|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,838 Year: 4,095/9,624 Month: 966/974 Week: 293/286 Day: 14/40 Hour: 3/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Christianity and the End Times | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
For now all I'm going to say is that you cannot make the four kingdoms that split up Alexander's conquered lands, the Diadochi, into the Fourth Empire of Daniel 7, they are consistently identified in the relevant prophecies as GREECE. They are the four wings and four heads of the leopard in Daniel 7 and the four horns that supplant the single notable horn on the goat in Daniel 8. They are GREECE, they are not the Great and Terrible Beast Empire. That is ROME.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: In that case you are assuming a contradiction since the Diadochi are the last Empire in Daniel 8 and Daniel 10-12
quote: Perhaps Daniel 7 means to split off the Seleucids as the last Empire, (or maybe you have misunderstood the symbolism). The ten horns can be reasonably read as fitting with the Seleucids.(There were seven rulers preceding Antiochus, and three who had or made claims on the throne only to be eliminated by Antiochus - the usurper Heliodorus and his two nephews) I have no disagreement with what you say about Daniel 8. I simply point out that the Diadochi are the final empire there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
For now all I'm going to say is that you cannot make the four kingdoms that split up Alexander's conquered lands, the Diadochi, into the Fourth Empire of Daniel 7, they are consistently identified in the relevant prophecies as GREECE. In that case you are assuming a contradiction since the Diadochi are the last Empire in Daniel 8 and Daniel 10-12 They are the last small kingdoms, not an empire, nor any one of them an empire, MENTIONED in those chapters, but they are not the last EMPIRE revealed in Daniel: that is the Great and tTerrible Beast of Daniel 7 where the kingdoms you are talking about are identified with the THIRD empire and not the fourth. Not only is the fourth described as great and terrible, far surpassing the three previous empires -- do you really want to compare either Egypt or Seleucia with Alexander the Great's enormous conquests? -- but it is also described as DIFFERENT from "all kingdoms" in some essential way that is not identified:
Daniel 7:23-24 writes: Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. Dan 7:24And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. "Devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces." There is nothing in the four Greek kingdoms that this describes, not even the Seleucids. Their wars were confined to the area of the eastern Mediterranean and were between two antagonists, not the whole world. The seven rulers of the Seleucids plus three who tried to take the throne do NOT represent the prophecy of the ten kings of the Great and Terrible Beast, ten actual ruling kings, THREE OF WHOM were subdued by the little horn. FACE IT, THIS IS NOT ANTIOCHUS. It is a similar type of character who has not yet appeared in history. And these warring kingdoms basically just disappeared from history although there are weak remnants of them in Egypt and Syria. And more important, they were not succeeded by the everlasting kingdom of God ruled by the saints of the most High which is how the prophecy of Daniel 7 concludes. So if we believe the prophecy, all that must be yet future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
And you can't even point to any timing from the seventy weeks prophecy that goes anywhere near the time of the Maccabean revolt against Antiochus IV. But your timing of the seventieth week puts it nearly 2000 years after the time it was supposed to happen. That's for the simple reason that it hasn't been fulfilled, that the prophecy so far has only completed the sixty-nine weeks to Messiah the Prince. The prophecy says that "seventy weeks have been determined upon your people and your holy city to put an end to transgressions..." end to sins, anoint the most holy, I forget the rest of it, but the point is that it doesn't give a particular time frame this has to happen in. Of course we expect it to be continuous but when you've tallied it all up there just happens to be this one dangling week or seven years. And although Jesus put an end to sins for believers, the prophecy seems to look forward to a complete end of transgressions, and that certainly has not yet arrived, which adds to the conviction that there is yet another seven years to come to fulfill the prophecy, which would be the covenant of seven years made by the future Antichrist.... You see it differently but I think all the rest has been fulfilled quite nicely, 49 years to rebuld Jerusalem and the temple after the Babylonian Capitivty, plus another sixty-two years adding up to sixty-nine, to Messiah the Prince, which certainly lands in Jesus' lifetime according to our most inadequate calculations and probably smack on the entry into Jerusalem if we were better at the calculations, but in any case they do not go anywhere near the Maccabean period. And all I've seen of your timing claims hardly even touch on what is required by the prophecy. If I missed it then please repeat it so this won't drag on forever. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: According to your interpretation. However the Seleucids were not that small a kingdom - at one point much larger than Nebuchadnezzer’s neo-Babylonian Empire, and Antiochus was giving Egypt a hard time. And, as I said there is no room for another Empire in Daniel 8 or 10-12.
quote: Even Rome didn’t manage that, and the later Mongol and British Empires did better - and still didn’t succeed. If it means the whole earth (and it may not) as we have seen in other discussions Hebrew is a bit funny about that.
quote: Given that the prophecy does fit I think we need a little more than your say-so on that.
quote: But they lasted well past the time of the Maccabean revolt even though Daniel 8 says that they wouldn’t (Daniel 8:23)
quote: And if you follow the evidence the prophecy failed. Since I don’t dogmatically insist on Bible prophecies succeeding, that really isn’t an issue for me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
"Devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces." There is nothing in the four Greek kingdoms that this describes, not even the Seleucids. Their wars were confined to the area of the eastern Mediterranean and were between two antagonists, not the whole world Even Rome didn’t manage that, But the Rome of the prophecy is yet future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3
|
quote: In other words you put part of the prophecy off into the distant future because it failed. That may not be what you meant, but it is what you said. Again, if you can’t justify inserting a massive gap into the prophecy for any reason other than the actual events not fitting the prophecy there really isn’t much point in arguing about the timing. You’re 2000 years out, I haven’t anything that bad.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined:
|
If the rest succeeded and it did, then the last week will also succeed.
Also, putting it off to the future has the interesting effect of spanning the time of Christianity and linking the Old Testament to the future, making it continuous in that sense. I've noted other ways in this discussion that Israel seems to be the main player in all the end times scenarios, while the Church is not so clearly present, which MIGHT be support for the Rapture theory. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: It didn’t all succeed, as I pointed out. Moreover, the last week hasn’t occurred to any plausible schedule. Arbitrarily pushing it into the future for no other reason is hardly going to convince anyone who doesn’t assume that Bible prophecy can’t fail.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Then it certainly isn’t the Roman Empire of history which is gone. So how do you keep to a count of four Empires when you ought to be including the past Roman Empire, at least some of the Empires that came after it and your future Roman Empier ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
But the Rome of the prophecy is yet future. Then it certainly isn’t the Roman Empire of history which is gone.So how do you keep to a count of four Empires when you ought to be including the past Roman Empire, at least some of the Empires that came after it and your future Roman Empier ? The future Roman Empire does have to be recognizably continuous with the original for the prophecy to make sense. Even you should recognize it when it is revealed. It may not come in our lifetime of course, but if it does I know I'll recognize it. I see it as waiting in the wings to suddenly burst upon the stage of history. It's going to be "different" from all other kingdoms, remember. And it's going to devour the whole world. Of course maybe I won't be around to see it, maybe I'll get raptured. Funny, I haven't even really believed in the pre-trib Rapture, but maybe I'm going to have to.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: How could that possibly happen ? There hasn’t been a Roman state for more than 500 years. That alone is a massive break in continuity. The institutions of the state ceased, the Turks took over and ran things their way. (And the Turks certainly ought to be on the list of Empires, since their Empire was large, long-lived and incorporated both the Holy land and the region once ruled by Babylon.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Just a thought. Remember there have been conscious attempts to continue the Roman Empire, including Hitler's Third Reich, following an earlier Second Reich or German empire, which usually counts the Holy Roman Empire as the First Reich, and we've had some wannabe Caesars of course, witness titles like "Czar" and "Kaiser." The IDEA of the Roman Empire has never really died. And there may yet be one to emerge with an even more evil Hitler at its helm. Just a thought.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Some people consider Islam or perhaps the Ottoman Empire to be the other leg of the statue in Daniel 2, one being the Roman Empire.l
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
The so-called Holy Roman Empire was never Roman (or even an Empire) and certainly not continuous with the original Roman Empire. And isn’t calling it the Third Reich a dead give away that continuity has been broken ?
It was Mussolini who was attempting to create a new Roman Empire, but again there was no real continuity. Modern Italy - even then - is just too different.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024