The 70wks Missing Ingredient.

[Douggg]

I would suppose you to think that way than to understand 1,000 charts aren't greater than God's words.


And right there in the next verse (v.13) it specifically says He sits and rules!

Do you think that God was addressing the actual King of Tyrus in Ezekiel 28 or a forthcoming prophecy concerning Satan?

 

[precepts]

Do you think that God was addressing the actual King of Tyrus in Ezekiel 28 or a forthcoming prophecy concerning Satan?

This has nothing to do with the fact God's words outweighs any charts, nothing to do with anyone ever being crowned symbolically in scripture.

Zec 6:11 Then take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest;

It is not symbolic. The crowns weren't made and placed on his head and taken off just for symbolism. The text doesn't support it.

Zec 6:12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:

Did "Jesus" ever build a temple? Nope!

Zec 6:13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

This is your proof He reigned, "the counsel of peace shall be between them both." Who is them? Zerubabel, the governor of Yahrushalem, the "Tirshatha" who should of been crowned king since he was the direct descendant of Achin (Mat 1:12), and Joshua. They both built the temple and ruled respectively (Ezra 3:2,8; 5:2).

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[ebedmelech]

I've been a little preoccupied precepts, but here's my answer:

You are not naive. You're rebellious. if it "did," the proper verb would have been "does."

Nothing rebellious...except the fact that you can't admit you've started an erroneous thread, and your error is being exposed precepts.

And I said:
This is where you are playing the fool and ignoring the fact that no one after Achin in that list was ever crowned king. Zedek was the last crowned king before the Babylonian captivity, not Achin, not anyone that's listed after Achin, your error, your willful disobedience to not acknowledge the fact. Eze 21 and Zech 6 are the facts! Matthew's genealogy has nothing to do with anything but Christ's genealogy alone.

Well...let me start out by correcting my own error. I have Jehoiakim and his son Jehoiachin mixed up. That means where I mention Jehoiakim...it should be Jehoiachin (his son).

Secondly, there doesn't have to be a king mentioned because Judah went into captivity under Jehoiachin. They're not in the land, so how can there be a king?

- You are not naive. You didn't address my points. You only danced around them. No one in Matthew's genealogy after Achin was ever crowned king, and the prophecy in Eze 21:25-26 is referring to Zedek. And once again, in your rebelliousness, you totally ignore the facts. Zedek was the last crowned king before all of Israel was taken to Babylon.

You are naive though precepts. Of course no one was crowned after Jehoiachin...I made that point already. You're trying to include Zedekiah (who doesn't count because the deportation was under Jehoiachin). Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah king over the remnant.

You have no points really, you only think you do. You're making Ezekiel 21 say what it doesn't say. I agree that Ezekiel 21:25,26 refers to Zedekiah. Once again...If Matthew ends the genealogy at Jehoiachin, it stops there. It's God who moved Matthew to record the genealogy in which every king is a descendant of David. Zedekiah doesn't count!

You're blaspheming! You willfully left out the promise of giving the crown to it's rightful owner, and Achin was never told to take off the crown. It was Zedek because Achin was taken to Babylon and Zedek made king in is stead. I already gave you the verses proving the fact. You are not that naive.

Once again..it's your naivety that looms large here because you don't have the full picture. There's no blasphemy, except in your dreams. Jehoiachin had no choice because God's judgement of Judah falls on Him. Because you ignore the prophet Jeremiah (who is right in the middle of it) you can't get a full understanding.

Where does scripture say no one after Achin on Matthew's genealogy was ever crowned king? LOL! I will do you one better. Where does it say everyone on the list were crowned kings?

When you can show Zedekiah in any genealogy as a descendant of David...at that point I'll listen. I already know you can't. Consider Jeremiah 22:24-30:
24 “As I live,” declares the Lord, “even though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were a signet ring on My right hand, yet I would pull you off;
25 and I will give you over into the hand of those who are seeking your life, yes, into the hand of those whom you dread, even into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and into the hand of the Chaldeans.
26 I will hurl you and your mother who bore you into another country where you were not born, and there you will die.
27 But as for the land to which they desire to return, they will not return to it.
28 “Is this man Coniah a despised, shattered jar? Or is he an undesirable vessel? Why have he and his descendants been hurled out And cast into a land that they had not known?
29 “O land, land, land, Hear the word of the Lord!
30 “Thus says the Lord, ‘Write this man down childless, A man who will not prosper in his days; For no man of his descendants will prosper Sitting on the throne of David Or ruling again in Judah.’”

That's real plain!

You're the one that missed in your rebelliousness. The facts are clear. You just can't accept them.

You have to produce the "real facts" first. Understand this Ezekiel and Jeremiah overlap in what they prophesy. Ezekiel is with the exiles and Jeremiah is in Judah. You have to read both to get the picture. This is why your picture is distorted.

You speak only because you have a mouth. This coming from a guy that want's scripture to prove they were no more kings crowned after Yahsha post Babylon. How foolish is that.

Doug pointed it out to you and you're too stubborn to read the passage properly. Joshua is symbolic of Christ in Zechariah. Joshua is no king. God is pointing out that Christ will be King!

Talk is cheap, and you've already went down that path of no return. That's why you can't accept the simple grammatical facts in scripture.

I can't accept them the way you read them...indeed not.

No, in yours! I have an open and shut case that I can prove in a court of law using common sense and logic. A court of law can't deny logic, but you do!

I do deny YOUR logic...because it opposes what scripture says precepts.

I don't see how you could be so sensible and want scripture to prove that not everyone in Matthew's genealogy list were crowned kings. It doesn't add up, but some are wise only in their own sight. You are no judge for sure!

I know...that's your problem...you want to say more than scripture says.

By saying you're not naive? That's attacking others?

No..."you're not that naive" is your common response. You go beyond that calling me a fraud because I don't agree with you. Not that it bothers me though because you can't judge me. Jesus will do that. All that shows is you inability to tolerate the fact that others don't agree with you.

You can't because you have no understanding. Anyone who doesn't know the men in Christ genealogy after Achin weren't kings can't be wise.

Can you show where I said there were any kings after Jehoiachin?

Again with the false labeling and false accusations, bearing false witness again. It's because you can't address the message! And that's attacking my person.

Precepts, can you answer this with a simple YES or NO...is Christ returning to judge the quick and the dead?

Once again you are dodging my questions. You are not for real! Why is Joshua called the "Branch" in Zech 6; and isn't the "Cedar branch," planted in the two eagles parable, planted post Babylon?

When you can read the passage properly you'll understand. Let me break it down for you...at Zechariah 6:1
11 Take silver and gold, make an ornate crown and set it on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest.

Right there it PLAINLY tells you Joshua is the high priest. Now look at Zech 6:2:
12 Then say to him, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, “Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the Lord.

The passage is speaking of the coming of Christ! As you like to say...YOU'RE NOT THAT NAIVE!

 

[precepts]

Nothing rebellious...except the fact that you can't admit you've started an erroneous thread, and your error is being exposed precepts.

Talk is cheap!

Secondly, there doesn't have to be a king mentioned because Judah went into captivity under Jehoiachin. They're not in the land, so how can there be a king?

Who is king Zedek--h? When did he reign, and who is Eze 21:25-26 addressing?

You are naive though precepts. Of course no one was crowned after Jehoiachin...I made that point already. You're trying to include Zedekiah (who doesn't count because the deportation was under Jehoiachin). Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah king over the remnant.

Whether you think he counts or not, it is he that's being told to take off the crown in Eze 21:25-26, period.

You have no points really, you only think you do. You're making Ezekiel 21 say what it doesn't say. I agree that Ezekiel 21:25,26 refers to Zedekiah. Once again...If Matthew ends the genealogy at Jehoiachin, it stops there. It's God who moved Matthew to record the genealogy in which every king is a descendant of David. Zedekiah doesn't count!

Matthew's genealogy list has nothing, for the umpteenth time, to do with Eze 21:25-26. It has nothing to do with Zedek being told to take off the crown until he whose right it was would be given it. That is the context and premise of this thread, not Christ's genealogy. Christ's genealogy is irrelevant to the fact.

Once again..it's your naivety that looms large here because you don't have the full picture. There's no blasphemy, except in your dreams. Jehoiachin had no choice because God's judgement of Judah falls on Him. Because you ignore the prophet Jeremiah (who is right in the middle of it) you can't get a full understanding.

What is the full picture? Eze 21:25-26 doesn't need anything else to support what it says. You're trying to avoid the fact.

When you can show Zedekiah in any genealogy as a descendant of David...at that point I'll listen. I already know you can't.

Do you really want me to believe you're serious? Zedek is not a descendant of David? If you can't get the simple facts right, what can you ever get right?

Consider Jeremiah 22:24-30:
24 “As I live,” declares the Lord, “even though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were a signet ring on My right hand, yet I would pull you off;
25 and I will give you over into the hand of those who are seeking your life, yes, into the hand of those whom you dread, even into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and into the hand of the Chaldeans.
26 I will hurl you and your mother who bore you into another country where you were not born, and there you will die.
27 But as for the land to which they desire to return, they will not return to it.
28 “Is this man Coniah a despised, shattered jar? Or is he an undesirable vessel? Why have he and his descendants been hurled out And cast into a land that they had not known?
29 “O land, land, land, Hear the word of the Lord!
30 “Thus says the Lord, ‘Write this man down childless, A man who will not prosper in his days; For no man of his descendants will prosper Sitting on the throne of David Or ruling again in Judah.’”

That's real plain!

What is your point? It is saying the same thing Eze 21:25-26 is saying. The kings of Judah would be no more.

So where does the crowning of Joshua come in, and why isn't anyone crowned after him?

You have to produce the "real facts" first. Understand this Ezekiel and Jeremiah overlap in what they prophesy. Ezekiel is with the exiles and Jeremiah is in Judah. You have to read both to get the picture. This is why your picture is distorted.

Please! The facts are clear: Ram (Jerem--h) can never change the fact Zedek was told to take off the crown until he whose right it was came and it would be given him; Ram cannot change the fact Joshua was crowned post Babylon as high priest and king and was never succeeded by any one, making Him the last crowned king in Israel's history. These are the facts and premise of the thread. Ram or no other book can change the facts.

Doug pointed it out to you and you're too stubborn to read the passage properly. Joshua is symbolic of Christ in Zechariah. Joshua is no king. God is pointing out that Christ will be King!

Try reading my response to Doug's foolishness. He didn't respond because it proved Joshua ruled and reign after he was crowned, proven in the books of Ezra and Nehem.

Only a fool or someone playing naive would imply someone crowned in scripture was only crowned symbolically and never ruled, contrary to it being noted in scripture. You're not that naive.

I can't accept them the way you read them...indeed not.

You can't accept them, period! The grammatical facts can only be read one way, and you can't accept the grammatical facts.

I do deny YOUR logic...because it opposes what scripture says precepts.

On the contrary, it is you who is opposing scripture by claiming Joshua never ruled, etc.

I know...that's your problem...you want to say more than scripture says.

And that is not what you're doing when you say Joshua never ruled but was only crowned symbolically?

No..."you're not that naive" is your common response. You go beyond that calling me a fraud because I don't agree with you. Not that it bothers me though because you can't judge me. Jesus will do that. All that shows is you inability to tolerate the fact that others don't agree with you.

It shows my resentment to ignorance, to nonsensical responses. Scripture says if a fool and a wise argue, there's no rest for the wise because he's annoyed by the fool's ignorance.

Can you show where I said there were any kings after Jehoiachin?

In your post #16, on page 1 of this thread, you said:

This is why you're in error saying there was no king after Joshua! Every king is a descendant of David clear up to Christ because God is honoring the Davidic Covenant!

Every King over Judah is a descendant of David affirming that the sceptre DID NOT depart from Judah, just as Jacob prophesied...and EVERY king over Judah was a descendant of David.

This is clear down to Jehoiachin...who was evil...and the LAST KING over Judah when Nebuchadnezzar takes Him captive.

All the kings over Israel until the divided kingdom, and all the Kings over Judah are DESCENDANTS OF DAVID clear down to Christ...who is Shiloh, which Jacob prophesied.

You have made an error in your reasoning precepts! You are thoroughly refuted by scripture.

- The deception goes on!

Precepts, can you answer this with a simple YES or NO...is Christ returning to judge the quick and the dead?

I have no time for foolish questions.

When you can read the passage properly you'll understand. Let me break it down for you...at Zechariah 6:1
11 Take silver and gold, make an ornate crown and set it on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest.

Right there it PLAINLY tells you Joshua is the high priest.

When was his high priesthood denied? Never!

Now look at Zech 6:2:
12 Then say to him, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, “Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the Lord.

The passage is speaking of the coming of Christ! As you like to say...YOU'RE NOT THAT NAIVE!

And He will build the temple? LOL. This only shows your willingness to play ignorant.

You say to read the passage properly then concluded it's speaking of Christ without even reading the entire passage or providing the proof. Who is recorded in Ezra and Nehem as the chief builders of the second temple?

It is an open and shut case.

You also keep bringing up Ram 22 while ignoring the context of God's planting of the Cedar branch, planted post-Babylon in the two eagles parable. Why?

My case is a concrete case based on common sense and logic, which a court can only uphold. Your thinking's not.

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[precepts]

After some 2,500+ years from Dan 9 and more years from Ram's 70 years/weeks prophecy, God is going to perform 70yrs in a new Babylon in a world a little older than 6,000+ years to a nation that was formed in the 2,648th year and existed for only 1,260 years until the AoD (the middle of the week), that wasn't a nation from that 1,260th yr to some 2,000+ years later, hasn't had a prophet or haven't heard from God since, makes complete sense to me too!

A nation that did not exist for some 2,000+ years after being a nation for a 1,260 years prior to their non-existence (2,648th yr + 1,260yrs = 3,908th yr (AoD) + 2,000+ yrs to 1968 a.d.) has no reason to doubt God or your prophecy to come. Two thousand plus years is but a drop in the bucket to God, man, and to prophecy.

How great thou art!

How... greaat...... thou... arrrtttt!

 

[ebedmelech]

Talk is cheap!

As is your reasoning here.

Who is king Zedek--h? When did he reign, and who is Eze 21:25-26 addressing?

Zedekiah is a puppet installed by Nebuchadnezzar. He reigned over the remnant after Judah and the reigning king Jehoiachin was taken captive.

Whether you think he counts or not, it is he that's being told to take off the crown in Eze 21:25-26, period.

Matthew's genealogy says no...and Matthew is showing the genealogy of Christ. When you wise up and really look at Matthew's genealogy, the light might come on.

Matthew's genealogy list has nothing, for the umpteenth time, to do with Eze 21:25-26. It has nothing to do with Zedek being told to take off the crown until he whose right it was would be given it. That is the context and premise of this thread, not Christ's genealogy. Christ's genealogy is irrelevant to the fact.

That is a statement of true biblical ignorance.

What is the full picture? Eze 21:25-26 doesn't need anything else to support what it says. You're trying to avoid the fact.

The full picture is this:
This is the time of the 70 years captivity...it has very little to do with the seventy weeks. Which is why this thread you started is erroneous. You think you have something when you have nothing. The seventy weeks have to do with after the seventy years.

Do you really want me to believe you're serious? Zedek is not a descendant of David? If you can't get the simple facts right, what can you ever get right?

No...he is not! See post 36 and you might get a clue.

What is your point? It is saying the same thing Eze 21:25-26 is saying. The kings of Judah would be no more.

Still...it has LITTLE to do with the seventy weeks...which is what you think. You also can't find Joshua as a king...why not? You hang on to a passage prophesying Christ and try to make it Johsua. You also start a thread and get defensive when people disagree with you. Is this about God's word or you?

So where does the crowning of Joshua come in, and why isn't anyone crowned after him?

Follow Matthew's genealogy...who does it name after the return to the land? Where is Joshua...and why is Zerubbabel there? Realize God the Holy Spirit doesn't have Matthew include that for decoration.

Please! The facts are clear: Ram (Jerem--h) can never change the fact Zedek was told to take off the crown until he whose right it was came and it would be given him; Ram cannot change the fact Joshua was crowned post Babylon as high priest and king and was never succeeded by any one, making Him the last crowned king in Israel's history. These are the facts and premise of the thread. Ram or no other book can change the facts.

You're still missing it though. Joshua is not a king...he's symbolic in the passage. In your stubborness you can't admit it. The passage is very clear.

Try reading my response to Doug's foolishness. He didn't respond because it proved Joshua ruled and reign after he was crowned, proven in the books of Ezra and Nehem.

No. Though Doug and I don't agree often, he had that right. Ezra and Nehemiah don't even address it. You assume Doug didn't respond for that reason...read how you speak to others...that's most likely why he didn't respond.

Only a fool or someone playing naive would imply someone crowned in scripture was only crowned symbolically and never ruled, contrary to it being noted in scripture. You're not that naive.

It's there for the reader. As I've told you...you're the naive one precepts, because you read in your own vacuum.

You can't accept them, period! The grammatical facts can only be read one way, and you can't accept the grammatical facts.

That statement says more about you and how you read scripture precepts, than it says of anyone else.

On the contrary, it is you who is opposing scripture by claiming Joshua never ruled, etc.

And that is not what you're doing when you say Joshua never ruled but was only crowned symbolically?

You've not shown that...period. You simply continue to mis-read Zechariah 6.

It shows my resentment to ignorance, to nonsensical responses. Scripture says if a fool and a wise argue, there's no rest for the wise because he's annoyed by the fool's ignorance.

So look in the mirror.

In your post #16, on page 1 of this thread, you said:

This is why you're in error saying there was no king after Joshua! Every king is a descendant of David clear up to Christ because God is honoring the Davidic Covenant!

Every King over Judah is a descendant of David affirming that the sceptre DID NOT depart from Judah, just as Jacob prophesied...and EVERY king over Judah was a descendant of David.

This is clear down to Jehoiachin...who was evil...and the LAST KING over Judah when Nebuchadnezzar takes Him captive.

All the kings over Israel until the divided kingdom, and all the Kings over Judah are DESCENDANTS OF DAVID clear down to Christ...who is Shiloh, which Jacob prophesied.

You have made an error in your reasoning precepts! You are thoroughly refuted by scripture.

- The deception goes on!

If you think so. That fact is...at that point I thought you meant Joshua who followed Moses. That was my error. I should have clarified that first. None the less Joshua of Zechariah 6 is a prophetic symbol of Christ.

I have no time for foolish questions.

When was his high priesthood denied? Never!

And He will build the temple? LOL. This only shows your willingness to play ignorant.

You say to read the passage properly then concluded it's speaking of Christ without even reading the entire passage or providing the proof. Who is recorded in Ezra and Nehem as the chief builders of the second temple?

It is an open and shut case.

You also keep bringing up Ram 22 while ignoring the context of God's planting of the Cedar branch, planted post-Babylon in the two eagles parable. Why?

My case is a concrete case based on common sense and logic, which a court can only uphold. Your thinking's not.

Then you can have YOUR thread precepts. One cannot debate scripture with you because you tend to take it personal. It's about scripture, not you.

It's one thing to disagree agreeably with others...something you have yet to understand. You can have YOUR thread.

 

[precepts]

As is your reasoning here.

That's ironic to the max. I will let the righteous, innocent readers with understanding decide because you have shown you have none.

Zedekiah is a puppet installed by Nebuchadnezzar. He reigned over the remnant after Judah and the reigning king Jehoiachin was taken captive.

Again you're dodging the fact. Who is Eze 21:25-26 referring to when it says "to take off the crown"? And Zedek, as I have already explained, but you continue to ignore, was Achin's uncle, meaning he is a descendant of David.

The only reason his seed isn't the line of kings Christ came thru is because he disobeyed God. God gave him a chance to be the ancestor of Christ, but he refused God's word in not surrendering to Nebuchadnezzar, which only shows how little you know about scripture. (Jer 19:15, 21:8-12, 27:12, & 29:16-19.)

Matthew's genealogy says no...and Matthew is showing the genealogy of Christ. When you wise up and really look at Matthew's genealogy, the light might come on.

This is your response to Zedek being the one referred to in Eze 21:25-26? that Matthew's genealogy says no? And you're telling me to wise up?

That is a statement of true biblical ignorance.

Matthew's genealogy having nothing to do with who Eze 21:25-26 is addressing is a statement of "true" scriptural ignorance? This is why I say you're rebellious, because you are not that naive.

The full picture is this:
This is the time of the 70 years captivity...it has very little to do with the seventy weeks. Which is why this thread you started is erroneous. You think you have something when you have nothing. The seventy weeks have to do with after the seventy years.

You are not that ignorant, just rebellious. Ram's 70yrs prophecy has nothing to do with Daniel's 70wks prophecy and the prophecy is given after Daniel realizes what Ram meant by the 70yrs in Babylon? Your erroneous conclusion is not realizing both are referring to the same period!

No...he is not! See post 36 and you might get a clue.

How many times have I provided verses proving Zedek was Achin's uncle, the brother of his father Akim. Yet you're here telling me he is not a descendant of David, and that I am clueless. That is the true picture of hypocrisy!

Still...it has LITTLE to do with the seventy weeks...which is what you think. You also can't find Joshua as a king...why not? You hang on to a passage prophesying Christ and try to make it Johsua.

You also start a thread and get defensive when people disagree with you. Is this about God's word or you?

Something is wrong with you! If you are a member of a Church, I suggest you have a talk with your pastor about these issues. These are simple facts written in scripture. There are no kings list in scripture and there's no one that's ever crowned that doesn't reign. Joshua being crowned king and high priest is a fact. You can't excuse your way out of what is fact and what is written.

Follow Matthew's genealogy...who does it name after the return to the land? Where is Joshua...and why is Zerubbabel there? Realize God the Holy Spirit doesn't have Matthew include that for decoration.

You didn't answer the questions: Where does the crowning of Joshua come in, and why isn't anyone crowned after him?

You're still missing it though. Joshua is not a king...he's symbolic in the passage. In your stubborness you can't admit it. The passage is very clear.

The crowns made weren't symbolic crowns, and the four others crowned with Joshua weren't symbolic also.

You are adding things not written to scripture, contrary to what scripture does say. Scripture doesn't say it was symbolic, nor does it suggest it. You are the one that's being stubborn, adding to scripture because "you" don't want to admit the fact regardless of Eze 21:25-26, the two eagles parable planting of the Cedar branch post-Babylon, and the many other verses I posted proving the fact.

No. Though Doug and I don't agree often, he had that right. Ezra and Nehemiah don't even address it. You assume Doug didn't respond for that reason...read how you speak to others...that's most likely why he didn't respond.

Ezra and Nehem proves Joshua and Zerubabel are the "them" who the counsel of peace is divide between, the two principal leaders of Israel, the two primary builders of the 2nd temple.

It's there for the reader. As I've told you...you're the naive one precepts, because you read in your own vacuum.

Again with the hypocrisy, your vacuum is claiming it was symbolic when scripture says it wasn't.

That statement says more about you and how you read scripture precepts, than it says of anyone else.

So far you've said Zedek is not a descendant of David and that Christ's genealogy alters who Eze 21:25-26 is referring to, two of the most erroneous statements ever. Your understanding is limited.

You've not shown that...period. You simply continue to mis-read Zechariah 6.

You, on the other hand, haven't shown where it does say Joshua didn't rule, contrary to Zech 6:13 specifically stating He ruled as a priest on His throne! You are posting foolishness, things without any substance!

If you think so. That fact is...at that point I thought you meant Joshua who followed Moses. That was my error. I should have clarified that first. None the less Joshua of Zechariah 6 is a prophetic symbol of Christ.

You thinking I was referring to Moses' Joshua is why you responded with everyone on Matthew's genealogy list was a king? This is your typically way of responding.

Your excuses makes no sense, as does any of your illogical conclusions.

Then you can have YOUR thread precepts. One cannot debate scripture with you because you tend to take it personal. It's about scripture, not you.

It's not about reasoning. It's about illogical responses. Reasoning entails understanding what's logical and what's not that brings one to the reality and truth of a matter by realizing the facts or at least being able to determine what the facts really are thru understanding.

It's one thing to disagree agreeably with others...something you have yet to understand. You can have YOUR thread.

Please! Disagreeing is but a smoke screen for you, as I have discovered.

 

[ebedmelech]

Have fun with your thread precepts.

 

[precepts]

You are welcome!

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[ebedmelech]

The 70 weeks prophecy includes the end of the 70 years of serving the king
of Babylon prophecy.

Jeremiah 25:11-12 is why Daniel supplicated. Babylon fell but still has yet to rule
for her full 70 years of time.
605 BC ----Nebucahdnezzar II
539 BC - Darius the Mede/Daniel 9
536-535 BC --Cyrus the Persian - has his first year as ruler of Babylon and
gives a decree to release Jews that want to rebuild.//Ezra 1:1

Daniel 6:28

Daniel 10:1///years after the return decree

No vinsight4u. The seventy years were God's punishment to Judah for not allowing the land to rest as God told them in the law.

Jeremiah prophesied the 70 years to apply only to the captivity as Daniel tells you Jeremiah prophesied. That passage is Jeremiah 25:
11 This whole land will be a desolation and a horror, and these nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years.
12 ‘Then it will be when seventy years are completed I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation,’ declares the Lord, ‘for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans; and I will make it an everlasting desolation.

Daniel tells you he's praying about that prophecy in Daniel 9:1-2!

Here's the problem with what you're saying:
The seventy weeks start from Artaxerses command to rebuild Jerusalem as Daniel 9:25 says. That command is in Nehemiah 2

Judah and Israel have already returned to the land...so the seventy years Jeremiah prophesied are over when they returned to the land.

Cyrus gave the command to restore the temple. Artaxerses gave the command to restore Jerusalem.

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[ebedmelech]

Cyrus also told to rebuild the city.

Find that in scripture. Cyrus gave the command to rebuild the temple. It's right there in Ezra 1:2

There are two 70-yr prophecies.

No. One prophecy is for seventy years, which Jeremiah prophesied. Daniel was given the prophecy of seventy SEVENS...they are weeks of years that total 490 years.

Jeremiah 25:11 requires a Babylonian king and verse 12 requires that he
is punished at the end of the 70 years - and the land of the Chaldeans.
Babylon was never punished when it fell to Darius, not in the way as to the land was made desolate//"perpetual desolations".

No one said Darius punished Babylon. That act was a direct result of Belshazzar defiling the vessels of the temple at his party.

Don't miss Jeremiah 25:12 it gives what that time applies to:
12 ‘Then it will be when seventy years are completed I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation,’ declares the Lord, ‘for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans; and I will make it an everlasting desolation.

The Lord's word through Jeremiah is very clear it happens WHEN THE SEVENTY YEARS ARE COMPLETED, that Babylon will be punished.

This concurs with Daniel 9:2:
Daniel 9:2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, observed in the books the number of the years which was revealed as the word of the Lord to Jeremiah the prophet for the completion of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy years.

Also read Jeremiah 50

Ezra 1:1-2 tells you clearly the 70 years are over:
Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he sent a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and also put it in writing, saying:
2 “Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, ‘The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and He has appointed me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah.
This command is to rebuild the temple. This is the difference in Ezra and Nehemiah. Ezra is about the temple being rebuilt at the command of Cyrus.

Nehemiah is about the city being rebuilt under Artaxerses..Nehemiah 2!

 

[precepts]

Dan 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.

Can somebody please explain to me how 70wks to the commandment "to restore and to build Jerusalem" computes to 445 bc? Artaxerxes decree to rebuild the wall comes 94 solar yrs after this Cyrus' decree. How does one conclude the decree to rebuild the city is Artaxerxes' decree and not Cyrus'?

Ezr 3:1 And when the seventh month was come, and the children of Israel were in the cities, the people gathered themselves together as one man to Jerusalem.

Another fallacy, all the children of Israel, it says here, were in their cities seven months post-Babylon. Yet Antichrist propaganda claims only Judah and Benjamin returned regardless of the historical fact all the nations under Babylon returned to their heritage because Cyrus' decree commanded so because he believed it to be the gods judgement on Babylon for destroying all the nations' gods and temples. He is said to have established the first human rights and freedom of religion act, freeing all the nations under Babylon to go back and worship their own gods instead of being forced to worship their conqueror's god, the first of it's kind. The Antichrist propaganda contradicts the historical facts.

Ezr 4:12 Be it known unto the king, that the Jews which came up from thee to us are come unto Jerusalem, building the rebellious and the bad city, and have set up the walls thereof, and joined the foundations.
Ezr 4:13 Be it known now unto the king, that, if this city be builded, and the walls set up again, then will they not pay toll, tribute, and custom, and so thou shalt endamage the revenue of the kings.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ezr 4:15 That search may be made in the book of the records of thy fathers: so shalt thou find in the book of the records, and know that this city is a rebellious city, and hurtful unto kings and provinces, and that they have moved sedition within the same of old time: for which cause was this city destroyed.
Ezr 4:16 We certify the king that, if this city be builded again, and the walls thereof set up, by this means thou shalt have no portion on this side the river.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ezr 4:19 And I commanded, and search hath been made, and it is found that this city of old time hath made insurrection against kings, and that rebellion and sedition have been made therein.
Ezr 4:20 There have been mighty kings also over Jerusalem, which have ruled over all countries beyond the river; and toll, tribute, and custom, was paid unto them.
Ezr 4:21 Give ye now commandment to cause these men to cease, and that this city be not builded, until another commandment shall be given from me.

Obviously this is before Nehem--h and Artaxerxes because it's Joshua and Zerubabel still building after the 7 months post-Babylon return.

This wrongly labeled Artaxerxes that causes them to stop building the city and the temple is not Nehem--h's Artaxerxes. According to history, he was an imposter that reign several months claiming to be the son of Cyrus until he was overthrown by Darius who conceded the rebuilding of the temple and city and in whose 6th yr of reign the temple was completed. If only some people would read the scriptures instead of posting foolishness.

This was the fulfillment of Cyrus' decree: to go forth and restore/build the city!

Neh 1:1 The words of Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah. And it came to pass in the month Chisleu, in the twentieth year, as I was in Shushan the palace,
Neh 1:2 That Hanani, one of my brethren, came, he and certain men of Judah; and I asked them concerning the Jews that had escaped, which were left of the captivity, and concerning Jerusalem.
Neh 1:3 And they said unto me, The remnant that are left of the captivity there in the province are in great affliction and reproach: the wall of Jerusalem also is broken down, and the gates thereof are burned with fire.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Neh 2:1 And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that wine was before him: and I took up the wine, and gave it unto the king. Now I had not been beforetime sad in his presence.
Neh 2:2 Wherefore the king said unto me, Why is thy countenance sad, seeing thou art not sick? this is nothing else but sorrow of heart. Then I was very sore afraid,
Neh 2:3 And said unto the king, Let the king live for ever: why should not my countenance be sad, when the city, the place of my fathers' sepulchres, lieth waste, and the gates thereof are consumed with fire?
Neh 2:4 Then the king said unto me, For what dost thou make request? So I prayed to the God of heaven.
Neh 2:5 And I said unto the king, If it please the king, and if thy servant have found favour in thy sight, that thou wouldest send me unto Judah, unto the city of my fathers' sepulchres, that I may build it.

This is 445 bc, 71 yrs after the temple was completed in the 6th year of King Darius' reign, after the city and temple worked ceased during the imposter's reign until the 2nd yr of Darius - obviously the "walls" being rebuilt during the "troublous times."

Neh 4:1 But it came to pass, that when Sanballat heard that we builded the wall, he was wroth, and took great indignation, and mocked the Jews.
Neh 4:2 And he spake before his brethren and the army of Samaria, and said, What do these feeble Jews? will they fortify themselves? will they sacrifice? will they make an end in a day? will they revive the stones out of the heaps of the rubbish which are burned?
Neh 4:3 Now Tobiah the Ammonite was by him, and he said, Even that which they build, if a fox go up, he shall even break down their stone wall.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Neh 4:6 So built we the wall; and all the wall was joined together unto the half thereof: for the people had a mind to work.
Neh 4:7 But it came to pass, that when Sanballat, and Tobiah, and the Arabians, and the Ammonites, and the Ashdodites, heard that the walls of Jerusalem were made up, and that the breaches began to be stopped, then they were very wroth,
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Neh 4:15 And it came to pass, when our enemies heard that it was known unto us, and God had brought their counsel to nought, that we returned all of us to the wall, every one unto his work.
Neh 4:16 And it came to pass from that time forth, that the half of my servants wrought in the work, and the other half of them held both the spears, the shields, and the bows, and the habergeons; and the rulers were behind all the house of Judah.
Neh 4:17 They which builded on the wall, and they that bare burdens, with those that laded, every one with one of his hands wrought in the work, and with the other hand held a weapon.
Neh 4:18 For the builders, every one had his sword girded by his side, and so builded. And he that sounded the trumpet was by me.
Neh 4:19 And I said unto the nobles, and to the rulers, and to the rest of the people, The work is great and large, and we are separated upon the wall, one far from another.

Nothing in Nehem--h's writings suggest they ever built the city, only the walls. And guess what? They completed their work in 52 days!

Neh 6:15 So the wall was finished in the twenty and fifth day of the month Elul, in fifty and two days.

Here endeth the lesson!

 

[Aijalon]

Two Exodus, two return from exile, you're not that naive.

again, I don't understand the need for you to define two Exoduses, except possibly to invent a reason why Jer 23 was fulfilled. It's not about the Exodus, it's about the quality of the change in the understanding of who God is to the Jews. God will CEASE being identified as a God who brought people out of Egypt. Don't you get it!

Please! You people are not naive. Eze 21:25-26 clearly proves Joshua crowned king and high priest post Babylon was the fulfillment of the "he whose right it was that would come."

Maybe if he was succeeded by another king at the end of his reign, then you might have had a case, but he's not. He is the last crowned king of Israel, period, your stumbling block.

That doesn't make sense. How does Joshua being the final king fulfill anything? Joshua was crowned in a vision, not in real life. He was spiritually bestowed Grace for priestly leadership. Joshua was not the final king or priest Jesus was/is. You have a gone off the rails. Anything Joshua did was obviously representative of the activity of Jesus Christ, as Joshua never in fact had supreme authority in his day - Israel was still a vassal state, and remained that way until destroyed by Rome.

 

[precepts]

again, I don't understand the need for you to define two Exoduses, except possibly to invent a reason why Jer 23 was fulfilled. It's not about the Exodus, it's about the quality of the change in the understanding of who God is to the Jews. God will CEASE being identified as a God who brought people out of Egypt. Don't you get it!

You are not that naive. The need to define two Exoduses is in verses 7 and 8. They define the two Exoduses, not me.

You are not that naive.

Don't you get it!

That doesn't make sense. How does Joshua being the final king fulfill anything? Joshua was crowned in a vision, not in real life. He was spiritually bestowed Grace for priestly leadership. Joshua was not the final king or priest Jesus was/is. You have a gone off the rails. Anything Joshua did was obviously representative of the activity of Jesus Christ, as Joshua never in fact had supreme authority in his day - Israel was still a vassal state, and remained that way until destroyed by Rome.

You are not that naive! Zech 6:13 specifically tells you He ruled on His throne as a high priest and king. It also specifically tells you He built the temple, and "the counsel of peace was between "them both." Who is "them"? Ezra and Nehem--h specifically tells you who "them" is. They were the primary builders of the temple and the principal rulers of Israel post-Babylon.

You people speak about things you have no knowledge of or even an idea about, which is folly. You only repeat what you've been told without even thinking about what you're saying. Like the wise king Solomon said, it is nothing but vanity and a vexation of spirit.

 

[Douggg]

You are not that naive! Zech 6:13 specifically tells you He ruled on His throne as a high priest and king.

precepts. what tribe was King David from? And what tribe was Joshua from?

God promised David that he would always have a descendant on the throne. David was of the tribe of Judah. Joshua was from what tribe? If Joshua was from a tribe other than Judah (a descendant of King David) then he could not have ruled as king because God promised David that his descendants would be the kings.

Joshua was of the wrong tribe, Levi, to rule as king.

Genesis 49:9, 10-"A lion cub Judah is. From the prey, my son, you will certainly go up. He bowed down, he stretched himself out like a lion and, like a lion, who dares rouse him? The scepter will not turn aside from Judah, neither the commander’s staff from between his feet, until Shi′loh comes; and to him the obedience of the peoples will belong."

Shiloh means - the one who's right it is.

Now if you go to that passage of Joshua having a crown set on his head - it is a prophecy that the one who's right it is, will be both king and priest. Jesus is our high priest in heaven, making intercession for us. When he returns he will take his rightful place as the King of Israel here on earth - Psalms 2.

Also, the kings of Israel were not crowned to take office, but anointed with oil. Joshua was never anointed as King.

 

[precepts]

precepts. what tribe was King David from? And what tribe was Joshua from?

What does that have to do with Zech 6:13 stating Joshua,. crowned king and high priest, reigned post-Babylon?

God promised David that he would always have a descendant on the throne. David was of the tribe of Judah. Joshua was from what tribe? If Joshua was from a tribe other than Judah (a descendant of King David) then he could not have ruled as king because God promised David that his descendants would be the kings.

Again, what does this have to do with Zech 6:13 stating Joshua reigned? It is what Zech 6:13 specifically states, a fact that can't be denied in a court of law, an open and shut grammatical fact that it is what the text is specifically saying. Why can't you comprehend the fact?

Joshua was of the wrong tribe, Levi, to rule as king.

Genesis 49:9, 10-"A lion cub Judah is. From the prey, my son, you will certainly go up. He bowed down, he stretched himself out like a lion and, like a lion, who dares rouse him? The scepter will not turn aside from Judah, neither the commander’s staff from between his feet, until Shi′loh comes; and to him the obedience of the peoples will belong."

Shiloh means - the one who's right it is.

So why was Joshua crowned instead of Zerubabel the rightful heir, and why was no one crowned ever after him in Israel?

Now if you go to that passage of Joshua having a crown set on his head - it is a prophecy that the one who's right it is, will be both king and priest. Jesus is our high priest in heaven, making intercession for us. When he returns he will take his rightful place as the King of Israel here on earth - Psalms 2.

A court of law can never deny the facts. He was the fulfillment of Eze 21:25-26, along with all the supporting verses I quoted in the opening post, facts that cannot logically be denied.

You can dance around them if you like, dwelling on one verse when there are so many other verses I quoted that proves the fact the context is post-Babylon.

And since the book is unread, there is plenty of room for error in any existing interpretation. So, get over it and accept the fact.

Also, the kings of Israel were not crowned to take office, but anointed with oil. Joshua was never anointed as King.

Continue to take away from what scripture specifically says. It's beyond reasonable.