Do scars remain in Jesus' feet and hands?

[John317]

>>1) Arise out of pagan Rome. Roman roots. Daniel 7: 7, 8, 23, 24.<<

>>3) Come up in Europe. Daniel 7: 8.<<

>>4) Overthrow three kingdoms. The third kingdom of the original ten was overthrown in AD 538. This is when the little horn came to power. Daniel 7:8, 20, 24.<<

>>5) Reign for 1, 260 years from A.D. 538 to 1798 and then lose its world power. In the last days it regains it world power. Daniel 7:25; Rev. 13:5.<<

>>6) Make war with and persecute Christians during the 1,260 years. Daniel 7: 21, 25; Rev. 13:7.<<

>>7) Have a man at its head who speaks and sees for it. Daniel 7:8.<<

>>9) Be diverse from the other nations of Europe: a religious and political power. Daniel 7: 24; Rev. 13: 4, 8.<<

I respectfully submit – that the above are constructed and rooted in a premise that is not sustained by Writ.

Those [bulleted] points were developed prematurely with wrested scripture. Read: Daniel 12:4

OK, then pick them apart-- showing how they are wrong-- and show how the scriptures in Daniel 7 and 8 should be applied to know the identity of the little-horn power.

[John317]

Quote:

Quote:John317

Can you show that atheistic communism does that? Does it fulfill all the identifying marks that the Bible gives us? Here are 10 of the marks. Name the ones it fulfills and ones it does not fulfill.

>>2) Come up after pagan Rome fell in AD 476. Daniel 7: 24.<<

“Come up after...”? Well, then, what entity ‘came up’ following

Matt 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

and what “nation”, given the historical facts, is in view?

What particular nation do you have reference to?

Nation here simply means people. In fact, if you read the NIV, that is precisely how it reads. It does not mean that the Kingdom of God was transferred from the nation of Israel to a single nation, but it was given to the non-Jews, the gentiles, in all the world, to all who would accept Christ and obey Him. This comes out in Acts and Galatians 3: 28, 29.

[jasd]

>>10) Be universal and world-wide. Having no national boundaries, it will permeate all nations. Revelation 13: 3, 7-8.<<

And, that’s the Pope!?

>>11) It was wounded to death then healed (rev 13:3;12) wounded to death - Pope captured by Berthier and taken captive (1798), healed - papacy restored by Mussolinin (1929)<<

Again, false premise. To propose, with theories developed so long ago, that the Pope and the Beast of Revelation 13 are one and the same is without exegetical justification – any reading, or misreading, of historical dates, aside.

The Roman Empire never did conquer Parthia nor enter into Persia proper; yet, you would have one believe that the Bear of Daniel 7 was Medo-Persia and was, somehow, subsequently, incorporated into a Papal Empire.

So, attempting to correlate the various aspects of the several Beasts, one asks, “Okay, all the conjectures aside, is the Pope the Beast of Revelation 13 or the fourth Beast of Daniel 7? the little horn of Daniel 7 or Daniel 8? the wounded head? the scarlet woman? a combination of scarlet woman and Beast? a combination of all? Seems that we’re presented with the ultimate conundrum and the ultimate chimera, yes?”

>>12) It will be on earth till the second coming (Dan 7:21,22)<<

That assessment that a Beast will be extant at the Parousia – seems to be justified.

>>13) It will think to change times and laws (Dan 7:25), LAWS - observance of 4th commandment changed from Sabbath to Sunday, changes to calendar (Gregorian - currently used)<<

Everyone knows that the Jews emerged from Babylon without their original calendar. The greatest and wisest Rabbis could not and cannot reconstruct the original. It fell off the wall and all the Rabbis could not... Were it so – that Daniel 7:25 addresses the 4th commandment – then it was and is the Jews who changed the Sabbath by attaching it – as a floating Sabbath – to a false calendar. Fact of the matter is – that Hosea and Jeremiah both state that Gd, Himself, caused The Sabbath to cease. That cessation applied to both the Northern Kingdom and the Southern Kingdom – to all the COI.

(what happens to the month of Abib (Nisan) when the barley harvest is late? what happens when The Sabbath falls upon the 10th of Abib (Nisan)? Did Gd then hold the people blameless for going to market on that Sabbath to purchase and carry home the Paschal lamb? [...] etc) [/extemporaneously]

Disabuse me should I err.

[jasd]

>>14) This power will take his seat in the temple of God showing himself that he is God: (2 Thess. 2: 4.) What is the temple of God but His church.

So this power will be part of the church.<<

2 Thess 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Umm, I read this bit of “God on earth” – and interpret it as near, sheer, lunacy by the church; that said, that happened centuries ago and – St Paul assigns this particular event (2 Thess 2:3,4) to happen at the very end of time. Bit of a exegetical dichotomy..., as St Paul made the unique distinction that that particular entity is in view not past, not now – but at the very end.

The Catholic Church originated much that can be categorized as nothing other than nonsensical and excessive. That said, if one parses the term – "God on earth" – one must take into consideration that it is the RCC which shepherded the doctrine of the Trinity, that has, almost exclusively, championed the doctrine of the Tri-Une Gd – Trinity. Pope as "Gd on earth" remains an entity of one, as in the numeral 1, definitely, not a Corporate Unity even vaguely conforming to the Trinity Gd. It seems that, however unwittingly,

the Pope was and is never the Majuscule Gd. That is simply bombastic rhetoric on the part of Popes who took themselves too seriously.

It may be that that one who declares himself Gd is that arch-adversary to Gd, Satan.

>>Has any power, which arose out of Rome and attempted to change God's law, ever claimed to occupy the place or role of God on earth?<<

Remember, St Paul claimed in persona Christi.

2 Cor 2:10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I [forgive] also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave [it], for your sakes [forgave I it] in the person of Christ;

>>#12 actually shows that this power cannot possibly be a single individual as many people today believe. It goes without saying that no single man could live for well over 1,500 years; but a state/religious institution headed by a man most definitely could--<<

It could equally apply to a people.

>>...and in fact has!<<

Preteristic, again?

>>Also, there is no power except one that came out of the Roman Empire, thought to change the time aspect of God's law,<<

Don’t know about coming out of the Roman Empire but – science seems able to affect (increase) the velocity of light using caesium gas. Seemingly, light arrives at its destination before it is even sent. [/extemporaneously]

It is even posited that the CERN centrifuge will allow man to construct black holes and affect time itself.

Seems to me that man (he) thinks to change times and laws: note the plural usage – as opposed to your singular usage.

>>This would mean that the power we are discussing exists today, right now.<<

There is an interesting text:

2 Thess 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

falling away/apostasia

“BAGD define apostasia as “rebellion, abandonment in a religious sense, apostasy”

Liddell and Scott say, “defection.”

Louw and Nida list apostasia under one semantic domain - rebellion.

It seems that that son of perdition remains hidden until a revolution – of sorts – at which time he (in the singular or the plural) can no longer remain – hidden.

So, yes, I agree that it is probable that that hidden one is now (and may have been for sometime) with us; though it is also possible that 'he' is another - even now, engaged in ‘war in heaven’.

>>This is what the Bible says. All we need to do is go to history to find who fulfills these 14 points.<<

Umm, I am put to mind an incomplete set of leggos; but that’s another story...

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>13) It will think to change times and laws (Dan 7:25), LAWS - observance of 4th commandment changed from Sabbath to Sunday, changes to calendar (Gregorian - currently used)<<

Quote:

JASD-- Everyone knows that the Jews emerged from Babylon without their original calendar. The greatest and wisest Rabbis could not and cannot reconstruct the original. It fell off the wall and all the Rabbis could not... Were it so – that Daniel 7:25 addresses the 4th commandment – then it was and is the Jews who changed the Sabbath by attaching it – as a floating Sabbath – to a false calendar. Fact of the matter is – that Hosea and Jeremiah both state that Gd, Himself, caused The Sabbath to cease. That cessation applied to both the Northern Kingdom and the Southern Kingdom – to all the COI.

What is your Bible evidence of this?

Jesus kept the Sabbath, and He certainly was not mistaken in what day the Sabbath was. The NT does not give us a single doubt as to which day of the week is the seventh day or the first day. Acts 13 does not give us any reason to think it was not really the Sabbath. Nor does Luke 23: 56. It says that Jesus' followers "rested on the Sabbath." It does not say, they merely thought they rested on the Sabbath. They actually kept it.

Does the U.S. Naval Observatory know that no one knows the weekly cycle? Does it know that we do not know the REAL days of the week?

Check this out:

However, in 108 of the 160 languages of mankind, the seventh day is called "the Sabbath"! Did you know that? Dr. William Mead Jones of London prepared a chart proving this. (A copy of this chart can be obtained free of charge from the publisher of this book: Ask for "The Chart of the Week" [bS–28-29]. English is one of the few major languages in which the seventh day is not called "the Sabbath."

Here are ten examples: Hebrew: Shabbath / Greek: Sabbaton / Latin: Sabbatum / Arabic: Assabit / Persian: Shambin / Russian: Subbota / Hindustani: Shamba / French: Samedi / Italian: Sabbato / Spanish: Sabado.

"By calculating the eclipses, it can be proven that no time has been lost and the creation days were seven, divided into 24 hours each."—Dr. Hinkley, The Watchman, July 1926 [Hinkley was a well-known astronomer].

"The human race never lost the septenary [seven day] sequence of week days and that the Sabbath of these latter times comes down to us from Adam, though the ages, without a single lapse."—Dr. Totten, professor of astronomy at Yale University.

"Seven has been the ancient and honored number among the nations of the earth. They have measured their time by weeks from the beginning. The origin of this was the Sabbath of God, as Moses has given the reasons for it in his writings."—Dr. Lyman Coleman.

"There has been no change in our calendar in past centuries that has affected in any way the cycle of the week."—James Robertson, Director American Ephemeris, Navy Department, U.S. Naval Observatory, Washington, D.C., March 12, 1932.

"It can be said with assurance that not a day has been lost since Creation, and all the calendar changes notwithstanding, there has been no break in the weekly cycle."—Dr. Frank Jeffries, Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society and Research Director of the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, England.

It is remarkable how complete is the Biblical and historical evidence corroborating the fact that the Bible Sabbath was given to us by the God of heaven. Let us keep the Sabbath that Jesus kept! He worshiped on the Bible Sabbath, and never told us to stop keeping it. No one else in the Bible said to either. The seventh day is the Sabbath, for God never changed it.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

How do you read the following bolded and underlined time element?

Matt 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

Given the multi-faceted questions posed by Jesus Christ’s disciples and His response by parts – I read it as ‘after the Book of Daniel is unsealed (time element) – there will occur an event spoken of by Daniel the prophet; that is, the abomination of desolation – will stand in the holy place'.

That, I read, is an event yet to unfold – with the “holy place”, as of yet, undefined.

No Preterism in view. [ed:jasd]

>>History records that in 70 AD, Jerusalem was destroyed by the armies of Rome.<<

Indeed, we find that event in historical records.

>>No Christians were killed because they knew of Christ's warning to leave when they saw the Roman legions surrounding the city.<<

That may have, indeed, been so; but because they had access to book of Matthew and understood what chapter 24 was warning THEM?

>>Matt 24: 15-20 has to do with things that happened at that time.<<

Note the markers (bolded) following:

Matt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

One would be wrong to interpret the above underlined to mean the Parousia itself; rather, the end would, inclusively, include a series of events... Moreover,

one notes: it is, even now, questionable that this Gospel has been preached in all the world – let alone at the time ca AD 70.

Matt 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

The underlined above ‘therefore’ (or consequently), introduces what follows.

Matt 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be

Matt 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

It seems that these iterated events did not occur ca AD 70 – but is yet future to us.

>>The Christians escaped because of Christ's warning and their study of Daniel's prophecy. They understood.<< [ed.jasd]

It is, as I’ve noted above, that the ‘time element’ places the “abomination of desolation standing in the holy place”, not ca AD 70 – but yet future to you and me.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Those [bulleted] points were developed prematurely with wrested scripture. Read: Daniel 12:4.

>>OK, then pick them apart-- showing how they are wrong--<<

Read: Daniel 12:4

>>...and show how the scriptures in Daniel 7 and 8 should be applied to know the identity of the little-horn power.<<

Mazzoroth:

Let’s begin with Virgo, as does the lion-Sphinx of Egypt. It is the first of four in the first book of the Mazzaroth.

Virgo the virgin. Ring any bells? Of course, it does.

Is 7:14 Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

The second house (mansion – as in – “In my Father’s house are many mansions...”) is Libra with the scales.

The depiction is one of commerce. It carries the sense of ransom in the Greek. We probably more easily recognize it in its Latin form. Emptio means ‘to buy or purchase’. Add the prefix ‘re’ and the ‘d’ for its euphonic value and we have in the Latin the word redemption – meaning ‘to buy or purchase back’.

Ps 106:10 And he saved them from the hand of him that hated [them], and redeemed them from the hand of the enemy.

The third house or mansion is that of Scorpio/Scorpion whose brightest star is Antares – Arabic, and said to mean “the wounding”. Two of its decans depict serpents; the first Ophiuchus and the other Aesculapius.

The fourth house or mansion is Sagittarius, a name whose origin traces back to the Akkadians. Its meaning is “The Prince of the Earth”. Sagittarius the Archer is dual-natured.

And so it goes... with the fifth house/first sign of the second book being Capricorn the Goat. After that, Aries the Ram, then Aquarius the water-bearer, and finally, the last of the second book – Pisces, the fishes.

Until, we reach and end with Leo the lion – the Lion of the House or Mansion of Judah, the Root of David – the fully depicted Jesus the Christ – who prevaileth to open the book.

Of course, the above is the briefest of the brief. However, it sufficiently parallels the story of redemption that one might pause re the reason Gd may have introduced the Mazzaroth to Writ; that is, as a mnemonic device for the ancients.

>>...the identity of the little-horn power.<<

I purport that if you believe – the narrative advanced by the many Daniel and Revelation Seminars – you might want to revisit and recalibrate your position. That said, though

I suspect who the little horn is – I am not prepared to share that information.

[melvin mccarty]

3) Come up in Europe

I cannot find that in my Bible. Where does it say that in yours? mel

[John317]

3) Come up in Europe

I cannot find that in my Bible. Where does it say that in yours? mel

Are you looking in your Bible for the word "Europe," by any chance?

Are you referring to Daniel 7: 7,8?

What or who is the fourth beast in 7: 7, which has strong iron teeth, and devours and breaks in pieces? Do you notice it has ten horns?

Big hint: it was a major power which followed Greece. Remember your High School history class?

Compare it to the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2: 40.

Who is the fourth kingdom here in Daniel 2? Another big hint, I hope: this kingdom has been referred to as "the Iron Kingdom" by none other than Mr. Gibbons, and was the largest and strongest empire of its time.

[Fausto]

Quote:

Are you looking in your Bible for the word "Europe," by any chance?

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>History records that in 70 AD, Jerusalem was destroyed by the armies of Rome.<<

Quote:

JASD--- Indeed, we find that event in historical records.

Quote:

JOHN3:17-- >>No Christians were killed because they knew of Christ's warning to leave when they saw the Roman legions surrounding the city.<<

Quote:

JASD---That may have, indeed, been so; but because they had access to book of Matthew and understood what chapter 24 was warning THEM?

I believe it is reasonable to assume that this was the reason Jesus gave the prophecy, to warn His followers of what was coming. Would it make any sense for Jesus to give the warning if it would not be available to those for whom it was intended?

Do you believe it was written after the prophecy of Jesus in Matt. 24 or before? Was Matthew written before 70 AD or after that date?

[John317]

3) Come up in Europe

I cannot find that in my Bible. Where does it say that in yours? mel

I'm sorry if I seem to you to have led you to think that your Bible (or mine?) would contain the word "Europe." That's a mistake and it's my fault that I wasn't clear on that. Europe is a name that we use today, but it was not known in the time of the prophet Daniel.

You have to put 2 + 2 together but it shouldn't be much more difficult than that, I'd think. Millions have done it before you so you have a good chance of doing it too. Just try hard.

[John317]

A fuller and more complete fulfillment is still future, yes, and these things will be repeated on a larger and more terrible scale than when they first occurred. But there is very good reason that virtually all Bible commentaries will tell you that many of these prophecies were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem.

Ever heard of "primary" fulfillment and "secondary" fulfillment? In the Old Testament as well as in the NT, some prophecies are fulfilled more than once. For instance, the destruction of Jerusalem was a pointer to the greater time of trouble that will come just before the time of Christ's return.

[melvin mccarty]

I think you know what I meant. But in case you missed it I suggest that it also does not say "in the western part of the Roman empire". Is it perchance because one can find what one is looking for?

In Dan. 7:11 it says the 4th beast was destroyed but the others were allowed to remain for a time and a season. If you apply the year-day principle here you get 450 years that "the rest of the beasts" exist after the 4th was destroyed (though deprived of their authority). When do you think that condition existed? mel

[John317]

I think you know what I meant. But in case you missed it I suggest that it also does not say "in the western part of the Roman empire". Is it perchance because one can find what one is looking for? ......

The Eastern Roman Empire did not break up into lots of different nations the way the Western Roman Empire did. So the Roman Empire, the fourth empire in prophecy, broke up into the states of Europe and into what eventually became the Ottoman Empire, under the rule and control of Islamic Turkey.

When one is looking for fulfillment of prophecy, I don't know how anyone can do it without looking for that fulfillment within history. That means looking to see what fulfills the prophecy.

How else do you suggest it be done?

In this case, we have the fourth beast breaking up into many different parts, just like the prophecy said would happen. The fourth beast is the one that follows the third beast. The third beast represents Greece. The empire that followed it was Rome. It fulfills all the specifics that the prophecy outlined.

Agree so far?

[melvin mccarty]

No! The Roman empire always existed as a group of states which were always changing boundaries and allegiences. The Roman empire included the territory of the three other "beasts" plus a fringe of north Africa and Part of Europe. Anyhow I realize this is a fruitless discussion. Why did you nor answer my question? mel

[John317]

No! The Roman empire always existed as a group of states which were always changing boundaries and allegiences. The Roman empire included the territory of the three other "beasts" plus a fringe of north Africa and Part of Europe. Anyhow I realize this is a fruitless discussion. Why did you nor answer my question? mel

When do your history books say that the Roman Empire began and when do your history books say the Roman Empire collapsed?

The reason I didn't answer your other question is that I have a family and had to come away from the computer for a while at that point. I will get around to all questions as I have time. I apologize for the break, Mel.

I have to go pay bills now but then will reply to your second question as soon as I'm finished with that little necessary, but undesirable, task.

[John317]

The Roman empire always existed as a group of states which were always changing boundaries and allegiences. The Roman empire included the territory of the three other "beasts" plus a fringe of north Africa and Part of Europe....

Don't give up so easily, Mel.

Everyone who knows this subject knows that the Roman Empire included parts of north Africa.

But how does that fact make the interpretation invalid that the fourth empire is the Roman Empire?

[melvin mccarty]

I don't understand why you assume that I am saying that the fourth kindom is not Rome. When did I suggest that? It was all of Rome including the first three kingdoms and when Daniel saw it coming up he noticed it was different because it had 10 horns. Eventually it was destroyed and burned (along with all it's horns one could suppose) but the others remained for a time and a season. At least that's what my Bible says. mel

[John317]

In Dan. 7:11 it says the 4th beast was destroyed but the others were allowed to remain for a time and a season. If you apply the year-day principle here you get 450 years that "the rest of the beasts" exist after the 4th was destroyed (though deprived of their authority). When do you think that condition existed? mel

Daniel 7: 11, 12--

New American Standard Bible:

"Then I kept looking because of the sound of the boastful words which the horn was speaking; I kept looking until the beast was slain, and its body was destroyed and given to the burning fire.

As for the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away, but an extension of life was granted to them for an appointed period of time."

1) Please consider the context of these verses. For instance, look at the preceding verses and the verses following them, that is, verses 9,10 and 13, 14. What is happening in those 4 verses?

2) You will notice that the context has to do with judgment, in verses 10-11. Therefore, the action described in verses 12, 13 take place at the time of judgment. If you look closely at verses 13, 14, you will notice they describe the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.

3) Verse 11, then, is talking about the destruction of the beast. It is utterly destroyed by fire. As soon as its dominion is gone, its life is not prolonged like the other beasts, but this fourth beast is utterly and completely destroyed. When does this occur, and who destroys it?

4) Verse 12 is parenthesis and contrasting the fact that the rest of the beasts (that is, Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece) were allowed to live for a certain period of time after their dominion was taken away. By contrast, the fourth beast will be totally destroyed at the termination of its dominion.

[melvin mccarty]

Nice try at interpretation but a bit weak doncha think? mel

[John317]

Can you say a little more? For instance, talk about specific problems in either evidence or logic that you believe you see?

[melvin mccarty]

Let's recap

4th beast = Rome

Had 10 horns plus 1 minus 3

Can the horns exist apart from the beast?

Here we have the beast again being destroyed..nothing said about horns. Is it still the beast (Rome) like it says or is it the horns or must we interpret it to fit our doctrine?

No I do not have the answers either. mel

[John317]

Let's recap

4th beast = Rome

Had 10 horns plus 1 minus 3

Can the horns exist apart from the beast?

Here we have the beast again being destroyed..nothing said about horns. Is it still the beast (Rome) like it says or is it the horns or must we interpret it to fit our doctrine?

No I do not have the answers either. mel

Consider the context of Daniel 7: 11, 12. For instance, look at the preceding verses and the verses following them, that is, verses 9,10 and 13, 14. What is happening in those 4 verses?

When was the little horn speaking the pompous words? What does Daniel see happening at the same time?

[John317]

Let's recap

4th beast = Rome

Had 10 horns plus 1 minus 3

Compare the language used to describe the fourth beast both in Daniel 2: 40 and Daniel 7: 7.

The point here is that the fourth beast was divided. Compare the description given in Daniel 2.

A power (or horn) came up both after the other powers and among the other powers.

3 of the original powers were taken out in the presence of the little horn (which goes on later to become powerful and speak pompous words against God).

Let's discuss these aspects and then go into you other questions.