Daniel's 70 weeks correctly interpreted (in my opinion)
- Thread starter delirious
- 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.
No.
Recall that "the beginning of birth pangs" [Matt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8/Lk21:8-11] come AFTER the 70ad events (according to what Luke 21:12 says [verses 12-24a referring to the 70ad events]). So this CHRONOLOGY issue (of which Amillennial-teaching is notorious for completely disregarding) shows the SEQUENCE to be:
--the 70ad events [come BEFORE...]
--"the beginning of birth pangs" [which is FOLLOWED by... (note what the "therefore" is there for)]
--the AOD [and further birth pangs]
It can't possibly be "the Cross"
Recall that "the beginning of birth pangs" [Matt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8/Lk21:8-11] come AFTER the 70ad events (according to what Luke 21:12 says [verses 12-24a referring to the 70ad events]). So this CHRONOLOGY issue (of which Amillennial-teaching is notorious for completely disregarding) shows the SEQUENCE to be:
--the 70ad events [come BEFORE...]
--"the beginning of birth pangs" [which is FOLLOWED by... (note what the "therefore" is there for)]
--the AOD [and further birth pangs]
It can't possibly be "the Cross"
Mat 24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
Mat 24:6 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.
Mat 24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
Mat 24:8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.
I’ll be honest TDW your writing style is kinda cryptic and hard to follow. Are you saying that the verses above are AD70?
Mat 24:6 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.
Mat 24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
Mat 24:8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.
I’ll be honest TDW your writing style is kinda cryptic and hard to follow. Are you saying that the verses above are AD70?
No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the above [your quoted verses] are "the beginning of birth pangs" and that the PARALLEL passages PROVE that these (these "beginning of birth pangs") MUST come AFTER the 70ad events. Here's why:
--Matthew 24:4-8 parallels Mark 13:5-8 and these parallel what is ALSO DESCRIBED [though not NAMED/LABELED such] in Luke 21:8-11 (ALL THREE of these passages are referring to "the beginning of birth pangs")… BUT
--Luke 21:12 (the following verse from the Luke 21:8-11 section of "the beginning of birth pangs") says specifically...
"BUT BEFORE all these [things]…" (BEFORE all these "the beginning of birth pangs" JUST DESCRIBED in vv.8-11), and then proceeds to speak of the events surrounding 70ad (described in verses 12-24a; with 24b following on from there...).
This is the SEQUENCE/CHRONOLOGY issue that Amill-teachings (and others like Preterism) completely disregard (and not in this Olivet Discourse alone, they do... they disregard "chronology" issues elsewhere also).
--Matthew 24:4-8 parallels Mark 13:5-8 and these parallel what is ALSO DESCRIBED [though not NAMED/LABELED such] in Luke 21:8-11 (ALL THREE of these passages are referring to "the beginning of birth pangs")… BUT
--Luke 21:12 (the following verse from the Luke 21:8-11 section of "the beginning of birth pangs") says specifically...
"BUT BEFORE all these [things]…" (BEFORE all these "the beginning of birth pangs" JUST DESCRIBED in vv.8-11), and then proceeds to speak of the events surrounding 70ad (described in verses 12-24a; with 24b following on from there...).
This is the SEQUENCE/CHRONOLOGY issue that Amill-teachings (and others like Preterism) completely disregard (and not in this Olivet Discourse alone, they do... they disregard "chronology" issues elsewhere also).
Luke 21 12-19 are not AD70, that’s the persecution of the early church by the unbelieving Jews. AD 70 starts with verse 20.
When Jerusalem is surrounded by Titus’ army, you’ll know that the desolation of Jerusalem is nigh.
Luk 21:20 (KJV) And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
When Jerusalem is surrounded by Titus’ army, you’ll know that the desolation of Jerusalem is nigh.
Luk 21:20 (KJV) And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
In one of my posts (or several), I worded it specifically as "events SURROUNDING 70ad" (as opposed to being the far-future events).
So, if you see that verses 12-24a [w/24b following on from there] vv12-24a must come BEFORE the things in vv.8-11 (which PARALLEL Mt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8 [all 3 passages being] "the beginning of birth pangs"), then you can begin to grasp the "CHRONOLOGY/SEQUENCE" issues that prove that "the Cross" is NOT when the AOD occurs.
SEQUENCE:
--the events surrounding 70ad (Lk21:12-24a; with 24b following on from there)
--THEN "the beginning of birth pangs" (Mt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8/Lk21:8-11)
--then the AOD
So, if you see that verses 12-24a [w/24b following on from there] vv12-24a must come BEFORE the things in vv.8-11 (which PARALLEL Mt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8 [all 3 passages being] "the beginning of birth pangs"), then you can begin to grasp the "CHRONOLOGY/SEQUENCE" issues that prove that "the Cross" is NOT when the AOD occurs.
SEQUENCE:
--the events surrounding 70ad (Lk21:12-24a; with 24b following on from there)
--THEN "the beginning of birth pangs" (Mt24:4-8/Mk13:5-8/Lk21:8-11)
--then the AOD
Another issue has to do with "the temple" (or, "the temple of God" where mentioned):
--the definite article ("the," regarding "temple") is not used (in the Greek) in the passages where referring to "the Church which is His body"
--but the definite article IS used in both 2Th2:4 and Rev11:1 ("the temple of God")
--in the Rev11:1 passage, the wording definitely distinguishes between "the temple of God," and "them that worship THEREIN" (as two separate entities)
--the definite article ("the," regarding "temple") is not used (in the Greek) in the passages where referring to "the Church which is His body"
--but the definite article IS used in both 2Th2:4 and Rev11:1 ("the temple of God")
--in the Rev11:1 passage, the wording definitely distinguishes between "the temple of God," and "them that worship THEREIN" (as two separate entities)
-
1
- Show all
Thank you for your patience with me. 
Mar 13:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:
The abomination of desolation takes place.
Mar 13:15 And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house:
Mar 13:16 And let him that is in the field not turn back again for to take up his garment.
Mar 13:17 But woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
Mar 13:18 And pray ye that your flight be not in the winter.
Mar 13:19 For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.
Mar 13:20 And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.
Mar 13:21 And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; or, lo, he is there; believe him not:
Mar 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.
Mar 13:23 But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.
Great tribulation - the Jews persecuting the early church.
Mar 13:24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
Mar 13:25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
Mar 13:26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
Mar 13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.
After the AofD and the tribulation of those days, then comes the AD70 destruction.
So either Locutus is right and Jesus returned in AD 70 or verse 26 is talking about the resurrection of Christ and AD 70 isn't mentioned in Marks account.
Mar 13:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:
The abomination of desolation takes place.
Mar 13:15 And let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter therein, to take any thing out of his house:
Mar 13:16 And let him that is in the field not turn back again for to take up his garment.
Mar 13:17 But woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
Mar 13:18 And pray ye that your flight be not in the winter.
Mar 13:19 For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.
Mar 13:20 And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.
Mar 13:21 And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; or, lo, he is there; believe him not:
Mar 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.
Mar 13:23 But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.
Great tribulation - the Jews persecuting the early church.
Mar 13:24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
Mar 13:25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
Mar 13:26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
Mar 13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.
After the AofD and the tribulation of those days, then comes the AD70 destruction.
So either Locutus is right and Jesus returned in AD 70 or verse 26 is talking about the resurrection of Christ and AD 70 isn't mentioned in Marks account.
^ How 'bout, before you label each section, deciding whether or not you agree that the following portions are PARALLEL:
--Matthew 24:4-8 "the beginning of birth pangs"
--Mark 13:5-8 "the beginning of birth pangs"
--AND Luke 21:8-11 [not LABELED as such, but DESCRIBING the very SAME beginning of birth pangs]
… then, once you decide if you can agree these are PARALLEL [events], then NOTE...
NOTE what the next verse (verse 12) says regarding the next section (vv.12-thru-whatever-verse)… and that "BEFORE" vv8-11 [BoBPs] can happen, the events covered in vv12[thru-whatever-verse] must take place...
[ONLY Luke 21:12-24a covers the events surrounding 70ad (only that section of the Olivet Discourse); with 24b following on from there]
--Matthew 24:4-8 "the beginning of birth pangs"
--Mark 13:5-8 "the beginning of birth pangs"
--AND Luke 21:8-11 [not LABELED as such, but DESCRIBING the very SAME beginning of birth pangs]
… then, once you decide if you can agree these are PARALLEL [events], then NOTE...
NOTE what the next verse (verse 12) says regarding the next section (vv.12-thru-whatever-verse)… and that "BEFORE" vv8-11 [BoBPs] can happen, the events covered in vv12[thru-whatever-verse] must take place...
[ONLY Luke 21:12-24a covers the events surrounding 70ad (only that section of the Olivet Discourse); with 24b following on from there]
-
1
- Show all
With the arrival of the printing press in the 15th century and the resulting explosion of Bibles accessible in the common language from Protestant sources, it became readily apparent to those who could now study the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation in particular, that Bible prophecy identified by symbols a persecuting apostate entity generally known as antichrist. If we list characteristics of antichrist, the following becomes readily apparent.
1.) It will rise to be a great power after the fall of the pagan Roman Empire (after 476 A.D.). See table.
2.) It will be a geographically small nation (a little horn).
3.) It would uproot three of the ten kingdoms the Roman Empire collapsed into.
4.) It will rule over many people, nations, and tongues (it will be universal).
5.) It will be headquartered in the city of seven hills, Rome.
6.) It will be a religio-political entity - a political city-state ruled by a priest-king.
7.) Its priest-king will make great and blasphemous claims.
8.) It will claim authority over all kings.
9.) It will claim its power to change the holy times and laws of God as its mark of authority.
10.) It will be an apostate church that makes the nations drink her cup of apostate doctrine.
11.) It will be a “mother” church, with apostate daughters coming from her.
12.) It will be a persecuting power, killing the faithful saints of Jesus Christ as heretics.
13.) It will hold power and authority for 1260 years following the fall of pagan Rome.
14.) It will suffer a deadly wound that will end 1260 years of dominance and persecution.
15.) It will be revived after the deadly wound, and all the world would wonder at its revival.
In this the “Historical” interpretation, the antichrist was clearly not merely a single individual, it was a system of apostasy and persecution that would hold control for over twelve centuries. The inevitable conclusion of those who studied these prophecies in scripture, before and during the Protestant Reformation, was that there was only one entity that fit all the above characteristics: the papal dynasty of the Roman Catholic Church. Is it any wonder that the Catholic Church was so violently opposed to the scriptures being available for everyone to read for themselves? There was such a stir created during the reformation that the Fifth Lateran Council (1512-17 A.D.) resorted to strictly forbidding anyone to publish a book without prior censorship, and also prohibited anyone from preaching on the subject of antichrist. The intent of both Futurism and Preterism was to be diversionary, to counter or offset the Protestant Historical interpretation, and present alternatives, no matter how implausible they might be.
The result is evident from the previous chart, which illustrates the three schools of interpretation regarding antichrist. Ribera's futurism puts the antichrist into a future three and one-half literal years. Alcazar's preterism identifies the antichrist as Nero. Both of them put antichrist outside the Middle Ages and the reformation period, identified by Protestant Historicists as antichrist's reign of 1260 prophetic years.
Now the truly amazing part of all this is that the Futurist theory dominates Protestant teaching today. About all you hear or read about today is the yet to appear antichrist, who will be unveiled in the last 3 1/2 years of Daniel's 70th week, when he declares himself to be God in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. That scenario, as you can now see, is directly traceable back to the pen of the Jesuit Francisco Ribera who manufactured this theory for the sole purpose of diverting attention from the papacy.
1.) It will rise to be a great power after the fall of the pagan Roman Empire (after 476 A.D.). See table.
2.) It will be a geographically small nation (a little horn).
3.) It would uproot three of the ten kingdoms the Roman Empire collapsed into.
4.) It will rule over many people, nations, and tongues (it will be universal).
5.) It will be headquartered in the city of seven hills, Rome.
6.) It will be a religio-political entity - a political city-state ruled by a priest-king.
7.) Its priest-king will make great and blasphemous claims.
8.) It will claim authority over all kings.
9.) It will claim its power to change the holy times and laws of God as its mark of authority.
10.) It will be an apostate church that makes the nations drink her cup of apostate doctrine.
11.) It will be a “mother” church, with apostate daughters coming from her.
12.) It will be a persecuting power, killing the faithful saints of Jesus Christ as heretics.
13.) It will hold power and authority for 1260 years following the fall of pagan Rome.
14.) It will suffer a deadly wound that will end 1260 years of dominance and persecution.
15.) It will be revived after the deadly wound, and all the world would wonder at its revival.
In this the “Historical” interpretation, the antichrist was clearly not merely a single individual, it was a system of apostasy and persecution that would hold control for over twelve centuries. The inevitable conclusion of those who studied these prophecies in scripture, before and during the Protestant Reformation, was that there was only one entity that fit all the above characteristics: the papal dynasty of the Roman Catholic Church. Is it any wonder that the Catholic Church was so violently opposed to the scriptures being available for everyone to read for themselves? There was such a stir created during the reformation that the Fifth Lateran Council (1512-17 A.D.) resorted to strictly forbidding anyone to publish a book without prior censorship, and also prohibited anyone from preaching on the subject of antichrist. The intent of both Futurism and Preterism was to be diversionary, to counter or offset the Protestant Historical interpretation, and present alternatives, no matter how implausible they might be.
Now the truly amazing part of all this is that the Futurist theory dominates Protestant teaching today. About all you hear or read about today is the yet to appear antichrist, who will be unveiled in the last 3 1/2 years of Daniel's 70th week, when he declares himself to be God in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. That scenario, as you can now see, is directly traceable back to the pen of the Jesuit Francisco Ribera who manufactured this theory for the sole purpose of diverting attention from the papacy.
Sorry the above post wasn't very brief.
Preterism- This is the belief that the apostle John wrote Revelation as a book containing a very brief view of history, describing events that would end by AD 70, with the destruction of Jerusalem. People who hold to this view believe John is describing the challenges of the early church in overcoming the Antichrist power of pagan Rome and the influence of Judaism.
Futurism- This is the belief that John wrote primarily about events that have yet to occur, even in our day. Including the future rise of the Antichrist. Futurism is the interpretation put forth by the popular Left Behind series and is supported by the majority of mainstream Protestant Christians. Interestingly, this theory was first put forth by a Roman Catholic Jesuit, Francisco Ribera in the late 1500's
Historicism- This is the belief that John was writing future history as it would unfold from his day to the end of time, detailing the events of the church and major world powers all the way through to the second coming of Christ. Interestingly, this is the view that most of the great Protestant reformers used in their teachings.
only one is right ....
Preterism- This is the belief that the apostle John wrote Revelation as a book containing a very brief view of history, describing events that would end by AD 70, with the destruction of Jerusalem. People who hold to this view believe John is describing the challenges of the early church in overcoming the Antichrist power of pagan Rome and the influence of Judaism.
Futurism- This is the belief that John wrote primarily about events that have yet to occur, even in our day. Including the future rise of the Antichrist. Futurism is the interpretation put forth by the popular Left Behind series and is supported by the majority of mainstream Protestant Christians. Interestingly, this theory was first put forth by a Roman Catholic Jesuit, Francisco Ribera in the late 1500's
Historicism- This is the belief that John was writing future history as it would unfold from his day to the end of time, detailing the events of the church and major world powers all the way through to the second coming of Christ. Interestingly, this is the view that most of the great Protestant reformers used in their teachings.
only one is right ....
With the arrival of the printing press in the 15th century and the resulting explosion of Bibles accessible in the common language from Protestant sources, it became readily apparent to those who could now study the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation in particular, that Bible prophecy identified by symbols a persecuting apostate entity generally known as antichrist. If we list characteristics of antichrist, the following becomes readily apparent.
1.) It will rise to be a great power after the fall of the pagan Roman Empire (after 476 A.D.). See table.
2.) It will be a geographically small nation (a little horn).
3.) It would uproot three of the ten kingdoms the Roman Empire collapsed into.
4.) It will rule over many people, nations, and tongues (it will be universal).
5.) It will be headquartered in the city of seven hills, Rome.
6.) It will be a religio-political entity - a political city-state ruled by a priest-king.
7.) Its priest-king will make great and blasphemous claims.
8.) It will claim authority over all kings.
9.) It will claim its power to change the holy times and laws of God as its mark of authority.
10.) It will be an apostate church that makes the nations drink her cup of apostate doctrine.
11.) It will be a “mother” church, with apostate daughters coming from her.
12.) It will be a persecuting power, killing the faithful saints of Jesus Christ as heretics.
13.) It will hold power and authority for 1260 years following the fall of pagan Rome.
14.) It will suffer a deadly wound that will end 1260 years of dominance and persecution.
15.) It will be revived after the deadly wound, and all the world would wonder at its revival.
In this the “Historical” interpretation, the antichrist was clearly not merely a single individual, it was a system of apostasy and persecution that would hold control for over twelve centuries. The inevitable conclusion of those who studied these prophecies in scripture, before and during the Protestant Reformation, was that there was only one entity that fit all the above characteristics: the papal dynasty of the Roman Catholic Church. Is it any wonder that the Catholic Church was so violently opposed to the scriptures being available for everyone to read for themselves? There was such a stir created during the reformation that the Fifth Lateran Council (1512-17 A.D.) resorted to strictly forbidding anyone to publish a book without prior censorship, and also prohibited anyone from preaching on the subject of antichrist. The intent of both Futurism and Preterism was to be diversionary, to counter or offset the Protestant Historical interpretation, and present alternatives, no matter how implausible they might be.
The result is evident from the previous chart, which illustrates the three schools of interpretation regarding antichrist. Ribera's futurism puts the antichrist into a future three and one-half literal years. Alcazar's preterism identifies the antichrist as Nero. Both of them put antichrist outside the Middle Ages and the reformation period, identified by Protestant Historicists as antichrist's reign of 1260 prophetic years.
Now the truly amazing part of all this is that the Futurist theory dominates Protestant teaching today. About all you hear or read about today is the yet to appear antichrist, who will be unveiled in the last 3 1/2 years of Daniel's 70th week, when he declares himself to be God in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. That scenario, as you can now see, is directly traceable back to the pen of the Jesuit Francisco Ribera who manufactured this theory for the sole purpose of diverting attention from the papacy.
1.) It will rise to be a great power after the fall of the pagan Roman Empire (after 476 A.D.). See table.
2.) It will be a geographically small nation (a little horn).
3.) It would uproot three of the ten kingdoms the Roman Empire collapsed into.
4.) It will rule over many people, nations, and tongues (it will be universal).
5.) It will be headquartered in the city of seven hills, Rome.
6.) It will be a religio-political entity - a political city-state ruled by a priest-king.
7.) Its priest-king will make great and blasphemous claims.
8.) It will claim authority over all kings.
9.) It will claim its power to change the holy times and laws of God as its mark of authority.
10.) It will be an apostate church that makes the nations drink her cup of apostate doctrine.
11.) It will be a “mother” church, with apostate daughters coming from her.
12.) It will be a persecuting power, killing the faithful saints of Jesus Christ as heretics.
13.) It will hold power and authority for 1260 years following the fall of pagan Rome.
14.) It will suffer a deadly wound that will end 1260 years of dominance and persecution.
15.) It will be revived after the deadly wound, and all the world would wonder at its revival.
In this the “Historical” interpretation, the antichrist was clearly not merely a single individual, it was a system of apostasy and persecution that would hold control for over twelve centuries. The inevitable conclusion of those who studied these prophecies in scripture, before and during the Protestant Reformation, was that there was only one entity that fit all the above characteristics: the papal dynasty of the Roman Catholic Church. Is it any wonder that the Catholic Church was so violently opposed to the scriptures being available for everyone to read for themselves? There was such a stir created during the reformation that the Fifth Lateran Council (1512-17 A.D.) resorted to strictly forbidding anyone to publish a book without prior censorship, and also prohibited anyone from preaching on the subject of antichrist. The intent of both Futurism and Preterism was to be diversionary, to counter or offset the Protestant Historical interpretation, and present alternatives, no matter how implausible they might be.
Now the truly amazing part of all this is that the Futurist theory dominates Protestant teaching today. About all you hear or read about today is the yet to appear antichrist, who will be unveiled in the last 3 1/2 years of Daniel's 70th week, when he declares himself to be God in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. That scenario, as you can now see, is directly traceable back to the pen of the Jesuit Francisco Ribera who manufactured this theory for the sole purpose of diverting attention from the papacy.
The required parameters are met.....today. But not much before.
Historicism is the only logical veiw. Daniel chapter 2 reveals empires from Babylon through to the second coming of Jesus. Revelation reveals events in the early church through to the second coming.
Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and Spurgeon all held to the historicism view, how could we or anyone come to any logical conclusion with the identity of the beasts and the whore without any historical evidence to back up the descriptions found in Daniel and Revelation?
Prophesy isn't for us to tell the future but so that we can see that God is in control and that God holds all thing in His hands.
Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and Spurgeon all held to the historicism view, how could we or anyone come to any logical conclusion with the identity of the beasts and the whore without any historical evidence to back up the descriptions found in Daniel and Revelation?
Prophesy isn't for us to tell the future but so that we can see that God is in control and that God holds all thing in His hands.
Yes I agree all of these are parallel, same story - birth pangs.
I don't agree with this. Everything prior to verse 20 happened prior to AD70. After the birth pangs and great tribulation happen, the next sign is Jerusalem surrounded with armies in AD70. When they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies then they would know the DESOLATION was NIGH, coming soon but not yet happened.
Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
I don't agree with this. Everything prior to verse 20 happened prior to AD70. After the birth pangs and great tribulation happen, the next sign is Jerusalem surrounded with armies in AD70. When they saw Jerusalem surrounded by armies then they would know the DESOLATION was NIGH, coming soon but not yet happened.
Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
Historicism doesn't say that prophesy is all in history, i believe that much of revelation is yet to be fulfilled.
Many prophesies are happening today around us. If prophesy has happened i look at history to see if it fits or i look at history and if the evidence fits the signs i know that the prophesy has happened at that time.
For example = study the life of Jesus and it perfectly fits the prophesies given throughout the old testament, so i know that Jesus was the messiah prophesied of old.
Many prophesies are happening today around us. If prophesy has happened i look at history to see if it fits or i look at history and if the evidence fits the signs i know that the prophesy has happened at that time.
For example = study the life of Jesus and it perfectly fits the prophesies given throughout the old testament, so i know that Jesus was the messiah prophesied of old.
-
1
- Show all