Post Number: 3
|Posted on Monday, March 14, 2016 - 11:27 pm: || |
Could this be about the ministry of Christ and good Friday?
Post Number: 1853
|Posted on Monday, March 21, 2016 - 12:31 pm: || |
In my opinion, that's reading a bit too much into this particular prophecy. While everything in the sanctuary pointed to Christ and His work, this passage isn't necessarily messianic in and of itself. This passage specifically predicts the Antiochus Epiphanes desecrating the Jewish temple and bringing a temporary halt to the sacrifices offered there. The temple is restored and sacrifices restarted when the Maccabees take back the temple. All Jewish scholars, that I know of, agree on this and it is this event that is commemorated by Hanukkah.
Most Christian scholars also agree on this, but some also believe there will be an even greater future fulfillment involving an Antichrist in last days.
It's difficult to interpret this as a prophecy about Jesus because it makes him either the villain of the passage (the one who defiles the temple and brings and end to the sacrifices) or the one who ends up restoring the sacrificial system. Neither one of these options fits very well which is one of the many reasons that the SDA interpretation falls apart in the broader context of the passage.
Post Number: 1854
|Posted on Monday, March 21, 2016 - 12:45 pm: || |
Okay after thinking about this, I want to modify my statement just a bit. As I understand it, some Dispensationalists who look for an even greater fulfillment of this passage in the future probably would be okay with Jesus being the one who restores the sacrificial system (in the future fulfillment) because they believe there will be animal sacrifices offered throughout the millennium in a restored temple. I had kind of forgotten about this particular twist when I was replying previously. I kind of have a problem with going back to animal sacrifices when Christ died once for all and fulfilled the shadows, but there certainly are many (in North America in particular) who strongly believe this.
Post Number: 47
|Posted on Monday, March 21, 2016 - 9:01 pm: || |
In my estimation the Dispensational interpretation, if it can even be called that, is as unbiblical as the SDA confusion of this passage.
Post Number: 15356
|Posted on Monday, March 21, 2016 - 11:59 pm: || |
While I have a problem understanding a return to animal sacrifices in a millennial kingdom, I certainly don't see this idea as being as unbiblical as the SDA confusion of Daniel 8:14. The book of Ezekiel certainly prophecies some sort of sacrifices. I don't know how to understand these things at this point, but I can't just write them off as meaningless. I suspend any interpretation for now; some things are simply not revealed until God brings about the fulness of time for them.
Adventism, however, can't find even a whisper of biblical foundation for its interpretation of Daniel 8:14. It is entirely fabricated and based on extra-biblical visions and conjectures and the endorsement of a false prophet.