Charlie744

Wow, I was just going to write the exact same thing... yes I was! Maybe...

Thank you very much for your deep and always supported thoughts. If you do not mind, can you please talk about the purpose of having the word “rather” in that verse? I would “rather” be present.... “ We can disagree regarding our interpretation of the Lazarus story... no problem! There certainly are many folks who insist they have gone to heaven and returned.... this is well above my pay grade!!! Thank you again, Charlie

Michael, I have witnessed a few folks in this forum that have such a beautiful gift of communicating their thoughts and opinions. You certainly are one of them. I have a different gift and it is so far from the one(s) you have been given. I am sure you have heard that “most guards want to be centers, and most centers want to play guard and dribble the ball up the court”. A lot of truth behind this ... I certainly would enjoy your kind of talent, but I think God knows what He is doing. Anyway, I agree with you completely and without reservation. I remember long ago I was contemplating why the Torah was written without any spaces between the paragraphs and even at the word level. I don’ know the structure or construction of the Hebrew language, but I would be surprised that this is the way Hebrew is written (maybe it is, I don’t know). In any event, I concluded that God simply said ONE long word to Moses. This would allow Moses to remember Genesis to Numbers as though it was just one long word.... But to tie this back to your response, I believe the Scriptures are similar in that they all act together as one word. They can not contradict any other part of this one word s it would simply become a misspelled word without anyone able to understand its meaning. So your point is well taken. If I am able to read into your comment, you are telling me there is a link / connection / relationship / message between each and every word in Scriptures - in this case, Daniel to Revelation; they must fit together like a glove. And I agree but that does not guarantee an interpretation in Revelation that fits to an interpretation in Daniel is true and correct. If 9:27 is misinterpretated, and it surely is (my opinion), then this will (have to) match the interpretation made in Revelation- and that is exactly what has been done. So, I have decided to start back at square 1, take advantage of all the tremendous work product generated over the past 2,000 years (which essentially results in two major interpretations for the ~ 11 or so primary differences in their interpretations), and focus on them only! I really do not have to reinvent the wheel when trying to understand the lion’ den, the metal man image, or the furnace stories. But these ~11 issues affect our interpretation of both Daniel and Revelation.... hence, no sense in concerning myself with their interpretations of Revelation.... I will / should be able to interpret Revelation when I have an interpretation of Daniel that works (for me). By trying to find the underlying message to us in Daniel that SPEAKS to The Messiah as opposed to trying to match these verses to someone in man’s history (AE, or Ptolemy), who have nothing to do with His Plan of Salvation, we will arrive at a very different interpretation. Thank you again , Charlie

Kenny, apparently there is much written on this topic as it seems to contradict all of those “fence posts” provided by folks in this forum. I read more than a few interpretations and, in my opinion, I believe the primary message is directed to the Sadducees who were then contending there is NO life after death (contrary to the beliefs of the Pharisees). He specifically mentions the three patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. He just might be telling us that only those that are in covenant with God will see internal life. As long as we are connected to the “vine”, we will be alive in Christ. Adam was told “if you eat of this tree you shall surely die”. But of course Adam did not immediately die (physically), but they would die spiritually in God. I believe this verse does not contradict those along this fence, but adds a special meaning to the Sadducees and all to be sons of Abraham and have eternal life AFTER we are resurrected. Kenny, no soup for you - one year! Charlie

Thank you Michael... I really do not use “shorthand”, except for FYI... And I hope you understand my response re: Revelation and not looking to Revelation to interpret Daniel. Perfect example: perhaps 90% contend the “he” in 9:27 is a He and not “He”. This and the supposed 7 year tribulation, along with the covenant reference has a tremendous impact on how folks interpret Revelation. My opinion is completely different and identifies “he” as “He”, and also relates to the covenant and the cutting off in the mindst of the 7 year period. Consequently, there is absolutely NO reason to look to Revelation - their interpretations of 9:27 will yield an interpretation in Revelation that could not possibly be in agreement with my Daniel. There are also many more different interpretations in Daniel that I believe are misinterpreted... therefore, Revelation is even further corrupted (my opinion). Thank you, Charlie

Iamlamad, thank you for your thoughts! I believe you recently have responded twice... As you might be aware, I have not studied Revelation and can not comment on 13. I believe Daniel must be interpreted on its own and in context with its own verses and not look to Revelation for interpretation (but as I mentioned many times, at the end of the day they can not contradict each other). Regarding your second question: I believe that pagan Rome is the beast. Consequently, they come to power prior to the crucifixion, they certainly continue until the late 400’s AD. The “beast” will continue until the second coming but it will not be “Rome”. It will be a Rome, meaning this beast will be like no other previous kingdom, hence there is no such animal on earth that could symbolize it. It (beast) will symbolize all the power, killing and destruction that will come upon the earth- so many different powers and empires will surface from the early Muslim empire to Hitler and beyond. The beast is the physical destruction and damage and murders, etc., regardless of the color of their jersey. Very simply, man will never change and will always seek power, glory and control through battle and wars. The little horn will arise from the beast and will also destroy, conquer and seek power, but for it will use a different approach (although the little horn would, for a time, use military and to destroy). Their war strategy focuses on gaining power and control through a religious approach, eventually claiming to be god on earth, ability to change God’s laws and times, and so much more. Both will continue until the second coming. Hope this answers your questions, Charlie

Kenny, thank you for this verse! Here is what I see at this time: Speks has listed more than a few verses that, for me at least, has built or constructed a strong, straight series of fence posts. Each post represents the same answer to this question, they all point straight and in same direction, etc. And I believe there are more than a few verses in the Scriptures that can serve as additional fence posts in the same direction. So, you have provided a verse from Matthew that might represent another post that is NOT in line with this fence. Kenny, it is very clear you are a big trouble maker! ?(hope you know I am joking!). Because this is a strong verse in Matthew and can not be dismissed easily (certainly not by me and my lack of knowledge re: this verse), it should be addressed. Therefore, either this verse is not speaking to this specific topic (similar to the Lazarus parable), or we have a problem- as we all know, Scripture can never contradict Scripture. At this time, we might be able to count a large number of fence posts that line up with this one seemingly going off in another direction. Can I suggest we might focus on the meaning of 22:32? Does this contradict the other posts or should it be in another line of fence posts?

Ask yourself this question and you will get the answer: What specifically is meant by “the power of the set-apart people”. That is the key!

Speks, now your just showing off! I believe this will allow me to respond to anyone’s question on this subject... you do know you could have “messaged” me this response and I could have used it in this site!!! Anyway, that is one heck of a response...once again, WELL DONE! One more thing.... I am well aware I could not have prepared such a response for this specific question, but it also is a great example that ALL our questions can be answered by searching in the OT. I believe that the Messiah could not, and would not have arrived on earth before God had given man ALL the information and knowledge he would ever need to understand and come to know the ONE TRUE GOD. Although the NT gives us so much unbelievable knowledge of the Lord, we should easily have looked at Him walking down the road and said to Him, “hey, I know you”! I mention this as I have been studying Daniel. I was instructed to study Daniel BEFORE I attempted to try and learn Revelation, since everyone told me that there was so much in Revelation that comes directly from Daniel. Yet, when I ran into more than a few difficult verses, these same folks directed me to Revelation for its interpretation. However, after finding some very different interpretations of Daniel (those that were in complete contradiction to those accepted by ~90% of today’s students and scholars of Daniel), it became apparent to me that one could not or should not look to Revelation to interpret Daniel. I do understand they must agree with each other, but Daniel (OT), must be understood first and enlighten Revelation (NT). Consequently, God has given us a complete set of books BEFORE His first coming, and the Jews would / should / could have interpreted Daniel accurately since Revelation was yet to be written. But that is another issue that I am discussing with folks in a different topic in this forum. Well, for me, this case is certainly closed, but it is still open for anyone still wanting to continue discussing it... ANY additional thoughts and responses will be appreciated! Thank you again, Speks, wonderful work! Charlie

Speks, with all sincerity, that really was just about perfect!! I wish I could write like that and I wish I could have said that—- in fact, as of tomorrow, I am going to tell everyone I did say it... Cut and paste is my best method of providing sound and pleasing advice and responses to ... well, just about to everyone! So once again, thank you for my next response! One other thing, if you don’t mind... since I still do not have the appropriate response to this topic, I am going to have to ask you to comment on what you think happens at the time of our death.. Looking forward to my next response to this topic, Best wishes, Charlie

Great information!! I definitely agree with you that the Lazarus parable is not meant to tell us what happens at death... but I do believe it’s purpose is to tell us we can do no more towards our salvation afterwards.. and our fate is permanently sealed... no ones prayers can change things, etc. The other quotes from Matthew and Revelation offer confusing or conflicting results... There are also others that I find are quite difficult to refute— two of which is that “the dead no nothing”, and “they have no more ... under the sun” (something like that). For me, these are clear and unambiguous... why would God tell us the dead know nothing IF, after death, we would experience either horrific pain or tremendous glory? This reminds me of another reason I am convinced one should never use Revelation to interpret Daniel. I believe we must understand Daniel on its own and study how the words and verses should be interpreted in CONTEXT with their surroundings verses, not the verses in Revelation. Anyway, thank you for your thoughts and consideration! Charlie

Thank you and not to move too far from the original topic, would it be safe to say, based on your response, that those who have died NOT in Christ are already suffering in hell or some place? Thank you, Charlie

Thank you Michael... by the way, what is WADR? I have not seen this before... In any event, I am sure you have read my opinion on those that seem to rely on their interpretations in Revelation to support Daniel’s verses. I also have mentioned that there can be NO discrepancies between the two books, BUT, Revelation can not drive Daniel. Daniel was written first and to the Jews. There are, in my opinion, maybe three periods of importance in Daniel; 1) the historical section of Daniel providing the period from Nebuchadnezzar to perhaps the Grecian empire, 2) the historical section or period of the 4th kingdom (pagan Rome), 3) the prophetic section or period of the 4th kingdom (beast), In my opinion, there have been too many important verses that folks have interpreted to be applicable or pertaining to the wrong period. This will give one a very different and incorrect interpretation— BUT, it may / seem quite appropriate if they can match it to a already difficult and enigmatic chapter/verses. Daniel must be understood FIRST... and it will provide a light to Revelation. The Jews would not have access to Revelation. Just my opinion. FYI, regarding your comment that all I need to do is to “google” or search the internet for the appropriate information on Revelation, and then offer an opinion... That is / would be so easy to do, but I have certainly done that while studying for Daniel. And I can assure you there are more than a few significant misinterpretations that ARE in the acceptable / majority position. But when I found (quite a few times), there was some interesting differences between these same quoted scholars (many verses within all chapters in Daniel), I realized I would need to study these differences for myself, and come to my own interpretation. So, no, I will complete Daniel WITHOUT sourcing Revelation, and then move on to Revelation. If my findings in Daniel, which DO reveal some very different interpretations of most of the previously identified 11 verses or terms in Daniel, then the current interpretations of Revelation are definitely incorrect. I will take and try and understand these prophetic books in the order given.... but as I said, at the end of the day, they must agree. I have read and heard some of the interpretations of Revelation that are used to support Daniel, and, since the Daniel interpretations differ from mine, I know their Revelation interpretations are in error (for these 11 items- the important verses causing these scholars a different interpretation). Now, one more thing if I may - if your WADR is a condescending remark that you have coupled with your comment that I should be able to go on to the internet... there really is no need for you to respond... If I was at a party or any other social gathering, and someone spoke to me in a manner that I have seen many do to others (and this is supposed to be a Christian setting), I would simply excuse myself and get another drink or go away from those types... Best wishes, Charlie

Please see the response above which responded to the previous verse. Unfortunately, I have not studied Revelation, so I can not comment on this verse and what it refers to or it’s meaing with Daniel. Unfortunately, I have to pass on these two verses as well... can not comment on your or anyone’s interpretations of verses in Revelation at this time.

Thank you for responding! I do think you are certainly in the majority. Most follow a future interpretation but may have differences on the specific identities of the 10... I don’t know your thoughts on the identity of the beast... but if the beast arrives near the time of Christ, should we also see the arrival of the 10 horns and the little horn? (Sooner rather than later). Look forward to hearing back from you, Charlie

Alright Joe, we are going to have to set some ground rules here before we continue discussing this or any other topic on Daniel: It is not fair for you to bring in Scriptures and logic to this discussion ?. It just isn’t right Joe!!! I went back to 2:40 and TRIED to allow my mind to clear itself and interpret this and the surrounding verses to see what they say (TO ME). And I certainly understand how easy Scriptures can be written with the identical words (translation) and still result in a few interpretations. I wish I could read / understand Hebrew AND the proper meaning of each Hebrew Word used in each verse (Hebrew words can have more than one meaning). Translations to English contribute to an already difficult understanding! In any event, 2:40, I believe it is telling me that this 4th kingdom is represented by iron, which is a metal stronger than any of the previous 3 metals, or their associated kingdoms. Also, this seems to confirm (to me) of the sheer brutality and destruction of this iron kingdom. I don’t see this as saying it is going to crush THOSE 3 previous / specific kingdoms, but any and ALL kingdoms and peoples they encounter (a more shotgun v. single shot meaning). Joe, I don’t think they conquered the previous 3 kingdoms, but they must BE the next kingdom following Greece. Pagan Rome would indeed follow Greece and destroy, conquer and tear people of any sort in pieces. And at the end of times, Jesus will come and destroy the “image”, which represents all of man’ kingdoms, systems (religious or secular), and establish His Kingdom. Alright Joe, I am going to have to concede with you on this one! I don’t want to but I simply can not argue with your quoted Scriptures and terrific logic here. ? Alright Joe, I think it’s time to take your meds!! (Really just kidding ?). I don’t think this is about land mass or Babylon proper! Although I have not studied Revelation, God is using symbolism in a similar manner. He is indeed able to identify (and certainly cause) these 4 kingdoms to arise at the exact time required to not only cover the period between the punishment of the Jews until His first coming, but He will ensure these kingdoms have the necessary characteristics and “operating” properties that will perfect His prophetic messages- both in the short and long terms. Babylon will serve as a physical kingdom/ power within God’s prophecies AND refer to their ungodly culture and practices of man for all time. Alright Joe, love the last part here (love the dialogue)... apparently, by this time your meds have kicked in- Thank God!!! (Once again— still kidding , big time) ? But Rome is or should be thought of in the same way as Babylon (above). Pagan Rome was a very destructive power and they also posessed the perfect characteristics at the time of His first coming. They were the perfect physical kingdom and power in God’s prophetic plan. They have/ will also represent all of the future powers and kingdoms arising over the next 2,000 years. Babylon the head represents the “thinking, thoughts and desires” of man, while the 4th beast will represent the physical destructive and brutal practices of mankind. These kingdoms were certainly real powers but they represent ALL that man is and will ever be WITHOUT God. Alright Joe, that’s my story and I am sticking to it!! Best wishes, Charlie

Thank you Joe! As usual, your responses always give us more information to consider and ponder on. You raise two points: 1) that the 4th kingdom will or must trample all other kingdoms OF THE metal man image, and also you commented that Rome adopted Greek culture, etc, which I assume you might mean they were not as vicious as some would think. My initial response is to question whether Rome will or must conquer the previous and SPECIFIC 3 kingdoms... I think they conquered everything and everyone they wanted to, and without ANY conscious or concerns—- they were heartless and brutal! Second part is they are simply the NEXT conquering kingdom and do not have to be s conquerer of the previous 3. One simple reason is the timing issue. Rome came into power well after the demise of the first two kingdoms. I am not sure I understand your comment that the “whole thing is about Babylon”... and specifically perhaps, “the land of Babylon”. The ONLY land that is important to God is the land of Israel. The “whole thing” is about God’s Plan of Salvation and how it will be eventually given to the Gentiles through these kingdoms (literally and figuratively), and also His restoration of His people back home where BOTH of these two will come together at His first coming. Babylon as a kingdom, empire or power group will NEVER be reconstituted! They have completed their mission. However, Babylon as a symbol of everything counter to God will ALWAYS exist until His second coming. 2) Regarding your comment that the “Stone” will crush the metal man image... agreed! I believe this means that He will destroy ALL of man’ kingdoms and their false gods (and this means our new cars, houses or jobs, etc., anything we worship other than Him. I don’t think this speaks about Him destroying a reconstituted Roman Empire. I believe the beast began as pagan Rome and would take many different forms and peoples over the next 2,000 years. This then comes together (in my mind only), that a figurative Babylon and a figurative Rome (beast) will certainly exist from the time of the crucifixion to His second coming. Joe, just my thoughts! Thank you again, Charlie

Thank you for your comments! Since I have not studied Revelation, I am hesitant to comment on this, but could your two references be a quick picture to John of what will be at the end times, as opposed to representing these souls have been with Him after each of their deaths? Besides Revelation, are there other verses that might support one side or another? It seems this kind is an issue or event that is just too important to leave to one verse (except for your quotes in Revelation). If so, it would leave man quite a lot of room to interpret this... and even though I am a novice in Scripture, I don’t believe God wants to leave too much for him to interpret .... Thanks again, Charlie

I think it might be safe to say that MOST folks believe this verse to confirm once an individual passes (in Christ), he or she will be “present in the Lord”. This might mean: a) their body goes back to the earth while their spirit or soul goes immediately into the presence of God, b) their body goes back to the earth, and because there is no sense of time, the next thing we see or become aware of is the presence of God, c) their body goes back to the earth, and His spirit that went into us (God breathed His spirit into Adam and he BECAME a living soul), returns to Him. At the end of time He will bring the two (Spirit + body) back together once again. I think these maybe the most accepted beliefs (?). Just about everyone I speak to only makes the statement, “absent from the body, present with the Lord”, as opposed to including the word “RATHER “. Consequently, from my point of view, the only reason why God would insert the word “RATHER” is to tell us this message speaks to the understanding (attempted, since there is no way we can fully appreciate being in His presence), we should / will learn just how much more we will rather be with Him than stay in this life .. death is not the end to fear. And this is the PRIMARY message and not that the next second we will be with Him. So, what do you think is the PRIMARY message and your thoughts on this? Thank you, Charlie

Just got back and saw your latest post... I am extremely surprised that you made that comment despite how much information I have provided you during the last 2 days! And this was AFTER you informed me TWICE that I would not know the truth.... I have told you why some information can not be revealed at this time but you don’t seem to want to respect that. Then when I give you the steps for you to uncover or recognize the answer to your question, for some reason you find it appropriate to repeat your comment “that I must not be able to support it”. I am going to have to agree with you- there is no way I could possibly know the TRUTH.. Best wishes, Charlie

Great questions!!!!!! I will try and make one more comment re: all of this since we are / would have to get into the interpretations that I can not reveal- at this time. As you are aware, and based some of your responses, I would estimate that some 85% of those who study Daniel believe that 11 is about AE and / or the Ptolemy rulers/empire. If you want to determine what are the 4 kingdoms and consequentially chapter 11, you must match up Daniel 2 to 7 to 8. I read somewhere when God wants to emphasize something, He mentions things twice. When God wants to figuratively hit you over the head to guarantee His message gets across to you, He then mentions it 3 times!!!! Well, God did mention the answer to these kingdoms AND the verses / chapters belonging to each through the 3 separate symbols- metal man image, the symbolic animals in 7, and then again in 8. If you match the 4 metal man sections across to 7 & 8 and keep the matchups PURE / CONSISTENT, you will have your answers! Got to go, Charlie

Your first comment is certainly correct- future to Daniel. Not sure I understand your second comment... there were at least 6 chapters dedicated to Babylon. Third comment... yes, Daniel knew and was there for the first two kingdoms. After those two kingdoms God did not spend much “ink” on Greece. Actually, Alexander did not have that much dealings with Israel- he did not attack or attempt to conquer or destroy them. So where is God’s discussion about the 4th kingdom? It is in 11, but after He tells us on 11:1 to 11:4 about the first 3 kingdoms... Beginning at 11:5, we see His discussion or revelation on the 4th kingdom. This is the period where He will come the first time. Regarding the timeline... the legs of iron, feet of clay and iron and the toes represent the 4th kingdom of pagan Rome and continues to His second coming. Charlie

Yes, verses 1 to 4 are nothing more than a very brief recap of the first 3 kingdoms - God’s way of confirming He has already dealt with them and put them in our rear view mirror.. Think about it... He provided us with almost 6 chapters of Babylon, then a lot of information about Medes-Persia (you can see each kingdom is receiving less and less “ink”. Then despite the very impressive military events associated with Alexander, there is even less “ink” given to the 3rd kingdom, so why are these first 4 verses necessary to record? They are a way to summarize and specifically identify them and put them behind us.. now, on to the most important kingdom- the 4th where He and His Plan take center stage. Charlie

Thank you for your thoughts... As I mentioned, nothing was more difficult than 11 and I can assure you it is NOT history! It is like so many other things that I and I am sure everyone has experienced at least a few times each —- and I will try and get my point across using a math analogy: I remember more than a few times where I simply could not get a particular math equation under my belt... my mind just could not see it. Totally frustrating and yet there were many others who had no problem understanding it. But then, for whatever reason, the light came on and I immediately understood the equation... and it seemed so simple to me then! Well, chapter 11 provided me with the same exercise ONLY it seemed 1,000 times more difficult. I am very comfortable with it AND it dovetails with the earlier chapters in Daniel, Charlie

No it is NOT because I am not sure of them... I am currently trying to complete chapter 11 and that means I have obviously completed chapters 1 - 10... I mentioned the 11 specific issues that have more than one interpretation within this “community” (this of course includes all individuals over the past 2,000 years (Augustine, Origin to today’s scholars and expository). Yet, there really are no more than two main interpretations for these 11 issues. So when I attempted to learn Daniel, it made perfect sense to try and learn what these folks believed- they certainly were and are so much more knowledgeable and educated than myself... but I kept trying to determine which major interpretation made more sense to me - but why shouldn’t these talented folks all agree? I decided to identify those “issues” where they disagreed- again, this came to these 11. I can assure you there was no way I could determine who had the better interpretation UNTIL I discovered they were both approaching the meaning of those issues/verses incorrectly- it was the APPROACH that was wrong. They were all interpreting the issues at what I refer to as “man’ level”, instead at His level... meaning we need to stop looking for their meaning by matching them to a certain man / ruler (like an AE or Ptolemy). Instead, we should see how these verses center or focus on the Messiah. The perfect example is in 9:27. Almost everyone contends the “he” is some future anti-Christ figure- and you can obviously see how this will affect Revelation. However, if you find the “he” is “He”, then it will give you a completely different interpretation within both Daniel AND Revelation. If you are able to perform this exercise for all 11 issues, Daniel will come together WITHOUT accessing Revelation and provide a very different interpretation. Then this understanding of Daniel will open up Revelation. Bottom line is this will all be presented for publication.... Charlie