Research: Majority of Americans Believe Works Are the Key to Salvation

[kleronomos]

How can something that doesn't exist be divided? The 70 Weeks expired right on time, 490 years after 457 B.C., else they've have to rename it "70 Weeks plus 2,000+ years" prophecy.

You can read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation and you'll not find a single Numerically Specific Time Prophecy (I didn't say "Event Specific Time Prophecy" - I said "Numerically Specific Time Prophecy") in all of Scripture that has inserted within it a "gap" of any sort. Just to name a few:

• Noah preached 120 years, no gaps.
• Israel spent 400 years in bondage, no gaps.
• Israel's wandering lasted 40 years, no gaps.
• Elijah's famine lasted 3 1/2 years, no gaps.
• The Shunammite woman's son was born after 1 year, no gaps.

The Prophecy itself in divided. We are not to take that into consideration? Isn't there an end followed by a week?

Daniel 9:24 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.

Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks


Are you saying that in the 7 year period

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.

Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


Are you saying the destruction of the city and sanctuary is within 7 years of Christ's crucifixion? Are you saying by 40AD the city was destroyed? I know I have missed something but I just don't know what.


You don't think it strange the 'end of the war' took place 2000 years before the actual end of the war?

 

[Goliath]

The whole concept of grace is unearned...

Romans 11:6 (KJV) And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Again, You have a verse which clearly appears to support your doctrine.
But you must reconcile Pauls teachings, with the foundational Salvation teachings of Jesus Christ, else you make the Lords Gospel....a false doctrine.
Jesus replied, "Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. (John 14: 23)
Can you reconcile (Romans 11:6) with what Jesus taught in (John 14:23)? The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the Truth, and if you can't reconcile your teachings with what Jesus taught, what you have, is a false doctrine. Because the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the Truth.

Now what Paul is saying in (Romans 11:6), is this....
The Works under the Law of Moses did not change the heart.
Why?
Because the Jews didn't keep them because they, Loved God. They kept them, because they feared God. Under the New Covenant of Grace, God created a new covenant, a covenant which changes the heart.
The Works Paul is railing against, are the "Works of the Law", ....under the Law of Moses., the Old Covenant, the one God did away with.
So why would Paul need to teach against the Law of Moses?
The Jews were having a difficult time switching to the New Covenant, because of the Priests, who were being converted, as shown in (Acts 6:7). These Priests, along with the Pharisee converts, wouldn't let go of the Law of Moses. These men had been the shepherds of the Jews, for a long..long time, and the sheep were still following them. And these shepherds, wanted believers to continue to follow the Law of Moses.
And when Peter had come up to Jerusalem, those who were of the Circumcision contended with him,
(Acts 11:2)

God did away with the Law of Moses, because it didn't change the heart, and created a Law that does change the heart. If this is not the truth, why would God have sent his Son with a New Covenant if it didn't fix the problem? Trust me on this one, The Works of the Law of Christ, those Good Works, done out of love...does change the heart.

There is no word 'basis' in Titus 3:5, but Paul does tell us on what 'basis' we are saved and that is His mercy.

Brother I was using the NASB version that you posted, and in it, you clearly printed the word "Basis".

 

[Phoneman-777]

The Prophecy itself in divided. We are not to take that into consideration? Isn't there an end followed by a week?

Daniel 9:24 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.

Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks


Are you saying that in the 7 year period

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.

Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


Are you saying the destruction of the city and sanctuary is within 7 years of Christ's crucifixion? Are you saying by 40AD the city was destroyed? I know I have missed something but I just don't know what.


You don't think it strange the 'end of the war' took place 2000 years before the actual end of the war?

Let's back up for a moment. In speaking of Messiah's death, it says "And AFTER threescore and two weeks (and the seven spent rebuilding) Messiah shall be cut off..."

This can be rewritten as: "And AFTER 62 Weeks (and the seven spent rebuilding), Messiah shall be cut off..."

If Messiah's crucifixion takes place "AFTER" the seven, threescore, and 2 weeks - or 69 Weeks - it must take place DURING the 70th Week.

Therefore, since the destruction of Jerusalem occurred decades after Messiah was cut off in the midst of the 70th Week, it can't part of the 70th Week, but is a future consequence of the events of the 70th Week that lies outside the prophecy of the 70 Weeks.

It can be shown from history and Scripture that the 69 Weeks ended and the 70th began in 27 A.D. at the river Jordan when Messiah was "anointed" in baptism and came up out of the water to begin His 3 1/2 year ministry, would be crucified in the midst of the Week, and would continue to "confirm the covenant" aka the New Covenant of salvation "through them that heard Him" for the remaining 3 1/2 years, as mentioned in Hebrews 2:3 KJV.

 

[kleronomos]

It IS an erroneous platitude to suggest that since Christ is our rest, we can now break the Sabbath - as ludicrous as claiming since Jesus is our truth, we can now lie.

We let Jesus be our Lamb slain, don't we?

Let's back up for a moment. In speaking of Messiah's death, it says "And AFTER threescore and two weeks (and the seven spent rebuilding) Messiah shall be cut off..."

This can be rewritten as: "And AFTER 62 Weeks (and the seven spent rebuilding), Messiah shall be cut off..."

If Messiah's crucifixion takes place "AFTER" the seven, threescore, and 2 weeks - or 69 Weeks - it must take place DURING the 70th Week.

Therefore, since the destruction of Jerusalem occurred decades after Messiah was cut off in the midst of the 70th Week, it can't part of the 70th Week, but is a future consequence of the events of the 70th Week that lies outside the prophecy of the 70 Weeks.

It can be shown from history and Scripture that the 69 Weeks ended and the 70th began in 27 A.D. at the river Jordan when Messiah was "anointed" in baptism and came up out of the water to begin His 3 1/2 year ministry, would be crucified in the midst of the Week, and would continue to "confirm the covenant" aka the New Covenant of salvation "through them that heard Him" for the remaining 3 1/2 years, as mentioned in Hebrews 2:3 KJV.

I read and understood your reasoning, and appreciate your thoughts, but I find myself not convinced and so I remain in disagreement and still don't understand why you. From my math the 70th week began in 29, not 27AD but I don't think that matters to much for this discussion. You have the covenant for a week confirmed but cut off, right? Not seeing how both those can be true at the same time either.


Would you agree AFTER, could actually just mean AFTER as it is written, the first two periods (seven sevens = 49 and the threescore and 2 sevens = 434)
were completed and not the beginning of the 70th, seeing that NOTHING happened in those next 7 years that is written would happen in that last period except the crucifixion?


If we do take that last period and make it future, and place the crucifixion of Christ and the later destruction of the city and temple in the 'AFTER the 69 weeks were completed', it all works out AND makes more sense.




Wouldn't the last week would have to BEGIN with a covenant made with many, Christ cut off in the midst, causing the sacrifice and oblation to cease (which didn't happen)?

yet what can ever fit
city and sanctuary destroyed
end of the war desolations
overspreading of abominations making desolate
the consummation and that determined poured out

which you SAY are consequences of, but that doesn't really fit with the way the whole thing is written, does it?

the first 2 parts so easy to SEE, the last basically UNABLE to even be worked out.
from the time of the decree unto is LITERAL
to the building unto is LITERAL
the cutting off of Christ LITERAL

but the destructions, covenants, oblations ceasing a CONSEQUENCE and not something that happened AFTER like it is written?

a covenant confirmed with many for a week hasn't ever happened, has it?

Has the sacrifice and oblation ceased? Have we not continued to love and worship the Lord all this time?


So even if you have this taking place in the 70th
Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off

nothing that follows does. So I don't agree we are to disregard AFTER and replace it WITH IN when NOTHING HOLDS TRUE, as everyone can plainly see.

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.

Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 

[crossnote]

Again, You have a verse which clearly appears to support your doctrine.
But you must reconcile Pauls teachings, with the foundational Salvation teachings of Jesus Christ, else you make the Lords Gospel....a false doctrine.
Jesus replied, "Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. (John 14: 23)
Can you reconcile (Romans 11:6) with what Jesus taught in (John 14:23)? The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the Truth, and if you can't reconcile your teachings with what Jesus taught, what you have, is a false doctrine. Because the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the Truth.

J

Again, You have a verse which clearly appears to support your doctrine.
But you must reconcile Pauls teachings, with the foundational Salvation teachings of Jesus Christ, else you make the Lords Gospel....a false doctrine.
Jesus replied, "Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. (John 14: 23)
Can you reconcile (Romans 11:6) with what Jesus taught in (John 14:23)? The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the Truth, and if you can't reconcile your teachings with what Jesus taught, what you have, is a false doctrine. Because the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the Truth.

There is no need to reconcile Jesus with Paul. They don't contradict, unless you are willing to say the Holy Spirit contradicts Himself. Remember ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God (2Tim 3:16), and Jesus never wrote Scripture while on this earth. Jesus put his stamp of approval on Peter and Peter put His stamp of approval on Paul (2 Pet 3:15-16). The Gospel of Jesus Christ is true but no truer than Paul's letters.

Rom 11:6...
And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

John 14:23...
Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

The way I'd reconcile/explain the supposed difference is to say, it is God who draws us, enlightens us, regenerates us unto salvation, but doesn't leave us orphans but continues the good work He began. IOW, it's all about Him, not us.

Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: (Php 1:6)

So why would Paul need to teach against the Law of Moses?

Paul did not speak against the Law of Moses (that was the perception of some of the Jewish leaders who thought that by doing the law one could attain salvation). He taught (and Jesus showed) that all have fallen short of God's standard and there was no one righteous (except Jesus) as explained in detail (Romans chaps1-3).

Brother I was using the NASB version that you posted, and in it, you clearly printed the word "Basis".

You're right there and that's a further reason why I am steering away from the Critical Text and gravitating towards the Received Text (KJV, Geneva etc.)

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; KJV(Tit 3:5)

He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we did in righteousness, but in accordance with His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,NASB (Tit 3:5)

In this case I really don't see much difference, as salvation is 'based' on His mercy.

 

[Phoneman-777]

We let Jesus be our Lamb slain, don't we?


I read and understood your reasoning, and appreciate your thoughts, but I find myself not convinced and so I remain in disagreement and still don't understand why you. From my math the 70th week began in 29, not 27AD but I don't think that matters to much for this discussion. You have the covenant for a week confirmed but cut off, right? Not seeing how both those can be true at the same time either.


Would you agree AFTER, could actually just mean AFTER as it is written, the first two periods (seven sevens = 49 and the threescore and 2 sevens = 434)
were completed and not the beginning of the 70th, seeing that NOTHING happened in those next 7 years that is written would happen in that last period except the crucifixion?


If we do take that last period and make it future, and place the crucifixion of Christ and the later destruction of the city and temple in the 'AFTER the 69 weeks were completed', it all works out AND makes more sense.




Wouldn't the last week would have to BEGIN with a covenant made with many, Christ cut off in the midst, causing the sacrifice and oblation to cease (which didn't happen)?

yet what can ever fit
city and sanctuary destroyed
end of the war desolations
overspreading of abominations making desolate
the consummation and that determined poured out

which you SAY are consequences of, but that doesn't really fit with the way the whole thing is written, does it?

the first 2 parts so easy to SEE, the last basically UNABLE to even be worked out.
from the time of the decree unto is LITERAL
to the building unto is LITERAL
the cutting off of Christ LITERAL

but the destructions, covenants, oblations ceasing a CONSEQUENCE and not something that happened AFTER like it is written?

a covenant confirmed with many for a week hasn't ever happened, has it?

Has the sacrifice and oblation ceased? Have we not continued to love and worship the Lord all this time?


So even if you have this taking place in the 70th
Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off

nothing that follows does. So I don't agree we are to disregard AFTER and replace it WITH IN when NOTHING HOLDS TRUE, as everyone can plainly see.

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.

Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Yes, Jesus is our sacrifice - but that doesn't mean we can disregard "take up your Cross daily and follow Me"

If we count 483 years from 457 B.C., that brings us to 27 A.D. (no year zero). Bear in mind, 457 B.C. is the most archaeologically confirmed date in all of Scripture, and used to be included in the margins of Bibles in Daniel 9. His ministry lasted 3 1/2 years until He was crucified "in the midst of the week" or 31 A.D. and Paul took the Gospel to the Gentiles 3 1/2 years later in 34 A.D.

Some people maintain the "6 goals" of Daniel 9:2 pertain only to Jews which went unfulfilled, therefore a gap is necessary.

I remember reading a commentary that "finish the transgression and make an end of sins" referred linguistically to the "rebellion of the Jews who refused to take the Gospel to the world" which ended when the Gospel went to the Gentiles in 34 A.D. Christ's death also made "reconciliation for iniquity" and brought "in everlasting righteousness" for the Jews who humbled themselves and put their trust in Him (and also the Gentiles after 34 A.D.). To "seal up the vision and the prophecy" refers to the expiration of the 70 Weeks standing as a "guarantee" that the 2,300 years from which they are "cut off" would also meet their fulfillment right on time -- the purpose of the revelation of the 70 Weeks was not only to announce the timing of Messiah's Advent, but to explain Daniel's confusion, because the angel specifically told Daniel to listen up while he explained the "vision" aka "mareh" which refers to the 2,300 Days of chapter 8, immediately followed by the revelation of the 70 Weeks prophecy. Of course, "anoint the Most Holy" referred to the inauguration of Christ's ministry as "High Priest" of both Jewish and Gentile Christian converts.

So, in this way, as well as others, the prophecy can easily be seen as having met it's 490 years from start to finish way back in the past, and not gap is necessary. Incidentally, there's not a single Numerically Specific Time Prophecy in all of Scripture where a "gap" is added - it ends exactly when the predicted numeric duration is given.

 

[Inquisitor]

Again, You have a verse which clearly appears to support your doctrine.
But you must reconcile Pauls teachings, with the foundational Salvation teachings of Jesus Christ, else you make the Lords Gospel....a false doctrine.
Jesus replied, "Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. (John 14: 23)
Can you reconcile (Romans 11:6) with what Jesus taught in (John 14:23)? The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the Truth, and if you can't reconcile your teachings with what Jesus taught, what you have, is a false doctrine. Because the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the Truth.

Now what Paul is saying in (Romans 11:6), is this....
The Works under the Law of Moses did not change the heart.
Why?
Because the Jews didn't keep them because they, Loved God. They kept them, because they feared God. Under the New Covenant of Grace, God created a new covenant, a covenant which changes the heart.
The Works Paul is railing against, are the "Works of the Law", ....under the Law of Moses., the Old Covenant, the one God did away with.
So why would Paul need to teach against the Law of Moses?
The Jews were having a difficult time switching to the New Covenant, because of the Priests, who were being converted, as shown in (Acts 6:7). These Priests, along with the Pharisee converts, wouldn't let go of the Law of Moses. These men had been the shepherds of the Jews, for a long..long time, and the sheep were still following them. And these shepherds, wanted believers to continue to follow the Law of Moses.
And when Peter had come up to Jerusalem, those who were of the Circumcision contended with him,
(Acts 11:2)

God did away with the Law of Moses, because it didn't change the heart, and created a Law that does change the heart. If this is not the truth, why would God have sent his Son with a New Covenant if it didn't fix the problem? Trust me on this one, The Works of the Law of Christ, those Good Works, done out of love...does change the heart.



Brother I was using the NASB version that you posted, and in it, you clearly printed the word "Basis".

Paul was teaching that same word of faith as he was in Romans 10.

Don't believe me?

Read it yourself.

Romans 11:20-23
Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. See then the kindness and severity of God: to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; for otherwise you too will be cut off. And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them in again.

Don't quote from Acts while discussing what Paul said in Romans chapter 11.

Can you see what your doing?

Your applying an interpretation to chapter eleven of Romans but refusing to quote from it.

 

[Inquisitor]

Yes, Jesus is our sacrifice - but that doesn't mean we can disregard "take up your Cross daily and follow Me"

If we count 483 years from 457 B.C., that brings us to 27 A.D. (no year zero). Bear in mind, 457 B.C. is the most archaeologically confirmed date in all of Scripture, and used to be included in the margins of Bibles in Daniel 9. His ministry lasted 3 1/2 years until He was crucified "in the midst of the week" or 31 A.D. and Paul took the Gospel to the Gentiles 3 1/2 years later in 34 A.D.

What source are you citing to support the following statement.

"457 B.C. is the most archaeologically confirmed date in all of Scripture"

How do you know that the ministry of Jesus lasted 3.5 years?

You need to support that statement; that the ministry of Jesus was 3.5 years.

How do you know that Jesus was crucified in the middle of the week?

The scripture indicates Jesus was crucified on the day before the Sabbath.

Where do you find in the N.T, that Paul started his ministry in 34 AD?

 

[Goliath]

Don't quote from Acts while discussing what Paul said in Romans chapter 11.
Can you see what your doing?
Your applying an interpretation to chapter eleven of Romans but refusing to quote from it.

Yes, but you can not see what you're doing.
I am using Acts as the back story...for people to understand the context of why Paul wrote, what he wrote. I love Paul's epistles...because I understand them. And I understand them because I was weaned on the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which I learned through Gods Holy Spirit. And I try to explain Paul, in context. But it's very difficult to explain to those who are in need milk (The Salvation teachings of Jesus Christ) yet choose to eat only the solid food (Paul's epistles). You are choking on it, and unfortunately, you will probably not know it until it's too late.

But, if and when you are born of God, and are ready for solid food.... then I will discuss Paul with you.

 

[Goliath]

There is no need to reconcile Jesus with Paul. They don't contradict, unless you are willing to say the Holy Spirit contradicts Himself.

So..If I show where your teachings show a contradiction, between what Jesus taught and your claim of what Paul was teaching, I am contradicting the Holy Spirit?
Kinda Scary....I didn't know you saw yourself in that light.

John 14:23...
Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
The way I'd reconcile/explain the supposed difference is to say, it is God who draws us, enlightens us, regenerates us unto salvation, but doesn't leave us orphans but continues the good work He began.

Are you saying, As the Holy Spirit, what you say negates what Jesus said?
I can hardly argue against someone who speaks for the Holy Spirit, so I will leave you to it.

 

[kleronomos]

If Messiah's crucifixion takes place "AFTER" the seven, threescore, and 2 weeks - or 69 Weeks - it must take place DURING the 70th Week.

If it were being counted as DURNING then why the word AFTER and all the events described not happeing?

It is much simpler to take it as a break rather than consecutive because of all the prophecy that didn't come true. IF IT HAD just as we can clearly see the construction of the temple we would also know who HE WAS and who the covenant was made with and how the sacrifice and oblation were cut off and on and on...BUT we know nothing because it hasn't taken place. And it certainly DIDN'T take place in the 7 years following. EVIDENCE or lack of it TELL us what the truth is, is all I am saying.

 

[kleronomos]

Yes, Jesus is our sacrifice - but that doesn't mean we can disregard "take up your Cross daily and follow Me"

If we count 483 years from 457 B.C., that brings us to 27 A.D. (no year zero). Bear in mind, 457 B.C. is the most archaeologically confirmed date in all of Scripture, and used to be included in the margins of Bibles in Daniel 9. His ministry lasted 3 1/2 years until He was crucified "in the midst of the week" or 31 A.D. and Paul took the Gospel to the Gentiles 3 1/2 years later in 34 A.D.

Some people maintain the "6 goals" of Daniel 9:2 pertain only to Jews which went unfulfilled, therefore a gap is necessary.

I remember reading a commentary that "finish the transgression and make an end of sins" referred linguistically to the "rebellion of the Jews who refused to take the Gospel to the world" which ended when the Gospel went to the Gentiles in 34 A.D. Christ's death also made "reconciliation for iniquity" and brought "in everlasting righteousness" for the Jews who humbled themselves and put their trust in Him (and also the Gentiles after 34 A.D.). To "seal up the vision and the prophecy" refers to the expiration of the 70 Weeks standing as a "guarantee" that the 2,300 years from which they are "cut off" would also meet their fulfillment right on time -- the purpose of the revelation of the 70 Weeks was not only to announce the timing of Messiah's Advent, but to explain Daniel's confusion, because the angel specifically told Daniel to listen up while he explained the "vision" aka "mareh" which refers to the 2,300 Days of chapter 8, immediately followed by the revelation of the 70 Weeks prophecy. Of course, "anoint the Most Holy" referred to the inauguration of Christ's ministry as "High Priest" of both Jewish and Gentile Christian converts.

So, in this way, as well as others, the prophecy can easily be seen as having met it's 490 years from start to finish way back in the past, and not gap is necessary. Incidentally, there's not a single Numerically Specific Time Prophecy in all of Scripture where a "gap" is added - it ends exactly when the predicted numeric duration is given.

The gap, in my opinion IS necessary because the 'events' as plainly laid out have not happened yet. I respect your study yet I still must disagree with those conclusions.


And how many are given in 'sections'? Past that, 454BC the commandment goes out, 426BC the decree, Daniels vision and the foundation laid, 405BC temple finished and dedicated 'seven sevens end' , 'sixty -two sevens begin', 4BC the nativity, 29AD 'sixty-nine sevens' end, Messiah cut off, 483 years from going forth of commandment.

Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself


40 years later (probation) 69AD Temple destroyed.
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.


Obviously, Christ isn't the one who is confirming any covenant for one week because as we just read ' And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself' and the temple destroyed, these are now in the past. Not to mention who would Christ have confirmed a one week covenant with at the beginning of His ministry?

He came for the lost sheep of the House of Israel though His interactions were with the House of Judah mostly. Being cut off but NOT FOR HIMSELF would not follow with HIM being the one to cause the sacrifiece and oblation to cease, and CHRIST would NEVER SPREAD ABOMINATIONS to make it desolate. And what was ever poured out upon the desolate in the 3 1/2 years after His crucifixion?

Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


Still I don't know if you are saying or are not saying that that Christ cut off and the daily sacrifice and oblation ceasing to be the same event, are you or aren't you? Aren't you or are you not saying that the prophecy goes forth in perfect order but then stops and goes backwards and repeats just one part? Does the temple destruction take place and then there is a covenant for for a week made or not? If so, how do you decide that? Don't you think if GOD gave a vision of Christ being cut off and the temple destroyed that if He showed it to happen WITHIN ONE WEEK that it would have? SO I will respect some of your reasoning but I can not agree and don't think that stating it as TRUTH is...the best course of action. Just my opinion.
Though the prophecy gives the time of the death of Christ, the prophecy was in answer to the prayer for the people and the CITY and was given in 'divisions'. 70 are determined, not 70 in consecutive years determined, that is a determination made by men and it doesn't fit with what is written, again, my opinion. Thank you for the reply, I understand what you are saying and your point of view, just don't agree.

 

[crossnote]

@Goliath ,you need to learn to quote people properly on a forum, otherwise they have nothing to respond to.
If you want a response, try again.

 

[Goliath]

@Goliath ,you need to learn to quote people properly on a forum, otherwise they have nothing to respond to.
If you want a response, try again.

I know...Right? Don't know how I managed to pull that one off. Had a reaction to something I ate, an intolerance that caused a migraine. Love a good Port, but it doesn't like me.

J
There is no need to reconcile Jesus with Paul. They don't contradict, unless you are willing to say the Holy Spirit contradicts Himself. Remember ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God.

Yes, that's true...but the context in which you put them together, is not inspired by God. The context in which you put them together, shows the Gospel of Christ to be a false doctrine. I know you don't see it, but take some time, read the Gospel of Christ, and highlight every salvation teaching that wouldn't be allowed to be taught in your church. And if you're honest, everything written in red will become a yellow highlight.

Years ago I challenged my dad with this, and he discovered I was right. I can tell folks the truth, but unless they see it for themselves, I can not convince them with just my words.

 

[Jackson123]

Yes, that's true...but the context in which you put them together, is not inspired by God. The context in which you put them together, shows the Gospel of Christ to be a false doctrine. I know you don't see it, but take some time, read the Gospel of Christ, and highlight every salvation teaching that wouldn't be allowed to be taught in your church. And if you're honest, everything written in red will become a yellow highlight.

The Word not contradict each other
The why people interpreted the Word may make the Word contradict each other

For example the teaching of Jesus about the judgement on the nation on Matt 25

My ex pastor say that judgement is only decide reward not decide heaven or hell

On the judgement Jesus say He will put those people into 2 different group

Sheep and goat

Sheep go to heaven because helping the poor

Goat go to hell because not helping the poor

My ex pastor say this is only to decide reward

Jesus say eternal fire or eternal live

Why pastor say only reward, because he think salvation not by work mean you can do every thing as long as you have faith

Noah informed by God about the coming fload
He believe
He is free to build an arch or sleep all day long than drown to die

Did The fact he believe save him from drown ?

He need to put his faith in to action

So he build an arch

Work is faith in action

That is Jesus talking about in Matt 25

If Noah believe what God tell him why not build an arch

Can you say no because it will mean save by work

Save ny faith, that faith show itself into action

He work to build an arch because his faith

Save by faith alone but faith that saved never alone

Martin Luther

 

[FreeGrace2]

The Word not contradict each other
The why people interpreted the Word may make the Word contradict each other

Which is what YOU do.

For example the teaching of Jesus about the judgement on the nation on Matt 25

My ex pastor say that judgement is only decide reward not decide heaven or hell

You should have listened to him.
re

On the judgement Jesus say He will put those people into 2 different group

The Bible shows that all believers will receive their glorified resurrection bodies "when He comes" back at the Second Advent, when Jesus sets up His Millennial Kingdom. The GWT judgment will be 1,000 years later. The believers will have already been rewarded for their service and given glorified bodies. Nothing more to judge.

Sheep and goat

Figures of speech.

Sheep go to heaven because helping the poor

Believers go to heaven because Jesus gives them eternal life. John 10:28. And they shall never perish.

Goat go to hell because not helping the poor

No, they are cast into the lake of fire because they never recieved etenal life. Rev 20:15

My ex pastor say this is only to decide reward

You should have listened to him.

Jesus say eternal fire or eternal live

No He didn't.

Why pastor say only reward, because he think salvation not by work mean you can do every thing as long as you have faith

What are you trying to get at?

Noah informed by God about the coming fload
He believe
He is free to build an arch or sleep all day long than drown to die

Noah was obedient.

Did The fact he believe save him from drown ?

Don't try to conflate physical deliverance from the flood with soul salvation from the lake of fire.

He need to put his faith in to action

Not for his soul. He was already saved.

So he build an arch

Work is faith in action

Yes. But doesn't save. One is saved by faith, all by itself.

That is Jesus talking about in Matt 25

You should have listened to your ex-pastor.

Save by faith alone but faith that saved never alone

Martin Luther

A rather confused man. Since salvation IS by faith alone, that means it is ALONE.

If faith is "never alone" that would mean you are NOT saved by faith alone.

The very statement by Luther is conflicted, as are your views expressed here.

Should have listened to your ex-pastor. He was teaching the truth.

 

[posthuman]

How do you know that Jesus was crucified in the middle of the week?

The scripture indicates Jesus was crucified on the day before the Sabbath.

not to support that the great tribulation already happened 2,000 years ago..
but the sabbath of John 19:31, 'a high sabbath' was the first day of Unleavened Bread ((Leviticus 23:5-6)) - the day after Passover.

this is the timeline that i believe:

• tuesday night/wednesday day
  • seder, arrest, then crucified wednesday afternoon & entombed before sundown
• wednesday night/thursday day
  • 1st high sabbath of the days of Unleavened Bread
  • 1st night, 1st day in the earth
• thursday night/friday day
  • the women buy & prepare spices for His burial - i suppose they thought Nicodemus & Joseph had done a poor job!
  • 2nd night, 2nd day
• friday night/saturday day
  • the weekly sabbath - they could not bring the spices until morning
  • 3rd night, 3rd day
• saturday night, sunday morning
  • Christ rises on the feast of Firstfruits - always on the day after sabbath - sometime after sundown.
  • we don't know what time - some say midnight, some say sunrise, some say 3am ('like a thief in the night')
  • all the early writings of the church indicate that the habit of the church was to meet to sing praises early on sunday morning, not on sabbath as some suppose, as the sun was rising, commemorating the day Christ rose.

there's simply no way to fit 3 days and 3 nights in a friday crucifixion and sunday resurrection.

 

[crossnote]

I know...Right? Don't know how I managed to pull that one off. Had a reaction to something I ate, an intolerance that caused a migraine. Love a good Port, but it doesn't like me.

LOL, need to lay off the cheap Port.

Yes, that's true...but the context in which you put them together, is not inspired by God. The context in which you put them together, shows the Gospel of Christ to be a false doctrine. I know you don't see it, but take some time, read the Gospel of Christ, and highlight every salvation teaching that wouldn't be allowed to be taught in your church. And if you're honest, everything written in red will become a yellow highlight.

Years ago I challenged my dad with this, and he discovered I was right. I can tell folks the truth, but unless they see it for themselves, I can not convince them with just my words.

Here is what I see the Gospel as...

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which alswo ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: (1Co 15:1-4)

This would follow Paul's reason why ALL men need the Gospel (Romans chaps 1-3) and how it saves (Rom 3).
Paul gives warning to those who preach a different Gospel (Gal 1:8-9).

True, I am not a RED LETTER Christian, I leave that for the liberal arm of Christianity, who boast in their good works but fail to give glory to God for His good work.

For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. (Rom 5:19)
...and that doesn't mean our obedience.

I left this Board around 2015 and when I came back, it sure has taken a turn for the worse, from free grace to works righteousness. (the worse kind).

 

[Mak33]

Here are some of the shocking (to me) findings in the poll (2020) cited below...

"A majority of Americans, a new survey finds, no longer believe that Jesus Christ is the way to eternal salvation. Faith (generally) and good works, they say, will do the trick "

Same as with the buddhism beliefs.

 

[Jackson123]

Jackson
Jesus say eternal fire or eternal live

Free grace2

No He didn't.

Matt 25
34Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdomprepared for you since the creation of the world.

Hmm
Jesus not say I put more diamond in your crown because you help the poor

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

Did Jesus say go to heaven but less diamond because you not helping the poor?

No

He say go to eternal fire or hell

So Matt 25 not about reward where both sheep and goat go to heaven

It is about heaven or hell

Or you make your own bible base on what you want