Adventists affirm Mark 1:15 regarding Dan 9 and the 70 weeks prophecy and pre-advent Investigative Judgment of Dan 7

[tall73]

Never said anything about "not going well".

You crammed three topics into one thread.

You insisted that weeks was the right translation without realizing the Hebrew term is disputed and context based.

You chastised a sincere man who has been rather kind to you in general, though not agreeing with you on various points, for his personal convictions.

You can't seem to find a Bible verse that says the work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement is investigation of books, because that is not what Lev. 16 said.

Those who commented on Daniel 7 pointed out things you rejected then admitted such as the connection to the eschaton, the judgment on nations etc.

You never even tried to address the fact that judgment on nations is by definition not what constitutes the Adventist IJ, because it is judgment on non-professed followers of God.

Folks like @The Liturgist noted your taking things out of context and ignoring the themes throughout the chapter to focus only on one line which you didn't relate to the point of the chapter at all.

You couldn't find the description of the IJ in Daniel 7 so instead you tried to get the timing from that text and the content from another.

But then you ignored a plain text that gave the content and the timing at His coming. You said it was out of context, but it was not at all because it was literally a conversation on not judging ahead of time because God will judge at His coming.

Then you resorted in your Scripture thread to posting Jewish sources because you couldn't find what you wanted in the Bible.

I would not call that a good thread.

The thread did have one highlight moment near the beginning, however, where the poster had a breakthrough moment on Mark 1:15, so that makes it worthwhile in that regard.

And I did enjoy the Adventist study that included first century expectations and the interpretation of the Essenes, which I came across while searching for other elements, so it was not all wasted time.

 

[BobRyan]

You didn't have to say it.

You crammed three topics into one thread, misunderstood half of what I was saying on the first topic because you assumed my view, and didn't read what I put. You chastised a sincere man who has been rather kind to you in general, though not agreeing with you on various points, for his personal convictions.

Are you familiar with the phrase "false accusation"??

I did not chastise except to point out that my discussions are sola-scripura based not sola-tradition. You and others are free to choose his method of avoiding quotes of the actual text if you wish. I simply don't engage in those kinds of discussions.

And you can't seem to find a Bible verse that says the work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement is investigation of books, because that is not what Lev. 16 said.

As stated before - only one Gospel speaks of Christ asking to "have this cup pass from me" but that does not DELETE the entire fact. You keep skimming past details that don't fit with your false accusations.

We can all see the Investigative Judgment from the books of record in Dan 7 -- no matter your interest in not discussing it.
We can all see that threads showing that the "Judgment solution" to the little horn problem in Dan 7 is called the "sanctuary" solution in Dan 8. Two chapters dealing with the same solution but highlighting different aspects of it.

Your wild notion that every text must have that same detail in it for the Dan 7 detail to remain true - is not logical, not compelling. Who goes for that ??

Those who commented on Daniel 7 pointed out things you rejected then admitted such as the connection to the eschaton

You mean the idea that I have been claiming all along that Dan 7 has the judgment and the 2nd coming in it - but I refuse to call it "Eschaton" in my posts?? Are you fully serious here or is this some kind of light moment in your post???

, the judgment on nations etc.

A good example of what we don't find in Dan 7:22.

Instead "until judgment was passed on the nations" we see this --

21 “I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, 22 until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom.

You never even tried to address the fact that judgment on nations is by definition not what constitutes the Adventist IJ

Multiple times I stated you are in error on that point. As noted in the Dan 7 thread Job 1 and Job 2 illustrate why there is such a focus on the saints in Dan 7:22-23 "judgment passed in favor of the saints". But our view of the end of it - includes Rev 9 and 2 Thess 1:5-8 where all the lost are destroyed at Christ's appearing.

However His Dan 7 judgment must conclude first (As even Dan 7 points out) -- only then are the nations destroyed. Rev 14 points out that first the saints are raptured (their judgment has concluded at that point) and then the wicked are slain.

Folks like The Liturgist noted your taking things out of context

In order to make the accusation that a text is taken out of context - one has to be willing to QUOTE the text and NOTE the details in that text. I am surprised you find this basic concept to be so challenging. You claim that he is not to be questioned for saying he is convicted to not quote actual texts, actual details in actual texts - then you affirm the false accusation that someone has taken something in scripture out of context - where that false accusation uses the method of NOT quoting scripture at all.

Are you even serious at this point?
I am pretty sure you did not learn such methods while employed in the Adventist church.

You couldn't find the description of the IJ in Daniel 7

AS IN ALL Bible teaching - we find details about it in MORE Than one place.

How is this even a little bit surprising for you?

I point to several places where the Bible provides details about the Judgment and you complain that all of it is not in ONE place??
seriously?
That is considered by you to be a compelling form of argument?
I just can't believe you are going down this road. Who goes for that?

But then you ignored a plain text that gave the content and the timing at His coming. You said it was out of context,

Because you run to text dealing with believers judging other believers then conflate that with GOD judging in the courts of heaven in Dan 7.

In some circles that is known as "bait-and-switch" contexts.

I think your purpose here is supposed to be to present a solid argument, with details, with facts that hold up ... not simply skimming past the details

Then you resorted in your Scripture thread to posting Jewish sources because you couldn't find what you wanted in the Bible.

Not true "again"

For those who actually read my two threads on this - I show that the solution in Dan 7 for the little horn "is the judgment"
That SAME solution for the little horn in Dan 8 is the cleansing of the sanctuary..

Have I said it a half dozen times yet? I am losing count.

 

[tall73]

Are you familiar with the phrase "false accusation"??

I did not chastise except to point out that my discussions are sola-scripura based not sola-tradition. You and others are free to choose his method of avoiding quotes of the actual text if you wish. I simply don't engage in those kinds of discussions.

There was no false accusation. He offered to do the best he could within the confines of his convictions and you over and over again made a point of rejecting his best efforts and belittling them.

As stated before - only one Gospel speaks of Christ asking to "have this cup pass from me" but that does not DELETE the entire fact. You keep skimming past details that don't fit with your false accusations.

We can all see the Investigative Judgment from the books of record in Dan 7 -- no matter your interest in not discussing it.

Of course we cannot all see the Adventist IJ particulars, which is why you had to go to Romans 2 to try and find the content. We do see God judging the nations and delivering the saints from the little horn, ruling in their favor, against the ones persecuting them. And of course, you just changed topics again.

I said:

tall73 said:

And you can't seem to find a Bible verse that says the work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement is investigation of books, because that is not what Lev. 16 said.

And then you said we see an investigative judgment. That was not the point made. The point made was that the fundamental belief statement says that the work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the day of atonement is investigative judgment. That is not true, per Leviticus 16. If you can't find it in the type, then it is not a fulfillment of the type.

We can all see that threads showing that the "Judgment solution" to the little horn problem in Dan 7 is called the "sanctuary" solution in Dan 8. Two chapters dealing with the same solution but highlighting different aspects of it.

Neither dealing with the day of atonement, because the day of atonement was not the restoring from outside defilement from a hostile power. The work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the day of atonement was corporate provision of blood.

Your continually pointing to what is not in the type and saying it is a fulfillment makes no sense. If it wasn't in the type, it is not a fulfillment.

Moreover, none of your texts show the elements of an Adventist IJ, which is why you try to combine them.

Your wild notion that every text must have that same detail in it for the Dan 7 detail to remain true - is not logical, not compelling. Who goes for that ??

It is not a wild notion that to be a fulfillment of the day of atonement type it has to relate to the type instead of being something completely different.

You mean the idea that I have been claiming all along that Dan 7 has the judgment and the 2nd coming in it - but I refuse to call it "Eschaton" in my posts?? Are you fully serious here or is this some kind of light moment in your post???

I mean that you dismissed the comments of the Liturgist until called on part of it which you had to admit.

A good example of what we don't find in Dan 7:22.

Bob, the court took away dominion and slew the other beast. You don't think that is judgment? You simply don't want to see it.

Instead "until judgment was passed on the nations" we see this --

21 “I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, 22 until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom.

In favor of the saints, and against the powers. No description of an Adventist IJ was anywhere in the passage.


tall73 said:

You never even tried to address the fact that judgment on nations is by definition not what constitutes the Adventist IJ

Multiple times I stated you are in error on that point.

You will have to spell that out Bob. How am I in error? You think that Babylon was professed followers of God?

In order to make the accusation that a text is taken out of context - one has to be willing to QUOTE the text and NOTE the details in that text. I am surprised you find this basic concept to be so challenging.

It is not necessary to quote it to prove that. And it was quoted at length by me, which you just ignored anyway. The court took away dominion and slew one beast, and you acknowledge those beasts represent nations.

You claim that he is not to be questioned for saying he is convicted to not quote actual texts, actual details in actual texts - then you affirm the false accusation that someone has taken something in scripture out of context - where that false accusation uses the method of NOT quoting scripture at all.

He can note your taking things out of context without referencing quotes. And even when quotes were referenced, you didn't deal with them anyway. You just kept posting your one line and referring to Romans 2, because Daniel 7 didn't have the details you needed.

Are you even serious at this point?
I am pretty sure you did not learn such methods while employed in the Adventist church.

I am very serious that you should not be a stumbling block to someone who told you he had a particular conviction and you urged him over and over to do it anyway.

I quoted the texts, so that has nothing to do with my methodology.

AS IN ALL Bible teaching - we find details about it in MORE Than one place.

How is this even a little bit surprising for you?

Because none of the texts actually describe what you want. And you ignored the text that had the judgment of the secrets of the hearts of men, and the timing at the second coming.

If you have to piece together two different texts to try to get an Adventist Ij, but then dismiss for no reason a text that states directly the time of the judgement that reveals the secrets of men's heart, then you are just spinning.

I point to several places where the Bible provides details about the Judgment and you complain that all of it is not in ONE place??
seriously?

Yes, because none of them picture an Adventist IJ with the required details. And Daniel 7 includes details that cannot be the IJ such as judgment on non professed followers of God, and nations.

That is considered by you to be a compelling form of argument?
I just can't believe you are going down this road. Who goes for that?

To point out that you can't find a text that actually contains the requisite components of the Adventist IJ, and ignore those that rule it out, spelling out the actual timing of judging and the secrets of men's hearts? Sure! That is compelling, because you can't show your point from an actual Scripture text. You ignore the context of Daniel 7. Romans 2 doesn't have a timing, but the text that spells it all out you won't look at.

That is quite compelling evidence that you are spinning.

Because you run to text dealing with believers judging other believers then conflate that with GOD judging in the courts of heaven in Dan 7.

I didn't conflate it with God judging nations in Daniel 7. It specifically said do not judge ahead of time and that the Lord will judge the secretes of men's hearts at His coming.

Pretending that is out of context is a joke. It says the nature of the judgment and the timing. And you cannot produce a text that has those elements for your view.

In some circles that is known as "bait-and-switch" contexts.

I think your purpose here is supposed to be to present a solid argument, with details, with facts that hold up ... not simply skimming past the details

I think you have failed with the most basic premise of showing how the IJ relates to the day of atonement to start with, and have utterly failed to convince any of the onlookers of the Ij being a Scriptural doctrine.

If you think people are going to miss that you reject a clear text about judging men's hearts at the Lord's coming in order to try to cobble together different out of context passages to salvage the Adventist IJ you are quite mistaken.

Not true "again"

For those who actually read my two threads on this - I show that the solution in Dan 7 for the little horn "is the judgment"
That SAME solution for the little horn in Dan 8 is the cleansing of the sanctuary..

Have I said it a half dozen times yet? I am losing count.

Bob, the work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the day of atonement is not going through books and cases. Your pointing to that is missing the entire point.

It is possible you don't even get the fact that you changed the type. But you did.


From the Adventist fundamental belief on the Sanctuary:

In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry, which was typified by the work of the high priest in the most holy place of the earthly sanctuary. It is a work of investigative judgment


Instead of what Leviticus 16 describes the High Priest as actually doing when He goes into the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement Adventist posit a judgement of individual cases, investigation of books, etc. None of that matches the text. Here is what the text says the high priest does when entering the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement:


Leviticus 16:15 “Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering, which is for the people, bring its blood inside the veil, do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bull, and sprinkle it on the mercy seat and before the mercy seat. 16 So he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, for all their sins; and so he shall do for the tabernacle of meeting which remains among them in the midst of their uncleanness. 17 There shall be no man in the tabernacle of meeting when he goes in to make atonement in the Holy Place, until he comes out, that he may make atonement for himself, for his household, and for all the assembly of Israel.

The High Priest in the Most Holy Place applies cleansing blood to make atonement for the sanctuary and for all the assembly of Israel.

There is no reference to books, to investigation, or to individual cases. It is a corporate provision for the whole camp.

 

[tall73]

Another text showing the judgment at Jesus' coming, in person.

Mat 25:31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.
Mat 25:32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
Mat 25:33 And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left.
Mat 25:34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
Mat 25:35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,
Mat 25:36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’
Mat 25:37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
Mat 25:38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?
Mat 25:39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
Mat 25:40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’
Mat 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
Mat 25:42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
Mat 25:43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’
Mat 25:44 Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’
Mat 25:45 Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’
Mat 25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

They appear before Him, He judges them, and some protest, but He presents their record. Then they receive their reward.

 

[BobRyan]

Those who commented on Daniel 7 pointed out things you rejected then admitted such as the connection to the eschaton

You mean the idea that I have been claiming all along that Dan 7 has the judgment and the 2nd coming in it - but I refuse to call it "Eschaton" in my posts?? Are you fully serious here or is this some kind of light moment in your post???

Folks like The Liturgist noted your taking things out of context

Are you familiar with the phrase "false accusation"??

In order to make the accusation that a text is taken out of context - one has to be willing to QUOTE the text and NOTE the details in that text. I am surprised you find this basic concept to be so challenging. You claim that he is not to be questioned for saying he is convicted to not quote actual texts, actual details in actual texts - then you affirm the false accusation that someone has taken something in scripture out of context - where that false accusation uses the method of NOT quoting scripture at all.

Are you even serious at this point?
==================


I did not chastise except to point out that my discussions are sola-scripura based not sola-tradition. You and others are free to choose his method of avoiding quotes of the actual text if you wish. I simply don't engage in those kinds of discussions.

There was no false accusation. He offered to do the best he could within the confines of his convictions

As you already noted -- he falsely accused someone of taking the text out of context while steadfastly refusing even look at the details in the text "out of his strong conviction" in that method.

Fine he has free will -- he can choose as he wishes. I do not find that sort of thing as compelling or as laudable as apparently you do.

Another example of where "we differ".

and you over and over again made a point of rejecting his best efforts and belittling them.

Are you familiar with the phrase "false accusation"??

On the contrary I kept pointing out that he was not addressing a single detail IN the text and he confirmed by statement saying that this was his strong conviction not to do so.

It is not necessary to quote it to prove that.

Are you familiar with the concept of "factless false accusation"? You are now commenting on the 'Factless" part of that concept.

You seem to embrace the idea of accusing someone then showing no details in the text or in the person's statement that make your point "AS IF" that is not the very definition of "factless false accusation"...

I don't see how this is even the least bit confusing for you.

And it was quoted at length by me, which you just ignored anyway.

I am happy to address any accusation you make about "out of context" for Dan 7 in fact I have given you an entire thread to make your case on that very point... so far... you decline.

He can note your taking things out of context without referencing quotes.

That's the underlying method for how "False accusations" are constructed in general.

Fine he has free will -- he can choose as he wishes. I do not find that sort of thing as compelling or as laudable as apparently you do.
Another example of where "we differ".

Your endorsement of such "methods" speaks volumes.

And even when quotes were referenced, you didn't deal with them anyway.

What quotes of the text of Dan 7 did you see him make to establish his "out of context" accusation??

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

As stated before - only one Gospel speaks of Christ asking to "have this cup pass from me" but that does not DELETE the entire fact. You keep skimming past details that don't fit with your false accusations.

We can all see the Investigative Judgment from the books of record in Dan 7 -- no matter your interest in not discussing it.

As noted repeatedly -- here and also on this Dan 7 thread
Page 1 - of this thread on Dan 7 and the IJ includes the Rom 2 details (which you appear to object to -- for some reason)

Adventists affirm Dan 7 pre-advent Investigative judgment (and then Dan 8 and Dan 9 for it being started in 1844)

Dan 7 describes the pre-advent Investigative judgment - vs 9-10 Pre-Advent Investigative (review of books, records in heaven by "the court") -- vs 21-22 "Judgment passed in favor of the saints" -- so they are being evaluated/reviewed/discussed (as Rom 2:4-16 describes it)...

www.christianforums.com

Dan 7 ALONE
vs 9-10 Pre-Advent Investigative (review of books, records in heaven by "the court") --
vs 21-22 "Judgment passed in favor of the saints" -- so they are being evaluated/reviewed/discussed (as Rom 2:4-16 describes it)
See Job 1, and Job 2 for the interest/focus of heavenly courts on the saints vs the wicked..
vs 21, 22,25 Persecution of saints happens WHILE this courtroom judgment in Dan 7 takes place - and continues - until judgment completes.
vs 27 "Then comes the ADVENT" -- so all the above is "pre-Advent"

Of course we cannot all see the Adventist IJ particulars

Sadly those verses above state what they say as quoted verbatim in that Dan 7 thread above and as mentioned here on this thread -- EVEN when folks do not accept what the details say in Dan 7.

, which is why you had to go to Romans 2 to try and find the content.

False "again".

Rom 2 ADDS the detail of the process that is used during that Pre-Advent Investigative judgment showing how it is that some fail and some pass.

As ALSO noted on this Dan 7 thread
Page 1 - of this thread on Dan 7 and the IJ includes the Rom 2 details (which you appear to object to -- for some reason)

Adventists affirm Dan 7 pre-advent Investigative judgment (and then Dan 8 and Dan 9 for it being started in 1844)

Dan 7 describes the pre-advent Investigative judgment - vs 9-10 Pre-Advent Investigative (review of books, records in heaven by "the court") -- vs 21-22 "Judgment passed in favor of the saints" -- so they are being evaluated/reviewed/discussed (as Rom 2:4-16 describes it)...

www.christianforums.com

We do see God judging the nations and delivering the saints from the little horn

We see saints tormented by the wicked the entire time that the pre-advent judgment takes place - as Dan 7 points out. What we do NOT see is God stepping in putting the wicked no hold and stating "Hey you wicked nations I condemn you " as IF that judgment process had the wicked stopped .. rather it is it not UNTIL the entire judgment work (of open books, court sits, judgment passed in favor of saints) completes that the wicked are then stopped.

As we can all see clearly.

 

[BobRyan]

I said:


And you can't seem to find a Bible verse that says the work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement is investigation of books, because that is not what Lev. 16 said.

And then you said we see an investigative judgment. That was not the point made.

1. Well this thread is about Mark 1:15, Dan 9 and the 70 weeks (490 years - day for year) timeline
2. There is a thread on the high priest, Yom Kippur, Sanctuary, Day of Atonement and judgment which you say you are determined not to respond to. That is not this thread.
3. Your entire system falls apart in Dan 7 alone because it proves the pre-advent Investigative Judgmenht where judgment is passed in favor of the saints in that process instead of your much-supposed "until judgment was passed against the nations". The Dan 7 details present an obstacle that your suggestions do not resolve.. so then you want to switch to "Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur" -- which is fine and I have a thread for you just for that purpose.

The point made was that the fundamental belief statement says that the work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the day of atonement is investigative judgment.

So no wonder this Mark 1:15, Dan 9 thread is not addressing that topic - but rather this thread is --

Adventists Affirm Dan 8:14, Lev 16 Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, Judgment

Dan 8:14 references the cleansing of the Sanctuary Dan 7 and Dan 8 - both deal with the problem of "the little horn" persecuting the saints. In Dan 7 the solution is the pre-advent judgment (according to the chapter). You can discuss those details for Dan 7 on the following thread...

www.christianforums.com

A thread I created almost as soon as you tried to take this Mark 1:15, Dan 9 thread off into that direction while ignoring the Dan 7 detail of the pre-advent Investigative judgment.

That is not true, per Leviticus 16. If you can't find it in the type, then it is not a fulfillment of the type.

false again.

In the Passover there is no suggestion of the nation of Israel rejecting the Messiah, the disciples fleeing, the trial of Christ, the sins of the entire world, the fall of the kingdom of Satan... etc.

Your downsize delete suggestion for types never worked in all of time..

Neither dealing with the day of atonement, because the day of atonement was not the restoring from outside defilement from a hostile power. The work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the day of atonement was corporate provision of blood.

Again .. your efforts to turn this Mark 1:15 , Dan 9 thread about the 70 weeks into that other thread about Dan 8, Lev 16, Rom 2 etc.
As soon as you introduced your favorite "other topic" -- I created that thread for you - which you are ignoring.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, the court took away dominion and slew the other beast. You don't think that is judgment?

That is the condemnation/execution of the wicked - it is not done in the court room , with the court seated and books opened...

it is done as 2 Thess 1:5-8 states with Christ appearing in flaming fire and destroying all the unsaved.

In favor of the saints, and against the powers.

We both know Dan 7 does not say that. It says "in favor of the saints" period.
That is the issue in Job 1 and Job 2
And in Romans 2 we don't see failing cases - failing because a successful case succeeds - rather EACH ONE gives an account for himself.
I Matt 7 and bad fruit bad tree is not condemned because a good tree exists.

No description of an Adventist IJ was anywhere in the passage.

Until you read vs 9 and 10 in Dan 7
Until you read vs 21-22 where judgment is passed in favor of the saints
until you read the part where the wicked prevail OVER the saints the entire time that the judgment is taking place
Until you read vs 27 to see the Advent of Christ and that all this work of judgment passed in favor of the saints precedes i

tall73 said:

You never even tried to address the fact that judgment on nations is by definition not what constitutes the Adventist IJ

Dan 7 never uses the term "judgment on nations"
Dan 7 never uses the phrase "court sits and judgment is passed against the nations"
and we both know it.

 

[BobRyan]

Because none of the texts actually describe what you want. And you ignored the text that had the judgment of the secrets of the hearts of men, and the timing at the second coming.

None of that is in Dan 7.
And I already pointed out your out-of-context insert where you insert a NT text where church members are told not to judge other church members -- into Dan 7 - as if the Judgment of God Himself in heaven , in that pre-Advent Dan 7:9-10 court room is not allowed before the Advent of Christ.

It is hard to take that tactic seriously.

If you have to piece together two different texts to try to get an Adventist Ij

What kind of nonsense is it to claim that if more than one text is used to get all details on a given Bible doctrine -- then it should be rejected?

What kind of off-the-cuff idea is that????
You see why I keep saying that I find some of your arguments very hard to take seriously.

Yes, because none of them picture an Adventist IJ with the required details.

sadly false.
You "meant" (no SINGLE one contains all the details of the Adventist IJ" and yet you wrote it as in the above.. very misleading.
The point remains - there is NOT standard among any Christian group on planet Earth that says all details for any one Bible doctrine must be found in a single text or single chapter -- or else toss it.

And we BOTH know it.

And Daniel 7 includes details that cannot be the IJ such as judgment on non professed followers of God, and nations.

not true "again".

In the IJ doctrine (as we both know) the IJ closes (as we see in Dan 7) and as we see in Rev 15:8 with the Rev 16 seven last plagues on all mankind and then ultimately with the 2 Thess 1:5-8 event of all the unsaved destroyed.

(Not the subject of this thread) but I am glad to add it to the one on Yom Kippur.

To point out that you can't find a text that actually contains the requisite components of the Adventist IJ

hmm "A SINGLE text that contains ALL the details"?? but then posted as in the above?? how misleading.

, and ignore those that rule it out, spelling out the actual timing of judging and the secrets of men's hearts?spelling out the actual timing of judging and the secrets of men's hearts?

I have responded repeatedly to your "church members not supposed to judge other church members" text -- and we both know it.
Again - hard to take you seriously when you do that.

You ignore the context of Daniel 7.

false accusation

Romans 2 doesn't have a timing

I don't point to Rom 2 for timing other than the vs 16 statement that it is future to Paul's day -- and we both know it.
I merely quote Rom 2 to show the "detail" of how the decide a failing case vs a passing one -- in the judgment, as stated repeatedly -- -- and we both know it.

I didn't conflate it with God judging nations in Daniel 7. It specifically said do not judge ahead of time

It tells church members not to judge others.
It says nothing about the Dan 7 pre-advent judgment not existing.

and that the Lord will judge the secretes of men's hearts at His coming.

even you unwittingly admit you messed up there - because we both know that the wicked do not persecute the saints at Christ's coming and you have been reminded almost non-stop that the wicked DO persecute AND PREVAIL over the wicked all during the judgment according to Dan 7 AFTER WHICH comes the Advent of Christ as Dan 7 states.

Your argument does not survive Dan 7.... again.

Pretending that is out of context is a joke.

I see. Well if that is your "solution" I am certainly happy to continue to affirm all these details that debunk that suggestion above.

 

[BobRyan]

I think you have failed with the most basic premise of showing how the IJ relates to the day of atonement to start with

As stated repeatedly

1. this is the thread on Mark 1:16 and Dan 9 where the 490 year timeline starts in 457 BC
2. The minute you inserted that topic above - I started this thread for you ON THAT TOPIC

Adventists Affirm Dan 8:14, Lev 16 Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, Judgment

Dan 8:14 references the cleansing of the Sanctuary Dan 7 and Dan 8 - both deal with the problem of "the little horn" persecuting the saints. In Dan 7 the solution is the pre-advent judgment (according to the chapter). You can discuss those details for Dan 7 on the following thread...

www.christianforums.com

3. You refuse to go to it - and I am not that interested in changing the subject/topic of this thread

, and have utterly failed to convince any of the onlookers of the Ij being a Scriptural doctrine.

Except those unbiased objective Bible students that actually read Dan 7 and follow the argument.

(Out of curiosity - how could you possibly know what "all onlookers" are convinced of??)

If you think people are going to miss that you reject a clear text about judging men's hearts at the Lord's coming

If you think they will miss the part where that idea of church members judging other church members is not the topic of Dan 7, is not the topic of this Mark 1:15 thread , and that it IS THE TOPIC of the text above that you are again NOT QUOTING because its context does not help your case...

Bob, the work of the high priest in the sanctuary on the day of atonement is not going through books and cases.

Not the topic of this Mark 1:15, Dan 9 thread.
But regarding your claim above -- there is a thread here that says otherwise. The one you refuse to look at.

Adventists Affirm Dan 8:14, Lev 16 Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, Judgment

Dan 8:14 references the cleansing of the Sanctuary Dan 7 and Dan 8 - both deal with the problem of "the little horn" persecuting the saints. In Dan 7 the solution is the pre-advent judgment (according to the chapter). You can discuss those details for Dan 7 on the following thread...

www.christianforums.com

From the Adventist fundamental belief on the Sanctuary:

In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry, which was typified by the work of the high priest in the most holy place of the earthly sanctuary. It is a work of investigative judgment


Instead of what Leviticus 16 describes the High Priest as actually doing when He goes into the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement

Clearly that belongs in

Adventists Affirm Dan 8:14, Lev 16 Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, Judgment

Dan 8:14 references the cleansing of the Sanctuary Dan 7 and Dan 8 - both deal with the problem of "the little horn" persecuting the saints. In Dan 7 the solution is the pre-advent judgment (according to the chapter). You can discuss those details for Dan 7 on the following thread...

www.christianforums.com

I don't see how this is even a little bit confusing.

 

[tall73]

BobRyan said:

Are you familiar with the phrase "false accusation"??

It is not at all a false accusation. You kept urging him to do something he said he had conviction not to do, and said he was "afraid", said he gained satisfaction by not quoting the text, and instead of working with his suggestions about discussing the verse without quoting you said he had to use the words of the actual text.

I think it is "instructive" that you are so quick to make claims about what Dan 7 is or is not about - yet fear to actually quote the Word of God - Dan 7 to make your case for or against something.

It looks to me like your method of distancing yourself from the actual words of the text is not serving you well.

I don't see how you can be tired of quoting scripture when as we see here - you almost never do quote it and have stated your determination not to prove your point regarding the text - by actually making your case from the text of scripture.

which I suppose should bring you some level of satisfaction since you keep insisting on not quoting the Bible text.

If you are doing to make a statement about Dan 7 - then use the words of the actual chapter... pick a verse in it

 

[tall73]

As noted repeatedly -- here and also on this Dan 7 thread
Page 1 - of this thread on Dan 7 and the IJ includes the Rom 2 details (which you appear to object to -- for some reason)

I do not object to Romans 2. I note that Romans 2 does not spell out timing, but speaks of judging the secrets of men. That is a text about individual judgment. And I posted a text that spells out the individual judgment again, speaking of the things hidden in darkness and the purposes of the heart. And that text actually gives the timing:


Romans 2:16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

1Corinthians 4:5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.

And we could add to this the other texts that spell out individual judgment, but do not match the Adventist investigative judgment:

For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11 For it is written: “As I live, says the Lord, Every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall confess to God.” 12 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.

Unlike the Adventist IJ where the one judged would not be present, here we have

standing
knee bowing
tongue confessing
giving an account

None of which can happen in the Adventist IJ.

And we have another detail that matches up, that we must appear before the judgment seat and RECEIVE the reward. That does not happen in the Adventist IJ. But it does match the earlier text with individual judgment, timing, and it includes commendation:

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

1Corinthians 4:5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.

Paul does NOT say that he has to wait to see if he passes the Adventist investigative judgment. Paul expects to RECEIVE his reward from the Righteous Judge.

2 Timothy 4:6 8 Finally, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that Day, and not to me only but also to all who have loved His appearing.

I do not have a problem with any of these texts that describe individual judgment of motives and the heart, and appearing before the judgment seat, and kneeling, bowing, confessing, giving account, etc.

But none of them agree with the Adventist investigative judgment.

Daniel 7 says nothing about individual judgment, but describes the saints as a group before the judgment even sits.

Daniel 7:21 “I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, 22 until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High

Dan 7 ALONE
vs 9-10 Pre-Advent Investigative (review of books, records in heaven by "the court") --
vs 21-22 "Judgment passed in favor of the saints" -- so they are being evaluated/reviewed/discussed (as Rom 2:4-16 describes it)

Daniel 7 ignoring the entire first part of the chapter, the removeal of the authority of the beasts, the slaying of the other beast, and the dominion of the little horn being taken away?

You are not in fact quoting the whole text Bob. In fact your arguments seems to do a lot better if only a few lines are quoted.

The saints do have judgment granted in their favor--as a group, which they were identified as before the judgment ever started, which again does not match the Adventist IJ which would have to determine the saints.

And you again try to get around the judgment on the beast powers, which would not happen in the Adventist IJ because Babylon etc. are not professed followers of God.

vs 21, 22,25 Persecution of saints happens WHILE this courtroom judgment in Dan 7 takes place - and continues - until judgment completes.
vs 27 "Then comes the ADVENT" -- so all the above is "pre-Advent"

Yes, the above scene of the judgment on the nations and in favor of the saints, which looks nothing like the Adventist IJ, mentions nothing of individual cases, begins before the advent, is not at all an issue for my view.

Moreover, the actual judgment on individual cases is described in numerous texts as something quite different from the Adventist IJ, being present, kneeling, confessing, giving account, taking place at Jesus' coming, involving receiving reward, etc.

But all the facts in that chapter are in fact a problem for your view, such as the focus on the beasts , the dominion being stripped from the beasts, the slaying of the fourth beast, the removal of the dominion of the little horn, the focus on the Son of Man having dominion over the nations, the focus on the judgment resulting in all nations and tribes and languages serving Him, and His kingdom lasting forever and ever.

You don't seem to want to discuss those because they don't belong at all in the Adventist IJ where only professed followers of God's cases are considered.

The court in Daniel 7 does give judgment in favor of the saints, and against the beasts.

 

[tall73]

Rom 2 ADDS the detail of the process that is used during that Pre-Advent Investigative judgment showing how it is that some fail and some pass.

No Bob, that is just your claim, but is clearly not the case when we look at all the texts. the secrets of the heart are revealed at His coming.

You settled on Romans 2 to import your content because it doesn't spell out the location or the timing.

Your reading it back into Daniel 7 has to be done by you, because Romans 2 doesn't specify the timing, and Daniel 7 doesn't describe a judgment on only individual professed followers of God at all.

We do, however, have a text that contains all the elements, and it parallels Romans 2

Romans 2:16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

1Corinthians 4:5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.

It shows individual judgment, disclosing hidden things, and the purposes of the heart, and is at Jesus' coming. Each one there will also RECEIVE commendation from God.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

Rom 2 ADDS the detail of the process that is used during that Pre-Advent Investigative judgment showing how it is that some fail and some pass.

No Bob,

Yes that is exactly what we see in Rom 2:4-16 details for a process where one is accepted and another rejected.

As we saw on this thread --

"The process" in that judgment used to determine pass/fail is described in Rom 2:4-16.
Rom 2 shows the PROCESS that they use in that judgment

Romans 2:5 But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who “will render to each one according to his deeds”: 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; 8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, 9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the [c]Greek; 10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God. 12 For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

That gospel process of Judgment is shown to deal with both the succeeding cases and the failing cases - and it uses the Matt 7 principle of Christ "by their fruits you shall know them"

The Law written on the heart (vs 15) is because of the New Covenant of Jer 31:31-34 and also in Heb 8.
Reward given to the saints does not make them a saint - they are already ARE the good tree or they would not have the good fruit.
Just as we see in Job 1 and in Job 2.

that is just your claim,

IT is for those of us who read the text and note the details

You settled on Romans 2 to import your content

Nope - I quote it to "note the details" as noted above. Those who imagine that the quote of the content of Rom 2:4-16 above is 'my content' -- need to pay more attention to details in the text.

The point remains
You can reject whatever details you wish.

 

[BobRyan]

Dan 7 ALONE
vs 9-10 Pre-Advent Investigative (review of books, records in heaven by "the court") --
vs 21-22 "Judgment passed in favor of the saints" -- so they are being evaluated/reviewed/discussed (as Rom 2:4-16 describes it)
See Job 1, and Job 2 for the interest/focus of heavenly courts on the saints vs the wicked..
vs 21, 22,25 Persecution of saints happens WHILE this courtroom judgment in Dan 7 takes place - and continues - until judgment completes.
vs 27 "Then comes the ADVENT" -- so all the above is "pre-Advent"


Sadly those verses above state what they say as quoted verbatim in that Dan 7 thread above and as mentioned here on this thread -- EVEN when folks do not accept what the details say in Dan 7.

Daniel 7 ignoring the entire first part of the chapter, the removeal of the authority of the beasts, the slaying of the other beast, and the dominion of the little horn being taken away?

because those verses do not delete verses that come later.

Because actually looking at the verses - matters - hence an entire thread on that one chapter.

You are not in fact quoting the whole text Bob.

I did not quote the entire book of Daniel ... I did quote those verses in detail as noted above.

You would have to actually GO to that thread to know - however.

Adventists affirm Dan 7 pre-advent Investigative judgment (and then Dan 8 and Dan 9 for it being started in 1844)

Dan 7 describes the pre-advent Investigative judgment - vs 9-10 Pre-Advent Investigative (review of books, records in heaven by "the court") -- vs 21-22 "Judgment passed in favor of the saints" -- so they are being evaluated/reviewed/discussed (as Rom 2:4-16 describes it)...

www.christianforums.com

Since that thread is not the subject of this one on Mark 1:15 and Dan 9 - I will not repost that entire thread here.

 

[tall73]

The Dan 7 chapter says the time he appoints for the judgment is before the coming of Christ and some time after the 1260 years of dark ages - and it is DURING the period where saints are being persecuted by the wicked.

But of course that is in the chapter on the pre-Advent IJ -- Dan 7... which you are not quoting at all.

Bob, bearing false witness in saying I have not quoted the chapter at all is rather bold when discussing the coming judgment.

I have quoted from the chapter repeatedly. And once again you are assuming my position. I do not hold the same position as the Liturgist. I do not think Daniel 7 is describing the judgment on individuals, and the revealing of the secrets of the heart. That happens AFTER Jesus coming, as I have posted Scriptures showing repeatedly.

The judgment on the beasts in chapter 7, which the whole chapter deals with, and the judgment in favor of the saints as a group happens BEFORE Jesus coming, and must do so not only because the saints are being persecuted, but because it is by the coming of Jesus that the man of sin/little horn is destroyed.

Jesus' coming is what relieves the persecution of the saints:

2 Thessalonians 1:3
3 We are bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is fitting, because your faith grows exceedingly, and the love of every one of you all abounds toward each other, 4 so that we ourselves boast of you among the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and [a]tribulations that you endure, 5 which is manifest[b] evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you also suffer; 6 since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with [c]tribulation those who trouble you, 7 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who [d]believe, because our testimony among you was believed.

==
That day repeatedly refers to the coming of Jesus. He then gives relief to the suffering saints, and brings vengeance on those who were persecuting them.

2 Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of [a]Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of [b]sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits [c]as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the [d]mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only [e]He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.

So we very much agree that the judgment scene of Daniel 7 is PRE-ADVENT. But it is not the Adventist Ij. Because it shows judgment on the beasts, and in favor of the saints as a group, who are being persecuted.

The theoretical Adventist IJ which you have no text picturing, deals with individual cases of professed followers of God. The beasts are not professed followers of God. And the chapter does not picture individual judgment.

The in-person judgment where we kneel, confess, stand before the throne, give account, etc. is at Jesus' coming. This judgment on the beasts is prior to and culminates in the coming.

And that is why the theme of the chapter is seen again and again to be God's dominion overall things, ruling over the nations of the earth, and God's kingdom lasting forever and ever.

 

[tall73]

1. Well this thread is about Mark 1:15, Dan 9 and the 70 weeks (490 years - day for year) timeline
2. There is a thread on the high priest, Yom Kippur, Sanctuary, Day of Atonement and judgment which you say you are determined not to respond to. That is not this thread.

You can stop pretending Bob. We were all here when you started the thread with three topics, including the 2300 days, etc. You can go start two other threads all you want, but this thread was not just on the 70 weeks. If you want more focused threads, don't start them unfocused and then complain.

So then the 490 years of Dan 9 starts in 457 B.C.
And the 2300 years (day for year) in Dan 8 start in 457 B.C.

===========================

My title is - "Adventists affirm Mark 1:15 regarding Dan 9 and the 70 weeks prophecy and Investigative Judgment start in 1844"

But I can see that the Dan 7 "investigative judgment start in 1844" topic is too much for one thread so I am making it into its own thread.

 

[tall73]

tall73 said:

That is not true, per Leviticus 16. If you can't find it in the type, then it is not a fulfillment of the type.

false again.

In the Passover there is no suggestion of the nation of Israel rejecting the Messiah, the disciples fleeing, the trial of Christ, the sins of the entire world, the fall of the kingdom of Satan... etc.

The fulfillment of the Passover type was Jesus' sacrifice, etc. though it may still have continuing meaning giving Jesus statement about eating it in the kingdom.

Attendant events such as disciples fleeing,, etc. was not what the type pointed to. The part that fulfilled the type was the part that was pointed to in the type.

From the Adventist fundamental belief on the Sanctuary:

In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry, which was typified by the work of the high priest in the most holy place of the earthly sanctuary. It is a work of investigative judgment


The work of the high priest in the most holy place was application of blood for atonement.

The fulfillment is likewise an application of atoning blood. There is nothing in the description of the high priest in the most holy place on the Day of Atonement that indicates books, investigation of individual cases etc. So when the belief says it was typified by the work of the high priest on the Day of Atonement, a reference to the type, it must then actually be seen in the type. And it is not.

It was just another excuse to justify their defense of a failed, time-setting message that was condemned by Scripture:

Matthew 24:4 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.

Matthew 24:36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

I Thessalonians 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

Rather than repent, they went on ignoring Scripture.

 

[BobRyan]

Those who commented on Daniel 7 pointed out things you rejected then admitted such as the connection to the eschaton

You mean the idea that I have been claiming all along that Dan 7 has the judgment and the 2nd coming in it - but I refuse to call it "Eschaton" in my posts?? Are you fully serious here or is this some kind of light moment in your post???

Folks like The Liturgist noted your taking things out of context

Are you familiar with the phrase "false accusation"??

In order to make the accusation that a text is taken out of context - one has to be willing to QUOTE the text and NOTE the details in that text. I am surprised you find this basic concept to be so challenging. You claim that he is not to be questioned for saying he is convicted to not quote actual texts, actual details in actual texts - then you affirm the false accusation that someone has taken something in scripture out of context - where that false accusation uses the method of NOT quoting scripture at all.

Are you even serious at this point?
==================


I did not chastise except to point out that my discussions are sola-scripura based not sola-tradition. You and others are free to choose his method of avoiding quotes of the actual text if you wish. I simply don't engage in those kinds of discussions.

There was no false accusation. He offered to do the best he could within the confines of his convictions

As you already noted -- he falsely accused someone of taking the text out of context while steadfastly refusing even look at the details in the text "out of his strong conviction" in that method.

Fine he has free will -- he can choose as he wishes. I do not find that sort of thing as compelling or as laudable as apparently you do.

Another example of where "we differ".

and you over and over again made a point of rejecting his best efforts and belittling them.

Are you familiar with the phrase "false accusation"??

On the contrary I kept pointing out that he was not addressing a single detail IN the text and he confirmed by statement saying that this was his strong conviction not to do so.

It is not necessary to quote it to prove that.

Are you familiar with the concept of "factless false accusation"? You are now commenting on the 'Factless" part of that concept.

You seem to embrace the idea of accusing someone then showing no details in the text or in the person's statement that make your point "AS IF" that is not the very definition of "factless false accusation"...

I don't see how this is even the least bit confusing for you.

And it was quoted at length by me, which you just ignored anyway.

I am happy to address any accusation you make about "out of context" for Dan 7 in fact I have given you an entire thread to make your case on that very point... so far... you decline.

He can note your taking things out of context without referencing quotes.

That's the underlying method for how "False accusations" are constructed in general.

Fine he has free will -- he can choose as he wishes. I do not find that sort of thing as compelling or as laudable as apparently you do.
Another example of where "we differ".

Your endorsement of such "methods" speaks volumes.

It is not at all a false accusation. You kept urging him to do something he said he had conviction not to do

support his argument with actual facts from the text as compared to my quote of it when he falsely accused me of taking the text out of context..?

You're saying you approve of such methods and would not at all ask for an actual "Fact"??? seriously??

, and said he was "afraid", said he gained satisfaction by not quoting the text

Possibly there is a lot of "satisfaction" that can be had by falsely accusing someone of taking some scripture out of context while carefully avoiding all details in that text or quote --

by definition a "factless accusation"

, and instead of working with his suggestions about discussing the verse without quoting you said he had to use the words of the actual text.

How odd that to support the accusation that something is taken out of context - one first has to be willing to note the actual text, note the actual details?? This you are claiming is some sort of stretch??

============================================================

Now here is where you quote me - asking for some sort of reasonable basis to support the accusation that something is amiss, something is taken out of context...

I think it is "instructive" that you are so quick to make claims about what Dan 7 is or is not about - yet fear to actually quote the Word of God - Dan 7 to make your case for or against something.

It looks to me like your method of distancing yourself from the actual words of the text is not serving you well.

I don't see how you can be tired of quoting scripture when as we see here - you almost never do quote it and have stated your determination not to prove your point regarding the text - by actually making your case from the text of scripture.

which I suppose should bring you some level of satisfaction since you keep insisting on not quoting the Bible text.

If you are doing to make a statement about Dan 7 - then use the words of the actual chapter... pick a verse in it

=====================

I really don't see how this is helping your case unless you are are some how trying to promote the idea of making factless accusations and a determined refusal to provide facts that would support the accusation.

Which seems very "odd" to me. I have no idea how you get there.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:


1. Well this thread is about Mark 1:15, Dan 9 and the 70 weeks (490 years - day for year) timeline
2. There is a thread on the high priest, Yom Kippur, Sanctuary, Day of Atonement and judgment which you say you are determined not to respond to. That is not this thread.

You can stop pretending Bob. We were all here when you started the thread with three topics, including the 2300 days, etc. You can go start two other threads all you want, but this thread was not just on the 70 weeks. If you want more focused threads, don't start them unfocused and then complain.

This thread is about Mark 1:15, Dan 9 and the 70 weeks of Daniel as we see in the OP and in the Title.

You brought up the High priestly work of Christ in MHP function which instead of ignoring - I then devoted an entire thread to that one topic so that your responses to it would be "page 1" material.

Adventists Affirm Dan 8:14, Lev 16 Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, Judgment

Dan 8:14 references the cleansing of the Sanctuary Dan 7 and Dan 8 - both deal with the problem of "the little horn" persecuting the saints. In Dan 7 the solution is the pre-advent judgment (according to the chapter). You can discuss those details for Dan 7 on the following thread...

www.christianforums.com

I note this fact in the OP this way -

My title is - "Adventists affirm Mark 1:15 regarding Dan 9 and the 70 weeks prophecy and Investigative Judgment start in 1844"

But I can see that the Dan 7 "investigative judgment start in 1844" topic is too much for one thread so I am making it into its own thread.

The idea that you are somehow "dissadvantaged" when an entire thread is devoted to the topic you are bringing up so that your own views are page-1 material on that thread -- is a bit hard to swallow.

Do you have any reasoning to go along with that idea?

The idea that my page-1 OP statement is somehow "pretending" something - is hard to believe. I am looking for facts in that regard - do you have 1?