Search results

It seems to me that the grammar would indicate that the "he" in verse 27 points back to the reference to the Messiah in verse 26 and not to "the prince that will come" because the Messiah is the last individual focused on in verse 26. It's the people of the prince to come that would destroy the...

As I and a vast majority of Christians believe because that is so obviously what the Messiah being cut off means. That is not at all what the verse says. Do you deny that the following verse is about Jesus, also? Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment, And who will declare His...

I didn't say otherwise, so can you explain what you're talking about here?

In verse 7 the war is between the dragon, Satan, and his angels and Michael and his angels and relates to Satan being cast out of heaven whereas the war in verse 17 is between the dragon, Satan, and those who follow Jesus Christ after Satan has been cast out of heaven. So, those are not talking...

I have to wonder sometimes how carefully you read what people say. I made it very clear multiple times that the "he" in verse 27 is about Jesus confirming the new covenant and making the old covenant and its sacrifices and offerings obsolete. No, it doesn't. Not necessarily. In the reference to...

Verse 26 focuses on that rather than on the prince to come. It's the people of the prince to come who destroy the city and the sanctuary, not the prince himself. So, the last individual in focus is the Messiah mentioned just before that. That's who verse 27 is referring to regardless of who the...

He believes that the 70 weeks are 490 literal days that occur in the future and that the prophecy has nothing to do with Christ's death at all.

Who says that the third woe isn't described? I highly doubt anyone claims that. The third woe is equivalent to the seventh trumpet. Revelation 8:12 Then the fourth angel sounded: And a third of the sun was struck, a third of the moon, and a third of the stars, so that a third of them were...

Sure. I have no problem with that. It's clear that what is written about in the book is not all in chronological order, so that has to be taken into account when interpreting any part of it. The most clear example of this is when you read the end of Revelation 11 where it talks about things...

@WPM never said that. He just believes that the prince to come in verse 26 refers to Titus. He believes the "He" in verse 27 is referring to the Messiah, Jesus Christ, just as all Christians who actually have discernment do. You quoting 1 Samuel 15:23 here is completely inappropriate. You are...

But, Truth7t7 said none of Daniel 9:26-27, including the reference to the Messiah being cut off, relates to Christ's death on the cross. I believe you should consider removing your love emoji response from that post.

Well, good for you. He admits that he's not always clear. He's often not very clear to me. It makes sense that you might be able to understand his points better than I can at times because you are a preterist like him. I never said that it does. I'm more than willing to discuss possibilities of...

Abraham's bosom could not have been the third heaven/paradise because Jesus said no one had been in heaven except for Him as of the time He said this... John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man. Jesus is talking about the third...

Do you acknowledge that Jesus is also the God and King of the Gentiles throughout the earth with Jew and Gentile believers together as His "one body"? Romans 3:29 Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, Ephesians 2:11 Therefore...

So, do you believe that Daniel 9:26-27 at least refers partly to the physical destruction of Jerusalem and the temple or not? Apparently not, since in other posts you claim that what happened in 70 AD is never referenced in the Bible. So, why do you say "God sent the Roman Army to make a...

Hey, let's just go back and forth telling each other we're wrong 100 more times as if we're just little kids arguing. Sound like a good idea? I'm sure it does to you, but not to me. You are insisting on having the worst interpretation of any verse in the Bible that anyone has ever had. So be it...

Read the whole discussion. He already acknowledged that he made a mistake with what he said because of being exhausted from work and because of health issues that he's having.

I disagree with your reasoning here. The verse is talking about the prince to come as of the time the prophecy was given, not a prince to come after the Messiah comes. I believe you're reading things into the text with your logic. Nowhere does it indicate that the prince to come has to be some...

Absolutely false. 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...

Yes, you've shown me your false interpretation several times. You are easily the most repetitive person on this entire forum. You say the exact same things over and over again. How about we just agree to disagree at this point instead of you repeating the exact same copy and paste spiel.