Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8925 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-20-2019 9:46 PM
27 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, kjsimons, ramoss, Theodoric, xongsmith (6 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,142 Year: 15,178/19,786 Month: 1,901/3,058 Week: 275/404 Day: 89/73 Hour: 1/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
67
8
91011Next
Author Topic:   Prophecy in the Bible - Theology of Double Fulfillment
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 106 of 157 (530795)
10-14-2009 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Jazzns
10-14-2009 7:53 PM


Re: Cohesive prophecy
Jazzins writes:

If you really have been paying attention to what I have been saying you would know that I am trying to discover my belief about the book of Daniel. I don't have an ideology about it. It is not my way or the highway but I certainly am not just going to take your word for it and have you call me a novice when I challange you about it.

Novice is not necessarily a demeaning word, Jazzins. I am a golf and tennis novice etc but have done extensive comprehensive study on the prophecies for over 60 years. By your own admission above, you appear to be somewhat of a novice of prophecy, particularly relative to the book of Daniel.

Online definition: novice: 1. A person new to a field or activity; a beginner.

I'm showing that the Greek empire and the four Grecian kings alluded to in the prophecy (chapter 9, which names Greece)do not satisfy a double fulfillment of the prophecy at large but that the Greek empire is just one of the succession of world empires which the book of Daniel covers, leading up to the end time messianic kingdom on earth which Daniel and the corroborating prophets allude to repeatedly.

I am explaining that the the Greek empire is simply one of the empires in the line of events which the prophet Daniel mentions relative to the primary purpose of the book which is to reveal the whole cohesive plan for the ages of planet earth, culminating with the messianic kingdom which Daniel and nearly all of the major prophets of the Bible allude to which is to come at what is described repeatedly by the prophets as well as Jesus himself as the end times.

The reason most here at EvC see Daniel's prophecy as contemporaneous to the time given appears to be to deny that future prophecy fulfillment of prophecy is possible and to espouse the secularistic agenda.

Furthermore, I am showing that Antiocus Epiphames IV does not satisfy a double fulfillment. There is no double fulfillment, because Antiocus Epiphanes IV and the other Greek kings are simply players in the whole cohesive prophecy as I have detailed in my previous message.

Jazzins writes:

Like I said before, I am examining 2 potential positions on Daniel that just happen to be different from yours. If that makes me a bad Christian in your eyes then so be it. I don't answer to you.

1. The following is taken from your OP to this thread:

But if you look at people who are deep into end-times thinking and writing right now they are basically saying that the events from Daniel 11 are going to happen again followed by the first fulfillment of Daniel 12. My question is, what is the Biblical support for this theology of double fulfillment?

You begin by assuming that if the prophecy of Daniel is to be fulfilled sometime in the future, there's a double fulfillment.

I'm showing that there is no double fulfillment. I've shown why ephames does not satisfy contemporaneous fulfillment because the 10 other kingdoms were to follow Greece and the 10 horned beast is followed by the messianic saint/messiah kingdom as per the cohesive prophecy at large. There is one fulfillment, part of which has been fulfilled in history and the rest is on track for fulfillment in the future.

jazzins writes:

Your perfectly free to reply to any post in any thread Buz, but I am done responding to you in this thread unless you decide to engage me as a peer and actually address the questions that I am asking.

OK. As per your OP I'm addressing the questions you asked relative to supporting why I believe there is no double fulfillment and why the ultimate end time fulfillment is still on track for future.

To allege that double fulfillment is necessary for futurist interpretation is erroneous. Nothing in the prophecies require a double fulfillment for the fulfillment to futurist, as I have shown. Imo, the implied premise in your OP to the contrary is not correct.

Edited by Buzsaw, : Missed a word in spell check


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Jazzns, posted 10-14-2009 7:53 PM Jazzns has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15319
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 107 of 157 (530822)
10-15-2009 5:40 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jazzns
10-01-2009 1:06 PM


It's a shame that kbertsche hasn't posted more, because he is the only one of the believers who seems to have any detailed understanding of the theology.

Peg and Buzsaw both take the first alternative identified in Getting into Daniel (Message 30), and both clearly rely on the fact that the end did NOT come in the 2nd Century BC as their major argument. The fact that their claimed fulfillments do not fit well with the actual prophecy is ignored (i.e. they assume that their beliefs trump the Bible).

While Double Fulfillment deals well with past fulfillments it still has problems with future fulfillments. For instance, do we have to have another Alexander ? Do we have to go through all the struggles in Daniel 11 over again ? Or is it just a matter of picking bits and pieces out of the prophecy, and ignoring even more than the other futurists do ?

In hindsight Daniel might have been a poor choice. Isaiah 7 might have been better since Double Fulfillment of that is more necessary, theologically. Even then you have those who ignore the context and insist that it must be about Jesus.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jazzns, posted 10-01-2009 1:06 PM Jazzns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Buzsaw, posted 10-15-2009 9:33 AM PaulK has responded
 Message 110 by Jazzns, posted 10-15-2009 10:51 AM PaulK has not yet responded

    
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 108 of 157 (530853)
10-15-2009 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by PaulK
10-15-2009 5:40 AM


PaulK writes:

It's a shame that kbertsche hasn't posted more, because he is the only one of the believers who seems to have any detailed understanding of the theology.

Hi Paul........As per the PaulK version, secularistic self avowed absolute judge and guru of alleged truth?

PaulK writes:

Peg and Buzsaw both take the first alternative identified in Getting into Daniel (Message 30), and both clearly rely on the fact that the end did NOT come in the 2nd Century BC as their major argument. The fact that their claimed fulfillments do not fit well with the actual prophecy is ignored (i.e. they assume that their beliefs trump the Bible).

Who then is attempting to trump the Bible, particularly Daniel who's prophecy states that the messianic entity ends the ten horn global empire and END of Gentile rule forever i.e. Daniel's end of days.?

Who then is attempting to throw under the rug the Roman empire in all of this before the end of days/fulfillment of prophecy comes?

Who then chooses to ignore the end of days rule of the saints of the most high as per the prophecy?

Who then refuses to admit that none of the above happened contemporaneously to the times of the prophecy as per Daniel the prophet?

PaulK writes:

While Double Fulfillment deals well with past fulfillments it still has problems with future fulfillments.

The alleged double fulfillment requirement need not exist for futurist fulfillment advocates. It's nothing but an obfuscating obstacle obscuring to obscure the obvious.

PaulK writes:

For instance, do we have to have another Alexander ? Do we have to go through all the struggles in Daniel 11 over again ? Or is it just a matter of picking bits and pieces out of the prophecy, and ignoring even more than the other futurists do ?

That's as absurd as insisting that we would need another Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, etc. As I have shown, Alexander is just another cog in the wheel of ultimate end time fulfillment relative to the cohesive prophecy at large.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by PaulK, posted 10-15-2009 5:40 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by PaulK, posted 10-15-2009 10:17 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15319
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 109 of 157 (530862)
10-15-2009 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Buzsaw
10-15-2009 9:33 AM


quote:

Hi Paul........As per the PaulK version, secularistic self avowed absolute judge and guru of alleged truth?

As an honest person who cares about the truth. Did you actually bother to read kbertsche's posts ?

quote:

Who then is attempting to trump the Bible, particularly Daniel who's prophecy states that the messianic entity ends the ten horn global empire and END of Gentile rule forever i.e. Daniel's end of days.?

By which you mean that I put the idea that the BIble means what it says above the assumption that prophecies must be fulfilled.

quote:

Who then is attempting to throw under the rug the Roman empire in all of this before the end of days/fulfillment of prophecy comes?

There are very few references to Rome in Daniel, and those to Republican Rome.

quote:

Who then chooses to ignore the end of days rule of the saints of the most high as per the prophecy?

I don't know. Who ?

quote:

Who then refuses to admit that none of the above happened contemporaneously to the times of the prophecy as per Daniel the prophet?

Apparently you, for one. (Not that I believe that there was such a person).

quote:

The alleged double fulfillment requirement need not exist for futurist fulfillment advocates. It's nothing but an obfuscating obstacle obscuring to obscure the obvious.

As I said, the only ones who require a double fulfillment are those who wish to keep both ideas - of Daniel as accurate regarding the time of Antiochus AND an accurate prediction of the future end of the world. Your comment here simply doesn't address my point.

quote:

That's as absurd as insisting that we would need another Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, etc. As I have shown, Alexander is just another cog in the wheel of ultimate end time fulfillment relative to the cohesive prophecy at large.

Are you saying that Double Fulfillment can freely dispense with elements of the prophecy or are you completely failing to address the real question ? Come to that given that you appear to have no real knowledge of the veiws of proponents of Double Fulfillment, why are you even attempting to answer a question which would require such knowledge ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Buzsaw, posted 10-15-2009 9:33 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2139 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 110 of 157 (530867)
10-15-2009 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by PaulK
10-15-2009 5:40 AM


First off, thanks for all your participation thus far. Its always interesting to see how someone else breaks it down. I have learned a lot in your exchanges with Peg. As much as an argument about the particulars of Daniel was not exactly what I was looking for I am interested in it anyway.

While Double Fulfillment deals well with past fulfillments it still has problems with future fulfillments. For instance, do we have to have another Alexander ? Do we have to go through all the struggles in Daniel 11 over again ? Or is it just a matter of picking bits and pieces out of the prophecy, and ignoring even more than the other futurists do ?

To be quite honest, as more time has past and I have run into those friends again I have the feeling that this was not a very sophisticated answer to my questions about Daniel. It could be that there actually does exist a sophisticated form of this argument but I don't think I have seen it yet. I think yes they do agree that Daniel 11 will happen again in some form and that the actors in that chapter will have modern analogues. I think you could at least somewhat logically say that Daniel 8 for example was Antiochus in order to show that Daniel could in fact predict the future and then the real important prophecy, about the actual end times, has a multiple fulfillment. At some point it breaks down to the issue of, "why are you asking these questions? Smarter people somewhere have this figured out." For particular social reasons I don't push too hard but I can push here. I just don't know if we have the right mix of ideas in this thread yet.

In hindsight Daniel might have been a poor choice. Isaiah 7 might have been better since Double Fulfillment of that is more necessary, theologically. Even then you have those who ignore the context and insist that it must be about Jesus.

Sure, that is why I didn't try to limit it too much in the OP but Daniel is where the idea for the thread started but I am really interested in other places where other believers tackle this issue where it might fit better.

Overall, I was taught growing up in chuch that the Bible does in fact have to stand up to scrutiny. This was a BIG part of the reason I started as a believer to begin with. More and more as time goes on I feel that what my preachers/teachers meant by "scrutiny" was more like "there exists a possible explanation for anything you can think of" rather than what I thought when I consider "scrutiny" which is if it is actually true. I had a pretty decent sized crisis of faith when I really started to ACTUALLY study the Bible and noticed how fallible it is. But you can't just divorce that from the religious experience so I came around to examining the situation with a more leniant allowance for Biblical error. There very well may still be value in the Bible and in my "old" (probably not the right word there) religion and I have already devoted enough time in my life too it that I feel it is only justified to give it a fair hearing with my new set of eyes.


If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson
This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by PaulK, posted 10-15-2009 5:40 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Buzsaw, posted 10-15-2009 8:48 PM Jazzns has responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 111 of 157 (531037)
10-15-2009 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Jazzns
10-15-2009 10:51 AM


Jazzns writes:

I think you could at least somewhat logically say that Daniel 8 for example was Antiochus in order to show that Daniel could in fact predict the future and then the real important prophecy, about the actual end times, has a multiple fulfillment.

In Daniel 8 the he goat, Alexander's empire, after Alexander's death, is divided into four kingdoms. I believe history attests to this.

Out of one of the kingdoms emerges eventully non-contemporaneously to the time of the prophecy a fierce one who will stand in the end times against the prince of princes, i.e. messiah and will be broken.

I can understand why you would take this to refer to Antiochus, but the problem is that Daniel is told to shut up the vision. Why? Because it is not to be fulfilled for a long time, i.e. at the 2nd advent of Jesus/messiah in the time of the end. There is no evidence that Antiochus confronted an entity regarded as the prince of princes. Nor would Daniel have been instructed to shut up the prophecy for a long time if it applied to Antiochus to effect some kind of double fulfillment.

This instruction is repeated to Daniel in chapter 12, the last chapter, that the prophecy is to be sealed until the end time, i.e. when John the Revelator would by God's providence unseal Daniel's prophecy and expound upon the details of the end time fulfillment of what Daniel saw before the sealing of it. Thus, for example, the details of the 10 horned beast revealed by God via John in Revelation 13 and 17. This is why I contend that you will never fully grasp Daniel without applying all corroborating scriptures relative to his prophecies. That's the way the wonderfully harmoneous scriptures are. That's why the comprehensive study of them has always excited me so much. The more I study them, (and I'm still learning after 6+ decades into them) the more I appreciate them and realize that they are indeed inspired from a far greater intelligence then we could ever comprehend.

My prayer for you, dear Christian brother Jazzins, is that in your apparent genuine desire to search out the truth, that you will grow to appreciate the accuracy of the Biblical record as I have come to see. This wonderful book is like a very deep fresh water spring which you can never ever drain dry.

Now, about Daniel 7. If you still think Daniel 7's 10 horned beast also applies to the Greek empire or 10 or 7 of the kings of the era, you have the same problem as in chapter 8, with the exception that the messiah and his saints saints end all Gentile empires forever (i.e the end times) The ten horned beast of Daniel 7 is that global empire detailed by John in Rev 13 and 17,18 which is the last great gentile global empire, and we are witnessing the emergence via the UN NEW WORLD ORDER which we hear so much about these days.

MY LIGHTS ARE DIMMING SO I'M POSTING THIS BEFORE I LOOSE IT!

ABE: I've edited this to say that I'm shutting down. We have some weather and we may loose electricity. I'll check for errors later.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited by Buzsaw, : As indicated.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Jazzns, posted 10-15-2009 10:51 AM Jazzns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Jazzns, posted 10-15-2009 9:59 PM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 114 by PaulK, posted 10-16-2009 4:31 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2139 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 112 of 157 (531047)
10-15-2009 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Buzsaw
10-15-2009 8:48 PM


Out of one of the kingdoms emerges eventully non-contemporaneously to the time of the prophecy a fierce one who will stand in the end times against the prince of princes, i.e. messiah and will be broken.

I won't deny that they are parts of Daniel that don't fit a Maccabean fulfillment. So the two choices are that you have to twist up the parts that do fit a Maccabean fulfillment which makes them sort of distorted, or you accept that Daniel was wrong.

I can understand why you would take this to refer to Antiochus, but the problem is that Daniel is told to shut up the vision. Why? Because it is not to be fulfilled for a long time, i.e. at the 2nd advent of Jesus/messiah in the time of the end. There is no evidence that Antiochus confronted an entity regarded as the prince of princes. Nor would Daniel have been instructed to shut up the prophecy for a long time if it applied to Antiochus to effect some kind of double fulfillment.

This problem with this is that it was not shut up until YOUR choice of fulfillment. Daniel was circulated quite well during Maccabean times and not at all prior to that (that we have evidence of).

Would it not fit your interpretation better had Daniel been sealed until Jesus' time?


If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson
This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Buzsaw, posted 10-15-2009 8:48 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Buzsaw, posted 10-15-2009 11:40 PM Jazzns has responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 113 of 157 (531057)
10-15-2009 11:40 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Jazzns
10-15-2009 9:59 PM


Jazzns writes:

I won't deny that they are parts of Daniel that don't fit a Maccabean fulfillment. So the two choices are that you have to twist up the parts that do fit a Maccabean fulfillment which makes them sort of distorted, or you accept that Daniel was wrong.

There's no twisting. A lot of stuff in Daniel is relatively contemporaneous. For example in Neb's dream, the gold head of the image was contemporaneously Neb's empire, etc. Further, the silver breast, i.e. Medo-Persian was relatively contemporaneous to be fulfilled in Daniel's life time with Daniel involved in Darias the Mede's empire.

Imo, the Maccabeans were just another cog in the wheel leading to end time fulfillment.

Jazzns writes:

Buzsaw writes:

I can understand why you would take this to refer to Antiochus, but the problem is that Daniel is told to shut up the vision. Why? Because it is not to be fulfilled for a long time, i.e. at the 2nd advent of Jesus/messiah in the time of the end. There is no evidence that Antiochus confronted an entity regarded as the prince of princes. Nor would Daniel have been instructed to shut up the prophecy for a long time if it applied to Antiochus to effect some kind of double fulfillment.

This problem with this is that it was not shut up until YOUR choice of fulfillment. Daniel was circulated quite well during Maccabean times and not at all prior to that (that we have evidence of).

No. It was shut up until a time when signs of the fierce one would emerge simultaneously at a time when events relative to end time messianic prophecy fulfillment would be observed.

1. Israel must be restored for messiah to rule because he was to come to a restored nation of Israel as per the prophets (example Ezekiel chapters 36-39, Zechariah 14, Isaiah and others etc.
2. Global government of all nations, tribes and tongues must be in place, i.e. the 10 horn empire of Daniel 7 and Rev 13, 17 and 18.
3. The saints/people of God will be severely persecuted by the powers that be, i.e. tribulation (see Daniel 7 and Rev 13, both being the 10 horn prophecy.

So now that we have these things emerging, we have more light on the meaning of Daniel and the corroborating prophets than they themselves had when they wrote them. Wonderfully amazing!

Jazzns writes:

Would it not fit your interpretation better had Daniel been sealed until Jesus' time?

Acturally some of Daniel was fulfilled with the first advent of Jesus, one being in chapter 9 beginning with 24 about the 70 weeks. This get's a bit comprehensive and may be for another topic. Perhaps there is some data in chapter 12 relative to the 1st advent of Jesus relative to the 1260 days etc, but again that requres some time to explain.

But to concisely answer your question, the 1st Jesus event does not satisfy the fierce one who confronts the prince of princes, the messianic kingdom and the end of Gentile empires, so no. The Jesus 1st advent was neither a single or one of a double fulfillment. It was another cog in the wheel of ultimate fulfillment of Daniel's cohesive prophecy at large.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Jazzns, posted 10-15-2009 9:59 PM Jazzns has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Buzsaw, posted 10-16-2009 10:10 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 117 by Jazzns, posted 10-16-2009 2:44 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15319
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 114 of 157 (531081)
10-16-2009 4:31 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by Buzsaw
10-15-2009 8:48 PM


quote:

In Daniel 8 the he goat, Alexander's empire, after Alexander's death, is divided into four kingdoms. I believe history attests to this.

Out of one of the kingdoms emerges eventully non-contemporaneously to the time of the prophecy a fierce one who will stand in the end times against the prince of princes, i.e. messiah and will be broken.


It also says that this will be in the "latter days" of those four kingdoms - i.e. while they still exist (8:23). It has been more than 2000 years since the last of Alexander's successors, Egypt, fell to Rome. This prophecy, therefore cannot accurately refer to our future.

This tells us that your interpretation of "Prince of Princes" as meaning the Messiah cannot be correct. On the other hand, as we know, Antiochus is depicted as defying God, which would certainly fit.

quote:

I can understand why you would take this to refer to Antiochus, but the problem is that Daniel is told to shut up the vision.

As Jazz has pointed out this is not a problem for the mainstream interpretation. The instruction is to keep the actual text secret. Daniel was known in the Maccabean period, and we have no real evidence that the book was known before then. Thus the Maccabean period is the latest possible time that fits.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Buzsaw, posted 10-15-2009 8:48 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 115 of 157 (531150)
10-16-2009 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Buzsaw
10-15-2009 11:40 PM


Fulfillment Not Contemporaneous
PaulK writes:

It also says that this will be in the "latter days" of those four kingdoms - i.e. while they still exist (8:23). It has been more than 2000 years since the last of Alexander's successors, Egypt, fell to Rome. This prophecy, therefore cannot accurately refer to our future.

The this which will be in the "latter days" is the fierce one which, way out in the future, contends with the "prince of princes" who does not show up contemporaneously.

1. Epiphames did what he did by his own military might. The one prophesied does it by a higher power. (8:24)
2. Epiphames did not contend with the messianic prince of princes.
3. Nothing is known relative to Epiphames having special powers of "understanding dark sentences" and "cause craft to proser in his hand" i.e. mystery etc. 8:23-25
4. Fulfillment will be at a time when stars/host of heaven are cast to earth 8:10. Note that in the NT, Jesus in his Olivet Discourse synopsis accounts in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 aludes to stars of heaven falling to earth after tribulation of saints/elect and before resurrection of saints, and abomination standing in holy place i.e end times/end of ages. (see Matthew 24 for example, especially verses 3 (time of the end still future), 15 (abomination of desolation), and 29 (stars fall).

There's just too much corroboration/cohesion with Daniel's prophecies with Jesus and John's prophecies in the NT to sweep under the proverbial rug.

PaulK writes:

This tells us that your interpretation of "Prince of Princes" as meaning the Messiah cannot be correct. On the other hand, as we know, Antiochus is depicted as defying God, which would certainly fit.

LOL. Numerous historical notables have significantly defied God over the centuries.

PaulK writes:

As Jazz has pointed out this is not a problem for the mainstream interpretation. The instruction is to keep the actual text secret. Daniel was known in the Maccabean period, and we have no real evidence that the book was known before then. Thus the Maccabean period is the latest possible time that fits.

LOL again. When it comes to comprehensive study and understanding of Biblical prophecy, the mainstream i.e. multitudes amount to the peanut gallery.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Buzsaw, posted 10-15-2009 11:40 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by PaulK, posted 10-16-2009 10:45 AM Buzsaw has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15319
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 116 of 157 (531157)
10-16-2009 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by Buzsaw
10-16-2009 10:10 AM


Re: Fulfillment Not Contemporaneous
quote:

The this which will be in the "latter days" is the fierce one which, way out in the future, contends with the "prince of princes" who does not show up contemporaneously.

Who has to turn up in the "latter days" of the Diadochi Kingdoms (8:23). If he didn't show up then, the prophecy has failed.

quote:

1. Epiphames did what he did by his own military might. The one prophesied does it by a higher power. (8:24)

True, that part of the prophecy DID fail.

quote:

2. Epiphames did not contend with the messianic prince of princes.


As I have already pointed out, Antiochus IV Epiphanes did fulfill that part of the prophecy - it is your interpretation of it that is the problem

quote:

3. Nothing is known relative to Epiphames having special powers of "understanding dark sentences" and "cause craft to proser in his hand" i.e. mystery etc. 8:23-25

Perhaps you should try a more modern translation. Especially since you don't understand Jacobean English that well. (In this context "craft" probably means "deceit" - as in "crafty").

quote:

4. Fulfillment will be at a time when stars/host of heaven are cast to earth 8:10. Note that in the NT, Jesus in his Olivet Discourse synopsis accounts in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 aludes to stars of heaven falling to earth after tribulation of saints/elect and before resurrection of saints, and abomination standing in holy place i.e end times/end of ages. (see Matthew 24 for example, especially verses 3 (time of the end still future), 15 (abomination of desolation), and 29 (stars fall).

8:10 is part of the vision. In it the "little horn", grows into the sky and dislodges stars and stamps on them. Are you really going to take this literally ?

quote:

There's just too much corroboration/cohesion with Daniel's prophecies with Jesus and John's prophecies in the NT to sweep under the proverbial rug.

And I certainly don't intend to. Of course later writers reinterpreted Daniel's prophecies after they failed. Those reinterpretations, however, cannot stand against the evidence.

The fact remains, that the prophecy of Daniel 8 culminates in the Hellenistic period - Daniel 8:23 is quite clear. And - to bring it back to the topic - this is a clear motivation to appeal to Double Fulfillment. If there is a single fulfillment, it must have occurred more than 2000 years ago. Only Double Fulfillment can allow a futurist reading, while remaining true to the text.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Buzsaw, posted 10-16-2009 10:10 AM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Buzsaw, posted 10-18-2009 7:55 PM PaulK has responded

    
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2139 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 117 of 157 (531216)
10-16-2009 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Buzsaw
10-15-2009 11:40 PM


No. It was shut up until a time when signs of the fierce one would emerge simultaneously at a time when events relative to end time messianic prophecy fulfillment would be observed.

Which doesn't answer my question about why we would then see it have an explosion of circulation, copying, editing, during the Maccabean period.

Remember you said:

Nor would Daniel have been instructed to shut up the prophecy for a long time if it applied to Antiochus to effect some kind of double fulfillment.

But we know that it WAS NOT shut up during the time that Antiochus was running around desecrating the temple, lying, coniving, killing jews, etc. Daniel was KNOWN then and even experienced quite a bit of popularity that it didn't experience before that.

It just seems REALLY strange that you are using Daniel 8 to suggest that the prophecy should be shut up until the end as support for why it could not refer to the Maccabean period when in fact we know the Maccabean's were quite fond of Daniel.


If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson
This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Buzsaw, posted 10-15-2009 11:40 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 118 of 157 (531233)
10-16-2009 3:31 PM


PaulK and Jazzns:

1. I have shown that John's NT Revelation has unsealed the details of the end time events to which Daniel alluded.

2. I have shown that observable events of our time verify that the end time fulfillment is on track to fulfillment and indeed are beginning to pass, i.e. the phenomenal restoration of Israel, being scattered globally for nearly 2 milleniums and the emergence of one world government/global empire encompassing all tribes, tongues and nations. President Obama is a master globalist moreso than he is a US nationalist. Even the Bush senior and junior presidents were advocates of a new world order. Obama is promoting this with all of his might, demeaning the US, undermining the war on terror and diminishing our national soverignty.

3. Christians and Christianity globally is being attacked and persecuted as per Daniel for the latter days when fulfillment ensues. More have been killed the last hundred years than all of the past centuries combined. According to Jesus, John and the other epistles, this is just the beginning. Relatively few Christians will escape tribulation/persecution before the 2nd advent of Jesus. This is known as the great tribulation. Alas, most evangelicals falsely assume that they will escape this by being rapture out before it begins while, in fact, it began with the Bolshevik Revolution nearly a hundred years ago and via rise of Islam, China etc.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Jazzns, posted 10-16-2009 4:05 PM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 120 by PaulK, posted 10-16-2009 4:34 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2139 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 119 of 157 (531249)
10-16-2009 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Buzsaw
10-16-2009 3:31 PM


1. I have shown that John's NT Revelation has unsealed the details of the end time events to which Daniel alluded.

So you are choosing not to respond to my points about the prevalence of Daniel in Maccabean times? John did not "unseal" Daniel, the Macabeans did. They were EDITING Daniel in 150BC.

Please kindly keep the remaining conspiracy theories to yourself as they are off-topic.


If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson
This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Buzsaw, posted 10-16-2009 3:31 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Buzsaw, posted 10-17-2009 6:15 PM Jazzns has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15319
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 120 of 157 (531254)
10-16-2009 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Buzsaw
10-16-2009 3:31 PM


No,Buz. All you have shown is that you have a daft interpretation of Daniel which doesn't fit with the text. Or reality.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Buzsaw, posted 10-16-2009 3:31 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
Prev1
...
67
8
91011Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019