helmut
Member
As I said, you gave no reasons why you consider the 1260 days to be another period than the 3½ times.But from Revelation 12:3, the description of the beast (represented by Satan), the 7 heads have their crowns. Which in Revelation12, are the 7 years, which I get from Revelation 12:6 the 1260 days plus Revelation 12:14 the time, times, half time.
In Daniel, we have different periods, e.g. in Dan 13,11-12. There is no reason to think they are consecutive periods, they are the same period (with somewhat different delimitation). And there is no reason to see more than 3½ years in Rev 12, expressed differently, but it is the same situation: Jerusalem (old covenant) being safe for 1260days = 3½ times[=years]).
No, it indicates the beast in contrast to its "father", the devil. And there is no mention of the horn in Revelation at all, it is pure speculation to read the horn, which is a Greek king, and the first one (Dan 8,212), into Revelation.Having their crowns indicates the King 7 (Revelation 17:10) has come to power - who is the little horn person.
Where do you get this chronology from?So the ten kings rising out of the fourth kingdom, and then the little horn - would mean those things in Daniel 7:24 take place before the 7 years begin.
The first question is, why I should assume that the text intends to give us a "timeline" in spite of what Jesus said, that we are not allowed to know the situation when He returns.The heads and horns, crowns/no crowns - why they are different in Revelation 12, 13, 17 - is essential for understanding how to fit everything correctly on a timeline.
The second is: Why should I assume your timeline is correct? There are other possible ways to construct a "timelime", using other verses in the Bible and interpreting your verses differently. You didn't give a biblical reason why your timeline should be taken as correct. Having some verses ornamenting what you say is not enough.
I know that I have to "learn" (=accept without asking) this to understand Revelation, Daniel etc. in the way you understand it. But this does not mean that this understanding is correct. You didn't show it from the Bible.Helmut - you must learn those. It is not an option or side study. You cannot understand bible end times prophecies without learning the meaning to those.
It is a sort of circular reasoning: If I accept your teaching, I will understand the Bible in a way that confirms your teaching. And I should believe you that this is the correct understanding.
I could also chose to listen to, say, catholic tradition, understand the Bible in light of this, so the Bible (understood as the RCC teaches) confirm the catholic tradition. Same principle.
I don't have to learn catholic tradition, I don't have to learn your system and its timeline. I have to listen what the Bible says.
Upvote
0