Why doesn’t Matthew Henry agree with either of you on Daniel’s 70 week prophecy, or any reformers for that matter?
The reason is that he/they doesn’t believe in JESUIT FUTURISM FANTASY, like you guys do.
Note this excerpt from the respected Presbyterian minister Matthew Henry’s Commentary, dated 1708-1710:
The book of Daniel 9, Verses 20-27
An answer was immediately sent to Daniel’s prayer, and it is a very memorable one. We cannot now expect that God should send answers to our prayers by angels, but if we pray with fervency for that which God has promised, we may by faith take the promise as an immediate answer to the prayer; for He is faithful that has promised. Daniel had a far greater and more glorious redemption discovered to him, which God would work out for his church in the latter days. Those who would be acquainted with Christ and his grace, must be much in prayer. The evening offering was a type of the great sacrifice Christ was to offer in the evening of the world: in virtue of that sacrifice Daniel’s prayer was accepted; and for the sake of that, this glorious discovery of redeeming love was made to him. We have, in verses ( 24-27 ), one of the most remarkable prophecies of Christ, of his coming and his salvation. It shows that the Jews are guilty of most obstinate unbelief, in expecting another Messiah, so long after the time expressly fixed for his coming. The seventy weeks mean a day for a year, or 490 years. About the end of this period a sacrifice would be offered, making full atonement for sin, and bringing in everlasting righteousness for the complete justification of every believer. Then the Jews, in the crucifixion of Jesus, would commit that crime by which the measure of their guilt would be filled up, and troubles would come upon their nation. All blessings bestowed on sinful man come through Christ’s atoning sacrifice, who suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God. Here is our way of access to the throne of grace, and of our entrance to heaven. This seals the sum of prophecy, and confirms the covenant with many; and while we rejoice in the blessings of salvation, we should remember what they cost the Redeemer. How can those escape who neglect so great salvation!
As you can see from the above quote, Matthew Henry, a Protestant writing in the early 18th century, knew nothing of a gap between the 69th and 70th week, and he knew nothing of a 7 year peace treaty with the antichrist in verse 27.
The futurist interpretation of this passage denies the prophecy of Jesus’ baptism in verse 24. It also denies His crucifixion in verse 27 and applies it instead to the antichrist, in an astounding twisting of scripture. I submit the futurist’s house is built on sand and will not stand scrutiny. They do not have a case, they have a relatively recent fairy tale designed to obscure the truth and spread confusion, whether they know it or not. The author of that futurist fairy tale is the Catholic Church, specifically a Spanish Jesuit priest by the name of Francisco Ribera (1537-1591). During the counterreformation he concocted the futurist interpretation to deflect reformist claims that the Papacy was the Antichrist of scripture. There is apparently no evidence that the futurist interpretation predates the Catholic counterreformation. It was intended as a smoke screen, and it still works today to a large degree.
You trying to distance yourself from your Israel post with all these other posts? Good luck. You’re gonna need it. No amounting of posting is going to take it away, though.