Calling All "Left Behind" Theology Believers (you up to the challenge?)

[Trekson]

Hi Phoneman. Your words, "It never ceases to amaze me how people can open a symbolic book, read things like "a third part of the trees" and then look around to see whether one third of the earth's trees have been destroyed. Revelation is SYMBOLIC."

Is symbolism used? Yes! In most cases, is the symbolism explained within the context? Yes! For the most part Revelations is to be taken LITERALLY, not symbolically! Here is an example of explanations within the context.

Rev. 17:7-12 - "And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. (the symbolism)

8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. (symbolism explained)

10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast." (symbolism explained)

If there is no similar explanation within the context of a particular passage then the passage should be taken literally.

 

[Phoneman777]

Hi Phoneman, See, here's the thing... Your words: "was enough to restrain the Bishop of Rome from taking the throne and commencing the 1,260 years reign of the Papacy."

I respectfully reject what you guys call, if I remember this correctly, "the year for a day principle" and I will tell you why. My Webster's defines "principle" as "a fundamental truth, law or postulate". If it is a "prophetic law" established by God then every single time the word "day" is mentioned in a prophecy then it MUST mean a year! If at any time it can be shown that a day meant a day then IT CAN NO LONGER BE A PRINCIPLE AND MUST BE REJECTED AS AN ACCURATE STANDARD OF DETERMINING BIBLE PROPHECY. It's really that simple. I will offer three examples of when a day meant a day.

Gen. 7:4 - "For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth."

Matt. 12:40 - "For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."

Rev. 11:9 - "And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves."

Look, God is not the author of confusion nor does he play mind games. If He meant a year, why would he use the word "day". He had no problem using the word "year" in these prophecies: Gen. 15:13, Gen. 41:26-27 to name a couple. So sorry, there is no such thing as a year for a day principle!Tre

Trekson, please remember that the only time the "day for a year" principle is employed is when the prophetic time period is given in an obviously SYMBOLIC manner. God's revelation of the forty days rain was obviously a literal revelation, but Jacob's "week" that he'd fulfill for Rachel was obvious a symbolic "7 year" period, which firmly establishes the "day for a year" principle. Also, the "70 Weeks of Daniel" which are 490 days are recognized universally as referring to a 490 year period, as was the words of Jesus when He said that He would continue to minister "today, tomorrow, and the third day I will be completed", which He spoke 6 months into His ministry and was thereafter "completed" 3 years later at Calvary. What about Ezekiel 4:6 KJV and Numbers 14:34 KJV, in which GOD HIMSELF employs a "day for a year"? There are many more examples that could be given, such as the "10 days" persecution of Diocletian in Revelation 2. What Christian has not experienced "10 days" of persecution? Maybe a church hypocrite, but certainly not a born again, target of Satan. The "10 years" is widely recognized to refer to the "10 YEARS" of severe, unprecedented persecution of Christians at the hands of the Roman Emporer Diocletian.

 

[Phoneman777]

I am well aware of the fact that Revelation is meant to be a symbolic representation of prophetic events, anybody with a working brain can see that. However, this does not mean I am supposed to extrapolate the terms "trumpet", or "signified" to mean every single word spoken thereof in the book cannot be viewed literally, or is simply symbolic for "war", and nothing else.

It is a violation of Scriptural directive to interpret prophetic symbols by any means other than the Bible itself - we are forbidden from utilizing headlines, hashtags, popular consensus or any other such extra-Biblical means to interpret prophetic symbols. Proof?

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Peter 1:20-21 KJV

If you want to know what the symbol of a "trumpet" means, ask one of the "holy men" like Jeremiah, and he will tell you. A trumpet in prophecy represents "the alarm of war". (Jeremiah 4:19 KJV)

THE BIBLE IS ITS OWN INTERPRETER.

 

[Phoneman777]

Hi Phoneman. Your words, "It never ceases to amaze me how people can open a symbolic book, read things like "a third part of the trees" and then look around to see whether one third of the earth's trees have been destroyed. Revelation is SYMBOLIC."

Is symbolism used? Yes! In most cases, is the symbolism explained within the context? Yes! For the most part Revelations is to be taken LITERALLY, not symbolically! Here is an example of explanations within the context.

Rev. 17:7-12 - "And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. (the symbolism)

8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. (symbolism explained)

10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast." (symbolism explained)

If there is no similar explanation within the context of a particular passage then the passage should be taken literally.

Who says the "third parts" must be literal? Fallen human reasoning?

No one can hope to correctly understand Daniel and Revelation unless one first grasps an understanding of the Sanctuary service because both books are well represented with Sanctuary imagery.

The prophecies given by Jesus in Revelation as He is depicted ministering in the Holy Place must begin to unfold BEFORE the Heavenly Sanctuary is cleansed because they are given while He is yet standing in the Holy Place. Likewise, the prophecies given when He has moved from the Holy Place into the Most Holy Place and has begun to cleanse the Sanctuary must begin AFTER this time. When did He begin to cleanse the Sanctuary?

Ask Daniel: "Unto 2,300 days, then shall the Sanctuary be cleansed" and because it was not possible to cleanse either an earthly Sanctuary or Heavenly Sanctuary 2,300 literal days from Daniel's revelation (the earthly lay in ruins and the heavenly had no High Priest yet), this prophecy MUST point to the future. By calculating 2,300 YEARS from 457 B.C., we come to 1844 A.D., when our High Priest Jesus moved from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place and began cleansing the Heavenly Sanctuary. The 7 Churches, 7 Seals, and 7 Trumpets were all given while Jesus was standing in the Holy Place, and all began unfolding simultaneously at the beginning of church history. Jewish Encyclopedias recognize that this "Day of Atonement" cleansing of the Sanctuary was "a time of Judgment" and even one of the most LIBERAL Bible commentaries, the "Interpreter's Bible Commentary, acknowledges that Hebrews 9 declares that the Heavenly Sanctuary needed to be cleansed, and that is why Revelation 14 says "Fear God and give glory to Him for the hour of His Judgment IS come", which came in 1844 A.D.

Daniel 7 depicts a courtroom scene with the Son of Man (Jesus) coming to the Ancient of Days (Father) as a Judgment begins to unfold. This is an Old Testament depiction of what our High Priest Jesus began doing in the Most Holy Place before the throne of God - the cleansing of the Sanctuary/Judgment hour, and is what led to for the first time the preaching of the soon return of Jesus - not after some "1,000 years of peace" delay as was popularly preached.

If you were well acquainted with Historicism, you'd know all this, which is why I think you should revisit the entire issue before continuing to embrace Jesuit Futurism. Not Futurism, but JESUIT Futurism because what you believe was unknown to the world until the JESUITS first began preaching it as a pathetic defense against the relentless beat down that Historicism brought against Catholicism.

The "third parts" are history.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Phoneman, I'll deal with this one today and the next one tomorrow. Your words: "Trekson, please remember that the only time the "day for a year" principle is employed is when the prophetic time period is given in an obviously SYMBOLIC manner. Who decides if it's symbolic or not? I believe most of your examples should be taken literally.

God's revelation of the forty days rain was obviously a literal revelation, but Jacob's "week" that he'd fulfill for Rachel was obvious a symbolic "7 year" period, which firmly establishes the "day for a year" principle. According to Gen. 29:27 there is nothing symbolic here the word 'week" is explained in the text as being 7 years. The only "principle" here might be that a period of seven years can be called a "week" of years.

Also, the "70 Weeks of Daniel" which are 490 days are recognized universally as referring to a 490 year period, Yes this does continue the prophetic 'week" symbolizing seven years but these two examples most certainly do not a year for a day principle make.

as was the words of Jesus when He said that He would continue to minister "today, tomorrow, and the third day I will be completed", which He spoke 6 months into His ministry and was thereafter "completed" 3 years later at Calvary. On this one it's possible you're way off. This is from Lk.13:32 but I question whether it is 6 months into his ministry. Verse 34 is where Christ laments over Jerusalem, however in Matthew the lament is found in Matt.23:37. Here it says Christ left the temple in Matt. 24:1 and proceeded with the Olivet Discourse which was cps. 24 &25 then in the beginning of Cp. 26:2, Christ says it is TWO days until the Passover then His crucifixion. So it seems to me the three days were literal.

What about Ezekiel 4:6 KJV and Numbers 14:34 KJV, in which GOD HIMSELF employs a "day for a year"? Again these are specific and explained within the context. No, it does not make a "principle". It's a giant leap from context explained to ALWAYS a year for a day. The only principle I see here is that a day means a day unless the scriptures tell you otherwise.

There are many more examples that could be given, such as the "10 days" persecution of Diocletian in Revelation 2. What Christian has not experienced "10 days" of persecution? Maybe a church hypocrite, but certainly not a born again, target of Satan. The "10 years" is widely recognized to refer to the "10 YEARS" of severe, unprecedented persecution of Christians at the hands of the Roman Emporer Diocletian." It might be "widely recognized" in your circles but for the rest of us it means there would be a ten day period when Smyrna was to undergo extreme persecution. Perhaps death squads were going to go thru the city killing christians, we don't really know for sure. The one thing I am sure of are the only ones being deceived are those who are unwilling to admit that Ellen White was just a woman who gave a lot of false prophecies.

 

[Dcopymope]

It is a violation of Scriptural directive to interpret prophetic symbols by any means other than the Bible itself - we are forbidden from utilizing headlines, hashtags, popular consensus or any other such extra-Biblical means to interpret prophetic symbols. Proof?

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Peter 1:20-21 KJV

If you want to know what the symbol of a "trumpet" means, ask one of the "holy men" like Jeremiah, and he will tell you. A trumpet in prophecy represents "the alarm of war". (Jeremiah 4:19 KJV)

THE BIBLE IS ITS OWN INTERPRETER.

The Bible certainly is its own interpreter, and since you are so fixated on the meaning of the term Trumpet, then read Numbers 10 and let reason prevail. This chapter makes it clear that a "trumpet" can have many different purposes. It says it can be a call to war or to something as simple as a call to assembly. Understanding that two plus two indeed equals four, we now see why the trumpet in the prophesies of John are used for many more purposes than just war. Its used for burning stars falling from heaven, for burning trees, exploding mountains and the like.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Phoneman, This is regarding post #24. Let's talk about the 2300 day prophecy. Although we disagree on when the 490 years was completed we do both agree that it was fulfilled historically. The prophecy of the 2300 DAYS was fulfilled historically as well. Most of this story is in the book of Maccabees and it is about Antiochus Eppiphanes. It has been historically proven that from the time he desecrated the temple with an abomination of desolation (a prophetic type for what will come) until he was defeated and tossed out by the Maccabees and the priests cleansed the sanctuary of the temple was literally 2300 days exactly. Only with the SDA's does 1844 have any significance but if you guys were honest with yourself, the only thing it celebrates is that Ellen White was wrong, Christ did not return and a story was made up to help her "save face".

 

[Phoneman777]

The Bible certainly is its own interpreter, and since you are so fixated on the meaning of the term Trumpet, then read Numbers 10 and let reason prevail. This chapter makes it clear that a "trumpet" can have many different purposes. It says it can be a call to war or to something as simple as a call to assembly. Understanding that two plus two indeed equals four, we now see why the trumpet in the prophesies of John are used for many more purposes than just war. Its used for burning stars falling from heaven, for burning trees, exploding mountains and the like.

yes, the but context of Revelation 8 is certainly not an "assembly", right? It's filled with the language of conflict

 

[Dcopymope]

yes, the but context of Revelation 8 is certainly not an "assembly", right? It's filled with the language of conflict

The language of the word is conflicted to someone who concludes that two plus two equals six, sure. But when reason prevails, when two plus two equals four, then the word becomes crystal clear, as God, being the creator of all, makes him the author of logic. You claimed that a trumpet is symbolic only of war, I proved otherwise, and now you are changing your tune claiming the Bible is "conflicted". Who are you to accuse someone of "private interpretation"? Who the hell do you think you are kidding? The use of a word can have many different purposes, which I pointed out to you, clearly.

 

[Phoneman777]

Hi Phoneman, This is regarding post #24. Let's talk about the 2300 day prophecy. Although we disagree on when the 490 years was completed we do both agree that it was fulfilled historically. The prophecy of the 2300 DAYS was fulfilled historically as well. Most of this story is in the book of Maccabees and it is about Antiochus Eppiphanes. It has been historically proven that from the time he desecrated the temple with an abomination of desolation (a prophetic type for what will come) until he was defeated and tossed out by the Maccabees and the priests cleansed the sanctuary of the temple was literally 2300 days exactly. Only with the SDA's does 1844 have any significance but if you guys were honest with yourself, the only thing it celebrates is that Ellen White was wrong, Christ did not return and a story was made up to help her "save face".

Daniel's "sealed" book was opened after the fulfilled heavenly signs heralded the "time of the end" and unfortunately, what was "sweet in the mouth" (the belief in the soon return of Christ) turned "bitter in the belly", when He didn't come, and the disappointment was heavy as many abandoned Jesus, but the few that remained went on to form the only worldwide Christian denomination that preaches the 3 Angels Messages - God's true remnant church that keeps His commandments and has the testimony of Jesus Christ. God always purges the "hangers on" before He gets busy with a great work.

No definite 2300 days timeframe - scholars are all over the place trying to fit a 2300 literal days somewhere to prove them literal. It doesn't exist. Please explain in more detail how it is that you arrive at this idea that there is a fit.

Antiochus can't be the "exceeding great" Little Horn of Daniel 8 that outshined the kings of Medo Persia and Alexander the Great:

• He was laughed at and ridiculed as "madman" by his contemporaries
• He and his entire army were punked and forced to leave Egypt by a single Roman ambassador and his small security force.
• His attempts to expand his realm throughout his entire career were at best "negligible" and often met with losses of territory.
• Of course, you will say none of that matters since Antiochus defiled the altar with a pig. BOTH Nebuchadnezzer and Titus defiled the entire Sanctuary in their respective reigns with the blood and guts of thousands or murdered Jews, which makes one pig on the altar pale in comparison, in terms of descration.

Antiochus did not arise "in the latter time of the reign" of these (4) kings":

• Antiochus was the 8th in a line of around 20 - does that sound like "the latter time of their reign"???? Sheesh!!!

"Out of one of them came forth another little horn"

• Overwhelming evidence demonstrates that the "them" from which the Little Horn came is NOT the "horns" (from which is derived the idea that the "Little Horn" came from the Seleucid "horn"), but that he came forth from one of the four "winds".

I appreciate your level of confidence in what you believe, which leads me to believe that you are not intimidated to consider what is written in this objective analysis, which actually gives a few reasons for why Antiochus could be seen as the Little Horn, but also gives many more reasons for disqualifying him: please decide for yourself.
http://1844madesimple.org/why-antiochus-iv-is-not-the-little-horn-of-daniel-8

 

[Phoneman777]

The language of the word is conflicted to someone who concludes that two plus two equals six, sure. But when reason prevails, when two plus two equals four, then the word becomes crystal clear, as God, being the creator of all, makes him the author of logic. You claimed that a trumpet is symbolic only of war, I proved otherwise, and now you are changing your tune claiming the Bible is "conflicted". Who are you to accuse someone of "private interpretation"? Who the hell do you think you are kidding? The use of a word can have many different purposes, which I pointed out to you, clearly.

Even a casual reader of Revelation 8 can see that what is depicted therein has NOTHING to do with "assemblies" or whatever else a "trumpet" might represent in the Bible, but that it has EVERYTHING to do with war and conflict, which the Bible full well represents by the symbol "trumpet", as Jeremiah concurs. There ain't nuthin "private" about that interpretation, for the "holy man" Jeremiah, as well as Ezekiel (watchman on the wall blows the trumpet), Paul (who shall prepare for battle if the trumpet give an uncertain sound?) and everyone other "holy man" who spoke on the issue agrees.

 

[Dcopymope]

Even a casual reader of Revelation 8 can see that what is depicted therein has NOTHING to do with "assemblies" or whatever else a "trumpet" might represent in the Bible, but that it has EVERYTHING to do with war and conflict, which the Bible full well represents by the symbol "trumpet", as Jeremiah concurs. There ain't nuthin "private" about that interpretation, for the "holy man" Jeremiah, as well as Ezekiel (watchman on the wall blows the trumpet), Paul (who shall prepare for battle if the trumpet give an uncertain sound?) and everyone other "holy man" who spoke on the issue agrees.

The many diffetrent purposes of the trumpet in the old testament:

(Numbers 10:1-10) "And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, {2} Make thee two trumpets of silver; of a whole piece shalt thou make them: that thou mayest use them for the calling of the assembly, and for the journeying of the camps. {3} And when they shall blow with them, all the assembly shall assemble themselves to thee at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. {4} And if they blow but with one trumpet, then the princes, which are heads of the thousands of Israel, shall gather themselves unto thee. {5} When ye blow an alarm, then the camps that lie on the east parts shall go forward. {6} When ye blow an alarm the second time, then the camps that lie on the south side shall take their journey: they shall blow an alarm for their journeys. {7} But when the congregation is to be gathered together, ye shall blow, but ye shall not sound an alarm. {8} And the sons of Aaron, the priests, shall blow with the trumpets; and they shall be to you for an ordinance for ever throughout your generations. {9} And if ye go to war in your land against the enemy that oppresseth you, then ye shall blow an alarm with the trumpets; and ye shall be remembered before the LORD your God, and ye shall be saved from your enemies. {10} Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in the beginnings of your months, ye shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; that they may be to you for a memorial before your God: I am the LORD your God."

I conclude that your interpretation of the trumpet being only for war as a private one. if you want to continue being dishonest about what the Bible actually states about the use of a trumpet, and you want to believe that God tossing a 'star' from heaven onto earth to poison the water supply somehow has to do with falling bombs, or some crap, then knock yourself out. What I will not tolerate is anybody accusing me of private interpretation when you are clearly doing the same dam thing.

 

[Phoneman777]

The many diffetrent purposes of the trumpet in the old testament:


I conclude that your interpretation of the trumpet being only for war as a private one. if you want to continue being dishonest about what the Bible actually states about the use of a trumpet, and you want to believe that God tossing a 'star' from heaven onto earth to poison the water supply somehow has to do with falling bombs, or some crap, then knock yourself out. What I will not tolerate is anybody accusing me of private interpretation when you are clearly doing the same dam thing.

Jeremiah, Paul, Ezekiel disagree with you, the Pope, and all other subscribers to Jesuit Futurism (which they manufactured as a desperate damage control measure when the Protestant Historicists were handing their butts to them during the Reformation).

Put down Emerging Church propaganda and study church history - PROTESTANT CHURCH HISTORY - for a change.

 

[Dcopymope]

Jeremiah, Paul, Ezekiel disagree with you, the Pope, and all other subscribers to Jesuit Futurism (which they manufactured as a desperate damage control measure when the Protestant Historicists were handing their butts to them during the Reformation).

Put down Emerging Church propaganda and study church history - PROTESTANT CHURCH HISTORY - for a change.

"Emergent church propaganda"? Never heard of it, nor do I care to know. I let the Bible speak for itself, and let all men be liars. I suggest you put down your own private interpretation for once, let reason prevail, and know that two plus two equals 4.

 

[Phoneman777]

"Emergent church propaganda"? Never heard of it, nor do I care to know. I let the Bible speak for itself, and let all men be liars. I suggest you put down your own private interpretation for once, let reason prevail, and know that two plus two equals 4.

I've reviewed your posts in this thread and I see that you've chosen to circle your "intellectual wagons" around your Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism theory, rather than allow it to stand the test of Biblical and historic scrutiny with regard to the issue of "the restrainer".

I'm not surprised in the least, for you are not the first and you won't be the last.

So far, no one has been able to offer any plausible explanation for why Paul uncharacteristically clammed up in his epistle about the restrainer's supposed "Agent of Holiness" identity, why he deprived the New Testament church of such an encouraging proclamation of this "Agent of Holiness" power preventing the rise of Antichrist, and why he left the church without a key to identifying the Antichrist by failing to identify the power that was restraining the rise of it, though the most fearful warning in all the Bible admonishes us to not take the Antichrist's mark...that is no one other than a Historicist like the Early Church Fathers, the Protestant Reformers, and anyone else with plain common sense and a willingness to accept the Bible and the facts of church history. If you disagree, please ANSWER THE OP QUESTION.

 

[Dcopymope]

I've reviewed your posts in this thread and I see that you've chosen to circle your "intellectual wagons" around your Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism theory, rather than allow it to stand the test of Biblical and historic scrutiny with regard to the issue of "the restrainer".

I'm not surprised in the least, for you are not the first and you won't be the last.

So far, no one has been able to offer any plausible explanation for why Paul uncharacteristically clammed up in his epistle about the restrainer's supposed "Agent of Holiness" identity, why he deprived the New Testament church of such an encouraging proclamation of this "Agent of Holiness" power preventing the rise of Antichrist, and why he left the church without a key to identifying the Antichrist by failing to identify the power that was restraining the rise of it, though the most fearful warning in all the Bible admonishes us to not take the Antichrist's mark...that is no one other than a Historicist like the Early Church Fathers, the Protestant Reformers, and anyone else with plain common sense and a willingness to accept the Bible and the facts of church history. If you disagree, please ANSWER THE OP QUESTION.

We've answered your "challenge" time and again, and I in particular have answered and refuted your claim to the trumpet being only for war when it clearly isn't. Its up to you if you'll accept those answers. And where are you getting this term "agent of holiness" from anyway? It ain't in scripture, nor does it even imply anywhere in last days prophecy that the temple with which the beast of Revelation will sit and claim to be God will be in Rome, but it will in fact be in Israel.

(Matthew 24:13-21) "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. {14} And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. {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 {16} Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: {17} Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: {18} Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. {19} And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! {20} But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: {21} For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."

The "holy place" measured, and in location identified to be Israel in Revelation:

(Revelation 11:1-8) "And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. {2} But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. {3} And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. {4} These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth. {5} And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed. {6} These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will. {7} And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. [n]{8} And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified."[/b]

For your interpretation to even begin to make any kind of logical sense, the location of the Lords crucifixion would have to be in Rome, not Golgotha, which I'm sure is understood by most Christians to be just outside the walls of Jerusalem. I don't recall Jesus Christ being crucified anywhere else but Israel. The only one claiming Jesus was crucified anywhere near Rome is you, since you are claiming that the Papacy or the Vatican is the temple of God, which I have shown is not and will not be the case. That is over two thousand kilometers in error on your part pal. According to you, Jesus Christ carried the cross another one-thousand miles just to be nailed to it. It sounds quite silly, and of course, unbiblical.

I don't care what some guy named Luther thought was the "man of sin". None of these men ever claimed to have received personal revelation telling them these things of the Papacy, and even if they did, I don't give a damn because their claims are obviously false. The only validation they had of this apparent truth in their minds in fact boils down to nothing more than their own personal experience under the Papacies persecution. Persecution of the saints has been going on since before Luther, Calvin and most of the men listed in your OP were even born. Many historical figures have been accused of being the anti-Christ and that the end is near, from the Papacy all the way up to freaking Barack Obama. All of it is based on nonsensical private interpretation. I'm sure next people will be claiming that Hillary or Trump is the anti-Christ, and this circus show goes on.

 

[Phoneman777]

We've answered your "challenge" time and again, and I in particular have answered and refuted your claim to the trumpet being only for war when it clearly isn't. Its up to you if you'll accept those answers. And where are you getting this term "agent of holiness" from anyway? It ain't in scripture, nor does it even imply anywhere in last days prophecy that the temple with which the beast of Revelation will sit and claim to be God will be in Rome, but it will in fact be in Israel.




The "holy place" measured, and in location identified to be Israel in Revelation:




For your interpretation to even begin to make any kind of logical sense, the location of the Lords crucifixion would have to be in Rome, not Golgotha, which I'm sure is understood by most Christians to be just outside the walls of Jerusalem. I don't recall Jesus Christ being crucified anywhere else but Israel. The only one claiming Jesus was crucified anywhere near Rome is you, since you are claiming that the Papacy or the Vatican is the temple of God, which I have shown is not and will not be the case. That is over two thousand kilometers in error on your part pal. According to you, Jesus Christ carried the cross another one-thousand miles just to be nailed to it. It sounds quite silly, and of course, unbiblical.

I don't care what some guy named Luther thought was the "man of sin". None of these men ever claimed to have received personal revelation telling them these things of the Papacy, and even if they did, I don't give a damn because their claims are obviously false. The only validation they had of this apparent truth in their minds in fact boils down to nothing more than their own personal experience under the Papacies persecution. Persecution of the saints has been going on since before Luther, Calvin and most of the men listed in your OP were even born. Many historical figures have been accused of being the anti-Christ and that the end is near, from the Papacy all the way up to freaking Barack Obama. All of it is based on nonsensical private interpretation. I'm sure next people will be claiming that Hillary or Trump is the anti-Christ, and this circus show goes on.

I must have missed your answer to the OP question. Please point to which of your posts contain an answer so I can review it. BTW, this thread is not about Revelation, it's about 2 Thessalonians 2 - THE RESTRAINER