Never scripturally a pre antichrist rapture

[BABerean2]

The gap between Dan.8:26 and 27 is taking place as I write.

I will assume you meant Daniel 9:26 and 27.

Why do you say there is a gap in that passage?

Because it is one of the 3 pillars of modern Dispensational Theology.
Your whole Two Peoples of God doctrine is like a 3-legged stool that falls without it.
Therefore, those promoting the doctrine must defend it to the death.

To make the idea work you must think that the angel Gabriel came to reveal the timeline of the New Covenant Messiah and then forgot to mention the New Covenant. Forget what is in the 1599 Geneva Bible, and forget that the scriptural reference beside of Daniel 9:27 in the NKJV Bible is Matthew 26:28.
Then you must act like anyone who does not agree with your viewpoint has a "non-literal" viewpoint of scripture.

You must also ignore any time that the Gospel was taken to Daniel's people during the first century.
Ignore Matthew 10:5-7 and Galatians 1:14-18 which show a period of time of about 7 years before Paul began his ministry to the Gentiles.

Then claim that the "Church Age" will end 7 years before the Second Coming of Christ.
Ignore the word "everlasting" in Hebrews 13:20.

Claim that God will one day deal with modern Israel under the Old Covenant system.
Forget that the New Covenant has made the Old Covenant "obsolete" in Hebrews 8:13.

Do all of the above and then maybe you can create a gap in Daniel chapter 9.

.

 

[Quasar92]

Nice try, but no goal. Sorry.

You're barking up the wrong tree. Review post #10 of reasons for the 70 weeks of years that destroy the views you hold.


Quasar92

 

[Quasar92]

I will assume you meant Daniel 9:26 and 27.

Why do you say there is a gap in that passage?

Because it is one of the 3 pillars of modern Dispensational Theology.
Your whole Two Peoples of God doctrine is like a 3-legged stool that falls without it.
Therefore, those promoting the doctrine must defend it to the death.

To make the idea work you must think that the angel Gabriel came to reveal the timeline of the New Covenant Messiah and then forgot to mention the New Covenant. Forget what is in the 1599 Geneva Bible, and forget that the scriptural reference beside of Daniel 9:27 in the NKJV Bible is Matthew 26:28.
Then you must act like anyone who does not agree with your viewpoint has a "non-literal" viewpoint of scripture.

You must also ignore any time that the Gospel was taken to Daniel's people during the first century.
Ignore Matthew 10:5-7 and Galatians 1:14-18 which show a period of time of about 7 years before Paul began his ministry to the Gentiles.

Then claim that the "Church Age" will end 7 years before the Second Coming of Christ.
Ignore the word "everlasting" in Hebrews 13:20.

Claim that God will one day deal with modern Israel under the Old Covenant system.
Forget that the New Covenant has made the Old Covenant "obsolete" in Hebrews 8:13.

Do all of the above and then maybe you can create a gap in Daniel chapter 9.

.

You wrote the following: "Because it is one of the 3 pillars of modern Dispensational Theology.
Your whole Two Peoples of God doctrine is like a 3-legged stool that falls without it.
Therefore, those promoting the doctrine must defend it to the death."

Your above oracle is a denial of the two people that are divided in such a simple way, you don't understand it.

1. The Church consists of Jews and Gentiles alike, al believers in Jesus Christ,l baptized into the one Spirit, recorded in 1 Cor.12:12-13, into the one body of Christ, His Church.

2. The nation of Israel who have rejected Jesus Christ as their Messiah and as such, are non-believers, also rejecting the terms of the New Covenant. You don't understand, that is the very reason Israel wll go through the tribulation, the 70th week of Daniel, 9:27. In contrast to the Church, that will not go through the tribulation.

Those are your two people, from which there is no option!

To understand the the gap, now taking place between Dan.9:26 and 27, q review of Jesus Olivet Discourse in Mt.24:4-31 and counter parts in Mk.13 and in Lk.21, thoroughly explains it, when you understand, it is unfulfilled prophecy.

Review post #10 in the reasons for the 70 weeks of Daniel thread for a complete breakdown.

The Olivet Discourse | Prophetic Issues | Lamb and Lion Ministries


Quasar92

 

[BABerean2]

You wrote the following: "Because it is one of the 3 pillars of modern Dispensational Theology.
Your whole Two Peoples of God doctrine is like a 3-legged stool that falls without it.
Therefore, those promoting the doctrine must defend it to the death."

Your above oracle is a denial of the two people that are divided in such a simple way, you don't understand it.

1. The Church consists of Jews and Gentiles alike, al believers in Jesus Christ,l baptized into the one Spirit, recorded in 1 Cor.12:12-13, into the one body of Christ, His Church.

2. The nation of Israel who have rejected Jesus Christ as their Messiah and as such, are non-believers, also rejecting the terms of the New Covenant. You don't understand, that is the very reason Israel wll go through the tribulation, the 70th week of Daniel, 9:27. In contrast to the Church, that will not go through the tribulation.

Those are your two people, from which there is no option!

To understand the the gap, now taking place between Dan.9:26 and 27, q review of Jesus Olivet Discourse in Mt.24:4-31 and counter parts in Mk.13 and in Lk.21, thoroughly explains it, when you understand, it is unfulfilled prophecy.

Review post #10 in the reasons for the 70 weeks of Daniel thread for a complete breakdown.

The Olivet Discourse | Prophetic Issues | Lamb and Lion Ministries


Quasar92

The problem is that your #1 and #2 above do not match the text of scripture.

We know that all Israelites did not reject the Messiah, based on Acts 2:36 and Romans 11:1.

The New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13. The exact text from Jeremiah 31 is found in Hebrews 8.
Then we find the New Covenant specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8.

Then you ignore those under the Blood of the Lamb in Revelation 12:11, even though a person cannot be under the Blood of the Lamb and not be under the Grace of the New Covenant of Christ.

Your whole system of interpretation is built by ignoring what is plainly written in God's Word.

.

 

[jgr]

You're barking up the wrong tree. Review post #10 of reasons for the 70 weeks of years that destroy the views you hold.


Quasar92

We've seen earlier the testimony of 70 contiguous weeks in the Epistle of Barnabas.

Here's Clement of Alexandria, circa 160 AD.

“And thus Christ became King of the Jews, reigning in Jerusalem in the fulfilment of the seven weeks. And in the sixty and two weeks the whole of Judaea was quiet, and without wars. And Christ our Lord, "the Holy of Holies," having come and fulfilled the vision and the prophecy, was anointed in His flesh by the Holy Spirit of His Father. In those "sixty and two weeks," as the prophet said, and "in the one week," was He Lord. The half of the week Nero held sway, and in the holy city Jerusalem placed the abomination; and in the half of the week he was taken away, and Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius. And Vespasian rose to the supreme power, and destroyed Jerusalem, and desolated the holy place. And that such are the facts of the case, is clear to him that is able to understand, as the prophet said.”

Stromata, book 1, chapter 21

I wonder if Clement had had a vision of dispensationalism when he threw in that last sentence.

 

[Riberra]

2. The nation of Israel who have rejected Jesus Christ as their Messiah and as such, are non-believers, also rejecting the terms of the New Covenant.

Their punishment have happen in 70 AD in the hands the Roman army...1,2 millions Jews have been slaughtered .

Daniel 9:26 b
...and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

There are time gaps in every prophecy, from the time they are made, till the time they are fulfilled, as I stated about the more than 300 OT prophecies jesus fulfilled in the NT. The gap between Dan.8:26 and 27 is taking place as I write.


Quasar92

You are evidently not understanding my question. You say there is a gap from the completion of the 69th week to the beginning of the 70th week of the 70 week prophecy, which right now is about 2000 years.

I am asking you to show me another time prophecy in the Bible that has a similar gap in the time frame where the time is put on hold until some time later for the time to begin again to completion.

I know about the "gap" from prophecy to fulfillment.

 

[SeventyOne]

You are evidently not understanding my question. You say there is a gap from the completion of the 69th week to the beginning of the 70th week of the 70 week prophecy, which right now is about 2000 years.

I am asking you to show me another time prophecy in the Bible that has a similar gap in the time frame where the time is put on hold until some time later for the time to begin again to completion.

I know about the "gap" from prophecy to fulfillment.

Luke 4:16-21

There is a gap in the fulfillment of the complete prophecy Jesus was reading from in Isaiah 61. He read a portion of the prophecy and proclaimed it fulfilled, but He stopped mid-sentence. This action places a gap between the partial fulfillment and the full fulfillment.

 

[jgr]

Luke 4:16-21

There is a gap in the fulfillment of the complete prophecy Jesus was reading from in Isaiah 61. He read a portion of the prophecy and proclaimed it fulfilled, but He stopped mid-sentence. This action places a gap between the partial fulfillment and the full fulfillment.

The reasons for Jesus' apparently abbreviated message become evident in Luke 4:28-29. They have nothing to do with a gap or delayed fulfillment. His intent was to define the audience for His ensuing message and ministry during His time on earth.

Jesus message and ministry were not directed to that synagogue audience, and that audience was unreceptive to the One who brought them.

Jesus message and ministry, as described in the portion of Isaiah 61 which He quoted, were directed to the most disadvantaged and downtrodden of humanity, those most willing to receive and believe in the One bringing that message and minstry: the poor, the brokenhearted, the captives, the blind, the bruised. Jesus elaborates on His selectivity, and the unreceptivity accorded Him, with the historical examples of the impoverished widow of Zarephath as the only one of many to whom Elijah was sent, and of the afflicted Naaman as the only one of many to whom Elisha was sent.

Jesus' audience in the synagogue that day was interested only in a message of a restored carnal kingdom of political, economic, and military dominance reflective of the expectations of a Messiah by the Talmudic Pharisaic Judaism of the time. When the message they received was the diametic opposite of those expectations, their hostility erupted, as recorded in v. 28-29.

Jesus had effectively set the stage regarding the nature of the mission and purpose of His coming, and the opposition which He would encounter during the entirety of His ministry. Notwithstanding that opposition, He would not fail to establish His kingdom, and to accomplish all that had been written long before by His servant Daniel in the inspired prophecies of Daniel 9:24-27.

 

[SeventyOne]

The reasons for Jesus' apparently abbreviated message become evident in Luke 4:28-29. They have nothing to do with a gap or delayed fulfillment. His intent was to define the audience for His ensuing message and ministry during His time on earth.

Jesus message and ministry were not directed to that synagogue audience, and that audience was unreceptive to the One who brought them.

Jesus message and ministry, as described in the portion of Isaiah 61 which He quoted, were directed to the most disadvantaged and downtrodden of humanity, those most willing to receive and believe in the One bringing that message and minstry: the poor, the brokenhearted, the captives, the blind, the bruised. Jesus elaborates on His selectivity, and the unreceptivity accorded Him, with the historical examples of the impoverished widow of Zarephath as the only one of many to whom Elijah was sent, and of the afflicted Naaman as the only one of many to whom Elisha was sent.

Jesus' audience in the synagogue that day was interested only in a message of a restored carnal kingdom of political, economic, and military dominance reflective of the expectations of a Messiah by the Talmudic Pharisaic Judaism of the time. When the message they received was the diametic opposite of those expectations, their hostility erupted, as recorded in v. 28-29.

Jesus had effectively set the stage regarding the nature of the mission and purpose of His coming, and the opposition which He would encounter during the entirety of His ministry. Notwithstanding that opposition, He would not fail to establish His kingdom, and to accomplish all that had been written long before by His servant Daniel in the inspired prophecies of Daniel 9:24-27.

So, are you saying the rest of that scripture was fulfilled that exact same day as well?

 

[jgr]

So, are you saying the rest of that scripture was fulfilled that exact same day as well?

No. But we know why He stopped when He did.

 

[SeventyOne]

No. But we know why He stopped when He did.

Right. Because it wasn't being fulfilled that very day like the rest, due to a gap in the time frame of fulfillment.

 

[jgr]

Right. Because it wasn't being fulfilled that very day like the rest, due to a gap in the time frame of fulfillment.

No. Because He had defined and delineated who His intended audience was, none of whom were there that day, which is why "...all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath" (v. 28).

 

[SeventyOne]

No. Because He had defined and delineated who His intended audience was, none of whom were there that day, which is why "...all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath" (v. 28).

That's more of an excuse to not face the fact the whole verse wasn't fulfilled on that day.

He didn't proclaim the day of the vengeance of the Lord to be fulfilled that day in their hearing, simply because it wasn't fulfilled on that day.

 

[jgr]

That's more of an excuse to not face the fact the whole verse wasn't fulfilled on that day.

He didn't proclaim the day of the vengeance of the Lord to be fulfilled that day in their hearing, simply because it wasn't fulfilled on that day.

I concur. It wasn't fulfilled that day. But His intent wasn't to delineate fulfillments. It was to delineate His audience.

 

[SeventyOne]

I concur. It wasn't fulfilled that day. But His intent wasn't to delineate fulfillments. It was to delineate His audience.

If you intend to declare knowledge concerning the intent of God, it would be best if you had more than speculation to support it.

Still, it's an example of a gap in fulfillment of a prophecy, which is what was asked for in the post where I responded.

 

[jgr]

If you intend to declare knowledge concerning the intent of God, it would be best if you had more than speculation to support it.

Still, it's an example of a gap in fulfillment of a prophecy, which is what was asked for in the post where I responded.

I rest my case.

 

[Quasar92]

The problem is that your #1 and #2 above do not match the text of scripture.

We know that all Israelites did not reject the Messiah, based on Acts 2:36 and Romans 11:1.

The New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13. The exact text from Jeremiah 31 is found in Hebrews 8.
Then we find the New Covenant specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8.

Then you ignore those under the Blood of the Lamb in Revelation 12:11, even though a person cannot be under the Blood of the Lamb and not be under the Grace of the New Covenant of Christ.

Your whole system of interpretation is built by ignoring what is plainly written in God's Word.

.

Your argument My statements in

The problem is that your #1 and #2 above do not match the text of scripture.

We know that all Israelites did not reject the Messiah, based on Acts 2:36 and Romans 11:1.

The New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13. The exact text from Jeremiah 31 is found in Hebrews 8.
Then we find the New Covenant specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8.

Then you ignore those under the Blood of the Lamb in Revelation 12:11, even though a person cannot be under the Blood of the Lamb and not be under the Grace of the New Covenant of Christ.

Your whole system of interpretation is built by ignoring what is plainly written in God's Word.

.

Your remarks my #1.and #2. points in post #143, "does not meet the text of the Scripture," is one you will never prove by the Scriptures that refute you over it. As previously posted:

>>>1. The Church consists of Jews and Gentiles alike, al believers in Jesus Christ,l baptized into the one Spirit, recorded in 1 Cor.12:12-13, into the one body of Christ, His Church.

2. The nation of Israel who have rejected Jesus Christ as their Messiah and as such, are non-believers, also rejecting the terms of the New Covenant. You don't understand, that is the very reason Israel wll go through the tribulation, the 70th week of Daniel, 9:27. In contrast to the Church, that will not go through the tribulation.<<<

You remain reuted.


Quasar92

 

[Quasar92]

I rest my case.

You might as well, it's empty.


Quasar92

 

[jgr]

You might as well, it's empty.


Quasar92

How about this case?

We've seen earlier the testimony of 70 contiguous weeks in the Epistle of Barnabas.

Here's Clement of Alexandria, circa 160 AD.

“And thus Christ became King of the Jews, reigning in Jerusalem in the fulfilment of the seven weeks. And in the sixty and two weeks the whole of Judaea was quiet, and without wars. And Christ our Lord, "the Holy of Holies," having come and fulfilled the vision and the prophecy, was anointed in His flesh by the Holy Spirit of His Father. In those "sixty and two weeks," as the prophet said, and "in the one week," was He Lord. The half of the week Nero held sway, and in the holy city Jerusalem placed the abomination; and in the half of the week he was taken away, and Otho, and Galba, and Vitellius. And Vespasian rose to the supreme power, and destroyed Jerusalem, and desolated the holy place. And that such are the facts of the case, is clear to him that is able to understand, as the prophet said.”

Stromata, book 1, chapter 21

I wonder if Clement had had a vision of dispensationalism when he threw in that last sentence.