Greg Laurie Explains Significance of the Mark of the Beast, 666

Laurie states, "Revelation 13 talks about spiritually dark times... the man of sin, the beast… best known as the antichrist… the most evil man who's ever lived… history's vilest embodiment of sin and rebellion."

However, I only see the word antichrist four times in the new testament and none of them ever appear in the book of Revelation.

Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour. (1 John 2:18)

Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. (1 John 2:22)

and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world. (1 John 4:3)

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. (2 John 1:7)

This Holy Spirit inspired Apostle speaks of a plurality of antichrists and a spirit of anthichrist. He also speaks of the first century as the "last hour" where many antichrists have appeared.

How does Laurie go from John's multiple antichrists in the first century teaching to one super-villain nearly 2000 years later?

Matthew2323 wrote ///How does Laurie go from John's multiple antichrists in the first century teaching to one super-villain nearly 2000 years later?///

I agree why the church is looking for a pretrib rapture or a super-villain to arise they might find themselves unpleasently suprised, It seems to me personaly that such things are speaking of movements, we should ask ourselves what movements or systems are responsable for the blood of the saints, and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus down through history.

I think Paul address that question in the second chapter of 2 Thessalonians when he talks about the mystery of iniquity that will be fully manisfested in the man of sin, the son of perdition. A sort of incarnation of Satan in the flesh.

2 Thessalonians 2
(1) Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
(2) That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
(3) Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
(4) Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
(...)

There are so many theories about the mark of the beast but in reality what does it really mean from a practical standpoint? Whenever we hear of some 'chip' some Christians want to yell MARK OF THE BEAST! without understanding what is going on with the chip.

How does the Mark of the Beast show that the world is moving toward Bible Prophecy?

Benjamin7,

Paul's letters to the Thessalonians were written in the early 50s and he speaks of the "man of sin" who "sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." Since this was written while the Temple was still standing, we should expect the 'man of sin' to be a first centruy figure.

Could we correlate the 'man of sin' who was "shewing himself that he is God" with Jesus' statement about the abomination of desolation? If so, who fits that description?

DEADn, Something to consider:

"The first readers of Revelation were told to “calculate the number of the Beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six” (13:18). Since Revelation was written to a first-century audience, we should expect the first-century readers to be able to calculate the number with relative ease and understand the result... Notice that the number is “six hundred and sixty-six, not three sixes.”

"When Nero Caesar’s name is transliterated into Hebrew, which a first-century Jew would probably have done, he would have gotten Neron Kesar or simply nrwn qsr, since Hebrew has no letters to represent vowels... When we take the letters of Nero’s name and spell them in Hebrew, we get the following numeric values: n=50, r=200, w=6, n=50, q=100, s=60, r=200 = 666."

See more: http://americanvision.org/1746/mark-of-beast-or/

Btw, you almost have 666 post here at SI... :)

Hi Matthew,

I don't get the Nero's calculated name reference. After all, Nero was dead for about thirty years when John had his revelation.

Nero's name properly spelled in Hebrew transliterated from the Latin--which is how his name would have been understood in the Roman world--does not equate to 666. The way you get Nero (really it's Nero's name plus his title of Caesar) to equal 666 is to transliterate his name into Greek and then transliterate the Greek name plus his title into Hebrew and then you have to misspell it by adding a Hebrew letter in order to achieve the calculation.

Other problems with an early date (A.D. 62-64) are:

Smyrna didn't have an active church until the early to mid 80's it didn't exist in A.D.64.

The apostle John's ministry to the Ephesian and surrounding churches didn't begin until after the fall of Jerusalem when he fled to Ephesus.

The condemnation and rebuking of many of the Churches in the initial chapters of Revelation become very awkward as they had just received the praise of the apostle Paul. Also related there is not even a hint of these issues in the Asian Churches in Paul's letters to them which would have been written very close to an early date for the Revelation.

The early church fathers testimony is that John wrote the Revelation around A.D.95

Nero's persecution of Christians was extremely local and never expanded beyond the city limits of Rome and only lasted for a very brief period. It's hard to imagine him being the great persecutor of the Church and of Israel.

"We have never been closer to the end of the world than right now,"

Indeed. but any "right now," as long as it is after yesterday's "right now" is closer to the end of the world.

Paul and the other apostles used a lot of words like "shortly" and "soon" when writing to their 1st century audiences about "last days." By the way, these 1st centrury persons were real people undergoing real persecution.

Were the apostles simply mistaken?

TK

Chris,
The theory that John wrote in the 90s is modern churchian myhtology and is about as valid as the Jesus Seminar's assertion that "John" was written in 120 AD. The internal evidence is what clues us in to an early dating.

Jeremy,
It is interesting to note that some manuscripts changed 666 to 616 because of the Latin variation.

I'd be curious to know what sources you've studied for the historical assertions that you've made.

If memory serves me correctly there was only one church father that thought of the later date for the Revelation and that, like anything, is even debated. However, even if every church father thought the book had been written in 95 AD the internal evidence disagrees.

When John mentions the Temple and seeing people worship in it, how would this have made any sense to someone if it had first been written in 95? To what Temple was he referring? Was the Holy Spirit trying to confuse the first readers of the letter?

Consider John's prologue:

"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John, who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it; for the time is near."

Clearly what follows is to be understood by those who first read the epistle. Notice that two expression of time: "must soon take place" and "the time is near." What in the context of the letter would lead a first centry believer to conclude that "soon" and "near" equate to 2000 years later and not something imminent?

Even if one rejects the calculation of the number of the beast as being Caesar Nero, this still does not lead us to the conclusion that "the things which must soon take place" should be interpreted as multi-antichrists 2000 years later.

Grace and peace,
Matthew

PS TMK - well spoken.

Hi Matthew,

My information comes from Robert Mounce, Biblical languages scholar who wrote Basics of Biblical Greek and other like works. To quote him specifically, "What is not generally stressed is that this solution asks us to calculate a Hebrew transliteration of the Greek form of a Latin name, and that with a defective spelling." This is from his commentary on the book of Revelation edited by F.F. Bruce

According to Church historians David Brady in his book, The Contribution of British Writers Between 1560 and 1830 to the Interpretation of Revelation, and William Milligan, Discussions on the Apocalypse, the attribution of the number of the name of the beast to Nero did not take place until the nineteenth century attributed to four German scholars, over 1,800 years after the writing of the book.

I believe internal evidence supports a late date of the writing of the book and is against an early date. I'll talk about Smyrna again. In Polycarp's letter to the Church at Philipi, Polycarp (the leader of the Church at Smyrna) specifically states that there was no Church in his city during the time that Paul ministered in Asia Minor. Polycarp attributes his conversion and the founding of the Smyrna Church to the ministry of the apostle John. John's ministry to the Churches surrounding Ephesus did not begin until after the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 64-68 when he fled there to escape the Roman/Jewish war. The Church at Smyrna didn't exist at the time of the fall of Jerusalem which is a key time reference for proponents of an early date for Revelation.

The Greek you mentioned "Must soon take place" is one Greek verb and the nuance cannot be adequately translated. It does not mean that it must happen in a short period of time after the warning is given. There is a way to say that in Greek and John didn't use that Greek construction. The Greek can be properly understood as the things that are going to take place will happen quickly. In other words, it won't be a drawn out process once the process begins.

Hi Matthew2323,

Chris,
The theory that John wrote in the 90s is modern churchian myhtology and is about as valid as the Jesus Seminar's assertion that "John" was written in 120 AD. The internal evidence is what clues us in to an early dating.

Upon what evidence do you base this assertion?

Everything that I have ever read from scholars has dated the Book of Revelation between 68-96 A.D. -- with the vast majority placing it ~95 A.D. The few who contend that Revelation was written earlier (DURING the life of Nero) seem to do so without offering anything tangible in terms of evidence to validate their claims.

If Nero was the "beast" mentioned in Revelation, then it seems to invalidate the notion that these things would happen "after" John saw them. After all, Nero was already on a rampage by those earlier suggested dates. Also, there are many things that were seen during the Revelation that do not seem to have happened...yet.

Perhaps you can include your reasons and evidence for dating of the Book of Revelation during the reign of Nero?

Mathew2323

Your words about nero and the number of the beast. What are we supposed to do with that? As far as I am concerned it seems as if you just proved that Nero was the Beast and the end times was then and not now. This is how I interpret what you said in your post.

This is a small reason why I don't study alot of 'end times' stuff because it leads down so many dead end roads because so many people have so many opinions and read so many things into even the Book of Revelations. It is really tiring in the end.

Numeric values really don't mean anything to me when it comes to name. It is just like someone being called a certain name because it means a certain thing. People do it today but does that name really reflect who that person is? It doesn't mean alot to me in the end.

I dont believe that all of Revelation has a past fulfillment; although I do believe that quite a bit does. I do believe that Christ will return, so I am not a full preterist- but I do not believe he will return twice (once to rapture the Church and then a second Second Coming).

I do believe that most if not all of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in 70 AD.

Bear, onviously Revelation is written in highly symbolic and figurative language. It is apocalytic writing. You simply can't read it literally, just like a lot of Isaiah and Ezekiel cannot be interpreted literally.

So you may have a picture in your mind of the "Millenium" that may simply something you have created in your mind. Be open to the idea that your picture may not be 100% correct, because i hate to tell you that it may not be. If there is one thing I have learned when it comes to end times stuff, it is not to hold too tight to any one interpretation. There is not enough clarity in the passages to allow for such a thing.

TMK, you subscribe to the Preterist view of Revelation, do you not?

While I'm a pre-millenialist, I agree with TMK that the fall of Jerusalem in A.D.68-70 is very related to Christ's teaching on the end times.

Bearmaster,
It is important to recognize the difference between interpretation and application. We can interpret the New Testament documents from a first century perspective because that is the context within which they were written. Because they are ultimately inspired by the Holy Spirit there is application for us today (and at all times).

Isaiah prophesied the Messiah's sufferings. Jesus fulfilled that prophecy. This is an historical fact. Does that lessen the power of what God did because it's now history?

Simply because one prophecy about a coming persecution has been fulfilled does not mean the other passages speaking of persecution are null and void (John 16:33, 2 Timothy 3:12).

Just because you have not "seen" the coming of Christ in judgment against Israel, doesn't mean it hasn't occurred. I'm sure it is not your intention, but that amounts to you setting yourself up as a judge of the Scriptures. Where in the Bible does it tell us that if we "see" it, then it is true? Are you open to the idea that there could be things you don't know have happen and would therefore change how you view a certain text?

Even if this is a "whacked out millennium," who are you to tell the King how to rule His kingdom? Was God any less sovereign when Israel suffered under Pharaoh?

Jeremy,
Thanks for the reply. I have one of Mounce's books. It's been a whlie though.... :)

Since John was an Israelite and Revelation contains Old Testament references, it doens't seem to be too much of a stretch to think that this Hebrew transliteration was what he had in mind. Oddly enough, one book I read stated that FF Bruce holds to an early dating of Revelation. (Perilous Times by Kenneth Gentry)

After Paul's two year season of ministry in Ephesus, Luke tells us that "all who lived in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks." This was in the early 50s. Smyrna was roughly 30 miles to the north and thus encapusalted in the "all Asia" phrase. Are you suggesting it took over 15 years to establish a "chruch" in Smyrna? The other six churches addressed in the Revelation had organized churches for that time period but Smyrna did not. That is a dubious proposition to say the least.

So while the word used in 1:1 (tachos) could be translated 'quickly,' the word 'eggus,' in the phrase "the time is near" refers to spatial or temproal nearness. Interestingly the the book of Revelation uses this word 'eggus' as a bookend, if you will. The first instance, as just mentioned, was in 1:3. It also appears in 22:10. "And he said to me, 'Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near.'"

One would do well to note, that 22:6,7, 12 and 20 utilize 'tachos' or 'tachu." However, even if the four events described in these verses all come about 'quickly,' they are part of the prophecy (or larger context) whose "time is near."

Chris,
As I mentioned the fact that John saw worshipers at the Temple strongly supports the idea that Revelation was written while the Temple was still standing. If the epistle had been written after 70 AD, how would the original audience interpret this knowing John said that "the time is near" for these things to happen? Would they have really thought that meant 2000 years later? If so, what in the text supports that conclusion?

Nero's persecution of the Church began in 64 AD. The Revelation appears after that, but before 70 AD when the Temple is destroyed. John describes the end in the middle of Nero's rampage. How does that invalidate the prophecy?

That persecution has already commenced, John affirms when he states that he is "your brother and fellow partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance which are in Jesus..." (1:9)

"There was given to him a mouth speaking arrogant words and blasphemies, and authority to act for forty-two months was given to him." (Revelation 13:5)
As I'd mentioned, Nero's persuction began in 64 (mid-November) and it did not end until his death in early June of 68. So there you have 42 months, give or take a small percentage. (I'm willing to give the Holy Spirit the benefit of the doubt as far as the minutia of chronology is concerned.) :)

Revelation 13:10 states, "If anyone is destined for captivity, to captivity he goes ; if anyone kills with the sword, with the sword he must be killed." Nero was know for killing with the sword. (The Apostle Paul being one of his victims by beheading.) When Nero committed suicide, it was with... you guessed it, a sword.

Do you have any evidence in the New Testament for a late authorship?

DEADn,
You said, "Numeric values really don't mean anything to me when it comes to name." I'm sorry you feel this way, but the Bible tells its original audience to, "calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six." You can ruminate on that for a while.

It is important to remember that when the New Testament speaks of the "last days" it is speaking of the imminent end of the Old Covenant era. The coming of the Lord, refers to Jesus' judgment on Israel for their rejection of the Messiah with the climax being the destruction of the Temple (the great tribulation). So yes, those "last days" are over.

The writer to the Hebrews considered his days as the last days. "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son..." And what does the book of Hebrews deal with in great detail? The end of the Old Covenant and the supremacy of Christ. Fits quite nicely, don't you think?

Grace and peace,
Matthew

Revelation 17:10 "There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time."

Five are fallen - Have passed away as if fallen; that is, they have disappeared. The language would be applicable to rulers who have died, or who had been dethroned; or to dynasties or forms of government that had ceased to be. In the fulfillment of this, it would be necessary to find five such successive kings or rulers who had died, and who pertained to one sovereignty or nation; or five such dynasties or forms of administrations that had successively existed, but which had ceased.

And one is - That is, there is one - a sixth - that now reigns. The proper interpretation of this would be, that this existed in the time of the writer; that is, according to the view taken of the time of the writing of the Apocalypse. The sixth head of the beast, or that which existed in the time of St. John, was the imperial power of the heathen Caesars, or the seventh form of government.

And the other is not yet come - The sixth one is to be succeeded by another in the same line, or occupying the same dominion.

And when he cometh - When that form of dominion is set up. No intimation is yet given as to the time when this would occur.

He must continue a short space - oligon. A short time; his dominion will be of short duration. It is observable that this characteristic is stated as applicable only to this one of the seven; and the fair meaning would seem to be, that the time would be short as compared with the six that preceded, and as compared with the one that followed - the eighth - into which it was to be merged. After Nero died, he was succeeded by Galba who reigned for 6 months and a week until he was murdered by the Praetorian Guard. - Barnes

James M. MacDonald (1877)
"We have then only to reckon the succession of emperors, and we must arrive with certainty at the reign under which the Apocalypse was written or was seen. It stands thus: (Julius) Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius ; these make up the five who are fallen. 'One is' - Nero. The ancients, although the empire was not fully established till the time of Augustus, reckoned from Julius Caesar." (The Life and Writings of St. John, London: Hodder & Stoughton, p. 164, 1877).

Jay E. Adams (1966)
"Should there be any question about the contemporary nature of the second section of the book, the seventeenth chapter dispels it... Can the kings be identified? Yes. Five of them are already dethroned, one is now (that is, was in John's day) reigning, and the seventh hasn't yet begun to reign. Words could not be plainer. Regardless of which Roman emperor one identifies with the head there can be no doubt that the beast-prophecy pertains to the Caesars who were then in power. The prophecy can refer to nothing but the contemporary Roman empire because of the angel's clear cut identification." (The Time is at Hand, p. 53)

Moses Stuart (1836)
"It seems indisputably clear that the book of Revelation must be dated in the reign of Nero Caesar, and consequently before his death in June, A.D. 68. He is the sixth king; the short-lived rule of the seventh king (Galba) "has not yet come."

Milton Terry (1898)
"This receives additional confirmation in the fact that the book assumes to belong to the period of the sixth king as mentioned in 17:10, 'the one that now is,' and if we follow the most natural method of reckoning the Caesars, and the one which appears in Suetonius and Sibylline Oracles, we have (1) Julius, (2) Augustus, (3) Tiberius, (4) Caligula, (5) Claudius, (6) Nero. The reign of Nero extended from A.D. 54-68, and somewhere between these dates we must assign the composition of the Apocalypse."

Quote: Only one city in the whole world has been built upon seven hills and this is Rome itself.

For a list of cities claimed to be built on seven hills see this linked as there is over sixty on it..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_claimed_to_be_built_on_seven_hills

One of the cites we all overlook is Jerusalem it is built on seven hills..

But moving on Rev 17: 9-10 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space

The seven heads are seven mountains are seven kings are empires that have ruled on earth. They are 1.Egyptian 2.Assyrian 3.Babalyion 4.Medo-Persian 5.Greece 6.Rome.

As for the 7th mountain it has to be the Islamic Caliphate this empire took over from Rome empire in ruling Jerusalem 636AD which is a key characteristic of all the other empires…

Rev 17:11-13 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.

The beast is the eighth and is of the seven and he will convince 10 kings to give there power and strength to him..

Rev 17:18 And the woman, which thou sawest, is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

The woman riding the beast is “that great city” if we look at Rev 11:8 we find out what city it is.

Rev 11:8 “And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified”

So we have 7 empires (seven heads are seven mountains are seven kings), which have ruled “that great city” Jerusalem.

Rev 17:16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

So the Beast and the ten kings (Horns) will hate the whore Jerusalem and will make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.

Look at what God said through Zechariah

‘For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.’ Zechariah 14:2

I've not read past the first page of responses but I agree with Matthew's response on the first page: "How does Laurie go from John's multiple antichrists in the first century teaching to one super-villain nearly 2000 years later?"

This is not just to Matthew but to everyone... read this article and study the Scriptures that go with it... (I'm not saying the article is 100% correct, I don't believe anyone or theology is correct on the endtimes), the article is enlightning!

Daniel Unsealed Part 1
http://www.ekklesia4him.net/daniel_unsealed.html

God bless,
Lisa

Quote: Personally it matters little to me which City is being spoken of in Revelation, because that really misses the point. It is a man which is being spoken of in finality and the city is just that, a city.

Miss the point you cannot separate the city from the man, that man wants to have the city so that he can set up his throne there showing himself that he is God that he usurped the place of God, and claims the prerogatives of God.

Why because God says... I have chosen Jerusalem for my Name to be there...." 2 Chronicles 6:6

Jerusalem is so very important to God

Ezekiel 16

God’s Love for Jerusalem

16 Again the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 2 “Son of man, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations, 3 and say, ‘Thus says the Lord God to Jerusalem: “Your birth and your nativity are from the land of Canaan; your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite. 4 As for your nativity, on the day you were born your navel cord was not cut, nor were you washed in water to cleanse you; you were not rubbed with salt nor wrapped in swaddling cloths. 5 No eye pitied you, to do any of these things for you, to have compassion on you; but you were thrown out into the open field, when you yourself were loathed on the day you were born.

6 “And when I passed by you and saw you struggling in your own blood, I said to you in your blood, ‘Live!’ Yes, I said to you in your blood, ‘Live!’ 7 I made you thrive like a plant in the field; and you grew, matured, and became very beautiful. Your breasts were formed, your hair grew, but you were naked and bare.

8 “When I passed by you again and looked upon you, indeed your time was the time of love; so I spread My wing over you and covered your nakedness. Yes, I swore an oath to you and entered into a covenant with you, and you became Mine,” says the Lord God.

9 “Then I washed you in water; yes, I thoroughly washed off your blood, and I anointed you with oil. 10 I clothed you in embroidered cloth and gave you sandals of badger skin; I clothed you with fine linen and covered you with silk. 11 I adorned you with ornaments, put bracelets on your wrists, and a chain on your neck. 12 And I put a jewel in your nose, earrings in your ears, and a beautiful crown on your head. 13 Thus you were adorned with gold and silver, and your clothing was of fine linen, silk, and embroidered cloth. You ate pastry of fine flour, honey, and oil. You were exceedingly beautiful, and succeeded to royalty. 14 Your fame went out among the nations because of your beauty, for it was perfect through My splendor which I had bestowed on you,” says the Lord God.

Jerusalem’s Harlotry

15 “But you trusted in your own beauty, played the harlot because of your fame, and poured out your harlotry on everyone passing by who would have it. 16 You took some of your garments and adorned multicolored high places for yourself, and played the harlot on them. Such things should not happen, nor be. 17 You have also taken your beautiful jewelry from My gold and My silver, which I had given you, and made for yourself male images and played the harlot with them. 18 You took your embroidered garments and covered them, and you set My oil and My incense before them. 19 Also My food which I gave you—the pastry of fine flour, oil, and honey which I fed you—you set it before them as sweet incense; and so it was,” says the Lord God.

20 “Moreover you took your sons and your daughters, whom you bore to Me, and these you sacrificed to them to be devoured. Were your acts of harlotry a small matter, 21 that you have slain My children and offered them up to them by causing them to pass through the fire? 22 And in all your abominations and acts of harlotry you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare, struggling in your blood.

23 “Then it was so, after all your wickedness—‘Woe, woe to you!’ says the Lord God— 24 that you also built for yourself a shrine, and made a high place for yourself in every street. 25 You built your high places at the head of every road, and made your beauty to be abhorred. You offered yourself to everyone who passed by, and multiplied your acts of harlotry. 26 You also committed harlotry with the Egyptians, your very fleshly neighbors, and increased your acts of harlotry to provoke Me to anger.

27 “Behold, therefore, I stretched out My hand against you, diminished your allotment, and gave you up to the will of those who hate you, the daughters of the Philistines, who were ashamed of your lewd behavior. 28 You also played the harlot with the Assyrians, because you were insatiable; indeed you played the harlot with them and still were not satisfied. 29 Moreover you multiplied your acts of harlotry as far as the land of the trader, Chaldea; and even then you were not satisfied.

30 “How degenerate is your heart!” says the Lord God, “seeing you do all these things, the deeds of a brazen harlot.

Jerusalem’s Adultery

31 “You erected your shrine at the head of every road, and built your high place in every street. Yet you were not like a harlot, because you scorned payment. 32 You are an adulterous wife, who takes strangers instead of her husband. 33 Men make payment to all harlots, but you made your payments to all your lovers, and hired them to come to you from all around for your harlotry. 34 You are the opposite of other women in your harlotry, because no one solicited you to be a harlot. In that you gave payment but no payment was given you, therefore you are the opposite.”

Jerusalem’s Lovers Will Abuse Her

35 ‘Now then, O harlot, hear the word of the Lord! 36 Thus says the Lord God: “Because your filthiness was poured out and your nakedness uncovered in your harlotry with your lovers, and with all your abominable idols, and because of the blood of your children which you gave to them, 37 surely, therefore, I will gather all your lovers with whom you took pleasure, all those you loved, and all those you hated; I will gather them from all around against you and will uncover your nakedness to them, that they may see all your nakedness. 38 And I will judge you as women who break wedlock or shed blood are judged; I will bring blood upon you in fury and jealousy. 39 I will also give you into their hand, and they shall throw down your shrines and break down your high places. They shall also strip you of your clothes, take your beautiful jewelry, and leave you naked and bare.

40 “They shall also bring up an assembly against you, and they shall stone you with stones and thrust you through with their swords. 41 They shall burn your houses with fire, and execute judgments on you in the sight of many women; and I will make you cease playing the harlot, and you shall no longer hire lovers. 42 So I will lay to rest My fury toward you, and My jealousy shall depart from you. I will be quiet, and be angry no more. 43 Because you did not remember the days of your youth, but agitated Me[a] with all these things, surely I will also recompense your deeds on your own head,” says the Lord God. “And you shall not commit lewdness in addition to all your abominations.

More Wicked than Samaria and Sodom

44 “Indeed everyone who quotes proverbs will use this proverb against you: ‘Like mother, like daughter!’ 45 You are your mother’s daughter, loathing husband and children; and you are the sister of your sisters, who loathed their husbands and children; your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
46 “Your elder sister is Samaria, who dwells with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who dwells to the south of you, is Sodom and her daughters. 47 You did not walk in their ways nor act according to their abominations; but, as if that were too little, you became more corrupt than they in all your ways.

48 “As I live,” says the Lord God, “neither your sister Sodom nor her daughters have done as you and your daughters have done. 49 Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had pride, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. 50 And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit.[b]

51 “Samaria did not commit half of your sins; but you have multiplied your abominations more than they, and have justified your sisters by all the abominations which you have done. 52 You who judged your sisters, bear your own shame also, because the sins which you committed were more abominable than theirs; they are more righteous than you. Yes, be disgraced also, and bear your own shame, because you justified your sisters.

53 “When I bring back their captives, the captives of Sodom and her daughters, and the captives of Samaria and her daughters, then I will also bring back the captives of your captivity among them, 54 that you may bear your own shame and be disgraced by all that you did when you comforted them. 55 When your sisters, Sodom and her daughters, return to their former state, and Samaria and her daughters return to their former state, then you and your daughters will return to your former state. 56 For your sister Sodom was not a byword in your mouth in the days of your pride, 57 before your wickedness was uncovered. It was like the time of the reproach of the daughters of Syria[c] and all those around her, and of the daughters of the Philistines, who despise you everywhere. 58 You have paid for your lewdness and your abominations,” says the Lord. 59 For thus says the Lord God: “I will deal with you as you have done, who despised the oath by breaking the covenant.

An Everlasting Covenant

60 “Nevertheless I will remember My covenant with you in the days of your youth, and I will establish an everlasting covenant with you. 61 Then you will remember your ways and be ashamed, when you receive your older and your younger sisters; for I will give them to you for daughters, but not because of My covenant with you. 62 And I will establish My covenant with you. Then you shall know that I am the Lord, 63 that you may remember and be ashamed, and never open your mouth anymore because of your shame, when I provide you an atonement for all you have done,” says the Lord God.’”

Matthew2323 wrote:

As I mentioned the fact that John saw worshipers at the Temple strongly supports the idea that Revelation was written while the Temple was still standing.

I ask:

Are you referring to the worshipers that John saw after he was caught up into heaven and was standing before the throne of God? I don't remember anything about worshipers standing in the Temple of Herod in the book of Revelation. Of course my memory isn't perfect but what chapter and verse(s) are you reading this?

Andrew, you wrote, "...Revelation it is more important to understand that which makes for wisdom in this matter, than that which makes for a good historical insight."

I'd like to ask you, on whose authority do you make the claim of "more important?" Also, who says that wisdom and historical insight are mutually exclusive?

Could you explain your a priori dismissal of the wisdom to calculate the number of his name? You have noted that 17:8 is the explanation, however that is not all of the explanation as it continues into verses 9 and 10. Not surprisingly, verse 9 speaks of "the mind which has wisdom." Do you reject the need for wisdom in this passage as well or assign it lesser value? Why or why not?

As far as your last point about the verse 8, let's look at it in its entirety:
"The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction. And those who dwell on the earth, whose name has not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was and is not and will come."

I'm not sure why you only quoted part of the verse but the phrase, "whose name" is referring to "those who dwell on the earth" and not the beast. See also 13:8 where the word "name" is also written in the sigular when referring to a multitude.

"All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain."

In your second post you sought to connect verse 8 and 11 to create a 2000 year gap, but how does that work when the Revelation begins and ends with the statement that the events are "at hand?" Remember, these believers are being presecuted. Where is the comfort in knowing that relief is two millennia away?

Colin,
You wrote, "The seven heads are seven mountains are seven kings are empires that have ruled on earth. They are 1.Egyptian 2.Assyrian 3.Babalyion 4.Medo-Persian 5.Greece 6.Rome. As for the 7th mountain it has to be the Islamic Caliphate..."

If you had lived in Asia Minor, that was under imperial Roman rule, why would you come to this conclusion? We are told in Revelation 1:3 and then again in 22:10 that the events will happen soon, from the reference point of the first readers. Thus, what in the context of the passage would have lead them to believe that the fulfillment was still nearly 600 years away?

"So the Beast and the ten kings (Horns) will hate the whore Jerusalem and will make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire."

Sounds like the destruction of the Temple and the end of the age of the sacrifical system just as Jesus and Zechariah prophesied. What in the text would have lead the original audience to conclude that "soon" equals approximately 2000 years or more?

Lisa,
My point in these posts has been that in the New Testament the phrase "last days" refers to the end of the Old Covenant era with all of its rituals and what not. The article you linked is still looking beyond the first centry context of the New Testament. Just wondering if you've considered the possibility that some New Testament prophecy has already been fulfilled?

Grace and peace,
Matthew

TrueWitness,

The Apostles John, speaking in Revelation 11:1 says,

"Then there was given me a measuring rod like a staff; and someone said, 'Get up and measure the temple of God and the altar, and those who worship in it.'"

Grace and peace,
Matthew

Bearmaster,

How does the fulfillment of prophecy make it lose power? Where is that written?

There is plenty of application in Revelation for believers in all ages. I've said that already.

The portions that prophesied the destruction of the temple and the end of the age of the Old Covenant have been fulfilled. How is that despising prophecy?

Why is believing that the prophecy has not been fulfilled more respectful than saying it has been fulfilled? How does that put out the fire? Isn't it inspiring to know that God has fulfilled what He promised?

Grace and peace,
Matthew

PS I've never claimed to hold to full preterism because I don't. Also I don't think anyone in this thread has stated such a position. We've only argued that the context demands a first century fulfillment for the portions we've been discussing.

Quote: Colin,
 If you had lived in Asia Minor, that was under imperial Roman rule, why would you come to this conclusion?

I can tell you how I come to the conclusion The seven heads are seven mountains are seven kings are empires that have ruled on earth They are 1.Egyptian 2.Assyrian 3.Babalyion 4.Medo-Persian 5.Greece 6.Rome. As for the 7th mountain it has to be the Islamic Caliphate..."


The starting point is the 6th Rome. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come Rev 17:10 
The one that is at that time was Roman simple enough..

Then we can backwards from there we know from Daniel that there four beasts

The 4 beasts vision of Daniel chapter 7 are commonly explained as follows:

Lion = Babylonian Empire
Bear = Medo-Persian Empire
Leopard = Greek Empire
4th Beast = Roman Empire

So how can the 4th Beast of Daniel vision be the 6th of John revelation?

Most interpretations squash four stages into the Roman Empire era but we know from John at his time of revelation the current beast was the 6th the Roman Empire.

Jesus mentioned a time called the times of the Gentiles.

Luk 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

When did the times of the Gentiles start did it start at the Babylonian Empire age or was Jerusalem being trodden down before then?

2 Chronicles 12 documents the taking of Jerusalem by the Egyptians however God showed them mercy because Israel humbled themselves and accepted there fate v8 they will, however, become subject to him, so that they may learn the difference between serving me and serving the kings of other lands.”

So Jerusalem was captured the temple plundered, the Kings house plundered and the Gold shields Solomon made were taken away but never the less Israel became the subjects of Egypt Empire.

The times of the Gentiles started with the Egyptians so they the Egyptians are 1st Beast while the Assyrian were the 2nd.

That’s how I come to my conclusion..

"..and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles"

How do you interpret "shall be" as "has been?" Jesus speaks of an event in the future not the past?

Also, how do you define the "at hand" passages in Revelation 1 and 22? What in the context would indicate this is anything other than imminent to the original audience?

Grace and peace,
Matthew