The latter Days: The type of the latter days

[DavidPT]

Agreed. The assumption would only be made after another 1,900+ years that it happened in the first century.

6 And now you know what holds him back, for him to might be revealed in his own time.

I've also no doubt that the apostles did not know when these things would take place:

36 But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not the angels of Heaven, but only My Father. Matthew 24.

So Paul was speaking to all Christians across the Age who would ever be persecuted by unbelievers - and he did not claim that it would take place in the lifetime of the Thessalonian church who were the first to receive the letter to them - because Paul was not a liar and if he had claimed it would take place in their lifetime, He would have been calling Jesus a liar:

36 But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not the angels of Heaven, but only My Father. Matthew 24.

Your interpretation is making Paul out to be a liar who claimed to know better than Jesus about when the prophesied return of Christ would come.

They did not claim to know when Jesus would return, neither did Paul. They did not call Jesus a liar. They may have believed that Jesus would return in their lifetime, just like our generation does, and just as many generations between theirs and ours have done.

Still, He has not come:

3 First, knowing this, that there will come in the last days scoffers walking according to their own lusts
4 and saying, Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.
5 For this is hidden from them by their willing it, that the heavens were of old, and the earth out of the water, and through water, being held together by the word of God,
6 through which the world that then was, being flooded by water, perished.
7 But the present heavens and the earth being kept in store by the same word, are being kept for fire until the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.

8 But, beloved, let not this one thing be hidden from you, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

9 The Lord is not slow concerning His promise, as some count slowness, but is long-suffering toward us, not willing that any of us should perish, but that all of us should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a rushing noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat. And the earth and the works in it will be burned up. 2 Peter 3

But you claim, "Oh they knew it would happen in their first century generation, because Paul knew it, and told them".

Except that Paul told them no such thing, because Jesus told the apostles and disciples who were His eyewitnesses, that no one would know the day or the hour of His return, and Peter told the churches that His return would come as a thief in the night and implied that it would be after a long, long time, so that people would be mocking the idea of the return of Christ by the time He returns.

But you claim, "Oh they knew it would happen in their first century generation, because Paul knew it, and told them".



Since the 1st century, the mystery of lawlessness has always been in the churches - it's referring to lawlessness in the churches, not the lawless deeds of unbelievers. And Paul was not telling of a lawlessness that does not still exist right up to this present day. So this fact does not prove your point in any way, shape or form. It's ridiculous to even cite Paul's revelation about lawlessness, as though it only existed in the first century. Eventually this same lawlessness will accompany and help the appearance of the man of sin.

Excellent points throughout.

 

[Zao is life]

Excellent points throughout.

Gracias

 

[5thKingdom]

5thKingdom said:
First, the four "Kingdoms/Beasts" represent the

(1st) Pre-Flood Kingdom
(2nd) Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven" specifically NAMED In Mat 22:2
(3rd) Christian "Kingdom of Heaven" specifically NAMED in Mat 13 [7 verses]
(4th) Great Tribulation "Kingdom of Heaven" specifically NAMED in Mat 25:1

Any serious biblical scholarship teach this? Or is this your own personal made up theology?

Sir... this is recorded history (reality)
Why is it "news" to you?


Secondly...
Can you REFUTE this doctrine from Scripture?
No you cannot. Because it is PART of the Gospel of the Bible.


Finally....
In this day and age you ask about "biblical scholarship"?
That is hilarious.


Search the Scriptures to see whether this is true or false doctrine.
If recorded history is not enough "proof" for you.


Jim

 

[5thKingdom]

Which claninja understood is what I believe and what my post implied - my post was implying the opposite of what I said. I do not believe the man of sin was revealed within the first 5 centuries A.D. He has not yet been revealed.

Is the Man of Sin "revealed" to the world or to the Last Saints?

Jim

 

[claninja]

Agreed. The assumption would only be made after another 1,900+ years that it happened in the first century.

6 And now you know what holds him back, for him to might be revealed in his own time.

the assumption is that the man of sin is a human being. Human beings don’t live for 1900+ years, and would be long dead by now, as Paul states his revealing was being restrained in the first century. I think it would be difficult to prove Paul meant the conception of the man of sin was being restrained.

I've also no doubt that the apostles did not know when these things would take place:

36 But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not the angels of Heaven, but only My Father. Matthew 24.

This is already a faulty premise though. Audience relevance is important. The phrase “no one knows the day nor hour” is an allusion to Galilean wedding traditions. In the tradition, the bride and groom knew the general time Frame but not the exact day nor hour. That was alone decided by the Father.

Thus Jesus told his audience when they saw the events of the olivet discourse then they would know he was near at the very door (general time frame).

Thus Jesus said “this generation shall not pass away til all these things occur” (general time frame).

This is confirmed by the apostles claiming:

1.) the end of all things had drawn near ( 1 peter 4:7)

2.) it was the last hour (1 john 2:18)

3.) the coming of Christ had drawn near (James 5:8)

4.) Christ would come in a little while and without delay (Hebrews 10:37)

5,) the end of the ages had come upon them (1 Corinthians 10:11)

6.) God would grant them relief from persecution at the coming of Christ (2 Thessalonians 1).

Since the 1st century, the mystery of lawlessness has always been in the churches - it's referring to lawlessness in the churches, not the lawless deeds of unbelievers. And Paul was not telling of a lawlessness that does not still exist right up to this present day. So this fact does not prove your point in any way, shape or form. It's ridiculous to even cite Paul's revelation about lawlessness, as though it only existed in the first century. Eventually this same lawlessness will accompany and help the appearance of the man of sin.

My point was only demonstrate that the “mystery” of lawlessness and the man of Sin were present during Paul’s day prior to the destruction of Jerusalem.

 

[claninja]

5thKingdom said:
First, the four "Kingdoms/Beasts" represent the

(1st) Pre-Flood Kingdom
(2nd) Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven" specifically NAMED In Mat 22:2
(3rd) Christian "Kingdom of Heaven" specifically NAMED in Mat 13 [7 verses]
(4th) Great Tribulation "Kingdom of Heaven" specifically NAMED in Mat 25:1





Sir... this is recorded history (reality)
Why is it "news" to you?


Secondly...
Can you REFUTE this doctrine from Scripture?
No you cannot. Because it is PART of the Gospel of the Bible.


Finally....
In this day and age you ask about "biblical scholarship"?
That is hilarious.


Search the Scriptures to see whether this is true or false doctrine.
If recorded history is not enough "proof" for you.


Jim

Ok, so it’s your personal made up theology. Good to know.

 

[Zao is life]

Is the Man of Sin "revealed" to the world or to the Last Saints?

Jim

Only if you believe that those who worship him will recognize him as the Antichrist will you believe that he will be revealed to the world as the Antichrist.

 

[Zao is life]

Human beings don’t live for 1900+ years

Yes they do. Jesus does. And there is a vague reference in the gospels to people who came out of the graves after His resurrection and went into the holy city - which the Revelation identifies as New Jerusalem (the other Jerusalem is never called the holy city again after the death and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah).

But no one who has not been resurrected from the dead can live for 1900+ years.

The phrase “no one knows the day nor hour” is an allusion to Galilean wedding traditions. In the tradition, the bride and groom knew the general time Frame but not the exact day nor hour. That was alone decided by the Father.

Therefore it is illogical to assume which time frame He meant.

I agree, audience relevance is important.

Daniel 9:26 tells us that the city and sanctuary will be destroyed. That's how we know that the abominations in Daniel 9:27 is referring to the abominations associated with the destruction of the city and the sanctuary after Messiah came.

Audience: The scribes and Pharisees in the temple:

What was prophesied in Daniel 9:26-27, Jesus repeated in Matthew 23:37-39 (and that's why He was pronouncing woe upon the scribes and Pharisees in the verses leading up to it: Matthew 23:13-36). Jesus was standing in the temple courtyard when He said these things.

Immediately after this it says, "And Jesus went out and departed from the temple ..

New audience: The disciples - and audience relevance is important:

.. And His disciples came to Him to show Him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said to them, Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, There shall not be left here one stone on another that shall not be thrown down." (Matthew 24:1-2).

Matthew 24:1-2 records the fact that Jesus repeated to His disciples what He had just told the Pharisees. Then He walked down the mountain, through the Kidron Valley over to the Mount of Olives, and walked to the top:

"And as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the world?" (Matthew 24:3).

The are no chapter or verse divisions in the original text of the Bible (they were inserted in 1227 A.D), but the surrounding context tells us which temple Jesus was talking about in Matthew 24:1-2, and therefore Matthew 24:3 should be the first verse of Matthew Chapter 24. The previous two verses close what Jesus was telling the Pharisees about the destruction of the city and sanctuary in Chapter 23.

The Jerusalem temple ceased being the holy place when Jesus died on the cross circa 30 A.D, and the veil in the tabernacle of that temple was torn in two.

Audience: Still the disciples - and audience relevance is important:

The context surrounding the abomination of desolation in the holy place in Matthew 24:15 (let the reader understand) is what Jesus was telling His disciples (not the scribes and Pharisees because he had left the temple already) about them becoming hated of all nations once the gospel has been preached as a witness to all nations, etc: - and audience relevance is important.

Matthew 24:15 starts with the word "Therefore .." meaning it pertains to what Jesus began to talk about in Matthew 24:9, and the words "all nations" in Matthew 24:14 and Matthew 24:9 tells us that Matthew 24:15 does not pertain to the temple mentioned in Matthew 24:1-2.

Many Christians (especially those who adhere to Preterist and Partial Preterist theology) will have the word "Therefore .." in Matthew 24;15 pertain to the temple Jesus was speaking about in Matthew 24:1-2, but in light of the surrounding context (Matthew 24;9-14), this seems unlikely.

It's far more likely that the abomination of desolation in the holy place (Matthew 24:15) does not pertain to the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D: It pertains to the great tribulation of the saints in the days that the man of sin seats himself up as the Head of the New Testament Temple, since the Jerusalem temple ceased being the holy place when Jesus died on the cross circa 30 A.D, and the veil in the tabernacle of that temple was torn in two.

Matthew 23:13-39 is the context of "this generation" in Matthew 23:36 - it's referring to the generation of Jews who would see the last days of the kingdom of Judea, the destruction of the city and sanctuary which occurred in 70 A.D and audience relevance is important.

Likewise, it's 100% clear by the text that Matthew 24:9-31 is the context of "this generation" mentioned in Matthew 24:34 - and that has nothing to do with the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, since all these verses are talking only about the tribulation of the saints when they become hated of all nations for His name's sake, leading up to His return and audience relevance is important.

You can ignore the context and the audience relevance in order to change the meaning of the text to suit your preferred eschatological model, but it doesn't work when we read the text strictly according to the context surrounding each text, and bear the audience relevance in mind.

My point was only demonstrate that the “mystery” of lawlessness and the man of Sin were present during Paul’s day prior to the destruction of Jerusalem.

The mystery of lawlessness was present, but you have added the presence of the man of sin without having any biblical or historical basis to do so. He was not present when Paul wrote, otherwise Paul would not have said,

2 Thessalonians 2
1 Now we beseech you, my brothers, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him,
2 that you should not be soon shaken in mind or troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word or letter, as through us, as if the Day of Christ is at hand [enistemi].
3 Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For that Day shall not come unless there first comes a falling away (ho apostasia - the apostasy), and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition,
4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, setting himself forth, that he is God.

[*StrongsGreek*]
1764 enistemi en-is'-tay-mee from 1722 and 2476; to place on hand, i.e. (reflexively) impend, (participle) be instant:--come, be at hand, present. see GREEK for 1722 see GREEK for 2476

Your purpose is clearly not only to show that the mystery of lawlessness was already present when Paul wrote, but also to assert that the man of sin was also present, even though none of your supporting arguments for this bear up under scrutiny.

 

[claninja]

Yes they do. Jesus does. And there is a vague reference in the gospels to people who came out of the graves after His resurrection and went into the holy city - which the Revelation identifies as New Jerusalem (the other Jerusalem is never called the holy city again after the death and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah).

But no one who has not been resurrected from the dead can live for 1900+ years.

Wait, so you believe there are 1900 + year old people living secretly somewhere on earth right now?

Therefore it is illogical to assume which time frame He meant.

This did not address nor counter anything that I stated. It would be absolutely incorrect to say Christ didn’t know the time frame based on him saying know one knows the “day nor hour”.

You used the argument that “no one knows the day nor hour” without realizing its first century, audience relevant meaning. Again, not knowing the day nor hour does not in any way mean Jesus didn’t know the general time frame. It is an allusion to the Galilean wedding tradition, of the bride and groom being aware of the general time frame, just not the exact day nor hour. This was known only to the father of the groom. If Jesus didn’t know the general time frame, then the following statements don’t make any sense:

Matthew 24:32-33 From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. 33So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates.

Matthew 24:34 34Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

If Jesus didn’t give his disciples the general time frame then the following statements don’t make sense:

1.) the end of all things had drawn near ( 1 peter 4:7)

2.) it was the last hour (1 john 2:18)

3.) the coming of Christ had drawn near (James 5:8)

4.) Christ would come in a little while and without delay (Hebrews 10:37)

5,) the end of the ages had come upon them (1 Corinthians 10:11)

6.) God would grant them relief from persecution at the coming of Christ (2 Thessalonians 1).

Then we can even ask if the following occurred during the apostles generation and answer easily with a yes:

Did the apostles generation experience, famine, war, persecution, false prophets, lawlessness, the gospel going to the whole oikoumene, the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, the days of vengeance TO FULFILL ALL THAT IS WRITTEN, the coming of the son of man on the clouds, the coming of the kingdom with power, and the saints being gathered into the wedding feast?

Again, easily yes.

Daniel 9:26 tells us that the city and sanctuary will be destroyed. That's how we know that the abominations in Daniel 9:27 is referring to the abominations associated with the destruction of the city and the sanctuary after Messiah came.

And i can’t even follow the rest of your argument, which doesn’t even address how you are wrong about he phrase “no one knows the day nor hour” nor remains with the context of the passage which is about the destruction of the temple. It must change the context completely away from audience relevance in order to foist up some hyper futuristic theology.

Your purpose is clearly not only to show that the mystery of lawlessness was already present when Paul wrote, but also to assert that the man of sin was also present, even though none of your supporting arguments for this bear up under scrutiny.

You already agreed the mystery of lawlessness was working in the first century, BUT You never addressed vs 9, which states the presence of the man of sin IS (present tense verb), NOT WILL BE, according to the work of Satan.

So we have 3 total pieces of evidence from Paul on the man of sin existing in the first century

1.) the revealing of the man of sin was being restrained in the first century. With the Thessalonians knowing the identity of who or what the restrainer was prior to Thessalonians being written.

2.) the mystery of lawless was already at work in the first century

3.) the presence of the man of sin was existing by the work of Satan in the first century.

 

[Zao is life]

And i can’t even follow the rest of your argument, which doesn’t even address how you are wrong about he phrase “no one knows the day nor hour” nor remains with the context of the passage which is about the destruction of the temple. It must change the context completely away from audience relevance in order to foist up some hyper futuristic theology.

You can't follow (or won't read?) the rest of what I said yet you just repeat the same long list of false assumptions based on the false assumption that Jesus was speaking only to His first century audience when He used a Jewish custom to illustrate the fact that no one would know the day of hour of His return.

You also ignore the fact that Paul told the Thessalonians that the return of Christ was not at hand in 2 Thessalonians 2:2.

You don't even realize that the Kingdom of Christ had drawn near when Jesus was speaking to His first century audience in the Olivet Discourse, but only arrived once He had died for the sins of the world and risen from the dead, and 10 days after He ascended into heaven, on the Day of Pentecost, the glory of God entered His tabernacle, the church.

Jesus was not speaking about the Kingdom of heaven having drawn near after He had risen - it was before He had risen:

And i can’t even follow the rest of your argument, which doesn’t even address how you are wrong about he phrase “no one knows the day nor hour” nor remains with the context of the passage which is about the destruction of the temple. It must change the context completely away from audience relevance in order to foist up some hyper futuristic theology. [/B]

1.) the end of all things had drawn near ( 1 peter 4:7)

2.) it was the last hour (1 john 2:18)

3.) the coming of Christ had drawn near (James 5:8)

4.) Christ would come in a little while and without delay (Hebrews 10:37)

5,) the end of the ages had come upon them (1 Corinthians 10:11)

See? Thanks to modern astronomy and it's fancy computer calculated dates we can even date the coming of the Kingdom of Christ - it was April 7, 30 A.D.

Your theology completely dispenses with the method by which the Kingdom of Christ - which had drawn near when Jesus was talking to his audience - was to come. Which is a shame, in my opinion, because it betrays the fact that you have a diminished regard for the price He paid in His own blood for the Kingdom of heaven to come (which had drawn near when He was speaking to His audience, but had not yet come).

Your theology completely dispenses with the actual day the Kingdom of heaven came, and places it in the year Jerusalem and the temple was destroyed instead, holding as the holy place the temple made with human hands that had ceased being the holy place when Jesus died on the cross.

PS; Paul did not tell the Thessalonians that the man of sin "is" present in 2 Thessalonians 2:9. Your false claim completely negates the fact that Paul associated the appearance of the man of sin with the Day of Christ (the Day He will return in judgment), and Paul told the Thessalonians unambiguously in verse 2 that the Day of Christ was not at hand and would not come until an apostasy has come, and the man of sin has been revealed.

Nice red herring for you to pretend that I claimed that there are people walking about secretly on earth, whom Matthew mentioned as being resurrected after Jesus rose from the dead, even though I said very clearly that I believe they could only have entered New Jerusalem (in heaven) because Jerusalem is never again called the holy city after the death of Christ, but the Revelation identifies New Jerusalem as the holy city.

Your long list of false assumptions based on false assumptions ignores so much scripture that negates your supporting arguments (such as the fact that Paul unambiguously told the Thessalonians that the return of Christ was not at hand in 2 Thessalonians 2:2). Yet you simply ignore all the scriptures proving the fallacious nature of your eschatological position, not realizing that in the process, the theology you have produced negates scripture.

The ambiguity of your argument is so glaringly obvious that I'm shocked that you cannot see it yourself.

 

[DavidPT]

Yes they do. Jesus does. And there is a vague reference in the gospels to people who came out of the graves after His resurrection and went into the holy city - which the Revelation identifies as New Jerusalem (the other Jerusalem is never called the holy city again after the death and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah).

Matthew 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.


Based on what this verse says, I can't figure out why you are equating the holy city with the NJ in heaven, which then doesn't explain this part---and appeared unto many. This only makes sense if the holy city meant here is meaning Jerusalem in the middle east in the first century, that they went into that city, and in that city appeared unto many. Not to mention, at this point in time Jesus had not even ascended into heaven yet, therefore, it doesn't make sense that the saints that came out of their graves after He has resurrected, that they would ascend to heaven before He does. Unless I'm misunderstanding you somewhere, you might want to rethink some of this.

John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Would this not be meaning after the graves were opened, and that the bodies of many saints came out of the graves? And does not this verse say Jesus had not yet ascended to heaven at this point?

 

[grafted branch]

You also ignore the fact that Paul told the Thessalonians that the return of Christ was not at hand in 2 Thessalonians 2:2.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:2 the word “at hand” is enistemi <1764>. It occurs 7 times, Romans 8:38, 1 Corinthians 3:22, 1 Corinthians 7:26, Galatians 1:4, 2 Thessalonians 2:2, 2 Timothy 3:1, and Hebrews 9:9. This word is mostly translated as present, meaning presently taking place.

James 5:8 for example uses the word eggizo <1448> which means to come near or approach in regards to the coming of the Lord.

I’m not an expert on when the books were written but my Bible says James was written AD 44-49 and 2 Thessalonians was written AD 51-52.

What makes sense here is everyone knowing the coming of the Lord was eggizo, or near and Paul had to explain to the Thessalonians that it wasn’t actually enistemi or presently occurring in AD 51-52.

What wouldn’t make sense is to try to say the coming or day of the Lord was at hand in AD 44-49 but then was no longer at hand in AD 51-52.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Part II of this article is here

Question: Why does Daniel Chapter 7 speak as though the latter days of the fourth kingdom is the latter-day kingdom that will be destroyed by Christ before the kingdom is handed over to the saints of the Most High?

This post shows why.

Firstly, notice that there are two separate times in the book of Daniel that the word "abomination" is associated with the temple of God, and there is a major difference between the two:

(i) Abominations were committed (Daniel 9:26-27) that the text tells us were going to end with the destruction of the city (Jerusalem) and the sanctuary (the temple).

(ii) The abomination of desolation (singular) set up by Antiochus IV, "Epiphanes" (meaning "God manifest", the epithet Antiochus IV attached to his name) did not result in the destruction of the temple: After he was ousted by the Maccabees, the temple was cleansed, and reconsecrated to God.

The history of Antiochus IV is well documented: Who he was, the way he came to power, which nations he fought wars with, his oppression of the Jews and the way he banned their religious worship, the way he gave himself the epithet to his name of "God manifest" ("Epiphanes"), and placed an idol - a statue of Zeus, "the king of the gods", in the sanctuary of God's temple in Jerusalem, etc.

Although it challenges the eschatology of many Christians determined to assign all biblical prophecy to the "still to be fulfilled" category, the parallels of the history of Antiochus IV with the text in Daniel Chapters 7, 8, 11 & 12 are far too remarkable to be simply brushed aside with the label "coincidence".

In fact, as will be seen in this article, there is a very good reason why Daniel closes Chapter 7 with the statement,

"But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his rulership, to cut off and to destroy until the end.
And the kingdom and rulership, and the greatness of the kingdom under all the heavens, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. And all kingdoms shall serve and obey Him." (Daniel 7:26-27).

The beasts/kingdoms of Daniel

(I) Lion: Nebuchadnezzar's Babyloniian kingdom.
(II) Bear: Persian kingdom.
(III) Leopard: Greek kingdom

The leopard kingdom divided into four parts after the death of Alexander the Great.

Out of one of these four rose one Antiochus IV, "Epiphanes".

There was an apostasy from the true faith on the part of many Jews during Antiochus IV's reign.

The wording of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 (see below) immediately brings to mind two historical characters:

1. Judas Iscariot ("the son of perdition").
2. Antiochus IV, "Epiphanes".

The Type: Antiochus IV, "Epiphanes": Daniel 11
36 And the king shall do according to his will. And he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper until the fury is fulfilled. For that which is decreed shall be done.
37 He will not regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god. For he shall magnify himself above all.

The anti-type: The man of sin: 2 Thessalonians 2
3 Let not anyone deceive you by any means. For that Day shall not come unless there first comes a falling away, and the man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition,
4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, setting himself forth, that he is God.

The way 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 is written takes our minds back to both Judas Iscariot * and to Antiochus IV, "Epiphanes" (Daniel's 4th beast).

The way Daniel's fourth king of the fourth kingdom ("beast") finds his end in both Daniel Chapter 7 and Daniel Chapter 12, takes our minds forward to the latter days kingdom and the return of Christ.

* The only two persons called "the son of perdition" in the New Testament are Judas Iscariot and the man of sin of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4.

So 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 is pointing us to both Antiochus IV and Judas Iscariot as the types (forerunners) of the man of sin. (Obviously there are other types or forerunners also: Nebuchadnezzar, Nero in the 1st century, etc - but 2 Thessalonians 2:4 points towards only these two persons).

Daniel 7, 8, 11 & 12 do not speak of the destruction of the temple or the city, but merely of the defilement of the temple by sacrifices to idols and an idol placed in the sanctuary in the latter days of the Seleucid Hellenistic kingdom of Antiochus IV.

Daniel Chapter 7's fourth kingdom ("beast")​

Many Christians misapply Daniel's fourth beast in Daniel Chapter 7 to the Roman Empire, because:

(a) The first three kingdoms represented by an image seen in a prophetic dream by Babylon's king Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel Chapter 2) correspond with at least the first three kingdoms of Daniel's vision; and

(b) Nebuchadnezzar's image seems to move from the Greek Empire (belly and thighs of bronze) to the Roman Empire (legs of iron), and then onto the final Empire of the Revelation.

However, Nebuchadnezzar's prophetic image has 5 parts/kingdoms, whereas Daniel Chapter 7 speaks only of four kingdoms ("beasts"), and the history of Antiochus IV, and the fourth kingdom, despite the denials of many Christians, matches incredibly well.

Also, three kings were indeed uprooted in order for Antiochus IV to rise to power, and this again correlates with history, but there is no mention of three of the ten kings of the Revelation being uprooted, nor of any toes in Nebuchadnezzar's image being removed.

Daniel 8:11; Daniel 11:31 and Daniel 12:11 are referring to the abomination of desolation that was set up in the holy place by Antiochus IV; but Daniel Chapter 12 is also the first part of the prophecy which is complemented by Jesus in Revelation 10:

Daniel 12:7
And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was on the waters of the river, when he held up his right and his left hand to Heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever
that it shall be for a time, times, and a half. And when they have made an end of scattering the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

Revelation 10:5-7
And the angel whom I saw standing on the sea and on the earth lifted his hand to the heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever and ever, who created the heaven and the things in it, and the earth and the things in it, and the sea and the things in it,
that there should no longer be time. But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he will begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as He has declared to His servants the prophets.

In Daniel Chapter 12, the final 3.5 years is mentioned. In Revelation Chapter 10 the final 3.5 years has now passed, and the 7th trumpet is about to sound. (Compare the whole of Daniel Chapter 12 with Revelation 10:1-7).

Antiochus IV reigned during the latter days of the Seleucid Hellenistic kingdom.

Notice that Revelation 13:2 is telling us about a coming kingdom ("beast") whose power (or perhaps character) will be a combination of the first three kingdoms mentioned in Daniel Chapter 7 (lion, bear, leopard).

It is prophesied of the "beast" of the Revelation that he will "open his mouth in blasphemy toward God, to blaspheme His name and His tabernacle, and those dwelling in Heaven. And it was given to it to war with the saints and to overcome them." (Revelation 13:6-7).

This is exactly what Antiochus IV also did in his day in the latter days of Seleucid Hellenistic kingdom; and so his kingdom (kingdom IV-A of Daniel's Chapter 7's four beasts) is the type (forerunner) of both:

(A) The kingdom ("beast") written about in the Revelation (IV-B); and
(B) The man of sin of 2 Thessalonians Chapter 2.

Speaking as though the kingdom of Antiochus IV is the latter-day kingdom that will be destroyed by Christ before the kingdom is handed over to the saints of the Most High, Daniel thus combines both the kingdom of Antiochus IV and the above (final) kingdom into one prophecy in both Daniel Chapter 7 and Daniel Chapter 12 - showing that the former king/kingdom (IV-A) is the type (forerunner) of the latter (IV-B).

So we have Daniel's fourth beast, Antiochus IV, projecting forward in time to the final kingdom, and vice-versa:

* The way 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 is written takes our minds back to both Judas Iscariot ("the son of perdition") and to Antiochus IV, "Epiphanes" (Daniel's 4th beast).
* The way Daniel's fourth beast finds his end in both Daniel Chapter 7 and Daniel Chapter 12, takes our minds forward to the return of Christ.

Notice that this identifies the man of sin of 2 Thessalonians Chapter 2 with the beast of Revelation 13:1-10, and suggests that the miracles and lying wonders mentioned as accompanying the coming of the man of sin in 2 Thessalonians Chapter 2 are not performed by the man of sin himself, but by the false prophet (the "beast from the earth") in Revelation Chapter 13, and that the man of sin is the same as the beast of Revelation 13:1-10.

The inspiration of God in the wording of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 and Daniel chapters 7 & 12's fourth king/kingdom ("beast") is clear, and is amazing.

It's also important to bear this in mind:

(i) Abominations were committed (Daniel 9:26-27) that the text tells us were going to end with the destruction of the city (Jerusalem) and the sanctuary (the temple).

(ii) The abomination of desolation (singular) set up by Antiochus IV, "Epiphanes" Daniel 8:11; Daniel 11:31 and Daniel 12:11) did not result in the destruction of the temple: After he was ousted by the Maccabees, the temple was cleansed, and reconsecrated to God.

So the above passages are not all talking about the same abominations; and Daniel's fourth beast is not talking about the Roman Empire just because the fourth part of the image in Nebuchadnezzar's dream (the legs of iron in Daniel Chapter 2) seems to be speaking about the Roman Empire.

Daniel's fourth beast and its latter days is telling of the latter days of both the Seleucid Hellenistic kingdom of Antiochus IV, "Epiphanes", as well as the latter days kingdom of the beast, and the return of Christ in judgment.

Part II of this article is here

There is another historical possibility for this question, that I think holds more Scriptural weight than the Maccabean period. Have you done any study into the Herodian Dynasty and started comparing content in the gospels, Acts to the book of Daniel?

 

[The Righterzpen]

Well the Roman Empire was the legs of iron. Two legs and 'coincidentally'? the Roman Empire split into the Western half and the Eastern part in the 4th century A.D. The feet are of part iron and part clay and Daniel is given two reasons for this: There will be a mixing of the seed of men in the final kingdom that will not adhere to one another so the final kingdom will be partly strong and partly brittle.

But though like you I used to believe that the 4th beast of Daniel was also the Roman Empire because the first three empires correspond to the first three empires represented by the image in Daniel 2, I don't believe it anymore. I think it is a mistake to believe the 4th kingdom/beast in Daniel 7 also represents the Roman Empire that is represented by the legs of iron in the image of Daniel 2.

It was always very confusing because according to the text of Daniel 7 the 4th beast was supposed to be defeated by Christ and destroyed in the burning flame and the everlasting Kingdom of Christ was supposed to replace it and be inherited by the saints. But it makes total sense to me now for the reasons I gave in my first post here.

Well Scripture does say that the 4th beast isn't like the other 3; although the Roman Empire, in a way, could be thought of as a typology.

We get examples of this in statement like "A decree went out from Augustus Caesar that all the world be taxed." Well we know Rome was not a literal global empire. But we certainly see in our day a global political system that spans national boundaries with a "new wold order" and "world economic forum". The global monetary system is all interconnected. The commerce is interconnected. The communication system, the Internet, the power grid, the food supply. All of this is driven by the agenda of a system that has no national boarders. Yet it's a very real entity; that's been "growing" over the centuries to become what it is today.

Revelation 13 talks about "7 heads / kings". Yet Revelation 17:11 says the beast itself is the 8th king. There's also 10 kings "who've yet to receive their kingdoms (who in turn give those over to the beast) - (I believe = providing I'm remembering this correctly.) Well, ironically, there's 10 nation groups mentioned in the book of Acts that are present at Pentecost; who's people are all convert to Judaism at the time.) And there is an interesting coincidence about "the Greater Israel Project" where if this political aspiration were to get it's wish; it would take land from 10 different nations. Does a literal (material land) fulfillment of that come to pass in the future? (I don't know the answer to that question.)

According to Revelation though the 6th king was reigning at the point Revelation was recorded. (Revelation 17:10) Now there were 7 Herods who ruled in the Herodian Dynasty in Judea for roughly 120 years. (I think actually 130?)

Noah took 120 years to build the ark. Which global destruction followed it's completion.

The beast "goes into perdition" as the saints "take the Kingdom"; but then apparently the beast comes out of perdition as Satan is loosed at the "end of the millennium". Is there a literal timetable to that millennium? That appears to be the case when we look at the actual Greek "1000 years" and notice it's actually a plural number. It's a plural "thousand"; a duel plural thousand. Does that mean the "millennial reign" comes at the end of 2000 years? (I don't know the answer to that question, but from bits and pieces of information we can gather; it's certainly plausible.)

Thus I think this is were we are in the time table. Or at least that appears to be the current manifestation politically.

We have the 4 global economic power houses right now. (US, Russia, China and India) Then we have Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Australia, Japan and South Korea. Now obviously these nations are in various states of decay because "the beast system" is a "kingdom divided against itself" and actually Satan doesn't have the ability to control the independent agent of the human will. Thus the "plebs" are revolting against the system. And the major backbone that holds up this system are the farmers, truckers train operators, dock workers, factory workers etc.

We're likely on the verge of a global depression that I think they are trying to avoid by starting a third world war. The banks are in trouble, the economies are in trouble, the energy system is in trouble. How bad things "break" remains to be seen. But yes, I definitely think we have "rough seas" ahead.

So though I think you are correct in the historical sense that Rome was not the end; but I also don't think you're too many degrees off from the truth either.

 

[claninja]

You can't follow (or won't read?) the rest of what I said yet you just repeat the same long list of false assumptions based on the false assumption that Jesus was speaking only to His first century audience when He used a Jewish custom to illustrate the fact that no one would know the day of hour of His return.

You didn’t respond to anything I posted, hence the repetition. Should I assume your silence is a concession that you understand the phrase “no one knows the day nor hour” doesn’t require that Jesus doesn’t know the general time frame?

As far as your post, it’s very difficult to follow. You go from Daniel 9’s aod being equal to Matthew 23, but not Matthew 24 because Jesus left the temple and there were no chapter and verse divisions, thus Matthew 24:3 shouldn’t be considered part of anything previously. Which is doesn’t even make any logical sense. What is the antecedent for “these things” in Matthew 24:3?

Then you claim Jesus wasn’t talking to the Pharisees but the the disciples in Matthew 24, so “audience relevance” for some reason, which isn’t explained.

Then you claim it’s “100% clear” that the context of Matthew 24:9-31 has nothing to do with the temple destruction. Such is a fallacious and subjective statement. If that was true, we wouldn’t be debating and the majority of serious scholarship would agree with you. But such isn’t the case.

It’s just a very difficult argument to follow……

The context is simple: Jesus states the temple will be destroyed in Matthew 24:1-2. The disciples ask “when these things will happen” in Matthew 24:3.

You also ignore the fact that Paul told the Thessalonians that the return of Christ was not at hand in 2 Thessalonians 2:2.

Strawman. Never ignored that.

“at hand” in that passage also can be translated as “present”. Since it’s in the perfect tense, it can mean “already occurred”. Therefore, I agree that the day of the Lord hadn’t already occurred, if this to be the correct understanding.

“Christ and His apostles always taught that the day of the Lord's coming is at hand; and it is not likely that Paul would imply anything contrary here; what he denies is, that it is so immediately imminent, instant, or present, as to justify the neglect of everyday worldly duties. Chrysostom, and after him Alford, translates, "is (already) present" (compare 2Ti 2:18), a kindred error. But in 2Ti 3:1, the same Greek verb is translated "come." Wahl supports this view. The Greek is usually used of actual presence; but is quite susceptible of the translation, "is all but present." -Jamieson fausset

“And the verb means more than is at hand,—rather, is now present (R. V.), is upon us; under the same verb (in its participle) “things present” are contrasted with “things to come” in Romans 8:38, and 1 Corinthians 3:22.” - Cambridge

You don't even realize that the Kingdom of Christ had drawn near when Jesus was speaking to His first century audience in the Olivet Discourse, but only arrived once He had died for the sins of the world and risen from the dead, and 10 days after He ascended into heaven, on the Day of Pentecost, the glory of God entered His tabernacle, the church.

The kingdom was “at hand” -mark 1:15

The kingdom would NOT appear immediately - Luke 19:11

The kingdom would not come with observable signs - Luke 17:20

The kingdom of God would come before his audience tasted death (mark 9:17

when they saw the events of the olivet discourse, they would know the kingdom was near - Luke 21:31

I have no disagreement that the kingdom was present prior to the resurrection, so no idea why you would say that without asking clarifying questions?

My position on how to understand the kingdom of God is in line with Dr. lightfoot.

“
Dr. Lightfoot has well observed that there are two senses especially in which the phrase "kingdom of heaven," is to be understood.

1. The promulgation and establishment of the Christian religion.

2. The total overthrow of the Jewish polity.

The Jews imagined that when the Messiah should come he would destroy the Gentiles, and reign gloriously over the Jews: the very reverse of this, our Lord intimates, should be the case. He was about to destroy the whole Jewish polity, and reign gloriously among the Gentiles.”

Your theology completely dispenses with the method by which the Kingdom of Christ - which had drawn near when Jesus was talking to his audience - was to come. Which is a shame, in my opinion, because it betrays the fact that you have a diminished regard for the price He paid in His own blood for the Kingdom of heaven to come (which had drawn near when He was speaking to His audience, but had not yet come).

Your theology completely dispenses with the actual day the Kingdom of heaven came, and places it in the year Jerusalem and the temple was destroyed instead, holding as the holy place the temple made with human hands that had ceased being the holy place when Jesus died on the cross.

False.

PS; Paul did not tell the Thessalonians that the man of sin "is" present in 2 Thessalonians 2:9.

If you want to ignore the original Greek, that’s on you. But Paul did write “the presence of the man of sin “IS” (present tense verb meaning to exist” by the works of Satan”. To say Paul didn’t write that is false.

Nice red herring for you to pretend that I claimed that there are people walking about secretly on earth, whom Matthew mentioned as being resurrected after Jesus rose from the dead, even though I said very clearly that I believe they could only have entered New Jerusalem (in heaven) because Jerusalem is never again called the holy city after the death of Christ, but the Revelation identifies New Jerusalem as the holy city.

The context of our discussion was the man of sin’s revealing being restrained during Paul’s day, not the resurrected Jesus. You said “yes they do” in regards to people living 1900 years. I asked a clarifying question, in regards to the original context of the discussion, if you believe there are 1900 year people living on the earth somewhere, since you believe the man of sin hasn’t been revealed yet. Asking a clarifying question is not a “red herring”.………

our long list of false assumptions based on false assumptions ignores so much scripture that negates your supporting arguments (such as the fact that Paul unambiguously told the Thessalonians that the return of Christ was not at hand in 2 Thessalonians 2:2). Yet you simply ignore all the scriptures proving the fallacious nature of your eschatological position, not realizing that in the process, the theology you have produced negates scripture.

And I could say the same generic, subjective argument about you, so not sure what this accomplishes….

The ambiguity of your argument is so glaringly obvious that I'm shocked that you cannot see it yourself.

What is specifically ambiguous about it, in order to help me learn?

“No one knows the day nor hour” is a Galilean wedding allusion to the bride, groom, friends, and family knowing the general time frame of the wedding, just not the exact day nor hour. Thus while Jesus doesn’t know the exact day nor hour, he does know the general time frame and states “when YOU see all these things, know he is near, at the door” AND “THIS generation will not pass away until all these things occur”. So far, I’m not sure what’s ambiguous here.

These idea that the events of the olivet discourse would occur in the generation of the apostles is affirmed by the “near” time statements written literally near to the destruction of Jerusalem.

1.) the end of all things had drawn near ( 1 peter 4:7)

2.) it was the last hour (1 john 2:18)

3.) the coming of Christ had drawn near (James 5:8)

4.) Christ would come in a little while and without delay (Hebrews 10:37)

5,) the end of the ages had come upon them (1 Corinthians 10:11)

So not sure what’s ambiguous there?

 

[Zao is life]

There is another historical possibility for this question, that I think holds more Scriptural weight than the Maccabean period. Have you done any study into the Herodian Dynasty and started comparing content in the gospels, Acts to the book of Daniel?

I've never heard of Herod defiling the temple and banning Jewish religious worship, so no.

 

[Zao is life]

Well Scripture does say that the 4th beast isn't like the other 3; although the Roman Empire, in a way, could be thought of as a typology.

We get examples of this in statement like "A decree went out from Augustus Caesar that all the world be taxed." Well we know Rome was not a literal global empire. But we certainly see in our day a global political system that spans national boundaries with a "new wold order" and "world economic forum". The global monetary system is all interconnected. The commerce is interconnected. The communication system, the Internet, the power grid, the food supply. All of this is driven by the agenda of a system that has no national boarders. Yet it's a very real entity; that's been "growing" over the centuries to become what it is today.

Revelation 13 talks about "7 heads / kings". Yet Revelation 17:11 says the beast itself is the 8th king. There's also 10 kings "who've yet to receive their kingdoms (who in turn give those over to the beast) - (I believe = providing I'm remembering this correctly.) Well, ironically, there's 10 nation groups mentioned in the book of Acts that are present at Pentecost; who's people are all convert to Judaism at the time.) And there is an interesting coincidence about "the Greater Israel Project" where if this political aspiration were to get it's wish; it would take land from 10 different nations. Does a literal (material land) fulfillment of that come to pass in the future? (I don't know the answer to that question.)

According to Revelation though the 6th king was reigning at the point Revelation was recorded. (Revelation 17:10) Now there were 7 Herods who ruled in the Herodian Dynasty in Judea for roughly 120 years. (I think actually 130?)

Noah took 120 years to build the ark. Which global destruction followed it's completion.

The beast "goes into perdition" as the saints "take the Kingdom"; but then apparently the beast comes out of perdition as Satan is loosed at the "end of the millennium". Is there a literal timetable to that millennium? That appears to be the case when we look at the actual Greek "1000 years" and notice it's actually a plural number. It's a plural "thousand"; a duel plural thousand. Does that mean the "millennial reign" comes at the end of 2000 years? (I don't know the answer to that question, but from bits and pieces of information we can gather; it's certainly plausible.)

Thus I think this is were we are in the time table. Or at least that appears to be the current manifestation politically.

We have the 4 global economic power houses right now. (US, Russia, China and India) Then we have Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Australia, Japan and South Korea. Now obviously these nations are in various states of decay because "the beast system" is a "kingdom divided against itself" and actually Satan doesn't have the ability to control the independent agent of the human will. Thus the "plebs" are revolting against the system. And the major backbone that holds up this system are the farmers, truckers train operators, dock workers, factory workers etc.

We're likely on the verge of a global depression that I think they are trying to avoid by starting a third world war. The banks are in trouble, the economies are in trouble, the energy system is in trouble. How bad things "break" remains to be seen. But yes, I definitely think we have "rough seas" ahead.

So though I think you are correct in the historical sense that Rome was not the end; but I also don't think you're too many degrees off from the truth either.

I don't actually have a belief 'engraved in stone' about who the first 5 kings of Revelation 17 were. The traditional view is Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, but I'm not convinced of that or any other view, so I find what you say about the Herods very interesting. I've often wondered if they may be Judean instead of Gentile kings.

I am convinced that Antiochus IV fulfilled the wars with the king of the South etc in Daniel 8 and 11, and that his self-exaltation and activities with regard to his attempts to stamp out the worship of the biblical God and all Jewish forms of worship, and his placing an idol of Zeus in the sanctuary, makes him the key Old Testament type of the man of sin.

I agree with what you say about the 8th king. He is one of the seven, and the ten kings of the Revelation will reign with him for one hour, handing over their own power and authority to him. Total 11 kings, one of which is the head of all the others. And they had not received a kingdom as yet when the 6th king existed, and that was when John received the Revelation.

So the 10 kings can only be the 7th head/mountain/kingdom. The 8th is the beast from the abyss and is one of the 7. His kingdom is also one that existed before John received the Revelation, and will reappear. Not sure if this is a counterfeit "resurrection" of a human, or simply another human in charge of a kingdom that became "resurrected" so to speak. The former possibility sounds bizarre to me (that of a "resurrected" human - but it's possible if Satan feels the need to match - at least through an illusion - Christ's resurrection from the dead).

For sure, Daniel's fourth beast in Daniel 7 and Daniel 12 is projecting forward to the last days of this Age.

So if the man of sin points by way of the title "son of perdition" back to Judas Iscariot the betrayer, as well as to Epiphanes ("God manifest") Antiochus IV, and Daniel's 4th beast and Daniel 12 are projecting forward, then the Bible is telling us that Antiochus IV is the type of the 8th king of the Revelation - but also of the man of sin. Which means that the lying wonders mentioned by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2 are not performed by the man of sin himself, but by the false prophet of Revelation 13, and the man of sin = the beast.

If I'm wrong about Antiochus IV being the type, then this whole thread's OP is a foundation of sand of a sand castle built on the sea's side of the high tide mark - bearing in mind that in any case I don't know who the 5 kings were that had already fallen by the time John received the Revelation. Maybe the 5 Greek kingdoms, maybe the Herods, maybe the traditional view. I won't guess an answer.

 

[Zao is life]

Well Scripture does say that the 4th beast isn't like the other 3; although the Roman Empire, in a way, could be thought of as a typology.

We get examples of this in statement like "A decree went out from Augustus Caesar that all the world be taxed." Well we know Rome was not a literal global empire. But we certainly see in our day a global political system that spans national boundaries with a "new wold order" and "world economic forum". The global monetary system is all interconnected. The commerce is interconnected. The communication system, the Internet, the power grid, the food supply. All of this is driven by the agenda of a system that has no national boarders. Yet it's a very real entity; that's been "growing" over the centuries to become what it is today.

Revelation 13 talks about "7 heads / kings". Yet Revelation 17:11 says the beast itself is the 8th king. There's also 10 kings "who've yet to receive their kingdoms (who in turn give those over to the beast) - (I believe = providing I'm remembering this correctly.) Well, ironically, there's 10 nation groups mentioned in the book of Acts that are present at Pentecost; who's people are all convert to Judaism at the time.) And there is an interesting coincidence about "the Greater Israel Project" where if this political aspiration were to get it's wish; it would take land from 10 different nations. Does a literal (material land) fulfillment of that come to pass in the future? (I don't know the answer to that question.)

According to Revelation though the 6th king was reigning at the point Revelation was recorded. (Revelation 17:10) Now there were 7 Herods who ruled in the Herodian Dynasty in Judea for roughly 120 years. (I think actually 130?)

Noah took 120 years to build the ark. Which global destruction followed it's completion.

The beast "goes into perdition" as the saints "take the Kingdom"; but then apparently the beast comes out of perdition as Satan is loosed at the "end of the millennium". Is there a literal timetable to that millennium? That appears to be the case when we look at the actual Greek "1000 years" and notice it's actually a plural number. It's a plural "thousand"; a duel plural thousand. Does that mean the "millennial reign" comes at the end of 2000 years? (I don't know the answer to that question, but from bits and pieces of information we can gather; it's certainly plausible.)

Thus I think this is were we are in the time table. Or at least that appears to be the current manifestation politically.

We have the 4 global economic power houses right now. (US, Russia, China and India) Then we have Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Australia, Japan and South Korea. Now obviously these nations are in various states of decay because "the beast system" is a "kingdom divided against itself" and actually Satan doesn't have the ability to control the independent agent of the human will. Thus the "plebs" are revolting against the system. And the major backbone that holds up this system are the farmers, truckers train operators, dock workers, factory workers etc.

We're likely on the verge of a global depression that I think they are trying to avoid by starting a third world war. The banks are in trouble, the economies are in trouble, the energy system is in trouble. How bad things "break" remains to be seen. But yes, I definitely think we have "rough seas" ahead.

So though I think you are correct in the historical sense that Rome was not the end; but I also don't think you're too many degrees off from the truth either.

I used to believe that "all" (Greek pas, which sometimes means "every" but not always - not each and every (pas) person in Judea and Jerusalem went to john to get baptized) meant all the nations of the earth. But I've come more and more to understand Babylon the Great as the anti-thesis of New Jerusalem, and the type of this is the faithful remnant of Jews who refused to apostatize in any given period in Israel's history being the type of New Jerusalem, and the apostatizing, unfaithful Jews being the kings of the earth (Revelation 1:5-6) fornicating with their mother, Babylon the Great, who sits on many waters, so is Catholic.

Ever noticed how "the kings of the earth" who committed fornication with Babylon the Great wailed and wept over her when she was destroyed? They could hardly be the same as the ten kings who will "hate the harlot, make her desoltae and naked, eat her flesh and burn her with fire" She has a kingdom over the kings of the earth, is described as a city - the anti-thesis of New Jerusalem - and the waters where she sits are "peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues" - catholic.(Revelation 17:15-18).

Authority was given to the beast over every tribe and tongue and nation and he will go to war against the saints and overcome them - just like Antiochus IV Epiphanes did in his day. There was an apostasy then, and an apostasy, together with lawlessness, is associated with the appearance of the man of sin.

"All (pas) nations, tribes and tongues" - catholic.

Regardless, I believe that for sure he will use the banking system and the integrated computerized digitalized one-world system to achieve his goals. And maybe quite a lot of computer produced VR imaging too. South Africa has gone backwards a lot, service delivery collpasing everywhere, but it has always been and remains way ahead with regard to the way everything is linked to your ID number and without your ID card and proof of Residence (a bill sent to your address or some other) you cannot have a bank account, you cannot own a sim card for your mobile, you cannot go to school, you cannot work, and I've only listed a few things you cannot do. You cannot bank without it. Period, and the banks are now pushing for no fiat currency wherever you pay, and no debit cards or credit cards. Finger-printing, facial images (mobile banking), and scan to pay - for anything and everything - is the way they're trying to get everyone to go.

Definitely, I believe the possibility of the mark of the beast being digital is very, very strong.

 

[Zao is life]

You didn’t respond to anything I posted, hence the repetition. Should I assume your silence is a concession that you understand the phrase “no one knows the day nor hour” doesn’t require that Jesus doesn’t know the general time frame?

As far as your post, it’s very difficult to follow. You go from Daniel 9’s aod being equal to Matthew 23, but not Matthew 24 because Jesus left the temple and there were no chapter and verse divisions, thus Matthew 24:3 shouldn’t be considered part of anything previously. Which is doesn’t even make any logical sense. What is the antecedent for “these things” in Matthew 24:3?

Then you claim Jesus wasn’t talking to the Pharisees but the the disciples in Matthew 24, so “audience relevance” for some reason, which isn’t explained.

Then you claim it’s “100% clear” that the context of Matthew 24:9-31 has nothing to do with the temple destruction. Such is a fallacious and subjective statement. If that was true, we wouldn’t be debating and the majority of serious scholarship would agree with you. But such isn’t the case.

It’s just a very difficult argument to follow……

The context is simple: Jesus states the temple will be destroyed in Matthew 24:1-2. The disciples ask “when these things will happen” in Matthew 24:3.



Strawman. Never ignored that.

“at hand” in that passage also can be translated as “present”. Since it’s in the perfect tense, it can mean “already occurred”. Therefore, I agree that the day of the Lord hadn’t already occurred, if this to be the correct understanding.

“Christ and His apostles always taught that the day of the Lord's coming is at hand; and it is not likely that Paul would imply anything contrary here; what he denies is, that it is so immediately imminent, instant, or present, as to justify the neglect of everyday worldly duties. Chrysostom, and after him Alford, translates, "is (already) present" (compare 2Ti 2:18), a kindred error. But in 2Ti 3:1, the same Greek verb is translated "come." Wahl supports this view. The Greek is usually used of actual presence; but is quite susceptible of the translation, "is all but present." -Jamieson fausset

“And the verb means more than is at hand,—rather, is now present (R. V.), is upon us; under the same verb (in its participle) “things present” are contrasted with “things to come” in Romans 8:38, and 1 Corinthians 3:22.” - Cambridge



The kingdom was “at hand” -mark 1:15

The kingdom would NOT appear immediately - Luke 19:11

The kingdom would not come with observable signs - Luke 17:20

The kingdom of God would come before his audience tasted death (mark 9:17

when they saw the events of the olivet discourse, they would know the kingdom was near - Luke 21:31

I have no disagreement that the kingdom was present prior to the resurrection, so no idea why you would say that without asking clarifying questions?

My position on how to understand the kingdom of God is in line with Dr. lightfoot.

“
Dr. Lightfoot has well observed that there are two senses especially in which the phrase "kingdom of heaven," is to be understood.

1. The promulgation and establishment of the Christian religion.

2. The total overthrow of the Jewish polity.

The Jews imagined that when the Messiah should come he would destroy the Gentiles, and reign gloriously over the Jews: the very reverse of this, our Lord intimates, should be the case. He was about to destroy the whole Jewish polity, and reign gloriously among the Gentiles.”



False.




If you want to ignore the original Greek, that’s on you. But Paul did write “the presence of the man of sin “IS” (present tense verb meaning to exist” by the works of Satan”. To say Paul didn’t write that is false.



The context of our discussion was the man of sin’s revealing being restrained during Paul’s day, not the resurrected Jesus. You said “yes they do” in regards to people living 1900 years. I asked a clarifying question, in regards to the original context of the discussion, if you believe there are 1900 year people living on the earth somewhere, since you believe the man of sin hasn’t been revealed yet. Asking a clarifying question is not a “red herring”.………





And I could say the same generic, subjective argument about you, so not sure what this accomplishes….



What is specifically ambiguous about it, in order to help me learn?

“No one knows the day nor hour” is a Galilean wedding allusion to the bride, groom, friends, and family knowing the general time frame of the wedding, just not the exact day nor hour. Thus while Jesus doesn’t know the exact day nor hour, he does know the general time frame and states “when YOU see all these things, know he is near, at the door” AND “THIS generation will not pass away until all these things occur”. So far, I’m not sure what’s ambiguous here.

These idea that the events of the olivet discourse would occur in the generation of the apostles is affirmed by the “near” time statements written literally near to the destruction of Jerusalem.

1.) the end of all things had drawn near ( 1 peter 4:7)

2.) it was the last hour (1 john 2:18)

3.) the coming of Christ had drawn near (James 5:8)

4.) Christ would come in a little while and without delay (Hebrews 10:37)

5,) the end of the ages had come upon them (1 Corinthians 10:11)

So not sure what’s ambiguous there?

You entire lengthy post makes like the only thing Jesus was talking about in the Olivet Discourse was the temple being destroyed.

He speaks more about the coming tribulation of the disciples once the gospel has been preached as a witness to all nations than He does about the destruction of city and sanctuary, but your entire thesis is based on the kingdom of heaven coming when the temple was destroyed, and the return of Christ happening when the temple was destroyed, and the man of sin appearing who knows how many months or years before the temple was destroyed.

You'd think that all of time centers around the day the temple was destroyed. Newsflash: It does not: It centers around the death and resurrection of Christ. The Kingdom of God came when He rose from the dead, and God's sanctuary was consecrated to God on the Day of Pentecost. The Old Testament temple ceased being the holy place the moment of Christ's death.

Your gospel is in effect "the gospel of the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D". All facts and biblical statements and prophetic utterances have to relate to that gospel (even though they don't all speak about it). Does your gospel ever consider the blood of Jesus shed for sins, his death and resurrection 40 years earlier might be the period all history centers around?

Jesus was using an illustration about a Jewish wedding to tell all people who believe in Him and wait for His return of all generations that no one but the Father knows the day or the hour of it - and yes, He said "Not even the Son".

But you know, or claim to know.

Paul was not telling the disciples at Thessolonika that the time for the appearance of the man of sin and return of Christ was at hand. You have put that into the text.

@claninja
1. The end of the ages = the fullness of time when Christ came and died, and rose again Ephesians 1:10. Hebrews 9:24-28 explains what the end of the ages means:

For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with hands - the representation of the true sanctuary - but into heaven itself, and he appears now in God's presence for us. And he did not enter to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the sanctuary year after year with blood that is not his own,
for then he would have had to suffer again and again since the foundation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the consummation of the ages to put away sin by his sacrifice. And just as people are appointed to die once, and then to face judgment,
so also, after Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many, to those who eagerly await him he will appear a second time, not to bear sin but to bring salvation.

In your point #5 above you have corrupted God's revelation yet again to claim that the end of the ages mentioned by Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:11 is referring to the destruction of the temple which was approaching.

Your gospel of the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem has nothing to do with God's gospel of salvation in Jesus.

2. The judgment of the world occurred when Jesus died on the cross John 12:31

3. Ephesians 1:10 was not fulfilled in 70 A.D, despite your eisegesis of this and so many other verses and passages (such as 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4).

Close your arguments now because they only convince you. I won't read your reply. It will just be more of the same eisegesis of scripture after scripture.

 

[claninja]

He speaks more about the coming tribulation of the disciples once the gospel has been preached as a witness to all nations than He does about the destruction of city and sanctuary, but your entire thesis is based on the kingdom of heaven coming when the temple was destroyed, and the return of Christ happening when the temple was destroyed, and the man of sin appearing who knows how many months or years before the temple was destroyed.

1.) What is the antecedent to “these things” in Matthew 24:3?

2.) did the apostles generation experience wars, famine, pestilence, earthquakes, false prophets, persecution, the gospel going to the whole oikoumene, the coming of the son of man on the clouds, the days of vengeance to fulfill all that is written, and the gathering of the good and bad into the wedding hall?

Your gospel is in effect "the gospel of the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D". All facts and biblical statements and prophetic utterances have to relate to that gospel (even though they don't all speak about it). Does your gospel ever consider the blood of Jesus shed for sins, his death and resurrection 40 years earlier might be the period all history centers around?

Well it’s already pretty clear that you don’t read my posts, as I already stated that I believe the kingdom came with Christ. So I have no idea what you are talking about here. When you can’t address an argument do you just make something up as a response?

The kingdom was at hand (mark 1:15)

The kingdom of God came upon the Israelites (matthew 12:28)

The kingdom would not appear immediately (luke 19:11)

The kingdom would not come with observable signs (luke 17:20)

The kingdom would come with power before the disciples tasted death (mark 9:1)

The kingdom would be near at the destruction of Jerusalem (Luke 21:32)

Jesus was using an illustration about a Jewish wedding to tell all people who believe in Him and wait for His return of all generations that no one but the Father knows the day or the hour of it - and yes, He said "Not even the Son".

In Galilean wedding traditions, the son and bride new the general frame, just not the exact the day. So to use the phrase “no one knows the day nor hour” to mean not even the general time frame is completely false, especially since Jesus said “this generation will not pass away till….”

Paul was not telling the disciples at Thessolonika that the time for the appearance of the man of sin and return of Christ was at hand. You have put that into the text.

Another strawman argument. Never said any of this. Why do you continue to make things up?

I said the man of sin’s revealing was being restrained in the first century and that the Thessalonians knew the identity of the restrainer. I said the mystery of lawlessness was already at work. And i said Paul used the present tense verb “is” when describing the man of sins presence as being “is” by the power of Satan.

You’ve addressed none of what I actually said and made up something i never said.

1. The end of the ages = the fullness of time when Christ came and died, and rose again Ephesians 1:10.

Absolutely agree, Hebrews 9:26
confirms this in even clearer language.

2. The judgment of the world occurred when Jesus died on the cross John 12:31

Ok, no disagreement here

3. Ephesians 1:10 was not fulfilled in 70 A.D, despite your eisegesis of this and so many other verses and passages (such as 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4).

Lol another strawman argument. I never mentioned Ephesians 1 in any of my posts. in fact agree with you that Christ appeared at the end of the ages to die on the cross as clearly stated by Hebrews 9:26.

I don’t understand why you need to continue to make things up instead of actually addressing what I posted?

Close your arguments now because they only convince you. I won't read your reply. It will just be more of the same eisegesis of scripture after scripture.

Another subjective, generic argument that could be said of you……I was hoping for a fruitful discussion……but you seem unable to actually address the things i wrote…..