The Messianic Kingdom?

[OldRegular]

considering you haven't answered the question he posed to you why would you expect him to answer you?

So you agree with DHK regarding the six promises of Daniel 9:24?

DHK insists that with the death of Jesus Christ none of the following happened:

Originally Posted by DHK {post#70}
These events have yet to occur:
What are the events mentioned:
--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.
--to anoint a most holy place. (vs. 24)

All these events have to do with the Jewish people.
All these events will take place within that 70th week.

Yet unbelievably DHK says that they will all take place during the 70th week when the Anti-Christ is reigning. That folks is what you get from the false doctrine of dispensationalism.

 

[revmwc]

So you agree with DHK regarding the six promises of Daniel 9:24?

I didn't answer either way, I just said you failed to answer his question so why do you expect him to answer yours. You haven't answered my latest question either.

 

[OldRegular]

I didn't answer either way, I just said you failed to answer his question so why do you expect him to answer yours. You haven't answered my latest question either.

Neither of you answer anything. You simply parrot the dispensational false doctrine!

I showed by Scripture that the six promises of Daniel 9:24 were fulfilled with the death of Jesus Christ. Can you present Scripture showing they will be fulfilled during the reign of the super-duper Anti-Christ as DHK claims!

 

[revmwc]

Be Honest! Present all of Strongs:

0310. rxa ’achar akh-ar'; from 0309; properly, the hind part; generally used as an adverb or conjunction, after (in various senses):-- after (that, -ward), again, at, away from, back (from, -side), behind, beside, by, follow (after, -ing), forasmuch, from, hereafter, hinder end, + out (over) live, + persecute, posterity, pursuing, remnant, seeing, since, thence[-forth], when, with.

So by the language in the original you must determine was it an adverb or as a substantive, that is as a noun or adjective to reflect the noun?

"26, And after the sevens sixty and two he shall be cut off anointed one and there is no to him and the city and the sanctuary he shall ruin people of governor the one coming and end of him in overflowing and until end war being decided ones being desolate."

So how is it used here? How was it written and intended by Daniel?

 

[OldRegular]

I didn't answer either way, I just said you failed to answer his question so why do you expect him to answer yours. You haven't answered my latest question either.

Because he made the statement in his post #70 and I responded in post #82

Originally Posted by OldRegular

Originally Posted by DHK
And then, as I have previously posted, here:
These events have yet to occur:
What are the events mentioned:
--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.
--to anoint a most holy place. (vs. 24)

I will respond with one simple question: Are you saying the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross accomplished NOTHING?

Originally Posted by DHK
All these events have to do with the Jewish people.
All these events will take place within that 70th week.
--All of these are phrases taken from the passage (9:24-27)
The passage is directed to the Jews. Christ did not bring in everlasting righteousness, did he? Is the reign of ISIS in Syria "everlasting righteousness"? Has he made an end of the sins and transgressions of the sins of the Jews, or are they increasing?

Was righteousness imputed to you because of your "faith in Jesus Christ"? Is that righteousness everlasting or does it come and go?

 

[OldRegular]

So by the language in the original you must determine was it an adverb or as a substantive, that is as a noun or adjective to reflect the noun?

"26, And after the sevens sixty and two he shall be cut off anointed one and there is no to him and the city and the sanctuary he shall ruin people of governor the one coming and end of him in overflowing and until end war being decided ones being desolate."

So how is it used here? How was it written and intended by Daniel?

Check my post#39. All the major translations use the word AFTER which means during the 70th week, about 2000 years ago! Daniel obviously mean't Jesus Christ was slaughtered by the Jews and Rome during the 70th week, again about 2000 years ago!

Question: Do you and DHK switch on occasion to parrot the dispensational doctrine or are you one and the same?

 

[revmwc]

The fact is HE caused a covenant to prevail by HIS death. I assume that you are participant in that Covenant.

Hebrews 8:7-13
7. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9. Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
10. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
11. And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
12. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Hebrews 9:11-16
11. But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12. Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15. And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

I do realize you will not understand the above Scripture since you are unable to answer the questions I posed in the preceding post and pose once again.

Paul made very clear the fact that the Covenant of Promise which is called a dispenstion of Promise by Dispensationalist has not been dis-anuled. The age in which God dealt with man through His promises is not dis-anuled, but God in His progressive dealing with mankind moved to a new period. The "Law which was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made." For all mankind "the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ," notice it was not that is anymore.

Galatians 3:16 "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus."

The way in which God dealt with man changed once Christ went to the cross, the Dispensation of Grace came forth. When the church is snatched away with the one who letteth the way in which God deals with mankind will again change. He will seal 144,000 Jews from the Tribes listed in Revelation, He will send two witnesses who will testify during the last 3 1/2 years of the tribulation, Revelation is clear on that. Nothing disannuls God's promise to Abraham, Isaac or Jacob, their physical seed will inherit the land. Nor will anything disannul the Promise made to David that his seed would sit upon the Throne, in David's Kingdom that is Israel. Paul said nothing could disannal God's promises. So God still has plans for nation Israel and He will fulfill His promises to them, including The Messianic Kingdom as promised.

 

[revmwc]

Check my post#39. All the major translations use the word AFTER which means during the 70th week, about 2000 years ago! Daniel obviously mean't Jesus Christ was slaughtered by the Jews and Rome during the 70th week, again about 2000 years ago!

Question: Do you and DHK switch on occasion to parrot the dispensational doctrine or are you one and the same?

So your answer to my question is that a word cannot be used in a different form it must always stay in the original form used?

 

[revmwc]

Check my post#39. All the major translations use the word AFTER which means during the 70th week, about 2000 years ago! Daniel obviously mean't Jesus Christ was slaughtered by the Jews and Rome during the 70th week, again about 2000 years ago!

Question: Do you and DHK switch on occasion to parrot the dispensational doctrine or are you one and the same?

Keil & Delitzsch are the utmost authority on the Hebrew text and they disagree with your interpretation.

Delitzsch, "came of Hebrew parentage; studied at Leipsic where he became a private lecturer in 1842; held the position of professor in Rostock in 1846; then in Erlangen in 1850; and then again in Leipsic in 1867.

His exegetical activity began in earnest at Erlangen, where he prepared independently and in connection with Karl Keil some of the best commentaries on the Old Testament (Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, 1866) which had been produced in Germany. These were soon translated into English and published at Edinburgh."


These two are world renowned authorities and you are in total disagreement with them.

The original bares out that the Messiah would be cutoff in the hinder part of the 69th week, in the form of writing utilized.

 

[beameup]

Daniel 9:24 "to anoint the most qodesh holy qodesh" is literally the "holy of holies".

Exodus 26:33 "And thou shalt hang up the vail under the taches, that thou mayest bring in thither within the vail the ark of the testimony:
and the vail shall divide unto you between the holy qodesh place and the most qodesh holy qodesh"

In order for Jesus to complete this prophecy of Daniel, he must anoint the holy of holies, which is clearly in the Temple.
This was not accomplished, the 2nd Temple has been destroyed for almost 2000 years. Therefore, this prophecy is yet future.

Exodus 26:34 And thou shalt put the mercy seat upon the ark of the testimony in the most kodesh holy kodesh place.

 

[OldRegular]

Keil & Delitzsch are the utmost authority on the Hebrew text and they disagree with your interpretation.

Delitzsch, "came of Hebrew parentage; studied at Leipsic where he became a private lecturer in 1842; held the position of professor in Rostock in 1846; then in Erlangen in 1850; and then again in Leipsic in 1867.

His exegetical activity began in earnest at Erlangen, where he prepared independently and in connection with Karl Keil some of the best commentaries on the Old Testament (Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, 1866) which had been produced in Germany. These were soon translated into English and published at Edinburgh."


These two are world renowned authorities and you are in total disagreement with them.

The original bares out that the Messiah would be cutoff in the hinder part of the 69th week, in the form of writing utilized.

I don't care what Keil & Delitzsch say. I care what Scripture says and Scripture teaches that Jesus Christ was crucified in the middle of Daniel's 70th week almost 2000 years ago!

 

[OldRegular]

Paul made very clear the fact that the Covenant of Promise which is called a dispenstion of Promise by Dispensationalist has not been dis-anuled. The age in which God dealt with man through His promises is not dis-anuled, but God in His progressive dealing with mankind moved to a new period. The "Law which was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made." For all mankind "the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ," notice it was not that is anymore.

Galatians 3:16 "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus."

The way in which God dealt with man changed once Christ went to the cross, the Dispensation of Grace came forth.

Post the complete passage in which GOD through the Apostle Paul makes it very clear that those redeemed by Jesus Christ are heirs to the promises made to Abraham:
Galatians 3:27-29
27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

When the church is snatched away with the one who letteth the way in which God deals with mankind will again change. He will seal 144,000 Jews from the Tribes listed in Revelation, He will send two witnesses who will testify during the last 3 1/2 years of the tribulation, Revelation is clear on that. Nothing disannuls God's promise to Abraham, Isaac or Jacob, their physical seed will inherit the land. Nor will anything disannul the Promise made to David that his seed would sit upon the Throne, in David's Kingdom that is Israel. Paul said nothing could disannal God's promises. So God still has plans for nation Israel and He will fulfill His promises to them, including The Messianic Kingdom as promised.

That is all dispensational mythology.

 

[OldRegular]

So your answer to my question is that a word cannot be used in a different form it must always stay in the original form used?

No! I am saying all the major translations use AFTER.

 

[revmwc]

I don't care what Keil & Delitzsch say. I care what Scripture says and Scripture teaches that Jesus Christ was crucified in the middle of Daniel's 70th week almost 2000 years ago!

Not according to Daniel 9 so where does it say in the N.T. it was in the 70th week, Daniels prophecy doesn't say that, not in the original language form. It says in the hinder part or at the end of it. Keil and Dlelitzsch break it down from the original.

Notice to who the 70 weeks involved, Daniel 9:24 "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."

It involved Israel as a nation. They concern the Holy city, Jerusalem.

So six things must be accomplished for the children of Israel as a nation and as a people:
"To finish transgression."
The transgression of the nation. Christ effacaious work on the cross provided redemption for each and every person who will believe, 1 Hohn 2:2 makes it clear He is the propitiation for all sin.

However Zech 12:10 still needs to be fulfilled for Israel as it is a promise from God. As well as Zech 13:1 again a promise by God.

"To make an end of sins" whose sins, well this passage agains in dealing with the children of Israel as a people. So an end to their sins as a nation This has yet to occur. Their sins will end at the second coming that is at the end of the Tribulation period, as the Messianic Kingdom begins.

"To make Reconciliation for iniquity" again whose iniquity? That of Israel as a nation. During the 70th week, so did Christ accomplish this for Daniel's people as a nation?

"And to bring in everlasting righteousness" for who again, Daniel's people the nation, this occurs at the end of the 70th week, so if as you say the 70th week has been accomplished then Christ brought in Everlasting righteousness to the Jewish people as a whole not as a remnant.

"To anoint the Most Holy" anoint the Holy of Holies, that can't be done without a temple so the Jews must rebuild that temple. Or else Jesus anointed it 3 1/2 years after His death, or in A.D. 70 as you say that is the finish point of the 70th week.

These things are told to Daniel as the 70 weeks being determined unto thy People and upon the Holy City, so back to the question when have these been accomplished for the Israelites and for Jerusalem?

Scripture is clear here.

 

[revmwc]

No! I am saying all the major translations use AFTER.

How does the original pan out that is proper exegetical use of scripture. Not by a commentary, look at the original then see how the grammatical use comes out use a concordance and then seek a commentary. Not read it in English and then take a commentary and make your decision. They should all bear it out. And as Keil and Delitzsch show the scripture bears out the end of the 69th week that Christ and came was cut off and that verse 27 deals with the ungodly prince that is the anti-christ who must come.

Then comes the Messianic Kingdom. All 6 things must be accomplished for Daniel's people Israel.

 

[OldRegular]

Not according to Daniel 9 so where does it say in the N.T. it was in the 70th week, Daniels prophecy doesn't say that, not in the original language form. It says in the hinder part or at the end of it. Keil and Dlelitzsch break it down from the original.

Notice to who the 70 weeks involved, Daniel 9:24 "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."

It involved Israel as a nation. They concern the Holy city, Jerusalem.

So six things must be accomplished for the children of Israel as a nation and as a people:
"To finish transgression."
The transgression of the nation. Christ effacaious work on the cross provided redemption for each and every person who will believe, 1 Hohn 2:2 makes it clear He is the propitiation for all sin.

However Zech 12:10 still needs to be fulfilled for Israel as it is a promise from God. As well as Zech 13:1 again a promise by God.

"To make an end of sins" whose sins, well this passage agains in dealing with the children of Israel as a people. So an end to their sins as a nation This has yet to occur. Their sins will end at the second coming that is at the end of the Tribulation period, as the Messianic Kingdom begins.

"To make Reconciliation for iniquity" again whose iniquity? That of Israel as a nation. During the 70th week, so did Christ accomplish this for Daniel's people as a nation?

"And to bring in everlasting righteousness" for who again, Daniel's people the nation, this occurs at the end of the 70th week, so if as you say the 70th week has been accomplished then Christ brought in Everlasting righteousness to the Jewish people as a whole not as a remnant.

"To anoint the Most Holy" anoint the Holy of Holies, that can't be done without a temple so the Jews must rebuild that temple. Or else Jesus anointed it 3 1/2 years after His death, or in A.D. 70 as you say that is the finish point of the 70th week.

These things are told to Daniel as the 70 weeks being determined unto thy People and upon the Holy City, so back to the question when have these been accomplished for the Israelites and for Jerusalem?

Scripture is clear here.

I showed through Scripture where the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ accomplished all six promises of Daniel 9:24. You have a problem with the Scripture then have at it. What is pathetic, and in my opinion blasphemous, is that you and DHK claim that the super-duper-Anti-Christ is going to accomplish what the death of Jesus Christ could not.

If Jesus Christ did not fulfill the promises of Daniel 24 we are all still lost and in our sins.

 

[OldRegular]

How does the original pan out that is proper exegetical use of scripture. Not by a commentary, look at the original then see how the grammatical use comes out use a concordance and then seek a commentary. Not read it in English and then take a commentary and make your decision. They should all bear it out. And as Keil and Delitzsch show the scripture bears out the end of the 69th week that Christ and came was cut off and that verse 27 deals with the ungodly prince that is the anti-christ who must come.

Then comes the Messianic Kingdom. All 6 things must be accomplished for Daniel's people Israel.

Jesus Christ instituted the Kingdom of God about 2000 years ago. There will be no Messianic kingdom where the Jews reinstitute the bloody sacrifices that are an abomination before GOD! You are parroting dispensational mythology!

Since DHK has run in the 2nd team you answer the questions I asked him and then perhaps you will have something worth saying.

Originally Posted by OldRegular

1. Are you saying the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross accomplished NOTHING?

2. Was righteousness imputed to you because of your "faith in Jesus Christ"? Is that righteousness everlasting or does it come and go?

 

[DHK]

You are making a gross and false and unscriptural interpretation because you have bought the dispensational lie about this prophecy. Daniel 9:26 states:

And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

The above Scripture states unequivocally that Jesus Christ was slaughtered AFTER 69 weeks. That means that , absent the lie of dispensational doctrine, Jesus Christ was slaughtered during the 70th week.

First, dispensational thought really has nothing to do with this but rather a proper exegesis of the passage.
Second, The passage says "after 69 weeks" which means "at the end of 69 weeks." It does not mean "in the 70th week." Daniel never said that or inferred that. Look up some reliable commentaries that are conversant with the Hebrew (like Keil and Delitzsch), and they will demonstrate to you that the "after" simply means "at the end of the 69th week, or before the 70th week.
Third, many very able scholars have calculated that date. I explained it to you once. I will endeavor to do so again.
--There are a total of 70 weeks or 490 years.

Dan 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
--The starting point of this 490 years is from a specific decree. It is the command given to restore and build Jerusalem. This decree went from Artaxerxes to Nehemiah in 444 B.C. (Neh.2:1-8). It was given directly to Nehemiah in the 20th year of Artaxerxes in the month of Nisan, or March-April of 444 B.C.
From this date to the Messiah will transpire a period of seven weeks, threescore and two weeks, or 483 years.

Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
--And after that 483 years Messiah would be cut off. There is a gap of time between the 69th and 70th week. It is indicated in the passage giving time for the Messiah to be "cut off," after the 69th week, for he is not cut off in the 70th week.
The calculation of Messiah's being cut off can meticulously be worked out using a calculation of time based on a 360 day lunar year, and a 30 day month as is indicated in the Book or Revelation.
The time span from Artaxerxes' decree to rebuild the city in March 444 B.C until Christ's crucifixion in April 33 A.D. covered 483 years. Daniel's prediction was very accurate. The last week is left unexplained and is best taken as yet to come.

What is your justification for saying that Jesus Christ is a covenant breaker. {I am pleased that you finally recognize the He of verse 27 is Jesus Christ.} There is nothing about breaking a covenant in that Scripture. That is simply the result of the dispensational lie that the "foreigner" made a covenant with the Jews. Yet the Scripture says the covenant Jesus Christ shall "cause to prevail" is with the many.

It is not my interpretation; it is yours.
Verse 27 "He shall confirm the covenant for one week."
You are determined to interpret the "He" as Christ (but it isn't)
You say Christ has made a covenant for seven years.
Then the verse goes on and says: "in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease...make it desolate," and so forth. IOW, he is not bringing peace, as the Prince of peace, he is bringing desolation, destruction, and stopping sacrifice. He is breaking his covenant in the midst of the week. He is not keeping it.
When did the promise, the covenant start? What was said? What promise did he make? With whom did he make it? And when did he say it would be for seven years. Give me one portion of Scripture where Jesus himself ever laid down such a covenant. He didn't.
Then show after seven years the confirmation of that covenant. Show how it was fulfilled after the seven years. What was the big upheaval in the midst of the covenant. If you can't explain this then Christ is simply a liar and a covenant breaker IMO, and according to your theology.

{Something I have found strange in the 10+years I have been on this Forum is how frequently dispensationalists use the pejorative "liar" in connection with GOD. It is you DHK who is calling Jesus Christ a liar and truce breaker! Where is the word truce mentioned in verse 27. You are again simply spouting the dispensational lie that the covenant is a truce between the "foreigner" of the CEV and Israel.}

First, I have demonstrated that the result of your outlandish interpretation of this passage of Scripture results in calling Christ a liar and a truce-breaker. It is up to you to demonstrate that he isn't. It is your interpretation that makes him one. Far be it from me to ever call him such things.
The CEV is consistent in using the word "foreigner" as the author knows that the "he" of verse 27 does not refer to Christ. This is the mistake you constantly make. Why blame him for a mistake you make. This has nothing to do with dispensationalism but a simple and proper exegesis of the text.

So it has been established by any rational reading of verse 26 that Jesus Christ died DURING the 69th week. Given the start of HIS ministry at the beginning of the 70th week Jesus Christ was slaughtered through the connivance of the Jews with the hated Romans {They hated Jesus Christ more.} in the middle of the 70th week.

After the 69th week, but before the 70th week.

The Tribulation is Daniel's 70th Week. It is a period of 7 years divided into two halves of 3 1/2 years, 42 months, 1260 days, etc. Then the Millennial Kingdom immediately follows. But are there gaps? Daniel himself shows that there are gaps.

Dan 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
--Daniel adds an extra 30 days, a gap of time before the Millennial Kingdom actually starts. Gaps are not unusual.

The sacrificial death of Jesus Christ made the sacrifice and oblation in the Temple worthless and their continuation was an abomination before GOD.

You are so bewitched with the dispensational error DHK that you are afraid to answer the simple questions I have asked repeatedly:

First, my answer was given to you here:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2229077&postcount=101

If you didn't understand it, it is because you have such a wild interpretation of this passage of scripture and force meanings into it that are not there.

Even your statement here does not make sense.
Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

(ESV) And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator."
--Whoever it is, he makes a strong covenant with many, not all, and then in the middle of the week he ends all sacrifice and offerings.
There is a covenant for one week, and then broken in the middle of the week.
The Temple here has become desecrated causing the sacrifices to cease.
This is the verse that Daniel refers to in Mat.24:15:

Mat 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand).

It is not Christ in this passage in Daniel. As Christ says, it is the abomination of desolation, the Antichrist. In that day they are to flee. It is a day yet to come. There may have been a partial fulfillment in 70 A.D. but the real fulfillment is still to come. It is called Daniel's 70th Week, Jacob's Trouble, The Great Tribulation.

The reason you will not answer them is that they give the lie to your repeated assertion that:

Originally Posted by DHK
These events have yet to occur:
What are the events mentioned:
--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.
--to anoint a most holy place. (vs. 24)

All these events have to do with the Jewish people.
All these events will take place within that 70th week.

Yes, all these events are yet to come to pass.
The promises are directed to the Jews.
The transgressions and the sins of the Jews have not ended; they continue to increase.
They have not made reconciliation with their Messiah, but will in the future.
Everlasting righteousness has not been brought in. This is obvious.
Christ will once again anoint the most holy place when he sets up his Kingdom.

I don't know how you interpret the above but they have certainly taken place or we are all still lost and in our sins.

You ignore a proper exegesis of scripture. You say that "the coming prince" a foreigner, is Christ, in effect calling Christ the Antichrist. That is a terrible interpretation.

 

[OldRegular]

When you answer the questions DHK, perhaps we will have something to talk about. When you refute my post where I showed that Jesus Christ through HIS death on the Cross fulfilled all the events of Daniel 9:24 perhaps we will have something to discuss.

Incidentally those questions you refuse to answer are as follows:

Originally Posted by OldRegular

1. Are you saying the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross accomplished NOTHING?

2. Was righteousness imputed to you because of your "faith in Jesus Christ"?

3. Is that righteousness everlasting or does it come and go?

 

[DHK]

When you answer the questions DHK, perhaps we will have something to talk about. When you refute my post where I showed that Jesus Christ through HIS death on the Cross fulfilled all the events of Daniel 9:24 perhaps we will have something to discuss.

Incidentally those questions you refuse to answer are as follows:

Originally Posted by OldRegular

1. Are you saying the death of Jesus Christ on the Cross accomplished NOTHING?

2. Was righteousness imputed to you because of your "faith in Jesus Christ"?

3. Is that righteousness everlasting or does it come and go?

Start another thread.
These questions are off topic and have nothing to do with "Messianic Kingdom" or especially, the passage of Daniel 9:24-27.

Are you saying that the Levitical diet of the Law of Moses is for us today?
What is the relevancy?
That is how I look upon your questions.