The objections to the dispensational interpretation are summarized below.Dispensational statements are given in bold.
This is followed by counter-arguments in normal text.
1. The 490 years start with Artaxerxes’ second decree.
This decree did not “restore” Jerusalem as judicial and executive capital of the nation, as required by the prophecy. See discussion above.
2. The 490 years have 360 days each.
The “weeks” of the Seventy Weeks are sabbatical weeks of years, where each seventh year is a Sabbath. Each year is therefore a normal literal solar year. There is no justification for reading this prophecy symbolically.
3. The appearance of the Messiah (9:25) at the end of the 483 years is Jesus’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem.
Jesus appeared about three years earlier when He was “anointed” and introduced to the world at His baptism. “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power” (Acts 10:38) and proclaimed this Anointed One to be His Son or King (Mark 1:9-11; cf. Ps. 2:6, 7) on the day of Jesus’ baptism by John the Baptist:
so that He might be manifested to Israel, I came baptizing in water. (John 1:31)
4. The Jewish period ended at Jesus’s triumphal entry, to be resumed much later.
The Jewish period did not end at Jesus’s triumphal entry, or at the Cross. For the first three or four years after the Cross the gospel was preached with the power of the Holy Spirit exclusively to Jews. It was only three or four years after the Jews started to persecute the believers that Peter, in a dream, received the instruction to take the gospel to the gentiles (Acts 10).
5. The “firm covenant” of the 70th week (v 27) follows after the destruction of the city in verse 26 in AD 70. Therefore the 70th week must follow after 70 AD, which necessitates a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks.
The events in the prophecy are not presented in chronological sequence, for instance:
The rebuilding of the city (25c) is mentioned after the appearance of the anointed one (25b), while the city was rebuilt four hundred years before the Anointed.
The prince causes sacrifices to cease (9:27) after the sanctuary is destroyed (9:26), but if the sanctuary is destroyed there remains no sacrificial system to be ceased.
Since 70 weeks have been determined for the city of “thy people” (9:24), the destruction of the city and the sanctuary in verse 26 must occur after the 70 weeks, and therefore after the 70th week of verse 27.
To determine the actual chronological sequence it must be noted that the prophecy is presented in a poetic form of parallelism with two foci—Jerusalem and the Anointed, and alternates between the two:
The events in the prophecy are not presented in chronological sequence, for instance:
The rebuilding of the city (25c) is mentioned after the appearance of the anointed one (25b), while the city was rebuilt four hundred years before the Anointed.
The prince causes sacrifices to cease (9:27) after the sanctuary is destroyed (9:26), but if the sanctuary is destroyed there remains no sacrificial system to be ceased.
Since 70 weeks have been determined for the city of “thy people” (9:24), the destruction of the city and the sanctuary in verse 26 must occur after the 70 weeks, and therefore after the 70th week of verse 27.
To determine the actual chronological sequence it must be noted that the prophecy is presented in a poetic form of parallelism with two foci—Jerusalem and the Anointed, and alternates between the two:
JERUSALEM
|
ANOINTED ONE
|
9:25a commandment to restore
|
9:25b unto the anointed one
|
9:25c Seven weeks
|
9:25c – and 62 weeks
|
9:25d shall be built again
|
9:26a - after the 62 weeks anointed cut off
|
9:26b destroy
|
9:27a - firm covenant – one week – sacrifice cease
|
9:27b abominations … maketh desolate
|
Because of this poetic parallelism, the assumption of a strict chronological sequence is incorrect.
6. The desolation at the end of verse 27 is concurrent with the end that is made to sacrifice and offering “in the middle” of the 70th week (earlier in the same verse). Daniel therefore placed the “abomination of desolation” exactly in the middle of the last week. Our Lord placed the “abomination of desolation” at ‘the end,’ just before His second coming in glory (Matthew 24:15, 21, 29, 30). The Seventieth Week therefore must also come at the end of the present age, just prior to Christ’s coming in glory.
The first assumption is the reasoning above is that the desolation of verse 27 is concurrent with making an end to sacrifice and offering. This is not so:
According to the literary analysis the termination of the sacrifices relates to the Messiah while the desolation has to do with the city, some 40 years later.
The messianic context of the prophecy demands that the termination of sacrifices must refer to the Cross.
The second assumption in the reasoning above is that Daniel 9:27 refers to an “abomination of desolation”. This is also not true. 9:27 refers to a desolator that arrives shortly after (on the wing of) abominations. The phrase “abomination of desolation” is used elsewhere in Daniel for something that is set up (11:31; 12:11), not a desolator. Similarly, our Lord spoke about the “abomination of desolation” as something that stands in the holy place (Matthew 24:15; or “standing where it should not be” Mark 13:14). The abomination of Matthew 24:15 and the desolator in Daniel 9:27 are related, but different things. An “abomination of desolation” is some repulsive sin, which leads to destruction. A desolator is a destroyer. It is therefore not appropriate to link Matthew 24:15 to Daniel 9:27 as if they refer to the same thing. The “abomination of desolation” is something that belongs to the other prophecies in Daniel, and those are not limited to the 490 years or to the Jewish nation, as is the prophecy in Daniel 9.
Thirdly, Jesus mentions the “abomination of desolation in Matthew 24:15 in the context of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. (Compare mat 24:16-19 to Luke 21:20-23.) Perhaps one can also apply it to the time before His return (v23), but that would be an additional meaning.
The reasoning therefore includes three major errors, any one of which would refute the conclusion.
7. There is a gap of 2000 years or more between the first 69 weeks and the 70th week.
An important conclusion from the literary analysis above is that the first part of verse 27 elaborates on the Messiah, while last part of the same verse elaborates on the destruction of the city. This denies the dispensational approach of detaching verse 27 from the previous verses and propelling it into the distant future to the end of time, to describe the events of the last seven years of earth’s history.
Verse 27 is arguably the core of the prophecy. All important events occur after the long period of 69 weeks (483 years). The purpose of the 69 weeks is therefore to foretell the timing of these events. Hence, to postpone that final week of years and to propel it far into the future is to defeat the purpose of the 69 weeks.
Many of the words used to describe the destruction of the city in verse 26 are repeated in the description of the destruction at the end of verse 27 (desolations – decreed – flood/poured out – end of/complete destruction), which implies that these two verses refer to the same events.
The wording of the text of Daniel in no way indicates a break or gap. There appears to be no valid reason, or defensible ground, for separating the seventieth week from the previous 69. To postpone the last seven years of final crisis to the end of the age is a form of exegesis without a precedent in all prophetic exposition.
8. The covenant in verse 27 is a new covenant made by an end time Antichrist.
The covenant in verse 27 is the divine covenant because that covenant is the central theme throughout Daniel 9, and for the other reasons provided above.
9. The temple will be rebuilt again a second time, after the destruction in verse 26.
The prophecy explicitly promises only one rebuilding of the city and the sanctuary. If the temple was to be rebuilt after the destruction of verse 26, the prophecy would have explicitly stated this, given that it is so clear about the rebuilding in verse 25.
10. The sacrificial system will be resumed.
There is no indication in Daniel 9 that sacrifices will be resumed, as in Daniel 8. Daniel 9 ends in the opposite, namely increasing chaos. The re-instatement of the sacrifices stems from the assumption that Daniel 9 covers the same ground as the other prophecies of Daniel, an idea which has been refuted above.
There can never be a valid return to the old covenant and its earthly temple worship. Christ, the Antitype, has terminated once for all the “shadow” and inaugurated a “better covenant” that offers His righteousness as the everlasting righteousness (see Hebr. 7:22; cf. chap. 10:12; Rom. 3:22, 25).
11. The termination of the sacrificial system relates to an end time Antichrist.
According to the New Testament, through the sacrifice (death) of the Lamb of God, God brought the sacrificial system to an end, made atonement for sin and brought in everlasting redemption. If we—against this background—read that the purpose of the 70 weeks includes “to make atonement and to bring in everlasting redemption” (9:24), and that the events of the 70 weeks include the appearance and death of the messiah, it is more than fair to conclude that the context demands that the termination of the sacrificial system in verse 27 refers to His crucifixion.
His death was the ultimate and real sacrifice for the sins of the human race. We, frail and tiny humans, living on a speck of dust floating in the immeasurable universe, find it difficult to believe in the supernatural. Here Daniel, 500 years before the cross, disclosed a great truth, which is also disclosed by Isaiah 53 when he wrote, ‘pierced through for our transgressions’. We must cling to such proofs of the supernatural. This also tells us much about the nature of the universe. God knows where we are. He died for our sins. We cannot understand why and how because His thoughts are as far above our thoughts as the stars are above the earth, but it is wonderful to understand that the Source of all power and love feels this way about us; undeserving sinners.
12. The sanctuary will be destroyed in the middle of the last week.
70 weeks have been determined for the city of “thy people” (9:24). This promises safety for the city for 70 weeks of years. The sanctuary will not be destroyed during that period. For this reason the city and the sanctuary was destroyed after the end of the 490 years.
13. The 70th week ends with the return of Christ.
The prophecy ends in the accumulation of desolations. It does not refer to the return of Christ. If the end of the last week was the Second Advent, would verse 27 not end in a description of His glorious return, as the other prophecies in Daniel do?
14. The goals of 9:24 will be fulfilled at the end of the 490 years
Daniel 9:24 declares that “atonement for iniquity” and “everlasting righteousness” was to be attained during the 490 years, through Israel.
A strange aspect of Dispensationalism is the proposal that sin will continue for 1000 years after the return of Christ. Furthermore, by postulating the Millennium as a period of Jewish dominance, it allocates in total 1490 years to the Jews; not 490 years.
It was argued above that Jesus made “atonement for iniquity” and consequently brought in “everlasting righteousness” for ages and ages to come.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
7. There is a gap of 2000 years or more between the first 69 weeks and the 70th week.
An important conclusion from the literary analysis above is that the first part of verse 27 elaborates on the Messiah, while last part of the same verse elaborates on the destruction of the city. This denies the dispensational approach of detaching verse 27 from the previous verses and propelling it into the distant future to the end of time, to describe the events of the last seven years of earth’s history.
Verse 27 is arguably the core of the prophecy. All important events occur after the long period of 69 weeks (483 years). The purpose of the 69 weeks is therefore to foretell the timing of these events. Hence, to postpone that final week of years and to propel it far into the future is to defeat the purpose of the 69 weeks.
Many of the words used to describe the destruction of the city in verse 26 are repeated in the description of the destruction at the end of verse 27 (desolations – decreed – flood/poured out – end of/complete destruction), which implies that these two verses refer to the same events.
The wording of the text of Daniel in no way indicates a break or gap. There appears to be no valid reason, or defensible ground, for separating the seventieth week from the previous 69. To postpone the last seven years of final crisis to the end of the age is a form of exegesis without a precedent in all prophetic exposition.
8. The covenant in verse 27 is a new covenant made by an end time Antichrist.
The covenant in verse 27 is the divine covenant because that covenant is the central theme throughout Daniel 9, and for the other reasons provided above.
9. The temple will be rebuilt again a second time, after the destruction in verse 26.
The prophecy explicitly promises only one rebuilding of the city and the sanctuary. If the temple was to be rebuilt after the destruction of verse 26, the prophecy would have explicitly stated this, given that it is so clear about the rebuilding in verse 25.
10. The sacrificial system will be resumed.
There is no indication in Daniel 9 that sacrifices will be resumed, as in Daniel 8. Daniel 9 ends in the opposite, namely increasing chaos. The re-instatement of the sacrifices stems from the assumption that Daniel 9 covers the same ground as the other prophecies of Daniel, an idea which has been refuted above.
There can never be a valid return to the old covenant and its earthly temple worship. Christ, the Antitype, has terminated once for all the “shadow” and inaugurated a “better covenant” that offers His righteousness as the everlasting righteousness (see Hebr. 7:22; cf. chap. 10:12; Rom. 3:22, 25).
11. The termination of the sacrificial system relates to an end time Antichrist.
According to the New Testament, through the sacrifice (death) of the Lamb of God, God brought the sacrificial system to an end, made atonement for sin and brought in everlasting redemption. If we—against this background—read that the purpose of the 70 weeks includes “to make atonement and to bring in everlasting redemption” (9:24), and that the events of the 70 weeks include the appearance and death of the messiah, it is more than fair to conclude that the context demands that the termination of the sacrificial system in verse 27 refers to His crucifixion.
His death was the ultimate and real sacrifice for the sins of the human race. We, frail and tiny humans, living on a speck of dust floating in the immeasurable universe, find it difficult to believe in the supernatural. Here Daniel, 500 years before the cross, disclosed a great truth, which is also disclosed by Isaiah 53 when he wrote, ‘pierced through for our transgressions’. We must cling to such proofs of the supernatural. This also tells us much about the nature of the universe. God knows where we are. He died for our sins. We cannot understand why and how because His thoughts are as far above our thoughts as the stars are above the earth, but it is wonderful to understand that the Source of all power and love feels this way about us; undeserving sinners.
12. The sanctuary will be destroyed in the middle of the last week.
70 weeks have been determined for the city of “thy people” (9:24). This promises safety for the city for 70 weeks of years. The sanctuary will not be destroyed during that period. For this reason the city and the sanctuary was destroyed after the end of the 490 years.
13. The 70th week ends with the return of Christ.
The prophecy ends in the accumulation of desolations. It does not refer to the return of Christ. If the end of the last week was the Second Advent, would verse 27 not end in a description of His glorious return, as the other prophecies in Daniel do?
14. The goals of 9:24 will be fulfilled at the end of the 490 years
Daniel 9:24 declares that “atonement for iniquity” and “everlasting righteousness” was to be attained during the 490 years, through Israel.
A strange aspect of Dispensationalism is the proposal that sin will continue for 1000 years after the return of Christ. Furthermore, by postulating the Millennium as a period of Jewish dominance, it allocates in total 1490 years to the Jews; not 490 years.
It was argued above that Jesus made “atonement for iniquity” and consequently brought in “everlasting righteousness” for ages and ages to come.
WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.
No comments:
Post a Comment