Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Fulfillments of Bible Prophecy
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 1 of 327 (506632)
04-28-2009 6:24 AM


(probably for the Bible Study thread or Faith & Belief)
Bible prophecy was one of the main reasons I started to take a serious look at the bible and religion. I really had very little knowledge of God or the bible when I was growing up and I could not say for sure that God was real because I had never experienced anything supernatural.
So when someone offered to show me 'proof' that the bible was a book inspired by God, i was obviously interested in how they could prove it. That 'proof' was prophecy.
Just so we are all on the same page as to what prophecy is, it means...(and there may be additional meanings)
1. revelation of divine will and purpose or the proclamation thereof
2. an expression of a divine command or judgment,
3. a declaration of something to come.
the Apostle Peter wrote:
quote:
. 2Peter 1:20"...no prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. 21For prophecy was at no time brought by man's will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit
I would also like to be clear that this thread is not for debate on whether a prophecy was written after the event but whether the prophecy was fulfilled in the manner that the scripture said it would be fulfilled.
(However, I know that critics make the claim of late authorship, so I will qualify each prophecy with the evidence for the time it was written)
______________________________________________
Prophecy about Alexander the Great in Daniel Chapter's 8 & 11.
In the sixth century BCE, the Prophet Daniel (as the book named after him) was inspired to record some remarkable visions that he saw which fortold the future course of world events. the visions he describes were a number of symbolic animals that displace one another on the world scene. He asked God what the vision means and an angel explains that the animals foreshadow world powers from his day onward.
One of those world powers was Greece...this is one small part of the prophecy.
quote:
Daniel 11:3 "And a mighty king will certainly stand up and rule with extensive dominion and do according to his will. And when he will have stood up, his kingdom will be broken and be divided toward the four winds of the heavens, but not to his posterity."
Speaking of the final two beasts, the angel says:
quote:
"The ram that you saw possessing the two horns stands for the kings of Media and Persia. And the hairy he-goat stands for the king of Greece; and as for the great horn that was between its eyes, it stands for the first king. And that one having been broken, so that there were four that finally stood up instead of it, there are four kingdoms from his nation that will stand up, but not with his power" Daniel 8:20-22.
How was this fullfilled?
The Babylonian Empire, (where Daniel was in captivity at the time of his writing, 618-535 BCE) was overthrown by the Ram possessing the two horns Medo-Persia, which, 200 years later, was conquered by the Greek world power spearheaded by Alexander the Great, "the great horn."
However, after Alexander's sudden death (323BCE), the "the great horn was broken", and his 4 generals divided the empire between them; the result being that the empire broke into four smaller empires, "four kingdoms from his nation that will stand up...but not with his power"
History testifies to the fact that his life was cut short and his 4 generals Ptolemy, Cassander, Lysimachus, Seleucus all took a portion of the empire to rule. Diadochi - Wikipedia
________________
But did Daniel write this prophecy in the 6th century, or later as critics claim? First, the book was alluded to in the first book of Maccabees (2bce). fIt was included in the Greek Septuagint version, the translation of which began in the 3rd century BCE.
Most notabley though, it contains historical details that would have been unknown to a second-century writer such as Belshazzar, the ruler of Babylon who was killed when Babylon fell in 539BCE.
The non-Biblical sources of the fall of Babylon are Herodotus (5th century), Xenophon (5th and 4th centuries), and Berossus (3rd century). None of these knew about Belshazzar. So its very unlikely that a second-century writer would have had information that had been unavailable to these earlier authors!
_____________
This is just one, there are so many more, but this is good one to start with.
some others that I would suggest to look at would be
1. the Messiahs time of arrival prophecy in Daniel.
2. the end of the Gentile Times & effects for earth
3. the Messianic prophecies and how they were fulfilled in Jesus
4. destruction of the ancient Kingdom of Tyre
5. Jesus prophecy about the Destruction of Jerusalem 70CE
6. the 'Seed' of God to destroy 'Seed' of Devil
7. Apostates to take over the christian church
8. Destruction of Babylonian world empire by Persian King Cyrus
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by PaulK, posted 04-28-2009 8:12 AM Peg has replied
 Message 4 by Peepul, posted 04-28-2009 8:38 AM Peg has replied
 Message 7 by Theodoric, posted 04-28-2009 10:40 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 9 by Perdition, posted 04-28-2009 1:10 PM Peg has replied
 Message 16 by kbertsche, posted 04-28-2009 6:00 PM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 28 of 327 (506786)
04-29-2009 5:10 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Peepul
04-28-2009 8:38 AM


Peepul writes:
Peg, are there any prophecies made either in old or new testament that you believe have come true in recent times (last 1800 years or so)?
In these cases, the fact that the prophecy occurred before the events in question would be completely unambiguous.
Yes good point, and yes there are.
Daniel wrote another prophecy about the time that the Messiah would arrive. So even 'if' the book of Daniel was written in 161CE as mentioned in the previous post, the prophecy was written well before the event.
the prophecy is known as the '70 Weeks' prophecy It reads, in part:
quote:
"There are seventy weeks that have been determined upon your people and upon your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, and to finish off sin, and to make atonement for error
... And you should know and have the insight that from the going forth of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Leader, there will be seven weeks, also sixty-two weeks [making 69 in all]. ...
And after the sixty-two weeks [that is, 7+62, or after the 69th week] Messiah will be cut off ... And he must keep the covenant in force for the many for one week [the 70th]; and at the half of the week he will cause sacrifice and gift offering to cease."
Daniel 9:24-27.
If these 'weeks' were literally seven days each, then the prophecy either failed to be fulfilled or the Messiah came during the Persian Empire's rule and was not identified. So it is evident that the '70 weeks' were symbolic of a much longer time.
It is counted as 70 x 7 = 490 YEARS from the rebuilding of the walls of jerusalem to the time of the messiahs arrival.
The majority of Bible scholars agree that the "weeks" of the prophecy are weeks of years. Some translations read "seventy weeks of years" including the Tanakh by the Jewish Publication Society.
The "70 Weeks of Years" began when the "word to restore jerusalem" went forth in the 20th year of the rule of Artaxerxes according to Nehemiah 2:1. This is 455BCE
It was the month of Nisan that Nehemiah asked the king: "...send me to Judah, to the city of the burial places of my forefathers, that I may rebuild it." (Ne 2:1,5)
The king gave his permission and Nehemiah traveled from Shushan to Jerusalem. On about the fourth of the jewish month of Ab (July-August) he gave the orders to rebuild the walls. Thus, "the going forth of the word" to rebuild Jerusalem, as authorized by Artaxerxes, was put into effect by Nehemiah in Jerusalem that same year.
So the year 455BCE is the year from which the 490 years would begin to count.
History and the Bible give evidence that Jesus came to John and was baptized, thereby becoming "Messiah the Leader" in the early autumn of the year 29CE
Just to recap on the number of years again
7 + 62= "69 weeks of years" converted to years = 69x7yrs = 483 years
455BCE - 483yrs = 28CE Of course there is no year '0' so you must add 1yr which brings us to 29CE. The very year Jesus was baptized and began gathering disciples .
Daniel further stated that "After the sixty-two weeks Messiah will be cut off, with nothing for himself." (Da 9:26) Remember that the 'week' is equivalent to 7 years, so 'half' a week equates to 3.5 years. This was the length of Jesus ministry. He was baptized in the autumn of 29CE and crucified at the passover of 33CE - 3 & 1/2 years in total.
there are further aspects to the prophecy relating to other aspects of the role of the messiah, but i've stuck to the timing of his arrival in this instance.
_____________________________
The book of Daniel was written while the Jews were being held captive in Babylon with the writing completed in about 536 B.C.E., and it covers the period from 618 to about 536 BCE. Daniel wrote Chapt 8 in the "third year of the kingship of Belshazzar" (c.553 BCE) Belshazzar - Wikipedia
Another reason why Daniel was certainly written at this time was that he names Belshazzar as a King of Babylon...most of the information we have about this king is from the book of Daniel, and as i mentioned in my first post, no others ancient writers knew of him.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Peepul, posted 04-28-2009 8:38 AM Peepul has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Stile, posted 04-29-2009 7:48 AM Peg has replied
 Message 33 by PaulK, posted 04-29-2009 7:49 AM Peg has replied
 Message 35 by bluescat48, posted 04-29-2009 9:33 AM Peg has replied
 Message 42 by Jaderis, posted 04-30-2009 5:33 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 29 of 327 (506787)
04-29-2009 5:23 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by PaulK
04-28-2009 8:12 AM


PaulK writes:
Nabonidus (the father of Belshazzar) was ruler of Babylon at that time - and HE is completely absent from the Book of Daniel. This surprising omission suggests that the author of Daniel did not have very good information about that time.
However you are also missing something very important from Daniel 8.
Daniel 8 is said a vision of the end times (8:17) I think that we can agree that the world did not come to an end at the time Daniel 8(which is the mid-2nd Century BC). That's a big mistake for a genuine prophet.
Daniel did not mention the wife of Belshazzar or Nabonidus...omission does not equate to an error. He did not need to mention Nabonidus because the ruler of the kingdom at the time was Belshazzar and it was that king who Daniel had direct dealings with.
The prophecy did not end with the king of Greece, it ended with the 'prince of princes standing up in the time of the end' and therefore the prophecy covered a much longer period of time...that time is still future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by PaulK, posted 04-28-2009 8:12 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by PaulK, posted 04-29-2009 7:31 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 30 of 327 (506788)
04-29-2009 6:41 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Perdition
04-28-2009 1:10 PM


Hi Perdition,
Perdition writes:
One problem I have with prophecy is how vague it is. IF God wants to show someone something happening in the future so they can write it down, why does he do so in a way that is open to interpretation? Why doesn't he tell David, "Yo, Dave, write this down, Babylon will fall to Medo-Persia, which will in turn fall to Alexander the Great from Macedonia. When Alex dies, his generals will fight for control and eventually tear his empire into 4 pieces."
Jesus gave a reason for this very question you ask...
quote:
Matt 13:10So the disciples came up and said to him: "Why is it you speak to them by the use of illustrations?" 11In reply he said: "To YOU it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the kingdom of the heavens, but to those people it is not granted...This is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations, because, looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, neither do they get the sense of it;...15For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive."
Today we encrypt sensitive information online...its to keep our personal information away from those who are not entitled to it. We encyrpt our bank accounts for instance It conceal the meaning of the information.
God uses symbolism for a similar purpose. The understanding of such symbolisms requires diligent study and belief in God. But many people are unwilling to take the time to understand, because they have no real love for God or truth. Hence, the "sacred secrets of the kingdom" remain hidden to them as Jesus explained.
Perdition writes:
Secondly, what is the use of prophecy if it isn't clear what it is saying until after it takes place? If it's just to prove that a certain person is a prophet, it seems rather unnecessary.
The purpose of prophecy was for mankind to identify who the true God is and who on earth were representing him. They served for the benefit of both those initially hearing it and those of all future periods who would put faith in God’s promises.
Perdition writes:
The problem is that it is still vague. Why would we need two things to stand for the same person? If Alexander is the Greek king in question, why does he need the goat and the horn to stand for him?
The 'hairy he-goat' initially had 1 horn (the 1st king), but when that horn was broken (1st kings death), four horns came up in its place.... So the first horn represented Alexander, and the 4 horns represented the 4 generals who took over the empire after his death and the Goat stood for the Greek Empire itself.
Re the Wiki link... are you looking at later rulers of the empire?
Initially the 4 generals took a section each and the kingdom was divided into 4 quarters.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Perdition, posted 04-28-2009 1:10 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Perdition, posted 04-29-2009 12:40 PM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 44 of 327 (506884)
04-30-2009 7:15 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by PaulK
04-29-2009 7:31 AM


PaulK writes:
Since Nabonidus, the father of Belshazzar, was king when Babylon fell, his omission is surprising to say the least.
Its not surprising at all. According to the "Verse Account of Nabonidus" Belshazzar held a kingly position at Babylon and explains the manner of his becoming coregent with Nabonidus. While Nabonidus was away on a military trip the accounts says that 'Belshazzar was appointed coregent and placed in the position of King'
PaulK writes:
Belshazzar was co-regent while his father was at Tema.
thats right, so its not incorrect to call him King. Actually the account in Daniel shows that Belshazzar was the second highest ruler in the kingdom because Belshazzar offered Daniel the 'Third Highest Positon' in the kingdom if he could interpret the writing on the wall. This is in line with Belshazzar having kingly authority and rightly called king.
PaulK writes:
According to Daniel 8:23 the end times occur in the "latter days" of the four kingdoms formed out of the Greek empire. Those are all long gone - so the prophecy must refer to the past, not the future.
not if the 'Prince of Princes' had not arrived. that part of the prophecy is still future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by PaulK, posted 04-29-2009 7:31 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by PaulK, posted 04-30-2009 7:55 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 45 of 327 (506885)
04-30-2009 7:19 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Stile
04-29-2009 7:48 AM


Re: Basic Math
10 points for enthusiasm

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Stile, posted 04-29-2009 7:48 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Stile, posted 04-30-2009 7:21 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 47 of 327 (506887)
04-30-2009 7:36 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by PaulK
04-29-2009 7:49 AM


PaulK writes:
This is only one possible interpretation. There are several other possible dates - and the 20th year of Artaxerxes is 445 BC.
you can work out wen the 20th year of Artaxerxes, by going back to the end of the reign of his father Xerxes. He died toward the end of 475BCE. Artaxerxes’ would have taken over his thrown in the same year
so 475 - 20 = 455

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by PaulK, posted 04-29-2009 7:49 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by PaulK, posted 04-30-2009 7:40 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 50 of 327 (506891)
04-30-2009 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by bluescat48
04-29-2009 9:33 AM


bluescat48 writes:
That would be an assumption that Christ was born right at the BCE CE which has shown to be incorrect. Even back in the middle ages it was determined that Christ was born somewhere between 3 BCE & 13 BCE. If one accepts Matthew's story of the Magi, than Christ would have to have been born prior to 6 BCE since that is the date of Herod's death.
Just to say that Christ was born the same year that places the Crucifixion no later than 27 CE.
I said that christ was 'Baptized' in 29ce, not 'born' then.
You are correct to say that he was born much earlier....he was actually born Sept/Oct 2BCE...no exact date is known but he was 30yrs old when he was baptized by John.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by bluescat48, posted 04-29-2009 9:33 AM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by bluescat48, posted 04-30-2009 9:53 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 53 of 327 (506897)
04-30-2009 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by PaulK
04-30-2009 7:40 AM


i agree that 476/465 is a conflict among different sources but 475 bce accepted too for various reasons.
quote:
Concerning the time when Xerxes died and Artaxerxes ascended the throne, M.de Koutorga wrote: "We have seen that, according to the chronology of Thucydides, Xerxes died towards the end of the year 475B.C.E., and that, according to the same historian, Themistocles arrived in Asia Minor shortly after the coming to the throne of Artaxerxes Longimanus." Mmoires prsents par divers savants l'Acadmie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres de l'Institut Imprial de France, first series, Vol. VI, second part, Paris, 1864, p. 147.
As further support of this, E.Levesque noted the following: "Therefore it is necessary, according to the Alexandrian Chronicle, to place Xerxes' death in 475B.C.E., after eleven years of reign. The historian Justin, III, 1, confirms this chronicle and the assertions of Thucydides. According to him, at the time of Xerxes' murder, Artaxerxes, his son, was but a child, puer [a boy], which is true if Xerxes died in 475. Artaxerxes was then 16 years old, whereas in 465 he would have been twenty-six years old, which would not justify anymore Justin’s expression. According to this chronology, since Artaxerxes began to reign in 475, the 20th year of his reign proves to be in 455 and not in 445 as it is said quite commonly."Revue apologtique, Paris, Vol. 68, 1939, p. 94.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by PaulK, posted 04-30-2009 7:40 AM PaulK has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 54 of 327 (506898)
04-30-2009 8:54 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by purpledawn
04-29-2009 3:10 PM


Re: Isaiah 54 - The Suffering Servant
purpledawn writes:
No matter what translation I read, offspring and a prolonged life is part of the prophecy.
didnt Jesus call his followers his 'children'?
and isnt he called their 'father'?
and wasnt he resurrected again?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by purpledawn, posted 04-29-2009 3:10 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by purpledawn, posted 04-30-2009 9:26 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 55 of 327 (506899)
04-30-2009 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by purpledawn
04-30-2009 7:49 AM


Re: Offspring and eternal life
purpledawn writes:
I think the use of the word seed is very specific, even creatively, and speaks of direct descendants, the passing of sperm, etc. I don't feel it means figuratively just anyone who joins the club.
thats not necessarily true...there are many examples where an indirect decedent is called a 'seed' and where a direct decendent is NOT called a seed
quote:
Gal 3:29Moreover, if YOU belong to Christ, YOU are really Abraham’s seed, heirs with reference to a promise"
Romans 9:6"...For not all who [spring] from Israel are really 'Israel' 7Neither because they are Abraham's seed are they all children"
John 8:39"In answer they said to him: "Our father is Abraham." Jesus said to them: "If YOU are Abraham's children, do the works of Abraham...your are from your father the devil..."
Matt 21:43"This is why I say to YOU, The kingdom (promised to Abraham's seed) of God will be taken from YOU and be given to a nation producing its fruits "

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by purpledawn, posted 04-30-2009 7:49 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by purpledawn, posted 04-30-2009 9:49 AM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 56 of 327 (506903)
04-30-2009 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by PaulK
04-30-2009 7:55 AM


PaulK writes:
But what about when Nabonidus came back or before he want away ? And why not mention that Belshazzar was only co-regent ? Why describe Belshazzar as the son of Nebuchadnezzar when he was the son of Nabonidus
It may be that Nebuchadnezzar was simply the 'father' of Belshazzar as to the throne, Nebuchadnezzar being a royal predecessor. In a similar manner, the Assyrians used the expression 'son of Omri' to denote a successor of Omri. Also the book Nabonidus and Belshazzar (by R.P. Dougherty, 1929) reasons that it is probable that Belshazzar's mother was Nitocris and that she was a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar (II). That really would make Nebuchadnezzar the grandfather of Belshazzar.
Paulk writes:
It doesn't show that Belshazzar was only the second most powerful person, and it calls him king anyway.
there are many examples of Co-Regencies in the ancient world...its not unusual to find father and sons ruling together as one.
PaulK writes:
According to Daniel 8 the "Prince of Princes" (8:25) is supposed to be around in the "latter days" of the Diadochi states (8:21-23), If he didn't turn up then it doesn't mean that the prophecy refers to the future - it means that the prophecy FAILED.
if it hasnt happened yet, that doesnt mean that it has failed, that just means it hasnt happened yet and its is still 'for the time of the end'

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by PaulK, posted 04-30-2009 7:55 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by PaulK, posted 04-30-2009 9:51 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 57 of 327 (506904)
04-30-2009 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Stile
04-30-2009 7:21 AM


Re: Basic Math
Stile writes:
I get carried away sometimes
But at least I have no lack of passion! Just a lack of intelligence... it's a dangerous combination
Not at all
it shows that you've at least thought about it...that takes intelligence

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Stile, posted 04-30-2009 7:21 AM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 59 of 327 (506906)
04-30-2009 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by purpledawn
04-30-2009 9:26 AM


Re: Isaiah 53 - The Suffering Servant
purpledawn writes:
Actually God is called father, not Jesus and we are considered God's children, not children of Jesus.
Isaiah 9:6 "For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. 7To the abundance of the princely rule and to peace there will be no end..."
this is a messianic prophecy...the messiah (Jesus) would fulfill all these roles. It does not mean that he has taken the place of God, for even he says that he is not the Almighty God. But he has been placed in a position of a god to us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by purpledawn, posted 04-30-2009 9:26 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by purpledawn, posted 04-30-2009 9:49 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 75 by Bailey, posted 04-30-2009 6:53 PM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 94 of 327 (507075)
05-01-2009 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Jaderis
04-30-2009 5:33 AM


Jaderis writes:
Why is it necessary to convert weeks into years? To make it fit after the fact, maybe?
Not at all. Its certainly symbolic language to us, i doubt we would use such a term. But in Hebrew it was understood. The Jewish Mishnah phrases the verse as 'weeks of years'.... and there is also a similar expression in Leviticus 25:8 "And you must count for yourself seven sabbaths of years, seven times, seven years, and the day of the seven sabbaths of years must amount to forty-nine years for you."
so while the term is strange to us, it was not strange to the hebrew speaking person.
Jaderis writes:
And isn't the interpretation of Jesus' death making the ritual sacrifice no longer necessary based on this particular passage an addition after the fact? Did Jesus actually say that it was so?
Daniels prophecy stated in vs 26"And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah will be cut off, with nothing for himself"
The jews understood this term because it was in the mosaic law with regard to the death penalty. Those breaking certain laws were to be 'cut off' from the congregation...that is 'put to death'.
Jesus confirmed that he was about to die when he gathered for the passover meal with his disciples.
quote:
Luke 22:14At length when the hour came, he reclined at the table, and the apostles with him. 15And he said to them: "I have greatly desired to eat this passover with YOU before I suffer;...Also, he took a loaf, gave thanks, broke it, and gave it to them, saying: "This means my body which is to be given in YOUR behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me." 20Also, the cup in the same way after they had the evening meal, he saying: "This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood, which is to be poured out in YOUR behalf."
Jaderis writes:
How does "being cut off with nothing for himself" equate to being baptized?
it doesnt. The being cut off equates to his death.
Jaderis writes:
It goes on to say that "He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven." And then "In the middle of the seven he will put an end to sacrifice and offering."
So where is the confirming of the covenant for "one seven?" What covenant with who?
Which "seven" is being spoken of now?
Daniel 9:27 states: "And he must keep the covenant in force for the many for one week [or seven years];
Its not referring to the Law covenant because that was removed by God when Jesus was sacrificed a few years earlier. Its talking here about the Abrahamic covenant which excluded the Gentiles in favor of the seed of Abraham. The jews were given the first opportunity to recieve the benefits of the Abrahamic covenant but that situation was not going to be permanent. It was only going to remain that way for 7 years or the 'one week'. This is the week that began with the appearance of the Messiah in 29CE - 36CE.
There is a lot of talk about how Paul was the one who preached to the gentiles and bought them into the congregations through some strange new teaching that he had invented, but thats not at all true.
It was actually the Apostle Peter who was directed in vision to go to the gentiles. He was sent to an Italian army officer named Cornelius and told to baptize him and his family. (Acts 10) At first Peter objects but Jesus tells him in vision to "stop calling the clean things, unclean"
When that happened the part of the prophecy that says: "and at the half of the week he will cause sacrifice and gift offering to cease."came into effect. Cornelius was baptized in the autumn of 36CE, which marked the end of the 70th week .
Jaderis writes:
And what about the end of the passage "And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him."
that part of the prophecy came after the 70 weeks as a result of their rejection of Christ
When Titus came against Jerusalem the army entered into Jerusalem and the temple itself, like a flood, and desolated the city and its temple. To the jews, anything pagan, such as a Roman army standing in their 'holy place' was a 'disgusting thing'
What happened in 70CE was at God's decree and as the prophecy stated
"What is decided upon is desolations...until an extermination, the very thing decided upon will go pouring out also upon the one lying desolate."
Jerusalem has never recovered from that fatal blow. Jesus words have come true for Jerusalem ..."Your house is abandoned to you" Matt 23:38
Jaderis writes:
It seems to me that this "prophecy" tells of an "Anointed One" who is cut off and then the "people of the prince who shall come" (aka not the "anointed one") destroy the city and much misery is to be had and "he" (lowercase he) makes a covenant for seven years and then puts an end to sacrifice and offering (including any offering...monetary or spiritual, so forget the prayers and tithes!!). This sounds to me like an "evil/not anointed" power and not the 3.5 years of ministry to which you attributed the "middle sevens." Especially since the "middle sevens" comes after the messiah has been "cut off with nothing for himself" (that's symbolic of death to me, but, whatever)
You've got all the parts, but not in the right order
At the time the prophecy was spoken, Jerusalem was in ruins and most of the inhabitants were being held in captivity in Babylon. The prophet said there would be a length of time before the annointed one arrived and during that time Jerusalem would be rebuild so that the city would be ready for when he arrived.
This is the purpose of the prophecy.
quote:
There are seventy weeks that have been determined upon your people and upon your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, and to finish off sin, and to make atonement for error, and to bring in righteousness for times indefinite, and to imprint a seal upon vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies.
The word was given by Artaxerxes in 455bce. The 7 weeks were the rebuilding work. It took them 49 years to rebuild the walls.
7 x 7yrs = 49yrs. 455bce-406bce
quote:
And you should know and have the insight that from the going forth of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Leader, there will be seven weeks,
The 62 weeks was the waiting period from the time the walls were rebuilt to the time the messiah would arrive. During this time there was further development of the city.
62 x 7yrs = 434yrs. 406bce-29CE. (29CE was the year Jesus began preaching)
quote:
also sixty-two weeks. She will return and be actually rebuilt, with a public square and moat, but in the straits of the times.
Jesus was killed in 33CE
quote:
And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah will be cut off, with nothing for himself.
Destruction of Jerusalem in 70CE by Titus was to happen in the near future.
quote:
And the city and the holy place the people of a leader that is coming will bring to their ruin. And the end of it will be by the flood. And until the end there will be war; what is decided upon is desolations.
For the length of Jesus ministry until 36CE, only the Jews were being preached to. This was the covenant of Abraham being kept in force for 1 week which is equal to 7 years from 29CE-36CE.
quote:
And he must keep the covenant in force for the many for one week;
These are the offerings made under the mosaic law code...these sacrifices served as a basis of the relationship the Jews had with God, but they killed Jesus at the 'half of the week' (33ce) God abandoned them as a nation. This explains why the 'covenant was kept in force for 1 week'. If they were still Gods chosen nation, the covenent would have remained in force, but instead it had to be 'kept' in force for the benefit of faithful jews.
quote:
and at the half of the week he will cause sacrifice and gift offering to cease.
The final destruction Jerusalem occured in 70CE by the roman army. No longer did the Jews enjoy Gods protection from the surrounding nations.
quote:
And upon the wing of disgusting things there will be the one causing desolation; and until an extermination, the very thing decided upon will go pouring out also upon the one lying desolate.
I use the New world translation...you can find it online. NWT
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Jaderis, posted 04-30-2009 5:33 AM Jaderis has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024