Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
Of course not.I still don't get it?
What are you talking about?Why the last thing on the list is the very first thing fulfilled? Not according to me, but according to some of you and what you are applying that to.
This is ridiculous. They are not listed in order that they would be fulfilled. There is no indication of such a thing.I would think that angel had better sense than that. If the idea was that number 6 is fulfilled first, he should have at least listed it first rather than last.
LOL. Show me where there is any indication whatsoever that the things listed in Daniel 9:24 had to be fulfilled in the order they were listed. Good luck. That is total nonsense. You're always trying to find a way around the truth.When the angel mentioned the first 7 weeks, the 62 weeks, then the 70th week, he didn't apply any of that out of chronological order. Everything was/is fulfilled in the exact order he placed them. First the 7 weeks, then the 62 weeks, then the 70th week.
LOL. If only you knew how weak your arguments are. You're always trying to come up with stuff like this. It's not convincing whatsoever. Is this all you have as a response to try to refute what I said? You are not being objective at all. You are clearly trying to make Daniel 9:24 say what you want it to say. You are not objectively considering my interpretation of it at all and you know it. If you were, then you wouldn't come up with nonsense like this to try to get around what I said.But in verse 24 this angel disregarded chronology altogether, thus trying to confuse us here if the last thing on this list is actually the first thing on that list that is fulfilled. Had he put that 'first' on the list, I might be inclined to agree that maybe it could be meaning what you are applying it to. But since he didn't, I see no reason to apply it to what you are applying it to. At least I'm trying to be somewhat objective here by saying that if he had listed that first, maybe then it could apply to what you are applying it to, meaning that I would be open to it involving that had he listed it first rather than last.
Why don't you give your interpretation of Daniel 9:24? If you want to be taken seriously about this, then let's see your interpretation. If the most holy isn't Jesus then who or what is it and how was or will it be anointed?