Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

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

  • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

    Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
    The final beast empire has 10 kings not 7. And no, 3 of those 10 kings are not subdued anywhere in the book of Rev. All ten are un-subdued the entire length of the GT. Additionally, that same final empire beast has 7 mountains and none of the mountains/heads fall anywhere in the book of Rev. Again, any translation that has "they are also seven kings" is based on corrupted manuscripts. The 7 heads are not these consecutive falling historic kingdoms.
    I'm really not sure, so I'll keep your comments in mind when checking these things out. In the meantime, it appears that you're just making assertions, without proofs. For example, the 3 kings in Dan 7 are subdued *before* the 3.5 years of Antichristian Rule. So why should the Book of Revelation mention this rebellion and putting down of the rebellion if its focus is primarily on the 3.5 years itself, rather than on events leading up to that time?

    And why not assume that the 10 horns are 10 kingdoms, whereas the 7 heads are the remaining 7 kings over those kingdoms, with 3 of the kings having been subdued prior to the rule of Antichrist? To just say "it ain't so" isn't enough for me.

    To say the mountains/heads do not fall anywhere in the book of Revelation is absurd and irrational to me! The book of Revelation is precisely where we read this! It *is* in the book of Revelation, or did you mean to say something else?

    Also, to say "they are also 7 kings" is a "corruption" is not proof to me--not even if some of the words are different from some translations in the original language. Just the way it is worded, less some other words, could still suggest both, that the 7 heads are 7 mountains, and that they also represent 7 consecutive historical kingdoms.

    The point is, 7 heads, or kings, stand behind the Antichrist, along with 10 horns, or kingdoms. This would assume that 3 of the kings over these kingdoms had already been put down. To identify them cryptically John would suggest that the 7 heads can be identified as Rome through 2 methods, by seeing them as a product of the 7 hills of Rome, or by seeing these 7 mountains as symbolic representations of a series of kingdoms, leading up to the Roman Empire.

    It doesn't really matter whether John is saying that the 7 Heads symbolize 7 kingdoms in history leading up to Rome, or that the 7 hills of Rome represent 7 historical kingdoms leading up to Rome. Both lead us to the same conclusion, that the 7 Heads represent the final form of imperial Roman power, which are likely 7 kings in that confederation. 10 horns may more strictly refer to 10 kingdoms. But the fact they are kingdoms indicate that they may have 3 proxy kings in there, as well. Inasmuch as they are mere figureheads may discount their importance among the 7 Heads.

    This is pure speculation on my part. I don't know, on the other hand, how you can be so sure?

    Comment


    • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

      Originally posted by randyk View Post
      For example, the 3 kings in Dan 7 are subdued *before* the 3.5 years of Antichristian Rule. So why should the Book of Revelation mention this rebellion and putting down of the rebellion if its focus is primarily on the 3.5 years itself, rather than on events leading up to that time?
      It speaks of the ten horns before it mentions the rise of the AC and at no time does the AC subduing any of those ten kings. It simply doesn't happen in the timeline of events John saw. People need to stop trying to mix Daniels visions in with John's because they do not match. Events are different and so are the time lengths.



      And why not assume that the 10 horns are 10 kingdoms, whereas the 7 heads are the remaining 7 kings over those kingdoms
      Why assume something that Rev doesn't say is true? The 7 mountains are not kings. Only the horns are kings and all ten are intact throughout the entire GT.


      , with 3 of the kings having been subdued prior to the rule of Antichrist?
      If that was true, we would see a beast with 7 horns in the book of Rev. We don't because it's not going to happen.


      To say the mountains/heads do not fall anywhere in the book of Revelation is absurd and irrational to me! The book of Revelation is precisely where we read this! It *is* in the book of Revelation, or did you mean to say something else?
      It's not found in the book of Rev. Quote any verse you want to support any of the 7 mountains/heads falling. The closest is a head being wounded and it heals so no fall happened there. Then there's the whole crowd of "The Antichrist was wounded in his head and died then resurrected"...uh, no...nowhere in scripture is such nonsense found but belief is far more important than the truth so virtually impossible to get someone to understand how wrong that one is.



      Also, to say "they are also 7 kings" is a "corruption" is not proof to me
      The KJV is based on a set of manuscripts and translations like the ESV is based on different manuscripts that have differences. They both aren't right.



      Just the way it is worded, less some other words, could still suggest both, that the 7 heads are 7 mountains, and that they also represent 7 consecutive historical kingdoms.
      The 7 mountains aren't consecutive in Rev. They all exist at the same time as part of the Rev 13 beast. None of them fall, none of them represent kings.


      This is pure speculation on my part. I don't know, on the other hand, how you can be so sure?
      Aside that God showed me these things, the other thing is that my position on these things has no errors. (this doesn't mean I haven't been wrong on things in the past and learned from that and changed) I've looked at it forwards and backwards and have presented it for evaluation for decades and the only errors I can see is in the opposing positions. Just the fact of confusing the heads as being various past kings is a major issue the text doesn't support. Forcing things from Daniel that isn't supported by Rev into Rev is a major issue.

      It's like a spelling competition.

      I spell "Revolution" while others spell it "Revelution"...when asked how can I be sure? Well, because the error isn't in my spelling. Use a math competition or anything similar so see why I am so sure.

      Originally posted by randyk View Post
      For example, the 3 kings in Dan 7 are subdued *before* the 3.5 years of Antichristian Rule. So why should the Book of Revelation mention this rebellion and putting down of the rebellion if its focus is primarily on the 3.5 years itself, rather than on events leading up to that time?
      It speaks of the ten horns before it mentions the rise of the AC and at no time does the AC subduing any of those ten kings. It simply doesn't happen in the timeline of events John saw. People need to stop trying to mix Daniels visions in with John's because they do not match. Events are different and so are the time lengths.



      And why not assume that the 10 horns are 10 kingdoms, whereas the 7 heads are the remaining 7 kings over those kingdoms
      Why assume something that Rev doesn't say is true? The 7 mountains are not kings. Only the horns are kings and all ten are intact throughout the entire GT.


      , with 3 of the kings having been subdued prior to the rule of Antichrist?
      If that was true, we would see a beast with 7 horns in the book of Rev. We don't because it's not going to happen.


      To say the mountains/heads do not fall anywhere in the book of Revelation is absurd and irrational to me! The book of Revelation is precisely where we read this! It *is* in the book of Revelation, or did you mean to say something else?
      It's not found in the book of Rev. Quote any verse you want to support any of the 7 mountains/heads falling. The closest is a head being wounded and it heals so no fall happened there. Then there's the whole crowd of "The Antichrist was wounded in his head and died then resurrected"...uh, no...nowhere in scripture is such nonsense found but belief is far more important than the truth so virtually impossible to get someone to understand how wrong that one is.



      Also, to say "they are also 7 kings" is a "corruption" is not proof to me
      The KJV is based on a set of manuscripts and translations like the ESV is based on different manuscripts that have differences. They both aren't right.



      Just the way it is worded, less some other words, could still suggest both, that the 7 heads are 7 mountains, and that they also represent 7 consecutive historical kingdoms.
      The 7 mountains aren't consecutive in Rev. They all exist at the same time as part of the Rev 13 beast. None of them fall, none of them represent kings.


      This is pure speculation on my part. I don't know, on the other hand, how you can be so sure?
      Aside that God showed me these things, the other thing is that my position on these things has no errors. (this doesn't mean I haven't been wrong on things in the past and learned from that and changed) I've looked at it forwards and backwards and have presented it for evaluation for decades and the only errors I can see is in the opposing positions. Just the fact of confusing the heads as being various past kings is a major issue the text doesn't support. Forcing things from Daniel that isn't supported by Rev into Rev is a major issue.

      It's like a spelling competition.

      I spell "Revolution" while others spell it "Revelution"...when asked how can I be sure? Well, because the error isn't in my spelling. Use a math competition or anything similar so see why I am so sure.
      James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

      Comment


      • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

        Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
        Probably has something to do with the first beast not being a person since the first beast is an empire of ten smaller kingdoms united under one greater empire. The leader of that great empire is the false prophet.
        The first Beast is a man, the AC who controls the world [his empre] for 3.5 years. There's no such thing as "smaller kingdoms" as such connotation would suggest they are independent. Rather they are territories within the AC's kingdom given to the 10 kings to oversee on behalf of the Beast. And the leader is the Antichrist, not the false prophet.

        Comment


        • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

          Originally posted by Deade View Post
          Here, I will spell it out for you:

          The Second Beast

          Rev. 13:11-18 "And I saw another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like unto a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the authority of the first beast in his sight. And he maketh the earth and them that dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose death-stroke was healed.

          And he [Beast 2] doeth great signs, that he should even make fire to come down out of heaven upon the earth in the sight of men. And he [Beast 2] deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by reason of the signs which it was given him to do in the sight of the [Beast 1] beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast [Beast 1], who hath the stroke of the sword, and lived.

          And it was given unto him [Beast 2] to give breath to it, even to the image of the beast [Beast 1], that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as should not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

          And he [Beast 2] causeth all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free and the bond, that there be given them a mark on their right hand, or upon their forehead; and that no man should be able to buy or to sell, save he that hath the mark, even the name of the beast [Beast 2] or the number of his name.

          Here is wisdom. He that hath understanding, let him count the number of the beast [Beast 2]; for it is the number of a man: and his number is Six hundred and sixty and six."


          So, you see the last two references could well be the name and number of Antichrist assigned to Beast 2.
          There is nothing in scripture to suggest that the number of the Antichrist 666 [Beast 1] is ever assigned to his False Prophet [Beast 2]. Rev 13:18 is simply informing the reader that the number or mark of the AC is 666 which will placed on the hand or forehead (Rev 14:9).

          Comment


          • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

            Never ceases to amaze how ignorance can be easily confused for knowledge. For e.g. in Dan 7, the little horn is correctly identified as the Antichrist. But they claim that the False Prophet inexplicably transforms himself into the AC in Revelation. Awesome!!!

            Comment


            • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

              Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
              It speaks of the ten horns before it mentions the rise of the AC and at no time does the AC subduing any of those ten kings. It simply doesn't happen in the timeline of events John saw. People need to stop trying to mix Daniels visions in with John's because they do not match. Events are different and so are the time lengths.
              I disagree with you. People certainly ought to line up Dan 7 and Rev 13-17, since they represent the very same period! They are 3.5 years, and they represent the Final Beast of the age, prior to the coming of Christ's Kingdom. The fact 3 of 10 kings are put down is a matter of simple math. John simply describes them as 10 horns and 7 heads.

              Originally posted by ewq
              Why assume something that Rev doesn't say is true? The 7 mountains are not kings. Only the horns are kings and all ten are intact throughout the entire GT.
              As I said, it doesn't matter whether it is the Beast's 7 horns or the 7 mountains--they represent the same thing--7 entities, used to cryptically present Roman imperial power. Although in the endtimes Christians will be able to identify the Beast by 7 kings that support him, but they will also be able to identify it through a succession of kingdoms leading to Rome, as well as by the identification of Rome as a 7-hilled city.

              Originally posted by ewq
              If that was true, we would see a beast with 7 horns in the book of Rev. We don't because it's not going to happen.
              3 horns, or kingdoms, are defeated. But the kingdoms are restored with proxy kings, rather than with their original kings. I admit--this is pure hypothesis on my part. Why else would Revelation present the Final Beast as having 10 horns and 7 heads when we know, from Dan 7, that 3 of the 10 horns are defeated?

              Originally posted by ewq
              It's not found in the book of Rev. Quote any verse you want to support any of the 7 mountains/heads falling. The closest is a head being wounded and it heals so no fall happened there. Then there's the whole crowd of "The Antichrist was wounded in his head and died then resurrected"...uh, no...nowhere in scripture is such nonsense found but belief is far more important than the truth so virtually impossible to get someone to understand how wrong that one is.
              I misread what you wrote. I read, "Nowhere are the 7 mountains/heads *found* in the Revelation." Sorry!

              Originally posted by ewq
              The KJV is based on a set of manuscripts and translations like the ESV is based on different manuscripts that have differences. They both aren't right.
              As I said, the differences you describe are irrelevant to the main point, that there could be, hypothetically, an equation between Dan 7 and Rev 13 in the matter of 3 horns falling and there being 7 heads--not just 10 horns.

              Originally posted by ewq
              The 7 mountains aren't consecutive in Rev. They all exist at the same time as part of the Rev 13 beast. None of them fall, none of them represent kings.
              As I said, whether it is the mountains that represent 7 kingdoms or only the 7 horns of the Beast that represent 7 kingdoms is irrelevant to the point. 7 historical kingdoms in succession and the 7 hills both represent, cryptically, the Roman Empire. That's what John hoped to identify for us. And the point is that that tradition will lead to its final form of 10 kingdoms and 7 kings in the Antichristian Empire.

              Originally posted by ewq
              Aside that God showed me these things, the other thing is that my position on these things has no errors. (this doesn't mean I haven't been wrong on things in the past and learned from that and changed) I've looked at it forwards and backwards and have presented it for evaluation for decades and the only errors I can see is in the opposing positions. Just the fact of confusing the heads as being various past kings is a major issue the text doesn't support. Forcing things from Daniel that isn't supported by Rev into Rev is a major issue.
              I've also studied it for decades, and have come up with the following conclusion. It may be that John only wished to identify the Roman Empire as the 4th Beast of Daniel, in a succession of kingdoms leading up to Antichrist, and also by reference to the "7 hills of Rome." But he also wished to point out that the final form of that empire will consist of 10 kingdoms and 7 kings. It's just as Daniel wrote--3 kings will have been put down, leaving only 7 kings. But the 10 kingdoms remain.

              Originally posted by ewq
              It's like a spelling competition.

              I spell "Revolution" while others spell it "Revelution"...when asked how can I be sure? Well, because the error isn't in my spelling. Use a math competition or anything similar so see why I am so sure.

              Comment


              • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

                Originally posted by Trivalee View Post
                Never ceases to amaze how ignorance can be easily confused for knowledge. For e.g. in Dan 7, the little horn is correctly identified as the Antichrist. But they claim that the False Prophet inexplicably transforms himself into the AC in Revelation. Awesome!!!
                Are not the AC and FP the same individual?

                Comment


                • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

                  Originally posted by Trivalee View Post
                  The first Beast is a man, the AC who controls the world [his empre] for 3.5 years.
                  7 mountains and 10 kingdoms is not a man. The FP is the only singular man Rev speaks of so he is the AC.
                  James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

                  Comment


                  • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

                    Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
                    The FP is the only singular man Rev speaks of so he is the AC.
                    Amen...……………………………………


                    Never ceases to amaze how ignorance can be easily confused for knowledge.

                    Comment


                    • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

                      Originally posted by randyk View Post
                      3 horns, or kingdoms, are defeated. But the kingdoms are restored with proxy kings, rather than with their original kings. I admit--this is pure hypothesis on my part. Why else would Revelation present the Final Beast as having 10 horns and 7 heads when we know, from Dan 7, that 3 of the 10 horns are defeated?
                      Daniels prophecies have been changed. The new version is in Rev. 3 of the 10 horns will no longer be defeated.




                      3 kings will have been put down, leaving only 7 kings. But the 10 kingdoms remain.
                      This is in contradiction to what Rev says:

                      Rev 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

                      It does not say, "And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; 3 will be defeated and 7 will receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

                      No matter what, what Daniel wrote about does not happen according to Rev and Rev is the newest prophecy we have from God.
                      James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

                      Comment


                      • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

                        Originally posted by ewq1938 View Post
                        Daniels prophecies have been changed. The new version is in Rev. 3 of the 10 horns will no longer be defeated.
                        Can you really say with a straight face that Daniel's prophecy have been changed? Don't you believe in the inspiration of Scriptures?

                        Originally posted by ewq
                        This is in contradiction to what Rev says:

                        Rev 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

                        It does not say, "And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; 3 will be defeated and 7 will receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

                        No matter what, what Daniel wrote about does not happen according to Rev and Rev is the newest prophecy we have from God.
                        It makes sense to me. 3 kings out of 10 are defeated by the Antichrist. This leaves 7 kingdoms undefeated, with their "heads" intact. The 3 defeated kingdoms are restored with proxy kings who do not enjoy the power of the 7 undefeated kings. 10 horns, or kingdoms, and 7 heads, or kings.

                        Comment


                        • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

                          Originally posted by randyk View Post
                          Can you really say with a straight face that Daniel's prophecy have been changed? Don't you believe in the inspiration of Scriptures?



                          It makes sense to me. 3 kings out of 10 are defeated by the Antichrist. This leaves 7 kingdoms undefeated, with their "heads" intact. The 3 defeated kingdoms are restored with proxy kings who do not enjoy the power of the 7 undefeated kings. 10 horns, or kingdoms, and 7 heads, or kings.

                          You both are right......and wrong.


                          No Daniel prophecies have not changed you are correct, however EWQ is correct that the three subdued cannot be 3 of the 10. Now it will not be until both of you see the three being the lion, bear, leopard which are subdued will you both understand.

                          Comment


                          • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

                            Originally posted by ross3421 View Post
                            You both are right......and wrong.


                            No Daniel prophecies have not changed you are correct, however EWQ is correct that the three subdued cannot be 3 of the 10. Now it will not be until both of you see the three being the lion, bear, leopard which are subdued will you both understand.
                            And I think your view is false. In Daniel it is 3 of the 10 horns that are subdued.

                            Dan 7.24 The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings.

                            Now this version isn't exactly clear. But it is generally believed that the 3 kings defeated are from the 10 horns.

                            I can understand how you think the 3 defeated kings are the 3 kings preceding the 4th and final king. But that isn't what actually happened. The 4th king, in my view, was the Roman Empire. And the Roman Empire did *not* defeat the 3 previous kingdoms of Babylon, Persia, and Greece.

                            What you have is a theory, and that's okay. But to inform me that I'm wrong, on the authority of your own eccentric theory, is a little much. It's okay, but hardly a "done deal."

                            Comment


                            • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

                              Originally posted by randyk View Post
                              The 4th king, in my view, was the Roman Empire. And the Roman Empire did *not* defeat the 3 previous kingdoms of Babylon, Persia, and Greece.

                              Your incorrect premise leads you to a wrong conclusion. So until you do away with the Rome delusion your conclusion will error.

                              Comment


                              • Re: The subdued 3 Kings of Dan 7

                                Originally posted by ross3421 View Post
                                Your incorrect premise leads you to a wrong conclusion. So until you do away with the Rome delusion your conclusion will error.
                                "Delusion?" If I have a wrong theory, it is not necessarily a "delusion."

                                And in this case it isn't. I'm completely open to the truth of the matter. I'm not deceived by some kind of satanic bondage!

                                Why don't we just consider all viewpoints equal until we learn enough to be more sure? I don't call you "deceived," and you don't call me "deceived?"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X