Search results

That's a viable view and the one I held before as well. Either way, we know that it's talking about Jesus confirming the new covenant and making the old covenant obsolete in verse 27.

Well, this is a relief that you weren't trying to change the text, but just made a typo. I could not comprehend how you thought that saying "the prince of the people to come" is no different than "the people of the prince who shall come". Wow. You were boggling my mind there, dude. Not sure...

No, that is not the same at all. The first one indicates that it's the people who destroy the city and the sanctuary and the second one indicates that it's the prince who destroys the city and the sanctuary, as you have claimed. That is very different and not the same.

I agree with him on that, but even if verse 26 is referring to a different prince than Messiah the prince, the last individual focused on before verse 27 is the Messiah. It's the people of the prince to come that are in focus in verse 26, not the prince himself. So, verse 27 is referring to the...

Wow. No, it does not. What are you trying to pull here? You should know better than to be dishonest like this. Here is the verse from the KJV: 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...

LOL. You have a way with words, buddy. Why do you divert attention away from Hebrews 8 to 10 that speaks of Christ confirming the new covenant and making the old covenant and its animal sacrifices and offerings obsolete? You deny that Daniel 9:24-27 is all about Jesus Christ even though it so...

It does not say "the prince of the people", so why are you acting as if it does? It says "the people of the prince that shall come". The prince that shall come had previously been identified as Messiah the prince and He came exactly when the prophecy said He would right after the end of the 69th...

So, you think they will be resurrected then? Or are you still going to insist they were taken to the heaven where Jesus resides (the third heaven/paradise) despite Jesus saying no one had been there except Him as of the time He spoke in John 3:13?

They weren't taken there bodily. Their souls and spirits would have been taken to Abraham's bosom when they physically died.

Can you tell me in which post you gave your interpretation of John 5:28-29? That's what Jesus said. Do you think Jesus knew what He was talking about when He said there is a singular hour coming when all of the dead will be resurrected or not? Wrong. I'm an amillennialist, but not a partial...

You're turning a verse about Jesus Christ into a verse about some imaginary future Antichrist instead! Worst interpretation of scripture ever! Jesus Christ is the One who confirmed the new covenant and made the old covenant and its animal sacrifices obsolete (Hebrews 8-10). That is what Daniel...

I agree. Using the grammar rules that some use for Daniel 9:27, we would have to conclude that 2 Thessalonians 2:9 is talking about Jesus rather than "that wicked" (man of sin/lawlessness). 2 Thessalonians 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit...

Jesus being cut off refers to Him being crucified, not being removed from the sequence of events. He is the one in verse 27 who confirms the covenant, which is the new covenant, which made an end of the old covenant sacrifices and offerings by making them obsolete (Hebrews 8-10). You are very...

But, they were not taken up to the third heaven/paradise where Jesus is or else Jesus wouldn't have said this.... John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man. Jesus made no exceptions here. No one, including Enoch and Elijah, had ever gone to...

You're absolutely right. Notice I wasn't blaming you for me wasting my time trying to discuss things with you. That's on me. I need to just stop doing that since we both know our discussions rarely go anywhere. I was correct. He's going by how he interprets other parts of Revelation in order to...

I agree that it doesn't refer to Christ's crucifixion itself, but then you say this... You reveal your lack of spiritual discernment yet again. Daniel 9:27 is talking about when Jesus established the new covenant with His blood during the 70th week which also made the old covenant and its...

So, you think such a significant event as the killing of many Jews in Jerusalem and other parts of Judea and the destruction of the temple buildings that the Jews held in such high regard is not prophesied anywhere in scripture. Why wouldn't it be? It was God's wrath against the unbelieving...

Who fled to the mountains when Jesus was crucified? Why was it particularly difficult for nursing mothers and pregnant women to flee? Why did He say to pray that it wouldn't happen during the winter or on the Sabbath?

How can he have so much spiritual discernment, but not be able to answer simple questions? It's a mystery.

That's a big difference between you and almost everyone! You try to spiritualize almost the entire Bible. It's a joke. Tell me, can we take what Jesus said in the following passage literally at face value or is there some spiritual meaning that we should take from what Jesus said here... John...