This is the context of how Dan. 9:24-27 should be considered!

[Trekson]

You are a futurist. I am not. But I think you defend pretrib, if i am not mistaken.

No, I'm not pretrib, I'm post-persecution.

 

[Zao is life]

So peddle your faux sanctimony somewhere else.

We're sick of it.

LoL Likewise:

Yes, a blatant manifestation of nothing other than the worship of antichrist. I'm long convinced that there is a special compartment in hell reserved for dispensatanism. Because it has the Word, but insists on contorting it into an abomination of desecration. It will experience the same fate as those of Christ's day.

Matthew 23
33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

 

[Zao is life]

How sad and unfortunate that no one agrees with that which the Holy Spirit teaches from the NT. about Dan. 9:24-27.
Please see post# 240

How are you coming to that conclusion when I, and others, have often cited the NT to support our understanding of Daniel 9:24-27, which is similar to yours?

Spiritual Israelite, the Holy Spirit is teaching him, and not anyone else apparently, those answers - as made clear by his post.

He is either sanctimonious and over-sensitive, OR he's making it look like @Earburner was claiming that he alone has the teaching of the Holy Spirit - or that's what @Spiritual Israelite 's narcissistic-sounding post implies.

I didn't get that from @Earburner 's post - and no objective reader would. He was simply saying that it is the Holy Spirit who teaches in the New Testament how to interpret Daniel 9:26-27.

Some are just prone to falsely claiming others say what they did not say in order to make themselves "look" big. It's all very transparent. They often talk about other posters to one another, without copying the poster they are talking about in.

Not sure what you are doing in your reply to his post.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

He is either sanctimonious and over-sensitive, OR he's making it look like @Earburner was claiming that he alone has the teaching of the Holy Spirit - or that's what @Spiritual Israelite 's narcissistic-sounding post implies.

I didn't get that from @Earburner 's post - and no objective reader would. He was simply saying that it is the Holy Spirit who teaches in the New Testament how to interpret Daniel 9:26-27.

Some are just prone to falsely claiming others say what they did not say in order to make themselves "look" big. It's all very transparent. They often talk about other posters to one another, without copying the poster they are talking about in.

Not sure what you are doing in your reply to his post.

Your reading comprehension skills are utterly horrible. In no way, shape or form was I being narcissistic. I was simply asking him why he was saying no one else agreed with his view when there are several of us who at least mostly agree with his interpretation of Daniel 9:24-27. I know you don't like me and I couldn't care less about that, but that's not an excuse for you to misrepresent my comments. Why would you not think that he was being narcissistic by acting like he was the only one who interprets Daniel 9:24-27 correctly?

 

[Zao is life]

Although not what I asked about, yes, Jesus talked to the four disciples “in private”. This strengthens the case that, grammatically, all the 2nd personal pronouns of “you” throughout the discourse refer to them.

Thus, the “you” in “when YOU see all these things then YOU know it is near”, grammatically refers to the disciples Jesus told this privately to : Peter, James, Andrew, and John. Those 4 disciples are the antecedent to “you” in the olivet discourse (in mark).





Right, Jesus said some of them would die in Matthew 24:9 via persecution. But the Jewish Roman war started around 66ad. Cestius Gallus, with Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem in 66 ad. James son of zebedee likely died before this, Andrew, may died before but also may have died during. Peter likely died at the start of the war. John died after the war. So potentially 3 out 4 of those disciples lived to Jerusalem being surrounded.

But I’m not sure what their deaths have to do with anything, especially since they are based on tradition not necessarily fact.
Regardless of the timing of their deaths, they still claimed the coming of the Lord had drawn near, the coming was in a little while, without delay, the end of all things had drawn near, and it was the last hour.

How could they claim it was “near”? Jesus said they would know it was near when they saw the events of the Olivet discourse.



The authors of the new testament never claim the day nor hour. They only claimed it was near.

Not knowing the day nor hour is not the same as not knowing the general time frame. A pregnant woman doesn’t know the day nor hour when the birth will occur, only the general time frame of 9 months. Your argument about the day nor hour is a moot point in regards to what I am talking about.



Incorrect, it is only near when the events of the Olivet discourse happen:

“So also, when you see all these things, you will know that He is near,f right at the door.”

If Christ's target audience included some who would see the events of 70 AD, and others who were not even born yet but would be born more than two millennia later and who would see the end of the age and His return that He was speaking about,

who else was Jesus supposed to speak to except the four apostles who had approached Him to ask Him the questions they asked?

Do you expect Him to have come back and called that later generation to the Mount of Olives so that He could speak to them there?

Have you never even thought of the possibility that though Jesus knew that His target audience included those who would be alive at the end of the age - and that the end of the age that HE was talking about had nothing to do with 70 AD - only those with ears to hear would understand and believe Him, and would understand that He spoke to us through His apostles?

Again, if Christ's target audience included some who would see the events of 70 AD, and others who were not even born yet but would be born much, much later and who would see the end of the age and His return that He was speaking about,

who else was Jesus supposed to tell, except the four apostles who had approached Him to ask Him the questions they asked?​

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Sorry, just an over sight on my part. Except for @covenantee, I was thinking I was being over looked in what was being said in the body of the
discussion.

You can't worry about how much feedback you get to your posts. You have no control over that. Also, there are likely a good number of lurkers here who don't post here who can learn from our posts.

 

[Zao is life]

Your reading comprehension skills are utterly horrible. In no way, shape or form was I being narcissistic. I was simply asking him why he was saying no one else agreed with his view when there are several of us who at least mostly agree with his interpretation of Daniel 9:24-27. I know you don't like me and I couldn't care less about that, but that's not an excuse for you to misrepresent my comments.

LoL. Sorry if I'm mistaken and sorry if in your pride you are correct about his opinion of himself (though I'm not interested either way), but your narcissism is also on full display in these boards very, very often - as is your underhandedness of frequently making posts talking to others "about" other members of this board

- and depending on who it is you at the time want on your side, you will drag in anyone you want - in this case (as is the case of your more recent posts "about" me to others) it is the Partial-Preterists whose doctrine you have vehemently disagreed with in the past, and who - if they themselves have not already been in the past - run the risk of being future targets of the same underhandedness from you that I'm talking about.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

If Christ's target audience included some who would see the events of 70 AD, and others who were not even born yet but would be born more than two millennia later and who would see the end of the age and His return that He was speaking about,

who else was Jesus supposed to speak to except the four apostles who had approached Him to ask Him the questions they asked?

Do you expect Him to have come back and called that later generation to the Mount of Olives so that He could speak to them there?

Have you never even thought of the possibility that though Jesus knew that His target audience included those who would be alive at the end of the age - and that the end of the age that HE was talking about had nothing to do with 70 AD - only those with ears to hear would understand and believe Him, and would understand that He spoke to us through His apostles?

Again, if Christ's target audience included some who would see the events of 70 AD, and others who were not even born yet but would be born much, much later and who would see the end of the age and His return that He was speaking about,

who else was Jesus supposed to tell, except the four apostles who had approached Him to ask Him the questions they asked?​

I agree with this. It's just silly to think that any time Jesus said "you" when talking to the disciples that He was only saying things that applied to them.

Matthew 18:19 “Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven.

Jesus said the above to the disciples. So, does that mean He was only saying if two of them agree concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by God the Father? Of course not. He was saying that in relation to any two believers at any time.

 

[MonoBiblical]

If Christ's target audience included some who would see the events of 70 AD, and others who were not even born yet but would be born more than two millennia later and who would see the end of the age and His return that He was speaking about,

who else was Jesus supposed to speak to except the four apostles who had approached Him to ask Him the questions they asked?

Do you expect Him to have come back and called that later generation to the Mount of Olives so that He could speak to them there?

Have you never even thought of the possibility that though Jesus knew that His target audience included those who would be alive at the end of the age - and that the end of the age that HE was talking about had nothing to do with 70 AD - only those with ears to hear would understand and believe Him, and would understand that He spoke to us through His apostles?

Again, if Christ's target audience included some who would see the events of 70 AD, and others who were not even born yet but would be born much, much later and who would see the end of the age and His return that He was speaking about,

who else was Jesus supposed to tell, except the four apostles who had approached Him to ask Him the questions they asked?​

I will pray for you to be more understandable. I can't comprehend your points.

 

[Zao is life]

Sorry dude, but that is insane.

As is the belief that there will be mortals living on this earth despite the fact that the regeneration of the entire creation is linked in scripture to the resurrection of the sons of God (the New Heavens and New Earth) - and that's besides all the other evidence in the New Testament and Revelation that THAT part of Amillennialist arguments is 100% true.

No resurrected in Christ will ever rebel against Christ (and die again!!!) and the amount of living people after the millennium will probably be close to what the earth has now.

They will not die, physically. You do not understand what "their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched" means. Nor do you understand why God preventing Adam from being able to continue to eat freely of the tree of life and live forever in his fallen state, was mercy.

 

[MonoBiblical]

I agree with this. It's just silly to think that any time Jesus said "you" when talking to the disciples that He was only saying things that applied to them.

Matthew 18:19 “Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven.

Jesus said the above to the disciples. So, does that mean He was only saying if two of them agree concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by God the Father? Of course not. He was saying that in relation to any two believers at any time.

I don't believe this was for eternity. It is not that we don't have enough faith or trust in God; but rather powerful miracles are not needed.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

LoL. Sorry if I'm mistaken

No, you are not sorry.

and sorry if in your pride you are correct about his opinion of himself

LOL. Why am I being prideful when he is the one who was complaining that no one agreed with him about Daniel 9:24-27?

(though I'm not interested either way), but your narcissism is also on full display in these boards very, very often

You don't know me at all, so stop pretending as if you do. You are making a fool of yourself by making a personal attack on me for no reason whatsoever. I'm not the one who questioned why no one was agreeing with me. Can you not read?

- as is your underhandedness of frequently making posts talking to others "about" other members of this board

This is a public forum. It's not like I'm gossiping about them in private.

- and depending on who it is you at the time want on your side, you will drag in anyone you want - in this case (as is the case of your more recent posts "about" me to others) it is the Partial-Preterists whose doctrine you have vehemently disagreed with in the past, and who - if they themselves have not already been in the past - run the risk of being future targets of the same underhandedness from you that I'm talking about.

LOL. Do you not also vehemently disagree with partial preterists? It's only bad if I'm doing that? Why are you so hypocritical?

 

[Zao is life]

I will pray for you to be more understandable. I can't comprehend your points.

As you can see from previous posts, many can understand - in fact most can (Post #268, for example). I will pray for you that God will give you more understanding.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I don't believe this was for eternity. It is not that we don't have enough faith or trust in God; but rather powerful miracles are not needed.

Did you read my entire post? You completely missed the point. The point I'm making is that when Jesus said "you' when talking to the disciples, it didn't necessarily mean that what He said only applied to them.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Did you read my entire post? You completely missed the point. The point I'm making is that when Jesus said "you' when talking to the disciples, it didn't necessarily mean that what He said only applied to them.

True

 

[Zao is life]

No, you are not sorry.


LOL. Why am I being prideful when he is the one who was complaining that no one agreed with him about Daniel 9:24-27?


You don't know me at all, so stop pretending as if you do. You are making a fool of yourself, but making a personal attack on me for no reason whatsoever. I'm not the one who questioned why no one was agreeing with me. Can you not read?


This is a public forum. It's not like I'm gossiping about them in private.


LOL. Do you not also vehemently disagree with partial preterists? It's only bad if I'm doing that? Why are you so hypocritical?

Personally I check myself from talking "about" anyone to others in these boards - ESPECIALLY if I'm claiming they said something or believe something, or talking about what they believe - unless I copy them in. It's against the board's rules, anyway - but for good reason.

Doing It betrays the behavior of a narcissist - because WE (including me) are all known by our fruits - I don't have to know you

- and talking of personal attacks - it's exactly what you were doing to someone else which was the cause of this very conversation we are having now, and what you have often done to me and many others. You also "liked" someone else's post when he was blatantly lying about what I said, though it was easy to go back and read what he was quoting and what he said that I was responding to.

Just letting my brother in Christ know - which is what I should be doing.

 

[Zao is life]

I agree with this. It's just silly to think that any time Jesus said "you" when talking to the disciples that He was only saying things that applied to them.

Matthew 18:19 “Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven.

Jesus said the above to the disciples. So, does that mean He was only saying if two of them agree concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by God the Father? Of course not. He was saying that in relation to any two believers at any time.

I don't believe this was for eternity. It is not that we don't have enough faith or trust in God; but rather powerful miracles are not needed.

I will pray for you to be more understandable. I can't comprehend your points. What does eternity and miracles have to do with what he said?

 

[MonoBiblical]

I will pray for you to be more understandable. I can't comprehend your points. What does eternity and miracles have to do with what he said?

I meant it was not meant to be forever. The Holy Spirit is not with us.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Personally I check myself from talking "about" anyone to others in these boards - ESPECIALLY if I'm claiming they said something or believe something, or talking about what they believe - unless I copy them in. It's against the board's rules, anyway - but for good reason.

I don't actually intend to do that, but forget to tag them sometimes and sometimes I do remember.

Doing It betrays the behavior of a narcissist - because WE (including me) are all known by our fruits - I don't have to know you

You don't know me at all. You often misunderstand what you read on here, so I take your comments with a grain of salt.

- and talking of personal attacks - it's exactly what you were doing to someone else which was the cause of this very conversation we are having now, and what you have often done to me and many others.

What are you talking about? Is it too much trouble for you to be specific?

You also "liked" someone else's post when he was blatantly lying about what I said, though it was easy to go back and read what he was quoting and what he said that I was responding to.

What are you referring to here? How can I respond unless you specify what you're talking about?

Just letting my brother in Christ know - which is what I should be doing.

Whatever. I don't take you seriously most of the time, just so you know. You get some things right here and there and other things very wrong. That's you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I meant it was not meant to be forever. The Holy Spirit is not with us.

But, the question was what does that have to do with what I said? You don't seem to be able to understand what people are saying for whatever reason.