Search results

Name one. Name, date, verbatim quote, link. Some actual evidence. Impossible for df, I know. It is virtually exclusively a df thing, integral and essential to the f in df, spawned in the Jesuit counterfeit counter-reformation of the historical apostasized papacy.

Not according to Luke 21:20. It was the Roman armies.

Brother, why are you ignoring Luke 21:20? There is a three-way corroboration between Matthew 24:15, Daniel 9:26-27, and Luke 21:20 which unmistakably identifies and confirms the AoD of 70 AD as the Roman armies. It is therefore a different AoD from Daniel 12:9-13. Hence your confusion.

To assist in the understanding of dispensational futurism's Matthew 24, I'm quoting several of its verses from its df bible. I trust this will be helpful: 4 And Jesus answered and said unto not them, Take heed that no man deceive not you. 5 For many shall not yet come in my name, saying, I am...

Everything that I quoted from the df bible is "not yet", so it is of the future. Exactly as you claim.

Feel free to explain with bias and understanding how ye is not ye, and/or see is not see, and/or Jerusalem is not Jerusalem, and/or compassed is not compassed, and/or armies is not armies, and/or know is not know, and/or desolation is not desolation, and/or nigh is not nigh.

From the df bible: Matthew 23 37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that not yet killest the prophets, and not yet stonest them which are not yet sent unto thee, how often would I have not yet gathered thy children together, even as a hen not yet gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would...

But Jesus didn't misjudge it. He spoke in the present tense, reflecting the impending doom of that generation.

Tell Jesus that He was wrong about everything.

Better tell Jesus that He was wrong. Matthew 23 37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 38 Behold, your...

Two of the defining characteristics of df are denial and disbelief. They accompany its fallacies and fantasies. All are abundantly present in your ravings here.

I'm amil. There's no bad guy in Daniel 9:27. df claims a bad guy in Daniel 9:27. Messiah the Prince in Daniel 9:25 is the grammatical antecedent of df's bad guy in Daniel 9:27. Do you think that Messiah the Prince is a bad guy?

It wasn't conjecture on Luke's part. Luke 21 20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. What to believe? 1. Luke's account or 2. Dispensational futurism's disbelief The Holy Spirit was Luke's inspiration in identifying the...

Christ's return, which we await in these last days which began 2,000 years ago. Hebrews 1 1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom...

So clarify what you're conveying.

The historical true Church strongly repudiates your modernist dispensational futurist denial and rejection of historical prophetic fulfillments.

He is Messiah the Prince, who confirmed His New Covenant (Matthew 26:28), caused sacrifice and oblation to cease by His Death in the midst of the 70th week, and desolated Jerusalem until its consummated complete destruction, using the Roman armies as His agents of judgment and complete...

Messiah the Prince was and is a Good Guy. He desolated Jerusalem until its consummated complete destruction, using the Roman armies as His agents of judgment and complete annihilation. Exactly as Daniel foretold.

Jesus in Matthew 24:15 and the parallel synoptic Gospels affirmed Daniel's description of the destruction of Jerusalem in Daniel 9:27 in 70 AD.

There's no bad guy in Daniel 9:27. That is dispensational futurist fantasy and fallacy.