In this chapter we will end our series on the the opening of the first seal of the Apocalypse and on the rider on the white horse. First, let us note some things that have been said by others relative to Daniel 9: 24-27.
From preceptaustin.com, a cite that gives commentaries on the scriptures, says this about Daniel 9: 24-27 (emphasis mine):
"Daniel 9:24-27 is one of the key Scriptures regarding "end times" prophecy. Daniel 9:24-27 holds the key to all prophetic interpretation and as such is the backbone of biblical prophecy."
"Well known pastor and author Ray Pritchard writes that
If you understand what these verses mean, you will have a good framework for understanding all that the Bible says about the future.
Miss this, and Revelation
will be a mystery to you
I think that those who say such things are of the Dispensational school. I deny that Daniel 9: 24-27, especially of the interpretation given of it by Dispensationalists, is the "key" to understanding "biblical prophecy," and deny that one must understand the Dispensational view of that text in order for the Book of Revelation, and unfulfilled prophecy, to be understood. How is the prophecy about the seventy weeks a "good framework for understanding all that the Bible says about the future"?
The seventy weeks have been fulfilled, as we have seen, yet the Apocalypse is future. It cannot therefore be a framework for the Book of Revelation. There is nothing in Daniel's prophecy about the second coming of Christ. It is rather all about the first coming. Of course, though the 490 years of the prophecy have come and gone, yet the effects of the events of that 70th week are with us today, yea, some even being eternal, such as the bringing in of "everlasting righteousness."
The Book of Revelation, and all new testament teaching on the second coming, may be understood apart from knowing the prophecy of the seventy weeks. The only reason why I can surmise for why so many teachers make the 70 weeks prophecy the framework for their system of eschatology is that it somehow is judged to support their views on a pre-tribulation rapture and of their extremism against what is called "replacement" theology (where the church fulfills many, if not all, of the promises made to Israel in the old testament). I cannot conceive however why it is so important, so integral, to their system of hyper literal interpretation.
Another writer said:
"If you have wondered where certain popular writers get the concept of a future seven-year Tribulation period, you will find the answer in this passage. Jesus refers to it in Mt 24:15 as does Paul in 2 Th 2:1, 2, 3, 4. And the amazing events of Rev 6-19 are simply an expansion of Daniel 9:27. What is presented here in a condensed form is greatly expanded in the New Testament. This passage is the key that unlocks many other biblical prophecies. (A Peek into God's Calendar)" (ibid)
But, the "tribulation period" of the Apocalypse lasts much longer than seven years. See my posting Tribulation Period - 7-yrs-Or More? for the evidence for this.
There is no mention of "seven years" in the Book of Revelation, nor in all the new testament. If the 70th week is not fulfilled, and is yet future, and is the key to understanding all new testament teaching on the second coming with its time of great tribulation, one would expect there to be mention of that "framework," would they not? This is not a faulty argument from silence because the silence is not what one would expect if the 70th week prophecy is the key to all prophetic understanding. Don't you see?
Daniel's 'Abomination of Desolation'
In my mind the "abomination of desolation" was fulfilled in A.D. 70 when the Roman soldiers entered into the Temple. This does not exclude a dual fulfillment however. We may indeed yet see another Jewish Temple and see Antichrist sit in it "demonstrating that he is God." That indeed would be another time when an abominable image was set up in the House of God. In fact, we may say that "the abomination that causes desolation" has been fulfilled twice already and Antichrist would be a third time.
Said Dr. Gill in his commentary:
"...but the Roman army is designed; see ( Luke 21:20 ) which was the (Mmvm Myuwqv Pnk) , "the wing", or "army of abominations making desolate", ( Daniel 9:27 ). Armies are called wings, (Isaiah 8:8 ) and the Roman armies were desolating ones to the Jews...Now our Lord observes, that when they should see the Roman armies encompassing Jerusalem, with their ensigns flying, and these abominations on them, they might conclude its desolation was near at hand; and he does not so much mean his apostles, who would be most of them dead, or in other countries, when this would come to pass; but any of his disciples and followers, or any persons whatever, by whom should be seen this desolating abomination, spoken of by Daniel the prophet:
not in (Daniel 11:31) which is spoken of the abomination in the times of Antiochus; but either in (Daniel 12:11) or rather in (Daniel 9:27) since this desolating abomination is that, which should follow the cutting off of the Messiah, and the ceasing of the daily sacrifice."
There is more than one prophecy in Daniel about "the abomination of desolation."
Dispensational teacher John Walvoord wrote:
"The interpretation of the revelation given to Daniel concerning the seventy weeks (Daniel 9:24–27) constitutes one of the determining factors in the whole system of prophecy. The attention given to it by all schools of interpretation, and the attacks upon the authenticity of the book itself combine to focus the white light of investigation upon it. The interpretation of this passage inevitably colors all other prophetic views, and a proper understanding of it is the sine qua non of any student of prophecy. The importance of the revelation of Daniel nine lies first of all in the chronology which it establishes."
But this is blatantly false. I do not doubt that what he says is true of his Dispensational "interpretation" of the prophecy, though not of the prophecy itself.
Walvoord continued:
"Properly understood, we have here the major outline of the period from Daniel to Christ and from the rapture of the Church to the second coming of Christ in glory. Certainly, no other Old Testament passage does as much for ordering events future from Daniel’s point of view as does the passage under consideration." (As cited here)
So, instead of the prophecy lasting 490 years, Walvoord makes the time period to be some 2500 years! (from Daniel till the second coming) How is that for interpreting the word of God? Ironically it is Walvoord who thinks that only he and his ilk take the prophesies literally!
Popular teacher David Jeremiah speaks on "Decoding Daniel's Seventy Weeks Prophecy" and of "the suspension of the prophecy." (here) The prophecy needs to be "decoded"? Are you kidding me? To me the prophecy is very clear and lacks all the stuff that those of the Dispensational school read into the passage.
Six Things
The six things that were to occur by the "cutting off" of the Messiah the Prince do not yet wait a future fulfillment but, praise God, have already come to pass!
"...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..."
How anyone can read the new testament and say that the death and sacrifice of Christ did not fulfill the above things, but yet await fulfillment, is incredible to me.
Jews Only?
One of the other errors of the Dispensational school on the 70 weeks prophecy is that they insist that only Israel or Israelites (according to the flesh) are involved in the prophecy. Dispensationalism insists that "the church," or Gentile believers of this age, are not at all involved in the prophecy. They insist that the words "upon your people," and "upon your city," and the reference to the destruction of the Temple, etc., prove this.
Though the prophecy chiefly concerns the earthly nation, or ethnic people, of the Jews, it does not exclude Gentile involvement. Certainly "the prince that shall come," the one who destroys the city and temple, is Gentile, being the Roman prince Titus. But how can bringing in everlasting righteousness, making an end of sins, and making reconciliation for iniquity, exclude Gentile believers and involve the Jews only?
At the commentary at preceptaustin, we have the Dispensational view upheld. In regard to Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy, they say (emphasis mine):
"5) A clear understanding of the history of Israel is the key to unlocking prophecy
From Genesis to Revelation, the Word of God centers on Israel and the Jew. (I don't think that is exactly correct. Many hundreds of years passed before the calling of Abraham and the birth of Jacob and the birth of the nation Israel. The focus "from Genesis to Revelation" is on the promised "seed" of Genesis 3 and the protoevangelium) If you want to accurately interpret prophecy you must understand how God deals with Israel in both Testaments. Israel is God's timepiece and is the key to unlocking the prophetic Scriptures. If you "replace" the Jew with the church in your interpretative scheme, you will fail to understand God's prophetic timetable for His chosen people, and thus fail to understand much of prophecy, especially that relating to Israel. You must receive the word of God in its literal, natural sense, allowing scripture to interpret scripture and refraining from interpreting a passage with based on a brand of theology you have been taught (be it dispensationalist, reformed, etc), and then you will see clearly that God is not yet finished with Israel or the Jew."
But, how can you exclude Gentiles from being recipients of the blessings of Messiah's making an end of sins, bringing in everlasting righteousness, and making reconciliation? Literal interpretation? Well, yes, I accept the literal interpretation of prophecy, but it is ironic that the Dispensational view of Daniel's 70 weeks does not take the 490 years literally! They can condemn Amillennialists for making "thousand yours" (Rev. 20) into some other time period, it being a figurative rather than a literal number (and rightly so), yet they do the same thing by turning 490 years into more than 2500 years. Further, how is putting a gap between the 69th and 70th week interpreting literally?
But, to see believing Gentiles as included in the prophecy is not "replacing" the Jew but an adding of him to the class to be benefited by Messiah's being cut off. "Interpretative scheme" of those who do not limit the prophecy of the 70 weeks to Jews only? What about the Dispensational "interpretative scheme"? "Interpreting in a literal natural sense" is what the Dispensational school does? I trow not.
The commentary continues with a citation from teacher Ray Pritchard:
"If you understand what these verses mean, you will have a good framework for understanding all that the Bible says about the future. Miss this, and Revelation will be a mystery to you...What is presented here in a condensed form is greatly expanded in the New Testament. This passage is the key that unlocks many other biblical prophecies." Pritchard goes on to add that "If you have wondered where certain popular writers get the concept of a future seven-year Tribulation period, you will find the answer in this passage. Jesus refers to it in Mt 24:15 as does Paul in 2 Th 2:1-4. And the amazing events of Rev 6-19 are simply an expansion of Da 9: 27 (note). What is presented here in a condensed form is greatly expanded in the New Testament. This passage is the key that unlocks many other biblical prophecies."
But, again, the absence of any passage in the new testament or in the book of Revelation of "seven years," or "seven year tribulation," or "seven year peace treaty," etc. is striking and surprising, is it not? If the Dispensational interpretation is the "key" that unlocks all the mysteries of unfulfilled prophecy, it is certainly curious why the new testament writers never spoke of it as such.
The commentary at precept Austin says:
"2) Daniel 9:24-27 - Outlines the future history of Israel
As will be discussed below, Daniel 9:24-27 lays out in summary form a timetable of the events that will impact Israel. There is no reference whatsoever to "the church" in this passage, although some commentators still imagine some reference to "the church.""
Just as nearly all bible commentators, including some Dispensationalists, will not restrict the promises of a new heart and a new covenant to ethnic Israelites (after the flesh genealogically), even though the promises are addressed to Israel, so we should do likewise with Daniel 9. Such passages as these:
"For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." (Heb. 8: 8)
"A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh." (Ezekiel 36:26)
If these promises are made to natural Jews alone, then I have no hope, and neither does any other Gentile.
Fake Righteousness?
Those who insist that the rider on the white horse is a fake, a false Messiah, or Antichrist, will focus almost entirely upon the idea of peace being the chief thing to see as a result of the going forth of that rider. They rarely mention the idea of righteousness and justice and purity as being the main thing alluded to by the color white. Does the Antichrist bring a false righteousness also when he comes?
7 Year Peace Treaty?
Where is there in Daniel 9: 24-27 a "seven year treaty between the Jews and Antichrist?" That surely is read into the passage.
In conclusion I say that the main lesson of the vision of the rider on the white horse in the Apocalypse is to picture the coming of the Lord in final judgment upon this wicked world. In this picture of Christ we see him "riding prosperously" as the Victor of victors. His heroic character and work as coming judge and king is set before us in the vision.
Recall too how the judgments of the end times are "arrows of victory" shot by the rider who "in justice and righteousness makes war."
No comments:
Post a Comment