The beasts of Revelation 13 - Interpreted and identified.

[abcdef]

On 3/14/2021 at 7:36 AM, Diaste said:

Masada was after 70 AD. I said the siege of Jerusalem by Titus in 70 AD was not genocide. Titus would not have taken 95,000 prisoners if it was genocide. Masada was a very different story and only happened 2-3 years later.

Titus did not take "prisoners", he took slaves for galleys, the games, mines, and generally jobs that ended in death or worse. The idea that he took slaves to preserve the people of Israel is not what he did. 

The siege of Masada is the same story as the destruction of Jerusalem.

The people of Israel who did not flee were either killed or enslaved with no respect for the idea of preserving Israel.

You can't really separate Jerusalem and Masada, because the siege of Masada was result of Jerusalem falling and it's aftermath. 

 

Quote

If that's true then Jesus would also be the leader of the people that destroyed the Temple and the city.

Jesus brought the armies of Rome to destroy the temple and Jerusalem.

It is beyond the power of people to destroy what God is protecting, in this case Jerusalem and its people.

When God/Jesus withdraws His protection over them, then evil comes rushing in.

In this case, the Roman armies brought by God.

 

Quote

Then the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary.

We know this was Titus and the Roman legions prompted by the bloodlust of X Fretensis. 

****If you say that the this refers to the Roman armies under Titus, then the destruction Jerusalem because of the AoD referred to in Dan. 9, already happened in the 70 AD ish time period.

Because the Roman armies have already destroyed Jerusalem, and will not in the future, because the scripture is already fulfilled.

 

Quote

And he will confirm a covenant with many for one week,

Jesus confirms forever covenants.

Not all the covenants are forever, for example,

The covenant of Moses and the Law. It was ended when Jesus died.

The covenant given to Noah in Gen 8:22, only lasts as long as there is a planet.

------

Notice that the covenant is "confirmed" for 7 years, and is not a contract that spans the time of 7 years.

Rom 15:8, "Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the fathers:"

Jesus "confirmed" the promises of the Law, and the promises made in the Law that there would be a new covenant.

So the 7 years was only the time of "confirming" the covenant by Jesus.

While the entire time of the covenants that Jesus confirmed, was over 2000 years, Adam through the death of Jesus.  

 

Quote

but in the middle of the week he will put an end to sacrifice and offering.

And he doesn't break them.

Jesus died in the middle of the 70th week.

 

Quote

And on the wing of the temple will come the abomination that causes desolation,

If Jesus is the prince in view here then Jesus is committing the A of D in 167 BC, but we know that was Antiochus IV. I don't see Dan 9:26-27 prophesying of Antiochus IV in truth; it's just to make a point

 

#1 AoD, In the time of Antiochus.

#2 AoD, In the time after Jesus by Rome.

 

Quote

until the decreed destruction is poured out upon him.

Destruction is not poured out on Jesus.

Choose your translation wisely. Although there are many who disagree with the translation of these verses, there are points that should be considered.

Dan 9:25-27,

If the scripture is about Jesus and the 70 AD. ish time period, then it must all fit into the history in some way, in that time period and fit in with the other scriptures about that time.

If the AoD cannot be proven absolutely, that it happened or did not happen in that time period, which seems to be the case, then the answer must be found by the placement in the timeline, in view of other scriptures.

Since it cannot be absolutely confirmed either way, then the statement, "it didn't happen", is about the same substance as, "it did happen."

But in this case, since the whole chapter is about Jesus and the 70 AD destruction, it seems that the last verses, if kept in context, would follow the same subjects in the 70 AD ish time period.

 

Quote

From OT study the sacrifices meant nothing anyway.

Well, if you didn't do them then you would be breaking the Law or in some cases the direct Word of God (Saul).

They were obligated to do them as long as they were under the Law of Moses.

So they did mean something.

 

Quote

The shekinah glory was gone from the Temple long before Jesus walked the earth in the 1st century.

But then when Jesus died, the curtain in the temple was torn from top to bottom.

So I'm not so sure that the temple was completely without meaning, Israel was still under the Law until Jesus died. There may still have been meaning for the temple, where Israel worshiped.

 

Quote

The Jews persisted as they are stiff necked and rebellious.

We all fall short of the glory of God. (Some more than others.)

Their stiff necks brought salvation to the gentiles.

 

Quote

The point means little in this discussion.

Every point is important and should be at least considered.

 

 

Edited March 20, 2021 by abcdef

[Linkin]

>>>>KI Won So, clear your mind then read Revelation 13:1 and 13:11, perhaps even the whole of chapter 13, familiarise yourself with the Scripture that I'm going to interpret. The key to understanding this passage and I suppose the book of Revelation as a whole is the blasphemous names on the heads of the beast.

>>>>Now, What The Bible Says.

*Revelation 13v1And I stood on the sand of the sea. And I observed a beast rising out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns

*Revelation 17v9 Here is the mind having wisdom: The seven heads are seven hills. There the woman is seated on them.

*Rome is the city on seven hills. She was seated there when John wrote Revelation.

The Ten Horns 

Daniel 7v7 “After that, in my vision at night I looked, and there before me was a fourth beast—terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. It was different from all the former beasts, and it had ten horns.

 

Edited March 20, 2021 by Linkin
Correct Punctuation

[Linkin]

>>>>Ki Won The key to understanding this passage and I suppose the book of Revelation as a whole is the blasphemous names on the heads of the beast.

>>>No. The Key is understanding where the writer John is drawing information from, which is the Old Testament. Such Books as Isaiah, Zechariah, Ezekiel, Daniel etc..

Revelation 13 needs to be understood from what was written in the book of Daniel.

[Diaste]

10 hours ago, abcdef said:

Titus did not take "prisoners", he took slaves for galleys, the games, mines, and generally jobs that ended in death or worse. The idea that he took slaves to preserve the people of Israel is not what he did. 

The siege of Masada is the same story as the destruction of Jerusalem.

The people of Israel who did not flee were either killed or enslaved with no respect for the idea of preserving Israel.

You can't really separate Jerusalem and Masada, because the siege of Masada was result of Jerusalem falling and it's aftermath. 

Didn't say 'to preserve'. Made a point about the absence of genocidal tendencies.

Maybe or maybe not. Masada was the end of the war but it's nowhere near Jerusalem and it was 2-4 years later. 

 

10 hours ago, abcdef said:

 

Jesus brought the armies of Rome to destroy the temple and Jerusalem.

It is beyond the power of people to destroy what God is protecting, in this case Jerusalem and its people.

When God/Jesus withdraws His protection over them, then evil comes rushing in.

In this case, the Roman armies brought by God.

Of course it was prophecy fulfilled.

10 hours ago, abcdef said:

 

****If you say that the this refers to the Roman armies under Titus, then the destruction Jerusalem because of the AoD referred to in Dan. 9, already happened in the 70 AD ish time period.

Because the Roman armies have already destroyed Jerusalem, and will not in the future, because the scripture is already fulfilled.

 

Not all the covenants are forever, for example,

The covenant of Moses and the Law. It was ended when Jesus died.

The covenant given to Noah in Gen 8:22, only lasts as long as there is a planet.

The NT says the Law is not abolished at this time and I don't know of scripture that says the Law will ever be abolished since the Law is a reflection of the nature and character of God. 

10 hours ago, abcdef said:

------

Notice that the covenant is "confirmed" for 7 years, and is not a contract that spans the time of 7 years.

Rom 15:8, "Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the fathers:"

Jesus "confirmed" the promises of the Law, and the promises made in the Law that there would be a new covenant.

So the 7 years was only the time of "confirming" the covenant by Jesus.

While the entire time of the covenants that Jesus confirmed, was over 2000 years, Adam through the death of Jesus.  

 

Jesus died in the middle of the 70th week.

After 69 weeks could mean to the minute of the end of the 69 weeks or on the day it ended. Nothing proves after 69 weeks must be a span of time of any duration in particular. I'm not one year older only on the day of my birth anniversary. I'm the 11th month and third week of the previous year. The moment the clock ticks past 2:45 am on that day is officially 'after'.

Jesus isn't the prince of 'the people of the prince that will come'. That has been shown to be a likely Assyrian.

10 hours ago, abcdef said:

 

#1 AoD, In the time of Antiochus.

#2 AoD, In the time after Jesus by Rome.

#2 has to be associated within the time of the coming of Jesus and the gathering of the elect. So not Rome.

 

10 hours ago, abcdef said:

 

Choose your translation wisely. Although there are many who disagree with the translation of these verses, there are points that should be considered.

Dan 9:25-27,

If the scripture is about Jesus and the 70 AD. ish time period, then it must all fit into the history in some way, in that time period and fit in with the other scriptures about that time.

If the AoD cannot be proven absolutely, that it happened or did not happen in that time period, which seems to be the case, then the answer must be found by the placement in the timeline, in view of other scriptures.

Since it cannot be absolutely confirmed either way, then the statement, "it didn't happen", is about the same substance as, "it did happen."

But in this case, since the whole chapter is about Jesus and the 70 AD destruction, it seems that the last verses, if kept in context, would follow the same subjects in the 70 AD ish time period.

The long gap must exist because of "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." 

That has not happened even to this day. It's close, but not quite there. It certainly didn't happen by 70 AD.

10 hours ago, abcdef said:

Well, if you didn't do them then you would be breaking the Law or in some cases the direct Word of God (Saul).

They were obligated to do them as long as they were under the Law of Moses.

So they did mean something.

Salvation is by belief and confession in the Messiah Jesus Christ. Ritual, blood, fat and piety doesn't do it, never did. Never will.

10 hours ago, abcdef said:

 

But then when Jesus died, the curtain in the temple was torn from top to bottom.

So I'm not so sure that the temple was completely without meaning, Israel was still under the Law until Jesus died. There may still have been meaning for the temple, where Israel worshiped.

I agree. But the Temple meant nothing in the context of salvation. The rending of the veil was symbolic in that the way to the Holy of Holies was now open to everyone. No longer hidden where only a Jewish High Priest could enter on behalf of the people. All people now had The High Priest and the way to the Holy of Holies was through Jesus Christ, not a veil.

[abcdef]

On 3/14/2021 at 7:54 AM, Diaste said:

Not saying it's Rome or Jerusalem.

Rome, Babylon, Jerusalem, or none of them, and is just a system?

The beasts of Rev 13 are nations and leaders, where is the capitol?

 

On 3/14/2021 at 7:54 AM, Diaste said:

It's a universal babylon of violence and greed and that multitude of merchandise

In a general sense, yes, it has always been here, the spirit of Babylon evil and its ways.

But these beasts in Rev 13 are are specific nations and leaders right?

 

On 3/14/2021 at 7:54 AM, Diaste said:

will have it's seat in some vast city

What is the location of the city? Babylon? Jerusalem? Rome? That rules the planet?

Pretrib says Jerusalem. What is your answer?

What is the city, that is the home of the beast, the seat of the beast? Rev 17:18

Maybe you will say Babylon, then it is not Jerusalem.

If it is Jerusalem then it cannot be Babylon.

The Beasts of Rev 13 are nations and people, where is their capitol?

In 96 AD ish period when the Revelation was given, Rome was the power that just killed John the Baptist, Jesus, destroyed the temple and Jerusalem, killed the apostles, and was holding John captive. Then they ruled over Israel for the next 1900 years until 1967, when Jerusalem was restored.

 

On 3/14/2021 at 7:54 AM, Diaste said:

at the end ofthe gae of the government of man.

The imagery of the beast nation and it's leader shows that they are given power for only 42 months, Rev 13:5, that is when their power ends. (The 42 months is symbolic of the time from 70 AD until 1967, when Rome ruled over the people of Israel, the 2nd 3 1/2 times.) 

But it doesn't say that they nations end, only that their power ends.

The power of the beasts, over the people of Israel, the saints Dan 7:25, ends when Jerusalem is restored, 1967.

 

On 3/14/2021 at 7:54 AM, Diaste said:

You mean:

And the merchants of the earth will weep and mourn over her, because there is no one left to buy their cargo

And

Every shipmaster, passenger, and sailor, and all who make their living from the sea, 

Or

where all who had ships on the sea were enriched by her wealth!

These descriptions using absolute terms of 'all' and 'every' fit no known city from the dawn of time throughout the universe. And certainly not Jerusalem. No country today has enough ports to fulfill this prophecy. 

(Please post the scripture location and version of the Bible that you are using, if it isn't the KJV, thanks.) 

Not the PLANET! The known world/earth of Israel and Jerusalem.

Look through the eyes of the people of Israel in the 96 AD ish time period.

You are thinking in the terms of modern people.

Think of the "earth", as being the known world of Israel in that time period. Where ever the people of Israel were, "under heaven", Acts 2:5.

-----

And which of those cities, Babylon, land locked Jerusalem, or Rome, would fit the concept of the vast modern seaport/city that you have envisioned?

The key verse is Rev 18:24, that can Only be Jerusalem.

 

On 3/14/2021 at 7:54 AM, Diaste said:

I can't take most of the prophecy literally and then backtrack to say two words are symbolic.

"One hour", Rev 18:17.

I guess that it depends if you are looking at time, from the concept of men, or from God's concept. Deciding what is literal and what is not is key to the understanding.

Since the Rev is full of symbolism, it should be considered.

 

On 3/14/2021 at 7:54 AM, Diaste said:

It take 30 minutes for an ICBM to be launched and find the target anywhere on earth. Much less in some cases. Any whole country could be destroyed today inside the noon hour for example. Not a stretch and easily taken literally.

Rev 18:21-23, Which city will be destroyed? And never be inhabited again?

Jerusalem? How will Jesus reign from Jerusalem, if it is never inhabited again?

The actual city of Babylon? But according to pretrib, the beast rules from Jerusalem.

 

On 3/14/2021 at 7:54 AM, Diaste said:

What city remains the same over 20 centuries even without war? That Jerusalem still exist in any form is a testament to the eternal promises of God. Still there. Still God's city. Still the inheritance.

Rev 18, 

Yes, but think of it in the 96 AD mindset of the people of Israel.

The streets, merchants, buildings, and people of the city that once existed there are gone and will never be seen again. Josephus wrote (I don't know exactly where) that when the Romans were done, you couldn't tell that a city ever existed there.

The modern city that is restored, is not the city of the temple that once existed before 70 AD.

Rev 18 describes the Jerusalem of 96 AD ish perfectly.

[Diaste]

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

Rome, Babylon, Jerusalem, or none of them, and is just a system?

The beasts of Rev 13 are nations and leaders, where is the capitol?

While scripture does not say exactly I see it as Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar, the Persians and Medes, and Alexander all had Babylon as a capitol. In Rev 18 Babylon has risen again and to great prominence; literally described as having all goods and making all sea merchants rich. 

Daniel 11 says some evil doer will pitch his tents between the seas and the holy mountain. That could be Jerusalem, but it could also be somewhere out side Jerusalem or surrounding Jerusalem.  I'm going with surrounding and not in based on other scriptures.

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

 

In a general sense, yes, it has always been here, the spirit of Babylon evil and its ways.

But these beasts in Rev 13 are are specific nations and leaders right?

 

What is the location of the city? Babylon? Jerusalem? Rome? That rules the planet?

Pretrib says Jerusalem. What is your answer?

What is the city, that is the home of the beast, the seat of the beast? Rev 17:18

Maybe you will say Babylon, then it is not Jerusalem.

If it is Jerusalem then it cannot be Babylon.

The Beasts of Rev 13 are nations and people, where is their capitol?

I don't know. No city today fits the Rev 18 description. I have looked. If this single city makes all sea merchants rich then it's a city that does not exist now and never has. And it's a frightening thought really. Even Herbert saw this. One planet that controlled the galaxy. One city that controls the world. 

Yes it's fantastic and mind bending to contemplate. We ain't seen nothing yet.

 

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

In 96 AD ish period when the Revelation was given, Rome was the power that just killed John the Baptist, Jesus, destroyed the temple and Jerusalem, killed the apostles, and was holding John captive. Then they ruled over Israel for the next 1900 years until 1967, when Jerusalem was restored.

The Jews killed John and Jesus. Herod beheaded John and Pilate found Jesus innocent. Also Rome faded away by 500 AD, with the eastern Empire continuing till 1400 AD when the Ottomans finally put it down. But the western arm that dominated the Mideast was gone by the time Islam rose and became the power in the region till 1900 AD at it's official end; but continues to dominate the ideology of 2 billion people. 

 

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

 

The imagery of the beast nation and it's leader shows that they are given power for only 42 months, Rev 13:5, that is when their power ends. (The 42 months is symbolic of the time from 70 AD until 1967, when Rome ruled over the people of Israel, the 2nd 3 1/2 times.) 

But it doesn't say that they nations end, only that their power ends.

The power of the beasts, over the people of Israel, the saints Dan 7:25, ends when Jerusalem is restored, 1967.

No, the beast is given power to continue 42 months. And days for years? 1260 years? Can you prove that?

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

 

(Please post the scripture location and version of the Bible that you are using, if it isn't the KJV, thanks.) 

It's Rev 18. 

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

Not the PLANET! The known world/earth of Israel and Jerusalem.

Look through the eyes of the people of Israel in the 96 AD ish time period.

You are thinking in the terms of modern people.

Think of the "earth", as being the known world of Israel in that time period. Where ever the people of Israel were, "under heaven", Acts 2:5.

It's not me, the scope of Revelation is all people and tribes and nations and tongues. The text of the Revelation points us to every person on earth.

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

 

And which of those cities, Babylon, land locked Jerusalem, or Rome, would fit the concept of the vast modern seaport/city that you have envisioned?

The key verse is Rev 18:24, that can Only be Jerusalem.

No. Rev 18:24, "And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth."

The highlighted part does not fit any known city, including Jerusalem. This is why I say it's 'the multitude of merchandise that filled them with violence and sin was found in them'. This is responsible for all that were slain in the earth. This will manifest in a city the likes of which the imagination has not seen.

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

 

"One hour", Rev 18:17.

I guess that it depends if you are looking at time, from the concept of men, or from God's concept. Deciding what is literal and what is not is key to the understanding.

Since the Rev is full of symbolism, it should be considered.

Yes. But symbols that represent real events that will manifest on this plane of existence except for one passage, maybe two

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

 

Rev 18:21-23, Which city will be destroyed? And never be inhabited again?

Jerusalem? How will Jesus reign from Jerusalem, if it is never inhabited again?

The actual city of Babylon? But according to pretrib, the beast rules from Jerusalem.

Clearly Jerusalem will be inhabited, so then it's not Jerusalem and it's some Babylon that will rise. 

 

On 3/20/2021 at 11:20 AM, abcdef said:

 

The streets, merchants, buildings, and people of the city that once existed there are gone and will never be seen again. Josephus wrote (I don't know exactly where) that when the Romans were done, you couldn't tell that a city ever existed there.

The modern city that is restored, is not the city of the temple that once existed before 70 AD.

 

Seems like a stretch. Because the ancient walls were torn down and the timeless foundations support glass and steel and concrete and not rough stone does not change the fundamental existence of the city. Still the same people of the same lineage dwelling therein.

Because the street is now blacktop and not cobblestone does not mean the street no longer exists. None of this is convincing.