Recent content by Davidpt

Maybe you have a fair point. I can admit that perhaps you do. What I think needs to be asked is this then. and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; This should be understood like this. There is a people of a particular prince, and it is these...

In verse 4 why did Commandements need to be capitalized? In verse 6 why did Prophets need to be capitalized? Also in verse 6, why was 'Name' capitalized? In verse 10 why did Lawes and Prophets needs to be capitalized? in verse 11 why did Law need to be capitalized? In verse 12 why did...

You need to look at in light of the following. And if you have any disputes with any of the following, simply querie Google and see if it will provide any links to what is being asserted here, then see if any of those links agree or disagree. Unless you can prove via sources on the internet that...

In that example you used, they also capitalized Sanctuarie. Therefore, what is your point?

I agree with you in return. Since I am not arguing that the capitalization of someone in verse 25 and 26 determines who is meant in verse 27. Even if Prince nor Messiah was capitalized in verse 25 and 26, it would still mean Jesus in verse 27, regardless. But as to the prince in question per...

"### Did the Translators Believe They Were the Same Person? Even though the 1611 translators didn't use capitalization to make the distinction, **your conclusion is absolutely correct:** neither the original 1611 translators nor the later 1769 editors believed the "Prince" of verse 25 and the...

In later additions it proves that the translators didn't take both princes to be one and the same. Since it is absurd, that if they did, that they then capitalized prince in verse 25 but didn't in verse 26. Why not if thy bothered to do so in verse 25 and that they took both to be one and the same?

What I typically do is type up what I plan on submitting, in Notepad first, then paste, then send. If it's going to be a lengthy post. But posts like this one I simply type up in real time then send. Notepad is not needed in this case.

The AI explained the history of KJV in great detail. Did you all not read what it said? The AI clearly said one cannot use the 1611 edition to prove anything one way or the other. Therefore, this is a strawman based on what the AI said. I'm simply using an AI as a tool for researching purposes...

Below, as the AI pointed out, but maybe you never read that part? ----------------- "Just be aware that if someone tries to "debunk" your point by pulling up a picture of the 1611 edition and showing erratic capitalization, you can counter by pointing out that modern capitalization rules...

Daniel 9:26 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...

Me: Not to mention. Take the KJV, for instance. The translators put Prince in verse 25 in Caps but did not do that with the prince meant in verse 26. Obviously, had the translators taken the 2nd prince to be meaning the prince in verse 25, they would have put that prince in caps as well. If...

Me: Is the following fact pertaining to Daniel 9:26, meaning these alleged grammar rules? ---------------- The Hebrew grammar allows that it can be referring to the last individual who was the subject, which refers to "the Messiah" in verse 26 and not necessarily the prince who was to come...

I will try and answer these things in this manner. Destroying someone can involve more than one idea. It can mean killing them, corrupting them, ruining them, or bringing them to spiritual desolation. The Hebrew word 'shachath' itself is broad enough to encompass more than merely demolishing...

Yes but not in the way you think. I will try and explain later since it is somewhat difficult to explain in a sentence or 2. Right now I'm just not prepared to try and type all of that out. Maybe later, assuming I don't forget.