The Prophetic Timeline: Why Jesuit Futurists/Jesuit Preterists Ignore It

[Earburner]

Yes

That's popular Dispensational nonsense used to explain (incorrectly) the difference between the operation of the Holy Spirit in the OT and NT, friend. There's several examples of OT figures indwelt by the Holy Spirit without any single indication it was temporary. Did King David pray, "prevent not Thy Holy Spirit from returning to me" or did he pray, "take not Thy Holy Spirit from me"?

So, what was the operational difference?

The partial impartation of the Holy Spirit in the OT was limited to the "fruits of the Holy Spirit" while the full impartation of the NT was complete with "gifts of the Holy Spirit".

That's it? What about Godly love and obedience? Have you read Isaiah 1:18 KJV or Leviticus 19:17 KJV? These are "fruits" of the Holy Spirit available since time immemorial to all, from Adam to the last sinner.

Sadly, most think Revelation stops unfolding at the end of chapter 3 and doesn't resume unfolding until after the so called "secret rapture" and the beginning of the "last 7 years of trib" - textbook Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism co-mingled with Darby's Dispensationalist ideas which were unknown to the Protestant Reformers who knew their Bibles and knew full well the papacy is the Antichrist.

You don't understand HOW or WHY we must be made to be holy, BEFORE the Holy Spirit can take up Permanent residence within us.
It's all about the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
The blood of animals CANNOT REMOVE our sins, but His blood DOES, through faith!!
God cannot Live within that which is sinful.
Only by our faith in His shed blood are we made holy before God.

 

[Earburner]

Yes

That's popular Dispensational nonsense used to explain (incorrectly) the difference between the operation of the Holy Spirit in the OT and NT, friend. There's several examples of OT figures indwelt by the Holy Spirit without any single indication it was temporary. Did King David pray, "prevent not Thy Holy Spirit from returning to me" or did he pray, "take not Thy Holy Spirit from me"?

So, what was the operational difference?

The partial impartation of the Holy Spirit in the OT was limited to the "fruits of the Holy Spirit" while the full impartation of the NT was complete with "gifts of the Holy Spirit".

That's it? What about Godly love and obedience? Have you read Isaiah 1:18 KJV or Leviticus 19:17 KJV? These are "fruits" of the Holy Spirit available since time immemorial to all, from Adam to the last sinner.

Sadly, most think Revelation stops unfolding at the end of chapter 3 and doesn't resume unfolding until after the so called "secret rapture" and the beginning of the "last 7 years of trib" - textbook Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism co-mingled with Darby's Dispensationalist ideas which were unknown to the Protestant Reformers who knew their Bibles and knew full well the papacy is the Antichrist.

What Antichrist?? There is no singular, one man band, miracle man to come, but there are many antichrists in every generation, since Jesus Ascended.
No, it's not the Papacy, but rather it is Israel who "is fallen", and is "the mother of harlots".

 

[Phoneman777]

You are still stuck in your religious indoctrination of pre-concieved thoughts.

Adam was full of living cells that God created within him, waiting for Oxygenated air, to remain alive. Within seconds, God breathed Oxgenated air into him, and then Adam's brain became fully conscious as an autonomous "living soul".

You, like many others, seem to employ a vivid imagination to explain away plainly stated truth. Genesis 2:7 KJV will always teach that the Soul comes into existence as a consequence of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life - to say the Soul continues to exist after the disunion of the two makes no sense.

Isn't it easier to just believe God instead of the Serpent who says the same thing the Immortal Soul crowd says - "thou shalt not surely die"? Why's the Immortal Soul crowd scared to death visit a graveyard at midnight? Y'all know them folk are dead!

(but not surely, right?)

 

[Phoneman777]

It's NOT ABOUT only the people of the Flood, but rather all people UPTO and AFTER the Flood of Noah, then Abraham to Malachi!!
With God and all people, there is only the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.
Gen. 4
[3] And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.
[4] And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
[5] But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.
[6] And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
[7] If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
[8] And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

[9] And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?
[10] And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's [innocent] blood crieth unto me from the ground [for vengeance].
"The shedding of innocent blood, is an abomination unto the LORD". Prov. 6:16-17 (specifically the blood of Jesus).

It is apparent that we all do not fully understand the value that God places upon blood.
We can see that Cain surely DID NOT.

It is also apparent that by Able's offering, he understood what the LORD required for an offering FOR SIN, of which he would have been informed and instructed by Adam, on what the correct offering was towards God.

Was there a break down in communication with Cain, or was it that Cain, being self willed in the matter, thought that ANY OFFERING, was a sufficient offering unto the LORD, to gain temporary atonement for sin?
With Cain, I perceive the latter.

1 Peter 3
[18] For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for [ALL] the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
[19] By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison [of eternal death];
[20] Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
Malachi 3:16; Rev. 6:9-11.

The number of 144,000 is not a number to count, but rather in it's formulation, it is a symbolic number of completion, of everyone that God "Remembered", who lived and died in faith, under the altar of the OC.

It's about the Antediluvians, and 1 Peter 3:19-20 says so:

[19] By which also He (the Spirit of Jesus) went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
[20] Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

Understand? Peter's talking about that 120 years of God's spirit "striving" with man via the Spirit of Jesus.

 

[Phoneman777]

It's not difficult at all to see that the Revelation associates the ten kings with the beast that had existed before John received the Revelation (i.e before the days of the Roman empire), but no longer existed by the time John received the Revelation.​

What follows the Greek belly/thighs of brass? Roman legs.
What follows the Greek four headed leopard? Roman beast with "iron" teeth.

But the Greek he-goat is followed by a "Greek Little Horn" which doesn't even begin to compare to Rome?

The Little Horn is "exceeding great" which qualifies only Rome.

Revelation 17:8 & 11-14 states that those ten kings will reign with that same beast that had existed but no longer existed by the time of the days of the Roman Empire, when that beast has ascended from the abyss.

Did not the barbarian tribes reign with the papal beast? Yes, with the papal beast over all of them. The beast from the abyss comes later.

Therefore, if the ten toes of the feet of the image in Nebuchadnezzar's dream are the same as the ten kings of Revelation 13 and 17, then the two legs of iron in Nebuchadnezzar's dream (Daniel chapter 2) cannot possibly be referring to the Roman Empire​

The First Beast of Revelation 13 is a composite of all the beasts of Daniel 7 so that anyone not seduced by Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism cannot miss it.

Yes, the Ten may be a "dual prophecy" which also refers to the planned "ten global divisions" authored by the "Club of Rome" - but definitely to the ten barbarian nations...because the kingdoms follow each other in succession without "gaps" between the fall of the one and the rise of the next.

- but they can however be a reference to the divided, partly strong and partly weak Greek kingdoms of the North and of the South which became the two most powerful of the four kingdoms that succeeded the 3rd 'beast' of Daniel's prophecy:

The Seleucid kingdom of (the kings of the North in Daniel's prophecies); and the Ptolemaic Egyptian kingdom (the kings of the South in Daniel's prophecies).​

How many times must I point out that Antiochus arose way to early to be the Little Horn that arises "at the latter time of their kingdom"?

...that Antiochus didn't take away the daily for 2300 or 1150 days?

...that the male pronoun "them" can't refer to the female noun "horn" - only to the male "winds"?

Care to comment?

Revelation 13:2 describes this beast, once it has ascended from the abyss, as being like a leopard, its feet being like those of a bear, and its mouth being like the mouth of a lion - the very symbols used for the Greek Empire, the Persian Empire that preceded it, and the Babylonian Empire which preceded the Persian Empire.​

The beast of Revelation 13 and 17 are two different beasts, with the bottomless pit beast referring to secular powers controlled by secret societies which in turn are controlled by the papacy. Hillary Clinton told all of us how happy she was the secret society Council on Foreign Relations opened up an office on the Eastern seaboard, saying, "Now we don't have to travel so far to get our marching orders."

Matthew Henry's Bible Commentary does a good job of showing the correlation between the history of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the text of Daniel. You would do well to read his commentaries on Daniel, and then checking the history in non-biblical sources, instead of showing your ignorance of historical facts.​

What ignorance? While I respect Henry's work, he doesn't explain how Antiochus suspended the daily for 2300 or 1150 days, doesn't explain how the male pronoun "them" can point to the female "horns", doesn't explain how the early ascension of Antiochus doesn't disqualify him as the Little Horn which arises "at the latter end of their kingdom".

The traditional applying of the legs of iron to Rome is over 100 years too early for the Roman Empire. Those legs of iron represents two of the four kingdoms that came out of Daniel's 3rd beast (Daniel 7) of which Egypt and Seleucia became the most powerful.​

Greece was conquered by Rome, as everyone knows. Yours is the only ignorance of history on display.

The feet of iron and clay represent the same kingdoms - the lion, the leopard and the bear - mentioned in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13:2 - it is this kingdom that John was told no longer existed by 100 A.D, and that John was told would ascend once again from the abyss.

It has nothing to do with Rome or the Roman Empire. The reason why Revelation 13:2 has the 3 kingdoms mentioned by Daniel in reverse order is because the final kingdom is the mirror image of the first three - Greece (the leopard) having been last (the kingdom that had existed but no longer existed by the time John received the Revelation), and before that, Persia (the bear), and before that, Babylon (the lion).

When it ascends again out of the abyss, the feet of iron and clay and the ten kings will come out of that empire which no longer existed in the days of the Roman Empire and John receiving the Revelation.

It's not difficult at all to see that your eschatology is mistaken and based either on ignorance of historical facts (or ignoring historical facts so as to attempt to force scripture to comply with a pre-decided eschatological outcome).

Atiochus IV Epiphanes indeed did continue his tyranny of the Jews of Jerusalem for 2300 Days and take away the daily sacrifices. He did indeed "speak great words" aka "blasphemies" by placing an idol to Zeus in the holy place of the 2nd temple and claiming to be Zeus and accepting the sacrifices he forced the Jews to make to Zeus as sacrifices made to himself. His persecutions of God's people did indeed "wear out the saints" - the Maccabees and their followers had to flee into exile to plan against him.

He did indeed "think to changes the times and laws".

He is indeed a type of the final Antichrist.

Your ignorance of historical facts is showing in the assertions you make.

Talk about "changing set times and laws" - instead of ackowleding historical facts and biblical facts, you have shown in this thread how determined you are to change facts in order to try to force them to comply with your own pre-decided theological and eschatological outcomes. Which is very much the same basic reasons for an Antichrist figure (Antiochus IV Epiphanes) or any coming Antichrist wanting to change set times and laws.

The ten kings of the beast are not the harlot they are going to destroy. The scriptures do not conflate the beast and the harlot the way you do in your theology.​

If you stick with the Daniel 2 template, you'll stay on track: Babylon, MP, Greece, Rome, Ten barbarian nations (and finally the papal "Little Horn" among them in Daniel 7 and 8).

 

[Phoneman777]

You don't understand HOW or WHY we must be made to be holy, BEFORE the Holy Spirit can take up Permanent residence within us.
It's all about the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
The blood of animals CANNOT REMOVE our sins, but His DOES, through faith!!
God cannot Live within that which is sinful.

Those in the OT were made holy and recieved the Holy Spirit while looking forward to the Cross - we are made holy and recieve the Holy Spirit while looking back to the Cross...we're all saved by grace through faith in the Cross of Jesus.

 

[Phoneman777]

What Antichrist?? There is no singular, one man band, miracle man to come, but there are many antichrists in every generation, since Jesus Ascended.
No, it's not the Papacy, but rather it is Israel who "is fallen", and is "the mother of harlots".

Yes, there are many "antichrists" - men who claim to "take the place of God" and claim the power to "forgive sin" and who "deny that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh" - refers to the papacy who everyone knows is guilty of the first two, and is guilty of number 3 via the "Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception".

 

[Earburner]

You, like many others, seem to employ a vivid imagination to explain away plainly stated truth. Genesis 2:7 KJV will always teach that the Soul comes into existence as a consequence of the union of the Body and the Breath of Life - to say the Soul continues to exist after the disunion of the two makes no sense.

Isn't it easier to just believe God instead of the Serpent who says the same thing the Immortal Soul crowd says - "thou shalt not surely die"? Why's the Immortal Soul crowd scared to death visit a graveyard at midnight? Y'all know them folk are dead!

(but not surely, right?)

I KNOW that DO YOU KNOW that what I have said is absolutely TRUE, but your indoctrination keeps you from admitting that it is TRUE!!
I said in POST #323: "Adam was full of living cells that God created within him, waiting for Oxygenated air, to remain alive. Within seconds, God breathed Oxgenated air into him, and then Adam's brain became fully conscious as an autonomous "living soul".

Now, where in what I said derailed you into you thinking that I said that man was given an "Eternal Soul"??
It's NOT there at all!! Because you KNOW that don't believe that!!

But, so that you can protect your status, in your Religion, with a foolish pre-concieved lieing doctrine, your intention is to show me to be the fool.
GOD did NOT create DEAD cells in the body of Adam!!!
Your concept is just as foul, as those who DO believe in an "Eternal Soul".
You are in denial of the truth that I have shown!

Those in the OT were made holy and recieved the Holy Spirit while looking forward to the Cross - we are made holy and recieve the Holy Spirit while looking back to the Cross...we're all saved by grace through faith in the Cross of Jesus.

Absolutely FALSE!! Sorry, you don't understand WHY the shedding of Christ's Blood was necessary to make one holy for the permanent indwelling of God's Holy Spirit.
The death and Resurrection of Christ was for God the Father, just as much as it was FOR US. Without His shed blood, there would never be the NEW covenant [contract] between us and God the Father.

 

[Earburner]

Yes, there are many "antichrists" - men who claim to "take the place of God" and claim the power to "forgive sin" and who "deny that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh" - refers to the papacy who everyone knows is guilty of the first two, and is guilty of number 3 via the "Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception".

All denominational religions and their doctrines lead people to believe by "the wisdom of men". It's knowing the difference of when one is taught by the power/authority of God's Holy Spirit from within. 1 Cor. 2:5.

 

[Earburner]

Those in the OT were made holy and recieved the Holy Spirit while looking forward to the Cross -

No! God could ONLY VISIT upon them through the sacrificial service of animals on a yearly basis. You KNOW this, it's part of your belief system in the understanding of Passover.

Therefore, even though they had the TEMPORARY forgiveness of sin through the blood of animals, their sins could NEVER be removed. For that cause alone, they never could receive or HAVE the literal Gift of Eternal Life, by which could only happen through the Holy Spirit permanently dwelling within them. He is Himself the vehicle of delivery for the Free Gift of Eternal Life. John 1:26-29; 1 John 5:12-23.
The book of Revelation should never be read or understood as being all things future!!

That is what Rev. 6:9-11 is all about. The symbolic white robes is the permanent giving of the Holy Spirit to each one under the altar of the OC., who had died in faith of "the Promise to come", who was Jesus, the Messiah/Savior.

Immediately after Jesus' mortal death, is when they of the OC received the Holy Spirit of God, the Gift of Eternal Life. I gave those words about the Centurion in KJV Mat. 27:50-54. View it again, and you will understand WHEN** it was that many (not all) of those who had been dead, came out of their graves.

**Note: the hill of "Golgotha" was only a few hundred feet from the view of the veil of the temple.

we are made holy and recieve the Holy Spirit while looking back to the Cross...we're all saved by grace through faith in the Cross of Jesus.

Correct! But for those under the altar of the OC, the permanency of the indwelling Gift of the Holy Spirit did not take place for any of them, until AFTER Jesus' mortal death and resurrection.
You KNOW these things, now start believing it!!
John 11[26] And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

By the way, now you can know who the symbolic 144,000 of Israel WERE.

 

[Zao is life]

What follows the Greek belly/thighs of brass? Roman legs.

Historically incorrect.

The ten toes of the feet of the image are the same as the ten kings of the Revelation who will war with the Lamb - the ten kings who will rule for one hour with the beast that will ascend from the abyss - the same beast that existed before the days John received the Revelation but no longer existed, i.e before the Roman Empire.

Ever noticed in your zeal to misapply history that the legs of iron come before the ten kings, who had received no kingdom as yet when John received the Revelation (during the days of the Roman Empire)?

JOHN told you that those ten kings will rule WITH the beast that is going to ascend from the abyss - the beast that existed before the Roman Empire - and those ten kings will go to war against the Lamb and be defeated by Him - the great mountain cut out without human hands that will strike the feet of the image (Daniel chapter 2 that you keep misinterpreting - the ten kings).

That's why your interpretation is so full of error - because you deny history, and deny what JOHN told us. You have the Roman Empire existing before the Roman Empire and ceasing to exist before it existed. It's absolutely ridiculous.​

What follows the Greek four headed leopard? Roman beast with "iron" teeth.

Historically incorrect yet again (and therefore, false). The FOUR Greek kingdoms that had existed before John received the Revelation, i.e before the days of the Roman Empire, followed the 3rd kingdom - the Greek kingdom of Alexander the Great. The ten kings of the Revelation, which are the same as the ten toes of the feet of the image in Daniel chapter 2, had received no kingdom yet, and still have received no kingdom yet. How can the beast that existed before Rome be Rome?

1+1=2, not 5. Your arithmetic needs brushing up because according to your eschatological theories 1+1= 5 (but you will first have to free your mind from your enslavement to the denominational false doctrine and false eschatology that you believe in).

Daniel 8:20-25
"The ram which you saw having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the shaggy goat is the king of Greece. And the great horn between his eyes is the first king. And as for that being broken, and four stood up in its place; four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in its power. And in the latter time of THEIR kingdom, .."

It does not say in the latter days of a Roman Empire. THEIR kingdom = the latter days of the four Greek kingdoms that succeeded the one Greek kingdom of Alexander the Great.

Daniel chapters 7, 8 and 11 are all applying the little horn to the king that came up in the latter days of the four Greek kingdoms that succeeded the one Greek Empire of Alexander the Great - the beast that had existed when John received the Revelation during the days of the Roman Empire but no longer existed at the time the Roman Empire existed - but will ascend again from the abyss. It's not the Roman Empire and it had noting to do with the Roman Empire.

Anyone can see how you change the Bible and the history, and then invent your own eschatology!!

"In the latter time of THEIR kingdom, when the transgressors have come to the full, a king, fierce of face, and skilled at intrigues, shall stand up. And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power."

The above is another reference to a "little horn" coming up among ten Greek horns - the little horn that came up from out of of the Seleucid kingdom and seized the throne illegitimately, having had three of the rightful heirs to the throne murdered.​

But the Greek he-goat is followed by a "Greek Little Horn"

That's right. Alexander the Great was followed by the four Greek kingdoms and the little horn is one that rose out of one of the four Greek kingdoms (Antiochus IV Epiphanes - the Macedonian Greek king of Seleucia) - that little horn, historically, is part of the beast (the Greek kingdoms) that existed before the days of the Roman Empire, according to Revelation 17:8.

But you obviously don't believe Revelation 17:8, or Daniel, because if you did you would not apply things that apply to the five kingdoms that came before the Roman Empire according to Revelation 17:8, to the Roman Empire.​

which doesn't even begin to compare to Rome?

Of course not. It has nothing to do with Rome. Your mind is enslaved to this obsession with Rome, and the Popes. That's why your eschatology is so confused - because it's based on a lot of falsehood.

You obviously don't believe Revelation 17:8 & 11-14. Nor do you believe Revelation 17:10 when it tells you that five of the seven kingdoms had already fallen by the time of the days of the Roman Empire - which makes it obvious that the ten toes of the feet of the image of Daniel chapter 2 are the same as the ten kings of the Revelation who will war with the Lamb - the ten kings who will rule for one hour with the beast that will ascend from the abyss.

That beast that will ascend from the abyss are the same five kingdoms of the beast that existed before the days John received the Revelation but no longer existed, i.e before the Roman Empire - identified in Revelation 13:2 with the symbols of leopard, bear and lion - the kingdoms of Babyon, Persia and Greece, including the four kingdoms and the "little horn" - all of which existed before the Roman Empire.

Ever noticed in your zeal to misapply history that the legs of iron come before the ten kings, who had received no kingdom as yet when John received the Revelation (during the days of the Roman Empire)?

JOHN told you that those ten kings will rule WITH the beast that is going to ascend from the abyss - the beast that existed before the Roman Empire - and those ten kings will go to war against the Lamb and be defeated by Him - the great mountain in Daniel chapter 2 that was cut out without human hands that will strike the feet of the image, of which the ten toes represent ten kings.​

The Little Horn is "exceeding great" which qualifies only Rome.

Rome is disqualified by Revelation 17:8 and by the fact that the little horn was a Greek horn which had already existed but no longer existed by the time of the Roman Empire, and by the fact that the ten kings did not exist yet - those ten kings who will make war against the Lamb and hand all their power and authority over to the same beast that existed before the days of the Roman Empire, when it ascends from out of the abyss, .

Your obsession with Rome has blinded you, together with the denominational false doctrine and eschatology that your mind has become enslaved by:​

Did not the barbarian tribes reign with the papal beast? Yes, with the papal beast over all of them. The beast from the abyss comes later.

The First Beast of Revelation 13 is a composite of all the beasts of Daniel 7 so that anyone not seduced by Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism cannot miss it.

etc etc etc. Total nonsense.

Your interpretation of "the Daniel chapter 2 template" that you stick to, is in error, so you have chosen to stick to false doctrines, and yourself and others who have made up your denominational eschatology have blinded one another with the things you have made up - things which are historically and biblically inaccurate, and therefore, false.

In your eschatology you have the Roman Empire existing before the Roman Empire existed. And you can't see how totally illogical it is.

PS: The Revelation does not say that the harlot IS (the same as) the beast. You conflate the two a whole lot in your made up eschatology. The harlot will be destroyed by the beast that she prostituted herself to - which is all seven heads of the beast - meaning all of Abraham's seed who compromised their faith in Christ for the sake of favors from the political authorities of this world. The Vatican is just one of the manifestations of the harlot.

The seven-heads of the beast represent seven kingdoms. Five had fallen by the time John received the Revelation. One existed (the Roman Empire), and the seventh had not yet come. When it comes, it must continue a short time. Likewise, the beast John saw the harlot seated on existed before John received the Revelation (so no longer existed) but it will ascend from the bottomless pit and go to perdition. Likewise, the ten kings will hate the harlot, and will eat her flesh and burn her with fire, rendering her desolate and naked.

"I counsel you to buy from Me gold tried in the fire, so that you may be rich; and white clothing, so that you may be clothed, and so that the shame of your nakedness does not appear.

Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is the one who watches and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame." -- Revelation 3:18 & 16:15.

Maybe some Catholics will remain faithful and not be found naked. Maybe some non-Catholics will be found naked.

You do not understand what you are talking about.​

 

[Earburner]

Yes, there are many "antichrists" - men who claim to "take the place of God" and claim the power to "forgive sin" and who "deny that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh" - refers to the papacy who everyone knows is guilty of the first two, and is guilty of number 3 via the "Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception".

The concept to believe that Jesus came to us in the flesh, is to understand and KNOW that Jesus has always been Eternally alive in Holy Spirit WITH the Father.

"That spirit of Antichrist" STATES that Jesus, in the flesh, was never Eternally Alive  BEFORE His virgin birth.
Both Orthodox and Zionist ISRAEL believe exactly that, whereas the Papacy and the RCC does NOT. They know full well that Jesus is "the Lamb OF God, who taketh away [removes] the sin of the world".


Antiochus Epiphanes lV was the ONLY "little horn" that was to come. There shall not be another!!

 

[Earburner]

Historically incorrect.

The ten toes of the feet of the image are the same as the ten kings of the Revelation who will war with the Lamb - the ten kings who will rule for one hour with the beast that will ascend from the abyss - the same beast that existed before the days John received the Revelation but no longer existed, i.e before the Roman Empire.

Ever noticed in your zeal to misapply history that the legs of iron come before the ten kings, who had received no kingdom as yet when John received the Revelation (during the days of the Roman Empire)?

JOHN told you that those ten kings will rule WITH the beast that is going to ascend from the abyss - the beast that existed before the Roman Empire - and those ten kings will go to war against the Lamb and be defeated by Him - the great mountain cut out without human hands that will strike the feet of the image (Daniel chapter 2 that you keep misinterpreting - the ten kings).

That's why your interpretation is so full of error - because you deny history, and deny what JOHN told us. You have the Roman Empire existing before the Roman Empire and ceasing to exist before it existed. It's absolutely ridiculous.

Historically incorrect yet again (and therefore, false). The FOUR Greek kingdoms that had existed before John received the Revelation, i.e before the days of the Roman Empire, followed the 3rd kingdom - the Greek kingdom of Alexander the Great. The ten kings of the Revelation, which are the same as the ten toes of the feet of the image in Daniel chapter 2, had received no kingdom yet, and still have received no kingdom yet. How can the beast that existed before Rome be Rome?

1+1=2, not 5. Your arithmetic needs brushing up because according to your eschatological theories 1+1= 5 (but you will first have to free your mind from your enslavement to the denominational false doctrine and false eschatology that you believe in).

Daniel 8:20-25
"The ram which you saw having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the shaggy goat is the king of Greece. And the great horn between his eyes is the first king. And as for that being broken, and four stood up in its place; four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in its power. And in the latter time of THEIR kingdom, .."

It does not say in the latter days of a Roman Empire. THEIR kingdom = the latter days of the four Greek kingdoms that succeeded the one Greek kingdom of Alexander the Great.

Daniel chapters 7, 8 and 11 are all applying the little horn to the king that came up in the latter days of the four Greek kingdoms that succeeded the one Greek Empire of Alexander the Great - the beast that had existed when John received the Revelation during the days of the Roman Empire but no longer existed at the time the Roman Empire existed - but will ascend again from the abyss. It's not the Roman Empire and it had noting to do with the Roman Empire.

Anyone can see how you change the Bible and the history, and then invent your own eschatology!!

"In the latter time of THEIR kingdom, when the transgressors have come to the full, a king, fierce of face, and skilled at intrigues, shall stand up. And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power."

The above is another reference to a "little horn" coming up among ten Greek horns - the little horn that came up from out of of the Seleucid kingdom and seized the throne illegitimately, having had three of the rightful heirs to the throne murdered.

That's right. Alexander the Great was followed by the four Greek kingdoms and the little horn is one that rose out of one of the four Greek kingdoms (Antiochus IV Epiphanes - the Macedonian Greek king of Seleucia) - that little horn, historically, is part of the beast (the Greek kingdoms) that existed before the days of the Roman Empire, according to Revelation 17:8.

But you obviously don't believe Revelation 17:8, or Daniel, because if you did you would not apply things that apply to the five kingdoms that came before the Roman Empire according to Revelation 17:8, to the Roman Empire.

Of course not. It has nothing to do with Rome. Your mind is enslaved to this obsession with Rome, and the Popes. That's why your eschatology is so confused - because it's based on a lot of falsehood.

You obviously don't believe Revelation 17:8 & 11-14. Nor do you believe Revelation 17:10 when it tells you that five of the seven kingdoms had already fallen by the time of the days of the Roman Empire - which makes it obvious that the ten toes of the feet of the image of Daniel chapter 2 are the same as the ten kings of the Revelation who will war with the Lamb - the ten kings who will rule for one hour with the beast that will ascend from the abyss.

That beast that will ascend from the abyss are the same five kingdoms of the beast that existed before the days John received the Revelation but no longer existed, i.e before the Roman Empire - identified in Revelation 13:2 with the symbols of leopard, bear and lion - the kingdoms of Babyon, Persia and Greece, including the four kingdoms and the "little horn" - all of which existed before the Roman Empire.

Ever noticed in your zeal to misapply history that the legs of iron come before the ten kings, who had received no kingdom as yet when John received the Revelation (during the days of the Roman Empire)?

JOHN told you that those ten kings will rule WITH the beast that is going to ascend from the abyss - the beast that existed before the Roman Empire - and those ten kings will go to war against the Lamb and be defeated by Him - the great mountain in Daniel chapter 2 that was cut out without human hands that will strike the feet of the image, of which the ten toes represent ten kings.

Rome is disqualified by Revelation 17:8 and by the fact that the little horn was a Greek horn which had already existed but no longer existed by the time of the Roman Empire, and by the fact that the ten kings did not exist yet - those ten kings who will make war against the Lamb and hand all their power and authority over to the same beast that existed before the days of the Roman Empire, when it ascends from out of the abyss, .

Your obsession with Rome has blinded you, together with the denominational false doctrine and eschatology that your mind has become enslaved by:

etc etc etc. Total nonsense.

Your interpretation of "the Daniel chapter 2 template" that you stick to, is in error, so you have chosen to stick to false doctrines, and yourself and others who have made up your denominational eschatology have blinded one another with the things you have made up - things which are historically and biblically inaccurate, and therefore, false.

In your eschatology you have the Roman Empire existing before the Roman Empire existed. And you can't see how totally illogical it is.

PS: The Revelation does not say that the harlot IS (the same as) the beast. You conflate the two a whole lot in your made up eschatology. The harlot will be destroyed by the beast that she prostituted herself to - which is all seven heads of the beast - meaning all of Abraham's seed who compromised their faith in Christ for the sake of favors from the political authorities of this world. The Vatican is just one of the manifestations of the harlot.

The seven-heads of the beast represent seven kingdoms. Five had fallen by the time John received the Revelation. One existed (the Roman Empire), and the seventh had not yet come. When it comes, it must continue a short time. Likewise, the beast John saw the harlot seated on existed before John received the Revelation (so no longer existed) but it will ascend from the bottomless pit and go to perdition. Likewise, the ten kings will hate the harlot, and will eat her flesh and burn her with fire, rendering her desolate and naked.

"I counsel you to buy from Me gold tried in the fire, so that you may be rich; and white clothing, so that you may be clothed, and so that the shame of your nakedness does not appear.

Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is the one who watches and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame." -- Revelation 3:18 & 16:15.

Maybe some Catholics will remain faithful and not be found naked. Maybe some non-Catholics will be found naked.

You do not understand what you are talking about.​

You are partly right and partly wrong!!
The Roman Papacy is only a denominational Religion of "church-ianity".
As with all the Christian Denominations, "ALL of the churches have SOME of the Lord's Truth, but NONE of the churches have ALL of His Truth"- Earburner.

The 10 horns, though prophesied long ago, in 525+/-BC., shall not be fulfilled until the time period of the issuance of the "MoB".

You quoted:
"And in the latter time of THEIR kingdom, .."

The kingdoms of the "four heads" was of the Grecian Empire- the 3rd Beast, which came to an END in 146 BC. and was usurped and replaced by the 4th Beast, the Roman Republic, of which became the Roman Empire in 27 BC.
Please see my post #332.

 

[Zao is life]

You are partly right and partly wrong!!
The Roman Papacy is only a denominational Religion of "church-ianity".
As with all the Christian Denominations, "ALL of the churches have SOME of the Lord's Truth, but NONE of the churches have ALL of His Truth"- Earburner.

The 10 horns, though prophesied long ago, in 525+/-BC., shall not be fulfilled until the time period of the issuance of the "MoB".

You quoted:
"And in the latter time of THEIR kingdom, .."

The kingdoms of the "four heads" was of the Grecian Empire- the 3rd Beast, which came to an END in 146 BC. and was usurped and replaced by the 4th Beast, the Roman Republic, of which became the Roman Empire in 27 BC.
Please see my post #332.

The 4th beast was not the Roman Republic. Your statement is historically inaccurate. Not factual.

Your insistence that the 4th beast was Rome or had anything to do with Rome is born out of a desire to cause history and scripture to comply with your made-up eschatology and the theology it is based upon.

The Roman Empire of circa 95 / 96 A.D (the approximate date John wrote the Revelation) was not the kingdom or empire "that was, and is not" (Revelation 17:8) (the kingdom that had existed, but no longer existed when John received the Revelation).
​

In other words, "the beast that will ascend from out of the abyss" existed before the Roman Empire (Revelation 17:8 & 11). The book of Daniel states that the 4th beast was a king who rose in the latter days of the Greek kingdom - the latter days of the four kingdoms that succeeded the Greek kingdom of Alexander the Great. It existed before the days of the Roman Empire, and will ascend again from the abyss.

 

[Earburner]

The 4th beast was not the Roman Republic. Your statement is historically inaccurate. Not factual.​

Dan. 7
[6] After this I beheld, and lo another [3rd Beast], like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the [3rd] beast had also four heads [right after Alex the Great]; and dominion was given to it.
[7] After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast [which began as the Roman Republic, founded by Romulus in 753+/- BC], 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 [previous three] beasts that were before it; and it [the 4th beast] had ten horns**.

Romulus - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Your insistence that the 4th beast was Rome or had anything to do with Rome is born out of a desire to cause history and scripture to comply with your made-up eschatology and the theology it is based upon.​

It most surely was the Roman Empire that sent John to Patmos. You have lost the plot of your Eschatological line up. Did you forget that the young AE-lV [of the 3rd beast] was held as a hostage in Rome, because of His father? AE-lV died in 149 BC.

The Roman Empire of circa 95 / 96 A.D (the approximate date John wrote the Revelation) was not the kingdom or empire "that was, and is not" (Revelation 17:8) (the kingdom that had existed, but no longer existed when John received the Revelation).​

You misunderstand God's meaning of time, about "that was, and is not..."and, > "yet is", which is meaning that through time, the 4th beast will not be clearly seen but shall be continually EVOLVING INTO it's final and last form, and will be KNOWN WHEN the "mark of the beast", will be manifested. **Then shall it's Ten Horns be designated and manifested also, for "one hour".

​

In other words, "the beast that will ascend from out of the abyss" existed before the Roman Empire (Revelation 17:8 & 11).

Yes! As the Roman Republic it existed, but NOT as the Roman Empire until 27 BC.

The book of Daniel states that the 4th beast was a king who rose in the latter days of the Greek kingdom -

You have a complete mis-read of the biblical words in Dan. 7

the latter days of the four kingdoms that succeeded the Greek kingdom of Alexander the Great. It existed before the days of the Roman Empire, and will ascend again from the abyss.

"It existed" [being that of the Roman REPUBLIC] "before" the days of Daniel (525+/- BC), as well as Alex the Great (356-323 BC).
Romulus founded the Roman REPUBLIC in 753+/- BC. That Republic did not become an Empire until 27+/- BC. That is 27 years before Jesus was born of flesh.

Edit:
Though the 10H are prophetically shown on the 4th Beast in Daniel and in Revelation, they are only designated and manifested in the final EVOLVED form of the 4th beast, being that of a Global Economic Empire, which shall produce the "mark of the beast", "that was, and is not..."and, > "yet is".

 

[Zao is life]

Dan. 7
[6] After this I beheld, and lo another [3rd Beast], like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the [3rd] beast had also four heads [right after Alex the Great]; and dominion was given to it.

It was in the latter days of THEIR kingdom (the four Greek kingdoms that succeeded the 3rd beast) that the terrible king arose - Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

The Roman Republic is NOT identified in scripture as a leopard, a bear and a lion. Your arguing against historical and biblical facts despite the testimony of so much secular and scriptural history is ridiculous.

The 4th beast has nothing to do with the Roman Empire - the Greek kingdoms had existed and ceased to exist by the time John received the Revelation, in which the beast that "was, is not, and will ascend out of the abyss" is identified as the formerly Greek kingdoms of the leopard (Greece), bear (Persia) and lion (Babylon).

One of the 4 heads that came out of the leopard was the Greek kingdom of Seleucia (the Seleucid Empire), it incorporated all of the territory of the bear and the lion and the leopard, with the exception only of Egypt - the (Greek) Ptolemaic kingdom.

Antiochus IV Eppihanes rose from out of that part of the Greek kingdom in its latter days. It ceased to exist following his death in 164 BC, and Egypt ceased to exist as a Greek kingdom in 30 BC.

The beast that existed before the Roman Empire when John received the Revelation, will ascend from the abyss, is - unfortunately for you and your eschatological inventions - 100% based in historical and scriptural fact as NOT the Roman Empire.

Your false assertions cause you to keep showing that your understanding is enslaved to the invented eschatology that you believe in - because your eschatology is factually incorrect and you think you can "correct" the established history contained Jewish history, Josephus, the Maccabees and in many other history books.

You fail.

The ten kings will reign with the beast that existed BEFORE John received the Revelation (BEFORE the Roman Empire existed), when it ascends from the abyss. They will war with the Lamb - but He will overcome them because He is Lord of Lords and King of Kings and those who will be with Him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

They will also destroy the harlot - which is a whole lot bigger than the one church you keep picking on.

The 4th beast has nothing to do with Rome. It was a Greek kingdom. Today it's Islamic, and has not yet ascended from the abyss (although it may be ascending from the abyss today). It's biblical type is the Seleucid Empire that was ruled by Antiochus IV Epiphanes in its latter days, and the prophecies were already fulfilled in part by him - but not all was fulfilled.

The Roman Republic was not an empire until the 1st century BC. The beast John saw existed BEFORE the days of the Roman Empire. Jesus showed him this fact in the Revelation - in Revelation 17:8 and Revelation 13:2. The Roman Republic is NOT identified in scripture as a leopard, a bear and a lion. Your arguing against historical and biblical facts despite the testimony of so much secular and scriptural history is ridiculous.

[which began as the Roman Republic, founded by Romulus in 753+/- BC],

 

[Earburner]

It was in the latter days of THEIR kingdom (the four Greek kingdoms that succeeded the 3rd beast) that the terrible king arose - Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

So then, you are saying that the 4th beast was the "four heads" of the Grecian Empire.
Was the the Roman Empire the 5th beast? If so, then scripture doesn't say so.

From my post #335, let's try this again:
Dan. 7
[6] After this I beheld, and lo another [a 3rd Beast], like a leopard, WHICH had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the [3rd] beast HAD also  FOUR heads [right after Alex the Great]; and dominion was given to it.
[7] After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a FOURTH beast.....

Who is the 4th beast?

 

[Phoneman777]

I KNOW that DO YOU KNOW that what I have said is absolutely TRUE, but your indoctrination keeps you from admitting that it is TRUE!!
I said in POST #323: "Adam was full of living cells that God created within him, waiting for Oxygenated air, to remain alive. Within seconds, God breathed Oxgenated air into him, and then Adam's brain became fully conscious as an autonomous "living soul".

Now, where in what I said derailed you into you thinking that I said that man was given an "Eternal Soul"??
It's NOT there at all!! Because you KNOW that don't believe that!!

But, so that you can protect your status, in your Religion, with a foolish pre-concieved lieing doctrine, your intention is to show me to be the fool.
GOD did NOT create DEAD cells in the body of Adam!!!
Your concept is just as foul, as those who DO believe in an "Eternal Soul".
You are in denial of the truth that I have shown!


Absolutely FALSE!! Sorry, you don't understand WHY the shedding of Christ's Blood was necessary to make one holy for the permanent indwelling of God's Holy Spirit.
The death and Resurrection of Christ was for God the Father, just as much as it was FOR US. Without His shed blood, there would never be the NEW covenant [contract] between us and God the Father.

David prayed "take not Thy holy spirit from me" which means he had the holy spirit dwelling within him.

There is nothing in the OT to suggest this indwelling was temporary.

The Cross merely provided a fullness of that same indwelling spirit not seen in the OT.

 

[Zao is life]

So then, you are saying that the 4th beast was the "four heads" of the Grecian Empire.
Was the the Roman Empire the 5th beast? If so, then scripture doesn't say so.

Don't worry, I think I got it.

This is what you are saying:

The beast that ascended from the abyss that existed before John received the Revelation but no longer existed when John received the Revelation, was the Roman Republic that became the Roman Empire, and the 10 kings that reigned with that beast when it ascended from the abyss were Roman kings who handed over their authority and power to the Pope, who was the beast that ascended from the abyss that existed before John received the Revelation, which was the Roman Republic that later became the Roman Empire.

They (those ten Roman kings) made war against the Lamb, but the Lamb overcame them, and the Pope, the Roman Republic, and the Roman Empire who were like a leopard, and had feet like the feet of a bear, and a mouth like the mouth of a lion,

were all thrown into the lake of fire, and the Kingdom and the greatness of the Kingdom was given to the saints of the Most High, whose Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom.

The resurrection of the dead occurred when Christ defeated the ten Roman Kings who reigned with the Roman beast ascended from the abyss, who made war against Him and handed their authority over to the Pope when he ascended from the abyss,

and according to the OP of this thread and @Phoneman777, the rest of us who followed the wrong eschatology and did not identify the beast that existed before John received the Revelation and the ten kings that reigned with him after he had ascended from the abyss, as ten Roman kings who according to yourself gave their authority to the Pope (who was the beast that had ascended from the abyss - the same beast that had existed before John received the Revelation but ceased to exist before John received the Revelation),

well we all got left behind

- because anyone who disagrees with your and @Phoneman777 's strange eschatology and rewriting of biblical and scriptural history, is a Jesuit

- a Jesuit who either follows an evil eschatology that places the ten "Roman" kings in the future - the ten "Roman" kings who reign with the beast ascended from the abyss (that existed before John received the Revelation but no longer existed when John received the Revelation),

or even worse, place it all in the past - but just not in the same way that your own eschatology places it all in the past.

Got it.

 

[Phoneman777]

All denominational religions and their doctrines lead people to believe by "the wisdom of men". It's knowing the difference of when one is taught by the power/authority of God's Holy Spirit from within. 1 Cor. 2:5.

The only denomination that fits all the Biblical criteria for the Little Horn aka Beast aka Antichrist aka Man of Sin aka Whore of Revelation 17 riding the Beast - is the papacy.

Did the Lutherans persecute Christians for 1,260 years?
Did the Methodists attempt to change God's times and laws?
Did the Baptists speak "great things" ("blasphemies"), claiming their ministers were God or can forgive sin?
Did the Pentecostals uproot the three horns, the Vandals, Heruli, or Ostrogoths?