The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

End Times
steve7150
Posts: 2571
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by steve7150 » Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:30 am

One thing i see from a chart of the ES prophecies which i just saw on the forum at brotherpete.com is that the 69 week prophecy is re Dan 9.24 - 26 and the 70th week is about Dan 9.27.

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1918
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by mattrose » Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:22 pm

steve7150 wrote:One thing i see from a chart of the ES prophecies which i just saw on the forum at brotherpete.com is that the 69 week prophecy is re Dan 9.24 - 26 and the 70th week is about Dan 9.27.
Well sure... but I think it is a huge stretch to assume that those are 2 totally different prophecies

steve7150
Posts: 2571
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by steve7150 » Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:03 pm

Well sure... but I think it is a huge stretch to assume that those are 2 totally different prophecies










Granted as i also think the 70 consecutive weeks makes sense but all together ES has 13 of these time prophecies and i wouldn't dismiss him because i believe one is a stretch. The point is if the 536BC - 1948 period does fit a significant sounding time frame then you can decide if it's coincidental or divine in origin and possibly important even if it's not connected to the 70th week. Anyway i have to get more info.

steve7150
Posts: 2571
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by steve7150 » Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:56 am

Well sure... but I think it is a huge stretch to assume that those are 2 totally different prophecies






I heard back from ES and here is the gist of his reply,

"A different starting date was chosen because the building of the "abomination that maketh desolate" and the restoration of Jerusalem are two different events, prophesied in two different verses. The prophecy about the abomination is in Dan 12.11. The restoration of Jerusalem is prophesied in Dan 9.25.
Four decrees about the Jewish restoration to the Holy land was issued by Medo-Persian kings. The only decree that fulfills the above prophecy is one by Artaxerxes 444-445BC as recorded in Nehemiah 2.8.

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1918
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by mattrose » Thu Sep 26, 2013 6:57 pm

steve7150 wrote: I heard back from ES and here is the gist of his reply,

"A different starting date was chosen because the building of the "abomination that maketh desolate" and the restoration of Jerusalem are two different events, prophesied in two different verses. The prophecy about the abomination is in Dan 12.11. The restoration of Jerusalem is prophesied in Dan 9.25.
Four decrees about the Jewish restoration to the Holy land was issued by Medo-Persian kings. The only decree that fulfills the above prophecy is one by Artaxerxes 444-445BC as recorded in Nehemiah 2.8.
Thanks for looking into that Steve :)

steve7150
Posts: 2571
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by steve7150 » Thu Sep 26, 2013 8:13 pm

Thanks for looking into that Steve :)






Thanks for bringing up the issue Matt :roll:

User avatar
bibleprotector
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 8:09 pm

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by bibleprotector » Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:52 pm

The problem with Skofield's view is that it negates the traditional Protestant Historicist view of identifying the Papacy as the False Prophet. There is, in some Roman Catholic writings, the idea that Mohammed (with his religion) is the false prophet. Further, Skofield has taken a natural view of the "abomination" when it, in the Protestant Historicist view, has a spiritual/Church application. His natural view is merely linked to the domes built on the temple mount at Jerusalem. Also his time frames are misapplied, particularly his attempt to count from the year 688 AD, which unreliable because there is no certainty as to exactly when the Dome of the Rock etc. was set up. He also has British Israelite beliefs and thinks that Jesus was 40 years old when crucified. Altogether, I think his concluding theory falls down under Biblical scrutiny.
[url]http://www.bibleprotector.com[/url]

steve7150
Posts: 2571
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by steve7150 » Thu Oct 03, 2013 7:53 am

The problem with Skofield's view is that it negates the traditional Protestant Historicist view of identifying the Papacy as the False Prophet










I think the Historicist view is that the Papacy is the Beast of Rev 13 and it seems pretty convincing to me. Skollfield thinks Islam is the beast and Muhammad is the false prophet. He has about a dozen prophecies in both directions related to the Dome of the Rock construction in 688AD and if it were one or two you could brush it off to luck, but a dozen?
To me the Historicist view makes the most sense and i think there could have been more then one beast at various times. Amazingly the number 666 could be applied to Nero Ceasar, the Papacy and to the Quran.
Last edited by steve7150 on Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by robbyyoung » Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:31 am

Hi All,

From my understanding, Dan 2:44 was fulfilled starting approximately around AD 26 - 30.

Revelation posited what was sealed up during Daniel's ministry, amongst other things. At the end of the age (Old Covenant), or AD 70, Daniel was promised resurrection, rest and rewards, Dan 12:13.

You know, Dan 2:35 gives us our current condition with no further explanation. A cliff hanger in regards to the question, "How will this work?"

Revelation leaves no room for anything prophesied to fall outside it's 1st century audience, Rev 22:6. What things will soon take place? Well, the prophecies regarding the entire book. That means the starting and ending points discussed, will soon take place. Where's the evidence that states otherwise? Where, in the Revelation of Jesus Christ, does it say some of these things will soon take place, while other "things" were not part of the whole of entire prophecy?

This is why I must respectfully disagree with Skolfield and others positing 1st century events to our day. Everything that was presented to the 1st century church was understood, we may find difficulty in the language, but these events were for their time.

God Bless!

steve7150
Posts: 2571
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: The False Prophet by Ellis Skolfield

Post by steve7150 » Thu Oct 03, 2013 12:17 pm

Revelation leaves no room for anything prophesied to fall outside it's 1st century audience, Rev 22:6. What things will soon take place? Well, the prophecies regarding the entire book. That means the starting and ending points discussed, will soon take place. Where's the evidence that states otherwise? Where, in the Revelation of Jesus Christ, does it say some of these things will soon take place, while other "things" were not part of the whole of entire prophecy?







I think there are times God speaks either in a present tense like Isa 53 when this prophecy took place 750 years later or Gen 3.15 where it sounds soon but took place thousands of years later.
I have trouble understanding the purpose of Revelation if the Full Preterist or Partial Preterist view is true. It doesn't seem like a Revelation since it's repeating things already previously clearly stated.
It's also possible the beginning of Revelation is about the destruction of Jerusalem but not the entire book.

Post Reply

Return to “Eschatology”