The Great Image.

[Eoreris]

The great image Nebuchadnezzar seen was the end time (Superpower)  It,s foundation (Feet) was made up of things that God has never said in scripture such as "All men are created equal"  Sayings like this were (Made up) by founding fathers as they imported slaves without acts of war.. just grabbing them and chaining them and taking them..  This end time superpower will now have this saying held to account.  The statues feet and toes (It,s foundation) is holding up all of it,s weight of brass, gold and World power.  If this foundation (Mixed races- seed of men) gives away then the entire statue (Kingdom-Nation) will collapse.  This nation is (Here) today..  And is already having feet and toes collapsing.. (BUT)  It will not collapse yet until a (Stone) out of Heaven not cut with human hands comes down and (Strikes) it on it's feet..   This is the 2 witnesses to come soon with plagues.. They will walk it's greatest city underfoot for 42 months.. Then... The golden head, the arms, the legs, all of it will fall in God,s judgement. Blessed are those that receive this truth of interpretation.

[Diaste]

On 4/26/2016 at 11:31 AM, Ezra said:

I thought you had studied the prophecy of Daniel, which gives you the "solid scripture".  Anyhow, here's the breakdown, and Dan 7:17 tells us that these four beasts are "four kings [empires] which shall arise out the earth":

Babylon (Dan 7:4)

Medo-Persia (Dan 7:5)

Graeco-Macedonia (Dan 7:6)

Rome (Dan 7:7a)

Revived Roman Empire (Dan 7:7b,8).

Please note below that the fourth beast has great iron teeth (corresponding to legs of iron) and has ten horns (corresponding to ten kingdoms), and that the Antichrist is represented by the Little Horn.

After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. (Dan 7:7,8).

 

The Iron kingdom is not Rome, the papacy, or a revived Roman empire, nor the EU. Demanding the Iron kingdoms identity as Roman is speculation in opposition to clear lineage of the statue kingdoms given in Daniel. It would make far more sense to conclude the Iron kingdom is a revived Greek empire. Because the little horn comes from the four notable horns after the great horn was broken, we see a succession of Grecian rulers, not Roman. But this isn't the case either as the succession is explained in Daniel 11 where the willful king comes from a specific line of kings that ruled over time from, and in, a particular geographic arena, and again it's not Roman. When scripture speak of the kings of the north and south it's in reference to the demise of Greece and the rise of the Diadochi. Why is this true? One, Rome had east and west divisions but it was still the same kingdom where the kings of the north and south are distinct from one another. Two, because scripture itself gives us the clue; the antichrist, beast, little horn, willful king, comes from one of the four notable horns that rose in the wake of Alexander's death and the partitioning of Greece. This leaves us with four geographic locations where the beast can possibly arise: Macedonia, Egypt, Asia Minor and the Mideast, with the additional fact these areas are the kingdoms ruled by the Diadochi. So Rome is out of consideration.

Where does the beast come from? From the physical and spiritual line of Antiochus lV, out of the Seleucid empire, and from one of several countries in the Mideast: Syria, Iraq, Iran, maybe another. It's my contention that since Babylon was the seat of power in that area for the Babylonians, Persians, Greece and the Seleucid Empire, it's likely the beast also hails from the general area and indeed Daniel 11 says just that.

In the end Rome is forced into scripture where a Mideastern beast is fully expected by the prophet.

[Diaste]

On 4/25/2016 at 2:18 AM, Marilyn C said:

Hi Trevor & Kan,

I liked that bit about `no revival there.`

However you both have gone on to many other topics & have not really given me scriptures that specifically tell us who the `feet & toes` are.

I have not written who I believe the `feet & toes` are yet as I am giving people time to discuss & work through what they are saying. If you would like me to post my view then I will - just ask.

Blessings, Marilyn.

Please post your view. I would like to see that.

 

[Diaste]

On 4/26/2016 at 0:32 AM, Kan said:

The "if" in my sentence, does not denote doubt, but process of logic.

"If" = condition to be met, "then" = condition fulfilled for conclusion.

There is no if, because the Bible has them dividing the single kingdom, and yet while divided, the Bible makes the statement that they are still considered as one Kingdom.

The "if" in my sentence, is our deductions from the text. "If the Bible says this... then that must apply."

Here is the application again, and by the way, we may conclude here that there are ten kings, because there are ten toes, but the Bible does not offer that conclusion, neither does it confirm it. Anecdotes have to be kept aside when teaching straight Bible.

But from this dream alone, and not counting Daniel 7, we may safely conclude a plurality of kings here, but that's all for the moment. 

The question "who are the ten toes?" should be asked "What happened to the fourth kingdom?" Because the iron is still in there.

The fact that the toes are not mentioned separately from the feet, shows connection. We have already seen how the image is a description of time, with successive kingdoms from Daniel until the end. One kingdom takes over another right down to the fourth, but the fourth is not taken over by a stronger kingdom, but gets mixed with pieces of "miry clay"  -sticky mud. A perfect description of the demise of Rome.

If the fourth kingdom is Rome, then Rome must have been divided, and that division did not end the effect of acting as one single kingdom, which is fulfilled in the division of Rome by the Euro kingdoms, which are again united through the rule of the Papacy as one kingdom. 

I suppose 'if' the premise is valid 'then' the conclusion would follow. Logically 'if' has to reflect the dataset. 'If' and 'then' reference each other, in a database for example. If the 'if' term does not appear in the dataset the return is false. Here the dataset is scripture and the 'if', Rome, does not appear and therefore the conclusion is returned false.

The toes and feet do not denote a particular kingdom, nor the return of a kingdom, or divisions of a kingdom. This image of toes and feet are a description of the condition and makeup of the kingdom in question. In no way does the description identify Rome. All the other clues in Daniel regarding the identity of the Iron kingdom lead us to the Mideast, the remnants of Greece, the Seleucid empire and the lineage of Anitochus lV.  From the statue we have to keep in mind all the facts. One fact that many miss is this: The iron breaks 'all these', Dan 2:40. What are 'all these'? The Gold, Silver, and Brass kingdoms, of course. Rome did not do that, but there was a kingdom that did.

[Diaste]

On 4/18/2016 at 11:05 AM, Ezra said:

I believe this would be better represented as the Revived Roman Empire, since it is not one kingdom but several kingdoms (nations).  Most commentators equate this with the European Union, which also constitutes the old Holy Roman Empire. The mixture of iron and clay shows its fundamental weakness, which is quite evident today.

Because the Antichrist will control this confederation of nations, it "shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces". The Antichrist is the Little Horn that "shall speak great words against the Most High" (Dan 7:24). He is called the Little Horn elsewhere in Daniel.

Maybe the 'difference' is something else. I don't see any difference between Rome and the precious metal kingdoms. All of them were made up of many nations. Babylon and Persia and Greece ruled many nations and the empire was called either Babylon, Persia, or Greece. So no difference there. In researching the administration of these kingdoms the governments were essentially the same. All promoted peace, security, commerce, education, the arts, even in the conquered nations; and the people of the conquered nations enjoyed personal, religious and political freedoms. Rome followed this example. All these kingdoms were ruled by emperors who mostly did as they wished even as the administration of the empire was governed by other political bodies and hierarchies. So again, no real differences there and once again, Rome is not in consideration and neither is the EU. Since we are looking for a 'different' kingdom it's reasonable to look to an empire that was the opposite of these three. If we could find an empire that exhibited warlike tendencies, where personal, political, and religious freedoms were banned, where art and education is strictly controlled, and the state dictated daily life, we would a real contender for the Iron Kingdom. 

There is an empire that fits the description of the Iron Kingdom and that's fundamental Islam. In truth the actions of Islam both in ancient times and today fit scriptural facts from Daniel and Revelation seamlessly and precisely. Islam was the most brutal empire in history; bent on conquering the entire world and forcing conversion to Islam under pain of slavery, taxation or death. Islam destroyed all references to any other religion including, books, art, cities, statues and temples or churches, same thing they are doing today. The precious metal kingdoms and Rome did none of that.

Another point that's a problem for interpreting an RRE, or the EU, as the Iron Kingdom is the existence of the EU (Rome) as a powerful political entity. The beast is not coming to power through worldly means or circumstances. The world is in awe of the beast and the dragon after the dragon heals the deadly head wound the beast receives. This is a spiritually powerful, supernatural act, allowed by God, that vaults the beast, not to control of the world, to garnering the awe and worship of the world; the control comes later through the actions of the false prophet. The control of the world by the beast and the dragon arrives through spiritual means: great signs, idols that demand worship, and the compulsion to receive the mark or live like an animal. There's a good deal more evidence leading away from the Roman interpretation and pointing directly to Islam but it's a bit too much for here.

[Ezra]

2 hours ago, Diaste said:

The Iron kingdom is not Rome, the papacy, or a revived Roman empire, nor the EU.

Since four empires succeeded each other as shown by Daniel, iron represents the Roman empire without the shadow of a doubt.  Greece does not succeed Greece. But everyone is free to create their own fantasies.

[Diaste]

On 7/17/2016 at 9:17 AM, Ezra said:

Since four empires succeeded each other as shown by Daniel, iron represents the Roman empire without the shadow of a doubt.  Greece does not succeed Greece. But everyone is free to create their own fantasies.

Actually Greece did succeed Greece in a way. The Diadochi ruled after Alexander so Grecian generals did indeed rule the Grecian Empire after the fall. The point was that Greece arising after Greece makes more sense than stuffing Rome into a place where it does not belong. The idea of Rome as the Iron Kingdom is a flight of fancy based on specious reasoning concocted as mere distraction. The kingdoms in question all took over the geographic area of the previous. In the order of succession it's clear the fourth must do the same. Rome did not accomplish this. Only Persia and Greece ruled Mesopotamia after Babylon, Rome did not. In 323 BC when Greece fell Rome was a small state at constant war with the local tribes, well out of it's depth in relation to the mighty Grecian Empire. In succession, the Diadochi ruled next as the Roman empire would not be any kind of power for centuries. In fact, the Roman Empire never did rule in Mesopotamia as it's conquests were to the north, south and west. After Alexander, Seleucid and his descendants ruled in the Mideast. This fits with Daniel as the little horn comes from one of the Diadochi, which came from Greece, which took over from Persia, who wrested control from Babylon. Daniel 11 recounts the succession of the Seleucid kings through Antiochus lV right to the willful king, who is the little horn and the beast. Again, Rome has nothing to do with last kingdom or the beast.

As far as the shadow of doubt goes there is a very large shadow cast on the Roman interpretation of the Iron Kingdom. There is no scripture backing the Roman claim. It's a story made up about 100 years ago meant to confuse and distract from reality. There is a great amount of scripture supporting the lineage of the beast from Babylon to Greece and Seleucid, right to the willful king at the end of the age. So, post some scripture proving Rome is the Iron Kingdom and quit wasting effort on derisive comments.

Addendum:

It is possible the beast comes from one of four areas: Modern Greece, Turkey, Egypt or somewhere in the Ancient Seleucid empire. I think it's interesting that Daniel says, "And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain;" Between the seas on the map is the area where the Seleucid empire reigned. The old Seleucid empire is between the Mediterranean, Black, Caspian, Red and Arabian Seas as well as the Persian Gulf. In this case then Egypt, Greece and Rome would be out of consideration. Turkey and Seleucid would still be in contention for the beast empire as Turkey is located in the same area. However, the old Seleucid empire is in the very middle of the Seas in question. The beast is going to establish his palace 'in the glorious holy mountain." This has to be in Israel and the description fits the Temple Mount. I'm convinced that political entities with long histories of seats of power, and palaces, established in the capitols of Turkey, Greece, or Egypt would not move those symbols of power to the Temple Mount; such an act would be political disaster. This act of, "plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain;" is going to require stunning boldness coming from an entity that either has no borders, no brick and mortar capitol and a hidden agenda, likely all of the above.

It's also interesting to note the scripture says, 'tabernacles'. These are tents. That's a desert dwelling Arab constituent like in the old days. 

[Marilyn C]

On ‎17‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 10:30 PM, Diaste said:

Please post your view. I would like to see that.

 

Hi Diaste,

Thank you for asking & sorry it has taken me so long to reply.

I believe the `feet & toes,` of the great image represent the Islam. The two aspects of Islam - Sunni & Shite are always in constant friction. This to me represents `the kingdom shall be partly strong & partly fragile.` (Dan. 2: 43) There are many details in God`s word that show us that Islam is this final world ruler.

The terrifying beast - ` dreadful & terrible, exceedingly strong......devouring, breaking in pieces, & trampling....different from all the beasts that were before it.` (Dan. 7: 7)

His nationality – Assyrian.  (Isa. 31: 8     Micah 5: 5)

The region he comes from – the Ancient Assyrian Empire. (Dan. 11: 35 – 43)

Leader of Ancient Assyrian region -  Iraq, Syria & Jordan. (Dan. 7: 8)

Leader of Islamic Federation – 10 kings of Islam. (Dan. 7: 8,   Rev. 17: 12)

He rules the world – (Rev. 16: 13 & 14,     19: 19)

 

Marilyn.

 

[Diaste]

47 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Diaste,

Thank you for asking & sorry it has taken me so long to reply.

I believe the `feet & toes,` of the great image represent the Islam. The two aspects of Islam - Sunni & Shite are always in constant friction. This to me represents `the kingdom shall be partly strong & partly fragile.` (Dan. 2: 43) There are many details in God`s word that show us that Islam is this final world ruler.

The terrifying beast - ` dreadful & terrible, exceedingly strong......devouring, breaking in pieces, & trampling....different from all the beasts that were before it.` (Dan. 7: 7)

His nationality – Assyrian.  (Isa. 31: 8     Micah 5: 5)

The region he comes from – the Ancient Assyrian Empire. (Dan. 11: 35 – 43)

Leader of Ancient Assyrian region -  Iraq, Syria & Jordan. (Dan. 7: 8)

Leader of Islamic Federation – 10 kings of Islam. (Dan. 7: 8,   Rev. 17: 12)

He rules the world – (Rev. 16: 13 & 14,     19: 19)

 

Marilyn.

 

Hey,

As you know I see the same thing concerning Islam; it's the beast empire and it's leader is the beast.  It could be that 'the Assyrian' is a general term for the invader from the north that comes from the nation of Syria, even if the ruler of Syria was born in, lets say, Iraq. But I see the same thing you do; there will be a Syrian invasion of Israel.

[Marilyn C]

26 minutes ago, Diaste said:

Hey,

As you know I see the same thing concerning Islam; it's the beast empire and it's leader is the beast.  It could be that 'the Assyrian' is a general term for the invader from the north that comes from the nation of Syria, even if the ruler of Syria was born in, lets say, Iraq. But I see the same thing you do; there will be a Syrian invasion of Israel.

Hi Diaste,

Great.....then as we know the divisions marking Syria, Iraq & Jordan were all done by the allies after WW2, so I believe the old Assyrian region will come together. Note ISIS is trying to do just that. And tens of thousands of Syrians have just fled into Jordan because of Russia`s bombing, thus taking Sunni Islam with them! Mmmmmm..............

Marilyn.