Throwing Down on End Times

Welcome to Theology Throwdown

Welcome to Theology Throwdown!

We, the Christian podcast community of podcasters, gather to discuss our theological differences with love and charity. This is a ministry called Striving for Eternity.

Well, welcome to another throwdown. This is where all the podcasters at the Christian podcast community get together. Well, obviously not all of us because we have a lot of them, but we get different faces, different voices each time.

Introductions and Podcast Backgrounds

So we actually have only one person here who hasn't missed a one as far as I can recall, and that would be Eve Franklin. So with that, we're going to all introduce ourselves. Tonight's topic is going to be eschatology, that is the doctrine of end times.

I'll start with Eve since you are the person who hasn't missed any of them as far as I believe. Introduce yourself, your podcast for the audience.

Hi, yes, I'm Eve Franklin, and I'm co-host of Are You Just Watching? My other host is Tim Martin, and we discuss movies and other entertainment from a Christian worldview. And I think we just finished, well, actually our last episode, we didn't know what movie to discuss because COVID's kind of shut down entertainment, and we just decided to talk about what we've been watching from a general standpoint, and we got to go see a movie this last week.

So our next episode will be on a new release, so we're very excited about that.

All right, I thought your co-host was actually going to be in here this week. I was hopeful.

Yeah, he's traveling this week, so it's not going to be possible. But you can find our website at areyoujustwatching .com, and our podcast is found on any of the podcasts, wherever you find your podcasts.

All right, next up would be Keith.

Keith Helpsley, host of Quest for Truth, my co-host Nathan Caldwell. We talk about, in a casual way, we talk about social issues, culture issues, try to find it in the Bible. And once a month, we do an expository look at the Bible, or dig a little bit deep.

Just we went to the book of John, and then we do an audio drama once a month. We shoot for that. We don't always make it. And so recently, actually, we had two audio dramas this last month, back to back.

One of them was a crossover show with my robots from my other podcast. And the last week, we had our audio drama about Luke investigating and writing things down.

All right, next up, we'll go with Mr. Anthony Russo, who is also kind of my co-host here.

Yeah, all right. Well, good evening, and hello, everyone. I am the host of GraceandPeaceRadio .com, Grace and Peace Radio, which is available on all the usual podcast platforms. It's a Christian living blog and podcast.

Try to usually keep it short, under a half hour, sometimes just 10, 15 minutes. Comes out every week, usually on Mondays, sometimes Tuesdays, if I'm a little backed up on things. But like I said, Christian living blog and podcast, and it's encouraging Christians in their biblical worldview, their commitment to the Lord Jesus Christ, and their active participation in the furtherance of his kingdom through Great Commission Living.

And so I've done devotional things. This past week, the episode was talking about just some of the strange responses some evangelical Christians have given to recent surveys that have come out, and how it really showed a lack of biblical knowledge, and how we really need to make sure that we are studying the Bible, reading it, and aware of what it is that we as Christians actually believe.

So those are just a couple of things I've talked about recently, and Grace and Peace Radio. You can find it everywhere.

Thanks so much. All right, and next up is, let's see, Daniel Minnick.

Hey, hello, I'm Daniel Minnick, the host of the Truthspresso podcast. And at Truthspresso, we like to dive deep into topics that raise a lot of questions that we have to get some good answers for, mostly questions that a lot of people don't even feel suited to ask, questions deep into theology, and economics, and politics.

And the episode that just aired today was asking the question, is democracy good and biblical? So that's going to be an interesting discussion as we're in an election year. The next episode for next week is going to be nine problems with democracy.

And so I hope you look forward to listening to that and having views challenged as we like to do at Truthspresso.

Yeah, I was going to bring up your response. I did listen to it already. And yeah, it was interesting. I actually had to, I'll admit, I had to listen to it and put aside my Americanism.

Oh, yeah. Well, wait, next episode is going to be like a ton of bricks. Oh, thanks. All right.

Next up is Ken. I'm Ken Shipchase with the Do Theology podcast, where we keep doctrine in its place. I co-host that with Jeremy Howard. You can find us at dotheology .com. Our podcast is about helping Christians think through, what are the theological distinctives that, first of all, we need to fight about, and we need to make sure we are understanding things, you know, things about the gospel, foundational truths of Christianity.

But then also, how do we live in unity with brothers and sisters in Christ who disagree, either in matters of theology or in matters of conscience? And so helping people wrestle through and do theology in their everyday lives.

And I'm Andrew Rapport, the host of several shows. So, Andrew Rapport's Rap Report, Andrew Rapport's Daily Rap Report, Apologetics Live, and this show, Theology Throwdown. I co-host So You Want to Be a Podcaster with Colleen Sharp.

So I keep myself a little bit busy. I don't know why. But we're glad that we can all get in to discuss this. The issue of end times, as Anthony and I were discussing different topics, this one became one of interest in these times, because it is something that a lot of people are starting to bring up again.

I noticed a lot more discussion on end times. I haven't seen it as much since 2000, really, before 2000, when everyone thought the world was coming to an end, and Y2K bug, and everything was going to crash.

And I think that one of the trends that I notice is that it seems like when there are major world events, World War I, World War II, Y2K, there seems to be a lot more focus on eschatology, the doctrine of end times.

Initial Positions on Eschatology

So let's do this. Let's go through and first find out from each of you what your position is, theological position is, of eschatology. What do you hold to? Or if you just don't have a position, just so we have an idea.

And after that, what we'll probably do is, either Anthony or I could give some definitions of overarching terms for the audience. So who wants to go first? Well, actually, I should do more like Anthony and pick people.

That way, we don't have dead air. So we'll start on my list. Eve, you're first. So what's your position? Oh, that's rude. Put me first. Okay, Anthony, what's your position? I can easily change that. Okay.

I just have to remember that I didn't skip you. So Anthony, what's your position?

Yeah. You know, it's funny. Yeah. Part of my testimony is I was a nominal Christian for 20 years. And so I was in and out of different churches. And I heard a lot of different things. And that really kind of gave me some, a little bit of all kinds of different sound theology, even though during that time, I really wasn't saved.

I heard a lot of really good theology. Most of those years, I was in pre-millennial churches. So naturally, that's what I grew up with, was there's going to be a rapture, then seven years, and then the tribulation, or, you know, seven years tribulation, then the millennium, and so on.

As I did get saved in 2005, and I started looking at things, and I came to the, obviously what's called the amillennial position, that the millennium is symbolic, that it's really not going to happen, that effectively what's going to happen is that Christ is going to come, and that's it.

Game over, and then it's judgment. And so, and I can talk more as to how I arrived at that, but that's where I stand on this. But I'm also not dogmatic, and I don't argue with people about it, because honestly, I also believe that none of us really know which is the correct one.

But anyway, go ahead.

Okay, Eve, is it okay to go to you now?

I was like him, raised as a pre-trib, pre-millennialist, being mostly Baptist my whole life, but I don't necessarily hold to a pre-trib. I do believe in a pre-millennial, but other than that, I consider myself a pan-millennialist.

It'll all pan out in the end. It's in God's plan, and I admit to a lot of ignorance on the topic. Ken, where are you at?

I'm a dispensational pre-millennialist. I was born and raised that way, and after studying the scriptures, I realized, you know what? This really is the biblical position.

So, yep, that's where I'm at. And let's see, Keith. I think it's going to be just like the left behind. It's exactly like that.

You said exactly like the left behind? Is that what you said?

Not really. I just had to be an honoree there. I'm like much of the rest of you. I was raised with Jesus is going to come back and tribulation and millennium, devil's defeated, all that good stuff. I still might hold to a pre-millennial position, but I'm not sure about the whole pre-tribulation thing.

I'm up in there on that one.

Okay, Daniel. Okay, last but not least. So, I, like most of you, grew up as a dispensational pre-millennialist after having some views challenged mostly by very strong dispensational views. I kind of studied a bit and then eventually kind of became convinced of an amillennial position, just kind of like Anthony there.

Like Eve, I'd also say that there's room to be wrong here. I'm not 100 convinced of it. It just seems to make the most sense of studying scripture and it's the simplest form of eschatology, but that's what I currently hold right now.

Also, to say that I can also say that I'm pan-millennialist, but amillennial in particular.

Well, you're not the last because I am. So, and I'll argue that I'm pro-millennial if there's a millennium, I'm all for it. No, see, pan-millennial, everyone just use that. No, I'm actually pre-millennial, pre-tribulational and we needed more of the Presbyterians and I forgot I was supposed to wear my mask, so I'll put that on.

If you guys don't recognize that, that is R .C. Sproul saying, what's wrong with you people? If I have to wear a mask, it should be R .C. Sproul saying, what's wrong with you people, right? So, we needed the Presbyterian representative.

Defining Premillennialism, Amillennialism, and the Tribulation

So, let's give some terminology for folks real briefly and then I'm gonna hand some of this off to Anthony to lead discussion. So, we have three major views that are viewed when it comes to this, pre-millennial, post-millennial, amillennial, okay?

So, with each of them, you hear the millennial, that is the thousand-year kingdom. So, the idea there is whether you believe that there is a literal thousand-year kingdom or not. If you believe there is a literal thousand-year kingdom, you're gonna be in the pre-millennial, post-millennial camp.

Amillennial would say that we're in the thousand-year kingdom now, but it is a very long period of time. So, it wasn't a literal thousand years and therefore we are in that. And by the way, both pre-millennial and amillennial get their theological roots from Augustine, which presents problems because everyone thinks that Augustine has their point of view, actually even post-millennial, we can include in that, because Augustine believed in a literal thousand-year period, he just believed that he was in it.

And so, that was actually held, that they were in the millennial kingdom until 1000 AD. So, a little historical note there, the Catholic Church started to have more of a amillennial view after 1000 AD or sometime after that, I think it was Pope Innocent II, and who wasn't so innocent.

So, what you're looking at with that is, when is Christ coming? Does he come before the thousand-year kingdom, after the thousand-year kingdom, or just there is no thousand-year kingdom, we're kind of in it.

The within pre-millennial, you may have heard some of us refer to pre, in that there's a couple of camps, there's pre-tribulational, mid-tribulational, pre-wrath, and then there's also post-tribulational.

So, those are dealing with the tribulation period. The tribulation is only within pre-millennialism, and that is going to be one where you have a seven-year period, where the Antichrist makes a covenant with, you know, basically a seven-year covenant with Israel, and he'll break it halfway through.

And as we look at that, the question is, when does the church get taken up? When does the rapture occur? At the beginning, before that seven-year period, in the middle of the seven-year period, just before God's, the wrath comes during that seven-year period.

So, a little bit, I think it's a little bit beyond the midpoint, and then, or at the end, post-tribulational. One of the posts, if you want a pre-wrath view, one of our podcasters, Echo Zoe Podcast, with Andy Olson, just did a podcast on the pre-wrath view.

So, I'll highlight that to let you guys know, to listen out if you're interested in that. But those are basically the main views. And so, with that, I'm going to hand this over to Anthony to kind of just lead the discussion.

The Rapture, 1 Thessalonians 4, and the Question of a Loud Event

Okay. So, yeah. You know, one of the things I mentioned earlier was in my own life, in my own wrestling with this, the main thing I saw with the pre-trib or the pre-mill position was it just seemed, honestly, convoluted.

So, part of my discussion on this is I'm going to ask you all some questions and you help me understand your position better. And so, hopefully through that, we'll kind of talk more about this. The first thing I noticed was the idea of the rapture and it, correct me if I'm wrong, but it comes from 1 Thessalonians 4, particularly where it says in verse 16, for the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangels and with the trump of God and the dead in Christ shall rise first.

Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore, comfort one another with these words.

What I see there is the rapture is loud. There's a shout, there's a trumpet. So, if there is a rapture, I don't see it as a silent sort of suddenly all the Christians disappear. It's a loud event, something that more fits with amillennialism.

What are your thoughts on that?

Well, doesn't the amillennial, besides having the millennium be a figure of time, doesn't that also make tribulation a figure of time as well? I'm just asking. I'm sorry, can you repeat that? I could barely hear you, honestly.

I'm just saying that in amillennialism, they consider the millennium to be a figure of time. It's not exactly a thousand years. Does the amillennial approach also consider the tribulation period a figure of time?

Yeah, and to be honest with you, that's something that, it's funny, because I'm taking systematic theology three this semester. Honestly, that's something, even in my own position, I don't quite fully understand where the tribulation fits in.

I don't think it's there, honestly. I think, unless, just this idea that things are just going to get so bad for Christians before Christ comes back. But yeah, you're right, there's no tribulation per se.

But you can't answer my question with a question.

Yeah, well, no, he was asking, clarifying, yeah. I would say, with what you brought up in 1 Thessalonians 4, this would be what we'd see as a rapture, right? In, but if in an amillennial position, it wouldn't fit in at all.

I almost think if the, maybe what we should start with would really be Revelation 20, right? Because that's really where the millennium gets brought in. But you brought up 1 Thessalonians 4. So I would say this would be the rapture within a, within, well, it could be in any of the systems.

I guess you're taking it that this is the final judgment, and therefore that's why it's a loud situation. But I would say that the Lord's calling up from all the Christians would be, would still be a pretty significant event.

And part of this that really does play into our understanding here would be, what does God do with Israel? That does play into it. Because if God has a future for Israel, and that's where, you know, pre-millennialism would see that God has a future plan for Israel.

So that also is something that plays into the interpretation. And this is where we get into broader things of covenant theology and dispensational theology. But keeping it simpler, I think that that plays into it.

Can I ask you a question?

Why do you think that the question of, is the rapture a loud event? Why would that propose a problem for a pre-trib position?

Well, as I understood it, the rapture is something that happens, you know, in the blink of an eye, all the Christians are gone. And so, and again, help me understand, okay? I'm not trying to tear down your position.

I'm honestly just trying to understand it better. But to me, if suddenly all the Christians disappear, whether it's loud or quiet, I mean, what are all the unbelievers gonna do? They're just gonna be like, oh, good, they're gone.

And I'm not trying to make fun of it. I'm really not. I'm just trying to understand what is the attitude then of the unbelievers who are left? It just seems like if all the Christians are gone, they're gonna be like, oh, well, everything they believed was true.

So that would make them want to repent or something, I would think. I just don't understand. What's the rest of the world gonna do?

Well, I think there's a few things that we could say to that. First, when it comes to the rapture and all the Christians disappearing, how many are actually gonna disappear is one question because we also believe in a great apostasy, a great falling away.

And so I think there's a very real possibility that there's going to be a lot fewer Christians than we anticipate actually disappearing. So there's that consideration. I'm not gonna be dogmatic about all of those issues.

But then also, even if there was a loud, like a huge cataclysmic event where there were suddenly just a mass amount of people off the face of the earth, I don't see why that would necessitate unbelievers all of a sudden coming to their senses.

They are already suppressing the truth and unrighteousness, denying the God that they know exists. Why would the fact that there's a lot of Christians disappearing, why would that cause them to change from that and to seek after the living and true God?

You know, the argument I've always heard was that it would be, people would say alien, it was aliens to explain it. But in light of what we see going on in our country, I actually argue, I think what's gonna happen is they're just gonna imprison Christians around the world.

And then people won't notice as much because the prisons will just be empty, but no one knows that.

People will rationalize anything. You know, they'll figure out something to say.

So is it safe to say that maybe dispensationalists today might not have as much an issue with, you know, people, the unbelievers hearing the shout, the voice of the archangel and the trumpet when the rapture occurs?

Because I think historically, I mean, of dispensationalism, the word mystery that the apostle Paul uses to differentiate the body of Christ from Israel would also make it so that the shout and the voice, only the Christians hear because it's almost like to distinguish this from anything prophetic, which then starts after the rapture occurs, the prophetic time clock starts again.

And so it's almost like trying to make a clean break from the body of Christ, then from the prophecy of Israel beginning and that since it's a mystery, then only Christians hear it. I mean, I could be wrong, but I've heard the term secret rapture and that historically dispensationalists held to the idea that the shout, the trumpet, the archangel's voice are only heard by the Christians somehow.

Yeah, I've heard that. I've heard, you know, the secret rapture thing. That's not necessarily something I hold to necessarily. And I don't know how widespread, I think it probably is pretty still a widespread belief amongst many dispensationalists, but I don't think it'll necessarily be a secret thing.

I think, like I said, it's going to be, there's the potential that it could be a very cataclysmic event all on its own if there are a great number of people that disappear. And if there's not, if there's only a small number of people that do get caught up into the air, then there's just a few, you know, there may have been a great noise in the heavens that people will try to find different ways to explain what that sound was.

And then there's a few people gone, you know, so.

The Timing of the Second Coming and the Seventy Weeks of Daniel

Okay. So I guess, and we'll get to the millennium. I guess I'll start this on a kind of a time flow. I guess another question I would have is, in the pre-mill position, when is the second coming of Christ?

Is it at the rapture? Or is it at the end of the seven years to establish the millennial reign?

I think that's where you have to differentiate between, as Andrew mentioned, the different camps of the pre-millennial position, because I am not, as I said, I'm raised pre-Trib, but I don't believe in pre-Trib anymore because of some of the issues that have just been raised in the previous conversation.

After reading the Bible for myself, I honestly don't see a pre-Trib rapture in the scripture. And so it's been hard for me in Baptist camps to have constant, you know, people who believe in a pre-Trib rapture, but I don't necessarily hold to it.

And I can't defend that position because I don't believe it anymore. But I do believe that the Lord will come and issue in a millennial reign. And so I do believe that He comes before the millennial, which is why I'm still pre-millennial.

But I'm not exactly sure where that coming fits into the tribulation. I don't see, and that's one of the reasons why I'm a pan-millennialist is because I honestly, I don't see how all of it goes together and I'm willing to express ignorance on it.

But I do believe that He doesn't come prior to the tribulation and sometimes concerns me when I see the church talking about persecution and tribulation and saying, well, at least we'll be, we won't have to experience it because God's going to take us away before it all happens.

And I'm like, well, you can definitely hope that, but what if He doesn't? Because I feel like sometimes we use it as, at least some Christians use it as a, well, we're not going to experience persecution.

God's going to rescue us from that. And that's, to me, it's a false comfort because God never promised us that we wouldn't be persecuted as Christians. And that has actually concerned me about the position of some of the denominations.

So it sounds like you're more a pan-tribulationalist, not a pan-millennialist. Yeah. Since you're pre-millennial either way, it sounds like you're a pan-tribulationalist.

Can I just say as a pre-tribulationalist, I actually agree with some of those concerns about some of the things that people have, the conceptions that like, oh, okay, we're going to be fully insulated and protected from everything.

I think it's a rather American-centric viewpoint where it's like, it's not as if God's church hasn't been persecuted around the world for a very long time. And that viewpoint that says, oh, well, we're not going to experience that because we're going to be raptured is very limited in its scope towards believers in America, typically.

And that's problematic.

So do we have a passage in the Bible that actually timelines a seven-year period that we can call the Great Tribulation?

Yeah. And this would be the one I would turn to is the 70 weeks of Daniel. If you look in Daniel chapter nine, this actually, in my opinion, is the most difficult for a someone who is a a millennialist to hold to, okay, to deal with.

Because when we look at this, I'm going to, I'll read this, but before I read it, what I want to do is note that as we look at it, focus on what's literal or whether it's not with each of these weeks.

Now, it's going to talk about a week. The week refers to a seven-year period. Okay. It actually, in the Hebrew, is just 77s. And so that could be a one-week period, seven days, or it could be one of the things with the way the Jewish calendar is, is things are marked by a seven-year period.

That's because on the seventh year, you add in an extra month, kind of like our leap year, they have a leap month. And so I want to read through this portion. It says, 70 weeks is, so this is Daniel 9, verse 24.

And I'll read 24 to 27. 70 weeks have been decreed for your people and for your holy city to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy place.

So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince, there will be a seven weeks and 62 weeks. It will be built again in the plaza and the moat, even in the times of distress.

Then after the 62 weeks, the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing. And the people of the Prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary and its end will come with a flood. Even to the end, there will be war.

Desolations are determined. And there he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week. But in the middle of the week, he shall put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering. And on the wing of abomination will come one who makes desolation even until a complete destruction.

One that is decreed is poured out on the one who makes desolate. So you have basically 70 weeks broken up into three. It's a seven year period, a 62 year, I'm sorry, a seven seven year period, a 62 seven year period and a one seven year period.

Now, basically every scholar I know will take the first 69 weeks as literal, okay, that we would argue that this is the decree that goes out to rebuild Jerusalem, that we have the building of Jerusalem.

The timeframe there is the 49 years. You have the next 62 times seven year period until Christ comes on the scene. And therefore the question becomes, where's this last week? Now, there are some who will try to say that that last week is the first half of the week is the three and a half year ministry of Jesus.

I've heard millennials argue that. And what do they do with the last half that week? Suddenly it becomes figurative. Now, as you read through this, I see nothing that would say that it's literal, literal, literal, literal, all of a sudden we take part of it figurative.

I think either all has to be literal or it all has to be figurative. Now you say, okay, what about some of these other views where you do take it literal? I think the premillennial views, the only one that has an answer to do to this passage in Daniel nine, because in verse 27, where it will speak about the one week, you have the 62 weeks in verse 26 that it says you have the seven week period.

Then after the 62 week period, the Messiah is cut off. So the Messiah comes on the scene at that point. Now, would you end up seeing, I believe with this is it says, that there is a possibility that we could see as a gap that wasn't described in the scripture, because he says, and he's going to make a covenant.

There's not the timeframe there like there was in verse 26. So we would see that the church age is this gap that's in the middle there. Now, I also point out and we'll get everyone's discussion on, but verse 24 gives you what's going to be the end of this 70 year period, the 490 years.

And one of it is to finish transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the holy place. So what I would say is we don't have an end to sin yet.

And people would say, well, this is the atonement was at the cross. But then that puts, again, it puts the timeframe off because the end of the 70th year has to be that where everyone sees that this would end up being in the middle of when Christ is at the crosses would be in the middle of that.

And that would present a problem, I think for any view other than pre-millennial. So that's where I would see this seven year tribulation.

See, if anybody else wants to jump in here, please do. But I'm going to counter with that with the idea that that's awfully convoluted. And I would rather say, I have no idea what this text means than to go with a convoluted answer like that.

And I don't mean the convoluted again to sound insulting, but I don't know what better word to use. It's kind of like I love and I have great affection and respect for my Presbyterian brothers and sisters.

However, I'm Baptist by conviction through reading the scriptures. And they would say they're Presbyterian by conviction through reading the scriptures. I get that. But I feel like the Presbyterians tend to read into certain texts in order to arrive at their conclusion.

And a plain reading of the New Testament by an average ordinary person would likely cause them to become Baptist by conviction, not Presbyterian, not infant baptism, not sprinkling. I feel like with the pre-mill position, the pre-trib position, it's the same thing.

There's an awful lot of reading into texts and making things say this and then this and then this in order to line it all up and say, aha. And so that's why I really struggle with it. That's why I ended up saying I can't embrace this because it's just too complex for...

I'd rather say we have no idea what this text is.

Well, Anthony, as a millennialist, I actually do take this passage literally. But of course, I know Andrew mentioned some of the things like the finishing the transgression, making end of sins. I see some of that language used in Hebrews.

When he himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the majesty on high and that the six... Let's see. So that the 70 weeks are 70 weeks of years and that they also don't break like the 70th week.

I don't see any evidence there that it breaks. Like I follow the notes from, I think it's Albert Barnes on understanding this that I would start at about 444 AD, the 70 weeks. And that the first section is when the wall is built, the moat is built.

And then the next section is the period between that. And if you take the sevens as sevens of the 360 day years, the Jewish years, because the Jews were taken into captivity because they didn't keep Sabbaths.

And so it used the 360 cycle. Like these don't necessarily have to be solar years of 365. But if they're 360 day years, then at the end of the 69th week, you end up in AD 30, which I think is when Jesus was baptized and his ministry started.

And then in verse 26, you have to read into it, the idea that the prince that shall come is different from Messiah the prince. I mean, I know that some scholars believe that and others will believe that the Messiah, the prince is the same as the prince that shall come.

But I think it's still possible to believe that the prince that shall come can also be Jesus Christ himself, Messiah the prince. And you might think, well, then why would the people of Jesus Christ be the ones who would come and destroy the city?

But if you go to a parable of the kingdom that Jesus mentions in Matthew chapter 22, where he says, the kingdom is heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son. And then you go, the people killed his son.

And then in verse seven of Matthew 22, he says, but when the king heard thereof, he was wroth and he sent forth his armies and destroyed those murders and burned up their city. So if this is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem here, the prince that shall come can still be the Messiah.

And when he says your house is left unto you desolate, since in the parable, the king would be the father, Jesus would be the son who would be the prince. And then their armies come and destroy the temple.

And then, Andrew, you mentioned verse 26, after three score and two weeks, so Messiah be cut off. Does that have to mean like immediately the second after the end of the 69th week, or could it be three and a half years after, you know, as like as a consequence after.

So then that's wrapped, that's reiterated in a different way in verse 27, where he referring back to Jesus will confirm the covenant with many for one week. So then I would say, well, what's this covenant?

It's the covenant with Israel to call the remnant and he confirms it for one week, but in the midst of the week, he causes the sacrifice and oblations to cease by his death, you know, after three and a half years of ministry.

And then the other half, I still take as literal because I believe that it was three and a half years after that point until the stoning of Stephen, the calling of Paul, and where the gospel goes out to the Gentiles.