Search results

You're welcome. Clement saw weeks of years, which is the only way that Daniel can be interpreted correctly, a lllooonnnggg time before Newton.

Chris, that's the dispensational error. Messiah is the only individual identified as a prince in the passage. If he is mistaken as Titus, then the grammatical referents mean that the "he's" in verse 27 refer to Titus. Titus was temporal prince. But he was under the divine command and control...

Stromata – Book I Chapter 21, The Jewish Institutions and Laws of Far Higher Antiquity Than the Philosophy of the Greeks

Why do you persist in your misquote? The verse does not read "prince of the people". It reads "people of the prince". The prince is unequivocally identified through grammatical referents as Messiah. And I've described in previous posts how His people were the Roman armies, His agents of judgment...

ECF Clement of Alexandria recognized the weeks as years way back in the 2nd century: Clement of Alexandria 150-215 AD (On Daniel 9:24-27 ; The 'Seventy Weeks' of Daniel) From the captivity at Babylon, which took place in the time of Jeremiah the prophet, was fulfilled what was spoken by Daniel...

Not necessarily. Undecided.

Timtofly wrote the post you responded to, and the topic is Josephus.

Still no evidence. Still more lying.

From your post 886: "Josephus put the event into the historical record. Obviously he believed it happened." You claimed this knowing full well that you could not provide supporting evidence. That's what.

Not different. He is identified as "prince" exclusively, and there is only one prince in the passage. He is Messiah. You "amnot here to teach basic rules of grammar" because you haven't learned them. Stop trying to impose your dispensational distortions upon the Inspired Constructs of the...

Let us examine your attempt at grammatical analysis. 1. I listed "prince" in verse 26 as a referent of the "he's" in verse 27. 2. There is only one individual identified as a prince in the passage, and it is Messiah, who from Scripture and history was a prince long before any Roman ruler. 3...

As expected, you're unable to provide any evidence to support your claim. So you've been lying.

Never have I said that "it was not Josephus". That's just another of your innumerable insufferable misrepresentations. "The people of the Church in Jerusalem were commanded by an oracle given by revelation before the war to those in the city who were worthy of it to depart and dwell in one of...

"Grammatically". Thanks for the guffaw. Readers will note your own flawless grammar, and therefore your eminent qualifications to exegete Daniel 9:25-27 grammatically. So, using your flawless grammatical processes, describe how "antichrist" appears grammatically in the said passage...

What did he say in his historical record? Provide a verbatim copy paste.

Josephus didn't flee.

Wow how dispens see their hallucinatory appartition antichrist everywhere they look. Since they don't believe that it was Christ who destroyed Jerusalem, it musta been their antichrist who did it. Maybe that guy tutus. Imagine that. Like they do.

How is what happened in 66 AD a premillenial or dispensational event? Have premils and dispens converted to preterism?

The Judean Christians fled in 66 AD when they saw "Jerusalem compassed with armies" (Luke 21:20,21). That qualifies as both a preterist and a historical event.

The Judean Christians fled in 66 AD. That qualifies as a preterist event.