Comments on: Daniel 9:27 Explained: Who Makes Which Covenant? http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/ Revolutionary Explanations for Bible Prophecy, Mysteries and Difficult Verses Sun, 25 Jul 2010 13:23:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Tim C http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-11169 Tim C Fri, 30 Apr 2010 06:07:30 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-11169 The capital and lower case H are in correct order. The first he refers to the antichrist The second He refers to the Lord The final he refers to "one who makes desolate" Each he represents a different entity. It's because so many assume that it's a Jewish temple that they cannot understand why He (capital H) would bring an end to sacrifice and offering. We need to get past the old covenant. There is only one sufficient offering now. The first he represents the the spirit of antichrist ruling amidst the people whom God has called, His spiritual temple. The first he also rules over this same nation which has apostasized from the true faith of Christ. This is the harlot, Mystery babylon. This same he, Oct 2008 went before 33 million people and promised to strengthen and uphold existing agreements of peace and security. It just so happened to be the first day of a feast week. So the lead up to the desolation is a combination of antichrist amidst the people of God, both in and outside the churches. A nation called forth in Christ, that they might be the temple of the living God. This apostasized nation is an abomination before God, therefore He (capital H) has had enough, brings it to an end, she has defiled the temple, and God will allow the 10 horned beast to destroy the harlot nation and peoples. This is the end of the spiritual sacrifice and offering brought about by He, Gods righteous judgement. The final he is one who makes desolate. A 10 member nation whom god has put in their heart to destroy the harlot. America, it is you! You are the harlot nation called forth in rightoeusness. But now you are drunk on the wine of the wrath of God. You have destroyed the temple, and now God will destroy you. People, it is time to flee....... The capital and lower case H are in correct order.
The first he refers to the antichrist
The second He refers to the Lord
The final he refers to “one who makes desolate”

Each he represents a different entity.

It’s because so many assume that it’s a Jewish temple that they cannot understand why He (capital H) would bring an end to sacrifice and offering. We need to get past the old covenant. There is only one sufficient offering now.

The first he represents the the spirit of antichrist ruling amidst the people whom God has called, His spiritual temple. The first he also rules over this same nation which has apostasized from the true faith of Christ. This is the harlot, Mystery babylon.
This same he, Oct 2008 went before 33 million people and promised to strengthen and uphold existing agreements of peace and security. It just so happened to be the first day of a feast week.

So the lead up to the desolation is a combination of antichrist amidst the people of God, both in and outside the churches. A nation called forth in Christ, that they might be the temple of the living God.
This apostasized nation is an abomination before God, therefore He (capital H) has had enough, brings it to an end, she has defiled the temple, and God will allow the 10 horned beast to destroy the harlot nation and peoples.
This is the end of the spiritual sacrifice and offering brought about by He, Gods righteous judgement.

The final he is one who makes desolate. A 10 member nation whom god has put in their heart to destroy the harlot.

America, it is you! You are the harlot nation called forth in rightoeusness. But now you are drunk on the wine of the wrath of God. You have destroyed the temple, and now God will destroy you. People, it is time to flee…….

]]> By: Tim McHyde http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-234 Tim McHyde Fri, 17 Nov 2006 20:40:35 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-234 Fallacies I see: #1 - "New Moon feast as instructed by YHWH" you mention does not exist and it is not instructed by YHWH in the Torah. There was a custom of feasting on that day you can see evidence of throughout the OT, but it is nowhere found in Leviticus 23 (with the rest of the appointed times) nor anywhere else in the Torah as a command to rest or do anything as some like Norman Willis teach. If it's not in Leviticus 23 or the Torah it's not a feast instructed by YHWH. Many days have commands to blow trumpets or have animals sacrificed on them, but few of them are commanded sabbaths. You cannot say that because some convocations are sabbaths they all are. #2 - Suppose there is a new moon festival commanded in Leviticus 23. There still remains no instruction as touching on sabbath observance about overriding the required "six days of work" count with it. If God meant "work six days and on the seventh keep sabbath unless interrupted by the new moon sabbath first" why did he say "work six days and the seventh is [always] the sabbath day of rest" in every single case where it's recorded? This is significant and should not be ignored if you are reading the Bible carefully for what God's instructions are Fallacies I see:
#1 – “New Moon feast as instructed by YHWH” you mention does not exist and it is not instructed by YHWH in the Torah. There was a custom of feasting on that day you can see evidence of throughout the OT, but it is nowhere found in Leviticus 23 (with the rest of the appointed times) nor anywhere else in the Torah as a command to rest or do anything as some like Norman Willis teach. If it’s not in Leviticus 23 or the Torah it’s not a feast instructed by YHWH. Many days have commands to blow trumpets or have animals sacrificed on them, but few of them are commanded sabbaths. You cannot say that because some convocations are sabbaths they all are.

#2 – Suppose there is a new moon festival commanded in Leviticus 23. There still remains no instruction as touching on sabbath observance about overriding the required “six days of work” count with it. If God meant “work six days and on the seventh keep sabbath unless interrupted by the new moon sabbath first” why did he say “work six days and the seventh is [always] the sabbath day of rest” in every single case where it’s recorded? This is significant and should not be ignored if you are reading the Bible carefully for what God’s instructions are

]]> By: Ted Walther http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-233 Ted Walther Fri, 17 Nov 2006 06:47:54 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-233 Shalom, Tim. Your article debunking the Lunar Sabbath was very logical. The arguments that you debunked were indeed flawed. However, every Lunar Sabbatarian that I know bases their first argument for the Lunar Sabbath on its congruence with the New Moon. If you follow the instructions to "work six days, then rest", and also keep the New Moon feast as instructed by YHWH, you will always be in sync. You will never have problems crossing the boundary of a month. The New Moon festival, which is sometimes two days long, but usually one day long, takes care of the sabbath. Look at how it works on the calendar. Day 1 is the New Moon feast. Work six days. Rest the seventh. This brings you to the eigth. Continue this. Finally you arrive at the 29th day of the month, a sabbath. Do you then count the next sabbath from that day? Or do you keep the New Moon feast the very next day the same way you kept the Sabbath? And then start the count of six work days? Remember, the Sabbath was not a commandment given in isolation. It was commanded together with the new moon and other feasts and appointments. If you throw out any little bit of Torah, it will distort how you interpret the rest of Torah. So it is with the Sabbath. Are the New Moons done away with? Fine then, keep your Saturday Sabbath. Noone can say otherwise. Ted Shalom, Tim.

Your article debunking the Lunar Sabbath was very logical. The arguments that you debunked were indeed flawed.

However, every Lunar Sabbatarian that I know bases their first argument for the Lunar Sabbath on its congruence with the New Moon. If you follow the instructions to “work six days, then rest”, and also keep the New Moon feast as instructed by YHWH, you will always be in sync. You will never have problems crossing the boundary of a month. The New Moon festival, which is sometimes two days long, but usually one day long, takes care of the sabbath.

Look at how it works on the calendar. Day 1 is the New Moon feast. Work six days. Rest the seventh. This brings you to the eigth. Continue this. Finally you arrive at the 29th day of the month, a sabbath. Do you then count the next sabbath from that day? Or do you keep the New Moon feast the very next day the same way you kept the Sabbath? And then start the count of six work days?

Remember, the Sabbath was not a commandment given in isolation. It was commanded together with the new moon and other feasts and appointments. If you throw out any little bit of Torah, it will distort how you interpret the rest of Torah. So it is with the Sabbath. Are the New Moons done away with? Fine then, keep your Saturday Sabbath. Noone can say otherwise.

Ted

]]> By: Michael http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-70 Michael Sun, 02 Apr 2006 17:43:12 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-70 Hello Tim At another website you have an article about the Lunar Sabbath in which you claim that it is of no value. You made it sound as though this is some weird calendar yet you gave no scriptural backing only you opinion. With this said can you send me proof that the Roman calendar you use today to keep the Saturday Sabbath is the same day ordained by Yahweh from creation? Keeping in mind that the Romans had a 4 day week and an 8 day week in their history. So do you really think they have the right 7th day Sabbath now? Also how do you justify the FACT that when the Israelites kept the 15th (Sabbath) on the first month (Passover) then on the next moon phase of the 15th they also kept a Sabbath. If they were using the Roman calculated calendar this would be impossible - right? Thanks Michael Hello Tim
At another website you have an article about the Lunar Sabbath in which you claim that it is of no value. You made it sound as though this is some weird calendar yet you gave no scriptural backing only you opinion.

With this said can you send me proof that the Roman calendar you use today to keep the Saturday Sabbath is the same day ordained by Yahweh from creation? Keeping in mind that the Romans had a 4 day week and an 8 day week in their history. So do you really think they have the right 7th day Sabbath now?

Also how do you justify the FACT that when the Israelites kept the 15th (Sabbath) on the first month (Passover) then on the next moon phase of the 15th they also kept a Sabbath. If they were using the Roman calculated calendar this would be impossible – right?

Thanks
Michael

]]> By: Alex http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-40 Alex Fri, 24 Feb 2006 01:10:23 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-40 Ooops i mispoke! Sorry hehe, i ment the "Anti-Pope". Ooops i mispoke! Sorry hehe, i ment the “Anti-Pope”.

]]> By: Tim McHyde http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-38 Tim McHyde Wed, 22 Feb 2006 18:50:58 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-38 Read my article again, the pope will not be the Antichrist because the pope already fits the False Prophet perfectly. You could call him the Anti-pope, however. :) Read my article again, the pope will not be the Antichrist because the pope already fits the False Prophet perfectly. You could call him the Anti-pope, however. :)

]]> By: Alex http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-37 Alex Wed, 22 Feb 2006 06:37:08 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-37 Ah i c, so i take it this last pope to come will be the Anti-Christ and not Pope Benidict? Because in Malachis prophecies it says after the BEnedict branch comes "Peter the roman" - THE END! lol, what a way to end prophecies huh? hehe. Im guessing hes talking about The Anti-Christ as Peter the Roman. Ah i c, so i take it this last pope to come will be the Anti-Christ and not Pope Benidict? Because in Malachis prophecies it says after the BEnedict branch comes “Peter the roman” – THE END! lol, what a way to end prophecies huh? hehe. Im guessing hes talking about The Anti-Christ as Peter the Roman.

]]> By: Tim McHyde http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-36 Tim McHyde Wed, 22 Feb 2006 02:56:46 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-36 He's the 2nd to last pope and one more must come before the already identified Antichrist at age 60 is beyond ruling age, and the fact that Benedict is already pretty old at 78 years old points to him dying soon. Check this out: The average life expectancy of a male in the U.S. who lives to be 78 is 8.7 additional years. (National Vital Statistics Reports,Vol. 53, No.6, Nov. 10,2004, p. 16, Table 5). http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ethicalesq/2005/04/20 He’s the 2nd to last pope and one more must come before the already identified Antichrist at age 60 is beyond ruling age, and the fact that Benedict is already pretty old at 78 years old points to him dying soon.

Check this out:

The average life expectancy of a male in the U.S. who lives to be 78 is 8.7 additional years. (National Vital Statistics Reports,Vol. 53, No.6, Nov. 10,2004, p. 16, Table 5).

http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ethicalesq/2005/04/20

]]> By: Alex http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-29 Alex Sat, 11 Feb 2006 00:55:30 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-29 If there is still one more pope.. then does that mean that this one will only live a short time? If there is still one more pope.. then does that mean that this one will only live a short time?

]]> By: Tim McHyde http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/comment-page-1/#comment-28 Tim McHyde Fri, 10 Feb 2006 22:48:29 +0000 http://timmchyde.com/daniel-9-27/#comment-28 Right, all these figures appear to be part of related multi-layered secret societies. For sure, however religious and godly appearing to the casual observer they may appear, they are certainly not carrying out God's instructions in the Bible. The next and final Pope looks to be the one who Revelation 13 is literally speaking about, as I covered here: http://escapeallthesethings.com/pope-benedict-XVI-ratzinger-antichrist-false-prophet-malachy.htm Tim Right, all these figures appear to be part of related multi-layered secret societies. For sure, however religious and godly appearing to the casual observer they may appear, they are certainly not carrying out God’s instructions in the Bible.

The next and final Pope looks to be the one who Revelation 13 is literally speaking about, as I covered here:

http://escapeallthesethings.com/pope-benedict-XVI-ratzinger-antichrist-false-prophet-malachy.htm

Tim

]]>