70th week of Daniel I like to question everythi..

1 y

70th week of Daniel

I like to question everything. Not out of rebellion, but because I want to learn. I like deep discussions as it gives everyone a chance to share their understanding.

The 70th week of Daniel has been sitting a bit "skew" in my throat for quite some time. My thinking is, why would this one prophecy be broken up in such a way; 69 weeks + 1 week 2000 years later. Are we taught this due to "traditions of men" and now hold onto it as it is truth?

We are told that it refers to the anti-Christ, but if the verse is read through different glasses then it looks more like it could be speaking of Yeshua ending the sacrifices...

If we calculate the initial 69 weeks then if comes to when Yeshua started His ministry. The standard belief is that He ministered for 3.5 years and was then crucified. At His crucifixion the veil in the temple was ripped; top down. Therefore sacrifices should strictly have stopped at that point.

I can't find a marker 3.5 years after Yeshua's crucifixion to complete the 70th week if this interpretation of the prophecy is correct.

What are your thoughts on this?

Comment

Two extra thoughts just came up:

1. Human sacrifice is an abomonation for Father. That is why Baal worship is no sinful. If Yeshua was sacrificed on the cross then is can be understood as the abomonation which made the daily sacrifice desolate...

2. I have historically always seen Yeshua as gentle and meek and only ascribe those kinds of verses to Him. I have come to realize that that is not the picture of when He overturned the moneychangers' tables in the temple. Nor when He returns and makes war against the nations. Why then read into the 70th week that it must be the anti-Christ who stops the daily and not Yeshua?

· Reply · 1695890625

Good points. I once read something on the 70 weeks, I believe by William Struse. It made sense back then, but I havent read it in years. I used to get emails as follow ups from him, but those didnt make sense, so I think I blocked them. I should go back and read the Daniel passage again. I recently read part of Daniel, but I dont think I read all of it. Thank you for bringing this up!

· Reply · 1695914638

I just re-read Daniel throught the weeks prophecy. It looks like it is still a time to come. The temple does need to be rebuilt currently. Once the command to rebuild it (a third time) goes out, the sixty two weeks will pass until the Prince comes. Then there will be half a week before the sacrifices are stopped. I suppose the rest of the seven weeks come after that. Its really doesnt mention them and how the play into it all. I was reading out of the Berean Study Bible.

· Reply · 1695923605

I also re-read Daniel 9 this morning and it just dawned on me that verse 25 says: "So you are to know and understand that from the issuance of the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until [the coming of] the Messiah, the Prince, there will be seven weeks [of years] and sixty-two weeks [of years]; it will be built again, with [a city] plaza and moat"

It talks of rebuilding Jerusalem and not the temple. We have been taught to read "temple" into the verse, but it talks about the city and walks being rebuilt as was done when Darius gave the order.

Verse 26-27 is where I believe the confusion comes in: "Then after the sixty-two weeks [of years] the Anointed One will be cut off [and denied His Messianic kingdom] and have nothing [and no one to defend Him], and the people of the [other] prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he will enter into a binding and irrevocable covenant with the many for one week..."

V26 talk about Yeshua, then about a people of the prince and then v27 talks about a "he". The general teaching is that that "he" is the prince of the people, but why don't we read it as being Yeshua as the other prince isn't even on the scene?

· Reply · 1695976478

I appreciate you bringing up this topic. I think the 70th week in Daniel 9 refers to the wicked prince because he's referred to many times as the one that takes away that which is continual (Daniel 8:11-13; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11). So I think Daniel 9:27 is one more example of that. Daniel was one who kept on observing the sacrifices even though sacrifices were stopped during his time (Daniel 9:21). So I think the wicked prince is going to try to remove "that which is continual" in the sense that he's going to ban prayer, especially prayer that would be done in the third and ninth hour, as Daniel would do it (Daniel 6 is probably a shadow of this). I think the two prophets of Revelation 11 are going to attempt to re-establish "that which is continual" in a spiritual sense (as Daniel would keep it), and then the wicked prince is going to try to ban that movement. Just as Haggai and Zekaryah re-established the second temple, those two prophets will probably establish the true temple. Let's also recall that the prophet Eliyahu guarded "that which is continual" even when many in the northern tribes were ignoring it (1 Kings 18:36), and we know that Malaki says that Eliyahu will come before the great day (Malaki 4:4-5). Now, I know Yohanan (John the Baptist) is Eliyahu according to Yeshua, but who is to say another prophet cannot arise in the Spirit of Eliyahu, especially since the prophets of Revelation will have similar authority? Just my two cents.

· 1696277116

2 Replies

Rhy Bezuidenhout

GidgetsMom

GidgetsMom

Rhy Bezuidenhout

Isaac Cruz

Eyes of Grace

His and Hers Promise Rings

Bookmark - Num 6:24-26

RESTORATION SCRIPTURES TRUE NAME 8TH EDITION

Dandelion Plantain Salve

Forsake Evil, Yahweh Forgives