Prophecy and History

[Timtofly]

Ramm was a believer in Scriptural authority and inspiration. He's dead. You aren't interested in checking your work. You should dispose of your spell-checker too?

And the topic is not me.

If you wish to discuss this person you introduced, then you are going to have to post what he wrote instead of just criticizing my posting ability.

I have never claimed my posts are perfect.

 

[RandyPNW]

And the topic is not me.

If you wish to discuss this person you introduced, then you are going to have to post what he wrote instead of just criticizing my posting ability.

I have never claimed my posts are perfect.

Timothy, I'm *not* criticizing your posts. I'm suggesting that your throwing out Ramm, as if he isn't worth his salt, is an indication you don't wish to consider any rebuttals--not even from conservative scholars who believe the Bible, as well as a scientist, I believe.

I would just be giving you his positions by memory, unless I want to do a search for his book in my library (which I could do). But as I recall, he explained that biblical language is sometimes misunderstood in the sense we sometimes look at things from our modern scientific point of view, whereas the primitive writing was more an exercise in local observation.

If I see a massive downpour, and as far as I could see the waters covered the land, I would say that all the land under heaven was covered with water, not meaning the entire planet, but all the land within eyesight.

Ramm argues that stupendous miracles of course are possible with God, but unlikely in view of the evidence that certain parts of the earth have ancient volcanoes that have never been disturbed by a global flood. Not only that, but the likelihood of fitting all of creatural and plant life in the ark to preserve it all is next to impossible.

Well, it *is* impossible. Ramm goes to some length to explain what creatures need to survive in terms of depth, salt or not, food, temperatures, etc. What likely happened is that Noah was asked to preserve all of the basic land animals in his region as symbolic of God's wish to preserve man's environment so that God doesn't have to start all over again creating man and his world.

 

[Timtofly]

Timothy, I'm *not* criticizing your posts. I'm suggesting that your throwing out Ramm, as if he isn't worth his salt, is an indication you don't wish to consider any rebuttals--not even from conservative scholars who believe the Bible, as well as a scientist, I believe.

I would just be giving you his positions by memory, unless I want to do a search for his book in my library (which I could do). But as I recall, he explained that biblical language is sometimes misunderstood in the sense we sometimes look at things from our modern scientific point of view, whereas the primitive writing was more an exercise in local observation.

If I see a massive downpour, and as far as I could see the waters covered the land, I would say that all the land under heaven was covered with water, not meaning the entire planet, but all the land within eyesight.

Ramm argues that stupendous miracles of course are possible with God, but unlikely in view of the evidence that certain parts of the earth have ancient volcanoes that have never been disturbed by a global flood. Not only that, but the likelihood of fitting all of creatural and plant life in the ark to preserve it all is next to impossible.

Well, it *is* impossible. Ramm goes to some length to explain what creatures need to survive in terms of depth, salt or not, food, temperatures, etc. What likely happened is that Noah was asked to preserve all of the basic land animals in his region as symbolic of God's wish to preserve man's environment so that God doesn't have to start all over again creating man and his world.

Anything that has changed like volcanos, happened after the Flood. There were no volcanos prior to the Flood.

I pointed out that Genesis was written from God's perspective, not any particular human.

If the Flood was local, why would God have to start all over again? The point of Noah and the Ark was that everything started over again from Noah and those on the ark. If God did not wish to start over, there would never have been a Flood period, local or not.

In other words, God could have killed all the locals, and people from other places would just resettle the area. No need to preserve the life in one area, if there was plenty to go around in other areas. You may as well say, God killed off all the other areas, there was no Flood, but Noah and his area were spared. They then spread out across the earth from there.

Genesis states that the whole earth from that point came from Noah and his three sons. The whole point was that everyone and everything was destroyed accept Noah and the animals with Noah.

 

[RandyPNW]

Anything that has changed like volcanos, happened after the Flood. There were no volcanos prior to the Flood.

I pointed out that Genesis was written from God's perspective, not any particular human.

If the Flood was local, why would God have to start all over again? The point of Noah and the Ark was that everything started over again from Noah and those on the ark. If God did not wish to start over, there would never have been a Flood period, local or not.

In other words, God could have killed all the locals, and people from other places would just resettle the area. No need to preserve the life in one area, if there was plenty to go around in other areas. You may as well say, God killed off all the other areas, there was no Flood, but Noah and his area were spared. They then spread out across the earth from there.

Genesis states that the whole earth from that point came from Noah and his three sons. The whole point was that everyone and everything was destroyed accept Noah and the animals with Noah.

You don't think there were any mountains formed before the Flood? Did you know Ararat was mentioned--a mountainous area? Did you know that ancient volcanoes can be aged, can be given a relative date? If the Flood was less than 10,000 years, BC, it wasn't old enough to match the age of some of these volcanoes, according to Ram.

You say the Bible was written from "God's point of view?" What does that mean? God had the Bible written by men who wrote for men. It wasn't written so that only heaven would understand!

What I said is that an entire region was exterminated--probably around the Black Sea, to show God's displeasure with sin. In fact He ultimately plans to exterminate sin from the earth, but not yet. If God had flooded the entire globe, no life would've survived, and God would've had to create all over again. He wasn't going to do that. He wanted to save humanity.

 

[iamlamad]

I wish I had a dollar for every time someone said, "God told me." If you can't base your argument on, "the Scriptures says," then you're wasting your time with me.

You may or may not need a dollar for every time, but you should believe the written scripture below.

The scripture says:
11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

12:14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

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.

Jesus words to me: Jesus' words spoken to me: "Every time I mentioned an event that would begin at the midpoint and go to the end of the week, I always included the three and a half year period of time."

Do you see the "three and a half year period of time" in each of these verses? Jesus was making reference to these very verses. Why do you find it so difficult to believe Jesus talks to people? Why especially when it is plain to see He was talking about plain scriptures?

I blame those dreaded preconceived glasses so many people wear when they read scriptures. I suspect that what these verses clearly show, disagrees with your theories. These 5 countdowns from the midpoint to the end of the week clearly prove that chapters 11, 12, and 13 are MIDPOINT chapters. Can we at least agree on this point?

 

[iamlamad]

You don't think there were any mountains formed before the Flood? Did you know Ararat was mentioned--a mountainous area? Did you know that ancient volcanoes can be aged, can be given a relative date? If the Flood was less than 10,000 years, BC, it wasn't old enough to match the age of some of these volcanoes, according to Ram.

You say the Bible was written from "God's point of view?" What does that mean? God had the Bible written by men who wrote for men. It wasn't written so that only heaven would understand!

What I said is that an entire region was exterminated--probably around the Black Sea, to show God's displeasure with sin. In fact He ultimately plans to exterminate sin from the earth, but not yet. If God had flooded the entire globe, no life would've survived, and God would've had to create all over again. He wasn't going to do that. He wanted to save humanity.

I have to agree with timetofly here. The mountains were formed, probably by the "hydroplate theory." It was the flood that caused the mountains. God purpose in the flood was to kill all land animals that breathe, including the entire human race except the 8 people that were in the ark. This is why God sent the animals into the ark.

 

[RandyPNW]

You may or may not need a dollar for every time, but you should believe the written scripture below.

The scripture says:
11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

11:3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

12:14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

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.

I accept Scriptures, but I do *not* accept the following...

Jesus words to me: Jesus' words spoken to me: "Every time I mentioned an event that would begin at the midpoint and go to the end of the week, I always included the three and a half year period of time."

This is a claim *you're* making *on your own authority.* Don't expect me to accept that without Scriptural backup. Making the point about something Scriptures are saying, and claiming to hear something specific from God are 2 separate things. I don't care how many Scriptures you cite, or even if the points you make are true--this doesn't confirm that God spoke something to you. So keep the authority of *your own claims* out of it please?

Do you see the "three and a half year period of time" in each of these verses? Jesus was making reference to these very verses. Why do you find it so difficult to believe Jesus talks to people? Why especially when it is plain to see He was talking about plain scriptures?

I have no problem believing that Antichrist rules for 3.5 years. Why do you think I have a problem with that? And what does that have to do with your claims about hearing things from God?

Neither cam I questioning whether God can speak to men. But there are all kinds of cultists who claim God has spoken to them. Should we just accept all of these claims without checking? We can all make mistakes. We need to stay humble and correctable, if need be.

I blame those dreaded preconceived glasses so many people wear when they read scriptures. I suspect that what these verses clearly show, disagrees with your theories. These 5 countdowns from the midpoint to the end of the week clearly prove that chapters 11, 12, and 13 are MIDPOINT chapters. Can we at least agree on this point?

I would also suggest you try not to "get personal" in our disagreements. It just poisons the waters and clouds the issues. Let's be less concerned about what "glasses" we wear and more concerned about interpreting Scripture properly?

But to answer your point, none of those Scriptures you cite say a thing about a "midpoint!" So why should I accept them as such? Why do *you* accept them as such? Is it just because you're reading halfway through the Revelation? If so, you must think the Revelation is to be fulfilled in the same linear sequence that these visions were given to John?

In that case we're in the realm of the ridiculous. The book of Revelation was given in a certain sequence to John, but it is hardly to be fulfilled in a linear sequence. Many of the visions are repeats of the same thing, given from different angles. Half-way through the book is not "half-way through the Great Tribulation."

 

[RandyPNW]

I have to agree with timetofly here. The mountains were formed, probably by the "hydroplate theory." It was the flood that caused the mountains. God purpose in the flood was to kill all land animals that breathe, including the entire human race except the 8 people that were in the ark. This is why God sent the animals into the ark.

I would suggest you read Ramm's book, too. It opened my eyes without forcing me to question the inspiration of Scriptures. Wonderful book!

 

[iamlamad]

I accept Scriptures, but I do *not* accept the following...

This is a claim *you're* making *on your own authority.* Don't expect me to accept that without Scriptural backup. Making the point about something Scriptures are saying, and claiming to hear something specific from God are 2 separate things. I don't care how many Scriptures you cite, or even if the points you make are true--this doesn't confirm that God spoke something to you. So keep the authority of *your own claims* out of it please?

I have no problem believing that Antichrist rules for 3.5 years. Why do you think I have a problem with that? And what does that have to do with your claims about hearing things from God?

Neither cam I questioning whether God can speak to men. But there are all kinds of cultists who claim God has spoken to them. Should we just accept all of these claims without checking? We can all make mistakes. We need to stay humble and correctable, if need be.

I would also suggest you try not to "get personal" in our disagreements. It just poisons the waters and clouds the issues. Let's be less concerned about what "glasses" we wear and more concerned about interpreting Scripture properly?

But to answer your point, none of those Scriptures you cite say a thing about a "midpoint!" So why should I accept them as such? Why do *you* accept them as such? Is it just because you're reading halfway through the Revelation? If so, you must think the Revelation is to be fulfilled in the same linear sequence that these visions were given to John?

In that case we're in the realm of the ridiculous. The book of Revelation was given in a certain sequence to John, but it is hardly to be fulfilled in a linear sequence. Many of the visions are repeats of the same thing, given from different angles. Half-way through the book is not "half-way through the Great Tribulation."

Notice that Paul did not hesitate to share his vision:
Acts 26:13 At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me.

14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.

Jesus said He would build His church on revealed knowledge, with the example of Peter declaring who Jesus was. I was THERE: I HEARD His words. You can either believe then or deny them. That is your choice.

Dan. 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week... That word "midst" means half or middle.

I find it very difficult to picture half of a seven year period divided by an event that will stop the daily sacrifices with half the week back in Jesus's time and the other half still future to us. I don't think this is God's intent in these passages.

God have us a picture of what is coming: Antiochus slew a pig on the altar, and erected an image of Zeus in the holy of holies! OF COURSE the Daily sacrifices had to cease: the place was poluted. They needed a red heifer without spot or blemish!

Paul tells us the man of sin (certainly not the high priest) will enter the most holy place and declare to the world that HE is the God of the Jews. After all, He will be in the holy of holies. Strong says of "temple" in 2 Thes. 2 where the man of sin will sit, "used of the temple at Jerusalem, but only of the sacred edifice (or sanctuary) itself, consisting of the Holy place and the Holy of Holies"

IF the Jews build a new temple, (I think there is bible evidence they will) and IF they are doing daily sacrifices (I think there is bible evidence they will) then when the man of sin will enter the holy place in the temple, the daily sacrifices must cease. Is not this exactly what Dan 9:27 tells us? Then Revelation 11 also speaks of a temple with an outer court and with worshipers inside worshiping God.

So you believe the Antichrist rules for 3.5 years. OK, WHERE in Revelation does he begin? Would you agree in chapter 13? Why then cannot the earlier chapters, chapters 8, 9, 11, and 12 by the first half of the week? I not only believe they CAN BE, I think they ARE.

I am certainly not going IGNORE God's words to me. I was THERE. I heard His voice and His words. Since I find His words agree with what is written, I will certainly write what He said.

What to do with "God said?" Since I know God speaks to people, I pay attention and then compare what someone said "God said" with the written word. If it fits, I accept it. If it does not fit, I put it on a back burner, so to speak, and meditate on it. Perhaps it is my perception of what is written that is off.

Why are you SO CERTAIN that the first half of the 70th week is not future to us? What scriptural proof can you show?

 

[iamlamad]

But to answer your point, none of those Scriptures you cite say a thing about a "midpoint!" So why should I accept them as such? Why do *you* accept them as such? Is it just because you're reading halfway through the Revelation? If so, you must think the Revelation is to be fulfilled in the same linear sequence that these visions were given to John?

Let's talk about "Midpoint." One day while I was reading Daniel 9:27, when my eyes and my mind got to the word "Midst" (means to divide in half or just half) GOD SPOKE: "You could find that exact midpoint clearly marked in the Book of Revelation."

I know, I have committed a sin and spoke of God's words to me. I would point out JESUS mentioned "midpoint." I did not create this word.

Daniel's prophetic years are 360 day years. One week or 7 years of 360 days comes to 2520 days. This is not scripture, it is arithmetic. But half of 2520 days comes to 1260 days. Rev. 11:3 and 12:6 both speak of 1260 days. Common sense then would tell us John is writing of HALF a week. With a little study we can see it is the last half of a week of 7 years. 2520 divided by 30 equals 84 months and 84 months divided by 2 (for a half of 7 years) comes out as 42 months. Revelation 11:2 and 13:5 show us 42 months.

Again, this could be the first half or the second half of one 7 or one seven year period of time. Study would show it both mentions are of the second half of the week.

These scripture prove a half-week, while Dan 9:27 speaks of an entire week. If an week is divided equally, then I don't need to see the word "midpoint" written out. Common sense tells us there must be a division point in a seven year period to arrive at five mentions of a half week. Because John divided the week exactly in heaven, then the division point must be in the middle or "midst" of the week—the very word Daniel used.

Since the first mention of the half week is found in chapter 11, again I ask, what will you do with the previous chapters? How can a week be divided by an event to end up with a half week, UNLESS there is an entire week to divide?

Yes, I DO see Revelation is very linear. I believe John wrote it that way. I see the entire 70th week from 8:1 to the 7th bowl in chapter 16, with the exact midpoint at the 7th trumpet.

 

[RandyPNW]

Notice that Paul did not hesitate to share his vision:
Acts 26:13...
Jesus said He would build His church on revealed knowledge, with the example of Peter declaring who Jesus was. I was THERE: I HEARD His words. You can either believe then or deny them. That is your choice.

My choice is to reject your claim. If you experienced anything, it was false. "Jesus voices" do not contradict Scriptures.

Dan. 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week... That word "midst" means half or middle.

Yes it does. Dan 9.27 identifies the Ruler of the People who will Come as the Roman General who confirms God's Covenant that places a curse on disobedient Israel. That was part of the Covenant--a curse on those in Israel who were disobedient.

So before this Ruler's people, the Roman Army, comes to destroy the "city and the sanctuary," something happens in the midst of the 70th Week to disallow animal sacrifices. This happened while Jews were still under the Law. When Christ died, the Covenant of animal sacrifice was terminated. God's Covenant with Israel under the Law was irrevocably broken.

Afterwards, in the NT era, animal sacrifices have no effect. So this prophecy cannot be future. It was already completed at the Cross.

Jesus' ministry was assumed to be about 3.5 years. That is in the midst of the 70th Week. There is no need for the last half of the Week to be fulfilled, since the Covenant ended at the mid-way point.

I've been studying and praying about this for decades. This is the best understanding I've had thus far, though I've changed my views several times. My views are based on more learning, and on more listening to others, particularly to scholars and the early Church Fathers.

 

[RandyPNW]

Since the first mention of the half week is found in chapter 11, again I ask, what will you do with the previous chapters? How can a week be divided by an event to end up with a half week, UNLESS there is an entire week to divide?

The 70th Week is the last of 70 Weeks *regardless of whether it is a full Week!* The prophecy of 70 Weeks is ended with the last Week being a shortened final "Week."

Yes, I DO see Revelation is very linear. I believe John wrote it that way. I see the entire 70th week from 8:1 to the 7th bowl in chapter 16, with the exact midpoint at the 7th trumpet.

Sorry, can't agree that the book of Revelation is linear. It is a narrative that includes a number of visions that repeat the same scenario, described in different ways. There is no need to make 7 seals, 7 trumpets, and 7 bowls a chronological sequence of fulfillments. They are merely a sequence in which John received them.

Obviously, some of the mini-accounts are going to have some chronological sequence. But a chronological sequence from vision to vision and from one part of a vision to the other--no. That is certainly not a given, and not at all logical given the content of these visions, which consist of prolepses, parenthetical comments, flashbacks, repetitions, etc. If you begin at Rev 1, it is already all over with--"behold, Jesus comes with the clouds. "

 

[iamlamad]

My choice is to reject your claim. If you experienced anything, it was false. "Jesus voices" do not contradict Scriptures.

Yes it does. Dan 9.27 identifies the Ruler of the People who will Come as the Roman General who confirms God's Covenant that places a curse on disobedient Israel. That was part of the Covenant--a curse on those in Israel who were disobedient.

So before this Ruler's people, the Roman Army, comes to destroy the "city and the sanctuary," something happens in the midst of the 70th Week to disallow animal sacrifices. This happened while Jews were still under the Law. When Christ died, the Covenant of animal sacrifice was terminated. God's Covenant with Israel under the Law was irrevocably broken.

Afterwards, in the NT era, animal sacrifices have no effect. So this prophecy cannot be future. It was already completed at the Cross.

Jesus' ministry was assumed to be about 3.5 years. That is in the midst of the 70th Week. There is no need for the last half of the Week to be fulfilled, since the Covenant ended at the mid-way point.

I've been studying and praying about this for decades. This is the best understanding I've had thus far, though I've changed my views several times. My views are based on more learning, and on more listening to others, particularly to scholars and the early Church Fathers.

Let's examine this passage

26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. 27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.”

WHEN in relation to the rest of this passage, will or did the people of the ruler who will come (or came) destroy the sanctuary? The answer is very clear: it was AFTER the 69 weeks, but it was BEFORE the 70th week. I did not write it like this—Daniel did.

WHO? What is the antecedent of the "He" That begins verse 27? It would be "The ruler who will come..." And when will this ruler come? AFTER the city and sanctuary have been destroyed. This is the order in which Daniel wrote it. Note that there will be a covenant for one seven or for seven years. This ruler will confirm or make solid this covenant.

Notice that in between the 69 weeks and the 70th week is where the anointed one was put to death. Take careful note that HE as NOT put to death inside that 70th week. It was between the 69th and the 70th.

When Jesus was talking about the end, He went from church age ("the end is not yet") and jumped right over this confirming of a covenant (or the beginning of the Week) and spoke instead of the abomination that will be in the midst of the week.

I also notice that John does not pinpoint the beginning of the week either, at least in so many words. It is my guess that this confirming of a covenant will either be done in secret or will be signed by several men, so that no one will know which one is the "ruler" Daniel spoke of. I believe it will be done in secret. No one will know exactly WHEN the start of the Week will take place. I see a confirmation of this when Paul wrote of the revealing of the man of sin will not be until He enters the temple and declares he is God. In other words, he WON'T be revealed at the beginning of the week.

" "Jesus voices" do not contradict Scriptures."

Please, show me the contradiction—if you are able.

"This happened while Jews were still under the Law. "

The Jews are still under the law in their minds. The church has been inserted into the Jewish timeline as a parenthesis. When the pre-tribulation rapture will take place, that parenthesis will end, and TIME will change from the age of grace or the church age instantly to the Day of the Lord. Pre-wrathers claim it to be back to back events: rapture/Day. I think they are very close.

"Afterwards, in the NT era, animal sacrifices have no effect."

You are looking at it from a legal point of view. This legal view will not stop Israel from starting animal sacrifices once again. They are determined and they are going to accomplish it. From the viewpoint of many people in the church today, they have "written off" the Jews. God cannot and will not do that, for He is a God that KEEPS promises. Since the Jews imagine they are under the Law, God will work with them under the law. Did you never notice when the "everlasting gospel" is taken to the people by the three angels of Rev. 14, there is NOTHING said about the Blood of Jesus, or anything about His death and Resurrection. The people are told to worship God and fear Him.

“Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has come. Worship him who made the heavens, the earth, the sea and the springs of water.”

This sounds FAR more like being under the Law, versus under the blood. Did you notice that Peter's message to the Jews was not about the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, but rather, to believe on Jesus as their Messiah and they would be saved. In short, Paul's gospel to the Gentile was a special gospel just for the Gentiles.

Here is the real question: will God HONOR their animal sacrifices? At this point in time, only God knows.

"Jesus' ministry was assumed to be about 3.5 years. "

You and I both know it was not written down any where, so all it is is an assumption. Please note in comparison that God has delineated the last half of the week to the exact day.

" There is no need for the last half of the Week to be fulfilled, since the Covenant ended at the mid-way point."

This is, of course, only in your way of thinking. God has a different plan. God is going to force all people to choose sides at the end of the Jewish age. There are too many today still sitting on the fence, so to speak, not giving their life to Jesus and not wanting to give their life to the devil either. EVERYONE is going to have to choose a side.

I hope must of the Jews and Hebrews will refuse the mark.

Jesus said that the days of great tribulation (that would be greater than any other time) would happen AFTER the abomination. Paul told us what that abomination will be: the man of sin will enter the holy of holies and declare He is God. I believe He will also bring an image (probably of himself) with him to set up there.

Where in Revelation do we see those in Judea beginning to flee? That would be 12:6. That verse then is only seconds after the abomination. John was not shown the abomination so did not write of it. Therefore, according to Jesus' words, the days of GT He spoke of could not be anything before Revelation 11. (It certainly was not early church timing.)

What will CAUSE those days of GT Jesus spoke about? It will be when the Beast and False Prophet begin to enforce worshiping the image and forcing people to take the mark. GREAT PRESSURE will be put upon people to hid, so they can keep their head on, but WATER (clear drinkable water) will be found only in stores. No one can enter a store for water, without the mark. The days of GT Jesus spoke of will begin late in Revelation 14, after the angel warning.

I see all the evidence pointing to the future for the entire Week.

 

[iamlamad]

The 70th Week is the last of 70 Weeks *regardless of whether it is a full Week!* The prophecy of 70 Weeks is ended with the last Week being a shortened final "Week."

Sorry, can't agree that the book of Revelation is linear. It is a narrative that includes a number of visions that repeat the same scenario, described in different ways. There is no need to make 7 seals, 7 trumpets, and 7 bowls a chronological sequence of fulfillments. They are merely a sequence in which John received them.

Obviously, some of the mini-accounts are going to have some chronological sequence. But a chronological sequence from vision to vision and from one part of a vision to the other--no. That is certainly not a given, and not at all logical given the content of these visions, which consist of prolepses, parenthetical comments, flashbacks, repetitions, etc. If you begin at Rev 1, it is already all over with--"behold, Jesus comes with the clouds. "

I find a FEW places where I believe John wrote as with parentheses—only a few. For example, I believe Revelation 11:7 to 13 are written as a parenthesis, where John takes the reader down the last half of the week with the Two Witnesses only. I believe Revelation 13, after perhaps verse 5, is a parenthesis, where John takes the reader down the last half of the week with the Beast and False prophet only.

I think there is ample proof that chapters 11, 12, and 13 are midpoint chapters. Each has one or more countdowns from the midpoint to the end of the week.


I find NO flashbacks. I find NO repetitions. I think these things are more imagined than real.

 

[anetazo]

Ezekiel chapter 13, the rapture theory is false doctrine and Jesus hates the fly away doctrine. I documented this.
The 4th beast of Daniel is the beast of revelation chapter 13. It's one world political system.

At the 6th trump, the one world political system receives deadly wound. Satan as antichrist will heal deadly wound. By establishing world peace. Its 5 month period, revelation chapter 9.

Ezekiel chapter 13 and Jeremiah chapter 23. The false preachers are teaching false doctrine. Like the rapture theory. Christian people are being set up to worship antichrist near future.

Second thessalonians chapter 2 will document, the son of perdition is satan, coming near future in his role as antichrist, to Jerusalem. If you don't have gospel armory on, that's knowledge of Gods word, those biblically illiterate will worship antichrist.
The biblically illiterate people who worshipped antichrist near future, will end up in sheol. It's holding place for the spirtualty dead or wicked.
Luke chapter 13, the wide gate ends in destruction. It's a Awful place. Those in sheol will find out hard way.

 

[iamlamad]

Ezekiel chapter 13, the rapture theory is false doctrine and Jesus hates the fly away doctrine. I documented this.
The 4th beast of Daniel is the beast of revelation chapter 13. It's one world political system.

At the 6th trump, the one world political system receives deadly wound. Satan as antichrist will heal deadly wound. By establishing world peace. Its 5 month period, revelation chapter 9.

Ezekiel chapter 13 and Jeremiah chapter 23. The false preachers are teaching false doctrine. Like the rapture theory. Christian people are being set up to worship antichrist near future.

Second thessalonians chapter 2 will document, the son of perdition is satan, coming near future in his role as antichrist, to Jerusalem. If you don't have gospel armory on, that's knowledge of Gods word, those biblically illiterate will worship antichrist.
The biblically illiterate people who worshipped antichrist near future, will end up in sheol. It's holding place for the spirtualty dead or wicked.
Luke chapter 13, the wide gate ends in destruction. It's a Awful place. Those in sheol will find out hard way.

I wish I had this much imagination.

 

[RandyPNW]

Let's examine this passage

26 After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. 27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.”

WHEN in relation to the rest of this passage, will or did the people of the ruler who will come (or came) destroy the sanctuary? The answer is very clear: it was AFTER the 69 weeks, but it was BEFORE the 70th week. I did not write it like this—Daniel did.

The order I see it is as follows.
1) The people of the ruler to come (the Roman Army) will destroy the city and the sanctuary (70 AD).
2) The historical context for #1 is set:
a. 69 Weeks lead up to the cutting off of Messiah in the 70th Week.
b. The 70th Week is the confirmation of the covenant of Law. What was confirmed was God's judgment against Israel for breaking the Covenant (Mt. Ebal). The Romans were the instruments of this judgment.
c. The Roman Judgment is called the "Abomination of Desolation" because it "desolates" both the city and the sanctuary (70 AD). This follows the 70th Week, in which Christ was cut off and temple sacrifices suspended in a shortened 70th Week.

Jesus said that the days of great tribulation (that would be greater than any other time) would happen AFTER the abomination.

The AoD was the Roman Army standing in the holy place, ie Jerusalem, prepared to desolate the city and the temple. That act began a long period of Jewish Diaspora, lasting the entire NT age. That is why this "tribulation" is called "great," because it is the longest judgment against Israel in history.

Paul told us what that abomination will be: the man of sin will enter the holy of holies and declare He is God. I believe He will also bring an image (probably of himself) with him to set up there.

The Romans were abominable pagans, just like Antiochus 4 was. The Romans had eagle standards, with the eagle representing an idol, offending the holy city of Jerusalem. This "abomination" became a "desolator" when the Romans invaded Jerusalem by force and destroyed the temple.

Where in Revelation do we see those in Judea beginning to flee? That would be 12:6.

Rev 12.6 is not related to the "fleeing" that Jesus called for in his own generation of Jewish Disciples. The Rev 12.6 event seems to take place in the endtimes. But it's a difficult passage for me.

What will CAUSE those days of GT Jesus spoke about? It will be when the Beast and False Prophet begin to enforce worshiping the image and forcing people to take the mark. GREAT PRESSURE will be put upon people to hid, so they can keep their head on, but WATER (clear drinkable water) will be found only in stores. No one can enter a store for water, without the mark. The days of GT Jesus spoke of will begin late in Revelation 14, after the angel warning.

Sorry, but Jesus defined the "Great Tribulation" as being the Jewish Diaspora of the NT age. What happens during the Beast's Reign will just cap a long age of suffering for the Jewish People, as well as for Jewish believers. And we are told this so that we take note in our own national circumstances.

 

[RandyPNW]

I find a FEW places where I believe John wrote as with parentheses—only a few. For example, I believe Revelation 11:7 to 13 are written as a parenthesis, where John takes the reader down the last half of the week with the Two Witnesses only. I believe Revelation 13, after perhaps verse 5, is a parenthesis, where John takes the reader down the last half of the week with the Beast and False prophet only.

I think there is ample proof that chapters 11, 12, and 13 are midpoint chapters. Each has one or more countdowns from the midpoint to the end of the week.


I find NO flashbacks. I find NO repetitions. I think these things are more imagined than real.

Rev 12 is clearly a flashback. Jesus' Coming is repeated throughout the book, in particular in the 6th Seal, in the 7th Trumpet, in the Harvest of Rev 14, as well as in numerous prolepses featuring the Church appearing at the end of the age in victory. You're not correct, as I see it.

 

[iamlamad]

Rev 12 is clearly a flashback. Jesus' Coming is repeated throughout the book, in particular in the 6th Seal, in the 7th Trumpet, in the Harvest of Rev 14, as well as in numerous prolepses featuring the Church appearing at the end of the age in victory. You're not correct, as I see it.

Revelation 12 is about Jesus introducing John to the dragon and in particular what the Dragon will be doing during the last 42 months. The dragon is mentioned 32 times in this chapter. Revelation 12:1-5 is written as a parenthesis. It was John recording how the Dragon tried to kill Jesus as a young boy. That part of this chapter was a history lesson for John.

Verse 6 is a real-time verse only seconds after the abomination. It is about those in Judea beginning to flee. Next, and again only seconds after the abomination, Michael goes to war with Satan to drive him out of the heavenly (high places) realm.

Verses 10-11 are about the tribulation saints that will not be faced with Satan's wrath.
Verse 13: as soon as Satan is cast down, he will go after those who began to flee into the wilderness. The Dragon or Satan discovers that God is protecting those who fled, so in the last verse, he turns to the remnant of those who believe in Jesus—those who were left behind but have turned to Jesus after the pre-trib rapture.

Sorry, there is no "flashback" except for the first 5 verses. There is no coming. Neither is there a coming at the 7th trumpet. It is written very plainly that there is a property closing where property ownership or rulership is taken from one and given to another. There is no words here than even hint of a coming.

There is a hint of a coming at the 6th seal, for it is right have His REAL coming for His church, just before wrath.

The timing of Revelation 14 is some unknown time shortly after the abomination. After the angel messages, the Beast and False prophet will begin to enforce the mark, so the days of great tribulation Jesus spoke of will begin. This is confirmed in chapter 15 when the martyrs of the Beasts begin to show up in heaven.

What then are the two harvests in Rev. 14? It should be obvious. The two beasts will entice the whole world to be killing so many who will refuse their mark, I suspect it will make the holocaust seem insignificant. The first sickle harvest then, is to represent the murder of the saints by beheading.

The second sickle harvest, that comes with wrath, is pointing to the Battle of Armageddon and the sheep and goat judgment where the wicked will be killed.

I find no coming here in chapter 14 either.

 

[iamlamad]

The order I see it is as follows.
1) The people of the ruler to come (the Roman Army) will destroy the city and the sanctuary (70 AD).
2) The historical context for #1 is set:
a. 69 Weeks lead up to the cutting off of Messiah in the 70th Week.
b. The 70th Week is the confirmation of the covenant of Law. What was confirmed was God's judgment against Israel for breaking the Covenant (Mt. Ebal). The Romans were the instruments of this judgment.
c. The Roman Judgment is called the "Abomination of Desolation" because it "desolates" both the city and the sanctuary (70 AD). This follows the 70th Week, in which Christ was cut off and temple sacrifices suspended in a shortened 70th Week.

The AoD was the Roman Army standing in the holy place, ie Jerusalem, prepared to desolate the city and the temple. That act began a long period of Jewish Diaspora, lasting the entire NT age. That is why this "tribulation" is called "great," because it is the longest judgment against Israel in history.

The Romans were abominable pagans, just like Antiochus 4 was. The Romans had eagle standards, with the eagle representing an idol, offending the holy city of Jerusalem. This "abomination" became a "desolator" when the Romans invaded Jerusalem by force and destroyed the temple.

Rev 12.6 is not related to the "fleeing" that Jesus called for in his own generation of Jewish Disciples. The Rev 12.6 event seems to take place in the endtimes. But it's a difficult passage for me.

Sorry, but Jesus defined the "Great Tribulation" as being the Jewish Diaspora of the NT age. What happens during the Beast's Reign will just cap a long age of suffering for the Jewish People, as well as for Jewish believers. And we are told this so that we take note in our own national circumstances.

I guess "to each his own." I read most of the book of Revelation very different than you do.