bible-truths.com/forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Need Account Help?  Email bibletruths.forum@gmail.com   

Forgotten password reminders does not work. Contact the email above and state what you want your password changed to. (it must be at least 8 characters)

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Daniel: 70 weeks, 1,335 days, 1290 days, and other times  (Read 6746 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

snorky

  • Guest
Daniel: 70 weeks, 1,335 days, 1290 days, and other times
« on: March 06, 2007, 05:56:25 PM »

Okay, I've read all of Ray's papers, most of them at least twice, many e-mails to him and many posts here on this forum, and I've come to the conclusion that the Bible must interpret itself, and, as a result I can thank God for more discernment than I've ever had reading the Bible.

The biggest problem (probably because I'm making it one!) is reading into the prophesies of Daniel concerning time periods, such as the 70 weeks (Daniel 9), the "time and times and half a time" (Daniel 12:7) and the 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11) and the 1,335 days (Daniel 12:12) and the "one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." (Daniel 9:27)

I am assuming these numbers are symbolic. But why these numbers? Is the week (seven days) a symbol of 7 = complete or perfect? Is "time and times and half a time" 3 1/2 years (as the rapture/great tribulation timeline/end times crowd believes?) And the other numbers?

Can anyone here shed some light here? What other places in the Bible deal with this issue? What other places in the Bible use these same numbers? Did Ray explain this and I just missed it?

Deb aka snorky
Logged

DWIGHT

  • Guest
Re: Daniel: 70 weeks, 1,335 days, 1290 days, and other times
« Reply #1 on: March 06, 2007, 07:40:39 PM »

Deb,

I believe that Ray will explain this much more in," Hell Part D."  I'm sure that there are many scriptures that I could find for you, but to explain them is another story.  I'm with you on this one as far as wanting to know what they mean.  I'm afraid that my old dispensational background will get in the way, not to mention my old man.  But if anyone would like to take a crack at this, I would love to hear it. ;)

In Him,

Dwight   
Logged

Kirk

  • Guest
Re: Daniel: 70 weeks, 1,335 days, 1290 days, and other times
« Reply #2 on: March 06, 2007, 09:37:14 PM »

Hi Snorky/Deb....remembering that there are 3 types of scriptures, literal, symbolic, and spiritual,
it's not so difficult to understand this as long as you don't follow dubious religious paradigms and
separate the 70th week from # 69.  The 70th week represents the "week" of Christ's
crucifixion.  Also, looking at the number 1290, it is 30 + 1260.  That's 30 years plus 3 1/2 years of the Jewish calendar (360 days per year.)  By the way, this is the only place I've found in the Bible that says Jesus was crucified at the age of 33 1/2 years.

Hope this helps somewhat.
Logged

snorky

  • Guest
Re: Daniel: 70 weeks, 1,335 days, 1290 days, and other times
« Reply #3 on: March 07, 2007, 02:35:38 AM »

Thanks, Dwight...I hope Ray does try explaining this and more in Daniel (which for me is the most difficult prophecy book, which makes Ezekiel look like a piece of cake  ;) )

And thanks too, Kirk. Your explaination makes sense...but then again, why does Daniel separate the 62 weeks from the other 7 weeks to make 69 weeks? The explanation of 1290 days, 1260 days and 3 1/2 years also makes sense...but what about 1335 days?

And I know this might sound ignorant, but what is meant by (Daniel 11:11) "and from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be 1290 days." Or am I reading it wrong? Does the taking away of the daily sacrifice EQUAL the setting up of the abomination of desolation? (Problem is I'm using a King James...maybe the translation is wrong.) Or is Danel saying the time from the taking away of the sacrifice TO the setting up of the desolation is 1290 days? I am assuming here that the taking away of the sacrifice is Christ substituting the new covenant for the old one and the abomination of desolation is the annulment of God's covenant with the Jews and granting it to the followers of Christ instead. Or does it have to do with something in Malachi, where God rejects the Jews' sacrifices? Or am I wrong?

Deb aka snorky
Logged

Kirk

  • Guest
Re: Daniel: 70 weeks, 1,335 days, 1290 days, and other times
« Reply #4 on: March 07, 2007, 11:00:17 PM »

Deb dba Snorky....Your questions remind me of my mindset 25 years ago...so many questions that seem to self-propagate.  Answer one, and two more pop up.

I studied this under an anointed teacher a long time ago....there have been myriad books written on this one subject.  People have talked about this 70th Week business for 2,000 years.  My take?

There are a lot more scriptures germane to our time than this.  It's nice to know the ins and outs of Daniel's 70 Weeks, but I've found many more invigorating subjects than this.  The books I've read posit arguments and make theories.  Can't say as I've got much from them.  Sorry I couldn't be more lucid.
Logged

Kirk

  • Guest
Re: Daniel: 70 weeks, 1,335 days, 1290 days, and other times
« Reply #5 on: March 08, 2007, 09:22:31 PM »

Deb dba Snorky

Amazing what a good night's sleep will do.  The 1345 refers to Pentecost.  There is some kind of formula that determines when Pentecost/50 days occurs, and there has been much argument concerning the predetermined baseline.  I don't concern myself with the details, but  there's something formulaic between Passover and Pentecost.  1345 minus 1290 yields 55.  That's Pentecost plus 5.  The 5 is where the religious bickering occurs.

Hope this helps a little.
Logged

cherokee

  • Guest
Re: Daniel: 70 weeks, 1,335 days, 1290 days, and other times
« Reply #6 on: March 09, 2007, 12:10:38 PM »

Deb aka Snorky

You said in your post (Problem is  I am using a King James...maybe the translation is wrong) if you would like a couple of better translations you can go to ( concordant.org) click on concordant version and get the Concordant Literal New Testament in PDF or HTML format to read or go to (olivetree.com) and download the Rotherham Emphasized bible free. However I do not recommend reading the articals on the concordant site as I feel they are not truthful.

Suzie
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 20 queries.