S.T. Ranger

I don't see that as the "dream" of every parent. While we did not have kids we did half raise a nephew and two nieces, and our dreams for them were not material, but spiritual. Above all our desire was that they come to know the Lord, so that whether in poverty or riches here on earth they would have riches not afforded by this world. As to the reason things are "taken" in the Tribulation, I take the view that we see the withdrawal of God's grace upon a secular world as the primary reason for the very tribulation that takes place. The primary reason that they suffer this judgment is because... 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 King James Version (KJV) 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; God bless.

It must be kept in mind that this is a directive given to Adam and Eve, rather than one given to you personally. While that general principle still exists, "multiplying" is not something everyone is going to do: Matthew 19:9-12 King James Version (KJV) 9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. 10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. 12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. Of course "men" does not exclude women from this teaching. As Christians we have been given explicit instruction in the New Testament. When we try to incorporate every command that has been given without keeping it in it's context we can create doctrine that doesn't necessarily apply to us. A good example is there was provision for men to offer up animals as vicarious sacrifice, that they die instead of the sinner and in their place, but despite the command most understand that this does not apply to the Christian, because Christ has offered up Himself and that Sacrifice only had to take place once in order to bring about remission of sins on an eternal basis (Hebrews 10:1-4; Hebrews 10:10-14; Hebrews 10:15-18). While both marriage and childbearing is normal for the majority, that doesn't mean it applies to everyone. We know that in the Tribulation not having children will be a blessing: Luke 23:29 For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. Likely because many children, whether young or grown will die during that time and it will be a time of grief. Hope that helps. God bless.

I think the font size is fine. Makes it easy to read. God bless.

Hi Salty,Had you thought regarding the New Jerusalem that the glory of God shines through it, & the nations walk in its light. `And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, & the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it;.....` (Rev. 21: 23 & 24) So how is the world going to receive the light from the New Jerusalem? The earth revolves as we know for `day & night,` thus the `light` would have to be in the heavenlies above the earth for the world to `walk in the light of it.`Marilyn. Not sure I would conclude there will be no stellar bodies, as this refers to New Jerusalem. Could you expand on this? Sure S.T. Ranger, I do see that there will be other stellar bodies in the New heavens. I just was referring to the New Jerusalem which descends out of heaven & to my understanding is located in the heavenlies. This is the `principalities & powers` area which involves the governing & influencing of the earth. The `Bride` symbol depicts for us the uniting, joining of the spiritual & physical realms, where God`s glory can shine through, for rulership & blessings. Marilyn. Hmm, lol, not sure I could say that entirely. I simply see New Jerusalem as that place built by Christ for believers, and that it will be in the new creation. I don't necessarily see it as a new place for God, because I see that God will always have His realm, which is Heaven, and will not displace Himself from His realm to live in a physical creation. God will be there, that is true, but that was the objective in the Garden. God also dwelt among man there, and this communion and relationship was ended by sin. So the new heavens and earth will be the eventual result of God's first creation of man and this universe, the inhabitants being those refined through fire, so to speak. New Jerusalem will not hover, in my view, bridging Heaven and the earth, but will be a part of the new creation which will be what God had in mind in the first place, which of course He knew that sin would corrupt and it would be necessary to make men suitable for eternal communion. So while there will be, I believe, a new heaven at that point, there will not be a new Heaven. And if we think about it, this type of creative process is not the first, because we have the Angels preceding us in a creative act followed by a separation of wicked and righteous. Who knows but that God may once again create and refine for His Eternal purpose a people who differs from us just as we differ from Angels (and demons), lol. Perhaps that should go in the Controversial section, lol. But as I said, that is just speculation. God bless.

I might suggest that as far as ''authority'' goes this primarily has application to the Millennial Kingdom, whereas in the Eternal State I think the distinction will be less pronounced.Perhaps you could declare what you have in mind? Interested to see what you have in mind. Hi S.T.Ranger. OK. Let`s look at `authority positions.` MILLENNIUM King – David, over Israel. `...they shall serve the Lord their God, & David their king whom I will raise up for them.` (Jer. 30: 9) Priests – in Israel. `Then they shall bring all your brethren for an offering to the Lord out of all the nations......And I will take some of them for priests & Levites, says the Lord.` (Isa. 66 : 20 & 21) NEW HEAVENS & NEW EARTH. Kings of the Earth - `And the nations of those who are saved shall walk in its light, & the kings of the earth bring their glory & honour into it.` (Rev. 21: 24) Kings over Israel - `..when the Son of man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed me will also sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes of Israel.`(Matt. 19: 28) Priests of Israel - `and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests & a holy nation.` (Ex. 19: 6) Kings & Priests – the Body of Christ. `...and has made us kings & priests to His God & Father,...` (Rev. 1: 6) `To Him who overcomes I will grant to sit with me on My throne, as I also overcame & sat down with My Father on His throne.` (Rev. 3: 21) We can see a common `authority` throughout – Kings & priests. We know that Christ is not just a king or a priest but a royal Priest, a King Priest, (after the order of Melchizedek). I therefore put to you that Christ has His type of rulership in each realm of God`s great kingdom. He is not a dictator, nor an autocrat, His rulership is not a republic, nor a democracy etc but He is a royal Priest who rules with righteousness & peace. He rules throughout God`s great kingdom in the different realms & is establishing His authority through sons who will operate in a ruling & priestly manner. Marilyn. I agree with the basic premise, which is that we are one, there is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female. All are to be priests in that sense. That doesn't negate that God has gifted and empowered certain among the body for roles of leadership, teaching, et cetera, by which we distinguish what is in view when we look at authority. In the Kingdom, we know there will be those granted authority based on their efforts in their lives. We know that in the Eternal State there will be some sort of distinction between believers, also based on their efforts while alive. But the bottom line is that all are one. I saw somewhere that you suggested that Israel will watch over Gentiles, which I do not see myself. But, have to get going, out of time, and hoped to get to a few of the posts before I left. God bless.

Hi S.T.Ranger, Have you thought that these `sheep` people are still on earth & that the kingdom they are going into is still on the `damaged` earth. Meaning this is not the `eternal kingdom` where people are `born again,` or `did righteous deeds,` or lived according to the revelation given. As you once said - progressive revelation of God. These `sheep` people are not born again, but just looked after the Jews in the great tribulation. You wouldn`t say that those requirements are the basis of your salvation, would you? Marilyn. No, because Christ is very clear in His teaching that only those that are born again will enter the Kingdom. I do not see justification that Israel will be a "shepherd" over Gentiles. As far as the world still being under the curse, that is true, hence the necessity after the Kingdom of the new heavens and earth. However, we see a renovation of sorts, where certain aspects of the curse, such as short life and enmity between man and animals, as well as enmity between men will be greatly affected in those days. We begin to see those who are not born again in the Kingdom after children are born within that Kingdom. Ultimately, only those who have been born again will enter the Eternal State, and even more specifically, those that have been glorified. Again, we have to distinguish between the Millennial Kingdom and the Eternal State to properly maintain an understanding about the relevant texts. In the Kingdom, there will be authority given among men, but I do not see authority over Gentiles given to Israel, but to Christ. In the Eternal State, God is the only authority, which is how it was to be in the beginning. Even in the saga of Israel, God was to be King, and they clamored for an earthly one. sadly, Israel, in her blindness, still clamors for an earthly King, when the King of Kings has been given to her, which they reject. We get into speculation about some things but as I said before, I believe those glorified in the Rapture will have a role similar to the ministry performed by Angels in this Age. I think we will be based in Heaven as Angels are today, and because we are spiritual (in body) at that time will be able to, as the Angels today do, be able to go back and forth. One speculation I would offer, as a parting subject of interest (maybe, lol), is that when God has moved among man previously we have seen new revelation. While we know that salvation culminates in Christ and this will be true eternally, it is interesting to speculate that in that day, in the Kingdom, God may provide more...Scripture. An incredibly exciting prospect to me, lol. We just don't know how things will be in any specific detail in that Kingdom, and I think all of us truly groan for that day, when we will know Him even as we are known, and have an understanding which we do not now. Great talking with you. God bless.

First, I do not deny the Kingdom. However, scripture gives us the strong indication that the millenium is only a day based on the verse from II Peter. II Peter 3:8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. Can you explain why this one thing is important to remember regarding the day of the Lord? Secondly, I do understand your frustration, although I do not understand how ceasing discussions benefits anyone. We are working with the same bible, and I really think what separates us from coming together is the issue of chronology. So I would appreciate it if you could at least respond to the scripture I offered you in regards to the dead being judged. Revelation 11:16 And the twenty-four elders, who were seated on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, 17 saying: “We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty, the One who is and who was,because you have taken your great power and have begun to reign.18 The nations were angry, and your wrath has come.The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophetsand your people who revere your name, both great and small—and for destroying those who destroy the earth.” Revelation 20:11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. This only happens once by my understanding of scripture, do you have an explanation for this? I appreciate you indulging me in this conversation, and do hope you will reconsider continuing, or at the very least a response to the above two inquiries. As for anything you have offered in scripture, I read every word and passage you have offered. I may not have responded to each one, but I always take what my brothers and sisters offer me in regards to scripture and examine it. In regards to what you offered towards the argument over whether first means first, none of what you offered to me says what you expressed to me. I do apologize for only responding to the first offering, not because I did not read all of them, but because I do not understand them in the way you are applying them. God bless you. Not sure if this will come through, as I have had several posts in the last day not go through, which I will attribute to the tablet. In regards to the usage of protos, I'm not sure how my post doesn't make the view presented clear. I gave examples of its usage where a sequential meaning is impossible, and combined with the fact that we already know that, at the least, the Lord"s resurrection is the first in sequence of time, and that it makes little sense to have the Two Witnesses resurrected at the end ( because he is empowered for forty two months yet no man can hurt them), then we have to consider ''first'' as not meaning first in a series. Also, we differ in regards to the thousand years which establishes that the dead do not rise at that time which again distinguishes this resurrection from the foundational teaching of one resurrection on the last day. It is not a matter of frustration in regards to your view, it is simply acknowledging that if an antagonist will not address a point or issue and continues with same arguments, then we are spinning our wheels. This is true on several key points. You say you don't deny the Kingdom (and I will clarify the thousand year physical Kingdom, not generally speaking, as I said, your salvation and sincerity is not questioned), then immediately say it is only a day based on correlating Peter's statement, which effectively denies the thousand years. This denies a clear statement in Revelation which is also reiterated by the fact that the first resurrection is simply not the same resurrection which follows and takes place at the Great White Throne. And I will stop there because several responses I have done have not gone through and with the distractions on my end I don't want to either waste time hunting and pecking on this tablet or do a longer post which won't go through anyway, lol. God bless. Hello again Ranger, Thanks for the response. I want to say, I think maybe you misunderstood my position regarding the passage in Revelation 20. I am unclear as to what you are saying in regards to this, but it appears you are taking this passage to say that the first resurrection occurs after the millenium, which it does not. There are three different groups spoken of in this passage. Those with the authority to judge, and those who had been beheaded are the first resurrection, this occurs prior to the millenium. These two groups come to life and reign with Him during the thousand years. The third group is the rest of the dead, meaning those who died outside His grace. This group is resurrected after the thousand years, this is when the Great White Throne judgement takes place, this is the judging of the dead. I also meant to clarify before, my position on this most closely resembles what people call "pre-wrath". I don't care much for the name it was given, but I think that is because of the references within scripture that say the wrath of the Lamb. All of that takes place after where this position places the rapture. What I know of the a-mil position is not what I believe, but perhaps we have a different understanding of the a-mil position. I see that you mentioned the scripture that I asked you about in regards to the judging of the dead and the chronology question, but I was hoping perhaps you could try explaining this in another way. I don't understand what you are saying in your response. I guess the most important question I have regarding this is, do you think the dead are judged more than once? I look forward to your response brother, and I'm sorry you are having issues with your tablet. I face similar struggles with this ancient computer I am using, so I sympathize with you on that, God bless you. I will just address this... "I guess the most important question I have regarding this is, do you think the dead are judged more than once?" Depends on how we approach the question. From the perspective of man in his sin, judgment has already taken place, and mankind is outside of relationship with God. Restoration of that relationship which was lost in Adam is through salvation in Christ whereby we are indwelt of God thus having, for the first time in our physical existence...life. In regards to the Second Death which is contrasted with the First Resurrection, this refers primarily to the second spiritual death man receives, rather than his physical death. It is on an eternal basis, which the first death, while spiritual, can be remedied. The Second Death cannot be. So in saying that, when men are cast into the Lake of Fire, they are ultimately and finally judged. Only those bereft of life (as opposed to those made alive through relationship with Christ) will be at that point judged, because for all who have been saved...there is no judgment remaining in the eternal perspective, because Christ has taken upon Himself the judgment we were born looking forward to, which will be exacted upon the unbelieving only. In Matthew 25 we see the Sheep and Goat judgment, in which the goats are said to go into eternal punishment. They do not go into the Lake of Fire, but, their judgment, just like those in Christ, is already sealed. There is no remedy for those that die outside of Christ. That doesn't negate the Great White Throne Judgment, and the culmination and finality of eternal judgment, but, is the appointed time when those who have rejected God will be tried and punished. I don't believe believers stand at this judgment, because again, if they are saved through Christ, their judgment on the eternal perspective has been paid through Christ. We can't see two judgments for believers, even as we don't see two judgments for unbelievers. We simply see the finality for both in physical death. At that point, we speculate about the physical bodies that are raised just prior to this judgment. I lean towards all believers being glorified at this point, but, I am not dogmatic about that. It could be that those among the believing that die during the Millennial Kingdom are glorified at that time, as we enter into a new Age which is significantly different from those before it. I have no doubts people will still need to be born again and come into a personal relationship with God through Christ, but again, it's a different Age, so I am not dogmatic. What we can be dogmatic about, though, is that the Great White Throne Judgment will be the final resurrection which takes place, and Scripture distinguishes this from the First Resurrection of Revelation 20 and separates these two resurrections by a thousand years. Other distinctions have been dealt with in prior posts so no point in going over them again. Basically, we need to remember that judgment has already fallen on man through Adam, and we distinguish this from the judgment that will be enforced through Christ. Christ taught that men are already condemned, and the remedy was to believe on Him. So that judgment is the same judgment that will exact penalty at the Great White Throne. Men will still die for their sin if they do not believe on Christ, and men enter into eternal life if they do, which remedies the penalty for sin eternally. We have been, at salvation, excused from that death, for Christ has died for us, in our place. We will be judged according to that done in the body, but Paul makes this clear this is not an eternal judgment, which is in view in regards to believing or not believing. Hope that makes sense. God bless.

Hello again Ranger, There are a few things in your post that I want to discuss with you. To begin with, let's step away from the debate about first and from this point just understand when I say first resurrection I am simply referring to what John describes in Revelation 20. I cannot step away from it, lol...that is the central focus. And this is why the discussion cannot progress, because we have to examine the events as they are given. So rather than stepping away, we hone in closer to make sure we don't miss important information. We are indeed speaking about the resurrection seen in Revelation 20, now our task is to properly identify it. In the larger focus is the Rapture of the Church, and the resurrection here is said by some to deny that the Church is raptured prior to this time...because it is the "first" resurrection. But we know it is not, because we already have Christ's resurrection, as well as the Two Witnesses, who cannot be said to be resurrected and raptured after Christ's Return (and this occurs in Revelation 19) because their resurrection takes place during the Second Woe, or, the Sixth Trumpet Judgment. This also denies a correlation to the Seventh Trumpet being the "last trump" spoken of by Paul. Secondly, we see the resurrection of the dead which is specifically and undeniably stated to follow a thousand year reign of Christ. This is not called the Second Resurrection...but the Second Death. Which again also causes us to understand that there is not just one general resurrection which takes place which we call the First Resurrection, but that the First Resurrection is a reference to the resurrection unto life. Only tribulation Martyrs are said to be raised at this time. I think it was you (and forgive me if I am wrong about that) that said everyone in view is "dead" in Revelation 20. That is not the case. Everyone that enters into Heaven is alive in Christ. That is not a fanciful designation concluded from various Scriptures, but a clear designation for anyone who is in Christ: they have been made alive through salvation in Christ and possess eternal life because they are in Him Who is Eternal. This can be said of those seated on the thrones that John sees. We could, if we wanted to, see this as a corresponding statement, in that John sees those appointed to authority and then gives us the details, but, since we see these thrones before events begin to unfold fully, I simply take the view that these are saints already passed away. Either way, we cannot designate them as dead. But that is where we disagree, lol. Denial of a Rapture is based on the argument as stated above. When we take the perspective that protos cannot be defined exclusively as "first in a series" and acknowledge that in many important passages the definition of first in rank is the only tenable way to interpret, then couple that with the fact that we cannot make this the "first" resurrection at all...then the passage becomes understandable in the timeline provided by God through John. Then...calculate the thousand years into the equation and it becomes very obvious: Christ returns, destroys His enemies, those (who were born again) that died in the Tribulation are raised, and those that died unbelievers (which includes those that thought they were, tares, chaff, evil trees) go into eternal punishment, which begins by their descent into Sheol/Hades at physical death (their bodies devoured as carrion and cleaned up over a seven month and seven year period, Revelation 19; Ezekiel 39). But we cannot impose New Jerusalem into the Tribulation period. Scripture does not do that, but separates the resurrection of the Tribulation Martyrs from the resurrection of the "dead" by a thousand years, then the passing away of the current universe, then the Great White Throne, then the descent of New Jerusalem (which again I think we need to keep in mind a city also represents her people). Revelation 20 King James Version (KJV) 4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. 11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. Revelation 21 King James Version (KJV) 21 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. Again, if we maintain the sequence given us, many problems cease to be a problem. The thousand year period is prophesied in the Old Testament, and it makes little sense to negate it. Christ did not do that, but taught specifically about this time throughout His Ministry to Israel. Again, read the Kingdom parables with that in mind and they will make more sense because they will fit into the harmonious and consistent pattern of prophecy throughout Scripture. And I will just point this out: Acts 1:6-8 King James Version (KJV) 6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? 7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. 8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. This, I believe, shows that this time has not been removed from God's prophetic timeline, but that the Lord here confirms that time is coming, but it is not for the disciples to be concerned with. Their concern is to be in regards to the coming Baptism with the Holy Spirit and their empowering for a ministry of witness. You are leaving out the raising of the Tribulation Martyrs. We see several declarations of the "time" being at hand, but, we cannot overlook the fact these are stated...within the Tribulation events. What is said... Revelation 10:5-7 King James Version (KJV) 5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, 6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: 7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets. ...even this is...prophetic. That the Mystery of God should be finished does not mean we nullify that the Tribulation does not end until the final Vial is poured out and Christ returns. There is then the resurrection of the Tribulation Martyrs, which as mentioned before does not correlate to Paul's teaching about the Rapture, simply because those saints which have died are not said to be raised in this resurrection. The midway point in the timeline I see is found here: Revelation 11:11-15 King James Version (KJV) 11 And after three days and an half the spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them. 12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them. 13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven. 14 The second woe is past; and, behold, the third woe cometh quickly. 15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. ...and we cannot impose the end of the Tribulation...during the Second Woe, because we have the Third Woe and the Seven Vial Judgments to go. The Two Witnesses are given forty two months to minister, and no man can harm them. So too, the Beast is, right after this event...given forty two months. This coincides with the casting down of Satan, where we see another declaration, following the one in ch.11 (c.f. with 12:15), where it seems there is an "end" to events: Revelation 12:9-12 King James Version (KJV) 9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. 11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. 12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. In view is not the end of the Tribulation, but the power once held by Satan. His last ditch effort will be the Antichrist: Revelation 13:4-7 King James Version (KJV) 4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? 5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. 6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. 7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. So a chronological view places these events in a harmonious timeline we can follow. The declarations do not mark the end, but signal the end to Satan's established power over this world. Keep in mind that it is God, not Satan, Who is in control and ordering events. His allowance for a forty two month period for Antichrist to be empowered coincides with His judgment on Israel and the world, even as He used foreign nations to judge Israel in the past. Trying to end the Tribulation to establish a timeline leads to the necessity of making the judgments the same judgments (only being viewed as more specific detail as Genesis Two is), and raises more problems than it settles. A chronological view of Revelation removes the mystery that was not given by God, but men who denied the Millennial Kingdom in the past, and those that have denied the Pre-tribulation Rapture in the past. Again, just read Revelation from a perspective it is chronological, and it will fall into place. In the middle of the Tribulation, Satan is cast down, the Beast begins persecution of Israel (who is provided protection for forty two months), and the Third Woe and the Seven Vials are poured out. You overlook what the text states: Revelation 10:7 King James Version (KJV) 7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets. It is in the days of the Seventh Angel, the Seventh Trumpet, that the mystery in view is finished. The mystery in view is the will of God revealed by His Prophets. In the last half of the Tribulation we see those that are saved and those that are not. No longer will there be doubt as to what is going on, but it will be known that the prophecies are being fulfilled. This would take some time to develop fully, but the beginning of this chapter plays a significant role, so rather than create confusion with a short response I am going to let this go, and just say that clearly...this is not the end of the tribulation. It is of necessity for those that deny the Pre-tribulation Rapture to make the Seventh Trumpet the trump spoken of by Paul, which is impossible because we can see that there is yet much left to unfold in the Tribulation after the Third Woe. As mentioned before, it is difficult to make the forty two months of the Two Witnesses (who are killed during the Second Woe and thus cannot be said to be raptured at the end of the tribulation) correspond to the forty two months of the Beast. Antichrist has no power over the Two Witnesses during their ministry, thus, when he does kill them, it is best to see this as the beginning of his wrath, which is for a short time. And lastly, we see a declaration of an "end" after this (see above, Revelation 12:10), and this too is not the end of the Tribulation. There is no discrepancy of Chronology here, simply a more detailed account of the day which mankind was created. Eve's creation at no time precedes Adam's, in either text. It is a chronological order of events still, and secondly...this is not a prophetic text. Again, prophecy is always given in chronological order, and everyone is happy to maintain that chronology unless it conflicts with their system of theology. And that is the only reason to then displace chronological order to Revelation. As I said before...the worst advice one can give or receive when trying to understand Revelation is to tell them Revelation is not chronological. It is, and when we maintain that chronology, as we do with every other prophetic text we look at, the necessity for reconciliations is removed. Just look at it, my friend, and I am confident you will come to agree. I do as well, and we are a rapidly disappearing group, my friend. We can thank the a-mil view for much of the confusion there is today about end time events. This has been the view embraced by the Church the most throughout the Church's History. This does not make it any more sound, because of that, any more than we would embrace baptismal regeneration because it too has been embraced by so many over the course of the Church's history. But again, there is no discrepancy in chronology in the two Genesis accounts: one simply provides more information than the other. Man was created on the sixth day, neither accounts denies that, and both accounts show man created male and female. Where some get confused (and this is just what I think), is that the naming of the animals, for example, is also thought to be said to have happened on the sixth day, but we impose that into the text. Often specific information is included in passages because they are relevant, but we do not have to make Adam created, naming the animals, and then God providing Eve all to have happened on the sixth day. God's omniscience accounts for His understanding that it was not good for Adam not to have a suitable help meet for him. Consider: Genesis 2:18-20 King James Version (KJV) 18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. This simply states that among animals there was not a suitable help meet for him. We impose into the text that this all takes place on the same day, when this is general information given in the course of recounting events. It could be viewed like this: "God declared that Adam should not be alone, so He made him a help meet for him; Adam named all of the animals and birds, but among them there was no suitable help meet, thus did God give Him Eve." Also consider: Genesis 2:10-14 King James Version (KJV) 10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. 11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. 13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. 14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. ...here again general information which is relevant tot he time of the writing but not to the time in view is also given. We don't impose information about these lands into the text, and neither should we when it comes to the account of the sixth day. There was no thought of implying that when God created Mankind that all of these things took place at the time the information is given. These details pertain to a time that takes place after the specific event, which is the creation of the Garden in Eden. I am a Young Earth Creationist, which is a view that has become very unpopular in the last thirty years, to the point where, just like being a Pre-Tribulation believer, gains disdain and condescension from many I speak to. God created this world, I believe, in six literal 24 hour days. The Genesis Two account is a more detailed account of the sixth day, in regards to the creation of man, and the naming of the beasts and birds is general information included to emphasize why it was not good for man to be alone. This applies to God's omniscience, rather than God creating man and beast, Adam naming them, and it becoming obvious that there was no mate for man among them. It is for our sake that this is included, not God's, Who knew before creating man that he would need a suitable help meet for him. And again, enjoyed talking with you, but it is time for me to get back to work, lol. God bless.

No rebuke, just discussion. The first seven sevens precedes the 62 sevens and are said to be two different periods, and the final seven come after the 62 Week period. After this period Messiah is cut off. This means that period is over. One could impose Christ into the final Week, and many do, however, imposing Christ being cut off within the final Week has problems, which is the reason for the ten points given in the OP. I will admit, lol, that the list was hastily assembled and I would suggest that it may be a better way to address the issue would be to point out the weaknesses in the list. I do think some good points are raised, but I didn't give it as a refined and tried list. I will go back and make improvements and perhaps return with a more concise list. I have done this very thing with baptismal regeneration which has been refined through objections by those of opposing views. So not sure this directly addresses your point, but perhaps you could rephrase your point if it doesn't. Are you saying the text allows for Christ being cut off mid-week? God bless. I think you understood me right, and I guess we will just simply have to agree to disagree. I hope we all (and speaking to myself also) remember to keep our minds open on this issue for the Jews were told when Christ was to come and because He didn't come as they thought He should, they missed out on His First Coming. Some have timed the decree to rebuild to the very day of Christ's Triumphant Entry, which is the view I take: that Christ was cut off at the very end of those 483 years. There is much debate about this, but, I don't think that any particular timing would nullify the fact that Christ is said to have come within the first 69 Weeks, and that His cutting off is best placed at the end of that period. The first seven and the 62 Weeks comprise the first 69 Weeks, and while they are distinguished apart, they run in a sequential manner. If we place the cutting off at Christ's death (which most do), it is a little difficult to see His earthly ministry as the first three and a half years of the Seventieth Week. Nor can we say the Seventieth Week began at His death, and that He confirmed the New Covenant, or the Covenant of Law...for a Week, because the Covenant of Law was not confirmed by Christ through His Death, nor was the New Covenant confirmed...for a Week, nor is the cessation of sacrifice and oblation seen to cease three and a half years after His Death. And I think that is it for me in this thread, finally. God bless.

Everyone is welcome to join in, and thanks for your participation. Whereas I see the focus to be on Israel's sin and the judgment imposed for it. There is more in view than that: Daniel 9:24-25 King James Version (KJV) 24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. 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: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. In the first verse we see that the entire Seventy Weeks are included, but in the second that "unto Messiah the Prince only the first 69 Weeks are spoken of. The rebuilding is but one issue which does not overshadow the underlying issue, which is Israel's rebellion and sin, and God's judgment. And again, we back up to see that the entire Seventy Weeks are factored in: to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Christ Himself divides timeframes for fulfillment here: Luke 4:16-21 King James Version (KJV) 16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. 17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, 18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, 19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. 20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. 21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears. Now we look at the original quote: Isaiah 61 King James Version (KJV) 1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; 3 To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified. 4 And they shall build the old wastes, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations. What was not fulfilled was the Day of Vengeance. It is my understanding that rebuilding was still in progress in the Lord's Day, though I would agree as far as initial rebuilding efforts the first forty nine years did see a restoration to the point where Services were in in progress. And this is the point which cannot be missed: the coming of Messiah is within the 69 Weeks and the cutting off takes place at the end of the 69 Weeks: Daniel 9:25 King James Version (KJV) 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: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. "From the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem...unto the Messiah the Prince...there shall be Seven Weeks and 62 Weeks." Daniel 9:26 King James Version (KJV) 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. After the 62 Week period Messiah is cut off. This means...Messiah had come. This has to be true if He is cut off after the 62 Week period. Most will agree that "not for Himself" refers to the fact that He died for sinners. So as it has been mentioned before, Messiah's cutting off would be found at the end of the 62 Week period. The final Week, or Seven year period, is then described, starting with the people of the prince that shall come, who destroy the city and the sanctuary...after Messiah is cut off. If we make the Messiah's cutting off the end of the 62 Week period, we then have seven years to deal with. If we make it in the midst or middle, we have three and a half years. The point is, Messiah is cut off, then we have the destruction of the city and sanctuary, which did not take place at the beginning of the Lord's earthly ministry, nor did it occur at the end, His death on the Cross, because we already know...Messiah has been cut off already. "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off," which designates this as taking place after. Because the Holy Spirit is specific about this, it makes little sense to impose the cutting off into the final Week. Secondly, we see that the entire Seventy Weeks are included in regards to what is said to result from the Seventy Week judgment: Daniel 9:24 King James Version (KJV) 24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Now, we go back to what Christ said was fulfilled: Luke 4:16-19 King James Version (KJV) 16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. 17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, 18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, 19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. ...and what was not: Isaiah 61 King James Version (KJV) 1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; Christ's ministry as Messiah to Israel and His ministry to the world as the Savior are distinguished in Scripture. The Gospel of Christ was a Mystery not revealed until Pentecost, and this through the Ministry of the Comforter, Who taught through the Apostles and disciples. Christ, during His ministry, said... Matthew 10:5-6 King James Version (KJV) 5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Matthew 15:23-24 King James Version (KJV) 23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. 24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. ...which does not deny His role as the Savior, but shows that understanding was not meant for this time, and that fulfilling His role as the Messiah awaited by Israel was. The Seventieth Week is for the same purpose the first 69 Weeks were, and the result of that judgment has never changed. Israel will be refined through fire and the end result is bringing Israel to repentance that they might serve God, rather than their sinful and rebellious ways which brought the judgment upon them in the first place. The root of chetsiy speaks of half. "Midst" is the KJV translation which could be, in our modern use, indiscriminate to placement in the context, but the Hebrew...not so much. We see it used here: Daniel 12:7 King James Version (KJV) 7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. The only other "prince" Daniel would suggest would be an Angelic or demonic entity, which I do not see as an unreasonable suggestion, and in fact think Revelation underscores the multifaceted implications of Prophetic Text. Satan will be the ultimate power behind the Antichrist, thus to see the "prince who shall come" as Satan or another demonic figure is reasonable. I lean heavily to Antichrist being in view, though, because I see this passage as pertaining to Israel on a physical level, rather than placing Satan as the one who brings about conditions where Israel can perform Levitical Service in an actual Temple, which would have to be the case for the Abomination which makes desolate to take place. And that is why only Christ and Antichrist were offered in the poll, because those are the two primary figures usually debated. Not offering more than the Two Covenants has also been objected to, but, again these are the two primary covenants in view in regards to Israel, who is the central figure in the Judgment itself. God bless.

By the way: 2 Thessalonians speaks about both, lol. Paul's primary point is neither have happened. God bless.

Sorry, inchrist, tried twice to respond and they didn't go through. In short, there is enough for you to address already and I will just briefly say that the verse is clear that it is the world, not Heaven, which is in view. You limit tereo se ek in its usage and would advise looking at Strong's for usage and am confident an understanding of being kept from the hour of testing which will come upon the world and all them that dwell on the earth is not only reasonable, but when we look at all that is relevant that is the only tenable view. The other issue would be that only those born again enter the Kingdom, and that this is just a basic principle of Christ's teaching. It is seen in Matthew 25 in the Sheep and Goat judgment. Sorry for the short response but limited in what I can do. Just give the points already raised into consideration and may God bless you in your studies. God bless.

Testing...trying to get a post through.

No rebuke, just discussion. The first seven sevens precedes the 62 sevens and are said to be two different periods, and the final seven come after the 62 Week period. After this period Messiah is cut off. This means that period is over. One could impose Christ into the final Week, and many do, however, imposing Christ being cut off within the final Week has problems, which is the reason for the ten points given in the OP. I will admit, lol, that the list was hastily assembled and I would suggest that it may be a better way to address the issue would be to point out the weaknesses in the list. I do think some good points are raised, but I didn't give it as a refined and tried list. I will go back and make improvements and perhaps return with a more concise list. I have done this very thing with baptismal regeneration which has been refined through objections by those of opposing views. So not sure this directly addresses your point, but perhaps you could rephrase your point if it doesn't. Are you saying the text allows for Christ being cut off mid-week? God bless.

Well, actually you’re not following along the wording of the prophecy, either. The New Covenant was not established UNTIL the death of the Messiah; however, the prophecy of Daniel 9 has already said, “He (the Messiah) would strengthen a covenant with many for one Seven.” That doesn’t necessarily push the Seven back to beginning at the time of Yeshua`s death, but rather confirms that this is a DIFFERENT covenant than the New Covenant! Again, the cutting off of Messiah is at His death, and as has been pointed out the New Covenant is an eternal Covenant, which, as you say, is different than the Covenant in view in Daniel. We cannot impose the Lord's ministry into the 70th Week. I agree it refers to support for an existing covenant, but the Lord had no need to support a covenant He established...it is finished when He establishes it. We can say Christ ''confirmed'' all of the Covenants, but, unless one denies His death as the cutting off of Messiah, then we cannot impose an establishing in this confirmation because of the ending of that confirmation. The cessation of sacrifice and oblation is important because this is associated with the Covenant of Law and we know Christ's making the Law obsolete takes place prior to the beginning of the 70th Week. Edited note: just wanted to clarify that Christ did abrogate the Law, hence an ending of sacrifice for sin; this would require the abomination which makes desolate coincide with that event if that is in view. And it is roughly 35 years later that we could see a fulfillment of this. I don't have a problem seeing a partial fulfillment in AD 70, just as I see Antiochus Epiphanies as a fulfillment, but just as prophecy concerning Christ on the throne still awaits final fulfillment, even so there remains a final Antichrist to come. Again, sorry for the short posts. Good talking with you guys. God bless.

Hi Salty, Had you thought regarding the New Jerusalem that the glory of God shines through it, & the nations walk in its light. `And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, & the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it;.....` (Rev. 21: 23 & 24) So how is the world going to receive the light from the New Jerusalem? The earth revolves as we know for `day & night,` thus the `light` would have to be in the heavenlies above the earth for the world to `walk in the light of it.` Marilyn. Not sure I would conclude there will be no stellar bodies, as this refers to New Jerusalem. Could you expand on this? God bless.

I might suggest that as far as ''authority'' goes this primarily has application to the Millennial Kingdom, whereas in the Eternal State I think the distinction will be less pronounced. Perhaps you could declare what you have in mind? Interested to see what you have in mind. God bless.

Hey...you got it! Excellent. No need to separate the people's of the eternal state as a group, though I think we have enough to go on to say some will be in places of authority over others. The same is true in the Church today yet we still have one Bosy of Christ. Did I say last post? lol God bless.

Sorry, bro’, but you have an error in your poll. There is no third option to the question about the covenant. Hence, when I tried to vote with neither selected, it gave me an error message. Only the two primary thoughts are given in the poll, and we can see that there is a majority who feel that Antichrist makes a covenant that may be thought to be distinct to Antichrist. There is good reason why the Davidic Covenant is not given, which is because it simply will not fit the context of either Daniel or Other relevant passages. ... Nonsense. One still must provide in a poll for a consideration that he may not have anticipated. And, it is only your OPINION that the Davidic Covenant doesn’t “fit the context of either Daniel or other relevant passages.” I find that it fits their contexts quite well! And why we would reject the Davidic Covenant as an option is quite simple: neither Christ not Antichrist will confirm the Davidic Covenant for one Week. It is not the Davidic Covenant that would allow for sacrifice and oblation, because we would have to see one or the other claiming to fulfill that role. Christ certainly did, but it had not impact on Levitical Service, which was already established and being carried out. ... It is the Davidic Covenant that PURPOSELY does NOT allow for sacrifice and oblation, which is PRECISELY why they CEASE! It is through the MESSIAH’S sacrifice and OUR UNION with the Messiah that gives God the freedom to associate with believers and set aside the need for further sacrifice! It was not necessary to have an “impact on Levitical Service”; Yeshua` fulfilled the sacrifice as a “priest forever after the order of Malkhiy-Tsedeq!” “My King of Righteousness!” In fact, the author of Hebrews tells us that the Levitical priests could NOT have fulfilled that role! Look at the WHOLE song: Psalm 110:1-7 1 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. 2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. 3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth. 4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. 5 The LORD at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath. 6 He shall judge among the heathen (Goyim; Gentiles), he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries. 7 He shall drink of the brook in the way: therefore shall he lift up the head. KJV Psalm 110:1-7 (0-7) 110:1(0) A psalm of David: (1) Adonai says to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemiesyour footstool.” 2 Adonai will send your powerful scepter out from Tziyon, so that you will rule over your enemies around you. 3 On the day your forces mobilize, your people willingly offer themselves in holy splendors from the womb of the dawn; the dew of your youth is yours. 4 Adonai has sworn it, and he will never retract — “You are a cohen forever, to be compared with Malki-Tzedek.” 5 Adonai at your right hand will shatter kings on the day of his anger. 6 He will pass judgment among the nations, filling it with dead bodies; he will shatter heads throughout an extensive territory. 7 He will drink from a stream as he goes on his way; therefore he will hold his head high. CJB This is a psalm of DAVID the king, one who was so selected by anointing to be king, a MESSIAH! It was written by the one to whom God made the covenant! And, this is a Messianic Psalm; that is, it prophesies about the future ULTIMATE Messiah, Yeshua`, as I’m sure of which you’re aware! Now, refresh your memory about what was written by the author of Hebrews: Hebrews 9:1-10:14 9:1 Now the first covenant had both regulations for worship and a Holy Place here on earth. 2 A tent was set up, the outer one, which was called the Holy Place; in it were the menorah, the table and the Bread of the Presence. 3 Behind the second parokhet was a tent called the Holiest Place, 4 which had the golden altar for burning incense and the Ark of the Covenant, entirely covered with gold. In the Ark were the gold jar containing the man, Aharon’s rod that sprouted and the stone Tablets of the Covenant; 5 and above it were the k’ruvim representing the Sh’khinah, casting their shadow on the lid of the Ark — but now is not the time to discuss these things in detail. 6 With things so arranged, the cohanim go into the outer tent all the time to discharge their duties; 7 but only the cohen hagadol enters the inner one; and he goes in only once a year, and he must always bring blood, which he offers both for himself and for the sins committed in ignorance by the people. 8 By this arrangement, the Ruach HaKodesh showed that so long as the first Tent had standing, the way into the Holiest Place was still closed. 9 This symbolizes the present age and indicates that the conscience of the person performing the service cannot be brought to the goal by the gifts and sacrifices he offers. 10 For they involve only food and drink and various ceremonial washings — regulations concerning the outward life, imposed until the time for God to reshape the whole structure. 11 But when the Messiah appeared as cohen gadol of the good things that are happening already, then, through the greater and more perfect Tent which is not man-made (that is, it is not of this created world), 12 he entered the Holiest Place once and for all. And he entered not by means of the blood of goats and calves, but by means of his own blood, thus setting people free forever. 13 For if sprinkling ceremonially unclean persons with the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer restores their outward purity; 14 then how much more the blood of the Messiah, who, through the eternal Spirit, offered himself to God as a sacrifice without blemish, will purify our conscience from works that lead to death, so that we can serve the living God! 15 It is because of this death that he is mediator of a new covenant [or will]. Because a death has occurred which sets people free from the transgressions committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promised eternal inheritance. 16 For where there is a will, there must necessarily be produced evidence of its maker’s death, 17 since a will goes into effect only upon death; it never has force while its maker is still alive. 18 This is why the first covenant too was inaugurated with blood. 19 After Moshe had proclaimed every command of the Torah to all the people, he took the blood of the calves with some water and used scarlet wool and hyssop to sprinkle both the scroll itself and all the people; 20 and he said, “This is the blood of the covenant which God has ordained for you.” 21 Likewise, he sprinkled with the blood both the Tent and all the things used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, according to the Torah, almost everything is purified with blood; indeed, without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. 23 Now this is how the copies of the heavenly things had to be purified, but the heavenly things themselves require better sacrifices than these. 24 For the Messiah has entered a Holiest Place which is not man-made and merely a copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, in order to appear now on our behalf in the very presence of God. 25 Further, he did not enter heaven to offer himself over and over again, like the cohen hagadol who enters the Holiest Place year after year with blood that is not his own; 26 for then he would have had to suffer death many times — from the founding of the universe on. But as it is, he has appeared once at the end of the ages in order to do away with sin through the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as human beings have to die once, but after this comes judgment, 28 so also the Messiah, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin, but to deliver those who are eagerly waiting for him. 10 1 For the Torah has in it a shadow of the good things to come, but not the actual manifestation of the originals. Therefore, it can never, by means of the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, bring to the goal those who approach the Holy Place to offer them. 2 Otherwise, wouldn’t the offering of those sacrifices have ceased? For if the people performing the service had been cleansed once and for all, they would no longer have sins on their conscience. 3 No, it is quite the contrary — in these sacrifices is a reminder of sins, year after year. 4 For it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins. 5 This is why, on coming into the world, he says, “It has not been your will to have an animal sacrifice and a meal offering; rather, you have prepared for me a body. 6 No, you have not been pleased with burnt offerings and sin offerings. 7 Then I said, ‘Look! In the scroll of the book it is written about me. I have come to do your will.’” 8 In saying first, “You neither willed nor were pleased with animal sacrifices, meal offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings,” things which are offered in accordance with the Torah; 9 and then, “Look, I have come to do your will”; he takes away the first system in order to set up the second. 10 It is in connection with this will that we have been separated for God and made holy, once and for all, through the offering of Yeshua the Messiah’s body. 11 Now every cohen stands every day doing his service, offering over and over the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this one, after he had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from then on to wait until his enemies be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has brought to the goal for all time those who are being set apart for God and made holy. CJB The Messiah Yeshua` DID strengthen the covenant for a Seven! A “Seven” in Hebrew Scripture is a “PERFECTION” or a “COMPLETION” or an “OATH!" Genesis 21:25-34 25 Now Avraham had complained to Avimelekh about a well which Avimelekh’s servants had seized. 26 Avimelekh answered, “I don’t know who has done this. You didn’t tell me, and I heard about it only today.” 27 Avraham took sheep and cattle and gave them to Avimelekh, and the two of them made a covenant. 28 Avraham put seven female lambs from the flock by themselves. 29 Avimelekh asked Avraham, “What is the meaning of these seven female lambs you have put by themselves?” 30 He answered, “You are to accept these seven female lambs from me as witness that I dug this well.” 31 This is why that place was called Be’er-Sheva [well of seven, well of an oath] — because they both swore an oath there. 32 When they made the covenant at Be’er-Sheva, Avimelekh departed with Pikhol the commander of his army and returned to the land of the P’lishtim. 33 Avraham planted a tamarisk tree in Be’er-Sheva, and there he called on the name of Adonai, the everlasting God. 34 Avraham lived for a long time as a foreigner in the land of the P’lishtim. CJB So, the very word “Seven” refers to God’s oath! His rejection and the result of His leaving them “desolate,” ENDED the sacrifices and the oblation (gift)! When He was crucified, He became the final “keves Elohiym” for the Pesach, the final “lamb of God” for the Passover! And, offering His own blood to the throne of God as our cohen gadol, our high priest, “nailed that door shut” forever! For 3.5 years, He offered them the Kingdom of God from the sky, since HE was the One anointed to be the King and HE came from the sky through the Ruach haQodesh. Ultimately, that generation rejected Him (as God knew they would), and it became our invitation into His Kingdom prematurely. However, for them, He took His Kingdom away when He ascended back to His Father. In the future, when He returns, He will offer them the Kingdom once again. This time, He will come as the Aryeeh `Am Yhudah! The Lion of the Tribe of Judah, coming in vengeance and rescue for His people! This will be when the second 3.5 years will occur. Finally, you asked “So Christians destroy the city and the sanctuary?” You’re not following along. First, I NEVER said that Messiah Yeshua` was the “prince that shall come.” To the contrary, it WAS Titus in the first century A.D. and "the PEOPLE of the prince that shall come” were the Roman soldiers. Don’t confuse the two: Yeshua` haMashiach (Jesus the Christ) is the “Messiah,” and Titus is the “prince that shall come.” Again, the verbs point back as actions of the “Messiah”; the “prince that shall come” is only an object of the prepo sition, so to speak. The verbs are NOT connected with the “prince!" I agree entirely and could not vote for the same reason. Although I could also call it the Covenant of Promise, read Galatians 3:14-29; or the even the Covenant of Liberty that Christ has given us. But we also see this promise coming in the Book of Malachi: Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me: and the LORD, Whom ye seek, the Messenger of the Covenant, Whom ye delight in: behold, He will come, saith the LORD of Hosts. Malachi 3:1 We see Jesus in this verse calling Himself the Messenger of the Covenant. And just as Retrobyter stated I see the covenant being confirmed by Jesus for He even says as much in the following verses-- for Testament is the same as Covenant--Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the New Testament in My Blood, which is shed for many. Luke 22:20 After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, This cup is the New Testament in My Blood: this do ye, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me. I Corinthians 11:25 In the middle of the 70th week Christ instituted the LORD's Supper in remembrance of His New Covenant. That is three and an half years into His ministry or the very end of His earthly life. For the Covenant/Testimony to be confirmed Blood had to be shed: And almost all things are by the law cleansed with blood; and without the shedding of blood is no remission. Hebrews 9:22 So Christ sacrifice on the Cross, was the blood shedding moment of the New Covenant. Jeremiah tells us of the New Covenant that Jesus would confirm in Jeremiah 31:31-34 while the writer or Hebrews quotes him in Hebrews 8:8-13. When dealing with the Book of Acts we see that the last half of the 70th weeks is dealing with just the nation of Israel and their chance at receiving this Covenant promise, before the end of the 70th week. For low and behold 3 and half years later we see that Paul/Saul is call to minister to the Gentiles Acts 9, then we see Cornelius conversion, but see what the Jews said when they discovered that a Gentile was saved: When they heard these things, then hold they their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance to life. Acts 11:18 This is also mention by the Apostles in Acts 15:6-19, when the Church had a special meeting to see how they were to handle this addition to the Jewish Believers. This is the Everlasting Covenant: Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the Great Shepherd of the sheep, through the Blood of the Everlasting Covenant, Hebrews 13:20 Christ Jesus has confirmed an Everlasting Covenant with all who believe in Him. This sounds very reasonable but as already mentioned...Christ is cut off prior the Seventieth Week. This would negate His earthly ministry from being appli able. The most dramatic error would be thinking that any covenant was confirmed for a seven year period. At no time did Christ, during His earthly ministry nor in times past confirm a covenant for seven years. Christ is the Covenant and it be ame available at Pentecost, which would be where the Seventieth Week would start. Not at the beginning of the Lord's ministry. This has been addressed yet no-one seems willing to show why the points are in error aside from retro's ciew that be ause the Davidic Covenant was not an option, all points are wrong. Again, Christ did establish the New Covenant through His death, however, we see that the promises of the New Covenant are fulfilled at Pentecost. So at this point I would ask how Messiah was cut off and then "confirmed" the New Covenant in His earthly ministry and how, since the Seventieth Week pertains to Israel, you then impose Paul into the equation. God bless.

Continuing... You're correlation to creation is also faulty because the seventh day rest will be the Millennial Kingdom. Hebrews can also help you're understanding in regards to Rest in Christ, which the writer exhorts his Hebrew brethren there were still those in need of entering. Again, the writer contrasts Hebrews under the First Covenant contrasted with being under the New. The culmination of rest for Israel will be first coming into covenant relationship with God under the New Covenant (as all believers now do, thus we have entered into that rest), then the Kingdom, then the Eternal State in the new creation. Israel has not yet entered into any of those rests as a nation, that day is yet future. The rest in view in the timeline is the fulfilling of all of the Covenants, which necessitates prophecy concerning the King establishing His Kingdom yet future. A spiritual Kingdom is not denied on my part, it is you're negating of the physical kingdom, which is the very kingdom primarily in view in the Lord's earthly ministry. As far as your final statements dealing with Who and who is in view, the points raised in the OP, which you have ignored based on the premise given, deals with that point. As I said, this is my final post, so the last word is yours. Have at it, lol, all I ask is that you deal with the points raised rather than ignore them and proceed with your own teaching, which is what you did from your first response. The false premise that ''all the points are in error because there is no option for the Davidic Covenant'' is no excuse to ignore all the points raised. You will have to also ignore everything spoken of in the New Testament concerning the New Covenant. Again we are to be ministers of the New Covenant, not the Davidic, which will be ministered by the King Himself when Israel is, on a national basis, as prophesied, brought into relationship with God through the New Covenant. And just as we are told in Daniel, this will be through judgment, and at that point will it be fulfilled...''all Israel will be saved,'' because the unbelieving will be destroyed. God bless

The point you try to make from Hebrews (following the quotation) is to impose a ''seven'' within the text, which is, in my view, an incredible abuse of the passage. The completion in view is not a seven, or a veiled reference, but is specifically speaking of completion through the New Covenant in contrast with the very incomplete nature of the Covenant of Law. In view is...salvation in Christ. The spiritualization of the text to support a view is shameful. You rob those who embrace your teaching of the intent of the writer and thus...the Holy Spirit. Again, the completion in view contrasts the Covenant of Law and the New Covenant established by Christ and His blood/death. The promise of eternal redemption is bestowed upon those set apart to God through His offering which is clearly contrasted with the offerings of the Law. The Law could not take always sins, the Offering of the New Covenant can and does. 10:14 sums up that completion and the contrast of the sacrifices of both Covenants by stating that in regards to remission of sins, for those sanctified by His blood/death/offering...it is forever settled. It is finished, complete, believers are forever forgiven. We put that back into the context of the Whole Counsel of the Word of God and see the writer, thus the Holy Spirit...confirm the promises of God to Man (for the promise of God is fulfilled in that all families of the earth will be blessed through the Seed). Now we put this back into the context of our discussion, and again, trying to impose the Davidic Covenant into Daniel becomes, not only impossible, but absurd. That covenant will not be fulfilled until Israel conforms to God's will, which did not occur in the first century, and as of yet still has not occurred. Continued...

Continuing... You argue that the Davidic covenant is confirmed and fuflfilled through Christ, yet again, most would agree that Christ is not cut off in the middle of the 70th Week' which makes it untenable for Christ to confirm the Davidic covenant after His death, then we see cessation of Levitical Service. So the portion of your post where you quote the Psalms is the beginning of a false argument, which becomes more apparent in your quotation of Hebrews. You then say ''refresh your memory,'' lol, and it is the Covenant of Law...in the very first verse you quote. Not sure this could have been intentionally more humorous than it is. The single point I would raise would be that Hebrews consistently teaches the Law was abrogated by Christ's death, which in the timeline falls prior to the Seventieth Week, which precludes the views that try to spiritualize Daniel to make the cessation spoken of in the middle of the Seventieth Week apply to Christ. While it is reasonable to make the correlation, we still have to maintain the Biblical timeline which does not place the cutting off of Messiah in the middle of the Week. Continued...

Hello retrobyter, I will address a few things in your post, which I did yesterday but due to the length and not having ability to copy and paste was not able to post it. So I will answer in order to your comments and apologize for such a response. This will be my last post in this thread so you are welcome to the last word, lol. First, the options in the poll represent the two primary views that fit Daniel, and if you want a poll that gives the Davidic Covenant as an option...create it. You have given your view and I explained already why it was not given. That you ''feel'' that the Davidic covenant fits the context of relevant passages does not negate the singular point that it is the Covenant of Law which is the covenant broken by Israel that brought about the judgment, as well as the fact that it is the Covenant of Law and the New Covenant the writer of Hebrews contrasts, nullifying your quotation of a chapter and a half of Hebrews...moot. Furthermore, Paul writes ''...we have been made able ministers of...the New Covenant.'' Not the Davidic, which like the Abrahamic Covenant, finds its fulfillment in the New, by which we do not exclude that covenant, but rather see it as inseparable from the establishing of the New through Christ. I did not put the New Covenant as an option either, which reason should be evident in the points themselves. Your second point also overlooks some obvious issues, primarily the fact that, again, cessation of sacrifice for sins is through relationship with God through...the New covenant. Not the Davidic. We also see a conflict with trying to see this covenant ''confirmed'' for one Week, and the, the opposite of what you insist, this confirming thwarted, which is not what took place. While it still remains for Israel to come into relationship on a national basis, that actually reinforces that your view suggests they were. You will deny that, but I would remind you that this last Week will see Israel brought under the New Covenant. So since this did not take place, coupled with the fact that it is roughly 35 years later the Temple is destroyed, we cannot, apart from fanciful applications, apply the establishment of any covenant concerning National Israel. You speak of ''our union'' when it is Israel's restoration through the New Covenant in view in Daniel. And that hasn't happened yet. Then, because you see that the confirming of a covenant in Daniel refers to the Davidic, you argue the Levitical priests can't fulfill this. This forgets that Christ did not cause Levitical Service to cease when He died. In order for this to be given a spiritual meaning only, we would also have to see these services stop in the middle of the Week. That didn't happen. The Priesthood is not compared to Christ's Priesthood except in a context of the Covenant of Law. In the chapter and a half you quoted...did that escape your attention? So the comparisons do not fit the context. Christ did not confirm the Davidic covenant for 3 1/2 years, make service of the Law obsolete, thus fulfilling the prophecy. Christ is cut off prior to the 70th Week, which places Christ's death before the covenant in view is ''confirmed.'' Again, I apologize for such a limited response, and will pause there and finish this in another post so as not to risk it not posting. Continued...

Wingnut, just to touch on the previous post: in regards to Revelation 11 and 20, again, we have the declaration in the former occurring within the Tribulation, and the latter occurring after the thousand year Kingdom, which makes it impossible for us to reasonably debate it because, as I said, we are viewing two different Bibles with two different timelines. The Bible you read is missing, not just the thousand year period clearly stated, but the fulfillment of the promise of God to Israel. That's not something I can change your mind about, only the Lord can do that. And the same can be said of me, just to be fair (or in other words I'm not just saying I'm right...you're wrong). But I will say that I see no reconciliation of your view with the timeline established in Scripture. Nullifying the thousand years by correlating it to Peter's statement does not negate the rest of the relevant texts we consider when we try to be eschatologically accurate. Just do me a favor, set aside the view that Revelation is ''not chronological,'' and try an approach that we use with all other prophecy, which I am convinced negates a great deal of confusion that many debate about. The parenthetical passages will fall into place in the timeline. We open with the seals which coincides with ministry of the Two Witnesses' they are caught up in the middle, at which point Antichrist is revealed for who he is, and then begins the forty two months in which Israel is preserved in the Wilderness. This coincides with the rise of Antichrist where there is no sacrifice and oblation, but demand of worship of the Beast. Just give it a look. Again, I can't convince you of this, but I am confident you will see the consistency in events in this approach. It does not rely on very weak correlations, and allows us to keep events in the order they were given. I enjoy debating with a-millennials, don't get me wrong, but I have to insist some basics are first addressed, particularly when the Rapture is in view. The resurrection which takes place at the Great White Throne truly fulfills the foundational teaching found in the Old Testament Scriptures, but if one cannot see the distinction between the two resurrections in CH.20, then we cannot draw conclusions where discussion is profitable. Until that is addressed, discussion beyond that becomes meaningless. One last example of the use of protos would be in Hebrews, where the writer designates the Covenant of Law as the First Covenant, where we know this is not the first covenant, not even when we make this Epistle exclusive to Israel (Paul makes this clear in Galatians 3). Just as in Revelation 20, what is exclusive is...the contrast. In type only two are in view, and only one is acceptable (Law/New; unto life/unto death). Sequence is not in view in either. And with that I pray your studies will be blessed of God and will say I have enjoyed the discussion. God bless.

First, I do not deny the Kingdom. However, scripture gives us the strong indication that the millenium is only a day based on the verse from II Peter. II Peter 3:8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. Can you explain why this one thing is important to remember regarding the day of the Lord? Secondly, I do understand your frustration, although I do not understand how ceasing discussions benefits anyone. We are working with the same bible, and I really think what separates us from coming together is the issue of chronology. So I would appreciate it if you could at least respond to the scripture I offered you in regards to the dead being judged. Revelation 11:16 And the twenty-four elders, who were seated on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, 17 saying: “We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty, the One who is and who was,because you have taken your great power and have begun to reign.18 The nations were angry, and your wrath has come.The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophetsand your people who revere your name, both great and small—and for destroying those who destroy the earth.” Revelation 20:11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. This only happens once by my understanding of scripture, do you have an explanation for this? I appreciate you indulging me in this conversation, and do hope you will reconsider continuing, or at the very least a response to the above two inquiries. As for anything you have offered in scripture, I read every word and passage you have offered. I may not have responded to each one, but I always take what my brothers and sisters offer me in regards to scripture and examine it. In regards to what you offered towards the argument over whether first means first, none of what you offered to me says what you expressed to me. I do apologize for only responding to the first offering, not because I did not read all of them, but because I do not understand them in the way you are applying them. God bless you. Not sure if this will come through, as I have had several posts in the last day not go through, which I will attribute to the tablet. In regards to the usage of protos, I'm not sure how my post doesn't make the view presented clear. I gave examples of its usage where a sequential meaning is impossible, and combined with the fact that we already know that, at the least, the Lord"s resurrection is the first in sequence of time, and that it makes little sense to have the Two Witnesses resurrected at the end ( because he is empowered for forty two months yet no man can hurt them), then we have to consider ''first'' as not meaning first in a series. Also, we differ in regards to the thousand years which establishes that the dead do not rise at that time which again distinguishes this resurrection from the foundational teaching of one resurrection on the last day. It is not a matter of frustration in regards to your view, it is simply acknowledging that if an antagonist will not address a point or issue and continues with same arguments, then we are spinning our wheels. This is true on several key points. You say you don't deny the Kingdom (and I will clarify the thousand year physical Kingdom, not generally speaking, as I said, your salvation and sincerity is not questioned), then immediately say it is only a day based on correlating Peter's statement, which effectively denies the thousand years. This denies a clear statement in Revelation which is also reiterated by the fact that the first resurrection is simply not the same resurrection which follows and takes place at the Great White Throne. And I will stop there because several responses I have done have not gone through and with the distractions on my end I don't want to either waste time hunting and pecking on this tablet or do a longer post which won't go through anyway, lol. God bless.