Pastor Scott Markle

*Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Content count

    1,086
  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Pastor Scott Markle

  • Rank
    Abiding in Christ
  • Birthday 08/13/1971
  • Bio My name is Scott Markle, and I have served the Lord my God and Savior in pastoral ministry since 1992. I have served as the pastor of Melvin Baptist Church, a small country church in the Thumb area of Michigan, since 1998. I have been joyfully married to my beloved wife Kerry since 1993; and we have been blessed of the Lord with two sons, Padraic and Westley.

    My life-verses are Philippians 3:8 and John 15:4-5. "Yea, doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ." "Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine: no more can ye except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches. He that abideth in, and I in him, the same bringeth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing." The burden of my life is to pursue "the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord" and to walk daily abiding in Christ, and Christ in me.

    Concerning all my ministry, it is the burden of my heart to exalt, not myself, but the name of Jesus Christ and the truth of God's Word. It is my burden that Christ must increase, while I must decrease. Therefore, I maintain the policy that my name, as the author of a book, must remain smaller, while the phrase, "For the Glory of the Lord," must stand larger above it. Thus far the Lord our God has graciously allowed me to self-publish two books which can be purchased at my website: "God's Wisdom for Marriage & The Home" and "The Spirit of Revival: A Contrite and Humble Spirit." In addition, I maintain a daily (Monday-Friday) Bible study blog at that website.

Contact Methods

  • Website URL http://www.shepherdingtheflock.com

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location: Melvin, MI
  • Are you IFB? Yes

Recent Profile Visitors


4,796 profile views

Pastor Scott Markle's Activity

  1. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Comment On Current Debate   

    No. 
  2. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Comment On Current Debate   

    Brother "Genevanpreacher,"
    If your comments above are intended to imply that I would support a viewpoint that in Biblical Scripture the grammatical meanings of the parts of speech and the parts of a sentence are not relevant, then you would certainly be mistaken.  If your comments are intended to imply that I would support a viewpoint that in Biblical Scripture the subject does not carry the grammatical meaning of the subject, that the verb, whether active, passive, linking, past tense, present tense, future tense, etc., does not carry the respective grammatical meaning of the verb, that the direct object or indirect object does not carry the grammatical meaning of either the direct object or indirect object, that the predicate nominative or predicate adjective does not carry the grammatical meaning either of the predicate nominative or predicate adjective, the the adjective or adverb does not carry the grammatical meaning either of the adjective or adverb, that the preposition and its prepositional phrase do not carry the grammatical meaning of the prepositional phrase, that dependent clauses do not carry the respective grammatical meaning of the various dependent clauses, that verbal phrases do not carry the respective grammatical meaning of the various verbal phrases, then you would not at all be correct.
    However, if your comment above is intended to acknowledge my recognition that a single, customary English grammar rule concerning formal English writing (that is -- that a sentence should not begin with a common conjunction) is not followed in the King James translation of Biblical Scripture, then you would be correct.  On the other hand, it is both accepted and common to employ the common conjunction at the beginning of an English sentence in non-formal English writing.  Furthermore, when this occurs, that common conjunction at the beginning of the sentence possess a regular and recognizable grammatical meaning, which is also true when such occurs in Biblical Scripture.
    (Note: The original context for my quoted statements above concerned the usage of the coordinating conjunction "and" at the beginning of each and every independent statement-sentence (clause) in Daniel 9:26-27, about which Brother Ian Day expressed the fact that he would not have been permitted such a grammatical construction in his university writing.  Such is certainly true, since the research writing required in university assignments are considered formal English writing.  Yet in the King James translation of the Biblical Scriptures, conjunctions are commonly found at the beginning of independent sentences, not because Biblical Scripture is considered non-formal writing, but (as I indicated in my above quote) in order to maintain translational accuracy from the original, Holy Spirit inspired Hebrew and Greek writings.)
  3. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Pre Trib Rapture and Luke 21:20-24?   

     
    Ok, now I am a little bit confused.
    Brother "Invicta," your answer seems fairly clear.  If I am understanding correctly, you would hold that the disciples' first compound question (1a. "When shall these things be?" 1b. "And what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?") was to be fulfilled before the "this generation" to which the Lord was speaking at that time would pass.  Furthermore, if I am understanding correctly, you would hold that the disciples' second compound question (2a. "And what shall be the sign of thy coming?" 2b. "And of the end of the world?") was to be fulfilled sometime in the future of the "this generation" to which the Lord was speaking at that time (that concerning this second compound question was our Lord's statement in Matthew 24:37 - "But of that day and hour knoweth no  man . . .").  Would you please confirm that I am understanding correctly?
    On the other hand, Brother Day, your answer has me confused.  Your answer appears to be indicating that you hold that yes, all of the prophetic utterances of these passages were to be fulfilled before the "this generation" to which the Lord was speaking at that time would pass.  Yet then you delivered a "like" to Brother "Invicta's" answer, which seems to be different than your answer.  Brother Day, could you make your answer more clear?
     
  4. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Debate - Prophecy in Daniel 9   

    You are correct that the coordinating conjunction “and” does not automatically indicate sequence of events, which I myself acknowledged in the opening statement of my above quote.  Indeed, as a coordinating conjunction, the conjunction “and” indicates a coordinating relationship between two or more grammatical elements in communication.  This coordinating relationship may be intended to communicate something “sequential or concurrent” (even as you yourself presented in your above quotation).  So then, how do we know in any given case whether the coordinating conjunction is intended to communicate a sequential idea or a concurrent idea?  We discern this through a consideration of the context (which is the very reason that I put forth so much effort in my above posting to engage the contextual flow of thought in Daniel 9:25-27 and the contextual usage of the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of each and every independent statement in Daniel 9:26-27).

    It is true that the rules of English grammar forbid the use of common conjunctions at the beginning of sentences in formal writing.  However, the language in which God the Holy Spirit inspired the Holy Scriptures was not English.  Rather, the original languages of Holy Spirit inspiration were Hebrew (for the Old Testament) and Greek (for the New Testament).  Now, in both Hebrew and Greek it is grammatically acceptable and common to use a common conjunction at the beginning of sentences.  Even so, out of reverence for Holy Spirit inspiration and for the sake of translational accuracy, the translators of the King James translation included these conjunctions at the beginning of sentences (and even paragraphs) in their translation.

    The three uses of the conjunction “and” that you emphasized (those in blue) in addition to those that I emphasized in my original posting are not actually relevant to the matter under discussion.  In fact, in my original posting I specifically stated that my analysis concerned “the coordinating conjunction ‘and’ at the beginning of each and every independent statement (clause) in Daniel 9:26-27.”  The reason for narrowing our focus only upon these usages of the coordinating conjunction at the beginning of each independent statement (clause) is because only these usages can reveal the coordinating relationship between the independent statements (clauses) with each other.  All of the other usages of the coordinating conjunction “and” in Daniel 9:25-27 (of which there are a total of eight) indicate the grammatical coordination between subjects, verbs, verbals, direct objects, and adjectives, but not the grammatical coordination between the independent statements (clauses) with each other.  As such, a consideration of these additional usages of the coordinating conjunction “and” are not at all relevant to discern whether or not the independent statements (clauses) are sequential to one another.

    So then, with this understanding in mind, let us return to our consideration of the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of the independent statements (clauses) in Daniel 9:25-27.  That consideration is as follows (even as I presented it in my original posting on the matter):

    1.  “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.”

    2.  “The street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.”

    3.   “And [sequential after statement #2] after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.”

    4.  “And [sequential after statement #3] the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.”

    5.  “And [sequential after statement #4] the end thereof shall be with a flood.”

    6.  “And [sequential after statement #5] unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”

    7.  “And [????????????????????] he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week.”

    8.  “And [sequential after statement #7] in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.”

    9.  “And [sequential after statement #8] for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation.”

    10.  “And [sequential after statement #9] that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

    As I have indicated above, these usages of the coordinating conjunction “and” are not relevant to the matter under discussion because they are not at the beginning of an independent statement (clause).

    The coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of the opening independent statement (clause) in Daniel 9:26 is not at all “redundant” because that statement does not actually begin a new paragraph.  Daniel 9:24-27 is a singular paragraph that covers a singular matter, that is – the “seventy weeks” that the Lord God determined to administer upon Daniel’s people, the children of Israel.  Yet even if Daniel 9:26 did begin a new paragraph, the coordinating conjunction at the beginning of that paragraph would not be grammatically redundant (as if God the Holy Spirit inspired redundancy simply for the sake of redundancy).  Rather, that usage of the coordinating conjunction would help to reveal the coordinating relationship between the new paragraph and the paragraph that preceded it.  Even so, whether this statement is simply an extension of the paragraph or is the beginning of a new paragraph, since the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of this statement is joined with the sequential prepositional phrase, “after threescore and two weeks,” this usage of the coordinating conjunction “and” is clearly intended to signal the sequential relationship between this statement and the statement (or even paragraph) before it.

    (Note: The idea that some words in God’s Holy Word are redundant simply for the sake of redundancy is foolish and somewhat offensive in relation to the truth of Holy Spirit inspiration.  Every single word that God the Holy Spirit inspired in God’s Holy Word is absolutely pure and is significantly important.  As such, I would challenge all to develop a greater respect for every single word that God the Holy Spirit inspired and for the grammatical structuring of those words in each sentence that God the Holy Spirit inspired in each given context.)

    Furthermore, Daniel 9:26 is not at all surprising in relation to the declaration of Daniel 9:24, since Daniel 9:24 revealed the six-fold results that would come to pass at the conclusion of the “seventy weeks,” whereas Daniel 9:26 is revealing events that will occur prior to the conclusion of the “seventy weeks.”  As such, the revelation of Daniel 9:24-26 concerning the Messiah (according to the three specific references to the Messiah) would be chronologically presented as follows:

    1.  Messiah would come – “unto the Messiah the Prince” (at the end of the first 69 “weeks”)
    2.  Messiah would be cut off – “And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off.” (after the end of the first 69 “weeks”)
    3.  Messiah would be anointed – “and to anoint the most Holy” (at the end of the 70 “weeks”)



    Yes, to those who had no grasp concerning the suffering and death of the Messiah, the truth that the Messiah will be cut off at all would be surprising.  However, the ordering of these events concerning the Messiah is not surprising, since these events do not conclude with the cutting off of the Messiah, but with the anointing of the Messiah.

    First, God the Holy Spirit in His work of inspiration did not include the word “end” anywhere in this statement.  Rather, God the Holy Spirit in His work of inspiration indicated that there would be a destroying, that “the people of the prince that shall come” would do the destroying, and that “the city and the sanctuary” would be that which is destroyed.  Furthermore, since (as you have indicated) the New Testament reveals that this destruction upon the city and temple of Jerusalem would be the consequence of the Israelites rejection of the Messiah, the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of this statement must also signal a sequential relationship between this statement and the one before it; for a consequence by definition is sequential to the cause.

    Herein you have made two grammatical changes to that which God the Holy Spirit inspired.  First, in your explanation you made the word “end” a grammatical predicate nominative; whereas God the Holy Spirit inspired the word “end” to be the grammatical subject of the statement.  As such, it is not that “the destruction of city & sanctuary” would be “the end.”  Rather, it is that the end of the city and the sanctuary would be with a certain means.  Second, in your explanation above you employed the preposition “after” in relation to the “flood,” which is a preposition that indicates sequence of time; whereas God the Holy Spirit inspired the preposition “with” in relation to the “flood,” which is a preposition that indicates a tool of means.  As such, it is not that the end of the city and the sanctuary would come “after invasion like a ‘flood’.”  Rather, it is that the end of the city and the sanctuary would come “with” (this is – by the means of) an invasion like the overflowing of a “flood.”  Nevertheless, this Holy Spirit inspired statement concerns the end of the city and the sanctuary, which is sequential to the statement before it.  Thus the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of this statement again signals a sequential relationship between this statement and the one before it.

    Again herein you have made two grammatical changes to that which God the Holy Spirit inspired.  First, in your explanation you made the word “desolations” a part of a compound object of a preposition; whereas God the Holy Spirit inspired the word “desolations” to be the grammatical subject of the sentence.  As such, it is not “with war & desolations determined.”  Rather, it is “desolations are determined.”  Second, in your explanation you change the Holy Spirit inspired prepositional phrase, “of the war,” to the prepositional phrase, “with war & desolations.”  As such, you have changed the possessive preposition “of” to the relational preposition “with;” you have changed the object of the preposition “war” to the compound object of the preposition “war & desolations;” and you have removed the prepositional phrase, “of the war,” from being a modifier for the noun “end.”  To your explanation I might ask the question – Until the end of what is war and desolation determine?  To which question your explanation would provide no answer.  However, to the Holy Spirit inspired statement I might ask the question – Unto the end of what are desolations determined?  To which question the Holy Spirit inspired statement would provide the answer – “Unto the end of the war.”

    (Note: Whenever an individual changes the grammatical structure that God the Holy Spirit inspired in any given statement of God’s Holy Word, that individual changes the meaning from that which God the Holy Spirit communicated to some other meaning.  Such changing of the meaning from that which God the Holy Spirit communicated by inspiration is not right dividing of God’s Word of truth.  Again, I would challenge all to develop a greater respect for every single word that God the Holy Spirit inspired and for the grammatical structuring of those words in each sentence that God the Holy Spirit inspired in each given context.)

    Now, in my above presentation of this statement from Daniel 9:27, I included the “[????????]” in order to signal my recognition (as I indicated in my above posting) that this usage of the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of this independent statement (clause) in this context would be the one of controversy.  In considering the intended usage for this controversial conjunction “and,” we must again ask the question -- How do we discern the intended usage for the coordinating conjunction “and” in any given case?  Again we recognize the answer – We do so through a consideration of the immediate context.  Even so, in my above posting I presented the following contextual consideration:

    Certainly, it must be recognized that the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of an independent statement (clause) does not automatically indicate that that given statement must be sequential to the statement before it.  However, in the contextual flow of thought of Daniel 9:25-27, every other usage of the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of an independent statement (clause) does seem to signal grammatically and contextually that that statement is sequential to the statement before it.  Even so, it only seems reasonable within this particular context to recognize that the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of the independent statement (clause) with which Daniel 9:27 begins also signals that that statement is sequential to the statement before it (which is the statement with which Daniel 9:26 ends).  As such, we find further grammatical and contextual evidence that the events of Daniel 9:26 are to occur within a “gap” of time between the events of verse 25 (wherein the 69th “week” ends) and the events of verse 27 (with which the 70th “week” both begins and ends).

    Even so, I am contending that this usage for the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of this independent statement (clause) is intended to be sequential.  However, in your explanation above you are contending something different, as per your opening declaration, “The 'and' begins a new thought.”  So then, what contextual evidence do you provide for this authoritative declaration?  Actually, you provide no contextual evidence whatsoever at all – unless you intended the following statement to be that evidence, “back to the 70th week, immediately following the 69th.”  However, this statement in itself has contextual problems.  First, God the Holy Spirit nowhere in this context inspired the phrase, “immediately following the 69th week,” or even anything similar to that phrase.  Therefore, the source for that “evidence” cannot be the Holy Spirit inspired context, but can only be your personally assumed position.  Second, concerning the phrase, “back to the 70th week,” we understand that by definition in order to go “back to” something, we had to have been there previously and had to have departed from it, in order that we might now return “back to” it.  However, God the Holy Spirit nowhere in the previous context made any direct reference whatsoever at all to the 70th “week.”  Therefore, by definition it is not possible for us to return “back to” it.  Again this point of “evidence” is found to be rooted, not in the Holy Spirit inspired context, but in your personally assumed position.

    No, there is no contextual evidence from the Holy Spirit inspired context of Daniel 9:24-27 that the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of this statement that begins verse 27 is intended to signal the beginning of a new flow of thought or even to return us back to a previous flow of thought.  Rather, the contextual evidence from the Holy Spirit inspired context simply indicates a sequence of events from the beginning of Daniel 9:26 to the end of Daniel 9:27.

    This Holy Spirit inspired statement in Daniel 9:27 does not say anything about “the final covenant sacrifice.”  In fact, the word “covenant” is not employed anywhere in this Holy Spirit inspired statement.  As such, this Holy Spirit inspired statement also does not say anything about “securing the new covenant/testament in Jesus’ blood.” 

    This Holy Spirit inspired statement in Daniel 9:27 does not say anything about the continuance of sacrifices being an abomination.  In fact, the word “sacrifice(s)” is not employed anywhere in this Holy Spirit inspired statement.  Furthermore, I did research on every reference to the word “abomination(s)” in the New Testament (of which there are only six); and I was unable to find a single reference that defined sacrifices of any kind as being an abomination.  So then, let us consider the reference to the Old Testament prophets that you presented as evidence for your assertion.  In their immediate context, both Isaiah in Isaiah 1 and Micah in Micah 6 were speaking against the sacrificial practices of the children of Israel in their day, which in both cases was hundreds of years before the sacrificial death of our Lord Jesus Christ upon the cross.  Thus these references also provide no evidence whatsoever at all that sacrifices continuing after Christ’s crucifixion were an abomination.  Finally, although Proverbs 15:8 does define certain sacrifices as being an abomination, it does not make any reference to sacrifices continuing after Christ’s crucifixion.  Rather, this verse teaches that the heart-character of the one making the sacrifice determines the acceptance or abomination of that sacrifice.  Religious conduct, even when it is commanded conduct (which would have been the case when Solomon wrote Proverbs 15:8), is not acceptable unless it is motivated by righteous character.  Such has always been true and shall always be true in relation to the Lord our God.

    This Holy Spirit inspired statement in Daniel 9:27 does not say anything about the end of the city and sanctuary.  In fact, both the words “city” and “sanctuary” are not employed anywhere in this Holy Spirit inspired statement.  Furthermore, the phrase “that determined” in this Holy Spirit inspired statement would refer back to the concluding statement of Daniel 9:26, as per the phrase therein, “desolations are determined” (which would be point #6 in our study, not point #4).  Finally, that concluding statement of Daniel 9:26 (point #6 in our study) does not refer to the end of the city and the sanctuary, but refers to “the end of the war.”

    Brother Day, throughout this immediate discussion above, your inaccuracies both grammatical and contextual to that which God the Holy Spirit actually inspired seem to abound in number.  Such inaccuracies place a great deal of doubt upon your credibility as an accurate Bible student.

    Scofield???  Have I made any reference to Scofield anywhere throughout this discussion-debate, or even throughout any of my presentations in any of the external threads?  Have I even once employed Scofield as a point of evidence for that which I have presented and contended?  NO!!!  I have not.  Every point that I have made, I have supported with actual evidence from the Holy Spirit inspired grammar and context. 

    Concerning your question of the “gap,” I will repeat myself yet again – God the Holy Spirit Himself inspired this passage to place all of Daniel 9:26 as a gap between the end of Daniel 9:25 wherein we find the end of the 69th “week” and the beginning of Daniel 9:27 wherein we find the beginning of the 70th “week.”  I myself did not arrange for that gap in the layout.  God the Holy Spirit arranged for that gap in the layout.  However, I myself intend to accept that gap in the layout just as God the Holy Spirit inspired it; and I myself also expect this prophetic utterance to be fulfilled in exactly the same manner as it was presented under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, with the “gap” included.

    This assessment of my position reveals your misunderstanding of my position.  My position does not change the emphasis “from Messiah to antichrist.”  Rather, my position acknowledges the work that both the Messiah and the antichrist will perform, as revealed by this Holy Spirit inspired passage.  Furthermore, my position does not end the 70th “week” with the antichrist in power and with Daniel’s people, the children of Israel, in destruction and desolation.  Rather, my position ends the 70th “week” with the fulfillment of the six-fold purpose-result statements of Daniel 9:24, wherein all of the children of Israel who are alive at that time shall place heart-faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior and shall be saved (in unity with Romans 11:25-27), wherein all of the children of Israel who are alive at that time shall experience such a transformation of heart that they will never again commit transgression or sins, but shall conduct themselves in perfect righteousness with the Lord (in unity with Isaiah 1:26; Jeremiah 3:17; 31:33; 32:39-40; Ezekiel 36:26-27; 37:23-24), wherein all of the children of Israel that are alive at that time shall be fully reconciled unto the Lord their God as a nation and shall enter into an enjoyment of all the New Covenant promises in every detail, including all of the land blessings (in unity with Jeremiah 31:31-40; 32:37-42; Ezekiel 36:21-38; 37:19-28), and wherein the Lord Jesus Christ shall administrate His kingship ministry bodily upon the earth from Jerusalem as King of kings and Lord of lords over the all the nations of the world (in unity with Revelation 19:11 – 20:4).  It does not at all appear to me that my position concludes and climaxes with an emphasis upon the antichrist.  Rather, it appears to me that my position concludes and climaxes with an emphasis upon the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.

    So then, at the time of the Lord Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection, did the Lord God fulfill His holy covenant concerning the children of Israel, which He made with Abraham, such that they were delivered out of the hand of their enemies and all that hated them?  Are the children of Israel now serving the Lord their God “without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him,” all the days of their lives?  It appears to me that we must still be looking to the future for the fulfillment of these New Covenant promises unto the children of Israel as a national people group (as per Jeremiah 31:31-40; 32:37-42; Ezekiel 36:21-38; 37:19-28).

  5. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Pre Trib Rapture and Luke 21:20-24?   

    Brother Day and Brother "Invicta,"
    For a better understanding of your respective positions on this matter, I wish to ask a question --
    Do you believe (each, respectively) that all of the events which were included in our Lord's prophetic utterance of Matthew 24:4-35; Mark 13:5-31; Luke 21:8-33 were to be fulfilled before the generation (viewing a generation as approximately 80 years???) to which the Lord was speaking would pass away?
  6. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic How to defend against a sheep   

    Now, now.  (Warning - dripping sarcasm.)  You all know that you cannot correct with "violence."  That will just hurt the psyche of the one whom you are correcting.  You all must learn gently to talk unto those "difficult" ones in order to help them to understand the "better way."  Correction is so very "violent," and "violence" is never the right way.
  7. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Pre Trib Rapture and Luke 21:20-24?   

    Well, if you intend to push that thought, I would simply push back as follows:
    Ok, so the disciples only asked two questions; however, both questions were compound questions, containing two parts each.  Thus the layout of the questions would be two main points with two sub-points each.  Now, since 2 x 2 = 4, in their two questions the disciples were asking concerning four aspects of information.  Furthermore, by this "two main points with two sub-points" layout, we can also discern that the first two aspects of information about which the disciples were asking were certainly related to each other, and that the second two aspects of information about which the disciples were asking were also related to each other (at least in the thinking of the disciples themselves).  Finally, by this "two main points with two sub-points" layout, we can discern that the two main point (that is -- the two main categories of question) are distinctly separate from each other.  As such, our layout would be as follows:
    1.  First category of questioning (concerning the destruction of the temple that the Lord had just mentioned)
         A.  "When shall these things be?"
         B.  "And what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?"
    2.  Second category of questioning (concerning the Lord's coming and the end of the world, which the disciples appear to join together in their thinking)
         A.  "And what shall be the sign of thy coming?"
         B.  "And what shall be the sign . . . of the end of the world?"
  8. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Pre Trib Rapture and Luke 21:20-24?   

    Except that when we join the three parallel passages of Matthew 24:3; Mark 13:3-4; and Luke 21:7, we understand that the disciples asked four questions of the Lord (not just the one that you emphasized above).
    Matthew 24:3 – “And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be?  And what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?”
    Mark 13:3-4 – “And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?”
    Luke 21:7 -- “And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be?  And what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?”
    These four questions are as follows:
    1.  "When shall these things be?" (that is -- the things concerning the destruction of the temple that the Lord had just mentioned)
    2.  "And what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?" (that is -- the things concerning the destruction of the temple that the Lord had just mentioned)
    3.  "And what shall be the sign of thy coming?"
    4.  "And what shall be the sign . . . of the end of the world?"
    So then, within the information that the Lord provides in His answer, we would expect information concerning all four of these questions (not just the one that you emphasized above).
  9. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Pre Trib Rapture and Luke 21:20-24?   

    Brother Invicta,
    I cannot "just take it" . . . "as the generation he was addressing," since the demonstrative pronoun "this" grammatically and literally can either (1) be a verbal means of pointing at an individual or thing in the context of the physical setting, or (2) be a verbal means of pointing at an individual or thing in the context of the communicated message.  I cannot just arbitrarily take one of these options and arbitrarily exclude the other option.  Rather, I must examine the contextual flow of thought in order to discern which of these two options is valid in this particular context.
  10. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Pre Trib Rapture and Luke 21:20-24?   

    Concerning the contextual flow of thought in Luke 21:5-36
    By Pastor Scott Markle
    (www.shepherdingtheflock.com)

     
    1.  Luke 21:5-6

    In response to some who were praising the physical glory of the temple, the Lord prophesied concerning the destruction of the temple, as follows:

    “And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said, As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

    2.  Luke 21:7

    The disciples ask the Lord some questions in relation to His prophetic utterance concerning the destruction of the temple, as follows:

    “And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be?  And what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?”

    Concerning these questions, it is of value also to consider the parallel passages in Matthew and Mark, as follows:

    Matthew 24:3 – “And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be?  And what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?”

    Mark 13:3-4 – “And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?”

    By considering all three of these passages together, we understand that the disciples asked the Lord concerning four things – (1) when the temple would be destroyed, (2) the sign for the fulfillment of the temple’s destruction, (3) the sign for the Lord’s coming, and (4) the sign for “the end of the world.”  By the manner in which the questioning concerning a “sign” was presented, it appears that the disciples may have believed in their thinking that the destruction of the temple, the coming of the Lord, and the end of the world would occur as a unit of events.  However, in His answer to these questions, the Lord does present these things as a unit of events, but as separate events at different times.

    3.  Luke 21:8-9

    The Lord begins his answer to these questions with a two-fold warning, first that they take heed not to be deceived by false christs and second that they not be terrified by current events of “wars and commotions,” as follows:

    “And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.  But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by.”

    Furthermore, within this warning the Lord provided two time references, even as the disciples had asked concerning the “when.”  These two time references are found in the two phrases, “and the time draweth near” and “for these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by.”  Concerning the first of these phrases, the question might be asked – “The time for what is drawing near?”  Since both of these phrases concerning time are located in the same context, it would seem reasonable to draw the answer for our above question from the second phrase concerning time.  The time matter referenced in the second phrase is that of “the end.”  Even so, we would understand that the events mentioned in these two verses indicate that “the end” would be drawing near, but would not yet be present.

    4.  Luke 21:10-11

    Herein the Lord expands upon the phrase, “wars and commotions,” from His previous statement, as follows:

    “Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.”

    Now, the concluding statement of this passage is of special note – “And fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven;” for it will be significant for consideration and understanding later in the entire context.

    5.  Luke 21:12-19

    Herein the Lord begins with another time element, opening the statement of verse with the following phrase, “But before all these things.”  With this phrase the Lord indicates that some of that which follows in His presentation would occur prior in time to that which He has already presented in Luke 21:8-11.  So then, how far in that which follows in the Lord’s presentation does this “before” time element extend?  At the least, it extends from verse 12 to verse 19; for that passage presents a unit of truth, as follows:

    “But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name’s sake.  And it shall turn to you for a testimony.  Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer: for I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.  And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.  And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake.  But there shall not an hair of your head perish.  In your patience possess ye your souls.”

    6.  Luke 21:20-24

    With this passage the question must be considered – Are the events that are presented in this passage to be included within the “before these things” element of time with which the Lord began Luke 21:12?  In order to answer this question, we must consider the statement with which the Lord begins Luke 21:25 – “And there shall be signs in the sin, and in the moon, and in the stars.”  Since this statement with which our Lord begins Luke 21:25 is so closely related to the statement with which He ended Luke 21:11 (that is – “And fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven”), it appears contextually that the Lord is picking up in verse 25 where He had left off in verse 11.  Even so, Luke 21:20-24 would indeed be included within the “before these things” element of time with which the Lord began Luke 21:12.

    In Luke 21:20 the Lord provides His answer to the disciples’ question concerning the sign for the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem (which according to historical record occurred in 70 AD through the armies of Rome), as follows:

    “And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.”

    Furthermore, in Luke 21:21 the Lord delivers a three-fold concerning the city of Jerusalem to those Israelites who are alive at that time, as follows:

    “Then [1] let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and [2] let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and [3] let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.”

    Then in Luke 21:22-23 the Lord reveals that this destruction of Jerusalem and the resulting distress upon the people of Israel is due to the Lord God’s wrath and vengeance upon them for their sinful rebellion against Him and their stubborn rejection of His Savior, as follows:

    “For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.  But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days!  For there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.”

    Finally, in Luke 21:24 the Lord indicates a three-fold result of distress that will come against the people of Israel, as follows:

    “And [1] they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and [2] shall be led away captive into all nations: and [3] Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”

    Herein also the Lord concludes with yet another element of time in the phrase, “until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”  This phrase indicates that the Lord God’s judgment against the people of Israel, such that they will be scattered among all the Gentile nations of the world and such that their city of Jerusalem will be trodden down under the power of the Gentiles, shall continue until the fulfillment of “the times of the Gentiles.”

    7.  Luke 21:25-26

    Herein the Lord speaks concerning events that will occur as “the times of the Gentiles” comes to its fulfillment.  Furthermore, in this passage the Lord picks up where He had left off at the end of Luke 21:11.  There He had concluded, “And fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.”  Then in Luke 21:12-24 spoke concerning things that would occur “before” those things.  Now in Luke 21:25-26 the Lord reengages His message from the end of verse 11 concerning the signs of the heavens, as follows:

    “And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.”

    8.  Luke 21:27-28

    Herein the Lord speaks concerning the matter of His coming, and thereby provides His answer to the question that the disciples’ had asked concerning the sign of His coming (as per the parallel passage of Matthew 24:3).  Indeed, the Lord indicates that His coming will follow after the signs in the sun, moon, and stars, wherein “the powers of heaven shall be shaken.”  Furthermore, the Lord indicates that His coming shall be “in a cloud with power and great glory,” such that the people of the earth will see Him in His power and glory, as follows:

    “And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.”

    Finally, the Lord indicates that the signs of His coming will be those very signs in the sun, moon, and stars, whereby His people are to “look up” with anticipation and to be assured of their full redemption in His coming, as follows:

    “And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.”

    9.  Luke 21:29-31

    Herein the Lord presents a parable concerning the signs of the fig tree in order to encourage His people concerning the observation of the signs for His coming, as follows:

    “And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; when they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.  So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.”

    Furthermore, the Lord indicates that when His people see the signs in the sun, moon, and stars, they are also to recognize that “the kingdom of God” will be initiated with His coming.  Even so, from Luke 21:2-31 we learn five truths concerning our Lord’s coming, as follows:

    1.  His coming will follow after the signs in the sun, moon, and stars.
    2.  His coming will be observed by the people of the earth.
    3.  His coming will be “in a cloud with power and great glory.”
    4.  His coming will result in the full redemption of His people.
    5.  His coming will initiate “the kingdom of God” upon the earth.



    10.  Luke 21:32-33

    Herein the Lord declares that “this generation,” the generation to which He was referring in that context, would not pass until the fulfillment of His coming, as follows:

    “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.  Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.”

    Now, the word “this” is a demonstrative pronoun that serves a means to verbally point at an individual(s) or a thing(s).  In this context the Lord employed this demonstrative pronoun in order to verbally point at a particular “generation.”  However, the demonstrative pronoun “this” does not necessary indicate that the Lord was verbally pointing at the generation of His audience; for the demonstrative pronoun can also be employed in order to verbally point at an element of the context.  Even so, in the immediate context of Luke 21:32, there is a particular generation referenced.  It is the generation of God’s people that shall see “the sings in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars,” such that “the powers of heaven shall be shaken.”  As such, it is “this generation” of God’s people that “shall not pass away” until the coming of the Lord is fulfilled, until their full redemption is fulfilled, and until “the kingdom of God” is initiated upon the earth.

    11.  Luke 21:34-36

    The Lord concludes His message with an exhortation unto His people ever to remain spiritually watchful, prayerful, and faithful, as follows:

    “And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares.  For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.  Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.”


  11. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Comment On Current Debate   

    If I am permitted to do so, I will present my agreement with Brother "Invicta's" answer above --
    Furthermore, I would point to a statement within the very context of Daniel 9:25 for the presentation of my answer.  Contextually, it appears that the independent statement (clause) at the end of Daniel 9:25 speaks concerning the events that will occur during that first "seven weeks" period (or, the first 49 year period).  Then it appears that the additional "threescore and two weeks" period (or, the addition 434 year period) is a space of time between the completion of those events and "the Messiah the Prince."
  12. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Everlasting Covenants?   

    Brother Day,
    Thank you for answering my question concerning your position on the definition for the "old covenant."  With the answer that you have given, it appears that we are in agreement that the "old covenant" is to be defined as the Lord God's covenant with the children of Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (which was reiterated in the book of Deuteronomy).  Recognizing that we have agreement concerning this definition for the "old covenant," I believe that you possess a misunderstanding concerning my position on the matter of God's covenants and the land promises.  I myself do not teach (because I do not believe) "that the old covenant provisions will again be valid in a future dispensation."  Even so, your accusation against me as follows is not valid --
    So then, what do I believe and teach about this matter of God's covenants and the land promises?  In my article above (in its various parts) I clearly communicate that the Lord God's covenant with the children of Israel at Mount Sinai was a conditional covenant, as per Deuteronomy 28:1-2 & 13-14.  Furthermore, in my article I also communicate the consequences if (when) the children would brake those conditions, as per Deuteronomy 28:21, 25, 36, 63-64.  However, I also communicate that the Lord God did give provisions and requirements for the restoration of the children of Israel, as per Deuteronomy 30:1-10.  How then can and will the children of Israel come to a perfect fulfillment of the requirements for that restoration?  The answer to this question brings us to my actual belief and teaching concerning the Lord God's new covenant with the children of Israel and concerning the land promises of that new covenant.  
    You see, as I have stated above, I do not  teach "that the old covenant provisions will again be valid in a future dispensation."  Rather, I believe and teach that the Lord God's unconditional covenant with Abraham (and as reiterated unto Isaac and Jacob-Israel), including its land promises and provisions, still remains valid unto this day and shall continue to remain valid unto the end of this old earth.  Furthermore, I believe and teach that the Lord God's NEW COVENANT promises and provisions, both in all of that covenant's spiritual blessings and in all of that covenant's land blessings, shall yet be fulfilled in every precise detail unto the children of Israel during the existence of this old earth sometime in the future.  I believe this and teach this as per such passages as Jeremiah 31:31-40, Jeremiah 32:37-42, Ezekiel 36:21-38, Ezekiel 37:19-28, etc.  In fact, by a thorough study of my article, it will be noticed that of the five different main points that I present, the one which encompasses the greatest amount of space and information is that point concerning the Lord God's new covenant with the children of Israel concerning "the land."  Furthermore, by a thorough study of my article, it will be noticed that I specifically communicate the Biblical truth that the promises and provisions of this new covenant specifically replace the promises and provisions of the covenant that the Lord God made with the children of Israel at Mount Sinai (the "old covenant"), which covenant the children of Israel had broken (as per Jeremiah 31:31-32).
    Now, since you yourself, Brother Day, place such emphasis in your belief system upon the New Covenant, why do you deny from the children of Israel the land promises and provisions that the Lord God prophetically declared that He would include in that New Covenant with the children of Israel?
  13. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Debate - Prophecy in Daniel 9   

    Yes, when an interval of time is intended, the Lord God reveals that through His Word; and He did just that through the Holy Spirit inspired layout of Daniel 9:25-27, which reveals the details concerning the “seventy weeks” (of years) that are announced in Daniel 9:24.

    Except that the Lord God actually did provide information concerning a “gap” of time. Yes, Daniel 9:24 does announce the promise of “seventy week” (of years).  Yet Daniel 9:25-27 reveals further details concerning that promise of “seventy weeks” (of years); and through the Holy Spirit inspired layout of those details, a “gap” of time was revealed.

    No, I am not reading a “gap” of time into the passage.  Rather, I am reading a “gap” of time directly out of the Holy Spirit inspired layout of the details of the “seventy weeks” (of years), as presented in Daniel 9:25-27.  Again, I present that layout just as God the Holy Spirit inspired it, as follows:

    1.  Daniel 9:24 – The “seventy weeks” (of years) are announced.

    2.  Daniel 9:25 – Details concerning the entire first 69 “weeks” are revealed.

    3.  Daniel 9:26 – Events that follow “after” the first 69 “weeks,” but with no mention whatsoever at all concerning the 70th and final “week.”

    4.  Daniel 9:27 – Details concerning the beginning, middle, and end of the 70th and final “week.”

    Or, to put this equation in an easier format:

    (v. 24) 70 “weeks”  =  (v. 25) 69 “weeks”  +  (v. 26) --no “weeks”--  +  (v. 27) 1 “week,” the 70th

    Since verse 25 specifies the first 69 “weeks” and verse 27 specifies the 70th “week,” and since verse 26 is located directly between these two specifications, I am reading directly out of the Holy Spirit inspired layout of the passage and of the promised 70 “weeks” a “gap” between verse 25 and verse 27 (that is – verse 26 and its events), and thus a “gap” in time between the end of the 69th “week” (which is specified in verse 25) and the beginning of the 70th “week” (which is specified at the beginning of verse 27).

    Therefore, as I have stated in a previous posting, so say I now again – I myself did not arrange for that gap in the layout.  God the Holy Spirit arranged for that gap in the layout.  However, I myself intend to accept that gap in the layout just as God the Holy Spirit inspired it; and I myself also expect this prophetic utterance to be fulfilled in exactly the same manner as it was presented under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, with the “gap” included.

    _________________________________________

    Concerning the grammatical and contextual usage of the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of each and every independent statement (clause) in Daniel 9:26-27.

    As we consider the sequence of the independent statements (clauses) in Daniel 9:25-27, we observe the following:

    1.  “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.”

    2.  “The street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.”

    3.   “And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.”

    4.  “And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.”

    5.  “And the end thereof shall be with a flood.”

    6.  “And unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”

    7.  “And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week.”

    8.  “And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.”

    9.  “And for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation.”

    10.  “And that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

    When considering the two independent statements (clauses) of Daniel 9:25, we notice that the coordinating conjunction “and” is not employed before either statement.  Furthermore, we would recognize that the second independent statement (clause) of this verse does not present an event that would occur sequentially after the event of the first independent statement (clause).  Rather, the event of the second independent statement (clause) of this verse would occur as an event within the time period of the first independent statement (clause).

    On the other hand, the first independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:26 does begin with the coordinating conjunction “and.”  Furthermore, in accord with the phrase “after threescore and two weeks,” we understand that the event of this statement would occur sequentially after the events of verse 25.  Again, the second independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:26 begins with the coordinating conjunction “and.”  Again, through the historical record, we understand that the event of this statement occurred sequentially after the event of the statement before it.  Yet again, the third independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:26 begins with the coordinating conjunction “and.”  Yet again, by the reference to “the end” of the destruction of “the city and the sanctuary,” we understand that the event of this statement would occur sequentially after the event of the statement before it.  And yet again, the fourth independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:26 begins with the coordinating conjunction “and.”  And yet again, by the reference to “the end of the war,” we understand that the event of this statement would occur sequentially after the event of the statement before it.

    Now, the first independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:27 also begins with the coordinating conjunction “and.”  Yet we shall save our consideration of the sequential or non-sequential nature of this statement until the end, since it will be the matter of controversy.  Again, the second independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:27 begins with the coordinating conjunction “and.”  Again, since this statement makes reference to the middle of the 70th “week,” whereas the statement before it made reference to the beginning of the 70th “week,” we understand that the event of this statement would occur sequentially after the event of the statement before it.  Yet again, the third independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:27 begins with the coordinating conjunction “and.”  Yet again, since this statement makes reference to that which will occur from the middle of the 70th “week” until the “consummation” of the 70th “week,” we understand that the event of this statement would occur sequentially after the event of the statement before it.  And yet again, the fourth independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:27 begins with the coordinating conjunction “and.”  And yet again, since this statement makes reference to the complete fulfillment of that judgment which was previously “determined,” we understand that the event of this statement would occur sequentially after the event of the statement before it.

    So then, what about the first independent statement (clause) of Daniel 9:27?  Well, what is the lay out of that which we understand thus far?  It is as follows:

    1.  “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.”

    2.  “The street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.”

    3.   “And [sequential after statement #2] after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.”

    4.  “And [sequential after statement #3] the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.”

    5.  “And [sequential after statement #4] the end thereof shall be with a flood.”

    6.  “And [sequential after statement #5] unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”

    7.  “And [????????????????????] he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week.”

    8.  “And [sequential after statement #7] in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease.”

    9.  “And [sequential after statement #8] for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation.”

    10.  “And [sequential after statement #9] that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

    Certainly, it must be recognized that the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of an independent statement (clause) does not automatically indicate that that given statement must be sequential to the statement before it.  However, in the contextual flow of thought of Daniel 9:25-27, every other usage of the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of an independent statement (clause) does seem to signal grammatically and contextually that that statement is sequential to the statement before it.  Even so, it only seems reasonable within this particular context to recognize that the coordinating conjunction “and” at the beginning of the independent statement (clause) with which Daniel 9:27 begins also signals that that statement is sequential to the statement before it (which is the statement with which Daniel 9:26 ends).  As such, we find further grammatical and contextual evidence that the events of Daniel 9:26 are to occur within a “gap” of time between the events of verse 25 (wherein the 69th “week” ends) and the events of verse 27 (with which the 70th “week” both begins and ends).

  14. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Pre Trib Rapture and Luke 21:20-24?   

    If we are talking only about the passage mentioned above (that is -- Luke 21:20-24), and not at all about the portion of the prophecy that continues thereafter (that is -- Luke 21:25-28), then I would agree that the reference therein to the destruction of Jerusalem is that of 70 AD by the armies of Rome.  Furthermore, I would contend that this portion of the prophecy (only Luke 21:20-24) extends from that destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD until the fulfillment of "the times of the Gentiles" (as stated at the end of Luke 21:24).  Finally, I would contend that this fulfillment of "the times of the Gentiles" is that which signals the timing for the remainder of the prophecy as presented in Luke 21:25-28 (which fits well with my understanding of Romans 11:25-27, as presented here, here, and here).
    As such, I would agree with Brother Dan McWhorter ("No Nicolaitans") above, and would have to disagree on this one with Brother Alan above.
  15. Pastor Scott Markle added a post in a topic Everlasting Covenants?   

    Brother Day,
    Now I am a bit confused about a point of belief in your position.  In your above two postings, you made reference to the "old covenant" a number of times.  I myself in my position have a fairly precise definition for what that "old covenant" is.  However, by the way in which you made reference to the "old covenant" in your above postings, I am not sure that your definition for the "old covenant" and my definition for the "old covenant" are the same.  Therefore, I am move to ask the question --
    What specific covenant of the Old Testament Scriptures do you view as the "old covenant"?  In my article I specifically make reference to three covenants, those being (1) the Lord God's covenant with Abraham (which He reiterated unto Isaac and Jacob-Israel), (2) the Lord God's covenant with the children of Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (which is reiterated in the book of Deuteronomy), and (3) the new covenant that the Lord God promised to make with the children of Israel.  Which one of these covenants do you view as the "old covenant"?