Rome can't be the Beast

Ligurian said:

I can't believe you're even asking this question.

Would Jesus' commandment-following-disciples have accepted the Revelation from some guy named Mark, whom the Apostles Matthew and John never even mention? (Retorical)

Click to expand...

Acts 12:12, Acts 12:25, Acts 15:37: There was a disciple named "John Mark". Is he the one who wrote the book of Revelation? After all, Revelation uses a very different style of how the language is actually penned, than the gospel of John.

Ligurian said:

Revelation 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, [and] the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

1-5 = five are fallen
6th = one is
7th = not yet come

The beast that was, and is not... at the time Revelation's written.

Who's one is... at the time Revelation's written? ... Answer: Rome.
Who was at the time Revelation's written: ........... Answer: anyone but Rome.
Who is not at the time Revelation's written? ......... Answer: anyone but Rome.

____________
Please tell me if there's something wrong with my math.
I must have posted this a dozen different ways within the last few months.
Nobody gets it. Nobody tells me why I'm wrong. All I get is silence... so far?

Click to expand...

I struggled with this as well and came up with a potentially fitting theory.

It may be Vespasian. He was the eighth emperor of Rome. He was also one of Nero's generals, so he is "of the seven". He was a general from 41 AD to 51 AD, but at the time of the writing of Revelation he was not (because he had retired). Then in 63 AD he came back to serve. So he was, is not, but yet will come.

The only part that has me stumped is the "he must remain for a short while" part. Still, it's an interesting theory.

Freedm said:

I struggled with this as well and came up with a potentially fitting theory.

It may be Vespasian. He was the eighth emperor of Rome. He was also one of Nero's generals, so he is "of the seven". He was a general from 41 AD to 51 AD, but at the time of the writing of Revelation he was not (because he had retired). Then in 63 AD he came back to serve. So he was, is not, but yet will come.

The only part that has me stumped is the "he must remain for a short while" part. Still, it's an interesting theory.

Click to expand...

The eighth can not be Vespasian because of what Revelation 17:11 says. The beast itself is the 8th.

Now if the beast itself is Rome; how can Rome be the last king? It doesn't make sense.

Revelation 20:10 the devil, the beast and the false prophet are thrown in to the Lake of Fire at the end of time. How can that be "the Roman Empire"? That doesn't make sense either.

Although I would agree on a certain point that "the beast" is "a system" so to speak. It's a false religious system created by Satan. It's in existence by the 1st century and continues until the end of time.

If you compare this to Daniel. The "beast" actually had an aspect of its origin starting with the Babylonian empire. What was the false religious system that emerged out of the Babylonian captivity that is still with us today?

It had to "remain a little while". A little while in regards to what? What was the culminating event of that religious system that had its birth during the Babylonian empire? The one who "Babylon the mother of harlots" rides on which is called spiritually Sodom and Egypt "where our Lord was crucified". Where was Christ crucified? (Not Rome!) He was crucified in Jerusalem. What false religious system is related to Jerusalem (that's still with us today)?

That was = Babylonian captivity to 70 AD.
Was not = 70 AD until about the 3rd century.
But yet will come = When did that false religious system once again become a political entity? (1948.)

The Righterzpen said:

The eighth can not be Vespasian because of what Revelation 17:11 says. The beast itself is the 8th.

Click to expand...

Revelation 17:11 literally tells us that the beast is a king. And Vespasian was the 8th king. How does this not make sense?

The Righterzpen said:

That was = Babylonian captivity to 70 AD.
Was not = 70 AD until about the 3rd century.
But yet will come = When did that false religious system once again become a political entity? (1948.)

Click to expand...

Interesting theory but I'm convinced the book of Revelation was written around 61 to 62 AD so this does not fit for me.

Here's another theory. There were eight procurators of Judea under Roman rule.

Five have fallen
1. Cuspeus Fadus 44 to 46
2. Tiberius Julius Alexander 46–48
3. Ventidius Cumanus 48–52
4. Marcus Antonius Felix 52–60
5. Porcius Festus 60–62

One is
6. Lucceius Albinus 62–64

One will stay for a little while
7. Gessius Florus 64–66 2

8. Marcus Antonius Julianus 66 to 70 AD - He was the eighth and final procurator of Judea, and he was so during the time of the zealot revolt.
He belongs to the seven because he has the same title, and perhaps because he was a relative of #4 Marcus Antonius Felix.
He once was and now is not because he ... I have no clue.
Also there's no record of Julianus being particularly cruel or evil, unlike his predecessor. In fact, there's barely any record of him at all.

I've gone through a lot of different theories and each one fits some of the descriptions in Revelation but I haven't yet found one that fits perfectly and that may simply be because we don't have enough detailed historical records. Perhaps if we could build a time machine we could pin it down.

My strongest theory however is that zealot led Israel, ie. the rebirth of the Macabeean dynasty, is the beast of Revelation 17 and the fourth beast of Daniel. It makes the most sense.

Ligurian said:

Revelation 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

Daniel 8:20 The ram which thou sawest that had the horns is the king of the Medes and Persians.LXX

Under the Roman Empire theory, by the same token, Medes and Persians would have separate kingdoms represented as silver and/or the ram. And since the 10 kingdoms have no kingdom yet... they cannot be Roman emperors.

Click to expand...

I think I'm missing your logic here. I agree that the ten horns can not be emperors because they rule concurrently not successively. The seven kings are successive, but the ten horns concurrent. However, if somebody believes the ten horns to be ten concurrent rulers of ten kingdoms within a kingdom, say for example a European union, then how do you disprove that? The fact that they have no kingdom yet does not disprove that because they would all receive their thrones at some future date.

Freedm said:

Here's another theory. There were eight procurators of Judea under Roman rule.

Click to expand...

There were seven Herods that ruled Judea. This started with Herod the Great; who was assigned as "king of Judea" by the Roman senate in (I think it was 48) BC. Mark Antony set the motion before the senate to make Herod the king.

The 7th Herod to rule Judea was Agrippa II who ruled until Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD. This Herod died somewhere between 90 and 100 AD. This fits what the book of Revelation says about 7 kings. Yet between the birth of Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem there are like 12 Roman emperors. (12 and 7 are not the same number.)

So thus I conclude that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck; it's probably a duck. Revelation says "seven kings". The Herodian dynasty had..... seven kings! Not sure it gets much clearer than that!

The 8th "king" is the beast itself. The beast is the corrupted system of Judaism. The Judaism of the 1st century was not the same as Mosaic Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism that we have today is an offshoot of the Pharisees. The Sadducees disappeared at the end of the 1st century.

There were 4 groups of "Jewish thought" in the 1st century. Pharisees, Sadducees, the Scribes and the Essenes. What we have of the Dead Sea Scrolls is theorized by some to be mostly Essene writings; although others say that collection represents a mixture of 1st Century BC "Jewish thought" groups. The site associated with the Dead Sea Scrolls probably had multiple purposes through the first BC / AD centuries.

The beast (the corrupt religious system) "was" = Babylonian captivity return to 70 AD.
"was not" = It disappeared at the end of the 1st Century AD and did not reappear until the completion of the penning of the Talmud by the end of the 3rd century AD.

Matter of fact; much of the source material for the Talmud came from the Gnostics. The Gnostics were a mixture of Greek religious ideas, and "Christianized" corrupted post-Babylonian captivity Judaism.

And "is" = the invention of Rabbinic Judaism from the 3rd century on; which again became a political theocracy in 1948.

It fits.

Ligurian said:

There is certainly no need to speculate about which John, because Jesus has told us beforehand who would be His witnesses and why. This first quotation is being said to Jesus' Disciples in the Passover Verses of Chapters 13-15.

Click to expand...

John Mark wrote the gospel of Mark. There are more similarities in the style of writing between Mark and Revelation than between John and Revelation. Mark is believed to be the first Gospel written. Then (probably) Matthew and than John.

Luke wrote both Luke and Acts and originally they were one long book. Luke would have completed his entire account just before Paul was killed. We know this because Paul is still alive (and so is Peter) by the end of Acts. According to tradition; Paul died in 68 AD. I'm not sure; but I don't think there is actually any either church, or secular record of Paul's death.

The style of writing / grammar in the book of John is much less "technical" and "formal" than Revelation. Also, there is no indication in the Book of Revelation that Jerusalem had been destroyed. (Which if Revelation had really been written in 90 AD; it would have been 20 years post the destruction of Jerusalem.)

Also, an earthquake leveled Laodicea in 60 AD; and there is no indication from the Book of Revelation that that event had happened yet.

So if one were to compare historical events to what was not stated in Revelation; one would have to conclude that Revelation was written at least prior to 60 AD.

Revelation talks about "5 kings fallen", "one is" and "one to come". If we were to date the writing of Revelation based on the reigns of the Herods; Herod Chalcis was the 6th Herod and he ruled between 41 and 48 AD. Revelation would have been written sometime during his reign.

This would have also coincided with the missionary trip where Paul got mad at Mark for "abandoning" them. The closest place to return to Jerusalem from where Paul was at the time was... the island of Patmos.

Ligurian said:

All of these things fit together, if you're willing to see them all. If any part is missing... you won't see much of anything real, IMO.

Because the fourth beast is entirely different from even the evils of Persian overlordship and greed. It is atheist, for one thing... which can never be said of Romans. If the EU is becoming atheistic against its will, blame the spectre of multiculturalism.

Click to expand...

The origins of the beast come from the Babylonians, the Persians, and the Greeks. We know this from Nebuchanazzar's dream.

Those empires overlapped each other. They occupied the same geographical space in the Middle East. Today, "10 nations" occupy that same geographical space. These "10 kings" had not received their kingdoms by the point of the writing of Revelation.

Now who are the "two horns" on the Greek Ram? What "political standing" in Judea came out of the Greek empire? (The Sadducees and the Pharisees.) The Sadducees and Pharisees were "political parties" that were striving for who got to be "top dog" post the break up of Alexander's empire.

According to the Greeks; that was partially what the Maccabean revolt was about. (Maccabees happened during the Seleucid Empire.) The Greeks record the Maccabees as an internal conflict. The Jews record Maccabees as the Greeks oppressing them. The Greeks halted temple sacrifices because they had caught Jews abducting Greek citizens to be used as sacrifices. (This was recorded by a Greek historian; who I'd have to look up his name. Right now I don't remember what it is.) It seems to me a similar type event is recorded in Luke 17 that talks about Galileans who Pilate sent soldiers into the temple after. The soldiers killed them and "mingled their blood with their own sacrifice".

The Pharisees become more powerful than the Sadducees. This is why the 2nd horn replaces the 1st. We could interpret this as having happened post destruction of Jerusalem, as we look at who's religious philosophy is predominant today. (Rabbinic Judaism comes from the Pharisees.)

Herod's ancestors were probably most likely "Edomites". Herod's ancestral land was invaded post return to Jerusalem (after Babylonian captivity) and the people there were forcibly converted to Judaism.

Now Herod the Great wanted to believe he was truly "king of the Jews". Problem was that it could be proven from the genealogical records that Herod was not of the tribe of Judah. So Herod destroyed those records when he went to rebuild the temple.

The Book of Ezra records who's families came back from Babylon and what tribes they were. Benjamin was the only tribe that was semi-intact still. The only lines of what was left of Judah; were basically the families who'd eventually produce Christ.

Other than Levites mentioned in the NT; we have no other records of any other tribes coming back from captivity of either the Assyrians taking the 10 northern tribes or the Babylonians taking Judah and Benjamin.

So if you start comparing this to who's in the European Union; again you have too many nations to be "10 kings" Revelation talks about. (But again; you have 10 nations today who take up the Middle East.) If you lay a map over the parameters of the Babylonian, Persian and Greek empires; today in those boundaries you have "10 nations".

The Righterzpen said:

So if you start comparing this to who's in the European Union; again you have too many nations to be "10 kings" Revelation talks about. (But again; you have 10 nations today who take up the Middle East.) If you lay a map over the parameters of the Babylonian, Persian and Greek empires; today in those boundaries you have "10 nations".

Click to expand...

The EU could easily be represented by ten kings (leaders). Such as, globally there are 160 nations, but 8 leaders make up the G8.

The middle east nations are going to be weakened by the Gog/Magog event. Which the 7 years follow that event.

Douggg said:

The EU could easily be represented by ten kings (leaders). Such as, globally there are 160 nations, but 8 leaders make up the G8.

The middle east nations are going to be weakened by the Gog/Magog event. Which the 7 years follow that event.

Click to expand...

Except nowhere in the Scripture does prophecy talk about Europe. You got to let the Scripture interpret itself.

Isaiah 28:9-11
9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

The only vague reference in Scripture that I've found that might be specific to Europe is in Job. There's a passage in there about "when men dwelt in caves" which I think is a reference to the post flood ice age. And I think it's only in the Book of Job that we have some idea as to when Job lived. Likely shortly after the flood. (Job 30)

The other reference to peoples who probably had come from northern Europe is to the "Amorites". Jerusalem is described as their father was an Amorite and their mother was a Hittite. Ezekiel 16:3.

Now Scripture doesn't say the Amorites ancestors came from Europe; but we make assumptions by information we can put together from archeology. The Egyptians describe the Amorites as having light skin and blue eyes. The first place "blue eyes" show up in the archeological record is Scandinavian people. We know this from the Human Genome Project. The Human Genome project has mapped every ethnic group / race on earth.

The Hittites on the other hand are described as having dark skin. And they were probably some form of African lineage. Which is interesting because now "Jerusalem" is the mix of two polar ends of the skin color diversity of humanity.

And this description of Jerusalem in Ezekiel 16 is in reference to that Jerusalem thinks it's something "special" and God corrects this notion in this passage. Jews historically have had an awful lot of racist ideology; thinking they were superior to other "gentile" peoples. God is explaining to them right here that their lineage as parts of humanity mix; isn't any different than any other race or people group. There were descendants of Jacob whom some of which had specific lineages that in time would give birth to the Messiah. But the descendants of Jacob have always been mixed with peoples of other groups.

We have Tamar, Rehab, Bathsheba and Ruth who are all foreign women and are direct ancestors of Christ. When Jesus tells the woman at the well that "salvation is of the Jews"; He's actually referencing Himself (and actually His racially mixed genealogy).

So when you go to try and interpret something Scripture is saying; you can't take it out of it's historical context to try and make it say something that it doesn't.

The "10 kings" who arise out of the beast post destruction of Jerusalem are not the European Union. Europe had no geographic reference to the Babylonian, Persian and Greek empires in Nebuchanazzar's dream.

Now here's another interesting piece of the puzzle. When you go to Acts and it describes those who were present at Pentecost who repented and converted at the preaching of Peter. It lists 10 people groups. Those people groups are all linked to the Babylonian, Persian and Greek empires. They are ethnicities of those nations. (Acts 2:9-10)

Now take Acts here and go back to Ezekiel 28:11. Compare this to 1 Corinthians 14:21&22. Compare this to Isaiah 28:11&12, Deuteronomy 28:49 and Jeremiah 5:15

Now go back to verse 5 in Acts 2: "5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven." Note the passage calls these people "devout of every nation under heaven "Jews".

Now look at Paul's definition of who a "Jew" is: (Romans 2)
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

So in making comparisons this way; who ultimately is "the nation" who comes against disobedient Judaism? That prophecy is fulfilled in Acts 2. That "nation" is the "nation" of Christendom. It's comprised of genuine believers from every tribe, tongue, kindred and nation.

The gospel starts with the gentile nations who were part of the Babylonian, Persian and Greek empires.

There's another reference (I believe it's Peter) who pens this statement; which is an acknowledgement that the gospel will continue to go into all the world. The implication isn't obvious in the English; but in Greek Peter states that he understands that the completion of the gospel going into all the world will not happen until a time far from his century. I'd have to do some more digging, because off the top of my head, I can't remember where that passage is. (I want to say it's in one of the "Peter" books.) I have to do some digging though. I remember studying that passage. I just can't remember what exactly it said in English; so thus I'm having trouble finding it.

So here you see several examples of how we are to interpret Scripture by comparing it to itself.

The Righterzpen said:

Except nowhere in the Scripture does prophecy talk about Europe. You got to let the Scripture interpret itself.

Click to expand...

The prince who shall come, comes from the people who destroyed the city and temple - the Romans. Rome is in Europe.

The Righterzpen said:

The "10 kings" who arise out of the beast post destruction of Jerusalem are not the European Union. Europe had no geographic reference to the Babylonian, Persian and Greek empires in Nebuchanazzar's dream.

Click to expand...

The little horn person - emerges as leader of the EU - will bring his EU army into the middle east from north and west of Israel - Daniel 8:9. Time of the end, following Gog/Magog.

They do so to control and possess all the middle east oil in the middle east - the territories once belonging to the Babylonian, Persian, Greek Empires.

The Righterzpen said:

So when you go to try and interpret something Scripture is saying; you can't take it out of it's historical context to try and make it say something that it doesn't.

Click to expand...

Keeping that in mind, Jesus was rejected by his own people to be their King of Israel. Mark 15:

9 But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews?

10 For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy.


26 And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.

31 Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save.

32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.


Thus, the Anti - Christ (the King of Israel) must be anointed the King of Israel, received by the Jews as their King of Israel, instead of and against the rightful King of Israel, Jesus, who came in the name of the Lord.

That's for a while... until he betrays them, by going into the temple, sitting claiming to have achieved God-hood, in 2Thessalonians2:4. Ending his time as their King of Israel - coming in his own name - the Antichrist.

The beast is the person after he is killed for his audacious act, but is brought back to life - which the ten EU kings then give their EU kingdom over to him - as dictator for 42 months. Until Jesus returns to this earth to destroy him.


The middle east countries do not have the military to impose its will on the rest of the world. The EU, with allies of the United States and Canada - in post Gog/Magog event does.


If you are going to study the end times - and understand correctly - the approach has to be...

1. the end times are event driven - not theological position driven.

2. the arch villain of the end times evolving to his end - has to be integrated into the timeline of those events.

Douggg said:

The prince who shall come, comes from the people who destroyed the city and temple - the Romans. Rome is in Europe.

Click to expand...

Which passage are you talking about here?

The only passage I can find about a king destroying the city; is a parable Jesus tells in Matthew 22. But in that context; the king who sends his armies and burns up the city is God Himself.

Isaiah 11:23 is the same context. He who destroys the city is God Himself.

Rider on a white horse imagery is seen in Zachariah and Revelation.
Zachariah 6:3-6, Revelation 6:2, Revelation 19:11-14.

In all those contexts; that rider is Christ.

Douggg said:

The little horn person - emerges as leader of the EU - will bring his EU army into the middle east from north and west of Israel - Daniel 8:9. Time of the end, following Gog/Magog.

Click to expand...

Daniel 8:

9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.

11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of the sanctuary was cast down.

12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered.

13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?

14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

…

23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practice, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.

25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days.

Herod the Great:

These two passages are somewhat parallel to each other. This "king" and "little horn" are Herod the Great. Herod the Great was of Greek ancestry, although he really wanted to believe he was the Messiah (and he wanted other people to believe he was the Messiah too).

He magnifies himself against the "Prince of the Host" and against the "Prince of Princes". the Prince of the Host and the Prince of Princes is Jesus Christ.

By him (King Herod) the "daily sacrifice is taken away" and "the sanctuary is cast down". He also sets up the "transgression of desolation" and is "broken without hand". This transpires in the course of "2300 days" and there are "1290 days" between the sacrifice taken away and the abomination set up.

So, what does this all mean?

Herod became client king of Judea in (elected by the Roman senate) in 40 BC. In 19 BC, he began reconstruction on the temple. He tore the entire reconstructed Solomon's temple down and totally rebuilt it. It was rededicated 10 years later in 9 BC; although we don't know when, we know it was before Passover.

Around about Passover of 9 BC (or 8 BC - depending on which calendar we are talking about - the "sacred" or the "secular"; because these calendars started 6 months apart) comes John the Baptist's father "in the course of Abia". (End of March) July of that year, John is conceived. Six months later, Jesus is conceived. About Passover of 8 BC, John is born. Six months later; (which would have been right after the secular new year of 7 BC) during the feast of tabernacles, Jesus is born. (End of September.)

Joseph, Mary and Jesus stay in Bethlehem for 2 years. The Magi show up probably around the fall of 5 BC. Mary and Joseph take Jesus to Egypt. Herod dies in the spring of 4 BC. They return from Egypt in the summer time of 3 BC.

The time span this takes place in is 2300 days. I.E. - 6 years and 4 months.

Now; the first communication from God in 400 plus years, comes to John the Baptist's father, Zechariah while he's in the temple. (We'll say Passover of 8 BC because we'll use the sacred calendar. This would have been the beginning of the year.) Roughly a year later John is born. 1.5 years from the angel coming to Zechariah, Jesus is born. 2 years after Jesus is born; Herod kills the babies in Bethlehem.

This time span is 1290 days. I.E. - 3.5 years. (Daniel 12)

So what does "take away the daily sacrifice" and "set up the abomination that causes desolate" mean?

First off, we have to define terms. The word "sacrifice" is not in the Hebrew. "Daily" in this passage is best translated "continuous" or "ceaseless". "Take away" means to "magnify". I have no idea why they translated these verses the way that they did.

11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the Prince of the host, and by him the ceaseless exaltation and the place of the sanctuary was cast down.

12 And an host was given him against the ceaseless by reason of transgression, and it (the host) cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered.

13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake. How long shall be the vision concerning the ceaseless and the transgression of desolation, to give both the Holy One and the host (army) to be trodden under foot?

Now this hearkens to Jesus making reference to "destroy this temple and I'll raise it on the 3rd day". He wasn't talking about a building, he was talking about his body.

14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be vindicated.

Jesus was "vindicated" of Herod the Great, when He returned from Egypt.

Now looking at this translation, it makes a whole lot more contextual sense. "Daily sacrifice" is a poor translation because Herod didn't take away the daily sacrifice, as was related to animal sacrifices; God took that away as soon as the Messiah was conceived; because He was the final sacrifice.

So, moving on from Jesus's birth to Herod trying to kill Him when He was two; this is where the "abomination that makes desolate" was set up. The first announcement that the Messiah was coming, was made by the angel when he appeared to John the Baptist's father. 3.5 years later, the coming of the Magi announces to the nation that the "King of the Jews" is born.

This makes contextual sense and fits into the 1290 day, as well as the 2300 day time table(s); both connected to the same king who "understands dark sayings".

Douggg said:

Keeping that in mind, Jesus was rejected by his own people to be their King of Israel.

Click to expand...

Yes, keep this in mind; who were the ones who rejected Christ. Remember Pilate (Rome) tried to set Jesus free.

Douggg said:

Thus, the Anti - Christ (the King of Israel) must be anointed the King of Israel, received by the Jews as their King of Israel, instead of and against the rightful King of Israel, Jesus, who came in the name of the Lord.

That's for a while... until he betrays them, by going into the temple, sitting claiming to have achieved God-hood, in 2Thessalonians2:4. Ending his time as their King of Israel - coming in his own name - the Antichrist.

Click to expand...

Now 2 Thessalonians 2:3 you see the term "son of perdition".

John 17:12 names Judas as the "son of perdition".

All these little clues tell us that all these prophecies are connected primarily to Christ's first coming.

Now the question comes for us in our time: Is there an "end game" that parallels the events of the 1st century? That certainly appears to be the case in the setting up of the global false religious system.

What is the only nation on earth that as a national entity universally rejects Christ? (It's the same nation that rejected Him the first time He came!

Look at what's been going on politically for the past about 110 years (which is actually the same time span of the reign of the Herods).

There's 120 years time span of the Herods.
There's 120 years Noah built the ark.
Look at the history of Zionism. In about another decade; we will be at 120 years.

2033 AD is 2000 years after Pentecost.

There are several NT passages that talk about "times" and "seasons".

The "1000 year reign" in Greek is actually a plural of 1000. (2000 or multiple thousands???)

Covid 19 was the onset of the contingency plan for "The Great Reset". Globalists want to reduce the global population to about 500 million.

Look at the Talmud and what Judaism believes about Jewish people as opposed to gentiles. And than look at all the stuff in the Talmud that's extremely anti-Christian. According to the Talmud; Jesus learned sorcery in Egypt and cast spells with his penis. There's a lot of perverse ideas in the Talmud.

Who's the "nation" who still rejects Christ. (It's not the EU; even though they are a bunch of globalist communists.) Globalism is part of "the beast system".

Start looking at the FED, the Balfour Declaration. WWI, The Transfer Agreement, WWII, Where did the 6 million number come from? (That's actually out of the Talmud.) And there were news articles flying around the newspapers about "6 million" and "holocaust" long before there was a Nazi in Germany.

Now start digging through the origin of the Scofield Reference Bible and modern eschatology. Premileenial dispensationalism is only about 150 years old at this point. Pre-millennialism is not what the church believed for the first 1850 years.

There's a lot of rabbit holes one could go down on this one!

The Righterzpen said:

Which passage are you talking about here?

The only passage I can find about a king destroying the city; is a parable Jesus tells in Matthew 22. But in that context; the king who sends his armies and burns up the city is God Himself.

Click to expand...

Daniel 9:26-27. It is not the king who destroys the temple and the city - but that he will be from the people who destroy the temple and city, which were the Romans. It is identifying where that person will come from. The fourth kingdom of Daniel 7.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.