Revolution in Iran

[cv5]

Daniel_9_24_Seven_Sets_Timeline (2).pdf

drive.google.com

Abstract


This document proposes that the six clauses of Daniel 9:24 describe seven sequential periods — "gears within gears" — rather than six facets of a single 490-year span. Working from independently anchored historical boundaries (the Second Temple's completion, Artaxerxes' wall decree, the 536 AD dust-veil event, Erasmus's Greek New Testament, Saddam Hussein's execution), the framework traces six completed sets running from 515 BC to 2006 AD, then proposes a seventh, open set — "anoint the Most Holy" — running 2006 to 2496.

This final set is read typologically against Solomon's building of the Temple and his own house: seven years for the Temple (mapped to the church age, 46–2006 AD), thirteen years for the palace (2006–2019, a period marked by concealment-based financial fraud — mortgage securitization, LIBOR, Madoff, offshore leaks), and the fourteen-day, two-part dedication (2019–2026 and 2026–2033, read as parallel constructions of a global financial-governance system — CBDCs, satellite infrastructure, AI compute, biometric ID, and autonomous military capability).

The central claim is that the true anointing of the Most Holy is spiritual and largely invisible to public record, while the observable news cycle during this period reflects only its earthly shadow — a counterfeit consecration built in imitation of the real one. All chronological and typological claims are flagged by tier and labeled where inference rather than direct evidence is used, per the falsifiability standard (2 Peter 1:20–21) applied throughout the broader manuscript.

Sounds like a zany layer cake of the dogmata of the Seventh Day Adventist - Charles Taze Russell - Augustinian allegorism with a dash of Roman Catholicism thrown in for good measure, with a rich buttery conspiracy theory icing on top.

Anyhoo, I see your proposal as nonsensical rubbish.
Sorry buddy.

 

[cv5]

Daniel_9_24_Seven_Sets_Timeline (2).pdf

drive.google.com

Abstract


This document proposes that the six clauses of Daniel 9:24 describe seven sequential periods — "gears within gears" — rather than six facets of a single 490-year span. Working from independently anchored historical boundaries (the Second Temple's completion, Artaxerxes' wall decree, the 536 AD dust-veil event, Erasmus's Greek New Testament, Saddam Hussein's execution), the framework traces six completed sets running from 515 BC to 2006 AD, then proposes a seventh, open set — "anoint the Most Holy" — running 2006 to 2496.

This final set is read typologically against Solomon's building of the Temple and his own house: seven years for the Temple (mapped to the church age, 46–2006 AD), thirteen years for the palace (2006–2019, a period marked by concealment-based financial fraud — mortgage securitization, LIBOR, Madoff, offshore leaks), and the fourteen-day, two-part dedication (2019–2026 and 2026–2033, read as parallel constructions of a global financial-governance system — CBDCs, satellite infrastructure, AI compute, biometric ID, and autonomous military capability).

The central claim is that the true anointing of the Most Holy is spiritual and largely invisible to public record, while the observable news cycle during this period reflects only its earthly shadow — a counterfeit consecration built in imitation of the real one. All chronological and typological claims are flagged by tier and labeled where inference rather than direct evidence is used, per the falsifiability standard (2 Peter 1:20–21) applied throughout the broader manuscript.

Just to refresh your memory:

The 5 New Testament "until" statements delineate and describe the 69th and 70th week Church Age interregnum quite infallibly.
Why and how anyone could possibly dismiss these crucial passages is testament to how poorly the Church today scores in logic and scholarship.

 

[ZNP]

Daniel 9:24 and the Church Age

A Case for Sequential, Ongoing Fulfillment

“Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.” — Daniel 9:24 (KJV)

1. Six Clauses, Not One Event​

Daniel 9:24 does not contain a single predicate. It contains six distinct infinitive clauses, set in grammatical parallel: to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Six parallel infinitives describing six distinguishable acts is not, on its face, the natural way to describe one instantaneous event. It is the natural way to describe a coordinated program — related acts unfolding together, but not necessarily collapsing into a single moment on the calendar.

If someone insists that all six clauses refer strictly to what happened at the cross in roughly AD 30–33, the burden of proof runs the other way: it must be shown, not assumed, that six grammatically independent acts are actually one act described six times.

2. Almost No One Actually Reads It That Way​

Test the claim against the outer two clauses. Very few interpreters — arguably none holding a serious exegetical position — argue that “finish the transgression” and “anoint the most Holy” both refer to the identical single event as “make an end of sins.” “Anoint the most Holy” is widely read as referring to something else entirely: the anointing of a holy place, a holy person, or a future consecration — not a repetition of Calvary. “Finish the transgression” is routinely tied to Israel’s national sin and its resolution, a matter most interpreters place in relation to Israel’s history and future, not as a synonym for the atonement itself.

If the first and sixth clauses are permitted to point elsewhere — to different referents, different timeframes, even future events — then the objection that the middle clauses must all be pinned to one single moment collapses under its own inconsistency. The interpreter who allows movement at both ends of the verse but insists on total simultaneity in the middle owes an explanation for why the same interpretive latitude stops there.

3. Sealed Up at the Cross? Then Why Was the New Testament Written After It?​

The fifth clause, “to seal up the vision and prophecy,” poses a direct problem for a strict cross-only reading. To “seal up” vision and prophecy means, at minimum, to close off or complete the revelatory process concerning it. If this clause was fulfilled at the cross, then all vision and prophecy pertaining to Daniel’s subject matter should have ceased at or immediately after AD 30–33.

But the New Testament — including its most extensive prophetic material, the book of Revelation — was written decades after the cross. New vision. New prophecy. If “seal up the vision and prophecy” was completed at the cross, the burden falls on the cross-only position to explain how prophetic revelation continued for another sixty-plus years afterward. The more coherent reading is that this clause, like the others, describes a process reaching its completion at the close of a longer era — not a switch thrown at a single point already passed.

 

[ZNP]

4. The New Testament Describes These Acts Being Applied, Not Merely Accomplished​

Scripture itself distinguishes between an act being objectively accomplished once and that same act being subjectively applied across time to individual people. This distinction is not imported from outside the text; Paul states it directly.

2 Corinthians 5:18–20 — “And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation... Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.”

Notice the structure: God has already reconciled the world to Himself in Christ — the objective, finished fact. But Paul immediately pivots to a present-tense office: “we are ambassadors.” An ambassador does not announce a treaty once and go silent; an ambassador represents the treaty continuously, for as long as the embassy stands. Every conversion, every believer who comes to Christ during the church age, is the ministry of reconciliation being exercised in real time — the application of a finished work to a person who was not yet born when that work was finished.

Romans 10:14–15 — “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?... and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent?”

This is the ministry of reconciliation caught in motion — sent, preached, heard, believed — a chain that by definition operates across time, one person and one generation at a time, not in a single moment.

This is precisely what a salvation testimony is. When a believer testifies to being reconciled to God and receiving righteousness by faith, that testimony is not a report on something that happened at the cross in the abstract — it is a personal, dated, individual instance of Daniel 9:24’s middle clauses being applied. Two thousand years of such testimonies, occurring continuously since Pentecost, are two thousand years of this clause in active operation.

5. Applied to Everyone Who Receives the Work — and It Is the Application That Fulfills the Clause​

The New Testament is explicit that reconciliation and righteousness are not automatically possessed by all people simply because Christ died. They are given “unto all and upon all them that believe” (Romans 3:22) — a qualification that only makes sense if there is an ongoing process of people believing, across time, during the age of grace.

Romans 1:17 — “For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.”
Romans 3:21–22 — “But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested... even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe.”
Romans 5:17 — “For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one Jesus Christ.”

Taken together these describe a three-stage, ongoing action: righteousness is being revealed (present, durative — an unfolding disclosure, not a single flash), it stands manifested and open to whoever believes (a completed inauguration with continuing effect), and it is received and lived in by believers as they come to faith, one at a time, throughout the age. This is the mechanism by which “bring in everlasting righteousness” happens historically: not as a legal fact filed away at the cross and left untouched, but as a righteousness continually brought in, person by person, as the gospel is preached and received. The application is not incidental to the clause — the application is what fulfilling the clause looks like in real, historical time. The same logic holds for “make reconciliation for iniquity”: reconciliation is not fulfilled merely by the cross having happened; it is fulfilled as it is administered, offered, and received by “all and upon all them that believe,” generation after generation.

6. The Gap Problem — and Why the Church-Age Reading Removes It​

A strict cross-only reading creates a chronological problem it cannot avoid. If the seventieth week (or the relevant fulfillment of these clauses) lands at the cross, then the sixty-ninth week — which Daniel’s own text places at the coming of Messiah the Prince — must somehow connect to the seventieth without an unexplained interval, or the position must posit a gap it does not derive from the text itself. Either the seventy weeks run consecutively, in which case the cross falls mid-stream of a still-unfinished countdown, or a gap must be inserted by assumption rather than shown from the passage.

The church-age reading dissolves this problem rather than patching it. If Daniel 9:24’s middle clauses describe the entire church age — inaugurated at the cross, administered through the ministry of reconciliation, and consummated at the age’s close — then there is no gap to explain away. The sixty-ninth week ends at Messiah’s appearing; the church age itself is the outworking of “make an end of sins, make reconciliation for iniquity, and bring in everlasting righteousness” across history; and the seventieth week remains free to attach to events at the close of the age, exactly where Daniel 9:26–27 places the prince who is to come, the covenant, and the abomination of desolation. Nothing has to be inserted. The history of the church age — an unbroken, continuing ministry of reconciliation offered to “all and upon all them that believe” — maps onto Daniel 9:24 without remainder, and the seventieth week is left exactly where the text’s own sequence puts it: still future to the cross, not collapsed into it.

A Question Worth Asking First​

Before working through the details above with someone holding the cross-only view, it is worth putting one question on the table at the outset, since it determines whether the rest of the conversation can go anywhere:

What would you consider evidence against your position — that is, what feature of the text, if present, would lead you to reconsider whether all six clauses are fulfilled strictly at the cross rather than across a longer administration?

If no answer can be given, the position is being held as an axiom rather than a conclusion, and no amount of textual argument will move it. If an answer can be given, that answer becomes the actual point of the discussion — and the case above should be tested directly against it.

 

[Cameron143]

Daniel 9:24 and the Church Age

A Case for Sequential, Ongoing Fulfillment

“Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.” — Daniel 9:24 (KJV)

1. Six Clauses, Not One Event​

Daniel 9:24 does not contain a single predicate. It contains six distinct infinitive clauses, set in grammatical parallel: to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Six parallel infinitives describing six distinguishable acts is not, on its face, the natural way to describe one instantaneous event. It is the natural way to describe a coordinated program — related acts unfolding together, but not necessarily collapsing into a single moment on the calendar.

If someone insists that all six clauses refer strictly to what happened at the cross in roughly AD 30–33, the burden of proof runs the other way: it must be shown, not assumed, that six grammatically independent acts are actually one act described six times.

2. Almost No One Actually Reads It That Way​

Test the claim against the outer two clauses. Very few interpreters — arguably none holding a serious exegetical position — argue that “finish the transgression” and “anoint the most Holy” both refer to the identical single event as “make an end of sins.” “Anoint the most Holy” is widely read as referring to something else entirely: the anointing of a holy place, a holy person, or a future consecration — not a repetition of Calvary. “Finish the transgression” is routinely tied to Israel’s national sin and its resolution, a matter most interpreters place in relation to Israel’s history and future, not as a synonym for the atonement itself.

If the first and sixth clauses are permitted to point elsewhere — to different referents, different timeframes, even future events — then the objection that the middle clauses must all be pinned to one single moment collapses under its own inconsistency. The interpreter who allows movement at both ends of the verse but insists on total simultaneity in the middle owes an explanation for why the same interpretive latitude stops there.

3. Sealed Up at the Cross? Then Why Was the New Testament Written After It?​

The fifth clause, “to seal up the vision and prophecy,” poses a direct problem for a strict cross-only reading. To “seal up” vision and prophecy means, at minimum, to close off or complete the revelatory process concerning it. If this clause was fulfilled at the cross, then all vision and prophecy pertaining to Daniel’s subject matter should have ceased at or immediately after AD 30–33.

But the New Testament — including its most extensive prophetic material, the book of Revelation — was written decades after the cross. New vision. New prophecy. If “seal up the vision and prophecy” was completed at the cross, the burden falls on the cross-only position to explain how prophetic revelation continued for another sixty-plus years afterward. The more coherent reading is that this clause, like the others, describes a process reaching its completion at the close of a longer era — not a switch thrown at a single point already passed.

These things came definitively at the cross, are coming progressively throughout the church age, and will come consummatively with the return of Christ.

 

[ZNP]

These things came definitively at the cross, are coming progressively throughout the church age, and will come consummatively with the return of Christ.

Yes, everything is based on the cross but it takes the church age for it to be completed in mankind. Daniel 9:24 is a prophesy about the church age.

 

[Larry73]

Are you willing to risk losing your country through economic collapse for that?

We are probably at a greater risk of losing this country to latent communism.... including some ELECTED communists..... and BOTH current political corrupt party's than due to economic collapse.

 

[cv5]

These things came definitively at the cross, are coming progressively throughout the church age, and will come consummatively with the return of Christ.

But wait: 30%+ of the Bible speaks to the redemption and restoration of the Nation Israel.
Aaaand there is your, and everyone else's problem.

Big problem, for you. But not for me.

 

[Cameron143]

But wait: 30%+ of the Bible speaks to the redemption and restoration of the Nation Israel.
Aaaand there is your, and everyone else's problem.

Big problem, for you. But not for me.

Not a problem. There will be a future redemption of large numbers of Jews. But they will come into the kingdom under the new covenant.

 

[cv5]

Daniel 9:24 and the Church Age

A Case for Sequential, Ongoing Fulfillment

“Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.” — Daniel 9:24 (KJV)

1. Six Clauses, Not One Event​

Daniel 9:24 does not contain a single predicate. It contains six distinct infinitive clauses, set in grammatical parallel: to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Six parallel infinitives describing six distinguishable acts is not, on its face, the natural way to describe one instantaneous event. It is the natural way to describe a coordinated program — related acts unfolding together, but not necessarily collapsing into a single moment on the calendar.

If someone insists that all six clauses refer strictly to what happened at the cross in roughly AD 30–33, the burden of proof runs the other way: it must be shown, not assumed, that six grammatically independent acts are actually one act described six times.

2. Almost No One Actually Reads It That Way​

Test the claim against the outer two clauses. Very few interpreters — arguably none holding a serious exegetical position — argue that “finish the transgression” and “anoint the most Holy” both refer to the identical single event as “make an end of sins.” “Anoint the most Holy” is widely read as referring to something else entirely: the anointing of a holy place, a holy person, or a future consecration — not a repetition of Calvary. “Finish the transgression” is routinely tied to Israel’s national sin and its resolution, a matter most interpreters place in relation to Israel’s history and future, not as a synonym for the atonement itself.

If the first and sixth clauses are permitted to point elsewhere — to different referents, different timeframes, even future events — then the objection that the middle clauses must all be pinned to one single moment collapses under its own inconsistency. The interpreter who allows movement at both ends of the verse but insists on total simultaneity in the middle owes an explanation for why the same interpretive latitude stops there.

3. Sealed Up at the Cross? Then Why Was the New Testament Written After It?​

The fifth clause, “to seal up the vision and prophecy,” poses a direct problem for a strict cross-only reading. To “seal up” vision and prophecy means, at minimum, to close off or complete the revelatory process concerning it. If this clause was fulfilled at the cross, then all vision and prophecy pertaining to Daniel’s subject matter should have ceased at or immediately after AD 30–33.

But the New Testament — including its most extensive prophetic material, the book of Revelation — was written decades after the cross. New vision. New prophecy. If “seal up the vision and prophecy” was completed at the cross, the burden falls on the cross-only position to explain how prophetic revelation continued for another sixty-plus years afterward. The more coherent reading is that this clause, like the others, describes a process reaching its completion at the close of a longer era — not a switch thrown at a single point already passed.

The proposed argument can be falsified at its foundation. Its central mistake is moving from grammatical plurality—six infinitives—to an alleged continuous fulfilment throughout the Church Age. That conclusion does not follow from the Hebrew syntax.

The decisive problems​

First, six objectives do not imply six successive historical eras. A single decree or program can contain several distinguishable purposes that are accomplished together, partly together, or at designated points within the stated period. For example, one military campaign may be commissioned “to defeat the enemy, liberate the city, restore the government, secure the border, punish the rebels, and establish peace.” Six infinitives do not prove a centuries-long, uninterrupted process.


Daniel 9:24 merely says that seventy sevens have been decreed for the accomplishment of six purposes. The infinitives identify the goals of the seventy-sevens program; they do not independently establish its chronology. The chronology must come from verses 25–27, where the seventy sevens are actually divided into seven, sixty-two, and one. The critic is therefore trying to derive a temporal scheme from grammatical forms that do not supply one.


Second, the text explicitly identifies the objects of the prophecy: “thy people” and “thy holy city.” In Daniel’s prayer, “thy people” repeatedly means Israel, and the holy city is Jerusalem. The prophecy is not decreed upon an undefined multinational Church. The Hebrew text states that the seventy sevens are decreed upon Daniel’s people and Jerusalem.


Third, Daniel 9 itself disproves uninterrupted fulfilment. Messiah is cut off after the sixty-ninth seven, and Jerusalem and the sanctuary are subsequently destroyed. Yet the final seven does not begin until the ruler of verse 27 confirms a covenant for one seven. Thomas Ice stresses precisely this point: the events after the sixty-ninth week and before the seventieth demonstrate the necessity of an interval. Fruchtenbaum likewise outlines Daniel 9:26 as containing Messiah’s death, Jerusalem’s destruction, and continuing war before treating Daniel 9:27 separately as the seventieth seven or Great Tribulation.

 

[cv5]

Not a problem. There will be a future redemption of large numbers of Jews. But they will come into the kingdom under the new covenant.

No, not just a large number of scattered Jews blah blah blah happyface.

A reformed NATION of Jews under INTENSE life-threatening extinction level persecution by a LITERAL supernaturally empowered Satan-man who is literally deceiving and running the entire planet.
This persecuted reformed NATION of Jews, who are suffering this "Time of Jacobs trouble", FINALLY recognize their sin of rejection and denial of their Messian Jesus, and call out to Him for deliverance.

All of this ushers in the Second Coming, where Messiah Jesus destroys the enemies of Israel with the breath of Him mouth, casts the beast and false prophet entities into the lake of fire, and chains their boss Satan in the bottomless pit.

Yes, I saw what you did there. This non-specific insipid bogus eschatology of yours is far from the Biblical truth of the matter.

 

[cv5]

Yes, everything is based on the cross but it takes the church age for it to be completed in mankind. Daniel 9:24 is a prophesy about the church age.

That is an absolutely false statement—absurd on its face.

The assertion that “Daniel 9:24 is a prophecy about the Church Age” is not an interpretation of the passage. It is a direct contradiction of the passage.

Gabriel explicitly states that the seventy weeks are decreed upon “thy people” and “thy holy city.” Daniel’s people are Israel, and Daniel’s holy city is Jerusalem. The entire chapter concerns Israel’s covenant transgression, Jerusalem’s desolation, the sanctuary, and the fulfilment of Israel’s prophetic program. The Church is neither named nor remotely identified as the subject of the seventy weeks.

Daniel had just confessed the sins of Israel:

“We have sinned… neither have we hearkened unto thy servants the prophets.”

He then pleaded for Jerusalem and the sanctuary:

“Cause thy face to shine upon thy sanctuary that is desolate.”

Gabriel’s answer therefore concerns the very people, city, and sanctuary about which Daniel had been praying. To suddenly insert the Church into verse 24 is not exegesis. It is theological sleight of hand.

The Church was still a mystery unrevealed in Old Testament prophecy. Paul explicitly describes it as a mystery formerly hidden but later revealed to the apostles and prophets. Daniel 9, by contrast, concerns Israel’s national prophetic timetable. The seventy weeks govern the history of Israel and Jerusalem—from the decree to restore Jerusalem, through the appearance and death of Messiah, the destruction of the city and sanctuary, the final seven-year period, and the ultimate establishment of everlasting righteousness.

The wording could hardly be clearer. Gabriel did not say:

“Seventy weeks are determined upon a future multinational body composed of Jews and Gentiles.”

He said:

“Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and thy holy city.”

Furthermore, the objectives of Daniel 9:24 have not been fulfilled in or by the Church Age. Israel’s national transgression has not yet been brought to its appointed conclusion. Jerusalem does not presently exhibit everlasting righteousness. Prophetic revelation has not reached its final consummation. The most holy place anticipated by the prophecy has not been anointed. These objectives await the completion of Israel’s seventy-week program and the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom.

The cross supplied the basis of reconciliation, but Daniel 9:24 is not merely a prediction that Christ would provide atonement. It describes the complete divine program decreed for Israel and Jerusalem. That program was interrupted after the sixty-ninth week, when Messiah was cut off. The subsequent destruction of Jerusalem occurred after the sixty-nine weeks, while the final week remains future.

Calling Daniel 9:24 a “Church Age prophecy” therefore requires the interpreter to ignore Daniel’s prayer, redefine Daniel’s people, relocate Daniel’s city, erase Israel from its own prophecy, and import the Church into a text that never mentions it.

That is not biblical interpretation. It is replacement theology imposed upon the text.

Daniel 9:24 is about Israel.

Daniel 9:24 is about Jerusalem.

Daniel 9:24 is about the completion of Israel’s national prophetic program.

The Church Age occurs during the interval between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks; it is not the subject of the seventy weeks themselves. Anyone claiming otherwise must first explain why Gabriel’s words “thy people” and “thy holy city” should mean something entirely different from what they plainly meant to Daniel.

 

[Cameron143]

No, not just a large number of scattered Jews blah blah blah happyface.

A reformed NATION of Jews under INTENSE life-threatening extinction level persecution by a LITERAL supernaturally empowered Satan-man who is literally deceiving and running the entire planet.
This persecuted reformed NATION of Jews, who are suffering this "Time of Jacobs trouble", FINALLY recognize their sin of rejection and denial of their Messian Jesus, and call out to Him for deliverance.

All of this ushers in the Second Coming, where Messiah Jesus destroys the enemies of Israel with the breath of Him mouth, casts the beast and false prophet entities into the lake of fire, and chains their boss Satan in the bottomless pit.

Yes, I saw what you did there. This non-specific insipid bogus eschatology of yours is far from the Biblical truth of the matter.

What covenant do you believe they will be under?

 

[cv5]

What covenant do you believe they will be under?

What you cannot fathom is this:
The New Covenant for the gentile Bride the Church has certain well defined statuses, roles and blessings.
The New Covenant for the Nation Israel has ITS OWN well defined statuses, roles and blessings.

They are NOT precisely the same, and they will NEVER be precisely the same, and they were never MEANT to be precisely the same.

You see, Gods plan is far more elegant and complex than most here can fathom. Why?
Because they are lazy and indolent in their scholarship.

I blame the pastors at these backwater "who cares" Churches. They want to warm pews and play pattycake, as this is a far more profitable and comfortable way of doing business.

 

[Cameron143]

What you cannot fathom is this:
The New Covenant for the gentile Bride the Church has certain well defined statuses, roles and blessings.
The New Covenant for the Nation Israel has ITS OWN well defined statuses, roles and blessings.

They are NOT precisely the same, and they will NEVER be precisely the same, and they were never MEANT to be precisely the same.

You see, Gods plan is far more elegant and complex than most here can fathom. Why?
Because they are lazy and indolent in their scholarship.

I blame the pastors at these backwater "who cares" Churches. They want to warm pews and play pattycake, as this is a far more profitable and comfortable way of doing business.

You should blame yourself. You don't even know that under the new covenant there is neither Jew nor Greek; only the new man, the new creation.

 

[cv5]

You should blame yourself. You don't even know that under the new covenant there is neither Jew nor Greek; only the new man, the new creation.

Only in the context this PRESENT AGE of the virgin Bride Church little buddy. Definitely not in context of the millennial age, the AGE TO COME

Do yourself a favor and shatter your delusions with some hard core Fruchtenbaum and Chronister.

But of course, as we both know, are not up to the task. The narrow path is far too arduous, and you might lose your baggage.

 

[Cameron143]

Only in the context this PRESENT AGE of the virgin Bride Church little buddy. Definitely not in context of the millennial age, the AGE TO COME

Do yourself a favor and shatter your delusions with some hard core Fruchtenbaum and Chronister.

But of course, as we both know, are not up to the task. The narrow path is far too arduous, and you might lose your baggage.

I see that you can't win arguments with scripture so you resort to belittling and insulting. Perhaps you should spend less time on eschatology and more time on spiritual disciplines.

 

[cv5]

I see that you can't win arguments with scripture so you resort to belittling and insulting. Perhaps you should spend less time on eschatology and more time on spiritual disciplines.

Enough with the passive aggressive deflection and mewling.

The facts are these:
The Millennial Age aka the AGE TO COME, is absolutely predicated upon the Nation Israel repenting, receiving Messiah Jesus, and thereby entering into the New Covenant.

And you foolishly thought that the gentile Church of this PRESENT AGE was all there is or ever will be?

 

[Cameron143]

Enough with the passive aggressive deflection and mewling.

The facts are these:
The Millennial Age aka the AGE TO COME, is absolutely predicated upon the Nation Israel repenting, receiving Messiah Jesus, and thereby entering into the New Covenant.

And you foolishly thought that the gentile Church of this PRESENT AGE was all there is or ever will be?

We're in the millennial age. The kingdom of God is continuing to grow. You don't remember the parable of the mustard seed? Or Daniel's interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream where the 5th kingdom starts out as a small stone but becomes a mountain and fills the whole earth? This is happening as we speak.

 

[Churchgoer]

We're in the millennial age. The kingdom of God is continuing to grow. You don't remember the parable of the mustard seed? Or Daniel's interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream where the 5th kingdom starts out as a small stone but becomes a mountain and fills the whole earth? This is happening as we speak.

Maybe they should try to remember the 1st commandment.
Thou shall not have any god before me.
No earthly political group before God.