[BornAgainBibleBeliever514]

I recently came across a truly amazing sermon set by Dr. Greg Estep, who is a KJO Dispensationalist, about Daniel's 70 weeks and there seems to be a revelation discussed in there that I'd like to start a discussion on.

It covers the 70 weeks, end-times prophecy and the period of the tribulation with a rare viewpoint: That the 70'th week started already, and then got paused for the church age, to resume after the rapture and continue 6.38 years, instead of the commonly preached full 7 years. This seems to explain all the apostolic miracles, the cessation of the sign gifts, parts of the plan for Israel, and sheds light on more than a few false doctrines derived from falsely dividing the Word of Truth.
It also draws some correlations between the Jewish feasts, and the time of the rapture, among many other great expositions.

Frankly, I'm quite blown away with the sermons, and I've been listening to them over and over, and I'd like to get some more input on the things he presents from other solid Bible believers.

Link to Sermon Audio

I know its six hours to listen to them all, but I can pretty much guarantee that you won't regret it, and his delivery is much like Gipp's, so he's almost fun to listen to.
If there are errors, I'd like to see them pointed out, but if this guy is bang-on, then it could be of much benefit to share this incredible teaching. I'm not saying this teaching is perfect, but my discernment is giving me a bright green light on this one, and I'd like to know if its wrong before adopting it.

It will definately be food for thought for any workman who seeks to rightly divide.

[Samuel]

I'll listen to them throughout the day, but I don't think it will be new to me. It seems to be the same opinion I hold. Its not new or rare, only because of today's pre-trib doctrine is it not taught much anymore, other than by a few.

I posted my view a while back elsewhere, and someone said that was never heard of the 70Th week being stopped, and restarted again. I told them, they had just not been listening.

It all hinges around a disputed interpretation of Daniel 9:26-27. Which was all fulfilled by Christ' first advent, and later the Roman army. Including the Abomination of Desolation. Now unless you want to call this a dualistic prophesy, and there is no evidence of it. As after this you will fine no mention, of more than 3-1/2 years in the Scripture. That's all that remains 3-1/2 years.

If you read all the prophesies in the Old Testament, about the day of the Lord, this does not leave the Church (body) going through tribulation. But as Paul stated the Son of Perdition must be revealed, before the coming Day of the Lord. And the Gathering (rapture) of the Church; begins that Day. So it is not pre-tribulation, but pre-wrath.

[BornAgainBibleBeliever514]

Hi Samuel, thanks for venturing to listen to the sermon and giving me your thoughts.

Its not new or rare, only because of today's pre-trib doctrine is it not taught much anymore, other than by a few.

Perhaps I didn't explain it accurately, but it sounds like you are thinking of a mid-trib rapture, at the abomination of desolation, but I could be misreading you.

What I understand Estep to be demonstrating is that something like ~220 days elapsed into the 70th week (Calvary to Acts) , then stopped when the gospel went to the Gentiles, and there are still 6.38 years to go, once the stopwatch starts again when the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, also when the rapture hits.

This would give ~2.88 years of tribulation left, then the abomination of desolation, then the 3.5 years of wrath, then the second coming.
As Estep points out, the Jews already made their covenant with the antichrist, or at least a type of him when they said:

"Jhn 19:15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar."

Just some thoughts on it, would like some more discussion. Not looking to argue with anyone or prove this point, just to find out if it makes sense to others too.

[Samuel]

I listened to the first hour, and will later listen to the rest. At this point, I don't think he is presenting it the way I had in mind.

I need to listen to some more, and then decide. But as of right now, this seems to be another angle, which I cannot say I have heard.

[BornAgainBibleBeliever514]

Its quite a good listen, and the first hour doesn't do the whole thing justice.
At one point he sort of breaks down and chuckles that its hard to teach the whole Bible in one sermon. Its like he's trying to pour a lake through a handheld funnel!

[BornAgainBibleBeliever514]

Nobody else interested ?

I might be the only guy who listens to preaching on my computer as a complete replacement for TV, movies, music and video games, hence I listen to preaching pretty much everyday.

This was the most revolutionary sermon I'd heard in a long time, thought others might enjoy too.

I just grabbed all 314 sermons by Dr. David Peacock, who is KJO, and seems really good.
Any comments on him?

[CKG]

Originally Posted by BornAgainBibleBeliever514

As Estep points out, the Jews already made their covenant with the antichrist, or at least a type of him when they said:

"Jhn 19:15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar."

Daniel 9
26. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27. And he (the prince that shall come) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the 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.

[CKG]

Originally Posted by BornAgainBibleBeliever514

As Estep points out, the Jews already made their covenant with the antichrist, or at least a type of him when they said:

"Jhn 19:15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar."

Daniel 9
26. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27. And he (the prince that shall come) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the 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 says 'the prince that shall come" shall confirm the covenant for one week but there's no record that this event has ever taken place so the full one week is still future.

[BornAgainBibleBeliever514]

Hi George and CKG!

My power supply blew up last week, and I've been totally busy this entire weekend, my church had a three-day revival, six sessions, which just wrapped up ( but not the revival itself, AMEN ! ). So I haven't been on the forum much this weekend.

First, Thanks for continuing on with my questions. George, apparently, your computer was working fine and either it or you is overclocked to put out such a long response
Frankly, I need some time to digest it before I can respond to it.
But gracefully, CKG's was shorter, and I can respond, not to imply George isn't graceful, but I'll have to muster up some crochety to talk to the old curmudgeon.


CKG, your point about the prince that shall come is indeed pointing to the future, but the chief priests accepting the Caesar as their king in John 19:15 happened hundreds of hears after the book of Daniel, so it doesn't really contradict, the time line is still intact.

John 19:15 could be the record of the covenant taking place.
Might I add, on the topic of time lines, When the 70 weeks started rolling, it transitioned from the 7 weeks for the rebuilding of the city into the threescore and two weeks until the Messiah should be cut off, without so much as a pause. Why shouldn't the 69th roll into the 70th without a pause?
After the resurrection and the ascension, the gospel being preached was the kingdom of heaven to the Jews.
The Body of Christ started with the resurrection, but only included Jews being added through apostolic signs and wonders, until the nation of Israel rejected God the Holy Spirit, and then the gospel changed to include the gentiles by grace through faith alone: the kingdom of God.
<<< Insert a big PRAISE GOD! here >>>

Seems logical to me that that's a big change, and the 70 weeks got paused there.
Remember that the Lord Jesus Christ is seated at the right hand of God's throne?

Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

And we always think He's been that way ever since the ascension, however:

Isa 3:13 The LORD standeth up to plead, and standeth to judge the people.

Since the gospel was still to the nation of Israel alone in those first 220 days of Acts (as this theory we're discussing suggests), then this makes sense with Stephen's stoning, where he:

Act 7:55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

Jesus stood up to plead and judge the nation of Israel at that moment, because their offer of the kingdom of heaven was still valid, God was still dealing with the Jews. This is evidenced by the working of apostolic signs and wonders, the early Acts doctrines of Baptismal regeneration, and the fact that right in Acts chapter 1, they needed to appoint a replacement, twelfth apostle, in order that the nation of Israel could legally be judged.

But right after Israel's "last chance" at Stephen's sermon to the Jews, (NOT in a replacement theology way, just their last chance to receive their Messiah by faith), then things really started changing. An Etheopian gets saved; Saul, of all people, gets converted (in a remarkable type of how the unbelieving Jew will be converted at the second coming); the apostolic signs and wonders begin to cease; and Peter receives the vision concerning unclean things.
The signs and wonders ceased in Jerusalem right then, and only happened a little bit since to convince unbelieving Jews that the gospel was now open to the gentiles.



Anyways, I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, or debate, I just want to discuss the theory that Greg Estep put forward in those sermons I linked to.
George, I know you are concerned about Estep as well, and so am I.
But the purpose of this thread is to discuss the theory, not Estep.
I'll answer your other post soon, and in no way am I mad at anyone over this, even if they don't agree. In fact, I want a discussion, so that together we can test the theory. I'm not dead set on it, if I'm wrong, I can change.
My interest is in the Truth, and I thank the Lord that you guys are here on this forum to give me someone to talk to about it.
I've asked the Lord about this theory, or revelation, whichever it turns out to be, that He show me the truth of it. My eyes and heart are towards Jesus, with a sincere desire to know what He wants me to know.

George, I appreciate your concerns, and I will answer you, but trust that my final authority isn't Estep or any other man, but rather its God's Holy Word.

Preliminary comment, George: Show me one human teacher/preacher that actually has 100% truth that I can learn from without having to chew the meat and spit out the bones...
If something is a heresy, I will spit it out and won't condone it. For example, I don't believe in the gap theory, but am I then to throw out everything God gave brother Ruckman because he also teaches the gap? That would be a waste!

Once more, this thread really really isn't about Estep, but about the theory he advanced in that particular sermon. I only reference him, because I haven't heard anyone else say it before. If he has other doctrines, or teachings done before or after this that are incorrect (that I never heard yet), then I will reject them. But if the 70 weeks time line theory is correct, I'm not going to throw it out.
Billy Graham used to preach some sound stuff (wayyyy back), but then he became a Romanist. Does that invalidate something truthful he said that a long time ago?

Thanks once again, brethren, for taking the time to talk with me about this theory (Daniel's 70 week time line). I'm not terribly interested in discussing Estep, but by proxy I guess we must, but I'd rather focus on the Bible and what it says about this prophecy.
I appreciate any and all concern anyone has for me, and I thank you for your efforts to talk about it. I'm sure that as long as we all seek Christ on every page, the body will be strengthened and edified.

[CKG]

Originally Posted by BornAgainBibleBeliever514

CKG, your point about the prince that shall come is indeed pointing to the future, but the chief priests accepting the Caesar as their king in John 19:15 happened hundreds of hears after the book of Daniel, so it doesn't really contradict, the time line is still intact.

John 19:15 could be the record of the covenant taking place.
Might I add, on the topic of time lines, When the 70 weeks started rolling, it transitioned from the 7 weeks for the rebuilding of the city into the threescore and two weeks until the Messiah should be cut off, without so much as a pause. Why shouldn't the 69th roll into the 70th without a pause?
After the resurrection and the ascension, the gospel being preached was the kingdom of heaven to the Jews.
The Body of Christ started with the resurrection, but only included Jews being added through apostolic signs and wonders, until the nation of Israel rejected God the Holy Spirit, and then the gospel changed to include the gentiles by grace through faith alone: the kingdom of God.
<<< Insert a big PRAISE GOD! here >>>

Seems logical to me that that's a big change, and the 70 weeks got paused there.
Remember that the Lord Jesus Christ is seated at the right hand of God's throne?

Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

And we always think He's been that way ever since the ascension, however:

Isa 3:13 The LORD standeth up to plead, and standeth to judge the people.

Since the gospel was still to the nation of Israel alone in those first 220 days of Acts (as this theory we're discussing suggests), then this makes sense with Stephen's stoning, where he:

Act 7:55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

Jesus stood up to plead and judge the nation of Israel at that moment, because their offer of the kingdom of heaven was still valid, God was still dealing with the Jews. This is evidenced by the working of apostolic signs and wonders, the early Acts doctrines of Baptismal regeneration, and the fact that right in Acts chapter 1, they needed to appoint a replacement, twelfth apostle, in order that the nation of Israel could legally be judged.

But right after Israel's "last chance" at Stephen's sermon to the Jews, (NOT in a replacement theology way, just their last chance to receive their Messiah by faith), then things really started changing. An Etheopian gets saved; Saul, of all people, gets converted (in a remarkable type of how the unbelieving Jew will be converted at the second coming); the apostolic signs and wonders begin to cease; and Peter receives the vision concerning unclean things.
The signs and wonders ceased in Jerusalem right then, and only happened a little bit since to convince unbelieving Jews that the gospel was now open to the gentiles.

Daniel 9
26. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27. And he (the prince that shall come) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the 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.

The Bible says HE (the prince that shall come) is the one confirming the covenant (Daniel 9:27) for one week. That has not happened yet. The one week doesn't start until HE (the prince that shall come) confirms the covenant. John 19:15 isn't a covenant. It takes two to make a covenant and John 19 says nothing about anyone confirming a covenant especially the Roman ruler. If the Jews were making a covenant in John 19, it was broken by Titus in 70 AD. Daniel 9 is very specific about how the 70 weeks are broken out. It says nothing about a starting of, stopping, and then restarting of the 70th week. It does tell us that "in the midst of the week he (the prince that shall come) shall cause the sacrifice and the 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 9:26 says the 69th week ends with Messiah being cut off and the last week doesn't start until he (the prince that shall come) confirms the covenant for one week. That's what the Bible says.