TRIBULATION LIE
- Thread starter samuel23
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I want to say one more thing
This is not a closed discussion amongst believers in THE BODY
I think that is what is overlooked
that there are many ears listening in
and to not correct believers in CHRIST before unbelievers outside THE DOOR because we are supposed to "love" one another implies that we should overlook the errors because we are in THE BODY and whole these errors do not remove us from THE BODY because we indeed are in THE REFUGE provided by GOD in HIS SON
What about those outside?
This is not a closed discussion amongst believers in THE BODY
I think that is what is overlooked
that there are many ears listening in
and to not correct believers in CHRIST before unbelievers outside THE DOOR because we are supposed to "love" one another implies that we should overlook the errors because we are in THE BODY and whole these errors do not remove us from THE BODY because we indeed are in THE REFUGE provided by GOD in HIS SON
What about those outside?
G
I actually agree with the idea that "great tribulation" is merely a phrase Jesus used to describe a period of time -- yet, that period of time is real - and, what Jesus was referring to is real - and, how Jesus defined it is real. And, as a matter of terminology and word usage - if we are going to use the term "Great Tribulation" - it should be defined strictly by what-and-how Jesus defined it to be.
If-and-just-because anyone on here has a less-than-'expert'-level understanding of the Greek -- is not a valid reason for anyone to say, in effect:
"Only 'experts' should post [ reference material, such as from Strongs ]; all of you 'amateurs' just shut-up - you are not allowed to discuss with other 'amateurs' - or 'experts', for that matter - your understanding of Greek words - or, their application in the scriptures." ( As if, one day you "magically" go from zero-understanding to full-understanding -- and now you have the right to discuss the subject. )
Does a first-semester Greek student have the right to discuss Greek words? How about second-semester? Third? Five years? 845 years? Just exactly at what point in time does a person have the right to discuss Greek words on CC????? ( *I* say that the owner of the site - through the rules of the site - has given every member that privilege! *I* say that any-average-Christian - having done a bit of studying of the Greek on their own - never having taken any seminary Greek classes - has that privilege! It is not their "expertise" in Greek that gives them that privilege. It is because of the 'context' of these discussion forums on this site that gives them that privilege! So, I don't want to hear any more crap from you about the 'privilege'-of-expertise on this site - or see you looking down your nose at anyone because you think you are so high-and-mighty with such superior understanding of the Greek, Hebrew, or anything else! )
Just in case you are referring to me... ( post #203 )
First of all, it was the previous page - not "a few pages ago" -- it would be more helpful if you would report such things more accurately.
Second, if this "something so strange" happens to be my use of the phrase "sense and tense" -- an "expert" like you should know by looking at the phrase - in double quotes - that it is only 'general' / 'generic' "layman-level" terminology - not specifically referring to the actual grammar-and-language-based concept of word-tense -- but, rather - refering to the overall "effective" meaning of a word - or words - in the context of - in this case - a passage of scripture.
It is a matter of fact - that I have studied Greek. In a seminary, no less!
Yet, I have never claimed to be any kind of "Greek expert"; nor have I ever claimed to "know it all" ( about Greek - or anything else, for that matter ) -- far from it!
Moreover -- I have promoted the idea many times that every member on CC should always - as a 'default' rule - view every post as simply the opinion of another member!
And speaking of opinions -- let me give you one of mine:
"There is no better way to study the Koine Greek than with the Textus Receptus, the KJV Bible, a good Greek Lexicon, and Strongs Concordance."
Third, if I "missed it", then what is it - exactly - that you find so strange -- so much so that you would make such a highly-accusative ( not referring to the accusative case here ) blanket-assumption that a person has never - not once - not even for a little bit - studied Greek?????
I have no doubt whatsoever that your statement is agenda-based.
Think what you will. Believe what you will. But -- don't make agenda-based statements intended to belittle and discredit others - just because you feel "threatened" if someone else on CC "encroaches your territory" by posting something "intruding into" an area that you think you have so completely mastered...
Very few things in this world infuriate me more than when people "boast" their 'credentials'.
The height of your pride is disgusting!
I wouldn't know --- I have only studied Koine Greek.
Be careful how you "jump on" this comment. I am saying it to illustrate that I am not afraid to admit that "I do not know everything" and that I would have to "take your word for it"... ( before looking into it further, if I so decided to do so )
I agree!
I agree!
So - you have a "high" knowledge and understanding of these concepts - and languages - etc...
And - you believe that you have "mastered" them... ( at least, to a great degree )
Yet...
You cannot "read" the KJV??????????
You cannot "understand" the KJV??????????
You are saying that you - master of languages and scripture - cannot "handle" the KJV??????????
"Something is just not right with this picture..."
Sounds like a very weak excuse to me...
Stop whining and realize that your agenda can be seen clearly from a thousand miles away!
( Feel free to decide whether that should mean an actual 1000 miles - or, just a long distance... )
Your loss... ( and a great loss it is! )
You would be surprised at the good use it has if you only understood what you are throwing away by avoiding it.
No - we cannot. Truth is more important than 'readability'. If you are more interested in Truth -- learn to read the KJV.
Sister -- you have been deceived into believing that the Wescott-and-Hort texts and modern bible texts are superior to the Textus Receptus and the KJV.
Sister -- in time, you will discover that there is no better bible version [ in English ] than the KJV to be used of God to convict...
Why do you think that the KJV is so "hated" by so many today?
Think about it...
If-and-just-because anyone on here has a less-than-'expert'-level understanding of the Greek -- is not a valid reason for anyone to say, in effect:
"Only 'experts' should post [ reference material, such as from Strongs ]; all of you 'amateurs' just shut-up - you are not allowed to discuss with other 'amateurs' - or 'experts', for that matter - your understanding of Greek words - or, their application in the scriptures." ( As if, one day you "magically" go from zero-understanding to full-understanding -- and now you have the right to discuss the subject. )
Does a first-semester Greek student have the right to discuss Greek words? How about second-semester? Third? Five years? 845 years? Just exactly at what point in time does a person have the right to discuss Greek words on CC????? ( *I* say that the owner of the site - through the rules of the site - has given every member that privilege! *I* say that any-average-Christian - having done a bit of studying of the Greek on their own - never having taken any seminary Greek classes - has that privilege! It is not their "expertise" in Greek that gives them that privilege. It is because of the 'context' of these discussion forums on this site that gives them that privilege! So, I don't want to hear any more crap from you about the 'privilege'-of-expertise on this site - or see you looking down your nose at anyone because you think you are so high-and-mighty with such superior understanding of the Greek, Hebrew, or anything else! )
Just in case you are referring to me... ( post #203 )
First of all, it was the previous page - not "a few pages ago" -- it would be more helpful if you would report such things more accurately.
Second, if this "something so strange" happens to be my use of the phrase "sense and tense" -- an "expert" like you should know by looking at the phrase - in double quotes - that it is only 'general' / 'generic' "layman-level" terminology - not specifically referring to the actual grammar-and-language-based concept of word-tense -- but, rather - refering to the overall "effective" meaning of a word - or words - in the context of - in this case - a passage of scripture.
It is a matter of fact - that I have studied Greek. In a seminary, no less!
Yet, I have never claimed to be any kind of "Greek expert"; nor have I ever claimed to "know it all" ( about Greek - or anything else, for that matter ) -- far from it!
Moreover -- I have promoted the idea many times that every member on CC should always - as a 'default' rule - view every post as simply the opinion of another member!
And speaking of opinions -- let me give you one of mine:
"There is no better way to study the Koine Greek than with the Textus Receptus, the KJV Bible, a good Greek Lexicon, and Strongs Concordance."
Third, if I "missed it", then what is it - exactly - that you find so strange -- so much so that you would make such a highly-accusative ( not referring to the accusative case here
) blanket-assumption that a person has never - not once - not even for a little bit - studied Greek?????I have no doubt whatsoever that your statement is agenda-based.
Think what you will. Believe what you will. But -- don't make agenda-based statements intended to belittle and discredit others - just because you feel "threatened" if someone else on CC "encroaches your territory" by posting something "intruding into" an area that you think you have so completely mastered...
Very few things in this world infuriate me more than when people "boast" their 'credentials'.
The height of your pride is disgusting!
I wouldn't know --- I have only studied Koine Greek.
Be careful how you "jump on" this comment. I am saying it to illustrate that I am not afraid to admit that "I do not know everything" and that I would have to "take your word for it"... ( before looking into it further, if I so decided to do so )
I agree!
I agree!
So - you have a "high" knowledge and understanding of these concepts - and languages - etc...
And - you believe that you have "mastered" them... ( at least, to a great degree )
Yet...
You cannot "read" the KJV??????????
You cannot "understand" the KJV??????????
You are saying that you - master of languages and scripture - cannot "handle" the KJV??????????
"Something is just not right with this picture..."
Sounds like a very weak excuse to me...
Stop whining and realize that your agenda can be seen clearly from a thousand miles away!
( Feel free to decide whether that should mean an actual 1000 miles - or, just a long distance...
)Your loss... ( and a great loss it is! )
What people don't understand about the KJV is that it will NEVER be "out-dated"...
In 5 years, you may need a new [modern bible version] - because the modern language will have changed enough to alter the meaning of the text.
In 10 years, you may need another still...
("Speaking strictly in terms of translation - not to mention 'error', etc.")
NOT SO with the KJV.
Unlike modern English - which is changing continually - the "middle English" of the KJV is "a snapshot in time" - fixed and un-changing.
No matter what changes in modern language, the language of the KJV will not have changed "one iota" -- in truth, it is actually "timeless"...
That is the "beauty" of it. God has "seen to it" that it does not change with the times...
You have to think of it like a second language -- once you learn that language - you are "good for life" - because it will not ever change -- this is how you have to look at it.
And then, you get the benefit of the "completeness" of the KJV.
I grew up with the KJV. I understand it better than any other version I have ever read from. I wouldn't trade it for any other version - under any circumstances.
It contains information that all the others have lost in their translation.
It is that good. It is that important. It is that "vital" to gaining the most accurate understanding of the original Greek and Hebrew texts.
"Has it ever occurred to you that Satan is trying to change the modern language as fast as he can so that people will 'throw out' the KJV?"
Believe it!
"I believe the KJV is STILL the BEST available English Bible translation BY FAR."
.
In 5 years, you may need a new [modern bible version] - because the modern language will have changed enough to alter the meaning of the text.
In 10 years, you may need another still...
("Speaking strictly in terms of translation - not to mention 'error', etc.")
NOT SO with the KJV.
Unlike modern English - which is changing continually - the "middle English" of the KJV is "a snapshot in time" - fixed and un-changing.
No matter what changes in modern language, the language of the KJV will not have changed "one iota" -- in truth, it is actually "timeless"...
That is the "beauty" of it. God has "seen to it" that it does not change with the times...
You have to think of it like a second language -- once you learn that language - you are "good for life" - because it will not ever change -- this is how you have to look at it.
And then, you get the benefit of the "completeness" of the KJV.
I grew up with the KJV. I understand it better than any other version I have ever read from. I wouldn't trade it for any other version - under any circumstances.
It contains information that all the others have lost in their translation.
It is that good. It is that important. It is that "vital" to gaining the most accurate understanding of the original Greek and Hebrew texts.
"Has it ever occurred to you that Satan is trying to change the modern language as fast as he can so that people will 'throw out' the KJV?"
Believe it!
"I believe the KJV is STILL the BEST available English Bible translation BY FAR."
.
You would be surprised at the good use it has if you only understood what you are throwing away by avoiding it.
No - we cannot. Truth is more important than 'readability'. If you are more interested in Truth -- learn to read the KJV.
Sister -- you have been deceived into believing that the Wescott-and-Hort texts and modern bible texts are superior to the Textus Receptus and the KJV.
Sister -- in time, you will discover that there is no better bible version [ in English ] than the KJV to be used of God to convict...
Why do you think that the KJV is so "hated" by so many today?
Think about it...
Last edited:
I am asking you to explain why you [ seem to ] say that the "cosmic signs" mark both the starting and ending of "the Tribulations"...
I am inclined to no longer engage in a discussion of the Book of Revelation mainly because as one fellow on line put it....The is nothing you can say that will change my mind"
However, you did ask. The opening of the 6th seal, I along with many others believe, the Tribulations (Daniel's 70th week) begins here. And as in Mat 24, the Sun goes dark and moon does not give up here light.
In Matt. 24....Jesus is talking to his disciples about the tribulations and says "Immediately AFTER the Tribulations of those Days" .
there is a distinct similarity between the two passages in several ways. They both speak of Tribulations yet to come. In Matt 24:15..Jesus tells them that look to Daniel the Prophet. He then tells us the Abomination of Desolate will again happen in the future. (it did not happen in 70AD) the Holy of Holies along with the entire temple burnt prior to any further action such as that.)
He tells the People of Israel who are believers by now that when they see..... SEE what ...when they SEE the AoD (antichrist/Satan) "stand in the Holy Place". Here Jesus is telling us the Antichrist/Satan IS the AoD and He steps into the Holy of Holies which in itself is a Abomination of Desolate. Daniel 9:27 tells us this is the beginning of the last HALF of the 70th week.
They (Israel) should flee Judea to the Mountains (south to Petra support by other scripture which is in direct conflict with the direction the fleeing Christians (they had 18 months to leave) in 70 AD.)
After they flee, Jesus tells us the 'GREAT Tribulations' will begin. Then He says,"21......such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be." HOW MANY WILL DIE HERE..because in the next verse (mat 24:22), 'His wrath is shortened or there would be no life left on earth.'
The last half of the 70 weeks, (42 months, 3 1/2 years, 1280 days) has begun and in Mat 24:29..Jesus tells us Immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days, the Sun and the Moon will be dark which will signify the END of the Tribulations and the beginning of the coming of Jesus Christ.
So, GaryA.... Your answer is , Rev 6:12 begins the Tribulations (Daniel's 70th week) and Matt. 24:29 Ends Daniel's 70th week with the "Sun being Black/darkened and the Moon being Blood/no light).
The Beginning and the END. (I have included the two scriptures in question below.)
Rev 6:..."And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;"
mat 24:29 ...."Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:"
No....Matthew is talking to his Disciples as he is walking to and sitting on the Mt. of Olives. across the Midron Valley fromthe Temple Mount.
I think you are thinking of Luke 21 where there is ample evidence Jesus is talking to the people within the temple especially on the last two or three verses.
Check it out and see if that is right....
P
Saints, let me take another position here...please hear me out.
Where is the safest place to be in a forest fire? The answer is where the fire has already been.
There's nothing more to burn.
Jesus took the judgement for us upon himself on Calvary. There's no more judgement upon us.
So where is the safest place to be? That's right...in Christ.
Now if the G.T. is God's judgement against a unbelieving rejecting world and God's promise to Abraham is to not to judge the righteous with the wicked then where will we be?
In the book of revelation John is suddenly caught up in heaven, he sees Jesus, is given a arial view of everything why? Because he is in Christ the safest place to be. When? Before it starts.
Paul says we are not appointed to wrath. Sodom was destroyed after lot was removed. Noah was lifted above the earth. Why? It was the safest place to be.
Both Noah and lot were spared by the promises of God. Now jesus made a promise to us that we may be where he is. So where did John find him on that day? Heaven.
Where is the safest place to be in a forest fire? The answer is where the fire has already been.
There's nothing more to burn.
Jesus took the judgement for us upon himself on Calvary. There's no more judgement upon us.
So where is the safest place to be? That's right...in Christ.
Now if the G.T. is God's judgement against a unbelieving rejecting world and God's promise to Abraham is to not to judge the righteous with the wicked then where will we be?
In the book of revelation John is suddenly caught up in heaven, he sees Jesus, is given a arial view of everything why? Because he is in Christ the safest place to be. When? Before it starts.
Paul says we are not appointed to wrath. Sodom was destroyed after lot was removed. Noah was lifted above the earth. Why? It was the safest place to be.
Both Noah and lot were spared by the promises of God. Now jesus made a promise to us that we may be where he is. So where did John find him on that day? Heaven.
G
Thank you Bladerunner. That helps me to better understand what you were saying.
You believe that "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars occur -- both - at the beginning - and - at the end - of the 'Great Tribulation'.
Do I have that right?
There is definitely a similarity with regard to the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars...
I believe that the mention of the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars - in all of the following verses - are referring to the same event(s):
Isaiah 13:10
Joel 2:10; 3:15
Matthew 24:29
Mark 13:24-25
Luke 21:25-26
Acts 2:20
Revelation 6:12-13
Revelation 8:12
Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:24-25 indicate that the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars occur after the end of that 'Tribulation'. And, of course, the wording of Matthew 24:30-31 indicates that [ the events of those verses ] occur after that...
I believe that the span of time of all of what is described in Revelation 6:12-14 overlaps that referred to in the Olivet Discourse verses, with regard to what is specifically mentioned. In the more general sense, they are all referring to the same event(s).
I recently discovered that I was wrong in assuming that the Abomination of Desolation must have occurred ~70 A.D.; rather, the Abomination of Desolation actually occurred in 167 B.C. -- when - Jerusalem was "overrun" by an army and desolated. I currently believe that what is referred to in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 is not actually the 'abomination' of the temple itself - but, rather - the desolation of Jerusalem. ( which happened in 167 B.C. - as an act of being "overrun" by an army ) It is an "indirect" reference to something that already occurred. ( which is why the phrases "whoso readeth, let him understand" is in Matthew 24:15 and "let him that readeth understand" is in Mark 13:14 )
In other wods, the prophecy of Daniel may very well be talking about the [ actual ] 'abomination' of the temple, but [ I believe ] what is being referred to in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 is actually the idea that:
"When you see [ what happened in 167 B.C. ] happening again..."
And -- also - because it has to "align" with Luke 21:20.
Luke 21:20 makes a direct reference to that which Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 make an indirect reference to.
So then -- that ( Jerusalem being "overrun" by an army and desolated ) did happen in 70 A.D. What was being referred to in all three accounts of the Olivet Discourse was Jerusalem being "overrun" by a Roman army. ( And, thereafter desolated as a result. )
So -- it is not that the Abomination of Desolation itself occurred in 70 A.D.; but, rather - Jerusalem being "overrun" by an army - that is actually the center-of-focus in those verses - in all three accounts of the Olivet Discourse.
As-or-after the armies surrounded Jerusalem, did they not establish a barrier that prevented people from leaving or entering the city?
I am not so sure that they had 18 months to leave. They were being trapped in their own city long before that. The Christians were the only ones to escape -- because, they understood the prophecy - and, did not waste any time getting out of the city when they saw it happening ( the armies gathering to surround the city ).
And thus -- the 'Great Tribulation' began in 70 A.D. We are still in it. It will end in the future.
How many will have died during the 'Great Tribulation'...? :
70 A.D. and its aftermath - a million +, wasn't it?
The Dark Ages - 50 million +, wasn't it?
Those who will be beheaded for not worshiping the beast - millions? / billions?
The days will be cut short ( in the future ) for the elect's sake.
There will have never been any time like it - before it or after it.
And then --- "immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days" -- the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars will occur. Notice that this is AFTER the end of the 'Great Tribulation'.
And then -- AFTER that - the Second Coming of Christ.
I believe both verses ( in general ) are referring to the same event(s).
You believe that "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars occur -- both - at the beginning - and - at the end - of the 'Great Tribulation'.
Do I have that right?
There is definitely a similarity with regard to the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars...
I believe that the mention of the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars - in all of the following verses - are referring to the same event(s):
Isaiah 13:10
Joel 2:10; 3:15
Matthew 24:29
Mark 13:24-25
Luke 21:25-26
Acts 2:20
Revelation 6:12-13
Revelation 8:12
Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:24-25 indicate that the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars occur after the end of that 'Tribulation'. And, of course, the wording of Matthew 24:30-31 indicates that [ the events of those verses ] occur after that...
I believe that the span of time of all of what is described in Revelation 6:12-14 overlaps that referred to in the Olivet Discourse verses, with regard to what is specifically mentioned. In the more general sense, they are all referring to the same event(s).
I recently discovered that I was wrong in assuming that the Abomination of Desolation must have occurred ~70 A.D.; rather, the Abomination of Desolation actually occurred in 167 B.C. -- when - Jerusalem was "overrun" by an army and desolated. I currently believe that what is referred to in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 is not actually the 'abomination' of the temple itself - but, rather - the desolation of Jerusalem. ( which happened in 167 B.C. - as an act of being "overrun" by an army ) It is an "indirect" reference to something that already occurred. ( which is why the phrases "whoso readeth, let him understand" is in Matthew 24:15 and "let him that readeth understand" is in Mark 13:14 )
In other wods, the prophecy of Daniel may very well be talking about the [ actual ] 'abomination' of the temple, but [ I believe ] what is being referred to in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 is actually the idea that:
"When you see [ what happened in 167 B.C. ] happening again..."
And -- also - because it has to "align" with Luke 21:20.
Luke 21:20 makes a direct reference to that which Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 make an indirect reference to.
So then -- that ( Jerusalem being "overrun" by an army and desolated ) did happen in 70 A.D. What was being referred to in all three accounts of the Olivet Discourse was Jerusalem being "overrun" by a Roman army. ( And, thereafter desolated as a result. )
So -- it is not that the Abomination of Desolation itself occurred in 70 A.D.; but, rather - Jerusalem being "overrun" by an army - that is actually the center-of-focus in those verses - in all three accounts of the Olivet Discourse.
As-or-after the armies surrounded Jerusalem, did they not establish a barrier that prevented people from leaving or entering the city?
I am not so sure that they had 18 months to leave. They were being trapped in their own city long before that. The Christians were the only ones to escape -- because, they understood the prophecy - and, did not waste any time getting out of the city when they saw it happening ( the armies gathering to surround the city ).
And thus -- the 'Great Tribulation' began in 70 A.D. We are still in it. It will end in the future.
How many will have died during the 'Great Tribulation'...? :
70 A.D. and its aftermath - a million +, wasn't it?
The Dark Ages - 50 million +, wasn't it?
Those who will be beheaded for not worshiping the beast - millions? / billions?
The days will be cut short ( in the future ) for the elect's sake.
There will have never been any time like it - before it or after it.
And then --- "immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days" -- the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars will occur. Notice that this is AFTER the end of the 'Great Tribulation'.
And then -- AFTER that - the Second Coming of Christ.
I believe both verses ( in general ) are referring to the same event(s).
Thank you Bladerunner. That helps me to better understand what you were saying.
Thank YOU
You believe that "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars occur -- both - at the beginning - and - at the end - of the 'Great Tribulation'.
Do I have that right? YES A cosmic distrubance at both the beginning and the END of the Daniel's 70th week.
There is definitely a similarity with regard to the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars...
I believe that the mention of the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars - in all of the following verses - are referring to the same event(s):
Isaiah 13:10.. He speaks of Pangs and Sorrows to come in verse 8 (i.e Mat24 :8)
Joel 2:10; 3:15..Joel tells here the Great Day of the Lord has Come in Joel 2:1
Matthew 24:29.. Telling this to his Disciples, presenting what Jesus said from a Jewish view
Mark 13:24-25.. Here Mark is similar but he present it from a slave's view.
Luke 21:25-26.. Here Jesus is telling the People. Luke is telling it from a Gentile View
Acts 2:20.. The Sun, moon and stars here appear to be those that are right before the 2nd coming
Revelation 6:12-13.. 6th seal and the beginning of Daniel's 70th week.
Revelation 8:12.. This too is in the beginning after the 7th seal is open...NOTICE only 1/3 of the the sun and moon are darkened.
Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:24-25 indicate that the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars occur after the end of that 'Tribulation'. And, of course, the wording of Matthew 24:30-31 indicates that [ the events of those verses ] occur after that...
I believe that the span of time of all of what is described in Revelation 6:12-14 overlaps that referred to in the Olivet Discourse verses, with regard to what is specifically mentioned. In the more general sense, they are all referring to the same event(s).
YES
I recently discovered that I was wrong in assuming that the Abomination of Desolation must have occurred ~70 A.D.; rather, the Abomination of Desolation actually occurred in 167 B.C. -- when - Jerusalem was "overrun" by an army and desolated. I currently believe that what is referred to in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 is not actually the 'abomination' of the temple itself - but, rather - the desolation of Jerusalem. ( which happened in 167 B.C. - as an act of being "overrun" by an army ) It is an "indirect" reference to something that already occurred. ( which is why the phrases "whoso readeth, let him understand" is in Matthew 24:15 and "let him that readeth understand" is in Mark 13:14 )
OK, don't go overboard here. the AoD did happen in 167BC with Antiochus Epiphanies. This what Jesus is telling us in Mat24:15.... He is referring to the past AoD while at the same time telling us it will happen again as According to Daniel the Prophet. (Daniel 9:27) If you do not believe that Daniel means anything then this verse is meaningless.
If you will look at the prophecy of 70AD Luke 21:20 Jesus uses "Desolate" for Jerusalem Not AoD. The armies he speaks of in that passage is the Roman Army. Rem in 167BC, Jerusalem was under captivity already. They needed NO army to defeat them. When Antiochus came to power, he killed many and desecrated the whole temple and altars before he placed a Idol of Zeus in the Holy of Hollies. In Luke 21:20,, Jesus is telling the people the prophecy about 70 AD (which just happens to be 38 years (the same length of a Generation they wondered in the wilderness (38 years)). To flee when they see the army encompassing the city. This takes around 18 months and leaves plenty of time for them to leave the city. They are not leaving in a panic mode here. Jesus tells them in Luke 21:21 tell them to stop people from other countries from entering the city.
On the other hand, Jesus through Matthew is telling his disciples of a Far Future AFTER 70AD. There are key words in each of the passages....Matt 24:9 the words "THEN SHALL THEY" but in Luke 21:12 "But before all these". See the previous verses on both to get context.
THe Abomination of Desolate of the Future is the Merged antichrist and Satan. He enters the Holy of Hollies and declares himself to be GOD. Mat. 24:15.."....When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation.....".... WHEN YE SEE the (antichrist/Satan) step into the Temple---SPLIT --RUN--FLY if you can....GET OUT THEN.......IMMEDIATELY and RUN to the Mountains (which are east in Petra)
Yes, a little different then in 167BC (NO Fleeing) and 70 AD (No immediate fleeing, just a casual leaving).
Yes, a little different than in 167BC (an Idol of Zeus in the Holy of Hollies), 70 AD ( NO AoD ..only Jersualem made Desolate (empty, dead, etc))
In other words, the prophecy of Daniel may very well be talking about the [ actual ] 'abomination' of the temple, but [ I believe ] what is being referred to in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 is actually the idea that:
"When you see [ what happened in 167 B.C. ] happening again..."
And -- also - because it has to "align" with Luke 21:20.
Luke 21:20 makes a direct reference to that which Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 make an indirect reference to.
So then -- that ( Jerusalem being "overrun" by an army and desolated ) did happen in 70 A.D. What was being referred to in all three accounts of the Olivet Discourse was Jerusalem being "overrun" by a Roman army. ( And, thereafter desolated as a result. )
So -- it is not that the Abomination of Desolation itself occurred in 70 A.D.; but, rather - Jerusalem being "overrun" by an army - that is actually the center-of-focus in those verses - in all three accounts of the Olivet Discourse.
As-or-after the armies surrounded Jerusalem, did they not establish a barrier that prevented people from leaving or entering the city?
I am not so sure that they had 18 months to leave. They were being trapped in their own city long before that. The Christians were the only ones to escape -- because, they understood the prophecy - and, did not waste any time getting out of the city when they saw it happening ( the armies gathering to surround the city ).
You have to go to History to get this....but to make it short,,the Ceasar Died, Vaspassian (Titus' father) finally became the Ceasar. However, Titus had left the Army on standbye while he went to Rome. There was infighting at ROME before all of this happened and it appears two Ceasars were killed in the struggle for power. Yes, it took a while and the Armies just sat there letting anyone enter and leave as they chose.
And thus -- the 'Great Tribulation' began in 70 A.D. We are still in it. It will end in the future.
No,, The Tribulations (Daniel's 70th week) has not started yet. The prophecy that Jesus Spoke of is true..So far the Bible is 100% accurate in its prophecies being fulfilled. There are two times periods here. "The times of the Gentiles" started back around 5-600BC with neberkenezer and technically is finished when the Anti-christ is revealed.
The other is the "Fulfillment of the Gentiles" This is the Church Jesus Speaks of and is Here until the Rapture. Do not confuse them
How many will have died during the 'Great Tribulation'...? :
70 A.D. and its aftermath - a million +, wasn't it?
The Dark Ages - 50 million +, wasn't it?
Those who will be beheaded for not worshiping the beast - millions? / billions?
The days will be cut short ( in the future ) for the elect's sake.
There will have never been any time like it - before it or after it.
And then --- "immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days" -- the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars will occur. Notice that this is AFTER the end of the 'Great Tribulation'.
And then -- AFTER that - the Second Coming of Christ.
I believe both verses ( in general ) are referring to the same event(s).
Thank YOU
You believe that "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars occur -- both - at the beginning - and - at the end - of the 'Great Tribulation'.
Do I have that right? YES A cosmic distrubance at both the beginning and the END of the Daniel's 70th week.
There is definitely a similarity with regard to the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars...
I believe that the mention of the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars - in all of the following verses - are referring to the same event(s):
Isaiah 13:10.. He speaks of Pangs and Sorrows to come in verse 8 (i.e Mat24 :8)
Joel 2:10; 3:15..Joel tells here the Great Day of the Lord has Come in Joel 2:1
Matthew 24:29.. Telling this to his Disciples, presenting what Jesus said from a Jewish view
Mark 13:24-25.. Here Mark is similar but he present it from a slave's view.
Luke 21:25-26.. Here Jesus is telling the People. Luke is telling it from a Gentile View
Acts 2:20.. The Sun, moon and stars here appear to be those that are right before the 2nd coming
Revelation 6:12-13.. 6th seal and the beginning of Daniel's 70th week.
Revelation 8:12.. This too is in the beginning after the 7th seal is open...NOTICE only 1/3 of the the sun and moon are darkened.
Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:24-25 indicate that the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars occur after the end of that 'Tribulation'. And, of course, the wording of Matthew 24:30-31 indicates that [ the events of those verses ] occur after that...
I believe that the span of time of all of what is described in Revelation 6:12-14 overlaps that referred to in the Olivet Discourse verses, with regard to what is specifically mentioned. In the more general sense, they are all referring to the same event(s).
YES
I recently discovered that I was wrong in assuming that the Abomination of Desolation must have occurred ~70 A.D.; rather, the Abomination of Desolation actually occurred in 167 B.C. -- when - Jerusalem was "overrun" by an army and desolated. I currently believe that what is referred to in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 is not actually the 'abomination' of the temple itself - but, rather - the desolation of Jerusalem. ( which happened in 167 B.C. - as an act of being "overrun" by an army ) It is an "indirect" reference to something that already occurred. ( which is why the phrases "whoso readeth, let him understand" is in Matthew 24:15 and "let him that readeth understand" is in Mark 13:14 )
OK, don't go overboard here. the AoD did happen in 167BC with Antiochus Epiphanies. This what Jesus is telling us in Mat24:15.... He is referring to the past AoD while at the same time telling us it will happen again as According to Daniel the Prophet. (Daniel 9:27) If you do not believe that Daniel means anything then this verse is meaningless.
If you will look at the prophecy of 70AD Luke 21:20 Jesus uses "Desolate" for Jerusalem Not AoD. The armies he speaks of in that passage is the Roman Army. Rem in 167BC, Jerusalem was under captivity already. They needed NO army to defeat them. When Antiochus came to power, he killed many and desecrated the whole temple and altars before he placed a Idol of Zeus in the Holy of Hollies. In Luke 21:20,, Jesus is telling the people the prophecy about 70 AD (which just happens to be 38 years (the same length of a Generation they wondered in the wilderness (38 years)). To flee when they see the army encompassing the city. This takes around 18 months and leaves plenty of time for them to leave the city. They are not leaving in a panic mode here. Jesus tells them in Luke 21:21 tell them to stop people from other countries from entering the city.
On the other hand, Jesus through Matthew is telling his disciples of a Far Future AFTER 70AD. There are key words in each of the passages....Matt 24:9 the words "THEN SHALL THEY" but in Luke 21:12 "But before all these". See the previous verses on both to get context.
THe Abomination of Desolate of the Future is the Merged antichrist and Satan. He enters the Holy of Hollies and declares himself to be GOD. Mat. 24:15.."....When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation.....".... WHEN YE SEE the (antichrist/Satan) step into the Temple---SPLIT --RUN--FLY if you can....GET OUT THEN.......IMMEDIATELY and RUN to the Mountains (which are east in Petra)
Yes, a little different then in 167BC (NO Fleeing) and 70 AD (No immediate fleeing, just a casual leaving).
Yes, a little different than in 167BC (an Idol of Zeus in the Holy of Hollies), 70 AD ( NO AoD ..only Jersualem made Desolate (empty, dead, etc))
In other words, the prophecy of Daniel may very well be talking about the [ actual ] 'abomination' of the temple, but [ I believe ] what is being referred to in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 is actually the idea that:
"When you see [ what happened in 167 B.C. ] happening again..."
And -- also - because it has to "align" with Luke 21:20.
Luke 21:20 makes a direct reference to that which Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 make an indirect reference to.
So then -- that ( Jerusalem being "overrun" by an army and desolated ) did happen in 70 A.D. What was being referred to in all three accounts of the Olivet Discourse was Jerusalem being "overrun" by a Roman army. ( And, thereafter desolated as a result. )
So -- it is not that the Abomination of Desolation itself occurred in 70 A.D.; but, rather - Jerusalem being "overrun" by an army - that is actually the center-of-focus in those verses - in all three accounts of the Olivet Discourse.
As-or-after the armies surrounded Jerusalem, did they not establish a barrier that prevented people from leaving or entering the city?
I am not so sure that they had 18 months to leave. They were being trapped in their own city long before that. The Christians were the only ones to escape -- because, they understood the prophecy - and, did not waste any time getting out of the city when they saw it happening ( the armies gathering to surround the city ).
You have to go to History to get this....but to make it short,,the Ceasar Died, Vaspassian (Titus' father) finally became the Ceasar. However, Titus had left the Army on standbye while he went to Rome. There was infighting at ROME before all of this happened and it appears two Ceasars were killed in the struggle for power. Yes, it took a while and the Armies just sat there letting anyone enter and leave as they chose.
And thus -- the 'Great Tribulation' began in 70 A.D. We are still in it. It will end in the future.
No,, The Tribulations (Daniel's 70th week) has not started yet. The prophecy that Jesus Spoke of is true..So far the Bible is 100% accurate in its prophecies being fulfilled. There are two times periods here. "The times of the Gentiles" started back around 5-600BC with neberkenezer and technically is finished when the Anti-christ is revealed.
The other is the "Fulfillment of the Gentiles" This is the Church Jesus Speaks of and is Here until the Rapture. Do not confuse them
How many will have died during the 'Great Tribulation'...? :
70 A.D. and its aftermath - a million +, wasn't it?
The Dark Ages - 50 million +, wasn't it?
Those who will be beheaded for not worshiping the beast - millions? / billions?
The days will be cut short ( in the future ) for the elect's sake.
There will have never been any time like it - before it or after it.
And then --- "immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days" -- the "signs" in the sun, moon, and stars will occur. Notice that this is AFTER the end of the 'Great Tribulation'.
And then -- AFTER that - the Second Coming of Christ.
I believe both verses ( in general ) are referring to the same event(s).
We know that the population of Israel at the time of the start of the "Great Tribulation" (Last Half of Daniels 70th week) will be cut by 2/3. Yes that many will die. WWII saw only 1/3 of the Jewish population dies (6 million).
As far as the rest of the world, From the time gap after the Rapture until the end of the tribulations (Armageddon), I would say roughly 1/3 to 1/2 of the population will die. Rem..the Church will be raptured (estimated at 1/3 the population of America,GB and other countries will only be around 4-500 million. The Martyred Saints and the those that the 144,000 bring on board will be in the billions. That leave earth dwellers. Approx. 13/ of them will Die. during this time. Leaving one a Remnant of Israel and a Remnant of Gentiles who live through Daniel's 70th week. They will repopulate the earth for the Millennium to come.
For further Study, I suggest Daniel from Beginning to end.
eus
M
In reading some of the wildly meandering conjecture from the two of you, one feels one's heart sinking: How can people become this quagmired in strange blathering? The leading problem with these sorts of ultra-complex, ultra-jumbled views on prophecy is that you both (Bladerunner and Gary) have a following of exactly one person - yourselves.
No scripture is of "private interpretation" and to state it frankly, I think the both of you have fallen squarely into that pitfall: You both claim, in effect, to have developed an interpretation that you and you alone can explain and that only you can understand.
The Bible doesn't work that way.
No scripture is of "private interpretation" and to state it frankly, I think the both of you have fallen squarely into that pitfall: You both claim, in effect, to have developed an interpretation that you and you alone can explain and that only you can understand.
The Bible doesn't work that way.
Who knows? Maybe the Holy Spirit could do so.
The description is clearly of the second coming. Tribulation is not even in mind. It describes the final wrath of God,
yes because He is talking of the great tribulation on the Jews from 70 ad to the present day.
One speaks of tribulation mainly in the past, the other does not refer to tribulation but to the wrath of God.
But it did happen in 70 ad. The Roman standards, which were an idolatrous abomination and to which sacrifices were made to the emperor, entered first the holy city and then the Holiest place of all.
Titus entered the holy of holies after which the temple was burned down. This was the desolating abominator..
They SAW Titus standing there with his soldiers and their standards.
He does not mention either Antichrist or Satan, Why bring them in? He mentions the desolating Abominator (Titus) standing where he ought not.
Titus? Agreed.
Daniel 9.27 does not mention the A of D.
True in general.
The great tribulation on the Jews began in 70 ad and has been going on ever since
There has never been a long drawn out tribulation like it. See for this Deut 28.15 on.
Millions, including the Holocaust.
No flesh will be saved (of the Jews).
The seventy sevens of Daniel have nothing to do with the great tribulation which lasts c 2000 years.
Why in the plural? It is the great one. But when it ceases it will herald the return of Christ.
So, GaryA.... Your answer is , Rev 6:12 begins the wrath of God
the Tribulation will be past (nothing to do with Daniel's 70th week) and Matt. 24:29 introduces the "Sun being Black/darkened and the Moon being Blood/no light), both signs of the end.
true, the signs of the end follow the Great tribulation on the Jews.
G
No - the 'Wrath of God' is the 'Vials'; and, does not include the 'Trumpets'.
This is a list of prophetic events - in order of occurance:
Abomination Of Desolation
Great Tribulation
Trumpet 1
Trumpet 2
Trumpet 3
Trumpet 4
Trumpet 5
Trumpet 6
Heaven / Temple Opened
JESUS
Trumpet 7
Resurrection & Rapture
Pre-Wrath
Vial 1
Vial 2
Vial 3
Vial 4
Vial 5
Vial 6
Armageddon
Vial 7
Marriage Supper
The span of time that covers all of what is described in the 'opening' of the 6th seal runs from 'Trumpet 1' to 'Vial 7'.
The 70th week of Daniel ended in 34 A.D. - at which point in time - the 'Times of the Jews' ended and the 'Times of the Gentiles' began.
In 70 A.D., the 'Great Tribulation' began. We are still in it. It will end at a future point in time.
The end of the 'Great Tribulation' will be marked by the "arrival" of the Two Witnesses.
The Two Witnesses will - literally - bring about the 'Trumpet' events.
For more on this, follow the link in my signature and take a look at my 'study' web pages...
This is a list of prophetic events - in order of occurance:
Abomination Of Desolation
Great Tribulation
Trumpet 1
Trumpet 2
Trumpet 3
Trumpet 4
Trumpet 5
Trumpet 6
Heaven / Temple Opened
JESUS
Trumpet 7
Resurrection & Rapture
Pre-Wrath
Vial 1
Vial 2
Vial 3
Vial 4
Vial 5
Vial 6
Armageddon
Vial 7
Marriage Supper
The span of time that covers all of what is described in the 'opening' of the 6th seal runs from 'Trumpet 1' to 'Vial 7'.
The 70th week of Daniel ended in 34 A.D. - at which point in time - the 'Times of the Jews' ended and the 'Times of the Gentiles' began.
In 70 A.D., the 'Great Tribulation' began. We are still in it. It will end at a future point in time.
The end of the 'Great Tribulation' will be marked by the "arrival" of the Two Witnesses.
The Two Witnesses will - literally - bring about the 'Trumpet' events.
For more on this, follow the link in my signature and take a look at my 'study' web pages...
Valiant,,,, easy there, your Hatred is showing....for all to see.
The readers of the post can see all three.. One, who was brave enough to ask a relevant question and the answer from one who believes:" a literal nation Israel to be restored in the future, a literal Kingdom, a literal tribulation and a literal return of the Lord and a Literal Rapture."
and
the third person, who does not agree with any of the points answered within the post and has what appears to be a deep seated hatred for God's Chosen people... Israel.
You, the reader has a choice to make here...Will it be a literal, futurist, fundalmentalist interpretation which means:
Literally reading and interpreting the WORD of GOD as it is written that includes interpreting symbols when needed, using the SAME hermeneutics throughout the whole book, interpretation of sentence structure(s) and literal interpretation of some 200 other figures of speech the Bible provides the reader with from Genesis 1 through Revelation 22 and more.
As far as the definition of a preterist (full or partial). I am sure there are plentiful sites on you-tube and other sites that will gladly inform you of the Doctrine associated with this type of eschatology.
The readers of the post can see all three.. One, who was brave enough to ask a relevant question and the answer from one who believes:" a literal nation Israel to be restored in the future, a literal Kingdom, a literal tribulation and a literal return of the Lord and a Literal Rapture."
and
the third person, who does not agree with any of the points answered within the post and has what appears to be a deep seated hatred for God's Chosen people... Israel.
You, the reader has a choice to make here...Will it be a literal, futurist, fundalmentalist interpretation which means:
Literally reading and interpreting the WORD of GOD as it is written that includes interpreting symbols when needed, using the SAME hermeneutics throughout the whole book, interpretation of sentence structure(s) and literal interpretation of some 200 other figures of speech the Bible provides the reader with from Genesis 1 through Revelation 22 and more.
As far as the definition of a preterist (full or partial). I am sure there are plentiful sites on you-tube and other sites that will gladly inform you of the Doctrine associated with this type of eschatology.
G
Matthew 24:
[SUP]6[/SUP] And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. [SUP]7[/SUP] For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. [SUP]8[/SUP] All these are the beginning of sorrows. [SUP]9[/SUP] Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
The words "all these" in the phrase "But before all these" in Luke 21:12 are referring to what is described in Luke 21:10-11. Luke 21:12 is a continuation of Luke 21:9.
In the passage above, verses 7-8 are an 'aside' - set apart by the phrases highlighted in red and teal. The word 'Then' at the start of verse 9 is a continuation of verse 6. Verse 9 is not indicating "after [ what is depicted in verses 7-8 ]. In chronological terms, the events of verses 7-8 actually occur "way later" - they depict events that are closer to our present time - in the more recent centuries -- and, more significant as time advances into the future...
[SUP]6[/SUP] And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. [SUP]7[/SUP] For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. [SUP]8[/SUP] All these are the beginning of sorrows. [SUP]9[/SUP] Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
The words "all these" in the phrase "But before all these" in Luke 21:12 are referring to what is described in Luke 21:10-11. Luke 21:12 is a continuation of Luke 21:9.
In the passage above, verses 7-8 are an 'aside' - set apart by the phrases highlighted in red and teal. The word 'Then' at the start of verse 9 is a continuation of verse 6. Verse 9 is not indicating "after [ what is depicted in verses 7-8 ]. In chronological terms, the events of verses 7-8 actually occur "way later" - they depict events that are closer to our present time - in the more recent centuries -- and, more significant as time advances into the future...