The Antichrist's seven year covenant with many

[luigi]

12 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

.The tens of thousands of saints with whom the Lord returns, however, are those who died for the Word in the Lord. There is no hint of this in the Word. It must therefore be imagination. 

First, WHICH "return?" He will bring the spirits of the billions who have died in Christ with Him in His next and 1 Thes. 4 coming.
When He comes again 7 years later, as shown in Rev. 19, He will have both the Old and New Testament saints with Him as part of the armies of heaven. Without a doubt, ALL of the saved of humanity at that time will be at the marriage and supper in heaven. Then all will return to earth and to Armageddon with Him. 

I'll have to close this before I write more. computer is XXX.

 

And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

Enoch may not have known a bigger number than "thousand." 

There is no scripture that tells us saints are caught up or raptured when they are executed. Are you talking about those saints seen under the altar at the 5th seal, or those who will be killed by the Beast and False Prophet? 

Those that are resurrected FIRST at Paul's rapture are the dead in Christ: perhaps several billion by now. They would INCLUDE those martyrs under the altar but will not be limited to only those who have been martyred: they will be ALL those who have died in Christ, natural death or otherwise. 

Enoch is given the Word he explicitly scribed. Tens of thousands, is tens of thousands. Whether more or less, however, the Lord still does return with saints who had been earlier martyred, then later caught up/raptured. This is how I make the scripture in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-16 fit with where those saints who died earlier are caught up/raptured prior to the living saints upon the Lord's return.

[luigi]

3 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

I can assure you, those that write commentaries use the Lord's word also, but they came up with something different than you. Perhaps you could entertain the idea, at least momentarily, that you have it wrong? 

I can entertain the idea, but I will always fall back on the Word first rather than commentary that contradicts the correlations in the Word. The Lord gave us data on the abomination of desolation and the sacrifice he takes away in Daniel 9:26-27, along with correlating descriptions in Daniel 11:30-31. If you wish to ignore the obvious, because you prefer some individual's commentary over the Word, that's your choice. I, however, by recognizing the correlation to be of the same series of events, am then able to gather more information about these latter day events through the additional corresponding data in Daniel 11. You, however, who prefer the commentary of man who claims these to be ancient events, despite the Word repeatedly informing us that these are latter day events, to which even Daniel was not permitted to understand, keeps you in the dark unfortunately.

[iamlamad]

Just now, luigi said:

Enoch is given the Word he explicitly scribed. Tens of thousands, is tens of thousands. Whether more or less, however, the Lord still does return with saints who had been earlier martyred, then later caught up/raptured. This is how I make the scripture in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-16 fit with where those saints who died earlier are caught up/raptured prior to the living saints upon the Lord's return.

Show us the verse telling you that, and I will believe you - if the verse really does say that. I only want to see scriptural proof.  I think you are trying to make "tens of thousands" fit with any other scripture. Good luck!

[iamlamad]

Just now, luigi said:

I can entertain the idea, but I will always fall back on the Word first rather than commentary that contradicts the correlations in the Word. The Lord gave us data on the abomination of desolation and the sacrifice he takes away in Daniel 9:26-27, along with correlating descriptions in Daniel 11:30-31. If you wish to ignore the obvious, because you prefer some individual's commentary over the Word, that's your choice. I, however, by recognizing the correlation to be of the same series of events, am then able to gather more information about these latter day events through the additional corresponding data in Daniel 11. You, however, who prefer the commentary of man who claims these to be ancient events, despite the Word repeatedly informing us that these are latter day events, to which even Daniel was not permitted to understand, keeps you in the dark unfortunately.

All I am saying is, what those scriptures tell us fit PERFECTLY with what happened to Antiochus. You can ignore this if you wish. It really does not matter. We have much in Rev. About the Beast and what He will do. You may not know this, but there are some that insist some of Dan. 8 is for our future also, when Daniel is very clear that it was about Antiochus. They are not scriptures critical to our salvation. 

By the way, if you leave Antiochus out of chapter 11, it will leave a big gap in time for the kings of the North and South. 

Edited September 3, 2020 by iamlamad

[luigi]

6 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

Show us the verse telling you that, and I will believe you - if the verse really does say that. I only want to see scriptural proof.  I think you are trying to make "tens of thousands" fit with any other scripture. Good luck!

If you cannot believe the Lord has the capacity to have His Word scribed the way He wanted it scribed, then how can anyone believe anything in the Word, when nearly anything in it can then be corrupt? I will believe the Word as is rather than change a little here and a little there to fit some unsupported point of view by man.

[luigi]

22 minutes ago, iamlamad said:

All I am saying is, what those scriptures tell us fit PERFECTLY with what happened to Antiochus. You can ignore this if you wish. It really does not matter. We have much in Rev. About the Beast and what He will do. You may not know this, but there are some that insist some of Dan. 8 is for our future also, when Daniel is very clear that it was about Antiochus. They are not scriptures critical to our salvation. 

By the way, if you leave Antiochus out of chapter 11, it will leave a big gap in time for the kings of the North and South. 

For some reason the Lord provides us numerous details in His Word about the end of the age throughout nearly every book in both the Old and New Testaments. I thereby do believe that this information is critical to whether we choose the lie which is soon upon us, or whether we choose the truth.

Daniel chapters 7 through 12 are all about the end times, correlating in great part with the book of Revelation. If you wish to disregard these data being for the last end of the indignation, when Satan makes his last stand, and instead choose these data to be in regards to some irrelevant individual in ancient history, that is up to you.  

Daniel 8:19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

[Retrobyter]

On 9/1/2020 at 5:40 PM, Da Puppers said:

You might try putting things in their proper order Retro;

1. Dan 9:25... UNTO MESSIAH THE PRINCE shall be 7 & 62 weeks.

2.  Dan 9:26... AFTER the 62 weeks shall...

A. Messiah be "cut off".

B. City and the sanctuary shall be destroyed. 

C. Desolations (more than one) are (plural) decreed....until the war. 

3. Daniel 9:27...a covenant is confirmed for the ONE last week.

This is a WESTERNIZED order. Your "A," "B," and "C" (which are typically written "a," "b," and "c," as subpoints to "2," in common outline form) did indeed happen "AFTER the 62 weeks"; HOWEVER, you should note that the text doesn't say HOW LONG "AFTER!" Typically, events such as the city being destroyed and the sanctuary being destroyed and the Messiah being "cut off" take far longer than a seven-year period ... and DID, as we well know and admit!

You (and others) think this means that there's a gap between the 69th Seven and the 70th Seven, but not necessarily. See, the count continued and these events happened in a different order chronologically than how they were reported by their significance. 

When Daniel was given the 7 Sevens and the 62 Sevens, there was no gap between them; so, why would there suddenly be a gap between the 62 Sevens and the 1 Seven? If things were "counted" in such a manner, WHY was such a gap placed there? NO REASON is given for such a drastic change in the counting of these Sevens, if things occurred as you suggest!

It wasn't Daniel (or rather, the messenger speaking to Daniel) who put the "gap" in the 70 Sevens; it was YESHUA` ("Jesus") who put a gap in place, and He did so when He left them "desolate" before He left earth, promising that they would not see Him again until they could welcome Him back as YHWH'S Messiah! Their widespread abominations (which Yeshua` summarized in Matthew 23) were the reasons for putting the gap in place! It's because they REJECTED THEIR MESSIAH! They REJECTED GOD'S ANOINTED ONE, GOD'S CHOICE, FOR THEIR KING! The Jewish leadership were UNFAITHFUL STEWARDS of the nation that belonged to God as His Kingdom. (If you'll pardon the analogy, they were like Denethor in J. R. R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings! They could not accept Yeshua` like Denethor could not accept Aragorn as his king!) They couldn't give up their power, however limited by Rome, and accept Yeshua` as God's Anointed One, even though God authenticated His Son as that Anointed One and validated His Son's place as Israel's King by working the miracles which they saw in abundance!

Can't you just hear it in their voices when they met after Yeshua` raised Elezar ("Lazarus")?!

John 11: (KJV)

45 Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him. 46 But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done.

47 Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said,

"What do we? (What are we going to do?) for this man doeth many miracles! 48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation!"

49 And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them,

"Ye know nothing at all, 50 Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not."

51 And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; 52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. 53 Then from that day forth they took counsel together for to put him to death.

This is why they convinced the people, who had just welcomed Yeshua` as David's Son when He rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, to cry out "Crucify Him!"

Quote

This is where you need to take note.   God "cut/karath" the/a covenant with Abraham 430 years before the law was given (which was nearly), and before he "confirmed" the covenant in Christ, 

Gal 3:17 KJV And this I say, that the covenant, that was CONFIRMED before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Cutting off, or the cutting of a covenant with blood is distinct and separate from when the covenant is confirmed.   The new covenant of Christ was cut when Christ cut off and offered his own blood on Golgotha's hill.   When we partake of this new covenant cup of communion, we do show and remember THE LORD'S DEATH until he comes again.   We don't partake of this cup of communion to remember his resurrection.   It is in remembrance of the new covenant that he has made/ cut by his own blood.  There was no blood sacrifice confirmation of a covenant at the baptism of Christ.   Christ had come some 30 years prior.   By incorrectly distinguishing between cutting and confirming of a covenant you have gotten things out of their proper order and placed verse 27 before verse 26, which does not incur the first of multiple desolations until some 40 years later.  The wise men knew that the birth of Jesus was he that was "born" to be the king of the Jews. 

Mat 2:2 KJV Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.

It was the birth of Christ that ended the 7 & 62 weeks, and not his baptism.   The only thing you have right is that the Messiah was cut off AFTER the 62 weeks had ended. 

Be Blessed 

The PuP 

Then, what do you do with the LIFETIME of the Messiah Yeshua`? He occurred after the 62 Sevens but before He was "cut off!" How does HE fit into your scheme, and why would HE be put in the very long gap? That doesn't make any sense!

 

[Diaste]

On 9/2/2020 at 7:53 AM, iamlamad said:

Would this be all the saints - every one? Why would ANYONE imagine God would allow His own bride to be murdered? I don't think we serve this kind of God. Would a loving human husband "prove" his fiance to this extent? NO! Yet people imagine God would. Even when we read:

1 Thes. 1:10

And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

 

This is His promise: to deliver us. Why then to SO MANY doubt Him? He has made a way of escape, yet it seems so many want to thumb their nose (so to speak) at his escape plan. I will never understand it. I am TAKING His plan of escape! 

"For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?" 1 Peter 4

"But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world" - 1 Cor 11

"And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:  for whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." - Hebrews 12

The mistake of pretrib is conflating wrath, which condemns the wicked and rebellious, with judgment and chastisement which all sons undergo.

Pretrib has changed the truth into a lie in this. The church isn't going anywhere and will deal with this judgment on the House of God but escape the eternal damnation of wrath, and only that.

 

[Retrobyter]

On 9/1/2020 at 7:17 PM, iamlamad said:

"the second noun in a noun construct state cannot be the subject of the sentence." I think the question is, can it be an antecedent?  I want to ask: what does this statement have to do with an antecedent? And antecedent does not have to be the subject. And it certainly be be found inside a prepositional phrase. I looked at verses 26 and 27  in 60 different English translations. They all said basically the same thing. Some said "anointed one," some said "Messiah," and some other words. then later in the verse, most say people of the "prince" or people of the "ruler."   In English, the antecedent seems to be the prince, not the people, and not the "anointed one."  I can only guess the rules for antecedents are the same in Hebrew as in English. 

Shalom, iamlamad.

Sorry, but you're a bit confused.

In Hebrew, neither "huw" nor "hiy" (which is "he" or "she") was used in this sentence. In the verse-27 part of the sentence, only the VERBS are seen. That's why, in the English translations, which are quite willing to break up a sentence into more than one, they have SUPPLIED the word "he" three times, since Hebrew verbs also carry masculine/feminine and singular/dual/plural endings!

The PRONOUNS require an "antecedent."

Verbs require a SUBJECT NOUN to complete the sentence. That MAY be with a pronoun, which in turn will require an antecedent - a noun that can substitute for the pronoun - but, again, the pronouns are NOT present in the text!

[iamlamad]

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, iamlamad.

Sorry, but you're a bit confused.

In Hebrew, neither "huw" nor "hiy" (which is "he" or "she") was used in this sentence. In the verse-27 part of the sentence, only the VERBS are seen. That's why, in the English translations, which are quite willing to break up a sentence into more than one, they have SUPPLIED the word "he" three times, since Hebrew verbs also carry masculine/feminine and singular/dual/plural endings!

The PRONOUNS require an "antecedent."

Verbs require a SUBJECT NOUN to complete the sentence. That MAY be with a pronoun, which in turn will require an antecedent - a noun that can substitute for the pronoun - but, again, the pronouns are NOT present in the text!

Not a bit, rather a LOT!

My attempt to translate:

A people, troops, tribe  (and the people)
A commander, civil, military, religious  (of the prince) 
To come in or come or go (who is to come)
go to ruin (will destroy)
Excitment (the city?)
A sacred place or thing (and the sanctuary) 
An extremity or after (the end) 
Flood or deluge (will come like a flood
Until or as far as or up to (and until)
Extremity or after (the end)
a battle or war (there will be war)
Stun, devastate, stupefy (desolations) 
to point sharply, to wound, to decide (have been decreed)

To be strong, to prevail or act insolently (he will confirm)
a covenant
much, many, great (with many)
united, one, first (for one)
a period of 7 days or years week (week)
the half, the middle(but in the middle)
a period of 7 days, week (week)
to repose, cease exertion, rest (he will put and end0
A slaughter, the flesh of an animal, sacrifice (to sacrifice)
a donation, ribute, or sacrificial offering (and offering)
Above, over, upon, against (and on)
An edge, extremity, wing, flap pinnacle (the wing)
an idol, idolatrous, filthy, disgusting (the abomination)
to stun, devastate, stupefy (that causes devistation)
As far as, even to, up to until (until) 
to point sharply, to wound, to be alert, to decide (the decreed)
Completion, complete destruction, consumption, annihilation (destruction)
to pour forth or be poured out (is poured out)
Above, over, upon, against (upon)
To stun, to devastate, stupefy (him)

26  ...a people or troops (with) commander to come (will) ruin excitement a sacred place (temple) (and) after (a) flood until extremity (end) war, devastations, decided.

27  Prevail strongly a covenant (with) many one seven (years) (but) (in) the middle (of) one seven (years) repose (cease) sacrifice (and) offering above or on a pinnacle or wing an idol to devastate up to a decision complete destruction be poured out upon to devastate. 

It seems very likely that the events of verse 27 should follow the last part of the previous verse and it would be either the people or the commander who would accomplish verse 27. 

Hebrew reminds me of what I have been studying of ancient Arabic in the Quran, before they added the diacritical markings. For example, just one character (like a smile) can mean several things depending on the diacritical marks. The problem was, the first Qurans were written before the diacritical markings were invented. So when a Quran was copied from the old, before the diacritics, it was anyone's guess what the original meaning was!

It seems, then, we should understand these verses through the lens of Revelation. It has MUCH MORE information, and if understood, shows a complete week. When Jesus, the head of the church, was teaching me, He said, "in fact, you could find the entire 70th week 'clearly marked.'" I heard His voice; I heard His words. I can't deny I heard it! 

Then I found what He sent me to find: the entire week marked by 7's: the 7th seal, the 7th trumpet (midpoint) and the 7th vial. 

Therefore I have to believe the entire 70th week is in our future.