Timtofly
Well-Known Member
Amil is a private interpretation.Not true! You cannot support your wild speculations with hard Scripture. One just has to read back on any thread and they will see reams of private interpretation.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Amil is a private interpretation.Not true! You cannot support your wild speculations with hard Scripture. One just has to read back on any thread and they will see reams of private interpretation.
Give us Scripture for all this.Also the beginning of the Millennium without sin and death. Without deception and corruption. Israel will be the Nation, Jesus as King will rule from over the other Nations.
Israel will be saved and front and center. The end of the fulness of the Gentiles age.
You might as well tell him to give you a million dollars. They have the same chances of happening.Give us Scripture for all this.
Exactly. So true!You might as well tell him to give you a million dollars. They have the same chances of happening.
Point out in history where sin has been removed from the earth as you claim Daniel 9:24 has been fulfilled, and sin stopped existing in your ideological world view.Exactly. So true!
Point out in history where sin has been removed from the earth as you claim Daniel 9:24 has been fulfilled, and sin stopped existing in your ideological world view.
Point out in history where sin has been removed from the earth as you claim Daniel 9:24 has been fulfilled, and sin stopped existing in your ideological world view.
Point out in pre-19th century orthodox Christian history where any recognized defender of the true faith denied that Daniel 9:24 has been fulfilled.Point out in history where sin has been removed from the earth as you claim Daniel 9:24 has been fulfilled, and sin stopped existing in your ideological world view.
Point out in pre-19th century orthodox Christian history where any recognized defender of the true faith denied that Daniel 9:24 has been fulfilled.
There is in fact; no justification for there not to be a gap between the 69th week and the 70th.He cannot even show any justification for a gap-theory.
There is in fact; no justification for there not to be a gap between the 69th week and the 70th.
Many have tried to place the final 7 years in the first Century, They all fail to make a viable case.
What to believe?There is in fact; no justification for there not to be a gap between the 69th week and the 70th.
Many have tried to place the final 7 years in the first Century, They all fail to make a viable case.
We all agree that that 7 years is divided into 2 halves.
The time periods of 3 1/2 years, 42 months and 1260 days as given to us in Daniel and Revelation, is proof enough of the second half of the 7 years before Jesus Returns.
The first half, will be a time of peace, as the peace agreement, Daniel 9:27, holds.
There is in fact; no justification for there not to be a gap between the 69th week and the 70th.
Many have tried to place the final 7 years in the first Century, They all fail to make a viable case.
We all agree that that 7 years is divided into 2 halves.
The time periods of 3 1/2 years, 42 months and 1260 days as given to us in Daniel and Revelation, is proof enough of the second half of the 7 years before Jesus Returns.
The first half, will be a time of peace, as the peace agreement, Daniel 9:27, holds.
Good question. And they are in context with Daniels 490 years. Both are related to the Sabbatical system, both are linear, congruent and sequential. Neither are based on Andersons 360-day year theory.Are these seventy years linear, congruent and sequential?
Good question. And they are in context with Daniels 490 years. Both are related to the Sabbatical system, both are linear, congruent and sequential. Neither are based on Andersons 360-day year theory.
Futurista and Preterista.Absolutely bro. This is nothing but horrible, bias and inconsistent hermeneutics. Futurist and Preterista do this on opposite sides of the equation.
That is beyond absurd. Multiple related and relevant Scriptures exist to aid and facilitate the correct and accurate determination and establishment of context. Without their inclusion, exegesis becomes eisegesis, and correct Scriptural interpretation becomes incorrect private interpretation.
This is no surprise coming from a dispensationalist, but it does explain the egregious chaotic interpretive shipwreck that characterizes dispensationalism.
It must also be recognized that grammar supersedes context as the first priority in interpretive analysis, because the rules of grammar are objective, rather than context, which is subjective. This too is frequently flouted in dispensationalism, but is of essential interpretive importance.
Thank you bro. You may use it unreservedly in your own inspirational exegeses. Thanks.By the way bro. This statement is very powerful. It is true and inspired.
Do you mind if I quote some of this when addressing corroboration?
Thank you bro. You may use it unreservedly in your own inspirational exegeses. Thanks.