Sorry, there are no polls available at the moment.

Articles & Posts

Parousia (Jesus’ Second Presence) and the End of the Age – Anthony Buzzard vs Peter K.

Peter K. and Anthony Buzzard discuss whether Jesus has already invisibly returned or whether he will return visibly in the future.


Find more information about Jesus’ invisible second presence by clicking here:  

Find out more about Anthony Buzzard by clicking here:

Click here for video explanation of Revelation 12 (Dragon & Michael) by JM












From Peter K on 10/27/17: I am working on some followup research from my debate with Anthony Buzzard.  Over the next few weeks I will add comments in areas where I was not fully satisfied with my response.


Daniel 11 covers many centuries of history (see here)  and finally verse 40 refers to the “time of the end.”  So this sets the timing of Daniel 12:1 when Michael stands up, as the “time of the end.”  Anthony Buzzard places this future and I applied the King of the North to Napoleon.  

In refuting me, Anthony quoted Daniel 11:45 (NKVJ) “And he shall plant the tents of his palace between the seas and the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and no one will help him.  His point was that King of the North is to be in Israel and that “no one will help him.”  So how would this apply to Napoleon.  Well, I did not quite recall, so I have looked into this to refresh my memory.

As it turns out, Napoleon’s Siege of Acre of 1799 was an unsuccessful French siege of the Ottoman-defended, walled city of Acre (now Akko in modern Israel) and was the turning point of Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt and Syria.   As he started to retreat back to Egypt, we have this interesting notation on his encampment on the “glorious holy mountain” “between the seas.” This is Mt. Tabor between the Mediterranean and the Galilee. It is “holy” because it probably refers to the Mount of Transfiguration, where in a vision Christ’s Kingdom was represented. On 16 April a Turkish relief force was fought off at the Mount Tabor. By early May, replacement French siege artillery had arrived overland and a breach was forced in the defences. At the culmination of the assault, the besieging forces managed to make a breach in the walls.

Also, “no one will help him” well fits Napoleans death.  The following quote is from www.history.com   “Beginning in 1812, Napoleon began to encounter the first significant defeats of his military career, suffering through a disastrous invasion of Russia, losing Spain to the Duke of Wellington in the Peninsula War, and enduring total defeat against an allied force by 1814. Exiled to the island of Elba, he escaped to France in early 1815 and raised a new Grand Army that enjoyed temporary success before its crushing defeat at Waterloo against an allied force under Wellington on June 18, 1815. Napoleon was subsequently exiled to the island of Saint Helena off the coast of Africa. Six years later, he died, most likely of stomach cancer, and in 1840 his body was returned to Paris, where it was interred in the Hotel des Invalides.”


Anthony indicated that Israel would be brought back to the land converted.  I disagreed and indicated God would have to purge out the rebels.   However, I could not quickly find the scriptures I was looking for.

My response is that the prophecy of the dry bones in Ezekiel 37 shows a gradual process of the bones coming together, then muscles and skin, etc. and finally breath being blown into it (the Holy Spirit).  So a process is described here that is gradual, ending with Israel receiving the Holy Spirit.

The Bible indicates that the Jews would be regathered to the land (Isa. 43:5-6, Jer 30:3; Isa 11:11), never again to be removed (Amos 9:14).  However, it does not say they will already be converted.  We can plainly see they have been brought back, became a nation in 1948 and have yet to be converted.

The next passage shows that Israel is converted and receives the Holy Spirit after they have already been in the land in unbelief and delivered from their enemies.

Zechariah 12:9-11  “9 For on that day I will begin to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.  10 “Then I will pour out a spirit[b] of grace and prayer on the family of David and on the people of Jerusalem. They will look on me whom they have pierced and mourn for him as for an only son. They will grieve bitterly for him as for a firstborn son who has died. 11 The sorrow and mourning in Jerusalem on that day will be like the great mourning for Hadad-rimmon in the valley of Megiddo.”

Zephaniah 3:11-13 (NKJV)  “11 In that day you shall not be shamed for any of your deeds In which you transgress against Me; For then I will take away from your midst Those who rejoice in your pride, And you shall no longer be haughty In My holy mountain [kingdom].  12 I will leave in your midst A meek and humble people, And they shall trust in the name of the LORD.  13 The remnant of Israel shall do no unrighteousness And speak no lies, Nor shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth; For they shall feed their flocks and lie down, And no one shall make them afraid.”

So the rebels are yet to be purged out, leaving a humble remnant.  That part is yet future.

Isaiah 4:2-4 (NKJV)  “2  In that day the Branch of the LORD shall be beautiful and glorious; And the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and appealing For those of Israel who have escaped.  3  And it shall come to pass that he who is left in Zion and remains in Jerusalem will be called holy–everyone who is recorded among the living in Jerusalem.  4  When the Lord has washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and purged the blood of Jerusalem from her midst, by the spirit of judgment and by the spirit of burning…”

So, after the Lord washes away the filth of Israel, there remains a holy remnant.

Zechariah 14:1-3 (NKJV) “1  Behold, the day of the LORD is coming, And your spoil will be divided in your midst.  2 For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem; The city shall be taken, The houses rifled, And the women ravished. Half of the city shall go into captivity, But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.  3 Then the LORD will go forth And fight against those nations, As He fights in the day of battle.”

So when this final battle for Israel takes place, “half the city will go into captivity.”  This is the purging of the rebels.  “But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.”  This is the holy remnant saved that will constitute the nucleus of God’s kingdom in Israel.  They will be led by the resurrected ancient fathers of Israel (David, Abraham, Daniel, etc.).


From Peter K on 10/31/17.  More research to share.


Brother Anthony Buzzard applies the “Abomination of Desolation to a man appearing in the future. I imagine therefore that he would have a problem with the idea that he Abomination of Desolation applies in the past at the end of the Jewish Age.  I see a double application to the Jewish Sacrifices in place of Jesus’ sacrifice at the end of the Jewish Age and The Mass identified and contradicting the Ransom at the end of the Gospel Age  Some connect the Abomination to the Roman armies destroying the temple.  Either way, that is in the past.

Here is evidence for the Abomination of Desolation in the past at the end of the Jewish Age.

Matt 24:15-16 (NKJV) “15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation <2050>, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)  16 “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.”

Compare now the parallel Luke account.

Luke 21:20-24 (NKJV) “20 ¶ “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation <2050> is near.  21 “Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her.  22 “For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.  23 “But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people.  24 “And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.”

Comparing both scriptures above, it is clear that there is an application in the past to the Abomination of Desolation, in this case Fleshly Israel’s rejection of the true sacrifice for sins [Jesus], and their retention of the typical sacrifices.  As already noted, some have also identified the Abomination as the Roman Armies which destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple.  Pagan Rome later became Papal Rome which set up the Mass (the Christian Abomination).

Evidence that the Christian Abomination of Desolation was set up in the past is found in Matthew 24:15 again. 

Matthew 24:15 (Wilson’s Diaglot) “15  When therefore you may see the abomination of the desolation, the word having been spoken through Daniel the prophet, having stood in place holy; (he reading let him think;)”

The abomination “having stood” is a better translation than “stand.”  According to Baker’s Analytical Greek New Testament, the word “standing” is a verb participle in the perfect tense (meaning complete).  The perfect tense has to do with completed action, however it is a primary tense because it emphasizes the present, or ongoing result of a completed action.  The completed action of the abomination of desolation was the setting up of the mass.  The ongoing result is observing the mass still in place within the Catholic Church which denies Jesus’ Ransom sacrifice.

Anthony Buzzard also says that the “it” should be “he.” In the scripture below.  So far I have not been able to find support for this.

Mark 13:14 (KJV) “But, when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, standing where it [He] ought not, he that readeth, let him, think, then, they who are in Judaea, let them flee into the mountains;”


I corresponded with some Bible Student elders and here is what they had to say about the Abomination of Desolation.


Since the Daniel 9 prophecy is to SEAL THE PROPHECY AND THE PROPHET, it MUST apply to the first advent.  In NOBODY’S view is there any point in establishing Daniel as a true prophet once the church is finished!

Daniel 9 is inescapably a part of Daniel 8.  The 70 weeks are CUT OFF AT THE BEGINNING of the 2300-day prophecy.  They are CLEARLY the BEGINNING of the 2300 years and do not, therefore, apply to the second advent. Gabriel is telling Daniel that 490 years are exclusively for ISRAEL — THEN come the Gentiles (Christendom), something with which Daniel has no familiarity.

In II Thess., the revealing of the man of sin is BEFORE the parousia. (Of course, your man is NOT AWARE of the parousia!)  But Paul has the revealing DELAYED BY ROME (in verses 6 and 7).  It is not delayed by the Gospel Age!  Additionally, verses 6 and 7 are LINKED by Paul with something ALREADY AT WORK in his day.

I John 1:18 has John LINKING the time of Antichrist’s presence to THE GOSPEL AGE, which he calls “the last time.”  He is not connecting Antichrist to the END of the age, but to the time the Church was just entering in his day.  Verse 19 shows CLEARLY that Antichrist comes from AN APOSTASY beginning in John’s day.  It is enormously difficult to push it to the second advent!

In the Mark 13:14 text (I’m not checking the Greek right now), the Matthew equivalent in all the best Greek grammar interpretations says “HAVING STOOD” — i.e., IN THE PAST.


“Man of sin” is properly “man of lawlessness” (2Thessalonians 2:3 per best ancient mss.)

It is proper to use a masculine pronoun to describe a dynasty of kings.  Consider another Daniel scripture, 2:37-39, where Daniel says to Nebuchadnezzar [Nabu-kadurri-uzur], “Thou, O king, … thou art the head of gold.  And after thee shall arise another kingdom…”  Nebuchadnezzar did not live to see the end of his own kingdom and the ascendancy of the Medo-Persian kingdom; his grandson was then on the throne of Babylon.  Therefore the masculine pronoun is appropriate to describe all the kings of that kingdom.

Similarly, the entire line of popes is properly called by the masculine pronoun.  (I have heard of claim that one woman was surreptitiously made pope, though she did not last long, supposedly about A.D. 855-857, following Leo IV.)  Just as “king of Babylon” applies to all the kings of Babylon; so a male Antichrist may refer to a series of men occupying the chief office of a kingdom, Papal or otherwise.

History shows us that the Roman pope became a civil ruler in A.D. 538-540 (when Roman General Belisarius left Rome to pursue the Ostrogoths and when at the Spring Equinox he left Italy for Constantinople).  Papacy was temporarily terminated when the pope was driven from Rome  (1798), died, and Napoleon prevented election of a successor, until a new one was elected outside territory under his control, 1800 March.  Protestants in the 19th century were not slow to note that the two 2-year periods were separated by 1260 years.  What could a future Antichrist do in a literal 1260 days that would compare to the reign of a lawless historical Antichrist?

The leaders of the Reformation all recognized the Roman system as the Antichrist.  Spanish Jesuit priest Francisco Ribera (ca. 1590), and then cardinal Bellarmine, proposed a future Antichrist as an alternative to a Roman Antichrist.  This Futurist view did not penetrate Protestantism until the early nineteenth century, with Samuel R. Maitland at Gloucester, then James H. Todd at University of Dublin, John Henry Newman (who converted to Rome and became a cardinal), Edward Irving, a Presbyterian preacher, then Margaret Macdonald’s “prophetic” visions, and later John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth Brethren.  The Anglican Bishop, Edward Elliott, wrote five editions of “Horae Apocalypticae” to counteract the new thinking about the Antichrist, and Henry Grattan Guinness further popularized Elliott’s defense.

[The history is to be found in Elliott’s 4-volume work, and is summarized in a non-Bible-Student journal, “Present Truth” of 1974 September.  They appear to be a group of Calvinists who suddenly discovered Martin Luther’s teachings.  They are called, “New Reformation Fellowship” in Fallbrook, CA, northeast of San Diego.]


[Click below on the Chart contributed by Bible Student Elder Richard Doctor, shows that the Reformers overwhelming identified the Papacy as the Antichrist.]

Antichrist identification

With all the success of the Reformation, it was necessary for the Catholic Church to have some “damage control.”  They assigned a capable Spanish Jesuit scholar who was fluent in Latin (of course), Greek, and Hebrew named Francisco Ribera,to tidy up all of the Catholic Church scholarship on the subject of AntiChrist.  This he did in his “Commentary on the Apocalypse of blessed John, Apostle and Evangelist” [B[eati] Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentarii]  Ribera died in 1591.


Since the 70 weeks of Daniel are a day for a year, why change to a day for a day in Daniel’s other prophecies?

How can we bring 3.5 years left over from the 70 weeks and bring it all the way up to future of our time with a supposed “gap theory”? Does Anthony Buzzard see a 7 year tribulation (mixing 3.5 years from Daniel and Revelation together)?  If so, why interpret the 3.5 from Daniel as a day for a year, and the 3.5 from Revelation as a day for a day and then mix the two together to get 7?


From Peter K on 11/3/17. More research to share.


Matthew 24:15 (AV) “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand <2476 “having stood”>  in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)”

Those who think that Antichrist (Man of Sin, Abomination, etc.) is FUTURE would have to deal with the fact that Jesus is here stating that you must LOOK BACKWARD — “HAVING stood” — in order to see this character.  THAT, of course is OUR contention.  You must LOOK BACKWARD at the Gospel Age.  It fits rather well with verse 14.  BECAUSE the (time of the) end has come when the Gospel is preached in ALL the world (Bible Societies provided Bibles to world in every major language in 1800s).  From this point you CAN look backward to see that the Abomination HAS STOOD in the holy place.  This puts Antichrist AFTER Jesus (first century) but before “the end.”

GREEK STUDY:  Strongs: 2476 ἵστημι histemi his’-tay-mee

estos: acc. sing. neut. part. perf.  In Matthew 24:15, McReynolds accurately gives, “having stood.”
“Then when you might see the abomination of the desolation, the word having been spoken through Daniel the spokesman [prophet], having stood in a holy place, let the one reading give thought.”
The verb grammar is taken from “The Analytical Greek Lexicon,” (Samuel Bagster and Sons, Ltd., London, or Harper & Row, New York and Evanston)
Translation is taken from Paul R. McReynolds, “Word Study Greek-English New Testament, with Complete Concordance,” 3rd edn.; Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1999.
Greek Text is taken from Nestle-Aland, “Novum Testamentum Graece,” 28th edn.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012.  [‘estos’ was changed to ‘estōs’ in many later manuscripts and Textus Receptus, per Tischendorf.  That form of the word might not be singular?  Otherwise it seems the meaning should be the same.]
Note about ESTOS: Just as AM, IS, ARE, WAS, and WERE (even though they all LOOK DIFFERENT!) are all forms of the verb TO BE, the same is the case in the Greek we are looking at. ESTOS is a form of HISTEMI. 
To summarize, the verb ἑστὸς (hestos) is in the Perfect Participle Active tense which means something has happened in the past, and continues.  The Mass was created by the Papacy long in the past as a substitute for Jesus’ Ransom sacrifice and it continues to this day.

2 comments to Parousia (Jesus’ Second Presence) and the End of the Age – Anthony Buzzard vs Peter K.

  • just Stay Sweet and Good

    Gene……I seem to favor the abomination that cause desolation was the total control the papacy accquiered in AD 539 when the demanded that they and they alone held the key to heaven with the control they had over who and who did not take of the mass. This truly was an abomination because it blocked the Ranom for ALL in people minds and discouraged a faith center religion for a man made religion and all of THEIR REQUIREMENTS. The priest could stand at the door of the church and barr anyone they wanted to, to not partake of the mass, thereby condeming them to eternal torment because they did not die in a state of grace. It is an abomination to stand in the place of the great Jehovah God and pass final judgement on any man now……It is not our job discription.

  • Gene Balthrop

    I believe ANTHONY Buzzard is wrong, the abomination of desolation has already taken place, it occurred in 70 Ad WHEN he prince (Titus) the son of emperor Vaspasian, came on described the temple cutting off the daily sacriffices, and burn the city of Jerusalem to the ground, just as history plainly shows.

    Also remember the Angel told Daniel He was showing him what would happen to “his’ pepole, he was a JEW, a captive of the kingdom of Judah , he was not of the kingdom of ISREAL as mr. Buzzard preaches.

    As AR as the man of sin goes mentioned in 2 Ths 2 that is speaking of a false “IMAGE” of JESUS being a GOD, HE IS THE “ONLY” MAN WHO HAS EVER TAKEN HIS SEAT IN THE TEMPLE OF THE TRUE GOD. The fallen churches turned the man JESUS INTO A God creating a false image of him, which breakes the first commandment, “thou shall have ‘no’ other God besides me, you shall make no “Image” of me in heaven above or earth below’.

    When fallen Christanity tuned Jesus into a God they broke the first commandment and created a false “image” of a GOD, turning the true “IMAGE” OF JESUS INTO A MAN OF SIN. There is no man who has asended to heaven and is being desplayed and worshiped as a God, but the “MAN” Jesus. There exist no actual man of sin, it is just a “LIE” ABOUT JESUS, brought about by the workings of Satan through the “apostate churches” as 2ths2 brings out.

    To him that has an ear let him hear.

    Peace and love to you and yours. …….gene

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>