Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8852 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-15-2018 2:49 AM
183 online now:
GDR, PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat) (3 members, 180 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: rldawnca
Post Volume:
Total: 836,903 Year: 11,726/29,783 Month: 748/1,642 Week: 162/460 Day: 1/62 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1516
17
1819
...
45NextFF
Author Topic:   Christianity and the End Times
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 241 of 672 (836014)
07-07-2018 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by Faith
07-07-2018 2:40 PM


Re: The ten kings are yet future
quote:

Just the fact that the statue represents four empires, three succeeding the first which we know was babylon, and that the subsequent visions including those in Revelation always represent the same four, is really enough to explain the statue.

Thereís a big problem for you there. You donít have a good explanation of the statue, and if the legs are Greek - and the evidence points that way - your interpretations of the rest go up in smoke. Iíve already explained why Revelation carries no weight with me, and my reasons are perfectly rational so I donít see why you keep bringing it up. It only emphasises the fact that you canít make your case from Daniel.

quote:

and if just knowing the sequence of history isn't enough, we also have the fact that Jesus was born in the Roman Empire, and that the prince that destroys Jerusalem after the crucifixion was a Roman,

And we know that Daniel 9 is really talking about Antiochus and the author of Daniel expected the end to come long before Jesus was born.

quote:

Christian doctrine is just the most sensible observations preserved as to how scripture should be interpreted.

Youíre appealing to Christian doctrine because the sensible ways of reading Daniel produce interpretations you donít like.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by Faith, posted 07-07-2018 2:40 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by Faith, posted 07-07-2018 3:33 PM PaulK has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 29149
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


(1)
Message 242 of 672 (836015)
07-07-2018 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 241 by PaulK
07-07-2018 2:54 PM


Re: The ten kings are yet future
Why am I talking about Revelation? Because Revelation picks up where Daniel left off and carries us through the end times up to the Second Coming, which is what this thread is about.

It's really very neat from many perspectives, one of which is that this last book of the Bible is even sort of similar to that last week of the seventy weeks of Daniel in that it is a small portion of the whole, it picks up an Old Testament theme even with Old Testament imagery after a long interlude of Christianity or the "times of the Gentiles" according to the Jewish frame of reference, it comes at the very end and it purports to bring the entire story of Planet Earth to a grand finale.

The Bible is just chock full of such beautiful symbolisms and symmetries and correspondences. It's all part of the evidence that it's God's word and nothing human beings could have come up with.

Yeah we know about Maccabees and the Seleucids and Antiochus. That all figures prominently in Daniel, but it's there partly to show us how prophecy works and how exact it can be in those wars of Daniel 11, and thereby give us a model for events to come at the very end of time, when Jesus will return and really will set up that everlasting kingdom that wasn't supposed to come in the time of the Maccabees anyway.

Next I need to spend some time putting together the imagery of the little horn of Daniel 7 with the prince who is to come and the bad guy in Revelation.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by PaulK, posted 07-07-2018 2:54 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by PaulK, posted 07-07-2018 3:53 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 243 of 672 (836016)
07-07-2018 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by Faith
07-07-2018 3:33 PM


Re: The ten kings are yet future
quote:

Why am I talking about Revelation? Because Revelation picks up where Daniel left off and carries us through the end times up to the Second Coming, which is what this thread is about.

I intend to get to the Revelation in time, but there is more to do before we get there.

However, since you know that the Revelation canít offer much to the debate in the interpretation of Daniel talking about it in that context is a waste of time.

quote:

Yeah we know about Maccabees and the Seleucids and Antiochus. That all figures prominently in Daniel, but it's there partly to show us how prophecy works and how exact it can be in those wars of Daniel 11, and thereby give us a model for events to come at the very end of time, when Jesus will return and really will set up that everlasting kingdom that wasn't supposed to come in the time of the Maccabees anyway.

In other words this book - that supposedly shows us how accurate prophecy can be - gets it massively wrong.

Odd that.

quote:

Next I need to spend some time putting together the imagery of the little horn of Daniel 7 with the prince who is to come and the bad guy in Revelation

Since that wonít help in the debate over the interpretation of Daniel, may I take it that you are giving up on that ? After failing to show even one hole in my arguments for the Maccabean interpretation over the futurist ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by Faith, posted 07-07-2018 3:33 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 29149
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 244 of 672 (836017)
07-08-2018 3:02 AM
Reply to: Message 227 by PaulK
07-06-2018 12:11 PM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
Since it is hard to keep all the particulars clearly sorted out I don't think I'm ready for a full-bore argument on these things. But I can sketch out a few points even if I may have to change some things in future posts.

PaulK writes:

Daniel 8 clearly favours the Maccabean interpretation since it clearly refers to that period and explicitly identifies itself as a prophecy dealing with the time of the end.

Daniel 8 IS about the Maccabean period, nobody I've run across disputes that. And there is no shift in the text to indicate a future fulfillment either. Some commentators nevertheless argue that the portrait of Antiochus is also a portrait of the future Antichrist, probably because of the reference to the time of the end. Martin Luther was one who held that view, Calvin disagreed with him. Other passages do connect Antiochus with a future similar personality, however, so the connection is justifiable.

PaulK writes:

Daniel 10-12 is the same, even the last section of Daniel 11 deals with the wars between the Seleucids and the Ptolomies and Daniel 12:1 goes straight into the end times, when the Jews will be delivered and even the dead will rise (12:1-3)

These alone make a very strong case for the Maccabean interpretation.

The last section of Daniel 11, from 11:36 on, is considered by futurists to be a shift from Anticiochus to the future Antichrist. They are similar personalities, for sure, but the specific description of the one in this section was quoted by Paul in a way that specifically identifies him with a future Antichrist:

Here's the passage:

Dan=11:36 writes:

And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.

And here's Paul:

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 writes:

Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God

Luther identified this passage as definitive of the papacy. In any case it takes the characteristics imputed to Antiochus and points them to a future fulfillment, another personality similar to him, which we refer to as the coming Antichrist.

Somewhere I ran across the mention of a coin Antiochus had made for himself on which he gives himself the title Theos Epiphanus, which was translated "God manifest."

Jesus also takes Antiochus and his time as pointing to a future fulfillment:

Matthew 24:15 writes:

When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand)

Clearly a future abomination of desolation even if Antiochus did something similar.

PaulK writes:

Daniel 7 is more even, since it is less clear, especially on dates. However the fact that the ďlittle hornĒ image is used here as in Daniel 8 - and the same person fits both to a degree that is quite surprising if it were not intended - weighs in favour of the Maccabean interpretation.

Yes they are very similar characters. But they come from different kingdoms so they are not the same. I also showed that Revelation identifies the same fourth kingdom as different from Greece.

And I've shown above that Jesus and Paul both indicate a future fulfillment of the time of Antiochus, his character and the act of placing the abomination of desoluteon. Even if you don't recognize a shift in the text at Daniel 11:36 these two references make the point that there is to be a future Antiochus type

I'd also point out that the fourth beast/kingdom is said to be different from ALL OTHER KINGDOMS. I don't think that describes the Seleucids. It's not clear what it describes -- yet.

Daniel 7:23 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.

The Seleucids also did not rule the entire world.

I'll have to come back to your last paragraphs because I'm getting too tired.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by PaulK, posted 07-06-2018 12:11 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 245 by PaulK, posted 07-08-2018 3:56 AM Faith has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 245 of 672 (836018)
07-08-2018 3:56 AM
Reply to: Message 244 by Faith
07-08-2018 3:02 AM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
You still havenít found any real holes.

quote:

Other passages do connect Antiochus with a future similar personality, however, so the connection is justifiable.

You mean that other passages are interpreted - by futurists - as connecting Antiochus to a future similar personality. If the Maccabean interpretation is correct the futurists are wrong on that one.

quote:

The last section of Daniel 11, from 11:36 on, is considered by futurists to be a shift from Anticiochus to the future Antichrist

As I have already shown there is good textual evidence to the contrary. Simply telling me that futurists disagree doesnít help your case at all.

quote:

the specific description of the one in this section was quoted by Paul in a way that specifically identifies him with a future Antichrist

Which is irrelevant for the same reasons that the Revelation is irrelevant.

quote:

Jesus also takes Antiochus and his time as pointing to a future fulfillment

Weíll get to that. While we canít say that Jesus said those words, we can say that they are at least a very strange thing to say given the actual events.

quote:

Yes they are very similar characters. But they come from different kingdoms so they are not the same. I also showed that Revelation identifies the same fourth kingdom as different from Greece.

The Revelation is not relevant. As I have shown that there is a strong case from Daniel that they came from the same kingdom.

quote:

I'd also point out that the fourth beast/kingdom is said to be different from ALL OTHER KINGDOMS. I don't think that describes the Seleucids

My thought is that it refers to the rise of Hellenistic culture. According to Maccabees, Jews were adopting Greek culture, Greek names, Greek activities - even havin surgery to hide the fact that they were circumcised.

1 Maccabees 1:14-15 (GNT - possibly not the best, but convenient)


14 They built in Jerusalem a stadium like those in the Greek cities. 15 They had surgery performed to hide their circumcision, abandoned the holy covenant, started associating with Gentiles, and did all sorts of other evil things.

And things just escalated from there with the Hellenisers dealing with Antiochus, bribing him to get appointed High Priest, and even groping as far as civil conflict.

On top of that Antiochus goes the whole way by seizing the Temple, ending the Jewish rites and dedicating it to the worship of Zeus (and, IIRC Antiochus didnít make a lot of distinction between him and himself)

I hope you can see that this was a unique threat to Jewish culture and faith.

quote:

The Seleucids also did not rule the entire world.

As we have seen in past discussions phrases like that can be very tricky. Hebrew is a bit odd in that respect, and I would hardly be surprised if the same oddity was found in Jewish Aramaic. Given that Daniel clearly doesnít take a world-wide view (for instance, Daniel 11:30 mentions Romeís intervention in Antiochusí wars against Egypt, but says nothing about Rome itself) itís far from clear that this is meant literally.

Even in Greek it doesnít have to literally mean the whole world. Luke 2:1 says that Augustus decree applied to the whole world, when there were large parts of the known world where Rome had no power. Indeed, it is likely that the actual census was of Judea, or at most the province of Syria when Judea was annexed to it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Faith, posted 07-08-2018 3:02 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by Faith, posted 07-08-2018 11:14 AM PaulK has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 29149
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 246 of 672 (836034)
07-08-2018 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 245 by PaulK
07-08-2018 3:56 AM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
Not feeling well, going to take your posts in pieces for now, starting with whichever issues I can answer most simply.

=============================

PaulK writes:

Faith writes:

I'd also point out that the fourth beast/kingdom is said to be different from ALL OTHER KINGDOMS. I don't think that describes the Seleucids

My thought is that it refers to the rise of Hellenistic culture.

According to Maccabees, Jews were adopting Greek culture, Greek names, Greek activities - even havin surgery to hide the fact that they were circumcised.

1 Maccabees 1:14-15 (GNT - possibly not the best, but convenient)

14 They built in Jerusalem a stadium like those in the Greek cities. 15 They had surgery performed to hide their circumcision, abandoned the holy covenant, started associating with Gentiles, and did all sorts of other evil things.

And things just escalated from there with the Hellenisers dealing with Antiochus, bribing him to get appointed High Priest, and even groping as far as civil conflict.

On top of that Antiochus goes the whole way by seizing the Temple, ending the Jewish rites and dedicating it to the worship of Zeus (and, IIRC Antiochus didnít make a lot of distinction between him and himself)

I hope you can see that this was a unique threat to Jewish culture and faith.

But I don't see how this is related specifically to the Fourth Beast which you identify with the Seleucid kingdom and futurists identify with the Roman Empire. For starters, Hellenization was a product of the spread of Greek culture to the wnole area conquered by Alexander, certainly not confined in any way to the Seleucids.

The Fourth Beast is said to be different from all other, or even ALL kingdoms. There was nothing substantively different about the Greek empire, or the Seleucids in particular, but this is what the description suggests. Something that doesn't look like any other kingdom we've ever seen. Seems to me there is nothing about the Roman Empire that is specifically different in that way either, but since we look to a future Roman Empire we need to expect it to be different from all other kingdoms.

This is probably indicated in the image of the statue, the iron legs being the Roman Empire we know, the feet and toes of both iron and potter's clay hinting at something different yet to come.

Hellenization in any case is not a special quality of the Greek Empire itself, which is in all its basic forms and functions was like all other kingdoms. As I read the description of the fourth beast it suggests a major difference in those forms and functions, the basic operations of a kingdom or empire.

PaulK writes:

Faith writes:

The Seleucids also did not rule the entire world.

As we have seen in past discussions phrases like that can be very tricky. Hebrew is a bit odd in that respect, and I would hardly be surprised if the same oddity was found in Jewish Aramaic. Given that Daniel clearly doesnít take a world-wide view (for instance, Daniel 11:30 mentions Romeís intervention in Antiochusí wars against Egypt, but says nothing about Rome itself) itís far from clear that this is meant literally.

Even in Greek it doesnít have to literally mean the whole world. Luke 2:1 says that Augustus decree applied to the whole world, when there were large parts of the known world where Rome had no power. Indeed, it is likely that the actual census was of Judea, or at most the province of Syria when Judea was annexed to it.

Seleucia never ruled over any more of the Greek lands than the Syria and Judea it started out ruling after Alexander's death. At the very least the concept of the "whole world" has to refer to the whole area conquered by Alexander.

And certainly Augustus' decree that all the world be taxed applied to the entire area under Roman rule. Not the entire planet but a substantial portion of it at that time.

In any case I read the phrase in connection with the future fourth beast or empire which probably will rule the entire planet.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by PaulK, posted 07-08-2018 3:56 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by PaulK, posted 07-08-2018 11:33 AM Faith has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 247 of 672 (836036)
07-08-2018 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by Faith
07-08-2018 11:14 AM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
quote:

But I don't see how this is related specifically to the Fourth Beast which you identify with the Seleucid kingdom and futurists identify with the Roman Empire. For starters, Hellenization was a product of the spread of Greek culture to the wnole area conquered by Alexander, certainly not confined in any way to the Seleucids.

The Seleucids were the ones who had power over the Jews and the Hellenising faction were making deals with Antiochus.

quote:

The Fourth Beast is said to be different from all other, or even ALL kingdoms.

Which other kingdom took control of the Temple for their own pagan rites ?

quote:

This is probably indicated in the image of the statue, the iron legs being the Roman Empire we know, the feet and toes of both iron and potter's clay hinting at something different yet to come.


The toes are not mentioned, but as I have pointed out the iron and clay actually seem to be references to the Diadochi kingdoms.

quote:

Seleucia never ruled over any more of the Greek lands than the Syria and Judea it started out ruling after Alexander's death. At the very least the concept of the "whole world" has to refer to the whole area conquered by Alexander.

And yet, as I pointed out the usual translations of Luke speak about the world when the actual event likely only applied to Judea.

The author of Daniel really doesnít seem much concerned with anything outside the region. And Daniel 11 clearly tells us that Antiochus would conquer Egypt.

quote:

And certainly Augustus' decree that all the world be taxed applied to the entire area under Roman rule. Not the entire planet but a substantial portion of it at that time.

Please back that up. I have researched the issue in the last and found no evidence of such.

quote:

In any case I read the phrase in connection with the future fourth beast or empire which probably will rule the entire planet.

Given that you donít even seem to have a sensible count of four - thereís no reason for the count to stop there or omit your presumed recreation - I think that you would really do better addressing the serious problems in your own arguments.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Faith, posted 07-08-2018 11:14 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 248 by Faith, posted 07-08-2018 11:59 AM PaulK has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 29149
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 248 of 672 (836037)
07-08-2018 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 247 by PaulK
07-08-2018 11:33 AM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
Given that you donít even seem to have a sensible count of four

What are you talking about? The four are obvious in the statue and Daniel 7 and the beast in Revelation 13 -- and yes Revelation counts as does the entire New Testament, you have no justification to exclude it. FOUR DISTINCT SECTIONS OF THE STATUE, FOUR DISTINCT BEASTS IN DANIEL 7, FOUR BEASTS REPRESENTED IN THE ONE BEAST OF REVELATION 13. Your attempt to mangle the futurist point of view is even worse than the way you mangle the entire prophecy to invent your Maccabean scenario. The four kingdoms are OBVIOUS. Stop this misrepresentation.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by PaulK, posted 07-08-2018 11:33 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by PaulK, posted 07-08-2018 12:21 PM Faith has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 249 of 672 (836040)
07-08-2018 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by Faith
07-08-2018 11:59 AM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
quote:

What are you talking about?

Exactly what I said. You have no sensible reason for the count to stop at four, or for the presumed recreation of the fourth empire to be completely absent from the prophecy.

I have been making this point repeatedly so you donít have any excuse for sudden surprise.

quote:

and yes Revelation counts as does the entire New Testament, you have no justification to exclude it

I certainly do have justification, and I have given it.

quote:

FOUR DISTINCT SECTIONS OF THE STATUE, FOUR DISTINCT BEASTS IN DANIEL 7, FOUR BEASTS REPRESENTED IN THE ONE BEAST OF REVELATION 13.

Which only shows how much you need a sensible explanation for the omissions.

quote:

Your attempt to mangle the futurist point of view is even worse than the way you mangle the entire prophecy to invent your Maccabean scenario. The four kingdoms are OBVIOUS

I have yet to see any evidence of mangling. The fact that the prophecies repeatedly list four kingdoms is a part of my point, not a contradiction of it.

quote:

Stop this misrepresentation.

What misrepresentation ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Faith, posted 07-08-2018 11:59 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by Faith, posted 07-08-2018 9:20 PM PaulK has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 29149
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 250 of 672 (836041)
07-08-2018 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by PaulK
07-06-2018 12:11 PM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
Daniel 9 is the most problematic, but it is problematic to both sides. The limit of 490 years weighs heavily against futurist interpretations since Christians wish to put the death of Jesus at the 483rd year. The fit is not too bad but not exact - enough to be a good point, but not enough to overcome multiple equally good or better points.

I haven't seen a truly good point yet in all your juggling of the prophecies to make them come out over a hundred years before the coming of Jesus Christ. From the decree of Artaxerxes that sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem ti rebuild the walls, the 483 years counts to 38 AD. That is really awfully close. Not exact, no, but close enough to suggest that there is an exact way of computing it if we have the right historical perspective. In any case nothing in the seventy weeks goes anywhere near the period of the Maccabees.

However, the remaining events did not occur to the seven year schedule, which is a significant point against, and the futurist interpretation is compelled to invent a gap between the 483rd year and the final 7. And the size of the gap is four times the entire duration of the prophecy and increasing.

We don't feel "compelled" to put the seven years to the future at all, we feel it is a wonderful revelation of how God works that it was so clearly left unfulfilled so that it has to be yet future. That fact allows for a truly magnificent grand finale of Planet Earth instead of your trivial puny manipulated little excuse for a finale that applies only to the Jews and didn't happen anyway and doesn't fit any part of the seventy weeks prophecy, and has to blur the fourth beast together with the third and cram the final Antichrist into Antiochus Epiphanes and has two bogus "messiahs" in the place of Jesus Christ the Savior of all mankind, who will come at the end of those separated seven years whether you like it or not.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by PaulK, posted 07-06-2018 12:11 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by PaulK, posted 07-08-2018 12:53 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 251 of 672 (836043)
07-08-2018 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by Faith
07-08-2018 12:43 PM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
quote:

I haven't seen a truly good point yet in all your juggling of the prophecies to make them come out over a hundred years before the coming of Jesus Christ. From the decree of Artaxerxes that sent Nehemiah to Jerusalem ti rebuild the walls, the 483 years counts to 38 AD. That is really awfully close. Not exact, no, but close enough to suggest that there is an exact way of computing it if we have the right historical perspective. In any case nothing in the seventy weeks goes anywhere near the period of the Maccabees.

In fact I have a reasonable case for a start date that gives an error of only sixty years. And a very strong case that the intended end date IS in the period of the Maccabees. Until you can refute that - and I havenít seen any good points from you on that front, Iím still well ahead. Especially as you have yet to justify inserting a gap of 2000 years into the prophecy.

quote:

We don't feel "compelled" to put the seven years to the future at all, we feel it is a wonderful revelation of how God works that it was so clearly left unfulfilled so that it has to be yet future.

OK, your God is wonderfully fallible when it comes to dates. I donít see whatís so great about that, but if you like it...

Oh sorry, I read the rest. Itís wonderful that Godís is fallible so you can make up stuff you like much better. Thanks for admitting that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by Faith, posted 07-08-2018 12:43 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 29149
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 252 of 672 (836049)
07-08-2018 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by PaulK
07-08-2018 12:21 PM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
You have no sensible reason for the count to stop at four, or for the presumed recreation of the fourth empire to be completely absent from the prophecy.

This must be a case of your making so little sense I haven't been able to answer, especially if there are other things I can answer.

For the count to stop at four? The count of empires? But it stops at four because the prophecies stop at four, I don't have anything to do with that. Four sections of the statue, four beasts in Daniel 7. Scripture identifies four and only four.

PaulK writes:

Faith writes:

FOUR DISTINCT SECTIONS OF THE STATUE, FOUR DISTINCT BEASTS IN DANIEL 7, FOUR BEASTS REPRESENTED IN THE ONE BEAST OF REVELATION 13.

Which only shows how much you need a sensible explanation for the omissions.

What omissions? I don't need an explanation for what the Bible says. The Bible gives four empires, period.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by PaulK, posted 07-08-2018 12:21 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 253 by PaulK, posted 07-08-2018 11:58 PM Faith has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14225
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 253 of 672 (836050)
07-08-2018 11:58 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by Faith
07-08-2018 9:20 PM


Re: Daniel: Maccabean versus Futurist
quote:

This must be a case of your making so little sense I haven't been able to answer, especially if there are other things I can answer.

The point makes perfect sense. So this is just your usual nastiness in place of argument.

quote:

For the count to stop at four? The count of empires? But it stops at four because the prophecies stop at four, I don't have anything to do with that. Four sections of the statue, four beasts in Daniel 7. Scripture identifies four and only four.

But history has rather more than four that seem to qualify for the list.

The Maccabean interpretation comes with that fine because the end occurs during the time of the fourth Empire in the sequence, without any intervening empires, or the necessity of a destroyed empire somehow returning.

Your interpretation covers a range of history where multiple empires are active in the region, where your candidate for the last Empire is destroyed - and you say that it comes back (and we still donít have a good explanation of how that could happen either) - an ad hoc move that has no support in the prophecy.

So again, the problem is that your interpretation doesnít really make sense.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Faith, posted 07-08-2018 9:20 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by Faith, posted 07-09-2018 12:01 PM PaulK has responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 10968
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 254 of 672 (836064)
07-09-2018 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by jar
07-06-2018 2:22 PM


Re: Lets Get Back To Marketing
jar writes:

even your quote reinforces the practice of dogma versus what is actually written in the stories as well as the common apologist tactic of trying to misdirect the audience's attention so they can palm the pea.

This is one of your favorite sayings but it is blatantly dishonest. I will admit that there are many Pastors and apologists who are dishonest. I would be more hesitant to accuse most of them being that way. Palming the Pea is a deliberate shell game where the operator willingly and knowingly cons the audience. We could argue that Gene Scott and perhaps Ken Ham are the same way, though it would take a lot more proof that these men are knowingly selling a product which they do not believe to be the truth. We could also assert that some of the leading televangelists are willfully misdirecting their audiences attention so as to make the money that allows their lavish lifestyles. They are marketing a product and they know that the product sells.

While most apologists earn a living off of their profession, I would argue that they are in no way attempting to misdirect anyone's attention. They genuinely believe in what they are saying.

Finally...show me how I myself unwittingly attempted to misdirect the audience's attention except to reinforce my belief that scripture speaks to us today? Your argument is not persuasive. I am in the group that desires a certain result, I'll give you that.

The author of 2 Peter needs to create an apology; a revision to what had been recorded as authoritative as the words of Jesus.
Show us the proof that this was the authors motive? Why when I google this accusation that I get so few hits? It seems that only jar makes this stuff up.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ĖRC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ĖMark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by jar, posted 07-06-2018 2:22 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by jar, posted 07-09-2018 8:27 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 256 by ringo, posted 07-09-2018 12:00 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30701
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 255 of 672 (836065)
07-09-2018 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by Phat
07-09-2018 7:57 AM


Re: Lets Get Back To Marketing
Phat writes:

Finally...show me how I myself unwittingly attempted to misdirect the audience's attention except to reinforce my belief that scripture speaks to us today? Your argument is not persuasive. I am in the group that desires a certain result, I'll give you that.

Read what you write Phat. You admit that you look only for the support for your desired outcome.

Phat writes:

Show us the proof that this was the authors motive?

Good grief Phat. Read 2 Peter. The author says that it is written to explain why the fact that the end did not come during that generation as Jesus said would happen should not be called the failed prophecy that it was.

Jesus said that the end would come during that generation.

That did not happen.

The author of 2 Peter had to make up an explanation of why that is not a failure.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios † † My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Phat, posted 07-09-2018 7:57 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
RewPrev1
...
1516
17
1819
...
45NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018