the Mark of the Beast, Daniel's 70th week, and Pastor Bill Macgregor

[Douggg]

Doug, there is little continuity between your dispensationalist’s views and the OT, not unlike preterism. Your dispensationalist’s views can’t surmount the prophecies that all the major prophets and some minor wrote about the sowing of both houses in the world and their redemption before they are gathered (Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7; and Hosea 2:14-23.) Furthermore, Christ affirms this in Matthew 13:24-30. These prophecies establish the Church as the vehicle to restore both houses of Israel under Christ’s mediation commencing with the first advent, and that their salvation is not delayed as your dispensationalist doctrines assert. If their salvation is not delayed then your dispensationalist doctrines on Romans 11 are relegated to the fire of 2 Corinthians 3:15.

Your refusal to answer to the prophecies, such as Ephriam becoming a multitude of nations, and your failure to recognize that Paul isn’t merely pulling the phrase “the fulness of the Gentiles," out of the air relegates your charts to oblivion.

As for Roman 11:26, Christ’s return ends probation for the Church, which includes Gentiles that are joined to Israel. The number of the elect of Israel is complete at the end of probation and that is the significance of Paul’s witness that all of Israel will be saved. As previously cited, the Gentiles who are saved are joined to Israel as adopted sons and daughters according to Isaiah 14, which in itself discredits your dispensationalist doctrine that the Church and Israel are two separate mediations.

For the LORD will have mercy on Jacob, and will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land: and the strangers shall be joined with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob. And the people shall take them, and bring them to their place: and the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of the LORD for servants and handmaids: and they shall take them captives, whose captives they were; and they shall rule over their oppressors. (Isaiah 14:1-2)​

As for your percentile of Israelites that embrace Christ, surely you jest, right? Have you not read Hosea?

Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people; Ephraim is a cake not turned. (Hosea 7:8)​

Again, this alone discredits your dispensationalist doctrines. God has been saving the descendants of Jacob for 2000 years even as the world looked upon them as Gentiles. There is simply no way of discerning who is a descendant of Jacob today for the most part, even as God knows. As Jacob prophesied, Ephriam would become a multitude of nations, considered Gentile nations by the world in the time of the end. As descendants of the lost tribes of Israel, to them belong the prophecies of being gathered and returned to “their” land at Christ’s appearing. That’s how he saves Israel and fulfills that Abraham becomes the father of many nations.

As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. (Genesis 17:4)​

All in all, your dispensationalist doctrines are wanting when it comes to continuity with the OT.

Jerry, apparently you don't know dispensationalism. In their system of belief, the age of grace is the church age. They believe in a pre-trib rapure of the church. The church gone, and with it the age of grace.

The Jews, Israel, not raptured, will go through the 7 years, and in the middle of it turn to Jesus and the gospel of salvation - saved by grace, not by works.

So you will have to admit my futurist view is not that of dispensationalists. It is also not that of preterists. Nor that of historists.

________________________________________________

Jerry, imo, what you should do is begin a thread on dispensationalism, featuring your criticism of it in the opening post. That thread would accommodate your obsession to talk about it.

 

[Jerryhuerta]

Jerry, apparently you don't know dispensationalism. In their system of belief, the age of grace is the church age. They believe in a pre-trib rapure of the church. The church gone, and with it the age of grace.

The Jews, Israel, not raptured, will go through the 7 years, and in the middle of it turn to Jesus and the gospel of salvation - saved by grace, not by works.

So you will have to admit my futurist view is not that of dispensationalists. It is also not that of preterists. Nor that of historists.

________________________________________________

Jerry, imo, what you should do is begin a thread on dispensationalism, featuring your criticism of it in the opening post. That thread would accommodate your obsession to talk about it.

When you make statements like “Currently only about 4% of Israel embrace Jesus as the messiah” and “Then after the rapture/resurrection event, with the church gone from the world, the Jews, Israel, will be saved during the time of the great tribulation” and “Jews currently don't believe in Jesus, but will turn to Jesus in the middle part of the seven years,” then you're placing yourself in the dispensationalist camp. If it quacks like a duck…

There is little continuity between your dispensationalist’s views and the OT, not unlike preterism. Your dispensationalist’s views can’t surmount the prophecies that all the major prophets and some minor wrote about the sowing of both houses in the world and their redemption before they are gathered (Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7; and Hosea 2:14-23.) Furthermore, Christ affirms this in Matthew 13:24-30. These prophecies establish the Church as the vehicle to restore both houses of Israel under Christ’s mediation commencing with the first advent, and that their salvation is not delayed as your dispensationalist’s doctrines assert. If their salvation is not delayed then your dispensationalist’s doctrines on Romans 11 are relegated to the fire of 2 Corinthians 3:15.

BTW, no one under the Old Covenant was saved by works. That is another dispensationalist fallacy.

 

[Douggg]

When you make statements like “Currently only about 4% of Israel embrace Jesus as the messiah” and “Then after the rapture/resurrection event, with the church gone from the world, the Jews, Israel, will be saved during the time of the great tribulation” and “Jews currently don't believe in Jesus, but will turn to Jesus in the middle part of the seven years,” then you're placing yourself in the dispensationalist camp. If it quacks like a duck…

No, I am not in the dispensationalist's camp, because they say the age of grace is over when the church age is over - in a pre-trib rapture they believe in - before the seven years begin.

My futurist view is different because the Jews will be saved , embacing the gospel of salvation, in the middle of the 7 years - saved by grace, not by works. Although the church will be gone from the world at that time.

If it quacks like a duck… Jerry, cliches are not a legitimate form of argument.

 

[Douggg]

BTW, no one under the Old Covenant was saved by works. That is another dispensationalist fallacy.

So you are admitting my futurist view is not that of dispensationalists ?

Jerry, it seems to be like you don't acknowledge the four major approach's to bible prophecy are...

1. futurism
2. dispensationalism
3. historistism
4. preteristism

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The woman's children are the children of Israel, commonly known as the Jews.

Revelation 12:5 makes it clear that Jesus is her child and the rest of her offspring are those who follow Jesus. That does not describe the children of Israel in general, since the children of Israel, the Jews, include those who don't follow Jesus.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Well certainly salvation came when Jesus died on the cross and resurrected on the third day. And the kingdom of God begun within Christians at that time.

So, why wouldn't you interpret Revelation 12:10 in light of that? I don't see any reason why not except for perhaps doctrinal bias.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

What made it clear, the outcome in hindsight?

There is no conditional point in this phrase:

"Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown."

You as an Amil don't even accept Christ coming back to current earth. Why are you arguing about post Second Coming earth that is not your Second Coming earth?

The point of condition is not always evident. Even you claim the message Jonah gave was conditional. You claim it was evident. Did God destroy Nineveh in 40 days?

Did you forget what you claimed? You claimed that all prophecy is conditional. That is completely ludicrous. Just because we can find one conditional prophecy means all prophecies are conditional? Of course not.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

The example of Jonah can hardly be viewed in support of conditional prophecy, Spiritual Jew.

Jerry, were you actually reading the discussion? My main point was to show that not all prophecy is conditional as Timtofly was claiming. If we find one example of a conditional prophecy that doesn't mean all prophecy is conditional. That's all I'm saying. I was not in any way, shape or form intending to start a debate about whether the prophecy in Jonah relating to Nineveh was conditional or not.

Do you understand what I'm saying to you, Jerry?

What we have in Jonah is an example of God’s influence or power to change the carnal nature or bend it to his will as he did with Jonah. Such a display of power affirms that God’s Providence is not contingent upon man’s will. It affirms His power was instrumental in the outcome of the prophecy to Nineveh.

So, He was just making an empty threat while knowing He was going to force them to repent? No, I don't buy that at all. But, I also have no interest in having a big discussion about this, since this is besides the point I was making to Timtofly, which was simply that not all prophecy is conditional. Not even close, obviously. A vast majority is not. If you want to argue that there are no conditional prophecies at all, I have no interest in arguing about that.

So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. (Romans 9:16)

Scripture does not maintain conditional prophecy by which Covenantalism replaces Israel with the Church. The Church is the vehicle to restore both houses of Israel in the wilderness (Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7; Hosea 2:14-23). Neither supersessionism nor dispensationalism can be upheld in scripture.

Jerry, do you have any idea of what I believe? Do you actually think I support dispensationalism? I have spent many years arguing against it. Maybe you should know who you're talking to first before you post next time.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

No, I am not in the dispensationalist's camp, because they say the age of grace is over when the church age is over - in a pre-trib rapture they believe in - before the seven years begin.

My futurist view is different because the Jews will be saved , embacing the gospel of salvation, in the middle of the 7 years - saved by grace, not by works. Although the church will be gone from the world at that time.

Many Jews have been saved over the past almost 2,000 years. What will be different in this future time compared to the past 2,000 years or so in relation to salvation? Clearly, you see something as being different during that time than how it's been since Christ's death and resurrection as it relates to salvation.

 

[Douggg]

So, why wouldn't you interpret Revelation 12:10 in light of that? I don't see any reason why not except for perhaps doctrinal bias.

Satan is cast down to earth in verses 7-9. Once he is cast down:

1. verse 14, the woman goes into the wilderness to be protected. Those are the Jews in Israel (Judea) who follow Jesus's instructions to flee into the mountains. Protected for a time/times/half time from Satan.

2. verse 17, Satan persecutes the remnant of her seed. That would be the Jews in Israel (Judea) who do not flee into the mountains right away when the abomination of desolation statue image is setup.

Why to flee to the mountains when they see the AoD? Because Satan will incarnate the AoD image once he is cast down to earth, and everyone will be required to worship it, or face the death penalty for not doing so.

Well how come verse 17 is not about the church? Because (1) the church is not appointed to wrath... and Satan when he is cast down will have great wrath - "woe to the inhabiters of the earth and sea, verse 12. (2) in Daniel 12, which speaks about the worst time there will be ever for Israel, the time, times, half times is in verse 7, as being how long the power of the holy people, which it talking about Israel and Daniel people in the context of that chapter, will be broken.

In Daniel 7:25 the time, times, half time appears again - with the same implication.

The church is not appointed to go through the great tribulation. But Israel is prophesied to go through that time of trouble. So location wise, the focus of the prophesies, is in Israel, Jerusalem in particular, the temple and the temple mount.

In the meantime, the church, the collective body of christian believers, has a mission to spread the good news of Salvation by believing upon the Lord Jesus Christ and Him crucified, and resurrected on the third day.

Which is why we are called missionaries - by Jewish countermissionaries.

 

[Douggg]

Many Jews have been saved over the past almost 2,000 years. What will be different in this future time compared to the past 2,000 years or so in relation to salvation? Clearly, you see something as being different during that time than how it's been since Christ's death and resurrection as it relates to salvation.

It is the size of the turning to Jesus that is different. The Jews, en masse, as the nation of Israel, will turn to Jesus.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Satan is cast down to earth in verses 7-9. Once he is cast down:

1. verse 14, the woman goes into the wilderness to be protected. Those are the Jews in Israel (Judea) who follow Jesus's instructions to flee into the mountains. Protected for a time/times/half time from Satan.

For one thing, the Jews in Judea fled into the mountains long ago to avoid the Roman armies that came to destroy Jerusalem and the temple buildings.

Also, you seem to be equating the woman with her children. It talks about the woman herself going into the wilderness. Where does it talk about any of the woman's children going into the wilderness? The only child of the woman referenced up to that point is Jesus in verse 5.

2. verse 17, Satan persecutes the remnant of her seed. That would be the Jews in Israel (Judea) who do not flee into the mountains right away when the abomination of desolation statue image is setup.

Those who didn't flee into the mountains were killed. Did Jesus give any indication that it was possible for someone to survive if they didn't flee? Absolutely not. And none of those who stayed around survived in 70 AD. They were all either killed or taken captive to other nations.

You are just way off on this. The remnant of the woman's seed are her children besides Jesus who is the only child of the woman referenced before verse 17. And verse 17 refers to them who have the testimony of Jesus. That's a reference to His followers. There is nothing here to indicate that it's only talking about Jews. Not whatsoever. Has Satan not been persecuting Christians (Jew and Gentile) for the past almost 2,000 years? Sure, he has. So, that is what Revelation 12:17 is talking about.

Why to flee to the moutains when they see the AoD? Because Satan will incarnate the AoD image once he is cast down to earth, and everyone will be required to worship it, or face the death penalty for not doing so.

No, the reason to flee is to avoid God's wrath, which is seen more clearly in Luke 21:20-24 than in the parallel passages of Matthew 24:15-22 and Mark 13:14-20.

Well how come verse 17 is not about the church?

It is.

Because (1) the church is not appointed to wrath... and Satan when he is cast down will have great wrath - "woe to the inhabiters of the earth and sea, verse 12.

My goodness, you talk about taking scripture out of context. Scripture says the church is not appointed to God's wrath. That is what verses like 1 Thessalonians 5:9 indicate.

1 Thess 5:9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.

The context of that verse is in relation to God's wrath that is described in 1 Thess 5:2-3 as "sudden destruction" that will come upon unbelievers from which "they shall not escape". THAT is the wrath that the church is not appointed to.

NOWHERE does it teach that the church is not appointed to Satan's wrath. You have to be kidding here. Are you somehow not aware that many millions in the church have suffered from Satan's wrath for the past almost 2,000 years? Have you never read this:

2 Timothy 3:12 In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted,

Do you think the persecution that Paul talked about here has nothing to do with Satan's wrath? Of course it does! How can you even suggest that the church is not appointed to Satan's wrath? Nothing more false has ever been said.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

It is the size of the turning to Jesus that is different. The Jews, en masse, as the nation of Israel, will turn to Jesus.

Why will it be different then? Will they somehow have more of an opportunity to be saved in the future than they have now? Does God not want all of them who are alive now to be saved?

 

[Douggg]

For one thing, the Jews in Judea fled into the mountains long ago to avoid the Roman armies that came to destroy Jerusalem and the temple buildings.

I agree.

Also, you seem to be equating the woman with her children. It talks about the woman herself going into the wilderness. Where does it talk about any of the woman's children going into the wilderness? The only child of the woman referenced up to that point is Jesus in verse 5.

The woman represents the people of the nation of Israel, collectively as a whole.

In verses 1-5 the woman gives birth to Jesus. He was caught unto God and to his throne, 1st century.

2000 years gap in the text from verse 5 (just as Daniel 9:26 does the same gap in the text to Daniel 9:27, and the seven year 70th week) - to verse 6.

In verse 6, those 7 year begin.

The woman is in the wilderness because her man child son has not returned to end the 70 weeks and bring in everlasting righteousness of the messianic age.

In verse 6, the woman is being cared for, and fed the Word of God by the two witnesses, testifying of the gospel of Salvation of her man child, to her other children, 1260 days.

In verses 7-9, the war in the second heaven, and Satan and his angels cast down to earth.

In verse 10, her other children embrace the gospel of Salvation of her man child .. and are borne again.

Isaiah 66:7 Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.

8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

i.e. as soon as the great tribulation of the 7 year 70th week begins, the Jews will be brought forth borne again into the Kingdom of God.

In verse 14, the woman goes into the wilderness, fleeing into the mountains, where she will protected from Satan. Again, the woman is talking about a collective group of the people of the nation of Israel. This collective part are them who will have followed Jesus words to flee to the mountains.

In verse 17, is the collective part who do not flee to mountains, and Satan will have access to make war with them.

 

[Douggg]

No, the reason to flee is to avoid God's wrath, which is seen more clearly in Luke 21:20-24 than in the parallel passages of Matthew 24:15-22 and Mark 13:14-20.

God wrath is not directed at the people of Israel during the great tribulation.

 

[Douggg]

My goodness, you talk about taking scripture out of context. Scripture says the church is not appointed to God's wrath. That is what verses like 1 Thessalonians 5:9 indicate.

The church is not appointed to God wrath, i.e. the vials of God's wrath during the great tribulation. Nor Satan's wrath to come during that time. The church won't be here.

NOWHERE does it teach that the church is not appointed to Satan's wrath. You have to be kidding here. Are you somehow not aware that many millions in the church have suffered from Satan's wrath for the past almost 2,000 years? Have you never read this:
2 Timothy 3:12 In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted,

Revelation 12:12 - great wrath. Just like every Christian at times it seems experience tribulation to different degrees. But during the second half of the 7 years, it will be great tribulation.

Have you ever heard of the time, times, half times in bible prophecy? Do you know what a short time is ?

The text says...

12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

 

[Jerryhuerta]

Jerry, were you actually reading the discussion? My main point was to show that not all prophecy is conditional as Timtofly was claiming. If we find one example of a conditional prophecy that doesn't mean all prophecy is conditional. That's all I'm saying. I was not in any way, shape or form intending to start a debate about whether the prophecy in Jonah relating to Nineveh was conditional or not.

Do you understand what I'm saying to you, Jerry?

So, He was just making an empty threat while knowing He was going to force them to repent? No, I don't buy that at all. But, I also have no interest in having a big discussion about this, since this is besides the point I was making to Timtofly, which was simply that not all prophecy is conditional. Not even close, obviously. A vast majority is not. If you want to argue that there are no conditional prophecies at all, I have no interest in arguing about that.

Jerry, do you have any idea of what I believe? Do you actually think I support dispensationalism? I have spent many years arguing against it. Maybe you should know who you're talking to first before you post next time.

Thanks for the heads up and my apologies for not grasping where you were coming from.

 

[rwb]

The Jews, who currently do not believe in Jesus, turn to Jesus in the middle of the 7 years, Revelation 12:10.

10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

Doug, how does this verse prove a mass conversion to Christ of apostate Jews?

 

[Original Happy Camper]

No, I am not in the dispensationalist's camp, because they say the age of grace is over when the church age is over - in a pre-trib rapture they believe in - before the seven years begin.

My futurist view is different because the Jews will be saved , embacing the gospel of salvation, in the middle of the 7 years - saved by grace, not by works. Although the church will be gone from the world at that time.

If it quacks like a duck… Jerry, cliches are not a legitimate form of argument.

can you please clearify if the following description is accrute and do you fall into this catagory

The eschatology of Futurism is largely credited to the early-mid 19th century interpretation of John Nelson Darby, widely recognized as "the father of modern Dispensationalism and Futurism", whose eschatological scheme was popularized in the 20th century church through the annotated Scofield Reference Bible.

 

[Douggg]

Doug, how does this verse prove a mass conversion to Christ of apostate Jews?

The Jews (Judaism) is currently looking for their messiah (someone other than Jesus who they reject).

Jesus said that they the Jews reject him who comes in the name of the lord, but another they will accept coming in his own name.

That person will be the little horn person, who after he emerges as a leader over a group of ten EU leaders, will right after Gog/Magog will come into the middle east with a strong EU army to act as peace keeper in the region - based on Daniel 8:9 coming from north and west of Israel, waxing strong. And in Daniel 8:25 that he destroys many by peace, imo, by deluding them that they are living in the messianic age.

He will be the prince who shall come, from the people who destroyed the temple and city, i.e. the Romans. In Daniel 7, the fourth kingdom. Which in the end times, appears to be the EU given its military and economic power. (I am watching Zelenski, btw).

The prince who shall come will confirm the Mt. Sinai covenant, for 7 years. The for 7 years is Deuteronomy 31:9-13, a requirement Moses made for all future leaders to see to it that the law is read to the nation of Israel on the feast of tabernacles, a fall feast.

The reason I am suspecting Zelenski is that the messiah in Judaism belief, based on teaching from the Rambam, is supposed to fight the battles of God in defending Israel. And the big thing is that the 7 years following Gog/Magog are the same 7 years of Daniel 9:27.

btw, I haven't lost track of your question.

Since the possibility is that Putin is Gog and he and Zelenski having already formed an opposition to each other, and Zelenski just recently applied for EU membership, which the EU leaders say that they are going to fast track Ukraine to full member status - could be laying the ground work of why the Jews could think Zelenski is the messiah later on when Gog/Magog happens.

The little horn person in Daniel 8:23 stands up an idiom for prepares to go to war. What war? It doesn't say. But I am thinking against the Gog/Magog force. So, it could be that Zelenksi will stage a EU military force in Greece as a show of force, a deterrent.

Anyway, Gog/Magog happens and God supernaturally destroys Gog's army.

But to the Jews, if Zelenski does get involved if only staging his army as a deterrent - they could interpret that as an act expected by them that the messiah is supposed to do - defend Israel. We are going to have to see how things play of course. It may not be Zelenski or Putin at all.

Anyway, to your question, the two witnesses will be preaching the gospel of Salvation to Israel, directed at the Jews because they will be doing so from Jerusalem. And warning them not to trust the perceived messiah that they will have embraced, because he is going to betray them, and that Jesus is the real messiah.

When the Antichrist, fake messiah, reveals himself to be the man of sin and not the messiah after all, betraying the Jews and the covenant, by claiming to have achieved God-hood and stopping the daily sacrifice, the Jews will realize that the two witnesses were spot on, and turn to Jesus en masse. It is going to be a time of distraught and confusion in Israel during that time.

God in Ezekiel 28:1-10 indicates that he is going to have the revealed man of sin assassinated by strangers, for his claiming to be God.

And not shortly thereafter, brings him back to life, in disdain for the person, at which time he becomes the beast of Revelation.