The 7's are INSIDE each other - they CANNOT be an end-to-end future timetable

[Douggg]

It doesn't say "until Messiah the Prince shows up in Jerusalem riding a donkey as the King of Israel". It makes much more sense that it's talking about the time that He would first start to be recognized as the Messiah. So, a passage like the following is related to Daniel 9:25.

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. 30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. 31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water. 32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. 33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. 34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

Your opinion does not recognize that it is Jesus Himself speaking in Ezekiel 39:21-29, following the 7 years of the Gog/Magog event.

 

[Timtofly]

The ministry of the messiah is not mentioned in Daniel 9.

It is in those simple words: "cut off". Not for Himself. "Cut off" was the Atonement that happened before the foundation of the world. God Himself the Lamb slain.

 

[Timtofly]

You're not making any sense. This is like saying that there can't be more than one passage of scripture that speaks of the same event, which is obviously not true.

There are a number of parallels in the book of Revelation looking at things from different angles. That is why you have the final wrath of Christ already about to come down in seal 6 (the silence in seal 7 means it's coming down when seal 7 is opened), and it also is portrayed as coming down in the 7th trumpet and 7th vial. And it's recorded in Revelation 14, 16, 19 and 20 as well. Either His final wrath comes down several different times, which makes no sense, or those are all speaking of the same event, which is the final wrath of the Lamb that will come down on the day He returns.

Theory does not make reality. Once your theory is experienced it is no longer a different view. You have yet to prove outside of the example of doll within a doll view, how one can experience two dolls at the same time. Once the focus is placed on one doll, it is taken off of the other. One is getting more specific with the detail.

We will not go back to the doll representing the 7 Seals, Once the 7th Seal is opened. The 6th Seal is not Armageddon. One cannot escape the linear view, once a prophecy is experienced.

Yes Armageddon is in the 7th Trumpet in the 6th Trumpet, in the 7 Seals as written. As experienced or even "if experienced", the 6th Seal is over never to be repeated again, no matter how one tries.

 

[Douggg]

Should the little horn be considered the Messiah and His role as a human?

That would be the only clarification given by Daniel. Gabriel is not declaring an AC at all in chapter 9.

The 70 weeks of Daniel 9 are not stand-alone in understanding future events of Daniel's people and Jerusalem.

The prince who shall come will become the Antichrist by being anointed the King of Israel, a mistake the Jews will make until he betrays them in the middle part of the 70th week.

Then for the remainder of the 70th week, he is the beast, no longer the King of Israel.

 

[Douggg]

It is in those simple words: "cut off". Not for Himself. "Cut off" was the Atonement that happened before the foundation of the world. God Himself the Lamb slain.

I have no disagreement over the theology. But as far as the plan of salvation which is dependent upon Jesus's resurrection - that part (about his resurrection) was intentionally left out of Daniel 9.

Otherwise, Satan would have never sought to have Jesus killed. It was kept a mystery, until after the resurrection, that Jesus's death on the cross would free man from the eternal consequences of sin.

1Corinthians2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

When Jesus died on the cross and resurrected - that gave man a way to be saved from the consequences of sin, and also makes it that God - in fairness - can destroy Satan for his sins.

Essentially, when Satan, through the serpent, got Adam and Eve to sin, that put mankind as a hostage - meaning God could not in equal justice let man slide for his sins while destroying Satan for his sins.

But God in His infinite wisdom of the everlasting gospel of Salvation- praise God - made Satan, in spite of all his craftiness - look foolish. Satan is no match for God.
___________________________________________________________

What Satan must have thought in seeking to have Jesus killed - is that he could prevent the Kingdom of God replacing his own kingdom ruling over the affairs of man. Satan had no idea that in doing so, he was signing his own death warrant.

__________________________________________________________

Jesus is coming and His reward is with Him. Christians, hang in there.

 

[Timtofly]

Where do you come up with this stuff? Unreal.

Ezra and Nehemiah. Of course one has to get dates from Calendars and failed human reasoning. You know, most of the time, was measured by the Olympics. Almost has come full circle, and now the Olympics is held every 2 years. How can you even be certain that we today know the exactness of all the BC dating? Some put more faith in human dating, than the actual word of God.

According to Josephus the temple was destroyed 638 years after it was built. No matter how you parse that, 483 years fits quite comfortably into those 638 years. Some like to claim tight fitting stretch jeans....

I know that Daniel says Jerusalem:

"Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince"

Do you think they built the Temple first and then the city? Only the walls were left for last. The Temple was the number one priority. Jerusalem was being restored along with the Temple.

Even if you subtract 40 from 638, that is still 598 years. Where do you tuck away over 100 years? There was a gap of time between the 49 years, the 7 weeks, and the solid 62 weeks of 434 years. We do not sit down and state the time of this gap. Many do not even want to think about a gap at all. 490 is solid and cannot be split whatsoever, according to their faulty human understanding. That is not even acknowledging the gap that Gabriel put in himself. 7 and 62 indicates a gap between 7 and 62. After 483 is all we need. You pick on Dougg, because his jeans are tighter fitting than yours, but even your jeans are too tight. There is still time left, because Messiah was cut off after 69 weeks, not after 70 weeks. The Prince will come to finish the prophecy and only then it will be complete as promised in Revelation 10:7

"But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets."

What needs to be finished more important than the 70th week. I know you want it to be implemented in the 1st century. That would mean the fulness of the Gentiles was also completed in the first century. That is also part of the mystery, that Gentiles would be considered into this promise afforded to Israel. So no, it will not be complete or finished until the Prince part is also completed.

Think about it. If we were having this conversation 1000 years ago, Jerusalem would be in the hands of the Muslims. Christians were barely considering crusades, much less that Jews would be around. Your 1000 year Millennium being at an end, would be even harder to prove, since Muslim influence over Jerusalem had been ongoing for over 300 years. The Christian revival spread by the British Empire would be laughed at. Even Europe was struggling as a Catholic place on the map, much less a tiny Island influencing the entire world. Yes there were believers who still looked for the future Second Coming instead of the historist view that would have been very grim at that point.

Do you think that in 1021 very many were arguing that the 70th week was definitely over in the first century? At what point would you place this 1991 year doll in or outside of the other dolls? There are some dolls that Revelation does not even cover. I would call this doll as covered by the trodding of the Gentiles, yet the verse in Revelation 11:2 is too specific and not symbolic of the last 1991 years.

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.

This verse is contained inside the 7th Trumpet, not the other way around. This last 1991 years does pertain to the cutting off of the Messiah, but also fits into the 70th week. So the fulness of the Gentiles is not the exact same thing as the trodding of the Gentiles. Neither is this temple that is measured about Christ or some spiritual temple. It is "a doll" inside the 7th Trumpet "doll". The 70th week is the outer most doll, defining Messiah Prince, Himself the Atonement. Daniel 9:27 is the 7th Trumpet "doll", not the 70th Week "doll".

The fullness of the Gentiles is the second doll inside of the first doll, being the 70th week, Messiah the Prince. Israel is only a part of the 70th week observing this whole Revelation. Israel would be cut off along with the Messiah. Israel would observe the fulness of the Gentiles, including all the other dolls mentioned in the book of Revelation.

"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city."

 

[Timtofly]

The 70 weeks of Daniel 9 are not stand-alone in understanding future events of Daniel's people and Jerusalem.

The prince who shall come will become the Antichrist by being anointed the King of Israel, a mistake the Jews will make until he betrays them in the middle part of the 70th week.

Then for the remainder of the 70th week, he is the beast, no longer the King of Israel.



View attachment 303509

The little horn was about Antiochus Epiphanies. Now was the whole of the little horn fulfilled during his lifetime, or will this horn return as another human? Yes, Gabriel is explaining the vision concerning this time of trouble, but verses 24- 27 of Daniel 9 is not about this little horn one tiny bit. Daniel 9 is about the Word of God as Messiah Prince in contrast to this little horn empowered by Satan. That is why Daniel was comforted. Daniel would not be comforted if Gabriel was explaining more bad news as you claim these verses do.

God's plan was that Messiah the Prince be cut off. God's plan may include Satan getting 42 months in the midst of the week of the sounding of the 7th Trumpet. But it was a comfort to Damiel because it was longsuffering God doing the allowing, and these goats and horns were not allowed to do more than what God planned. The confirmation of the Covenant is not a seven year peace treaty. It is a confirmation and remains confirmed. Souls still need to be beheaded to remain in and covered by the Atonement Covenant. That they all were brought in by faith and glorified would be even better. No one has to be beheaded. Nor is this a second chance. It is not. It is because the church failed as the Steward of the vineyard. The vineyard was handed over to Satan to harvest the last of any harvest available.

Daniel would not have seen this as a second chance, but to say Daniel was seeing a 7 year peace treaty is also not viable.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

The little horn was about Antiochus Epiphanies. Now was the whole of the little horn fulfilled during his lifetime, or will this horn return as another human?

Antiochus Epiphanies' territory was Bashan. So not human would be m2c

Yes, Gabriel is explaining the vision concerning this time of trouble, but verses 24- 27 of Daniel 9 is not about this little horn one tiny bit. Daniel 9 is about the Word of God as Messiah Prince in contrast to this little horn empowered by Satan. That is why Daniel was comforted. Daniel would not be comforted if Gabriel was explaining more bad news as you claim these verses do.

God's plan was that Messiah the Prince be cut off. God's plan may include Satan getting 42 months in the midst of the week of the sounding of the 7th Trumpet. But it was a comfort to Damiel because it was longsuffering God doing the allowing, and these goats and horns were not allowed to do more than what God planned. The confirmation of the Covenant is not a seven year peace treaty. It is a confirmation and remains confirmed. Souls still need to be beheaded to remain in and covered by the Atonement Covenant. That they all were brought in by faith and glorified would be even better. No one has to be beheaded. Nor is this a second chance. It is not. It is because the church failed as the Steward of the vineyard. The vineyard was handed over to Satan to harvest the last of any harvest available.

Daniel would not have seen this as a second chance, but to say Daniel was seeing a 7 year peace treaty is also not viable.

 

[DavidPT]

The 70th week is the Revelation of Messiah the Prince. Verse 27 are the days of the 7th Trumpet. Many translations claim verse 27 is the 70th week. It is not.

As Messiah, the Word of God was the Atonement. As Prince, the Word of God confirms the Atonement Covenant at the end of the final harvest. The result of the confirmation is the winepress of God's wrath. Or the week of the 7th Trumpet is cut in half, and Satan is given 42 months. God's justice allows for desolation.

Many argue that the Word of God cannot set up a throne and temple on earth. They argue that there is no need, then claim God cannot allow the temple to be desolated. Whatever God does, God justifies His own actions. God is just in allowing humans to live in sin, as much as forcing them to live perfect lives without sin.

Unless I'm mistaken, every time the Jews built a brick and mortal temple it was because they were instructed to do so via a word from God informing them to do so. Assuming another temple gets built by the Jews in the future, what word from God recorded in their Bibles would be informing them to do this yet again? It can't be anything recorded in the NT though, since we are talking about unbelieving Jews and that the NT is not part of their Bible.

 

[Douggg]

The little horn was about Antiochus Epiphanies.

Antiochus was not the little horn. The little horn in the text of Daniel 8 is time of the end, and stands up against the Prince of princes - Jesus.

 

[Timtofly]

Unless I'm mistaken, every time the Jews built a brick and mortal temple it was because they were instructed to do so via a word from God informing them to do so. Assuming another temple gets built by the Jews in the future, what word from God recorded in their Bibles would be informing them to do this yet again? It can't be anything recorded in the NT though, since we are talking about unbelieving Jews and that the NT is not part of their Bible.

The Word of God as Prince. I see a Temple as built even during the Trumpets. Just because John listed 5 very troubling events, does not mean that is all that happens. Should it take long to build one?

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:"

Christ and the angels are here. They will be involved in building the Temple. Do people assume the throne is out in the open or in the Temple? Why would Christ build a castle or palace separate from His Temple. The Temple is for the throne of the Word of God. The throne will be in the Temple in the place of the Holy of Holies. The Holy of Holies was for the Messiah. The throne will be for the Prince.

 

[Timtofly]

Antiochus was not the little horn. The little horn in the text of Daniel 8 is time of the end, and stands up against the Prince of princes - Jesus.

Not 100% there. There is no continuation of the Greek empire in the future. You use Exekiel any way, and that army is not a revived Greek army. There is not a future prince, king, ruler, governor, president, emperor as many claim. There is a false prophet whom is this little horn you claim as future.

 

[Douggg]

There is not a future prince, king, ruler, governor, president, emperor as many claim. There is a false prophet whom is this little horn you claim as future.

The little horn person is a king in the text. He is not a prophet.

Daniel 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

 

[DavidPT]

Do people assume the throne is out in the open or in the Temple?

I can't speak for others, but I assume His throne could be mobile, thus the same throne as in heaven, except it has been relocated to the earth, as in literally travels from there to here via some form of spacecraft, like maybe a mother ship. In both Ezekiel(the first cpl of chapters) and Daniel 7, wheels are mentioned in relation to His throne, thus depicticting something that is mobile. I'm not dogmatic about this though, thus not something I could likely convincingly argue, yet I still think it could be involving things like this.

 

[Timtofly]

The little horn person is a king in the text. He is not a prophet.

Daniel 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

That is because it was in the context of OT thought. When king Saul stepped out of the bounds of his kingship authority, and became a priest that was an unacceptable change of authority. The separation of church and state should always be of concern to the church. The government created by Satan will blur those lines. Why does Satan need a false prophet any ways? Even as pointed out, the office of pope was called the AC. Not the head of the government or a king, but the head of the major religion. John never defines an AC. We should not either. The little horn if a renewed version of Antiochus Epiphanies would bring awe, and would bring a king who crossed into the boundary of religion and brought the abomination of desolation into the Temple.

 

[Timtofly]

I can't speak for others, but I assume His throne could be mobile, thus the same throne as in heaven, except it has been relocated to the earth, as in literally travels from there to here via some form of spacecraft, like maybe a mother ship. In both Ezekiel(the first cpl of chapters) and Daniel 7, wheels are mentioned in relation to His throne, thus depicticting something that is mobile. I'm not dogmatic about this though, thus not something I could likely convincingly argue, yet I still think it could be involving things like this.

And it would be placed in a Temple. The ark was mobile and put in a Tabernacle. The Prince on a Throne being mobile and placed in a Temple. Perhaps Ezekiel's Temple is mobile. New Jerusalem is mobile and way larger than Ezekiel's Temple.

 

[Douggg]

Why does Satan need a false prophet any ways?

To have the world worship the image of the beast. Which that statue image will be incarnated by Satan, so that a deceived world will worship Satan.

John never defines an AC.

John in 1John2 defines an antichrist(ian) as someone who once was counted as being a Christian but departed to deny that Jesus is God come in the flesh. And to deny that Jesus is the Son of God.
An example of such a person would be Yusuf Estes, once a pastor, now a muslim. He has some You Tube videos.

Back in John's day, it was more well understood that the Antichrist would be someone that the Jews will embrace as their King of Israel messiah - instead of and against Jesus the true Christ King of Israel.

In 1John2:18, they were aware that Antichrist was coming. It was understood that the Antichrist would be someone, coming in his own name, instead of and against "Christ the King of Israel" (Mark 15:31-32) - so John didn't need to define Antichrist.

18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

The person will be the Antichrist only for as long as he is the King of Israel. That will last from the start of the 7 years to somewhere around three years later - when he goes into the temple, sits, claims to have achieved God-hood. Revealing himself as the man of sin, and not the messiah after all.

Then for the remainder of his time the person is the "beast".

 

[Timtofly]

To have the world worship the image of the beast. Which that statue image will be incarnated by Satan, so that a deceived world will worship Satan.


John in 1John2 defines an antichrist(ian) as someone who once was counted as being a Christian but departed to deny that Jesus is God come in the flesh. And to deny that Jesus is the Son of God.
An example of such a person would be Yusuf Estes, once a pastor, now a muslim. He has some You Tube videos.

Back in John's day, it was more well understood that the Antichrist would be someone that the Jews will embrace as their King of Israel messiah - instead of and against Jesus the true Christ King of Israel.

In 1John2:18, they were aware that Antichrist was coming. It was understood that the Antichrist would be someone, coming in his own name, instead of and against "Christ the King of Israel" (Mark 15:31-32) - so John didn't need to define Antichrist.

18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

The person will be the Antichrist only for as long as his is the King of Israel. That will last from the start of the 7 years to somewhere around three years later - when he goes into the temple sits, claims to have achieved God-hood. Revealing himself as the man of sin, and not the messiah after all.

Then for the remainder of his time the person is the "beast".


View attachment 303534

Since none of the beast in Revelation 13 fit your criteria, and none of the horns or beast in Daniel fit your criteria, there is no AC.

The only "AC" will be a declared Messiah. The image, an abomination of desolation, will be declared the messiah of humankind. It will not be "an" or "the" Messiah, but remain a beast.

That is how John presents the trio. Satan empowers the FP the same way he empowered Antiochus Epiphanies. Then Satan will present himself as some grand champion. Together they create an image that will come to life.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

View attachment 303356

Interesting graphic. However I think the Day of the Lord starts with the 7 Trumpets not the 7 bowls of wrath but based on my Futurist view and world events, I don't think we'll have to wonder much longer who is right in their interpretation of Revelation.

 

[Douggg]

Since none of the beast in Revelation 13 fit your criteria, and none of the horns or beast in Daniel fit your criteria, there is no AC.

Correct in what you are saying about the beasts in Revelation 13. And the horns and beasts in Daniel.

In all of those passages, the little horn person is associated with being a king of the Roman Empire.

And that Roman Empire kingdom is the EU.

There will be the Antichrist though. A person who will be anointed the King of Israel, but coming in his own name. That person will be the little horn person, a Jew, as the leader of the EU, aforehand to becoming the Antichrist.

little horn > prince who shall come> anointed the King of Israel> revealed as the man of sin> beast.