Timelines Overview

OR there is option C: The abomination of desolation in chapter 8 is different from the the one in 9:27... chapter 8 being already fulfilled and chapter 9 being the one of which Jesus spoke.

It seems to me that this has to be the case and that even the traditional dispensational model would support this. If the time for the chapter 8 abomination is 2300 evenings and mornings, this cannot occur at the midpoint of a 7 year tribulation unless it continued into the millennium.

So then we are left with the conclusion that a) the chapter 8 abomination has already been fulfilled and chapter 9 is a separate event, OR b) the abomination is sooner than the midpoint of 7 years if they are the same thing.

EDIT: I think your suggestion, kjs, that it is intended to form a pattern is a good one.

Sorry witness1

I can find no reference to your option C in chapter 8

Here is a list from several different English versions.....

transgression of desolation (kjv)
prevarication of desolation (jub)
while the desecration terrifies (isv)
the desolating rebellion (ceb)
the transgression that brings horror (amp)

What ever is being talked about in Chapter 8 -- does NOT appear to be the abomination of desolation .......

This may seem a funny question in the middle of this thread, but were the two kingdoms ever reunitied from having been divided since Christ was in the flesh and then crucified? Where they one united kingdom when they crucified him?

Daniel's 70th week:

I believe our error lies in attributing the events of Revelation to the entire 7 years of Daniel's 70th week. I believe that the events of Revelation occur within the second half of the 70th week. (see link for the graphic I made)

Let's look at the 70 weeks for God's people:
There are 7 weeks (49 years)
There are 62 weeks (434 years)
There is 1 week (7 years)
-This week is cut in half- 3.5 years and 3.5 years.
-It is cut at the point where sacrifice and offering cease.

In Revelation, we are given several day counts in chapters 11, 12, and 13. Dispensational scholars add these together to equal a sum total of 7 years, but interestingly these are only listed as 1260 days or 42 months- not the 1290 days as given in Daniel 12. Also, there is nothing in Revelation that says we should add them together to equal 7 years. So then why do we add them together? Because we see Daniel 9:27 say that the week has 2 parts to it and we attribute the events of Revelation to the 70th week. This is partially true and partially untrue (IMO).


Covenant scholars insist that Messiah fulfilled the first half of the week, but then they do not see a gap for the Church Age, so they consequently must believe all 70 weeks have been fulfilled. In order to be systematic in their thinking, they believe the second half of the week was fulfilled with Jesus' disciples and culminates in the stoning of Stephen. This is partially true and partially untrue (IMO).

So here is the question: are the 70 weeks fulfilled?
The purpose of the 70 weeks is to:

1) Finish (shut up, restrain) the Transgression (rebellion and lawlessness) - not actualized- rebellion and lawlessness abound
2) To Make an End of Sins (to finish, seal up) - not actualized- sin still abounds, even in believers
3) To Make Atonement for Sin - actualized in Jesus and needs to be accounted for within the 70 weeks
4) To Bring in Everlasting Righteousness (Age-lasting righteousness) - not actualized until transgression and sin are shut up
5) To Seal up the Vision and Prophecy (to complete, finish, and fulfill vision and prophecy) - not actualized- we see Acts 2 all over the place because the need for prophecy will only end when Christ Himself is here
6) To Anoint a Holy of Holies - not actualized until the coming day when the entire earth is filled with the Shekinah Glory



The problem I see with the dispensational view is that it does not give credit to Messiah's sacrifice as the fulfillment of the 70th week. They say the 69th week ends with Him riding in on a donkey, and then there is the gap for the Church Age, and then the antichrist has a peace treaty and ends sacrifice in the middle of the week. So Messiah's atonement is not accounted for at all within this timeframe. But none of the purposes of the 70 weeks can be accomplished without the cross. The cross must be accounted for within the 70 weeks.

The problem I see with the covenant view is that only 1 of the 6 purposes of the 70 weeks have been actualized (in red above), although they are all fulfilled judicially. Also, to say that the disciples and the stoning of Stephen fulfilled the second half of the week does not give credit to the fact that these 70 weeks deal with Israel as a nation (IMO) and need to be on a larger scale.


So then we are left in quite a quandary. Which one is right? I think both are partially right and partially wrong. We need to give credit to the truth that these purposes are accomplished in the cross and will be actualized at His second coming (covenant theology), and we need to give credit to the fact that Jesus promised to receive us to Himself and keep us from the hour of tribulation (dispensational theology).

Since I see no reason to think that the events of Revelation span 7 years, it makes complete sense to me that they fit in the second half of the 70th week and that the gap of the Church Age has been at the middle of the 70th week rather than at the beginning. This idea has been strengthened in my mind recently by some scriptures in Zephaniah, which I will share soon.

Lastly, we also need to see that there simply isn't 7 years of material in Revelation.
-The antichrist is given authority for 42 months. Yet the antichrist (IMO) is the 1st seal. How is the first seal opened at the beginning yet he only has authority for 42 months? Does he not have authority for the first 3.5 years and is then given authority for the second 3.5 years? The whole earth follows and marvels at the beast... it seems to me that he has authority from the moment the seal is opened.
-After the witnesses ascend, the second woe has passed. There does not seem (to me) to be much happening after that except the bowl judgments, which seem to take place in rapid succession and do not fill the span of 3.5 years.
-Revelation 12 seems to begin with Ezekiel 38 which we believe will happen soon, and Rev 12 only covers 3.5 years. The dragon immediately pursues the rest of the woman's offspring after the earth swallows up the flood pursuing the woman (Ezekiel 38). This does not sound like the traditional idea that he comes in peace for 3.5 years and only turns and fools everyone 3.5 years later. It sounds like this is the time in which he is given authority to blaspheme the name of God and conquer the saints, and this happens immediately after Ezekiel 38 and lasts for 42 months.
-From a practical standpoint, if the mark of the beast is established at 1260 days, how does anyone possibly survive for another 3.5 years? There has already been famine and drought and wormwood waters (animals and fish die too) so I would think all the food would pretty much be gone at that point.


I have many more thoughts and scriptures to share but my kids need some attention. Please let me know if anything here is unclear and can be explained better.


disciple4life , I initially posted this reply on the other thread but thought it would be better here.

Thanks for weighing in kjs . So it seems we are in agreement that the 70th week started but was placed on hold after the crucifixion. Yay! We also believe that all 6 purposes have not been fulfilled. Even if we differ on how many exactly have been fulfilled, there are some still future. Yay again!

Our disagreement lies in whether verse 9:27a is about the crucifixion or the antichrist stopping sacrifices.

"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"

I think you have an excellent point that Messiah is referred to as "Anointed" in this passage and that 9:27b is not about Messiah. (I was definitely wrong about that before which is why I am grateful for the discussion!) But in 9:27a we still just have that darn "he". I feel like I would agree with you if it said, "the prince will cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease" without it saying "the anointed prince". But we don't see that. Just "he", which could either refer to the anointed prince or the other prince.

So then my question is... since we only have a "he" without knowing whether "he" is anointed or not... what makes sense with everything else we are seeing in the world right now? What fits the theme of scripture, the day counts in Revelation, and the references to "the day of the Lord" in 2 Thes and Zeph 1? What fits with the nuggets of truth that individual watchmen have gleaned from scripture (which don't seem to fit with each other)? What fits with the dreams many have been given with warnings about not falling prey to false doctrine or being deceived?


If you can't tell by now, I am trying to synthesize everyone's ideas together. Maybe it's the Retriever in me. But I am trying to look at each brother or sister's unique perspective and calling and see how it can all work together. Some say Gog and Magog will happen soon. Some say that it can't happen until after the abomination. Some feel strongly that "the temple of God" is not the rebuilt temple. Some feel strongly that any animal sacrifice would be an abomination. Some feel strongly that these conspiracy theories are very important. As the body of Christ, I really think we need to listen to each other. The more I hear about what everyone thinks is important, like the conversation on the other thread this morning about Gog and Magog, the more I think the interpretation I am proposing makes more and more sense. Whether these views are always expressed in love is for the Lord to deal with 


What I am seeing right now is that some watchmen here have been told to dig a hole in the wall like Ezekiel was told in chapter 8 (please read chapters 8 and 9 of Ezekiel!). These watchmen have begun to look at the abominations taking place in secret, and even greater abominations continue to come forward than were previously known, just like the Lord told Ezekiel. These watchmen believe all will be made public soon and our country will be fractured. We see in Ezekiel that the abominations take place before the young men are sealed on their foreheads.


Also what I am seeing in 2 Thes and Zeph 1 about the "day of the Lord" seems to support the interpretation that the "he" is Messiah who was cut off in the middle of the 70th week and also THE BODY OF MESSIAH will be taken in the middle of the week as well, although our sacrifice is a living sacrifice that is simply hidden away in heaven in order to cease on earth.
 
I fully admit I could be wrong, and it's no skin off my back if I am. The Lord knows I am His, and He will judge the thoughts and intentions of my heart regardless of whether I am right or wrong. But I have prayed earnestly for understanding, and I do feel like the Lord continues to confirm this to me like in the conversation on the embassy thread this morning. I will share what I feel like I have been shown in Zephaniah soon, and after that I will leave this alone again unless I feel like the Lord shows me something else or someone has a question. There is so much in the Connor book that I haven't shared yet and would be happy to if anyone wants to know more. But if you see anyone proclaiming to be God soon or any secret abominations being made public, let's talk! 

PS. I love that you added "but one day will be so"!

It seems like, regardless as to how we read this "he", there has to be some back and forth in time. If the "he" is the antichrist who will make a covenant for 1 week... this is described in verse 27 even though the desolation of the city is described in verse 26.

My point being that we should not view 26 and 27 as chronological (ie verse 26 happens and then verse 27), because this is not the case for any end time model. Rather, verse 26 describes something and then verse 27 describes something else that overlaps somehow with verse 26.

Also... my Messiah isn't dead and I know yours isn't either... so I'm not understanding this argument my friend.