Mike wrote: Wondered that myself. Some of the debate team banned, maybe? Who knows?
An interesting and informative 4 series message on the presevation of the word of God is preached by a fellow by the name of J Hanson Smith on sermonaudio. It is the only messages he has on here at present and he is a proponent of the KJV for the reasons he states. I recommend a listen.
You are commenting on everything but Da 9:26. This passage is devastating to amillenialism as you are finding out.
Ga 3:17 is speaking about the covenant of law, the Mosaic covenant, which is 430 years after the Abrahamic covenant. What has that got to do with Da 9:26?
The new covenant is called an everlasting covenant He 13:20. The covenant in Da 9:26 is said to be confirmed for 1 week. by the prince of the people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary.
Now, quit beating around the bush. Did the Jews destroy the city and the sanctuary after the 69 weeks or not? It is in the text. Why is it not relevant? If they did not, who did?
Apparently you are not reading the text. Let me quote Da 9:26 again for you.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:
The language in this text will not permit the Messiah and the coming prince of the people who destroyed the city and the sanctuary to be the same person nor will it allow the covenant to be the new covenant.
Your view is of dispensationalism DJC49 and not the passage in Daniel and the whole prophecy and you have not answered my question. There is no doubt that the decree was given in actual years (49) to rebuild Jerusalem. Then scholars whom I trust say they have worked the numbers and exactly 434 years to the day from that decree was Jesus crucified, totaling 69 weeks or 483 years. Now, you say all these prophecies given in Daniel 9 were accomplished 7 years later and the 70 weeks were finished.
I have to say that I have not heard that one put forth before. Provide me a link because I would like to see how all that was accomplished.
I am glad though that you will acknowledge the 1000 years in Re 20 and the 1290 days and the 335 days and the 3 1/2 years are literal and mean what they say.
BTW ... how silly is it to interpret the word "he" found in Dan 9:27 as referring to the Antichrist?
Did you read the verse? Are you saying that the Messiah and the prince that shall are one and the same?
His (the prince that shall come) people will destroy the city and sanctuary AFTER the 69 weeks.
Now, you say all this has been accomplished by 7 years after the cross. Yet they were still offering sacrifices in AD 70, 40 years after the crucifixion.
Tell us about one other place in Scripture where a "time prophecy" was truncated and then extended for an indeterminate period of time -- in this case, almost 2000 years [That's 282+ weeks of years!]
Okay! Here is just one prophecy that has a duel time element in it's fulfillment
Is 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; 3 To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified. __
Did GOD'S prophetic clock stop ticking.... __ No! The division of the time IS the prophecy! The end is:
Da 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasti
I have been pondering these statements by DJC49, trying to make sense of them. ___ Additionally, Lone Wolf, since the Messiah is "cut off" AFTER the 69th week (of years), logically, He must then be "cut off" DURING the 70th week (of years). As a matter of fact, that's exactly what history records: after 3 1/2 years of Christ's earthly ministry to the Jews, He is crucified which puts an END to the sacrifices and oblations which are now abominations.
On the one hand, JD, you argue that the Messiah was indeed "cut off" AFTER the 69th week -- according to Scripture. On the other hand, you claim that the Messiah was NOT "cut off" during the 70th week.
This is an impossibility. ____
What am I missing here?
DJC49 is insisting that the Messiah was not cut off until after the 69 weeks. I am with him up to here. But then, he says the Messiah was cut off in the middle of the 70th week.. I think he is just going to let this hang out and not explain it. What is the relevance of 69 weeks? Why even bring it up?
These men know my position because I have told them. There is a break between the 69th and 70th week. But I do not know what their position because they have not explained it and the above statements are confusing.
DJC49 wrote: There is no break. There is no twilight zone.
Neither I nor the Scriptures have argued for a twilight zone. This time frame between the 69th and 70th week is recorded and explained by the great apostle Paul in Ephesians and Colossians as being a definte pre-planned albeit unpredicted in prophetic books intention of God to form his church. Therefore, it is called the "mystery of Christ".
DJC49 wrote: On the one hand, JD, you argue that the Messiah was indeed "cut off" AFTER the 69th week -- according to Scripture. On the other hand, you claim that the Messiah was NOT "cut off" during the 70th week. This is an impossibility.
Yes, I am saying Messiah was cut off after the 69 weeks because that is what Da 9:26 says. I do not think I used the word "during"!
DJC49 wrote: Why? Because the very second the 69th week ends, the 70th week begins. Your camp thinks GOD'S prophetic clock stopped immediately after week 69.
Please clarify your position because you are confusing me with this statement. Are you saying that
1) the cross is when the Messiah was cut off? 2 Daniels prrophecy was fulfilled 7 years later? (approx 37 AD)
Those who subscribe to amillennialism have a very difficult time with passages like Da 9, or even with the book of Daniel itself. They do not believe these prophecies are recording future events that are even future to us today because they have been taught there is not a physical Israel who are even yet God's favored nation and the people through whom he will bring all these prophecies to pass. They teach that the church is now Israel and all prophecy has been fulfilled and the next thing on the prophetic calendar is the last thing, the end of the world.
Therefore all the prophets that wrote about future events of Israel being brought back to her own land and Christ reigning on the throne of David from Jerusalem and all the earth at rest and being at perfect peace must be spiritualized and applied to the present or heaven. And those passages and books that deal with the coming future judgment, the tribulation, the time of Jacob's trouble, the wrath of God, etc must have already taken place.
So then, their presupposition that there is no Israel is brought to Daniel 9:26 and if their is no Israel there is no prince that shall come after AD 70 to finish the desolation of Jerusalem, and besides, the 70 years are complete. They have to be. Their presuppositions demand it!
The post I made to DJC49 was critical to my argument and you pushed the abuse button and it was deleted. I am not going to retype my response but it is more serious to accuse someone of changing the bible when he did no such thing than it is to use the word "idiotic", yet I did not report you for abuse for doing it.
Now, all my comments are still there and you can show where I have changed the bible, as you say.
Here is what you said!
You are atill not getting it JD. You are changing the bible to read how you want it to read. It does not say towards the end of the 69 weeks, it says AFTER the 69 weeks. Deal with the text as it is written, don't try changing it.
I actually got the idea for the word from DJC49 when he said of me:
How in the world do you ever come up with the idiotic idea that we believe that the Messiah is a Roman?
Great peace have they that love thy law, and nothing shall offend them.
That is my policy and I have never pushed the abuse button because I have not been offended!
You keep making the same erroneous point. I am not saying that the Messiah is cut off during the 62 weeks, I am saying he is cut off after the 62 weeks. The last day of the 62 weeks is still after it. Suppose the decree was made by cyrus at 1:00 PM and Messiah was cut off exactly 434 years later to the day at 3:00 PM. That would be after.
But you have offered nothing in the way of the text making your case. This is a sorry way to debate. You accuse me of something I do not do yet offer nothing in return. WHAT IS YOUR POINT? You have not given any scenario for the fulfillmernt of this prophecy.
And, as far as you recommending my permanant removal, I would remind you that I pay to be on here. I am a Plus member.
Make your case for the final 7 years of the 490 year prophecy. We know that the first two divisions of the prophecy were literal years and very exact. If there were no break between the end of the 69th week and the beginning of the 70th week, then the fulfillment would have occured in AD 37. Is this your contention?
The Lone Wolf wrote: JD, what you fail to see is that AFTER the 69 weeks is when the Messiah will be cut off, not during the 69th week. At least that is what the text says. You are trying to cut him off during the 69 weeks, not after. That is my argument. The text says what it says. I would encourage you to listen to a great sermon that explains where I am coming from. [
What I need to know from you fellas is if you believe the text is teaching the Messiah is a Roman instead of a Jew? Or are you teaching that the Jews destroyed the Holy city, Jerusalem? You must answer this question before we can go on because this is how the text reads.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. Cut off means kille and he was cut off the very last day of the 69th week. That ended the 69th week of the prophecy but it did not begin the 70th week.
The people who destroyed the city after the 69th week were Romans. They did it before the prophecied prince came. The confirmation of the covenant by that prince begins the 70th week.
The Lone Wolf wrote: JD, if you want any further discussion from me, cut the sarcastic remarks.
I truly am sorry about that but it is evident many times you fellows are commenting without reading the text and it is frustrating. Because I know if you would read the context and take the words at face value you would not conclude the things you do.
What ontext begins this whole discourse?
It is the context of the desolation of Jerusalem.
In Je 25 there is a near and far fulfillment of the cahstening hand of God upon the nations after the 70 years babylonian captivity and he sends Jeremiah to all nations of the world with the wine cup of his fury and demands them all to drink and here is what he says if they refuse to drink:
Jer 25:29 For, lo, I begin to bring evil on the city which is called by my name, and should ye be utterly unpunished? Ye shall not be unpunished: for I will call for a sword upon all the inhabitants of the earth, saith the LORD of hosts. This is the 70th week, more partuclarly the last 3 1/2 years of that week, the time period of Re 4-19.
History tells us it was the Roman general Titus who destroyed Jerusalem after the 69 weeks and the prince that shall come then, logically, will be a Roman citizen if the Roma
And he shall *** CONFIRM THE COVENANT *** with many for one week: ____
This suggests a covenant already in existence!
and in the midst of the week (the seven years) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, (Suggesting a temple with Jewish sacrifices)
and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it (the temple) desolate, even until the consummation (the end of the week), and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
Lu 13:35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until [the time] come when ye shall say, Blessed [is] he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Notice how this prince makes the temple desolate and defines for us the abomniation of desolation (singular).
1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. 2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. 42 months is 1290 days or 3 1/2 years, 1/2 of 7 years or the midst of the week.
that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
I have much to say about Daniel's 70 weeks but let us reason a little bit here.
Daniel was told 70 weeks were determined against the holy people, Israel.
The messiah would be cut off at the 62nd week AFTER the 7 weeks that would transpire until the command to rebuild Jerusalem.
Okay, that is a total of 69 weeks or 483 years. In the same week that Messiah was cut off, he uttered these words:
Mt 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)
The holy place is in the temple and no one stood in the temple when Jesusalem was sacked in AD 70. It was at this time that Israel ceased being a nation. No one giving the chronology of Israel in AD 70 would say, "well, Israel is 1567 years old", and then come back in AD 71 and say, "Well, Israel is 1568 years old", and then 5 years later come back and say, Well, Israel is now 1573 years old". But, if the CONFIRMATION of this covennant in Da 9 is the marking of God for time again for Israel, then the 70th week is clearly shown and the prince of the Romans who destroyed the city and the temple is yet to stand in the holy place at the middle of that 70th week!
The Lone Wolf wrote: According to the passage, the Mesiah was cut off AFTER the 69 weeks, not during the 69 weeks. It was in the 70th week that he CONFIRMED, not established THE covenant. The "he" is talking about the Christ and the covenant is the New Covenant.
Are you sane? Are you denying that Messiah was a Jew? Do you think the Jews have destroyed Jerusalem at sometime in their past? What exactly is your claim here?
When Daniel made this prophecy, it was after he read a prophecy of Jeremiah concerning 70 years and he asked to understand it. Chapter 9 is the explanation. It is a prophecy of 70 weeks of years, not 69 weeks of years.
Da 9:2B that he would accomplish seventy years in the DESOLATION OF JERUSALEM! Can you read?
Jerusalem was at that very minute desolate with it's temple destroyed and the walls broken down! Nehemiah went back later and rebuilt the walls with a weopon in one hand and a tool in the other. Troublous times, I would say.
But, when will you FINISH the desolation of Jerusalem, Lord? Nehemiah went back after the decree from Cyrus, 49 years.
V 26B and the PEOPLE of the prince that SHALL COME (AFTER THE 69 WEEKS) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;
rogerant wrote: God Expressed love to His people Israel not because they were Holy in themselves, but because they were Holy because He imputed Holiness to them, because of His promise to Abraham. There was nothing within them that merited favor from God. It was because of his unconditional promise to Abraham that he would have many descendants, physical and Spiritual.
He said he set his love upon Israel for none of the resons cited by you. Many Israelites went to hell. See Lk 16, which proves there is more than one attirbute of the character of God and just because one is true the others are not diminished. Men, even Israelites, have the duty to hear God and obey him and if they do not, the love of God see Jn 3:16 that motivated him to send his son so we might be saved will not override his justice.
This imputed holiness doctrine that you invented is not even worth commenting on.
Revelation 4-19 represents the 70th 7 in Daniels prophecy of the 70 sevens or sevety weeks of years in Da 9.
The plagues that will be poured out on the kingdom of the anti-christ were typified by the encounter God had with Pharoah back in Egypt when he delivered Israel from his iron and persecuting claw by the hand of Moses who typified Christ. So, Revelation is the anti-type when the real clash of two kingdoms take place with winner take all.
The end of the week finds Satan and his man, the anti christ soundly defeated and cast into prison and the earth a devastation as Egypt was after the plagues in Exodus.
Then we see the nation established and the laws of God established like it was when Israel was led out of Egypt and . There will need to be laws if Christ reigns in perfect righteousness with a rod of iron.
It is interesting that God miraculously destroyed Pharoah's army at once in the RED Sea and when Christ comes back to the valley of Megeddo, his destruction of Anti-christ's army will be such that the blood will run for some 180 miles to the depth of the horses bridle. This is surely like a Red Sea and an immersion of an army.
God deals with a perfect word and the correctanswer to the survey question is "pre-millennial!"
Here is what God said was the reason he chose Israel:
The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: 8 But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. 9 Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;
God did not choose Isreal from before the foundation of the world and this election was not individual election and never were all of these Israelites believers
But God loved and chose Israel. But why?
6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. When did he choose them?
When they were in the land of Egypt. Ez 20:5.
In Israel, God has shown that he loves people who never become believers.
The church of Jesus Christ is likewise elect corporately.
I guess I do not know what your point is but I do not attempt to validate the word of God by personalities of the past. I do not quote them but sometimes I comment on what others say about them. The bible, which I consider to be the KJV, can stand on its own without a need to look into the past to see what other men thought about it. My defence of the KJV is mainly from it's internal testimony and while it is profitable to study the manuscript evidence, I think, it is not essential for me to conclude that the KJV is the ONLY word of God in the English.
I really don't care about Wesley, whether he was good or bad. I care about what is going on today and this article says that watered down translations are the major part of the problem. MurryA and men like him are today's enemies of the word of God and I am in the battle on the side of the KJV and I am defending it and marking those who are against it and warning against fellowship with them.
John Wesley had his opportunity and now it is past and he is gone on to his reward. Now, it is my turn.
However, there are plenty of heretics from the past who used a KJV. Many Calvinists used it! Conversion is essential to understanding it and possession of a copy is not enough.