10 Comments

I have been thinking about this....that the 1000 year reign may have already taken place. I'm so happy to read this. I have been studying and praying about this for a while. I believe this is the confirmation I have been looking for. I am trembling right now.

Expand full comment

Thank you. I pray that I am a vessel that Yah uses to spread truth. When I first discovered this it was a lightbulb moment. The more I look into it, the more and more I cannot conclude otherwise. We see through a glass darkly, but I get a feeling that the glass is starting to become clear. Aslan is on the move. Soon, we will see him face to face and walk with him, further up and further in. May God richly bless you.

Expand full comment

The tribulation did not take place between 63 and 70 AD. According to Daniel 2 and Daniel 7, the Antichrist's Kingdom and rule is over the second form of the Roman Empire. The 10 toes partly of clay and partly of iron. The first form of the Roman empire fell in 476 AD. The so-called Holy Roman Empire that arose after this, was the 10 toed empire described by Daniel and the Book of Revelation.

Expand full comment

We are told the first form fell in 476AD. We are told the Holy Roman Empire rose out of the fall of the Roman Empire. I have serious questions though about the official narrative re: 1000 years of the middle/dark ages.

But as to the tribulation, Jesus himself said it would happen to "this generation", the generation He was speaking to. And it did. He is not a false prophet. See Matthew 24.

Expand full comment

Matthew 24 in context is talking about the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple. This is what Jesus was answering. In the parallel account in Luke, he only records these two questions, “when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?” Verse 20, “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. In the parallel passages in Matthew and Mark, they both call this the abomination of desolation spoken by Daniel the prophet.

Expand full comment

Revelation, however, after Chapter 3 is referring to the rise of the beast kingdom and it's ruler who will rule over ten nations. Revelation 17 paints a pretty clear picture that this is the so-called Holy Roman Empire. The woman, mystery Babylon, represents the false religion that rides the beast, i.e, the religious aspect of the beast kingdom is stronger than the political power of any of these nations. Her colors are purple and Crimson, the colors of the Vatican. This false religious system is extremely wealthy (RCC) and she is the city that ruled over the kings of the earth at the time John wrote Revelation. The woman is the City, the city is Rome. The Antichrist and his kingdom rule over the ten nations from Rome.

Expand full comment

The leaders of the Protestant reformation all believed that they were living through the tribulation of Revelation and that the RCC was the Beast system, and that the Popes of the Roman Catholic Church were a succession of antichrists. With the rise of dispensationalism, and it's spread like wildfire throughout the Christian world during the last two hundred years, this is something that has been almost erased from history!

Expand full comment

Does this theory believe that Nero was the Antichrist? If so, how do those who hold this position reconcile this; Nero died 6/9/68 ad. Jerusalem fell on 8/9/70 ad. According to the end of Rev 19, when Jesus returns he will throw the Beast(Antichrist) and false prophet into the lake of fire. How could Nero have been the beast if he died over two years before the return of Christ?

Expand full comment

Thank you! I enjoyed this rabbit hole immensely. It has connected many dots for me and i think its absolutely possible.

God bless fren 😉🙏❤️

Expand full comment

ThankQ fren!

Expand full comment