Search results

The context of the words "for thy people and for thy holy city" demands "cut off" aka "cut off a portion which will pertain only to Jews and Jerusalem" refers to cutting off the 490 from the 2300.

God isn't going to force anyone to stay who chooses to leave. Plenty of texts support this... ...like the Unmerciful Servant who asked and received a full pardon but wound up again responsible for his original sin debt because he refused to allow the character of his master to be manifested in...

No, it is YOU who continues to gaslight. No matter how many times I tell you I'm a Protestant Historicist, you keep saying I'm a Preterist or preach Jesuit Preterism. Protestant Historicism existed decades BEFORE Jesuit Preterism came on the scene, which anyone who climbs on here and presumes...

The "two witnesses" are "the sons of oil". What is it that the "oil of the Spirit" gives life to? That which is "given by inspiration of God" - the Word of God. A comparison of Revelation 11 and Zechariah 4 shows that these "Two Witnesses" are the OT and NT. It's referring to the French Revolution.

Whether you realize it or not, you have follwed after the same Jesuit errors that most of all Christianity has. As an SDA, we don't have to spin anything. They can't be literal because you can't "cut off" 490 years from 2300 literal days. I'm not talking about the "karat" of verse 25 -------...

A Biblical parable can contain things that cannot and do not happen in real experience, as in Jotham's parable of the trees or Abel's blood crying out from the ground. Luke 16:19-31 KJV is most definitely a parable depicting things that do not happen in real experience. Demanding that the use...

Yep, I don't trust anything except Scripture - and whatever the news or the "official government report" says, I immediately rule that out.

No, the prophecy says the 490 years are "cut off" from the 2300 years and designate that portion of the 2300 years as pertaining only to the Jews and Jerusalem. The two prophecies are intrinsically tied together for the three reasons I gave you, and therefore both begin at Artaxerxes' 457 B.C...

I know what the text says, which is where I got the three undeniable textual facts for why the 70 and the 2300 are intrinsically tied, making the 2300 days to be as much a literal 2300 years as the 70 Weeks are 490 years.

Please do not gaslight me, sir, because I have zero patience for it. I've already told you that while Jesuit Preterism claims all prophetic events happened in the 1st century, Protestant Historicism says these events began unfolding in the 1st century and continue to unfold alongside history...

The evidence points to widespread papal control of politics and religion via a network of Jesuit controlled secret societies: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTbHLOB5jHyPxt6B3dZfpVCTpDK6VdBUi I would say that's circular reasoning. We can't substantiate doctrine on uninterpreted...

Holy smoke, we're saying the same thing! It's the "latter time of their kingdom" meaning "the end of the four kingdoms established by Cassander, Ptolomey, Lysimachus, and Seleucid" that we are to look for the Little Horn to arise. The only power that was "exceeding great" that arose at that...

I agree with that! It is at the end of the reign of the four Greek kingdoms that the Little Horn was to arise. The Pagan Rome Little Horn arose and attacked horizontally to expand its empire and then morphed into Papal Rome when it began attacking vertically toward God's throne. This is...

I believe there was a day in 70 A.D. when the Lord withdrew forever divine protection of Jerusalem. I believe there was a day in 539 B.C. when God used MP to bring the Babylonian empire to an end. What "lies"? I never said they were.

Again, when the angel told John of the city that was "reigning over the kings of the Earth" he had already finished the chapter 17 revelation and had commenced explaining it to John - which means "is that great city" is present perfect tense, as is "reigneth over the kings of the Earth" which is...

I'm a Protestant Historicist and your insistence on confusing that with Jesuit Preterism proves you don't understand a thing about Historicism and therefore are wholly unqualified to comment on it...which is to be expected from one seduced by the Babylonian wine of Jesuit Futurism.

This statement is to me incredible. A blind man can see the two prophecies are linked, as shown below: Gabriel came to explain Daniel's 2300 Days confusion and the words he used were the 70 Weeks. Gabriel said "consider the mareh" which Hebrew word exclusively refers to the 2300 Days "vision"...

Protestant Historicism correctly interprets the Ten Toes of Daniel 2 which rise after the fall of the Roman legs of iron to be the same Ten Horns of the Fourth Beast in Daniel 7 which depict the Ten Barbarian nations which arose out of the ashes of the fallen Roman Empire: Anglo Saxons =...

Jesus said what's done to His children is done to Him. In Sodom, the exceeding wickedness and hatred of righteousness by the inhabitants brought down the judgment of God, exemplified by the unbridled hostility and defiance of the men of Sodom who sought to rape and murder God's people for...

Look, you're a victim of a flawed foundation - you insist on interpreting the 70 Weeks as symbolic, but the 2300 Days from which the 70 are cut off, as literal. You refuse to concede that Antiochus arose at the midpoint of the reign of the four kingdoms so that he can be the Little Horn which...