490 YEARS DONE!!!!!

Daniel 9:24 24 "Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place.

Boy, that was an easy one. The Scripture declare that all of those things will happen in the 70 weeks, the 490 years.

 

No, most have all concluded that you're wrong. Sorry

 

Breaking the 490 year timeline up by inserting a gap of "undefined duration" into a part of it - ruins the 490 year timeline. No timeline can work if you allow those who use it to simply "insert gaps of undefined length" into it as they feel inclined to do so.

Notice that in Daniel 9:1-4 we have the 70 year timeline of Jeremiah.

Notice that there is no nope of using that timeline if you are free to break it into pieces and then insert gaps of undefined duration into that 70 timeline.

It destroys the timeline to do that.

So you started reading Late Great Planet Earth when you were 3?

In Christ,

Bob

 

I can only count to 29, then I start over.

 

That assumes your conclusion taht th 490 years have been completed. But they have not, as was already demonstrated.

But you have seroius problems that I already pointed out. Jesus is cut off before the 70th week, not in the middle of it. Just read the text as it stands. You have the following

7 years
62 years
Messiah cut off
Prince to come destroys city and sanctuary, with flood, war, desolations
Covenant made for 70th week
Sacrifices cut off in the middle of hte week;
Desolation comes.

Notice how much in the text comes between the cutting off of Messiah and the covenant. You want to change the order, but the text will not allow it.

And you guys complain about distorting a time line. You just completely changed the order of the text. And i repeat, the "he" that makes the covenant is not hte Messiah. It is the prince who is to come.

Tammy, you have some serious problems because you want to change the text. If God had intended for it to be understood the way you have, he would have said that. But he didn't. And you shouldn't rewrite it for him.

 

I can't help but notice you didn't explain why you took Daniel's order of events and changed it. Mind filling us in?

 

1. You have demonstrated that the 490 year timeline STARTS at a point 483 years before the Messiah.

2. You have demonstrated that you find no basis in all of scripture for taking scriptural timelines and inserting gaps of undefined lengths into the middle of them.

3. You have demonstrated that even though Daniel 9 mentions both the coming of the messian AND the cutting off of the Messiah (the Cross of Christ) - you find no place for the Cross of Christ in "your" chopped up timeline model EVEN though it is mentioned in Danile 9's 490 year time.

Notice.

This is a reference to the cross and to the destruction of Jerusalem.

Your view does not have ANYTHING included in it AFTER the 483 years (after the 7 weeks PLUS Sixty-two weeks) other than events scattered far from the end of the 69th week. Certainly not the central point of all of history - the cross of Christ EVEN though it IS mentioned right here IN the 490 year timeline!

What is so important that would justify chopping up this timeline JUST when it covers the ministry of Christ and His death on the Cross?

What is so important that it would justify chopping up this ONE timeline as opposed to EVERY OTHER TIMELINE in scripture?

Answer: nothing!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Larry has posted several times taking the Scripture quite literally and accurately. Why are these just ignored? I find it interesting, Tam, that you post things like, "How come no one will answer me, etc." Then when Larry clearly shows from Scripture your error you say, "Oh, let's just be friends and ignore the differences." Your position is absolutely indefensible from Scripture and just a couple of simple posts by PastorLarry have shown that. Where in the world do you get that the disciples ministered for 3 1/2 years to complete the 490? Talk about reading in to the Scripture. It's so much easier to just take God at His word, then you don't have to do all that twisting.

 

Tam, sweetie, with all the twisting you do, I bet you look like pretzel.

 

They are not ignored. He has been responded to "in detail" and the primary, obvious problem of chopping up the 490 year timeline looms so large over his interpretation that it can not be ignored.

There is no timeline in all of scripture (not even the 70 year timeline that starts the chapter of Daniel 9 NOR the 490 year timeline that ends it) that can be preserved by chopping it up and inserting gaps of undefined length into it.

Obviously.

The position of chopping up "only this one timeline" is absolutely indefensible.

The "other obvious problem" is that Daniels 490 year timeline explicitly references both the start of the Messiah's ministry AND his being "cut off" 3.5 year later. But in the "chop and toss" model Pastor Larry most STOP the timeline JUST when it gets to this all-important work of Christ on the cross!!

The chop-and-toss model use here and only here - swaps out a focus on the cross - for a focus on an antichrist.

You are making a huge blunder here by expecting every single element in the 490 year timeline to be established with a Biblical reference and date because the "chop-and-toss" model totally avoids Biblical fulfillment "event" and has to "imagine them" for that last week.

But if we "preserve" the 490 year timeline as we do with all other prophetic timelines in scripture - THEN we SEE each event IN scripture with NT FOCUS on the start of Christ's ministry, the cross, the making of the "covenenat" by Christ (Matt 26:28) and the fact that the Messiah puts a stop to sacrifices and offerings (Heb 10) -- ALL of them clearly IN the 490 year timeline and mentioned in Daniel 9 -- and all of them clearly FOCUSED on in the NT.

But the chop-and-toss model has no place at all for the cross of Christ in the 490year timeline EVEN though it is mentined IN Daniel 9 has an event in that timeline!

How tragic!

What a huge obstacle for the chop-and-toss model to overcome!

It's so much easier to just take God at His word, then you don't have to do all that twisting.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I read it. It didn't address the issues.

Threescore and two weeks is 62 weeks of years, meaning 434 years. That is not 3 1/2 years that Jesus preached the good news since 434 does not equal 3 1/2. So explanation number one is clearly refuted.

It is a ruler that will come after Jesus. It is not necessarily the ruler immediately after Jesus. Quite often in prophecy, there is a telescoping affect making things appear close that are in reality far apart.

No, it doesn't. The "he" of the covenant is the prince who is to come, the ruler. IT is not Jesus. The context will not allow your explanation. It is too far removed and the time line doesn't work. This covenant is made at the beginning of the 70th week intended for the 70th week, but it is broken in the middle. The Messiah died previously to the covenant being made, as is clear from simply reading the order ofhte text.

As I have already shown, your explanation will not work with the text as it stands. Your explanation requires something entirely different than the text allows. The order is simple 69 weeks, Messiah cut off, prince to come makes covenant for 70th week, covenant broken in the middle of hte 70th week.

Let me explain quickly again, why Christ is not in view. SOme have said that the covenant of v. 27 is the New covenant of Matt 26. They also say that Christ's death ends the sacrifice. In Matthew, Christ makes the covenant on one day (probalby Thursday) and ends sacrifices on Friday with his death. In Dan, the covenant is made after the Messiah has been cut off; the covenant is made for one week (7 years); and the sacrifices are ended 3 1/2 years after the covenant is made, not 1 day after the covenant is made. Your interpretation depends on the weeks having various lengths. Then you refer to the destruction of AD70, which is 38 years after Christ's death, which inserts that dreaded gap in the time line that Bob has railed against. The reality is that even your side has a gap in teh time line; it is just a different sized gap. You haven't avoided it; you have simply changed it.