Jump to content

WilliamL

Diamond Member
  • Content Count

    2,012
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

WilliamL last won the day on March 1 2016

WilliamL had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,914 Excellent

5 Followers

About WilliamL

  • Rank
    Diamond Member
  • Birthday 09/01/1950

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sangre de Cristo Mts. CO
  • Interests
    Four Corners, Rocky Mountains
    States of the Cross
    Tierra de la Cruz

Recent Profile Visitors

3,839 profile views
  1. I would say a similar event, certainly not the same one. Note that if you read a little further in Rev. 12, you will find out who is to be at least partially responsible for the casting down of the rebellious angels of heaven: Rev. 12:10 Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, “Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down. 11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death." The "our brethren" with this power are those first mentioned in verse 5: She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. And her Child was caught up to God and His throne. -- whom Jesus had described previously in Rev. 2:26-27: “And the one overcoming, and keeping My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations— ‘He shall rule them with a rod of iron; They shall be dashed to pieces like the potter’s vessels’— as I also have received from My Father. One cannot have power over the nations without first having authority over the angelic Powers that rule over those nations: 1 Corinthians 6:3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels?
  2. Answered in the first of the two Daniel 8 posts, listed above: Daniel 8:10 And he became great unto the host of the heavens, and caused to fall [Hiphil] earthward some from the host and from the stars, and trampled them. 11 And he was made great [Hiphil] unto the sar/chief of the host… 25 “…and he shall stand against the sar-sarim/chief one of chief ones…” Antiochus took the titular name Epiphanes, which literally means “Over-Shining One,” or more generally “Manifestation (of Godhood).” To dispel any doubt, he minted coins carrying his portrait along with the words Theos Epiphanes: “God Manifest.” He was thoroughly possessed by a heavenly sar/chief one/Power. And, as such, felt empowered to contest for preeminence over the Land of Israel and the Jerusalem Temple with the sar-sarim of heaven. Some have supposed that one to be Onias III, the pious Jewish High Priest. Others have presumed him to be the pre-incarnate Christ. But in Daniel 10:13 and 12:1, the pre-incarnate Christ tells us that “the אחד/first/foremost of the ancestral sarim” [Heb. אַחַד הַשָּׂרִים הָרִאשֹׁנִים] is the archangel Michael, who is “the great sar, the one standing over your people [Israel].” See also Daniel 10:21, Revelation 12:7, Jude 9, and Joshua 5:14. When a man is thoroughly possessed by one of the angelic Powers, he has that power to call upon to contest with other angelic powers. Just as we do when we are operating by the power of the Holy Spirit. Just as the Son of Perdition will have in the future: 2 Thes. 2:9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders... Yes, Antiochus "died from disease" -- he was "broken without hand," just as Daniel 8:25 prophesied.
  3. I would like to suggest that you post this on your blog. Especially if your blog is to remain dormant, because then this will appear at the top of the list. That would make this post available for view for a long time, without it continually being buried by new topics.
  4. The view that Daniel 8 pertains to the End Times is another common misconception, based largely upon bad translations of some of the significant passages of that chapter. Case in point, the two mentions of "the time of the end" highlighted above. The Hebrew actually reads, "at a time of an end..." I dissect this chapter in some detail, showing the literal Hebrew text, in a two articles beginning here: https://www.worthychristianforums.com/blogs/entry/1575-daniel-924-27-examined-part-2-daniel-8ʼs-original-vision-of-“the-pesharebellion”-of-the-jews/ Here is an extensive passage from the relevant part of the second article: Daniel 8:17 …כִּי/because לְעֶת־/for a time of קֵץ/ an end [is] הֶחָזֹֽון/the vision/revelation. “…because the vision is for a time of an end.” – not “the time of the end,” as this is generally mistranslated. (There is no ה/“the” before קץ.) That interpretation has imposed within it the presumption that there is only one time when there will be an end. But other prophetic, already-fulfilled times, ends, and time-of-end passages can be seen in Ezekiel 7:2-12 and 21:25, 29 (the latter verses generally mistranslated). Daniel 8:19 …אֲשֶׁר־/what יִהְיֶה/shall happen בְּאַחֲרִית/in the latter (part/time) of הַזָּעַם/the fury/rage, כִּי/because [it is] לְמֹועֵד/for an appointed time קֵֽץ/of an end. “…what shall happen in the latter part of the fury, because it is for an appointed time of an end.” Again, the Hebrew does not say, as this is generally mistranslated, “at the appointed time (shall be) the end.” Like with verse 17, nothing of this event relates to our day either. To give a similar example, Daniel 11:29 prophesies “at the appointed time he [Antiochus] shall return and go toward the south,” but that “appointed time” prophecy was fulfilled in 168 B.C. Daniel 8:23 וּֽבְאַחֲרִית/And in the latter (part/time) מַלְכוּתָם/of malkutham/their kingdom, כְּהָתֵם/while bringing to fullness [Hiphil Infin. with prefixכ: “while, when”] הַפֹּשְׁעִים/the transgressing/rebelling ones [Qal Active Participle, plural], מֶלֶךְ/a king יַעֲמֹד/shall arise… “And in the latter part of their kingdom, while the rebelling ones/transgressors are bringing to fullness their apostasy, a king shall arise…” These three verses, 8:17, 19, 23, are where translators and commentators often go astray, imposing words and understanding not expressed in the Hebrew. In these and similar Hebrew prophetic texts, a common default presumption of translators has been that every “time of an end,” “Day of the LORD,” and “latter day/time” must refer to the end of OUR age. This is not true at all: there have been many “ends” of kingdoms and eras prophesied that have already come to pass. For example: Jeremiah 46:2 Against Egypt. Concerning the army of Pharaoh Necho, King of Egypt, which was by the River Euphrates in Carchemish, which Nebuchadrezzar King of Babylon smote in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah. … 10 For this is the Day of the Lord GOD of hosts, a day of vengeance… This historically-famous “Day of the LORD” battle took place in 610 B.C. Other fulfilled Day of the LORD prophecies include Joel 1:15 (but not Joel 2-3), and Ezekiel 7:19 and 13:5. The final “end”/Day of the LORD/last of the last days does not come until the end of the 7th Millennium, “when He [Christ] delivers the kingdom to God the Father…[having] put an end to all rule and all authority and power.” 1 Cor. 15:24 Daniel 8:23 defines the very era of the 2300-day abasement of Jerusalemʼs Temple: “in the latter part/time of their [the Greek] kingdom.” By 168 B.C., only the significantly-diminished Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms remained out of Alexanderʼs once vast empire. Therefore, the “fierce king” and ha-poshim/“the rebelling ones” of verse 23 can only be Antiochus Epiphanes and the Jewish apostates, respectively. All of the verses from 8:23-28 prophesy about the qualities and acts of Antiochus: they do not prophesy about OUR times.
  5. One key thing in all of this is that the AoD was mentioned (for the final and last time in prophecy) way back in verse 31. Actually, the final mention of the Abomination of Desolation, and the only End Time prophecy of that event in Daniel, is found in 12:11 -- Standard translation of Daniel 12:11-12 11 And from the time that the daily/continual service shall be taken away, and an abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be 1290 days. 12 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the 1335 days. Literal translation of Daniel 12:11-12 11 And from the time the daily/continual service has been caused to be taken away, and/even to the placing of an abomination of desolation: 1290 days. 12 Blessed/happy is the one who earnestly waits, and comes/attains to 1335 days. For those of you who think any of the events mentioned in Daniel 11 before verse 40 is yet future, you need to do more homework. All of those events are historical, as has been shown by many historians of the era of the Greek Empire. Seleucid King Antiochus Epiphanes IV fulfilled everything from 11:21-35. The abomination of desolation committed by him, mentioned in 11:31, took place in 168 B.C. For those who might be interested, I have a 5-part series of articles on my blog called Antiochus Epiphanes and the End Times, which starts here: https://www.worthychristianforums.com/blogs/entry/1411-antiochus-epiphanes-and-the-end-times-part-1-the-history/
  6. Index and summaries of all articles is here: https://www.worthychristianforums.com/blogs/entry/1403-index-and-summaries-of-articles/ Daniel 9:24-27 Examined, Part 6: Do Verses 26b-27 Prophesy Future Events? Daniel 9:26b “…and people of a leader/commander, the one coming in, he shall cause to destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end shall be with a flood of attackers, and unto an end of battle/warfare, desolations being decreed. 27 And he shall cause to prevail/confirm (or, shall make strong) a covenant for the multitude one week; and in the midst/middle of the week, he shall cause to cease blood sacrifice and offering. And upon/over a wing/corner shall be abominations/idols of a destroyer, even until a (the) consummation/complete end so having been decreed shall be poured out upon a desolator.” These verses speak about a number of very specific events, and three specific people. An itemization: 1) A commander of a military force shall cause his army to destroy both Jerusalem and its Sanctuary. 2) That commander shall come/go in – in context, into the Land of Israel. 3) The Sanctuary shall be overwhelmed by a flood of attackers. 4) The commander shall cause his people to make or confirm some kind of covenant with a multitude of the people of Israel for seven years. 5) Either approximately or exactly (the Hebrew text allows for either) in the middle of the seven years, the commander shall be the cause of an end to blood sacrifice and other offerings. 6) “An intensive desolator” = “a destroyer” shall commit abominations, and/or bring idols over or upon a wing/corner of the Temple. Nothing indicates that this destroyer is the commander 7) That idolatry shall continue until a complete end, one having been decreed or determined at some point, shall be “poured out upon a desolator.” This water metaphor “poured out” hearkens back to verse 26ʼs words “its [the Sanctuaryʼs] end shall be with a flood.” Likewise, the ʻdecreed endʼ of verse 27 likely refers back to the ʻdecreed desolationsʼ of verse 26, at least in part. * * * Most American commentators say that all of these events shall be fulfilled by “the Antichrist” sometime in the future. However, the secondary scriptures that they provide to actually support their assertions are few, and questionable at best. Instead, their arguments rely on a great deal of unsupported presumptions. Starting from the top of the list: 1) They can provide no scripture that prophesies the rebuilding of the Temple prior to the Second Coming of the Messiah. Also, they can provide no scripture that says Jerusalem will be destroyed in the End Times. (Damaged, yes; destroyed, no.) Daniel 9:24-27 makes no mention at all of “end times,” “latter days,” or any similar term that unequivocally points to the seven events being fulfilled in OUR Latter Days. 2) Daniel 11:40-45 does say that an End Time commander/leader, “the King of the North,” shall enter and occupy the Holy Land. But nothing in that passage speaks anything about a Temple – a notable omission, if one were to actually exist. 3) Likewise, nothing in that passage says anything about the Sanctuary being overwhelmed and destroyed. And the proponents of “the Antichrist” theory can provide no other scripture that says that either. 4) Neither can they provide any secondary scripture that prophesies a 7-year covenant in the End Times, or even mentions any such 7-year event. 5) Plenty of presumptions are offered that string together two 1260-day prophecies (of which there are a number), which theories purport to prove there is a 7-year period broken exactly in its middle when “the Antichrist” reneges on his covenant. But, like the witnesses that testified against Jesus at his trial, “their testimonies [do] not agree” with each other. Mark 14:56 Also, they can provide no secondary scripture that speaks about blood-sacrifice [זֶבַח] being resumed before the return of the Messiah. Daniel 12:11 does not use this term; 9:27 has its only use in Daniel. 6) They can provide no secondary prophecy about idol worship taking place somewhere on the edges/extremities of a Latter-Day Temple or Sanctuary. (Within such a sanctified place, yes: Matthew 24:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4. Outside of such place, no.) 7) There are scriptures that say the King of the North will “come to his end” in the End Times, as will 2 Thessalonians 2ʼs Son of Perdition, and also the Little Horn of Daniel 7. However, the context of Daniel 9:26b-27 indicates that “the one coming in” is a commander who causes an army of his people to overwhelm and pour out destruction on someone else who has already brought desolation. But nothing in the passage says anything at all about the commander himself being overcome. That, however, is what most proponents of “the Antichrist” theory claim to be the case. Summary Those that say Daniel 9:26b-27 prophesies future events concerning “the Antichrist” have no unequivocal evidence from other biblical texts which witness to an End Time fulfillment of 26b-27ʼs seven specific prophecies. What little they offer, mainly having to do with #7 above, is ambiguous and contradictory. So in sum, it is evident that this theory is based upon a great deal of speculation and presumption (sand), but lacks any solid scriptural foundation (rock). The next article will examine the view that Daniel 9:26b-27 was fulfilled historically.
  7. Daniel 11:40 “In a time of an end the king of the South shall attack him; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter the countries, overwhelm them, and pass through. 41 He shall also enter the Glorious Land, and many shall be overthrown; but these shall escape from his hand: Edom, Moab, and the prominent people of Ammon. 42 He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape. 43 He shall have power over the treasures of gold and silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; also the Libyans and Cushites shall follow at his heels. 44 But news from the east and the north shall trouble him; therefore he shall go out with great fury to destroy and annihilate many. 45 And he shall plant the tents of his pavilion between the seas and the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and no one will help him. 12:1 At that time Michael shall stand up, the great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, even to that time." -- the latter phrase in bold referring to the Great Tribulation. Whether you are pre-, mid-, or post-trib, all of the events leading up to verse 12:1 may well occur while you are still here. So the question is: what changes in the current global political scene do you think must take place first, before the events of 11:40 are likely to occur? (For one example, who would invade Egypt now, while el-Sisi is in power? Would he need to be overthrown first, in order to cause the King of the North to subdue a different government in Egypt?)
  8. Index and summaries of all articles is here: https://www.worthychristianforums.com/blogs/entry/1403-index-and-summaries-of-articles/ Daniel 9:24-27 Examined, Part 5: Verse 27 And now we come to what may be the most variously translated – and mistranslated – verse of the Bible, Daniel 9:27. To quote from Part 1: “The translatorʼs dilemma is compounded when he has no clear understanding of the doctrine or prophecy being expressed! In such cases, the interpretation often reflects the presumptions of the translator.” Well, a plethora of presumptions have been inserted into the various translations of verse 27. The translation below will strictly follow the rules of biblical Hebrew grammar. * * * וְהִגְבִּיר/And he shall cause to prevail/confirm; or, And he shall make strong [Hiphil Perfect 3ms with וְ/vav consecutive prefix] בְּרִית/a covenant לָרַבִּים/for the multitude שָׁבוּעַ/week אֶחָד/one… “And he shall cause to prevail/confirm (or, shall make strong) a covenant for the multitude one week…” Comment: A vav consecutive, also called a vav relative, is an unusual convention in Hebrew that changes a Perfect verb (completed action) into the effect of an Imperfect verb (incomplete action). They are commonly found, as here, at the beginning of a verse or phrase to continue a future tense sequence, the “consecutive,” the “relationship.” In this case, the narrative begins with the previous Hiphil Imperfect verb in verse 26, which is future tense: יַשְׁחִית/“he shall cause to destroy.” The narrative then continues in verse 27 with other future actions of the same “he.” The same man who is to cause the destruction of Jerusalem and Sanctuary also, as part of his actions, both causes [Hiphil] to confirm (or make) a covenant; and, as shown below, is the cause [Hiphil] of the cessation of blood sacrifices. “A covenant”: there is no ה/the before ברית/covenant. “The” multitude: there is a ה before רבים/multitude, subsumed within the preposition לָ; it is indicated by the Qamets vowel point [ ָ ] beneath it. * * * …וַחֲצִי/and the midst/middle of הַשָּׁבוּעַ/the week יַשְׁבִּית/he shall cause to cease [Hiphil Imperfect 3ms] זֶבַח/blood sacrifice וּמִנְחָה/and offering. … “…and in the midst/middle of the week, he shall cause to cease blood sacrifice and offering. …” Comment: “…the midst of the week” is an example of a Construct Chain, in which two or more consecutive nouns are connected with an “of.” When the latter noun is prefixed with a ה, as in this case, both (or multiple) nouns will carry the definite article in the translation: “the midst of the week.” The term חצי is sometimes used in a general sense: it cannot be presumed here to mean “exact middle,” i.e., 3½ years. Cf. Num. 32:33; Josh. 10:13; Ps. 102:24; Jer. 13:11. Note the third and final 3ms Hiphil verb in this future tense prophetic narrative. Because it is not prefixed by a vav consecutive, it reverts to the Imperfect. * * * …וְעַל/And upon/over כְּנַף/a wing/corner/border, שִׁקּוּצִים/abominable things/idols of מְשֹׁמֵם/one who destroys/a destroyer [Polel verb stem (like Piel: intensive) Active Participle ms]… “… And upon/over a wing/corner shall be abominations/idols of a destroyer…” Comment: All kinds of presumptions have been imposed by different translators upon this phrase. For example, עַל means “upon, over,” never “for” or “by.” (Compare what your Bible says.) כְּנַף is a noun here; this spelling is never a verb participle, as the KJV mistranslates it (“overspreading”). It has no prefix ה/the. שִׁקּוּצִים is plural, not singular. Although many people presume that this phraseשִׁקּוּצִים מְשֹׁמֵם/shiqqutzim məshomame is equivalent to the similar-sounding phrase שִׁקּוּץ שֹׁמֵם/shiqqutz shomame of Daniel 12:11, they are significantly different. Only the latter phrase fulfills the prophecy by Jesus about “the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet.” Matt. 24:15 Both shiqqutz and shomame are singular and lack the prefixה, so shomame can act as an attributive participle, thus as a modifier of shiqqutz: “a desolating abomination” = “an abomination of desolation.” In contrast, 9:27ʼs shiqqutzim is plural, while məshomame is singular, so cannot be its modifier: it has to be a noun, “destroyer.” (Attributive participles must agree in number – both being singular or plural; in gender – both being masculine or feminine; and in definiteness – both having or not having the definite articleה. See Part 4 for the three kinds of participles.) The NIVʼs “an abomination that causes desolation” utterly corrupts the meaning of the Hebrew text. The NIV rejects the Hebrew, following the Greek Septuagint, which grossly varies from the Hebrew text of the Book of Daniel. Contrary to the understanding of many people, the original Septuagint scholars did not translate anything beyond the Torah, the five books of Moses. Translations of the other Old Testament books were added later by unknown translators at unknown times. Those translations significantly varied in quality. * * * …וְעַל־/even until כָּלָה/a consummation/complete end וְנֶחֱרָצָה/so/even having been decreed/determined [Niphal Passive Participle fs with ו prefix] תִּתַּךְ/(it) shall be poured out [Qal Imperfect 3fs] עַל־/upon שֹׁמֵֽם/a desolating one/desolator [Qal Active Participle ms]. “…even until a (the) consummation/complete end so having been decreed shall be poured out upon a desolator.” Comment: Many have been confused by the two similar participles derived from the same Hebrew verb שָּׁמֵם/shawmame: məshomame in the previous phrase of verse 27, and shomame in this phrase. The difference between them derives from the former being an intensive (Polel) participle, and the latter being a common (Qal) participle. Therefore, I have translated the former as “destroyer,” and the latter as (merely) “desolator.” The important thing to understand here is that these are two different men, with the former being more destructive than the latter. Note that there is no ה/the before שֹׁמֵם/desolator: “the desolator” is a common but misleading mistranslation, based again upon a presumption. And, because this is an active participle – “one doing” something – that rules out this merely being a passive “desolate(d) one/thing/place,” as this word is sometimes mistranslated. There is also no ה before כָּלָה/“consummation;” but since that consummation is “decreed,” a “the” may be implied. * * * Daniel 9:27 “And he shall cause to prevail/confirm (or, shall make strong) a covenant for the multitude one week; and in the midst/middle of the week, he shall cause to cease blood sacrifice and offering. And upon/over a wing/corner shall be abominations/idols of a destroyer, even until a (the) consummation/complete end so having been decreed shall be poured out upon a desolator.” The Two Primary Views The three primary views outlined in Part 4 about Daniel 9:26b-27 have been narrowed down to two: 1) all of this prophecy is yet to be fulfilled, and 2) all of this prophecy has already been fulfilled. The following articles will examine these views in turn.
  9. You are welcome to try to keep the Old Covenant. I choose enter into the New Covenant, which has better promises. Hebrews 8:6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.
  10. James 2:1 My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality. The "Kingdom Torah", as your version puts it, refers to the King's Law, and the King is Jesus Christ. Not Moses. YHWH gave the Ten Commandments, and Jesus in his authority added the two Great Commandments. Moses included God's commandments within the Law of Moses, as well as the second of the two Great Commandments. But the Law of Moses IS NOT the "Kingdom Torah" -- that is the Torah of the Christ/Messiah and His New Covenant: Luke 22:20 Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the New Covenant in My blood, which is shed for you."
  11. You mean, you cannot understand that "Mosaic Law" is merely shorthand for "the Law of Moses"? Picky picky picky. Joshua 8:31 A as it is written in the book of the law of Moses, 1 Kings 2:3 as it is written in the law of Moses, 2 Kings 14:6 according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, 2 Chronicles 30:16 And they stood in their place after their manner, according to the law of Moses the man of God: the priests sprinkled the blood, which they received of the hand of the Levites. Ezra 3:2 as it is written in the law of Moses the man of God. Daniel 9:13 As it is written in the law of Moses, Malachi 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant Luke 2:22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Etc.
  12. "Subtle illusions"? Hardly. The Law of Moses required the Aaronic priesthood to serve all of the Torah's statutes for sacrifices and offerings in the Tabernacle, and then later the Temple. Not a single one of the feast days can be properly observed without a Temple. Most particularly the Day of Atonement. Fortunately, another Temple, the heavenly one, has superseded the former earthly one; but that Temple has a different priesthood and a different Law. "Negate Torah entirely"?? What, is Torah made up of parts that one could pick and choose? James 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. And that is the big problem with Messianic Judaism today: it is made up of a bunch of well-meaning but self-deluded believers in Christ all arguing among themselves about which of the Torah's precepts they really really need to keep, and which they can let slide. Many of such well-intentioned brothers and sisters are in my own community, so I speak from firsthand experience. The Torah is worthy for deep study, but the Law of Moses is best now taken as wisdom literature, akin to Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. It has many prophetic representations, but the Church is not bound by its material precepts. I have posted a 7-part series on the spiritual significance of the Tabernacle and Court, and the Feast Days associated with it, which series begins here:
  13. Huh! And yet the same people would have no problem at all believing that Man is body and soul and spirit. Go figure. Bing bing bing bing! You win the prize for eliciting my 2000th post. Your check in is the mail.
  14. For one example: Mark 10:2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. 3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? 4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. [= Deut. 24:1] 5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. 6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. ... 10 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. ... 12 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. For another example, when he said on the cross, "Τετέλεσται" -- "it has been completed/fulfilled" -- he was indicating that the Law's requirement for blood sacrifice had been fulfilled for all time. This he also made evident when he prophesied that -- Matt. 23:35 ...on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth... 36 ...all these things will come upon this generation. 37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem... 38 ...Your house is left to you desolate... The desolation of the Temple in 70 AD made any further fulfillment of the Law impossible, because the Temple was required to fulfill the Aaronic ordinances.
  15. Yes. Pre-Wrath is the correct understanding. It is the only one that fulfills all of the prophecies without having to go through contortion acts to make things fit. For anyone looking for a relatively short portrayal of the sequence of events in the End Times, I suggest this blog post:
×
×
  • Create New...