2 answers to 2 questions on the O.D.

[covenantee]

"NO" Jesus Christ isn't the "He" in Daniel 9:27 making desolation upon earth, as reformed eschatology falsely claims

He is Messiah the Prince, who confirmed His New Covenant (Matthew 26:28), caused sacrifice and oblation to cease by His Death in the midst of the 70th week, and desolated Jerusalem until its consummated complete destruction, using the Roman armies as His agents of judgment and complete annihilation.

Exactly as Daniel foretold and Jesus affirmed.

Refuting and rebutting dispensational futurism's fantasies and fallacies.

 

[n2thelight]

1 Corinthians 12:28
And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

1 Corinthians 14:29
Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

Ephesians 4:11
And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

Thinking you not catching what I'm conveying .

 

[n2thelight]

He is Messiah the Prince, who confirmed His New Covenant (Matthew 26:28), caused sacrifice and oblation to cease by His Death in the midst of the 70th week, and desolated Jerusalem until its consummated complete destruction, using the Roman armies as His agents of judgment and complete annihilation.

Exactly as Daniel foretold and Jesus affirmed.

Refuting and rebutting dispensational futurism's fantasies and fallacies.

So what happens next, what period of time are we in scripter wise ?

 

[Truth7t7]

He is Messiah the Prince, who confirmed His New Covenant (Matthew 26:28), caused sacrifice and oblation to cease by His Death in the midst of the 70th week, and desolated Jerusalem until its consummated complete destruction, using the Roman armies as His agents of judgment and complete annihilation.

Exactly as Daniel foretold and Jesus affirmed.

Refuting and rebutting dispensational futurism's fantasies and fallacies.

I Strongly Disagree With Your Reformed Eschatology In 70AD Preterist Fulfillment

 

[Randy Kluth]

If the literal doesn't fit your narrative in teaching, it's removed through symbolic allegory "Apocalyptic Language" this being a prime example

I've not removed anything. I'm not sure what it means, literally or otherwise. Or even if it's *supposed* to be taken allegorically. Are you denying that *anything* should be taken allegorically? Normally, the context will tell you. But apocalyptic language by nature is difficult.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The word consummation is the very foundation interpreting Daniel 9:27 and its timing

This verse clearly teaches the bad guy seen will be present on earth until the "consummation" or "ultimate end" a future event unfulfilled

This word "Consummation" destroys your claims that Daniel 9:27 has been fulfilled historically in 66-70AD Jerusalem, Of course you want to disregard this scriptural truth to maintain your teaching

Jesus Is The Lord

What are you--hard of hearing? I told you I'm not sure about the interpretation of this last phrase, and it is argued over by scholars. So you want to make a controversial section the *main argument* for your position? The cults tend to do things like this. My position stands alone, even without considering this final phrase.

 

[Randy Kluth]

You have been clearly shown several times that Daniel's AOD seen in Matthew 24:15 & Daniel 9:27 didn't take place in 66-70AD as you claim, it's future unfulfilled

You can't have a fulfillment of Matthew 24:21 in a great tribulation, because Daniel's AOD causes or starts the great tribulation seen in Matthew 24:21, it's that simple

That doesn't make sense to me. Yes, the AoD starts the Great Tribulation. The AoD is the Roman Army laying siege to Jerusalem 66-70 AD, which started the Jewish exile. And this exile last throughout the NT age. Where is the contradiction in this?

 

[Randy Kluth]

It's hardly absurd. None of the events happened in the disciples lifetimes so we know without a doubt that he was saying "you" to future "yous".
This is how most prophecy works. The prophecy is written and people of that generation read it but the fulfillment is not in their lifetimes but FAR into the future.

Not interested. Saying "you" means nothing to you.

 

[covenantee]

I Strongly Disagree With Your Reformed Eschatology In 70AD Preterist Fulfillment

The historical true Church strongly repudiates your modernist dispensational futurist denial and rejection of historical prophetic fulfillments.

 

[covenantee]

Thinking you not catching what I'm conveying .

So clarify what you're conveying.

 

[covenantee]

So what happens next, what period of time are we in scripter wise ?

Christ's return, which we await in these last days which began 2,000 years ago.

Hebrews 1
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

 

[ScottA]

2) Jesus said that his Coming with his Kingdom would take place long after the events of his generation. At least, this was the obvious implication, since Jesus said that the fall of Jerusalem (70 AD) would lead to an age-long Jewish dispersion among the nations until he would return only at the end of the age. Clearly, Jesus separated the 2 questions about the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD and his Coming at the end of the age into 2 distinct answers.

This means that Jesus did *not* mean to include his own Coming as one of the events to take place in his own generation. He said his Coming would *end* this age, and that all of the birth pains would alone take place in his own generation, leading up to an age-long dispersion of the Jewish People.

Matthew 12:28
But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Matthew 12:28
But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you.

I've read the debate about how the Kingdom comes since the 70s when I read Ladd's "The Presence of the Future." It's a very interesting subject to me.

Teaching that the Kingdom had "drawn near" at his 1st Coming was a major part of Jesus' message. It had not come, but in a sense had "come upon the Jewish People." It confronted them with the decision to abide by the principles of the Kingdom, or not. They could follow Jesus and do right under the Law, or not. They could follow Jesus after the covenant of Law collapsed, or not.

But the Kingdom was "in their midst" by Jesus' own presence there, and not because the eschatological Kingdom had already arrived. I hope you don't mean that?

 

[ScottA]

I've read the debate about how the Kingdom comes since the 70s when I read Ladd's "The Presence of the Future." It's a very interesting subject to me.

Teaching that the Kingdom had "drawn near" at his 1st Coming was a major part of Jesus' message. It had not come, but in a sense had "come upon the Jewish People." It confronted them with the decision to abide by the principles of the Kingdom, or not. They could follow Jesus and do right under the Law, or not. They could follow Jesus after the covenant of Law collapsed, or not.

But the Kingdom was "in their midst" by Jesus' own presence there, and not because the eschatological Kingdom had already arrived. I hope you don't mean that?

Jesus said "has come", you say "had not come." I would say that puts you in accord with Israel (who crucified Him).

But that is the common misunderstanding...we should talk about it.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Jesus said "has come", you say "had not come." I would say that puts you in accord with Israel (who crucified Him).

But that is the common misunderstanding...we should talk about it.

What an incredible cheap shot! I'm "in accord with Israel who crucified him?" Don't bother answering...

 

[ScottA]

What an incredible cheap shot! I'm "in accord with Israel who crucified him?" Don't bother answering...

Sorry to offend, but not a cheap shot--perhaps a brutally honest one.

But we have seen this before, and it is no cheap shot to Israel either. Paul explained that their downfall was for our benefit--so no, I am not even being critical, but warning that strong delusion was foretold of our time, for having believed a lie--a scriptural fact of our times. Except in our case there is no other benefactor and therefore we do it to ourselves, not for us but against us, only to our shame.

Shall we not see or hear what history now attests, and repent while there is still time?

But let me be perfectly clear: Just as Israel crucified Christ in the flesh--the church and we who were once far off but now who have been invited to be partakers, have also put off what Christ brought for the blessing of every nation when He came. We to have not fully receiving Him in spirit according to His promise, saying that all should "shortly come to pass"--2,000 years ago. Which is not to you personally--even though you echo the same words, but rather to the whole assembly who has in its own way left Christ lay at rest for these two days as a carcass in the earth. Nonetheless, the third day He shall be perfected, just as He said. But what shall He find us doing--yeah, what has He found us doing now for millennia?

 

[Timtofly]

Surely you see how absurd your argument is here? Jesus is saying "you" not to the people he was looking at but to a nameless group in the future who would suddenly say, "He, I think he was speaking of me?"

Hal Lindsey has a lot of people to answer to with his definition of "this generation." Not only was that bad interpretation, but his prophecy, based on that interpretation, didn't come true. The generation that saw the rebirth of the State of Israel did *not* see the Rapture in 40 years, nor in 70 years. And those who follow him are making the same error.

They are not all dead yet either. Until they are all dead, you cannot claim they will not see the Second Coming.

 

[Timtofly]

There's no bad guy in Daniel 9:27. That is dispensational futurist fantasy and fallacy.

Amil claim a bad guy in Daniel 9:27. That is not a sole futurist point. Dispensations were held by Paul. A conversation based on name brands is boring and quite frankly a deceitful tactic. You cannot even define your own position, so you hide behind name calling like a five year old. Do you like Jif or Smuckers? Both are only peanut butter, and nothing special.

 

[Timtofly]

Last time I checked, good guy's don't make or cause desolation

Daniel 9:27KJV
27 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.

Are you saying God did not send plagues on Egypt in Exodus?

 

[Timtofly]

Jesus in Matthew 24:15 and the parallel synoptic Gospels affirmed Daniel's description of the destruction of Jerusalem in Daniel 9:27 in 70 AD.

No they did not. That is jumping to conclusions. Since Jesus Christ is the Prince confirming the Covenant in Daniel 9:27, where did Jesus affirm He was the army that destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70AD? Not even history can back up that claim. Jesus did not approach Jerusalem with an army and completely destroy the temple and city. That was not even prophecied in Daniel 9:26. Jesus' own people destroyed the temple, not Jesus Himself.

Daniel 9:27 is not even about destruction. It is about the removal of the Holy Spirit from the earth. It is where Satan is allowed total, that is 100%, control of the earth. It is abomination and desolation, not the end of some buildings.

The very act of salvation is chopping one's head off. How many churches today would last very long if the only way to be a member is having one's head chopped off? That would be considered an abomination and desolation. In fact no one would be alive after joining. That is the whole point. Physical death is the only way to escape this desolation. There is no enduring until the end. Only the ability of cutting off the head to prevent the mark of the beast. It is one or the other. Not some in between state.

Daniel 9:27 is still future, because no such desolation has been necessary.

Yes Jesus said the buildings of the temple would be destroyed. No, Jesus did not say when, in any verse we can read today. Yes it happened in 70AD. If you want to call what was said at the temple the OD, that is one's weird opinion. Jesus did not say anything about destruction in the words attributed to the discussion on the mount itself.

In fact Jesus did not give any time frames besides a generation. Jesus gave many more events besides buildings being destroyed. But you seem to be claiming a single event in 70AD to be the sole fulfillment of every prophecy in Scripture.