Daniel 11

[Overaged]

While Daniel 11 reveals the tactics of Satan in attacking Christ and God's people throughout history, it also shows us that the more Satan attacks, the greater the victories attained by Christ and His church.

As Ellen White wrote, "Persectuion served only to extend the truth, and the fanatcism which Satan endeavored to unite with it resulted in making more clear the contrast between the work of Satan and the work of God." (GC 196)

I believe she may have had Dan 11:32 in mind as she penned those words. The "application" of this scriptural principle is that today, now, we should also be experiencing signal victories in Jesus. If our experience today reflects victory in Jesus, we will always have something to say about Him when talking of AoD, regardless of how many of them we think there are. We will look at the coming troubles depicted in scriptures with faith and hope In Christ, and not emphasize so much the devils powers...

[Lysimachus]

Quote:

What the former Rome

did physically to the visible or earthly sanctuary, which was "the figure of the true" (Dan.

9:26, 27; Matt. 24:15), that the latter Rome has done spiritually to the invisible or

heavenly sanctuary that is in itself the true." Dan. 11:31; 12:11; 8:11, 13.

Now that is powerful.

It just blows my mind somethings just how genius A.T. Jones was. When you read his works, your jaw just drops wide-open---in amazement how he could write more profoundly and more professionally, and more clearly than the best scholars out there. He had such an ability to put concepts into words and help you visualize it.

[Overaged]

[Dr. Rich]

There are three "abominations of desolation":

1) When the Romans surrounded and destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD. It was a sign to God's people to flee the city.

2) The work of the pagan and papal phases of the little horn in casting down the truth of the gospel and Christ's work in the heavenly sanctuary.

3) When the national Sunday law is passed and the image to the beast is formed. This is a sign for God's people to leave the cities. {5 T 451}

While your attempt to make prophecy say what it does not say failed, your opinions all are just assumptions. There is only ONE Abomination of Desolation--and that will happen when Satan, as the 2nd beast of Rev. 13, causes the image of the beast to come alive. Period! Please don't fall for anything that can't be proven from the words of Jesus!

[Dr. Rich]

A.T. Jones caused havic with those who followed the words of Jesus because he preached the same gospel as did Paul. It's my opinion that the Adventist Church took the wrong turn at the 1888 meeting.

[Lysimachus]

Don't blame A.T. Jones' later "mishaps" as evidence against his former works while he was walking in the faith.

God used him mightily. Discouragement due to terrible mistreatment by many leading men contributed to his later apostasy. There is evidence does show that he most likely repented, however.

[Overaged]

Quote:

Daniel 11:45

And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

We can trace the prophecy of the 11th chapter of Daniel step by step to this last verse. As we see the divine predictions meeting their fulfillment in history, our faith is strengthened while we look ahead to this final accomplishment of God's prophetic word.

The "King Of The North" meets his end in this text. As we see the divine predictions meeting their fulfillment in history, our faith is strengthened in the final accomplishment of God's prophetic word. This is how I see Daniel, chapter 11. Note; it is predicted of the king of the north that "he shall come to his end, and none shall help him." Just how and when and where his end will come, we may watch with solemn interest, knowing that the hand of Providence guides the destiny of nations.

The hand of Providence guiding the nations, can also be seen in the holy writ of Daniel 11 as guiding individuals to the God-ordained destinies of eternal life. Note, Daniel 11:32

"They that do know their God shall be strong and do exploits." Those who forsake the book of the covenant, the Holy Scriptures, who think more of the decree of popes and the decisions of councils, or of themselves, than they do of the word of God--these shall he, the pope, corrupt by flatteries. And this includes some seventh-day Adventists. That is, they shall be led on in their partisan zeal for the pope by the bestowment of wealth, position, and honors. At the same time a people shall exist who know their God, and these shall be strong, and do exploits.

In the past; these were Christians who kept pure religion alive in the earth during the Dark Ages of papal tyranny, and performed marvelous acts of self-sacrifice and religious heroism in behalf of their faith. Prominent among these stand the Waldenses, the Albigenses, and the Huguenots.

Both now, and in the future; during that "temptation which comes upon the whole world," (Rev 3:10), these who "know their God;" and "do exploits" shall be seen showing and telling everyone they meet about the covenant relationship we can have with Jesus; the only remedy for our human hostilities, with it's promises of forgiveness, power to change, and a place amongst God's people, even in the midst of the fiercest storms of slander, persecutions and executions; all because of our faith.

The entire reference of the Bible prophecy in Daniel 11 is so obvious! When this good news about the kingdom has been carried in the power of the Spirit "throughout the whole world," then, and only then, "the end will come." (Mat 24:14).

Daniel 11 tells us how important it's prophecy is by way of "the abomination which makes desolate." (vs 31) This "abomination" should be seen to be that vast system of belief and practice, which for well over a thousand years has led people away from the Priestly Ministry of Jesus, depriving them of access to "The Prince of The Covenant;" (vs 22).

"The abomination which makes desolate" was still future IN CHRIST'S DAY, meaning that we can realize how that the message of Daniel 11, is ultimately the same as the message of Daniel 7 & 8 & 9. Notice I said "message;" not messages. In Daniel 11, God warns us that out of the secular empires of earth, a politico-religious entity would arise and 1) replace Christ's priestly ministry with a counterfeit Christian ministry, 2) and persecute the people who tried to maintain their faith in the true Christ, 3) and out of this "abomination;" Jesus will give signal victory, day by day, to those those who "know their God, and do exploits."

Today, as Adventists; I believe we stand at the end of the notable line of faithful witnesses, spread over the course of more than 2,000 years. Hundreds of pioneering expositors have preceded us. As Adventists, we may truly say that we are the recoverers and restorers of the soundest principles and applications of the most godly and learned scholars of the past, in this vital area of Biblical study in prophecy.

The white-robed ones who surround the throne of God are not composed of that company who were lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God, and who choose to drift with the current of the world rather than to breast the waves of opposition in defense of the faith. All who remain pure and uncorrupted from the spirit and influence prevailing at this time will have stern conflicts. They will come through great tribulation; they will wash their robes of character and make them white in the blood of the Lamb. These will sing the song of triumph in the kingdom of glory.

May we take the heart of the message of Daniel 11, into our hearts today; this I pray in Jesus' name.

[John317]

There are three "abominations of desolation":

1) When the Romans surrounded and destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD. It was a sign to God's people to flee the city.

2) The work of the pagan and papal phases of the little horn in casting down the truth of the gospel and Christ's work in the heavenly sanctuary.

3) When the national Sunday law is passed and the image to the beast is formed. This is a sign for God's people to leave the cities. {5 T 451}

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

While your attempt to make prophecy say what it does not say failed, your opinions all are just assumptions.There is only ONE Abomination of Desolation--and that will happen when Satan, as the 2nd beast of Rev. 13, causes the image of the beast to come alive.

Do you believe Satan will literally make a statue come alive and that this will be the only Abomination of Desolation? Why do you believe this? Why is making a statue come alive called "the Abomination of Desolation"?

I'm not giving my assumptions or opinions.

[15]So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),

{16} then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. {Matt. 24: 15, 16}

When did this take place? Wasn't it at the time the Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem and destroyed the city in 70 AD? And didn't Jesus Himself call it "the abomination of desolation"? Why did He call it this?

[John317]

A.T. Jones caused havic with those who followed the words of Jesus because he preached the same gospel as did Paul. It's my opinion that the Adventist Church took the wrong turn at the 1888 meeting.

It wasn't A.T. Jones who caused havoc; the havoc was caused by those who rejected what he and E. J. Waggoner were teaching in 1888-1895.

I agree that we took a wrong turn in 1888, but the wrong turn wasn't what you think it was. The wrong turn, again, was in our not fully accepting and practicing what those two men and Ellen White were teaching. As a church we still haven't, which is why we're still here.

[John317]

Lysimachus, I think you're right about A.T. Jones, and that's probably the reason Satan was determined to lead him astray under the influence of Dr. Kellogg. God sent warnings to him through Ellen White, but tragically Jones didn't accept them.

[Gordon1]

God sent warnings to him through Ellen White, but tragically Jones didn't accept them.

John, it's tragic for any to ignore God's warnings - even today when EGW's strong counsel is labeled extremism.

Alonzo T. Jones had an understanding that is matched by few.

[Lysimachus]

I think I'm going to buy the book, The Two Republics, by A.T. Jones. An 895 page MASTERPIECE!! :D

[Lysimachus]

Gordon1,

Here's the sources you were looking for:

Gregory of Tours confirms that the Visigoths embraced the principles of religious liberty. The Visigoth Agilan once admonished Gregory of Tours declaring:

• “You must not blaspheme against a faith which you yourself do not accept. You notice that we who do not believe the things which you believe nevertheless do not blaspheme against them. It is no crime for one set of people to believe in one doctrine and another set of people to believe in another. . . .” “Legem, quam non colis, blaspheme noli; nos vero quae creditis etsi non credimus, non tamen blasphemamus, quia non deputur crimini, si et illa et illa colantur. Sic enim vulgate sermon dicimus, non esse noxium, si inter gentilium aras st Dei ecclesiam quis transiens utraque veneriyur.” (Thorpe, L. Trans. Gregory of Tours - The History of the Franks (Harmondsworth, 1974), 309-10.)

The Catholic Church now had a powerful “heretical” Arian race largely in control of all of Gaul and Italy with a mutual ideology diametrically opposed to the government of the papacy.

As rightly stated by Rouche:

• “It could only be separated through the disappearance of one of the two religions, the one that mixed the State and the Church.” (Rouche, Michel. Clovis. Fayard, France, 1996, 322.)

Unfortunately, it was already decided for the Visigoths by the decisive battle of Vougle in 508 as Clovis defeated Alaric II and then reigned in the West. With Clovis’ Merovingian dynasty coming into power and his ascension to the Catholic Faith, Theodore the Great, the Arian King of Italy, decreed between the years 507-511 a most remarkable decree. This decree was honored by the Arians but was diametrically opposed to the principles and government of the Catholic Church:

The Letters of Cassiodorus

507 A.D. – 511 A.D

Book II – 27.

King Theodoric to all the Jews living in Genoa

• “The Jews are permitted to roof in the old walls of their synagogue, but they are not to enlarge it beyond its old borders, nor to add any kind of ornament, under pain of the Kings sharp displeasure; and this leave it granted on the understanding that it does not conflict with the thirty years ‘Statute of Limitations.’

  ‘Why do ye desire what ye ought to shun? In truth we give the permission which you craved, but we suitably blame the desire on your wandering minds. We cannot order a religion, because no one is forced to believe against his will.” (Cassiodorus, Magnus Aurelius, Hodgkin, Thomas, The Letters of Cassiodorus. London: Henry Frowde, 1886, 185-6.)

The above is an excerpt pulled from Chapter 5, entitled "Religious Liberty - The Best Kept Secret of the Dark Ages", from Heidi Heik's "A.D. 508 Source Book".

In a nutshell, he shows how this was a best kept secret in the Dark Ages. That the Arian Powers, despite some exceptions, generally held to the views of religious liberty. All that began change in A.D. 508, and more forcefully in 538.

[Dr. Rich]

It taks insight to see it I guess. What Jesus said in Matthew 24 came after he told them that the house if Israel had become desolite--that God was no longer there. Therefore, there was NO "holy place" when Jerusalem was destroyed--period! The only time this will ever happen in the future. These events take place in Jerusalem as the "Two Witnesses" testify to the world. This is the great delusion that Satan uses to make those of the world follow him and it ends up that Satan kills the two witnesses as the whole world rejoice over this--but in 3 and a half days, the two witnesses are taken up to heaven.

[Lysimachus]

Did you get the sources I gave above Gordon?

[Gordon1]

Did you get the sources I gave above Gordon?

Hi Marcos, thanks for these references. It appears the Arians were the leading Christians of the day, granting their enemies religious liberty.

I believe Jones states the Heruli, Vandals & the Ostrogoths were the three horns plucked up by the roots (Daniel 7:8,20,24) - plucked up by Rome because they were anti-Trinitarian. (This might be found in the Two Republics).

In essence, Arians were the early Protestant reformers.

If you come across the EGW sources for three Abominations of Desolation this would be worth a read too.

[Lysimachus]

Hi Marcos, thanks for these references. It appears the Arians were the leading Christians of the day, granting their enemies religious liberty.

I believe Jones states the Heruli, Vandals & the Ostrogoths were the three horns plucked up by the roots (Daniel 7:8,20,24) - plucked up by Rome because they were anti-Trinitarian. (This might be found in the Two Republics).

In essence, Arians were the early Protestant reformers.

If you come across the EGW sources for three Abominations of Desolation this would be worth a read too.

In Edwin de Kock's new masterpiece book, The Truth About 666 and the Story of the Great Apostasy, purchasable here, here, or here, new primary source evidence has revealed that many of these so called "Arians" were not "Arians" after all, but what Edwin terms more of a "semi-Arianism"--in other words, there is evidence that they did not believe Jesus was a created being, rather, that He was truly the Son of God, yet fully God. It is extremely difficult to prove that the "Arian" kingdoms were "Arian" in their beliefs. Such information only comes from Catholic sources, which, as evidence reveals, was based on smear campaigns. Evidence does reveal, however, that these "Arian" so-called powers kept the Sabbath--and there is good reason to believe this was one of the reasons these "Arian" powers were being exterminated.

In fact, here is a review on Edwin's book. I'd check it out:

http://biblelight.net/Publications%20by%20E.%20de%20Kock.pdf

The Truth About 666 book is 874 pages. I have read 230 pages so far, and feasting on every bit of it. The data is truly impressive.

There is a debate as to whether the "Heruli" fit the bill as one of the 3 plucked-up horns. Heidi Heik's, in his "A.D. 538 Source Book" argues some good reasons why the Visigoths fit the bill as the first horn that was plucked up and not the Heruli. This is based on a deep-word-study on what the term "plucked up" actually means...and he also argues that the Papacy had nothing to do with the extermination of the Heruli--rather, it was all Theodoric's (king of Ostrogoths) doing, and asked permission from Emperor Zeno of the east to destroy the Heruli. Furthermore, Heik's argues that the Heruli were not Arian (or Christian), but Pagan. There seems to be growing support now in Adventism that the 3 horns are the "Visigoths", the "Vandals", and the "Ostrogoths". Even Heinz Schaidinger, from Bogenhofen Seminary in Austria in his booklet, "Historical Confirmation of Prophetic Periods" from the Biblical Research Institute subscribes to this view.

Edwin de Kock, of course, does not go along with Heidi Heik's on the first horn being the Visigoths--despite the fact that Edwin quotes from Heik's books at times. I emailed Edwin and his reasons for the Heruli being the first of the 3 plucked horns, and asked him why he did not go along with Heik's. Edwin's reasons were not compelling enough for me to be convinced, but I understand where he's coming from. There is much more research that needs to be done in this area.

One will have to take out time to evaluate the primary sources before they judge for themselves. The primary sources are provided in the books mentioned. You can purchase them here. Heidi Heik's official website with all the primary downloadable sources can be found here: http://www.TheSourceHH.org

If Adventists want to have the tools to give an answer for the hope that is within them concerning these issues, they need to buy these books. Ellen White says that historians will try to pick our dates to pieces, and that we should research to nail these dates down.

God bless.

Marcos

[Gordon1]

Thanks Marcos. As I've read, Arius taught that Christ was Begotten of the Father, just as the Bible states. Some claim Arius taught that Christ was created, but this was more likely a rumour to discredit him & his fellow believers.

As you're showing here, Arius was a straight shooter:

• Sabbath Keeper

• Religious Liberty agent

• Son of God preacher

• Anti-Trinitarian

• Contended with Rome

A.T. Jones should be a good source for the three horns and I believe he includes a bibliography. Terry Hill (SDA) has researched Arius on his Adventist Pioneer site - see Councils & Creeds Section 7: http://theprophetstillspeaks.co.uk/SBDH.htm

[John317]

In essence, Arians were the early Protestant reformers.

Yet the Arians were wrong if they did not believe that Christ is God.

[Gordon1]

Yet the Arians were wrong when it comes to their beliefs regarding Christ's deity.

Yes John, victors write the history books and this was Rome's slur to discredit Arius. Rather, Arius taught that Christ was fully divine, the Only Begotten Son of God, just as your byline states.

Christ was not created, but brought forth by the Father in the days of eternity. (Proverbs 8:22-30; Micah 5:2)

[John317]

Fully divine or fully God?

Christ is fully God and fully man. Titus 2: 3 calls Him "our great God and Savior." The angels are also "divine," but they are not deity like Christ is. John 1: 1 makes it clear that the pre-existent Christ was God, having every attribute of deity that the Father has. He is the second person of the Godhead, as the Holy Spirit is the third and the Father is the first. As Ellen White said, "There are three living persons in the heavenly trio."

That's actually a very important part of the study of Daniel 8, 9, and 11. Only God can explain God to man, and only a man can represent man to God.

If you closely analyze Prov. 8, you will see that there's nothing in those verses which tells us that Christ was either created or had a beginning of life in any other way prior to coming to this earth. The terms used, "brought forth," "possessed," and "established," do not mean that Christ came out of the Father's being in some fashion. It's speaking, rather, of Christ's having been prepared for His work of salvation and representing God to the universe.

Micah 5: 2 isn't referring to Christ's "coming forth" out of God. Christ came forth out of heaven to save mankind. Notice the last part of the verse says Christ's origins were from the days of eternity. This same phrase "days of eternity" is also used with reference to Jehovah.

Micah 5:2

But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah,

who are too little to be among the clans of Judah,

from you shall come forth for me

one who is to be ruler in Israel,

whose origin is from of old,

from everlasting [lit. "days of eternity"].

[Gordon1]

Christ and the Father are separate persons.

Christ was the Son of God before creation, before Satan fell. God's dear Son. (see PP36)

Christ was the Son of God to Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 3:25.

Christ was brought forth in the days of eternity. (Proverbs 8:22-30, Micah 5:2)(PP36)

Christ is the Son of God. God is the Father of Christ.

Christ is our Intercessor with the Father, never the inverse.

Christ is the Lamb of God. The Father is not the Lamb of God.

Christ is the Anointed One, because the Father anointed His Son. (Acts 10:38)

The Father is not the Anointed One.

Christ calls us to the city of His God (Revelation 3:12)

At Bethlehem Christ became Son of God in a new sense (i.e for a second time)

Christ is subject to His Father, His God. These roles are NEVER reversed.

When time wraps up, Christ will be subject still. (1 Corinthians 15:28)

Arius had it right, along with the Adventist Pioneers.

[John317]

Christ and the Father are separate persons.

Christ was the Son of God before creation, before Satan fell. God's dear Son. (see PP36)

Sure, but what does "Son of God" mean? Does it mean Christ was "Son of God" in the same way people are "sons" of their father and mother?

Christ was and is "the eternal, self-existent Son."

There was never a time when He wasn't the Son of God. But He is also "self-existent." What is that? Only God is self-existent. It means He doesn't rely on anyone or anything for his existence. God is also eternal. Christ is eternal. That means God has no beginning and no ending. Christ as a man had an ending, but deity did not sink and die.

[Gordon1]

The English language of Proverbs 8 is strong evidence of Christ's origins in the days of eternity "before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth" (v. 25)

For this reason Ellen White used Proverbs 8 and Micah 5:2 to lay the foundation for the five book Conflict series, quoting these texts on the second page of Patriarchs & Prophets.

[John317]

At Bethlehem Christ became Son of God in a new sense (i.e for a second time)

Yes. And in what new sense? In the sense that God became His literal Father, His daddy. That means that Jesus as the Son of God had a beginning of His existence, which Christ as God did not have.