Alternative Timeline? Comparing the Trumpet and Bowl Judgments

[dhchristian]

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

If pressed I would say the beast from the abyss in Rev 17 is not the king of the locusts from 5th trumpet. We don't see the king of the locusts rising from the abyss in Rev 9,  but we do see the beast ascend from the pit in Rev 17. 

On a surface examination, yes there is no verse that ties the these 2 together... So here is what I know, the evidence if you will as I have followed it, and perhaps you will then be able to make the conclusion I make, or at the least see why I have made this connection. This will take some length, so bear with me.

The Bottomless pit is mentioned 3 x in Revelation All three of them tie together (My Hypothesis). Jude 1:6, and 2 Peter 2:4 speak of these angels which are bound, and the 2 peter passage uses the word Tartaroo, which means the lowest pit of hell, or the abyss. The Book of Enoch also speaks of them, which is non-canonical yet extant at the time of Jesus. (Some say Jude, quotes Enoch directly?) This angel of the Bottomless pit, is a fallen angel, Not a demon. Demons are the spirits of deceased "Nephillim", the offspring of the Mating of the fallen angels, and the daughters of men. So, When we see demons like frogs coming out of the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet, we know they are not one of the fallen angels. Yes, the Spirit of the devil (Satan) is one of these spirits, but they all require a host body. 

Here are some contradictions this also creates. Depending on your timeline, most people put the 42 months the beast rules as the first half of the week, and that is whether you say the abomination and the revealing of the man of sin are one in the same, or if they are different events. Most people also therefore put the two witnesses in that first half of the week as well. Well, the problem is the beast of rev. 13 is powerless to kill the two witnesses, but the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit does kill them. The key here being "if any man hurt them" (11:5) But this beast is capable of hurting them, and therefore is no man. 

And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. (Rev. 11:7)

The dragon, the beast, and the false prophet are all men possessed, while the Beast from the bottomless pit is not. Proof for this is found in rev. 16.

13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. 

But the beast of rev. 17 goes to destruction.

8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. 

Notice also how this beast has no crowns, and the ten horns only receive power for 1 hour with the beast.

And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

And the purpose of this power is to execute judgment upon the harlot.

16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. 17 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

Notice also that this beast is destroyed by the Lamb with his army of the chosen and the faithful...

14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

Compare this to 2 thess. 2:8 And how Jesus Kills the beast during the day of Christ... Notice how this beast from the bottomless pit makes war on the LORD, while the beast of rev. 13 only makes war on the saints.

And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (2 Thess. 2:8)

Which coincides with Rev. 19 and the Rider on the White Horse, Which is the day of the LORD. 

11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.... 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. (Rev 19:11,14)

This also coincides with Jude, and the Quote that is said to come out of the book of Enoch...

14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Jude 14,15)

which in turn ties back into Peter, thus identifying the beast that ascends out of the Bottomless pit is a fallen angel, locked there at the time of the flood. 

For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; (2 Peter 2:4)

Thus we are full circle here proving the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit points to Abaddon, and He is not killed until the final Battle by the Rider on the White horse with his saints riding behind him. 

I Hope you follow this line of reasoning. 

[dhchristian]

Just now, Da Puppers said:

This leads me to the beasts from the sea and earh,  later referred to as the beast and false prophet.   Their end result is that they will be cast into the lake of fire.   What this means is that they are in possession of an eternal nature during their time on earth.   And because Apollyon is an angel,  he too possesses an eternal nature.   Unless you can believe that the seals, trumpets and vials are not of a concurrent concurrent nature, you would be hard pressed to believe me when I tell you that timing of the 5th trumpet and the 42 month rise and reign of the beast from the earth,  occur at the same time.   Let me assure you that I arrived at the simultaneous timing of these 2 events before I equated them to be one and the same.   Let there be no confusion.   Apollyon,  the false prophet, beast from the earth,  and the beast that ascends from the B.P. are all one and the same. 

Read My comment above which I posted before reading this as I was writing when you posted this, and see if you still think this way. 

[dhchristian]

deleted for and replaced 

Edited July 22, 2019 by dhchristian

[dhchristian]

6 minutes ago, Da Puppers said:

What this means is that they are in possession of an eternal nature during their time on earth.

All men have an eternal soul/spirit in them, and is the reason why hell is eternal. I do not know if you are one of those people that believe in soul sleep, and do not believe in everlasting punishment in hell, but this teaching is a false teaching. 

[dhchristian]

19 minutes ago, Da Puppers said:

2. The terminus for death/ hell are when they are cast into the lake of fire.   The concept of this place of separation will cease upon the final resurrecting of all of mankind at the time of the GWTJ.   With the completed resurrection of all,  and the abolishment of death,  the place (abode) of death/ hell is empty and no one else will suffer death/ separation. Therefore,  "death/ hell" is only a temporal punishment.   It's not saying that punishment is only temporal,  but the punishment that is experienced via death/ hell is.  The punishment of the wicked is everlasting. 

I Strongly disagree, and this is basically soul sleep. 

What you fail to understand is that when Christ died on the cross he gave an eternal gift to us, To accept that gift is life eternal, to reject that eternal gift is eternal torment. NO ONE in the Bible spoke more of this eternal torment than Jesus did. This why rejecting Jesus is so grievous for those who do. Do a YouTube search on the "most powerful sermon ever preached" By Charles Lawson, the sermon is called hell fire. 

[dhchristian]

11 minutes ago, Da Puppers said:

With all that being said,  where (and please give your explanation of why)  in my explanation do you see that I am in error,  to claim that this is equal to annihilitionism?

Apologies, My Mistake, I read your comment wrong above. The argument used by the annihilitionists is to say death and hell are thrown into the lake of fire, therefore anything or anyone thrown into the lake of fire is separated from God eternally and ceases to exist. When You wrote "The concept of this place of separation will cease " I Understood it as you saying separation will cease, as in they will cease from existence. Sorry about that. 

[Diaste]

16 hours ago, dhchristian said:

On a surface examination, yes there is no verse that ties the these 2 together... So here is what I know, the evidence if you will as I have followed it, and perhaps you will then be able to make the conclusion I make, or at the least see why I have made this connection. This will take some length, so bear with me.

The Bottomless pit is mentioned 3 x in Revelation All three of them tie together (My Hypothesis). Jude 1:6, and 2 Peter 2:4 speak of these angels which are bound, and the 2 peter passage uses the word Tartaroo, which means the lowest pit of hell, or the abyss. The Book of Enoch also speaks of them, which is non-canonical yet extant at the time of Jesus. (Some say Jude, quotes Enoch directly?) This angel of the Bottomless pit, is a fallen angel, Not a demon. Demons are the spirits of deceased "Nephillim", the offspring of the Mating of the fallen angels, and the daughters of men. So, When we see demons like frogs coming out of the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet, we know they are not one of the fallen angels. Yes, the Spirit of the devil (Satan) is one of these spirits, but they all require a host body. 

I'll just hit a few points to make it brief. Forgive me as I have not studied it in depth. I know the references but I didn't do a refresher, but here goes.

It's important that 'angels' are bound. There could be more than one. The angels of the abyss is called the king of the locusts. At this point it's not the king of the locusts that rises out of the pit.

I suppose it's possible that demons and fallen angels are not of the same ilk. I'm not convinced but I'm interested and I'll look into it.

16 hours ago, dhchristian said:

Here are some contradictions this also creates. Depending on your timeline, most people put the 42 months the beast rules as the first half of the week, and that is whether you say the abomination and the revealing of the man of sin are one in the same, or if they are different events. Most people also therefore put the two witnesses in that first half of the week as well. Well, the problem is the beast of rev. 13 is powerless to kill the two witnesses, but the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit does kill them. The key here being "if any man hurt them" (11:5) But this beast is capable of hurting them, and therefore is no man. 

Or...The beast rises to power at the beginning under the auspices and power of the dragon, confirms the covenant with Israel and surrounding Arab nations, the two witnesses show up to oppose this alliance of death between the resurrected beast and Israel, all during the first half. The beast is only given 42 months of complete authority which would be after the A of D to the end of the week. Given that 'power to continue' is absolute he is able to kill the two witnesses, during or after the ascension of the Temple and the declaration of godhood.

This is where it's a little fuzzy yet for me: Did the fallen angel or demon of the abyss(not the king of the locusts) rise at the beginning of the week when the beast was healed of the deadly head wound, or is it a possession of the man that is the beast at the time our Father grants His leave for the beast to continue for 42 months? Perhaps in the beginning when the beast is healed of the deadly head wound he is possessed then but limited under the control of our Father for the first 42 months, then levels up, unleashed at the moment of our Father's choosing. 

16 hours ago, dhchristian said:

And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. (Rev. 11:7)

The dragon, the beast, and the false prophet are all men possessed, while the Beast from the bottomless pit is not. Proof for this is found in rev. 16.

13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. 

But the beast of rev. 17 goes to destruction.

8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. 

Notice also how this beast has no crowns, and the ten horns only receive power for 1 hour with the beast.

I'm more of the mind it's a complex series of circumstances concerning the beast. All of this can be true of a single individual. I don't think there is a restriction on Rev 11:7. For instance: the verse relates it's the beast that ascends out of the abyss that kills the two witnesses, the verse does not demand a rise from the abyss at the very moment of the death of the two witnesses. It could be true, but there is no language that demands that scenario.

16 hours ago, dhchristian said:

And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

And the purpose of this power is to execute judgment upon the harlot.

16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. 17 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.

It's one of the things. The language here is general. "For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled."

The destruction of the harlot is the will of God but the reference here is fulfilling the general words of God and the death of the harlot is a specific singular act. Certainly at this point of the narrative there are a great many more words of the Father to be executed.

16 hours ago, dhchristian said:

Notice also that this beast is destroyed by the Lamb with his army of the chosen and the faithful...

14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

Compare this to 2 thess. 2:8 And how Jesus Kills the beast during the day of Christ... Notice how this beast from the bottomless pit makes war on the LORD, while the beast of rev. 13 only makes war on the saints.

"As much as you have done it to one of these little ones, you have done it to me." 

There is no limit here on campaign of destruction. Fighting against the people of God is fighting against God. Every war is like that. Troops in the field fight each other at the behest of the leader and each side is striving to get the others leader.

16 hours ago, dhchristian said:

And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (2 Thess. 2:8)

Which coincides with Rev. 19 and the Rider on the White Horse, Which is the day of the LORD. 

11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.... 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. (Rev 19:11,14)

This also coincides with Jude, and the Quote that is said to come out of the book of Enoch...

14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. (Jude 14,15)

which in turn ties back into Peter, thus identifying the beast that ascends out of the Bottomless pit is a fallen angel, locked there at the time of the flood. 

For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; (2 Peter 2:4)

Thus we are full circle here proving the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit points to Abaddon, and He is not killed until the final Battle by the Rider on the White horse with his saints riding behind him. 

I Hope you follow this line of reasoning. 

I follow the reasoning but I don't know that I can see the king of the locusts that is not said to rise from the abyss, as the same as the beast who does rise from the pit. I do apologize for such literal fundamentalism, but there ya have it.

[dhchristian]

1 hour ago, Diaste said:

I follow the reasoning but I don't know that I can see the king of the locusts that is not said to rise from the abyss, as the same as the beast who does rise from the pit. I do apologize for such literal fundamentalism, but there ya have it.

What I did there in that post is known as scripture interpreting scripture. You made some valid points in response, But ultimately you could not let go of the framework which you were given by the fundamentalists. This is the big problem with fundamentalism known as the "cult of textualism" a term coined by A.W. Tozer, you would do well to read and be familiar with. That being said I do consider myself a fundamentalist, and you did make some valid points especially regarding the war on the saints is like the war on the Lamb, which I totally agree with you on, But it does little to differentiate the means of death of the beast that rises out of the sea, and the beast that rises out of the bottomless pit, When they go to destruction, one at the day of Christ the other at the day of the LORD. What that comment, Re: the war on the saints= the war on the Lamb is like saying the day of Christ is the same as the day of the LORD, because Jesus is the LORD, which is a true statement, but fails to distinguish between these two days, which are distinguished in the word of God.

Also the distinction between what the purpose of these beasts are. One is to make war on the saints, while the other is to carry out God's will regarding the Harlot.

What Your Line of thinking also makes you do is place the fifth trumpet at the beginning of the week, and or worse yet if you do not see Abaddon as the king of the Locusts, you have to place the two witnesses death at the beginning of the week, meaning their ministry precedes the final week as do the other trumpets (I know, because I explored this option at one time, and it just does not work).

By acknowledging that the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit is distinct from the beast that ascends out of the sea is where the evidence leads to. As an investigator, we need to follow the evidence which leads to the Truth. Unfortunately what has happened in this world,and in the Laodicean church is the post modern mindset has infiltrated and Truth has become subjective, which is not TRUE. Jesus is the Truth, when we find Truth, we find Jesus there waiting.

[Diaste]

20 hours ago, dhchristian said:

What I did there in that post is known as scripture interpreting scripture. You made some valid points in response, But ultimately you could not let go of the framework which you were given by the fundamentalists.

I agree scripture must interpret scripture, or lets say it's the most reliable approach. I would never say that another person could not assist in interpretation confirmed over time either through events, other people or another nugget of Gold in the word of God. Over time I have noticed that a great deal of revealed truth in scripture usually is confirmed in other passages of scripture and it only takes diligence to dig up those gems. I may have labeled my self as a literal fundamentalist as it's the best description of the philosophical approach I employ. Over the years, and there have been many, I found organizations tend to interpret holy writ though any number of biases and all have turned out to be unreliable and inaccurate. A literal approach allows the words to speak and removes the faulty idea of a personal message to overshadow the text. A search for the intent of the author based on character, purpose and context never strays from grand plan of our Father and in that sense I'm grounded in the fundamentals.

20 hours ago, dhchristian said:

This is the big problem with fundamentalism known as the "cult of textualism" a term coined by A.W. Tozer, you would do well to read and be familiar with.

I get what he's saying but a broad brush doesn't reflect his ideas. Neither do I think he's correct as it seems quite impossible to glean any truth from a Spirit inspired text apart from the Spirit. The idea that some people can lock away uninspired textual fact apart from the truth which the Spirit provides, and claim to be a follower of the Lord in Spirit does not appear to be true in my experience. Spiritual truth simply cannot be received by the one who does not seek it and even the most basic tenets are rejected. If perhaps Tozer is referring to outward manifestations of the working of the Spirit that's a level of faith issue, or a depth of belief in the true power of our Lord. And even if he is correct in his assumption that "They conceive truth to be something which they can grasp with the mind. If a man holds to the fundamentals of the Christian faith — then he is thought to possess divine truth." we are talking about the difference between being born of the spirit and remaining in the flesh which this quote indicates, "orthodoxy without the Holy Spirit." In that sense I wholly agree with Him as it's the contrast between flesh and Spirit. But I would disagree that it has anything to do with the search for truth of prophetic interpretation as it's dogmatic in my mind the Spirit drives the search in the first place, even if an individual allows personal bias to creep in.

20 hours ago, dhchristian said:

But it does little to differentiate the means of death of the beast that rises out of the sea, and the beast that rises out of the bottomless pit, When they go to destruction, one at the day of Christ the other at the day of the LORD.

Since I do not see there is any difference between the sea beast of Rev 13 and the Rev 17 beast, please cite the evidence these two are separate entities.

20 hours ago, dhchristian said:

Re: the war on the saints= the war on the Lamb is like saying the day of Christ is the same as the day of the LORD, because Jesus is the LORD, which is a true statement, but fails to distinguish between these two days, which are distinguished in the word of God.

I have heard this before and do not see any difference. One can call a four wheeled means of transportation a car or a vehicle, it's still the same thing. You'll have to cite evidence for this.

20 hours ago, dhchristian said:

Also the distinction between what the purpose of these beasts are. One is to make war on the saints, while the other is to carry out God's will regarding the Harlot.

So the same beast cannot direct the war against the saints and the destruction of the harlot? "For God has put it into their hearts to carry out His purpose by uniting to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled." Certainly the fulfillment of the words of God are not restricted to the destruction of the harlot.

20 hours ago, dhchristian said:

What Your Line of thinking also makes you do is place the fifth trumpet at the beginning of the week, and or worse yet if you do not see Abaddon as the king of the Locusts, you have to place the two witnesses death at the beginning of the week, meaning their ministry precedes the final week as do the other trumpets (I know, because I explored this option at one time, and it just does not work).

That would be true if I thought the king of the locusts was the same as the beast that was, and is not, and yet is, which I do not. You hold to that and you are correct, it would place the 5th trump at the beginning. Abaddon is not said to come out of the abyss, only the locusts. Abaddon is the angel of the abyss, the king which rules the locusts, and from this alone he does not rise from the abyss to the earthly plane. Peter tells us 'angels' were put in chains and cast into the abyss so there is more than one. I think many assume Abaddon rises from the abyss and they associate him with Satan and/or the beast, even making them equivalent. It's possible but it's assumption unless there is a direct link confirming identity.

 

20 hours ago, dhchristian said:

By acknowledging that the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit is distinct from the beast that ascends out of the sea is where the evidence leads to. 

No. Assuming this leads to your conclusion. The distinction here is attributes and events. The same beast rises from the population of earth and is resurrected from death. 

[dhchristian]

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

A search for the intent of the author based on character, purpose and context never strays from grand plan of our Father and in that sense I'm grounded in the fundamentals.

Agreed, as am I...

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

we are talking about the difference between being born of the spirit and remaining in the flesh which this quote indicates, "orthodoxy without the Holy Spirit." In that sense I wholly agree with Him as it's the contrast between flesh and Spirit. But I would disagree that it has anything to do with the search for truth of prophetic interpretation as it's dogmatic in my mind the Spirit drives the search in the first place, even if an individual allows personal bias to creep in.

Response:

Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. Rom 8:7

Though fundamentalisms literalism is the best approach there comes a time when the mind of man is not capable of grasping the things of God. They MUST BE Spiritually discerned. 

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Cor. 2:14)

What fundamentalism did was Lock the this spiritual discernment out of the life of the believer and instead replaced it with Dogma taught by the scribes of fundamentalism. They created a timeline to view prophecy from that locked it into their dictated system. In So doing they Locked Jesus out of the church. 

This discovery of the differentiating between the beast of revelation 13:1 that rises out of the sea, and the beast of revelation 17, that rises out the bottomless pit is one of those things that was never seen or allowed by the fundamentalist. They always equated the two like you are doing here, And quite frankly the evidence points to them being different as I outlined, using scripture to interpret scripture. The result of this has been to erroneously use the descriptives of the beast out of the bottomless pit to identify the beast of Rev. 13, which in turn has led to many thinking the beast of revelation 13 can be identified as the Pope, or as Obama, or as Trump or as Prince Charles, etc. Thus going contrary to what Paul writes in 2 Thess. 2 that  the man of sin must be revealed.

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

Since I do not see there is any difference between the sea beast of Rev 13 and the Rev 17 beast, please cite the evidence these two are separate entities.

re-read my original comment to you regarding this, where I went through all the scriptures. The evidence to me is clear.

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

So the same beast cannot direct the war against the saints and the destruction of the harlot? "For God has put it into their hearts to carry out His purpose by uniting to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled." Certainly the fulfillment of the words of God are not restricted to the destruction of the harlot.

 

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

That would be true if I thought the king of the locusts was the same as the beast that was, and is not, and yet is, which I do not. You hold to that and you are correct, it would place the 5th trump at the beginning. Abaddon is not said to come out of the abyss, only the locusts. Abaddon is the angel of the abyss, the king which rules the locusts, and from this alone he does not rise from the abyss to the earthly plane. Peter tells us 'angels' were put in chains and cast into the abyss so there is more than one. I think many assume Abaddon rises from the abyss and they associate him with Satan and/or the beast, even making them equivalent. It's possible but it's assumption unless there is a direct link confirming identity.

The beast of Rev. 17 is carrying out God's judgment on the Harlot, the beast of rev. 13 is fighting a war on the saints. When the day of Christ happens is when the saints and all are raptured when the beast from the bottomless pit rules there are no more saints to be oppressed only Israel is left. The beast of revelation 13 is killed at the day of Christ, as are the dragon and the false prophet. their spirits go out to the kings of the World to gather them for Armageddon. All this while the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit is ruling. Again, for the evidence go and re-read my post with all the scriptures. Because I do not equate the two beasts, the fifth trumpet does not have to be at the beginning and worse yet for you equating the two is that you have to now place the two witnesses 1260 days ahead of the 42 months the beast of rev. 13 rules, Thus throwing a big contradiction into the Words of Jesus on the Olivet discourse which says the man of sin rules at the beginning of the final week.

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

No. Assuming this leads to your conclusion. The distinction here is attributes and events. The same beast rises from the population of earth and is resurrected from death. 

I Have put my timeline out there for you to disagree with, now let's see yours. You can play the contrarian all day long, But until you put your evidence on the table to face the same scrutiny then you cannot prove anything right or wrong. Again, re-read my original comment, where I use scripture to interpret scripture to prove that the beast that rises out of the bottomless pit is different from the beast that rises out of the sea. As a court case goes, where the evidence is presented for one side, which I have done, now it is your turn to place your evidence on the table for scrutiny and questioning. I Rest my case so to speak for now.... Your hypothesis is the beast of rev. 13, and the beast that rises out of the bottomless pit are one in the same.