Those Who Deny the Covenant of the Antichrist for Seven Years
Re: Gakak45 - Youtube
You're just picking names out of a hat with no specificity. When John was writing he said the beast "was" and "and one is" (Rev. 17.10 indicating the king at that time was not the Antichrist, so Domitian was not the Antichrist. None of your names work with this understanding. Also, all scholars agree 666 is a number associated with the beast so we can know who he is with certainty. He is the first beast, the Antichrist. Of all the Caesars it was Nero, for Neron Kaisar in Aaramaic equals 666. At the time of John's writing in 95 AD, there were on record 5 Caesars who died horrific deaths ("five are fallen" v.10) being murdered or committed suicide. Your sixth is dead, but the sixth according to John was alive at the time of his writing.Originally Posted by Gakak45
"The other is not yet come; and when he cometh..." (v.10). This is in the future. So is the 8th. The 8th is Nero, since the 8th is one of the five, but also of the seven because he is the culmination of all their evil and will possess the seventh who "must continue a short space" (v.10).
"Head wound" is very specific terminology that leaves the person probably in a coma. It is at this time this seventh who received the head wound becomes possessed by the eighth, the Antichrist.As for the head wound, John merely saw one of the symbolic heads "as if wounded to death". That means it received a mortal wound, that is, the wound would have been deadly had it not been healed by some means.
These are future events. When I say in the future someone will be wounded or slain, that is just the grammar in the way we speak. Revelation 13 are future events in the Tribulation of 7 years. This 7th man or consecutive head is a man with personality. When he survives the deadly head wound, the Antichrist possess him.The verb sphazo (meaning "wounded" or "slain") is used in the perfect passive participle, clearly indicating this had already occured when John wrote it. The verb for "deadly wound" is plege, which means a deadly stroke.
He is physically attacked to point of near death.John never describes the nature of the wound, where it was inflicted or by whom. He does say, however, the wound was inflicted by a sword. (Rev 13:14). Now the word translated "sword" is macharia in Greek. It means "a small sword, or dirk-like object".
It is not the Antichrist who gets wounded in the head, but the forerunner to the Antichrist. Remember, the Antichrist is the 8th in Revelation 17, not the 7th. The 7th is only here for a short while because of that deadly head wound in Rev. 13.3,14. These are clearly future events: "and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder" (Rev. 17.8). The 8th comes out of the pit by the Satan the Restrainer to possess the body of the 7th.Where do you get the idea that the Anti-Christ gets wounded in the head? The Scripture clearly states this has already happened, so that rules out the future Anti-Christ since his kingdom hasn't even begun at this point (Rev 17:8).
Put yourself in John's perspective in which he is very familiar with the Roman Empire's pursuits in his day and Nero who killed the most Christians in history. Even though Domitian was the 12th, only 5 Caesars had died horrible deaths (excluding the year of 4). It doesn't matter how they were killed, just that they were. Since Domitian is the 6th, the 7th is in the future who receives the deadly head wound.Which of the six former kings, of the six former empires (Pharaoh, Sennacherib, Nebuchadnezzar, Darius, Alexander the Great, and Ceasar--I made sure to mention them this time!) suffered such a wound? Julius Ceasar instantly comes to mind. Unfortunately, though Ceasar was stabbed repeatedly with a large dagger or sword, he ultimately died as a result. How about your guy Nero? He committed suicide by stabbing himself through the neck. Unfortunately though, like Ceasar, he did not survive.
Silly. Trying to make an arrow the same as a large knife or small sword. In war everyone probably gets hit at least once by a similar object. The 7th is in the future after the 6th at John's time.The description matches none of these guys, except one. You guessed it. Alexander the Great. It's well-documented, historic fact that at the town of Malli, near the Ravi River in India, Alexander was struck in the chest by a 39-inch barbed arrow, which pierced his lung and came out his neck (ouch). No one, not even his troops, not even his doctors, thought he'd survive. Yet he did. It took thirty-nine different surgical procedures to mend the damage, but it healed.
It is the forerunner, the 7th who signs the peace treaty, receives the wound, possibly a head wound, suffers a near fatal death, then Neron Kaisar possesses him.Also, let's talk about the Seven-Year Peace Treaty. First off, the Anti-Christ will not sign a peace treaty with anyone, much less for seven years. He will only appear on earth for the last three and a half years of the Tribulation (Rev 12:6, 14; 13:5).
In the future there will be a 7 year peace treated by the forerunner who become the Antichrist.Secondly, this whole idea stems from the erroneous exegesis of Daniel 9:27 which reads: "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week" (Which, in prophetic lingo, refers not to a literal week (seven days), but a sabbatical week (seven years).
It will exist when a treaty is made prior to the 7 year Tribulation Sept. 14, 2015 to Aug. 7, 2022.To "confirm", according to the dictionary, means to "ratify, reinforce or make formally valid something that already exists".
You can't "confirm" something that doesn't (already) exist.
"The prince" (Dan. 9.26) who comes to destroy is none other than the Antichrist. "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one set of 7 years" (v.27). It is the forerunner who makes the peace treaty, but when he dies and Nero inhabits his body, then desolation are poured out. Naturally before desolation is peace, just like in the time of Noah, they were "eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark" (Matt. 24.38). We know peace in the middle east is the hardest thing to come by and this is the center stage. "For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape" (1 Thess. 5.3).The Anti-Christ is mentioned nowhere in this verse.
The word "peace" is found nowhere in this verse.
The word "treaty" is not found either.
You're being petty. "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate" (Dan. 9.27).Nowhere does it state that the covenant is made, then broken. The words "make" and "break" are not found there either.
Canceling Jewish sacrifices is very offensive to Israel. "Make" is the word used to make desolate.
There is no 7 year covenant with Abraham's seed. How silly. It is yet in the future, because the 7th was not even born at the time of John's writing, but the 8th had died, but would come again to be brought out of the pit by Satan.This verse doesn't refer to a future covenant, but to the already existing covenant between God and Abraham's seed.
The first 69 weeks had to do with Jesus. There were exactly 69 sets of 7 of 360 days each which took us from Nisan 1, 444 BC, the declaration to rebuild the temple, to when the Messiah would be "cut off". Jesus entered Jerusalem on Monday, the first day inspection of the Lamb. The 4 day inspection was March. 28, 29, 30, 31. Jesus died on the cross April 1, 33 AD (Gregorian) on Friday. The 70th week has to do with a lot of things: restoring a remnant of Israel, Satan's wrath, God's wrath and the consummation of this age. In Dan. 9.26 "the people of the prince that shall come" is not the "Messiah be cut off, not for himself". Jesus doesn't make desolate, but Satan does through his Antichrist. Jesus's people are not "the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary." Those are Satan's people and the people of the Antichrist "that shall come" (v.26).The prophecy of the seventy weeks has nothing to do with the Anti-Christ, and everything to do with Jesus Christ. The "He" mentioned here isn't the Anti-Christ, but the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Jesus, not the Anti-Christ, is the subject and focus of this prophecy (Dan 9:25).
You're confusing Jesus for the people of the Antichrist. 70 AD is verse 26, but it is not Jesus who does this, but the people of the Antichrist who is to come, that being Neron Kaisar resurrected.The preceding verses, 25 and 26, refer to Jerusalem, the Messiah, and His atoning death. Verse 26 also refers to the destruction of the second Temple by the Romans, which took place in 70 AD. The words "...the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple)" were fulfilled, in precise detail, when Titus completely destroyed Jerusalem and the second temple.
Both are wrong. Read carefully. It doesn't say Titus. It says the people of the prince who is to come. These are people who follow after the Antichrist who will yet come, but now they at that time tear down the Temple.In context, when verse 27 says "...he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week", there are only two possible interpretations:
1. That it refers to the Messiah, who's the subject of the previous two verses.
2. That it refers to the prince (Titus) who destroyed the city and the temple.
It's got to be one or the other.
"The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary." All students of Revelation know that this refers to the Romans. After the death of Christ the Jews incurred God’s severe judgment: the Romans came and destroyed Jerusalem and its temple sanctuary in 70 A.D. Since the term "the people" refers to the Romans, many accordingly think that the term "the prince" obviously points to the Roman prince Titus who led the Romans. But there are many reasons to refute this conclusion. Why is it that the Scripture here does not say the prince shall destroy the city but rather says the people of the prince? Although the prince must work through his people, it is still unnatural to say the people and not directly say the prince. Since the Holy Spirit mentions both the prince and the people, while nevertheless putting a primary emphasis on the people, can it be that He is implying by this that these people represent the people of that prince who is yet to come? If so, then the prince in question here is not Titus, and the people who attacked Jerusalem in the former day were in spirit and in attitude morally the people of the future prince. This prince whom Daniel prophecies about will be a world renown figure in the future, who is the Antichrist. "The prince that shall come" is therefore the Antichrist.
Since both are not true for this passage, then the 3rd choice is the correct one, that the people of the future Antichrist destroyed the city. Titus was not murdered nor did he commit suicide. He died on of natural causes and his name does not add up to 666.Your only choices are to believe it's the Messiah that confirms the covenant, or that Titus, who devastated Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD, will someday return as the Anti-Christ and make a Seven-Year Peace Treaty with Jews who, to this very day, despise him.
The covenant will be a brokered peace deal prior to the Tribulation starting, and commences Sept. 14, 2015 for 2,520 days to Aug. 7, 2022 when Jesus steps down on the mount of olives."The covenant" refers to the (already existing) eternal covenant God made with Abraham and his Seed. This chapter begins with a reference to that covenant (Dan 9:4). The exact same word in Hebrew, beryith, is used in both verses (4 and 26). In verse 4, Daniel is not talking about a "Seven-Year Peace Treaty", but about the (Abrahamic) covenant.
There is no 7 year covenant in Dan. 9.4. The covenant in Dan. 9.4 is for Israel to be His chosen ones to be the center of all nations. Since there is no 7 year Abrahamic covenant we are talking about end-times: "even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate" (v.27). Where has in history this been fulfilled? "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy"?
None of these things were true in Jesus' day, nor 70 AD, nor at any time in history. Not till the consummation is completed in Daniel's last seven will Jesus return to judge and reign in the millennial kingdom will this be so. Did you know God is sick in His heart because at least 10,000 people die every day from starvation and at least 50,000 die every day needlessly? Hundreds if not thousands of people are murdered and raped every day. Think about that! You need to get a conscience. Do I need to go into the 70 million killed by Mao, 40 million by Stalin and 30 million by Hitler? Do I need to mention China executes 10,000 of its people every year. Do I need to talk about nuclear bombs pointing at each other? Rev. 20.3 says the nations won't be deceived in the 1000 years; surely they are deceived now still with so much war and rumors of wars. That is no millennial peace.
.The Messiah doesn't make this covenant. He confirms the already existing one. He ratifies it
Jesus never made a 7 year covenant nor did he ratify one.
This is a covenant, but it is not a 7 year covenant. You're barking up the wrong tree.How?
By dying on Mount Moriah where Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac 2,000 years earlier. Abraham prophesied that God would provide Himself a lamb for the sacrifice and even called the place Yahwe Jireh (God will provide) (Gen 22:8,14). Jesus was the Lamb God provided, to confirm His covenant with Abraham and his Seed, just like Abraham predicted, just like Daniel predicted (Gen 22:8-14, Jn 1:29). Since the Messiah is Abraham's Seed, only the Messiah is qualified to confirm such covenant.
This is Paul's teaching in the New Testament:
"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect." (Gal 3:16-17)
Nobody is saying Abraham is confirming a covenant with Antichrist. You're confusing covenants. Jesus did not destroy the Temple, the people of future Antichrist did it. Even Titus is a follower of the Antichrist of our future.The Anti-Christ never was, nor will he ever be, Abraham's Seed. Therefore, there's no way he can confirm the (Abrahamic) covenant. It's the Messiah who caused the (animal) sacrifice and oblation (grain offering) to cease. God no longer accepts such sacrifices and offerings, since the ultimate sacrifice for sin, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Messiah, already offered Himself as the final, eternal, all-sufficient sacrifice to confirm the eternal covenant God made with Abraham (Heb 9:12, 10:14).
The Messiah is the one who caused the animal sacrifices to cease, but you are confusing the Old Testament sacrifices with what Israel will due once they rebuild their Temple soon. This Temple will be built (2 Thess. 2.4, Rev. 11.2, Matt. 24.15).
"When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)" (Matt. 24.15). Jesus is not an abomination. "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be" (Matt. 24.21). The holocaust against the Jews in WWI & WWII were far worse than what happened in 70 AD. You are worshiping the Antichrist because you accuse Jesus of destroying the Temple in 70 AD.
Jesus did atone for the sins of the world, so there is no more need for sacrifices, since Jesus is the once-for-all sacrifice. When the sacrifices occur during the Tribulation, God never sanctioned them.
Yes and it is never a 7 year peace deal. It is for forever. When Jesus entered Jerusalem, he never made a peace deal for 7 years and then broke it. How silly.It's only the Messiah's precious Blood that can confirm His Covenant. It's only His Blood that forever washes away our sins. Praise His Holy Name!
Since the covenant in Dan. 9.26-27 definitely can't be to do with Jesus since Jesus does not destroy the Temple in 70 AD, then it is none other than that peace treaty you are so against. The evil nature of this "prince" can't be Jesus. The covenant is uncovered when peace abounds.There's nothing in the entire Bible about a "Seven-Year Peace Treaty". Don't bother to look for one because there won't be one.
"And he shall confirm a covenant with the many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease" (v.27a Darby). The preceding verse tells us of the destructive actions of Antichrist; this next verse continues to speak of his action. The last seven is divided into two halves. At the beginning of the last seven, the Antichrist will confirm a covenant with many. This covenant is not the Old Covenant which God singularly covenanted with His people, for the use of the indefinite article "a" here proves it. The phrase "the many" with the use of the definite article "the" refers to a special group of people — even the Jews. So that this covenant will be a political pact between the Jews and the Antichrist. The duration of the pact is to be seven years, but in the middle of this term of years Antichrist will break it. This is the meaning of the words, "he shall think to change the times and the law," found in chapter 7 and verse 25. Here we may see the similarity disclosed between this prince and the little horn mentioned in chapter 7.
In the midst of these seven years in question, Antichrist shall break the covenant, and thus the rest of this period of the seven (that is to say, three years and a half) shall be in his hand. During these three and a half years he shall also wear out the saints (7.25). And during the same three and a half years, this little horn will attempt to change time and season, and cause sacrifice and oblation to cease. At the present moment the Jews have neither sacrifice nor oblation; but in the future these will be restored. We now have seen the beginning of the return of the Jews to Palestine and have also heard of their desire to restore these things. The end is truly near.
Why will the Antichrist cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease? Because at that time he will speak blasphemously against God (see ch. 7). Since sacrifice and oblation are offered to God, he will naturally forbid them. "And upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end" (v.27b). "The wing of abominations" speaks of idols. In the temple of God the wings of the cherubim covered the ark. Yet Antichrist shall enter God’s temple and proclaim himself God (2 Thess. 2), thus having the wings of abominations. Due to this idolatry, God will permit desolations to extend for three and a half years until the end of the seventy sevens. "And that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate" (v.27c). The desolate is Jerusalem. As the end of the seventy sevens approaches, the nations shall gather to attack Jerusalem. Then shall the Lord fight for her (Zech. 14.1-6). And so shall the word of Daniel 9.24 be fulfilled.
There is no glory "for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate" (Dan. 9.27). Nor does God get glory in "the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined" (v.26).This portion of scripture glorifies God and exalts His faithfulness, and yet you would ascribe the prophecy to the Anti-Christ?
What was it you said about checks and balances again?
Do you realize you worship Satan? For when Antichrist reigns you are free to accept him since you won't think of him as the Antichrist, because you deny the 7 year peace treaty even when it happens, even when 1/3 of the people of the earth killed (Rev. 9.18) and 200 million military units congregate in the middle east (v.16).
Hope this helps.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks