tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-482074623575075650.post8006272794182320544..comments2023-10-19T21:23:52.838+08:00Comments on calvinistguy :: theblog: Examining the Dispensational Parenthesis Theory of Daniel’s Seventy Weeks Prophecycalvinistguyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05157229724513921193noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-482074623575075650.post-64113276308162466752018-05-19T14:20:05.508+08:002018-05-19T14:20:05.508+08:00distance mba in india
Truth be told, the verifiabl...<a href="https://www.mibmglobal.com/fast-track-programme.php?id=FTBBA" rel="nofollow">distance mba in india</a><br />Truth be told, the verifiable records permit at most an Exile up to 69 years and around 16 days. This reality firmly underpins the futurist position, however do you know why? Is it accurate to say that you were even mindful that the Exile was such a great amount of shorter than what most have assumed?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05174647958540286658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-482074623575075650.post-61323889732800651222012-04-09T11:49:58.435+08:002012-04-09T11:49:58.435+08:00First, your claim that exegetical consistency dema...First, your claim that exegetical consistency demands that Dispensationalists should understand any point <i>after</i> the 69 weeks as being IN the 70th week, based on Hosea 6:2, loses all of its force when the 70 weeks of Jewish <i>disobedience</i> are considered which necessitated the Exile. For recall that the 70 weeks of Jewish disobedience are implied in the 70 years of Jewish Exile, in which each year of the Exile represented a 7-year period in which the Jews had failed to ‘sabbath’ (i.e., rest) their land in the 7th year of a 7-year period, as per the commandment. <br /><br />In other words, 70 years of agricultural Sabbath-breaking, i.e., 490 years of disobedience, are implied in the 70 year Exile; <b>yet note that this 490 years of disobedience was <i>non-contiguous</i>, occurring over about an 800 year period. </b> And so, obviously implied was a 1st Sabbath year that went observed, <i>after</i> which there was a 2nd Sabbath year that went unobserved, <i>after</i> which there was a 3rd Sabbath year that went unobserved, and so forth, all the way up to 70 Sabbath years that went unobserved, at which point God acted to send Judah into Exile. The implied numerical sequence is undeniable, since there is an all but <i>quid pro quo</i> between the 70 years of agricultural Sabbath breaking and the 70 year Exile to allow the land to rest.<br /><br /> That is, there could not have been a 70th year of agricultural Sabbath breaking unless there had been a 69th, nor a 69th year of agricultural Sabbath breaking unless there had been a 68th, and so forth. And so, while the word “after” doesn’t technically occur (like the word <i>trinity</i> throughout the Bible) it is certainly implied in Daniel 9. And, again, because many of these years which came <i><b>after</b></i> each other one were often interrupted by periods of time before the next numerically sequenced, agricultural Sabbath-breaking took place, your argument that any numbered day or year which follows its preceding numbered day or year must come without interruption, cannot be sustained. <br /><br />Cry as theologians might, into their beer mugs over a desire for “exegetical consistency,” God has not always seen fit to arrange His plans to accommodate the way theologians presume the Bible must be understood. <br /><br />I may continue to critique your complaints against the Dispensationalist view of a parenthesis between the 69th and 70th week, especially if I see that you are still active on this blog. In the meantime, I continue to await your response about why the 70 years of Exile were ca. only ‘69’ in number, and why that would have nevertheless satisfied God’s sense of justice.<br /><br />Daniel GracelyUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03103470748060341738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-482074623575075650.post-8999395896643264252012-04-09T10:12:50.223+08:002012-04-09T10:12:50.223+08:00Are you still active on this blog? If so, I plan o...Are you still active on this blog? If so, I plan on responding at greater length.<br /><br />My chief complaint is your too narrow focus on 'textual' issues at the expense of the biblical and extra-biblical <i>historical</i> record. For example, presumably your view interprets the 70 years of Exile as 70 normal solar years? But then why doesn't the historical record show this? <br /><br />In fact, the historical records allow at most an Exile up to 69 years and about 16 days. This fact strongly supports the futurist position, but do you know why? Were you even aware that the Exile was so much shorter than what most have supposed?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03103470748060341738noreply@blogger.com