Is ENP not the Covenant ? Why not ?

(heavily moderated)

Postby Seeker on Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:01 am

Many people who are RRE adherents will quote Rev 17 that Rome was during John’s time or number 6 of 8.

Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
Rev 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
Rev 17:13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
Rev 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.


The very scripture they often cite proves against Rome producing the AC. There are 8 in total with the 8th being the beast or AC. Five are fallen (before Rome’s time), one is, Rome (during John’s time), and the other, future is not during John’s time. And then the beast (AC) is the 8th.

RRE claims that the EU is the revived Roman Empire or the next after the 6th. This would make the RRE the 7th leaving the 8th to be the AC. This proves that the EU is not the AC kingdom. It would take two revivals to get to number 8 from number 6. This also just ignores the historical fact that the Ottoman Empire succeeded the Roman Empire in ruling over Israel and the middle east. The Ottoman empire would be number 7 not the EU.

The beast that was (before John’s time), is not (during John’s time). Rome was during John’s time and the beast wasn’t during John’s time. Proof positive it wasn’t the Roman Empire. So again Rome is disqualified from being the AC kingdom.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:16 am

Seeker wrote:Hey Doug,

He is introduced here

Dan 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.


But that's before the end times in Daniel 11:35, which disqualifies him from being the Antichrist.


Places the AoD here

Dan 11:45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.
Dan 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
Dan 12:3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.


The act of the AOD is not mentioned in those particular verses. But later in Daniel 12:12.
Shows the same person dying right before the resurrection.


Now where do you read about the Antichrist dying in those particular verse? He comes to his "end". That doesn't mean dying. The Antichrist's "end" is not dying anyway. He is cast alive into the lake of fire. Those attacks in Daniel 11:40-45 by the North, South, and East just preceed Jesus's return.

Not only that, the false prophet has the world make the image of the Antichrist, the act of the AOD, to be worshipped after the Antichrist is mortally wounded. You are placing the act of the AOD (Daniel 11:31) ahead of the Antichrist dying???? Please explain.

Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Seeker on Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:30 am

Hi Doug,

You will never see it so no use going over it all again, others will see it though.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Mr Dan on Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:36 am

Id like to throw a question into this conversation if I may.

So lets assume that Dan 9:26 is indeed refering to the legions under Vespasion the emporer or his son of the same name despite Rev 17 seems to indicate that the empire being spoken of didnt exist in the writings of John which I believe we date around ad 95.

Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.


We know that the 15th legion was based in Syria with a strength of 60 thousand legionairs and according to Tacitus the Syrian province had sworn allegience to Vespasion near the end of the year of four emporers in 69 under the authority of the governor Mucianus adding 13 thousand Syrians to the legions strength. In addition we know that the legion used jewish mercenaries in the march against Vitealus in Rome in ad 69 and can be speculated that it allso incorporated a number of Armeneans as well.

How sure are we that the people spoken of in Dan 9:26 are Roman and not Syrian or is this an assumption?
Mr Dan
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Creation

Postby Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:47 am

The beast that was (before John’s time), is not (during John’s time). Rome was during John’s time and the beast wasn’t during John’s time. Proof positive it wasn’t the Roman Empire. So again Rome is disqualified from being the AC kingdom.



They are 8 kings. The sixth was ruling at the time of John. The five fallen are....

Julius Caesar
August Caesar
Tiberius
Caligula
Claudius

That family is called the Julio-Claudains. According to RomanEmperors.org and as a matter of history Nero was the last of that goup.

Nero - was the sixth king - who was reigning during John's time.

The seventh king was yet to come of John times. And even when the seventh does come, his reign is brief.

The seventh king is the incognito Man of Sin - the Antichrist - who will reign 3 1/2 years, before being mortally wounded. As the seventh king, he is represented in Revelation 13 as one of the seven heads. All written with blasphemy - as the Roman Emperors, all, considered themselfs as god.

The resurrected Antichrist, the beast ascending from the bottomless pit will the eighth king - the beast. Being "of" the other seven as it says - meaning that he will be of the Julio-Claudian bloodline.

The phrase-ology that you are challenging - the beast that "was, and is not, and even he is " the eighth is just an expression to say that he lives, is killed, and resurrected. Similar sequencing (but not exact) is given about Jesus in Revelation 1:4.

You might be able to make any argument that Judas is the Antichrist - or perhaps it is the same demon that possessed Judas who will possess the resurrected Antichrist.

Peace,

Doug L.
Last edited by Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Mr Dan on Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:09 am

What about Nerva ad 96-98 . He was connected to the Julio Claudian line through his uncle Octavious's marriage to Tiberiuses grandaughter. Not a direct blood relation sure but the others were allso linked by marriage and adoption combining the family lines.

I dont follow the reasoning that the Julio Claudian line represent the eight kings. Augustus the founder was of the line but was born under the name Octavion and adopted in to the Julion line.

Regardless Nero committed suicide in 68 ending the direct line ushering the year of four emporers and the beginning of the flaviun dynasty that lasted until ad 96.

Most agree that the dating of johns writing is ad 95 during the flavians rule but nero died 2 years before the jewish uprising so I fail to see the Julio Claudian connection. Explain please.
Last edited by Mr Dan on Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:42 am, edited 3 times in total.
Mr Dan
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Creation

Postby Seeker on Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:15 am

Usually the last place RRE people cite is Daniel 2. So might as well cover it as well up front. The legs they say represent the east and west division of the old Roman Empire. From Dan 2 they say that the 4th kingdom existed back in Roman times, went into hibernation, and will reemerge in the form of the current EU. Or has emerged I guess.

The great thing about Daniel 2 is that God provides an interpretation for the dream.

Dan 2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

He even says the dream is certain and the “interpretation” of it is sure. Makes it a simple matter of reading the interpretation that God says is a sure interpretation for the dream. God tells us exactly what the dream means in other words.

Dan 2:31 Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.
Dan 2:32 This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,
Dan 2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.
Dan 2:34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.
Dan 2:35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.
Dan 2:36 This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.


So that was the dream now Daniel will tell the interpretation of that dream. This is what God says the dream means.

Dan 2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
Dan 2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.
Dan 2:39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.
Dan 2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.
Dan 2:41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.
Dan 2:42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.
Dan 2:43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.
Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
Dan 2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.


God says that Nebuchadnezzar was the head of gold. So this is a positive ID on the first kingdom. There would be two more and then a fourth for a total of four, no more no less. RRE would say the iron legs were east and west Rome while God says that the iron represents strength. As iron was the strongest metal so will the 4th kingdom be.

RRE would say that the difference in the feet and toes being made of clay/iron is the re-born Roman Empire. God says that kingdom will be divided and as the toes were part iron and part clay the kingdom will be partly strong and partly broken (weak/fragile). It just says that the 4th kingdom will be a composite of strength and weakness.

In the days of these kings (of the 4th kingdom) God will set up His everlasting kingdom. This clearly places this at the end of last 7 years. Remember this is the 4th kingdom that this is referring to. Rome did not do this. If Rome did not fulfill the things written about the 4th kingdom it wasn’t the 4th kingdom.

Rev 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
Rev 17:13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
Rev 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.


The 10 kings had received no kingdom yet, they receive power as kings for one hour with the beast. The kings are only kings while the AC reigns. The AC did not reign in Rome. The 10 kings are only present with the AC during his time span. Rome did not fulfill either part of this.

Dan 7:20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.
Dan 7:21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
Dan 7:22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.


The AC makes war with the saints until the time came that the saints possess the kingdom. The little horn here is the leader of the 4th kingdom Daniel speaks of in Dan 7. Dan 2 also says that there are only 4 kingdoms and that the AC leads the 4th.

Dan 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
Dan 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
Dan 7:26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.
Dan 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.


This again shows the 10 kings reigning during the time of the AC and gives us a timeframe of 3 ½ years that the leader of the 4th kingdom has power over the saints. He will make war with them and overcome them for 3 ½ years. Then the saints will be given the kingdom.

The saints inherit the kingdom after the conclusion of the last 7 years. The AC and the 10 kings that are with him must exist during the last 3 ½ years, besides the ones he overthrows himself, but they are around for him to overthrow in the first place. The AC+10 are part of the composition of the 4th kingdom. They are vital ingredients to the fulfillment of the prophecies concerning the 4th kingdom.

Only the 4th kingdom fulfills these prophecies. Rome did not fulfill them. There is no indication anywhere of the 4th kingdom living, dying, and being re-born. I guess it makes sense to some but not to me. Everywhere I look the bible excludes Rome from being the 4th kingdom.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 12:30 pm

Mr Dan wrote:What about Nerva ad 96-98 . He was connected to the Julio Claudian line through his uncle Octavious's marriage to Tiberiuses grandaughter. Not a direct blood relation sure but the others were allso linked by marriage and adoption combining the family lines.

I dont follow the reasoning that the Julio Claudian line represent the eight kings. Augustus the founder was of the line but was born under the name Octavion and adopted in to the Julion line.

Regardless Nero committed suicide in 68 ending the direct line ushering the year of four emporers and the beginning of the flaviun dynasty that lasted until ad 96.

Most agree that the dating of johns writing is ad 95 during the flavians rule but nero died 2 years before the jewish uprising so I fail to see the Julio Claudian connection. Explain please.


There is a lot of controversy surrounding the 95 or 60's timeframe. I don't claim to be a expert, but I once heard some bible prophecy commentator explain what the 95 date was based on (he was in the camp that, like me, ascribe to 60's timeframe). Exactly what he said I don't recall, but the general essence was the whole thing (the 95 date) was based upon some abiguious inferences in some letters written by early church notables, one referencing the other in a second and third hand method.

On the issue of Nerva....

http://www.romanemperors.org/

They say that Nero was the last of the Julio-Claudians. btw, Julius's father was also named, gues what? ....Caesar :mrgreen: It is a family name.

At that site, they start listing the Roman "emperors" with Augustus because Julius Caesar was a dictator (at the top of the page at that site). But they were all of the same family.

The reason why that the eight kings of Revelation 17 are of that family is that the prince who shall come in Daniel 9:26-27 is of the people who destroy both the temple and the city - which historically has been recognized as the Romans. What can be more Roman than being descended fro the Julio Claudian bloodline?

The other thing being as they are of that Roman bloodline, it ties them to the fourth empire in Daniel 2 Nebuchadnezzaar's statue dream,
that is, the Roman Empire.

Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Mr Dan on Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:05 pm

Thats what Im trying to get at Doug, is that Im trying to understand is there a definate link in here that Im missing. I recognize the dispute about the 60-95 time frame for Johns writing as well as the division in thinking between the Augustus and Julien camps beginning that line of Emperors. I assume neighter of us is a definitive expert on these matters but are both well enough read to understand the debates concerning the interpretation of history well enough to discuss the different views longer than need be. We could go into some length about who did what in the jewish revolt but Im just recognizing that there is some reason to question not only if that passage is indeed refering to 70 ad and if so does it apply to just the Roman soldiers in the 15th legion or can we safely incorporate the other forces as well? I want to move past the point of assumptions and see if there is something solid that can definitly say its one or the other?
Mr Dan
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Creation

Postby Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:18 pm

Seeker, the ten toes, the ten kings, are at the bottom of the fourth empire. They have not be revealed yet....with certainity.

The are at the end of the fourth empire - the Roman Empire. Just like the four breakup empires of Alexander's kingdom were at the bottom of the torso of brass.

The tens will be last portion of the Roman Empire. The genesis of the Roman empire into the end-times is....

Roman Empire > Holy Roman Empire as associated with the Vatican, the ten kings burn the Vatican to the ground, forthcoming at the mid-point of the seven years > Roman Empire.

It's all the Roman Empire represented in the statue. The ten toes are just like the four kingdoms in Daniel 8:22-23 it is still THEIR KINGDOM singular, even as the breakup kingdoms, as being the torso of brass, the Greek Empire.

8:22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

8:23 And in the latter time of THEIR KINGDOM, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.


Why does it say in the latter time of THEIR KINGDOM and not kingdoms? :answerthequestion:

Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:48 pm

Mr Dan wrote:Thats what Im trying to get at Doug, is that Im trying to understand is there a definate link in here that Im missing. I recognize the dispute about the 60-95 time frame for Johns writing as well as the division in thinking between the Augustus and Julien camps beginning that line of Emperors. I assume neighter of us is a definitive expert on these matters but are both well enough read to understand the debates concerning the interpretation of history well enough to discuss the different views longer than need be. We could go into some length about who did what in the jewish revolt but Im just recognizing that there is some reason to question not only if that passage is indeed refering to 70 ad and if so does it apply to just the Roman soldiers in the 15th legion or can we safely incorporate the other forces as well? I want to move past the point of assumptions and see if there is something solid that can definitly say its one or the other?


Here's what I trying to get at, Dan. If we somehow figure a Syrian factor under the guise of being with the Roman Army.... then we are stuck back in the torso of brass, the four breakup kingdoms. That torso of brass has long since gone - which includes the four breakup kingdoms of the Syrians (Assyrians as the case may be).

I keep referring my friend - brother Seeker - back to Daniel 8:22-23, because 8:23 ends that torso of brass by all of the transgressions that occured during that timeframe in the name of Hellinization of the Jews against their covenant with God have come into full, capped by Antiochus's actions. As a matter of history, Antiochus Epihanes meet every one of those prophecies in Daniel 11:21-31. Including the type of act called the abomination of desolation - which pinnacled the hellenization because the staute was of Zeus - but with a kicker in that Antiochus asserted that he was the manifestation of Zeus - that is, Antiochus was claimng that he was god.

What we have to look at now is how the Roman Empire applys. I don't claim to be the orignator of everything I say.... some of it though, I haven't heard anywhere else, such as, the eight kings being of the Julio Claudian family line. That is not to say that someone else has not concluded the same thing.

I get bits and pieces from 35 years of listening, reading, and watching many many bible commentators - as well as, my own study. From Irving Baxter, Endtime.com, who is posttrib, and I don't even agree with him on that, and some other issues... I picked up on what he said about the Holy Roman Empire - and its significance. And why the Vatican has such pull with the European politicians. Well, I can not overlook the fact that in Rev 17, the woman is associated sitting upon seven hills - which to me ties her as being the RCC , more specifically the Vatican.

Now even though I don't recall Irving saying this, I reason - if we are in a defacto Holy Roman Empire situation right now as he says and I agree - what would it take to go back into simply the Roman Empire - with a dictator in charge - like Julius Caesar was.

Picking up on what Irvin said, I considered what has to happen to do that is the "Holy" part of the Holy Roman Empire has to be eliminated. Which in Revelation 17, that can be done, in the concept of the 10 kings hating the woman, although they had a good time with her, and ravages her with fire. To me, that means that the Vatican will be burnt to the ground, either literally or figuratively. Because, let's face it - at that particular time when the Antichrist has recovered from the mortal wound and claims to be god.... what purpose is the Vatican's religion, whatever it has evolved to by that time? So the European 10 don't have to cater to the Vatican anymore. The religious center held by the Vatican will migrate to Jerusalem - where the Antichrist will go into the temple and sit himself down as god. The European 10 will pledge total allegiance to him.

Thus, for that last three and a half year we have the Roman Empire, with the ten toes, and prince who has come, a descendant of the Julio-Claudians. He will also be a Jew. And right now in Lebanon, the lead peacekeeping nation is..... Italy :eek:


Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Mr Dan on Thu Jan 11, 2007 3:21 pm

Dan 8:20 The ram which thou sawest having [two] horns [are] the kings of Media and Persia.
Dan 8:21 And the rough goat [is] the king of Grecia: and the great horn that [is] between his eyes [is] the first king.
Dan 8:22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
Dan 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
Dan 8:24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
Dan 8:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify [himself] in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
Dan 8:26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told [is] true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it [shall be] for many days.
Dan 8:27 And I Daniel fainted, and was sick [certain] days; afterward I rose up, and did the king's business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood [it].

I would agree that this appears to be prophecy concerning Antiochus IV, however if we attempt to tie that in with 11:21 as some do I would say the similarities end as Antiochus did recieve the throne of the Selucid kingdom but not by flatteries or peace. he had assumed the role as something of a fill in ruler since the rightfull heir was to young to rule. he remedied this with murder and assumed the role since he was heir in line after the infant Antiochus. So for whatever reason Daniels vision focuses around the Persians and the grecians, who had been at war for centuries occupying each others lands and cities
So while I agree daniel 8 shows the break up and division of Alexanders kingdom, dan 11 cannot be speaking of that, while the campaigns appear to mirror in many ways the campaigns of Antiochus IV and his predecessors the rise to power does not match his own, as well as dan 12 clearly leads l to the last days.

We all agree who the first three empires are in the statue vision where we part and the purpose of this discussion since we need to validate the fourth before we can assume if the ENP is the covenent or not , is the definition of the the legs and ten toes.
Dan 2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.


Later in his life Daniel recieves a similar vision but this time instead of the statue hes sees four beasts, the fourth of which is depicted in revelation. Concerning the fourth beats Daniel is told
Dan 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.


regarding the fourth part of the statue, the legs of iron and the ten toes Daniel is told
Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, [but] it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.


So clearly it is explained to daniel that during the days of the legs of iron and ten toes of clay God will set up his kingdom, signifying that this empire beast or part of the statue is to come about in the days just prior to the establishment of the Kingdom of God right?

That being said lets move onto the dating of Johns writing, if the date is 60 ad instead of 95 as some would say that eliminates allso the julien-Claudious line because rev 17 says the king does not currently exist. With Nero being the last typicaly associated with that line of emperors and his reign ending in 68 ad he and the julien-Claudious line would have currently existed. It might be more practicle to assume it refers to them if the later date is used but well run into some problems there as well if we honestly examine it. But regardless the placing of the fourth kingdom as defined by the angel bypasses the Roman period anyways.

So we look at the Holy Roman empire aspect, the problem in my line of thinking here is that for starters the Holy Roman empire wasnt Roman. It was a loose assortment of Germanic tribe coming togethor under a loose religious confederation in an attempt to revive the last cultural vestiges of what was left behind by Rome. In all truth Europe as a whole was a collection of warring f people trying to assume dominence in a very troubling time. There was the absence of central governent since Rome had declined ,withdrawn, and seperated due to internal corruption, a long period of lousy leadership, to many foriegners in its military ranks as well as a lengthy list of cause and effects that contributed to centuries of conflict in the European area. Followed by horrible plagues, Mongul and timured invaders from asia as well as Islamic invaders from the coast of africa. The vatican has such a pull in European politics because the vatican has ingrained itself in European politics and helped stabalise the warring people of Europe a thousand years ago with a call to carry the cross into the crusades. The vatican has vied for power for over a thousand years compromising the gospel of Jesus Christ for its own political gain.Arguably If it wasnt for the vatican there wouldnt be a Europe today. Regardless Charlemagne the founder of the Holy Roman Empire was a frank and I would find it hard to believe there is any connection to the Julien lineage there. I think its really stretching it. Im not familiar with Irvin so I cant comment on his approach to this but thats my view of it.

I know many people view the reference to the city on seven hills as a marker toward Rome but I should note that Istanbul is allso a city of seven hills, founded by Byzantene greeks and refered to in anchient Mythologies as Magog, the city at the center of the earth. Alexander held this view when he built the caspian gates, allthough that in itself is not without dispute.

I dont see anything conclusive to say Rome is the fourth kingdom, nor do I think we can conclusively say one way or the other, but I do think Herbs recent post on the Arab quartet was especially interesting.

Peace to you Doug,
Dan
Mr Dan
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Creation

Hey

Postby njfishwatchTurkey&Isr on Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:06 pm

Hey Dan,

I started a thread a few years back about the armies that attacked jerusalem in 70 a.d. I did quite a bit of research from books and the internet and came to the same conclusion that the army was probably primarily made up of Syrians. So even if Daniel 9's "people of the prince" referred to the 70 a.d. it could very well refer to the descendents of the Syrian people and not Romans as we think of it. That thread was deleted with many others.
njfishwatchTurkey&Isr
 
Posts: 790
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:10 pm

Postby Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:25 pm

Hi Mr. Dan,

That being said lets move onto the dating of Johns writing, if the date is 60 ad instead of 95 as some would say that eliminates allso the julien-Claudious line because rev 17 says the king does not currently exist. With Nero being the last typicaly associated with that line of emperors and his reign ending in 68 ad he and the julien-Claudious line would have currently existed. It might be more practicle to assume it refers to them if the later date is used but well run into some problems there as well if we honestly examine it. But regardless the placing of the fourth kingdom as defined by the angel bypasses the Roman period anyways.


I didn't mean to imply that Revelation was written in the year 60, but sometime within that 60's decade..... I can't remember exactly which year within that decade that is usually credited as being the time when Revelation was given to John.

Anyway, I think you misunderstand the Julio-Claudian connection as it applies to those verses. So I will try this method....

17:10 And there are seven kings
(the seven kings are the seven heads on the beast, the beast itself is the eighth king in Rev 17:11 below): five are fallen (those five are the five, sequentially reigning, previous Julio-Claudians - and there are precisely five as a matter of history - (1) Julius Caesar, (2) Augustus, (3) Tiberius, (4) Caligula, (5) Claudius - so I am not being arbitrary just picking any 5), and one is (the one who is - is number 6, Nero, who was ruling at the time, and historically was the last of that family clan according to the history books... up to this point in history. The Antichrist whose appearance is just around the corner, however, will turn out to be the last of that line. If there had been other Julio-Claudians hostorically ruling after Nero, then my theory regarding the Julio-Claudian connection to the Antichrist wouldn't hold. ), and the other is not yet come (this is number 7, he was future of John's time, and still has not appeared, he will be the Antichrist, who's bloodline if it were possible to trace would go all the way back to the Julio-Claudians); and when he cometh, he must continue a short space (as the seventh king, initially, the Antichrist's reign will be short, the first three and a half years of the final 7 years).

17:11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth
(the beast itself is the eighth king, and is the revealed as the Man of Sin, Antichrist who recovers from the mortal wound who reigns for the second three and a half years, the 42 months of Rev 13. In Rev 13, his wound is found as one of the seven heads, that is, him as the seventh king that I just mentioned in the previous verse above), and is of the seven (very important!!!! the Antichrist is of the other seven and being a descendent from the Julio Claudians, he is off that bloodline), and goeth into perdition.

Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Mr Dan on Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:59 pm

Interesting theory Doug, I think it depends heavily on the date of Johns writing.

Exerpt from an encyclopedia note discussing the different schools of thought regarding the writing of revelation

Futurism is the school of interpretation contending that the last week of "Daniel's 70 Weeks" did not follow the 69th week, but is somehow delayed, that most of the prophecies in the book of Revelation are still unfulfilled. Most Futurists believe the book of Revelation was written late in the first century (96 A.D.).

Praeterists believe that the prophecies of Revelation concern themselves with the fall of Jerusalem (70 A.D.) and the judgment by Pagan Rome. Praeterists believe John wrote the Revelation in 64-68A.D., during Emperor Nero's reign.



Historicism is the progressive Revelation of Jesus Christ in the Christian Age. The Historicist view holds that the book of Revelation is almost completely fulfilled, except for the fall of Mystery Babylon. The term in Rev 1:1, "shortly come to pass", means simply the prophecies in the book will soon begin to happen, not "shortly be fulfilled", as some would have the phrase mean. Historicists generally agree that Revelation was written around 96 A.D., during Emperor Domitian's reign.

Personally I choose to date the writing later based on my understanding, frankly I have a number of problems with the early date. To many to go into here.
Im not dismissing anything as I dont know for certain myself and would be happy to look at your source material if you provide it. :grin:

Njfish Id like to see what you have too, Most of what I have is in hardback to my left on the bookshelf or Id send it your way as well.
Mr Dan
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Creation

Postby Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:28 pm

I would agree that this appears to be prophecy concerning Antiochus IV, however if we attempt to tie that in with 11:21 as some do I would say the similarities end as Antiochus did recieve the throne of the Selucid kingdom but not by flatteries or peace. he had assumed the role as something of a fill in ruler since the rightfull heir was to young to rule. he remedied this with murder and assumed the role since he was heir in line after the infant Antiochus.


From what I read, Antiochus IV was taken hostage to Rome as a youth because his dad Antiochus III lost a a battle to the Roman Scipio. And the Romans kept Antiochus III in check from any uprisings because they had his son Antiochus IV.

How did Antiochus IV get out of Rome? In 175 B.C., Antiochus IV's brother, Seleucus IV Philopator, interveined and got Antiochus IV released from Rome.... because Seleucus IV Philopator exchanged his own son, as being the hostage held by the Romans.

Seleucus IV Philopator was assasinated by one of his generals - Heliodrus. 3 September 175: Heliodorus kills Seleucus; his wife Laodice V appears to have married Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who succeeds his brother.


Okay, let's look at those dates...

3 September 175: the Seleucid commander Heliodorus kills Seleucus IV, who is succeeded by his son Antiochus, who is too young to rule. So Antiochus IV Epiphanes assumes the role of leader.

Also in 175, With support of king Eumenes II Soter of Pergamon, Antiochus becomes king; Heliodorus killed.

170: On behalf of Antiochus IV, Andronicus kills the young king Antiochus.

175 to 170, That's 5 years that Antiochus was ruling, having peacfully assumed the role although not directly in line as the rightful heir.

Okay what does Danie l11, say?

11:21 And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.

Well, the Antiochus IV Epiphanes married his deceased brother's (Seleucus) wife - so that seems to be some flatteries there, and he must have gotten some support within the heirarchy to have assumed the role of leader for those 5 years. Now Antiochus IV Epiphanes was a vile person, no doubt about it.... as he plotted with another guy to have the rightful heir of his brother Selecus IV killed - but that was 5 years after Antiochus IV Epiphanes peacefully assumed the role as leader. Athough Antiochus IV Ephinphanes was not in the honored position to inherit the throne - just as it says in Daniel 11:21.

Peace,

Doug L.
Last edited by Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:41 pm

Mr Dan wrote:Interesting theory Doug, I think it depends heavily on the date of Johns writing.

Exerpt from an encyclopedia note discussing the different schools of thought regarding the writing of revelation

Futurism is the school of interpretation contending that the last week of "Daniel's 70 Weeks" did not follow the 69th week, but is somehow delayed, that most of the prophecies in the book of Revelation are still unfulfilled. Most Futurists believe the book of Revelation was written late in the first century (96 A.D.).

Praeterists believe that the prophecies of Revelation concern themselves with the fall of Jerusalem (70 A.D.) and the judgment by Pagan Rome. Praeterists believe John wrote the Revelation in 64-68A.D., during Emperor Nero's reign.


Yes, I have had many many long discussions with preterists. It is ironic that the one thing I agree with them on (and me being a futurist :mrgreen: _) is the date when John received Revelation. Most preterist believe that references to the Antichrist referrred to Nero. Of cousre, I don't agree with them on that, but they did provide links to some lengthy essays to the timing of when Revelation was received by John, 64-68 AD ....which I do agree with them on.


Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Mr Dan on Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:46 pm

I suppose he came in peacefully if usurping the throne through assasination counts as peacefull, but point taken. But that doesnt get us around the chapter break that probably shouldnt be there.
Dan 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation [even] to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
Dan 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame [and] everlasting contempt.
Dan 12:3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.


Daniel 12 clearly labels this in the catagory of things yet to come. Even if its merely setting up an archtype the focus would still be upon Grecia and Persia and not Rome. If Rome is the obvious choice for the fourth empire than why must we jump through so many hoops to get to it?

Occams razor
Mr Dan
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Creation

Postby Douggg on Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:07 pm

Daniel 12 clearly labels this in the catagory of things yet to come. Even if its merely setting up an archtype the focus would still be upon Grecia and Persia and not Rome. If Rome is the obvious choice for the fourth empire than why must we jump through so many hoops to get to it?


I don't think anyone is having to jump through any hoops. It is a overwhelming fact of history that the Roman Empire followed the Greek Empire. You would have an impossible task of hoop jumping :mrgreen: to show the Greek Empire as being in place from the time of Jesus, 2000 years, to the present.... if you wanted to assert that the fourth empire has not yet arrived.

Regarding Daniel 12, I think everyone here at this site that I have discussed with, including myself, all agree that Chapter 12 talks about the endtimes events. The issue is where in Daniel 11, does that transition to the end-times takes place. I say Daniel 11:35 because the time of the end is referenced in that verse.

We all agree that from Daniel 11:36 to the end of Daniel 12 is referring to the end-times.

The disagreement is over the parts of Daniel 11 occuring prior to verse 35 and when the Greek Empire torso of brass ends. Where exactlly in Daniel 11, do you find the end of the Greek empire torso of brass ending?

Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Mr Dan on Thu Jan 11, 2007 7:43 pm

The problem is that if you apply daniel 11 to Antiochus IV you have to apply the entire passage to him because 11:36 could easily be used to describe his transgression in the temple as well that the rest of Dan 11 is a carryover from the previous statements. You know as well as I do that the chapter breaks were added at a date later than the original writings and represent the translators interpretation of scripture for reference purposes.
So when I say we have to jump through hoops to arrive at that conclusion I refer to the assumption thats being made to Rome. It IS an assumption since it isnt clearly said and when questioned with passages such as dan 2:23 and dan 7:23 which clearly show the fourth empire as being reserved for the end the conversation is redirected to the people of the prince to come ASSUMING the verse is speaking about the sacking of jerusalem in 70 ad while ignoring the historical perspectives of that time. So if Daniel 11 and 12 are talking about the same thing, which I dont see how they cannot be why do we get Rome when the focus is on Persia and Grecia ? The more we discuss the more convinced I am the Rome theory doesnt stand up to scrutiny without distorting the facts since No one and I mean no one Ive spoken to can show definitive proof.

Im not sitting here saying I hold the answer by any means but I seriously question the conclusions that are being put forth and would gladly stand corrected if I am misinterpreting whats being said in those verses. I just dont see it being Rome by whats writen in Daniel and when I start pulling references out of Isaiah, Ezekial,Amos,Joel and the prophets of the old testament I see it move further and further from that conclusion.

Im not trying to be a pain in the rear eitgher, but I cant just swallow and accept it with so many unaswered questions, it would be irresponsible and ignorant of me to do so. Hence, this discussion. :grin:
Mr Dan
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Creation

Postby Douggg on Fri Jan 12, 2007 5:11 am

The more we discuss the more convinced I am the Rome theory doesnt stand up to scrutiny without distorting the facts since No one and I mean no one Ive spoken to can show definitive proof.


Brother Mr. Dan, who drove the spikes into Jesus's hands?

Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Seeker on Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:32 am

Hi Doug,

Just thinking about that division you place in Dan 11. This is where you say it switches from Antiochus to the AC.

But that's before the end times in Daniel 11:35, which disqualifies him from being the Antichrist


Here are the verses up to that point let’s read them.

Dan 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
Dan 11:32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.
Dan 11:33 And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.
Dan 11:34 Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries.
Dan 11:35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.


According to you, Antiochus places the AoD. Then the people that know their God will be strong (11:32). Those with understanding among the people will instruct many but they will fall to the sword. When they fall they will be given a little help.

Now some of those with understanding, from back when Antiochus was killing them, will fall in the end times since 11:35 switches us to the endtimes.

So Antiochus begins this persecution, stops midway, and the AC picks it back up 2,000+ years later. You see how that makes absolutely no sense to put a division where you do? Are these people hanging around waiting for the AC to finish the persecution that Antiochus started a verse earlier? They are the same people, the ones with understanding.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Douggg on Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:56 am

11:32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.

11:33 And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.

11:34 Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries.

11:35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.


Those verses are about the time of the Maccabees who fought back against Anitiochus's efforts to Hellenize the Jews, the spreading of the greek religion and culture, which was against the covenant that the Jews had with God. The Jews celebrate the efforts of the Maccabees with their holiday of Hannakuah.

Verse 35 ended the era of the torso of brass - the Greek empire. And brought in the era of the Roman Empire. It was the Romans who drove the spikes into Jesus's hands. Which was at the end of the 69th week of Daniel 9's 70 weeks. They were the legs of iron at that time.

The counting of the seventy weeks has been suspended until the end times begin again - as well as the Roman Empire being in a state of suspension for the past 2000 years - as well as the nation of Israel being in exile the past 2000 years. Now that the end times are here, formally the last week is soon to start. That is when Daniel 11:36 picksup with the Antchrist at the time of the end.... and the resumption of the counting of the seventy weeks... with the Roman Empire resummed with the ten toes in the feet of iron and clay... the last stages of the fourth empire..... just like the 4 breakup kingdoms at the start of Daniel 11 represented the last stages of the torso of brass, the Greek Empire.

Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Seeker on Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:48 am

Hi Doug,

Verse 35 ended the era of the torso of brass - the Greek empire. And brought in the era of the Roman Empire. It was the Romans who drove the spikes into Jesus's hands. Which was at the end of the 69th week of Daniel 9's 70 weeks. They were the legs of iron at that time.


So the "time of the end" means the end of the Greek Empire?

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Douggg on Fri Jan 12, 2007 9:35 am

11:35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.


It is saying that there is yet some time to go to the end, because of the time appointed is the 70 weeks of years "appointed" upon the Jewish people in Daniel 9.

Historically we know that counting of the seventy weeks was suspended at the end of week 69. So verse 35 completes the Maccabees rebellion against Antiochus IV, driving him from the land.. completing that torso of brass era... the Roman era begins... we then get that suspension of time, and verse 11:36 picksup with the end times Antichrist.

11:40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

Verse 11:35 has already transitioned us into the end times and the Antichrist in verse 11:36. Up until verse 11:40 above, those verses between 11:36 and 11:39 cover the first three and a half years of the Antichrist's reign. Verse 11:40 above, "at the time of end", referes to the latter days of the Antichrist's reign.... just before the world sees the sign of Jesus's return in the heaven.

The fighting that goes on in verses 11:40 -11:45, brings all of the armies of the world into the area. In preparation for the gathering at Armageddon to fight the Lord's Return.


Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Seeker on Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:32 am

Hi Doug,

Verse 11:35 has already transitioned us into the end times and the Antichrist in verse 11:36.


Dan 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

168 BC

Dan 11:32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.
Dan 11:33 And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.
Dan 11:34 Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries.


165 BC

The temple would have had to be purified prior to Dan 11:35 which transitions to the end times correct?

Dan 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

It says here in Dan 12 that there are only 3 ½ years after the AoD is set up. Or does this mean to the end of the Maccabeus revolt since the AoD here is talking about back in 168 BC according to you.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Seeker on Fri Jan 12, 2007 10:45 am

Hi Doug,

I wasn’t real clear in my last post let me try to clarify a bit. You claim the AoD in Dan 11:31 happened in ~168 BC. If that is the case why was not the end 3 ½ years later as Dan 12:11 says that there will be 3 ½ after the taking away of the daily sacrifices and setting up the AoD. The end should have happened around 164 BC but it didn’t.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby anydaynow on Fri Jan 12, 2007 11:34 am

Antiochus was a foreshadow of the prince to come, the Bible is full of them. You should read in Maccabees exactly what he did do. It will sound eerily like coming off the pages of Revelation.
anydaynow
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 10:48 am
Location: Georgia

Postby Seeker on Fri Jan 12, 2007 11:53 am

Hi anydaynow,

Yes I have read it over many many times. That still doesn't change that the same person spoken of in Dan 11:21 comes to his end in Dan 11:45 which is the last 3 1/2 years just before the resurrection of Dan 12:1. Dan 12 says that there will only be 3 1/2 years after the AoD of Dan 11. If Antiochus fulfilled Dan 11:31 there should have only been 3 1/2 years after that.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Seeker on Fri Jan 12, 2007 1:20 pm

Hi Doug,

keep referring my friend - brother Seeker - back to Daniel 8:22-23, because 8:23 ends that torso of brass by all of the transgressions that occured during that timeframe in the name of Hellinization of the Jews against their covenant with God have come into full, capped by Antiochus's actions.


So you are saying that Antiochus also fulfilled Dan 8?

Dan 8:15 And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man.
Dan 8:16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.
Dan 8:17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.
Dan 8:18 Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright.
Dan 8:19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.
Dan 8:20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
Dan 8:21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
Dan 8:22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
Dan 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
Dan 8:24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
Dan 8:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.


Ok where do you insert your friend here? I am guessing you would say that 8:23 is about Antiochus while Dan 8:24 is about the AC??? Another hidden switch in the bible? Seems to be a common theme Doug. The king of fierce countenance stands up around 170 BC and his power will be mighty around 2,000+ years later.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Seeker on Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:48 pm

Hi Doug,

Which vision is Daniel referring to here?

Dan 9:21 Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.
Dan 9:22 And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding.
Dan 9:23 At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.


Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Seeker on Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:21 am

Hi Doug,

The vision that Daniel is talking about in Dan 9 was in Dan 8. Daniel 9 is just another interpretation for the vision from Dan 8 because Daniel still didn’t understand from the first time Gabriel explained it. Let me show you. The original vision is covered in Dan 8:3-12.

Dan 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?
Dan 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.


How long shall the vision “concerning the daily sacrifice” and the transgression of desolation. This vision specifically concerns the taking away of the daily sacrifices and the AoD. The sanctuary will be cleansed 2,300 days and evenings later or ~ 3 ½ years. So this vision is specifically speaking of the AoD and the cleansing of the temple afterwards.

Dan 8:15 And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man.
Dan 8:16 And I heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.
Dan 8:17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.
Dan 8:18 Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright.
Dan 8:19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.


Daniel didn’t understand the vision and sought its’ meaning. Gabriel was sent to make Daniel understand. First thing Gabriel says is that the vision is for the time of the end. Gabriel says, “Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.”

This is what we know about the vision so far.

1) Concerns the daily sacrifice
2) Concerns the transgression of desolation
3) To give the host and sanctuary to be trodden under foot
4) The vision will be for 2,300 days/evenings then the sanctuary will be cleansed.
5) At the time of the end shall be the vision
6) I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

Indignation means this:

H2195
זעם
za‛am
zah'-am
From H2194; strictly froth at the mouth, that is, (figuratively) fury (especially of God’s displeasure with sin): - angry, indignation, rage.


Dan 8:20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
Dan 8:21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

Dan 8:5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
Dan 8:6 And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power.


The interpretation shows the ram with two horns to be Media-Persia and the goat as Greece. The great horn was the first king.

Dan 8:22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

Dan 8:8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.


The first king is broken and 4 come up to replace him but not to the extent of his power.

Dan 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

Dan 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.


Daniel 8:23 is said to be the little horn or king of fierce countenance. Let’s continue to read about the little horn.

Dan 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.
Dan 8:10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
Dan 8:11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
Dan 8:12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.
Dan 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?
Dan 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.


By this little horn, the daily sacrifice is taken away by reason of transgression. Remember the vision is concerning the daily sacrifice and transgression of desolation. The little horn does this. Keep this in mind for a bit while I continue on into Dan 9.

Dan 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
Dan 8:24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
Dan 8:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
Dan 8:26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days.
Dan 8:27 And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king's business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood it.


In the interpretation portion the king of fierce countenance is the little horn who takes away the daily sacrifice. The vision of the evening and the morning (2,300 days) which Daniel was told is true (8:26). Daniel fainted and was ill but went about his business serving the king. He was astonished by the vision (concerning the daily sacrifice) but none understood it.

After this explanation, by Gabriel, Daniel still did not understand any of the vision of the 2,300 days (evening/morning). This ends chapter 8 and we proceed into chapter 9.

Dan 9:1 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;
Dan 9:2 In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.
Dan 9:3 And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes:


Babylon falls and Daniel is in the second kingdom, Media-Persia. Daniel understands the prophecy of Jeremiah concerning the 70 years of exile. Dan 9:3-9:19 are Daniel’s prayers and supplications to God.

Dan 9:20 And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God;
Dan 9:21 Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.


Here is Gabriel for the second time. Notice how Daniel describes him. “whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning”. Daniel recognized Gabriel from the vision in Dan 8 when Gabriel was sent to interpret it for Daniel. The vision at the beginning was concerning the daily sacrifice and the transgression of desolation.

Dan 9:22 And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding.
Dan 9:23 At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.


At the beginning of Daniels supplications (Dan 9:3) the commandment was given for Gabriel to return and show Daniel, for Daniel is greatly beloved. Therefore understand the matter and consider the vision (from Dan 8).

Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
Dan 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.


So Gabriel gives Daniel another interpretation for the same vision. Here again we see it concerns the daily sacrifice and desolations. The little horn and the “prince that shall come and confirm the covenant” are one and the same. They both take away the daily sacrifice and both are referring to the same vision. Dan 8:23 therefore cannot be speaking of Antiochus as you propose.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Douggg on Sat Jan 13, 2007 7:51 am

I wasn’t real clear in my last post let me try to clarify a bit. You claim the AoD in Dan 11:31 happened in ~168 BC. If that is the case why was not the end 3 ½ years later as Dan 12:11 says that there will be 3 ½ after the taking away of the daily sacrifices and setting up the AoD. The end should have happened around 164 BC but it didn’t.


Since Daniel 12 is specfically addressing the end times, the 1290 days and the 1335 days is relavent to the end-times prophecies of Daniel 9:26-27, to complete the 70 weeks, which is when the prince who shall come, the Antichrist, from the people who destroyed the temple - the Romans - confirms the covenant, and takes away the daily sacrifice.

The type of act described in Dan 11:31 as being the abomination of desolation is not the specific Act that the Antichrist will make.... although it will be the same type that Antiochus IV made.

We also know from Revelation 13, that the false prophet has the world make an image of the Antichrist and everyone is told to worship that image (statue). That is the abomination of desolation, because historyically, from Daniel 11:31, of what Antiochus IV did, we know exactly the type of Act the abomination of desolation will be.... which, otherwise, someone could argue that the making of the statue and requiring everyone to worship it in Revelation 13 is not the AOD. But because we have the very specifics from history, we know that it is.

The Act of the abomination of desolation in Daniel 12 will be in the end times, after the end times begin. The type of Act of called the abomination of desolation in Daniel 11:31.... was before the end times.... so the 3 1/2 years that say should have occured is not relavent to Daniel 11:31.


Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Douggg on Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:15 am

Seeker wrote:Hi Doug,

So you are saying that Antiochus also fulfilled Dan 8?


If you are talking about all those prophecies concerning the little horn" or the "king of fierce countenance? The answer is "no". I don't see Antiochus IV mentioned anywhere in Daneil 8, except the type of act he did was the final ultimate trangression that ended the Greek Empire age of the torso of brass, Daniel 8:23. The little honr and the king of fierce countenance are references to the Antichrist.

Some people do say that the little horn in Daniel 8 is Antiochus IV, but I definitely do not.

Antiochus's IV, in the latter time of the Greek Empire torse of brass, act of sacrificing a pig upon the altar and placing a statue of Zeus in the temple - was the pinnalce of the trangressions made during the time of the four break up kingdoms - which "their" kingdom SINGULAR - the Greek Empire had come into a full....i.e. completion, by the ultimate act.

That is why in Daniel 11:35-36 it switches to the end times - king - Daniel 8's reference as being the king of fierce countenance, the Antichrist.

22Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

23And in the latter time of
THEIR KINGDOM (singular), when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

I'll ask you again, Seeker, why does it say "THEIR KINGDOM" above....are we still in the Greek Empire age? The Greeks did not drive the nails into Jesus's hands. The counting of the seventy weeks was not suspended during the days of the four break up kings.... but the Romans. Daniel 8:23 , above, is the transition verse... from the end of the Greek empire... centuries into the end times and the Antichrist. Same thing happens in Daneil 11:35-36.


Peace,


Doug L.
Last edited by Douggg on Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:33 am, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Seeker on Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:29 am

Hi Doug,

Since Daniel 12 is specfically addressing the end times, the 1290 days and the 1335 days is relavent to the end-times prophecies of Daniel 9:26-27


So let me get this straight. Dan 12 is not referring to the first previous example of the AoD but rather skips chapter 11 and refers back to chapter 9. Is that what you are saying?

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Seeker on Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:40 am

Hi Doug,

I'll ask you again, Seeker, why does it say "THEIR KINGDOM" above..


Dan 8:8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
Dan 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

Dan 8:22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
Dan 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.


I don't know Doug but the 4 notable ones are the 4 kingdoms that stand up out of the nation. Out of one of the 4 notable ones came forth a little horn. That little horn is the king of fierce countenance. The 4 notable ones were the 4 divisions of the Greek empire. Out of one of those divisions the little horn/king of fierce countenace stands up. Daniel 11 specifies that it is the northern division that the AC/little horn/king of fierce countenance rises. That as we know was in the middle east.

Peace,
Seeker

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Douggg on Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:51 am

Seeker wrote:Hi Doug,
Since Daniel 12 is specfically addressing the end times, the 1290 days and the 1335 days is relavent to the end-times prophecies of Daniel 9:26-27


So let me get this straight. Dan 12 is not referring to the first previous example of the AoD but rather skips chapter 11 and refers back to chapter 9. Is that what you are saying?

Peace,
Seeker


oops, I clicked the wrong button. :mrgreen:

It will take me a little bit to type up a response.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Douggg on Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:02 am

Seeker wrote:Hi Doug,

I'll ask you again, Seeker, why does it say "THEIR KINGDOM" above..


Dan 8:8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
Dan 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

Dan 8:22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
Dan 8:23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.


I don't know Doug but the 4 notable ones are the 4 kingdoms that stand up out of the nation. Out of one of the 4 notable ones came forth a little horn. That little horn is the king of fierce countenance. The 4 notable ones were the 4 divisions of the Greek empire. Out of one of those divisions the little horn/king of fierce countenace stands up. Daniel 11 specifies that it is the northern division that the AC/little horn/king of fierce countenance rises. That as we know was in the middle east.

Peace,
Seeker

Peace,
Seeker


Looking at where the Antichrist will emerge from, the area north and west of Israel .... is not the Middle East is it?

What about the area of Macedonia or Western Greece.... those are European countries? And the Balkans? The Balkan countries, like Romania are small... hence "the little horn" ?

Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Seeker on Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:52 am

Hi Doug,

What about the area of Macedonia or Western Greece.... those are European countries? And the Balkans? The Balkan countries, like Romania are small... hence "the little horn" ?


Dan 11:2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.
Dan 11:3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
Dan 11:4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.
Dan 11:5 And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.
Dan 11:6 And in the end of years they shall join themselves together; for the king's daughter of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement: but she shall not retain the power of the arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm: but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that begat her, and he that strengthened her in these times.


Here’s the Greek kingdom of Alexander in Dan 11:2 mentioned as Grecia. His kingdom is divided toward the 4 winds of heaven. Then the rest of the chapter discusses two of those divisions, the north and south. The AC rises in the estate of the King of the North therefore the AC arises out of one of the notable ones, the north. This tells us exactly which of the four the AC rises from. So a simple matter of just looking at a map of the northern division of Alexander’s kingdom.

Image

The area in red on this map is the area that the northern, Seleucid, division of the split was located. It is in this area that Daniel 8 and 11 point us to in our search for the AC. As you can see this does not include any of the areas you asked about. Nor does it include any of Europe.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Douggg on Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:37 pm

Seeker wrote:

Here’s the Greek kingdom of Alexander in Dan 11:2 mentioned as Grecia.


:mrgreen: you got the wrong map, brother Seeker.

Verse 2 is preliminary history to Alexanders Kingdom. The preliminary history in Verse 2 is about the fourth Persian king, Xeres, who warred against the realm of Grecia, invaded Greece in 480 BC, but failed.

Alexander, who appears in verse 3, was born in 356 BC in Macedonia, the area around present day Thessaloniki in northern Greece.
from... http://www.pothos.org/alexander.asp?paraID=88

Here's the right map....

http://library.thinkquest.org/10805/alexmap.html

Using the right map of Alexander the Great's Greek Empire - look at what area is North and West of Israel. Macedonia and the Balkans and Western Greece.... i.e. Europeans.


Peace,

Doug L.


i
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Seeker on Sat Jan 13, 2007 1:09 pm

Hi Doug,

you got the wrong map, brother Seeker.


Hey Doug you found a map of the entire Greek kingdom. Remember it is split into to 4 divisions and out of one of those divisions the AC rises. The map I showed you is the area of the northern division of the old Greek empire. It was most of Alexanders kingdom but not all. Here is another map at this link. This one has the same area northern (Seleucid) division shown in green. There is a legend in the lower left of the map showing that green represents the Seleucid portion of the kingdom. It covers the same area the map I have showing it in red does.

http://studylight.org/se/maps/browse.cgi?st=120#088

You can choose a size to view it at and enlarge the map for easier viewing.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Douggg on Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:39 pm

Seeker wrote:Hi Doug,

you got the wrong map, brother Seeker.


Hey Doug you found a map of the entire Greek kingdom. Remember it is split into to 4 divisions and out of one of those divisions the AC rises. The map I showed you is the area of the northern division of the old Greek empire. It was most of Alexanders kingdom but not all. Here is another map at this link. This one has the same area northern (Seleucid) division shown in green. There is a legend in the lower left of the map showing that green represents the Seleucid portion of the kingdom. It covers the same area the map I have showing it in red does.

http://studylight.org/se/maps/browse.cgi?st=120#088

You can choose a size to view it at and enlarge the map for easier viewing.

Peace,
Seeker


Nice maps. The green and the brown show the northern and southern division - which are in Daniel 11:5-31, I agree, are clearly those 2 divisions.

But the Antichrist does not come out of the Northern Kingdom, the part in Green.... which you have so deftly pointed out is the largest of those four break-up kingdoms.... which also being so big, much more so than even any of the European countries.... that it does not fit the "LITTLE horn" desgination of Daniel 7. The LITTLE horn comes up among ten other horns....emerging from a SMALL nation.

....so Turkey does not even fit. I have also heard other people argue... the Antichrist will come out of Lebanon.... but the requrement of emerging from the north and west of Israel eliminates Lebanon.

Looking at Map 88, the two areas - that are possible to meet the North and West of Israel, and also being SMALL, requriements are in (1) purple (2) tan. But in modern terms - which of those areas are now SMALL countries - I ask you? I don't consider Greece a small country, btw.

http://studylight.org/se/maps/browse.cgi?st=120#088

:mrgreen: you might have to dig up another map showing the modern countries. I don't have a link, but I am working on it. :)


Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Mr Dan on Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:03 pm

....so Turkey does not even fit. I have also heard other people argue... the Antichrist will come out of Lebanon.... but the requrement of emerging from the north and west of Israel eliminates Lebanon.

Hi Doug
But it doesnt eliminate Bergama which is Pergamon which is withing the empire of Lysimachus who is one of the four divisions of Alexanders kingdom which is allso

- Rev 2:13 - I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, [even] where Satan's seat [is]: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas [was] my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.

Which is the place
Rev 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as [the feet] of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.




Note: Seat is translated in both instances as throne in all translations other than kjv
Mr Dan
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Creation

Postby Douggg on Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:18 pm

Mr Dan wrote:
....so Turkey does not even fit. I have also heard other people argue... the Antichrist will come out of Lebanon.... but the requrement of emerging from the north and west of Israel eliminates Lebanon.

Hi Doug
But it doesnt eliminate Bergama which is Pergamon which is withing the empire of Lysimachus who is one of the four divisions of Alexanders kingdom which is allso

- Rev 2:13 - I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, [even] where Satan's seat [is]: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas [was] my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.

Which is the place
Rev 13:2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as [the feet] of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great
authority.


Mr. Dan, it has to be both from the area of one of the four Alexanders the Great break up kingdoms AND out of a modern country - because the antichrist emerges from among ten END-TIMES kings, Dan 7:. He will be the little horn among THEM. We have to look at a modern map as well as the area covered by Alexander's Kingdom. Turkey is a very big country.

Dan 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.

7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up
among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.


So, the Antichrist will appear after the ten end times kings are in place.

We don't know for certain, who those ten kings are, but they are in place before the little horn (of Daniel 7) appears. I personally think that is the WEU nations - those would be the ten. In Daniel 8 the little horn comes forth (which to me means makes his appearance to the world) from one of Alexanders' four breakup kingdoms - to the south and east toward Israel.

I don't see too many possibilities of any area meeting all the criteria - except Macedonia or one of the Balkan countries. I don't think that Macedonia is one of the ten WEU countries....???? But it is within the block of Roman Empire former countries...so it is possible as the little horn the Antichrist could still come up from within that block of nations, himself not being one of the ten... AND within the terroritory of one of the four breakup kingdoms within the smallest of those breakup kingdoms ...AND Macedonia (or one of the other Balkans) is a little country.


Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Mr Dan on Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:56 pm

The WEU does provide us with some interesting possibilities if indeed Europe is the direction these prophecies are pointing. I would agree with you that regardless of what direction we do look nothing lines up precisely the way we seem to be expecting it, however we may be interpreting it. The WEU has evolved and devolved a number of times in its history since the original five members signed the treaty in 1948. I think the problem I would point out with the Weu from my perspective is that it really isnt limited to ten members but has ten affiliate members, numerous guests and associate partners that are on board as well. Interestingly though as I understand it, that as the Weu's power was being taken from it to be merged with the constitution and larger political body the Weu seemingly changed hats to focus more on the european defensive aspect of its original charter. Im not sure exactly how I would fit this into prophecy but I do find it interesting that instead of abandoning a defunct organization its been at the minimul least, somewhat usefull, at least in my mind if I understand its purpose well enough.

Im sure you made the connection in the last post that I was atempting to point out with Bergamon that Turkey in itself cannot be ruled out because of geographical location but allso the breakdown of Alexanders kingdom into four distinct empires today encompasses 16 modern countries two of which are in fact Balkin states and weu affiliate members. (Bulgaria and Romania, the third being greece. In addition the countries that fall into those boundries are Turkey,Syria,Lebanon,Israel,Jordon,Egypt,libya,Iraq,Iran,Kuwait,
Afghanistan,Turmenistan,and Pakistan.

Now whatever the case may be I think we can eliminate two or possibly three from the beast empire as Daniel 11 says of the conquest Edom,Moab Chief of the children of Ammon will escape his grasp. As I understand it Edom lies in the Negev desert , Moab is generaly understood to be Jordon,
and exactly what is meant by the chief of the children of Ammon is unknown to me. I would assume it would refer to the patriarch of that family and where he dwelt but probably east of the Jordon.

Im not going to speculate on what may happen in the next day month or several years but I do think there are some interesting happenings in the middle east, between the Arab members themselves and between the EU and arab states that may very well be worth watching from both sides of this discussion.


Peace, Dan
Mr Dan
 
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:30 pm
Location: Creation

Postby Douggg on Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:42 am

Mr Dan, would you not agree though that Turkey is a large county, as compared to the other countries in the region, including Europe? I think that size alone disqualifies Turkey as being a little horn type of nation.

The Antichrist himself is not little because he is more stout than the other ten kings....

Daniel 7:20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.



Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Seeker on Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:42 am

Hi Mr Dan,

The real key to the link with Turkey is Ezekiel 38-39. Gog is the AC. Meshech and Tubal were in the Turkish region. Eze 38 tells us who the players will be and 4 or 5 of them there were located in what we know as Turkey and the immediate area. It is easy enough to prove Ezekiel 38-39 to be talking about the last 7 years. Unless we have two coalitions competing to destroy Israel. I find no eveidence of that anywhere. But I do find evidence of Israel's neighbors attacking her near the end. It is in many places throughout the day of the Lord passages.

Eze 38:17 Thus saith the Lord GOD; Art thou he of whom I have spoken in old time by my servants the prophets of Israel, which prophesied in those days many years that I would bring thee against them?
Eze 38:18 And it shall come to pass at the same time when Gog shall come against the land of Israel, saith the Lord GOD, that my fury shall come up in my face.
Eze 38:19 For in my jealousy and in the fire of my wrath have I spoken, Surely in that day there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel;
Eze 38:20 So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth, and all the men that are upon the face of the earth, shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground.


Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Seeker on Sun Jan 14, 2007 1:03 am

Hi Doug,

What is all this racket you are making about north and west.

Dan 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

Think about this for a minute. The pleasant land is Israel. The kingdom of the AC grows south of where it is located. It also grows east. And also toward Israel (pleasant land). The pleasant land is not east or south of the AC kingdom (10 kings plus AC) because those two points of the compass are listed separate from the direction of the pleasant land. Get it Israel is not east of the AC kingdom. Israel is east of Europe. The AC grows to the east and also the direction of Israel. This again excludes Europe from the possible candidates. Rome just has no support in the bible Doug face it.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

Postby Douggg on Sun Jan 14, 2007 6:17 am

Seeker wrote:Hi Doug,

What is all this racket you are making about north and west.

Dan 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.



It does not say toward the south, THEN toward the east, THEN toward the pleasant land. Toward the south, and toward the east is biblical language of saying the direction of "southeast" toward Israel. And it just says that the little waxed exceeding great out of that area on his way in that direction.... meaning he heads that way in strength....like leading a EU reaction force out of Macedonia or the Balkans when Gog/Magog attacks Israel - pretrib.

Think about this for a minute. The pleasant land is Israel. The kingdom of the AC grows south of where it is located. It also grows east. And also toward Israel (pleasant land). The pleasant land is not east or south of the AC kingdom (10 kings plus AC) because those two points of the compass are listed separate from the direction of the pleasant land. Get it Israel is not east of the AC kingdom. Israel is east of Europe. The AC grows to the east and also the direction of Israel. This again excludes Europe from the possible candidates. Rome just has no support in the bible Doug face it.


Good time to recap...:mrgreen:

The only place possible for the Antichrist to come forth from is Macedonia (the size of Vermont) or one of the Balkan countries. Turkey is way too big (the size of Texas ) to be considered a little horn type country.... plus it is muslim...and one of the countries listed in Ezekiel 38 as part of the Gog/Magog force that will be destroyed...pretrib....Gog is not the AC as Gog reappears at the end of the millenium.

again, I ask you to show the presence of the Greek Empire, the torso of brass.... like I have with the defacto Holy Roman Empire. If the Antichrist's empire is not the fourth empire of the Romans extended into the end tiems... and hasn't arrived yet... then rationally speaking the Greek Empire, the torso of brass, must be still around. :answerthequestion:

But Alexander died long ago.... and the four breakup kingdoms...were destroyed by the Romans.

It was not the Greeks who drove the spikes into Jesus's hands but the Romans. The counting of the seventy weeks was suspended when the Roman Empire ruled - as the fourth empire. That suspension of the counting of the seventy weeks will resume in the days of the ten toes of iron mixed with clay - bring back the unity of the nations that made up the Roman Empire, Those nations are predominately West of Israel - which makes the Antichrist the king of the west, as the king of the south pushes at him; and the king of the north reacts against him, and news from the east troubles him - occure in Daniel 11... at the end of the second three and a half years.

The Greeks Empire, the torso of brass, did not destroy the temple - which was the Romans in 70 AD - followed by the destruction of the city by the Roman.... Hadrian. The Greeks are not the five fallen kings in Revelation 17, nor was a Greek ruling at the time of John.... those were all Romans of the fourth empire - the Roman Empire. All of the Caesar claimed to be god - the blasphamey on each of the 7 heads as said in Revelation 13. The ten kings are of the former Roman Empire nations - who will burn the Vatican to the ground - Revelation 17 - eliminating the "Holy" from the Holy Roman Empire....so that the European kings will give all their support to one of their own, the Antichrist who will claim to be god.

You think Erdogan and the Muslims are going to hold off the United States and Europe combined and enforce the 666 requirement.... sheesh, :mrgreen: ? It ain't going to be a Muslim BIG country, nor a Muslim Antichrist.

Peace,

Doug L.
User avatar
Douggg
 
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:27 pm

Postby Seeker on Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:34 am

Hey Doug,

This thread is about disproving the ENP not proving Turkey. You want to discuss Turkey move it to the Turkey thread.

Peace,
Seeker
Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
Seeker
 
Posts: 2165
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:32 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Prophecy Debate Area

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests