The Prophecy of the 70 weeks of Daniel

I am sorry, but repeating unsupported assertions do not make your case any stronger.Show support for your dates. I can actually show support for other dates.There have been people who showed support for other start dates, other end dates. Why should I accept you interpretation?
I can make a case for Jesus being executed in 36 ce. not 37 ce, based on the works of Josephus.You have not answered the critisms at all, and merely avoided . Why is that.So, to reiteratewe have unsupported assumptions, an arbitrary start date, and arbitrary end date, and this fits?Out of curiosity, when do you think the Book of Daniel was written?

It's even worse than that.. he can't justify the year 32 c.e., since according to Josephus, John the Baptist was killed in 36 c.e., and Jesus was supposed to have started his ministry when John the Baptist was killed.

I note that somehow you managed to post this 3 times.

quote:

---

If the order and content of the kingdom aspect of the prophesy has nothing to do with whatever you are sayimng, who cares?? Focus.

---

I am simply pointing out that I do not claim that the legs and toes belong to the Kingdom before them. You are meant to focus on the arguments I do make, not on the arguments you would like me to make.

quote:

---

Must have missed that bit. Your thing here is to try to point to some other so called messiahs, I see. Pathetic.

---

No, I'm pointing out real messiahs. Who fit Daniel's prophecy better than Jesus (whose claim to be a messiah is pretty dubious).

quote:

---

Look, let's be clear here. Do you believe in God, and the bible or not?? I am getting a little tired of pussyfooting around with you. If you do, tell us if you think the prophesy is true and valid, and how you supposedly think it was fulfilled.

---

What I believe about God and the Bible shouldn't matter.However since the Kingdom of God did not appear and sweep away the Hellenistic kingdoms, it is quite clear that the prophecy did fail. Indeed your own arguments, inventing tenuous connections between the Roman Empire and Kingdoms created by people who were never under Roman rule, in territory that Rome never controlled. Or inventing huge gaps or trying to insert huge temporal gaps in the middle of sentences - where they make no sense.Your own arguments prove that the prophecy failed.

quote:

---

So you deny the 70 AD historical date. OK. That will requite proof. Got any??

---

I don't deny that the Romans destroyed the Temple (and much of Jerusalem) in 70 AD. I do deny that that has anything to do with Daniel's prophecy. Even your interpretation requires inventing gaps in the 70 weeks to try and force the prophecy to fit events.

quote:

---

Titus came from Greece by any standard?? Tell us about it.

---

No, that's just what you wanted me to say. The prince of the prophecy was Antichus IV Epiphanes, not Titus. Antiochus could be said to be Greek, although his Kingdom didn't include Greece and his capital was near modern Baghdad.

quote:

---

Of course it does. There is a long period of time between the last week, and the 69th.

---

Where does Daniel say that ? WHere does he say hat there are ANY gaps in the 69 weeks ?
You do realise that if you can insert gaps into the 70 weeks just because it happens to be convenient the prophecy becomes meaningless ? That you're giving IamJoseph license to say - if he should want to - that the 69 weeks have not even ended now. All he has to do is to insert gaps the way you do.

quote:

---

The toes, by the way, I suppose you are considering part of the fourth kingdom? I read it as part of the same stuff as the fourth, but part different. Modern Europe, and the remnants of the Roman empire are really not what they used to be.

---

They're less Roman than Rome was Greek ! If Daniel really thought like that there'd be no need for talking about different Kingdoms at all. (So why not include the British Empire ? Or the Mongols ? Or the Islamic Empire ?)

quote:

---

Well, that really doesn't matter, because sometimes in a chapter, we launch into the future, or some such. So that is fine tuning, not something to be done on a pagan forum.

---

It's not in the middle of a chapter. Or a paragraph - it's in the middle of a sentence.
The key sentence is verse 23: So where are you going to put the jump so that the King can be born 2000 years after "the latter period of their rule? "

quote:

---

No one could guess all the kingdoms of the earth, when Jesus would come, and be killed, and the sanctuary destroyed, etc etc etc.

---

And Daniel was wrong about the kingdoms, never mentioned Jesus and failed to predict the destruction you think he meant...

Be sorry all you like, nothing could be much better supported. And I don't give a hoot about little alternatate so called starting points. An honest look at the basic facts shows that the options narrow right down.You need a Messiah to come after the ceratain years. You will need to produce one for your claims!! Mine set the calendar! Where is yours? Hiding in your basement??"The first decree or proclamation that went out to return to and restore Jerusalem was in 444 B.C. and this decree was issued by the Persian king Artaxerxes who gave the Jews permission in Nisan 1, 444 B.C. to rebuild Jerusalem"
http://www.ffruits.org/firstfruits/daniels70weeks.aspxSo, from there, or somewhere around there if you want to grasp at straws, you need to cook up the Messiah after 483 years, and have Him killed.I don't know of anyone else that can do that. We can. It really nails it!Then for icing on the cake, let's see you destroy the sanctuary as well!!! Right on cue, in the periods of seven years!!!??It is what it is.

OK, let's slow down, you are claiming a Messiah came after seventy weeks? And the temple was destroyed??
Who was it, santa clause?? Maybe tiberius bogusendi? Or a Greek, perhaps? Maybe alexander nobodyatallanyoneeverheardofski??The Greek kingdom was to be swept away by the fourth beast, or kingdom, and I think Buzzsaw pointed that out. You harping on some little twisted sidebar thst you obviously cannot support in the overall biblical context is nothing more than a biased and dishonest and impish cavort.

quote:

---

The prince of the prophecy was Antichus IV Epiphanes, not Titus.

---

I see. And he destroyed the sanctuary how many 'weeks' after the Messiah came? No, you have built a weak fable, and interpretation on ignoring the fourth kingdom in the context of the book. It cannot be Greece. What can happen is that out of one of the four divisions of former Greece, eventually, the evil last king can come.
You simply can not wave away the four kindoms, trying to get stuck in Greece, so you can reject the Messiah that came, and was cut off, but not for Himself.But thanks for making an attempted case. Hard to believe anyone could actually believe that, but we'll give you the benefit of the doubt there.

OK, thanks.

OK, thanks.

"Whatever the case, Alexander secured his sovereignty of Greece after some resistance, and started a war against Persia in 334BC, following his fathers plans. He crossed the Hellespont with 35.000 Greek and Macedonian soldiers, and near the ancient city of Troy he defeated an army of 40.000 Persians and Greek mercenaries, losing only 110 men.
"
Alexander the Great, GreeceYou better get to work, and clean up tens of thousands of links, and books! Call it tomato if you like, it is commonly associated with Greece. And the way the bible describes him as moving so fast, in winning, is also astounding. Thanks for that.

"Whatever the case, Alexander secured his sovereignty of Greece after some resistance, and started a war against Persia in 334BC, following his fathers plans. He crossed the Hellespont with 35.000 Greek and Macedonian soldiers, and near the ancient city of Troy he defeated an army of 40.000 Persians and Greek mercenaries, losing only 110 men.
"
Alexander the Great, GreeceYou better get to work, and clean up tens of thousands of links, and books! Call it tomato if you like, it is commonly associated with Greece. And the way the bible describes him as moving so fast, in winning, is also astounding. Thanks for that.

quote:

---

OK, let's slow down, you are claiming a Messiah came after seventy weeks? And the temple was destroyed??
Who was it, santa clause?? Maybe tiberius bogusendi? Or a Greek, perhaps? Maybe alexander nobodyatallanyoneeverheardofski??

---

If you'd been paying attention you'd know that I've already told you.The first messiah (Cyrus) comes after the SEVEN weeks. This is the reading in the Masoretic text.The second could the High Priest, Onias III or his successor Jason. Jason was installed (through Antiochus' influence) in 175 BC replaced in 172 and driven off in 169 BC. In 167 BC Antiochus attacked Jerusalem in reaction to Jasons's defeat. Jason fits the dates better.Antichus stormed the walls as Daniel said and entered the Temple, looting it (the destruction referred to by Daniel). We know that the Temple wasn't literally destroyed since it goes on operating - until it is stopped and pagan worship is instituted in the Temple itself.Following this he banned sacrifice and set up a pagan altar in the Temple ("The Abomination"). The Romans did neither.

quote:

---

It cannot be Greece.

---

The author of Daniel clearly disagrees. YOu have yet to refute the clear testimony of Daniel 8.

quote:

---

What can happen is that out of one of the four divisions of former Greece, eventually, the evil last king can come.

---

It had to happen while the Hellenistic Kingdoms still exist. Daniel 8:23 says so. And it didn't.

quote:

---

You simply can not wave away the four kindoms, trying to get stuck in Greece, so you can reject the Messiah that came, and was cut off, but not for Himself.

---

And I don't. At least I have actual messiahs. Who fit the dates and text better.

quote:

---

Hard to believe anyone could actually believe that,

---

I know that a lot of fundamentalists have a problem believing that the Bible could actually mean what it says. I mean you reject the seventy weeks. You reject Daniel 8's clear indication that the "vile King" "will" come in the time of the Hellenistic Kingdom
You reject even your own idea that the last Empire is Rome in favour of adding in a bunch of non-Roman states.

Hi Starman,You may have missed my earlier post, but could you tell me what is the date of the oldest existing text of Daniel?Cheers.

quote:

---

You better get to work, and clean up tens of thousands of links, and books! Call it tomato if you like, it is commonly associated with Greece.

---

I guess you need to brush up on your reading skills. These statements come before the part you choose to quote. Did you not manage to read them ?I wonder what other sources say. What about WikipediaThis agrees. How about Britannica ? Nope.Looks like they all agree with me. Want to explain how that happened ?Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

The fourth Kingdom is clearly Greek.However, once it became apparent that the author(s) of Daniel (who is a fictional character)was wrong about the coming of god's kingdom the only way to address this was to reintepret the fourth kingdom as the Romans.The thing about the Book of Daniel is that the alleged history in it is a terrible mess, Darius the Mede for example never existed, and there was no Median empire when the Book of Daniel claims there was.Throw in the internal discrepencies and the book is barely worth anything hisotrically.The common accepted date for composition is around 165 BCE, which makes the prophecies redundant.

Brian, Predictions! No such thing as a prophet. LOL.

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.

Paulk,You should just ignore starman because he is refuted every time and you know that.

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.