The Old Testament saints were saved the same as New Testament saints, by faith. Although they did not know who or how they were to be saved as we do on this side of Calvary, they put their faith in God to save them. They had faith in the savior to come as we have faith in the savior that came, Jesus Christ. Just read Hebrews 11 to see many of the Old Testament saints that are mentioned as having faith.
Before Christ rose from the grave, Old Testament saints were held in Abraham's bosom as mentioned in Luke 16:22 as their sins had not yet been paid for. After Christ's resurrection, the saints were taken to heaven with Christ. Their sins paid for the same as ours, by the sacrifice of Jesus.
Jannelle, may CHRIST IN US grace us with HIS wisdom and HIS understanding.
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith (CHRIST IS OUR FAITH), preached before the GOSPEL unto Abraham, saying in thee shall all these nations be blessed.
Hebrews 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, AS WELL AS UNTO THEM: but the word (CHRIST) preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them (CHRIST IN THEM) that heard it.
The GOSPEL IS:
2 Timothy 1:10 But is now made manifest (Christ in the flesh) by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath ABOLISHED DEATH, and hath brought LIFE and IMMORTALITY to light through the gospel.
1 John 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil (alive to the flesh), for the devil sinneth from the beginning, For this purpose (gospel) the Son of Man was MANIFESTED, that he might destroy THE WORKS OF THE DEVIL.
This is the GOSPEL: You (seed of flesh) died on the cross with Christ and you (seed of Spirit) was RAISED with HIM.
The saints of old received this promise also at HIS RESURRECTION
Hebrews 11:39 And these all, having received a good report through faith, received not the promise (victory over sin and death) (CHRIST IN US):
Hebrews 11:49 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect (accomplished at Christ death and resurrection).
Matthew 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Matthew 27:53 And came out of the graves at HIS RESURRECTION, and went into the holy city (new Jerusalem), and appeared to many.
I think the reason for this is found in the last verse 32: "These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations: and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood."
From Noah & his sons, all the Earth was repopulated after the Flood, which wiped out everyone. Even though most of those names might not mean much to us, it was important to Israel in understanding their roots & to historians who would be able to follow the generations which came from those names.
In Genesis chapter 10, what is the importance of the bible listing all these sons and daughters? So many sons and daughters were listed and I am wondering why?
ED, you notice how Stanjett put edible. the exact verse is genesis 1:29. It says THE GIVING OF FOOD..... i know pot is made in edibles now, My advice is not to fall for this trap. I am 40 and the holy spirit recently convinced me of this sin. i had been smoking since i was 14. Here is my reference: Isaiah 5: 12, And the harp and the viol the tabret and PIPE and wine are in their feasts but they regard not the work of the LORD neither consider the operation of his hands. WE are to be of SOBER MIND. i used to think i was even while smoking pot... im afraid its just not the case though.
also, I have a hard time finding your correspondence from the previous comment. I'm not very good with blogs I guess. I thought when you hit "reply" it would bring you to the last comment.
Thank you once again for your comments Robert - they are appreciated. I'm away for a month in rural areas with intermittent internet, so am unable to respond adequately. I hope to resume once again on my return. However, your comments are very informative & enlightening & require further consideration.
They will put antichrist into power & will continue to persecute the true remnant church. As far as the 70 weeks go, I mentioned this before.
Jesus died in the middle of the 70th week or at 486 1/2 years because of the word AFTER in verse 26.
That leaves 3 1/2 years to be fulfilled. Here are three possibilities. I hold to #2.
1. The death of Stephen 3 1/2 years after Jesus died. This is a belief of the 7th Day ADventists but there is no way to prove his martyrdom historically or biblically on that time. But it is true the gospel really went to the Gentiles at that point so it might be true. Thta would ahve fulfilled the end of 70 weeks then.
2. the 3 1/2 years of the Great Revolt War starting in spring of 66AD and ending in fall of 70 AD. I hold to this one because part of the Daniel 9 prophecy has to do with the destruction fo the temple and historically it did last 3 1/2 years.
3. the 3 1/2 years mentioned in Revelation might be it but it doesn't make sense to me as there is nothing in the prophecy talking 2,000 years later & the temple being destroyed was part of the prophecy.
I am open to the other two possibilities but it is interesting that the Great Revolt lasted 3 1/2 years, fits the prophecy perfectly & is exactly 40 years AFTER the death of Jesus and 40 is the number for testing, trials, etc. I see God granting grace of an extra 40 years since the crucifixion of Jesus even though they were causing many Jewish Christians to be killed by themselves and stirring up government against the Christians as they do to this very day in America with the ADL, ACLU, SPC, and many other organizations that have been taking away our rights for several decades now. We are the persecuted ones. They are hated by many because of what they do and say about Gentiles in their writings. Ever read the Talmud at all? Jesus is called a bastardd and burning in hell in excrement forever just to name one thing they say about Him. 1/3 of the world is SHEMitic. They make up words.
Now, I realize that you've also given a fuller explanation of this & it is noted & appreciated. However, to fully appreciate both sides of understanding verse 27 (whether speaking of Jesus or Anti-Christ), we would need to understand "confirming the covenant", "for one week (7 years)", & a "ceasing & removal of the sacrifices & abominations". You've said that Jesus affirmed the promise through the Gospel (how so for 7 years?), the sacrifices/oblations ceased through His death & resurrection, & the desolation of the abominations at His Second Coming (I assume)."
me:
Remember what Daniel's prayer was. The answer from Gabriel was concerning HIS people (the Jews), the Messiah, and the destruction of the 2nd temple. The end of the Jewish age ended the 70th week.
Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon THY people and upon thy holy city,
Mat 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
Three different words for WORLD in Matthew 24 explains this. Also, THIS GENERATION shall not pass till ALL these things be in Matthew 23's prophecy. See the FULL futurists confuse this by thinking none of Matthew 24 happened. And the FULL preterist goes to far thinking all of it happened and that there isn't a double meaning with it.
We are all ONE people now. To divide up Jew and Gentile goes against the whole new covenant. Paul said WE are the temple. We are all ONE in Christ. The middle wall of perdition is gone. We have to ignore all of these verses that hurt the pre-trib teaching.
One major problem is Judah is just one tribe so even if God never fuflilled His CONDITIONAL promise to them, they would only get 1/12th of the land today, not all of Israel, most of Jordan and parts of two other nations. This is a major theological problem. Joshua and 1st Kings said God already kept his promise and gave them all the land in three passages. It was fulfilled.
2Th 2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
they thought the LAST antichrist was going to arise during their time or the warning would not have gone out at that time in this epistle. They did have their antichrist Caesar Nero which did add up to 666.
2Th 2:6 And now ye know what (what do you think this what is?) withholdeth (holds back) that he (the antichrist) might be revealed in his time.
The Holy Spirit is not a WHAT. I personally think this WHAT is the Holy Spirit's "restraining power". I can't say this 100% for sure but it makes sense. Your thoughts?
On Daniel 9:27, the "he" - do you know what an antecedent is?
Hi Chris, I agree with all of that. There is one gospel forever. Many pre-trib teachers hold to grace and law during what they would call the enxt dispensation. Most pre-tribbers that hold to pre-trib never give this much thought. But that is what many teachers teach. One fo the biggest propagators, C.I. Scofield was one fo them.
On the Holy Spirit, He will never be absent or no one could be saved and no miracles could happen with the two witnesses as it is through the Holy Spirit that all miracles are performed. I site 1st Corinthians.
1Co_12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
1Co_12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
1Co_12:9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
The Holy Spirit may allow or lift His hand back to some degree to allow the antichrist to arise but the antichrist still can only do what the Holy Spirit allows.
i think you are thinking of this verse which i will send in next comment.
THE RESTRAINER aka The Holy Spirit on Genesis 10 - 3 years ago
By Mishael
2 Thessalonians 2:7, I believe the Restrainer is none other than the Holy Spirit, or we could say the Holy Spirit working through the New Testament Born again church.
Supporting the idea that the Holy Spirit within the church is the Restrainer, is the fact that the restrainer is referenced both as a thing, and as a person, HE.
Also, the power delaying Satan's masterplan, to unveil his false messiah; must be of God. It makes much more sense to say that the Holy Spirit is curbing the devil, than a political entity or even an angel. The Holy Spirit of God is the only Person with sufficient (supernatural) power to do this restraining. He co-created with God and the Word of God, at creation.
Of course, the Spirit works through born again believers to accomplish this. The church, indwelt by the Spirit of God, has always been part of what holds society back from the swelling tide of lawless living.
At some point, Paul says, the Spirit will STEP ASIDE from His restraining work, allowing sin to have dominion over mankind.
Second Thessalonians 2:7 can be literally rendered, "The secret of lawlessness is already working, only it cannot be revealed until HE WHO NOW WITHHOLDS, disappears "from the midst." I believe this "disappearing from the midst" will happen at the time the church leaves the earth at the Caught Up (rapture) in the clouds to Jesus.
The Holy Spirit will still be present in the earth, of course, but He will be taken out of the way in the sense that His unique sin restraining ministry through God's born again people, will be removed.
There is a scripture that says our days are written down. I'll look for that tomorrow.
Stephen was being stoned on Sauls orders, and it is written that Stephen saw heaven opened and Jesus standing up; which means that Jesus was going to intervene. I believe he took Stephen up right then, by an Angel.
I think it happens. I can not make an assumption without knowing if this child had ever attended Church, or had been taught about right , wrong , sin, righteousness; Jesus.
People I know and pray for, still refuse to come to Christ. I still pray for them, but I cannot violate their right of free will.
The Bible says ALL of our tears are saved in a bottle. In heaven He will wipe the tears away personally. There will be no memories of tears or loss.
My nephew died in a fiery 18-wheeler accident; same age as my son. It didn't make me feel any better to know he died instantly. But I knew he was a Christian.
Take Jesus's Life and give Him yours. Just hang on and let Him have that ache in your heart; the anger and all the loss. Someday you will know the truth of that tragedy.
Alot of us are waiting for that day. I will lift you in prayer tonight.
This is where the Greek text gives clarification to the word good. In Matthew 19:16-17, it says And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
Now the word good in this verse is the Greek word AGATHOS. AGATHOS in English means good. But there are different Greek words for the term good.
This particular word AGATHOS is the good of God. It's the good that the Holy Spirit produces. When Jesus went about doing good, He didn't do KALOS, which is humanitarian good. He went around doing AGATHOS. That is, He was touching people's souls, their spirits.
When this man comes up to Jesus, he says, Good teacher. He didn't say KALOS, like we would use today if we were to say he or she is a good teacher.
This man is saying AGATHOS, good. What AGATHOS, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?
And He said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
So, in Verse 17, the first thing Jesus says to him is, why did you call me AGATHOS? There is none AGATHOS but one, and that is, God.
So Jesus is saying, do you realize you just called me God? Do you know why you called me that?
We see the word good in English and it means one thing to us which causes confusion because we know there are good people. However, in the Greek text, the word Agathos was used which can only be applied to the good of God. Human good is Kalos. But this man called Jesus Agathos. What I notice is that Jesus didn't correct this man and say you can't call me that. Why? Because Jesus is God. Jesus said there is none Agathos but God, and you just called me Agathos. This man knew exactly who Jesus was. What a great confession!
So, it seems that the word "he" is the critical word in verse 27, rather than the rest of that verse, as the substance of the verse can go either way if the "he" is not agreed on. With discussions I've had in the past, my mind, once securely closed, has opened to the possibility that "he" could indeed be referred to Jesus, but then I ask: is the "ceasing of the sacrifices/oblations" done by His Sacrifice or by the work of the Anti-Christ, seeing that the word "cause" implies a causative action rather than a resulting action?
Jesus didn't physically go out there & destroy their altars (there weren't any at that time), it was done by virtue of His Sacrifice negating its value & currency. But the one who would physically cause its cessation could be seen as the wicked one. Of course, we know that Israel has not restarted the sacrificial system even though it has been under pressure to do so, but it could well be that Anti-Christ's initial concessions to Israel, will include reinstalling the sacrificial system, that which he will later demand an end to. And, I did read your other good comments to this end, but as said, the debate on the "he" is not just because of my ignorance, but some very fine scholars who see it as Jesus & others, as Anti-Christ.
So, as much as I would like to read your other 'pages', I think that this verse 27 is the point of contention that has to be surmounted. As well, I'll be out of 'circulation' for a month as I will be travelling on holidays in remote areas of Australia (without phone/internet). Though Robert, rest assured, I do value your comments immensely & thank you for them, as they give me good things to 'chew' on & only the Lord can confirm these things to our hearts. I ever wait on Him for His Light & He does indeed use folk like you to help bring this about.
I began drafting a response to your previous comments yesterday, but got bogged down with trying to calculate the weeks (of years) in Daniel 9. I got up to the 62 weeks (crucifixion) but just couldn't get past that with the coming of Titus & the destruction. So, I will leave it at that as my time could better be spent on dwelling on other, clearer matters. Though, to comment on the following:
You: "But none of that is in the actual verse. it is being read into the verse. that is what a presupposition is."
Me: True, the Anti-Christ is not directly shown there in v 27, however, I understand that 2 Thes 2:3,4: "and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." This is the passage that is commonly referred to as a reference to the Daniel 9:27 prophecy about him.
Concerning the Covenant made in verse 27 (referring to your most recent comments):
I understand how this verse is understood when the "he" is seen as Jesus (i.e. it is Jesus Who confirms the Covenant (that which was first made in Genesis); it is Jesus through His Sacrifice that cancels out the need for sacrifices/oblations, etc.; & this will be the case until He returns).
Then looking at the same verse with 'other' eyes: i.e. it is Anti-Christ confirming the Covenant (for the 7 years) that he first makes with Israel so as to garner their support for his position & work of peace on their behalf; & after 3 1/2 yrs, he breaks his (the) covenant (= support/promises) & then proceeds to desecrate the Jewish temple (which we assume will be re-built again), put a stop to the sacrifices & in so doing sits in the temple as God demanding worship. And of course, the rest of that account is seen in his treatment of the Jews, his powers, obedience to him by all, death/martyrdom, etc.
5.Our opinions don't matter. The context of the passage is all about Jesus dying for sins and the destruction of the temple.
6.Why are people implying a "future peace treaty here" when it doesn't even teach that? They are reading in light of a presupposition they were taught as a young Christian or Bible College student like I was.
7.Why did all commentaries pre-1830 teach the 'he' here is the Messiah? We know that the Bible says many false doctrines would arise in the last days. We are here. This keeps people from preparing their hearts for persecution.
B. What would cause the sacrifices and oblations to cease?
1. Jesus' death as the FINAL AND ONLY LAMB of GOD that GOD WILL FOREVER ACCEPT, and He became the LAST HIGH PRIEST TOO. Caiphas lost his job that day. Everything he did at that point was meaningless and anyone in the future doing these things will be meaningless and incur the wrath of God. Look at what God sent in 70 AD and again in 363 AD.
2. Just because SOME of the Joos went back to sacrificing for 40 more years rejecting Jesus as the Messiah and rejecting atonement when God had enough, doesn't mean those sacrifices amounted to anything. They didn't. They were wasting their time. They even admitted in Yoma 39b in the Talmud that the scarlet wool never turned white again after 30 AD. So those next 40 years were totally meaningless when it came to sacrifices and oblations. God had mercy on them and gave them another 40 years on top of the 490 to repent and accept the Lord Jesus. I know I sent you all this before.
ME: "There are TWO princes mentioned in this passage. One is Titus (secular little prince) and the other Jesus the Messiah, the Prince of peace." (v26).
YOU: Yes, I do agree with you on that, but when we get to verse 27 & we see (A) "And he shall confirm the covenant with many", this is where divergent opinions arise on who "he" is. Some say that it speaks of Jesus, others, Anti-Christ. For those referring it to Jesus, I sought understanding as to His "confirming the Covenant FOR ONE WEEK (7 Years) & (B) causing the sacrifice & oblation to cease, etc." If it was Jesus, (C) how & when did this happen at His coming & His death, as all things continued the same way with the Jews? (D) If it referred to the "Prince that shall come", then it spoke about, either evil Titus at his coming in AD 70, or that spirit that was in him, to be revealed in the Anti-Christ.
ME: BREAKING IT DOWN. I think I did this for you before. You may have not read it.
A & B: CONFIRM THE COVENANT =
1.What covenant was promised to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:15?
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
2.What covenant came into being WHEN Jesus rose from the dead?
3.What covenant is constantly talked about throughout the whole New Testament and referred to in the Old Testament many times with Daniel 9:24-27 just being one of those times?
4.Why is the KJB the only one that calls it THE covenant? THE is a definitive article only meaning ONE of a kind ONE time. There has been many peace treaties over the centuries. More modern English translations have changed THE to A so they can encrypt pre-trib theology in by making it say more than one possibility. The NLT is so horrible it teaches pre-trib theology.
This is about 1/4th of my response and breaking it all down for you. I wish I could just send you the Word document so you can read it over and over. Blogs are nice but limited.
yOU: The Anti-Christ proponents say that the verse speaks of the Anti-Christ in position for 7 years, first coming as a peace-maker (confirming the covenant he makes to this end). In the midst of the week (3 years), he breaks that covenant, stopping all Jewish worship & his position on the 'throne' desecrates & makes the Temple an abomination.
ME: But none of that is in the actual verse. it is being read into the verse. that is what a presupposition is.
YOU: I agree that it is Jesus that is spoken about in vv 24,25. But when you look at the 'weeks' of years given in vv 24-27, we see that Jesus was already crucified (v 26) & Jerusalem destroyed by Titus in AD 70 (69 weeks). Then in v 27 "he confirms the covenant for 1 week (the remaining week from the 70 weeks)". How do you understand this in the light that Jesus was already crucified at the 62nd week?"
ME: 49 YEARS WERE ALREADY FULFILLED BEFORE THE next 62 were mentioned so that brings it to 69 weeks and then we have the AFTER in verse 26. Reread the passage.
Dan 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks (483 years upto Jesus' baptism in Jordan- His anointing) : the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times (the first 49 years or 7 weeks). + [plus]
Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeshall 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
the destruction of the temple happened 40 years after the 486 1/2 to 490 years were already fulfilled. I call that The Stay of Execution before God the Father brought judgment on Jerusalem FULFILLING mATTHEW CHAPTERS 20, 21, 22, AND 23. Remember Jesus saying to forgive 70 x 7=490. 490 years came to a close which an extra 40 years would have been extra grace.
I have a complicated question. My girlfriend was once married to a man, but they are now divorced. However, he already have a wife before her. She was forced married by her parent to be the second wife against her will. After married, she was abused and her ex-husband slept with other women. Eventually, he got caught abusing her and was put to jail. They both file for divorce. Now she's my girlfriend. I want to marry her but it's difficult. I understand that if a man divorces his wife makes him commit adultery and when he remarried. She was forced into a marriage and paid the price for it. Is she still bound to him for being the second wife? The first wife did not divorce with him. Also, will this still be considered committing adultery even though she was forced to be second wife? Am i considered someone who committed adultery? Can I marry her?
c. You: "So when someone says the Joos can be saved by grace and keeping the law during a future time period they are contradicting dozens of passages in both the old and new testaments."
Me: I heartily agree, as Grace & Faith are required for salvation today, there can't be a reversion back to either just the Law or a fusing of both. For those who will die until the Millenial rule of Christ, their destinies are either Heaven or Hell. For those still alive at Christ's reign & hear the Gospel preached ( Rev 14:6), it would still be the Gospel of Faith without the Law. And lest any think that this is a 'second chance Gospel' given for all, I sense that it is still the same Gospel sent to those living at that time, whereas those who rejected it earlier, perished because of their rejection of it. It seems that the validity of the Gospel is not based on a specific duration (i.e. a cut off time) but on its eternal value & offer to all living. And of course, where the Holy Spirit is absent there can't be conviction; but when Christ is present (Millenium), His Spirit goes to work. And the fact that it is preached today in all love & urgency as the Spirit still abides, is so that those who choose to reject it now & die, will never receive a second chance for eternal life, even though it remains valid.
The Anti-Christ proponents say that the verse speaks of the Anti-Christ in position for 7 years, first coming as a peace-maker (confirming the covenant he makes to this end). In the midst of the week (3 years), he breaks that covenant, stopping all Jewish worship & his position on the 'throne' desecrates & makes the Temple an abomination. Now I realize you are aware of the various ways to look at it, & even Carlos (I think) alerted me to the "he" in verse 27 as referring to Jesus. So, I'm well aware of both positions by taking off my 'pre-trib hat' & even admit that this understanding could be valid. And also, as you would know, there are many scholars who just can't fit the events of v 27 to anyone but the spirit of Satan. So that's where we're at: two opinions who firmly believe their understanding of this verse is correct.
b. You: "Isn't the chapter about Jesus confirming THE covenant (verses 24 and 25)? It's all about that. to make an end of sins, THE TESTATOR must die in order for the will or covenant to become in affect. All over Hebrews."
Me: I agree that it is Jesus that is spoken about in vv 24,25. But when you look at the 'weeks' of years given in vv 24-27, we see that Jesus was already crucified (v 26) & Jerusalem destroyed by Titus in AD 70 (69 weeks). Then in v 27 "he confirms the covenant for 1 week (the remaining week from the 70 weeks)". How do you understand this in the light that Jesus was already crucified at the 62nd week?
The Old Testament saints were saved the same as New Testament saints, by faith. Although they did not know who or how they were to be saved as we do on this side of Calvary, they put their faith in God to save them. They had faith in the savior to come as we have faith in the savior that came, Jesus Christ. Just read Hebrews 11 to see many of the Old Testament saints that are mentioned as having faith.
Before Christ rose from the grave, Old Testament saints were held in Abraham's bosom as mentioned in Luke 16:22 as their sins had not yet been paid for. After Christ's resurrection, the saints were taken to heaven with Christ. Their sins paid for the same as ours, by the sacrifice of Jesus.
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith (CHRIST IS OUR FAITH), preached before the GOSPEL unto Abraham, saying in thee shall all these nations be blessed.
Hebrews 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, AS WELL AS UNTO THEM: but the word (CHRIST) preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them (CHRIST IN THEM) that heard it.
The GOSPEL IS:
2 Timothy 1:10 But is now made manifest (Christ in the flesh) by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath ABOLISHED DEATH, and hath brought LIFE and IMMORTALITY to light through the gospel.
1 John 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil (alive to the flesh), for the devil sinneth from the beginning, For this purpose (gospel) the Son of Man was MANIFESTED, that he might destroy THE WORKS OF THE DEVIL.
This is the GOSPEL: You (seed of flesh) died on the cross with Christ and you (seed of Spirit) was RAISED with HIM.
The saints of old received this promise also at HIS RESURRECTION
Hebrews 11:39 And these all, having received a good report through faith, received not the promise (victory over sin and death) (CHRIST IN US):
Hebrews 11:49 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect (accomplished at Christ death and resurrection).
Matthew 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Matthew 27:53 And came out of the graves at HIS RESURRECTION, and went into the holy city (new Jerusalem), and appeared to many.
From Noah & his sons, all the Earth was repopulated after the Flood, which wiped out everyone. Even though most of those names might not mean much to us, it was important to Israel in understanding their roots & to historians who would be able to follow the generations which came from those names.
Ecclesiastes 7:17
also, I have a hard time finding your correspondence from the previous comment. I'm not very good with blogs I guess. I thought when you hit "reply" it would bring you to the last comment.
Jesus died in the middle of the 70th week or at 486 1/2 years because of the word AFTER in verse 26.
That leaves 3 1/2 years to be fulfilled. Here are three possibilities. I hold to #2.
1. The death of Stephen 3 1/2 years after Jesus died. This is a belief of the 7th Day ADventists but there is no way to prove his martyrdom historically or biblically on that time. But it is true the gospel really went to the Gentiles at that point so it might be true. Thta would ahve fulfilled the end of 70 weeks then.
2. the 3 1/2 years of the Great Revolt War starting in spring of 66AD and ending in fall of 70 AD. I hold to this one because part of the Daniel 9 prophecy has to do with the destruction fo the temple and historically it did last 3 1/2 years.
3. the 3 1/2 years mentioned in Revelation might be it but it doesn't make sense to me as there is nothing in the prophecy talking 2,000 years later & the temple being destroyed was part of the prophecy.
I am open to the other two possibilities but it is interesting that the Great Revolt lasted 3 1/2 years, fits the prophecy perfectly & is exactly 40 years AFTER the death of Jesus and 40 is the number for testing, trials, etc. I see God granting grace of an extra 40 years since the crucifixion of Jesus even though they were causing many Jewish Christians to be killed by themselves and stirring up government against the Christians as they do to this very day in America with the ADL, ACLU, SPC, and many other organizations that have been taking away our rights for several decades now. We are the persecuted ones. They are hated by many because of what they do and say about Gentiles in their writings. Ever read the Talmud at all? Jesus is called a bastardd and burning in hell in excrement forever just to name one thing they say about Him. 1/3 of the world is SHEMitic. They make up words.
Now, I realize that you've also given a fuller explanation of this & it is noted & appreciated. However, to fully appreciate both sides of understanding verse 27 (whether speaking of Jesus or Anti-Christ), we would need to understand "confirming the covenant", "for one week (7 years)", & a "ceasing & removal of the sacrifices & abominations". You've said that Jesus affirmed the promise through the Gospel (how so for 7 years?), the sacrifices/oblations ceased through His death & resurrection, & the desolation of the abominations at His Second Coming (I assume)."
me:
Remember what Daniel's prayer was. The answer from Gabriel was concerning HIS people (the Jews), the Messiah, and the destruction of the 2nd temple. The end of the Jewish age ended the 70th week.
Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon THY people and upon thy holy city,
Mat 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
Three different words for WORLD in Matthew 24 explains this. Also, THIS GENERATION shall not pass till ALL these things be in Matthew 23's prophecy. See the FULL futurists confuse this by thinking none of Matthew 24 happened. And the FULL preterist goes to far thinking all of it happened and that there isn't a double meaning with it.
We are all ONE people now. To divide up Jew and Gentile goes against the whole new covenant. Paul said WE are the temple. We are all ONE in Christ. The middle wall of perdition is gone. We have to ignore all of these verses that hurt the pre-trib teaching.
One major problem is Judah is just one tribe so even if God never fuflilled His CONDITIONAL promise to them, they would only get 1/12th of the land today, not all of Israel, most of Jordan and parts of two other nations. This is a major theological problem. Joshua and 1st Kings said God already kept his promise and gave them all the land in three passages. It was fulfilled.
2Th 2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
they thought the LAST antichrist was going to arise during their time or the warning would not have gone out at that time in this epistle. They did have their antichrist Caesar Nero which did add up to 666.
2Th 2:6 And now ye know what (what do you think this what is?) withholdeth (holds back) that he (the antichrist) might be revealed in his time.
The Holy Spirit is not a WHAT. I personally think this WHAT is the Holy Spirit's "restraining power". I can't say this 100% for sure but it makes sense. Your thoughts?
On Daniel 9:27, the "he" - do you know what an antecedent is?
On the Holy Spirit, He will never be absent or no one could be saved and no miracles could happen with the two witnesses as it is through the Holy Spirit that all miracles are performed. I site 1st Corinthians.
1Co_12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
1Co_12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
1Co_12:9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
The Holy Spirit may allow or lift His hand back to some degree to allow the antichrist to arise but the antichrist still can only do what the Holy Spirit allows.
i think you are thinking of this verse which i will send in next comment.
When you enter the website there is one box for words or phrases you recall;
Second box is to search a scripture
Tap the verse you want to read Comments on and it will highlight yellow. Scroll downward to open the Commentary on that
Scripture.
There's a link nearby that to read commentary on Memorable room comments which may help you. Already written comments.
There's a quickie Google Link to try and find scriptures you can't quite recall all of it. Very helpful!! You just back arrow to where you had been.
Pray for a few people in prayer requests? It is very rewarding to help others. Useful preaching like Jesus does.
Check out all the links in the red section. It has some great teaching for people who want to know what being born again means.
Down near the bottom of this screen is
1-100 pages of daily history from Community Rooms.
It's useful when you've been waiting on a question you want answers to.
Explore!! :D
2 Thessalonians 2:7, I believe the Restrainer is none other than the Holy Spirit, or we could say the Holy Spirit working through the New Testament Born again church.
Supporting the idea that the Holy Spirit within the church is the Restrainer, is the fact that the restrainer is referenced both as a thing, and as a person, HE.
Also, the power delaying Satan's masterplan, to unveil his false messiah; must be of God. It makes much more sense to say that the Holy Spirit is curbing the devil, than a political entity or even an angel. The Holy Spirit of God is the only Person with sufficient (supernatural) power to do this restraining. He co-created with God and the Word of God, at creation.
Of course, the Spirit works through born again believers to accomplish this. The church, indwelt by the Spirit of God, has always been part of what holds society back from the swelling tide of lawless living.
At some point, Paul says, the Spirit will STEP ASIDE from His restraining work, allowing sin to have dominion over mankind.
Second Thessalonians 2:7 can be literally rendered, "The secret of lawlessness is already working, only it cannot be revealed until HE WHO NOW WITHHOLDS, disappears "from the midst." I believe this "disappearing from the midst" will happen at the time the church leaves the earth at the Caught Up (rapture) in the clouds to Jesus.
The Holy Spirit will still be present in the earth, of course, but He will be taken out of the way in the sense that His unique sin restraining ministry through God's born again people, will be removed.
It's been done before. (see Genesis 6:3).
Stephen was being stoned on Sauls orders, and it is written that Stephen saw heaven opened and Jesus standing up; which means that Jesus was going to intervene. I believe he took Stephen up right then, by an Angel.
I think it happens. I can not make an assumption without knowing if this child had ever attended Church, or had been taught about right , wrong , sin, righteousness; Jesus.
People I know and pray for, still refuse to come to Christ. I still pray for them, but I cannot violate their right of free will.
The Bible says ALL of our tears are saved in a bottle. In heaven He will wipe the tears away personally. There will be no memories of tears or loss.
My nephew died in a fiery 18-wheeler accident; same age as my son. It didn't make me feel any better to know he died instantly. But I knew he was a Christian.
Take Jesus's Life and give Him yours. Just hang on and let Him have that ache in your heart; the anger and all the loss. Someday you will know the truth of that tragedy.
Alot of us are waiting for that day. I will lift you in prayer tonight.
This is where the Greek text gives clarification to the word good. In Matthew 19:16-17, it says And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
Now the word good in this verse is the Greek word AGATHOS. AGATHOS in English means good. But there are different Greek words for the term good.
This particular word AGATHOS is the good of God. It's the good that the Holy Spirit produces. When Jesus went about doing good, He didn't do KALOS, which is humanitarian good. He went around doing AGATHOS. That is, He was touching people's souls, their spirits.
When this man comes up to Jesus, he says, Good teacher. He didn't say KALOS, like we would use today if we were to say he or she is a good teacher.
This man is saying AGATHOS, good. What AGATHOS, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?
And He said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
So, in Verse 17, the first thing Jesus says to him is, why did you call me AGATHOS? There is none AGATHOS but one, and that is, God.
So Jesus is saying, do you realize you just called me God? Do you know why you called me that?
We see the word good in English and it means one thing to us which causes confusion because we know there are good people. However, in the Greek text, the word Agathos was used which can only be applied to the good of God. Human good is Kalos. But this man called Jesus Agathos. What I notice is that Jesus didn't correct this man and say you can't call me that. Why? Because Jesus is God. Jesus said there is none Agathos but God, and you just called me Agathos. This man knew exactly who Jesus was. What a great confession!
So, it seems that the word "he" is the critical word in verse 27, rather than the rest of that verse, as the substance of the verse can go either way if the "he" is not agreed on. With discussions I've had in the past, my mind, once securely closed, has opened to the possibility that "he" could indeed be referred to Jesus, but then I ask: is the "ceasing of the sacrifices/oblations" done by His Sacrifice or by the work of the Anti-Christ, seeing that the word "cause" implies a causative action rather than a resulting action?
Jesus didn't physically go out there & destroy their altars (there weren't any at that time), it was done by virtue of His Sacrifice negating its value & currency. But the one who would physically cause its cessation could be seen as the wicked one. Of course, we know that Israel has not restarted the sacrificial system even though it has been under pressure to do so, but it could well be that Anti-Christ's initial concessions to Israel, will include reinstalling the sacrificial system, that which he will later demand an end to. And, I did read your other good comments to this end, but as said, the debate on the "he" is not just because of my ignorance, but some very fine scholars who see it as Jesus & others, as Anti-Christ.
So, as much as I would like to read your other 'pages', I think that this verse 27 is the point of contention that has to be surmounted. As well, I'll be out of 'circulation' for a month as I will be travelling on holidays in remote areas of Australia (without phone/internet). Though Robert, rest assured, I do value your comments immensely & thank you for them, as they give me good things to 'chew' on & only the Lord can confirm these things to our hearts. I ever wait on Him for His Light & He does indeed use folk like you to help bring this about.
Robert,
I began drafting a response to your previous comments yesterday, but got bogged down with trying to calculate the weeks (of years) in Daniel 9. I got up to the 62 weeks (crucifixion) but just couldn't get past that with the coming of Titus & the destruction. So, I will leave it at that as my time could better be spent on dwelling on other, clearer matters. Though, to comment on the following:
You: "But none of that is in the actual verse. it is being read into the verse. that is what a presupposition is."
Me: True, the Anti-Christ is not directly shown there in v 27, however, I understand that 2 Thes 2:3,4: "and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." This is the passage that is commonly referred to as a reference to the Daniel 9:27 prophecy about him.
Concerning the Covenant made in verse 27 (referring to your most recent comments):
I understand how this verse is understood when the "he" is seen as Jesus (i.e. it is Jesus Who confirms the Covenant (that which was first made in Genesis); it is Jesus through His Sacrifice that cancels out the need for sacrifices/oblations, etc.; & this will be the case until He returns).
Then looking at the same verse with 'other' eyes: i.e. it is Anti-Christ confirming the Covenant (for the 7 years) that he first makes with Israel so as to garner their support for his position & work of peace on their behalf; & after 3 1/2 yrs, he breaks his (the) covenant (= support/promises) & then proceeds to desecrate the Jewish temple (which we assume will be re-built again), put a stop to the sacrifices & in so doing sits in the temple as God demanding worship. And of course, the rest of that account is seen in his treatment of the Jews, his powers, obedience to him by all, death/martyrdom, etc.
5.Our opinions don't matter. The context of the passage is all about Jesus dying for sins and the destruction of the temple.
6.Why are people implying a "future peace treaty here" when it doesn't even teach that? They are reading in light of a presupposition they were taught as a young Christian or Bible College student like I was.
7.Why did all commentaries pre-1830 teach the 'he' here is the Messiah? We know that the Bible says many false doctrines would arise in the last days. We are here. This keeps people from preparing their hearts for persecution.
B. What would cause the sacrifices and oblations to cease?
1. Jesus' death as the FINAL AND ONLY LAMB of GOD that GOD WILL FOREVER ACCEPT, and He became the LAST HIGH PRIEST TOO. Caiphas lost his job that day. Everything he did at that point was meaningless and anyone in the future doing these things will be meaningless and incur the wrath of God. Look at what God sent in 70 AD and again in 363 AD.
2. Just because SOME of the Joos went back to sacrificing for 40 more years rejecting Jesus as the Messiah and rejecting atonement when God had enough, doesn't mean those sacrifices amounted to anything. They didn't. They were wasting their time. They even admitted in Yoma 39b in the Talmud that the scarlet wool never turned white again after 30 AD. So those next 40 years were totally meaningless when it came to sacrifices and oblations. God had mercy on them and gave them another 40 years on top of the 490 to repent and accept the Lord Jesus. I know I sent you all this before.
Let me know if you want the rest.
YOU: Yes, I do agree with you on that, but when we get to verse 27 & we see (A) "And he shall confirm the covenant with many", this is where divergent opinions arise on who "he" is. Some say that it speaks of Jesus, others, Anti-Christ. For those referring it to Jesus, I sought understanding as to His "confirming the Covenant FOR ONE WEEK (7 Years) & (B) causing the sacrifice & oblation to cease, etc." If it was Jesus, (C) how & when did this happen at His coming & His death, as all things continued the same way with the Jews? (D) If it referred to the "Prince that shall come", then it spoke about, either evil Titus at his coming in AD 70, or that spirit that was in him, to be revealed in the Anti-Christ.
ME: BREAKING IT DOWN. I think I did this for you before. You may have not read it.
A & B: CONFIRM THE COVENANT =
1.What covenant was promised to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:15?
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
2.What covenant came into being WHEN Jesus rose from the dead?
3.What covenant is constantly talked about throughout the whole New Testament and referred to in the Old Testament many times with Daniel 9:24-27 just being one of those times?
4.Why is the KJB the only one that calls it THE covenant? THE is a definitive article only meaning ONE of a kind ONE time. There has been many peace treaties over the centuries. More modern English translations have changed THE to A so they can encrypt pre-trib theology in by making it say more than one possibility. The NLT is so horrible it teaches pre-trib theology.
This is about 1/4th of my response and breaking it all down for you. I wish I could just send you the Word document so you can read it over and over. Blogs are nice but limited.
Do they own a Bible? Do you see them read it? If you say we need to conserve moneydo they do it? Has any of her ex's stalked her; threatened her?
You need to date till you've answered many of these questions.
Read 1 Corinthians 7, the marriage chapter. If your Bible has center of each page columns, read those references too.
Certainly read 1 Corinthians 13
Selah means, pause, and think on these things.
ME: But none of that is in the actual verse. it is being read into the verse. that is what a presupposition is.
YOU: I agree that it is Jesus that is spoken about in vv 24,25. But when you look at the 'weeks' of years given in vv 24-27, we see that Jesus was already crucified (v 26) & Jerusalem destroyed by Titus in AD 70 (69 weeks). Then in v 27 "he confirms the covenant for 1 week (the remaining week from the 70 weeks)". How do you understand this in the light that Jesus was already crucified at the 62nd week?"
ME: 49 YEARS WERE ALREADY FULFILLED BEFORE THE next 62 were mentioned so that brings it to 69 weeks and then we have the AFTER in verse 26. Reread the passage.
Dan 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks (483 years upto Jesus' baptism in Jordan- His anointing) : the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times (the first 49 years or 7 weeks). + [plus]
Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeshall 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
the destruction of the temple happened 40 years after the 486 1/2 to 490 years were already fulfilled. I call that The Stay of Execution before God the Father brought judgment on Jerusalem FULFILLING mATTHEW CHAPTERS 20, 21, 22, AND 23. Remember Jesus saying to forgive 70 x 7=490. 490 years came to a close which an extra 40 years would have been extra grace.
c. You: "So when someone says the Joos can be saved by grace and keeping the law during a future time period they are contradicting dozens of passages in both the old and new testaments."
Me: I heartily agree, as Grace & Faith are required for salvation today, there can't be a reversion back to either just the Law or a fusing of both. For those who will die until the Millenial rule of Christ, their destinies are either Heaven or Hell. For those still alive at Christ's reign & hear the Gospel preached ( Rev 14:6), it would still be the Gospel of Faith without the Law. And lest any think that this is a 'second chance Gospel' given for all, I sense that it is still the same Gospel sent to those living at that time, whereas those who rejected it earlier, perished because of their rejection of it. It seems that the validity of the Gospel is not based on a specific duration (i.e. a cut off time) but on its eternal value & offer to all living. And of course, where the Holy Spirit is absent there can't be conviction; but when Christ is present (Millenium), His Spirit goes to work. And the fact that it is preached today in all love & urgency as the Spirit still abides, is so that those who choose to reject it now & die, will never receive a second chance for eternal life, even though it remains valid.
The Anti-Christ proponents say that the verse speaks of the Anti-Christ in position for 7 years, first coming as a peace-maker (confirming the covenant he makes to this end). In the midst of the week (3 years), he breaks that covenant, stopping all Jewish worship & his position on the 'throne' desecrates & makes the Temple an abomination. Now I realize you are aware of the various ways to look at it, & even Carlos (I think) alerted me to the "he" in verse 27 as referring to Jesus. So, I'm well aware of both positions by taking off my 'pre-trib hat' & even admit that this understanding could be valid. And also, as you would know, there are many scholars who just can't fit the events of v 27 to anyone but the spirit of Satan. So that's where we're at: two opinions who firmly believe their understanding of this verse is correct.
b. You: "Isn't the chapter about Jesus confirming THE covenant (verses 24 and 25)? It's all about that. to make an end of sins, THE TESTATOR must die in order for the will or covenant to become in affect. All over Hebrews."
Me: I agree that it is Jesus that is spoken about in vv 24,25. But when you look at the 'weeks' of years given in vv 24-27, we see that Jesus was already crucified (v 26) & Jerusalem destroyed by Titus in AD 70 (69 weeks). Then in v 27 "he confirms the covenant for 1 week (the remaining week from the 70 weeks)". How do you understand this in the light that Jesus was already crucified at the 62nd week?