Daniel 11:36-45

[resistingrexmundi]

I believe this person may come out of being falsely planted in the Church, but he certainly will not be a true Christian belonging to The Body of Christ.

I believe true Christians are "born again of the Holy Spirit", and that false Christians and unbelievers can be born again of an unholy spirit, the spirit of Satan, living within the temple of the human heart..

Blessings

But you still have failed to support this being a single individual.

[John 10:10]

	Logged

[resistingrexmundi]

	Logged

Doth that man love his Lord who would be willing to see Jesus wearing a crown of thorns, while for himself he craves a chaplet of laurel? Shall Jesus ascend to his throne by the cross, and do we expect to be carried there on the shoulders of applauding crowds? Charles H. Spurgeon

[John 10:10]

I believe this person may come out of being falsely planted in the Church, but he certainly will not be a true Christian belonging to The Body of Christ.

I believe true Christians are "born again of the Holy Spirit", and that false Christians and unbelievers can be born again of an unholy spirit, the spirit of Satan, living within the temple of the human heart..

Blessings

But you still have failed to support this being a single individual.

I have explained several times that someone whom Paul calls "that lawless one" (2 Thess 2:8-9) whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power, signs and false wonders will be slain at the coming of our Lord.  If you choose to believe that this is not a single individual, time will tell who is correct in their beliefs.

Blessings

[Peter]

I have explained several times that someone whom Paul calls "that lawless one" (2 Thess 2:8-9)....

And we have explained several times, that Paul ACTUALLY said "lawless", and that the "one" is a bracketed word THAT WAS ADDED TO PAUL'S WORDS by the translators who, little doubt, shared your doctrinal bias.
You can PROVE NOTHING through your claim. Indeed your claim IS NOT SUPPORTED by the original Greek.
http://brotherpete.com/index.php?topic=415.msg5121#msg5121

[John 10:10]

Sorry but that is a seperate parable than the one of the mustard seed. It deals with people's understanding of teachings about the kingdom of heaven. Not the kingdom itself. Jesus does not define the birds as satan or ministers of satan in the parable you originally mentioned.

Show me how bird is defined as satan or a minister of satan in THIS parable. Jesus set the parameters of each parable. You are reading into that verse what you wish to be there.

Jesus interpreted only two parables, the parable of the sower and the parable of the wheat and tares.  My understanding of Scripture is that whenever God uses His Word to interpret Scripture He has given previously, we are to use His interpretations everywhere else in Scripture where these same words are used.  So when Jesus said in Matt 13:4 & 19 that birds/the evil one comes to snatch away seed that has been sown, the same truth applies to the birds in the parable of the mustard seed (vs 32) that can only grows into a bush, but grows into an un-natural tree.  I certainly don't believe these are songbirds, as some have said.

If you disagree with this principle of interpreting Scriputre, that is your choice.

Blessings

[John 10:10]

I have explained several times that someone whom Paul calls "that lawless one" (2 Thess 2:8-9)....

And we have explained several times, that Paul ACTUALLY said "lawless", and that the "one" is a bracketed word THAT WAS ADDED TO PAUL'S WORDS by the translators who, little doubt, shared your doctrinal bias.
You can PROVE NOTHING through your claim. Indeed your claim IS NOT SUPPORTED by the original Greek.
http://brotherpete.com/index.php?topic=415.msg5121#msg5121

Someone or some thing comes upon the world's scene just before our Lord returns, "whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming; that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved" (vs 8-10).

If you believe this is not an individual person, that is your belief, but not mine.

Blessings

[resistingrexmundi]

Sorry but that is a seperate parable than the one of the mustard seed. It deals with people's understanding of teachings about the kingdom of heaven. Not the kingdom itself. Jesus does not define the birds as satan or ministers of satan in the parable you originally mentioned.

Show me how bird is defined as satan or a minister of satan in THIS parable. Jesus set the parameters of each parable. You are reading into that verse what you wish to be there.

Jesus interpreted only two parables, the parable of the sower and the parable of the wheat and tares.  My understanding of Scripture is that whenever God uses His Word to interpret Scripture He has given previously, we are to use His interpretations everywhere else in Scripture where these same words are used.  So when Jesus said in Matt 13:4 & 19 that birds/the evil one comes to snatch away seed that has been sown, the same truth applies to the birds in the parable of the mustard seed (vs 32) that can only grows into a bush, but grows into an un-natural tree.  I certainly don't believe these are songbirds, as some have said.

If you disagree with this principle of interpreting Scriputre, that is your choice.

Blessings

What you are referring to is hermeneutics. And I believe firmly in the use of hermenuetics. However you are isolating a single word to make your case rather than looking at the parable as a whole. These are two seperate parables about two different, though interelated, subjects. The first parable that mentions the birds is in reference to how the wicked work to steal the knowledge of the kingdom of heaven away.

Mat 13:4   And when he sowed, some [seeds] fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:  

Mat 13:19   When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth [it] not, then cometh the wickeit] not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

Mat 16:12 Then understood they how that he bade [them] not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

Mar 8:15 And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and [of] the leaven of Herod.

Luk 12:1 In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples first of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.

1Cr 5:6 Your glorying [is] not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?

1Cr 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:

1Cr 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened [bread] of sincerity and truth.

Gal 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.


The Apostle Paul went on to explain that like leaven a little sin can cause great corruption to grow. So we must be unleavened. Are we to believe then that Jesus likened the kingdom of heaven to sin and corrupt doctrine? NO. Because that is a contradiction in terms. But if you isolate a single word without taking into consideration what is being said and what else scripture brings to bear on the subject you are forced to that conclusion. Now this has been off topic so try and answer my original question which you left out from my previous post.

« Last Edit: May 05, 2010, 01:36:30 PM by resistingrexmundi »	Logged

Doth that man love his Lord who would be willing to see Jesus wearing a crown of thorns, while for himself he craves a chaplet of laurel? Shall Jesus ascend to his throne by the cross, and do we expect to be carried there on the shoulders of applauding crowds? Charles H. Spurgeon

[Peter]

I have explained several times that someone whom Paul calls "that lawless one" (2 Thess 2:8-9)....

And we have explained several times, that Paul ACTUALLY said "lawless", and that the "one" is a bracketed word THAT WAS ADDED TO PAUL'S WORDS by the translators who, little doubt, shared your doctrinal bias.
You can PROVE NOTHING through your claim. Indeed your claim IS NOT SUPPORTED by the original Greek.
http://brotherpete.com/index.php?topic=415.msg5121#msg5121

Someone or some thing comes upon the world's scene just before our Lord returns, "whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming;......

The "thing" is just what it says. "that wicked" or "the lawless" that is revealed. Mohammed's Islamic empire - following Mohammed's "laws" of murder, thievery, broken contracts, lies, and rape of captives - for openers.

Revelation 20:10 And the devil that deceived them {Muslims} was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast {Islam} and the false prophet {Mohammed} [are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

You suppose that qualifies as destruction?

........ that is, the one .....

What "one"? You did it again. Do you see the power of indoctrination?

...... whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, ........

You don't suppose the following qualifies as Satan's work in them?

Surah 9.30 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

Surah 4:157 That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Can you see that the EXACT OPPOSITE OF THE GOSPEL might qualify?
That 1.5 billion people ARE ANTICHRISTS as the single most important fundamental of Mohammed's religion?

....... with all power ......

Revelation 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as [the feet] of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
http://brotherpete.com/index.php?topic=12.0

...... and signs .......

Now dig this. The Greek word "semeion" is translated as "signs" in 2 Thess, and in the verse in Revelation that says the false prophet "wrought miracles" before (that is "in the presence of") the Islamic "beast".

Rev 19:20   And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles [semeion] before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Are you ready?

signs
New Testament Greek Definition:
4592 semeion {say-mi'-on}
from a presumed derivative of the base of 4591; TDNT - 7:200,1015; n n
AV - sign 50, miracle 23, wonder 3, token 1; 77
1) a sign, mark, token
1a) that by which a person or a thing is distinguished from
others and is known
1b) a sign, prodigy, portent, i.e. an unusual occurrence,
transcending the common course of nature
1b1) of signs portending remarkable events soon to happen
1b2) of miracles and wonders by which God authenticates the men
sent by him, or by which men prove that the cause they are
pleading is God's

Mohammed's Quran is A PERFECT FIT!
Mohammed is distinguished from others by his Quran and has been known for the last 1400 years for it!

....... and false wonders, .....

Go online or on YouTube and look up Islamic sites and channels on the "science" of the Quran. You won't believe the ridiculous nonsense you see. They believe that science proves the Quran even as Mohammed claimed the sun set in a spring of murky water!

...... and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, .........

In large measure because the church is blind to their plight, or doesn't bother to care, or even encourages them down their path to perdition the way the Pope and Vatican Council have.

......... because they did not receive the love of the truth .......

I am stunned you haven't seen enough of this in the formermuslim forum to truly see it manifest.

....... so as to be saved"[/i] (vs 8-10).

If you believe this is not an individual person, that is your belief, but not mine.

Blessings [/b]

You hold your belief on an unsupported premise, as we have shown from the Greek, while it blinds you from the truth.
Let alone that your own personal "The" "Antichrist" has to come from the Body of Christ - which is certainly a first for me.

So what do you imagine? Some fake Christian is going to rise, in a Europe that is today rapidly falling to Islam. And this guy is going to convert the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, or 1/4 of mankind in Islam alone, in what, 3-1/2 years, or is it 7? What do they convert to? A fake Christianity? You and I know they are really prone to Christian conversion, aren't they?
Preaching from what? A soap box, since you tossed the rebuilt temple part of your doctrine aside?

Why is it that this conversation seems so one-sided. Why aren't you pointing out what you perceive as errors and implausibility, or hermeneutic rule compromising, of the few elements that we have shown you of what we believe?

If you put forth just 1/10 the effort at understanding, that you are currently putting into clutching onto your doctrine, I believe you could find yourself just a blessed as resisting and I have been, by understanding Revelation through the traditional continuous-historic context, in which we all - Christians and Jews - understand Old Testament prophecy was fulfilled.
Particularly when you have to re-author the order of scripture in order to force it to conform to your view.

[John 10:10]

I've explained to you how I rely more on the teachings of our Lord Jesus to understand what will happen on earth shortly before He returns, rather than relying on what you and others consider to be a correct understanding of other prophetic Scriptures.  The teachings of Jesus are very plain to me, and gives me clear understanding how we are to carry on His work on earth until He returns.  If I have need to understand perfectly the prophesies that I now see only in part, I believe my Lord will give me that understanding when it's time to get on that train.  Until then, let Luke 21:36 be our guide.

Blessings

[resistingrexmundi]

I've explained to you how I rely more on the teachings of our Lord Jesus to understand what will happen on earth shortly before He returns, rather than relying on what you and others consider to be a correct understanding of other prophetic Scriptures. .

That is odd you should say that considering Revelation is the teaching of Jesus to us specifically about the prophetic timing of the end times.
Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified [it] by his angel unto his servant John:

The teachings of Jesus are very plain to me, and gives me clear understanding how we are to carry on His work on earth until He returns.  If I have need to understand perfectly the prophesies that I now see only in part, I believe my Lord will give me that understanding when it's time to get on that train.  Until then, let Luke 21:36 be our guide.

Blessings

Luk 21:36   Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.  

Yes and what better way to prepare people than to show them the dangers of waiting for that future boogie man while they stay blind to the dangers of the present spirit of satan that is plaguing our society today.

[Peter]

I've explained to you how I rely more on the teachings of our Lord Jesus to understand what will happen on earth shortly before He returns, rather than relying on what you and others consider to be a correct understanding of other prophetic Scriptures.

That claim rings hollow since you once held John Nelson Darby's 19th century futurism, lock, stock and barrel. Nobody could come to the conclusions of that inverted pyramid of pile-on presumption on their own. You admitted to having been indoctrinated into it by admitting to later having overcome parts of it. Yet it would seem you have deluded yourself into believing that you somehow arrived at it by "relying on the teachings of our Lord Jesus".

If I have need to understand perfectly the prophesies that I now see only in part, I believe my Lord will give me that understanding when it's time to get on that train.

Why would you expect to be given an understanding when you aren't genuinely seeking truth? You overcame a couple components of Darby's doctrine that you were taught, expressly because you recognized they were false through scripture, but in spite of that you tenaciously cling to the pieces of it that you have left, even risking creating your own personal Gospel, by rearranging the order of scripture to to conform it to the broken remnant of what you have left of Darby's doctrine.

We aren't looking for you to "rely" on anything we have shown you. Though we had hoped you would at least try to understand what we are showing you. But you instead choose self-imposed blindness to it, as if we had not written a thing in this thread, as if we are invisible.

Do you understand that by rearranging the Olivet Discourse you are effectively making the claim that you know better what Jesus said, than His three witnesses Matthew, Mark and Luke did? How could they be so wrong? How could they get things so out of order?
Do you really think that is what "the Lord is showing you"?

[John 10:10]

When you can come to say as did Paul in 1 Cor 2:16,
 
"For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ,"

then maybe you will find out that you do not have all of the mind of the Lord on matters of eschatology, and others know some things that you do not.

Until then,

Blessings

[resistingrexmundi]

When you can come to say as did Paul in 1 Cor 2:16,
 
"For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ,"

then maybe you will find out that you do not have all of the mind of the Lord on matters of eschatology, and others know some things that you do not.

Until then,

Blessings

Did anyone up here claim to have all the answers? In fact I am composing an alternate possibility for the application of Daniel 11. However there are things we can PROVE scripturally and things we CANNOT. Like the existence of single antichrist is something we cannot prove. Especially given that Jesus never identified any one figure as particularly evil in the last days but used the term "wicked". Which as we showed you was used plurally in parables and as direct teachings. Paul uses the same plurality in his epistles. All of the "one"'s that you see in those verses are scribal additions. Those helper words obscure the true meaning of scripture sometimes.

So let us start with something we can prove.

Revelation 12:6 (KJV): And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred [and] threescore days.


Most agree that Israel, is the "woman" in the context of this verse.  If we then consider that the end of the 1260 "days" was when Israel came out of "the wilderness" (of the people Ezekiel 20:35), or out from being scattered among the nations, returning home and declaring her independence in 1948, and subtract 1260 years ("each day for a year"), we arrive at 688 AD.

A quick Yahoo search reveals that this is widely understood to be the founding year of the construction of the Islamic mosque, the Dome of the Rock.

Next let's try a verse that involves 42 "months" in prophecy.
There are 365.24 days in our modern solar year, or John's 1st century Julian (365.25) year, divided by 12 months = 30.44 average days in a month:


Revelation 11:2: But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty [and] two months.


The city of Jerusalem was under the foot of, or controlled by, Gentiles until the Israelis took back the holy city in 1967.  42 months x 30.44 days = 1278.5 days (as years). Subtracting this from 1967 we arrive at 688.5.  Once again, the founding year of the Dome of the Rock.

Let's explore Daniel's 1290 "days" in prophecy, that he penned over 500 years before John authored the problems from Revelation above:


(KJV) Daniel 12:11: And from the time [that] the daily [sacrifice] shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, [there shall be] a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
(Tanach) -  Daniel 12:11 And from the time the daily sacrifice was removed and the silent abomination placed, is one thousand, two hundred, and ninety.


Sacrifices were suspended three times in the Old Testament:  once before Daniel (Chronicles 28:24-25), once during the Babylonian captivity in 583 BC (Chronicles 36:19 and Ezra 3:6), and once, about four hundred years later, by the Greek king Antiochus Epiphanies.  Let's try the 583 date considering that Daniel would write about the abolition of sacrifices with which he was directly familiar.


Old Testament - day = year "language" is suggested in Genesis' account of the flood as 30 day months pointing to a 360 day prophetic year, each year being equal to .9857 solar year (360/365.24) of or our modern historical record that the event dating comes from. 1290 x .9857 = 1271.5 solar years.  Subtracting 583 we arrive again at 688.5 AD.  The founding year of The Dome of the Rock - THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION.

Daniel and John's prophecies were written over 500 years apart, yet the two books unite with mathematical precision - both pinning the year 688 AD - that was hundreds of years in John's future and over a thousand years in Daniel's future!

Revelation 13:5:  And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty [and] two months.

Again using the average of 30.44 days in a month, multiplied by 42 months = 1278.5 days (as years).  Subtracting this from 1967, the year of Israel's regaining of Jerusalem, we arrive again at 688.5. The founding year of the Dome of the Rock.

Daniel 9:24-26: 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.  25  Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.  26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come 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.


Quoting from "The False prophet":  "Almost 100 years after Gabriel spoke to Daniel, a special decree was granted by Artaxerxes I to Nehemiah (444-445 BC).  This is the ONLY decree recorded in the Bible that gave the Jews permission to 'restore Jerusalem and rebuild its walls'.  The Messiah, Jesus, was "cut off" or crucified in 32 or 33AD." 
Much of Christianity understands these 69 weeks to be 69 sevens of years.  So we have 69 x 7 or 483 prophetic 'years'."  Again, uniformly using our multiplier of .9857 to reconcile this 360-day year "language" (per Genesis) with the solar year units of our modern historical record, yields: 483 x .9857 = 476 solar years.  Artaxerxes' decree in 444 BC + 476 years = 32 AD, the cross right to the year!

Again quoting from The False Prophet:  "But what about those six points that were supposed to be fulfilled during these 70 weeks? Ah-ha! All but one were fulfilled at the cross. Did not Jesus (1) finish transgression eternally, (2) make an end of sin,(John 1:29) (3) make reconciliation for iniquity, (4) bring in everlasting righteousness, and (6) anoint the Most holy with His own precious blood?  Of course, praise the Lord! Point (5), however, was left out: 'Seal up vision and prophecy'. This is where those peculiar 7 weeks and 62 weeks come in:


7 x 7 years in prophecy = 48.3 Solar years. 444 BC - 48.3 = 395.7 BC,  Malachi was inspired to write the last book of the Old Testament.
"The Scripture to the Jews was complete, and no more was written until the New Testament era! So Old Testament vision and prophecy were indeed 'sealed up'. As one dear Rabbi lamented in about 200 BC, 'The Holy Spirit has departed from Israel,' and until this very day, the Jews, as a nation, have not been permitted to see any further. The Lord has blinded their eyes so they could not recognize Jesus as their Messiah (Romans 11:8, 2 Corinthians 3:15)." 


Earlier you mentioned allowing scripture to interpret scripture and I concur. Let us start with Daniel's beasts.

Daniel 7:4  The first [was] like a lion, and had eagle's wings...

Daniel 7:5  And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear...

Daniel 7:6  After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard...

Daniel 7:7  After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly...

The first was reference to Babylon, the second was Medo-Persia, the third was Greece, and the fourth was Rome.

Now in Revelation we see beast pop up again. Following the hermeneutic rule it means empire or kingdom.

Revelation 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as [the feet] of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

The seats of the ancient successive kingdom beasts of Daniel's lion, bear and leopard which are Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece, are occupied today by the countries of Iraq, Iran, and Syria/Lebanon. The dragon in the verse above is Satan. All of the land that made up those kingdoms is controlled by and united by Islam. Which explains perfectly why the beast in Revelation is 1 beast made of three beasts already mentioned in scripture. Islam is driven by the very spirit of antichrist. You know that. 

Please read the False Prophet. Just as a favor to see where we are coming from. Here is a link http://www.beholdthebeast.com/preface_tfp.htm

[Peter]

When you can come to say as did Paul in 1 Cor 2:16,
 
"For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ,"

then maybe you will find out that you do not have all of the mind of the Lord on matters of eschatology,.....

Of course I would be the last to claim that I did. Particularly after having been indoctrinated into futurist eschatology, and then blessedly having overcome it, by simply seeking out and following the truth. Indeed exactly through a willingness to understand, that something that I believe, could be in error.

..... and others know some things that you do not.

No question. But you failed to count yourself among those "others" by failing to demonstrate the truth of your beliefs through scripture - indeed but rather demonstrated an abuse of scripture - and yet you did not lodge the first criticism against what we have been trying to explain to you. Indeed if you had been watching the 2 Thess thread you would have found that resisting and I are still very much learning. Evermore, everyday.

Until then,

Blessings[/b]

Instead of engaging in a personal attack, why don't you instead explain how you believe you have been given license to rearrange the order of the Olivet Discourse, to fit your unique eschatology?

You said: "I've explained to you how I rely more on the teachings of our Lord Jesus to understand what will happen..."
But what you are attempting is to modify futurist doctrine that you were taught, with preterist doctrine that you were taught. It won't work because there is a gulf of 1900 years that separates the two doctrines.

And in case you didn't notice, resisting and I are pointing out our understanding of what did happen, regarding fulfilled prophecy, not idly speculating about the future.

"The folly of interpreters has been to foretell times and things by this prophecy [Revelation], as if God designed to make them prophets. By this rashness they have not only exposed themselves, but brought the prophecy also into contempt. The design of God was much otherwise. He gave this and the prophecies of the Old Testament, not to gratify men's curiosities by enabling them to foreknow things, but that after they were fulfilled they might be interpreted by the event, and his own providence, not the interpreters', be then manifested thereby to the world. For the event of things predicted many ages before will then be a convincing argument that the world is governed by Providence." - Sir Isaac Newton

Instead of personal attacks, why don't you try to understand what we have been advancing, and then criticize the portions you find problematic, as we did yours?

The easiest way is to understand it in it's entirety, as a brick by brick empirical argument, as presented in "The False Prophet" by Ellis Skolfield.
http://beholdthebeast.com/the_great_detective.htm
However if you put your effort into MISunderstanding, or try page by page to wring it through the filter of your futurist/preterist hybrid doctrine, you likely won't get very far. Why not consider this entire traditional continuous historic context - with which you are well familiar in regard to Old Testament prophecy but not at all familiar in regard to New Testament prophecy - entirely on it's own merit?