Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9071 total)
54 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, nwr (3 members, 51 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Upcoming Birthdays: Percy
Post Volume: Total: 893,075 Year: 4,187/6,534 Month: 401/900 Week: 107/150 Day: 38/42 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Endtime Prophecy and the European Union
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 313 (407547)
06-26-2007 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by CWHJr
06-26-2007 6:17 PM


Re: Logical conclusions
Yes there are 27 nations in the EU but there are only 10 that have any veto rights and therefore they control the movement of the EU.

Could you tell us which 10 nations these are? And can you link to the relevant documents that govern the EU? I'm sure that the relevant treaties and such are posted on line; and since English is one of the official languages of the EU, then these treaties should have English versions posted.

Thanks.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by CWHJr, posted 06-26-2007 6:17 PM CWHJr has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Taz, posted 06-27-2007 12:00 AM Chiroptera has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17166
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 47 of 313 (407550)
06-26-2007 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by CWHJr
06-26-2007 6:17 PM


Re: Logical conclusions
There are Christians and Christians. Not all think dogmatically and many would agree wih much I've said. I was raised a Christian but I've had absolutely no experience of Jesus at all. Not ever. And I see no reason to beeive that Christian's experneices of Jesus are fundamentally different from the religious experiences of Hindus, Buddhists or Muslims - or any others.

On the other hand your interpretations of prophecy have no real basis in the Bible or even your experiences. The EU has ten states - if you only count ten - is hardly much of a fulfilment. You need to match the other points in the prophecy. Where are the three horns that are supposed to be uprooted ? Is there really much chance that the Temple will be rebuilt and running again in a mere three years - when it hasn' started yet and there's no sign of an imminent start either ? How can the sacrifice be stopped by the end of 2011 if it hasn't been restarted ?

I'll delay a discussion of Grant Jeffrey's calculations until you explain them better. Which 70 weeks start in 606 BC. Why there's a remaining 360 weeks - and why only those are multiplied by 7.

He's also wrong about the "exact day". I've seen similar calculations. They require fiddling the start date. Inventing a ficitonal 360-day "prophetic year" (there's no such thing in the Bible). Ignoring the fact that the 70'th week doesn't fit. Ignoring the fact that the author of Daniel intends his prophecies to refer to the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and that the events of that time fit the prophecy better. Needless to say I'm not impressed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by CWHJr, posted 06-26-2007 6:17 PM CWHJr has taken no action

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 313 (407593)
06-26-2007 11:34 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by PaulK
06-26-2007 2:09 AM


Re: Logical conclusions
PaulK writes:

Yes, Daniel's prophecies did fail in some respects. The seventy week prophey in particular is a bit of a mess since the times don't seem to work out (although clearly the unknown author intended the end to fall in his own time) - and doesn't really work with the various other interpretations that Christians have proposed either (they have to ignore the 70th week or assert that it is entirely separate from the 69 - for which they can give no good reason).

The 69 weeks of years do precisely work out if you do the math on them. If you cannot agree to that, please show why you think they don't.

It's the 70th week only that raises the most controversy. A 7th Day Adventist prophecy teacher on Sky Angel TV (Dominion Broadcasting) taught that that last week happened contemporaneous to Jesus's baptism and ministry whereas the majority think it applies to an end time 7 years where a treaty is signed which will be broken midway which would be 3 1/2 years. I'm not convinced as to which yet but am fully convinced that the 69 come out in such a manner that a bonafide fulfilled prophecy is historical.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by PaulK, posted 06-26-2007 2:09 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Nimrod, posted 06-27-2007 12:13 AM Buzsaw has taken no action
 Message 52 by PaulK, posted 06-27-2007 2:23 AM Buzsaw has taken no action

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 2520 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 49 of 313 (407595)
06-27-2007 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Chiroptera
06-26-2007 6:29 PM


Re: Logical conclusions
Chiro, he's somewhat right, you know.

There are 5 permanent members in the UN security council, which are China, USA, England, France, and Russia. There are 10 non-permanent members. These guys change ever 2 years. The current ones are Belgium, Congo, Ghana, Indonesia, Italy, Panama, Peru, Qatar, Slovakia, and South Africa.

Now, the number 10 happens to be the same number that our number system is based on. It's also the number of fingers we have. In other words, it's a number that is built into our psychology. Therefore, I don't think it's some kind of miracle that the prophecy used the number 10 and then there are 10 non-permanent members in the UN.


Disclaimer:

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Chiroptera, posted 06-26-2007 6:29 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Chiroptera, posted 06-27-2007 8:29 AM Taz has taken no action

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 313 (407597)
06-27-2007 12:07 AM


The Kingdoms (beast horns)
These beast horns which are analogous to kingdoms are alluded to in three Biblical texts which are Daniel 7, Revelation 13 and Revelation 17. In order to determine what/who these are one must apply all of the info given in all three accounts. When you do this it does not come out applying to some revived Roman empire or EU confederation. It is clearly global. Note in Revelation 17 the wording goes that these rule as kings which could mean they are not literal kings/kingdoms or it may be that they are key powerful nations who dominate the politics of the planet. In the Daniel account some information is given that is not mentioned in the other two which reveals that the "little notable horn" will subdue three of the kingdoms which would make a total of eight since these three will become one as is implied.
At this point all we can do is watch and speculate as to how this will all work out. The point I wish to make is that according to the info in these three texts, this is global and not limited to the EU, though certainly the EU will be a player in it all.

The implication also in the 11th and 12th chapter of Daniel is that these end time powers will be of made up of two groups, the more northern ones and the more southern ones relative to Israel, the northern ones being the more totalitarian regimes and the southern being the more democratic.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

  
Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 51 of 313 (407598)
06-27-2007 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Buzsaw
06-26-2007 11:34 PM


ADVENTIST preacher
I think I know who you are refering to.

He wrote the best prophecy book (by far) I ever read called "Exploding The Israel Deception" (more like a booklet, its real tiny and about 120 pages).

His interpretation was that the 490 days equal years and started after the Temple was rebuilt.

He essentially equated the closing events to Jesus death on the cross and thus that took the sacrifice away.When the Temple was torn in two.

The problem I saw was that he was using a lower chronology.I believe the date for the rebuilding of the temple was about 516 BC (unless finishing touches were put several decades later that I dont know about).I cant say the exact date he used because...

I wish I had the book but I lent it to some preacher.This preacher friend I know is always talking about "rapture" and "prophecy", so I thought it would be a good book to give him some alternative views (the majority of what the book talks about is actually fairly sound exegesis-in stark contrast to typical prophecy "experts"). The preacher got all confused after reading it and thought the author was "A Jew trying to bash Christianity".I told his the author was a fundamentalist Christian and explained that his book was actually the best attempt to make some sense in the "prophecy" arena.I thought the book actually gave the best case at DEFENDING Christianity from absurd modern day interpretations that havae been imposed on the Bible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Buzsaw, posted 06-26-2007 11:34 PM Buzsaw has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by PaulK, posted 06-27-2007 2:34 AM Nimrod has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17166
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 52 of 313 (407605)
06-27-2007 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Buzsaw
06-26-2007 11:34 PM


Re: Logical conclusions
quote:

The 69 weeks of years do precisely work out if you do the math on them. If you cannot agree to that, please show why you think they don't.

The abolition of the Sacrifice occurred in 168 BC. That is the middle of the 70th week. The start point must therefore be about 655 BC. That's way too early. You did actually read my post where I pointed out that the events "predicted" referred to Antichus IV Epiphanes ?

(And even in the erroneous Christian interpretations we don't know which year Jesus died in so any claim that the numbers work out exactly is exaggerating.)

quote:

It's the 70th week only that raises the most controversy. A 7th Day Adventist prophecy teacher on Sky Angel TV (Dominion Broadcasting) taught that that last week happened contemporaneous to Jesus's baptism and ministry

That doesn't seem to solve anything. You still don't have a "Prnce of the People who is to come" attacking Jerusalem. You don't have the sacrifice being banned. You don't have an "abomination which causes desolation". All these things have matches in Antiochus IV Epiphanes.

quote:

I'm not convinced as to which yet but am fully convinced that the 69 come out in such a manner that a bonafide fulfilled prophecy is historical.

So basically you don't know which of two years the end of the 69th week refers to. You don't know - and can't know - when either of those two years was. You don't even know - and can't know - which year the original author intended for the start point. You have to throw out andreject the interpretation which best ifts the prediction and best fits into the context of Daniel. So I'd say that your conviction is on pretty shaky ground.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Buzsaw, posted 06-26-2007 11:34 PM Buzsaw has taken no action

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17166
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 53 of 313 (407606)
06-27-2007 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Nimrod
06-27-2007 12:13 AM


Re: ADVENTIST preacher
He's got another problem. The 490 years start from the decree which allowed rebuilding to begin. (Daniel 9:25).

If he equates the end of the sacrifices and the Abomination to Jesus death (and it's hard to see how the Abomination fits) he's still got the end of the 70 weeks occurring 3 1/2 years after that. What event does that correspond to ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Nimrod, posted 06-27-2007 12:13 AM Nimrod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Nimrod, posted 06-27-2007 5:48 AM PaulK has replied
 Message 79 by Pollux, posted 12-10-2011 12:01 AM PaulK has taken no action

  
Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 54 of 313 (407610)
06-27-2007 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by PaulK
06-27-2007 2:34 AM


Re: ADVENTIST preacher
(I cant paste but this is in responce to your 539/516 BCE comment)

Yes, I do understand that plain reading of the text.539BCE would be the general idea. (There are some other interpretations though, and the guy may have been refering to later events perhaps closer to the time of Ezra)

I want to respond to the previous message that wasnt directed to me though.

You have decided that you *KNOW* which specific person the author of Daniel was refering to.

Why do you think that the dates dont add up (are we assuming that each day equals a year?).I mean that takes us back to about 660 BCE.

There were fairly precise historical records back then.But the Jews auctually had a slightly LOWER chronology (if anything)as far as their calculations were concerned, not higher as your theory would require.

True that some isolated time periods were longer (for example, Josephus gave 612 years from the 1st Temple to the Exodus where as most modern scholars give 284-480 AND there was also a longer time from between the 1st Temple to the 2nd Temple in the Jews ancient understanding), but there general chronology was lower.

Let me ask you something.

Do you feel that the events in Daniel were viewed by legalistic Jews as completed or unfinished? (Im refering mainly to "non-messianic" or less-messianic Jews when I say legalistic) (also I am refering mainly to the BCE/BC period).What do you feel the views were of more messianic type Jews.

When exactly do you feel that the post-fact "prophecies" were written down? In the same week as the events? Less than 7 years after?

I am wondering what dynamics you feel were responsible for the book being held in such regard in its day and a few centuries after (less important though still worth mentioning is that it is in the Tanak to this day).

Thanks!

Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by PaulK, posted 06-27-2007 2:34 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by PaulK, posted 06-27-2007 1:31 PM Nimrod has taken no action

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 313 (407617)
06-27-2007 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Taz
06-27-2007 12:00 AM


Re: Logical conclusions
Hi, Taz.

CWHJr. isn't talking about the United Nations. He is talking about the European Union. As far as I know, the EU doesn't have anything like the security council. I can think of three member nations that are large and powerful enough that they wield a huge de facto influence over EU policy, but finding ten kings is going to be quite a stretch.

I don't think that the UN Security Council really counts, anyway. There are 15 members total, and in any event, ten of them serve for temprorary terms. Only five are permanent, and these are the ones that have the power.

However, your point is taken. John the Revelator chose the number 10 in his fascinating heavily-coded riddle, and human beings are going to set up a lot of institutions based on the number 10. You are correct that it isn't going to be hard for the faithful to find candidates for the 10 kings.

Edited by Chiroptera, : Added stuff.


Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Taz, posted 06-27-2007 12:00 AM Taz has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by jar, posted 06-27-2007 10:41 AM Chiroptera has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33887
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 56 of 313 (407626)
06-27-2007 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Chiroptera
06-27-2007 8:29 AM


Re: Logical conclusions
He is talking about the European Union. As far as I know, the EU doesn't have anything like the security council.

This is yet another area where it is very easy for the Prophecy folk to play word games. With the creation of the EU and the end of the Cold War, the security functions of NATO are gradually being assumed by the EU.

BUT...

they also play games with the UN and the UN Security Council in the sure knowledge that their audience is too ignorant to know how silly their assertions really are.

The facts are that the UN Security Council does not have any capabilities of projecting power unless Member Nations provide the funding, logistics and manpower.

It is toothless.


Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Chiroptera, posted 06-27-2007 8:29 AM Chiroptera has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Taz, posted 06-27-2007 12:23 PM jar has taken no action
 Message 60 by imageinvisible, posted 12-19-2007 3:03 PM jar has replied
 Message 63 by imageinvisible, posted 01-01-2008 10:59 PM jar has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 2520 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 57 of 313 (407638)
06-27-2007 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by jar
06-27-2007 10:41 AM


Re: Logical conclusions
jar writes:

The facts are that the UN Security Council does not have any capabilities of projecting power unless Member Nations provide the funding, logistics and manpower.

It is toothless.


I think that's pretty much the original intent by the founders of the UN. The League of Nations failed because it did not have the support and respect of the most powerful nations. The UN pretty much was another version of the League, but this time it got the support and a tiny bit of respect from the most powerful nations. It hasn't got anything remotely close to what we would call an influencial political entity. The only thing it can do is talk.

The EU, however, have a potential to become the first multinational active government in our history. I'm hopeful.


Disclaimer:

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by jar, posted 06-27-2007 10:41 AM jar has taken no action

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17166
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 58 of 313 (407655)
06-27-2007 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Nimrod
06-27-2007 5:48 AM


Re: ADVENTIST preacher
The interpretation of the seventy weeks prophecy in Daniel 9 as referring to Antiochus IV Epiphanes is:
1) Consistent with the other prophecies in Daniel
2) A good fit to the historicl events.

Neither of these are true for readings that have Chapter 9 talking about events a couple of hundred years later.

Now I can only guess why the dates don't add up - but all everyone else can do is guess, too. I'd rather stick with the relatively solid evidence we have than rely on someone elses speculations.

I also don't see why we can place much weight on the opinions of Jews AFTER the prophecies failed. Why should I trust them any more than the Jehovah's Witnessess attempts to deal with their failed prophecies ? We know that people who have an emotional investment in prophecies do invent reasons to deny the failures. We have reason to beleive that Daniel was popular around the time of the Maccabean revolt (we know it was popular not too long after that time). We know that Jews even now are waiting for the Messiah but it's been a lot longer than 490 years since any possible candidate for Daniel's decree. So it looks pretty clear to me that the opinions of people who believed in the prophecies aren't going to tell us anything useful on their own.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Nimrod, posted 06-27-2007 5:48 AM Nimrod has taken no action

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17166
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 59 of 313 (407702)
06-27-2007 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by CWHJr
06-26-2007 6:17 PM


Re: Logical conclusions
For you information the 430 years is from Ezekiel 4. It is NOT describd as referrign to years of punishment (if it predicts anything it's more likely to be the duration of the siege of Jerusalem which the chapter predicts). Leviticus 26:8 doesn't say that God will multiply the underved time by seven - rather it suggests that the punishment will be repeated, only seven times worse. And it's pretty dubious to maintain that the punishment continued uninterruped from the Babylonan captivity up to the formation of modern Israel. If the punishment is exile, for instance, then the start point for the repeated punishment should be no earlier than 70 AD.

In other words you have to look at the bible, and consider what is said. You can't trust the people who claim prophecy fulfilment. They're almost always twisting something, or leaving out bits that don't fit - usually both.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by CWHJr, posted 06-26-2007 6:17 PM CWHJr has taken no action

  
imageinvisible
Member (Idle past 5147 days)
Posts: 132
From: Arlington, Texas, US
Joined: 12-03-2007


Message 60 of 313 (441993)
12-19-2007 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by jar
06-27-2007 10:41 AM


Re: Logical conclusions
I wonder how toothless the UN will be when they elect a president.

My bad. I got my information mixed up. that was supposed to be the EU that is getting a full time (i.e. not every six months) president.

Edited by imageinvisible, : added qs text


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by jar, posted 06-27-2007 10:41 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 12-19-2007 3:05 PM imageinvisible has taken no action
 Message 62 by Chiroptera, posted 12-19-2007 3:23 PM imageinvisible has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022