Biblical Timeline leading up to the end

[parousia70]

But satan is clearly deceiving the nations as we speak.

Is he?
Remember just 2000 years ago all nations outside Israel had no knowledge of Jehovah, no relationship, no covenant.

Such is no longer the case.
That is what “deceive the nations no more means”.

The notion that at some point in the future the “binding of Satan” will result in even the unrepentant having a share in his defeat and a share in Christ’s victory over him is untenable to the honest Bible expositor.

 

[ThatCanadianDude_88]

Is he?
Remember just 2000 years ago all nations outside Israel had no knowledge of Jehovah, no relationship, no covenant.

Such is no longer the case.
That is what “deceive the nations no more means”.

The notion that at some point in the future the “binding of Satan” will result in even the unrepentant having a share in his defeat and a share in Christ’s victory over him is untenable to the honest Bible expositor.

Yes, satan is still deceiving the nations. There is no mention of covenant relationship, there is no mention of the unrepentant sharing in anything. The passage simply speaks of the presence and activity of satan. Satan is either deceiving the nations, or he is not. If he is deceiving the nations, then this has not been fulfilled yet.

The point of these passages is to make known that satan is not present when the Messianic Kingdom is present, he is only released at the end of this subsequent age, and for God's sovereign purpose.

 

[Douggg]

There are several different positions. The Historicist view seems plausible. The Geneva Bible footnotes say;

p. Which is ment of Julius Cesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero &c. who were as Kings in effect, but because thei colde not rule, but by the consent of the Senat, their power is compared to a litle horne For Mahomet came not of the Romaine empire, and the Pope hathe no vocacion of governement: therefore this can not be applied unto them and also in this prophecie the Prophets purpose is chiefly to comfort the Jewes unto the revelation of Christ Some take it for the whole bodie of Antichrist.
q. Meaning, a certeine portion of the ten hornes: that is, a parte from the whole estate was taken away. For Augustus toke from the Senat the libertie of chosing the deputes to send into the provinces, and toke the governement of certeine countreis to him self.
r. These Romaine Emperours at the first used a certeine humanitie and gentlenes, and were content that others as the Consuls and Senat shulde beare the name of dignitie, so that thei might have the profite, and therefore in elections and counsels wolde behave them selves according as did other Senatours: yet against their enemies and those that wolde resist them, thei were fierce and cruel, which is here ment by the proud mouth.


Geneva Bible: Notes. (1560). (Vol. 1, p. 361). Geneva: Rovland Hall.

Those are six kings, not ten kings. And they did not rule contemporary with each other, to give their kingdom to the beast and to rule with the beast for one hour..

Julius Ceasar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero are six kings of the 7 heads (kings) in Revelation 17:10. Differently, the ten kings are the ten horns and rule contemporary with each other, i.e. at the same time.

You are doing a copy and paste from commentary on the bible.. that doesn't give the names of the ten kings.

I am asking you to name the ten kings by their actual names, who were living at the time that God setups up his everlasting kingdom here on earth. You say most claim they have already come. So name the ten kings who were here.

The apostles in the books of the New Testament should have named the ten kings. But none of the apostles (except John in Revelation) made any mention of them, nor named them. In contrast, the names of the twelve apostles are given in the New Testament.

Plus, none of the the apostles named the Antichrist, nor the beast, nor the prince who shall come, nor the little horn, nor the revealed man of sin.

They didn't because those are all future, as are the ten kings.

 

[parousia70]

Yes, satan is still deceiving the nations. There is no mention of covenant relationship, there is no mention of the unrepentant sharing in anything. The passage simply speaks of the presence and activity of satan. Satan is either deceiving the nations, or he is not. If he is deceiving the nations, then this has not been fulfilled yet.

The point of these passages is to make known that satan is not present when the Messianic Kingdom is present, he is only released at the end of this subsequent age, and for God's sovereign purpose.

So you’re saying the unrepentant sinners who will be alive during the messianic age will not be being influenced by Satan at that time?
They too will be enjoying a life free from satanic deception and influence?

 

[Dave L]

Those are six kings, not ten kings. And they did not rule contemporary with each other, to give their kingdom to the beast and to rule with the beast for one hour..

They are six kings of the 7 heads (kings) in Revelation 17:10. Differently, the ten kings are the ten horns and rule contemporary with each other, i.e. at the same time.

You are doing a copy and paste from a commentary on the bible, that doesn't give the names of the ten kings.

I am asking you to name the ten kings by their actual name, who were living at the time that God setups up his everlasting kingdom here on earth. You say most claim they have already come. So name the ten kings who were here.

The apostles in the books of the New Testament should have named them, by made no mention of them. The names of the twelve apostles are given.

Plus, none of the the apostles named the Antichrist, nor the beast, nor the prince who shall come, nor the little horn.

They didn't because those are all future, as are the ten kings.

What difference does it make? How does this affect anything in this topic?

 

[Dave L]

Yes, satan is still deceiving the nations. There is no mention of covenant relationship, there is no mention of the unrepentant sharing in anything. The passage simply speaks of the presence and activity of satan. Satan is either deceiving the nations, or he is not. If he is deceiving the nations, then this has not been fulfilled yet.

The point of these passages is to make known that satan is not present when the Messianic Kingdom is present, he is only released at the end of this subsequent age, and for God's sovereign purpose.

If flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom, only saints in glorified bodies are there for Satan to deceive and cause to fight each other.

 

[Douggg]

What difference does it make? How does this affect anything in this topic?

You are referring to chronology that leads up to the end. You are making statments that the Kingdom of God is strictly spiritual and that there will be no kingdom of God physically ruling over the nations, present on the earth and ruling over them

So since you say the Kingdom of God is spiritual, and in Daniel 2 it says in the days of these kings, referring to the ten toes in Daniel 2, which are the ten kings in Daniel 7 - you should be able to name the ten kings by name, as well as the little horn person who comes up amongst them.

But you cannot name the names of the ten kings - because the statement you make and concept you have that the Kingdom of God is strictly spiritual and will never be a physical kingdom to rule over the nations here on earth - is wrong.

 

[Dave L]

You are referring to chronology that leads up to the end. You are making statments that the Kingdom of God is strictly spiritual and that there will be no kingdom of God physically ruling over the nations, present on the earth and ruling over them

So since you say the Kingdom of God is spiritual, and in Daniel 2 it says in the days of these kings, referring to the ten toes in Daniel 2, which are the ten kings in Daniel 7 - you should be able to name the ten kings by name, as well as the little horn person who comes up amongst them.

But you cannot name the names of the ten kings - because the statement you make and concept you have that the Kingdom of God is strictly spiritual and will never be a physical kingdom to rule over the nations here on earth - is wrong.

The problem is, most of this has been fulfilled. And your gap theory is lousing you up thinking it is future. You have zero scripture to base your claims on, only a gap scripture says nothing about. You need to drop the false prophecy and climb on board with historic Christendom.

 

[Douggg]

The problem is, most of this has been fulfilled.

A statement is not evidence of it having being fulfilled. The names of the ten kings, the name of the little horn, the name of the Antichrist - would be evidence of end times prophecies fulfilled.

And your gap theory is lousing you up thinking it is future. You have zero scripture to base your claims on, only a gap scripture says nothing about. You need to drop the false prophecy and climb on board with historic Christendom.

Futurists rely on unfulfilled scripture for their view. Historists rely on claims that end times prophecies have been fullfilled, but can't name the persons involved - no evidence. Differently, Futurists will name names when the prophecies are actual fulfilled.

It is obvious from the lack of evidence from the historist position, that the futurist position is right.

 

[Dave L]

A statement is not evidence of it having being fulfilled. The names of the ten kings, the name of the little horn, the name of the Antichrist - would be evidence of end times prophecies fulfilled.


Futurists rely on unfulfilled scripture for their view. Historists rely on claims that end times prophecies have been fullfilled, butt can't name the persons involved - no evidence. Differently, Futurists will name names when the prophecies are actual fulfilled.

It is obvious from the lack of evidence from the historist position, that the futurist position is right.

Revelation says "things which must shortly come to pass". You say "not so Lord", "it's things which will not happen until several thousands of years have passed".

 

[ItIsFinished!]

What keeps Satan from deceiving other than the gospel?

Being bound for a literal 1,000 years.
Which has not happened YET.
But will.

 

[Dave L]

Being bound for a literal 1,000 years.
Which has not happened YET.
But will.

The gospel binds Satan does it not?

 

[ItIsFinished!]

The Book of Revelation from a futuristic point of view is the only right way to understand eschatology properly.
Other Scripture will not be in harmony with any other approach .
That is why end times prophecy is so controversial.
It doesn't and shouldn't be that (this) way.

 

[Dave L]

The Book of Revelation from a futuristic point of view is the only right way to understand eschatology properly.
Other Scripture will not be in harmony with any other approach .
That is why end times prophecy is so controversial.
It doesn't and shouldn't be that (this) way.

But it was about things shortly coming to pass.

 

[Douggg]

Revelation says "things which must shortly come to pass". You say "not so Lord", "it's things which will not happen until several thousands of years have passed".

No, I haven't said such a thing.

John was writing to the church's. In Jesus's message to the church's those things were taking place right then.

When prophecies have been fulfilled there is evidence that they have been fulfilled. You are lacking evidence, Dave.

 

[Dave L]

No, I haven't said such a thing.

John was writing to the church's. In Jesus's message to the church's those things were taking place right then.

When prophecies have been fulfilled there is evidence that they have been fulfilled. You are lacking evidence, Dave.

You are the one without scriptural backing. And if you can transpose "shortly" into billions of years in the future, you are not to be trusted in anything of a biblical nature.

 

[ThatCanadianDude_88]

So you’re saying the unrepentant sinners who will be alive during the messianic age will not be being influenced by Satan at that time?
They too will be enjoying a life free from satanic deception and influence?

Yes, because that is what Scripture says is to take place. You're laying down your own requirements for what should or shouldn't be allowed to happen, requirements that don't have anything to do with Scripture.

The fundamental issue here is that you do not understand the nature of the Messianic Age, though that is understandable considering your amillenialist views.

 

[ThatCanadianDude_88]

Revelation says "things which must shortly come to pass". You say "not so Lord", "it's things which will not happen until several thousands of years have passed".

In Revelations, Christ told first century churches that He was "coming quickly", does that mean the return of Christ took place in the first century? To interpret this literally is to misunderstand what Christ was saying.

The disciples of Christ themselves also fell into this same misunderstanding, more than once they interpreted the teachings of Christ to mean that the kingdom would appear immediately, did it?

It is problematic to impose strict chronology to the words of Scripture without understanding the context of what's being said. Scripture often condenses prophetic timelines and makes use of prophetic telescoping. Christ knew how much we need to remain sober and vigilant so He often imparted teachings with a spirit of urgency. That doesn't mean we are to take everything literally and interpret it all chronologically, this I believe is error.

 

[Dave L]

In Revelations, Christ told first century churches that He was "coming quickly", does that mean the return of Christ took place in the first century? To interpret this literally is to misunderstand what Christ was saying.

The disciples of Christ themselves also fell into this same misunderstanding, more than once they interpreted the teachings of Christ to mean that the kingdom would appear immediately, did it?

It is problematic to impose strict chronology to the words of Scripture without understanding the context of what's being said. Scripture often condenses prophetic timelines and makes use of prophetic telescoping. Christ knew how much we need to remain sober and vigilant so He often imparted teachings with a spirit of urgency. That doesn't mean we are to take everything literally and interpret it all chronologically, this I believe is error.

“The revelation of Jesus Christ that God gave Him to show His slaves what must quickly take place. He sent it and signified it through His angel to His slave John,” (Revelation 1:1)

 

[ThatCanadianDude_88]

If flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom, only saints in glorified bodies are there for Satan to deceive and cause to fight each other.

Scripture makes it clear that there will be nations and people groups existing during the Messianic Age...that does not mean that they are inheritors of the kingdom of God. We know how it all eventually ends, Revelations 20:9.

I must say, I see a lot of ideas and statements being made that have no bearing on Scripture. Bible study is not meant to be guesswork, nor is it a matter of personal opinion, I am sure you can agree with that.