Third Temple Scam in modern Jerusalem?

nolidad said:

Specify this covenant as you are implying it is well known.

Click to expand...

It's known as the New Covenant

mkgal1 said:

I'm not asserting that Jesus "entered into a 7 year covenant with Israel ".....so why would I attempt to show that?

Click to expand...

Because we are addressing your claim that Daniel 9 is already fuflilled and you said Jesus entered into Covenant with Israel! Well the covenant of Daniel 9 is a 7 year covenant that gets broken halfway through! That is why! It is simply what is written in Gods Word.

nolidad said:

Because we are addressing your claim that Daniel 9 is already fuflilled and you said Jesus entered into Covenant with Israel! Well the covenant of Daniel 9 is a 7 year covenant that gets broken halfway through! That is why! It is simply what is written in Gods Word.

Click to expand...

The text states exactly zero information of a 7 year covenant ....nor does the text state anything of this covenant being broken.

This assertion is not "simply written in God's Word ".

nolidad said:

No but He was at teh time of the end of their (the four generals ) kingdoms as is written in Gods Word and not douggs re-interpretation!

Click to expand...

You are the one who is modifying what time of the end means, rather than accepting that the little horn person is not referring to Antiochus.

BABerean2 said:

Daniel was given the interpretation of the passage, but you are ignoring that part of the text to make your charts work.

Click to expand...

You are making a ambiguous accusation.

You also claim the New Covenant cannot be found in Daniel 9 because the resurrection is not in the passage, even though the resurrection is not found in most of the New Covenant passages.

Click to expand...

There is no requirement in the bible to confirm the New Covenant in Christ for 7 years.

The is a requirement in the bible to confirm the Mt. Sinai covenant for 7 years. You are ignoring that fact, in order to make new covenant theology's interpretation of Daniel 9:26-27 work.

And you expect us to believe your interpretation of Daniel 9:27, without any support from any other Christian on the planet.

Click to expand...

Again you are making an abiguous statement. The are multitudes who believe the confirming of the covenant for 7 years will be by the prince who shall come, the Antichrist.

Have you ever considered the possibility that your charts could be wrong?

Would it be the end of the world for you if you had to change some of your charts?

I have had to change some things I once believed, because they came from men instead of from God.

Click to expand...

I think you need to again change some things you believe.

BABerean2 said:

Can you show us another Christian who believes Daniel 9:27 is about the Sinai Covenant?


How many passages can you show us which contain the words "New Covenant" and the word "resurrection"?


If you cannot, my statement above is not "ambiguous"?


When we compare what you are saying to the Word of God, your statements do not agree with scripture.
Anyone who attempts to make the Two Peoples of God doctrine work, has taken the wrong fork in the road.
Your efforts to ignore the New Covenant reveal this fact.



Jer_31:31 "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—

Mat_26:28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Mar_14:24 And He said to them, "This is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many.

Luk_22:20 Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.

1Co_11:25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me."

2Co_3:6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

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—
(Quoted from Jeremiah 31:31-34)

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.

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.

Heb_12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.


.

Click to expand...

I don't care to participate in your boondoggle.

_________________________________________________

There is no requirement in the bible to confirm the New Covenant in Christ every 7 years.

There is a requirement in the bible to confirm the Mt. Sinai covenant every 7 years. You are ignoring that fact, in order to make new covenant theology's interpretation of Daniel 9:26-27 work.

Can you agree to those two statements?

BABerean2 said:

There is nothing in the text of Daniel 9 which says the covenant must be confirmed every 7 years.
You are adding that part to make your private interpretation work.

Click to expand...

I wrote in the bible. There is a requirement to confirm the Mt. Sinai covenant on 7 year cycle in the bible. Deuteronomy 31:9-13.

There is nothing in the bible to confirm the New Covenant in Christ on a 7 year cycle.

Do you agree or disagree?

mkgal1 said:

It's known as the New Covenant

Galatians 3:7
Understand, then, that those who have faith are sons of Abraham​

Click to expand...

mkgal1 said:

The text states exactly zero information of a 7 year covenant ....nor does the text state anything of this covenant being broken.

This assertion is not "simply written in God's Word ".

Click to expand...

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,

13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

There it is in two places, so you can see and know!

nolidad said:

There it is in two places, so you can see and know!

Click to expand...

There *what* is?

Douggg said:

You are the one who is modifying what time of the end means, rather than accepting that the little horn person is not referring to Antiochus.

Click to expand...

Then show me incontext, grammar and biblically why I am wrong!

20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.

21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.

You demand that "the latter time of their kingdom" must mean the ten kings of revelation and Daniel 7

and that the "king of fierce countenance" must be the beast or antichirst! Just because you spent a long time in making a nicely done chart!

But you are being dishonest against the context and grammar and reading of Daniel 8. You have not provided one valid reason why we should take verses 20-22 as the history they are and then reject verses 23-26 is pulled out of its context and refers to 2500+ years in the future.

And then you do the same with the little horn passage in Daniel 8.

5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.

6 And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power.

7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.

8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.

9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.

The little horn comes from the four notable ones- not from the ten horns of Daniel 7.

You have not and cannot defend biblically, grammatically or contextually why we must agree to your rewrite of this passage as well and make it mean the beast/anitchrist of the last days!

What you are seeking to do, is to rewrite these passages to conform to your chart and not allow your chart to the natural, normal, usual way these passages are designed to be understood. God knows how to use grammar. The Body of Christ does not need people who get special revelations to correct His Word and tell us what he really meant.

This is not a good thing.

mkgal1 said:

It's known as the New Covenant

Galatians 3:7
Understand, then, that those who have faith are sons of Abraham​

Click to expand...

So when did Jesus establish the new covenant as a 7 year covenant?????

Is it the year (27 AD which you say starts the 70th week)) that He was cut off as Daniel says

nolidad said:

So when did Jesus establish the new covenant as a 7 year covenant?????

Click to expand...

The text doesn't state "7 year covenant".

mkgal1 said:

The text states exactly zero information of a 7 year covenant ....nor does the text state anything of this covenant being broken.

Click to expand...

But the text does say confirm the covenant for 7 years.

And there is in the bible of such a requirement to confirm the Mt. Sinai covenant for 7 years, timed to be in the shmitah cycle, year of release. Which the 70 years of Babylonian captivity was tied to the shmitah cycle as well.

2Chronicles 36:20 And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia:

21 To fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years.

Douggg said:

But the text does say confirm the covenant for 7 years.

Click to expand...

True.

mkgal1 said:

There "what" is?

Click to expand...

The shattering of whatever covenant the ANTICHRIST makes with Israel.

Exactly what teh covenant is- we do not know as of yet.

But if it is like the many bad covenants made in the past- it is probably land for peace (and maybe the right to rebuild the temple that must be built).


Isaiah says from Divine perspective, this 7 year covenant is:

1. Isaiah 28:15
   Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
   
   
2. Isaiah 28:18
   And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.

mkgal1 said:

The text doesn't state "7 year covenant".

Click to expand...

Really? C'mon be real!

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

Now go look up confirm in the Hebrew and then look up how that word is used in Hebrew in the Hiphil perfect!

You will learn it means to establish with power or authority!

Please do not play this silly game- you are far better than that!

nolidad said:

Really? C'mon be real!

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

Click to expand...

Yes, really.

Confirming something for a time =/= that something only lasts for that amount of time.

Nolidad said:

Please do not play this silly game- you are far better than that!

Click to expand...

Likewise....please don't minimize this by labeling it "a silly game". It's not. This distortion has caused many people to be blinded to all that Christ's ministry meant & all that it fulfilled.