Search results

You can interpret your Scripture. I'll let Scripture interpret mine.

I described your replacement attempts as "replacement ideology" to distinguish them from "replacement theology".

Who or what interprets Scripture? 1. You or 2. Scripture Do you need a hint?

But an abomination of desolation can stand in a city. Which is what the Roman army did, in 70 AD, 40 years after Messiah was cut off. Scripturally, historically, and grammatically, "the prince who shall come" was "Messiah the Prince". Messiah was (and is) a Prince, who did come some 500 years...

You are stuck attempting to replace (via replacement ideology) objective Biblical grammar with your subjective private interpretations.

You are stuck attempting to override grammatical objectivity with your interpretive subjectivity.

You are stuck on grammatical denial.

You refuse, with no reason, to acknowledge that "Messiah the Prince" is a qualifying grammatical referent of "the prince who shall come". Grammar is comprised of the fixed objective rules governing a language. Interpretation is subjective and variable. The objective rules of grammar must be...

Jerusalem was the holy city, and the city was a place. The Roman armies stood in the holy place, Jerusalem. Do you comprehend?

Scripture interprets Scripture. I only need to quote it.

The destruction of Jerusalem was Divinely Ordained to signal the passing of the old covenant and all of its vestiges, and to affirm the establishment of the New Covenant and the spiritual Kingdom of God. Aware Christians know that multitudes of Jews have embraced Christ since Calvary. Why do...

A city is a place. "what part of that do you fail to comprehend>"

The referent of "the prince that shall come" is "Messiah the Prince" in verse 25. The Romans were the agents and servants, the people, of Messiah, to accomplish His purposes of judgment and destruction upon the nation that had rejected Him. Multitudes of Jews have accepted Jesus' gospel of...

Nehemiah 11:1 And the rulers of the people dwelt at Jerusalem: the rest of the people also cast lots, to bring one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem the holy city, and nine parts to dwell in other cities. Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O...

The correct term is actually "referent", which is defined as: "the person, thing, or idea that a word, phrase, or object refers to". There is no noun or pronoun dependency. The referent of "the prince that shall come" is "Messiah the Prince" in verse 25. Messiah was, and is, a Prince...

Yes. And what is the antecedent of "the prince who shall come"?

The holy place was the holy city of Jerusalem. The desolation of which was the Roman conquest objective.

True and corroborated by Luke 21:20: And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. The Roman armies bore the pagan ensigns in battle, and worshiped them. An idolatrous abomination to the monotheistic Jews.

Yeah. Darby/Scofield modernist Jesuit futurism. Futurized fantasy and fallacy.

Grammar doesn't guess.