Antiochus IV and the Little Horn

[Truth Files]

Bible prophecy presents a revelation of the existence of the spirit world in addition to the material world of humans. These are angelic and include both those who serve the Lord and those who serve satan.

The primary example of this involves relationships between satan and his agents who are fallen angels.

These can operate through human kings like the Greek king Antiochus IV of the ancient past and the coming little horn [king] of the future who rule over human dominions like city/states, countries, nations, and empires. [Revelation 9:11, 12:9, 17:8-11]

The symbol of the horn indicates that the human king position has a satanic connection. Examples of these include Sargon, Nebuchadnezzar, Alexander the Great (great horn), Antiochus IV, and the little horn king of the northern Middle East at the time of the end of this present age.

Certain angelic creatures are often referred to as a "prince" [principality] in contrast with the human leader defined as a king. There are God's angelic princes like Michael the archangel who is the protector of the nation of Israel [Daniel 12:1] .... and there are those who follow satan who is himself an angelic prince.

Abaddon-Apollyon is the angelic king of the abyss who in turn rules over others like the prince of Persia and the prince of Grecia [this "prince" rules over the 7 human kingdoms of the Middle East, past and future, for satan [Revelation 17:8]. He will be the angelic "prince that shall come" out of the abyss at the end of this present age.

He will rule directly through and in the coming little horn [human king of the northern Middle East], and will also rule over the 10 other contemporary horns that represent the 10 human kings of his divided kingdom at the time of the end

The people of this angelic "prince that shall come" were not the Romans during the first century, but will be his human followers during the coming tribulation period.

He is satan's christ [anti-christ .... meaning "against" Christ] operating directly through the little horn at the time of the end. [Daniel 9:26]

It is his followers who will invade Israel during the coming 70th week decreed for the nation. The Roman Empire is not included in the scope of the prophetic visions, is not represented by the iron legs of Daniel's image, and was not Daniel's fourth beast.

There is a reference in Daniel 11:30 to the ships of "Chittim" [Rome] interfering with military movements by Antiochus, the ancient Greek king of the north in the Middle East who ruled Syrio/Babylonia at the latter end of the Greek presence.

This naval incursion was carried out by the Romans stationed at Cyprus. Secular history records such an incident that involved a threat directed at Antiochus.

He was conducting military operations against the Greeks ruling the south and was told to end his expansion adventures and leave the area.

The Roman officer drew a circle around Antiochus in the sand and demanded that he give his agreement to cease military operations before he stepped out of the circle.

This humiliated him in front of his men and as he returned to the north he vented his rage by attacking Israel. He had pigs sacrificed on the altar of the temple and placed a statue of Zeus on the temple mount.

Daniel's visions include much detail about the interactions and wars between the Greek kings of the north and those of the south in the Middle East with the remnant of Israelites positioned geographically between these two dominions.

The northern division of Alexander's empire was the one that portrays the track of satanic involvement [the 5th head of the beast] through its kings.

Visions of the prophets are generally focused on the northern sector of the Middle East in relationship to Israel. This area will be satan's base of operations at the time of the end. [Daniel 8:9-10, 11:36-45]

Antiochus is the subject of the visions leading up to the end of northern Greek dominance. This king was heavily influenced by the first beast of Revelation, Abaddon-Apollyon, and his subordinated angelic prince of Grecia [another fallen angelic prince] specifically with his designs against Israel.

It is important to understand that Antiochus was not the end time little horn viewed by Daniel in other parts of his visions. Antiochus was one of the last Greek kings who held the fifth king position related to the beast's fifth head [dominion .... kingdom of the Middle East].

Another controversial item involves the breach in Daniel's visions between the end of Greek rule and the appearance of the little horn at the time of the end.

A careful study of the historical record of the career of Antiochus will verify that all of the verses recording his rule, from Daniel 11:21 through 11:35, should be applied to him. Daniel is told that the rest of the vision is for the time of the end. [Daniel 11:36-45; 12:7]

Some try to apply a number of previous verses up to the end of verse 35 to the little horn of verse 36 and then are looking for those events to take place as part of the time of the end.

Verses 21 through 35 are actually a very accurate account of Antiochus and his political career foretold in advance. Skeptics claim that these things must have been written after the fact by someone other that Daniel because of their accuracy.

Antiochus obtained his position as king by trickery and deception. He had a few very significant political supporters who made it possible for him to seize the larger northern division of Alexander's empire without direct rights to the throne.

He eliminated his political rivals with the support of the large armies of his political backers and then subsequently raised armies of his own to support his designs on additional Middle Eastern territory.

He also deceived the remnant of Israel and the Greek kings of the south by intrigue [forming agreements and breaking them] and subsequent hostile military actions.

His ambitions were to consolidate the Middle Eastern segment of the Greek Empire under his rule. He was never able to conquer the south [Egypt], but this will be accomplished by the little horn at the time of the end. [Daniel 11:40]

He made common cause with Hellenized Jews who were supportive of Greek rule and had the high priest murdered [ruler of the covenant]. He also subjugated Israel to Greek customs and laws including desecration of the holy places.

He attacked and killed thousands of Jews who were opposed to Greek culture and would not forsake their covenant with the Lord.

His actions were different than those of his predecessors including his father Antiochus the Great. These rulers were often more benevolent and allowed the Jews a good measure of autonomy.

Some of the Israelite remnant who refused to forsake their covenant with the Lord revolted against Greek rule toward the end of the Greek presence.

The Maccabees succeeded in regaining their independence and restored the temple and related worship that was desecrated by Antiochus. They had support from Rome against their Greek rulers, but eventually became subjected to Roman rule.

Daniel is told at the end of verse 35 that full and permanent restoration for his people would take place, but not until the time appointed which will occur at the end of this present age. [Daniel 11:35]

A similar situation will exist during the 70th week when Israel will be attacked, invaded, and occupied by the coming little horn who is the king of verse 11:36-45; 12:7.

Israel's victory will be the result of the intervention of the Lord to rescue the believing remnant part of the nation. [Micah 5]

The last and final king of the north will be Abaddon-Apollyon [the first beast of Revelation .... 9:11; 17:8], a fallen angelic who does satan's bidding on the earth, operating in the human little horn. He will be allowed to actually incarnate the little horn and persecute Israel during the 70th week decreed for the nation at the end of this present age.

Antiochus raised armies and attacked the Greeks ruling the south [Egypt] three times but was never able to conquer and add the south to his kingdom. Egypt will be conquered by the little horn at "the time appointed", which is still yet future.

There is a breach in the scope of Daniel's visions at the end of verse 35 which ends with the rule of Antiochus. Verse 36 should be applied to the little horn who will rule the Middle East at the end of this present age.

The little horn's activities will be similar, but will not include all of the things that Antiochus did and will include other things that Antiochus did not do.

Abaddon-Apollyon was active and influencing Antiochus. Glimpses of this truth can be seen when the visions seem to switch from the human king to this angelic master prince and his higher role as the satanic enemy of the Lord. [Daniel 8:9-12]

Some define this as a double reference considering only the human side of the vision which includes both Antiochus and the little horn.

In fact, the common denominator is Abaddon-Apollyon because of his involvement and objectives with the activities of both kings.

There is no double reference between the little horn and Antiochus. These are two different human kings. Abaddon-Apollyon is the same angelic prince.

Abaddon-Apollyon will continue when he is released from the abyss at the time of the end to influence and ultimately incarnate the little horn during the 70th week.

All of the remaining verses of Daniel 11 starting with verse 36 and including all of chapter 12 apply to the 70th week.

Alexander was the first Greek king of Abaddon's fifth head [dominion] and Antiochus was the last Greek king to hold the position recorded in the scope of Bible prophecy related to Greek domination.

Daniel sees the little horn immediately after he is shown the division of Alexander's empire. [Daniel 8:9-12; 8:23-25]

He is told that the divided empire would not be ruled by Alexander's posterity and would be ruled by others even after Greek dominance. [Daniel 8:18-25]

The others will be the people of the little horn who will rule the Middle East during the time of the end. If we are close to the beginning of the time of the end, these would be the current Islamic occupiers of the Middle East.

There are indications of where the geographical locations of the inhabitants will be and their ancestral links.

Psalms 83 is an example of this that includes land areas adjacent and close to the land of Israel. The other greater extents of his future Middle Eastern kingdom are described in Ezekiel 38.

If we are close to the time of the end then the current Islamic occupiers of the Middle East would be suspect. The student of Bible prophecy should consider this possibility.

The little horn is the subject of the coming 70th week who will first rule the sixth smaller head (dominion, kingdom) of the beast which he will then expand to form the seventh and final divided kingdom with 10 other human kings. He is the king of fierce countenance described in Daniel 8:23-25 and Daniel 11:36-45; 12:7.

[ClubV12]

Oh, yet another version of the false 70 week discourse. Like we don't have enough threads covering this subject already.

SPAM away....

[John317]

:-)

[Lysimachus]

Don't worry ClubV12, I will spam him right back. In his own thread that is.

[Lysimachus]

Antiochus Epiphanes

George Burnside

These few facts overthrow this pagan, modernistic theory that tries to make Daniel a mere historian and not a prophet of God.

To avoid and obscure the clear light of prophecy, the theory was advanced that one of the Syrian kings, Antiochus Epiphanes was the little horn of both Daniel 7 and 8. Let us consider the facts.

LITTLE HORN OF DANIEL 7, IS IT ROMAN OR SYRIAN?

1. "Little horn" rose out of ten divisions of Rome. Therefore it is Roman. Daniel 7:7, 8.

2. To say this prophecy applied to Antiochus is to teach all was fulfilled before Christ and thus Daniel was

merely a historian and not a prophet.

3. This view is held by the modernist schools which reject Daniel as a prophet.

4. Christ upheld Daniel the prophet.

5. According to Jerome and Bishop Thomas Newman the Antiochus view was originated by Porphyry (Died AD 304). Porphyry was a pagan whose one aim was to stop the advance of Christianity. His theory was not to expound Daniel but to discredit and deny Daniel as a prophet. He did not try to confirm the Bible, but to deny it's divine origin. It was a pagan attack to hold back Christianity's inroads into paganism. Daniel therefore, according to this theory, was not a prophet but merely an historian. It was the amazing accuracy of the sure word of prophecy and its uncanny fulfillment that made Porphyry claim Daniel was written after the events of Antiochus, hence was not a prophecy at all. Such is the origin of this Goddishonoring and truth opposing theory.

6. "Greece" is pictured as one animal, a goat, with four horns. These were the four generals of Alexander and were not separate kingdoms. Alexander the Great's coffin is to be seen in the Istanbul museum. Goat's heads are carved in the stone sarcophagus, as the goat was the symbol of Greece. Daniel 8:5 11, 21.

7. Antiochus did not rise after the "ten kings" Daniel 7:6. Antiochus was only one of the Syrian kings and not a new kingdom.

8. Antiochus was not "diverse" from his predecessors Daniel 7:7, 24

9. It is impossible to find three kings whom Antiochus plucked up. Daniel 7:8, 24

10. He was not "more stout than his fellows" Daniel 7:20. His father, not he was called Antiochus the Great.

11. His persecutions did not last even 3.5 literal years.

12. The kingdom following the Grecian was Roman, not the everlasting Kingdom of the Saints. Daniel 7:27.

13. Antiochus did not continue until the Judgment before the Ancient of Days. Daniel 7:9-14, 26, 27. These few facts overthrow this pagan, modernistic theory that tries to make Daniel a mere historian and not a prophet of God. The vain attempts to make Antiochus the little horn of Daniel 8 fail likewise.

14. Antiochus was not a horn or a kingdom. A Horn of a beast is never taken for a single person, but signifies a new kingdom. The "four horns" of the He-goat were "four kingdoms" (Daniel 8:22). Antiochus was merely one of a line of kings and not a separate kingdom. Hence he was merely a part of one of the horns. Antiochus reigned over one of the four horns and "the little horn" was a fifth power. Therefore, Antiochus was not the "little horn". Rome was "the little horn.”

15. Antiochus certainly did not "wax exceeding great". He was not even the strongest of the Seleucid section of Alexander's kingdom. Antiochus was weak and was tributary to the Romans.

16. Antiochus certainly did not wax "exceeding great towards the south" Daniel 8:9. His march to the south" to Egypt was stopped by the mere word of an unarmed Roman officer. When Antiochus said he would think about the Roman's demand the Roman drew a circle in the sand around Antiochus and told him he would do his thinking within that circle. Antiochus turned and retreated. He was frightened out of Egypt by an unarmed representative of Rome. He was later routed by the Jews. To apply this prophecy of a world power a super power which waxed "exceeding great towards the south" to this cruel but weak creature appears to be the height of folly and is advanced merely to avoid or explain away this divine prophecy.

17. His push to the east resulted in his death. He certainly did not wax "exceeding great" in that direction.

It is very apparent that the "little horn" of either Daniel 7 and 8 does not apply to Antiochus Epiphanes. The facts do not fit the specifications of Prophecy. Applying the prophecy to Antiochus was a poor pagan's attempt to avoid his God required responsibilities and to excuse his rejection of truth. He tried to discredit the divine predictions of the one whom Christ called "Daniel the Prophet". Daniel was not a mere historian as this truth-rejector would imply.

The finger of Daniel’s prophecy points with infallible accuracy to the awful Roman apostasy that climaxed in the Papacy who cast down the truth, wears out the saints of the Most High, and continues through the "time of the end" and will continue to the "end of time".

Antiochus Epiphanes was one of the weakest of the kings of Syria. He gave himself the name “Epiphanes" = "The Illustrious". Prideaux, the historian says that this title could not be more alien to his character. The Syrian people called him “Epimanes" - "The Madman".

The prophecy points to not only a persecuting power that would “cast down some to the host and of the stars to the ground and stamped upon them?” But he also "magnified himself even to the Prince of the host" (Christ) Daniel 8:10, 11. "He shall stand up against the Prince of princes" Christ. Daniel 8:25.

This Rome did but Antiochus died 164 years before Christ. Antiochus just does not meet the specifications of prophecy.

If a power meets some of the specifications but not all of them, then it must be rejected.

[Lysimachus]

Futurists, like Preterists apply the time period of 2300 evenings and mornings in Daniel 8:14 to literal days, or “1150 evening and morning sacrifices” (which ever feels more convenient—as long as it undermines Historicism). A pity to think that both Preterists and Futurists alike adopt this detrimental interpretation of Daniel 8 which originated from the pagan philosopher, Porphyry of Tyre (A.D. 234—c. .305), whose foremost aim was to terminate the advancement of Christianity. In order to try and prove that Daniel was not a prophet, it was Porphyry, according to Jerome and Bishop Thomas Newman, who originated the view that Antiochus was the Little Horn of Daniel 8. Through his pagan attack, He proposed that Daniel was merely a historian, and that he wrote the book of Daniel after the events of Antiochus. Both Futurists and Preterists also deny that the 2300 day period covers more than just the desecrating power of the Little Horn. A close analysis of the Hebrew in Daniel 8 reveals that the 2300 day period encompasses not just the desecrating power of the Little Horn, but also the Ram (Persia), the Goat (Greece), the 4 notable horns (four divisions of Alexander’s empire), AND the Little Horn! With this in mind, it matters not how one wishes to try and make Antiochus fit the Little Horn. The 2300 day period [known as the “mareh”] encompasses the TOTALITY of the vision [chazon] in Daniel 8. This automatically forces the 2300 days to be years, and these 2300 years end in the year 1844.

Also keep in mind that the 70 Jewish scribes who translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek, making the Septuagint, unanimously qualified the “evening-mornings” by using the Greek word “days”—--the term “evening-mornings” was used by Daniel because he was using artistic “sanctuary language” concerning the lamps that burned “always”, or “daily” in the sanctuary (See for example: Exodus 27:20, 21; Leviticus 24:2,3). The Hebrew word for “evening” is EREB, and for “morning”, BOQER. In other words “ereb-boqer”. Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31, all testify that an “evening” (ereb) and a “morning” (boqer) = a day. Dispensationalists have tried to cut this argument down by saying that “evening-morning” represents “evening and morning sacrifices or burnt offerings”, and therefore, since there was a sacrifice or burnt offering in the evening and in the morning, that means we must cut the 2300 in half to 1150 days. Then they try to fit 1150 days into Antiochus IV Epiphanies’ desecration of the Jewish temple. The problem is, according to Maccabees, Antiochus desecrated the temple for exactly 3 years to the day, or 1095 days. Therefore, Antiochus (along with a HOST of other reasons) does not fulfill this prophecy. It’s 55 days off. And finally, ALL temple sacrifices and burnt offerings were NEVER offered from “evening and morning”, but rather “MORNING AND EVENING” (see 1 Chron 16:40; 2 Chron 2:4; 13:11; 31:3; 2 Kings 16:15; and Ezra 3:3) In that order! The fact that Daniel used “evenings and mornings” in Daniel 8:14 is significant, and lends credence to the fact that Daniel meant full days, as a day is from evening to morning, not morning to evening according to Genesis 1. And since 2300 literal days = 6.4 years, and Antiochus only desecrated the temple for 3 years, we have no choice but to apply the 2300 evening-mornings to years, and since the “70 weeks” of Daniel 9:24 are “cut off” from the 2300 years of 8:14, that means the 2300 years end in 1844 if we begin in 457 B.C. I've worked with the math hundreds of times, and it is VERY precise! Not to mention that in Daniel 8, the context demands that the 2300 year period stretch to the “time of the end” [8:17,19]

[Lysimachus]

Just think folks, those poor Adventists who come in this thread to learn the "truth", so that maybe they might leave the Adventist faith, will end up getting "duped" in the end, and stick with the Adventist faith.

How tragic. >.<

And to think of ALL that work that "Truth" Files invested? Shame.

[Lysimachus]

Uriah Smith on Antiochus (Daniel and The Revelation, pp. 171-178

"VERSE 9. And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. 10. And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them. 11. Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of this sanctuary was cast down. 12. And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced and prospered." {1897 UrS, DAR 171.2}

A third power is here introduced into the prophecy. In the explanation which the angel gave to Daniel of these symbols, this one is not described in language so definite as that concerning Medo-Persia and Grecia. Hence a flood of wild conjecture is at once let loose. Had not the angel, in language which cannot be misunderstood, stated that Medo-Persia and Grecia were denoted by the ram and the he-goat, it is impossible to tell what applications men would have given us of those symbols. Probably they would have applied them to anything and everything but the right objects. Leave men a moment to their own judgment in the interpretation of prophecy, and we immediately have the most sublime exhibitions of human fancy. {1897 UrS, DAR 172.1}

There are two leading applications of the symbol now under consideration, which are all that need be noticed in these brief thoughts. The first is that the "little horn" here introduced denotes the Syrian king, Antiochus Epiphanes; the second, that it denotes the Roman power. It is an easy matter to test the claims of these two positions. {1897 UrS, DAR 172.2}

I. Does it mean Antiochus? If so, this king must fulfil the specifications of the prophecy? If he does not fulfil them, the application cannot be made to him. The little horn came out of one of the four horns of the goat. It was then a separate power, existing independently of, and distinct from, any of the horns of the goat. Was Antiochus such a power? {1897 UrS, DAR 172.3}

1. Who was Antiochus? From the time that Seleucus made himself king over the Syrian portion of Alexander's empire, thus constituting the Syrian horn of the goat, until that country was conquered by the Romans, twenty-six kings ruled in succession over that territory. The eighth of these, in order, was Antiochus Epiphanes. Antiochus, then, was simply one of the twenty-six kings who constituted the Syrian horn of the goat. He was, for the time being, that horn. Hence he could not be at the same time a separate and independent power, or another and remarkable horn, as the little horn was. {1897 UrS, DAR 172.4}

2. If it were proper to apply the little horn to any one of these twenty-six Syrian kings, it should certainly be applied to the most powerful and illustrious of them all; but Antiochus Epiphanes did not by any means sustain this character. Although he took the name Epiphanes, that is, The Illustrious, he was illustrious only in name; for nothing, says Prideaux on the authority of Polybius, Livy, and Diodorus Siculus, could be more alien to his true character; for, on account of his vile and extravagant folly, some thinking him a fool and others a madman, they changed his name of Epiphanes, "The Illustrious," into Epimanes, "The Madman." {1897 UrS, DAR 174.1}

3. Antiochus the Great, the father of Epiphanes, being terribly defeated in a war with the Romans, was enabled to procure peace only by the payment of a prodigious sum of money, and the surrender of a portion of his territory; and, as a pledge that he would faithfully adhere to the terms of the treaty, he was obliged go give hostages, among whom was this very Epiphanes, his son, who was carried to Rome. The Romans ever after maintained this ascendency. {1897 UrS, DAR 174.2}

4. The little horn waxed exceeding great; but this Antiochus did not wax exceeding great; on the contrary, he did not enlarge his dominion, except by some temporary conquests in Egypt, which he immediately relinquished when the Romans took the part of Ptolemy, and commanded him to desist from his designs in that quarter. The rage of his disappointed ambition he vented upon the unoffending Jews. {1897 UrS, DAR 174.3}

5. The little horn, in comparison with the powers that preceded it, was exceeding great. Persia is simply called great, though it reigned over a hundred and twenty-seven provinces. Est.1:1. Grecia, being more extensive still, is called very great. Now the little horn, which waxed exceeding great, must surpass them both. How absurd, then, to apply this to Antiochus, who was obliged to abandon Egypt at the dictation of the Romans, to whom he paid enormous sums of money as tribute. The Religious Encyclopedia gives us this item of his history: "Finding his resources exhausted, he resolved to go into Persia to levy tribute, and collect large sums which he had agreed to pay the Romans." It cannot take long for any one to decide the question which was the greater power, - the one which evacuated Egypt, or the one which commanded that evacuation; the one which exacted tribute, or the one which was compelled to pay it. {1897 UrS, DAR 174.4}

6. The little horn was to stand up against the Prince of princes. The Prince of princes here means, beyond controversy, Jesus Christ. Dan.9:25; Acts.3:15; Rev.1:5. But Antiochus died one hundred and sixty-four years before our Lord was born. The prophecy cannot, therefore, apply to him; for he does not fulfil the specifications in one single particular. The question may then be asked how any one has ever come to apply it to him. We answer, Romanists take that view to avoid the application of the prophecy to themselves; and many Protestants follow them, in order to oppose the doctrine that the second advent of Christ is now at hand. {1897 UrS, DAR 175.1}

II. It has been an easy matter to show that the little horn does not denote Antiochus. It will be just as easy to show that it does denote Rome. {1897 UrS, DAR 175.2}

1. The field of vision here is substantially the same as that covered by Nebuchadnezzar's image of chapter 2, and Daniel's vision of chapter 7. And in both these prophetic delineations we have found that the power which succeeded Grecia as the fourth great power, was Rome. The only natural inference would be that the little horn, the power which in this vision succeeds Grecia as an "exceeding great" power, is also Rome. {1897 UrS, DAR 175.3}

2. The little horn comes forth from one of the horns of the goat. How, it may be asked, can this be true of Rome? It is unnecessary to remind the reader that earthly governments are not introduced into prophecy till they become in some way connected with the people of God. Rome became connected with the Jews, the people of God at that time, by the famous Jewish League, B.C.161. 1Maccabees8; Josephus's Antiquities, book 12, chap.10, sec.6; Prideaux, Vol.II, p.166. But seven years before this, that is, in B.C.168, Rome had conquered Macedonia, and made that country a part of its empire. Rome is therefore introduced into prophecy just as, from the conquered Macedonian horn of the goat, it is going forth to new conquests in other directions. It therefore appeared to the prophet, or may be properly spoken of in this prophecy, as coming forth from one of the horns of the goat. {1897 UrS, DAR 175.4}

3. The little horn waxed great toward the south. This was true of Rome. Egypt was made a province of the Roman empire B.C.30, and continued such for some centuries. {1897 UrS, DAR 176.1}

4. The little horn waxed great toward the east. This also was true of Rome. Rome conquered Syria B.C.65, and made it a province. {1897 UrS, DAR 176.2}

5. The little horn waxed great toward the pleasant land. So did Rome. Judea is called the pleasant land in many scriptures. The Romans made it a province of their empire, B.C.63, and eventually destroyed the city and the temple, and scattered the Jews over the face of the whole earth. {1897 UrS, DAR 176.3}

6. The little horn waxed great even to the host of heaven. Rome did this also. The host of heaven, when used in a symbolic sense in reference to events transpiring upon the earth, must denote persons of illustrious character or exalted position. The great red dragon (Rev.12:4) is said to have cast down a third part of the stars of heaven to the ground. The dragon is there interpreted to symbolize pagan Rome, and the stars it cast to the ground were Jewish rulers. Evidently it is the same power and the same work that is here brought to view, which again makes it necessary to apply this growing horn to Rome. {1897 UrS, DAR 176.4}

7. The little horn magnified himself even to the Prince of the host. Rome alone did this. In the interpretation (verse 25) this is called standing up against the Prince of princes. How clear an allusion to the crucifixion of our Lord under the jurisdiction of the Romans. {1897 UrS, DAR 176.5}

8. By the little horn the daily sacrifice was taken away. This little horn must be understood to symbolize Rome in its entire history including its two phases, pagan and papal. These two phases are elsewhere spoken of as the "daily" (sacrifice is a supplied word) and the "transgression of desolation;" the daily (desolation) signifying the pagan form, and the transgression of desolation, the papal. (See on verse 13.) In the actions ascribed to this power, sometimes one form is spoken of, sometimes the other. "By him" (the papal form) "the daily" (the pagan form) "was taken away." Pagan Rome was remodeled into papal Rome. And the place of his sanctuary, or worship, the city of Rome, was cast down. The seat of government was removed by Constantine in A.D.330 to Constantinople. This same transaction is brought to view in Rev.13:2, where it is said that the dragon, pagan Rome, gave to the beast, papal Rome, his seat, the city of Rome. {1897 UrS, DAR 176.6}

9. A host was given him (the little horn) against the daily. The barbarians that subverted the Roman empire in the changes, attritions, and transformations of those times, became converts to the Catholic faith, and the instruments of the dethronement of their former religion. Though conquering Rome politically, they were themselves vanquished religiously by the theology of Rome, and became the perpetrators of the same empire in another phase. And this was brought about by reason of "transgression;" that is, by the working of the mystery of iniquity. The papacy is the most cunningly contrived, false ecclesiastical system ever devised; and it may be called a system of iniquity because it has committed its abominations and practiced its orgies of superstition in the garb, and under the pretense, of pure and undefiled religion. {1897 UrS, DAR 177.1}

10. The little horn cast the truth to the ground, and practiced and prospered. This describes, in few words, the work and career of the papacy. The truth is by it hideously caricatured; it is loaded with traditions; it is turned into mummery and superstition; it is cast down and obscured. {1897 UrS, DAR 177.2}

And this antichristian power has "practiced," - practiced its deceptions upon the people, practiced its schemes of cunning to carry out its own ends and aggrandize its own power. {1897 UrS, DAR 177.3}

And it has "prospered." It has made war with the saints, and prevailed against them. It has run its alloted career, and is soon to be broken without hand, to be given to the burning flame, and to perish in the consuming glories of the second appearing of our Lord. {1897 UrS, DAR 177.4}

Rome meets all the specifications of the prophecy. No other power does meet them. Hence Rome, and no other, is the power in question. And while the descriptions given in the word of God of the character of this monstrous system are fully met, the prophecies of its baleful history have been most strikingly and accurately fulfilled. {1897 UrS, DAR 177.5}

----------------------------------------------------

Some tough cookies to swallow here Truth Files! Inconvenient truths that you don't want to have to square up to. Better meet them head on and grapple with them if you truly desire to live up to your online screen name.

[Lysimachus]

Uriah Smith later wrote these points again in different words. These are worthy of consideration as well. Keep note that I do not agree with Uriah Smith concerning the Daily, and the stars that were cast down, but everything else is top notch:

Then Shall The Sanctuary Be Cleansed - SYMBOL OF THE LITTLE HORN EXPLAINED - Uriah Smith

"And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power; and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand." Verses 23-25. {1898 UrS, LUJ 154.1}

This little horn is unquestionably a symbol of the power that succeeded Grecia in the dominion of the world. And this, according to the prophecies of Daniel 2 and 7, was Rome. Some special reasons must be given if we are to take the ground that this prophecy does not run parallel with the others, and from the time of its beginning bring to view the same universal kingdoms. In this case, of course, this little horn would represent Rome. {1898 UrS, LUJ 154.2}

The view is however taken by some that this prophecy is not parallel with Daniel 2 and 7, and that the little horn of this chapter does not symbolize Rome; but the good reasons upon which such a view ought to rest are not forthcoming. Romanists, to avoid the application of this part of the prophecy to the Roman power, which includes as one of its phases, the papacy, endeavor to shift the application from Rome to Antiochus Epiphanes. And this lead of the papists has been followed by the majority of Protestants, thoughtlessly, it would seem, or for some reason of their own. This view cannot be correct; for the reasons which show that this applies to Rome are more clear and numerous than those even which determine the application of the other symbols. {1898 UrS, LUJ 155.1}

This little horn of Daniel 8 does not symbolize Antiochus Epiphanes, but it does symbolize Rome. To prove this is easy. If people would only treat interpretations of prophecy as they treat bank-bills, that is, compare them with the detector to see if they are genuine, there would be no trouble. The only wonder is that any one could ever have supposed the application to Antiochus to be correct. {1898 UrS, LUJ 155.2}

The proposition here affirmed, then, is that the little horn of Daniel 8 does not symbolize Antiochus, but does symbolize Rome, because,- {1898 UrS, LUJ 155.3}

1. This horn came out of one of the four horns of the goat. Verse 9. It was therefore another horn separate and distinct from any of the four. One of these four horns, as we have seen, was the kingdom of Syria,founded by Seleucus, from whom sprung the famous line of kings known in history as the "Seleucidae." Of these there were twenty-six, in order as follows:- {1898 UrS, LUJ 155.4}

(1) Seleucus Nicator, (2) Antiochus Soter, (3) Antiochus Theus, (4) Seleucus Callinicus, (5) Seleucus Ceraunus, (6) Antiochus the Great, (7) Seleucus Philopater, (8) Antiochus Epiphanes, (9) Antiochus Eupator, (10) Demetrius Soter, (11) Alexander Bala, (12) Demetrius Nicator, (13) Antiochus Theos, (14) Antiochus Sidetes, (15) Zebia, (16) Seleucus, son of Nicator, (17) Antiochus Grypus, (18) Antiochus the Cyzicenian, (19) Seleucus, the son of Grypus, (20) Antiochus Eusebes, (21) Antiochus, second son of Grypus, (22) Philip, third son of Grypus, (23) Demetrius Eucheres, (24) Antiochus Dionysius, (25) Tigranes, (26) Antiochus Asiaticus, who was the last of the Seleucidae, and who, after an insignificant reign of four years, was driven from his dominions by Pompey, the Roman, B.C. 65, and Syria made a Roman province. {1898 UrS, LUJ 156.1}

It will thus be seen that Antiochus Epiphanes was simply one of the twenty-six kings who constituted the Syrian horn of the goat. He was for the time being that horn; hence he could not be at the same time a separate and independent power, or another remarkable horn, as the little horn was. {1898 UrS, LUJ 156.2}

Rome was such a separate horn, and, from the standpoint of this prophecy, came out of one of the horns of the goat, thus answering exactly to the prophetic description. Why it was represented as coming out of one of the horns of the goat, will be clearly seen from the following facts: In the year 161 B.C., Rome became connected with the Jews by the famous Jewish League (1 Maccabees 8; "Josephus's Antiquities," b. xii, chap. X, sec. 6; Prideaux, vol. ii, p. 166). Nations are mentioned in prophecy when their history becomes interwoven with that of God's people. Therefore in the year B.C. 161, the conquering legions of the Roman power came into the prophet's view. But just seven years before this, B.C. 168, Rome had conquered Macedonia (one of the four horns of the goat), adding it to its empire. The prophet was viewing the horns of the goat, and when Rome had made the Macedonian horn a part of itself, and seven years later came into the field of the prophet"s vision, by its league with the Jews, he would of course speak of it, from this point of view, as coming forth from that horn. And as if coming from that horn, the prophet beholds it from that point pursuing its triumphant career. {1898 UrS, LUJ 156.3}

2. Were we to apply the little horn to any one of these twenty-six Syrian kings, it should be to the most illustrious and powerful one of them all. But this was not Antiochus Epiphanes. For historians inform us that his name, "Epiphanes," the "Illustrious," was changed to "Epimanes," the "fool," on account of his vile and extravagant folly. Antiochus the Great was perhaps the most famous of the Syrian kings. {1898 UrS, LUJ 157.1}

The little horn cannot apply to Antiochus, but must signify the Roman power, because,- {1898 UrS, LUJ 157.2}

3. This little horn, in comparison with the preceding kingdoms, Media and Persia, waxed "exceeding great." There is in the prophecy a regularly increasing gradation of power: great, very great, exceeding great. Applying the little horn to Antiochus, the following result is presented:

(1.) "Great," Persia. True. (2.) "Very great," Grecia. True. (3.) Exceeding great," Antiochus. Nonsense! {1898 UrS, LUJ 157.3}

The Persian Empire is simply called "great," though it ruled "from India even unto Ethiopia, over an hundred and twenty and seven provinces." Grecia, still more extensive and powerful, is called "very great." Then comes the power in question, which is called "exceeding great." Was Antiochus great in comparison with Alexander, who conquered the world? or with the Romans, who conquered vastly more than all of Alexander's dominions? The kingdom of Antiochus was only a portion of the empire ruled by the goat. Is a part more than the whole? Of the relation between Antiochus and the Romans, the Religious Encyclopedia says: "Finding his resources exhausted, he [Antiochus] resolved to go into Persia to levy tributes, and collect large sums which he had agreed to pay the Romans." {1898 UrS, LUJ 157.4}

Can any king be said to have waxed exceeding great, when he left his kingdom no larger than he found it? But Sir Isaac Newton testifies that Antiochus did not enlarge his dominions. He made some temporary conquests in Egypt, but immediately relinquished them when the Romans took the part of Ptolemy and commanded him to give them up. {1898 UrS, LUJ 158.1}

It surely cannot take any one long to decide which was the greater power, the one which evacuated Egypt or the one which commanded that evacuation; the one compelled to pay tribute, or the one to whom he was compelled to pay it. One was Antiochus; the other was Rome. With Rome as the third member of the series, we have this result: 1. "Great," Persia. True. 2. "Very great," Grecia. True. 3. "Exceeding great," Rome. More emphatically true than either or both the others. {1898 UrS, LUJ 158.2}

4. The little horn was to stand up against the Prince of princes, by which title, without doubt, our Lord is meant. But Antiochus died one hundred and sixty four years before Christ was born. There was a power, however, which did stand up against the Saviour. Rome, in the days of our Lord, was in the zenith of its glory. And Rome, in the person of Herod, endeavored to destroy Jesus, when an infant. Subsequently, when Pilate was its mouthpiece in Judea, Rome, in obedience to the frenzied clamor of apostate Jews, nailed him to the cross. {1898 UrS, LUJ 158.3}

The same work is attributed to the great red dragon of Revelation 12, a symbol referring so evidently to Rome that there is no ground to dispute the application. {1898 UrS, LUJ 159.1}

Antiochus answers not one specification of the prophecy; and here we may therefore dismiss him. But, for a more full elucidation of the prophecy, we may further say of its application to Rome:- {1898 UrS, LUJ 159.2}

5. This horn was "little" at first. So was Rome, but it "waxed," or grew, "exceeding great" in three several directions. What better terms could be used to describe the course of that power which from a small beginning rose to be the mistress of the world? {1898 UrS, LUJ 159.3}

6. It gathered dominion toward the south. Egypt was made a province of the Roman Empire B.C. 30, and continued such for over six centuries. {1898 UrS, LUJ 159.4}

7. It marched its conquering legions toward the east. Rome subjugated Syria B.C. 65, and made it a province of the empire. {1898 UrS, LUJ 159.5}

8. It set its face toward the pleasant land. Judea is so called in many scriptures. Ps.106:24; Zech.7:14; etc. First by a league of assistance and friendship, the Romans took under their influence the holy land and people. They subsequently made Judea a Roman province B.C. 63, and finally destroyed the city of Jerusalem, A.D. 70, burned their beautiful temple with fire, and scattered the Jews over the face of the whole earth to be gathered no more till time shall end. {1898 UrS, LUJ 159.6}

9. It waxed great even to the host of heaven. The "host of heaven," used in a symbolic sense in reference to earthly scenes, must denote persons of illustrious character or exalted position. The great red dragon (Rev.12:4), pagan Rome, is said to have cast down a third part of the stars of heaven to the ground. This is the same power as the little horn under consideration, and that passage in Revelation refers to the same work; namely, the acts of the Romans in oppressing the Jews and depriving them of their rulers. {1898 UrS, LUJ 159.7}

10. By him the daily (not daily "sacrifice," as our translators have supplied, for it has no reference to the Jewish sacrifices, but daily "desolation," which is paganism) was taken away, and the transgression of desolation, the papacy, was set up. Chapter 11:31. Rome, and Rome alone, did this. While Rome was the ruling power in the world, a most singular revolution took place, - the religion of the empire was changed from pagan to Christian; that is, to that corrupted form of Christianity known as the papacy. And the place where paganism had long had "its sanctuary," Rome, with its Pantheon, or temple of all the gods, was "cast down," or degraded to the second rank, by the removal of the seat of government by Constantine, to Constantinople, in A.D. 330. So in Rev.13:2, the dragon, pagan Rome, gave to the beast, papal Rome, his seat, the city of Rome, and great authority. {1898 UrS, LUJ 160.1}

11. An host was given him against the daily. The prophet now views it from the standpoint of its spiritual character. The nations that flocked to the standard of the papacy, turned from that desolating religion called "the daily," which was paganism. The barbarians that subverted the Roman Empire became converts to that nominal Christianity before which they were thus brought face to face, and were soon transformed into willing instruments whereby their former religion, paganism, was dethroned. No other power has in any respect fulfilled this prophecy. {1898 UrS, LUJ 160.2}

161

PICTURE AND TEXT

12. In the interpretation (verse 23) it is called "a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentences." Such was emphatically Rome, with its warlike paraphernalia, and its strange language which the Jews did not understand. Moses used similar language, referring, as all agree, to the Romans. Deut.28:49,50. {1898 UrS, LUJ 161.1}

13. It was to stand up in the latter time of their kingdom, when the dominion of the four horns of the goat was drawing to an end. It was at that very time that Rome appeared. {1898 UrS, LUJ 161.2}

162

14. It was to destroy wonderfully. Hear all opposing powers, which it so rudely overthrew, testify, Thus did Rome. {1898 UrS, LUJ 162.1}

15. Rome (in its papal form) has destroyed the mighty and holy people, the people of God, more than all other powers combined. A many-tongued voice from the blood of more than fifty million martyrs, goes up to testify against it. {1898 UrS, LUJ 162.2}

16. And it has (through popery) "practised," - practised its deceptions upon the people, and its schemes of cunning among the nations, to gain its own ends, and aggrandize its power. {1898 UrS, LUJ 162.3}

17. And it has "prospered." It has made war with the saints, and worn them out, and prevailed against them. {1898 UrS, LUJ 162.4}

18. It has run its allotted career, and is to be "broken without hand." Verse 25. How clear a reference is this expression to the stone cut out without hand which is to smite the image upon its feet and dash it to pieces. So the papacy is soon to perish in the consuming glories of the second coming of our Lord. {1898 UrS, LUJ 162.5}

Thus Rome fulfils all the specifications of the prophecy. No other kingdom meets even one. Rome is the power in question. No other can be. {1898 UrS, LUJ 162.6}

In view of all these facts, if any one still affirms that Antiochus was the little horn, or if he even hesitates to admit its application to Rome, all one can do for such a person is to take him by the hand, and exclaim, with the deepest commiseration for his unfortunate condition, "Non compos mentis. Farewell." {1898 UrS, LUJ 162.7}

The bearing of the point here made upon the conclusion of the prophecy, will soon appear. {1898 UrS, LUJ 162.8}

[Kevin H]

While there are some similarities between the discription of the little horn and Antiochus, there are a lot of differnces: For example he came from one of the 4 horns while the little horn comes from one of the four winds. And he comes from the opposit direction than the little horn comes from.

What is amazing is how the Favian Emperors of Rome fit the discription. There were 10 emperors and they uprooted 3 of them. They came from one of the four winds of heaven from the direction that Daniel prophecyed. Titus destroyed the temple and Jerusalem and his brother Domination exiled John to Patmos where he could live and hear about the members of his churchs being martered.

[Truth Files]

The Satan's beast little horn [a king of the northern Middle East] will rise in the same ancient geographical region that Antiochus IV ruled .... Syrio/Babylonis, a division of Alexander's broke Asian holdings [not Rome]

[Daniel 7;7-25; 8:8-9; 11:1-4; 11:36-45; 12:7]

The exact career of Antiochus IV [Daniel 11:21-35]

The coming little horn at the time of the end of this present age .... the time appointed [Daniel 11:36-45; 12:7]

The ancient Roman Empire is not seen in these visions

[Lysimachus]

The Satan's beast little horn [a king of the northern Middle East] will rise in the same ancient geographical region that Antiochus IV ruled .... Syrio/Babylonis, a division of Alexander's broke Asian holdings [not Rome]

[Daniel 7;7-25; 8:8-9; 11:1-4; 11:36-45; 12:7]

The exact career of Antiochus IV [Daniel 11:21-35]

The coming little horn at the time of the end of this present age .... the time appointed [Daniel 11:36-45; 12:7]

The ancient Roman Empire is not seen in these visions

It doesn't matter how much you try to make Antiochus fit the prophecies, he fails on several accounts as listed above. But let's say he failed on just the 2300/1150 alone (which he does). Even if he met every specification of the prophecy, and failed on just this one alone, he must be disqualified.

God doesn't miss a lick. Rome meets every single specification.

The 2300 days can only be interpreted as years, as it is encompassing the totality of the "chazon", which begins with the Ram. The "mareh" (vision of the evening-morning) encompasses the totality of the chazon, which covers the ram, the goat, the great horn, the 4 horns, and the little horns.

There is no way you are going to squeeze the ram (Greece), the goat (Medo-Persia), the great horn (Macedonia/Alexander), the 4 horns (4 divisions of Alexander's empire), and the little horn that came from one of the four winds of heaven into 6.4 or 3 years!

I'm sorry, but the Bible requires you to fit all these empires within the 2300 time frame, and it just ain't gonna work by interpreting them as literal days!

[Truth Files]

"God doesn't miss a lick. Rome meets every single specification."

>Like I said, Daniel 11:21-35 is Antiochus IV .... 11:36-45; 12:7 is the little horn of the time of the end appointed

>And Rome did not start out as two opposing kingdoms, one north and one south of Israel [Daniel 2:33] [the two iron legs ... the little horn will come from the northern leg of iron] .... these two kingdoms of the Middle East are still a future development to come in the Middle East [Daniel 11:40]

The little horn's confederated kingdom will include all of the Middle East [Daniel 2:40-43; 7:7-25; 11:36-45; 12:7]

>Antiochus IV [king of the north, bronze thigh] never conquered Egypt [king of the south, bronze thigh]

>The little horn, king of the north of the time of the end will do it .... this little horn will come from his place out of the north [Daniel 8:9] .... and he is called the "Assyrian" in Micah 5:5-6

..... this king is not a Pope from Europe

>I think EGW missed the lick

[Lysimachus]

"God doesn't miss a lick. Rome meets every single specification."

>Like I said, Daniel 11:21-35 is Antiochus IV .... 11:36-45; 12:7 is the little horn of the time of the end appointed

>And Rome did not start out as two opposing kingdoms, one north and one south of Israel [the two iron legs] .... these two kingdoms of the Middle East are still a future development to come in the Middle East [Daniel 11:40]

[Truth Files]

"Where does it say that the Little Horn started out as two opposing kingdoms?"

>He does not start out as two opposing kingdoms

>His is the king of the northern iron leg at the time of the end

>The king of the south pushes at him .... and he defeats him and adds Egypt to his Middle Eastern holdings [Daniel 11:40]

Daniel's image presents this picture:

1 Head of gold

[neo-Babylon]

2 Arms of Silver

[Medo - Persian]

1 Chest of Silver

[greater Persian]

1 Bronze belly

[Alexander's Asian holdings]

Alexander's kingdom divided:

2 Bronze thighs

[syrio/Babylonia - Egypt]

At the time of the end:

2 Legs of Iron

[Northern little horn [Daniel 8:9] - Egypt]

1 Divided Kingdom of Iron and clay

[Little horn's confederated kingdom with 10 other kings]

[Kevin H]

I hope I get time to write here, I need to do some things. But we need to use the principles of exegeses and analogy. It is very important for us to read the chapter in the SDA Bible Commentary "The Role of Israel In Bible Prophecy." as well as study the key in Deuteronomy 4 and the cycles in Leviticus and Deuteronomy (the similarities and the differences between the 2 cycles) also what would be useful is if you can get a hold of Henri Frankfort's book "Before Philosophy"

The exile could have been the last days ending in a glorious second exodus lead by the Messiah. Daniel 2 has 4 kings and the book of Daniel has 4 kings: Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Darius and Cyrus. Daniel 7 and 8 starts to re-apply from individual kings to kingdoms.

Daniel 8 was given the year that included the day that was 2300 literal days from the fall of Babylon. (and 1150 literal days from business as usual). In Daniel 9 the 2300 days were connected to the 70 weeks of years, which started on the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, which we have independent archaeological conformation from 2 other sources, the Elephantine papyri and the Samaritan papyri for coming into effect on the Day of Atonement 456 BC.

If you look at the dates of Ezekiel 38 an 39 you find a time period that if you add them up you have a 2310 day prophecy. Now if you subtract the 10 days from the first day of the year to the day of Atonement you have another 2300 day prophecy, and mixed with Daniel 9-12 you could see what WOULD have happened IF Jesus was accepted when he came, and the 2300 days could have been the last 2300 days of the 70 years.

Daniel's prophecies were directly pointing to two places: First how the exile could have been the last days, and second a reapplication on returning back to the land in a lackluster exodus for another 490 years of land theology, where IF they were faithful and IF they accepted Jesus when he came Daniel's prophecies WOULD have been fulfilled not with a second coming but Jesus setting up the kingdom after his resurrection.

Now like with the Hebrews when they first got to the edges of the promised land and sent out the 12 spys but the people were afraid to cross, so went back into the wilderness for 40 years then the choice to cross given to another generation, so Daniel's prophecies for the exile to be the last days were reapplied to the end of another 70 weeks of years period (From David's anointing to the end of the exile was 70 weeks of years, with things that could have taken place the 2300 days from the third year of Belshazzar to the fall of Babylon) and then reapplied to a return to the land in a lackluster exodus but again the issue on the last week of years and the last 2300 days. Now unlike the 70 weeks of years which was connected to literal years, the term for the 2300 days is 2300 evenings-mornings, or cycles and not limited to a specific literal time but to any of the Deuteronomy cycles (which would mean 2300 days, 2300 months, or 2300 years). Joachim of Fiore, in the Middle East on the crusades and there learned about the Biblical cycles which lead to it pointing us to the mid 1800's. (there may still be an application to the last 2300 literal days of earths history, but if that was to be the case the Holy Spirit will reveal it to us when it is time. Let's not run a head of him. but become firm in the truth for our day)

I'm sorry but Antiochus did come from the opposite direction of from where Daniel predicted the little horn to come from. Neither the 2300 nor the 1150 days really fit him, and he came from one of the horns not from the winds (The text said that there were four horns [with horns being written in the masculine tense] going towards the four winds of heaven [with the word winds being written in a feminine tense] and out of one of them [with the word them also being written in the feminine tense] thus the little horn comes from one of the four winds from the North EAST of Jerusalem, and Antiochus came from one of the horns from the North EAST. And does not fit either of the 2 major time periods that Daniel focus on: The end of the 70 weeks of years from David to the end of the exile, where the Messiah could have come and set up the kingdom, or the end of the reapplied 70 weeks of years to where the Messiah could have set up the kingdom.

Once again Jesus was not accepted, we needed a second coming, and so we need to draw further analogies from Daniel's exegeses and this is how we notice the Flavian Emperors and the Holy Roman Empire with Papal supremacy and 1844 and pointing us to things such as global heating and globalism, genetic soy problems and other issues we are starting to face as we see the toes attempting to join together. As we are faithful into studying into these periods if there is further light the Holy Spirit will reveal it to us when the time is right.

[Kevin H]

Exegeses of Daniel 2:

Gold: Nebuchadnezzar

Silver:Belshazzar

Brass: Darius

Iron:Cyrus

Feet of Iron and Clay: weakening of the empire,

Toes of Iron and Clay: breaking up of the kingdom

Attempt to unite saving the empire but ending up in total Chaos

The stone setting up the kingdom of God.

Analogy of Daniel 2 based on Daniel 9-12 and Ezekiel

Gold: Babylon

Silver: Medio-Persia

Brass: Greece brakes up into 4 horns going to the 4 winds of heaven

Iron: Rome, coming from one of the 4 winds of heaven traveling south east to get to Jerusalem

and events that could have happened in the life of Jesus (some did some didn't due to Jesus not being accepted) and the setting up of the Kingdom.

Further analogy based on the principles of analogy and studying Daniel and Revelation.

Gold: Babylon

Silver: Medio-Persia

Brass: Greece

Iron: Rome

Feet of Iron and Clay: A church state (clay is what God forms but here the clay is formed by the political state instead of God) thus the Holy Roman Empire including Papal Supremicy

Toes of Iron and Clay: No world empire, independent nations, some more clay like (freedom, American Revolution) others more Iron like (communinism, the French revolution, naziism, and other more oppressive nations) and religious plurality as we have the freedom to worship according to the dictates of our conscience.

Attemmpt for the toes to join together: Globalism

Utter chaos

The second coming!!!

[miz3]

Quote:

In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon, Daniel had a dream, and visions passed through his mind as he was lying on his bed. He wrote down the substance of his dream.

2 Daniel said: “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me were the four winds of heaven churning up the great sea. 3 Four great beasts, each different from the others, came up out of the sea.

4 “The first was like a lion, and it had the wings of an eagle. I watched until its wings were torn off and it was lifted from the ground so that it stood on two feet like a man, and the heart of a man was given to it.

5 “And there before me was a second beast, which looked like a bear. It was raised up on one of its sides, and it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. It was told, ‘Get up and eat your fill of flesh!’

6 “After that, I looked, and there before me was another beast, one that looked like a leopard. And on its back it had four wings like those of a bird. This beast had four heads, and it was given authority to rule.

7 “After that, in my vision at night I looked, and there before me was a fourth beast—terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. It was different from all the former beasts, and it had ten horns.

8 “While I was thinking about the horns, there before me was another horn, a little one, which came up among them; and three of the first horns were uprooted before it. This horn had eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth that spoke boastfully."

Daniel 7:1-8.

Notice:

1. The LITTLE HORN comes from the Fourth Beast! That would be Rome and only Rome!

2. This beast had ten horns! FACT!

3. The LITTLE HORN came from the Roman Empire! FACT!

4. The LITTLE HORN replaced three horns. FACT!

5. The question is which three horns did the LITTLE HORN uproot?

6. The Bible gives the answer in verse eight. The LITTLE HORN replaced "three of the first horns". FACT!

7. Who are the "three of the first horns"?

When you have the answer to that you will know who the LITTLE HORN actually uprooted!

Surely you big brains can figure that one out?

[Truth Files]

I think your little brain just bit the dust

The little horn [a human king] will come from the north .... north of Israel [Daniel 8:9 [the vectors given place him in the north]; 11:36]

Here he is again: [Joel 2:20; Micah 5:5-6]

No Roman or Pope fits the descriptions given and neither can be construed to be the "Assyrian"

Here he is again: [Ezekiel 39:15]

Rome was not, and Europe is not north of Israel .... ever look at a map of the world?

The interpretation of the visions of the Bible prophets is not for the novice .... your statements tell me that you are speaking from ignorance and full of pride

Ask yourself this .... what am I doing and what is my purpose?

[miz3]

I think your little brain just bit the dust

The little horn [a human king] will come from the north .... north of Israel [Daniel 8:9 [the vectors given place him in the north]; 11:36]

Here he is again: [Joel 2:20; Micah 5:5-6]

No Roman or Pope fits the descriptions given and neither can be construed to be the "Assyrian"

Here he is again: [Ezekiel 39:15]

Rome was not, and Europe is not north of Israel .... ever look at a map of the world?

The interpretation of the visions of the Bible prophets is not for the novice .... your statements tell me that you are speaking from ignorance and full of pride

Ask yourself this .... what am I doing and what is my purpose?

[Truth Files]

Correct scriptures .... wrong interpretation

..... you are way off course

This little horn has no moorings in the ancient Roman Empire [political or Papal]

.... not named is prophetic scripture and not in reality [you are speculating and inserting your idea]

Rome is in the dust bin of history never to rise again .... and the Pope is a joke today, a mere figurehead and leader of a dying apostate "church" .... the RCC is on the skids today and Europe is being inundates by the adherents of Islam]

He is the "Assyrian" who will come out of the northern Middle East at the time of the end of this present age [Micah 5:5-6]

Do you have any knowledge of geographical location?

And it is this little horn and the 10 other kings [horns] who will destroy the "great city" of MBG in one day at the time of the end [Revelation 17:16-18; 18:1-21] .... explain this to me

And it is this same little horn and the 10 other king [horns] who will challenge the Lord at Armageddon at the time of the end, and the Lord will destroy them [Revelation 17:14; 19:11-21] .... explain this to me

[miz3]

Correct scriptures .... wrong interpretation

..... you are way off course

This little horn has no moorings in the ancient Roman Empire [political or Papal]

.... not named is prophetic scripture and not in reality [you are speculating and inserting your idea]

Rome is in the dust bin of history never to rise again .... and the Pope is a joke today, a mere figurehead and leader of a dying apostate "church" .... the RCC is on the skids today and Europe is being inundates by the adherents of Islam]

He is the "Assyrian" who will come out of the northern Middle East at the time of the end of this present age [Micah 5:5-6]

Do you have any knowledge of geographical location?

And it is this little horn and the 10 other kings [horns] who will destroy the "great city" of MBG in one day at the time of the end [Revelation 17:16-18; 18:1-21] .... explain this to me

And it is this same little horn and the 10 other king [horns] who will challenge the Lord at Armageddon at the time of the end, and the Lord will destroy them [Revelation 17:14; 19:11-21] .... explain this to me

Did I say it was the Pope?

NO! NO! NO!

I never said the LITTLE HORN was the Pope!

In fact the LITTLE HORN is NOT THE POPE!

It cannot be the Pope because the Pope never was a king of the Roman Empire! The Pope became prominent only after the Roman Empire had fizzled!

[Truth Files]

"In fact the LITTLE HORN is NOT THE POPE!"

>Well at least you have moved passed EGW's SDA definition

.... so tell me who is the little horn according to scripture, where will he arise and what will he do

>Keep in your mind that this little horn is the same as the first beast of Revelation [this beast [Revelation 9:11; 11:7; 13:1-4; 17:8-14] will possess and become the little horn and who will confederate the 10 other kings who will rule with him]

>Note the symbolic trappings of this beast in Revelation 13:1-2 .... Daniel has the same identical description of this angelic beast's ancient Middle Eastern rule [Daniel 7:4-6] .... no Rome in this composite [Neo-Babylon [lion], Persia [bear], and Grecia leopard]]

>This beast did not rule over the Roman empire which came after the first three .... but he will come out of the abyss at the time of the end to Rule the Middle East again [Daniel 2:40-43; 7:7-8]

>Satan [the dragon] is the one behind this beast in the little horn [Revelation 13:1-4]

>All of this is included in the prophetic scriptures in many different visions

>Find them, list them, and study them [all of them can be found] .... if you cannot I will

.... also, I would like your explanation of the two items that I requested above

[Kevin H]

Mrs. White was affirming how God had lead us and pointed us towards the future, just because there are a bunch of Adventists who are not willing to move but set up camp where the pioneers have fallen asleep does not give you the right to classify Mrs. White with the tradionalists. She goes beyond them.

The Papacy is a part of the 5th section, the 5th head of the beast of Revelation 13. Rome was the legs of iron and clay, or the 4th head of Revelation 13. We are in the cross over between the 6th head, the deadly wound with the 10 horns and crowns on the horns instead of on a head, or in Daniel the toes, and the 7th head, the deadly wound beng healed, the apptmpt for the toes to unite that will end in total chaos because they will not cleave one to another, as we see them attempting to cleave through globalism. We no longer have real Republicans and real Democrats, one party in office just keeps carrying on the globalism work that the previous party was starting with only a few outward trappings of who the parties use to be. The Republicans use to be the party of the billionares and the Democrats of the working people. Today the Republicans are the party of big oil and the Democrats of the big banks.

However Daniel in exegeses was pointing us to first how the world could have ended with the exile, then second how the world could have ended had Jesus been accepted, and through analogy how to get through history through the 7 periods: Babylon, Medio-Persia, Greece, Rome, Holy Roman Empire (Including the role of the Papacy), the deadly wound, and the deadly wound being healed. Hold to the old landmarks to see where we are going (however, don't hold so tightly to them that you can move on with history).

Antiochus got people intersted in Daniel again, and there may be a couple of ideas there that people wrote about Antiochus that later got edited into the text, however Daniel was not talking about Antiochus (nor directly about the Flavian emperors or the papacy directly although can be applied to both of them by analogy). We need to move beyond the pope being the all in all and you need to move beyond seeing Daniel as conserned about Antiochus. Becareful that your name is not the first two words of a 5 word sentence.

There are events happening today in our daily life that Daniel can be applied to. The papacy was one mile stone in history and looking at the different mile stones we can better prepare for what is happening, and Antiochus is only a detour to not study Daniel in the context of what he was really conserned about. Once again, for exegeses Daniel 1-6 is very focused on the exile being the last days to end with the messiah bringing the Hebrews home in a second great exodus. Daniel 7 and 8 still holds out that hope but is becoming more open to the idea that they were not finishing the work and that God would have to lead us back into the wilderness again for another generation to return to jordan with the chance to cross into the promised land, and Daniel 9-12 is how they could prepare for the messiah and what would have happened if they had accepted Jesus, with again principles that could be reapplied to the future if he is not accepted.

[miz3]

Whatever KevinH.

I don't think Daniel and Revelation have crossover beasts and symbols!

You cannot use Revelation to help you understand Daniel and visa versa!

Who is the LITTLE HORN?

He is one of the Roman Empires guys who up staged three other guys!

Remember NO YEAR/DAY stuff can be part of any of these prophecies! All our interpretations must conform to that proviso or they are auto false!