Jump to content

Diaste

Diamond Member
  • Content Count

    2,417
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Diaste last won the day on June 5 2018

Diaste had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,220 Excellent

8 Followers

About Diaste

  • Rank
    Diamond Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    WY, USA
  • Interests
    The Advent of the Beast.
    The Sign of the Coming of the Son of Man.
    The Gathering of the Elect.
    My Children.
    Motorcycles.
    Mountains.
    Chess.

Recent Profile Visitors

3,554 profile views
  1. Diaste

    Maps & Charts

    The EU as criteria is supposition. It's not mentioned in scripture. Not true. Since the 4 notable ones spread in the cardinal directions it more than plausible the references to the KOTN and the KOTS are Lysimachus and Ptolemy and their descendants all the way to 2019 and beyond. And even if it's nothing to with lineage, the areas where they ruled have survived. That being the case Cassander in Macedonia would have be the west, Seleucus in the east. The only evidence of the west in Daniel 11 that I see is the reference to Javan. But the land of Javan comes against the beast, so the beast isn't from Greece. If Daniel 11 is taken as a whole the beast is in Mesopotamia. And Assyria was ruled by Seleucus after the Greek empire was split up. And if the little comes out of one of them, and the beast is Assyrian, then it makes more sense the beast originates from the Seleucid Empire, which it does.
  2. Diaste

    Maps & Charts

    Impressive but for the untenable position that the Roman empire has anything to do with the beast at the end of days. Islam fits the fourth terrible, dreadful, unusual iron toothed beast much better; and Islam is alive, and strong and everywhere. The Roman empire is dead. The EU doesn't even have any part in the ten kings. It's a non-starter.
  3. Diaste

    Maps & Charts

    How interesting! This Roman Empire map above shows Rome did not go further east than the Levant. I find it interesting that all the maps Alive posted showed the empires stretching to the Indus valley. The Islamic map I posted shows the same.
  4. And yet the direct antecedent of 'he' is the 'prince of the people' which is not Jesus. And the covenant of Jesus is everlasting. It's confirmed forever. Is it truncated? It seems that confirming a forever covenant for a very short period weakens the promise of eternity. Not sure that's in the character of our Lord.
  5. If the A of D is to stand in the Holy Place, how is that going to happen if there is no Temple? If that did not happen in 70 AD then it's for the future and another Temple will stand. Uh huh...to go along with that did you know the Jews are expecting an earthly king to be their protector? Read here, Who is the Messiah? to see what the Jews think about the Messiah as a people. I have heard it from their own lips they are waiting for an earthly king to redeem the nation. Well no, not knowingly. But they may believe the Messiah is the heir of David and they can worship God through OT ritual. I think you know there are groups in Israel that want a Temple again. In fact I have heard they have all the materials, exterior and interior as well as all the vessels and have been breeding red heifers in America and in Israel. They want a Temple, they are ready and it's coming. If it's not then how does this occur? " Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."
  6. And that just doesn't seem supported in whole by the passage. " 26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make [it] desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." In v 26 we see messiah 'cut off'; the term is 'karath' which is to 'cut off' or 'cut down'. The idea is that he is no more as the term is used as 'perish' or 'kill'. Messiah cannot be the the prince of the people who will come. That's a different individual, as he's alive and leading a people. The Messiah is dead and another guy is coming. Was this Titus and his legions coming to destroy the city? They did. It's in the histories. But there's too much here to think it's 70 AD. The same prince is associated with the end, "and the end thereof [shall be] with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined." Is this just the end of the rebellion? I think not because of this, "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:" The one who confirms the covenant must be the 'prince of the people who shall come'. This same prince must also cause the sacrifice to cease and desecrate the Temple. Titus did not do this and in fact his legions acted in opposition to his orders and burned the Temple. Titus had no moment in which to stop the Temple liturgy nor commit abominations and certainly never confirmed an existing covenant for 84 weeks. In reality only this refers to Jesus, "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off," and this is obviously a new character, "and the people of the prince that shall come". Messiah is gone and a prince is coming. Also the 'prince of the people' must endure to the 'consummation'. The idea behind 'consummation' is annihilation, complete destruction, completion. That cannot refer to Titus nor the Roman empire as the Romans continued for centuries after this and with the Temple gone there could be no, "overspreading abominations making desolate, even until the consummation" by the prince who confirmed the covenant. So this prophecy is coming.
  7. Yes, but the Temple question isn't a part of the answer. I don't think it's possible to know if 'when shall these things be' is in reference to 70 AD or the Third Temple, or both perhaps. Jesus goes on to talk about the end of the age and doesn't mention when, 'There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.' What I'm saying is His answer refers to the end of the age and His coming. Beginning of sorrows prior to the A of D then GT and His return in glory. We all seem to agree the A of D is at the midpoint and the events after that well documented, so 3.5 years. If then a single generation will not pass till all these things are fulfilled then the generation that sees the A of D will also see the beginning of sorrows, which makes that time frame associated with the A of D, GT and the 2nd coming, or the first half of the week. Daniel 9:26-27 Then the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood, and until the end there will be war; desolations have been decreed. 27 And he will confirm a covenant with many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of the temple will come the abomination that causes desolation, until the decreed destruction is poured out upon him.” I do not see it as possible this speaks to what Jesus did. The direct antecedent to the first part of v 27 is the prince of the people who will come. Jesus is the guarantor of an everlasting covenant, not 7 years. In v 27 it seems the covenant is broken, Jesus isn't going to break the covenant, it's forever. The Temple is desecrated and if this was a Jesus covenant for 7 years it seems more than unlikely he would break the covenant then desecrate the symbol of that covenant. "...until the decreed destruction is poured out upon him." The 'he' and 'him' from v 26-27 certainly cannot be Jesus as this passage refers to the 'end' twice and Jesus is triumphant at the end, not destroyed. Is this a prophecy beyond the 70 years of desolation Daniel speaks about at the beginning? Yes. I fact I see no relief from that for the Jews. Most of what Daniel saw in the visions and the heard in the meetings with the divine throughout the entire book concern the end and the tyranny of the coming king and his kingdom. So is there a week left to fulfill? Strangely, this seeming unfathomable notion is a very real possibility.
  8. In that case there would be three things: the first two and the end of the world. It's like a court case, the questions are related to a single case with many aspects, which questions leaders to the truth of the event.
  9. "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." This has to be a truth in regards to this: "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what [shall be] the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?" Then everything between these two statements has to be associated with the Return of Jesus. It's true then that the generation that shall not pass must be one in which the events and conditions Jesus relates in Matt 24:4-33 is future. All of it. Then if it's true the A of D is at some time in the middle of the week as Daniel has said, then what of Matt 24:4-14? "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." This can only be true if the witnesses are contemporary to the events described. So then Matt 24:4-12 has to be an unprecedented time, near in time to the Return of Jesus, or neither 'shall not pass till all is fulfilled' and 'enduring to the end' could not be true. So why cannot the events from Matt 24:4-12 be the half of the week before what we all know is the last half of the week after the A of D?
  10. Agree. Jesus is coming. We need to be watching.
  11. Great topic. Posting books in a discussion forum?
  12. But the timing would be off. At the end of the 42 months the beast is defeated and thrown in the pit. A concurrent schedule would not allow for the beast to rise up and kill the witnesses after 42 months as it's over and the beast is gone. I can't liken the plagues of the seals and trumps and bowls to the power of the witnesses. It's possible the beginning of sorrows is the time of the witnesses and the obvious chaos depicted is a direct result of their ministry. The witnesses are given carte blanche and the trumps and bowls are more specific in effect, timing, and appear to be a one off where the witnesses "strike the earth with every kind of plague as often as they wish." But if there was a first half called the beginning of sorrows and the witnesses arrived at the onset they could be the ones causing the wars, economic instability leading to economic control, and death as depicted in seals 2-4. Though I think those three seals are more conceptual in nature, creating other conditions, removing stability and allowing mankind to act in the sinful nature. Accurate or not I see the beast rise, not in full power but enough to create a false peace with Israel, the witnesses appear to oppose the beast and warn the Jews and torment the earth, at the end of the 42 months of their prophesy the beast ascends the Temple, declares he is god, kills the witnesses, and forces the world to worship him or die, then continues unopposed in enormous power till Jesus destroys him at the end of the second 42 months.
  13. It makes a case for 7 years. If the 42 months of the beast's power to continue and the 42 months of the witnesses are concurrent, and only in the last half of the week, then you would have the beast killing them at the very end of the week with the ensuing three day party. There will be no making merry and sending gifts during the wrath of God. So then the 42 months cannot be concurrent. I suppose there could be overlap but I'm convinced that isn't the case. No one can touch these two for the length of their moment confronting the beast and the world. But the beast does kill them after their 42 months is expired,when the beast is given the power to continue for his 42 months; deceiving the world demanding worship and what not. Two successive 42 month periods as I dont see the beast refraining from the murder of the witnesses when he has clearly been given enormous power; and no doubt this is the same 42 months where Satan has been cast to earth.
  14. The only point I can make for a time period before the A of D directly associated with the end of the age is the two witnesses. They must prophesy 42 months and I'm betting it's not going to be during God's wrath.
  15. Ignoring the reality of the Pretrib doctrine yet again. 1 Cor 15:51 has no reference to apostasia. 1 Thess 4:17. "...shall be caught up..", harpázō – properly, seize by force; snatch up, suddenly and decisively – like someone seizing bounty (spoil, a prize); to take by an open display of force (i.e. not covertly or secretly)." This is all our hopes and dreams, or should be, and you are saying harpazo is equivalent in concept and action to apostasia? Nonsense. There isn't even a reference to harpazo in 2 Thess 2. The gathering in that passage is in reference to the assembly of the people of God, " episynagōgḗ – a specific (apt) "grouping together" that fulfills (builds on) the specific purpose of the gathering together." "Our gathering..." is literally 'a company assembled'. The two aren't even the same part of speech, yet you equate them. More nonsense. No. Harpazo, "properly, seize by force; snatch up, suddenly and decisively – like someone seizing bounty (spoil, a prize); to take by an open display of force (i.e. not covertly or secretly)." We are taken. We cannot desert the earth. Where do we go and how do we get there of our own power? We can't. Pretrib loves to say how we are gathered but then says we leave under our own power when it suits. All evidence to the contrary. I had this discussion before. Dicessio is also a defection, a departure from an ideology, and was used mostly in a political context. Look it up. In any case, apostasia appears in the text and is defined as revolt or rebellion as far back as I can find, about the 4th century if memory serves. But continue to twist. It's your life. You have been informed. No, again. It's not the whole thing. Paul was combating the false reports of the return of Jesus as if it already happened. The whole point is to remind the people of what comes before the Return and the gathering, rebellion of God's people against Him and the revealing of the beast. You do realize your take on 2 Thess 2 says that the gathering must occur before the gathering?
×
×
  • Create New...