What is the "SIGN" of the Son of Man - Poll

[VictoryinJesus]

historical accounts

I asked because they thought He would miraculously and suddenly appear in their temple and no one would know how he got there.
Sounds like they thought this by something written, which they thought meant he would suddenly appear in their temple.
It had to really enrage them even the more when Stephen cried “However the most High dwells not in temples made with hands; as said the prophet,” Acts 7:48

If they are professing His sudden appearance in a stone temple, to then be told God doesn’t dwell in temples made with hands…no wonder they stoned Stephen. It was completely against their identifiers of the messiah they professed.

 

[MA2444]

I asked because they thought He would miraculously and suddenly appear in their temple and no one would know how he got there.
Sounds like they thought this by something written, which they thought meant he would suddenly appear in their temple.

Maybe it was John 14:21?
21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.../KJV

(or maybe that wasn't written yet? lol.)

But, something like that. Back then God coming to visit and give instructions to quite a few people and they prolly heard about those instances and figured it would be their turn at some point?

(and it was too but they didnt like it)

 

[APAK]

The appearance of the sign of the Son of Man in heaven is the sixth seal event, which terrorizes the wicked of the earth who will have been persecuting the saints.

The reaction of the kings of the earth will be to gather their armies as Armageddon to prepare to make war on Jesus to keep Him from executing judgment on them.

The glorified appearance of Jesus will be with sickle in hand, His intentions clear.

The timing will be 1290 days after the abomination of desolation statue image of the beast-king is placed on the temple mount.

Once the sign of the Son of Man, Jesus, appears in heaven to them here on earth, the kings of the earth will have 45 days to prepare to make war on Jesus. On the 45th day, Jesus descends to earth and destroys those armies. Ending the Great Tribulation of 1335 days in length.



View attachment 45247

I see you are a die-hard futurist by your writings...

I do see merit in you saying that believers will be persecuted before the end of the current and 'final' age for earthly mankind (framed in my words for my bias). The persecution of new believers that began in Christ's generation was real and a shadow of future and continual persecutions since that time as history records. And it will not abate. It will truly intensify tremendously in the future, all over the globe, as I see global centralized government mandates passes down to the nations, in full cooperation, with Anti-Christian policies in place, soon.

Have you ever considered that 'the abomination that causes desolation' only refers to a past event. Of the pagan Roman army icons to their gods, as symbols that were brought into the temple in Jerusalem. The Roman army, with their pagan idols of Zeus and Jupiter on their ensigns, caused the desolation of the Holy Land. After the Roman armies made Jerusalem desolate, they converted the temple in Jerusalem into a temple to Zeus as a gesture of thanks and honor to their god.

All happened in 70 AD as one of Christ clear imprints of his new Kingdom rule from heaven into this forsaken fallen earth of miserable human beings. The clear sign and signature that effectively ended the existence of national Israel as a chosen entity and of a religion that became corrupted, with the transition of Christ's new believers, his Body, as the beginning of this new and last age until the New Jerusalem comes into full being?

 

[Douggg]

Have you ever considered that 'the abomination that causes desolation' only refers to a past event. Of the pagan Roman army icons to their gods, as symbols that were brought into the temple in Jerusalem. The Roman army, with their pagan idols of Zeus and Jupiter on their ensigns, caused the desolation of the Holy Land. After the Roman armies made Jerusalem desolate, they converted the temple in Jerusalem into a temple to Zeus as a gesture of thanks and honor to their god.

In Matthew 24:15, Jesus referred to what Daniel wrote regarding the abomination of desolation.

When we go to Daniel 12, which in Daniel 12:11-12 has the abomination of desolation in it, in Daniel 12:9 it deals with time of the end. So the events of 70 AD era were not the abomination of desolation fulfillment.

However, Luke 21:20-24 is the 70AD event when Jerusalem was made desolate. I do agree with that part of your position.

But the abomination of desolation of Matthew 24:15 and Daniel 12:11-12 is still future. Albeit not distant future.

 

[akelch]

What?! So what is it then? Ethereal? So all those Testimonies I have ever heard about heaven are not true? No flowers or fields of grass or rivers? No buildings or yellow brick road made from gold bars? No trees or fruit or anything?

I'm sorry Brother but I have to disagree. It may be that heaven is very very different in an upgraded way compared to our earth, but it's still solid furniture there, lol.

People have been taken on tours inthe spirit. They went to the Library of heaven...!! Wow.
...and as we went through the door, blahblahblah...they use doors in heaven is the point. People mention it in telling their stories.

Luke 17
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh NOT with observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Revelation 6:
16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:

17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

We may say the sickle is for one thing when it is for another purpose…to me I see it as a time to harvest …like when He told the disciples to see the fields (not speaking of literal fields but teaching them of “what is not yet seen” with an example they could see. John 4:34-36 Jesus said to them, "My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to accomplish his work. [35] Do you not say, 'There are yet four months, then comes the harvest'? Look, I tell you, lift up your eyes, and see that the fields are white for harvest. [36] Already the one who reaps is receiving wages and gathering fruit for eternal life, so that sower and reaper may rejoice together.

James 1:20 For the wrath of man works not the righteousness of God.
^this tells me His wrath works obedience unto righteousness, and not sin unto death. His wrath not the same as our definition of wrath.

2 Corinthians 10:3-6 tells of “revenge” in a peculiar way of “revenging” all disobedience through and by obedience(the obedience of Christ): For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: [4] (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds [5] Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; [6] And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.

^this tells me that the sickle could be “a readiness to revenge” “all disobedience” when the harvest comes “to the obedience of Christ” …what is this “revenge”? …this Vengeance on all disobedience? See …who avenges disobedience by and through obedience? Look at the crucifixion. That is the argument I hear the most against the church and religion…how it’s a talker but not a doer of the very thing it preaches. Saying how religion is quick to tell you everything you do wrong; but it never takes a look at itself and practices the things preached towards others. Who practices what they preach at others? Like the Pharisees which He said “do as they say, but do not do as they do”?

Point is And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.
To me makes the sickle necessary….for its God’s will you bear Fruit.

 

[Douggg]

We may say the sickle is for one thing when it is for another purpose…to me I see it as a time to harvest

Jesus in Revelation 14 is given a sickle.

Also, an angel was given a sickle.

Jesus returns to Jerusalem, where He will destroy those armies that have surrounded the city.

In Revelation 14:19-20 the angel who is also given a sickle executes the wrath of God, as it says - "without the city", i.e. not Jerusalem and vicinity. The blood will flow a horse's bridle deep in some places for 1600 furlongs, 200 miles.

So the sickle Jesus is given and the sickle the angel is given - both are for judgement. Jesus destroys the armies in Jerusalem and vicinity. The angels destroys the rest of the armies beyond Jerusalem and vicinity.

 

[Dave Watchman]

Maybe a couple guys came close. Sometimes these forums can be virtual idea factories. A connection with the sign of Jonah sounds right. And a big cross in the sky, that's close enough and related to what it really is. And the Judgement of the church. Really the culmination of the judgement of the living just prior to Christ's appearance. Because when He appears, we will be like Him, for we will see Him as He is. It's all happening fast when we meet the Lord in the air.

If we did know what this sign is, would we accept it if it challenges our current views of eschatology?

But we don't know what it is. Yet. Why don't you tell us? I'm still trying to pin down not what it is, but when it is. Sir, you know. “These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. It's the same sign that the Son of Man's enemies saw in the first century. The Resurrection. Jesus became the Sign for that. The historicity of the Resurrection is unimpeachable. It's unique in time. It's uniquely Jesus. Jesus has the patent for it. It is the Sign of the Son of Man.

Or, a better question might be, how it will look from the vantage point of the tribes remaining on the earth when the sign happens? When they see from the wrong end, the ones coming out of the great tribulum illuminating the sky. How will it look to pregnant women? Those nursing new babies? These people are going to mourn with an unfortunate, and an unparalleled remorse, a mourning no one else will ever experience in time. Comparable with the "gnashing of teeth" a thousand years from now.

Maybe a better question would even be if we did know what this sign is, should we even be talking about it now. I think we're late into the equivalent of the third day, the last day, in the belly of the great fish. I think we're close enough just to sit back and see it, or be it, in real time. This is a case where the price action makes for market commentary. In my view there are too many other disciplines involved first in understanding this, not the least of which is the state of the earth during the millennium.

"Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. - Mathew 24: 30-31​

So first they see the Sign of the Son of Man,

Then all of the tribes mourn,

Then they will see the Son of Man coming,

Then they will see Him send His angels,

Then they will see the elect gathered from the heavens.

That's bad news.

For some. You don't want to see the elect gathered from the heavens. This is not something you want to see, this is something that you want to be. It would mean to be on the wrong end of the equation. We don't mourn as others do, as the tribes of the earth do, who have no hope. We don't see the sign of the Son of Man. Because we ARE the sign of the Son of Man.

"So the Jews said to him, “What sign do you show us for doing these things?” Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” But he was speaking about the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken. - John 2: 18-22​

This alone is a tough understanding. Someone could probably write a wall of text on it. Lol. It ends up with half the people arguing that Jesus was Crucified on Wednesday. "And in three days I will raise it up. Temple, House, Body. But did Jesus raise Himself up after three days? Or was it His Father in heaven that raised Him? Paul went on to pen a phrase, the "body of Christ". Is this maybe where Paul got it from?. Built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit. The temple of His Body.

But was He speaking about the temple of his own personal body? Was Jesus talking just about raising his own body up, I will raise it up, after three days? Just prior to Jesus saying these things, He had gotten more angry than I have ever imagined seeing Him. Making a whip of cords, driving the merchants out of the temple, with sheep and oxen on the run. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; do not make my Father’s house a house of trade.” His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for your house will consume me.” But was it "zeal" for His own physical "body", or is this zeal for something else Jesus is to raise up? If this "zeal" for His Father's House is just that physical temple, why would He switch the narrative to destroying it, and then He will raise a new one up in three days? Also note the language: "raise a new one up". Raise it up. I will raise it up.

The idea that Jesus' own body is the temple is just not Biblical. And in this case Jesus saying He will raise it up Himself; "I will raise it up, I [JESUS] WILL RAISE IT UP. The Bible doesn't say Jesus raised Himself from the dead. It says He was raised from the dead, "When therefore He was raised from the dead… When Jesus was raised".

In Mark 14 there's an enlargement of the idea when Jesus' accusers claimed “We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another, not made with hands.’” Not made with hands. Here the House Temple Body concept is made more clear.

I will raise it up.

"And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. - John 6:39​

​

"For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” - John 6:40​

​

"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. - John 6:44​

​

"Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. - John 6:54​

I will raise him up.

On the last day.

The historicity of the resurrection is unimpeachable. If the Old Time Jews could have produced a body, a physical body of Christ in the first century, there would be no Christianity now. Jesus's resurrection, and our resurrection, is connected.

"For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. - Matthew 12:40​

When Jonah came back from the dead after three days lost in the depths of the sea, he himself had become a sign. He also became a precursor, a sign of resurrection, of restoration.

Jonah didn’t work a miracle. He was a miracle.

Likewise, after Jesus' capture, suffering, brutal death, three days and nights caught in the depths of the earth, He Himself had become The Sign. He became a precursor, a sign of resurrection, of restoration. The first born of many brethren. Jesus restoreth my soul, He restoreth my life.

The sign of the Son of Man must be the first resurrection from Revelation 20. This is the culmination of the Body of Christ, when the Body of Christ is finally realized and completed on that "last day". Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power. I called it the greatest event in the history of mankind. Another guy told me that the greatest event in the history of mankind was the Cross. But it's all connected. Without Him, I can do nothing. When mankind fell, they required a Saviour. Thinking about it like that, with necessity being the mother of invention, the Woman, God's People, gave birth to the Man Child.

And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake.

Some are going to shine like the brightness of the sky above, some like the stars of heaven. But those of us who are sleeping, some from all of history, and we here who remain alive, are going to light up the stratosphere in a way that it's never been lit up before. And when the angels are sent to gather us from the heavens, we are already there and waiting to be gathered. At that point the sign of the Son of Man has been seen. And all of the tribes remaining on the earth will mourn.

And, behold, something Greater than Jonah is here.

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[MA2444]

Luke 17
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh NOT with observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

...I'm not seeing the nexus to connect this with what we were talking about?

 

[MA2444]

That was a sickle earlier in the thread. Someone posted a picture of one and another poster commented that aint no sickle, to which I agreed to I think. Well it was a sickle because it was a short handled one. The long handled one is a scythe!

 

[MA2444]

Does Christ return in the first century NEED to be in physical form? Jesus says that the coming of the Kingdom would not be seen with human eyes so it would make sense to me that Christ's return maybe a spiritual return also. This might be the reason he told us to watch for the "sign" of his return because we would not see it with our eye but know it him because of the "sign".

Matthew 24:27
For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

I think you are confusing two seperate events into one. Scripture says, every eye will see Him. That's the so called 2nd coming. The one where it is in secret and the world will not see Him is the Rapture. He will come for His Bride like a thief in the night, by surprise (Surprise to us!) and all the world will know is a lot of people are missing.

Your Avatar is messing with me! In my periphiral vison you look like Derek Prince. I'm watching a teaching series of his and you dress just like him! Lol. I see your not him when I look directly at the picture. It's weird.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I account the abomination-that-causes-desolation to be the zealot leader encamping IN the temple - "shewing himself to be God."

Anyhow, I respect your view and the study behind it. We don't quite agree on everything, but there is significant overlap.

We are more in agreement than you think on this. I do agree that the Zealot armies along with the Roman army were part of the PLURAL "Jerusalem surrounded by armIES" (plural). Daniel 9:26 wrote that "unto the end of the war desolationS (plural) are determined". Since the Roman army was totally absent from Jerusalem after Cestus Gallus left in AD 66 until Titus and the Roman army arrived once again in AD 70, the only armies at Jerusalem as the "abomination that causes desolation" operating "UNTO the end of the war" would have been the armies of the competing Zealot factions inside Jerusalem during those intervening years.

And I agree it was a Zealot leader who was the first to get into the temple in Jerusalem in AD 66, "shewing himself to be God". This was Menahem - the first who came to Jerusalem "in the state of a king" (as Josephus wrote). Menahem actually succeeded in getting into the temple with his armed warriors, to worship "in a pompous manner" (as Josephus described it), dressed in King Herod's royal garments of state stolen from Masada. This obviously showed Menahem's self-exalting claim to being the "King of the Jews" - a title that truly belonged only to Christ Jesus, the Son of God.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I asked because they thought He would miraculously and suddenly appear in their temple and no one would know how he got there.
Sounds like they thought this by something written, which they thought meant he would suddenly appear in their temple.

Having Christ "suddenly appear in their temple" was taken from the prophecy in Malachi 3:1-3.

"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap: And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness."

The message was lost on most of the people of Israel that John the Baptist actually was this messenger who "prepared the way" before Christ Jesus. Christ Himself claimed to be this "refining fire". He once said "I came to send fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!" That "kindled fire" came in the AD 66-70 period when the day "burned as an oven" in that "great and dreadful day of the Lord". Christ bodily returned - He "suddenly came to His temple" - and had that temple torn down to the last stone and burned it up, as Christ had predicted.

 

[Marty fox]

Revelation 6:
16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:

17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Jesus claimEd that this would happen in the first century

Luke 23
26 As the soldiers led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus. 27 A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him. 28 Jesus turned and said to them, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children.
29 For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ 30 Then

“‘they will say to the mountains, “Fall on us!”
and to the hills, “Cover us!”’[b]

 

[Davidpt]

Jesus claimEd that this would happen in the first century

Luke 23
26 As the soldiers led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus. 27 A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him. 28 Jesus turned and said to them, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children.
29 For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ 30 Then

“‘they will say to the mountains, “Fall on us!”
and to the hills, “Cover us!”’[b]

@Douggg brought up Revelation 6 where you then applied the 6th seal to 70 AD.

The thing is though, pertaining to what occurred in 70 AD, those things involved literal events. To then apply Revelation 6 and the 6th seal to 70 AD would mean the following, for example, is something that literally happened at the time---And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains(Revelation 6:15)

As if this part---the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man---are meaning unbelieiving Jews in the 1st century pertaining to 70 AD. And that they literally did this---hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains. Keeping in mind that 70 AD involved literal events. People actually got attacked and many of them were killed. How did they get killed at the time if they were literally hiding themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains? And doesn't the text in Revelation 6 indicate they are hiding from the wrath of the Lamb? Except they were being attacked by Romans, not Christ.

Let me guess. Per your view, hiding themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains is not meaning in the literal sense. Yet you are applying it to 70 AD, nonetheless, where 70 AD involved literal events.

The point then being, what is recorded in Revelation 6 and the 6th seal can't fit what occured in 70 AD. Only in one's mind can it fit, brought about by doctrinal bias. But in reality it can't fit.

 

[3 Resurrections]

How did they get killed at the time if they were literally hiding themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains? And doesn't the text in Revelation 6 indicate they are hiding from the wrath of the Lamb? Except they were being attacked by Romans, not Christ.

In the Matthew 22 parable about the "King" coming against the murderous servants, (the "King" being God), Christ said that the "King" would send forth "HIS armies" and destroy those murderers, and burn up their city. In other words, the Romans were only acting out the intended purpose which God had designed for Jerusalem and the nation of Israel's destruction. The Pharisees perceived that Christ had spoken this parable against themselves (Matt. 21:45).

And in the process, those besieged inhabitants of Jerusalem literally were hiding in the dens and caves of Jerusalem's underground network of tunnels as the Romans were in the process of taking the city. Josephus records these being hunted down and taken by the Romans, particularly the Zealot leader Simon bar Gioras, who took a band of his loyal soldiers underground in an attempt to dig their way out of Jerusalem to freedom. They ran out of food, however, and Simon had to surrender himself to the Romans by coming out of the ground on the very site of the temple, dressed in garments that showed he thought of himself as the King of the Jews.

There are also hundreds of natural cliffside limestone caves in Galilee in which the Jews hid when the Romans were conquering those northern cities beginning in AD 66. Flattened Roman arrowheads have been found in some of these caves, showing that they knew the caves were occupied by Jewish rebels. Google it.

 

[ewq1938]

Revelation 19

Those things aren't there. Why cite it?

 

[ewq1938]

Jesus in Revelation 14 is given a sickle.

So the sickle Jesus is given and the sickle the angel is given - both are for judgement. Jesus destroys the armies in Jerusalem and vicinity.

Rev 14 doesn't describe Jesus destroying anyone with his sickle. He uses it to gather and so does the angel:

Rev 14:14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
Rev 14:15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.
Rev 14:16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.
Rev 14:17 And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.
Rev 14:18 And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.
Rev 14:19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
Rev 14:20 And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

Only the winepress is violent, not the sickles.

 

[ewq1938]

@Douggg brought up Revelation 6 where you then applied the 6th seal to 70 AD.

The thing is though, pertaining to what occurred in 70 AD, those things involved literal events. To then apply Revelation 6 and the 6th seal to 70 AD would mean the following, for example, is something that literally happened at the time---And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains(Revelation 6:15)

As if this part---the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man---are meaning unbelieiving Jews in the 1st century pertaining to 70 AD. And that they literally did this---hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains. Keeping in mind that 70 AD involved literal events. People actually got attacked and many of them were killed. How did they get killed at the time if they were literally hiding themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains? And doesn't the text in Revelation 6 indicate they are hiding from the wrath of the Lamb? Except they were being attacked by Romans, not Christ.

Let me guess. Per your view, hiding themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains is not meaning in the literal sense. Yet you are applying it to 70 AD, nonetheless, where 70 AD involved literal events.

The point then being, what is recorded in Revelation 6 and the 6th seal can't fit what occured in 70 AD. Only in one's mind can it fit, brought about by doctrinal bias. But in reality it can't fit.

If Christ already returned then the AC did also...a dangerous thing to believe since neither have come yet.

I have noticed similar teachings about the antichrist/man of sin etc.

Doctrines like Pre-trib teach the church will be gone, so they don't worry about the antichrist or look for any of the signs of his arrival.

Various forms of Preterism including Amillennialism teach the antichrist already came in the past so there is no need to watch for him now.

Other doctrines teach that the antichrist isn't ever a singular man, or that denominations like the RCC and it's Papacy are the antichrist which is a mis-identification of the last and final antichrist and antichrist type system.

All false doctrines teach some version of doctrine where it's adherents need not worry about or watch for the not-yet-here antichrist. Seems like a great thing for satan to introduce into the churches so his antichrist (whoever he is) can slip right in and deceive those not watching. The antichrist is also known as a false christ and that is the most dangerous thing not to be knowledgeable about in the endtimes because of the apostasia (the Apostasy).


So, not watching for the antichrist or not believing in a singular future AC or thinking something/someone else is the antichrist can result in one being deceived and possibly committing Apostasy.

That is extremely dangerous. Beware!

 

[Douggg]

Only the winepress is violent, not the sickles.

The purpose of the sickles are for gathering the harvest to be cast into the winepress of God's wrath.