Posted on 06/17/2010 4:24:08 PM PDT by Ken4TA
1. The Promise to Abraham
2. The Millennial Syndrome
3. Daniel’s Prophecy
>>>Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem...<<< (from v. 25)
As long as verse 23 remains "cut off" from these types of commentaries/interpretations, there will be no understanding.
I’ve always found Daniel interesting and that’s a good summary of the prophecy. It shows why Jesus was born at the time he was and not fifty or something years earlier or later. It also gave those looking for the messiah a general time frame to expect him.
Cheers.
Just what are you trying to say? Verse 23 is not a part of 24-27, it's the introduction, of which verse 22 is also to be included.
Exactly! The ministry of Jesus started the 70th week of the prophecy. Israel's people were looking for the Messiah's appearance with great expectation; thinking that he would be their King and overthrow the Roman occupation of Israel. That was not to be. They were looking for a wrong sort of King and Savior.
Bless you!
For the most part this analysis of the prophecy is correct. The best way to analyze this prophecy is to start off with the passover date 14 Nisan 3790 which is the exact date of “cut off” of the Messiah. That date is the exact date of the middle of the 70th week. If you go back 486.5 years from that date you get 3303.5 which is 1 Nisan 3303. That year is the 7th year of Artexerxes. Ezra 7:7
My question remains from post #37 from your thread “The promise to Abraham”. I repeat for the 3rd or 4th time. Where in the Bible and what date have the house of Judah and house of Israel been reunited in the land of the Abrahamic land covenant since 721 BC ?
Blessings in your search for TRUTH
understood by whom????
Cyrus gave the command for the Temple to be rebuilt not Jerusalem. And given that Cyrus died circa 530 BC, how does 490 get you anywhere close to the time of Jesus' ministry???
As far as the rest, it is mostly a jumbled mess of replacement theology word salad.
All tribes of Israel were reunited in the building of the temple in Jerusalem when Cyrus gave the command to do so. That happened at the end of the 70 years Israel and Judah were captive in Babylon.
understood by whom????
By most students of the Bible!
Cyrus gave the command for the Temple to be rebuilt not Jerusalem. And given that Cyrus died circa 530 BC, how does 490 get you anywhere close to the time of Jesus' ministry???
Read your Bible. Check out Daniel 9:25 for starters.
As far as the rest, it is mostly a jumbled mess of replacement theology word salad.
Rhetoric! I guess the same could be said of Dispensationalism; and most other groups on their end-time theology.
The Bible does not say that. If you think it does show me where???
Read your Bible. Check out Daniel 9:25 for starters.
Get real and learn some math -- your numbers don't add up -- much less your jumbled bible salad. According to your theology and math, the Messiah would have had to come numbers in 53BC -- LOL.
Laugh all you want! I find it intersting to notice that C. I. Scofield originally favored using the decree of Artaxerxes, until he read Martin Anstey's book, "Romance of Bible Chronology" which contained a system of chronology far superior to any of the former systems, for it dates were based only on the Scriptures. Scofield pointed out that the decree of Cyrus is the correct starting point of the 70 weeks prophecy. He then accepted this conclusion and rejected the erroneous chronology based on Ptolemy. He pointed this out in his book "What Do The Prophets Say?" (page 142) published in 1918: ""Whatever confusion has existed at this point has been due to following the Ptolemaic instead of the Biblical chronology, as Anstey in his 'Romance of Bible Chronology'." But he never corrected the dates in his Scofield Bible notes!
You should read a little more instead of blindly following erroneous statements made by those who follow the notes in various books and propagated by influencial preachers, teachers, and church pastors.
Regardless of this, Christ came on God's schedule just as is recorded in the Bible - which is from Cyrus' command to rebuild Jerusalem; which also included the temple.
So then the Messiah came in 53 BC??? Wow -- you replacement theology propagators are something else.
Scofield pointed out that the decree of Cyrus is the correct starting point of the 70 weeks prophecy.
A replacement theology teaching assistant citing C. I. Scofield as an authority!!!
Will wonders never cease!!!
So then the Messiah came in 53 BC??? Wow -- you replacement theology propagators are something else.
Hmmm...it seems you don't read or believe what the Bible has to say. You're replacement theology replaces what God has revealed - sad, very sad; that's all I can say.
"Scofield pointed out that the decree of Cyrus is the correct starting point of the 70 weeks prophecy."
A replacement theology teaching assistant citing C. I. Scofield as an authority!!!
Will wonders never cease!!!
Nope, not as long as you continue to disbelieve the Bible and are insistent on using you're replacement theology for God's word!
Maybe you should be arguing with those propagating erroneous teachings....???? - like Dispensationalists, JW's, and all who teach speculative and sensational end-time teachings?
I'm waiting for you to show me how 536 BC [Cyrus' Decree] less 483 years [69 weeks of years] gets you to any other Messianic Coming other than 53 BC.
Don't you have some replacement math to go along with your replacement theology???
On last time! Let me quote someone else, as you won't just believe me :-)
We believe the evidence is clear that it was CYRUS who gave the commandment which restored the people to Jerusalem so that it could be built - both the city and the temple. However, there is a teaching that is commonly held - especially by dispensationalists - the the 70 weeks are NOT to be counted from the decree of Cyrus, but from a much later decree. According to the dates given by Ussher, the twentieth year of Artaxerxes (when letters were given to Nehemiah to go to Jerusalem) would come closer to the time required by the prophecy - so as to measure unto the time that Christ was revealed to Israel. For this reason, some have chosen this as the starting point of the 70 weeks prophecy. (Anderson, The Coming Prince, page 124.)
But instead of seeking a later decree from that of Cyrus, we feel what should be questioned is they system of dates that some have used in this connection. The fact is that the chronological systems of Ussher, Lloyd, and others that seek to date this period, have all been based on the "cannon" of Ptolemy, a list of Persian kings and the supposed length of time that they reigned. Mauro says: "Ptolemy does not even pretend to have had any facts as to the length of thePersian period (that is to say, from Darius and Cyrus down to Alexander the Great)"; his dates are based on "calculations or guesses made by Eratosthenes, and on certain vague floating traditions." (Mauro, The Seventy weeks and the Great Tribulation, pages 22, 24). Nevertheless, dates based on Ptolemy are often quotred as though they had some special authority.
"He (Cyrus) is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to JERUSALEM thou shalt be BUILT; and to the TEMPLE, thy foundation shall be laid" (Isa. 44:28).
"I have raised him up in righteousness, and I will direct all his ways: HE SHALL BUILD MY CITY, and shall, let go my captives, not for price nor reward" (Isa. 45:14).
According to Josephus, Cyrus wrote: "God almighty has appointed me to be king of the habitable earth..he indeed foretold my name by the prophets, and that I should build Him a house at Jerusalem which is in the country of Judea." After Cyrus had read the prophey in Isaiah, "He called for the most eminent Jews that were in Babylon, and said to them, that he gave them leave to go back to their own country, and to REBULD THEIR CITY JERUSALEM, and THE TEMPLE of God." (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, XI, 1, 2, 3.)
Read Ezra, chapter one, which records the proclamation that was made by Cyrus; chapter two, which gives a list of those that returned; chapter 3, which tells us that the "people gathered themselves together as one man to Jerusalem" (v. 1), Built an altar, and made offerings. "But the foundation of the temple of the Lord was not yet laid" (v. 6). However they began making arrangements for its building "according to the grant that they had of Cyrus" (v. 7). Two years and two months after their return, "All the people shoulted with a great shout...because the foundation of the house of the Lord was laid" (vs. 8-11).
Think: 2 years and 2 months passed away before they even laid the foundations! Do you assume that the people were just sitting around during that time? Or were they building homes during that time? Read Chapter 4, verses 11-16, then verse 24; then continue reading until your eyes are sore!
Naw, the time that Cyrus gave the command was the end of the 70 years captivity and the start of the 70 weeks prophecy!
Does your replacement theology really want to go by what the Bible and history tells us? If so, have at it, it doesn't really bother me.
You say:
All tribes of Israel were reunited in the building of the temple in Jerusalem when Cyrus gave the command to do so. That happened at the end of the 70 years Israel and Judah were captive in Babylon.
If that is so, then where is or who was the the king spoken of in
Eze 37:22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:
Why does Isaiah say they will be gathered from the four corners of the earth, if the people of the Babylonian captivity returned only from Babylon?
Isa 11:12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
If the whole house of Israel and house of Judah returned to Jerusalem after 70 years of captivity, then why does Yeshua say
Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
It’s obvious that the entire house of Israel was not in Jerusalem at that time.
If the whole house of Israel returned to the physical promised land of the Abrahamic pact, then why does Paul, who was sent to preach to the Gentile nations, use the term “our fathers” when speaking to the Corinthians of a far away land.
1Co 10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
If all the 2 houses returned after the 70 years in “Babylon”, why does Zechariah say they will be taken out of “Egypt and Assyria”? When did that occur. Any history book, date, anything you can show.
Zec 10:10 I will bring them again also out of the land of Egypt, and gather them out of Assyria; and I will bring them into the land of Gilead and Lebanon; and place shall not be found for them.
Blessings in your search for TRUTH
"24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer , and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; 25 That frustrateth the tokens of the liars, and maketh diviners mad; that turneth wise men backward, and maketh their knowledge foolish ; 26 That confirmeth the word of his servant, and performeth the counsel of his messengers; that saith to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be inhabited; and to the cities of Judah, Ye shall be built, and I will raise up the decayed places thereof: 27 That saith to the deep, Be dry , and I will dry up thy rivers: 28 That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid."
The Lord didn't say that Cyrus would "say it". He said that He would "say it".
And Isaiah 45:14 refers not to Cyrus but to the "son" of Cyrus.
You are still avoiding the mathematical insufficiency of your proposition which calls for the Messiah to have arrived in 53 BC.
Doesn't that bother you at all????
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.