70 weeks

mkgal1 · Dec 21, 2020

nolidad said:
They sought the overthrow of gentile rule over Israel.

The Zealots denied Christ Jesus being the True Temple......making them unbelievers and not abiding with the True Vine....rendering them as cut off from God's people (making them Gentiles).

Acts 3:23
Then Moses said, ‘Anyone who will not listen to that Prophet will be completely cut off from God’s people.’

Timtofly · Dec 22, 2020

mkgal1 said:
The Cross, most definitely, belongs in the topic of sin. Just because a word isn't in a certain passage - like the word "Cross" and Daniel 9:24 - doesn't mean it doesn't belong.
"Stopped all the actions of sin" is a personal expectation.

John the baptizer said Jesus would "take away the sin of this world". What do you believe the Cross means?

What John the Baptist said was true.

The world is still here. Sin is still being taken away. It was not that sin was no more after the Cross. God saw sin taken away before He even created the world. The Cross was an event planned by God at a certain time in history, but sin did not stop at the Cross. There is going to be a sin free time during the last 1000 years. But that only starts at the end of the 7th Trumpet. Sin was in the world for about 6000 years. And the Cross took all the sin away for those 6000 years. The issue is most of humanity did not accept that, and they declared themselves to be their own sin caretaker.

It was not that sin would be taken away from the world 4000 years and the last 2000 would be sin free.

It was the fact humanity cannot take sin away at any point in the whole 6000 years. Only Christ can remove sin.

nolidad · Dec 22, 2020

mkgal1 said:
Your accusation of "blatant dishonesty" was leveled specifically against the creator of that video....and now you're admitting to not even watching the video. I don't expect you to view the video....but it seems dishonest to criticize something as being dishonest when one isn't even informed of the content. All I was asking for was something we could discuss....ie, something like "the video said this....but I see this in Scripture". Empty accusations don't contribute to discussion.

I watched enough to see that he was twisting SCriptures to get teh allegorical reinterpretation desired. I am sure many parts are true but the foundational belief of the video is dishonest.

Americans sue other Americans for less altering of peoples words than what many Christians do to alter what is written in Scripture to give it a subtle new meaning.

nolidad · Dec 22, 2020

BABerean2 said:
Have you had your eyesight checked lately?

Do you understand the phrase "now He has..." ?

Do you understand the words "He is also Mediator of a better covenant..." ?

Heb 8:6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.
Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.
Heb 8:8 Because finding fault with them, He says: "BEHOLD, THE DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH— (The author of the Book of Hebrews quoted Jeremiah 31:31 showing is it "now' fulfilled.)
Heb 8:9 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS IN THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; BECAUSE THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DISREGARDED THEM, SAYS THE LORD.
Heb 8:10 FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS IN THEIR MIND AND WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
Heb 8:11 NONE OF THEM SHALL TEACH HIS NEIGHBOR, AND NONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, 'KNOW THE LORD,' FOR ALL SHALL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST OF THEM TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.
Heb 8:12 FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."
Heb 8:13 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Do you understand the phrase "He has made..." ?

.

So you are saying that Jews are automatically saved then! That all Israelis have Gods law written in their hearts.

That Israelis are Gods people and He is their God.

That all Israelis know the Lord and do not need anyone to tell them to know the Lord.

That God no longer remembers the sins of all Israelis anymore.

OKAY then yyo do have a two people of God doctrine.

nolidad · Dec 22, 2020

mkgal1 said:
The Cross, most definitely, belongs in the topic of sin. Just because a word isn't in a certain passage - like the word "Cross" and Daniel 9:24 - doesn't mean it doesn't belong.
"Stopped all the actions of sin" is a personal expectation.

John the baptizer said Jesus would "take away the sin of this world". What do you believe the Cross means?

Of course "the cross" is the focal point of everything spiritual. That is a given.

But bringing people to cease their sinning while because of the cross, is no the focus of this partial passage.

Adam and Eve living after the fall involves the cross.
Jacob becoming the Father of Israel after deceiving his dad invovles the cross.
But we are simply focusing on what God said will happen by the end of those 70 weeks God determined for Israelis and Jerusalem.

But if you wish to make the "cross" the overarching reason for things, please include it in every biblical quote you cite!

I will start for example purpose.

Us discussing here involves the cross! Without the cross we would not even be interested in talking spiritual things.

so if you want the cross front and center, please write all your statements like the example I gave.

Other wise let us talk like sane rational people.

BABerean2 · Dec 22, 2020

nolidad said:
So you are saying that Jews are automatically saved then! That all Israelis have Gods law written in their hearts.

If you have to tell others what they think in order to ignore the word "now" in Hebrews 8:6-13, you have exposed your doctrine for what it really is.

You also have to ignore Paul's words below to make your doctrine work.

Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh;
Rom 2:29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.

Hopefully, you do understand the word "Israelis" would include those from all races, right ???

.

nolidad · Dec 22, 2020

mkgal1 said:
The Zealots denied Christ Jesus being the True Temple......making them unbelievers and not abiding with the True Vine....rendering them as cut off from God's people (making them Gentiles).

Acts 3:23
Then Moses said, ‘Anyone who will not listen to that Prophet will be completely cut off from God’s people.’

And it says what you just said in the bible where?

This is just making an assumption on SCripture based on your own personal bias. IOW you are allegorizing what Moses said to defend your allegorical opinion that the native Israeli zealots suddenly became Gentiles and lost their "Jewishness".

Are you absolutely 100% positive that not a single zealot was doing it with a misguided heart? Like Peter did in the garden when He cut Malchus' ear off?

The further we go down this thread, the more allegories and assumptions and implied implications you keep coming up with to defend you rposition! That is a very shaky foundation indeed.

nolidad · Dec 22, 2020

BABerean2 said:
If you have to tell others what they think in order to ignore the word "now" in Hebrews 8:6-13, you have exposed your doctrine for what it really is.

You also have to ignore Paul's words below to make your doctrine work.

Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh;
Rom 2:29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.

Hopefully, you do understand the word "Israelis" would include those from all races ???

.

I am not telling you what you think, I am just applying your words t o our discussion.

You adamantly declare the new covenant is fulfilled and abuse the Scriptures to justify it.

So I keep osting the new Covenant and now say you rbelief.

If you believe th enew Covenant is fulfilled (completed and brought to its conclusion), then you should believe that all Jews know God now and have no need to be taught!

that is what the New covenant absolutely declares will happen when it is in effect!

Unless of course you are speaking of a different new Covenant than the one found in Gods Word at Jeremiah 31:31-34.

Well let us apply your meaning of Romans 2:28-29 to another passage you have quoted so we shall be consistent.

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

So to be consistent according to your usage- Israel/Jew means either teh church or just the remnant of faithful Jews. You have said both.

So according to your hermeneutic

verse 25 Blindness in part is happened to teh church /faithful jews until the ful=nesss of the gentiles (you have failed to define this for us)

verse 26: after this event of teh gentiles whoever they are, all The church /faithful remnant will be saved.

verse 27- which covenant is this one? teh Jeremiah 31 covenant is with the whole house of Israel andf Judah so what covenant is this one as you reject that Israel and Jews mean Israel and Jews but has a spiritual meaning.

But now if you wish to know th ereality of Romans 2:28-29 in its proper context and not as a all encompassing statement that defines the term Jew, just let me know.

BABerean2 · Dec 22, 2020

nolidad said:
You adamantly declare the new covenant is fulfilled and abuse the Scriptures to justify it.

You are arguing with the author of the Book of Hebrews in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 9:15, instead of with me.
Therefore, you are arguing with what is found in God's Word in order to make your doctrine work.

.

Spiritual Jew · Dec 22, 2020

nolidad said:
Well you seem to have no problem accusing me of being dishonest!

And no I do not hold to what you say I hold to! That is what is dishonest. If you want to know what I hold to ask- and don't commit teh sin of presumptiousness. Putting words in peoples mouths is simply pride running amok.

Maybe you should work on being more clear then. So, when exactly do you think "to make an end of sins" will be fulfilled? If you don't know, just say so.

nolidad · Dec 22, 2020

BABerean2 said:
You are arguing with the author of the Book of Hebrews in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 9:15, instead of with me.
Therefore, you are arguing with what is found in God's Word in order to make your doctrine work.

.

No I am arguing with your re-interpretation of the meaning of words.

You intentionally redefine words to support your agenda.

Spiritual Jew · Dec 22, 2020

Timtofly said:
What John the Baptist said was true.

The world is still here. Sin is still being taken away. It was not that sin was no more after the Cross. God saw sin taken away before He even created the world. The Cross was an event planned by God at a certain time in history, but sin did not stop at the Cross. There is going to be a sin free time during the last 1000 years. But that only starts at the end of the 7th Trumpet. Sin was in the world for about 6000 years. And the Cross took all the sin away for those 6000 years. The issue is most of humanity did not accept that, and they declared themselves to be their own sin caretaker.

It was not that sin would be taken away from the world 4000 years and the last 2000 would be sin free.

It was the fact humanity cannot take sin away at any point in the whole 6000 years. Only Christ can remove sin.

The literal end of sin won't occur until after the thousand years and Satan's little season which you believe occur after the second coming of Christ. So, should we assume then that you believe the 70th week will end 1000+ years after the second coming of Christ?

nolidad · Dec 22, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
Maybe you should work on being more clear then. So, when exactly do you think "to make an end of sins" will be fulfilled? If you don't know, just say so.

Daniel 9:24
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.

After the 70 weeks. When Jesus returns.

YOur gotcha questions about what happens in the Millenial Kingdom are based on irrelevancy.

Whether or not Jews reproduce in the kingdom we can only assume. Whether the children of Israel born in the millenial kingdom will sin we can only assume. I can't give you answers that have no reference in SCripture.

I told you that but you sitll wish to muddy the waters with Questions a rational lover of God cannot answer with any certainty. then you thunder how I make no sense.

nolidad · Dec 22, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
The literal end of sin won't occur until after the thousand years and Satan's little season which you believe occur after the second coming of Christ. So, should we assume then that you believe the 70th week will end 1000+ years after the second coming of Christ?

Well you appear to love to make you assumptions biblical truth, so I nor anyone else can stop you.

I am a literalist. I have been accused of being woodenly literal. But compared to how you wish to make others answer you , my literalness is as stiff as ketchup.

BABerean2 · Dec 22, 2020

nolidad said:
No I am arguing with your re-interpretation of the meaning of words.

You intentionally redefine words to support your agenda.

What does the word "now" mean in your dictionary?

I am not the one claiming God did not fulfill his promises to the Jews at Calvary, which is one of the greatest errors of your doctrine.

.

Timtofly · Dec 22, 2020

Spiritual Jew said:
The literal end of sin won't occur until after the thousand years and Satan's little season which you believe occur after the second coming of Christ. So, should we assume then that you believe the 70th week will end 1000+ years after the second coming of Christ?

What is your proof of the literal end of sin?

Mine is the 7th Trumpet and Revelation 10.

No, the 70th week ends prior to the Millennium. The 7th Trumpet stops at 6pm. The Millennium starts at 6pm. Choosing Satan is not a sin. It is a bad choice, with dire consequences, but sin it is not. Adam disobeyed before sin was a thing. But sin was a thing the second he ate. The choice was prior to sin, not a sin. God told Adam not to eat. God did not tell Adam, "not to think about eating."

nolidad · Dec 23, 2020

BABerean2 said:
What does the word "now" mean in your dictionary?

I am not the one claiming God did not fulfill his promises to the Jews at Calvary, which is one of the greatest errors of your doctrine.

.

So you are saying that at Calvary God wrote His laws in the hearts of the house of Israel and Judah.
So you are saying that Calvary was the event "after those days" in Jer. 31:31-34
So you are saying that every Israeli knows the Lord from the least to the greatest.
So you are saying that God remembers the sins of the house of Israel and Judah nomore.

YOu do have a two people of God doctrine .

BABerean2 · Dec 23, 2020

nolidad said:
So you are saying that Calvary was the event "after those days" in Jer. 31:31-34

It would be the author of the Book of Hebrews who says the things above in the scripture below.

When did Christ die?

Heb 9:15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

Why did the author of Hebrews quote Jeremiah 31:31-34 below, along with the word "now"?

Heb 8:6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.
Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.
Heb 8:8 Because finding fault with them, He says: "BEHOLD, THE DAYS ARE COMING, SAYS THE LORD, WHEN I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH—
Heb 8:9 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS IN THE DAY WHEN I TOOK THEM BY THE HAND TO LEAD THEM OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT; BECAUSE THEY DID NOT CONTINUE IN MY COVENANT, AND I DISREGARDED THEM, SAYS THE LORD.
Heb 8:10 FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS IN THEIR MIND AND WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS; AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
Heb 8:11 NONE OF THEM SHALL TEACH HIS NEIGHBOR, AND NONE HIS BROTHER, SAYING, 'KNOW THE LORD,' FOR ALL SHALL KNOW ME, FROM THE LEAST OF THEM TO THE GREATEST OF THEM.
Heb 8:12 FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."
Heb 8:13 In that He says, "A NEW COVENANT," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

.

mkgal1 · Dec 23, 2020

nolidad said:
I watched enough to see that he was twisting SCriptures to get teh allegorical reinterpretation desired. I am sure many parts are true but the foundational belief of the video is dishonest.

Americans sue other Americans for less altering of peoples words than what many Christians do to alter what is written in Scripture to give it a subtle new meaning.

But there needs to be supporting evidence presented. All I'm seeing are empty accusations.

mkgal1 · Dec 23, 2020

Timtofly said:
What is your proof of the literal end of sin?

As Peter explained....God appointed Jesus as the One to judge the living and the dead....and Jesus offers forgiveness for all sin:

Acts 10:39-43
39We are witnesses of all that He did, both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem. And although they put Him to death by hanging Him on a tree, 40God raised Him up on the third day and caused Him to be seen— 41not by all the people, but by the witnesses God had chosen beforehand, by us who ate and drank with Him after He rose from the dead. 42And He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that He is the One appointed by God to judge the living and the dead. 43All the prophets testify about Him that everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins through His name.”

........that's the "end of sin". Sin has no power over those who believe in Him.

70 weeks

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Amillennialist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

His perfect way sets me free. 2 Samuel 22:33

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency