Mark of the Beast
#95
It is absolutely obvious to the adept scholar of Scripture that the Apocalypse of St. John is primarily about the destruction of Biblical Judaism circa 70 AD.  There is just WAY too much evidence that points to this, both internally and externally.  Now, with that being said, Revelation could very well be dual-prophetic - that is, some or even most of the prophesies could be fulfilled once again at a future time.  But...we do not know this for sure, but it seems that there could be some sort of inverse in fulfillment concerning this very difficult book of the Bible.

I declare myself a preterist (not a hyper-preterist, but what is nowadays called a "partial preterist," which is actually the most Catholic position).  I have absolutely no problem stating that the first 20 chapters of Revelation are primarily fulfilled during the 1st century with the destruction of the Jewish Temple.  Even the owners of this site claim the same thing as I do, and they have an excellent article on this very site about this subject:   http://www.fisheaters.com/endtimes.html   I also see the obvious Scriptural references of Christ stating that his "coming" is imminent.  This is because there are actually two separate "comings" that Christ and the Apostles speak of - the "spiritual" judgment coming upon Jerusalem, when the Kingdom of Heaven begins and Satan is bound -- and the final "physical" Second Coming of Christ at the end of time.  There are no two ways around this, it is a Scriptural fact - but the confusion is wrought because these two comings are mentioned in the same manner.  It only takes careful study to realize which of these are being explained.  Take a look at a few verses and see:

Matthew 10:23 -- When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next; for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel, before the Son of man comes.

Matthew 16:27,28 --  For the Son of man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay every man for what he has done. 28* Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

We see NUMEROUS times in the Gospels of Christ speaking about His Kingdom, stating that the Kingdom of Heaven was at hand, was imminent.  Here are some examples in Matthew alone:

1. "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." (Matt. 3:2)

2. "The axe is already laid at the root of the trees." (Matt. 3:10)

3. "His winnowing fork is in His hand." (Matt. 3:12)

4. "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." (Matt. 4:17)

5. "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." (Matt. 10:7)

Now, when did the Son of Man "come in His Kingdom?"  In 70 AD, when the Jewish Temple fell and Satan was bound - thus the Kingdom of Heaven was given to the world. "'When the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vine-growers?' '...He will bring those wretches to a wretched end, and will rent out the vineyard to other vine-growers, who will pay him the proceeds at the proper seasons.' '...Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you, and be given to a nation producing the fruit of it.' ...When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard His parables, they understood that He was speaking about them." (Matt. 21:40-41,43,45)   

We see in Matthew 24:3 that there are actually two separate questions being asked. Jesus answers the first question concerning the spiritual "coming" of Christ.  Jesus gives several blatant signs that will occur before the Son of Man comes into His Kingdom.  Then after all of the signs are given, He states:  "This generation will not pass away until all these things take place." (Matt. 24:34)  Indeed, 40 years later the spiritual "coming" of Christ occured. THEN in verse 36, Jesus begins to answer the second part of the question posed in verse 3, "when will be the close of the age?"  For this Christ says:  But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, * but the Father only. 37* As were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of man.   The mood totally shifts in this verse.  When speaking of the spiritual "coming" upon Jerusalem, Jesus gave specific signs that would be right before His coming.  For his physical Second Coming, nobody knows the day or the hour, not even Jesus Himself or the angels, but the Father alone.

Jesus was very, very clear in saying that Jerusalem would suffer a judgement:

Matthew 23:34-24:2
"Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Or as Luke puts it:

"...the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation; From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation."


What else is stated about the spiritual judgment coming on Jerusalem?:  "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it; 22 for these are days of vengeance, to fulfil all that is written (Luke 21:21,22)  ---  For the days shall come upon you, when your enemies will cast up a bank about you and surround you, and hem you in on every side, 44* and dash you to the ground, you and your children within you, and they will not leave one stone upon another in you; because you did not know the time of your visitation (Luke 19:43)

The absolute significance of Christ's spiritual judgment coming upon Jerusalem is not dealt with nowadays in Christianity as it should.  This is when Jesus came in His Father's glory, in His Kingdom.  Remember what Jesus said to Caiaphas when he was about to be executed:   But I tell you, hereafter you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven (Matt 26:64)  Coming upon the "clouds of heaven" IS a judgment coming, and was used many times in the Old Testament.  This made Caiaphas outraged, and he rent his garment. 

Now look at the first part of Revelation:   THE revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants what must soon take place ... Behold, he is coming with the clouds...

Thus, the book of Revelation IS about the spiritual "coming" of Christ upon Jerusalem.  The esoteric symbolism is used to present the physical realities of the Roman armies coming to destroy the city.  The evidence in support is overwhelming.  God the Father also used armies to act as instruments of judgment in Old Testament days, when He "came on the clouds" to judge.

Christ came in His Father's glory in His "spiritual" coming, His judgement coming upon Jerusalem that ushered in His Kingdom.  Jesus will come in HIS glory at the end of time, and Scripture tells us this most clearly.  We see in Matthew 16:27,28 that Christ is speaking about coming in His Father's glory, and we see the evidence -- For the Son of man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay every man for what he has done. 28* Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." We know that this MUST be Christ's spiritual coming, for He stated that there were some in His midst who would not taste death until He came in His Kingdom.  He also stated that "this generation shall not pass until all this things take place." and He told Caiaphas that he would see "the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven."  BUT, Jesus will come in HIS glory at the end of days, and we see the evidence in Matthew 25 -- When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.  Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left. Then the King will say to those at his right hand, 'Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world;

The confusion is wrought in Scripture when one cannot separate the two "comings" of Christ.  I am not saying that Christ's spiritual judment coming was the Second Coming as some hyperpreterist claim, but that it was something unique.  His true "Second Coming" is the second in a direct line of type, His Second physical coming.

Now, Revelation could also be about Christ's physical Second Coming, a judgment coming upon earth.  BUT, we must not jump to conclusions, or we would be no better than the John Hagee's of the world.  Just because the Third Secret may have something to do with Revelation 12 doesn't necessarily mean that ALL of Revelation is about the future.  It could just be related to that specific Scripture is some way.  We know that ALL of the Apocalypse of St. John is about the past.  Some, most or possibly even all of it could also be about the future, too.  The only way we will find out is to see what happens tommorrow...
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Mark of the Beast - by Munda_cor_meum - 11-21-2009, 04:37 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 11-21-2009, 07:20 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by AntoniusMaximus - 11-21-2009, 07:50 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by kimbaichan - 11-21-2009, 09:05 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by SoCalLocal - 11-22-2009, 12:48 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Stubborn - 11-22-2009, 07:47 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Petertherock - 11-22-2009, 03:35 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Nic - 11-23-2009, 05:24 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by savienu - 11-23-2009, 09:43 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 11-27-2009, 08:02 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 11-30-2009, 02:21 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 11-30-2009, 03:16 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 11-30-2009, 10:32 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by SoCalLocal - 11-30-2009, 11:39 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 11-30-2009, 12:36 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 11-30-2009, 01:56 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 11-30-2009, 06:02 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 11-30-2009, 10:44 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Iuvenalis - 12-01-2009, 01:20 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-01-2009, 02:49 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 12-01-2009, 08:52 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-01-2009, 10:31 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by RalphKramden - 12-01-2009, 11:12 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by CrusaderKing - 12-01-2009, 02:15 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-01-2009, 03:24 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 12-01-2009, 06:28 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Iuvenalis - 12-01-2009, 06:40 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by CrusaderKing - 12-01-2009, 07:48 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by CrusaderKing - 12-01-2009, 07:54 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-01-2009, 08:43 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Munda_cor_meum - 12-01-2009, 09:03 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-01-2009, 09:13 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-01-2009, 09:27 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 12-02-2009, 12:42 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-02-2009, 11:20 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-02-2009, 11:35 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-02-2009, 12:14 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-02-2009, 12:22 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-02-2009, 12:57 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-02-2009, 01:11 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by IrishCowboy - 12-02-2009, 01:41 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 12-02-2009, 06:55 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-02-2009, 07:05 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-02-2009, 07:15 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by IrishCowboy - 12-02-2009, 07:26 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-02-2009, 08:55 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-02-2009, 10:08 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-02-2009, 10:13 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-02-2009, 10:18 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-02-2009, 11:24 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-02-2009, 11:30 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by IrishCowboy - 12-03-2009, 01:28 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 12-03-2009, 06:31 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by IrishCowboy - 12-03-2009, 06:54 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by INPEFESS - 12-03-2009, 07:21 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-03-2009, 07:37 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by INPEFESS - 12-03-2009, 09:17 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-03-2009, 09:29 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-03-2009, 10:14 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Louis_Martin - 12-03-2009, 10:26 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-03-2009, 10:26 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-03-2009, 10:32 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by James02 - 12-03-2009, 11:17 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by INPEFESS - 12-03-2009, 11:32 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by IrishCowboy - 12-04-2009, 12:52 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-04-2009, 02:20 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-04-2009, 03:23 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 12-04-2009, 07:02 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-04-2009, 08:41 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-04-2009, 09:04 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-04-2009, 12:58 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-04-2009, 12:59 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-04-2009, 01:23 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by IrishCowboy - 12-04-2009, 02:08 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-04-2009, 02:16 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 12-04-2009, 07:30 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-05-2009, 12:41 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-05-2009, 01:16 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by INPEFESS - 12-05-2009, 01:29 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-05-2009, 02:02 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-05-2009, 02:04 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by INPEFESS - 12-05-2009, 02:07 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by John C - 12-05-2009, 04:02 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-05-2009, 04:08 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by DJR - 12-05-2009, 09:00 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Nic - 12-09-2009, 07:35 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by ggreg - 12-12-2009, 06:56 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Nic - 12-13-2009, 10:45 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by 59zvc - 12-14-2009, 02:23 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Historian - 12-14-2009, 02:40 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by 59zvc - 12-14-2009, 04:11 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Nic - 12-15-2009, 05:35 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 12-15-2009, 08:45 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by unknown - 12-19-2009, 03:30 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Nic - 12-19-2009, 06:10 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by unknown - 12-19-2009, 07:45 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Nic - 12-19-2009, 08:01 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Foligno - 01-13-2010, 06:08 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Nic - 01-13-2010, 08:12 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Arun - 01-14-2010, 07:48 PM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Nic - 01-15-2010, 08:04 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by churchesoffortwayne - 02-17-2010, 06:30 AM
Re: Mark of the Beast - by Nic - 02-22-2010, 09:41 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)