In Daniel 8, 11, and 12, is A4E meant? Or is a future anti-christ meant?

[Spiritual Israelite]

IOW, per your view the thousand years and the 42 month reign of the beast = the same era of time, the past 2000 years in this case. As if that can make sense that a thousand years vs 42 months, thus a long era of time pertaining to the former, a short era of time pertaining to the latter, that these are referring to the same era of time, a long era of time, 2000 years and counting, in this case. Except logic says that 42 months can't represent the same amount of time that a thousand years can represent. That's just common sense.

LOL. It is foolish to rely on your human wisdom the way you do. You clearly have no understanding of what Paul wrote about here...

1 Corinthians 2:9 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Stop thinking like the natural man who thinks the deeper things of God are foolishness. We're talking about the most highly symbolic book in the entire Bible here and you insist on interpreting it as literally as possible.

If the time period was meant to be taken literally then why is it referred to as 42 months, 1260 days and a time, times and half a time? Why is it referred to in 3 different ways like that if it's a literal time period? The fact that it's referred to the way it is makes for strong evidence that it's not meant to be taken literally. Otherwise, it would be referenced the same way each time.

Your lack of understanding of the identity of the two witnesses is one big reason why you are not able to understand how the 42 months/1260 days can be figurative of the New Testament era (up until Satan's little season). The two witnesses symbolically represent the church and its witness during the NT time period. The two witnesses are referred to as two candlesticks because candlesticks represent churches or congregations in the book of Revelation (Rev 1:20), so that represents the Jew and Gentile congregations witnessing together as one body of Christ (the church). They are referred to as two olive trees because that represents the branches of the wild olive tree, representing Gentile believers, being grafted in with the branches of the natural olive tree, representing Jewish believers, as Paul wrote about in Romans 11.

How do you explain the beast coming out of the bottomless pit at the end of the 42 months/1260 days in Revelation 11:7, when you have the beast coming out of the bottomless pit just before or at the beginning of the 42 months in Revelation 13?

It would be like someone in a math class claiming that the number 42 and the number 1000 can equal the same amount. Yet, no one, and I'm assuming including you, would ever propose such nonsense.

Like the natural man, you consider the deeper things of God to be nonsense because you can't spiritually discern anything. You rely completely on your own flawed human wisdom for understanding and that's why you believe false doctrine. You are frequently not able to discern the difference between literal and figurative text because of your carnal way of thinking.

42 months = 1260 days. 1000 years = 360,000 days, that assuming literal days are meant. No way in any universe can 1260 days mean the same thing as 360,000 days, even if in both cases the literal amount specified is not meant.

There's no way in your carnal mind it can mean that, but in reality it certainly can. We both believe that the 70 weeks of Daniel 9:24-27 is not 490 literal days, but 490 years instead. How are you able to allow for 70 weeks to equal 490 years, but for some reason you can't allow for any other time periods to be symbolic?

Assuming Amil is the correct view, it would obviously have to mean that the 42 months represent satan's little season.

That's nonsense. Why would any Amil claim that worshiping the beast and having the mark of the beast, etc. only applies during Satan's little season when his little season follows the time, symbolically referred to as the thousand years, during which Christ's followers did not worship the beast or have its mark?

Except that doesn't appear to be your view.

Why would it be? It makes no sense at all. You're not even thinking here.

There is nothing logical about a thousand years and 42 months equaling the same amount of time, the same era of time.

Not in the carnal mind, it isn't, but those of us who don't rely on our own flawed minds and imaginations have no trouble with that.

Even Preterists, though I disagree with them as well, would never suggest that a thousand years and 42 months mean the same era of time and involve the same amount of time.

LOL. As if this means anything to me? You may have noticed that I refute preterist arguments on a regular basis here? Why would I care what they think about this?

You have told me in the past that I only think I'm being logical about things when I really am not. As if you might have room to talk if you are proposing utter nonsense that a thousand years and 42 months are meaning the same thing, are involving the same era of time, the past 2000 years in this case, that assuming the thousand years precede the 2nd coming. Even if it does, common sense says that the 42 months would follow the thousand years in that case, not parallel them instead. If your view is supposed to be correct why isn't there at least some logic to it? There is no logic to any view that insists a thousand years and 42 months mean the same thing, are involving the same era and amount of time.

I could not care less about your flawed common sense. You are wasting your time with all this gibberish. You expect symbolic text to make sense in a literal, common sense way, which is just ridiculous.

Keeping in mind you did say this--- I see the 42 months, 1260 days and time, times and half a time as being symbolic representations of the New Testament time period. If you are not meaning the past 2000 years by that, then what are you meaning by that?

LOL. I meant what I said. You know when the New Testament time period is, right? So, yes, I believe it represents the time leading up to Satan's little season, which I believe is symbolically referenced as 3.5 days in Revelation 11:11.

The last thing thing I need is you once again accusing me of misrepresenting your view.

Every single time, without fail, that I have said you have misrepresented my view, you misrepresented my view. I understand my view far better than you do.

Also keeping in mind, per your view the past 2000 years equal the thousand years. LOL, you can't have the thousand years and this 42 months in question both meaning the past 2000 years if you expect anyone to take you seriously. Meaning anyone with a brain taking you seriously.

Here's your problem. Your doctrine is based primarily on some of the most difficult to interpret passages in all of scripture while my doctrine (Amil) is based primarily on clear, straightforward passages that I use to help understand more difficult passages. If YOU want to be taken seriously, then address what I said in the first 2 posts of this thread: Unlike Amillennialism, Premillennialism is based on assumptions and speculation rather than on any clear, straightforward scriptures

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Is Jesus returning to this earth ? If so, there is a gap between His first coming and His second coming.... correct ?

Yes, but this is irrelevant in relation to there being any gaps in the 70 weeks. The prophecy says that 70 weeks were determined to fulfill the six things listed in Daniel 9:24 and gives no indication whatsoever of there being any gaps during the determined time period.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Again false!

Dan 9:26-27
(26) And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
(27) And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

No, the destruction of the city and the sanctuary, the Old Testament congregation, comes before Christ confirmed a covenant for one week. The confirmation of the covenant is for the New Testament congregation - the one that Christ rebuilt in three days over the fallen tabernacle (the Old Testament congregation as a kingdom representative).

LOL. You just repeat the same nonsense over and over again. You make everything more difficult than it needs to be. Jerusalem and its temple buildings were destroyed in 70 AD and there is plenty of historical evidence to back that up. The prophecy related to Daniel's people, the Israelites, in particular, so it relates to their city and sanctuary where they gathered to worship. Jerusalem and the temple buildings were destroyed just as Daniel prophesied and just as Jesus said they would be.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Take verse 25, for instance. Nothing in this verse is meaning outside of the 69 weeks and that it has a beginning point and an ending point. No one would argue that what is recorded in verse 25, that any of it is meaning outside of the 69 weeks. The same should be true for verse 27. None of it is meaning outside of the 70th week. Therefore, it demands that there is a gap in the 70th week because verse 27 also has to have an ending point recorded just like verse 25 has an ending point recorded.


By making some of verse 27 to be meaning outside of the 70th week, now there is nothing recorded in verse 27 that tells us how the 70th week ends. I don't find that to be acceptable, that nothing in verse 27 reveals how the 70th week ends. That equals cherry picking and is mainly caused by doctrinal bias'. Anyone not coming to the text with doctrinal bias' are going to conclude that this in verse 27 reveals the manner in which the 70th week ends---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

That's how the 70 weeks end. Therefore, the 70 weeks cannot be fulfilled without there being a gap somewhere within them. The way you and others try and get around this is like such---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate--this is not meaning during the 70th week, this is meaning after the 70 weeks were finished in it's entirety earlier on. If that is true, prove it per verse 25 by showing that some of it too is meaning after the first 69 weeks are fulfilled. That way you are treating both verse 25 and 27 in the same manner. IOW, if verse 27 can involve events outside of the 70th week, then so should verse 25 be able to involve events outside of the 69 weeks.


Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.


No one argues that anything recorded in this verse are involving events outside of this 69 weeks.

While OTOH, some are arguing per verse 27, that, though the context is the 70th week, not all of verse 27 is pertaining to the 70th week. Only up to this part is it pertaining to the 70th week---and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease. Except the middle of the week is not the end of the week, it is the middle of it. So where is the remainder of the week recorded in verse 27? Obviously, here---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. Except some are arguing that that part is not even pertaining to the 70th week, since they know full well, to argue that means they have to then admit to a gap in the 70 weeks, something they are arguing against not for.

Putting a huge gap within a prophecy that never said it would have any gaps is what I find to be unacceptable. It says in Daniel 9:24 that 70 weeks were determined to fulfill the six things listed in the verse. That means those six things would be fulfilled within a determined 70 week (490 year) time period. Your view stretches that time period at least 2,000 years beyond what was determined starting with the commandment to restore and rebuild Jerusalem.

 

[TribulationSigns]

LOL. You just repeat the same nonsense over and over again. You make everything more difficult than it needs to be. Jerusalem and its temple buildings were destroyed in 70 AD and there is plenty of historical evidence to back that up. The prophecy related to Daniel's people, the Israelites, in particular, so it relates to their city and sanctuary where they gathered to worship.

LOL. Says the one recycling the same warped preterism-inspired interpretation on loop. Daniel’s “people” weren’t just ethnic Jews—they were the whole congregation of Israel: Old Testament Israel, then New Testament Israel, the Church. All six points in Daniel 9:24 apply to them. End of story.

Jerusalem and the temple buildings were destroyed just as Daniel prophesied and just as Jesus said they would be.

Ah, yes—because clearly Daniel 9:26 was all about bricks and mortar. Except… NOT! The “Jerusalem” and “temple” there weren’t about some doomed pile of stone—they pointed to Christ’s own body, the Old Testament congregation that fell before He confirmed the New Covenant. And that’s the temple He rebuilt in three days. But hey, if you’d rather trade the glory of the gospel for a demolition report, go right ahead.

 

[covenantee]

False. The studies, like yours, out there dripping with speculation of when this Covenant is confirmed. For we 'must' let the Bible itself tell us what it means.

We know From the context (after the 62 weeks) that it starts after the cross, after Messiah the Prince is 'Cut Off.' And we know that this Prince Confirms [gabar], a Hebrew word which actually is Strengthened, the Covenant after these 62 weeks. Therefore, the final week cannot start until Christ is cut Off FIRST! Not when Christ was baptized! Moreover, we know that in the middle of this final week, the sacrifice and offering will cease, and that at the end of this last week, is the consummation. This much is clearly told us in the verse. And so God has told us that that this final week is from the cross (after 62 weeks when Messiah is cut off), and goes all the way from there, to the Consummation (the End of the World). And so what need is there to speculate? On several levels we see that it signifies the New Covenant week. In fact, the only reason anyone would speculate differently would be if they didn't understand how sacrifice and offering ceases in the middle of the week. Many people believe this refers to the 'literal' sacrifice of lambs ceased at the Cross and eventually the fallen literal temple in 70AD, and so they are confused by a New Covenant week, with sacrifice ceasing, after the cross.

Selah!



False. The final week of 70 weeks of Daniel is in process until the Second Coming, the Consummation. Not your fallen Jewish temple in 70AD.

Your gnosis psychosis is on full display today.

Daniel 9
24 Seventy weeks are determined...

Explain how your decapitated orphaned undetermined 70th week can exist within Daniel's 70 determined weeks.

It can't.

Daniel and the Holy Spirit who inspired him are immeasurably smarter than you.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Your gnosis psychosis is on full display today.

You need to read again,

"And we know that this Prince Confirms [gabar], a Hebrew word which actually is Strengthened, the Covenant after these 62 weeks. Therefore, the final week cannot start until Christ is cut Off FIRST! Not when Christ was baptized!"

How does this suddenly turn into “gnosis psychosis”? Sounds more like a classic case of “I don’t like what I’m hearing, so I’ll just dismiss it.” Convenient, isn’t it?

Daniel 9
24 Seventy weeks are determined...

Explain how your decapitated orphaned undetermined 70th week can exist within Daniel's 70 determined weeks.

It can't.

Daniel and the Holy Spirit who inspired him are immeasurably smarter than you.

LOL!!!!!! You are not reading correctly!

Dan 9:24-27
(24) Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
(25) Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
(26) And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
(27) And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

The seventy weeks aren’t some exclusive VIP pass for ethnic Jews only as you thought it only Daniel's people. Wrongo! They’re determined for all of God’s Saints, both Old Testament Israel and New Testament Israel, the Church. WE will all sit at the same table with Abraham, David, and Daniel at the Second Coming BECAUSE of verse 24. Selah

Verse 26? That was the judgment determined on the Old Testament congregation for their desolation.
Verse 27? That’s the judgment determined on the New Testament congregation for their desolation.

Selah!

 

[covenantee]

The seventy weeks aren’t some exclusive VIP pass for ethnic Jews only as you thought it only Daniel's people. Wrongo!

You can't even construct a credible strawman.

Daniel 9
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city...

That's a direct reference to the Israelites and Jerusalem.

Was it limited to them? Only in your mind. The Gospel began to be proclaimed to the entire world after the end of the 70th week.

The Holy Spirit and Daniel, smarter than you again.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

LOL. Says the one recycling the same warped preterism-inspired interpretation on loop. Daniel’s “people” weren’t just ethnic Jews—they were the whole congregation of Israel: Old Testament Israel, then New Testament Israel, the Church. All six points in Daniel 9:24 apply to them. End of story.

Ah, yes—because clearly Daniel 9:26 was all about bricks and mortar. Except… NOT! The “Jerusalem” and “temple” there weren’t about some doomed pile of stone—they pointed to Christ’s own body, the Old Testament congregation that fell before He confirmed the New Covenant. And that’s the temple He rebuilt in three days. But hey, if you’d rather trade the glory of the gospel for a demolition report, go right ahead.

Ah, yes, Christ referred to His body when He talked about "these buildings" being destroyed just before the Olivet Discourse. Okay. LOL.

 

[TribulationSigns]

You can't even construct a credible strawman.

Daniel 9
24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city...

That's a direct reference to the Israelites and Jerusalem.

Was it limited to them? Only in your mind. The Gospel began to be proclaimed to the entire world after the end of the 70th week.

The Holy Spirit and Daniel, smarter than you again.

It is not about being smarter. It's about being able to discern what God's Word is talking about. And I do not think you are as smart as you think to begin with. Please reconsider carefully:

Heb 9:15-17
(15) And for this cause he is the mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
(16) For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
(17) For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

The testament is a covenant. Therefore, Christ is the mediator of the New Covenant, right? So this covenant can't become a force or made strengthen until Christ has to die first... with his Blood! That is why He said, "It is finished!" Okay? This is how Christ had the covenant in Daniel 9:27 confirmed. But the question is, with who?

Is it for "Israelites and physical city Jersualem" only as you think? Again, like I said, you are not that smart.

See...you do NOT understand who Daniel's people are and the holy city the Lord is talking about here! It is ALL the Saints from the Old Testament and the New Testament that Christ died for! And get this... we are the Holy City ourselves! The bride of Christ, Revelation 21:2, 9-10. They are Daniel's people! Not a physical city!

This shows that you lack the wisdom of Christ to understand what Daniel is talking about. Truly!

 

[TribulationSigns]

View attachment 68161

Good example for those who are spiritually blind. Yeah...

Ah, yes, Christ referred to His body when He talked about "these buildings" being destroyed just before the Olivet Discourse. Okay. LOL.

The Pharisees and scribes thought so, too. Talking about spiritual blindness!

 

[covenantee]

It is not about being smarter. It's about being able to discern what God's Word is talking about. And I do not think you are as smart as you think to begin with. Please reconsider carefully:

Heb 9:15-17
(15) And for this cause he is the mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
(16) For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
(17) For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

The testament is a covenant. Therefore, Christ is the mediator of the New Covenant, right? So this covenant can't become a force or made strengthen until Christ has to die first... with his Blood! That is why He said, "It is finished!" Okay? This is how Christ had the covenant in Daniel 9:27 confirmed. But the question is, with who?

Is it for "Israelites and physical city Jersualem" only as you think? Again, like I said, you are not that smart.

See...you do NOT understand who Daniel's people are and the holy city the Lord is talking about here! It is ALL the Saints from the Old Testament and the New Testament that Christ died for! And get this... we are the Holy City ourselves! The bride of Christ, Revelation 21:2, 9-10. They are Daniel's people! Not a physical city!

This shows that you lack the wisdom of Christ to understand what Daniel is talking about. Truly!

Yup, full dose of gnosis psychosis. No such thing as physical reality. Everything is virtual. Virtual Israelites. Virtual Jerusalem. Seventy virtual weeks. Seventieth virtual week. Virtual 70 AD. Virtual covenant. Virtual church. Virtual history.

Keep 'em coming.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Good example for those who are spiritually blind. Yeah...

Those who are spiritually blind, like you, bore me.

The Pharisees and scribes thought so, too. Talking about spiritual blindness!

You're not talking about the Olivet Discourse, which is what I'm talking about. John 1:18-21 is not part of the Olivet Discourse no matter how much you try to make it so.

Mark 13:1 And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here! 2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

You try to say that "these great buildings" that Jesus said would be destroyed refer to His body. LOL! Jesus had one body, not multiple bodies. He referred to "these great buildings" that the disciples were talking about, not "this great building" of His body. LOL. Talk about spiritual blindness! You can't get much more spiritually blind than trying to turn the temple buildings standing at that time into Christ's body.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Yup, full dose of gnosis psychosis. No such thing as physical reality. Everything is virtual. Virtual Israelites. Virtual Jerusalem. Seventy virtual weeks. Seventieth virtual week. Virtual 70 AD. Virtual covenant. Virtual church. Virtual history.

Keep 'em coming.

Again like I said, sounds more like a classic case of “I don’t like what I’m hearing, so I’ll just dismiss it by accusing TribulationSigns of making everything 'virtual."

Convenient, isn’t it?

Hint: You are confused about the difference between symbolic and virtual. The Bible uses vivid symbols to reveal deep spiritual truths, not some “virtual reality” garbage.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Mark 13:1 And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here! 2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

You try to say that "these great buildings" that Jesus said would be destroyed refer to His body. LOL! Jesus had one body, not multiple bodies. He referred to "these great buildings" that the disciples were talking about, not "this great building" of His body. LOL. Talk about spiritual blindness! You can't get much more spiritually blind than trying to turn the temple buildings standing at that time into Christ's body.

You still have a lot to learn...

I have been quoting to you (word for word) about not one stone left standing in Jerusalem, and reading Matthew 24 in an Biblically insular fashion. But the fact is, we cannot read scripture in a vacuum where there is nothing acceptable as truth except our own pet verses that "seem" to support us as long as we don't include others. All scripture must be in harmony with itself, and it most certainly is not "if" we attempt to claim that Matthew 24 stands by itself, or the passages of Luke 19 or passages of Mark 13, have nothing to do with the question at hand. God even gives us examples of the Devil attempting to use just that specific type of erroneous interpretive methodology.

Matthew 4:6-7

• "And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
• Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God."

Note the Devil's hermeneutic style. Yes, he quotes from scripture, but he doesn't consider "other scriptures" which have equal bearing on the question. But Christ demonstrates the proper hermeneutic in answering, "it is written again," or "it is written more" (there is more written). Christ corrects by declaring there is more written beside your pet verse, Spiritual Israelite! Christ's solution is not to deny the Devil's scripture, but to tell him that this is not all that scripture has to say concerning this. For example, there is more written on the subject. If we take one isolated verse, as in this example, we will inevitably come to private interpretations and improper conclusions. And what Christ said is exactly what I am saying. There is more written on the subject besides a few lines in Matthew about the Temple that has to be considered. And when all scripture (not just Matthew) is considered, clearly, the stones of Israel falling are figures representing (as the Pharisees perceived) the people. ...He spoke of THEM! They are the old stones that rejected Christ and the New Testament saints are the New Living stones in the rebuilding. Consider wisely..

Luke 19:39-42

• "And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.
• And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.
• And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,
• Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes."

He who hath an ear, let him hear!

Israel cried Hosanna to the King, but they were the old and so did hold their peace in proclaiming Christ King, and the stones "did" immediately cry out. Not the physical stones of the city!! It is the spiritual stones. The Jews were spiritual stones of the old building! The word of God is a gigantic spiritual picture puzzle with every piece in place. Just because one does not understand this, does not make the truth of it null and void.

Therefore, Mark 13:1 was not about physical stones of the building falling. Christ was talking about Jews who lost the kingdom representative. It was the fall of Old Testament congregation to make way for the New Testament congregation, were we are NOW the spiritual stones of that building.

So your interpreation, like the partial preterism, is clearly wrong!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You still have a lot to learn...

Not from you. That's for certain. No one who denies the existence of Satan as a real spirit being who tempted Jesus in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights and attempts to deceive others has anything to teach me. No one who tries to create a third group of people besides the saved and lost in order to twist scripture to fit his doctrine has anything to teach me. No one who tries to equate physical temple buildings with Christ's body has anything to teach me. No one, like you, who tries to spiritualize as much scripture as he possibly can instead of properly discerning which text is literal and which is figurative or which text is about physical things and which is about spiritual things, has anything to teach me.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Therefore, Mark 13:1 was not about physical stones of the building falling. Christ was talking about Jews who lost the kingdom representative. It was the fall of Old Testament congregation to make way for the New Testament congregation, were we are NOW the spiritual stones of that building.

So your interpreation, like the partial preterism, is clearly wrong!

LOL. Let's look at the text again, shall we?

Mark 13:1 Mark 13:1 And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here! 2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

In verse 1, what temple do you think Jesus went out of? His body? LOL. When the disciples said "Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!", what stones and what buildings do you think they were referring to? When Jesus said in response "Seest thou these great buildings", you are saying He was telling them to look at the unbelieving Jews who lost the kingdom that weren't even there at the time and saying that they would be destroyed with no stone left upon another? Why would He ask them to see something that wasn't there? You are butchering the text. The disciples were clearly talking about the temple buildings in Jerusalem and marveling at them and then Jesus responded in relation to those buildings that they would be destroyed. Jesus was not impressed with those temple buildings like the disciples were and basically said "So? What about them? They are going to be completely destroyed, so they are nothing to Me".

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You need to read again,

"And we know that this Prince Confirms [gabar], a Hebrew word which actually is Strengthened, the Covenant after these 62 weeks. Therefore, the final week cannot start until Christ is cut Off FIRST! Not when Christ was baptized!"

What in the world is this nonsense? It says the Messiah would be cut off AFTER the 62 weeks, which followed the first 7 weeks, so that places His death within the 70th week. There's nothing there which says His death would have to occur BEFORE the 70th week could begin. It says just the opposite of that. Do you not know what the word "after" means? Did you not learn the meanings of simple words in school? I have seen dispensationalists try to deny that Jesus was cut off after the end of the 69th week, but I've never seen an Amillennialist make such a ridiculous claim. It seems like you want to be an Amil dispensationalist even though that is not possible.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yup, full dose of gnosis psychosis. No such thing as physical reality. Everything is virtual. Virtual Israelites. Virtual Jerusalem. Seventy virtual weeks. Seventieth virtual week. Virtual 70 AD. Virtual covenant. Virtual church. Virtual history.

Keep 'em coming.

I can't help but wonder whether or not he believes in physical reality at all.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Not from you. That's for certain. No one who denies the existence of Satan as a real spirit being who tempted Jesus in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights and attempts to deceive others has anything to teach me. No one who tries to create a third group of people besides the saved and lost in order to twist scripture to fit his doctrine has anything to teach me. No one who tries to equate physical temple buildings with Christ's body has anything to teach me. No one, like you, who tries to spiritualize as much scripture as he possibly can instead of properly discerning which text is literal and which is figurative or which text is about physical things and which is about spiritual things, has anything to teach me.

Oh, you’re still blind to the very Word of God I’ve carefully laid out for you? How surprising—after all the times I’ve quoted Scripture, word for word, and yet you still refuse to accept it. By all means, keep denying it; I’m sure that helps your case. But just so you know, the Lord is the ultimate Judge here, and I’m perfectly fine leaving it in His hands.