The parable of the fig tree and "this generation"

[3 Resurrections]

That's the thing. You say these things happen, but they are not present anywhere in the Revelation. Revelation states they are at war against the Lamb. It says nothing about Rome, and it most certainly doesn't say they fought against each other.

Remember the parable Christ gave in Matthew 22:1-14 of the "King" sending "HIS armies" to destroy the murderers of His servants and to "burn up their city". Christ was going to use the agency of the Sea Beast's Roman armies to come against the city of Jerusalem. And the Pharisees perceived that He spoke this parable against themselves. This parable in Matthew 22 was the same as the prediction of the abomination of desolation, which Luke 21 interpreted as "Jerusalem surrounded by armies". The Scarlet Beast would most definitely be battling against the King's armies that would finally burn up their city.

And they most definitely fought against each other. Josephus describes the war of the various Zealot factions against each other in the period surrounding the AD 66-70 siege. But even before then, Christ had predicted this growth of animosity of Israel's citizens aligning against each other in Luke 12:52-53 where even families would be divided against each other. It was all part of the internecine warfare that would break out where the battle of "Gog" in Israel would be characterized as "every man's sword shall be against his brother" (Ezekiel 39:21).

And again, there are no verses that state that the unclean spirits would be imprisoned in Jerusalem.

There is. Revelation 18:2 describes it. Likewise, Isaiah 24:21-23 also describes the imprisonment in Jerusalem for the punishment of the angelic host of "high ones", along with the "kings of the earth".

And this person was NOT a high priest, just a deputy. I already looked this up, and they were clear. Only one high priest, though they have a deupty. That person did NOT have the title of high priest, for there was only one high priest. (Or Jesus would need another, as His claim to High Priest is along the same lines.)

Caiaphas and Annas were both called high priests during Christ's arrest and crucifixion. The term high priest served rather like an honorary title that was never withdrawn, rather like our term "President" for all those who ever served in that office. We speak of "President Kennedy", though he has been long dead. One high priest only would be serving at any given time, but many former high priests existed in those days.

Again, you can go to the kings of the earth thread, and see every reference in both the Old and New Testaments. It is actually very clear. The high priests are NOT the kings of the earth. It is literally speaking of the kings of the earth.

Revelation 16:14 lists the "kings of the earth" as being a separate enemy opposed to the kings of the "whole world". These would be aligned against each other in that battle for Jerusalem. They aren't the same thing.

So now they aren't generals, they are antichrists?

Some of them were both generals and serving as a false christ trying to claim Daniel's prophesied role of Messiah the Prince.

I would think that the money changers were just merchants who took advantage of the system.

The money-changers were responsible for collecting a fee for exchanging all the foreign currency coming to the temple. Any foreign currency was traded for the only coin that the high priesthood accepted in the temple for sales and purchases of sacrificial items for worship - the Tyrian shekel mark imposed by the Land Beast. The money-changers worked hand in glove with the high priesthood in those days to perpetuate this corrupt practice.

No, hatred has to do with your strong determination, in the face of correction, to hang onto the idea that the kings of the earth are high priests. I went and read the other thread on the other board, and someone did a very good job of showing it. You even went as far as saying, that even though David was speaking of gentiles in the context, his usage of kings of the earth related to the high priests. You even violated the context.

I hang onto the definition of kings of the earth being high priests because God does. In Psalms 2, He accuses the kings of the earth of conspiring together against Himself and His anointed, which would be Christ Jesus. The kings of the earth would want to "cast away their cords from us" - the cords of the covenant bond between God and themselves. These "cords" of covenant relationship had not been binding on the Gentile people at the time of Christ's crucifixion.

Jospehus says there were many generals chosen. Then mentions two... How is that a great many? The king at the beginning considered most, if not all his men generals. What about them? In book three, there are more generals listed.

Josephus listed ten total generals for preparing for the Roman Jewish war in those various districts listed. Keep reading in the Josephus passage I gave you. It is ten generals - no more and no less. And Josephus himself was one of those ten generals / ten horns on the Scarlet Beast. So he ought to know.

Who is the beast? It can't be Ananus, as he is one of the horns, according to you. And it is clearly stated that none of the horns are kings. Who is the beast that they unify with to attack the Lamb?

The eighth high priest "king" which headed up the Scarlet Beast when it arose to existence in AD 66 was Mattathias ben Annas, the grandson of Annas, who was "of the seven" kings because he was descended from that family of Annas the high priest with its seven high priest "kings". Mattathias was deposed from that office by the Zealots soon after AD 66, when they cast lots to set up their own puppet high priest, Phannias, who didn't have a clue what he was doing .

 

[TMSO]

If you accept what the apostles were saying on these things, which was what Christ taught them during the 40 days, then ‘I called my son’ actually means that the meaning about Israel has been set aside.

That is not what it means. It means that there was another fulfillment. There are multifulfillment prophecies in the Old Testament. That passage in Jeremiah is very clear that God would never do that. Why do you just act like that verse doesn't exist.

We should apply that across the scope. We no longer are concerned about the old covenants furniture and equipment. God is not going back to them. The eternal has come in Christ.

Since there is nothing to apply across the scope, what should we apply across the scope? Change God's words from saying He will never set them aside, and will not leave them to what you are saying? Isn't that going too far?

It is not a matter of mistake but of graduation.

Nuance is the enemy. That is why there are white lies, and gray areas. With God, there is no such thing.

D’ists put a wild amount of weight on what is not declared by Christ. On Passages not handled by him. On figuring out when ‘the kingdom comes to Israel’ which is not our business, says Acts 1.

You bury a lot of what has been declared. This kind of handling of scripture is where we have someone else saying that God's temple is the abomination of desolation. Even after telling this person what Jesus says about the temple, and what prophecy speaks of Jesus in link to the temple, he says that it is still the abomination of desolation. Why? Other verses he twists.

 

[TMSO]

Remember the parable Christ gave in Matthew 22:1-14 of the "King" sending "HIS armies" to destroy the murderers of His servants and to "burn up their city". Christ was going to use the agency of the Sea Beast's Roman armies to come against the city of Jerusalem. And the Pharisees perceived that He spoke this parable against themselves. This parable in Matthew 22 was the same as the prediction of the abomination of desolation, which Luke 21 interpreted as "Jerusalem surrounded by armies". The Scarlet Beast would most definitely be battling against the King's armies that would finally burn up their city.

I think you forgot what the scarlet beast was about... again. The scarlet beast attacks the lamb. This is why it is the antichrist. Attacking Christ. Against Christ. And the armies with Him are against Christ, the lamb. That sounds completely backwards to what ou are saying. Luke 21 is not interpreted as the abomination of desolation. What look is saying is when the armies surround the city, it is going to be destroyed. Left desolate. It was desolate. Israel didn't become a nation again (in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy) until 1948. For that to be in contravention of prophecy, all the Arab countries attacking Israel would have won. The Arabs could not have asked for better odds. Over 100 to 1. They lost... badly.

And they most definitely fought against each other. Josephus describes the war of the various Zealot factions against each other in the period surrounding the AD 66-70 siege. But even before then, Christ had predicted this growth of animosity of Israel's citizens aligning against each other in Luke 12:52-53 where even families would be divided against each other. It was all part of the internecine warfare that would break out where the battle of "Gog" in Israel would be characterized as "every man's sword shall be against his brother" (Ezekiel 39:21).

Gog is Russia, or better, was Russia until destroyed. "39 “And you, son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Behold, I am against you, O Gog, [a]the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal; 2 and I will turn you around and lead you on, bringing you up from the far north, and bring you against the mountains of Israel."

Ezekiel 39
"21 “I will set My glory among the nations; all the nations shall see My judgment which I have executed, and My hand which I have laid on them. 22 So the house of Israel shall know that I am the Lord their God from that day forward. 23 The Gentiles shall know that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity; because they were unfaithful to Me, therefore I hid My face from them. I gave them into the hand of their enemies, and they all fell by the sword. 24 According to their uncleanness and according to their transgressions I have dealt with them, and hidden My face from them.” ’

25 “Therefore thus says the Lord God: ‘Now I will bring back the captives of Jacob, and have mercy on the whole house of Israel; and I will be jealous for My holy name— 26 after they have borne their shame, and all their unfaithfulness in which they were unfaithful to Me, when they dwelt safely in their own land and no one made them afraid. 27 When I have brought them back from the peoples and gathered them out of their enemies’ lands, and I am hallowed in them in the sight of many nations, 28 then they shall know that I am the Lord their God, who sent them into captivity among the nations, but also brought them back to their land, and left none of them [k]captive any longer. 29 And I will not hide My face from them anymore; for I shall have poured out My Spirit on the house of Israel,’ says the Lord God.”"

I'm not seeing what you said. In fact, I am seeing the last few verses, which speak out against what you are saying.

There is. Revelation 18:2 describes it. Likewise, Isaiah 24:21-23 also describes the imprisonment in Jerusalem for the punishment of the angelic host of "high ones", along with the "kings of the earth".

Ah. I see. You read Israel/Jerusalem into the prophecy. "After these things I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illuminated with his glory. 2 And he cried [a]mightily with a loud voice, saying, “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and has become a dwelling place of demons, a prison for every foul spirit, and a cage for every unclean and hated bird! " There is no reason to believe that this is Jerusalem. Again, the description runs contrary to Old Testament prophecy, which means this is another city, perhaps Babylon that was rebuilt in the 1980s? When Saddam Husseing believed that he was Nebuchadnezzar. If there were another caliphate, perhaps they will choose Babylon as their city?

Caiaphas and Annas were both called high priests during Christ's arrest and crucifixion. The term high priest served rather like an honorary title that was never withdrawn, rather like our term "President" for all those who ever served in that office. We speak of "President Kennedy", though he has been long dead. One high priest only would be serving at any given time, but many former high priests existed in those days.

Annas was only the high priest from 6AD-15AD, so no, Annas was not the high priest. He was deposed when Augustus died. Caiaphas was the high priest from 18AD-36AD. It doesn't matter if you are called high priest if you can't be high priest. God would strike you dead pretty quickly.

Revelation 16:14 lists the "kings of the earth" as being a separate enemy opposed to the kings of the "whole world". These would be aligned against each other in that battle for Jerusalem. They aren't the same thing.

No, it goes from local (Rome, wherever) and then out to the whole world. They are linked together. Also, they are not aligned against each other. Revelation 16:14 is just making it clear that they will ALL be there, at the battle of that great day of God Almighty. The battle at Armageddon.

Some of them were both generals and serving as a false christ trying to claim Daniel's prophesied role of Messiah the Prince.

The money-changers were responsible for collecting a fee for exchanging all the foreign currency coming to the temple. Any foreign currency was traded for the only coin that the high priesthood accepted in the temple for sales and purchases of sacrificial items for worship - the Tyrian shekel mark imposed by the Land Beast. The money-changers worked hand in glove with the high priesthood in those days to perpetuate this corrupt practice.

This is what I mean. Reading into scripture. The mark is on the hand or on the forehead, and it shows loyalty to the beast. One cannot buy or sell unless they have the mark. It can't be the Tyrian shekel, because they could still sell and take Tyrian shekels, right? So again, reading into prophecy. According to the angel then, anyone who ever touched a tyrian shekel is hell bound, without hope.

I hang onto the definition of kings of the earth being high priests because God does. In Psalms 2, He accuses the kings of the earth of conspiring together against Himself and His anointed, which would be Christ Jesus. The kings of the earth would want to "cast away their cords from us" - the cords of the covenant bond between God and themselves. These "cords" of covenant relationship had not been binding on the Gentile people at the time of Christ's crucifixion.

Why? God does not. If he meant high priests and not kings, such as Herod who tried to kill Jesus, or the other kings in the area, and the rulers, which the rulers could be the religious leaders, such the the high priest. Even if looking at the future, what you say makes no sense.

Josephus listed ten total generals for preparing for the Roman Jewish war in those various districts listed. Keep reading in the Josephus passage I gave you. It is ten generals - no more and no less. And Josephus himself was one of those ten generals / ten horns on the Scarlet Beast. So he ought to know.

Ah, but very quickly there were only nine. Perhaps God did this to thwart you?

The eighth high priest "king" which headed up the Scarlet Beast when it arose to existence in AD 66 was Mattathias ben Annas, the grandson of Annas, who was "of the seven" kings because he was descended from that family of Annas the high priest with its seven high priest "kings". Mattathias was deposed from that office by the Zealots soon after AD 66, when they cast lots to set up their own puppet high priest, Phannias, who didn't have a clue what he was doing .

If you read the history, there were only nine generals because one died off right at the start. Yet they all share power for one hour. And, it wasn't the high priest who gave them power, but according to Revelation, it is the beast that gives these horns their power. So... who is this beast again?

 

[TMSO]

There is. Revelation 18:2 describes it. Likewise, Isaiah 24:21-23 also describes the imprisonment in Jerusalem for the punishment of the angelic host of "high ones", along with the "kings of the earth".

I forgot Isaiah. It seems you didn't read the rest of Isaiah 24:23.

"It shall come to pass in that day
That the Lord will punish on high the host of exalted ones,
And on the earth the kings of the earth.
22 They will be gathered together,
As prisoners are gathered in the [f]pit,
And will be shut up in the prison;
After many days they will be punished.
23 Then the moon will be disgraced
And the sun ashamed;
For the Lord of hosts will reign
On Mount Zion and in Jerusalem
And before His elders, gloriously."

This says that the host of exalted ones will be punished on high. It says that the kings of the earth will be punished on earth. Where is Jerusalem again? The ones that will be gathered together are the kings of the earth. Why? "After many days they will be punished". If the host of exalted are punished on high, and the kings of the earth on earth, then they can't be punished "together". And why is the Lord of hosts doing this to the kings of the earth? "For the Lord of hosts will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem and before His elders, gloriously. Who are the elders?

 

[EarlyActs]

I forgot Isaiah. It seems you didn't read the rest of Isaiah 24:23.

"It shall come to pass in that day
That the Lord will punish on high the host of exalted ones,
And on the earth the kings of the earth.
22 They will be gathered together,
As prisoners are gathered in the [f]pit,
And will be shut up in the prison;
After many days they will be punished.
23 Then the moon will be disgraced
And the sun ashamed;
For the Lord of hosts will reign
On Mount Zion and in Jerusalem
And before His elders, gloriously."

This says that the host of exalted ones will be punished on high. It says that the kings of the earth will be punished on earth. Where is Jerusalem again? The ones that will be gathered together are the kings of the earth. Why? "After many days they will be punished". If the host of exalted are punished on high, and the kings of the earth on earth, then they can't be punished "together". And why is the Lord of hosts doing this to the kings of the earth? "For the Lord of hosts will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem and before His elders, gloriously. Who are the elders?

But the NT tells us that there is a new Jerusalem that is not attached to this earth. If you know NT history, you know there is no "Zionism"--no allegiance to the geographic place regardless of faith in God. Gal 4, Heb 11-13.

 

[TMSO]

But the NT tells us that there is a new Jerusalem that is not attached to this earth. If you know NT history, you know there is no "Zionism"--no allegiance to the geographic place regardless of faith in God. Gal 4, Heb 11-13.

I don't think there is Zionism, however, there is an allegiance there as far as God is concerned. It is all over the Old Testament. However, I do not believe this exists (outside of New Jerusalem) after the end of the age. It is a story of two flocks, one of the house of Israel, and another flock which Jesus is also gathering. At the end of the age, the two flocks will finally be totally gathered in, and it will be one flock. The remaining will be any gentiles saved during the end, and the remnant of Israel. (Only the remnant that are the elect of God. I believe the rest will be swept away during the upcoming final tribulation.

 

[EarlyActs]

I don't think there is Zionism, however, there is an allegiance there as far as God is concerned. It is all over the Old Testament. However, I do not believe this exists (outside of New Jerusalem) after the end of the age. It is a story of two flocks, one of the house of Israel, and another flock which Jesus is also gathering. At the end of the age, the two flocks will finally be totally gathered in, and it will be one flock. The remaining will be any gentiles saved during the end, and the remnant of Israel. (Only the remnant that are the elect of God. I believe the rest will be swept away during the upcoming final tribulation.

an allegiance there as far as God
To be clear, do you mean that in the NT we will find an allegiance to the land as strong as stated in the OT? Do you think there is an upcoming tribulation that is the wrath of God upon earth on the final day? By some accounts, this is merely an hour. I'm asking also about the term tribulation because this seems to require believers to be present (sometimes transl 'suffering'), while 'He saves us from the coming wrath' is the case in Thess or Rom 2.

 

[3 Resurrections]

I think you forgot what the scarlet beast was about... again. The scarlet beast attacks the lamb. This is why it is the antichrist. Attacking Christ.

The very word "anti-christ" does not mean an attack against Christ. It carries the meaning of a person presenting themselves as a pseudo-christ - a FALSE Christ, or an imitation Christ. Any antichrist was wanting to BE the anointed one which would be the Christ / Messiah the Prince which Daniel had predicted would come at the end of the 69th week of the prophecy. And yes, there were some of those operating within the Scarlet Beast kingdom which came to life again in AD 66 which were attempting to present themselves as such. But that did not make the Scarlet Beast itself the Antichrist. A Beast is always representative of a kingdom or empire. The Antichrist was a single individual man: one that the Thessalonians knew about in their day, as well as the identity of who and what was restraining him from coming into full power yet.

Gog is Russia, or better, was Russia until destroyed. "39 “And you, son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Behold, I am against you, O Gog, [a]the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal; 2 and I will turn you around and lead you on, bringing you up from the far north, and bring you against the mountains of Israel."

Gog is Israel, according to Numbers 24:5-10 in the LXX. Gog's battle was going to be a CIVIL WAR, when "every man's sword shall be against HIS BROTHER" (Ezekiel 38:21). Gog would come out of his place in the north parts - the north parts of ISRAEL, which was divided into four corners, according to Ezekiel 7:2.

Ah. I see. You read Israel/Jerusalem into the prophecy. "After these things I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illuminated with his glory. 2 And he cried [a]mightily with a loud voice, saying, “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and has become a dwelling place of demons, a prison for every foul spirit, and a cage for every unclean and hated bird! " There is no reason to believe that this is Jerusalem.

This absolutely is Old Jerusalem. And I don't "read Israel / Jerusalem into the prophecy". I am believing Christ in His condemnation of the city Jerusalem as being guilty of all the righteous blood shed on the earth from Abel to Zecharias (Matthew 23:34-37). This was the identical charge made against "that great city" Mystery Babylon in Revelation 18:24. Old Jerusalem and Mystery Babylon "that great city where also our Lord was crucified" were one and the same city.

Annas was only the high priest from 6AD-15AD, so no, Annas was not the high priest. He was deposed when Augustus died. Caiaphas was the high priest from 18AD-36AD. It doesn't matter if you are called high priest if you can't be high priest. God would strike you dead pretty quickly.

Please refer to Luke 3:2. "Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness."

This is what I mean. Reading into scripture. The mark is on the hand or on the forehead, and it shows loyalty to the beast. One cannot buy or sell unless they have the mark. It can't be the Tyrian shekel, because they could still sell and take Tyrian shekels, right? So again, reading into prophecy. According to the angel then, anyone who ever touched a tyrian shekel is hell bound, without hope.

No, Revelation 13:16 says the mark was going to be "received" in the hand or the forehead. The mark was handed over to the person to use. The mark was not said to be something stamped or imprinted on the hand or forehead. And no, simply touching a Tyrian shekel didn't render someone "hell bound, without hope", any more than touching the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was a sin (for which Adam and Eve were responsible as being caretakers of the Garden). It was worship of the pagan Sea Beast which was forbidden: giving homage to that Sea Beast with fealty and dependence upon it. This homage is related to a heart and spirit thing - not a bodily contact.

No, it goes from local (Rome, wherever) and then out to the whole world. They are linked together. Also, they are not aligned against each other. Revelation 16:14 is just making it clear that they will ALL be there, at the battle of that great day of God Almighty. The battle at Armageddon.

The "kings of the earth" and the kings of "the whole world" were most definitely aligned against each other in the AD 66-70 period. That was the deception of those unclean spirits which brought these different "kings" to battle with each other. Vespasian and Titus were the world's kings aligned against all Israel's former high priest kings of the earth inside Jerusalem. And the battle was never said to take place at Armageddon. The armies "went up over the breadth of the land", conquering the cities of Judea on their way to the final, main target of Jerusalem where most of the other cities' fugitives had fled for protection.

Why? God does not. If he meant high priests and not kings, such as Herod who tried to kill Jesus, or the other kings in the area, and the rulers, which the rulers could be the religious leaders, such the the high priest.

The "kings of the earth" who conspired with the rulers of the Sanhedrin council to crucify God's Anointed One were the high priests Annas and Caiaphas and their kindred - not Herod. Caiaphas wanted Christ as the one man to die for the people so that the whole nation would not perish by Rome's coming against them for a revolt (John 11:49-50). The high priests were the Psalms 2:2's "kings of the earth" who threatened the disciples (Acts 4:6, 17, 29).

Ah, but very quickly there were only nine. Perhaps God did this to thwart you?

You have miscounted Josephus's list of ten generals in Wars 2.20.3-4, which were the ten horns of the Scarlet Beast chosen to prepare the various districts for the coming war with Rome. It doesn't matter if one of them was murdered about a year later. Ten generals / ten horns were chosen to act as if they were kings (with no crowns) for a brief "one hour" that it took to bring that nation to destruction.

Joseph son of Gorion
Ananus the high priest
Jesus the son of Sapphias, one of the high priests
Eleazar the son of Ananias, the high priest
Niger, governor of Idumea
Joseph the son of Simon
Manasseh
John the Essene
John, the son of Matthias
Josephus, the son of Matthias the priest

If you read the history, there were only nine generals because one died off right at the start. Yet they all share power for one hour. And, it wasn't the high priest who gave them power, but according to Revelation, it is the beast that gives these horns their power. So... who is this beast again?

I presume you are referring to Niger who was slain by the Zealots after the Idumean raid on Jerusalem in AD 67/68 (Wars 4.6.1). But this only fulfills the terms of the short lifespan of the Scarlet Beast in Revelation 17:8. It was "about to ...go into destruction" soon after that Scarlet Beast arose to existence once more in AD 66. Heads, horns, harlot, and all were to be destroyed by Jerusalem's Lake of Fire conditions before the close of AD 70. That Scarlet Beast of an independent kingdom of Israel established by the Zealot rebellion (the apostasia) was not destined to live for long.

 

[TMSO]

an allegiance there as far as God
To be clear, do you mean that in the NT we will find an allegiance to the land as strong as stated in the OT? Do you think there is an upcoming tribulation that is the wrath of God upon earth on the final day? By some accounts, this is merely an hour. I'm asking also about the term tribulation because this seems to require believers to be present (sometimes transl 'suffering'), while 'He saves us from the coming wrath' is the case in Thess or Rom 2.

I believe there is an allegiance until the next age. I believe that Revelation is future, and refers to the redemption of the world, with the sealed scroll Jesus holds being God's will and testament in regards to all creation. As God's plan of redemption involves the whole world, and Israel is at the center of that, they have focus in Revelation. They are also the focus of Satan's desire to defeat God. If Israel fails, if Israel is destroyed, then Satan defeats God. Why? Then God's faithfulness and promises fail, and God breaks His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The Mosaic covenant, that failed, but Abraham, Isaac and Jacob never broke covenant with God. In Exodus, this is why God said that if Israel turns their hearts toward Him, He will remember His covenants, and He will rescue them.

Tribulation is for the world, though the focus will be on believers and on Israel. (As Israel is the main target of Satan, as God's covenant people through His covenants with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Leviticus 26
"40 ‘But if they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers, with their unfaithfulness in which they were unfaithful to Me, and that they also have walked contrary to Me,
41 and that I also have walked contrary to them and have brought them into the land of their enemies;
if their uncircumcised hearts are humbled, and they accept their guilt—
42 then I will remember My covenant with Jacob, and My covenant with Isaac and My covenant with Abraham I will remember;
I will remember the land.
43 The land also shall be left empty by them, and will enjoy its sabbaths while it lies desolate without them;
they will accept their guilt, because they despised My judgments and because their soul abhorred My statutes.
44 Yet for all that, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, nor shall I abhor them, to utterly destroy them and break My covenant with them;
for I am the Lord their God.
45 But for their sake I will remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God:
I am the Lord.’ ”"

 

[turbomaniac]

In order to understand a prophesy you must know that in old testament all prophesies are given both for an event at short time and an event long time. When a short time prophesy is happening than we know that the long term event will happen also. In example Isaiah gave the judas King prophesy short term that the Judas kingdom will be demolished by Babylon empire and at the same time gave the notorious prophesy "behold the virgin will give birth". By fulfilling the short term as we all know with the Babylon captivity we know that the long term prophecy will happen.


Jesus did the same thing so as Apostle John (after all Prophets speaked Jesus word). Jesus gave prophesy short term for the destruction of Jerusalem 70 ad and at the same time gave prophesy for His second coming. By fulfilling the 70 ad destruction we know that the second prophesy will be fulfilled.

This is not my opinion is what Saints interpretated

 

[TMSO]

The very word "anti-christ" does not mean an attack against Christ. It carries the meaning of a person presenting themselves as a pseudo-christ - a FALSE Christ, or an imitation Christ. Any antichrist was wanting to BE the anointed one which would be the Christ / Messiah the Prince which Daniel had predicted would come at the end of the 69th week of the prophecy. And yes, there were some of those operating within the Scarlet Beast kingdom which came to life again in AD 66 which were attempting to present themselves as such. But that did not make the Scarlet Beast itself the Antichrist. A Beast is always representative of a kingdom or empire. The Antichrist was a single individual man: one that the Thessalonians knew about in their day, as well as the identity of who and what was restraining him from coming into full power yet.

This Anti-christ is the beast that rises up from the abyss and goes to perdition. The abyss, the symbol of satanic/demonic power. This Antichrist will stand in the temple and proclaim himself God. In fact, he to will be of three. The beast, his image, and his mark. Consider that the church of AI is rising from the ashes. In this church, it is to worship AI, a human creation. (It's more complicated then that, but it once existed, ceased to exist, and is now coming back.) If the Anti-Christ was known, then why didn't Polycarp, Ignatius, Irenaeus, and Papias not know? Two of them knew John personally.

Gog is Israel, according to Numbers 24:5-10 in the LXX. Gog's battle was going to be a CIVIL WAR, when "every man's sword shall be against HIS BROTHER" (Ezekiel 38:21). Gog would come out of his place in the north parts - the north parts of ISRAEL, which was divided into four corners, according to Ezekiel 7:2.

"“How lovely are your tents, O Jacob!
Your dwellings, O Israel!
6 Like valleys that stretch out,
Like gardens by the riverside,
Like aloes planted by the Lord,
Like cedars beside the waters.
7 He shall pour water from his buckets,
And his seed shall be in many waters.
“His king shall be higher than Agag,
And his kingdom shall be exalted.
8 “God brings him out of Egypt;
He has strength like a wild ox;
He shall consume the nations, his enemies;
He shall break their bones
And pierce them with his arrows.
9 ‘He bows down, he lies down as a lion;
And as a lion, who shall rouse him?’
“Blessed is he who blesses you,
And cursed is he who curses you.”"

I read that apparently the LXX and two or three other translations translated Agag as Gog. " Gog's presence in these passages of the manuscript can be explained as a result of the scribal confusion of the Hebrew גוג and גוע in the process of translating from Hebrew to Greek (Bøe 2001:59; Tooman 2011:140)."

Hmm... " Now the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 2 “Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, [a]the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, and prophesy against him, 3 and say, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Behold, I am against you, O Gog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal. "

Guess where Rosh, Meschech and Tubal were located...
In what is now the basic area of... Russia. Gog truly was from the north. (And Gog is a PERSON. Magog is the nation.

"14 “Therefore, son of man, prophesy and say to Gog, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “On that day when My people Israel dwell safely, will you not know it? 15 Then you will come from your place out of the far north, you and many peoples with you, all of them riding on horses, a great company and a mighty army. 16 You will come up against My people Israel like a cloud, to cover the land. It will be in the latter days that I will bring you against My land, so that the nations may know Me, when I am hallowed in you, O Gog, before their eyes.”"

Gog is not Israel.

This absolutely is Old Jerusalem. And I don't "read Israel / Jerusalem into the prophecy". I am believing Christ in His condemnation of the city Jerusalem as being guilty of all the righteous blood shed on the earth from Abel to Zecharias (Matthew 23:34-37). This was the identical charge made against "that great city" Mystery Babylon in Revelation 18:24. Old Jerusalem and Mystery Babylon "that great city where also our Lord was crucified" were one and the same city.

Please refer to Luke 3:2. "Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness."

You did it. You have single handedly undermined the gospel. Pat yourself on the back. Obviously Luke can no longer be trusted as long as your argument stands.

No, Revelation 13:16 says the mark was going to be "received" in the hand or the forehead. The mark was handed over to the person to use. The mark was not said to be something stamped or imprinted on the hand or forehead. And no, simply touching a Tyrian shekel didn't render someone "hell bound, without hope", any more than touching the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was a sin (for which Adam and Eve were responsible as being caretakers of the Garden). It was worship of the pagan Sea Beast which was forbidden: giving homage to that Sea Beast with fealty and dependence upon it. This homage is related to a heart and spirit thing - not a bodily contact.

Perhaps you should use a lexicon. I actually found it was quite specific that it is indeed a stamp placed on the back of the hand.

"Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 5480: χάραγμα

χάραγμα, χαράγματος, τό (χαράσσω to engrave);
a. a stamp, an imprinted mark: of the mark stamped on the forehead or the right hand as the badge of the followers of Antichrist, Revelation 13:16; Revelation 14:9, 11; Revelation 15:2 Rec.; (πυρός, the mark branded upon horses, Anacreon () 26 (55), 2)."

"Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
stamp, mark.
From the same as charax; a scratch or etching, i.e. Stamp (as a badge of servitude), or scupltured figure (statue) -- graven, mark."

Revelation 13
"9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”"

You may want to read that multiple times.

 

[TMSO]

The "kings of the earth" and the kings of "the whole world" were most definitely aligned against each other in the AD 66-70 period. That was the deception of those unclean spirits which brought these different "kings" to battle with each other. Vespasian and Titus were the world's kings aligned against all Israel's former high priest kings of the earth inside Jerusalem. And the battle was never said to take place at Armageddon. The armies "went up over the breadth of the land", conquering the cities of Judea on their way to the final, main target of Jerusalem where most of the other cities' fugitives had fled for protection.

No.

The "kings of the earth" who conspired with the rulers of the Sanhedrin council to crucify God's Anointed One were the high priests Annas and Caiaphas and their kindred - not Herod. Caiaphas wanted Christ as the one man to die for the people so that the whole nation would not perish by Rome's coming against them for a revolt (John 11:49-50). The high priests were the Psalms 2:2's "kings of the earth" who threatened the disciples (Acts 4:6, 17, 29).

It was Caiaphas. Pilate and Herod were involved. Pilate was the one who ensured everyone saw that this was Jesus, the king of the Jews. The Jews did not want that to be seen. Would Psalms mean anything if that sign was not there? Why did Pilate side with the people? Why did Herod not stop what was happening?

You have miscounted Josephus's list of ten generals in Wars 2.20.3-4, which were the ten horns of the Scarlet Beast chosen to prepare the various districts for the coming war with Rome. It doesn't matter if one of them was murdered about a year later. Ten generals / ten horns were chosen to act as if they were kings (with no crowns) for a brief "one hour" that it took to bring that nation to destruction.

Joseph son of Gorion
Ananus the high priest
Jesus the son of Sapphias, one of the high priests
Eleazar the son of Ananias, the high priest
Niger, governor of Idumea
Joseph the son of Simon
Manasseh
John the Essene
John, the son of Matthias
Josephus, the son of Matthias the priest

I presume you are referring to Niger who was slain by the Zealots after the Idumean raid on Jerusalem in AD 67/68 (Wars 4.6.1).

Joseph son of Gorion was killed.

But this only fulfills the terms of the short lifespan of the Scarlet Beast in Revelation 17:8. It was "about to ...go into destruction" soon after that Scarlet Beast arose to existence once more in AD 66. Heads, horns, harlot, and all were to be destroyed by Jerusalem's Lake of Fire conditions before the close of AD 70. That Scarlet Beast of an independent kingdom of Israel established by the Zealot rebellion (the apostasia) was not destined to live for long.

You have so mutilated Revelation that John's words that his warnings pertain to you. You should consider them.

 

[3 Resurrections]

This Anti-christ is the beast that rises up from the abyss and goes to perdition

No, a Beast is always in scripture prophecy representative of an empire or a kingdom - not an individual man, which the Antichrist would be. You want to lump them together as being the same thing, and scripture never does that.

If the Anti-Christ was known, then why didn't Polycarp, Ignatius, Irenaeus, and Papias not know? Two of them knew John personally.

Because "great men are not always wise". Even the disciples were still confused about some basic teachings after years of personal instruction by Christ, and the risen Christ had to enlighten them about certain things after His resurrection.

Gog is not Israel

Gog is definitely Israel, because Gog's battle in Israel would involve a conflict when "every man's sword shall be against HIS BROTHER". CIVIL WAR. This was the Zealots' doing who ended up fighting against their own people in an effort to become the prophesied Messiah.

Perhaps you should use a lexicon. I actually found it was quite specific that it is indeed a stamp placed on the back of the hand.

"Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 5480: χάραγμα

χάραγμα, χαράγματος, τό (χαράσσω to engrave);
a. a stamp, an imprinted mark: of the mark stamped on the forehead or the right hand as the badge of the followers of Antichrist, Revelation 13:16; Revelation 14:9, 11; Revelation 15:2 Rec.; (πυρός, the mark branded upon horses, Anacreon () 26 (55), 2)."

"Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
stamp, mark.
From the same as charax; a scratch or etching, i.e. Stamp (as a badge of servitude), or scupltured figure (statue) -- graven, mark."

Revelation 13
"9 Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, 10 he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name.”"

You may want to read that multiple times.

This only proves my point. The Tyrian shekel had abominable images and inscriptions stamped on it which gave homage to the gods of Rome and the devil-worshipping city of Tyre. These images and inscriptions on these Tyrian shekel coins were forbidden by God all the way back in the OT (Deuteronomy 7:25-26), but the priesthood were requiring the use of this coin by anyone coming to the temple. People who "received" this mark in their hand in exchange for their foreign currency in order to either sell or purchase sacrificial items in the temple had to pay an onerous fee which was collected by the money-changers for the priesthood.

You have so mutilated Revelation that John's words that his warnings pertain to you. You should consider them.

And you have ignored all the time-relevant language which John used to show those first-century servants of Christ what was "about to take place" in their own generation. All those prophecies of future events were of events which were "AT HAND". When one ignores the significance of this language in the introduction and conclusion of Revelation (Rev. 1:3 and Rev. 22:10), interpretations go far off into left field.

 

[TMSO]

No, a Beast is always in scripture prophecy representative of an empire or a kingdom - not an individual man, which the Antichrist would be. You want to lump them together as being the same thing, and scripture never does that.

"9 “Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. 10 There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time. 11 The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to [f]perdition."

The beast is a person, an eighth what? An eighth king.

"18 Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666." Why is it the number of this beast the number of a man? John is telling us this is a man.

Because "great men are not always wise". Even the disciples were still confused about some basic teachings after years of personal instruction by Christ, and the risen Christ had to enlighten them about certain things after His resurrection.

Gog is definitely Israel, because Gog's battle in Israel would involve a conflict when "every man's sword shall be against HIS BROTHER". CIVIL WAR. This was the Zealots' doing who ended up fighting against their own people in an effort to become the prophesied Messiah.

This is not civil war. This is, as scripture says, God's judgement on Gog. God will route Gog, and the soldiers in his army will be killing each other, just as has happened at other points in Israel's history, where God confused the armies of Israel's enemies. To the point that more enemies killed themselves, then Israel killed. So please, a little exegesis. Ezekiel is clear that Gog is the prince of cities that existed in what is now present day Russia. Not Israel.

This only proves my point. The Tyrian shekel had abominable images and inscriptions stamped on it which gave homage to the gods of Rome and the devil-worshipping city of Tyre. These images and inscriptions on these Tyrian shekel coins were forbidden by God all the way back in the OT (Deuteronomy 7:25-26), but the priesthood were requiring the use of this coin by anyone coming to the temple. People who "received" this mark in their hand in exchange for their foreign currency in order to either sell or purchase sacrificial items in the temple had to pay an onerous fee which was collected by the money-changers for the priesthood.

So, if one went to a city in Israel, would one pay with a tyrian shekel, or with some other kind of money? Scripture is clear, no buying or selling anywhere without the mark. However, history is clear that this shekel was only for the temple. There was other money used, that had Caesar's inscription on it. "16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has [g]the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." And what did John say about the name or number of the beast? It is of a man. But the inscriptions on the Tyrian shekel are not of a man, but of a god. There is also no number or name on the shekel. Also this coin was no longer used by 66 AD. So another fail.

And you have ignored all the time-relevant language which John used to show those first-century servants of Christ what was "about to take place" in their own generation. All those prophecies of future events were of events which were "AT HAND". When one ignores the significance of this language in the introduction and conclusion of Revelation (Rev. 1:3 and Rev. 22:10), interpretations go far off into left field.

I don't ignore the significance. However, I also don't ignore the fact that I John was written around 95-100AD, and says Jesus had not come yet.

 

[3 Resurrections]

So, if one went to a city in Israel, would one pay with a tyrian shekel, or with some other kind of money? Scripture is clear, no buying or selling anywhere without the mark. However, history is clear that this shekel was only for the temple. There was other money used, that had Caesar's inscription on it. "16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has [g]the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." And what did John say about the name or number of the beast? It is of a man. But the inscriptions on the Tyrian shekel are not of a man, but of a god. There is also no number or name on the shekel. Also this coin was no longer used by 66 AD. So another fail.

The fact that this Tyrian shekel coin was no longer required for temple use in AD 66 by the Zealots who had overthrown their Roman governance makes the point that the Judean Land Beast of Rev. 13 was no longer the leading power at that point in time. It meant that the Scarlet Beast kingdom of an independent nation of Israel had arisen to existence once more. This is not a "fail". This again proves my point.

And the Tyrian shekel "mark" did have the name of the Sea Beast on it. The new Tyrian shekel copies which were minted in Jerusalem after 19 BC were only allowed to be produced by authorization of Rome. This authorization was stamped on the reverse ide of the coin with the initials "KP", standing for "kratos Romaion", meaning that it was by the "power of the Romans" that this Tyrian shekel coin was issued. These Jerusalem copies of the Tyrian shekel are called in the numismatic records a "crude shekel" because of the rather sloppy technique used to depict the demi-god Herakles on the front. It's almost as if the Jews, knowing they were making an image forbidden by God, at least tried to use the most careless technique they could get away with and still abide by Rome's requirements that the same images would appear on Jerusalem's minted Tyrian shekel coinage.

I don't ignore the significance. However, I also don't ignore the fact that I John was written around 95-100AD, and says Jesus had not come yet.

Everything you write concerning end times events shows that no consideration at all is being given to the time-relevant language John used to portray imminent events in his days. And you are still presuming a late date for 1 John (and also Revelation) for which there is no foundation by scripture's own internal witness. If you really did believe the imminent language in 1 John and Revelation applied to the AD 95-100 years, there is no way all of the imminent disasters and judgments match with events in the years from AD 95-100.

 

[ChristB4us]

Let's see ... in Matthew 24:32-34, Jesus gave a very important sign. “Now learn a parable of the fig tree: When his branch is yet tender and putteth forth leaves ye know that summer is nigh. So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily, I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” Throughout the Bible we learn that the fig tree represents the Nation of Israel (Jeremiah 24:1-10; 29:17-23; Luke 13:6-9). Leaves sprouting on a tree are an evidence that the tree has sprung to life after a dormant winter. Jesus was actually telling us that when we see Israel come alive as a nation — after being without a homeland for nearly 2,000 years — then we will know that God’s Kingdom is right at the door.

Has Israel put forth leaves? Yes, most definitely. After the Roman conquest in the First Century B.C., Israelites as a people were dispersed among all nations, often persecuted bitterly, having to live in Ghettos, then hunted and exterminated as undesirables. Yet Jewish hopes remained strong in God’s promises of a return to their homeland. “Next year in Jerusalem” was their cry. This hope was fulfilled in one of the great miracles of our day. The fig tree, Israel, put forth leaves in May 1948 when once again it became a nation after thousands of years without a homeland. God has done no such thing with any other nation.

Luke adds something in his account of this prophecy that makes our faith even stronger: “Behold the fig tree, and all the trees... when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the Kingdom of God is nigh at hand.” (Luke 21:29-31) Notice that Luke adds “and all the trees.” If the fig tree pictures Israel, then all the trees would refer to other nations. Luke is telling us that, together with Israel springing to life, many other nations would put forth leaves, sprouting into existence. And what does history tell us? For centuries, up to 1945, the number of independent nations in the world had remained relatively constant at around 70. However, since 1945 the number of independent nations has grown dramatically to 196 nations! More than 126 new independent nations have sprung into being that were previously held as colonies. This ties in closely with the time that Israel became a nation in 1948.

Thus Israel, simultaneously with 126 other nations, has put forth leaves, sprouting into existence. What a thrill to our hearts to realize that we are on the very brink of the greatest event in all human history — the establishment of God’s Kingdom!

I have never considered the fig tree as representing Israel but the signs of the times, like earthquakes and volcanos that are now increasing as a woman about to give birth.

These signs of the fig tree were to be given to signify that the Bridegroom is coming and is at the door for when He will judge His House at the pre great tribulation rapture event. I had not seen it as the establishment of God's kingdom on earth as you do, even though that will happen at the end of the great tribulation.

So I disagree, since His warning to be watchful & ready was for the coming of the Bridegroom, rather than His coming as the King of kings, but thanks for sharing. That is what I believe His use of the fig tree was specifically for.

 

[TMSO]

The fact that this Tyrian shekel coin was no longer required for temple use in AD 66 by the Zealots who had overthrown their Roman governance makes the point that the Judean Land Beast of Rev. 13 was no longer the leading power at that point in time. It meant that the Scarlet Beast kingdom of an independent nation of Israel had arisen to existence once more. This is not a "fail". This again proves my point.

It has absolutely NOTHING to do with what is recorded in Revelation. It does not fulfill what is written. You keep adding and removing what you please from Revelation without fear of John's warning.

And the Tyrian shekel "mark" did have the name of the Sea Beast on it. The new Tyrian shekel copies which were minted in Jerusalem after 19 BC were only allowed to be produced by authorization of Rome. This authorization was stamped on the reverse ide of the coin with the initials "KP", standing for "kratos Romaion", meaning that it was by the "power of the Romans" that this Tyrian shekel coin was issued.

The name of a beast is that of a man. Again, you add and remove from Revelation as you please.

These Jerusalem copies of the Tyrian shekel are called in the numismatic records a "crude shekel" because of the rather sloppy technique used to depict the demi-god Herakles on the front. It's almost as if the Jews, knowing they were making an image forbidden by God, at least tried to use the most careless technique they could get away with and still abide by Rome's requirements that the same images would appear on Jerusalem's minted Tyrian shekel coinage.

Herakles is not the beast. But this mark in Revelation represents the beast, a man. It links the bearer to the beast, a man. Please, stop destroying what God has given us in Revelation.

Everything you write concerning end times events shows that no consideration at all is being given to the time-relevant language John used to portray imminent events in his days. And you are still presuming a late date for 1 John (and also Revelation) for which there is no foundation by scripture's own internal witness. If you really did believe the imminent language in 1 John and Revelation applied to the AD 95-100 years, there is no way all of the imminent disasters and judgments match with events in the years from AD 95-100.

It is future. How do we know it is future? It is about the end of the age, which, as has been shown elsewhere, is the "complete end". That is, NOTHING comes after. The age of man is over. The age of eternity begins. This creation is done away with, and in comes the new.

 

[3 Resurrections]

The name of a beast is that of a man. Again, you add and remove from Revelation as you please.

When you say that the mark must have the name of the Beast on it, this is adding to scripture. The mark and the number and the name of the beast are all listed as separate and distinct aspects of it's existence in Revelation 13:17

Herakles is not the beast. But this mark in Revelation represents the beast, a man. It links the bearer to the beast, a man. Please, stop destroying what God has given us in Revelation.

I did not say Herakles was the beast. The Tyrian shekel copy minted by the Jews represented Rome's power over the nation of Israel, because it was only issued by permission of Rome's authority, and was stamped with those initials which proved Rome's authorization of that abominable coin.

The ancient history of the Sea Beast was begun by the man Nebuchadnezzar 666 years prior to John writing Revelation. Nebuchadnezzar's "lion" kingdom (which was one of the features of the Sea Beast in Rev. 13:2) "was made to stand upon its feet AS A MAN, and a MAN'S HEART was given to it" (Daniel 7:4). The Jews who knew their Daniel scriptures would have recognized this reference to a "man" with the Sea Beast in Rev. 13:18.

It is future. How do we know it is future? It is about the end of the age, which, as has been shown elsewhere, is the "complete end". That is, NOTHING comes after. The age of man is over. The age of eternity begins. This creation is done away with, and in comes the new.

Revelation spoke of those future events being in John's immediate future, of "things that are ABOUT TO BE hereafter" (Rev. 1:19). Future to John, but not future to us. According to Paul, there are multiple ages of human history, and Revelation was speaking about the end of the age in John's immediate future.

 

[TMSO]

When you say that the mark must have the name of the Beast on it, this is adding to scripture. The mark and the number and the name of the beast are all listed as separate and distinct aspects of it's existence in Revelation 13:17

I did not say Herakles was the beast. The Tyrian shekel copy minted by the Jews represented Rome's power over the nation of Israel, because it was only issued by permission of Rome's authority, and was stamped with those initials which proved Rome's authorization of that abominable coin.

And I am not sure why you are doing this, since, when reading scripture, it is blatantly obvious this is not the mark. However, your belief crumbles if it is not, so you are fighting tooth and nail. If I went to see in the temple, and I had no Tyrian Sekels, would I be allowed to sell? (Since I would receive Tyrian Shekels, and I'm not going as a money changer, but as a merchant? I mean, I am sure that they would allow me to sell. Buying is another problem, as they only take Tyrian shekels.

The ancient history of the Sea Beast was begun by the man Nebuchadnezzar 666 years prior to John writing Revelation.

Again with the eisegesis.

Nebuchadnezzar's "lion" kingdom (which was one of the features of the Sea Beast in Rev. 13:2) "was made to stand upon its feet AS A MAN, and a MAN'S HEART was given to it" (Daniel 7:4). The Jews who knew their Daniel scriptures would have recognized this reference to a "man" with the Sea Beast in Rev. 13:18.

Really? Do you have any evidence. I'm pretty sure the Rabbis would have something to say about this. Considering they don't accept Revelation.

Revelation spoke of those future events being in John's immediate future, of "things that are ABOUT TO BE hereafter" (Rev. 1:19). Future to John, but not future to us. According to Paul, there are multiple ages of human history, and Revelation was speaking about the end of the age in John's immediate future.

Future to John is also future to us. (Okay, can be future to us.) Given the disciples questions, Jesus' response, it is blatantly obvious that this is our future, as Revelation relates to the complete end, as the disciples put it. I understand you aren't arguing against this, because you have no argument against it. If there is anything I have learned about scripture and how things work, if you find a foundational point is wrong, you have to rebuild. You have cracks in the foundation of your argument. I was following along with all you said, and one little thing destroyed your whole argument for me. Why? Because I am logical and rational, and all your arguments flow from the one point. One point of failure. What the disciples were asking Jesus. When will you set up your kingdom. Asked two different ways in Matthew 24, and Acts 1. " 6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority."
Only a king can restore a kingdom. The disciples still didn't understand Jesus was leaving. Did Jesus provide another answer to the question they didn't ask? "10 And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, 11 who also said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.”"

Did they say the disciples will see Him again? No. They just said that He will come in like manner as He left.

 

[3 Resurrections]

And I am not sure why you are doing this, since, when reading scripture, it is blatantly obvious this is not the mark. However, your belief crumbles if it is not, so you are fighting tooth and nail. If I went to see in the temple, and I had no Tyrian Sekels, would I be allowed to sell? (Since I would receive Tyrian Shekels, and I'm not going as a money changer, but as a merchant? I mean, I am sure that they would allow me to sell. Buying is another problem, as they only take Tyrian shekels.

You are posting as if any of the Beasts will be appearing in our future. They have all gone out of existence. This Tyrian shekel "mark" of the Beast requirement was gotten rid of long ago in AD 66 when the Scarlet Beast came to existence again in Israel. The Zealots started minting their own currency at that time instead of the Tyrian shekel, since the rebellion they started wanted nothing to do with giving any kind of homage to the Roman phase of the Sea Beast.

Again with the eisegesis.

And you are totally missing the significance of Revelation 13:2's features of the lion, bear, and leopard all being present in that final Sea Beast of Revelation 13. These were Daniel's representations of the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, and Greek kingdoms respectively; with the power behind all of these former kingdoms subsumed into the final Roman phase of the Sea Beast operating in John's days.

Really? Do you have any evidence. I'm pretty sure the Rabbis would have something to say about this. Considering they don't accept Revelation.

Christ had already told His Jewish audience that if they read Daniel, they would understand what He was talking about. So yes, the Daniel scriptures were being heavily considered in those days. All the people, even the Samaritan woman at the well, knew that Daniel's "Messiah the Prince" was coming in their time, and in the AD 30 year, which is why the Jewish religious leaders sent a delegation to John the Baptist around that year to ask if he were that coming Messiah or the prophet preceding that Messiah the Prince. Eventually the Daniel scriptures were rejected because they pointed unmistakably to Christ Jesus as the fulfillment of Daniel's predictions.

What the disciples were asking Jesus. When will you set up your kingdom. Asked two different ways in Matthew 24, and Acts 1. " 6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority."

The disciples were still operating under the mistaken impression that Messiah the Prince would be in control of a physical kingdom of ethnic, national Israel. God did intend to have the Scarlet Beast of an independent kingdom of Israel arise in AD 66, soon after John wrote Revelation 17:8, but this was not to be the immediate concern of the disciples in Acts 1. They had other priorities of establishing the spiritual kingdom of God in the early church beginning at Pentecost in AD 33.