neural
Truth Seeker
Posts: 113
|
Post by neural on Apr 15, 2018 11:36:43 GMT -6
I've been looking for some answers regarding two things that have often been used in relation to end times prophecy, but I keep coming up empty handed. I find it likely because I do not know the proper search terms.
In Genesis 6:3, God says (paraphrased) "My Spirit will not strive with man forever, for he is also flesh, his days shall be one hundred and twenty years".
This is taken by some to mean that the rule of man (the time when people will be ruled by people (kings, etc.)) will be a total of 120 Jubilee yeas (120 * 50 = 6000), and often is used to support the 1000 years per day theory, that parallels the 6 days of creation and 1 day of rest.
I don't have an argument against that, in fact I'm inclined to believe that as a theory it makes sense, but I am unable to find scriptural reference as to where people connect Genesis 6:3 with 120 Jubilees, and not just the 120 years before Noah and his family boarded the ark.
Also, there are people who use, as support for their statements, a sort of duality with prophecy. One example is Daniel 9:25-27. It states Seven 'Sevens' and Sixty-two 'Sevens' until Jesus is crucified, and that the 'Sevens' are markers for the passage of years.. We have seen that this prophecy was fulfilled exactly. However, there are theories which indicate there is a duality with this prophecy. That not only was it fulfilled before Jesus was here as a man, but also *after*. Specifically that in 1535, a decree to rebuild Jerusalem was given, and that Sixty-two 'Sevens' of years later, in 1969, the Jewish Quarter Development Company was supposedly commissioned to rebuild Jerusalem (I have researched this one, but it seems a little weak, and I try not to stretch prophecy to fit certain dates). Seven 'Sevens' after 1969, is 2018, so overall, the use of duality on prophecy fulfillment points towards something big this year.
Again, no argument really against that, but I'm having a difficult time finding where we are told in scripture that some prophecies have dual fulfillment (before Christ, and during the age of Grace).
I am unsure still about linking to external sites, so if the mods permit, I can link to the page specifically about Daniel 9 for anyone that wants more information there.
|
|
|
|
Post by davewatchman on Apr 15, 2018 13:41:10 GMT -6
I've been looking for some answers regarding two things that have often been used in relation to end times prophecy, but I keep coming up empty handed. I find it likely because I do not know the proper search terms. In Genesis 6:3, God says (paraphrased) "My Spirit will not strive with man forever, for he is also flesh, his days shall be one hundred and twenty years". This is taken by some to mean that the rule of man (the time when people will be ruled by people (kings, etc.)) will be a total of 120 Jubilee yeas (120 * 50 = 6000), and often is used to support the 1000 years per day theory, that parallels the 6 days of creation and 1 day of rest. I don't have an argument against that, in fact I'm inclined to believe that as a theory it makes sense, but I am unable to find scriptural reference as to where people connect Genesis 6:3 with 120 Jubilees, and not just the 120 years before Noah and his family boarded the ark. Also, there are people who use, as support for their statements, a sort of duality with prophecy. One example is Daniel 9:25-27. It states Seven 'Sevens' and Sixty-two 'Sevens' until Jesus is crucified, and that the 'Sevens' are markers for the passage of years.. We have seen that this prophecy was fulfilled exactly. However, there are theories which indicate there is a duality with this prophecy. That not only was it fulfilled before Jesus was here as a man, but also *after*. Specifically that in 1535, a decree to rebuild Jerusalem was given, and that Sixty-two 'Sevens' of years later, in 1969, the Jewish Quarter Development Company was supposedly commissioned to rebuild Jerusalem (I have researched this one, but it seems a little weak, and I try not to stretch prophecy to fit certain dates). Seven 'Sevens' after 1969, is 2018, so overall, the use of duality on prophecy fulfillment points towards something big this year. Again, no argument really against that, but I'm having a difficult time finding where we are told in scripture that some prophecies have dual fulfillment (before Christ, and during the age of Grace). I am unsure still about linking to external sites, so if the mods permit, I can link to the page specifically about Daniel 9 for anyone that wants more information there. Hi neural I don't know what the, "his days shall be one hundred and twenty years", means exactly. When i didn't think i could figure it out in any sort of a way that could give me any details, i skipped it. But like the millennial day theory, i think there's something going on with it. It's just not going to be able to give me any accuracy for the here and now. It's never going to point me to 1969 or 2018 like the other things will. I bet these are reserved to glorify God when He shows us in person. But about the dual fulfillment, that i think is tricky. I don't think that there is any dual fulfillment. There is going to only be one Abomination of desolation, one Gog-Magog and Jerusalem surrounded by armies is not the abomination of desolation. If i say what i think Daniel 9 is, most of the people are going to get mad. I don't think too many will understand. It's radical, even for me. And very hard to explain. Daniel 9 is not exactly a dual prophecy. It's an is what it is prophecy. It's unique. Daniel 9 had to written in such a way as to include two comings of Messiah embedded within the text. A primary coming that would be for sure, and a secondary coming that would be included if necessary. The Jews might have accepted their Messiah in the first century. That's why John the baptist was running around saying the Kingdom of God was at hand. Because there might not have been a second coming. The Old Time Jews had to be given a true chance to redeem the 70 weeks. If they did, the Kingdom of God would have began right then and there. We would have already burnt up the wooden weapons by now. The 1st century Jews were given 70 weeks to, among other things, seal both the vision and the prophet. During the Babylonian exile God had three prophets in operation at the same time: Daniel, Ezekiel and Jeremiah. But these three prophets were being given two different end time schematics. Though technically Daniel is an OT book, it really is a sealed relative to Revelation's story and doesn't mix well with the OT end time scenario. With the exception of Daniel, is there any OT mention of a second coming? The original plan was for the Jews to accept their Messiah, then Jesus would have began the Kingdom of God on earth right away because it really was "at hand" at that time. John the Baptist would not have died the way that he did, "lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction". Jesus would have sent disciples out from Jerusalem to invite anyone who wanted to be saved to come and live there in the 1st century. Jerusalem would have eventually grown to such a huge population that it's walls could no longer contain it. Then, after some time, Lucifer in the guise of Gog Magog would attempt to attack the unwalled Holy City but Jesus would destroy him and his army where they stood and we would spend the next seven years burying them and burning their wooden weapons. And the wolf would lay down with the lamb and we could watch an infant stick his hand into a viper's den while we built Ezekiel's Temple. But now instead, Paul gets knocked off his horse, the NT gets written, Daniel gets unsealed for the final generation, we get an end time Abomination of desolation standing in an all new holy place, an end time Babylon, Antichrist, mark of the beast, two witnesses of 144,000, Jesus makes His second visitation and we have a brand New Jerusalem with an end time variation on Gog Magog. Does this describe how the crucifixion occurred?: Him Whom They Have PiercedOr is this describing the original method of how Jesus would have been sacrificed if humanity had not turned Him over to the enemy? I don't remember too many of those tribes crying out of control too hard. Just mostly his family and close friends. It's looking to me like everything that has taken place in the world since 1535 has been so that Israel would become a nation again in 1948. The Ottoman empire, WW1, WW2, 1948 and all the trees. But the one and the only reason for all this to happen was so that Israel could capture Jerusalem and then in 1969 create a reason for the Knesset to make an official decree to "restore and build Jerusalem". They are just there to hold up the a sign now, the sign that reads the end is here. This was written 2600 years ago and at that time there may not have been a second coming required. The Jews might have cooperated and accepted their Messiah in the first century. Jesus would have come one time only and never ascended back to heaven, making a second coming unnecessary. Daniel 9 had to be written in such a way to include both the primary visitation of Jesus AND the possibility of a secondary visitation in a compact and simultaneous fashion. I think we're in a different plan right now. What I'm trying to explain here is difficult, I don't want this to sound as if I'm blaming the Jews because I'm not. But not everything in the OT eschatology reads to me like it had a guarantee that it would get done no matter what. The Ezekiel temple is an example of something that might be fulfilled by not even being built. What if they didn't put away their whoring or the dead bodies of their kings. Would He still dwell in their midst forever? Even after they crucified Him? How was He supposed to build Ezekiel's temple if they sent Him back to Heaven? What if they weren't ashamed of their iniquities and what they did. Would they still get the temple plan no matter what? Can you hear a stipulation or an ultimatum in the Script? Think about it. Watch this 57 second video. Check out the guy sleeping in the back. "Now let them put away their whoring and the dead bodies of their kings far from me,
and I will dwell in their midst forever.Prayers At The Tomb Of King David In Jerusalem.
|
|
neural
Truth Seeker
Posts: 113
|
Post by neural on Apr 15, 2018 14:47:27 GMT -6
I believe I understand what you are saying there.
It's difficult to really see these things sometimes because on one hand, we have freedom of choice, and on the other, God has His will for how this entire thing we know as life will play out.
For example, was it ever even possible that the Jews would have accepted Jesus as their messiah, or was the rejection part of the overall plan? (I have no clue on that one, just using it as an example).
I appreciate the insight. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by davewatchman on Apr 15, 2018 15:15:59 GMT -6
For example, was it ever even possible that the Jews would have accepted Jesus as their messiah, or was the rejection part of the overall plan? (I have no clue on that one, just using it as an example). I appreciate the insight. Thank you. It must have been a part of the overall plan. And God is God. He has to know the end from the beginning. But the Jews still had to be given the honest chance, a true chance. Otherwise it would be fake. John the Baptist was trying as hard as he could. Do you think he knew what was going on? When he was in jail waiting to be beheaded. And he sent his guys out to ask Jesus, are you the one we're waiting for?, or shall we wait for another. I'm sure it was over when John was killed. Remember when Jesus was talking about John the Baptist and said "and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. If you are willing to accept it? Is that not because if they were willing to accept it, it means we get the curse. Because John failed to turn the hearts of the sons to the fathers. I don't think they understood at that time that John was their indicator of hope, a walking litmus test of their survival. If he failed, the land would be doomed, stricken with a decree of "utter destruction". That's why, if you're willing to accept it. |
|
|
|
Post by boraddict on Apr 15, 2018 15:24:32 GMT -6
Davewatchman, the guy sleeping in the back was busted. That was funny.
Neural, I am with Dave on the 120 year question. You said:
"In Genesis 6:3, God says (paraphrased) "My Spirit will not strive with man forever, for he is also flesh, his days shall be one hundred and twenty years".
This is taken by some to mean that the rule of man (the time when people will be ruled by people (kings, etc.)) will be a total of 120 Jubilee yeas (120 * 50 = 6000), and often is used to support the 1000 years per day theory, that parallels the 6 days of creation and 1 day of rest.
I don't have an argument against that, in fact I'm inclined to believe that as a theory it makes sense, but I am unable to find scriptural reference as to where people connect Genesis 6:3 with 120 Jubilees, and not just the 120 years before Noah and his family boarded the ark."
My answer is as follows: Let's say that Lamech was 182 years old when Noah was born (Gen. 5:28). And Noah lived 500 years and his three sons were born (Gen. 5:32). This means that Noah's sons were born after Lamech was 682 years old. It also means that since Lamech lived to be 777 years old and then died (Gen. 5:31), that he lived with his grand sons for 95 years. That is, Noah was 595 years old when his father Lamech died. This and the forgoing information of Chapter 5 is background information and is parenthetical. That is, the story of Chapter 4 continues in Chapter 6; however, we took a detour in Chapter 5 for some needed information to the story. Now in Chapter 6 we continue with the story that was taking place in Chapter 4.
So we went from Adam to Noah in Chapter 5 providing a genealogy. But not only that, we were told the incredible length of their lives upon the earth. And the story continues: "And it came to pass" meaning something like, after "...Enos, then began men to call upon the name of the Lord" (Gen. 4:26). "And it came to pass (Gen. 6:1), when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that were fair and they took to them wives of all which they choose."
Notice there is a difference in the type of men from Chapter 5 to Chapter 6. The Chapter 5 men were saints of God, whereas the Chapter 6 men are simply taking daughters of men as they choose. They are stealing them and so forth. The men
have become wicked. Thus comes Noah's flood. That is, the Lord withdrew his spirit from the earth and all his holy men of Chapter five except Noah and his sons. The Lord stated that he was going to do this: "And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man for that he also is flesh (Gen 6:3)." That is, man became exclusively carnally minded and took the women for his own purposes as stated in Gen. 6:2.
Consequently, the long lives of mankind was shortened to a life expectancy of 120 years as the Lord states: "yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years" (Gen. 6:3). That is, even though I God am going to destroy the wicked men, I will allowed mankind to continue upon the earth but only to a life expectancy of 120 years.
Gen. 6:4 continues that there were giants in the land and this is again is referring back to the time before the flood.
I do not know that there is a secondary application to the 120 years; however, the primary application is that of a comparison to the long lives of the people before the flood.
Additionally, since Noah lived 950 years (Gen. 9:29), and 350 of those were after the flood (Gen. 9:28), then the flood occurred when Noah was 600 years old, 5 years after his father Lamech died.
|
|
neural
Truth Seeker
Posts: 113
|
Post by neural on Apr 15, 2018 17:19:30 GMT -6
boraddict: I think we're on the same page there. When I first started really studying what the Bible says vs. what people were beginning to claim around July of last year, this is where I came across the issue of what exactly "120" meant. I need to find the source of the statement, but I believe there was more than one video or page claiming that the 120 Jubilee years was valid. What caught my attention was that none of them supplied a scriptural source for this belief. The closest I came to making any headway on it was a statement that the 120 Jubilees is taught among Judaism, but it ended there. Perhaps it is in the book of Jasher or one of the other books that those of the Jewish faith use, but from what I can tell it is certainly not in our Scriptures.
|
|
