Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Spock

Who is The 7th Kingdom Beast (and 8th) of Rev?

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, Salty said:

Here's a little lesson from our Lord Jesus on how... we can still be here on earth all up to the 7th Vial event:

Rev 16:15-17
15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.

16 And He gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

17 And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done.
KJV

 

Agreed.  v15 is either there randomly for no purpose other than randomness, or it is germane to the context.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Salty said:

The actual 6th beast king entity John said was in his day was Domitian, a Roman emperor. The Roman empire as the legs of iron is unmistakable.

The idea that Nero was the "one is" comes from the 7 kings in Rev 17:10. People believe that the 7 kings are Roman. Nero is the 6th and the 5 before him are the "...5 are fallen..." At least that seems to balance as there were 6 Roman emperors from Julius to Nero. With Domitian as the "one is" there is no balance; Domitian was the 12th Roman emperor. Rome as the Iron Kingdom is also impossible from the vision of the ram and goat from Daniel 8. This vision establishes the rough goat as Greece and the great horn as Alexander. From this great horn come four notable horns, the Diadochi, that ruled the Grecian kingdom in Alexander's stead. This is a matter of history and fulfills the prophecy to the letter. The little horn is the beast, as we all know from several biblical passages. This little horn comes from one of the four notable horns. Biblically there is no other possibility for the origin of the little horn, or beast, or AC. From this clear succession of kings, from Alexander to the little horn, we can factually conclude the little horn rises from contemporary Greece, Egypt, Asia Minor, or the Middle East as these four areas are the realms of the four notable ones, Ptolemy, Cassander, Seleucid, and Antigonus, that rose to power after the fall of Alexander. This succession has nothing to do with the Roman Empire.

But it can be narrowed down a bit more. From the statue in Daniel 2 we see an interesting succession other than just empires. There is a regional constant in the succession. It begins with the great King Nebuchadnezzar. Babylon under Belshazzar falls to the Medes and the Persians. The Medo Persian Empire rules from Babylon. When Alexander defeats Darius, Alexander sets up his rule from Babylon. Since these three kingdoms, Gold, Silver, Brass, all supplanted each other in the same region, its compelling evidence the Iron kingdom would follow in this vein. Especially compelling is the statue connection. All five kingdoms, Precious Metals, Iron, and Iron mixed with clay, rise from each other; they flow from top to bottom and replace each other as noted in Daniel 2. Rome did not accomplish this as the Roman Empire did not control Mesopotamia.

If the Precious Metals all ruled the same area it's more than reasonable the Iron kingdom would do the same as the geographic succession evidence is strong; and the lineage from Alexander, to the Diadochi, to the little horn is irrefutable and excludes any Roman connection.

There is an empire that matches the description of the Iron kingdom perfectly. It existed as a dominate empire rivaling any in history. This empire is described;

Dan 7:7 "After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns."

And,

Dan 7:23  "Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces."

This kingdom must be fierce, a destroyer, breaking, stamping the residue, and diverse from the others before it. Babylon, Persia and Greece were civil governments, as was Rome. The fourth kingdom must be 'diverse' from that. The fourth kingdom must also be a destroyer of the earth that breaks, bruises and stamps on the residue. Rome did not do this; in fact the opposite is true of the Roman Empire.

The Islamic empire circa 700 to 1600 AD fits this description. The Islamic empire is religious, not civil. They trampled the whole earth defeating the Roman legions many times. They ruled over all the land of the great Grecian empire even subduing northern Africa and penetrating far north into Europe. They broke every image of a god or king and stamped the residue. In fact there are videos making the rounds of ISIS breaking images and then literally kicking and stomping on the broken pieces! The Islamic empire destroyed entire cities, forced religious conversions on pain of death or slavery, or crushing taxation, and if the stats are accurate murdered 250 million people and this at a time when the population of earth had not yet reached a billion! These acts are antithetical, and therefore 'diverse' to the rule of the Precious Metals and Rome.

The Islamic empire up to 1929 when the Caliphate was abolished is the Iron kingdom. The iteration of that kingdom, now the iron mixed with clay, is what we see today. The current Islamic empire, ISIS (the iron), is made up of many nationalities (the clay). Further, Islam has infiltrated most countries. These adherents form their own communities in the host countries and even establish 'no go' zones to keep out the natural citizens. This is the fulfillment of, Dan 2:43 "And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay."  This fulfillment can also be extended to religious and psychological aspects. 

Three things lead to the conclusion that Rome is the 4th, 5th, 7th, and or 8th kingdom: misinterpretation of Rev 17:10, improper dating of Revelation, and wishful thinking. The idea of Rome as the 4th and 5th empire of the statue is unmistakably incorrect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Diaste said:

The idea that Nero was the "one is" comes from the 7 kings in Rev 17:10. People believe that the 7 kings are Roman. Nero is the 6th and the 5 before him are the "...5 are fallen..." At least that seems to balance as there were 6 Roman emperors from Julius to Nero. With Domitian as the "one is" there is no balance; Domitian was the 12th Roman emperor. Rome as the Iron Kingdom is also impossible from the vision of the ram and goat from Daniel 8. This vision establishes the rough goat as Greece and the great horn as Alexander. From this great horn come four notable horns, the Diadochi, that ruled the Grecian kingdom in Alexander's stead. This is a matter of history and fulfills the prophecy to the letter. The little horn is the beast, as we all know from several biblical passages. This little horn comes from one of the four notable horns. Biblically there is no other possibility for the origin of the little horn, or beast, or AC. From this clear succession of kings, from Alexander to the little horn, we can factually conclude the little horn rises from contemporary Greece, Egypt, Asia Minor, or the Middle East as these four areas are the realms of the four notable ones, Ptolemy, Cassander, Seleucid, and Antigonus, that rose to power after the fall of Alexander. This succession has nothing to do with the Roman Empire.

Domitian is the one in Apostle John's days per early tradition, around A.D. 81-96. For the purposes of understanding about the 8 beast kings of Rev.17, it doesn't really matter what Roman emperor one suggests, we know the Roman empire was the power of the day that had John placed in captivity on Patmos.

Per Rev.13:1-2, which gives reference to the ten horns and beast ideas from Daniel 7, that's how we can be sure the kings of Rev.17 is not simply about a succession of Roman emperors. Rev.17 is defining terms first given in Rev.13.

In Daniel 2, we are told the whole of the 5 pieces of the statue come tumbling down 'together' when the stone strikes upon its feet. And we are told immediately after that God's eternal Kingdom is setup. Therefore, that is pointing to all five pieces of the statue existing, together as one, in the last days of this world when Jesus, The Stone which the builders rejected, comes to strike the beast statue upon its feet of ten toes, and the whole comes tumbling down.

Likewise in the Book of Daniel with descriptions of a false one coming to exalt himself, speaking blasphemies against God, and the saints given in his hand for a short time, is a topic for the very end of this world also as Daniel was told for the end. Rev.13 about the beast and dragon there is also mentioned doing these same descriptions from Daniel (see Rev.13:5-8).

There are other references in Daniel to show it is linked to the events for the end as declared in Christ's Olivet discourse and in Revelation. In Matthew 24, Jesus warns of the "abomination of desolation" event from the Book of Daniel. Antiochus IV set the blueprint for that event, but that was in 170 B.C., about 200 years before Jesus warned about the "abomination of desolation" from Daniel. The fact that Antiochus IV represents a blueprint pattern, or type, for the AOD prophecy should tell you more about the Daniel prophecies concerning the "little horn" and "vile person" for the end of this world.

Now the ideas that men's traditions have dreamed up to form Preterist (what is past) doctrine are actually tools to get God's people off track from understanding the events to occur at the very end of this world, as given in Bible prophecy through God's servants, like Daniel and John.

Dan 12:1-4
12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
KJV


Just that above Scripture alone should be ample evidence that those Daniel prophecies involve events for the very end of this world. Yet there are men in this world with different agendas than keeping to God's Word as a whole.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Diaste said:

This little horn comes from one of the four notable horns. Biblically there is no other possibility for the origin of the little horn, or beast, or AC.

I think you have misunderstood.    It is not that one of the four breakup kingdoms is the "origin" - that is, the little horn being borne in one those territories or that being his place he emerges from - but that is where the waxes strong from toward to the south and east, toward the pleasant land, Israel.

The prince who shall come is from the Romans and not the Greeks.     And before anyone says the Syrians and Egyptians volunteered forces in the destruction of the temple and city - neither of those are north and west of Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, douggg said:

I think you have misunderstood.    It is not that one of the four breakup kingdoms is the "origin" - that is, the little horn being borne in one those territories or that being his place he emerges from - but that is where the waxes strong from toward to the south and east, toward the pleasant land, Israel.

The prince who shall come is from the Romans and not the Greeks.     And before anyone says the Syrians and Egyptians volunteered forces in the destruction of the temple and city - neither of those are north and west of Israel.

Daniel 8

8 "Therefore the he goat (Alexander) waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones (Diadochi) toward the four winds of heaven." 9 "And out of one of them (Diadochi) came forth a little horn (the beast), which waxed exceeding great,"

Dan 8:9 "...toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. (Israel, or west)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Salty said:

Domitian is the one in Apostle John's days per early tradition, around A.D. 81-96. For the purposes of understanding about the 8 beast kings of Rev.17, it doesn't really matter what Roman emperor one suggests, we know the Roman empire was the power of the day that had John placed in captivity on Patmos.

It matters. Scripture speaks to 7 specific kings that are somehow related. A succession of 7 kings that brings forth the 8th that is again somehow related to the first 7. In reality there has to be more to go on.  It's not logical to say, "One is, therefore Rome."

Per Rev.13:1-2, which gives reference to the ten horns and beast ideas from Daniel 7, that's how we can be sure the kings of Rev.17 is not simply about a succession of Roman emperors. Rev.17 is defining terms first given in Rev.13.

Which terms? I mean it's great to throw out conclusions but where's the thesis and the facts? Very different things are presented in two chapters.  I know it's not about a succession of Roman Kings. In fact it's true the Iron kingdom has nothing at all to do with Rome. The 8 kings of Rev 17:10-11 are of some other relationship than the ancient Roman empire.

In Daniel 2, we are told the whole of the 5 pieces of the statue come tumbling down 'together' when the stone strikes upon its feet. And we are told immediately after that God's eternal Kingdom is setup. Therefore, that is pointing to all five pieces of the statue existing, together as one, in the last days of this world when Jesus, The Stone which the builders rejected, comes to strike the beast statue upon its feet of ten toes, and the whole comes tumbling down.

And isn't it interesting that you say that? If true, Rome is once again out of consideration as it does not exist today. But Babylon (Iraq), Persia (Iran), and Greece do. Who then would be the 4th and the 5th? Islam fits the prophecy. It did exist as major power for centuries and is back albeit in a less pure form.

Likewise in the Book of Daniel with descriptions of a false one coming to exalt himself, speaking blasphemies against God, and the saints given in his hand for a short time, is a topic for the very end of this world also as Daniel was told for the end. Rev.13 about the beast and dragon there is also mentioned doing these same descriptions from Daniel (see Rev.13:5-8).

There are other references in Daniel to show it is linked to the events for the end as declared in Christ's Olivet discourse and in Revelation. In Matthew 24, Jesus warns of the "abomination of desolation" event from the Book of Daniel. Antiochus IV set the blueprint for that event, but that was in 170 B.C., about 200 years before Jesus warned about the "abomination of desolation" from Daniel. The fact that Antiochus IV represents a blueprint pattern, or type, for the AOD prophecy should tell you more about the Daniel prophecies concerning the "little horn" and "vile person" for the end of this world.

All of that is old news and well established. What exactly do you think this should be telling me?

Now the ideas that men's traditions have dreamed up to form Preterist (what is past) doctrine are actually tools to get God's people off track from understanding the events to occur at the very end of this world, as given in Bible prophecy through God's servants, like Daniel and John.

But aren't you doing the same thing? You contend the the 5 kings preceded John's day and a Roman emperor fulfills the "...one is...". That would mean the 6 kings prophecy was fulfilled by the time John received the Prophecy from Jesus.

Dan 12:1-4
12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
KJV


Just that above Scripture alone should be ample evidence that those Daniel prophecies involve events for the very end of this world. Yet there are men in this world with different agendas than keeping to God's Word as a whole.

What are you implying?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Diaste said:

Domitian is the one in Apostle John's days per early tradition, around A.D. 81-96. For the purposes of understanding about the 8 beast kings of Rev.17, it doesn't really matter what Roman emperor one suggests, we know the Roman empire was the power of the day that had John placed in captivity on Patmos.

It matters. Scripture speaks to 7 specific kings that are somehow related. A succession of 7 kings that brings forth the 8th that is again somehow related to the first 7. In reality there has to be more to go on.  It's not logical to say, "One is, therefore Rome."

Rev.17 is a revelation about 8 beast kings, not 7. It is logical for John to have said, "and one is", meaning in his day:

Rev 17:10
10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
KJV

Did you think I was just making that up that John said that "and one is" or something? Stay focused in The Word. Five had fallen, and one is, what does that run the count to??? To six, of course. The one that existed in John's day was the 6th beast king. Would that 6th one have been Soupy Sales ruling from the South Pole? Of course not, it was Domitian, emperor of Rome in Apostle John's day who most likely is who had him imprisoned on the Isle of Patmos.

 

Per Rev.13:1-2, which gives reference to the ten horns and beast ideas from Daniel 7, that's how we can be sure the kings of Rev.17 is not simply about a succession of Roman emperors. Rev.17 is defining terms first given in Rev.13.

Which terms? I mean it's great to throw out conclusions but where's the thesis and the facts? Very different things are presented in two chapters.  I know it's not about a succession of Roman Kings. In fact it's true the Iron kingdom has nothing at all to do with Rome. The 8 kings of Rev 17:10-11 are of some other relationship than the ancient Roman empire.

Your fabrications are insulting. I did not just throw out conclusions without Scripture basis of fact. I just GAVE you Biblical references there! Can't you read??? What is Rev.13:2 pointing to back in the OT?

In Daniel 2, we are told the whole of the 5 pieces of the statue come tumbling down 'together' when the stone strikes upon its feet. And we are told immediately after that God's eternal Kingdom is setup. Therefore, that is pointing to all five pieces of the statue existing, together as one, in the last days of this world when Jesus, The Stone which the builders rejected, comes to strike the beast statue upon its feet of ten toes, and the whole comes tumbling down.

And isn't it interesting that you say that? If true, Rome is once again out of consideration as it does not exist today. But Babylon (Iraq), Persia (Iran), and Greece do. Who then would be the 4th and the 5th? Islam fits the prophecy. It did exist as major power for centuries and is back albeit in a less pure form.

Fabrications again. What Bible prophecy shows signs of fulfillment BEFORE it actually happened??? Your first two statements reveal you don't even understand that simple fact that events of a prophecy may not manifest until it's time for the prophecy to actually take place!

Like I said, Dan.2 reveals it is NOT Babylon, nor Persia, nor Greece that will be the power of the feet of ten toes of iron mixed with clay. Rome was the legs of iron, which is why so many Bible scholars point to a revival of the old Roman empire. Well, the revival is actually much greater than just the old Roman empire, because Dan.2 shows ALL of the other beast pieces riding on top of the feet. That means they ALL are manifested as one for the end. In plain English - "one world government" (which is the globalist's words, not mine).

Likewise in the Book of Daniel with descriptions of a false one coming to exalt himself, speaking blasphemies against God, and the saints given in his hand for a short time, is a topic for the very end of this world also as Daniel was told for the end. Rev.13 about the beast and dragon there is also mentioned doing these same descriptions from Daniel (see Rev.13:5-8).

There are other references in Daniel to show it is linked to the events for the end as declared in Christ's Olivet discourse and in Revelation. In Matthew 24, Jesus warns of the "abomination of desolation" event from the Book of Daniel. Antiochus IV set the blueprint for that event, but that was in 170 B.C., about 200 years before Jesus warned about the "abomination of desolation" from Daniel. The fact that Antiochus IV represents a blueprint pattern, or type, for the AOD prophecy should tell you more about the Daniel prophecies concerning the "little horn" and "vile person" for the end of this world.

All of that is old news and well established. What exactly do you think this should be telling me?

It is revealing that the Antichrist is coming to play God in Jerusalem, which is one of the main topics from Daniel for the end of this world. That was in response to those who attempted to say there is no connection with the Book of Daniel for the end of this world.

Now the ideas that men's traditions have dreamed up to form Preterist (what is past) doctrine are actually tools to get God's people off track from understanding the events to occur at the very end of this world, as given in Bible prophecy through God's servants, like Daniel and John.

But aren't you doing the same thing? You contend the the 5 kings preceded John's day and a Roman emperor fulfills the "...one is...". That would mean the 6 kings prophecy was fulfilled by the time John received the Prophecy from Jesus.

No sense in continuing conversation with you, since you deny even the simple Biblical fact of what Apostle John said in Rev.17 that five kings had already fallen by his day. If you refuse to admit that simple Biblical fact, then it points to your obvious agenda to try and manipulate The Word of God just to fit your own doctrine which is false.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Salty said:

Rev.17 is a revelation about 8 beast kings, not 7. It is logical for John to have said, "and one is", meaning in his day:

It is not logical to conclude anything based on one term.  It goes like this:

Logic:

Men are mortal.

I am an man.

Therefore, I am mortal.

Illogic:

My dog is black.

Therefore my dog is a Labrador.

This is what everyone does when interpreting Rev 17:10. They take a fragment and build an empire. One clue leads us nowhere. 

Logic: 

Prophecy is future. 

Revelation 4:1 states, "...must be hereafter." 

The context does not change. 

Rev 4-21 is prophecy. 

Rev 17:10 is prophecy and therefore future.

Illogic:

"...one is..."

Therefore, Rome is revived.

Define a few more arguments and maybe the conclusion would have validity.

21 hours ago, Salty said:

No sense in continuing conversation with you, since you deny even the simple Biblical fact of what Apostle John said in Rev.17 that five kings had already fallen by his day.

If you refuse to admit that simple Biblical fact, then it points to your obvious agenda to try and manipulate The Word of God just to fit your own doctrine which is false.

Love the above response. Shaming, insults and accusations only point out you understand the merit of my arguments.

 

21 hours ago, Salty said:

Did you think I was just making that up that John said that "and one is" or something? Stay focused in The Word. Five had fallen, and one is, what does that run the count to??? To six, of course. The one that existed in John's day was the 6th beast king. Would that 6th one have been Soupy Sales ruling from the South Pole? Of course not, it was Domitian, emperor of Rome in Apostle John's day who most likely is who had him imprisoned on the Isle of Patmos.

First you said the above. Clearly convinced that the prophecy of the 6 kings, "...five are fallen, one is..." had been fulfilled before John received the prophecy from Jesus.

Fabrications again. What Bible prophecy shows signs of fulfillment BEFORE it actually happened??? Your first two statements reveal you don't even understand that simple fact that events of a prophecy may not manifest until it's time for the prophecy to actually take place!

I'm not saying that. You and everyone else that concludes the Rev 17:10 sentence fragment, "...five are fallen..." is past are demanding prophecy is fulfilled before it was even given. It is IMPOSSIBLE that a prophecy of 7 kings in Rev 17:10 is in anyway the past. Especially since the context of the Rev from Chapter 4 to the end is, "...things which must be hereafter."  If you actually believe the "...one is..." was in John's day, then you must also admit "...five are fallen..." is past and therefore not prophecy.

 

21 hours ago, Salty said:

Per Rev.13:1-2, which gives reference to the ten horns and beast ideas from Daniel 7, that's how we can be sure the kings of Rev.17 is not simply about a succession of Roman emperors. Rev.17 is defining terms first given in Rev.13.

Which terms? I mean it's great to throw out conclusions but where's the thesis and the facts? Very different things are presented in two chapters.  I know it's not about a succession of Roman Kings. In fact it's true the Iron kingdom has nothing at all to do with Rome. The 8 kings of Rev 17:10-11 are of some other relationship than the ancient Roman empire.

Your fabrications are insulting. I did not just throw out conclusions without Scripture basis of fact. I just GAVE you Biblical references there! Can't you read??? What is Rev.13:2 pointing to back in the OT?

You gave two chapters of evidence and a conclusion. What's you main idea? You said,  "Rev.17 is defining terms first given in Rev.13." Which terms? Notice how I did not question the Rev to Daniel reference, yet that's what you focus on. I asked about your contention that Rev 17 is defining terms from Rev 13. I want to know which terms your are referring to through some kind of initial idea, then some examples of the terms and definitions, and then a conclusion based on the preceding. Is that too much to ask? If you are going to cast about willy-nilly you should be prepared to defend.

 

21 hours ago, Salty said:

In Daniel 2, we are told the whole of the 5 pieces of the statue come tumbling down 'together' when the stone strikes upon its feet. And we are told immediately after that God's eternal Kingdom is setup. Therefore, that is pointing to all five pieces of the statue existing, together as one, in the last days of this world when Jesus, The Stone which the builders rejected, comes to strike the beast statue upon its feet of ten toes, and the whole comes tumbling down.

Like I said, Dan.2 reveals it is NOT Babylon, nor Persia, nor Greece that will be the power of the feet of ten toes of iron mixed with clay. Rome was the legs of iron, which is why so many Bible scholars point to a revival of the old Roman empire. Well, the revival is actually much greater than just the old Roman empire, because Dan.2 shows ALL of the other beast pieces riding on top of the feet. That means they ALL are manifested as one for the end. In plain English - "one world government" (which is the globalist's words, not mine).

Are you saying Rome is revealed in Daniel? I have heard scholars scream, "Rome, Rome, Rome!" for years. It's all based on one verse fragment. There is no evidence that the Iron Kingdom is Rome other than ridiculous assumptions that one, Jesus meant Domitian when he said, "...one is...", and two, Jesus gave a prophecy detail that was already fulfilled before the prophecy was given, and a third blatant lie, that the fallen five are related to the kingdoms of the statue.  There is NO PROOF Rome is the Iron Kingdom, just assumptions. 

In your above statement I notice that you commit the same error as in the rest of your posts; contradiction. First you say the 5 kingdoms are all manifested together, existing together as one. Then you say neither Babylon, Persia or Greece will be the power of the Iron Kingdom. Well if all 5 exist together then their power is consolidated into one. Meaning all five contribute power to the final beast empire. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Diaste said:

It is not logical to conclude anything based on one term.

....

Totally irrelevant idea. What John said in Rev.17:10 with "and one is" about the 6th king in his day is irrefutable. No since in bringing that matter back up with me. You can twaddle your nonsense with someone else on that.

Your arguments are baseless and simply make no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

17 hours ago, Salty said:

Totally irrelevant idea. What John said in Rev.17:10 with "and one is" about the 6th king in his day is irrefutable. No since in bringing that matter back up with me. You can twaddle your nonsense with someone else on that.

Your arguments are baseless and simply make no sense.

Here's more nonsense. 

Rev 13 

The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority.  And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast.  So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?”

It's pretty plain the world only follows the beast after the deadly head wound. Once the beast is brought back to life from a seemingly mortal wound the world is in awe of both the beast and the dragon.  Once the dragon has brought the beast back to life the world knows this man is a godlike figure and warring against him would be futile, all based on the resurrection of the beast by the dragon and the presence and power of the dragon. This beast and his rise is propelled by spiritual and supernatural power, not earthly organizations, smooth speeches, political acumen, or military might.

The following may or may not be true but it's entirely plausible.

Since I'm convinced scripture leads us to the identity of the beast through the succession of Alexander, to the Diadochi and then to the Seleucid empire from which rose Islam and the first incarnation of the Iron kingdom, which has passed, to the current form of Islam, ISIS and it's leader, the scenario could play out as follows:  ISIS is world wide terror and has taken a great deal of peace from the ordinary lives of the people of earth. Many nations are fighting against ISIS and it appears they are being ousted from their strongholds. Their leader, Abu Bakar al Baghdadi is the most hunted man in the world. I have no doubt he'll be caught at some point and brought into court and tried. He'll be found guilty in a very public trial with the whole world watching, and the whole world will breathe a sigh of relief on his conviction and death sentence. He would no doubt be tried in some middle east country like Saudi Arabia, Iran, possibly Iraq, where the death sentence is carried out by beheading.  A day or two later, the beast rises through the miraculous healing power of the dragon, given to him by the Father, and the world is now in real fear and the deepest awe after seeing one actually raised from the dead...And the 70th week begins...

I also find it interesting the beast from the sea in Rev 13 has 7 heads and one of the heads is wounded to death. Since all 7 heads are on the same beast there is some common thread binding the 7 heads to a particular group. This is a parallel to Rev 17:10 and is the same beast, and the beast of Rev 13 is future from John's day, as is the Rev 17 beast, making the 7 heads(kings), ten horns(ten other kings) all future as well. 

Enough nonsense for now...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...