Especially since the bible tells us:
1 Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
It's clear that Satan is not yet currently bound
Did Jesus return around 70 AD?
- Thread starter SeekTruth
- 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!
1 Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
It's clear that Satan is not yet currently bound
You missed the point entirely. It's not about how many times Joe drove home. It is about that no one can know when Joe drove home based on only the following---and at that time Joe shall get in his car and drive home. Therefore, context preceding that statement is required in order to know when Joe does that. It's simply a rule of grammar, in general. If there is a 'when' involved, that might be different. Such as---and at that time Joe will get in his car and drive home, when he walks out into the parking lot, after clocking out from his shift that day. But where is there a 'when' like that in Daniel 12:1? Granted there is a 'when' here--and there should be a time of trouble. But we still don't know when this time of trouble is meaning. Therefore, we need context before verse 1 in order to determine that.
We already know by comparing some of the following, that there is connection between ch 11 and 12.
Daniel 12:10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.
11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up , there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
Compared with...
Daniel 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate .
32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.
33 And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.
34 Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries.
35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white , even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.
Last edited:
The Scriptures say what they say, and men will have their say about them.
The sheer volume of antichrist/antitruth activity that exists in the world today, could lead one to presume that we are in a time, or season if you will, of great deception.
Revelation 21:2
And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband.
What happened with Old Jerusalem, on earth? Old Jerusalem vs New Jerusalem. Widow vs Bride. If a man leaves his wife because she is a whore, he will find a better wife. He replaced the old with the new.
And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband.
What happened with Old Jerusalem, on earth? Old Jerusalem vs New Jerusalem. Widow vs Bride. If a man leaves his wife because she is a whore, he will find a better wife. He replaced the old with the new.
If Babylon is meaning Jerusalem in Revelation 18, it is not meaning Jerusalem in the first century, it is meaning Jerusalem in the final days of this age. In order for the verse you provided to be fulfilled, it requires that the old Jerusalem shall be found no more at all. Maybe you take Rev 21:2 as already fulfilled. I don't. To do so contradicts Revelation 18:21 if Jerusalem is meant, the fact this same old Jerusalem can still be found.
Last edited:
Revelation 18:7
Babylon said: I sit as a queen and I am not a widow.
Look, the old wife could not accept the fact that she was left by her husband. And she became very jealous. She hated his new wife. That is why she tried to destroy her. She persecuted her, she stabbed her, she humiliated her. For 40 years she did so, until the husband came, took his old wife and threw her into the fire. And he took his new wife and went to a better place to live there in peace and joy.
What if Jesus returned around 70 AD, took all his followers, and brought them to a better world? And the people who were left in this world are the unworthy, and we are the descendants of the unworthy?
The following explains some of these things instead, such as the absurd nonsense you are proposing here.
2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
So who exactly is God in the verses below? This is exactly what happened in 70AD
Revelation 17
16 The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute.They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire. 17 For God has put it into their heartsto accomplish his purpose by agreeing to hand over to the beast their royal authority, until God’s words are fulfilled.
Jesus and the Father are both God there is only one God
What I implied in that post with the Scripture I submitted, I'm not applying that to you throughout. I am not painting that with a broad brush. Only in regard to what you said when you said---"What if Jesus returned around 70 AD, took all his followers, and brought them to a better world? And the people who were left in this world are the unworthy, and we are the descendants of the unworthy?"
As to Matthew 24, in my view, some of it has been fulfilled, some of it hasn't.
BTW, keep in mind what you already admitted in the OP---I know this is a controversial matter. I know that many here are now going to call it pathetic
In the event you get offended by what some of us say, you should already be prepared for that and not expect the opposite instead--that it's not a controversial matter. Keeping in mind, no one forced you to start this thread.
Last edited:
Ronald Nolette
Well-Known Member
The first resurrection spoken of in REv 20:6 speaks of the physical resurrection. Not the new birth where we are born again, not resurrected.
In order to get the full context regarding Michael we need to start with Daniel 10.
NIV Daniel 10:20So he said, “Do you know why I have come to you? Soon I will return to fight against the prince of Persia, and when I go, the prince of Greece will come; 21but first I will tell you what is written in the Book of Truth. (No one supports me against them except Michael, your prince. 11:1And in the first year of Darius the Mede, I took my stand to support and protect him.)
Michael standing up in Daniel 12:1 is referring back to him being mentioned in Daniel 10. So during all of the events that are taking place in Daniel 11, during that time frame, Michael isn’t taking a stand, then he does take a stand “at that time” which is described in Daniel 12.
Ok, I don’t know when in time you have the Revelation 12 fight between Michael and the dragon taking place, but it can’t happen whenever the Daniel 11 time frame occurs, right?
Most people have the beginning of Daniel 11 starting around 300BC with Alexander the Great. Then somewhere around Daniel 11:36 some folks think it switches to a future Antichrist. If that’s what you’re thinking then you can’t place the Revelation 12 fight at the cross because your Daniel 11 time frame is somewhere around 2,300 years long. You’d have to place the Revelation 12 fight prior to 300BC or at some future time.
Similar threads
