people, the children of Israel as a national group especially in the light of Isaiah 49 quoted by Simeon & Paul. Isa. 42:6 Acts 13:47 Acts 26:23 The teaching of Scripture overrides your grammatical analysis.

Referring to Daniel’s people Israel as “a national group” (or, as a national people group) is supported first by the Lord God’s promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:2 – “And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing.”  Furthermore, it is supported by the Lord God’s reiteration of that promise unto Jacob (whose name the Lord God had changed to Israel) in Genesis 46:3 – “And he said, I am God, the God of thy father: fear not to go down into Egypt; for I will there make of thee a great nation.”  Indeed, it is supported by various passages throughout the Old Testament, including such passages as Exodus 19:6; Deuteronomy 4:6-8; Deuteronomy 26:5; 2 Samuel 7:23; 1 Chronicles 17:21; Psalm 147:19-20; Isaiah 1:4; Isaiah 26:1-2; Jeremiah 31:35-37; Ezekiel 2:3; Ezekiel 37:22.  Finally, it would be of value for us directly to consider one of these passages, Jeremiah 31:35-37 –

Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; the LORD of hosts is his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.  Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.”

So then, have the ordinances of "the sun for a light by day" and "of the moon and of the stars for a light by night" departed from before the Lord?  As best as I could tell last night and this morning, they have not.  Therefore, I am brought to the conclusion, based upon the absolute faithfulness of God's Word, that "the seed of Israel" has also not "ceased from being a nation" before the Lord "for ever." 

 Scripture makes it very clear that God's blessings are for all the nations of the earth Gen. 22:18, repeated to Isaac Gen. 26:4 & Jacob Gen. 28:14 . . .

 Actually, Scripture does not indicate this at all.  In your statement you have applied a plural number of “God’s blessings” unto “all the nations of the earth.”  (By this statement, you may even be implying that the plural number of all “God’s blessings” are for and unto “all the nations of the earth.”)  Yet not a single one of the references that you have provided in support of your assertion actually speaks concerning a plural number of “God’s blessings” being administered unto “all the nations of the earth.”  What these passages actually do say is as follows:

Genesis 22:18 – “And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.”  (That is – in and through Abraham’s seed “all the nations of the earth” would be blessed with some form of blessing from the Lord God.  Yet what that form of blessing would be is not at all specified.  Nor are we even informed that that form of blessing would be plural.)

Genesis 26:4 – “And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.”  (That is – in and through Isaac’s seed “all the nations of the earth” would be blessed with some form of blessing from the Lord God.  Yet what that form of blessing would be is not at all specified.  Nor are we even informed that that form of blessing would be plural.)

Genesis 28:14 – “And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.”  (That is – in and through Jacob’s seed “all the families of the earth” would be blessed with some form of blessing from the Lord God.  Yet what that form of blessing would be is not at all specified.  Nor are we even informed that that form of blessing would be plural.)

. . . so when Gabriel answers Daniel's prayer with the words:
Seventy 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 anoint the most Holy.
he is stating prophecy relating to God eternal declared purposes. The people of Israel will be blessed according to God's declared prophecy, as they respond in faith & obedience. The nations & families of the earth will also be blessed as they respond to God & the message of the Messiah.

 Your above conclusion is built upon your previous foundational premise.  Yet since your previous foundation premise stands faulty, so the conclusion that you have built upon that faulty foundation also stands faulty.  Indeed, “the nations & families of the earth” are not anywhere whatsoever at all mentioned in Daniel 9:24.  Although you continually contend that you are simply following the simple reading of the passage (in opposition to my “complicated grammatical analysis” of the passage), you are the one who is herein adding something to the passage that is not at all present therein.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Why “thy people”? Gabriel the archangel is speaking, so he refers to the people in question as “thy people” whereas if the LORD were speaking, he would have said “my people.” So they are Daniel's people because Daniel is a Jew who identifies himself with God's people Israel.

 

The question of your previous post comes down to:

Is God keeping his promise to Israel as a believing people in the present Gospel age through the redeeming work of the Lord Jesus Christ, or is Israel still waiting to become a godly nation under Jesus as King & David as co-regent?

 

Is God punishing 60 or more generations of the children of Israel when he said “this generation?” Mat. 24:34 Is that the way a faithful God keeps his promises?

 

In Hosea 3:1-5 God tells Israel (as distinct from Judah):

4 For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:

5 Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.

Israel did not return when Judah returned. They remained scattered 600 years, not only without a king (like Judah) but without the temple worship. Those who believed were gathered by the Apostolic preaching.

 

The force of the Gospels, and the Apostolic preaching, is that Jesus was born King in David's line Mat. 1:1 Luke 1:32-33 Luke 1:68-79 , was crucified as “King of the Jews” and ascended to David's throne at his Father's right hand. Acts 2:30-36

 

Peter clearly understands the kingdom of priests & the holy nation of Exo. 19:6 to be the church of believers in Jesus 1 Peter 2:9 , & not the unbelievers. 1 Peter 2:7-8 Note that the believers become the prophesied “holy nation.”

 

Hosea saw the disobedient “not my people” of Israel as people to be gathered as “my people” together with Gentiles 1 Peter 1:1 1 Peter 2:10 . The description of Peter's readers in 1 Peter 4:3 is hardly that of children of Israel waiting for the Messiah. Paul uses Hosea to show that the Gentiles (never “my people”) become my people, beloved, children of the living God. Rom. 9:22-26 Don't forget that Romans continues to 16 chapters & includes Rom. 15:8-13 showing that Jesus confirm(ed) the promises made unto the fathers. Isn't that what Gabriel prophesied? He shall confirm the covenant ...

 

God's purposes for his people Israel are fulfilled in & by the Lord Jesus Christ. When they come as sinners to Jesus they are welcomed into the full relationship as redeemed children of Abraham & children of God. Gal. 3:26-29 But they must repent & come, & abide not still in unbelief. There is a glorious new covenant in Jesus' blood.

 

There are 60 generations of Jews who have lived & died in rejection of their Messiah, Jesus. However, during that period countless Jews, beginning with the many thousands recorded in Acts, have believed in their Messiah, Jesus, & been numbered with the strangers & pilgrims rejected by their nation. The church is the continuing children of Israel, children of God. Note that wonderful prophecy of Isaiah 49, Isa. 42:6 echoed by Simeon & Paul: Luke 2:29-32 Acts 13:47 Acts 26:23

Isa. 49:6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

 

The prophecy of Gabriel was gloriously fulfilled by Jesus within the 70 weeks.

 

Those who rejected their Messiah could not annul the prophecy – that rejection & its consequences – destruction & desolation - were also according Gabriel's prophecy. See also Deu. 18:18-19 quoted by Peter in Acts 3:22-26

 

The Gospel is still open, & vast numbers of Jews may yet repent & trust in their presently despised & rejected Messiah.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

Why “thy people”? Gabriel the archangel is speaking, so he refers to the people in question as “thy people” . . .

Because, indeed, Gabriel is speaking to Daniel about Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, and because the Lord God Himself had determined that the “seventy weeks” would be specifically administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.

. . . whereas if the LORD were speaking, he would have said “my people.”

I myself prefer not to presume on what the all-wise Lord God might have said, especially since that is not what actually happened, and was not what actually was said.  If the all-wise Lord God had desired to speak directly to Daniel, He certainly could have.  Since He chose to send the angel Gabriel, I must believe that this was the wisest course of action in that instance.  Furthermore, since the angel Gabriel used the phrase, “thy people,” I must believe that “thy people” was the exact phrase that the all-wise Lord God instructed and intended for Gabriel to use.

The question of your previous post comes down to:

Is God keeping his promise to Israel as a believing people in the present Gospel age through the redeeming work of the Lord Jesus Christ, or is Israel still waiting to become a godly nation under Jesus as King & David as co-regent?

No, the purpose of my previous posting was as follows:

1.  To emphasize the truth that the “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24 truly is a reference unto Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.

2.  To demonstrate that the Lord God’s promise unto Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3 corresponds to the “thy people” phrase of Daniel 9:24 through the phrase, “And I will make of thee a great nation,” not through the phrase, “And in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”

3.  To demonstrate that it is Biblically legitimate to make reference unto the children of Israel as a national people group, as per the Lord God’s own usage of the term nation for them, beginning with the Lord God’s promise in Genesis 12:2 to make out of Abraham’s descendants “a great nation.”

4.  To express a corrective concerning your statement, “Scripture makes it very clear that God's blessings are for all the nations of the earth Gen. 22:18, repeated to Isaac Gen. 26:4 & Jacob Gen. 28:14 . . .”

Now, since the remainder of your previous posting is based upon your misunderstanding concerning the primary points of my previous posting, I do not feel any relevant need to engage any further with it.  Rather, I believe that we should return our focus to the details of Daniel 9:24-27, since that is the actual purpose for this discussion-debate.

_____________________________________

The saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ was FINISHED at Calvary, with his death & resurrection, followed by his ascension.

Throughout your postings your continue to emphasize this point.  Certainly, it is a worthy Biblical and doctrinal point for emphasis.  However, in the context of this discussion-debate, it is not greatly needed.  There is NO disagreement between us concerning this point itself.  The disagreement is not whether, or not, “the saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ was FINISHED at Calvary, with His death and resurrection, followed by His ascension.”  Rather, the disagreement is whether, or not, Daniel 9:24 is speaking concerning this saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ.  You say that it is, and I say that it is not.  So then, in the context of this discussion-debate, it is our respective responsibility to give evidence for our opposing positions.

That was in the middle of week 70, assuming that 70 follows 69.

Yes, making that human assumption is necessary for your position.  Indeed, this is a matter of disagreement between us.  We both agree that “week” 70 follows after the first 69 “weeks.”  However, you make the human assumption, based upon the natural manner of counting, that “week” 70 follows immediately consecutive after the first 69 “weeks,” whereas I would contend that “week” 70 follows after the first 69 “weeks,” but with a gap of time between them, rather than immediately consecutive.  Now, if there is nothing in the Biblical revelation of Daniel 9:26-27 to indicate otherwise, then the human assumption of natural counting would certainly be valid.  However, if there is something in the Biblical revelation of Daniel 9:26-27 to indicate otherwise, then the authority of God’s word would cancel any human assumption.

 Did Jesus then bring in everlasting righteousness? Paul discusses this in great detail in Romans. You are contending that the actual application of those blessings is yet future as it must be absolute, perfectly realised, so that week 70 is totally separated from week 69. That is an assumption imposed by your grammatical interpretation, not a straightforward reading of Scripture.

You continue to place my grammatical analysis in contrast to a straightforward reading.  The fact is that if a grammatical analysis is accurate to a given text, then it is equivalent to a straightforward reading, simply with a more detailed understanding for the specific ways in which the words and phrases of the text are being used and are modifying other words and phrases in the text.  As such, a correct grammatical analysis, by definition, does not assume or impose anything on the given text.  It only reveals what is actually, straightforwardly being stated in the given text.  Now, with regard to the discussion-debate itself, I am actually the only one of us who has done any significant grammatical analysis of the passage.  I have to wonder why that might be?  I have to wonder why you yourself do not engage in grammatical analysis?

Did Jesus then bring in everlasting righteousness? Paul discusses this in great detail in Romans . . . .

When Abraham believed in the LORD, & he counted it to him for righteousness, did Abraham immediately become sinless? No, but he did become righteous. We also become righteous by faith, as Paul explains in Romans 3 & 4. The righteousness we have by faith in Christ is everlasting righteousness. I don't think you will dispute that Jesus at Calvary made reconciliation for iniquity, so did he not also finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins? Yes! Rom. 6:22-23 Micah 7:18-20 Isa. 44:22-23 Acts 3:19

Every believer, both in the OT & the NT, possess everlasting righteousness, because we have the righteousness of faith in Christ. Rom. 9:30 Phil. 3:9 Hab. 2:4

Personal salvation takes place in time, but Jesus' saving work was FINISHED during the 70th week. And many thousands of Israel believed in their Messiah within the 70 weeks.

Concerning “everlasting righteousness.”

Throughout God’s Holy Word we encounter various aspects of “everlasting righteousness,” as follows:

1.  Forgiveness & Imputation.  Forgiveness is the work of God wherein, at the moment of an individual’s faith in Christ for salvation, God completely forgives that individual’s account of all unrighteousness, such that that individual believer’s account in heaven is eternally without even the smallest speck of unrighteousness.  In addition, imputation is the work of God wherein, at the moment of an individual’s faith in Christ for salvation, God records the perfect righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ Himself on that individual’s account, such that that individual believer’s account in heaven is eternally filled with the record of absolutely perfect righteousness.  This then provides a heavenly record of “everlasting righteousness.”  (See Acts 2:38; 10:43; 13:38-39; 26:18; Colossians 1:14; 2:13; Romans 3:21-26; 4:1-25; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Philippians 3:8-9)

2.  Justification.  Justification is the work of God, based upon His work of forgiveness and imputation, wherein, at the moment of an individual’s faith in Christ for salvation, God judicially declares that individual believer to have a judicial standing before Him as completely without any unrighteousness and as completely possessing perfect righteousness.  This then provides a judicial standing of “everlasting righteousness.”  (See Romans 3:24-31; 4:5, 25; 5:1, 9, 15-21; 8:29-33; 1 Corinthians 6:11; Galatians 2:16; 3:7-11; Titus 3:7)

3.  Regeneration.  Regeneration is the work of God wherein, at the moment of an individual’s faith in Christ for salvation, God spiritually begets that individual as one of His own dear children, joining that individual believer’s old spirit, which was spiritually dead in trespasses and sins, with Christ spiritually in His crucifixion, so as to remove that old spirit from that individual believer, and joining that individual believer with Christ spiritually in His resurrection, so as to create a new spirit by the power of God the Holy Spirit within that individual believer, which is created after the likeness of God’s own perfect righteousness and true holiness.  This then provides a partial (spirit) condition of “everlasting righteousness.  (See John 1:12-13; 3:3-8; 5:24; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Romans 6:3-11; Ephesians 2:1-10; 4:24; Titus 3:5-6; 1 Peter 1:3-5, 23)

4.  Glorification.  Glorification is the work of God wherein He shall, at the future resurrection, change each individual believer’s soul from corruptible to incorruptible and each individual believer’s body from mortal to immortality, thereby fashioning each individual believer in spirit, soul, and body after the glorious image of our Lord Jesus Christ.  This then provides a perfect condition of “everlasting righteousness.”  (See John 6:39-40; Romans 8:16-23, 29-30; 1 Corinthians 15:42-57; Ephesians 1:13-14; Colossians 3:4; Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Peter 1:3-5; 1 John 3:1-2)

5.  Israel’s Restoration.  Israel’s restoration is the work of God wherein He shall save and convert all of the children of Israel by putting a new heart and a new spirit in every one of them, such that He will cause His Law and His fear to be in their hearts, such that He will cause them to obey His Word and His will, and such that He will cause them never to defile themselves or depart from Him again.  This then provides a perfect condition of “everlasting righteousness” for the children of Israel.  (See Jeremiah 3:17-29; 31:31-34; 32:37-40; Ezekiel 36:25-28; 37:21-23.)

So then, to which one of these aspects of “everlasting righteousness” does Daniel 9:24 refer when it presents the purpose statement, “to bring in everlasting righteousness”? 

First, as we seek to answer this question, we can legitimately combine points #1-3 above for this question, since they all occur in the same event, that is – the event of an individual’s faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior.  Thus we are able to consider three possible options for our question – (1) the event of a believer’s salvation, (2) the event of a believer’s glorification, (3) the event of Israel’s restoration.

Second, in considering the phrase itself from Daniel 9:24, we find that in itself it does not reveal the answer, since it does not include any further modifiers of explanation.  Therefore, it becomes necessary for us to consider other matters in the context in order to help discern the answer to our question.

Even so, we take notice that this purpose statement is joined with two other purpose statements that seem to present “the other side of the coin.”  These are the two phrases, “to finish the transgression” and “to make an end of sins.”  On the one hand, we have transgression and sins being brought to a complete finishing and a complete ending.  (Note: In previous postings Brother Day has made accusation against me that I am adding to the intent of God’s Word by adding the word “complete” in my explanation for these phrases.  However, by definition the words “finish” and “end” indicate that which is concluded and completed, such that it no longer continues.  Thus, in fact, my explanatory phrases “complete finishing” and “complete ending” are grammatical redundancies, which I have purposefully chosen for the sake of emphasis.)  On the other hand, we have a condition of “everlasting righteous” being brought into being.  So then, of our three possible options, which ones combine a complete finishing and ending of transgression and sins with an ongoing condition of “everlasting righteousness”?  Actually, two options allow for this – the event of a believer’s glorification and the event of Israel’s restoration.

So then, is there any other matters of context that might help us to discern the answer to our question above?  Yes, we take notice that the “seventy weeks” about which Daniel 9:24 speaks is specifically determined by the Lord God to be administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Now, since the purpose statements of Daniel 9:24 present the Lord God’s purpose for the “seventy weeks,” these purpose statements must be an integral part of the “seventy weeks.”  Furthermore, since the “seventy weeks” are specifically to be administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, then in this context we should view the purpose statements for those “seventy weeks” as also being specifically for Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  So then, of our three possible options, which one combines a complete finishing and ending of transgression and sins with an ongoing condition of “everlasting righteousness” and applies this specifically to the children of Israel?  Answer – The event of Israel’s restoration.

(Note:  It is likely that Brother Day will discard “the event of Israel’s restoration” as a non-legitimate option for the phrase “everlasting righteousness.”  First, it is likely that he will do so by continuing to disregard the truth that the “seventy weeks” were determined by the Lord God to be administered specifically “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Furthermore, it is likely that he will do so by denying that “the event of Israel’s restoration” has any application unto this present earth, but only an application unto the new earth to come.  As such, it is likely that Brother Day will continue to press “the event of a believer’s salvation,” which includes the “everlasting righteousness” aspects of forgiveness and imputation, justification, and regeneration.  However, if he does continue to press this, he runs into a “timing” problem of his own.)

Brother Day, you have previously pressed “the event of a believer’s salvation,” including forgiveness and imputation, justification, and even regeneration, as the only legitimate option for the case of “everlasting righteousness” in Daniel 9:24.  In so doing, you have presented the apostle Paul’s usage of Abraham as an example for this aspect of “everlasting righteousness.”  Indeed, it is Biblically accurate to use the case of Abraham as an Old Testament example for this aspect of “everlasting righteousness.” 

Forgiveness and imputation as a unit is indeed an aspect of “everlasting righteousness;” and we would both agree that Old Testament believers experienced this aspect of “everlasting righteousness,” even as the example of Abraham would reveal.  Furthermore, justification is indeed an aspect of “everlasting righteousness;” and we would both agree that Old Testament believers experienced this aspect of “everlasting righteousness,” even as the example of Abraham would reveal.  Finally, regeneration is indeed an aspect of “everlasting righteousness;” and you and I would both agree (although some on my side of this debate would not agree with me on this point) that Old Testament believers even experienced this aspect of “everlasting righteousness.” 

Yet since these aspects were already available and experienced by Old Testament believers thousands of years before Daniel, how would they need to be “brought in” hundreds of years after Daniel, as per the phrase, “to bring in everlasting righteousness”?  The phrase “to bring in” seems to indicate something that was not previously present, for there is no need “to bring in” something that is already present and being experienced.  As such, the phrase “to bring in” would reveal that the aspects of forgiveness and imputation, justification, and regeneration are specifically not the aspects of “everlasting righteousness” about which the phrase in Daniel 9:24 is speaking, since those aspects of “everlasting righteousness” had already been brought in to be experienced from the very first Old Testament believer onward.

____________________________________________

[Pastor Scott Markle]

At our Lord Jesus Christ’s exaltation to the right hand of God the Father, He experienced a second anointing (as per Psalm 2:2-9; Psalm 45:1-8; Hebrews 1:8-9).  According to these passages, it appears that this anointing was for our Lord Jesus Christ’s ministry as King.  Even so, Psalm 2:7-9 appears to reveal that this kingship ministry will have its fulfilled application as follows – “I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.  Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.  Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” 

[Brother Ian Day]

When was Psalm 2:7 fulfilled? Paul tells us it was at the resurrection. Rom. 1:4 Peter alludes to this in Acts 2:30-32 Peter also applies Psalm 2 to those who crucified the Messiah, both Jewish leaders & Gentiles in his prayer. Acts 4:24-31 He is ascended to his heavenly throne as the anointed One. Heb. 1:1-14

Indeed, Psalm 2:7 was fulfilled at our Lord Jesus Christ’s resurrection.  In fact, I would contend that Acts 13:32-33 substantiates that even better than the verses which you have presented, as follows:

And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.”

However, the point of my statements above were not only about Psalm 2:7, but were also about Psalm 2:8-9.  In these three verses, a progression of three things is presented, as follows:

1.  The day that God the Father “begot” God the Son, which according to Acts 13:32-33 occurred at the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

2.  The day that God the Father gave “the heathen” and “the uttermost parts of the earth” unto God the Son for His inheritance and possession.

3.  The day when God the Son would break the heathen “with a rod of iron” and dash the heathen “in pieces like a potter’s vessel.”

So then, when was Psalm 2:8-9 fulfilled; or when shall Psalm 2:8-9 yet be fulfilled?  It was in answer to this point that I presented Hebrews 10:12-13 & Revelation 19:11-16; 20:1-4.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

However, at our Lord’s exaltation to the right hand of God the Father, He did not immediately engage in the administration of that kingship ministry upon and over the whole earth.  Rather, according to the teaching of the book of Hebrews, our Lord Jesus Christ is presently engaged in His ministry as High Priest.  Indeed, Hebrews 10:12-13 appears to indicate that our Lord Jesus Christ is yet waiting for the earthly application of His kingship ministry – “But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.”

[Brother Ian Day]

Not at all. Read Heb. 1 before you read Heb. 10. Peter explains what is happening & why there appears to be a slowness to God fulfilling his promises – 2 Peter 3:3-9 Note Mat. 28:18-20 ALL power.

Hebrews, in Heb. 7:1-3 explains Jesus' status as great high Priest & King in his teaching about Melchisedec who was the only Priest-King in the OT, not only a type of Christ, but Christ himself, the LORD, the most high God. Gen. 14:18-22 .....

Please understand that I did not at all deny that our Lord Jesus Christ is both Priest and King.  In fact, I fully acknowledged that He was anointed for His ministry as King at His exaltation to the right hand of God the Father.  However, I presented that our Lord Jesus Christ is presently engaged in the administration of His ministry as Priest, and not as King.  Indeed, I presented that our Lord Jesus Christ shall engage in the administration of His ministry as King in the future when the prophetic events of Revelation 19:11-16 & Revelation 20:1-4 are fulfilled; for then He shall rule over the heathen and the whole earth “with a rod of iron” (see Revelation 19:15) in fulfillment of Psalm 2:8-9.

Now, let us consider Hebrews 10:12-13 in comparison with Hebrews 1.  In Hebrews 10:12-13 we find a number of truths concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, as follows:

1.  He “offered one sacrifice” (of Himself) “for sins for ever.”

2.  Then He “sat down on the right hand of God.”

3.  “Henceforth” (that is – from that time forward) He is sitting at God’s right hand “expecting” (that is – in a spirit of expectation, of expecting anticipation).

4.  He will continue “henceforth” in this spirit of “expecting” anticipation “till his enemies be made his footstool.”

So then, what do we find in Hebrews 1?

Hebrews 1:3 – “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins . . .”  This corresponds perfectly with point #1 above.

Hebrews 1:3-4 – “. . . sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.”  This corresponds perfectly with point #2 above.

Hebrews 1:8-9 – “But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.  Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.”  This continues the correspondence with point #2 above, and reveals the truth that at God the Son’s exaltation to the right hand of God the Father, He was anointed for His ministry as King.

Hebrews 1:13a – “But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand . . .”  This also corresponds perfectly with point #2 above.

Hebrews 1:13b – “. . . until I make thine enemies thy footstool?”  This corresponds perfectly with points #3-4 above.

So then, by reading Hebrews 1 before reading Hebrews 10:12-13, I find that my understand of Hebrews 10:12-13 is correct and even has a perfect correspondence with Hebrews 1 (which was certainly as I would expect, since God’s Word does not contradict itself).

_________________________________________________

Your focus on “Israel as a national group” rather than Israel as God's people is a serious division between us.

Is it also a serious division between you and the Lord God? 

Genesis 12:2 – “And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing.”

Jeremiah 31:35-37 – “Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; the LORD of hosts is his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.  Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.”

______________________________________________

The OT prophecies are given in terms of Israel, as descendants of Abraham, through Isaac & Jacob, & the promises to the patriarchs include the nations.  (underline and bold added by Pastor Scott Markle)

Actually, as I have presented in a previous posting, the Lord God presented five different promise statements with His message unto Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3.  To these the Lord God then added a sixth promise statement in Genesis 12:7; and of these six promise statements, only one of them is a promise of blessing specifically for all the families and nations of the earth.  These promise statements are as follows:

1.  “And I will make of thee a great nation.” (v. 2)  This is a promise only to Abraham and his physical descendants, the children of Israel.

2.  “And I will bless thee, and make thy name great.” (v. 2)  This is a promise only to Abraham himself.

3.  “And thou shalt be a blessing.” (v. 2)  This is a promise only concerning Abraham himself.

4.  “And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee.” (v. 3)  This is a promise and a curse specifically concerning how others relate to Abraham and his physical descendants, the children of Israel.

5.  “And in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” (v. 3)  This is the one and only promise that is specifically for all the families and nations of the earth, a blessing that is promised in and through Abraham and his physical descendants, the children of Israel.

6.  “Unto thy seed will I give this land.” (v. 7)  This is a promise only to Abraham and his physical descendants, the children of Israel.

So then, why is it that the one who continually claims the principle of a “straightforward reading” as the ground for his position is not actually following the straightforward reading concerning this matter – that “the promises [plural] to the patriarchs include the nations”?

_______________________________________________

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Certainly, John reveals in 1 John 3:9, under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, that that part of us believers which has been “born of God” does not ever engage in the commission of sin.  Before an individual’s salvation, that individual’s spirit was spiritually “dead in trespasses and sins” (see Ephesians 2:1-3), being completed “alienated from the life of God” (see Ephesians 5:18) and from any walk of fellowship with God.  However, at the moment of faith in Christ as Savior, that individual’s spiritually dead spirit was crucified with Christ and thereby eradicated (see Romans 6:6).  In addition, that individual was raised up with Christ unto “newness of life” (see Romans 4), having his spirit regenerated (spiritually born again) as a new creature in Christ Jesus (see 2 Corinthians 5:15), such that his regenerate spirit is now created after God’s own nature in “righteousness and true holiness” (see Ephesians 4:24).  In this manner, the regenerate spirit of the believer has indeed entered a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness.”

[Brother Ian Day]

Again you are adding to the Scripture to make your argument. Where in Rom. 6:6 do we read that our (previously) spiritually dead spirit is eradicated? The body of sin (aka the flesh) is indeed destroyed but our spirit is regenerated. We have new life freed from sin.

I think that last sentence is actually saying that “the regenerated believer is in the spiritual condition of everlasting righteousness.” I hope that means we are in agreement, but again I fear that may not be the case.

I suppose that you can think whatever you want to think about my last statement above.  I suppose that you can even change it however you wish to change it.  However, you cannot change my last statement above and then put it back into my mouth as is if your change is what I said or is what I meant to say.  I said precisely what I intended to say in the statement that I myself made – “In this manner, the regenerate spirit of the believer has indeed entered a spiritual condition of “everlasting righteousness” (not the entire person of the believer, that is – not the soul or body of the believer).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'll select the follow key quotation covering specific aspects of the debate, particularly relating to v. 24. 

Quote: Bro Scott

So then, to which one of these aspects of “everlasting righteousness” does Daniel 9:24 refer when it presents the purpose statement, “to bring in everlasting righteousness”? 

First, as we seek to answer this question, we can legitimately combine points #1-3 above for this question, since they all occur in the same event, that is – the event of an individual’s faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior.  Thus we are able to consider three possible options for our question – (1) the event of a believer’s salvation, (2) the event of a believer’s glorification, (3) the event of Israel’s restoration.

Second, in considering the phrase itself from Daniel 9:24, we find that in itself it does not reveal the answer, since it does not include any further modifiers of explanation.  Therefore, it becomes necessary for us to consider other matters in the context in order to help discern the answer to our question.

Even so, we take notice that this purpose statement is joined with two other purpose statements that seem to present “the other side of the coin.”  These are the two phrases, “to finish the transgression” and “to make an end of sins.”  On the one hand, we have transgression and sins being brought to a complete finishing and a complete ending.  (Note: In previous postings Brother Day has made accusation against me that I am adding to the intent of God’s Word by adding the word “complete” in my explanation for these phrases.  However, by definition the words “finish” and “end” indicate that which is concluded and completed, such that it no longer continues.  Thus, in fact, my explanatory phrases “complete finishing” and “complete ending” are grammatical redundancies, which I have purposefully chosen for the sake of emphasis.)  On the other hand, we have a condition of “everlasting righteous” being brought into being.  So then, of our three possible options, which ones combine a complete finishing and ending of transgression and sins with an ongoing condition of “everlasting righteousness”?  Actually, two options allow for this – the event of a believer’s glorification and the event of Israel’s restoration.

So then, is there any other matters of context that might help us to discern the answer to our question above?  Yes, we take notice that the “seventy weeks” about which Daniel 9:24 speaks is specifically determined by the Lord God to be administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Now, since the purpose statements of Daniel 9:24present the Lord God’s purpose for the “seventy weeks,” these purpose statements must be an integral part of the “seventy weeks.”  Furthermore, since the “seventy weeks” are specifically to be administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, then in this context we should view the purpose statements for those “seventy weeks” as also being specifically for Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  So then, of our three possible options, which one combines a complete finishing and ending of transgression and sins with an ongoing condition of “everlasting righteousness” and applies this specifically to the children of Israel?  Answer – The event of Israel’s restoration.

(Note:  It is likely that Brother Day will discard “the event of Israel’s restoration” as a non-legitimate option for the phrase “everlasting righteousness.”  First, it is likely that he will do so by continuing to disregard the truth that the “seventy weeks” were determined by the Lord God to be administered specifically “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Furthermore, it is likely that he will do so by denying that “the event of Israel’s restoration” has any application unto this present earth, but only an application unto the new earth to come.  As such, it is likely that Brother Day will continue to press “the event of a believer’s salvation,” which includes the “everlasting righteousness” aspects of forgiveness and imputation, justification, and regeneration.  However, if he does continue to press this, he runs into a “timing” problem of his own.)

Brother Day, you have previously pressed “the event of a believer’s salvation,” including forgiveness and imputation, justification, and even regeneration, as the only legitimate option for the case of “everlasting righteousness” in Daniel 9:24.  In so doing, you have presented the apostle Paul’s usage of Abraham as an example for this aspect of “everlasting righteousness.”  Indeed, it is Biblically accurate to use the case of Abraham as an Old Testament example for this aspect of “everlasting righteousness.” 

Forgiveness and imputation as a unit is indeed an aspect of “everlasting righteousness;” and we would both agree that Old Testament believers experienced this aspect of “everlasting righteousness,” even as the example of Abraham would reveal.  Furthermore, justification is indeed an aspect of “everlasting righteousness;” and we would both agree that Old Testament believers experienced this aspect of “everlasting righteousness,” even as the example of Abraham would reveal.  Finally, regeneration is indeed an aspect of “everlasting righteousness;” and you and I would both agree (although some on my side of this debate would not agree with me on this point) that Old Testament believers even experienced this aspect of “everlasting righteousness.” 

Yet since these aspects were already available and experienced by Old Testament believers thousands of yearsbefore Daniel, how would they need to be “brought in” hundreds of years after Daniel, as per the phrase, “to bring ineverlasting righteousness”?  The phrase “to bring in” seems to indicate something that was not previously present, for there is no need “to bring in” something that is already present and being experienced.  As such, the phrase “to bring in” would reveal that the aspects of forgiveness and imputation, justification, and regeneration are specifically not the aspects of “everlasting righteousness” about which the phrase in Daniel 9:24 is speaking, since those aspects of “everlasting righteousness” had already been brought in to be experienced from the very first Old Testament believer onward.

24 Seventy 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 anoint the most Holy.

That is what the prophecy is about, & we agree (I think) that it relates to the saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ in his earthly life; at Calvary; & by his ascension. 

We also agree that the 69 weeks bring us to the baptism of the Lord Jesus at the beginning of his ministry. We also agree that all believers possess the righteousness of faith. 

That being so, it should be clear on a straightforward reading of Scripture to see the 70th week immediately following the 69th week, relating to the 3 years of Jesus' earthly  ministry, & the 3-4 years following Pentecost. You have used a lot of words & arguments to try to refute the straightforward reading, but they are not convincing. In fact you make the prophecy to fail, as vastly more than 70 weeks have passed.  

You argue that the prophecy solely relates to national Israel whereas the prophecy is given for Daniel's (thy) people. Nations include people, but only people can respond to the Gospel. Godly prophets & kings (like Samuel, David & Hezekiah) influenced the nation they ruled over, so that national blessings ensued, but many wicked people lived in those times. 

Let's relate it to national Israel during that 70th week. Jesus ministered to the people during 3 years or so, teaching, healing, forgiving sin, casting out demons, & generally living a perfect life under the Law. As such he was the surety of the new & better testament/covenant, redeeming his people by his blood. He instituted the communion, or Lord's supper, with the wine representing the blood of the new testament/covenant. He suffered in the midst of the 70th week, rose from the dead, taught his disciples about the kingdom of God, & gave them the commission to be witnesses to all, beginning at Jerusalem.

At Pentecost they witnessed in the power of the Holy Ghost, & 3,000 Jews out of every nation under heaven were converted & baptised in the name of Jesus. A few days later, after a lame man was raised, 5,000 believed. Not long after, when the church had grown to the extent that additional administrators were needed, the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.​

One of those, Stephen, was accosted by the mob, & brought before the council, where he made his defense in the power of the Holy Ghost. After giving them a history lesson he rebuked them & declared them "uncircumcised." So they stoned him. Subsequently Saul was converted. Peter was was given a special vision giving him confidence to preach the Gospel to Gentiles, who were saved, & filled with the Holy Ghost,without circumcision; without becoming Jews. God's exclusive dealing with the physical descendants of Abraham was ended - the Gospel was open to all. 

We can assume Gabriel & Daniel were familiar with the books of Moses, & particularly the promise of the Messiah: 

 Deut. 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. 

Peter quotes that prophecy in Acts 3:

18 But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.

19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; 20 and he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: 21 whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. 22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not 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 covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. 26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

The Apostles preached full & free forgiveness in the name of Jesus. Those who heard & believed would indeed be blessed as children of ... the covenant. 

Those who would not hear, who rejected the Gospel, would be destroyed from among the people

Before that generation passed, within 40 years, that prophesied destruction happened. 

Now you argue:

Yet since these aspects were already available and experienced by Old Testament believers thousands of yearsbefore Daniel, how would they need to be “brought in” hundreds of years after Daniel, as per the phrase, “to bring ineverlasting righteousness”?  The phrase “to bring in” seems to indicate something that was not previously present, for there is no need “to bring in” something that is already present and being experienced.  As such, the phrase “to bring in” would reveal that the aspects of forgiveness and imputation, justification, and regeneration are specifically not the aspects of “everlasting righteousness” about which the phrase in Daniel 9:24 is speaking, since those aspects of “everlasting righteousness” had already been brought in to be experienced from the very first Old Testament believer onward.

Certainly such forgiveness & everlasting righteousness was available & experienced by the OT believers, BUT the basis for that was not established until Jesus completed his saving work. They had examples & shadows of the heavenly things. As we read in Hebrews11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: 40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.  

The 70 weeks prophecy was completed within the 490 years. All that remained was the prophesied destruction, & despite the scoffers, it was God's gracious longsuffering that it did not immediately occur.

2 Peter 3:The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.  

That is a warning to all of us, to make full use of this age of grace. 10 But the day of the Lord will come ...

And yes, we do look forward to experiencing perfect righteousness:

11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

[Pastor Scott Markle]

So then, to which one of these aspects of “everlasting righteousness” does Daniel 9:24 refer when it presents the purpose statement, “to bring in everlasting righteousness”? 

First, as we seek to answer this question, we can legitimately combine points #1-3 above for this question, since they all occur in the same event, that is – the event of an individual’s faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior.  Thus we are able to consider three possible options for our question – (1) the event of a believer’s salvation, (2) the event of a believer’s glorification, (3) the event of Israel’s restoration.

Second, in considering the phrase itself from Daniel 9:24, we find that in itself it does not reveal the answer, since it does not include any further modifiers of explanation.  Therefore, it becomes necessary for us to consider other matters in the context in order to help discern the answer to our question.

Even so, we take notice that this purpose statement is joined with two other purpose statements that seem to present “the other side of the coin.”  These are the two phrases, “to finish the transgression” and “to make an end of sins.”  On the one hand, we have transgression and sins being brought to a complete finishing and a complete ending.  (Note: In previous postings Brother Day has made accusation against me that I am adding to the intent of God’s Word by adding the word “complete” in my explanation for these phrases.  However, by definition the words “finish” and “end” indicate that which is concluded and completed, such that it no longer continues.  Thus, in fact, my explanatory phrases “complete finishing” and “complete ending” are grammatical redundancies, which I have purposefully chosen for the sake of emphasis.)  On the other hand, we have a condition of “everlasting righteous” being brought into being.  So then, of our three possible options, which ones combine a complete finishing and ending of transgression and sins with an ongoing condition of “everlasting righteousness”?  Actually, two options allow for this – the event of a believer’s glorification and the event of Israel’s restoration.

So then, is there any other matters of context that might help us to discern the answer to our question above?  Yes, we take notice that the “seventy weeks” about which Daniel 9:24 speaks is specifically determined by the Lord God to be administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Now, since the purpose statements of Daniel 9:24 present the Lord God’s purpose for the “seventy weeks,” these purpose statements must be an integral part of the “seventy weeks.”  Furthermore, since the “seventy weeks” are specifically to be administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, then in this context we should view the purpose statements for those “seventy weeks” as also being specifically for Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  So then, of our three possible options, which one combines a complete finishing and ending of transgression and sins with an ongoing condition of “everlasting righteousness” and applies this specifically to the children of Israel?  Answer – The event of Israel’s restoration.

(Note:  It is likely that Brother Day will discard “the event of Israel’s restoration” as a non-legitimate option for the phrase “everlasting righteousness.”  First, it is likely that he will do so by continuing to disregard the truth that the “seventy weeks” were determined by the Lord God to be administered specifically “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Furthermore, it is likely that he will do so by denying that “the event of Israel’s restoration” has any application unto this present earth, but only an application unto the new earth to come.  As such, it is likely that Brother Day will continue to press “the event of a believer’s salvation,” which includes the “everlasting righteousness” aspects of forgiveness and imputation, justification, and regeneration.  However, if he does continue to press this, he runs into a “timing” problem of his own.)

Brother Day, you have previously pressed “the event of a believer’s salvation,” including forgiveness and imputation, justification, and even regeneration, as the only legitimate option for the case of “everlasting righteousness” in Daniel 9:24.  In so doing, you have presented the apostle Paul’s usage of Abraham as an example for this aspect of “everlasting righteousness.”  Indeed, it is Biblically accurate to use the case of Abraham as an Old Testament example for this aspect of “everlasting righteousness.” 

Forgiveness and imputation as a unit is indeed an aspect of “everlasting righteousness;” and we would both agree that Old Testament believers experienced this aspect of “everlasting righteousness,” even as the example of Abraham would reveal.  Furthermore, justification is indeed an aspect of “everlasting righteousness;” and we would both agree that Old Testament believers experienced this aspect of “everlasting righteousness,” even as the example of Abraham would reveal.  Finally, regeneration is indeed an aspect of “everlasting righteousness;” and you and I would both agree (although some on my side of this debate would not agree with me on this point) that Old Testament believers even experienced this aspect of “everlasting righteousness.” 

Yet since these aspects were already available and experienced by Old Testament believers thousands of yearsbefore Daniel, how would they need to be “brought in” hundreds of years after Daniel, as per the phrase, “to bring in everlasting righteousness”?  The phrase “to bring in” seems to indicate something that was not previously present, for there is no need “to bring in” something that is already present and being experienced.  As such, the phrase “to bring in” would reveal that the aspects of forgiveness and imputation, justification, and regeneration are specifically not the aspects of “everlasting righteousness” about which the phrase in Daniel 9:24 is speaking, since those aspects of “everlasting righteousness” had already been brought in to be experienced from the very first Old Testament believer onward.

[Brother Ian Day]

24 Seventy 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 anoint the most Holy.

That is what the prophecy is about, & we agree (I think) that it relates to the saving work of the Lord Jesus Christ in his earthly life; at Calvary; & by his ascension. 

I have continually argued throughout this discussion-debate that Daniel 9:24 is not speaking concerning the event of our Lord Jesus Christ’s crucifixion, resurrection, and exaltation.  Furthermore, there is not one single reference to our Lord Jesus Christ’s crucifixion, resurrection, or exaltation in the entire portion of my posting that you quoted above.  So then, how did you come to the conclusion that we agree on this point?  You could only do so by reading into my statements something that I did not say, rather than reading out from my statements that which I actually presented.

We also agree that the 69 weeks bring us to the baptism of the Lord Jesus at the beginning of his ministry.

We do agree on this point.

We also agree that all believers possess the righteousness of faith. 

We would agree that all believers possess the elements of “everlasting righteousness” which I have listed in my previous post as (1) forgiveness and imputation, (2) justification, and (3) regeneration.  However, this agreement does not have any relevancy to any agreement on our part concerning Daniel 9:24, since I have specifically contended above that these are the very aspects of “everlasting righteousness” that cannot be intended in the context of Daniel 9:24.

That being so, it should be clear on a straightforward reading of Scripture to see the 70th week immediately following the 69th week, relating to the 3 years of Jesus' earthly  ministry, & the 3-4 years following Pentecost.

Since your above listing of “agreements between us” is not accurate, your proposed conclusion is also not so clear.

You have used a lot of words & arguments to try to refute the straightforward reading, but they are not convincing. In fact you make the prophecy to fail, as vastly more than 70 weeks have passed.  

Actually, I have not even engaged very much concerning the grammatical and contextual reasons that the 70th “week” (of years) does not follow immediately consecutive to the end of the first 69 “weeks” (of years).  These grammatical and contextual reasons are found in Daniel 9:26-27, and I have not yet focused upon these two verses in their details.  In fact, I intend to set my focus upon Daniel 9:26 later in this very posting.

However, in order to demonstrate that having a gap of time between the end of the 69th “week” (of years) and the beginning of the 70th “week” (of years) is not necessarily to cause the prophecy to fail, allow me to present a couple of illustrations.

1.  Let us suppose that I declare my determination to pay you $70.  Then let us suppose that I count out sixty-nine $1 bills to you.  Then let us suppose that in one week from today, I count out the last and final $1 bill to you.  Did I fulfill or fail my declared determination to pay you $70, even though I put a gap of time between my payments?  Now, let us also suppose that during the days between my two payments to you, I used various other monies to pay bills and to buy merchandise.  Did I then fulfill or fail my declared determination to pay you the $70?  The fact is that I fulfilled my declared determination regardless of the intervening time and regardless of the usage of other monies for other purposes.

2.  Let us suppose that I declare my determination to work for you for seven days.  Then let us suppose that I engage in working for you for six consecutive days.  Yet let us suppose that I then do not work for you for the next six days.  Then let us suppose that after this six day break, I then work for you for one day.  Did I fulfill or fail my declared determination to work for you for seven days, even though I put a gap of time between the first six days of work and the seventh day of work?  Now, let us also suppose that during the time period wherein I did not work for you, I worked for someone else.  Did I then fulfill or fail my declared determination to work for you for seven days?  The fact is that I fulfilled my declared determination regardless of the intervening time and regardless of my usage of that intervening time.

If the Lord God determined (as He did) to administer 70 “weeks” (of years) upon Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, for a specific set of purposes, and if the Lord God administered the first 69 of those “weeks” (of years), but then placed a gap of time until the administration of the 70th “week” (of years), would He have failed in His declared determination and purpose?  He would not, as long as He did not specifically declare that the 70 “weeks” (of years) would be consecutive, and as long as the intervening period of time had no direct relationship to the fulfillment of His declared purposes for the 70 “weeks” (of years) that He had determined.

_______________________________________

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Yet since these aspects were already available and experienced by Old Testament believers thousands of years before Daniel, how would they need to be “brought in” hundreds of years after Daniel, as per the phrase, “to bring in everlasting righteousness”?  The phrase “to bring in” seems to indicate something that was not previously present, for there is no need “to bring in” something that is already present and being experienced.  As such, the phrase “to bring in” would reveal that the aspects of forgiveness and imputation, justification, and regeneration are specifically not the aspects of “everlasting righteousness” about which the phrase in Daniel 9:24 is speaking, since those aspects of “everlasting righteousness” had already been brought in to be experienced from the very first Old Testament believer onward.

[Brother Ian Day]

Certainly such forgiveness & everlasting righteousness was available & experienced by the OT believers, BUT the basis for that was not established until Jesus completed his saving work. They had examples & shadows of the heavenly things. As we read in Hebrews11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: 40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.  

By definition the phrase, “to bring in,” indicates the bringing in to existence and/or experience something that was previously not in such existence and/or experience.  Since, as you yourself acknowledge, the elements of “everlasting righteousness” that are related to the event of a believer’s salvation (that is – (1) forgiveness and imputation, (2) justification, and (3) regeneration) were already in existence and experience thousands of years before the prophetic utterance unto Daniel, then these elements of “everlasting righteousness” had no need to be brought in.  They already were in.  Even so, the phrase, “to bring in everlasting righteousness,” must then refer to some other element of “everlasting righteousness” than these. 

Making the argument that “the basis for” these elements of “everlasting righteousness” had not yet occurred in history until our Lord Jesus Christ’s crucifixion, resurrection, and exaltation is not really relevant, since Daniel 9:24 does not use the phrase, “to bring in the basis for everlasting righteousness.”  Rather, Daniel 9:24 uses the phrase, “to bring in everlasting righteousness,” which is a grammatical reference to the bringing of the “everlasting righteousnessitself.

______________________________________________

Concerning Daniel 9:26.

Grammatically, this verse presents four independent statements (clauses), as follows:

1.  “And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.”
2.  “And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.”
3.  “And the end thereof shall be with a flood.”
4.  “And unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”

Concerning the first of these independent clauses, we are agreed that it refers to and was fulfilled in our Lord Jesus Christ’s crucifixion, “not for himself,” but the salvation of us sinners.  Concerning the second of these independent clauses, we are agreed that it refers to and was fulfilled in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by the armies of Rome.  Concerning the third of these independent clauses, we are agreed that it refers to and was fulfilled in the “overwhelming armies” of Rome (acknowledging that the word “flood” is a common figure of speech in the Old Testament Scriptures for a multitude of people) that were sent against the children of Israel at that time.  Concerning the fourth of these independent clauses, we are agreed that it refers to the “desolations” that the Lord God has “determined” to administer against the children of Israel throughout and unto the end of the war (conflict) between Rome and the children of Israel.

(Note: The word “war” in this context simply refers to a matter of conflict between two opposing parties.  It may refer to a single battle.  It may refer to a war with an established beginning and ending.  It may also refer to an ongoing conflict over a lengthy period of time that may include periods of intensity and periods of inactivity.  I myself believe that the conflict between Rome, both in its “iron” form as an empire and in its “iron and clay mixed” form as a religious force, and the children of Israel has not ceased unto this very day.  As such, I myself also believe that the “desolations” which the Lord God “determined” to administer against the children of Israel are still in force unto this day.  However, this is not a point over which I care to make any specific argument one way or the other.)

Now, concerning “the prince that shall come,” there are four characteristics that we can discern from this verse about him, as follows:

1.  He shall be a “prince,” that is – a political leader of some kind.

2.  He shall be characterized by “coming,” whether this means coming into existence or coming specifically to Jerusalem is not specified.  (Note: I myself believe that this is a reference to his coming unto Jerusalem and the children of Israel.)

3.  His “coming” would be in the future to Daniel’s time.

4.  This “prince” will have a direct relationship to Rome (the “people” who would destroy Jerusalem and the temple).  Herein we should note that the verse does not state that this prince would be personally responsible in any way for that destruction.  Rather, it only indicates that this prince would be “of” (that is – would have some form of relationship with) the people who would destroy Jerusalem and the temple.

Finally, concerning the revealed time elements in Daniel 9:24, we find only one at the beginning of the verse – “And after threescore and two weeks . . .”  Even so, this time element clearly indicates that all of the events that are prophesied in this verse will occur after the first 69 “weeks” (of years) are completed.  However, this verse does not make any direct reference at all to the 70th and final “week” (of years).  This verse does not indicate whether the prophesied events of this verse are all to be contained within that 70th “week” (of years), whether they are to occur after the 70th “week” (of years), whether they are to occur through and beyond that 70th “week” (of years), or whether they are to occur in a period of time between the end of the 69th “week” (of years) and the beginning of the 70th “week” (of years).  Again, this verse states nothing whatsoever at all concerning the 70th “week” (of years). 

On the other hand, Daniel 9:27 does make specific reference unto the 70th and final “week” (of years).  In fact, Daniel 9:27 makes reference to the beginning of that “week” (of years), to the middle of that “week” (of years), and to the end (“consummation”) of that “week” (of years).  So then, if we consider the Holy Spirit inspired layout of Daniel 9:24-27, we find the following:

                    (v. 24)  70 “weeks” (of years) are determined  by the Lord God upon Daniel’s people, the children of Israel

                ________________________________________________________________________________________

                    (v. 25)  The first 69 “weeks” (of years), from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince

                +  (v. 26)  ---  After the first 69 “weeks” (of years), but no reference to the 70th “week” (of years)  ---

                +  (v. 27)  The beginning, middle, and end of one “week” (of years), the 70th and final "week" (of years)

 

Or, to put this equation in an easier format:

               (v. 24)  70 “weeks”  =  (v. 25)  69 “weeks”  +  (v. 26)  --no “weeks”--  +  (v. 27)  1 “week,” the 70th

 

So then, by the Holy Spirit inspired layout of this passage, we find a gap in the layout between the end of the 69th “week” (of years) and the beginning of the 70th “week” (of years).  That gap is found in Daniel 9:26.  I myself did not arrange for that gap in the layout.  God the Holy Spirit arranged for that gap in the layout.  However, I myself intend to accept that gap in the layout just as the Holy Spirit inspired it; and I myself also expect this prophetic utterance to be fulfilled in exactly the same manner as it was presented under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, with the “gap” included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Actually, I have not even engaged very much concerning the grammatical and contextual reasons that the 70th “week” (of years) does not follow immediately consecutive to the end of the first 69 “weeks” (of years).  These grammatical and contextual reasons are found in Daniel 9:26-27, and I have not yet focused upon these two verses in their details.  In fact, I intend to set my focus upon Daniel 9:26 later in this very posting.

 

 

However, in order to demonstrate that having a gap of time between the end of the 69th “week” (of years) and the beginning of the 70th “week” (of years) is not necessarily to cause the prophecy to fail, allow me to present a couple of illustrations.

 

 

1.  Let us suppose that I declare my determination to pay you $70.  Then let us suppose that I count out sixty-nine $1 bills to you.  Then let us suppose that in one week from today, I count out the last and final $1 bill to you.  Did I fulfill or fail my declared determination to pay you $70, even though I put a gap of time between my payments?  Now, let us also suppose that during the days between my two payments to you, I used various other monies to pay bills and to buy merchandise.  Did I then fulfill or fail my declared determination to pay you the $70?  The fact is that I fulfilled my declared determination regardless of the intervening time and regardless of the usage of other monies for other purposes.

 

 

2.  Let us suppose that I declare my determination to work for you for seven days.  Then let us suppose that I engage in working for you for six consecutive days.  Yet let us suppose that I then do not work for you for the next six days.  Then let us suppose that after this six day break, I then work for you for one day.  Did I fulfill or fail my declared determination to work for you for seven days, even though I put a gap of time between the first six days of work and the seventh day of work?  Now, let us also suppose that during the time period wherein I did not work for you, I worked for someone else.  Did I then fulfill or fail my declared determination to work for you for seven days?  The fact is that I fulfilled my declared determination regardless of the intervening time and regardless of my usage of that intervening time.

 

 

If the Lord God determined (as He did) to administer 70 “weeks” (of years) upon Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, for a specific set of purposes, and if the Lord God administered the first 69 of those “weeks” (of years), but then placed a gap of time until the administration of the 70th “week” (of years), would He have failed in His declared determination and purpose?  He would not, as long as He did not specifically declare that the 70 “weeks” (of years) would be consecutive, and as long as the intervening period of time had no direct relationship to the fulfillment of His declared purposes for the 70 “weeks” (of years) that He had determined.

_______________________________________

 

You are working hard to falsify the promises of God.

OK. You promise to pay me £70, & pay me £69 - Then you say, "I'll pay the £1 to your Great 70x grandson. You die in debt, with your promise broken.

You promise to build me a house - we agree it will take 70 weeks. After 69 weeks all is ready for the final week's work, so I can take possession. Then you tell me, "Yes, there is only one more week before I finish, but I've got a contract to build for someone else, so I am leaving your building indefinitely. That final week could be many years away."  

That is not how God keeps his promises. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You are working hard to falsify the promises of God.

Actually, no effort at all has been put forth with any intention whatsoever “to falsify the promises of God.”  Rather, some effort was put forth in order to illustrate a single point, the point being that a “gap” of time between the end of the 69th “week” (of years) and the beginning of the 70th “week” (of years) would not cause the failure and the falsifying of our Lord God’s prophetic utterance in Daniel 9:24-27.  Furthermore, a great deal of effort has been put forth throughout the entirety of this discussion-debate in order to demonstrate the inaccuracies of your position concerning the details of Daniel 9:24-27.

OK. You promise to pay me £70, & pay me £69 - Then you say, "I'll pay the £1 to your Great 70x grandson. You die in debt, with your promise broken.

Except that the Lord God of heaven and earth, God the Father, does not die; therefore, He can never “die in debt with a promise broken.”

You promise to build me a house - we agree it will take 70 weeks. After 69 weeks all is ready for the final week's work, so I can take possession. Then you tell me, "Yes, there is only one more week before I finish, but I've got a contract to build for someone else, so I am leaving your building indefinitely. That final week could be many years away."  

Except that the Lord God did not wait until after the 69th “week” was completed before He gave report concerning the “gap” in time between the end of the 69th “week” and the beginning of the 70th “week.”  Actually, He gave this report even before the entire process of the 70 “weeks” began.

That is not how God keeps his promises. 

How does the Lord God keep His promises?  He keeps them precisely according to the details with which He gave them.  Now, (as I stated with the conclusion of my previous posting) since God the Holy Spirit through inspiration arranged for a gap in the layout between the end of the 69th “week” (of years) and the beginning of the 70th “week” (of years), I myself expect this prophetic utterance to be fulfilled precisely in the same manner as it was presented under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, with the “gap” included.

_____________________________________________

Concerning Daniel 9:27.

Grammatically, this verse presents four independent statements (clauses), as follows:

1.  “And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week.”
2.  “And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.”
3.  “And for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation.”
4.  “And that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

Herein we find a specific reference to “one week.”  In this context this appears to be a reference unto the 70th and final “week” (of years) of the 70 “weeks” (of years) that the Lord God had determined to administer “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Even so, this verse begins with a statement concerning the initiation of that “week” (of years) by indicating that some specific “he” will “confirm” some specific “covenant” with a group of “many” (presumably, in this context, a “many” from among the children of Israel) for a time period of “one week” (7 years).  Furthermore, this verse speaks concerning the middle point of that “one week” period (the 3.5 year point), wherein the same specific “he” will “cause the sacrifice and the oblation” (presumably, within this context, at the temple in Jerusalem) “to cease.”  Third, this verse indicates that this same specific “he” at this middle point of this “one week” period (the 3.5 year point) will, “for” the purpose of “the overspreading of abominations,”  make “desolate,” presumably in this context, the temple in Jerusalem (as well as, possibly, the city of Jerusalem and the people of Jerusalem), and that this specific “he” will maintain this “overspreading of abominations” and this desolation “even until the consummation,” presumably in this context, of this “one week” (which would also be the consummation of the entire 70 “weeks”).  Finally, this verse indicates that those desolations which were determined as per the concluding statement of Daniel 9:26 will be “poured upon the desolate” (presumably, in this context, upon the children of Israel).  Thus we are able to observe that Daniel 9:27 covers details concerning the beginning, the middle, and the conclusion of the 70th and final “week” (of years).

However, this general overview of the verse does raise a number of questions concerning certain details, as follows:

1.  To whom does the pronoun “he” make reference?

Grammatically and contextually, there are two possible antecedents for the pronoun “he” in Daniel 9:27.  The first of these is “the Messiah the Prince.”  The second is “the prince that shall come.”  Three times throughout the context of Daniel 9:24-26 the Messiah is referenced, and each time He is referenced with an exalted title, as follows: (1) “the Most Holy” in verse 24, (2) “the Messiah the Prince” in verse 25, and (3) “Messiah” in verse 26.  Considering that such exalted titles are used for Him in each of these prior cases, it seems out of contextual character then to reference Him in verse 27 simply with the pronoun “he” for all three uses.  Furthermore, when the pronoun “he” could have been used for the Messiah in verse 26 without any ambiguity from the context of verse 25 (since the other “he,” “the prince that shall come,” had not even been mentioned yet in the context), still the exalted title “Messiah” was employed.  As such, this seems to emphasize the characteristic of this context to reference the Messiah only with exalted terminology.  On the other hand, by referring to “the prince that shall come” with such a more general and less exalted phrasing, it would fit the character of the context quite well then to reference him in verse 27 with the simple pronoun “he.”  Furthermore, it is a common principle of communication (although not a universal principle) to arrange the antecedent for a pronoun as the closest possibility, which “the prince that shall come” would be in the contextual flow of thought from verse 26 unto verse 27.  As such, the grammatical and contextual evidence seems to point unto “the prince that shall come” as the correct antecedent for the pronoun “he” in Daniel 9:27, rather than “the Messiah the Prince.” 

Even so, I myself would contend that the “he” of Daniel 9:27 refers to some political leader of the Roman kingdom (within the context of its “iron and clay mixed” form as a religious force) “shall come” unto Jerusalem and “shall confirm” some specific “covenant” with some “many” (presumably, in this context, a “many” from among the children of Israel).  Furthermore, I myself would contend that this “prince” from the Roman kingdom “shall confirm” this specific “covenant” only and specifically for a period of “one week” (or, for a period of 7 years), even as the modifying prepositional phrase, “for one week,” directly indicates.  Finally, I myself would contend that this confirming of this specific “covenant” will initiate the beginning of the 70th and final “week” (of years) of the 70 “weeks” that were determined by the Lord God to be administered “upon” Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.

2.  What is the meaning of the phrase “shall confirm” in this context?

The verb “to confirm” indicates the strengthening of something that had previously been or become weak and/or ineffective.  In relation to a covenant, the verb “to confirm” indicates the affirming, or establishing, or engaging of a covenant that was or had become previously weak and/or ineffective.  As such, the phrase “shall confirm” in this context seems to imply a specific covenant that had previously existed, but that had also previously become ineffective.

3.  To what specific covenant does the phrase “the covenant” make reference?

The use of the definite article “the” in the phrase “the covenant” seems to indicate that this “covenant” is some definitely specific covenant.  However, no further description is given in Daniel 9:27 concerning this “covenant,” or even in the full context of Daniel 9:24-27, by which to specifically define this “covenant.”  Therefore, we must consider the broader context of the entire chapter of Daniel 9 and of the entire book of Daniel.  In so doing, we find one other reference to a covenant with the definite article “the” in Daniel 9, in Daniel 9:4.  Furthermore, we find five other references to a covenant with the definite article “the” in Daniel 11, in Daniel 11:22, 28, 30 (2), 32. 

In Daniel 9:4 Daniel indicated that the Lord God was keeping (in the present tense of Daniel’s time) “the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments.”  So then, what “the covenant” was the Lord God keeping with His people at that present time?  It would seem most likely that Daniel was referring to the covenant that the Lord God had made with the children of Israel at Mount Sinai during Moses’ time.  This would seem to be supported when we consider the similarity in terminology, as per Moses’ declaration unto the children of Israel in Deuteronomy 7:12-13, saying, “Wherefore it shall come to pass, if ye hearken to these judgments, and keep, and do them, that the LORD thy God shall keep unto thee the covenant and the mercy which he sware unto thy fathers: and he will love thee, and bless thee, and multiply thee: he will also bless the fruit of thy womb, and the fruit of thy land, thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep, in the land which he sware unto thy fathers to give thee.”  Furthermore, this would seem to be supported when we consider Daniel’s own reference unto “the law of Moses” in Daniel 9:11-13, saying, “Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.  And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil: for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem.  As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before the LORD our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth.”  Finally, within their context every one of the five references to “the covenant” or “the holy covenant” in Daniel 11 also appears to be a reference unto the covenant that the Lord God had made with the children of Israel at Mount Sinai.

So then, in what way will the “he” of Daniel 9:27 “confirm” the Lord God’s covenant with the children of Israel that He had made with them at Mount Sinai?   In order to answer this question, it might be of value to consider the opposite behavior as presented in Daniel 11:30-31.  Therein we learn of a foreign ruler who would “have indignation against the holy covenant,” which he would demonstrate by polluting “the sanctuary of strength” (that is – the temple in Jerusalem) and by taking away “the daily sacrifice” from being engaged.  Even so, if having indignation against “the holy covenant” is to pollute the temple and to take away the sacrificial system from the temple, then it would seem reasonable to conclude that confirming “the covenant” would be to support the temple and the engagement of the sacrificial system in the temple.

Even so, I myself would contend that some political leader of the Roman kingdom (within the context of its “iron and clay mixed” form as a religious force) “shall come” unto Jerusalem and “shall confirm the covenant with many” among the children of Israel for a seven year period (“one week”), such that there shall be an agreement that those “many” among the children of Israel will be permitted to engage in the sacrificial system of the temple for that period of time.

4.  What does it mean that this “he” will “cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease”?

The second independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:27 states, “And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.”  This statement clearly indicates that this event will occur “in the midst of the week,” that is – at the 3.5 year point of the 7 years for which “the covenant” had originally been confirmed.  What then will this “he” do at this time?  He personally “shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.”  He will cause the sacrificial system of the temple in Jerusalem to cease being engaged.  He will no longer permit sacrifices and oblations to continue.  Now, if it is correct that the confirming of “the covenant” would be an agreement to permit the engagement of the sacrificial system in the temple, then this act would be a direct violation of the agreement of that confirming of “the covenant.”

5.  What does it mean that this “he” shall “make it desolate”?

The third independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:27 states, “And for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation.”  Having caused the sacrificial system of the temple to cease at the 3.5 year point of the 7 years, the “he” of this verse will make something to be “desolate.”  In a context concerning the confirming of “the covenant” of the sacrificial system in the temple at Jerusalem and concerning the cessation of that sacrificial system, it would seem reasonable to conclude that the temple in Jerusalem and its sacrificial system, at the least, is that which is “made desolate.”  It is even possible that this work of desolation by the “he” of the verse will also encompass the city of Jerusalem and the Israelite inhabitants of Jerusalem.  Furthermore, this work of desolation by this “he” will occur “for the overspreading of abominations,” that is – for the purpose of abundantly spreading abominations in and upon the temple in Jerusalem.  Finally, this work of desolation by this “he” will continue “even until the consummation,” that is – until the completion of the seven year (“one week”) period, which will also be the completion for the entire 70 “week” period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...