END TIMES - RANDY AND PASTOR DAVE

Religions > Bible > END TIMES - RANDY AND PASTOR DAVE

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 5 of 7

Topic:	Religions > Bible
User:	"Pastor Dave"
Date:	02 Jun 2005 10:55:40 AM
Object:	END TIMES - RANDY AND PASTOR DAVE

On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 20:26:09 -0700, "randy"
<rkluth@wavecable.com> spake thusly:

I am truly sorry for this level of formality. It is
not a reflection on you personally. It's just that, as
I said, I do not wish for this to degenerate into a ill
willed argument. Please understand that. I am
being sincere...

One last thing. Which group are you posting from,
so that I don't accidentally exclude it when starting
the new thread, should you consent?

I'm posting from alt.messianic. I used to post on
last-days, so I'm used to discussing some eschatology.
I'll try to observe good manners, but that's expected
anyway. Why don't you just fire away, and see how
things go?

I will take this as your agreement to the guidelines.
If that is not correct, please say so.
Please state what your beliefs are, as I do not wish
to attribute a belief to you, that you do not hold.

Regardless, I'm still not sure what your position is.
You say that all prophecy was fulfilled in the 1st
century. But how does that leave room for Christ's
return?

I would suggest that we start with Jesus' with
discourse. What is your impression of what
is found in Matthew 24:1-3, for example?
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.

User: "Ray"
Title: Re: END TIMES	10 Jun 2005 10:29:12 PM

"randy" <rkluth@wavecable.com> wrote in message
news:46CdnZ6mPuN6UzTfRVn-ow@wavecable.com...

"Ray"

"randy"

Just wandering what you make of this prophecy, for it is relevant to

the

70
weeks.

That is the Revelation 12 GREAT SIGN in the heavens
See this picture capture from an astronomy program showing this sign, I
believe.

http://watchman888.land.ru/images/serpentsg4dos.gif

I have explained it in ohter posts, but no one has got back to me?
Am I written off already?

You've cross-posted to quite a few ngs--I doubt *everybody* has written

you

off! If there aren't many responses, it may be lack of interest in the
subject matter, a feeling of indifference--whatever. My own thought is I
don't know enough about astrology to know enough about the various
astrological signs. I do have access to the information, but am not
concerned enough to do all the research. I've heard that someone
intentionally produced these astrological signs to tell the Bible story,
etc. But since man came up with the artwork, it wasn't God. So I'm a bit
unconcerned about it. I'm not saying it isn't interesting.

The prophecy of Rev 12 is of much more concern to me. It's part of
Scripture. My position on it is a very common one. The woman with the 12
stars, etc. represents Israel, or perhaps even Eve. She gave birth to the
Messiah, the "man child," who was taken up to heaven, unmolested by Satan.
It's just a figure--not a literal account of Jesus' life. The dragon is
Satan, who goes down to persecute God's people in Israel, as well as
Christians everywhere.

randy

Thank you so much for your kind reply Randy
I just finished watching a TV show called Australian Story which gave me
some hope.
This does a different person each week and this week it was a man who for
over 30 years has been doing to his propety in the outback things which the
government were paying farmers to do the opposite. It was all about water
retention, and now in the time of drought, everwhere is is brown dust and
his place is all green. So now they listen to him. Actually part 2 is next
week, which is not often they do a 2 part show for its only 30 minutes.
As one could say, behold the voice of one crying in the wilderness, of this
man it could be said the voice of one crying out from an oasis in the
wilderness. The gov was paying to remove trees and reeds an so forth. He
built this place from bad salt rising from the soil to put it back to
natures way. To keep the wet lands and so on and so forth. Scientists
laughed at him for over a decade, and now they are scratching their heads to
ponder, for to them it should be overwhelmed with salt and barren, and it is
not.
This just goes to show, that God's things are complexed systems, and often
many systems entwined, as a cord of 3 does not easily break.
The princples this man uses, he says, is like the body, he sees the wet
lands like the kidneys and liver. That in times of drought moisture comes in
from other areas by "veins" or channels in the soil.
Now this may seem way off base. But the point is true understanding comes
from seeing God's principles. These same principles are not just in one
area, but are in fact the infrastructure of all things. It is seeing this
stand out as a pattern in other areas where true intelligence shines, for it
sees God in all things and God's ways in all things. It starts to understand
the mind of God as it were. As Paul says, be ye transformed by the renewing
of your mind and you will know the will of God. That which is acceptable
holy and true. (I speak from understanding, for my mind does not remember
unless I understand, so it probably wont fit any translated version)
So I will just have to be patience, and when these things come to pass that
I have said, then like poor old Peter the farmer of oasis, will have them
lined up to listen. Actually, an idea which came to me a while ago was of
the Revelation 12 oasis. A place prepared by God in the wilderness for the
final 42 months as seen in the last part of chapter 12. A place away from
the dragon, and flood which is drank up by the earth. This is what Peter the
farmer has been doing, preparing the system to drink up the flood waters to
provide for the droughts, but in a way which is God's design. The aborigines
taught him from a young age how to find water, which would also lead to
food, even witchedee grubs which seek water in the desert areas.
All this will fit together at the right time. To those looking they will see
it sooner. To the "scientists" of traditional thoughts, they will miss it
and laugh at it, right up until the rest of the world is in its 42 months
drought from the two witnesses, and this other land, Australia, best gotten
to by the two wings of the great eagle (aircraft) will be in bloom. Far away
from the lands where the beast will be trying to dominate and get it's hands
on the denser population (perhaps a double meaning on denser). Pride cometh
before a fall. The Australian Scientists have now been humbled to see Peter
the Farmer's ways work.
Bless God for His planning. I see it all coming together.
This is both a blessing and a curse.
It is frustrating, like talking to pre-schoolers about engine mechanics
But I see Peter the Farmer, and I am blessed with more hope
I see I have forgotten, That God's plan will be done.
Amen.
(incidentally, this has nothing to do with astrology)
(God forbids telling the future. A difference to understanding the fruits of
which is sown, which also is backed by the many kinds of things lining up.
To see just one is to rick "astrology". Genesis says the stars do line up as
signs, but not alone. Proper science of the evironment, and all other areas,
will show the principles of God, all will bear witness. Many threads, may
"prophets" like Peter the Farmer)
PEace
Ray
.

User: "Ray"
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 04:38:10 PM

"Ray" <raymokeeffe@888hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d8a8gd$lo9$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...

"randy" <rkluth@wavecable.com> wrote in message
news:5JqdnebM-5ejGjXfRVn-rQ@wavecable.com...

"terry"

randy

Randy,
Thanks for your thoughts. In your linear view of the 490 yrs., am I

right

that you would then conclude the prophecy of Daniel around the stoning

Stephen? If so, how would you describe the fulfillment of the events

accomplished during this prophecy as given in Dan. 9:24?

I see the 70 Weeks as concluded in the midst of the 70th Week, at the
"cutting off" of Messiah. Whether or not the 70 Weeks was actually

concluded

at the stoning of Stephen I don't know.

Dan 9:26 And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one (Messiah) shall

cut off, and shall have nothing...
...27 And he (Messiah) shall make a strong covenant with many for one

week;

and for half of the week he shall cause sacrifice and offering to cease

(the

final half of the week)...

Messiah comes. Titus destroys the temple.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not

for

himself: and the people of the prince that shall come (Titus) shall

destroy

the city and the sanctuary (70 AD); and the end thereof shall be with a
flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Messiah makes a new covenant with Israel and ends the old covenant.

Titus

destroys the temple.
27 And he (Messiah) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week

(new

the

desolate.

This is how I've viewed it for quite a few years now, and it is an
historical interpretation. Most of the modern futurist views I hear feel
that this is a prophecy of an Antichristian 7-year covenant. I reject

this

outright because the context is the destruction of the temple, which

occured

in 70 AD. And this interpretation was confirmed by Jesus himself in his
Olivet Discourse.

Luke 21:20 � "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know
that its desolation has come near."

It seems, IMO, to *not* have some type of gap here, places this

prophecy

in
the category of a lie, which I know we both reject. Also, the Lord

seemed

to go to extreme detail, and if we just casually 'round' it off, are

doing injustice to the prophecy? Certainly there is some overlapping,
double fulfillment, types and shadows coming into play, but if

Revelation

is seen as future, and the time is constant with 3 1/2 yrs, and Jesus
ministered 3 1/2 yrs. wouldn't this be a very simple explanation of

the

time given throughout Daniel and Revelation, and answer the conclusion

Daniel's prophecy?

Yes, I think it's wrong to put a gap in there between the 69th Week and

the

70th Week. That would be absurd, I feel. The central focus of the

prophecy

is on the culmination of the 70th Week with several things in mind. The
Messiah comes. He is cut off. A covenant is made. The sacrifices are
stopped. The temple is destroyed. I believe the destruction of the

temple

was to follow immediately after the 70 Weeks, within the very generation

the Messiah.

Both Daniel and Revelation spoke to their more immediate historical

context,

as well as to some future context. Prophets generally had words to say

their own generation first. But there was often a larger historical

context

in mind, with the end of all things in view. In the case of Daniel, he

was

looking at the Babylonian, Persian, and Greek empires primarily, since

they

were in the immediate forecast. But beyond this Daniel saw a Roman
civilization developing that would lead to the consummation of all

things.

In the middle of all this Messiah would come, so that he would become

the

pivotal point of all prophecy. And as we now know, his resurrection from

the

dead and the establishment of his throne in heaven has laid the

groundwork

for the way in which God has now been dealing with people everywhere in
history. Israel is no longer the central focus. The Law is no longer an
accepted covenant with God. But God continues to honor His covenants

with

Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. All hope now lies with our trust in Jesus'
forgiveness--not in the Law and animal sacrifices.

I guess I'm really asking, why did you change to a linear view? What

did

it
answer which your previous view did not? Doesn't it create more

questions

and problems surrounding this prophecy rather than clearing it up?

I changed to a linear view for two reasons. I logically concluded that

God meant to communicate anything at all to the Church He had to do it
somehow throughout Church history. So in looking at the historical view,

concluded it was a sound interpretation. Secondly, I agreed ultimately

with

those who logically concluded that nothing but a linear view of 70 Weeks
made sense. Otherwise, it is not actually a 70 Weeks period!

Also, on a side note, I make a clear distinction between tribulation
(wrath
of man), and day of the Lord. (wrath of God) If these two are

confused,

men
wrestle greatly with seeing the church experience the 'wrath of God.'

But,

down through the ages, the church has experienced the wrath of man.

That works for me. I've heard it before.

Also, interesting to note, it seems the Lord is giving Satan a shot of

1/2 years to do his work through the antichrist. Just thinking out

loud.

pray this finds you and your family enjoying our Lord.

Thanks Terry. Prophecy is a very interesting but difficult subject,

isn't

it?
randy

Just wandering what you make of this prophecy, for it is relevant to the

weeks.

That is the Revelation 12 GREAT SIGN in the heavens
See this picture capture from an astronomy program showing this sign, I
believe.

http://watchman888.land.ru/images/serpentsg4dos.gif

I have explained it in ohter posts, but no one has got back to me?
Am I written off already?

PEace

Ray

Another point to ponder...
God knows all things. He knows what you are going to think next and what you
are going to do about it.
Consider that the Revelation 12 birth of Jesus is way out of place in the
timeline. But consider, God knew about computers and the astronomy software
of skyglobe, and how this will show a great sign to the world, as it shows
the great sign in the heavens. Then the placement of that in Rev 12 is
correct in the timeline. But that also means I am presenting to you now
before time, for it will be just before the start of the final 42 months,
time times and half a time, 1260 days, that it stands out as obvious. And a
whole lot of crap is gonna hit the fan so people will say, why didnt I see
this sooner.
It sucks seeing what people dont see sometimes. Because mankind is so full
of faults which blind him to see things when his mind is already made up.
And often that can be a "I dont know, so no one else should be able to know
either". It was handed to me on a plate out of the blue, with curious ideas.
But one must step outside of the box. There is nothing mystical about all
these things, in that the hunches led to major signs in the clues.
But it's going to be at least until January next year that those which do
not understand will see a major sign. And then another 42 months until the
start of the final 42 months before this Revelation 12 fits with the
timeline. And at that time the Great Tribulation will also be a great sign,
and much suffering.
So frustrating at times... but I guess I am learning some patience... but
for every person which reject this, there is another which doesnt. I guess I
am just used to aiming for 100%, and getting it many times. 50% is just
unacceptable to my 100% applied efforts.
Sometimes ignorance is bliss, and stepping out in front of a bus while
oblivious can be sweet release. But the trouble is when you know what you
know and have heart and determination, God keeps you alive because you are
more than useful, and one seed brings in meaning yeild for generational
harvests. Oh well... I died a long time ago. So I am useful. I threw it all
out, and was built upon the rock foundation of truth. May God likewise open
your eyes to see the things which I too was blind to.
The journey start with one step, not ends in the same step.
PEace
Ray
.

User: "randy"
Title: Re: END TIMES	10 Jun 2005 12:46:45 PM

"Ray"

Consider that the Revelation 12 birth of Jesus is way out of place in the
timeline....

I know what you mean, but I don't personally see Jesus' birth in Rev 12 as
way out of place in the timeline. The reason for this is simple. The entire
book of Revelation is composed of many visions. They are all kind of pieced
together in a single narrative, as a single prophecy for John. But in fact,
the book of Revelation contains many distinct visions. And what makes these
visions unique is the fact that nearly all the visions use symbolism that
ties in with the return of Messiah. Just about every vision either refers to
or uses symbols of the consummation of this age.
This has confused so many inexperienced Christians. They read Revelation and
wonder how many times Jesus is supposed to return? You see him return at the
7th trumpet. You see him return (seemingly) in the 6th seal. You see him
come at the harvest and at the great winepress of God. You see him come with
the great multitude on the sea of glass. You see him come on a white horse,
with his army following after. So do we conclude that Jesus is going to come
14 times, pretrib, midtrib, postrib, again and again? ;)
No, all these visions represents the same general truths. The current age is
an age of warfare. Jesus has taken his seat in heaven, and the Devil is
fighting against Jesus' work on earth. Satan is persecuting Israel and
trying to destroy the Church. But the climax of this history is depicted in
the final 3 1/2 years of the age, at the end of which Messiah returns on an
unknown day. In other words, following 3 1/2 years of Antichristian rule,
there is a space of time that nobody knows but God alone. Jesus will come
back *after the tribulation period* to bring judgment on earth and to save
his people. IOW all these visions are directed towards one great
postribulational advent of Messiah. The vision of Rev 12 simply sets the
stage, to develop a theme that began in the Garden of Eden but ends at
Armageddon.
Ray, I strongly believes that God communicates to us in interesting ways,
whether through astrological signs or by various numbers that pop up in our
life. But we have to be very careful to make the Scriptures the measuring
stick for signs, since signs can be arbitrary or even arranged by the Evil
One. Signs only work when God speaks first to your heart.
randy
.

User: "Douglas Cox"
Title: Re: END TIMES	12 Jun 2005 10:36:11 AM

On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 10:46:45 -0700, "randy" <rkluth@wavecable.com>
wrote:
<snip>

No, all these visions represents the same general truths. The current age is
an age of warfare. Jesus has taken his seat in heaven, and the Devil is
fighting against Jesus' work on earth. Satan is persecuting Israel and
trying to destroy the Church.

Rev 12:3 describes great red dragon in heaven, where the heavenly
woman is also.
The "heaven" and "earth" in this prophecy are used as symbols, as we
can deduce since the Church is on here on the earth. Her presence in
"heaven" is symbolic, as she represents those in Christ, and of course
Christ is in heaven; the earth, OTOH, represents the world.
The war is between the dragon, along with his angels, and Michael, and
the holy angels of God. It is evidently spiritual warfare that is
referred to here. Paul wrote of this kind of warfare:
Ephesians 6:10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the
power of his might.
Ephesians 6:11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to
stand against the wiles of the devil.
Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but
against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the
darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Ephesians 6:13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that
ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to
stand.
Ephesians 6:14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with
truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
The war involves Christians, as it is about their discovery of the
truth, and truth is referred to a garment that one wears; the woman is
clothed with the sun, and the Church is called the light of the world.
Evidently the sun is sometimes darkened! The war is evidently not over
yet, but the final result is that the dragon gets cast down, and is
overcome by the saints. Here how this happens:
Rev 12:9 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.
Rev 12:10 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.
Rev 12:11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the
word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the
death.
So it is basically a war of words; it is a spiritual warfare,
involving religious ideas, and the discovery of the truth, and the
saints wrestling with "spiritual wickedness in high places" and "the
rulers of the darkness of this world".
The woman in heaven is the Church, and the sun with which she is
clothed is the light of the gospel. Stars cast to the earth evidently
represent those who have returned to the world, that is, those who
follow the tail of the dragon, and who have abandoned their faith.

But the climax of this history is depicted in
the final 3 1/2 years of the age, at the end of which Messiah returns on an
unknown day.

This refers to the final 3 1/2 years of the 70 weeks prophecy of
Daniel 9:24-27, in which Christ confirms the covenant with believers.
The period is not a literal 3 1/2 years in my opinion. It is the
"time, times, and a half," referred to in Daniel's prophecies, and is
equivalen to the 42 months and 1,260 days that John uses elsewhere,
and which all represent that remaining time of the Church. For a more
complete discussion of this see:
http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/Daniels_Time.html
http://vinyl2.sentex.ca/~tcc/7_times.html
The "war" that Rev 12:7 refers to involves questions such as the right
interpretation of the 3 1/2 years - is it literal? Or is it symbolic
fo a longer time period?

In other words, following 3 1/2 years of Antichristian rule,
there is a space of time that nobody knows but God alone.

The prophecy of Dan 7 shows the saints are at war with a horn with
"eyes like the eyes of a man," who has a "mouth speaking great
things." The "eyes like the eyes of a man" represents the human view
on thins, that contrasts with the divine one, that is revealed to us
in the scriptures and through God's spirit.
The reformers all thought the Church had been under the influence of
the antichrist for a very long time. Even John the apostle said there
were many antichrists around in his day. So one should not look for an
antichrist to come, perhaps with a fierce scowl, and maybe even having
horns and a tail! We need to wake up and see the enemy that is here
now; the "3 1/2 years of Antichristian rule" are the centuries of
darkness that the Church has been through already. "By their fruits ye
shall know them" said Jesus.

Jesus will come
back *after the tribulation period* to bring judgment on earth and to save
his people. IOW all these visions are directed towards one great
postribulational advent of Messiah. The vision of Rev 12 simply sets the
stage, to develop a theme that began in the Garden of Eden but ends at
Armageddon.

When the dragon is cast down out of heaven, it is a cause for joy for
those who dwell in heaven; that is, the Church. It means that they
have overcome his deceptions.
<snip>
Doug
http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/Daniels_Time.html
.

User: "Douglas Cox"
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 03:23:46 PM

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 11:15:26 -0700, "randy" <rkluth@wavecable.com>
wrote:
<snip>

I guess I'm really asking, why did you change to a linear view? What did
it
answer which your previous view did not? Doesn't it create more questions
and problems surrounding this prophecy rather than clearing it up?

I changed to a linear view for two reasons. I logically concluded that if
God meant to communicate anything at all to the Church He had to do it
somehow throughout Church history. So in looking at the historical view, I
concluded it was a sound interpretation. Secondly, I agreed ultimately with
those who logically concluded that nothing but a linear view of 70 Weeks
made sense. Otherwise, it is not actually a 70 Weeks period!

Right, because time has no gaps. But the 70 weeks are broken up into
separate parts, and most people overlook the possibility that there
are different units in the sections. For example, the 1st 7 "weeks"
can be leap years, that is years having an extra month, and if so,
they span 133 years, so the prophecy can begin with the decree of
Cyrus, rather than one of the subsequent ones.
Another possibility is that the last three and a half years is a
symbolic period, that spans the period of the Church to the end of the
age - it's the Bible's label for "the remaining time of the Church!"
This is what makes this 70 Weeks prophecy "seal up" other prophecies,
as mentioned in Dan 9:24. The three and a half years, the last half of
the last week, are mentioned in several prophecies in Revelation, that
have to do with the Church, especially Revelation 11 and 12. So to
understand those prophecies we need to have a key or a way to unseal
those prophecies. It turns out that what is needed is a proper
interpretation of Daniel's 70 Weeks prophecy.
Doug
http://www.sentex.net/%7Etcc/Daniels_Time.html
.

User: "terry"
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 04:01:56 PM

randy wrote in message <5JqdnebM-5ejGjXfRVn-rQ@wavecable.com>...

"terry"

randy

Randy,
Thanks for your thoughts. In your linear view of the 490 yrs., am I

right

that you would then conclude the prophecy of Daniel around the stoning

Stephen? If so, how would you describe the fulfillment of the events to

accomplished during this prophecy as given in Dan. 9:24?

I see the 70 Weeks as concluded in the midst of the 70th Week, at the
"cutting off" of Messiah. Whether or not the 70 Weeks was actually

concluded

at the stoning of Stephen I don't know.

Dan 9:26 And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one (Messiah) shall

cut off, and shall have nothing...
...27 And he (Messiah) shall make a strong covenant with many for one

week;

and for half of the week he shall cause sacrifice and offering to cease

(the

final half of the week)...

Hello Randy,
I guess to every man his own, right? Anyway, I guess what bothered me with
the fulfilled view years ago, was the fact Titus' destruction, which is
part of the prophecy, takes place outside the time period of the said
prophecy, and IMO becomes a stretch. This seems to demand a gap, and the
obvious place is at the cutting off of Messiah. OTOH, you seem to be
undecided concerning the totality of the years prophecied, which seems to
let the prophecy sort of dangle around in unexplanation. But, I'm glad
eschatology is not a point of fellowship among brethern, not to me anyway.

Messiah comes. Titus destroys the temple.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not

for

himself: and the people of the prince that shall come (Titus) shall

destroy

the city and the sanctuary (70 AD); and the end thereof shall be with a
flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

Here is the point I'm referring to. The prophecy is in relation to
Jerusalem (v.24). Therefore, for the judgment to happen upon Jerusalem, in
the said 70 wks., there appears a need for a gap at messiah's cutting off,
for if not, Titus' destruction (70 A.D.) was *after* the prophecy.

Messiah makes a new covenant with Israel and ends the old covenant. Titus
destroys the temple.
27 And he (Messiah) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week

(new

covenant): and in the midst of the week he (Messiah) shall cause the
sacrifice and the oblation to cease (old covenant), and for the
overspreading of abominations he (Titus) shall make it desolate (70 AD),
even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the
desolate.

This is how I've viewed it for quite a few years now, and it is an
historical interpretation. Most of the modern futurist views I hear feel
that this is a prophecy of an Antichristian 7-year covenant. I reject this
outright because the context is the destruction of the temple, which

occured

I agree totally with your thoughts and reasoning here!

It seems, IMO, to *not* have some type of gap here, places this prophecy
in
the category of a lie, which I know we both reject. Also, the Lord

seemed

to go to extreme detail, and if we just casually 'round' it off, are we
doing injustice to the prophecy? Certainly there is some overlapping,
double fulfillment, types and shadows coming into play, but if

Revelation

is seen as future, and the time is constant with 3 1/2 yrs, and Jesus
ministered 3 1/2 yrs. wouldn't this be a very simple explanation of the
time given throughout Daniel and Revelation, and answer the conclusion

Daniel's prophecy?

Yes, I think it's wrong to put a gap in there between the 69th Week and

the

70th Week. That would be absurd, I feel. The central focus of the prophecy
is on the culmination of the 70th Week with several things in mind. The
Messiah comes. He is cut off. A covenant is made. The sacrifices are
stopped. The temple is destroyed. I believe the destruction of the temple
was to follow immediately after the 70 Weeks, within the very generation

the Messiah.

Both Daniel and Revelation spoke to their more immediate historical

context,

as well as to some future context. Prophets generally had words to say to
their own generation first. But there was often a larger historical

context

in mind, with the end of all things in view. In the case of Daniel, he was
looking at the Babylonian, Persian, and Greek empires primarily, since

they

were in the immediate forecast. But beyond this Daniel saw a Roman
civilization developing that would lead to the consummation of all things.
In the middle of all this Messiah would come, so that he would become the
pivotal point of all prophecy. And as we now know, his resurrection from

the

dead and the establishment of his throne in heaven has laid the groundwork
for the way in which God has now been dealing with people everywhere in
history. Israel is no longer the central focus. The Law is no longer an
accepted covenant with God. But God continues to honor His covenants with
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. All hope now lies with our trust in Jesus'
forgiveness--not in the Law and animal sacrifices.

I certainly agree with much of your thinking here. Only exception seems to
be the reason we are given 3 1/2 years in Revelation. The only, and to me,
obvious explanation, is that it is the last part of the 70th wk. Otherwise,
why 3 1/2 yrs? The time in Revelation seems to fly around without any
bearings if not connected with some other timeline. And since the
*totality* of the prophecy as mentioned in the 6 statements in Dan. 9:24,
are *yet to be fulfilled,* it seems the complete conclusion of this
prophecy is in future within the last 3 1/2 yrs.

I guess I'm really asking, why did you change to a linear view? What did
it
answer which your previous view did not? Doesn't it create more

questions

and problems surrounding this prophecy rather than clearing it up?

with

those who logically concluded that nothing but a linear view of 70 Weeks
made sense. Otherwise, it is not actually a 70 Weeks period!

Good thoughts, and I see your reasoning, but I would beg to differ. Other
prophecies involved *gaps,* especially as they related to the Messiah. To
deny *any* gap was one of the reasons the Jews as a nation rejected Jesus
as the Messiah. They claim even today, that if Jesus was the Messiah, He
would have brought in everlasting peace and righteousness to the earth.
Because they refuse to see the two-fold fulfillment of many prophecies,
they miss their completion.

Also, on a side note, I make a clear distinction between tribulation
(wrath
of man), and day of the Lord. (wrath of God) If these two are confused,
men
wrestle greatly with seeing the church experience the 'wrath of God.'

But,

down through the ages, the church has experienced the wrath of man.

That works for me. I've heard it before.

Also, interesting to note, it seems the Lord is giving Satan a shot of 3
1/2 years to do his work through the antichrist. Just thinking out loud.

pray this finds you and your family enjoying our Lord.

Thanks Terry. Prophecy is a very interesting but difficult subject, isn't
it?
randy

Yes it is. I have enjoyed reading and considering your thoughts on this.
Take care...
In the Crucified, yet Risen Lamb,
Terry Ivy
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 06:10:32 PM

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005 16:01:56 -0500, "terry"
<terry@desk.com> spake thusly:

No, it is not outside the time period of the prophecy,
since the prophecy does not say that the destruction
takes place within the 70 weeks.

This seems to demand a gap

No, your bad assumption about what it says
demands a gap.
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 07:35:07 AM

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 22:57:07 -0500, "terry"
<terry@desk.com> spake thusly:

It seems, IMO, to *not* have some type of gap here, places this prophecy in
the category of a lie, which I know we both reject.

No, it only means you're reading it wrong. :)

I guess I'm really asking, why did you change to a linear view?

Where did Daniel say to throw thousands of years in
there, wherever you like? :)
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.

User: "Ray"
Title: Re: END TIMES	08 Jun 2005 08:37:32 AM

"terry" <terry@desk.com> wrote in message
news:KM-dnQRbYNWO8TvfRVn-oA@netdoor.com...

Randy,
Sorry for the delay, but I've been busy with some other posts, personal
study and preaching. Anyway, I believe you stated you are post-trib,
pre-millenial. In your post-trib, which I would personally hold, do you
distinguish between tribulation and the wrath of God/Day of the Lord?

Also, another interesting point of discussion, is the fact that in Rev.,
the time period is always 31/2 years. I find this very interesting,
especially since that appears to be the time left for future fulfillment

Daniel's vision if one holds that Jesus is the 'he' of 9:27. If so, then
when Jesus came to confirm the covenant (that spoken of by the
prophets--especially Jeremiah), His ministry was ended after 31/2 years,
which would leave 31/2 yrs yet to be fulfilled, instead of the traditional
7. There are many other points to consider along this line. What think ye?

In Jesus,
Terry Ivy

Hi Terry
About the 3.5 years of Jesus left from Daniel 9:27.
I find that hard to fathom why people get that, only that they have not
understood other factors.
For of the 70 weeks they are divided into parts of 7, 62 and 1. If one was
going to divid a time delay between these, surely it would be to keep one of
these numbers and be 1 and not half? But before we go there also consider
that the 62 and 7 giving us 69 has the death of the Messiah, as cut off,
some translations say cut off from the land of the living. Such Cut off, is
similar to the Isaiah 53 prophecy which says he bore our transgressions.
(from memory)
So if he is cut off after 69 weeks, by the people of the prince which is to
come, they would not be his people cutting him off would they?
The prince which is to come, would most likely be the 70th week prince. For
why would Jesus make a covenant and then break it? God does not break
covenants, for the scriptures say he is not a man that he should lie nor the
son of a man that he should change his mind.
And besides, when I researched the final 7 years, I got some very
interesting results with many amazing number signs and even a sign in the
clouds a huge 7 with a divide in the middle like the way some write a 7.
Meanwhile with the first 69 weeks, if looked at as 30 day months for lunar
years. After all, there is no reason to have a month at all unless it is to
map a moon cycle, then the 1260 days as 42 months at 30 days each, which is
exactly 3.5 years, makes those as 360 day years. And from that from 446BC in
King Artaxerxes 20th year of reign (counted inclusive from his start of
reign in 465BC) when adding the converted years, comes to 31AD (with zero
plus 1 adjustment)
69x7 = 483 years
As 360 day years this is 173880 days
Converted to 365.25 day Julian years is 173880/365.25 =
476.05749486652977412731006160164
-446 + 476 = 30
allow for zero year not existing so add a 1, = 31AD
This is also independantly backed by the signs at Jesus birth, 2 great signs
in the heavens, as seen by the Magi in Matthew and the Great Sign from
Revelation 12. This occured on Sept 11, 3BC. If you add 33 x 360 day years
to 9 11 3BC, it comes to a week before passover in 31AD.
I have two images of these on my site at...
http://watchman888.land.ru/images/daniels69weeks.gif
http://watchman888.land.ru/images/JCbirth2.gif
any comments Terry and Randy?
Sorry I have come late here, but I do believe I have some valid points. I
have had to elminate the hecklers for my sanity, as they know how to turn me
sour.
PEace
Ray
.

User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
Title: Re: END TIMES	08 Jun 2005 08:50:59 AM

"Ray" <raymokeeffe@888hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d86sa9$n0o$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...
[snip]

This is also independently backed by the signs at Jesus birth, 2 great
signs
in the heavens, as seen by the Magi in Matthew and the Great Sign from
Revelation 12. This occurred on Sept 11, 3 BC. If you add 33 x 360 day
years
to 9 11 3 BC, it comes to a week before Passover in 31 AD.

That's impossible. Herod the Great died in 3 BC, and Jesus was born at least
three years before that according to the slaughter of the innocents. Three
years had passed from the time the Magi visited Herod on their way to find
the Messiah, hence, Herod slaughtered every male child in Bethlehem under
the age of 3. That puts the birth of Jesus at about 6 or 7 BC, and the
crucifixion at about 26 AD.
Ike
.

User: "Scorpio"
Title: Re: END TIMES	08 Jun 2005 02:36:30 PM

"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ttGdncgXRbtdajvfRVn-3g@comcast.com...

That's impossible. Herod the Great died in 3 BC, and Jesus was born at
least three years before that according to the slaughter of the innocents.
Three years had passed from the time the Magi visited Herod on their way
to find the Messiah, hence, Herod slaughtered every male child in
Bethlehem under the age of 3. That puts the birth of Jesus at about 6 or 7
BC, and the crucifixion at about 26 AD.

Grow up. What you wrote is not historical. You are reading Nativity stories,
fabricated stories to glorify the Lord. Herod the Great was born in 72 B.C.,
died in 4 A.D. There were no Star of Bethlehem, no Magi and no massacre of
children by Herod the Great. Why don't you read the writings of Josephus.
You sound so naive. LOL

Ike

User: ""
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 11:52:24 AM

Scorpio wrote:

"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ttGdncgXRbtdajvfRVn-3g@comcast.com...

That's impossible. Herod the Great died in 3 BC, and Jesus was born at
least three years before that according to the slaughter of the innocents.
Three years had passed from the time the Magi visited Herod on their way
to find the Messiah, hence, Herod slaughtered every male child in
Bethlehem under the age of 3. That puts the birth of Jesus at about 6 or 7
BC, and the crucifixion at about 26 AD.

I'm afraid you don't seem to know much about history. Most history
involves using all the sources, not just one of them, and still less
ignoring some of them and then jeering that they aren't true.
Incidentally, it is not honest of you to state as fact that which you
do not know personally to be true. You only suppose that there were no
Magi, massacre,etc. You're entitled to say that as your opinion -- to
state it is fact is to lie. Atheists tend to be unclear as to the
difference, which does atheism no favours.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 12:03:57 PM

On 9 Jun 2005 09:52:24 -0700,

spake thusly:

Scorpio wrote:

"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ttGdncgXRbtdajvfRVn-3g@comcast.com...

That's impossible. Herod the Great died in 3 BC, and Jesus was born at
least three years before that according to the slaughter of the innocents.
Three years had passed from the time the Magi visited Herod on their way
to find the Messiah, hence, Herod slaughtered every male child in
Bethlehem under the age of 3. That puts the birth of Jesus at about 6 or 7
BC, and the crucifixion at about 26 AD.

I'm afraid you don't seem to know much about history. Most history
involves using all the sources, not just one of them, and still less
ignoring some of them and then jeering that they aren't true.

Incidentally, it is not honest of you to state as fact that which you
do not know personally to be true. You only suppose that there were no
Magi, massacre,etc. You're entitled to say that as your opinion -- to
state it is fact is to lie. Atheists tend to be unclear as to the
difference, which does atheism no favours.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Well put. :)
--
Pastor Dave
Silence in the Face of Doctrinal Criticism is Suicide
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/solution.html
http://tinyurl.com/ce97m
.

User: "Scorpio"
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 01:00:05 PM

"Pastor Dave" <news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:p9tga1dvfc6hgtsftu189hv4tfouvle0vi@4ax.com...

On 9 Jun 2005 09:52:24 -0700,

spake thusly:

Scorpio wrote:

"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ttGdncgXRbtdajvfRVn-3g@comcast.com...

That's impossible. Herod the Great died in 3 BC, and Jesus was born at
least three years before that according to the slaughter of the
innocents.
Three years had passed from the time the Magi visited Herod on their
way
to find the Messiah, hence, Herod slaughtered every male child in
Bethlehem under the age of 3. That puts the birth of Jesus at about 6
or 7
BC, and the crucifixion at about 26 AD.

Grow up. What you wrote is not historical. You are reading Nativity
stories,
fabricated stories to glorify the Lord. Herod the Great was born in 72
B.C.,
died in 4 A.D. There were no Star of Bethlehem, no Magi and no massacre
of
children by Herod the Great. Why don't you read the writings of
Josephus.
You sound so naive. LOL

I'm afraid you don't seem to know much about history. Most history
involves using all the sources, not just one of them, and still less
ignoring some of them and then jeering that they aren't true.

The Gospels of the Nativity are certainly not a credible source of history
except for ignorant fundi-mental-Ists and Sacred fortune tellers like you.
Significant elements in the Nativity stories in Matthew and Luke were
invented to bolster the divinity of Christ and to imitate similar stories
from the Old Testament and Greco-Roman culture.
The Serinus Census, the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, the Star of Bethlehem,
the Magis' visit, the Massacre of the Innocents by Herod, the Flight into
Egypt, to names a few, are invented stories written to bolster the divinity
of Christ.
True that Herod the Great had two of his sons, Aristobolus and Alexander,
assasinated because he was paranoid about someone usurping his throne, but
he didn't have his very young grandchildren killed. Both Aritobolus and
Alexander had young children and they were of Jewish royal blood.

Incidentally, it is not honest of you to state as fact that which you
do not know personally to be true. You only suppose that there were no
Magi, massacre,etc. You're entitled to say that as your opinion -- to
state it is fact is to lie. Atheists tend to be unclear as to the
difference, which does atheism no favours.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Well put. :)

Suck puppet Dave trying to get even. LOL.
What's your problem Dave? Am I making a fool of you both. You should be
ashamed of yourselves spreading fundi-mental-Ist's lies and counter-lies you
do and accuse those who try to educate you of not being honest even calling
them Atheists. Shame on you both.
Stupid idiots. Soothsayers. :-)

--

Pastor Dave

User: ""
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 06:47:16 PM

Scorpio wrote:

"Pastor Dave" <news-group-mail@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:p9tga1dvfc6hgtsftu189hv4tfouvle0vi@4ax.com...

On 9 Jun 2005 09:52:24 -0700,

spake thusly:

Scorpio wrote:

"H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ttGdncgXRbtdajvfRVn-3g@comcast.com...

That's impossible. Herod the Great died in 3 BC, and Jesus was born at
least three years before that according to the slaughter of the
innocents.
Three years had passed from the time the Magi visited Herod on their
way
to find the Messiah, hence, Herod slaughtered every male child in
Bethlehem under the age of 3. That puts the birth of Jesus at about 6
or 7
BC, and the crucifixion at about 26 AD.

Grow up. What you wrote is not historical. You are reading Nativity
stories,
fabricated stories to glorify the Lord. Herod the Great was born in 72
B.C.,
died in 4 A.D. There were no Star of Bethlehem, no Magi and no massacre
of
children by Herod the Great. Why don't you read the writings of
Josephus.
You sound so naive. LOL

I'm afraid you don't seem to know much about history. Most history
involves using all the sources, not just one of them, and still less
ignoring some of them and then jeering that they aren't true.

The Gospels of the Nativity are certainly not a credible source of history
except for ignorant fundi-mental-Ists and Sacred fortune tellers like you.

I'm afraid that ignoring sources on religious grounds is called
bigotry.

Significant elements in the Nativity stories in Matthew and Luke were
invented to bolster the divinity of Christ and to imitate similar stories
from the Old Testament and Greco-Roman culture.

Excuse me, but would you confine yourself either to statements which we
all agree are true, or else those for which you actually have some
evidence? This is all contradicted by the historical sources.

The Serinus Census, the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, the Star of Bethlehem,
the Magis' visit, the Massacre of the Innocents by Herod, the Flight into
Egypt, to names a few, are invented stories written to bolster the divinity
of Christ.

Written by whom? When? And how do you know? Were you there? If not,
what is your source for this, other than modern hearsay?
Why not stick to things which can be shown to be true?

Well put. :)

Suck puppet Dave trying to get even. LOL.

What's your problem Dave? Am I making a fool of you both. [abuse]

I'm sorry you didn't read what I wrote. We must all either tell the
truth, or be branded a liar.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.

User: ""
Title: Re: END TIMES	09 Jun 2005 06:48:21 PM

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 9 Jun 2005 09:52:24 -0700,

spake thusly:

I'm afraid you don't seem to know much about history. Most history
involves using all the sources, not just one of them, and still less
ignoring some of them and then jeering that they aren't true.

Incidentally, it is not honest of you to state as fact that which you
do not know personally to be true. You only suppose that there were no
Magi, massacre,etc. You're entitled to say that as your opinion -- to
state it is fact is to lie. Atheists tend to be unclear as to the
difference, which does atheism no favours.

Well put. :)

Many thanks!
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.

User: "Douglas Cox"
Title: Re: END TIMES	08 Jun 2005 10:04:57 AM

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 08:50:59 -0500, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
<Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote:

"Ray" <raymokeeffe@888hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d86sa9$n0o$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...

[snip]

I'm not sure what sources Ray is relying on, but very similar claims
were made by prof Ernest L. Martin in his books.
He also showed that the evidence for the supposed date of 3 BC for the
death of Herod is flawed, and it probably should be dated 1 BC.
Martin gives 27-28 BC for the beginning of Christ's ministry, 30 AD
for the year of his crucifixion.
http://www.askelm.com/prophecy/p950102.htm
Doug
.

User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
Title: Re: END TIMES	08 Jun 2005 10:33:12 AM

"Douglas Cox" <tcc@sentex.net> wrote in message
news:sl1ea1dhfcna2msmm67amoqupobjoon8r9@4ax.com...

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 08:50:59 -0500, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
<Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote:

"Ray" <raymokeeffe@888hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d86sa9$n0o$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...

[snip]

That's impossible. Herod the Great died in 3 BC, and Jesus was born at
least
three years before that according to the slaughter of the innocents. Three
years had passed from the time the Magi visited Herod on their way to find
the Messiah, hence, Herod slaughtered every male child in Bethlehem under
the age of 3. That puts the birth of Jesus at about 6 or 7 BC, and the
crucifixion at about 26 AD.

Nothing personal, but I get leery when someone says "showed." Hypothesized
maybe, but Herod was a pretty well documented figure in secular circles, and
Mr. Martin would have to overcome a lot of historical documents to prove his
point.
That's how we wound up with this "seven-year" thing that people keep relying
on when interpreting prophecy. The actual numbers, without any great
manipulation, point to a different hypothesis altogether, and the narratives
start to flow together.

Martin gives 27-28 BC for the beginning of Christ's ministry, 30 AD
for the year of his crucifixion.

http://www.askelm.com/prophecy/p950102.htm

Doug

Ike
.

User: "Douglas Cox"
Title: Re: END TIMES	08 Jun 2005 11:05:52 AM

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:33:12 -0500, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
<Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote:

"Douglas Cox" <tcc@sentex.net> wrote in message
news:sl1ea1dhfcna2msmm67amoqupobjoon8r9@4ax.com...

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 08:50:59 -0500, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
<Xeickleberrybooks@comcast.net> wrote:

"Ray" <raymokeeffe@888hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d86sa9$n0o$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...

[snip]

That's impossible. Herod the Great died in 3 BC, and Jesus was born at
least
three years before that according to the slaughter of the innocents. Three
years had passed from the time the Magi visited Herod on their way to find
the Messiah, hence, Herod slaughtered every male child in Bethlehem under
the age of 3. That puts the birth of Jesus at about 6 or 7 BC, and the
crucifixion at about 26 AD.

Ok, here is another discussion of the question, that concludes Herod
died either 2 BC or 1 BC, from:
http://www.answers.com/topic/herod-the-great
--------------------begin quote-----------------------------
Date of His Death
Some chronologers hold that he died in the year 5 or 4 BC. Their
chronology is based to a large extent on Josephus� history. In dating
the time that Herod was appointed king by Rome, Josephus uses a
"consular dating", that is, he locates the event as occurring during
the rule of certain Roman consuls. According to this, Herod's
appointment as king would be in 40 BC, but the data of another
historian, Appianos, would place the event in 39 BC. By the same
method Josephus places Herod's capture of Jerusalem in 37 BC, but he
also says that this occurred 27 years after the capture of the city by
Pompey (which was in 63 BC). (Jewish Antiquities, XIV, 487, 488 [xvi,
4]) His reference to that latter event would make the date of Herod's
taking the city of Jerusalem 36 BC. Now, Josephus says that Herod died
37 years from the time that he was appointed king by the Romans, and
34 years after he took Jerusalem. (Jewish Antiquities, XVII, 190, 191
[viii, 1]) This might indicate that the date of his death was 2 BC or
perhaps 1 BC.
According to Josephus, Herod died not long after an eclipse of the
moon and before a Passover. (Jewish Antiquities, XVII, 167 [vi, 4];
213 [ix, 3]) Since there was an eclipse on March 11, 4 BC. (March 13,
Julian), some have concluded that this was the eclipse referred to by
Josephus.
On the other hand, there was a total eclipse of the moon in 1 BC,
about three months before Passover, while the one in 4 BC was only
partial.
Another line of calculation centers around the age of Herod at the
time of his death. Josephus says that he was about 70 years old. He
says that at the time Herod received his appointment as governor of
Galilee (which is generally dated 47 BC), he was 15 years old; but
this has been understood by scholars to be an error, 25 years
evidently being intended. (Jewish Antiquities, XVII, 148 [vi, 1]; XIV,
158 [ix, 2]) Accordingly, Herod's death occurred in 2 BC or 1 BC.
--------------------end quote-----------------------------

That's how we wound up with this "seven-year" thing that people keep relying
on when interpreting prophecy. The actual numbers, without any great
manipulation, point to a different hypothesis altogether, and the narratives
start to flow together.

Martin gives 27-28 BC for the beginning of Christ's ministry, 30 AD
for the year of his crucifixion.

http://www.askelm.com/prophecy/p950102.htm

Doug
.

User: "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
Title: Re: END TIMES	08 Jun 2005 02:03:28 PM

"Douglas Cox" <tcc@sentex.net> wrote in message
news:ni5ea1hkjqoirj68erftea621nj593sk4h@4ax.com...
[snip[

--------------------begin quote-----------------------------

Date of His Death

Some chronologies hold that he died in the year 5 or 4 BC. Their
chronology is based to a large extent on Josephus' history. In dating
the time that Herod was appointed king by Rome, Josephus uses a
"consular dating", that is, he locates the event as occurring during
the rule of certain Roman consuls. According to this, Herod's
appointment as king would be in 40 BC, but the data of another
historian, Appianos, would place the event in 39 BC. By the same
method Josephus places Herod's capture of Jerusalem in 37 BC, but he
also says that this occurred 27 years after the capture of the city by
Pompey (which was in 63 BC). (Jewish Antiquities, XIV, 487, 488 [xvi,
4]) His reference to that latter event would make the date of Herod's
taking the city of Jerusalem 36 BC. Now, Josephus says that Herod died
37 years from the time that he was appointed king by the Romans, and
34 years after he took Jerusalem. (Jewish Antiquities, XVII, 190, 191
[viii, 1]) This might indicate that the date of his death was 2 BC or
perhaps 1 BC.

According to Josephus, Herod died not long after an eclipse of the
moon and before a Passover. (Jewish Antiquities, XVII, 167 [vi, 4];
213 [ix, 3]) Since there was an eclipse on March 11, 4 BC. (March 13,
Julian), some have concluded that this was the eclipse referred to by
Josephus.

On the other hand, there was a total eclipse of the moon in 1 BC,
about three months before Passover, while the one in 4 BC was only
partial.

Another line of calculation centers around the age of Herod at the
time of his death. Josephus says that he was about 70 years old. He
says that at the time Herod received his appointment as governor of
Galilee (which is generally dated 47 BC), he was 15 years old; but
this has been understood by scholars to be an error, 25 years
evidently being intended. (Jewish Antiquities, XVII, 148 [vi, 1]; XIV,
158 [ix, 2]) Accordingly, Herod's death occurred in 2 BC or 1 BC.

--------------------end quote-----------------------------

Interesting, but that still puts Jesus' birth at about 5 or 6 BC.
Here's another factor to consider.
Acts says that the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph and told him that
"they" who sought Jesus' life were dead, not just Herod. I checked the
parsing a while back and it is "they."
So, not only was Herod dead, but all those who were in cahoots with him.
This could push the birth even further forward on the scale.
Personally, I'm sticking to 6 or 7 BC, but it's no big deal. God called
Jesus out of Egypt in about 1 BC or 1 AD (there is no 0 AD) and there were
70 years to the destruction of the temple from that point. Likewise, there
were 62 years between the time Pompey defiled the temple in 63 BC to the
time God called Jesus up out of Egypt (again, there is no 0 AD), in
accordance with Matthew 2:15.
(The reason I note that there is no 0 AD is that we have to take off a year
when we cross the BC/AD line.)
Ike
.

User: "terry"
Title: Re: END TIMES	08 Jun 2005 05:07:32 PM

Ray wrote in message ...

"terry" <terry@desk.com> wrote in message
news:KM-dnQRbYNWO8TvfRVn-oA@netdoor.com...

traditional

7. There are many other points to consider along this line. What think

ye?

In Jesus,
Terry Ivy

these numbers and be 1 and not half? But before we go there also consider
that the 62 and 7 giving us 69 has the death of the Messiah, as cut off,
some translations say cut off from the land of the living. Such Cut off,

similar to the Isaiah 53 prophecy which says he bore our transgressions.
(from memory)

So if he is cut off after 69 weeks, by the people of the prince which is

come, they would not be his people cutting him off would they?
The prince which is to come, would most likely be the 70th week prince.

For

why would Jesus make a covenant and then break it? God does not break
covenants, for the scriptures say he is not a man that he should lie nor

the

son of a man that he should change his mind.

Ray,
Thanks for jumping in--no problem. You may want to read again the prophecy
of Daniel, for it reads different than your interpretation. Now, I'm not
attempting to change you, or anyone else's eschatology, but thought it
would be interesting for discussion.
Everything *revolves* around one's interpretation of the 'he' of 9:27.
Without wading through all of the options, let me present one which is
usually not discussed. Most hold the 'he' as the antichrist, but seem to
impose meanings into the verse and into the book of Revelation. When the
'he' is taken as antichrist, then 7 yrs is held as the time left to fulfill
this prophecy, and then this 7 yrs is superimposed upon a reading of
Revelation.
Those who hold to a 7 year period remaining, usually even admit that when
the 31/2 yrs is mentioned in Revelation, it is always referring to the
last part of the 7 year period/tribulation. But, they have no time to
delegate to the events before the 3 1/2 years are mentioned, so they work
backwards (by using the 'he' as antichrist) and say there must be 3 1/2
years before the afore mentioned 3 1/2, because we have 7 as the
foundation. However, 7 years is never mentioned in Revelation!!--only 3
1/2.
Well, this brings me to a possible change in interpretation concerning the
time left at the end of the age. If the 'he' in Dan. 9:27, is Jesus, and He
came to Israel after the 483 years/69 wks of the prophecy. How long did He
minister? 3 1/2 years! If He came to confirm the covenant for the last week
(7 years) of the prophecy, and His ministry was for half that time, and
Revelation ONLY mentions half that time, then everything fits without
having to do monkey flips. BTW, confirm means to 'cause to prevail, to be
strong, prevail.' Jesus came to 'confirm' the covenant spoken of by the
prophets to Israel.
And at His death, and in the "middle of the week," Jesus "caused the
sacrifice and the oblation to cease." The old covenant sacrifices came to
an eternal end in regards to atonement for sin with God at Calvary. This
would simply leave the last 3 1/2 years of the final week to be
fulfilled--which is what Revelation ALWAYS mentions! So the prophetic gap
would be between the 3 1/2 year sections of the last week, instead of
between the 69 and 70 week. Of course and unless someone is a loose
preterist and holds that at the stoning of Stephen the 70 weeks prophecy
came to a close. But this fails to hold up with the expected events which
will consumate with the completion of the prophecy as mentioned in Dan. 9.
Ray, just some thoughts. Much more can be discussed along these lines
which, IMOH, stays more accurate than much of what I studied and believed
over the years from preterism, to historicism, or hard nosed futurism, etc.
Just some things for those with open minds to look at. For if it is one
thing I realized many years ago, that is that there are various views which
have merit to them concerning eschatology. It is just sad when men use
'their package' to establish standards of Christian fellowship. Jesus is
definitely coming back, (even if someone holds to strict preterism) but the
hows and the whens are open for much discussion and consideration.
Sorry for the brevity, but as usual, I'm late for a meeting. Anyway, take
care....
In the Crucified, yet Risen Lamb,
Terry Ivy
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Bible was written in tears and to tears it will yield
its best treasures. God has nothing to say to the frivolous
man." - A. W. Tozer
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[snip]
.

User: "Ray"
Title: Re: END TIMES	08 Jun 2005 07:01:25 PM

was

going to divid a time delay between these, surely it would be to keep one

similar to the Isaiah 53 prophecy which says he bore our transgressions.
(from memory)

So if he is cut off after 69 weeks, by the people of the prince which is

come, they would not be his people cutting him off would they?
The prince which is to come, would most likely be the 70th week prince.

For

why would Jesus make a covenant and then break it? God does not break
covenants, for the scriptures say he is not a man that he should lie nor

the

son of a man that he should change his mind.

fulfill

this prophecy, and then this 7 yrs is superimposed upon a reading of
Revelation.

Those who hold to a 7 year period remaining, usually even admit that when
the 31/2 yrs is mentioned in Revelation, it is always referring to the
last part of the 7 year period/tribulation. But, they have no time to
delegate to the events before the 3 1/2 years are mentioned, so they work
backwards (by using the 'he' as antichrist) and say there must be 3 1/2
years before the afore mentioned 3 1/2, because we have 7 as the
foundation. However, 7 years is never mentioned in Revelation!!--only 3
1/2.

Well, this brings me to a possible change in interpretation concerning the
time left at the end of the age. If the 'he' in Dan. 9:27, is Jesus, and

came to Israel after the 483 years/69 wks of the prophecy. How long did He
minister? 3 1/2 years! If He came to confirm the covenant for the last

week

(7 years) of the prophecy, and His ministry was for half that time, and
Revelation ONLY mentions half that time, then everything fits without
having to do monkey flips. BTW, confirm means to 'cause to prevail, to be
strong, prevail.' Jesus came to 'confirm' the covenant spoken of by the
prophets to Israel.

And at His death, and in the "middle of the week," Jesus "caused the
sacrifice and the oblation to cease." The old covenant sacrifices came to
an eternal end in regards to atonement for sin with God at Calvary. This
would simply leave the last 3 1/2 years of the final week to be
fulfilled--which is what Revelation ALWAYS mentions! So the prophetic gap
would be between the 3 1/2 year sections of the last week, instead of
between the 69 and 70 week. Of course and unless someone is a loose
preterist and holds that at the stoning of Stephen the 70 weeks prophecy
came to a close. But this fails to hold up with the expected events which
will consumate with the completion of the prophecy as mentioned in Dan. 9.

Ray, just some thoughts. Much more can be discussed along these lines
which, IMOH, stays more accurate than much of what I studied and believed
over the years from preterism, to historicism, or hard nosed futurism,

etc.

Just some things for those with open minds to look at. For if it is one
thing I realized many years ago, that is that there are various views

which

have merit to them concerning eschatology. It is just sad when men use
'their package' to establish standards of Christian fellowship. Jesus is
definitely coming back, (even if someone holds to strict preterism) but

the

hows and the whens are open for much discussion and consideration.

Sorry for the brevity, but as usual, I'm late for a meeting. Anyway, take
care....

In the Crucified, yet Risen Lamb,
Terry Ivy

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Bible was written in tears and to tears it will yield
its best treasures. God has nothing to say to the frivolous
man." - A. W. Tozer
--------------------------------------------------------------------

[snip]

Hi Terry
Actually I have had this all unfold to me in the last 2 years or so.
Though I did go into this with one bias, and then tried to understand how
this idea was put forward.
That was by Barry R Smith (deceased 2002) and what he wrote in his first 3
books, Warning, Second WArning, and Final Warning. lol
Since then he apparently wrote many books, but I was not a fan of his, just
intrigued by some of what he had to say. In fact at one of his meetings and
listening to some of his quotes, he seemed to be quite a cocky smart *****.
However among my relatives, he became a topic of discussion. He never said
he was a prophet, but travel on donations to preach the end times warning.
He also had an idea for calculating the number of the beast which I also
tried to test for clues of divine inspiration back in 1985.
But one of Barry's things was the final 7 years. So when I tried to nut it
out only in early 2003, and there were other factors involved with world
events lining up for what looked to be a possible prophecy in Iraq, I
started to piece it all together and write it down.
Now you mentioned the 42 months, 1260 days, time times and half a time as
all mentioned in Revelation as taken to be the same period, exactly half of
7 years. However, it is possible that some of those refer to the first half
of those 7 years. (2 x 42 months).
I gave up on the idea until I saw somehting in the news of Iraq in November
2003, and it was then I looked at a possible bible prophecy, and a date I
wrote down for a 5 months period. And that date occured something on the
news. It was the start of a new military operatoin called Iron Hammer to act
upon intelligence gained from the last several months interrogations. Eactly
5 months after the start of Operation Desert Scorpion, which was to round up
suspects for questioning in Abu Ghraib.
Back in March or April I saw an apache helicopter on the news with the sun
shining of its dome (the Longbow A64-D model), and it appeared to be gold
like in appearance, above the blades. IF one saw the craft as having a head
and tail, then the CROWN would suppose to be on its head, but its not quite
its head. The prophecy says they had upon their heads as it were, crowns of
gold.
So I had hunches as well as things standing out. So that was another angle I
was looking at to see where that led.
Back to the 70 weeks. I actually did some search online, and had something
turn up about the star of Bethlehem at Jesus birth as followed by the Magi.
This site had been created in 1999 or earlier, and it estimated Jesus birth
on September 11, and not Decemeber 25.
It was then I decided to re-read more on these things online and read the 70
weeks and see what others have found. And the 69 weeks starting in the 20th
year of Artaxerxes given in the account of Nehemiah 2, and history pointing
to this in 446BC.
The chart I made up
http://watchman888.land.ru/images/daniels69weeks.gif
actually has much more information. It takes into account the cencus and the
best time to kill two birds with the one stone and collect taxes as well at
a harvest feast. This 3 way coinciding seemed a logical use of resources for
the Romans.
Also it takes into account the value of Jesus, Messiah, Gospel and Cross, as
taken from Smith's code each having the sum value of 444.
This was the count from the decree to the year of birth. The year of birth
being an independant calc based on two great signs occuring in the heavens.
That is enough for now. And I would appreciate you consider both diagrams
and how they fit together before you reply, else it will be as if I have
said nothing, and that you have not thought about these things I have spent
many hours gathering together. And I do not mean to be rude or
confrontational, but am totally sick of not being heard and getting a down
pat answer which thinks it does not need to look at those things. I am not
saying you are doing it, but if you are sending something while rushing out
the door, its a safe bet it could go there.
For one must look at how they all fit together nicely. This is MY WORK, not
someone elses. So I will defend it. I probably and not so good at taking
criticism, especially if it is to spout a preconceived notion. Please do not
take offense at this, I am just trying to say, dont do these things I am
mentioning.
I wish I had a thicker skin, which might explain why Barry R Smith was a bit
of a cocky smart *****. If I have cause a ruffle of feathers, please accept my
appologies. Perhaps I am lacking in self esteem far too much to discuss
this. Please bare with me. Discussion is not a skill I have, in my house
growing up it was domination and orders and beltings. But I try to manage
and am too afraid to have kids for fear of being too heavy on them as is the
natural reaction of copying our parents, especially in stressful times.
This may seem to go all over the place, but it must. For it is several
independant threads converging to prove a point. Like a set of cross hairs
these are pointing at 3 dates. And for Jesus birth we have 2 dates, which
are within the same 24 hour period.
http://watchman888.land.ru/images/JCbirth2.gif
Skyglobe shows these signs...
It has start the Magi were most likely observing, Jupiter (planetes in Greek
means wanderer, and all lights were seen as stars, even gods) aligns with
Regulus on Sept 11, 3BC. Some time later Jupiter goes into it's retograde
cycle. All planets do this. It is an optical illusion where it appears to
stop still and reverse direction, then resume again. It is based on the
orbit and rotation of the earth. So what happened is that not only did
Jupiter align with Regulus, it also did this 3 times. For the timing of the
retograde be to align with Regulus is also a major sign. For it could have
happened anywhere and not passed another major star, but the timing was for
this. Now Regulus apparently has the meaning "the little king". And Jupiter
is the Roman name for Zeus, which is the King of the gods. So while the
pagan type ideas have meanings, often they are distortions of what is. We
know there is one God, we know stars cannot fall to earth. But we need to
look at what they thought back then. The Magi were not rebuked for following
the sign. What I am talking about is NOT astrology, but simple observations
of FREAK signs.
The other sign which occurs the following morning at sunrise on the 12th of
Sept 3BC, is Virgo rising with the sun. The Moon rises after her as if at
her feet. The fact be known, the sun would hide everything after it breached
the horizon. So to the observers they would be filling in the blanks in
their minds and with their maps of the stars. With skyglobe we can see that
it is very close to be in alignment with her feet. The constellation the
Serpent rose about the same time as the moon to the left... it has some
angle changes which might be deemed as heads for each of the starts, perhaps
7