Is The Holy Spirit Or The Church The Restrainer Of 2 Thess.?

After slogging thru 11 pages: Historically, the Catholic based Reimes bible came out 1 yr.(?) before the release of KJV and used "revolt" as a translation of the Greek word Apostasia so as to refer to the Protestant Reformation as the "bad guys" and in reaction, KJV switched the translation in their bible to "fallen away" when in fact, many for 100's of years understood the word to mean "departure" or secondary meaning "disappeared." Which in fact, aligns with the "rapture" as happening pre-trib.
For a long time, I was unconvinced myself, about the pre-trib rapture as separate from the 2nd coming but have been totally convinced by Thomas Ice who has even more argument than I have seen here for why this is so. Google him - I fear if I load another video I will be virtually stoned to my eternal life. So I agree with Major, Abdicate, Euphemia, and JohnC.
According to Ice, when the church is raptured, the HS will be free to work with the remnant Jews and tribulation saints. Maranantha.
 
Silk said:
After slogging thru 11 pages: Historically, the Catholic based Reimes bible came out 1 yr.(?) before the release of KJV and used "revolt" as a translation of the Greek word Apostasia so as to refer to the Protestant Reformation as the "bad guys" and in reaction, KJV switched the translation in their bible to "fallen away" when in fact, many for 100's of years understood the word to mean "departure" or secondary meaning "disappeared." Which in fact, aligns with the "rapture" as happening pre-trib.
For a long time, I was unconvinced myself, about the pre-trib rapture as separate from the 2nd coming but have been totally convinced by Thomas Ice who has even more argument than I have seen here for why this is so. Google him - I fear if I load another video I will be virtually stoned to my eternal life. So I agree with Major, Abdicate, Euphemia, and JohnC.
According to Ice, when the church is raptured, the HS will be free to work with the remnant Jews and tribulation saints. Maranantha.
Click to expand...

Praise the Lord! I hope all who read this see and understand what the results are when we pray; study and ask the Holy Spirit for direction and learning.
 
Phoneman777 said:
Bro, how can you calculate 483 years from 445 BC and arrive at 33 AD? Are you using Common Core math? ;)

Here's how I see it:
  • Artaxerxes' decree: 457 BC
  • Add 483 years: 27 AD
  • 27 AD: The year of "unto Messiah the prince" of Daniel 9, when Jesus was "anointed" by the Holy Spirit in dove form in the Jordan River, according to Luke 3 and the use of his favorite calendar, the Syro-Macedonian.
(Futurist scholars admit to Luke's affinity for this calendar, but choose to set it aside when reckoning Luke 3 because Futurism cannot possibly survive when this calendar chronicles the 15th year of Tiberius, which is the year of Jesus' baptism, as being 27 AD.)
  • "Unto Messiah the prince", the event in which our Lord is anointed in the Jordan, is the conclusion of the 69 weeks.
  • The 70th week commenced with Jesus coming up out of the water and beginning His public ministry by calling His disciples.
  • "After threescore and two (and the seven) weeks, or the 69 weeks, "Messiah (was) cut off but not for Himself" which was during the 70th week, and specifically, was in the midst of the 70th week after 3 1/2 years of ministry.
  • "In the midst of the week, He (caused) the sacrifices and oblations to cease" to have any value in the eyes of God when He was crucified.
  • No clock stoppage
Click to expand...

I see that we are going to banter back and forth until the Rapture comes over this. It is clear that we are not going to agree but I enjoy communicating with my brothers over Biblical things such as this.

As to the decree of Artaxerxes being the one that Daniel spoke of, I have to say to you that this command recorded in Ezra 7:11-26 clearly had nothing to do with rebuilding the "city." Please, you read carefully and what you will see is that Ezra summarized the intent of the kings command when he stated in verse #7: "To beautify the house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem".

It seems then to me that the date of 445 B.C. is more in line with what actually took place. That is when the king gave permission to Nehemiah to go:......"Unto the city of my father's sepulchers, that I may build it" (Neh. 2:5).

The edict even mentions the materials he needed to gather to do the work in Neh. 2:8.... "For the wall of the city".

It was all about the rebuilding of the CITY.

Now as for the "Anointing" that you are fixed upon as the baptism of Jesus. Isn't that in reality trying to make an event fit where we want it to because we approach it with a pre-conceived notion? Just asking you to think about it my brother.

"To ANOINT the most High" has been understood over the years to be one of 3 things at various times, but never the baptism of Messiah.

1). Zerubbabel's Temple.
2). Christ Himself.
3). A Future temple when the Messiah's reign will be inaugurated with righteousness.

The most logical and natural IMO is #3. That is the description that Ezekiel gives us in his book in chapter 40-45, together with actual animal sacrifices which will commemorate Christ's death on the cross.

Even the phrase in Daniel 9:24 where we have......"And to ANOINT the most Holy". If you will look up the meaning of MOST HOLY I think you will see that it means literally........"HOLY OF HOLIES"

Any way........That is how I see it.
 
So...
I will go ahead and throw my opinion into the pot as well...

I believe it is the Holy Spirit.....
I believe there is good evidence - both Scriptural, as well as historical.....
BUT... I believe that it is the Holy Spirit that "Tabernacles with" the Faithful Jewish Remnant and indwells Spirit filled Christians....
... so what the WORLD will see is that a certain portion of Christians and Jews will leave or be expelled....
And... As per usual - everyone else will CHEER their departure.....

My example of the Jewish War... Here's what happened.....
The Sold Out Harlot Religious Organization decided to REBEL against the Rulers of the World... All the robbers and assassins and other "Worthless men" teamed up with them to help make it happen... and it more or less worked out EXACTLY as in Rev 18... Except - -It was a 1 headed beast..... But.. That Beast utterly destroyed that Harlot..... so it's instructive..... We need to learn that lesson again....

But.... About 38 years before that... There was this Jewish Messiah Fellow who got hung up on a Cross and miraculously raised himself from the dead and was seen by a whole bunch of his disciples.....
And in the intervening 38 years - the Harlot Organization worked hard as they could to Destroy and RUN OFF all the Believers in such fellow....

They finally succeeded - aided by one of Jesus's prophesies (When you see the enemy cast a trench about Jerusalem....)... and all the Holy Spirit filled Christians (Who were mostly Jews at that point) LEFT..... Not only did they flee Jerusalem - they fled the entire REGION.....

This is when you see the whole situation spiral completely into INSANITY.... Factions killing eachother.... Temple leadership sending armies out to WAR on Other Jewish cities in the region..... Etc.... There is a clear point there that you can see that God pulled out the "Restrainer".... and they were no longer Restrained.... and they just put the pedal to the floor chasing after their own destruction.... AND... All their enemies were strengthened to ENSURE the destruction would happen....

You can make the same case with Germany during the Jewish Holocost..... that once Hitler removed the Jews and the Christians that were helping the Jews - the whole place cascaded into Insanity - and the whole empire set about chasing it's own destruction full speed ahead.... And... all their enemies were strengthened to ensure the destruction would happen....

In that light... If we use History as any sort of example.... I don't think the Rapture is going to go the WAY so many of us like to dream it will go......

Thanks
 
JohnC said:
So...
I will go ahead and throw my opinion into the pot as well...

I believe it is the Holy Spirit.....
I believe there is good evidence - both Scriptural, as well as historical.....
BUT... I believe that it is the Holy Spirit that "Tabernacles with" the Faithful Jewish Remnant and indwells Spirit filled Christians....
... so what the WORLD will see is that a certain portion of Christians and Jews will leave or be expelled....
And... As per usual - everyone else will CHEER their departure.....

My example of the Jewish War... Here's what happened.....
The Sold Out Harlot Religious Organization decided to REBEL against the Rulers of the World... All the robbers and assassins and other "Worthless men" teamed up with them to help make it happen... and it more or less worked out EXACTLY as in Rev 18... Except - -It was a 1 headed beast..... But.. That Beast utterly destroyed that Harlot..... so it's instructive..... We need to learn that lesson again....

But.... About 38 years before that... There was this Jewish Messiah Fellow who got hung up on a Cross and miraculously raised himself from the dead and was seen by a whole bunch of his disciples.....
And in the intervening 38 years - the Harlot Organization worked hard as they could to Destroy and RUN OFF all the Believers in such fellow....

They finally succeeded - aided by one of Jesus's prophesies (When you see the enemy cast a trench about Jerusalem....)... and all the Holy Spirit filled Christians (Who were mostly Jews at that point) LEFT..... Not only did they flee Jerusalem - they fled the entire REGION.....

This is when you see the whole situation spiral completely into INSANITY.... Factions killing eachother.... Temple leadership sending armies out to WAR on Other Jewish cities in the region..... Etc.... There is a clear point there that you can see that God pulled out the "Restrainer".... and they were no longer Restrained.... and they just put the pedal to the floor chasing after their own destruction.... AND... All their enemies were strengthened to ENSURE the destruction would happen....

You can make the same case with Germany during the Jewish Holocost..... that once Hitler removed the Jews and the Christians that were helping the Jews - the whole place cascaded into Insanity - and the whole empire set about chasing it's own destruction full speed ahead.... And... all their enemies were strengthened to ensure the destruction would happen....

In that light... If we use History as any sort of example.... I don't think the Rapture is going to go the WAY so many of us like to dream it will go......

Thanks
Click to expand...

And it seems that we agree once again. Scary isn't it?

Yes, I also believe that church will go right on being church after the Rapture. In fact I think that churches everywhere in the world will be packed out the Sunday after the Rapture, because there will be a lot left behind who just knew they were going up but...........
 
Sure - if history is any indication, "Church" will go right along after the "rapture".....

Where I disagree is that the CHURCH will be the one cheering that those pesky, noisy "Pick your enemy" Apostates who were AGAINST Cooperation and Brotherhood are NOW gone ... "THIS will usher in A New Era of Cooperation and Brotherhood!"

They will not be SAD that those fellows are now gone... They will be OVERJOYED, empowerered, and united because Those Fellows have been a Thorn in their Side for YEARS now.....

That's basically what happened when the Christians finally left Judea.... Everybody else cheered....
 
Abdicate said:
Year of His death...

after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off
Click to expand...
27 AD is the year that the "unto Messiah the Prince" event occurred, which event concludes the 69 weeks, and is likely referring to His baptism b/c the only way it could be referring to His death is if Daniel would have not spoken of His death as being "after" the 69 weeks. His death is a separate event that happened "after threescore and two (and seven) weeks", else Daniel would have never indicated such.
JohnC said:
The fact that the Early Church Fathers thought Rome was the restrainer is fine historical fact and all.... but what are the consequences of that being the case?

Let's walk through it....
SO.... Question 1....
Which Rome is Rome?
Was it the physical CITY of Rome ....
Was it the Formal Roman Empire... If so, which half... The Byzantine empire lasted a LONG time....
Did it continue with the European Papacy and Holy Roman Empire and the Catholic Church?
Or... do you consider the Turkish empire which went to 1918 to be the continuation of the Byzantine empire and thus Rome?

Please be specific.... Nail it down without any hand waving.....

So... Second question... If Rome is the Restrainer.... HAS Rome fallen or not?
Once again - please be specific...... Nail this down

Third question......
What are the Consequences of Rome and NOT the Holy Spirit being the Restrainer?
In contrast....
What are the consequences of the Holy Spirit and NOT Rome being the Restrainer?

Fourth question......
My opinion.... The events of the Jewish War from 66 to 71 AD are very instructive......
Do you see any parallels between the "Removal of the Restrainer" from Judea to the events in the Jewish War?
If not - fine...
If so.... WHAT was the Restrainer - whose removal precipitated the madness?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Hi, thanks for your input. Here's what happened historically:
1) The ECF spoke of the "seat of the Caesars" which at that time was in Italy, so the answer is the Western Roman Empire.
2) The Western Roman Empire fell for all intents and purposes by 467 AD, and was divided among barbarian tribes for several decades.
3) The resulting chaos and instability led to a mutual agreement among the tribes to allow the Church to rule and reign, which upon accepting this role, became the Papacy - the union of church and state.
4) The Papacy which is the Little Horn of Daniel, the first Beast of Revelation 13, and the Whore of Revelation 17, proceeded to fulfill all the identifying marks of Bible prophecy found in Daniel and Revelation. Here are a few:
  • The Papal "little horn" came up officially in 538 AD "among the ten horns" which arose out of the ashes of the Roman Empire. Non-religious historians have identified these 10 as the Anglo-Saxons, Francs, Visigoths, Suevi, Burgundians, Allemanni, Lombards, Vandals, Heruli, and Ostrogoths which prevailed when the dust settled and from which came forth the Papacy.
  • Was "different" from the other horns, in that this was a "religio/political power" which would be led by a succession of men.
  • uprooted the three "horns" of Daniel 7 (Vandals, Heruli, and Ostrogoths) b/c they refused to submit to the Papal power and utterly destroyed them "by the roots" and left nothing of them, not even their own historical accounts. All information on these 3 are from Rome.
  • has the "eyes like the eyes of man", meaning this kingdom was to be led by men lacking Holy Spirit discernment and wisdom while relying on that of man
  • has "a mouth speaking Great Things" which Revelation 13 adds "blasphemies". The Bible says it is blasphemy for a man to claim to be God and the power to forgive sins; both of which the Papacy claims to this day (John 10, Luke 5)
  • Would "wear out the saints of the Most High". The persecutions of Christians today are NOTHING to what followers of Christ had to endure under the 1,000+ year persecution of the Church via the crusades, inquisitions, etc. Between 75Million - 150 Million Christians were killed for their faith under Papal rule
  • Would "think to change times and laws". The Papal power claims the power and has attempted to change the Ten Commandments and adjust other directives of Jesus, such as communion and baptism, and has instituted so many blasphemous rites and rituals that the Protestant Reformation was inevitable
  • Would reign for "a time, times, and 1/2 a time" which when compared to Revelation 12 means "1260" prophetic days, or literal years. The Papacy reigned from 538 to 1798, exactly 1260 years, when Napoleon's General Berthier arrested and imprisoned the Pope and the Papacy was declared "dead" when it received a "deadly wound", which would later be healed. The "sword of France" used by the Papacy for so long to kill Christians and other enemies was turned upon itself. "He that leadeth into captivity must go into captivity; he that killeth with the sword must be killed by the sword".
  • The "deadly wound" was healed in 1929 when Mussolini gave back the Papal territory and officially recognized the Papacy once again as a legitimate kingdom. Today, "the whole world wonders after the Beast", including Protestants who are completely blind to their own history b/c they have bought into the lies of Futurism and Preterism. The Papacy, once understood fully by Protestants to be Satan's agency of deception and death, is now regarded as a peaceful, unassuming, religious beacon of light to an uncertain world.
These are but just a few of the reasons why the Protestants of old preached Historicism and laughed Jesuit Ribera's Futurism and Jesuit Alcazar's Preterism to scorn. Any history book will confirm that which is written above. The question is are we humble enough to let go of cherished beliefs in favor of what the Bible teaches, which I admit is not easy to do, but possible if we pray earnestly for discernment.
 
I really do appreciate your detailed explanation. It is a lot to think about...

I guess from my perspective.... I would question:
The destruction of the Anti-christ would then usher in the 1,000 year reign of Christ....
The bloodiest century in recorded HISTORY recently ended.......
More Christians were killed during the 20th century than all other centuries combined... Many of them at the hands of Islam.... which I don't generally associate with the Reign of Christ....

So... I might lean towards that not being THE specific fulfillment....

BUT... I believe it is also VERY instructive...

Imagine if the Papacy had Google, the NSA, and the Internet to track down "Heretics", Jihadists to gun them down in the streets, and Atom bombs to make sure the job got done....
 
JohnC said:
Sure - if history is any indication, "Church" will go right along after the "rapture".....

Where I disagree is that the CHURCH will be the one cheering that those pesky, noisy "Pick your enemy" Apostates who were AGAINST Cooperation and Brotherhood are NOW gone ... "THIS will usher in A New Era of Cooperation and Brotherhood!"

They will not be SAD that those fellows are now gone... They will be OVERJOYED, empowerered, and united because Those Fellows have been a Thorn in their Side for YEARS now.....

That's basically what happened when the Christians finally left Judea.... Everybody else cheered....
Click to expand...

I would think however that people who then lose their children and mates and parents will be very upset at the loss of their loved ones.
That sense of loss IMO would move them to a Church in order to find answers. It will do them no good, but IMO they will make the effort.

I agree that the majority will be happy and the A/C will then be able to step right into that void of depression and loss with his message of peace and love and unity for all.
 
Phoneman777 said:
27 AD is the year that the "unto Messiah the Prince" event occurred, which event concludes the 69 weeks, and is likely referring to His baptism b/c the only way it could be referring to His death is if Daniel would have not spoken of His death as being "after" the 69 weeks. His death is a separate event that happened "after threescore and two (and seven) weeks", else Daniel would have never indicated such.

Hi, thanks for your input. Here's what happened historically:
1) The ECF spoke of the "seat of the Caesars" which at that time was in Italy, so the answer is the Western Roman Empire.
2) The Western Roman Empire fell for all intents and purposes by 467 AD, and was divided among barbarian tribes for several decades.
3) The resulting chaos and instability led to a mutual agreement among the tribes to allow the Church to rule and reign, which upon accepting this role, became the Papacy - the union of church and state.
4) The Papacy which is the Little Horn of Daniel, the first Beast of Revelation 13, and the Whore of Revelation 17, proceeded to fulfill all the identifying marks of Bible prophecy found in Daniel and Revelation. Here are a few:
  • The Papal "little horn" came up officially in 538 AD "among the ten horns" which arose out of the ashes of the Roman Empire. Non-religious historians have identified these 10 as the Anglo-Saxons, Francs, Visigoths, Suevi, Burgundians, Allemanni, Lombards, Vandals, Heruli, and Ostrogoths which prevailed when the dust settled and from which came forth the Papacy.
  • Was "different" from the other horns, in that this was a "religio/political power" which would be led by a succession of men.
  • uprooted the three "horns" of Daniel 7 (Vandals, Heruli, and Ostrogoths) b/c they refused to submit to the Papal power and utterly destroyed them "by the roots" and left nothing of them, not even their own historical accounts. All information on these 3 are from Rome.
  • has the "eyes like the eyes of man", meaning this kingdom was to be led by men lacking Holy Spirit discernment and wisdom while relying on that of man
  • has "a mouth speaking Great Things" which Revelation 13 adds "blasphemies". The Bible says it is blasphemy for a man to claim to be God and the power to forgive sins; both of which the Papacy claims to this day (John 10, Luke 5)
  • Would "wear out the saints of the Most High". The persecutions of Christians today are NOTHING to what followers of Christ had to endure under the 1,000+ year persecution of the Church via the crusades, inquisitions, etc. Between 75Million - 150 Million Christians were killed for their faith under Papal rule
  • Would "think to change times and laws". The Papal power claims the power and has attempted to change the Ten Commandments and adjust other directives of Jesus, such as communion and baptism, and has instituted so many blasphemous rites and rituals that the Protestant Reformation was inevitable
  • Would reign for "a time, times, and 1/2 a time" which when compared to Revelation 12 means "1260" prophetic days, or literal years. The Papacy reigned from 538 to 1798, exactly 1260 years, when Napoleon's General Berthier arrested and imprisoned the Pope and the Papacy was declared "dead" when it received a "deadly wound", which would later be healed. The "sword of France" used by the Papacy for so long to kill Christians and other enemies was turned upon itself. "He that leadeth into captivity must go into captivity; he that killeth with the sword must be killed by the sword".
  • The "deadly wound" was healed in 1929 when Mussolini gave back the Papal territory and officially recognized the Papacy once again as a legitimate kingdom. Today, "the whole world wonders after the Beast", including Protestants who are completely blind to their own history b/c they have bought into the lies of Futurism and Preterism. The Papacy, once understood fully by Protestants to be Satan's agency of deception and death, is now regarded as a peaceful, unassuming, religious beacon of light to an uncertain world.
These are but just a few of the reasons why the Protestants of old preached Historicism and laughed Jesuit Ribera's Futurism and Jesuit Alcazar's Preterism to scorn. Any history book will confirm that which is written above. The question is are we humble enough to let go of cherished beliefs in favor of what the Bible teaches, which I admit is not easy to do, but possible if we pray earnestly for discernment.
Click to expand...

As JohnC said.....that is a lot to think about. Actually to me it is a lot of Preterits error to consider.

Historicists such as yourself have usually believed the "1,260 days" spanned the Middle Ages and concluded within the early modern or modern era. Although many dates have been proposed for the start and finish of the "1,260 days", certain time spans have proven to be more popular than others.. The majority of historicists throughout history have identified the "1,260 days" as being fulfilled by one or more of the following time spans:

  • 312 AD to 1572
  • 606 AD to 1870
  • 538 AD to 1798
  • 756 AD to 2016
While I understand the need to believe in the Historical approach to prophecy I must say that the Futuristic approach to the End Times is the ONLY one of many approaches that harmonizes the Scriptures: Dan. 9:24; 26-27; 7:19-27; 8:23-25; Matt. 24 & 25; 2 Thess. 2:1-12; Here, 30:4-10; Rom. 11:25-26; Jn 5:25; Zech. 12:9-14; Jere. 23:5-8; into one unified eschatological program.

The Futuristic approach is the only one that accomplishes the purpose stated in Rev. 1:1.............
"To show unto his servants things which must shortly come to past".
 
Major said:
As JohnC said.....that is a lot to think about. Actually to me it is a lot of Preterits error to consider.

Historicists such as yourself have usually believed the "1,260 days" spanned the Middle Ages and concluded within the early modern or modern era. Although many dates have been proposed for the start and finish of the "1,260 days", certain time spans have proven to be more popular than others.. The majority of historicists throughout history have identified the "1,260 days" as being fulfilled by one or more of the following time spans:

  • 312 AD to 1572
  • 606 AD to 1870
  • 538 AD to 1798
  • 756 AD to 2016
While I understand the need to believe in the Historical approach to prophecy I must say that the Futuristic approach to the End Times is the ONLY one of many approaches that harmonizes the Scriptures: Dan. 9:24; 26-27; 7:19-27; 8:23-25; Matt. 24 & 25; 2 Thess. 2:1-12; Here, 30:4-10; Rom. 11:25-26; Jn 5:25; Zech. 12:9-14; Jere. 23:5-8; into one unified eschatological program.

The Futuristic approach is the only one that accomplishes the purpose stated in Rev. 1:1.............
"To show unto his servants things which must shortly come to past".
Click to expand...
I'd have to respectfully disagree on the point of Futurism's ability to harmonize those texts. For instance, the 69 weeks ended in 27 AD, from Artaxerxes' 457 decree "unto Messiah the Prince" and that "AFTER (69) weeks Messiah shall be cut off". A MAJOR PROBLEM with Futurism is that it attempts to make "unto Messiah the prince" and "Messiah shall be cut off" the EXACT SAME event, but the former is the conclusion of the 69 weeks while the latter takes place AFTER the 69 weeks. Everyone here seems to slough off this most incredible point as mere afterthought. Why? "Messiah the Prince", whatever that is, is the part of the 69 weeks that CONCLUDES this segment of time, and "Messiah shall be cut off" is another event that takes place AFTER that period of time. What is the implication? That Jesus' death took place AFTER the 69 weeks ended and happened DURING the 70th week which was not cut off from the prophecy, but immediately followed the 69th week. Why then is it postulated that Jesus was baptized, not killed, in 27 AD? Because Luke's reckoning of both Tiberius' 15th year reign and Jesus' baptism, if we use what historians agree was his favorite calendar for chronological reckoning, the Syro-Macedonian, puts that in the year 27 AD. We have to somehow claim that Jesus' death was both part of the 69 weeks (it's conclusion) AND ALSO part of the period of time that followed the 69 weeks ("AFTER threescore and two [and seven] weeks Messiah shall be cut off) in order to establish Futurism, but Historicism requires no such contradictory claim, but says that "Messiah the Prince" pertained to His baptism which began His ministry and the 70th week in which He was killed in the midst of, confirmed the Covenant of Grace with us, and cause the sacrifices and oblations to cease to be of any value anymore after His great, final sacrifice. Historicism is very compelling and I wish people would take the time to just for once investigate as to why for so many centuries Protestants subscribed to it but now have changed their minds. Respectfully, I think it has to do with the sensationalism that surrounds it (Left Behind movies, etc) more than anything. I fear that Rome's resurgence into the mainstream limelight, with all her deadly Jesuit forces working around the world infiltrating governments, academia, etc. will succeed in leading many into deception. I pray God that doesn't happen.
 
Phone? Did you look at Abdicates timeline? There is a lot of evidence now that Christ was born between 6 BC and 4 BC. The switchover to AD deducts (I forgot) 1 or 2 yrs. There is also evidence that the Jewish calendar was purposefully changed. And perhaps I skimmed over somehow, but what is the proof that Luke used the calendar you said?
 
Phoneman777 said:
27 AD is the year that the "unto Messiah the Prince" event occurred, which event concludes the 69 weeks, and is likely referring to His baptism b/c the only way it could be referring to His death is if Daniel would have not spoken of His death as being "after" the 69 weeks. His death is a separate event that happened "after threescore and two (and seven) weeks", else Daniel would have never indicated such.

Hi, thanks for your input. Here's what happened historically:
1) The ECF spoke of the "seat of the Caesars" which at that time was in Italy, so the answer is the Western Roman Empire.
2) The Western Roman Empire fell for all intents and purposes by 467 AD, and was divided among barbarian tribes for several decades.
3) The resulting chaos and instability led to a mutual agreement among the tribes to allow the Church to rule and reign, which upon accepting this role, became the Papacy - the union of church and state.
4) The Papacy which is the Little Horn of Daniel, the first Beast of Revelation 13, and the Whore of Revelation 17, proceeded to fulfill all the identifying marks of Bible prophecy found in Daniel and Revelation. Here are a few:
  • The Papal "little horn" came up officially in 538 AD "among the ten horns" which arose out of the ashes of the Roman Empire. Non-religious historians have identified these 10 as the Anglo-Saxons, Francs, Visigoths, Suevi, Burgundians, Allemanni, Lombards, Vandals, Heruli, and Ostrogoths which prevailed when the dust settled and from which came forth the Papacy.
  • Was "different" from the other horns, in that this was a "religio/political power" which would be led by a succession of men.
  • uprooted the three "horns" of Daniel 7 (Vandals, Heruli, and Ostrogoths) b/c they refused to submit to the Papal power and utterly destroyed them "by the roots" and left nothing of them, not even their own historical accounts. All information on these 3 are from Rome.
  • has the "eyes like the eyes of man", meaning this kingdom was to be led by men lacking Holy Spirit discernment and wisdom while relying on that of man
  • has "a mouth speaking Great Things" which Revelation 13 adds "blasphemies". The Bible says it is blasphemy for a man to claim to be God and the power to forgive sins; both of which the Papacy claims to this day (John 10, Luke 5)
  • Would "wear out the saints of the Most High". The persecutions of Christians today are NOTHING to what followers of Christ had to endure under the 1,000+ year persecution of the Church via the crusades, inquisitions, etc. Between 75Million - 150 Million Christians were killed for their faith under Papal rule
  • Would "think to change times and laws". The Papal power claims the power and has attempted to change the Ten Commandments and adjust other directives of Jesus, such as communion and baptism, and has instituted so many blasphemous rites and rituals that the Protestant Reformation was inevitable
  • Would reign for "a time, times, and 1/2 a time" which when compared to Revelation 12 means "1260" prophetic days, or literal years. The Papacy reigned from 538 to 1798, exactly 1260 years, when Napoleon's General Berthier arrested and imprisoned the Pope and the Papacy was declared "dead" when it received a "deadly wound", which would later be healed. The "sword of France" used by the Papacy for so long to kill Christians and other enemies was turned upon itself. "He that leadeth into captivity must go into captivity; he that killeth with the sword must be killed by the sword".
  • The "deadly wound" was healed in 1929 when Mussolini gave back the Papal territory and officially recognized the Papacy once again as a legitimate kingdom. Today, "the whole world wonders after the Beast", including Protestants who are completely blind to their own history b/c they have bought into the lies of Futurism and Preterism. The Papacy, once understood fully by Protestants to be Satan's agency of deception and death, is now regarded as a peaceful, unassuming, religious beacon of light to an uncertain world.
These are but just a few of the reasons why the Protestants of old preached Historicism and laughed Jesuit Ribera's Futurism and Jesuit Alcazar's Preterism to scorn. Any history book will confirm that which is written above. The question is are we humble enough to let go of cherished beliefs in favor of what the Bible teaches, which I admit is not easy to do, but possible if we pray earnestly for discernment.
Click to expand...
Wow... that's a lot of speculation. Show me where/what a "prophetic" year is in the Scriptures.... the actual calendar used to be 360 days until ~701BC, and I've proven that in my study. With Daniel and John's prophecies, it's implied that it'll return and if you read Isaiah's prophecies you'll understand why. 1260 on a 360-day calendar is the time from Passover to Feast of Tumpets or 3.5 years, or 42 months. That's as far a stretch of reality I'm willing to go.
 
Phoneman777 said:
I'd have to respectfully disagree on the point of Futurism's ability to harmonize those texts. For instance, the 69 weeks ended in 27 AD, from Artaxerxes' 457 decree "unto Messiah the Prince" and that "AFTER (69) weeks Messiah shall be cut off". A MAJOR PROBLEM with Futurism is that it attempts to make "unto Messiah the prince" and "Messiah shall be cut off" the EXACT SAME event, but the former is the conclusion of the 69 weeks while the latter takes place AFTER the 69 weeks. Everyone here seems to slough off this most incredible point as mere afterthought. Why? "Messiah the Prince", whatever that is, is the part of the 69 weeks that CONCLUDES this segment of time, and "Messiah shall be cut off" is another event that takes place AFTER that period of time. What is the implication? That Jesus' death took place AFTER the 69 weeks ended and happened DURING the 70th week which was not cut off from the prophecy, but immediately followed the 69th week. Why then is it postulated that Jesus was baptized, not killed, in 27 AD? Because Luke's reckoning of both Tiberius' 15th year reign and Jesus' baptism, if we use what historians agree was his favorite calendar for chronological reckoning, the Syro-Macedonian, puts that in the year 27 AD. We have to somehow claim that Jesus' death was both part of the 69 weeks (it's conclusion) AND ALSO part of the period of time that followed the 69 weeks ("AFTER threescore and two [and seven] weeks Messiah shall be cut off) in order to establish Futurism, but Historicism requires no such contradictory claim, but says that "Messiah the Prince" pertained to His baptism which began His ministry and the 70th week in which He was killed in the midst of, confirmed the Covenant of Grace with us, and cause the sacrifices and oblations to cease to be of any value anymore after His great, final sacrifice. Historicism is very compelling and I wish people would take the time to just for once investigate as to why for so many centuries Protestants subscribed to it but now have changed their minds. Respectfully, I think it has to do with the sensationalism that surrounds it (Left Behind movies, etc) more than anything. I fear that Rome's resurgence into the mainstream limelight, with all her deadly Jesuit forces working around the world infiltrating governments, academia, etc. will succeed in leading many into deception. I pray God that doesn't happen.
Click to expand...

You are correct.........we will be in disagreement.

You have confused Messiah's baptism with His beginning of the ministry as the start of the 70th week.
Daniel stated that it would be when He was "CUT OFF".......Crucified.

That my friend has caused all kinds of error one being that the events were History when in fact they have yet to take place.

Blessings to you .
 
Abdicate said:
Wow... that's a lot of speculation. Show me where/what a "prophetic" year is in the Scriptures.... the actual calendar used to be 360 days until ~701BC, and I've proven that in my study. With Daniel and John's prophecies, it's implied that it'll return and if you read Isaiah's prophecies you'll understand why. 1260 on a 360-day calendar is the time from Passover to Feast of Tumpets or 3.5 years, or 42 months. That's as far a stretch of reality I'm willing to go.
Click to expand...

777 has for some reason understood the baptism of Messiah Jesus to have begun the 70th week of Daniel.

Well I do know the reason. He is rooted in Preterism which is the base for the Historical view of prophecy.

When one mis-understands the words of Daniel....."Cut Off" NOT to mean the crucifixtion then the door is opened to all kinds of error.
 
Major said:
777 has for some reason understood the baptism of Messiah Jesus to have begun the 70th week of Daniel.

Well I do know the reason. He is rooted in Preterism which is the base for the Historical view of prophecy.

When one mis-understands the words of Daniel....."Cut Off" NOT to mean the crucifixtion then the door is opened to all kinds of error.
Click to expand...
Brother, please know that both Preterism and Futurism are Jesuit ideas that came AFTER Protestant Historicism identified the Papacy as antichrist, not the other way around.

Also, Daniel says "Messiah the Prince" concludes the 69 weeks and "Messiah Cut Off" occurred only AFTER the conclusion of the 69 weeks. This is not a difficult concept to grasp. The problem is Jesuit Futurism which has blinded the minds of Christians into believing that black is white and up is down. He was crucified AFTER, I repeat AFTER, spelled A-F-T-E-R the conclusion of the 69 weeks (Messiah the Prince), which means He was crucified DURING the 70th week, which followed immediately AFTER the 69th week. No clock stoppage. The whole problem is a failure to understand the word "AFTER", because we need the whole 70th week intact so that it can be transported down to the end of time, but if simply read the Bible as it's written, we know that Jesuit Futurism is a lying deception of the Papacy. :)
 
Major said:
You are correct.........we will be in disagreement.

You have confused Messiah's baptism with His beginning of the ministry as the start of the 70th week.
Daniel stated that it would be when He was "CUT OFF".......Crucified.

That my friend has caused all kinds of error one being that the events were History when in fact they have yet to take place.

Blessings to you .
Click to expand...
"Messiah the Prince" is not the same as "Messiah Cut Off". The confusion lies with those who wish to make the two one in the same. One follows AFTER the other. And since Jesus' baptism co-insides with the year that the 69 weeks concludes (27 AD), we can conjecture that "Messiah the Prince" refers to Jesus' ANNOINTING (Messiah) in the Jordon River. With the 69 weeks concluded with this, what week commenced immediately after? Yes, the 70th.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top