The Prophecy of the 70 weeks of Daniel

quote:

---

Such a desperate grasping at straws, and strawmen here. Cyrus is not a contender for the Messiah. Call him tomato, or call him messiah, or call him Popeye, it matters not. He was, as the Antichrist may be, anointed for a purpose. Whoopee do. No one said that Cyrus came from a virgin, or a plethora and virtual armada of other prophesied things, did they???

---

Exactly. Nobody said it. Nobody at all. You just like to pretend I said it because you can't answer my point. I don't know what you hope to gain by repeating an obvious falsehood over and over again.

quote:

---

So make up your mind here! Is your defense attempt claiming that the bible is wrong, or that the dates must be wrong!!?? You have no case within the bible, is that where you choose to be trounced? Fine with me.

---

The fact that you can't keep up with my arguments does not mean that I am changing my mind. In fact I have a very good case. Daniel 8 clearly places the End TImes in the Hellenistic period, as I have already explained.

quote:

---

our grasping at ludicrous straws, trying to claim Greece was more than the empire in the time and place it was in, is unsupportable by the bible. Now what?

---

SInce I have said no such thing, it is obvious who is clutching at straws,

quote:

---

The events of Dan 9 demand that a sequential fulfillment be the order of the day

---

In a period of 490 years. WHich is over..

quote:

---

The prophesy was to finish the whole Jewish history. That never happened in a year, or a century, or whatever, if you notice!!

---

Exactly. The end did not occur on schedule. The prophecy failed.It really is that obvious and simple. To anybody who can read the Bible without their preconceptions getting in the way.

{Duplicate - See Message 234. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.

{Duplicate - See Message 234. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.

{Duplicate - See Message 234. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I suppose 167-164 BC would be it, unless there are earlier ones from other sources. Or would it be 200 years after the Book of Daniel was written?

---

No, that date is the date of the original text, not the manuscript. The manuscript is dated 4 BC - 68 AD as can clearly be seen in the text. (emphasis mine)

{Duplicate - See Message 234. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.

{Duplicate - See Message 234. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.

{Duplicate - See Message 234. - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Of course it does.

---

Tell us how?

quote:

---

What are you on about? I haven’t said any writings were a hoax, all I have asked you is the date of the oldest extant text of Daniel! A question you have dodged how many times now, 6 or 7?

---

If they are not representative of the dates that they say they are, of course you are saying they are a fraud. Prove it!!

quote:

---

So what are the earliest extant records?

​

Since you deal in evidence, what is the date of the earliest extant evidence?

---

What is you point? You suggest that it was a hoax? That the sacred scriptures, so meticulously preserved, of Israel, were a shabby croc??Otherwise, why would it matter when the oldest hardcopy of the record from Daniel, that we knew of at the moment, matter?? Think about it.

quote:

---

You know why, you even posted a link and admitted that the author messed up with the name Darius the Mede!

---

Where was that? I can dig up thousands of links in a New York minute, if what you say is true?!

quote:

---

In the example in question, it is the amount of evidence that shows there was no such person as Daniel’s Darius.

---

Person??? You claim strange things. Got any proof for that fairy tale?? The name apparently must refer to a title. Not the name of a king. Get it??

quote:

---

I haven’t posted anything yet mate, I’m still trying to get you to answer the simple question that I keep asking you, and you get all defensive.

​

Once you answer this question we can move on to my next question which will start to build a background and an understanding of the issues surrounding of the Book of Daniel.

​

Then, perhaps, we can discuss these issues rationally.

​

But I find with some my students that they learn much better with a step by step approach, instead of trying to tackle too many issues at the same time.

​

So, chill out, focus on my question, and if you do not have an answer then just say so, this isn’t a problem.

​

One more time:

​

What is the date of the oldest existing text of the Book of Daniel?

---

Speaking of learning, whatever you do to your hostages, aside, what have you to address the ancient record, and it's apparent date?? Not the latest copy of the record, mate, but the record itself?? Maybe you could get your students to read this thread, where teach struts his stuff??? I bet you lose a few!!! I double dare you!

Hi Starman,I'm suspending you 24 hours for posting the same message many times.I appreciate the effort other participants have been making in not responding in kind to Starman's more, uh, enthusiastic posts.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

There's all of this skepticism relative to the extant Biblical manuscripts. To my knowledge, nobody is questioning the accuracy of Homer's Iliad and Odyssey.Homer lived somewhere around a millennium BC, yet the oldest extant manuscripts of that are around two millenniums after they were written, about 1000 AD.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Actually, no one really knows if 'homer' wrote the odyssey and the Iliad. They are attributed to him to be sure, and it is a certain romantic notion about a blind bard..The earliest mention of the Iliad was from the 5th century bce. Internal evidence shows the original work was probably about 8th century bce. Every one will acknowledge that it is based on legend.Internal evidence for the Book of Daniel narrows it's writing from between 167 bce and 164 bce.As far as I see, no one is trying to say the works of Homer are prophecy, and it means your soul if you disbelieve in it.

Loose your soul for disbelieving Daniel? I don't see that as a criteria for salvation, though most saved people likely believe the account. Many do not study it or try to understand it but anyone who prayerfully and carefully delves into it becomes apprised on much of the whys and wherefores of where the world is headed. In the last chapter some added significant data is given relative to our times, though that is straying from the topic of this thread.The Bible begins with the origin of human history and ends with it's finality when new heavens, earth and Jerusalem/Holy City replace it.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

The truth, Paul is that the fierce king who utters the dark sentences in verses 23-26 is a deceitful impressive slippery fellow who destroys many, all the while talking peacefully. He makes war with the "holy ones," i.e. the true Christians in the end times. Note that in Daniel 7:25 the notable little horn of the beast "made war with the saints and prevailed against them." The notable little horn who persecutes the saints (holy ones) is one and the same mighty one who persecutes the "holy ones" in chapter 8. His kingdom is also the same beast kingdom of Revelation 13 in the NT which "makes war with the saints and overcomes them." The planet is witnessing this as we debate. War is being waged on the Christians in Africa, Muslim nations, Communist nations, etc. The globalist beast kingdom, i.e. world government is emerging via the UN which btw is anti-Christian and pro-Muslim. You and others here need to corroborate these scriptures or you'll never understand them or whataheck is going on in the world today.Note how many times the "end times" and similar wording appears in these visions.Note also that when he confronts the "Prince of princes" in verse 25 of 8 that he is "broken without hand." John the revelator says messiah Jesus will destroy his enemies with the breath of his mouth or something similar to that when he appears to Jerusalem to set up shop/kingdom. This corroborates with the "little stone" of the first image vision which destroys the world kingdoms and becomes the mountain replacing the destroyed kingdoms of this world.Starman is right. Your arguments are full of holes so as to attemp to secularize everything that Daniel prophesied and to render as contemporary history. You pick and choose so as to overlook anything and everything that doesn't fit your secularist mindset for the book of Daniel, Jehovah's prophet. Edited by Buzsaw, : Add embolding

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Firstly Buz, I'll thank you not to attribute starman's misrepresentations to me.

quote:

---

The truth, Paul is that the fierce king who utters the dark sentences in verses 23-26 is a deceitful impressive slippery fellow who destroys many, all the while talking peacefully. He makes war with the "holy ones," i.e. the true Christians in the end times.

---

It is only your assumption that the text refers to Christians, rather than to pious Jews. Given the evidence that Daniel's "end times" are around 160 BC I'd say that your assumption has problems.

quote:

---

Note that in Daniel 7:25 the notable little horn of the beast "made war with the saints and prevailed against them." The notable little horn who persecutes the saints (holy ones) is one and the same mighty one who persecutes the "holy ones" in chapter 8.

---

Chapter 8 explicitly places the End Times in the Hellenistic period.

quote:

---

His kingdom is also the same beast kingdom of Revelation 13 in the NT which "makes war with the saints and overcomes them." The planet is witnessing this as we debate.

---

Obviously we aren't. Even your erroneous reading requires that you have a candidate for the king who is supposed to lead this war. And you don't.

quote:

---

War is being waged on the Christians in Africa, Muslim nations, Communist nations, etc

---

IN SOME of these nation Christians may be being persecuted. But that's it, really. And in each case it's local forces acting on their own agenda. There is nobody in overall charge.

quote:

---

The globalist beast kingdom, i.e. world government is emerging via the UN which btw is anti-Christian and pro-Muslim. You and others here need to corroborate these scriptures or you'll never understand them or whataheck is going on in the world today.

---

By which you men that if I don't twist the Bible to fit into your prejudices and hatreds I'll never share your warped vision of the world. That's hardly an argument calculated to change my mind.

quote:

---

Note how many times the "end times" and similar wording appears in these visions.

---

Believe me I do. It corroborates my view that they are speaking of the same time. A time long before Jesus was born.

quote:

---

Note also that when he confronts the "Prince of princes" in verse 25 of 8 that he is "broken without hand.

---

Yes, it's anther example of Daniel failing.

quote:

---

John the revelator says messiah Jesus will destroy his enemies with the breath of his mouth or something similar to that when he appears to Jerusalem to set up shop/kingdom. This corroborates with the "little stone" of the first image vision which destroys the world kingdoms and becomes the mountain replacing the destroyed kingdoms of this world.

---

Except that the stone is never identified as a single person. The stone simply seems to be the Kingdom of God. There simply is no corroboration there.

quote:

---

Starman is right.

---

You mean he is right to grossly misrepresent my arguments, because it is the only way you can deal with them ? He is right to misrepresent and reject the Bible, because the Bible is subject to the dogma that you share ? He is right to confuse matters by failing even to keep track of his own arguments, because you have no real case ?If you praise starman's dismal record you only confirm how hopelessly weak your position is.

quote:

---

Your arguments are full of holes so as to attemp to secularize everything that Daniel prophesied and to render as contemporary history.

---

If my arguments were full of holes you could answer them. Obviously you can't. Starman can't even acknowledge my arguments let alone deal with them

quote:

---

You pick and choose so as to overlook anything and everything that doesn't fit your secularist mindset for the book of Daniel, Jehovah's prophet.

---

Of course when you accuse me of "picking and choosing",you are really complaining because I DIDN'T "pick and choose" - the way you do. You want me to ignore Isaiah 45:1 You especially want me to ignore Daniel 8:8-9 and Daniel 8:22-23 because they sink your interpretation of the prophecies of Daniel. Don't think I've forgotten how badly you want to avoid discussing those.