Historic or Contemporary.

[Ezra]

20 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

He will do the same for the last Gentile World Ruler.

"Gentile" is totally incorrect. "Jewish World Ruler" is the correct term, since the Antichrist must of necessity be a Jew. George Soros -- a renegade Jew -- is a good PRECURSOR to this Jewish Antichrist who will claim to be God. Soros is another minion of Satan bent upon causing worldwide anarchy and chaos. After he is finished, a JEWISH false Messiah will come upon the scene to clean up the mess created by the globalists.  But he will take full control and introduce a false peace for a season.  After that he will claim to be God and will in fact be worshiped.

[Marilyn C]

2 hours ago, Ezra said:

"Gentile" is totally incorrect. "Jewish World Ruler" is the correct term, since the Antichrist must of necessity be a Jew. George Soros -- a renegade Jew -- is a good PRECURSOR to this Jewish Antichrist who will claim to be God. Soros is another minion of Satan bent upon causing worldwide anarchy and chaos. After he is finished, a JEWISH false Messiah will come upon the scene to clean up the mess created by the globalists.  But he will take full control and introduce a false peace for a season.  After that he will claim to be God and will in fact be worshiped.

Hi Ezra,

I don`t see any scriptures there to back up your claims. Do you have any?

These are my thoughts -

`So the Lord of hosts will come down to fight for Mount Zion & for its hill. Like birds flying about, so will the Lord of hosts defend Jerusalem. defending, He will also deliver it; passing over, He will preserve it.........Then the Assyrian shall fall by a sword not of a man......` (Isa. 31: 4 - 8)

So we see that when the Lord returns to deliver Israel from its enemies the Assyrian shall fall. Assyrian is still a nationality today. The famous tennis player, Andre Agassi is of Assyrian nationality. This scripture tells me that the anti-Christ is of Assyrian nationality.

Marilyn.

[Marilyn C]

8 hours ago, Ezra said:

"Gentile" is totally incorrect. "Jewish World Ruler" is the correct term, ....

Just another thought Ezra, while you are looking for that scripture to back up your claim.

`Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.`  (Luke 21: 24)

The Great Image of Daniel 2 is God`s overview of the `Times of the Gentiles` ruling the world, till God sets up His kingdom rule through Israel. Then & only then will there be a Jewish World Ruler.

Marilyn.

[Ezra]

On 2/8/2017 at 11:24 PM, Marilyn C said:

1. Scriptural Basis. There is NO scriptural basis for the historic view. They try to join details about King Neb, with the Lion beast, but God has not said that.

Marilyn,

Since you have mentioned this thread in another discussion, let's examine your statements. Daniel says to Nebuchadnezzar "THOU ART THIS HEAD OF GOLD" (Dan 2:38) in connection with the image of Nebuchadnezzar's dream. So that demolishes your argument right there. That image -- gold, silver, brass, iron, iron and clay -- represents those four ancient empires discussed by Daniel, plus the revived Roman Empire of the future.

If Babylon was represented by the head of gold, it was also represented by the winged lion with a man's heart. History confirms that Medo-Persia succeeded Babylon, and Graeco-Macedonia succeeded Medo-Persia.  Finally Rome succeeded all of these, which are all presented as beasts.

On 2/8/2017 at 11:24 PM, Marilyn C said:

God, by an angel said to Daniel,  `Those great beasts....shall arise,`

Simply because it uses the future tense-- "shall arise" -- does not nullify the fact that those great beasts represented the four major empires in the Mediterranean region. The point to note is that they shall arise OUT OF THE EARTH (earthly kingdoms) not that they were future, which would be ludicrous.

On 2/8/2017 at 11:24 PM, Marilyn C said:

The 4 kingdoms rule contemporaneously – ruling at the same time. You will see in Dan. 7: 7 that the last kingdom ruler treads down the other 3 kingdoms

Once again, this is completely incorrect. This verse says that this beast "stamped the residue with the feet of it" (KJV) which simply means that the residue of those previous empires was wiped out by Rome, which dominated the ancient world and imposed its laws and customs on the Mediterranean region.

On 2/8/2017 at 11:24 PM, Marilyn C said:

The Contemporary View – The 4 beastly kingdoms are the 4 great Federations of our time.

Now this is PURE FANTASY.  There are no such "4 great federation of our time".  We know that the European Union is on shaky ground right now, and it is the only "federation" worth talking about.  With Brexit a reality, and the nationalist movements in other European countries, this mishmash of Europe with cease to exist.  

The British Commonwealth has more or less ceased to have any significance, the Russian Federation is not a true federation since many of those countries have been forced into coming under the Russian umbrella, so where did you come up with this wild and wacky idea?

[Marilyn C]

14 hours ago, Ezra said:

 

Since you have mentioned this thread in another discussion, let's examine your statements. Daniel says to Nebuchadnezzar "THOU ART THIS HEAD OF GOLD" (Dan 2:38) in connection with the image of Nebuchadnezzar's dream. So that demolishes your argument right there. That image -- gold, silver, brass, iron, iron and clay -- represents those four ancient empires discussed by Daniel, plus the revived Roman Empire of the future.

If Babylon was represented by the head of gold, it was also represented by the winged lion with a man's heart. History confirms that Medo-Persia succeeded Babylon, and Graeco-Macedonia succeeded Medo-Persia.  Finally Rome succeeded all of these, which are all presented as beasts.

 

Hi Ezra,

Thank you for responding & posting your thoughts.

1. I agree that God said that king Neb. is the Head of gold. Quite clear no ambiguity there. However......I see nowhere that God tells us that the lion of Dan. 7 is king Neb. That is your assumption, bro.

2. `shall arise.` Do you not think that God knows His tenses? You said -

Simply because it uses the future tense-- "shall arise" -- does not nullify the fact that those great beasts represented the four major empires in the Mediterranean region. The point to note is that they shall arise OUT OF THE EARTH (earthly kingdoms) not that they were future, which would be ludicrous.

God, (through the angel) was talking to Daniel who was already in Babylon & actually near its end. God doesn`t say `Babylon shall arise...` That would be nonsense. God is talking future.

3. `treading down the other 3 kingdoms.` You say -

Once again, this is completely incorrect. This verse says that this beast "stamped the residue with the feet of it" (KJV) which simply means that the residue of those previous empires was wiped out by Rome, which dominated the ancient world and imposed its laws and customs on the Mediterranean region.

How could Rome tread down the Babylonian government or the Medes & Persian Government when God had already judged them & done away with them. They were no more. Also Rome was many centuries after Babylon. How on earth could it affect that system. (600 BC Babylon to near the time of the Lord.) That is quite a stretch & quite ridiculous, Ezra.

4.The first 3 kingdoms are given an extension after God sets up His kingdom rule on earth. Thus they could only be contemporary to the time of God`s kingdom rule on the earth.                                                   

`As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season & a time.` (Dan. 7: 12)

Ezra, you have not addressed this scripture as to what you think it means. Do you want to have a try.

Marilyn.

 

[Ezra]

1 minute ago, Marilyn C said:

I agree that God said that king Neb. is the Head of gold. Quite clear no ambiguity there. However......I see nowhere that God tells us that the lion of Dan. 7 is king Neb. That is your assumption, bro.

Sorry, but if you are still capable at stumbling over this matter and saying *I see nowhere*, then what you are doing is deliberately avoiding the truth.  So it is not my assumption, but your presumption and we cannot discuss anything more.  

[Marilyn C]

Just now, Ezra said:

Sorry, but if you are still capable at stumbling over this matter and saying *I see nowhere*, then what you are doing is deliberately avoiding the truth.  So it is not my assumption, but your presumption and we cannot discuss anything more.  

Hi Ezra,

OK, Look forward to discussing on another topic, bro. Marilyn.

[Omegaman 3.0]

On 2/10/2017 at 5:48 AM, Daniel 11:36 said:

s your way of eliminating missmuffet's view of the related scriptures?

This person has more truth of the scriptures than you think Marilyn

There are others who have discovered the same

Daniel, please keep to the topic instead of criticizing what others think on the topic. Nothing in the quote I just posted, even addresses the topic at all!

[Marilyn C]

On ‎11‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 0:48 AM, Daniel 11:36 said:

Is this your way of eliminating missmuffet's view of the related scriptures?

This person has more truth of the scriptures than you think Marilyn

There are others who have discovered the same

 

Hi Daniel 11:36,

I must have missed your post & it was only that Omegaman brought it up that I went back & found it. Sorry for my oversight. Now, NO I was not trying to eliminate missmuffet`s view. That was the trouble, she never posted her view only someone else`s. I was concerned that she thinks that is OK to present other people`s `teachings` as truth, (which they may or may not be). If she posted that view in her own words then we would be able to have a discussion. I would ask her questions concerning her view & she would then try & back them up with scripture & so on.

If you want to put forward the historic view, then go right ahead, & maybe we can discuss it together.

regards, Marilyn.

[Marilyn C]

1 hour ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Daniel, please keep to the topic instead of criticizing what others think on the topic. Nothing in the quote I just posted, even addresses the topic at all!

Hi Omegaman,

I think there has been a mix up there, bro. I have addressed Daniel`s comments now as I missed them before.

Marilyn.