A verdict in search of evidence.
Most of what people believe about the end times today has no scriptural support. It comes from a theory based on what might happen if we insert a gap between Daniel’s 69th and 70th weeks. And then recreate the climate of the day.
That would be to imagine a revived Roman empire. The same setting the original 70th week had in the first century.
With an "Antichrist" ruling instead of Jesus dying for sin. Even though Jesus fulfilled the 70th week in the first century as predicted!
And then squeeze in a pre-trib rapture according to Margaret MacDonald’s fever induced visions of the 1800s.
Followed by a 7-year tribulation (70th week) caused by Antichrist.
Then add a rebuilt temple, and return to animal sacrifice with red heifers and all, thinking Ezekiel’s temple visions were literal and earthly. Even though the book of Hebrews solidly contradicts this.
And more, let’s say, Russia marching on Israel where ancient prophecies can come alive a second time, if, we turn spears into nuclear weapons and horses into aircraft. And Israel’s cattle, the reason for Gog and Magog invading, into oil and commerce.
All based on the idea of what might happen if we create and insert a huge gap, lasting thousands of years between the 69th and 70th week. Even though scripture doesn’t mention it.
Spears into missiles, cattle into oil, Jesus into Antichrist, Gog and Magog into Russia? First the Common Market, and then the EU or any superpower you can change into the Roman Empire? etc., etc.
All of this and more as prophecy buffs worldwide "strip mine" scripture finding evidence to support their verdict.
Comments
-
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?
-
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
-
[Deleted double post.]
-
@Dave_L said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
Then you sorely misunderstood or the people teaching it to you (and I'm guessing you did not attend Moody or DTS so you can't really claim that) didn't understand and/or teach it correctly.
I spent considerable time with Dr. Ryrie, aruguably the foremost voice on this subject, before he died and I am telling you that you are wrong on these issues.
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
Then you sorely misunderstood or the people teaching it to you (and I'm guessing you did not attend Moody or DTS so you can't really claim that) didn't understand and/or teach it correctly.
I spent considerable time with Dr. Ryrie, aruguably the foremost voice on this subject, before he died and I am telling you that you are wrong on these issues.
I am not wrong. If so, put up scripture refuting anything I've said so far.
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
Then you sorely misunderstood or the people teaching it to you (and I'm guessing you did not attend Moody or DTS so you can't really claim that) didn't understand and/or teach it correctly.
I spent considerable time with Dr. Ryrie, aruguably the foremost voice on this subject, before he died and I am telling you that you are wrong on these issues.
I am not wrong. If so, put up scripture refuting anything I've said so far.
Um, that makes no sense. I am saying you aren't accurately describing dispensationalism. That has nothing to do with Scriptural support denying what you have said.
-
Dave, all 6 of your points are totally off base. You might imagine such a person thinking that list, but they don't likely exist.
-
@GaoLu said:
Dave, all 6 of your points are totally off base. You might imagine such a person thinking that list, but they don't likely exist.This is what they teach. They wont tell you they prefer Margaret MacDonald's hallucinations over the bible. And they dodge the obvious. But this is what it comes down to when sampled across Dispensational pulpits in the land.
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
Then you sorely misunderstood or the people teaching it to you (and I'm guessing you did not attend Moody or DTS so you can't really claim that) didn't understand and/or teach it correctly.
I spent considerable time with Dr. Ryrie, aruguably the foremost voice on this subject, before he died and I am telling you that you are wrong on these issues.
I am not wrong. If so, put up scripture refuting anything I've said so far.
Um, that makes no sense. I am saying you aren't accurately describing dispensationalism. That has nothing to do with Scriptural support denying what you have said.
How can you trust any system where truth is flexible? Why progressive Dispensationalism if they were right in the first place?
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
Dave, if you are going to attack a mainstream belief you should at least portray it accurately. Jesus is the Anti-Christ? Really?It is a fact, Dispensationalists turn Jesus (Daniel 9:27) who fulfilled Daniel's 70th week in the first century as planned, into a future Antichrist yet to arrive on the scene. The gap has no scripture supporting it.
Again, if you are going to attack a position, you best know what you are attacking first. Clearly you do not.
I know more about Dispensationalism than most Dispensationalists do. I also know many weak spots you are unaware of, or you wouldn't be a Dispen_satin_alist.
Wow, really cute, same kind of arguments KJV onlyers say about the Non Inspired Version.
Makes for a good punchline but not a sound argument.
That being said, you have actually demonstrated that you don't know much about Dispensationalism.
Good grief.
Just sayin' it took me years to recover from Dispensational teaching having to prove myself and them wrong at each turn in the road. If you understood half of it you would seek repentance.
I don't think you can say you recovered from Dispensational teaching, you were taught something else.
I wish I had been taught something else.
You were. I don't know what it was, but it wasn't mainstream Dispensationalism.
It certainly was. Straight out of Moody and DTS.
Then you sorely misunderstood or the people teaching it to you (and I'm guessing you did not attend Moody or DTS so you can't really claim that) didn't understand and/or teach it correctly.
I spent considerable time with Dr. Ryrie, aruguably the foremost voice on this subject, before he died and I am telling you that you are wrong on these issues.
Does Ryrie think there is a gap in Daniel's 70 weeks, of unlimited duration? If so, he then has a more elaborate smoke screen covering his false prophecies.
-
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
-
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
Without reading it, I'll bet no direct scripture reference exists saying there is a gap.........If it's there post it.
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
Without reading it, I'll bet no direct scripture reference exists saying there is a gap.........If it's there post it.
There is also no direct Scripture saying there isn't one. But the article actually gives textual evidence that there is so you should read it.
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
Without reading it, I'll bet no direct scripture reference exists saying there is a gap.........If it's there post it.
There is also no direct Scripture saying there isn't one. But the article actually gives textual evidence that there is so you should read it.
So martians exist since scripture doesn't say they do not?
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
Without reading it, I'll bet no direct scripture reference exists saying there is a gap.........If it's there post it.
There is also no direct Scripture saying there isn't one. But the article actually gives textual evidence that there is so you should read it.
So martians exist since scripture doesn't say they do not? Have you ever considered teaching a class on hermeneutics?
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
Without reading it, I'll bet no direct scripture reference exists saying there is a gap.........If it's there post it.
There is also no direct Scripture saying there isn't one. But the article actually gives textual evidence that there is so you should read it.
So martians exist since scripture doesn't say they do not?
Did you read the article or are you just going to insist on throwing out stupid statements?
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
Without reading it, I'll bet no direct scripture reference exists saying there is a gap.........If it's there post it.
There is also no direct Scripture saying there isn't one. But the article actually gives textual evidence that there is so you should read it.
So martians exist since scripture doesn't say they do not?
Did you read the article or are you just going to insist on throwing out stupid statements?
I am not planning to invest any time in the article. If you can lift one scripture from it directly stating a gap exists, I'll devote time to it.
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
Without reading it, I'll bet no direct scripture reference exists saying there is a gap.........If it's there post it.
There is also no direct Scripture saying there isn't one. But the article actually gives textual evidence that there is so you should read it.
So martians exist since scripture doesn't say they do not?
Did you read the article or are you just going to insist on throwing out stupid statements?
I am not planning to invest any time in the article. If you can lift one scripture from it directly stating a gap exists, I'll devote time to it.
I'll note you aren't actually interested in discussing truth and are closed-minded into your own understanding of Scripture whether it is correct or not. What are you scared of? Are you scared that your understanding of the Bible might not be correct?
-
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
Without reading it, I'll bet no direct scripture reference exists saying there is a gap.........If it's there post it.
There is also no direct Scripture saying there isn't one. But the article actually gives textual evidence that there is so you should read it.
So martians exist since scripture doesn't say they do not?
Did you read the article or are you just going to insist on throwing out stupid statements?
I am not planning to invest any time in the article. If you can lift one scripture from it directly stating a gap exists, I'll devote time to it.
I'll note you aren't actually interested in discussing truth and are closed-minded into your own understanding of Scripture whether it is correct or not. What are you scared of? Are you scared that your understanding of the Bible might not be correct?
I know what scripture says in this matter, and I am bored stiff wading through unnecessary reading.
-
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
@reformed said:
@Dave_L said:
This does not address the problem. This addresses it. Find one scripture saying a gap of unlimited duration exists between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks.
Here's a good article. https://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2012/04/why-gap-in-daniels-70-weeks.html
Without reading it, I'll bet no direct scripture reference exists saying there is a gap.........If it's there post it.
There is also no direct Scripture saying there isn't one. But the article actually gives textual evidence that there is so you should read it.
So martians exist since scripture doesn't say they do not?
Did you read the article or are you just going to insist on throwing out stupid statements?
I am not planning to invest any time in the article. If you can lift one scripture from it directly stating a gap exists, I'll devote time to it.
I'll note you aren't actually interested in discussing truth and are closed-minded into your own understanding of Scripture whether it is correct or not. What are you scared of? Are you scared that your understanding of the Bible might not be correct?
I know what scripture says in this matter, and I am bored stiff wading through unnecessary reading.
You know what Scripture says? Or you know what people have told you the Scripture means? The Scripture isn't very specific about what the 70 weeks are. And there is textual evidence in Daniel 9 to suggest there could be a gap.
