O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
There's no mention of the source of your accounting in your post, but is it Ussher by any chance? Or maybe the John Evans book, The Four Kingdoms of Daniel ? By Ussher's accounting in his Annals, he exactly follows the landmarks you have described for dating the 490 years prophecy, which I can understand and agree with; (beginning with the Artaxerxes I decree in the Jubilee year of 454 BC until Paul's vision in the Jerusalem temple, 3 years plus into his ministry, when God commissions him to concentrate his missionary efforts on reaching those in Gentile lands). Preston may regard that as ending this grandiose 70 year prophecy with a whimper, and from the Jewish nation's perspective, it is. If you're one of the Gentile class, though, it's glorious news.
Not sure if the Daniel 9:26 reference to "desolations (plural)" is in direct relation to the particular examples of desolations you are highlighting here, but it seems reasonable. After all, the phrase goes "unto the end of the war (70 AD) desolations (plural) are determined", which would allow for them to occur anywhere between the Messiah being cut off (crucifixion), and the end of the war - as it relates to the destruction of the actual temple.
I sense from the tenor of your various replies that you also tend to look for fulfillment of types in whatever you are reading?
Thanks for the reply. My Sunday School teacher mentioned two popular dates for ending the countdown naturally without any time warps (who I am blessed with because he teaches the truth and is still allowed to be in my church). I push him a little too much with Tim's teachings though. I picked up Tim's book at a Don Preston conference and it was a real eye opener to me.
So it struck me as odd that the date ending the 490 years was not more acknowledged yet the very people who were doing the counting were in a rage over what it had led to. They literally stopped up their own ears to avoid hearing the good news from Stephen, and Saul was one of them.
According to types, the firstborn in the flesh was persecuting the one born of promise. Circumcision of the heart was refused by the ones who still insisted on the types. Refusing the Holy Spirit was of course unforgiveable because second birth was the only way to be in the renewed family of God.
Like you said, the believing Jews adopted us at the end of their countdown and that is significant. So the countdown ended with the Jews fulfilling the original mission of Adam; to take the best covenant life there is to all the original creation types, by the promised seed of Eve. You would think they would be proud of that. You would think we would take more note of the fulfillment of the Bible's original intent.
The old covenant land borders were defended by bow and sword, which may be why they thought they should drive out the new covenant 'intruders' by violence. The new covenant land is defended by truth which is not as easy as it sounds. I think I am learning that being on the right side is what matters most and maybe all land (people) is not to be conquered. Of course all the races are in the kingdom not all the people, but even in my own church it seems truth is most resisted even by my best freinds. Paul insisted on going back to Jerusalem and trying again because he agonized that his own people in the flesh didn't get it. He went against all warnings, and it did eventually take Him all the way to Nero.
Or maybe everyone on earth is in the kingdom of God today but only believers are allowed to enter the capital city.
I think the challenge is how to fit these (and others) into the 70 weeks:
Dan 9:24 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.
You say the challenge is to fit Daniel 9:24 and others into the 70 weeks.
1. To finish transgression - At the end of the 490 years, Jesus is seen in new covenant position; standing beside the Father, as Stephen is being killed. Maybe transgression refers to 'transgressed as Adam'. Sin reigned from Adam to Moses because fallen Adam was the head. God renewed the old covenant with others but they were still under law and still transgressed the old covenant.
2. Make an end of sin - In the sense of 1 John 3:9 whatever that is
3. Make atonement for iniquity - The crucifixion in the middle of the last week
4. Bring in everlasting righteousness - Jesus procured the completed image of God in Adam and took that immortal human soul to head up the new covenant
5. Seal up vision and prophecy - This is the difficult one. Can anyone help me here?
6. Anoint the most holy place - The anointing left the temple due to Judah's apostasy and returned to indwell God's people (the 12 tribes and their proselytes) at Pentecost
"Seal up vision and prophecy" whatever it means Jesus applied it to his generation.
Mat 24:15 `Whenever, therefore, ye may see the abomination of the desolation, that was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (whoever is reading let him observe)
Mat 24:16 then those in Judea--let them flee to the mounts;
Mat 24:17 he on the house-top--let him not come down to take up any thing out of his house;
Mat 24:18 and he in the field--let him not turn back to take his garments.
Mat 24:19 `And woe to those with child, and to those giving suck in those days;
Mat 24:20 and pray ye that your flight may not be in winter, nor on a sabbath;
Mat 24:21 for there shall be then great tribulation, such as was not from the beginning of the world till now, no, nor may be.
Mat 24:22 And if those days were not shortened, no flesh would have been saved; but because of the chosen, shall those days be shortened.
Mat 24:23 `Then if any one may say to you, Lo, here is the Christ! or here! ye may not believe;
Mat 24:24 for there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and they shall give great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, also the chosen.
Mat 24:25 Lo, I did tell you beforehand.
Mat 24:26 `If therefore they may say to you, Lo, in the wilderness he is, ye may not go forth; lo, in the inner chambers, ye may not believe;
Mat 24:27 for as the lightning doth come forth from the east, and doth appear unto the west, so shall be also the presence of the Son of Man;
Mat 24:28 for wherever the carcase may be, there shall the eagles be gathered together.
Mat 24:29 `And immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from the heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken;
Mat 24:30 and then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in the heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the earth smite the breast, and they shall see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of the heaven, with power and much glory;
Mat 24:31 and he shall send his messengers with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his chosen from the four winds, from the ends of the heavens unto the ends thereof.
Mat 24:32 `And from the fig-tree learn ye the simile: When already its branch may have become tender, and the leaves it may put forth, ye know that summer is nigh,
Mat 24:33 so also ye, when ye may see all these, ye know that it is nigh--at the doors.
Mat 24:34 Verily I say to you, this generation may not pass away till all these may come to pass.
For a extended study see Don Preston's work "Seal Up Vision and Prophecy"and Seventy Weeks are Determined...For The Resurrection.
I understand books are expensive and people would like to just get answers from blogs but the fact is some answers are too deep and expanded to really fit into a blog. Guys like Preston are not getting rich writing "Full Preterist" books but they can't continue to study and write without our support.Most of Don's books are in Kindle version now so it's a lot cheaper.
Something that caught my attention "then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in the heaven"
Notice a sign would appear...not Jesus.
I thought Simeon's prophecy uttered over the infant Jesus did call him a "sign which shall be spoken against;" in Luke 2:34. It's a perfectly acceptable interpretation of Matt. 24:30 for the Son of Man in the heaven to be the actual sign itself. It doesn't twist the sentence at all to understand it that way.
And we all know that the virgin-born child prophecy in Isaiah 7:14, "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;...."
Also, Isaiah 11:10, 12 speaks of the "root of Jesse" (Christ), which would be an "ensign for the nations" as he gathers Israel "from the four corners of the earth."
Sounds like Jesus is the sign, to me.
I think your ignoring audience relevance and conflating signs.Of course Jesus' physical birth and resurrection were signs...But we have to try and understand what his words meant to those he spoke to.
Especially Mat 24:34 Verily I say to you, this generation may not pass away till all these may come to pass.
Do you think this has been fulfilled?
How confusing can the Bible become when we ignore context? Let me give an example.
Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, "Teacher, we want to see a sign from you."
He answered, "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.
A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah." Jesus then left them and went away
But just a few verses latter we read Mat 24:30 and then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in the heaven;
Now back up to
Mat 16:27 `For, the Son of Man is about to come in the glory of his Father, with his messengers, and then he will reward each, according to his work.
So now we need to understand what this meant to his 1st century Jews. Don Preston has done a great work in explaining what was meant by "In the Glory of The Father" You can watch a short youtube that will give you an ideal of what he is proposing.
Please let me know your thoughts,i truly appreciate your views.
Thanks for the reply but you seem to seal the problem for me. Must we also have a gap in the 490 years, even if it is about 1% of the dispy gap? Were the Judahans supposed to accept their messiah and avoid the wilderness wondering of the church? Or is it a predetermined grace period to renew the body in the reversaI of things? I have several of Don's books but I guess I will now purchase the one that most specifically addresses this conundrum. Thanks for the lead in this detective work. I know it makes perfect sence somehow!
Apologies for not responding sooner. Spent most of the week out of commission. This may be drifting a bit off-center from the 70 weeks discussion, so apologies again. First, I'll grant you the Isaiah 7:14 reference could well be disputed as proof of Jesus being the sign itself, but the Isaiah 11:10, 12 references are dealing with exactly the same event as in Matthew 24:30-31. No conflating going on there at least. The word "ensign" means the same as "sign".
I did watch the link you gave with Don's views of what "In the glory of the Father" means in regard to Christ's return. Looks like he is essentially in agreement with Dr. Gentry on this point. There is no escaping the Acts 1:11 text for me, though. If the angels said Jesus would come in like manner as he went, that means bodily to my understanding. In addition, to my understanding that also meant the Mount of Olives location, which is east of Jerusalem (Matt. 24:27).
Just as a side comment, I was fascinated to read online this week that the Jews didn't consider their main direction of the compass to be North, as we do. They regarded the East as the direction from which to orient themselves. I think I read that the Hebrew word for South translates literally as "turning to the right". After considering the multitude of OT references to the significance of the "East" in everything from how the Exodus camps were set up, how blood was sprinkled on the east side of the mercy seat, to the distinction of the eastern temple gate in Ezekiel, it makes sense now. God put an asterisk on the direction of the east for some purpose. If his return is not physical, what difference would direction of the compass make? Don's point is that if Christ comes in "the glory of the Father", that since God never came physically in the various judgments of the nations in OT scriptures, that Christ didn't either in 70 AD. This presumes that since those judgment-comings were metaphorical in description, that any other comings must be also. Besides, God was not incarnate in the OT, but in the NT, He is.
Don makes an emphatic statement that there was no physical return of Christ in the clouds of heaven in 70 AD. Period. If he makes that assertion based on our having no extra-biblical record of such an event, he should also consider that we have no extra-biblical record of Christ's ascension from the Mount of Olives, either. Does that mean it didn't happen?
I think I know why the particular verse you are emphasizing in Matt 24:30 would use the word "sign" connected with Christ's appearing. Looking just a few verses before this one, in Matt 24:24 there are false Christs and false prophets who would be showing (visible) "great signs and wonders", convincing enough to deceive even the elect, if that were possible. These signs performed by earthly impostors would be a cheap substitute for the real Sign which would come in the clouds of heaven.
Hope you haven't been hit with the same flu bug that got me this week. Go all winter finally spring gets here and wham!
Pretty interesting information you provided about the Jews and the use of the compass. If you still have the link I'd love to take a loo at it.
About your comment "There is no escaping the Acts 1:11 text for me, though. If the angels said Jesus would come in like manner as he went, that means bodily to my understanding."
There have been several articles written on this from a Fulfilled view and I'm not sure the futurist are even using this argument....save for the total literalist. They're literal until it comes to the time statements then change horses in the middle of the stream. Consistency isn't something they seem to care about.
Keith Mathison an vocal opponent of Full Preterism has written a response to these views so I link to his article to continue in the fair and balanced approach we take at this site :)
Please take special note of J.L. Vaughn's response.
Is this true?
traditionally Acts 1:11 has been understood to be a clear and unambiguous promise of the personal, visible, and bodily Second Coming of Jesus Christ to earth.
Or is this the view of modern scholars?
For example, I can't find any such claim by Calvin."
Any thoughts you have as always are appreciated.
Here are a couple sites that essentially are saying the same thing about the whole Hebrew / East compass orientation thing. www.ancient-hebrew.org/27_eternity, or the other one at www.ancient-hebrew.org/docs/39_brown-time.pdf
I read through both the links you gave from Bell and Preston (thank you, John), on Acts 1:11 - spotted a couple internal contradictions - get back later on those, but won't make a comment about them at this post location due to different topic.
Also read Preston's comments on Daniel and the 70 weeks at his Preterist Research Institute site, dated Jan. 2014. He and John Evans hold opposing viewpoints on the terminus ad quem for this 70 weeks. Gotta say I hold to Evan's position in "The Four Kingdoms of Daniel" that 70 AD is not included in the final 70th week, which is Eohn's original point of this post. Without having purchased Preston's latest book related to this subject (hey, it's April 15-Uncle Sam has all my money!), it would appear from the comments I read on PRI that he considers this 70 weeks as a kind of elastic tape measure, with technically no gaps in it.
I think this 70-week yardstick is composed of solid titanium.