Why are some interpreters not being honest with the text involving Daniel 9:27?

[Spiritual Israelite]

What is the logic in verse 27 being the 70th week then nothing in that verse even showing how the 70th week ends?

Why do you focus on that instead of the verse referring to by far the most significant part of the 70th week which was our Great God and Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, sacrificing Himself for the sins of the world and thereby confirming and establishing the new covenant while effectually making an end of the old covenant animal sacrifices and offerings? For some reason, that information means nothing and all that matters to you is that it doesn't specifically indicate how the 70th week ended. That is just unbelievable to me. You have the wrong focus. Daniel 9 is all about what Jesus was going to do. He did everything described in Daniel 9:24 and Daniel 9:25-27 is mainly about Him as well. But, premils like you miss that.

It can't be this part below if some of you insist is meaning after the entire 70 weeks already expired decades earlier.

and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

His death made the temple spiritually desolate even until the consummation of the temple being made physically desolate. There was no need for the physical desolation to be part of the 70 weeks because that isn't what the 70 weeks is about. It's about what Jesus did.

In your mind then---even until the consummation---it is not involving the end of something, therefore, it can't be meaning how the 70th week ends for certain?

Why would it need to mean that? I see no reason for that. Is the 70 week prophecy about physical destruction or is it about spiritual deliverance? Read Daniel 9:24 and think about what was supposed to be accomplished by the end of the 70 weeks. Tell me, do you see anything about physical destruction there? There isn't. The physical destruction was an end result of the Jews not accepting what Jesus did to establish the new covenant, but there is nothing to indicate that any physical destruction had to be part of the fulfillment of the 70 weeks.

consummation
kalah
kaw-law'
from 'kalah' (3615); a completion; adverb, completely; also destruction:--altogether, (be, utterly) consume(-d), consummation(-ption), was determined, (full, utter) end, riddance.

I like this def---(full, utter) end---which can't even remotely fit with the city being destroyed in 70 AD the fact that same city is back on the map again, as we speak.

This is doctrinal bias at its worst. The city was completely destroyed in 70 AD. Just because it was later rebuilt does not change that fact. You make the assumption that it has to mean it was destroyed, never to appear again, but that isn't what it means. Your doctrinal bias tells you that.

That does not then equal this in regards to the city of Jerusalem---(full, utter) end---that that was fulfilled in 70 AD. We can't be cherry picking here. 70 AD involved the destruction of both the city and the temple. While this might be true pertaining to the temple---(full, utter) end---it clearly isn't true pertaining to the city, though. Keeping in mind this as well---Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression

Unbelieving Jews, not believing Christians, are in control of Jerusalem today. That to me sounds like the transgressions involving the holy city, they are not quite finished yet. And until they are finished, it is a contradiction to insist the entire 70 weeks have already been fulfilled.

I can't even put into words how sad it is to see Christians try to act as if the finishing of transgression has something to do with the literal finish of transgressions by the people of Israel. If you're going to think it has something to do with that, then that wouldn't be fulfilled even when Christ returns, but rather wouldn't be fulfilled until over a thousand years later based on the premil view. Is that what you think then? That the 70-weeks isn't fulfilled until over a thousand years after Christ returns?

To finish the transgression is all about what Jesus did by being wounded for the transgressions of the people of Israel (and all other people, of course) and Him being numbered with the transgressors and making intercession for the transgressors? The following passage tells us what finishing the transgression is all about:

Isaiah 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. 7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. 8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. 9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. 10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. 11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

 

[Truth7t7]

LOL. I agree with preterists in their interpretation of some things and I agree with futurists like you in your interpretations of other things. But, somehow you want to equate people like me with preterists. Ridiculous. You are making the false assumption that everyone has to be labeled either a preterist or a futurist. I am neither. Both preterists and futurists share the very bad mistake of assuming most prophecy is either about the past or about the future. There is no balance in either doctrinal system.

The only agreement I have with reformed eschatology is there won't be a millennium, Jesus returns in fire and final judgement (The End)

Reformed eschatology denies a future human antichrist and two literal witnesses returned, bringing literal plagues upon this world

Reformed eschatology goes so far as to deny that a literal second coming of Jesus Christ is seen below

Do you also deny the future second coming of Jesus Christ to earth is seen below?

Matthew 24:27-30KJV
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The only agreement I have with reformed eschatology is there won't be a millennium, Jesus returns in fire and final judgement (The End)

Good for you. I don't adhere to reformed eschatology, whatever that even means. I study scripture for myself. If I happen to agree with that on some things, so be it.

Reformed eschatology denies a future human antichrist and two literal witnesses returned, bringing literal plagues upon this world

Do you ever tire of saying the exact same things over and over again year after year? I've never seen anything like it.

Reformed eschatology goes so far as to deny that a literal second coming of Jesus Christ is seen below

Why are you saying this to me? When have I ever denied the literal second coming of Jesus Christ? Never! Please seek help so that you don't waste your time making false accusations like this against others.

Do you also deny the future second coming of Jesus Christ to earth is seen below?

Matthew 24:27-30KJV
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

No, I don't and never have. Think about this. You can't get back the time you waste making false accusations about what others believe. Think first before you post next time.

 

[Truth7t7]

Why do you focus on that instead of the verse referring to by far the most significant part of the 70th week which was our Great God and Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, sacrificing Himself for the sins of the world and thereby confirming and establishing the new covenant while effectually making an end of the old covenant animal sacrifices and offerings? For some reason, that information means nothing and all that matters to you is that it doesn't specifically indicate how the 70th week ended. That is just unbelievable to me. You have the wrong focus. Daniel 9 is all about what Jesus was going to do. He did everything described in Daniel 9:24 and Daniel 9:25-27 is mainly about Him as well. But, premils like you miss that.


His death made the temple spiritually desolate even until the consummation of the temple being made physically desolate. There was no need for the physical desolation to be part of the 70 weeks because that isn't what the 70 weeks is about. It's about what Jesus did.


Why would it need to mean that? I see no reason for that. Is the 70 week prophecy about physical destruction or is it about spiritual deliverance? Read Daniel 9:24 and think about what was supposed to be accomplished by the end of the 70 weeks. Tell me, do you see anything about physical destruction there? There isn't. The physical destruction was an end result of the Jews not accepting what Jesus did to establish the new covenant, but there is nothing to indicate that any physical destruction had to be part of the fulfillment of the 70 weeks.


This is doctrinal bias at its worst. The city was completely destroyed in 70 AD. Just because it was later rebuilt does not change that fact. You make the assumption that it has to mean it was destroyed, never to appear again, but that isn't what it means. Your doctrinal bias tells you that.


I can't even put into words how sad it is to see Christians try to act as if the finishing of transgression has something to do with the literal finish of transgressions by the people of Israel. If you're going to think it has something to do with that, then that wouldn't be fulfilled even when Christ returns, but rather wouldn't be fulfilled until over a thousand years later based on the premil view. Is that what you think then? That the 70-weeks isn't fulfilled until over a thousand years after Christ returns?

To finish the transgression is all about what Jesus did by being wounded for the transgressions of the people of Israel (and all other people, of course) and Him being numbered with the transgressors and making intercession for the transgressors? The following passage tells us what finishing the transgression is all about:

Isaiah 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. 7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. 8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. 9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. 10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. 11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

Daniel's AOD is future, and the bad guy causing the Abomination and Desolation will be present on earth to the "Consummation" Ultimate End

"Future" Events Unfulfilled

This "Future" figure will be present on earth making (Abomination & Desolation) to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End) "Future" Event(s) Unfulfilled

(The Future Consummation)

2 Peter 3:10KJV
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

Daniel's AOD (Even Until The Consummation) "Future"!

Daniel 9:27KJV
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.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Daniel's AOD is future, and the bad guy causing the Abomination and Desolation will be present on earth to the "Consummation" Ultimate End

"Future" Events Unfulfilled

This "Future" figure will be present on earth making (Abomination & Desolation) to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End) "Future" Event(s) Unfulfilled

(The Future Consummation)

2 Peter 3:10KJV
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

Daniel's AOD (Even Until The Consummation) "Future"!

Daniel 9:27KJV
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.

As usual, you just repeated what you believe yet again (as if we don't already know) and you didn't bother addressing anything I said. I hope one day you learn how to take part in two way discussions, but I can see that you still have not learned that.

 

[covenantee]

They did cease have any meaning once Christ made His once for all sacrifice. How can you, as a Christian, not recognize that? You should have more discernment than this.

How can Israel finish its own transgression? Only Jesus could do that for them. Daniel 9 is all about Jesus but you make it all about Israel! Open your eyes! Jesus did for them what they could not possibly do themselves.

Jesus accomplished all of those things listed in Daniel 9:24 as only He could! Read this if you want to understand how the transgression was finished, how the end of sins was made and how reconciliation was made for iniquity:

Isaiah 53:5 But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him and by his wounds we are healed.6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all. 7 He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. 8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away. Yet who of his generation protested? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was punished. 9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth. 10 Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand. 11 After he has suffered, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.



From the Bible, of course. Are you somehow not aware that Jesus made their temple spiritually desolate around the time of His death (see Matthew 23:37-38) and that it became physically desolate in 70 AD?

Amen brother.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

This doesn't add up. This is horrible hermeneutics. History shows that the 490 years were linear, congruent and sequential. Those of us that take 490 years to mean exactly that do not have to prove that it is harmonious; we just have to accept what it states. We take it literally (1) because it happened literally, (2) there is no command to decapitate it and project it into the unknown. Seven multiplied by seventy comes to 490 cohesive unitary years, not 2,500 broken up years and counting. The clincher is: there is no gap mentioned in the prophecy so there is no need or warrant to insert one in there.

This is absolutely right. There is absolutely nothing in the text itself to indicate that there would be any gap at any point during the 70 weeks. So, apart from doctrinal bias, there is no reason whatsoever for someone to assert that there is a gap in the 70 weeks. There is no basis for that belief at all. Adding a gap to the 70 weeks is a move made out of desperation by those who are not willing to accept what it is really all about.

 

[Truth7t7]

Why are you saying this to me? When have I ever denied the literal second coming of Jesus Christ? Never! Please seek help so that you don't waste your time making false accusations like this against others.

The question below doesn't state you deny the second coming as you twist my words, it clearly ask if the second coming is seen in Matthew 24:27-30 (Yes/No)

Once Again

Reformed eschatology goes so far as to deny that a literal second coming of Jesus Christ is seen below

Do you also deny the future second coming of Jesus Christ to earth is seen below?

(Seen Below, Seen Below, Seen Below)

Matthew 24:27-30KJV
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 

[Truth7t7]

This is absolutely right. There is absolutely nothing in the text itself to indicate that there would be any gap at any point during the 70 weeks. So, apart from doctrinal bias, there is no reason whatsoever for someone to assert that there is a gap in the 70 weeks. There is no basis for that belief at all. Adding a gap to the 70 weeks is a move made out of desperation by those who are not willing to accept what it is really all about.

You claim the 70th week ended at the cross of calvary "Wrong"

You have clearly been shown in post #104 that the bad guy will cause Daniel's AOD in the 70th week, and he will be present on earth until the "Consummation" or Ultimate End

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The question below doesn't state you deny the second coming as you twist my words, it clearly ask if the second coming is seen in Matthew 24:27-30 (Yes/No)

Once Again

Reformed eschatology goes so far as to deny that a literal second coming of Jesus Christ is seen below

Do you also deny the future second coming of Jesus Christ to earth is seen below?

(Seen Below, Seen Below, Seen Below)

Matthew 24:27-30KJV
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Calm down, buddy. So I misunderstood what you were saying and didn't realize you were only talking about this passage. No reason to accuse me of twisting your words when I simply misunderstood them. So, now that I realize what you're asking, the answer is no. I don't deny that passage (Matthew 24:27-30) is referring to the second coming of Jesus Christ to earth (or at least earth's atmosphere - we both believe He will destroy the earth when He returns). I don't know why you would even ask that question when I have many times referred to that passage in relation to His future second coming. Usually in debates with pre-tribs since that passage clearly shows that He will return after the tribulation of those days and not before.

Also, you need to start acting like an adult and stop referring to reformed eschatology when talking to me. I don't ascribe to reformed eschatology, I study scripture for myself. If I agree with them on some things it doesn't mean my beliefs come from that belief system nor does it mean I agree with all of it. So, please grow up and leave nonsense like that out of your comments.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You claim the 70th week ended at the cross of calvary "Wrong"

You have clearly been shown in post #104 that the bad guy will cause Daniel's AOD in the 70th week, and he will be present on earth until the "Consummation" or Ultimate End

You have shown nothing clearly except that you have that particular belief. You have done nothing to back it up in any convincing way. And, once again, you failed to address any of my points. Do you expect to be taken seriously when you refuse to specifically address any points others make? I hope not.

 

[Davidpt]

You equate someone disagreeing with you with not being open about these things. You are coming across as being very confident that you are correct about these things. Does that mean you are not open to correction and can't be wrong? I doubt you would say that. So, why is that the case for those who disagree with you?

In any argument, assuming someone is correct, this means that someone is holding the trump card that can't be trumped. It would be like 2 ppl arguing what does 2 + 2 equal? One argues that it equals 4. The other argues that it equals 5, It is then a waste of time, thus totally pointless, for the one who concludes that it is 4, to even consider any arguments made by the other person. The one that concludes that the answer is 4 is already holding the trump card that can't be trumped. It doesn't matter if the other person has 10,000 different arguments why he is correct instead, he is never going to be able to trump the trump card, thus making him the one correct instead.

In my mind, and clearly you disagree of course, as to what we are discussing in this thread, I am convinced that it is I that is holding the trump card, that being this---everything recorded in Daniel 9:27 pertains to events that occur during the 70th week. None of it is involving anything outside of the 70th week. Therefore, it is impossible, as in 100% impossible to interpret the 70 weeks in such a way that it does not involve a gap somewhere.

 

[Zao is life]

The only agreement I have with reformed eschatology is there won't be a millennium.

Once before in my case you asserted that anyone who has agreement with any part of historicism or preterism regarding Daniel 9:26-27 is also a historicist or preterist, and therefore I'm a historicist or preterist.

Well, then you are a reformist because you agree with part of reformed eschatology.

I also agree with a lot of reformed theology - but not the millennium. So I guess maybe you should stop shoving others into boxes and slapping your labels onto those boxes, because the only people we can more-or-less safely do that with, are preterists.

 

[covenantee]

You claim the 70th week ended at the cross of calvary "Wrong"

You have clearly been shown in post #104 that the bad guy will cause Daniel's AOD in the 70th week, and he will be present on earth until the "Consummation" or Ultimate End

You have clearly shown in post #104 that you continue to perpetuate aberrant Jesuit futurism's fantasies and fallacies.

Simple grammatical referback referents confirm that all of the "he's" in Daniel 9:27 are Messiah the Prince. Thus Christ Himself is your "bad guy".

It doesn't get more absurd than that.

The AOD is the Roman armies (Matthew 24:15; Luke 21:20) which served as the people of Messiah the Prince to accomplish His purposes of judgment and desolation upon Jerusalem and Israel, destroying the city and sanctuary (Daniel 9:26, 27).

Roman commander Titus acknowledged God's role as the Desolator: "We have certainly had God for our assistant in this war, and it was no other than God who ejected the Jews out of these fortifications; for what could the hands of men or any machines do towards overthrowing these towers?"

Your fantasized future "consummation" was unleashed by the Desolator upon Jerusalem and Israel in 70 AD.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

In any argument, assuming someone is correct, this means that someone is holding the trump card that can't be trumped. It would be like 2 ppl arguing what does 2 + 2 equal? One argues that it equals 4. The other argues that it equals 5, It is then a waste of time, thus totally pointless, for the one who concludes that it is 4, to even consider any arguments made by the other person. The one that concludes that the answer is 4 is already holding the trump card that can't be trumped. It doesn't matter if the other person has 10,000 different arguments why he is correct instead, he is never going to be able to trump the trump card, thus making him the one correct instead.

Okay.....?

In my mind, and clearly you disagree of course, as to what we are discussing in this thread, I am convinced that it is I that is holding the trump card,

And, of course, I am convinced that I hold the trump card. Whatever. Can't we just discuss these things without wasting time thinking the other is being dishonest with the scripture or any nonsense like that? I believe we are both trying to be honest with the scripture. So, why can't we just give each other the benefit of the doubt and not judge each other's motives? I know I can do that. Can you? I'm pretty sure you can.

that being this---everything recorded in Daniel 9:27 pertains to events that occur during the 70th week. None of it is involving anything outside of the 70th week. Therefore, it is impossible, as in 100% impossible to interpret the 70 weeks in such a way that it does not involve a gap somewhere.

Can you acknowledge that, despite how confident you are about that, it is still just your opinion and not a fact?

As for there being a supposed gap in the 70 weeks, WPM had a great response to that. Did you see it? If so, can you please respond to what he said? I believe the onus is on you to give evidence that the prophecy itself indicates that there would be a gap within it. I don't personally see an indication of that anywhere in the prophecy. Not even close. I see no basis at all to think that it's not talking about things that would be accomplished within a 490 year continuous period of time with no gaps.

If you look at Daniel 9:24, that shows six things that were going to be accomplished during the 70 weeks. None of those things have anything to do with physical destruction. With that in mind, why would you think that the physical destruction mentioned within the prophecy has to be fulfilled within the 70 weeks? The prophecy is not about that, it's about Jesus making the way for spiritual deliverance and salvation, which He did by way of His death and resurrection.

 

[Truth7t7]

Calm down, buddy. So I misunderstood what you were saying and didn't realize you were only talking about this passage. No reason to accuse me of twisting your words when I simply misunderstood them. So, now that I realize what you're asking, the answer is no. I don't deny that passage (Matthew 24:27-30) is referring to the second coming of Jesus Christ to earth (or at least earth's atmosphere - we both believe He will destroy the earth when He returns). I don't know why you would even ask that question when I have many times referred to that passage in relation to His future second coming. Usually in debates with pre-tribs since that passage clearly shows that He will return after the tribulation of those days and not before.

Also, you need to start acting like an adult and stop referring to reformed eschatology when talking to me. I don't ascribe to reformed eschatology, I study scripture for myself. If I agree with them on some things it doesn't mean my beliefs come from that belief system nor does it mean I agree with all of it. So, please grow up and leave nonsense like that out of your comments.

I stated reformed eschatology denies the future literal second coming is seen in Matthew 24:27-30

I asked a simple question if you believed the same and after a couple rounds you believe the future second coming is seen in the passage, answer (Yes) simple, you believe the "Future" event is seen in the passage Matthew 24:27-30, great so do I

 

[Truth7t7]

You have shown nothing clearly except that you have that particular belief. You have done nothing to back it up in any convincing way. And, once again, you failed to address any of my points. Do you expect to be taken seriously when you refuse to specifically address any points others make? I hope not.

Your points have been clearly answered, you claim Daniel's 70th week was fulfilled at the cross of calvary "Wrong"

As post #104 clearly explains the bad guy who caused Daniel's AOD in Daniel 9:27 will be on earth until the "Consummation" or "Ultimate End" 2 Peter 3:10-13 "Future"

You're answered In great detail below, the AOD and 70th week is "Future", you can read the word "Consummation" over and over its not going away

"Even Until The Consummation" Future

Daniel's AOD is future, and the bad guy causing the Abomination and Desolation will be present on earth to the "Consummation" Ultimate End

"Future" Events Unfulfilled

This "Future" figure will be present on earth making (Abomination & Desolation) to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End) "Future" Event(s) Unfulfilled

(The Future Consummation)

2 Peter 3:10KJV
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

Daniel's AOD (Even Until The Consummation) "Future"!

Daniel 9:27KJV
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.

 

[Zao is life]

What is the logic in verse 27 being the 70th week then nothing in that verse even showing how the 70th week ends? It can't be this part below if some of you insist is meaning after the entire 70 weeks already expired decades earlier.

and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

In your mind then---even until the consummation---it is not involving the end of something, therefore, it can't be meaning how the 70th week ends for certain?

consummation
kalah
kaw-law'
from 'kalah' (3615); a completion; adverb, completely; also destruction:--altogether, (be, utterly) consume(-d), consummation(-ption), was determined, (full, utter) end, riddance.

I like this def---(full, utter) end---which can't even remotely fit with the city being destroyed in 70 AD the fact that same city is back on the map again, as we speak. That does not then equal this in regards to the city of Jerusalem---(full, utter) end---that that was fulfilled in 70 AD. We can't be cherry picking here. 70 AD involved the destruction of both the city and the temple. While this might be true pertaining to the temple---(full, utter) end---it clearly isn't true pertaining to the city, though. Keeping in mind this as well---Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression

Unbelieving Jews, not believing Christians, are in control of Jerusalem today. That to me sounds like the transgressions involving the holy city, they are not quite finished yet. And until they are finished, it is a contradiction to insist the entire 70 weeks have already been fulfilled.

Key words: Desolate, desolation, desolations:; and CONSUMMATION

26 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.

There are TWO things being spoken of: city AND sanctuary.

27 and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make IT desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Jesus called it desolation here too:

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 house is left unto you desolate.
​

Daniel 9:26-27 mentions desolations regarding the city that would be destroyed, and desolation regarding the temple that would be destroyed. Which of the two is being spoken of as IT being consumed? Both city AND sanctuary? Or just one?

CITY OR TEMPLE?

For the overspreading of abominations he shall make IT desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

The temple was indeed consumed - it was consumed by fire. It has still never risen again from that desolation.

Daniel 9:26-27 mentions desolations regarding the city that would be destroyed, and desolation regarding the temple that would be destroyed.

You have assumed that the word "consummation" refers to both city and temple.

"Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you shall neither worship the Father in this mountain nor yet at Jerusalem." -- John 4:24.

" the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands".

John 4
23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks such to worship Him.
24 God is a spirit, and they who worship Him must worship in spirit and in truth.

The temple was indeed consumed. The prophecy in Daniel 9:26-27 spoke of the desolation of both the city and the sanctuary, but only spoke of the consummation of the sanctuary.​

 

[covenantee]

Your points have been clearly answered, you claim Daniel's 70th week was fulfilled at the cross of calvary "Wrong"

As post #104 clearly explains the bad guy who caused Daniel's AOD in Daniel 9:27 will be on earth until the "Consummation" or "Ultimate End" 2 Peter 3:10-13 "Future"

You're answered In great detail below, the AOD and 70th week is "Future", you can read the word "Consummation" over and over its not going away

"Even Until The Consummation" Future

Daniel's AOD is future, and the bad guy causing the Abomination and Desolation will be present on earth to the "Consummation" Ultimate End

"Future" Events Unfulfilled

This "Future" figure will be present on earth making (Abomination & Desolation) to the (Consummation) or (The Ultimate End) "Future" Event(s) Unfulfilled

(The Future Consummation)

2 Peter 3:10KJV
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

Merriam-Webster
Definition of consummation

1: the act of consummating the consummation of a contract by mutual signature specifically : the consummating of a marriage
2: the ultimate end

Daniel's AOD (Even Until The Consummation) "Future"!

Daniel 9:27KJV
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.

Debunked regurgitant.

From Daniel 9:27 Hebrew:

3617 [e]
kā·lāh
כָּלָה֙
the consummation
N‑fs

"kalah: completion, complete destruction, consumption, annihilation"

There's no Jesuitized futurized end times "ultimate end".

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I stated reformed eschatology denies the future literal second coming is seen in Matthew 24:27-30

But, I don't deny that. So, what does that tell you? It should tell you that you need to stop mentioning reformed eschatology when you're talking to me.

I asked a simple question if you believed the same and after a couple rounds you believe the future second coming is seen in the passage, answer (Yes) simple, you believe the "Future" event is seen in the passage Matthew 24:27-30, great so do I

Yes, that's great. So, please stop mentioning reformed eschatology when talking to me. Otherwise, I'll just have to ignore you.