Kan

Haha, but if commuters do it all the time, is it a predictable routine rather than chaos? I believe it happens in that exact order.

The prophecies indicate that the third kingdom, Greece, was beaten by a stronger and more brutal kingdom, which was ? Not Rome? The first, second and third beasts have lost their dominion, there is nothing left to crush or oppose is there? Is the new AC power going to break down the Greek cafes? Is it political or religious? All the kingdoms of the world are political, and all of them have been targets of false religion which Satan has been trying to establish through them. Satan is not so interested in political power as he is in gaining worship. Note what Daniel and his companions had to put up with, religious persecution. That is the only reason Satan builds up large mountains of people/kingdoms. He is not interested in making civilizations, he wants to kill the saints, and controlling large centralized populations is one way to do it. So all kingdoms are intentionally religious, Anti-god, Pagan, false Christs. So the most successful kingdom of Satan is the most religious - the Roman Catholic empire, the little horn on the fourth beast, and it was politically backed by the kings of Europe. Blasphemy is a religious term. The whole theme of the Antichrist is blasphemy, the little horn speaks blasphemy, and the beast of Rev 13 is blasphemous and the last red beast has blasphemies written all over its body. The last attempt of Satan to gain worship through religion, will be backed by political powers, and unlike any time in history, this last beast will be backed by the people of the world. Very similar to revolutionary France, except it won't be anti-God, but God worshiping, they will worship and obey the false Christ which is Satan, as we have been warned about. (The Bible ties the beast out of the bottomless pit - that ended the Papal reign in 1798 AD, to the last red beast, they have the same origin, See Rev 11 and 17. Whereas the other beasts came out of the sea or the earth.) Political power is something any draconian system needs in order to enforce its ideals, so of course the AC is political, but with religious intent, as all of the prophecies show.

I don't know, but the only Messiah for the Jews has already been.

Your reaction is understandable, because the term "cult" can be applied by whomever to whomever in any which way. Yes it is confusing, but I did not mean to confuse anybody, except to point out that human nature has fingers pointing in all directions except to self. And if the world lies in wickedness, as the apostles taught, then we can expect them to be pointing the finger at what they think is the problem and name it a cult, most likely the saints. In the mean time, the devil is demonizing the name of Jesus, through extremist groups, knowing full well that the last saints standing will be demonized, just like they called our Lord "Beelzebub" exceptin this case he will have convinced the world that he is Christ and that the dissidents are criminals worthy of death. When the world has reached this point, God Himself will come down from heaven and intervene, with a consuming fire, that melts the bottom of the ocean.

We need to understand the reign of the Papacy as the Antichrist in the past, otherwise we really have no direction in any predictions of the future, because the future is a repetition of the past, you even suggest the reinstatement of ten representatives of the EU, and without any evidence of another ten rulerships, this seems like a valid expectation...which I lean towards, until we have further knowledge. As far as the Pope is concerned, we know he is the chosen representative of the church, and what he shows publicly may not necessarily be what happens behind closed doors. Whatever the case, I don't think the Pope is "the Antichrist"- but the devil is, and anyone who follows the devil through sin, is of the Antichrist. The system of the Papacy which works in secret is more or less doing the will of Satan, but the open Catholic church and its millions are not "the Antichrist." In fact they are called God's people as far as Revelation goes. The current Pope may be one of these saints, or he may become one, but as a human being, he is not the Antichrist. And what is more, the Antichrist revealed is not some strange animal with horns that sits in a Jewish temple. The Antichrist is revealed when Satan impersonates Jesus Christ, who teaches men to obey commandments which contradict the original and only law of God. The devil has been teaching the world through its trusted religions for the past 300 years, and especially since the mid 1800's, that the law of God has been made redundant, and is nothing better than an icon of ignorance in the past. In this way he has already prepared the world to receive his new order of law and doctrine in the name of Christ. The world will follow his ways because they have resisted the truth about themselves in regards to cherished idols of sin. And rather than face the death of their sins, they have chosen an invented gospel, which allows them to believe that they will be saved while practicing known sin. This is the danger of the work of Satan, it is religious in nature and subtle, and not a building busting monster with red eyes, as many futurists would have us believe. Daniel 7:25 says that the work of this dark power is to try and "change times and laws." The old Papacy changed the time of the Sabbath, from Saturday to Sunday, and it removed the second law of God, because it condemns idolatry. The work of Satan in the future is the same as in the past, so we may expect that he will cause the world to disregard the law of God, knowing that breaking the law of God on only one point is enough to remove the protection of God from the plagues, as described in Revelation 16. The churches are filled with ministers who do not tell the people the truth, and are leaving their flocks unshielded. In fairness and compassion, before the end, people will be given a clear warning of what the mark of the beast is, so that their decision may be an informed one. That message is symbolized as three angels flying in the midst of heaven, in Revelation 14:6-12.

The Ottoman empire lost its supremacy on August the 11 th 1840, when the Sultan signed away its independence to the four then major world powers. Ever since that time it has been under these powers. Turkey the Capitol of that old empire was often referred to as the Ottoman power, or as the allies called it "the sick man of the east." So the wars that Turkey was involved in, were seen by some as the remainder of the Ottoman empire, but it was already long gone.

I did not say the last beast is history, but added "and we have one to end." There is one more which will last until the Kingdom of God. Rome already trampled all over the other kingdoms in ancient times, that is history, and old Rome has fallen, but the worst part of it - the blasphemous little horn is still alive and well. Daniel says that the little horn carries on right until the end. If you are waiting for a great kingdom to wipe out all other kingdoms, you'll be waiting for a long time, because it won't happen. To begin with, the toes are all different kingdoms reigning until the Kingdom of God. Also John saw three beasts all living in modern times. There won't be a single kingdom, but the world will be united, and this unity is represented by the red beast which carries a wicked woman or church. We are living in those days, when the whole world wonders after the beast that had the deadly wound and was healed. The Papacy fell from direct political rule at the end of its 1260 year reign as predicted by Daniel and John, and has healed from that, and now it rules over all the governments/kings of the world. For new Bible readers, see Revelation chapters 17 and 18, how it all ends. It is this little horn power which is behind the persecuting of the saints and has planned to wipe them out soon, through the implementation of its mark- "the mark of the beast." It will do that by gaining the full support of the world to its demands. You have presented the concept that the fourth beast destroys the other three, in the last days, and then it is destroyed, and then the other three keep going. That does not sound much like the destruction described by Daniel, if the three previous kingdoms are able to survive that. The book of Daniel is dealing with the dominion of certain kingdoms, not so much their physical destruction. Rome went after rule, and although she was prepared to crush, burn and bury, she preferred an immediate defeat and surrender, in order to retain the goods and ground. The first three Kingdoms had world dominion, and the fourth had the same. But the fourth has an unusual and different dominion, or in another manner, through the little horn on its head, which lasts until the end of time. If the fourth kingdom is Rome, then how does Rome crush Persia, Babylon and Greece in the last days, when there is nothing left of Rome except the little horn? Either way, you can't dismiss the reign of the Papacy as the Antichrist for the period of 1260 years from 538 AD to 1798 AD, which is the driving motive behind all these theories of futurism and so forth. Unless there is a clear understanding of the past the future will not be revealed.

I go along with the gist of what you are saying. The last part of the prophecies to be fulfilled, are about the last beast in Revelation - the red one, which is a tricky one, because it "was, and is not, and yet is." That sounds like it is stealthy or invisible to the world. This last beast has to be associated with the little horn on the fourth beast of Daniel 7, which also goes right to the end of time and is destroyed by God.

Verses 11 & 12, This is talking about two different endings of the kingdoms, the one of losing both dominion and existence, the other three of losing dominion and having a semblance of lasting. The last beast goes out in flames, the previous three have their dominion removed, here is the difference. That's history so far, and we have one to end, which one? It is very obvious that the last beast cannot be just the old Roman empire, because it crumbled under the Barbarians, but it is the persecuting Church of Rome which developed out of Rome and reigned for 1260 years, and it is still here today. It had a "deadly wound" but it was healed and "all the world wondered after" it. It did not end. The little horn rambles on until it is destroyed by God. The terrible image of the fourth beast has less to do with the Roman army, because there have been formidable armies prior to Rome. The Alexandrian forces are an example, defeating an army where they were seriously out-numbered. The terror of this last beast is not military might, but warfare against the saints, is it not? While it is plain that Rome killed Christians along with villains for entertainment, it was the Church of Rome which would bring about the great tribulation of 1260 years. That was the terrible part about it. Other than that, this last beast is not too different than the previous three. The left-overs of the Babylonian, Persian and Greek kingdoms are still with us today, but this last beast (which carries the blasphemous little religious horn, which persecutes the saints and still exists today) comes to an end through the vengeance of God on it. It is essentially the same as the toes in the image - "in the days of these kings," God will set up His kingdom... The texts don't necessarily say that the fourth beast is killed first and then the others dwindle on, as if they were all reigning contemporaneously. I think that is a view which would need another text showing the same.

Keep your eye on Turkey? In my current view, this is one of the most unheeded signs of the end in all of prophecy. Turkey is the capitol of Islam, it is the political representative of the old Ottoman empire which was founded on the rule of the Muslims. While the Ottoman empire came to its predicted end in August 1840, Turkey remains the leading symbol of its extensive influence through the political impact of this old religion. Daniel 11:45 is actually talking about that world power, the demise of Turkey and its lack of allies/support will spell the end of this Islamic capitol and symbol, while the world successfully denies this religion its power. Stripped of political support and power, and denied religious influence, it will come to its end as predicted. The end of this world influence, marks the beginning of a troubled time. See Daniel 12:1. "The tabernacles of his palace" is the religious building that represents a political religion. A tabernacle is religious, a palace is political. The mosque of Islam is right on the temple rock in Jerusalem. "Yet he shall come to his end; an none shall help him." No more support from anything - from resources such as oil, from political powers such as Russia, or England, etc and no support for its religion, as we see today.

This is what we understand is meant by the word "cult" as used today. We could show several examples of this kind of recruitment, and some of these characteristics, we could expect to see among the saints, only with a different motive, we hope. Because the line between the true and the false is made deliberately fine by the Liar, can we really trust what is going on in the world, and how it will define a cult with its different social norms? A cult can be any group of any particular following, depending on who we are listening to. The characteristics of cult as mentioned in this thread, can be judged and misapplied to the innocent by any social stigma. And surely bigotry is not free of that mistake. A cult can make a bad name for itself, and these are used as examples of what not to be or to join, but then again a group which is not necessarily a cult can quite easily be labelled as one, and treated as one. And while we think of a cult as the minority, either locally or globally, how do we know that the whole world is not a cult, and that minor groups are diversions from that fact? In which case Jesus becomes the greatest cult leader. But on the other hand if you have a false Christ, then he truly becomes a cult leader, and as far as the Bible seems to indicate, the last cult will be global, by a globally known false Christ - Satan himself.

Bless you, this is all new to me too.

It is important to be able to recognize the difference between the conviction of the Holy Spirit and misapplied guilt or shame. Learning this is a lifetime experience, getting to know the difference between useless hurt and genuine help from the Lord. I know that the Lord does not intend to shame me, though sometimes I feel it, and I feel a resistance to step back from pursuing a misguided course of action or thought. But "The goodness of God leads us to repentance." Conviction from the Holy Ghost comes from seeing a contrast between the kindness and patience of Christ and our ridiculous ways of handling (what we think are) adverse situations. The Lord wants us to be empowered and secure, and with His conviction always comes the offer of a much better way, it does not leave us without any solution like home-made guilt does. What is home-made guilt? It is what we perceive we should be feeling, and it comes from having a cycle of abuse within us created by sin. The devil knows that humans can be conned into abusing themselves very easily, and it is far more efficient to cause them to do it, and to let them go, than to have to be there at every moment to tempt and annoy them, like he had to do with our faithful friend Jesus. We have no idea of what He endured. Pride begets powerlessness, which begets the desperate need to be in charge of self improvement - including what we think are the convictions of a Christian outlook. Did you hear that? We make up a system of morality and guilt and we become lord of our lives, but we don't know that we are telling God what to think of us, and how to deal with us. We prefer to be the ones administering what we think is an apt punishment for our sins, and to reward ourselves by assurances of salvation when we think it is due. Here are some classic examples; waiting for the main part of feeling guilty or sinning to be over and or diminished enough, before coming to the Lord for forgiveness. Not sharing our thoughts with the Lord until we are in the "holy zone" of thoughts again. Indulging in a deep sense of loss and rejection of the Lord, as if we were not lost in the first place by the very fact that we are sinners, for which Christ purchased free salvation ! Going to a religious meeting and allowing ourselves to get a spiritual high- which does not even last until Monday morning. Pretending to leave the Lord and getting lost in the world. Do you recognize all these symptoms? These are inventions supported by our beliefs and religious systems. And there are many other ways that we think we can remain in control of our 'spiritual journey.' But is it really the path of faith and knowledge or is it pride and ignorance? Religions have many sayings and Bible verses to encourage cycles of self abuse, using the following techniques - sensationalism through great sermons, music, songs shouting and mania. Passive aggressive Christianity - the dishonest life, the fake acceptance of others, not swearing but thinking curses, judging self and others by behavior rather than through humanity, histrionic 'love' which some believe is "witnessing." Unbearable burdens such as guilt, unspoken agendas of behavior within a church group, misdirected feelings and ideas of romance, doctrines of cruelty such as eternal damnation and torture in hell fire. Ill defined and ambiguous moralities are a form of cruelty. When cycles of spiritual self abuse begin to wear out, all the devil needs to do is slap us once and we are done. We end up defining what is sin in our lives, rather than knowing that we are totally undone so far as any right doing and proper self assessment is concerned. We do not know what righteousness is. We imagine that we are making progress as Christians, but in fact we have not changed, we just become more sophisticated in our self management. We need a complete transformation of heart and mind, and Jesus our High Priest is committed to this work for us. Christ only knows our condition, Christ only can help, Christ knows we cannot be found meddling in this work, but we have to leave it to Him alone. This means a daily surrender to His judgement and correction of us. We feel convicted that we have not reacted in the calm and rational way to something which we know gets us off track. Immediately we confess that wrong and ask Him to remove it from our lives. We do not go on a pilgrimage and neither do we ignore what was confronted. We leave it right there and then in the hand of the High Priest, who takes it and burns it up. But what if we find the same thing keeps coming up? Does this mean that what happened before did not work? No, we now will be faced with the same situation over and over again until there is not a single response left. Jesus not only wants us to conquer through His work, but wants us to be "more than conquerors." Today we are more than conquerors in Christ.

The term "cult" is related to "culture" in the Latin (17th century). And it means worship. A true religion is one where the belief creates a "lifestyle" or a "culture." The Christian belief is a new life style. It is a culture, and a very good one. But the term "cult" nowadays has been directed as an accusatory label on extremist/ non mainstream groups. True Christianity has always been - in the minority. False Christianity or nominal Christianity has popular acceptance, and is now the prime mover to label true Christianity as extremist/fundamentalist/cultism. That is easy to achieve, with numerous examples of small groups which have laid claim to the Bible and abused themselves, or others. The fact remains that in the last days the true saints will be marked as the worst criminals that ever existed. A demonic cult.

We hear of order created out of chaos in Christian teachings and in ancient pagan myths about creation. Evolution also seems to support the idea of sophistication, complexity and functionality coming from an explosion - the big bang. Does the Bible infer chaos at the beginning of creation? Note that the scientific meaning of "chaos" is different than the common usage. We'll use the term chaos in its common setting. Scientific meaning; non linear dynamics, randomness with a predictable pattern. Common meaning; disorder and confusion.

The question of the 2300 days (which are prophetic years, just like every other dream time in Daniel), is about the vision and not specifically the desolation. "...How long shall be the vision concerning ..." It does not say how long shall the abomination be, although that goes hand in hand with the subject. However the angels are asking about the cause of Christ, the Lamb of God symbolized in the "daily sacrifice." How long will the Son be misrepresented on earth, how long will this go on? The abomination of desolation had a political reign over the earth - 1260 years, or 1290 years counting the set up of it. You probably already know that the same question is repeated in Daniel 12:6,7 and the answer here is not 2300, but 1260 or 3.5 years. BTW this text related to Rev 10:6. Then at the close of the book, the angel gives another two time lines which lock in the end of the 2300 days/years. The 1290 and 1335 years. The vision is about the cause of the sanctuary being trodden underfoot. That had already happened prior to Daniel, that is why Israel ended up in captivity. But there was a time prophesied when this would no longer go on, and there would be a conclusion to the purposes of God with humanity. But before that time would come, the abomination that makes desolate will have a final go at ridding the world of Christ, which it was pretty successful at, over the great tribulation of 1260 years. It sought to wipe out true Christianity by replacing it with idol worship, a false priesthood (spies) and death, all in the name of God. The little horn that comes out of one of Greece's provinces is Rome.

Yes, that's what I think, there is no scriptural basis to separate the 70th week from the rest and project it into the future, without any dates to anchor it. In regards to the end of the 70 weeks, and the destruction of Jerusalem, I thought according to other writings, like that of Josephus Flavius, that it happened about 38 years after Jesus died, in 31 AD. Remember these times are in direct relation, as an explanation to the vision of chapter 8, the 2300 years. Four time lines tie in the beginning of the 2300 years and another three time lines tie in the other end of the 2300 years. There are at least 5 dates in history which need to be married with these charts, some tie in with the NT others with the old. And the other dates can be confirmed by history from Christ on wards. Here is a quick overview of those dates. 457 BC the work going ahead with the building according to the decree made by Cyrus and put into action by Artaxerxes. (2300 years from 457 BC to 1844 AD). 408 BC the walls are completed (62 weeks of years to the Messiah) 27 AD the Messiah begins His ministry by John the baptist's prophesying. (27 AD to 34 AD is 1 week of years) 31 AD Jesus is slain in the middle of that last 7 years or week of years. 34 AD the end of the 490 years (457 BC to 34 AD) 508 AD "the abomination that makes desolate is set up." Daniel 12:11 (1290 years from 508 AD to 1798 AD) 538 AD the beginning of the great tribulation of 1260 years. Daniel 7:25 and 12:7. (538 AD to 1798 AD is 1260 years) Revelation 12:6,14 11:3, 13:5. 1798 AD the end of Papal supremacy (the abomination) and the start of "the time of the end" of the 2300 years drawing to a close. Daniel 11:35 & 40, 12:4. 1843 AD the last year of the 2300 years. Daniel 12:12. (1335 years from the set up of the abomination to the end of the 2300 years.) The beginning of the last phase of Christ's work as High Priest. Daniel 7:10 & 13. Daniel 8:13,14. Rev 10:6,7. 11:19.

Yes it does make sense how you figured it out. But see how the 7 weeks go together with the 62, it says so in verse 25, before the 62 weeks are introduced. First the street and the walls are fixed over a period of 49 years, then the temple was repaired for 46 years, which is not mentioned here. But it goes on from the building of the street and walls, to the remaining years left until the Messiah, which is 62 weeks. You have put the 49 years or 7 weeks after the Messiah. 31 AD plus 49 is 80 AD. Maybe I got it wrong. 27 AD plus 49 is 76 AD. No.... 27 AD plus 46 is 73 AD. Not quite, but we can shift the dates of the Messiah, which would not agree with Luke and the record of a particular Roman ruler. Now you also pointed out the word "END" in big letters. "the end thereof" is not talking about the end of the 70 weeks is it? I thought it is talking about the end of "the city and the sanctuary?" And also "unto the end of the war." That's not the end of 70 weeks is it? It could be, but the primary interpretation of the language is as follows, the word "thereof" is referring to the preceding sentence and subject - the destruction of "the city and the sanctuary."

That's because you are a mod...

Look I agree with you, and I have a rough idea of where you are coming from, you have an understanding of what constitutes true science vs the false. When people talk about science, it is pretty obvious that there are many other views about science which are 'true' in different circumstances, simply because there are false views of science even among scientists, if we can call them that - let alone the millions of sheep around them. What I would like to see is a more rounded approach to other views, and I need to learn the same. You can still make a point through an illustration or an example, without attacking things like definitions, which again can be taken in a variety of ways, anything from a colloquial meaning to general misnomers. People usually don't listen well when confronted, they are too busy building armaments. There is no doubt that what you see as a fallacy has to be confronted, and you do, but how successful is such a confrontation and is it getting through what you want? The other thing is, that when you pack truth into a post, it can't be too long, because people speed read these days and don't contemplate what is written, they commonly misread. The days of careful readers are over. I'm guilty, I realize that I may have misread some of your posts and backed the wrong side. Thanks for letting me know where you are at. I want to hear what you have to say, without having to wait until you have wrestled someone into the right corner. That's what I am saying, - just tell us the interesting stuff, and forget about who has what fallacy, because in the end truth is attractive to those who want it. I get why you want to attack a fallacy, because it is the very thought pattern which prevents the truth from coming in. I am with you when it comes to Christians accepting pseudo sciences, as you call them, and I can understand your disappointment that genuine science is not seen for its value because of these pseudo sciences.

Post asked Enoch why he started this thread, with the intention, I guess, to finding out what he wanted to accomplish by it. Enoch takes it personally, which he did not have to. That is what I am saying. He could have continued on an academic level without feeling that he had to divulge a personal motive for starting the thread. In any case, I think there's a little too much tension in the way Enoch writes, and I'm not sure whether it's a cultural thing or just a personal style. Not that it is a worry, but the topics hardly make it past the start line...before Enoch is hitting someone hard with a corrector pen, if you know what I mean. Can't help liking the guy though.

I thought that the destruction of Jerusalem came some time later after the 70th week? I agree with you about the 70th week not being separate and future. I too can't find any permission to do that going by what has been written in the Bible. Jesus was cut off in the middle of the 69th week. 70 weeks of probation for Israel, 7 weeks of building the wall in troubled times, plus 62 weeks extra until the Messiah. And in the middle of that last week of the 70, the 69th week, or the 62nd week if counting from the rebuilding of the walls, the Messiah is cut off. Which puts the end of the 70th week three and a half years after His sacrifice. Jerusalem was not destroyed until another 36 years later. It was over for Israel at the end of the 70th week, when they killed the first disciple - Stephen in 34 AD, (at the very same time God elected a man named Saul to begin era of the Gentiles as the new custodians for the gospel.) Calculated as follows; 70 weeks are given to Israel 70 x 7 = 490 years 457 BC --------------------------------------------------------------------------34 AD 69 weeks (Seven, three score and two weeks) from the rebuilding until the Messiah 69 x 7 = 483 years 457 BC----------------------------------------------------------- 27 AD 7 weeks of rebuilding the wall 7 x 7 = 49 years 457 BC -----------408 BC-----------------------------------------27 AD-----------34 AD Another 62 weeks after the walls until the Messiah 62 x 7 = 434 years 457 BC -----------408 BC------------------------------------------27 AD----------34 AD In the middle of the week Messiah is cut off 1 x 7 halved = 3.5 years 457 BC -----------408 BC------------------------------------------27 AD---31 AD---34 AD "The people of the prince that shall come" will destroy Jerusalem 70 AD.

I would not read that motives are being asked for here. At least not to begin with. The questions still allow you to be impersonal and on subject don't they?

You need to chill out Enoch... BTW, Post did not "appeal" for a "motive," but what you want for the outcome of this thread.

Since I know nothing of "the theory of evolution," I have to accept it at face value. A "Theory" = is a guess, an applied guess, be it educated or otherwise. In layman's language "Let's get serious about guessing." "Evolution" = "evolving," an observational term given to "what we think has happened," "It looks like it has evolved" etc. The T of E is "A guess about what seems to have happened." A theory or a guess is not necessarily the truth, and neither is "what we think might have happened" necessarily the truth. We can say that the T of E is "the guessing of a guess." Since a guess shows ignorance, the T of E could be "the ignorant pursuit of ignorance." You would have to be fairly self convinced to uphold that. The Bible calls it "willingly ignorant."