I want to see timeline charts.....

[mkgal1]

I don't agree with all of this. I'm just sharing for the sake of discussion.

 

[Douggg]

Daniel 9:26-27 KJV
[26] And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: 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: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

What are you talking about?! Read Daniel 9:27 on how he (the same Messiah the Prince in context) has confirmed the covenant? What covenant is this? Tell us!

You cannot prove the covenant confirmed for 7 years is the new covenant in Christ. The resurrection is not found in Daniel 9.

It was intentionally left out, to keep Satan in the dark. Otherwise, Satan would not have orchestrated Jesus's death - which made it possible for God in equal justice to judge and destroy Satan for his sin, while offering grace to man for man's sin - by believing on the death and resurrection of Christ. The power of the gospel is in the resurrection of Christ. For if Christ has not risen, what miserable creatures we are, to paraphrase Paul.

The covenant to be confirmed for 7years is the Mt. Sinai covenant by the Antichrist, as the Jews will perceive him to be the promised messiah, descended from David, to be the great King of Israel - which lasts for about 3 years and some months.
____________________________________________________

And if Daniel 9 had the resurrection in it - then would that not make an easier task to get the Jews to believe in Jesus and the gospel of Salvation ?

 

[TribulationSigns]

You obviously have something specific in mind. Why don't you share it?

How was the new covenant (also means testament) was confirmed? Or make it strong? How to become a force? Didn't you read Scripture or bother to search to find it yourself when I challenge you do it. Obviously it seems that you have failed.

Hebrews 9:15-17 KJV
[15] And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, 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.
[16] For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
[17] For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

This is when Christ, Messiah the Prince, has confirmed a covenant with many (New Testament Congregation) with his DEATH! This is what Daniel 9:27 talked about! Not Titus and the Romans. Not Antichrist in the future. This is the same prince according to context who was put to death by his own people which brought the end of Old Testament Congregation (verse 26), but at the same time, with his death and his blood, a congregation that was fallen (in verse 26) has been rebuilt in Christ with his Resurrection (three days). This is the transition of the Covenant/Congregation. Selah!

John 2:19-21 KJV
[19] Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
[20] Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
[21] But he spake of the temple of his body.

Do you understand what the temple of his body really referred to? Or are you still blind like the Jews when they thought Christ was talking about their physical temple! Up to the Holy Spirit to open your eyes to my testimony!

 

[mkgal1]

How was the new covenant (also means testament) was confirmed? Or make it strong? How to become a force? Didn't you read Scripture or bother to search to find it yourself when I challenge you do it. Obviously it seems that you have failed.

Why so aggressive, TS?

I wish to have discussions here....not to be involved in an inquisition.

 

[mkgal1]

Hebrews 9:15-17 KJV
[15] And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, 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.
[16] For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
[17] For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

This is when Christ, Messiah the Prince, has confirmed a covenant with many (New Testament Congregation) with his DEATH!

.....and then, for the next 3.5 years, His followers testified - in Jerusalem - of what they witnessed:

Acts 4:5 ~ The next day the rulers, elders, and scribes assembled in Jerusalem...

Acts 4:20 ~ For we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard.”​

 

[TribulationSigns]

.....and then, for the next 3.5 years, His followers testified - in Jerusalem - of what they witnessed:

Acts 4:5 ~ The next day the rulers, elders, and scribes assembled in Jerusalem...

Acts 4:20 ~ For we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard.”​

What is your point? Speak up. Peter and John were already anointed with the Holy Ghost at Pentecost which began the New Testament Congregation and they were standing before rulers, elders, scribes....

So?

 

[mkgal1]

Please spare me from your martyr complex.

 

[mkgal1]

What is your point? Speak up. Peter and John were already anointed with the Holy Ghost at Pentecost which began the New Testament Congregation and they were standing before rulers, elders, scribes....

So?

The New covenant was confirmed during the 70th week....from 26/27 AD to 33/34 AD....mostly to those in the City of David (Daniel's people).....fulfilling the prophecy right on time.

 

[TribulationSigns]

The New covenant was confirmed during the 70th week....from 26/27 AD to 33/33 AD

The New Covenant was confirmed from 27AD to 33AD? How? Prove it with Scripture that supports this. Else you are wrong (as usual).

 

[mkgal1]

The New Covenant was confirmed from 27AD to 33AD? How?

I made a typo. 27 - 34 AD.

Through the entire ministry of Christ ....and His follower's ministry after His ascension, that testified of all He had fulfilled of the ancient Hebrew Scriptures. The gospel went to the Jews first (Daniel's people):

Matthew 10:5-6 ~ These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go onto the road of the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.​

 

[TribulationSigns]

I made a typo. 27 - 34 AD.

Through the entire ministry of Christ ....and His follower's ministry His ascension, that testified of all He had fulfilled of the ancient Hebrew Scriptures.

You did not answer my question. How exactly did the covenant was confirmed? It was not confirmed over a few years. It was confirmed when Christ DIED, so that it becomes a force! Not over few years, but right at the moment when Christ died! My goodness. Why can't you read Hebrews 9:15-17. You can't refute it by saying, "oh the new covenant was confirmed between 27 and 34AD." Uh?! You have no bible proof for that. Where is your Scripture that tells you the covenant was confirmed over a few years. Not your private opinion!

 

[TribulationSigns]

Matthew 10:5-6 ~ These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go onto the road of the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.​

I do not think you understand who are the lost sheep of Israel.

Because according to biblical prophecy, the return of the lost tribes of Israel signals the coming of the Messianic Kingdom. And when Christ came, he restored Israel by freeing the captivity from spiritual Babylon, and brought the lost sheep of Israel home. For this anti-type to take place (Matthew 12:29), the type had to have taken place (Jeremiah 50:4-6). The lost of Israel had to be delivered from bondage and restored.

Matthew 15:24-28

• "But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
• Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
• But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
• And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
• Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour."

Was Jesus Looking all over the world for a lost race of Jews? Was He saying He came but for the house of Britain, of the house of Japan, or but for the house of Ethiopia? No, it is quite obvious that the lost of Israel are not another particular group or nation, they were right there in that Jewish nation. Others were considered dogs and swine in the Biblical vernacular. Yes, they eat of the crumbs off the masters table, but Israel was of the Jews. Christ came to the Jew first, and then to the Gentiles, which you once suggested. That's also not an insignificant doctrine.

Matthew 10:5-7

• "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
• But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
• And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand."

So then, how are the tribes of Israel lost, when God identifies the lost as the people of that nation? They were lost in that they were separated from God, 'not' that they were a people who were not yet accounted for. He has come to restore the Kingdom to the lost sheep of Israel, not to Gentiles and not the dispersed in Samaria, but it's plain Christ is addressing the "Jews", and when Christ established the New Covenant Church, He brought that promise to its fulfillment. Jesus Christ came into the world to redeem Israel and bring the restoration of the Kingdom, and that is precisely what He did.

Luke 1:68-69

• "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people,
• And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David;

Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he hath visited and redeemed his people. There is no distinction anymore. When the remnant from those 10 tribes returned with the remnant of Judah with Ezra they continued as the nation, and we see that there is not again that distinction. Judea and Jews have become totally synonymous with Israel. This could not be true if God wanted Israel different from Jews. The terms are used inter-changeably, as Jesus plainly illustrates all through His ministry.

The only real question about their fate is the one which man invents to satisfy his appetite for mystery, fables, legend and tradition. Any conquered land has it's inhabitants subjugated, killed, deported or they are absorbed into the populace. There is absolutely no reason to suspect that it was any different in this case. The 10 tribes were likewise dispersed after their captivity, and the remnant of them returned and were again made one nation under God.

Moreover, isn't it literally ridiculous to claim that the 10 tribes are still lost when the Bible itself unambiguously demonstrates the absurdity of this, by naming people living then who are from these tribes?

Luke 2:36

• "And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;"

Here we have God himself speaking of a tribe in Israel, which man in his 'arrogance' denies was in Israel and declares lost, and is yet to return. Asher was one of the 10 tribes of Israel. How then is the tribe lost? Obviously not in God's eyes, but only in man's fables is the tribe lost. Does this man Phanuel of the tribe of Aser not exist? Does his daughter Ana come from a tribe that in but a memory? It makes no sense. Quite obviously by the word of God the tribes were still in Israel. Else the passage is nonsensical, and we cannot believe anything.

Even the Apostle Paul spoke of a united 12 tribes in the present, when he spoke of the promise of Christ.

Acts 26:6-7

• "And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers:
• Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews."

Paul is speaking of Israel, and there is not the slightest hint of a lost portion, or tribe. Only in the minds of men were these tribes mysteriously lost. ..and that for their own self-serving purposes.

Acts 4:36

• "And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus,

Here again, we have a man Joses who is of the tribe of Levi, while man claims this tribe is still lost. Paul himself is of the tribe Benjamin, so how many tribes are there? God numbers the tribe of Levi (Revelation 17) as one of the 12 tribes sealed of God. Obviously not lost according to the 'authority' of God's Word, and one of the twelve. Likewise Aser, clearly one of the 12 as demonstrated in Revelation chapter 7. That is to say if we receive the word of God as authority over secular myths and legends.

The indoctrinated retort, 'that's all is well and good, but what about the distinction between the Jews and Israel?' ..the moral of the story being, some things people want lost, even when they cannot be lost. As God (not I) clearly shows, after the restoration of the dispersed from captivity we find the terms 'Jews and Israel,' are synonymous. They are used to identify the exact same people, and this would be biblical confusion if[7]. And so, truly, where is the mystery? These Theologians are missing the point. Judea is a figure of Christ, without which none of them are Jews in God's defining of the term. And Christ being the Lion of the tribe of Judah, is what restores the kingdom and makes men Jews. It's not in their blood line, but in His.

Romans 2:28-29

• "For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
• But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."

The fact of the matter is, the New Testament gives no hint of alleged lost. We can only say, What distinction? Shall man put asunder what God has joined? Therefore we must conclude that by the preponderance of biblical evidence, there is no continuing distinction made today between Jews and Israel, and that the tribes of Israel were present in Israel when Jesus came to her.
The end of it all? God's Israelites are by Grace, not Race! The unconditional promises made to Israel have been fulfilled in Abraham's Seed! Not seeds as of many, but Seed as one, Christ (galatians 3:16). Therefore, those who are in Christ are the blood-bought Israel of God, and these are those who constitute God's Elect, or Chosen people. Lost, but now found. Bound, but now free. Brought out of captivity in the Son Israel, called out of Egypt. This Son is not a geographical area nor a race, but Christ Jesus.

Ephesians 4:8

• "Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men."

The Gift which is Salvation, freedom from bondage to Satan, freedom from serving sin, restoration of the Kingdom to Israel by the making of Christ to ascend on High, a King, reconciling the lost sheep of the house of Israel to God. We, Christians, are also part of the lost sheep of the House of Israel because we are Jews in Christ where Salvation Gospel was preached to. The fulfillment of the prophecy of the eternal restored Kingdom, which has no end.

 

[mkgal1]

You did not answer my question. How exactly did the covenant was confirmed? It was not confirmed over a few years. It happened when Christ DIED! My goodness. Why can't you read Hebrews 9:15-17. You can't refute it by saying, "oh the new covenant was confirmed between 27 and 34AD." You have no bible proof. Where is your Scripture that tells you how the new covenant was confirmed? Not your private opinion!

I believe it was confirmed over years (7 years, to be exact). There's not a passage that states the specific answer to that ("Jesus and His followers confirmed the covenant with Daniel's people for 7 years") - it's based on what narrative or framework a person believes. Arguing from omission is a fallacy.

When Jesus spoke, He almost always spoke in ancient Hebrew Scriptures. I'd have to quote all the words of Jesus recorded in the New Testament in order to show through Scriptures that He was confirming the covenant with Daniel's people all throughout His ministry.

 

[TribulationSigns]

I believe it was confirmed over years (7 years, to be exact)

Based on WHAT SCRIPTURE that says this?! I know you don't have one. Saying, "Covenant confirmed over 7 years" is purely private opinion without Scripture support whatsoever!

The New Covenant was confirmed when Christ died per Hebrew 9:15-17 very clearly! Not at Baptism! And this covenant lasted until the Consummation (Second Coming). Not 7 years later.

 

[mkgal1]

There's not a passage that states the specific answer to that ("Jesus and His followers confirmed the covenant with Daniel's people for 7 years") - it's based on what narrative or framework a person believes. Arguing from omission is a fallacy.

Based on WHAT SCRIPTURE

Answered.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Answered.

No, you have not answered. You did not offer Scripture. You remained refuted with your private interpretation.

 

[mkgal1]

The New Covenant was confirmed when Christ died per Hebrew 9:15-17 very clearly!

What is your interpretation of the 70th week of Daniel? The time of the last "week" - the final 7 years?

 

[TribulationSigns]

What is your interpretation of the 70th week of Daniel? The time of the last "week" - the final 7 years?

Why should I discuss the whole week of Daniel 9:27 if you did not understand how the covenant itself was confirmed right in the right place? You obviously tried to change the subject so you won't admit your error because you could not find a Scripture to support your private interpretation. Your doctrine remains refuted.

I won't talk with you further until you find Scripture to support your claim the New Covenant was confirmed over a few years. How did the confirmation started with what?

 

[mkgal1]

No, you have not answered. You did not offer Scripture. You remained refuted with your private interpretation.

The entire Bible testifies to that. Christ was in the Old Testament....and the New Testament reveals the reality of what the Old Testament was pointing to.

 

[TribulationSigns]

The entire Bible testifies to that. Christ was in the Old Testament....and the New Testament reveals the reality of what the Old Testament was pointing to.

Is that your best answer since you can't seem to find a verse?

Read again.