Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

beameup

It Shall Be An Everlasting Covenant With Them

Recommended Posts

 

And how exactly do you work out that timeline?

 

Henry Grattan Guinness, who was an astronomer of note and a writer on prophecy said that  From Artaxerxes to Jesus (I cannot remember what point in His ministry) was 490 lunar years and 490 solar years from Darius.  

 

Ptolemy on whose writings secular chronology is based gives the Persian Empire 205 years, whereas Jewish and Persian traditions give only about  55 years.

 

Ptolemy gives 10 or 11 Persian kings  after Cyrus, but Herodotus, Xenophon, and scripture give only four. 

 

First we read of Xerxes

 

Daniel 11:2  And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.
 
Then Alexander
 
Daniel 11:3  And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
4  And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.
 
Herodotus only gives Artaxerxes as a Pro Rex for his father looking after the kingdom while Xerxes was on his Greek expedition.

 

Are you purposely ignoring the books of Ezra and Nehemiah which I previously referenced and quoted?

Either way, you are not making yourself look very good to the rest of us.

 

A gap is a gap is a gap... whether it be 37 years (33 AD--70 AD) or 1,981 years (currently).

 

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2 Peter 3:8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More smokescreen.....

 

I never mentioned 2500 years.

 

I am talking about the inherent order of events - 69 weeks, Messiah is cut off, war ending with flood, covenant is confirmed for a week, in the middle of that week the sacrifice ceases.

 

Messiah is cut off, the war ends before the covenant is confirmed, the last week starts with the confirmation of that covenant, and the sacrifice ceases in the middle of that week.

No mention of other time periods, not 10 days, not 10 years, not 70 years, not 700 years, not 2500 years - but the order is OBvious and simply stated, and the passage is blatantly plain about that order.

 

 

However, you have to fit a war in between Messiah being cut off after the 69th week, and the covenant being confirmed at the start of the 70th week.

The passage includes it; so must we.

And Messiah being cut off, and the sacrifice ceasing are also separate events in this passage.

 

What implications these things have is not at issue here - when reading the passage these things are plainly seen.

 

Therefore our understanding of events and timing must fit with these facts. But the passage itself does not comment further on other events or timing.

2500 years, 70 years, whatever, are just not in this passage.

7 weeks, 62 weeks, Messiah cut off, a war, a covenant confirmed for a week, the sacrifice ceases.

 

Why do you make the 69 weeks end at the end of Christ's ministry rather that the beginning?  It seems plain to me that when John said  

 

29 ¶  The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

 
36  And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!
 
And the voice of God from heaven said.
 
Matt 3:17  And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
 
Mark 1:11  And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
 
Lu 3:22  And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.
 
The disciples recognized him as Messiah.
 
John 1:41  He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.
 
 
Mark 3:16  Now as he walked by the sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew his brother casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers.
17  And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men.
18  And straightway they forsook their nets, and followed him.
19  And when he had gone a little further thence, he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets.
20  And straightway he called them: and they left their father Zebedee in the ship with the hired servants, and went after him.
 
23 ¶  And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out,
24  Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy 
 
Luke 4:41  And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ.
 
The Jews also were expectant at that time.
 
Jesus said: Mark 3:15  And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
 
What time could be fulfilled, but the end of 69 weeks?
 
That seems perfectly plain to me.  As you OBviously disagree, I would like to know why you reject what seems to me, and to others, plain scripture teaching?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you purposely ignoring the books of Ezra and Nehemiah which I previously referenced and quoted?

Either way, you are not making yourself look very good to the rest of us.

 

A gap is a gap is a gap... whether it be 37 years (33 AD--70 AD) or 1,981 years (currently).

 

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2 Peter 3:8

 

 

 

I have already shown from Ezra, that it is very unlikely that Nehemiah could have built the walls in the  20th or 31st year of Artaxerxes, according to accepted chronology, as he would have been at least 130 years old, being one of the leading Jews who returned with Zerubbabel, also Isaiah said it would be Cyrus who would give the command to build the city.  

 

As Nehemiah returned at the beginning,

Ezra 2:1 ¶  Now these are the children of the province that went up out of the captivity, of those which had been carried away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away unto Babylon, and came again unto Jerusalem and Judah, every one unto his city;

2  Which came with Zerubbabel: Jeshua, Nehemiah, Seraiah, Reelaiah, Mordecai, Bilshan, Mispar, Bigvai, Rehum, Baanah. 

He would have known the walls were broken down, so why was he still shocked over  100 years later?

 

Morecai was also on who returned at the same time.  Think on that.  

 

Is 44:28  That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid.
 
Remember it was the publishing of the command, not the completion of the work.
 

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:

 

Because Ezra did not mention both in Ezra 1,it doesn't mean that the scripture was not fulfilled.When Nehemiah returned and worked on the walls the city was built as they were living in houses.  The city was built before the temple,  Haggai :1-4.

 

Nehemiah repaired the walls in  days, hardly building the city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isaiah Chapter 61 (Luke 4:17-19)
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.
 
Jesus stopped reading for a reason. I think hind sight proves Jesus knew He was going to pause the weeks of Daniel so we gentiles can be saved under His glorious grace. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Isaiah Chapter 61 (Luke 4:17-19)
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.
 
Jesus stopped reading for a reason. I think hind sight proves Jesus knew He was going to pause the weeks of Daniel so we gentiles can be saved under His glorious grace. 

 

 

Yes that is what I was taught in the Brethren,

 

But what they don't teach you is that Jesus did complete the quote later, referring to the destruction of Jerusalem.Luke 21:22  For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. Only a less than 40 gap for "this generation"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that is what I was taught in the Brethren,

 

But what they don't teach you is that Jesus did complete the quote later, referring to the destruction of Jerusalem.Luke 21:22  For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. Only a less than 40 gap for "this generation"

 

 

Perhaps it is good if we continue with this passage from Luke 21 and continue on to verse 27:

And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
 
BTW, I really have no idea what the "Brethren" teach, as I'm from a Baptist background.  This is a "Baptist" forum isn't it?
Now, I see that 4th Century Catholic Replacement Theology "remnants" have crept in even to the Independent Baptist forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that is what I was taught in the Brethren,

 

But what they don't teach you is that Jesus did complete the quote later, referring to the destruction of Jerusalem.Luke 21:22  For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. Only a less than 40 gap for "this generation"

 

 

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.
-------vs---------
For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
 
I see a big difference in those two quotes? I think the days of vengeance means punishment for sin. Jesus fulfilled all what was written in the Law but not the prophets. For example Isaiah 30:26
 
Can you explain how you think all things was fulfilled that is written in the prophets? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you make the 69 weeks end at the end of Christ's ministry rather that the beginning? It seems plain to me that when John said

29 ¶ The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!

And the voice of God from heaven said.


Matt 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Mark 1:11 And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.


Lu 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

The disciples recognized him as Messiah.

John 1:41 He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.



Mark 3:16 Now as he walked by the sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew his brother casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers.
17 And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men.
18 And straightway they forsook their nets, and followed him.
19 And when he had gone a little further thence, he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets.
20 And straightway he called them: and they left their father Zebedee in the ship with the hired servants, and went after him.

23 ¶ And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit; and he cried out,
24 Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy

Luke 4:41 And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ.

The Jews also were expectant at that time.

Jesus said: Mark 3:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

What time could be fulfilled, but the end of 69 weeks?

That seems perfectly plain to me. As you OBviously disagree, I would like to know why you reject what seems to me, and to others, plain scripture teaching?

Oh this is easy......

Dan 9
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.

See there at the start?
It says "After threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself......"

That is the death of Christ on the cross.
After 69 weeks that is what happens.

Pretty simple if you read what is written...

Not after 69 weeks Messiah appears on the scene...... Edited by DaveW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DaveW (and others),

 

Today I read a booklet by Norbert Lieth entitled, "Daniel's Seventy Weeks of Years". This was put together from a series of articles he wrote a few years ago for Midnight Call magazine.

 

If you are in agreement with what is in the booklet, and from what I recall reading here I believe you are, then I believe I now understand your view and why you hold to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DaveW (and others),

Today I read a booklet by Norbert Lieth entitled, "Daniel's Seventy Weeks of Years". This was put together from a series of articles he wrote a few years ago for Midnight Call magazine.

If you are in agreement with what is in the booklet, and from what I recall reading here I believe you are, then I believe I now understand your view and why you hold to that.


I've never heard of the guy, nor read his book (OBviously), so I can't say if I agree with his view or not.

My points in this thread are based only on the reading of the passage from Daniel 9.
Others here have tried to force a view onto my words, but I have made no application as to what it means further.
It says there is a war, but I made no mention of which war or when.
It says the sacrifice ceases, and we know that the Jews continued to make sacrifice until the temple was destroyed.
I point out the order of events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DaveW,

 

The booklet is based upon Daniel 9. He does go into some historical evidences to go along with some of what the Word says, but Daniel 9 is the foundation. He touches upon the war aspects and such too. It's only something like a 25 page booklet so it's rather concise.

 

Midnight Call, who he writes for and is associated with, has a website at http://www.midnightcall.com

Midnight Call mostly deals with eschatology, though does also cover other things, and is pre-trib rapture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard of the site (I think), but I don't go to too many sites of any kind.

I rarely - if ever - go to "theology sites", and when I do it almost exclusively through links here.

I do not remember the last time I searched for theological material on line.

Seriously - I check here, I have two 4x4 site I visit occasionally (one local, one national), and the Formula 1 racing site.
Aside from that I search for specific items - car parts and the like.
Oh and I blog a tiny bit, have a Google+ account which I do nothing with, and we have a church website.

But anyway - I can't say I do or don't agree with this booklet because I just don't know.

;)

Edited by DaveW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Coming Prince" by Sir ROBert Anderson of Scotland Yard was published in 1894.

It clearly lays-out Daniel 9 using achecological evidence and Biblical text to reveal

the exact date of the presentation of the Messiah to Israel (aka: Palm Sunday).

Of course, this evidence is ignored by "Replacement Theology" as well as unbelieving Jews.

 

And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai
the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it,
according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the
commandment of (1st) Cyrus, and (2nd) Darius, and (3rd) Artaxerxes king of Persia. 
Ezra 6:14  (Artaxerxes deals with the establishment of the city-state of Jerusalem by permitting rebuilding of the walls.)
Edited by beameup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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.
-------vs---------
For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
 
I see a big difference in those two quotes? I think the days of vengeance means punishment for sin. Jesus fulfilled all what was written in the Law but not the prophets. For example Isaiah 30:26
 
Can you explain how you think all things was fulfilled that is written in the prophets? 

 

 

I take it to complete the quote given in Luke 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"The Coming Prince" by Sir ROBert Anderson of Scotland Yard was published in 1894.

It clearly lays-out Daniel 9 using achecological evidence and Biblical text to reveal

the exact date of the presentation of the Messiah to Israel (aka: Palm Sunday).

Of course, this evidence is ignored by "Replacement Theology" as well as unbelieving Jews.

 

And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai
the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it,
according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the
commandment of (1st) Cyrus, and (2nd) Darius, and (3rd) Artaxerxes king of Persia. 
Ezra 6:14  (Artaxerxes deals with the establishment of the city-state of Jerusalem by permitting rebuilding of the walls.)

 

 

Yes I have read that book.  If I remember correctly he believed in several second comings, one in the middle of the tribulation and one at the end and perhaps other comings.

 

Anderson was a Brethren man.  At the time he wrote it, the Brethren were the only ones who had that teaching.  The Baptists absorbed it after Scofield published HIS bible. Mainly American Baptists, because Scofield was American and got HIS bible into Baptist schools over there.  Conservative English baptists do not usually hold that doctrine, but the liberals may and I know me s

 

I believe strongly that Anderson was wrong with his dates.  I once did a chart that listed Anderson's dates and others who also based their dates on Ptolemy, I wonder what happened to that.  A more reliable dating system is given by Martin Ainsley in The Romance of Biblical Chronology. (about 1905) You can find it online.

 

Augustine said that Hezekiah and Romulus lived at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"The Coming Prince" by Sir ROBert Anderson of Scotland Yard was published in 1894.

It clearly lays-out Daniel 9 using achecological evidence and Biblical text to reveal

the exact date of the presentation of the Messiah to Israel (aka: Palm Sunday).

Of course, this evidence is ignored by "Replacement Theology" as well as unbelieving Jews.

 

And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai
the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it,
according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the
commandment of (1st) Cyrus, and (2nd) Darius, and (3rd) Artaxerxes king of Persia. 
Ezra 6:14  (Artaxerxes deals with the establishment of the city-state of Jerusalem by permitting rebuilding of the walls.)
 
 

 

 

Do you not think it strange that Xerxes is not mentioned here?  

 

Some writers say there are only two kings mentioned here and the text should read.

 

according to the commandment of (1st) Cyrus, and (2nd) Darius, even Artaxerxes king of Persia. 
 
Whatever you say, the scripture says the command was given by God in Isaiah, and Cyrus was to publish the command, and it was the publishing, or going forth that Daniel mentions. Anyway it doesn't really matter, as the command was published.  It only matters to your teaching as it would fail if you are wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know Anderson nor Ainsley...... but why do you say Ainsley is more accurate?

I don't care personally, just wondering about your justification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh this is easy......

Dan 9
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.

See there at the start?
It says "After threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself......"

That is the death of Christ on the cross.
After 69 weeks that is what happens.

Pretty simple if you read what is written...

Not after 69 weeks Messiah appears on the scene......

 

 

I agree with that.  And of course what comes after the 69th week?  The seventieth of course.  Messiah was cut off after the 69th week and in the seventieth.  How long after?  The next verse tells us.  

 

I don't know Anderson nor Ainsley...... but why do you say Ainsley is more accurate?

I don't care personally, just wondering about your justification.

 

Ainsley goes into the subject more carefully.  He says there is a complete bible chronology from Adam to Christ.  That chronology goes unbroken from Adam to Cyrus, then from Cyrus to Christ using the decree of Cyrus, but that chronology breaks down if we  take the decree of Artaxerxes as the starting point.  I disagree with Mr Ainsley's conclusions at times, one of which is that he takes the 69 weeks to end at Palm Sunday. Scripture chronology is based on scripture, secular chronology is based on the teachings of astronomer/astrologer Ptolemy who also gave the teaching that the sun circled the earth.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Ainsley goes into the subject more carefully.  He says there is a complete bible chronology from Adam to Christ.  That chronology goes unbroken from Adam to Cyrus, then from Cyrus to Christ using the decree of Cyrus, but that chronology breaks down if we  take the decree of Artaxerxes as the starting point.  I disagree with Mr Ainsley's conclusions at times, one of which is that he takes the 69 weeks to end at Palm Sunday. Scripture chronology is based on scripture, secular chronology is based on the teachings of astronomer/astrologer Ptolemy who also gave the teaching that the sun circled the earth.  

 

Fair enough - just asking because often times people say something is better simply because they agree with it, or it agrees with them.

;)

 

I personally have never had the time to trace things like this back.

As a result, I do not teach much on such things and when I do, I stick with what is clear, and explain that I do not have a full understanding of, for instance in this case the exact timing of events involved.

That is one reason why I asked if any knew of why the 7-62-1 division previously in this thread (or maybe the other one......??? )

 

I have found people appreciate it when I tell them I don't understand a passage rather than trying to push something into it.

If people approach me afterwards and ask, then I put it onto my study list.

Of late I have more time to study, and am reveling in that extra time.

I have done some in depth study on several issues that previously I would not have had time for.

 

This kind of thing will get to the front of the list in time, and then I will put you all on the right track. :lol: (Please note everyone - this is a joke! )

Edited by DaveW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough - just asking because often times people say something is better simply because they agree with it, or it agrees with them.

;)

 

I personally have never had the time to trace things like this back.

As a result, I do not teach much on such things and when I do, I stick with what is clear, and explain that I do not have a full understanding of, for instance in this case the exact timing of events involved.

That is one reason why I asked if any knew of why the 7-62-1 division previously in this thread (or maybe the other one......??? )

 

I have found people appreciate it when I tell them I don't understand a passage rather than trying to push something into it.

If people approach me afterwards and ask, then I put it onto my study list.

Of late I have more time to study, and am reveling in that extra time.

I have done some in depth study on several issues that previously I would not have had time for.

 

This kind of thing will get to the front of the list in time, and then I will put you all on the right track. :lol: (Please note everyone - this is a joke! )

 

The other thing I disgree with him (tentatively) is the length of the period of the Judges which Ainsley takes as 450 years based on Paul's statement Acts 13:20  And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet.

Which disagrees with the statement in 1 Kings 6:1Ki 6:1  And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD.
 
In that he agrees with Anderson. Also he says from the entry into Canaan till the end of the elders who outlived Joshua was 20 years.  I can see his reasoning, but when I did a bit of Maths, I tend to disagree.  My reasoning is as follows.
 
We don't know how old Joshua was at the exodus, but Joshua was in the census two years after, so was at least 18 at the exodus.  Moses took the 'young man'  Hosea and renamed him Joshua.  Joshua died aged 110. 
Take 110, less the supposed 20 years, less 40 years for the sejour in the wilderness and we have 50 for his age at the exodus.  Now could he be called a 'young man' if he was 50?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Numbers 14 says everyone 20 years and older would die in the wilderness, and in vs 30 (I think) Joshua and Caleb are particularly exempted from that, which indicates that they both were over 20 at the beginning of the 40 years in the wilderness.

Josh 14:10,11 tell us that at the entering in of the land Caleb was 85 - that means at the start of the 40 wilderness years Caleb was around 45.

Not sure if we are told specifically if Joshua or Caleb was older, but we have a wide range to fit Joshua in.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So lets effectively get rid of the antichrist and say it already took place so only the kingdom is left.  Now only the return of Christ but no armies surround Jerusalem until the end of the Millennial Kingdom and the only resurrection is the GWT.

 

You guys are all picking and choosing which Scriptures fit your theological view and not literal representation of any truth.

 

Roman destruction of Jerusalem is not the final destruction of Jerusalem.  Nor would it have been rebuilt again after it was "without form and void" in 70ad. 

 

To follow the thinking in the above posts, the next step is for Christ to come with the New Jerusalem no Millennium.  He will come destroy the old earth and heaven and then make a new one and the new Jerusalem will descend upon the earth evermore to be here forever.  NOT!

Edited by AVBibleBeliever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 21 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...