The Seventy Weeks in Daniel, and that Disputed Seventieth Week

Status
Not open for further replies.

Puritanhead

Puritan Board Professor
Prophecy teachers in our generation definitely apply the day-for-a-year principle to the famous 70th week of Daniel 9:27, that states, "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice... to cease." Based on the one-day principle, this "one week" is really seven years, which is not hard to comprehend.

I would be interested in having a refresher crash course: what are the various views on the Seventy Weeks in Daniel succinctly stated? How do the postmil, the historicist and historic premil succinctly explain it?

Likewise, I would appreciate any references to scholarly articles on the matter, but please explicitly state the position.


[Edited on 1-21-2006 by Puritanhead]

[Edited on 1-21-2006 by Puritanhead]
 

non dignus

Puritan Board Sophomore
I believe there are two ways in which it is fulfilled.

1. It was an actual 7 years; 3.5 years of public ministry, then the crucifixion causing the end of sacrifice, then 3.5 more years of exclusively calling Jews.

2. The whole week or the later half is co-temporaneous with the millennium. Within that span of time, the temple is destroyed bringing an end to sacrifice.:2cents:
 

VirginiaHuguenot

Puritanboard Librarian

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
Very interestingly,
Dr Rushdoony held to an idealist view of Revelation/Daniel in his book Thy Kingdom Come. Even if one seriously disagrees wtih Rush and then proceeds to mock him, his book merits serious study. This was a man who had much of the Bible memorized and read a book a day for fifty years. He also was attuned to a modern heresy of the day, both then and now, that men tend to ignore--Statism.

I read the first few pages today in the library and was strangely moved. Rush demolished liberal scholarship. He wrote with a warm fervor, carried along by relentless logic.

[Edited on 1--22-06 by Draught Horse]
 

Contra_Mundum

Pilgrim, Alien, Stranger
Staff member
The seventy break down to 62, 7 and 1. I do not think the figures (especially the larger/higher numbers) are meant to be exact (to the day). In other words,, I think E.J. Young is correct to postulate that the biblical breakdown means that the 3 time frames are not necessarily continuous, but may overlap as that to which they refer encounter some degree of overlap.

I do think that the general time frame (70) refers to the coming of Messiah. I also think that the final 7 refers to the ministry of Jesus (in the middle of the 7, or 3.5, the Messiah will be cut off). Thus, I do not see any time left to factor in. However, I think that it is worth considering that Jesus gave the nation 40 years reprieve from judgment--yet more space for repentance, and then they saw 3.5 years of annihilation by Titus. Being extra-biblical data, it cannot be stated dogmatically, but it is a nice coincidence...
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
Originally posted by Contra_Mundum
The seventy break down to 62, 7 and 1. I do not think the figures (especially the larger/higher numbers) are meant to be exact (to the day). In other words,, I think E.J. Young is correct to postulate that the biblical breakdown means that the 3 time frames are not necessarily continuous, but may overlap as that to which they refer encounter some degree of overlap.

I do think that the general time frame (70) refers to the coming of Messiah. I also think that the final 7 refers to the ministry of Jesus (in the middle of the 7, or 3.5, the Messiah will be cut off). Thus, I do not see any time left to factor in. However, I think that it is worth considering that Jesus gave the nation 40 years reprieve from judgment--yet more space for repentance, and then they saw 3.5 years of annihilation by Titus. Being extra-biblical data, it cannot be stated dogmatically, but it is a nice coincidence...

I have found most non-dispensational views to take that interpretation. Is that the general reformed view?
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
Right,
I've seen Gentry and Ferguson, both representative of two different schools, arrive roughly at the same position.
 

non dignus

Puritan Board Sophomore
Originally posted by Contra_Mundum
The seventy break down to 62, 7 and 1. I do not think the figures (especially the larger/higher numbers) are meant to be exact (to the day). In other words,, I think E.J. Young is correct to postulate that the biblical breakdown means that the 3 time frames are not necessarily continuous, but may overlap as that to which they refer encounter some degree of overlap.

I do think that the general time frame (70) refers to the coming of Messiah. I also think that the final 7 refers to the ministry of Jesus (in the middle of the 7, or 3.5, the Messiah will be cut off). Thus, I do not see any time left to factor in. However, I think that it is worth considering that Jesus gave the nation 40 years reprieve from judgment--yet more space for repentance, and then they saw 3.5 years of annihilation by Titus. Being extra-biblical data, it cannot be stated dogmatically, but it is a nice coincidence...

Right. The Dispensationalists always miss that it's a grand jubilee.
 

Puritanhead

Puritan Board Professor
I struggle with the historic premill-- take on the seventy weeks, and want a clearer picture... Darby's idea of parenthesis seems rather far-fetched. I would like to read Spurgeon contra Darby, but don't know where to find it.
 

Tirian

Puritan Board Sophomore
Originally posted by non dignus
Originally posted by Contra_Mundum
The seventy break down to 62, 7 and 1. I do not think the figures (especially the larger/higher numbers) are meant to be exact (to the day). In other words,, I think E.J. Young is correct to postulate that the biblical breakdown means that the 3 time frames are not necessarily continuous, but may overlap as that to which they refer encounter some degree of overlap.

I do think that the general time frame (70) refers to the coming of Messiah. I also think that the final 7 refers to the ministry of Jesus (in the middle of the 7, or 3.5, the Messiah will be cut off). Thus, I do not see any time left to factor in. However, I think that it is worth considering that Jesus gave the nation 40 years reprieve from judgment--yet more space for repentance, and then they saw 3.5 years of annihilation by Titus. Being extra-biblical data, it cannot be stated dogmatically, but it is a nice coincidence...

Right. The Dispensationalists always miss that it's a grand jubilee.

Interesting - I really don't know much about what this jubilee is yet. During a discussion recently, a friend started arguing that the Jews had not yet had this jubilee while we were considering some of the implications of the covenantal fulfilment in Christ. I had little to offer in response to this particular matter of the jubilee, yet my reaction was to think his statement sounded dispensational - hence my interest in your statement!

If you are willing, could you expand on what it is in a few dot points so I can go and look into it in more detail. Alternatively if you know of any good articles on it etc.

Many thanks,

Matt
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top