The Little Horn--More

[TrevorL]

Greetings again The Wanderer,

2 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

What I am looking for is why you say this. What is your reference points for pulling these dates/events from? And how do they make The Catholic Church out to be "the little horn" of Bible prophecy?

Looking at the items that you have mentioned, what should be abundantly clear is that the little horn arises out of one of the ten subdivisions of the Roman Empire and then becomes possessor of three of these subdivisions. Justinian was the Emperor of Constantinople, and during AD 529-533 he proclaimed the bishop of Rome as Universal Bishop. 1260 years later, in 1789-93 the National Assembly of Revolutionary France passed legislation directed to the limiting the power and authority of the Catholic Church. In AD 608-610 Phocas issued the decree pronouncing the Pope as head of all the churches. 1260 years later in 1868-1870, the last remnant of temporal power was taken from Pope Pius when the revolutionaries under Garibaldi finally occupied Rome, and made it the capital of a united Italy. Again I ask, what is your alternative fulfilment of these and other details?

 

Kind regards

Trevor

[TrevorL]

Greetings again The Wanderer,

8 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

Have you considered the possibility that it wont be just one church that will stand behind said identifiers of "the little horn?

 

8 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

The above quote from my post of 15 hrs ago is ONE of my "alternative" view points on this. 

I believe that the details are mainly fulfilled in the RCC. I also believe that many of the Churches will  support the RCC in the opposition to Christ when he returns.

8 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

I remain disappointed that while you have "answered" my questions, I am not seeing the info I was wondering about. That might be my fault tho for not explaining myself better. You gave us some names and dates; but what I am very interested in is book, page number, etc so that the wider-context of said citations can be reviewed as to relevance and accuracy.

My resources are fairly extensive as I have been a hoarder / collector of books, notes and magazines over many years. These are not usually in the public domain, but some are electronic. One set of notes from 1973 suggests a number of other dates on the rise of the RCC and corresponding decline 1260 years later. As well as AD533 and AD608-610 he adds AD 549-554, 590 and 600 on page 61 of his Daniel notes (printed in USA). I could copy this detail if you want. I have checked two other sets of notes printed in Australia, and these have similar details. I have a book with similar detail. I have not checked my numerous magazines specifically on the above dates. But I have been reading a series of magazines from 1864, and the 1868 magazines were anticipating that significant events would occur soon regarding the demise of the Papacy. Out of all my resources, I cannot remember any that did not clearly identify the fourth beast as the Roman Empire and the little horn as the Papacy.

Kind regards Trevor

 

 

[JoeMo]

From the slide above:

"... it is proper to inquire carefully, How do we know that this is truth?"  I agree wholeheartedly.  And the one and only real source of truth for believers is The Bible - not anything from commentators, inspired writers, etc.  For me, if I can't reconcile it from scripture, I doubt it's authenticity.  Don't necessarily reject it out of hand, but neither do I accept it as "truth".

Then there's this tricky thing about how I interpret the scripture I read.  I could interpret a particular verse one way while others see it differently.  THAT'S the part thats hard to reconcile. (not to mention the fact that most of us read scripture as translated from the original languages rather than from the original languages).  That's one reason I don't see the papacy as the only candidate for the "little horn" or "sea beast".  A candidate - yes (maybe) but the sole candidate?  Absolutely not.  Other candidates have been identified in previous posts.

[B/W Photodude]

On 1/2/2019 at 7:13 AM, TrevorL said:

I asked if you have another suggestion of a power that fulfils the details of Daniel 7. Also would you like to identify when the ten kings will fight against the Lamb Revelation 17:12-14? Is this before, during or after Armageddon?

My study of Armageddon leads me to an entirely different understanding. I tend to think many who study prophecy spend too much time seeing war, as in blood shed and armed conflicts by military forces. I do not see Armageddon as a physical war. So, no "ten" kings. (Actually, there are only seven and three were destroyed and removed from the earth.)

So, here is my understanding. One must start start even at the name Armageddon. Armageddon is a transliteration error of the name Har Megiddo. Har (meaning "mountain") Megiddo is also known as Mt. Carmel.  You may remember Mt Carmel as the mountain where Elijah met Ahab, the priests of Baal, and people of Israel. His famous question there to those assembled was, "How long halt ye between two opinions?"

While everyone has their opinion personal "Armageddon" in their souls, the end times events will move this earth to one last great moment of "How long halt ye between two opinions?" for the whole earth. The Sabbath controversy will be part of the story, but the real challenging question will be "Are you going to follow God or man?" Will you receive the mark of God or the mark of the beast?

Granted, there will be wars all over the earth along with all the other displays of destruction of every kind. But Armageddon is different. It is a continuation of the War between Christ and Satan and it will be played out in everyone's hearts.

[TrevorL]

Greetings again B/W Photodude, 

4 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Armageddon is a transliteration error of the name Har Megiddo. Har (meaning "mountain") Megiddo is also known as Mt. Carmel.

Another suggestion is that the word Armageddon has the meaning “a heap of sheaves in the valley for judgement or threshing”, and could be an allusion to the following:

Joel 3:9–14 (KJV): 9 Proclaim ye this among the Gentiles; Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up: 10 Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong. 11 Assemble yourselves, and come, all ye heathen, and gather yourselves together round about: thither cause thy mighty ones to come down, O LORD. 12 Let the heathen be wakened, and come up to the valley of Jehoshaphat: for there will I sit to judge all the heathen round about. 13 Put ye in the sickle, for the harvest is ripe: come, get you down; for the press is full, the fats overflow; for their wickedness is great. 14 Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision (mg: cocision or threshing): for the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision.

4 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

My study of Armageddon leads me to an entirely different understanding. I tend to think many who study prophecy spend too much time seeing war, as in blood shed and armed conflicts by military forces. I do not see Armageddon as a physical war.

The word Armageddon only occurs in the following, as part of the 6th Vial, and it appears that within this 6th Vial period our Lord Jesus will return v15:

Revelation 16:12–16 (KJV): 12 And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared. 13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. 15 Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame. 16 And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.

Thus the word “Armageddon” is also known as the Battle of Armageddon.

This is another aspect, but I believe that there will be 10 future kings that will oppose Christ (The Lamb) Revelation 17:12-14 after Armageddon Revelation 16:16 as Armageddon is during the 6th Vial, and yet there are further judgements in the 7th Vial Revelation 16:17-21.

Kind regards Trevor

[TrevorL]

Greetings again The Wanderer, 

On 1/3/2019 at 7:46 AM, The Wanderer said:

I am sure they are but now I am mystified as to why you are not posting any specific references. We need to be able to check stuff out for ourselves.

I am not sure what to do here to respond and satisfy what you are asking. My situation is not based on some set of notes or book, but a general knowledge imparted in a consistent environment which to my memory has always taught that the four metals and beasts represent Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome and the little horn of Daniel 7 represents the Papacy. My environment has been by reading, by attending numerous Bible Classes. In my environment we do not have any one authoritative voice or book, but many have contributed to the general environment.

For starters, possibly a common source that you may share is “The Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse” by Isaac Newton. The relevant chapters are Chapter 6 – Of the ten Kingdoms represented by the ten horns of the fourth Beast, pages 47-73 and Chapters 7 and 8 Of the Eleventh Horn, pages 75-90, 91-113. I have not studied the following in detail, but the following is similar, identifying the four Kingdoms and also the Little Horn as the Papacy. This is a SDA book by Uriah Smith, The Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation and perhaps you could start at page 119 “Rise and Work of the Little Horn”. So initially I would be interested how you view these expositions.

I am not sure if Greg would want me to reference a book that can be purchased, but one recent fairly thorough exposition that I could refer to is “The Book of Daniel” 368 pages, written by an Australian up to Daniel 9:9 and continued and published by his son with help from other senior expositors. The notes that I referred to were mainly from the 1960s, but I do not have an electronic copy. If I checked my magazines starting from the 1830s I could find some references and exposition of Daniel 7. I have some of these in print and others electronic. These formed the framework of later expositions. I have also attended numerous Bible Classes and have some mp3 talks on Daniel from the Internet. Again I am not sure that Greg would want a link to some of these talks.

Kind regards Trevor

(Your reference is O. K--GM)

[hch]

Years ago references were more important than they are today. If you did not have them, it could take eons to find out the source.

But today, we can google a quote or part of a quote and in less time than it takes to ask for a reference, we can know who said what.

 

[hch]

On ‎1‎/‎1‎/‎2019 at 11:10 PM, TrevorL said:

I have listened to your video, but I support the basic view of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome for the four metals and four beasts. I cannot accept your concept of four future kings based on Daniel 2.  I do not accept that the earth beast has anything to do with the USA, (even though this may be standard SDA teaching ???) and thus do not also agree with your enlargement of this to refer to four Presidents. I need to verify this, but I understand the earth beast speaking more of the "Holy Roman Empire".

 

Hey TrevorL

This message got by me, or I would have replied sooner.

Lots of people have difficulty applying Daniel 2 to our time, i.e., 4 endtime American presidents. And some here have scoffed me for my biblical interpretations calling it everything but reliable. But I continue to study.

In my studies, I told everyone, who would listen for 14 months before the fact, that Pope Benedict XVI would not be pope after the spring of 2013. Then when it happened, I learned by the fulfillment of prophecy details that I did not understand before it happened. Likewise, from my study of prophecy, I saw that President Bush II was the last American president identified in Daniel 2, then it was back to the drawing board to see what I missed when he yielded the office to President Obama.

That was most interesting. As I restudied Daniel 2 & 7, I realized that I had overlooked that the Roman power was twofold: pagan  and papal. So I found Obama in Daniel 2. And since I understood the 7 heads on the healed sea-beast in Revelation 13 to be the popes from Pius XI through Benedict XVI and the 10 horns to be Presidents Truman through Clinton, I had no trouble seeing the two horns on the earth beast that followed were Bush II and Obama. But Obama was not the last (horn) American President. The scoffers took me to task. Instead of looking at the evidence and seeing what was right, they mocked the study because it was not fulfilled as I had presented it.

But God is gracious. And I have continued to study. And what I discovered fills me with hope. 

I knew that the duo (translated as two in the 42 months of Revelation 13) had been fulfilled as 42 full months with a little time left over by pope John-Paul II. He died 42 full months after 9/11/01 on 4/2/05. I also knew from looking at all the particulars that on the Hebrew calendar it was exactly 42 plus 2 months to the day from 9/11/01 to 4/2/05. The Bible writers used the Hebrew calendar. It is lunar. A month has t be added periodically to keep it in sync with our solar calendar. The month of Adar I was added twice between 9/11/01 and 4/2/05. And in Luke 10:1 duo is translated as 2 & 2.  That solved the mystery of the 4 kings. The duo horns on the earth beast are 2&2: Presidents Bush II, Obama, Trump, and Michael... for it is written that there will be a time of trouble like we have never seen and Michael will stand for his people (cf Daniel 12:1).

So the bottom line, as I understand it is: when Michael stands for his people, Michael will stand for His people.

IMHO, It is time to get ready to go home.

[Gregory Matthews]

Finding a quote on the Internet does not tell us the source used by the person placing the quote in a post here.  Common      quotes have multiple of sources which may very in small details.

One can only know the source used when is it given by the person using it.

NOTE:  I am not saying that one should provide a source for everything written.  I do not and I do not expect such from others.

 

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again hch,

5 hours ago, hch said:

Lots of people have difficulty applying Daniel 2 to our time, i.e., 4 endtime American presidents. And some here have scoffed me for my biblical interpretations calling it everything but reliable. But I continue to study.

I appreciate your detailed response. I cannot accept your perspective as I hold the traditional view of most aspects of these prophecies. I have a mate who also attempts to write contemporary events into prophecy, most of them after the event. He used to be invited to speak at our meeting, and on the first occasion when he started in this new direction, he left us extremely surprised, and we discovered that more was to come, rather than this being a slight aberration on a bad day. He was well respected in his general standing and from previous encounters and was encouraged to speak on neutral subjects when invited again, but he persisted almost in an obsessive way as if his perspective was absolutely important. He is no longer invited to our speaking platform, but attends various combined events. I am not sure of his standing at his own meeting and we do not worry about trying to fix the situation, but I get the impression that he is to some extent isolated and he has complained to me that he is not invited to speak at other meetings. We are a lay community. He occasionally shares some of his predictions with me on a personal basis, but recently he seems to have lost interest partly due to my past reticence to endorse any of his views, and possibly a change of mind on some aspects. He has written an extensive book on a particular theme, and this was only a small part of his overall new developments and exposition and I asked him before publication to send me an electronic copy of one chapter that I could test. I asked for a chapter that he had written on Isaiah 6, one of my favourite chapters of Scripture. I have answered him, and we are still good friends. I think you would find his views unique, and his initial suggestion and then how he develops his understanding of Isaiah 6 almost ludicrous, but I will not give an example or give you a clue to his unusual view of Isaiah 6.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

[JoeMo]

18 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Armageddon is a transliteration error of the name Har Megiddo. Har (meaning "mountain") Megiddo is also known as Mt. Carmel.

That's a great observation!  In my studies, I have seen that "Armageddon" is a transliteration of "Har Megadon", meaning the Mount of the Assembly - which could be either Mt. Carmel or Mt. Moriah (the Temple Mount). I tend to lean on Mount Moriah, as it correlates with the prophecy of Jesus descending there; and a great earthquake occurs; opening a great valley through which the inhabitants of Jerusalem are supposed to flee.

"On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives (which is immediately adjacent to Mt. Moriah) will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south. 5 You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake[a] in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him." (Zech. 14:4-5)

Regardless, "Armageddon" will take place somewhere around Israel - be it Mt Carmel, Mount of Olives, or Mt. Moriah - not all over the world.  Nonetheless, the impact will be tremendous all over the planet.

[phkrause]

29 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

Regardless, "Armageddon" will take place somewhere around Israel - be it Mt Carmel, Mount of Olives, or Mt. Moriah - not all over the world.  Nonetheless, the impact will be tremendous all over the planet.

My belief is that Armageddon is a spiritual battle between God and his angels and Satan and his angels!! Good vs Evil. Not a literal war between people!!

[hch]

2 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again hch,

I appreciate your detailed response. I cannot accept your perspective as I hold the traditional view of most aspects of these prophecies. I have a mate who also attempts to write contemporary events into prophecy, most of them after the event. He used to be invited to speak at our meeting, and on the first occasion when he started in this new direction, he left us extremely surprised, and we discovered that more was to come, rather than this being a slight aberration on a bad day. He was well respected in his general standing and from previous encounters and was encouraged to speak on neutral subjects when invited again, but he persisted almost in an obsessive way as if his perspective was absolutely important. He is no longer invited to our speaking platform, but attends various combined events. I am not sure of his standing at his own meeting and we do not worry about trying to fix the situation, but I get the impression that he is to some extent isolated and he has complained to me that he is not invited to speak at other meetings. We are a lay community. He occasionally shares some of his predictions with me on a personal basis, but recently he seems to have lost interest partly due to my past reticence to endorse any of his views, and possibly a change of mind on some aspects. He has written an extensive book on a particular theme, and this was only a small part of his overall new developments and exposition and I asked him before publication to send me an electronic copy of one chapter that I could test. I asked for a chapter that he had written on Isaiah 6, one of my favourite chapters of Scripture. I have answered him, and we are still good friends. I think you would find his views unique, and his initial suggestion and then how he develops his understanding of Isaiah 6 almost ludicrous, but I will not give an example or give you a clue to his unusual view of Isaiah 6.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

It is difficult to maintain objective when you have a Bible translation like the KJV where they translated Daniel's visions as though they had been fulfilled in 1611 before the 2300 year prophecy even met its fulfillment in 1844. And when you add to that a friend who did not have everything right: It is a recipe to quash any desire to look a little deeper.

Moses encountered that problem when he raised the bronze serpent on the pole in the wilderness. Some looked and some refused. That is just the way it is. Ezekiel was told that he was not responsible for how his message was received, only that he gave the warning faithfully. Likewise, I only share what I know at the time I learn it. The Holy Spirit is responsible for leading folks to look or not.

Christian regards,

[TrevorL]

Greetings again hch,

5 hours ago, hch said:

It is difficult to maintain objective when you have a Bible translation like the KJV where they translated Daniel's visions as though they had been fulfilled in 1611 before the 2300 year prophecy even met its fulfillment in 1844. And when you add to that a friend who did not have everything right: It is a recipe to quash any desire to look a little deeper.

I appreciate your response. I am not sure of what you are saying concerning the KJV of Daniel 8, as I do not see much problem with the KJV here. Also I have a different view to you of the 2300 years as I claim it mainly speaks of BC334-333 to AD 1967. So as afar as my status in this forum, or if I was in a SDA environment I would be isolated in my opinion. I hope you eventually mellow in some of your opinions, but I suggest that what I have read so far is not “deeper”, but rather is disoriented and confusing, especially the Presidents of the USA. From an Australian viewpoint, these men are insignificant, even though Trump is often in the news, sometimes in a bad context.

Kind regards Trevor

[B/W Photodude]

7 hours ago, JoeMo said:

That's a great observation!  In my studies, I have seen that "Armageddon" is a transliteration of "Har Megadon", meaning the Mount of the Assembly  ...  I tend to lean on Mount Moriah, as it correlates with the prophecy of Jesus descending there;

"Armageddon" will take place somewhere around Israel ...  not all over the world.

I will stick with Mt Carmel and the principle involved. At the end of this age, the question will be as Elijah asked, "How long halt ye between two opinions?" And the opinion is for every person on the world to face and decide. The outcome is that whether for God or self, everyone will get a mark -- of God or the beast. Since people live all over the world, it will be an internal struggle all over the world. The conflict is nearly over. It is just down to mopping up the mess. Again, not an armed conflict in the usual sense of a human war.

[B/W Photodude]

5 hours ago, hch said:

It is difficult to maintain objective when you have a Bible translation like the KJV

I only seriously read the KJV. I find that even the difficult passages from the older English just invites a "drill down" to understand the text. The most fascinating thing I have found in my KJV studies would not have been possible if I had been studying any other version. Sometimes, if a text is difficult, I may go to BibleHub and read all the translations and see how they reflect on the KJV. Of course, a dictionary is also helpful. But the only way you will get my KJV from me is to pry it out of my cold dead fingers!

I will say that somewhere on my bucket list is to read the Bible in another language. Polyglots are fascinating to me and perhaps I will venture further into that capability myself!

5 hours ago, hch said:

Likewise, I only share what I know at the time I learn it. The Holy Spirit is responsible for leading folks to look or not.

Unfortunately, hch, you have been wrong in the past. Something the Holy Spirit does not do is lead people into error and then assist them into leading others into error. So, I am comfortable in not being led! 

Also, unfortunately, I hear too many people in a wide variety of situations claim to have the guiding of the Holy Spirit. Even some of our church leaders are claiming the guidance of the Holy Spirit in areas that clear guidance from SOP gave a proper course of action. Sometimes it is so clearly wrong that even a caveman could figure out that "Houston, we have a problem!"

[JoeMo]

1 hour ago, B/W Photodude said:

The conflict is nearly over. It is just down to mopping up the mess. Again, not an armed conflict in the usual sense of a human war.

I certainly don't get this from the Bible.  I look at the prophecies in Daniel, Revelation, Zechariah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel about the end being the worst thing that ever happened or will happen as pretty dire.  Water turned to blood, the church on the verge of being defeated, death, famine, plagues, wars, millions slain, massive earthquakes and other natural disasters, totally unnatural celestial disturbances, boils, scorpions, iron beasts trampling everything, one-world government, fire falling from the sky, people's tongues and eyes rotting out of their heads.  Mess isn't just down to being  mopped up; it's just beginning. (This is not a time-setting prophecy)

Satan's previous attempts to destroy God's order of things all involved great earthly violence Hitler, Stalin, The Ottoman Empire, the Crusades, the Flood were all horrific bloody catastrophes. Why shouldn't the worst thing to ever happen not involve terrible natural and man-made catastrophes.

[hch]

13 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again hch,

I appreciate your response. I am not sure of what you are saying concerning the KJV of Daniel 8, as I do not see much problem with the KJV here. Also I have a different view to you of the 2300 years as I claim it mainly speaks of BC334-333 to AD 1967. So as afar as my status in this forum, or if I was in a SDA environment I would be isolated in my opinion. I hope you eventually mellow in some of your opinions, but I suggest that what I have read so far is not “deeper”, but rather is disoriented and confusing, especially the Presidents of the USA. From an Australian viewpoint, these men are insignificant, even though Trump is often in the news, sometimes in a bad context.

Kind regards Trevor

Hey Trevor,

I am a firm believer in the authenticity and reliability of the KJV. I use it almost exclusively.

But the KJV is not without problems. For example, in Daniel the words malkuw (Strong H4437) is translated as kingly throne (5:20), realm (6:3), and reign (6:28), but malkuw is translated as kingdom all of the other times that it occurs in Daniel. Consider the KJV rendition of Daniel 2:39 as compared to an alternate rendition derived from a word study of the original language:

"After thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth"  Daniel 2:39, KJV  "After thee shall arise another reign of your land, and another third reign of brass, which shall bear rule over all your land" 2:39, alternate

The KJV rendition of 2:39 predisposes the reader to focus on the four-kingdom view that was accepted as the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecies in 1611, which was 230 years before Daniel's 2300-year prophecy (8:14) was fulfilled. 

If you take the position that the 2300-years were not fulfilled until 1967...the 1611 interpretation was understood 350 years before the prophecy was unsealed and opened.

God sealed Daniel until the time of the end (Daniel 12:4, 9) and He used the translators' four-kingdom understanding of the prophecy to seal the 4-king meaning until the prophecy was unsealed in the endtime.

So the choice is simple: We go with the superficial meaning that is true, but that was understood prematurely (before Daniel was unsealed and opened), or we look a little deeper to find the meaning that was unsealed in the endtime.

Now that we are in the endtime, it would bless us to understand that which God specifically sealed until the time of the end.

[hch]

On ‎1‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 12:20 PM, Gregory Matthews said:

Finding a quote on the Internet does not tell us the source used by the person placing the quote in a post here.  Common      quotes have multiple of sources which may very in small details.

One can only know the source used when is it given by the person using it.

NOTE:  I am not saying that one should provide a source for everything written.  I do not and I do not expect such from others.

Is the data (the fact) the question or is the source (reference) the question?

When a fact is introduced as a fact, the reference provided tells the reader where the fact was found by the poster. If no reference is cited and the fact is found by google search, i.e., the fact is verified as a fact. Is not the verification of the fact that it is a fact is the purpose of giving the reference? (Did the poster imagine or falsely say this or that or is the fact  not something that can be verified?)

What difference does or should it make to anyone (if after they are able to confirm that a fact is a fact) that they would care or have to know where the poster encountered the fact? (We are not talking about the leak of national intelligence.)

IMHO, References help with fact checking.

Why worry about the specific source of a  reference if the fact is confirmed to be a fact? Having the fact as the purpose of the reference is different than wanting the poster's specific references. Instead of fact checking, could it  be reference checking? I.e., to be able to confirm that the fact is from an approved source or to discredit the reference because it is not an approved source? if that were the intent, it  makes the credibility of the reference the issue rather than the credibility of the fact. 

If a known fact is available from multiple sources (both widely accepted and some not so reliable) if the poster found the fact in question on a less reliable place, will that taint the reliability of the fact even though it is readily available on an "approved site" if it were googled?

If the reference checker is predisposed to discount a FACT because they do not approve of the source referenced, would they not be in danger of rejecting a FACT as being factual because of the reference?

Facts vs references? That may be problematic...

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again hch,

2 hours ago, hch said:

The KJV rendition of 2:39 predisposes the reader to focus on the four-kingdom view that was accepted as the fulfillment of Daniel's prophecies in 1611, which was 230 years before Daniel's 2300-year prophecy (8:14) was fulfilled. 

If you take the position that the 2300-years were not fulfilled until 1967...the 1611 interpretation was understood 350 years before the prophecy was unsealed and opened.

God sealed Daniel until the time of the end (Daniel 12:4, 9) and He used the translators' four-kingdom understanding of the prophecy to seal the 4-king meaning until the prophecy was unsealed in the endtime.

So the choice is simple: We go with the superficial meaning that is true, but that was understood prematurely (before Daniel was unsealed and opened), or we look a little deeper to find the meaning that was unsealed in the endtime.

Now that we are in the endtime, it would bless us to understand that which God specifically sealed until the time of the end.

I find your reasoning here unusual, as I suggest that the understanding that the four metals and the four beasts representing Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome was never sealed. Daniel lived to see the overthrow of Babylon by Medo-Persia when he was involved in the events with Belshazzar in Daniel 5, and Daniel 8 reveals the overthrow of Medo-Persia by the Grecian power of Alexander the Great. The Roman power is not named, but would have been identified once it came on the scene, so to suggest that the four kingdom view of Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 was sealed, and that this represents the 1611 view to me seems ludicrous. The Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome view stands, and to transfer the scene to four American Presidents is nonsense, as the scene depicted is on another continent, Europe and the Middle East. The sealing has to do with only some of the detail of Daniel’s prophecies, and 1844 or 1967 did not mark an exact date when any of this became unsealed. Rather the unfolding of events, and some careful meditation and discussion of these prophecies, especially those relating to the end times, has seen some unsealing Daniel 12:4, 8-10.

Kind regards Trevor

[hch]

4 minutes ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again hch,

I find your reasoning here unusual, as I suggest that the understanding that the four metals and the four beasts representing Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome was never sealed. Daniel lived to see the overthrow of Babylon by Medo-Persia when he was involved in the events with Belshazzar in Daniel 5, and Daniel 8 reveals the overthrow of Medo-Persia by the Grecian power of Alexander the Great. The Roman power is not named, but would have been identified once it came on the scene, so to suggest that the four kingdom view of Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 was sealed, and that this represents the 1611 view to me seems ludicrous. The Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome view stands, and to transfer the scene to four American Presidents is nonsense, as the scene depicted is on another continent, Europe and the Middle East. The sealing has to do with only some of the detail of Daniel’s prophecies, and 1844 or 1967 did not mark an exact date when any of this became unsealed. Rather the unfolding of events, and some careful meditation and discussion of these prophecies, especially those relating to the end times, has seen some unsealing Daniel 12:4, 8-10.

Kind regards Trevor

Hey Trevor,

How does the Bible define sealing?

Nebuchadnezzar's 4 king Babylonian dynasty sealed the authenticity of Daniel 2: 1) Nebuchadnezzar [the gold head], 2) King Evil-Merodach [his son, the silver chest], 3) King Neriglissar [Nebuchadnezzar’s son-in-law, brass midsection], 4) Nabonidus [another son-in-law, an iron leg that extend into a foot mixed with clay], who co-rule with Belshazzar [Nebuchadnezzar’s grandson, the other iron leg that extend into an iron foot mixed with clay]. Kings Belshazzar and Nabonidus co-ruled until Babylon fell. That reading perfectly matches Jeremiah 27:4-11.
 

Quote

 

4  And command them to say unto their masters, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Thus shall ye say unto your masters;
5  I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are upon the ground, by my great power and by my outstretched arm, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me.
6  And now have I given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant; and the beasts of the field have I given him also to serve him.
7  And all nations shall serve him [Nebuchadnezzar], and his son [Evil-Merodach], and his son’s son [Belshazzar], until the very time of his land come: and then many nations [Medo-Persia] and great kings [Cyrus, etc.] shall serve themselves of him.
8  And it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith the LORD, with the sword, and with the famine, and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them by his hand.
9  Therefore hearken not ye to your prophets, nor to your diviners, nor to your dreamers, nor to your enchanters, nor to your sorcerers, which speak unto you, saying, Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon:
10  For they prophesy a lie unto you, to remove you far from your land; and that I should drive you out, and ye should perish.
11  But the nations that bring their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, and serve him, those will I let remain still in their own land, saith the LORD; and they shall till it, and dwell therein.

 

 

Nebuchadnezzar's dynasty sealed the authenticity of Daniel 2 as did the 4 kingdoms. But the meaning of the prophecy was sealed until the endtime.

" But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased." Daniel 12:4 " Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end." 12:9.

As I read it,  God commanded Daniel to SEAL THE BOOK that was not seal some chapters and not to seal others.  And the sealing was not to be unsealed until the time of the end. So the 4-kingdom meaning, though correct, sealed the authenticity of the book, but the meaning of the prophecy was not to be completely understood until the endtime. The endtime is in the context of the Time of Trouble and Michael standing for his people (12:1).

Food for thought,

[TrevorL]

Greetings again hch,

10 hours ago, hch said:

Nebuchadnezzar's 4 king Babylonian dynasty sealed the authenticity of Daniel 2: 1) Nebuchadnezzar [the gold head], 2) King Evil-Merodach [his son, the silver chest], 3) King Neriglissar [Nebuchadnezzar’s son-in-law, brass midsection], 4) Nabonidus [another son-in-law, an iron leg that extend into a foot mixed with clay], who co-rule with Belshazzar [Nebuchadnezzar’s grandson, the other iron leg that extend into an iron foot mixed with clay]. Kings Belshazzar and Nabonidus co-ruled until Babylon fell.

I appreciate your additional detail. I apologise for my previous abruptness and negative language, but I still cannot accept your perspective on this and do not want to go down the track of answering your specific detail.

I would be interested in discussing other detail with those that hold more or less the traditional view. As well as the basic framework of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome there is much more minor detail in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 to exercise our interest and discernment leaving much to be discussed with those of similar minds. For example, a few of many aspects, the feet and toes of iron and clay Daniel 2:41-43, what is the clay element, the fact that the stone strikes the image on the feet Daniel 2:34, the fact that the whole image is ground to powder and the stone becomes a great mountain and fills the earth Daniel 2:35, that is the earth is not burnt but is equated with the kingdom, and how the fourth beast is destroyed but the other three beasts lose their dominions but survive for a season and a time Daniel 7:12 and what is the meaning of the kingdom and dominion under the whole heaven Daniel 7:27, if as held by SDAs that the saints are in heaven and the earth is burnt for the 1000 years.

Kind regards Trevor

[hch]

6 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again hch,

I appreciate your additional detail. I apologise for my previous abruptness and negative language, but I still cannot accept your perspective on this and do not want to go down the track of answering your specific detail.

 

 

I would be interested in discussing other detail with those that hold more or less the traditional view. As well as the basic framework of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome there is much more minor detail in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 to exercise our interest and discernment leaving much to be discussed with those of similar minds. For example, a few of many aspects, the feet and toes of iron and clay Daniel 2:41-43, what is the clay element, the fact that the stone strikes the image on the feet Daniel 2:34, the fact that the whole image is ground to powder and the stone becomes a great mountain and fills the earth Daniel 2:35, that is the earth is not burnt but is equated with the kingdom, and how the fourth beast is destroyed but the other three beasts lose their dominions but survive for a season and a time Daniel 7:12 and what is the meaning of the kingdom and dominion under the whole heaven Daniel 7:27, if as held by SDAs that the saints are in heaven and the earth is burnt for the 1000 years.

 

 

Kind regards Trevor

 

 

Thanks Trevor,

It was tradition that led folks astray in the 1843 & 44 Advent movement. Because of tradition, they got the event wrong and many fell away after that. But the Holy Spirit is quite able to lead us into all truth. I give the facts as I understand them at the time. As Friday used to say: The facts and just the facts.

Christian regards,

[TrevorL]

Greetings again hch,

7 hours ago, hch said:

But the Holy Spirit is quite able to lead us into all truth. I give the facts as I understand them at the time.

Many claim Holy Spirit guidance, but the results from two people thus guided are contradictory. My mate that I mentioned before, came to a difficulty in his exposition of Isaiah 6, and he wrote as if praying, “what is the solution here” and then writes “thank You”, and gives an outrageous concept. I am not sure if he was relying on the Holy Spirit or prayer, but I assume he is still locked into this decisive moment.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

[TrevorL]

Greetings again The Wanderer,

I find your list a little confusing, as I suggest that some of these items are describing different entities. I will mention only the following:

3 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

(12) "the little horn" (Dan 8:8)

The little horn of Daniel 7 is different to the little horn of Daniel 8. My understanding is that the little horn of Daniel 7 describes a religious power, while that of Daniel 8 is a military power.

3 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

4) "the Prince that shall come" (Dan 9:26)

I find this unusual, as I believe that this is describing the Romans in AD70.

3 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

It must be sought in the Western Continent.

Could you explain what you are suggesting by this term?

Kind regards Trevor