[SoothingDave]

I firmly disagree with you assessment of this as well. The fact is that if the interpretation of week is a 7 year period or if it is a period of 7 days it would still be a literal interpretation no matter which one you choose. The fact is you don't seem to understandstand the terms literal and figurative. To interpret Daniel's 70 weeks as 490 days or as 490 years is still a literal interpretation. So I stand by my statement. Any time period, using days, years, months, weeks, nights. Just show me one, and I will get off your case.

OK, you win. If you can define 70 weeks to mean either 490 days or 490 years and still insist that you are taking it literally, then I won't argue with you.

Please define for me what "literal" and "figurative" mean then. SD

[JohnnyM]

The difference is in definition of the "week". There is factual basis for defining a week as 7 years or for defining it as 7 days. So the difference is NOT in the literally-ness of the passage (it literally means 7 weeks), but what time-period the term "week" is referring to. To take it figuratively would mean that "70 weeks" as a whole is an indiscrimanately long period of time.

JM

[malakhi]

Please define for me what "literal" and "figurative" mean then. SD

Clearly, JohnnyM is using a figurative definition of 'literal'.

;o)