Search the Community

It seems like all the major JW-related topics on this forum, no matter what the original topic, have become a mix of discussions that will end up including: Russia, Ukraine, Covid19, the UN, the KON, the KOS, and China. That's perfectly fine, of course. But for ease of reference, what if we could include our basic ideas and opinions about the KON, KOS, GOG and MAGOG, in one place. I'm not proposing to move any posts from other topics to here, but anyone should feel free to copy and quote what's been said elsewhere, if they wish. I wanted to start with some quotes from WTS publications as a basis. First from the Pure Worship book: *** rr chap. 17 p. 183 par. 8 “I Am Against You, O Gog” *** 8 “The king of the north.” (Read Daniel 11:40-45.) Daniel foretold the march of world powers from his day down to our time. The prophecy also mentions rival political foes—“the king of the south” and “the king of the north”—each of them having changed identity over the centuries as various earthly nations have fought for supremacy. Regarding the final campaign of the king of the north in “the time of the end,” Daniel said: “He will go out in a great rage to annihilate and to devote many to destruction.” Jehovah’s worshippers are the primary target of the king of the north. But like Gog of Magog, the king of the north comes “to his end” after failing in his attack on God’s people. And on the topic of Gog of Magog, just previous to the above quote: *** rr chap. 17 p. 182 “I Am Against You, O Gog” *** The Enemy—Gog of Magog 3 Read Ezekiel 38:1, 2, 8, 18; 39:4, 11. Here is the gist of the prophecy: “In the final part of the years,” an enemy called “Gog of . . . Magog” invades “the land” of God’s people. But that vicious attack causes Jehovah’s “great rage” to flare up, and Jehovah steps in and defeats Gog. Victorious, Jehovah gives his defeated enemy and all those with him “as food to all kinds of birds of prey and the wild beasts.” Finally, Jehovah gives Gog “a burial place.” To understand how this prophecy will be fulfilled in the near future, we first need to identify Gog. 4 Who, then, is Gog of Magog? From Ezekiel’s description, we may conclude that Gog is an enemy of pure worshippers. Is Gog a prophetic name for Satan—the greatest of all enemies of true worship? For many decades, that is what our publications said. However, a further consideration of Ezekiel’s prophecy led to an adjustment in our understanding. The Watchtower explained that the title Gog of Magog refers, not to an invisible spirit creature, but to a visible human enemy—a coalition of nations that will fight against pure worship. Before we review the basis for such a conclusion, let us first examine two clues in Ezekiel’s prophecy that indicate that Gog is not a spirit creature. 5 “I will give you as food to all kinds of birds of prey.” (Ezek. 39:4) The Scriptures often use the idea of birds of prey devouring a carcass as a warning of divine judgment. God gave such warnings to the nation of Israel as well as to non-Israelite nations. (Deut. 28:26; Jer. 7:33; Ezek. 29:3, 5) Note, though, that those divine warnings were given, not to spirit creatures, but to flesh-and-blood humans. After all, birds of prey and wild beasts eat flesh, not spirit. So this divine warning in Ezekiel’s prophecy suggests that Gog is not a spirit creature. 6 “I will give Gog a burial place . . . in Israel.” (Ezek. 39:11) The Scriptures do not speak of spirit creatures as being buried on earth. Rather, Satan and his demons will be abyssed for 1,000 years, and later they will be hurled into the symbolic lake of fire, signifying their everlasting destruction. (Luke 8:31; Rev. 20:1-3, 10) Since Gog is spoken of as being given “a burial place” on earth, we may conclude that he is not a spirit creature.

The sixth one poured out his bowl on the great river Eu·phra?tes,+ and its water was dried up+ to prepare the way for the kings+ from the rising of the sun – Revelation 16:12  Who are the "kings coming from the rising sun" described in Revelation 16:12? The question might seem silly or too simple. All Jehovah's Witnesses, or nearly all, have learned that the kings from the rising sun are Jehovah and His Son Christ. The book "Revelation its climax" in this regard says Â… This is also bad news for Babylon the Great! 21 At the height of the splendor of ancient Babylon, the copious waters of the Euphrates were a fundamental element of its defensive system. In 539 a.E.V. those waters dried up when their course was diverted by the Persian leader Cyrus. This allowed Cyrus the Persian and Darius the Medus, the kings coming from the "rising sun" (ie from the east), to enter and conquer Babylon. At the crucial moment the Euphrates failed as a defense of that great city. (Isaiah 44: 27-45: 7; Jeremiah 51:36) Something similar must happen to modern Babylon, the world system of false religion. 22 Babylon the Great "sits on many waters". According to Revelation 17: 1, 15, these symbolize "peoples and crowds and nations and tongues", multitudes of followers whom it considers a protection. But the "waters" are drying up! In Western Europe, where it once exerted great influence, hundreds of millions of people are now openly without religion. In some countries, for many years a policy has been stubbornly aimed at eradicating the influence of religion. In these countries the masses did not rise in its defense. Likewise, when the time comes when Babylon the Great will have to be destroyed, the decreasing number of her followers will turn out to be no protection for her. (Revelation 17:16) Although boasting of having billions of followers, Babylon the Great will find herself helpless before the "kings coming from the rising sun". 23 Who are these kings? In 539 a.E.V. they were Darius the Medus and Cyrus the Persian, who were employed by Jehovah to conquer the ancient city of Babylon. On this day of the Lord, the false religious system of Babylon the Great will be equally destroyed by human rulers. But once again it will be a divine judgment. Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, the "kings coming from the rising sun," will have to put the "thought" of turning against Babylon the Great and completely destroying it in the hearts of human rulers. (Revelation 17:16, 17) The pouring of the sixth cup publicly proclaims that this judgment is about to be performed! (paragraphs 20 to 23, pages 229-230 of the Italian edition).   Are the Almighty God and His Son Christ the "kings coming from the rising sun"?   However, some questions arise. Let us admit that Cyrus and Darius represent Jehovah and Christ (even if it seems a somewhat risky parallel) and we admit that we can skip the action of the United Nations * (see footnote) because of what Revelation 17: 17 says. "Preparing the way" means creating the conditions to pass. Also wanting to assert that instead of referring to the passage we refer to something else (how to carry out a destruction) "preparing the way" always means "creating the favorable conditions for doing something". It is clear that if we talk about Cyrus and Darius, they, being simple human beings, really needed someone to prepare the way because if they could not divert the Euphrates River they would never cross the borders of Babylon. Can we say the same about Jehovah and Christ? Do they need someone to "prepare the way for them" in order to cross or defeat anyone? Obviously not - Isaiah 40:15 It is also reasonable to believe that the angel in charge of pouring the cup on the Euphrates River to prepare the way for Jehovah and Christ as to simplify them things? The current explanation in effect says that Jehovah and Christ will destroy Babylon the Great, by which time the people (represented by the water of the river) does not protect you anymore. But does God Almighty and His Son Christ really need to weaken the defensive walls of Babylon the Great in order to destroy it? Moreover, if indeed Babylon the Great loses the love of her lovers, is not the strange reaction that kings and traders show immediately after its destruction? - compare Revelation 18: 9-19 The official explanation states "The reaction of nations may seem surprising if we take into account the fact that Babylon was destroyed by the symbolic ten horns of the scarlet wild beast. (Revelation 17:16) But once Babylon, the" kings of earth "will clearly show how useful it was to keep the people quiet and subservient" (Chapter 37, paragraph 2). So Babylon the Great had lost the love of her lovers, had not lost it or regained it after its destruction? - Compare Revelation 18: 7 Moreover, the nations were not aware even before this nation "was useful for them to keep the people quiet and subservient"? ** Let us reflect on the words of Revelation 17:15 which identify the waters as "peoples and crowds and nations and languages". If the waters are people, and these are placed to protect a nation, they can lower themselves in two different ways. Either these people lose interest in that nation (ie they do not protect it any more and then it would really mean that its lovers got fed up with her) or those people simply are gone - compare Revelation 9: 13-15 (see also Jeremiah 50: 35-38; 51:36, 37) Furthermore, in the basic writing of this article the water of the Euphrates river only dries up when the angel pours his cup.  This means that up until a moment before the river bed was normally swollen. These reflections should cast a shadow over all those disquisitions that would wish for Babylon the Great to lose more and more consensus and that this is an indication of its imminent destruction. If the angel did not pour the sixth cup of God's wrath on the Euphrates River, water would not dry up at all. Otherwise, someone will be able to find a scripture where it says that the water goes down "about his business" and the bowl of God's only serves to give "the final blow." Nowhere, however, is there any indication of this. Moreover, if it were people who were tired of Babylon the Great (as the lowering of the waters is currently being interpreted), what good is it for God to put his thought into their hearts? - see Revelation 17:17 If it is people who get tired of their lover, they would not destroy it of their own free will? Do we have to suppose that this direct action by God only serves to speed up the times? It does not seem so. As the Lord himself said: “Knowing their thoughts, he said to them: “Every kingdom divided against itself comes to ruin, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand. 26  In the same way, if Satan expels Satan, he has become divided against himself; how, then, will his kingdom stand?” - Matthew 12:25, 26 Babylon the Great is a fundamental part of the system of Satan for which he, as the ruler of the world, would have no interest in bringing down or even just watching while the waters are lowering. If it were for Satan, Babylon the Great would last forever but they will lower themselves exclusively because of God's will and against all expectations. Not by chance, in fact, the cup of the previous wrath (the fifth) is poured on the throne of the wild beast and it is said that it is obscured. This means that now, these kings, at least for a while will no longer have control over it - Revelation 16:10 Here, then, that the reaction of kings and traders becomes absolutely logical. They have never ceased to love her but for a reason that they will not be able to explain themselves, during an hour of madness, they will turn into their assassins. The lowering of the waters, therefore, means that now the people present near the great Euphrates River (who could be there for protection of the borders as for any other reason) are gone. If we look at the order of events described in chapter 16 of Revelation it seems to be so. Verse 12 speaks of the sixth cup of the wrath of God which dries up the great Euphrates River and soon afterwards, in verses 13 and 14, are seen "coming out of the mouth of the dragon and the mouth of the wild beast and the mouth of the false prophet three impure expressions inspired [that seemed] similar to frogs (...) and go to the kings of the entire inhabited earth, to gather them to the war of the great day of God Almighty. " If we cling to official understanding, does not it seem that something is missing between verse 12 and verse 13? If the drying up of the Euphrates about the loss of love against Babylon the Great, after this event you should not see the king's attack and then destroy it and then, only after, see the gathering to Armageddon? Where did the missing verse go? Or ... why is this episode not even mentioned? Even the theory of the book written in "non-chronological" order here lapses because we are not talking about what is written before or after; there would simply be a whole piece missing! Piece, among other things, to which two chapters will be dedicated later (see the article "who establishes the correct interpretation?"). This makes it clear that the topic is too important to have been "skipped". The answer is always simpler than the questions would allow you to imagine. There is no "missing piece" between verses 12 and 13 and no "complicated time play" because the lowering of waters simply indicates the elimination of those people. If the waters mean "peoples, crowds, nations and languages" these peoples, crowds, nations and languages now we are gone. Babylon the Great, therefore, has already been destroyed and that is why the next action of the rulers of the world is to prepare for the battle of Armageddon. As we have seen in previous articles, in fact, the destruction of Babylon the Great is a prelude to the war of Armageddon and not to the great tribulation. Now, going back to the question "who are the kings coming from the rising sun", how many chances are there that they are Jehovah and Christ, since there are no more people? Let's think about it for a moment. Before the water went down for those who had a problem entering that city? Would any armies placed to protect a nation be a problem for any spiritual creature or for other human beings? - compare Isaiah 8: 7 It is evident that it is human beings who need someone to prepare the way for them and a nation without several inhabitants has no barriers or impediments of any kind. Are these kings therefore human beings? And if they are human beings ... who are they?   They are human beings the kings from the rising sun?   From what we have learned, it is now easy to link the scriptures. We have seen that the gathering to Israel will be literal (that we treated in the article entitled "The appointed times of the nations"). We also saw that the ingathering will take place shortly before the war of Armageddon ( "Next stop: Israel"). By doing two plus two it will be easy to understand who these kings are, but let us see if the Scriptures give us reason to believe that the understanding is correct. Let's see what Isaiah 60: 1-3 tells us.  “Arise, O woman,+ shed light, for your light has come. The glory of Jehovah shines on you.+  2  For look! darkness will cover the earthAnd thick gloom the nations;But on you Jehovah will shine,And on you his glory will be seen.  3  Nations will go to your light+And kings+ to your shining splendor”. Speaking of the period in which there would have been "thick darkness" on the national groups (which period?) the woman would have risen and the kings, taken from all the nations, would have come to her luster. This scripture can not have been fulfilled in the past, is it not? In fact, the Israelites have never accepted people from other nations in their land as kings. It can not even be fulfilled in the new world because it speaks of "thick darkness on national groups". When should it be fulfilled, then? “Foreigners will build your walls,And their kings will minister to you,+For in my indignation I struck you,But in my favor* I will have mercy on you.+ 11  Your gates will be kept open constantly;+They will not be closed by day or by night,To bring to you the resources of the nations,And their kings will take the lead” - Isaiah 60:10, 11 Isaiah tells us where these kings come from (from nations around the world) and also says that they "will take the directive" in bringing their resources. “And you will actually drink the milk of nations,+At the breast of kings you will nurse;+And you will certainly know that I, Jehovah, am your Savior,And the Powerful One of Jacob is your Repurchaser.+ 17  Instead of the copper I will bring in gold,And instead of the iron I will bring in silver,Instead of the wood, copper,And instead of the stones, iron;And I will appoint peace as your overseers. And righteousness as your task assigners” - Isaiah 60:16, 17 (see also the details of Isaiah chapter 62). Obviously someone could say that these scriptures applied to the Israelites because, among other things, they suggest that these kings come to bow, to serve, not really to govern. We know that the scriptures also say this. But is this what Isaiah is talking about? Let the Bible respond. “I will set a sign among them, and I will send some of those who escape to the nations—to Tar?shish,+ Pul, and Lud,+ those who draw the bow, to Tu?bal and Ja?van,+ and to the faraway islands—who have not heard a report about me or seen my glory; and they will proclaim my glory among the nations.+ 20  They will bring all your brothers out of all the nations+ as a gift to Jehovah, on horses, in chariots, in covered wagons, on mules, and on swift camels, up to my holy mountain, Jerusalem,” says Jehovah, “just as when the people of Israel bring their gift in a clean vessel into the house of Jehovah.” 21  “I will also take some for the priests and for the Levites,” says Jehovah” - Isaiah 66:19-21 True, this writing can apply to those who "seize the kingdom" or the elect, who are taken from every part of the earth - Matthew 11:12 However, we have also seen that the structure of the post-armageddon Promised Land will in some respects be similar to that of the shadow of things - see Colossians 2:17 Obviously it will be infinitely better (see the article entitled "The temple of Ezekiel's vision is a reality!"). For example, we know that ancient characters such as Abraham, Moses and David will serve as princes in the new world and therefore there will be a sort of hierarchy of theocratic bill even if our only King will always be only Jesus Christ. Do we have to wait for the end of a thousand years to have superintendents, kings or princes directing the affairs in the country? This would not make sense. From what we understand, among those who repopulate Israel at the end of the satanic system, will be chosen "kings", or "majestic" who will take the directive among the people - Nehemiah 10:28, 29 In harmony with this, the chief leaders of the tribes of Israel were called princes and the 68th Psalm says that kings would bring gifts - see Psalm 68: 27-29 Psalm 138: 4 says, "All the kings of the earth will praise you, O Jehovah, for they will have heard the sayings of your mouth" and it is evident that these "kings" can not be those who stand against Jehovah and His Anointed at the battle of Armageddon. They are kings definitely different. If we think about it, it's not what we've always been told? During the Millennial Kingdom and also in the New World some will be chosen to be the "sarim" and will take the directive at various levels. The difference with this understanding is that no one has told us that some of these people will be chosen already before or during the attainment of the Promised Land *** (also because the literal repopulation of Israel has never been taken into consideration and also the belief that the resurrection would have occurred "during" the millennium made it impossible to understand these scriptures). Jehovah will somehow choose "kings" among the survivors of the nations to repopulate the land that bears His Name. The fact that these kings come from the "rising sun" (ie from the east) is a further confirmation of their identity. In Daniel 11:44, or in the story parallel to the event of Revelation 16:12, it is said that the king of the north will be troubled by the news that will come from the "east and north". In the article already mentioned, namely the one entitled "Next stop: Israel" we have specifically seen why this king is so perplexed. He sees the people of God gathered and intent on reaching the Promised Land and behind all this he sees clearly the work of God. Therefore, the kings coming from the rising sun are not Jehovah and Jesus but they are those people chosen by all the nations of whom Jehovah will be pleased, who will take the directive for their whole spiritual family - Ezekiel 20:40, 41 And of course, unlike the Israelites of the past, they will not forget to have a king over them - 1 Timothy 6:15; Revelation 19:16 How do you feel about learning this? Do you hope to be among them?  Footnotes * In this and other articles the term "United Nations" was used, indicating the scarlet beast with seven heads and ten horns described in Revelation. We know that today it is represented by the United Nations but it is said that in the future this military / political agglomeration will not be called "Congress of the peoples" or in any other way.  ** "They were useful for keeping the people quiet and submissive": obviously the official explanation is that Babylon the Great is the world empire of false religion. We know, however, that their despair is due precisely to the fact that they lose the opportunity to continue with their illicit trafficking.  *** The fact that writing identifies them as kings before actual entry into the Promised Land may suggest that Jehovah has already named them as such. However, it is not certain that this appointment takes place only a certain period after under the Millennial Kingdom which begins with the destruction of the kings at Armageddon.  As was stated in the article entitled "Next stop: Israel," Babylon the Great could be inhabited again when "the people gathered from all nations" will approach to it to repopulate. In this case the lowering of the waters described by the sixth cup would have to do with the destruction of the people of the surrounding area. It is reasonable to conclude that if the destruction of Babylon the Great begins Armageddon (and in this case we would already be in Armageddon) the people of God must be in the area so that all the armies of the world prepare themselves in an attempt to destroy it.

In our path of study of the prophecies, as already seen in various previous articles, we will have come across something that we would not have believed possible. The understanding of Babylon the Great, as well as that concerning Armageddon, the Jerusalem above or the Heavenly Jerusalem, have indeed constituted great changes in the official understanding of Jehovah's Witnesses. We can not ignore the chain effects that these "changes of vision" have produced and continue to produce on many other more or less important doctrines. The author of this blog would like above all to clarify that all the theses presented so far have never been considered inspired or infallible and therefore each reader is invited to make their own evaluations (and maybe to contribute) by comparing and meditating on the Scriptures without any injury. At the same time, however, the author is equally convinced that the articles showed respect for the Bible and used it as a guide and supreme authority. Every affirmation, whenever it was possible, was accompanied or confirmed by one or more Scriptures and therefore, although certain arguments went against the official teaching, it was decided to do so in good conscience. The possible firm conviction of the author as well as certain categorical expressions used are exclusively due to this: the support of the Scriptures - John 17:17; 2 Timothy 3:16, 17; 2 Corinthians 10: 4, 5 The article that will be developed now, will also consist of a significant change of vision and we will see how, changing the conditions, real or possible scenarios become real that, until the day before yesterday, we would have considered really far-fetched - Job 42 :2; Mark 10:27 The wisest thing that each of us can do is to evaluate that every thesis presented is really in harmony with the Scripture, and nothing else, without closing up in shell or reshaping the power of God to what we think possible - Mark 12:24 ; Job 38: 4 What do we know, with certainty, of the battle of Armageddon?  What do we know about the Armageddon war? Speaking of the war of the great day of the Almighty God, what do we know for sure? - 1 Thessalonians 5:21 Well, we know that it is not total destruction due to a human war, a solar flare, a meteorite or other Hollywood nonsense - Isaiah 45:18; Psalm 78:69; Ecclesiastes 1: 4 We know it is the crucial war in which God takes revenge on his enemies and on the enemies of His people - Psalm 2: 3-6; Sofonia 1:18; Zechariah 2: 8 We also know that it is the occasion when Jehovah is magnified and makes himself known to the nations - Ezekiel 36:22, 23 It is the war that will free His people from oppression and slavery and will finally begin the Millennial Kingdom - Exodus 15: 11-13; Revelation 7:10 These are reliable informations. For the rest, when it will happen, what means it will use, which scenario will present itself just before the outbreak of this war, etc., only assumptions are made. One of these assumptions, which seems to have a strict logic, is that the place in Hebrew is called Har-Maghedon, is not a literal place but a situation. In practice it would be the situation in which all the enemies of God find themselves fighting against His People, wherever they are. This conclusion seems absolutely logical because how could a war of such proportions, which should encompass all of humanity and therefore billions of people, take place in such a small geographical area? It is absurd to even think about it. However, before closing our faculties of perception on any contrary subject we try to consider the following - James 1:19 First of all we have seen that the war between the king of the north and the king of the south, which is a prophecy to come, could greatly reduce the number of people present on earth including their armies - compare Revelation 6: 3, 7, 8 It's a raw topic we would not like to talk about but the prophecies seem clear. This topic has been dealt with in various previous articles, including the one entitled "Who is the horn that became very great?". Furthermore, as we saw in the article titled "Which nations disappear in Armageddon?" We know that the war of Armageddon will not destroy all nations and people on the planet. This war will indeed destroy the satanic system which includes the savage beast, the kings of the earth and their armies - 1 John 3: 8 Seen from this point of view, perhaps the fact that this war can be fought in a specific and relatively restricted place becomes a possibility? Furthermore it is necessary to make a couple of clarifications. Har-Magedon, which means "Mountain of Megiddo", is not a specific reference to that "tell" that you see in Volume 1 of the book "Insight" (page 953 in the edition in Italian). What you see in photography is what remains of ancient Megiddo, a small hill built on 26 layers of ruins of ancient cities. That is "Megiddo" but where's the mountain? Since there is no mountain called "Mount of Megiddo" we try to make assumptions without prematurely concluding that the whole argument is symbolic. Megiddo is located at the entrance of the pass through the chain of Mount Carmel, which overlooks the valley of Esdraelon from the south-west. So the Mount of Megiddo might be Mount Carmel (compare 1 Kings 18:19, 20, Jeremiah 46:18, Amos 1: 2; 9: 3; Naum 1: 3, 4) and could include all the hilly countryside that surrounds the valley of Megiddo, one hundred kilometers north of Jerusalem, including the valley of Esdraelon. Space is noticeable, but before assuming any calculation, we try to ask ourselves according to what logic or why the kings of the earth should / could be there. To a superficial judgment it would seem a stupid thing. The kings of the earth and their armies will not be able to fight against Christ and his elect (though they will try to - compare Revelation 19:19, 20) and so it is evident that they will take it upon His people. Why, then, to concentrate in one area of the earth (whatever it is) to try to destroy the people of God if it is found in all the inhabited earth? we have seen that the earth chosen by God for His people is still the Promised Land and the gathering of Israel will be literal. The article in part said, "When nations have run out of time, including both the trampling of Jerusalem and the persecution, Armageddon will begin to destroy this beast and all the compact peoples in the fight against the Lamb. At that moment Jerusalem will have been freed and the people of God, after the necessary period spent in the "inner rooms", will be able to go to that country which is still part of the promise and where in a short time it will begin to flow milk and honey - Isaiah 26: 20 " What have we seen so far? We have seen that Babylon the Great is modern apostate Israel but this has to do with the people who occupy it, certainly not with the geographical area which, in itself, can not have merit or guilt - Zechariah 5: 6-8 So, once Israel is liberated from Babylon the Great, Jehovah will bring His people back to that land that bears His name and will be inhabited from generation to generation - Joel 3:20 The crucial question is therefore: will this rallying and consequent exodus to the Promised Land begin after Armageddon or its approach? Some scriptures suggest that this happens just before the final battle. How can we say it? We have seen that during the last war between the king of the north and the king of the south, some nations are able to escape - see Daniel 11:41 The writing mentions Edom, Moab and Ammon and, coincidentally, these are the same nations in which a part of the people of Israel found shelter in the past - compare Psalm 60: 8, 9; Isaiah 16: 4; Jeremiah 40:11 The logical conclusion is that the people of God who survived the war, since they will have to live again Israel now liberated by the Great Whore, are in the vicinity of the Promised Land at least some time before the final battle. This situation would also be similar to what happened in the past but on a much larger scale. If the meeting takes place before Armageddon, then it becomes logical and plausible that the "kings of the earth" will gather in the place that in Hebrew is called Har-Maghedon. This is done to prevent the achievement of the Promised Land (and kill them all at once - compares Psalm 2: 1-6) or simply to kill them once they reach. This hypothesis makes reasonable not only the literal gathering of kings and armies but also the specific place of the gathering. Let's try, for a moment, to read Revelation as if it were the first time and as if they had not taught us anything. The writing says “And I saw three unclean inspired expressions* that looked like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon+ and out of the mouth of the wild beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14  They are, in fact, expressions inspired by demons and they perform signs,+ and they go out to the kings of the entire inhabited earth, to gather them together to the war+ of the great day of God the Almighty ( ... ) And they gathered them together to the place that is called in Hebrew Armageddon" – Revelation 16:13, 14, 16 Without doing any disquisition on what terms and what it means, the first image that would come to mind are the kings who are gathered together somewhere, is not it? In fact, the writing says that these frogs "gathered them", which makes one think that these kings are heading towards a specific place. After all we have never done any disquisitions on the idea that these frogs actually go to the kings of the earth; we have never hypothesized that their "going to" the kings of the earth was symbolic because it is evident that, if these kings live in different and distant nations, these frogs have to go or go towards them. But we have re-discussed that the kings go somewhere. So frogs go literally (they must reach these kings) while kings go in a symbolic sense. That is, they do not go anywhere. The question that would be spontaneous to those who did not know anything about the issues at stake would be ... "Why do the kings of the earth, at the approach of the war, go to the place called Har-Maghedon (whatever place it is)?" In a war scenario, the answer would become simple: because the object of contention is in that area or near that area. Any nation that would place its army on the borders of another nation would send a strong and clear message. He is preparing for the war. In this case, however, the question does not concern the conquest of the territory of Israel but the extermination of the people who intend to live there - Psalm 2: 1-4 Finally we must distinguish the kings of the earth from their armies. The writing of Revelation says that only the kings of the earth are gathered at Har-Maghedon. How many will be the kings of the earth, following their ministers, their officials in various capacities, their bodyguards, etc? A few thousand? A few tens of thousands? Is the entire hilly area of Carmel and the valley of Esdraelon itÂ’s sufficient to accommodate a few tens of thousands of people? Obviously yes, even only the Carmel. Where will the armies be and for which aircraft will they be extended? We do not have a precise answer but we can make some reasoning based on what we know from the scriptures. The simple distinction, which perhaps few have noticed, between the kings of the earth and their armies, should make every hypothesis fall "of the impossibility of the event" because if the Bible does not specify the area of armies extension they could really be hundreds of millions and even billions of people. The final battle would take place "around the Mount of Megiddo" for an indefinite area (why could not they cover all of Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Egypt, Syria and Iraq for example?) God's people would still be surrounded, the writing would not it would fail and Jehovah would rise above the nations. So, regardless of all the reasoning we have just made, if the Bible does not specify the extent of the armies deployed against the people of God, all the discourse on the secure symbolic nature of writing lapses or at least is not as reasonable as it initially seemed. We will try however to "build" the extension of this army only on the basis of what we know and keeping as close as possible so that all the talk will acquire heaviness and it is really the Bible to speak - Romans 3: 4 Regarding the last dominant king described in Daniel chapters 11 and 12 we know that he will place his tents "between the great sea and the holy Mount of the Adornment" - Daniel 11:45 After this event "he will have to come to his end, and there will not be a rescuer for him" and then it is understood that "pitching the tents" is the last action he performs before his final destruction. We have also seen that the destruction of Babylon the Great (or the nation of Israel) is the prelude to Armageddon and not to the great tribulation. As a result, the army of the last ruling king should already be present on the territory of Israel before the final battle * (see footnote). He simply has to wait for all the others to come (it is to be noted, in fact, that the writing which calls for the gathering of the kings of the earth at Har-Maghedon makes no mention of the wild beast. He is not mentioned because he is among the kings or simply because it is already there?). However, for the moment we do not know whether this immense army will stand as a shield to prevent Israel from entering or whether it will wait for "the people gathered from all the earth" to actually enter the country and then surround it - see for example Joel 3: 9- 12; Nehemiah 6:16; Psalm 44:13; 59: 5, 6; 76:11, 12; 97: 1-3; Jeremiah 1: 14-16; 6:25; 25: 9; Lamentations 1:17 For the moment we can imagine both situations since concepts do not change. So, to obstruct any access to the coming people, the armies will have to cover Israel at least for its entire length. Does this seem reasonable to you? So we have to hypothesize an extension that goes from the Great Sea (the Mediterranean) to the Mount of the Adornment west of Israel and an extension at least similar to the east side of Israel (in terms of width). So a length at least equal to that of Israel if not more. What area are we talking about? We can only make an estimate but a territory equal to twice the current Israel should cover an area of 45 / 50,000 square kilometers. With this in mind, let us now assume how powerful this army could be. A site makes a list of the ten most numerous armies (updated to 2015). This is the list with the respective numbers.  CHINA (number of staff: 2.285.000). UNITED STATES (1.458.000). INDIA (1.325.000) NORTH KOREA (1.106.000) RUSSIA (1.027.000) TURKEY (666,500) SOUTH KOREA (639,000). PAKISTAN (617,000) IRAN (523,000). EGYPT (468,000)  The total number of staff would be just over ten million people. We also consider that, as we saw at the beginning, the war between the kings of the north and the king of the south by then will have greatly reduced the numbers and at least a part of the nations listed above may not exist anymore. For the benefit of the numbers, however, it must be said that in case of conflict the "effective" would not be the only ones to go to war. The numbers could be greatly underestimated (it is doubtful, in fact, that the official numbers correspond to the real ones). Finally we must consider that this is the last move of Satan before being thrown into the abyss for a thousand years so he would have every interest in making the armies as numerous as possible. So we multiply by five these numbers and assume that the final attack includes 50 million armed soldiers to the teeth. The area we estimated could contain fifty million people? Yes and fairly well if we consider that these people are not there to live or stay but simply as soldiers waiting to launch a furious attack. Every soldier would have a living space of about one square meter. Do you remember the photographs in which Hitler had his huge troops? In those large gatherings there were probably three or four people every square meter.  In Hitler's huge gatherings there were probably 3 or 4 people per square meter  It is evident that we are making assumptions and the estimates, both of the army and of the militarized area, could vary a lot, but the point we want to illustrate is simply one. Despite the ideas that we made about the war of Har-Magedon, and how they are rooted in us, we can not exclude that the final battle takes place in this geographical area and that it will prove to be the biggest fight in the history of humanity. Indeed, the scriptures mentioned in support of the argument suggest that this is not simply a possibility. Any new understanding, however, can make other scriptures harmonious or create forcing. Forcing should be an indicator that "something is wrong". What happens with the other scriptures, understanding that the place of the final battle will be a specific and relatively restricted place? Meanwhile, as we have mentioned, this situation would be very similar to several biblical episodes we know - see for example Exodus 14: 10-14; 2 Kings 18: 19-25 Jehovah would be exalted in the midst of the nations precisely because, not being really all destroyed, the distant peoples and nations would speak of this event with terror and for centuries - compare Joshua 2: 9-11; Deuteronomy 2:25; Psalm 112: 10 Isaiah 63: 1-6 describes Jehovah coming from Edom who, as we have seen, is one of the places where God's people find refuge, and from there he begins to "tread peoples into His wrath." Psalm 2: 2 describes all the peoples and national groups united "as one man" and this gives the idea that the rulers of the earth, and therefore their armies, are effectively gathered somewhere as one army, a single mass and compact. Finally (but not "finally" because you will find many other similarities if you want to look for them) suddenly becomes clear why the king of the north is troubled because of news from the east and the north - see Daniel 11:44 So far what have we been told? In other words ... we have been told that we do not know. In the book "Pay attention to the prophecies of Daniel" on page 283 (Italian edition) we speak of Gog of Magog (among other things in the understanding that it is Satan the Devil) and paragraph 26 concludes with the words "But what at the end they will contain the news from the east and from the north only God will establish it and time will tell it ". Instead, understanding the scenario that will be created shortly before the final battle we can guess why this king is so upset. He sees the people of God, who evidently believed he had eliminated, gathered and on their way to the Promised Land! Depict the scene. It is easy to imagine that he understands that there is God, the True God and not the farce built by the false prophet behind all this. Despite his immense power and his fury, he has not succeeded in eliminating the people of God who are now reaching the Promised Land in fulfillment of Bible prophecy. It is not surprising that this causes great anger in him and comes out "with great fury to annihilate and to vote many to destruction", or the people of God gathered there - Daniel 11:43 And this explains why he "will pitch the tents of his palace between [the] great sea and the holy mount of the Adornment". Let's take a moment to imagine the scene and see us there, intent on reaching the promised land as the Israelites were in the time of Moses. Perhaps we may find ourselves imprisoned between the Great Sea and the army or we may be a few kilometers from the border and see "men of extraordinary stature" - Numbers 13:33 Perhaps some of us, seeing such a colossal army, might doubt Jehovah's power or his will to protect us - Isaiah 43:10, 11 Try to imagine how many situations described in the Bible would become the mirror of those last moments of the system of things. It is not difficult to see the harmony of the Word of God and to understand what will happen if we free ourselves from our conditioning and do not associate the word "impossible" with God. Is not it a wonderful prospect? One day, towards the end of the terrifying events that will occur on earth, someone will call us to lead us to the Promised Land, but the journey will be reserved only for those who will understand the prophecy and act accordingly. Next stop: Israel. Take the ticket. Make reservations now. The forecasts say that the area will be quite crowded.   Footnote. The article entitled "1290 and 1335 days" shows a difference of 45 days between trampling on God's people and achieving his "happiness" - see Daniel 12:12 These 45 days could include the time of the gathering of the people of God and the consequent exodus that will lead them to cross the boundaries of the Promised Land.  It is necessary to specify that even if the lowering of the waters of the Euphrates has to do with the destruction of these peoples and not simply with the loss of the defenses, this could refer to the peoples that surround Israel and not with Israel - compare Joel 3 : 4 This could mean that the payment of the sixth cup of the angel is not yet the actual destruction of Babylon the Great and therefore the people of Israel might still be alive and active when God's people approach it to "repopulate". As strange as this may seem, this seems to be in harmony with Revelation 16:19 which says that God would have remembered Babylon "to give it the cup of wine of the fury of his wrath" and by reading the context this happens during or near of the judgment of armageddon - compare Revelation 16:13 Other Bibles translate in a similar way and therefore it would seem evident that when nations gather in Armageddon, God still has to pour his wrath upon Babylon the Great. If this understanding is correct, when the king of the north "will come out with great fury to annihilate and vote many to destruction" it is possible that in his blinding fury he will strike first the nation that had always been their lover - compare Revelation 18 : 10, 15, 18 (see also Zechariah 14:13, 14) And obviously this will happen by God's will - Revelation 17:17 This possibility makes very probable the situation in which the people of God are effectively blocked between Israel (still populated) and all the armies of the world. Â

Everything we read about the "70-Week" prophecy reported in the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy!" (Chapter 11) is worthy of attention and demonstrates how accurate and reliable the word of God is even when pronouncing prophecies very distant in time. The historical accuracy and the numerous Scriptural references that gave weight and authority to the whole speech were also evident. Anyone who approaches the Word of God without preconceptions can not but be struck by this demonstration of power and wisdom on the part of God. The explanation of the 70 weeks is unexceptionable but can be said to be the same as other prophecies? What about those calculations on which many of us have based the hopes of a lifetime and that clashed with the criticism of the majority? We are talking about 1914. Is this also a prophecy of Daniel? Was this also treated with the same marvelous accuracy of the seventy weeks we have just read? Although it may not be easy, we try to be truly objective because understanding or not understanding the prophecy, like the rest of God's Word, can make much difference to our eternal future - John 17: 3; 2 Thessalonians 1: 8 WHAT DID OF 1914?  The book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy" on pages 85 to 97 explains in detail the dream of Nebuchadnezzar and the 7-time prophecy asserting that it indicates the coming of the Kingdom of God in 1914. It would therefore be profitable to take the book and compare it with what will be read below. Does Nebuchadnezzar's dream really prophesy the coming of the Kingdom of God in 1914?  THAT'S IT? Let's try to examine what is written in the book without prejudices. At a first reading it seems that Jehovah God wanted to give a lesson of humility to Nebuchadnezzar, which happened. The "seven times", at least for him, were seven years and this is confirmed by the whole story. Reading all this without preconceptions, it does not seem that we should look for other explanations more or less hidden. However, let us take the thesis that "the tree indicates a dominion and a sovereignty much greater than those of the king of Babylon. It symbolizes the universal sovereignty of Jehovah, the King of the heavens, especially with respect to the earth ". This means, first of all, that the Kingdom of God is comparing, in a certain way, to the kingdom of Babylon and this strides with many biblical passages describing Babylon as the greatest enemy of God's people. It also means that the "vigilante" (ie an angel of Jehovah) decides to overthrow the Kingdom of God and this is, to say the least, strange. Some will object that we must not look for similarities in every aspect of the prophecy but also decide which part of the prophecy must have a second fulfillment and which one could be arbitrary enough. After all, we have no other scriptural references to show us which details to focus on and which to leave out. So it is being said that the prophecy of the tree applies entirely to Nebuchadnezzar while only a small part would apply to the Kingdom of God. For the prophecy of the "seventy weeks" we did not need to break the prophecy to try to understand who was applied or if it applied to more than one person because the subject was clear and recognizable from the beginning. On the contrary, all the 7-day prophecy is built on a single verse that is what it says ... "The tree grew and became strong, and its same height finally reached the heavens and was visible to the end of the whole earth" (Daniel 4:11). Meanwhile, the writing says that the tree "becomes visible" to the end of the earth and not that "embraces the end of the earth" and the meaning is very different. The aforementioned book says: "the great tree represents the 'domain that reaches the end of the earth', which embraces the whole realm of mankind. Thus it symbolizes the universal sovereignty of Jehovah, particularly in relation to the earth. - Daniel 4:17 ". "Reaching the end of the earth" means that it extends the domain to the end of the earth while "being visible to the end of the earth" means that it is known, famous. AnyhowÂ… is not it a bit fragile, let's say risky, to build a series of prophecies (all linked together) on this single explanation? Note that the specification "particularly in relation to the earth" is due to the fact that the universal sovereignty of Jehovah is, indeed, universal, for which the tree should have been seen not only in the whole earth but throughout the universe. By specifying, instead, "in relation to the earth", we can exclude the skies from the vision and take the application for good. Anyway, we should ask a question. Is the fact that the tree reaches the heavens or the end of the earth itÂ’s a demonstration or even an indication of the fact that we are talking about the Kingdom of God? We always leave the Bible to enlighten us. Notice what Jehovah told Ezekiel in reference to the Pharaoh. Ezekiel 31: 1-8 says Â… “In the 11th year, in the third month, on the first day of the month, the word of Jehovah again came to me, saying: 2  “Son of man, say to Phar?aoh king of Egypt and to his hordes,+‘Whom are you like in your greatness?  3  There was an As·syr?i·an, a cedar in Leb?a·non,With beautiful branches like a shady thicket, lofty in stature;Its top was among the clouds.  4  The waters made it grow big, the deep springs of water caused it to grow high. Streams were all around where it was planted;Their channels watered all the trees of the field.  5  That is why it grew taller than all the other trees of the field. Its boughs multiplied, and its branches grew longBecause of the abundant water in its streams.  6  All the birds of the sky nested in its boughs,All the wild animals of the field gave birth under its branches,And all the populous nations were dwelling in its shade.  7  It became majestic in beauty and in the length of its branches,For its roots went down into abundant waters.  8  No other cedars in the garden of God+ could compare to it. None of the juniper trees had boughs like it,And none of the plane trees could match its branches. No other tree in the garden of God could rival its beauty”. Do we note some similarities with the vision of Nebuchadnezzar? Both are compared to tall and mighty trees. Both reach high heights, up to the sky in fact the expressions "reach the heavens" or "reach the clouds" are equivalent - Compare Job 22:14; Isaiah 14:14; Daniel 7:13 Of both we notice the big difference with the other trees. Of both it is said that all the flying creatures and all the wild beasts find food and shelter. Now if we apply the principle that the tree that "reaches the clouds" must represent the Kingdom of God, then even the Egyptian empire should be an antitype of the Kingdom. Unfortunately, however, in this story there is no mention of the "times" and consequently it is not possible to count anything. If you think it's ridiculous that the Egyptian empire will represent the Kingdom of God, why should it be acceptable to the Babylonian empire? Jehovah goes on to say ““Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says: ‘Because it* became so tall, lifting its top among the clouds, and its heart became arrogant because of its height, 11  I will hand it over to the mighty ruler of the nations.+ He will surely act against it, and I will reject it for its wickedness”. The Pharaoh was exalted, just as Nebuchadnezzar did, and for this reason God decided to humiliate him - Matthew 23:12 Nebuchadnezzar escaped with seven years of madness while Pharaoh's empire was besieged. Also this verse remarks the fact that God takes away and gives "the kingdom to whom he wills" (and in this case He gave the kingdom of Pharaoh to the "despot of nations"). Ezekiel 31: 12-14 continues Â… “And foreigners, the most ruthless of the nations, will cut it down, and they will abandon it on the mountains, and its foliage will fall in all the valleys, and its branches will lie broken in all the streams of the land.+ All the peoples of the earth will depart from its shade and abandon it. 13  All the birds of the sky will live on its fallen trunk, and all the wild animals of the field on its branches.+ 14  This is so that no tree near the waters should grow so tall or lift up its top among the clouds and that no well-watered tree may reach up to them in height. For they will all be given over to death, to the land down below, along with the sons of mankind, who are going down into the pit.Â’. Even this tree is cut down and humiliated (Jehovah will do this through the king of Babylon). Because of the many similarities with the kingdom of Egypt, are we really certain that the tree that "reached the heavens" refers to the Kingdom of God?  When we talk about 1914, are we really like the Bereans? Or are we "Bereans" only when we have to refute the doctrines of Christianity?  There is another interesting detail that should make us reflect. The Bible compares the heavens to governments, be they human or celestial. Applying this concept to the tree that reaches the heavens and whose other trees do not stand comparison with it, it would simply mean that this tree has the kingdom over the other (smaller) kingdoms and of Babylon the Great is said to have " the kingdom over the kings of the earth "- Revelation 17:18 The only legitimate parallel that you can do with Babylon, without fear of taking corners, is related to Babylon the Great because it is the parallelism that makes the Bible. Indeed, all the world empires mentioned in the Scriptures had, for a time, the kingdom over the other kingdoms. Cyrus, in fact, said of himself ... "I am Cyrus, king of the world, great king, legitimate king, king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of the four extremities (of the earth), son of Cambyses (Ka-am -bu-zi-ia), great king, king of Anzan, nephew of Cyrus ,. . . descendant of Teispe,. . . of a family (that) has always reigned ". (Ancient Near Eastern Texts, edited by J. B. Pritchard, 1974, p.37). Undoubtedly humility was not a characteristic appreciated by the Persians as well as by the Babylonians but in fact the kingdom had power over the other known kingdoms (so to be called "king of the four ends of the earth") and so it could be said that its height had reached the heavens and was visible or known to the ends of the earth. In the story of Ezekiel and in that of Daniel there is no reference, just anyone, to the Kingdom of God, on the contrary ... both accounts mention a judgment from God on enemy nations, proud and violent. Any chronological calculation should respect the subject in being and in fact this part of the Scripture is very different from what is said about the "seventy weeks" - Daniel 9: 24-27 In the account of Daniel chapter 9, one speaks clearly of the Messiah (see Daniel 9:25) and it is not necessary to read what is not written. Anyone who wanted to be polemical could discuss the start date from which to count the "weeks" or even the adduct method * (one day for a year) but certainly we can not discuss the subject in existence (the Messiah). It could also be absurd to discuss who the Messiah really was (which Jews are still discussing) but certainly we can not argue that Daniel chapter 9 speaks of the arrival of the Messiah! Instead, Daniel chapter 4 speaks of Nebuchadnezzar and his kingdom, while all the "understanding" concerning the Kingdom of God is built on four lines in the book "Pay attention to Daniel's prophecies!" That read: "But the great tree represents the domain that reaches the end of the earth, which embraces the entire kingdom of mankind. Thus it symbolizes the universal sovereignty of Jehovah, particularly in relation to the earth. - Daniel 4:17 "(chapter 6, page 87 of the Italian edition of the book). Does not this seem like a very firm statement with a very weak base? Let us try not to tell Daniel 4:17 what he does not really say because it is enough to know the basic rules of grammar so as not to be distracted by the subject. The subject is Nebuchadnezzar and God makes him understand that, because of the fact that he is exalted, he would have taken away his kingdom and given it to whoever He had wanted (exactly as He did to Pharaoh). In practice the one who really rules is the Creator and the other kingdoms exist only because He allows it - Compare Romans 13: 1 So there is no reason to believe that the tree (that is, one of the many governments that Jehovah has permitted in the history of mankind), actually represents the Kingdom of God. If someone wants to imply that the fact that God mentions His dominion is indicative that the tree itself represents His dominion (and is an incredible semantic acrobatics) then we can take the story reported in 2 Kings 19: 14-19 and do it same reasoning. “Hez·e·ki?ah took the letters out of the hand of the messengers and read them. Hez·e·ki?ah then went up to the house of Jehovah and spread them* out before Jehovah.+ 15  And Hez·e·ki?ah began to pray+ before Jehovah and say: “O Jehovah the God of Israel, sitting enthroned above* the cherubs,+ you alone are the true God of all the kingdoms of the earth.+ You made the heavens and the earth. 16  Incline your ear, O Jehovah, and hear!+ Open your eyes,+ O Jehovah, and see! Hear the words that Sen·nach?er·ib has sent to taunt the living God. 17  It is a fact, O Jehovah, that the kings of As·syr?i·a have devastated the nations and their lands.+ 18  And they have thrown their gods into the fire, because they were not gods+ but the work of human hands,+ wood and stone. That is why they could destroy them. 19  But now, O Jehovah our God, please save us out of his hand, so that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you alone are God, O Jehovah.” Hezekiah knew very well that Jehovah was "the true God of all the kingdoms of the earth" and he prayed that Sennacherib would be stopped in his intent to destroy Jerusalem. We know very well what was the answer of Isaiah which last part reads Â… “Because your rage against me+ and your roaring have reached my ears.+ So I will put my hook in your nose and my bridle+ between your lips,And I will lead you back the way you came.” - 2 Kings 19:28 If we did the same reasoning as for chapter 4 of Daniel, then we might suppose that the "reign of Sennacherib" was also an antitype of the kingdom of God because he too had to learn (at his own expense) that Jehovah is "the true God of all. the kingdoms of the earth "or, in other words, "dominates over all mankind ". Unfortunately, even in this story there are no numbers, days, weeks or months to be calculated and therefore no reason to read "the coming of the kingdom of God" even where no mention is made of it. Is it possible that the strong desire to see the prophecies fulfill has influenced the intention and therefore pushed to read what was not actually written? This means that if you really want to see a second fulfillment of the story reported in Daniel chapter 4, you should respect the subject in being and that is Babylon. It is likely that the story of Daniel is simply telling the humiliation of Nebuchadnezzar and that the "seven times" mean only seven years but we can not be categorical. In this regard it is useful to reflect on the fact that even the humiliation of the Pharaoh, reported in Ezekiel, could have a second fulfillment as Jehovah says that he will "shake the nations" and this could be a reference to the Armageddon war.  So, without fixing ourselves too much with a specific date, in case the story of Daniel wanted to show us a second fulfillment of the prophecy, the report is actually saying: "Babylon will fall, will remain inactive for seven times and then rise again". This can only bring our mind back to the last mention that the Bible makes of Babylon - Revelation 17:5 The clues about Babylon the Great brought us to the nation of Israel so the question we should ask ourselves is ... "From what year we should start counting the 2520 years (ie 360 * 7) until we see the rebirth (if any) of Babylon? " From the story of Daniel the possible dates from which to count the seven times are two: 1) Since Nebuchadnezzar has had the vision or has fallen into "misfortune" (in fact, Daniel says "the tree is you" - Daniel 4: 20-22) 2) From the death of Nebuchadnezzar (if Nebuchadnezzar represents the kingdom of Babylon, his death is the moment when the tree is "knocked down" but it is to be noted that there is no reference to this in the narration of Daniel who, indeed, he says that the kingdom would be assured - Daniel 4:26) As far as the first hypothesis is concerned, it is impossible to have an accurate date because neither the Bible nor the secular history tells us in which year Nebuchadnezzar was expelled from his kingdom. This happened, obviously, after 597 a.E.V. (year in which Nebuchadnezzar brings the first Jewish prisoners to Babylon according to the secular date, there is a difference of 20 years with that of the slave who, in fact, puts 617 a.E.V.) and within 570 a.E.V. (if Nebuchadnezzar dies in 562 BCE - always according to the secular date - and the period of "captivity" lasts 7 years and the kingdom is returned to him presumed to have reigned for at least a year, 570 is the last useful year) . However in the first four chapters of Daniel we mention Daniel, Sadrac, Mesac and Abednego first as children (Daniel 1: 3, 4) and later as robust men (Daniel 3:12, 27) and all this before Nebuchadnezzar has the famous dream tree. This means that, from their deportation until the day when the king erected the image of gold, at least 15, 20 years passed. So if the Jews came to Babylon in 597 a.E.V. but they pass 20 years before the construction of the golden idol and having taken for good the secular date (562 a.E.V) it is possible to restrict the period from 577 a.E.V. up to 570 a.E.V. Obviously they are only estimates but the important date is the maximum time limit (570 a.E.V) so if from the deportation until the construction of the image had passed 15 years instead of 20, the starting date would be 582 a.E.V. but the last possible useful date would always be 570 a.E.V. The eventual rebirth of Babylon, if Daniel is talking about this, would have happened between 1943 E.V. (2520-577) and 1950 E.V. (2520-570). To reinforce this hypothesis there would also be the fact that the narration of his expulsion is the last story reported to Nebuchadnezzar. Few verses later, in fact, we no longer speak of him but of Baldassarre (Daniel chapter 5). It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that Nebuchadnezzar had the vision in the last years, perhaps during the last decade of his reign.  The second hypothesis concerns the death of Nebuchadnezzar, which takes place, according to the secular sources, in 562 a.E.V. According to the slave, in 582 a.E.V. (see the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy" chapter 7, page 99). Counting 2520 years we arrive at 1958 E.V. in the first case and to 1938 E.V. in the second case.  "Babylon will fall, remain inactive for seven times and then rise again"  What does recent history tell us? If, as we have seen, Babylon the Great is the nation of Israel, this would corroborate the first hypothesis. The first hypothesis places the rebirth of Babylon between 1943 and 1950. Indeed, the "resurrection" of Israel took place in May 1948.  Knowing the fixation of human beings for dates and calculations, however, it is prudent to pay attention to the most important things. The secular dates can not be secure, based on findings and comparisons more or less incomplete, and certainly we can not base our faith on this - 2 Corinthians 5: 7 What would happen if the 597 a.E.V., as well as 607 or 537 or any other date on which we based much of the biblical prophecies (without there being a real reason for doing so) tomorrow proved to be completely wrong? The consequences could be very serious and not just from a human point of view - Amos 3: 1, 2 We must not take Jehovah's mercy for granted, so we must be cautious in our statements. Since we have no certainty that the "seven times" do not simply represent seven years, we should not lose ourselves in these speculations. Is not the most important thing to understand the identity of Babylon the Great? Those who have truly studied the Bible without preconceptions have understood that Babylon the Great is indeed Israel and this has understood it regardless of dates and calculations. This is a crucial aspect of prophecy because it is the clues that guide us in the subjects and times in which we are living, such as road signs, and not the calculations - Compare Matthew 24:32, 33 and 2 Timothy 3: 1-5 and do a contrast with Matthew 24:36 There is no temporal indication for the killing of the two clothed witnesses (see Revelation chapter 11) but we know that they are revealed at the end of the war. We know that the city called "Sodom and Egypt" is Babylon the Great, hence Israel, and as a result we also know which nation and events to watch carefully. That the Bible actually prophesises the year of his "resurrection" or not, is certainly interesting but not fundamental for those who believe that it is indeed the inspired Word of God. Fundamental, if anything, will be "get out of it" when the UN prepares to destroy it.  * However the Bible confirms the "one day for a year" method and also that this was the same method used by God's people - Ezekiel 4: 6; Luke 3:15 ** The Bible allows us to be "fully competent" then all the speeches made on 607 a.E.V. pro and contra, they are absolutely useless. Nebuchadnezzar's dream, as we have seen, has nothing to do with the Kingdom of God  Â

Si bien la mayoría de nosotros està n enfocados en los "problemas burocráticos de la organización" comprometiéndonos a hacer propuestas más o menos factibles y más o menos bíblicas para "mejorar las cosas", las profecías bíblicas se cumplen flagrantemente ante nuestras narices y casi nadie se da cuenta. Nuestra actitud de sujeción (para algunos es impactante usar incluso este término), impide a la mayoría de nosotros de enfrentar al corazón la comprensión bíblica y las profecías que son una parte fundamental. Es mucho mejor hablar de "problemas organizativos", de "astillas locas" y "vacunas en lugar de pastores", engañándonos de que las dos cosas son problemas distintos e independientes unos de otros. Bueno, todos hacen sus propias evaluaciones y presentan lo que consideran más importante. El objetivo de este blog, sin embargo, es prestar atención a las profecías y ver cómo estas afectan a cada uno de nosotros. Para la mayoría de nosotros fue impactante ver cómo una nación moderna como Rusia ha violado todos los derechos humanos más básicos al prohibir el trabajo de predicación de los testigos de Jehová. Excepto luego usa las frases usuales ... "Sabemos que seremos odiados por todas las naciones ... sabemos que las cosas empeorarán", etc. muy pocos se han dado cuenta de que esta era una profecía bíblica específica y clara - Mateo 24: 9; Daniel 8: 11-13  ¿Sabes lo que sucederá pronto?  "Específica y clara" sólo para aquellos que realmente prestado atención a la profecía y sin condiciones. Para otros son las escaramuzas habituales, los problemas habituales entre las naciones, un poco "como sucedió en el pasado con Malí o Burundi ... Un problema, por supuesto, pero nada significativo en las escrituras. Si lo que sucedió en Rusia no es relevante desde el punto de vista de la escritura, incluso los tiempos en los que vivimos no son particularmente relevantes (la consecuencia paradójica de estar en el "tiempo del fin" durante más de 100 años es que todo lo que sucede es importante "pero tampoco") - Jeremías 4: 5-7 El efecto de cadena de no haber identificado este evento también significa no reconocer la identidad del rey del norte (identidad a la que deberíamos haber llegado mucho antes de este evento) y luego perderse en desacuerdos sobre ISIS, posibles alianzas entre los EE. UU. Rusia y así sucesivamente - Daniel 7: 7, 8, 20 ¿Podría ser que alguien nos mostró la luna y estábamos mirando el dedo? Puede ser que nos hayamos acostumbrado a tener explicaciones de segunda mano, es decir, a terceros que nos han hecho investigaciones por nosotros, que ahora no logramos o hacer una investigación seria usando solo la Biblia? Si fue impactante para algunos, lo que sucedió en Rusia, esperamos a ver lo que sucederá - Jeremías 4: 16-18 Mientras tanto, el rey del norte continuará "tirando la verdad al suelo" y esto sugiere que la obra de predicación será proscrita en otros países antes o durante la guerra - Daniel 8:12. Sí, porque estallará una guerra. ¿Alguien te ha dicho que al final no habrá una batalla real entre el rey del norte y el rey del sur? ¿Alguien le ha dicho que si estallara una guerra entre Rusia y los Estados Unidos, nadie sobreviviría y, por lo tanto, Dios no lo permitiría? Falso. La última gran guerra humana se describe tanto en Daniel como en Apocalipsis - Daniel 11:40; Apocalipsis 9: 16-19 Esta guerra conducirá a la derrota del rey del sur - Daniel 11: 41-43 Antes de esto, el pueblo de Dios será severamente disciplinado por no haber enseñado la verdad como debería haberlo hecho. La advertencia contra los falsos profetas no está dirigida solo al cristianismo: Apocalipsis 8:10, 11; Jeremías 23:15; Amós 5: 7; 06:12 Esto significa que la persecución podría incluir otras denominaciones "cristianas" y es de esperar que esto se interprete como el ataque a "Babilonia la Grande" o el comienzo del ataque. Esto también es falso. Además, es de esperar que muchos hermanos piensen que la guerra entre los reyes del norte y los reyes del sur conducirá directamente al Armagedón (como ya sucedió en pasado, entre otras cosas). La luz de la "verdad" se apagará y esto sugiere no solo que la obra de predicaciòn será reprimida físicamente sino también que la reputación de quienes nos guían será cuestionada seriamente (probablemente se mostrarán noticias inconvenientes y, a pesar de lo que sea él podría pensar, esto será parte de la voluntad de Dios). El rey del norte, por lo tanto, "considerará a los que han dejado el pacto santo" (Israel) y haciendo una comparación con Apocalipsis 9, vemos que las aguas del Eufrates comienzan a descender. Comenzará a mostrar cierta hostilidad hacia Israel y la guerra que se dividirá solo pondrá a esta nación en una posición incómoda. Esta nación estará claramente incluida en esta guerra, incluso si no está claro si actuará políticamente "detrás de escena" o si estará involucrado en primera persona. Esperamos y vemos Huelga decir que el estallido de la guerra disolverá las Naciones Unidas y quizás alguien empiece a alimentar la duda de que la Liga de las Naciones de 1919 no tuvo nada que ver con eso cuando "cayó al abismo" - Apocalipsis 17: 8. Solo al final de la guerra que conducirá a la victoria definitiva del rey del norte (y por lo tanto no conducirá al Armagedón) entonces las Naciones Unidas podrán levantarse nuevamente (cualquiera sea el nombre que hayan asumido entonces) con la esperanza y la intención de traer verdaderamente "paz y seguridad" (Apocalipsis 13: 3, 4) para toda la humanidad, lo que sucederá algún tiempo después con la "ayuda" del falso profeta, y solo entonces comenzarán a predicar "los dos testigos vestidos con sacos" ... pero ya nos hemos ido muy adelante con las profecías.  Por el momento observamos los siguientes eventos. La proscripción de los testigos de Jehová y quizás otras denominaciones cristianas en otras naciones. La reputación cada vez peor de quienes toman la directiva entre los que conocemos. Tenga cuidado con Israel (atacque, fuertes quejas del rey del norte antes, durante o después de la guerra). Brote de la guerra (que debe tener dos fases significativas); Israel será incluido en esta guerra, directa o políticamente detrás de escena. Disolución de la ONU. Victoria del rey del norte (si todavía estamos vivos ... lo veremos). Termine la demolición de la "verdad". Renacimiento de la ONU y búsqueda desesperada de paz y seguridad. Hay otros eventos por el momento que no están claros y entre ellos los signos literales probables del cielo (eclipses o meteoritos). Al no tener ciertas certezas bíblicas por el momento, prefiero evitar escribir en este sentido.  Concluyo con un mensaje sincero a mis hermanos "conscientes" que son muy poco conscientes. ¿cuántos de ustedes se han tomado la molestia de hacer una investigación exhaustiva sin repetir lo que se les ha enseñado y buscando apoyo en las Escrituras? ¿Cuántos de ustedes tienen la Biblia en casa? Cuando suceden ciertas cosas, este blog, o el blog de otra persona que llegue a conclusiones similares, sin duda tendrá un auge en las visitas, así que no me preocupo por la popularidad o impopularidad de ciertas declaraciones (mucho menos mi popularidad personal) ... pero ¿En qué posición estarà n todos aquellos que, a pesar de haber tenido la oportunidad de hacerlo, realmente no "leerán día y noche" tratando de escudriñar las Escrituras, haciendo un esfuerzo reflexivo sin ideas preconcebidas y sin temor a perder algo, cuando todas estas cosas comiencen a pasar? - 2 Corintios 13: 5 Después de haber tomado las profecías a la ligera, diremos ... "Y bueno ... ¡por otro lado no nos habían enseñado!" y luego estaremos en el lugar con nuestra conciencia y con Dios o ¿seremos responsables personalmente de no haber mostrado la atención adecuada, independientemente de nuestros límites de comprensión? 1 Tesalonicenses 5:20, 21  PD Mientras que tenemos el tiempo favorable, animo a todos los hermanos reflexivos y sensibles, en lugar de pretender nada, a estudiar realmente la Biblia y reflexionar sobre este informaciones.   Commenti Â

La siguiente discusión apunta exclusivamente a identificar "el cuerno pequeño". No se ha considerado todo lo que va más allá de su mera identificación (lo que hará, en qué período, en lo que se refiere a otros eventos). Esto se hará en un artículo futuro. El artículo, es bueno recordar, aunque cito las Escrituras en apoyo de la tesis presentada, sin embargo, representa las ideas personales del autor.    Y el macho de las cabras, por su parte, se dio grandes ínfulas+ hasta el extremo; pero en cuanto se hizo poderoso, el gran cuerno fue quebrado, y procedieron a subir conspicuamente cuatro en lugar de él, hacia los cuatro vientos* de los cielos.+ 9  Y de uno de ellos salió otro cuerno, uno pequeño,+ y siguió haciéndose mucho mayor hacia el sur* y hacia el naciente y hacia la Decoración.*+ 10  Y siguió haciéndose mayor hasta llegar al mismo ejército de los cielos,+ de modo que hizo que algunos del ejército y algunas de las estrellas+ cayeran a la tierra, y se puso a hollarlos.+ 11  Y hasta llegar al mismo Príncipe+ del ejército se dio grandes ínfulas, y de él el [rasgo] constante*+ fue quitado, y el lugar establecido de su santuario fue echado abajo.+ 12  Y un ejército mismo fue gradualmente entregado,+ junto con el [rasgo] constante,+ debido a transgresión;+ y siguió arrojando la verdad+ por tierra,+ y actuó y tuvo éxito – Daniel 8:8-12  Todos los testigos de Jehová saben muy bien quién es la cabra en pocos versículos después de que se dice claramente "el macho cabrío [representa] al rey de Grecia" - Daniel 8:21. Todos los Testigos de Jehová (o casi todos) también conocen muchos detalles sobre Alejandro Magno (el cuerno pequeño que se hizo grande), la partición de su reino, etc. En el versículo 9 del capítulo 8, sin embargo, Daniel ve otro cuerno. Ya no estamos hablando de Alejandro Magno y esta parte de la visión se cumple un cierto período después de la división del reino de Grecia. ¿Cuánto más tarde? Lo comprenderemos por lo que leeremos sobre este cuerno. Mientras tanto, veamos qué dice el esclavo sobre este cuerno. Puede encontrar la información en el libro "¡Preste atención a las profecías de Daniel!" en las páginas 137-144 (edición italiana del libro).  Aislamos algunas declaraciones del libro mencionado. Haremos esto no por un espíritu crítico sino simplemente para evaluar si pueden existir otras posibilidades. Después de todo, cuando la Biblia simplemente deja pistas, es lógico pensar que esto sucede para que la gente pueda intentarlo nuevamente hasta llegar a la conclusión más lógica: compare Proverbios 2: 1-5. De lo contrario, utilizaría un lenguaje claro, sin posibilidad de error, como sucedió en el caso de Ciro el conquistador, cuyo nombre se conocía incluso doscientos años antes. En este caso, como en el caso de Babilonia la Grande, debemos llegar a la identidad del sujeto al evaluar si las pistas coinciden con lo que sabemos. El libro dice que "en 55 a.E.V, Julio César al mando de un cargamento invadió Britania pero no pudo establecer un asentamiento permanente". "Luego" continúa "en 122 E.V., el emperador Adriano comenzó la construcción de un muro desde la desembocadura del Tyne hasta el Golfo de Solway, que marcó el límite norte del Imperio Romano. A comienzos del siglo V las legiones romanas abandonaron la isla ". Así que está claro que el Imperio Romano, después de más de 170 años de asentamiento (de 55 a.E.V. a 122 E.V.), aún no había logrado conquistar completamente Britannia, a diferencia de lo que sucedió en la mayor parte de Europa. No solo eso. El libro declara explícitamente que "a principios del siglo V las legiones romanas abandonaron la isla". Entonces deberíamos preguntarnos qué fue lo que realmente quedó de Roma a partir de ese momento, pero probablemente, como veremos más adelante, este no es un punto fundamental. Hay otros problemas, ciertamente significativos desde un punto de vista bíblico. Sin lugar a dudas, Inglaterra era "un cuerno pequeño" que creció en muchos aspectos, sin embargo, la escritura establece claramente que este cuerno pequeño habría hecho caer a tres reyes. ¿Cuál es la explicación del esclavo? Se habla de la derrota de España durante el ataque naval de la famosa "armada" liderada, en 1588, por Felipe II. Es difícil establecer si una derrota en la batalla puede ser equivalente a la derrota de un reino (la escritura dice que estos cuernos se rompieron ... concepto que parece indicar algo más que una batalla que salió mal) pero de hecho esta batalla naval constituyó un gran pérdida y una gran humillación para España. Luego se señala la Francia y se dice que "durante el siglo XVIII, los ingleses y los franceses se enfrentaron en Norteamérica y la India, hasta que se firmó el Tratado de París en 1763. De este tratado William B. Willcox escribió que "sancionó la nueva posición de Gran Bretaña como la principal potencia europea en el mundo no europeo ". Incluso en este caso, podemos decir que Inglaterra mejoró ... ¿pero realmente derribó el cuerno? Sin embargo, ¿qué decir de Holanda, mencionado como el segundo cuerno que se había arrancado de Inglaterra? El libro explica ... "En el siglo diecisiete, los holandeses poseían la marina mercante más grande del mundo, pero Inglaterra, al extender sus dominios coloniales, finalmente prevaleció sobre ese reino". Entonces no se menciona la guerra o la batalla, sino simplemente la supremacía comercial. Si podemos discutir si una batalla importante puede realmente "divulgar un cuerno", ¿qué puede decirse de una batalla comercial? Parece un concepto bastante forzado porque, en la historia de la humanidad, muchos reinos han sido vencidos (incluso aplastados) desde un punto de vista económico / comercial y seguramente Inglaterra, con todas sus colonias diseminadas por el mundo, puede "jactarse" "el aplanamiento de muchos otros imperios comerciales globales. Si hacemos una investigación sobre Holanda, de hecho, leeremos acerca de las conquistas de los sajones y los francos, pero nunca de los británicos. Además, todo el libro de Daniel, cuando menciona el "romper el cuerno" o "los cuernos", se refiere a la guerra, luego a la conquista militar del reino o a la muerte del soberano. En este sentido, no incluye ninguna de las tres "batallas" mencionadas por separado, tal vez, la victoria obtenida mucho más tarde, en 1815, contra Napoleón. Tenga en cuenta las palabras del ángel, también informadas en el libro, sobre este poder: el ángel le dijo a Daniel que la cuarta bestia, o cuarto reino, "habría devorado toda la tierra". (Daniel 7:23) Hay otra dificultad y es bíblica. Si el imperio angloamericano es una extensión de la Roma antigua, como explica el mismo libro, al comentar sobre la imagen inmensa (capítulo 2), ¿por qué se identifica a este último como un rey del sur?  La antigua Roma, de hecho, representaba al rey del norte.  Todos los reyes de la estatua de Daniel 2 pueden ser identificados como "el rey del norte"; ¿Es posible que el último rey (pies) sea el rey del sur?  ¿Deberíamos suponer que el rey del sur nació de las raíces del rey del norte? Si es así, ¿con qué propósito o beneficio habría sido crear estas distinciones? ¿No sería suficiente y más claro decir que varias naciones habrían estado en guerra durante varios siglos? ¿Cuál fue el uso de la investigación en investigación para tratar de entender qué rey o reino habría representado al rey del sur o del norte si hubieran sido intercambiables? Esto lleva a un problema aún mayor. Según Daniel, el último enfrentamiento termina con la victoria del rey del norte y, de hecho, después de Daniel 11:40 que menciona esta batalla, no se menciona al rey del sur y, en realidad, se dice simplemente que el rey victorioso "debe alcanzar al su fin "- Daniel 11:45 Siempre hablando del mismo rey, se dice que "Y contra el Príncipe de príncipes+ se pondrá de pie, pero será sin mano como será quebrado" - Daniel 8:25. Todo esto está en armonía con el relato de Apocalipsis que menciona una sola potencia dominante, la última, que luchará contra el Cordero - Apocalipsis 13: 2; 19: 19-21 A lo largo de Apocalipsis, al menos desde el capítulo 9 en adelante, no hay dos poderes antagónicos sino un poder dominante al cual Satanás le da "su trono, su poder y gran autoridad" - Apocalipsis 13: 2. Esta bestia, exactamente como Daniel escribe, "devora a toda la tierra" - Daniel 7:23; Apocalipsis 13: 7. En este punto nos enfrentamos a un problema insuperable. O el poder angloamericano es en realidad el rey del norte (y entonces encajarían con una parte de las palabras de Daniel y Apocalipsis) o el cuerno pequeño que se hizo grande no puede ser Inglaterra, y mucho menos el imperio angloamericano. Así que tratemos de buscar otro sujeto político y también comencemos con una suposición lógica y bíblica. Después de la derrota del último rey, el tercero, se habla de que la Corte se siente para quitar este dominio y destruirlo - Daniel 7: 24-26 Ninguna otra guerra humana u otros reyes dominantes se mencionan mientras tanto. Entonces, si este cuerno se convierte en el último rey dominante, debemos suponer que al menos el último de los tres reyes, el rey del sur, de hecho, todavía está vivo. Si esto no fuera así, nos encontraríamos ya ahora en la gran tribulación o bajo el juicio de Armagedón. Los reyes caídos, útil para identificar este cuerno pequeño, que se dispararon, pueden ser a lo sumo dos. Comenzamos la búsqueda de este cuerno, sin perder de vista al rey del norte. Si tuviéramos la certeza de aquellos que encarnan al rey del norte a lo largo de los siglos, no necesitaríamos ir "ciegamente" para ver cuántos reinos se hicieron grandes y contar los reyes caídos para cada nación probable. Debemos encontrar una nación que pueda identificarse razonablemente como un rey del norte y, al mismo tiempo, encarnar las otras características descritas. Los espejos de resumen de estos dos grupos se encuentran respectivamente en las páginas 228 y 246 del libro mencionado anteriormente. Los dos últimos reyes mencionados son el imperio germánico (en el papel del rey del norte) y el imperio angloamericano (en el papel del rey del sur). Se notará que una de las razones por las cuales Alemania es identificada como "rey del norte" es el hecho de que está aliada con Italia, esa nación histórica de la antigua Roma, así como también las conexiones con el Sacro Imperio Romano. La otra indicación es que William I asumió el título de Kaiser (César). Suponiendo que la Alemania nazi fuera el rey del norte, debemos preguntarnos quién asumió este papel al final de la guerra. Después de todo, como hemos visto da los reyes o emperadores anteriores, estos dos antagonistas siempre han resucitado. La respuesta podría ser más simple de lo que siempre hemos imaginado. Hasta ahora hemos reconstruido la identidad de sus respectivos reyes por el linaje de sangre o por los territorios ocupados. Cuando cambia la identidad de los dos reyes (ver capítulo catorce), toda la cuestión se juega en el territorio de Siria. Siria representa al rey del norte, mientras que Egipto es el rey del sur. Sin embargo, con la intervención de Roma entre los dos contendientes, Antíoco IV (sirio) debe abandonar sus reclamos sobre Egipto. Esto pone fin a la rivalidad entre los dos reyes. Podemos decir que el rey del norte en ese momento ya no existe (pero sería mejor decir que no es visible). Menos de cien años después, Siria se convierte en una provincia romana. Es solo por esta razón que podemos identificar a Roma como el rey del norte: el vínculo político / geográfico. Se podría decir que el rey del norte (y también su rival) es un sujeto extranacional que se mueve de nación en nación pero que, en cada movimiento, siempre se aleja del último lugar donde estuvo. Por lo tanto, no importa cuál sea la nación, el linaje, la etnia o la cultura en la que terminará este tema, pero solo cuenta su última etapa (y al límite la huella que dejó en esta última etapa). Además, por lo que hemos visto hasta ahora, el rey del norte nunca se convierte en el rey del sur y viceversa, incluso si una parte de los territorios conquistados puede ser compartida por ambos. Partiendo de esta suposición, abrimos el libro "¡Presten atención a las profecías de Daniel!" en la página 257 (capítulo quince, siempre de la ediciòn italiana: en otras ediciones puede tener pagina diferente).  En esta fotografía vemos claramente a los ganadores de la última gran guerra que llevó a la derrota de la Alemania nazi, o al viejo rey del norte. Usted ve al primer ministro británico Winston Churchill (por lo tanto parte del rey del sur), Franklin D. Roosvelt (presidente de los Estados Unidos, también parte del rey del sur) e Iosif Stalin (¿cuál rey?). ¿Quién dividió a la Alemania nazi entre estos? Inicialmente, en agosto de 1945, se dividió en cuatro partes: francés al sur-oeste, británico al noroeste, EE. UU. Al sur y soviético al este. De uno de estos imperios nacería el rey del norte, pero ... Inglaterra y los Estados Unidos, en la parte del rey del sur, no podían cambiar su identidad. Las únicas dos posibilidades permanecieron, por lo tanto, Francia y Rusia. Sin embargo, la Francia de Napoleón puede haber desempeñado el papel de rey del sur cuando infligió un golpe mortal al Sacro Imperio Romano en 1805. ¿Quién permaneció, entonces? La Rusia de Stalin, naturalmente. Además, quizás pocos saben que incluso la palabra rusa hecha "Zar", al igual que kaiser en alemán, significa César * (ver nota al pie). El último zar ruso, Nicolás II, fue depuesto en 1917 y hasta ahora hemos hablado de la división de Alemania casi treinta años más tarde, pero es interesante observar cómo "franco" este imperio para el papel de rey del norte (así como el Impresión romana evidente). Rusia, en su crecimiento desproporcionado, también ha incorporado algunas naciones que originalmente fueron colonias romanas. Así que profundicemos en la historia de Rusia para ver si coincide con la descripción que la Biblia hace de ella. No nos confundamos: cualquier nación que desempeñe el papel del rey del norte en nuestros días, no necesariamente tiene que identificarse como tal en sus primeros días (lo importante es que no es parte del rey del sur). De hecho, hasta la segunda guerra mundial, el rey del norte está representado por la Alemania de Hitler. Las pistas para rastrear la identidad de este rey, que en el último momento interpretará al rey del norte, pueden ser mucho más antiguas. Exactamente como con la explicación del libro citado, que señala a Inglaterra como el cuerno pequeño, solo muchos años después "crece mucho" (con la alianza de los Estados Unidos) pero las batallas mencionadas son útiles para su identificación (España, Holanda, Francia) ocurrió cuando todavía era pequeño (es decir, los Estados Unidos no entraron en estos conflictos). Simplificando: encontramos una nación que derrota a dos reyes, que crece mucho, que está presente en nuestros días y se convierte en el rey del norte debido al territorio conquistado en la última guerra.  Habitado desde la antigüedad, en el primer milenio aC el territorio de la Rusia actual albergaba poblaciones de diferentes razas, idiomas y culturas, entre los cuales surgieron primero los escitas y los sármatas. Entre el 3ro y el 9no siglo AD los godos, los hunos, y luego una serie de poblaciones eslavas que se establecieron principalmente en Ucrania y en las regiones circundantes, llegaron al país. Un punto de inflexión importante se produjo en la segunda mitad del siglo IX, cuando una población escandinava, la Variaghi, también llamada Rus (de ahí el nombre de Rusia), fundó con Rjurik el primer núcleo del estado ruso en torno a la región de Nóvgorod. http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/storia-della-russia_(Enciclopedia-dei-ragazzi)/ El nacimiento de este pequeño asentamiento, Rjurik, podría considerarse el cuerno pequeño. Algo realmente insignificante. Mucho más insignificante que Inglaterra podría considerarse en el momento de las conquistas romanas. Si también quisimos movernos seiscientos años al Gran Ducado de Moscovia bajo la guía de Iván III (1462-1505), no se puede negar que desde entonces este cuerno ha crecido de una manera muy desproporcionada. ¡Este imperio ha continuado expandiéndose exponencialmente para alcanzar un área de más de 17 millones de kilómetros cuadrados!  Los Rus fundaron Rjurik en el siglo IX. Hoy supera los 17 millones de kilómetros cuadrados  Podría discutirse sobre guerras internas, sobre formas de agregación, en tiempos no lineales ... no importa. La única cosa que importa, con el fin de identificar, es su crecimiento desproporcionado. La objeción de que muchas naciones de la antigua Unión Soviética no pueden identificarse a sí mismas como el cuerno porque se separaron del imperio original en independencia (quince estados son postsoviéticos) no es válida. Incluso el imperio angloamericano se considera como un poder único, sin embargo, Gran Bretaña y los Estados Unidos han sido soberanos e independientes entre sí. ¿Cuál y cuántos reyes derrotó este cuerno? Sin duda, el primero fue Napoleón. En este sentido, leemos Â…  Las pérdidas del Gran Ejército en Rusia fueron catastróficas y tuvieron una influencia irreversible en el equilibrio militar en Europa; de acuerdo con Georges Lefebvre, Napoleón tenía aproximadamente 400,000 muertos y desaparecidos y 100,000 prisioneros [3]; David G. Chandler habla en lugar de 370,000 muertos y desaparecidos y 200,000 prisioneros, incluyendo 48 generales y 3,000 oficiales; además de las pérdidas humanas, las pérdidas materiales sufridas por el ejército también fueron desastrosas; los franceses trajeron solo 250 cañones de Rusia, los rusos aseguraron haber capturado 925; La pérdida de más de 200,000 caballos para los franceses, que privó a la caballería napolitana de los medios para regresar al poder original en las campañas de guerra posteriores, también fue muy grave. ( Â… ) Sobre las causas de la catástrofe del Gran Ejército, Napoleón en el 29 ° Boletín y luego en el Memorial de Santa Elena condujo la ruina de su empresa casi exclusivamente al clima invernal ruso temprano que debilitaría a las tropas y convertiría la campaña rusa en un desastre [204] ]. Esta interpretación tradicional fue tomada de los testimonios y los primeros historiadores franceses; Philippe-Paul de Ségur, participante y primer gran historiador de la empresa, explicó la catástrofe también destacando las precarias condiciones de salud de Napoleón, lo que habría afectado la actividad y la resolución, y se refería a factores externos como el destino adverso y falta de suerte. https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campagna_di_Russia#Bilancio_e_conseguenze Es verdad que Napoleón fue oficialmente derrotado en Waterloo por la "séptima coalición", pero ¿cómo hubieran ido las cosas si el emperador todavía hubiera tenido a todos sus generales y sus hombres más poderosos? Dado que la historia no se hace con el “quizà s” y con el “pero”, no podemos saber, pero la derrota pensante que sufrieron los franceses en Rusia (y los números hablan claramente) no podía que cambiar el destino. Muchos historiadores està sn de acuerdo que fue la Rusia el verdadero ganador de la guerra. También en este caso es difícil ser categórico sobre quién realmente rompió el cuerno, pero seguramente la derrota que el ejército de Napoleón sufrió en Rusia no es remotamente comparable a lo que le sucedió a la armada española en 1588. Además, esta batalla prejuzgó el destino de la guerra, así como la caída de la propia Francia, algo que no se puede decir de la España del 1588.   Napoleòn es el primero cuerno ¿Quién podría ser el segundo? Solo Adolf Hitler, último rey del norte en orden de tiempo.  La batalla de Stalingrado, iniciada en el verano de 1942 con el avance de las tropas del Eje hasta el Don y el Volga, finalizó en el invierno de 1943, después de una serie de fases dramáticas y sangrientas, con la aniquilación del 6. ° ejército alemán permaneció rodeado por Stalingrado y con la destrucción de la mayoría de las otras fuerzas germánicas y del Eje comprometidas en el área estratégica del sur del frente oriental. Esta larga y gigantesca batalla, definida por algunos historiadores como "la más importante de todas la Segunda Guerra Mundial", [12] marcó la primera gran derrota político-militar de la Alemania nazi y sus aliados y satélites, así como el comienzo de avanzado soviético hacia el oeste que terminaría dos años más tarde con la conquista del edificio del Reichstag y el suicidio de Hitler en el búnker de la Cancillería durante la batalla de Berlín. [13]  https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battaglia_di_Stalingrado#Dicembre.2C_il_tentativo_di_salvataggio_tedesco  Aquí también, las pérdidas en términos de vidas humanas son realmente increíble Ningún historiador serio puede negar el papel decisivo que tuvo Rusia en la derrota de la Alemania nazi.   Hitler es el segundo cuerno Se cumplieron todas las condiciones para identificar al último rey del norte. Tenía que nacer como un cuerno pequeño. Se había convertido en enorme. Tenía que identificarse como un rey del norte. Tenía que soltar tres cuernos.   ¿Quién es, por lo tanto, el tercer rey? Él será el rey del sur, como las Escrituras predicen. Es en ese punto que se dará grandes arias "hasta el ejército de los cielos, para que deje caer parte del ejército y parte de las estrellas" ... pisoteando la verdadera adoración y los verdaderos cristianos. Después de esta tercera victoria no habrá otros reyes e imperios capaces de luchar contra él y es en este punto que "devorará toda la tierra" - Daniel 7:23; Apocalipsis 13: 4 También es en este punto que el Príncipe de los príncipes intervendrá y lo destruirá "sin mano". De hecho, hay un último detalle, podemos decir la condición, que debería haberse respetado, pero esto es evidente en otras escrituras. Este rey habría comenzado a suprimir el sacrificio continuo, o la obra de predicación, en su territorio - Daniel 11:31 También está claro que esta supresión, ya que se habría "inundado e invadido" durante la guerra, se habría extendido a otras naciones (pero no se excluye que esta proscripción se extendería incluso antes de la guerra). Los recientes eventos que han involucrado a nuestros hermanos en Rusia ... ¿no parecen una clara indicación para identificar al pequeño cuerno?   Nota de pie de página * La continuidad real y legal legítima del Imperio Romano continúa con Iván III, (según algunos descendientes de Druso Germanico, emperador romano) cónyuge de Zoe Paleologa, sobrina y heredera del trono del último emperador bizantino (Imperio Romano de Oriente).  Referencias históricas para profundizar http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/storia-della-russia_%28Enciclopedia-dei-ragazzi%29/ https://www.mondimedievali.net/Medioevorusso/cronologia.htm https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comunit%C3%A0_degli_Stati_Indipendenti https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variaghi https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impero_russo https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storia_della_Germania_dal_1945#La_Germania_dal_1945_al_1949 https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campagna_di_Russia#Catastrofe_finale_della_Grande_Armata http://www.maat.it/livello2/napoleone-2.htm https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battaglia_di_Waterloo#Valutazioni_conclusive

Antes DespuésÂ

"After this I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible and unusually strong. And it had teeth of iron, big ones. It devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped what was left with his feet. And it was something different from all the [other] beasts that were before it, and had ten horns "- Daniel 7: 7 Â "I beheld then because of the sound of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld till the beast was slain and his body was destroyed and it was given to the burning fire "- Daniel 7:11 Â Â This treatment has the objective to correctly identify not only the beast of Daniel's vision but also the period of prophecy in connection with his murder. This will be a fundamental prophecy. Err the reference period, as was the case within Christianity, inevitably leads to straining and inconsistencies. What some say about this beast and how it should interest us personally? Since the dreadful and terrible beast makes its appearance after the leopard-like beast (Daniel 7: 6), which we know to be the Macedonian o greco empire, it must be the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire, in fact, as we have seen in several previous articles, takes the place of Greece on the world stage. Since we do not see other animals that was, it concludes Roma to be "killed" and this creates a domino effect on many subsequent interpretations. The prophecy would end the fall of Rome (Roma whom?), The Son of man of whom we read in the following verses is vested with the authority in the first century (see footnotes) and the book of Revelation, written before 70 EV, actually speak of the destruction of Jerusalem in the first century and so on. As a result of the fact that everything would be fulfilled by the fall of the Roman Empire, the beasts that you give a "life extension" for a time and a season, would the nations of today. I have simplified: there would be many other things but this is enough to understand how such an interpretation can change much our view of things. Leaving aside the various contradictions and unanswered questions that this interpretation creates, we must see if there is really a credible supporting them with scriptures. As we have done so far, the only reliable modus operandi is the comparison of records and respect for the authority of God's Word. Let us first of all that the prophet's attention is captured by this beast and in particular by its horns - Daniel 7: 8 This is a key aspect of the vision. We have already discussed the meaning of the horns in a previous article but now we will see it from another point of view. We take as an example the Macedonian Empire because there is more than ever useful to acquire the right key to the vision. We know that this empire represented by the goat, when he was in command of Alessandro Magno, was depicted with a "notable horn" - Daniel 8: 5 After the death of Alessandro Magno, when the empire was divided among four of his generals, the same goat is described as having "four horns" - Daniel 8: 8 We can see immediately a strangeness . The original empire is actually divided into four smaller empires and yet there is always only one goat. Why? Why do not you see four different beasts? Let's keep in mind these questions to answer later. Now let's speculate. If the goat, described by Daniel had been shot down in the time that he had "the great horn", what period of time would refer the vision and what territory would understand? The answer is simple. If the goat was shot down at the time of the great horn, this would take place during the rule of Alessandro Magno (between 356 and 323 BCE) on the only his vast empire. If the goat in Daniel, however, was shot down in the time when he had four horns, what period and what territory would embrace? The answer becomes more interesting. In this case, the empire is divided into four and see the goat fall would mean the defeat of all four generals and their occupied territories. In the vision, however, he would fall one beast. From these considerations we understand that the beast represents an empire, but the horns are the powers that share or compete for the domain or the territory of that empire - Compare Revelation 17:12; Daniel 11:39 These horns can be allied, as in the case Medo-Persian empire, but they can also fight against each other as seen for example in Daniel 7: 8 When an empire is divided, because it is seen as other horns on the beast itself and not as the beasts? Evidently because they emphasize from original empire. The horns present in the same beast tells us that all those powers have arisen from the same original empire. Having all the same origin, we could say that are "unrelated" to each other. The Medes and the Persians, in fact, had many differences but also many things in common. With this in mind, we can begin to understand the meaning of the vision of the fourth and final beast seen by Daniel. As we explained in another article, previous empires are seen "hornless" because they do not have power or are not dominant in the vision of the reference time . Understanding the vision reference time is very important. This allows us to establish that at the time that Daniel has the vision, the dreadful and terrible beast is already divided into various powers. What does this mean? The empire is rising after the Macedonian Roma and on this there is very little to discuss as confirmed by the dream of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar - Daniel 2:39, 40 So the first part of the hypothesis is correct: the beast that Daniel sees is Rome. That said, however, we must focus on the horns as did Daniel himself. If the beast has ten horns, in harmony with what we have seen so far, it follows that the original Empire (Roma) is already divided into an unknown number of powers. This, by itself, drop the hypothesis that Rome has to be "killed" as well as the time in which it would fulfill the prophecy. From these ten horns, at some point in history, check yet another horn that is what speaks great things (Daniel 7:11); what is the time in which the animal is killed . In Rome there is only the origin. In simple words the prophecy is saying that the latter horn, whatever the time of fulfillment, is one of the many powers born of ancient Rome. This beast is the final, there are no other - Daniel 7:17 So, since we should not expect the appearance of other animals, it is clear that his killing is done in the end time. This king is the same which is discussed below and "grandiose words" that pronounces we can find in Daniel 11: 36-38 From the point of view of God, since this king will become an object of worship for many people, it pronunciation "grand words", that is exaggerated and completely out of place for a human being or human military power - Compare Revelation 13: 3-6 Intending to correct the vision we need not climb over backwards in an attempt to demonstrate that there is talk of two kings and two different times because the similarities are obvious. Obvious for those who read the scriptures without trying to defend, at all costs, his own idea. This means that what you read in the following verses, which the Son of man who is given dominion, authority and kingdom, is fulfilled in the end time. This also leads us to realize what it is actually killing the beast and the fact that being thrown "into the burning fire." This expression can only bring our minds to the "lake of fire" reported at Revelation 19:20 The lake of fire is a place from which there is no return and therefore you would expect, if this had happened in Rome, that there was no longer any trace of this empire. Instead Europe and much of Asia and Africa is full of Roman remains, aqueducts from the statues the ancient buildings. This does not give precisely the idea that was thrown into the "burning fire", is not it? Instead of the last dominant empire on earth, as described in Revelation, it says that the whole beast will be cast into the lake of fire. Besides, this is an action that can only make the Almighty God and His Son Christ, not an invading empire. Unless speculate that the fall of Rome intervened personally God, there is no way to "harmonize" this expression. Rome, in fact, never really died and was never really replaced. The social fabric is wore out, and this allowed many people simply "get" and divide it but was never really defeated in battle. He fell under his vices and under its own weight. The vision speaks of the beast that is not killed except in time when this remarkable horn appears. As we saw in the previous article, this horn is the last king of the north on the world stage, namely Russia. It goes without saying that this explanation, as we have already seen, a wonderful window opens in verse 12. The explanation that would apply all this to the fall of Rome, can not explain why, between kingdoms currently present (those to which a prolongation of life in our days) still exists Rome and even all the nations would be allowed that were exclusively owned by Rome. If Rome is burned in the blazing fire and the other allows himself a "life extension", should exist Iran (Persia), Iraq (Babylon) and Greece ... but should not exist Italy (the when Rome is still the capital), should not exist France nor Germany nor Spain and so on. Instead it appears that this extension of life a little 'at all is granted. If instead the beast is killed at Armageddon, it is clear that the other animals are given a life extension for "a time and a season" after the judgment of Armageddon. This allowed us to sensibly understand how he can "check" this Gog of Magog full Millennial Kingdom. We just carefully observe, then, that world events, without being distracted by explanations forced and unscriptural, as we await the fulfillment of the angel's following words recorded in Daniel 7:18: "But the saints of the Supreme receive the kingdom, and take possession of indefinitely kingdom, even indefinitely to times indefinite '- see also Revelation 20: 4 Footnotes * This interpretation asserts that the Son of man receives the kingdom in the first century to the fact that Jerusalem was under Roman rule (cf. Matthew 28:18), but obviously does not explain why, according to the order written by Daniel, this does not happen the fall of Rome. Reading Daniel 7: 11-14 we understand that the enthronement of the Son of Man takes place after the killing of this beast and, therefore, the enthronement could not take place in the first century since, at that time, Rome was well far from being "killed." That if we do not play the usual chronological order is not in the book. However, it should be argued that when considering the order of the beasts as chronological (ie the order of the appearance of empires is chronologically Correctly or ) can not be determined in an arbitrary way that the next part is not written chronologically. What it is written in chronological order it is also evident from the words of Daniel that says, more than once, "I continued watching ..." - Daniel 7: 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13 The writing of Matthew 28:18 does not prove that he began to reign in the first century (if not on the Christian congregation) because there is a difference between taking power legally and take it effectively. If Christ had taken power in effect in the first century, it would mean that the world would no longer be ruled by Satan since then. But sixty years after these words of the Lord, the apostolo Giovanni said "the whole world lies in the power of the wicked" - 1 John 5:19 ** You do not even understand the "what Rome" would be talking about the prophecy since this empire was split in two in 395 EV The beast can not be considered "killed" at the time of his division. The Eastern Empire fell in 476 EV while that of the West in 1453 with the fall of Constantinople. The beast can not be considered to be "killed" in 476 since a portion of it continued to exist and therefore in theory of Christ the enthronement event would occur after 1453. However even 1453 can be considered the date of the beast dsell'uccisione for the reasons spiegat the in this article. *** On the same line of this false interpretation of "Babylon the Great" Roma would be that would be killed (it is not clear by whom) to his downfall. To support this hypothesis is often referred to "the seven hills of Rome" and many flights of fancy to determine who would be the seven most important king of Rome - compares Revelation 17: 9 **** "Finally," but not really seen that the inconsistencies are many, you can not explain for what reason the writing says "there are four kings that will rise from the earth" (Daniel 7:17) meaning it clear that there would have been only the most four kings , not one more. The explanation would like the angel speaks to Daniel, the four powers, but that would not have all the powers that would arise on earth. The vision, in short, get to a certain point but not to the time of the end - Look instead Daniel 7:18 Â Â

"E in quanto a te, o Daniele, rendi segrete le parole e sigilla il libro, sino al tempo della fine. Molti [lo] scorreranno, e la [vera] conoscenza diverrà abbondante” - Daniele 12:4 In Daniele 12:11, 12 si legge… “11 “E dal tempo in cui è stato soppresso il [sacrificio] continuo ed è stata posta la cosa disgustante che causa desolazione, ci saranno milleduecentonovanta giorni. 12 “Felice colui che rimane in attesa e che arriva a milletrecentotrentacinque giorni!” Questa parte è fondamentale per completare il quadro di Rivelazione.  Intanto rispolveriamo la memoria in base a ciò che diceva/dice lo Schiavo in merito a questi giorni. I 1290 giorni andrebbero dal gennaio 1919 al settembre 1922 in quanto nel 1919 i membri della Società furono rilasciati e da quel momento iniziarono a fare progresso fino al 1922... anno in cui si tenne quella storica assemblea a Cedar Point (Ohio) che diede straordinario impulso all’opera di predicazione (questi sarebbero i 1290 giorni). Dopodiché a questi giorni aggiungono altri 1335 giorni arrivando così al maggio 1926, anno in cui gli unti “raggiungono una condizione felice” in quanto non ci sono più “nostalgici” (fratelli che ancora rimpiangevano Russell e ancora studiavano la Bibbia attraverso gli “studi sulle Scritture”) viene presentato il libro “Liberazione” (1926) e altri particolari. Tutto questo è riportato nel libro “Profezie di Daniele” alle pagine 298-305. C’è da dire che per far combaciare queste date i giorni sono stati “grandemente arrotondati” (Rutherford e i suoi collaboratori furono rilasciati il 26 marzo 1919, non a gennaio 1919; si veda la Torre di Guardia del 16/05/2016 all’articolo intitolato “A chi è stata affidata l’opera”) ma cosa anche più importante la scrittura di Daniele, dopo aver menzionato i 1290 giorni, dice “Felice colui che rimane in attesa e che arriva a milletrecentotrentacinque giorni!” - Daniele 12:12 “Arrivare a...” significa aggiungere a quanto c’era prima. Questo significa che se si parla di 1290 giorni e poi si dice “arriva a 1335 giorni” bisogna aggiungere altri 45 giorni e non altri 1335 giorni. Si potrebbe pensare che applicando le profezie ad assemblee o congressi o pubblicazioni o risoluzioni speciali, qualunque numero dovesse comparire nella Bibbia, forzando anche la data di inizio e fine con qualche gioco semantico, cadrebbe sicuramente su qualcosa di importante. Comunque proviamo a leggere semplicemente quello che c’è scritto dimenticando quello che sappiamo o crediamo di sapere. Intanto negli ultimi due capitoli di Daniele si parla di questa “cosa disgustante” e di un re che dice “cose meravigliose e bestemmie”. Si dice inoltre che questo re avrebbe fatto guerra contro i santi e li avrebbe fatti inciampare o vinti e che sarebbe arrivato fino al santo monte dell’Adornamento – Daniele 11:32-45 Questi particolari importanti, senza alcuna forzatura, ci riportano al libro di Rivelazione in particolare ai capitoli da 11 a 13. Inoltre Daniele 12:1 parla di Michele che sarebbe sorto in favore “dei figli del popolo di Daniele” e sarebbe quindi iniziato un tempo di angustia “come non se ne sarà fatto accadere da che ci fu nazione” – Daniele 12:1; Matteo 24:21; Rivelazione 12:12 E’ fin troppo evidente che Daniele e Giovanni stiano parlando dello stesso periodo di tempo. Partendo da questo assunto, quindi, anche i giorni descritti nei due libri devono combaciare. Tuttavia Daniele parla di 1290 giorni mentre Rivelazione parla di 1260. Come mai? La domanda di Daniele è... “Quale sarà la parte finale di queste cose?” - Daniele 12:6 In pratica Daniele, turbato da tutto quello che ha visto, deve essersi chiesto quando tutto sarebbe finito (cioè quando la cosa disgustante avrebbe finito di frantumare il popolo Santo e quando avrebbe avuto termine questo sistema politico guerrafondaio). L’angelo risponde... “Dal tempo in cui è stato soppresso il sacrificio continuo ed è stata posta la cosa disgustante che causa desolazione, ci saranno 1290 giorni” – Daniele 12:11 Quindi, prima di andare avanti, dobbiamo farci una serie di domande. 1) Chi offriva i sacrifici continui? 2) Qual è la controparte moderna? 3) Cos’è la cosa disgustante? 4) Confrontando con il libro Rivelazione, quando viene soppresso il sacrificio continuo? Dovremmo ormai saper rispondere a queste domande. 1) Erano i sacerdoti leviti ad offrire i sacrifici. 2) La controparte moderna sono i cristiani che predicano (potremmo supporre coloro che hanno incarichi speciali nell’ambito della congregazione, eletti o potenziali tali, ma il sacrificio che offriamo è, appunto, l’opera di predicazione – Ebrei 13:15) 3) La cosa disgustante, in Rivelazione, è la bestia selvaggia che ascende dall’abisso (la stessa che distruggerà Babilonia la Grande) ma fosse anche l’impero anglo-americano, il blocco Russia-Cina o qualsiasi altra forza politica, l’avvenimento che ci interessa in questo contesto è la soppressione del sacrificio continuo (cioè l’uccisione dei due testimoni vestiti di sacco). 4) Confrontando quindi con il libro Rivelazione... esaminiamo quanto segue. La soppressione del sacrificio continuo (cioè l’opera di predicazione compiuta dagli eletti) è descritta nel capitolo 11 di Rivelazione quando, “la bestia selvaggia che ascende dall’abisso farà guerra contro di loro e li vincerà e li ucciderà ” – Rivelazione 11:7 E’ proprio questo il momento in cui il sacrificio continuo viene soppresso? Sembra proprio di sì perché successivamente si sentono alte voci in cielo che dicono: “Il regno del mondo è divenuto il regno del nostro Signore e del suo Cristo” e quindi si parla della nascita del figlio (il regno di Dio). Quindi questo è l’avvenimento da cui contare 1290 giorni. Questi 1290 giorni sono “la parte finale di queste cose” cioè gli ultimi atti di questo sistema di cose secondo la domanda fatta da Daniele. Sappiamo che, una volta scacciato Satana sulla terra (avvenimento successivo all'uccisione dei due testimoni vestiti di sacco) egli dà alla bestia tutta la sua potenza e autorità e Rivelazione 13:5 dice che essa avrà autorità d’agire per 42 mesi. Questi 42 mesi, ovvero 1260 giorni, sono gli stessi menzionati nel capitolo 11 dove l’angelo dice a Giovanni di “tralasciare il cortile che è fuori del santuario del tempio” perché sarebbe stato dato alle nazioni le quali lo avrebbero calpestato, appunto, per 42 mesi. Ricapitolando… Prima c’è la predicazione dei due testimoni vestiti di sacco. La cosa disgustante o bestia selvaggia, descritta sia in Daniele che in Rivelazione, sopprime il sacrificio continuo quando li uccide (Rivelazione 11:7; Daniele 12:11); da questo momento si devono contare 1290 giorni i quali portano alla “fine di queste cose”. La bestia selvaggia è libera di calpestare il cortile per 42 mesi (ovvero 1260 giorni; vedi Rivelazione 13:5) e quindi dobbiamo chiederci: cosa succede tra la morte dei due testimoni e il momento in cui Satana dà alla bestia tutta la sua potenza (la quale agirà , calpestando il popolo di Dio, per 42 mesi)? Dunque, leggiamo… “15 E il settimo angelo suonò la sua tromba. E vi furono alte voci in cielo, che dicevano: “Il regno del mondo è divenuto il regno del nostro Signore e del suo Cristo, ed egli regnerà per i secoli dei secoli”. 16 E i ventiquattro anziani che erano seduti dinanzi a Dio sui loro troni caddero sulle loro facce e adorarono Dio, 17 dicendo: “Ti ringraziamo, Geova Dio, Onnipotente, Colui che sei e che eri, perché hai preso il tuo gran potere e hai cominciato a regnare. 18 Ma le nazioni si adirarono, e venne l’ira tua, e il tempo fissato di giudicare i morti, e di dare la ricompensa ai tuoi schiavi i profeti, e ai santi e a quelli che temono il tuo nome, i piccoli e i grandi, e di ridurre in rovina quelli che rovinano la terra”. 19 E il [santuario del] tempio di Dio che è in cielo fu aperto, e l’arca del suo patto fu vista nel [santuario del] suo tempio. E ne seguirono lampi e voci e tuoni e un terremoto e grossa grandine. 12 E un gran segno fu visto nel cielo, una donna vestita del sole, e la luna era sotto i suoi piedi, e sulla sua testa c’era una corona di dodici stelle, 2 ed era incinta. E grida nelle sue doglie e nel suo travaglio per partorire. 3 E fu visto un altro segno nel cielo, ed ecco, un gran dragone color fuoco, con sette teste e dieci corna e sulle sue teste sette diademi; 4 e la sua coda trascina un terzo delle stelle del cielo, e le scagliò sulla terra. E il dragone si teneva davanti alla donna che stava per partorire, per divorarne il figlio quando l’avesse partorito.5 Ed essa partorì un figlio, un maschio, che deve pascere tutte le nazioni con una verga di ferro. E il figlio di lei fu rapito presso Dio e il suo trono. 6 E la donna fuggì nel deserto, dove ha un luogo preparato da Dio, affinché vi sia nutrita per milleduecentosessanta giorni. 7 E scoppiò la guerra in cielo: Michele e i suoi angeli guerreggiarono contro il dragone, e il dragone e i suoi angeli guerreggiarono, 8 ma esso non prevalse, né fu più trovato posto per loro in cielo. 9 E il gran dragone fu scagliato, l’originale serpente, colui che è chiamato Diavolo e Satana, che svia l’intera terra abitata; fu scagliato sulla terra, e i suoi angeli furono scagliati con lui. 10 E udii nel cielo un’alta voce dire: “Ora son venuti la salvezza e la potenza e il regno del nostro Dio e l’autorità del suo Cristo, perché è stato gettato giù l’accusatore dei nostri fratelli, che li accusa giorno e notte dinanzi al nostro Dio! 11 Ed essi lo vinsero a motivo del sangue dell’Agnello e a motivo della parola della loro testimonianza, e non amarono la loro anima neppure di fronte alla morte”. Alla morte e risurrezione dei 2 testimoni il regno del mondo diventa davvero il regno “del nostro Signore e del suo Cristo” in quanto nasce il Regno di Dio (ormai sufficientemente completo del numero degli eletti) e inizia la purificazione dei cieli e il giudizio sulla terra. Infatti il capitolo 12 parla della nascita del figlio. Quindi scoppia la guerra in cielo e Satana viene scagliato sulla terra. Da quel momento ha davvero “un breve periodo di tempo” perché potrà giocare con la sua bestia soltanto per altri 42 mesi – Confronta Rivelazione 12:12 e 13:5 con Rivelazione 19:19–20:2 Quindi se la risurrezione spirituale avviene in un “batter d’occhio” i 30 giorni sono il periodo che include la nascita del Regno di Dio e la durata della guerra in cielo o poco meno. In armonia con ciò, 30 giorni furono il periodo di tempo in cui il popolo di Dio fece lutto per la morte di Aaronne (il primo Sommo Sacerdote) – Numeri 20:29 Quindi, dopo un’interruzione di 30 giorni, il nuovo Sommo Sacerdote ricominciò ad officiare. La morte dei due testimoni “vestiti di sacco” porta ad un’interruzione dei servizi sacerdotali per 30 giorni (essi vengono risuscitati appena 3,5 giorni dopo ma evidentemente non possono cominciare ad officiare subito anche perché bisogna purificare i cieli). Questa differenza di 30 giorni sono anche i giorni abbreviati di cui parlò Gesù in quanto la grande tribolazione non inizia immediatamente dopo l'uccisione dei due testimoni – Vedi Matteo 24:22 Satana e i suoi demoni, infatti, saranno occupati a combattere una guerra in cielo che perderanno ma che li terrà occupati per un po'. Anche al tempo dei primi cristiani i giorni di tribolazione furono abbreviati sul nascere e non verso la fine; il ritiro degli eserciti romani (avvenuto all'inizio dell'assedio) permise ai cristiani di "fuggire ai monti" e salvarsi la vita. Da questo possiamo ricavare anche la durata della grande tribolazione la quale inizia nel momento in cui Satana viene scagliato sulla terra, appena 30 giorni dopo l’uccisione dei due testimoni, e dura 42 mesi. Infine l’angelo conclude dicendo... “Felice colui che rimane in attesa e che arriva a milletrecentotrentacinque giorni!” Daniele 12:12 Perché si diventa felici? Evidentemente perché, dopo che la cosa disgustante ha scatenato la sua furia su tutto il popolo di Dio, adesso è arrivato il momento del giudizio di Dio sulla bestia e su tutto il resto del mondo. Questo dovrebbe essere quel periodo di tempo di cui parla Isaia dicendo... “Va, popolo mio, entra nelle tue stanze interne, e chiudi le tue porte dietro di te. Nasconditi per un breve momento finché la denuncia sia passata” – Isaia 26:20 45 giorni sono effettivamente pochi giorni in più rispetto ai 40 giorni di tempo in cui la nazione di Israele avrebbe dovuto vagare nel deserto per raggiungere la terra promessa.  Quindi premettendo che… Se il racconto di Rivelazione è in ordine cronologico (come sembra) e se i 1290 giorni di Daniele sono i 1260 giorni (+30) di Rivelazione… 1) La risurrezione generale (spirituale) inizierà solo dopo l'uccisione dei due testimoni vestiti di sacco descritti in Rivelazione 11. 2) Questo permetterà la nascita del Regno di Dio. 3) Solo alla nascita del Regno di Dio scoppia la guerra in cielo la quale durerà 30 giorni o poco meno. 4) La grande tribolazione inizierà 30 giorni dopo l’uccisione dei due testimoni e cioè alla fine della guerra in cielo. 5) La grande tribolazione durerà 42 mesi i quali sono anche “il breve periodo di tempo” rimasto a Satana per agire. 6) Armaghedon inizierà allo scadere di questi 42 mesi e durerà 45 giorni (la "breve denuncia" in cui il popolo di Dio si chiuderà nelle sue stanze interne – Isaia 26:20)   COMMENTI SIGNIFICATIVI Ora, la mia domanda è: come facciamo a sapere che i riferimenti temporali che troviamo in Daniele e Rivelazione (che siano giorni o mesi) non sono simbolici ma letterali?  Prima Parte. Ti ringrazio, Sagmar, per la tua domanda. In effetti sembra che quando "ci gira" applichiamo "un giorno per un anno" e quando "non ci gira" un giorno equivale ad un giorno. Bene, proviamo a fare alcune considerazioni. Partendo da Rivelazione, la prima menzione che si fa di questo periodo di tempo si trova al capitolo 11 il versetto 2. L'angelo dice a Giovanni "Ma in quanto al cortile che è fuori del [santuario del] tempio, gettalo completamente fuori e non misurarlo, perché è stato dato alle nazioni, ed esse calpesteranno la città santa per quarantadue mesi". Quindi il capitolo 11 si concentra su questi due testimoni vestiti di sacco i quali ricordano i sacerdoti leviti (infatti si parla della misurazione del Tempio) che officiano nel Tempio e si occupano dei sacrifici – Ebrei 13:15 Se i due testimoni rappresentano i sacerdoti leviti, chi rappresenta "il cortile che è fuori del santuario del tempio" il quale sarà calpestato, appunto, per 42 mesi? Evidentemente sono il popolo di Dio nel suo insieme. Vediamo come continua il resoconto di Rivelazione. Alla fine della loro predicazione i due testimoni vengono uccisi, risorgono, suona la settima tromba, nasce il regno di Dio... (Capitoli 11 e 12 di Rivelazione). Alla nascita del regno di Dio scoppia la guerra in cielo e Satana è particolarmente adirato perché, da quel momento in poi, "ha un breve periodo di tempo" – Rivelazione 12:12 Quanto breve? Dal momento che secondo lo schiavo il "breve periodo di tempo" sarebbe iniziato nel 1914 la domanda è più che legittima. Continuiamo a leggere. Una volta che Satana è stato scagliato sulla terra si parla della bestia con dieci corna e sette teste che ascende dal mare e della testa scannata a morte che "fu sanata"... quindi i versetti 4 e 5 (capitolo 13) dicono... "E adorarono il dragone perché aveva dato l’autorità alla bestia selvaggia, e adorarono la bestia selvaggia con le parole: “Chi è simile alla bestia selvaggia, e chi può guerreggiare contro di essa?” 5?E le fu data una bocca che diceva cose grandi e bestemmie, e le fu data autorità di agire per quarantadue mesi". Agire per fare cosa? Per "far guerra contro i santi e vincerli" – Rivelazione 13:7 Quindi si sta parlando dell'avvenimento descritto dall'angelo, vero? Il cortile fuori dal tempio sarebbe stato calpestato per 42 mesi e, infatti, questa bestia agirà contro il popolo di Dio per 42 mesi. Questo periodo è letterale o è simbolico? (segue seconda parte)  Seconda parte. Anche se per lo schiavo 103 anni possono essere considerati "un breve periodo di tempo" se rapportati a 6.000 anni di esperienza di Satana... certo non può dirsi di 1260 anni! Se applichiamo, infatti, la regola "un giorno per un anno", 42 mesi sono 1260 anni e certo non può essere considerato "un breve periodo di tempo" neppure rapportato all'età dell'uomo. Se questo è opinabile, sicuramente è difficile immaginare che questo possa essere il periodo in cui Satana è "particolarmente adirato" contro il popolo di Dio e cioè il periodo di tempo in cui cerca di distruggerlo! E' difficile immaginare che qualche cristiano possa sopravvivere a 1260 anni di furia satanica (continuando a leggere la Rivelazione si capisce che la persecuzione sarà molto intensa) – Matteo 24:21, 22 Potrebbero non essere 1260 anni ma comunque un periodo di tempo non letterale, comunque breve? Il fatto che la Bibbia rimarchi questo periodo di tempo due volte, non c'è motivo per credere che non lo sia. Inoltre scopriamo che la Bibbia menziona questo periodo non due volte ma tre. Quando la donna "fugge nel deserto" si dice che ciò accade "affinché vi sia nutrita per milleduecentosessanta giorni". Dove si incastrano questi 1260 giorni (ovvero 42 mesi)? Ovviamente nello stesso periodo in cui la bestia avrà autorità d'agire. Infatti la scrittura dice che Satana si adirò contro la donna e, non riuscendo a farla annegare, "se ne va a far guerra al seme di lei". Questo fa ben capire che il popolo di Dio, durante tutta la grande tribolazione, continuerà ad essere nutrito (in qualche modo e in qualche misura) per tutto il tempo necessario ovvero "1260 giorni" che sono gli stessi 42 mesi in cui il popolo di Dio sarà "calpestato". (segue terza parte)  Terza e ultima parte. Una volta stabilito che è un "breve periodo di tempo"... perché dovrebbero essere 5 anni (ad esempio), 74 mesi o qualsiasi altro periodo "breve" se la Bibbia dice, per ben 3 volte, che saranno 42 mesi? Ricordiamo inoltre che ciò che avviene in questo punto della Rivelazione è simile a ciò che avvenne ai primi cristiani. Quando l'esercito romano ritirò l'assedio a Gerusalemme (e in un articolo precedente si identifica Israele come Babilonia la Grande) i cristiani fuggirono ai monti in obbedienza alle parole di Gesù. La distruzione di Gerusalemme, però, non avvenne immediatamente ma circa tre anni e mezzo dopo (si può discutere se contare il periodo da Cestio Gallo a Tito o da Tito a Tito ma grossomodo il periodo è quello). Alla fine dei tre anni e mazzo, o giù di lì, Gerusalemme viene assediata e distrutta ("questi sono i giorni per fare giustizia" disse Gesù). Allo stesso modo alla fine dei 42 mesi le Nazioni Unite distruggono Babilonia la Grande. Il tempo per la bestia selvaggia di agire termina. Inizia Armaghedon. Dunque andiamo a vedere i 1290 giorni di Daniele. Avrai già evinto che, se i giorni di Rivelazione sono letterali, devono esserlo anche quelli di Daniele ma alcuni particolari rafforzeranno questa interpretazione. Sia in Rivelazione che in Daniele possiamo identificare "la soppressione del sacrificio continuo" – Daniele 12:11 Rivelazione 11:7 Quindi a meno che non si stia parlando di due avvenimenti distinti (ma entrambi parlano del "tempo della fine", della grande tribolazione e di "Michele") dobbiamo concludere che stiano parlando dello stesso avvenimento, giusto? Tuttavia il calcolo riportato in Daniele parte un po' prima di quello riportato in Rivelazione. L'angelo dice "E dal tempo in cui è stato soppresso il [sacrificio] continuo ed è stata posta la cosa disgustante che causa desolazione, ci saranno milleduecentonovanta giorni" – Daniele 12:11 Invece il tempo rimasto a Satana per agire (il breve periodo di tempo) parte da quando egli è stato scacciato sulla terra, giusto? Quindi tutti gli avvenimenti che accadano "nel mezzo" (dall'uccisione dei due testimoni fino a quando Satana da alla bestia tutta la sua potenza) rientrano in questa differenza temporale. Ci si aspetterebbe che se i giorni fossero letterali anche la differenza tra i due periodi dovrebbe essere minima, non è vero? Perché Daniele dice proprio "1290 giorni" e cioé un periodo di tempo che racchiude i 1260 giorni di Rivelazione più "qualcosa in più" (che serve a far rientrare la risurrezione spirituale e la guerra in cielo) se questi giorni non fossero letterali? Quindi possiamo dire che questo "breve periodo di tempo" è ripetuto per ben 4 volte tra Rivelazione e Daniele. Questi fatti rendono più che ragionevole considerare i 1260 giorni e i 1290 come letterali.

The immense statue of Nebuchadnezzar's dream. Babylon comes from the north, according to what Ezekiel 26: 7 says (see also Jeremiah 46:10). Comparing Jeremiah 50: 9 with Isaiah 21: 2, 9 and Daniel 5:28 it is understood that the average Persian comes from the north. Reading Daniel 11: 3 understands that the "mighty king" is Alexander the Great, identified as the "king of the north". Reading Daniel 11:16, 20-22 it is understood that Rome is the next king of the north. If all the kings of the statue were "king of the north" ... the last king can be the Anglo-American empire, or the king of the south?

CZĘŚĆ 15 Wygnaniec ogląda prorocze wizje przyszłości Daniel prorokuje o Królestwie Bożym oraz o przyjściu Mesjasza. Upadek Babilonu DANIEL, wyjątkowo bogobojny młodzieniec, został uprowadzony do niewoli w Babilonie jeszcze przed zburzeniem Jerozolimy. Razem z grupą innych Żydów — wygnańców z pokonanego królestwa Judy — otrzymał pewną miarę swobody. Podczas długiego życia w Babilonie Daniel dostąpił licznych błogosławieństw Bożych: uszedł nawet z życiem po wtrąceniu do lwiej jamy i otrzymał wizje dotyczące dalekiej przyszłości. Najważniejsze spisane przez niego proroctwa skupiały się na Mesjaszu i jego panowaniu. Danielowi wyjawiono, kiedy przyjdzie Mesjasz. Bóg wyjawił Danielowi, kiedy można się spodziewać przyjścia „Mesjasza Wodza” — miało to nastąpić 69 symbolicznych „tygodni” po ogłoszeniu dekretu o odbudowie murów Jerozolimy. Rozkaz ten został wydany długo po śmierci Daniela, w 455 roku p.n.e. Wtedy też zaczął się wspomniany okres 69 „tygodni”. Normalny tydzień trwa siedem dni, zaś proroczy „tydzień” — siedem lat. A zatem 69 tygodni lat trwało 483 lata, do roku 29 n.e. W następnej części tej broszury zobaczymy, co się wtedy wydarzyło. Daniel dowiedział się również, że Mesjasz zostanie zgładzony i dokona przebłagania za grzechy ludzkości (Daniela 9:24-26). Mesjasz zostanie Królem w niebie. W niezwykłej wizji nieba Daniel ujrzał, jak Mesjasz, „podobny do syna człowieczego”, podchodzi do tronu samego Jehowy. Bóg daje mu „panowanie i dostojeństwo oraz królestwo”. Królestwo to ma być wieczne, a władzę wraz z Mesjaszem ma sprawować grono nazwane „świętymi Najwyższego” (Daniela 7:13, 14, 27). Królestwo zniszczy rządy tego świata. Bóg umożliwił Danielowi zrozumienie snu, który zaniepokoił babilońskiego króla Nebukadneccara. Monarcha ujrzał wielki posąg z głową ze złota, piersią i ramionami ze srebra, brzuchem i udami z miedzi, goleniami z żelaza oraz ze stopami z żelaza zmieszanego z gliną. Kamień odcięty od góry uderzył w kruche stopy posągu i go zniszczył. Daniel wyjaśnił, że poszczególne części posągu wyobrażają następujące po sobie mocarstwa światowe, począwszy od Babilonu — głowy ze złota. Daniel zapowiedział, że w czasie panowania ostatniego mocarstwa zacznie działać Królestwo Boże. Zmiażdży ono wszystkie rządy tego świata, a samo będzie istnieć wiecznie (Daniela, rozdział 2). W późnej starości Daniel ujrzał na własne oczy upadek Babilonu. Król Cyrus zdobył miasto dokładnie tak, jak zapowiadali prorocy. Wkrótce potem Żydzi mogli wrócić do ojczyzny, która była spustoszona przez 70 lat. Pod kierownictwem wiernych namiestników, kapłanów i proroków w końcu odbudowali Jerozolimę i świątynię Jehowy. Co się jednak stało po upływie wspomnianych 483 lat? Na podstawie Księgi Daniela.