How close is the Seven Year Tribulation?

[BibleScribe]

Of course it was by God's command first silly!

According to Young, it was GOD's command period, but liars have attributed it to men. Scripture accounts for that historical edict, -- DIRECTLY from GOD --, exactly as Young observed that it must come.


BibleScribe



To All,

John Walvoord may not have been the most enlightened scholar, but he was extremely well researched. As such he finds those expert views which offer insight into Scriptural nuances which others might reasonably be oblivious to. According Walvoord citeds Edward Young as follows:

"Young considers the expression the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem ... [in reference to] the issuance of the word, not from a Persian ruler but from God."
Daniel, The Key To Prophetic Revelation, p. 224


The problem is that these liars have not waited until "the time of the end" in accordance with Daniel 12:4 & Daniel 12:9, but have asserted FALSE ancient fulfillments in an attempt to provide an answer to Scripture which is "shut up and sealed". As such, is it any wonder that their lies should come to light?

BibleScribe

 

[veteran]

According to Young, it was GOD's command period, but liars have attributed it to men. Scripture accounts for that historical edict, -- DIRECTLY from GOD --, exactly as Young observed that it must come.


BibleScribe



To All,

John Walvoord may not have been the most enlightened scholar, but he was extremely well researched. As such he finds those expert views which offer insight into Scriptural nuances which others might reasonably be oblivious to. According Walvoord citeds Edward Young as follows:

"Young considers the expression the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem ... [in reference to] the issuance of the word, not from a Persian ruler but from God."
Daniel, The Key To Prophetic Revelation, p. 224


The problem is that these liars have not waited until "the time of the end" in accordance with Daniel 12:4 & Daniel 12:9, but have asserted FALSE ancient fulfillments in an attempt to provide an answer to Scripture which is "shut up and sealed". As such, is it any wonder that their lies should come to light?

BibleScribe

According to God's Word, it was God's Will FOR Cyrus as His "anointed". So if anyone here is telling a lie, as you infer, then it's you.

I wonder if Walvoord denied the Daniel 9:25-26 verses mention of Messiah as being about Christ Jesus like you do? That's another one of the lies being told on this forum that I forgot to add to my list.

 

[BibleScribe]

According to God's Word, it was God's Will FOR Cyrus as His "anointed". So if anyone here is telling a lie, as you infer, then it's you.
...

Actually if you want to call someone a liar, then please address your opinion to both Edward Young and John Walvoord.

I wonder if Walvoord denied the Daniel 9:25-26 verses mention of Messiah as being about Christ Jesus like you do? ...

And once again, you twist the TRUTH to gain some false argument. The fact is SCRIPTURE provides the foundation for any such determination wherein the word mashiyach is employed 39 times. And one of those citations is found in Leviticus 4:3 as follows:

Lev 4:3 If the priest [sup]3548[/sup] that is anointed[sup]4899[/sup] do sin [sup]2398[/sup] according to the sin [sup]819[/sup] of the people [sup]5971[/sup]; then let him bring [sup]7126[/sup] for his sin [sup]2403[/sup], which he hath sinned [sup]2398[/sup] , a young [sup]1241[/sup] [sup]1121[/sup] bullock [sup]6499[/sup] without blemish [sup]8549[/sup] unto the LORD [sup]3068[/sup] for a sin offering [sup]2403[/sup].


So if you think Jesus may have sinned, and needed to bring a sin offering, then it is YOU that is deceiving yourself and those who read your words.






To All,

The Contemporary English Version footnote correctly captures the significance of the text, as follows:

Daniel 9:25 the Chosen Leader: Or " a chosen leader." In Hebrew the word " chosen" means " to pour oil (on someone's head)." In Old Testament times it was the custom to pour oil on a person's head when that person was chosen to be a priest or a king.


Furthermore, if there is ANY society which sums numbers typical of "seven and sixty-two", wherein a hammer costs $4 and $17, plus tax, then PLEASE provide that precedent. Otherwise, there is an anointed one after the seven, and a second anointed one after the sixty-two exactly as some Versions correctly depict:

Daniel 9:26-26 ESV
[sup]25[/sup] Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time. [sup]26[/sup]And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. ...


And lacking that precedent, Sir Isaac Newton was correct in his assessment that it does "violence" to Scripture to sum numbers in such fashion:

We avoid also the doing violence to the language of Daniel, by taking the seven weeks and sixty two weeks for one number. Had that been Daniel’s meaning, he would have said sixty and nine weeks, and not seven weeks and sixty two weeks, a way of numbring used by no nation.
http://www.isaacnewton.ca/daniel_apocalypse/pt1ch10.html


But some christians would rather assail the messenger than walk through this 9th Chapter of Daniel point by point, address what the Text actually presents, and arrive to what the Author actually intended.

BibleScribe

 

[veteran]

Actually if you want to call someone a liar, then please address your opinion to both Edward Young and John Walvoord.




And once again, you twist the TRUTH to gain some false argument. The fact is SCRIPTURE provides the foundation for any such determination wherein the word mashiyach is employed 39 times. And one of those citations is found in Leviticus 4:3 as follows:

Lev 4:3 If the priest [sup]3548[/sup] that is anointed[sup]4899[/sup] do sin [sup]2398[/sup] according to the sin [sup]819[/sup] of the people [sup]5971[/sup]; then let him bring [sup]7126[/sup] for his sin [sup]2403[/sup], which he hath sinned [sup]2398[/sup] , a young [sup]1241[/sup] [sup]1121[/sup] bullock [sup]6499[/sup] without blemish [sup]8549[/sup] unto the LORD [sup]3068[/sup] for a sin offering [sup]2403[/sup].


So if you think Jesus may have sinned, and needed to bring a sin offering, then it is YOU that is deceiving yourself and those who read your words.






To All,

The Contemporary English Version footnote correctly captures the significance of the text, as follows:

Daniel 9:25 the Chosen Leader: Or " a chosen leader." In Hebrew the word " chosen" means " to pour oil (on someone's head)." In Old Testament times it was the custom to pour oil on a person's head when that person was chosen to be a priest or a king.


Furthermore, if there is ANY society which sums numbers typical of "seven and sixty-two", wherein a hammer costs $4 and $17, plus tax, then PLEASE provide that precedent. Otherwise, there is an anointed one after the seven, and a second anointed one after the sixty-two exactly as some Versions correctly depict:

Daniel 9:26-26 ESV
[sup]25[/sup] Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time. [sup]26[/sup]And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. ...


And lacking that precedent, Sir Isaac Newton was correct in his assessment that it does "violence" to Scripture to sum numbers in such fashion:

We avoid also the doing violence to the language of Daniel, by taking the seven weeks and sixty two weeks for one number. Had that been Daniel’s meaning, he would have said sixty and nine weeks, and not seven weeks and sixty two weeks, a way of numbring used by no nation.
http://www.isaacnewt...se/pt1ch10.html


But some christians would rather assail the messenger than walk through this 9th Chapter of Daniel point by point, address what the Text actually presents, and arrive to what the Author actually intended.

BibleScribe

You're guilty of Absolutism, treating every occurance in the Old Testament of 'mashiyach' (anointed; Messiah in Dan.9) to mean only someone other than Jesus Christ. Your whole crazy basis is to treat that word to mean all others except Christ, disregarding Scripture context.

When God called Cyrus His "anointed", He was not speaking of Christ Jesus (even though Cyrus does... serve as a pattern for Christ's second coming to free His people from the endtime Revelation Babylon captivity). When it was used in conjunction with Israel's kings, priests, and Patriarchs, it was about their called office as given in Scripture context with it.

When it was used in Daniel 9:25-26, it was about Christ Jesus to set the time and events of His first coming!

 

[Perspectives]

He made this earth for us. He's going to remake it again for us. If He sucks us up outta here so we can float on a cloud like chubby little cherbs plucking harps and singing hymns for eternity, then He has rendered us irrelevant! Not to mention extremely bored.....

 

[Charlie]

He made this earth for us. He's going to remake it again for us. If He sucks us up outta here so we can float on a cloud like chubby little cherbs plucking harps and singing hymns for eternity, then He has rendered us irrelevant! Not to mention extremely bored.....

Dear Friend:

Your 'Big Picture' leaves a lot to desired. Those who are accounted worthy to escape all the things that shall come to pass. Luke 21:36 will be given incorruptible bodies. These will allow them to move between heaven and earth, during the1,000 years and they will be kept busy ruling over the nations of the world as they rule and reign as directed by the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, from heaven.

God Bless you. Charlie

 

[BibleScribe]

You're guilty of Absolutism, ...

I would observe that you're guilty of not using your brain. For how is it that one Version says "seven and sixty-two", for which there is absolutely NO precedence for, and Newton correctly identifies this as "violence" to Scipture; and another Version correctly depicts an anointed one after the seven, and a second anointed one after the sixty-two? Did Jesus have a brother? Did HE come to earth on TWO occasions?

Scripture is really quite simple, -- just as the Author intended.

BibleScribe

 

[BibleScribe]

To All,

Please be most assured that GOD seldom provides a doctrinal point without confirmation. As such I have proposed multiple failures of the "classical" interpretation in Post #139, and provide them again for your reference:


1. Daniel 9:2 specifies "years". -- This is a clue.

2. Daniel 9:2 does not use the simple shama to perceive the prophecy of Jeremiah as though reading that book, but rather the Soloman biyn to perceive the prophecy in the BOOKS.-- This is another clue.

3. Daniel 9:25 "going forth of the word" does NOT have the inference of any edict from man, but rather and edict directly from GOD. -- This is another clue.

4. The Daniel 9:25 seven is one duration with an anointed one "coming" after that duration. -- And another clue.

5. The Daniel 9:25 - 26 sixty-two weeks is a second duration with a second anointed one who is cut off after that duration. -- Still another clue.

6. The "weeks"/"week" are the inconcise Masculine gender text, which are specifically NOT 490 years. -- And yet another clues.

7. The second anointed one who is cut off is not killed upon the sixty-two, but simply AFTER. -- The clues keep on coming.

8. The destroyer does not come at the beginning, middle, or upon the end of the seventieth shabuwa, but "shall come" after the seventieth shabuwa. -- You can't handle these clues.

9. The seven, the sixty-two; the seventieth; and after the seventieth (shall come); are chronologically connected, with NO ~2,000 year gaps. -- And still more clues.

10. This prophecy is shut up and sealed until the time of the end, which is approximate to 1948. -- The final clue which I've identified.



And of course, if all the specifics provided by Scripture were wrong, and an ancient fulfillment were correct, then somebody should tell Montgomery who described this 9th Chapter as the "dismal swamp" of Old Testament prophecy. Thus if he and the other greats cannot resolve it, I would propose that neither can "veteran".


So maybe, just maybe, the prophecies of this book are indeed shut up and sealed until ~1948. And if so, then can we FINALLY open these prophecies?!?

BibleScribe

 

[tomwebster]

...

So maybe, just maybe, the prophecies of this book are indeed shut up and sealed until ~1948. And if so, then can we FINALLY open these prophecies?!?

BibleScribe

Someone already has opened them.

 

[BibleScribe]

... maybe the last thing which you asserted is open to the church is the "day" or the "hour" of Jesus' return. But then again, you were strangely silent after that promise. -- Did you awake from your slumber to offer that which you cannot deliver???



Ref. Topic: "A time line", Post #4 by BibleScribe, and Post #5 by tomwebster, http://www.christian...67-a-time-line/

...
Please be aware that just because GOD says "no man knows the day nor the hour", that we can't know the week, the month, the season, the year, the decade, the score, the century, the daytona (the 500), or the millennium. The fact is, the year is identified in Scripture.
...

But we can study and learn. You are misreading Matthew 24:36. The word "knoweth" is intuitive knowledge. We do not know intuitively but we can learn if we study.

To All,

Where "tomwebster" has feigned knowledge, it's a simple process to prove what he really is. -- And it ain't a capital "C" Christian, but it might be a capital "D" deceiver.

BibleScribe

 

[veteran]

To All,

Please be most assured that GOD seldom provides a doctrinal point without confirmation. As such I have proposed multiple failures of the "classical" interpretation in Post #139, and provide them again for your reference:


1. Daniel 9:2 specifies "years". -- This is a clue.

2. Daniel 9:2 does not use the simple shama to perceive the prophecy of Jeremiah as though reading that book, but rather the Soloman biyn to perceive the prophecy in the BOOKS.-- This is another clue.

3. Daniel 9:25 "going forth of the word" does NOT have the inference of any edict from man, but rather and edict directly from GOD. -- This is another clue.

4. The Daniel 9:25 seven is one duration with an anointed one "coming" after that duration. -- And another clue.

5. The Daniel 9:25 - 26 sixty-two weeks is a second duration with a second anointed one who is cut off after that duration. -- Still another clue.

6. The "weeks"/"week" are the inconcise Masculine gender text, which are specifically NOT 490 years. -- And yet another clues.

7. The second anointed one who is cut off is not killed upon the sixty-two, but simply AFTER. -- The clues keep on coming.

8. The destroyer does not come at the beginning, middle, or upon the end of the seventieth shabuwa, but "shall come" after the seventieth shabuwa. -- You can't handle these clues.

9. The seven, the sixty-two; the seventieth; and after the seventieth (shall come); are chronologically connected, with NO ~2,000 year gaps. -- And still more clues.

10. This prophecy is shut up and sealed until the time of the end, which is approximate to 1948. -- The final clue which I've identified.



And of course, if all the specifics provided by Scripture were wrong, and an ancient fulfillment were correct, then somebody should tell Montgomery who described this 9th Chapter as the "dismal swamp" of Old Testament prophecy. Thus if he and the other greats cannot resolve it, I would propose that neither can "veteran".


So maybe, just maybe, the prophecies of this book are indeed shut up and sealed until ~1948. And if so, then can we FINALLY open these prophecies?!?

BibleScribe

Sound's just like Judaism to me.

 

[BibleScribe]

To All,

It appears that "veteran" declines to evaluate the TRUTH of Scripture. Equally, he also ignores the council of the greats, as provided in Post #92:



In his book, John Walvoord writes regarding the interpretation of the seventy “weeks":

1. Per Walvoord: "...Montgomery, for all of his scholarship and knowledge of the history of interpretation, ends up with no reasonable interpretation at all.”, P.218

2. Per Walvoord: "...as Young points out, the word ‘sevens’ is in the masculine plural instead of the usual feminine plural. No clear explanation is given except that Young feels ‘it was for the deliberate purpose of calling attention to the fact that the word “sevens” is employed in an unusual sense.’", P.217

3. Per Walvoord: "...Young finally concludes after some discussion that Keit and Kliefoth are correct when they hold that the word ‘sevens’ does not necessarily mean year-weeks, but an intentionally indefinite designation of a period of time measured by the number seven, which chronological duration must be determined on other grounds.” , P.218

4. Per Montgomery: "... efforts to obtain an exact chronology fitting into the history of Salvation, after these 2,000 years of infinitely varied interpretations, would seem to preclude any use of the 70 Weeks for the determination of a definite prophetic chronology.", P. 217

5. Per Walvoord: "Some amillenarians, however, use a literal year time unit for the first sixty-nine weeks but an indefinite period for the last seven years, as in the case of Philip Mauro...", P. 218

6. Per Montgomery: "... the great Catholic chronographers ... as well as those of all subsequent chronographers (including the great Scalinger and Sir Isaac Newton) have failed.. And Edward Young too, finds no satisfactory conclusion for the seventy sevens ... and leaves it without a satisfactory explanation.", P. 217

7. Per Young, regarding "the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem": "This phrase has reference to the issuance of the word, not from a Persian ruler but from God." , P. 224 -

John Wolvoord, "Daniel, The Key to Prophetic Revelation", Moody Press, Chicago, 1971


8. Per Newton: "We avoid also the doing violence to the language of Daniel, by taking the seven weeks and sixty two weeks for one number. Had that been Daniel’s meaning, he would have said sixty and nine weeks, and not seven weeks and sixty two weeks, a way of numbring used by no nation."

Isaac Newton, "Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John (1733)", http://www.isaacnewton.ca/daniel_apocalypse/pt1ch10.html




Please allow me to remind you, Jesus NEVER insisted that the religious receive the Truth, HE merely offered that information -- and they rejected it. And so too, some in this Forum.

BibleScribe

 

[[email protected]]

Paul showed in 2 Thess.2:3-4 the Antichrist will exalt himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped. That means the A/C won't just be the Islamic Mahdi. It shows ALL the deceived, regardless of the religion, will worship him in place of God. It must have something to do with the kind of miracles the Antichrist is going to work on earth.
* * *
We who remain faithful to Christ Jesus, waiting for His coming, are not going to join with other religions of the world. We're not going to sacrifice Christ Jesus as The Only Saviour to man in favor of one-world religious idealism. Because we won't, we're not going to 'fit in' when false messiah shows up with the majority of the world bowing to him as God. We're gonna' kind of... stand out like a sore thumb, when that happens.

That there is an apparant design among world leaders towards a one-world government is no longer a prediction. It is a goal nd a movement that is obvious to all. The support system is the fragile financial web that spans the globe. That Islam is the only militant organized religion (anti-Christian I might add) on the planet is also beyond prediction. That too is obvious to all. The goal of Islam to be the one and only religion on the planet is not a mystery or special epiphany to anyone. By persuasion or by blood, they intend to carry it out.

What remains?

The brave announcement by veteran that Christians won't sacrifice Christ is an endorsement of the elect only I fear. Already millions of Christians (in name only?) eagerly follow preachers who lead their misguided flocks in paths apart from Jesus. The gospel is being subverted even as we exchange words here. The prosperity gospel, situational ethics, personal improvement, and passive indifference toward God are epidemic. Even the pillars of the faith are in doubt; heaven, hell, the sacrifical death of Christ. These matters are apart from the salvation available and purchased by the very Son of God, yet they are in doubt even among Christians.

For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearances, as though they were realities, and are often even more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are."
- Niccolo Machiavelli

That a remnant shall be preserved by God is a matter of heaven's tradition and not that of man. I pray that those who read this are counted among the courageous who do not deny the faith even among our misguided bretheren.

 

[revturmoil]

Veteran said,

Paul showed in 2 Thess.2:3-4 the Antichrist will exalt himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped. That means the A/C won't just be the Islamic Mahdi. It shows ALL the deceived, regardless of the religion, will worship him in place of God. It must have something to do with the kind of miracles the Antichrist is going to work on earth.

We who remain faithful to Christ Jesus, waiting for His coming, are not going to join with other religions of the world. We're not going to sacrifice Christ Jesus as The Only Saviour to man in favor of one-world religious idealism. Because we won't, we're not going to 'fit in' when false messiah shows up with the majority of the world bowing to him as God. We're gonna' kind of... stand out like a sore thumb, when that happens.

You have mis-interpreted this passage.
2 Thessalonians 2:4 　Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

You are incorrect in your assumption. You said that verse 4, "shows ALL the deceived, regardless of the religion, will worship him in place of God."
The verse simply states that the lawless one will oppose and exalt himself above ALL things that affirm or are spoken about God or things that are worshipped. (called means to speak or to affirm) It doesn't imply that all the deceived in the world regardless of religion will worship him.
　
Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or is worshipped:
That verse does not imply that all the world will worship him. It implies that he opposes and exalts himself above 'ALL' things that either speak about God (like the bible) and above all things of worship. (Whether statues, altars, or idolatrous images).

There's a big difference in interpretation between one who opposes and exalts himself above God and all religions than your interpretation which you say,

"shows ALL the deceived, regardless of the religion, will worship him in place of God."

The verse doesn't imply that all religions will worship the lawless one. Only that he will exalt himself above God and above all religions, statues, idols, etc...

The man of sin demands worship for himself that belongs to only to God.

"He stands against and exalts himself above all Divine authority, and above every object of adoration, and every institution relative to Divine worship." (Clarke)

His religion (islam) will not tolerate the worship of anyone or anything except himself. HE will be the object of worship.

The word all in verse 4 is misleading if you don't look at it in the Greek Lexicon.

ALL in verse 4 is 'pas' which actually means 'individually'.
You really need to do a study on the word all. I know that you think this is insignificant but there are over 130 words for all and it's used about 7 different ways.
http://www.bluelette...ngs=G3956&t=KJV

Probably my biggest gripe with your post is this comment,

We're not going to sacrifice Christ Jesus as The Only Saviour to man in favor of one-world religious idealism. Because we won't, we're not going to 'fit in' when false messiah shows up with the majority of the world bowing to him as God."

Only those within his ten nation Islamic Empire and those in his religion (Islam) will bow to him as God.

I have challenged you before to quote just ONE verse of scripture implying that Rome would have a significant role in the last days. You haven't been able to post one and neither has anyone else! You even went to the extreme to say," Does there really need to be."
I would like you to quote ONE verse that implies that the religion of the beast is a united global religion. JUST ONE VERSE!

 

[revturmoil]

There are problems with the reply options on the forum.

 

[rockytopva]

Do you see the wide distribution in the above poll? This is the reason why we cannot build doctrine around the end time... In which most denominations will simply state something like... "We believe in the Second Coming of Jesus Christ." I listen to BBNRadio.org, a Christian fundamentalist station. I heard one guy preach it like I believe, seven church ages, then a rapture, then seven years tribulation. Then another preach the seven churches as something else. Those of us who study Revelations develop different perspectives on this prophecy, with little cohesion among the members.

I have made a video on my perspective on the end time... In which I admit that these dates are not exact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7rTb4BJQsg

 

[veteran]

Veteran said,


You have mis-interpreted this passage.
2 Thessalonians 2:4 　Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

You are incorrect in your assumption. You said that verse 4, "shows ALL the deceived, regardless of the religion, will worship him in place of God."
The verse simply states that the lawless one will oppose and exalt himself above ALL things that affirm or are spoken about God or things that are worshipped. (called means to speak or to affirm) It doesn't imply that all the deceived in the world regardless of religion will worship him.
　
Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or is worshipped:
That verse does not imply that all the world will worship him. It implies that he opposes and exalts himself above 'ALL' things that either speak about God (like the bible) and above all things of worship. (Whether statues, altars, or idolatrous images).

There's a big difference in interpretation between one who opposes and exalts himself above God and all religions than your interpretation which you say,


The verse doesn't imply that all religions will worship the lawless one. Only that he will exalt himself above God and above all religions, statues, idols, etc...

The man of sin demands worship for himself that belongs to only to God.

"He stands against and exalts himself above all Divine authority, and above every object of adoration, and every institution relative to Divine worship." (Clarke)

His religion (islam) will not tolerate the worship of anyone or anything except himself. HE will be the object of worship.

The word all in verse 4 is misleading if you don't look at it in the Greek Lexicon.

ALL in verse 4 is 'pas' which actually means 'individually'.
You really need to do a study on the word all. I know that you think this is insignificant but there are over 130 words for all and it's used about 7 different ways.
http://www.bluelette...ngs=G3956&t=KJV

Probably my biggest gripe with your post is this comment,



Only those within his ten nation Islamic Empire and those in his religion (Islam) will bow to him as God.

I have challenged you before to quote just ONE verse of scripture implying that Rome would have a significant role in the last days. You haven't been able to post one and neither has anyone else! You even went to the extreme to say," Does there really need to be."
I would like you to quote ONE verse that implies that the religion of the beast is a united global religion. JUST ONE VERSE!

I NEVER said the following remark:

"Only those within his ten nation Islamic Empire and those in his religion (Islam) will bow to him as God."


Wonder where you got that from? Maybe Popeye?


Rev 13:7-8
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
(KJV)

Is that good enough?

 

[revturmoil]

Sorry about that. I made a mitsake and wrote it within the quote tabs and I apologize. I'm the one that said it not popeye.

And no that's not good enough! The beast of Rev 13 and 17 and Daniel 7 has ten horns and that doesn't indicate the entire world.

Again you fail to understand that the word all in Rev. 13:7 is the word individually. It's a different word than the word all in verse 3. The word all in vese 7 is 'pas'. It has a limited meaning compared to 'holos'. It indicates all the kindreds, tongues, and nations that are under his rule or individually his or within his kingdom. It doesn't imply all the kindreds, tongues, nations of the world but only those that are particular to his kingdom or under his power.

Revelation 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
1) individually
a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2) collectively
a) some of all types

http://www.bluelette...ngs=G3956&t=KJV

3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

The word all in verse three is 'holos' which means...

1) all, whole, completely

http://www.bluelette...ngs=G3650&t=KJV

This means the the entire world will wonder after the beast especially when he was and is not, and yet lives!
This word is 'pas' and it really has a limited use compared to 'holos'. Pas only refers to the thing that is spoken.

 

[veteran]

And no that's not good enough! The beast of Rev 13 and 17 and Daniel 7 has ten horns and that doesn't indicate the entire world.

The Rev.13:7-8 Scripture DOES point to ALL THE WORLD falling to worship that image of the beast that false one will set up, all EXCEPT Christ's elect chosen.

Rev.9 shows you that again about the stinging that's for five months. The locusts are allowed to sting ONLY those NOT sealed with God's sealing! That's ALL inclusive EXCEPT Christ's elect servants.

That is also shown in Matt.24 about Christ's elect being the only ones not deceived.

The Greek word 'pas' for "all" means exactly that, 'the whole'. The context of the stinging in Rev.9 reveals that also. You cannot just take the Scripture context like Rev.13:7 which is giving specific coverage of all kindreds and tongues and nations and try to say that does not mean the whole world.

Likewise with the Rev.13:1-2 marker in relation to Daniel, the earlier beast kingdoms meant all the known civilized nations, as that's what they historically included, with the Roman empire including the largest of them all, covering Europe also. Expansion of the beast kingdoms is the order of the beast kingdom working, and the final one of ten horns, ten crowns, and seven heads will cover all nations and peoples.

And by the globalist political operations today, someone who cannot not see that globalist working definitely has their head buried deep... in the sand!

 

[BibleScribe]

...
Likewise with the Rev.13:1-2 marker in relation to Daniel, the earlier beast kingdoms meant all the known civilized nations, as that's what they historically included, with the Roman empire including the largest of them all, covering Europe also. Expansion of the beast kingdoms is the order of the beast kingdom working, and the final one of ten horns, ten crowns, and seven heads will cover all nations and peoples.

And by the globalist political operations today, someone who cannot not see that globalist working definitely has their head buried deep... in the sand!

... If I might give some tangible to the presentation, one could account for this world history as such:


SEVEN HEADS

1. Babylonian (gold)
2. Medo/Persian (silver)
3. Grecian (bronze)
4. Roman (iron)
-- concurrent "divided"
-- 5. U.K./U.S. (lion/eagle)
-- 6. Russian (bear)j
-- 7. China (leopard)


TEN HEADS

Five CURRENT membership in the Permanent Security Council
1. U.S.
2. U.K.
3. France
4. Russia
5. China

Five NOMINATED to membership in the Permanent Security Council
6. Germany (economic power)
7. Japan (economic power)j
8. Brazil (regional representative for S. America)
9. Nigeria (regional representative for Africa)
10. India (regional representative for the near east)


BODY ATTRIBUTES

Mouth (trade/economic/financial) of the lion, -- U.S./U.K.
Body (most populous) of the leopard -- China
Feet (most land mass) of the bear -- Russia



... and of course, the U.N. is the "beast", which "was and is not" because it has NO Populous, NO Geography, NO Army, etc., etc.



BibleScribe