Protestant disinfo debunked-Catholics are also Christians

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

Verse 26 ends with the temple being destroyed as well as the city by the Arabs and talks about the coming man of sin, the "prince". Verse 27 deals with the 70th week.

The destruction of Jerusalem spoken of in verse 26 took place in 70AD. The prince mentioned was not the Antichrist.

Verse 27 does speak more of the 70th week, again confirming that the Messieh will be cut off/crucified during the 70th week.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
No offense TJ, but I'm going to trust that Jesus was telling the truth when He said in Matthew 24 that the key to His coming and the "end of the world" was when people saw the events described in Daniel 9:27. He just has more credibility to me.

I'm not seeing Jesus admitting to being false and speaking of another messieh being crucified in Matthew 24.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by colbe

 

I didn't try and get you banned from ATS, I did no such thing Colbe. That's another completely false accusation. I'm not going to even acknowledge your posts if you continue to do this.

edit on 1-7-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

False accusations seems to be the normal from most of the trinitarians on this board.

And the ATS mods are very inconsistent in what they allow or don't allow.

edit on 2-7-2013 by truejew because: (no reason given)

truejew,

Quit following your fairly new non-trinitarian sect. Wild and crazy Non-Trinitarian Mormonism is a little older. The faith, Roman Catholicism rejects Mormon Baptism. The Trinity MUST be believed. Jesus said believe all that I have taught you. You can't pick and choose, that would make you a non-Catholic Christian.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
No offense TJ, but I'm going to trust that Jesus was telling the truth when He said in Matthew 24 that the key to His coming and the "end of the world" was when people saw the events described in Daniel 9:27. He just has more credibility to me.

I'm not seeing Jesus admitting to being false and speaking of another messieh being crucified in Matthew 24.

edit on 2-7-2013 by truejew because: (no reason given)

I never said any of that crap, straw man.

He answered their question about His own second coming and the end of the world. To which He referred them to Daniel 9:27 as the key to the timing of it. He hasn't had His 2nd advent yet, nor has the end of the world/age come yet.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

Verse 26 ends with the temple being destroyed as well as the city by the Arabs and talks about the coming man of sin, the "prince". Verse 27 deals with the 70th week.

The destruction of Jerusalem spoken of in verse 26 took place in 70AD. The prince mentioned was not the Antichrist.

I know this. I just said verse 26 ends with the Arabs destroying the temple and the city in 70 AD.

Verse 27 does speak more of the 70th week, again confirming that the Messieh will be cut off/crucified during the 70th week.

27 doesn't say anything about Him being cut off, the "he" personal pronoun refers to the last person spoken of which would have been the "prince", not the Messiah from verse 26.

reply to post by colbe


I am not a Mormon.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
No offense TJ, but I'm going to trust that Jesus was telling the truth when He said in Matthew 24 that the key to His coming and the "end of the world" was when people saw the events described in Daniel 9:27. He just has more credibility to me.

I'm not seeing Jesus admitting to being false and speaking of another messieh being crucified in Matthew 24.

edit on 2-7-2013 by truejew because: (no reason given)

I never said any of that crap, straw man.

He answered their question about His own second coming and the end of the world. To which He referred them to Daniel 9:27 as the key to the timing of it. He hasn't had His 2nd advent yet, nor has the end of the world/age come yet.

That is what your doctrine teaches. That Jesus failed and another messieh must be looked for.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

Verse 26 ends with the temple being destroyed as well as the city by the Arabs and talks about the coming man of sin, the "prince". Verse 27 deals with the 70th week.

The destruction of Jerusalem spoken of in verse 26 took place in 70AD. The prince mentioned was not the Antichrist.

I know this. I just said verse 26 ends with the Arabs destroying the temple and the city in 70 AD.

Verse 27 does speak more of the 70th week, again confirming that the Messieh will be cut off/crucified during the 70th week.

27 doesn't say anything about Him being cut off, the "he" personal pronoun refers to the last person spoken of which would have been the "prince", not the Messiah from verse 26.

And there we see the error of your doctrine. It makes Jesus a failure and the Antichrist the one who will be cut off in the midst of the 70th week (Although around 2 thousand years late) to bring salvation to mankind.

You may want to replace Jesus with YHWH, call Jesus a failure, and look to the Antichrist for your salvation, but I'll stay with Jesus. Jesus is the one who was crucified for our sins. Jesus is the one who finished the transgression, made an end of sins, made reconciliation for iniquity, brought in everlasting righteousness, sealed up the vision and prophecy, and anointed the most Holy. It was Jesus who caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease.

reply to post by truejew

And there we see the error of your doctrine. It makes Jesus a failure and the Antichrist the one who will be cut off in the midst of the 70th week (Although around 2 thousand years late) to bring salvation to mankind.

Except for a few details you leave out. One, Gabriel said the scope of those last four verses in Daniel 9 deals with the Jews/Israel and the city of Jerusalem. Two, there is no mention at all of anyone being "cut off" in verse 27. And finally, take your objections up with Jesus Himself. He is the one who referred His disciples to Daniel 9:27 as the key to the timing of His return and the end of the world in Matthew chapter 24. So take your o ejections up with Christ in prayer, not me for saying the same thing He did. The abomination of desolation Daniel and Christ referred to in Daniel 9:27 is the key to this. And He has yet to return and the world has not ended yet, therefore the 70th week when the man of sin enters the holy place and declares himself to be god has likewise not yet happened.

You're the one making Jesus out to be a failure and false prophet by saying He was wrong in Matthew 24 when He told His disciples that the key for His return and the end of the world was the events of Daniel 9:27.

You may want to replace Jesus with YHWH, call Jesus a failure, and look to the Antichrist for your salvation, but I'll stay with Jesus.

I've said absolutely none of that above, absurd straw man fallacy. As previously stated the "he" personal pronouni in English would refer to the last person mentioned in the text which would be the "prince that shall come". So verse 27 deals with the man of sin, not Jesus. He is the one who will be defeated.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
No offense TJ, but I'm going to trust that Jesus was telling the truth when He said in Matthew 24 that the key to His coming and the "end of the world" was when people saw the events described in Daniel 9:27. He just has more credibility to me.

I'm not seeing Jesus admitting to being false and speaking of another messieh being crucified in Matthew 24.

edit on 2-7-2013 by truejew because: (no reason given)

I never said any of that crap, straw man.

He answered their question about His own second coming and the end of the world. To which He referred them to Daniel 9:27 as the key to the timing of it. He hasn't had His 2nd advent yet, nor has the end of the world/age come yet.

That is what your doctrine teaches. That Jesus failed and another messieh must be looked for.

No it doesn't, you're either lying or slandering. I never said that. Jesus said He Himself was returning after the events of Daniel 27. Have you seen Him yet? When was His triumphant return in glory??

Daniel 9:27 does not refer to Jesus, unless in your theology He is an "abomination" who makes Jerusalem "desolate".

Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by colbe

 

I am not a Mormon.

She never said you were Mormon. I think I know why it's like arguing with a child with you most of the time.. either you have major reading comprehension issues or you purposely misrepresent what people say. She said your little non-Trinitarian movement is quite new, and compared it to a different non-Trinitarian movement which is much older, Mormanism. Colbe didn't say you were a Mormon. Lol

By chance is English your second language?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

You're the one making Jesus out to be a failure and false prophet by saying He was wrong in Matthew 24 when He told His disciples that the key for His return and the end of the world was the events of Daniel 9:27.

Actually, no. Jesus was not speaking of Daniel's 70 weeks at all. There are similarities between the messianic 70th week, which is past and fulfilled, and the Antichrist's counterfeit 70th week, which will deceive many people, including yourself, into following the Antichrist.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
No offense TJ, but I'm going to trust that Jesus was telling the truth when He said in Matthew 24 that the key to His coming and the "end of the world" was when people saw the events described in Daniel 9:27. He just has more credibility to me.

I'm not seeing Jesus admitting to being false and speaking of another messieh being crucified in Matthew 24.

edit on 2-7-2013 by truejew because: (no reason given)

I never said any of that crap, straw man.

He answered their question about His own second coming and the end of the world. To which He referred them to Daniel 9:27 as the key to the timing of it. He hasn't had His 2nd advent yet, nor has the end of the world/age come yet.

That is what your doctrine teaches. That Jesus failed and another messieh must be looked for.

No it doesn't, you're either lying or slandering. I never said that. Jesus said He Himself was returning after the events of Daniel 27. Have you seen Him yet? When was His triumphant return in glory??

Daniel 9:27 does not refer to Jesus, unless in your theology He is an "abomination" who makes Jerusalem "desolate".

I did not say that you said it, just that is what your doctrine teaches.

Verse 27 neither calls Jesus, nor the people of the prince an "abomination". What it calls abominations is what was going on in Jerusalem during the days of the messieh. It is because of those abominations (note abominations is plural, not singular as you seem to think) that Jerusalem was made desolate.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


And here comes the insults.

Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

And here comes the insults.

I didn't insult you. I asked if English was a second language because it appears so. If that's not the case you can say no.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

You're the one making Jesus out to be a failure and false prophet by saying He was wrong in Matthew 24 when He told His disciples that the key for His return and the end of the world was the events of Daniel 9:27.

Actually, no. Jesus was not speaking of Daniel's 70 weeks at all. There are similarities between the messianic 70th week, which is past and fulfilled, and the Antichrist's counterfeit 70th week, which will deceive many people, including yourself, into following the Antichrist.

Why would I follow the man of sin? I'm not a Muslim. And he most certainly was, he directed the apostles to Daniel 9:27 in His response to their question about His second coming and the end of the world (Matthew 24:1).

reply to post by truejew


"Shall come one who makes desolate".

Did Christ return yet? Has the world or age come to an end? You can either say yes to both of those, or you are affirming Jesus was a false prophet in Matthew 24. And the "he", (personal pronoun) in verse 27 cannot refer to the "people" of verse 26, it's singular, and it cannot refer to Jesus because He was not the previous person mentioned before the pronoun appeared. The " he" in verse 27 can only refer back to the previous male person mentioned in the text which would be some coming "prince". Who would be an Arab because his "people" destroyed the temple and city of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

You're the one making Jesus out to be a failure and false prophet by saying He was wrong in Matthew 24 when He told His disciples that the key for His return and the end of the world was the events of Daniel 9:27.

Actually, no. Jesus was not speaking of Daniel's 70 weeks at all. There are similarities between the messianic 70th week, which is past and fulfilled, and the Antichrist's counterfeit 70th week, which will deceive many people, including yourself, into following the Antichrist.

Why would I follow the man of sin? I'm not a Muslim. And he most certainly was, he directed the apostles to Daniel 9:27 in His response to their question about His second coming and the end of the world (Matthew 24:1).

Jesus fulfilled the 70 weeks of Daniel in the 70th week, the week after the 69th week, as Daniel prophesied. Any interpretation of Matthew 24 that contradicts Daniel 9 is incorrect.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

You're the one making Jesus out to be a failure and false prophet by saying He was wrong in Matthew 24 when He told His disciples that the key for His return and the end of the world was the events of Daniel 9:27.

Actually, no. Jesus was not speaking of Daniel's 70 weeks at all. There are similarities between the messianic 70th week, which is past and fulfilled, and the Antichrist's counterfeit 70th week, which will deceive many people, including yourself, into following the Antichrist.

Why would I follow the man of sin? I'm not a Muslim. And he most certainly was, he directed the apostles to Daniel 9:27 in His response to their question about His second coming and the end of the world (Matthew 24:1).

Jesus fulfilled the 70 weeks of Daniel in the 70th week, the week after the 69th week, as Daniel prophesied. Any interpretation of Matthew 24 that contradicts Daniel 9 is incorrect.

There is already a 38 year gap between verse 26 and verse 27 unless you claim Jesus was crucified in 70 AD or you claim the temple and city were destroyed in 32 AD. The 69 weeks are not contiguous with the 70th and it's why Gabriel split the two periods up as he did. Now we know the gap has been some 1900+ years because neither has the world/age come to an end, nor has Christ returned in glory.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew

 

There is already a 38 year gap between verse 26 and verse 27 unless you claim Jesus was crucified in 70 AD or you claim the temple and city were destroyed in 32 AD.

Incorrect. The prophecy does not say the destruction of Jerusalem will take place within the 70 weeks, only that it will happen sometime after Messieh is cut off.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

The 69 weeks are not contiguous with the 70th and it's why Gabriel split the two periods up as he did. Now we know the gap has been some 1900+ years because neither has the world/age come to an end, nor has Christ returned in glory.

There was actually three periods, not two. The first 7 weeks, the second 62 weeks, and the third 1 week. There was no gap between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks and no gap between the 62 weeks and 1 week.