let me go copy and paste someone else's teaching
Do you think someone here did that?
let me go copy and paste someone else's teaching
I think he thinks intojoy did thatDo you think someone here did that?
I agree with MajorWe all know how to copy and past Mr. Joy. Do YOU personally have in input on this subject????
Well I think its fine as well.. But I believe Major was hoping to have a real bible study on this issue, where we all shared our own understanding. Those things that we had studied out for ourselves.....You know Paul that if a person does not have evidence of Christ in their heart and it is not seen in their conversation, then all the biblical knowledge they have only works to puff them up? knowledge itself puffs up, but love edifies. I think our brother Major was hoping we would edify each other with this study?Seriously! I did not notice...but copy and paste should be fine as long as the author is indicated...no?
But your knowledge of scripture has many errors. You should read what dr Fruchtenbaum wrote . Even brother Paul has given an amen to what I shared. I don't seek to glorify myself as you try and do by "prove me wrong" "show that you know scripture". Those are statements of an insecure mind / faith. If you think about it, if I believe exactly as frucht stated, why do I need to put it in my own words? It takes too long son!I already know how to copy and paste...thank you
Well when you are able to enter into the scriptures for yourself and debate my "errors" then you can prove your ability as to what is "error" and what is not "error". As it stands now, you seem unable to make a scriptural point as to any doctrine that I have presented. Until that time, your opinion is just the opinion of those who are consumed with their own ideas and carnal understanding.But your knowledge of scripture has many errors. You should read what dr Fruchtenbaum wrote . Even brother Paul has given an amen to what I shared. I don't seek to glorify myself as you try and do by "prove me wrong" "show that you know scripture". Those are statements of an insecure mind / faith. If you think about it, if I believe exactly as frucht stated, why do I need to put it in my own words? It takes too long son!
YummyWell when you are able to enter into the scriptures for yourself and debate my "errors" then you can prove your ability as to what is "error" and what is not "error". As it stands now, you seem unable to make a scriptural point as to any doctrine that I have presented. Until that time, your opinion is just the opinion of those who are consumed with their own ideas and carnal understanding.
Well when you are able to enter into the scriptures for yourself and debate my "errors" then you can prove your ability as to what is "error" and what is not "error". As it stands now, you seem unable to make a scriptural point as to any doctrine that I have presented. Until that time, your opinion is just the opinion of those who are consumed with their own ideas and carnal understanding.
B. The First Sixty-Nine Sevens - Daniel 9:25b unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. The program of the Seventy Sevens is then subdivided into three units: seven sevens, sixty two sevens, and one seven. The first sixty nine sevens is a combination of the first two subdivisions: the seven sevens and the sixty two sevens.
1. The Seven Sevens or Forty-Nine Years The first subdivision is seven weeks or seven sevens, which is a total of forty nine years. This refers to the forty-nine year period that it took to rebuild Jerusalem. In regard to the rebuilding of Jerusalem, it speaks of the city as being built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. The first subdivision of the Seventy Sevens, then, is the seven sevens or forty-nine years during which time Jerusalem was rebuilt. Only after forty-nine years was the rebuilding process brought to completion.
2. The Sixty-Two Sevens or Four Hundred Thirty-Four Years The second subdivision of the Seventy Sevens is threescore and two weeks or sixty-two sevens, comprising a total of 434 years. Insofar as this passage is concerned, there was no break between the first and the second subdivisions of the Seventy Sevens. The sixty-two sevens immediately followed the seven sevens, or the 434 years immediately followed the forty-nine years. Combining seven sevens and sixty-two sevens gives a total of sixty-nine sevens; or combining forty-nine years with 434 years gives a total of 483 years. A total of 483 years will transpire from the time that the decree is issued until the coming of the Messiah, the prince. Hence, the first 483 years of the 490-year period comes to an end with the First Coming of the Messiah.
The expression: unto the anointed one, the prince, does not point towards a Triumphal Entry but only points toward His appearance. Thus, the reference is to His birth, not to His Triumphal Entry. From the decree to rebuild Jerusalem to the birth of Yeshua would be a total of 483 years. Regardless of whether you take the decree to be that of Cyrus or the decree of Artaxerxes to Nehemiah, the first sixty nine sevens must come to a completion before the year A.D. 70.
C. The Events Between the Sixty-Ninth and the Seventieth Sevens - Daniel 9:26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and shall have nothing: 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 even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined.
MBS 067
Okee Dokie. Just a note to anyone new - if you post someone else's commentary, you should note who the author is. It has something to do with copyrights and the legal forms in any forum because it brings on lawsuits.
Bring it down, boys - you could spoil a really good thread.
Peace, please.
Well I think its fine as well.. But I believe Major was hoping to have a real bible study on this issue, where we all shared our own understanding. Those things that we had studied out for ourselves.....You know Paul that if a person does not have evidence of Christ in their heart and it is not seen in their conversation, then all the biblical knowledge they have only works to puff them up? knowledge itself puffs up, but love edifies. I think our brother Major was hoping we would edify each other with this study?
I did in the previous post that was questioned by Paul (I think it was Paul)Copy and pasted. It would be wise to post the source of your thinking.