An Overview of the Tribulation.

[EarlyActs]

You've triggered many alarms and bells when you claim the rapture and Revelation happened in and about 70 AD.

There is no point in deflecting. To claim that there will be a 2nd atonement just for Israel, apart from what happened in Christ, is grotesquely false.

 

[EarlyActs]

You didn't answer the question...when did this happen?????

Let me post it again...

All I have to do is read the bible rather than some false opinion.

When has this happened? 8Then the second angel sounded his trumpet, and something like a great mountain burning with fire was thrown into the sea. A third of the sea turned to blood, 9a third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed.

btw, all sea life would die if 1/3 of the sea turned to blood. This is another clue as to the type of symbolism you are handling.

 

[EarlyActs]

As I have said REPEATEDLY...there are events in Revelations that have never occurred....especially around 70 AD.

13And as I observed, I heard an eagle flying overhead, calling in a loud voice, “Woe! Woe! Woe to those who dwell on the earth, because of the trumpet blasts about to be sounded by the remaining three angels!”

Notice it's for the whole EARTH.....not Jerusalem and the temple area.

btw, Josephus (a priest) did reference various strange signs over Jerusalem during the battles. Among them were announcements and trumpets by angels.

 

[Josheb]

Don't ask me. Ask EarlyActs in post 100 that i was responding to.

No, it was you who said his post about alarms and bells triggered alarms and bells. I'd like that clarified.

Post 100 is far afield fo the op and runs the risk of being deleted if the thread ventures further away. This op is about dating revelation based on internal evidence and has absolutely nothing to do with future actions of pastors and two atonements and the other poster's mention of alarms and bells. Post 100 does not deserve a reply from anyone because it's completely off-topic. It should be ignored, and its content not rewarded.

I'm wondering why claiming "the rapture and Revelation happened in and about 70 AD" sets off alarms in your view, especially since Post 100 does not mention the rapture (or Revelation, or 70 AD).

 

[EarlyActs]

I just spent 10 mins trying to find my treatment of Dan 9 but no luck, so I will store this here and under Daniel 9 (the thread).

As v24 says the 7 redemptive accomplishments of Messiah are completed in the 70 weeks. It is intriguing that this period also includes closing up prophecy, which is why Christ said in Acts 1 that 'we are not to know' about "the kingdom of Israel." And why no further discussion is found in Acts.

Christ's redemptive death (see v24) is after the 69th week, which is of course the 70th. Half of this week is the redemptive Gospel, half is destructive (of Israel). His title here is the Anointed One, meshiach.

The next person mentioned is 'the ruler who will come (and his people)' of v26. This is from the earlier visions of ch 2, but is not the horrible desolating person who is mentioned last and finally. The "ruler who will come" is Rome.

Notice the imperfect tense of 'war will continue to the end' as though it had been going on before the 70th. Quite true. There were various skirmishes (see discussion in Acts 5), but the end of this conflict would be 'like a 'dabar' (destructive flood).' Notice that this is confined to Israel even though the term from Genesis is used.

The term "desolations" gets mentioned before the evil desolator.

The major interpretive difficulty now shows itself--the antecedent of He in v27a. Remember, the horrible desolating person has not yet been mentioned. He is Christ. "Confirm" is a positive, favorable word choice; a good thing. Daniel is referring to the new covenant, the one that contains the redemptive treasures of v24. It is for the "many" in the same sense as Is 53's "He will justify many." From the start of Christ's ministry to the solidification of the apostle's teaching is roughly 7 years, and that is the "confirming."

The middle of the final 7 is v27b and is the Gospel event, like v24 said, which puts an end to sin (as debt), accomplishes atonement, and brings righteousness in Christ. That's what the first line of v25 meant about 'after' the 69th. The letter to Hebrews makes full discharge of 'an end of sacrifice and offering.'

Ironically, the zealots who took over the temple in the Jewish War ended its sacrifices to save on food; a sort of desperate mirror image "ending of sacrifice" a la Judaizing! It's so tragic! All that death for a system that had been ended!

Then we have 27c and it does have a new antecedent, as you can see from the commentaries. At the temple, the horrible desolator would be running the show, and he is the abomination and finally his end overcomes him. Thus Mk 13 and Mt 24 tell us "Let the reader understand" that this is about the zealots who captured Jerusalem and the Temple as a fort. This is the only NT quote of Dan 9 and it is about the desolator.

He is the desolator of Israel because he insists on fighting the 'ruler who is to come' instead of submitting to God's plan in Dan 2 where the new kingdom comes like a flying stone that turns all worldly kingdoms into a dust that becomes a great new mountain (not Zion) on which the world can worship God.

The NET's notes bt and bu in v27c explain the shift of antecedent found in the Hebrew; it is the most extensively noted translation:

On the wing[bt] of abominations will come[bu] one who destroys,
until the decreed end is poured out on the one who destroys.”

This person is not the ruler to come, because 'the rebellion/abomination (Dan 8:13) that desolates' contains its own explanation: it is the rebellion or abomination that desolates the place, even though another army is involved.

The NET shift of antecedent is a better translation than the NIV.

Notice that the desolator is the one whose time is ended, not the ruler who is to come of ch 2.

This is why any overview of the NT must state that the zealot movement is responsible for desolating the country. It's agenda was quite the opposite of the spread of the Gospel of Messiah seen in v24. In Luke, Jesus gave warning after warning to Israel about agitating Rome (chs 11, 13, 15, 17, 19!, 21). At the same time he wanted them to become missionaries of His Gospel. And he tried to do so with 2-3 Galilean zealots, where open revolt had started when he was a child.

Daniel 9's vision is justifiable called the miniature of NT history.

 

[Josheb]

Many will and can argue it is YOU who is changing scripture.

Perhaps, but they cannot prove it because what I did was quote what is stated and then stand firmly on those words. I did not add one pixel to anything stated in any scripture I quoted, and I did not subtract one, either. At best it can be argued the connections I have made from one passage to the next (I never proof-text) is inferential but given the fact the scriptures state what the scriptures state the onus is on my critics to prove scripture does not state what it states. Jesus plainly stated the disciples would go through the tribulation. I did not "interpret" that. I am standing firmly on what is plainly stated for all to read objectively. John explicitly stated he was going through tribulation. I did not add one pixel to that verse. I read it exactly as written and do not add to or subtract from it at all. It is an objectively verifiable fact there only five mentions of "tribulation" in the entire book of Revelation and it is just as objectively verifiable John was experiencing one of them when he wrote Revelation, the churches in the seven letters were experiencing three of those mentions and the fifth is specifically stated to pertain to those who'd washed their robes in the blood of the lamb. I did not add to or subtract from any of those verses one iota and that too is an objectively verifiable fact. It is objectively verifiable the events described after chapter 19 follow the tribulation. It is, therefore, just as objectively verifiable the op's graphic lacks a bookend or terminal point in its chronology and "time frame." It is a simple observation EVERYONE can make and agree to (and we all should do so and encourage @Marilyn C with goodwill to address that matter). It is an objectively verifiable fact that the claims made about Psalm 2 and 110, Zechariah 6, and Daniel 7 are NOT supported by the texts cited. They state things other than what was claimed.....

.....and I do not read the same things I was just told being applied to posts 1, 3, or 4. Are double standards being applied? If not, then ask Marilyn about her changing scripture because the facts of scripture read exactly as written demonstrably prove changes were made.

Attacking ME does not change the facts of scripture.

Keep the posts about the posts, not the posters .

 

[CrowCross]

You are right IF it is to be taken in crass literalism and if 'gea' in an intensely Judaic document means the whole world rather than Israel.

Once again you failed to address when the events mentioned in Rev happened.

btw, the 1st instance, as I recall, of the Israel/world difficulty is in the Beatitudes of Mt 5: blessed are the meek. Was it an address specifically to the violent Judaizers or to the whole world? I find for the former, although it applies to the rest of the world once that is seen clearly. That is why the subtitle of THE COVENANT REVOLT is "Jesus, the Zealots and the destruction of Israel."

I fail to see your point.

 

[CrowCross]

There is no point in deflecting. To claim that there will be a 2nd atonement just for Israel, apart from what happened in Christ, is grotesquely false.

I never made that claim.

 

[CrowCross]

btw, all sea life would die if 1/3 of the sea turned to blood. This is another clue as to the type of symbolism you are handling.

Would it???? What if it only happened in a particular area of the globe.

Secondly, then what does the symbolism represent?

In reality everything point to it being part of the tribulation such as man has never seen before nor will see again.

 

[CrowCross]

btw, Josephus (a priest) did reference various strange signs over Jerusalem during the battles. Among them were announcements and trumpets by angels.

Does that mean they happened? The bible doesn't mention they happened.

And once again I need to point out the tribulation according to the bible is WORLD wide.

 

[3 Resurrections]

This is why any overview of the NT must state that the zealot movement is responsible for desolating the country. It's agenda was quite the opposite of the spread of the Gospel of Messiah seen in v24. In Luke, Jesus gave warning after warning to Israel about agitating Rome (chs 11, 13, 15, 17, 19!, 21). At the same time he wanted them to become missionaries of His Gospel. And he tried to do so with 2-3 Galilean zealots, where open revolt had started when he was a child.

Daniel 9's vision is justifiable called the miniature of NT history.

Yes indeed. The effect of the competing Zealot factions operating in Christ's days and increasingly thereafter is greatly underestimated, especially for those days of "Great Tribulation" when they tore Jerusalem's besieged inhabitants to pieces between themselves. The Zealots originated from "Galilee of the Gentiles" and were the "Gentiles" which trod Jerusalem underfoot for 42 months in Revelation 11:2.

It was various Zealots wanting to fulfill the Messiah role that were going to be making those claims as "false Christs" in those first-century days.
"Gog" was a Zealot leader Simon bar Giora who gained control of Jerusalem in AD 69, and whose army fell on the mountains of Israel by the Roman troops.
The "Man of Lawlessness" was the Zealot Menahem - called the Son of Destruction because he was either the son or grandson of Judas the Galilean in Acts 5:37 who led an insurrection against Rome.
Christ was crucified between two Zealot thieves, and Barabbas was a Zealot who was released instead of Christ.

 

[Josheb]

There is no point in deflecting. To claim that there will be a 2nd atonement just for Israel, apart from what happened in Christ, is grotesquely false.

Who made such a claim? I just searched every page for "atonement" and the only one posting ANYTHING about a second atonement is YOU! It starts in Post 100 as a slippery slope hypothetical and does not reoccur again until Post 121, then in Post 125 where we read, "The middle of the final 7 is v27b and is the Gospel event, like v24 said, which puts an end to sin (as debt), accomplishes atonement, and brings righteousness in Christ."

Daniel 9:24
Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place.

According to the author of Hebrews, the end of sin has already been accomplished.

Hebrews 9:26
He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

And Paul explains how that sacrifice does so.

Romans 6:3-11
Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into his death? Therefore, we have been buried with him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of his resurrection, knowing this, that our old self was crucified with him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died is freed from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over him. For the death that he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life that he lives, he lives to God. Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

The matter is made complete and eternal in our resurrection whereby we are raised incorruptible and immortal. No more sin.

Daniel 9's end of sin is an already past event. It is not a part of the tribulation. It is part of the things John saw before he wrote Revelation.

Revelation 1:19
Therefore, write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things.

• Things John had seen.
• Things that existed at the time of his seeing the visions.
• Things that take place after the first two.

John had seen Jesus the putting away of sin by the sacrifice of himself. John was there. He was there at Calvary.

John 19:26-27
When Jesus then saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He *said to His mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" Then He *said to the disciple, "Behold, your mother!" From that hour the disciple took her into his own household.

John had seen it with his own eyes! He was there to see Jesus resurrected in the flesh, too. He was the first of the disciples to see the empty tomb (Jn. 20:3-4), and he was there when Jesus appeared in the flesh on the road to Emmaus and again when he appeared to Thomas. John was told to write down the things he'd seen and the things which are and when it came to the end of sin mentioned by John that would have been one of the things he'd seen. It was past-tense, not future. It has nothing to do with the chronology or time frame of the tribulation.

And absolutely nothing to do with a supposed second atonement about which no one else is posting!

 

[Marilyn C]

Yes; lots of comments.

First, the graphic is vague.

Hi Josheb,

Thank you for taking the time to do such a detailed reply. I look forward to a detailed discussion.

You say the graphic is vague. Note it is an Overview. Also, there is much detail within that. You may have missed this addition.

 

[Marilyn C]

John had gone through or was going through the tribulation at the time Revelation was written and read by his original audience.

Revelation 1:9
I, John, your brother and fellow partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance which are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.

John was a "fellow partaker in the tribulation." Furthermore, the book of Revelation was not written to Jews or geo-political, nation-state Israel. The book was written to the Church, those who are called Christ's bondservants.

Revelation 1:1
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bondservants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John...

`Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep these things which are written…` (Rev. 1: 3)

Revelation is written to all who will read and hear its words.

The Father gave Jesus the four visions describing His unveiling as – Head, Heir, Mediator and Judge - to show His servants His heavenly glorification and what He is beginning to do from the heavenly realms.

`The revelation/unveiling OF Jesus Christ, (Head, Heir, Mediator & Judge) which God (Father) gave to Him to show His servants…` (Rev. 1: 1)

 

[Josheb]

Hi Josheb,

Thank you for taking the time to do such a detailed reply. I look forward to a detailed discussion.

You say the graphic is vague. Note it is an Overview. Also, there is much detail within that. You may have missed this addition.

Yes, it is an overview. As an overview it is vague and, imo, vague beyond what qualifies as an overview. It has no beginning and end markers. Things listed are not said to be ordered. Things like this (and more) are problematic. It is not much of an "overview," and it does not specify a "time frame."

`Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep these things which are written…` (Rev. 1: 3)

Revelation is written to all who will read and hear its words.

Yes, and NOTHING we say about the text of revelation can ever contradict what the first century original reader would have understood. Any such interpretation would be adding to the text.

The Father gave Jesus the four visions describing His unveiling as – Head, Heir, Mediator and Judge - to show His servants His heavenly glorification and what He is beginning to do from the heavenly realms.

`The revelation/unveiling OF Jesus Christ, (Head, Heir, Mediator & Judge) which God (Father) gave to Him to show His servants…` (Rev. 1: 1)

Speculation/ It has no place in this discussion. I understand what you've said but those are all extra-scriptural interpretations not what scripture itself states. Jesus is certainly head, heir, mediator, and judge, but those roles do not mean there are four such visions. And if that were the case it is incumebnt upon you to evdence and prove that case with scripture and not pile baseless claims upon baseless claims.

• Pick a point
• Evidence the point
• Use scripture, and use scripture as written, plainly read wherever possible.

Please.

 

[Marilyn C]

Yes, it is an overview. As an overview it is vague and, imo, vague beyond what qualifies as an overview. It has no beginning and end markers. Things listed are not said to be ordered. Things like this (and more) are problematic. It is not much of an "overview," and it does not specify a "time frame."

Yes, and NOTHING we say about the text of revelation can ever contradict what the first century original reader would have understood. Any such interpretation would be adding to the text.

Speculation/ It has no place in this discussion. I understand what you've said but those are all extra-scriptural interpretations not what scripture itself states. Jesus is certainly head, heir, mediator, and judge, but those roles do not mean there are four such visions. And if that were the case it is incumebnt upon you to evdence and prove that case with scripture and not pile baseless claims upon baseless claims.

• Pick a point
• Evidence the point
• Use scripture, and use scripture as written, plainly read wherever possible.

Please.

The timeframe is the tribulation - beginning, middle and end as per details of the scroll which covers the width of the page. All other details correspond to - the beginning, middle and end.

The first century believers would understand of Christ being -

- the Head, (Eph, 1: 22),

- the Heir, (Ps. 2: 7 & 8 `son` Heb. bar` a title for the heir apparent to the throne. Hebrews 1: 1 & 2)

- the Mediator, (Ps. 110: 4, Heb. 9: 11 & 12, 1 Tim. 2: 5)

- the Judge, (John 5: 27)

 

[Marilyn C]

And the word "Israel" is found only three times in the entire book of Revelation (Rev. 2:14, 7:4, and 21:12) and only one of those three could possibly be about covenant nation-state Israel. It is more likely about the Israel that is Israel to which Paul refers in Romans 9. It specifically has to do with the 144,000 survivors of the tribulation and that is likely a reference to what Paul wrote in Romans 11.

The words `more likely` are speculation and not from scripture.

The word `saints` is used in scripture as to –

• Israel. (Ps. 30: 4, 31: 23 etc)
• Judah. (Hosea 11: 12 KJV)
• Body of Christ, believers, (Phil. 5 etc)
• Those martyred in the Gt, trib. (Rev. 15: 3)

Israel in Rev. 21: 12 refers to the Old Testament saints who `looked for a city` `whose builder and Maker is God. ` (Heb. 11: 10 & 16)

 

[Marilyn C]

So.....

As far as the timeline of the tribulation goes as asserted by the graphic in this op goes,

• The tribulation of Revelation has already come and gone. John was a participant in it. So too were the seven churches to whom individual letter were written instructing them to overcome tribulation.

The tribulation of Revelation has not `come and gone.` What the 7 churches have to overcome is false teaching –

• `left their first love. ` (Rev. 2: 4) `not holding fast to the Head. `(Col. 2: 19)
• `doctrine of Balaam,` (worldly) and the `Nicolaitans,` (lording it over) (Rev. 2: 14 & 15)
• Prophetess teaching immorality, (Rev. 2: 20)
• `dead,` no truth. (Rev. 3: 1)
• `unfaithful and false witness,` (Rev. 3: 17)

And all those errors and false teachings are still with us today.

`that we should no longer be children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting,…but speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the Head – Christ – (Eph. 4: 14 & 15)

 

[Marilyn C]

Jesus will remain enthroned in heaven until his Father defeats all his enemies.


I am also curious why the timeline ended with chapter 19

It is Jesus who will defeat His enemies.

`The Lord (Jesus) is at Your (Father) right hand; He shall execute kings in the day of His wrath…` (Ps. 110: 5)

`the Father ….has given Him (Jesus) authority to execute judgment also,….` (John 5: 27)

`Now out of His (Jesus) mouth goes a sharp sword that with it He should strike the nations ….` (Rev. 19: 15)

`the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel or our Lord Jesus Christ.` (2 Thess. 1: 7 & 8)


Now you ask why the timeline ended with ch. 19. Good question. I was going on notes from former teachers. Then I worked out that diagram. But, yes, it would have been better to include the Lord`s return. Will try and rectify it. Thanks.

 

[EarlyActs]

The words `more likely` are speculation and not from scripture.

The word `saints` is used in scripture as to –

• Israel. (Ps. 30: 4, 31: 23 etc)
• Judah. (Hosea 11: 12 KJV)
• Body of Christ, believers, (Phil. 5 etc)
• Those martyred in the Gt, trib. (Rev. 15: 3)

Israel in Rev. 21: 12 refers to the Old Testament saints who `looked for a city` `whose builder and Maker is God. ` (Heb. 11: 10 & 16)

That is saying that even back then they were not looking for that Jerusalem but rather for something 'above.' Compare the rest of the chapter. It is quite clear. It ends with us intersecting with all of them, not seeking separate places which is the mistaken central doctrine of D'ism.