Mark 13

MARK 13

ON VIDEOS-

MARK 13- https://youtu.be/vYBGKqDp5aE

https://ccoutreach87.com/7-18-17-mark-13/ 

 

FRIENDS- https://youtu.be/-NmAm67q4BU 

[Made the 2nd video the other day with some friends- figured I would post it now]

 

.Olivet discourse [End times]

.Herod’s temple

.Ventriloquist

.Demon possession

.Signs of the end

.A.D. 70- Titus

.Qumran community listened

.Dead sea scrolls

.Anti- christ

.Preterism

.2^nd coming

.Rapture?

.What generation?

.Hal Lindsey- Harold Camping

.Prophetic clock?

.End of age [not world as you might think]

.Man of sin

.Reductionism

.Salvation from what?

.John Nelson Darby

.Tacitus- Josephus

.End times- according to Jesus

 

FRIENDS-

.Furman- Andy

.George- Craig

.Cassie

.2 Bobby’s?

 

NEW-

Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple- which took place in AD 70 under the Roman General Titus [who later became an emperor]-

In Mark’s Gospel the disciples ask ‘when will this be’- talking only about the destruction of the temple-

In Matthews gospel they ask 3 things-

 

Luke follows along the line of mark-

 

John’s gospel has no end times passage- possibly because he wrote an entire bible book on the end times- Revelation.

 

Jesus gives us the basic signs that most of us are familiar with.

Wars- persecution- those who endure to the end will be saved.

 

Jesus also speaks of his second coming-

 

And he says this happens after the tribulation-

 

He sends forth his angels and they gather together his people-

On the video I tried to explain the various ways bible teachers have approached the end times teaching.

Some view the fulfillment as having happened in the 1^st century [Preterists].

 

The historic belief of Christians is there will be centuries of difficulty for the church.

The gospel will go to all the nations-

There will be a great shaking of many things.

After all these things- Jesus will come back again- bodily- and there will be a Resurrection of the dead-

And I have hope in God, which they themselves also hold, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

Acts 24:15

 

All will stand before God and give an account-

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

 

There will be a new heaven and earth- all will be made new-

New International Version
Then I saw "a new heaven and a new earth," for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. Rev. 21:1

 

There will be no more curse-

And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:

 

There will be many false prophets- men who claim to be Christ himself- we are to avoid them-

 

The only one who knows when Jesus will come back is God the Father-

We are to avoid setting dates for the 2^nd coming.

There have been many wicked men in the history of humanity that have been types of the anti- christ.

There will be more to come-

John himself said he [the spirit of anti christ] was already in the world- in the 1^st century-

And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

 

 

Our eyes should be fixed on Jesus- we should not become fixated on the figure of the anti- Christ.

We should live our lives as if Jesus could come back at any time.

 

Because even if this event does not happen in our life time- we might die any day- and will also have to give an account to God-

And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

On the video I also tried to show you the different views of ‘This generation’ -

Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

 

In your life- you have about a generation- 40- 50 years- in which you will fulfill your destiny.

 

You will go thru great struggles in life- there will be a time of trouble like never before- you will be hated by people-

 

But if you endure thru all this- then you too will have a role in publishing the good news in all nations-

You too will send out ‘angels’ [messengers] to all the ends of the earth-

You too will be able to show your self alive after your suffering by many infallible proofs-

To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

 

And even in your life- you will have the honor to complete the mission God has given you- and then shall the end [outcome] be-

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

 

PAST POSTS- [Past teaching I did that relates to today’s post- MARK 13]

https://ccoutreach87.com/588-2/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/romans-updated-2015/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/07/07/acts-16/ 

 

MARK-

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/03/04/mark-3-isaiah-61/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/03/14/mark-4/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/03/27/mark-5/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/04/05/mark-6/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/04/16/mark-7/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/04/30/mark-8/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/05/14/mark-9/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/06/07/mark-10/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/06/22/mark-11/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/2017/07/14/mark-12/ 

 

Ok- the ruling empire at the time of Christ was Rome- just prior to the appearance of Jesus- the Roman Emperor- Caesar Augustus- consolidated the Roman Empire under his rule-

Rome was ruled by a senate- some famous names from history were in it- Cicero being one.

Caesar Augustus was the nephew of Julius Caesar- his real name was Octavian [Octavius].

After the death of Julius Caesar- there were some power struggles that took place- between some other famous people.

Marc Antony being one of them [Cleopatra too- he was in love with the girl for sure].

Now- we read about Augustus in the New Testament- and we read in the book of Revelation about the Mark of the Beast- and that those who don't worship- give homage to the Beast- they will be killed.

So- Many Christians would be killed because they would refuse to give homage to Caesar Augustus [meaning son of the Divine].

‘Wow- how did he get a name like that’ [there was more than one Caesar by the way- as well as more than one Herod- who did play a part in these power struggles- it can get confusing- even to me].

When Octavian defeated Marc Antony at Actium [32 BC].

Herod [The Great] had a problem- he had previously sided with Antony and found himself on the losing side.

Yet he was smart- did some ‘brown nosing’ as we say-and patched things up.

Herod had 3 sons- who would eventually take positions of authority in the Roman government at the time of Christ.

Herod Antipas was over the region that we read about in the New Testament where Jesus did most of his ministry- Galilee.

Ok- Octavian claimed deity because of a heavenly sign associated with his rise to power- and this is how he became called ‘Caesar Augustus’.

He sort of saw himself as a   ‘re-incarnate’- of his great uncle Julius Caesar.

‘John- what in the heck does this have to do with the Dead Sea Scrolls’.

Ok- good question.

The Jews had various responses to the empires that ruled over them during various times.

Alexander the Great instituted Hellenization- a sort of cultural compromise over the people he conquered.

They could keep their religious/cultural roots- but would be subservient to Alexander and Greek rule.

Some Jewish people rejected any compromise- we call them the Essenes- they moved out of town- so to speak, and lived in what we refer to as the Qumran community.

This was a few centuries before the time of Christ- and this was where the Dead Seas Scrolls were found in the 20^th century.

A Bedouin boy was looking for his goats- threw a rock in a cave right off the Dead Sea- and that’s how we found the scrolls.

The scrolls might have been hidden there by the Essenes-

Now- when my friends asked me about them- I told them that it’s been a while since I read up on any of this- but to the best of my memory the thing that made them significant was the fact that they were very old manuscripts- from the bible- and they backed up what we had had all along.

I did read up this week- and basically had it right.

The earliest Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament we had previously dated back to around 900- 1000 A.D.

These manuscripts went back about 1000 years earlier- and they contained portions from almost every book of the Old testament- and some complete books.

The only book missing was Esther.

So- this was indeed a very significant find for scholars.

But the Scrolls also contain some of the writings from the Essenes themselves- things we never had before- so this too was significant.

There were Jews at the time of the first century who tried to ‘get along’ with Rome- and with the person in charge of their region [one of the sons of Herod the Great at the time of Christ].

These are referred to as Herodian’s in the bible.

Some wanted a revolution to rid Rome from Jerusalem- these were the Zealots [one of Jesus disciples was in this group].

Some thought if they returned to a legalistic obeisance of the law- that this would bring in a deliverer- like the stories we read about in the Old testament- these were the Pharisees.

And some took more of a political compromise- these were the Sadducees.

Eventually a war with Rome would be fought [By the way- Josephus- the famous 1st century historian- fought on the side of the Jews in the war- and after Jerusalem was sacked in A.D. 70- he went to Rome and wrote his great works- thinking he would make a case for the Jewish people with the Romans. This is why we have his works today- which are very valuable to scholars].

NOTE- In time I’ll try and cover how we ‘got our bibles’ [called the Canon- meaning Rule/ Measurement].

Frankly- there is a lot of confusion in the general public about conspiracies [like the Catholic Church had some type of plot to keep certain books out].

Or stories about how the Church taught Mary Magdalene was a prostitute so they could discredit her.

Actually- we read in the gospels that Jesus cast out ‘spirits’ from a woman who was probably living this type of life-

And Jesus had a ministry to the down and out- it is indeed possible that Mary was one of these women-

And if true- it would not demean her in any way-

That’s how this tradition more than likely developed- But- we don’t know for sure.

So a few years back the Church officially said ‘we don’t know’.

Ok- Plot?

No- just being careful.

So there are other misguided beliefs like this- that sincere people have- and over time I hope to get to them.

I’ll do one more in keeping with this post.

I mentioned above that Caesar Augustus did indeed take the title of ‘son of God’.

And some critics of the Church say ‘see- there were all types of religions that had Sons of God’.

I watched one show a few years back- and it stated that these religions had ’12 disciples- a leader named Lord and Savior- and he healed and claimed to be God’s Son- and rose from the dead’.

Ok- that show was ‘fibbing’ to put it lightly- they went too far [historically speaking] in trying to diminish the Christians claim of Christ by doing this.

Now- is there some truth to this at all?

Yes- like I just mentioned above- Octavian did indeed claim deity- a ‘son of god’.

So- how do we explain this?

In the book of Galatians the bible says ‘in the FULLNESS of times God sent forth his Son’.

Jesus came at a set time in history- in fulfilment of the Jewish Prophets- to be who he was- and to do what he did.

Now- this is not special pleading here- but I find it a masterpiece that God’s Son came at a time when the Roman Empire had one sitting on the throne- who too claimed deity.

Yet Jesus was in a region of the lower class- his men were not highly educated- and his followers were people under oppression.

Augustus lived in the wealthy and influential capital of ‘the world’- he had all you could ever ask for- he was worshiped as a god.

Yet in 3 short centuries- one of the heirs of the empire- Constantine- would have an experience – not with a former Caesar- but with a vison of a Cross-

He would convert to Christianity- and declare Christianity to be the religion of the realm.

[parts]

I quoted from these too- on today’s video-

https://ccoutreach87.com/1st-2nd-samuel/ 

https://ccoutreach87.com/nehemiah-isaiah/ 

https://ccoutreach87.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/6-10-15-second-coming-rapture.zip 

 

 

 

 

 

(1216) lets try and do a few things; first, I read a few more chapters in Wrights book [N.T. Wright] and as much as I really like his writing, I do have a few problems with some of the ways he states stuff. He kinda tries to walk the middle road in the area of the second coming and the physical nature of it. He does say he believes in the real second coming and that it did not happen yet. He does teach that Jesus is ‘in heaven’ [Gods realm] physically- good. But he also says stuff like ‘when Jesus ascended you don’t believe he lifted off vertically from the planet’ [actually I do!] or when Jesus comes back it wont be like some spaceman descending out of space [well I know he’s not a ‘spaceman’ but I do believe he will come from ‘out there’]. It was statements like this that caused me a little concern in the past. He also states that he is not a full Preterist, and distances himself from those who tried to claim him as one. But you can hardly blame them, he really does at times sound like he is one [Preterists believe the second coming happened in a.d. 70- it’s a long story] Wright empathically says he does not believe that. Yet he says all the statements from Jesus on ‘his coming’ do not refer to an actual second coming in the future. But he believes Paul and other New Testament passages do teach a real, literal second coming, but that Jesus never spoke of it. To be frank, I think brother Wright opens up the door to all the accusations and confusion that some people have about his position. I still like Wright, he is an excellent N.T. scholar and 1^st century historian, but I think there are some problems with his views on the second coming. He definitely states he believes in a real, physical second coming. But instead of it being ‘Jesus coming down from somewhere’ it will be more like ‘Gods realm [heaven] joining our realm’ and at that time he will physically be with us. Well I do believe that at the second coming ‘both realms unite’ that at that moment we will have a ‘new heavens and earth’ I just don’t see the point in Wright’s language when he seems to make light of the physical aspects of Christ’s return. I also agree with him 100% about the New Testament not teaching a ‘rapture’ he rightfully shows us that the ‘rapture chapter’ [1^st Thessalonians 4] is the same as 1^st Corinthians 15. There simply is no ‘secret coming’ taught in the New Testament [some will be caught by surprise, but it will be no secret!] All in all I like Wright, will continue to read him, just thought I needed to mention these points. Okay, let’s turn to politics. The climate in the country continues to be really bad at this time [9-09] I watched MSNBC show over and over again a picture of a man toting a sub machine gun on his back at some Obama town hall. Of course this is dangerous and nuts! The problem is Chris Matthews portrayed it along with the mindset of ‘see these white skinhead radicals, these racists who are against change’ his whole rant against the people opposing Obama is done in this vain. Sure enough, another news organization showed you the full picture of the man with the gun on his back; he was a black man. Why mention this? Stuff like this, purposefully not telling the whole story, or taking an incident and being dishonest about it to prove your point, this stuff creates racial tensions all on its own. There is no need to try and fabricate a scenario in order to make it fit your story. There are enough real nuts in the country for the news media to not have to fabricate stuff like this, to make the audience think that the ‘gun man’ was an anti Obama ‘right winger’, he obviously was not. Those who oppose the president should do so on purely political grounds, those who support him should take the same view. To be against or for a person because of their race is wrong, very wrong. But people should not feel intimidated if they want to oppose him for the right reasons. When the country sees this type of race card being played, this breeds a type of racism all on its own. Did the bill being floated on Capitol Hill fund abortions- you bet it did! I know the denials have gone forth vehemently, Obama himself publicly said that his position in national health care would include provisions for women’s reproductive rights; he was point blank asked this question. In no uncertain terms he said it would. But after the heat hit the fan they of course would not say it like this. In essence the proposed bill would have included language for ‘women’s reproductive rights’ but because the term ‘abortion’ was not specifically stated, the politicians said ‘oh no, those who think abortion is in there are misleading you’ they lied to you. So let’s try and pass what both sides agree on; pass laws on making it illegal for an insurance company to drop you if you get sick. Provide funding for those who can’t buy insurance and try and get everyone insured. Do tort reform. Get the stuff done that can get done, don’t create all types of problems by bringing up ‘reproductive rights’ there are too many people [Democrats and Republicans] who are truly opposed to abortion in a fundamental way, leave that language out. And for heavens sake, if the media has a picture of a man with a gun strapped to his back, don’t portray him as some white skinhead, especially if the guys black!

 

 

[parts]

(1162) I mailed the materials off yesterday, let me mention one more thing about the letters from my friends in prison. The letter from Leonard, it is full of praise and thanksgiving and glory; it reminds me of the testimonies of new believers. Many times over the years I have noticed good friends of mine come to know the lord, doing things in ministry and fellowship together. Sometimes these brothers struggle for years and go back to prison. The genuine brothers really do experience a ‘mini’ revival when this happens. It’s common for the average person to judge them as getting ‘jail house religion’ they can’t see that the process of chastening and the guys renewing their faith are a real process that brings great joy to them. Believe me, I have seen this happen many times and know that for the most part these guys are not faking. Okay, in Luke 9 we have lots of good stuff; Jesus sends his guys out light ‘don’t take money, extra goods, etc.’ Herod hears about Jesus and wonders if it’s John the Baptist risen from the dead [guilty conscience no doubt!] Lets hit the statement ‘some of you standing here will not die until you see the kingdom’. Over the years commentators have had various views on this, a common view is right after Jesus says this the transfiguration happens and this might be referring to that, it’s possible? The New Testament has various statements like this that the critics of Christianity have used over the years to debunk the faith. The famous atheist Bertrand Russell wrote a book called ‘why I am not a Christian’ one of the reasons stated was the so called missed prophecies of Jesus, these statements in the bible about Jesus coming kingdom that would take place within the lifetimes of those who heard him. Russell also rejected the faith based on a faulty idea from the philosopher John Stewart Mill. Mill said if every thing must have a cause, then God must have a cause, and if God is the first cause, then why not say the universe/world are the first cause instead of God. Russell believed this faulty argument, the law of causation does not teach that every thing must have a cause; it teaches every effect must have a cause. Any way Russell got duped by this fictitious argument and kept it his whole life. But back to those who read the statements in the bible about Jesus coming quickly, the things being written that will happen shortly [revelation] and stuff like that. There is some truth to the Preterists argument that the ‘last days’ that were taking place were speaking of the end of the present age of law and the introduction of the new age of grace. These brothers also link most of the ‘seeing the kingdom come’ verses with a.d. 70 and the destruction of the Jewish temple and law system. There are various views on these subjects. What about Jesus saying that some of the disciples would not die until they saw God’s kingdom? Preterists think the transfiguration happened too quickly after the statement for it to be speaking of that, it’s possible? I think some of the Preterists are too ‘futuristic’, let me explain. Jesus is functioning and operating out of the reality of Gods kingdom, he’s healing people, raising the dead, doing all sorts of things that are contrary to the natural order of things. He is introducing God’s kingdom to his disciples, they are actual witnesses to the events of Gods order breaking into mans order. The greatest events of this kingdom that they will witness will be the death, burial, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, these ‘parts’ of the kingdom will be the most significant aspects that they will ever SEE in their lives. I prefer to see the reality of God’s kingdom, and the statements about certain followers being alive at the time of God’s kingdom coming, thru this lens. To push the majority of the significance out to a.d. 70 and the destruction of the temple seems to miss the great reality of Jesus death, burial, resurrection and ascension as actual witnessed events of the first century church. So, Russell and others who thought Jesus statements were false prophecies did not really see the reality of these things. I do believe that the events surrounding the destruction of the temple are important, and that you can find many verses that speak of the passing of the old testament order as the ‘end of that world/age’ but I believe the actual work of Jesus in redemption, as being witnessed by the early church, would be a better ‘location’ for the explanation of these types of things. Got it? [note- the main point being the importance the new testament puts on the eyewitness accounts of the disciples to the work of Jesus in redemption, any connecting with ‘the seeing’ of things and the witnesses of those things ‘seen’ has to be viewed thru this lens, the most important ‘seen things of the kingdom’ are without a doubt speaking of the great work of Jesus. This was so important that when Peter mentions the replacement for Judas office, he states that the new apostle must have been a witness of these things from the beginning of Jesus ministry]

 

 

[parts]

 

 

 

 

"Some think that the Apostle Paul referred to the Roman empire, and that he was unwilling to use language more explicit, lest he should incur the calumnious charge of wishing ill to the empire which it was hoped would be eternal; so that in saying, 'For the mystery of iniquity doth already work,' he alluded to Nero, whose deeds already seemed to be as the deeds of Antichrist. And hence some suppose that he shall rise again and be Antichrist. Others, again, suppose that he is not even dead, but that he was concealed that he might be supposed to have been killed, and that he now lives in concealment in the vigor of that same age which he had reached when he was believed to have perished, and will live until he is revealed in his own time and restored to his kingdom. But I wonder that men can be so audacious in their conjectures" (De Civitate Dei, XX.19.3).

 

I pasted this from another site-

In both ancient Greek and Hebrew, letters also represented numerals (as they do in Latin), their values assigned according to the order of the alphabet, alpha and aelph, for example, having the numerical value of 1. By adding these values, words could be represented as the sum of their numbers. This literation of numbers and numeration of letters was known as isopsephism by the Greeks and gematria by the Jews (which, in cabalistic practice, has been used to interpret Hebrew scripture). If the Greek spelling of Nero Caesar (Neron Kaisar) is transliterated into Hebrew (nrwn qsr), the numerical equivalent is 666.

What is curious, however, is not so much that 666 can be decoded to signify Nero but that the name of the emperor is encoded in this particular number, especially since it could have been represented more readily in other ways. If "Nero" is retained in Greek, for example, the numeration would be 955 or, if "Neron," 1005; in Hebrew, then 256 or 306, respectively. It only is when the words are transliterated into Hebrew that the numeration adds up to 666 (nrwn qsr, 50 + 200 + 6 + 50 + 100 + 60 + 200). Even so, this is an alternate spelling, a letter in "Neron" being transliterated (nrwn instead of nrw) but not in "Caesar" (qsr instead of qysr), although these forms do appear in both the Talmud and a contemporary Aramaic scroll from Qumran. It is intriguing, therefore, that 666 encodes the name of Nero in Hebrew when Revelation, itself, was written in Greek.

One should appreciate, too, that there were no numbers in Greek or Hebrew and that the "the number of the beast" was not presented as a figure but as letters of the alphabet or written in full. That is to say, it was not expressed as "666" (indeed, discrete Arabic numerals would not be invented for another five hundred years) but as the numerical values of the three letters representing 600, 60, and 6.

For Watt, the significance of 666 is that its expression in Latin is the sequential Roman numerals DCLXVI, which parallels but is the antithesis of the "Alpha and Omega" that John uses to characterize both Christ (22:13) and God (1:8, 21:6). As the Deity represents the beginning and end, so the Antichrist is a reversal of the first and last, D (500) preceding I (1). To phrase this another way, 666 (or rather DCLXVI) signifies the Antichrist because that number signifies Nero, and Nero—who was a matricide, proclaimed his divinity on Egyptian coins as the "Savior and Benefactor of the World," and the first emperor to persecute the Christians—signifies the Antichrist. Indeed, the procurator of Judea (c. AD 60) refers to Nero as "my lord" (kyrios), the same title applied to Jesus (Acts 25:26).

If the Latin (rather than the Greek) spelling "Nero Caesar" (above) is transliterated into Hebrew (nrw qsr), the final "n" in Neron being omitted (and its corresponding value of 50), the name computes as 616, which is the number indicated in the oldest surviving copy of the New Testament (the fragment illustrated below). If, instead, "Neron Caesar" is correct, it may be that the Latin was transcribed incorrectly, perhaps because the copyist realized that this transliteration did not equate to 666 and so omitted the letter, which changed the sum to 616.

Still, each digit of 666 is one less than seven, the perfect number, and such mathematical play may have tended to establish 666, rather than 616. Regardless of the number, Nero is the only name that can account for both 666 and 616, which is the most compelling argument that he, and not some other emperor, such as Caligula or Domitian, was intended. Too, for the number to have any significance for a reader of the first century AD, it would have to refer to a contemporary historical figure.

Writing a century later, Irenaeus is the first church father to comment on the number of the beast, although he apparently was ignorant of what the number actually encoded. Nor is he correct in assuming that John's vision occurred "almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign" (Adversus Haereses, V.30.3; a tradition repeated by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, III.18.3, and by the church fathers), which is to say sometime before AD 96, when the emperor was assassinated and just a few years before John himself died of old age. Rather, his presumed banishment to Patmos (where Revelation was written) seems to have occurred almost thirty years earlier, toward the end of Nero's reign and before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, which John otherwise would have mentioned.

For Irenaeus, 666 was correct. The Antichrist "sums up in his own person all the commixture of wickedness which took place previous to the deluge....and also sums up every error of devised idols since the flood" (V.29.2). The flood came in the six hundredth year of Noah and the golden image set up by Nebuchadnezzar (who Shadrach, Meshach, and Bednego refused to worship) was sixty cubits high and six cubits wide (Daniel 3:1ff). This being the case and "this number being found in all the most approved and ancient copies....I do not know how it is that some have erred following the ordinary mode of speech, and have vitiated the middle number [L] in the name, deducting the amount of fifty from it, so that instead of six decads they will have it that there is but one" (V.30.1).

Nero, too, was the sixth emperor, counting from Julius Caesar (as did Suetonius, for example, and Josephus, cf. Antiquities of the Jews, XVIII.2.2, where Tiberius is identified as the third). "And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come" (Revelation 17:9-10). Of these emperors, it is Nero who had been "wounded to death" but "his deadly wound was healed" and he still lived (13:3)—Nero redivivus.

St. Jerome-"As for the Antichrist, there is no question but what he is going to fight against the holy covenant, and that when he first makes war against the king of Egypt, he shall straightway be frightened off by the assistance of the Romans. But these events were typically prefigured under Antiochus Epiphanes, so that this abominable king who persecuted God's people foreshadows the Antichrist, who is to persecute the people of Christ. And so there are many of our viewpoint who think that Domitius Nero was the Antichrist because of his outstanding savagery and depravity." (St. Jerome - Commentary on Daniel; notes on Daniel 11:27-30, -- BAKER BOOK HOUSE Grand Rapids 6, Michigan 1958)

 

Some will suggest that the book of Revelation was written only for those living at the time, and that 666 most probably applies to Cæsar Nero, who ruled Rome from 54 to 68 A.D., rather than someone from latter centuries. This point of view, which suggests Revelation had an immediate application to the first century, is known as preterism. So, just how is Nero linked to 666?

Preterists take Nero's name, Nero Cæsar and transliterates the Latin into Hebrew.  An "n" is added to conform with the Hebrew spelling and usage of Nero's name, in a manner similar to the Greek adding an "s" (i.e., Jeremias, Jonas, etc.).  Other names in scripture where the adding of an "n" may be seen are Abaddon, Apollyon, and Armageddon.  Once Hebraicized,  the Latin Nero Caesar becomes "nrwn qsr," which when using the numeric equivalent of the letters, then adds up to 666 as follows:

Nun 

= 

50 

Resh 

=

200 

Waw 

=

6 

Nun 

= 

50 

 

 

 

Qoph 

= 

100 

Samech 

= 

60 

Resh 

= 

200 

An example of this spelling has been recently discovered in one of the Dead Sea scrolls. If you use the same process, but without the added "n" the result is 616. Interestingly, some early manuscripts have 616 rather than 666, but even scholars such as Irenæus [A.D. 120-202] attribute the 616 to only a copyist error (Against Heresies: V, xxx) "this number [666] being found in all the most approved and ancient copies" [of the Apocalypse] and asserts that "men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony" [to it - 666].

 

I. The Premillennial Interpretation

A. Who they are

1. They are those who teach that in the near future Jesus will return to set up an earthly kingdom in Palestine for a thousand years.

2. They teach that the literal nation of Israel will then accept Him and be His special people as they were in the Old Testament.

3. They derive their name, premillennialists, from their doctrine of a literal millennium, before which the Lord returns (pre means “before;” millennium means “1,000 years” and is taken from Revelation 20).

B. They hold that the 70 weeks of Daniel 9, the whole prophecy, is exclusively for national Israel, the Jews

1. Nothing here for the church at all.

2. They appeal to the fact that it is “my people Israel” and literal Jerusalem that Daniel has been praying for.

3. They point to verse 24, where “thy people” is literal Judah and “thy holy city” is Jerusalem.

C. They explain the 70 weeks as a definite period of time

1. Not literal, for a literal interpretation would take the period as 490 days—a little more than a year.

2. A week, in the prophecy, is a week of years, they say.

3. 70 weeks, therefore, is 70 periods of 7 years, or 490 years.

D. Their breakdown of the 70 weeks, taken as 490 years

1. The starting–point, according to the text, is the “going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem” (v. 25).

a. Premillennialists differ as to when this is.

b. Some say that it is Cyrus’ decree that Judah could return to Canaan; others refer to Darius’ permission to build the temple (cf. Ezra 6); others refer to Artaxerxes’ letter of Nehemiah 2:8.

c. It is important to them to establish the starting–point exactly, so that their definite period of 490 years comes correctly.

2. There are 69 weeks from that date to Messiah Prince (v. 25): “seven weeks and threescore and two weeks” = 69 weeks).

a. On the basis of 1 week = 7 years, a period of 483 years.

1) At this point, premillennialism has a problem and its attempt to solve the problem has resulted in many huge books of dates and numbers.

2) The problem is that it is difficult to get 483 years between a command to rebuild Jerusalem and “Messiah.”

a) Cyrus decreed Israel’s return in 537 B.C.—this is the best date for the going forth of a command to build Jerusalem, but it leaves too many years intervening before Messiah, and is therefore unacceptable to the premill.

b) So, many date the period from 445 B.C., the date of the letter of Artaxerxes of Nehemiah 2; they then carry the 69 week-period (483 years, on their view) to some late (arbitrary) date in the life of Christ.

c). This 69-week (or 483-year) period is divided into two parts, 7 weeks and 62 weeks (v. 25).

1) The 7 weeks, or 49 years, is the time of the actual rebuilding of Jerusalem, ending, roughly, at the time of the conclusion of the Old Testament Bible.

2) The 62 weeks, or 434 years, is the long period between the Testaments, up to some point in Christ’s life. (Some say His baptism; others, His triumphal entry.)

3) It is their view of the 70th week, however, that is the most important aspect of the premill interpretation of the passage and that lies at the very heart of the premill doctrine of the last days.

c. The last week, a definite period of 7 years, is still future.

1) It does not follow the 69 weeks.

2) Between the 69th week and the 70th week lies the nearly 2,000 years of our present age.

3) In the future (from our standpoint), the 70th week of verse 27 will occur.

a) At the end of the present age, the church will be raptured out of this world into the air and Antichrist will arise. (The “he” of verse 27 is supposed to refer to the Antichrist of the future.)

b) For 3? years, or ? of the 70th week, he will make a covenant with Israel, restored to the “Holy Land” of Palestine.

c) Suddenly, “in the midst of the week” (v. 27) he will begin persecuting Israel.

d) For 3? years, national Israel is persecuted—this is supposed to be “the great tribulation” of the Bible.

e) At the end of the 70th week, Jesus will return to destroy Antichrist, save Israel, and set up the millennial kingdom for 1,000 years, during which He reigns with national Israel from Palestine.

f) The importance of this interpretation of the seventy weeks and especially, of the 70th week for premillennialism is evident: this gives them the huge gap (or parenthesis) between the first advent of Christ and the supposed period in the future when Christ shall deal again with national Israel, the gap during which Christ gathers a church.

A. In opposition to the premill view, there are two basic objections as a whole

1. First, they can give no proof that the weeks are definite periods of 7 years each.

a. Often, the premill is quite dogmatic about this, but wrongly.

b. The fact is that nowhere in Scripture does the term week mean “7 years.”

2. Secondly, the passage does not indicate in any way that the 70th week is separated from the preceding 69 by a huge span of time.

a. If you think of it, this is a very bold bit of eisegesis (reading into a passage something that is not by any stretch of the imagination there).

b. To be sure, the 70th week follows the 69th, but at once.

B. Positively, what the 70 weeks are

1. Gabriel tells Daniel of one period of 70 weeks. Literally, it is 70 “sevens” (the Hebrew word for week). 70 is a symbolical number.

a. The premill will object to our taking the number symbolically; he will insist that it be taken literally.

1) Our reply to the premill is: “Do that. Take it literally. Then you have a period of 490 days.” But the premill does not want to take it literally, for he wants to make it 490 years.

2) In addition, we point out that prophecy of the 70 weeks is given to Daniel as a vision (v. 23: “consider the vision”). A vision is characterised by symbolism.

a. Seven is the number of the covenant of God with His people; 10 is the number of fullness. 70, therefore, symbolizes the fulfilment of the covenant of Jehovah, the covenant with Abraham and his seed.

b. The 70 weeks are the period of time from the command to rebuild Jerusalem to Jesus Christ, as the period of the fulfilment of the covenant. In this period, the covenant (7) will be fulfilled (10).

1) Understanding the70 weeks is not a matter of computing dates and figures.

2) We are basically uninterested in juggling dates and figuring calendar years.

3) That it happens to be about 575 years is irrelevant.

1. This one period of 70 weeks ends in an event in which, according to verse 24, six things are realized, the finishing of transgression, etc.

a. All of these occur during the first advent of Christ Jesus (from His Incarnation through His resurrection and ascension).

a. The 70-week period terminates in the first advent of Christ, so that the whole period is from our standpoint past, not at all future.

1. The breakdown of the 70 weeks in detail:

a. The period begins with the going forth of a command to build Jerusalem (v. 25).

1) This is the decree of Cyrus that Judah may return to Canaan in 537 B.C.

2) See Isaiah 44:28 and Isaiah 45:13.

3) This was a crucial juncture in Israel’s history and a wonderful manifestation of God’s faithfulness.

a) Israel is desolate, doomed.

b) God then, amazingly, orders Cyrus to give Israel deliverance, life from the dead.

a. 69 weeks takes us to Christ Jesus, “Messiah Prince” (v. 25).

1) This period is divided into two parts: 7 weeks and 62 weeks.

2) The 7 weeks are the period of the troublous building of Jerusalem.

a) Under Zerubbabel, Ezra, Nehemiah.

b) This takes us to about the time of the end of the Old Testament canon.

3) The 62 weeks are the period between the testaments.

4) The 69 weeks takes us up to “Messiah Prince.”

a) The premills argue over which event in the life of Christ is meant.

b) It is natural to understand verse 25 to refer to the coming of Messiah, that is, His birth.

(1) When Jesus was born, “Messiah Prince” appeared.

(2) “Where is he that is born King of the Jews?” the wise men asked, at the occasion of Jesus’ birth.

c) The 69 weeks, therefore, extend from Cyrus’ decree to the birth of Jesus.

b. Then, the 70th week follows, the “one week” of verse 27.

1) It is the period of the life and work of Jesus Christ that belongs to His first advent, inclusive of the resurrection, ascension, and perhaps, the outpouring of the Spirit.

2) The period of Jesus’ ministry was the 70th week, the period of the fulfilment of the covenant (7x10).

1. Objections against this interpretation of the 70th week by the premill.

a. Basically, there are two objections; both concern verses 26-27.

a. First, the premill points out that Messiah is cut off after the 69th week (v. 26) and before the 70th week (v. 27): the same thing, he says, is true of the destruction of the city by the people of the prince.

1) The latter, all agree, refers to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans under the general, Titus, in A.D. 70.

2) The premill argues that both the death of Jesus and the destruction of Jerusalem occur before the 70th week, not in it, according to the passage.

b. In close connection with this first objection, the premill maintains that verse 27 (“he shall confirm the covenant”) refers to the Antichrist and to a covenant which he will make with Israel at the end of the world, when the 70th week will finally come.

c. Our answer to these objections:

1) It is true that the death of Messiah comes after the 69th week (v.26); it is not the case however, that the text says that it occurred before the 70th week.

2) The one who confirms the covenant in verse 27 is not Antichrist, but Christ: He does this, not in the future, but in the past (from our present standpoint).

1. The truth of verses 26-27:

a. The cutting off of Messiah and His having nothing (as it is in the original Hebrew) is the crucifixion of Jesus.

a. This occurred in the 70th week, which 70th week is the “one week” of verse 27; it is exactly the death of Messiah that makes that week the 70th week, that is, the week of the fulfilment of God’s covenant.

b. The first part of verse 27 refers to the Messiah, Jesus:

1) The meaning of verse 27 will be clearer from a more faithful translation than that given in the King James version: “And he shall confirm the covenant with many, one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and upon the wing of abominations [is] the one making desolate and unto completion and it is determined it shall be poured out on the desolate.”

2) It is Jesus the Messiah who confirms God’s covenant, “one week.”

3) It is Jesus the Messiah who puts an end to all Old Testament sacrifices and oblations by His one sacrifice of Himself on the cross in the midst of the 70th week (cf. Heb. 10).

4) If one asks concerning the rest of the 70th week, it is that which belongs to the first advent of Jesus following His death, namely, the period of His resurrection, ascension, and the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. One could make a good case, on the basis of the passage, for the contention that the end of the 70th week is the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. It was then that the new covenant as the fulfilment of the old covenant was definitively manifested.

c. Proof of this interpretation, as opposed to that of the premill:

1) It is exegetically incorrect to make “he” in verse 27a to refer back to “prince” in verse 26, and thus to come to the conclusion that the reference is to Antichrist.

a) The fact is that the subject of the phrase in verse 26 is not “the prince,” but “the people of the prince,” that is, the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

b) The one, main subject of the entire prophecy is “Messiah Prince” and it is, therefore, to Him that “he” refers in verse 27a.

2) Verse 27 speaks of someone confirming a covenant.

a) The premill explains this to mean that the Antichrist will, in the future, make a covenant with the nation Israel.

b) But as the King James Version shows, verse 27 does not use the Hebrew word that means “make;” rather, it uses a word that means “to confirm;” the reference is not at all to the making of a new covenant but to the confirming of an already existing covenant.

(1) Jesus, “Messiah Prince,” did exactly this by His first advent: He confirmed the covenant with many.

(2) The covenant is God’s covenant with Abraham and Israel, the covenant Israel violated, as Daniel bitterly lamented in his prayer, the covenant which Daniel nevertheless besought God to keep.

(3) Jesus did confirm this covenant by His death and in the conformation revealed it in its full reality as including not only the elect of the Jews but also of the Gentiles.

1. In conclusion:

a. The 70 weeks are fulfilled in the first advent of Jesus.

a. The covenant of Jehovah has been confirmed—for the many elect of all nations.

b. All of the blessings of the covenant, the benefits mentioned in verse 24, have been obtained by Messiah and are now freely dispensed to God’s people.

c. We and all believers live in the enjoyment of that fulfilled covenant and its spiritual blessings, in the new dispensation.

Another interpretation of the 70 weeks given by some Reformed amillennialists is the following. The 70 weeks are the entire period from the command to build Jerusalem to the second advent of Christ, including the present age. From Cyrus’ decree to the first advent is 7 weeks; from the first advent to the appearance of Antichrist in the future is 62 weeks; the 70th week is the brief period in the future during which Antichrist will reign and which ends with Christ’s return. The interpretation is possible because of another possible reading of the last part of verse 25. It is possible to translate the last part of verse 25 as follows: “… unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks; and threescore and two weeks the street shall be built again” etc. According to this translation, the building of the street and the wall, during the 62 weeks, is symbolic of the gathering of the church in the new dispensation.

This interpretation is wrong for the following reasons:

1. Like the view of the premills, this interpretation supposes that verse 27a (“he shall confirm the covenant”) refers to the Antichrist. Everything said above against the premill explanation of verse 27 holds against this explanation.

2. It does injustice to the plain meaning of the last part of verse 25. By the building the street and the wall of Jerusalem in troubled times, Gabriel does not refer to the gathering of the church but to the literal rebuilding of Jerusalem after the return of Judah from captivity.

3. The most serious and obvious error of this interpretation is its distortion of the statement in verse 26 that Messiah shall be cut off and have nothing. According to this interpretation, this has to be the destruction of the church by Antichrist at the end of the world (“after threescore and two weeks …”). In fact, the text is speaking of the cutting off of the Messiah personally, that is, Jesus’ death on the cross.

4. The translation of verse 25 is correct as we have it in the King James Version.

 

I. The Premillennial Interpretation

II. The Correct, Scriptural Interpretation

III. Another Interpretation

 

 

[parts]

 

 

 

VERSES-

 

www.corpuschristioutreachministries.blogspot.com 

https://www.facebook.com/john.chiarello.5?ref=bookmarks 

https://ccoutreach87.wordpress.com/ 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZ4GsqTEVWRm0HxQTLsifvg 

https://twitter.com/ccoutreach87 

https://plus.google.com/108013627259688810902/posts 

https://vimeo.com/user37400385 

http://johnchiarello.tumblr.com/ 

https://medium.com/@johnchiarello 

http://ccoutreach.over-blog.com/ 

https://www.reddit.com/r/john/ 

 

 

Note- Please do me a favor, those who read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on- Thanks- John.#

 

 

 

 

 

Posted by Corpus Christi Outreach Ministries at 6:47 AM