Gabriel’s message to Daniel is extremely relevant

[Bobby Jo]

Bobby Jo said, (Post #130)

FINE:

Rev. 12 says SEVEN CROWNS, but Rev. 13 says TEN CROWNS.

What happened? Why the difference? What's going on?​

... I did in fact address the issue of ... "crowns." ...

Show us all where you explained why Rev. 12 says SEVEN CROWNS/DIADEMS, but Rev. 13 says TEN CROWNS/DIADEMS.


The old saying says: Put up or shut up. And thus far you've done neither, so please do one.
Bobby Jo

 

[Heart2Soul]

@Bobby Jo, Revelation 12 has to do with the woman with child....Revelation 13 has to do with the beast of the sea....2 very separate incidents occurring here....
Here is a video that might interest you....

 

[Bobby Jo]

... I did answer his question about differences between 7 diadems and 10 diadems in post #118. He thought I was diverting to 7 heads and 10 horns--that was a mistake on his part. ....

Randy Kluth Post #118:
My view of the 10 and 7 is that it is based on Dan 7, where there are 10 kings who comprise Antichrist's empire. Antichrist defeats 3 of the kings, leaving 7 kings and 10 states, or nations. They are 7 heads and 10 horns.​

There are THREE basic elements: the seven HEADS; ten HORNS; and seven/ten DIADEMS (crowns). The are NOT interchangeable. As such, the question still stands:

Why does Rev. 12 say SEVEN diadems (crowns), and Rev. 13 say TEN diadems (crowns).​

And it's ok if you don't have an answer, but PLEASE don't do VIOLENCE to Scripture.
Bobby Jo

 

[Bobby Jo]

@Bobby Jo, Revelation 12 has to do with the woman with child....Revelation 13 has to do with the beast of the sea....2 very separate incidents occurring here....
Here is a video that might interest you....

Dear H2S,

Already seen the video, and it has NOTHING to do with these two aspects. But a few years ago, I was CHALLENGED to ANSWER what another forum member couldn't resolve, (-- previously having never even been aware of the "contradiction" --). And after a few moments the answer was APPARENT, so I posted back. Of course, the CHALLENGER never acknowledged the TRUTH of what I presented.

It's such a simple solution, but a conundrum for those who purport proficiency in Prophetic topics. So I repeatedly use it (and others) to refute their "expertise".

So here's the solution:

SEVEN DIADEMS -- throughout world governments

1. Gold, Babylon
2. Silver, Medo/Persia
3. Bronze, Greece
4. Iron, Rome
-- Clay, "Divided"
-- 5. Lion/Eagle, U.K./U.S.
-- 6. Bear, Russa
-- 7. Leopard (actually a TIGER), China
​

... now when the 8th, "Dreadful Beast", United Nations (... eighth that was and is not, because it has NO Population, NO Geography, and NO Army ...) comes on the scene, it bring a NEW ERA:

TEN DIADEMS -- under the United Nations Permanent Membership of the Security Council:

Permanent Membership on the Security Council
1. U.S.
2. U.K.
3. France
4. Russia
5. China

NOMINATED for Permanent Membership on the Security Council *
6. Germany – economic power
7. Japan – economic power
8. Brazil – regional representative for S. America
9. Nigeria – regional representative
10. India – regional representative for the Near East

* “The Road To Reform: Towards A New Clarity,” U.N. Chronicle, MI, Vol. 30, Issue 4, December 1993, pp. 45-46​

... and to further confirm the "interpretation", the LION (/EAGLE) is the MOUTH because the U.K./U.S. has preeminence in Science, Technology, Trade, & Finance; the LEOPARD (actually a TIGER) is the BODY because China has the most Population; and the BEAR is the FEET because Russia has the most land mass (8M vs 3M each for the U.S., Canada, and China).


Such a simple solution for such simple Scripture and History!
Bobby Jo

 

[Bobby Jo]

@Heart2Soul

I'm not sure what happened, but I didn't see the second video listed until a moment ago, and it appears the only thing the "author" got right is that there is a Book of Revelation in the Bible, but the rest is nonsense. And I could refute each of his FALSE assertions (doctrines), but I can't cure all the ignorance in the church. In fact, I don't believe in all my postings that I've cured a single person of their ignorance. -- It's like my favorite aunt who used to tease: My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts. And she was teasing, but everyone else is SERIOUS.

And so I council, and then leave them to receive their "reward".
Bobby Jo

 

[Timtofly]

That is one way that insecure people build themselves up.

Being insecure is not the whole of it. It takes a spirit of Satan to purposely do it. Insecure people may lash out in defense. This type is not defensive. It is outright offensive.

 

[Bobby Jo]

Being insecure is not the whole of it. It takes a spirit of Satan to purposely do it. Insecure people may lash out in defense. This type is not defensive. It is outright offensive.

... and another who I leave to receive their own "reward".

Is there no end to nonsense?
Bobby Jo

 

[Randy Kluth]

Randy Kluth Post #118:
My view of the 10 and 7 is that it is based on Dan 7, where there are 10 kings who comprise Antichrist's empire. Antichrist defeats 3 of the kings, leaving 7 kings and 10 states, or nations. They are 7 heads and 10 horns.​

There are THREE basic elements: the seven HEADS; ten HORNS; and seven/ten DIADEMS (crowns). The are NOT interchangeable. As such, the question still stands:

Why does Rev. 12 say SEVEN diadems (crowns), and Rev. 13 say TEN diadems (crowns).​

And it's ok if you don't have an answer, but PLEASE don't do VIOLENCE to Scripture.
Bobby Jo

What is the matter with you, brother? I've told you repeatedly that I'm not just dealing with the 7 heads and 10 horns--that is just the wider context. Of course I deal with that too!

But I never diverted from the main question, which concerned the difference between the 7 crowns in Rev 12 and the 10 crowns in Rev 13. I *answer that!*

Just go back to post #118 and look. Unless you have a reading impairment, which I don't think you have, it is all right there! I even quote the relevant verses and put in bold the word "crown."

No, I've not diverted, I've not avoided, I've not been dishonest. On the other hand, you've misrepresented me in front of everybody here. You really should apologize, brother, because in this case you're 100% wrong.

Not that I'm judging you as a non-Christian. It's just that I'm judging you a *bad Christian,* for treating me this way, and for acting so arrogant with many, insulting them as "ignorant" or "fools."

You really need to get a handle on your relationship with God because last I looked, He was still "love." And you're not at all demonstrating that virtue. On the contrary, you're exhibiting the worse form of contempt.

This is what I said in post #118, and it explicitly referenced the difference between the 7 crowns and the 10 crowns:

Rev 12.3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads...

9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him...

13.1 The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name.

I have for years pointed out the difference between the different number of crowns in Rev 12 and Rev 13. I did have a theory about it, but am not sure.

I also give you my theory on why the number of crowns change from the Dragon to the Beast. But obviously you didn't read it properly. And until you do, you apparently wish to double down on your misinformed accusations.

 

[Timtofly]

My reward and job is watching people squirm. It is not fun. It is humbling and like Jeremiah the weeping prophet a lamentation, not a joy. Ask any prophet here who has to deliver bad news. Why would any one purposely wound even if a rebuke?

 

[Randy Kluth]

In post #118 I informed Bobby Jo what my theory was behind the change from 7 crowns of the Dragon to 10 crowns of the Beast.

Rev 12.3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads...

9 The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him...

13.1 The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name.

I have for years pointed out the difference between the different number of crowns in Rev 12 and Rev 13. I did have a theory about it, but am not sure.

So in order to put behind me the baseless accusations of Bobby Jo, indicating I had tried to avoid answering the question, and in order to inform you of what my theory is, let me try to explain again.

My theory is that the Dragon, who is Satan, has 7 crowns on his heads because he is viewed as being cast out of heaven and upon the earth in order to head up the Beast Empire by empowering the Beast himself--the Antichrist. The Beast is viewed as having 10 crowns on his heads because he is viewed as emerging from the sea, before the 10 heads have been reduced to 7 heads.

If you care to comment, please do. I'm not, however, interested in hearing any more from Bobby Jo, unless there is admission of error on his part. And clearly, the animosity and insults have to go--there can be no respectful conversation with that kind of bad attitude.

 

[Bobby Jo]

What is the matter with you, brother? I've told you repeatedly that I'm not just dealing with the 7 heads and 10 horns--that is just the wider context. ...

Apparently you want to integrate the HEADS, HORNS, and DIADEMS. So. let's start with the SEVEN HEADS. -- Who are they?

And then who are the TEN HORNS?

And finally, we'll address the DIADEMS.

Fair enough? -- And note, the SEVEN are not the same as the TEN plus or minus the difference of THREE. The SEVEN versus TEN are completely different sets!
Bobby Jo

 

[Timtofly]

In post #118 I informed Bobby Jo what my theory was behind the change from 7 crowns of the Dragon to 10 crowns of the Beast.

My theory is that the Dragon, who is Satan, has 7 crowns on his heads because he is viewed as being cast out of heaven and upon the earth in order to head up the Beast Empire by empowering the Beast himself--the Antichrist. The Beast is viewed as having 10 crowns on his heads because he is viewed as emerging from the sea, before the 10 heads have been reduced to 7 heads.

If you care to comment, please do. I'm not, however, interested in hearing any more from Bobby Jo, unless there is admission of error on his part. And clearly, the animosity and insults have to go--there can be no respectful conversation with that kind of bad attitude.

All I can say is your theory can be worked out with kingdoms. What kingdoms that can be worked out, is in the past. My point is it has been Satan pulling the strings and influencing the kingdoms. There is only one man revealed as a false prophet. If anything is going to be revealed in the 4th seal when 2 billion humans die, we are not told.

Jesus and the writers warned us not to look for humans calling themselves "Christ" and if they do, mark them as an antichrist and ignore them. With this in mind, looking for an Antichrist instead of a false prophet goes against Revelation and the rest of the NT.

If Satan tries to come back after the 4th seal and proclaim to be a "saviour", I doubt it will last long. Perhaps the majority of those killed will be Christians beheaded for their testimony. Did not Nero blame the Church for the economic collapse and have them killed even while Rome was being destroyed? If the war, famine, plague, and wild beast kill mostly Christians, there may not be too many left alive at the rapture. But until the 4th seal is opened and governments turn on each other, no one may be able to predict what happens. Personally a world wide revival of Repentance and turning to God is God’s Will and my prayer.

 

[Bobby Jo]

To All,

To be PERFECTLY CLEAR:

• The Rev. 12 and Rev. 13 "seven heads" are the same as the Rev. 17 "seven kings".

• The Rev. 12 and Rev. 13 "ten horns" are the same as the Dan. 7 "ten (little) horns".

• The Rev. 12 "SEVEN diadems" ARE NOT the same as the Rev. 13 "TEN diadems" entities. They're two DIFFERENT groups.

• The Rev. 12 "red dragon" is NOT the same as the Rev. 13 "beast"

• The Rev. 13 "beast" is the same as the Rev. 17 "eighth" "that was and is not", and also the same as the Dan. 7 "dreadful beast".

• Anytime someone uses mathematical gymnastics to contrive a partial explanation, DEMAND that they solve the WHOLE passage.

That should clear things up!
Bobby Jo

 

[Randy Kluth]

Apparently you want to integrate the HEADS, HORNS, and DIADEMS. So. let's start with the SEVEN HEADS. -- Who are they?

And then who are the TEN HORNS?

And finally, we'll address the DIADEMS.

Fair enough? -- And note, the SEVEN are not the same as the TEN plus or minus the difference of THREE. The SEVEN versus TEN are completely different sets!
Bobby Jo

Nothing about you has been fair, brother.

 

[Stranger]

I gave you a reasonable offer, and you answer by making insults. Obviously, you are going to have your way, and not consider anything but what you wish to believe. That isn't respectable.

You gave nothing. I showed you that (Is. 61) referenced no gap. But with further revelation from the Bible, we recognize there was a gap. That is through the very words of Christ Himself.

You ignore it. That isn't respectable. Not to me....but to Christ.

Stranger

 

[Bobby Jo]

Nothing about you has been fair, brother.

You're the one who twists the Heads and the Horns as though they were the DIADEMS. -- Newton used the phrase "doing VIOLENCE" to Scripture and it fits what you're contorted.

So YOU need to be FAIR to Scripture, and NOT BUTCHER the text or the fulfillments. -- Or go your own way, and follow your own imaginations. Your choice.
Bobby Jo

 

[Randy Kluth]

You gave nothing. I showed you that (Is. 61) referenced no gap. But with further revelation from the Bible, we recognize there was a gap. That is through the very words of Christ Himself.
You ignore it. That isn't respectable. Not to me....but to Christ.
Stranger

I would be nice to debate with you, but you have to not take things personally. I simply disagree. It's okay that we don't agree. You have your arguments, and I have mine. Then we can just get them out there and let others decide what they wish to believe. We're doing them a service, hopefully, by giving them a couple of options.

 

[Stranger]

Isa 61.1 The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is on me,
because the Lord has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim freedom for the captives
and release from darkness for the prisoners,
2 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor
and the day of vengeance of our God,
to comfort all who mourn,
3 and provide for those who grieve in Zion—
to bestow on them a crown of beauty
instead of ashes,
the oil of joy
instead of mourning,
and a garment of praise
instead of a spirit of despair.
They will be called oaks of righteousness,
a planting of the Lord
for the display of his splendor.

This passage is focused on describing the Jewish Hope, and does not provide a timeline. In excluding a timeline, the events are not given a particular chronological arrangement. We are only told there is a "year" of the Lord's favor, and a "day" of vengeance.

Since this "Jewish Hope," as I call it, is depicted everywhere in the Prophets, to some degree, we know the general outline. God lets Israel suffer punishment through the persecutions of the pagan nations until the time for her recovery. Then those nations will be utterly defeated, as well as destroyed, leaving a remnant of Israel to rebuild the nation into a full, godly nation once again.

To say there is a "gap" between the restoration of Israel and the vengeance of God against the nations who abused them is ludicrous. It is way too obvious that the only sequence given is based upon the logical sense that the judgment must precede the restoration. Therefore, the judgment is in a "day," whereas the restoration is the final goal, taking place over a year of time.

Luke 4.16 He stood up to read, 17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

Here Jesus emphasizes the year of the Lord's favor, referring to the Hope of Israel, the "Jewish Hope." It is ubiquitous in the Prophets, if only inferred. The goal of Israel has always been to restore the nation to godliness and to establish that for all time.

Nothing here establishes a chronology between the judgment leading to this restoration and the restoration itself. Jesus simply chooses to emphasize the restoration of Israel, and ignore the judgment part of this.

To call this a "gap" assumes that there is an established chronology to begin with. And as I showed you, Isa 61 did *not* establish a fixed chronology at all. There is only the assumption that in order to have the final restoration of Israel, the judgment of Israel's enemies must take place first.

What then did Jesus indicate was being fulfilled in his own day, if the final restoration of Israel remained far off into the future?

Jesus declared not that the restoration of Israel had begun, but that there was a part he had to play as Messiah that connects to the future Hope of Israel. His proclamation of the Gospel to those who would receive it clearly establishes the constituent members of those who will be blessed to be in that future restoration. Therefore, his Messianic calling to *proclaim the Gospel of salvation* was an essential part of the fulfillment of this prophecy, not as the restoration of Israel itself, but rather, as a means of acquiring a membership in that future Kingdom.

Luke 4. 20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. 21 He began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”

22 All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” they asked.

23 Jesus said to them, “Surely you will quote this proverb to me: ‘Physician, heal yourself!’ And you will tell me, ‘Do here in your hometown what we have heard that you did in Capernaum.’”

24 “Truly I tell you,” he continued, “no prophet is accepted in his hometown. 25 I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah’s time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. 26 Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. 27 And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the Syrian.”

More double talk. More bs. Jesus declared that the 'acceptable year of the LORD' in (Is. 61:2) was being fulfilled in Him. He stopped in the middle of that quote and did not quote "the day of vengeance of our God".

That day of vengeance is a 'future day' as you admit. That means there is a gap between Christ in His first coming and Christ in His second coming. Thus there is a gap in the sentence of (Isa. 61:2) that is at present 2020 years wide, and still widening every day. Even though in (Is. 61) it is spoken of as the same event.

Further revelation proves otherwise.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

... said the man with his mouth full.

And even worse, he's content in his own vomit.
Bobby Jo

Come back when you have something to offer. Of course that would mean you wouldn't be back for quite some time. But, I am hopeful.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

I would be nice to debate with you, but you have to not take things personally. I simply disagree. It's okay that we don't agree. You have your arguments, and I have mine. Then we can just get them out there and let others decide what they wish to believe. We're doing them a service, hopefully, by giving them a couple of options.

If one option is false, how is that doing anyone a 'service'?

Stranger