|
|
Post by butterfly5777 on Jan 17, 2018 1:50:05 GMT -6
Hi All,
I have a provocative question to ask you... and I'm interested in your thoughts.
Is it possible that the 7 year countdown has begun and we do not realize it???
I ask this for several reasons:
1.) Jesus clearly said "Unless those days were shortened, no man would survive... but those days will be shortened." In order to fulfill the High Holy Days on the back end of the 7 years, He must shorten them on the front end.
2.) To move much beyond the Spring of 2018 is to make most of the signs we've seen null & void. Are we simply in the time of His "tarrying" and is this part of the 7 years???
3.) None of the numbers match after this. The only other possibility is 2020 when the Jews would have perfect vision. But this seems to apply to a mid trib scenario.
4.) If it's not this year - the second half of the total solar eclipse over the USA in 2024 makes no sense whatsoever prophetically - except that the USA is in big trouble with God - and something really bad is coming!
5.) John did not get called up to Heaven - to The Door - until chapter 4:1.
6.) The Door also coincides with the Song of Solomon (lattice) and the Wedding of Cana (Bride and Groom shut away for 7 days) - which took place in the Spring. Jesus also said, "when you see all these things happening, know that summer is nigh, even at The Door."
7.) This year Passover and Easter fall on the same weekend - Passover March 30/31 and Easter April 1. How odd would it be if we were out of here on the midnight hour of the 1st with all others waking up on April Fools Day having been left behind. The Bible clearly stipulates between the Righteous and the Fools.
8.) Easter is actually the Feast of First Fruits. Jesus is the First Fruit of the Dead. Is there a possibility that the graves will burst open on Resurrection Day, just like Jesus' grave was empty and the Dead will rise this day?
9.) 40 Days later - the number of days Jesus walked the earth - brings you to May 14th, the 70th year anniversary of Israel becoming a nation - the same day Jesus ascended. The angels said to the men of Galilee, "Why are you standing here looking into the sky? This Jesus you saw leave will return in the very same way you saw Him go." Many believe the Feast of Firstfruits (Christ's 1st ascension into Heaven/reason He told Mary not to grab ahold of Him) is for the graves to burst open and 2nd ascension is for "those who are alive and remain..." Otherwise, the word "remain" would not have been used. So could there be a gap???
10.) Ten days after Ascension Day/70 Year Anniversary is Pentecost - this gives 10 days for Sardis to be imprisoned, two Witnesses to come at Pentecost or appear (if already here) and Tribulation against Wheat to begin. This also puts the ministry of the 2 witnesses in line with the Pentecost (2 Candlesticks) and Hanukkah (2 Olive Trees harvested) holidays making those Scriptures line up on the calendar and their ministry make sense according to Rev 11.
11.) This keeps all of the signs we've already seen in perfect place.
I'm curious to hear your responses. Please let me know what you think. Thanks!
God bless! Maranatha!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Jan 17, 2018 8:09:24 GMT -6
Are you familiar with Daniel Matson and watchfortheday.org? He's got some interesting theories addressing some of your questions. Most of the time I have to read his stuff several times because he packs a lot in there. One possibility is that the 7 years are not divided neatly in two halves. Does the Bible say anywhere the length of the first half? It's assumed to be 1260 days - the length of the ministry of the two witnesses. But what if they overlap with the second half? watchfortheday.org/tubshevat2018.html |
|
|
|
Post by kjs on Jan 18, 2018 10:19:57 GMT -6
We need to determine by what you mean as the seven year count down....
For example we have Daniel's last week (7 years) and it gives a definite starting point (a leader confirms a covenant with Israel) ...
Since nothing like a confirmation has been made recently with Israel -- it is safe to assume that is still a future event....
(so that leaves the start of Daniel's final week still pending)
Most feel that Daniel's final week (final 7 years) and the Seven years spoke in Revelation are the same seven years...
While it is plausible they could be -- there is no text stating they are the same...
For example in Revelation there are several "day counts" -- which taken together -- exceed the seven year period.....
Now most feel these extra days -- show "overlap" within the seven year period -- while others feel there is no overlap and the Revelation time period is greater than 7 years....
So which seven are u discussing......
|
|
|
|
Post by witness1 on Jan 18, 2018 11:11:23 GMT -6
This was posted on another thread, but it is applicable here so I'm sharing. The idea is that the "He" who confirms a covenant with Israel is: God. And this is not a new covenant but rather one that God made with Israel a long time ago, but now He is "strengthening or renewing the covenant"... He is turning His attention back to Israel after the church age. If this is the true meaning of Daniel 9:27, it is possible that God has already renewed that covenant and the 70th week has already begun. If this is true, it would mean that the events of Revelation don't line up exactly with Daniel and that the seals have not been opened yet since we don't see the 2 Witnesses. I don't know that I believe this is the case... just throwing it out there. watchfortheday.org/whoishe.html |
|
|
|
Post by kjs on Jan 18, 2018 13:27:38 GMT -6
This was posted on another thread, but it is applicable here so I'm sharing. The idea is that the "He" who confirms a covenant with Israel is: God. And this is not a new covenant but rather one that God made with Israel a long time ago, but now He is "strengthening or renewing the covenant"... He is turning His attention back to Israel after the church age. If this is the true meaning of Daniel 9:27, it is possible that God has already renewed that covenant and the 70th week has already begun. If this is true, it would mean that the events of Revelation don't line up exactly with Daniel and that the seals have not been opened yet since we don't see the 2 Witnesses. I don't know that I believe this is the case... just throwing it out there. watchfortheday.org/whoishe.htmlYes, there a a few who argue about who the "HE" is in 27 ..... However, when one reads the entire verse .... the "HE" is going to be "destroyed" 27 And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week,[g] and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.” In other words -- the "HE" in the first part of the sentence is same one who receives the desolation (a state of complete emptiness or destruction.) in the last part...... Since God cannot be destroyed -- I would say that makes a pretty good case that the first "HE" is not God. |
|
|
|
Post by witness1 on Jan 18, 2018 14:04:17 GMT -6
I guess I need to look at some commentaries on the original language, but “the desolator” sounds to me like the one who makes things desolate AKA the abomination of desolation. It sounds like he makes things desolate until the appointed end (“decreed time”) of his time to make things desolate.
|
|
|
|
Post by kjs on Jan 18, 2018 15:56:04 GMT -6
I guess I need to look at some commentaries on the original language, but “the desolator” sounds to me like the one who makes things desolate AKA the abomination of desolation. It sounds like he makes things desolate until the appointed end (“decreed time”) of his time to make things desolate. I am no expert, but when the phrase says .... "until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.” The one being "poured out upon" is the one who brought it about or the phrase "come one who makes desolate...." it appears to be the same one who brought about the "stop" of the sacrifices..... |
|
|
|
Post by witness1 on Jan 18, 2018 18:56:08 GMT -6
Ah yes. Now I see where I've gone wrong and wasn't communicating clearly. I've been reading the second half of that verse differently. Let me tell you what I've been thinking and see what you think. I've been thinking about this verse for a long time... since back when I thought the church would be given the power to be the 2 witnesses.  I really struggled with this verse because nowhere does it talk about the covenant being a peace treaty. I was trying to figure out if there was a different way to read this verse beyond what has always been taught. It seems like SK was saying the same thing, that this is not a peace treaty, but he then approached it from a theology of covenantalism (my perspective of his theology anyway). Is there a way dispensationalism fits here that is different from the commonly held belief that the antichrist will stop sacrifices in the temple? It seems to me that there are so many end time theories, and they can't all be right. One verse read a certain way affects many other verses and creates an entire theology. But that verse read a different way shows a very different scenario. But how do we know which way is correct? So I thought: what if we start at Revelation 12? It seems like that is where God is telling us to start. It seems like He may have given us the picture on the front of the puzzle box and now we have to figure out how all the pieces fit together to create this picture. What was the sign for? Perhaps it was for a day count or something like that, but perhaps it was also to tell us where to begin unraveling this knot of prophecy. Start at Revelation 12 and go from there. If we do this, the picture I see is not one of peace but one of war from the beginning. I guess I've never thrown this idea out there before because it goes against what dispensationalists have always thought, but I'm throwing it out now for feedback. I've been viewing Revelation 12 as a general outline of the tribulation: 1) The dragon is thrown down to earth 2) The dragon pursues Israel 3) Israel flees to the wilderness 4) The earth comes to the aid of the woman, much like the Red Sea came to her aid last time she fled from those pursuing her- this time perhaps an earthquake. Israel then stays in the wilderness being nourished by God for 3.5 years 5) The dragon gets mad and goes to make war with the saints Nowhere here do I see anything about peace, and Daniel 9:27 does not really suggest the covenant is one of peace. Is there another way to view this verse? At the time I was thinking about this last fall, I was teaching 1 Peter to a group of college students, and when I read "sacrifice and offering," I thought of the church. I think of how we are supposed to be daily, living, sacrifices. I thought, "Could we have read this verse wrong all this time? What if putting an end to sacrifice and offering means putting an end to Christians and their living sacrifices?" I thought it could be the abomination making war on the saints. But that didn't really fit because it seems like the end to sacrifice and offering comes in a single moment of time. Once I read the idea that the "He" could be God confirming the covenant, I read the second half of that verse differently as well, like you say. That the "He" is the same one who puts an end to sacrifice and offering. This would mean that God is the one who puts an end to sacrifice and offering. So... here's my thought: Could the rapture put an end to sacrifice and offering for 3.5 years? Could God take Christians from earth, stopping the martyrdom being experienced across the world? Putting an end to those of us who are daily living for others? In a single moment of time, the sacrifice and offering could end with the rapture. Christians will be gone, and the dragon will turn his attention to Israel. This sacrifice and offering would then resume at the 3.5 year mark when the dragon turns to make war with the saints. The tribulation saints (may we keep them in our prayers) would then take up the banner of sacrifice and offering that so many around the world are carrying now. I don't see peace... I see war. It makes sense to me that God could confirm the covenant He made with Israel long ago. What do you think about the idea that He could be the one to put an end to sacrifice and offering through the rapture? I could be way off... let me know! |
|
|
|
Post by butterfly5777 on Jan 18, 2018 20:34:59 GMT -6
Are you familiar with Daniel Matson and watchfortheday.org? He's got some interesting theories addressing some of your questions. Most of the time I have to read his stuff several times because he packs a lot in there. One possibility is that the 7 years are not divided neatly in two halves. Does the Bible say anywhere the length of the first half? It's assumed to be 1260 days - the length of the ministry of the two witnesses. But what if they overlap with the second half? watchfortheday.org/tubshevat2018.htmlHi Natalie, Thanks for your response. Yes, I'm familiar with Daniel Matson's work. I've followed it for many years. I'll check out his site again to see what he says about this. Thanks for the tip. As for your statement about the possibility that the 7 years are not divided neatly into 2 halves, I'm not sure how this can be the case for the following reasons: 1.) When Jacob worked 7 additional years for Rachel, these years were consecutive. If God is using this as a parallel, it seems it would match exactly - and the final 7 year "Time of Jacob's Trouble" would also be 7 consecutive years. 2.) It is customary for the Jewish wedding ceremony to include a 7 day period of time whereby the Bridegroom and Bride are "hidden away". If these 7 days parallel the Wedding Feast of the Lamb - a day for a year of Jacob's Trouble - I don't see how they can be broken up. 3.) As for the length of the first half - Rev 11 indicates 1260 days cover the 1st & 2nd woe (see Rev 11:14), with the 2nd woe ending just after the witnesses ascend to Heaven and a huge earthquake occurs killing 7000 and 1/10th of the City falling. From that point forward the remainder of the 1290 covers the 3rd woe. The midpoint of the Trib is the AC taking a headwound - which has to happen at Passover - so he can lie in state for 3 days and then come back to life through artificial intelligence and possession by Satan. If the first half extends beyond the 1260 days their deaths interfere with the death of the AC. So, this doesn't make sense either. To me, it seems the AC makes the pronouncement that he is going to set himself up in the Temple during the Fall Holy Days during the final year of the witness' testimony. They step up their warnings to the world. Jews realize he is not who they think he is. The AC goes after the witnesses and kills them in Dec around Hanukkah. Someone then begins to plot to kill the AC. He is later killed by the sword at Passover the following year. Then all hell breaks loose on earth from that point forward with Satan indwelling the AC the 144,000 fulfilling their part of this drama for the final 1290. |
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Jan 18, 2018 20:43:19 GMT -6
I think you misunderstood what I wrote...I agree that it is 7 continual years, but maybe it's not neatly 1260 + 1260. What if the first part was shorter and the second longer? What if the first half were say 1230 and the second 1290? I tend to think that it will be equal, but was adding something else to consider.
As for your point 3, I will have to go look at Revelation again. Your thoughts there make sense and are similar to thoughts I have on how it is going to go.
|
|
|
|
Post by butterfly5777 on Jan 18, 2018 20:46:33 GMT -6
We need to determine by what you mean as the seven year count down.... For example we have Daniel's last week (7 years) and it gives a definite starting point (a leader confirms a covenant with Israel) ... Since nothing like a confirmation has been made recently with Israel -- it is safe to assume that is still a future event.... (so that leaves the start of Daniel's final week still pending) Most feel that Daniel's final week (final 7 years) and the Seven years spoke in Revelation are the same seven years... While it is plausible they could be -- there is no text stating they are the same... For example in Revelation there are several "day counts" -- which taken together -- exceed the seven year period..... Now most feel these extra days -- show "overlap" within the seven year period -- while others feel there is no overlap and the Revelation time period is greater than 7 years.... So which seven are u discussing...... Hi kjs, Thanks for your response. When you ask "which seven are u discussing" can you be more specific? I'm confused. My understanding is that there is one 7 year period of time for "Jacob's Trouble" that comprises the Great Tribulation (first 3.5 years/sometimes referred to as the tribulation) and God's Wrath (last 3.5 years) separated by the death/"resurrection" of the AC. I know there are other number counts but I'm not sure where these fit in to the overall equation. Again, please clarify your comments. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by butterfly5777 on Jan 18, 2018 21:23:14 GMT -6
I think you misunderstood what I wrote...I agree that it is 7 continual years, but maybe it's not neatly 1260 + 1260. What if the first part was shorter and the second longer? What if the first half were say 1230 and the second 1290? I tend to think that it will be equal, but was adding something else to consider. As for your point 3, I will have to go look at Revelation again. Your thoughts there make sense and are similar to thoughts I have on how it is going to go. Your first point is a possibility, but I'm not sure how that makes events line up properly. I will have to research that a little further. As for your second point, Rev 11:3 clearly says the ministry of the 2 witnesses is "a thousand two hundred and threescore days" or 1260. However, in reviewing the ministry of the 2 witnesses again, something jumped out at me that I think we all need to pay close attention to... Rev 11:1 states "And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, 'Rise and measure the temple of God, and the alter, and them that worship there." This makes it clear that BEFORE the witnesses begin their ministry the THIRD TEMPLE IS ALREADY REBUILT. So, if the ministry of the witnesses is the umbrella over the first 2 Woes (Rev 11:14) they have to have a TEMPLE to minister from. This makes me think the following: 1.) If we are in the current timeframe when all of this is coming to pass and we are standing on the edge of the 7 years unfolding - President Trump may not only be the president to move the embassy to Jerusalem, but also the one to permit the Jews to build their 3rd Temple! The Temple Institute has been talking about the fact that this will only take them 3 months. Everything is ready to go! Since Trump made the declaration that the Embassy would be moved back there, the Jews have been saying this is simply the "first step" and they are expecting to be given permission to rebuild. Could this happen this winter, so it's ready to go by their 70th birthday? This date is Iyar 5 on the Jewish calendar, or April 20th on ours. Big celebrations are planned in Israel on this date. The rest of the world will be looking to May 14th. Mike Pence is going to be in Israel this weekend - Jan 20th. 3 months from this date is April 20th exactly. Coincidence??? 2.) If Trump is not the President to do this, then the Restrainer would have to be removed SOON to allow for time for the AC to broker the Covenant with Many, build the Temple, and have the two witnesses show up at the newly built Temple by Pentecost (May 24th) in fulfillment of their titles "Two Candlesticks". 3.) Some strongly believe we are still in the Jubilee Year until Nisan 1 in March on the spiritual calendar. If this is the case, doesn't it stand to reason the Jews would also get their Temple back as part of the Jubilee promise that "all things return to their rightful owner"? I could be wrong on this, but if we have the year right, and all of the signs we've seen leading up to 2017, and now clearly pointing to 2018, are accurate - and we're not misunderstanding them - I think the next couple months are going to be VERY IMPORTANT WATCH TIMES.Could this be possible??? |
|
|
|
Post by butterfly5777 on Jan 18, 2018 21:25:10 GMT -6
This was posted on another thread, but it is applicable here so I'm sharing. The idea is that the "He" who confirms a covenant with Israel is: God. And this is not a new covenant but rather one that God made with Israel a long time ago, but now He is "strengthening or renewing the covenant"... He is turning His attention back to Israel after the church age. If this is the true meaning of Daniel 9:27, it is possible that God has already renewed that covenant and the 70th week has already begun. If this is true, it would mean that the events of Revelation don't line up exactly with Daniel and that the seals have not been opened yet since we don't see the 2 Witnesses. I don't know that I believe this is the case... just throwing it out there. watchfortheday.org/whoishe.htmlYes, there a a few who argue about who the "HE" is in 27 ..... However, when one reads the entire verse .... the "HE" is going to be "destroyed" 27 And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week,[g] and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.” In other words -- the "HE" in the first part of the sentence is same one who receives the desolation (a state of complete emptiness or destruction.) in the last part...... Since God cannot be destroyed -- I would say that makes a pretty good case that the first "HE" is not God. I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH KJS... THE "HE" BEING SPOKEN OF IS THE AC. |
|
|
|
Post by butterfly5777 on Jan 18, 2018 21:35:16 GMT -6
Ah yes. Now I see where I've gone wrong and wasn't communicating clearly. I've been reading the second half of that verse differently. Let me tell you what I've been thinking and see what you think. I've been thinking about this verse for a long time... since back when I thought the church would be given the power to be the 2 witnesses. I really struggled with this verse because nowhere does it talk about the covenant being a peace treaty. I was trying to figure out if there was a different way to read this verse beyond what has always been taught. It seems like SK was saying the same thing, that this is not a peace treaty, but he then approached it from a theology of covenantalism (my perspective of his theology anyway). Is there a way dispensationalism fits here that is different from the commonly held belief that the antichrist will stop sacrifices in the temple? It seems to me that there are so many end time theories, and they can't all be right. One verse read a certain way affects many other verses and creates an entire theology. But that verse read a different way shows a very different scenario. But how do we know which way is correct? So I thought: what if we start at Revelation 12? It seems like that is where God is telling us to start. It seems like He may have given us the picture on the front of the puzzle box and now we have to figure out how all the pieces fit together to create this picture. What was the sign for? Perhaps it was for a day count or something like that, but perhaps it was also to tell us where to begin unraveling this knot of prophecy. Start at Revelation 12 and go from there. If we do this, the picture I see is not one of peace but one of war from the beginning. I guess I've never thrown this idea out there before because it goes against what dispensationalists have always thought, but I'm throwing it out now for feedback. I've been viewing Revelation 12 as a general outline of the tribulation: 1) The dragon is thrown down to earth 2) The dragon pursues Israel 3) Israel flees to the wilderness 4) The earth comes to the aid of the woman, much like the Red Sea came to her aid last time she fled from those pursuing her- this time perhaps an earthquake. Israel then stays in the wilderness being nourished by God for 3.5 years 5) The dragon gets mad and goes to make war with the saints Nowhere here do I see anything about peace, and Daniel 9:27 does not really suggest the covenant is one of peace. Is there another way to view this verse? At the time I was thinking about this last fall, I was teaching 1 Peter to a group of college students, and when I read "sacrifice and offering," I thought of the church. I think of how we are supposed to be daily, living, sacrifices. I thought, "Could we have read this verse wrong all this time? What if putting an end to sacrifice and offering means putting an end to Christians and their living sacrifices?" I thought it could be the abomination making war on the saints. But that didn't really fit because it seems like the end to sacrifice and offering comes in a single moment of time. Once I read the idea that the "He" could be God confirming the covenant, I read the second half of that verse differently as well, like you say. That the "He" is the same one who puts an end to sacrifice and offering. This would mean that God is the one who puts an end to sacrifice and offering. So... here's my thought: Could the rapture put an end to sacrifice and offering for 3.5 years? Could God take Christians from earth, stopping the martyrdom being experienced across the world? Putting an end to those of us who are daily living for others? In a single moment of time, the sacrifice and offering could end with the rapture. Christians will be gone, and the dragon will turn his attention to Israel. This sacrifice and offering would then resume at the 3.5 year mark when the dragon turns to make war with the saints. The tribulation saints (may we keep them in our prayers) would then take up the banner of sacrifice and offering that so many around the world are carrying now. I don't see peace... I see war. It makes sense to me that God could confirm the covenant He made with Israel long ago. What do you think about the idea that He could be the one to put an end to sacrifice and offering through the rapture? I could be way off... let me know! Your response seems to indicate a mid trib rapture, but there are too many Scriptures that refute this. Specifically the fact that the Lord said the Church of Philadelphia would be spared the tribulation. Plus, you have to take into account the various harvest seasons - barley (rapture of Born Again Christians), wheat (tribulum severing head of wheat), and grapes (Winepress of God's wrath). So, this, too, indicates there are different stages for different groups. And there are many others. So, I would have to disagree with what you've said here. Also, how can we start in REV 12??? This bypasses the first 2 woes altogether. Where do you put these events on the calendar then?? |
|
|
|
Post by barbiosheepgirl on Jan 18, 2018 21:38:53 GMT -6
First, let me put this verse out from the NASV:
27“And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”
Here is the YLT version (Young's literal translation):
27And he hath strengthened a covenant with many — one week, and [in] the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease, and by the wing of abominations he is making desolate, even till the consummation, and that which is determined is poured on the desolate one.’
Is the "sacrifice and present" the abomination that will be destroyed?
I am in biblehub for my info here, but the word "wing" is not used, but rather "overspreading" and so is not some part of a the temple, like a west wing or something...
(I could read it "he is making desolate the ovespreading of the detested things.")
I also always have to remind myself what the word abomination is. It can mean this: detested thing
The hebrew word used for desolation in this text is used in 2 other places in Daniel only, but the Hub says it is kind of unclear its actual meaning, but ascribe it to a description of land, sometimes equating it to "deserted"..
so let me say it how I am hearing it:
and in the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease (be no longer) and the overspreading of the detested thing (these sacrifices?) he is making deserted (gone?) even til complete destruction , that which is decreed (go back to the beginning of the decree, who is it for?) , is poured on the abomination (the detested thing).
YLT of the beginning of this warning or decree by Daniel:
24‘Seventy weeks are determined for thy people, and for thy holy city, to shut up the transgression, and to seal up sins, and to cover iniquity, and to bring in righteousness age-during, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the holy of holies.
So I will resay it:
and in the midst of the week he causeth sacrifice and present to cease (be no longer) and the overspreading of the detested thing (these sacrifices?) he is making deserted (gone?) even til complete destruction , is poured on the abomination (the detested thing), for thy people.
And here is that literal translation that we have at the beginning concerning the infamous "treaty, or agreement", it is stated from literal translation as "strengthened a covenant with many" So it is an existing covenant, not something new...
|
|
I really struggled with this verse because nowhere does it talk about the covenant being a peace treaty. I was trying to figure out if there was a different way to read this verse beyond what has always been taught. It seems like SK was saying the same thing, that this is not a peace treaty, but he then approached it from a theology of covenantalism (my perspective of his theology anyway). Is there a way dispensationalism fits here that is different from the commonly held belief that the antichrist will stop sacrifices in the temple? 