pretrib Timing of the Rapture

[Psalms37:4]

14 hours ago, Last Daze said:

I'm not sure why you think Daniel was obligated to expound to that level of detail to Nebuchadnezzar.  He's telling the king what his dream was.  Daniel wasn't there to give the king a detailed account of successive kingdoms, only to explain the king's dream to him as revealed to him by God.

That's the point I was trying to get across. The dream is about 4 kingdoms, nothing else, not even the rulers are of significance.

 

 

 

 

[Psalms37:4]

13 hours ago, simplejeff said:

So what ? Thinking as the world thinks ?!?  What he didn't take fondly, and what you think, does not ever change any Scripture nor anything that happened.

"the king exlaimed" ,   is quote of what kind of king ?  Good with Integrity and honest, truthful ?   No.

Stick with who had integrity, and is honest, and truthful : Jesus first,  then Daniel and the faithful ones.

Jesus always had perfect integrity, and no time nor any moment did He lack Righteousness ....

Yahweh Himself speaks the highest testimony of Daniel.  

What Yahweh wanted Daniel to speak  Daniel spoke.

Neither Jesus nor Daniel spoke as if under constraint nor under pressure to nor controlled by anyone else, period.

They (BOTH) spoke the Father's Word, Yahweh's Testimony, Yahweh directed.

 

 

 

[Diaste]

On 11/13/2017 at 12:14 PM, WilliamL said:

And who is "the King?"  The same king of the north spoken of throughout Daniel 11 -- THE king of the north, the spiritual ruler over the earthly realm. There is no new personage suddenly being proclaimed here in verse 36, or else the definite article "the" would not be used.

This isn't really the topic but it doesn't matter to me. I like the exploration.

In fact we see several kings in Dan 11 right from the get go. Verse 3 and 4 refer to Alexander and the Diadochi. This is obviously where we see the king of the north and the king of the south emerge. Ptolemy of Egypt began the reign of the KOTS and Antigonus in Asia Minor was another strong king who ruled the North.  On a rational note I'm on the look out for the other two, Cassander and Seleucid, throughout Dan 11 and 12 only because v 4 tells us Alexanders empire would divide to the four winds. That doesn't mean that all four MUST appear in Dan 11 but if the evidence suggests they do then it's certainly not out of bounds to conclude the kings of the "four winds" appear.

By v 11 the KOTS is the stronger king and defeated the KOTN twice; once in v 7 and once in v 11. Only by v 15, after many years does the KOTN prevail.

Verse 16 is saying another actor is coming against the KOTN. The KOTS has just been defeated. The arms and the people could not withstand and there was no strength in the realm of the KOTS to withstand. Now there must be another actor that come against the winner, the KOTN, as no strength of anything was left to the KOTS.

The KOTN north is the winner of the war with the KOTS defeated. So who is the 'he' that comes against him (KOTN)? Is the KOTN coming against the KOTN? That seems quite illogical. And it cannot be the KOTS as no strenght to withstand exists in the KOTS.

We also see the first introduction of the willful king, or at least the concept of a strong king, here. "But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will". Just like in v 36. The 'willful king'.

Skipping to v 31 we see the A of D. This act was committed by a descendant of Seleucid, Antiochus IV. This is indisputable as a matter of world history. Antiochus cannot be equated with the KOTN as Antigonus was king in the north, Asia Minor, and Antiochus emerged from the Seleucid kingdom of Mesopotamia and points east.

Back to v 16 we see the willful king stand in the holy land, which he consumes, and then of course the descendant, and/or heir, in v 31 commits the A of D. All of this occurred in the Seleucid Empire as this empire ruled from the Mediterranean to the Indus.

In v 40 it stands out that the KOTN is not named as the 'him' the KOTS pushes at. As far as I can see the KOTN and the KOTS are specified by name in every case. But not in v 16, 36 or 40. Also it seems to make no sense to conclude the KOTN is the willful king based on v 36-39. Scripture is speaking to the acts of the willful king in v 36-39. This doesn't change in v 40. 

The king of the south comes against 'him' in v 40. This can only be the willful king of v 36-39. So then the KOTN comes against 'him' as well. The subject of the passage doesn't suddenly change so the 'him' remains the same one from v 36-39. The 'him' the KOTS comes against is the same 'him' the KOTN fights.

If the KOTN is the same as the willful king then the KOTN would come against himself. Not a sound conclusion.

The truth is there is a king arising from the ancient Seleucid empire as Dan 11 points out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Last Daze]

9 hours ago, Psalms37:4 said:

That's the point I was trying to get across. The dream is about 4 kingdoms, nothing else, not even the rulers are of significance.

Pertaining to the kingdoms, I agree.  The common thread of those four kingdoms, I believe, is their involvement with Judah, affecting Jerusalem and the temple.

[Dennis1209]

On 11/13/2017 at 11:47 PM, Psalms37:4 said:

No please tell me. Why did Daniel only mentioned Nebuchadnezzar as the ruler of one kingdom but leave out the names of the other 3 kingdoms?

It's like hey you're gonna tell me I'm the king of the first kingdom but you tell me about 3 other kingdoms and leave me in the dark about who rules over them? Oh wow, what a tease!

 

Hi Psalms37:4,

If I'm understanding your question correctly? My understanding is, prophecy is inspired and given by God to his profits, not so we can predict the future, but not be left in the dark. And when it comes to pass, we can look back and know it was the revelation of the One True Living God Himself, and give Him all the praise, honor and glory. 

The Lord says, my Grace is sufficient for thee, so the prophecy God elects to reveal will be sufficient for and to whom He reveals it. I believe Daniel revealed to Nebuchadnezzar everything God told him and my suspicion is Daniel himself probably didn't understand it either, based on the closing versus of the Book of Daniel.

[Psalms37:4]

On 11/17/2017 at 1:59 PM, Dennis1209 said:

Hi Psalms37:4,

If I'm understanding your question correctly? My understanding is, prophecy is inspired and given by God to his profits, not so we can predict the future, but not be left in the dark. And when it comes to pass, we can look back and know it was the revelation of the One True Living God Himself, and give Him all the praise, honor and glory. 

The Lord says, my Grace is sufficient for thee, so the prophecy God elects to reveal will be sufficient for and to whom He reveals it. I believe Daniel revealed to Nebuchadnezzar everything God told him and my suspicion is Daniel himself probably didn't understand it either, based on the closing versus of the Book of Daniel.

Dennis, I was pulling the guy's chain. Don't take anything I said in all of page 11 literally. I just noticed you had written a post to me. Thanks for commenting.

 

 

[WilliamL]

On 11/15/2017 at 4:14 AM, Diaste said:

In fact we see several kings in Dan 11 right from the get go. Verse 3 and 4 refer to Alexander and the Diadochi. This is obviously where we see the king of the north and the king of the south emerge. Ptolemy of Egypt began the reign of the KOTS and Antigonus in Asia Minor was another strong king who ruled the North. 

Seleucus was the King of the North:

Dan. 11:5 “Also the king of the South [Ptolemy I Soter] shall become strong, as well as one of his princes [Seleucus I Nicator]; and he [Seleucus I] shall gain power over him and have dominion. His dominion shall be a great dominion.

The whole history of these two kingdoms, that of the Ptolemies and the Seleucids, are well-documented. Many sources of biblical history will provide all the details. After the division of Alexander's kingdom, only these two kingdoms became relevant to the Daniel 11 narrative, because they were the only ones directly involved in the history of Daniel's people.

On 11/15/2017 at 4:14 AM, Diaste said:

Skipping to v 31 we see the A of D. This act was committed by a descendant of Seleucid, Antiochus IV. This is indisputable as a matter of world history. Antiochus cannot be equated with the KOTN as Antigonus was king in the north, Asia Minor, and Antiochus emerged from the Seleucid kingdom of Mesopotamia and points east.

Antiochus was the king of the north at this time; the lineage of Antigonus was completely irrelevant to the scene in the Middle East. The last of his line, Perseus, was defeated by and lost his reign to Rome before Antiochus desecrated the Temple.

But all of this history sort of  misses the point of the kings of the north and south in Daniel 11. Take verse 7 for an example:

11:7 But from a branch of her roots one shall arise in his place/office/estate...

The words in bold are repeated in a number of later places in Daniel 11, indicating that even though one HUMAN king of a lineage died and another replaced him, the real king was a spiritual "prince," a "principality in heavenly places" (Eph. 3:10; 6:12; Col. 1:16).  These were the spiritual masters of the whole Seleucid and Ptolemy lines of kings, and they are still alive and functioning even today. This is the import of the "time of the end" passage of verses 40-45: both of these heavenly rulers are about to greatly affect world affairs through their earthly human puppets one more time before Christ returns.

[Daniel 11:36]

WilliamL

 

You are correct in your article above

Antiochus IV was the last king of the Seleucid kingdom mentioned in the prophecy [Daniel 11:21-35]

Then the vision skips to the time of the end of this present age and gives the battle between the king of the north and the king of the south [Daniel 11:36-45]

[Diaste]

On 11/21/2017 at 1:07 PM, WilliamL said:

Seleucus was the King of the North:

Dan. 11:5 “Also the king of the South [Ptolemy I Soter] shall become strong, as well as one of his princes [Seleucus I Nicator]; and he [Seleucus I] shall gain power over him and have dominion. His dominion shall be a great dominion.

Yes, but the context is all four kings, not just two. I'm not convinced your belief along with a verse in which you inserted personal interpretation is a strong conclusion.  While Seleucus ruled in Syria, with his capitol as Babylon, to the east of Israel, Antigonus ruled farther north in Asia Minor, making him the king of the north. The above does not prove the Seleucid kingdom is the king of the north. Dan 11:5 seems to be saying the KOTS will have a captain that will be stronger than the KOTS, gaining greater power than the first KOTS and have a great dominion. This occurred with Ptolemy II Philadelphus retaking Cyrene and expansion into Syria and Asia Minor, the greatest extent of the Ptolemaic dynasty as the successors all diminished Egypt and eventually were defeated by the Romans. So then, Dan 11:5 was fulfilled in ancient history by Ptolemy I and II. The point of the history lesson is much of Dan 11 follows the acts of the Diadochi and descendants, right to the AC. Even Greece is mentioned. Greece is Chittim, or Kittiy, a son of Javan, who Flavius says is the ancestor of the Greek people. Which of course fits the context perfectly and includes all four 'notable ones'.

The whole history of these two kingdoms, that of the Ptolemies and the Seleucids, are well-documented. Many sources of biblical history will provide all the details. After the division of Alexander's kingdom, only these two kingdoms became relevant to the Daniel 11 narrative, because they were the only ones directly involved in the history of Daniel's people.

The quote, "because they were the only ones directly involved in the history of Daniel's people." is a false premise. This is an old rationalization concocted to prop up false conclusions. Please provide scripture explicitly proving the idea end of the age prophecy should be interpreted by direct involvement of certain actors with the Jewish nation. In other words, does scripture explicitly state this as a method of interpretation? To contrast this idea Dan 2 leads us on a clear path to the identity of the fourth beast. The succession of Kings from Nebuchadnezzar to Alexander is manifest. Scripture and history prove beyond doubt these empires ruled in the same region and from the same capitol, Mesopotamia and Babylon. If the fourth, Iron kingdom, took over and destroyed all these it would have to do so in the region of Mesopotamia and the city of Babylon. This would be the Seleucid empire and scourge born from that kingdom, Islam and Mohammed.  

Antiochus was the king of the north at this time; the lineage of Antigonus was completely irrelevant to the scene in the Middle East. The last of his line, Perseus, was defeated by and lost his reign to Rome before Antiochus desecrated the Temple.

As the Ptolemiac line died out with Rome's conquest, as the Seleucid line died out...means nothing. What's relevant is the configuration of the regions ruled by the Diadochi and their existence today. What's irrelevant is Rome's involvement in the fulfillment of end of the age prophecy. What matters is what we see right now and the state of current conditions. The areas ruled by the Diadochi are still quite clearly defined. Greece, Egypt and Turkey are legitimate political entities. This means we still have 3 of the four areas ruled by the Diadochi in existence today. A look at a map would show the simplicity of this idea. Egypt in the south, Turkey in the north, Greece in the west, and the Mid/Near East as ruled by Seleucus. If the orientation of direction is the Promised Land, then the north is Asia Minor and the east is Mesopotamia.

But all of this history sort of  misses the point of the kings of the north and south in Daniel 11. Take verse 7 for an example:

11:7 But from a branch of her roots one shall arise in his place/office/estate...

The words in bold are repeated in a number of later places in Daniel 11, indicating that even though one HUMAN king of a lineage died and another replaced him, the real king was a spiritual "prince," a "principality in heavenly places" (Eph. 3:10; 6:12; Col. 1:16).  These were the spiritual masters of the whole Seleucid and Ptolemy lines of kings, and they are still alive and functioning even today. This is the import of the "time of the end" passage of verses 40-45: both of these heavenly rulers are about to greatly affect world affairs through their earthly human puppets one more time before Christ returns.

I have no doubt the affairs of earth are directed by spiritual powers, too much scripture to ignore.

 

[Daniel 11:36]

The  beast of Revelation was the king of the first 5 kingdoms and will come out of the abyss to rule the next two, the 6th and 7th

First the smaller 6th, and then the 7th expanded/divided

[Revelation 9:11, 17:8-14]

He will do this through the human little horn of Daniel's visions ruling the 6th and 7th [Daniel 7:7] .... then becoming the 8th king himself to rule for the last 3.5 years of the coming tribulation period

This beast, Abaddon/Apollyon, will then be sent to his destruction in the Lord's lake if fire [Revelation 19:19-20]

But just before the beast's release from the abyss the Lord's own will be made immortal [Revelation 3:10]

Edited November 26, 2017 by Daniel 11:36