OkCornel:


Thanks bro. These guys don’t understand history and eschatology.

OkCornel:

Thanks bro. These guys don’t understand history and eschatology.

You that know history and eschatology show us the academic journals you have published and the Universities where you have lectured like these Professors and Doctors in history and religious studies whos researches are in this video


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmEScIUcvz0

MindHacker9009:


You that know history and eschatology show us the academic journals you have published and the Universities where you have lectured like these Professors and Doctors in history and religious studies whos researches are in this video


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmEScIUcvz0

Do the professors and doctors in history have answers to these questions? If yes, please share them here. I'm patiently waiting.

Going by Daniel 9 v 26 - 27 and 2 Thessalonians 2 v 1-4

Who was the ruler that;
1) Confirmed a covenant with many for 7 years?
2) Put an end to sacrifice and offerings in the middle of that covenant and;
3) Set up an abomination that causes desolation at the temple?
4) Declared himself to be God in God's temple?

As far as I'm concerned, whatever happened in 70AD does not fulfill all of these criteria. If you disagree, show us the ruler that fulfilled all of these. We are patiently waiting.

Cc: DTruthspeaker

OkCornel:
Do the professors and doctors in history have answers to these questions? If yes, please share them here. I'm patiently waiting.

Going by Daniel 9 v 26 - 27 and 2 Thessalonians 2 v 1-4

Who was the ruler that;
1) Confirmed a covenant with many for 7 years?
2) Put an end to sacrifice and offerings in the middle of that covenant and;
3) Set up an abomination that causes desolation at the temple?
4) Declared himself to be God in God's temple?

As far as I'm concerned, whatever happened in 70AD does not fulfill all of these criteria. If you disagree, show us the ruler that fulfilled all of these. We are patiently waiting.

The Defeat of Cestius Gallus, A.D.66
S. G. F. Brandon describes how the Roman legate faced the problems of a Jewish Revolt.

S.G.F. Brandon | Published in History Today Volume 20 Issue 1 January 1970
In the summer of A.D.66 the priests of the great Temple of Yahweh at Jerusalem suddenly refused to offer the daily sacrifice for the wellbeing of the Emperor and people of Rome. These sacrifices had become the accepted token of Israel’s loyalty to Rome; for the Jews were excused, because of their religious principles, from sacrificing to the deities of the Roman state. Refusal to offer their form of ‘loyal’ sacrifice was, therefore, tantamount to an act of rebellion on the part of the Jews. https://www.historytoday.com/archive/defeat-cestius-gallus-ad66

The abomination that causes desolation is the roman army surrounding Jerusalem at the end.

Kobojunkie:


The abomination that causes desolation is the roman army surrounding Jerusalem at the end.

Nope

Who had a covenant with many for 7 years and broke it midway as predicted in Daniel 9 v 27?

Who will declare himself to be god in God’s temple per 2 Thessalonians 2 v 1-4?

That’s the person responsible for the abomination of desolation.

Any person in history that meets these criteria?

OkCornel:
■ Nope Who had a covenant with many for 7 years and broke it midway as predicted in Daniel 9 v 27?
Who will declare himself to be god in God’s temple per 2 Thessalonians 2 v 1-4? That’s the person responsible for the abomination of desolation. Any person in history that meets these criteria?

Read the excerpt again. The abomination that causes desolation described by Daniel in Daniel 12 is the Roman army that surrounded the city of Jerusalem, the army of locusts described in Joel 1, 2, and 3, I believe, with lion and scorpion-like features; an army hopping, swarming and destroying as it went.... yep, the roman army. That is the abomination that causes desolation and this to God's Jerusalem.

The who you are looking for isn't a particular individual but a government - Roman government over Jerusalem during that time.

Kobojunkie:
Read the excerpt again. The abomination that causes desolation described by Daniel in Daniel 12 is the Roman army that surrounded the city of Jerusalem, the army of locusts described in Joel 1, 2, and 3, I believe, with lion and scorpion-like features; an army hopping, swarming and destroying as it went.... yep, the roman army. That is the abomination that causes desolation and this to God's Jerusalem.

The who you are looking for isn't a particular individual but a government - Roman government over Jerusalem during that time.

If the Roman soldiers surrounding Jerusalem in 70AD is the abomination of desolation according to you….

Why then does Apostle John have a vision of the future in Revelation 11 v 1-3 showing Jerusalem would be trampled by the gentiles…hmm?

John witnessed this in Patmos circa 96AD, over 20 years after Jerusalem was destroyed.

Kindly explain.

OkCornel:
If the Roman soldiers surrounding Jerusalem in 70AD is the abomination of desolation according to you….Why then does Apostle John have a vision of the future in Revelation 11 v 1-3 showing Jerusalem would be trampled by the gentiles…hmm? John witnessed this in Patmos circa 96AD, over 20 years after Jerusalem was destroyed. Kindly explain.

How certain of you of this?

Kobojunkie:
How certain of you of this?

See for yourself.

OkCornel:
■ See for yourself.

So I am to take it that your position is that whatever the "Christian scholars" declare is also your truth, right?

Kobojunkie:
So I am to take it that your position is that whatever the "Christian scholars" declare is also your truth, right?

Go and research history for facts, that’ll save your time with unnecessary questions.

MindHacker9009:


And you believe you are the spokesman for Jesus, when Jesus Himself even said it in Revelation 22:12 Behold, I'm Coming Soon

I would just add a brief rejoinder to what my brother in Christ, OkCornel has explained in order to give you more clarity.

The events that Jesus narrated which you quoted are actually related to the time of Jacob's Trouble. Everything that happened in AD 70 is referred to as the time of Jacob's Trouble.

Now, the time of Jacob's Trouble bears a striking similarity to a future event. They are similar in a few ways but they're not the same event. Due to their similarities, there appears to be an overlap in incidences. OkCornel has shown you the differences between those events by highlighting the expected happenings that never took place 2000yrs ago.

Jesus was forwarning the disciples about an imminent destruction of Jerusalem while also telling them about His second coming. The last seven years of the world have some elements of the time of Jacob's Trouble in it but they're not the same events.

If the events of AD 70 were understood by the disciples as marking Christ's second coming, then they would have concluded that Christ was no longer coming since the predicted events had occured without Christ appearing. However, the reverse is the case because they understood that the events that happened clearly relates to the time of Jacob's Trouble and has nothing to do with the second coming.

At the second coming, all the events prophesied by Daniel would receive total and literal fulfilments. Until then, Jesus would not come. Even the Apostle Paul gave such hints in the Thessalonian reference you halvely quoted to obfuscate the truth.

OkCornel:
■ Go and research history for facts, that’ll save your time with unnecessary questions.

That may be your strategy but it isn't mine at all when it comes to knowing the Truth of God.

If you read Revelations 1 Jonn mentions mentions the visions were given him when he was on Patmos(past tense) insinuating the writing did not take place on Patmos but after Patmos. I too have read and seem movies made about how John supposedly wrote wrote book while he was on Patmos but if one is to go by John's Revelation in chapter 1, fhe one and only place where John even mentions Patmos, one begins to wonder when it was that John was in fact exiled on Patmos and when it was that he was released.

Also, what direct connection exists between John and the Domician regime. Why must if have been during Domician's reign and not during the time of any of those before him?

To your original question about why John wrote in future tense, given that revelation is a record of the details given to him in the past --- while he was on Patmos--- John probably did that in a bid to maintain the integrity of the visions as revealed to him in the past.

Kobojunkie:
That may be your strategy but it isn't mine at all when it comes to knowing the Truth of God.

If you read Revelations 1 Jonn mentions mentions the visions were given him when he was on Patmos(past tense) insinuating the writing did not take place on Patmos but after Patmos. I too have read and seem movies made about how John supposedly wrote wrote book while he was on Patmos but if one is to go by John's Revelation in chapter 1, fhe one and only place where John even mentions Patmos, one begins to wonder when it was that John was in fact exiled on Patmos and when it was that he was released.

Also, what direct connection exists between John and the Domician regime. Why must if have been during Domician's reign and not during the time of any of those before him?

To your original question about why John wrote in future tense, given that revelation is a record of the details given to him in the past --- while he was on Patmos--- John probably did that in a bid to maintain the integrity of the visions as revealed to him in the past.

When was John banished to the island of Patmos hmmm?

OkCornel:
■ When was John banished to the island of Patmos hmmm?

That is one of the major questions here that I have yet to find answers to.

MaxInDHouse:
When Jesus said:

“Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father. For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. For as they were in those days before the Flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and they took no note until the Flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be." Matthew 24:36-39

It should be noted that the time to bring an end to badness can't be determined by hour or day calculation because God is getting time to time reports from His angels who are serving as His eyes foreseeing the activities of Jehovah's Witnesses globally.
So it's after these people has reached the last person with their message on this planet that the destruction will occur just as it happened in the days of Noah, that's why Jesus himself can't say specifically what day or hour it will happen! Matthew 24:36

Tbe OP is talking about miscalculation of dates and prediction of Jesus return. Only Jehovah witnesses claims that after the failure of their prediction, that claim Jesus return in 1914.


Please tell us more about that.

MaxInDHouse:


That statement is to be understood from the point of view of creatures whose existence has nothing to do with expiration date.
If you look at it from the human point of view then the word "SOON" will confuse you because a thousand years of man is like a day to the Bible's Author {2Peter 3:8} from man's viewpoint it's taking forever but God is not slow regarding His plans many are out there with pure hearts practicing false religions they are God's main concern {2Peter 3:9} His angels are taking note of all the places where His worshipers (Jehovah's Witnesses) are touching with their message and names are recorded in remembrance of those sparing their time to discuss with JW {Malachi 3:16} so by the time God is satisfied with the WORKS of His Witnesses the end will come just like the days of Noah! 2Peter 3:10 compare to Luke 17:26-27

May you have PEACE!

According to the OP, all interpreters including Jehovah's Witnesses are confused.


The bolded portion has not categorically said that 1 day = 1000 years.


All of them are confused. No exceptions.

MightySparrow:

Tbe OP is talking about miscalculation of dates and prediction of Jesus return. Only Jehovah witnesses claims that after the failure of their prediction, that claim Jesus return in 1914.
Please tell us more about that.

MightySparrow:

According to the OP, all interpreters including Jehovah's Witnesses are confused. The bolded portion has not categorically said that 1 day = 1000 years. All of them are confused. No exceptions.

You this idiot i've told you to stop quoting me!

Kobojunkie:
That is one of the major questions here that I have yet to find answers to.

You know fully well John was banished to Patmos over two decades after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. And he saw Jerusalem occupied by gentiles for 42 months in Revelation 11 v 1-3.

That already sinks your assumption the abomination of desolation occurred in 70 AD.

You can’t wriggle out of this.

OkCornel:
■ You know fully well John was banished to Patmos over two decades after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. And he saw Jerusalem occupied by gentiles for 42 months in Revelation 11 v 1-3. That already sinks your assumption the abomination of desolation occurred in 70 AD. You can’t wriggle out of this.

1. I do not!

All I know is that John claims he wrote the Book of Revelations after he left Patmos. I don't know the particulars of when John was on Patmos, how long he was there, or when exactly he left the island.

Kobojunkie:
1. I don't! Don't confuse that which you accept with that which I know abeg!

All I know is that John claims he wrote the book of revelations after he left Patmos.

And John was banished to Patmos over two decades after the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD. Case closed.

OkCornel:
■ And John was banished to Patmos over two decades after the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD. Case closed.

If that is what you want to hold to, good for you. You don't seem capable of responding with more than just these assertions. So, I choose to move on now!

Kobojunkie:
If that is what you want to hold to, good for you. You don't seem capable of responding with more than just these assertions. So, I choose to move on now!

I’m responding to you with historical evidences.

John was banished to Patmos over 20 years after the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed.

In Revelation 11 v 1-3, he saw Jerusalem occupied by gentiles for 42 months.


Care to explain why? If indeed the abomination of desolation happened already in 70AD hmmm?

OkCornel:
■ I’m responding to you with historical evidences. John was banished to Patmos over 20 years after the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed. In Revelation 11 v 1-3, he saw Jerusalem occupied by gentiles for 42 months.Care to explain why? If indeed the abomination of desolation happened already in 70AD hmmm?

***Yawn***!

MaxInDHouse:



You this idiot i've told you to stop quoting me!

Aha, a ti lepo ọ.

Defend the 1914 lie and other dates

Ari tẹni mọ wí.......

Kobojunkie:
***Yawn***!

Busted

▢ Where does this fable/tale that John was banished to Patmos for 2 decades by Domitian come from?
According to some sources, Tertullian(155–240 AD) said so, but there is no truth to this.

Early Christian writer Tertullian(155–240 AD) is the source of the story that Emperor Domitian (emperor from 81 to 96 AD) plunged John into boiling oil in front of an audience at the Colosseum. John emerged unscathed and everyone in attendance is said to have converted to Christianity after witnessing John’s miraculous survival. Other attempts to kill John apparently failed, so he was banished to the Isle of Patmos.

All Tertullian seems to have stated(see Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics 36;) is that after being immersed in oil and taking no hurt, John was banished to an island. Tertullian (155–240 AD), in his writing, makes no mention of
●the name of the island
● Domitian
● the 2 decades banishment.

Another important fact to note is that Tertullian's tale comes about 100 years after the tale regarding John would have taken place. Again, if Tertullian whose account comes over 100 years after the fact he proposed provided no reference to Domitian in fact being the emperor at the time of the supposed banishment, where does the connection — Domitian to John's supposed immersion in boiling oil — come from?

Hippolytus seems to be regarded as yet another early witness to the idea that John was on Patmos because he had been sent there by the Romans in exile (see Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics 36; Victorinus of Pettau, On the Apocalypse 10.3; Eusebius, Church History 3.18.1-3), but he also seems to have drawn his own idea from the tale told by Tertulilian as well.

Kobojunkie:
▢ Where does this fable/tale that John was banished to Patmos for 2 decades by Domitian come from?
According to some sources, Tertullian said so, but there is no truth to this. All Tertullian seems to have stated is that after being immersed in oil and taking no hurt, John was banished to an island. Tertullian makes no mention of the name of the island, or of Domitian, or that the supposed banishment was for 2 decades as so-called scholars claim.

Historical evidence…

OkCornel:
Historical evidence…

Historical my arse!

John the Apostle[10] (Ancient Greek: Ἰωάννης; Latin: Ioannes[11] c. 6 AD – c. 100 AD; Ge'ez: ዮሐንስ or Saint John the Beloved was one of the Twelve Apostles of Jesus according to the New Testament. Generally listed as the youngest apostle, he was the son of Zebedee and Salome. His brother James was another of the Twelve Apostles. The Church Fathers identify him as John the Evangelist, John of Patmos, John the Elder, and the Beloved Disciple, and testify that he outlived the remaining apostles and was the only one to die of natural causes, although modern scholars are divided on the veracity of these claims.

So, according to the above John died at age 93. But you claim John was exiled in AD 95, at age 89, for 20 years to the Island of Patmos. where does this record that he was exiled for 2 decades come from?

John wrote in Revelations 1vs 9 that he was no longer on Patmos at least at the time he wrote the words in the first chapter of Revelations. So, what makes you believe that John was on Patmos at the time claimed by your so-called historians? What are these identities at least so I can research their claims for my own self?

1990+ years of failed prophecies.

OkCornel:
■ Seems you’re struggling with basic English. Kindly point out where I mentioned Apostle John was banished to the island of Patmos FOR 20 YEARS. How does “Apostle John was banished to Patmos island 👉over 20 years after👈the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed.” Automatically mean the same thing as John was banished for 20 years to the island of Patmos? I really love how you’re making a joke of yourself here.Read slowly and understand.

Oh, OK. My mistake!

So, your claim is that he was banished to the Island of Patmos in AD 95 at age 89, right? And you claim Domitian did it — banished him. Where does this claim come from? What historical figure is responsible for recording or reporting this?