Damascus - Events and Prophecies

I stand ready with a fire extinguisher, should your head spontaneously combust...

I am not a scientist, but I play one on TV.

Just kidding.

IDK why they are hard. I believe God has gifted me with the ability to 'poke holes' in things. I can offer to say that the Creator is not just a passionate, and emotionally loving God, but also a God of logic and reason and patterns. I believe scripture passages must have logical explanations, even if we do not know what they are, or cannot figure it out. Thus, I ask 'why' and seek explanations that make sense [to me].

I can also say that one of the things believers are supposed to do is to compare things in light of what scripture says. With an infinitely dimensional, omniscient Creator who has communicated to our three-dimensional selves through the scriptures (dumbed it down for us, so to speak), I believe He has provided all of the answers necessary in His Word. As knowledge has increased, different 'perspectives' on the messages provided in the scriptures start to become visible. Nevertheless, they must still be compared in light of what is already known. They should make some kind of sense to the general population. 'Special revelation' is for an individual, and should not be shared, because the perspective is often not digestible by most people. They just won't can't get it; and it can cause some serious divisiveness in the Body of Christ.

Much of what you post is in that category of 'different perspectives'. Indeed, there have been a number of new people here with unconventional approaches to the understanding of the Word of God. Even Scotty woke a lot of people up with the Rev 12:1 interpretation on 9/23 using stellarium. I try to see whether such unusual observations/hypotheses can be reconciled with orthodox interpretations. Sometimes they can't. Sometimes the orthodoxy needs to be re-evaluated. Sometimes the new perspective is flawed and should be corrected. I have been able to reconcile some of what you have posted as hypotheses here. Some I cannot reconcile. Most of the time, it looks like you're just using different words, but the interpretation or intent is the same or similar.

Thank you for pointing out these passages. I would like to dialogue a bit on them if you do not mind.

Rev 17:14 - This passage does not directly exclude the possibility that the followers of Christ will be active in the battle at Megiddo; notwithstanding that the sword that proceeds from the mouth of our Lord is explicitly shown to be that which slays his enemies. I think the orthodox view is that Christ is still doing all the work in this battle, we just follow Him; which makes for a nice parallel to the general concept salvation and of following Christ - He did it all. We did nothing. Thus, I find that your perspective on the 144,000 waging war does seem to play around in the gray area some (where scripture is not crystal clear). This is not a no-no, afaik.

Rev 14:1 - It occurred to me this morning that this passage does not specify whether it occurs before the battle at Megiddo, or after! Heretofore, I have generally considered this to be the moment the Lord touches down on Mount Zion. But wait!  What if it is a representation of His rule/reign well after the battle? Kinda where he holds court between the end of the battle and the beginning of the millennium? If the former, your perspective on the 144,000 makes more sense. If the latter, both orthodoxy and your perspective may be off. It's difficult to tell.

Rev 19:19 - Does this passage not also include those who were saved prior to the tribulation, and those saved during the tribulation? I can see how it would not preclude the 144,000 from being present; but as I noted before: from what I can see, the 'job description' of the 144,000 is not clearly stated in scripture. So them being warriors is not precluded, imho.

In essentials: Unity. In non-essentials: Liberty; and in all things: Charity. General understandings and explanations of prophecy are usually, imho, not essentials. But that does not mean we should not discuss and debate vigorously.

Thanks for reading.

That is big news. Truly a sign of the times.