vic C. said:
lecoop said:
[quote="vic C.":518ec]:-D
Yeah, historicism is looking more and more like the view for me. 8-)
Vic, I can agree with you - right up to the sixth seal! :D
Coop
LOL
:
Hey Coop, question for you:
If a prophetic week is seven years, then a prophetic day has to be one year. So, what do you think about 1,260 prophetic days being 1,260 years? :-D[/quote:518ec]
No, I don't believe a day has to be one year. And when we see "days" how do we know that it is a "prophetic" day? If you study Revelation carefully, you see that each mention of the 3 1/2 years is speaking of the SAME 3 1/2 years. After the abomination that splits the week, the temple is trampled by the Gentiles for the next 42 months. That to us is 42/12 or 3 1/2 years. If it makes sense this way, why try to make is say something different? The two witnesses then testify for the same 3 1/2 years, but more accurately, for 1260 days. 1260/360 = 3 1/2 years. Next, the woman flees and is protected for 1260 days. The same 1260 days that the two witnesses will be testifying, and the same 42 months that the temple will be trampled. The woman will be fed for time, times, and half of time: again, 3 1/2 years. The very same 3 1/2 years that the temple will be trampled and the same 1260 days that the two witnesses will be testifying. Finally, the beast will have authority for 42 months. Of course, it will be the same 42 months that the temple will be trampled. His armies (Gentiles) will be stationed in Jerusalem.
So no, when John speaks of days, he is speaking of days. You can believe this.
However, if you want to assign a "second meaning" (I have given the primary meaning) that there will be or was a 1260 year period, and that seems to make sense, I guess you are free to do that. However, don't expect everyone to believe it.
Coop