The Didache on the coming of the world-deceiver: What 1st and 2nd century saints were taught

[Randy Kluth]

The gospel record of the apostles state that Pontius Pilate wanted nothing to do with the death of Christ, washing his hands of it as he handed their Messiah over to be killed, and the record makes it obvious that Caesar knew nothing of the specific events that were taking place when Christ was crucified, until after the events had already taken place.

The historical record is that roughly 40 years later the Romans had enough of the Jews and their zealot rebels constantly trying to overthrow Roman rule over Judea and Jerusalem, and so they destroyed Jerusalem and the temple.

The only reason why the Jews still 'behaved' in this way toward Rome, is because they had rejected the Messiah. For sure, Satan was behind the Jews' rejection of their Messiah and their demand that he be crucified, as well as behind Rome's (Pontius Pilate's) reluctantly granting them their wish.

However Satan was no more behind the Jewish zealot's constant rebellion against Rome (and Rome's eventual final reaction to it in 70 A.D) than he has always been behind all wars and all conflicts, since the fall of Adam.

The difference between A.D 30 when Jesus was crucified and 70 A.D is that by 70 A.D God had withdrawn from that part of israel that had been broken off from God's covenant relationship with Israel, who had been broken off through their unbelief, hence had withdrawn from involvement in the affairs of the Jews of Judea and Jerusalem who rejected Christ.​

My biggest problem with the latter part of Dan 9 was with the use of pronouns. "He" seems to refer back to the one whose people, an *army,* comes against Jerusalem to destroy it and the sanctuary. And "he" is the one to....
1) confirm a covenant to fulfill the final week of the 70 weeks,
2) put an end to sacrifice and offering in the middle of the final week,
3) set up an abomination of desolation to bring about an end to the temple.

These are the 3 things that Jesus spoke about in his Olivet Discourse, which he plainly indicated would bring about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. An army, ie the Roman army, would surround Jerusalem, and is called the "abomination of desolation."

This would be accomplished first by Messiah being "cut off," which Jesus plainly predicted in advance. And in so doing, God's covenant with Israel would be irretrievably broken, delegitimizing all that Israel did under that covenant, including sacrifices and offerings.

However, the author of Hebrews indicated that the end of OT worship did not immediately end because it survived Christ's death for a short time. The temple where sacrifices were offered was destroyed later in 70 AD.

The one thing that I have most confusion about is the "covenant" that the Roman ruler makes to complete the 70 Weeks in the last week. It appears the Romans allow Jesus to minister for 3.5 years before he is "cut off," which completes the 70th Week in a half-week.

It may be that the passage is only indicating that the Roman ruler naively confirms God's covenant of Messianic Salvation, the 6 things spoken about him earlier in the passage, by bringing sacrifice under the Law to an end in Christ's crucifixion. I'm not sure.

Though these things have always been difficult for me to understand, this is how I presently see it. You're certainly welcome to explain your own position on this. I welcome it.

 

[Peterlag]

The Didache, also known as "The Lord's Teaching Through the Twelve Apostles to the Nations" (Διδαχὴ Κυρίου διὰ τῶν δώδεκα ἀποστόλων τοῖς ἔθνεσιν), is a brief anonymous early Christian treatise (ancient church order) written in Koine Greek, dated by modern scholars to the first or (less commonly) second century AD. (Wikipedia)

Eusebius talks about it in his “Ecclesiastical History” in Book 3 chapter 25 and calls it the Institutions of the Apostles. The exact date it was written is unknown; however, it is attributed to the first or second century. The work disappeared, but two fragments were discovered in 1782. Then an entire Didache manuscript dating to 150 AD was rediscovered in a town in Turkey, in 1873.

The following is the final chapter of 16 chapters that were taught to all Christians in the nations in the first and second centuries by those who had learned from the apostles:

Chapter 16: Watchfulness; The Coming of the Lord.

" 1. Watch for your life’s sake. Let not your lamps be quenched, nor your loins unloosed; but be ye ready, for ye know not the hour in which our Lord cometh.

2. But often shall ye come together, seeking the things which are befitting to your souls: for the whole time of your faith will not profit you, if ye be not made perfect in the last time.

3. For in the last days false prophets and corrupters shall be multiplied, and the sheep shall be turned into wolves, and love shall be turned into hate;

4. for when lawlessness increaseth, they shall hate and persecute and betray one another, .."
(see Matthew 24:9-13)

" ..and then shall appear the world-deceiver as the Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered into his hands, and he shall do iniquitous things which have never yet come to pass since the beginning .. "
(2 Thessalonians 2:1-10, or Revelation 13:11?).

" 5. Then shall the creation of men come into the fire of trial, and many shall be made to stumble and shall perish; but they that endure in their faith shall be saved from under the curse itself .."
(See Matthew 24:9, 21-22).

" .. 6. And then shall appear the signs of the truth; first, the sign of an out-spreading in heaven; then the sign of the sound of the trumpet; and the third, the resurrection of the dead;

7. yet not of all, but as it is said: The Lord shall come and all His saints with Him .."
(see Matthew 24:29-30; as well as the last sentence of Zechariah 14:5; as well as Revelation 19:14 and Revelation 17:14).

" 8. .. Then shall the world see the Lord coming upon the clouds of heaven."
(See Matthew 24:30-31).

What is the most striking to me about the above is what the earliest Christians were taught about this:

" ..and then shall appear the world-deceiver as the Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered into his hands, and he shall do iniquitous things which have never yet come to pass since the beginning .. "
(2 Thessalonians 2:1-10, or Revelation 13:11? Or are both men one and the same man? Or is it talking about the one mentioned in Revelation 13:1-7?).

He does signs and wonders, and the beast if Revelation 13:1-7 is not said to do signs and wonders himself/itself. Nor does 2 Thessalonians 2 say that the man of sin is himself performing the signs and wonders.
​

The only one who is specifically mentioned in the New Testament to himself be doing the signs and wonders, is the beast of Revelation 13:11 (who Revelation 19 identifies as the false prophet). He has two horns like a lamb but speaks like a dragon.

So my question is, who is the above world-deceiver who will appear "as the Son of God", i.e which New Testament scripture is he most likely to be identified with?
​

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

PS: I don't have an answer to my own question.

Source: Quotes from the Early Church Fathers: The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, The Didache - Apostles Creed , as well as Wikipedia.​

Well, you asked for our take. And once again we must watch to whom it is addressed. Most and I mean almost everything in the book of Revelation deals with Israel and probably the second resurrection and not the first. Much of this deals with Christ coming with his saints which tells us the first resurrection has already occurred. So we not only need to look at to whom the writing is addressed to, but also the time. The time of the book of Revelation could be a thousand years after the Christians have already been taken off the planet.

 

[Zao is life]

My biggest problem with the latter part of Dan 9 was with the use of pronouns. "He" seems to refer back to the one whose people, an *army,* comes against Jerusalem to destroy it and the sanctuary. And "he" is the one to....
1) confirm a covenant to fulfill the final week of the 70 weeks,
2) put an end to sacrifice and offering in the middle of the final week,
3) set up an abomination of desolation to bring about an end to the temple.

These are the 3 things that Jesus spoke about in his Olivet Discourse, which he plainly indicated would bring about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. An army, ie the Roman army, would surround Jerusalem, and is called the "abomination of desolation."

This would be accomplished first by Messiah being "cut off," which Jesus plainly predicted in advance. And in so doing, God's covenant with Israel would be irretrievably broken, delegitimizing all that Israel did under that covenant, including sacrifices and offerings.

However, the author of Hebrews indicated that the end of OT worship did not immediately end because it survived Christ's death for a short time. The temple where sacrifices were offered was destroyed later in 70 AD.

The one thing that I have most confusion about is the "covenant" that the Roman ruler makes to complete the 70 Weeks in the last week. It appears the Romans allow Jesus to minister for 3.5 years before he is "cut off," which completes the 70th Week in a half-week.

It may be that the passage is only indicating that the Roman ruler naively confirms God's covenant of Messianic Salvation, the 6 things spoken about him earlier in the passage, by bringing sacrifice under the Law to an end in Christ's crucifixion. I'm not sure.

Like you (below), I used to struggle with it a while back. Not any more, because I recognized the same style in all the prophets that I will mention below this quote:

Though these things have always been difficult for me to understand, this is how I presently see it. You're certainly welcome to explain your own position on this. I welcome it.

This is so easy to understand, because it's the way almost all the prophets write. The writings of the prophets are full of examples where two different entities or subjects are mixed together into two (or more) of the same verses. Here's one example of MANY examples:

Hosea 1:11
(A) Then the sons of Judah and the sons of Israel shall be gathered together, and shall set over themselves one head

(B) and they shall come up out of the land. For great shall be the day of Jezreel.

The main subject of the above prophecy is the coming judgment of the Northern kingdom of Israel in the Valley of Jezreel and the subject was introduced a few verses earlier (Hosea 1:4-5). But verse 11 is also talking about the fact that the two kingdoms would become one again at a time that was still way into the future - so the two subjects are mixed into one verse.

In Daniel 9, the timing for the coming of the Messiah is the subject that was introduced in Daniel 9:24-25, so the chief subject of the entire 70 weeks prophecy is the Messiah.

Note: If the chief subject in the prophecy was about both the Messiah AND the people of the prince who was to come [mentioned in verse 26], the latter would also have got a mention in the beginning, in verses 24-25 (which he does not).

But the information given in verses 24-25 is interconnected with the information about the leader of the people who would destroy the city and the sanctuary, so the information is added in verses 26-27:

The Messiah:

26 And after sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself.
27 And he (Messiah) shall confirm a covenant with many for one week. And in the midst of the week he (Messiah) shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease.

City & Sanctuary:

26 And the people of the ruler / prince who shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. And the end of it shall be with the flood, and ruins are determined, until the end shall be war.
27 and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Jesus neither destroyed His own body (the temple) nor the temple in Jerusalem. The Romans did both. But like the long gap in time between the first part of Hosea 1:11, there is a gap in time between the crucifixion of the Messiah and the Romans destroying the Temple.​

 

[Randy Kluth]

Like you (below), I used to struggle with it a while back. Not any more, because I recognized the same style in all the prophets that I will mention below this quote:

This is so easy to understand, because it's the way almost all the prophets write. The writings of the prophets are full of examples where two different entities or subjects are mixed together into two (or more) of the same verses. Here's one example of MANY examples:

Hosea 1:11
(A) Then the sons of Judah and the sons of Israel shall be gathered together, and shall set over themselves one head

(B) and they shall come up out of the land. For great shall be the day of Jezreel.

The main subject of the above prophecy is the coming judgment of the Northern kingdom of Israel in the Valley of Jezreel and the subject was introduced a few verses earlier (Hosea 1:4-5). But verse 11 is also talking about the fact that the two kingdoms would become one again at a time that was still way into the future - so the two subjects are mixed into one verse.

In Daniel 9, the timing for the coming of the Messiah is the subject that was introduced in Daniel 9:24-25, so the chief subject of the entire 70 weeks prophecy is the Messiah.

Note: If the chief subject in the prophecy was about both the Messiah AND the people of the prince who was to come [mentioned in verse 26], the latter would also have got a mention in the beginning, in verses 24-25 (which he does not).​

I'm not sure that follows. I agree that Messiah is at the center of the prophecy, both at the beginning and at the end. However, the state of the temple is the broader context, and the people who destroy that temple are a critical part of that.

The ruler is identified as someone we should know, and it is apparent from the broader context of the book of Daniel that the 4th Kingdom, existing in the time of Messiah, would be the Roman Empire, following the Babylonian, Persian, and Greek empires, which are identified.

But the information given in verses 24-25 is interconnected with the information about the leader of the people who would destroy the city and the sanctuary, so the information is added in verses 26-27:

The Messiah:

26 And after sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself.
27 And he (Messiah) shall confirm a covenant with many for one week. And in the midst of the week he (Messiah) shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease.

City & Sanctuary:

26 And the people of the ruler / prince who shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. And the end of it shall be with the flood, and ruins are determined, until the end shall be war.
27 and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Jesus neither destroyed His own body (the temple) nor the temple in Jerusalem. The Romans did both. But like the long gap in time between the first part of Hosea 1:11, there is a gap in time between the crucifixion of the Messiah and the Romans destroying the Temple.​

That is the point. It was the people of the ruler to come, ie the Roman Army, who would destroy the city and the sanctuary. Jesus identified them in Luke 21 as an army surrounding Jerusalem, which we know from history was a Roman army.

So no, Jesus did not destroy his own body, nor the temple. As I was arguing, the pronouns suggest that the very one whose army destroys the city and the sanctuary is the one who completes the 70th Week in the interruption of sacrifices and offerings under the Law. That happened when Christ was put to death by the Roman governor, annulling the covenant God had between Himself and Israel.

Please note that the words seem to suggest not that this "ruler" makes a covenant, but rather, "confirms" it. That means he may inadvertently be causing Messianic Prophecy to be fulfilled by his negative actions.

Again, I don't know these things for certain. It's just my current opinion. I do like to hear other views, however. Thanks for your input on it.

 

[Zao is life]

I'm not sure that follows. I agree that Messiah is at the center of the prophecy, both at the beginning and at the end. However, the state of the temple is the broader context, and the people who destroy that temple are a critical part of that.

The ruler is identified as someone we should know, and it is apparent from the broader context of the book of Daniel that the 4th Kingdom, existing in the time of Messiah, would be the Roman Empire, following the Babylonian, Persian, and Greek empires, which are identified.

That is the point. It was the people of the ruler to come, ie the Roman Army, who would destroy the city and the sanctuary. Jesus identified them in Luke 21 as an army surrounding Jerusalem, which we know from history was a Roman army.

So no, Jesus did not destroy his own body, nor the temple. As I was arguing, the pronouns suggest that the very one whose army destroys the city and the sanctuary is the one who completes the 70th Week in the interruption of sacrifices and offerings under the Law. That happened when Christ was put to death by the Roman governor, annulling the covenant God had between Himself and Israel.

Please note that the words seem to suggest not that this "ruler" makes a covenant, but rather, "confirms" it. That means he may inadvertently be causing Messianic Prophecy to be fulfilled by his negative actions.

Again, I don't know these things for certain. It's just my current opinion. I do like to hear other views, however. Thanks for your input on it.

All I can say to the above is that IMO you are mistaken to believe it has to be the Roman prince who destroyed the Temple who must also be the one who completes the 70th week.

@Randy Kluth There are two princes being spoken of, IMO: Messiah the Prince, and the prince who became Caesar at some point soon after A.D 70 (Titus) - the ruler of the people who were to come.

The Messiah confirmed the New Covenant which was promised when He shed His blood in the middle of the 70th week, causing the system of sacrifices and offerings for sins to cease:
​

"Behold, the days come, says the LORD, that I will cut a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah" (Jeremiah 31:31)

​

"but this shall be the covenant that I will cut with the house of Israel: After those days, says the LORD, I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. And they shall no more teach each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, Know the LORD; for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sins no more." (Jeremiah 31:33-34).

"For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for MANY for the remission of sins." (Matthew 26:28).

Note the word MANY:
​

Daniel 9:27 "And he shall confirm a covenant with MANY for one week. And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the offering to cease, and for the overspreading wings (Hebrew: kanaph) of abominations he shall make it (the city and the sanctuary) desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." (Daniel 9:27).

CAUSING SACRIFICE AND OFFERING TO CEASE

Isaiah 1:11-17​

"To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices to Me? says the LORD; I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs, or of he-goats.

When you come to appear before Me, who has required this at your hand, to trample My courts?

​

Bring no more vain sacrifice; incense is an abomination to Me; the new moon and sabbath, the going to meeting; I cannot endure evil and the assembly! Your new moons and your appointed feasts My soul hates; they are a trouble to Me; I am weary to bear them.

And when you spread out your hands, I will hide My eyes from you; yea, when you make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of blood.
​

Wash yourselves, make yourselves clean; put away the evil of your doings from before My eyes; cease to do evil; learn to do good; seek judgment, reprove the oppressor. Judge the orphan, plead for the widow.

Hebrews 10:8-10​

"Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;

Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

​

"..and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." (Daniel 9:27b).

Hebrews 10:3-7​

But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again of sins every year. For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Therefore when He comes into the world, He says, "Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, but You have prepared a body for Me. In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have had no pleasure. Then I said, Lo, I come ( in the volume of the Book it is written of Me) to do Your will, O God."

I also believe that you seem to attaching the abomination to something other than the continued offering of sacrifices for sins after Messiah had brought an end to the entire system of sacrifices and offerings for sin.

I suppose it's what we believe the abomination "must" refer to. I don't believe it referred to anything the Romans did in the Temple, but to what the Jews were doing by continuing to offer sacrifices for sins.

I also believe God's judgment already came when Jesus died on the cross because that's when the Jews rejected God. The wrath upon them because of their continued sacrifices and offerings for sin came 40 years later.

I also don't believe that what is said about the destruction of both the city and the Temple in verses 26-27 needed to be fulfilled in the 70th week or needed to end the 70th week - in the same way that the judgment of the Northern kingdom of Israel and the reuniting of the house of Israel and the house of Judah as in Hosea 1:11 were hundreds of years apart (it takes place in Christ), though both are mentioned in the same verse, but because of the way we in the West read literature, it seems as if it's all spoken in the same breath regarding the timing, when it's actually speaking about two separate (but connected) events in history written into one or two of the same verses in the prophetic statements.

@Randy Kluth One thing we all know for certain is that Daniel 9:26-27 is speaking about the destruction of both the city and the Temple, and we all know for certain that it happened only decades AFTER the Messiah came.

@Randy Kluth We only need to fathom what the abominations (for some reason all English Bibles write it in plural form) were that are referred to in Daniel 9:27, and which Prince it was who brought an end to the system of sacrifices and offerings for sins​

 

[Zao is life]

Well, you asked for our take. And once again we must watch to whom it is addressed. Most and I mean almost everything in the book of Revelation deals with Israel and probably the second resurrection and not the first.

Israel = the church = the saints = those who are in Christ though their faith in Christ = all nations, tribes and tongues, including the Jews who believe.

Much of this deals with Christ coming with his saints which tells us the first resurrection has already occurred. So we not only need to look at to whom the writing is addressed to, but also the time. The time of the book of Revelation could be a thousand years after the Christians have already been taken off the planet.

Well whew! At least I'm not dealing with yet another person who says the Revelation all occurred 66-70 A.D. Your booking is for the final scene. Couldn't you get an earlier seat?

There are some problems with the above theory though. Such as the fact that the beast of Revelation 13 will make war with the saints and will overcome them, whereas the gathering of the Gog / Magog armies against the camp of the saints after the thousand years has run its course (when they have expired) does not result in their being overcome.​

 

[Zao is life]

That's not my opinion, but it's a reasonable view. We certainly agree on the time frame. Daniel's 70th Week was, in my opinion, a shortened period of 7 years, or 1 "Week." In the middle of that "Week" Christ was cut off by the Roman government at the behest of a Jewish mob. The Jewish People themselves did nothing to stop it.

As a result, God poured out His wrath upon Israel, breaking His covenant of protection with them. In 70 AD Jerusalem was destroyed, along with the temple, and the Jewish People were vomited out of their land for the duration of the present age. I believe that Christ's word of forgiveness for his betrayers is advance notice that the Jewish People can be restored if they repent of their lawlessness.

Many thousands have already been restored over the centuries because they repented of their unbelief. Paul talks about them needing to repent of their unbelief, because their lawlessness was already dealt with on the cross of Christ.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

If the GT happens soon, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would be my guess to be the Antichrist or the false prophet.
Although they are supposedly waiting for the 12th Imam. He is 84 and the leader of the most funded nation of terrorism and desires Israel to be annihilated.
This war now of course is his proxy war, but soon it will expand to cover the entire Middle East.
He is currently gathering several nations against Israel and within some time, ten nations. The Beast has manifested itself throughout history and always attacked Israel: Babylon, Assyria, Medo-Persian, Egyptian, Greek, Roman. The 7th Empire was the Ottoman for close to 500 years till 1923, but Israel was not a nation. They are again alive and have spread throughout the world. 1 billion strong. A Jihad would ignite terrorist cells all over, but the central war will be against Israel.

 

[Jay Ross]

The gospel record of the apostles state that Pontius Pilate wanted nothing to do with the death of Christ, washing his hands of it as he handed their Messiah over to be killed, and the record makes it obvious that Caesar knew nothing of the specific events that were taking place when Christ was crucified, until after the events had already taken place.

The historical record is that roughly 40 years later the Romans had enough of the Jews and their zealot rebels constantly trying to overthrow Roman rule over Judea and Jerusalem, and so they destroyed Jerusalem and the temple.

The only reason why the Jews still 'behaved' in this way toward Rome, is because they had rejected the Messiah. For sure, Satan was behind the Jews' rejection of their Messiah and their demand that he be crucified, as well as behind Rome's (Pontius Pilate's) reluctantly granting them their wish.

However Satan was no more behind the Jewish zealot's constant rebellion against Rome (and Rome's eventual final reaction to it in 70 A.D) than he has always been behind all wars and all conflicts, since the fall of Adam.

The difference between A.D 30 when Jesus was crucified and 70 A.D is that by 70 A.D God had withdrawn from that part of israel that had been broken off from God's covenant relationship with Israel, who had been broken off through their unbelief, hence had withdrawn from involvement in the affairs of the Jews of Judea and Jerusalem who rejected Christ.​

The best form of defence against another member is to accuse them of doing the very same things that you are doing yourself.

In my posts i have pointed to a very different understanding of who the actual antichrist is and suggested that the antichrist will be an entity that is a wicked fallen heavenly host.

Now if you are suggesting that the antichrist will be a human then our understanding differs very greatly and Ephesian 6:12 is being understood very differently.

I did not accuse you of being a false prophet, but of being a good and faithful servant of Satan and as such you are presenting information which is contrary to what is recorded in the scriptures.

So if you are saying that I am a false teacher, then be careful that you are not one too.

 

[Jay Ross]

There are some problems with the above theory though. Such as the fact that the beast of Revelation 13 will make war with the saints and will overcome them, whereas the gathering of the Gog / Magog armies against the camp of the saints after the thousand years has run its course (when they have expired) does not result in their being overcome.

Wow, Such a poor understanding of the Scriptures.

The Beast of Rev 13, we are informed in Rev 17, comes up out of the abyss after it has been locked for 1,000 years, after they are judged in heaven and dispatched into the pit for many days to await the time of their punishment, at the same time as Satan, the False prophet and the judged kings of the earth. During the 1,000 years of Satan, the beast and the False Prophet, and the judged kings of the earth are imprisoned for 1,000 years, there will be peace on the earth during the time of the Great harvest of souls into the Kingdom of God.

Oh well, each to their own peculiar understanding.

Who will be found to be right? I wonder if Fullness of the Gentiles will have a podium place upon which to stand.

 

[ewq1938]

It doesn't, though, ewq1938.
​

It does. Someone is said to perform miracles (lying wonders) to deceive and the man of sin is the subject. It is no coincidence that Rev speaks of a singular man who does the same exact thing.

 

[Peterlag]

Israel = the church = the saints = those who are in Christ though their faith in Christ = all nations, tribes and tongues, including the Jews who believe.

Well whew! At least I'm not dealing with yet another person who says the Revelation all occurred 66-70 A.D. Your booking is for the final scene. Couldn't you get an earlier seat?

There are some problems with the above theory though. Such as the fact that the beast of Revelation 13 will make war with the saints and will overcome them, whereas the gathering of the Gog / Magog armies against the camp of the saints after the thousand years has run its course (when they have expired) does not result in their being overcome.​

I can't say any more on this because this is not my field. I believe Revelation is mostly all Jewish so I stay out of that book.

 

[Zao is life]

Wow, Such a poor understanding of the Scriptures.

Who will be found to be right? I wonder if Fullness of the Gentiles will have a podium place upon which to stand.

The one who is puffed up and arrogant and full of false accusations will have no "podium on which to stand", regardless of his knowledge or whether or not he was wrong or right about his understanding of any portion of Bible prophecy.

That one will stand who understands that biblical prophecy and the Revelation of Jesus Christ is not about creating podiums for people to stand on, but that the only thing that matters to Christ is the one whose works show obedience to the commandment of Christ produced by the fruit of the Spirit, and where the is any knowledge and understanding of prophecy, it will cease.

For example, the one who knows why God hates evil and false accusations and the spirit behind them, will have a much better chance of remaining standing, and it has nothing to do with his understanding of prophecy.

The works of one who claims to be sent (appointed by God) to reveal "hidden mysteries" will not stand, because he is a false prophet.​

The Beast of Rev 13, we are informed in Rev 17, comes up out of the abyss after it has been locked for 1,000 years​

If you had stopped with "comes up out of the abyss" and not added something (your own words) to sacred scripture with the words "after it has been locked for 1,000 years" (which Revelation 17 does not say), then there would be a reason to consider what you are saying.

However, the way of putting it that would show a Christ-like approach to the Revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ (instead of puffed up pride), would be simply something like,

".. which, it seems to me, must be pointing to the thousand years, because Revelation 13 tells us that it's Satan who will give the beast his seat, power and great authority, and the first time anything is mentioned about Satan being locked in the abyss, is in Revelation 20".

Not necessarily those words, but something like those words, and without adding your own words to any portion of scripture - your own words which express your own understanding and interpretation of the passage.

That better sort of speech would show that at the forefront of your mind always, is the commandment of the One who you claim is your Lord, and this would only be the case if entirely absent from your speech, has been any prior and recent false and evil accusation leveled at someone who belongs to Christ, who He purchased with His blood,

as well as any insinuation of who's "understanding" will stand, or mention of any 'podium', as though if your understanding is correct, you scored points with Christ (you do not - no one scores any points with God just because his understanding of a prophetic portion of scripture may be correct).

Why is it even necessary for me or anyone else to correct your speech and point to the spirit behind your false and very personal accusations?

You owe me a public apology because of your previous post and false accusation, which was public. Until you do, I'm ignoring any further posts from you. I have also never claimed to be someone who is sent (by God) to reveal any 'hidden mystery'.
​

It's a pity, because what you said about the timing of the beast coming up from out of the abyss was at least thought-provoking, but I would have wanted to know why then the close of Revelation 20 seems to place the destruction of Satan in the lake of fire a thousand years after the beast and false prophet have been destroyed in the same lake of fire (I said seems to).

But unfortunately I won't talk to you again until I have an apology from you.

I'm not holding my breath, because your track record has me believing that you're far more likely to just double-down with your own puffed up accusations produced by a spirit that is not the Spirit of Christ.

Your knowledge is nothing. Your understanding pointless. Even if you are correct in certain respects - because it is Jesus who reveals, and you who understood (if you have understood correctly). It gives you no points. Neither does the spirit behind your speech.
​

 

[Zao is life]

The best form of defence against another member is to accuse them of doing the very same things that you are doing yourself.

In my posts i have pointed to a very different understanding of who the actual antichrist is and suggested that the antichrist will be an entity that is a wicked fallen heavenly host.

Now if you are suggesting that the antichrist will be a human then our understanding differs very greatly and Ephesian 6:12 is being understood very differently.

I did not accuse you of being a false prophet, but of being a good and faithful servant of Satan and as such you are presenting information which is contrary to what is recorded in the scriptures.

So if you are saying that I am a false teacher, then be careful that you are not one too.

Your understanding and knowledge - whether real or imagined - is pointless and scores you 0 points with God. The spirit behind all your posts filled with false accusations gives you a place among those whose only 'podiums' are their self-produced infamy.

@Jay Ross PS: I'm not wasting my time with you any more.

 

[ewq1938]

I can't say any more on this because this is not my field. I believe Revelation is mostly all Jewish so I stay out of that book.

It's mostly Christian actually.

 

[Peterlag]

It's mostly Christian actually.

It's Jewish right down to the candle sticks and all the Jewish items it mentions.

 

[Zao is life]

It does. Someone is said to perform miracles (lying wonders) to deceive and the man of sin is the subject. It is no coincidence that Rev speaks of a singular man who does the same exact thing.

Okay, well IMO it does not say he himself is the one doing the miracles.

He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, and as a result he takes his seat in God's temple, displaying himself as God.

and all those who live on the earth will worship the beast, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who was killed.

In Revelation 13 the one being worshiped is not the one doing the miracles.

Unless the dude in 2 Thess 2:4 is competing with the beast of Revelation 13 for the worship of the world.

 

[Zao is life]

I can't say any more on this because I stay out of that book.

It shows. You can't be informed about a book you stay out of.

 

[Peterlag]

It shows. You can't be informed about a book you stay out of.

It's Jewish so I stay out of it.

 

[Zao is life]

It's Jewish so I stay out of it.

Don't you like Jews?