5 Loaves & 2 Fishes

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, 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.

Please note: the seventy sevens are determnined upon they people (the Jews) and thy holy city (Jerusalem).
All the clauses that express the purpose of the prophecy should be viewed in this light.
This pinpoints the fulfilment as being the second coming of Christ (unless you have a view that the natural city of Jerusalem carries on after the second coming of Christ and the Jewish people have a redemptive uniqueness due to their ethnicity which is pretty hard to substantiate).
Thus the prophecy that must be sealed up is that regarding the Jews and Jerusalem.

Also the last 3 1/2 years of the second half of the seventieth seven are mentioned in Daniel 3 times in Revelation 5 times in three chapters. They are etiher in chapter context or book context all in conjunction with
Jesus’ return
The Resurrection
The Judgment
The Everlasting Kingdom
So the vision and prophecy regarding the Jews and Jerusalem are sealed up and finished with at the second coming of Christ when all the other clauses are ultimately fulfilled also.

And all God's people said, "Amen."

I found this comment on the Internet and put it here for consideration.

I totally agree with this assessment Gid.

All of the things spoken of in Daniel 9 are completed by Jesus during His time with us.

To finish the transgression:
Rom 5:14
But death reigned from Adam unto Moses, even over them also who have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, who is a figure of him who was to come.

To make an end of sins:
Hebrews 9:26
For then he ought to have suffered often from the beginning of the world: but now once at the end of ages, he hath appeared for the destruction of sin, by the sacrifice of himself.

To make reconciliation for iniquity:
Titus 2:14
Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and might cleanse to himself a people acceptable, a pursuer of good works.

To bring in everlasting righteousness:
2 Cor. 9:9
As it is written, He hath dispersed abroad; he hath given to the poor: his righteousness remaineth for ever.

To seal up (fulfill) the vision and prophecy
Matt. 11:13
For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John

To anoint the most Holy.
Luke 3:22
And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape, as a dove upon him; and a voice came from heaven: Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

Even Jesus, as read in Matthew 24:11-34 speaks of Daniel's prophecy being fulfilled in the disciples generation:
When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand......Amen I say to you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

Sorry, but to wrench one week of the prophecy and transport it into some indeterminate future is not warranted in either the scripture or the actual historical fulfilment of it.
There is also an inconsistency in applying the day/year principle (rightly) to the 70 weeks, (70x7=490days...years) but ignoring the very same principle when discussing the prophetic 42 months, 1260 days, and times ,time and half a time, that as you pointed out are mentioned elsewhere in Daniel and in Revelation. These are as much prophetic time periods as is the 70 weeks, and should be treated in just the same manner.
1260 days=1260 years.
42 months =1260 days...years.
"Times" (2 years -720 days) plus "time" (1 year-360 days) plus half a time
(180 days) totaling 1260 days...years.

How do we know that "time" is a year? From Nebuchadnezzar's sojourn of 7 years (7 times) as a beast of the field. (Daniel 4:23)

These time periods of 42 months, 1260 days, and times time and half a time are completely unrelated to the 70 weeks. The scriptures reveal them as representing two distinct applications, but covering the same period. The first application is in the sense of the persecuting power of the antichrist and his dominion over the saints,( Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Rev. 11:2, 12:6) the second application being the preserving power of God for His people through that same time. (Rev. 11:3, 12:6,14.)
Preterism misses this specific marker pointing directly to the true antichrist power by claiming it belongs to Antiochus. But let us be completely honest here. Antiochus did not persecute God's people for 1260 years. Not even 1260 days. Neither did Nero, nor any other Caesar or ruler of those times. The history simply does not fit.
Futurism also misses the same marker by ignoring the past and misapplying the day/year principle. (Or not applying it at all.)
And interestingly, it was the very same power that made both futurism and preterism popular that the marker points to. All the reformers recognized it.
Todays Protestants however are lulling themselves into a false sense of security by ignoring history and not believing the scriptures.

A further reason why it is an impossibility that the 70th week is in the future, is that the scripture plainly states that "reconciliation for iniquity" occurs within the 70th week. The futurist view that places Calvary after the 69th week but somehow before the 70th week is an error.

But back to the original query from Gideon. I'd like to offer a somewhat different perspective on one or two of the accomplishments of Jesus at the cross.
1, ...to finish the transgression...

To finish the transgression...single transgression. What single transgression? The second part of the passage deals with the multitude of plural individual sins of men and women, so what does this single reference to transgression allude to?
Because the whole of the 70 weeks are determined (or cut off) for the Jewish nation, (therefore a time of probation for them ....the time of the Jews as opposed to the time of the Gentiles which followed after), I suggest that "the transgression" is a corporate transgression which is singularly applied to the Jewish nation.
A thought that could very well be applied to the passage is that of 'filling up the cup of iniquity' by the Jew, having been specifically alluded to by Jesus Himself when He said " Fill ye up the measure of your fathers." (Matt. 23:32)
Compare Genesis 15:16. Their crowning sin was of course the rejection and crucifixion of their Messiah. Jesus baptism was precisely 3and 1/2 years previous. Calvary came in "the midst of the week" (Dan. 9:27) and the Jews compounded their transgression 3 and 1/2 years later when the leaders, representing the "nation", blocked their ears and stoned Steven to death, their time of probation was closed by their own obstinacy. Jesus prophesied of this when He said "Behold, your house is left unto you desolate". (Matt. 23:38)
Also... "The kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." (Matt.21: 43).

2. ....to make an end of sins....
The Hebrew word 'chatta'th' (sins) can also be applied to sin offering. (See Levit. 4:3, 21, 24, 32.) This reveals a parallel application to Daniel 9:27 which says ..."and in the midst of the week He shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease"....

Brakelite,
can you kindly illuminate me how using Nebuchadnezzar's time = year and the 70 7s scale of a day for a year both in succession to time, times, half a time to get not 3 1/2 years but 3 1/3 years of years (1260 years)???

42 months = 3 1/2 years
time, times 1/2 time = 3 1/2 years
1260 days = 3 1/2 years
1/2 week of years (from the midst of the last week to the end of the last week) = 3 1/2 years.

I don't see a compelling reasons to extrapolate further or double apply timescales to any of these - here is a wonderful consistency that sits in harmony with all the contexts in which these references in Dan and Rev occur.

Also most people who play around with the 1260 years etc end up referencing secular history to find dates etc. and end up with some quite fanciful interpretations.

If you take a sola scriptura approach a much more satisfying result can be reached with greater consistency.

The antichrist is nowhere mentioned in Dan's 70 7s. Keep him out of it - at least in the sense that there is not direct mention of him in the prophecy itself only the prince (Messiah) and the people of the prince (the armies of Titus).

Christ was cut off but not for himself after the 69th week...
This occurred on the cross when He [Messiah] confirmed the Abrahamic Covenant in the midst
of the week. Thus Christ ministered 1/2 week or 3 1/2 years before this occurred and the second half of the week is deferred to the end of the church age and concludes with the events I mentioned earlier. This is more than established in the mouth of two or three witnesses as I pointed out from Daniel and Revelation.

Breaches of time occur in other places in Scripture so this is not an isolated case.

It is obvious that prophecies regarding Jerusalem are not sealed up yet and are still being fulfilled.
Rev 11:3 onwards gives very specific prophetic detail yet to be fulfilled in Jerusalem and to the Jews.

Sorry if we haven't finished chewing some of the other aspects but I was hoping we could now share how all of us see this one.



Can we just focus on this clause please? What does it mean, "... To anoint the most Holy"? What is "the most holy?" Has he/it already been anointed or do we await something future?

The first I can think of is:
And Jesus being baptized, forthwith came out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him. And behold a voice from heaven, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

As a second, we could also say:
And after the days of her purification, according to the law of Moses, were accomplished, they carried him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord: As it is written in the law of the Lord: Every male opening the womb shall be called holy to the Lord:

Greetings all.

Where is the most Holy place?

Ex 26
"You shall hang up the veil under the clasps, and shall bring in the ark of the testimony there within the veil; and the veil shall serve for you as a partition between the holy place and the holy of holies.

He 8
For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;


Done and dusted...imo

Jeff, can you elaborate on what you mean by a holy place in heaven? Is it a place or a person?

I just responded, but found myself logged out...again.

Take 2

I think it is the place where the veil hung..that kept us out of the holy of Holies.
Jesus annointed it with his own blood, allowing us access to the Father...Just like in the garden before the fall.

Hi All,

And to be in the Presence of The Father for you and I means to be washed in The Blood, The Presence of The HolyGhost!

Without Christ a person/unbeliever could not live in The Presence of The HolyGhost but to come into and live in His Presence must surely mean not only the Curtain of The Temple, The Veil, but The Christian also must be washed in The Blood of Christ and there we have The Trinity complete!

But Wait is not the Holy of Holies/The Temple now in our hearts, therefore, The Trinity Presence must be in our being, our hearts too!

Just a thought folks!

Yours in Christ and Christ in me,

Colin.

Personally, I don’t see this as happening in a future millennial temple. Never-the-less, the Hebrew word used (qodesh) always refers to a place – or the items contained in a place. Some here are interpreting that which is anointed as a ‘person.’ Now, I know that Jesus was anointed, but the context of Daniel 9:24 does not seem to refer to a person IMO. Do you think it might be more accurate to say that the ‘holy of holies’ represents the place of access into the divine presence?

In other words, is there a place in heaven - a ‘holy of holies’ - which Christ anointed with his blood. Is it an actual ‘place’ or is it simply symbolizing our free access into the divine presence?

Jerome, when he translated into the Vulgate, seemed to think it did. I wouldn't want to argue with his understanding of Hebrew, as I have no clue except what I can find in modern concordances. He had moved to Jerusalem to strengthen his grip on Jewish scripture commentary, so I would have no issue accepting his understanding of the Hebrew word which he translated as the Saint of saints.

septuaginta ebdomades adbreviatae sun super populum tuum et super urbem sanctam tuam ut consummetur praevaricatio et finem accipiat peccatum et deleatur iniquitas et adducatur iustitia sempiterna et impleatur visio et prophetes et unguatur sanctus sanctorum

Seventy weeks are shortened upon thy people, and upon thy holy city, that transgression may be finished, and sin may have an end, and iniquity may be abolished; and everlasting justice may be brought; and vision and prophecy may be fulfilled; and the Saint of saints may be anointed.

I think this is one reason why many commentaries refer to Daniel 9 as Jesus baptism.

A late added PS;
Referring to a holy place as the temple could also be read as:

Jesus answered, and said to them: Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

Having made the earthly ministry & sanctuary obsolete by His death Christ ascended and anointed the “Most holy,” Heavenly Sanctuary, preparatory to His ministering there (Comp. Exo 30:22-30; Heb 8:4-5; 9:11). The Hebrew for “Most holy” (qodesh qodashim) is often applied to the things of
the sanctuary but nowhere to a person.
No longer does the child of God have an earthly sanctuary nor an earthly priesthood to visit in order to approach God. We can now approach directly in the Spirit to our Mediator Who ministers as our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary.
Hebrews 10:19-22 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; And having an high priest over the house of God; Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.

Good verses Brakelite. Concerning this 'Heavenly Sanctuary' written of in the book of Hebrews, is it an actual 'place' - a heavenly structure of some sort? Or is it symbolic of 'access into the divine presence?

In either case, was it anointed during the seventy 'weeks' as Dan 9:24 said it would be? More specifically, was it anointed in the actual 70th week?

Hi. Do you think the following was literal, or symbolic?
Revelation 11:19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

It was the temple or sanctuary on earth that was symbolic. It was a copy of the real one in heaven.

Hebrews 8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.



Jesus rose into heaven and entered the sanctuary there shortly before pentecost, so yes, the anointing would have taken place at that time, within the 70th week.
The priests of the OT were anointed with oil, a type of the Holy Spirit. Not coincidence that the oil when it was poured out upon the head of the priest that it ran down to the ground. It would not be unthinkable that Christ was likewise anointed as High Priest when He entered the sanctuary in heaven, and the Holy Spirit "ran down" to the earth at pentecost, when from that time forward the disciples became 'priests' in the household of God.

Yo

I assumed that Jesus annionted the most Holy place at his ascention, when he was presented before the Father.

- I think the most Holy place is where the Father is at .., and Jesus being the most Holy one ever, is the only one who could possibly annoint the place where the Father resides, allowing access to any sinner who truly recieves him.



Everyone started singing about redemption, everyone saw a fulfillment of the 70 week promise to atone and open the door to the Father......Hallelul yah.


....but




Not sure if the veil was torn upon his death or ressurection, but this seems to pinpoint the time the barrier to the Father was removed...aka the annionting of the Holy place.

Jesus also said to the thief,

.....

The thief would die later on the same day, yet be with the Lord in Paradise before the ressurection the third day..?

or did he say ....

"Truly I say to you today , you shall be with Me in Paradise........like in 3days when i will raise it up.?

The victory salute of the ressurection was a sure thing 3 days aftr his death...It is written.