Search results

The problem is this, though---I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame(Daniel 7:11). That event hasn't even happened yet unless you or someone else can convincingly prove otherwise. Therefore, the point being, it conflicts with verses 13-14...

The following is basically a summary of my view vs your view. In the event I didn't summarize your view correctly, feel free to correct any misunderstandings of your view. The last thing I'm wanting to do is misrepresent someone's view intentionally or unintentionally. My view: 1. Daniel...

What you are failing to consider is this. There are two 3.5 year periods, not 1. One simply follows the other. Because, after all, how can the 2Ws be made war against after the 3.5 years when Revelation 13 is already telling us that it is during the 3.5 years that saints are being made war...

It's possible that you and I might be somewhat on the same page in regards to verse 13 and 14. What's mainly in question, are we somewhat on the same page in regards to verses 9-12, 21-22, and verse 27? Speaking for myself I see none of those verses except for verse 21 meaning before His 2nd...

It is verse 12 that proves to me that Revelation 20:11-15 can't be meant in verses 9-11. Some interpreters insist verse 12 is simply parenthetical. except I don't buy that argument if these same interpreters are insisting verses 9-11 are involving Revelation 20:11-15. What happened to the rest...

In that case since things like that do indeed happen on YouTube all the time, I guess this means they are laughing all the way to the bank and couldn't care less about a rapture, since they won't be able to enjoy spending all of that money on worldly things if they are removed from the planet...

Let's try something different here. Let's set aside for a moment the timing of the millennium and see if there is anything we agree with each other about? For example, when I said the following, is it something you basically agree with or is it something you disagree with entirely? "Until the...

At least you have some good arguments there---not. As if mere opinions alone can qualify as valid arguments. Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14...

I let ChatGPT rephrase some things for me here and there. Still my thoughts, though. That's a good question — and yes, I agree that Daniel 7:13–14 describes Christ’s ascension, not His Second Coming. The text says He comes “to” the Ancient of Days (not from), which fits Acts 1 and Psalm 110:1...

This Pretrib rapture that is supposed to take place within the next day or two, will Post tribbers who do not believe in Pretrib also get raptured? After all, note what the following records---For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again(1 Thessalonians 4:14). Obviously--that that is also...

The funny thing about it in my case, I can see what you have in red in verse 14, that being applicable to the here and now, regardless that you can't see it. While at the same time I can't see verse 27 also being applicable to the here and now. Because, in my view, verse 22 leads to verse 27...

This post was good. I tend to agree with a lot of it. Verse 27 is where we might not be on the same page about, though.

In Daniel 7 verse 27 is not fulfilled until verse 21 and 22 are fulfilled first. Obviously, verse 21 has not been fulfilled in it's entirety since verse 22 hasn't been fulfilled yet. Verse 27 says all dominions shall serve and obey Him. Not even remotely matching reality if we apply that to the...

Great analogy, but even so...where are you seeing in Revelation 20:11-15 it equalling this in Daniel 7:22---and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom? Therefore, unless you have a better solution, this seems to mean in Daniel...

Maybe you are not keeping up with how AI is progressing these days and what the end goal might involve? There are some in the know, not meaning me of course, who predict via AI a form of immortality will be achievable at some point. Which then makes perfect sense of-- And in those days shall men...

Per Premil it might look like this. Revelation 20:4 is understood to be a fulfillment or echo of Daniel 7:22, with both passages describing the saints taking possession of the kingdom after a period of tribulation and the defeat of oppressive powers. While Daniel describes the saints taking...

You are concluding that per what? Some of the trumpet warnings perhaps?(initially I said judgments but maybe warnings fit better?) If so, are all of the trumpet warnings even meaning during the 42 month reign of the beast, thus during great tribulation? Or maybe you don't connect the 42 month...

If any of this is involving the 42 month reign of the beast, like I take it be involving, it is those refusing to worship it that are being wiped out, and not also the ones worshiping it. If it wipes them out as well, who then is remaining on the earth to worship it if it has wiped out pretty...

Not one mention of abominations recorded in Luke 21, though. Which might mean what Luke 21:20 is involving is not what Matthew 24:15 is involving. I have zero issue with agreeing Luke 21:20 involved 70 AD. But I do have issue with Matthew 24:15 involving 70 AD. For one, if the AOD was fulfilled...

LOL. One of the most preposterous things I ever heard in my life, that the Roman armies were the abominations. But not that that this is the first I have heard you claim that. As if what is recorded in Revelation 17 is not a far better fit for abominations, but instead, that the Roman armies are...