Comments on: From Babylon to Babylon: An Exposition of Daniel’s Seventy Weeks http://fullpreterism.com/davidgreen/from-babylon-to-babylon-an-exposition-of-daniels-seventy-weeks/ Helping to correct some of the common misunderstandings of a fulfilled view of Bible prophecy known as preterism. Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:06:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: David Green http://fullpreterism.com/davidgreen/from-babylon-to-babylon-an-exposition-of-daniels-seventy-weeks/comment-page-1/#comment-37 David Green Tue, 20 Oct 2009 03:37:36 +0000 http://fullpreterism.com/?p=301#comment-37 Hi Robin, :) You wrote: "The anointing of the holy place . . . . This Christ did in the heavenly tabernacle . . . at the cross. . . . My response: The writer of Hebrews said that Christ's anointing of the holy place was taking place "now" when the book of Hebrews was written: "<em>Christ is . . . entered into </em>. . . [the heavenly Holies], <em>now to appear in the presence of God for us </em>(Heb. 9:24). Christ was "<em>now</em>" --after the Cross-- purifying (anointing) the most holy place with His "<em>better sacrifices</em>" (Heb. 9:23). You wrote: "I don't think the new house (Church/ temple) is in view yet in Daniel. . . . " My response: Why not? Might it not be fitting to see the new house consummately "anointed" when the old, earthly, hand-made house/temple/sanctuary was destroyed in 70 (Dan. 9:26)? You wrote: "Joel 3:21 For I will cleanse their blood that I have not cleansed. . . ." My response: You got me there. :) How do you interpret "I will cleanse their blood"? YB, Dave :) Hi Robin, :)

You wrote: “The anointing of the holy place . . . . This Christ did in the heavenly tabernacle . . . at the cross. . . .

My response: The writer of Hebrews said that Christ’s anointing of the holy place was taking place “now” when the book of Hebrews was written: “Christ is . . . entered into . . . [the heavenly Holies], now to appear in the presence of God for us (Heb. 9:24). Christ was “now” –after the Cross– purifying (anointing) the most holy place with His “better sacrifices” (Heb. 9:23).

You wrote: “I don’t think the new house (Church/ temple) is in view yet in Daniel. . . . ”

My response: Why not? Might it not be fitting to see the new house consummately “anointed” when the old, earthly, hand-made house/temple/sanctuary was destroyed in 70 (Dan. 9:26)?

You wrote: “Joel 3:21 For I will cleanse their blood that I have not cleansed. . . .”

My response: You got me there. :) How do you interpret “I will cleanse their blood”?

YB,

Dave :)

]]> By: MoGrace2u http://fullpreterism.com/davidgreen/from-babylon-to-babylon-an-exposition-of-daniels-seventy-weeks/comment-page-1/#comment-36 MoGrace2u Mon, 19 Oct 2009 13:33:21 +0000 http://fullpreterism.com/?p=301#comment-36 Hi Dave, I do think a time frame is in view for earthly things as it relates to the reigning king. The 7 weeks/49 years takes us from Cyrus who issued the command to build the temple, unto the end of Darius' rule - under whom the temple was finished. The 62 weeks/ 434 years begins with the command from Artaxeres to Nehemiah to rebuild the walls in 444 BC. That period ends when Herod's temple is inaugurated in 10 BC. Between 6 - 4 BC you have the Pharisees rebelling about the idolatrous eagle Herod placed on the temple - cleansing it in preparation for the birth of Messiah. The earthly events thus serve as signs. The anointing of the holy place is a sacrificial term, which is seen in the act of the high priest on the day of atonement whereby he consecrates the holy things with blood. This Christ did in the heavenly tabernacle in preparation for the dead to be raised at the cross. Which is what I think Daniel's prophecy concerns regarding the fulfillment of the promise to Israel for the resurrection of the dead. Joel 3:20 But Judah shall dwell for ever, and Jerusalem from generation to generation. Joel 3:21 For I will cleanse their blood that I have not cleansed: for the LORD dwelleth in Zion. I don't think the new house (Church/ temple) is in view yet in Daniel, but is about what things must precede that house to prepare for it to be built. Our house was however finished in 70 AD in time for the dead to be raised to dwell in it forever and God to dwell in His people. What the Lord begins according to His word, He completes. The saints now have received the dominion in His kingdom in which they rule and reign with Christ forever. The idea that some have that there must come a time when the temple is completed by the salvation of the last saint, seems bogus to me. As well as the idea that there are any enemies of God that are competing against the rule of Christ in His temple or kingdom and must someday all be put down so we can enjoy an earthly kingdom in a worldly peace among men. A spiritual kingdom has no end - but an earthly one does. It is the temporal things that came to an end - and death takes care of wicked men. But the living who are in Christ will never die, and men are gathered into His kingdom in every generation world without end. Which times in the earth were fulfilled when the dead were raised - as Joel stated would be the case! YSIC, Robin Hi Dave,
I do think a time frame is in view for earthly things as it relates to the reigning king. The 7 weeks/49 years takes us from Cyrus who issued the command to build the temple, unto the end of Darius’ rule – under whom the temple was finished. The 62 weeks/ 434 years begins with the command from Artaxeres to Nehemiah to rebuild the walls in 444 BC. That period ends when Herod’s temple is inaugurated in 10 BC. Between 6 – 4 BC you have the Pharisees rebelling about the idolatrous eagle Herod placed on the temple – cleansing it in preparation for the birth of Messiah. The earthly events thus serve as signs.

The anointing of the holy place is a sacrificial term, which is seen in the act of the high priest on the day of atonement whereby he consecrates the holy things with blood. This Christ did in the heavenly tabernacle in preparation for the dead to be raised at the cross. Which is what I think Daniel’s prophecy concerns regarding the fulfillment of the promise to Israel for the resurrection of the dead.

Joel 3:20 But Judah shall dwell for ever, and Jerusalem from generation to generation.
Joel 3:21 For I will cleanse their blood that I have not cleansed: for the LORD dwelleth in Zion.

I don’t think the new house (Church/ temple) is in view yet in Daniel, but is about what things must precede that house to prepare for it to be built. Our house was however finished in 70 AD in time for the dead to be raised to dwell in it forever and God to dwell in His people. What the Lord begins according to His word, He completes. The saints now have received the dominion in His kingdom in which they rule and reign with Christ forever.

The idea that some have that there must come a time when the temple is completed by the salvation of the last saint, seems bogus to me. As well as the idea that there are any enemies of God that are competing against the rule of Christ in His temple or kingdom and must someday all be put down so we can enjoy an earthly kingdom in a worldly peace among men. A spiritual kingdom has no end – but an earthly one does. It is the temporal things that came to an end – and death takes care of wicked men. But the living who are in Christ will never die, and men are gathered into His kingdom in every generation world without end. Which times in the earth were fulfilled when the dead were raised – as Joel stated would be the case!

YSIC,
Robin

]]> By: David Green http://fullpreterism.com/davidgreen/from-babylon-to-babylon-an-exposition-of-daniels-seventy-weeks/comment-page-1/#comment-35 David Green Mon, 19 Oct 2009 03:02:16 +0000 http://fullpreterism.com/?p=301#comment-35 Hi Robin, Thank you for the comment. :) I see the "weeks" as being contiguous and unsplit, because they were not fixed "weeks of years" but unquantified periods of time that had no mathematical proportion to the "weeks" that defined them. (If they were literal "weeks of years," then people could have calculated the years to the Second Coming.) I agree that the last "week" included the time of God's eschatological patience (2 Peter 3:9). I believe the anointing of the holy place was not restricted to Christ Himself but included His "house," the church (Heb. 3:6; 1 Jn. 2:27). I agree that "the living were receiving the benefits of Daniel 9:24 from the Cross forward." One of those benefits was the anointing. :) I'm not sure what you mean when you say that the "blood" of the dead "had not been cleansed at the Cross." Did you mean the sins of the dead? You said that the dead differed from the living because the dead "were waiting for the end of the OC era." But so were the living: "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" (Rom. 7:24) YB, Dave :) Hi Robin,

Thank you for the comment. :)

I see the “weeks” as being contiguous and unsplit, because they were not fixed “weeks of years” but unquantified periods of time that had no mathematical proportion to the “weeks” that defined them. (If they were literal “weeks of years,” then people could have calculated the years to the Second Coming.) I agree that the last “week” included the time of God’s eschatological patience (2 Peter 3:9).

I believe the anointing of the holy place was not restricted to Christ Himself but included His “house,” the church (Heb. 3:6; 1 Jn. 2:27). I agree that “the living were receiving the benefits of Daniel 9:24 from the Cross forward.” One of those benefits was the anointing. :)

I’m not sure what you mean when you say that the “blood” of the dead “had not been cleansed at the Cross.” Did you mean the sins of the dead?

You said that the dead differed from the living because the dead “were waiting for the end of the OC era.” But so were the living: “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” (Rom. 7:24)

YB,

Dave :)

]]> By: MoGrace2u http://fullpreterism.com/davidgreen/from-babylon-to-babylon-an-exposition-of-daniels-seventy-weeks/comment-page-1/#comment-34 MoGrace2u Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:55:21 +0000 http://fullpreterism.com/?p=301#comment-34 Hi Dave, I think people forget that when looking at dates in OT prophecies, no one was going by BC years. Rather it was the reign of kings that was used to mark time. Or in Ezekiel's case, which year of captivity they were in. So in Daniel, we see various markers given to identify each of the divisions of the weeks for when they begin. It is 70 weeks all total but they are not contiguous, and the division of the last week shows it is being split too, in order to give space for repentance. I do however think that the anointing of the most holy place happened at the cross, not in 70AD. That was when the veil was torn, which was not manifested to Israel until the temple came down. The living were receiving the benefits of Dan 9:24 from the cross forward. The dead however were waiting for the end of the OC era. Their blood which had not been cleansed at the cross, required their resurrection first. Robin Hi Dave,
I think people forget that when looking at dates in OT prophecies, no one was going by BC years. Rather it was the reign of kings that was used to mark time. Or in Ezekiel’s case, which year of captivity they were in. So in Daniel, we see various markers given to identify each of the divisions of the weeks for when they begin. It is 70 weeks all total but they are not contiguous, and the division of the last week shows it is being split too, in order to give space for repentance.

I do however think that the anointing of the most holy place happened at the cross, not in 70AD. That was when the veil was torn, which was not manifested to Israel until the temple came down. The living were receiving the benefits of Dan 9:24 from the cross forward. The dead however were waiting for the end of the OC era. Their blood which had not been cleansed at the cross, required their resurrection first.

Robin

]]>