Posted on 06/20/2010 5:59:21 PM PDT by USALiberty
The Purpose For This Index The Rapture Index has two functions: one is to factor together a number of related end time components into a cohesive indicator, and the other is to standardize those components to eliminate the wide variance that currently exists with prophecy reporting.
The Rapture Index is by no means meant to predict the rapture, however, the index is designed to measure the type of activity that could act as a precursor to the rapture.
You could say the Rapture index is a Dow Jones Industrial Average of end time activity, but I think it would be better if you viewed it as prophetic speedometer. The higher the number, the faster we're moving towards the occurrence of pre-tribulation rapture.
Rapture Index of 100 and Below: Slow prophetic activity Rapture Index of 100 to 130: Moderate prophetic activity Rapture Index of 130 to 160: Heavy prophetic activity Rapture Index above 160: Fasten your seat belts
(Excerpt) Read more at raptureready.com ...
Um, what?
This is speaking of Jesus not the anti-christ. Jesus confirmed the covenant with the Jews for 3.5 years and was cut off in the middle of it.The overspreading of the abomination was the continuation of the daily sacrifice by the Jews. God gave them 40 years to repent and in ad 70 God destroyed the Temple and the daily sacrifices. You will not find any where in the bible that says that there will be 7 years of tribulation. Revelation speaks of a 3.5 year period. the tribulation is only 3.5 years.
Those are all characteristics of the guy who signs a seven-year peace contract with Israel.
So if Jesus Christ is that guy, I'm going to need to see supporting Scripture that will prove without a doubt that Jesus Christ already signed a seven-year peace contact with Israel.
Show me in Daniel where it talks about the anti-christ
Daniel, also tells us that the last seven years begins when Israel signs or confirms a covenant with a world leader that scripture identifies as the Beast (Antichrist). (Daniel 9:27)
Now it's your turn to give me the Scripture to support your claim that Jesus Christ is the guy who signed a seven-year peace contract between Israel and her enemies.
these two verses talk about the same person the Messiah, You can not say one is about Jesus and then the next one is about an anti-christ. It is not good bible reading verse 27 says nothing about a anti-christ. Jesus consummated the covenant after 3.5 years which caused the requirement of the sacrifice to end.
When Jesus Christ was crucified, did He come back to life and continue His ruling over the entire world?
"the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary" - the people that destroyed the sanctuary (Temple, in 70AD) were the Romans and "the prince that shall come" will be of the people who destroyed the Temple in 70AD.
The fact that the Temple was destroyed after Jesus was crucified nukes your entire assertion, but I'll play along.
Since the destruction of the Temple occurred after Christ's crucifixion, are you still going to maintain that 1. Jesus was of Roman descent and 2. Jesus died, was brought back to life by Satan, desecrated the Temple, forced the Jews to stop their sacrifices, ruled over the entire world, was referred to as the "Beast" throughout Scripture, and confirmed a seven-year peace contract between Israel and her enemies?
One, last time, I'm going to need the Scripture that inarguably shows that Jesus Christ was the guy who met all of the characteristics listed above that the Bible states will be attributes of the guy who confirms the seven-year peace contract between Israel and her enemies.
If I don't see that supporting Scripture in your next post, I'll know that you simply cannot support your assertion that Jesus Christ ever confirmed a seven-year peace contract between Israel and her enemies and will know that that nonsense can be permanently dismissed.
If you are looking for a new temple and a 7 year tribulation and rapture before all that then you will be sadly mistaken.
THX MUCH.
This is the second such "debate" I have seen in the last week. Some discuss the issues around the end times, while others want to argue. It can be rather easy to get caught up ones own position on the issue. Pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib, no-trib; on and on it goes.
I have read rationales for various positions on the topic. I have also seen some of those verses that seem to support this position or that one posted with the usual: "see? see? it is obvious that the position I ascribe to is correct!"
I know what position I have concluded has the most scriptural support. I also know that I don't know which scenario God will make happen. I think it is reasonable to conclude none of you do either.
WHY do we all want to get into arguments - that's right, not discussions (although there certainly are some) but arguments over this? I don't know of any scripture that states that one must believe on the mid-trib (or whatever) rapture of the church in order to be saved.
Elsewhere I referred to these issues as nonessential scripture. If one was introducing someone to Jesus Christ would you use the "Romans road", or launch into an apologetic on post-trib rapture? Make no mistake, there are absolutes worth contending for; the deity of Christ - that He was and is God is one of those essentials that draws a dividing line between those who are Christian and these who are not. But why are we slicing and dicing the body over this?
I think all of us who belong to Jesus Christ would agree that salvation through Him is what is desperately needed now, regardless of what is coming or when. A person can rationalize all day that he or she is “contending for the faith” when the only thing being served is that person’s pride. What a waste. If one cannot discuss this issue with kindness, civility and care for those who have concluded differently about end times, then I respectfully recommend that you agree to disagree and just drop it, and get on with what really matters now.
I finally have my answer.
NO YOU HAVE YOUR DOGMA.
Timing
Possibly something involving Iran? Check out these other threads posted today:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2539258/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2539488/posts
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.
25"So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress.
26"Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.
Verse 24 tells us 70 weeks, correct?
Verse 25 then tells us there will be 7 weeks AND 62 weeks, correct?
Verse 26 tells us "Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing,",
It does not say after 62-1/2 weeks the Messiah will be cut off, and it does not say that the Messiah will begin his ministry after 62 weeks.
Then it tells us after Messiah is cut off, that the city and sanctuary will be destroyed.
NOW...We can look at verse 27:
"And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate."
The first 7 weeks have gone by, the next 62 weeks have gone by and Messiah is cut off, and the city and sanctuary are destroyed...NOW...HE will make a covenant for 1 week (7 years), but in the middle will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering.
Who is this HE? Messiah has already been cut off after week 62 (69), and now week 70 starts with a covenant which is broken by the the one who made it 1/2 way through.
I thought maybe you were confusing 3 score and 2 weeks with 3-1/2 years. A score is 20 years. So 3 score is 60, and 3 score and 2 is 62.
Just and fyi, if you made that mistake.
"Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent" (John 6:29)
"...Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief." (Mark 9:24)
"And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe." (John 14:29)
"For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord..." (2Timothy 1:7,8)
"...for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." (Rev 19:10)
"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed..." (2 Peter 1:19)
Da:9:24: Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
Da:9:25: Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: (a total of 69 weeks) the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. Da:9:26: And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. Da:9:27: And he (Jesus) shall confirm the covenant with many (Jews) for one week: and in the midst of the week(3.5 years) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,(temple sacrife not needed after the crusifiction) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate,t (God gave the Jews 40 years to repent for the continuation of the sacrifice) even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
For interpreters like Gary DeMar, who advocate a continuous fulfillment view of all seventy weeks without a break, it is they who must put both the crucifixion of Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem, some forty years later, into the final week of years which is only seven years in length. Yet, DeMar accuses those of us who see a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth week as exercising"'silly-putty' exegesis,"[100] of stretching out this biblical timeframe in a manner not supported by the text itself. DeMar argues that Christ's death took place in the middle of the final week, which would then draw to a conclusion in a.d. 33 with the conversion of Paul (an event which in no way is even remotely alluded to in Gabriel's prophecy).[101] What DeMar fails to tell his readers is that while he rails against a gap, he is oh so silent about how to ram, cram, and jam two events separated by forty years into a seven year period. Perhaps his approach should be called "shoehorn" exegesis!
A closer look at DeMar's problem reveals a grave contradiction in his understanding of Daniel 9:24-27 and his view of Matthew 24:15 as having been fulfilled in a.d. 70. "The abomination of desolation is mentioned in one Old Testament book (Dan. 9:27;11:31; 12:11),"[102] declares DeMar. He then statesthat "[T]here was no doubt in the minds of those who read and understood Jesus' words in Matthew 24:15 that the abomination of desolation prophecy was fulfilled in events leading up to the temple's destruction in a.d. 70."[103] Clearly DeMar links the fulfillment of the abomination of desolation in Daniel 9:27, which will occur in the middle of the week, with the Roman destruction of the temple in a.d. 70, some 40 years later. Sorry Gary, but even with the flexibility of new math, the numbers don't add up. There is no way to ram, cram, and jam events that occurred at least forty years apart into seven years.
Randall Price notes that "the events in verse 26: 'the cutting off of Messiah,' and of'the people of the prince,' are stated to occur after the sixty-nine weeks. If this was intended to occur in the seventieth week,the text would have read here 'during' or 'in the midst of' (cf. Daniel's use of hetzi, 'in the middle of,'verse 27). This language implies that these events precede the seventieth week, but do not immediately follow the sixty-ninth. Therefore, a temporal interval separates the two."[104] Only the literal, futurist understanding of the seventy weeks of Daniel can harmonize in a precise manner the interpretation of this passage.
Messiah Will Be Cut Off
As I work my way through the various items to be tackled in the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27, I will continue my focus on issues related to verse 26. We have seen thus far that verse 26 begins with the phrase "after the sixty-two weeks." The text goes on to describe three things that will take place at the end of the sixty-ninth week of years (i.e., 483 years). Therefore, in this installment, I will deal with three important phrases in verse 26. They are: 1) "the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing," 2) "the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary," and 3) "its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined." All evangelical interpreters agree that the cutting off of Messiah certainly refers to the death of Jesus. This fits perfectly into my interpretation thus far. Since the 483 years were fulfilled to the day on March 30, a.d. 33-the date of Christ's Triumphal Entry (Luke 19:28-40)-and Jesus was crucified four days later on April 3, a.d. 33, then it was an event that took place after the 483 years, but not during the final week of years. This textual point is recognized by many, including amillennialist E. B. Pusey who says, "[N]ot in, but after those three score and two weeks, it said Messiah shall be cut off."[105] "As this relates to the chronology of the prophecy," notes Dr. John Walvoord, "it makes plain that the Messiah will be living at the end of the sixty-ninth seventh and will be cut off, or die, soon after the end of it."[106] G. H. Pember further explains:
"Now, His crucifixion took place four days after His appearance as the Prince-that is, four days after the close of the Four Hundred and Eighty-third Year. Nevertheless, the prophecy does not represent this great event as occurring in the Seven Years which yet remained to be fulfilled. Here, then, is the beginning of an interval, which separates the Four Hundred and Eighty-threeYears from the final Seven".[107]
The next phrase "and have nothing," literally means "and shall have nothing." To what does this refer? Certainly Christ gained what was intended through His atoning death on the cross as far as paying for the sins of the world.
What was it that He came for but did not receive, especially in relationship to Israel and Jerusalem, which is the larger context of this overall passage? It was His Messianic Kingdom! Indeed, it will come, but not at the time in which He was cut off. Dr. Charles Feinberg declares, "it can only mean that He did not receive the Messianic kingdom at that time. When His own people rejected him (John 1:11), He did not receive what rightly belonged to Him."[108]It is because of Daniel's people (the Jews) rejection of Jesus as their Messiah that the Kingdom could come in. The coming of the Kingdom requires acceptance of Jesus as Messiah in order for it to be established in Jerusalem. The Kingdom will arrive by the time the final week is brought to fruition. Since Israel's kingdom has not yet arrived, this means it is future to our day. Therefore, we have just seen another reason why the final week of years is also future to our day.
The Prince Who Is To Come
Identity of the prince who is to come is a matter of considerable debate and discussion.The full statement says, "the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary." Perhaps the best way to determine the identity of this prince is to first look at what he is prophesied to do at his arrival upon the stage of history. The people of this coming prince will destroy the city, clearly a reference to Jerusalem because of the overall context, and also the sanctuary. What sanctuary was there in Jerusalem? It could be nothing else other than the Jewish temple. Has the city and the temple been destroyed? Yes! Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed in a. d. 70 by the Romans. This cannot be a reference to a future time, since, as Dr. Walvoord notes, "there is no complete destruction of Jerusalem at the end of the age as Zechariah 14:1-3 indicates that the city is in existence although overtaken by war at the very moment that Christ comes back in power and glory. Accordingly, it is probably better to consider all of verse 26 fulfilled historically."[109]
The subject of this sentence is "the people," not "the prince who is to come." Thus, it is the people of the prince who is to come that destroys the city and the sanctuary. We have already identified the people as the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in a.d. 70 under the leadership of Titus. Yet, I believe that the prince who is to come is a reference to the yet to come Antichrist. Dr. J. Dwight Pentecost explains,
"The ruler who will come is that final head of the Roman Empire, the little horn of 7:8. It is significant that the people of the ruler, not the ruler himself, will destroy Jerusalem. Since he will be the final Roman ruler, the people of that ruler must be the Romans themselves.[110] The coming prince cannot be a reference to Christ, since He is said to be "cut off" in the prior sentence. This prince has to be someone who comes after Christ. The only two viable possibilities is that it could either refer to a Roman prince who destroyed Jerusalem in a.d.70 or a future Antichrist".
Why should we not see the prince who is to come as a reference to Titus who led the Roman conquest in a.d. 70? Because the emphasis of this verse is upon "the people," not the subordinate clause "the prince who is to come." This passage is apparently stated this way so that this prophecy would link the Roman destruction with the a.d. 70 event, but at the same time setting up the Antichrist to be linked to the final week of years to the first "he" in verse 27. He is not described as the prince coming with the people, but instead a detached and distant description, as one who is coming. This suggests that the people and the prince will not arrive in history together. Dr. Steven Miller adds, "but v. 27 makes clear that this'ruler' will be the future persecutor of Israel during the seventieth seven. 'The people of the rule' does not mean that the people 'belong to' the ruler but rather that the ruler will come from these people."[111] Interestingly our amillennial friends agree that this is a reference to theAntichrist as noted by Robert Culver:
"Neither is there any difficulty with our amillennial friends over the identity of "the coming prince," . . . Keil and Leupold recognize him as the final Antichrist, said to be "coming" because already selected for prophecy in direct language in chapter 7 as "the little horn," and in type in chapter 8 as "the little horn." Young thinks otherwise but is outweighed on his own "team."[112] The Seventy Weeks of Daniel
Let me get this straight- you have to mangle Scripture to the point that Jesus Christ is the Antichrist but I have my "dogma"? You can find no Scripture whatsoever to back up your claim that Jesus Christ is the Beast who will confirm a seven-year peace contract between Israel and her enemies, and I'm the one who has "dogma"?
I'm not the one with any dogma and I'm certainly not the one who is deluded.
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.