70 weeks

sovereigngrace said:

It is impossible debating with you. You cherry-pick what you respond to. When someone submits arguments that expose your hermeneutics you skip around them. Please address:

Daniel 9:2 says: “In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem. And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplication, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes.”

Are these seventy years linear, congruent and sequential?

Click to expand...

The post you are addressing here wasn't even addressed to you, and that in this post you are addressing I'm simply trying to answer what Yesha asked of me in that post. After all, one can see the portion I quoted, and where I'm asked, "How are you concluding that a gap must exist?" So, maybe you are meaning another post of mine?

The way my mind typically reasons things is like such. If two ppl were debating what 2+2 equals, and that one of them is arguing that it equals 4, and the other is arguing it equals 5, obviously the former is already holding the trump card that can't be trumped. The former doesn't need to consider any of the latter's arguments, the latter needs to be considering the former's arguments. In my mind, the fact I'm convinced the entire 27th verse involves the 70th week, I'm already holding the trump card that indicates there has to be a gap somewhere in the 70 weeks, thus trumping any arguments insisting there are no gaps anywhere. In Daniel 9:24 there are 70 weeks involved. In verse 25 we are told about 69 of these weeks. So where are we told about the remaining week? Verse 27. Why does that verse indicate that someone confirms a covenant for one week? Maybe because that is what the entire verse is focusing on.


I see it being ludicrous that if this part---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate---is not anything that is fulfilled during the 70th week, then what is it doing in this verse to begin with? What would anyone living during Christ's day, or even before His day, have made of that part? Would they have concluded that it is something that happens during the 70th week, or would they have concluded it is something that takes place after the 70th week?

A lot of you in here are basing a lot of your conclusions on hindsight that would have been unavailable to them at the time. Then you are automatically assuming you are correct about all these things, because in hindsight you see that Jerusalem and the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, so this part in verse 27 in question has to be meaning that, therefore this is not something that takes place during the 70th week, but takes place after the 70th week. Yet, Daniel 9:24 concerns 70 weeks, not after 70 weeks instead. Why then would verse 27 be involving something that takes place after the 70 weeks are finished? It wouldn't.

Now that I got that out of the way, I guess I can try and answer the question you asked. There would be no gaps in those 70 years, but what exactly does that prove if I am correct to conclude that verse 27 is meaning the 70th week, all of it, therefore proving there has to be a gap somewhere?

sovereigngrace said:

Are these seventy years linear, congruent and sequential?

Click to expand...

No. There is a hiatus, a gap between the 69th and the 70th 'week'. A gap of nearly 2000 years, which is proved by what is described for that final 7 years not having been fulfilled.

sovereigngrace said:

This doesn't say He will eventually become Lord of lords and King of kings. It rather says that He is already that.

Click to expand...

So when Jesus does Return physically, with His title of King of Kings and Lord of Lords written on His thigh.... Revelation 19:16, will people say: Where were you when we needed You in 2020?
Reigning in the Spiritual realm, just isn't the same as how it will be after He Returns.

Douggg said:

I would say that the 70th week still being unfulfilled is counter to the reformation teachings on eschatology, and who is the Antichrist, and replacement theology, yes. But I would not taint it with the Jesuits who claim that the Pope is the representative for Jesus.

Click to expand...

WOW you admit that you are following the counter reformation teaching of futurism but deny the authors of it. Why is that?

That would fit with the rest of your posts as being illogical. You agree with the teaching but not the ones who developed it. IE the gap

This verses come to mind when I ponder the Jesuit teaching

John 8:43-45 King James Version (KJV)
43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

So now we know that you follow teachings of the RCC by your own admission.

But you deny one of the foundation teachings of the RCC that the pope is Jesus here on earth, so you appear to believe somethings in the RCC teaching but not all, the above verse says " because there is no truth in him"

So are you the arbitrator of truth that comes from an origination that says they can forgive sin and GOD has to abide by their decision?

Jesuits are priests.
"Catholic priests are considered to be very powerful. In fact, according to St. Alphonsus Liguori, priests are given the power to forgive sins, and God must obey their judgment decisions:"

Paganism and the Priesthood | Celibacy | The Tonsure | Biblical Leadership

I am praying that you find the truth as recorded in God's Holy Word.

keras said:

Imagination has a field day when it is believed that 'after' means 3 1/2 years.

Click to expand...

Says the person who implied to me that my eternal destiny depends on whether or not I agree with his interpretation of scripture.

The word "after" used in Daniel 9:26 is clearly used in relation to the 69th week, not in relation to what point in time during the 70th week Messiah would be cut off. The 3 1/2 years is derived quite logically from the fact that verse 27 states that the sacrifice and oblation will be caused to cease in the midst of the 70th week.

DavidPT said:

Not necessarily, assuming that part is referring to Christ. It could just mean that the gap is not between the 69th and 70th week, but is in the middle of the 70th week. No matter how you look at it, this part----and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate---couldn't possibly mean something that is fulfilled within 3.5 years of Christ's death,

thus a gap if Christ is meant in verse 27. And the fact the great trib is 42 months according to Revelation 13:5 and other NT Scriptures, and that the great trib would be future from the time of the cross, Christ would continue confirming the covenant with many the remainder of the week by them continuing to worship Him rather than the beast. That would be the logic as I see it if Christ is meant in verse 27 as the one confirming the covenant with many for one week, and that the gap is in the middle of the 70th week. And since there has to be a gap somewhere in the 70 weeks, regardless, I guess it's at least possible it might be in the middle of the 70th week instead.

Click to expand...

Why does that 3.5 years have to be after a 1,990 + years gap? Why could it not have been in the first century?

Daniel 9:26 states "And the people of the ruler who shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. And the end of it shall be with the flood, and ruins are determined, until the end shall be war."

Rome's war against the Jews in Judea began in 66 A.D and lasted till 70 A.D when Jerusalem was destroyed. So if there was a gap between the midst of the 70th week and the fulfillment of the entire prophecy, why could that gap not have been the plus-minus 40 years between Calvary and 70 A.D? How long did the war last until the consummation? 66 A.D to 70 A.D. Was that not 3.5 years maybe?

If there is a gap between the 70th week and the complete fulfillment of the prophecy, why can't it mean that "the people of the ruler who shall come" destroyed the city and the sanctuary around 40 years after the midst of the 70th week?

DavidPT said:

These things will be involving the spiritual not the literal, therefore no literal temple involved where animal sacrificing resumes then is put to end again. I see that as total nonsense. What I don't see as total nonsense is the AC trying to entirely do away with what Christ accomplished on the cross, by directing worship towards him rather than God, which he appears to do in the final 42 months of this age. And the fact 42 months is 1/2 of 7 years, either that's a coincidence that so does something sinister also happen during the latter half of the 70th week, that according to Daniel 9:27, or that maybe someone is trying to tell us something here instead.

Click to expand...

Well maybe the man of sin will seat himself in the tabernacle of God (the Church) in the final 42 months of this Age, claiming that Daniel 9:27 has just begun to be fulfilled and it's the beginning of the final seven years, when in fact it marks the beginning of the final 42 months.

But we're speculating - and the reason why we're speculating is because this is what happens when we lose sight of the fact that Daniel 9:26 states that the completion of the 70 weeks prophecy will involve:

(a) The cutting off of the Messiah after 69 weeks; and
(b) A war which will culminate in the destruction of the city and the sanctuary.

Daniel 9:27 also tells us that the completion of the prophecy will involve:

(a) A covenant being confirmed by Him (I believe it refers to the New Covenant being confirmed by the Messiah by His blood of the New Covenant in the midst of the week when He is cut off); and

(b) the sacrifice and oblation being caused to cease in the midst of the 70th week, and the overspreading of abominations will occur from then on till the end of both the war and the desolation spoken of in verse 26.

If we read verse 27 losing sight of what verse 26 says, then we will easily do ridiculous things with the prophecy like pushing its ultimate fulfillment to the end of the Age, even though there is absolutely nothing in the text suggesting we should do that.

DavidPT said:

What a lot of you don't grasp or seem to want to grasp, the way you are understanding some of these things, which is basically how I'm understanding some of these things, can actually work with a gap in the 70 weeks.

Click to expand...

I answered this in Post #125. You bring up some good points, but I can't see why the "gap" between the cutting off of the Messiah and completion of the prophecy isn't plus-minus 40 years only. It does not make sense to me if I keep what Daniel 9:26 says in mind while reading Daniel 9:27.

Original Happy Camper said:

WOW you admit that you are following the counter reformation teaching of futurism but deny the authors of it. Why is that?

Click to expand...

The reformers were wrong about the Pope/papacy being the Antichrist. And persons becoming Jews by virtue of becoming Christians. And the church becoming Israel.

Original Happy Camper said:

So now we know that you follow teachings of the RCC by your own admission.

Click to expand...

No, the RCC has doctrine which I don't subscribe to, such as the position of Pope, and the exhalation of Mary, and praying to the saints for intercession.

Original Happy Camper said:

So are you the arbitrator of truth that comes from an origination that says they can forgive sin and GOD has to abide by their decision?

Click to expand...

No. And stop putting words into my mouth.

SDA is as wrong about the Pope/papacy being the Antichrist, beast, as the reformers were.

DavidPT said:

The post you are addressing here wasn't even addressed to you, and that in this post you are addressing I'm simply trying to answer what Yesha asked of me in that post. After all, one can see the portion I quoted, and where I'm asked, "How are you concluding that a gap must exist?" So, maybe you are meaning another post of mine?

The way my mind typically reasons things is like such. If two ppl were debating what 2+2 equals, and that one of them is arguing that it equals 4, and the other is arguing it equals 5, obviously the former is already holding the trump card that can't be trumped. The former doesn't need to consider any of the latter's arguments, the latter needs to be considering the former's arguments. In my mind, the fact I'm convinced the entire 27th verse involves the 70th week, I'm already holding the trump card that indicates there has to be a gap somewhere in the 70 weeks, thus trumping any arguments insisting there are no gaps anywhere. In Daniel 9:24 there are 70 weeks involved. In verse 25 we are told about 69 of these weeks. So where are we told about the remaining week? Verse 27. Why does that verse indicate that someone confirms a covenant for one week? Maybe because that is what the entire verse is focusing on.


I see it being ludicrous that if this part---and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate---is not anything that is fulfilled during the 70th week, then what is it doing in this verse to begin with? What would anyone living during Christ's day, or even before His day, have made of that part? Would they have concluded that it is something that happens during the 70th week, or would they have concluded it is something that takes place after the 70th week?

A lot of you in here are basing a lot of your conclusions on hindsight that would have been unavailable to them at the time. Then you are automatically assuming you are correct about all these things, because in hindsight you see that Jerusalem and the temple was destroyed in 70 AD, so this part in verse 27 in question has to be meaning that, therefore this is not something that takes place during the 70th week, but takes place after the 70th week. Yet, Daniel 9:24 concerns 70 weeks, not after 70 weeks instead. Why then would verse 27 be involving something that takes place after the 70 weeks are finished? It wouldn't.

Now that I got that out of the way, I guess I can try and answer the question you asked. There would be no gaps in those 70 years, but what exactly does that prove if I am correct to conclude that verse 27 is meaning the 70th week, all of it, therefore proving there has to be a gap somewhere?

Click to expand...

The last paragraph is all i was interested in.

I do not honestly know what you are trying to say with the rest. It doesn't make sense. I have watched you for many years and have yet to see you turn one Amil. You simply push Premils into the Amil camp. Why? (1) Your constant avoidance, (2) your lack of corroboration for your opinions, (3) your failure to address the salient points, (4) your constant opting out of debates at pivotal moments and (5) your lack of consistent hermeneutics. I have seen many Premils change to Amil. I remember debating Dave T and Eric when they were Premils. Open-minded Premils tend to shift to Amil. It ticks all the biblical boxes.

Because of this, you have been one of the greatest recruiting tools for Amil.

Douggg said:

The reformers were wrong about the Pope/papacy being the Antichrist. And persons becoming Jews by virtue of becoming Christians. And the church becoming Israel.

No, the RCC has doctrine which I don't subscribe to, such as the position of Pope, and the exhalation of Mary, and praying to the saints for intercession.

No. And stop putting words into my mouth.

SDA is as wrong about the Pope/papacy being the Antichrist, beast, as the reformers were.

Click to expand...

Not so! The Bible clearly and repeatedly shows that we (the Church of Jesus Christ throughout the world) are the true Jews, the true circumcision (Romans 2:25-29; Philippians 3:3 and Colossians 2:11) and the true Israel (Romans 11:17; 11:24-25 and Ephesians 2:10-19) and the true children of Abraham (Romans 4:11; 4:13-15; 4:16-18; 9:6-8; Galatians 3:7-9; 3:12-14; 3:16 and 3:26-29) today. We have been grafted in! Scripture makes clear that upon salvation we become citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem (true Jerusalem), which is also called Mount Zion (or God’s Sion). We see this in Matthew 21:42-46; John 3:3; Romans 9:33; 11:26; Ephesians 1:3; Ephesians 2:4-6; Philippians 3:20; Hebrews 12:22 and 1 Peter 2:5-10. These unambiguous, explicit and repeated Scriptures make that abundantly clear.

jeffweedaman said:

It has everything to do with it. How else can there be atonement sin iniquity and transgressions but through his cross?

24 “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city,
to finish the transgression,
to make an end of sin,
to make atonement for iniquity,
to bring in everlasting righteousness,
to seal up vision and prophecy
and to anoint the most holy place.


Heb 9
11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.


but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, 28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

Click to expand...

Well I agree fully with making atonement for iniquity.

But how did Israel finish THE transgression
Do you really think an end of sin has been accomplished for Israelis (remember this 70 weeks is for Daniels people-Jews, god most certainly would have inspired all people if He meant Jew and Gentile)
Where is everlasting righteousness for Israel and Jerusalem.
So you are saying the most holy is the heavenly one and not jesus like several others have told me is what that means! So now we have two most holies with you folk. which alleogical interpreation is of god and which one is not or are both you wrong?

What you fail to see is that there are three "sins" mentioned and three separate actions. It is not to atone for THE transgression, sin and iniquity.

It is to :

1; Cease THE transgression
2. Make an end of sin.
3. Make atonement for iniquity.

Three separate things to be accomplished for three separate types of going astray!

Also Jesus is mediating the New covenant. One does not need to mediate something if it is in full effect! Just ask a union. Once the contract is ratified- their mediator is no longer needed for the covenant is in effect!

We all need to pay more careful attention to teh words God Inspired to be the Bible and not how we FEEL they should read.

Original Happy Camper said:

WOW you admit that you are following the counter reformation teaching of futurism but deny the authors of it. Why is that?

That would fit with the rest of your posts as being illogical. You agree with the teaching but not the ones who developed it. IE the gap

This verses come to mind when I ponder the Jesuit teaching

John 8:43-45 King James Version (KJV)
43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

So now we know that you follow teachings of the RCC by your own admission.

But you deny one of the foundation teachings of the RCC that the pope is Jesus here on earth, so you appear to believe somethings in the RCC teaching but not all, the above verse says " because there is no truth in him"

So are you the arbitrator of truth that comes from an origination that says they can forgive sin and GOD has to abide by their decision?

Jesuits are priests.
"Catholic priests are considered to be very powerful. In fact, according to St. Alphonsus Liguori, priests are given the power to forgive sins, and God must obey their judgment decisions:"

Paganism and the Priesthood | Celibacy | The Tonsure | Biblical Leadership

I am praying that you find the truth as recorded in God's Holy Word.

Click to expand...

Catholic teaching is right out there on the Internet in what we call the Catholic "Catechism." Please take a quotation from there when representing Catholic teaching--it will get past a lot of bigotry and the misinformation that comes with it. You seem to have picked up on some of this false information. One of the great gifts Jesus gave us what the forgiveness of sins:
“‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’” (John 20:21–23). "Breathed on them" seems to be missed by so many non-Catholics who attempt to understand the Bible. These are God's very words in Genesis in regard to man's creation.

Spiritual Jew said:

The things that some people say on this forum are truly mind boggling.

Please tell me your interpretation of Daniel 9:24. How else can those six things listed in that verse be accomplished apart from the death and resurrection of Christ? Please include as much detail as possible in giving your interpretation of Daniel 9:24. When do you think it will be fulfilled and how?

Click to expand...

Yes they are truly mind boggling! but let us post the verse:

Daniel 9:24-27
King James Version

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.


1. These 490 years are decreed or marked out for Daniels people (Israelis) and Jerusalem. No Gentiles even implied here.

2. To finish(end) THE transgression ONe specific transgression (pesha)=rebellion. Have Israelis finished their rebellion against God yet?

3. to make an end of sins (chattah) acts of sin. Are you saying Jews no longer sin?

4. To make reconciliation for iniquity.(avon) guilt or punishment for sin. This has been accomplished at Calvary!

5. Bring in everlasting righteousness-what is done that is right, just normal. Jesus is everlasting Righteous, but the construct means people living righteously! Are you saying that all Israelis are now everlasting righteous?

6. Seal up vison and prophecy_ That was shot for Paul and Jude and John all prophesied after your date for the end of 490 years! Seal up means make an end to! So that one also is outside of your 490 year timeline.

7. Anoint the Most Holy. Well now on your side we have two most holies! If one is the most holy in heaven, I don't see anywhere where Jesus anointed the most holy. I see He poured out His blood on the Mercy seat in accord with the symbol of the lambs blood.

OIf it means anointing Jesus as King as He will be- Remember this is for Daniels people and city. Simply show where and when the Jews anointed Jesus as King and that settles that one.

Teh only way we can make your ideas fit, is if we change meaning of words and alter the normal usual way people would read this passage with as one called it- the secret code language.

Douggg said:

The reformers were wrong about the Pope/papacy being the Antichrist. And persons becoming Jews by virtue of becoming Christians. And the church becoming Israel.

Click to expand...

The choice:

1. Reformers burning at the stake to liberate the true Church from spiritual darkness and oppression.
2. Douggg pontificating from his easy chair that the Reformers were wrong.

The choices just keep getting easier.

nolidad said:

But how did Israel finish THE transgression

Click to expand...

Jesus was the only Israelite that fulfilled the Mosaic Covenant entirely. He is who "finished the transgression". That's the purpose of Him saying on the Cross:

Jesus is the True Israel.
John 15:1-6 speaks of how Jesus fulfilled Isaiah 27:1-13

nolidad said:

Well I agree fully with making atonement for iniquity.

But how did Israel finish THE transgression
Do you really think an end of sin has been accomplished for Israelis (remember this 70 weeks is for Daniels people-Jews, god most certainly would have inspired all people if He meant Jew and Gentile)
Where is everlasting righteousness for Israel and Jerusalem.
So you are saying the most holy is the heavenly one and not jesus like several others have told me is what that means! So now we have two most holies with you folk. which alleogical interpreation is of god and which one is not or are both you wrong?

What you fail to see is that there are three "sins" mentioned and three separate actions. It is not to atone for THE transgression, sin and iniquity.

It is to :

1; Cease THE transgression
2. Make an end of sin.
3. Make atonement for iniquity.

Three separate things to be accomplished for three separate types of going astray!

Also Jesus is mediating the New covenant. One does not need to mediate something if it is in full effect! Just ask a union. Once the contract is ratified- their mediator is no longer needed for the covenant is in effect!

We all need to pay more careful attention to teh words God Inspired to be the Bible and not how we FEEL they should read.

Click to expand...

Your posts are very hard to read.

You also show a great ignorance of the office of priest that Christ now holds and functions in. The 2-fold office of a priest is making a sacrifice and intercession/mediation for the people of God.

Hebrews 8:6 declares: “now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

This is present tense.

Christ came to save sinners and He completed that perfectly, in that He secured eternal redemption for his elect through His death (Hebrews 5:8-9). He now sits at the right hand of majesty interceding for His elect.

Hebrews 9:14-15 confirms this: “the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament [diathēkē], that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.”

This is present tense.

Hebrews 12:22 & 24 sums it all up: “ye are come unto ... Jesus the mediator of the new covenant [diathēkē], and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel."

This is present tense.

The cross does not seem satisfactory, efficacious and final enough for Premillennialism. It wrongly and strongly promotes the full reinstitution of the redundant old covenant arrangement with its multiple additional sin offerings to atone for the sins of man in the future (Ezekiel 40:39, 42:13, 19, 21, 22, 25, 44:27, 29, 45:17, 19, 22, 23, 25, 46:20, Zechariah 14:16-21). They advocate the restarting of the “meat offering” (Ezekiel 42:13, 44:29, 45:15, 17, 24, 25, 46:5, 7, 11, 14, 15, 20, Zechariah 14:16-21), the “trespass offering” (Ezekiel 40:39, 42:13, 44:29, 46:20, Zechariah 14:16-21), the “burnt offerings” (Ezekiel 40:38, 39, 42, 43:18, 24, 27, 44:11, 45:15, 17, 23, 25, 46:2, 4, 12, 13, 15, Zechariah 14:16-21), the “peace offerings” (Ezekiel 43:27, 45:15, 17, 46:2, 12, Zechariah 14:16-21) and the “drink offerings” (Ezekiel 45:17, Zechariah 14:16-21).

This is despite the fact that the New Testament Scripture makes clear that Christ was the final sacrifice for sin (Romans 6:10, Hebrews 7:27, 9:12, 28, 10:10, 12, 14 and 1 Peter 3:18) and that there are no more offerings for sin (Hebrews 9:26, 10:18, 26 and 1 John 3:5). The reality is, one can search the New Testament pages, but can search Revelation 20 from start to finish, and there is not the slightest allowance for such a religious sham in the presence of Jesus in the age to come. They will never happen, neither for atonement or memorial. This is a Premil invention! Scripture describes the old covenant sacrificial system as “that which is done away” (2 Corinthians 3:11) and “that which is abolished” (2 Corinthians 3:13). It makes clear: “the old testament … vail is done away in Christ" (2 Corinthians 3:14). Hebrews 10:9 confirms: “He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.” Hebrews 10:2 confirms they “ceased to be offered.”

nolidad said:

Yes they are truly mind boggling! but let us post the verse:

Daniel 9:24-27
King James Version

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.


1. These 490 years are decreed or marked out for Daniels people (Israelis) and Jerusalem. No Gentiles even implied here.

2. To finish(end) THE transgression ONe specific transgression (pesha)=rebellion. Have Israelis finished their rebellion against God yet?

3. to make an end of sins (chattah) acts of sin. Are you saying Jews no longer sin?

4. To make reconciliation for iniquity.(avon) guilt or punishment for sin. This has been accomplished at Calvary!

5. Bring in everlasting righteousness-what is done that is right, just normal. Jesus is everlasting Righteous, but the construct means people living righteously! Are you saying that all Israelis are now everlasting righteous?

6. Seal up vison and prophecy_ That was shot for Paul and Jude and John all prophesied after your date for the end of 490 years! Seal up means make an end to! So that one also is outside of your 490 year timeline.

7. Anoint the Most Holy. Well now on your side we have two most holies! If one is the most holy in heaven, I don't see anywhere where Jesus anointed the most holy. I see He poured out His blood on the Mercy seat in accord with the symbol of the lambs blood.

OIf it means anointing Jesus as King as He will be- Remember this is for Daniels people and city. Simply show where and when the Jews anointed Jesus as King and that settles that one.

Teh only way we can make your ideas fit, is if we change meaning of words and alter the normal usual way people would read this passage with as one called it- the secret code language.

Click to expand...

When is all this fulfilled?

Douggg said:

No, the RCC has doctrine which I don't subscribe to, such as the position of Pope, and the exhalation of Mary, and praying to the saints for intercession.

Click to expand...

Yet you preach their teaching on the future antichrist and the gap theory.

So then you are saying that some of what they say is truth as determined by you.

I will go with the reformers and not the teachings of the Jesuit Ribera

"He then developed the doctrine of futurism. His explanation was that the prophecies apply only to a single sinister man who will arise up at the end of time. Rome quickly adopted this viewpoint as the Church’s official position on the Antichrist."

Jesuit Futurism

Read and understand

Valletta said:

Catholic teaching is right out there on the Internet in what we call the Catholic "Catechism." Please take a quotation from there when representing Catholic teaching--it will get past a lot of bigotry and the misinformation that comes with it. You seem to have picked up on some of this false information. One of the great gifts Jesus gave us what the forgiveness of sins:
“‘As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained’” (John 20:21–23). "Breathed on them" seems to be missed by so many non-Catholics who attempt to understand the Bible. These are God's very words in Genesis in regard to man's creation.

Click to expand...

Only Jesus can forgive sin as it pertains to salvation not a man here on earth. You and I can forgive our fellow man. But the sinner still needs to ask GOD for forgiveness.
https://classic.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2 Peter+3&version=KJV
1 John 1 King James Version (KJV)

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

jgr said:

The choice:

1. Reformers burning at the stake to liberate the true Church from spiritual darkness and oppression.
2. Douggg pontificating from his easy chair that the Reformers were wrong.

The choices just keep getting easier.

Click to expand...

Your post is an excellent example of demagoguery.