Do scars remain in Jesus' feet and hands?

[John317]

....Yet, if you are wrong about yours... then the entire basis for your faith is shattering down... meaning that Ellen White is a false prophet and that you belonged to the false church (based on your take on it) I think you need to be very careful when dealing with prophetic symbolism, and base your faith on that.

Church is not a building. It's people who either love or reject God. Remnant will not be selected until the very last days of persecution... that's what makes the remnant ... remnant. Right now all of those "lover of God" are very sincere, but we'll see what happens when things really start happening and their families suffer. I'd like to know that most of the Adventist Church will pull through, but I know this will not be the case as some people don't come back because the air conditioning is broken .

Frankly my understanding of the reason for the Seventh-day Adventist church is that it would not exist today without the life and work of Ellen White. I don't know of any church historian who would disagree with that assessment. My trust in God comes out of my understanding of the Bible and out of my personal, based-based experience with Him.

As for prophetic symbolism, what is it about that which you see as the most dangerous or threatening or bad or whatever you wish to call it?

In terms of my understanding of the symbolism, I believe in many of the same beliefs that the majority of the protestant leaders and the churches for over 500 years believed and taught. That is not why I believe them, however, because they also believed in Sunday, which I do not believe in. Those views of Bible symbolism were also believed by virtually all SDAs, including Ellen White, and even today are still what the SDA church generally believes. Every time I study them and dialogue with people such as yourself, I come away with a stronger conviction that these fundamental beliefs of the church's view of prophecy are Biblically and historically sound.

I continue in the SDA church because after studying the beliefs and doctrines over and over again, I have concluded that they are right according to the Bible. That is why I joined the church, and it is why I continue in the church. I am not here because I think it may be a pretty good church or because I see nice people in it. I have no other reason to be here except that I believe with everything in me that it is God's last-day church with a mission from God to live and preach the Three Angels Messages in order to prepare the world for the soon return of Christ.

[John317]

... Church is not a building. It's people who either love or reject God.

Yes, of course. But I fail to see how that fact relates to what we are discussing here. No one has mentioned the idea that church is a building. I am simply trying to understand your meaning here.

What have I said that would be proved wrong if we both acknowledge-- which I readily do-- that the church in the Biblical sense is not a building?

Quote:

Remnant will not be selected until the very last days of persecution... that's what makes the remnant ... remnant.

Yes, it is the remnant of the remnant who will finally be saved. It was always so in the Bible. And why is this true? Because those who should be among the remnant don't take advantage of the light that God has shed on their pathway but instead they rebel and go back into the world. That is exactly what many in Israel did. It got to the point where God's own people-- incredible as it seems-- were actually sacrificing their own children to the false gods. They were called to be among the remnant but they failed. We can be the same: called to be the remnant but found outside because we refused to let God lead us all the way.

Called to be the remnant but rebelling against God and against His prophet, just as the Israelites rebelled against Moses on the edge of the Promised Land. As a people, are we repeating the history of Israel?

The self-understanding of the Seventh-day Adventist church is that God raised up the church for two major purposes:

1) To uplift God's downtrodden law, which the little horn power had attempted to change and suppress.

2) To restore the full gospel through the proclamation of the Three Angels Messages, which includes the Pre-Advent Judgment, the mediation of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary, and righteousness by faith in Christ.

The gospel has been perverted by the false religious doctrines of the little horn power, who seeks to draw attention to human priests and human traditions instead of pointing the people to Christ and His work in the sanctuary above, from which our High Priest sends the power of the promised Holy Spirit to help sinners overcome sin.

Now what is the mission or purpose of the Seventh-day Adventist church? Is it not to prepare the remnant to stand faithful to God through that persecution?

But what if, instead of preparing a remnant, a significant portion of the church begins to seriously doubt its own purpose like the children of Israel did? Can the church do what God designed it do if this happens?

Awhile ago, there was a thread concerning what people thought they would do if they were Satan. Don't you think that it would be a good idea for a general to organize what is called a Fifth column? That is, to introduce people into the church who are either working consciously for the enemy or who are at least under the enemy's influence and control?

I am sure Satan wants to see confusion among the church that God raised up to proclaim the end-time messages. I have no doubt of this. That is just exactly what He did shortly after the death of the apostles. He infiltrated the church and brought in false teachings in order to cause people to be spiritually drunk. He is doing the same today. Multitudes in our church are asleep or confused. Satan has succeeded in getting many in the church not only to question the basic beliefs of the church but to be willing to entertain the possibility that God's prophet was a fraud.

Quote:

Right now all of those "lover of God" are very sincere, but we'll see what happens when things really start happening and their families suffer. I'd like to know that most of the Adventist Church will pull through, but I know this will not be the case as some people don't come back because the air conditioning is broken .

This is true. But why should anyone come back if they sincerely believe the church is not teaching any more truth than, say, the Baptists or Methodists, etc.? If there is just as much truth being taught in the Catholic Church, and if I could be prepared to be part of the last-day remnant just as well in the Roman Catholic Church as I can in the Seventh-day Adventist church, why not join the Catholic Church?

What it boils down to is answering the question, why am I a Seventh-day Adventist? Would I be just as happy and spiritually fulfilled as a member of some other denomination or group? For me, after years of thinking it through, and even after attending other churches and studying their teachings, my only answer is a resounding NO. I am right where I believe without a doubt that God wants me to be.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:John317

Rome was divided into about 10 kingdoms. The little horn arises out of the Roman Empire. This is precisely what history tells us occurred in the papacy's rise out of the Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire fell in 476 AD. [...]

So, what’s with the year AD 538 – that is being tossed about in the previous pages? Let’s see, that would represent ‘bout a 62-year gap/hiatus/’intermission’ between the AD 476 Fall of Empire and the unfolding of events ca AD 538, yes? You’re not saying that there can exist a ‘transitional’ gap in chapter 7 of Daniel – whilst objecting same re the seventy-weeks prophecy of Daniel 9?

>>Historians give the following groups of people, or nations, that the Western Empire was divided into: the Franks, the Bergundians, the Allaman, the Vandals, the Suevi, the Visigoths, the Saxons, the Ostrogoths, the Lombards, and the Heruli.<<

Those who’ve become engaged in the attempt to parcel the ‘Roman Empire’ into ten distinct ‘kingdoms’ have, so far, compiled a list of no less than 60-plus possible ‘peoples, tribal units, nations, and kingdoms’ – ‘horns’, as it were. (even prominent, historical SDA authors/expositors seemed not to agree which ‘kingdoms’ should be included in a list re the ten horns of the Beast)

>>1) It has the eyes of a man (v. 8). (Compare Rev. 13: 18)<<

What significance do you attach to the above.

>>2) Speaks pompous (KJV), or boastful (NASB;NIV), words against God (vv. 8, 11, 25).<<

I believe that atheist communism qualifies.

>>3) It is speaking these pompous words at the time of the judgement scene described in Daniel 7: 9, 10, 13,14, 25-26.<<

That may be, but what significance attaches in the way of a timeline?

>>4) Its appearance is "greater," "larger," "more imposing," than the other horns (7:20).<<

Bigger/greater than the ‘horn’ of Napoleon and General Berthier?

>>5) It is active when the judgment scene begins and when the judgment is completed, its dominion is taken away and given to the people of God, and God's kingdom shall then be an everlasting kingdom (7:18). (Compare what is said in Daniel 2:44.)<<

So, the Vatican City is to be given to – umm, the SDAs?

>>6) Makes war against the saints and prevails against, or overpowers, them (7:21), until a judgement (v. 22). Verse 25 says he "persecutes the saints of the Most High."<<

The communists made war against the saints of the Most High – as, presently, do Muslims.

>>7) This little horn power shall attempt to change times and law (v. 25).<<

“...and shall think to change times and laws:” Should it be advanced that it is Papal R_O_M_E and the 4th Commandment/Seventh-day Sabbaths that are in view, let it be noted that – for all practical purposes – that change has been effected.

The Biblical passage may actually reference physical “times and laws”. Note the practice of cloning – for instance. That would be thinking to change the spoken word of Gd, to wit, “kind after its own kind”. Science is now ‘thinking’ or envisioning – to enhance man’s brain with such as molecular or DNA (interface) computational capabilities. Evolutionarily, that would be equivalent to a quantum leap, or at the very least, a very notable evolutionary punctuation in scale. Hello, Borgs...! etc.

>.8) The saints will be given into his hand for a time and times and half a time (v. 25). (Same period of time is found in the following verses: Daniel 12: 9; Rev. 11: 2; 11: 3; 12:6; 12: 14; 13:5. I believe the evidence is that this is a period of 1,260 literal years.<<

Were they, in fact, literal years, that is 1260 years – shouldn’t the whole shebang have ended in AD 1798?

You’re suggesting something other than a finish – an extension appended to the 1260 years, yes?

>>Based on what we have studied so far, what world power do these marks of identification point to? How many world powers fit ALL the marks up to this point?<<

What if the 10 powers/kingdoms are only now emerging? with the “little horn” yet to make an appearance? What if it is not to occur for centuries, yet? (During Nixon’s Presidency, the world was partitioned into 10 parts. Interestingly, though not contiguous – State of Israel, New Zealand and Australia, and South Africa comprised 1 part ) After all,

the verb tense I keep referencing is not date specific as to its beginning point.

>>Lest there be any doubt of its identity, the Bible offers additional characteristics and descriptions of this power in Daniel 8 and 11; Revelation and 2 Thess. 2.<<

I confess to a measurable degree of confusion re Daniel 11. I think I would, for the most part, tend towards the Assemblies of Gd in describing, largely, conflict between Syria and Egypt

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:John317

>>Here is Young's Literal Translation: "17 These great beasts, that [are] four, [are] four kings, they rise up from the earth."

NASB-- "17 These great beasts, which are four in number, are four kings who will arise from the earth."

Amplified Bible: "17 These four great beasts are four kings who shall arise out of the earth."<<

>>From the point of view of Daniel, these kingdoms were future for the most part. See Daniel 2: 39-45 for similar tenses.<<

They may share similar tenses, but those kingdoms of Daniel 2 have a definite terminus a quo (limit from which), a beginning point; to wit:

Dan 2:38 ... Thou [art] this head of gold.

The originating point for the fulfilling of this dream centers upon Nebuchadnezzar and Babylonia. The date is almost precisely arrived-at.

Contrastively, though one, by inference, may derive an end (terminus ad quem) to the vision of the four beasts (Daniel 7), there is no beginning point in view – in the text. There is only the future tense – shall arise. Moreover,

the sense of the passage indicates that the ‘beasts’ are contemporaneous – one to another – as opposed to the image dream of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2) where each Empire immediately succeeds the previous.

>>Of course it is in the "past" to anyone living after Daniel's day. Daniel was told these various powers would arrive on the world's scene in the future, which is now our past.<< [ed.jasd]

Umm, John317, that would not – necessarily – be so. The point from which these four beasts arise – is indefinite – and has to be extrapolated from even – that outside of Writ.

Example: does “sea” always represent peoples? Yes? So, what then of a vision which states that the beasts/kings arise from both the sea and the earth? per that articulated by “one who stood by”.

Interestingly, America is under Admiralty Law – the Law of the Sea, as it were. All STATES (including the former District of Columbia) are now under Admiralty Jurisdiction.

Where does the Admiralty Court figure vis-à-vis the International Conglomerates (Corporations) in all of this – if, indeed, it does?

And, interestingly, there is somewhat of a paradox evident in the growing influence of International Conglomerates vis-à-vis Nation-States.

[John317]

...the sense of the passage indicates that the ‘beasts’ are contemporaneous – one to another – as opposed to the image dream of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2) where each Empire immediately succeeds the previous...

Do you believe that the beasts of Daniel 7 are all contemporaneous empires or kingdoms?

Could you give an example or two of how the "sense of the passages indicate" this understanding? Also, do you know of a commentary which takes this view? The reason I ask is that I would like to read the best possible defense of this viewpoint. It sounds utterly fascinating, although, I must say, extremely novel.

Take a look at the way these beasts are introduced:

1) Beast #1: "The first was like a lion....." 7:4

2) Beast #2: "And suddenly another beast, a second, like a bear..." 7:5

3) Beast #3: "After this, I looked, and there was another, like a leopard..." 7:6

4) Beast #4: "After this, I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible... It was different from all the other beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns." 7:7

Verse 7 is worth looking at carefully:

Consider the following line in several translations:

a) Amplified Bible-- "And it was different from all the beasts that came before it, and it had ten horns."

Christian Standard Bible-- "It was different from all the beasts before it, and it had 10 horns."

c)Today's New International: It was different from all the former beasts, and it had ten horns.

d) New Jerusalem Bible (Roman Catholic): "It was different from all the previous beasts and had ten horns."

Now compare Daniel 7: 23 to see how that verse describes the fourth kingdom. You will notice that apparently this fourth kingdom rules the known world alone, because it says that "it shall devour the whole earth, trample it and break it in pieces."

One other thing of interest in regard to understanding these beasts is that all three major schools of prophetic interpretation-- Historicist, Preterist, and Futurist-- understand these beasts to represent kingdoms that arose in consecutive order such that none of them ruled contemporaneously. Both the Historicist and the Futurist schools view the fourth beast as Rome, whereas the Preterist view is that the fourth beast represents Greece. All three schools of interpretation understand the first beast to be Babylon.

If you check out a Catholic study Bible such as the New Jerusalem or the New American Bible, you will see that Catholics also view these beasts as rising up in consecutive order the way that history shows that they arose. The only big difference is that the study notes in the Catholic Bible neglects to mention the Roman Empire in Daniel 2 or 7. I can understand why. However, they do say that these beasts in chapter 7 parallel the metals of the image in Daniel 2. I totally concur with that understanding, except that it is fairly easy to prove that the fourth kingdom is indeed the Roman Empire. However, that will be a point we can take up and thoroughly discuss after you respond to this post.

5) The little horn: "I was considering the [10] horns [on the fourth beast], and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them..." 7:8

I do not see how anyone can understand this to mean that the little horn was contemporaneous with the first, second, or third beasts. This cannot be so, for the simple reason that this fourth beast "devours the whole earth, tramples it and breaks it in pieces." Also, another point that makes it impossible for the little horn to exist at the time of the first, second, and third beasts, is that the prophet only notices the little horn "coming up," or appearing on the scene of history, after the fourth beast has broken up into separate kingdoms. That obviously does not happen while the first kingdom is still in existence.

I have never yet laid eyes on any commentary or Bible commentator who did not believe that the first beast symbolized Babylon and the fourth beast either Greece or Rome.

Let me know what you think.

[John317]

Quote:

Quote:John317

Rome was divided into about 10 kingdoms. The little horn arises out of the Roman Empire. This is precisely what history tells us occurred in the papacy's rise out of the Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire fell in 476 AD. [...]

So, what’s with the year AD 538 – that is being tossed about in the previous pages? Let’s see, that would represent ‘bout a 62-year gap/hiatus/’intermission’ between the AD 476 Fall of Empire and the unfolding of events ca AD 538, yes? You’re not saying that there can exist a ‘transitional’ gap in chapter 7 of Daniel – whilst objecting same re the seventy-weeks prophecy of Daniel 9?

Not sure what the point is here. Please explain. There is no gap in the 1,260 day prophecy if that is what concerns you here. AD 476 is not not part of the prophetic time because of course it preceded the commencement of that period. The prophetic time began in 538 AD, as you quite correctly observe. That is why I am not a little puzzled, to say the least, why you are persuaded that there the date 476 AD must force what you call a hiatus or intermission. None such exists, of course.

Could you please explain what you mean? I'm very curious.

[John317]

>>Historians give the following groups of people, or nations, that the Western Empire was divided into: the Franks, the Bergundians, the Allaman, the Vandals, the Suevi, the Visigoths, the Saxons, the Ostrogoths, the Lombards, and the Heruli.<<

Those who’ve become engaged in the attempt to parcel the ‘Roman Empire’ into ten distinct ‘kingdoms’ have, so far, compiled a list of no less than 60-plus possible ‘peoples, tribal units, nations, and kingdoms’ – ‘horns’, as it were. (even prominent, historical SDA authors/expositors seemed not to agree which ‘kingdoms’ should be included in a list re the ten horns of the Beast)

Even if I were to accept your argument as a fact-- which I do not-- it wouldn't change the fundamental truth that the Western Roman Empire broke up into approximately 10 nations or peoples, and that after the break up, the papacy was given great power over the Western portion of the empire, rose to immense power for approximately 1,260 years, received a wound that almost led to its demise, has risen back to great power and still rules to this day, about 1,500 years after the fall of the Roman Empire. These are undeniable facts of history that can be easily proven. I do not know of a single historian that disputes these fundamental truths.

Later today I'll continue writing about the various nations that Rome was divided into after its fall.

[fccool]

John... I did complete studies of Daniel 7 and revelation. In fact I've completed several of these, which is why I've started to ask questions when confronted with several facts. Let's look at the Beast of revelation.

And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. He had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on his horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. 2The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority. 3One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was astonished and followed the beast. 4Men worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, "Who is like the beast? Who can make war against him?"

5The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months. 6He opened his mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. 7He was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them. And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. 8All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world.

1) Let's notice the following... who is the Beast? Is it papacy, or is it the Roman Empire? We are told that it is the papacy, yet the beast of the Daniel 7 is the Roman Empire, and the little horn is the Papacy. Notice that the seven heads represent the hills upon which the woman (The church... THE PAPACY) sits. Therefore the beast WOULD NOT BE, the Papacy itself but the Roman Empire.

2) You have to notice the chronology within the same section of the prophecy.

a) He comes out of the sea

one of his heads seemed like it has a deadly wound that was healed

c) Then he (whole world) wondered and followed the Beast, saying who is like the beast (has this happened already?)

Notice where the Fatal wound passage was paced. In between of the coming out of the sea, and the whole world was astonished and following the beast. They worshiped him and asked who can make war with him...

3) Notice that the beast is given authority for 42 months... I would interpret that after that period HE HAS NO AUTHORITY to persecute the saints and slander God's name. Notice that the two go hand in hand inclusive. It would seem to me that after the 42 months of the authority the Beast would no longer have the authority to do either. Even if you argue that the second beast gives the authority to the first one... the next point kills the argument.

4) The beast IS NOT PAPACY... but the ROMAN EMPIRE. The papacy only rides the first beast and has no military power of itself. THE ROMAN EMPIRE IS NON EXISTENT TODAY! It simply does not! How would you derive that the USA gives the authority to the BEAST (not the HEAD, or HORN, or WOMAN), if the Beast simply would not exist today? The beast can't be both the horn, the beast and the woman. These are clearly separate entities.

For this view to be correct, the Roman Empire would have to be resurrected. Not to say that this could not happen in the future... but for that to happen... the Papacy once again would have to be placed as the head of the European Union (Monarchial Head). I don't see this happening anytime soon, but I could be wrong.

Id's like to hear your answers to these questions.

[fccool]

PS: The spirit of prophesy is clearly the Testimony of Jesus, which is clearly His word, which is clearly the Bible (inspired bu the Spirit of God)....

19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

It is not some special gift given to one person that others do not have. And not everyone who slaps "Testimonies" on the title of a book can claim to be/have the "Spirit of Prophecy".

[John317]

John... I did complete studies of Daniel 7 and revelation. In fact I've completed several of these, which is why I've started to ask questions when confronted with several facts.

It's good to ask questions. Nothing at all wrong with that.

I'd like to hear what convictions you have about what you have studied in Daniel 7 and Revelation. What have you learned? What are some of what you consider the most important points?

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

...the sense of the passage indicates that the ‘beasts’ are contemporaneous – one to another – as opposed to the image dream of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2) where each Empire immediately succeeds the previous...

>>Do you believe that the beasts of Daniel 7 are all contemporaneous empires or kingdoms?<<

Indeed.

>>Could you give an example or two of how the "sense of the passages indicate" this understanding?<<

Dan 7:11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld [even] till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.

Dan 7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.

The text states that though the other three beasts “had their dominion taken away” – they existed even after the demise of the fourth beast. That implies contemporaniety.

I find the ‘markers’ between the fourth beast of Daniel 7 and

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

somewhat compelling.

I may be wrong but the above mentioned ‘markers’ suggest a correspondence between the beast of Daniel 7 and that of Revelation 13 – howbeit, in different morphologies.

>>Also, do you know of a commentary which takes this view?<<

I’ve never searched for a commentary to sustain my understanding of the verb tense utilized in Daniel 7. It seemed, simply too self-evident – and validated by Daniel 12:4 – to bother. I suppose I may stand alone in the matter; however,

I doubt it.

>>The reason I ask is that I would like to read the best possible defense of this viewpoint. It sounds utterly fascinating, although, I must say, extremely novel.<<

The textual exposition needs no defense other than for one to consider the verb tense employed - relative to the date of Babylonia's demise.

>>Take a look at the way these beasts are introduced:

1) Beast #1: "The first was like a lion....." 7:4

2) Beast #2: "And suddenly another beast, a second, like a bear..." 7:5

3) Beast #3: "After this, I looked, and there was another, like a leopard..." 7:6

4) Beast #4: "After this, I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible... It was different from all the other beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns." 7:7<<

Dan 7:3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.

That’s it. “Four great beast came up from the sea.” Not, “one following another”; not, “successively”; not, “removed and then another arose”; not, ... The text might as easily read, “I beheld the beasts. The first was like...; and, I beheld a second...; after this, I beheld another... Such terminology as first, second, another, a fourth – might as easily be a descriptive portrayal of four aspects viewed within one spatial environment.

[jasd]

Errata:

/ ”genetically modified” – fell off the page. Read: “the practice of cloning the genetically modified –“

/ “...where each Empire immediately succeeds the previous.” With the exception of – the feet mixed of iron and miry clay..., which arise after an 'gap/intermission' of a unspecified length of time.

[jasd]

>>Verse 7 is worth looking at carefully:<<

Per “dreadful and terrible” and “different from all the other beasts”...

Cannot both phrases be construed to represent other than Papal R_O_M_E?

Per “that were before it”...

Though there are some what sez..., I am not aware of a marker in the text denoting that before ought to carry a temporal sense – rather than locative, that is, “that were before it,”

>>Now compare Daniel 7: 23 to see how that verse describes the fourth kingdom. You will notice that apparently this fourth kingdom rules the known world alone, because it says that "it shall devour the whole earth, trample it and break it in pieces."<<

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Should I be right in my understanding of verb tenses as iterated by "one of them who stood by",

the Ten-horned Beast is yet to arise - if it is not already in its formative stages. The beasts - lion, bear, and leopard become incorporated into the Ten-horned Beast.

I might amend my above quote to, instead, suggest that the above conveys the idea of a Confederacy with three lesser parts and one greater - a chimeric fusion, if you will.

>>All three schools of interpretation understand the first beast to be Babylon.<<

Well, then, they obviously are correct – having a greater understanding of what future verb tenses – are all about :-)

>>If you check out a Catholic study Bible such as the New Jerusalem or the New American Bible, you will see that Catholics also view these beasts as rising up in consecutive order the way that history shows that they arose. [...] However, they do say that these beasts in chapter 7 parallel the metals of the image in Daniel 2. I totally concur with that understanding, except that it is fairly easy to prove that the fourth kingdom is indeed the Roman Empire.<<

I suppose one might say that there is wisdom in ‘waiting upon the Lord’; that is, not ‘running until sent’, as it were. When Gd seals a matter until such and such time, one must consider the presumptuousness of forcing it prematurely. When we do not respect the seal of Gd we declare that Gd simply engages in meaningless superfluity.

>>5) The little horn: "I was considering the [10] horns [on the fourth beast], and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them..." 7:8

I do not see how anyone can understand this to mean that the little horn was contemporaneous with the first, second, or third beasts. This cannot be so, for the simple reason that this fourth beast "devours the whole earth, tramples it and breaks it in pieces."<<

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Should I be right in my understanding of verb tenses as iterated by "one of them who stood by",

the Ten-horned Beast is yet to arise - if it is not already in its formative stages. The beasts - lion, bear, and leopard become incorporated into the Ten-horned Beast.

I might amend my above quote to, instead, suggest that the above conveys the idea of a Confederacy with three lesser parts and one greater - a chimeric fusion, if you will.

>>Also, another point that makes it impossible for the little horn to exist at the time of the first, second, and third beasts, is that the prophet only notices the little horn "coming up," or appearing on the scene of history, after the fourth beast has broken up into separate kingdoms. That obviously does not happen while the first kingdom is still in existence.<< [ed.jasd]

Goes to premise. What if the fourth beast emerges with the ten horns representing its most salient feature – constituent detritus of “broken kingdoms” not in view?

>>I have never yet laid eyes on any commentary or Bible commentator who did not believe that the first beast symbolized Babylon and the fourth beast either Greece or Rome.<<

Am I the only person who acknowledges that verb tenses - that every word of Gd – carry [intrinsic] meaning in Gd’s Holy Writ?

Of course, premature wresting of Writ is suspect.

(There is no indicator attesting to the fact that even if – the beasts are labeled first, second, another, etc, or even if they did come up out of the sea successively – that they could not have been contemporaneous. One might look to the many contemporaneous nations extant today – with many preceding and many following another)

[John317]

And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. He had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on his horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. 2The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority. 3One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was astonished and followed the beast. 4Men worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, "Who is like the beast? Who can make war against him?"

5The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months. 6He opened his mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. 7He was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them. And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. 8All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world.

1) Let's notice the following... who is the Beast? Is it papacy, or is it the Roman Empire? We are told that it is the papacy, yet the beast of the Daniel 7 is the Roman Empire, and the little horn is the Papacy. Notice that the seven heads represent the hills upon which the woman (The church... THE PAPACY) sits. Therefore the beast WOULD NOT BE, the Papacy itself but the Roman Empire....

Don't forget that the Roman Catholic Church and the papacy succeeded to the position and power previously occupied by the Roman Empire. Historians consider the Papacy and the Roman Catholic Church a continuation of the Roman Empire. Under the papacy, Medieval Europe was known as the Holy Roman Empire.

The historian, Edward Gibbon, wrote in his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, "The successors of St. Peter and Constantine were invested with the purple and prerogatives of the Caesars" (Chapter 49).

"[The Pope] assumed the title pontifex maximus discarded by the emperors" (History of the World, J.M. Roberts, p. 301.

See below for more evidence that the papacy was a continuation of the Roman Empire.

List the characteristics that the the Bible gives of the sea-beast:

1) Comes up out of the sea.

Remember Daniel 7:3 in which the prophet describes four beasts that come up out of the sea.

2) Has ten horns and seven heads, each head having a blasphemous name.

The horns stand for political powers (Rev. 17: 12). Notice that the fourth beast of Daniel 7 also has ten horns. On the blasphemous name, compare Rev. 17 3. Blasphemy is a religious term and indicates a claim to take the prerogatives of God.

3) Ten crowns on his horns.

4) Resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion.

The beast of Rev. 13 combines the features and characteristics of all four beasts of Daniel 7, representing the succession of empires that would rule the world. This image of the composite beast from the sea is based on Daniel's vision. Notice that the order of the beast is the reverse of the order given them in Daniel 7. In Daniel they were named in the order in which they were arise, and in Rev. 13 they are given in the reserve order because the apostle John is looking back in time whereas Daniel was looking at them before they arose. This composite beast is the successor of all the world powers that proceeded him: Babylon (the lion), Medo-Persia (the bear), and Greece (the leopard).

5) The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority.

Satan gives power to the sea-beast. Satan is the REAL power behind this beast, just as he was behind the powers of Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. Rev. 12:3 shows that Satan uses the various persecuting, political powers of the the earth to do his bidding. Rev. 12:4 describes the Roman power as waiting to destroy the Messiah when He came. We know that Herod attempted to kill Jesus, and Herod of course got his power from Rome because he was appointed by Caesar, the Roman Emperor. Jesus Christ was finally put to death with the authority of a Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, also an appointee of the Roman Emperor.

Therefore the dragon is both Satan and the Roman Empire through which Satan works.

The capital of the papal system was the same as that occupied by the Roman Empire at its height. "Out of the ruins of political Rome, arose the great moral Empire in the 'giant form' of the Roman Church" (A.C. Flick, The Rise of the Mediaeval Church, p. 40).

6) One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed.

Notice who sustains this apparently fatal or mortal wound. It not the sea-beast itself, but it is one of the heads of the beast. In other words, the mortal wound is sustained by a power that arises out of the sea-beast. Therefore, if we say, as I believe, that the sea-beast represents the Roman Empire, the mortal wound is sustained by one of the powers that comes out of the Roman Empire.

(The Roman Catholic Church generally teaches that the sea-beast is the Roman Empire of John's day. Therefore all three major schools of prophetic interpretation--Preterist, Historicist, and Furturist-- believe that the sea-beast symbolizes the Roman Empire or some aspect of it. For instance, the footnotes in the Catholic New American Bible say, "The wild beast, combining features of the four beasts in Daniel 7: 2-28, symbolizes the Roman Empire." By contrast, the notes in this same Bible say that the fourth empire in Daniel 7:7 represents Greece, not Rome.)

7) The whole world was astonished and followed the beast. Men worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, "Who is like the beast? Who can make war against him?"

The power succeeding the Roman Empire is clearly papal Rome. It fulfills the prophecy of receiving its power and authority from the dragon, the Roman Empire. "When the Western empire fell into the hands of the barbarians, the Roman bishop was the only surviving heir of this imperial past, or, in the well-known dictum of Hobbes, "the ghost of the deceased Roman empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof" (History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, p. 287).

8) The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months.

Compare Daniel 7: 25; Rev. 12:6, 13-16. The forty-two months, the 3 1/2 years, and 1,260 days are all the same period.

9) He opened his mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven.

The power being described would be both a state and a religious organization, for it claims the prerogatives of God and is evidently concerned with and involved in religious affairs.

This is certainly fulfilled in the papacy.

Believers are portrayed as already reigning in heaven with God (Eph. 2:6; Rev. 1: 6; 5: 9-10) in contrast to "those who dwell on the earth" (Rev. 13:8, 12, 14).

10) He was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them. And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world.

Notice that it is after the beast receives what appeared to be a mortal wound which was healed that the beast is given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. All the inhabitants of the earth will once again worship the beast-- that is, all whose names are not written in the book of life.

This part is being fulfilled even as we speak and will be fulfilled even more in the future as virtually the whole world follows after this beast power.

[John317]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

...the sense of the passage indicates that the ‘beasts’ are contemporaneous – one to another – as opposed to the image dream of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2) where each Empire immediately succeeds the previous...

>>Do you believe that the beasts of Daniel 7 are all contemporaneous empires or kingdoms?<<

Indeed.

Does it give you any pause at all concerning that view, that you stand alone in it?

It's possible that everyone is completely wrong about it, but on the other hand there is possibly a good reason why virtually no one believes the kingdoms of Daniel 7 ruled at the same time.

Do you believe that the kingdoms described in Daniel 2 and Daniel 8 were also contemporaneous?

After analyzing your reasons for believing these kingdoms are contemporaneous-- particularly your interpretation and application of Daniel 7: 16, 17-- I still do not understand why you arrive at your conclusion. How does the phrase, "one of those who stood by," and the future verb tenses in verse 17, show that these kingdoms must be all in power at the same time?

[fccool]

John, again... you can't take one of the heads of the Beast and ascribe the whole power to it! Papacy is only one of the heads. It is in no way saying that it is the dominating one. If Revelation indicates it, I'd like to see it.

You can't single out an issue and then create eschatology based on some stretched out assumptions. Here's the assumption that you are making.

1) The beast is the Roman Empire

2) Papacy is the wounded head

3) Therefore Papacy is the Extension and thus by association the whole beast.

The thing is ... the head can not stand alone... it has to be attached to something to be a head. What is Papacy attached to today???? What kind of Empire does it have outside of couple miles around the Vatican Hill?

Notice that wounding one of the heads of the beast would not kill it completely anyway. IMO the beast would be able to function without the wounded head... but that was not the case when the Papacy was overthrown. Roman Empire was done long time before the French Revolutions.

The Roman Empire has to be resurrected for Papacy to be the resurrected head.

[John317]

>>JOHN3:17--Also, do you know of a commentary which takes this view?<<

I’ve never searched for a commentary to sustain my understanding of the verb tense utilized in Daniel 7. It seemed, simply too self-evident – and validated by Daniel 12:4 – to bother. I suppose I may stand alone in the matter; however,

I doubt it.

Just as it is good for a writer to study other writers, and artists to study other artists, or scientists to study what other scientists have done, in the same way it is a good idea for people studying the Bible to find out what others who study a particular subject have thought and said about it. It can help prevent one from making unnecessary mistakes.

Quote:

JOHN3:17--- >>The reason I ask is that I would like to read the best possible defense of this viewpoint. It sounds utterly fascinating, although, I must say, extremely novel.<<

The textual exposition needs no defense other than for one to consider the verb tense employed - relative to the date of Babylonia's demise.

How does that verb tense show anything about Babylonia's demise? What is your reasoning?

Notice from Daniel 7:1 that the prophet has his vision here while Babylon was still a world power.

What are your reasons for not accepting Daniel 2 and 7 as showing the same kingdoms and periods of time?

[John317]

John, again... you can't take one of the heads of the Beast and ascribe the whole power to it! Papacy is only one of the heads. It is in no way saying that it is the dominating one. If Revelation indicates it, I'd like to see it...

I'd like to hear what convictions you have about what you have studied in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13. What have you learned? What are some of what you consider the most important points?

[John317]

John, again... you can't take one of the heads of the Beast and ascribe the whole power to it! Papacy is only one of the heads. It is in no way saying that it is the dominating one. If Revelation indicates it, I'd like to see it.

I don't know what I have written that you are responding to here. Could you quote what it is? Then we can talk better about specifics. It's possible I said something that needs to be clarified or that I did not explain clearly enough.

Quote:

You can't single out an issue and then create eschatology based on some stretched out assumptions. [/ quote]

Like what? Are those below the only ones you have in mind?

Are you referring to the fourth beast of Daniel 7?

Who do you believe is represented by the first three beasts of Daniel 7?

I would not say I am assuming the beast is the Roman Empire. I would say that I am basing that belief on sound exegesis and history.

Who do you believe the fourth beast of Daniel 7 to be?

Quote:

2) Papacy is the wounded head

Who do you believe the little horn of Daniel 7: 8 power to be, and for what reason?

Again, I am not assuming the little horn power is the papacy, but I'm basing it on what I believe is sound exegesis and good historical evidence.

As we continue to dialog, we can list these reasons for identifying the little horn.

Do you believe the Antichrist and little horn power are one and the same?

Quote:

3) Therefore Papacy is the Extension and thus by association the whole beast.

No, this is not my reasoning or what I have said up to this point.

Perhaps you could quote what I have said and what exactly you are responding to so that I can make more than a general reply.

Quote:

The thing is ... the head can not stand alone... it has to be attached to something to be a head. What is Papacy attached to today???? What kind of Empire does it have outside of couple miles around the Vatican Hill?

What do the heads and the crowns represent?

Quote:

Notice that wounding one of the heads of the beast would not kill it completely anyway.

Merely "wounding" it would not kill it, of course, by very definition. But the text says one of the heads appeared to receive a wound that killed it, but it got well and then went on to grow to great power again. (See Rev. 13:3)

Quote:

IMO the beast would be able to function without the wounded head... but that was not the case when the Papacy was overthrown. Roman Empire was done long time before the French Revolutions.

Do you mean to say you do not think that the beast could possibly function if it lost any of the heads? What does a "beast" symbolize? What do the heads symbolize?

Quote:

The Roman Empire has to be resurrected for Papacy to be the resurrected head.

Now that is an assumption if ever there was one. Upon what exegetical and historical basis do you draw that conclusion?

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:jasd

...the sense of the passage indicates that the ‘beasts’ are contemporaneous – one to another – as opposed to the image dream of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2) where each Empire immediately succeeds the previous...

Quote:John317

>>Do you believe that the beasts of Daniel 7 are all contemporaneous empires or kingdoms?<<

Quote:jasd

Indeed.

>>Does it give you any pause at all concerning that view, that you stand alone in it?<<

Am I? Check it out. Let me ask you, “Does it give you any pause to be associated with a .Org holding so many views contrary to the majority of Xtiandom?”

I daresay it doesn’t, does it? Well, were I, indeed, standing alone – I wouldn’t give a fig.

>>It's possible that everyone is completely wrong about it, but on the other hand there is possibly a good reason why virtually no one believes the kingdoms of Daniel 7 ruled at the same time.<<

Again, goes to premise; and, of course, verb tenses vis-à-vis the Holy Word of Gd.

Perhaps, the very ‘facts’ as advanced, is evidence enough that Gd, when sealing the Book of Daniel, had no intention of being gainsaid.

>>Do you believe that the kingdoms described in Daniel 2 and Daniel 8 were also contemporaneous?<<

Absolutely, if you mean by contemporaneous - that the Ram (Dan 7) corresponded to the metal silver in Daniel 2, and the Goat (Dan 7) corresponded to the metal brass - of Daniel 2. That said, let me expand..., by cutting from the thread:

Re: Salvation, Redemption, Restoration??? #111822 - 02/10/07 08:40 PM

Example: Babylon cannot be the lion of Daniel 7, as so often advanced. Throughout the entirety of Holy Writ the signifier/symbol –- lion -- describes the COI (Ez 19, et al)…, not Babylon.<<

And the Bear...: Was the Bear ever used as signifier/symbol for other than Russia? Too astrological? Not according to the Bible.

The book of Daniel employed the Goat/Capricorn to represent Greece. Why?

The Greeks believed themselves ruled by the stars of Capricorn, the goat.

That same book, same chapter, employed the Ram/Aries to represent the Persians.

The Persians, likewise, believed themselves ruled by the stars of Aries, the ram (so far as to carry Ram's heads as standards in battle).

Precedent obtains. The word of Gd obtains.

Oh, the Bear; Russia/USSR was [is?] the only nation that was allotted three votes in the UN -- that same body seeking world domination and which now supersedes our own US Constitution.

Bones have historically been used for tallying: one bone, two bones, three bones...

(Some are gleaned from David Hocking, formerly of BIOLA U)

[ed.jasd]

End/cut

(per the three schools of Biblical interpretation, does, or does not Gd confuse by representing the Kingdom Medo-Persia by first utilizing the signifier, Bear – and then pulls the switcheroo by next signifying Medo-Persia with the symbol, Ram?)

>>After analyzing your reasons for believing these kingdoms are contemporaneous-- particularly your interpretation and application of Daniel 7: 16, 17--<<

I do not assign contemporaniety on the strength of Daniel 7:16,17.

>>I still do not understand why you arrive at your conclusion.<<

I’ve addressed the indicators for contemporaniety of the beasts in my above posts.

>>How does the phrase, "one of those who stood by," and the future verb tenses in verse 17, show that these kingdoms must be all in power at the same time?<<

They don’t. Per the future verb tense...: by its utilization, Babylonia is eliminated from consideration as one of the four beasts. The vision of Daniel 7 was given the prophet in the first year of Balshazzar. That year does not attest to an “arising” power; rather, it speaks of an absolute end of Empire – even given, the pseudo-argument that Gd employed the lion as signifier of Babylonia.

[melvin mccarty]

One has to use the term "world power" very loosely in order to draw certain conclusions. Babylon at it's height was only significant in a relatively small area of the world. Even Rome, while it included the previous three beasts' territories, consisted of a fringe around the Mediterranian Sea and part of Europe. Is Scripture using the same reference points when it talks about ALL the world serving the beast?

mel

[John317]

Quote:

JOHN3:17-->>Do you believe that the kingdoms described in Daniel 2 and Daniel 8 were also contemporaneous?<<

Absolutely, if you mean by contemporaneous - that the Ram (Dan 7) corresponded to the metal silver in Daniel 2, and the Goat (Dan 7) corresponded to the metal brass - of Daniel 2.

Let's slow down here and walk through this very deliberately.

In Daniel 8:5, which power was symbolized by the male goat.

Also, which power was symbolized by the head of the statue in Daniel 2: 32?

[John317]

One has to use the term "world power" very loosely in order to draw certain conclusiobs. Babylon at it's height was only significant in a relatively small area of the world. Even Rome, while it included the previous three beasts' territories, consisted of a fringe around the Mediterranian Sea and part of Europe.

Yes, good point. That is a given. When you study those empires, it is common to see references to "world empire" and "ruled the then known world." From the point of view of the Hebrews of that time period, those empires were world empires. The Bible concentrates on those nations that had contact with or influence upon the Hebrew people. That's primarily because the Messiah was to come into our world through the Hebrews.

Quote:

Is Scripture using the same reference points when it talks about ALL the world serving the beast?

mel

No, because prophecy takes into account the fact that other parts of the world would be discovered. When God inspired the book of Revelation, He certainly knew what "all the world" meant. We shouldn't think that it only means that the former Roman Empire will serve or worship the beast. We can expect that all the world really means all the world as we know it today. It is including what we know of as Communist China and the Islamic nations as well.

As you may know, Rev. 13 contains passages that refer to the United States. We will discuss that later as we've gotten through Daniel 7, 8, and the first part of Rev. 13.

When Jesus commanded us to take the gospel into all the world, he obviously meant all the nations that we know about today, and he didn't intend for us to limit his command to only those nations the disciples would have known.

In Daniel 2: 40, the fourth kingdom is described as "crushing all the other" nations. It does not mean every single nation on the face of the globe that we know of today by looking at a photo taken by a satellite.

[John317]

Example: Babylon cannot be the lion of Daniel 7, as so often advanced. Throughout the entirety of Holy Writ the signifier/symbol –- lion -- describes the COI (Ez 19, et al)…, not Babylon.<<

Therefore, for you, Daniel 7: 4 refers to the children of Israel? How do you apply this prophecy? What do you believe it is telling us?

Quote:

And the Bear...: Was the Bear ever used as signifier/symbol for other than Russia? Too astrological? Not according to the Bible.

For you, then, Daniel 7: 5 refers to Russia?

Given your understanding of prophecy, tell what you believe these chapter signify?

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

JOHN3:17—

>>Do you believe that the kingdoms described in Daniel 2 and Daniel 8 were also contemporaneous?<<

Quote:jasd

Absolutely, if you mean by contemporaneous - that the Ram (Dan 7) corresponded to the metal silver in Daniel 2, and the Goat (Dan 7) corresponded to the metal brass - of Daniel 2.

>>Let's slow down here and walk through this very deliberately.

In Daniel 8:5, which power was symbolized by the male goat.<<

Quote:

Quote:jasd

The book of Daniel employed the Goat/Capricorn to represent Greece. Why?

The Greeks believed themselves ruled by the stars of Capricorn, the goat.

>>Also, which power was symbolized by the head of the statue in Daniel 2: 32?<<

Quote:

Quote:jasd

They may share similar tenses, but those kingdoms of Daniel 2 have a definite terminus a quo (limit from which), a beginning point; to wit:

Dan 2:38 ... Thou [art] this head of gold.

The originating point for the fulfilling of this dream centers upon Nebuchadnezzar and Babylonia. The date is almost precisely arrived-at.