The Little Horn of Daniel 8: A Suggestion

[DanielMunoz]

Hi friends!

I've written an endless (54 A4 pages) article on the Little Horn of Daniel 8 and on the beasts of Revelation 12, 13 and 17. But it's only available in spanish right now (if somebody wants to read it in spanish anyway, this is the link: El papado en retrospectiva).

I'll post here the key elements of the Daniel 8 part of the study. Later, in another thread, I'll post the Revelation part.

Importance of the study.

In my opinion, the most important contribution of this study is the finding of a new way of interpreting certain literary structures in prophecy, which could be applied to other apocalyptic prophecies to unlock them. In fact, applying to Revelation 13 the same reasoning I'll show here for Daniel 8, it happened that I found support for this EGW statement (among others):

"The decree that will finally go forth against the remnant people of God will be very similar to that issued by Ahasuerus against the Jews." - {LDE 258.2}

Which literary structure will be analyzed on Daniel 8?

Dr. William Shea notes (2DARCOM, 507-508) that there is a particular structure in Daniel 8 using the gdl (became great) verb.

Descriptions of both the Persian Ram and the Greek He Goat ends with gdl verb. The difference is that the Persian Ram became great, but the Greek He Goat became very great.

The Little Horn's description, on the other hand, has three parts, each one beginning (not ending) with the gdl verb. And the description (8:9) says that the Little Horn became exceedingly great.

So we will analyze why the description is reversed and split into three parts. And how it affects the interpretation of the prophecy. (on the next post...)

[Stan]

Don'r forget our Sister forum, www.foroadventista.com

[DanielMunoz]

Don'r forget our Sister forum, www.foroadventista.com

Hi Stan. I've opened a thread on the same topic on that forum days ago. Thanks for the advice.

[hch]

Hi friends!

I've written an endless (54 A4 pages) article on the Little Horn of Daniel 8 and on the beasts of Revelation 12, 13 and 17. But it's only available in spanish right now (if somebody wants to read it in spanish anyway, this is the link: El papado en retrospectiva).

I'll post here the key elements of the Daniel 8 part of the study. Later, in another thread, I'll post the Revelation part.

Importance of the study.

In my opinion, the most important contribution of this study is the finding of a new way of interpreting certain literary structures in prophecy, which could be applied to other apocalyptic prophecies to unlock them. In fact, applying to Revelation 13 the same reasoning I'll show here for Daniel 8, it happened that I found support for this EGW statement (among others):

"The decree that will finally go forth against the remnant people of God will be very similar to that issued by Ahasuerus against the Jews." - {LDE 258.2}

Which literary structure will be analyzed on Daniel 8?

Dr. William Shea notes (2DARCOM, 507-508) that there is a particular structure in Daniel 8 using the gdl (became great) verb.

Descriptions of both the Persian Ram and the Greek He Goat ends with gdl verb. The difference is that the Persian Ram became great, but the Greek He Goat became very great.

The Little Horn's description, on the other hand, has three parts, each one beginning (not ending) with the gdl verb. And the description (8:9) says that the Little Horn became exceedingly great.

So we will analyze why the description is reversed and split into three parts. And how it affects the interpretation of the prophecy. (on the next post...)

Sounds more complicated than it really needs to be. But I suspect that it will confirm recent discoveries in Daniel.

Thanks for sharing

[DanielMunoz]

The Persian Ram

It is said about the Persian Ram that he pushed "westward, and northward, and southward" (vs. 4). But "westward, and northward, and southward" of where?

Daniel saw the Ram standing "before the river" (vs. 3), which was "at Shushan" (vs. 2). So the Ram pushed "westward, and northward, and southward" "of Shushan", because he was standing at Shushan.

It fits perfectly with Medo-Persia, whose main conquests were Babylon (east of Shushan), Lydia (north of Shushan), and Egypt (south of Shushan) (2 DARCOM, 503).

De description ends saying that he became great.

The Greek He Goat

It is said about the Greek He Goat that he "came from the west" (vs. 5). But the west of where?

Since "he came to the ram" (8:6), which was at Shushan, it can be concluded that he came from the west of Shushan.

It fits perfectly with the Greeks (Macedonians), who came from the west of Persia, conquering a wide strip of land in his way ("on the face of the whole earth", vs. 5).

De description ends saying that the he goat became very great.

The Little Horn

It is said about the Little Horn that he came from "out of one of them" (vs. 9), and he "waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant [land]" (vs. 9).

There is a problem here. He "waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east" of where?

The fact that he waxed "toward the pleasant [land]" is a hint that the south and the east towards where he waxed cannot be the south and the east of Palestine (the pleasant [land]), but must be a place where you can go from there toward the south, the east, and Palestine (so it can't be Palestine).

Ok dude, it's easy: the point can be Rome, from where if you go south and east you go to Palestine.

Wait. It's not so easy. It's the best explanation we have for the prophecy. But it's not perfect.

Rome did not expand only toward south and east (and Palestine). It expanded almost symmetrically toward the four winds of heaven. So, why north and west are not mentioned?

In the case of the Persian Ram, it is not only said that it expanded toward south and west because Palestine was to the south-west of Persia. North is also mentioned. Why then prophecy would not mention north and west in the case of Rome?

And about south and west being the directions taken by Rome to get to Palestine, it is not the way prophecy described the Greek movement toward Persia. It is not said of the He Goat that he went toward east, because he moved east to get to Persia. It is said that he came from the west.

So we have that when prophecy says where some kingdom come from, it says: from somewhere. So in the case of Rome it should have said: came from the north, and the west (if we want to describe how he got into Palestine).

And we have that when prophecy says where a kingdom goes to, it says: went southward, westward, etc. But it mentions everywhere it moved, not only the directions that lead it to Palestine.

Now is when the gdl literary structure makes it all clear (next post).

[DanielMunoz]

What does it mean that the little horn's description is split into three parts and reversed?

When we read the descriptions of the Ram or the He Goat, they have not become great (gdl) until we reach the "became great" (gdl) expression on the text. I mean, all the description is showing how he became great, and after they finished becoming great, it says: he became great.

There is a direct hint of this in the He Goat description. Just after it said that "the he goat waxed very great" (vs. 8), it is said that he was "at the height of his power" (New International Version).

So, what would a reverse description mean? Well, I think it means retrospect. The Little Horn is being described looking in retrospect from a time when he has already became great. In fact, if you read his description, you first read that he became great, and only then (after he became great) you read toward where, as if you where looking back in time.

It fits perfectly with Papacy

From when in time should we look back in retrospect? A good time is the end of the prophecy: 1844 ("how long?" asked the angel).

And from where in space should we look? Well, the Little Horn did not attack the Ram or the He Goat, he attacked the saints, the church of God, the woman. So, where was the woman at 1844? She was in the United States, "the land which the Lord provided as an asylum for His people" {Mar 179.3}.

So if we look back in retrospect from the United States at 1844, we can see that Papacy "waxed exceedingly great toward south (Latin America), toward east (Europe), and toward the pleasant [land] (Palestine)". Although Papacy wasn't anymore in Palestine, and lost part of Europe to Protestantism, if we look back in retrospect, he had had those lands. In the middle ages Papacy got the Kingdom of Jerusalem with the crusades and reigned over almost (if not all) Europe.

Why split into three?

One may become great in many dimensions: love, money, health, spiritual, intellectual, etc. Papacy became great in three dimensions: Territorial, temporal power, ecclesiastical power.

Verse 9 describes his territorial dimension: south, east and Palestine.

Verse 10 describes his temporal power dimension: He became great against the host and the stars, which represent "the mighty (stars) and the holy people (host)" (vs. 24).

Verse 11 and 12 describes his ecclesiastical power: He became great against Jesus (the prince of the host), and took from him his continual (ministry of intercession) getting in the middle of the people and Christ, etc.

There are much more details I have to share about this. They are details compared to what we have seen until now. But they are very important (I think) in the sense that they confirm a lot of things adventists believe (year-day principle, link between Daniel 8 and 9, USA as the new land for the woman, little horn as an apostate power, sanctuary not the earthly one, Antiochus not the little horn, verb changes meaning, and more). And a lot more in Revelation using a similar analysis on an similar structure, that we will see later.

But It's becoming late here now I'll continue as soon as I can.

God bless you. Happy Sabbath.

[phkrause]

Happy Sabbath back at ya Daneil