The Prophecy of the 70 weeks of Daniel

quote:

---

1. No mention of the Book of Daniel at all until the mid 2nd century BCE

​

2. No texts in existence that date any older then the mid-2nd century BCE.

​

3. Daniel's book was not included in Jewish Scripture that was closed in ca. 200 BCE.

​

4. There is no evidence that the Book of Daniel was considered to be scripture before the 2nd century BCE.

---

1) - Support for this claim?2) - Support for this claim? Says WHO?3) -Support for this claim?4) - What evidence from that time for any book being scripture do you have?? !!

quote:

---

No, I don't. I have never stated nor implied anything of the sort.

---

Yes, if you claim Greece is anything more than the belly an thighs of the image, you do. A belly and thighs that were to be followed by another kingdom. Another kingdom that would be here when God takes over.

quote:

---

Daniel 8 provides significant support, backed up by the other "prophecies" in Daniel.
Remember that Daniel 8 is explicitly stated to be an End Times prophecy, and explicitly stated to refer to what we would call the Hellenistic period.

​

The clear references to the acts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes in Daniel provide further evidence confirming this interpretation,

---

Having some local fulfillments to prophesy never preclude the ultimate fulfillments. The key to knowing where the one gets off, and the other starts, is context, and balance, and the rest of the book. Something you sorely lack the ability to deal with.

quote:

---

I want you to recognise the fact that the Bible does not restrict the term "messiah" to one singular individual. There are messiahs and The Messiah.

---

Nonsense!!!! There is only One that was to come to save mankind, and make things right again, and that Lamb of God was looked forward to from the getgo. Calling a king of this world a messiah, is really a misapplication of the term. Anointed is anointed, and saving mankind is saving mankind, and paving the way back to God. All things are not equal.

quote:

---

The fact that Jesus is not an especially good candidate for The Messiah is a side issue, only mentioned in passing. Everyone who knows the Bible understands that the majority of messianic prophecies have yet to be fulfilled.

---

His birth place, virgin birth, and a lot of other details are given, right on up to the manner of death. To declare Him otherwise is nothing short of an admission of gross ignorance.Of course there is much still to be fulfilled, that does not take away from what so obviously already has been!

quote:

---

Thank you for having the honesty to admit that I was right on this point. It was Buzsaw who claimed that the stone was a single person.

---

No, he was right, in that it is the Person of God. A Person that also was a person. But only the person that was God could fill the bill. You are therefore severely, and totally wrong, in the extreme.

Since some insinuate that Daniel was written after the fact, here is some support that shows otherwise.Bible Query from Daniel Harvardhouse.com "Evidence No. 1: Documents written in 5th century BCE Egypt (~495 BCE TO ~402 BCE) reveal unique textual and linguistic styles from that era. These documents are called the Elephantine Papyri. By comparing the texts of the Elephantine Papyri to the texts of Daniel, scholars have concluded that the textual style of Daniel places the book within the era of the 5th century BCE. Even Naturalists accept that the style of writing would place the book of Daniel centuries earlier than the 2nd century BCE. However, Naturalists favor the 165 BCE date due to their bias.Common Sense Placement for DanielPerhaps the easiest way of understanding why Daniel was written about 530 BCE is by using the English language from another era. Have you ever read Chaucerian English (14th century - 700 years ago) or Miltonian English (17th century - 300 years ago)? Consider the following example from the 14th century written by Chaucer:But for to tellen yow of his array,
His hors were goode, but he was nat gay.
Of fustian he wered a gypon
Al bismotered with his habergeon,
For he was late ycome from his viage,
And wente for to doon his pilgrymage.Language changes over time. This is a true statement for English as it is for Aramaic and Hebrew. The style of writing and word usage date when the literature was written. Consider the following example from the 17th century written by Milton:When such musick sweet
Their hearts and ears did greet,
As never was by mortall finger strook,
Divinely-warbled voice
Answering the stringed noise,
As all their souls in blisfull rapture took:
The Air such pleasure loth to lose,
With thousand echo's still prolongs each heav'nly close.Many of the words take time to decipher for someone used to reading 21st century English. In the same way, the Aramaic found in the book of Daniel does not fit the era of 165 BCE.In support of this conclusion by analogy, Naturalists believe it is okay to place the initial six chapters of the book of Daniel as being written at an earlier time than 165 BCE. Since there is no prophecy in the initial six chapters, that is acceptable to Naturalists. However, the writing style for the entire book of Daniel requires that it be dated much earlier than 165 BCE. (Another indication of bias against the reality of prophecy).Finally, if you would like to get a better feel on why the book of Daniel does not fit in with the Dead Sea Scrolls era, take the time to watch a science fiction movie entitled, "Millennium." In this movie, a person comes to the 20th century from the 30th century to snatch away people who happen to be flying on an aircraft that is about to crash. The point of watching such a movie is to show how the person from the 30th century does not fit into the 20th century.Evidence No. 2: Another textual evidence that Daniel was written centuries before 165 BCE are the texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls (written from 150 BCE to 50 CE). Scholarly comparison of the unique textual and linguistic styles support that Daniel was written centuries before the Dead Sea Scrolls. Dating Daniel to 165 BCE is not credible.Naturalist's views for dating the book of Daniel are based on false assumptions about prophecy. Since we can verify Daniel's prophetic ideas came true, then Daniel's words appear to come from outside time-space. The date for writing the book of Daniel must be pushed back to match the text and linguistic style of the 5th century BCE.Evidence No. 3: Jesus called Daniel a prophet. " . spoken of through Daniel the prophet (Matthew 24:15 [NASB]).Daniel foretold of the destruction of Jerusalem, which happened to occur in 70 CE (about 235 years after the modern scholars date of 165 BCE, showing Daniel to be prophetic). There are many reasons why we would expect Jesus to foretell of the coming destruction of the temple and Jerusalem.* Reason No. 1: Jesus claimed to be the Messiah foretold by the prophets (including Daniel).* Reason No. 2: According to Daniel 9:26, the Messiah would be killed at Jerusalem some time before the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem were to occur. Jesus walked inside and taught people within the temple courts.* Reason No. 3: Jesus knew and understood Daniel as a prophet. Since Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, Jesus expected both the temple and Jerusalem to be destroyed after his time on earth. Daniel foretold these events. Jesus accepted Daniel as a prophet and carried through with the prophecy.* Reason No. 4: Jesus' followers knew of his prophecies about the coming destruction of Jerusalem and wrote Jesus' words into the gospel accounts.* Reason No. 5: In the book of Acts, the first Christian martyr named Stephen was accused of telling about Jerusalem's coming destruction, "For we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place" (Acts 6:14). The book of Acts shows that early Christians expected the temple and Jerusalem to be destroyed (this expectation was commonplace).Both the message of Daniel's 70-weeks prophecy and the words of Jesus foretold that Jerusalem would be destroyed. Based on Jesus' claim to being the Messiah, it would be expected of him to foretell the coming destruction of the temple and Jerusalem.Evidence No. 4: Josephus called Daniel, ". . . one of the greatest of the prophets [Antiquities Book 10, Chapter 11, paragraph 7 Search for "GREATEST OF THE PROPHETS on the linked site"] because Daniel's prophecies are "time-oriented" and reveal "WHEN" future events would occur. Why did Josephus hold such a high view of Daniel?Since Josephus lived in the years 37 to 100 CE, he is closer to reality than modern scholars, who are more than 2,000 years removed from the biblical culture. Since the study of Daniel shows that modern scholars are biased against the reality of prophecy at the 98.5% confidence level, Josephus' view of Daniel appears to be correct.Evidence No. 5: Dead Sea Scrolls community members referred to . . . Daniel the Prophet (book entitled "Florilegium" or commentary). Eight copies of Daniel were found at the Qumran community with one copy dated to 125 BCE using carbon dating techniques. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that Daniel was written in 165 BCE. Would people living in 165 BCE accept Daniel as a prophet if Daniel was written at that time?Evidence No. 6: Scholarly remarks about the Dead Sea Scrolls community accepting Daniel as a prophet. Some modern-day scholars find it incredible that if Daniel were indeed written in 165 BCE, the Dead Sea Scroll community would have accepted Daniel as a prophet. Again, the Naturalist views are questionable based on their doubts about Daniel being accepted as a prophet after only 40 years. Would Daniel be renowned as a prophet if it were known that he had lived a mere 40 years earlier? In that event, he would have been a contemporary person writing fiction. Refer to "The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible" translated and with commentary by Martin Abegg, Jr., Peter Flint & Eugene Ulrich, dated 1999, page 484.Evidence No. 7: Internal textual evidence that compares the book of Daniel to the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Dead Sea Scrolls are known to have been written in the era of 170 BCE to 50 CE. There is a definitive textual style and linguistics for this era. However, the textual style and linguistics for the book of Daniel are very different. Both conservative and liberal scholars acknowledge that the textual style and linguistics for the book of Daniel supports that it was written centuries before the Dead Sea Scrolls community came to exist. Naturalists override this evidence due to their bias against the reality of prophecy.Evidence No. 8: Jesus' life meets Daniel's prophecy about a Messiah that would be killed. Jesus fulfilled Daniel's prophecy by being crucified (supported by numerous sources). Based on Daniel, after the Messiah's death, Jerusalem and the temple were to be destroyed. It is apparent that Jesus knew and understood the book of Daniel. It would only be expected that Jesus would foretell of the temple and Jerusalem's destruction. Christians accept all these facts as the basis for believing Jesus fulfilled Daniel's "time-oriented" prophecy. It would be expected that Jesus would foretell of the temple and Jerusalem's destruction before those events were to occur."

quote:

---

Of course that only follows if you ASSUME that the prophecy must come true. Without that assumption there is no requirement to "extend" the Hellenisitc kingdoms past their historical dates.

---

Or, if one assumes that the Greco Macedonian empire had it's time, and is no more, as was written!! Sometimes the obvious helps. Why assume otherwise?

quote:

---

On the contrary, the context supports my case. What I do NOT do is assume that your beliefs take priority over the text of the Bible. That is what you complain about.

---

Which beliefs!!??? That Cyrus is ruled out a having a snowball's chance in hell of being the Messiah? That Greece simply will not be here in a ruling way, or Alexander, when Jesus takes over? You must be kidding.

quote:

---

Even assuming orthodox Christian, beleifs that would be The Messiah. However that does not rule out the existence of other messiahs because that require denying what the Bible says.

---

Maybe if you are talking about false messiahs, they are foretold to be here a plenty. But trying to call some dead historical peon a Messiah, in any real sense of the word is an exercise in absurdity squared.

quote:

---

Being a messiah is being anointed, not saving the world. That is what the Hebrew word, whether translated as "anointed" or transliterated as "messiah" means.

​

As I say, if you wish to read anything more than being a messiah (that is being God's anointed) into Isaiah 45:1, that is your problem. It is not a part of my argument.

---

Anointed for what, that is the qiestion?! Only One is THE Anointed. Only One Is God with us. Only One was to defeat death, and not see corruption. Only One could fulfill the prophesies of that One. Cyrus is not a contender, not even in the race. Work on that.

quote:

---

On the contrary, we don't know where Jesus was born, there is no prophecy of a virgin birth and most of the other details are taken from texts that are not even prophecies, let alone messianic.

---

Isa 7:14 - Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."Definition1. virgin, young woman
1. of marriageable age
2. maid or newly married ++++ There is no instance where it can be proved that this word designates a young woman who is not a virgin. "
Interlinear Search for '' - NAS with the BHS and NA26 - StudyLight.org" even Rashi said the word ALMAH in Song of Solomon 1:3 and 6:8 means virgin!"
Is Isaiah 7:14 about Hezekiah or Jesus?

quote:

---

I should have known that it wouldn't last. The stone is not stated to be God or any person. The Bible does not say that it is anything other than the Kingdom of God. Why would a stone, cut out of a mountain without hands describe God, rather than a kingdom formed by God's divine action ?

---

The stone is cut out without hands, so it has nothing to do with being made by man.By the way, Jesus is the rock, and stone and that is almost His nickname. Ever heard 'Rock of Ages'!!!??

quote:

---

Here’s the logic for you. There was a time when there was no Jewish literature, and then there was Jewish literature. Of all the Jewish literature we have there is no mention of the Book of Daniel until the mid-2nd century BCE.

---

Josepheus referred to it, in the link I gave, and it seemed to be in a way that looks at Daniel as more than some Johnny come lately. The best Jewish record we have is the old testament, anyhow. Daniel is in there. Your suspicions seems unfounded.

quote:

---

We go with the evidence we have, not the evidence we don’t have. Now, in the future there may well be evidence of Daniel’s book being mentioned before the mid-2nd century BCE but at the moment there are none.

---

That swings both ways, meaning none against either. Why doubt the sacred record of the ancient Jews , who were the people of God, for no reason at all??? makes no sense.Records were COPIED, very carefully and handed down! Your charge amounts to a baseless, and anti semitic one!

quote:

---

What is the oldest extant text of the Book of Daniel?

---

That matters no more than when you bought your last hard drive for a computer, and still had some sort of older stuff you passed on to it, from another one! The issue is the record, not the latest copy of that recpord we happen to know about. A record, by the way, ridiculously carefully passed down!! You will need to give me a reason to doubt it.

Well, thanks for the pep talk. I don't believe you, however. I find that the religious, cultish accepted so called definition of what is science, here eliminates me as something other than a hit and runner.Here is my evidence, I used to post as Simple. That doesn't work anymore. Posting under this name is my reply to fangs out moderation. You can take that or leave it. I doubt I will have the chance to reply anyhow, so, all the best.

quote:

---

The one single good point introduced by the fundamentalist Christian side is that if you assume the most convenient start date for them the end of the 69 weeks where a messiah is supposed to be cut off comes out to within a few years of the time when Jesus was crucified.

---

Glad you admit that, in other words, the bullseye is hit close, no matter how you look at it.

quote:

---

However, this point rests on the uncertain start date, and can be refuted by the simple observation that the events of the final 7 years do not occur as predicted. Even the Roman capture of Jerusalem after the Jewish revolt is more than 30 years later, and other events still have to occur.

---

In other words you have nothing against it, and no other records match the amazing level of the bible. The final seven years have not happened, so how you would expect them to have turned out any way at all, is admitting you just do not understand the context.

quote:

---

The only response to this problem is to invent an arbitrary "gap" between the 69th and 70th week - a gap at least FOUR TIMES large than the period allotted. The text provides no basis for doing so. They point to the time being broken up into units but they never even consider a gap between the first two units. The only point is to try and force the text into their beliefs.

---

The division of time till Messiah came and the last week had to exist, unless Messiah was not planning to get cut off, but take over right away. The bible is clear that was never the plan.

quote:

---

With regard to the 70 weeks, the main weakness is the lack of a good choice of start date. Even the earliest is too late. However, since this can be written off as an error on the part of the author, it is not fatal. With regard to the events of the 70th Week the case is very strong, finding a good fit with the events described in 1 and 2 Maccabees. For instance, 1 Maccabees 1 describes how Antiochus storms the city, raiding and looting the Temple. Two years later, one of his commanders comes to the city, talking of peace and winning the trust of the people - only to turn around, betray that trust and attack by surprise. Antiochus bans the Jewish sacrifices and introduces pagan worship in the Temple - the "abomination that causes desolation". All this fits well with the events scheduled for the 70th Week.

---

No idea what you are talking about, there are a few start dates that are generally used, but the one that makes most sense is the one that hits bang on, to the only Messiah that came and was cut off, and pierced, and born in Bethlehem, and who quoted Daniel a few times, as well as referenced the soon destruction of the temple!

quote:

---

The greater context also supports the conventional view. The prophecy of Daniel 8 tells us that the End Times will occur while the Hellenistic kingdoms following Alexander still survive. Daniel 11 is largely about the wars between the Seleucids and the Ptolemys, until a Seleucid ruler shall subdue Egypt and come to attack Jerusalem. Daniel 12 continues this prophecy, telling us of the events to follow which include a general resurrection. It is not hard to see that Daniel 11-12 also places the end times in the Hellenistic period.

---

Nothing places the end anywhere near the time of Alexander, the big horn of the goat. You just prefer to cling to a weak and cherry picking interpretation of a few things, that are ridiculous in the big picture.

quote:

---

The greater context places the events at the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
The events of that period have a good fit for the events scheduled for the 70th week.

---

Some events of some chapters do refer to that time, that does not take away from what else they have to refer to, whether you choose to ignore the rest of the bible or not.Edited by starman, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Wrong. I do not extend the Greco-Macedonioan Empire forward. Instead I identify Daniel's End Times as being at a past time when that Empire historically existed - and Daniel 8 clearly states that that Empire is still extant in Daniel's End Times.

---

Besides ignoring the place of the Greco Macedonian empire, and it's demise, and the others kingdom, and ten parts that come from it in the end days, if you want to keep all Dan 8 as fulfilled, please show me the stars that were cast down?? Are they hiding somewhere? Did no one see them?? What were they real little stars??I seem to forget where Alexander stomped on stars!?Dan 8: 10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them. 11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.Now I have heard a case for all this being in the days of Greece, and maybe that is right. I have heard others claim it jumped into the final time, when, of course we know stars will fall, according to other parts of the bible.Now, in chapter 8, it seems to fine tune this for us, as to who we are talking about here, and WHEN!" 22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. 23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. 24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. 25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand"So, out of the four parts of what Greece got divided into, is where the fierce king shall come from.. When?? Not before Greece was divided, before it got taken over by the next kingdom, but AFTER, showing that it was not from the ruling time of Greece, as you seem to think!Then, we need to look at the very end time of their existence, the latter time as Dan 8 clearly says!!22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. 23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. 24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. 25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand"Broken without hand?? That sounds a lot like the kingdom of Jesus that was cut out without hands, in other words, without MAN's hands.Again, context. You can't just have a fanatic's field day taking things out of context. Sorry.If the latter time of the parts of Greece was long ago, why are they still here???

quote:

---

Daniel does not have any kingdom divided into "ten parts".

​

The stars falling to earth in Daniel 8 are part of the vision and therefore should not be assumed to be literal.

---

The ten divisions, or kings are ten parts, and they will give their power to the beast. Most people have ten toes, and the image that represented the kingdoms on earth till the Messiah takes over were ten toes. Count em.Not like each toe runs around by itself or anything, no, they are all on the feet, and control will be from the Antichrist.As for stars, I am afraid that you are not in a position to dictate what one should assume stars mean. While it is true that it might have meant angels, or some such, in the past, it is also possible, I would think, that an ultimate application may apply to the latter days.So, it would be again, in context, and with a look at the rest of the book, not just what you declare, for some unknown reason.

quote:

---

If you knew your history you would know that after Alexander's death his Empire was divided among his generals. That is the division referred to. It is those Kingdoms that Daniel 8 refers to, not some other later Kingdom.

---

Not sure what else you think I was talking about? But say, if Egypt was an area that was one of them, you will notice it still exists today in some form. So the areas that the kingdom were divided into, - out of one of them, will rise this important leader of the last days of the rule of man on earth.In the latter time of these places!!! That cannot be said of Egypt at the month or year that it was divided up!!! Obviously, because it is still here.

quote:

---

We all know that the End Times didn't come. The question is when Daniel believed that they would come. And Daniel 8 clearly answers that question - and shows that Daniel was wrong. That is simple, honest, fact.

---

Why would it come, till it comes?? What, you would like prophesy if the final leader lived in Greece thousands of years ago, or in Europe in the dark ages, or in Britain in the Victorian era?No, the only time it can come, is when the time actually is at it's end. No need to worry about that, if we are still here, be sure it ain't come yet!But also note that certain things are now in place, that were not in centuries past. How could Russia invade Israel, if there was no Israel there to invade, for example. (Not that God asked it to be there, when He gets them together, we will know it) Europe is in a stronger position to be getting together, or parts of it, as well.And of course there are many other things that indicate that the wrap up phase could kick easily, when the time is right.Now, of course, within the ancient bits that were fulfilled, we also have latter times of certain kingdoms, so we need to look at the context of any particular verse.

quote:

---

The Hellenistic Kingdoms are long gone. The last of them, Ptolemaic Egypt, fell to Rome in 30BC. They are not "still here" any more than the Babylonian or Persian Empires are "still here".

---

The kingdoms are of course by and large still here. Greece is still here even! Not as some world leader, nor should they be. They were to be defeated as that, and another one take over, quite clearly.

But Greece is still here. It doesn't matter what they call it.

quote:

---

Daniel never refers to a Kingdom divided into ten parts or talks of "The Messiah" taking over.

​

Try and stick to what the text actually says.

---

Of course he does, right in Dan 2. The fourth kingdom, the legs of iron, when it is destroyed by the rock of ages, is in the form of ten toes. No one else could destroy the kingdoms of the world, and rule forever and ever. Elementary. It is also cross referenced by the rest of the bible, that God will rule here one day.

quote:

---

I'm not dictating what they MEAN I'm just pointing out that it would be very silly to take it literally.

---

Since stars also refer to heavenly beings, and other things, we don't need to agree and fine tune that. This alone likely does not place the event strictly in either the past, or the future. It could refer to both.

quote:

---

The context would include the fact that the relevant verse is part of the description of a symbolic vision.

---

A series of visions, in a book, surrounded by even more visions, all of which need to be considered. In the case of the latter days of the four divisions of Greece, they are still here. The context is that it gives the area, or possible areas we can know that the last leader will come from. Not that Greece, or the areas that the generals divided up will be here as some world kingdom. That is an impossibility, since it clearly tells that another kingdom will follow. Knowing this irrefutable fact, then, the seventy weeks cannot be misunderstood, as you try to do.

quote:

---

Unfortunately for you, Daniel explicitly refers to the latter days of the Greek Kingdoms, not some other states that might eventually arise in the remote future. Your reading is simply not viable.

---

Explicitly?
So, when was the explicit end of Egypt? Or Syria?But, even if one could somehow show that this were the case, and that kingdoms had to refer only to the phase where they were freshly divided, we still have the bridging of the gap by the local fulfillment.We can look at details, if you like."II. THE EGYPTIAN-SYRIAN CONFLICTA. THE CONFLICT WILL BEGIN...
1. The "king of the South" will gain in strength - Dan 11:5a
a. This king is Ptolemy I
b. Who ruled Egypt (306-284 B.C.)
2. As well as "one of his princes", who will gain power over the
other - Dan 11:5b
a. This is thought to refer to one of Alexander's princes
(generals)
b. In which case it is Seleucus I, who ruled Syria (312-280
B.C.)
-- Caught in the middle between Syria and Egypt, Israel will bear
the brunt of much of the conflict between these two empiresB. THERE WILL BE A FAILED ALLIANCE...
1. The "daughter of the South" will go to the "king of the North"
- Dan 11:6a
a. The event occurred in the reigns of Ptolemy Philadelphus
(284-246 B.C.) and Antiochus Theus (261-246 B.C.)
b. Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus was given to
Antiochus, upon the condition that Antiochus divorce his
wife Laodice
c. Hoping to make peace between Egypt and Syria
2. But the "daughter of the South" will not retain her authority
- Dan 11:6b
a. Two years after the marriage, Berenice's father (Ptolemy
Philadelphus) died
b. Antiochus put her away and restored his first wife Laodice
c. Laodice killed Antiochus, and Berenice fled, but was later
put to death along with her children and attendantsC. THE SOUTH WILL RISE IN ANGER...
1. A "branch of her roots" will come with an army - Dan 11:7
a. This was Berenice's brother, Ptolemy Euregetes (246-221
B.C.)
b. Who failing to save his sister, attacked Syria to avenge
her death
2. The avenger (Ptolemy Euregetes) will succeed - Dan 11:8
a. Euregetes took their gods, princes, and precious articles
to Egypt
b. Euregetes ruled longer than the next Seleucid king,
Seleucid Callinicus (246-226 B.C.)D. THE CONFLICT WILL ACCELERATE...
1. The "king of the North" (Seleucid Callinicus) will try to
invade the kingdom of the South - Dan 11:9-10
a. He does not succeed, though his sons (Seleucid Ceraunus and
Antiochus the Great) shall stir up strife
b. One son in particular, Antiochus the Great (225-187 B.C.),
does succeed in overwhelming Egypt (actually, regain Syrian
land taken by Egypt)
2. The "king of the South" will respond in rage - Dan 11:11-13
a. This king of Egypt is Ptolemy Philopator (221-204 B.C.)
b. Angry that Antiochus the Great regained control of Syrian
territory, he gathered a great army and defeated Antiochus
at Raphia
c. His victory was short-lived, for Antiochus returned with a
better-equipped army in 203 B.C.
3. Others will contribute to the war against the South - Dan
11:14
a. This included Philip, king of Macedon, who aligned with
Antiochus
b. Also some violent Jews, prompted by what they perceived as
the fulfillment of the vision, but they shall fall
4. The "king of the North" shall prevail against the South, but
then fall - Dan 11:15-19
a. Again, this is Antiochus the Great
1) The forces of the South were not able to resist him
2) He stood in the "Glorious Land" (Israel) with
destruction in his power
b. He tried to strengthen his kingdom by giving his daughter
in marriage
1) His daughter Cleopatra, given to Ptolemy Epiphanes (204-
180 B.C.)
2) But she came to favor the purposes of her husband rather
than her father
c. Antiochus then turned his attention to the coastlands
(Mediterranean)
1) Making war with the Romans
2) But was defeated by Scipio Asiaticus, a Roman military
leader
d. Defeated by the Romans, Antiochus the Great returned home
and died soon after"
http://www.ccel.org/contrib/exec_outlines/dan/dan_11.htmSomewhere, however, when talking about this, it jumps far into the end of man's rule on earth, and directly starts talking about the ultimate fulfillment. Both are true, and valid. So we can accept your points, and it changes nothing at all. No need to quibble.The fine tuning comes where we pinpoint where the time jump takes place. This is a pattern found elsewhere in the bible as well.But any way you shake it, the last week of Daniel could not have been in the time of Greece! Trying to stick it there is absurd, and ignorant of context.You seem to be missing the all important bridge from local fulfillment to ultimate fulfillment. That means you miss everything. The ultimate fulfillment is utterly impossible in the past only.

quote:

---

How can the ruler of a Hellenistic Kingdom attack Israel when the Hellenistic Kingdoms are gone. The necessary conditions are NOT in place, and haven't been for over 2000 years.

​

That isn't relevant. The question is when did Daniel say that the End Times would come.
Chapter 8 tells us that it should be in "the latter days" of the Hellenistic Kingdoms. Other prophecies narrow the time down to the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabean revolt.

---

No, all that might be narrowed down is a local fulfillment. See, in my opinion, some verses have a double bang for the buck. They refer to both. For example, these verses possibly are not limited to the old wicked king." 23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. 24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. 25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand. "
Seems to make more sense that this applies to both, especially since it ENDS up exclusively about the end of days wicked guy!!!You trying to lock everything in to the past, just is not an option.9: 25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. 26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;And, we still have the already fulfilled bits, of the Messiah coming after the certain years!! Then, we had Titus come in and do you know what. No other arrangement of the years works at all. Nothing else is close, or makes any sense, or is at all solid, and fits with the rest of history, and the bible.Edited by starman, : No reason given.

quote:

---

In other words he doesn't. All you have is a reference to the toes which you assume refers to ten separate kingdoms. But it's just an assumption. And you don't even have anything you can call a reference to the Messiah.

​

So try really hard to stick to what the text actually says, will you ?

---

False!Da 7:24 - And 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.Re 17:12 - And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.The ten kings of the end are well known. Your attempts to ignore and deny the rest of the bible are weak, and futile.

quote:

---

You're the one who brought it up, treating it as if it were literal.

---

True, I was trying to find some bit that could only be fulfilled in the very end. That wasn't it, that I am aware of.

quote:

---

Yes, but you have to actually do it. Not say you've done it, while ignoring the bits you don't like.

---

In pointing out that it is more than one vision, I ignore nothing. Any unclear bit on one vision is easily cleared up. with context, and balance. Cherry picking, and clinging to pet theories is all you have been doing.

quote:

---

No. That is not context. That is something you made up. The actual context shows Daniel consistently dealing with political entities, not geography. The actual text deals with political entities not geography. And the political entities in question are all gone.

---

The end time leader is a political entity. Focus.

quote:

---

So what you are saying is that if you twist Daniel 8 by inventing a fake "context", use your preferred interpretation you'll come up with the "correct" interpretation of the 70 weeks - by which you mean the interpretation that you like despite the fact that you have to distort that too, to try to make it fit.

---

Some have admitted here that the weeks are years. No start from any decree gets the Messiah that far off, does it?? That is your problem. And the destruction of the temple after the decree can't be fit into any other take. How many times can a temple be utterly destroyed, from point a to point b!!??

quote:

---

I didn't say that Daniel referred to either of those explicitly. Their end is implicit in that the Kingdom of God will replace them.

---

Of course His kingdom will replace all others. Nothing in the bible says that was in the days of Greece, of course! Ridiculous.

quote:

---

Or we can take Daniel 8 at its word. Use a different interpretation of the statue and the four beasts - one that actually fits the real context. And get an interpretations of the 70 weeks that actually works.

---

NO, you can't do anything of the sort, actually! The image represented kingdoms, in an order, right up till God takes over the earth.Dan 2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. 38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold. 39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. 40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. 41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. 42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken... 44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.The visions all agree, and the kingdoms are identifiable. No way round it.

quote:

---

By which you mean that you have to invent a jump, which isn't there in the text.

---

If it talks in a certain place about the very end, yes, it has spanned time, from the last bit mentioned, obviously. And there is no way on earth to get around the clear fact, that at some point, in chapters that covered history, it does just that, start talking about the very end.For example, again in Daniel, we have chap 7 doing this. There is no way possible to attribute these things to any king of the past. Period. That is not an option.17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth. 18 But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever. 19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet; 20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows. 21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; 22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. 23 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. 24 And 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. 25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. 26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. 27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions F56 shall serve and obey himIt SPELLS out that it is talking about kingdoms, and that the end result is God, and His people ruling forever. That you cannot fit into history. Neither can you say that any chapter cannot launch from the past to the future, in covering certain things. Your attempt to limit chapters to the past is a crass attempt to try to make, by (rest of the bible) ignorant cherry picking, God look dumb. Not sure why you would bother, it can't work, in the light of day. [quote] If a chapter clearly ends up talking about something in the future that cannot have been fulfilled by any stretch of the imagination in the past, you cannot deny it is talking about the future!!! Period. Since this happens quite a bit, you have no point.

quote:

---

The real context includes Daniel 8 which clearly places the End TImes in the Greek Empire.
Your "context" is simply your own invention, contrary to the actual text.

---

How can you get that God takes over in ancient Greece from this???Dan 8:21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. 22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. 23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. 24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. 25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand. 26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days.

quote:

---

The evidence shows that the events of the 70th week match real historical events in that period.

---

Not all of them, only the stuff that is supposed to take place. Can you tell us how you think these things were all fulfilled somewhere in history!!!!???Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.Some everlasting righteousness we have now!!!! Get serious.

No! get with the times, man. We are in the times when miry clay is in with the iron. No king required there at all, in fact, the weakness of the clay should clue one in. I do not expect any of the ten kingdoms, or toes of the end to have a king. Maybe a president, or prime minister, or some such thing. Such is the days of the clays.

quote:

---

Which are NOT said to be rulers of separate kingdoms. Indeed the best historical fit has them as the successive rulers of a single kingdom. This issue has been dealt with.

---

Historical evidence for kingdoms that exist just before God takes over can't exist. Focus, man. That is ridiculous.

quote:

---

In addition it is invalid to use Revelation to override what the Book of Daniel actually says. The Book of Daniel clearly places its events in time. The Revelation - written at least 250 years AFTER that time - places its events still further ahead.

---

Don't think of using the rest of the bible as trying to override your pet warped theories. Think of it as context, balance, and perspective, and a clarifying force.You have no idea of the time of many of the events in Daniel obviously, and if a stone smote all the kingdoms already, and God took over, where is He? I must have missed that along with everyone else on the planet. (Except you and your sister, of course)

quote:

---

In other words you ignored the context while looking for a bad argument.

---

Well, actually, I decided that the spiritual context was too much for an atheist dominated board, and not really needed. No need to get fancy, and try to explain how the past blends with the future in bible prophesy mid stream!!

quote:

---

I have been promoting an integrated understanding using everything we can find. Chapter 8 is key, but chapters 9 and 11 provide strong support. In contrast you have to invnet massive jumps in time to cling to YOUR pet theories. I don't need anything like that.

---

Sit down, this may be a shock to you. When we start dealing in God taking over the planet, and events of the extreme end, we must jump somewhere, cause it never happened yet. That is what prophesy happens to be all about!! This is news? If it never jumped anywhere in the future it would not BE prophesy!!! Got you there.

quote:

---

The end time leader is RULER of a political entity. And presumably "focus" means that we should ignore the fact that your "context" is a fabrication that ignores the real context.

---

In english, now??? Who ignores what? And what about this leader of the time of the extreme end? Focus.

quote:

---

Everyone agrees that the "weeks" are periods of seven years and nobody has disputed that in the course of this thread. Characterising that as an "admission" is pure spin. And there are certainly possible start dates that place the end date quite far from your candidate for Daniel's second messiah.

---

Not that include a Messiah being killed in the ways the bible prophesied, and born where prophesied, and etc. Not that include Jerusalem, and the temple being utterly destroyed.That really neuters any possible tweaking ability you have for playing with, and trying to confuse the dates!! It hits the target no matter how you try to shake the board.

quote:

---

The destruction is not a problem for me, because clearly the Temple is still working afterwards. Therefore it refers to damage that can be put right, at least to the extent of allowing Temple business to continue, within a short period. (That's using the context again.) We do have a successful raid of the Temple, with the treasures looted at exactly the right time. Thus the problem is answered - as you already knew.

---

Say what??? The temple that had not one stone left upon another was still working?? Maybe that is not as clear as you think! Tell us how that works?

quote:

---

Daniel 8 and Daniel 11-12 DO say exactly that. So you are calling the Bible ridiculous.

---

I call those interpretation attempts, so called, that try to stuff in destroyed temples, cut off Messiahs, and God ruling the earth, and etc. -as having happened in the time of Greece inept insults to what the bible actually is saying six ways from Sunday.

quote:

---

Of course we can. All we have to do is to choose a different breakdown which actually fits in with the clear statements of Daniel 8.

---

Babylon was the head, and another kingdom followed, on down the line. You can't play with the order, any more than you can have Greece take over the US!!

quote:

---

Well that is odd since it is a description of Antichus IV Epiphanes !

---

I see, so how was this bit fulfilled?!!!!!Dan 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. 10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened. 11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.When were those books opened, and all judged, and the end time leader (beast) slain, etc!?? Get serious.

quote:

---

Everything apart from the end happened. That would be a pretty big coincidence. Not a little coincidence like being able to find a start date that gives you a near miss on only one event. And with all the other evidence against it referring to our future., clearly it is the best possibility available.

---

It is no coincidence that there were local fulfillments. Prophesy works that way. You can't end it till the fat lady sing, though, and all the prophesy is a done deal. That would leave you dangling back in ancient Greece or some silly has been place, thinking that it was all wrong.

quote:

---

I can't and don't deny that the author was talking abut HIS future. However, I clearly should not assume that the author must have been talking about our future just because his prediction was wrong !

---

The visions of Daniel were not about his future! He was to go his way, and stand in his lot, till the end, because it was a long long way off still. Many days. The visions had to do with his people, the Jews. The kingdoms that would follow, right on up to the end, when we have God taking over, etc. Again, you miss the boat entirely.

quote:

---

You only have 490 years.

​

However you read it the prophecy failed.

---

To do what?!! To FINISH the vision, bring in everlasting righteousness, and etc etc. That is why the important last week of Daniel that has not possibly been fulfilled yet is so important. The final scene. The last act. Everything else is history, and part of that, the 62 week stuff, took us right to Jesus being cut off, the temple destroyed, etc. Right on cue.

quote:

---

I see three problems with the arguments in the OP.

​

First, it is incumbent upon anyone making a claim of prophesy fulfilled - biblical or otherwise - to produce iron clad evidence that the prophesy was indeed made before the actual events predicted.

---

Daniel was a captive, and part of the captivity. The dates for that are known. Unless you claim that the Jews fabricated the whole book, in a sinister fashion!? Daniel was also contemporary with others.I offer the direct words of the Almighty in Person, as evidence. This was talking to a contemporary of Daniel's, Ezekiel.
"Eze 14:18 Though these three men were in it, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, they shall deliver neither sons nor daughters, but they only shall be delivered themselves. 19 Or if I send a pestilence into that land, and pour out my fury upon it in blood, to cut off from it man and beast: 20 Though Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own souls by their righteousness."And again, God Himself, in Ezekiel." 3 Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee"Daniel was wise, and the chief of wise men even in Babylon, and a revealer of secrets! That means you need to try to dismiss this book as well, and it's datings!!!Remember, if you claim a forgery, it is an elaborate one.2".1.2 The Book's Claim That the Author Lived in the Sixth Century BC. Several times Daniel refers to himself as the witness of the events he describes (7:2; 8:1, 15, 27; 9:22; 10:2, 7; 12:5) and claims that he was present in the royal court in Babylon from shortly after his exile from Judea in 605 to around 535 BC (Dan. 1:21; 10:1). The text contains many historical references that would have been unknown to a Second Century writer. These include the assertions that: a) Neo-Babylon was the creation of Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 4:30); b) Belshazzar was the second ruler of the Empire and governed Babylon in his father Nabonidus' place (implied by Belshazzar only being able to offer Daniel third position in the kingdom - 5:7, 16, 29) (Pffeifer, 1948: 757-759), and c) that Shushan was to be found in the province of Elam (8:2). In the Persian and Roman periods Shushan gave its name to the province in which it was located (Archer, 1985b: 408-409). In addition to the Daniel's own statements concerning himself we also have the testimony of Jesus in Matthew's gospel (Matt. 24:15). This establishes that he believed Daniel to be the book's author.""Deportations of Jews from Judah and Israel took place during several eras in ancient history. The Babylonian exile lasted from 586-538 BC. “Exile” means that they were forced to live outside of the Promised Land."Persian words found in Daniel are traceable to the Old Persian Period which ended about 300 BC (Kitchen, 1970: 42-44).BiblicalStudies.org.uk: The Book of Daniel by Robert I BradshawOf course you would have to add in the new testament as in on the scam, it alluded to Daniel's writings.Table 10: Allusions to Daniel in the New TestamentNT ReferenceAllusion to DanielMatt. 24:2112:1Matt. 24:307:13Matt. 24:317:22 Thess. 2:3-47:25; 11:36Rev. 1:147:9Rev. 1:1510:6Rev. 1:178:17-182:101:124:2, 97:9 (cf. 4:34; 12:7)5:112:45:68:35:93:4; 5:195:117:109:205:2310:5-612:711:37:2512:37:712:48:1013:1-27:3-613:57:8, cf. v.3613:118:320:47:920:127:10-- And, of course Jesus Himself, that directly mentioned Daniel, and the abomination of desolation!!Now, Ezekiel is dated to the time when the prophesies of Daniel come from!"The Book of Ezekiel can be dated based on the links it records between the rule of King Jehoiachin (King of Jerusalem) and the other events that the book describes.According to this system, Ezekiel was originally written in the 22 year period between 593 to 571 BC. The following table lists events in Ezekiel with their dates."
Book of Ezekiel - Wikipedia

quote:

---

Second, we have all read about Nostradamas..

---

Too vague.

quote:

---

Third - I have always had a problem with the story of Jesus and the donkey. How useful is a prophesy if someone does something to make sure it "fulfills the prophesy?"

---

There are so many things that a man could not control, suspecting Him in this donkey caper is moot.