Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Debate only within the framework of the ENPI theory

Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:51 am

I'm just curious to know.........

With the birds falling from the sky world wide; fish washing ashore, beasts of the field dieing - and all for no apparent reason......and not to mention the land of Israel being "mandated" to be divided; all STILL within the timeframe of the ENP(I), how many are still discrediting this theory?
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Wickus on Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:48 pm

Great to see you here Mr Boldly. :grin:

Still holding on to it. It makes more sense now than it did a year ago. What is currently happening between Israel and the PA can play a major role. If an Palestinian state is declared this year, we may see the following Scriptures come to pass:

Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

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:)


That will mean that we are entering the last 3.5 years or the great tribulation. And while we are still in the time frame of the only 7 year treaty in the history of Israel it will be foolish to turn against it.

This is the response I got on the same subject:

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=59045
Faithful is the saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
User avatar
Wickus
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:31 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Sat Jan 22, 2011 5:02 pm

Thanks for the response Wickus,

Prayerfully, as time continues, and signs become more prevalent - then the Truth will reveal itself.

Watching, and hanging on with ya!
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Loop on Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:01 pm

I'm still watching it, tooo much going on to not watch it...
Psalms 91
1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
2 I will say of the LORD, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.
Loop
 
Posts: 1539
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:08 am
Location: WV

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby drdos on Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:28 pm

I'm just info seeking here. So is the ENP still a 16 country organization? If people are thinking this is the 7 year agreement it would have started 1/1/07, and if that is so we would be approaching the mid point of the week right? If that's the case then the AOB would be pretty soon, and the witnesses would be on the scene soon? I just have serious doubts that we are in the first 3 1/2 period of the week. Things are not bad enough yet... I think we are in the birth pains state still No? Thanks
drdos
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:06 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby slick on Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:44 am

Hello Wickus & Mr Baldy,

The 6th seal brings pestilence & death, and during the 7 trumpets the Sun is given power to scorch men & John sees what looks to him as a great Burning mountain fall from the sky into the sea.......HMMMMMM! UNACCOUNTED FOR ANIMALS DEATHS ALL OVER.....GLOBAL WARMING....AND A METEOR HEADING TOWARD THE EARTH.....Where are we? Im absolutly still watching .
GOD-BLESS,

THE BATTLE RAGES TIL THE LION SOON ROARS!

Clarence
slick
 
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby mrgravyard49 on Sun Jan 23, 2011 6:23 am

Wasnt the halfway point in July of 2010?
mrgravyard49
 
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 4:51 pm
Location: Columbus Ohio

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Sun Jan 23, 2011 8:26 am

I'm just info seeking here. So is the ENP still a 16 country organization? If people are thinking this is the 7 year agreement it would have started 1/1/07, and if that is so we would be approaching the mid point of the week right? If that's the case then the AOB would be pretty soon, and the witnesses would be on the scene soon? I just have serious doubts that we are in the first 3 1/2 period of the week. Things are not bad enough yet... I think we are in the birth pains state still No? Thanks


Hi drdos,

I'd like to take a jab at answering your question(s). First, for some of us who have not abandoned the ENP(I) theory, we have come to discover that there is a possibility that the week in which the coming Antichrist will confirm the Covenant with the Many, may be a separate entity than the 70th week of Daniel - but yet they may overlap at some point. There are even those of us who believe that Christ may have fulfilled the first 3.5 years of the final week in His Ministry - thus, leaving a final 3.5 year period that is yet to be fulfilled. This seems to be the case right now, and is consistent with Scripture (in my humble opinion) - which means that "if" the ENP(I) is the "confirming process" of a previous Covenant - which would be the 1995 Euro-Med Process; then the ENP(I) has served as a "marker" to indicate that at some point the final 3.5 years are about to commence.


As far as things that we "expected to see" at the MIDPOINT - like the cessation of sacrifices; a Temple; the Two Witnesses...etc, well, all I can say is Scripture never indicates that we will see any of those things "commence" right at the 1,260 day mark; but however at some point we will have to see them. Scripture does indicate that we will see the A0D (Matthew 24:15) and it does indicate that we will see "armies surround Jerusalem" (Luke 21:20). These two things appear as if it will happen this year, as there is a mandate that Israel is set to be divided - with Peace Keeping Troops stationed there.

This is the reason why some of us believe that the ENP(I) theory is still alive and well. For those who have expected to see certain things happen, and within your own reasoning and timing - then all I can say is lets just wait and see. There are a lot of things going on geopolitically, economically, and by nature, that indicates we are there. If we could "see" everything that has been prophesised to happen - then there would be no need for Jesus to warn us to be ready, or indicate that He is coming at a time that we won't expect. (Matthew 24:44)
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby drdos on Sun Jan 23, 2011 2:37 pm

Mr Baldy wrote:
I'm just info seeking here. So is the ENP still a 16 country organization? If people are thinking this is the 7 year agreement it would have started 1/1/07, and if that is so we would be approaching the mid point of the week right? If that's the case then the AOB would be pretty soon, and the witnesses would be on the scene soon? I just have serious doubts that we are in the first 3 1/2 period of the week. Things are not bad enough yet... I think we are in the birth pains state still No? Thanks


Hi drdos,

I'd like to take a jab at answering your question(s). First, for some of us who have not abandoned the ENP(I) theory, we have come to discover that there is a possibility that the week in which the coming Antichrist will confirm the Covenant with the Many, may be a separate entity than the 70th week of Daniel - but yet they may overlap at some point. There are even those of us who believe that Christ may have fulfilled the first 3.5 years of the final week in His Ministry - thus, leaving a final 3.5 year period that is yet to be fulfilled. This seems to be the case right now, and is consistent with Scripture (in my humble opinion) - which means that "if" the ENP(I) is the "confirming process" of a previous Covenant - which would be the 1995 Euro-Med Process; then the ENP(I) has served as a "marker" to indicate that at some point the final 3.5 years are about to commence.


As far as things that we "expected to see" at the MIDPOINT - like the cessation of sacrifices; a Temple; the Two Witnesses...etc, well, all I can say is Scripture never indicates that we will see any of those things "commence" right at the 1,260 day mark; but however at some point we will have to see them. Scripture does indicate that we will see the A0D (Matthew 24:15) and it does indicate that we will see "armies surround Jerusalem" (Luke 21:20). These two things appear as if it will happen this year, as there is a mandate that Israel is set to be divided - with Peace Keeping Troops stationed there.

This is the reason why some of us believe that the ENP(I) theory is still alive and well. For those who have expected to see certain things happen, and within your own reasoning and timing - then all I can say is lets just wait and see. There are a lot of things going on geopolitically, economically, and by nature, that indicates we are there. If we could "see" everything that has been prophesised to happen - then there would be no need for Jesus to warn us to be ready, or indicate that He is coming at a time that we won't expect. (Matthew 24:44)
Mr baldy thank you very much for explaining. I see now where this theory fits.
drdos
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:06 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Seeker on Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:00 pm

Hi Mr. Baldy,

As far as things that we "expected to see" at the MIDPOINT - like the cessation of sacrifices; a Temple; the Two Witnesses...etc, well, all I can say is Scripture never indicates that we will see any of those things "commence" right at the 1,260 day mark;


Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

In the case of the two witnesses it specifies 1260 days.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby James1:12 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:39 am

I'm still watching each element of the theory with particular interest in what will become of the WEU this Summer and what will the 10 leading members do. NATOs restructuring and the future of European defence will become more and more pressing as time goes on.

Edited to add:

The ad-hoc defence agreements springing up in Europe kicked of by the UK and France will have to come under some sort of EU wide organization for them to be particularly meaningful. Ashton has been asked to head this up but I think that is just some sort of insincere courtesy to the EU given that Ashton has been reluctant to get involved in defense matters. I think there is more organization going on than meets the eye between the national capitals otherwise they would not have all so readily disbanded the WEU at a time when NATO was undergoing structural change.
Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him.
James1:12
 
Posts: 1044
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:53 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:13 am

Seeker wrote:Hi Mr. Baldy,

As far as things that we "expected to see" at the MIDPOINT - like the cessation of sacrifices; a Temple; the Two Witnesses...etc, well, all I can say is Scripture never indicates that we will see any of those things "commence" right at the 1,260 day mark;


Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

In the case of the two witnesses it specifies 1260 days.

Peace,
Seeker


Hi Seeker,

It appears as if you didn't record my entire statement. I did qualify the aformentioned statement that I made, by continuing it by stating: "but however at some point we will have to see them."

Scripture is definately clear about the Two Witnesses, and the amount of days that they are given to prophesy. My point is that it may not be clearly seen at the time that they actually commence their testimony - they may not be recognizable to everyday people who are passing by, or to the World for that matter. I believe that as the tribulation becomes worse, it will be evident who these two are - as the Antichrist will have his dealings with them; but to say that on day one of the 1,260 period they will be known - I don't think can be supported with Scripture.
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:21 am

James1:12 wrote:The ad-hoc defence agreements springing up in Europe kicked of by the UK and France will have to come under some sort of EU wide organization for them to be particularly meaningful. Ashton has been asked to head this up but I think that is just some sort of insincere courtesy to the EU given that Ashton has been reluctant to get involved in defense matters. I think there is more organization going on than meets the eye between the national capitals otherwise they would not have all so readily disbanded the WEU at a time when NATO was undergoing structural change.


Hi James1:12,

I share this exact opinion of yours, and I believe that it can be supported with Scripture. (Revelation 17:11-12). The opinion you have is really interesting, in that because the EU is like and iron and clay mixture - I believe that this is what will cause the WEU to come to life in the form of crisis management, and spring forth the Antichrist. This is all happening extremely fast, and it needs to - especially with the mandate set forth to establish a Palestinian State.
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Seeker on Tue Jan 25, 2011 6:53 am

Hi Mr. Baldy,

Scripture is definately clear about the Two Witnesses, and the amount of days that they are given to prophesy. My point is that it may not be clearly seen at the time that they actually commence their testimony - they may not be recognizable to everyday people who are passing by, or to the World for that matter.


Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

Rev 11:5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.
Rev 11:6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.


Oh they will be recognizable spewing fire and devouring their enemies. God gives them power for 3 1/2 years believe me people will notice. They will be in Jerusalem smiting the earth with all kinds of plagues. That is how their ministry is defined so they will be definitely noticed according to scripture.

as the Antichrist will have his dealings with them; but to say that on day one of the 1,260 period they will be known - I don't think can be supported with Scripture.


How many days do you propose that they remain hidden? Wasn't 3 1/2 years back around August? That would be about 150 days past when God says their ministry begins. You're proposing that the two witnesses are still hidden 5 months after the 3 1/2 year mark? They may not be known on day one of the 1260 days but still not known around day 1410.... Can you show me any scripture that supports that theory?

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby burien1 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 7:22 am

Seeker wrote:Hi Mr. Baldy,

Scripture is definately clear about the Two Witnesses, and the amount of days that they are given to prophesy. My point is that it may not be clearly seen at the time that they actually commence their testimony - they may not be recognizable to everyday people who are passing by, or to the World for that matter.


Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

Rev 11:5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.
Rev 11:6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.


Oh they will be recognizable spewing fire and devouring their enemies. God gives them power for 3 1/2 years believe me people will notice. They will be in Jerusalem smiting the earth with all kinds of plagues. That is how their ministry is defined so they will be definitely noticed according to scripture.

as the Antichrist will have his dealings with them; but to say that on day one of the 1,260 period they will be known - I don't think can be supported with Scripture.


How many days do you propose that they remain hidden? Wasn't 3 1/2 years back around August? That would be about 150 days past when God says their ministry begins. You're proposing that the two witnesses are still hidden 5 months after the 3 1/2 year mark? They may not be known on day one of the 1260 days but still not known around day 1410.... Can you show me any scripture that supports that theory?

Peace,
Seeker

Agree 100%. The Jews in Israel, do not take kindly to Christians proselytizing. It is banned and punishable by up to one year in jail, so I believe It will be very much noticed.
Psalm 119:105; Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
User avatar
burien1
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 7562
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:57 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby burien1 on Tue Jan 25, 2011 7:26 am

Stupid cat again !
Psalm 119:105; Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
User avatar
burien1
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 7562
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:57 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:22 am

Seeker wrote:Hi Mr. Baldy,

Scripture is definately clear about the Two Witnesses, and the amount of days that they are given to prophesy. My point is that it may not be clearly seen at the time that they actually commence their testimony - they may not be recognizable to everyday people who are passing by, or to the World for that matter.


Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

Rev 11:5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.
Rev 11:6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.


Oh they will be recognizable spewing fire and devouring their enemies. God gives them power for 3 1/2 years believe me people will notice. They will be in Jerusalem smiting the earth with all kinds of plagues. That is how their ministry is defined so they will be definitely noticed according to scripture.

as the Antichrist will have his dealings with them; but to say that on day one of the 1,260 period they will be known - I don't think can be supported with Scripture.


How many days do you propose that they remain hidden? Wasn't 3 1/2 years back around August? That would be about 150 days past when God says their ministry begins. You're proposing that the two witnesses are still hidden 5 months after the 3 1/2 year mark? They may not be known on day one of the 1260 days but still not known around day 1410.... Can you show me any scripture that supports that theory?

Peace,
Seeker


Hi Again Seeker,

Let be begin my rebuttal by stating this.......

It really amazes me how those that have preconceived ideas about the End Times seem to put any ideas that logically fit - and that according to Scripture - out of their minds, as if it were illogical to think of such, when God has plainly stated that no man knows the day or the hour. Again, Christ clearly warns the Church that He is coming at a time that they won't expect Him. So if all the "Geniuses " out there could clearly see the signs...then why would there be a need for the Creator of the Universe to warn His Followers? Apparently you haven't plainly read, and understood all that I have stated. Again, I have stated that the ENP(I), and the 70th week MAY be two separate entities, but "may" at some point overlap. This is very IMPORTANT to understand. You, as with others (to include myself; at one time) are GUILTY of reading into Scripture, and "assuming" that when the coming Antichrist confirms the Covenant with Many that this will actually start the 70th week. Or that we would "SEE" certain events that we expect to happen; and that within our own understanding. I now challenge you to prove this sort of thinking; or your "thoughts" with Scripture.

In your "thinking" You are ASSUMMING that these Two Witnesses will be recognizable, and be seen on day one of their 1,260 day Ministry - Again....I challenge you to prove this "ASSUMPTION" with Scripture.

Everything that I have submitted cannot be ruled out - it is my theory based on what "may happen" and that according to the FACTS that our World is showing us today, according to what has been provided in Scripture. I have not made any assumptions - such as you have by reading into Scripture; in that you ASSUME that the Two Witnesses will be spewing fire on day one, or casting plagues on day one, and immediately be recognizable. Now, the ball is in back in your court. Why don't you prove your thoughts with Scripture, and please no "assumptions"!

In closing......my language is not intended to be harsh, or mean spirited. I am just very, very passionate about what I believe in. If I can be proven wrong, then I will very humbly admit that I was wrong, and beg for forgiveness. The entire process in which the ENP(I) theory has derived has truly fascinated me, and moved me to a point in which I have become closer to Christ. I have never seen prophecy come together such as it has now. So again, if I have come off a bit strong...then I apologize, as it is not my intention. Even if this theory is wrong...then I still am grateful that it has lead me to delve deeper into Scripture in such a way, as I never have before, and I thank God for that.
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby david on Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:35 pm

I have revised my position from almost certain to not sure to don't think so. The mid-term point or three and a half years has certainly come and gone. Today would look for how this instrument is used by the EU and it's future implications for Israel. If more information were posted showing how this is relevant today then maybe...

I have have come to an alternate interpretation for Daniel 9:27. This is the only passage that supports 7 year treaty. Basically Christ has confirmed the covenant with the many, those who believe in him, he put and end to sacrifice by making the ultimate sacrifice, desolation will continue until the one who makes desolate is destroyed by Christ coming. (Paraphrased) According this this view, there is no need for sacrifices to be restored on the temple only to have them "stopped" by an AC.

I still belie in an FP and an AC to come, just not a seven year treaty. Yet I do hold out the possibility of some dual fulfillment with it would be somewhat twisted with non-matching terms.

david
User avatar
david
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:34 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Wickus on Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:43 pm

Same here Mr Baldy. It is the first time in my 25 years of watching for the return of Christ that events are starting to make sense. It has and is still leading me closer to Jesus.

Back to topic...
Faithful is the saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
User avatar
Wickus
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:31 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby drdos on Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:44 pm

Well one way to know from day one if it's the witnesses they may be wearing sparkly white robes, and not a suit and nike sneekers, but you know they may just have common cloths on. Just a thought... :mrgreen:
drdos
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:06 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Loop on Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:48 pm

The mid-term point or three and a half years has certainly come and gone.


I thought it started in Jan. 2007 ?

07 to o8 = 1 year, 08 to 09 = 2 years, 09 to 10 = 3 years

middle of 2011 would make it 3 1/2 years, not quiet there yet ? ?

Am I missing something ? :oops:
Psalms 91
1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
2 I will say of the LORD, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.
Loop
 
Posts: 1539
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:08 am
Location: WV

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby jgilberAZ on Tue Jan 25, 2011 3:01 pm

Loop wrote:
The mid-term point or three and a half years has certainly come and gone.


I thought it started in Jan. 2007 ?

07 to o8 = 1 year, 08 to 09 = 2 years, 09 to 10 = 3 years

middle of 2011 would make it 3 1/2 years, not quiet there yet ? ?

Am I missing something ? :oops:


You're missing 10 to 11 = 4 years.

Jan 2007 to Jan 2011 is four years.
2 Timothy 2:24a..And the servant of the Lord must not strive ...
The meaning is, that the servant of Christ should be a man of peace. He should not indulge in the feelings which commonly give rise to contention, and which commonly characterize it. He should not struggle for mere victory, even when endeavoring to maintain truth; but should do this, in all cases, with a kind spirit, and a mild temper; with entire candor; with nothing designed to provoke and irritate an adversary; and so that, whatever may be the result of the discussion, "the bond of peace" may, if possible, be preserved.
.
User avatar
jgilberAZ
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 9:49 am
Location: Arizona

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Loop on Tue Jan 25, 2011 4:25 pm

:lol: One things for sure, never claimed to be good at math.... :oops:

Running back and forth to the hospital with my mom and losing a horse this week has not helped either.... :bag:
Psalms 91
1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
2 I will say of the LORD, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.
Loop
 
Posts: 1539
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:08 am
Location: WV

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:00 am

david wrote:I have revised my position from almost certain to not sure to don't think so. The mid-term point or three and a half years has certainly come and gone. Today would look for how this instrument is used by the EU and it's future implications for Israel. If more information were posted showing how this is relevant today then maybe...

I have have come to an alternate interpretation for Daniel 9:27. This is the only passage that supports 7 year treaty. Basically Christ has confirmed the covenant with the many, those who believe in him, he put and end to sacrifice by making the ultimate sacrifice, desolation will continue until the one who makes desolate is destroyed by Christ coming. (Paraphrased) According this this view, there is no need for sacrifices to be restored on the temple only to have them "stopped" by an AC.

I still belie in an FP and an AC to come, just not a seven year treaty. Yet I do hold out the possibility of some dual fulfillment with it would be somewhat twisted with non-matching terms.

david


Hi David,

All I can say is wow.....I never viewed Daniel 9:27 such as you have stated it. However, to suggest that Christ "confirmed the covenant with the many" is to suggest that He is the "he" as it relates to the passage in Daniel 9:27 - this is where we differ. I do find it very interesting however that with your statement, you have included that the "desolation will continue until the one who makes desolate is destroyed by Christ coming." This seems fit Scripture, in that many are expecting a "time of peace" or a so-called "Peace Treaty" to come into effect; when Scripture is clear that "war" will continue until the end. (Daniel 9:26)

It further appears as if you are contradicting Scripture, in that you also say that you do not belive in a seven year treaty, when this is plainly associated (depending on your belief - with the Antichrist who is to come; or with Christ). I will say however, that if there is no need for sacrifices to be restored to the temple - then it would fit plainly in what others, and myself believe, and that is that Christ fulfilled the 1st half of the week (3.5 years) in His Ministry, and subsequent death on the Cross.

I now wonder if Daniel 9:27 is referring to both Christ, and the Antichrist; as they both are included in the entire passages of Scripture from Daniel 9:24-27.

Thanks for your input...you definately have given me something further to study!
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Seeker on Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:15 am

Hi Mr. Baldy,

Everything that I have submitted cannot be ruled out - it is my theory based on what "may happen" and that according to the FACTS that our World is showing us today, according to what has been provided in Scripture. I have not made any assumptions - such as you have by reading into Scripture; in that you ASSUME that the Two Witnesses will be spewing fire on day one, or casting plagues on day one, and immediately be recognizable. Now, the ball is in back in your court. Why don't you prove your thoughts with Scripture, and please no "assumptions"!


Assumptions...here let me post these scriptures again apparently you didn't notice them in my last post. These scriptures tell what the two witnesses do and how long they do it.

Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.
Rev 11:4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.
Rev 11:5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed.
Rev 11:6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.
Rev 11:7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.


That is what the bible says the two witnesses do during their 3 1/2 year ministry. There are not two men doing that in this world today. I say the two witnesses will do exactly what the scriptures above say. It is not my theory that says the two witnesses are around but hidden. Scripture says that fire proceeds out of their mouth and devours their enemies. Those are not my words they are the Lord's. God says that these two have the power to shut up heaven that it rain not in the days of their prophecy...still raining in Jerusalem isn't it. See it is your picture of the two witnesses that has zero in common with scriptures. God gives them power for 3 1/2 years you really think they would be sitting around not using the power God gave them to testify with? They aren't testifying in Jerusalem like scripture says they will be. They smite the earth with plagues at their will. Now as I asked for in my last post where are the scriptures that show the two witnesses hidden for the first 5 months of their testimony? I have been using scripture to back my posts in every post I have made to you. How many scriptures have you shown supporting what you claim about the two witnesses. It is you who is making assumptions here not I.

Rev 11:12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.
Rev 11:13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.
Rev 11:14 The second woe is past; and, behold, the third woe cometh quickly.
Rev 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.


Just after the two witnesses are resurrected the kingdoms of the world become Christ's and He will reign forever. That is at the end of the last 7 years at the beginning of the millennium. That places the two witnesses testimony in the last 3 1/2 years. Your last 3 1/2 years began long ago and still no two witnesses as the bible says there will be. It is your theory that does not match what the bible shows concerning the two witnesses. Show me the scriptures that support your view of the two witnesses please.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby drdos on Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:24 am

Loop wrote::lol: One things for sure, never claimed to be good at math.... :oops:

Running back and forth to the hospital with my mom and losing a horse this week has not helped either.... :bag:

Hey Loop praying for you and family, and hoping all is well. Blessings
drdos
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:06 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 8:10 am

Hi again Seeker......

Ahem......... let be begin by saying thank you for the challenge! But you get no cigar for your rebuttal. Lets do address a few of these issues that you do bring up, and let me further show you were you make "assumptions" and/or "read into" Scripture.

Seeker wrote:Scripture says that fire proceeds out of their mouth and devours their enemies. Those are not my words they are the Lord's. God says that these two have the power to shut up heaven that it rain not in the days of their prophecy...still raining in Jerusalem isn't it. See it is your picture of the two witnesses that has zero in common with scriptures. God gives them power for 3 1/2 years you really think they would be sitting around not using the power God gave them to testify with?


Since you have mentioned the aforementioned, and - (thank you very much) have provided Scripture to prove the same, in that you have first listed:

Seeker wrote:Rev 11:5 And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed


If you'll notice the word "IF"...the word "if" is conditional - that doesn't mean that it "WILL"happen. It plainly says "and "if" any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth"...this certainly doesn't mean, as you have stated, that they will spew fire from their mouth's the entire 3.5 year period - this is where you have "read into" Scripture.

Then you provide this:

Seeker wrote:Rev 11:6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.


Again, if you'll notice that they "have power to shut heaven" - this doesn't mean that they are shutting it now; they just have this power. Then if you'll notice the very last part of this verse ""as often as they will". This means that they have discretion. So your question about it raining in Jerusalem is mute. You have no case. Nor do I have to provide you with anything additional, as far as Scripture is concerned at this point, because my case is made.

In closing, you have clearly read into Scripture....and I hope that it is not for some preconceived idea that you have concerning the Return of Chirst. Let me add that you have not even taken into consideration that the week that the Antichrist confirms the Covenant with the many, and the 70th week may be two separate entities - which is KEY to understanding what I, and others who still believe that the ENP(I) theory may be valid; nor have you provided any Scripture whatsoever that the Two Witnesses are actually "seen" during the entire time of their Testimony. Prove this!

I have used the very Scriptures that you have provided to prove my point.
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Seeker on Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:06 am

Hi Mr. Baldy,

Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

They prophesy for 1260 days. Below is the definition for prophesy.

G4395
προφητεύω
prophēteuō
prof-ate-yoo'-o
From G4396; to foretell events, divine, speak under inspiration, exercise the prophetic office: - prophesy.


They do things they foretell events, speak under inspiration, exercise the prophetic office for 1260 days. During the time that they are taking they action to prophesy they use the power given to them to smite the earth with plagues as often as they wish. There are not two witnesses in Jerusalem at this time prophesying as there would be according to Rev 11:3 if this were the last 1260 days.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby drdos on Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:56 am

Seeker wrote:Hi Mr. Baldy,

Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

They prophesy for 1260 days. Below is the definition for prophesy.

G4395
προφητεύω
prophēteuō
prof-ate-yoo'-o
From G4396; to foretell events, divine, speak under inspiration, exercise the prophetic office: - prophesy.


They do things they foretell events, speak under inspiration, exercise the prophetic office for 1260 days. During the time that they are taking they action to prophesy they use the power given to them to smite the earth with plagues as often as they wish. There are not two witnesses in Jerusalem at this time prophesying as there would be according to Rev 11:3 if this were the last 1260 days.

Peace,
Seeker

Scripture is very clear on this. Thanks for sharing and for the debate..
drdos
 
Posts: 3296
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:06 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby david on Wed Jan 26, 2011 11:06 am

Loop wrote:
The mid-term point or three and a half years has certainly come and gone.


I thought it started in Jan. 2007 ?

07 to o8 = 1 year, 08 to 09 = 2 years, 09 to 10 = 3 years

middle of 2011 would make it 3 1/2 years, not quiet there yet ? ?

Am I missing something ? :oops:


I think you missed something there, 2007+5.5=2010.5 or June 2010. Some how you went from 2010 being three years added a half a year and you got 2011.


david
User avatar
david
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:34 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Loop on Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:01 pm

Hey Loop praying for you and family, and hoping all is well. Blessings


Thank you so much...


I think you missed something there, 2007+5.5=2010.5 or June 2010. Some how you went from 2010 being three years added a half a year and you got 2011.

david


Yep , see that LOL! Been a rough Month...
Psalms 91
1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
2 I will say of the LORD, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.
Loop
 
Posts: 1539
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:08 am
Location: WV

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby david on Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:01 pm

Yep , see that LOL! Been a rough Month...[/quote]


Loop I'm am sorry I should have read further down; I don't mean to beat :alrighty: you up when your down. I hope things turn around for you.

david
User avatar
david
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:34 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Loop on Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:34 pm

Thats OK David.. :hugs: My math has never been the best even on a good day LOL!... :wink:
Psalms 91
1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
2 I will say of the LORD, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.
Loop
 
Posts: 1539
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:08 am
Location: WV

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby david on Wed Jan 26, 2011 3:04 pm

Mr Baldy wrote:
david wrote:I have revised my position from almost certain to not sure to don't think so. The mid-term point or three and a half years has certainly come and gone. Today would look for how this instrument is used by the EU and it's future implications for Israel. If more information were posted showing how this is relevant today then maybe...

I have have come to an alternate interpretation for Daniel 9:27. This is the only passage that supports 7 year treaty. Basically Christ has confirmed the covenant with the many, those who believe in him, he put and end to sacrifice by making the ultimate sacrifice, desolation will continue until the one who makes desolate is destroyed by Christ coming. (Paraphrased) According this this view, there is no need for sacrifices to be restored on the temple only to have them "stopped" by an AC.

I still belie in an FP and an AC to come, just not a seven year treaty. Yet I do hold out the possibility of some dual fulfillment with it would be somewhat twisted with non-matching terms.

david


Hi David,

All I can say is wow.....I never viewed Daniel 9:27 such as you have stated it. However, to suggest that Christ "confirmed the covenant with the many" is to suggest that He is the "he" as it relates to the passage in Daniel 9:27 - this is where we differ. I do find it very interesting however that with your statement, you have included that the "desolation will continue until the one who makes desolate is destroyed by Christ coming." This seems fit Scripture, in that many are expecting a "time of peace" or a so-called "Peace Treaty" to come into effect; when Scripture is clear that "war" will continue until the end. (Daniel 9:26)

It further appears as if you are contradicting Scripture, in that you also say that you do not belive in a seven year treaty, when this is plainly associated (depending on your belief - with the Antichrist who is to come; or with Christ). I will say however, that if there is no need for sacrifices to be restored to the temple - then it would fit plainly in what others, and myself believe, and that is that Christ fulfilled the 1st half of the week (3.5 years) in His Ministry, and subsequent death on the Cross.

I now wonder if Daniel 9:27 is referring to both Christ, and the Antichrist; as they both are included in the entire passages of Scripture from Daniel 9:24-27.

Thanks for your input...you definitely have given me something further to study!


Mr. Baldy thank you for the complement. I agree from the point of view I mentioned there is definitely some issues to work out. This is a very complex passage and is translated many different way depending on the version. I figure if I'm going to base the whole theory of a coming 7 year treaty based solely on this passage then I should completely understand this passage and be certain of it's future prophetic implications. If this passage does not support a 7 year treaty then the whole thing falls apart.

If you go back to Daniel 9:24 You will discover it's is about the Messiah, so why would the terms change and for what reason? Consider viewing them in a different context applying Messiah, look at the terms used for Messiah He and Prince. Ask why have the caps changed.

We know still today the Temple mount has been desolate and will be till Christ returns. And yes there is an abomination that was set up on the wing, the Dome of the Rock.

Note the last sentence in Dan. 9:27

And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”


Notice how it changes terminology from "He" or "he" or "Prince" or "prince" to "one who makes desolate". This is a clear differentiation from the prior terms to make clear there will be "one" who will come and make desolate. I find the term "consummation" to be interesting, if you look this up it means to seal or to consummate a marriage. Does Christ return until the time determine, claim his bride and pour out his wrath on the one who makes desolate?

I'm not sure if that's the way the passage is intended if so it's very condensed. Even if that's not the intended meaning, Daniel 9 is a very condensed passage as it is.


I definitely don't have it together and I'm not saying this view is "right" and yes do waver some ways. Yet to me the evidence for a future 7 treaty is weak.


david
User avatar
david
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:34 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 3:13 pm

Seeker wrote:They do things they foretell events, speak under inspiration, exercise the prophetic office for 1260 days. During the time that they are taking they action to prophesy they use the power given to them to smite the earth with plagues as often as they wish. There are not two witnesses in Jerusalem at this time prophesying as there would be according to Rev 11:3 if this were the last 1260 days.


Hi Seeker,

You are really not comprehending what I have stated. I am not disagreeing with the fact that the Two Witnesses prophesy for 1,260 days. Nor the powers that they are given, or the discretion at which they can use such powers.

The point that you have not understood is the simple fact that I wrote that the ENP(I) and the 70th week of Daniel may be two separate entities - yet at some point overlap. Again......This is KEY to understanding what I have mentioned. If they do indeed overlap then the actual 1,260 days that they prophesy can be at any point during the week. The ENP(I)'s duration is from January 1, 2007 - December 31, 2013. The point that I'm trying to make is that the Two Witnesses can actually appear on December 30, 2013 - and we would still have a match. You don't seem to get that.

You also have seemed to forget about Daniel 12:11-12; which gives a specific number of days that the A0D and the cessation of sacrifices will have come to fruition - that being 1,290 days. Now explain that mystery inside your own "thinking".

In closing, you won't find anywhere in Scripture that indicates that the week that the Antichrist confirms the Covenant with Many is the same as the beginning of the 70th week. Nor will you find anywhere in Scripture that the Two Witnesses show up at the "exact" Midpoint of the Week that the Antichrist confirms the Covenant with Many - these thoughts have all been "assumptions", which has subsequently lead to faulty theories as it relates to the End Times. Not to mention, if we all "saw" or could "see" when specific events were to happen - such as the cessation of sacrifices, or the "exact" point in which the Two Witnesses were to begin their Ministry; then why would Daniel give a specific number of days (1,290) to indicate when the fruition of the cessation of sacrifices and the A0D will have occurred? Or why would Jesus specifically point to the A0D as a reference point to be seen? (Matthew 24:15). Not to mention, if we could specifically "see" all of these things, then one could pinpoint the "exact" Day of Christ's Return - when He has plainly stated that no man knows the Day or the Hour.

Again, I happen to believe that the week that the Antichrist confirms the Covenant with Many only serves as a "marker" to point to a final 3.5 year period, and not some 7 year period that many have come up with. This final 3.5 year period can be supported with Daniel 12; Revelation 11; Revelation 12; and Revelation 13 - which all give a final 42 month time period.

I hope that this clears matters up as far as what I have been trying to convey.
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Wed Jan 26, 2011 3:39 pm

david wrote:Yet to me the evidence for a future 7 treaty is weak.


Hi David,

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on there being a future 7 year treaty as described by Daniel 9:27. And that's okay, because at this point, I don't believe that anyone has all the right answers.

The reason why I began this thread is because things are beginning to either look bright - or be very scary from the standpoint of the unsaved. Many have ruled the ENP(I) theory out because of things that they have "expected" to see at it's Midpoint. Fact of the matter is, there are several accounts which most have not considered - and I have attempted to bring some of them out in this thread. I cannot take credit for brainstorming these ideas - as this belongs to other members of this forum, who have not let the ENP(I) theory die as well. We all have agreed that way too many factors make this theory still valid.

Not to mention, all one has to do is LOOK at what's happening in our World. The major earthquakes, fish, birds, beasts of the field dieing - without an explanation, and the Global economic crisis that we face. Let me close by stating this........
there is a mandate to "divide" Jerusalem, and it is set to happen later this year. This is still within the timeframe of the ENP(I). Scripture is clear that when the END finally sets in, that things will begin to happen very very rapidly - or come in like a flood. In my humble opinion, when they divide the land - you will see "armies" surrounding Jerusalem, the coming Antichrist will have made his move to Jerusalem at some point, and the A0D will occur. Then all hell will break out on Earth. The division of the Land is something that cannot be overlooked, and now it appears as if the whole World is against Israel......time is short.
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby david on Wed Jan 26, 2011 6:15 pm

Mr Baldy wrote:
david wrote:Yet to me the evidence for a future 7 treaty is weak.


Hi David,

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on there being a future 7 year treaty as described by Daniel 9:27. And that's okay, because at this point, I don't believe that anyone has all the right answers.

The reason why I began this thread is because things are beginning to either look bright - or be very scary from the standpoint of the unsaved. Many have ruled the ENP(I) theory out because of things that they have "expected" to see at it's Midpoint. Fact of the matter is, there are several accounts which most have not considered - and I have attempted to bring some of them out in this thread. I cannot take credit for brainstorming these ideas - as this belongs to other members of this forum, who have not let the ENP(I) theory die as well. We all have agreed that way too many factors make this theory still valid.

Not to mention, all one has to do is LOOK at what's happening in our World. The major earthquakes, fish, birds, beasts of the field dieing - without an explanation, and the Global economic crisis that we face. Let me close by stating this........
there is a mandate to "divide" Jerusalem, and it is set to happen later this year. This is still within the timeframe of the ENP(I). Scripture is clear that when the END finally sets in, that things will begin to happen very very rapidly - or come in like a flood. In my humble opinion, when they divide the land - you will see "armies" surrounding Jerusalem, the coming Antichrist will have made his move to Jerusalem at some point, and the A0D will occur. Then all hell will break out on Earth. The division of the Land is something that cannot be overlooked, and now it appears as if the whole World is against Israel......time is short.


Thank you in kind for your reply, I'm not totally ready to give up on the ENPI myself. I agree, if there are further developments that utilize the ENPI to divide Jerusalem then I would say there is almost a certain correlation

If the ENPI is the major active component of prophecy for our day then it is somewhat convenient for us, in that all we have to do is read the headlines. At least we use to be able to follow in the headlines, now there is not much being said about it. I've been relying on others here to maintain watch about this particular subject. If the ENPI is not related to prophecy then following Headlines and trying to fit them into bible prophecy could lead us further in the wrong direction. Also I'm a little wary of re-tooling a previous theory.

On the other hand I have been tempted to re-investigate it since this thread was posted. I would like to have a better understanding of the current ENPI status and how it could be still used against Israel. I have a past vested interest in the ENPI myself. So... I suppose I'll just have to see what I can find.

Thanks for the dialogue Mr. Baldy see you around,

david
User avatar
david
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:34 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby James1:12 on Thu Jan 27, 2011 12:45 am

Do remember that FP8 is coming in 2013 and thats the next 7 year EU budgetary framework and like with FP7 they will probably use it to fund the ENP(I) or its successor...

On the question of whether the current ENP is still valid as part of Daniels 70th week and whether the week in Revelations is the same or not, I believe there is definately grounds for believing either way. I would say this, and I think its a point both sides agree on, it will be the signposts that determine this and illuminate the whole situation... until then I can't see scripture providing a definitive answer. Given that I will continue to watch the ENP and all its elements keeping in mind that these things may actually develop a bit later into what scripture describes as the very last days.
Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him.
James1:12
 
Posts: 1044
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:53 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby mrgravyard49 on Thu Jan 27, 2011 3:41 am

Sooo, If IF the enp is still around. Then I guess the midpoint is July?
When are we looking at the rapture?
mrgravyard49
 
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 4:51 pm
Location: Columbus Ohio

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Wickus on Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:23 am

mrgravyard49 wrote:Sooo, If IF the enp is still around. Then I guess the midpoint is July?
When are we looking at the rapture?


Hi Mr G

As Mr Baldy explained in the other posts, the 7 year covenant (ENP) and the 70th week may be two different time frames. There is also good reason from Scripture to believe that there is only 42 months left of the 70th week to be fulfilled. Revelation is full of 1260 days/42 months time frames. There is no mention of 7 years in the book of Revelation.

With that said, if the 7 year covenant is only a road sign and not the start of the 70th week as most of us believed, we will in error be looking for a midpoint. So I am not worried or even looking for a mid point anymore. The last 3.5 years can start at any time, but I do believe it will have something to do with the dividing of Israel and Jerusalem. That can lead to the AoD and Jesus gave that as a clear sign for us to look for.

For the rapture... I will leave that to the Lord. We can only speculate about that.
Faithful is the saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
User avatar
Wickus
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:31 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby NeedHim on Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:53 am

I just wanted to thank you smart people for your explanations. I've always felt there has been assumptions by the various scholars on many of these things. These discussions are helping me piece things together too. So thanks to both sides of the argument.
NeedHim
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:45 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Seeker on Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:30 am

Hi Mr. Baldy,

The point that you have not understood is the simple fact that I wrote that the ENP(I) and the 70th week of Daniel may be two separate entities - yet at some point overlap. Again......This is KEY to understanding what I have mentioned. If they do indeed overlap then the actual 1,260 days that they prophesy can be at any point during the week. The ENP(I)'s duration is from January 1, 2007 - December 31, 2013. The point that I'm trying to make is that the Two Witnesses can actually appear on December 30, 2013 - and we would still have a match. You don't seem to get that.


So you are admitting that the ENPI has nothing to do with the start of the last 7 years?

You also have seemed to forget about Daniel 12:11-12; which gives a specific number of days that the A0D and the cessation of sacrifices will have come to fruition - that being 1,290 days. Now explain that mystery inside your own "thinking".


What mystery are you referring to inside my thinking? I have no problem with the 1290 days. Here are some quotes from your posts.

Ok, first I want to say again that I believe that the ENP(I) IS the confirming 7 year process of the Covenant with Many.

Let me qualify why I still believe that the ENP(I) is still the prophesied confirming period of the 1995 Euro-Med - which I believe fulfills the requirements of Daniel 9:27, and is indeed the Covenant with Many. (This is a work in progress with others, whom I am communicating with, in an attempt to figure this all out)


Why did you change your view here?

In closing, you won't find anywhere in Scripture that indicates that the week that the Antichrist confirms the Covenant with Many is the same as the beginning of the 70th week.


Dan 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.
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.
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.
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.


Dan 9:24 says that 70 weeks are determined upon Israel and their holy city. Dan 9:25 accounts for 7 plus 62 weeks or 69 weeks. 70 -69 equals one week. That one week is accounted for in Dan 9:27 making that last week in 9:27 the 70th week. That accounts for the entire 70 weeks. The 70th week is shown in Dan 9:27 and is the same week that the covenant is confirmed in.

Nor will you find anywhere in Scripture that the Two Witnesses show up at the "exact" Midpoint of the Week that the Antichrist confirms the Covenant with Many - these thoughts have all been "assumptions", which has subsequently lead to faulty theories as it relates to the End Times.


We can easily determine the ending and the beginning of the two witnesses ministry.

Rev 11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

The prophesy for 3 1/2 years. So once we find when it ends we simply subtract 3 1/2 years to find the beginning.

Rev 11:7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.

When they have finished their 3 1/2 year testimony they are killed finishing the time they had alloted (1260 days). At their death the 1260 days expires.

Rev 11:12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.
Rev 11:13 And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted, and gave glory to the God of heaven.
Rev 11:14 The second woe is past; and, behold, the third woe cometh quickly.
Rev 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.


The 7th angels sounds after they ascend into heaven. At the 7th trumpet the kingdoms of the world become the kingdoms of God and Jesus shall reign for ever and ever. That is the beginning of the millennium when Jesus begins to reign. So sometime just before the millennium begins is when the two witnesses are resurrected. Subtract 1260 days from the beginning of the millennium and that gets us to around the midpoint of the last 7 years. So we can know with certainty that the two witnesses testify during the last 3 1/2 years prior to the millennium.

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: )
Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
Mat 24:17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
Mat 24:18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
Mat 24:19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
Mat 24:20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
Mat 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.


Jesus tells us that the worst tribulation that Israel will ever see begins with the AOD. When they see the AOD that Daniel spoke of they are to flee. Where did Daniel speak of the AOD?

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.

Dan 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.


Dan 9:27 tells us that the AOD Daniel spoke of occurs in the midst of the 70th week beginning the worst tribulation that Israel will ever see.

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.

The daily sacrifice is taken away in 11:31 and 9:27. Dan 9 indicates midst which is not exactly the middle. Daniel 12 indicates the AOD would be around 30 days prior to the mid-point. That matches what we see in Rev 11 as well. From the millennium to the midpoint would be 1260 days. But the two witnesses are resurrected before the actual 7th trumpet. My guess would be the 30 days that we see in Dan 12. Either way we see that the AOD should have occured at least 1290 days prior to the millennium. That marks the beginning of the AC's 3 1/2 year reign. The AC causes the AOD so it would have to occur within his reign.

Dan 7:21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
Dan 7:22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.


The AC makes war with the saints and prevailed against them "Until the Ancient of days" came. And judgment was given to the saints of God and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. The Antichrist prevails at war with the saints until the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. When do the saints possess the kingdom? That marks the end of the AC's reign when his kingdom is taken from him and given to the saints.

Dan 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
Dan 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
Dan 7:26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.
Dan 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.


The AC makes war with the saints for 3 1/2 years until the kingdom is given to the saints of God. That we know occurs at the millennium when we live and reign with Christ the 1,000 years. So this tells us precisely when the AC is reigning for his 42 months. When his 42 months are over Jesus returns and the saints get the AC's kingdom.

In closing, you won't find anywhere in Scripture that indicates that the week that the Antichrist confirms the Covenant with Many is the same as the beginning of the 70th week. Nor will you find anywhere in Scripture that the Two Witnesses show up at the "exact" Midpoint of the Week that the Antichrist confirms the Covenant with Many - these thoughts have all been "assumptions", which has subsequently lead to faulty theories as it relates to the End Times.


Scripture refutes your whole comment as I have just shown. The two witnesses ministry and the AC reign can be proven to co-exist during the same last 3 1/2 years.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:35 am

NeedHim wrote:I just wanted to thank you smart people for your explanations. I've always felt there has been assumptions by the various scholars on many of these things. These discussions are helping me piece things together too. So thanks to both sides of the argument.


Hi NeedHim,

I don't know if you have been officially WELCOMED, but I thank you for your comment, and WELCOME you to what members of the Body of Christ have been praying for more discernment on. I can't speak for others, but I'm certainly not a smart person - I just have a deep desire to please God, and learn His ways.

Let me close by saying that.......I think that we may be on to something, and it began with the original owner of this board, who discovered this information - and thanks be to God, for giving him this information.

May God Bless you!
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Thu Jan 27, 2011 9:12 am

Hi once again Seeker,

Man, I love a good rebuttal - but dude you are KILLING ME. Nice work in attempting to "misrepresent" the things that I am trying to relay. Are you actually reading what has been posted, or are you taking your own preconceived ideas and tying them into Scripture, to make it fit the way that you believe?

First, let me state that why don't you CAREFULLY read what I have posted - then you will see that nothing that I have posted either contradicts what I and others believe, or that I have I shown a change of mind.

After reading ALL that you have posted, all I can say is that you are CONTINUING to read into Scripture, and you have not clearly understood that . Just because I have stated that the ENP(I) confirms the 1995 Euro-Med; or Barcelona Process - doesn't negate the fact that part of the 70th week; or 3.5 years couldn't have been fulfilled with the Ministry of Christ. AND, You still can't PROVE that when the coming Antichrist confirms the Covenant with the Many is the beginning of the 70th week. I don't care how many Scriptures you post - that dog just won't hunt.

All you have me quoted as saying is that I believe that the ENP(I) fulfills the requirement of Daniel 9:27; in that it is a 7 year "confirming process" with a Covenant with the Many. This is TRUE, and I stand by it. What you YET AGAIN.... don't seem to understand, and get through your head, is that I, and others have stated, is that this "may be" a separate entity from the 70th week. I have further qualified this by stating that we "may be" looking for a final 3.5 year period - in that Christ's Ministry "may have" fulfilled the 1st half of this 7 year requirement, and ONLY 3.5 years remain. This is what "appears" to be consistent with Scripture.


In closing Seeker..........let go of your preconceived ideas about the Return of Christ.....they just may be getting in your way of understanding.
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Thu Jan 27, 2011 9:25 am

Wickus wrote:As Mr Baldy explained in the other posts, the 7 year covenant (ENP) and the 70th week may be two different time frames. There is also good reason from Scripture to believe that there is only 42 months left of the 70th week to be fulfilled. Revelation is full of 1260 days/42 months time frames. There is no mention of 7 years in the book of Revelation.


Ahhhh...... Brother Wickus,

Thank you for the support! But I must say on this forum Brother, (even for the sake of being banned) that it has been you, Brother Scott of "Born to Watch"; Hisown, Nonymouse, Adamantine, and others who have held fast to Herb's original idea that the ENP(I) may be on to something - something that we didn't have all the answers to, but yet made sense. You personally have kept this theory alive; in that you have provided your own web-site for us to fellowship on a theory that JUST DIDN'T MAKE SENSE to let go. I thank God for giving you this valued, and much needed WISDOM.

Even if the ENP(I) theory turns out to be a non-issue...it has certainly NOT gone Fruitless.

Thank you again Brother Wickus....and may God richly Bless You!
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Seeker on Thu Jan 27, 2011 9:37 am

Hi Mr. Baldy,

or 3.5 years couldn't have been fulfilled with the Ministry of Christ. AND, You still can't PROVE that when the coming Antichrist confirms the Covenant with the Many is the beginning of the 70th week. I don't care how many Scriptures you post -that dog just won't hunt.


I just showed you Dan 9:27 where he confirms the covenant. Are you trying to say Jesus does the confirming of the covenant? If so scripture please. I can definitely bust that dog if you don't mind me using your terminology here.

All you have me quoted as saying is that I believe that the ENP(I) fulfills the requirement of Daniel 9:27; in that it is a 7 year "confirming process" with a Covenant with the Many. This is TRUE, and I stand by it.


Is it or is it not the covenant with many in Dan 9:27?

I have further qualified this by stating that we "may be" looking for a final 3.5 year period - in that Christ's Ministry "may have" fulfilled the 1st half of this 7 year requirement, and ONLY 3.5 years remain. This is what "appears" to be consistent with Scripture.


It doesn't appear consistent with the scripture I have been showing you. But then again I am having a hard time understanding you as it seems to change as we go along here. Simple yes or no...is the ENPI the covenant with many in Dan 9:27?

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Thu Jan 27, 2011 9:49 am

Seeker wrote: But then again I am having a hard time understanding you as it seems to change as we go along here. Simple yes or no...is the ENPI the covenant with many in Dan 9:27?


Seeker.....what aren't you getting about this?

YES.....I believe that the ENP(I) is the Covenant with Many mentioned in Daniel 9:27. What you can't get through your head is that just because there are those of us who believe that it IS the "Covenant with Many" does NOT mean that it begins the 70th week. Whether it's the final half of the week - being 3.5 years - or the ENITRE 7 years. It's JUST a 7 year period that a Covenant with Many is "confirmed" that is ALL that is mentioned in Daniel 9:27!

You are making the MISTAKE in tying this week into the FINAL years (whether it be 3.5 years or 7) - when Scripture DOESN'T!
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Seeker on Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:07 am

Hi Mr. Baldy,

YES.....I believe that the ENP(I) is the Covenant with Many mentioned in Daniel 9:27. What you can't get through your head is that just because there are those of us who believe that it IS the "Covenant with Many" does NOT mean that it begins the 70th week.


Yes it does scripture shows it as the 70th week.

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.

The covenant with many is confirmed for one week. That week is the 70th week. If the ENPI were the covenant with many in Daniel 9:27 then the week has began since scripture shows it to be the 70th week. Just because you and others think it began at some other time does not make what scripture says incorrect. Scripture shows the covenant with many starting the 70th week.

Dan 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.
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.
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.
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.


Dan 9:25 7+62=69. That accounts for 69 of the 70 weeks that this prophecy covers. Dan 9:27 he confirms the covenant for the remaining of the 70 which is one. If the ENPI is the covenant with many of Dan 9:27 then the 70th week began with that covenant. How can you not see that it is very clearly written?

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Mr Baldy on Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:42 pm

Hi Seeker,

Seeker wrote:Dan 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.
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.
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.
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.

Dan 9:25 7+62=69. That accounts for 69 of the 70 weeks that this prophecy covers. Dan 9:27 he confirms the covenant for the remaining of the 70 which is one. If the ENPI is the covenant with many of Dan 9:27 then the 70th week began with that covenant. How can you not see that it is very clearly written?



Glad you asked.........Now let me show you were you are making assumptions, and clearly reading into Scripture.

First let me begin by stating that in your rebuttal, you have clearly left out verse 24. If you'll notice that God gives Daniel 70 weeks to determine the following things in verse 24:

1) To finish the transgression
2) To make an end to sins
3) To make reconciliation for iniquity
4) To bring in everlasting righteousness
5) To seal up the vision and prophecy
6 To anoint the most Holy

In your claim, all these things will have come to pass by the end of the 70th week, or prior to the Return of Christ. Now let me ask you this, if all these thing are to be determined prior to Christ's Return, then why does sin, rebellion, and death yet still occur during the Millennial Reign of Christ?

Could it be that those who have considered the aforementioned passages of Scripture - to include yourself; have "read into" Scripture, therefore making the "assumption" that these requirements have to be completed prior to the Return of Christ, when this information is not provided with Scripture? Have you considered that these six "requirements" will not be finished, until after the Millennial Reign - when Christ has defeated it ALL and has further returned the Kingdom back over to God the Father that God may be in all? (1 Corinthians 15:22-28)

1 Corinthians 15:22-28 reads: 22) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23) But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24) Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25) For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26) The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27) For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28) And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

The aforementioned passages of Scripture explains it all.......(I really shouldn't have to provide more at this point) but....in fairness, I will.

Now I will show you where you have yet "read into Scripture" and once again "assummed" things; in that you have began your rebuttal with verse 25 in an order to make an attempt to explain the 70th week. You have provided the 7+62=69; that is a given. Scripture clearly indicates that. But then, and this is where you make your "assumption" because you conveniently leave out verse 26, which brings in the coming Antichrist - who "confirms" the Covenant in verse 27. What Covenant? Verse 27 establishes a "covenant" which has not been previously introduced. So because this covenant that hasn't been previously introduced into Scripture; nor the nature of what this covenant may be, now shows up in Scripture - and there are those who want to read into Scripture and make this the "final" week, when Scripture does not indicate such. And to further prove a point....there are those who want to call this same covenant a "Peace Treaty"; and to add insult to injury - they further want to say that he "breaks" the covenant at it's Mid-Point. You Seeker haven't mentioned this of course - that I've seen, but I'm just making a point on how this passage of Scripture has been clearly read into. You happen to read into it by way of including this "week" that the Antichrist confirms the covenant by making it the beginning of the 70th week - when Scripture does not indicate this.

In closing.....just because you say that this week that the Antichrist confirms the covenant begins the 70th week doesn't make it so. Nor have you proved your point by Scripture that it does - and in contrast, the Scripture that I have provided in 1 Corinthians 15:22-28 clearly shows that the six requirements set forth in Daniel 9:24 will not come to fruition until the Millennial Reign of Chirst is complete.
Mr Baldy
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:26 pm
Location: San Antonio, Tx

Re: Discrediting the ENP(I) theory?

Postby Seeker on Fri Jan 28, 2011 8:48 am

Hi Mr. Baldy,

No matter how you try to dance around this the facts are still the same. There are 70 weeks of the prophecy 69 have already passed. There is one left to be fulfilled and it has the covenant with many for "one week" covering the span of it. The covenant is confirmed for the entire one week. That one week can be none other than the 70th week.

Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:

The one week has to be week number 70 because the other 69 have already been accounted for. The covenant with many is within that last week. How God accomplishes all He says He will is up to Him not me but the fact is that the covenant with many is for the "one week" and that is the 70th week of the 70 week prophecy.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Next

Return to ENPI theory only

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest