Daniels 70-Weeks Timeline

[covenantee]

But He does mention Daniel in antiquities and the fall of Jerusalem and the sanctuary in Wars. Maybe you don't exist because he doesn't specifically mention you!

Stupefaction on display.

You claimed: "Even Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city."

Give us the verbatim quote from any source in which "Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city".

Another opportunity to prove you're not a Christian liar.

 

[covenantee]

But He does mention Daniel in antiquities and the fall of Jerusalem and the sanctuary in Wars. Maybe you don't exist because he doesn't specifically mention you!

Stupefaction on display.

You claimed: "Even Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city."

Give us the verbatim quote from any source in which "Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city".

Another opportunity to prove you're not a Christian liar.

Too late. You're a liar. A Christian liar is still a liar.

There is not one instance in The Antiquities of the Jews in which ""Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city".

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Stupefaction on display.

You claimed: "Even Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city."

Give us the verbatim quote in which "Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city".

Another opportunity to prove you're not a Christian liar.

And yet another opportunity for you to show your foolishness.

1. Josephus was a Hebrew Scholar.
2. Josephus mentions Daniel ( so He knows the book) in antiquities.
3. Josephus writes extensively on teh destruction of the city and the sanctuary- which is a fulffilment of prophecy from Daniel.
4. Josephus being a Hebrew Scholar so He would have known the prophecy of Daniel. Even if He doesn't say it explicitly.
5. If we follow you rlogic- we would have to question if most of the commands Paul gave to the church didn't come from Jesus because most of the time He doesn't explicitly and verbatim say these are commands from Jesus! I would have said I know you are not that ignorant, but now I am forced to say I only hope.

If you do not understand teh reality of piecing together information and realizing truths, you must lead a dizzying confused life.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Too late. You're a liar. A Christian liar is still a liar.

There is not one instance in The Antiquities of the Jews in which ""Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city".

Go back and reread and stop making false accusations.

I never said that. I just answered your charge that Josephuis never mentioned Daniel. NOw you are adding more to your original post. I tire of your rabbit trails. why don't you devote some of this energy to prove Jesus is the second prince mentioned in Daniel 9 instead of this stupidity you seem to wish to major in.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Stupefaction on display.

You claimed: "Even Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city."

Give us the verbatim quote from any source in which "Josephus, th enon believer he was, recognized Titus fulfilled Daniel as far as the destruction of the city".

Another opportunity to prove you're not a Christian liar.

Well you demand a verbatim quote where I never gave or implied a verbatim quote. ou are just dodging the fact you are so wrong and try to make false claims of my words- it is you who are lying by editing my words. YOu really are an ultra liberal aren't you. they play this game of lying about what people say.

Though yopu have taken further than the politicians have- for you try to lie about what I say to me!
Now try to prove Jesus is th esecond prince in Daniel 9 which is the topic at hand.

A partial list of your rabbit trails from having integrity.

1. Rejejcting Hebrew, Greek and near universal rules of grammar.
2. complaining about not biblical language scholars.
3. having a snit about Jospehus.
4. when I proved one of your false claims wrong about Josephus, you just create asnother false claim.
5. Arguing the Hebrew about teh word prince.
6. Bringing up Darby as if that is some voodoo spell.
7.When I showed you far more translations calling "archon" ruler instead of prince- you hang onto Wycliffe.
8. Falsely accussing me of saying Jesus is never called prince when I only said He was not the second prince of Daniel 9.

Now either put you rbog boy pants on- or this will be my last post and you can hurl your final ad-hominems. I am now more convinced that is all you are good for.

 

[covenantee]

And yet another opportunity for you to show your foolishness.

1. Josephus was a Hebrew Scholar.
2. Josephus mentions Daniel ( so He knows the book) in antiquities.
3. Josephus writes extensively on teh destruction of the city and the sanctuary- which is a fulffilment of prophecy from Daniel.
4. Josephus being a Hebrew Scholar so He would have known the prophecy of Daniel. Even if He doesn't say it explicitly.
5. If we follow you rlogic- we would have to question if most of the commands Paul gave to the church didn't come from Jesus because most of the time He doesn't explicitly and verbatim say these are commands from Jesus! I would have said I know you are not that ignorant, but now I am forced to say I only hope.

If you do not understand teh reality of piecing together information and realizing truths, you must lead a dizzying confused life.

Your lie continues to pursue you. Proverbs 28:13

 

[covenantee]

Well you demand a verbatim quote where I never gave or implied a verbatim quote. ou are just dodging the fact you are so wrong and try to make false claims of my words- it is you who are lying by editing my words. YOu really are an ultra liberal aren't you. they play this game of lying about what people say.

Though yopu have taken further than the politicians have- for you try to lie about what I say to me!
Now try to prove Jesus is th esecond prince in Daniel 9 which is the topic at hand.

A partial list of your rabbit trails from having integrity.

1. Rejejcting Hebrew, Greek and near universal rules of grammar.
2. complaining about not biblical language scholars.
3. having a snit about Jospehus.
4. when I proved one of your false claims wrong about Josephus, you just create asnother false claim.
5. Arguing the Hebrew about teh word prince.
6. Bringing up Darby as if that is some voodoo spell.
7.When I showed you far more translations calling "archon" ruler instead of prince- you hang onto Wycliffe.
8. Falsely accussing me of saying Jesus is never called prince when I only said He was not the second prince of Daniel 9.

Now either put you rbog boy pants on- or this will be my last post and you can hurl your final ad-hominems. I am now more convinced that is all you are good for.

Your lie continues to pursue you. Proverbs 28:13

 

[covenantee]

Go back and reread and stop making false accusations.

I never said that. I just answered your charge that Josephuis never mentioned Daniel. NOw you are adding more to your original post. I tire of your rabbit trails. why don't you devote some of this energy to prove Jesus is the second prince mentioned in Daniel 9 instead of this stupidity you seem to wish to major in.

Your lie continues to pursue you. Proverbs 28:13

 

[Davy]

Here is the verse in full that I quoted.Ephesians 2:19-22 As you can see, New Testament writers had a revelation of the temple greater than simplistic literalism.

“You are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.”​

This is New Testament Christianity. This is what Daniel was alluding to when he said a time was coming when ‘the Most Holy’ would be anointed. And it WAS anointed - in the 70th week. I dont know you Davy, but if anyone ever starts building a brick and mortar temple in Jerusalem, don’t give a dime towards it! Don’t even clap your hands. It would be an abomination!

Too late; you've already marked yourself as a non-believer that Jesus of Nazareth died on the cross! And because of that, you don't belong here on a Christian forum.

 

[covenantee]

Too late; you've already marked yourself as a non-believer that Jesus of Nazareth died on the cross! And because of that, you don't belong here on a Christian forum.

The raving of a psychotic fool.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Your lie continues to pursue you. Proverbs 28:13

You need a new line. the falsehood of this one has alreadfy seriously damaged your integrity.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The raving of a psychotic fool.

Well this has come to an inglorious end. If you feel the need to continue to act like the unsaved have the last word. this is my last response to you on this thread.

 

[covenantee]

Well this has come to an inglorious end. If you feel the need to continue to act like the unsaved have the last word. this is my last response to you on this thread.

"The raving of a psychotic fool" wasn't directed at you. Why are you responding to it?

 

[covenantee]

You need a new line. the falsehood of this one has alreadfy seriously damaged your integrity.

Proverbs 28:13 doesn't need a new line.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Hebrew anbd Greek are different in case you didn't know! No charge for the lesson.

So? What difference does it make if I show He is a prince in Hebrew or in Greek? You were denying that He is a prince at all. I proved you wrong. Just admit it and be glad you learned something.

Now prove that Jesus being the Prince of peace demands that He is the second named prince in daniel 9.

I wasn't the one making that claim. I think that it very well could be the case if it's talking about the Jews as being the people of the prince that were responsible for the destruction of the city and the sanctuary. Or it could be referring to a Roman ruler like Titus who led the Roman armies that destroyed the city and the sanctuary. Either way, I'm completely convinced that it's not talking about some future Antichrist.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

also by the way. I never said jesus was never called prince- go back and look at all my posts and get rid of that lie.

I have simply said He is not the second prince mentioned in Daniel. what is it with so many of you here that we talk about one subject and then yoou lose a sense of sanity and try to take my words and misapply them to things I never said??? Is this something that you learn in covenant theology schools?

You don't realize how poor you are at communicating. You need to think more before you post. You don't even realize what you imply by what you say.

You said, in relation to Jesus:

A prince does not rule over kings, but an archon or chief ruler would rule over kings.

Then I showed that Jesus is the Prince of Peace. Do you think He does not rule over kings as the Prince of Peace? What you said would imply that. Would you like to take back what you said?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

So? What difference does it make if I show He is a prince in Hebrew or in Greek? You were denying that He is a prince at all. I proved you wrong. Just admit it and be glad you learned something.

I wasn't the one making that claim. I think that it very well could be the case if it's talking about the Jews as being the people of the prince that were responsible for the destruction of the city and the sanctuary. Or it could be referring to a Roman ruler like Titus who led the Roman armies that destroyed the city and the sanctuary. Either way, I'm completely convinced that it's not talking about some future Antichrist.

Stop your lying! Never once did I say Jesus was never a prince! The very passage I said Jesus is Messiah the Prince. Bearing false witness against a brother is still sin!

YOu can be convinced, but you have to violate sound exegesis as well as rules of grammar to arrive at that conclusion.

Jews though their unbelief caused the destruction, did not destroy the city and sanctuary. That is a physical thing God is prophesying and Rome did that. and He is the prince that will establish a covenant for 7 years with Israel.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

You don't realize how poor you are at communicating. You need to think more before you post. You don't even realize what you imply by what you say.

You said, in relation to Jesus: Then I showed that Jesus is the Prince of Peace. Do you think He does not rule over kings as the Prince of Peace? What you said would imply that. Would you like to take back what you said?

And I showed why "Prince" is a very poor translation of "archon" The vast majority of English translations corrected prince and use the more accurate term ruler. Remember when a concordance shows multiple words, it isnot listing synonyms but alternate readings based on context, and almost allways in order of importance.
Ruler is the one that shold be used unless context shows different.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Stop your lying! Never once did I say Jesus was never a prince! The very passage I said Jesus is Messiah the Prince. Bearing false witness against a brother is still sin!

How is it lying when I was just going by what you were saying. It would be lying if I was purposely misrepresenting what you were saying, but I'm not. If I was mistaken about what you were saying, so be it. That's just being mistaken. That isn't the same as lying. So, what is your point in arguing about the word prince in relation to Jesus then?

YOu can be convinced, but you have to violate sound exegesis as well as rules of grammar to arrive at that conclusion.

That's a lie. So, you are not one to tell someone else not to lie. Stop lying yourself first.

Jews though their unbelief caused the destruction, did not destroy the city and sanctuary.

There is a sense in which that was the case, though. So, it's a viable possibility that Jesus is the prince of the people that destroyed the city and the sanctuary.

That is a physical thing God is prophesying and Rome did that. and He is the prince that will establish a covenant for 7 years with Israel.

Who? That would have to be Titus or someone like that in that case. Why are you trying to make it out to be a future Antichrist when that doesn't fit the context of Daniel 9:24-27 whatsoever?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

And I showed why "Prince" is a very poor translation of "archon" The vast majority of English translations corrected prince and use the more accurate term ruler. Remember when a concordance shows multiple words, it isnot listing synonyms but alternate readings based on context, and almost allways in order of importance.
Ruler is the one that shold be used unless context shows different.

What difference does this make? What a waste of time. Jesus is a prince so that shows that a prince can also be a ruler. So, you can keep wasting time on semantics if you want, but I don't want any part of that since it's pointless.