jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (24 posts)

concerning the 70th week in Daniel

  1. tlmcgaa70 profile image65
    tlmcgaa70posted 3 years ago

    23 At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.

    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.

    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: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

    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.

    27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


    i am curious how people read the 69 weeks, which speak of the time fromt he rebuilding of Jerusalem to the time of CHRISTs ministry, and then suddenly in the seventieth week they have it as speaking of the anti-christ. so i would like to discuss what YOU think it means and why. and non believers, feel free to join in, since it is a sad fact that many non believers seem to know more about what the bible says than do believers...

    1. profile image0
      Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You need jerami for this one. He's got the most interesting take on these things of anyone here.

      1. tlmcgaa70 profile image65
        tlmcgaa70posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        thank you Emile R. i do not know this Jerami, but if he stops in and shares his views i would be most interested to hear them. i am rather disappointed, but not surprised in the apathy shown by so called Christians. one would think they would want to know what is coming. but like i said, few Christians seem to know or even want to know what the Word of their GOD says.....

        1. profile image0
          Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Well, it is Sunday. Maybe they are busy doing other Christian things today. smile

    2. Writer Fox profile image78
      Writer Foxposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      It's difficult to understand with the translation you are using. The translation you are using isn't a very good one.  Try this one:
      http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16492

      There is no word 'christ' or 'anti-christ' in the chapter.  To understand God's anointed one (messiah) who was King Cyrus (Koresh), see Isaiah 44:28 and 45:1.

      For an explanation of the chapter, see:
      http://outreachjudaism.org/daniel-nines-70-weeks-audio/

      1. tlmcgaa70 profile image65
        tlmcgaa70posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        hello WriterFox, and thank you for your response.  i must disagree with your interpretation though. firstly, King Cyrus was at he time of Daniels prophecy, (Daniel saw this vision when Cyrus was king). also, the Messiah was CHRIST, not Cyrus.  as for what bible version i read, i trust the KJV (1611), because it is the bible GOD gave man, the bible HE protected, and the bible HE spread throughout the world.  again thank you for your response. also here is a link that helps explain who the annointed on it.

        http://www.rightlydividingtheword.com/a … daniel.htm

  2. Zelkiiro profile image85
    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago

    "Week" means "week." Pure and simple. It means he gave a 70-week prophecy, it turned out to be full of crap, and then scholars kept bullsh!tting their way to explaining it away. And so it continues.

    If Daniel (or the writer claiming to be Daniel) really meant to say "age" instead of "week"...he could have just said "age." The Hebrews had a word for it. They had words for many things. It's a very complex and flexible language. They can articulate these things.

    Trying to say "Oh, he meant this" or "What he's really saying is this" is bollocks of the highest order. If he was delivering such a dire prophecy, you'd think he'd want to spell it out as clearly as possible so that, y'know, action could be taken to prepare for/change it. And if he had a brain in his head, he would have. But nope, he went with "weeks," and so it's "weeks," and hindsight is 20/20 unless you're blind.

    1. tlmcgaa70 profile image65
      tlmcgaa70posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Daniel spoke what he was told to speak. if GOD wanted the word for ages used, then it would have been. pure and simple. and if you believe it was a literal period of 70 WEEKS, then i can see how it would appear to be "total crap" as you so delicately put it. most anyone who studies bible prophecy agrees that week meant a period of seven...and going by this, history has shown that this prophecy has already been fulfilled. unless someone can show me, of course, that this is not true. and that is why i started this thread. i want to make sure i am right. and if it turns out i am wrong then i will need to change my thinking.

      1. JMcFarland profile image89
        JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        What do you say to the accusation of several biblical scholars that the book of Daniel is a forgery,  written much later than it claims?   Its explored in some depth in Bart ehrman in his book, aptly named "forged"

        1. tlmcgaa70 profile image65
          tlmcgaa70posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          i say that satan has many people, including so called Christians, fooled.

          1. JMcFarland profile image89
            JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            And how do you know or demonstrate which side is filed and which side is right?

            1. tlmcgaa70 profile image65
              tlmcgaa70posted 3 years ago in reply to this

              because my GOD shows me what is truth and what is not. but i honestly do not expect a non believer to understand or even accept that answer. however, it is the only answer i have or care to have. i have spent my entire life trusting in my GOD (44 yrs). not because i was taught to by man, but because i was taught to by GOD. i see no reason to stop trusting in HIM, and plenty of reasons to continue doing so.

              also, the point of this thread is not to bash believers (or non believers) for their faith or lack of it. so far, no bashing has been done, and i would like to keep it that way. i am not here to discuss whether the book of Daniel is valid or not, but how it is read or interpreted.

              1. JMcFarland profile image89
                JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Is asking a question consisted a breeding ground for potential bashing?   In a free,  open forum like this,  you're not only to get people who agree with your point of view.   I have as much right to post anywhere I like as you and I have said and done nothing that can be deemed disrespectful.   Is that a problem?

                The problem with simple assertions is that you can say anything you want.   That doesn't make it true.   You said some people are deceived by Satan,  insinuating that biblical scholars who make a living studying these topics are the ones being deceived because they disagree with your opinion.   Did I get that right?

                1. tlmcgaa70 profile image65
                  tlmcgaa70posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  since i am the one who started this thread, i am merely requesting that in discussing this topic, we refrain from arguing or bashing. i ask because i know there are many people who like nothing better than stirring up arguments. i will stop conversing with anyone who does this. i did not say you were bashing...i said lets not start. i have also made it clear that i am interested in differing views, as it presents me with a chance to better understand this particular scripture. it does not mean i will agree with differing views, but then i might, i wont know til they are presented.
                  since i posted this thread, it should be pretty obvious that i believe Daniel to be a valid part of the bible, so it honestly doesn't even make sense for someone to participate in this conversation if they themselves do not believe it. as i said, i am not here to discuss the validity of the book of Daniel, but the meaning or interpretation of certain verses in Daniel. why is that so hard to understand? if you do not have an opinion, i do not see why you wish to join this conversation. sure, you have as much right as anyone else to join in, but if you do not have an opinion on the topic at hand...why would you want to unless you merely want to start an argument?
                  you join this conversation, challenging my beliefs, when i just wish to discuss one topic. i said in the beginning i welcome non believers to join because i have noticed many seem to know scripture better than many Christians. i did not invite non believers just so you can challenge my beliefs (which you can never do). if you cannot discuss the topic as i posted it, why join the conversation? as for your question, yes, you got it right. CHRIST HIMSELF said many would be deceived, would believe false doctrines...so why should my saying be so strange?

                  1. JMcFarland profile image89
                    JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    All I did was ask what you think about an overhearing number of actual biblical scholars reaching the conclusion that Daniel was a) not written by Daniel and b)written much later than thought.   I think that I'd this book is an actual forgery,  it bears a lot of weight on your forum thread.   With all due respect,  my posts have been on topic, brief and respectful.   You seem to be the one attempting to pick a fight with me with your doubly long responses and insinuations of my intent.

 
working