The 1260 Year Interpretation of Protestantism

[12tribes]

No where in Daniel chapter nine does it say either directly or by any standard of implication that a day equals one year (using any and all definitions of a year, lunar, solar, rabbinical, etc.).

In addition, you cannot use Numbers 14:34 and/or Ezekiel 4:6 because these two instances are "local events" and are in no way shape or form "global events".

If 70 weeks represents 490 years, this FORCES the day-year application, whether you like it or not.

It is very simple. This we can all understand. No complexities of any kind.

Sorry! Weeks means weeks. Daniel nine does not say it means "years". Seventy weeks does not mean or represent four hundred and ninety years. You are putting something into the Bible that is not there.

You can't "force"!

You cannot force one plus two to equal four. One plus two equals three.

Thus, Daniel nine means exactly what it says, "490 weeks"! There are NO YEARS.

Matthew 18:22

(22) Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

Jesus made reference to the 70 x 7, now why would He do that? maybe it was a coincidence? Although with God nothing is a coincidence.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Sorry! Weeks means weeks. Daniel nine does not say it means "years". Seventy weeks does not mean or represent four hundred and ninety years. You are putting something into the Bible that is not there.

You can't "force"!

You cannot force one plus two to equal four. One plus two equals three.

Thus, Daniel nine means exactly what it says, "490 weeks"! There are NO YEARS.

So 70 weeks then means 490 days, which means 1.4 years.

Please tell me miz3, where in history do these 1.4 years fit in?

This is your problem not mine.

Could it be that you just don't know how to explain Daniel chapter nine?

If you tell me "I can't explain how 490days or one point four years fits into Daniel nine", I will except your honest testimony.

But when you make it up and "force" the Bible to say what it does not say, that I cannot go along with. I have to question the voracity of such Scriptural interpretation.

[cheddar]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Thus, Daniel nine means exactly what it says, "490 weeks"! There are NO YEARS.

So explain the meaning of Daniel 9: 24-27. What's it a reference to?

The 70 weeks would be much easier to understand if historicists hadn’t lobotomized Matt. 24.

Jesus makes it clear that Jerusalem and the temple will be in existence just prior to the time of trouble.

He also said that from the destruction of Jerusalem to the 2nd coming would happen in the span on ‘one’ generation.

This completely excludes 70AD as playing any part at all in what he was talking about.

[miz3]

OK, I think I know where you're coming from. :-)

Interesting.

[miz3]

The hand is sometimes quicker than the eye.

[John317]

...Could it be that you just don't know how to explain Daniel chapter nine?

He is not saying he can't explain Daniel 9. He's asking you what you believe it means and what is it referring to.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

...Could it be that you just don't know how to explain Daniel chapter nine?

He is not saying he can't explain Daniel 9. He's asking you what you believe it means and what is it referring to.

This is your problem not mine.

Could it be that you just don't know how to explain Daniel chapter nine?

If you tell me "I can't explain how 490days or one point four years fits into Daniel nine", I will except your honest testimony.

But when you make it up and "force" the Bible to say what it does not say, that I cannot go along with. I have to question the voracity of such Scriptural interpretation.

[Lysimachus]

Right, I want you miz3 to tell me your interpretation of Daniel 9:24-27. I don't want to hear about how we're wrong in our interpretation. I want to hear YOUR interpretation. Bottom line.

[miz3]

Right, I want you miz3 to tell me your interpretation of Daniel 9:24-27. I don't want to hear about how we're wrong in our interpretation. I want to hear YOUR interpretation. Bottom line.

This is your problem not mine.

You are the one asserting you know the solution. You are the one asserting the year/day. I am merely saying that you are wrong in this assertion. Now defend what you have asserted or:

Could it be that you just don't know how to explain Daniel chapter nine?

If you tell me "I can't explain how 490days or one point four years fits into Daniel nine", I will except your honest testimony.

But when you make it up and "force" the Bible to say what it does not say, that I cannot go along with. I have to question the voracity of such Scriptural interpretation.

[cheddar]

Well, for starters the word Messiah was added by the translators.

A more accurate translation would be 'anointed leader' or 'anointed prince' which brings a parallel with the two witnesses or two anointed ones in Rev. 11.

The anointed leader being the leader of the two witnesses similar to how Moses would have been over Aaron.

The anointed one is cut off in the midst of the week while the two witnesses are killed and lie in the streets for 3 and half days.

They confirm the new or everlasting covenant with the many (144K) after which they are both killed and the 144K are prepared to stand in the time of Jacob's trouble.

This will be the time they stand in the sight of God without an intercessor and the plagues begin to fall.

[Aliensanctuary]

Eze 4:4-6

Quote:

4.`Lie down on your left side and take the guilt of the House of Israel on yourself. You will bear their guilt for as many days as you lie on that side. 5.Allowing one day for every year of their guilt, I ordain that you bear it for three hundred and ninety days; this is how you will bear the House of Israel's guilt.

6.And when you have finished doing this, you are to lie down again, on your right side, and bear the guilt of the House of Judah for forty days. I have set the length for you as one day for one year.

Quote:

From vs. 4-6 we can see that from the original time period of 390 years and 40 years, the LORD told Ezekiel to change the years into days. This is a 1 year = 1 day transformation, not a day-to-year switch.

For prophetic time periods using the 1 year = 1 day theme, we must first determine the number of years. 1260 days is also equal to 1260/360=3.5 years, approximately, depending on the number of days one wishes to use for a year. The 3.5 years is the time period we are starting out with. Now, using the year=day principle in Ezekiel 4:4-6, we change 3.5 years into 3.5 days. Thus, 1260 days (3.5 years, really) becomes 3.5 days, an unrealistic amount of time for much of anything prophetic to occur.

We can see that days-to-years is the opposite of years-to-days. Thus, Ezekiel 4:4-6 cannot legitimately be used as a model to change prophetic days into prophetic years. Although vs 6 states one day for one year, it means one year becomes one day, therefore 390 years and 40 years become 390 days and 40 days, respectively, in Ezekiel’s unusual charade.

Ezek 4:4-6 really is an invalid "proof" of transforming days into years because it starts out with years and ends up with days, the opposite of the 1 day=1 year hypothesis. Plus, it doesn't appear to have any connection with prophetic time periods. Although, we could transform any Biblical time period expressed in years into days to fit the model of Ezek 4, but that would be meaningless.

Methuselah lived 969 years, dying just before the Great Flood, according to Genesis. Let's transform 969 years into 969 days, as Ezek 4 suggests. Therefore, Methuselah really lived only 969 days, or about 2.7 years. Thus, this transformation is invalid for prophetic time periods also, and cannot be used to turn days into years.

There is no proof from these verses that the year-to-day transformation is reversible.

[John317]

Thus, Daniel nine means exactly what it says, "490 weeks"! There are NO YEARS.

Originally Posted By: John3:17

So explain the meaning of Daniel 9: 24-27. What's it a reference to?

Originally Posted By: cheddar

The 70 weeks would be much easier to understand if historicists hadn’t lobotomized Matt. 24.

Can you show it? Quote it and give us your reasoning in the Scriptures.

Originally Posted By: cheddar

Jesus makes it clear that Jerusalem and the temple will be in existence just prior to the time of trouble.

Where does Jesus say this about the Temple?

Originally Posted By: cheddar

He also said that from the destruction of Jerusalem to the 2nd coming would happen in the span on ‘one’ generation.

Of course if Jesus said this, he was a false prophet, would you agree?

Where do you believe Jesus said it? I think I know but I don't want to put words in your mouth.

Originally Posted By: cheddar

This completely excludes 70AD as playing any part at all in what he was talking about.

How so?

How then do you understand what Jesus said in Matt. 24: 15-20?

How do you account for the fact that Christians in AD 69 left Jerusalem to escape the Romans as Jesus had warned them to do?

[cheddar]

In Luke's account armies is used in the plural.

Rome had many legions but one army.

The ten horns of the beast will hate the whore and burn her with fire.

That would be armies in the plural.

[John317]

Well, for starters the word Messiah was added by the translators.

A more accurate translation would be 'anointed leader' or 'anointed prince' which brings a parallel with the two witnesses or two anointed ones in Rev. 11.

Actually the term "Messiah" is a transliteration of the original langauge. It was not added by translators any more than "anointed prince." They are both legitimate translations that are accurate reflections of the original Hebrew. See Strongs #4899.

Messiah means "besmeared with oil," or "anointed."

[ClubV12]

"...the only prophecy capable of converting a Muslim to Christianity."

Well, at least I got that helpful tidbit out of this thread. I have some Muslim friends I recently visited out of state. While there I shared with them the fact that I was now a Seventh-day Adventist. You could have heard a pin drop... There not just friends, there like family, I've known them for 20+ years, we've shared lifes up and downs, marriages, births, deaths.

I was completely unprepared on how to progress any further than, "I'm a christian" now. I felt like I had just apostized. How to reach Muslims is something I need to study, I guess the 70 weeks is a good place to start.

[John317]

In Luke's account armies is used in the plural.

Rome only had one army.

The word used in Luke is the Greek noun, stratologeo, Strongs #4760, and is most accurately and literally rendered, "encampments," or "the sites of a military encampment."

It has nothing to do with whether Rome only had one army. What it's talking about are troops prepared for battle.

We speak of the 5th or 7th Army Corps and so on. Those are armies, even though the US only has one army. The Roman armies were similarly organized.

[cheddar]

Jesus said in all three accounts - Matt, Mark, Luke.

This generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled.

The all would include the destruction of Jerusalem and the 2nd coming.

[12tribes]

Originally Posted By: cheddar

In Luke's account armies is used in the plural.

Rome only had one army.

The word used in Luke is the Greek noun, stratologeo, Strongs #4760, and is most accurately and literally rendered, "encampments," or "the sites of a military encampment."

It has nothing to do with whether Rome only had one army. What it's talking about are troops prepared for battle.

We speak of the 5th or 7th Army Corps and so on. Those are armies. The Roman armies were similarly organized.

Luke 21:20

(20) And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies,G4760 then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

G4760

stratopedon

strat-op'-ed-on

From the base of G4756 and the same as G3977; a camping ground, that is, (by implication) a body of troops: - army.

[John317]

[12tribes]

Jesus said in all three accounts -

This generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled.

The all would include the destruction of Jerusalem and the 2nd coming.

Matthew 24:1-3

(1) And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.

(2) And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

(3) And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Jesus was asked 3 questions

1) When shall these things be?

2) What shall be the sign of thy coming?

3) And of the end of the world?

So did Jesus answer the question concerning the destruction of the temple? Yes they were signs for both the destruction of the temple and the end of the world

[Lysimachus]

Jesus said in all three accounts - Matt, Mark, Luke.

This generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled.

The all would include the destruction of Jerusalem and the 2nd coming.

http://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1999/September/this-generation-will-certainly-not-pass-away

[Lysimachus]

One moment I smell Futurism, the next moment I smell Preterism. Wow, anything to get away from Historicism! Even more, Adventist Historicism! Right ClubV12?

It's amazing how people will wiggle and tiggle and find every loophole they can to get away from the inconvenient truth that the Papacy is the predicted Antichrist power of Daniel and Revelation!

[John317]

Jesus said in all three accounts - Matt, Mark, Luke.

This generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled.

The all would include the destruction of Jerusalem and the 2nd coming.

If you believe Jesus meant to say He would return within one generation of the time that Jerusalem was destroyed, are you saying Jesus was referring to a yet future destruction of Jerusalem from our viewpoint?

There are different ways of understanding Matt. 24: 34.

First of all, what is h genea? It is Strongs#1074.

It may mean a generation, birth, and progeny, but it can also mean a race, an interval of time as in an age, course of life.

Secondly, if you consider the previous verses, particularly verses 32-33, the reference to genea may well signify that those who see the fulfillment of all those signs which are described will live to see Christ return.

[Aliensanctuary]

Dan 9:24. NJB

Quote:

Seventy weeks are decreed

for your people and your holy city,

for putting an end to transgression,

for placing the seal on sin,

for expiating crime,

for introducing everlasting uprightness

for setting the seal on vision and on prophecy,

for anointing the holy of holies

.

Dan 9:24 NLT

Quote:

A period of seventy sets of seven has been decreed for your people and your holy city to put down rebellion, to bring an end to sin, to atone for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to confirm the prophetic vision, and to anoint the Most Holy Place.

Perhaps this prophecy has a dual meaning: a partial fulfillment in the past, and a complete fulfillment in the future, just as the Messianic prophecies do that.

For today,

Has there been an end to transgression/rebellion?

Is there no more sin?

Has guilt been atoned for?

Are we experiencing everlasting righteousness?

Have vision and prophecy been sealed/completed?

Has the holy of holies been anointed?

Today, we see a world full of transgression/rebellion, which means people everywhere are still sinning. That kind of rules out everlasting righteousness.

The book of Daniel refers several times to "time of the end" in connection with the prophecies. Time of the End, to me, doesn't mean 2000-3000 years of history, nearly half of mankind's existence on this planet. It makes more sense that this time period is much shorter, and lies in the future. Sure, there are some historical parallels, or partial fulfillments, and maybe that was intentional.

Maybe in the re-appearance of the Four Beasts during the Time of the End, we will see a time-compressed repeat of history. We may very well be there to see some of it.

[John317]

Yes, amazing indeed.

It's foolishness.