Prophecy in the Bible - Theology of Double Fulfillment

no problem, im not the best at explaining things but im always willing to give it another go. fair point, im happy to examine it closer. You've takent the popular view and the Jewish tradition on this verse and it seems reasonable becaues Antiochus IV did attempting to stamp out true worship in jerusalem, he built an altar over the great altar in the temple. The Apocryphal book of 1 Maccabees (1:54) applies this prophecy to those events.But this was only the Jewish interpretation of matters, not an inspired revelation. Jesus Christ gave the inspired revelation when he showed that the prophecy was yet future.Antiochus IV rule goes back to 164bce. But im not trying to say that he was not the king of the North at that time. He certainly was back then. What i'm saying is that the timing of Vs 20 is actually the first century.Dan11:21 says that the "leader of the Covenant" would be broken by the one who is despised. Now this 'Leader of the Covenant' is none other then Jesus christ. This means the king who was then standing must have been ruling in the 1st century and not over 160 years earlier.No matter how you look at it, if Antiochus was the one who stood up in Vs 20, then there is still a gap of 160 odd years between vs 20 and vs 21. The 'leader of the Covenant' is Jesus. im happy to examine that closer too

quote:

---

Daniel 11:31"And there will be arms that will stand up, proceeding from him; and they will actually profane the sanctuary, the fortress, and remove the constant [feature]. And they will certainly put in place the disgusting thing that is causing desolation."

---

Its important to understand what the 'disgusting thing' is and how it causes desolation and also what the 'constant feature' is and how it is 'removed'the Disgusting thing is related to idols as Deut 29:17 shows 'And YOU used to see their disgusting things and their dungy idols'The constant feature were the sacrifices. This part of Isreals worship was established by Moses and was continued day and night for centuries. Exodus 29:38And this is what you will offer upon the altar: young rams each a year old, two a day constantly. ...42It is a constant burnt offering throughout YOUR generations..."When the No webpage found at provided URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%2870%29Roman armies that came in 70CE with their ensigns, they were virtually idols and were disgusting to the Jews. The roman army stood in a holy place when they entered the temple with these idols.That destruction was far worse then anything Antiochus IV had done previously. The destruction of the temple in 70CE was final and even to this day what stands in the temple at Jerusalem??? A mosque! The 'constant feature' has been gone since the temples destruction.So Jesus words were the true application of the prophecy, not the maccabees. Jesus knew that a greater destruction was ahead which is why he told his listeners to 'flee to the mountains' when they saw jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies. This was actually the first visit by Rome in 66CE. They didnt actually enter jerusalem, they camped outside for a while, then left. 3 years later Titus came back to deliver the final blow.Edited by Peg, : No reason given.Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

I thought i did answer your question directly. You wanted to know what reasons there were for accepting 'another' interpretation other then the application to the time of the maccabees. I explained that it was because Jesus used Daniels prophecy about the disgusting thing as something yet to come. This means that according to Jesus, the fulfillment of Vs20 could not have been 163 years earlier. Yes i guess i am. Im going by Jesus words. As a christian, his words are more important then that of the Maccabeean rebels. Yes they did apply the prophecy to Antiochus IV but that does not mean they were correct in their application.If you believe that Jesus was the Messiah, then you'd have to accept that his words are truth as he said they were. You'd also need to explain why Antiochus IV did not desolate the temple in the same complete sense that the Romans did.I would think that this is evidence that the prophecy was more fulfilled by the Romans seeing they put Jewish worship completely out of action...that is complete annialation. The priesthood was never reinstitued in Isreal and the 'constant feature' of sacrifices was gone and still is gone. Antiochus had a 3 year battle that ended and the temple suffered no permanent damage. Life went on and the temple and its priesthood survived. Vs 20 has been and gone and it wont happen again, just as Vs 22 has been and gone with Jesus the messiah being killed that wont happen again so obviously not all these verses can have a double fulfillment. There are prophecies that do have a double fulfillment though but i dont believe these verses are one of them.We have already entered the 'end times' and we are living them right now. The modern day kings of the north and south are active right now. History shows that Britain took on imperial power in the 17th century. During the following century, British influence in Egypt increased and after 1882, Egypt was actually a British dependency. When World WarI broke out in 1914, Egypt belonged to Turkey and was ruled by a khedive, or viceroy. After Turkey sided with Germany in that war, Britain deposed the khedive and declared Egypt a British protectorate. Gradually Britain and the United States became the Anglo-American World Power and together, they came into the position of the king of the south.Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

the desstruction in 70ce brought the whole jewish system to its knees and put an end to their entire system of worship. After the destruction in 70ce the priestly sacrifices ended, the temple was burned to the ground and today only one part of the 'wailing wall' exists.how can you honestly say that antiochus 3 year battle was worse then what the romans did?over 1 million jews were killed in 70CE...how many did Antiochus kill?

if were were living in the maccabean time and witnessed that, then i'd probably agree and also would have applied daniels prophecy to Antiochushowever if i was a jew living in 70ce and witnessed the killing of over 1million of my fellow citizens and the temple of jerusalem completely destroyed by roman armies carrying ensigns, i'd probably think that the fulfillement was happening right then.I agree its not hard to see why the maccabeeans applied to prophecy to Antiochus, however, as I said, in 29CE Jesus applied Daniels prophecy to a future time and therefore I cant justify applying the prophecy to an earlier time.

we've been discussing Daniel 11, not chptr 8 so it sesms we've been taling about different passagesDaniel 8 is the Hellenistic period, it explains itself

quote:

---

Understand, O son of man, that the vision is for the time of [the] end. 18And while he was speaking with me, I had become fast asleep on my face on the earth. So he touched me and made me stand up where I had been standing. 19And he went on to say: Here I am causing you to know what will occur in the final part of the denunciation, because it is for the appointed time of [the] end. 20The ram that you saw possessing the two horns [stands for] the kings of Me′di‧a and Persia. 21And the hairy he-goat [stands for] the king of Greece

---

so i am not contending thisIts chpter 11 i've been talking about. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

no, Daniel 8 is a stand alone prophecy involving certain events from the time of the medio Persian empire and the take over by AlexanderDaniel 11 is a detailed account of the struggles between the kings of the north and the south thru time until the last days.they are different.

which time of the end?that term 'time of the end' refers to a time period marking the conclusion of a system of things and culminating in its destruction. That could be any time and any event. Alexander the great experienced a 'time of the end'as did the people of Noahs day and likewise did the jewish system in 70ce....added to that the Messiah experienced a 'time of the end' when he was also put to deathDaniel uses that same expression when he is explaining the dream of Nebuchadnezzar in Dan 2:28 "However, there exists a God in the heavens who is a Revealer of secrets, and he has made known to King Neb‧u‧chad‧nez′zar what is to occur in the final part of the days. Your dream and the visions of your head upon your bedthis it is:"its an expression signifying the end of something that does not only apply to one specific event is what i'm saying.Another example where a similar expression is used is when Jacob explains to his 12 sons what will befall them.

quote:

---

Genesis 49:1 Later on Jacob called his sons and said: Gather yourselves together that I may tell YOU what will happen to YOU in the final part of the days. 2Assemble yourselves and listen, YOU sons of Jacob, yes, listen to Israel YOUR father.

---

I should just ask you how you understand 'end of time' to mean.

thats fine, however the whole book of Daniel is not pointing to just one event...this is why i asked earlier specifically which part of Daniel are you asking aboutthere are different events and different times being prophecied. They may appear to be 1 prophecy, but it is not one prophecy...its a culmination of many.

yes that could be a little difficult considering he didnt undertsand what he was writing.

quote:

---

Daniel 12:8Now as for me, I heard, but I could not understand; so that I said: O my lord, what will be the final part of these things?
9And he went on to say: Go, Daniel, because the words are made secret and sealed up until the time of [the] end

---

yes there are later bible writers who spoke about the 'end times' or 'last days'2Tim 3:1 But know this, that in the last days critical times hard to deal with will be hereJerimiah 23:20 "...In the final part of the days YOU people will give YOUR consideration to it with understandingJude 17As for YOU, beloved ones, call to mind the sayings that have been previously spoken by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, 18how they used to say to YOU: In the last time there will be ridiculers, proceeding according to their own desires for ungodly things.Matt 24:3 3While he was sitting upon the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached him privately, saying: Tell us, When will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things? the word 'conclusion' here is synteleias meaning joint end/combination end/ending together.So as these 'last days' or 'end of the system' or 'end times' was spoken of by Jesus and his apostles, its clear that the 'end' didnt happen at an earlier time. It was still coming in their day.And the evidence is that it still hasnt come yet...so lets say Daniels prophecy is true and the end is still coming, then it could not have already come. Or alternatively, none of Daniels prophecy is true and everything he wrote was forged later...or was just a coincidence. Yes this is how i understand it too. But that has not yet happned so obviously Daniel 2:44 has not yet come to pass. It is still future.

but that was the point...if later writers spoke about the 'end times' as something coming in the future, how can we apply Daniels 'end times' to an earlier period?You said that the 'end times' in Danile related to the Macabeean period and Antiochus IV? However im showing you that later bible writers spoke about the 'end times' as something in the future.

thats no problemi did say at the outset that this was 'one' interpretationyou dont have to believe it...many do though.As i said previously, Jesus said that Daniels words about the 'desolation' was still coming. This is why the jewish interpretation of Daniel could not have been correct.the jews werent the best at interpreting their own scriptures...especially considering they did not even recognise their messiah when he showed up. They could not see how he fulfilled the prophecies spoken in Isaiah and nor were they able to use Daniels 70weeks prophecy to calculate the time of his arrival.

ok so what reasoning do you use to come to that conclusion?

ah ok I see where you are coming from.
_____________________________________________________________
Daniel 9:24There are seventy weeks that have been determined upon your people and upon your holy city....And you should know and have the insight that from the going forth of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Leader, there will be seven weeks, also sixty-two weeks. She will return and be actually rebuilt, with a public square and moat, but in the straits of the times. And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah will be cut off
__________________________________________________________________before i go on i need to know when you understand the time of the 70 weeks began. the prophecy says "from the going forth of the word to restore and rebuild jerusalem"what date do you have for when this 'word' went forth...for this is when the 70 weeks must begin. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

Do you know what the event "from the going forth of the word to restore and rebuild Jerusalem" isdo you know who gave that word and when?

well my understanding is that it was the word of Artaxerxes who gave the initial legal approval for the captive Jews to return to Jerusalem to rebuildIt would make sense to take the first instance of any legal approvals as the starting point for the reason that it set the legal precedent for the captive jews to return and rebuild.
Once that initial legal approval was given, there would be no need for another legal approval.That first legal approval was given by Artaxerxes in his 20th year according to Nehemiah 2:1-8 . Now i know the date of his rule is debated and generally believed to be 465bce. But it is debatable.
_________________________________________________________________
 And it came about in the month Ni′san, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king, ...4In turn the king said to me: What is this that you are seeking to secure? 5... I said to the king: If to the king it does seem good,.. that you would send me to Judah, to the city of the burial places of my forefathers, that I may rebuild it. ...7And I went on to say to the king: If to the king it does seem good, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the River, that they may let me pass until I come to Judah; ...So the king gave [them] to me, according to the good hand of my God upon me.
__________________________________________________________________So Nehemiah got the legal permission to return to Judah, he was given letters from the King with written permission and he was able to use those letters to secure safe passage back.Reference works place Artaxerxes’ accession year in 465BCE while other documents give his father, Xerxes, a reign that continued into the 21st year. Xerxes’ rule is generally counted from 486BCE because this is when his father Darius died. There is strong evidence for calculating the last year of Xerxes and the accession year of Artaxerxes as being 475BCE. This evidence is found in Greek sources, in Persian sources and in Babylonian sources.

quote:

---

Concerning the time when Xerxes died and Artaxerxes ascended the throne, M.de Koutorga wrote: We have seen that, according to the chronology of Thucydides, Xerxes died towards the end of the year 475B.C.E., and that, according to the same historian, Themistocles arrived in Asia Minor shortly after the coming to the throne of Artaxerxes Longimanus.Mmoires prsents par divers savants l’Acadmie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres de l’Institut Imprial de France, first series, Vol. VI, second part, Paris, 1864, p. 147.

---

quote:

---

E.Levesque noted the following: Therefore it is necessary, according to the Alexandrian Chronicle, to place Xerxes’ death in 475B.C.E., after eleven years of reign. The historian Justin, III, 1, confirms this chronicle and the assertions of Thucydides. According to him, at the time of Xerxes’ murder, Artaxerxes, his son, was but a child, puer [a boy], which is true if Xerxes died in 475. Artaxerxes was then 16 years old, whereas in 465 he would have been twenty-six years old, which would not justify anymore Justin’s expression. According to this chronology, since Artaxerxes began to reign in 475, the 20th year of his reign proves to be in 455 and not in 445 as it is said quite commonly.Revue apologtique, Paris, Vol. 68, 1939, p. 94.

---

If Darius died in 486BCE. and Xerxes died in 475BCE, how could it be explained that some ancient documents allot to Xerxes a reign of 21 years? If Darius and Xerxes did corule, then Xerxes’ reign could be counted either from the start of a coregency with his father or from his father’s death. If Xerxes ruled 10 years with his father and 11 years by himself, some sources could attribute to him 21 years of rulership, while others might give him 11 years.The Greek historian Herodotus says: Darius judged his [Xerxes’] plea [for kingship] to be just and declared him king. But to my thinking Xerxes would have been made king even without this advice. This indicates that Xerxes was made king during the reign of his father Darius.There is also evidence from Persian bas-reliefs. In Persepolis several bas-reliefs have been found that represent Xerxes standing behind his father’s throne, dressed in clothing identical to his father’s and with his head on the same level. Usually the king’s head would be higher than all others, but in this case, his head is the same level with his son.Then also in Babylon there is much evidence that they served together. Two clay tablets were found in Babylon. One is a business text about hire of a building in the accession year of Xerxes. The tablet is dated in the first month of the year, Nisan. (A Catalogue of the Late Babylonian Tablets in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, by R.Campbell Thompson, London, 1927, p. 13, tablet designated A. 124) Another tablet bears the date month of Ab(?), accession year of Xerxes. This particular tablet does not attribute to Xerxes the title king of Babylon, king of lands, which is seen on most other tablets of the times. Usually a king’s accession year begins after the death of his predecessor. However, Darius lived until the seventh month of his final year, whereas these two documents from the accession year of Xerxes bear dates prior to the seventh month (one has the first month, the other the fifth). Therefore these documents do not relate to an accession period of Xerxes following the death of his father but indicate an accession year during his coregency with Darius.
If that accession year was in 496BCE, when the palace at Babylon for Xerxes had been completed, his first year as coregent would begin the following Nisan, in 495BCE, and his 21st and final year would start in 475BCE. So this shows that Xerxes’ reign included 10 years of rule with Darius (from 496 to 486BCE) and 11 years of kingship by himself (from 486 to 475BCE)And there is one more way to determine the year that Artaxerxes began to rule and thus figure out if his 20th year was when Nehemiah said it was.
Its the evidence that Artaxerxes ruled beyond his 41st birthday. A business document from Borsippa was found that is dated to the 50th year of Artaxerxes. (Catalogue of the Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, Vol. VII: Tablets From Sippar 2, by E.Leichty and A.K. Grayson, 1987, p. 153; tablet designated B.M. 65494)
One of the tablets connecting the end of Artaxerxes’ reign and the beginning of the reign of Darius II has the following date:
51st year, accession year, 12th month, day 20, Darius, king of lands. (The Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania, Series A: Cuneiform Texts, Vol. VIII, Part I, by Albert T.Clay, 1908, pp. 34, 83, and Plate 57, Tablet No. 127, designated CBM 12803)Greek, Persian, and Babylonian sources agree that Artaxerxes’ accession year was 475BCE and his first regnal year was 474BCE. This makes Nehemiahs words about asking the king in his 20th year as occuring in 455bce....20 years after his assession year.So the word went forth in 455BCE. The prophecy begins at this point when the 'word went forth' in the form of legal letters giving Nehemiah permission to go to rebuild jerusalem. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.