The Seventy 'Sevens' of Daniel. It's Not What You Think It Is.

 Most of us who have studied end time prophecies are very familiar with the seventy ‘sevens’ of Daniel 9. It is one of the ‘go-to’ chapters in the Bible that scholars in the modern era use to determine end time events. Most popular interpretations teach that this prophecy, particularly  the 70th week, is where we get the scriptural basis for the seven year Great Tribulation.

But is that really what the 70 sevens are about?

When reading anything in Scripture it's important to understand, ‘a text without a context is a pretext.’ It is also vital to make a serious attempt to understand the original audience and how they would have understood it.

The context

Chapter 9 of Daniel begins with him praying. He had been studying the writings of Jeremiah (25:11-12; 29:10) and understands that the exile was to last for 70 years. At the time of Daniel's prophecy, those years are coming to an end.

Daniel 9:20-22

“While I was speaking and praying, confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel and making my request to the Lord my God for his holy hill

while I was still in prayer, Gabriel, the man I had seen in the earlier vision, came to me in swift flight about the time of the evening sacrifice.

He instructed me and said to me, ‘Daniel, I have now come to give you insight and understanding.’ “

The first thing to understand is that this prophecy is coming to Daniel in response to his prayer. Daniel hasn't asked about the end times. He is petitioning about the Jewish people and the city of Jerusalem and the temple. So this answer Gabriel delivers is a specific response to Daniel’s prayer. Continuing in verse 23:

“As soon as you began to pray, a word went out, which I have come to tell you, for you are highly esteemed. Therefore, consider the word and understand the vision: “Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place. Know and understand this: 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. After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him. ”

Daniel referenced Jeremiah 29:10 at the beginning of the chapter and knew that the captivity was to last 70 years. 

Jeremiah 29:10

“This is what the Lord says: “When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my good promise to bring you back to this place.”

The seventy years are only mentioned one time in Jeremiah in that one verse. Undoubtedly he had read all of Jeremiah or at least large portions of it. So it is reasonable to assume that he had also read somewhat farther in Chapter 31:31-34.

“The days are coming,” declares the Lord, 

“when I will make a new covenant 

with the people of Israel 

and with the people of Judah.

It will not be like the covenant 

I made with their ancestors 

when I took them by the hand 

to lead them out of Egypt, 

because they broke my covenant, 

though I was a husband to them, ” declares the Lord.

“This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel 

after that time,” declares the Lord. 

“I will put my law in their minds 

and write it on their hearts. 

I will be their God, 

and they will be my people.

No longer will they teach their neighbor, 

or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ 

because they will all know me, 

from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the Lord. 

“For I will forgive their wickedness 

and will remember their sins no more.”

With that background, knowing that a new covenant was coming, Daniel would likely have understood what he records in 9:24 to be the completion and fulfillment of the Old Covenant:

“Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place.”

So Daniel was praying, confessing the national sins of the Jewish people and asking God to restore the nation and Gabriel came to tell Daniel the timeline left for the Jewish nation. Essentially there was another 490 years before God was going to bring his entire plan of redemption to completion.

Problems in counting.

There are a few difficulties in understanding the seventy ‘sevens.’ One of them is determining when to start counting. Jeremiah said the exile would be seventy years. In reality, Jerusalem fell in 586 BC to the Babylonians. Cyrus decreed that the Jews could return in 539 BC. That was only 47 years. But if we start counting from when Babylon first came against Jerusalem sometime around 608 BC we get closer to 70 years. Also from 539 BC, until the time of Christ is significantly more than 490 years.

But again, maybe that isn't where we should start counting. Verse 25 of chapter 9 doesn't say from the time the Jews can return. It says, 

“From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild the city.” 

Cyrus's decree was to build a temple and allow the Jews to return.” The verbiage in Daniel 9 doesn't say anything about the temple, nor does it say ‘a decree.’ It simply says ‘From the time the word goes out…’ Crucial to the restoration was building the wall. That didn't happen until the time of Nehemiah nearly a century later. If that is the case, we should start counting from the time of Ezra and Nehemiah which would have been around 450 BC. 70 ‘sevens’ would take us to around 40 AD. If we subtract one ‘seven’ we arrive at 33 AD. That is approximately the time of Christ's ministry.

Some insight is seen in 2 Chronicles 36:21:

“The land enjoyed its sabbath rests; all the time of its desolation it rested, until the seventy years were completed in fulfillment of the word of the Lord spoken by Jeremiah.”

From the time of the kingdom until the Babylonians took Jerusalem was approximately 400-450 years. If the land sabbaths had not been observed then seventy years would have been needed to fulfill that obligation. With the end of the exile the debt was paid. This adds up to roughly 490 years. Now in answer to Daniel's prayer, Gabriel is telling him that there is another 490 year period necessary to complete the Old Covenant and bring in the New.

Seven 'sevens' and sixtytwo 'sevens.'

One thing that is unclear in the vision is the distinction between the first group of sevens and the second group of sevens because it is not clearly explained in the vision. Some have opined that the first group, seven 'sevens which is fortynine years was the time it took to rebuild Jerusalem. This is very plausible but I think we can add that if we are to start counting from the time of Nehemiah, then fortynine years would take us to around 400bc. That is about the time Malachi laid down his quill. Part of this prophecy was to "to seal up vision and prophecy." That would be completed with the finishing of the Old Testament. Then would follow sixtytwo weeks, or 434 years of silence from the Holy Spirit. That is approximately the time from Malachi until John the Baptist.

From the time of Moses until Malachi there had not been a time period of more than about twenty years without some divine revelation from the Holy Spirit. Now there would be centuries with no word from the Holy Spirit.

The writer of the apocraphal book of 1 Maccabbees makes this statement in chapter 9 verse 27;

"So there was great distress in Israel, the worst since the time when prophets ceased to appear among them."

The Maccabeean rebellion occured around 165bc. So by this time nearly two and a half centuries had passed since the completion of the Old Testament. The absence of the prophets must have been acutely felt because it is significant that it was worthy of mention in this history.

So it would appear that Gabriel was telling Daniel that from the time the word went out, there would be fortynine years until the completion of the Old Testament and then another 434 years of silence until the Messiah would come. 

The final ‘seven.’ 

Daniel 9:26-27

“After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.

He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.”

This is where it gets complicated and there are a number of possible interpretations for this. But there are some things we have to remember;

1. Verse 25 shows us the ‘Anointed one’ and the ‘ruler’ are one and the same. That can only mean Jesus.

2. The people of the ruler were the Jews. They rejected him for the most part. 

Contemporary interpretations figure there is a time lapse and that the Great Tribulation is the final week. That is the sole reason the church believes that the Great Tribulation is a seven year period just before Christ returns. The problem is there is no indication that these weeks aren't to be understood as being consecutive. 

Up until the early part of the nineteenth century there was no church teaching that believed that this final seven was about the end times. If you study both Matthew Henry's and John Gill's commentaries, they explain the seventieth week to end with the destruction of Jerusalem. The idea that there is a time lapse between week 69 and 70 didn't come about until the teachings of John Nelson Darby and C. I. Scofield. 

This creates a serious problem because we have to ask ourselves, Was the church wrong for over eighteen hundred years and did God suddenly give us some new revelation? That would allow the possibility that the Canon of Scripture isn't closed. There isn't time to go into it here but upon investigation we see that dispensationalism, the pre-tribulation rapture and the seven year ‘Great Tribulation’ are the result of taking liberties with the texts. That, along with the ‘new revelations’ makes these interpretations completely impossible.

Here are some possible interpretations;

• The seventieth week begins with Jesus's baptism and his earthly ministry. He teaches and explains the new Covenant.

• After 3.5 years (middle of the week) He is crucified. That makes the atonement and ushers in the everlasting righteousness. At the moment he dies the veil of the temple is torn, signifying the end of the Old Testament sacrificial system. 

• 3.5 years later, Stephen becomes the first martyr which begins the persecution of Christians in Jerusalem and many Christians leave the city, thus ending the seventy weeks determined for the holy city. While the city of Jerusalem continued to survive for another 35 years or so, the end was unavoidable and the relationship with Rome steadily deteriorated until Titus finally destroyed the city and the temple in 70 AD.

The Abomination that Causes Desolation

The abomination that causes desolation causes a lot of confusion and I am convinced the reason for this is we assume that when the Bible speaks of it, it is referring to the same thing. But it happened in the middle of the 2nd century BC, when Antiochus Epiphenes, the Seleucid ruler placed a statue of Zeus in the temple and sacrificed a pig on the altar. It appeared to have happened when Emperor Caligula attempted to place a statue of himself in the temple. It is possible it will happen again. But that doesn't mean that this specific prophecy applies to a future abomination.

Also, some translations translate it as the ‘abomination that causes desolation,’ others, like the King James translate it as:

Daniel 9:27 KJV

“And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

This indicates more than one abomination. The fact that for the most part, the Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah and had made an idol out of the Mosaic law, was in itself an abomination and the disobedience of the Jews caused their desolation.

Here are some possible interpretations:

• One suggestion is that when the veil was torn it allowed the common folk to enter the holy place. That would have desecrated the old temple effectively destroying it.

• Around the time that Stephen was stoned, the emperor, Caligula attempted to place a statue of himself in the temple. Apparently he had succeeded in placing statues of himself in various synagogues but never succeeded in placing one in the temple.

• Another interpretation is that once the persecution of the church began in earnest in Jerusalem and most Christians fled, it set the stage for the end of the city. Similar to the fall when God told Adam ‘on the day you eat the fruit you will die,’ Adam didn't die that day but death was now inevitable. This seems to be indicated by the sentence in verse 26:

“The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.”

When the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah, they had pronounced the sentence on themselves, the end was inevitable even though it didn't come right away.

Matthew 27:25

“All the people answered, ‘His blood is on us and on our children!’ ”

In Matthew 24 Jesus predicted the end of Jerusalem.

“Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

The writer of Hebrews also gives us an indication that it wouldn't end all at once.

Hebrews 8:13

“By calling this covenant ‘new,’ he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.”

At the time Hebrews was written, Jesus had established the New Covenant and allowed the Old Covenant to fade away. Once the temple was destroyed there was no way to continue the practices of the old system. The perfect sacrifice for the redemption of sin was accomplished through Jesus. There is no longer a need for priests, a temple or sacrifices. Jesus fulfilled all the Law.

Erroneous effects of dispensationalism.

Dispensational theology was never taught or believed until the time of Darby and Scofield. Without going into the complexities of the beliefs, this is where the idea that the rapture is going to whisk the church away and then God is going to renew the covenant with the Jews in some way, shape or form. The seventy weeks prophecy causes a problem because if you don't assume the time gap you have to conclude that God was done with the Old Covenant relationship with the Jews and Jerusalem and the Temple would be destroyed. That doesn't fit in with a dispensational view. But without taking such liberties with the text you have to conclude that with the end of the Old Covenant and the beginning of the New, the temple would be no more.

This does not mean that God doesn't still hold the Jews in a special regard. Paul indicates this in Romans 11. But we must understand that there is only one name given by which we must be saved. That goes for the Jews and the Gentiles. God has always spoken of a remnant and there exists a remnant today. There are a large number of ethnic Jews that have embraced Jesus as the Messiah and there will be more in the future.

Conclusion

“Do not go beyond what is written.”  (1 Corinthians 4:6)

Understandably, there are things in this prophecy that are confusing and as such, the answers may be somewhat elusive. What we can discern is that Daniel was shown an approximate time table of the rest of the Old Covenant and God bringing in the New. As we read this we need to look at the context. Daniel was wanting to know when God was going to end the exile. Because he understood that the captivity was to last 70 years, when the angel said seventy ‘'sevens,’ it is very likely Daniel understood that to mean 490 years. There is nothing in the prophecy to indicate that there would be a gap between the 69th week and the 70th. 

Contrast this prophecy with the 11th and 12th chapters which clearly are about the end of all things.  At the end of the book, Daniel is confused and has questions. All he is told is to seal up the prophecy and go his way because the prophecy pertains to the distant future. There appears to be no such confusion on his part about the prophecy in chapter 9.

The problem arises when we get confused about some of the verbiage and we take liberties with the text in order to make it fit our understanding. When it says, “War will continue until the end,” it is easy to assume it means the end times. But the context is the end of the Old Covenant and ushering in of the New. Jerusalem fell in 70 AD, and the temple was destroyed so completely that there is no evidence the temple ever existed. There is nothing substantive to assume the prophecy in Daniel 9 has any meaning beyond the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Old Covenant.

The Danger of Belief in a Flat Earth

Until recently, the flat earth/geocentric idea could be dismissed as a fringe theory that nobody really took seriously. But lately I have been seeing more articles written by Christians and even pastors claiming that we have been deceived by modern science and our government to believe the idea that the earth is a sphere and that the earth is a planet that revolves around the sun. They claim that we need to get back to what the Bible teaches about the earth and creation and abandon the pseudo-science that has deceived us.

But there's a huge problem.

• The Bible does NOT teach that the earth is flat.
• It doesn't teach that the earth is the center of the solar system.
• The idea that the sun is the center was not based on pagan sun worship, nor does it depend on belief in the 'big bang.'
• The idea that the earth is a sphere goes back to Pythagarus and Aristotle several centuries before Christ.

What is the flat earth Theory?

Dr. Danny R. Faulkner in his article, Falling For a Flat Earth writes:

What is the flat-earth model? In the flat-earth model, the earth is a flat disk, with the North Pole at its center. The earth is bounded by an ice wall that we call Antarctica. The ice wall keeps the oceans’ water contained on earth.

Somewhere beyond the ice wall, a dome rests over the earth. This dome contains the stars. The dome turns each day, producing the motion of stars that we see each night.

The sun and moon orbit under the dome, circling the axis of the North Pole. This produces the daily motion of the sun and moon. The sun and moon don’t actually rise and set; they merely appear to do so. We only experience darkness because the sun has moved so far away that its spotlight doesn’t shine on our location.

So what does the Bible actually teach us about the earth? The flat earth proponents attempt to claim that certain passages prove that the earth is flat such as Revelation 7:1:

"After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth to prevent any wind from blowing on the land or on the sea or on any tree."

Now almost all thinking, rational people understand that this is an idiomic expression, not a statement of scientific fact. Of course, this doesn't work with the idea of the earth being a flat disc because a disc doesn't have corners.

Several times the Bible uses the expression, 'the ends of the earth.' The flat earthers point out that a sphere doesn't have ends. But again, this is an idiomic expression and throughout the entire church age Christians have recognized it as such.

Another one is Daniel 4:11:

"The tree grew large and strong and its top touched the sky; it was visible to the ends of the earth."

The flat earthers claim that it would only be possible to see a tree from the 'ends of the earth' if the earth was flat. They fail to realize that this was a dream and in the interpretation of the dream Daniel explained that the tree was Nebuchadnezzar himself.

Another one is Matthew 4:8:

"Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor."

Again, the flat earthers claim that if the earth were a sphere it would be impossible to see all of the kingdoms of the world from a mountain. One obvious problem is that such a mountain where someone could see all the kingdoms of the earth doesn't exist even if the earth was flat. Also, it would be impossible for Satan to show Jesus all of the kingdoms and their splendor from a mountain.

Luke's account of this temptation of Jesus doesn't mention a mountain and adds a subtle detail:

Luke 4:5

"The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world."

Luke's account simply says a high place and says he showed them to Jesus in an instant. to view all the kingdoms from a high vantage point would take more than an instant. The language here seems to indicate that Jesus was shown the kingdoms in a vision.

Some other Bible passages speak of the earth as being on pillars (Job 9:6), as being unmoveable (Psalm 93:1). These passages are poetic in nature and not intended to give a scientific explanation. Verses in Revelation must be understood as being in a vision. Even today we use idiomic metaphoric language to describe something even though we know that what may appear is not necessarily what it is. For example, I remember a cute Peanuts cartoon where Sally and Linus are standing together and talking. Sally says, "Someday I'm going to get up really early and watch the sunrise." Linus, with blanket in tow, explains that the sun doesn't actually rise and set but rather the earth turns making it appear like the sun rises and sets. In the last frame Sally says, "Someday I'm going to get up really early and watch the earth turn."

The reason it is funny is because even though we know that the sun doesn't actually rise and set we still call it sunrise and sunset. We don't call it, watching the earth turn.

The creation account in Genesis does not provide scientific detail on how the universe runs any more than it explains how the human body works. That isn't the purpose of the creation account, or the rest of the Bible for that matter.

These so called 'proof texts' that are supposed to prove that the earth is a flat disc do not prove anything.

A look at history.

Contrary to the claims of the flat earthers, the idea that the earth is a sphere is not new. The Greek philosophers from as early as the 5th century BC had already written opinions that the earth was a sphere and by the early second century, Eratosthenes had measured its circumference with relative accuracy.

Some claim that until about 500 years ago everyone believed that the earth was flat and Christopher Columbus wanted to prove that the earth was a sphere. Actually since before the time of Christ, belief in a spherical earth was widely accepted. The argument with Columbus was not whether the earth was flat but rather the opponents of Columbus believed that the earth was much larger than Columbus believed. The motive for trying to find a westward sea route to the far east was that before the Suez Canal joined the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea, ships would have to sail around the dangerous Cape of Good Hope.

Ancient Babylonian map of the world. 
7-9th century B.C.

Interestingly, the idea of  flat, disc shaped earth goes back to the ancient Babylonians. The earliest map of the earth dates from somewhere between the 7th and 9th century BC. and depicts the earth as a flat disc.

Problems With the Flat Disc Earth Model.

1. It is physically impossible for earth to be flat or disc-shaped. The force of gravity would cause all of the matter composing the earth to collapse in on itself forming a sphere. A sphere is the only shape that an object the size and mass of the earth can sustain. In the asteroid belt there are many irregularly shaped objects. However, it seems that once the diameter reaches around 5-600 miles, the mass is great enough that gravity pulls it into a spherical shape. The earth, being nearly 8,000 miles in diameter necessarily must be a sphere. Some say that gravity doesn't actually exist. They say that according to Colossians 1:17 Jesus holds everything together. Jesus Christ does hold everything together. He uses what we call gravity. It may surprise some people but we actually don't know what gravity is. We know that masses tend to be attracted to each other but science cannot explain why. They just do.
2. If the earth was flat then the entire earth would experience day at the same time and night at the same time and we wouldn't need time zones. But when it is getting dark in Florida you can call your friend in Hawaii and it's still afternoon. That wouldn't be possible if the earth was flat. Now the flat earth proponents would say that the sun is a spotlight moving around in the 'dome' and only shines in certain areas at a time. If that were true, even though it may not be shining where you are you should still be able to see it. It also wouldn't explain why the moon has phases.
3. If the earth was flat we would experience seasons at the same time. But when it is winter in the northern hemisphere, it is summer in the southern hemisphere. Summer and winter are primarily caused by the angle of the sun hitting the earth. If the earth was flat it would be hitting the earth at the same angle at the same time. But if the earth was a sphere it would explain why the sun is nearly directly overhead in Florida but at a low angle in Buenas Aires.
4. If the earth was flat then all of the stars would be visible from anywhere on the earth. But in the upper and lower latitudes many stars are not seen. The North star is not visible in most of the southern hemishere and the Southern Cross is not visible in most of northern hemishere. That would not be the case if the earth was flat.
5. If the earth was a flat disc, during an eclipse of the moon, the shadow of the earth would appear round only if the eclipse occured overhead but would appear wedge or knife shaped closer to the horizon. However, the shadow always appears round no matter the  orientation. That would only be possible if the earth was a sphere.

Time doesn't allow for me to explain the Corialis effect which would only be possible if the earth was a spinning sphere but it explains why cyclones spin clockwise in the southern hemishere and counterclockwise in the northern hemisphere among many other things.

Heliocentric vs. Geocentric Model.

While it was widely accepted that the earth was a sphere since before the time of Christ, it wasn't until much later that we understood that our solar system was not the center of the universe. Therefore our understanding evolved, if you will, from the idea that the earth was the center of the universe to the sun being the center. Until larger aperture telescopes were invented which allowed us to see stars and galaxies too faint for the naked eye, we had no idea just how big the universe was and how insignificant our part of the cosmos is.

Many of the flat earth/geocentric people claim that the Bible teaches that the sun revolves around the earth. Psalm 19:5-6 is a favorite 'proof text':

"It is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other, nothing is deprived of its warmth."

As was mentioned before, the book of Psalms is poetry set to music. It is not intended to give a scientific explanation of how the universe works. This passage is painting a word picture. It isn't intended to explain how the heavenly bodies actually move through the universe. It is a song meant to be sung in worship.

Many of the flat earth/geocentric people claim that Nicholas Copernicus went against Biblical teaching and embraced pagan sun worship by suggesting that the sun, not the earth was the center of the universe. That is completely false. Copernicus was a Polish mathematician/astronomer, and a devout man. He studied the motions of the planets and realized that the planets moved at different speeds against the backdrop of the other stars and sometimes seemed to stop and even go in reverse for a bit before continuing their forward motion. Copernicus calculated that the best way to explain that motion was if the earth was not the center of the universe, rather, the sun was the center and the earth was traveling around the sun as well.

Two of the planets, Mercury and Venus don't travel across the entire sky. Mercury never exceeds 20 degrees elongation from the sun and Venus never exceeds about 40 degrees. That doesn't make sense if the earth is the center of the universe. However, it makes perfect sense if the sun is the center and Mercury and Venus go around the sun in closer orbits to the sun making earth the 'third rock.' The other three visible planets, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn move across the entire sky. That indicates that they are farther away from the sun than earth and their orbits encompass the earth and sun.
Contrary to the idea of these stars being wanderers (plan'es) they actually travel in very rigid paths to the point that we can accurately predict exactly where they will be positioned in the sky at any given time in the future.

Why This Matters

Contrary to what some flat earthers who claim to be Christians assert, the current scientific understanding of the universe doesn't contradict Bible teaching at all.

• The Bible does not teach that the earth is a flat disc.
• The Bible does not teach that the earth is the center of the universe.
• The heliocentric model is not pagan in its origin and doesn't affect what the Bible teaches in any way, shape, or form.

I truly believe that the church needs to get back to what the Bible truly teaches. But those who assert that the Bible teaches the flat earth/geocentric model are actually leading people even farther from the truth of scripture. 

So what is the motive to believe the flat earth/geocentric model?

Dr. Danny R. Faulkner in his article, Falling For a Flat Earth also writes:

One attraction may be similar to the allure of an ancient philosophy called gnosticism, which infiltrated the early church. One of the tenets of gnosticism is that special knowledge leads one either to salvation or to a higher spiritual level. Christian flat-earthers seem to believe that they have learned some important teaching about cosmology that has been hidden from most Christians.

They speak of having a much deeper appreciation of God since coming to believe that the earth is flat. In fact, they often claim that many atheists were born again after coming to believe that the earth is flat. One must wonder what will happen to either group if they ever come to realize that they’ve been duped. 

This is deadly stuff. Gnosticism was one of the first great heresies to challenge the early church. It challenges the simplicity of the gospel, available to everyone (2 Corinthians 4:3). We don’t need to depend on the extrabiblical wisdom of the special few.

Science is a good thing. Proverbs 25:2 says:

"It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings."

God didn't tell us everything there is to know about the universe in his Word. He left much for us to discover. Up until the time of Freud and Darwin, science was primarily about exploring the wonders of creation and the creator. It wasn't until after these individuals and others like them that science began to go against the Bible. As we learned to build telescopes and develop higher forms of mathematics, we discovered that the God we serve is far bigger and greater than we ever imagined. When Jesus stood on the Mount of Olives and said, "All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me," the disciples had absolutely no idea just how great that authority was. As we have probed into deep space and discovered more and more but still cannot see the end of the universe, we get a greater glimpse of the magnitude of Jesus's statement. No! The earth is not a flat disc with a hard dome over it. The universe is infinitely bigger than that. But the flat earthers would have us believe that it's much smaller making God much smaller as well. That's just what Satan wants us to believe.

Matthew 10:16:

“I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves."

Belief in a flat earth/geocentric model makes Christians look foolish, because it is very obvious that this model is complete nonsense. This is simply another tool that Satan uses to discredit Christianity. This belief makes us as harmless as serpents and wise as doves -- completely backwards.

The flat earthers claim that we who believe in a spherical earth have been under the strong delusion spoken of in 2 Thessalonians 2:11:

"For this reason God sends a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie."

The spherical earth has been widely understood since centuries before Christ. It is only in these last days that it has become increasingly popular to believe something that is so obviously not true.

They have it backwards. 

The flat earth/geocentric model is a deception. It is not reality!

If the Devil can convince you that the earth is flat, he can make you believe anything.

What Happens When The Church Wakes Up?

 Matthew 25:1-13

“At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish and five were wise. The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. The wise ones, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep. “At midnight the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’ “Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.’ “ ‘No,’ they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’ “But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut. “Later the others also came. ‘Lord, Lord,’ they said, ‘open the door for us!’ “But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you. “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

Many have opined, quite accurately, that with all of the evil happening in our nation and the world that the church has been asleep. Some have opined that the church in the western world is a sleeping giant. 

I believe there are some things in this parable that we need to look at and take seriously because we may find out the modern church is not as much of a giant as we think it is.

I need to start with somewhat of a disclaimer. I believe it is vital to not go beyond what is written. In this case I may have pushed the envelope a little bit, although I am refering to something that is in the text even though it isn't really talked about.

One thing to note is that because much time passed before the bridegroom came they ALL slept. It has been nearly 2,000 years since Jesus ascended to heaven. Prosperity in the western church has has made us soft and lazy. It has been pretty quiet as far as persecution, causing the church to sluggishly slip into a slumber. 

As these ten virgins slept they were indistinguishable from each other. They all looked pretty much the same while they slumbered. In the same way, often during good, restful times it is very difficult to tell true and false converts apart. It isn't until the call goes out that it is time to wake up that it suddenly becomes apparent who  and what they really are.

So while the virgins waited and slumbered they all appeared the same. It was after the call went out to meet the bridegroom that the difference became apparent.

Oil is often used in the Bible to represent the Holy Spirit and it is no different in this case. While they waited and slumbered they didn't need the oil and they could blend in with those who had plenty of oil. In the same way, during peaceful good times when there is no persecution it is easy for false converts to fit in with the true converts. But when difficulty comes it becomes apparent which ones really are followers of Christ and which ones aren't.

So while some have opined that the church is a sleeping giant, I am concerned that hard times may reveal that the church is really quite small. Is it possible that when persecution comes there may not be very many who have oil in their lamps?

It is imperative that we all heed the admonition in 2 Corinthians 13:5;

"Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not    realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test?"

Make sure you have plenty of oil for your lamps. 

PEOPLE HATE REFORMED DOCTRINE. HERE'S WHY.

Every once in a while someone will want to argue with me about Reformed doctrine, particularly the doctrines of election and predestination.

My first response is to ask them if they have actually read The Institutes of the Christian Religion, by John Calvin. The answer is almost always no. Then I reply, "Read the entire work and then come back and we will discuss it."

Yes, I have read it. It is an absolutely brilliant work. It is not the infallible word of God and there are things Calvin said that I think he's off track on, particularly infant baptism. This work of Calvin could be accurately described as an exposition and commentary on the gospel. As Charles Spurgeon said:

"I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else."

For those who don't like Reformed doctrine it may be of comfort to know that many of the great reformed preachers intially hated the doctrine too. But when faced with what scripture actually says about the sovereignty of God and the depravity of man they couldn't argue with it.

Here are the main objections and some responses:

1. Does God really determine that some are going to hell?

Actually in our dead, fallen state we are ALL going to hell. What God actually proactively does is determine that he is going to save some from going to hell.

Romans 3:23:

"for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,"

Almost everyone knows what John 3:16 says. Fewer know what verse 17 says and almost nobody knows what verse 18 says. Verse 18 says:

"Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son."

The world was already condemned and that included us.

2. But we have free will.

Interestingly, the Bible nowhere says that we have free will. We DO have free will in the sense that we are not puppets where someone is pulling our strings. But our will is in bondage to our nature. In Romans 8:7:

"The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so."

Without being regenerated (born again) we simply cannot respond to the gospel call.

1 Corinthians 1:18:

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

This first section of Ephesians explains it well;

Ephesians 2:1-10:

"As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do."

The word for dead in verse 1 is 'necros,' and it literally means 'dead.' Dead people cannot hear the gospel. Dead people cannot respond to the gospel. I remember a sermon by Paul Washer preaching on Ezekiel 37 and he explained that whenever we preach the gospel we are just like Ezekiel and we are preaching to a cemetery. Unless God breathes life into the corpses absolutely nothing is going to happen.

Unless God had breathed his life into us, we would have rejected the gospel as well. But God breathed life into us and then, being made alive, we could hear the gospel and respond to His call.

This is even affirmed in the Old Testament

Ezekiel 36:26-27:

"I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws."

'Heart of stone' is literally non-living. 'Heart of flesh' does not mean carnal. It means living. We were once dead and have been made alive. Now that we are alive we can hear God's voice and with his spirit in us we can now follow him.

ANSWERING THE GOSPEL CALL REQUIRES A NEW NATURE

3. The doctrine of election makes it sound like we really don't have a choice. So how can I be responsible if God has already determined who will be saved and who won't? Paul anticipates this argument in Romans 9:19:

"One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”

His answer basicly is that God can do whatever he wants and who are we to tell God what he can and cannot do. Chapters 8 and 9 so firmly establish the doctrine of election that some early theologians around the time following the Reformation, who disagreed with the doctrine, explained it by actually saying that Paul was mistaken. Of course, that opens a whole new can of worms about biblical reliabiliity, which I won't address here.

The underlying reason that many object to Reformed doctrine is pride. We don't want to admit that in our carnal state we are not capable of choosing to follow Christ and that we are dependant on his grace for every aspect of our salvation. As someone once said, "The only thing I contribute to my salvation is the sin that made it necessary."

4. But I made the choice to follow Jesus when I heard the gospel.

The reason you made the choice to follow Jesus is because God removed the old 'heart of stone' and replaced it with a 'heart of flesh' (Ezekiel 36:26). You just weren't aware that God had performed open heart surgery. You may remember the story of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11:38-44). The problem is Lazarus was dead. If I were ot walk up to the tomb and say, "Lazarus, come forth!," nothing is going to happen. If the greatest preacher today commands Lazarus to come out it will be the same result. Some have said that Jesus had to say, "Lazarus, come forth!" because if he had simply said, "Come forth!" all the dead would have come out. In reality, Jesus has the same issue. Lazarus is dead. Dead people can't hear. But Jesus did something that nobody saw. Behind the scenes, he breathed life into the dead man and made him alive. Now when Jesus said, 'Lazarus come forth!" he was able to hear the voice of Jesus.

It is the same with us responding to the gospel call. We are spiritually dead and simply cannot respond to the gospel call. But God did something that nobody saw. He gave us spiritual life by the rebirth. Now when we hear the gospel we respond to the voice of our shepherd.

Otherwise we would respond just as those who are perishing -- "The message is foolishness."

Jesus made this point when he was talking to Nicodemus in John 3:3:

"Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again. ”

The word 'see' actually means 'percieve.' Without the rebirth we cannot even comprehend the gospel.

A few points of Arminianism and it's problems.

1. Arminianism affirms the doctrine of total depravity but says that in our fallen nature we can still choose to accept the gospel call. That is a contradiction. If we, in our fallen state, can accept Jesus then we aren't totally depraved.

2. God doesn't determine who he is going to save but he knows who will ultimately accept his offer of grace.

The problem with this is that he creates each and every one of us in our mothers' wombs. We have to assume that he creates some of us who he already knows will accept him and others who he knows will reject Him. It becomes a circular argument. It still comes down to election and the sovereignty of God.

If we take another approach, that God actually doesn't know who ultimately will accept his offer of grace then we have a broken link in the sovereignty of God. If God isn't completely sovereign then he isn't God. As someone once said, "Once you have embarked on the road of Arminianism you have headed down the road to atheism."

Arminianism actually contradicts itself.

Some misunderstandings about Reformed Doctrine:

1. If everything is predetermined why do we preach and share the gospel with the unsaved?

The simple answer is that is how God has chosen to spread the gospel. If you look at the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19-20, one thing that is missing is getting people saved. It is NOT our job to save people. Our job is to preach, and then baptize and disciple those who are being saved. Jesus does the saving.

In Exodus 32: 9-14, God was going to wipe out the Israelites beccause they had made a golden calf. Moses interceded on their behalf and God relented. A hyperCalvinist view would have been to shrug and say, "Oh well." That was exactly what the priest Eli did when he was told his sons would be punished because they were corrupt.

1 Samuel 3:18b:

"Then Eli said, “He is the Lord; let him do what is good in his eyes.”

We don't know who God is actually saving and who he isn't. Our job is to present the gospel and let God do the saving.

Interestingly, nobody worked harder at evangelizing the unsaved than the reformers.

2. Some people may be turned away who truly desire to follow Christ.

John 6:37:

"All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away."

If a person truly desires to take up their cross and follow Christ, they can rest assured that God regenerated them. Otherwise they would have no desire to follow Him.

Rejection of Reformed theology has resulted in false conversions.

We have a huge problem in the modern church today. We have almost completely lost the understanding of regeneration. Being born again has been reduced to the notion that an individual has accepted Jesus as their Savior. Today we have altar calls and the 'sinner's prayer' which is found nowhere in the New Testament nor is it found anywhere for most of church history.

Because we believe the rebirth simply means making a decision to follow Christ, we have watered down the message to make it easy for people to accept the gospel.

The modern message barely speaks of judgment for the unrepentant sinner and the need to repent. Sin, if it is mentioned at all, is treated like some 'unfortunate mistake' that keeps us from our true destiny. Peter's first sermon hit people hard. His message on Pentecost was basically, "Jesus the Nazarene was the Lord's Christ and you killed him." At the end he didn't issue an altar call and say; "Who would like to invite Jesus into their heart? I see that hand."  Rather it says the people were pricked in their hearts and asked what they needed to do. That is when Peter told the people to repent and be baptized. By their response they demonstrated that God had done his work on their hearts.

The Second Great Awakening brought about an idea that all but lost the understanding of regeneration and reduced conversion to a 'decision' or an 'act of the will.' The modern church has almost universally adopted this doctrine and the result has been a lot of buildings full of unconverted people who responded to an unbiblical gospel call. This is why the modern church is making so little of an impact in the world today.

Conclusion:

You may ask if it really matters what we believe. The real issue is that if you believe we had anything to do with our salvation you have nullified the Gospel. As I mentioned before, the only thing we contribute to our salvation is the sin that made it necessary. In our natural state, we have no ability to respond positively to the gospel call. It requires the resurrection power of God to give us spiritual life so we can hear the voice of the Good Shepherd.

Our doctrinal beliefs dictate how we do everything from body life, preaching, missions, and evangelism.

• If we truly believe that every aspect of our salvation is accomplished by God himself, then we will preach the Gospel without reservation with the understanding that God is the one who saves.

• If we believe that man is capable in his fallen state to receive the gospel, then the tendency is to believe we are responsible to get people saved. The temptation will be to make the gospel more palatable to get people to accept Christ. The problem is obvious. If we try to make the gospel more palatable then we have altered the gospel. An altered Gospel is a false Gospel. If people respond to a false Gospel then they aren't truly being saved.

It is my hope and prayer that you will prayerfully see the truth of the doctrine of election and predestinattion after critically reading this explanation. If you are interested in further reading, several years ago I wrote a blog entitled, Predestination and Free Will, which goes into the subject in more detail. You can find it on this blogsite if you look back to 2016.