[geocentrism] Re: 666

IN Blue

"Martin G. Selbrede" <mselbrede@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:   
    On May 22, 2007, at 4:04 PM, Allen Daves wrote:

  Granted one can read these in various ways however , again you are 
interjecting how you read it not what is read....He did not say to the 
anointing he states till messiah the prince

  

  I'm injecting nothing, Allen.  "Messiach" means "the one who has been 
anointed."  Jesus isn't the Messiach until He is anointed, and His anointing 
didn't occur at His birth.  The promise is of the coming of one who IS 
anointed, not someone who is going to be anointed. 
  Messiach has no future transitive stem in the word: it expresses a completed 
fact of anointing. While Jesus may well have been "born King of the Jews," this 
was His by right, having no bearing on anointing. Hence, the terms "Prince" 
(Hebrew: rosh") and "Anointed One" (Messiach) are kept separate in the text.  
His messiah-hood is mentioned first, his prince-hood second, because the former 
is the critical, primary thing, the latter is a consequence of the former.   

  There's no Anointed One without an anointing occurring first.  Until then, 
he's the "Unanointed One," or the "Yet-To-Be-Anointed One," which are 
completely different Hebrew terms from Messiach. David wasn't an Anointed One 
until Samuel poured oil over his head. That was the defining act of God, and it 
was the defining act that constituted Jesus as "christos" ("the anointed one," 
the meaning of "christos" which is the Greek translation of "Messiach").
  

  In short: the term "unto the coming of an Anointed One, the Prince" cannot 
possibly refer to the birth of Jesus, because He wasn't yet anointed, and 
therefore was not "messiach" but "un-messiach."  He enters His office as 
Messiach at the appointed time, at His baptism. Neither is He a priest until He 
has something wherewith to offer, as Hebrews 5 makes clear: in fact, His 
fitness to be a priest is predicated on His suffering, to be like unto us, 
except without sin.

   
   
  When Jesus was born Messiah the price was here..? 
  1.The word and structure are not soley exclusive since he was still 
considered the zMesiah or king or whatever. IF a new born is born and is heir 
it is not uncommon to refer to him as the prince or a  king is born even though 
he may not have been anoited yet as king which is customary.......Matthew 2:2 
Therfore, they cant be argued as the imparitive for excluding his birth  also 
ref Luke 2:30 & 38 Note also Anoint the most holy Jesus said Matthew 12:6 and 
again Luke 1:35 he was already considered holy ......Jesus parents presented 
him to the preist after her purification.  So to call Jesus messiah at his 
birth is not just correct ...............it is ooooo so normal.. .....don't see 
a valid argument here
   
  2. Again Herod was dead by the time Jesus was Crucified and Jeruselem 
destroyed  but ch 9 also benchmarks "even in troublesome times" "street and 
wall " 9:25 deomonstrated in Nehimiha ch 5 and John 2:20 Herods day, the king 
out of the third empire,   street and wall can be demonstrated and took place 
before herods death in any case. 
   
  3.The six events are set up on a time times and half a time outlines just as 
in the case of the other surounding events and revelation.. it is not a generi 
c figure of speech it is a spceific referecne to a set of events by vertue of 
the other correlations/ descriptors..as i stated before ch 9 outlines the city 
destruction and Christ death as well and you cant fit those into the same count 
no matter how you attempt to count it..there are many ways you can "interprete" 
or read 70 weks, i am showing you how to count it and how to know how to count 
it the right way by process of elimination and identifying the bechmarks which 
must be meet in any count... again the Key is time (70), times( 62&7) and half 
a time (42 months  addresseed in Rev ch 11 & 12.) linear and non linear time 
sets and how you can know which are which
   
   
  

  Martin
  

  

    



GIF image

Other related posts: