The 1260 Year Interpretation of Protestantism

[cheddar]

Dan 9:27

Quote:

He will strike a firm alliance with many people

for the space of a week;

and for the space of one half-week

he will put a stop to sacrifice and oblation,

and on the wing of the Temple will be the appalling abomination

until the end, until the doom assigned to the devastator."

Dan 12:11

Quote:

From the moment that the perpetual sacrifice is abolished and the appalling abomination set up: a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

The halting of the sacrifices and the Abomination are committed by "a prince who is to come" according to Dan 9. He must indeed be a long-liver to stop the sacrifices, then 1290 years later, set up the Abomination. What did he do with himself during that time period, nearly 1300 years?

Either the author of Daniel was mistaken above, or those who turn days into years are.

Amen. That makes perfect sense to me, but then logic, reason and evidence don’t stand a chance against the ‘traditions of men’.

On a side note – no increase of knowledge has ever come close to the internet. The world wide web has brought the combined knowledge of the whole world to anyone with a computer. Nothing even compares to this and it’s only been readily available for the past two decades.

[jasd]

>>You're still ranting on in this thread jasd?<<

Language, language, mon petite... I believe you were searching for the phrase – ‘returned courtesy’ – instead, were you not?

>>Must be eating you up.<<

In fact it’s rather dreary having to keep going over the basics.

>>You like to pick on small little things I notice,<<

Disregarding the “small little things” is sloppy exposition.

>>...but always fail to deal with the major arguments I present.<<

Like what?

>>The small arguments that you raise do not topple the main ones.<<

A thesis is rendered merely a hypothesis when the smallest point cannot be answered.

>>I don't have time to deal with all your posts.<<

Lucky you.

>>Won't be available for another month.<<

Is “Happy Trails” apropos?

[Lysimachus]

It's actually more dreary having to read your Dispensational tautological noise, lol. Nothing but hermetic dragon theology that emanates from the Jesuits and the Psuedepigrapha. I weary of your posts that go on and on and have no substance whatsoever.

Nothing you can say, however, will change the fact that the Sunday Law is coming. Nothing you can say however will make the Papacy not the Antichrist. You can ramble on and on and on, and it won't change these facts. There is only one truth. Not two, not three, not four! But one. And one thing I know for sure. It sure isn't your version!

[ClubV12]

"If",,, this is about logic, reason and evidence,,, "then", William Miller nailed it, his "program" fits perfectly. It's the only logical, reasonable, supported by the evidence of history, conclusion that one could reach.

Anything else, is just the devisings of men and has a serious "bug" in the program.

[teresaq]

I am trying so hard to understand the reasoning but it keeps escaping me. I guess it all depends on the individual as to what they view as moral decency. One sees as atrocious under any circumstances what another views as quite acceptable under certain circumstances. I'll keep struggling to understand the mentality. It usually "clicks" after a while.

She also said, below, and so many more like it,...

I feel like fleeing from the place lest I receive the mold of those who cannot candidly investigate the doctrines of the Bible. Those who cannot impartially examine the evidences of a position that differs from theirs, are not fit to teach in any department of God’s cause. What we need is the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Without this, we are no more fitted to go forth to the world than were the disciples after the crucifixion of their Lord. Jesus knew their destitution, and told them to tarry in Jerusalem until they should be endowed with power from on high. Every teacher must be a learner, that his eyes may be anointed to see the evidences of the advancing truth of God. The beams of the Sun of Righteousness must shine into his own heart if he would impart light to others. {1888 534.3}

No one is able to explain the Scriptures without the aid of the Holy Spirit. But when you take up the word of God with a humble, teachable heart, the angels of God will be by your side to impress you with evidences of the truth. When the Spirit of God rests upon you, there will be no feeling of envy or jealousy in examining another’s position; there will be no spirit of accusation and criticism, such as Satan inspired in the hearts of the Jewish leaders against Christ. As Christ said to Nicodemus, so I say to you, “Ye must be born again.” “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” You must have the divine mold before you can discern the sacred claims of the truth. Unless the teacher is a learner in the school of Christ, he is not fitted to teach others. {1888 534.4}

And what created all this stirring up of human passions which was bitterness of spirit, because some of their brethren had ventured to entertain some ideas contrary to the ideas that some others of their brethren had entertained, which were thought from their understanding to be inroads upon ancient doctrines? {1888 311.3}...

There have been, I was informed, misunderstandings not only of the testimonies, but of the Bible itself. Men have exalted themselves and esteemed themselves too highly, which leads to the denouncing of others and passing judgment upon their brethren. Envy, jealousy, evilspeaking, evil surmising, judging one another, has been considered a special gift given of God in discernment, when it savors more of the spirit of the great accuser who accused the brethren before God day and night. There has been a spirit of Phariseeism, a hard, unsympathetic spirit towards the erring, a withdrawing from some and leaving them in discouragement, which is leaving the lost sheep to perish in the wilderness. There has been a placing of men where God alone should be. {1888 312.3}

...

Originally Posted By: Lysimachus

....

Fccool,

Your disbelief... your disbelief... if you do not make up your mind to overcome your disbeliefs now, and choose NOW with a decided stand to give up your cherished doubts . ...

It's time to LAY DOWN your doubts, ...

...those who are on shaky ground ... is to reject the offer from the Lord ....

You ... the diluted doctrines you have allowed yourself to succumb to. Either take a decided stand with us, or give up Adventism entirely and go flop on the floor like a fish on dry land with the Pentcostals.

Your so called "honest analysis and observation" is really just a cover-up to not have to just accept what is given, and take it simply. ... you evaluate to death the phraseology and wording until you reach the point where you end up philosophizing your way ... were you a humble man ...

It's time to take a decided stand. There is no in-between. ...

It's either get in or get out. We have NO TIME TO LOSE! We're MOVING FORWARD, with or WITHOUT you.

...you are sympathizing with not only the atrocities committed by Rome, but you are also cuddling up to the venomous deception of Zionism and the New World Order that is honed in by that Satanic Jesuit construct known as Dispensational Futurism.

[Lysimachus]

Dan 9:27

Quote:

He will strike a firm alliance with many people

for the space of a week;

and for the space of one half-week

he will put a stop to sacrifice and oblation,

and on the wing of the Temple will be the appalling abomination

until the end, until the doom assigned to the devastator."

Dan 12:11

Quote:

From the moment that the perpetual sacrifice is abolished and the appalling abomination set up: a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

The halting of the sacrifices and the Abomination are committed by "a prince who is to come" according to Dan 9. He must indeed be a long-liver to stop the sacrifices, then 1290 years later, set up the Abomination. What did he do with himself during that time period, nearly 1300 years?

Either the author of Daniel was mistaken above, or those who turn days into years are.

The word "sacrifice" is not in the original Hebrew in Daniel 12:11. It is "daily", or "tamid", and it means "continuum". It is connected to the continual ministration of the the Prince of the Host, which is in the Heavenly Sanctuary. The 1290 of Daniel 12:11 historically commences in 508 A.D., when the Church amalgamated with the State when King Clovis of France was not only baptized, but pledged his full allegiance to defending the Church. This was an illegal union between Church and State that was "set up". This setting up usurped the High Priestly Ministry of Christ in heaven.

Your translation of Daniel 9:27 is appalling.

This New Covenant of promise is seen in Daniel 9:27: “And he [Messiah] shall confirm [Hebrew: “make strong”] the covenant** with many* for one week”. The Antichrist is never known to make a covenant with ANYONE!

Proof of this lies in Matthew 26:28“For this is my blood of the new covenant**, which is shed for many* for the remission of sins” [unfortunately, the Futurist interpretation of this verse (beginning around 1850 based off of the Roman Jesuit Francisco Ribera’s work of the 16th century) falsely interprets the “he” as the Antichrist. But even a casual look at Daniel 9:24-27 will prove that “the most Holy” (verse 24), “Messiah the Prince [nagiyd]” (verse 25), “Messiah” (verse 26a), “the prince [nagiyd]” (verse 26b) and the “he” (verse 27) are ALL referring to the same individual—Jesus Christ.

Let’s evaluate the full context:

Daniel 9:24-27 --

(24) “Seventy weeks [490 years, from 457 B.C. to 34 A.D.] are determined upon thy people [the Jews] and upon thy holy city [Jerusalem], to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy [When the Messiah would come to the Jewish nation, born as a babe, and be anointed by the Holy Ghost at His baptism in 27 A.D.].

(25)“Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince [nagiyd] shall be seven weeks [7 weeks/49 years], and threescore and two weeks [62 weeks/434 years]: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

(26) "And after threescore and two weeks [after 62 weeks, which is “after the 69th week” or 483 years] shall Messiah be cut off [“killed”], but not for himself: and the people [Jewish people, not “army”] of the prince [nagiyd = Messiah the Prince] that shall come [Messiah is the one that “comes”, not the people] shall destroy the city and the sanctuary [Hosea 13:9 “O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself”]; and the end thereof shall be with a flood [Roman Armies], and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. [said Jesus: Matthew 23:38 – “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate”]

(27) "And he [Messiah] shall confirm [make strong] the covenant [same word as “testament”] with many [Matthew 26:28 – “This is my blood of the new covenant which is shed for many”] for one week [starting 27 A.D. at Christ’s “anointing” in Acts 10:37,38 at his baptism to 34 A.D. when the gospel went forth to the Gentiles, Stephen was stoned, Saul became Paul, and Peter received the vision to preach to the Gentiles] : and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease [Christ’s sacrifice caused the meaning and value of animal sacrifices to cease in 31 A.D. at his death], and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate [Matthew 23:38 “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.”], even until the consummation [israel as a nation will be spiritually desolate even until Christ's Second Coming], and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. [Christ spoke when the house was desolate, and he predicted the desolations were determined upon the “desolate”—meaning, the Romans would desolate that which was already spiritually “desolate”, which went into effect 39 years later in 70 A.D. at the destruction of Jerusalem]

Notice the following phrase from verse 26:

“the people of the prince that shall come” – Futurists interpret this to mean that the “people will come”…or “the armies will come up to the city”. However, the grammatical structure is not referring to the “people” coming. It’s really saying “….the prince [messiah] that shall come”, not the people! There are two ways to interpret it, but in the light of the understanding presented, it HAS to be “the Messiah that shall come”….based on tons of scriptural references that speak about the coming of the Messiah. This goes marvelously with John 1:11 which says: “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.”—“the people of the prince”. The “prince” in verse 26 and the “he” in verse 27 are both speaking of Jesus Christ, not Antichrist. To read antichrist into these passages forces us to stretch the texts far beyond their simplicity.

Gerhard F. Hasel once again insightfully states:

• Ninth, another serious problem concerns the assumption of an unprecedented covenant-making by antichrist. [A. C. Gaebelein, The Prophet Daniel, (New York, 1911), p. 142; Walvoord, Daniel, pp. 232-236).] The OT (and the NT) “contain no hint of any such covenant at all, let alone some earlier one that he could confirm at this point in Dan. 9.” [Payne, Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy, p. 389.] The difficulty with this assumption is that it takes a lesser figure, namely “the prince that shall come” (vs. 26), as the antecedent of the “he” in verse 27, rather than the dominant figure, the “Messiah” (vs. 26). The word “prince” is a subordinate figure in verse 26. It is not even the subject of the clause. The subject of the clause is “the people.” Therefore, the fitting grammatical antecedent of the “he” (vs. 27) is the “Messiah” (vs. 26).

  Tenth, the futurists interpreters transform the “prince” into “a future deputy of the devil” [Payne, Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy, p. 389.] and a “future enemy of the people of Israel.” [Ibid.] This interpretation overlooks the fact that the emphasis in verse 26 is not upon the “prince” but upon the “people of the prince.” Young points out, “This prince, therefore, must be one who rules over these people, . . . he must be their contemporary, alive when they are alive.” [Young, pp. 211-212] A prince living 1900 years later than the people is quite contrary to the text. L. Wood replies that the phrase “the one coming” means “from whom will come.” This makes the entire phrase read “the people from whom will come a prince.” [Wood, p. 258.] However, such a reading is not supported by the Hebrew text.

  Eleventh, recent study of the poetry of 9:24-27 indicates a very intricate literary structure. [see J. Doukhan, “The Seventy Weeks of Daniel 9: An Exegetical Study,” AUSS 17 (1979): 1-22; W. H. Shea, “The prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27,” chap. 3, pp. 75-118 in this volume.] Such a structure binds the entire section together in literary patterns that do not permit the kind of chronological fragmentation demanded by the dispensational system. The literary arrangement supports the idea that the three titles—Messiah Prince (vs. 25), the Messiah (vs. 26a), and the Prince (vs. 26b)—refer to the same person who is cut off in the middle of the last week. [shea, “The Prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27,” pp. 92-94 in this volume.] (Gerhard F. Hasel, 70 Weeks, Leviticus, Nature of Prophecy, pp. 24, 25)

In closing, I would like to point out that there is more than one abomination of desolation. The one in Daniel 9:27 has nothing to do with the one in Daniel 12:11. There are a total of at least 4 abominations of desolations that occur throughout Daniel, Matthew, and Revelation up until the Second Coming, and context demands which one is being discussed.

The abomination of desolation in Matthew (referring to Daniel) is concerning when the Roman Eagle Sun-Burst standards were planted outside the city walls of Jerusalem. Then the desolation followed this abomination. Israel was reaping its own fruits, and incurred such a desolation upon themselves--for rejecting the Messiah. The worst sin there is.

This abomination of desolation, and that which happened to the city of Jerusalem, was a small foretaste, a learning experience, a glimpse, a shadow pointing forward to the great antitypical destruction of the world. Jerusalem foreshadowed what will happen on a world-wide global scale.

We haven't seen nothin' yet. And those who have their eyes focused on the Middle East for the fulfillment of prophecy will be CAUGHT WITH THEIR PANTS DOWN, and will flee and ask the rocks to fall upon them--because they refused to discern spiritual things. They chose to literalize the prophecies. They chose not to be hewed and squared by God's prophet in these last days, Ellen White.

Oh will they croak. Oh will they MOAN and groan that they did not hear the warnings and choose to accept what God has told us through His prophet, who is now showing us how these Old Testament type prophecies will now be antitypically realized, spiritually and globally.

[Lysimachus]

Teresaq,

Is it possible that you can help us out for a change? And try answering these Dispensational-Futurist objections? Instead of being so hung up on my or other's methods of dealing with them?

Can you not help and pitch in some for a change?

And to John317, BobyRyan, ClubV, HCH, Kevin H, etc. etc.... anyone want to take on the above posts by JASD? I don't have time now as I'm getting ready for another trip and won't be back till after the 16th of September. I won't be leaving till the 31st of this month, but have tons and tons of stuff to do, so I won't be able to get to all these posts with thorough responses in a while.

Blessings! :)

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:Lysimachus

>>I don't have time to deal with all your posts.<<

Quote: jasd

Lucky you.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:Lysimachus

>>Won't be available for another month.<<

Quote:jasd

Is “Happy Trails” apropos?

>>It's actually more dreary having to read your Dispensational tautological noise, lol. Nothing but hermetic dragon theology that emanates from the Jesuits and the Psuedepigrapha. I weary of your posts that go on and on and have no substance whatsoever.<<

Oy! Schizoid? I thought we’d lost you to a Sabbatical or some such...

More’s the pity – and here you let on – as though you truly possessed gravitas.

>>Nothing you can say, however, will change the fact that the Sunday Law is coming. <<

That may be. Perhaps, you’ll apprehend the meaning of couth before then.

>>Nothing you can say however will make the Papacy not the Antichrist.<<

Please do yourself a favor and read the letters of St John – for it is only he who used the term – and it is only in his writings that one may appreciate what he means by the term.

Do not proceed or persist without first doing so.

>>You can ramble on and on and on, and it won't change these facts.<<

Know thy terms.

>>There is only one truth. Not two, not three, not four! But one. And one thing I know for sure. It sure isn't your version!<<

Can one rely on the word of someone who misuses the term “Antichrist”?—when ‘expositing’?

Allow me a bon mot:

“Beauty is but the reflection which is visible in a thousand different utterances of the polished man.” --Goethe [/paraphrased]

Language, language, good fellow.

[teresaq]

I can see that you are very sincere, and really trying hard. While I appreciate the invite..."been there, done that" somewhere else when I first started getting involved in these forums.

But let me know when you win a convert by your methods. It never has worked for me.

Teresaq,

Is it possible that you can help us out for a change? And try answering these Dispensational-Futurist objections? ...

Can you not help and pitch in some for a change?

[Lysimachus]

There are many kinds of Antichrists. We know what John meant. But when we say "Antichrist", we're just using a metaphor for the Little Horn, or Man of Sin. In other words, we're referring to the "man of sin". He's no doubt the "head Antichrist". Pretty simple.

More rabbit trails that you're trying to get me on. You need to focus on what you should know what I mean.

[Lysimachus]

I appreciate the invite...but "been there, done that" somewhere else when I first started getting involved in these forums.

But let me know when you win a convert by your methods.

Originally Posted By: Lysimachus

Teresaq,

Is it possible that you can help us out for a change? And try answering these Dispensational-Futurist objections? ...

Can you not help and pitch in some for a change?

I'm not expecting to get any converts out of this. I'm doing this for myself. To strengthen my own faith. Sometimes some people pass that point that "treating them really super gentle and nice" doesn't work anymore. There comes a time to deal with people without kid gloves.

I've spend many years seeing Adventists act so "smooth" and smile all the time, all the while the critics just cream them and walk all over them. I've seen where this "niceness" simply doesn't work. After enough time transpires, there comes a time to pull the Elijah method on the false prophets. He actually made fun of their false god.

[teresaq]

Yes. Well, I notice people tended to disappear after just a few sentences from Jesus.

I'm trying to learn that way. Let you know when I get there.

[jasd]

>>There are many kinds of Antichrists.<<

Not according to Hoyle – nor St John, at that. There are but few definitions – and they are all uniquely St John’s.

>>We know what John meant. But when we say "Antichrist", we're just using a metaphor for the Little Horn, or Man of Sin.<<

When we exposit Holy Writ – it is best that we are as precise as it is within our means to be; otherwise, pardon me, it is sloppy.

>>In other words, we're referring to the "man of sin". He's no doubt the "head Antichrist". Pretty simple.<<

No, it is not!—it is terrible hermeneutics. It is eisegesis.

>>More rabbit trails that you're trying to get me on.<<

I don’t post to you per se. I post to the inquiring mind – the one attempting to discern that still small voice. The one who runs into friends and family and know naught but rote – being subsequently dismissed for his beliefs.

>>You need to focus on what you should know what I mean.<<

So, you supercede EGW and Gd? Stay close to Holy Writ – and ignore all the overweening proud who have wrested Writ – as emollient for their own ego – or that they might make merchandise of the Saints.

[cheddar]

AlienS brought up a good point – The king of the north takes away the daily and places the abom. of desolation and these events are separated by 1290 days. How does one king live to be 1290 years old? – it’s impossible. Let alone the fact that the little horn and the king of the north are the same power. Do you see the little horn of Dan.8 as the same power as the king of the north in Dan.11? They do the same things so they must be the same power. The king of the north has all the characteristics of an individual. He does battle with the king of the south who has sons and daughters. They sit down at the same table and speak lies to each other. I’m no defender of the papacy but this power does not reign for thousands of years. Historicists have day for a year on the brain.

[ClubV12]

teresaq(sda), Lysimachus makes a valid point, I say that in kindness. For some reason you often appear to support a discussion, no matter what the subject, in a way that leaves me wondering just what side your on.

...just an observation.

[teresaq]

That's because I am much more concerned with people and trying to win them back with understanding and compassion rather than condemnation.

Will they be won, maybe not. Jesus could have won every battle by you and yours tactics if He had wanted to. But Jesus would rather have died on the cross than win that way.

Is our need to be right, our beliefs so important to us, that we would drive the very souls the HS is struggling so hard to win, farther and farther away from Him?

Its our choice. What is more important? Trying to make sure everyone knows what the right beliefs are, or winning those souls back? NOTICE I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT GIVING UP THE "RIGHT" BELIEFS. Just what do you care about more. Things? Or people?

It is much, much, much, much harder to struggle against the natural man than it is to let loose and be one's natural self against the "enemy". I know. I lose more than I win. But by the grace of God I am going to win that battle and honestly love even if it kills me as it did Jesus and so many of His followers.

[John317]

You're not the only one who gets that impression, Club. It's like a double personality, and I have seen it in many of her posts. I think it's important for teresaq(sda) to understand what some people are picking up from her posts.

[John317]

The expressions time, times and the dividing of time; 42 months, 1260 days and 70 weeks, are very peculiar. They could have been expressed in literal language but instead they are given a symbolic flavor. Notice, for example, that Luke 4:25 and James 5:17 refer to the period when there was no rain in the days of Elijah as three years and six months. This is the normal way of expressing time (see also, Acts 18:11; II Samuel 2:11; I Samuel 27:7).It is significant that every measurement of time in prophecy is given a symbolic flavor: hour (Revelation 17:12; 9:13), day (Revelation 12:6), week (Daniel 9:24-27), month (Revelation 13:5), year (Daniel 7:25). It is also significant that non-apocalyptic prophecies express time in literal language: 70 years (Jeremiah 25:11-12), 400 years (Genesis 15:13-15), 120 years (Genesis 6:3) with literal persons performing literal actions!

I don't know how your argument here can be lost on anyone studying these issues. It is usually strangely ignored.

[John317]

He's not interested in your theology and complete understanding of eschatology. He is interested in you loving people.

Actually, the Bible makes it plain that God is interested in both. He doesn't tell the prophets that all He's concerned with is loving people and accepting them no matter what. God is interested in both love and the truth.

Love must be based on truth. If it isn't, it isn't genuine love.

Without truth, love is mere sentimentality.

Christ is the Truth, and His word is the truth. Genuine love must be based on them both.

[12tribes]

>>There are many kinds of Antichrists.<<

Not according to Hoyle – nor St John, at that. There are but few definitions – and they are all uniquely St John’s.

>>We know what John meant. But when we say "Antichrist", we're just using a metaphor for the Little Horn, or Man of Sin.<<

When we exposit Holy Writ – it is best that we are as precise as it is within our means to be; otherwise, pardon me, it is sloppy.

>>In other words, we're referring to the "man of sin". He's no doubt the "head Antichrist". Pretty simple.<<

No, it is not!—it is terrible hermeneutics. It is eisegesis.

>>More rabbit trails that you're trying to get me on.<<

I don’t post to you per se. I post to the inquiring mind – the one attempting to discern that still small voice. The one who runs into friends and family and know naught but rote – being subsequently dismissed for his beliefs.

>>You need to focus on what you should know what I mean.<<

So, you supercede EGW and Gd? Stay close to Holy Writ – and ignore all the overweening proud who have wrested Writ – as emollient for their own ego – or that they might make merchandise of the Saints.

1 John 2:18

(18) Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Revelation 17:5

(5) And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

According to this there are many antichrists, doesn't matter what anyone says what matters is what the Bible says

[John317]

The majority of my studies that I have written in my book are based on Scriptures alone. Numerous times I've sat down with different students and flipped back and forth between pages, quoting texts. They were blown away. I let the scriptures speak alone with hardly any interjection on my part, and they were speechless. All saw the perpetuity of God's law. All saw that the Sabbath was not done away with. All saw that the Beast power was realized in the Papacy.

It shook them to a sense of realization that they need to do what is right and be saved.

I know one girl who, as a result of her conviction on the Sabbath and her understanding of eschatology (that I presented to her), was forced to leave her family and escape, because they were persecuting her for her new found faith that has set her free, and she is so excited to know the Sabbath truth! She was forced to leave home because they were not giving her this religious freedom.

The Sabbath issue is a great test in Christianity, no doubt about it.

In fact, this girl that I know, her father is a Dispensationalist, and he prevented his children from being able to utilize their Social Security Number because he was writing a book on how the SSN was the Mark of the Beast. They couldn't even get their drivers license, and they were in their 20s!

When I presented the Bible's version of the Mark of the Beast, guess what?

It set her free! This was relieving to her, and now she had some ammo to prove to her dad what the Bible truth is concerning the Mark of the Beast.

This is not an isolated case either. I know of situations like this scattered throughout many of the conservative evangelical families.

Amazing! That's really wonderful to hear. This is exactly what we all need to be doing.

[12tribes]

AlienS brought up a good point – The king of the north takes away the daily and places the abom. of desolation and these events are separated by 1290 days. How does one king live to be 1290 years old? – it’s impossible. Let alone the fact that the little horn and the king of the north are the same power. Do you see the little horn of Dan.8 as the same power as the king of the north in Dan.11? They do the same things so they must be the same power. The king of the north has all the characteristics of an individual. He does battle with the king of the south who has sons and daughters. They sit down at the same table and speak lies to each other. I’m no defender of the papacy but this power does not reign for thousands of years. Historicists have day for a year on the brain.

Daniel 11:31

(31) And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

It is not the king of the north that takes away the daily but, the Papacy.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Lysimachus

1. Do you believe that saved Christians are to keep the 4th commandment Sabbath holy?

2. Do you believe that the Papacy is the predicted Antichrist/Beast/Harlot/Little Horn/Man of Sin/Son of Perdition predicted in Daniel, Revelation and 2 Thessalonians?

3. Do you believe that Sunday sacredness is the Mark of the Beast?

4. Do you believe the Sunday vs. Sabbath controversy will be a central issue in the last days?

.... Someone posted a while ago that God can speak through an Ass and a rock, or a bush. He does not need your superior intellect, education and understanding.

.... By me answering yes to these is meaningless.

Those questions are not a denial that God can speak through an Ass or a rock or a bush. Neither do the questions mean that God needs superior intellect or edcuation.

The questions are about Bible truth, aren't they?

Such a statement as you made here means you've concluded that our beliefs are meaningless, that it doesn't matter what our teachings and beliefs are. Is this really what you are telling us?

It seems to me that you are thinking that in order to love people, we must jettison Bible doctrines. That's a mistake. I hope I'm wrong about what you're saying, but that is the impression I got from your post.

[12tribes]

The halting of the sacrifices and the Abomination are committed by "a prince who is to come" according to Dan 9. He must indeed be a long-liver to stop the sacrifices, then 1290 years later, set up the Abomination. What did he do with himself during that time period, nearly 1300 years?

Either the author of Daniel was mistaken above, or those who turn days into years are.

In years, 1290 days is approximately 3.58 years.

Daniel 9 has been fulfilled you sound just like some other denominations who teach that the final week will be in the future.

Mark 1:15

(15) And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Jesus is referring to Daniel 9 He fulfilled it.

Daniel 9:27

(27) And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Matthew 27:50-51

(50) Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

(51) And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

Looks simple enough Jesus fulfilled Daniel 9

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: cheddar

AlienS brought up a good point – The king of the north takes away the daily and places the abom. of desolation and these events are separated by 1290 days. How does one king live to be 1290 years old? – it’s impossible. Let alone the fact that the little horn and the king of the north are the same power. Do you see the little horn of Dan.8 as the same power as the king of the north in Dan.11? They do the same things so they must be the same power. The king of the north has all the characteristics of an individual. He does battle with the king of the south who has sons and daughters. They sit down at the same table and speak lies to each other. I’m no defender of the papacy but this power does not reign for thousands of years. Historicists have day for a year on the brain.

Daniel 11:31

(31) And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

It is not the king of the north that takes away the daily but, the Papacy.

First, excellent posts 12Tribes! Your entrance into these forums has been a huge welcome and relief!!

Secondly: Wait, I thought the King of the North WAS the Papacy? Help me.

Heidi Heiks takes this position, along with most Adventist scholars. You should check out his 2 new books: "The 'Daily' Source Book" and "King of the North". http://www.thesourcehh.org/store.htm

Tim Roosenberg takes a very unique position that is generating popularity in Adventism. That the King of the North represents the Christian world headed by the Papacy, and the King of the South represents the Muslim world. He makes some good points in his videos, and wow, he does a marvelous job at applying it to the end-times, that there will be a major drag-out-knock-out fight between these two powers just before Jesus comes back:

http://www.sealingtime.com/media/product...hecy/index.html