hch Posted May 21, 2015 Author Share Posted May 21, 2015 To glean the Catholic church or a Pope from the book of Daniel is just sophistry. You have taken a preconcieved idea and forced it into the book of Daniel with no exegetical warrant to do so. Can you show me where the book of Daniel mentiions a Pope? You can't. To spread false witness against your brother is a direct violation of the ninth commandment. “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. What you have to do in order to project the book of Daniel into your future is to make the historic situation of Antiochus into a new situation and subsequent villian. If you are willing to use this against another organization outside of the historical context, then you would have to accept the same imaginative scenarios against yourself. Some organizations like some fundamental Jewish roots churches levy this same scenario against all other churches including SDA's. We all are trying to create new times and seasons to pry them from the law of Moses-Hellenistic churches influenced by paganists. live by the sword-then die by the sword With the new updates, I did not know how to get back onto this forum until now. So let's look at your position Brotherly Love: "Catholic church or a Pope from the book of Daniel is just sophistry." Then I would not be able to understand and teach that Pope John-Paul II is specifically identified in Daniel 7. But he is and I say so from the word of God. Thus I was able to identify him and Benedict XVI in Revelation 17 - so much so that I accurately understood and tweeted 8 times between Sept 2011 through Sept 2012 that Benedict would not be pope in 2013 narrowing it down to: he might last till the Spring of 2013 and he did not. Twitter's archives prove that my progressive understanding of Daniel and Revelation was correct. That is my testimony regarding popes in Daniel and Revelation. What evidence do you have to support your position? Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hch Posted May 21, 2015 Author Share Posted May 21, 2015 I notice in the poll that most say that Daniel 2 and 7 is false and not up to date... To be honest that is why we are so confuse, too much garbage is thrown in the mix! That is what Nebuchadnezzar saw a bunch of liars and he was about to destroy them, including all the wise men that all practice to believe in some deity, don't you all understand it! But the captain respected Daniel and his companions and allowed them to confront the king and you know the rest of the story. This Chapter was not related to Daniel Seven and I will explain it in part two after you dissect this first. Sorry if you all felt this was long but you cannot truly answer two chapters without understanding history. The Bible is the greatest history book written, the spade proves it, and all the sciences shows the evidence and respects it, even if men don't. You cannot understand the Bible unless you understand history and true science first! Welcome Stinsonmarri. Thank you for contributing. You had much food for thought. Since so few have voted, be sure to cast your vote and watch the poles. A lot of stuff has muddied the water regarding Daniel. Blessings Hch Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted May 22, 2015 Share Posted May 22, 2015 With the new updates, I did not know how to get back onto this forum until now. So let's look at your position Brotherly Love: "Catholic church or a Pope from the book of Daniel is just sophistry." Then I would not be able to understand and teach that Pope John-Paul II is specifically identified in Daniel 7. But he is and I say so from the word of God. Thus I was able to identify him and Benedict XVI in Revelation 17 - so much so that I accurately understood and tweeted 8 times between Sept 2011 through Sept 2012 that Benedict would not be pope in 2013 narrowing it down to: he might last till the Spring of 2013 and he did not. Twitter's archives prove that my progressive understanding of Daniel and Revelation was correct. That is my testimony regarding popes in Daniel and Revelation. What evidence do you have to support your position? What you are claiming is defined as sophistry..but you are in good company. Many claim to teach from the bible a whole host of people who fit the description, and many fall for it. The evidence is that Daniel does not go into modern times without using prejudice, speculation, historical revision and using blatant allegory. That is why the prophesy pundits are 1000 percent wrong 100 percent of the time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hch Posted May 22, 2015 Author Share Posted May 22, 2015 What you are claiming is defined as sophistry..but you are in good company. Many claim to teach from the bible a whole host of people who fit the description, and many fall for it. The evidence is that Daniel does not go into modern times without using prejudice, speculation, historical revision and using blatant allegory. That is why the prophesy pundits are 1000 percent wrong 100 percent of the time Brotherly love, From what you wrote above, are we to understand that you are saying that God lied to Daniel? God's messenger told Daniel: "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased" (12:4). And again: "And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end" (12:9). The time of the end is identified by the messenger in his words to Daniel as a time when knowledge shall be increased and when men shall run to and fro. Our modern time fits that criteria; past ages do not. Saying that Daniel is not specifically intended for the time of the end (our modern time) is truly sophistry. The word of God clearly states that Daniel is for the endtime when knowledge is to increase. At the time of the end, I studied Daniel and Revelation and knowledge has increased. I have 8 time dated tweets in twitter's archives from Sept 2011 to Sept 2012 that demonstrate that knowledge has increased. My understanding of Daniel and Revelation allowed me to accurately tweet (100% correctly before it happened) that Benedict was a short timer (Sept 2011). Naysayers said, DAH he is an old man. Based on Bible prophecy, in 2011 & 2012; I tweeted more specifically: 2012 is pope Benedict's last year. I continued studying Daniel and was even more specific: he might last till May 2013. Then in September 2012, I tweeted: Pope Benedict might last till the Spring of 2013. KNOWLEDGE HAS INCREASED: Pope Benedict did not make it till the spring of 2013. And now that it has happened knowledge has continued to increase, I understand from Daniel and Revelation why Pope Benedict left office before 29 March 2013. What you boldly deny as sophistry is prophecy fulfilled. Obviously the sophistical prophetic position that you have presented here has missed something. In spite of the evidence, some folks will fight for their opinion rather than to change. Others will reexamine the evidence and follow where it leads. Still another class will be overcome with uncertainty and doubt not knowing what to believe. I pray that I will always follow the Light and grow in brotherly love. Christian regards, His child henry phkrause 1 Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Brotherly love, From what you wrote above, are we to understand that you are saying that God lied to Daniel? God's messenger told Daniel: "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased" (12:4). And again: "And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end" (12:9). The time of the end is identified by the messenger in his words to Daniel as a time when knowledge shall be increased and when men shall run to and fro. Our modern time fits that criteria; past ages do not. Saying that Daniel is not specifically intended for the time of the end (our modern time) is truly sophistry. The word of God clearly states that Daniel is for the endtime when knowledge is to increase. At the time of the end, I studied Daniel and Revelation and knowledge has increased. I have 8 time dated tweets in twitter's archives from Sept 2011 to Sept 2012 that demonstrate that knowledge has increased. My understanding of Daniel and Revelation allowed me to accurately tweet (100% correctly before it happened) that Benedict was a short timer (Sept 2011). Naysayers said, DAH he is an old man. Based on Bible prophecy, in 2011 & 2012; I tweeted more specifically: 2012 is pope Benedict's last year. I continued studying Daniel and was even more specific: he might last till May 2013. Then in September 2012, I tweeted: Pope Benedict might last till the Spring of 2013. KNOWLEDGE HAS INCREASED: Pope Benedict did not make it till the spring of 2013. And now that it has happened knowledge has continued to increase, I understand from Daniel and Revelation why Pope Benedict left office before 29 March 2013. What you boldly deny as sophistry is prophecy fulfilled. Obviously the sophistical prophetic position that you have presented here has missed something. In spite of the evidence, some folks will fight for their opinion rather than to change. Others will reexamine the evidence and follow where it leads. Still another class will be overcome with uncertainty and doubt not knowing what to believe. I pray that I will always follow the Light and grow in brotherly love. Christian regards, His child henry You say that I am using sophistry to support my position, but you claim Daniel only fits our time because going here and there to increase knowledge is about planes, trains, automobiles and science. what you have done is sophistry, and you have lept from the pages of the text and into your own understanding and sensationalism. This would be way to foreign to the context to be possible Running to and fro gaining knowledge would be about the sealed vision in Daniel if we are to stay in context. The verb for to and fro occurs elsewhere Jeremiah 5:1 Run to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, look and take note! Search her squares to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth, that I may pardon her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hch Posted May 23, 2015 Author Share Posted May 23, 2015 You say that I am using sophistry to support my position, but you claim Daniel only fits our time because going here and there to increase knowledge is about planes, trains, automobiles and science. what you have done is sophistry, and you have lept from the pages of the text and into your own understanding and sensationalism. This would be way to foreign to the context to be possible Running to and fro gaining knowledge would be about the sealed vision in Daniel if we are to stay in context. The verb for to and fro occurs elsewhere Jeremiah 5:1 Run to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, look and take note! Search her squares to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth, that I may pardon her. Brotherly love, you said of me, "you claim Daniel only fits our time because going here and there to increase knowledge is about planes, trains, automobiles and science" Yet the post cited did not say anything about the increase of knowledge regarding "planes, trains, automobiles and science." My comments were strictly limited to Daniel and Revelation and the increased of knowledge regarding BIBLE study specifically as it relates to the endtime. From that Bible stuey, I declared before Pope Benedict left office that the Bible clearly teaches that he was not to be pope in 2013. But you responded by asserting that I am engaging in sophistry when I merely linked the prophecy to its endtime fulfillment. And from my comments regarding Daniel's endtime meaning you falsely assumed and wrote of my prophetic understanding has : " lept from the pages of the text and into your own understanding and sensationalism." If that is what you want to call Bible prophecy fulfilled right under our noses so be it. One definition of Sophistry is "tricking someone by making a seemingly clever argument." Anybody reading this thread, who takes the time to look at statements that you label as sophistry and the statements that you are making will have no difficulty recognizing the examples of sophistry. Where are the trains plains and automobiles in this is the post that you were responding to? It is obvious that my post (added below for your convenience) seeks truth in agreement with Jeremiah 5:1 Run to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, look and take note! Search her squares to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth, that I may pardon her. On 5/22/2015, 5:31:28, hch said: Brotherly love, From what you wrote above, are we to understand that you are saying that God lied to Daniel? God's messenger told Daniel: "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased" (12:4). And again: "And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end" (12:9). The time of the end is identified by the messenger in his words to Daniel as a time when knowledge shall be increased and when men shall run to and fro. Our modern time fits that criteria; past ages do not. Saying that Daniel is not specifically intended for the time of the end (our modern time) is truly sophistry. The word of God clearly states that Daniel is for the endtime when knowledge is to increase. At the time of the end, I studied Daniel and Revelation and knowledge has increased. I have 8 time dated tweets in twitter's archives from Sept 2011 to Sept 2012 that demonstrate that knowledge has increased. My understanding of Daniel and Revelation allowed me to accurately tweet (100% correctly before it happened) that Benedict was a short timer (Sept 2011). Naysayers said, DAH he is an old man. Based on Bible prophecy, in 2011 & 2012; I tweeted more specifically: 2012 is pope Benedict's last year. I continued studying Daniel and was even more specific: he might last till May 2013. Then in September 2012, I tweeted: Pope Benedict might last till the Spring of 2013. KNOWLEDGE HAS INCREASED: Pope Benedict did not make it till the spring of 2013. And now that it has happened knowledge has continued to increase, I understand from Daniel and Revelation why Pope Benedict left office before 29 March 2013. What you boldly deny as sophistry is prophecy fulfilled. Obviously the sophistical prophetic position that you have presented here has missed something. In spite of the evidence, some folks will fight for their opinion rather than to change. Others will reexamine the evidence and follow where it leads. Still another class will be overcome with uncertainty and doubt not knowing what to believe. I pray that I will always follow the Light and grow in brotherly love. Christian regards, His child henry Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hch Posted May 23, 2015 Author Share Posted May 23, 2015 I would have edited my comment to say this if I had not run out of time: Brotherly love, you said of me, "you claim Daniel only fits our time because going here and there to increase knowledge is about planes, trains, automobiles and science" Yet the post cited did not say anything about the increase of knowledge regarding "planes, trains, automobiles and science." My comments were strictly limited to Daniel and Revelation and the increased of knowledge regarding BIBLE study specifically as it relates to the endtime. From that Bible study, I declared before Pope Benedict left office that the Bible clearly teaches that he was not to be pope in 2013. But you responded by asserting that I am engaging in sophistry when I merely linked the prophecy to its endtime fulfillment. And from my comments regarding Daniel's endtime meaning you falsely said that my prophetic understanding has: " lept from the pages of the text and into your own understanding and sensationalism." If correctly understanding Bible prophecy and having the documentation that proves that it was correctly understood before the fact and that the understanding was confirmed by recent events is what you are calling sophistry, that line of reasoning won't stand scrutiny. One definition of Sophistry is "tricking someone by making a seemingly clever argument." Anybody reading this thread, who takes the time to look at statements that you label as sophistry and the statements that you are making will have no difficulty recognizing the examples of sophistry. Where are the trains plains and automobiles in the post that you were responding to? It is obvious that my post (added below for your convenience) seeks truth in agreement with Jeremiah 5:1 Run to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, look and take note! Search her squares to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth, that I may pardon her. On 5/22/2015, 5:31:28, hch said: Brotherly love, From what you wrote above, are we to understand that you are saying that God lied to Daniel? God's messenger told Daniel: "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased" (12:4). And again: "And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end" (12:9). The time of the end is identified by the messenger in his words to Daniel as a time when knowledge shall be increased and when men shall run to and fro. Our modern time fits that criteria; past ages do not. Saying that Daniel is not specifically intended for the time of the end (our modern time) is truly sophistry. The word of God clearly states that Daniel is for the endtime when knowledge is to increase. At the time of the end, I studied Daniel and Revelation and knowledge has increased. I have 8 time dated tweets in twitter's archives from Sept 2011 to Sept 2012 that demonstrate that knowledge has increased. My understanding of Daniel and Revelation allowed me to accurately tweet (100% correctly before it happened) that Benedict was a short timer (Sept 2011). Naysayers said, DAH he is an old man. Based on Bible prophecy, in 2011 & 2012; I tweeted more specifically: 2012 is pope Benedict's last year. I continued studying Daniel and was even more specific: he might last till May 2013. Then in September 2012, I tweeted: Pope Benedict might last till the Spring of 2013. KNOWLEDGE HAS INCREASED: Pope Benedict did not make it till the spring of 2013. And now that it has happened knowledge has continued to increase, I understand from Daniel and Revelation why Pope Benedict left office before 29 March 2013. What you boldly deny as sophistry is prophecy fulfilled. Obviously the sophistical prophetic position that you have presented here has missed something. In spite of the evidence, some folks will fight for their opinion rather than to change. Others will reexamine the evidence and follow where it leads. Still another class will be overcome with uncertainty and doubt not knowing what to believe. I pray that I will always follow the Light and grow in brotherly love. Christian regards, His child henry Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hch Posted May 23, 2015 Author Share Posted May 23, 2015 For the record, I believe and teach: Daniel and Revelation are to be considered as one book. They both relate to the past (Daniel's day). the present (everything from Daniel's day to the present was the present when it was encountered), and the future (which is the endtime - the time in which we are living with some events yet to be fulfilled). And by their fulfillment in the endtime, Daniel and Revelation will explain themselves. And that some things that appear to have been fulfilled in Daniel and Revelation will have a final complete fulfillment. It is unfortunate that some folks have settled that some things have been fulfilled in Daniel and Revelation when those things cited are but a glimpse of what is yet to come. In some cases the way marks that God has given to encourage us along the prophetic path are but glimpses of what is yet to come. And how shall we understand the final endtime fulfillment if we have settled in our mind that prophecies yet to be fulfilled have already been fulfilled in the past? Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 (edited) Any interpretation other than your own gets the response of God lying to Daniel? Nice touch!! The book of Daniel repeats the theme of 'to you and your people" and references Mosaic Covenant practices like the alter, sacrifice and sanctuary. Are you a Jew in exile in the middle east? Are you under the exile and occupation by middle east and Grecian Empires? Remember, the book of Daniel gives four beasts/kingdoms and lists by name four kingdoms 1. babylon, 2. Media 3.Persia 4 Greece. Are you a Jew in the middle east with a Temple offering sacrifice? These hardly correspond to a 21 century ordeal Edited May 23, 2015 by brotherly love Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hch Posted May 26, 2015 Author Share Posted May 26, 2015 Any interpretation other than your own gets the response of God lying to Daniel? Nice touch!! The book of Daniel repeats the theme of 'to you and your people" and references Mosaic Covenant practices like the alter, sacrifice and sanctuary. Are you a Jew in exile in the middle east? Are you under the exile and occupation by middle east and Grecian Empires? Remember, the book of Daniel gives four beasts/kingdoms and lists by name four kingdoms 1. babylon, 2. Media 3.Persia 4 Greece. Are you a Jew in the middle east with a Temple offering sacrifice? These hardly correspond to a 21 century ordeal It is a common mistake to assume that Daniel is limited to ancient kingdoms. 1. Babylon, 2. Media/Persia 3. Greece and 4. Rome (pagan and papal) were God's seal of authenticity on the book of Daniel, not the endtime meaning of the book. Each time a kingdom arose and fell, it testified of the accuracy of God's word to Daniel. But the endtime meaning was sealed until the last days. And now that the last days are here, Daniel is explaining itself. Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 It is a common mistake to assume that Daniel is limited to ancient kingdoms. 1. Babylon, 2. Media/Persia 3. Greece and 4. Rome (pagan and papal) were God's seal of authenticity on the book of Daniel, not the endtime meaning of the book. Each time a kingdom arose and fell, it testified of the accuracy of God's word to Daniel. But the endtime meaning was sealed until the last days. And now that the last days are here, Daniel is explaining itself. You can only draw out popes from having a theological bias and read this into the text. In Daniel chapter 7:13-14 the first advent comes after the 4th beast is slain, if this is Rome or as you would say papal rome, the we should be still waiting for Jesus to ascend to the ancient of days and sit at the right hand of God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hch Posted May 27, 2015 Author Share Posted May 27, 2015 You can only draw out popes from having a theological bias and read this into the text. In Daniel chapter 7:13-14 the first advent comes after the 4th beast is slain, if this is Rome or as you would say papal rome, the we should be still waiting for Jesus to ascend to the ancient of days and sit at the right hand of God. Brotherly Love, You have repeated this statement a few times, "You can only draw out popes from having a theological bias and read this into the text." It still comes across as being illogical. What evidence are you using to substantiate this statement regarding the FIRST ADVENT: " In Daniel chapter 7:13-14 the first advent comes after the 4th beast is slain, if this is Rome or as you would say papal Rome," Christian Regards, hch Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hch Posted May 27, 2015 Author Share Posted May 27, 2015 When Daniel 7 begins, Daniel cites 4 sea-beasts. Based on popular renditions, we frequently understand Daniel 7:23 to be saying: "The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth" Thus the 4 sea-beasts are deemed to be 4-kingdoms. And of course that is not wrong, but it is not the whole truth and nothing but the truth. In fact, this partial understanding makes Scripture contradict Scripture. Quote His child Henry Bible student/Author https://www.loudcry101.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.