Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 19:14:44 GMT -6
Ok. Arrived in Fargo....So far it seems all that have reviewed the original question have come up with the same conclusion that I did - that the two timeframes mentioned in Rev 12 are the same period of time.
I'd love to hear support for the alternative view if anyone wishes to provide any. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by whatif on Oct 8, 2017 19:56:51 GMT -6
Some of this would've been in part two of my article if I ever get around to writing it. If you get the opportunity, silentknight, I for one would love to read it! |
|
karen
New Member
Posts: 29 
|
Post by karen on Oct 8, 2017 20:41:52 GMT -6
Some of this would've been in part two of my article if I ever get around to writing it. If you get the opportunity, silentknight, I for one would love to read it! I will second that. I am so grateful that you are not silent, because I learn so much from your posts. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 23:21:14 GMT -6
Can it be, that we are witnessing the beginning of a paradigm change regarding pre-trib, pre-wrath, mid-trib and the role of the true church in the light of the Rev 12 sign? As it was often said, no one of us got all puzzle pieces right, lots of believers are contributing to the knowledge. I like this thought, stephan! Tell us more! I wish, I could.... It's a feeling deep in my guts, that even the endtime models are somehow converging. The more, we start focussing on Jesus, the more we will understand and differences in our understanding will melt away. I think, it has to do with the unity within the body of Christ. Remember the prayer of our Lord in John 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. |
|
|
|
Post by mike on Oct 9, 2017 6:08:35 GMT -6
^^^Double thumbs up brother!! (@stephan)
|
|
|
|
Post by whatif on Oct 9, 2017 19:22:06 GMT -6
^^^Triple thumbs up, brothers!
|
|
|
|
Post by grandpaskitzo on Oct 9, 2017 19:36:13 GMT -6
Well, if any of us is right on the timing of 'whatever it is', then the dispensation of grace is about to change to something different. That could be the feeling you, myself, and I'm sure others are feeling. Buckle up kiddies, cause it's Gna get wild. We have to remember that the dispensation between the law and grace wasn't just a one day quick change, it was a process. Major prophecies are being fulfilled, and with that, the perceptions of reality by everyone everywhere are being shifted.
Like Stephan stated, keep seeking Jesus and we'll soon understand!
And as always, Maranatha and Maranatha!
|
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Oct 9, 2017 20:19:29 GMT -6
^^^Triple thumbs up, brothers! I only have two thumbs. So... yeah. |
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Oct 9, 2017 20:23:25 GMT -6
@stephan and linda , In the bulk of the church the people are taught that the woman is Israel and the child is Jesus. Some teachers have realized that the child is not Jesus, he is the church. But they still hold onto the woman being Israel. In my opinion, this does not ring true. So I ask the Lord to reveal more in this area. I am not saying that this is a word from the Lord, but this is what became more obvious to me after this request. The woman is Zion. The child is Emmanuel. I wrote this up in this article which Gary posted on Unsealed.org - www.unsealed.org/2017/09/o-come-o-come-emmanuel.html. It contains some "evidence" of the child's name. I encourage you to read it. To say the woman is Zion though, is not fully meaningful. We all have a lot of opinions about who / what Zion is. The scripture contains the struggle between two kingdoms, two cities, two women. Babylon and Zion. Revelation reveals their final outcomes. One way to think of Zion is that she is the one true belief system - the fully grafted spiritual Israel - the Kingdom of God - the Bride of Christ - the True church from Adam to the last believer. And right now, she is within the believers. She became pregnant at Pentecost in 33 A.D. and now, 40 jubilees later (gestational period in weeks - Pentecost is also know as the Feast of Weeks), she is due to give birth. This does not fully capture what is in my mind regarding her, but it is hard to describe her in words. Perhaps I will try again later - I have to get on the road right now for an 8 hour drive. EDIT: I just realized how dogmatic this sounds. I am just expressing my opinion and welcome any enlightenment from others if they wish to express their own opinions. But that might need to be on a different thread or we may loose the 3.5 year point of this discussion.  I like this as a hypothesis; however, what is your take on the woman (if Zion) from Rev 12 fleeing to the wilderness? Where was she before? If she is fleeing to heaven (harpazo) wouldn't that be a bit redundant? Pls help me out here. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2017 21:26:54 GMT -6
I like this as a hypothesis; however, what is your take on the woman (if Zion) from Rev 12 fleeing to the wilderness? Where was she before? If she is fleeing to heaven (harpazo) wouldn't that be a bit redundant? Pls help me out here. Right now Zion is being fed and nourished moment by moment by the believers. The kingdom of God is growing all the time. But once Emmanuel is born and caught up to the throne and satan is cast down to earth, Zion will go into hiding. Zion is not a group of people. Zion is a belief system. The true belief system. Her going to the wilderness symbolizes the truth going into "hiding" but not being destroyed. The truth hides for a short time as darkness permeates the Earth. Satan tries to kill the true belief system. But she cannot die, so eventually he gives up and goes after the rest of her children: people who walk according to that truth. He can kill off the flesh, but Zion lives on and eventually makes herself ready for her groom. The wilderness is a picture - it is not a real group of people going to Pella or any other wilderness shelter. If one ponders for a bit, it would become clear that only a small group of people would be able to flee to the wilderness: the ones that are alive during the tribulation age. That group of people could not possibly give birth to Emmanuel (or the son's of God). No the woman is much more significant. After all, how could those that flee to the wilderness have given birth to the one that was caught up before they flee? Wouldn't they have been also caught up, if the woman was a group of believers? If she was a group of non-believers, how could she give birth to the son(s) of God? She is not a group of people. I don't agree with much of dispensationalism, particularly the idea that the Spirit is removed from the earth during the tribulation, I do not believe that Grace only holds for an age, but rather for all ages. But, for those who do teach this, they could look at Zion going into hiding as coinciding with the Spirit being removed. EDIT: I should note here - I do not have this all figured out. It is a fairly new consideration on my part and I am seeing a lot of scriptural (and common sense) support for it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2017 23:31:09 GMT -6
I like this as a hypothesis; however, what is your take on the woman (if Zion) from Rev 12 fleeing to the wilderness? Where was she before? If she is fleeing to heaven (harpazo) wouldn't that be a bit redundant? Pls help me out here. Right now Zion is being fed and nourished moment by moment by the believers. The kingdom of God is growing all the time. But once Emmanuel is born and caught up to the throne and satan is cast down to earth, Zion will go into hiding. Zion is not a group of people. Zion is a belief system. The true belief system. Her going to the wilderness symbolizes the truth going into "hiding" but not being destroyed. The truth hides for a short time as darkness permeates the Earth. Satan tries to kill the true belief system. But she cannot die, so eventually he gives up and goes after the rest of her children: people who walk according to that truth. He can kill off the flesh, but Zion lives on and eventually makes herself ready for her groom. The wilderness is a picture - it is not a real group of people going to Pella or any other wilderness shelter. If one ponders for a bit, it would become clear that only a small group of people would be able to flee to the wilderness: the ones that are alive during the tribulation age. That group of people could not possibly give birth to Emmanuel (or the son's of God). No the woman is much more significant. After all, how could those that flee to the wilderness have given birth to the one that was caught up before they flee? Wouldn't they have been also caught up, if the woman was a group of believers? I don't agree with much of dispensationalism, particularly the idea that the Spirit is removed from the earth during the tribulation, I do not believe that Grace only holds for an age, but rather for all ages. But, for those who do teach this, they could look at Zion going into hiding as coinciding with the Spirit being removed. EDIT: I should note here - I do not have this all figured out. It is a fairly new consideration on my part and I am seeing a lot of scriptural (and common sense) support for it. Hm.....partially agreed. Without going into too much details, generally spoken we must never forget that prophecies often, if not mostly have multiple fulfilments and multiple levels of meanings. Thus, no matter what kind of model we are trying to build, it should take into account all these aspects. Otherwise we are in danger of either overallegorizing or on the other hand missing the deeper meaning. All manmade models are incomplete and can only cover some facets of the inconceivable greatness of God and his thoughts. This is of course also true for dispensationalism. And for every whatsoever new model too. Maybe we need several concurrent models to get an idea of the underlying truth of Rev 12. This does not and by no means fully invalidate yet available models. (Remember the heated discussion regarding Calvinism and Arminianism?) In Rev 12 we also see multiple groups and entities. Of course real people (Israel, Jews) are in view as well as maybe some belief system. And Satan wants to annihilate the Jews in order to make God a liar. Even this aspect may be extended onto the believers. To come full circle, if a model helps us to gain a better understanding of our Lord and Saviour Jesus, I'd see it as helpful. This is, what the whole scripture is for and written of, to focus on HIM. Just a few morning thoughts... EDIT: Surely you have a similar view on that, only want to clarify my standpoint. Never intended to sound dogmatic. |
|
|
|
Post by MissusMack08 on Oct 10, 2017 10:23:09 GMT -6
I like this as a hypothesis; however, what is your take on the woman (if Zion) from Rev 12 fleeing to the wilderness? Where was she before? If she is fleeing to heaven (harpazo) wouldn't that be a bit redundant? Pls help me out here. Right now Zion is being fed and nourished moment by moment by the believers. The kingdom of God is growing all the time. But once Emmanuel is born and caught up to the throne and satan is cast down to earth, Zion will go into hiding. Zion is not a group of people. Zion is a belief system. The true belief system. Her going to the wilderness symbolizes the truth going into "hiding" but not being destroyed. The truth hides for a short time as darkness permeates the Earth. Satan tries to kill the true belief system. But she cannot die, so eventually he gives up and goes after the rest of her children: people who walk according to that truth. He can kill off the flesh, but Zion lives on and eventually makes herself ready for her groom. The wilderness is a picture - it is not a real group of people going to Pella or any other wilderness shelter. If one ponders for a bit, it would become clear that only a small group of people would be able to flee to the wilderness: the ones that are alive during the tribulation age. That group of people could not possibly give birth to Emmanuel (or the son's of God). No the woman is much more significant. After all, how could those that flee to the wilderness have given birth to the one that was caught up before they flee? Wouldn't they have been also caught up, if the woman was a group of believers? If she was a group of non-believers, how could she give birth to the son(s) of God? She is not a group of people. I don't agree with much of dispensationalism, particularly the idea that the Spirit is removed from the earth during the tribulation, I do not believe that Grace only holds for an age, but rather for all ages. But, for those who do teach this, they could look at Zion going into hiding as coinciding with the Spirit being removed. EDIT: I should note here - I do not have this all figured out. It is a fairly new consideration on my part and I am seeing a lot of scriptural (and common sense) support for it. Isa 66:7 “Before she was in labor, she gave birth; Before her pain came, She delivered a male child. Isa 66:8 Who has heard such a thing? Who has seen such things? Shall the earth be made to give birth in one day? Or shall a nation be born at once? For as soon as Zion was in labor, She gave birth to her children. If a woman can give birth before she goes into labor, a remnant of Jewish believers can believe AFTER the rapture and still be considered Zion who gave birth. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2017 11:07:04 GMT -6
I agree Stephan - Amen! I am giving one level of interpretation that is not common. I am not trying to define the entirety of Rev 12.
I agree MissusMack08 - This scripture actually confirms the identity of the woman as Zion. Which is what I have been saying. All believers are part of the children of Zion. So certainly, those who become believers during the tribulation are also children of Zion.
But they are not Zion. That is why they are called, "the remnant of her offspring."
But now we have completely departed from the thread subject - and actually, it seems the thread has run its course - no one has presented a argument that supports Rev 12 talking about 2 different 3.5 year periods.
|
|
|
|
Post by whatif on Oct 13, 2017 21:45:23 GMT -6
^^^Triple thumbs up, brothers! I only have two thumbs. So... yeah. LOL, yardstick! Hope you don't all think I'm a Nephilim giant or something...  |
|
|
|
Post by davidjayjordan on Dec 3, 2017 13:23:16 GMT -6
I realize this will be a bit contentions, so I ask, right of the bat, for us all to be very patient with one another. The question is as the thread title suggests. How many 3.5 years periods are spoken of in Revelation 12?If we ignore our pre-conceived ideas about how long the tribulation is, wouldn't the simplest reading of Rev 12 speak of only one period of 3.5 years? As you answer this question, please don't assume that Rev 12 has to be talking about the entire tribulation period - or even be during the tribulation period. Just looking at the plain language of Rev 12: The woman flees to the wilderness where she is fed for 1260 days. The woman flies to the wilderness where she is nourished for time, times, and half a time. To me it seems obvious that this is the same event. I recognize that to others it seems obvious that the opposite is true. So.... I want to hear from both sides why they support one side verses the other. But - arguments that start with - "Well we know the tribulation is 7 years because of Daniels 70th week." Will not hold merit in my mind. The reasons are: 1. There are already disagreements about whether some or all of Daniel's 70th week is a already fulfilled. - please don't argue this point in this thread - that is not the point of the thread. 2. Even if Daniel's 70th week is future and is 7 years and represents the tribulation - that does not mean that Rev 12 is trying to cover that entire time. I am not trying to persuade here - just the opposite - i want to hear good arguments and to be persuaded. Thanks brothers and sisters. IMO... there are two 1260 time periods.... one after the Covenant signing, starting the last seven year period, and one after the abomination of desolation is set up (after 30 days), when we are instructed to flee (to Petra) The Tribulation is sometimes referred to the Last 7 Years and the last half or 1260 days called the Great TRIBULATION... The 1260 days can not be misunderstood because the Lord refers to it over and over and over again 1260 days 42 months Time, times and dividing of times. The Last 7 years also has to include a time frame for setting up the Mark of the Beast computer inside the Holy of Holies (after the Russian (AC takes over the 3rd Temple) So add this to your timeline and you get 1260+30+1260= 2550 add some holy days and you have 2555 days... 7 times 365 days/per year IMO |
|
