I think I asked something similar before, but the map I often look at is significantly different than common eschatology mappings...to such an extent at times I find myself having to work hard at remembering what some of the more generally understood timelines actually look like. Which I find pretty bad on my part. Please excuse any ignoracne here. It is rather organic, unfortunately. But as I reread Dan 7:23-27, I found myself taking the view that the little horn could be referring to its ultimate endgame (the midpoint rule of AC). And may not be referring to the AC activity action at the point and time of when he makes a covenant with the many.
In other words, I have come to seen the little horn to possibly be a horn that becomes apparent as the little horn well within the escalation period
during the tribulation. If this is a possible way to look at the scaling of these developments it would look something like this:
- AC makes a deal with the many (yet unknown as a massive unique powor--nor necessarily a small horn teir out of the 10--still in cognito)
- AC small horn emerging becomes distinguishable during the first half of tribulation as during that time he downs 3 kings.
- As the tribulation progresses (perhaps in its second year) the 10 nation confederacy is emerging
- At the nearing midpoint of the trib, the 10 horns are clear as well as the 11th obviously having come from these 10
The problem I see with my view is that it is not strictly linear but modular (like the 11th horn being revealed would be in tandem with the 10 also coming of age). And since the 10 +1 model is linear, it would stand to reason that we see it mostly as linear. So I feel like I am kind of cheating by making it a tandem modular view rather than strictly linear.
But the reason I would see this (regardless of modular or linear) is that the little horn does not have to be the 11th horn at the time the AC makes a deal with the many. At that time he could be a not so well known entity. At least in relation to..."Oh look he came out of the 10 and he defeated 3 kings and NOW he is making a covenant with the many." Which I believe is one of the traditional ways of what we are looking for (and perhaps also an increasing interest for a necessary gap period between the rapture and tribulation start period).
To me I believe it might be presumptive to see the AC at the start of the tribulation already have a legacy of 10 nations (3 downs) in his wake by that point. So to me, it does make sense that the clearlity of the little horn and the 11th could be something only best defined dynamically toward the end of the 2nd year of the tribulation or sometime during the first six months of the 3rd. And that does make sense to me in terms of timing. But I am wondering if you might see any eschatological inconsistencies with considering this approach. Is what I am sharing here a possible way to look it? I am just not aware if it is not because we normally don't even consider this as a potential to discuss it. At least as far as I have seen generally online.
So is it possible that the 10 nation confederacy be yet still emerging well into the first year of the tribulation even after the AC has made a deal with the many? Its not normally seen that way. But I don't see anything preventing us from doing so other than perhaps taking too poetic of a license with the linear way it which it is stated. For example the language in Revelation about the 7th king being the 8th seems to be both linear and poetic license in some sense that would likely make sense when we see what that means (not us the church but the world here left with that puzzle emerging).
Why I believe this to be an important consideration is that I don't think the age of grace necessarily has to see the confederacy come into full view in order for their to be an 11th that makes a deal with the many. In my view it could be that this "horn" effectiveness of the AC is looking at his supernatural empowerment point at the middle of the tribulation and not at the start of the 7 years.
One last point on this for clarity's sake -- the reason this jumps out at me is that what I have noticed over the years is an increasing allowance and focus evangelicalism has seemingly taken for granted--or at least the appearance possibly thereof. Since the AC starts the tribulation timer when making a deal with the many...we seem to pack meaning into that to infer some global rule of his out of the gate. To such an extent it would appear that the tribulation is as much Satans 7 year reign as it is the 7th week for Israel. And wherever I might not be aware of where I might be falling exegetically short, it would not be in understanding that satan only rules for 3.5 years, not 7. But the sensational nature of and mind boggling anticipation in the nearness of such a colorful time as the tribulation proper being right there on the horizon for us has seemed to just also philosophically shoehorned in the AC as one ruling for 7 years and having global control for 7 years (even though the feet/toes of Daniels statue has it that even at globalism''s worst...its spotty). And seeing that screams, to me, that spiritual warfare has helped us overplay our eschatological hand. Like "Warning will Robninson" kind of thing to take notice.
I hope I have expressed myself in such a way so as to make sense in what I am asking. This is not something that seems to dawn on us for discussion. And maybe for good reason and I just don't see it. But for the life of me (in trying to remain honest in doing little tricks with scripture my mind might want to) I honestly am asking this kind of question because it could be literally that all these things we are waiting to see form over the years could quickly happen under short order when the climate and atmospherica realm changes from age of grace to age of miraculous meets terror. No? Appreciate any feed back on this. Because if this is possible, like the rapture, the tribulation starting has 0% need of seeing anything necessarily happen I would figure. Thanks for reading, considering and any helpful things to contrast or complement. Blessings.
youtu.be
Thanks. Yes. this is over the target. Thanks for engaging. It is kind of clear why this might not be a road too troddened...because I don't see discussion like this. However, I am sure on some theology geek forums there would be. But I only have so much time to read and respond and I love the combination of our forum in being able to engage deeply while having the great advantages of keeping it light and conversation. And overly technical issues not so much the mainstay...amen!
