|
|
Post by MissusMack08 on Aug 16, 2017 15:24:39 GMT -6
Hi guys again. I have a little time now to expound on the Fiery Dragon video done by Daniel Valles at the Informed Christians YouTube channel (its the second video I linked previously). He begins pretty quickly in that video to cover why he believes the dragon is Draco. His main premise is this: the people of 1 AD would have immediately recognized John's vision of the dragon as being Draco because of a very popular poem that everyone knew and even Paul quotes in the Bible (Act 17:28). The poem is "Phenomena" by Aratus. The description of Draco in that poem gives him the characteristics described by John in his vision.
In later videos, Daniel begins to work out what the 1/3 of the stars means. He assumes John is seeing the vision from the ground. He tediously deals with the math to determine how much of the sky would be visible, what roughly 1/3 would mean and what dates that 1/3 would possibly be starting on to end up in front of the woman just before Sept 23.
It seems pretty logical and straightforward to me. I don't know if I agree with his interpretation of what it means: namely that the Rev 12 sign is the "sign of the son of man" and that travail will come BEFORE the sign (Matt 24:29-30) so we should be expecting the rapture anytime before the sign and before sudden destruction. It's possible but I'm not yet willing to accept that interpretation wholesale. (To me it doesn't really matter because I'm watching and I'm ready to go!) How can we know if the Rev 12 sign is the "sign of the son of man?" But it's not just that verse that he uses to back up the idea of the travail coming before Sept 23rd. I think he also equates it to the 6th seal description. Sorry I don't have this all down concretely. I'd need to go through hours and hours of his videos with a notebook to get it all and work it out. I just don't have that kind of time at the moment. So if anyone else feels intrigued and compelled... by all means go for it!
|
|
|
|
Post by barbiosheepgirl on Aug 16, 2017 15:38:32 GMT -6
This thread and the other called "Lets find that Dragon" are both good threads,,,but golly, I am having a hard time keeping up.
|
|
|
|
Post by cwood85 on Aug 16, 2017 15:50:34 GMT -6
yardstickWow! Thanks! My daughter is much better today  Lots and lots of prayers for that little one. I am going to create a whole new thread on this so that it is better typed and thought out. The original response and research was done on my phone. I will let you know when I post it. And yes I agree on verse 5 and will add to that in the new thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by socalexile on Aug 16, 2017 19:29:58 GMT -6
OK, so your conclusion is.... without the dragon we may need to consider another interpretation?How about throwing one out there ... What exactly do you mean? You are making lite of a well thought out explanation... surely you have another idea? I was thinking that just because we cannot figure it out now, does not mean it will not be revealed in the next 40 days or so... Until we can get the confirmation of that, we cannot say that Clarke's interpretation is an indication of a definite rapture date, and if nothing happens, we're going to have to play defense in regards to the Sign itself. If the rapture does not happen, then then the fallout will cause people to ignore that the Sign itself is a fulfillment, and much of the church will go back asleep, or even fall away (which doesn't mean losing salvation). I would just prefer he would concentrate on what is confirmed at the moment, and tell people to watch and wait, rather than try to place his hope of the Dragon on Planet X. Yes there is a lot of "coincidences" with the sign and the eclipse, but we shouldn't set ourselves up and presume that God has set the rapture for the 23rd. I think a message of "get ready" and "repent (change your mind)" is in order with a "wait and see what God does". |
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Aug 16, 2017 20:06:05 GMT -6
I was thinking that just because we cannot figure it out now, does not mean it will not be revealed in the next 40 days or so... Until we can get the confirmation of that, we cannot say that Clarke's interpretation is an indication of a definite rapture date, and if nothing happens, we're going to have to play defense in regards to the Sign itself. If the rapture does not happen, then then the fallout will cause people to ignore that the Sign itself is a fulfillment, and much of the church will go back asleep, or even fall away (which doesn't mean losing salvation). I would just prefer he would concentrate on what is confirmed at the moment, and tell people to watch and wait, rather than try to place his hope of the Dragon on Planet X. Yes there is a lot of "coincidences" with the sign and the eclipse, but we shouldn't set ourselves up and presume that God has set the rapture for the 23rd. I think a message of "get ready" and "repent (change your mind)" is in order with a "wait and see what God does". Never hurts to be prudent. |
|
|
|
Post by watchmanjim on Aug 16, 2017 22:47:43 GMT -6
I was thinking that just because we cannot figure it out now, does not mean it will not be revealed in the next 40 days or so... Until we can get the confirmation of that, we cannot say that Clarke's interpretation is an indication of a definite rapture date, and if nothing happens, we're going to have to play defense in regards to the Sign itself. If the rapture does not happen, then then the fallout will cause people to ignore that the Sign itself is a fulfillment, and much of the church will go back asleep, or even fall away (which doesn't mean losing salvation). I would just prefer he would concentrate on what is confirmed at the moment, and tell people to watch and wait, rather than try to place his hope of the Dragon on Planet X. Yes there is a lot of "coincidences" with the sign and the eclipse, but we shouldn't set ourselves up and presume that God has set the rapture for the 23rd. I think a message of "get ready" and "repent (change your mind)" is in order with a "wait and see what God does". I don't think Scott is saying the rapture has to happen on the 23! Is he? I try to keep up with his videos, but I haven't seen him say it has to happen on that date. |
|
|
|
Post by socalexile on Aug 16, 2017 23:39:13 GMT -6
Until we can get the confirmation of that, we cannot say that Clarke's interpretation is an indication of a definite rapture date, and if nothing happens, we're going to have to play defense in regards to the Sign itself. If the rapture does not happen, then then the fallout will cause people to ignore that the Sign itself is a fulfillment, and much of the church will go back asleep, or even fall away (which doesn't mean losing salvation). I would just prefer he would concentrate on what is confirmed at the moment, and tell people to watch and wait, rather than try to place his hope of the Dragon on Planet X. Yes there is a lot of "coincidences" with the sign and the eclipse, but we shouldn't set ourselves up and presume that God has set the rapture for the 23rd. I think a message of "get ready" and "repent (change your mind)" is in order with a "wait and see what God does". I don't think Scott is saying the rapture has to happen on the 23! Is he? I try to keep up with his videos, but I haven't seen him say it has to happen on that date. He's all but said it. He's not flat-out saying it but that's the conclusion many are getting from his videos it seems. He hasn't stated what the result of the church being born on Sept 23 is, if not the rapture. He might want to clarify if he means something else. |
|
|
|
Post by watchmanjim on Aug 16, 2017 23:45:30 GMT -6
There's nothing wrong with giving something your best guess, in my opinion. That's what he's doing. That's not harmful. He has already shown the humility of being able to change his best guess when new information becomes available. If he needs to do that, he probably will. And there's nothing wrong with that. He has clearly said this.
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Aug 18, 2017 6:33:18 GMT -6
I posted my thoughts in the other thread "Lets Find the Dragon" or whatever its called so I'm putting them here too Verse 1 - He describes the woman, her adornment was the sun, moon & stars, from his vantage point in heaven. He explains what he sees, physically. Every one who reads this can relate to the sun, moon and stars are common. There is no need for him to elaborate on these things. Verse 3 - He tells us there is another sign. His view differentiates this sign from the first as the first is great, this is a "just a sign" (and there are others throughout scripture). But next he says what strikes me the most "And Behold..." "Hey look!" Why does he not tell us to "hey look over here!!" at the "great wonder"? Also note he doesn't mention any stars. He doesn't tell us what the seven crowns are, yet he tells us the woman's crowns are stars in verse 1. Why doesn't he tell us what the crowns are made of like he did in the first vision? Because these are different signs. I don't think the great red dragon is a "hidden constellation" or "planet x" or anything physically in the stars. John even tells us in verse 9 that the dragon is Satan. John sees this from heaven, it is the war in heaven. If someone already spelled this out (likely better than I did), sorry for not reading the whole thread 😏 Read more: unsealed.boards.net/thread/107/find-dragon?page=5#ixzz4q6qWSfFu |
|
|
|
Post by mike on Aug 18, 2017 6:48:59 GMT -6
Another thought to add here that strikes me is verse 9 " And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." We know he has always deceived the world, theres no truth in him (John 8:44) but why does John point this out again as if he hadnt told us previously...could it be that deceiving the whole world really means the rapture occurs and he actually is able to deceive everyone (or almost everyone, perhaps world system) Strongs 3625 - the inhabited world, that is, the Roman world, for all outside it was regarded as of no account. Just thinking "aliens" or something similar again...Then in verse 10, doesnt it contradict? I mean think it through (maybe you have  )but the devil is cast out of heaven(s) to earth and we are told that salvation, strength and the kingdom are come. "10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night." |
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Aug 18, 2017 16:07:10 GMT -6
Until we can get the confirmation of that, we cannot say that Clarke's interpretation is an indication of a definite rapture date, and if nothing happens, we're going to have to play defense in regards to the Sign itself. If the rapture does not happen, then then the fallout will cause people to ignore that the Sign itself is a fulfillment, and much of the church will go back asleep, or even fall away (which doesn't mean losing salvation). I would just prefer he would concentrate on what is confirmed at the moment, and tell people to watch and wait, rather than try to place his hope of the Dragon on Planet X. Yes there is a lot of "coincidences" with the sign and the eclipse, but we shouldn't set ourselves up and presume that God has set the rapture for the 23rd. I think a message of "get ready" and "repent (change your mind)" is in order with a "wait and see what God does". I don't think Scott is saying the rapture has to happen on the 23! Is he? I try to keep up with his videos, but I haven't seen him say it has to happen on that date. I cannot recall him having explicitly said the harpazo would be on 9/23. |
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Aug 18, 2017 16:11:04 GMT -6
At this moment, there is nothing I can find that fits the description of the Dragon, and the only thing those who are looking at this can produce is conjecture about "planet X" that no evidence exists for. Without the Dragon, Clarke's idea about the rapture on the 23rd has little basis. We may need to consider another interpretation. I have felt an odd motivation to do a very careful word study on Rev 12:1-4, to see what the words from the Greek actually convey. I was able to isolate a hypothesis about the word 'another' in verse 3 indicating the sign is of the same type (though not a great sign) as verse 1. See the 'finding nemo the dragon' thread... I'll dig into it a bit and post my findings. I believe there may be an alternate way of 'reading' the text. Hopefully someone better studied in Greek than I am can correct my suppositions. |
|
|
|
Post by cwood85 on Aug 18, 2017 18:59:22 GMT -6
I have clarified and researched more into my comment on verses 3 & 4 on my take of the dragon. I created a PDF and it is available for anyone to view in this google drive link: drive.google.com/file/d/0B9GidEkUtuKmSTRnN1VIMC1HdzQ/view?usp=sharingThoughts and opinions are greatly appreciated. I am not typically a led by the Holy Spirit type, but the speed and clarity I had while looking into this seems very much so. So I have prayed on this before posting. |
|
|
|
Post by socalexile on Aug 18, 2017 19:12:33 GMT -6
I have clarified and researched more into my comment on verses 3 & 4 on my take of the dragon. I created a PDF and it is available for anyone to view in this google drive link: drive.google.com/file/d/0B9GidEkUtuKmSTRnN1VIMC1HdzQ/view?usp=sharingThoughts and opinions are greatly appreciated. I am not typically a led by the Holy Spirit type, but the speed and clarity I had while looking into this seems very much so. So I have prayed on this before posting. Verses 3-4 can't be symbolic, without verses 1-2 also being symbolic due to the fact that he refers to both as a sign appearing in heaven. |
|
|
|
Post by cwood85 on Aug 18, 2017 19:14:58 GMT -6
I have clarified and researched more into my comment on verses 3 & 4 on my take of the dragon. I created a PDF and it is available for anyone to view in this google drive link: drive.google.com/file/d/0B9GidEkUtuKmSTRnN1VIMC1HdzQ/view?usp=sharingThoughts and opinions are greatly appreciated. I am not typically a led by the Holy Spirit type, but the speed and clarity I had while looking into this seems very much so. So I have prayed on this before posting. Verses 3-4 can't be symbolic, without verses 1-2 also being symbolic due to the fact that he refers to both as a sign appearing in heaven. Why not? Please explain, I do not know enough myself. |
|
Lots and lots of prayers for that little one. 
)but the devil is cast out of heaven(s) to earth and we are told that salvation, strength and the kingdom are come.