Support via Patreon | Subscribe

Header Image: The angel Gabriel coming to Daniel

Daniel's 70 Weeks

 

To fully understand Jesus's first, and indeed what is commonly called his "Second Coming," we need to understand the book of Daniel. This prophetic books give many details and glimpses into the future about coming kingdoms, rulers and above all, the Messiah. I'm going to be focussing on just one part of the book, chapter nine, often referred to as "Daniel's 70 Weeks". But just what is "Daniel's 70 Weeks" you might be asking as you read this. For those unfamiliar with Old Testament prophecy, it is a prophetic vision that Daniel was given from God, and interpreted by the angel Gabriel. You can read the prophecy in full below: 

Dan 9: 20-27 (NRSV)

While I was speaking, and was praying and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the Lord my God on behalf of the holy mountain of my God— while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom I had seen before in a vision, came to me in swift flight at the time of the evening sacrifice. He came and said to me, “Daniel, I have now come out to give you wisdom and understanding. At the beginning of your supplications a word went out, and I have come to declare it, for you are greatly beloved. So consider the word and understand the vision:

“Seventy weeks are decreed for your people and your holy city: to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place. Know therefore and understand: from the time that the word went out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the time of an anointed prince, there shall be seven weeks; and for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with streets and moat, but in a troubled time. After the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing, and the troops of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed. He shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall make sacrifice and offering cease; and in their place shall be an abomination that desolates, until the decreed end is poured out upon the desolator.”

Now, in this prophecy, it speaks of "weeks" (or literally, "sevens") – 70 in total, which if taken at face value would only be just over a year in length. This would be a very short time to do all that is spoken of by the angel — especially the rebuilding of a city!

Advertisement

The prophecy in Daniel gave the time span for the rebuilding of the city and even mentions that it will be in a "troubled time" as Gabriel told Daniel, which we can see happen in the book of Nehemiah in about 444 BC (around 94 years later):

Nehemiah 4:7-8

But when Sanballat and Tobiah and the Arabs and the Ammonites and the Ashdodites heard that the repairing of the walls of Jerusalem was going forward and the gaps were beginning to be closed, they were very angry, and all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and to cause confusion in it. (cf. Neh 4:16-18; Ezra 3:3) 

The is a prophetic metaphor for years – each day equals one year. You may wonder how the "sevens" or "week" equals 7 years, and by looking at other examples of prophetic language in the Bible, we can find two other places where one day is equal to one year in a prophetic sense: Ez 4:6 and Num 14:34. There's also two other places where one day is equalled with one thousand years: Ps 90:4 and 2 Pet 3:8 – unlike the previous examples, these aren't spoken of in a prophecy or vision as to have a specific time meaning, but are rather hyperbole to make a point, as the surrounding context of those verses will show.

Advertisement

If we were to calculate Daniel's prophecy based on 1000 years to each day, it would cover a timeframe of 70,000 years instead of 490 – which is just slightly ridiculous!

So lets break down the prophecy to see what's going on and being said:

"Seventy weeks are decreed for your people and your holy city" — 70 weeks, or 490 years (70x7), have been decreed by God as the time set for the following things to take place for the Jews and Jerusalem. These things can be split up into six parts:

  1. To finish the transgression
  2. To put an end to sin
  3. To atone for iniquity
  4. To bring in everlasting righteousness
  5. To seal both vision and prophet
  6. To anoint a most holy place (Heb. or "thing" or "one").

The angel Gabriel then gives a brief overview of how all of these things will happen, when the seventy week countdown begins, and the timescale for each part. The nation of Israel were basically on probation from God to get their act together; they have 490 years to get right with God, which is point 1. Then follows points 2-6. This prophecy is actually very precise and specific!

...from the time that the word went out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the time of an anointed prince, there shall be seven weeks; and for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with streets and moat, but in a troubled time. After the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing, and the troops of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.

I'm going to include this same quote from the NIV translation too (all other quotes are NRSV), as it keeps the original wording of "sevens" instead of using "weeks", which I find makes the grammar of the sentence flow a little better:

From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’  It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble.

This in total means that there are to be 483 years from when the word "goes out" to start restoration on Jerusalem. I point this out because of the way the English translations make the initial seven and the sixty-two sevens appear as separate events, as in the NRSV ("there shall be seven weeks; and for sixty-two weeks...") whereas the NIV quote doesn't come across that way, and neither does it in some other versions, such as the KJV. I looked this up in a Hebrew interlinear (since I can't read ancient Hebrew) and the flow of the sentence is more akin to the NIV, KJV etc., with a Sof passuk (ie. a full stop/period) marking the end of the sentence at the end of verse 25. But I'm not a Hebrew expert so I may be overlooking other aspects of grammar here.

What has this got to do with Jesus?

Advertisement

Now you may be asking, what has all this got to do with the "Second Coming?" Well, in order to fully understand when the return and "the end" is to take place, we must first understand the timing of Daniel's prophecy about the Messiah as his first coming and death, and then what's oftern thought to be his return are all wrapped up in this 70 weeks.

"From the time the word went out" is often related to King Cyrus, who gave the initial decree that allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem to begin rebuilding their temple (cf. 2 Chron. 36:23; Ezra 1:2-5). This is assumed because Cyrus was prophesied about by Isaiah 150-200 years before he was born. The amazing thing about this prophecy is that Isaiah actually named Cyrus and that he would do this! Check it out:

Isaiah 44:28

...who says of Cyrus, “He is my shepherd,
    and he shall carry out all my purpose”;
and who says of Jerusalem, “It shall be rebuilt,”
    and of the temple, “Your foundation shall be laid.”

Advertisement

But what is often overlooked in this is that Cyrus only gives a decree to rebuild the temple. We see this fulfilled in Ezra 3:8-13 which tells of when the foundations were laid after the Jews returned to Jerusalem following Cyrus's decree. Josephus, a first century Jewish historian, gives a nice little insight into this aspect of Jewish history (Antiquities 11:1,2) when he recounts that King Cyrus didn't realise this was written but when it was shown to him, he then had a desire to go about and fulfil it - despite being a Persian king who didn't even know nor worship the God of the Jews (Isa 45:5)!

So when did the seventy week clock begin ticking, if not with Cyrus? There are four decrees by three kings to the Jews concerning the rebuilding of the temple and the city, over a period of time: Cyrus, Darius and Artaxerxes (twice, although there is some dispute over whether there was a second king with the same name later on).

But is it the decree of Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:11-26) in which the Jewish people were allowed to go back to Jerusalem with the blessing of the king, so that they may restore it fully. This happened  in the 7th year of his reign (Ezra 7:8), which according to historical records, would have been 457 BC.

As a point of interest, there is another way in which these initial 7 weeks and 62 weeks can be read which could also explain why the "weeks" are phrased in two parts ("until the time of an anointed prince, there shall be seven weeks; and for sixty-two weeks..."). This first anointed price could well reference Cyrus (as "anointed" doesn't always mean the Messiah in the Saviour sense), and the "word" that went out could be a reference to Jeremiah's prophecy about the Babylonian captivity (which is during the time that Daniel was written). Jeremiah prophesied about Jerusalem about 587 BC, which would in fact be 49 years before Cyrus gave his decree, around 538 BC. The break in the time, and then continuing with "and for sixty-two weeks it shall be built..." would still begin when the rebuilding actually took place, in the reign of Artaxerxes, still leading us up until the time of Jesus. 

Linking into the New Testament

Advertisement

It is generally accepted that Jesus was baptised around 26 or 27 AD, given the timescales and points in history the authors of Scripture give us (eg. Luke 3:1). This now brings us from "the time that the word went out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem" right up until "after the sixty-two weeks" when the next "anointed one" appears in the prophecy, as when Jesus was baptised it was then he was anointed by the Holy Spirit to begin his ministry (Matt 3:16-17; Acts 10:38). As an aside for those reading who may not realise the connection: Messiah is the Hebrew word for "anointed," and Christ is the Greek version of that Hebrew word – hence Jesus Christ, or Jesus the Messiah (although, not all who were anointed were thought or expected to be the promised Saviour-Messiah).

This timescale brings us perfectly up to the 69 "weeks" of Daniel's prophecy, which is 483 years leaving only the remaining "week" to go.

There is a 'pause' here, similar to the first 7 weeks, in the way the angel Gabriel phrases the prophecy to Daniel in verse 26: "After the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing" – so the initial 483 years brings us up to the next appearance of the Anointed One, and then after this he shall be "cut off", ie. killed. Jesus was crucified after about 3 years of ministry.

Before getting into that last 7 year period, I'd just like to point out some aspects of the Gospels and Galatians which should hopefully make more sense now in light of Daniel's prophecy and its timing:

Gal 4:4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law... (emphasis mine)

Mark 1:14-15 Now after John was arrested, Jesus came to Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news.” (emphasis mine)

 Jesus began his ministry at that time because it was when the "time [was] fulfilled", referencing Daniel's prophecy (which would also "seal both vision and prophet" about this event; v.24) , which his original audience would have understood. The Jewish people had that time while Jesus was with them to repent and turn back to God and enter his eternal kingdom which was promised to the Messiah – the kingdom which Daniel also prophesied about in Daniel chapter two, that would be founded not by human hands, and which would last forever. That was the time which God had given his people, and those who rejected it would suffer what was prophesied about in the final "week".

Dan 2:44

And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall this kingdom be left to another people. It shall crush all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever

2 Peter 1:11

For in this way, entry into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be richly provided for you

Jn 18:36

Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not from this world. If my kingdom were from this world, my followers would be fighting to keep me from being handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not from here.

The Final Week

There is some contention about this final seven years. The details about what happens during that time are divided in half: a ruler will come to destroy for the first half (3.5 years), and then war will ensue until the end, which will also be this ruler's end too when the final 3.5 years are complete.

Some say that it is still yet to come, in some far-flung future, as the "prophetic clock" stopped when Jesus was killed. I suspect if you've ever been taught anything about the "End Times," that is what you believe or expect, especially if you have read or watched the Left Behind books or films which are based heavily on a futurist interpretation of Daniel, Revelation and the Olivet Discourse.

But it may surprise you to know that this isn't the only interpretation or school of thought, despite how popular this view is. I used to believe that this was what was going to happen, that it could happen at any moment as "Jesus is coming soon!" along with great tribulation and "armageddon" as people often proclaim. But after studying this topic for quite some time now, I've found that it doesn't reconcile with what the Scriptures say, or what Jesus taught, nor what history shows, and thus have had to adjust my views.

Advertisement

Lets have a look at what is to happen in the final seven years:

Dan 9:26-27

After the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing, and the troops of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed. He shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall make sacrifice and offering cease; and in their place shall be an abomination that desolates, until the decreed end is poured out upon the desolator.

 Now some say that since Jesus' ministry was about 3 and a half years long, that this was the final week and why the sacrifices were ceased. On the face of it this seems to make sense, as the sacrificial death of Jesus was the be the final sacrifice for sins for all time in the eyes of God, thus any other animal sacrifices aren't accepted. While Jesus's death did fulfil other aspects of this prophecy: "an anointed one shall be cut off  ... to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness" which the New Testament authors were clearly aware of and saw fulfilled in Jesus, I won't write them all out here but will give references – John 1:29; 1 Cor 1:30;  2 Cor 5:17-19,21; Romans 3:21-22 ; Romans 5:17-19; Heb 13:12; Heb 9:15;  1 Peter 2:24; Col 1:20, plus many more.

Advertisement

I will quote one passage though, which I think summarises the fulfillment of Jesus in Daniel's prophecy:

Heb 9:26b-25

But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to remove sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Not only does this state that the early Christians saw Jesus as being the ultimate sacrifice to remove sins for all time, and give those who believe in him everlasting righteousness, but that they also recognised the times as being "the end of the age". I will be going more into that topic later in this series. 

Advertisement

So while I do see a fulfillment here in part, and agree with the New Testament authors that Jesus's sacrifice did put an end to the need for animal sin sacrifices, however I don't believe that this is what Dan 9:26-27 is all about, as the Jews will have continued to sacrifice in the temple as they always did, even after Jesus's death.

No, this part is also what Jesus prophesied about in Matt 24:15 "So when you see the desolating sacrilege standing in the holy place, as was spoken of by the prophet Daniel" and also in verse 30, "they will see ‘the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven’" which is also a reference to the book of Daniel chapter seven: "As I watched in the night visions, I saw one like a son of man coming with the clouds of heaven."

Here, Jesus also says that the temple will be destroyed too, which is what this final week in Daniel is also saying: "the prince ... shall destroy the city and the sanctuary" – contrast this with Matt 24:1-2.

Some reading this now may be thinking of something else Jesus said, "But about that day and hour no one knows" — this can still be true despite the preciseness of Daniel's prophecy, simply because the 70 weeks appear to have some time breaks which leave it open to happen only when certain events are in play – by which point the signs of what's coming will be obvious yet still not definite.

Advertisement

"After the sixty-two weeks ... the troops of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city..." – there's an indefinite period of time here, which is why Jesus told his disciples, "when you see all these things, you know that he is near..."

I'll be discussing Matthew 24-25 in more detail in Part 3 of this series; the next part will be looking at what exactly "coming on the clouds of heaven" means in terms of it's usage in the Old Testament prophetic texts, and how the disciples and those listening to Jesus would have understood it, as all these phrases link the New to the Old Testament. As 1st century Jews who knew their Scriptures, they would have undoubtedly have heard it differently to how we do in a 21st century context with all of our "End Times" baggage and bias.

 

Feel free to leave a comment below and share your thoughts!

Advertisement

 


 

Further reading: 

 

Contribute on Patreon

Enjoying this? Consider contributing regular gifts for this content on Patreon.
* Patreon is a way to join your favorite creator's community and pay them for making the stuff you love. You can simply pay a few pounds per month or per post that a creator makes, and in return receive some perks!

Subscribe to Updates
Order my new book today from Amazon or fortydays.co.uk

Subscribe to:

Have something to say? Leave a comment below.

Leave a comment   Like   Back to Top   Seen 1K times   Liked 0 times

Subscribe to Updates

If you enjoyed this, why not subscribe to free email updates and join over 215 subscribers today!

Order my new book today from Amazon or fortydays.co.uk

Subscribe to Blog updates

Enter your email address to be notified of new posts:

Subscribe to:

Alternatively, you can subscribe via RSS RSS

‹ Return to Blog

All email subscriptions must be confirmed to comply with GDPR.

I've already subscribed / don't show me this again

Recent Posts

The Relationship Between Jesus and Sophia

| 22nd July 2021 | Christology

The Relationship Between Jesus and Sophia

Now you may be wondering about the title, or thinking “who the heck is Sophia??” — well, bear with me, and all will be revealed. It’s not as sinister or weird as it may first appear. I saw a post on my Instagram feed the other day that just got me a little riled up. I’ll admit it, I can be a little short-tempered at times, especially around the subject of Jesus and seeing him/the Christian faith misrepresented to such a degree that it could mislead others down the wrong path. I don’t normally write responses to things like this, but I felt this one deserved it, mainly just to add some clarity to a somewhat confusing topic, and so there’s a place I (or you, if you fancy sharing my posts!) can point people to if this type of ideology is going to spread. Here’s the Instagram post in question, but it’s the caption below it that got to me. I’ll quote the caption below, too, in case the embedded post doesn't work (here’s a direct link too). View this post on Instagram A post shared by Adam Ericksen (@adamericksen)   Jesus had two moms.Their names areMary and Sophia.You’ve heard about Mary, but do you know about Sophia?Sophia is the Greek word for God’s Wisdom.And God’s Wisdom is a Woman. Her name is Sophia.Sophia was there at the beginning of creation. She birthed the world into existence.Deuteronomy 32 says that God gave birth to the people. That was Sophia.Christians began to associate Sophia with the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is Sophia. She is the divine feminine who is the Third Person of the Trinity.Sophia is our divine Mother.God is She who loves you.❤️❤️❤️ — via @adamericksen A lot of the comments under that post seemed to find it quite affirming in some ways, others were confused as they’d never heard this before (and rightly so) but were keen to look into it. There were also a lot of references to a single author, and book, called, She Who Is, by Elizabeth A. Johnson, where this idea seemed to have originated in some form. In fact, the majority of the comments were wanting to explore this idea in more depth. So, I think maybe there’s something to be said there for the lack of female representation in the Church if it garnered this type of response, but I also thought if people are this taken by the idea, I wanted to write something to offer some Biblical and historical views on this “Sophia”, as she isn’t a new concept at all. The caption under the Instagram post sounds nice, but it’s ever so slightly off-kilter that it misrepresents everything. Let’s look at the claims line by line: Jesus had two moms.Their names areMary and Sophia. Well, not much to say here yet, but… nope. You’ve heard about Mary, but do you know about Sophia? Well, yes, I do. Maybe you, dear reader, know as well. But I began to question whether the author of the caption did. Sophia is the Greek word for God’s Wisdom. OK, finally. Getting to some facts and less conjecture. Although I would clarify that “sophia” (σοφία) is simply the Greek word for “wisdom”, not specifically “God’s wisdom” (or a name), per se. It’s a minor point though, I’m just nit-picking now. Sophia was there at the beginning of creation. She birthed the world into existence. Right, so here’s where it gets a little “squiffy”. It’s true that Wisdom, or “Sophia”, was there at the very beginning before anything was created, and that she stood beside God during creation. We can see all of this in the book of Proverbs, and it’s all very interesting. I’m sure you’ll notice parallels with John 1. But was this Sophia a separate entity from who we normally think of as being there in the beginning? Who created everything — the Word or the Holy Spirit? Proverbs 8:22–31The Lord created me at the beginning of his work,the first of his acts of long ago.Ages ago I was set up...

An Examination of Conditional Immortality (Part Two)

| 03rd July 2021 | Hell

An Examination of Conditional Immortality (Part Two)

Welcome to Part Two of my study and examination of Conditional Immortality (aka Annihilationism). If you missed part one, you can read that one here. As with part one, this will be a long post as there is still much ground to cover before we can really grasp the bigger picture about what Scripture teaches. So with that said, I’ll pick right up where we left off. In part one, I covered a lot of New Testament texts, a few Old Testament passages, plus a look at what some of the earliest church leaders also wrote on the topic to the early church. In this one, we will be looking at a few more Old Testament examples and how they relate to the imagery used in Revelation, amongst other things. Unquenchable Fire and Undying Worms What of unquenchable fire and undying worms? Do these phrases really mean that the fuel of the fire and the worms must last forever and ever? We have a few references to shed some light on the meaning of these phrases which we can examine below: Ezekiel 20:46–48Mortal, set your face toward the south, preach against the south, and prophesy against the forest land in the Negeb; say to the forest of the Negeb, Hear the word of the Lord: Thus says the Lord God, I will kindle a fire in you, and it shall devour every green tree in you and every dry tree; the blazing flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from south to north shall be scorched by it. All flesh shall see that I the Lord have kindled it; it shall not be quenched. So, in our first example, Ezekiel was obviously not prophesying that the forests of Negeb would burn forever and never go out. Instead, fire that “shall not be quenched” is used to mean fire that cannot be interrupted or stopped in its destructive purpose. No one is able to stop a fire like this until it has run its course, or it is stopped by something greater, which is what the word “quench” actually means. It is an action performed by something external which stops the flames — what it doesn’t mean is a fire burning out naturally once it consumes its fuel. The fire will continue regardless. Jeremiah 17:27But if you do not listen to me, to keep the sabbath day holy, and to carry in no burden through the gates of Jerusalem on the sabbath day, then I will kindle a fire in its gates; it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem and shall not be quenched. Here is another reference to an unquenchable fire consuming something and not being stopped even after the object of destruction has been “devour[ed]”. The image is one of a fire which rages on and on, even after everything in it is burnt up and destroyed. Now let’s move onto the “undying worms” and see how that phrase is used. In the New Testament we see this phrase used in Mark 9:47–48, which originally comes from Isaiah, and also a similar theme in Jeremiah. Isaiah 66:24And they shall go out and look at the dead bodies of the people who have rebelled against me; for their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh. A little earlier in Isaiah 66 (v.16) we see that God executes judgement with fire and “by his sword, on all flesh”, and that the dead will be many, ending the chapter with the verse quoted above. Jeremiah picks up on a similar theme of God’s judgement, people being killed to such an extent there won’t be room to bury them. This is also where we find a reference to Gehenna, or the valley of the son of Hinnom, as its name means (also called Topheth), in chapters 7 and 19. The concept of Gehenna as a place of punishment is then picked up by Jesus in Matthew 10:28, which he uses in a more eschatological sense. Jeremiah 7:32–33Therefore, the days are surely coming, says the Lord, when it will no more be called Topheth, or the valley of the son of Hinnom, but the valley of Slaughter: for they will bury in Topheth until there is no more room. The corpses of this people will be food for the birds of the air, and for the animals of ...

Does Easter Have Pagan Origins?

| 22nd March 2021 | Easter

Does Easter Have Pagan Origins?

Much like any major Christian holiday, there are the usual arguments and accusations about how it’s all just pagan festivities with a “Christian mask”. Easter is no different, and usually gets hit the hardest over its so-called “pagan roots”, or in the month or so preceding it, Lent being some “invention of the Catholic Church”. Table of Contents The Lenten Fast The Easter controversy and why we celebrate it when we do Is the Name “Easter” really the Anglo-Saxon goddess Eostre? Chocolate eggs and bunnies? Concluding Thoughts Further Reading and Sources I like to try and observe Lent, as it is one of the most ancient customs in the Church, which led me to researching its origins, along with the Easter celebration, to see where they have their basis. Unsurprisingly, it turns out that much of the accusations against Easter and Lent as “pagan” are either fabricated or is just misinformation. So let’s examine the different aspects of Easter to see how we got from Passover to resurrection, to little bunnies and chocolate eggs! The Lenten Fast A forty day fast prior to Easter has been a long established practice within the Church dating back to possibly within the first century. This is well established from ancient letters we still have available, such as from Irenaeus in the second century: For some consider themselves bound to fast one day, others two days, others still more. In fact, others fast forty days … And this variety among observers [of the fasts] did not have its origin in our time, but long before in that of our predecessors.–Irenaeus (c.180) Notice here that Irenaeus mentions that this was a practice passed onto them by their “predecessors”, a term often used in conjunction with the Apostles themselves, or those who immediately came after them, putting the origins of this Lenten fast much earlier than when Irenaeus wrote in 180, and also possibly having Apostolic origin. The Easter controversy and why we celebrate it when we do Back in the days of the early church, there arose a controversy around the celebration of Easter (or “pascha” as it was known then). But no, before your imagination runs wild, it wasn’t quite as exciting as it sounds and still had nothing to do with “paganism”. The dispute was over which day to hold the festival! Yep, the controversy really is as mundane as that. In fact, it was one of the issues raised at the council of Nicea to be discussed and hopefully settled, and is officially known as the Quartodeciman (lit. Fourteenth) controversy/dispute. It’s called this due to the issue being over whether the Easter celebration should follow the Jewish pattern of Passover on the 14 Nisan or not and simply follow the days of the week (Friday and Sunday). It became a bigger issue when the not only the Jewish community of believers wanted to follow this method, but when the Gentile Asian communities also claimed that their Quartodeciman practice was of Apostolic origin! It was a disciple of John the Apostle, and bishop of Smyrna, called Polycarp (c.69–c.155) who followed this practice in one of the seven churches of Asia as well as Melito, bishop of Sardis (died c.180). Irenaeus tells us that, in his old age, Polycarp visited the bishop of Rome to discuss this matter with him as the Roman church had diverged from the Quartodeciman custom and celebrated the resurrection according to the day Jesus rose instead: Sunday (the first day of the week). We gain an important glimpse about this whole dispute from Irenaeus though, when he tells us of the meeting between Polycarp and Anicetus: Neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp not to observe what he had always observed with John the disciple of our Lord, and the other apostles with whom he had associated; neither could Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it, as he said that he ought to follow the customs of the presbyters that had preceded him. … And they parted from each...

BOOK REVIEW: Four Views on Hell 2nd edition

| 17th March 2021 | Book Review

BOOK REVIEW: Four Views on Hell 2nd edition

This is a guest post by David Jakubovic. The views are that of the author and don't necessarily reflect the views of That Ancient Faith. A 20 year update of the 1996 book by the same name, this slim volume (211 pages) is a helpful cross-section of current evangelical thought on Final Punishment, sampling Denny Burk on Eternal Conscious Torment (ECT hereafter), John Stackhouse Jr on Conditional immortality (CI hereafter), Robin Parry on Christian Universalism (CU hereafter) and Jerry Walls on (a Protestant) Purgatory. Preston Sprinkle pens both Introduction and Conclusion, plus there are Scripture, Author and Subject indices. The Introduction sets the scene, listing the 3 historically available views along with speculation about post-mortem purgatorial sanctification, before clarifying that it is not the existence of hell that is here in doubt: “They agree that hell exists, but they differ on what this hell is like.” (11) Sprinkle lists verses used by all 4 views, then introduces the academic background of the 4 essayists. He finally issues a substantial challenge to the reader: “You, of course, will probably agree with only one of the following essays and disagree with the other three. But keep in mind: disagreement is not refutation. We must be able to refute the evidence of the views that we disagree with and then provide more compelling biblical evidence for the view that we uphold.” (15) Burk kicks off Chapter One (‘Eternal Conscious Torment’) with a startling parable. He visualizes a man torturing creatures in increasing order of complexity and dignity: first torturing a grasshopper, a frog, a bird, a puppy and finally a human baby. Burk states: “In each of the scenarios above, the ‘sin’ is the same – pulling the legs off. The only difference in each of these scenarios is the one sinned against…The seriousness of the sin is not measured merely by