How can you not see that a tribulation period can't be the wrath of God?
Gods wrath upon someone can be a time of tribulation for that same someone can't it?
The descriptions are there
My personal eclectic view
- Thread starter Randy Kluth
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
How can you not see that a tribulation period can't be the wrath of God?
Gods wrath upon someone can be a time of tribulation for that same someone can't it?
The descriptions are there
1stCenturyLady
Well-Known Member
This site used to let us correct mistakes without a time limit. It must have been reduced to an hour.
Thank you for sharing your view, but I'm not sure if you're attributing the Mid-Trib view to me, or simply describing what you think of my position? I'm certainly not Mid-Trib, though I can understand why there is such a position. It is not, however, historically validate, in my opinion. It does not enjoy historical depth.
The visions of Revelation are many and not always coordinated, time-wise or sequence-wise. The coming of the Kingdom pictured in the 7th Trump in Rev 11 is simply the end of one major vision, the Scroll Vision. There are 7 Seals to the Scroll, and at the opening of the 7th Seal there are 7 Trumpets. This major vision contains a number of smaller visions, each of which contribute to a focus on the 2nd Coming of Christ.
There is a sequence to these visions, but their order is more determined by the symbolism being used than by an actual historical chronology. It is simply the order in which these visions are revealed to John. The opening of the 6th Seal also seems to represent the 2nd Coming of Christ.
I do not see two periods of 3.5 years explicitly described as such anywhere in the book of Revelation or anywhere else in the Bible. It is simply being assumed that Daniel's "70th Week" is a future 7 year period which must contain the 3.5 years mentioned in the book of Revelation. Somehow another 3.5 year period is fit in there by the reader to make the period amount to 7 years. I think this is completely illegitimate, biblically.
The 3.5 years mentioned in the book of Revelation refers to the period of Antichrist's unchallenged rule on earth. Nobody can defeat him. And this period comes from Dan 7. The book of Revelation indicates that after this period is completed there is a call to Armageddon, perhaps to challenge Antichrist's rule? A mobilization like this would likely take months.
It is during mention of Armageddon that we are warned Christ will return "like a thief." The world will not be prepared for him to come, thinking only that this is another world war.
As I said, I don't call the period of Antichrist's Reign the "Great Tribulation." I think Christ identified that period in Luke 21 when he referred to it as a Jewish Punishment that was to begin at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and to end when he returns.
But I completely agree that this final persecution of the saints by Antichrist will be a "trial" and not "God's Wrath." God's Wrath will be revealed when Christ returns to destroy the Antichrist's attempt to establish his own ungodly kingdom on earth, sending many into Eternal Punishment.
I do understand why you believe that. However Dan 12.11, for me, is a review of earlier information in the book of Daniel that details the Reign of Antiochus. Although the 1290 days and the 1335 days may fit within a 7 year period there is no indication in Revelation itself that there even is a 7 year period!
Eze 38.8,16 identifies an endtime event, but it is hardly certain that a 7 year period of Antichristian terror is taking place. No period of 7 years, attacking the saints, is even described. It is purely an invasion into Israel that is being described--not a world dictator who vents his wrath upon both Israel and the Church.
Eze 39.9 speaks of a period of 7 years, but it seems to follow the judgment to fall upon Gog. And if this was the Antichrist, then the 7 years would follow the current age, being a part of the Millennial Age. The 7 years are spent cleaning up after war--not during it.
Furthermore, Barton Payne in his Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy has pointed out that Antiochus 4 ruled for 1290 days (as opposed to mention of 1260 days in the book of Revelation). He thought perhaps the news of Antiochus' demise, travelling slowly in those days, took more days to reach the Jewish People--hence, the 1355 days.
I think Dan 12 is a review of not one but two different time periods, both of which astounded Daniel, making it appear that the Jewish People would be defeated. Dan 12.7 speaks of the endtime reign of Antichrist for 3.5 years. Dan 12.11 speaks of the reign of Antiochus 4 for 1290 days. Both entities were future in Daniel's time, and he wanted to know more about both events, which were mentioned earlier in his life.
There were, I believe, two "abominations of desolation" mentioned in the book of Daniel. The one you refer to in Dan 12.11 is also in Dan 11.31. Both refer to Antiochus' abominable acts which led to the desolation of many Jewish people. There is also a glimpse of this in Dan 8.
But in Dan 9.27 there is another, different AoD that refers, I believe, to the abominable Roman Army which desolated Jerusalem in the generation of Christ. Same AoD terminology, but different contexts. Perhaps these different events were meant to be compared?
In Luke 21 Jesus identified, it appears, the AoD as the Roman Army because in the same place in his Discourse the other Gospel authors used the term "Abomination of Desolation." Therefore, the AoD represented the Roman Army for the Gospel authors.
That's because the words describe systems of interpretation that have evolved in Christian history. Obviously, this takes place *after* the Bible was written. We would no more discount the translation of the Bible into other languages as illegitimate because they are not written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek.
Yes.
Absolutely false. That's pure judgmentalism. It may be true in individual or even group cases, but certainly not in all cases. And it certainly is not "necessarily so."
That's purely an immature way of looking at it. Things are not so "cut and dried" after years of experience. Stop the judgmentalism and start accepting the fact that life is a process, and we have to learn to get along.
There is sometimes hard work that we may wish we did not have to do. But good work does have its rewards. The lazy will have theirs, as well.
Revelation 12:6 - 1260 days
then a war in the second heaven and Satan and his angels cast down to earth
Revelation 12:14 - time, times, half time.
Together, adding to 7 years.
Gog is not the Antichrist. Gog is the leader of Meshech and Tubal, Ezekiel 38:3. Some people think Putin. May be yes. May be no.
The person who becomes the Antichrist is the prince that shall come of Daniel 9:26 to come to Israel following the Gog/Magog event. He will be anointed the King of Israel, thought-to-be messiah. Thus, becoming the Antichrist.
He will then confirm the mount Sinai covenant for the 7 year cycle Moses spoke of in Deuteronomy 31:9-13. The confirmation will be a big speech from the temple mount.
The abomination of desolation in Daniel 11:31 was a statue image of Zeus set-up in the temple complex by Antiochus IV. (You can do a Google search on the internet to read about it)
It was a preview of what the end times abomination of desolation will be..... a statue image of the beast king placed on the temple
mount.
Daniel 11 transitions to the end times in Daniel 11:35. The king in Daniel 11:36 is the end times Antichrist person after he has become the beast.
Last edited:
Dispensationalism routinely confuses the two terms. We shouldn't repeat its error.
Jesus in Matthew 24:21 explicitly identifies the destruction of Jerusalem as tribulation.
Yes tribulation but not the great tribulation
Are you saying that the great multitude from every tribe tongue and nation were killed in Jerusalem in 70AD?
Revelation 7
The Great Multitude in White Robes
9 After this I looked, and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. 10 And they cried out in a loud voice:“Salvation belongs to our God,
who sits on the throne,
and to the Lamb.”
11 All the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 12 saying:
“Amen!
Praise and glory
and wisdom and thanks and honor
and power and strength
be to our God for ever and ever.
Amen!”
13 Then one of the elders asked me, “These in white robes—who are they, and where did they come from?”
14 I answered, “Sir, you know.”
And he said, “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
I believe that the great tribulation started the day that Stephen was stoned to death and is still happening today
The problem is you"re adding "7 years." The prophecy does not indicate two sets of 3.5 years. Rather, it mentioned the same 3.5 years in different way--1260 days, 42 months, a time, times and half a time.
How can you, with good conscience, claim that Rev 12 mentions "7 years" when it doesn't?
As I said, the AoD of Antiochus 4 is a different one than the AoD of the Roman Army. Both Antiochus and the Roman Army were abominable pagans imposing themselves within the sacred territory of the Temple. Antiochus tried to impose Hellenism and idolatry upon the Jews who followed the Law. The Roman Army surrounded the walls of Jerusalem to destroy the sacred temple of the Jewish People. They were "desolators" because they imposed their way at the cost of many thousands of Jewish lives.
Dan 11 ends with a long description of Antiochus 4 and introduces a time of great tribulation for the Jewish People, with an angel protecting Israel from complete annihilation. This is exactly what Jesus spoke of. The Romans would destroy Jerusalem and the Temple, and send the Jewish People into exile until they are nearly annihilated. But they would be restored in the end.
Keep in mind that the Romans were the 4th "king" that Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel saw would arise after Babylon, Persia, and Greece. Immediately following the mention of Antiochus in Dan 11 the great tribulation of the Jews began under the Romans. And Roman Imperial Culture remains to the present day and is associated with European dominance.
Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: )
The great tribulation will begin when the abomination of desolation that Daniel spoke about in Daniel 12:11-12 will be standing on the temple mount.
It will be a statue image made of the beast-king in Revelation 13:14 that will be placed on the temple mount.
When Satan is cast down to earth in Revelation 12:7-9, Satan will indwell the statue image, making it appear to come alive, and speak. Revelation 13:15.
42 months later, when Jesus returns, Jesus will cause the statue image to go up in flames, turned to ashes, exposing Satan there on the temple mount, fulfilling Ezekiel 28:16-19.
The terms "3.5 years" and "3 1/2 years" are found nowhere in bible prophecy. The 1260 days, the 42 months, the time/times/half time are not exact equals to each other. Which is why for those three different time expressions.
You are the one claiming that Revelation 12:6 and Revelation 12:14 don't total 7 years.
Revelation 12 has the 7 years in it. Revelation 13 has the last 42 months of the 7 years in it. Proved so by the crowns/no crowns on the heads and horns in each of those chapters being different from each other.
The Roman army was not the abomination of desolation "set up" that Daniel spoke of in Daniel 12:11-12, to take place in the time of the end, Daniel 12:9.
The EU is the end times manifestation of the Roman Empire. The little horn person (who becomes the Antichrist and then later the beast king) will be over a group ten EU leaders as the first indicator of his identity. He will also be a Jew.
We don't know yet what the group will make up. Maybe a defense council of some sort.
Last edited:
The pharisees said the same thing to Jesus.
Pretty funny how everybody wants to shout "I have the truth!"
Then they get offended when they actually encounter it, rather than actually think about it.
It only feels like judgement to you because you sense the condemnation.
That's not from me, though.
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
It obviously confuses you because you are turning the word "after" into "immediately after" even though the text does NOT indicate how long after the 69th week ends that the Messiah would be cut off. It is just your ASSUMPTION that He was cut off immediately after the 69th week ends. Jesus was cut off in the midst of the 70th week when He confirmed and established the new covenant while making the old covenant sacrifices and offerings obsolete. What part of that confuses you?
Spiritual Israelite
Well-Known Member
He identified it as wrath, also.
Luke 21:20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. 22 For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 23 But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
Do you not consider the great tribulation that happened in 70 AD to have been a result of God's wrath or am I misunderstanding you?
Yet, the following proves it is.
Matthew 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
How does the NT define elect? Unbelieving Jews? No. It is meaning the following, and no way in a million years is the following meaning unbelieving Jews.
Matthew 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Therefore, the fact the elect meant in verse 22 is obviously not meaning unbelieving Jews, and the fact that Christians escaped to safety before Jerusalem was attacked and destroyed, it is then absurd that 70 AD was cut short for the elect's sake, when the elect were never in any danger at the time. Especially in regards to this--there should no flesh be saved.
Not to mention, if verse 21 is meaning something local not global, it is equally absurd that something local can be greater than something global. That not even something global can equal nor surpass it. Totally backwards, thus absurd. Jesus made it crystal clear in verse 21 that the great tribulation meant has no equal nor can be surpassed by anything in the past nor in the future. What part of--no, nor ever shall be--are some not comprehending?
We then end up with interpreters placing their doctrinal bias' above plain ole' common sense. The fact common sense alone says that something local can't be greater than something global. And clearly, in regards to great tribulation meant in Revelation 7, that is involving global not local only.
I know, I know. I get it. You and those that agree with you are right, not the Bible nor common sense.
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
Too bad. You should have stuck to the dispensational hermeneutic. Having the 70th week fulfilled in Jesus day is completely inconsistent with Daniel.
The Roman conquest of jerusalem is also inconsistent with Matt. 24, Dan.9 and Revelation and thesselonians
The Luke portion of the Olivet discourse focused on the 70AD fall of Jerusalem. MAtt.24 was futuristic.
A post trib rapure is inconsistent with Scripture. God delivers His people before great judgments (the flood) the siege of Jerusalem)It also contradicts Pauls promise in thesselonians.
Paul also described the abomination of desolation. It is singular and male and must stand in teh holy place (holy of holies) The Roman armies did not do that.
The tribulation Jesus talks about on the saints in Matthew 24 is the same as Revelation.
They are a part of the great multitude from every tribe toung and nation
Last edited:
Similar threads
