Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christianity and the End Times
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 61 of 1748 (835766)
06-30-2018 12:42 PM


Yes I can't deal with all your false evidence, sorry. Maybe I can come back to it or maybe I should just leave you to your false ideas.
But I want to give the commentary on Daniel10 to 12 where the scene shifts to the future version of Antiochus known as the Antichrist, where the events stop fitting Antiochus and are clearly still unfulfilled:
}
D. The Antichrist: the end times Antiochus Epiphanes.
1. (Dan 11:36) The willful king: a shift to a future fulfillment.
Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished; for what has been determined shall be done.
a. He shall exalt and magnify himself above every god: The angel explained to Daniel that this king would blaspheme God and exalt himself until the wrath has been accomplished and what has been determined shall be done.
b. Above every god: Here we shift from what was fulfilled in the Ptolemies and the Selucids to what will be fulfilled in the Antichrist, the final world dictator. Daniel was told that this revelation pertained to the latter days (Daniel 10:14), and Daniel 11:36 begins to look more towards this final world dictator, who is sort of a last days Antiochus Epiphanes.
i. We know that everything about this prophecy was not fulfilled during the career of Antiochus Epiphanes. Jesus specifically said the real abomination of desolation was still in the future (Matthew 24:15). The Apostle Paul paraphrased Daniel 11:36 in reference to the coming Antichrist: 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 (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4).
ii. Antiochus Epiphanes is important, but mostly as a historical preview of the Antichrist. This is why so much space is given to describing the career of one evil man — because he prefigures the ultimate evil man. Antiochus Epiphanes is the trailer released well before the Antichrist, who is like the feature.
c. He shall exalt and magnify himself above every god: Antiochus Epiphanes certainly did this in the general sense that all sinners oppose God. Yet he remained loyal to the Greek religious tradition, which revered the entire Olympian pantheon. Antiochus Epiphanes put a statue of Zeus in the temple, not of himself. This statement will be far more precisely fulfilled in the Antichrist, who sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God (2 Thessalonians 2:4).
d. Shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished: Antichrist will do much damage, but he is on a short chain and will only work into God’s plan. God’s purpose will be accomplished.
2. (Dan 11:37-39) The character and authority of the willful king.
He shall regard neither the God of his fathers nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall exalt himself above them all. But in their place he shall honor a god of fortresses; and a god which his fathers did not know he shall honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and pleasant things. Thus he shall act against the strongest fortresses with a foreign god, which he shall acknowledge, and advance its glory; and he shall cause them to rule over many, and divide the land for gain.
a. He shall regard neither the God of his fathers nor the desire of women: Based on this, some Bible scholars believe that the Antichrist will be of Jewish descent, and perhaps will also be a homosexual. These things may not be popularly known about the man, but they may be true nonetheless.
i. But many commentators believe that the desire of women refers to Jesus, in that all women desired the honor of bearing the Messiah and understanding desire as it is used in Haggai 2:7. Seeing the desire of women as Jesus makes most sense in light of the flow of context.
b. He shall honor a god of fortresses: The Antichrist will take and hold power with military might and the shrewd use of great riches.
3. (Dan 11:40-45) The final conflict.
At the time of the end the king of the South shall attack him; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter the countries, overwhelm them, and pass through. He shall also enter the Glorious Land, and many countries shall be overthrown; but these shall escape from his hand: Edom, Moab, and the prominent people of Ammon. He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape. He shall have power over the treasures of gold and silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; also the Libyans and Ethiopians shall follow at his heels. But news from the east and the north shall trouble him; therefore he shall go out with great fury to destroy and annihilate many. And he shall plant the tents of his palace between the seas and the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and no one will help him.
a. At the time of the end: The angel described to Daniel a confederation of kings coming against this great leader, with a battle in and near the Holy Land.
b. King of the South shall attack him; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind: Prophetically speaking, a precise identification of peoples mentioned is difficult. The king of the South may be Egypt or represent the Arab community. The king of the North may be the Antichrist’s domain (as the new Antiochus Epiphanes) or it may be Russia.
i. The precise points may be cloudy, but the general idea is clear. The end will be marked by great conflict, culminating in the world’s armies gathering in the Promised Land to do final battle.
c. Yet he shall come to his end, and no one will help him: In the end there is no hope for the Antichrist or for any of his followers.
By the way I think just about all the current ideas of where the Antichrist will come from are wrong.

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by ringo, posted 06-30-2018 12:44 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 63 by PaulK, posted 06-30-2018 12:58 PM Faith has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 62 of 1748 (835767)
06-30-2018 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Faith
06-30-2018 12:42 PM


Faith writes:
Yes I can't deal with all your false evidence, sorry.
If you can't deal with it, you can't declare it false either. And you certainly can't just brush it aside claiming it wasn't presented.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 12:42 PM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 63 of 1748 (835768)
06-30-2018 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Faith
06-30-2018 12:42 PM


quote:
Yes I can't deal with all your false evidence, sorry. Maybe I can come back to it or maybe I should just leave you to your false ideas.
In other words you are the one relying on assertion.
quote:
But I want to give the commentary on Daniel10 to 12 where the scene shifts to the future version of Antiochus known as the Antichrist, where the events stop fitting Antiochus and are clearly still unfulfilled
And you will notice how little that conclusion relies on the text of Daniel. Antiochus, of course, called himself a god Epiphanes means God Manifest. And, as I have pointed out Daniel 11:40 is still about the Diadochi monarchs (see Daniel 4)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 12:42 PM Faith has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 64 of 1748 (835769)
06-30-2018 1:15 PM


Anyone care to explain why these 'prophecies' are open to interpretation? How come these predictions are so important yet so obscure?
Just like miracles, never anything unambiguos. Now why is that?

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 6:48 PM Tangle has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 65 of 1748 (835771)
06-30-2018 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Faith
06-30-2018 12:19 PM


Re: The decree that starts the seventy weeks countdown
Only when you pick and choose dates and make up stuff.
Nothing in the Old Testament refers to Jesus except in the Dogma of your Cult.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 12:19 PM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 66 of 1748 (835772)
06-30-2018 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by PaulK
06-26-2018 1:56 PM


Re: Daniel
Daniel 10-12 is back to how God is going to smash Antiochus and the Greeks and set up the eternal Jewish Kingdom
Daniel 10 gets angels involved. It’s another end times prophecy, and starts with the Greeks coming to defeat the Persians.
Daniel 11 is the meat of this prophecy. Again Alexander’s kingdoms are divided and the successor kingdoms - named after the four cardinal directions here - are the focus. Only the North (Seleucids) and South (Ptolomies) are of real significance.
There are echoes of Daniel 9 here, more evidence that the seventieth week really is about Antiochus’ dealings with the Jews.
Daniel 9:25 ...And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood...
Daniel 11:22 With the force of a flood they shall be swept away from before him and be broken, and also the prince of the covenant
And this goes on, until the end of the chapter. There is no shift, just as in Daniel 8 the focus is firmly on Antiochus.
Daniel 12 completes it, saying that Michael will intervene, there will be great troubles for the Jews, but they will be redeemed, even the dead who will return to life.
There is more on timing, though:
11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.
Again this makes a mess of some futurist interpretations. If the daily sacrifice had been taken away and the abomination set up in 70AD or before, then this period should have been completed, even if the days are read as years. So, it’s back to everything being in the future.
So, in conclusion Daniel places the end times in the Maccabean period, explicitly in Daniel 8 and 11. Daniel 7 and 9 link to those, (Daniel 9 referencing events of the period) and nothing says otherwise.
Christian interpreters usually can’t accept this but nevertheless it is there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by PaulK, posted 06-26-2018 1:56 PM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 6:30 PM PaulK has replied
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 7:37 PM PaulK has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 67 of 1748 (835773)
06-30-2018 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by PaulK
06-30-2018 4:50 PM


still on the seventy weeks
This is the rest of that commentary.
4. (Dan 9:26) What happens after the first sixty-nine weeks.
And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; and the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.
a. After the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off: The Biblical term cut off is sometimes used to describe execution (see Genesis 9:11 and Exodus 31:14). Gabriel told Daniel that the Messiah will be cut off for the sake of others, not for Himself.
i. Able chronologists have shown that the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ occurred immediately after the expiration of 483 prophetic years, of 360 days each, from the time of Artaxerxes’ order. (Ironside)
ii. Strangely, many able commentators simply ignore these numbers. The numbers are symbolic and not arithmetical. (Baldwin)
iii. Cut off is a poignant description of Jesus’ earthly life up to and including the cross. Born in another man’s stable, cradled in another man’s manger with nowhere to lay his head during his life on earth, and buried in another man’s tomb after dying on a cursed cross, the Christ of God and the Friend of the friendless was indeed cut off and had nothing. (Heslop)
b. Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary: After the Messiah was cut off, Jerusalem and her temple would be destroyed again by an overwhelming army (with a flood). Most all Bible scholars and commentators agree that this was fulfilled in the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70.
c. The people of the prince who is to come shall destroy: The destroying army is made up of the people of the prince who is to come. This coming prince is described more in Daniel 9:26.
5. (Dan 9:27) The events of the seventieth week.
Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolate.
a. He shall confirm a covenant: The he Gabriel described is the prince who is to come mentioned in the previous verse. If we know that the prince’s people destroyed Jerusalem in a.d. 70, then we know this coming prince has his ancestral roots in the soil of the ancient Roman Empire.
i. Therefore, the prince who is to come will in some way be an heir to the Romans, even as the final world government is an heir to the Roman Empire (Daniel 7).
b. He shall confirm a covenant with many for one week: The coming prince will make a covenant with Israel for the final unit of seven years, completing the seventy weeks prophesied for the Jewish people and Jerusalem.
i. Covenant with many: The word many here is a specific reference to Israel, not a general reference to a group. The ancient Hebrew says, covenant with the many.
ii. With this covenant Israel will embrace the Antichrist as a political messiah, if not the literal Messiah. Jesus predicted this in John 5:43: I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive.
iii. Taking the description of what would be accomplished in the 70 Weeks from Daniel 9:24, we know that the 70 Weeks are not yet complete. Yet the events promised in the first 69 weeks are fulfilled, indicated that there is a lengthy pause in the 70 Weeks, between the 69th week and the 70th week. The 70th week will begin when the coming prince shall confirm a covenant with the Jewish people. These gaps or pauses in prophecy may seem strange to us, but they are common. Comparing Isaiah 9:6 and Luke 1:31-33 shows another significant pause or gap in prophecy regarding the coming of the Messiah.
iv. We can think of it in this way: God appointed 490 years of special focus on Israel in His redemptive plan. The years were paused by Israel’s rejection of Jesus. Now there is no special focus on Israel in God’s redemptive plan because this is the time of the church. God’s focus will return to Israel when the church is taken away (at the rapture) and the last seven years of man’s rule on this earth begin.
v. The 70th week will begin when the Jewish people are restored in unbelief to their land and city; and among them will be found a faithful remnant, owning their sin, and seeking Jehovah’s face. (Henry Ironside writing in 1911)
c. In the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering: The coming prince will break the covenant with Israel in the middle of the seven years, the final week (period of seven years).
i. The Book of Revelation sees this seven year period with both its halves as yet future (Revelation 12:6, 13-14; 13:5-9, 14-15). The middle of the week and the end of sacrifice had not yet happened in 90 a.d.
d. On the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate: The ending of sacrifice will come with abominations, followed by tremendous desolation.
i. Abominations translates an ancient Hebrew word (shiqquwts) that is connected to horrific idolatry (Deuteronomy 29:17, 1 Kings 11:5-7, 2 Kings 23:13). The idea is that the coming prince breaks the covenant and brings an end to sacrifice and offering by desecrating the holy place of the temple with a horrific idolatry.
ii. Jesus called this the abomination of desolation (Matthew 24:15) and indicated that it would be a pivotal sign in the Great Tribulation. Paul referred to the idolatry of the coming prince in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.
e. Until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolate: This breaking of the covenant and abomination of desolation has a promised consummation. Before the 70th week is completed, each of the things described in Daniel 9:24 will be accomplished and everlasting righteousness will reign.
The following is how the time is calculated using the 360-day calendar. I wanted to study it first but didn't get to it so I'll have to do that later.
The Seventy Weeks of Daniel as Understood by Sir Robert Anderson in The Coming Prince
Daniel 9:24-25 says that from the decree to rebuild Jerusalem to the coming of the Messiah there will be 483 years.
7 + 62 weeks = 69 groups of seven years. 7 x 69 = 483 years
Anderson understood a prophetic year as 360 days. This is based both on ancient history and on Revelation 11:2, 13:5, 11:3, and 12:6 which indicate that 42 months — 3 years — are equal to 1,260 days.
Therefore, 483 years x 360 days = 173,880 days
Artaxerxes started his reign in 465 b.c. The decree to rebuild Jerusalem was given on the first day of Nisan, in the 20th year of Artaxerxes. In our calendar system (the Julian calendar) that date is March 14, 445 b.c. (Nehemiah 2:1)
Jesus started His ministry in the 15th year of Tiberius (see Luke 3:1). Tiberius started his reign in a.d. 14, so Jesus’ ministry started in a.d. 29. Anderson believed that Jesus celebrated four Passovers during His ministry, one each in a.d. 29, 30, 31. and His final Passover in a.d. 32. With the help of lunar charts, we can calculate the exact date of ancient Passovers, so it is possible to calculate the exact day of Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem as April 6, a.d. 32.
From 445 b.c. to a.d. 32. there are 476 years on the Julian calendar
(not 477 years, because there is no year zero).
476 years x 365 days = 173,740 days.
Adjusting for the difference between March 14 and April 6 adds 24 days.
Adjusting for leap years over a period of 476 years adds 116 days.
The total number of days from March 14, 445 b.c. to April 6, a.d. 32.
173,740 + 24 + 116 = 173,880 days.
According to his calendar, Daniel told us there would be 173,880 days between the decree and the arrival of Messiah the Prince.
Jesus said to the Jews of this day: If you had known, even you, especially in this your day, the things that make for your peace! (Luke 19:42). David said of this day in Psalm 118:24: This is the day which the Lord has made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by PaulK, posted 06-30-2018 4:50 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by PaulK, posted 07-01-2018 1:54 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 68 of 1748 (835774)
06-30-2018 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Tangle
06-30-2018 1:15 PM


Anyone care to explain why these 'prophecies' are open to interpretation? How come these predictions are so important yet so obscure?
Actually the book of Daniel is remarkably UNobscure for biblical prophecy because there are so many explanations of the visions given. If you just read the vision of Daniel 7 cold with all its beasts coming up out of the sea you'd never figure out on your own that they represent a series of empires, but it gets explained not only that they are empires but which empires. except for the fourth empire which remains unnamed so you have to figure it out from the previous empires which is easy if you know the history of the times in question.
but prophecy is obscure in order to keep some people from understanding it. Debunkers for instance. Also, it's enough information to give us a heads-up for some important coming events while allowing those events to develop normally in their own time. The Antichrist isn't going to show up if we already know exactly what to expect of him, so we have to keep our eyes open in order to put together the clues scripture gives us. And as scripture says, only believers will be able to recognize most of this stuff. PaulK isn't going to be able to recotgnize any of it because he doesn't see the future Antichrist at all, he thinks all this prophecy was finished in the time of the Maccabean revolt before Jesus came. And I'm sure you don't have the desire to try to learn any of this either.
Just like miracles, never anything unambiguos. Now why is that?
How are miracles ambiguous? They seem pretty straightforward to me. Your problem is not believing the witness accounts, but there's nothing ambiguous about those accounts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Tangle, posted 06-30-2018 1:15 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by jar, posted 06-30-2018 7:21 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 73 by Tangle, posted 07-01-2018 3:27 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 69 of 1748 (835775)
06-30-2018 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Faith
06-30-2018 6:48 PM


The prophesy con job!
Faith writes:
but prophecy is obscure in order to keep some people from understanding
What an utter explicit example of the con job that is Christian Apologetics.
Obscure prophecy is simply worthless fodder to con the gullible and willfully ignorant.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 6:48 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 70 of 1748 (835776)
06-30-2018 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by PaulK
06-30-2018 4:50 PM


Re: Daniel
Daniel 10-12 is back to how God is going to smash Antiochus and the Greeks and set up the eternal Jewish Kingdom
Sort of. But Jesus reigns over that kingdom.
Daniel 10 gets angels involved. It’s another end times prophecy,
Another one? The angel comes to show Daniel more detail about the events of Daniel 8.
and starts with the Greeks coming to defeat the Persians.
As the goat defeated the ram in Daniel 8. I've already spelled all this out above.
Daniel 11 is the meat of this prophecy. Again Alexander’s kingdoms are divided and the successor kingdoms - named after the four cardinal directions here - are the focus. Only the North (Seleucids) and South (Ptolomies) are of real significance.
As I spelled out above. This prophecy focuses on the ongoing war between the Seleucids, from which came a series of kings called Antiochus, the final one being the little horn of Daniel 8, and Egypt under the Ptolemies.
There are echoes of Daniel 9 here, more evidence that the seventieth week really is about Antiochus’ dealings with the Jews.
Daniel 9:25 ...And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of it shall be with a flood...
You've got the timing all wrong as usual. The prince who is to come follows the cutting off of Messiah the Prince who is Jesus Christ, but Antiochus preceded Jesus by two hundred years. the prince who is to come destroyed the temple and most of Jerusalem and is well known to be Titus and the Roman army in 70AD. Antiochus didn't destroy anything anyway, he desecrated the temple with a figure of Zeus and then a pig.
You have offered not one iota of support for the timing you keep claiming. There is no way any of the prophesied lengths of time that add up tot he seventy weeks point to the time of the Maccabees and Antiochus Epiphanes. The sixty-nine weeks land us in Jesus' lifetime at the very least, but very likely smack on the day He entered Jerusalem on the donkey to announce His Messiahship, one week before the crucifixion. And after that there remains one week out of the seventy weeks prophesied to "bring an end to transgressions" which has to mean the complete end of the effects of the Fall, which has to mean the very end of the world, which is yet future. And that week is said to be the span of a covenant made by the prince who is to come, and Antiochus made no such covenant. The prince to come is the little horn of Daniel 7 who arises out of the Roman Empire. We are now dealing with the Roman Empire and not the Seleucids. The final week of the prophecy is still future and refers to a man of the ROMAN Emprie, not to Antiochus. Antiochus is his model, we know that from previous prophecy, he is to act quite a bit like Antiochus did, put up an abomination of an idol in the temple, but his features go beyond Antiochus. This is a different man in a different time, a time that has not yet come.
Yes there is no obvious Roman Empire at the moment, but don't worry, we'll recognize it when the time comes.
Daniel 11:22 With the force of a flood they shall be swept away from before him and be broken, and also the prince of the covenant
And this goes on, until the end of the chapter. There is no shift, just as in Daniel 8 the focus is firmly on Antiochus.
Read the commentary. Antiochus came before Jesus. Messiah the Prince is Jesus. The prince who is to come follows the crucifixion. Antiochus is a type or symbol of this prince, but he is not this prince. There is a shift in his characteristics and doings. Antiochus made no covenant for seven years etc etc etc etc. And you've got the timing SO wrong. The seventieth week has not been fulfilled by any event anyone can identify between Daniel and the end of the New Testament, or any time since then. It is still future, and so is the princie to come who will make a covenant for that span of time.
Daniel 12 completes it, saying that Michael will intervene, there will be great troubles for the Jews, but they will be redeemed, even the dead who will return to life.
Many commentators today do think this will all be going on with the Jews and that the Church will have been "raptured" out of the world. I am still not convinced of the "pre-Tribulation Rapture" but I have to admit that the end times prophecies seem to be dealing exclusively with ethnic Israel and not with the Church. There is enough ambiguity to make this unresolved in my mind nevertheless. There could be a Rapture before the Tribulation and Israel will be the exclusive focus of the end times events, or the Church could be included as the people of God in the descriptions of events.
There is more on timing, though:
11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.
Again this makes a mess of some futurist interpretations. If the daily sacrifice had been taken away and the abomination set up in 70AD or before, then this period should have been completed, even if the days are read as years. So, it’s back to everything being in the future.
There are people who are expecting the literal temple in Jerusalem to be rebuilt so that there will be a ceasing of sacrifices yet to be resumed. Perhaps the temple will be rebuilt but I don't think that's what the prophecy is about. I think we need to wait and see as things should get much clearer as the time approaches.
So, in conclusion Daniel places the end times in the Maccabean period, explicitly in Daniel 8 and 11. Daniel 7 and 9 link to those, (Daniel 9 referencing events of the period) and nothing says otherwise.
No. Again, your timing is totslly wrong and the character of the prince is sufficiently different from Antiochus, and there was no covenant of seven years made gby Antiochus IV and Antiochus did not destroy the temple and most of Jerusalem and so on and so forth. You have no evidence for your interpretation at all.
  • Daniel 7 gives an overview of the four empires from Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon to the Roman Empire through a series of symbolic animals, the lion that becomes a man for Babylon, the lopsided bear for Medo-Persia, the Leopard with four wings for Greece and the Great and Terrible Beast for the fourth empire which we know to be the Roman Empire. A Little Horn arises from the beast that symbolizes the ROMAN Empire, not the Greek Empire from which came Antiiochus Epiphanes. These are two different "little horns."
  • Daniel 8 focuses in on Medo-Persia and Alexander the Great's Greece through the symbols of the ram with the lopsided horns and the goat with the notable single horn. The goat defeats the ram and the one horn is replaced by four, and out of one of them emerges a little horn which is Antiochus Epiphanes.
  • Daniel 9, the prophecy of the Seventy Weeks, is not about the empires or Antiochus, it is about the timing of the coming of the Messiah promised throughout the Old Testament. The timing highlights the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the temple after the destruction by Nebuchadnezzer, at the end of the Babylonian Captivity, and counts from there to Messiah the Prince who is Jesus Christ who was "cut off but not for himself," after which comes a prince whose people destroy that same temple and most of the city that were rebuilt in Daniel's time. Nowhere is the Roman Empire named because it did not exist in Daniel's time but it is the empire in power when Jesus comes, and it is Titus of the Romans who destroys the temple and most of Jerusalem.
    The timing points to Jesus, Paul, it does not point to Maccabees or Antiochus.
  • Daniel 10 to 12 is revealed to Daniel by a magnificent angel and we learn that nations have their own angels, Israel's being Michael the Archangel. He reveals more about the period after Greece defeats Persia and Alexander dies and his generals are ruling, specifically details about wars between the Seleucids who have a series of kings named Antiochus, and Egypt which is ruled by the dynasty of the Ptolemies. (The other two kingdoms that replaced Alexander are not part of this historical account.) Antiochus IV called Epiphanes emerges at the end of the wars and is defeated by the Maccabees in defense of their temple.
    But the last verses of these chapters morph into new doings and characteristics of this Antiochus character so that the only reasonable way to understand it is that a completely different character is being described. We put him together with the little horn of Daniel 7 who is not Antiochus Epiphanes (who is the little horn in Daniel 8), and with the prince who is to come at the end of Daniel 9 and understand him to be a character who has not yet emerged in history, who when he emerges will have world power, will make a covenant for seven years with "many" and who will stop the sacrifices of a revived temple in a revived Roman Empire and then present himself as God in the temple, the abomination of desolation. I think these things ARE yet future but I think they are symbolic of something else yet to be revealed.
Christian interpreters usually can’t accept this but nevertheless it is there.
It really isn't there at all.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by PaulK, posted 06-30-2018 4:50 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by PaulK, posted 07-01-2018 2:43 AM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 71 of 1748 (835777)
07-01-2018 1:54 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Faith
06-30-2018 6:30 PM


Re: still on the seventy weeks
The commentary ignores all sorts of important stuff. No justification for dividing the seventy weeks, no justification for using a calendar that there is no record of the Jews ever using.
Without justification for those points it just falls apart.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 6:30 PM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 72 of 1748 (835778)
07-01-2018 2:43 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Faith
06-30-2018 7:37 PM


Re: Daniel
Firstly I want to point out that my post was not a reply to you, it is a continuation of my series of posts about Daniel. Therefore your angry complaints that my points repeat things you have said earlier are completely inappropriate.
quote:
Another one? The angel comes to show Daniel more detail about the events of Daniel 8.
Yes, it is another prophecy.
quote:
You've got the timing all wrong as usual. The prince who is to come follows the cutting off of Messiah the Prince who is Jesus Christ, but Antiochus preceded Jesus by two hundred years.
The prince attacks and desecrates the city after a messiah is cut off, within the seventy weeks. Since nobody did that in the seven years after Jesus died and Antiochus did thst not so long after Onaias died this is evidence that I have the timing right, and you do not.
quote:
Antiochus didn't destroy anything anyway, he desecrated the temple with a figure of Zeus and then a pig.
He successfully attacked the city more than once before that.
quote:
You have offered not one iota of support for the timing you keep claiming.
That is untrue - I’ve repeated one point above. You, on the other hand have offered no evidence for the massive gap between the 69th and 70th week or for your 360 day weeks or for the assertion that the starting point must be a command from a Persian Emperor.
The actual text, therefore fits my views better than the attempts to force it into Christian doctrine. That is WHY I take those views.
quote:
Yes there is no obvious Roman Empire at the moment, but don't worry, we'll recognize it when the time comes.
Even a recreated Roman Empire would be a new Empire. Besides about the only evidence of Rome you have is a problematic interpretation of Daniel 9, at odds with Daniel 8 and Daniel 10-12 both of which point to th Diadochi kingdoms.
quote:
The seventieth week has not been fulfilled by any event anyone can identify between Daniel and the end of the New Testament, or any time since then. It is still future,
By which you mean it failed to happen in the time allowed. Odd, then, how it agrees so well with the events preceding the Maccabean
Revolt.
quote:
No. Again, your timing is totslly wrong and the character of the prince is sufficiently different from Antiochus, and there was no covenant of seven years made gby Antiochus IV and Antiochus did not destroy the temple and most of Jerusalem and so on and so forth. You have no evidence for your interpretation at all.
Obviously the prophecy does not envisage actual destruction of the city. Therefore, as I have argued, destroy is a poor translation. I don’t think we can assert that there was no covenant of seven years - we don’t have complete records by any means.
To deal in brief with your list of points.
The assertion that the little horn image refers to two different people needs more support. The evidence that the Roman Empire is intended is weak, and contradicted by Daniel 8 and Daniel 10-12.
I have already pointed to serious problems with your interpretation of Daniel 9.
While you sat that Daniel 10-12 morphs it continues to use the title used to identify the Seleucid rulers (King of the North), the most, then, you can argue is that it refers to a later Seleucid which still places the time before Jesus.
In fact if the character is at all different from the historical Antiochus it is quite likely propaganda or the result of prejudice against him.
quote:
It really isn't there at all.
I have shown that it is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 7:37 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Faith, posted 07-01-2018 10:50 AM PaulK has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 73 of 1748 (835779)
07-01-2018 3:27 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by Faith
06-30-2018 6:48 PM


Faith writes:
Actually the book of Daniel is remarkably UNobscure for biblical prophecy because there are so many explanations of the visions given. If you just read the vision of Daniel 7 cold with all its beasts coming up out of the sea you'd never figure out on your own that they represent a series of empires, but it gets explained not only that they are empires but which empires. except for the fourth empire which remains unnamed so you have to figure it out from the previous empires which is easy if you know the history of the times in question.
That's a great example of why prophecy is obscure
but prophecy is obscure in order to keep some people from understanding it
Hang on, didn't you jusy say....
Faith writes:
Actually the book of Daniel is remarkably UNobscure
Black is, indeed, white.
Also, it's enough information to give us a heads-up for some important coming events while allowing those events to develop normally in their own time.
It's apparently just enough information for motivated thinkers to make up anything they like but not enough for anyone else to make head nor tail of it. Very convenient. And very stupid if your intention is to demonstrate anything to rational people and change anybody's mind.
The Antichrist isn't going to show up if we already know exactly what to expect of him, so we have to keep our eyes open in order to put together the clues scripture gives us.
How can anyone possibly believe such childish crap? It's a miracle in itself.
How are miracles ambiguous? They seem pretty straightforward to me. Your problem is not believing the witness accounts, but there's nothing ambiguous about those accounts.
Well obviously the accounts of miracles in the bibles aren't proof of anything miraculous at all, but I'm talking of the endless accounts of modern day miracles. Nobody's amputated arm has ever miraculously grown back.
Prophecy is not prophecy if it is ambiguous and requires convoluted interpretaion by those that already believe. Miracles aren't miracles if they are stories in books or just normal events.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Faith, posted 06-30-2018 6:48 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 74 of 1748 (835785)
07-01-2018 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by PaulK
07-01-2018 2:43 AM


None of your claims fits the prophecies
The assertion that the little horn image refers to two different people needs more support.
The little horn of Daniel 7 comes up among the ten horns of the Great and Terrible Beast, which represents the Fourth Empire. The first three are Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon, the lion that becomes a man, then Medo-Persia represented by the bear, and then Alexander's Greece represented by the leopard with four wings. These three are identified in the text specifically as Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece, but the fourth is not named, just referred to as the Great and Terrible Beast.
We know that historically the empire that followed Greece was the Roman Empire. Therefore the little horn in Daniel 7 comes out of that empire. What is your objection to this? You insert some other empire in place of the Roman Empire? Something nobody has ever heard of, that can't possibly deserve the image of being so Great and Terrible it surpasses Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece? Something like that?
So that's the first little horn we hear about in Daniel. The second comes in the next chapter, Daniel 8, where two of the four kingdoms of Daniel 7 are now the focus: Medo Persia in this case represented by a ram, and Greece represented by a goat with a single "notable" horn. These are specifically identified as Medo Persia and Greece under Alexander who is the notable horn. Then that horn is broken off and four horns come up in its place, which we know represented Alexander''s four generals who split the rule of the territory he conquered, two of them being particularly prominent, Ptolemy who ruled Egypt, and Antiochus of the Seleucids who ruled the area of Syria and Judea.
It is out of one of the four horns that replace the horn of Alexander that the "little horn" emerges. Since this is emerging from the GREEK empire it is not the same horn as the one in Daniel 7 which emerges from the Fourth empire represented as the Great and Terrible Beast with ten horns. This kingdom FOLLOWS Greece in the prophecy, it is not the same kingdom. Therefore the little horn I s not the same horn. You have no justification whatever to confound the two, they are completely different persons. One displaces three of the ten kings of the Fourth Kingdom, the other in Daniel 8 rises out of one of the four kingdoms that followed Alexander.
Somehow I know you will just ignore all this and claim it's the same little horn anyway, evidence be damned.
\ The evidence that the Roman Empire is intended is weak, and contradicted by Daniel 8 and Daniel 10-12.
The empire that followed Alexander's Greece was indeed a Great and Terrible empire and we KNOW it was the Roman Empire, because we know history, Paul. It is not contradicted by Daniel 8 and 10-12 because they simply focus in on a different subject, the Seleucids and the rise iof Antiochus Epiphanes.
  • You've got two grossly unqualified "messiahs" in place of the great Messiah the Prince,
  • and apparently a minor kingdom in place of the Great and Terrible Roman Empire,
  • and you've confounded the little horn of the Seleucids of Daniel 8 with the little horn of the Roman Empire of Daniel 7.
  • And you can't even point to any timing from the seventy weeks prophecy that goes anywhere near the time of the Maccabean revolt against Antiochus IV.
By the way, I read through your posts and failed to find any even slightly plausible argument for the timing of the seventy weeks prophecy to the time of the Maccabees. You try to make something of the initial 49 years which doesn't make any sense, about when the messiah came? I rally can't make sense of it. But I haven't found anything that puts the Maccabean period in any kind of reasonable relationship to the priophecy of the seventy weeks. The sixty-nine weeks reach to Jesus' time. And your claim that Antiochus made a covenant with the Hellensts says nothing about seven years, which is the requirement for the covenant made by the "prince who is to come. How can you go on insisting that your interpretation is the right one without a shred of evidence from the Seventy Weeks prophecy to support it?
ABE: Your argument that we don't have good enough records of any covenant of Antiochus to know if it was seven years or not is ludicrous, Paul. If God gives prophecy He is going to make sure the evidence is there to support it. When the seventieth week comes, and it HAS NOT YET COME -- and you have offered NOTHING to argue that it has, which would involve some counting of years -- then we will know beyond a doubt that it HAS come. And it is even possible that some of us here will live through it. Those of us who believe these prophecies are going to recognize it whether anybody else does or not. /ABE
Your claim to have answered the question about the timing has nothing to do with the actual timing, you merely confound Antiochus with Titus who attacked Jerusalem after the crucifixion. Count us some years, that's what the prophecy requires. At least give us a ballpark count that comes anywhere near the Maccabean period. God wouldn't waste His time on such specific prophecies if their fulfillment isn't just as specific as the prophecy claims for it. He says seventy sevens, He MEANS seventy sevens, He splits off ONE seven, that means there is a reason for splitting it off. You didn't even bother to see where the 49 years would count to, you just turned a comma into an excuse to make it the count to the Messiah although it's OBVIOUS, Paul, OBVIOUS, that the whole sixty-nine sevens was meant.
As for the end times of the distant future, it is foreshadowed at the end of each of those sections of Daniel, chapters 7, 8 and 9, and the final 12. This is where the little horn of Daniel 7 is meant, and Antiochus !V merges into something different in 8 and the prince who is to come morphs from Titus to a future figure in 9, and 12 points to the same future person.
But I understand to argue that would mean mustering the relevant verses, so maybe we can do that. Or maybe not. I wanted to mention it here anyway.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by PaulK, posted 07-01-2018 2:43 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by PaulK, posted 07-01-2018 11:38 AM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 75 of 1748 (835786)
07-01-2018 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Faith
07-01-2018 10:50 AM


Re: None of your claims fits the prophecies
You confuse your favoured interpretation with the text.
quote:
The little horn of Daniel 7 comes up among the ten horns of the Great and Terrible Beast, which represents the Fourth Empire. The first three are Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon, the lion that becomes a man, then Medo-Persia represented by the bear, and then Alexander's Greece represented by the leopard with four wings. These three are identified in the text specifically as Medo-Persia and Greece, but the fourth is not named, just referred to as the Great and Terrible Beast.
The text of Daniel 7 doesn’t name any of the kingdoms, so I don’t know where you get that idea from.
quote:
We know that historically the empire that followed Greece was the Roman Empire. Therefore the little horn in Daniel 7 comes out of that empire. What is your objection to this?
That the Diadochi kingdoms are the last Empire in Daniel, from Daniel 8 and 10-12.
quote:
The empire that followed Alexander's Greece was indeed a Great and Terrible empire and we KNOW it was the Roman Empire, because we know history, Paul. It is not contradicted by Daniel 8 and 10-12 because they simply focus in on a different subject, the Seleucids and the rise iof Antiochus Epiphanes.
If they identify this as the final empire - and they do - they contradict the idea that Daniel refers to any later empire.
quote:
You've got two grossly unqualified "messiahs" in place of the great Messiah the Prince,
I have two eminently qualified messiahs. Cyrus is immensely important to the Jews, and Onaias was very important to the conflict between the Hellenisers and the more traditionalist Jews, as shown by the coverage he gets in 2 Maccabees.
quote:
and apparently a minor kingdom in place of the Great and Terrible Roman Empire,
The Seleucids - which is the minimal interpretation - were quite terrible enough.
quote:
and you've confounded the little horn of the Seleucids of Daniel 8 with the little horn of the Roman Empire of Daniel 7.
So I disagree with your interpretation- with evidence.
quote:
And you can't even point to any timing from the seventy weeks prophecy that goes anywhere near the time of the Maccabean revolt against Antiochus IV.
But your timing of the seventieth week puts it nearly 2000 years after the time it was supposed to happen. Not that you have even bothered to examine my timing at all (it’s probably better than you think).
Of course I don’t invent my own calendar to try to make it fit, either, which puts me one up on the apologists.
quote:
As for the end times of the distant future, it is foreshadowed at the end of each of those sections of Daniel, chapters 7, 8 and 9, and the final 12. This is where the little horn of Daniel 7 is meant, and Antiochus !V merges into something different in 8 and the prince who is to come morphs from Titus to a future figure in 9, and 12 points to the same future person.
It is where the apologists have to go against the text. Daniel 8 is a prophecy of the end times and stops in the latter days of the Diadochi kingdoms. (Yet the Seleucids lasted a 100 years more and Egypt longer still). Daniel 9 has a prophecy of seventy weeks with no hint of a massive gap. Daniel 11 goes on talking about the King of the North - clearly identified as the Seleucid monarch, right to the end.
quote:
But I understand to argue that would mean mustering the relevant verses, so maybe we can do that. Or maybe not. I wanted to mention it here anyway.
Oh, certainly. I can point to Daniel 11:4 indicating that the Kings identified by the cardinal directions in the following text are the Diadochi monarchs, and 11:40 still refers to the King of the North and the King of the South.
I can point to Daniel 8:17 identifying that prophecy as dealing with the time of the end.
The absence of a gap in the 490 years would not, of course be identified by any verse. Only the presence of a gap should be mentioned - yet so far you have cited nothing to say that there is one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Faith, posted 07-01-2018 10:50 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Faith, posted 07-01-2018 11:56 AM PaulK has replied
 Message 79 by Faith, posted 07-01-2018 1:46 PM PaulK has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024