Sir Isaac Newton was a premil historicist, very interesting person and commentator. Here's his works in a nutshell.
http://www.historicist.com/newton/nutshell.htm
http://www.historicist.com/newton/nutshell.htm
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
Newton's Dark SecretsAlannah said:I don't have a lot of time, so I didn't read the article, but I know he spent most of his life trying to prove there was a God. He has many journals unpublished about this. Funny thing is I watched about that on PBS, perhaps from NOVA I'm not sure....
vic said:Newton's Dark SecretsAlannah said:I don't have a lot of time, so I didn't read the article, but I know he spent most of his life trying to prove there was a God. He has many journals unpublished about this. Funny thing is I watched about that on PBS, perhaps from NOVA I'm not sure....
I saw that same show a few times too! He has some interesting belifs about the "Trinity". He was even an alchemist.
A VERY interesting man indeed. :angel:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/newton/
I have a hard time reading anything on pbs.
vic said:Anyone care to see Newton's interpretation of Daniel 9?
http://www.historicist.com/newton/newtonprophecy.htm
If my math is correct, that is actually 70 1/2 weeks, no?Newton felt that the 70 weeks of Daniel were completed with the death of Christ around the year 33 or 34 A.D. In addition to the completion of these 490 years, Newton also believed there was a significance to the 7 weeks, 62 weeks, 1 week and 1/2 of a week.
Let's see... 1948 + 49 = 1997 Did I miss His Second Coming?... The 49 years began on May 14, 1948 with the call to return and rebuild Israel. Those 49 years will end very shortly when Jesus comes as Prince to take His bride.
This is a problem for me. I need to find out if there really was seven years between His crucifixion and Cornelius. I also am not making the connection concerning the "one week" covenant.Newton's interpretation of Daniel's 1 week is rather brief:
"Yet shall he confirm the covenant with many for one week. He kept it, notwith standing his death, till the rejection of the Jews, and calling of Cornelius and the Gentiles in the seventh year after his passion."
Like a growing number of Bible scholars, Sir Isaac Newton felt that the 1 week portion of Daniel's prophecy related to Jesus Christ and not the Anti-christ, as modern day Bible scholars teach.
This just doesn't harmonize with his 1/2 week explanation.Did Jesus confirm His covenant of love and mercy with Daniel's people for 7 years? According to Newton, there was a 7 year period between the death of Christ and the time the Gospel was sent out to the Gentiles at the calling of Cornelius. If this is correct, then this could be the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy.
The one week period above is contiguous, but half of it is in the near future? Am I reading this correctly?Newton's interpretation of Daniel's half a week is also quite brief:
"And in half a week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease; that is, by the war of the Romans upon the Jews: which war, after some commotions, began in the 13th year of Nero , A.D. 67, in the Spring when Vespasian with an army invaded them; and ended in the second year of
Vespasian, A.D. 70, in autumn, September 7 when Titus took the city, having burnt the Temple 27 days before: so that it lasted three years and an half."
I believe Newton is including, actually adding the 3 1/2 years of the Jewish revolt and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD to his prophecy.Quote:
Newton felt that the 70 weeks of Daniel were completed with the death of Christ around the year 33 or 34 A.D. In addition to the completion of these 490 years, Newton also believed there was a significance to the 7 weeks, 62 weeks, 1 week and 1/2 of a week.
If my math is correct, that is actually 70 1/2 weeks, no?
Looking at this from a different (historical) perspective, this could certianly be Daniel's 70th. week.Quote:
Newton's interpretation of Daniel's 1 week is rather brief:
"Yet shall he confirm the covenant with many for one week. He kept it, notwith standing his death, till the rejection of the Jews, and calling of Cornelius and the Gentiles in the seventh year after his passion."
Like a growing number of Bible scholars, Sir Isaac Newton felt that the 1 week portion of Daniel's prophecy related to Jesus Christ and not the Anti-christ, as modern day Bible scholars teach.
This is a problem for me. I need to find out if there really was seven years between His crucifixion and Cornelius. I also am not making the connection concerning the "one week" covenant.
Mark 14:24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.
Is this really the covenant Daniel wrote about?
Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm a covenant with the many for one week. And in the middle of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease. And on a corner of the altar will be abominations that desolate, even until the end. And that which was decreed shall pour out on the desolator. (LITV)
The thing here is Jesus' death didn't cause a cease in sacrifices, did it? What about the abominations? Jesus could have never caused abominations.
Heh, I wrote contiguous, but I think I meant to write continous. Anyway, from a historical perstective, this also makes sense.Quote:
Newton's interpretation of Daniel's half a week is also quite brief:
"And in half a week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease; that is, by the war of the Romans upon the Jews: which war, after some commotions, began in the 13th year of Nero , A.D. 67, in the Spring when Vespasian with an army invaded them; and ended in the second year of
Vespasian, A.D. 70, in autumn, September 7 when Titus took the city, having burnt the Temple 27 days before: so that it lasted three years and an half."
The one week period above is contiguous, but half of it is in the near future? Am I reading this correctly?
First off, no one is over intellectualizing. We are hashing things out here. Whether you choose to believe it or not, the view in question here was around for hundreds of years, way before the "sacred" pretribulation view and was actually held by many Reformers. Please do the study on the history of futurism, especially the hustory of PreTrib.To be honest here, I have no idea what you guys are talking about, other than over intellectualizing it. I might not have a doctorate behind my, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure what the Bible has to say about end-times.
LOL, Jason, I just caught that!JM said:G, what is "BP" and who is Ike?
Dude! I keep telling you, you really need to research and study the history of PreTribulationism. Are you afraid of what you might discover?golfjack said:As far as I am concerned, you guys are out there in left field. And I certainly wouldn't study a book written by a reformer. I will stick to the Charismatic views on end-times.
May God bless, Golfjack