70 x 7

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

THERE ARE ONLY FOUR KINGDOMS.

Daniel two states that in "IN THE TIME OF THESE KINGS" Which kings?

THE KINGS OF BABYLON, MEDIA-PERSIA, GREECE, AND ROME!

There is not a scintilla of evidence in Daniel chapter two that it is talking about the Second Coming! Such a notion is only a preconceived idea that must come from a source outside of the Bible!

You are right that there are only four kingdoms that Daniel talks about, the last one being Rome. Rome still exists as papal Rome. It has been papal Rome since 438 AD when the bishop of Rome began to rule unhindered by serious competition. Papal Rome is the little-horn of Daniel 7 and 8. (Pagan Rome had meanwhile moved to Constantinople.) So those kingdoms and peoples still do exist even to this day.

The papacy has nothing to do with the Roman Empire! These are two completely different entities. The Popes did not replace the Roman Emperors! There is not a scintilla of evidence that the Papacy is part of Daniel's visions.

Oh! Here it comes! But miz3, but miz3 what about that LITTLE HORN?

That LITTLE HORN is part of the Roman Empire a secular kingdom! The Bible does not state that this entity is some "religio-political entity"!

Such assertions of "religio-political entity" come again from preconceived ideas that have been started by humans who are adding to the Word of God!

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

The Prophecy was not meant to be a prophecy for US TODAY!

Then why did the angel say seal up the book because it is for the time of the end?

And, show me when all these events took place already. People have asked you that already, but you haven't produced a single one. That's because you can't.

Go back through the posts and my exchange with "cheddar" on this very question! My answer is there!

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: John317

Jesus meant the Kingdom of God has drawn near in the sense that it's now time to prepare for it and that people can begin to participate in the kingdom even now by allowing the laws of God's reign to be established in their hearts and lives.

But Jesus is also saying that the Kingdom hasn't yet come in outward signs. It will do that eventually, but that time is not yet. The kingdom is in people's hearts as Jesus rules as king in our lives.

Originally Posted By: miz3

Come on John317 don't cherry pick one text. You left out the text that states "the Kingdom of Heaven is in you". That means it is already here!

As I said already, the kingdom of heaven is here in the persons of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit and to the extent that people claiming to be His followers allow Him to rule their lives.

The word "within" is translated from a Greek word which may also be translated as "among you" or "in your midst." Luke 17: 21. Christ's kingdom was already in their midst or among them in the prerson of Jesus Christ.

But that is not the primary fulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel 2: 34, 35, 43-45.

Notice what Jesus says in Luke 17: 24-- that at some future time, "the Son of Man will be in His day." What day is that? The day when Christ's kindgom destroys and consumes the sinful, rebellious kingdoms of this world, which are largely ruled by Satan.

Like I already told you Jesus told Pilot that He was a King already and that His Kingdom already existed and was "not of this world"!

It is pretty clear! Whether you accept it is up to you!

[John317]

Is Christ ruling as King now?

Does He have the kingly crown on and the King's robe on at this time?

Or is He the High Priest?

Notice that Jesus doesn't come as King until Rev. 19: 15, 16, which occurs at the second coming.

Originally Posted By: miz3

Yes! Jesus told Pilot that He was a King! Did you forget that little FACT! He also told Pilot that His Kingdom was not of this world!

Jesus has always been king in the sense that He is the ruler of the universe, but He hasn't been ruling as a king. He will begin to do this when He returns the second time. As you point out, Christ's kingdom is not of this world. One day, after the second coming, it will be Christ's kingdom again.

[miz3]

Whatever John317.

That's not an answer its spin!

[Truth Files]

"Truth Files the only Book I have been reading is the Bible"

>How about addressing the items that I put forth to you when you said that Daniel 2:34-35 is the first coming of Jesus Christ?

>Your statement tells me that you are reading commentary from other sources .... you did not get this idea from the scriptures alone

>I would suggest dumping the theology of preterism/kingdom now influences and for you to return to the drawing board .... stick to the scriptures for a few years [i have about 40 in the study now along with knowledge of ancient and modern history] and ask the Lord to reveal the true meanings .... He will do this you know .... as long as you motives are pure, that you earnestly seek Him in the process, and that you are willing to spend the time .... there is no magic short cut

[Lysimachus]

All historians agree that papal Rome emerged out of the ruins of the ancient pagan Roman Empire. Thomas Hobbes, English Historian, says this:

• If a man consider the origin of this great ecclesiastical dominion, he will easily perceive that the Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof. (Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, 457)

Some of you here might want to consider terminating arguing with miz3. Arguing with him is like beating a dead horse. You simply can't reason with him. Nothing you say will convince him. He is joined to his idols, leave him alone (Hosea 4:17)

Last time I checked, it is called the "Roman"....yes, one more time... "ROMAN Catholic Church". Last time I checked, the Pope borrowed the title "Pontifex Maximus" from the Roman Caesars -- meaning "greatest bridge-maker".

Last time I checked, the Popes reign in the same spot, the Capital of Rome, where the Caesars did.

But saying these things will go in one ear and out the other with miz3.

One more time: He is joined to his idols, leave him alone.

[John317]

The papacy has nothing to do with the Roman Empire! These are two completely different entities. The Popes did not replace the Roman Emperors! There is not a scintilla of evidence that the Papacy is part of Daniel's visions....

That LITTLE HORN is part of the Roman Empire a secular kingdom! The Bible does not state that this entity is some "religio-political entity"!

What you say here flies in the face of the clear facts of history. Virtually all historians are in agreement on this. The Bishop of Rome took over the place vacated by the Emperor of Rome. This is a well established fact of history. Have you ever read Gibbon's history of Rome? Or a book called, "The Two Babylonians"? Also check out H.G. Wells' History of the World.

The Bible shows us that the little-horn power is a "religio-political" power. Are you unaware of this?

[Kevin H]

The kings and kingdoms of Daniel chapter two are:

Babylon, Media-Persia, Greece, and Rome!

That is only four kingdoms! Daniel chapter two DOES NOT LIST ANY MORE KINGDOMS THAN THESE FOUR!

There is NO FIFTH KINGDOM!

There is no split kingdom!

THERE ARE ONLY FOUR KINGDOMS.

Daniel two states that in "IN THE TIME OF THESE KINGS"! Which kings?

THE KINGS OF BABYLON, MEDIA-PERSIA, GREECE, AND ROME!

There is not a scintilla of evidence in Daniel chapter two that it is talking about the Second Coming! Such a notion is only a preconceived idea that must come from a source outside of the Bible!

God's leading is a oneness of the opposites of God being in complete control and allowing for human free will. Usually we as people when we come to a set of opposites, instead of making a oneness out of them if possible, we tend to embrace the one and reject the other.

Technically Daniel 2 is four KINGS!!!!!! I know some commentaries want to leave room for the word to be translated Kingdoms, but they are only reading back into the texts assumptions about Daniel 2. No place else in the Bible or ancient world does the word used in Daniel 2 mean kingdoms, It always is a specific term for only individual kings.

Deuteronomy 4 gives two possible histories for Israel, one if they were faithful and one if they were unfaithful. There have in recent years been more studies by scholars of different faiths on this topic in this but here is an excellent article in the SDA Bible commentary that is a nice summery of what these newer and more scholarly studies are finding; The Role of Israel in Old Testament Prophecy. If they were unfaithful they would get different curses finally ending in exile and in the last days (i.e. the exile) if they were to call on God God would rescue them. This is fleshed out by other prophets but in a nutshell, in the Old Testament the idea of the exile gave to the Hebrew boys and girls the same pictures that the Sunday Law gives to the typical Adventist boys and girls. They were expecting the exile to end in a second great exodus lead by the Messiah.

Daniel 2 held to this eschatology. There were to be the 4 KINGS, and the book of Daniel mentions 4 kings: Nebuccadnezzar, Belshazar, Darius, and Cyrus; After Cyrus things were to get weak and fall apart and the Messiah be the final emperor.

The condition was that God's people were to share with their neighbors their unfaithfulness and God's faithfulness and share the gospel with their neighbors in exile. As everyone went home after the exile the gospel would spread, people would make choices and either choose for or against the Messiah and the Messiah would end up setting up his reign.

The condition was not met, and by analogy the prophecies went to the kingdoms, and with the possibility that at the end of another 70 weeks of years (the reflection of the 70 weeks of years from David to the end of the exile) where the messiah would come and could have set up the kingdom. Some of what was predicted was fulfilled, other parts need to be fulfilled through analogy.

Yes,Miz3 you see the Babylon, Media-Persia, Greece and Rome, but you have ignored the feet of iron and clay, toes of iron and clay, the attempt for the toes to join together. You take part of the truth and use it against the rest of the truth. But there are many Biblical principles you are missing, just as Daniel 2 can expand from the 4 kings, expand Deuteronomy 4 from the exile to beyond, so the prophecies of Daniel can spread beyond the time of Christ.

[John317]

Like I already told you Jesus told Pilot that He was a King already and that His Kingdom already existed and was "not of this world"!

It is pretty clear! Whether you accept it is up to you!

Jesus was first a prophet and teacher.

Next Jesus was the Lamb of God that bears the sins of the world and is nailed to the cross as a sacrifice.

After that Christ became our High Priest, and this is what He still is today.

Some day soon Christ will lay off His High Priestly garment and put on His kingly robes and His crown, and then He will come as King of Kings and as Judge. He will then set up His visible kingdom.

Right now Jesus' kingdom is invisisible, and He rules only as people accept His laws and allow Him to rule in their hearts by faith. That is different from Christ ruling the nations with a rod of iron and His kingdom smashing the nations of the earth. That hasn't yet occurred.

[Kevin H]

Amen John. And had the gospel been spread into all the world, the Lord could have come before this.

[John317]

I agree that He could come before this. Just like God could have done things very differently if the literal nation of Israel had accepted Christ as their Messiah instead of giving Him over the Gentiles to kill.

[Lysimachus]

God's leading is a oneness of the opposites of God being in complete control and allowing for human free will. Usually we as people when we come to a set of opposites, instead of making a oneness out of them if possible, we tend to embrace the one and reject the other.

Technically Daniel 2 is four KINGS!!!!!! I know some commentaries want to leave room for the word to be translated Kingdoms, but they are only reading back into the texts assumptions about Daniel 2. No place else in the Bible or ancient world does the word used in Daniel 2 mean kingdoms, It always is a specific term for only individual kings.

Deuteronomy 4 gives two possible histories for Israel, one if they were faithful and one if they were unfaithful. There have in recent years been more studies by scholars of different faiths on this topic in this but here is an excellent article in the SDA Bible commentary that is a nice summery of what these newer and more scholarly studies are finding; The Role of Israel in Old Testament Prophecy. If they were unfaithful they would get different curses finally ending in exile and in the last days (i.e. the exile) if they were to call on God God would rescue them. This is fleshed out by other prophets but in a nutshell, in the Old Testament the idea of the exile gave to the Hebrew boys and girls the same pictures that the Sunday Law gives to the typical Adventist boys and girls. They were expecting the exile to end in a second great exodus lead by the Messiah.

Daniel 2 held to this eschatology. There were to be the 4 KINGS, and the book of Daniel mentions 4 kings: Nebuccadnezzar, Belshazar, Darius, and Cyrus; After Cyrus things were to get weak and fall apart and the Messiah be the final emperor.

The condition was that God's people were to share with their neighbors their unfaithfulness and God's faithfulness and share the gospel with their neighbors in exile. As everyone went home after the exile the gospel would spread, people would make choices and either choose for or against the Messiah and the Messiah would end up setting up his reign.

The condition was not met, and by analogy the prophecies went to the kingdoms, and with the possibility that at the end of another 70 weeks of years (the reflection of the 70 weeks of years from David to the end of the exile) where the messiah would come and could have set up the kingdom. Some of what was predicted was fulfilled, other parts need to be fulfilled through analogy.

Yes,Miz3 you see the Babylon, Media-Persia, Greece and Rome, but you have ignored the feet of iron and clay, toes of iron and clay, the attempt for the toes to join together. You take part of the truth and use it against the rest of the truth. But there are many Biblical principles you are missing, just as Daniel 2 can expand from the 4 kings, expand Deuteronomy 4 from the exile to beyond, so the prophecies of Daniel can spread beyond the time of Christ.

A good hardy amen to this post Kevin H!! Well articulated. Couldn't have said it better myself.

[ClubV12]

truth files says,

"I have about 40 in the study now along with knowledge of ancient and modern history."

Much study and still unable to come to an understanding of the truth. And people think "newbies" are at a disadvantage? Not so fast... I aint that smart, but I know what's truth and what aint, it doesn't take 40 years to figure it out.

Being "religious" for decades may well be a liability, not an assett.

[Lysimachus]

truth files says,

"I have about 40 in the study now along with knowledge of ancient and modern history."

Much study and still unable to come to an understanding of the truth. And people think "newbies" are at a disadvantage? Not so fast... I aint that smart, but I know what's truth and what aint, it doesn't take 40 years to figure it out.

Being "religious" for decades may well be a liability, not an assett.

Reminds me of 2 Tim. 3:7 - "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

The Disciples, who were fishermen, learned more on doctrine and Christ than ALL the Pharisees put together! =]

[cheddar]

So what you're saying is that we can't trust the word of God. Once we finally figure out what it's saying - well then it might happen or it might not.

Jesus said that heaven and earth would pass but not one jot or tittle would pass from the law till all be fulfilled and when he said this he was referring to the law and the prophets.

Not one person on this forum has explained how all 4 metals will be destroyed at the 1st or 2nd coming. It's been shown how the toes might be destroyed but that's it. All 4 metals are in place and destroyed when the stone hits the toes and this is exactly what we see in Revelation.

All thru Rev. we see a beast with 7 heads and 10 horns - if the focus were just the 4th beast it would be just 1 head and 10 horns. This beast (a combination of all 4 beasts in Dan. 7) is in place when the mark is set up, he blasphemes the tabernacle in heaven and all the world worships it.

I'm not saying that I have it all figured out but maybe this beast hasn't showed up yet.

[John317]

Not one person on this forum has explained how all 4 metals will be destroyed at the 1st or 2nd coming. It's been shown how the toes might be destroyed but that's it. All 4 metals are in place and destroyed when the stone hits the toes and this is exactly what we see in Revelation.

All four kingdoms will be destroyed and replaced by the kingdom of God at the second coming. The fourth kingdom, including the papal kingdom, is a composite of all four of those kingdoms. Also, don't forget that the peoples who made up those four kingdoms are still in existence, even though the first three no longer have an empire. The primary idea of Daniel 2 is that all human kindgoms will be destroyed at the second coming of Christ, and that is exactly what we see in Matt. 24, 1 & 2 Thess., and Revelation.

[Lysimachus]

Originally Posted By: cheddar

Not one person on this forum has explained how all 4 metals will be destroyed at the 1st or 2nd coming. It's been shown how the toes might be destroyed but that's it. All 4 metals are in place and destroyed when the stone hits the toes and this is exactly what we see in Revelation.

All four kingdoms will be destroyed and replaced by the kingdom of God at the second coming. The fourth kingdom, including the papal kingdom, is a composite of all four of those kingdoms. Also, don't forget that the peoples who made up those four kingdoms are still in existence, even though the first three no longer have an empire. The primary idea of Daniel 2 is that all human kindgoms will be destroyed at the second coming of Christ, and that is exactly what we see in Matt. 24, 1 & 2 Thess., and Revelation.

Well said John317! Sometimes I shake my head in disbelief as to why we even have to go through ALL this work trying to explain these basic things they should have already figured out from simple Adventist Revelation Seminar lectures, or from reading basic articles. It's like they are not interested in really studying our materials? They are just upset at the beliefs, but really don't want to have to hammer them out? Whatever it is, it is truly sad.

Professor Walter Veith, in his Total Onslaught series, did a superb job at explaining on how the religion of Babylon, Persia, Greece AND Rome can all be found in the religion of the Papacy. All the Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman symbols are there. The Papacy is a "composite" of all the ancient religious, stemming all the way back to Babylon and Nimrod!

Cheddar and miz3 tend to get "hung up" on an irrelevant arrangement of words. They get hung up on "they all crumble at the same time!". Yikes, GET THE POINT! Don't get CAUGHT UP on SILLY things like this!

Try to UNDERSTAND the point that is being made, do not get CAUGHT UP on this idea that "they must all crumble at the same time".

Those are little SIDE distractions the DEVIL implants in your minds so that you miss the spiritual THRUST of the message being presented.

The point is: at Christ's Second Coming, ALL the Kingdoms of this world will come to an end, FOR EVER. The entire system of Babylon (which is the Papacy) will crumble! Hence, the entire image crumbling aptly symbolizes the point, as Babylon starts with the Head of Gold.

[cheddar]

Here's some more words to get caught up on. Daniel identifies Nebuchadnezzar as the head of gold.

Pretty self explanatory - Nebuchadnezzar was dead at the 1st coming and really dead at the 2nd coming.

Maybe Nebuchadnezzar is a type of Satan (Isa. 14) and he's the head of gold and the rest of the image represents the kingdom he will establish in the last days. That would clearly fit with the whole image being destroyed at the 2nd coming.

Why is it that so many who are so loyal to Sister White's writings never talk about her vision of Satan's impersonation in the last days? This is the greatest deception of all time! and so much more significant than anything the RCC has done or ever will do.

The RCC will be a major player in the last days - any Sunday legislation that comes about they will definitely be at the forefront of but they are only a puppet while Satan is the puppet master.

[John317]

...Professor Walter Veith, in his Total Onslaught series, did a superb job at explaining on how the religion of Babylon, Persia, Greece AND Rome can all be found in the religion of the Papacy. All the Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman symbols are there. The Papacy is a "composite" of all the ancient religious, stemming all the way back to Babylon and Nimrod!

....The point is: at Christ's Second Coming, ALL the Kingdoms of this world will come to an end, FOR EVER. The entire system of Babylon (which is the Papacy) will crumble! Hence, the entire image crumbling aptly symbolizes the point, as Babylon starts with the Head of Gold.

What's really important to notice, too, is that Daniel pays more attention to, and writes more words about, the little-horn power than he does to all the other powers combined. The reason the little-horn power is the central focus is that he is fighting against God and against God's people. He directly attacks the truth of God.

This little-horn power/the man of lawlessness/antichrist is the papal system and has lasted now for about 1500 years. It is gaining in power and influence, and by the end, people will be amazed at the power of this institution to influence the world. There was a time when it seemed the papacy was a thing of the past, but during the last 20 years, it's shown the world that, together with the USA, it was strong enough to bring down an empire, the USSR.

[Truth Files]

"Reminds me of 2 Tim. 3:7 - "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

>Always hiding behind a shadow

>Maybe you are the one who ever learns, but never is able to come to the knowledge of the truth .... ?

>Zechariah 14?

[Lysimachus]

Here's some more words to get caught up on. Daniel identifies Nebuchadnezzar as the head of gold.

Pretty self explanatory - Nebuchadnezzar was dead at the 1st coming and really dead at the 2nd coming.

[Truth Files]

"I agree 100%. And yes, Walter Veith talks about this extensively. The Maitreya (the coming Cosmic Christ) has reported through his forerunner, Benjamin Creme, that he will take the crown of St. Peter.

There has been LOTS of "talk" about this subject. Satan will be the "full materialization", and "physical manifestation" of the "man of sin" in the last days. Lucifer will crown himself Pope, in the Vatican, and will perform wondrous miracles before the eyes of all the people!"

>All hobgoblin .... all of it

>Can't believe that the SDA has fallen for this nonsense

>Read here:

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Seventh-Day%20Adventist/walter_veith_heretic.htm

[miz3]

"Truth Files the only Book I have been reading is the Bible"

>How about addressing the items that I put forth to you when you said that Daniel 2:34-35 is the first coming of Jesus Christ?

>Your statement tells me that you are reading commentary from other sources .... you did not get this idea from the scriptures alone

>I would suggest dumping the theology of preterism/kingdom now influences and for you to return to the drawing board .... stick to the scriptures for a few years [i have about 40 in the study now along with knowledge of ancient and modern history] and ask the Lord to reveal the true meanings .... He will do this you know .... as long as you motives are pure, that you earnestly seek Him in the process, and that you are willing to spend the time .... there is no magic short cut

Thanks but no thanks! I will not join you!

By the way I am not reading commentary from anywhere! Just the Bible alone!

[miz3]

All historians agree that papal Rome emerged out of the ruins of the ancient pagan Roman Empire. Thomas Hobbes, English Historian, says this:

• If a man consider the origin of this great ecclesiastical dominion, he will easily perceive that the Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof. (Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, 457)

Some of you here might want to consider terminating arguing with miz3. Arguing with him is like beating a dead horse. You simply can't reason with him. Nothing you say will convince him. He is joined to his idols, leave him alone (Hosea 4:17)

Last time I checked, it is called the "Roman"....yes, one more time... "ROMAN Catholic Church". Last time I checked, the Pope borrowed the title "Pontifex Maximus" from the Roman Caesars -- meaning "greatest bridge-maker".

Last time I checked, the Popes reign in the same spot, the Capital of Rome, where the Caesars did.

But saying these things will go in one ear and out the other with miz3.

One more time: He is joined to his idols, leave him alone.

"All historians agree"! That is your statement. Don't you see anything wrong with this statement besides the obvious one that "NOT all historians agree"?

1. It is patently false that "ALL HISTORIANS" agree on anything historical!

2. The last time I checked historians were not Bible interpreters.

The reason you cannot "reason with me" is that I do not RECOGNIZE your Pagan Sources which you cite as proof of your position! I also do not recognize your fatal preconceived ideas that you are constantly twisting into the Scripture as additions to what the Scripture actually states.

The fact is the Roman Empire and the Papacy are two different entities period!

You think that because they share the "name Roman" that makes them the same entity! Just having the same name does not make them the same entity.

For example, you call yourself Lysimachus does that mean you are the same person/entity of the Seleucid Lysimachus? Of course not! You share the same name but you are clearly two different entities entirely! That is unless you are claiming that you and the Seleucid Lysimachus are indeed the same entity?

The absurdity of your argument is obvious! Very shallow thinking! Sloppy Biblical scholarship!