Marcus O'Reillius

The current Pope is a fool. According to one "prophecy" - he is also the LAST Pope. I will bet dollars to donuts that he will not be at the head of fourth terrible beast. As politically-oriented to the left as he is, he is still a symbol of God, and the powers-that-be hate that. Remember: the beast torments the harlot. The harlot may "ride" the beast, but she does not rule it.

I've thought about it and I don't think as you do. In fact, I think quite contrary to your way of thinking. Paul WROTE about the "son of perdition". I will color code like things. 2Th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, These are the TWO things which the Thessalonians are awaiting: His Coming - which is on the Day of Christ, or the Day of the Lord, and our gathering together unto Him - which is the Rapture. AND they are linked in sequence order by the conjunction "and". We can expect one and then the other. Paul will go on tell the Thessalonians that they can still expect what they thought they had missed. 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Paul is essentially telling them it has not come to pass - that's why they were worried. They thought they had been left behind. Now Paul will set TWO PRIOR conditions which must come to pass before the first two, SO IF they DON'T see these: then they haven't "missed" Jesus. These two events must come first. This is established by the use of the word: EXCEPT. The two pairs of events are worded backwards. In the Greek, the most important things come first in a sentence; they don't use our syntax. Here in the opening of this chapter, Paul gets to the good part before he gets to the prerequisite bad part. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; KJV Basic reading comprehension is required. The sequence of events surrounding the Rapture goes like this based on the language Paul uses: Falling away Son of Perdition revealed The coming of Jesus Christ Our gathering to Him. That is the LOGICAL order given by what Paul writes. Many misconstrue it, and you are free to spin it around to your liking as well - I very much doubt this will ever get you to change your mind. I write only for those with an open mind.

Let me know how that works out for you.

...Indeed, they have the same aim as revealed by Jesus to John: Rev 17:13They have one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast. 14They will make war against the Lamb… The ten member ruling council is not opposed to the anti-Christ; they are in competition with him. Both interests are opposed to God, and also are in opposition to the Catholic Church as well, which as the body which encompasses the mother-son worship of Babylon is portrayed as a Harlot, much as rebellious Israel was described as a prostitute in the Old Testament. Both the ten horns, or ministers and the little horn or anti-Christ will be aligned against Christianity and may be like secular humanists which is closely akin to the Hellenistic Greeks. So the nature of the struggle whereby the three are replaced by this little horn is usually viewed as an adversarial process gained in open conflict as in war, going into the word study reveals a Machiavellian political process within the highest governmental of this super-state, the terrible fourth beast. This puts it in perfect resonance with the dual focus description of the Antichrist as “a stern-faced king, a master of intrigue” as he was described in Daniel 8:23. The picture that should emerge is one where conditions have to be made right for this one; this little horn with the eyes of a man speaking boastfully can then take charge. This is backed up in the Revelation account God though Jesus gives John: REV 13:2b The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority. Notice the devil is giving the fourth terrible nation his power after it is formed. Out of it from the account in Revelation proceeding in linear fashion, one of the heads, the one that is present during the seventieth ‘seven,’ becomes prominent. The beast in REV 13:5 is that head or man. This character is described in Revelation: REV 13:5The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months. 6He opened his mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. Like Daniel’s little horn in chapter seven, this man has the ability to speak and like the dual focus descriptive account from Daniel chapter eleven, he speaks against God. So the nature of the fourth terrible beast which initially has ten rulers only to have one man come up and hamstring three and govern over them after the super-state of Rome is put into place is matched with the account in Revelation whereby the nation out of the sea has great power and then one person comes to rule in opposition to God. The nature of the Antichrist as master of intrigue is preserved through the word study and he operates in the background until his time is ripe. To see how this figure performs and is finally revealed as Paul notes with his characterization of him as the Man of Lawlessness, propels the analysis forward into the seventieth ‘seven.’

Moving on from the description of the man, specifically, to show how this Antichrist comes into power, God has revealed this in yet another vision in Daniel chapter seven with the account of the four beasts. Picking up from where this analysis left off in the previous chapter setting up the nations, the fourth beast as depicted with the additional information from Revelation 13:2, is a combination of the previous three beasts. Ruling over it are ten horns, or men who are given authority as kings to rule for one hour. It is through these ten rulers or ministers of government that the Antichrist depicted in Daniel chapter seven as the little horn comes to power. DA 7:8"While I was thinking about the horns, there before me was another horn, a little one, which came up among them; and three of the first horns were uprooted before it. This horn had eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth that spoke boastfully. While horns are symbols of power in the Bible, this figurative description of a “horn” goes beyond that. In Revelation chapter 17, an Angel takes John aside and describes the seven-headed, ten-horned end-time beast of a nation/ruling system. In that passage, the Angel explains what or more accurately who the ten “horns” are: REV 17:12"The ten horns you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but who for one hour will receive authority as kings along with the beast. When Daniel is speaking of “horns,” the vision he describes can be seen as powerful rulers which control the “beast” of a nation. The use of “horn” then identifies a powerful person. The figurative use of “horn” adds to ruler’s attributes rather than describing a separate person. The Hebrew contains more shades of meaning on how the three kings in place for one hour are supplanted by the little horn. The word for uproot in the Aramaic, ‘aqar, rq'[}, has the same meaning in Hebrew and the words are closely related in their respective writing with the Hebrew being: rq'[;.—TWOT p.1056. The English word uproot carries an idea of being utterly pulled up and destroyed as uprooting a plant and so killing it. And if this were the intent of Daniel, then to convey that meaning, the best Hebrew word would be natash, vt'n:: it has the meaning to root out, pluck up and is rendered once in the KJV in regards to cities as destroy and in the ASV as overthrow.–TWOT p.611. But the Hebrew derivative of the Aramaic ‘aqar, has two definitions, one means to pluck up or root out, and the second means to hamstring.—TWOT p.692. The use of ‘aqar as to hamstring is used in 2nd Samuel 8:4, 1st Chronicles 18:4, and Joshua 11:6 and is used in reference to horses. Reading‘aqar as uproot as in the sense of gardening may not be the only valid translation that accurately describes the relation between the little horn and the other three. The second time Daniel speaks of this uprooting of the three horns is to one who is standing there in the Heavenly realm in his vision. (Daniel chapter seven has the same event written three times, once in receiving it, the second in question of it, and the third in answer by “one standing there” from Heaven within the vision) Daniel relates the three horns which were uprooted before the little horn as falling before him in verse 7:20. This word in the Aramaic, ne pal is the same as the Hebrew, napal, and has a myriad of uses and connotations, and can be used as falling into one’s hands. Because of the richness of the word like its English equivalent, no distinct rendering is possible.—TWOT p1045, 587 Daniel’s descriptive account of his vision in verse 7:8 is buttressed by the explanation given to him of the vision from one who was standing there. The explanation this one gives Daniel adds another bit of evidence in the verb he uses to show how the Antichrist comes to power that can assist in rendering a proper translation of the previous word uproot. DA 7:24The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. The other aspect has to do with how we read Daniel 7:24. In it we read this little horn will “subdue three kings.” In English we’re fairly confident in assessing a contest where a victor emerges, however in the Aramaic, the word Daniel uses does not have that same connotation. Daniel uses shepat, meaning literally, judge.—TWOT p.1080. It’s counterpart in the Hebrew is shapat, meaning judge, govern. The primary sense of shapat is to exercise the processes of government. Since, however, the ancients did not always divide the functions of government, as most modern governments do, between legislative, executive, and judicial functions (and departments) the common translation, “to judge,” misleads us. For, the word, judge, as shapat is usually translated, in modern English, means to exercise only the judicial function of government. Unless one wishes in a context of government—civil, religious, or otherwise—consistently to translate as “to govern or rule,” the interpreter must seek more specialized words to translate a word of such broad meaning in the modern world scene… Hence the following analysis of use of this basic word for exercise of government appears. 1. To act as a ruler…(The other three definitions center on the judicial aspect of the word centering on shopet.)… shapat, with its derivative noun mishpat, is the commonest word to designate the function of government in any realm and in any form. It apparently differs from the rarer din (verb and noun) chiefly in being the more formal and technical term while din is more poetic.—TWOT p.947-8. Translating shepat as subdue with its connotation following the primary definition of conquering by force, does not fit the word sense of judging. However the alternate definition of subdue, to bring into submission does fit a general sense of shapat, the Hebrew equivalent, in that governing has superior and inferior roles. Furthermore Webster defines subdue as “to bring under control, esp. by an exercise of the will”—3rd New International Dictionary p.2274 also allows for a reading shepat in the sense of governing. Combining Daniel’s reference to the little horn as governing, with the aspect of subdue as bringing under control then leads credence to the uprooting of three kings whereby they are rendered ineffective as in being hamstrung rather than utterly destroyed as they give their power to govern to this last little horn. This concept changes the nature of the political struggle slightly; the ten are not in opposition to the little horn. Indeed, they have the same aim as revealed by Jesus to John: Rev 17:13They have one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast. 14They will make war against the Lamb…

Shifting gears from the aspect of rebellion in general among the people to the acts of the ruler who will come, in a latter vision of Daniel, Antiochus is a launching point for describing the Antichrist. Here In the last prophetic vision in Daniel from chapter ten until the end of Daniel’s book is a long explanation in which the “man dressed in linen” provides to Daniel in relation to his dream about a terrible war. From Daniel 11:5-30 the Man in Linen describes a generational war between Seleucus Nicator, the ruler over all the rest of Asia except lower Syria and Palestine; and Ptolemy, son of Lagus, the king of Egypt and Palestine which, all in all, spans about 160 years. The pivot point of dual focus centers on the passage describing the abomination and its immediate verses (31 through 35) can have dual applicability. The lens of dual focus shifts the vision from Daniel's near-term to the far-term of the end times. No part of the history of second century B.C. after Antiochus sets up of the abomination is described by the Man in Linen as he continues in verse 36. This portion of Daniel after the pivot point describes a ruler unknown in the annals of history and it is separated into two parts. The first only describes the anti-Christ through in verses 36-39. After that, the Man in Linen moves in a linear progression telling the story of conquest at the end of times which is how the opening of verse 40 puts it until verse 45 which brings the future account around in a loop to the midpoint of the one 'seven' with the anti-Christ poised to enter Jerusalem. His end is not at that moment, yet will come because once 'who is like God' arises, the anti-Christ's doom is certain. To compare this figure with the previous use of dual focus in chapter eight has several parallel aspects in the general description of the character of this ruler who will come and can be laid side-by-side: DA 8:24He will become very strong, but not by his own power. He will cause astounding devastation and will succeed in whatever he does. He will destroy the mighty men and the holy people. 25He will cause deceit to prosper, and he will consider himself superior. When they feel secure, he will destroy many and take his stand against the Prince of princes. Yet he will be destroyed, but not by human power. DA 11:36"The king will do as he pleases. He will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of things against the God of gods. He will be successful until the time of wrath is completed, for what has been determined must take place. 37He will show no regard for the gods of his fathers or for the one desired by women, nor will he regard any god, but will exalt himself above them all. 38Instead of them, he will honor a god of fortresses; a god unknown to his fathers he will honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and costly gifts. 39He will attack the mightiest fortresses with the help of a foreign god and will greatly honor those who acknowledge him. He will make them rulers over many people and will distribute the land at a price. The parallel between strength in chapter eight is described as his being able to do as he pleases. There is no restraint upon him at this point. The rebellion against God is summed up in the second sentence of verse 11:36. The epitome of this selfishness will be manifested in the Antichrist setting himself up as God. Both accounts have success as an attribute. The stand this Antichrist takes against God is shown in Revelation chapter eleven as being aligned with a foreign god, a god of fortresses, which alludes back to the previous word study on feel secure that will typify the end times. While the first description assures his destruction, the second use of dual focus adds more detail. With the aid of this spiritual power outside of God, he succeeds and he doles out rewards not by merit, but by money so that everything is wholly corrupted. Chapter eleven concludes with the assurance of this Antichrist’s destruction as a future certainty, though it is not accomplished at 11:45. That end was probably part of Daniel’s dream that troubled him so much that he began a three week fast that preceded this explanation which gives the context for the “great war.” As an introduction to the Antichrist, these two portions of Daniel in chapters eight and eleven give the reader some clear description on this figure. To describe him, the historical account of Antiochus IV Epiphanes serves as a template. Besides turning away from God, this individual refutes God and literally is in opposition to Him. What follows is the consequence for rebelling, and that is judgment, specifically, his destruction. It is important to note that not all these attributes fall to Antiochus or his history. But with his example, this figure will operate in much the same manner.

There is an interesting tie in with Paul’s teaching on eschatology to the Thessalonians from Gabriel’s explanation in Daniel about “When they feel secure…” in verse 8:25. The question of who feels secure by asking who ‘they’ refers to should note that that word is added in the translation. The Hebrew only has “when prosperity.” The word used has an interesting theological twist to how the Christian is to rely on God. Security is elusive. Being secure in a physical sense often leads to downfall. There is actually a tie between being at ease in a related word, shelev, and delusion. –Brown, Driver and Briggs, p. 1017c. True security can only be achieved through God, so any attempt to acquire security apart from God is a false condition or form of self-delusion, and often leads to disaster when God acts. Thus self-reliance is a form of rebellion against God’s dominion. This is backed up by the underlying word study on the word made to act as a verb in feel secure: shalwa: “shalwa. Quietness, prosperity. A blessed character trait in anybody’s life (Ps 122:7; Prov 17:1). Yet it can become an open door to disaster. Note that one of Saodom’s sins was “abundance” of idleness (shaqat, Ezk 16:49). It may produce “carelessness” (Prov 1:32). And a political platform promising peace at all costs can be nothing more than a subterfuge and a personal expedient.—TWOT p.927 This aspect of promising peace at all costs as an illusion was framed by Benjamin Franklin in his quote: “Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither.” He recognized rightly the Christian tenet that security can only be found in God, and cannot be achieved in this world. However, Satan will attempt to create heaven in this world. His vanity and self-reliance ignores the fact that security comes from God, because he would supplant God as the center of worship. So this security will be more like the tranquility found in a police state as the Antichrist attempts to control events in a very worldly sense. Paul wrote about this as a corollary tie in to Gabriel’s explanation: 1TH 5:1Now, brothers, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, 2for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3While people are saying, "Peace and safety," destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. The Lord will come to those that are not looking for Him like a thief in the night, stealing in without their foreknowledge. Jesus said much the same in His parable concerning His second coming in Matthew 24:45-51. Here Jesus juxtaposes the faithful servant from the wicked servant. The latter will be caught unaware: 48But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, `My master is staying away a long time,' 49and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. So the people Paul is talking about in 1TH 5:2-3, are the people who are wicked. It is they who are mouthing “Peace and safety” as a motto. This warning to the Christian has an immediate applicability to the present war on terrorism. Although the events of September 11, 2001 were horrific, the response of the United States Government in creating a new department of Homeland Security demonstrates man’s attempt to provide for his own security. The means by which this endeavor are being instituted are diametrically opposed to following God and will further create a situation that will facilitate a general condition conducive to the rise of the Antichrist.

The Anti-Christ The only time the word “antichrist” is used in the Bible is in John’s writings. This however, does not completely describe the anti-Christ anticipated here in a literal rendering of prophecy as one who is set up as a talking image of himself in front of the Curtain within a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem at the midpoint of the one ‘seven.’ While John points to “antichrist” as a coming figure, he goes onto say that anyone who opposes Christ is by definition “anti” - Christ. Furthermore, any system which promises salvation apart from God, whether it be technology, Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, science, environmentalism, or evolution is “anti” - Christ. On top of that, the John writes that there is a spirit of anti-Christ which permeates the world; the “world” being juxtaposed opposite what Christ is and represents. So while John is the only one who writes explicitly about “antichrist,” to be so ultra-literal as to myopically focus only on what he has to say about the anti-Christ loses sight of what other prophetic writing in Scripture says about the desolator, little horn, man of lawlessness or any other title that which points to the ruler who will come who sets himself up in the Temple claiming to be God. That person, as told by Jesus in Matthew 24:15, Paul in 2Th 2:4, and John in Revelation 13:14, is a person and he is the same person John says will ultimately come: the anti-Christ. To have a complete view of the “ruler who will come” means incorporating all the myriad ways Scripture describes this seminal figure. It is only through the various descriptions of him that a true picture of his being can emerge. Prophecy gives an indication on the rise of the Antichrist. The manner in which this terrible ruler comes to power is revealed through two separate descriptions in Daniel from chapters eight and eleven where near term prophecy acts as a dual focus giving a model for the end time ruler. The pivot point revolves around Antiochus IV Epiphanes. This interpretation for dual focus also has an interesting bit of supporting evidence in Paul’s letters. The rise of the little horn reveals more information through a careful word study in the Hebrew on how he rises to prominence in Daniel chapter seven. These two parts show how the Antichrist rises out of the ruling council of the terrible beast to lead the terrible beast of a nation. Taken together with the context of second century Israel which had devolved into Hellenistic practices, the latter part of Daniel chapter eight presents a world situation divorced from God. The passage continues with the last of 8:23; “a stern-faced king, a master of intrigue, will arise,” This is completely inline with Paul’s account in Thessalonians, which Paul has the rebellion occurring immediately before the emergence of the Antichrist where he is revealed. The verse in Daniel has an equally juxtaposed word to describe this Antichrist figure: arise. Arise comes from ‘amad meaning stand, remain, endure. In theological usage, it is used extensively for standing before God. While sitting is the purview of God, and subjects before Him stand, the stand this character doomed for destruction makes is in defiance. In another sense of the language, the devastation he causes also completes the turning away from God. DA 8:24He will become very strong, but not by his own power. He will cause astounding devastation and will succeed in whatever he does. He will destroy the mighty men and the holy people. 25He will cause deceit to prosper, and he will consider himself superior. When they feel secure, he will destroy many and take his stand against the Prince of princes. Yet he will be destroyed, but not by human power. When this individual comes to power, verse 24 describes what he will accomplish: He will have success with astounding devastation and destroy both the mighty and the Holy people. Conversely as the Holy people are destroyed deceit or alternately, treachery –TWOT p.849 will increase. As the condition ripens, because of the use of be for when they feel secure, (and they has been added in the translation) introduces a temporal clause –TWOT p.87, to the point that that occurs, at a point when destruction comes to the mighty and holy and deceit prospers; two additional actions come forward, he will destroy many and take his stand, which here is the same word ‘amad translated before as arise. The second action means he will stand in opposition against the Prince of Princes, a reference to God, or more specifically, the King of Kings of the New Testament: Jesus. This sense of stand as in opposition is not unlike the mistranslation of gabar in Daniel 9:27. In opposition to God, gabar can mean to stand in opposition to God by the strength of one’s self.

Ah! So what you are railing against is not a simple concept found in the Bible, but a whole matter of interpretation! Futurism is your great satan. Well, my friend, I know no Jesuits, and I take a plain, literal reading of the Word. This very manner of interpretation is not wrong! It is but one of four different ways people can approach end-time prophecy. So just because I have a different perspective than you, does not mean I am wrong. Nor does it make you wrong. But what I will rail about are those who are on a mission to discount a whole class of eschatology because it is not to their way of thinking. So accuse all you like, but I think you're way off with your condemnations of the literal, futuristic rendering of end-time prophecy.

Or are they a test to separate wise virgins from foolish virgins and bring the number of fifth Seal martyrs towards their final number? We shall see, and perhaps in our lifetimes.

I disagree.

On the other hand, he is a man, who is limited to the normal lifespan of a man.

Why is this in a thread about Post-Tribulation / Pre-Wrath eschatology? You think. Thus you believe. It is also logically deductible that you think your thinking is the revelation of the Holy Spirit of God, because that is what you say. Yet others who are also believing and thinking and asking the Holy Spirit to guide them - and they have conclusions that are not so complicated as trying to figure out how gravity would even exist in your mind's belief/thinking structure which you say is a revelation from the Holy Spirit - a claim which is also part of your thinking and thus your belief structure. Your thinking/belief also takes the dimensions which replicate the Most Holy Place in the first Tabernacle - which is a copy of what is IN Heaven - which you have placed IN creation, floating somewhere out in the ether... to revive an old concept which also isn't scientific at all, which you purport to have an interest in - and you fashion this huge, promised, God-made structure, some 1500 miles square at its base, and some 1500 miles tall, and you place it on the earth - the old earth - and because it doesn't "fit" well, you then make it into a pyramid, and when I questioned your placement on this earth, that it would not be able to function in this world's physical laws of gas compression, you then came up with, what you might think is a revelation of the Holy Spirit of God, a very complicated, literally unworkable scheme of compartmentalized air pockets in that un-Hebrew-like invention of yours, and you still maintain this idea despite any criticism to the contrary. You maintain this thinking/belief structure so much, you drew a picture of it and use it as your avatar. And to be right, I have to adopt your thinking? Oh really? I don't think so. I also know that words in Hebrew have more than one meaning. I know that those earth-bound ancients would not understand anything as complicated as another dimension. That to them, Heaven is as far away as a place they can never go - in the clouds - yet as near to them as the sky they see every day, because that is how close the Spirit, which we cannot see, can be to us, just one simple dimension-shift away. I know that God's Abode - in Heaven - was there before there was a sky - which is how you want to force Heaven to be. So don't tell me that the Holy Spirit dictates this; God has not put His signature on this line of thinking with any miraculous sign. While I don't dare speak for God, so too should you not dare speak for God in saying this thinking of yours came from revelation from the Holy Spirit - because then you ARE speaking for the Holy Spirit. So don't you tell me that the Holy Spirit is the source of your thinking to buttress it to the point that no one can challenge you. You are treading on shaky ground when you do, and as your brother in Christ, I would be remiss if I didn't warn you. I hope you weather the upcoming hurricane without undue loss.

Along with "clear" I am very wary of following anyone who says, "The Holy Spirit told me that...". This long-winded, and unconvincing argument of yours Roy has no real place in the debate about Post-Trib and Pre-Wrath. If I were the moderator, I'd kindly ask you to take your esoteric arguments to a more appropriate thread. This will be the last from me on this: you may continue to post as you like, however, my absence should not indicate a lack of argument on my part to refute, rebut or reject yours. I simply will cease to provide a venue for your particular side-issue.

People also focus on the literal aspect of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar's dream and point to the toes, which are not illuminated by the text for special consideration, and many make an interpretation that there will be 10 nations because of the "ten kings". Ten Kingdoms? Or ten kings? Rev 17:12 The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they receive authority as kings with the beast for one hour. _________________________________________________________________________ . The Angel is describing the beast with seven heads. Rev 17:3 ...a woman sitting on a scarlet beast, full of blasphemous names, having seven heads and ten horns. This beast is also called a dragon in Rev 16:13; it is a spiritual being as well. It is not Satan because this being is possessed by a spirit greater than it. Thus this beast is the eighth "head". _________________________________________________________________________ . The heads are double: they are both mountains and rulers. Rev 17: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits, 10 and they are seven kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while. The seven mountains is commonly referred to Rome; I have no qualm with that interpretation although there are other cities with seven hills. The harlot is comparable in apocryphal terms to the woman Israel whom God loved in Ezekiel 16: 15 "But you trusted in your beauty and played the harlot because of your fame, Putting two and two together, it is an easy comparison to the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) in Rome who "rode" the scarlet beast of the Roman Empire, becoming political as well. Both the woman Israel of Ezekiel 16 and the woman of Rev 17 as the RCC, may started out as virgins, in that they were true to God, but by enmeshing themselves with the kings of this world, they became unfaithful, hence both became harlots. __________________________________________________________________________ . . The aspect of time is introduced with the explanation of the kingly interpretation of the heads. ~ have fallen, one is, the other yet to come ~ At the time of the end: five are past. One is present. The last is future. Seen over 2500 years, these rulers may represent the seven worst ever. I cannot name the worst five in history, but Hitler ought to be in that number, as well as some Roman Caesars. So looking over time: there are seven successive Kings. __________________________________________________________________________ . . However, as to the horns, do they really represent 10 nations put together ~ OR ~ do they represent the 10 rulers over the inception of the fourth terrible beast who itself formed by the previous three beasts of Daniel 7? Rev 13:1 Then I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads, and on his horns were ten diadems, and on his heads were blasphemous names. 2 And the beast which I saw was like a leopard, and his feet were like those of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. Notice the list is in reverse order and names the same three beasts which all rise together out of the "sea" in Daniel 7 I can lend an interpretation: The lion: America The bear: Russia The leopard: Europe. Putting these three great end-time kingdoms together at the end, makes a for a complete unification of the northern half of the Northern Hemisphere. A true, Kingdom of the North. _________________________________________________________________________ . Over this amalgamation of sovereign nations, a federation as you will, suppose they constituted themselves with a ruling council of ministers - not unlike how the "body" of the EU has been formed with 12 ministers overseeing 25, now 24 nations; with TEN Ministers. Then ~ these 10 "Ministers" would act AS Kings, yet they would come with no kingdom! Thus they would fulfill this important clause set in the explanation for this aspect of the scarlet beast/dragon nation: Rev 17:12 The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they receive authority as kings with the beast for one hour. SO ~ I am looking for a future combination of European-originated, Romanesque nations which will form a nation so great and powerful, none could withstand it. Still there will be a "South" untamed who attacks it (and is within it as the clay of Dan 2:41/43) ~ Islam And an "East" who is set as the spoiler trying to come in at the last and conquer both ~ China. Furthermore, it is within this very small circle of power, these ten "Ministers" that the little horn of Daniel arises. The anti-Christ is a political animal residing within the powerful, who only makes his move at the end.

Again, you are so narrowly focused on being so ever correct in your language that you have become totally unintelligible. Heaven is more than just the "sky" because it also pertains to the place where the Temple of God, and the very Throne upon which the Father reigns. And that existed before there was a sky. And THAT CONCEPT simply eludes you with all your exacting word definition. OOPS! You used the "clear" word. Thus I know the following RESTRICTION is also not "clear" at all, but a limitation you put on it to mean ONLY the physical world, and thus you're no better than the LDS as WilliamL brought up. This limitation reminds me of a joke. A visitor to a mental facility asked how they graded their patients. The administrator showed him a bathtub full of water. "We present them with this and ask them to empty it. We present it along with a bucket, a cup, and a spoon; and ask them how they would like to proceed." "I see," said the visitor, "so if they don't pick the bucket, you admit them?" "No sir, a normal person would simply open the drain; so which room should I set aside for you?" So upon which planet does God reside?

You have GOT to be kidding me... Oh my gosh, you're not kidding... THIS? This is what you now come up with to keep your definition of Heaven intact? Amazing. You are so technically correct on saying names so that it gets to point you have to decipher what you write, yet one simple concept, that God existed before there was anything created, now is spun out of control as to meaning it wasn't until He was NAMED, that JESUS existed and so He existed only when the sky also did ~ so He could come "from" the sky -- so you can still maintain THAT the SKY is Heaven. I was telling my pastor just the other day that people will not change what they believe about anything eschatological or theological. This is just another case in point in a long list. Good day Roy.

Brevity is the soul of wit. So in a way, because I disagree with what you're saying; people are in Heaven when they fly all cooped up in coach seating. By the way, your explanation of where Jesus went - and you intimate that He kept on going - doesn't explain how Jesus literally "pops" into and out of rooms and open spaces after His Resurrection but before the Ascension from the Mount of Olives. I prefer a dimensional shift because Jesus existed before there was a sky. That is where He came from. That is where He is now. And this means Heaven is not just "sky", because that is part of creation.

Roy, again you give us another long-winded and tortured language lesson all to preserve your earthly, man-centered view of heaven-on-earth. While you try to dictate terms and conditions, still others have another sense. Gal 4:1 Now I say, as long as the heir is a child, he does not differ at all from a slave although he is owner of everything, 2 but he is under guardians and managers until the date set by the father. 3 So also we, while we were children, were held in bondage under the elemental things of the world. 4 But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, 5 so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. 6 Because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, " Abba! Father!" 7 Therefore you are no longer a slave, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God. There is a distinct schism between Man and God. There is a distinct schism between Earth and Heaven. There is a distinct schism between Hagar and Sarah. There is a distinct schism between Ismael and Isaac. There is a distinct schism between Mount Sinai and Mount Zion. There is a distinct schism between the Law and the Gospel. There is a distinct schism between Judaism and Christianity. There is a distinct schism between Adam and Jesus. There is a distinct schism between this Earth and the New Earth. There is a distinct schism between Religion and Spirituality. So if some of us want to envision Heaven as something not of this world, which is what the sky is; we need not maintain your view, which I see as earth-centered. So allow me, and others, to view these two verses as referencing the same thing, because I and others do. Gal 4:26 But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. Heb 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel. Answer these questions: Where did Jesus go when He ascended? What altitude did He stop at in your view? How many miles up did He go before He stopped? Is Jesus stuck at that same spot? Where is He right now?

So: After the Parousia of Jesus at night, and the terror it will instill upon the wicked world, (and this is aptly described in a single verse in Isaiah: 17:14 In the evening, sudden terror! Before the morning, they are gone!) When He alights upon the earth and the 144,000 are "mustered" with Jesus on the newly cleft Mount of Olives from Zechariah 14:4 (as per Acts 1:11). (Again Isaiah sees this in chapter 13: The LORD Almighty is mustering an army for war. Read 13:2-6 and 5:26. I think Isaiah saw the 144,000 there.) ~ Three Angels warn the world, the first with the eternal Gospel which will convert many who never heard it before, the second in summary, and the third who warns the wicked -- THEN the wicked go into hiding: AND this is perfectly preserved in Rev 6:15 because it comes after sun/moon/star sign and the second earthquake of the sixth Seal. The "sealing" of the 144,000 happens after they are mustered. It is during this time that I think Jesus goes to that dimensional realm of Paradise, where He went with the thief on His Right on the day He was crucified, to sound the Last Trumpet and so resurrects the Dead in Christ when He calls out (John 5:25). Then He comes with them (1Th 3:13) to gather the Elect who remain and are left from all over the world, (Mt 24:31, 1Th 4:17, Rev 14:14-16) east to west I would add as my opinion, and every eye will see Him. And we are taken up (paralambano - to receive our inheritance, also used when someone "receives" Christ into their heart) My wife had a prophetic dream years ago when I started this inquiry of mine. She "knew" before she saw Him, that He was on the earth. The spiritual adviser we knew then, said that knowledge was the mark of a prophetic dream. My wife then described seeing Jesus come, and from the vantage point of her dream it was from the east, which didn't strike her as anything worth noting, just the setting as she described it immediately told me it was from the east - and she had no way of knowing how this fit with Scripture - and she described the feeling she had inside as beautiful and indescribably wonderful. This exchange will not be painful I think. Not all of us will die, and this exchange is not like dying. But taking the word in 1Co 15:51, allasso, as such, leaves the world with inanimate bodies: they're "dead". In sequence fashion, only when both parts of the Harvest are in hand, does Jesus deliver them to Heaven, where John sees them before the Father, arrayed in white robes and holding palm branches (not harps) (and I want to know - where did they get all those palm fronds?) having been taken out of the Great Tribulation. The seventh Seal is broken, and there is silence for half an hour. AM 8:3 "In that day," declares the Sovereign LORD, "the songs in the temple will turn to wailing. Many, many bodies--flung everywhere! Silence!" The world awakens with the dawn to dead bodies. The people they had sought to eliminate are now lifeless forms. Imagine if you will that this exchange leaves bodies scattered all about - without a mark on them! Now imagine as you will, that as Jesus begins to trample out the Wrath of God upon the world - the wicked begin to get their due and their fears are partially realized. They don't understand, nor will they be able to comprehend, the ever-deepening pit in which they will be drawn into only to die in the end. And the longer they hold on, the worse it will be. For Americans on the Day of the Lord, far removed from Israel, imagine if you will that the Yellowstone Caldera blows. Think of Mount St. Helens on steroids, a thousand-fold stronger! This catastrophe, when mountains "smoke", would wipe out their food supply in the Midwest and short out their electrical grid over most of the country. What the wicked had deprived us during the Great Tribulation, food and power - will not be denied them for even longer. Their struggle to stay alive will be a lot tougher when they come out of their shelters - but the Wrath of God is only just beginning. I don't give them much chance at all to surviving it, in fact, I know they won't. But when the Day of the Lord dawns, and they find the bodies, won't the wicked also be shocked? Here are those pesky Christians who hadn't taken the mark. Their Lord has come and gone - and they're dead! Why, 'If He did that to them, what is He going to do to us?' they might cry. And those foolish Christians who took the mark will assemble in their church buildings and wail and moan. Theirs is a terrible end; they were so close - they had a hope of Heaven, and now they get to live and die in Hell on earth. Yes, the rich and powerful will survive the catastrophe of the Day of the Lord. They will hunker down in their bunkers and maybe come out later, but their lives won't be as comfortable as they were. The effect of the first Trumpet alone will have them clawing for survival for a year or more until they can rebuild their infrastructure and with their will power, bend creation to their liking... but then sometime later, the second Trumpet will sound, and all their work will be for naught. And the 144,000? During the Day of the Lord, you can read what they do in Joel 2, as Jesus tramps out His Wrath in Israel. I wouldn't want to be there...

You know, the thing here is that when the wicked hide from the paraousia of Jesus -- as a meteor shower (falling stars) acts as the celestial fireworks to what a friend of mine described as a dimensional rift, and I immediately thought he was onto something - when the night sky scrolls back and the earth is pierced by the Light of God - just the opposite as to how the precursor sun/moon/star sign starts out with clouds darkening the earth at the brightest part of day: noon -- their imminent destruction is NOT NEXT. Nor will all of them die in the ensuing firestorm/volcanic eruption (mountains will "smoke") which affects a third of the earth on the following daylight portion of the Day of the Lord. I'm pretty sure they will "make it" through the Day of the Lord if they're not in Israel for those two battles that happen that Day: one around and in Jerusalem and the other to its South around Bethlehem in the "Valley of Decision." I'm also pretty sure there will be "church services" going on too... for all those left behind like the five foolish virgins. Reading the sixth Seal's sequence of events and the companion, parallel account to it in Revelation 14, I do not have to change what I wrote, - the sequence-of-events I assembled and produced for you is correct - but I do have to change how I envisioned it. I had always thought the hiding took place during the previous day when the foreboding darkness took hold; as the progressive cloud cover enveloped the earth. I'm sure the cable news boys will ALL be in panic over that. Can you imagine the coverage? That is when I thought the powerful would hide. Not so. And have you been watching what's going on? The rich are in a frenzy to build these things, these underground bunkers. Read about it here: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/bunker-builders-anticipate-lucrative-trumpocalypse-932748 - it's up on the DrudgeReport. No. Their destruction is not next. Our Rescue is. And that Rescue, the Rapture, is not what everyone might expect. In fact, I think the word Paul uses in 1Co 15:51 - allasso - has a double meaning. It can mean to "change" or "exchange". Now I have read commentaries and most all prefer "change", however, that does not answer Jesus' cryptic answer to the Disciples about where "we" go in Luke 17:37: as dead bodies where the birds of prey go. (Various Bible versions use different birds here, but even great predator birds are not above eating carrion.) Now we don't like that idea, of discarding our bodies. We are quite in love with ourselves. But God does not need to reconstitute bodies which no longer exist in the ground to resurrect the Dead. But as Paul says, what was planted in one form (buried) rises in another. So the old form is no longer needed. Likewise with those who remain and are left - which is an important qualification IF you look at the Rapture as happening after the shortened Great Tribulation - their bodies are also not needed in order for us to be rid of flesh and blood which cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. So what if we exchange our bodies for new ones and the old ones, no longer needed, are simply discarded? Would not that answer where we "go" in such mysterious and cryptic fashion? Question: Could these new, immortal, and imperishable bodies be the "places" God has prepared for us from John 14:3?

Roy, I'm not so sure you and I even have the same concept of the afterlife. Theologically, and eschatologically, this is where we differ even on our respective views of Heaven, with you opting for a literal application of the word to 'sky' and I preferring a more dimensional difference. Where do we go when we die? Where do you say we go when we die?

Dear Spinmeister: 1Th 4:16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.

Good thing I give my money to Donald Trump and I don't deny the wicked demonstrate what they heard from the third Angel and are entirely mistaken as to what comes NEXT when Jesus comes - the Harvest of the Elect -- as any good Sequence-of-Events analyst will tell you. Sun/moon/star event Day of the LORD. Scrolling of the sky = sign of the Son of Man Jesus touches down on Mount Zion Mustering the 144,000 on Mount Zion with Jesus standing upon the earth 3 Angels fulfill the Great Commission / Warn the wicked The Last Trumpet Call of God Dead in Christ are Resurrected Son of Man coming on the clouds with the Saints Harvest Redemption / Gathering Elect from the earth Those who are alive and are left are gathered up Great Multitude arrive in Heaven out of the Great Tribulation Books / Scroll opened with breaking of seventh Seal First Trumpet fire and blood – 1/3rd of earth burned Avenging Angels – supplying Blood and managing the Fire

Where is the Last Trumpet mentioned in the Bible? 1Co 15:51-52. What does it say? 1Co 15:51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. Does this happen simultaneously? No. But is says "and we will be changed". Yes, and taken alone, you could say that. However, there is an accompanying verse which shows the two are not so linked. Where is that written? 1Th 4:16-17. What does it say? 1Th 4:16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord. So with the Trumpet call of God, the Dead in Christ will rise first, is that correct? Yes. Is that written anywhere else? Yes. Where is that written? John 5:25. What does it say? Jn 5:25 Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. Doesn't that only address those who are spiritually dead in their sin within His presence two thousand years ago? No, it can also be taken eschatologically. It doesn't say trumpet does that in John 5:25. Yes, it doesn't say it does outright, but that doesn't mean when those who are numbered among the "Dead in Christ" when He resurrects them aren't also woken up with that Last Trumpet. An omission of a fact is not a commission of an error in the Bible. Lots of little facts are omitted all the time in the story-telling nature of the Bible. The "Dead in Christ" WILL HEAR the voice of the Son of God. Is there anything else that allows a two-step process where only the Dead in Christ are the only ones to hear the Last Trumpet. Yes. Where is that written? 1Th 3:13. What does it say? ...at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all His saints. How is that? From a "observer-true" perspective of one of the Elect standing upon the earth as our Lord encircles it gathering up the Elect, they would see Jesus coming on the clouds of Heaven WITH those who have already been resurrected from Paradise. What does this mean? It means that Roy is assuming that the Last Trumpet is also heard by the wicked. As far as we know, only the Dead in Christ who are "asleep" (a euphemism for resting in peace in death) hear the Last Trumpet. Thus, all his two-part it means this to these people and that to another people is moot. Never mind that the REACTION of different sets of people NEVER changes the PURPOSE of the Trumpet.