Who are the seven heads of Revelation 17?

[Martn]

[Martn]

[Martn]

[JoeMo]

MCBGM,

As a traditionalist Jew keeping the old customs, I assume that you don't put much credence in the New Testament (I may be wrong). As a Christian, I put as much faith in the authority of the New Testament as I do in the Torah.  The Torah is even quoted several places in the NT, such as Is.64:6:

"All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like  filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away."

Romans 3:10-18 quotes from several places in the Torah - quoted by a Pharisee among Pharisees.  In Acts 4:11-12, Peter is speaking of Jesus when he says

"Jesus is ‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the cornerstone.' [Ps. 118:22]

¹² Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”

 

From these and many other accounts in the NT (taken from the Torah), it is easy to infer that we all need a Savior; and the only being in the universe qualified to be that Savior is Jesus.  You are correct to say that this is the blessed hope for not only Christians, but for all mankind.  Jesus was a Jew; and as one yourself, you are "family"!

There are 144,000 members of the family of Jacob - 12,000 from each tribe - who will be the "first fruits" of salvation.  Thousands of Jews have come to embrace the Messiah of Joseph (Jacob's son) as also being the Son of David.  We are either under the Law or under the grace.  Under the Law, if we have broken any precept of the Law, our "reward" is eternal death. Under the Savior, we have eternal life; because (as a Christian), I believe that Jesus has already paid the penalty for all of our sins - mine and yours; conscious or unconscious sin.  It is my blessed hope.  Without the salvation of Jesus Christ, I am doomed to eternal oblivion.  If we look into our hearts, I think we can all see that we have sinned (even if only occasionally) and fallen short of God;s standard.  We have all at times ignored the pleading of the Spirit.  We all need to be saved!

I hope this doesn't sound like an altar call or something, but give Jesus a chance to be your Savior.  You'll be glad you did!

[Pickle]

20 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

If someone is "at the door", has he not arrived at your house?

A person who is at the door is one step away. Christ's coming has been one step away since 1833.

 

20 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I do not agree with the whole 1798 teaching.

As you have seen, I can discuss the topic without mentioning 1798. I mentioned 1798 because you raised the point of the darkening of the sun having to come not years or centuries after the end of the tribulation.

 

20 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I do not agree with the SDA application of the "falling of the stars" Nov, 13, 1833.  That same star shower has come repeatedly since then.

When, exactly? When did it occur in such a way that it was seen over at least a similar amount of territory?

 

20 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

And there have been many blood moons and solar eclipses since.

Since the moon was about full on May 19, 1780, that event wasn't a solar eclipse. And there wasn't a lunar eclipse either. What blood moons are you referring to that aren't eclipses?

You could not have convinced Bible believing Christians of those times that those events weren't the prophesied signs. But again, if you don't cite reasons why such things couldn't be the fulfillment of the prophecies, I don't have to mention them.

 

20 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

There are folks here at CA who disagree with me, whom I still enjoy dialoging with.  I do not enjoy dialoging with you.  Your tone is very argumentative and dismissive.  Saying to me, "Your position contradicts Scripture."  No Pickle - it just contradicts your interpretation of Scripture. 

I certainly haven't wanted to offend you, but read through your last posts. Have you ever explained where the Bible says that the persecution of Dan. 11:33, 35 begins when the time of the end begins, rather than ends when the time of the end begins, as the text plainly says? Or did you concede that you were mistaken on this point? If you did, I missed it. If you don't address the points made, and don't explain how the texts really say something other than how they read, then of course dialogue will be difficult.

Here's another point:

Matthew 24:22-24  And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened. Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

I already raised the issue of the darkening of the sun and moon, and the falling of the stars having to tell that Christ's coming is near, not here. Additionally, Christ warns us against false Christs and false prophets after the tribulation is cut short. Thus, there must be a period of time between the end of the tribulation and the second coming.

This agrees with Dan. 11:33-12:1, where we have persecution lasting until the time of the end, which you said was probably the 1260 days, and a whole bunch of military maneuvers and such after that, before Michael stands up. It also agrees with Dan. 12:4-13, which has Daniel being sealed until the time of the end begins, after the 1290 days have ended. But it doesn't agree with the idea that the 1260 days end with the second coming.

[Pickle]

15 hours ago, MCBGM said:

I should have simplified it. Saying they were, in both genealogies, biological descendants of Jeconiah in spite of Levirate marriage on one side which accounts for their differences in parentage between Matthew and Luke.

How do you know that Salathiel was a biological descendant of Jeconiah in both genealogies?

[8thdaypriest]

20 hours ago, MCBGM said:

Jews lived, quite successfully I might add, without a temple and without animal sacrifices for some 500 years before Jesus was even born. Yet they still found themselves forgiven, and do so to this day, without any need of such primitive and barbaric object lessons, intended only for a primitive people.

Without a temple, without sacrifices, and without a mediator, how do Jews obtain forgiveness?

Directly (ek) from God.

God forgives. God does not require animal sacrifice --or human sacrifice-- in order to forgive sin.

Christians and other peoples still require such things, in order to feel forgiven. This is the difference between Jewish faith (which develops, from the power of God, as a result of doing good works) and Christian faith in salvation through (dia) Jesus. Jews, from their struggles, have learned to understand that God never needed and does not ever require such things.

Here's a good explanation of the Jewish position:

http://whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation2.html

http://whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation1.html

http://whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation4.html

http://whatjewsbelieve.org/explanation4.html

Wow.  So the commands concerning the sacrifices, through Moses, from the LORD on Mt Sinai.  That was all a deception?  Or something just made up in the mind of Moses?  Or - did it really never happen - receiving those commands??  Do Jews believe it was something just left over from paganism?? 

[8thdaypriest]

5 hours ago, Pickle said:

I certainly haven't wanted to offend you, but read through your last posts. Have you ever explained where the Bible says that the persecution of Dan. 11:33, 35 begins when the time of the end begins, rather than ends when the time of the end begins, as the text plainly says? Or did you concede that you were mistaken on this point? If you did, I missed it. If you don't address the points made, and don't explain how the texts really say something other than how they read, then of course dialogue will be difficult.
 

Words such as "concede that you were mistaken", turn a discussion into a CONTEST.  It's like we are back in kindergarten.  One kid pins another one down and shouts, "Give!  Give!".  This is NOT a DEBATE contest.  This is a discussion. 

You absolutely believe that you are  "correct" because you absolutely believe that Ellen White was a prophet of God.  Because you believe you are "correct", you keep trying to "pin me down". 

I do not believe that we will fully understand the prophecies of Daniel (and Revelation) until they are fulfilled just prior to Jesus' return.  For now, we try to connect dots, and see where the weight of the evidence is pointing.  There is no way - at this time - to say whether my current understanding of these prophecies is "correct". 

[JoeMo]

27 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Words such as "concede that you were mistaken", turn a discussion into a CONTEST.  It's like we are back in kindergarten.  One kid pins another one down and shouts, "Give!  Give!".  This is NOT a DEBATE contest.  This is a discussion. 

I agree with Rachel.  People shouldn't have to provide a myriad of "proof texts" or answer others' inquiries into trivialities to totally validate their opinions and personal beliefs.  This is a discussion board; not a theological PhD dissertation board review. It's one thing when someone asks questions out of curiosity, and another when they just seem to be trying to pick a fight.  

"But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. ¹⁰ Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. ¹¹ You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned.Statements like "did you concede that you were mistaken" and getting all hung up on minutiae  and trivialities is NOT productive. (Titus 3:10-11)"

For example -

5 hours ago, Pickle said:

How do you know that Salathiel was a biological descendant of Jeconiah in both genealogies?

Is this really important in the cosmic order of things?  Does knowing the truth about this bring me any closer to my heavenly reward?  If it does, I'm doomed.

If you want to have a discussion with someone rather than an argument, soften your tone.  Say something like "I don't believe that way" instead of implying (or making it easy to infer) that they are wrong and you are right.  Cuz guess what?  When it comes to the absolute truth, we're all probably wrong in one area or another.

[Martn]

[Martn]

[Martn]

[phkrause]

4 hours ago, MCBGM said:

Animal sacrifice was implemented in order to ease humanity away from human sacrifice, which had been the norm. Which is one reason why it makes no sense to Jews that animal sacrifice would then, later on, be replaced by human sacrifice in Jesus.

Really!! Animal sacrifices were already implemented by God after sin enter!! Did not Cain kill Abel because he was [censored] off that God accepted Abel's animal sacrifice. Seems to me they were around long before there was a nation of Israel or the Hebrew people!!

[Pickle]

6 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Words such as "concede that you were mistaken", turn a discussion into a CONTEST.  It's like we are back in kindergarten.  One kid pins another one down and shouts, "Give!  Give!".  This is NOT a DEBATE contest.  This is a discussion. 

You absolutely believe that you are  "correct" because you absolutely believe that Ellen White was a prophet of God.  Because you believe you are "correct", you keep trying to "pin me down". 

I do not believe that we will fully understand the prophecies of Daniel (and Revelation) until they are fulfilled just prior to Jesus' return.  For now, we try to connect dots, and see where the weight of the evidence is pointing.  There is no way - at this time - to say whether my current understanding of these prophecies is "correct". 

Your reply comes across to me as if you aren't interested in even discussing the topic. The biggest reason it comes across to me that way is that while you blame my understanding on Ellen White, you still didn't address the fact that Dan. 11:33, 35 says that the persecution lasts until the time of the end begins. Referring to Ellen White that way rather than addressing the point made comes across as evasion.

I did concede that I was mistaken on a point, and I believe you were the one who showed I was mistaken. Certainly you can do the same.

So are you saying that you believe Daniel is sealed until the second coming, or just prior to it? That would fit your idea that the 1260 days take us up to the second coming. But we are still left with a period of time between the end of the 1260 days and the second coming, during which Dan. 11:40-45 takes place, and the heavenly signs of Mat. 24 take place, and the false Christs and false prophets of Mat. 24 appear. The only difference between our views would then be how long a period of time that is. Right?

[Pickle]

5 hours ago, MCBGM said:

Simply because all there is, is a single text. One tiny verse --from a Christian source (Luke)-- which gives a different (and likely not biological) parentage for Salathiel.

While on the other hand, we have multiple sources and texts. Including one from a very reliable Christian source (Matthew). All of which tell us, repeatedly and consistently, in no uncertain terms, that Salathiel's father really was Jeconiah.

I don't see in your response anything solid that proves that Salathiel was a biological descendant of Jeconiah. All I see is an assertion, a maybe. While couldn't Luke be presenting biological descent and Matthew legal descent?

[Pickle]

5 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I agree with Rachel.  People shouldn't have to provide a myriad of "proof texts" or answer others' inquiries into trivialities to totally validate their opinions and personal beliefs.

The question of whether the time of the end begins after the 1260 days have ended, or when the 1260 days start, is by no means a triviality. It's a key question which is clearly answered in Scripture, and which undermines many of the false futuristic teachings on prophecy that are circulating out there.

Now if she doesn't want to discuss the topic, that is her choice. But then, why post?

Dan. 11:33, 35 clearly say that the persecution lasts until the time of the end. Rachel said she thinks this persecution is probably the 1260 days. Yet on April 5 she said that the time of the end begins when the 1260 days start. So, where should we go from here?

5 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Is this really important in the cosmic order of things?  Does knowing the truth about this bring me any closer to my heavenly reward?  If it does, I'm doomed.

But you're not the one who is basing a rejection of Christ as King Messiah on the assertion that Salathiel was a biological descendant of Jeconiah. So that question, you can ignore it if you want. But for MCBGM, it's an important question. And if it is important to him, then it's important to him, even if it's not important to you or me.

[Pickle]

5 hours ago, MCBGM said:

Not a deception. Not a fiction.

An object lesson. A parable of sorts, in 3D.

Animal sacrifice was implemented in order to ease humanity away from human sacrifice, which had been the norm. Which is one reason why it makes no sense to Jews that animal sacrifice would then, later on, be replaced by human sacrifice in Jesus.

So would you consider yourself reformed, conservative, orthodox, or ultra-orthodox?

I have had a conservative Jew seem to allude to such ideas about the sacrificial system, but I don't see any way to support what you've said from Scripture, which makes me wonder if you're reformed.

The biggest problem is that God instituted animal sacrifices before there was ever a human sacrifice, and so there's no way that animal sacrifices were implemented to ease humanity away from human sacrifice. We see Abel offering an animal sacrifice in Gen. 4. Certainly you aren't saying that Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel had been offering human sacrifices before that, are you?

[JoeMo]

13 hours ago, Pickle said:

The question of whether the time of the end begins after the 1260 days have ended, or when the 1260 days start, is by no means a triviality. It's a key question which is clearly answered in Scripture, and which undermines many of the false futuristic teachings on prophecy that are circulating out there.

Now if she doesn't want to discuss the topic, that is her choice. But then, why post?

Dan. 11:33, 35 clearly say that the persecution lasts until the time of the end. Rachel said she thinks this persecution is probably the 1260 days. Yet on April 5 she said that the time of the end begins when the 1260 days start. So, where should we go from here?

From my perspective, it appears that we are dealing with a matter of semantics here. I agree that recognizing the start of the 1260 days in important.  IMHO, the "time of the end" starts with the 1260 days; which will be kicked off by the abomination of desolation.  There will be persecution prior to that (we see it now already in the Middle East); but starting with the 1260 days, persecution, tyranny, and evil will reign Supreme.  It is during this time that the martyrs cry out (figuratively) "How long, Lord?" from under the altar.  Cosmic disturbances announce the "end of time" (more immediate than the "time of the end").  It is at this time - during the 6th and 7th seals that the church is taken off of the planet; and the wrath of God (7 bowls of God's wrath - way scarier than the wrath of man) falls on the unrepentant remaining on the planet.

So in my personal mental construct:

• start of 1260 days = start of the time of end (the reign of the Beast)
• end of 1260 days (day 1261 through 1335) - the end of time (7 last plagues and 2nd Coming)
• day 1336 through the next 1000 years = millennium

Just a thought - Following the order of the Jewish feast days, I find it plausible that the 1260 days will start in the Passover season (spring feasts); ending with the 2nd coming 3.5 years later on the Day of Atonement.

[Pickle]

4 hours ago, JoeMo said:

From my perspective, it appears that we are dealing with a matter of semantics here. I agree that recognizing the start of the 1260 days in important.  IMHO, the "time of the end" starts with the 1260 days; which will be kicked off by the abomination of desolation.  There will be persecution prior to that (we see it now already in the Middle East); but starting with the 1260 days, persecution, tyranny, and evil will reign Supreme.  It is during this time that the martyrs cry out (figuratively) "How long, Lord?" from under the altar.  Cosmic disturbances announce the "end of time" (more immediate than the "time of the end").  It is at this time - during the 6th and 7th seals that the church is taken off of the planet; and the wrath of God (7 bowls of God's wrath - way scarier than the wrath of man) falls on the unrepentant remaining on the planet.

So in my personal mental construct:

• start of 1260 days = start of the time of end (the reign of the Beast)
• end of 1260 days (day 1261 through 1335) - the end of time (7 last plagues and 2nd Coming)
• day 1336 through the next 1000 years = millennium

Just a thought - Following the order of the Jewish feast days, I find it plausible that the 1260 days will start in the Passover season (spring feasts); ending with the 2nd coming 3.5 years later on the Day of Atonement.

Hi Joe.

Daniel 11:33  And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.

Daniel 11:35  And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end:

See how it says that the persecution lasts until the time of the end? Now the question then is, is this period of persecution that lasts many days the 1260 days? I don't see any way around the fact that it has to be, given Dan. 12:4-12, but let's consider a few more verses from Dan. 11.

Daniel 11:36  And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.

Would you not agree that Paul in 2 Th. 2 borrows language from this verse when talking about the man of sin?

Daniel 11:40  And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

If we try to say that vs. 40 occurs at the start of the 1260 days, then we have to say that vs. 40 jumps back in time to the start of the man of sin's reign, since he was already reigning in vs. 36. But it is far simpler to just accept the idea that the time of the end begins at the end of the 1260-day reign of the man of sin.

There are other issues too. Take for example 2 Th. 2, where Paul says that the idea that Christ's coming is imminent is a deception. Why does he say that? Because the man of sin must reign first. If the 1260 days were literal days, then there would really be no reason to denounce the idea of an imminent second coming, because anything that is 3 1/2 years away is essentially imminent. However, if the 1260 days are 1260 years, then Paul's statement makes sense, particularly in light of Daniel and Mat. 24. At the conclusion of the 1260 days, the time of the end begins, the events of Dan. 11:40-45 begin to unfold, and the heavenly signs take place that tell us that Christ's coming is at the door.

I've never seen this connection before. Paul says Christ's coming can't be near until the man of sin reigns. Jesus says that after we have seen all the heavenly signs after the tribulation, His coming is near. But it makes sense.

[Martn]

[Martn]

[Martn]

[Pickle]

17 minutes ago, MCBGM said:

Horatio!

Yes.

Really.

There is more to that biblical history than meets the eye. Much more.

"more things in heaven and earth..."

Were you going to address the impression you've left that Adam, Eve, Cain, and/or Abel were conducting human sacrifices, and that God then introduced animal sacrifices to get them away from that?

It is a common thought that the sacrificial system was introduced in Gen. 3, with the coats of skin being an allusion to that. That would then set the stage for Cain's failure to bring a sacrifice that included blood, which would have an act of faith pointing forward to the promised Redeemer.

Would you agree that there was no death before Adam and Eve sinned, and that thus there were no animal sacrifices before they sinned?

I think it is helpful to note that, historically speaking, there has been a lack of objectivity in Jewish exploration of some issues involving Jesus. And sometimes for what might be called good reasons, given some of the unreasonable persecution that has occurred.

I'm thinking particularly of a chronological issue. Both Ussher's chronology and Jewish chronology uses the same Hebrew text, and yet Ussher's date of 4004 BC for the creation of the world is far earlier than the Jewish date of 5776 years ago. Why such a big discrepancy? That puzzled me for some time, and the ultra-Orthodox leader and the Reform rabbi I asked didn't seem to know.

It has to do with Dan. 9's 70 weeks. The 490 years are viewed as being the time between the destructions of the two temples. Thus the Talmudic date for the destruction of the temple by Babylon becomes 421 or 422 or 423 BC, 163-165 years earlier than reality.

So why not correct the faulty chronology, a problem no knowledgeable Jewish scholar will dispute? It should take centuries to do that. Why each year perpetuate the fiction that creation was 5700+ years ago instead of 5900+ years? The only thing I've been able to come up with is that doing so would draw too much attention to Dan. 9, and the possible reasons this false theory was adopted to begin with, that someone somewhere was trying to keep people from concluding that the prophecy pointed to Jesus.

The Talmud goes so far as to suggest that the Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes of Ezra 6:14 were all the same person. Thus Persian history was collapsed so that those 160+ years could just disappear.

So since the existence of this chronological problem is indisputable, I think we have a fairly clear cut case for there being sometimes a lack of objectivity, which in practical terms means that we should examine more closely traditional Jewish teachings than we might otherwise do.

Were you aware of this chronological problem?

[Pickle]

14 minutes ago, MCBGM said:

Yes.

Why the evasive response?

[Martn]

4 minutes ago, Pickle said:

Were you aware of this chronological problem?

Of course.

Jewish scholars aren't the ones who have a problem with the facts.

They have been reluctant --in times past, and still cautious now-- to discuss the facts with Christians. To do so often meant losing one's head, literally.