Search results

There was no coming of Christ after the resurrection because the resurrection itself was the second coming of Christ. This is where Preterists, in my view, get it completely wrong. Like futurists, they look for another coming after the resurrection instead of recognizing that Christ literally...

The consummation was the consummation (completion) of the seventy weeks. During that seventy-week period came the end of earthly Jerusalem and the Old Covenant. The seventy weeks marked the beginning of the end for Daniel's people (the Jews) and his holy city (earthly Jerusalem). During those...

I’m King James only so I fully stand behind it but the KJV translators did capitalize “the prince to come” in their original writing. 26 And after threescore and two weekes, shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himselfe, and the people of the Prince that shall come, shall destroy the citie...

I agree it’s absurd to think both princes are the same but what I’m saying is that capitalizing prince doesn’t change who that prince is. The only way to prove who the prince in verse 27 is from the context of verse 27. The context of verse 27 is Jesus confirming the covenant God made to Abraham.

It doesn’t matter if prince is capitalized or not. Capitalization doesn’t prove anything.

Their drug and child trafficking operations fund that.

They tax you to keep you subservient and to prevent wealth accumulation by the peasants.

Whether it was Titus or some future person who causes the daily sacrifice to end, my point in asking those questions is to show that there are two separate "end of daily sacrifices" events. One is the physical stop — when the sacrifices are literally, forcibly prevented (the temple...

I think the Matrix and Terminator movies were documentaries.

I would assume you do agree that the Roman destruction ended the daily sacrifice from that point to now. Assuming you do agree, is this 2000 year hiatus of animal sacrifice found anywhere in the Bible or is the future hiatus the only one mentioned?

Do you agree that animal sacrifice should’ve stopped right then and there but stiff-necked Jews kept on doing it anyway in direct rebellion against God?

I disagree obviously, but out of curiosity, do you believe the death of Jesus ended God’s requirement for a daily sacrifice?

The death of Jesus caused the daily sacrifice and oblation to cease. The little horn took the daily sacrifice away by destroying the temple.

Are you saying that the “prince that shall come” is Jesus? I hope not because that would be saying that Christian’s (the people of Jesus) would be the ones to destroy the city and the sanctuary.

Nowhere in the Bible is the serpent identified as “The Antichrist”. In fact nowhere in the Bible is “The Antichrist” mentioned. The only reference to antichrist is the spirit of antichrist defined as anyone who denies that Jesus is the Christ.

I agree. God took their souls and spirits and the body stayed behind. As I’ve said before that’s how all believers leave here and go to be with the Lord and that’s why Jesus said whoever believes in Him shall never SEE death. Jhn 8:51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he...

No it doesn’t. Where do you see anything about an antichrist in Daniel 9? The prince that was to come was a person, the person responsible for leveling Jerusalem for killing their Messiah.

What do you mean by spiritual princes? I don’t understand what point you’re trying to make.

The entire prophecy is about Jesus, the prince to come is an explanation of what would be done to the people who cut him off.

One - Jesus. The prince that shall come was a literal person.