Is the Seventieth Week of Daniel Still to Come?




Jesus confirmed the covenant with Israel for a special period of seven years.  He originally came to natural Israel. He sent His disciples as follows: Jesus ministered to Israel during His 3.5 years of ministry.  And then He was "cut off."  This implies that His life ended before the natural span would have ended it.  What about the remaining 3.5 years?  According to Daniel, the disciples must have continued preaching for the next 3.5 years solely to the Israelites.  And they did!

Jesus told them to go into all the world and preach, but this did not occur until after 3.5 years following the cross.  In fact, Jesus said to begin preaching in Jerusalem, then to Judea, and then Samaria and finally to the uttermost parts of the world.  On the day of Pentecost Peter preached to the Jew, first, the great message of Acts 2:38.  No gentiles were ministered to as of that time.

In person, Christ came to Israel during the first half of the "week" -- three and a half years.  Through the disciples ( for the three and a half years that remained), his message still went to Israel, "the Lord worketh with them, and confirming the word with signs following" (Mk 16:20).

But when Cornelius was saved in Acts 10 the picture changed.  Acts does not give us the date this occurred, but careful following of the events in Acts tells us that this was the end of the latter 3.5 years of ministry.  Only then did the Gospel fully begin to be preached to the gentiles.


If indeed, and it is beyond doubt that it is so, Jesus was the "he" of Daniel 9:27 and the seventy weeks are therefore fulfilled totally, there are great implications that should affect our views of prophecy, moving us to change them.

The idea of a future time period in which God can only deal with the Israelites due to a seven-year period designated for them and them only, not yet fulfilled, demands that the church be not present.  Futurists teach that the church cannot be here during a future period of seven years because Daniel's 70th week has not yet occurred.  And, therefore, there must a be future fulfillment of this period of time.  And when it occurs, it is for Israel, Daniel's people.  That means the church must not be present in the world during that time.  It is this conclusion that is the basis for the pretribulation rapture theory.  This doctrine proposes that the church will be removed before the 70th week of Daniel commences.

But this study proves that there is no future seven-year tribulation period.  It proves that the idea of a 70th week of Daniel not yet fulfilled is incorrect.    Therefore, God is finished with Israel, and is solely working in one work in the church.  


Futurists believe that God still deals with natural Israel as His people as He did in pre-cross times.  And this fits nicely into their pretribulation rapture theory in which only Israel is dealt with apart from the Church during their future 70th week of Daniel.

However, to think that God will work with Israel apart from the new birth experience and the church as if they were His people is to propose very false notions of the Gospel, and it is to deny the following.

After Calvary, the only way to have relationship with God was to obey Acts 2:38.  You cannot be of God in any sense of the word unless you obey the Gospel.  This message was dealt to the Jews alone for 3.5 more years.  But God knew they would reject the message as a whole, and turned to the gentiles at that point.  God foretold that natural Israel would only receive attention for 3.5 years after Christ put an end to sacrifices.  Spiritual Israel was the Church.  And unless natural Israel became part of spiritual Israel, then natural Israel was no longer God's people.  The Gospel was preached solely to natural Israel for the first 3.5 years after the cross.  But it was preached to them that they would become true Israel, or the true Israel of God, the CHURCH.

Though Israel is naturally descendent from Abraham, Paul clearly taught the following:

Paul said that Abraham is father to those who believe, and is not limited as father to those who are physically descendent from him.  It seems there may be some room here to think that those who are naturally descended from Abraham are still considered his children.  It seems we read that not only are the naturally-descendent folks his children, but also those who are not naturally descendent, who believe as he believed, are his children.  That means the Gentiles can say they are descendants of Abraham if they believe the Gospel.

Some will read verse 12 and stop there and say, "See?  God has two peoples.  Naturally-descendent Israel, and we Gentiles who have believed the Gospel."

Notice verse 12:

They intimate that natural Israel need not obey the Gospel and yet still be considered a child of Abraham.  They say Paul proposed that those who are of Abraham are those of the circumcision and also those who walk in the faith of Abraham.  So there are two groups.  Those who walk by faith and those who do not, who are simply descended from Abraham and still keep circumcision and the law.  Not so.  Keep reading verse 13.

Does Paul say that natural Israel need not believe the Gospel to still be considered God's people?

The entire Promise to Abraham was through righteousness of faith.  If natural Israel does not have that righteousness of faith, they are not heirs to the promise.  Verse 11 said that Abraham is father to "all them that believe."  Paul intended us to understand that, yes, the natural Israel who were circumcised can believe and be heir to the promise, but we who are not circumcised can also be heirs if we believe.  It is to all them that believeAll them.  Circumcision is not the deciding factor.  Faith is.  This does not say that only the gentiles have to believe and the natural Israelites do not have to believe, but rather it says to "all who believe" is the promise given -- including natural Israel -- if they believe.  So it only follows that if natural Israel disbelieves the Gospel they are no longer heir.

Then Paul clarifies it even more when he said:

It must be by righteousness of faith that makes the promise effective.   And the only faith that grants righteousness is faith in Christ as our righteousness. The law could not do what God did through Jesus Christ.  It could not put the intended righteousness into us.  But only through Jesus Christ could this be, and was, done.  If the Jews do not accept Christ's work on the cross to condemn sin, they are under law alone.  And if they are under law, the law cannot do what God did through Christ.  So they are yet unrighteous.

Therefore, Natural Israel cannot be heirs since the time of Calvary if they have not believed the Gospel of Christ through Whom God condemned sin in the flesh that we might have the righteousness required.

We conclude that God cannot deal with natural Israel apart from the manner He dealt with the Church, for His people, the children of Abraham, are only considered to be those who have faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  All those who believe, alone, are the children of Abraham.  Before Christ, God led natural Israel towards the advent of Christ.  They were His people only while they followed the Word of God given during Old Testament times.  When they disobeyed Old Covenant word and commandment, they were cut off.  Not until they repented and obeyed the Old Covenant again did He work with them.

Since the Old Covenant is vanished away forever, He will not honour those who honour it any more.  Since the New Covenant has come, only obedience to it determines who is God's people.

Jeremiah prophesied of the new covenant to come.

Hebrews commented upon this. The Old Covenant was ready to vanish away as soon as it was foretold that a new covenant would come in Jeremiah's day.  It was immediately rendered "old" the very moment Jeremiah noted a New Covenant to come.

Hebrews speaks of the Old Covenant as a "has been" by using terms in the past tense, rather than present tense terms.

It is no longer looked upon for it "was" but not "is." Priesthood and law changed.  God no longer honours it.

If Israel were to turn to the Law again and reinstate animal sacrifices, God would not honour them as He did during Old Testament times when they fell away from covenant practices and reinstated animals sacrifices.  Why?  If Israel fell away from animal sacrifice in the Old Testament times they could be reinstated and brought back to Him upon reconvening the animal sacrifices.  But that is not the case any longer.  Since Jesus has come, God's entire law has changed and priesthood has also changed -- forever!   He will not revert to Old Testament Law again.  There is still Law, but not the Old Testament Law.

It is utter blasphemy to think that God will honour the animals sacrifices that may recommence in Israel in these last days.  And to think that the clock will start ticking for Israel again when they sacrifice more animals is an abomination to even consider.  This is the danger of the aspect of pretribulation proponents who believe God will honour Old Testament sacrifices again.  Many of the Pretribulation proponents do not believe that, but some do.  This is the danger of pretribulation doctrine and the futurist 70th week of Daniel doctrine.  Ultimately it undermines the blood of Jesus and renders it as not being the last and final sacrifice acceptable to God.

To say that the blood of Jesus was offered for the sins of all people for all time until Israel starts animal sacrifices again and the church is removed, is to blaspheme the power of the blood of Jesus.  Did His blood merely remove all but seven years' worth of Old Testament sacrifice?  Did Christ fulfill all but seven years of Mosaic Law?  


We read of "saints" during the tribulations of Revelation's account, who face persecution from the beast and resist the mark of the beast.

To say that there will be tribulation saints during the time of a "church-less" tribulation period, in which the church does not exist due to having been raptured away beforehand, is to likewise come very close to blasphemy.  To say that there will be saints after the cross of Christ, who are not part of the church is to say that there is another plan of God outside of the Gospel for salvation.

The Church is comprised of all those who were born again and brought out from sin.  They are delivered from the world and have come out of darkness.  Church means "called out ones".  And for one to be saint of God after the cross, one has to have been been called out of darkness.  And if they are "called out" then they are "CHURCH", for that is what the term means!  Therefore, its impossible for there to exist "called-out-of-darkness" people of God outside the church, for anyone called-out is the "Church" by definition.

If anyone is called out of sin by God, it will have been through Jesus Christ's death on the cross.  And that calling-out makes them part of the Church.  It is that simple.  If you are saved from sin and darkness, then you are in the Church.  And there is only way to be saved from sin and darkness -- that is deliverance through Jesus Christ and obedience to the Gospel.  How can there be "saints" since Calvary, who are brought out of sin and outside the church?   Saints are holy ones.  The only "holy ones" whom God recognizes today are those in Christ -- in the Church.

There can be no other plan of salvation, because Jesus completed the work.  No more work needs to be done aside from the cross.  The work could never be completed by Old Testament law, therefore another and better plan was possible.  That better plan was the Gospel.  But since the Gospel, there can be no better plan.  There can be no other plan.  The old law is vanished away and is presently nullified.  The book of Hebrews taught so.

We are called SAINTS IN LIGHT in Colossians.  And we read that saints are the called out ones.

Being called out of darkness is what CHURCH means.  CALLED OUT ONES.  And Paul inseparably ties the thought of being a saint with the kingdom of Jesus Christ. That saints and the church are one and the same body!

The idea of a future 70th week of Daniel demands that we see a people called saints of God who are not born of water and Spirit and have nothing to do with the Gospel.  To say they do obey the Gospel and are delivered into Christ's light out of darkness is to say they are part of the church, for the term Church means "CALLED OUT ONES."  But this contradicts pretribulation rapture theory in every sense!

What is the truth?

The truth is that the 70 weeks of Daniel are all fulfilled.  Tribulation has and will be since the Church was born and until the rapture of the church at the end of the world.  There will be no future seven-year tribulation period.  Tribulation has and will continue and will increase in intensity towards the end.  But there is no special time of tribulation apart from what is already.  Present tribulation will only increase.

The church will meet antichrist, for what element will antichrist be against if there is nothing "of Christ" in this world?  Only the Church is of Christ.  Nothing else is of Christ.

The implications of a future 70th week of Daniel are dangerous.  Let us stand on the truths of the New Testament, base our understanding of prophecy on their stated facts first, and know that the Church is the only people of God today, and all those who wish to know God, including natural Israel, must be born again.  Jesus told the Jew, Nicodemus, "You must be born again."  Why?  Had Nicodemus not been born again later, when the true Israel of God, the Church,  would have been born, he would have been alienated from the commonwealth of God.