Third Temple Scam in modern Jerusalem?

BABerean2 said:

Daniel Chapter 9: Dr. Kelly Varner

Click to expand...

Now at the ten minute mark Varner after berating and ridiculing dispensationalists ( as opposed to allegorists) is that from the time of the issuing of the command to rebuild until Jesus went into the waters was the end of the 69 th week of Daniel!

But the Bible says this:

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.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:

So according to the bible applied to Varners opining- Jesus died after He came out of the waters of the Jordan being baptized by John! The bible does not say after 69 1/2 weeks- But after 69 weeks!

At 14:40 He shows his ignorance of the basic rules of grammar. He correctly says he is a pronoun and must refer back to an antecedent, then either through ignorance or deception He says it refers back to Messiah the Prince.

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 unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:

Any one who knows about antecedents knows that the he of 27 and like all personal pronouns MUST refer back to the nearest antecedent which is the prince of the people who will destroy! Not back two people to Messiah the Prince.

He also goes back to the old adding to this passage by saying teh sacrifice and oblation cease to mean the effectriveness of the sacrifice and oblation. But that is not what it says. Why Varner and others feel the need to correct gods' Inspired writing here as if God did not know to insert the "effectiveness" of the sacrifices.

Not you nor mikgal nor this Varner has shown why we should accept these additions to the word of God and these subtle implications you say must be correct.

Varner is a precious believer, but when it comes to Daniel 9, with all due respect to him- he is a blowhard. He violates Hebrew, grammar and basic rules of interpretation.

Douggg said:

side comment - your post looks a look better - with no exclamation marks.

Click to expand...

Well I speak and write with passion. Us old school folk ( I am almost 66) learned that exclamation marks are used to emphasize something being written, so I use them to emphasize things!

It may not be new school, but this old dog has been doing it all his life.

BABerean2 said:

1Pe 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
1Pe 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
1Pe 2:7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
1Pe 2:8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
1Pe 2:10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.


.

Click to expand...

And I agree with this 100% So what point are you trying to bring?

nolidad said:

BTW, I do not know what Hebrew commentaries you are using, but Hebrew bibles show death in vse 15 and 18 is "maveth" not Mot. Mot was teh Caananite god of death as they say but maveth or wawet is not derived from this caananite language.

Click to expand...

nolidad said:

For if it is the new covenant then you and Mikgal are saying that the new covenant is no longer going out to Jews! Because the covenant of Daniel 9 was made for only 7 years

Click to expand...

No, it's been posted a few times now.....the covenant wasn't *made* for 7 years!!! (exclamation points used since they seem to "speak your language"). For 7 years the new covenant was confirmed with Daniel's people, exclusively (as they were the ones under the former covenant with God).

No one is excluded from the New Covenant. Anyone that abides in Christ are heirs according to the promise of Abraham:

nolidad said:

Well I speak and write with passion. Us old school folk ( I am almost 66) learned that exclamation marks are used to emphasize something being written, so I use them to emphasize things!

It may not be new school, but this old dog has been doing it all his life.

Click to expand...

I almost 72 - junior . I know what your English teacher taught you - and that was to go easy on the exclamation marks.

nolidad said:

The bible says He established it with many for only 7years! Does that mean that at 34 AD Jews were no longer welcome, for the new covenant Jesus established with Israel reached its' 7 years????? That is the conclusion of you rso called "proofs".

Click to expand...

We are living in the same culture using the same language (I'm presuming English is your first language?)...and yet my words are somehow being taken to mean exactly the opposite of what I'm expressing. This discussion may serve as an excellent example of how a person's bias about something can cause blindness to what's actually being stated.

About the comment about 34 AD and "Jews no longer welcome"? Who do you think Paul, James, and Peter were (besides leaders of our early Church)?

Paul's words to the Philippians seem to be the most clear as to the shift in the people of the covenant (shift from "circumcised in the flesh" to "circumcised hearts"):


BABerean2 mentions it often (and I'll have to search for how he expresses it).... but excluding the faithful Israelite remnant from our Church results in a different gospel.

Anyone here is free to use my previous citation of Clement of Alexandria to point out to nolidad (he has me on "ignore") that, beginning from the earliest days of the NT true Church, there is not one defender of the historical true Church, all of the way to the 19th century, who denied the fulfillment of the accomplishments of Christ at Calvary in Daniel 9:24.

Not one.

And not one who believed that Christ was antichrist.

nolidad said:

Well you said that He confirmed the covenant with many for 7 years.

YOu said it was Jesus who did that
You said the covenant was confirmed in 27 AD

Click to expand...

Yes.....the covenant was confirmed with many for 7 years. 27 AD is only one year. Jesus....the anointed Messiah that Daniel's timeline mentions....came "on the scene" exactly according to the prophesied time ("until the Messiah"). His appearance and fulfillment of Scripture and His message continued - through His witnesses - in Jerusalem until 34 AD. It's seven years from 27-34 AD. That was the 70th and final week of Daniel's prophecy.

There are two threads running right now related to this topic. I already posted this in the other one, but it is relevant here as well:

If a person ends the time at 69 weeks and leaves the 70th for the future, they deny Christ's ministry. Jesus arrived "on the scene" in 26/27 AD (John the baptizer had paved the way)......"to the time of Messiah" on the timeline brings us to Jesus's baptism and the beginning of His ministry at that time. He was "cut off but not for Himself" - a term for the death penalty by crucifixion - in 30 AD (halfway through the 70th week). His disciples and followers in ancient Jerusalem witnessed that death could not hold Him as He appeared to them for 40 days after His crucifixion. He ascended to heaven. As His witnesses.....His followers spread this news throughout Jerusalem for the remaining 3.5 years (just as God’s message to Daniel had foretold).

457 BC---- + 7-weeks/49 years/408 BC----- + 62 weeks/434 years/26 AD + (Messiah's baptism and beginning of ministry)......crucifixion 30 AD......34 AD end of 490 years

nolidad said:

JER 31:

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Click to expand...

nolidad said:

1. God says the New covenant is with all of Israel and all of Judah (that is the meaning of the house of)
1A. Daniel 9 says that covenant is with just many.

Click to expand...

First of all.....the invitation of a new covenant was out (as Jesus explained in His parables) to all of Israel and those of Judah. But, in the New Covenant, the criteria of circumcision changed. It was no longer a circumcision of the flesh (as in the Mosaic covenant) it was a circumcision of the heart. Jesus confronted these men (Pharisees) about that shift in covenant, in their day......as they were claiming their fleshly connection to Abraham made them heirs. Jesus informed them of how they'd truly be considered sons of Abraham (by following Abraham's example of faith):


......and, secondly, notice who Peter’s audience was on Pentecost - 50 days after the Cross (Passover):

nolidad said:

2. Verse 32 this covenant is unlike the covenant made (Mosaic) which Israel broke.
2A No mention of this in the 7 year covenant of Daniel 9

Click to expand...

The difference is - the new covenant is unconditional and can't be broken. Daniel 9 isn't a comprehensive new covenant lesson....it's mostly the Messianic timeline.

nolidad said:

Not all Jews know the Lord and that is a requirement of the new covenant- which according to you r last quote was fulfilled in Jesus!

Click to expand...

That's a requirement set up by futurists....not set by God. Christ Jesus is True Israel that kept the Mosaic Covenant. The Messiah was known to bring the covenant of peace.

jgr said:

Beginning from the earliest days of the NT true Church, there is not one defender of the historical true Church, all of the way to the 19th century, who denied the fulfillment of the accomplishments of Christ at Calvary in Daniel 9:24.

Not one.

And not one who believed that Christ was antichrist.

Click to expand...

Just sharing a critical fact that JGR had pointed out earlier.

Nolidad said:

But the Bible says this:

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

Click to expand...

You're correct. That's what the Bible says.

It works out like this:

457 BC (the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem)-->- + 7-weeks/49 years/408 BC----- + 62 weeks/434 years/26 AD + (Messiah's baptism and beginning of ministry)......crucifixion 30 AD......34 AD end of 490 years

mkgal1 said:

We are living in the same culture using the same language (I'm presuming English is your first language?)...and yet my words are somehow being taken to mean exactly the opposite of what I'm expressing. This discussion may serve as an excellent example of how a person's bias about something can cause blindness to what's actually being stated.

About the comment about 34 AD and "Jews no longer welcome"? Who do you think Paul, James, and Peter were (besides leaders of our early Church)?

Paul's words to the Philippians seem to be the most clear as to the shift in the people of the covenant (shift from "circumcised in the flesh" to "circumcised hearts"):

Philippians 3
2Watch out for those dogs, those workers of evil, those mutilators of the flesh! 3For it is we who are the circumcision, we who worship by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh— 4though I myself could have such confidence.

If anyone else thinks he has grounds for confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin; a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; 6as to zeal, persecuting the church; as to righteousness in the law, faultless.7But whatever was gain to me I count as loss for the sake of Christ. 8More than that, I count all things as loss compared to the surpassing excellence of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ 9and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ,(a) the righteousness from God on the basis of faith.​

BABerean2 mentions it often (and I'll have to search for how he expresses it).... but excluding the faithful Israelite remnant from our Church results in a different gospel.

Click to expand...

Well I only say that because you say the Covenant of Daniel 9 is the new covenant.

You say it is Jesus who is making the covenant with Israel in Daniel 9.

And Daniel 9 says the covenant is strongly made for 7 years! Like it or not , that is exactly what it says!

There is no thing in the new Covenant that says that it is the fact teh gospel goes out to Jews exclusively for 7 years, so I am left wondering between what the Bible says and then what you say it says what exactly you mean.

Given that teh New Covenant is found in Jer. 31, what happens after the 7 years according to you?

mkgal1 said:

Yes.....the covenant was confirmed with many for 7 years. 27 AD is only one year. Jesus....the anointed Messiah that Daniel's timeline mentions....came "on the scene" exactly according to the prophesied time ("until the Messiah"). His appearance and fulfillment of Scripture and His message continued - through His witnesses - in Jerusalem until 34 AD. It's seven years from 27-34 AD. That was the 70th and final week of Daniel's prophecy.

Click to expand...

So what happens after the 7 years or the 70th week to the new covenant and the Jews???

In this answer you are writing more like a Jehovah's Witness than a believer! The Bible unambiguously says a "he" and not a "they" establishes the covenant for one 7. Now you are saying Jesus and the disciples. which is it. The Bible "he" or your "they".?

Also how do you reconcile the fact that the bible says that Messiah is cut off after 69 weeks, but using your time lines it isn't until 69 1/2 weeks?

Still waiting to see how you reconcile the New Covenant God will make with all of Israel and Judah with the opinion you write that He hasn't because the 7 years is up!

YOU are saying the new covenant was for all the house of Israel and all the house of Judah for 7 years and if they didn't smarten up- God will change His tune and only make it with some of the house of Israel and some of the house of Judah. Can you please cite me scriptures where God says He will do that with the New Covenant found in Jeremiah 31?

mkgal1 said:

The difference is - the new covenant is unconditional and can't be broken. Daniel 9 isn't a comprehensive new covenant lesson....it's mostly the Messianic timeline.

Click to expand...

According to you . You have yet to reconcile how Jesus was cut off after 69 weeks but yet died after 69 1/2 weeks according to your timelines.

mkgal1 said:

First of all.....the invitation of a new covenant was out (as Jesus explained in His parables) to all of Israel and those of Judah. But, in the New Covenant, the criteria of circumcision changed. It was no longer a circumcision of the flesh (as in the Mosaic covenant) it was a circumcision of the heart. Jesus confronted these men (Pharisees) about that shift in covenant, in their day......as they were claiming their fleshly connection to Abraham made them heirs. Jesus informed them of how they'd truly be considered sons of Abraham (by following Abraham's example of faith):

Click to expand...

first off you are wrong! god did not issue an "invitation" for all Israel and Judah to join HIm in a new covenant. He said HE will make a new covenant with all Jews! This inivitation is you adding something to the Word of God that is simply not there!

And circumcision is not relevant to the covenant as spelled out in Jeremiah 31.

So are you saying that when Jesus said the kingdom would be taken from them- He was revoking teh new covenant with the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah? After all God said this:

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

Paul re-affirmed this in Romans 11 but you and BAB and the teachers videos he posted all i mply it is no longer to the whole house of Israel and Judah. where did God say He was modifying the covenant.

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

mkgal1 said:

You're correct. That's what the Bible says.

It works out like this:

457 BC (the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem)-->- + 7-weeks/49 years/408 BC----- + 62 weeks/434 years/26 AD + (Messiah's baptism and beginning of ministry)......crucifixion 30 AD......34 AD end of 490 years

Click to expand...

Except historians disagree with your timeline!

Teh command to build Jerusalem went out in the 20th years of Artexerxes reign ( also known as Makromehr and Longiminus.

Nehemiah 2
King James Version

2 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.

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,

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?

4 Then the king said unto me, For what dost thou make request? So I prayed to the God of heaven.

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.

6 And the king said unto me, (the queen also sitting by him,) For how long shall thy journey be? and when wilt thou return? So it pleased the king to send me; and I set him a time.


Artexerxes father (xerxes) was killed in 455B.C. It took a year for Artexerxes to consolidate his rule. And because it was Nehemiah writing to Jews- He did not count Artexerxes first year on teh thronme as it was called the regnat (forgive the spelling) yeart and was not counted! That puts the 69th week at 30 AD which is 483 years or 69 weeks according to Daniel and right at the time that Messiah was cut off!

Well I am gone till Friday. My wife is a front line hospital worker. I convinced her to take a couple days off and I am taking her for a getaway to relax and recharge!

BABerean2 said:

In Romans 1:16 Paul said the Gospel was taken "first" to the Jews.

When was this time period, and how long did it last?


.

Click to expand...

Yes pAul did but what does that to do at all with the new covenant?

Jeremiah 31:31-37
King James Version

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

35 Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The Lord of hosts is his name:

36 If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.

37 Thus saith the Lord; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord.


there is nothing that says that the New covenant was taking the gospel to the Jews first!

BTW before Paul even preached to a gentile in any town He went to- He always went to the Jew first!