Senior Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


iamlamad last won the day on September 22 2014

iamlamad had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

691 Excellent

1 Follower

About iamlamad

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

266 profile views
  1. Thanks! I believe I will! I must give credit where credit is due: you were right in a way: I should have found only the PRESENT TENSE forms of this word. I repent of not doing that. The following are all the PRESENT TENSE forms of " erchomai " Luk 13:7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come G2064 seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? He came three years ago, He came two years ago, and this year he came....so this is a coming again and again, but for one person. Luk 19:13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come. G2064 In this story His coming will be a ONE TIME coming. Jhn 5:7 The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, G2064 another steppeth down before me. Perhaps he tried to come over and over in the past. So when He says, “while I am coming,” he is speaking of each individual coming. Jhn 8:14 Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, G2064 and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, G2064 and whither I go. He came from heaven ONCE. Jhn 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come G2064 again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. His coming will be once FOR the church, then once WITH the church. But in this context it is a SINGLE coming FOR the church. Jhn 14:18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come G2064 to you. His coming is a ONE TIME coming as shown in the day of Pentecost. Jhn 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come G2064 to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. He prayed to the Father many times. Jhn 17:13 And now come I G2064 to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves. He prayed to the Father many times. Jhn 21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, G2064 what is that to thee? follow thou me. This coming will be a ONE TIME coming as shown in Rev. 19 Jhn 21:23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, G2064 what is that to thee? This coming will be a ONE TIME coming as shown in Rev. 19 2Co 13:1 This is the third time I am coming G2064 to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. More than one coming. 1Ti 4:13 Till I come, G2064 give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine. He is speaking of His arriving there once. Many "I am coming" to the churches in Rev. 2 & 3. How many times will He come to each church? He is speaking of His coming once as in Rev. 19. Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come G2064 quickly. Amen. Even so, come, G2064 Lord Jesus. This probably refers to His coming FOR the saints. Case in point: in none of these examples do we find many people coming one at a time. Rev. 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; 13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? 14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Present tense " erchomai " in Greek Septuagint Zec 2: 10 Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord. This is clearly the Rev. 19 coming: and ONE TIME thing. Isa. 66:18 For I know their works and their thoughts: it shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory. The nations gather ONE time, then they die. Strongs definition of Greek Present Tense: “The present tense represents a simple statement of fact or reality viewed as occurring in actual time. In most cases this corresponds directly with the English present tense. Some phrases which might be rendered as past tense in English will often occur in the present tense in Greek. These are termed "historical presents," and such occurrences dramatize the event described as if the reader were there watching the event occur. Some English translations render such historical presents in the English past tense, while others permit the tense to remain in the present.” Case in point: the KJV rendered Erchomai in our verse in Rev. 7 as “which came.” It is a “historical presents” verb. I disagree with your take on this verse: John did not see people coming one by one: he saw the entire crowd there around the throne. I am convinced he used the “historical present” sense because he was there seeing this great crowd. From NASB: “In regard to the use in Greek of the historical present, the Board recognized that in some contexts the present tense seems more unexpected and unjustified to the En­glish reader than a past tense would have been. But Greek authors frequently used the present tense for the sake of heightened vividness by transporting their readers in im­agination to the actual scene at the time of occurrence. “ (Emphasis added) From a Greek scholar: Dr. Maurice Robinson: “The historical present is merely a stylistic literary device used in Koine Greek to heighten the dramatic impact of the narrative by placing the reader in a “you are there” type of framework. In English, the more usual style requires use of the past tense wherever the Greek might use the historical present, and English, translating the Greek as past tense in such situations, is *not* inaccurate nor does it have any actual effect upon exegesis or interpretation beyond someone merely noting the heightened dramatic form of expression.” Now, do any of the different translators translate this verse as a one time event that is past tense? New International Version I answered, "Sir, you know." And he said, "These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Berean Study Bible "Sir," I answered, "you know." So he replied, "These are the ones who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Douay-Rheims Bible And I said to him: My Lord, thou knowest. And he said to me: These are they who are come out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and have made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Weymouth New Testament "My lord, you know," I replied. "They are those," he said, "who have just passed through the great distress, and have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Wycliff bible: And Y seide to hym, My lord, thou woost. And he seide to me, These ben thei, that camen fro greet tribulacioun, and waischiden her stoolis, and maden hem white in the blood of the lomb. Tyndale: And I sayde vnto him: lorde thou wottest. And he sayde vnto me: these are they which cam oute of gret tribulacion and made their garmetes large and made them whyte in the bloud of the lambe: Coverdale: And I sayde vnto him: LORDE thou wotest. And he sayde vnto me: these are they which cam out of gret tribulacion, and made their garmentes large, and made the whyte in the bloude of the lambe: Bishop’s bible: And he sayde vnto hym, Lorde thou wotest. And he sayde to me: These are they which came out of great tribulation, and haue wasshed their long robes, and made them whyte by the blood of the lambe Geneva Bible: And I saide vnto him, Lorde, thou knowest. And he saide to me, These are they, which came out of great tribulation, and haue washed their long robes, and haue made their long robes white in the blood of the Lambe. Mace New Testament: my Lord, answer'd I, you can tell. and he said to me, these are they who came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the lamb. Peshitta - Lamsa Translation: And I said to him, My LORD, you know. And he said to me, These are those who came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Are there any commentaries that render this as past tense? Jamieson-Fausset-Brown came—rather as Greek, "come"; implying that they are just come. Conclusion? It seems you are no closer to proving these are coming one by one. This present tense form of "erchomai " can mean exactly what I have been saying: they JUST ARRIVED in heaven as a group. Some commentaries are on your side of this discussion, but at least one on my side. However, there are 12 translations I found that render this as a past tense event. It seems one must decide from the context.
  2. Thanks. you brought another proof text to mind: Genesis 29:20 So Jacob served seven years to get Rachel, but they seemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her. HOW many years was "Jacob's trouble?" It was seven more years he was tricked into serving. NOT 3 1/2, but 7.
  3. How many times must I show you how much you are in error here? Did it just go right over your head? Ah! It is those pesky preconceived glasses again! Take them off and READ: Mat 2:11 And when they were come G2064 into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh. Where is the "continual" coming? It is not here. Your theory is simply not truth. Mat 2:21 And he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came G2064 into the land of Israel. Where is the "continual" coming? Your theory is only a theory and a false one at that. Mat 2:23 And he came G2064 and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. Where is the "continual" coming? It is not found because your theory is false. Mat 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting G2064 upon him: Where is the "continual" coming? The Holy Spirit came ONCE and stayed. Mat 4:13 And leaving Nazareth, he came G2064 and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim: Where is the "continual" coming? It is only a figment of your imagination. I am confident you will never admit to being wrong. Mar 5:1 And they came over G2064 unto the other side of the sea, into the country of the Gadarenes. Where is the "continual" coming? There was ONE trip to the other side at this time. Luk 1:59 And it came to pass, that on the eighth day they came G2064 to circumcise the child; and they called him Zacharias, after the name of his father. Where is the "continual" coming? It is not to be found in this verse! Where did your theory come from? Imagination? Act 14:24 And after they had passed throughout Pisidia, they came G2064 to Pamphylia. Where is the "continual" coming? This is only ONE coming. Your theory is simply faulty. It was my intent to show a verse from every book in the New Testament. There are over 600 uses, so that would not be a problem at all. If we could attach any other meaning to this word, it would be that it just happened - it is not a coming from sometime back in history. So once again your theory fails: this group seen around the throne is the just raptured church: they were NOT THERE in chapters 4 & 5. They JUST ARRIVED. And they did NOT "continaully" arrive. Now, if you mention this again, I will quote a verse from every book in the New testament showing this Greek word can be used for a SINGLE coming: one that just happened.
  4. Sorry, that was suppose to be Daniel. Don't get your hopes up: the very reason we are in disagreement is because there is so few verses telling us anything about this subject. The 70th week is marked with 7's: the 7th seal opens the 70th week, the 7th trumpet marks the midpoint and the 7th vial ends it. Don't disagree with this, or you will be wrong!
  5. inchrist wrote, Again you can not take the crucifixion out the 490 and place it in its own timing as the crucifixion begins daniel 9:24 to bring in, to put, to seal up.... Why not? Only your theory says so. Back to basics: All Daniel told us is that Christ was cut off sometime after the 69th week. He did not say or even infer that the cutting off was inside the 70th week. In fact, John does not mention the 70th until a new verse with a new subject: a 7 year covenant to fulfill the 70th week.
  6. inchrist wrote, d 5 hours ago · Report post I see the problem here....you think Daniel 9:27 "break" in the negative sense.....again this is your opinion being forced onto Daniel. You stated Christ does not break covenants in reference to Daniel 9:27. I showed you, God does and used Christ to break a covenant....understand im not using a negative connotation here of placing God in breach of contract. I thought I explained that.....Your Job is to show "breakin" the COVENANT in D.9:27 is in the negative connotation. Which you failing at. You see a problem where there isn't one. And where you don't see one, you have a big one. When I was talking about God and covenants, I was talking about the OLD COVENANT, not anything in 9:27. Of course this will go right over your head, because you believe the 70th week in verse 27 is just a continuation of the 69th week with no gap between weeks. But let's take about verse 27: You imagine this 70th week is just a continuation of the 69th and that Christ was killed at the 3.5 year mark, leaving the 3.5 years left to happen in our future. You have two insurmountable problems that you just ignore. 1. The sacrifices did not stop, when all translations tell us they WILL stop at the 3.5 year mark. Jesus made them useless, but He certainly did not stop them in 32 or 33 AD. 2. What is it actually that stops the sacrifices? You imagine that it was Christ's death! Yet, the day after, the sacrifices went on as if nothing happened, showing us your theory is faulty. I believe it is the man of sin entering the temple that will cause the sacrifices to end. The devil has no new tricks: he is going to repeat what he has done in the past. The beast of Rev. will end up doing just what Antiochus did: and place an image in the most holy place (after he walks in and declares he is God.) I guess you know, this Beast to come will also copy Nebuchadnezzar and force people to worship an image: again, no new tricks. 3. Your theory fails in another way: if a week is to be divided, the entire week must be present to be divided. It is impossible to divide a half week and end up with a half week. But somehow you imagine it! I agree, it was a GOOD thing when Christ ended the Old and began the New. I just don't think verse 27 is about this at all. Can you come up with some logical theory as to WHY Jesus would created a 7 year covenant? And WHEN? After His death? Before His death? Was this covenant made at the end of the 69th week and before He was cut off? What was His purpose? To start the Daily Sacrifices again?
  7. I was not trying to pigeon-hole you. Let's take a look: Matthew 24: Tell us, when shall these things be? (The temple being destroyed) ...what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? Jesus spent many verses in this portion of His narrative. This portion of His narrative was and is about church history: In some ways it parallels the first 5 seals that are also church age: 4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. 6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows. 9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. 10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. 13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. Verse 13 is the first mention of "the end." From verse 15 on, Jesus is talking about the end of the age: 15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) ... 42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. :-) I am happy to know, you are not a preterist. " most of it was directed to His immediate future in and around 70 A.D" I still disagree. By the way, that was a great bible study you did! Thanks. Notice that Luke's account spells out that (c) Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) would be surrounded by armies and that it's ruin would be imminent! It is VERY possible that when Luke mentions armies surrounding Jerusalem, that that also is FUTURE prophecy, and just happened (on purpose) to fit what happened in 70 AD, thereby causing the Christians to escape the city. For the most part, all the gospels say about the same thing for the Olivet Discourse except for that portion in Luke. God has said He will bring the nations of the world Against Israel and Jerusalem. Nathan, the 15 year old boy in Israel that went to heaven for a short time, and saw the end of this age while there, said there were 70 nations that came against Israel. I am convinced, the city will be taken again and burned, as is written. But Christ will touch down and make a way of escape for the Jews captured there. One does NOT have to fall prey to the opinion that an idol has to be set up in the Temple, any more than one has to understand this to be some future event! Hmmm. Yet, this is exactly what Paul tells us! The man of sin will enter the Holy of Holies in the temple and declare he is God! That will be an abomination. And that will STOP the daily Sacrifices. Since they have not been started yet, since 70 AD, we should conclude this is FUTURE.
  8. It is interesting to note that the False Prophet cannot do miracles UNLESS he is in close proximity to the Beast. This tells me that Satan will have possessed the Beast.
  9. Make no mistake, He IS the Author!
  10. Inchrist wrote, Yes God ended it, so well done for getting to that point....but he ended it with His instrument Called Jesus Christ. What part of zech 11:10 with Daniel 9:24 - 27 are you battling with? Zechariah 11:10 "And I took my staff, even Beauty, and cut it asunder, that I might break my covenant which I had made with all the people." See what this is.....its GODs PERSPECTIVE...THE ONLY PERSPECTIVE. WHY did God end it? Because He is a God that breaks covenants? No, because Israel NEVER KEPT IT. Israel is who broke it first. God divorced Israel (Jer. 3:8) And then the presence of God left the Holy of Holies, left the temple, then left the city. (Ezekiel 9-11) How amazing they kept right one with their daily sacrifices as if nothing happened. Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. So was the law was over when Christ came? I think John the Baptist was the "bridge" between the Old Covenant and the New. But the New could not begin until the Death of Christ. So Christ on earth was a dispensation we could call, the "dispensation of Immanuel." After Christ died, His blood was what the New Covenant was based on. So the New covenant began when Christ rose from the dead: as the testator of His own will and testament. Since the 70th week of Daniel is future, then the Law is not entirely over. Matthew 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Daniel does not speak of Christ's resurrection - only His death. 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. It seems Daniel starts a new though with verse 27. It is set apart from verse 26. Now we know that is a gap between the two. Daniel put in there, led by the Holy Spirit.
  11. In a way, yes, but He used Daniel to write it 2000 + years before the fact.
  12. What did Jesus say? Matthew 24 14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. 15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) 16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: So when those living in Judea SEE the abomination, they are to flee into the wilderness. I wonder, could we find another verse of them fleeing? Rev. 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days. Wow! Jesus said it, and now we see it being fulfilled. It goes without saying that they have just seen the abomination! Who is "the woman" in this verse? According to Jesus, those living in Judea. And in context, the woman is Israel, from which our Messiah came. Now, where in John's narrative did they flee? We have five keys here showing us that John is at the midpoint of the week. 11:1-2 tells us of the man if sin just arriving in Jerusalem, perhaps 3 1/2 days before the abomination that divides of the week. His armies (Gentiles) will trample the city for 42 months. OF COURSE this 42 months is the last half of Daniel's 70th week. This count will begin days before the exact midpoint and go to the 7th vial that ends the week. 11:3 tells us the two witnesses suddenly show up and begin their testimony which is to last 1260 days. They show up just 3 1/2 days before the abomination that divides the week. OF COURSE this 1260 days is the last half of Daniel's 70th week. This count will begin days before the exact midpoint and go to just 3 1/2 days BEFORE the 7th vial that ends the week. 12:6 tells us of the fleeing. Of course this 1260 days will be the last half of the week, and will go to the 7th vial that ends the week. 12:14 tells us those that fled will be fed and protected for 3 1/2 years in the wilderness. OF COURSE this 3 1/2 years is the last half of Daniel's 70th week. This count will begin just after the exact midpoint and go to the 7th vial that ends the week. 13:6 tells us the Beast will have his authority for 42 months. This count also will begin shortly after the exact midpoint and go to the time Christ returns. Therefore, we see the fleeing, 12:6, comes in the middle of the other counts, showing us that they flee right at the midpoint of the week. Now, could we find a verse that speaks of something that divides the week into two halves? Dan. 9: 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 The word "Midst" is translated from the Hebrew word " chetsiy ." חֵצִי chêtsîy, khay-tsee'; from H2673; the half or middle:—half, middle, mid(-night), midst, part, two parts. So Daniel is telling us that something that will cause the sacrifices to stop, will also divide the week into two equal parts. This something is a HE. Actually, Paul tells us of an abomination that will stop the daily sacrifices: 2 Thes. 2: 4 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 would fit with what Daniel wrote perfectly: when this man, NOT the High Priest, enters the Most Holy Place in the temple, it will be an abomination! And at this moment, those living in Judea that KNOW Jesus' words, will flee. Is it possible this "he" is also Daniel's "he?" I think it is very likely! If we back up from Rev. 6:2, the fleeing, and look for some significant event in Revelation, we come to the 7th Trumpet. I believe the 7th Trumpet will sound in heaven to MARK the very moment the man of sin will enter the temple and declare he is God. Therefore, the 7th trumpet will mark the exact midpoint of the week. With the midpoint marked for us, it is easy to see that the first 6 trumpet judgments will come in the first half of the week. And the vials in the last half of the week. In fact, God marked the entire 70th week for us using the 7's: the 7th seal marks the beginning of the week, and the 7th vial ends the week. It us just common sense: if I am to divide an apple in half, I must first have a WHOLE apple. For an abomination to divide the week, one MUST have the entire week. And that is exactly what we see in Revelation: 7th seal - 7th Trumpet - 7th vial: the entire week clearly laid out.
  13. This is theory that you insist on teaching, but cannot be backed up with scripture. The sacrifices DID NOT STOP! Therefore your theory on "he will put an end to sacrifice and offering" is simply wrong, but you will not admit it. Obviously Daniel is speaking of something else. What does Daniel 12 tell us? That when the sacrifices are stopped, the abomination is set up. These two go together.
  14. It is a theory, and a theory that will not stand up to scripture. The PURPOSE of "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..." Was so the Jews would know WHEN their Messiah would come. And in fact, HE DID come at the right time and fulfilled this part of the prophecy. So FROM a point in time, TO a point in time, Christ was to show up. It is a very simple concept. The "anointing" did not stop this time count, TIME stopped it. 173,880 days stopped this count. Then Daniel said, AFTER He arrives, He will be cut off. And that is exactly what happened. You imagine this infers some time into the 70th week, yet Daniel did not. He does not begin the 70th week until the next verse. In truth, His death was BETWEEN the 69th week and the 70th week with a GAP. "you have to physically remove the crucifixion completely out of the seventy sevens or 490, it then is not part of the time frame" So? Can you find a scripture that will PROVE His death must in included in the 70th week? I just take scripture as it is written, and don't try to force some theory to fit. The truth is, the sacrifices did not stop, proving your theory false. And the book of Revelation shows us the ENTIRE WEEK. Finally, show us just ONE VERSE in the gospels that shows us His ministry was exactly 1260 days. Next, demonstrate to us how you can divide a week in half when you only have a half week to work with. Make no mistake here: it is an abomination that stops the sacrifices and divides the week. Again, your imagination is running wild! There is simply NO WAY for you to know that when Jesus said, "my time is not yet come" that He was thinking of Daniel. After all, He said Himself that He never spoke unless He hear the Father speak first. Therefore, He knew about time from the Father. There is NO NEED to stretch scripture! There is no need to imagine things that cannot be proven. You still have not solved the very first problem with your theory: The sacrifices DID NOT STOP: proving your theory false. Yet, you have spent days trying to prove a theory that cannot be proven, for it does not fit the written word.