1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 (New American Standard Bible)

13 But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope.

14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus.

15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.

16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.

17 Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.

18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.

Taking it all together, what is above and 1 Thessalonians 5, it’s totally clear we are not going anywhere if we physically live till the end times. Not going anywhere till the end, His day, when He comes for us and judges the wicked.

1 Thessalonians 5 makes it pretty clear we all will be here till the “day of the Lord” and for sinners it will be wrath and judgement; for saints it will be the good promised hope for us to spend eternity with Him. The “day of the Lord” is the last day, the end. God has Paul also note that in 1 Corinthians 1:4-8. And Jesus mentioned His day will come as clearly as lightening in Luke 17:24-37. It’s all the last day for everyone. The day of resurrection.

Can you tell me why you feel tribulation will be exactly 7 years?

Here is what I believe, drawing from the EXPLICIT Biblical evidence presented from all three positions. In relation to the pre-tribbers, I believe that we will not see the wrath of God [1 Thess 5:9]. In relation to the mid-tribbers, I believe it will happen sometimes AFTER the mid-point of the 7-year tribulaton, but NOT exactly on the mid-point. In relation to the post-trib position, I do believe that the Antichrist will persecute for 1260 days. Hope that helps…

I am even more confused than ever.

Yea I was pretty confused for a bit too .

You don’t know how long I’ve been doing study on this before even posting that link as a comment .

This must be referring to two different princes, right?

Right, but only one Prince is ever actually noted by title to ever fit the pronoun “he”, that being Jesus Christ. That is how the sacrifice ceased. His sacrifice was the end of such in the eyes of God. The only other mention of “prince” is regarding “people of the prince”, a group. That does not fit the use of the term “he” in verse 27.

I am interpreting the first Prince to be Christ and the second prince to be a world leader maybe the Anti-Christ.
…
Even though Pre-Trib is not Biblical, could the second prince of Daniel be referring to a future leader? What are your thoughts?

It is my humble view given some lenghty study and prayer, that the whole of Daniel 9:24-27 has already been fulfilled and applied to Israel’s past and it related directly to Matthew 24:15-22. I feel in Matthew 24, that ONLY verses 2 and verses 15-22 were fulfilled well in the past. The roadmap in our time is Matthew 24:5-14 and Matthew 24:23-51. Everything I see relating to Daniel 9:24-27 and Matthew 24:15-22 already occurred and the timing for years fits it having already occurred.

(This is all stuff I was going to make into a post one day, but was still looking for the best explanations I could find to convey it.)

Take a look at this video, it’s the best I’ve found so far to explain Daniel 9. Don’t worry about the music very much, look at the charts outlined. If you take 70 weeks, which is 70 times 7 days = 490. If that is years, everything plays out perfectly to have occurred in 490 years as explained. The “people of the prince” were under orders from a Roman ruler to destroy Jerusalem, Titus. Titus is the 2nd prince. Daniel 9 is relating to 70AD and was completed with Jesus being crucified and what He said would occur 70AD.

(Stick with me a second so I can finish before you jump to conclusions about what I’m saying.)

If you check old Bible commentaries outside of those influenced by the Darby/Scofield view, it was not uncommon to see Daniel 9 AND Matthew 24:15-22 as being viewed as already fulfilled. So what was the “abomination of desolation”? Some see it as the stoning of Stephen, saints had to RUN after that happened as Jesus warned in Matthew 24:15-22

Acts 11:19 (New American Standard Bible)

19 So then those who were scattered because of the persecution that occurred in connection with Stephen made their way to Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except to Jews alone.

The stoning of Stephen fits the number of years and the fact saints faced major persecution and were scattered after that. It also fits that things were bad but the time of the persecution was “shortened”. Then after that the church grew.

Also with Matthew 24:15-22 is the destruction of 70AD. We know the saints had to run then as Jesus warned and Rome taking Jerusalem is viewed as the abomination of desolation by those who see it as being fulfilled in 70AD. Keep in mind, we’re just talking about verses 15-22, not everything else in that chapter.

So basically it’s fulfilled and possibly even double fulfilled. Depending on if you see the abomination of desolation as occurring in 70AD instead of Stephen being stoned. Stephen being stoned and the gospel pouring out the Gentiles after that fits the prophesy.

In Matthew 24 2 QUESTIONS are asked. They asked Jesus when the events of the destruction of temples would take place AND when He would return. Matthew 24:15-22 answers the destruction of temples, since it is related to Daniel 9. Either you can see it as being sealed to occur once Stephen was stoned or you can see it as all occurring in 70AD, but it happened either way you view it and it’s all related to the same set of prophesy.

So what you’re left with, is none of the Darby/Scofield assertions that temple sacrifices have to resume and talk of a fixed 7 years. Now what baffled me, when I felt the Darby/Scofield view was correct when there is talk about resuming sacrifices, is how they would speak as if Jews would have full control of Jerusalem again. That conflicts with Luke 21:24, that shows Jews will NEVER have full control of Jerusalem until ALL the Gentiles have come in, the times of the Gentiles needs to be fulfilled first. Now the Jews could one day have enough control or be permitted to perform sacrifices in the future, perhaps. But the view the Jews will get ALL of Jerusalem and restart sacrifices conflicts with them never having it till all the Gentiles have come in. But if you go with pre-trib it works since you just claim the Gentiles were all raptured and don’t worry about how there are claims of Gentiles still saved after the pre-trib view of rapture. But this is because you can’t make a solid and full case with the pre-trib viewpoint, you have to leave something out using the pre-trib view.

So we’re left with the fact BEASTS will come (or already are) and The Mark and so on, I’m not seeing solid scripture to claim whether or not temple sacrifices will be going, not seeing a 7 year deal with the Anti-christ although we know an Anti-christ will be. And the claim the 144,000 will do super evangelism prior to the return of Christ, I’m not seeing where the Bible notes that.

I think Matthew 24:15-22 could possibly occur for us, but it would mean an “abomination of desolation” that does not have to be old Jewish temple related.

And see the Daniel 9:25 portion of the timeline here.

I think we all agree that site may be incorrect in asserting the pope as “the” Anti-christ, but they’ve certainly got things much better in line with scripture than the Darby/Scofield view.

You know what I am talking about. These Pre-Trib pastors would never want to be associated with anything Catholic, but their entire eschatology is based on Jesuit teachings.

Also, the footnotes refer me back to Isaiah 55:4 in regard to the first Prince….. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2055:4;&version=9;

I am interpreting the first Prince to be Christ and the second prince to be a world leader maybe the Anti-Christ. However, what makes anyone think that this passage in Daniel is referring to the former prince of Syria. Even though Pre-Trib is not Biblical, could the second prince of Daniel be referring to a future leader? What are your thoughts?

My earnest and sincere prayer everyday to God is “Lord, I just want truth” Thank God we have the Spirit of Truth to lead and guide us into ALL truth as we earnestly seek it and contend for the faith.

I believe the “pre-trib” theory is slowly being eroded away…for me anyways…pray for me as I continue to study to show myself approved unto God…

I will look at the info tonight after I get out of work. However, I am still Post-Trib because that IS what the Church taught for over 1800 years until the 1800s came along.

Kyle