Daniel's 1260 vs. 1290 vs. 1335 vs. 2300 Days

[Komentaja]

I believe the Bible is very straight-forward in showing this to us. It is one of the most simple things to understand in eschatology - but, people ignore it.

Is it though? The Bible seems to teach a 7 year, or 3,5 year great tribulation. Not one that spans 2000+ years. You and I are living peaceful lives, where is the tribulation so bad that has never been seen before nor shall be ever again, the tribulation that is so bad that no flesh would be saved unless those days were shortened?

 

[Komentaja]

Here you go buddy. But are you able to comprehend how this impacts historicism?

Here let me help you: the 1,260 days are literal sidereal DAYS aka 42 months aka 3.5 years.

The 3.5 sidereal DAYS before their resurrection follows the day for a year pattern.

Oh and BTW, the other 1,260's, the 1,290 and 1,335 are also undoubtedly sidereal DAYS, effortlessly and eminently provable in context.

[Rev 11:3, 11 KJV]
3 And I will give [power] unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred [and] threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. ...

11 And after three days and an half the Spirit of life from God entered into them, and they stood upon their feet; and great fear fell upon them which saw them.

All of this proves that historicism is a flaming train wreck.

Agreed. But they have to take the two witnesses not as two people, since they view it at 1260 years. I saw many reformers believed the city where our Lord was crucified somehow wasn't Jerusalem where they lay dead. It was either soemthing about the french revolution or Rome... The obsession with the pope.

 

[GaryA]

@GaryA should watch the video.

I watched the whole 7-part series.

 

[GaryA]

Some may argue never. That is the strange thing. The final two resurrections are separated by a thousand years:



That is why I believe Daniel 12 is referring to what happened at the Crucifixion.

Yet - the passage in Revelation 20 you made reference to is unmistakably tied to the Second Coming of Christ and the 'first resurrection' - the thousand years being the Millennium.

Not to my knowledge, no.


I am interested in hearing your take if you have evidence for that.

I have no evidence for that - but, it would have to be the only logical conclusion if you assumed that it happened circa 70 A.D. (or at any other time in the first century) - but, then it would have to be previous to the 'first resurrection'.

However, how many times in history does the Bible indicate the simultaneous resurrection of both saved and lost? Do you think one such occasion occurred circa 70 A.D. involving only the OT saints?

In any case - I believe there is one such occasion mentioned in scripture when/where both saved and lost are resurrected together at the same time - the Great White Throne Judgment - Revelation 20:11-15.

 

[GaryA]

Is it though?

Yes - it is - it really really is - IF you do not allow yourself to be carried off into fantasy interpretations of scripture.

The Bible seems to teach a 7 year, or 3,5 year great tribulation. Not one that spans 2000+ years.

Without trying to make any offense - let me suggest that 'seems' is the keyword here - IF you allow yourself to be carried off into [a particular] fantasy interpretation of scripture, it can/may very well "seem" like it - but, in truth, it is not. And, it is clearly seen and easily shown - IF - and, ONLY IF - you are [truly] willing to let go of the 'fantasy' so that you can see the simple truth that is painfully obvious in scripture. But, you WILL NOT be able to see it clearly for as long as you hold onto the 'fantasy' - because, the 'fantasy' clouds your vision and fills up your thinking with complex and unnecessary "stuff" that is not actually put forth in scripture as being the truth that leads to a proper understanding of eschatology.

It really is that simple. It really is.

It is absolutely "amazing" how some folks just will not let go of the 'fantasy' so that they can see the truth that is very plainly stated in scripture - but, you also have to accept what is there that is foundational to the real actual truth. For example - it is the real actual truth that Matthew 24:15-20[-22], Mark 13:14-18[-20], and Luke 21:20-23a[-24] are all three "referring to"/"talking about"/indicating the exact same 'event' - at the exact same time in history. Until you come to this conclusion, you will never ever ever ever properly understand eschatology.

However, when you understand that these three passages of the Olivet Discourse apply to the same exact thing - you will be [virtually] "home free" in discovering the real truth.

You see - if Satan can keep your mind occupied with "unnecessary useless complex junk/stuff" that "seems" to make sense - he can keep you from ever discovering the real truth.

But - you have to let go of that "junk/stuff" - so you can think and see clearly what the Bible really actually says.

Remember that the "junk/stuff" is based on a combination of true things and false things. The Jewish wedding pattern is a real thing; however, it does not override the plain simple straight-forward "blatant" truth of what we are told in the Olivet Discourse and other places in scripture. If you get too deep into and focused onto the Jewish wedding pattern (like some do/have) - and, make it your core foundation that renounces all else - you will miss much from the simple straight-forward things in various passages of scripture that would keep you from falling into error.

Build your foundation on the plain simple straight-forward "blatant" truth of scripture first-and-foremost.

Don't try to wrap all of scripture around what just "seems" to be "workable" as some complex theory - start with what the Bible really actually says [directly] - that does not require you to have to try to fit something else into it or it into something else - that is where you need to start - that needs to be the first/bottom later of your foundation.

The false things are normally/usually misinterpretations of scripture.

You and I are living peaceful lives, where is the tribulation so bad that has never been seen before nor shall be ever again, the tribulation that is so bad that no flesh would be saved unless those days were shortened?

It is not over yet - and, the worst is yet to come...

Do you not realize that all of the 'tribulation' in the world over the past ~2000 years (but including that which is yet to happen) is far worse than any before it or would ever be after it?

Here is the thing - if you try to make the Bible fit into "what makes sense" - you are going to find yourself in error - you MUST simply believe what the Bible really actually says FIRST (the 'plain simple straight-forward "blatant" truth') - THEN "what makes sense" will [virtually] "fall into place" as you understand what scripture is trying to tell you.

It really is much easier than you think; however, you absolutely MUST - "let go and let God" [teach you] (i.e. STOP listening to modern thinking) - or, you will never ever ever ever properly understand eschatology.

It is that simple.

So - "let go and let God"...

 

[GaryA]

I saw many reformers believed the city where our Lord was crucified somehow wasn't Jerusalem where they lay dead. It was either soemthing about the french revolution or Rome... The obsession with the pope.

This is an example of confusion and error caused by simply not believing what scripture actually said - 'where also our Lord was crucified'.

When scripture says something "outright" - plain simple straight-forward - no guesswork required - that needs to be at/in the bottom layer of our foundation for understanding the truth.

"Don't alter it - don't disregard it - just believe it."

 

[cv5]

Agreed. But they have to take the two witnesses not as two people, since they view it at 1260 years. I saw many reformers believed the city where our Lord was crucified somehow wasn't Jerusalem where they lay dead. It was either soemthing about the french revolution or Rome... The obsession with the pope.

Yup. The RCC is their straw man alright.

The thing is, those two passages ALONE shipwreck their zany Biblically illiterate dogma. They are trapped and have no answer....

 

[cv5]

Yes - it is - it really really is - IF you do not allow yourself to be carried off into fantasy interpretations of scripture.


Without trying to make any offense - let me suggest that 'seems' is the keyword here - IF you allow yourself to be carried off into [a particular] fantasy interpretation of scripture, it can/may very well "seem" like it - but, in truth, it is not. And, it is clearly seen and easily shown - IF - and, ONLY IF - you are [truly] willing to let go of the 'fantasy' so that you can see the simple truth that is painfully obvious in scripture. But, you WILL NOT be able to see it clearly for as long as you hold onto the 'fantasy' - because, the 'fantasy' clouds your vision and fills up your thinking with complex and unnecessary "stuff" that is not actually put forth in scripture as being the truth that leads to a proper understanding of eschatology.

It really is that simple. It really is.

It is absolutely "amazing" how some folks just will not let go of the 'fantasy' so that they can see the truth that is very plainly stated in scripture - but, you also have to accept what is there that is foundational to the real actual truth. For example - it is the real actual truth that Matthew 24:15-20[-22], Mark 13:14-18[-20], and Luke 21:20-23a[-24] are all three "referring to"/"talking about"/indicating the exact same 'event' - at the exact same time in history. Until you come to this conclusion, you will never ever ever ever properly understand eschatology.

However, when you understand that these three passages of the Olivet Discourse apply to the same exact thing - you will be [virtually] "home free" in discovering the real truth.

You see - if Satan can keep your mind occupied with "unnecessary useless complex junk/stuff" that "seems" to make sense - he can keep you from ever discovering the real truth.

But - you have to let go of that "junk/stuff" - so you can think and see clearly what the Bible really actually says.

Remember that the "junk/stuff" is based on a combination of true things and false things. The Jewish wedding pattern is a real thing; however, it does not override the plain simple straight-forward "blatant" truth of what we are told in the Olivet Discourse and other places in scripture. If you get too deep into and focused onto the Jewish wedding pattern (like some do/have) - and, make it your core foundation that renounces all else - you will miss much from the simple straight-forward things in various passages of scripture that would keep you from falling into error.

Build your foundation on the plain simple straight-forward "blatant" truth of scripture first-and-foremost.

Don't try to wrap all of scripture around what just "seems" to be "workable" as some complex theory - start with what the Bible really actually says [directly] - that does not require you to have to try to fit something else into it or it into something else - that is where you need to start - that needs to be the first/bottom later of your foundation.

The false things are normally/usually misinterpretations of scripture.


It is not over yet - and, the worst is yet to come...

Do you not realize that all of the 'tribulation' in the world over the past ~2000 years (but including that which is yet to happen) is far worse than any before it or would ever be after it?

Here is the thing - if you try to make the Bible fit into "what makes sense" - you are going to find yourself in error - you MUST simply believe what the Bible really actually says FIRST (the 'plain simple straight-forward "blatant" truth') - THEN "what makes sense" will [virtually] "fall into place" as you understand what scripture is trying to tell you.

It really is much easier than you think; however, you absolutely MUST - "let go and let God" [teach you] (i.e. STOP listening to modern thinking) - or, you will never ever ever ever properly understand eschatology.

It is that simple.

So - "let go and let God"...

Gary buddy, I hate to tell you this, but that is your standard "non answer" answer

 

[GaryA]

You and I are living peaceful lives, where is the tribulation so bad that has never been seen before nor shall be ever again, the tribulation that is so bad that no flesh would be saved unless those days were shortened?

I forgot to mention - you have to look at biblical prophecy 'on God's time scale' - which is sometimes [much] longer than it might "seem"...

 

[cv5]

Is it though? The Bible seems to teach a 7 year, or 3,5 year great tribulation. Not one that spans 2000+ years. You and I are living peaceful lives, where is the tribulation so bad that has never been seen before nor shall be ever again, the tribulation that is so bad that no flesh would be saved unless those days were shortened?

Never forget that this 7 years concatenates flawlessly with the Hebrew betrothal wedding protocol:

The Ancient Custom (7 Days): After the bride and groom entered the bridal chamber (Chuppah) for Yichud (seclusion), they remained hidden inside for exactly seven days. During this week-long seclusion, the bride was completely hidden from the public eye while the wedding guests celebrated outside.

The Prophetic Fulfillment (7 Years): Christ (the Bridegroom) returns at the Rapture to fetch His Bride (the Church) and takes her to the dwelling places He has prepared in His Father's house (John 14:2-3).

The Contrast (Heaven vs. Earth): Just as the ancient couple was hidden for seven days, the Bride is hidden away in the heavenly Yichud for seven years. While the 7-year Tribulation (the Time of Jacob's Trouble / Daniel's 70th week) brings wrath and judgment upon the earth, the Bride is simultaneously experiencing her 7-year seclusion and "honeymoon" in heaven safely with the Bridegroom.

Following this 7-year heavenly Yichud, the Bride is finally revealed to the world when she descends with Christ at the Second Coming, leading directly into the public Marriage Supper of the Lamb.

 

[GaryA]

We know with certainty from scripture exactly when the 'Great Tribulation' begins and when it ends - relative to other 'events' described/detailed in scripture.

In our history, we have actually seen the events associated with the beginning of it; however, we have not [yet] seen the events associated with the end of it.

It started circa 70 A.D. and will end at some point in the future. Therefore, we are in it now...

And, because we are already past the beginning of it - there can no longer be anything that is 'pre-trib' - it is that simple - it really is.

 

[GaryA]

Sorry @Researcher - I don't mean to derail the thread - I will hold off from further posts so that the discussion may get back on track to the thread title topic...

 

[GaryA]

Sorry @Researcher - I don't mean to derail the thread - I will hold off from further posts so that the discussion may get back on track to the thread title topic...

I suppose that if I post on topic (or, close enough to it), that is okay...

See, here's the thing. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, once one does an honest, not biased interpretation of Daniel 10, all the way from verse one, they will discover that Antiochus IV Epiphanes died way before the Abomination of Desolation ever occurred.

I am pretty certain that the discussion in the video that is in post #53 (or, the series that it is a part of) disagrees with this assessment...

 

[Researcher]

No worries @GaryA and others. I don't mind if folks go off topic. I appreciate everyone's comments no matter what. Let the chips fall where they may.

I promise I will respond to what I can after I do my chores.

 

[GaryA]

Well - I have no problem with the idea that no part of Daniel 11 is talking about the End Times Scenario - that the time frame at the last verse is circa 1 B.C.; however, I cannot get away from the conclusion that Daniel 12:2-3 is referring specifically to the resurrection at the Second Coming of Christ. The only other imaginable possibility is what I mentioned earlier; however, that introduces issues in other passage(s) of scripture.

 

[dkontner]

Ecclesiastes 1​

9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

 

[cv5]

We know with certainty from scripture exactly when the 'Great Tribulation' begins and when it ends - relative to other 'events' described/detailed in scripture.

In our history, we have actually seen the events associated with the beginning of it; however, we have not [yet] seen the events associated with the end of it.

It started circa 70 A.D. and will end at some point in the future. Therefore, we are in it now...

And, because we are already past the beginning of it - there can no longer be anything that is 'pre-trib' - it is that simple - it really is.

Who is "we" ?

And no "we" are definitely not in the tribulation. It is the time of Jacob's trouble.

"We" are the gentile virgin Bride, not appointed to eschatological wrath.

Oh and BTW, the 1260 days has nothing to do with the Church any time it is mentioned.

The 42 months has nothing to do with the Church any time it is mentioned.

The 3 1/2 years has has nothing to do with the Church any time it is mentioned.

The 1290 days has has nothing to do with the Church.

The 1335 days has has nothing to do with the Church.

Daniel 8 has has nothing to do with the Church.

Daniel 9 has has nothing to do with the Church.

Daniel 12 has has nothing to do with the Church.

Revelation 6-18 has nothing to do with the Church.

 

[GaryA]

Who is "we" ?

Those of us who know how to correctly and properly interpret scripture...

And no "we" are definitely not in the tribulation. It is the time of Jacob's trouble.

The time of Jacob's trouble is Armageddon - it occurs after Christ returns - during the [time of the] 'Wrath of God' - at the Second Coming of Christ.

"We" are the gentile virgin Bride, not appointed to eschatological wrath.

The 'Wrath' comes later - when/after Christ returns - at the Second Coming of Christ.

Oh and BTW, the 1260 days has nothing to do with the Church any time it is mentioned.

The 42 months has nothing to do with the Church any time it is mentioned.

The 3 1/2 years has has nothing to do with the Church any time it is mentioned.

The 1290 days has has nothing to do with the Church.

The 1335 days has has nothing to do with the Church.

Daniel 8 has has nothing to do with the Church.

Daniel 9 has has nothing to do with the Church.

Daniel 12 has has nothing to do with the Church.

Revelation 6-18 has nothing to do with the Church.

Keep studying...

 

[GaryA]

Agreed. But they have to take the two witnesses not as two people, since they view it at 1260 years.

I consider myself a historicist and believe that the Two Witnesses are two individual people and that the 1260 days are literal [24-hour] days.

 

[GaryA]

No worries @GaryA and others. I don't mind if folks go off topic. I appreciate everyone's comments no matter what. Let the chips fall where they may.

Okay.

I promise I will respond to what I can after I do my chores.

Me thinks you might be a bit busy for a while...?