Search results

It's referring to the physical destruction of Jerusalem and the temple and figuratively describing it as being with a flood because of how the Roman armies would go into the entire city and overwhelm it and destroy it. It was figuratively like a wave of soldiers coming in and flooding the city...

That is the point I've been making as well, but the argument is being made that the "he" in verse 27 must refer to "the prince that shall come" in verse 26 and that is simply not the case. The Hebrew grammar allows that it can be pointing back to the last individual focused on in the previous...

Yes, that's one prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple and it's also mentioned in Luke 19:41-44, Luke 21:6-7, Luke 21:20-24, Matthew 22:7, Matthew 24:1-2, Matthew 24:15-22, Mark 3:1-2 and Mark 13:14-20. Some of those are parallel passages, obviously. I'm trying to see if he...

His people, the Jews, were responsible for the destruction of the city and the sanctuary because of having rejected Christ. So, that's a viable way of looking at it. First, the prophecy mentions Messiah the prince in verse 25, and then it mentions the Messiah (not Messiah the prince this time...

You don't have to be a preterist to see it that way. That's where you are flat out wrong. You acknowledge that what happened in 70 AD was God's wrath and punishment against the unbelieving Jews, right? So, what is wrong with believing that the Bible prophesied that event? That's not preterist...

Yes, I know that. Where did you get this from what I said? Of course I know that and never said otherwise. Go back and read the whole discussion so that you can know what it's about. This discussion was about whether Enoch and Elijah had ascended to heaven (the third heaven/paradise). I'm...

I never said that a date was given. Why can't you ever just respond to what I'm actually asking instead of resorting to strawman arguments? Let me try again. Do you believe that what ended up happening in 70 AD, which you acknowledge was God's wrath and judgment against unbelieving Jews, was...

When people lie, what do you call them? No matter how many times I tell you I'm not a preterist, you keep falsely accusing me of being one. That is a lie. So, if you don't like being called a liar, then stop lying about me. I don't! I just read one of your posts where you acknowledge that what...

So, which verses in the Bible do you think prophesy about that event of God's wrath and judgment against unbelieving Jews that occurred in 70 AD, if any?

Why would the consummation not refer to the previously mentioned physical destruction of the city and the sanctuary which came about because of the Jews having cut off the Messiah and continuing to mostly reject Him right up until the city and the sanctuary were destroyed?

I'm fine with that view and agree with your view. I'm NOT defending preterists! That is a LIE! Why do you insist on lying about me? Repent of your LIES! I'm showing how it's viable to see verse 26 as possibly referring to both the Messiah, Jesus, and to Titus, without that meaning that verse 27...

Why do you say that?

You have this false idea that the reference to the prince that shall come somehow is saying that the prince that shall come would come some time after the Messiah comes. That is not at all what the text indicates. It simply refers to a prince that would come some time in the future from the time...

This is what I believe as well, but somehow it makes me a preterist and you're not. What gives? Unbelievable.

Will you, for once, read what I actually say? Take your time for once and pay attention to what is actually being said. I'm saying that view is viable because of how Hebrew grammar works. I'm being fair to that particular view. It doesn't require believing that verse 27 has to be in reference...

No, it does not. If that was the case, I'd agree with them that all, or at least most of the Olivet Discourse and the book of Revelation were fulfilled by 70 AD, but I do not. So, you have no clue as to what you're talking about, as usual. Nonsense! I do not claim that Jesus came in 70 AD like...

What happened with Paul was after Jesus said what He did in John 3:13. You keep trying to find ways around the truth, but you can't do it.

The concept is taught in scripture, as I showed in my post that you apparently ignored. The concept that is not taught in the Bible is that God shows favoritism to the people of Israel over the people of other nations. Acts 10:34 Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God...

When people lie, as you did, I call them liars. It's too bad that you think it's okay to lie. You should repent of your lies instead of whining about me calling it out.

He probably likes both equally well since he believes in two raptures. LOL.