George, this one’s a keepergcdonner wrote:It comes to playing "pin the tail on the anti-christ", which, btw isn't even mentioned in the book of Revelation...
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
![Thumbs up :up:](./images/smilies/thumbs-up-smiley-emoticon.gif)
George, this one’s a keepergcdonner wrote:It comes to playing "pin the tail on the anti-christ", which, btw isn't even mentioned in the book of Revelation...
Thanks Max. Happy New Year!MaxPC wrote:George, this one’s a keepergcdonner wrote:It comes to playing "pin the tail on the anti-christ", which, btw isn't even mentioned in the book of Revelation...![]()
And I 100% agree with that. The number represents the Roman Emperor. Just as the "King of the North" in Daniel 11:36- who matches the "Man of Sin" description by Paul in 2nd Thess. 2:3- is the Emperor of Rome. If you read Daniel, and connect the historical dots you can see that the "King of the North" refers not to just one but to multiple Roman Emperors. Caesar married Cleopatra (Queen of the South)- Titus destroyed the temple and put up a temple to Jupiter in its place (abomination of Desolation)...gcdonner wrote:The answer is more closely related to the early church and the context of the book of Revelation, being in the first century. Many of the early church fathers regarded Nero as being the beast of Revelation, since the description matches him and the number also matches his name.
It comes to playing "pin the tail on the anti-christ", which, btw isn't even mentioned in the book of Revelation...
To find the precedence in scripture for the mark, I suggest you read Ezekiel 9 and then before that Deut 6:5-9.
I agree. See my earlier post.BTW, do you know what the "seal of God" is? It is my firm conviction that if you really have it you won't or can't take the "mark of the beast".
To avoid misunderstanding, I believe "the beasts" in Revelation are empires of nations, just as are the "beasts" in Daniel. They are related books. John is directed to measure in Revelations, and Daniel (as well as Ezekiel) sees a man measuring in heaven in their visions.Outsider wrote: I don't believe that the antichrist or the "beast" is a person.
If you note, I was replying strictly to the OP. There was too much of a bunny trail going on after that...LOLOutsider wrote:And I 100% agree with that. The number represents the Roman Emperor. Just as the "King of the North" in Daniel 11:36- who matches the "Man of Sin" description by Paul in 2nd Thess. 2:3- is the Emperor of Rome. If you read Daniel, and connect the historical dots you can see that the "King of the North" refers not to just one but to multiple Roman Emperors. Caesar married Cleopatra (Queen of the South)- Titus destroyed the temple and put up a temple to Jupiter in its place (abomination of Desolation)...gcdonner wrote:The answer is more closely related to the early church and the context of the book of Revelation, being in the first century. Many of the early church fathers regarded Nero as being the beast of Revelation, since the description matches him and the number also matches his name.
It comes to playing "pin the tail on the anti-christ", which, btw isn't even mentioned in the book of Revelation...
I'm not saying television is "the antichrist". Someone else brought in that terminology.
I don't believe that the antichrist or the "beast" is a person. The antichrist is a spirit that lives in the beast and the false prophet. What I am saying is television can be an idol, and as such it agrees with the description of the "image of the beast" in Revelation.
To find the precedence in scripture for the mark, I suggest you read Ezekiel 9 and then before that Deut 6:5-9.
I quoted from Ezekiel 9 in an earlier post.
I agree. See my earlier post.BTW, do you know what the "seal of God" is? It is my firm conviction that if you really have it you won't or can't take the "mark of the beast".
The man in Ezekiel is measuring in the city of Jerusalem, not in heaven, just to clarify. I do believe the beast was a person and that the anti-christ was/is a spirit, which was already working in John's time, which was during the "last days" of the Old Covenant (OC), which is what the book of Revelation has in view and not the end of the world.Outsider wrote:To avoid misunderstanding, I believe "the beasts" in Revelation are empires of nations, just as are the "beasts" in Daniel. They are related books. John is directed to measure in Revelations, and Daniel (as well as Ezekiel) sees a man measuring in heaven in their visions.Outsider wrote: I don't believe that the antichrist or the "beast" is a person.
gcdonner wrote:The man in Ezekiel is measuring in the city of Jerusalem, not in heaven, just to clarify.Outsider wrote:To avoid misunderstanding, I believe "the beasts" in Revelation are empires of nations, just as are the "beasts" in Daniel. They are related books. John is directed to measure in Revelations, and Daniel (as well as Ezekiel) sees a man measuring in heaven in their visions.Outsider wrote: I don't believe that the antichrist or the "beast" is a person.
--Ezekiel 434 And the glory of the Lord came into the temple by way of the gate which faces toward the east. 5 The Spirit lifted me up and brought me into the inner court, and behold, the glory of the Lord filled the temple.
6 Then I heard Him speaking to me from the temple, while )a man stood beside me. 7 And He said to me, “Son of man, this is the place of My throne and the place of the soles of My feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel forever.
I do believe the beast was a person
I absolutely agree on that point.and that the anti-christ was/is a spirit, which was already working in John's time,
That's pretty much where Daniel leaves things. But I think Revelation picks up where Daniel left off.which was during the "last days" of the Old Covenant (OC), which is what the book of Revelation has in view and not the end of the world.
I'm sure you are aware that scripture doesn't deal with the end of time, but only the end of the age, and from my perspective that was the end of the OC age.
The book of Hebrews was written sometime in the 60s, not long before the destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem.Heb 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.
Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
You never can tell. Youth doesn't guarantee tomorrow. Nor old age forbid. May your life be long, and prosperous.gcdonner wrote:One thing that must be recognized when trying to interpret scripture is that it is consistent with other scripture, and can be interpreted using other scripture. The time factor for the Revelation is one such perspective that is so often overlooked in this regard. Both from internal evidence in the book itself as well as external evidence from the other books dictates that the fulfillment of the book was found in the first century AD. It is better to adjust our understanding to comply with scripture than to try and force scripture to fit our imaginations.
John says several times in the Revelation that these things were shortly to come to pass or about to come to pass and that Jesus himself declared that he would come soon. Rather than imposing an unprecedented definition of "soon", as many do, we need only to look at what the writer of the book of Hebrews had to say about the coming of Christ.But he also says:Heb 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.
What do you say to this?Matthew 24
30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
The book of Hebrews was written sometime in the 60s, not long before the destruction of the temple and city of Jerusalem.
I suggest that just as Jesus said,Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
It happened within the contemporary generation of his incarnation. He was no false prophet and his concept of a generation in this context was the understood 40 year time period, which would culminate in AD 70.No, he is not a false prophet. He didn't prophecy when he would return. He only prophecied how. And what's a couple of thousand years to God?Matthew 24
36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only."
Mark 13
32 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
Time is short for me now so I must leave my comments for the moment. Being an old man, I suspect that the "end of the world" for me will be sooner than for y'all.