The 1,335 days prophecy

[Last Daze]

 

 

We know who the ram and the he goat is because scripture interprets it for us.

 

 Daniel 8:20   The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.

 Daniel 8:21   And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

 Daniel 8:22   Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

 

There should be no confusion there, it's clear and shouldn't be an issue.

now we go to the next verse;

 

Daniel 8:23   And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

 

The four generals went north, west, east, and south.  The kingdom they all belong to is spiritually called Babylon. ...

William replies: Huh? The only kingdom being described is the Kingdom of the Greeks: that is "their kingdom." And that whole kingdom was snuffed out before the end of the 1st century BC.

 

All of the rest of the points you made are likewise covered in my post to Serving.

 

Daniel 8:21   And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

Daniel 8:22   Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

 

The four generals do not stand up in Alexanders power, the power of Greece.  It says so.

Four kingdoms.  If it was Greece still, then they would still be one kingdom, but they took took territiories each for themselves and started new kingdoms.  And out of one of them became Rome.

 

The only thing these four kingdoms have in common is that they are all of Babylon spiritually.

 

Daniel 8:23:  ......"And in the latter time of their kingdom."....it's grouping them all together, we know they went their separate ways, and one kingdom became powerful (Rome) but they are treated equally here.

It's becase they all have one kingdom ruling over them, and that is Satan's kingdom, ....Babylon..... spiritually speaking.

So, in the latter time of Satan's kingdom, is when this fierce king will stand up, and this fierce king is the little horn.

Did you look at 2 Thessalonians and compare?

Daniel 8:23 ......."when the transgressors are come to the full?.....

Do you really think that evil doers reached their peak back then?  or has sin gotten worse over the years.

You decide.

 

Daniel 8:24 ....."a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences stall stand up."

Who are the christian world with knowledge expecting?

What are the prophesies for?,

and what does "at the time of the end" mean to you?

 

Good observation about spiritual Babylon.  It seems that we so easily forget the effect that the spiritual has on the natural.  We tend to rely on what we can relate to through our senses, and since we can't see the spiritual realm, we lose sight of it's relevance. 

[WilliamL]

 

And I showed you that Scripture acknowledges the Feast of Dedication:

 

John 10:22 Now it was the Feast of Dedication in Jerusalem, and it was winter.

-- speaking precisely of the Jewish feast established to commemorate the Maccabees' cleansing and re-dedication of the Temple, at the time (December) that it was re-dedicated. Which feast Jews have observed continuously for 2079 years. Now, you can ignore the evidence of history all you want, its your choice:

 

I went to the scriptures to find out what this feast of dedication is and it took me all the way back to the days of Moses.

 

It started here, no temple yet, but just an altar.

Numbers 7:84   This was the dedication of the altar, in the day when it was anointed, by the princes of Israel: twelve chargers of silver, twelve silver bowls, twelve spoons of gold:

Numbers 7:88   And all the oxen for the sacrifice of the peace offerings were twenty and four bullocks, the rams sixty, the he goats sixty, the lambs of the first year sixty. This was the dedication of the altar, after that it was anointed.

 

And later here, Solomon builds the temple, and the altar is here

 

2 Chronicles 7:7   Moreover Solomon hallowed the middle of the court that was before the house of the LORD: for there he offered burnt offerings, and the fat of the peace offerings, because the brasen altar which Solomon had made was not able to receive the burnt offerings, and the meat offerings, and the fat.

 

2 Chronicles 7:8   Also at the same time Solomon kept the feast seven days, and all Israel with him, a very great congregation, from the entering in of Hamath unto the river of Egypt.

2 Chronicles 7:9   And in the eighth day they made a solemn assembly: for they kept the dedication of the altar seven days, and the feast seven days.

2 Chronicles 7:16   For now have I chosen and sanctified this house, that my name may be there for ever: and mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually.

 

Now the 2nd temple is built.

 

Ezra 6:15   And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king.

 Ezra 6:16   And the children of Israel, the priests, and the Levites, and the rest of the children of the captivity, kept the dedication of this house of God with joy,

 Ezra 6:17   And offered at the dedication of this house of God an hundred bullocks, two hundred rams, four hundred lambs; and for a sin offering for all Israel, twelve he goats, according to the number of the tribes of Israel. ...

 

It seems to me that this "dedication" of the altar, where the sacrifices are made, is a dedication to God, and not man.  This altar was not in a temple at first, then it stood in the 1st temple that Solomon built, and the 2nd temple also.  It is a dedication to God that his house is sanctified by him, because he made it possible.  I'm not getting what you are telling me, but letting the scriptures tell the story.

 

 

John 10:22   And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.

John 10:23   And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch.

 Unbelievable. The passage in John says 1) it was a feast day, and 2) it was held in the Winter. None of the passages you cite above (other than the one I cited) mention any feast that 1) the Jews continually observed, and 2) held in the winter. Only Hanukkah, also called the Feast of Lights and the Feast of Dedication, fits the meaning of John 10:22. And Hanukkah, as any Jew or literate Christian will tell you, is the annual feast held in December to commemorate the cleansing and re-dedication of the Temple by the Maccabees in 165 BC.

Edited March 8, 2015 by WilliamL

[WilliamL]

 

Daniel 8:21   And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

Daniel 8:22   Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.

 

The four generals do not stand up in Alexanders power, the power of Greece.  It says so.

Four kingdoms.  If it was Greece still, then they would still be one kingdom, but they took took territiories each for themselves and started new kingdoms.  And out of one of them became Rome.

 

William replies: In the whole world, there is not a single historian of this period that would agree with you that Rome came "out of one of" the descendant kingdoms of Alexander. You teach a fantasy. Antiochus IV Epiphanes actually "came out of Rome," where he had been held hostage after his father, Antiochus III the Great, lost the Battle of Magnesia to Rome in 190 BC.

 

"...but not in his power"; the preposition [b- in Aramaic] means either with or in: "in/with his power." The meaning is that none of these kings had the power of Alexander [historically true]; not, that they had no connection to Greece.

 

Daniel 8:23 ......."when the transgressors are come to the full?.....

Do you really think that evil doers reached their peak back then?  or has sin gotten worse over the years.

 

William replies: The transgressors/apostates being referred to were the Jewish (Aaronic) priests, who began corrupting Temple worship and Jewish law, replacing them with Greek customs. High priests began to buy their office from Antiochus, and they killed the rightful and righteous high priest Onias III. The same type of transgression is spoken of in Dan. 9:24, which also took place under Roman rule. These passages of Dan. 8 and 9:24-27 were all fulfilled in accurate detail historically. But you choose to ignore history and/or rewrite it to your suiting. You are welcome to do so, but when you do it in open forum, you deceive others with your falsities, which I will then correct, for the sake of anyone who chooses to hear it. And let them then make up their own minds.

 

Edited March 8, 2015 by WilliamL

[RustyAngeL]

Might it show that God does not have a fixed timeline for the end time? The plan is for it to arrive 1,290 days after the AoD is set up, but God might wait a little longer - perhaps to allow more time for people to repent - but he will not exceed 1,335 days.

God knows exactally when all this will take place. He is the only one who knows.  That is why it is so important for people to repent because we don't know the time.  Don't ever think that you have it all figured out because not even Jesus know the time.  Only the Father.  His plea is just be ready.

[Sister]

 Unbelievable. The passage in John says 1) it was a feast day, and 2) it was held in the Winter. None of the passages you cite above (other than the one I cited) mention any feast that 1) the Jews continually observed, and 2) held in the winter. Only Hanukkah, also called the Feast of Lights and the Feast of Dedication, fits the meaning of John 10:22. And Hanukkah, as any Jew or literate Christian will tell you, is the annual feast held in December to commemorate the cleansing and re-dedication of the Temple by the Maccabees in 165 BC.

 

William

 

Their feast days and celebrations were already considered as abominations to God.  Jewish mysticism already had it's roots from the days of Babylon.  Just because they celebrated this feast in the days of John does mean that it is according to God's instructions, but could be their own feast day they have invented for themselves to take the glory away from God and give it to man.  The original dedication feast had nothing to do with Judas Maccabees.  This very same dedication feast has been perverted.  If you read the old testament, you will find that God sent them prophets continually to correct them.  God had been displeased with them for a long time.

The scriptures are supposed to harmonise, not contradict.  No where does it say in the holy bible that this dedication feast they celebrated during the times of John was instructed by God to celebrate  what Judas Maccabees did or even call him the Savior of Israel..  Howbeit, they did celebrate a dedication feast, but no where does it say it was for the reason you are giving me.  You could be right, they could of celebrated it by then according to a new tradition, but you cannot prove it through the holy scriptures that this feast was ordered by God, but I can prove to you that God had no pleasure in their feast days and celebrations, because they ignored all the prophets and did their own thing.

 

Isaiah around - 739 BC

 Isaiah 1:10   Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.

 Isaiah 1:11   To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.

 Isaiah 1:12   When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts?

 Isaiah 1:13   Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.

 Isaiah 1:14   Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.

[Sister]

These passages of Dan. 8 and 9:24-27 were all fulfilled in accurate detail historically. But you choose to ignore history and/or rewrite it to your suiting. You are welcome to do so, but when you do it in open forum, you deceive others with your falsities, which I will then correct, for the sake of anyone who chooses to hear it. And let them then make up their own minds.

 

I am not ignoring history, but do not agree with your interpretation, which you say, the little horn, this same king with a fierce countenance who magnifies himself against the prince of the host (Christ) by casting the truth to the ground in deceiving, and not by his own power, .....but by Satan's power, as clarified in 2Thessalonians, has nothing to do with the Son of Perdition, but is someone else from the past according to your history books....and mind you, the vision is for the time of the end.  This is what I am specifically disputing.  If you want to go to Daniel 9, we can go there too, because it does not prove anything to back your case on this subject and I would like to prove that God can give us understanding without going to outside sources, because it's all here contained in his Word.

[ghtan]

 

Might it show that God does not have a fixed timeline for the end time? The plan is for it to arrive 1,290 days after the AoD is set up, but God might wait a little longer - perhaps to allow more time for people to repent - but he will not exceed 1,335 days.

God knows exactally when all this will take place. He is the only one who knows.  That is why it is so important for people to repent because we don't know the time.  Don't ever think that you have it all figured out because not even Jesus know the time.  Only the Father.  His plea is just be ready.

 

Actually, I think God seldom work in terms of dates but in terms of targets. Most time prophetic references in the bible are symbolic. Do you remember any prophecy that fixed the date of Jesus' first coming? Instead, he came in the "fullness of time" (Gal 4:4; Eph 1:10). Similarly, the end will come when the "full number of gentiles has come in" (Rom 11:25). No fixed date is involved. That is why Jesus did not provide a date for his second coming.

[Sister]

These passages of Dan. 8 and 9:24-27 were all fulfilled in accurate detail historically. But you choose to ignore history and/or rewrite it to your suiting. You are welcome to do so, but when you do it in open forum, you deceive others with your falsities, which I will then correct, for the sake of anyone who chooses to hear it. And let them then make up their own minds.

 

 

 

Daniel 9:24   Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

 

The seventy weeks started from when the angel spoke to Daniel.

  Daniel 9:25   Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

 

One week passed, from when the angel spoke to Daniel, to when then the command came by Cyrus to start building the temple.

So after one week already passed, you have only 69 weeks left.  The temple did not start construction when the Angel gave the order, but a week later.  So when you reach week 69, it's really week 70, because time lapsed in that first week when nothing was happening.  (70 weeks are determined from that day the angel spoke to Daniel)  Here is your missing week.  Right in the beginning.

  Daniel 9:26   And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

 

Jesus crucified and killed on week 62 (really week 63) We are counting from when the order came by Cyrus now, a week later.  Again the first week is already passed.

  Daniel 9:27   And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

 

Christ shall confirm the covenant for one week. 

Christ started his ministry, preached for 3 1/2 years, was killed, resurrected, showed himself, and his apostles preached for 3 1/2 years.  This is that week he confirmed his covenant.

but in the middle of that week (in the middle of those 7 years total), Christ the Messiah was killed. This is when the sacrifices and oblations by the people are no longer required, for the ultimate sacrifice had taken place at his death.

 

So from week 62, (really week 63) to the destruction of the temple in 70Ad, the prophecy is finished.  The Jews from that day on have never had their own temple.  No temple for around 2000 years now.

This prophecy is specifically about them having the 2nd temple rebuilt to it's destruction.  This is the whole 70 weeks.

 

So after 70Ad, at the destruction of the temple when this prophecy was completed, desolations continue until the consummation, which is Christ's coming.  There is no 70th week to come, for it is passed.

 

 

What does this have to do with the little horn as proof? 

Is it by this scripture, you are pointing that this particular prince that destroys the city and the sanctuary is the little horn?

Daniel 9:26   And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

 

Jerusalem, and it's temple was destroyed by Titus, and his son.  It does not say that the sanctuary was cleansed, but destroyed.  After this unto the end are only desolations, no cleansing of the sanctuary mentioned, for there is no sanctuary/temple since 70Ad.

 

So week 69 is really week 70.  Count from when the angel gave the order to Daniel.  Include that missing week in the first week before building started.

Instead we have a doctrine preached that the 70th week is to come.  If the destruction was at week 69, then does it make sense that the last week until the coming equals 2000 years?  That's a very long week which throws all the others out.

[WilliamL]

 

 Unbelievable. The passage in John says 1) it was a feast day, and 2) it was held in the Winter. None of the passages you cite above (other than the one I cited) mention any feast that 1) the Jews continually observed, and 2) held in the winter. Only Hanukkah, also called the Feast of Lights and the Feast of Dedication, fits the meaning of John 10:22. And Hanukkah, as any Jew or literate Christian will tell you, is the annual feast held in December to commemorate the cleansing and re-dedication of the Temple by the Maccabees in 165 BC.

Their feast days and celebrations were already considered as abominations to God.  Jewish mysticism already had it's roots from the days of Babylon.  Just because they celebrated this feast in the days of John does mean that it is according to God's instructions, but could be their own feast day they have invented for themselves to take the glory away from God and give it to man.  The original dedication feast had nothing to do with Judas Maccabees.  This very same dedication feast has been perverted.  If you read the old testament, you will find that God sent them prophets continually to correct them.  God had been displeased with them for a long time.

 

The scriptures are supposed to harmonise, not contradict.  No where does it say in the holy bible that this dedication feast they celebrated during the times of John was instructed by God to celebrate  what Judas Maccabees did or even call him the Savior of Israel..  Howbeit, they did celebrate a dedication feast, but no where does it say it was for the reason you are giving me.  You could be right, they could of celebrated it by then according to a new tradition, but you cannot prove it through the holy scriptures that this feast was ordered by God, but I can prove to you that God had no pleasure in their feast days and celebrations, because they ignored all the prophets and did their own thing.

 

Isaiah around - 739 BC

 Isaiah 1:10   Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.

 Isaiah 1:11   To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.

 Isaiah 1:12   When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts?

 Isaiah 1:13   Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.

 Isaiah 1:14   Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.

 

Your whole diatribe above has nothing to do with our original debate, wherein you denied the historicity of the Maccabees cleansing and rededicating the Temple in 165 BC, saying that there was no biblical evidence for it. You were wrong on that, so now you've tried to change the subject, rather that admitting you were wrong.

[WilliamL]

 

These passages of Dan. 8 and 9:24-27 were all fulfilled in accurate detail historically. But you choose to ignore history and/or rewrite it to your suiting. You are welcome to do so, but when you do it in open forum, you deceive others with your falsities, which I will then correct, for the sake of anyone who chooses to hear it. And let them then make up their own minds.

 

I am not ignoring history, but do not agree with your interpretation, which you say, the little horn, this same king with a fierce countenance who magnifies himself against the prince of the host (Christ) by casting the truth to the ground in deceiving, and not by his own power, .....but by Satan's power, as clarified in 2Thessalonians, has nothing to do with the Son of Perdition, but is someone else from the past according to your history books....and mind you, the vision is for the time of the end.  This is what I am specifically disputing.  If you want to go to Daniel 9, we can go there too, because it does not prove anything to back your case on this subject and I would like to prove that God can give us understanding without going to outside sources, because it's all here contained in his Word.

 

Without going to outside sources, we would know nothing about when the Persian Empire ruled, when the Greek Empire defeated it, who Alexander the Great was; we would know practically nothing about the history of the period of Christ's era, would not even know the millennium in which he was born, would not know when the 2nd Temple was destroyed, etc. etc. etc. If ignorance is bliss, bliss on.