Al Baghdadi.

[JoeCanada]

On 10/28/2019 at 11:47 AM, Diaste said:

Baghdadi, once described as the 8th of 12, which also makes him the 8th and of the 7, is now dead and headless.

Positive ID confirmed.

What does this mean?

I guess we'll see....

Hey Diaste,

Getting back to the OP.....,

I've done a little investigative journalism on Abu Bakr al-baghdadi.

Al-Baghdadi was hiding in the province of Idlib in Syria, just 2 1/2 miles from Turkey. Why did the US helicopters fly some 300 miles across Iraq and Syria when they could have  flown from Turkey? Was President Erdogan supporting the Islamic State and its leader, Al-Baghdadi?

Al-Baghdadi was a self proclaimed leader of the Islamic State (I.S.) since bursting on the scene in July of 2014. He proclaimed himself to be the Caliph of a new nation, the Islamic State. He was a world class terrorist who took brutality to a new level - burning prisoners in cages, crucifying young children, etc.

Even though they took vast amounts of land, what really captured the imagination of radical Islamists all over the world, was their ability to rapidly defeat the traditional Iraq Army and capture territories. So much so that over 30,000 soldiers from around the globe joined their ranks. Remember that?

They say that about 10% of the 1.5 billion Muslims are radicalized.....that means that 150 million radicals, the size of a nation. These radicals are dreaming of an Islamic Empire run under Sharia law, and although the I.S, has lost its territory and now its Caliph, they haven't lost their dreams.

And this is key: The defeat of I.S. and the death its Caliph has created a vacuum into which those unmet dreams have fallen.

The 'Caliph cat is out of the bag' and someone else is going to start another one to fulfill its dreams.

There is a very real possibility that Daniel 8: 1-8 is a future prophecy (which I hold to). It describes a man rising in Iran (represents Media-Persia) claiming to be the 12th Iman, the Muslim Savior. This will infuriate Turkey (Yavan) because they believe that Sunni Muslims are the true Muslims, and that the Caliph should be base out of Istanbul. 

Perhaps this is why Turkey was backing and supporting Al-Baghdadi, a Sunni Caliph.

So now, a vacuum has been created that needs to be filled.

Stay tuned.....watch Iran.

 

 

[WilliamL]

On 11/5/2019 at 10:04 PM, wingnut- said:

On 11/5/2019 at 9:19 AM, WilliamL said:

But your answer says nothing about "the Antichrist" reigning from Mystery Babylon. Which is what my challenge was about.

Start with the implied collaboration, the woman is riding the beast.  Then it is a matter of all the other shared attributes.  The kings of the earth, and the dwellers of the earth are drunk on this city's wine, which is a reference to the spiritual influence.  The beast we know from other scripture has demanded all worship be directed to him, so they are connected in the religious system.

Then you have the reference to the city being drunk with the blood of the saints and martyrs of Christ.  The beast is the one who wages the 42 month war on the saints, but both of them are apparently accountable for the casualties of this war.  So they are connected in the military system.

Then we are told the city has dominion over the kings of the earth in the passage, and elsewhere in scripture we are told that the beast is given authority over everyone.  So they are also connected in rulership.

Conclusion, the beast is reigning from this city.

Too many presumptions for me. Try this one, for one oft-repeated interpretation:

The city is Rome, which was already drunk with the blood of the saints by the time Revelation was written, and had dominion over the kings of the earth. The woman-harlot is Babylonian religion, practiced by the Pontifex Maximus of Rome, a title later taken by the Roman popes, which religion also became noted for shedding the blood of the saints.

"The beast that you saw was, and is not [present], and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition." Rev. 17:8 This is Azazel, or if you wish another of the fallen angels cast down to the Abyss at the Flood, as not only Enoch tells us, but also Jude 6 and 2 Peter 2:4. When the Beast arises from the Abyss in the End Times, his rulership will not seek any further accordance with the harlot city; rather, his minions "will hate the harlot, make her desolate and naked, eat her flesh and burn her with fire." Rev. 17:16

Hard to see why "the Antichrist" -- your term, not mine -- would permit the destruction of his own capital city by his own subjects. 

[WilliamL]

On 11/10/2019 at 8:03 AM, JoeCanada said:

The 'Caliph cat is out of the bag' and someone else is going to start another one to fulfill its dreams.

There is a very real possibility that Daniel 8: 1-8 is a future prophecy (which I hold to). It describes a man rising in Iran (represents Media-Persia) claiming to be the 12th Iman, the Muslim Savior. This will infuriate Turkey (Yavan) because they believe that Sunni Muslims are the true Muslims, and that the Caliph should be base out of Istanbul. 

Perhaps this is why Turkey was backing and supporting Al-Baghdadi, a Sunni Caliph.

So now, a vacuum has been created that needs to be filled.

Stay tuned.....watch Iran.

Feedback: 

Erdogan makes no secret that he wants to be the Caliph of a revived Ottoman Empire. (Just like Putin wants to revive the old Soviet Union.) One of the reasons Erdogan was not-so-secretly backing ISIS was because he hates Syria's Assad, an Islamic rival, and wanted to bring him down. Then he could have switched sides, backed the overthrown of ISIS, and carved up Syria for himself. Just as he is trying to do right now by his invasion of, and "safe zones" in, Syria.

Turkey is not Yavan, which people are the Greeks, long time foes of Turkey. The Turks are from another race entirely.

Watch Iran indeed. I and others suspect the impetus for the invasion of the King of the North per Dan. 11:40 will be due to the trouble caused by Iran and its proxies in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Gaza.

[wingnut-]

1 hour ago, WilliamL said:

Too many presumptions for me. Try this one, for one oft-repeated interpretation:

The city is Rome, which was already drunk with the blood of the saints by the time Revelation was written, and had dominion over the kings of the earth. The woman-harlot is Babylonian religion, practiced by the Pontifex Maximus of Rome, a title later taken by the Roman popes, which religion also became noted for shedding the blood of the saints.

 

The problem with this is that the woman is identified by the angel as a city, so that rules the religion out.  It is certainly fair to debate which city it will be, but scripture seems fairly clear it will be Jerusalem.

 

1 hour ago, WilliamL said:

"The beast that you saw was, and is not [present], and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition." Rev. 17:8 This is Azazel, or if you wish another of the fallen angels cast down to the Abyss at the Flood, as not only Enoch tells us, but also Jude 6 and 2 Peter 2:4.

 

I don't disagree, although as I said before I don't put any faith in the book of Enoch so I'm not personally willing to put a name to it.  I also would agree it is very likely that more than just the destroyer is going to emerge from the abyss when it is unlocked.

 

 

1 hour ago, WilliamL said:

When the Beast arises from the Abyss in the End Times, his rulership will not seek any further accordance with the harlot city; rather, his minions "will hate the harlot, make her desolate and naked, eat her flesh and burn her with fire." Rev. 17:16

 

Revelation 17:12 And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received royal power, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast.

 

For a very short period of time this is true, not the entire 3.5 year period, but rather one hour or a short time if you prefer.  There are several possibilities as to what brings this about.  One being, the signs of His coming lead to a scorched earth type mentality from the enemy, an if I can't have it no one can response.  The second being, the 1260 days of protection for the Jews expires at that hour, and the enemy simply resorts to doing what he wanted to do at the outset of the 1260 days as explained in Revelation 12.

 

1 hour ago, WilliamL said:

Hard to see why "the Antichrist" -- your term, not mine -- would permit the destruction of his own capital city by his own subjects. 

 

We can use the term beast if you prefer, doesn't matter to me.  I do not disagree with your earlier reference to there being many anti-christs.

 

God bless

[Steve_S]

On 11/8/2019 at 1:30 PM, wingnut- said:

Ancient Babylon is destroyed, so this Babylon of the end times is a symbolic reference relating to what takes place there spiritually.  The religion of that time is going to be the last false religion to exist, the worst to have existed, and when it falls there will never again exist such a thing.  What follows is Jesus' kingdom which will in fact stand forever, but there is a difference between modern day Jerusalem and Zion, His holy city.  Something to consider in confirming this is what Jesus said Himself, in regards to His kingdom, which is where He will rule from on earth.

In perusing this thread, one of the biggest things that popped out of me was the underlined part of this statement. My question would be, when did this happen and by whom?

Edited November 12, 2019 by Steve_S
Clarification.

[wingnut-]

47 minutes ago, Steve_S said:

In perusing this thread, one of the biggest things that popped out of me was the underlined part of this statement. My question would be, when did this happen and by whom?

 

Persian conquest

In 539 BC, the Neo-Babylonian Empire fell to Cyrus the Great, king of Persia, with a military engagement known as the Battle of Opis. Babylon's walls were considered impenetrable. The only way into the city was through one of its many gates or through the Euphrates River.

https://www.ancient.eu/babylon/

After Alexander’s death at Babylon in 323 BCE, his successors (known as `The Diadochi’, Greek for `successors’) fought over his empire generally and the city specifically to the point where the residents fled for their safety (or, according to one ancient report, were re-located). By the time the Parthian Empire ruled the region in 141 BCE Babylon was deserted and forgotten. The city steadily fell into ruin and, even during a brief revival under the Sassanid Persians, never approached its former greatness.

In the Muslim conquest of the land in 650 CE whatever remained of Babylon was swept away and, in time, was buried beneath the sands. In the 17th and 18th centuries CE European travelers began to explore the area and return home with various artifacts. These cuneiform blocks and statues led to an increased interest in the region and, by the 19th century CE, an interest in biblical archaeology drew men like Robert Koldewey who uncovered the ruins of the once great city of the Gate of the Gods.

[Steve_S]

26 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

 

Persian conquest

In 539 BC, the Neo-Babylonian Empire fell to Cyrus the Great, king of Persia, with a military engagement known as the Battle of Opis. Babylon's walls were considered impenetrable. The only way into the city was through one of its many gates or through the Euphrates River.

Right, but Babylon was not destroyed. It wasn't even damaged. The regular people in the city were under Persian rule for probably around three days without even realizing it. In fact, Babylon became an important part of the Persian empire and was basically a second capital. That persisted. Alexander basically took it as his eastern capital and it's actually where he died.

I ask this because there's always a lot of debate about what happens to Babylon in Revelation 17-18 (a small snippet of this can be found in the last few pages of this thread). But, nobody ever asks, what happened to the first Babylon. There were prophecies made about it. For example:

Isa 13:1  The burden against Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw. 
Isa 13:2  "Lift up a banner on the high mountain, Raise your voice to them; Wave your hand, that they may enter the gates of the nobles. 
Isa 13:3  I have commanded My sanctified ones; I have also called My mighty ones for My anger—Those who rejoice in My exaltation." 
Isa 13:4  The noise of a multitude in the mountains, Like that of many people! A tumultuous noise of the kingdoms of nations gathered together! The LORD of hosts musters The army for battle. 
Isa 13:5  They come from a far country, From the end of heaven—The LORD and His weapons of indignation, To destroy the whole land. 
Isa 13:6  Wail, for the day of the LORD is at hand! It will come as destruction from the Almighty. 
Isa 13:7  Therefore all hands will be limp, Every man's heart will melt, 
Isa 13:8  And they will be afraid. Pangs and sorrows will take hold of them; They will be in pain as a woman in childbirth; They will be amazed at one another; Their faces will be like flames. 
Isa 13:9  Behold, the day of the LORD comes, Cruel, with both wrath and fierce anger, To lay the land desolate; And He will destroy its sinners from it. 
Isa 13:10  For the stars of heaven and their constellations Will not give their light; The sun will be darkened in its going forth, And the moon will not cause its light to shine.

This is a description from Isaiah of what is going to happen to Babylon. It continues, even. This is a good spot to take a breath, though, because there is just glaringly obvious eschatological imagery. As the prophecy continues, we see there are worldwide events occurring.

Isa 13:11  "I will punish the world for its evil, And the wicked for their iniquity; I will halt the arrogance of the proud, And will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible. 
Isa 13:12  I will make a mortal more rare than fine gold, A man more than the golden wedge of Ophir. 
Isa 13:13  Therefore I will shake the heavens, And the earth will move out of her place, In the wrath of the LORD of hosts And in the day of His fierce anger. 
Isa 13:14  It shall be as the hunted gazelle, And as a sheep that no man takes up; Every man will turn to his own people, And everyone will flee to his own land. 
Isa 13:15  Everyone who is found will be thrust through, And everyone who is captured will fall by the sword. 
Isa 13:16  Their children also will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; Their houses will be plundered And their wives ravished. 
Isa 13:17  "Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, Who will not regard silver; And as for gold, they will not delight in it. 
Isa 13:18  Also their bows will dash the young men to pieces, And they will have no pity on the fruit of the womb; Their eye will not spare children. 
Isa 13:19  And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, The beauty of the Chaldeans' pride, Will be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. 
Isa 13:20  It will never be inhabited, Nor will it be settled from generation to generation; Nor will the Arabian pitch tents there, Nor will the shepherds make their sheepfolds there. 
Isa 13:21  But wild beasts of the desert will lie there, And their houses will be full of owls; Ostriches will dwell there, And wild goats will caper there. 
Isa 13:22  The hyenas will howl in their citadels, And jackals in their pleasant palaces. Her time is near to come, And her days will not be prolonged." 

This is obviously literally speaking about Babylon - The "Beauty of the Chadleans' pride. Not really a way that one can make an argument that it is a metaphor for Israel in this context. I post this, because what is specifically mentioned in verse 19 and 20 has not yet happened. Babylon was never destroyed like this. It was still a trading outpost during the Byzantine empire. Over time it died off, but was never destroyed. I highlighted the above statements in red because these have actually been persistently happening there throughout history. Saddam Hussein actually restored a part of Babylon. You can see pictures of the United States military outside of the ruins with actual Arabian shepherds nearby. I'm not specifically sure enough about things like this to be totally dogmatic on it. What I can say is that if this prophecy was intended to be literal, it was not literally fulfilled. Nor was at least part of the prophecy regarding Babylon in Jeremiah 50:

Jer 50:35  "A sword is against the Chaldeans," says the LORD, "Against the inhabitants of Babylon, And against her princes and her wise men. 
Jer 50:36  A sword is against the soothsayers, and they will be fools. A sword is against her mighty men, and they will be dismayed. 
Jer 50:37  A sword is against their horses, Against their chariots, And against all the mixed peoples who are in her midst; And they will become like women. A sword is against her treasures, and they will be robbed. 
Jer 50:38  A drought is against her waters, and they will be dried up. For it is the land of carved images, And they are insane with their idols. 
Jer 50:39  "Therefore the wild desert beasts shall dwell there with the jackals, And the ostriches shall dwell in it. It shall be inhabited no more forever, Nor shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation. 

 

Edited November 12, 2019 by Steve_S
Grammar.

[JoeCanada]

3 hours ago, WilliamL said:

Feedback: 

Erdogan makes no secret that he wants to be the Caliph of a revived Ottoman Empire. (Just like Putin wants to revive the old Soviet Union.) One of the reasons Erdogan was not-so-secretly backing ISIS was because he hates Syria's Assad, an Islamic rival, and wanted to bring him down. Then he could have switched sides, backed the overthrown of ISIS, and carved up Syria for himself. Just as he is trying to do right now by his invasion of, and "safe zones" in, Syria.

Turkey is not Yavan, which people are the Greeks, long time foes of Turkey. The Turks are from another race entirely.

Watch Iran indeed. I and others suspect the impetus for the invasion of the King of the North per Dan. 11:40 will be due to the trouble caused by Iran and its proxies in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Gaza.

Hi William,

"Turkey is not Yavan, which people are the Greeks, long time foes of Turkey. The Turks are from another race entirely."

Yavan was a son of Yaphet (Japhet), Yavan is parallel with the Greek word "Ionia", which is the Greek region of Asia Minor, which is a portion of the land mass of Turkey. 

Indeed. Iran and its proxies have caused and are causing a great deal of trouble in the region. Things are heating up for a big war. 

[wingnut-]

1 hour ago, Steve_S said:

This is obviously literally speaking about Babylon - The "Beauty of the Chadleans' pride. Not really a way that one can make an argument that it is a metaphor for Israel in this context. I post this, because what is specifically mentioned in verse 19 and 20 has not yet happened.

 

I completely agree this prophecy is yet future, but just to clarify in verse 19 it specifies the kingdom of Babylon, not the city itself.  Why is this important?  Consider the area the Babylonian Empire consisted of.  It ran through the Nile region of Egypt, cut across the upper part of the Red Sea to the top of the Persian Gulf in the southern area.  From the Nile area it went north all along the Great Sea (Mediterranean) covering southern Turkey and moving east along the borders of what was Media at that time and hooking south back down to the Persian Gulf.  So in modern day it contained parts of, or all of the following nations.  Turkey, Jordan, Israel, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia.

Most of those nations are specifically mentioned in the end times prophecies, not by their current names but by their names in ancient times, such as Babylon, Edom, Moab, etc.  Those surrounding areas are where we get specific prophecies regarding their judgement, specifically even mentioning the Lord coming up out of them.  While there are also verses that touch on this being a global event, including the passage from Isaiah 13 amongst others, everything specifically mentioned is from within that region and were part of the kingdom of Babylon.  Many people still question whether this will be a global event because of that, which I personally disagree with but many do still believe that.

I'm not exactly dogmatic either, is it possible that Babylon the city will be rebuilt again, sure, it is possible.  I don't expect it will be though, as the hour is growing late and a great city cannot be erected overnight by man.  Given the present state of Iraq it just strikes me as highly unlikely it would begin anytime in the near future.

 

1 hour ago, Steve_S said:

Isa 13:20  It will never be inhabited, Nor will it be settled from generation to generation; Nor will the Arabian pitch tents there, Nor will the shepherds make their sheepfolds there. 

 

In regards to verse 20 this obviously has to be future still as well.  Exactly what part of the kingdom of Babylon this refers to it is difficult to say for certain, but we know that the majority of what was the kingdom of Babylon is the exact area God promised to Abraham's seed in Genesis 15, from the Nile to the Euphrates.  So whatever part of Babylon will never be inhabited again ( I suspect in reference to the Millennial Kingdom period) is probably located on the opposite side of the Euphrates which was the base of the empire.

 

[Steve_S]

1 hour ago, wingnut- said:

I completely agree this prophecy is yet future, but just to clarify in verse 19 it specifies the kingdom of Babylon, not the city itself.  Why is this important?

I'd have to strongly disagree with that interpretation. It doesn't specifically say the kingdom of Babylon. It says the "Glory of kingdoms," i.e. the city of Babylon is the glory of the kingdoms which it controls. Pretty much every Masoretic based translation translates it as this or along those lines. The Septuagint is not exactly the same, However:

Isa 13:19  And Babylon, which is called glorious by the king of the Chaldeans, shall be as when God overthrew Sodoma, and Gomorrha.

There's an obvious difference, but I would point out that the vast majority of the quotes from the old testament by new testament authors are from the Septuagint. The main point, though, is that it's definitively delineated as a city there, or at least absent the kingdom title. It is also compared to Sodom and Gomorrah, which are both cities and kingdoms, but it was the capital that was burned to the ground.

The biggest problem with it, though, is that all Israel, parts of Egypt, and much of Assyria were all parts of the babylonian empire. If it is necessary to read this as having a totally future fulfillment in the millennium and it is literal, and involves the kingdom of Babylon, not just Babylon itself, then all of those would necessarily have to be empty, which is, of course, not an option, as all are mentioned as being quite populated.

I would also point out that in Jeremiah 50, which we barely dipped our toe into, but is quite deep and broad with regards to this topic, it does not once mention Babylon from an imperial perspective, not explicitly anyway.