Daniel 7 helps prove when Revelation 20:4 is meaning

[RandyPNW]

I will agree, it generally refers to a departing...in one place it was used as a departing from Moses. The word apostasia does not specify what is being departed from. That is why in the other passage, Moses was added. In the King James, they were falling away, but did not say what they were falling away from. Here is how apostasia was translated before the KJV.

Let no ma deceave you by eny meanes for the lorde commeth not excepte ther come a departynge fyrst and that that synfnll man be opened ye sonne of perdicion.” (Tyndale Translation, 1534)

Let no man disceaue you by eny meanes. For the LORDE commeth not, excepte the departynge come first, and that Man of Synne be opened, even the sonne of perdicion. (Coverdale Bible, 1535)

Let no man deceaue you by any meanes, for the Lorde shall not come excepte there come a departinge fyrst, & that that synfull man be opened, the sonne of perdicion. (Cranmer Great Bible, 1539)

Let no man deceyue you by any meanes, for the Lord commeth not, except there come a departyng first, and that, that sinful man be opened, the sonne of perdicyon] (Matthew’s Bible 1549)

Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for [that day shall not come,] except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, [euen] the son of perdition. (Beza Bible, 1565)

Let no man deceiue you by any meanes for that day shal not come, except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition. (Geneva Bible, 1575)

Since in verse 3b, the man of sin is revealed, and since verses 6-8 tell us HOW he will be revealed, then the only solution is that somewhere in 3a the restrainer has been taken out of th away.

I can find no other possibility of anything taken out of the way or having departed in 3a other than in the word apostasia.

That leaves only TWO possibilities: either enough people "fall away" (let's suppose they fall away from God) that the Holy Spirit will not have enough people left to work through to restrain or hold back the revealing, OR the sudden departing of the church will take place as in the rapture.

I can easily see people after the rapture, searching the scriptures to find out what just happened, and saying: AHA! That is what Paul was meaning by apostasia! Remember, it is THE apostasia. What Paul must have had in mind is something NO ONE COULD MISS.

If Paul really meant a falling away from God, how would anyone know when enough had fallen away to mean THE falling away? The only way I could see this fit would be if there was a massive falling away in ONE DAY or one week. Only then would it be significant. Also what I find, when people are falling away here in the US and in Europe, MORE people are coming to the Lord in Africa and China, so the church is growing, not shrinking.

In short, I see a very good reason to consider Paul's use of Apostasia as the departing of the church. We will have to ask Him when we get there!

You have a very fair way of dealing with this, and a good attitude. But I don't see the issues the way you do. I don't see the central emphasis on the removal of restraint, and I don't see the Falling Away, or apostasia, as something separate from the revelation of Antichrist.

I see the Falling Away and the revelation of Antichrist as one. The Falling Away of Christian Civilization has been happening for a long time now, and I think we need to be aware of that. But Paul's focus seems to be on how it *must* lead up to the revelation of Antichrist to present a sure sign that Christ is coming soon to destroy him.

As I said before, the removal of restraint appears to be disguised or to be of secondary importance. Paul just wants his readers to know that Christ's Coming is not imminent in the sense that he can come before Antichrist himself is revealed. Christ will come to destroy Antichrist, and not before. Anyway, that is how I read it.

In other words, Antichrist's appearance is presently being restrained so that Christ's Coming itself is not yet fully imminent. We should not expect him "any day," as many Imminency Pretribulationists claim. Instead we are to maintain vigilance every day against satanic deceptions that will keep us unprepared for the Kingdom of righteousness soon to be revealed.

 

[RandyPNW]

What you are missing is that Paul's "coming" is before wrath, while Matthew 24's coming and the Revelation 19 coming is AFTER wrath. They must be talking about two very different comings. In Paul's coming Christ comes only to the air and is hidden in a cloud, while in Matthew 24 coming, after the tribulation of those days, "every eye will see Him." In Paul's coming, He is coming FOR His saints, while in the Matthew 24 coming He is coming WITH His saints.

These seem like artificial distinctions to me. I've done studies to show where the original teaching was in the Bible and how it it given additional details in the NT. All of these teachings are tied together--in particular, the Coming of the Son of Man, which originates in Dan 7.

There are not 2 teachings, Mat 24 and Rev 19. They are exactly the same, and they both refer back to the same source in Dan 7. Both comings follow the tribulations of the Jewish People, who are being punished for their sins. Christ is coming to *restore Israel* and to fulfill God's promises to Abraham.

Jesus is coming with the clouds, ie he is coming down from the clouds of heaven. The clouds do not continue to obscure him when he is revealed. It is not a "secret coming," as Pretribulationists claim. In both cases, Mat 24 and Rev 19, Jesus is *revealed,* and every eye will see him. He will light up the sky from East to West.

Where in Revelation is the Man of sin Revealed as the Antichrist Beast? That would be when He enters the temple and starts the abomination that will lead to desolation. That is in chapter 11 of Revelation. Did you not notice that the Great crowd, too large to number, was seen in heaven in chapter 7? That is four chapters and 3 1/2 years before the man of sin will enter the temple.

2 issues here. 1 is that these visions are, I believe, prolepses, reflecting future events as if they are happening presently, in front of us. For example, in Rev 1 we see Jesus coming with the clouds. This is a prolepsis, showing Jesus as if he is coming presently, in front of us, even though it is actually a prophecy of his future coming.

A number of visions and very many symbols are given to reflect the final apocalyptic event of Jesus' return. He doesn't return many times--these several visions are all saying the same thing adding details that are necessary.

So the Great Multitude from all nations in ch. 7 is a prolepsis, showing Christians being delivered at the 2nd Coming, in my opinion. Trying to put the narrative into a chronological progression is an exercise in futility. Revelation was not given that way. It was a single narrative providing a number of separate visions without a single chronological sequence.

The part about the temple I reject as OT imagery. There will be no NT temple built since Christ fulfilled the temple law for all time.

As to the Abomination of Desolation, I believe that is based on its identification with the Roman Army who destroyed the temple in 70 AD. This comes from Dan 9 and the Olivet Discourse. We simply have different interpretations of these things. Without them a lot of this is answered for me.

I find it strange, everywhere I look, I find evidence of the pretrib rapture and wonder why others do not see it. I think where many miss the truth is they try to morph two FUTURE comings of Christ into ONE coming. It does not work.

If you can quote the Pretrib Rapture in the Bible as *explicit teaching* then I will see it. But what you claim to "see" is simply not there. Pretrib Teaching has to be *read into* various texts. You have to believe, in advance, the allusion of a Pretrib Rapture.

In fact, many Pretrib Teachers have admitted this. They claim that Pretrib Teaching is a mystery revealed by Special Revelation to those with Faith. Nothing could be more dangerous than requiring subjective belief without explicit statements from the Holy Spirit!

 

[RandyPNW]

And you believe this, when Daniel gave us two verses showing a 3 1/2 year period of time, and John in Revelation shows us 5 more: two given as 42 months, two given as 1260 days and one given as Daniel did, in "times" or years. All of these are a 3 1/2 year period of time that is the LAST HALF of the 70th week, all of it still future to us today.

You have to understand the different prophecies as I do to understand my position. Dan 9 does *not* refer to "time, times and half a time!" You are quite wrong about that!

The book of Daniel does refer to the 3.5 years in Dan 7 and in Dan 12. But it is easy to get these 3.5 years confused with references to the reign of Antiochus 4, whose reign of terror was also approx. 3.5 years!

Dan 8 and Dan 12 identify periods of time that relate to Antiochus 4, in particular the 1290 days mentioned in Dan 12. You will notice that two different sets of time are given in ch. 12, the "time, times and half a time" and the "1290 days." One applies to the Antichrist, and the other to Antiochus 4, in my opinion.

So the primary source of Antichrist's 3.5 years comes from Dan 7. Dan 9, by contrast, speaks of the 1st Coming of Christ and of the destruction of Jerusalem at that time. There is no "time, times and half a time" in Dan 9!

WE find these mentions of the 3 1/2 years, in chapters 11, 12, and 13. These are therefore midpoint chapters. I found the exact midpoint, marked with the 7th Trumpet. You will notice, very soon after the 7th trumpet is sounded, those in Judea begin to flee, 12:6.

You need to take meds if you're hearing voices like that! If your "revelations" don't fit with Scriptures, you need to reject those "voices!"

You said, "I don't believe Daniel's 70th Week has anything to do with the book of Revelation at all!" All I can add is, your thinking about Revelation is vastly different than Jesus' thinking. He showed me that the entire 70th week is in Revelation, from chapter 8 to chapter 16.

So you think your teaching is the equivalent of Jesus? Sounds like you're puffed up in pride? I'm going to follow my conscience, as well as my understanding of Scriptures. The 70th Week was completed within a period of 70 Weeks of years from King Artaxerxes' proclamation in 457 BC.

This isn't even close for me. The passage spells out what Messiah would do--things that happened at the cross. And the prophecy spells out the main focus is on the destruction of the temple one more time, which happened in 70 AD at the hands of the Roman Army, which made them the Abomination of Desolation.

I'm not insisting you agree with me. But I don't accept things simply because you're the equivalent of "Jesus" and "Jesus spoke to you."

One thing I wonder about: how could you come to believe Revelation was fulfilled at Christ's first coming, when John received this vision around 95 AD and was told God would show him "things to come?"

I never said the book of Revelation was fulfilled at Christ's 1st Coming! I said the 70 Weeks prophecy was fulfilled at Christ's 1st Coming! If you're going to argue my beliefs, you need to properly understand what I do believe.

 

[claninja]

Again, I don't understand your use of the language "conspiracy theory?" I'm using a particular interpretation of a passage, and not conspiring at all!

My belief that Roman Civilization extended beyond the Eastern and Western branches of the old Roman Empire is a reality. Whether you can call European Civilization "the Roman Kingdom" simply because it is part of Roman Civilization is debatable, and I've not said otherwise. But it is *not* a conspiracy!

Yes, a conspiracy theory by its very definition.

you’ve already admitted the empire fell and even provided historical dates for it.

Still can’t follow your logic of how modern Europe is actually the Roman Empire. Why can’t it be the Greek empire based on your criteria?

None of your verses indicate the Antichrist "existed"--past tense, during the ancient Roman Empire. What they do indicate is that the entire age is characterized by AntiChristian deception, ie there have been and will be many Antichrists before the anticipated Antichrist actually arrives.

incorrect, the antichrist was In the world, in the first century, per John, THATS HOW JOHN KNEW IT WAS THE LAST HOUR

“but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.”

“I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.”

“18Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come.”

Saying the "spirit of Antichrist" is already here is not the same thing as saying the Antichrist himself is here. Saying there have already been many Antichrists is not the same thing as saying THE Antichrist has already come. We very much disagree on this. And I don't believe it's wrong at all.

says who? Where does scripture ever say you heard “the” antichrist is coming? And why would anyone in John’s audience understand antichrist as different than the spirit of the antichrist when the antichrist is defined as anyone who denies the father and the son?

Again it’s still a biblical fact that the spirit of the antichrist and antichrists existed in the first century despite you arguing some “the” antichrist hadn’t arrived yet.

Roman Empire. But he certainly did not bring with him the promised Messianic Kingdom. That remains "near."

But he did.

mark 9:1 1And he said to them, “Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.”

 

[Douggg]

You have to understand the different prophecies as I do to understand my position. Dan 9 does *not* refer to "time, times and half a time!" You are quite wrong about that!

The book of Daniel does refer to the 3.5 years in Dan 7 and in Dan 12. But it is easy to get these 3.5 years confused with references to the reign of Antiochus 4, whose reign of terror was also approx. 3.5 years!

Dan 8 and Dan 12 identify periods of time that relate to Antiochus 4, in particular the 1290 days mentioned in Dan 12. You will notice that two different sets of time are given in ch. 12, the "time, times and half a time" and the "1290 days." One applies to the Antichrist, and the other to Antiochus 4, in my opinion.

So the primary source of Antichrist's 3.5 years comes from Dan 7. Dan 9, by contrast, speaks of the 1st Coming of Christ and of the destruction of Jerusalem at that time. There is no "time, times and half a time" in Dan 9!



You need to take meds if you're hearing voices like that! If your "revelations" don't fit with Scriptures, you need to reject those "voices!"



So you think your teaching is the equivalent of Jesus? Sounds like you're puffed up in pride? I'm going to follow my conscience, as well as my understanding of Scriptures. The 70th Week was completed within a period of 70 Weeks of years from King Artaxerxes' proclamation in 457 BC.

This isn't even close for me. The passage spells out what Messiah would do--things that happened at the cross. And the prophecy spells out the main focus is on the destruction of the temple one more time, which happened in 70 AD at the hands of the Roman Army, which made them the Abomination of Desolation.

I'm not insisting you agree with me. But I don't accept things simply because you're the equivalent of "Jesus" and "Jesus spoke to you."



I never said the book of Revelation was fulfilled at Christ's 1st Coming! I said the 70 Weeks prophecy was fulfilled at Christ's 1st Coming! If you're going to argue my beliefs, you need to properly understand what I do believe.

Randy, please go back and edit your post #63. In constructing your post, you mistakenly quoted me as saying certain things. It was not me. You got me mixed up with somebody else.

 

[grafted branch]

The saints that possessed the Kingdom of heaven are those Old Covenant saints who believed the prophesy about the Messiah coming. They are the faithful of old going with Christ after His resurrection to heaven. Now since Christ came and emptied the place in the grave before Christ came, called Abraham's bosom, now all believers leave our physical body and go as living (spirit) soul to heaven where we wait until time shall be no more for this earth.

I think I agree with most of what you said, although I’m not fully convinced that all of Sheol was cleaned out in Matthew 27:52-53.

I’m not dogmatic about this but we have Acts 2:29 which states David’s sepulcher remained at that time and Acts 2:34 which says David is not ascended into the heavens. Also Matthew 27:52 uses the words “many of the saints” which would imply not all the saints arose.

Again, I’m not dogmatic about it and don’t want to argue one way or the other but it does seem possible that some were still in Sheol at the time of Acts 2.

 

[grafted branch]

All I can say is, Daniel and John in Revelation tell us very specifically that during the 42 months of the Beast's authority believers will be overcome.

Well it doesn’t say believers, it says saints. My argument is that national Israel was referred to as saints and Israel was also described as saints (without using the word saints) in the Old Testament.

One might (and probably should) ask, "how can this be" when we have been given authority over the devil. I am reminded of what happened a few years ago: a dozen believers with their arms tied behind their back, lined up and beheaded. It is a sad fact that has been repeated countless times since Stephen was murdered. Why didn't God rescue them? We will have to ask Him when we see Him. All I can say is, we live in the devil's world. God never promised a rapture every time a believer was captured.

If being physically killed is considered as being overcome then believers have been overcome for much longer than 42 months. Paul didn’t consider death as being overcome in Philippians 1:20-21; why should we consider death as being overcome for only the 42 months of the beast?

 

[grafted branch]

I think it is easy to see if we consider there is a physical world and a spiritual world. When a saint is murdered, they are overcome physically, in the natural realm. Since they are born again, their spirit will go to heaven. In the realm of the spirit, according to Paul, that is GAIN.

The only way a saint can be overcome in the realm of the spirit is if they get so far into sin that they CHOOSE to turn away from God and despise the urging of the Holy Spirit.

Where in the Bible does it say that we should consider our physical condition as being overcome?

 

[rwb]

I will agree, it generally refers to a departing...in one place it was used as a departing from Moses. The word apostasia does not specify what is being departed from. That is why in the other passage, Moses was added. In the King James, they were falling away, but did not say what they were falling away from. Here is how apostasia was translated before the KJV.

Let no ma deceave you by eny meanes for the lorde commeth not excepte ther come a departynge fyrst and that that synfnll man be opened ye sonne of perdicion.” (Tyndale Translation, 1534)

Let no man disceaue you by eny meanes. For the LORDE commeth not, excepte the departynge come first, and that Man of Synne be opened, even the sonne of perdicion. (Coverdale Bible, 1535)

Let no man deceaue you by any meanes, for the Lorde shall not come excepte there come a departinge fyrst, & that that synfull man be opened, the sonne of perdicion. (Cranmer Great Bible, 1539)

Let no man deceyue you by any meanes, for the Lord commeth not, except there come a departyng first, and that, that sinful man be opened, the sonne of perdicyon] (Matthew’s Bible 1549)

Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for [that day shall not come,] except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, [euen] the son of perdition. (Beza Bible, 1565)

Let no man deceiue you by any meanes for that day shal not come, except there come a departing first, and that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition. (Geneva Bible, 1575)

Since in verse 3b, the man of sin is revealed, and since verses 6-8 tell us HOW he will be revealed, then the only solution is that somewhere in 3a the restrainer has been taken out of th away.

I can find no other possibility of anything taken out of the way or having departed in 3a other than in the word apostasia.

That leaves only TWO possibilities: either enough people "fall away" (let's suppose they fall away from God) that the Holy Spirit will not have enough people left to work through to restrain or hold back the revealing, OR the sudden departing of the church will take place as in the rapture.

I can easily see people after the rapture, searching the scriptures to find out what just happened, and saying: AHA! That is what Paul was meaning by apostasia! Remember, it is THE apostasia. What Paul must have had in mind is something NO ONE COULD MISS.

If Paul really meant a falling away from God, how would anyone know when enough had fallen away to mean THE falling away? The only way I could see this fit would be if there was a massive falling away in ONE DAY or one week. Only then would it be significant. Also what I find, when people are falling away here in the US and in Europe, MORE people are coming to the Lord in Africa and China, so the church is growing, not shrinking.

In short, I see a very good reason to consider Paul's use of Apostasia as the departing of the church. We will have to ask Him when we get there!

I too have come to understand the departing is speaking of the believers being caught up to meet the Lord in the air. The Church through the Gospel restrains sin. Because when the Gospel is preached and unsaved man hears, repents and believes he/she is no longer condemned by sin. Therefore, sin is certainly being restrained. The time will come when the Church, therefore the Gospel will be taken out of the way, because the Kingdom will be complete, and the last (seventh) trumpet will begin to sound. That will be the second coming of Christ. Then the man of sin will be revealed and destroyed, and the heavens and earth also destroyed by fire.

I also agree that Paul does not use apostasy as a falling away from the Church, because people have been falling away from the beginning. Even John writes of this happening of those who depart from believers because they did not belong. It is the departing of the Church from this earth that make it abundantly clear that the Lord has come again.

1 John 2:19 (KJV) They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

 

[rwb]

I think I agree with most of what you said, although I’m not fully convinced that all of Sheol was cleaned out in Matthew 27:52-53.

I’m not dogmatic about this but we have Acts 2:29 which states David’s sepulcher remained at that time and Acts 2:34 which says David is not ascended into the heavens. Also Matthew 27:52 uses the words “many of the saints” which would imply not all the saints arose.

Again, I’m not dogmatic about it and don’t want to argue one way or the other but it does seem possible that some were still in Sheol at the time of Acts 2.

Only that part of the grave that held righteous dead of Old. And only their living (spirit) souls ascended with Christ to heaven. The physical body returned to dust, even King David's, which is what Acts 2:29 is alluding to. Believers' bodies will not be resurrected and made immortal and incorruptible until Christ comes again. Yes, Matthew 27:52 could not say the bodies of 'all' saints arose, because all believers had not at that time physically died.

When Christ was resurrected Paul says, He became the firstfruits of them that slept (died). But the hour is coming when every body of every human will be resurrected, some to resurrection life, and the rest to resurrection of condemnation.

1 Corinthians 15:20 (KJV) But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

John 5:25-29 (KJV) Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

 

[rwb]

All I can say is, Daniel and John in Revelation tell us very specifically that during the 42 months of the Beast's authority believers will be overcome.

How do we know specifically when there will be a literal 42 months of the beast's authority, since believers have been overcome by the beast from the beginning of the Messianic age? Could it be that 42 months symbolize time given to the beast and 1260 days given to the Church for witnessing throughout this age of TIME likened to a thousand years, and the Day of the Lord? Not consecutive time, but the fullness of time given both equaling time, times and the dividing/half of time?

 

[DavidPT]

The woman who flees into the wilderness in Revelation 12 is saved, I think we are in agreement on this, but woman isn’t specifically called the saints.

While I would agree that the 3.5 years, 1260 days, and time times and 1/2 time could all be pointing to the same period of time, I don’t necessarily think that has to be the case. I don’t think all the instances where we see this can all fit into just one half of the seventieth week.

I don't disagree with this. I only used those 2 verses in Revelation 12 to show that they help us determine what is meant by a time, times, and the dividing of time.

 

[DavidPT]

How do we know specifically when there will be a literal 42 months of the beast's authority, since believers have been overcome by the beast from the beginning of the Messianic age? Could it be that 42 months symbolize time given to the beast and 1260 days given to the Church for witnessing throughout this age of TIME likened to a thousand years, and the Day of the Lord? Not consecutive time, but the fullness of time given both equaling time, times and the dividing/half of time?

This is strange logic that a short period of time could somehow be expressing a long period of time. In no universe is 42 months similar to a thousand years. If the thousand years pertain to this age, it would obviously mean that this 42 months pertain to satan's little season after the thousand years. It certainly wouldn't parallel the thousand years nor be equal to it in length.

 

[rwb]

This is strange logic that a short period of time could somehow be expressing a long period of time. In no universe is 42 months similar to a thousand years. If the thousand years pertain to this age, it would obviously mean that this 42 months pertain to satan's little season after the thousand years. It certainly wouldn't parallel the thousand years nor be equal to it in length.

You're not reading what I wrote David. Both the 42 months and the 1260 days are times within time that spans the two advents of Christ. These symbolic times given for both building and destroying are NOT consecutive.

I'll give you an example of what I believe. Using this symbolic time, the beast is given in this Messianic age, the devil comes against the church of Smyrna, casting some of them into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days (Rev 2:10). This is time used to destroy, trying to prevent the Kingdom from being complete. This time then is given to the beast and is symbolized as 42 months. It is NOT literally 42 months, but symbolizes time given for Satan to attack Christ and His Church. Every time we read of the beast, Satan, the devil, false prophet etc. attacking Christians as we proclaim the Gospel, that time is symbolized 42 months.

Why do I believe this is how to define both the 42 symbolic months and the symbolic 1260 day? Because Christ tells us in this Messianic age as the Gospel is sent unto all the world, there will be "great tribulation" coming against it. But, we also have His promise that these times of "great tribulation" will be cut short for the sake of the elect or no flesh would be saved.

As we look at the history of the Church on earth, we find many examples of this truth. Again and again we read of martyrdom for Christians, but in every example the evil does not succeed in preventing the Kingdom of heaven from being built because the Church on earth has its time for building also. Never in any of the examples of persecution against the Church on earth has evil ever been able to keep the Church from continuing to proclaim the Gospel. The persecution in most instances if not every instance has only served to make the Church stronger and more determined to take the Gospel unto all the earth. There has never throughout human history been any greater tribulation than what the Church on earth has endured and still survives almost two thousand years later, nor will there ever again be such "great tribulation" on this earth.

 

[DavidPT]

You're not reading what I wrote David. Both the 42 months and the 1260 days are times within time that spans the two advents of Christ. These symbolic times given for both building and destroying are NOT consecutive.

I'll give you an example of what I believe. Using this symbolic time, the beast is given in this Messianic age, the devil comes against the church of Smyrna, casting some of them into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days (Rev 2:10). This is time used to destroy, trying to prevent the Kingdom from being complete. This time then is given to the beast and is symbolized as 42 months. It is NOT literally 42 months, but symbolizes time given for Satan to attack Christ and His Church. Every time we read of the beast, Satan, the devil, false prophet etc. attacking Christians as we proclaim the Gospel, that time is symbolized 42 months.

Why do I believe this is how to define both the 42 symbolic months and the symbolic 1260 day? Because Christ tells us in this Messianic age as the Gospel is sent unto all the world, there will be "great tribulation" coming against it. But, we also have His promise that these times of "great tribulation" will be cut short for the sake of the elect or no flesh would be saved.

As we look at the history of the Church on earth, we find many examples of this truth. Again and again we read of martyrdom for Christians, but in every example the evil does not succeed in preventing the Kingdom of heaven from being built because the Church on earth has its time for building also. Never in any of the examples of persecution against the Church on earth has evil ever been able to keep the Church from continuing to proclaim the Gospel. The persecution in most instances if not every instance has only served to make the Church stronger and more determined to take the Gospel unto all the earth. There has never throughout human history been any greater tribulation than what the Church on earth has endured and still survives almost two thousand years later, nor will there ever again be such "great tribulation" on this earth.

You're not being logical then. I'm willing to entertain anything as long as it is at least logical.

The following proves that you are wrong to apply the 42 months like this.

Revelation 16:2 And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.

When do they receive the mark and are worshiping it's image? When all of the following is fulfilled first.


Revelation 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority
3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed : and all the world wondered after the beast.
Revelation 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months

Revelation 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon
12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Let's now let's look at Revelation 16:2 again.


Revelation 16:2 And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.

Logically explain how anyone receiving the mark, and worshiping his image, during it's 42 month reign, can have a noisome and grievous sore upon fall upon them if they are not all living in the same era of time? Does not the text indicate that happens to those men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image? Wouldn't it be a lie if there are men which had the mark of the beast, and which worshipped his image, but that this vial was never poured out on them because they did not live during the era of time the first vial is poured out?

If we have the 42 months spanning an era of time involving hundreds or thousands of years, it contradicts what is recorded in Revelation 16:2. Assuming Christ returns sometime in the 21st century, thus this vial is poured out sometime in the 21st century, how would that affect others in the past who allegedly also had the mark, and was alledgedly worshiping it's image, say in the first century, or the 2nd century, etc? It wouldn't. There is zero way to apply Revelation 16:2 to hundreds or thousands of years, therefore, the 42 months have to be involving an era of time where everyone that has the mark, so that what's recorded in Revelation 16:2 can happen to them all.

 

[rwb]

You're not being logical then. I'm willing to entertain anything as long as it is at least logical.

The following proves that you are wrong to apply the 42 months like this.

Revelation 16:2 And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.

When do they receive the mark and are worshiping it's image? When all of the following is fulfilled first.

Revelation 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority
3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed : and all the world wondered after the beast.
Revelation 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months

Revelation 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon
12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed
13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live
15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Let's now let's look at Revelation 16:2 again.

Revelation 16:2 And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.

Logically explain how anyone receiving the mark, and worshiping his image, during it's 42 month reign, can have a noisome and grievous sore upon fall upon them if they are not all living in the same era of time? Does not the text indicate that happens to those men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image? Wouldn't it be a lie if there are men which had the mark of the beast, and which worshipped his image, but that this vial was never poured out on them because they did not live during the era of time the first vial is poured out?

If we have the 42 months spanning an era of time involving hundreds or thousands of years, it contradicts what is recorded in Revelation 16:2. Assuming Christ returns sometime in the 21st century, thus this vial is poured out sometime in the 21st century, how would that affect others in the past who allegedly also had the mark, and was alledgedly worshiping it's image, say in the first century, or the 2nd century, etc? It wouldn't. There is zero way to apply Revelation 16:2 to hundreds or thousands of years, therefore, the 42 months have to be involving an era of time where everyone that has the mark, so that what's recorded in Revelation 16:2 can happen to them all.

David, I would love to give an answer to you, but in all honesty, I cannot figure out what exactly you're arguing??? Do you believe that unbelievers must receive the mark of the beast at an appointed time, and if they do not, they have not received it??? Are you arguing for chronological order of Revelation???

 

[iamlamad]

You have a very fair way of dealing with this, and a good attitude. But I don't see the issues the way you do. I don't see the central emphasis on the removal of restraint, and I don't see the Falling Away, or apostasia, as something separate from the revelation of Antichrist.

I see the Falling Away and the revelation of Antichrist as one. The Falling Away of Christian Civilization has been happening for a long time now, and I think we need to be aware of that. But Paul's focus seems to be on how it *must* lead up to the revelation of Antichrist to present a sure sign that Christ is coming soon to destroy him.

As I said before, the removal of restraint appears to be disguised or to be of secondary importance. Paul just wants his readers to know that Christ's Coming is not imminent in the sense that he can come before Antichrist himself is revealed. Christ will come to destroy Antichrist, and not before. Anyway, that is how I read it.

In other words, Antichrist's appearance is presently being restrained so that Christ's Coming itself is not yet fully imminent. We should not expect him "any day," as many Imminency Pretribulationists claim. Instead we are to maintain vigilance every day against satanic deceptions that will keep us unprepared for the Kingdom of righteousness soon to be revealed.

Randy, HOW can they be "one" when the revealing cannot happen until the departing takes place FIRST. This alone proves the two cannot be one, for one is dependant upon the other.

Verses 6-8 tells us that what must happen first is the significant departing. Then, after the restraining force has been taken out of the way, THEN (and only then) will be the man of sin be revealed.

Christ will come to destroy Antichrist, and not before. Anyway, that is how I read it.

(Emphasis added.)

If this were the only verses on this subject, there would be far more disagreements! Thankfully, God has given us several more passages on this subject. We have to understand difficult passages such as 2 thes. 2, from simpler passages such as 1 Thes. 4 & 5.

As I see it, God waited a sufficient time after Christ's resurrection for Israel as a nation to accept Him as their Messiah. When they refused, God put blindness in part on the Jews and sent Paul to the Gentiles. Further, I am convinced that their 70th week would have taken place shortly after that had they accepted Jesus as their Messiah. Therefore, I see the Gentile church of today as a parenthesis inserted into Jewish time. This theory is further advanced because right after the pretrib rapture, the 70th week will take place.

Another proof that Christ will come again ONLY for the Gentile (mostly) church of today is that John SAW the church in heaven right after the start of the Day of His Wrath.

Did you ever wonder why John stopped his narrative of the seals between the 6th and 7th and went into an intermission? I wondered so much, I kept bugging God about it. I believe He answered, but not in words.

Have you ever watched a play where they close the curtain between acts of the play? What happens behind the curtain when they close it? They (the actors and helpers) are rearranging the setting to FIT the next act.

I am convinced that is what God did in the vision and what John did when he wrote. What was the previous "act?" It was the church age that ended with the 6th seal start of the Day. God closed the curtain to rearrange the setting for the next act: the start of the 70th week of Daniel that will begin at the 7th seal and with the first trumpet judgment.

What then must be rearranged to be ready for the next act: the time of Jacob's trouble? God must see TWO events take place before He will allow the HURT to come upon the earth.
1. God must see the 144,000 are sealed for their protection.
2. God must see the CHURCH in the throne room of heaven, safe away from His wrath.

When God sees these events take place, then the 70th week will begin.

This is why God showed John the just-raptured church in heaven before the Week begins.

This is why 1 Thes. 4 shows ANOTHER previous coming before His coming to Armageddon. He comes first FOR His church, then comes again WITH His church.

 

[iamlamad]

You're not reading what I wrote David. Both the 42 months and the 1260 days are times within time that spans the two advents of Christ. These symbolic times given for both building and destroying are NOT consecutive.

I'll give you an example of what I believe. Using this symbolic time, the beast is given in this Messianic age, the devil comes against the church of Smyrna, casting some of them into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days (Rev 2:10). This is time used to destroy, trying to prevent the Kingdom from being complete. This time then is given to the beast and is symbolized as 42 months. It is NOT literally 42 months, but symbolizes time given for Satan to attack Christ and His Church. Every time we read of the beast, Satan, the devil, false prophet etc. attacking Christians as we proclaim the Gospel, that time is symbolized 42 months.

Why do I believe this is how to define both the 42 symbolic months and the symbolic 1260 day? Because Christ tells us in this Messianic age as the Gospel is sent unto all the world, there will be "great tribulation" coming against it. But, we also have His promise that these times of "great tribulation" will be cut short for the sake of the elect or no flesh would be saved.

As we look at the history of the Church on earth, we find many examples of this truth. Again and again we read of martyrdom for Christians, but in every example the evil does not succeed in preventing the Kingdom of heaven from being built because the Church on earth has its time for building also. Never in any of the examples of persecution against the Church on earth has evil ever been able to keep the Church from continuing to proclaim the Gospel. The persecution in most instances if not every instance has only served to make the Church stronger and more determined to take the Gospel unto all the earth. There has never throughout human history been any greater tribulation than what the Church on earth has endured and still survives almost two thousand years later, nor will there ever again be such "great tribulation" on this earth.

Now I am beginning to see where you are coming from, so to speak. You are making something symbolic when it was meant by God and by John to be taken literally.

The first proof of this is found in Daniel 7, when the last half of the 70th week is written to be time, times and half of time or 3 1/2 years.

Second, in Daniel 12, again he wrote of the last half of the week (a 7 year period of time) as time, times and half of time.

Third, Daniel added a 30 day period of time to the last half of the week as 1290 days.

Fourth, Daniel added another 45 days to the 1290 adding 75 days to the 1260.

Fifth, in Revelation 11, John wrote of the 42 months of trampling by Gentiles. (I think Gentile armies came to Jerusalem with the man of sin who will turn beast.)

Sixth, John wrote of the 1260 days of witnessing.

Seventh, John wrote of the 1260 days of fleeing.

Eight, John wrote of the time, times and half of time of protection for those who fled.

Ninth, John wrote of the 42 months of Authority of the Beast.

Count them up! That is NINE proofs we have that the last half of the 70th week is future to us and will be 1260 days, with some significant event taking place 30 days later (I believe that is when Jesus will return) and then another significant event 45 days after that. That could be the start of the Millennial Reign of Christ. It could be the dedication of the temple. God chose not to tell us.

Since 42 months equals 1260 days and equals 3 1/2 years, I think we have ample proof these numbers are meant to be taken literally. Then I have Jesus' words spoken directly to me that the five countdowns written in Revelation are all for the last half of the 70th week.

Since I found the midpoint in chapter 11 of Revelation and the trumpets before that, it just makes sense that the first half of the week will be taken up with the first 6 trumpets.

 

[iamlamad]

These seem like artificial distinctions to me. I've done studies to show where the original teaching was in the Bible and how it it given additional details in the NT. All of these teachings are tied together--in particular, the Coming of the Son of Man, which originates in Dan 7.

Daniel knew NOTHING of the Gentile church of today. He was a Jew and was giving future events for the Jews.

When Jesus gave His end times discourse, still at that time the Gentile church of today was a MYSTERY hidden in the Father. I doubt very much if Jesus knew at that time that Israel was going to reject Him as their Messiah - even after He rose from the dead - that God was going to get fed up (so to speak) with the Jews and put blindness on them and go after the Gentiles to take out a people for His name.

When Paul received the revelation of the Rapture of the church, the catching up of those who were alive and in Christ was a MYSTERY. While Jesus was alive, we know Mary and Martha believed in a resurrection day - probably from Daniel 12, but they knew nothing of the Gentile church of today.

God chose to put blindness upon the Jews and went after ME - a Gentile - and I will always love Him for that. It is as if God placed the Gentile church of today AS A PARENTHESIS into the Jewish timeline. Paul understood this. In other words, 1 Thes. 4, is ONLY for the Gentile church of today - all who are born again. (Some Jews have been born again and added to the church, but they have become ONE with the rest of the body of Christ.)

Paul wrote that HE was sent to the Gentiles, while the eleven would minster to the lost sheep of Israel. Therefore, when we want information about the Gentile church, for the most part, we read Paul's epistles.

All this is when the coming Paul talked about - a coming ONLY to the air - is strictly concerning the Gentile church. It is for US - Gentiles. It is not in any way related to His coming to Armageddon as written in Matthew 24 and Revelation 19. In fact, there are verses that tell us when He comes to Armageddon, He will come WITH His saints.

 

[iamlamad]

There are not 2 teachings, Mat 24 and Rev 19. They are exactly the same, and they both refer back to the same source in Dan 7. Both comings follow the tribulations of the Jewish People, who are being punished for their sins. Christ is coming to *restore Israel* and to fulfill God's promises to Abraham.

I agree with everything you wrote there. However, Christ will certainly come over seven years before this for His Gentile church. This is the coming Paul wrote of. There is no connection between the two comings except Jesus will come both times, but in 1 Thes. only to the clouds and then return to heaven with His church.

In other words, Matthew 24 cannot be compared with 1 Thes. 4 & 5. These are two separate comings for two separate purposes.