The date of great tribulation

[shilohsfoal]

Here's the date: 67 AD.

What is the year Peter and Paul died in Rome?

 

[ewq1938]

Accually the first beast isnt the miitary that occupies Jerusalem for those 42 months.The second beast is that miitary.

No, the second beast is the false prophet, a single person. The first beast is ten kingdoms within 7 mountains.

Rev 19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

Here the beast and the kings and their armies are mentioned. We just have to figure out which beast is meant here and the next verse tells us that:


Rev 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.


So, "beast" here is reference to the first beast of Rev 13, and it is associated with the ten kings/horns and their armies. So, the first beast is the military that occupies Jerusalem as I previously said.

 

[shilohsfoal]

No, the second beast is the false prophet, a single person. The first beast is ten kingdoms within 7 mountains.

Rev 19:19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

Here the beast and the kings and their armies are mentioned. We just have to figure out which beast is meant here and the next verse tells us that:


Rev 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.


So, "beast" here is reference to the first beast of Rev 13, and it is associated with the ten kings/horns and their armies. So, the first beast is the military that occupies Jerusalem as I previously said.

So you believe there will be a person with two horns sticking out of his head.

Hmmm

Well,i tried to help you.
You will just have to wait and see thats its not a man,with two horns like a lamb .

 

[Lost4words]

This generation does not mean 2,000 years away. Jesus was addressing the generation of the Apostles.

So many End time experts on here, just like we have had throughout the ages! All proved wrong.

 

[ewq1938]

So you believe there will be a person with two horns sticking out of his head.

So you believe there will be an army with two horns sticking out of it's head? Or are the horns symbolism and when it says that beast is the false prophet maybe it means that and not an army of people?

 

[ewq1938]

This generation does not mean 2,000 years away. Jesus was addressing the generation of the Apostles.

Yet none of what he said would happen in the GT happened in their generation so clearly he meant a future generation.

 

[Lost4words]

Yet none of what he said would happen in the GT happened in their generation so clearly he meant a future generation.

Depends how you read it. How you interpret it.

 

[ewq1938]

Depends how you read it. How you interpret it.

What I don't understand is how some will reinterpret the visible return of Christ and angels gathering the elect into a spiritual none visible return of Christ...and they tend not to even deal with the angels gathering the elect part. The second coming is a big deal and it was to be a literal, visible and physical return. Clearly that is exactly what Christ said one generation would witness all the events of the GT AND that same second coming.

 

[parousia70]

What I don't understand is how some will reinterpret the visible return of Christ and angels gathering the elect into a spiritual none visible return of Christ...and they tend not to even deal with the angels gathering the elect part. The second coming is a big deal and it was to be a literal, visible and physical return. Clearly that is exactly what Christ said one generation would witness all the events of the GT AND that same second coming.

Since None of that harmonizes with the scriptural precedent, the honest expositors of scripture will have to disagree, if we wish to remain In harmony with the holy writ.

 

[parousia70]

Obviously, the only 'case' that will convince you, is when the atmosphere is pushed aside, the moon shines blood red, the earth shakes and shudders and millions are killed worldwide.
Blithely thinking that these things won't happen, just leaves you unprepared and unready to face what is plainly told us in our Bibles.

You just contradicted yourself.

How can I simultaneously be convinced and unprepared?

 

[ewq1938]

Since None of that harmonizes with the scriptural precedent

The only applicable precedent is a visible second coming. Anything less than that is not what Christ described. All passages about the second coming agree that it's visible, and literal and physical and He is not alone, he returns with his saints and angels from heaven.

 

[parousia70]

The only applicable precedent is a visible second coming. Anything less than that is not what Christ described. All passages about the second coming agree that it's visible, and literal and physical and He is not alone, he returns with his saints and angels from heaven.

Again, none of that matches the scriptural preciident. Your personal interpretation of those soassges would be unrecognizable to Jesus and the apostles (and the saints and angels from heaven)

Revelation 14:14-20 alone disproves your hyper liberalization of The cloud coming of Jesus.
Read it closely.

 

[ewq1938]

Again, none of that matches the scriptural preciident.

You remain incorrect. Scriptural precedent regarding the second coming is fully and strictly a literal, visible, and physical coming.

 

[Lost4words]

I am amazed to see the many different views on how the end times will play out. The many 'experts'. All claiming 'they' know the truth.

 

[SandwichBoy]

What is the year Peter and Paul died in Rome?

I dont know. When did John the Apostle recieve the vision of the Apocalypse at Patmos?

 

[eleos1954]

And your point is what?

That "this generation shall not pass till all these things take place" doesn't literally mean what it literally means?

Like I said ... the passage has dual questions and dual answers and the passage about wars and rumors of wars etc. will continue (for each generation) and is referring of things that will pass until Jesus comes. They are continuous in every generation until Jesus returns, so applies to every generation until that happens. Evidentially beyond your comprehension.

 

[parousia70]

You remain incorrect. Scriptural precedent regarding the second coming is fully and strictly a literal, visible, and physical coming.

If that were true you could demonstrate it from scripture.

Did you even Read Revelation 14:14-20?

 

[parousia70]

Like I said ... the passage has dual questions and dual answers and the passage about wars and rumors of wars etc. will continue (for each generation) and is referring of things that will pass until Jesus comes. They are continuous in every generation until Jesus returns, so applies to every generation until that happens. Evidentially beyond your comprehension.

Every Generation sees the Abomination of Desolation?
Ever Generations sees Jerusalem encompassed with Armies?
Every generation witnesses the stone by stone dismantling of the temple as it happens over and over and over?

 

[ewq1938]

If that were true you could demonstrate it from scripture.

I have. The second coming is always a visible, literal and physical return of Christ. This is what Christ taught and what the disciples knew and wrote about. Your position isn't supported as far as the return of Christ is concerned. OT none visible examples of God doing this or that does not apply and is far out of context to the second coming. Christ will have two comings and both were physical.

Did you even Read Revelation 14:14-20?

Yes. It doesn't support your argument simply because it doesn't address the second coming. Have you read Rev 19, the part showing Christ returning with an army? That's a depiction of the second coming.

 

[parousia70]

I have. The second coming is always a visible, literal and physical return of Christ. This is what Christ taught and what the disciples knew and wrote about. Your position isn't supported as far as the return of Christ is concerned. OT none visible examples of God doing this or that does not apply and is far out of context to the second coming.

Rather, those OT examples form the entire backdrop for the doctrine of the "coming" of Christ, for it was in this manner of the Father's glory that Christ said he would come (Matt 16:27-28; Lk. 9:26; Matt 24:33-34).

It [Rev 14:14-20] doesn't support your argument simply because it doesn't address the second coming.

Then exegete Revelation 14:14-20 for us... what Coming of Christ on the clouds to reap the harvest of the earth IS Rev 14:14-20 depicting in your view? And How is/was it different from the "2nd coming" coming of Christ on the clouds for the harvest of the earth?

Show us where scripture teaches these are separate and distinct "comings of Jesus on the clouds to harvest the earth", as you claim.

Have you read Rev 19, the part showing Christ returning with an army? That's a depiction of the second coming.

Kinda like this description of God descending upon Mt Sinai to deliver the tablets to Moses depicted here, right?:

And he said: “The Lord came from Sinai, And dawned on them from Seir; He shone forth from Mount Paran, And He came with ten thousands of saints; From His right hand Came a fiery law for them. (Deuteronomy 33:2)

How come none of the people saw those ten thousand saints? Surely 10,000 saints descending from Heaven upon Mt Sinai would be visible for miles around, no?

As I indicated, The cloud-coming of Revelation 1:7 that "every eye would see" is shown in Revelation 14:14-20 to be an event that occurs in the heavenly realms. As the passage reveals, Christ's actions and commands in the heavenlies result in various tribulation-period disasters that transpire on earth. Simply put, Revelation 14:14-20 is the cloud-coming that "every eye would see." This is significant, for St. John is not describing the coming of Christ as some visual spectacular with cumulus clouds in the skies overhead, but as the coming of Yahweh himself, making Christ equal with the Father, precisely in the manner and tradition of Yahweh's Old-Testament-era comings.

You have to completely ignore or redact these precedent-setting scriptures, and instead apply a totally foreign, hyper-literal definition to this language that would be unrecognizable to Jesus and the Apostles and Prophets of God.

Such remains untenable.