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

[Douggg]

You can't try to differentiate the heads of the beast from the beast itself.

Regarding the seven heads in Revelation, when the text of Revelation 17:10 says "kings", it means "kings" .

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Regarding the seven heads in Revelation, when the text of Revelation 17:10 says "kings", it means "kings" .

LOL. Doug, did you somehow miss when I said I agree with this? But, it also says the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman, Babylon, sits. That is not literal mountains any more than the many waters she sits on are literal waters or any more than the beast with seven heads and ten horns she rides on is a literal beast with seven heads and ten horns. The seven mountains refer to the seven historical kingdoms that the seven kings reign over, with the Roman empire being the one that "is" at the time John wrote the book.

But, again, prophet beasts are kingdoms (Daniel 7:23), yet you keep trying to say the beast is a man. You blatantly contradict what scripture says prophet beasts are.

Tell me, Doug, who was the beast before John wrote the book? What does it mean when John said the beast "is not" at the time he wrote the book even though one of its heads "is" at that time? What does it mean for the beast to be in the bottomless pit and to later come out of it?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

OK. Well, I will just have to wait to see whether or not the beast of Revelation 13:2 denies that Christ has come in the flesh and hence will be an antichrist beast- the final antichrist (whether he/it is a man, or ten kings). Which it seems to me is the same as the 8th king/dom of Revelation 17.​

Prophetic beasts are kingdoms, not individuals.

Daniel 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

Don't forget that a great deal of symbolism is being used in the book of Revelation. The book was purposely "signified" (Revelation 1:1). Just because it might talk about the beast as if it were an individual, it's a symbolic reference that you should not take literally. Babylon is not a woman at all and yet it talks about Babylon as a harlot and refers to it as "she" and "her". So, if it ever refers to the beast as "him" or "he", it shouldn't be taken to mean it's talking about an individual man any more than the references to "her" and "she" means that Babylon is an individual woman.

 

[Douggg]

Tell me, Doug, who was the beast before John wrote the book? What does it mean when John said the beast "is not" at the time he wrote the book even though one of its heads "is" at that time? What does it mean for the beast to be in the bottomless pit and to later come out of it?

The beast currently in the bottomless pit is the garden of eden serpent beast (used by Satan to get Adam and Eve to sin).

When the end times person (soon to be revealed) is killed and comes back to life that disembodied garden of serpent beast spirit, will be allowed to come out of the bottomless and possess him.

 

[Phoneman777]

And so on the day that Jesus shed His innocent blood, as the sin bearer of all the world, it didn't need to be shed for them, who were people of faith under the OC., looking for "the promise that was to come"?

The OC believers looked in faith to the Lamb that was to come; NC believers look back in faith to the Lamb that came.

It's that simple.

I hope that you know that the Righteousness of God and His Gift of Eternal Life, COULD ONLY BE PERMANENTLY GIVEN, AFTER one has put their faith in the shed blood of Christ, so that their sins could be both forgiven AND REMOVED.

The blood of animals, under the OC. could NEVER REMOVE ones sins. Therefore if there be no removal of sins from a person , then there will be NO GIFT of Eternal Life coming from God to them, who is found in such a condition.

Everyone, from Adam to the last sinner, will be saved by grace.

 

[Phoneman777]

OK. Well, I will just have to wait to see whether or not the beast of Revelation 13:2 denies that Christ has come in the flesh and hence will be an antichrist beast- the final antichrist (whether he/it is a man, or ten kings). Which it seems to me is the same as the 8th king/dom of Revelation 17.​

The papal Beast of Revelation 13 denies just that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The beast currently in the bottomless pit is the garden of eden serpent beast (used by Satan to get Adam and Eve to sin).

Total nonsense. You refuse to accept what scripture teaches, which is that prophetic beasts are kingdoms (Daniel 7:23). The beast is a symbolic entity, but you interpret it to be a literal beast. That's like interpreting the woman who sits on the beast (Rev 17:3) as a literal woman. Just utter nonsense.

When the end times person (soon to be revealed) is killed and comes back to life that disembodied garden of serpent beast spirit, will be allowed to come out of the bottomless and possess him.

LOL. No end times person will be killed and come back to life. Only God can resurrect the dead and God will not be resurrecting some supposed evil end times person. LOL. Your beliefs are completely ridiculous.

 

[Zao is life]

Prophetic beasts are kingdoms, not individuals.

Daniel 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

Don't forget that a great deal of symbolism is being used in the book of Revelation. The book was purposely "signified" (Revelation 1:1). Just because it might talk about the beast as if it were an individual, it's a symbolic reference that you should not take literally. Babylon is not a woman at all and yet it talks about Babylon as a harlot and refers to it as "she" and "her". So, if it ever refers to the beast as "him" or "he", it shouldn't be taken to mean it's talking about an individual man any more than the references to "her" and "she" means that Babylon is an individual woman.

An individual kingdom or beast that denies that Christ has come in the flesh and goes to war against the Lamb and is identified by a mark or the number of its name - meaning it will have a name - is THE antichrist (ὁ antichristos) John told us is coming when he said that even by the time he wrote, there were already many antichrists.​

 

[Douggg]

Total nonsense. You refuse to accept what scripture teaches, which is that prophetic beasts are kingdoms (Daniel 7:23). The beast is a symbolic entity, but you interpret it to be a literal beast. That's like interpreting the woman who sits on the beast (Rev 17:3) as a literal woman. Just utter nonsense.

Whether "beasts" refer to literal beasts, or as kingdoms, or as individual persons - depends on the context of the scriptural passages.

LOL. No end times person will be killed and come back to life. Only God can resurrect the dead and God will not be resurrecting some supposed evil end times person. LOL. Your beliefs are completely ridiculous.

In Isaiah 14:18-20, (verse 19) the soul of the slain man of sin is cast out of the grave, a metaphor for brought back to life, by God, in disdain for the person - a Jew who will destroy his land and his people. It will be the strong delusion that God sends in 2Thessalonians2:11 to them who believe the man of sin's lie of having achieved God-hood.

In verse 18, the reference is to the ornate tombs of past kings. But although the man of sin will be killed, his body will not be placed into a ornate tomb, i.e. buried, (verse 20), but instead will be brought back to life while he is still in his casket, at a worldwide televised event - which the world will see him see sit up in his casket back alive - and will believe that he has overcome death.

Isaiah 14:
18 All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his own house.

19 But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet.

20 Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Whether "beasts" refer to literal beasts, or as kingdoms, or as individual persons - depends on the context of the scriptural passages.


In Isaiah 14:18-20, (verse 19) the soul of the slain man of sin is cast out of the grave, a metaphor for brought back to life, by God, in disdain for the person - a Jew who will destroy his land and his people. It will be the strong delusion that God sends in 2Thessalonians2:11 to them who believe the man of sin's lie of having achieved God-hood.

In verse 18, the reference is to the ornate tombs of past kings. But although the man of sin will be killed, his body will not be placed into a ornate tomb, i.e. buried, (verse 20), but instead will be brought back to life while he is still in his casket, at a worldwide televised event - which the world will see him see sit up in his casket back alive - and will believe that he has overcome death.

Isaiah 14:
18 All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his own house.

19 But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet.

20 Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned.



View attachment 48597

Absolute nonsense of fairy tale proportions.

 

[Zao is life]

The papal Beast of Revelation 13 denies just that.

I don't know what the Papal city believes about whether or not Christ has come in the flesh. From what I hear it does indeed believe that Christ has come in the flesh.

Maybe you can inform me if I'm wrong.

I know that Jesus Christ is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

So I know that Christ rules over the kings of the earth who do not fornicate with the harlot.

And I know that the harlot is that great city, which reigns over the kings of the earth that commit fornication with her.

I know that the kings of the earth who committed fornication with the harlot will weep and wail over the harlot's demise when she is destroyed by the ten kings of the beast, so IMO the they can hardly be the same as the ten kings who will hate the harlot.

I know that New Jerusalem is that great city and is a city of gold, precious stones and pearls (Revelation 21:10-11 & 18-21).

I know that the harlot is that great city and is "..gilded with gold, precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her FORNICATION" (Revelation 17:4).

But I will have to wait and see whether that great city that is a harlot is a literal city, or not - because New Jerusalem is not a literal city with physical boundaries.

 

[Earburner]

The OC believers looked in faith to the Lamb that was to come; NC believers look back in faith to the Lamb that came.

It's that simple.

Everyone, from Adam to the last sinner, will be saved by grace.

The Grace of God, through the shedding of Christ's innocent blood, is made available to everyone.

However, ONLY those who have [taken] part in the First Resurrection, who is Christ Himself, by being "born again" of His Holy Spirit, into New life, have become a NEW creature [creation] of God**.
Rom. 8
[8] So then they that are in the flesh [only] cannot please God.
[9] But ye [brethren] are not in the flesh [only], but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is NONE of his.

**Note: 2 Cor. 5
[17] Therefore if any man BE IN Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

 

[Phoneman777]

I don't know what the Papal city believes about whether or not Christ has come in the flesh. From what I hear it does indeed believe that Christ has come in the flesh.

Maybe you can inform me if I'm wrong.

I know that Jesus Christ is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

So I know that Christ rules over the kings of the earth who do not fornicate with the harlot.

And I know that the harlot is that great city, which reigns over the kings of the earth that commit fornication with her.

I know that the kings of the earth who committed fornication with the harlot will weep and wail over the harlot's demise when she is destroyed by the ten kings of the beast, so IMO the they can hardly be the same as the ten kings who will hate the harlot.

I know that New Jerusalem is that great city and is a city of gold, precious stones and pearls (Revelation 21:10-11 & 18-21).

I know that the harlot is that great city and is "..gilded with gold, precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her FORNICATION" (Revelation 17:4).

But I will have to wait and see whether that great city that is a harlot is a literal city, or not - because New Jerusalem is not a literal city with physical boundaries.

The papacy denies that Jesus has "come in the flesh" by their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception: that Mary was "immaculately conceived, preserved from all stain of original sin".

Therefore, the "unfallen flesh" of Mary along with the Holy Spirit resulted in a Jesus born with "different flesh" than humanity's fallen flesh - and by this, they deny Jesus came in the "same" flesh as us.

This false teaching leads to two terrible heresies:

• God unjustly demands we turn from sin while having given Jesus an advantage He denied to us.
• The flesh of Jesus is unapproachable, making necessary the catholic intercessory priesthood

The truth is:

[14] Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;​

[15] And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
[16] For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
[17] Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
[18] For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.​

 

[Phoneman777]

However, ONLY those who have [taken] part in the First Resurrection

No one has taken part in the First Resurrection - it's not until Jesus comes in glory.

 

[Zao is life]

The papacy denies that Jesus has "come in the flesh" by their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception: that Mary was "immaculately conceived, preserved from all stain of original sin".

Therefore, the "unfallen flesh" of Mary along with the Holy Spirit resulted in a Jesus born with "different flesh" than humanity's fallen flesh - and by this, they deny Jesus came in the "same" flesh as us.

This false teaching leads to two terrible heresies:

• God unjustly demands we turn from sin while having given Jesus an advantage He denied to us.
• The flesh of Jesus is unapproachable, making necessary the catholic intercessory priesthood

The truth is:

[14] Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;​

[15] And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.​

[16] For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. ​

[17] Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.​

[18] For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.​

They have weird beliefs, I know. Quite a few. YET there are others who do not follow her doctrines, and 2 Thessalonians 2 says

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except the apostasy (o apostasia) come first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.

Paul said that the above man of sin will be destroyed by Christ at the time of His coming, and the apostasy to come before the return of Christ is marked by the rise of the lawless one. Verse 7 says:

"For the mystery of lawlessness is already working, only he is now holding back until it comes out of the midst" (MKJV).

The KJV and most translations translate that as "taken out of the way" but the words are ginomai ek mesos. Ginomai means "come into being", ek is from out of, and mesos is midst or among. So it's "come from out of the midst of the lawlessness".

Jesus said, "Many false prophets will appear and deceive many, and because lawlessness will increase so much, the love of many will grow cold. But the person who endures to the end will be saved." in Matthew 24:11-12.

It seems to me like more than one group or one church organization that takes part in the apostasy - like just "Christians" in general, rather then "these Christians" and "those Christians" or "this church" and "that church".

I know that all the apostates will be led by one head - the man of sin - and from one city reigning over the others - but to me it's speculation and adding assumptions and speculation to what is written to identify any man, group or church, or city at this point.

For me It suffices to know that the harlot does not seem to be pointing to the city that was, i.e, Jerusalem, because it's contrasted in the Revelation with New Jerusalem by way of a thesis-antithesis comparison, and John sees this harlot seated on a beast that has risen from the pit that has ten kings reigning contemporaneously with the beast, who will destroy the harlot.
​

There are so many different groups and so many different individuals each having added their own speculation to what is written, and then everyone identifies their own speculation as the identity of entities in the Revelation like Babylon the Great.

Aside from that there are different interpretations of history that each different group has to maintain in order to have history comply with their own particular identification of Babylon the Great.

So I don't buy any of it, or add anything just because I don't really know what "city" the Revelation is talking about when it speaks about Babylon the Great.

 

[Phoneman777]

The KJV and most translations translate that as "taken out of the way" but the words are ginomai ek mesos. Ginomai means "come into being"​

Ginomai also means "come to pass" - the KJV translators got it right.

ek is from out of, and mesos is midst or among. So it's "come from out of the midst of the lawlessness".​

The reason the KJV translators chose "taken out of the way" is simple: when the papacy arose in 538 A.D., the Roman catholic church had been the "official religion" of pagan Rome since Constantine centuries earlier.

So, yes, when pagan Rome was removed "out of the midst" aka "taken out of the way" of this environment - not "lawlessness" - all that was left was the Roman catholic church and ten feisty barbarians "horns" who eventually submitted their individual authorities to the Bishop of Rome - thus, pagan Rome morphed into papal Rome.

Jesus said, "Many false prophets will appear and deceive many, and because lawlessness will increase so much, the love of many will grow cold. But the person who endures to the end will be saved." in Matthew 24:11-12.

For interest's sake, these "many" are Christians - because "agape" can only be obtained by the saints - never the wicked.

It seems to me like more than one group or one church organization that takes part in the apostasy - like just "Christians" in general, rather then "these Christians" and "those Christians" or "this church" and "that church".​

Prophecy says a principle apostate organization that would accomplish very specific acts of rebellion (eg: "speak great words ("blasphemies" which Scripture specifies as claiming: to be God/the power to forgive sin) against the Most High"; "think to change times and laws"; "given into (the papacy's) hand for a time, times, and half a time")

I know that all the apostates will be led by one head - the man of sin - and from one city reigning over the others - but to me it's speculation and adding assumptions and speculation to what is written to identify any man, group or church, or city at this point.​

That would be the pope - but it's incorrect to say "the pope is the antichrist" because we must remember the antichrist is not "one man" but a "kingdom" that has had many popes at its head - the papacy has boasted for almost 1,500 years to "stand in the place of Christ" and "take the place of Christ" which is the very definition of "anti-Christ".

For me It suffices to know that the harlot does not seem to be pointing to the city that was, i.e, Jerusalem, because it's contrasted in the Revelation with New Jerusalem by way of a thesis-antithesis comparison, and John sees this harlot seated on a beast that has risen from the pit that has ten kings reigning contemporaneously with the beast, who will destroy the harlot.​

The harlot is not Jerusalem - please don't miss this:

After John saw the vision of the future harlot, the angel then proceeded to explain it - so when said "the woman is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the Earth" he spoke in the present tense.

Was Jerusalem sitting on 7 hills and reigning over the kings of the Earth when John was on Patmos? The only city doing that was Rome, the "city of 7 hills". It's in Rome the apostate "whore" church straddled the secular beast, the prophetic symbol of papal Rome.

There are so many different groups and so many different individuals each having added their own speculation to what is written, and then everyone identifies their own speculation as the identity of entities in the Revelation like Babylon the Great.

Peter referred to "the church that is in Babylon" when referring to the pure church in Rome before the "falling away" which happened 538 when papal Rome arose.

Aside from that there are different interpretations of history that each different group has to maintain in order to have history comply with their own particular identification of Babylon the Great.

So I don't buy any of it, or add anything just because I don't really know what "city" the Revelation is talking about when it speaks about Babylon the Great.

Those who oppose Protestant Historicism were previoulsy handed a puzzle with half the pieces missing by those who've embraced Jesuit "Left Behind" Futurism or Jesuit "Way Behind" Preterism. They were then directed to smash and jam together mismatched pieces because obtaining a distorted image is better than not obtaining anything at all. By the time Protestant Historicists show up with the rest of the pieces, they've become so attached to the familiar, distorted image (like an ugly old but comfortable shirt) that there is simply no room on the table for any more pieces and no interest in considering what image could emerge with a properly assembled puzzle.

 

[Douggg]

So I don't buy any of it, or add anything just because I don't really know what "city" the Revelation is talking about when it speaks about Babylon the Great.

Babylon the Great in Revelation is the mystical kingdom of Satan and his angels. Not a physical kingdom.

The woman turned harlot in Revelation 17, which has Mystery, Babylon the Great, the mother of harlots and abominations upon the earth written on her forehead - is the Vatican, which many of it doctrines have been influenced by Babylon the Great, the mystical kingdom of Satan and his angels.

Babylon is fallen, is fallen, in Revelation 18, is referring to when Satan and his angels will be cast down to earth in Revelation 12:7-9 in middle of the forthcoming 7 year 70th week of Daniel 9:27.

Revelation 18, compares that fall as to a great trading city that sudden falls, to no longer exist. During the time, times, half time that Satan will have left, God dismantles Satan's mystical kingdom of Babylon the Great.

.

 

[Timtofly]

Yes. Each head of the dragon is wearing a crown in Revelation 12 but in Revelation 13 the dragon has given the beast his seat, power and great authority - and the crowns have shifted to the ten horns of the beast,

and those then kings will reign contemporaneously for "one hour" with the beast that ascended from the abyss, which (or who) the 8th king/dom (Revelation 17), which will continue for 42 months (Revelation 13).

That is an historical shift, as the other 6 heads of the dragon were all in the past, prior to the Second Coming. The ten horns are after the Second Coming. That is the shift in power.

The 7th head of the dragon is Satan. The ten horns would be on that head, not any of the others from past history. Because John is specific, they have no kingdom. You cannot take past kingdoms to define the ten horns.

"And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast."

You can just call that head Satan. Saying "the beast" is vague.

The beast rising out of the sea is just the view of the dragon from man's perspective. Still the same historical kingdoms, powered by Satan throughout history.

The false prophet is the mouth of the beast, at the point specified in the chapter. Those literal 42 months of power given to the 7th head, Satan as the 8th kingdom. Whether or not that is the same hour in chapter 17 is immaterial. Personally I think that one hour is the literal battle against the Lamb, called Armageddon.

"These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful."

Seems like the hour they come together as one with all their own armies, no?

I am not sure why people are saying the heads are individuals. The heads are kingdoms. Most historical kingdoms had multiple individual rulers. Saying this beast in whole is just one revived nation from the past seems wrong. The 6th head was the one healed, but was not an individual.

The healing was post the Second Coming. We are in the time period of the the 6th head. Since that power shifts to the horns, that 6th head is no longer viable at some point.

Not sure why the 7th Kingdom declared at the 7th Trumpet is so ignored by those who claim to study Scripture. Revelation 11:15

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

That is as viable a one world empire as the 6 heads of the dragon, sea beast, or scarlet colored beast. It would also be the shortest lived, 3.5 days. It is not dissolved, but placed on hold for 42 months. The number 8 does come after 7. There are not 8 heads on any of the beast. The ten horns are not the 7th head replaced by an 8th head.

The meaning of this verse seems straightforward:

"The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is."

Satan is this beast:

"And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon."

John is referring to this beast, but one can interpret him as Satan. Satan always was, one individual throughout time, was not, not a human, though part of John's symbolism (the dragon, the sea beast, and even the scarlet colored beast), and yet is the power and authority of the 8th kingdom. Satan also historically gave his power to the nations of Daniel's image in Daniel 2. Nothing I posted has contradicted Scripture. Some claim Satan had ultimate authority in the OT, that was diminished at the Cross, and has been chained like a dog for a few days. Why can they not see that Satan is the 7th head that becomes the 8th kingdom after Jesus is announced as the 7th Kingdom at the 7th Trumpet.

The heads even the wounded one, are not individuals, but Satan being: was, is not, yet is, still applies. Satan is not a kingdom, yet one of the heads of authority. People cannot stand this interpretation, because it means Jesus is on the earth as King before Satan's 42 months. They ignore the whole point, as it is hard to twist the fact 8 comes after 7.

"And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition."

This can sound confusing as the 7th Kingdom is included, but not part of the 7 headed beast. The 8th is part of the 7 heads, but not the 7th Kingdom. This is not saying Satan is both the 7th and 8th, one peaceful and one of tribulation. Jesus is the 7th as called the Prince to come, even in Daniel. Many get Daniel wrong claiming some human antichrist. The heads are not individual humans, ever. The 7th Kingdom is Jesus. The 8th kingdom is Satan. This means Jesus is already on the earth, and the Second Coming happened before the 7th Trumpet, and Satan's 42 months as the 8th kingdom. Yet some will falsely allege that is just twisting Scripture to point out a pre-trib Second Coming and rapture.

 

[Zao is life]

That is an historical shift, as the other 6 heads of the dragon were all in the past, prior to the Second Coming.

So we agree.

The ten horns are after the Second Coming.

So we disagree

The 7th head of the dragon is Satan.

The dragon is Satan. The dragon, the whole dragon, and nothing but the dragon, is Satan.

The crowns on his heads are the seven kings of Revelation 17.

The ten horns would be on that head, not any of the others from past history.

So we agree.

Because John is specific, they have no kingdom. You cannot take past kingdoms to define the ten horns.

So we agree. Why are you arguing as though anything I said disagrees with the above?

You can just call that head Satan. Saying "the beast" is vague.

Satan is not the beast. Is the Revelation vague for talking about the dragon and the beast in Revelation 13?

The beast rising out of the sea is just the view of the dragon from man's perspective.

No it isn't. Is the dragon giving the dragon his seat, his power and great authority?

I'll read the rest of what you said later.

 

[Timtofly]

The dragon is Satan. The dragon, the whole dragon, and nothing but the dragon, is Satan.

No, then Satan would not be the beast that was. Satan does not have 7 heads. The symbolism is the connection Satan has with the historical 6 kingdoms.

Satan is the 7th head of all 3 iterations. Satan does not have 7 parts and one part needs, Satan's healing power. The 6th kingdom needs Satan's power to heal the mortal wound just after the baptism of fire at the 6th Seal. That is the Second Coming.

None of the first 5 kingdoms are restored and brought back, Babylon, Medes and Persians, Greece, Rome, nor the ten toes. The 6th kingdom is what is restored by Satan. Satan is of the 7 heads, but the 8th kingdom.

The dragon in Revelation 12 is the historical introduction of the 5 kingdom statue of Daniel 2. In Revelation we see how Satan interacts with human government. By Revelation 17, we see Satan as the only head left.

There is no literal dragon. The dragon is symbolic. Revelation 20 tells you who the dragon is, but the 7 heads are symbolism.

"And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,"

This does not mean that the dragon is literal, but represents Satan throughout the book. But the heads represent kingdoms.