Third Temple Scam in modern Jerusalem?

[mkgal1]

Some men have, and some have not.

"Covenants: The Backbone of the Bible | BibleProject™" Covenants: The Backbone of the Bible | BibleProject™

 

[mkgal1]

I started a new thread to discuss the New Covenant:
New Covenant - fulfilled?

 

[Douggg]

"Covenants: The Backbone of the Bible | BibleProject™" Covenants: The Backbone of the Bible | BibleProject™

Does the site have a video on the teaching of dispensationalism as well? Covenant theology and dispensationalism are two man-made system on how to understand the bible.

 

[jgr]

God creates the covenants. Man can react by agreeing to those covenants - or by saying no, rejecting the covenant.

In Deuteronomy 31:9-13, the requirement stipulated by Moses is for the leaders of Israel to confirm on a 7 year cycle that the children of Israel agreed to the Mt. Sinai covenant that God created - when they said "we do" to the covenant.

There is no such requirement in the new covenant. Moses himself was not the Mt. Sinai covenant. Differently, Jesus Himself is the new covenant.

You didn't answer the question, so here it is again:

Do you believe that the New Covenant is only ever preached, but never confirmed in those who believe and accept it?

 

[jgr]

Please point out a lie there.

Such is our friend's last resort when his dispensational delusions fail the tests of Scripture.

Entirely unsurprising.

 

[Douggg]

You didn't answer the question, so here it is again:

Do you believe that the New Covenant is only ever preached, but never confirmed in those who believe and accept it?

I think you are confusing the word confirmed with validated. So, the question you are asking is flawed in it's construct. And the subject matter of Daniel 9:27 is confirmed for 7 years. Which you did not include in your question.

The New Covenant will be validated in those who believe and accept it when the resurrection/rapture takes place.

The issue is who is the prince who shall come. And what is the covenant that he confirms for 7 years.

 

[mkgal1]

Does the site have a video on the teaching of dispensationalism as well? Covenant theology and dispensationalism are two man-made system on how to understand the bible.

No....because that isn't a comparison of theology. For almost 1200 years the Church was in unity about this. The early church was adamant about seeking the Holy Spirit in order to have Truth to be their guide (that's how it was decided what were heresies and they were rejected). This was the belief of our apostolic early church. Covenants are the foundation of our faith.

 

[Douggg]

No....because that isn't a comparison of theology. For almost 1200 years the Church was in unity about this. The early church was adamant about seeking the Holy Spirit in order to have Truth to be their guide (that's how it was decided what were heresies and they were rejected). This was the belief of our apostolic early church. Covenants are the foundation of our faith.

I am pretty sure that site is covenant theology based. And is opposed to dispensationalism. They are both man-made systems of how to understand the bible.

The issue is who is the prince who shall come. And what is the covenant he confirms for 7 years.

 

[mkgal1]

I am pretty sure that site is covenant theology

Christianity = covenant theology.

There was no other opposing view until the last few hundred years. Now.....christianity is all over the place.

 

[mkgal1]

The issue is who is the prince who shall come. And what is the covenant he confirms for 7 years.

He came, Douggg. Jesus....the Messiah.

There are two actions in that passage: confirming a covenant and destroying the city and the sanctuary. It's "the people " (plural) that actively destroyed Jerusalem. So disagreeing over "the Prince" is a side issue.

IOW....."people" cannot be the "He" that confirmed the covenant. A singular pronoun isn't used for "people".

Daniel 9:26
And the people......will destroy the city and the sanctuary.​

 

[Douggg]

Christianity = covenant theology.

There was no other opposing view until the last few hundred years. Now.....christianity is all over the place.

Covenant theology - Wikipedia

He came, Douggg. Jesus....the Messiah.

There are two actions in that passage: confirming a covenant and destroying the city and the sanctuary. It's "the people " (plural) that actively destroyed Jerusalem. So disagreeing over "the Prince" is a side issue.

IOW....."people" cannot be the "He" that confirmed the covenant. A singular pronoun isn't used for "people".

Daniel 9:26
And the people......will destroy the city and the sanctuary.​

The problem is with your interpretation of confirm the covenant for 7 years, is that Ezekiel 39:21-29, Jesus Himself speaking in the text, indicates what the 7 years are, and when.

 

[jgr]

I think you are confusing the word confirmed with validated. So, the question you are asking is flawed in it's construct. And the subject matter of Daniel 9:27 is confirmed for 7 years. Which you did not include in your question.

The New Covenant will be validated in those who believe and accept it when the resurrection/rapture takes place.

The issue is who is the prince who shall come. And what is the covenant that he confirms for 7 years.

I said "confirmed". I know the meaning of "confirmed". You said "validated". Your word "validated" or its root "valid" appears nowhere in the entirety of Scripture.

Your claim that "The New Covenant will be validated in those who believe and accept it when the resurrection/rapture takes place." is disproven by Scripture below.

Hebrews 12
22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

I've grammatically (corroborated Scripturally and historically) proven that the prince who shall come is Messiah, and therefore that the everlasting covenant which He confirmed beginning with the Jews for seven years, is the New Covenant in His Blood.

 

[Douggg]

Your claim that "The New Covenant will be validated in those who believe and accept it when the resurrection/rapture takes place." is disproven by Scripture below.

Hebrews 12
22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,
24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

How does that verse disprove that the belief of those of the New Covenant in Christ will not be validated in the resurrection/rapture?

I've grammatically (corroborated Scripturally and historically) proven that the prince who shall come is Messiah, and therefore that the everlasting covenant which He confirmed beginning with the Jews for seven years, is the New Covenant in His Blood.

No, you haven't. The only thing that you have proved is that you don't understand Daniel 9:26-27, who the prince who shall come is and what the covenant is that he will confirm for 7 years is.

 

[jgr]

How does that verse disprove that the belief of those of the New Covenant in Christ will not be validated in the resurrection/rapture?

"Ye are come" (present tense) "to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant."

Does Jesus mediate invalid covenants?

No, you haven't. The only thing that you have proved is that you don't understand Daniel 9:26-27, who the prince who shall come is and what the covenant is that he will confirm for 7 years is.

Awaiting your grammatical disproof.

 

[Douggg]

Does Jesus mediate invalid covenants?

That is not the issue.

Awaiting your grammatical disproof.

The messiah cutoff is before the destruction of the temple and city in the text - grammatically and historically a fact.

The prince who shall come is of those people - the Romans.

Jesus was not a Roman, but a Jew. A fact.

 

[jgr]

That is not the issue.

The messiah cutoff is before the destruction of the temple and city in the text - grammatically and historically a fact.

The prince who shall come is of those people - the Romans.

Jesus was not a Roman, but a Jew. A fact.

Of course it's the issue. It's in Scripture, so it's the issue.

Awaiting your grammatical disproof of my grammatical proof.

Complete with referents.

 

[Douggg]

Awaiting your grammatical disproof of my grammatical proof.

Complete with referents.

In the KJV, the messiah cutoff is before the destruction of the temple and city in the text - grammatically, .... and historically a fact.

The prince who shall come is of those people - the Romans.

Jesus was not a Roman, but a Jew. A fact.

 

[iamlamad]

If you are calling those who do not agree with you goats, come on out with it...
.

Surely you know of the judgment of the nations - also called the sheep and goat judgment.

The question was asked, if someone is NOT a part of the millennial Reign on earth, then where else could they be? From what Jesus said, the goats will not be there.

 

[iamlamad]

Maybe "a" covenant.....but they can't confirm God's covenants with humanity (and that is the topic of discussion).

And there is where we differ. I believe the covenant in question is in Dan. 9:27. I don't think that is a covenant of God. I think the Beast of Revelation confirms this covenant.

 

[BABerean2]

Surely you know of the judgment of the nations - also called the sheep and goat judgment.

The question was asked, if someone is NOT a part of the millennial Reign on earth, then where else could they be? From what Jesus said, the goats will not be there.

Revelation 20: Does your interpretation agree with all other scripture?

(Chronological or Recapitulation?) (Literal vs. Figurative?)

Based on the following scripture, will immortals and mortals both live on earth for 1,000 years after the Second Coming of Christ? Will there be renewed animal sacrifices in earthly Jerusalem for 1,000 years after the Second Coming of Christ? Will Christ conduct funeral services for mortals killed in accidents many years after His Second Coming? Graveyards needed?


Can the following questions be examined without ridicule, and condemnation, based on the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34, and found fulfilled in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and Hebrews 12:18-24?


Can the number 1,000 be used in a symbolic manner? Psalm 50:10


Does an angel with a key come from heaven and open the bottomless pit in Revelation 9:1-2? Why did the angel have to unlock the pit if it was not locked previously?
Who is the king of the angels in the bottomless pit found in Revelation 9:11?
Are some of the angels “bound” in some manner in Revelation 9:14?
If the beast comes up out of the pit in Revelation 11:7, where is the beast before then?


John sees “souls” at the beginning of Revelation chapter 20.
Are these the same “souls” found in Revelation 6:9-11?


Is the “first resurrection” in Revelation 20:5 the first bodily resurrection in the Book of Revelation? (Rev. 11:11) Are there two different types of resurrections in John chapter 5?
John 5:24 (Spiritual) ? Were you dead, and now you are alive?
John 5:27-30 Christ describes the bodily resurrection and “hour” of judgment of “all” the dead.


Who is the “strong man” who is bound in Matthew 12:26-29?
How is Satan “bound” in Revelation 20:3?


How many mortals are left alive on the planet at the end of Matthew 25:31-46?
Isaiah 65:17-25? Are people really dying in verse 20? Context, Context, Context…


Was Paul expecting Christ to return "in flaming fire", taking vengeance on those who do not know God in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10? How would mortals survive this fire?
Does the fire come at the end of Revelation 20?


Did Paul expect both the living and the dead to be judged at the appearing of Christ, in 2 Timothy 4:1?
When is the judgment of the dead in Revelation 20? Is it the same judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:18?


What is the restitution of all things at the return of Christ in Acts 3:20-21?
Will Christ's sacrifice at Calvary also reverse the curse, at His return?


Does death die at the last trumpet in 1 Corinthians 15:50-55?


Why did Jesus correct the woman at the well when she said earthly Jerusalem was the place to worship? See John 4:20-24.
Why did Paul say the Jerusalem above is our “mother” in Galatians 4:24-31?
What is the inheritance of the Old Testament Saints in Hebrews 11:15-16?


Is the third temple found in 1 Peter 2:4-10? Is this temple just as real as a temple made of earthly stones?


What was Peter expecting on the day of the Lord when He comes as a thief in 2 Peter 3:10-13?


Do we find the judgment of both the living and the dead at the 7th trumpet, which is the last trumpet in the Bible, in Revelation 11:15-18? Why do most preachers ignore the time of the judgment of the dead, with reward for some, and destruction for others in Revelation 11:18? What does it prove about the chronology of the Book of Revelation?


.