Search results

You promote and defend Preterit doctrine but you don't believe you are a Preterit? And you call me a liar? Gee, wouldn't be calling me a Preterit be an insult for you? I mean since you've called not only I but many of the people posting in these forums much worse, belittling, laughing at...

But you are defending WPM who says it is Titus! If you don't want to be linked with him, stop defending the error! In this passage of Daniel 9 there is no mention of any other Messiah, prince or he that is NOT Christ! Than why are you defending someone who does say that? I quoted him, you...

No, this is how you whine when I label you Preterit for promoting and defending the Preterit doctrine.

How is that a viable understanding? Whether 'he' refers to Messiah in vs 26 or the prince that shall come, you still haven't explained how 'he' that shall confirm/strengthen the covenant can be anyone other than Christ! Where in Scripture, not history past can we find Titus or anyone else...

Be careful not to judge others for what you are guilty of! Matthew 7:1-2 (KJV) Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. No, what you're doing is trying to protect the Preterit...

Mental gymnastics! Yes, the people of the prince destroy the city and sanctuary, therefore 'he' is either referring to the prince who shall come or the people of the prince. He not 'they' or 'them' as WPM and apparently you are trying to force. If 'he' was Titus and the Roman Army or even the...

Since it is the people of the prince who shall come, that CORRUPT the city and sanctuary are the Jewish people, I think there might be less confusion if 'shachath' had been translated corrupt. Because the city and temple were already corrupt when Messiah the Prince came, and after the cross...

Taking the popular position does not make that opinion truth. How do you explain (without doing mental gymnastics with the passage) how "he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week" if 'he' is not Messiah the Prince? 'He' can only be referring to "the prince that shall come" who is...

It seems that you want to re-write the verses to support the Preterit point of view? Dan 9:25-27 speak of only ONE prince, written as Messiah the Prince, Messiah cut off, the prince that shall come, and he shall confirm the covenant, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it...

More Preterit gymnastics. Just spin and twist he of vs 27 to be Christ while saying the prince that shall come is Titus, even though the passage clearly says the prince that shall come is the SAME he who shall confirm the covenant.

EXACTLY! Who do you think he of vs 27 is if not the same prince of the people that shall come? Of course, making the prince that shall come Titus with the Roman Army changes who he of vs 27 is. I call it Preterit gymnastics! Trying to force the physical destruction into this passage of...

This is confusing because WPM said that he believes the prince of the people who shall come is Titus with the Roman Army. How could it be Titus with the Roman Army since the prince of the people that shall come is the same he that shall confirm the covenant with many of vs. 27.

The question focuses on who the people of the prince that shall come is? Yes, the prince that shall come is the same he who shall confirm the covenant in vs 27. The prince that shall come is NOT Titus coming with the Roman Army as WPM and others believe.

David, ask yourself what and why Daniel prayed an incredibly heartfelt prayer to God for himself and his people while still in captivity after the first temple and city and been destroyed by the Babylonians. Tell me if you agree that the re-built temple and sanctuary would also be made...

That's because you're reading this without understanding why God sent the Babylonians to destroy the city and sanctuary. Daniel's heartfelt prayer tells us WHY. Because the people of Messiah, the Prince who was the one to come had become an abomination before the LORD, making both city and...

No David, they are not the same. You're trying to make the prince who is to come the one who destroys the city and sanctuary. The verse does not say that. It says the people of the prince who was to come are the ones who destroy the city and sanctuary. IOW the Jewish people themselves, who...

Sadly, this is true! In the days of Daniel, the people of the prince who was to come were Jews. They became apostates before God, turning away from Him they made the city and sanctuary abominable and desolate. Daniel understood this as the reason God sent the Babylonians to destroy both city...

Why do you doubt that they are one and the same? Isn't the Messiah the Prince also the prince of the people who destroyed the city and sanctuary? Listening to Daniel's prayer for his people seems to make it clear the first physical destruction through the Babylonian Army was the result of...

It wasn't the prince (the Messiah) who was to come who destroyed the city and sanctuary, it was His people, apostate Jews. Through spiritual abominations the city and sanctuary had been made desolate. For this reason, the city and sanctuary were destroyed in the days of Daniel, and this will...

Yes, but not all have been translated from the Hebrew נָגִיד nâgîyd, naw-gheed'. In this verse prince of Persia comes from שַׂר sar, sar as do the princes of Israel Daniel prays for (9:6). שַׂר sar, sar - a head person of any rank or class נָגִיד nâgîyd - a commander (as occupying the...