Jump to content

Da Puppers

Members
  • Content count

    48
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral
  1. Image of the beast

    No. Prewrath. Though few will probably agree with me, tho the church WILL experience the ravaging effects of the G.T., I don't feel like they will be here to make a decision about the mark. In a nutshell, the rapture will take place after the seals (the great tribulation) but before the mark is instituted, which will be institited after the trumpets->in this order: Seals, rapture, trumpets, mark. The PuP
  2. Image of the beast

    I feel like the resulting aftermath of the great tribulation will be final impetus for implementing the mark. Instead of "make America great again", I believe the motto will be "Make the world great again". The horrific destruction that takes placer during that time [such as never been before] will have worldwide support. But, I really think that there is a hidden agenda there. The A/C & false prophet will know that God's people, the elect of Israel, will never accept such an idolatrous policy, and will not take the mark, thus targeting them. Though few will probably agree with me, tho the church will experience the ravaging effects of tree G.T., I don't feel like they will be here to make a decision about the mark. The vials, which mentions judgment upon those that take the mark, are part of the fullness of the wrath of God. Those who refuse, will have to die, but they will be only from among those who were not saved at the time of the rapture. If the mark is the strong delusion that God sends to them (2 Thess 2), then all who are subject to that, even if it is by refusal, are experiencing the wrath of God, prior to when the fullness of that wrath shall come in the pouring out of the vials. One final note. Being that the mark will be implemented sometime during the reign of the beast (42 months), my personal opinion is that the time of the mark is equated to the 2300 evenings and mornings of Daniel 8. I.e., 1150 days, or about 110 days after the beginning of the 1260 days of Rev. 12, and will last until the end. A couple of key phrases: "transgression of desolation", and "... shall the sanctuary AND the host to be trodden under foot". The "host" could be referring to the people of God, or the city itself. Rev. 11 refers to Jerusalem being trodden down for 42 months. Whereas, Daniel 7 says that his people will be given into his hand for "time, times & the dividing of time". So, either way, whether the host refers to the city or the people of God, the maximum time could only be about 3.5 years. This would be less than 2300 days, but it would be more than 1150. What does that mean? It means that the sanctuary being trodden under foot has to be less than the 3.5 years that the people or the city will be downtrodden. Therefore the 2300 days prophecy, if it is an endtimes prophecy, [Daniel 8 indicates that several times by the use of the words "time of the end, etc "], can only mean 1150 days of time. It must mean that the 1150 days and the 1260 day prophecies either 1. Don't end at the same time, OR 2. Don't begin at the same time. I choose the latter. Blessings The PuP
  3. Show me the scripture then The PuP
  4. I would be glad to point you to specific scripture for any question that you want to ask. Adding to scripture, is that like saying the antichrist will rule from Jerusalem for 3.5 or even 7 years? You sure won't find that in your bible. Blessings The PuP
  5. did I say anything other than being north of Israel? If anything, I argued against it being Russia. There are not many other choices left with them out of the picture. Mt. Nebo is a very highly revered mountain by Jews. Jerusalem, being only 30 miles from Nebo, is visible on a clear day from there. And it is not in modern day Israel, but in Jordan. The PuP
  6. He is not called the king of the north in Daniel 11 for nothing. Joel 2 also concurs that it is a "northern army" in verse 20. He is rightly called the Assyrian in Isaiah and that Empire was predominantly to the north of Israel. But don't let that fool you into thinking that is the direction of his attack. Launching an attack, using many horses, from the far north quarters, even from the southernmost provinces of Russia, would have virtually no element of surprise or unexpected upon Israel. The list of nations that participate in this attack is not only found in Eze 38/39, but other places in scripture as well. Amos 1,2; Isaiah 7-23; Jeremiah 25; & 47-51; Ezekiel 20:45 - ch. 32; along with many in the minor prophets. National endtime judgments are found throughout, including some from Jesus (Tyre & Sidon), but do we find any others that point specifically to Russia? You could spend a lot of time reading the scriptures and researching that question, but very little you will find in essence of specific judgments against them. Does that mean that they won't be a participant? No. But it probably precludes from being the major player, as many think is suggested by Ezekiel. Just to be brief here, the resulting military campaign is laid out in the latter verses of Daniel 11 by the king of the north. That military march, will take him from his home base (NORTH OF ISRAEL) to Syria and/ or Iran, to Jordan (Moab & Ammon), then to Egypt, back to Jordan, (expecting to fight with those rebel -rousers from the north and east, most likely nations supportive to the king of the South (Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt, et al, essentially Shi'ite governments). So how does this turn into a surprise attack on Israel? The attack is launched from the glorious holy mount. That is not found in Jerusalem, but is actually found in Jordan only about 30 miles from Jerusalem. A holy mountain... in Jordan? Yep! Get your bible atlas out. Mt. NEBO is located in modern day Jordan. Who are some of its famous visitors? Moses and Elijah. Elijah may or may not have ascended to heaven from Mt. Nebo, but he was definitely on the east side of the Jordan river, in modern day Jordan, less than 5 miles from Nebo, when the chariot of fire came for him. The glorious holy mount is Mt. NEBO, which lies adjacent to the valley of Jehoshaphat. Ezekiel doesn't call it Hamon-Gog for nothing. As in, Gog, in the land of Ammon. How about its secondary name, Hamonah. The land of Ammon! You might want to re-read Amos 1,2 about now. Pay attention to the cities named there. You will find them all located just east and south of the Dead sea. Not to mention the coastal cities of the Philistines/ Lebanese, AND DAMASCUS! When you see Jerusalem, compassed with armies. There are a boatload of scriptures here pointing to Syria, Lebanon, Moab, Ammon, Edom, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Tyre, etc. all suffering catastrophic defeats. Let's not forget the cities of Judah and Israel, being left a desolate wasteland. Blessings The PuP
  7. Please do not hurl totally unfounded accusations about what I do or don't believe. You have no basis whatsoever to think that I believe the king of the north is Russian or that I don't believe that there is a future 70th week. You are doing a good job of living up to the adage of "if you don't want to learn anything, don't bother yourself with asking questions". If you don't know, and it's important for you to know, then by all means ask. Our conversations might continue to be productive if you would not make assumptions about what a scripture says. Your incessant rebuttal of who was troubled is clearly refuted by the scripture: *[[Dan 11:44]] KJV* But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: THEREFORE he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many. I know you understand the use of the word therefore. It points back to something just previously stated. It was HIS troubled state of mind that causes him to leave what he is doing (in Egypt) to furiously attend to the source of his troubling, coming from the north and east of where he is at. The scripture makes that clear by saying that he has power over the treasures of Egypt AND "at the footsteps of Libya and Ethiopia ". He came from the land of Moab and Ammon into Egypt, and now he will return there (under Israel's guardian eyes) to combative destroy the troublemakers... "to destroy and utterly to make away many". As far as the scriptures saying that the covenant/ agreement is broken is absolutely not stated there, but is a totally unfounded assumption. Besides "to confirm" something is based on something of prior existence, not something that is newly formed. Please stick to what the scriptures declare. The PuP
  8. You see Russia as a big player in the endtimes, mainly I think because of Eze. 38/39. It is much debated. Let me give you something to ponder that I ran across in a lengthy reading from Isaiah. I will be reading more from there in the coming days. From chapter 7, where i started reading about the virgin that conceived [I posted on another forum, in response to a non-messianic Jewish poster, that Hezekiah was at least 10 years old when Isa 7 is taking place (Jewish thinking believes that it was referring to his upcoming birth], and that it could not be Hezekiah, but refers to the birth of Christ. (From chapter 7) at least down to chapter 17, where i stopped, is a protracted discourse on the last days. A central point developed there is the attack on Israel by the Assyrian in chapters 10,11. Much of that discourse is on the participants of that attack. Philistines. Moab. Ammon. Babylon. Damascus. And Syria! Look at this verse: *[[Isa 9:11]] KJV* Therefore the LORD shall set up the adversaries of Rezin against him, and join his enemies together; Notice that it doesn't say Rezin, the king of Syria. But it says the adversaries of Rezin. His enemies. What is expounded there is that the enemies of Syria, will join in a confederacy to attack Israel. In a last days attack that is led by "the Assyrian". There is a whole lot to read in those chapters. But the historical information that is found in those chapters (some difficult to apply), but it is setting the stage for this endtimes attack on Israel. Find and read the verse that starts like this: "On the shoulders of the Philistines, to the west...", Isa 11:14. Look at the end of that verse. Edom, Moab & Ammon. Remind you any other scripture? Hint: Dan.11. He is talking about those who will join in the attack on Israel. The adversaries of Syria... together. And for all that Isaiah says that, it will not be enough to quell the fierce anger of the Lord. *[[Isa 9:21]] KJV* Manasseh, Ephraim; and Ephraim, Manasseh: and they together shall be against Judah. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still...(cannibalism) He is saying that even with the children of Manesseh and Ephraim fighting against their brethren of Judah, this will not be enough to turn away God's anger. But back to my point. The adversaries of Syria fighting together against Judah. As I see it now, Russia is supporting Bashar Assad. A supporter. Not an enemy. I don't know how things will turn out there, but Syria is a key ingredient to what happens in the last days. Her adversaries, will eventually join forces to attack Israel. The Kurds, formerly known in ancient times as the Medes, will become a player. Mark my words. The kingdom of Media, will be reborn. But anyway, I would ask you to read some of these chapters in Isaiah. Blessings The PuP
  9. In this verse the one who is troubled is the "HE/HIM". AND later you say that the ones that are troubled are: And yet you say that you ate not being contradictory? I don't think you are reading your own material(from the blog). You attempt to prove your point by looking at the historical event? We are talking about what happens in the future when "HE is troubled". Maybe you are looking for the future fulfilment of verse 44 to match the historical fulfilment (before the days of Christ) instead of what the scripture actually says that he is the one who is troubled. You are either not making sense or denying the accuracy of what the word says. Please clarify. I thought that you might be saying that the A/C -E/U ruler was not the king of the north but i read it again: Are you saying that the HE/HIM of verse 44 is NOT the king of the north? I have problems with you saying that the treaty (that he will break) is the "marker" for the final 7 years. Dan. 9:27 says that the marker is the confirmation of the covenant. But it does not say that the covenant is broken in the middle of the week. Out says that the sacrifices cease in the middle of the week. *[[Dan 9:27]] KJV* 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. Unless you can show me in other scriptures, the covenant is not broken or disannulled. It is confirmed for 7 years. I see this as God being the one who confirms the covenant (which one? ) with his people. Blessings The PuP
  10. I just want to be clear that I understand you. First, you believe that temple sacrifices AND/ OR the rebuilding of the temple could happen before or after the rapture. Correct? Secondly, you point out that the king of the North is not Russia or China "44 But tidings out of the east (China) and out of the north(Russia) shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many." But then you say that it is China/ Russia are the ones that are troubled, "Thus Russia and China will be TROUBLED that he has gained this strategic area," It sounds like you are contradicting what the scriptures say. Thirdly, [just analyzing what you say], if a covenant that the king of the north, makes with the surrounding nations, IS the basis of the 70th week "covenant", and he "then renege on his agreements at the optimal time" does this not terminate the counting of time "of the 70th week"? Do you see what i am saying? If the covenant, whatever it may be, is confirmed for 7 years, how could renegging constitute confirmation, if it is broken? The PuP
  11. So he will appear on the scene, but not necessarily identifiable (to the unwary). Do you feel like that there will be an identifiable 7 year period, or just a prophesied 3.5 +/- year period? (It was not clear from your comments). What about your views concerning rebuilding the temple and the offering of sacrifices? Blessings The PuP
  12. I am not talking about any event that is to happen before the rapture. It is no mystery about your belief in imminency. Granted, the amount of time that passes between the time of the rapture and 70th week begins is an unknown. Being a staunch supporter of pretrib, and your understanding of prophetic scriptures, should have no problem with what the scriptures say will happen during those days. After all, I have heard you speak many times about your gift of prophetic understanding. Of what value is that if you, and all true discerners of prophecy are not here during any of the prophesied events that take place (AFTER the rapture) , of what value is it, to those that remain? I assume that your view of the last days will be kick started by the 70th week covenant. So, what does that entail in your view? 1. A peace treaty of some sort? 2. Resumption of temple sacrifices? 3. Agreement to rebuild the temple? How, in your prophetic prowess of the scriptures, (remember there are no events prophesied to take place before the rapture, and that your gift is for those left behind, unless it is for the church today), how will the world know that they have entered the last days (70th week)? Since God is not a liar, then you surely know how things will transpire. Will the temple sacrifices resume before the rapture takes place? The PuP
  13. So, if sacrifices resumed on temple mount, would you still hold to your pretrib view? What about if the temple was built or being built, would that alter your views? The PuP
  14. Forgive you for what? I found no offence in what you said. The PuP
  15. I know what you believe. That's not what this is about. Tell me, what event, written in the scriptures [imminency makes no demands on needed events], in earliest fashion, cannot take place before the rapture, and [because of your confidence of timing] would create serious doubts about it, a pretrib rapture, still being a reality? Blessings The PuP
×