Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Understanding Daniel 2 kingdoms in a SIMPLE way

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
    It does NOT say FRACTURED kingdom. It actually says it is a kingdom that is MIXED but does NOT stay together as a COHESIVE whole.
    Moreover this is true of the Feet Kingdom which precedes the Toes.
    The Feet and Toes are made of Iron and Clay which means it will not CLEAVE TOGETHER.

    Cleave: to adhere firmly and closely or loyally and unwaveringly

    So it WOULD NOT CLEAVE means just the opposite right? That it is FRACTURED. It's semantics. It means a Kingdom that will not come back together until the very end times. We could take the USA 100 years ago which has a 48 state power base, flash forward 1000 years and they might have fractured into 50 different state powers, then 3000 years later they may become ONE POWER again, but it wouldn't be the same power that broke asunder. So, I think its safe for me to say God is saying its a fractured kingdom that stays apart for 2000 some odd years. That doesn't mean its the same Kingdom. That's just lingo.

    We have the clues we need. The Little Horn is called a Beast so he is the 5th Beast.

    Strange, the history books show that the British Empire DID dominate the whole world leading to the largest Land (and Sea) Empire in history
    And that has nothing to do with being a "BEAST" per se. 1.) France and Spain were World powers also, so that means England was never ruling over Europe as a whole entity. 2.) You also can't have a Beast whilst Israel is as "Dead Men's Bones".

    The bible is about Israel, and the 4 Beasts are all in juxtaposition unto Israel. God was trying to chastise a WAYWARD Israel with His 70 weeks Decree/Judgment. God was not going to allow the Church to be overcome by the power of Dark forces, Jesus stated that the gates of hell will not overcome my church which I build upon this rock. So, these Beasts type Governments were not allowed to rise in Europe after Rome. Thus the Gospel could spread there freely for the most part.

    Where was A4E's kingdom? It ruled ZERO land in Europe, but was ENTIRELY in the Middle East and Central Asia.
    Its not about where these Gentile Kings were from per se. Its about them being over Israel AND the Mediterranean Sea Region. Rome and Greece both being powers at the SAME TIME kind of gives us a glimpse of this END-TIME Beast's type because he's from both Greece and Europe.

    Nope, the ONLY Kingdom of those which ruled over the WHOLE Mediterranean Sea was Rome. None of the others did.
    The Mediterranean, like Europe is NOT the focus of the prophecy in Daniel 2.
    The focus is Babylon and the kingdom which rules it affecting Jerusalem and those of Israel.
    While this is true, they ALL Ruled over Israel and the Mediterranean Sea Region to a certain degree. Of course, the first three could not rule over the whole Mediterranean Sea Region without ruling over Europe also, and that was a no go. I think the whole point God is making when He points out how big and bad or how fierce the Iron Kingdom was is that as per the Mediterranean Sea Region it was far grander in nature than the other 3 were. Most of them spread farther east.

    The focus however is not Babylon, the focus is always Israel.
    Last edited by Revelation Man; Nov 22 2020, 01:17 AM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      Well why not say set then instead of sequence.
      Perhaps your being in a different country, you don't understand how language works where I am. Where I am, THE sequence (with the article emphasized) indicates a set in which a sequence takes place, as in a set of 4. So, you have THE sequence of 4 things listed. Since your forte is language, I suspect you could just be playing language games with me.

      But I'm hoping for the best. My wife is English, and we do have communication problems regularly. A slight variation on an English expression and misunderstanding results. In the same way, a slight delay in a phone call overseas, and we talk over one another.

      But you've not been a pleasant debater, from my perspective. So I'm not holding my breath. The value I derive from you is not Christian, as in Christian fellowship takes place between us. Rather, I am able to use your intelligent arguments to prosecute my ideas in an attempt to help others with the same issues. I wish it were otherwise, but apparently that's a choice you've made some time ago, and continue to stick with?

      Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      However in BOTH cases your argument is baloney.
      The SET (like the SEQUENCE) is specified WITHIN the prophecy.
      The ENTIRE SET is the Statue, followed by the Kingdom of the Saints.
      No, as I've told you numerous times now, the set is established by the mention of the "4th Kingdom.* This establishes a set of 4. You do not determine, as I see it, a set of 5 Kingdoms when no 5th Kingdom is mentioned. The mention of a "Divided Kingdom" after mention of the 4th Kingdom, therefore, suggests that the Divided Kingdom is a subset of the 4th Kingdom and a latter-day expression of the same.

      Why you wish to argue this is beyond me? You already know my opinion, and unless you come up with something meaningful, it won't change my opinion or anybody else's opinion, I should think?

      Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      The KoS starts with the END of the Last Kingdom of the Statue, with the KoS (through Christ) being responsible for bringing down that Kingdom.
      Did that happen with Kingdom of Rome? No it did not. Oops, as Rom has ended hundreds of years ago.
      Again, the 4th Kingdom, the Roman Kingdom, is expressed in the subsets, the Ancient Roman Empire/European Civilization and the Antichristian Empire. They are all expressions of the "Roman Kingdom." The ancient Roman Empire did not terminate the "Roman Kingdom," as I define it. It evolved into European Civilization, just as the Kingdom of Alexander the Great evolved to incorporate new Kingdoms within that original Empire. You know that but use our disagreement to perpetuate your insulting manner, when we could simply "agree to disagree."

      Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      As there is NOTHING in Daniel 2 which says it is a SET of ONLY FOUR kingdoms, AND as historical reality also shows that the KoS did NOT start with the end of the 4th kingdom, anyone has to conclude your claim is nothing more than wishful thinking.
      A lot of people engage in what you call "wishful thinking." But they and I believe the 4th Kingdom to be the Roman Kingdom and the Last Kingdom before Christ returns. Some, before ancient Rome fell, thought it would not fall before Christ came. Others, after Rome fell, believe that Roman political culture continues in European Civilization until it is revealed as the "Feet" of the Great Image.

      Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      The POINT is that the Roman Civilisation WAS conquered COMPLETELY by outside forces. It is NOT the SAME political force which governs. This is why historians speak about the FALL of the Roman Kingdom.
      You are again talking about the fall of Ancient Rome. I'm talking about "European Civilization," as it extended beyond the ancient Roman Empire and on into Medieval and Modern Europe.

      Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      Now you can make an argument for a piecemeal ending of the Roman Kingdom - the West fell in 476 AD but the east was only 1453 AD. This is a VALID argument.
      In fact when we look at the FALL of the previous Greek Kingdom, we discover it too fell piecemeal. This means we have a REAL example of the transition from one kingdom to another. Rome conquered the last Greek kingdom in 30 BC, and that made Rome the successor to the Greek kingdom.
      What I am ridiculing is the FALSE notion that Rome continued AFTER it fell, because it was governed by other peoples.
      You shouldn't be ridiculing at all, because it is a serious position I hold to. To deny there is any link between the ancient Roman Empire and European Civilization today is in itself absurd. You may disagree because you believe the "Roman Kingdom" cannot be called the "Roman Kingdom" if the ancient Empire itself was defeated. But nobody can say that European Civilization ended with the ancient Roman Empire! So, I call European Civilization the "Roman Kingdom."

      Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      I am dismissive when someone is NOT cohesive, such as your "mystical" continuation of Rome.
      As I said, there is nothing mystical about seeing European Civilization as an extension of the ancient Roman Kingdom. In the same way Hellenistic culture can be seen as an extension of the Greek Kingdom until political power waned among the Greek rulers in favor of other rulers.

      Roman rule did not wane in favor of other outside rulers. There was no Alexander the Great to come in and establish a new Kingdom where the Roman Empire once stood. Instead, Europe devolved into lesser kings who continually tried to lead a new Holy Roman Empire, which was built upon the foundation of the the original Roman political tradition itself.

      Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      Nope, it is NOT the same people. When you FINALLY understand this THEN you will realise why I disparage your view so much. It is as valid a view as a flat earth.
      The Roman Empire encompassed what now are known as the Italian people, the French people, the British people, and even the German people. And that was just in the West.

      The Eastern branch encompassed Greek people as well as Slavic people, which includes much of Eastern European peoples today. Same peoples, and even some of the same type of languages.

      Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      What rule is made up? My claim that the prophecy should be CONSISTENT?
      The end of the 4th is NOT described as a latter day defeat of the Legs - that is pure nonsense. Where in Daniel 2 does it say that? Now you really are making things up!
      The rules you make up are based upon your own assumptions, that the 4th Kingdom is strictly ancient Rome, that the 4 Kingdoms can not include the Divided Kingdom, and that the Divided Kingdom must be a "5th Kingdom" because it is mentioned after the 4th Kingdom.

      I gave you a set of 4, and you say the 4th Kingdom cannot be the Last Kingdom because it must end as you expect the other Kingdoms must've ended. But there is no rule given as to how each Kingdom must end, only that in order to maintain a succession one Kingdom must be succeeded and conquered by the next.

      Inasmuch as the Roman Kingdom is the Last Kingdom, it cannot have been conquered when Rome fell, but must continue until it reaches the Feet stage, at which time it is defeated not by another Divided Kingdom, but rather, by the Kingdom of God. It is all predicated upon the 4th Kingdom being the Last Kingdom--something you deny only because you claim the Divided Kingdom *cannot* be a subset of the 4th Kingdom! That is your rule--not any rule given in the Bible.

      Again, the argument is stronger that there is only a set of 4 Kingdoms, and not a set of 5 Kingdoms. Only a 4th Kingdom is mentioned! And Daniel's dream is very much like Nebuchadnezzar's dream, which means they are likely a confirmation of one another. In both dreams there is a set of only 4 Kingdoms, in case there is any doubt that there are only 4 Kingdoms.

      Even moreso, the 4th Beast in Dan 7 is related, it seems, to the Beast in the book of Revelation. Both have 10 horns and 7 heads in the sense that in Daniel the Little Horn defeats 3 of the 10 horns, leaving only 7 heads and 10 horns. And that Beast is inferred to be a Roman Kingdom. The Harlot city of 7 hills rides upon the Beast, which seems to be a clear reference to Rome.

      Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
      The LAST Kingdom is destroyed by the RETURN of the King.
      Amils have the Rock striking occurring DURING the Roman Kingdom and thus bringing it to an end. This is at least CONSISTENT and fits to some degree with Daniel 2 (though also ignoring the Feet).
      However as you are Premil, then the Rock striking is a yet FUTURE event and is what defeats the Last Kingdom.
      The FALL of a Kingdom DOES denote the the END of a Kingdom. This is why it is called the Fall of the Kingdom!!
      The Fall of the Roman Empire is *not* the fall of the "Roman Kingdom." It is only the fall of the ancient form of the Roman Kingdom, just as Alexander's Kingdom fell with Alexander's death and was parceled out to other kingdoms within that general Kingdom.

      So your presuppositions are keeping you from accepting what I believe to be the biblical meaning of the 4th Kingdom, the "Roman Kingdom." It did not fall with its ancient phase, in 476 and in 1453. No, European Civilization has inherited the "Roman Kingdom," and still exists today.

      And it will become the "Feet," and will come under the control of the Antichrist. Then the 4th Kingdom will be destroyed by the coming of the Kingdom of Christ. In that way it will be the Last Kingdom. That is how the 4th Kingdom is supposed to end.

      Let's just save a lot of time and sum up our disagreement and then drop it--I think anybody reading this would understand the arguments by now? You believe the *Roman Empire* = the *Roman Kingdom.* And that makes sense--I don't ridicule it.

      But my position is that the Bible is defining the *Roman Kingdom* as *European Civilization,* only beginning with the ancient Roman Empire. One can make up his or her own mind based on the text.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Revelation Man View Post
        For starters, this looks like a copy & paste effort, but that is OK I can still prove this is an incorrect position. We see at the end of the chapter, Gabriel is told to interpret this dream for Daniel, so we know it is indeed END TIMES, and that Jesus is spoken of in two different ways here.

        The fact that you/whoever, says that Antiochus is a TYPE then insists this can only be Antiochus is kind of like admitting, this could be the Anti-Crist also, since Antiochus is a TYPE of Anti-Christ, so the proof is in the pudding, and the "PUDDING" is in Gabriel's interpretation of the dream, of course

        Gabriel's Interpretation.

        Daniel 8:16 And I heard a man's voice(Jesus) between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision. 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: (1) for at the time of the end shall be the vision. 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. 19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the (2) last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

        20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. 21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn(Alexander the Great) that is between his eyes is the first king. 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. 23 (3)And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a (4)king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. 24 And (5) 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.

        25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, (6) and by peace shall destroy many: (7) he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but (8) he shall be broken without hand. 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. 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.

        Let's do this the easy way brother, by identifying END TIME EVENTS which can be nothing else, and by taking Gabriel at face value as to per what he said in Daniel chapter 8.

        1.) Gabriel clearly states that at the "TIME OF THE END" shall be the vision.

        2.) The LAST or End of the INDIGNATION is referring to Israel's 70 weeks of punishment for their sins against God. At the LAST END of "THE INDIGNATION" !!

        3.) In the LATTER TIME of "THEIR KINGDOM" (Greece), all the Beasts lived on save for Babylon, even they did for a time and a season, like Daniel 7:11-12 says. This happens when the TRANSGRESSORS are come to the FULL. Or, when God's Bowls of Wrath are filled up. Just like Israel had to go to Egypt for 400 years because the Caanaites had not yet sinned against God enough for His wrath to become full, the bible says that in Genesis.

        4.) We see the King of Fierce Countenance, that was not Antiochus, the Romans told him what he could and could not do, he was not allowed to Conquer Egypt, we know the Senator FORBADE him from doing that, yet we are supposed to belive Daniel 11:40-43 was Antiochus, come on man, that doesn't even add up. As per "UNDERSTANDING DARK SENTENCES", you know that means like Dark Riddles, it puts forth that this man understands Black Magic, and we see in Matt. 24 that this man and the False Prophet (Matt. 24:24) performs MIRACLES and calls down fire from Heaven etc. etc. This was not Antiochus

        5.) "HIS POWER" shall be Mighty but "NOT BY HIS OWN POWER", and we can see that in Revelation 13 can't we? Rev. 13:4 And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast:and they worshiped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with him?

        6.) "BY PEACE shall he Destroy MANY" is the Anti-Christ, Antiochus never made ANY Peace deals with Israel or the surrounding nations. He doesn't FIT.

        7.) The "Prince of princes" is Jesus Christ brother, come on. He will stand up against Jesus but be defeated, Antiochus was killed in battle on the eastern front.

        8.) This MAN is broken "WITHOUT HAND" and every time this is mentioned, it's showing us God will give us the ultimate VICTORY via His proclamations !! In Dan. 2:34 AND 2:45 the STONE was cut out of the Mountain, WITHOUT HANDS !! In Revelation19:20-21 we see the Beast and False Prophet are cast into hell, but in verse 21 it says the REMNANT of the Beast are slain by the SWORD that comes out of the Mouth of Jesus, in other words, Jesus just SPEAKS VICTORY the way he SPOKE CREATION. He conquers WITHOUT HANDS !! Via the Holy Word that proceeds out of his mouth. So, WITHOUT HANDS refers to Jesus Christ, the Prince of princes. Antiochus did not stand up against Jesus my brother, but the Anti-Crist will. And he will be defeated by the presence of his coming, for Jesus speak victory just like he spoe creation.

        There is no need in my quoting the other portions of your reply that argues against the Daniel 8 prophecy being the Anti-Christ, which has been proven to be an incorrect thesis brother. All the clues add up to an END TIME EVENT and Jesus as being the Prince of princes. As per chapter 11...........
        For a start, you made a baby error by assuming that every rendition of "at the time of the end shall the vision be" automatically denote the eschaton. Since you misunderstood these clear timescale indicators, is it any wonder why you keep going down the garden part? The majority of Daniel's visions save those that will occur in the end-times, were fulfilled during the 400 years between the end of the OT and the NT. This was the period God had warned that he would be silent and not speak to Israel because of their disobedience. See Amos 8:11-12. If you read Daniel from chapter 1 to12, you'll find "at the time of the end" used repeatedly, you'll agree with me that it will be naive for a reader to ignore the context and assume they all refer to the end times!

        In Dan 8:17, the time of the end here refers to the end of the time of God's silence. Remember that Antiochus IV era was AFTER the return from captivity, ie the 400 years between the Old and NT and the first advent? It was also the period of Jewish limited sovereignty.
        • The appointed time refers to the 70 Weeks. Unfortunately, you erred by forgetting that the order to rebuild Jerusalem (the 70 Weeks) was given in 457BC.
        • But the Messiah appeared in 69th Week (Dan 9:25-26).
        • Therefore, it is ludicrous to place the 69 already fulfilled Weeks in the end-times.
        • And Dan 8 was fulfilled during the 69 Weeks.
        I am disappointed that you didn't bother to read my last post in full. I pray you are not one of those that are afraid of reading detailed exegesis, who instead, read a couple of lines and assume they know the rest of the article. I made this observation given the fact that I posited in clear terms that A4E's role ended in Dan 11:31 and that the rest of the texts up to v-35 portrays the fate of the Jews in the aftermath of A4E's Hellenization agenda. I further argued that contrary to the popular belief that Antiochus IV continued to the end of Dan 11, that the king in verse 36 without the prefix of north or south, was indeed Herod the Great.

        Yet despite my position, you said "4.) We see the King of Fierce Countenance, that was not Antiochus, the Romans told him what he could and could not do, he was not allowed to Conquer Egypt, we know the Senator FORBADE him from doing that, yet we are supposed to belive Daniel 11:40-43 was Antiochus, come on man, that doesn't even add up."

        If you lack the patience to read or understand my position, how can you ever see how wrong you are?

        5.) "HIS POWER" shall be Mighty but "NOT BY HIS OWN POWER", and we can see that in Revelation 13 can't we? Rev. 13:4 And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast:and they worshiped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with him?

        6.) "BY PEACE shall he Destroy MANY" is the Anti-Christ, Antiochus never made ANY Peace deals with Israel or the surrounding nations. He doesn't FIT.

        7.) The "Prince of princes" is Jesus Christ brother, come on. He will stand up against Jesus but be defeated, Antiochus was killed in battle on the eastern front.


        As I said earlier, some phrases are used in texts that are already fulfilled and also some are still in the future. Since you failed to cite the chapter and verse that relate to (a) His Power shall be mighty...(b) By Peace shall he destroy many...(c) The Prince of princes - I will ignore them instead of trying to second guess the passage you referred to.

        Finally, BROKEN WITHOUT HAND: I am still dismayed that you wrongfully assumed that I placed A4E in Dan 11:36-45 whereas my position is the contrary. The king here is Herod the Great and despite his atrocities and numerous enemies, he died of an illness and NOT by the hand of man. Thus fulfilling the prophecy that he will be destroyed without hand. According to 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. After Armageddon, the AC+FP was cast alive into the lake of fire. So explain how AC moved his palace between the seas and the glorious holy mountain?

        Technically, to be broken or destroyed without "hand" can also be rendered as death from either natural causes or illness but certainly not by man.

        It is unfortunate that you seem to have a phobia for reading or diligent study. I gave you a simple clue - read up on the meaning and the inception of Hanukkah and come back and tell your readers when it started in Jewish history because it certainly was not one of the Feasts ordained by Moses in the Law.



        Comment


        • Originally posted by Revelation Man View Post
          Rev. 13 says no such thing as you claim, this is how things get bent out of shape. The Daniel 11:40-43 Anti-Christ is NOT THE BEAST YET........You do get that right? Seems you missed it. Meanwhile, the Rev. 13 Anti-Christ has already become THE BEAST by this time. Your argument lost all cred when it refused to understand in order to gain the power he has to go forth CONQUERING, like Rev. 6 states via the White Horse. As per the prose used in Rev. 13, it's just that, prose, people are not actually WORSHIPING the Dragon most of them are still ignorant Atheists who do not believe in God but believe in "HUMANISM" so, in essence, they are SERVING Satan by not serving God !! But, the Dan. 11:40-43 EVENTS/Wars happen BEFORE he becomes THE BEAST. So your whole argument there is null and void brother.

          Daniel 11 IS NOT fulfilled, we can even see that the SPECIFIC AREAS are cited which correlates with END-TIME EVENTS. For instance, Ammon, Moab, and Edom are Central and Southern Jordan, and where do the end-time Jews (Woman in Rev. 12) flee unto? The Petra/Bozrah area of Jordan, these areas can not be TOUCHED by the Anti-Christ. And AGAIN, after the Roman Senator FORBADE Antiochus from conquering Egypt AGAIN they were not conquered by any Greeks, so how was Daniel 11:40-43 fulfilled in the past? It wasn't my faithful brother, it's a FUTURE EVENT.

          I will get to the other post in a bit.........I have to keep my UK brothers on their toes.

          You guys are the closest thing we have to a deep abiding friend, maybe France also. God Bless
          I would have laughed if this is not such a serious matter. To claim that the AC is the king fighting a vague and nameless king from the south (Egypt Dan 11:40-43) in the end-times is nothing short of old women's fables, according to Paul! Of all the likely world super-powers of this age that could potentially stand up to the AC, your pick is Egypt? Is this the best you can do, brother?

          For one who ostensibly has studied Revelation, I am amazed at how you pick and chose which texts to address in Dan 11:36-45.

          Dan 11:44 But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.

          Again, bearing in mind, the power given to the AC at that time and that nobody can war against him (Rev 13:4), please explain this news that is supposed to worry him?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by randyk View Post
            [SIZE=16px]But I'm hoping for the best. My wife is English, and we do have communication problems regularly. A slight variation on an English expression and misunderstanding results. In the same way, a slight delay in a phone call overseas, and we talk over one another.
            LOL. We English, like to keep it simple. And I agree with you that slight variations in the language expression sometimes lead to misunderstanding even though we (British and American) eventually get there in the end.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by randyk View Post
              [SIZE=16px]No, as I've told you numerous times now, the set is established by the mention of the "4th Kingdom.* This establishes a set of 4. You do not determine, as I see it, a set of 5 Kingdoms when no 5th Kingdom is mentioned. The mention of a "Divided Kingdom" after mention of the 4th Kingdom, therefore, suggests that the Divided Kingdom is a subset of the 4th Kingdom and a latter-day expression of the same.

              Why you wish to argue this is beyond me? You already know my opinion, and unless you come up with something meaningful, it won't change my opinion or anybody else's opinion, I should think?
              I enjoy reading your arguments (you and FHG), but I've chosen to stay out of it because I have already discussed Dan 2 & 7 extensively with FHG. He has nothing new that I have not heard and I, too, have exhausted my arguments. In the end, he's stuck to his Picket fence as I have, mine.

              So allow me to comment on just the above. Once again, I concur with your rendition of "sequence". Since Scripture has given us a sequence of FOUR kingdoms, there is no basis to add to that number. Consequently, we must seek the interpretation of any appendage as part of that relevant kingdom that has evolved.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Trivalee View Post

                LOL. We English, like to keep it simple. And I agree with you that slight variations in the language expression sometimes lead to misunderstanding even though we (British and American) eventually get there in the end.
                I have to be careful because I pick up English slang quickly, and fail to understand that some of it could be off color.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Trivalee View Post

                  I enjoy reading your arguments (you and FHG), but I've chosen to stay out of it because I have already discussed Dan 2 & 7 extensively with FHG. He has nothing new that I have not heard and I, too, have exhausted my arguments. In the end, he's stuck to his Picket fence as I have, mine.

                  So allow me to comment on just the above. Once again, I concur with your rendition of "sequence". Since Scripture has given us a sequence of FOUR kingdoms, there is no basis to add to that number. Consequently, we must seek the interpretation of any appendage as part of that relevant kingdom that has evolved.
                  Yes, and I'll remind you that FHG is a "she." She just doesn't like to advertise the fact for whatever reason? I might've treated her more politely had I known up front, but it took someone else to tell me. I feel Christian fellowship with you at times, but never with her. She's always insulting when you put up an argument against her own position. She just can't keep it very civil. Oh well, I'm not fragile.

                  I do see her argument, because the common argument is the one you and I hold, that there are only 4 kingdoms, ending with Rome. However, like FHG, Christians were somewhat surprised, I think, by the fall of the Roman Empire, and wondered: what did Nebuchadnezzar's dream indicate by the coming of the Kingdom of God to end the set of 4 kingdoms?

                  Some then began to come up with different scenarios, and I'm not sure in what order? There was the Amil belief that Christ established his Kingdom in the midst of the Roman Empire when he died on the cross, and is now sort of "cleaning up" his victory in a symbolic "Millennial Kingdom."

                  There is also the belief, like FHG thinks, that there were future hordes following the Roman Empire to either extend the 4th Kingdom or replace it as the final Antichristian Kingdom. Perhaps it was an aftermath of the 4th Kingdom, a continuation of it, or perhaps even, as FHG thought, a 5th "Divided Kingdom?"

                  Regardless, the Kingdom of God did not actually come after the fall of Rome, and not even after the fall of Constantinople a thousand years later! Something in the Dream of Nebuchadnezzar had to explain this time period between the Roman Empire and the future coming of God's Kingdom?

                  Something had to explain the difference, as well, between the ancient Roman Empire, the Divided Kingdom in the time period following that Empire, and the Antichristian Empire? And what was the difference between the Legs and the Feet of the 4th Kingdom?


                  Therefore, some have thought that this interim time period, between the fall of Rome and Christ's Coming, was an extension of the 4th Kingdom. And some thought it was actually a 5th Kingdom, the "Divided Kingdom." Using the language of 4 Kingdoms, however, it appears that the "Divided Kingdom" was simply a latter-day extension of the 4th Kingdom, as I view it.

                  Many thought that following the collapse of the Roman Empire, the period of Antichrist had begun. Some thought this was an extension of the 4th Kingdom, and some thought this was the "5th Kingdom." Regardless, what appeared after the fall of Rome were barbarian hordes. And what appeared at the fall of Constantinople were Islamic hordes.

                  What appeared after the rise of the Holy Roman Empire was a corrupt Roman Catholic Church, and the Protestants saw that Church as the Whore of Rev 17, part of the Antichristian phase.

                  In modern times, some, like Hal Lindsey, have seen the rise of a new secularistic Europe as the latter day phase of the Roman Empire--the Antichrist to come. I would agree with this assessment.


                  I've established my own view, in accord with what I see to be the most logical arguments dating back to the beginning. If the Roman Kingdom began with the Roman Empire, then the fall of the Roman Empire must have somehow continued on in European Civilization in a variety of political forms, including the Holy Roman Empire and the modern European Community, or European Union.

                  This is not original with me. I've borrowed mostly from Gordon Lindsay, but also from Hal Lindsey.

                  I'm curious how you feel about all this?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Trivalee View Post

                    For a start, you made a baby error by assuming that every rendition of "at the time of the end shall the vision be" automatically denote the eschaton. Since you misunderstood these clear timescale indicators, is it any wonder why you keep going down the garden part? The majority of Daniel's visions save those that will occur in the end-times, were fulfilled during the 400 years between the end of the OT and the NT. This was the period God had warned that he would be silent and not speak to Israel because of their disobedience. See Amos 8:11-12. If you read Daniel from chapter 1 to12, you'll find "at the time of the end" used repeatedly, you'll agree with me that it will be naive for a reader to ignore the context and assume they all refer to the end times!

                    In Dan 8:17, the time of the end here refers to the end of the time of God's silence. Remember that Antiochus IV era was AFTER the return from captivity, ie the 400 years between the Old and NT and the first advent? It was also the period of Jewish limited sovereignty.[LIST][*]The appointed time refers to the 70 Weeks. Unfortunately, you erred by forgetting that the order to rebuild Jerusalem (the 70 Weeks) was given in 457BC.[*]But the Messiah appeared in 69th Week (Dan 9:25-26).[*]Therefore, it is ludicrous to place the 69 already fulfilled Weeks in the end-times.[*]And Dan 8 was fulfilled during the 69 Weeks.
                    The End of Time reference in this prophetic uttering is about the 70th week which has not yet come. As I show via the 8 points. The End of Time could have happened in 70 A.D. had Israel REPENTED but of course, God knew they wouldn't. Why do you think Jesus said in Matt. 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. 39For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

                    Why do you think the 70 AD events look so much like the End Time Events? The 70th week was CONDITIONAL, Israel has to REPNT before the 70th week Judgment can come to pass. Which is why I upped my game so much, the Holy Spirit was like Ron, Israel doesn't just get saved by me, they must REPENT FURST, Only those who come unto me BY FAITH alone makes it to heaven !! So I lookED at Malachi 4:5-6, and Zechariah 13:8-9, and I understood, Israel repents BEFORE the flee Judea at the 1290. Which is 30 days BEFORE the Anti-Christ Conquers Jerusalem at the 1260.

                    All of my points prove Daniel 8:9-14 are END-TIME EVENTS. Gabriel tells us that Jesus (Prince of princes) will defeat this man WITHOUT HANDS. The 70th week is End Times, nit the 69 weeks. You are saying that, not me. Daniel 8:1-8 WAS FULFILLED, Daniel 8:9-14 has not been fulfilled, and Daniel 11:36-45 has not been fulfilled. I have an Exegesis on Daniel 11 and 12 that tells who every King is, how he came to power etc. etc. This is how I discovered who Jason was, the False Prophet TYPE.

                    I am disappointed that you didn't bother to read my last post in full. I pray you are not one of those that are afraid of reading detailed exegesis, who instead, read a couple of lines and assume they know the rest of the article. I made this observation given the fact that I posited in clear terms that A4E's role ended in Dan 11:31 and that the rest of the texts up to v-35 portrays the fate of the Jews in the aftermath of A4E's Hellenization agenda. I further argued that contrary to the popular belief that Antiochus IV continued to the end of Dan 11, that the king in verse 36 without the prefix of north or south, was indeed Herod the Great.
                    I read it, but I didn't see any different points being made, I was sleepy, I will read it again to see if a reply is needed. It looked like the exact same points from a different perspective tbh. But I will give it a fresh look. We have been busy trying to catch these crooked people stealing an election in our country the last few weeks.

                    But maybe you were not speaking about the other post, I see you are referring to Daniel 11:31 through 35 here, and I have the best Exegesis on this subject I have ever seen, I spent a good deal of time on it, so I understood you stated he ended at 31, I think he ends at 33 or maybe 34, as per his influence, of course, e was not there, but Jason his appointed High Priest was leading this effort, then he got removed etc. etc. So, I know you aren't saying he Conquered Egypt, and that was my point, either it's HIM or it has to be an END TIME Greek King, it can't be a Roman, like a lot of people try to say, this whole chapter is about the Palace Intrigue of the Greek Kings, not Romans. So who Conquered Egypt, all of North Africa, Israel and was not allowed to Cinquer what is now Central and Southern Jordan like Daniel 11:40-43 says? NO ONE, because it is a future event. Let me show you who it is. Let me show you brother why the Little Horn is said to come out of the Fourth Beast AND why the Little Horn is said to come out of ONE of the Four Generals kingdoms in the END TIMES............AND why he will be an Assyrian.

                    So, this man is born in Greece and ARISES to power in the E.U. and the E.U. currently has 7-year agreements with these Nations look it up, in Wikipedia.

                    European Neighborhood Policy

                    The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) is a foreign relations instrument of the European Union (EU) which seeks to tie those countries to the east and south of the European territory of the EU to the Union. These countries, primarily developing countries, include some who seek to one day become either amember state of the European Union or more closely integrated with the European Union. The ENP does not apply to neighbours of the EU's outermost region, specifically France's territories in South America, but only to those countries close to EU member states' territories in mainland Europe.

                    The countries covered include Algeria, Morocco, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya. Palestine, Syria, and Tunisia. The EU offers financial assistance to countries within the European Neighbourhood, so long as they meet the strict conditions of government reform, economic reform, and other issues surrounding positive transformation. (The ole CARROT & STICK approach)

                    Funding the policy: from ENPI to ENI

                    Giving incentives and rewarding best performers, as well as offering funds in a faster and more flexible manner, are the two main principles underlying the European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) that came into force in 2014. It has a budget of €15.4 billion and provides the bulk of funding through a number of programmes. The ENI, effective from 2014 to 2020, replaces the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument – known as the ENPI. This cooperation instrument continues to be managed by DG Development and Cooperation - EuropeAid, which turns decisions taken on a political level into actions on the ground. ENPI funding approved for the period 2007-2013 was €11.2 billion.

                    So, the E.U. has "AGREEMENTS" in place, the word Covenant in Hebrew simply means agreement. So, they have 7-year AGREEMENTS in place with Algeria, Morocco, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Palestine, Syria, and Tunisia. Let's look at Danel 8:25, Daniel 9:27, and Daniel 11:40-43.



                    Daniel 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.

                    Daniel 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.

                    Daniel 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(Syria & Lebanon). 41 He shall enter also into the glorious land (Conquers Israel), and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon (Why do Edom, Moab and Ammon "ESCAPE" out of his hand? It is Central and Southern Jordan, or where Petra and Bozrah are located at, and that is where the Woman (Israel) of Rev, 12 flees to and are "PROTECTED" by God for 1260 days).

                    42 He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape. 43 But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.

                    Do you get who "THE MANY" are now brother? It's not Israel that the Anti-Christ enters into an Agreement with per se, it's Israel and THE MANY [Nations] in the Mediterranean Sea Region. He becomes a BEAST and all of the other Beasts likewise ruled the whole region, not just Israel. So, this MAN will not just Conquer Israel, he will conquer Syria, Lebanon, and all of North Africa, thus when you add the E.U. and all these Nations together, you have the same Entity as the Old Fourth Beast on a map, thus the clue he comes out of the Fourth Beasts Head now makes sense. Let's look at the Old Roman Empire, AND the E.U. plus THESE NATIONS that the E.U. currently has "AGREEMENTS" with, on a map also.

                    The Roman Empire Map circa 117 A.D.

                    shutterstock-203589544-1.jpg

                    European Neighborhood Policy Map


                    954918050865d37c35d6e2f762917aca (6).jpg


                    This E.U. King/President has to Conquer all those nations he has "AGREEMENTS" with, and then the Anti-Christ will look like his PAPA the Roman Empire, exactly like him on a map. He has to be born in Greece to come out of one of the Four Generals kingdoms, he as to be of the Assyrian bloodline and he has to come to power in the E.U. and ten the E.U. has to Conquer the Mediterranean Sea Region WHILE Israel is a Nation again because there can be no Beast over Israel without an Israel. So, the ABOVE MAP, is what you will have when the E.U. King Conquers all of those Nations he has AGREEMENTS WITH.

                    I don't take Herod the great seriously because he's not of Greek lineage brother. He was an Edomite raised to be a Jew. Chapter 11 is about the Greek Kings Lineage, nothing more and nothing less.

                    Yet despite my position, you said "4.) We see the King of Fierce Countenance, that was not Antiochus, the Romans told him what he could and could not do, he was not allowed to Conquer Egypt, we know the Senator FORBADE him from doing that, yet we are supposed to belive Daniel 11:40-43 was Antiochus, come on man, that doesn't even add up.


                    As stated above, the Daniel 11 chapter is about the Greeks, not a Jew named Herod the Great. Daniel 11:40-43 is about the End Time Anti-Christ. What we get is THREE POINTS of CONFIRMATION as per to who this man is, where he's from, and what his Bloodline is.

                    He's an Assyrian by blood, he is born in Greece, this is why we get such a DETAILED RUNDOWN in Daniel 11 via the lineage of his birthplace, and finally, we get the place he comes to power in, the European Union. ALL THREE must be true, and only a person of Assyrian bloodline, born in Greece, who can them come to power in the E.U. can be the coming Anti-Christ, and I was shown in a vision in 1986, that he is already in this world. Amen.

                    If you lack the patience to read or understand my position, how can you ever see how wrong you are?
                    And as I stated, I read this, but I do not take anyone but a Greek serious as per this Prophecy, it doesn't even make sense brother. This I say via your thinking it had to be Antiochus or another Greek and thus it CAN'T BE........Thus I was being overtly facetious, to make a point. It was not ANYONE, because NO Greek has done this since the first time Antiochus conquered Greece, thus its a FUTURE Greek, and he will be the Anti-Christ.

                    I admit I post things that may go over people's heads via what I am speaking of when I get in a hurry, and especially when this site gets a little wonky as it does a lot of times, and I think I am about to lose a long post. I sometimes do not go in-depth as much as I could. But the point was it has to be a Greek and thus it can't be Antiochus, so who is it? And thus you cite Herod the Great who of course is not a Greek. Chapter 11 is al about the Greek Kings !!

                    5.) "HIS POWER" shall be Mighty but "NOT BY HIS OWN POWER", and we can see that in Revelation 13 can't we? Rev. 13:4 And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast:and they worshiped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with him?

                    6.) "BY PEACE shall he Destroy MANY" is the Anti-Christ, Antiochus never made ANY Peace deals with Israel or the surrounding nations. He doesn't FIT.

                    7.) The "Prince of princes" is Jesus Christ brother, come on. He will stand up against Jesus but be defeated, Antiochus was killed in battle on the eastern front.

                    As I said earlier, some phrases are used in texts that are already fulfilled and also some are still in the future. Since you failed to cite the chapter and verse that relate to (a) His Power shall be mighty...(b) By Peace shall he destroy many...(c) The Prince of princes - I will ignore them instead of trying to second guess the passage you referred to.
                    A. and B. are of course Daniel 8:25, I think I have posted them quite a few times in both or all three replies, so I figured you would have that that on auto-pilot, my bad. So, you are saying its not about the Anti-Christ, but Antiochus, well, it can't be about Antiochus. Daniel 8:9-14 is about the Anti-Christ. And They are in chapter 8, are you just ignoring hem because they prove you wrong brother since the whole DEBATE CITED..........GABRIEL'S INTERPRETATION.........In big red letters? I don't see how you could miss it.

                    GABRIELS INTERPRETATION

                    Oh well.

                    Finally, BROKEN WITHOUT HAND: I am still dismayed that you wrongfully assumed that I placed A4E in Dan 11:36-45 whereas my position is the contrary. The king here is Herod the Great and despite his atrocities and numerous enemies, he died of an illness and NOT by the hand of man. Thus fulfilling the prophecy that he will be destroyed without hand. According to 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. After Armageddon, the AC+FP was cast alive into the lake of fire. So explain how AC moved his palace between the seas and the glorious holy mountain?
                    Again, you didn't say, you just stated it WAS NOT the Anti-Christ, and since he has to be a Greek, I cited the LAST Greek to Conquer Egypt, so I forced you to say who it was, that way I can box you in on whom it was. Now that you say, King Herod, that proves you to be in error brother, it has to be a Greek King. Your position, unless pointed out, has to be brought forth if you are going to deny it's the Anti-Christ because it is the Anti-Christ. So, if you fail to say who it is, I have to go with it being the Last Greek to conquer Egypt.

                    The WITHOUT HANDS always refers to God/Jesus, not simply a man dying of a disease. The Anti-Christ will dwell BETWEEN the Seas, this simply means in Jerusalem brother. Jerusalem is between the Dead Sea and the Great (Mediterranean) Sea. Chapter 11:36-45 is a MINI play by play of the Anti-Christ coming to Power (verses 36-39), Conquering(verses 40-43), living in Jerusalem(verse 44), then coming unto his end (verse 45). It's just not a thorough telling, the more thorough telling is done in Daniel chapter 12.

                    Daniel 11:45 is ARMAGEDDON.......His end. Then in Daniel 12, we get the more fuller play by play.

                    Technically, to be broken or destroyed without "hand" can also be rendered as death from either natural causes or illness but certainly not by man.
                    The reference is always to God in the bible/in Daniel's dreams.

                    It is unfortunate that you seem to have a phobia for reading or diligent study. I gave you a simple clue - read up on the meaning and the inception of Hanukkah and come back and tell your readers when it started in Jewish history because it certainly was not one of the Feasts ordained by Moses in the Law.
                    I will allow you to explain your understandings in detail to others. I am speaking as per to whom the Anti-Christ is in these responses.

                    I would have laughed if this is not such a serious matter. To claim that the AC is the king fighting a vague and nameless king from the south (Egypt Dan 11:40-43) in the end-times is nothing short of old women's fables, according to Paul! Of all the likely world super-powers of this age that could potentially stand up to the AC, your pick is Egypt? Is this the best you can do, brother?

                    For one who ostensibly has studied Revelation, I am amazed at how you pick and chose which texts to address in Dan 11:36-45.

                    Dan 11:44 But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, and utterly to make away many.

                    Again, bearing in mind, the power given to the AC at that time and that nobody can war against him (Rev 13:4), please explain this news that is supposed to worry him?
                    Well, pretty much all of Christendom disagrees with you brother. The Dan. 11:36-45 verses are about the Anti-Christ.

                    Meggido is North of Jerusalem my brother and Jesus comes from the East. That is why that is referenced and then he "COMES TO HIS END" in the very next verse.

                    He is THE BEAST in Rev. 13, he is NOT THE BEAST YET in Dan. 11:40-43, thus he goes forth Conquering first as Rev. 6 says via the White Horse.

                    Jesus has no problem defeating this Beast in verse 45 brother. You conflate too many passages. He will die right?

                    God Bless.



                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Revelation Man View Post
                      The Feet and Toes are made of Iron and Clay which means it will not CLEAVE TOGETHER.
                      Cleave: to adhere firmly and closely or loyally and unwaveringly
                      So it WOULD NOT CLEAVE means just the opposite right? That it is FRACTURED. It's semantics. It means a Kingdom that will not come back together until the very end times. We could take the USA 100 years ago which has a 48 state power base, flash forward 1000 years and they might have fractured into 50 different state powers, then 3000 years later they may become ONE POWER again, but it wouldn't be the same power that broke asunder. So, I think its safe for me to say God is saying its a fractured kingdom that stays apart for 2000 some odd years. That doesn't mean its the same Kingdom. That's just lingo.
                      Nope! Fractured means it WAS a WHOLE and THEN it broke apart. The picture given here though is of something which TRIES to be a whole, but does not stick together. It is NOT about a kingdom which DID exist and then fractures, but about a kingdom which seeks to be one, in this case through ideology, but fails to unite. An example in recent history were the Communist countries of the world, which seemed united, but actually Communist China invaded Communist Soviet Union.
                      Semantics IS important, because we MUST go with the words used, and what they mean, and not some clever devising of our own.

                      We have the clues we need. The Little Horn is called a Beast so he is the 5th Beast.
                      There is NO 5th beast, just as there is no 8th beast in Revelation.
                      The Little Horn IS the 8th (and 11th) horn, and the Beast itself is OF the spirit of the AC, with the Little Horn of Dan 7 being the culmination of the Spirit of the AC found in one person. Moreover this little horn will be like the little of horn of Dan 8, without being the little horn of Dan 8.

                      And that has nothing to do with being a "BEAST" per se. 1.) France and Spain were World powers also, so that means England was never ruling over Europe as a whole entity. 2.) You also can't have a Beast whilst Israel is as "Dead Men's Bones".
                      1) There is NO requirement to rule over Europe. Rome did NOT rule over all of Europe either, most of Germany, none of Poland, nor places further East were part of Rome. Europe is an irrelevancy.
                      Did France or Spain rule over Jerusalem or Babylon? Nope. Though France post World War 1 did have some control over what became Iraq, but this did not include Babylon or Babylonia. See map here:
                      https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...8_May_1916.jpg
                      However Britain did have control over both.
                      When was Israel "dead men's bones"?
                      Clearly according to Ezekiel 37 this was in his time (that of the exile).
                      Most would agree however that Persians, Greeks and Romans were Beasts, and this was DURING the time of the "dead men's bones" so I disagree with your claim in point two also.

                      The bible is about Israel, and the 4 Beasts are all in juxtaposition unto Israel. God was trying to chastise a WAYWARD Israel with His 70 weeks Decree/Judgment. God was not going to allow the Church to be overcome by the power of Dark forces, Jesus stated that the gates of hell will not overcome my church which I build upon this rock. So, these Beasts type Governments were not allowed to rise in Europe after Rome. Thus the Gospel could spread there freely for the most part.
                      Jesus did NOT state that the gates of hell will not overcome the church. He actually stated the gates of hell would not prevail against the church, which means they would NOT stay closed, but that the church would burst those gates open and ransack hell.
                      the statue in Dan 2, which is what my focus was on has NOTHING to do with Europe, and everything to do with the kingdom of Babylon and what kingdom would rule over it afterwards, and then the kingdom after that and so on UNTIL the Kingdom of the Saints, established by Jesus.

                      Its not about where these Gentile Kings were from per se. Its about them being over Israel AND the Mediterranean Sea Region. Rome and Greece both being powers at the SAME TIME kind of gives us a glimpse of this END-TIME Beast's type because he's from both Greece and Europe.
                      It has NOTHING to do with the Mediterranean Sea. It IS about Babylon and by extension Israel (and Jerusalem).
                      The AC is neither from Greece or Europe - but that discussion is outside this OP.

                      While this is true, they ALL Ruled over Israel and the Mediterranean Sea Region to a certain degree. Of course, the first three could not rule over the whole Mediterranean Sea Region without ruling over Europe also, and that was a no go. I think the whole point God is making when He points out how big and bad or how fierce the Iron Kingdom was is that as per the Mediterranean Sea Region it was far grander in nature than the other 3 were. Most of them spread farther east.
                      You do NOT need to rule over Europe in order to rule the Med.
                      The Med connects Southern Europe to Africa
                      The Caliphate basically ruled the Med, with Venice and Genoa fighting for Northern Med.
                      Each kingdom ruled a large area, the Persians ruled all the way into Northern India.
                      As did the Greeks.
                      The Romans went more West and North and less East.

                      The focus however is not Babylon, the focus is always Israel.
                      Not in Daniel 2. Israel is caught up in it, but the focus is the kingdoms which rule AFTER King Nebuchadnezzar UNTIL the kingdom of the Saints.
                      Each Kingdom CONQUERS the preceding Kingdom, UNTIL the toes, which does NOT conquer the Feet, but rather grows out of it.
                      Get the Feet Kingdom correct and then you will understand where and what the Toes will be.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by randyk View Post
                        Yes, and I'll remind you that FHG is a "she." She just doesn't like to advertise the fact for whatever reason? I might've treated her more politely had I known up front, but it took someone else to tell me. I feel Christian fellowship with you at times, but never with her. She's always insulting when you put up an argument against her own position. She just can't keep it very civil. Oh well, I'm not fragile.
                        FHG led me to believe that he is a male. But if that isn't true, well, it's up to him. So far, he/she hasn't corrected me once for addressing him as a male.

                        Originally posted by randyk View Post
                        I do see her argument, because the common argument is the one you and I hold, that there are only 4 kingdoms, ending with Rome. However, like FHG, Christians were somewhat surprised, I think, by the fall of the Roman Empire, and wondered: what did Nebuchadnezzar's dream indicate by the coming of the Kingdom of God to end the set of 4 kingdoms?

                        Some then began to come up with different scenarios, and I'm not sure in what order? There was the Amil belief that Christ established his Kingdom in the midst of the Roman Empire when he died on the cross, and is now sort of "cleaning up" his victory in a symbolic "Millennial Kingdom."

                        There is also the belief, like FHG thinks, that there were future hordes following the Roman Empire to either extend the 4th Kingdom or replace it as the final Antichristian Kingdom. Perhaps it was an aftermath of the 4th Kingdom, a continuation of it, or perhaps even, as FHG thought, a 5th "Divided Kingdom?"

                        Regardless, the Kingdom of God did not actually come after the fall of Rome, and not even after the fall of Constantinople a thousand years later! Something in the Dream of Nebuchadnezzar had to explain this time period between the Roman Empire and the future coming of God's Kingdom?

                        Something had to explain the difference, as well, between the ancient Roman Empire, the Divided Kingdom in the time period following that Empire, and the Antichristian Empire? And what was the difference between the Legs and the Feet of the 4th Kingdom?


                        Therefore, some have thought that this interim time period, between the fall of Rome and Christ's Coming, was an extension of the 4th Kingdom. And some thought it was actually a 5th Kingdom, the "Divided Kingdom." Using the language of 4 Kingdoms, however, it appears that the "Divided Kingdom" was simply a latter-day extension of the 4th Kingdom, as I view it.

                        Many thought that following the collapse of the Roman Empire, the period of Antichrist had begun. Some thought this was an extension of the 4th Kingdom, and some thought this was the "5th Kingdom." Regardless, what appeared after the fall of Rome were barbarian hordes. And what appeared at the fall of Constantinople were Islamic hordes.

                        What appeared after the rise of the Holy Roman Empire was a corrupt Roman Catholic Church, and the Protestants saw that Church as the Whore of Rev 17, part of the Antichristian phase.

                        In modern times, some, like Hal Lindsey, have seen the rise of a new secularistic Europe as the latter day phase of the Roman Empire--the Antichrist to come. I would agree with this assessment.


                        I've established my own view, in accord with what I see to be the most logical arguments dating back to the beginning. If the Roman Kingdom began with the Roman Empire, then the fall of the Roman Empire must have somehow continued on in European Civilization in a variety of political forms, including the Holy Roman Empire and the modern European Community, or European Union.

                        This is not original with me. I've borrowed mostly from Gordon Lindsay, but also from Hal Lindsey. I'm curious how you feel about all this?
                        Thanks for sharing your views.

                        My position is based on the fact that scripture told us there are FOUR kingdoms after which God's eternal kingdom, will be established. I didn't reach this conclusion on the bases on a scholar or Theologian's expressed views. As the Spirit who gives discernment is my witness, my position here came from a diligent study of the texts. In Dan 7:7-8, we are told that the 4th kingdom has '10 horns' from which the Antichrist will arise. According to Rev 17:12, the ten horns will give their power to the Beast. Thus I reached the following conclusions:
                        • Since scripture didn't say that the 10 horns are a separate kingdom, any addition to the number (FOUR) already prescribed, is man-made and blasphemous.
                        • Despite the fall of Rome, it's appendages (10 horns/nations) will rise to prominence at the time of the AC to fulfil the scripture.
                        The UK has taken the cue by leaving the EU, whether this will spur other nations to leave in the years to come to the point that only ten nations would be left at the time of the AC, is moot. But what I will not entertain in any shape or form, is the unfounded theory of a 5th kingdom! So far, no scholar or Theologian can give an accurate explanation of the ten horns/kings - who they are or when they will arise. But since the word of God is infallible, rise they will. And most importantly, they will be an offshoot of Rome.

                        This is my position.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Trivalee View Post

                          FHG led me to believe that he is a male. But if that isn't true, well, it's up to him. So far, he/she hasn't corrected me once for addressing him as a male.
                          You can ask her, but she isn't very transparent. I think she prefers to avoid "labels." She probably thinks gender is irrelevant, and just adds an obstacle of some sort. I wouldn't agree, but it is what it is. I refer to her as "sister" all the time, and she doesn't correct me either!

                          Originally posted by Trivalee View Post
                          Thanks for sharing your views.

                          My position is based on the fact that scripture told us there are FOUR kingdoms after which God's eternal kingdom, will be established. I didn't reach this conclusion on the bases on a scholar or Theologian's expressed views. As the Spirit who gives discernment is my witness, my position here came from a diligent study of the texts. In Dan 7:7-8, we are told that the 4th kingdom has '10 horns' from which the Antichrist will arise. According to Rev 17:12, the ten horns will give their power to the Beast. Thus I reached the following conclusions:
                          • Since scripture didn't say that the 10 horns are a separate kingdom, any addition to the number (FOUR) already prescribed, is man-made and blasphemous.
                          • Despite the fall of Rome, it's appendages (10 horns/nations) will rise to prominence at the time of the AC to fulfil the scripture.
                          The UK has taken the cue by leaving the EU, whether this will spur other nations to leave in the years to come to the point that only ten nations would be left at the time of the AC, is moot. But what I will not entertain in any shape or form, is the unfounded theory of a 5th kingdom! So far, no scholar or Theologian can give an accurate explanation of the ten horns/kings - who they are or when they will arise. But since the word of God is infallible, rise they will. And most importantly, they will be an offshoot of Rome.

                          This is my position.
                          Absolutely. For once we're on the same page. I wouldn't call a divergent opinion "blasphemous," but I do agree that it is intuitive to read the 4th Kingdom as the last in a set of 4 Kingdoms mentioned. Thanks brother!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
                            Nope! Fractured means it WAS a WHOLE and THEN it broke apart. The picture given here though is of something which TRIES to be a whole, but does not stick together. It is NOT about a kingdom which DID exist and then fractures, but about a kingdom which seeks to be one, in this case through ideology, but fails to unite. An example in recent history were the Communist countries of the world, which seemed united, but actually Communist China invaded Communist Soviet Union.
                            Semantics IS important, because we MUST go with the words used, and what they mean, and not some clever devising of our own.
                            Well, it was a WHOLE Beast, and then God used the number 10 with Iron and Clay in order to show that the Roman Beast had become FRACTURED into MANY NATIONS. This is just a fact. Is not the same Beast, it is the same Area/Region and the Little Horn Beast will arise amongst the 10 or the FRACTURED Kingdoms that were once united as the Roman Empire.

                            Semantics is not important here if one understands what God is trying to tell us, and I understand exactly what this means. Its basically just this easy, God is telling us that a Little Horn Beast will arise in the End Times and he will look just like the Old Roman Empire once looked on a Map. We are even given what it will look like, we are shown THE 10 (Europe) and we are also SHOWN who he Conquers in Daniel 11:40-43. Thus we can understand that this Little Horn's landmass will be the exact landmass of the Old Roman Empire.

                            There is NO 5th beast, just as there is no 8th beast in Revelation.
                            The Little Horn IS the 8th (and 11th) horn, and the Beast itself is OF the spirit of the AC, with the Little Horn of Dan 7 being the culmination of the Spirit of the AC found in one person. Moreover this little horn will be like the little of horn of Dan 8, without being the little horn of Dan 8.
                            There is a 5th Beast, Daniel 7:11 PROVES THIS, it calls THE MAN a Beast, and says the Beasts BODY is DESTROYED and he is thus KILLED and then cast into hell. So, of course, the Little Horn is the 5th Beast. There is no 8th on this Earth. The 8th is Apollyon, his Kingdom however is the Bottomless Pit. The 7 Headed Beast has SEVEN HEADS, not 8.

                            NOTICE: The 11 Horn is NEVER MENTIONED in Rev. 13 sister? You know why? The Little Horn who arises AMONGST the 10, is the 7th Head. You have these 7 Heads: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome............2000 some odd year Church Age............Anti-Christ = the 7th Head of this Seven-Headed Beast. The Little Horn of Dan. 7 and 8 is the exact same man. He is the Anti-Christ of Rev. 13. He is the 5th Beast mentioned in Dan. ch. 7 and the 7th Head of the 7 Headed Beast of Rev. 13.

                            1) There is NO requirement to rule over Europe. Rome did NOT rule over all of Europe either, most of Germany, none of Poland, nor places further East were part of Rome. Europe is an irrelevancy.
                            Did France or Spain rule over Jerusalem or Babylon? Nope. Though France post World War 1 did have some control over what became Iraq, but this did not include Babylon or Babylonia. See map here:
                            https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...8_May_1916.jpg
                            However Britain did have control over both.
                            When was Israel "dead men's bones"?
                            Clearly according to Ezekiel 37 this was in his time (that of the exile).
                            Most would agree however that Persians, Greeks and Romans were Beasts, and this was DURING the time of the "dead men's bones" so I disagree with your claim in point two also.
                            The point about a "REQUIREMENT" is irrelevant, we are speaking as per to what God is "SAYING" and He is thus saying that these 10 Kings are ALL Europe Divided as per once they were the Roman Empire as one collective unit. It doesn't matter than mankind has stretched Europe to include Russia and Ukraine in some instances, God is saying, what was once the Roman Empire (like the MAP I posted above) will not be allowed to come back together as a cohesive unit until after Israel is REBORN as a Nation (their bones come back together) until the very End-Times. Notice, Israel becomes a Nation in 1948, and the Treaty of Rome created the European Common Market basically in the 1950's.

                            The Whole of Europe, as it is defined now, is not the point. The point is what was the Roman Empire WILL BE AGAIN on a Map, like I show above, it doesn't have to be 100 percent exact, the point is the Roman Empire or 4th Beast will be recreated basically in the 5th Beat Little Horn Anti-Christ. The Anti-Christ will rule over Jerusalem, this he will be the 7th Head or LAST BEAST.

                            Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome were the Four Beasts of Daniel, the 5th Beast will be the Little Horn/Anti-Christ. These were not during the time of the Dead Men's Bones. That started in AD 70 when God turned His back on Israel and allowed them to be carried off to various lands a la the diaspora.

                            Jesus did NOT state that the gates of hell will not overcome the church. He actually stated the gates of hell would not prevail against the church, which means they would NOT stay closed, but that the church would burst those gates open and ransack hell.
                            the statue in Dan 2, which is what my focus was on has NOTHING to do with Europe, and everything to do with the kingdom of Babylon and what kingdom would rule over it afterwards, and then the kingdom after that and so on UNTIL the Kingdom of the Saints, established by Jesus.
                            Come on now sister !!

                            Matthew 16:15He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

                            18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

                            The reason we are a DEFEATED CHURCH now is we do not use this POWER given unto us by God because we are too busy LOVING this evil World. Like I stated, Jesus bound Apollyon the Destroyed and gave the KEYS of the Kingdom to us, the Church. Amen. We know they can't overcome the Church nor prevail, it's the same thing, they can Martyr or members, but that made us stronger, but having ONE CENRTAL POWER would have been a detriment for Christianity. The reason the Pilgrims moved to the USA was to have Freedom of Religion, the English Nobels and the Euro Nobles wanted to run the Churches as they saw fit. Could you imagine all of these Governments under one umbrella at that time, if one man has an anti-God bent, he might ban all bibles, so God kept them divided.

                            It has NOTHING to do with the Mediterranean Sea. It IS about Babylon and by extension Israel (and Jerusalem).
                            The AC is neither from Greece or Europe - but that discussion is outside this OP.
                            No, Babylon means NOTHING to God. He hated Babylon. Babel means CONFUSION, and what are those who fight against their own loving Creator at Armageddon? CONFUSED to the brim, that's what. Babylon simply means Satan's Dark Kingdom on this earth whee he DECEIVES Mankind for a time and a season. That is why in Rev. 16:19 God states CLEARLY that those he defeats are Babylon the Great, and that he placed them in the Wine-press of his Wrath. So who were they? Well, look back to the 6th Vial, it tells us who they are !! It says they are the Kings of the WHOLE WORLD who are gathered to do battle with God.

                            So, Babyllon = the WHOLE WORLD. The A.C. is Greek, that is a 100 percent fact. And Greece is in Europe.

                            You do NOT need to rule over Europe in order to rule the Med.
                            The Med connects Southern Europe to Africa
                            The Caliphate basically ruled the Med, with Venice and Genoa fighting for Northern Med.
                            Each kingdom ruled a large area, the Persians ruled all the way into Northern India.
                            As did the Greeks.
                            The Romans went more West and North and less East.
                            There is no caliphate coming sister. Its just not factual sister. That is called being blown with the wind, I saw te same types spreading the RCC stuff in the 70s and 80s. Its just the trend that is taking shape now, but its not factual. The Bible clearly tells us this man is born n Greece and comes to power in the E.U. To me its not that complicated, but then again its my calling. There was no Beast from Rome or maybe even AD 70 until the Anti-Christ, and he can only become a Beast because Israel was REBORN in 1948.

                            Its all about Israel and the Mediterranean Sea Region.

                            Not in Daniel 2. Israel is caught up in it, but the focus is the kingdoms which rule AFTER King Nebuchadnezzar UNTIL the kingdom of the Saints.
                            Each Kingdom CONQUERS the preceding Kingdom, UNTIL the toes, which does NOT conquer the Feet, but rather grows out of it.
                            Get the Feet Kingdom correct and then you will understand where and what the Toes will be.
                            Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 is the SAME DREAM, one from a King of this world's perspective, and one from God's perspective. NOTICE: Nebuchadnezzar saw his Kingdom as the "GOLD STANDARD" and all the kingdom were precious metals. God saw His Kingdom as one of FOUR PREDATORY BEASTS !!

                            The 10 Horns come out of the Fourth Beasts Head is just like the 10 Toes being a part of the Feet which is Iron and Clay. The 10 in both instances suggest that the ONE (Rome) became DIVIDED. And then in the End Times, these Nations came back together unto the Little Horn Anti-Christ Beast.

                            God Bless.


                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Revelation Man View Post
                              Well, it was a WHOLE Beast, and then God used the number 10 with Iron and Clay in order to show that the Roman Beast had become FRACTURED into MANY NATIONS. This is just a fact. Is not the same Beast, it is the same Area/Region and the Little Horn Beast will arise amongst the 10 or the FRACTURED Kingdoms that were once united as the Roman Empire.
                              In Daniel 2 it was NOT a whole beast, but a whole statue.
                              However the 10 Toes are ONLY connected with the 2 Feet (being the SAME kingdom) like Alexander's Kingdom is the Middle and the diadochi (Ptolemy, Seleuceus etc) are the thighs.
                              The AREA/region in question for the Statue IS Babylon and Mesopotamia (not Mediterranean).
                              There is NO link with the Roman Kingdom, which was the 4th kingdom, and like the 6th in Revelation 17 ONLY relevant because it was the kingdom when Jesus came and the NT was written.

                              Semantics is not important here if one understands what God is trying to tell us, and I understand exactly what this means. Its basically just this easy, God is telling us that a Little Horn Beast will arise in the End Times and he will look just like the Old Roman Empire once looked on a Map. We are even given what it will look like, we are shown THE 10 (Europe) and we are also SHOWN who he Conquers in Daniel 11:40-43. Thus we can understand that this Little Horn's landmass will be the exact landmass of the Old Roman Empire.
                              Why would he look at the Old Roman Empire?
                              The 10 horns do NOT arise out of the Legs, but out of the Feet.

                              There is a 5th Beast, Daniel 7:11 PROVES THIS, it calls THE MAN a Beast, and says the Beasts BODY is DESTROYED and he is thus KILLED and then cast into hell. So, of course, the Little Horn is the 5th Beast. There is no 8th on this Earth. The 8th is Apollyon, his Kingdom however is the Bottomless Pit. The 7 Headed Beast has SEVEN HEADS, not 8.
                              Nope.
                              Dan 7:11 “I looked then because of the sound of the great words that the horn was speaking. And as I looked, the beast was killed, and its body destroyed and given over to be burned with fire.
                              The horn ON the 4th beast was speaking. The WHOLE 4th beast is killed. This is NOT an additional beast.
                              The 8th horn is the Little horn, for there were 10, then the 11th, the little horn springs up. Now the little horn uproots 3, whihc means there are now only 8 horns. The little horn is therefore the 11th (and the 8th).
                              In Rev 17 we are shown the SAME thing, with 10 kings who unite (make an agreement with each other) and give their power to another (an 11th king, who had no power of his own). This 11th king is called the 8th in Rev 17, for there are 7 kings and then an 8th.

                              NOTICE: The 11 Horn is NEVER MENTIONED in Rev. 13 sister? You know why? The Little Horn who arises AMONGST the 10, is the 7th Head. You have these 7 Heads: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome............2000 some odd year Church Age............Anti-Christ = the 7th Head of this Seven-Headed Beast. The Little Horn of Dan. 7 and 8 is the exact same man. He is the Anti-Christ of Rev. 13. He is the 5th Beast mentioned in Dan. ch. 7 and the 7th Head of the 7 Headed Beast of Rev. 13.
                              The number 11 is never mentioned because it is called the 8th.
                              Those heads are WRONG.
                              The heads are the heads of the beasts SEEN in Daniel 7.
                              Count them:
                              Winged Lion (Griffin) - 1 head
                              Bear - 1 head
                              Leopard - 4 heads
                              4th beast - 1 head
                              1 + 1 + 4 + 1 = 7
                              The beast in Rev 13 (and 17) is the beasts of Daniel 7.
                              The heads are the heads of those beasts.

                              The AC is NOT the 7th head, for it is an 8th!
                              Rev 17:11 As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven

                              The point about a "REQUIREMENT" is irrelevant, we are speaking as per to what God is "SAYING" and He is thus saying that these 10 Kings are ALL Europe Divided as per once they were the Roman Empire as one collective unit.
                              Weird to say this is what God is saying based on nothing but your own say so.

                              Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome were the Four Beasts of Daniel, the 5th Beast will be the Little Horn/Anti-Christ. These were not during the time of the Dead Men's Bones. That started in AD 70 when God turned His back on Israel and allowed them to be carried off to various lands a la the diaspora.
                              Again wrong. Babylon was NOT one of the beasts of Daniel 7 as Dan 7:17 states:
                              Dan 7:17 ‘These four great beasts are four kings who shall arise out of the earth.

                              All four beasts are FUTURE to this vision. The first arose within a year.

                              The reason we are a DEFEATED CHURCH now is we do not use this POWER given unto us by God because we are too busy LOVING this evil World. Like I stated, Jesus bound Apollyon the Destroyed and gave the KEYS of the Kingdom to us, the Church. Amen. We know they can't overcome the Church nor prevail, it's the same thing, they can Martyr or members, but that made us stronger, but having ONE CENRTAL POWER would have been a detriment for Christianity. The reason the Pilgrims moved to the USA was to have Freedom of Religion, the English Nobels and the Euro Nobles wanted to run the Churches as they saw fit. Could you imagine all of these Governments under one umbrella at that time, if one man has an anti-God bent, he might ban all bibles, so God kept them divided.
                              I am not part of a DEFEATED church. If you are I suggest you put your faith in Jesus.
                              Jesus did NOT bind Apollyon nor did Apollyon have the keys of the kingdom. God has them.
                              It is NOT about them prevail OVER us, but that they can't prevail against our attacking them.

                              No, Babylon means NOTHING to God. He hated Babylon. Babel means CONFUSION, and what are those who fight against their own loving Creator at Armageddon? CONFUSED to the brim, that's what. Babylon simply means Satan's Dark Kingdom on this earth whee he DECEIVES Mankind for a time and a season. That is why in Rev. 16:19 God states CLEARLY that those he defeats are Babylon the Great, and that he placed them in the Wine-press of his Wrath. So who were they? Well, look back to the 6th Vial, it tells us who they are !! It says they are the Kings of the WHOLE WORLD who are gathered to do battle with God.
                              So, Babyllon = the WHOLE WORLD. The A.C. is Greek, that is a 100 percent fact. And Greece is in Europe.
                              You say Babylon is nothing, then say Babylon is the whole world, then that Babylon is the AC being Satan's dark kingdom.
                              Babylon is introduced as Mystery Babylon, for there is a mystery about this Babylon.

                              There is no caliphate coming sister. Its just not factual sister. That is called being blown with the wind, I saw te same types spreading the RCC stuff in the 70s and 80s. Its just the trend that is taking shape now, but its not factual. The Bible clearly tells us this man is born n Greece and comes to power in the E.U. To me its not that complicated, but then again its my calling. There was no Beast from Rome or maybe even AD 70 until the Anti-Christ, and he can only become a Beast because Israel was REBORN in 1948.
                              Its all about Israel and the Mediterranean Sea Region.
                              I did NOT say there is a Caliphate coming. I said there was a Caliphate. It happened ALREADY. It conquered the Roman kingdom, but being based on ideology and not ethnicity it did NOT mix.
                              The Caliphate is GONE. The Feet of the Statue ended, and now is the time of the Toes. The 10 kings are LIKE the Feet, being a kingdom based on ideology and NOT ethnicity.
                              The US could fit that idea (except it is not 10), the EU could fit that idea (except it is also not 10). I don't believe it exists in any form yet. However it will.

                              Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 is the SAME DREAM, one from a King of this world's perspective, and one from God's perspective. NOTICE: Nebuchadnezzar saw his Kingdom as the "GOLD STANDARD" and all the kingdom were precious metals. God saw His Kingdom as one of FOUR PREDATORY BEASTS !!
                              Not the SAME dream. This is why people so often go wrong. They apply eisegesis instead of reading what each dream shows.
                              These dreams were given 50 years apart. The first when Babylon was attaining the height of its power, the second when Babylon was about to lose its power.

                              The 10 Horns come out of the Fourth Beasts Head is just like the 10 Toes being a part of the Feet which is Iron and Clay. The 10 in both instances suggest that the ONE (Rome) became DIVIDED. And then in the End Times, these Nations came back together unto the Little Horn Anti-Christ Beast.
                              Finally we have some agreement. Do you understand what you have written?
                              The 10 Toes are PART of the Feet.
                              The Feet are NOT Rome!
                              The Legs were Rome.
                              Let that sink in, and really work it through.
                              The Legs are Rome, the Feet are the Kingdom which conquered Rome. The Toes are going to grow out of what the Feet were!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
                                The End of Time reference in this prophetic uttering is about the 70th week which has not yet come. As I show via the 8 points. The End of Time could have happened in 70 A.D. had Israel REPENTED but of course, God knew they wouldn't. Why do you think Jesus said in Matt. 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. 39For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

                                Why do you think the 70 AD events look so much like the End Time Events? The 70th week was CONDITIONAL, Israel has to REPNT before the 70th week Judgment can come to pass. Which is why I upped my game so much, the Holy Spirit was like Ron, Israel doesn't just get saved by me, they must REPENT FURST, Only those who come unto me BY FAITH alone makes it to heaven !! So I lookED at Malachi 4:5-6, and Zechariah 13:8-9, and I understood, Israel repents BEFORE the flee Judea at the 1290. Which is 30 days BEFORE the Anti-Christ Conquers Jerusalem at the 1260.

                                All of my points prove Daniel 8:9-14 are END-TIME EVENTS. Gabriel tells us that Jesus (Prince of princes) will defeat this man WITHOUT HANDS. The 70th week is End Times, nit the 69 weeks. You are saying that, not me. Daniel 8:1-8 WAS FULFILLED, Daniel 8:9-14 has not been fulfilled, and Daniel 11:36-45 has not been fulfilled. I have an Exegesis on Daniel 11 and 12 that tells who every King is, how he came to power etc. etc. This is how I discovered who Jason was, the False Prophet TYPE.
                                I never said that the 70th Week has been fulfilled. Surely that should be obvious given that as I pointed out that the Messiah was killed at the 69th Week, with ONE week yet to be fulfilled? Fortunately, we both agree that one week remains and it will be fulfilled at the time of the AC, the GT and the return of the Messiah. Our contention is whether Dan 8:9-14 has already been fulfilled or yet in the future? I am satisfied that I've given you irrefutable proof that Antiochus IV Epiphanes fulfilled it.

                                There's no pleasure in repetition, so I'll leave you to it. Hopefully, the good Lord will give you the requisite discernment to understand this in His time.

                                Originally posted by ForHisglory View Post
                                I read it, but I didn't see any different points being made, I was sleepy, I will read it again to see if a reply is needed. It looked like the exact same points from a different perspective tbh. But I will give it a fresh look. We have been busy trying to catch these crooked people stealing an election in our country the last few weeks.

                                But maybe you were not speaking about the other post, I see you are referring to Daniel 11:31 through 35 here, and I have the best Exegesis on this subject I have ever seen, I spent a good deal of time on it, so I understood you stated he ended at 31, I think he ends at 33 or maybe 34, as per his influence, of course, e was not there, but Jason his appointed High Priest was leading this effort, then he got removed etc. etc. So, I know you aren't saying he Conquered Egypt, and that was my point, either it's HIM or it has to be an END TIME Greek King, it can't be a Roman, like a lot of people try to say, this whole chapter is about the Palace Intrigue of the Greek Kings, not Romans. So who Conquered Egypt, all of North Africa, Israel and was not allowed to Cinquer what is now Central and Southern Jordan like Daniel 11:40-43 says? NO ONE, because it is a future event. Let me show you who it is. Let me show you brother why the Little Horn is said to come out of the Fourth Beast AND why the Little Horn is said to come out of ONE of the Four Generals kingdoms in the END TIMES............AND why he will be an Assyrian.

                                So, this man is born in Greece and ARISES to power in the E.U. and the E.U. currently has 7-year agreements with these Nations look it up, in Wikipedia.
                                Whether your last election was stolen or not, Trump has turned the time-honoured institution of the White House into a joke. His actions are nothing short of what you would expect from African politicians who never leaves office unless there's bloodshed or a military coup. I don't care a hoot about Biden or Trump, so I'm not taking sides with anyone. My remark is purely based on the fact that Trump's desperation to hang on to power has tainted the world view of US democracy/elections that is hitherto, the world's envy.

                                The last US presidents that appealed to me were Ronald Reagan, George Bush Sr., and Bill Clinton. Obama was a showman president and an atheist. Trump, in my view, is a narcissist. This election was his to lose and, he managed to do just that! He could have read the shifting mood of the people and seized the opportunity to unite Americans during the Black Lives Matter protest. Instead, he promoted division and strife. Secondly, he could have taken the COVID-19 pandemic seriously. By his own doing, he managed to alienate a significant number of the electorate.

                                If you are a Trump supporter and believe I've spoken out of turn, please forgive me. My views are that of someone following the news (Fox News, CNN, ABC, etc.) from across the pond.

                                Back to our discourse. We are too polarized for any agreement on Dan 8 and 11. The AC is not in any of these chapters. Your attempt to force him there, don't make sense. Dan 11:41-43 shows the course that Octavius Caesar took after his victory over Mark Antony and Cleopatra. He passed through Syria, Judea (the glorious land) down to Egypt in pursuit of the pair. However, the lands of Edom, Moab and Ammon were not invaded during his excursion. Dan 11:43, after Octavius' victory over Antony and Cleopatra, the treasures of Alexandra (Egypt's greatest city and capital at the time) was his to plunder.





                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X