Historical View Of Prophecy, Follow Up


You said, “There’s a very good reason why the New Testament doesn’t make more specific reference to the 70th Week of Daniel. As Gabriel pointed out to Daniel, it’s for his people and his holy city. The church is not involved and won’t be here.”

Question: Are you saying that the purpose/audience of the OT is Israel and the purpose/audience of the NT is for the Church?

Also, Jesus spoke in the Olivet Discourse about the coming destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem which was for Daniel’s people and his holy city, so not sure why it would follow that he wouldn’t also speak about the 70th week? The argument doesn’t seem to follow. What am I missing?


No, I’m not separating the Old Testament from the New. Speaking to the Church, Paul said that every thing that was written in the past is for our learning. (Romans 15:4) When he wrote that there was no New Testament so he was referring to the Old. I’m saying that Daniel’s 70th week is directed to Israel not the Church.

In the Olivet Discourse Jesus was responding to a request for the specific sign that would point to His coming. Referring to Daniel by name He pointed to the most critical sign in the 70th Week prophecy, the Abomination of Desolation, and directed His readers to understand it. In effect, he said that it would kick off the last half of the 70th Week, which He called The Great Tribulation. Prior to Matt. 24:21 the phrase Great Tribulation was unknown.

The Bible is meant to be understood as a single message. Parts of it are directed toward Israel, parts to the Church and parts are for the unbelieving gentiles, but the Lord expects all of us to be familiar with all of His Word.

By mentioning Daniel’s name in Matt. 24:15 He was pointing to the 70th week prophecy and telling all of us to understand it, even though it only applies directly to those who will be alive on Earth at the time, and is specifically intended for the believing remnant of Israel.