Daniel 8

[ARGOSY]

42 minutes ago, Spock said:

Wow, pretty interesting stuff brother.  I'm not saying I buy it because I don't, but at least you have some support to make that statement. Although going back and forth using 390 and 360 looks to be a stretch to me if you want to know. It seems forced. And since when do we use the Greek calendar for any interpretation?  You know what calendar God uses, so I definitely can't buy this on that basis alone. 

Vut I will give you some props for having some basis, albeit, a very very small one.

spock

Lol, well in my defense, this was during the time that Greek culture and language dominated the Middle East. Not only that, Greek was so prominent that even in Jesus time, the entire New Testament was written in Greek and not Hebrew. So it's not far fetched to use Greek methods during a Greek time. This is how Herodotus, a historian, describes the counting of years, he was calculating the no. of days in 70 years::

"Take seventy years as the span of a man's life. Those seventy years contain 25,200 days without counting intercalary months. Add a month every other year to make the seasons come round with proper regularity, and you will have 35 additional months which will make 1050 days. Thus the total days of your seventy years is 26,250 and not a single one of them is like the next in what it brings."

ie he uses 30 day months to get 70 years

30 days x 12 months x 70 years = 2520 days in 70 years

then he adds in intercalary months for every second year:

30 days x 35 years = 1050

So Herodotus was describing the calculation of Greek years, being 360 days and every second year 390 days.

[ARGOSY]

47 minutes ago, Spock said:

Brother,

oh yeah, thanks for reminding me how Antichus died- by disease. I forgot. Ok, I will give you that one.

as for the other point you made, my gut tells me to reject your logic.  I cannot accept your interpretation you set forth regarding a direct attack on the Prince of princes. You may be right, but my gut is usually pretty accurate, and I'm seeing Jesus, and the end of end times on this one. I'm seeing this dude as the beast of rev 13, not Antiochus.  Thus, I see a near far application being given to us in Daniel 7/8. 

My third basis for making this end time was verse 23:. “In the latter part of their reign...."

i interpret this to mean at the very end, not just at the end of Alexander the Greats reign. Notice, the nations that made up the Greecian Dynasty are still present. They will rise again which will be the latter part of their reign. 

Spock's is in the house

Aaah are you introducing a "gap" theory into the Persian/Greek timeline as described in Daniel 8?  You are so certain of the end times application that you wish to insert a break there that the text does not describe. Surely "the latter part of their reign" refers to the latter part of their reign?   Towards the end of the goat/Greek empire, just before the Romans took over the four kingdoms, there will be this little horn. 

In this place context certainly favours a Seleucid king who exists during the power of the four horns of Greece, rather than a future king who exists long after the reign of the four horns of Greece. My gut feel, which can be correct, is that you are incorrect   ...    

[WilliamL]

2 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

Where I do disagree is that Rev 13 is clear that the beast/antichrist will dominate for the last 42 months , and the false prophet will be focussed on giving the beast power. So during the final great tribulation there is ONLY ONE final antichrist as described in Rev 13 and 2 Thess 2 (and Daniel 11:36-45).   And so although you speak some truth here, still there is only one Satanic inspired antichrist who shall rule during the last 42 months

Be careful here. Rev. 13 only states that the "mouth" of the Beast -- that is his spokesman, not the Beast himself -- will be "given authority to continue for 42 months." The Beast and his spokesman are two different beings, just as Moses as his "mouth"/spokesman Aaron were. Ex. 4:14-16 These 42 months are not "the last" of the Beast's dominion: Revelation nowhere says that. Neither does it ever say or indicate that these months will occur during the Trib. They in fact do not, but rather are post-Trib, during the time of the Wrath of God, that part which is called "Jacob's trouble." Jer. 30:7

2 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

2) I agree that the bible does not even mention a rebuilt temple.  2 Thessalonians 2, the often quoted source for a rebuilt temple refers to the anticrist being at the "most holy place" of God  (according to the Greek) , which as you say could refer to the temple mount and not necessarily a rebuilt temple. But Ezekiel refers to a temple that is already built BUT requires cleansing.   I suspect that Christians are going to help the antichrist build an evil temple in a misguided attempt to help the Jews and build our own Tower of Babel just before the great tribulation. This temple will be cleansed during the millenium as per the temple cleansing of Ezekiel chapters 42-44

I, and I believe most others, do not believe that Ezek. 40-45 describe an already built Temple; but rather, only the design for one. Just as Moses was shown the exact pattern of the Tabernacle, and David was shown the pattern of the Temple Solomon was to build.

We are told in Zech. 3:8-10 and 6:12-13 that The Branch, having the name of Yoshua/Yeshua, "shall build the Temple of YHWH...and shall sit and rule on His throne..." This is a messianic prophecy, whereby Jesus/Yeshua, called the Branch in a number of scriptures, will be the one given charge by God to both build and rule from the Millennial Temple.

No Temple built by an antichrist would ever be called the House of God by scripture. Neither would one built by Jews, unless God specifically called and authorized them to do so, like Moses, Solomon, and Zerubbabel were so called. But scripture says no such thing about any such End Time temple.

[Spock]

William,

Do you agree sacrifices will be reinstituted in the last days before Christ's return? If so, where will this be taking place?

[WilliamL]

1 hour ago, Spock said:

Ok, now that I've come out of the corner for not listening to you, here are my thoughts on these three points.  Actually, brother Argosy stole them, but just so you know, here are mine:

1. When I say antichrist, I mean the beast pursuant to Rev 13 and Rev 19, see below:

 20But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image.

2. You may be right, but I assume if sacrifices will be reinstituted and the beast will do his abomination thing, it will be much like Antiochus. I won't make a big deal though (small potatoes). I just believe strongly this will happen and is very important because the GT commences here.

I answered Argosy's points above.

I agree that the Beast will be the baddest antichrist, other than Satan himself, who is also one. But please note that the Beast only arises from the Abyss (Rev. 17:8) after that Abyss is opened at the 5th Trumpet. This is after the 6th Seal Rapture of the saints; whereas the Son of Perdition comes before the Trib. even begins. The Trib begins (Dan. 12:1) when the Son of Perdition commits the Abomination of Desolation (Dan. 11:45), and ends just before the 6th Seal's great heavenly and earthly cataclysms and quickly-following Rapture. 2 Thes. 2:8 clearly tells us that the SoD meets his demise at that Coming of the Lord. So the Beast cannot be the Son of Perdition: they are two different antichrists -- the SoD before and during the Trib, the Beast after the Trib.

[WilliamL]

3 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

This event occurred during a time when the Greeks dominated the region, therefore the Greek Calendar is best. The book of Maccabees dates both the beginning and end of that period:

I Maccabees 1:54 says:"On the 15th day of the 9th month of the 145th year [of the kingdom of the Greeks] king Antiochus set up the abominable idol of desolation upon the altar of God."

 I Mac. 4:52,53 "And they arose before the morning of the 25th day of the 9th month of the 148th year, and they offered sacrifices according to the law upon the new altar...

That describes 3 years 10 days. Herodotus describes a Greek year as alternating between 360 days and 390 days. 

390+360+390+10= 1150 days

I am not familiar with that Herodotus reference, which does not make calendrical sense. Nevertheless, at the time of the Maccabees 300 years later than Herodotus, the Greeks kept a lunar-solar calendar that began in the Spring, like the Jews. Their years lasted 354/5 and 384/5 days, depending upon whether or not a 13th lunar month was added.

[WilliamL]

17 minutes ago, Spock said:

Do you agree sacrifices will be reinstituted in the last days before Christ's return? If so, where will this be taking place?

No, I do not. No scripture says so. Daniel 12:11, which is the "abomination of desolation" quote to which Jesus referred, specifically does not mention sacrifices, although many English Bibles (such as my NKJV) add the word in italics. That is, it is an opinion inserted by the translators, not a word found written in the Hebrew.

The prophecy of Daniel 9:27 was fulfilled in the first century A.D. with the destruction of the Temple by the Romans, and does not apply to the End Times.

So this is why I warn people that they might get caught looking past the mark for the fulfillment of End Time events, if they are pre-wrath and/or post-trib and expect to see a rebuilt Temple or Temple Mount blood sacrifices before the Second Coming. No justification in scripture for expecting these things.

[ARGOSY]

On 2/14/2016 at 5:01 PM, WilliamL said:

I am not familiar with that Herodotus reference, which does not make calendrical sense. Nevertheless, at the time of the Maccabees 300 years later than Herodotus, the Greeks kept a lunar-solar calendar that began in the Spring, like the Jews. Their years lasted 354/5 and 384/5 days, depending upon whether or not a 13th lunar month was added.

You are right that it doesn't make sense, but it's the way Herodotus describes a Greek year:

"Take seventy years as the span of a man's life. Those seventy years contain 25,200 days without counting intercalary months. Add a month every other year to make the seasons come round with proper regularity, and you will have 35 additional months which will make 1050 days. Thus the total days of your seventy years is 26,250 and not a single one of them is like the next in what it brings.

Using his method, the Greek calendar would drift away from the seasons quite rapidly, they would not associate a month with a season. Which seems illogical to us, only because it's not something we are used to. It seems unstructured to us, but to the Greeks they may have been perfectly comfortable with it. 

I Maccabees 1:54 says:"On the 15th day of the 9th month of the 145th year [of the kingdom of the Greeks] king Antiochus set up .....

Now Spock disputes the use of the Greek calendar, but the text itself seems to be counting Greek years, from the beginning of Greek Empire. It's the 145th year of the Greek empire. 

 

[WilliamL]

48 minutes ago, ARGOSY said:

You are right that it doesn't make sense, but it's the way Herodotus describes a Greek year:

"Take seventy years as the span of a man's life. Those seventy years contain 25,200 days without counting intercalary months. Add a month every other year to make the seasons come round with proper regularity, and you will have 35 additional months which will make 1050 days. Thus the total days of your seventy years is 26,250 and not a single one of them is like the next in what it brings.

Using his method, the Greek calendar would drift away from the seasons quite rapidly, they would not associate a month with a season. Which seems illogical to us, only because it's not something we are used to. It seems unstructured to us, but to the Greeks they may have been perfectly comfortable with it. 

I Maccabees 1:54 says:"On the 15th day of the 9th month of the 145th year [of the kingdom of the Greeks] king Antiochus set up .....

Now Spock disputes the use of the Greek calendar, but the text itself seems to be counting Greek years, from the beginning of Greek Empire. It's the 145th year of the Greek empire. 

Herodotus was one confused puppy, but that was not uncommon for ancient historians, because there were so many different calendars used among the various nations to try to correlate. (The author(s) of 1 and 2 Kings had enough troubles just trying to correlate the parallel reigns of the kings of Judah and Israel!) Also, as Velikovsky showed, before the mid-700s BC cataclysms briefly alluded to in the Bible and other ancient histories, earth literally had a 360-day year. No joke. Velikovsky's 30-page chapter on the subject, "The 360-day Year," in Worlds in Collision, provides a vast and wide-ranging amount of data from ancient cultures worldwide that proves the literal 360-day year existed up until the time of King Uzziah.

As for the calendar used in the books of Maccabees, these were dated from the beginning of the reign of Seleucis I Nicator in 312 BC. The 145th year (= 144 years + whatever months) of the Seleucid Era therefore began in the spring of 168 BC.

[James Bejon]

On 11 February 2016 at 1:00 PM, Kan said:

"When the transgressors are come to the full." The four Grecian provinces remained under Rome, right until the Barbarian nations pilfered Rome, and regulated its old territories, subdividing them and naming them after their conquests. This did not happen widely until the 4th century AD.

Nevertheless, the term "transgressors" is talking about "the abomination that makes desolate" the truth, it is "the mystery of iniquity" - talked about by the apostle Paul, which was "already working" on his day, centuries before it would take control of the world. That is, before the 1260 years of the "dark ages," rightly named.

"Transgressors" by Biblical interpretation is "law breakers," not any laws, but specifically the laws of God. Sometimes the Antichrist is called the lawless one.

The ministry of Christ was to bring the benefits of His sacrifice to the world, through the knowledge and application of the sanctuary in heaven by faith, see Hebrews 8. Paul could not tell what he wanted about this subject, because the people were still living off milk and not solid spiritual food. The temple in heaven contains the laws of God, under or beside the throne, and the only mediator between heaven and earth is Jesus Christ. But the Papacy usurped this place and made their temples and priests and systems of rule in the earth, robbing the world of great salvation and light.

This is what Daniel was inquiring about, and this is the crux of the whole book of Daniel. Therefor all (vision) time prophecies in Daniel, chapters 9 and 12, fit into the 2300 year prophecy that would transpire between the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, in 457 BC, and the end of the 2300 years, when the issue of God's rightful place would be resolved and understood by the world.

The world is facing a test, whether they will follow and obey the commandments of men or those of God. The issue is about the law of God and worship. Hence we see the oft repeated phrase in Revelation, "Here are they that keep the commandments of God and have the faith of Jesus."

The little horn continues tight until the end, and therefor it could not be BC only.

Hi Kan.  I’m not 100% sure what you’re saying here.  Are you saying the 21st cent. AD could plausibly be considered to be ‘the end of the rule/kingdom’ of people like Seleucus and Ptolemy?  If so, that strikes me as quite a stretch.