Why Daniel's 70th Week does NOT support Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism

  • 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.

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
14,772
1,382
113
That's why we look to the "holy men (which) spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit".
I can't even begin to count how much of this violates the laws of eschatological hermeneutics, the most glaring of which is the lack of a prophetic timeline, but we'll have to agree to disagree.
Again whose private interpretation violates the laws of whose eschatological hermeneutics

2 Peter 1:20-21 King James Version (KJV) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

How we look to faith as a work that works in us causes division .Some go as far as saying God does not need faith to work. Making faith without effect.

We as to did the apostles as holy men of old knew where the faith by which they could beleive God working in them, came from. It was never in respect to their person as corrupted dying being . That simply creates men that some think a venerable . The foundation of JW's Catholiscim and Mormonism etc. Any denomination where men Lord it over the faith of the pew sitters.

Again because many do not see faith as a work they violate the opening commandment not to have the work of Christ as a labor of love in respect to holy men of old. We are warned of those who say we do need a man to teach us.

One is the master teacher Christ who works with us us Just as the father worked in the Son of man .We preach, the unseen Lord does the teaching .The when can obey his commandment to study to show our approval of Him. Other wise it is pit one holy man of old against another as if we did wrestle against flesh and blood and not spiritual wickedness in High places .The battle of the century Paul VS. James


James 2 King James Version (KJV) My brethren, have not (commandment) the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

The consequence.

James 2: 7 King James Version (KJV) Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?

An example Of Christ working in each one to both will and perform his good pleasure (Philippians 2: 12-13 )Making the work of faith or labor of the father and Sons love complete, perfect, not in part but the whole (Philippians 1: 6

Note (Purple) my addition to rightfully divide ..

James 2: 20-24 King James Version (KJV) But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was (Christ's) faith (as a work) made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God,( having the faith coming from God) and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: (not of himself) and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. 20-24


 

Phoneman-777

Active member
Aug 3, 2019
417
138
43
Again whose private interpretation violates the laws of whose eschatological hermeneutics

2 Peter 1:20-21 King James Version (KJV) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

How we look to faith as a work that works in us causes division .Some go as far as saying God does not need faith to work. Making faith without effect.

We as to did the apostles as holy men of old knew where the faith by which they could beleive God working in them, came from. It was never in respect to their person as corrupted dying being . That simply creates men that some think a venerable . The foundation of JW's Catholiscim and Mormonism etc. Any denomination where men Lord it over the faith of the pew sitters.

Again because many do not see faith as a work they violate the opening commandment not to have the work of Christ as a labor of love in respect to holy men of old. We are warned of those who say we do need a man to teach us.

One is the master teacher Christ who works with us us Just as the father worked in the Son of man .We preach, the unseen Lord does the teaching .The when can obey his commandment to study to show our approval of Him. Other wise it is pit one holy man of old against another as if we did wrestle against flesh and blood and not spiritual wickedness in High places .The battle of the century Paul VS. James


James 2 King James Version (KJV) My brethren, have not (commandment) the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

The consequence.

James 2: 7 King James Version (KJV) Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?

An example Of Christ working in each one to both will and perform his good pleasure (Philippians 2: 12-13 )Making the work of faith or labor of the father and Sons love complete, perfect, not in part but the whole (Philippians 1: 6

Note (Purple) my addition to rightfully divide ..

James 2: 20-24 King James Version (KJV) But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was (Christ's) faith (as a work) made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God,( having the faith coming from God) and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: (not of himself) and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. 20-24
What I see is a lack of faith in the part of those who reject the Biblically defined meaning of prophetic symbols and apply their own "private interpretation" rather than the interpretation of the "holy men" which "spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost".

A beast is a "kingdom", not a man.

A horn is a "kingdom", not a man.

The Beasts of Revelation 13, the Ten Horns, the Little Horn, etc., are "kingdoms". The prophetic timeline begins in Daniel 2 with Babylon and traces Medo Persia, Greece, and Rome, and the divisions of Rome right down to our day.

What is also rejected is the age old teaching principle of "repetition and enlargement" where God repeats the same theme of prophecy with added elements as the chapters unfold, like any good teacher would, but the confused Christian world wants to make the prophetic chapters disjointed and disconnected, which has resulted in such mass confusion that, for instance, everyone everywhere is so sure WHAT the Mark of the Beast is, but have absolutely no idea WHO the Beast is, which is absurd. You've got to identify the Beast before you can identify its Mark, and all that remains is identifying the Mark since the Protestant Reformation already identified the Beast from Scripture.
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
14,772
1,382
113
What I see is a lack of faith in the part of those who reject the Biblically defined meaning of prophetic symbols and apply their own "private interpretation" rather than the interpretation of the "holy men" which "spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost".

A beast is a "kingdom", not a man.

A horn is a "kingdom", not a man.

The Beasts of Revelation 13, the Ten Horns, the Little Horn, etc., are "kingdoms". The prophetic timeline begins in Daniel 2 with Babylon and traces Medo Persia, Greece, and Rome, and the divisions of Rome right down to our day.

What is also rejected is the age old teaching principle of "repetition and enlargement" where God repeats the same theme of prophecy with added elements as the chapters unfold, like any good teacher would, but the confused Christian world wants to make the prophetic chapters disjointed and disconnected, which has resulted in such mass confusion that, for instance, everyone everywhere is so sure WHAT the Mark of the Beast is, but have absolutely no idea WHO the Beast is, which is absurd. You've got to identify the Beast before you can identify its Mark, and all that remains is identifying the Mark since the Protestant Reformation already identified the Beast from Scripture.
You seem to be missing that its not the interpretation of the apostle as a private interpretation . Not by the will of the apostles.

Words have meaning attached. Apostle sent one.. . with no other meaning added . Many have added new meaning destroying the use of the word

Abel the first recorded apostle prophet and first recorded martyr. Making the apostles like those in Acts 14 into gods in the likeness of men is the cornerstone to all denomination who lord it over the pew sitters . Mormonism Catholiscim or the JW's are three that clearly violate the meaning of apostle.. Each one tries to fit their venerable ones under the metaphor 144,000. A number no man could count. In the end destroying the parable losing the signified understanding..

If you desire to look at natural un-redeemed man as a private interpretation . We can look at Saul before he believed prophecy .

Saul born a Jew went to the best school available of hermeneutics available, had the best teacher and as a false zeal for knowing God he persecuted the Christians to death. Just like the 15 century reformation .A copy of the first century reformation . In any generation sola scriptura does the reforming and restoring.

Again not moved by the apostles own will . Not one thought came from the corrupted apostles.. God whose name is Jealous will not share his glory with the corrupted hands of mankind.

2 Peter 1:20-21 King James Version (KJV) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

A beast is a "kingdom", not a man.

A horn is a "kingdom", not a man
The gospel is not about the political nations of the world .We do not wrestle against flesh and blood the things seen
.
Corrupted dust is corrupted dust.

The beast is the creation of flesh and blood to include mankind as one of the beast of the field that God breathed in the spirit essence of life.

Horns (strength) found in parables are used to symbolize kingdoms or sects .Satan is the god of the kingdoms of this world . He comes on with all power of lying wonders in his attempt to deceive the believers

Ten like hundred or thousand (metaphors) signify a unknown in many, many parables. We are not of the number as those who number days or people rather than walk by faith after the unseen eternal will.

Many simply literalize the understanding hid in the parable and focus on what the eyes see the temporal as a false hope They look to signs and wonders destroying faith that does come by hearing the parable. .

The man of sin is the man Satan uses to destroy faith. Seen clearly in the example of Mathew 16 with Peter. Peter was forgiven of his blasphemy .

Man of sin. The things of natural un-redeemed mankind. No sign and wonder was given the last Jonas was fulfilled.. . .It is a evil, faithless generation (666) that does seek one.

Same with the mark, a lying wonder. The mark the foundation of the doctrine is establish in Genesis 3.

666 the number of unconverted mankind( antichrists a legion) . The man of sin" kind" Led by the spirit of sin, the evil one. . the antichrist (one)
 

Phoneman-777

Active member
Aug 3, 2019
417
138
43
You seem to be missing that its not the interpretation of the apostle as a private interpretation . Not by the will of the apostles.

Words have meaning attached. Apostle sent one.. . with no other meaning added . Many have added new meaning destroying the use of the word

Abel the first recorded apostle prophet and first recorded martyr. Making the apostles like those in Acts 14 into gods in the likeness of men is the cornerstone to all denomination who lord it over the pew sitters . Mormonism Catholiscim or the JW's are three that clearly violate the meaning of apostle.. Each one tries to fit their venerable ones under the metaphor 144,000. A number no man could count. In the end destroying the parable losing the signified understanding..

If you desire to look at natural un-redeemed man as a private interpretation . We can look at Saul before he believed prophecy .

Saul born a Jew went to the best school available of hermeneutics available, had the best teacher and as a false zeal for knowing God he persecuted the Christians to death. Just like the 15 century reformation .A copy of the first century reformation . In any generation sola scriptura does the reforming and restoring.

Again not moved by the apostles own will . Not one thought came from the corrupted apostles.. God whose name is Jealous will not share his glory with the corrupted hands of mankind.

2 Peter 1:20-21 King James Version (KJV) Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.



The gospel is not about the political nations of the world .We do not wrestle against flesh and blood the things seen
.
Corrupted dust is corrupted dust.

The beast is the creation of flesh and blood to include mankind as one of the beast of the field that God breathed in the spirit essence of life.

Horns (strength) found in parables are used to symbolize kingdoms or sects .Satan is the god of the kingdoms of this world . He comes on with all power of lying wonders in his attempt to deceive the believers

Ten like hundred or thousand (metaphors) signify a unknown in many, many parables. We are not of the number as those who number days or people rather than walk by faith after the unseen eternal will.

Many simply literalize the understanding hid in the parable and focus on what the eyes see the temporal as a false hope They look to signs and wonders destroying faith that does come by hearing the parable. .

The man of sin is the man Satan uses to destroy faith. Seen clearly in the example of Mathew 16 with Peter. Peter was forgiven of his blasphemy .

Man of sin. The things of natural un-redeemed mankind. No sign and wonder was given the last Jonas was fulfilled.. . .It is a evil, faithless generation (666) that does seek one.

Same with the mark, a lying wonder. The mark the foundation of the doctrine is establish in Genesis 3.

666 the number of unconverted mankind( antichrists a legion) . The man of sin" kind" Led by the spirit of sin, the evil one. . the antichrist (one)
Sorry, but having trouble following your English :/ I do know the diff between a Biblical interpretation and a private interpretation. The Biblical says beasts are kingdoms, while the private says the beast is a man, supercomputer, etc., and that's why I don't accept Jesuit Futurism...it's a private interpretation.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
4,471
915
113
A beast is a "kingdom", not a man.
A horn is a "kingdom", not a man.
The Beasts of Revelation 13, the Ten Horns, the Little Horn, etc., are "kingdoms". The prophetic timeline begins in Daniel 2 with Babylon and traces Medo Persia, Greece, and Rome, and the divisions of Rome right down to our day.
What is also rejected is the age old teaching principle of "repetition and enlargement" where God repeats the same theme of prophecy with added elements as the chapters unfold, like any good teacher would, but [...]
And yet, Babylon had its "spokesperson" in the person/individual of Nebuchadnezzar ("Thou art this head of gold" Dan2:38).

Now, what I'm going to put in this post likely will not convince you, as you are set in what you believe. I place it here for the readers... to consider that it ['beast'] is both a "kingdom" and a "king":

Daniel 7 (in part):

17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings [/kingdoms], which shall arise out of the earth. 18 But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.
19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet; 20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other [/another horn] which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows. 21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; 22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. 24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another [/another king (horn)] shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. 25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they [the saints] shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. [compare with Rev13:5-7,1] 26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.



Daniel 7:20 "whose look is more stout than his fellows" is describing an individual (namely, "another king"/"another horn" that shall arise "out of this kingdom" meaning, out of the "fourth"... aka the "MOUTH" [i.e. spokesperson] of Rev13:5-7 [aka an individual])

"ten horns" - Revelation 17:3, 7, 12, 16; Revelation 12:3; 13:1; Daniel 7:7, 20, 24



This is how I see it.
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
14,772
1,382
113
Sorry, but having trouble following your English :/ I do know the diff between a Biblical interpretation and a private interpretation. The Biblical says beasts are kingdoms, while the private says the beast is a man, supercomputer, etc., and that's why I don't accept Jesuit Futurism...it's a private interpretation.
Not sure how you get beasts as being kingdoms? Why?

Beast represent corrupted flesh and blood, mankind. .Mankind, one of the beast of the field. They work in kingdoms . Satan the spirit of error is the god of all the kingdoms on earth .

But a beast is not a kingdom .He uses the word mountains as spiritual high places to represent a legion of gods as false kingdoms . The god of this world over the kingdoms of this world.

Kingdoms that will become the one kingdom of God in the new order.

Revelation 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
14,772
1,382
113
Ten in multiples, hundred, thousand are used in parables throughout the scriptures to indicate a unknow or a faith issue .The "golden measure .Our invisible head.

His glory as the glory of God not seen is shown as the first strength using a bullock. His horn or strength is one.(unicorn )

Deuteronomy 33:17 His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

Four is used to represent universal as applying to everyone . South, north, east and west and in multiples of tens. 40 to indicate trial of suffering . 400 years in slavery .

Daniel 7 is a picture or parable of the one spirit of anti-chirist (singular) Satan that works in the affairs' of men antichrists (many) He is represented by ten to represent he is the god of all the kingdoms of this world Not political or global locations. The spirt of Catholiscim does not only work in Rome. Just as the spirit of faithless Judaism does only work in Jerusalem . We walk by faith.

One description of the father of lies. Coming in all his false glory .Repeated in Revelation

Daniel 7 King James Version (KJV) In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed: then he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters. Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea. And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another. The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it. And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.

Again ten to represent all .
 

Phoneman-777

Active member
Aug 3, 2019
417
138
43
And yet, Babylon had its "spokesperson" in the person/individual of Nebuchadnezzar ("Thou art this head of gold" Dan2:38).

Now, what I'm going to put in this post likely will not convince you, as you are set in what you believe. I place it here for the readers... to consider that it ['beast'] is both a "kingdom" and a "king":

Daniel 7 (in part):

17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings [/kingdoms], which shall arise out of the earth. 18 But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.
19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet; 20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other [/another horn] which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows. 21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; 22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. 24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another [/another king (horn)] shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. 25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they [the saints] shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. [compare with Rev13:5-7,1] 26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.



Daniel 7:20 "whose look is more stout than his fellows" is describing an individual (namely, "another king"/"another horn" that shall arise "out of this kingdom" meaning, out of the "fourth"... aka the "MOUTH" [i.e. spokesperson] of Rev13:5-7 [aka an individual])

"ten horns" - Revelation 17:3, 7, 12, 16; Revelation 12:3; 13:1; Daniel 7:7, 20, 24



This is how I see it.
Respectfully, I say this for the benefit of those who may read your post and consider your explanation to be plausible: Your logic constitutes a False Equivalence.

Proponents of Jesuit Futurism demand singular nouns/pronouns and personification such as "man of sin" and "he shall speak great words against" and also "mouth speaking great things" which are used to refer to the kingdom of Antichrist must limit the scope of the kingdom of Antichrist to the actions of just one evil man.

However...

...in the examples you cite for support of such a limitation, the singular nouns/pronouns or personification contained therein which are used to refer to the whole of the kingdom do not ever limit the scope of the kingdom to just a single man -- e.g., "thou ("Nebuchadnezzer") art this head of gold" was indeed representative of Babylon, but in no way limits the scope of the Babylon's role in prophecy to Nebuchadnezzer. You can't argue as support for limiting the scope of Antichrist's kingdom to a single man examples which in no way provide for such limitations.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
4,471
915
113
Respectfully, I say this for the benefit of those who may read your post and consider your explanation to be plausible: Your logic constitutes a False Equivalence.

Proponents of Jesuit Futurism demand singular nouns/pronouns and personification such as "man of sin" and "he shall speak great words against" and also "mouth speaking great things" which are used to refer to the kingdom of Antichrist must limit the scope of the kingdom of Antichrist to the actions of just one evil man.
However...
...in the examples you cite for support of such a limitation, the singular nouns/pronouns or personification contained therein which are used to refer to the whole of the kingdom do not ever limit the scope of the kingdom to just a single man -- e.g., "thou ("Nebuchadnezzer") art this head of gold" was indeed representative of Babylon, but in no way limits the scope of the Babylon's role in prophecy to Nebuchadnezzer. You can't argue as support for limiting the scope of Antichrist's kingdom to a single man examples which in no way provide for such limitations.
Respectfully, I would think it is *you* that is "limiting" it... to say that it is ONLY "a kingdom" (and not "a kingdom" AND "a king" [the "king" part is what is referred to by the "A MOUTH" was given unto it Rev13:5-7... which parallels Daniel 7:20-25, in the places I pointed out these parallels, and which passage shows an individual, "whose look was more stout than his fellows"]).

OTOH, *I* am not saying that the evilness will stem from only "one man." ;)



[note to readers: "futurist" here :) . In that, I see the "1260 days" as actually and literally "1260 DAYS" and not 1260 YEARS as the "Historicist" view has it. (Again, Rev1:1 "things that must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]"... not that which would unfold over some 2000 yrs, nor 1260 yrs)]
 
Last edited:

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
4,471
915
113
^ Daniel 7:24 (in the Dan7:20-25 section I supplied as parallel) distinguishes "king" [individual person] from "kingdom" :

"24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom [H4437 - malchutah/malku] are ten kings [H4430 - malchin/melek] that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings [H4430 - malchin/melek].
 

Phoneman-777

Active member
Aug 3, 2019
417
138
43
Respectfully, I would think it is *you* that is "limiting" it... to say that it is ONLY "a kingdom" [/QUOTE] Historicism rightly interprets the actions of Antichrist's kingdom as not limited to just one man, but the 1,260 year lineage of enthroned popes prior to the deadly wound - your Jesuit Futurism never expands the actions of Antichrist beyond "one evil dude". So, it is you who are setting subjective limitations in prophecy.
(and not "a kingdom" AND "a king" [the "king" part is what is referred to by the "A MOUTH" was given unto it Rev13:5-7... which parallels Daniel 7:20-25, in the places I pointed out these parallels, and which passage shows an individual, "whose look was more stout than his fellows"]).
Again, you are subjectively reasoning that "mouth" and "stoutness" must limit the kingdom of Antichrist to one man when you know full well God over and over utilizes singular nouns/pronouns and personification in reference to the actions and influence of entire kingdoms.
[note to readers: "futurist" here :) . In that, I see the "1260 days" as actually and literally "1260 DAYS" and not 1260 YEARS as the "Historicist" view has it. (Again, Rev1:1 "things that must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]"... not that which would unfold over some 2000 yrs, nor 1260 yrs)]
The 70 Weeks must be 490 years b/c no "Messiah the Prince" came fulfilling Daniel's prophecy 490 days after any of the Medo Persian decrees, but One did 490 years later - it is inconsistent to acknowledge the "day/year principle" in Daniel 9, but insist "time, times, and half a time" 1,260 (when compared with Revelation 12) of both Daniel 7 and Revelation 12 are only days. The 1,260 are years and span from the papacy's inception in 538 A.D. to the "deadly wound" in 1798 A.D. Our readers know "consistency, thou art a jewel" but inconsistent Jesuit Futurism is no better than cryptocurrency - existing only on paper but totally intangible. :p
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
4,471
915
113
TDW: Respectfully, I would think it is *you* that is "limiting" it... to say that it is ONLY "a kingdom"
Historicism rightly interprets the actions of Antichrist's kingdom as not limited to just one man, but the 1,260 year lineage of enthroned popes prior to the deadly wound - your Jesuit Futurism never expands the actions of Antichrist beyond "one evil dude". So, it is you who are setting subjective limitations in prophecy.
Again, you are subjectively reasoning that "mouth" and "stoutness" must limit the kingdom of Antichrist to one man when you know full well God over and over utilizes singular nouns/pronouns and personification in reference to the actions and influence of entire kingdoms.
Not true. I'm not saying "the beast" is ONLY "an individual".

Again, it is both "a kingdom" AND "a king" [an individual].

And there is explanation (given) for BOTH OF THESE. ;)

The 70 Weeks must be 490 years b/c no "Messiah the Prince" came fulfilling Daniel's prophecy 490 days after any of the Medo Persian decrees, but One did 490 years later - it is inconsistent to acknowledge the "day/year principle" in Daniel 9
The "70 WEEKS" is not to be conflated with "a day/year principle".

That's not what is taking place by the words "SEVENTY WEEKS are determined upon...". The text is literally "Seventy SEVENS".

Then the context determines just WHAT KIND of SEVENS is meant, whether days, years, potatoes...

But this is NOT "a day/year PRINCIPLE" here in this text, see, and that is the difference. Majorly. ;)

Do not conflate these concepts (as you are suggesting).

, but insist "time, times, and half a time" 1,260 (when compared with Revelation 12) of both Daniel 7 and Revelation 12 are only days. The 1,260 are years and span from the papacy's inception in 538 A.D. to the "deadly wound" in 1798 A.D. Our readers know "consistency, thou art a jewel" but inconsistent Jesuit Futurism is no better than cryptocurrency - existing only on paper but totally intangible. :p
I disagree, and believe that where it says "1260 days," that it means "DAYS" (and that in the future, Israel's future, the believing remnant of Israel [coming to faith FOLLOWING "our Rapture"] will be "the WISE [of Israel]" per the Daniel 12 CONTEXT, who will come to "UNDERSTAND" ['the WISE shall understand'] just what, exactly, the Dan12:6-7 "time, times, and an half" [specifically worded as it is (in the Hebrew) in 12:7 (differing from 7:25 tho speaking of the SAME time-slot), and in the CONTEXT of the setting of vv.1-4 (chpt12), i.e. MID-TRIB / and the SECOND HALF of the [7] trib yrs] that which v.7 is speaking of... (and corresponding to the "1260 days" but in a much more pointed way, meaning, a PRECISE SET of "1260 days," not any random 1260 days--and this will be important at that [future] time, because it will be during a time-period of great DECEPTION).


But I'm not going to convince you. This is more for the readers to consider. :)


Mainly... to exhort to investigate the DIFFERENCE between "the seventy WEEKS" prophecy, and the [DISTINCT] idea of "a day/year PRINCIPLE" which is NOT what Dan9:24-27 is showing. ;)
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
4,471
915
113
^ Related to the "seventy WEEKS" prophecy is the verse which states (Luke 21:24), "...and Jerusalem shall be TRODDEN DOWN OF the Gentiles UNTIL the TIMES of the Gentiles be fulfilled" [see also Rev11:2 for its TIMING], which phrase "the TIMES of the Gentiles" (being DISTINCT from the phrase "the FULNESS of the Gentiles") is NOT speaking of [what is commonly referred to as] the "Church age" as many suppose. No.

"The TIMES of the Gentiles" refers to "Gentile domination over Israel" and which started in 606/605bc (think: Neb's "dream/statue/image" with Neb as "head of gold") and which will not be concluded until the end of the future trib yrs (at the time of Christ's Second Coming to the earth Rev19).


Again, the "Seventy Weeks" prophecy pertains to THIS ^ . ("...are DETERMINED UPON thy [Daniel's] people, AND UPON thy [Daniel's] HOLY CITY")



[Lk21:24 ^ is followed by v.32's saying "TILL ALL be fulfilled" which necessarily INCLUDES everything v.24 had just listed]
 

Phoneman-777

Active member
Aug 3, 2019
417
138
43
Not true. I'm not saying "the beast" is ONLY "an individual". Again, it is both "a kingdom" AND "a king" [an individual]. And there is explanation (given) for BOTH OF THESE. ;)
Representation and Reality are two different things. Antichrist's kingdom may be referenced in both the singular and plural, but it exists only as a plurality, unless you're willing to argue that an entire kingdom exists as the embodiment of one individual...which would be kinda silly.
The "70 WEEKS" is not to be conflated with "a day/year principle". That's not what is taking place by the words "SEVENTY WEEKS are determined upon...". The text is literally "Seventy SEVENS". Then the context determines just WHAT KIND of SEVENS is meant, whether days, years, potatoes...
I just don't see what is the hard part here. The context plainly says the 69 Weeks are bounded by the decree on the one side and the arrival of Messiah on the other side. The decree when forth in the days of the Medes and the Persian, did they not? So, I ask you, did Jesus come 483 days or years after the time of the decree? The answer is obvious and proves the "day/year" principle in prophecy.
But this is NOT "a day/year PRINCIPLE" here in this text, see, and that is the difference. Majorly. ;) Do not conflate these concepts (as you are suggesting).
Pretty sure unless Jesus came 483 days after Artaxerses' decree, the 483 days are symbolic of 483 years.
I disagree, and believe that where it says "1260 days," that it means "DAYS" (and that in the future, Israel's future, the believing remnant of Israel [coming to faith FOLLOWING "our Rapture"] will be "the WISE [of Israel]" per the Daniel 12 CONTEXT, who will come to "UNDERSTAND" ['the WISE shall understand'] just what, exactly, the Dan12:6-7 "time, times, and an half" [specifically worded as it is (in the Hebrew) in 12:7 (differing from 7:25 tho speaking of the SAME time-slot), and in the CONTEXT of the setting of vv.1-4 (chpt12), i.e. MID-TRIB / and the SECOND HALF of the [7] trib yrs] that which v.7 is speaking of... (and corresponding to the "1260 days" but in a much more pointed way, meaning, a PRECISE SET of "1260 days," not any random 1260 days--and this will be important at that [future] time, because it will be during a time-period of great DECEPTION).
Time in prophecy is just as symbolic as heads, horns, beasts, seas, etc.
But I'm not going to convince you. This is more for the readers to consider. :) Mainly... to exhort to investigate the DIFFERENCE between "the seventy WEEKS" prophecy, and the [DISTINCT] idea of "a day/year PRINCIPLE" which is NOT what Dan9:24-27 is showing. ;)
To the readers, I ask that you consider that my challenge to TDW has gone unmet. I stated that we can't interpret the 70 Weeks as "years" but then get on over to Revelation and interpret the 1,260 days as just days - which is inconsistent hermeneutics. In order to confirm that the 70 Weeks are years, I showed him that the 69 Weeks begin with a decree in the time of Medo Persia and end with the arrival of Jesus - not 483 days later but 483 years later. TDW offered a rebuttal concerning "contexts" and "weeks of sevens" but completely avoided my point about the period between the decree and the arrival of Jesus...this is because he knows no Messiah came 483 days after Artaxerxes' decree and any consideration of my point leads to the inescapable conclusion that in prophecy days represent years.
 

Jackson123

Senior Member
Feb 6, 2014
8,701
760
113
Luther was clearly mistaken. Most of the Reformers had this view, but it is simply unsupported by Scripture. The Bible is very clear that the reign of the Beast (the Antichrist) is only for 3 1/2 years (42 months, 1260 days).
It doesn't mean not papacy

It may the last 31/2 years papacy
 

Phoneman-777

Active member
Aug 3, 2019
417
138
43
Since the papacy has been around for OVER 1,600 YEARS we know that making it the Antichrist is sheer nonsense.
And here is an example of misappropriation of Scripture in order to debunk Scriptural exegesis. ;)

1600 years of Papal existence means nothing because the prophecy clearly says that 1,260 years into the reign of the Papal Antichrist, the "DEADLY WOUND" would interrupt it...I'm sure you know full well that EXACTLY 1,260 years into its reign, General Berthier marched into the Vatican, arrested the Pope, and the Papacy was declared dead. However, the "DEADLY WOUND" was to be healed, and all the world would eventually "wonder after the Beast", right or wrong?
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
4,471
915
113
Representation and Reality are two different things. Antichrist's kingdom may be referenced in both the singular and plural, but it exists only as a plurality, unless you're willing to argue that an entire kingdom exists as the embodiment of one individual...which would be kinda silly.
What you are saying here ^ makes no sense to me.

I've already pointed out the PARALLEL of Rev13:5-7,1 is found in Daniel 7:20-25 where (esp. in v.24) "kingdom" is clearly distinguished from "king [/an individual]". (BOTH being in this text.)

It's your choice to not acknowledge this fact.
I just don't see what is the hard part here. The context plainly says the 69 Weeks are bounded by the decree on the one side and the arrival of Messiah on the other side. The decree when forth in the days of the Medes and the Persian, did they not? So, I ask you, did Jesus come 483 days or years after the time of the decree? The answer is obvious and proves the "day/year" principle in prophecy.
The prophecy distinctly states "FROM... UNTO the Messiah the Prince shall be 7 'periods of seven' and 62 'periods of seven' [aka '69 'periods of seven' TOTAL]". (We both agree that this equals 483 YEARS [and I would say, "'483 YEARS' of 360-days each"]).

We know it was YEARS by viewing/understanding the context; but also by understanding the options of what "PERIOD/S OF SEVEN" can apply to, literally, and the CHOICES are:

--a 'period of seven' DAYS; OR

--a 'period of seven' YEARS [we both agree that this LATTER option "FITS" better than the 'period of seven' DAYS option--but BOTH OPTIONS are "literal"... either "LITERAL DAYS" *or* "LITERAL YEARS" (for the "shabua/heptad/'period of seven' [H7620])]

These BOTH (both CHOICES) are "LITERAL". Either literal DAYS or literal YEARS ('period/s of seven'), and the latter choice "fits" time-wise.

It is NOT that we see the H7620 word translated "days" (it ISN'T) and that we therefore must MAKE IT "symbolical" to actually *mean* YEARS. No.

The word actually MEANS "a period of seven [DAYS... LITERAL DAYS]" OR "a period of seven [YEARS... LITERAL YEARS]"... either choice IS LITERAL. No need to use ANY form of SYMBOLISM for this WORD, as it works JUST FINE *literally* ! ;)
Pretty sure unless Jesus came 483 days after Artaxerses' decree, the 483 days are symbolic of 483 years.
The Hebrew word for "days" is NOT in the text here.

And the word for "WEEKS" ('a period of seven') can refer to EITHER "days" OR "years" IN A LITERAL SENSE.

It's up to the reader to ascertain just WHICH of these TWO OPTIONS "fits" (the 'a period of seven YEARS" is what "FITS"... and fits LITERALLY).
Time in prophecy is just as symbolic as heads, horns, beasts, seas, etc.
I find that many places where a specific number is used along with it, it is actually QUITE PRECISE!

There are even other "time-stamps / time-markers" in Revelation that are not as explicit, but are ascertained by knowing what Scripture states ELSEWHERE about something, for example, the "kings [go/] went out to war" at a VERY SPECIFIC time/day of the year, in OT history [think Rev19], so when all of these factors are examined together, the "timeline" (of ['future'] Rev events) can be laid out on a calendar, so to speak (showing how precise these actually are, and have been "further supplied" IN The Revelation [well after His "resurrection/ascension"], written around 95ad).
To the readers, I ask that you consider that my challenge to TDW has gone unmet. I stated that we can't interpret the 70 Weeks as "years" but then get on over to Revelation and interpret the 1,260 days as just days - which is inconsistent hermeneutics. In order to confirm that the 70 Weeks are years, I showed him that the 69 Weeks begin with a decree in the time of Medo Persia and end with the arrival of Jesus - not 483 days later but 483 years later. TDW offered a rebuttal concerning "contexts" and "weeks of sevens" but completely avoided my point about the period between the decree and the arrival of Jesus...this is because he knows no Messiah came 483 days after Artaxerxes' decree and any consideration of my point leads to the inescapable conclusion that in prophecy days represent years.
Except, "WEEKS" means "a period of seven"... it does not mean "day/days"... there is a DIFFERENT Hebrew word for that.

This word (H7620) means "a period of seven" (whether 'a period of seven' [literal] DAYS, *OR* 'a period of seven' [literal] YEARS, both being LITERAL in meaning... no need to make "symbolism" out of anything here!)

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7620.htm


THAT *IS* being CONSISTENT! ;)