Daughter of Women

[wingnut-]

39 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Specifically regarding 9:27, and the reason why the terribly long winded message above is to mention that I firmly believe that, although God could have easily recorded “Messiah” instead of “he” in 9:27 is because many / most people - today’s Christians (just like the Jews at the time of His first coming), would fail to recognize Him.

 

I've had the same thoughts regarding Daniel 9, as have others I am sure, but as you will find in Daniel 11 the interpretation falls apart.

 

Daniel 11:31 Forces from him shall appear and profane the temple and fortress, and shall take away the regular burnt offering. And they shall set up the abomination that makes desolate. 32 He shall seduce with flattery those who violate the covenant, but the people who know their God shall stand firm and take action.

[Charlie744]

wing nut—- Please understand this is an absolutely PERFECT illustration of why 11 is SO darn difficult. 

I have gone through 11 (early verses) patting myself on the back feeling so good at my interpretations only to find they EXPLODE in my face as I attempt to continue with those interpretations further on in 11 verses— and this one you brought up was a serious wake up call, if you will. Almost 100% contend this is quite clear and can only speak of the “profaning of the Temple AND the taking away of the daily sacrifice.... and I was certainly on board with them - what else could this possibly refer to other than the obvious mentioned above?

And since this was “clear” and pointed to (depending on 1 of the 2 interpretations), this referred to the actual Temple destruction in 70 AD or the destruction of some 3rd Temple some time 2,000 years or so on the future AND would SEEM to fit quite nicely with the misinterpretations connected with the identification of “he” in 9:27 and a 7 year tribulation!!!!!

Consequently, if my interpretations of the earlier verses in 11 were or MIGHT be accurate, they had to meet or be consistent with this very important verse (and please believe me this “groundhog day experience”, if you will, had been done over and over so many times in order to ensure the interpretations on the earlier verses kept their integrity... 

Only very recently have I been able to identify an interpretation for this specific verse... and if this effort failed, everything (new interpretations) up to this verse would fall apart! 

However, although I believe it speaks directly to this verse I have not written this down in my notes to where I can attach it or send it with this response... and this is ONLY because I was relieved in finding it and could move on knowing all the interpretations for the earlier verses were NOT “blown up “.

BUT, I will immediately put a brief comment / response to your comment / observation, and I thank God He showed me this prior to your observation since, without it, just about all my interpretations / comments would have NO value or importance!!!!! (Especially to myself)!

 I will try and respond later this evening and hopefully offer something of value, best wishes, Charlie 

[Spock]

1 hour ago, Charlie744 said:

wing nut—- Please understand this is an absolutely PERFECT illustration of why 11 is SO darn difficult. 

I have gone through 11 (early verses) patting myself on the back feeling so good at my interpretations only to find they EXPLODE in my face as I attempt to continue with those interpretations further on in 11 verses— and this one you brought up was a serious wake up call, if you will. Almost 100% contend this is quite clear and can only speak of the “profaning of the Temple AND the taking away of the daily sacrifice.... and I was certainly on board with them - what else could this possibly refer to other than the obvious mentioned above?

And since this was “clear” and pointed to (depending on 1 of the 2 interpretations), this referred to the actual Temple destruction in 70 AD or the destruction of some 3rd Temple some time 2,000 years or so on the future AND would SEEM to fit quite nicely with the misinterpretations connected with the identification of “he” in 9:27 and a 7 year tribulation!!!!!

Consequently, if my interpretations of the earlier verses in 11 were or MIGHT be accurate, they had to meet or be consistent with this very important verse (and please believe me this “groundhog day experience”, if you will, had been done over and over so many times in order to ensure the interpretations on the earlier verses kept their integrity... 

Only very recently have I been able to identify an interpretation for this specific verse... and if this effort failed, everything (new interpretations) up to this verse would fall apart! 

However, although I believe it speaks directly to this verse I have not written this down in my notes to where I can attach it or send it with this response... and this is ONLY because I was relieved in finding it and could move on knowing all the interpretations for the earlier verses were NOT “blown up “.

BUT, I will immediately put a brief comment / response to your comment / observation, and I thank God He showed me this prior to your observation since, without it, just about all my interpretations / comments would have NO value or importance!!!!! (Especially to myself)!

 I will try and respond later this evening and hopefully offer something of value, best wishes, Charlie 

I’m watching this too, Charlie.  

If you can convince me 11:36-45 is about Jesus and not About the Antichrist, then I hope you make a living in sales. I’m sure you are a wealthy man with that talent. ?

spock watching....

[Charlie744]

Spock, I am very happy to see that you are “still taking my calls “.

 I have completed an interpretation of the verses 5 to 30 using a non- historical approach. This, in my mind is the only “approach” that would and could provide us (both Jews before the crucifixion and everyone after) with a prophetic message from God. 

If He wanted to continue to discuss the thug type (very unimportant) rulers during that time I would suggest He would have be able to really impress us with His details and back room stories about someone who was one of the most important and brilliant generals ... EVER.  I don’t think He would waste His very valuable prophetic capital, AND the last two chapters of one of the two most prophetic books in the OT to merely talk about some minor actors / rulers and unimportant conflicts and battles occurring within the 3rd kingdom- again, if He wanted to continue talking about the 3rd kingdom, I would say He “messed up big time” (being very facitous of course) since Alexander would have been my choice by far!!!!  If He devoted a relatively few verses to Alexander and the 3rd kingdom.... then why almost 30 verses in chapter 11 for a few characters who had NO kingdom, were not even kings of a kingdom AND were simply and barely mentioned as “wings” that came up after his demise.

Most importantly, God had Daniel identify at least 4 very significant actors within the 4th kingdom: beast, 10 horns, little horn, 3 plucked up.... and of course, these actors are and important and critical player within His Plan of Salvation, the growth and success of His Chuch, the coming corruption of His Church by the “little horn”....

If 11:5 to 11:30 is to speak of the AE and the Ptolemy rulers / conflicts, which have absolutely nothing to do with the issues to come over the next 2.000 years regarding His Plan of Salvation and the real war or battle for ALL our souls (Spiritual battle NOT another one of man’s physical wars or conflicts), then someone please tell me where He speaks of these 4 actors and the purpose of Daniel... Is He only giving us to is a “history lesson” proving how powerful He is in telling us a short story of a few unimportant actors coming in the next few hundred years?  No, He has already established His power, His Holiness, His glory, His omnipotence, and on and on.... The verses in 11 must reveal to us important events that are to take place over the next 2,000 years that will help us in the most important war in mankind’s history- the “Spiritual” battle for our souls!

Not only must 9:27 (easily) speak of the Messiah (along with all the verses in 9), But chapter 11 must also speak to the 4th kingdom, those specific actors fond in 7, and what will take place on the following 2,000 years. 

So, please give 9:27 some additional thought on its own... God is not spending His prophetic capital on an AE, the Ptolemys, and He certainly is not giving any attention or “ink” in Daniel to an “anti-Christ figure”, especially in the same chapter and specific verse where He reveals His upcoming crucifixion in the midst of the final week of Daniel’s 70 weeks. 9:27.

Please re-read 9:23 to 9:26 as well- These 6 things in v. 24 MUST be accomplished by “He”in 9:27 before the end of the 70th week (after 7 and 62 weeks or 69 weeks), The Messiah will be “cut off”, that is within the last week and in the “midst” of that last week.

Now, I must get back to the promised response to wing nut... and, unfortunately, due to MY  inability to respond in a brief and concise manner, this may have delayed my response to him until tomorrow... 

Again, so kind of you to still have an interest in this issue from my studies... best wishes always, Charlie 

 

 

[Charlie744]

Spock, I forgot to ask you a question....

Based on your last response, does this mean you have found that the verses UP TO 11:36 ARE speaking about the Messiah and NOT a historical figure such as AE or the Ptolemy rulers, etc.?

Perhaps you could provide s very quick summary of your interpretation for these verses? Thank you again, Charlie 

[wingnut-]

2 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

wing nut—- Please understand this is an absolutely PERFECT illustration of why 11 is SO darn difficult. 

 

The positive thing we have going in this conversation is that anytime I read chapter 9 it reads to me exactly how you see it.  So take your time, share your understanding, and if it agrees with the whole of scripture it won't be difficult to persuade me.  Like spock said, my problem arises with chapter 11 and attributing any of those things to the Lord.

[Charlie744]

Wingnut, thank you for your response. 

It is not even Christmas and I have already received two presents!

 I have not mentioned it yet but it was my original intention, at the suggestion of a friend of mine, that I really should try and read / study Daniel BEFORE I attempted to read and study Revelation.

 I am / have never been a reader or student or serious Christian on any level until approximately 5 - 7 years ago !

Now, it had become THE most important part of my life and I since last July, 2019, I have been trying to be understand and, if necessary, interpret Daniel even it conflicts with everything that has been presented and accepted by past scholars, theologians, commentators, etc., over the past 2,000 years.

 I have largely completed the first 10 chapters and now finding 11 to He the most difficult... and it is entirely due to the “approach” being taken.

Despite my (apparent) success in interpreting all the earlier chapters of Daniel in a “spiritual” approach (and not in  those verses that are easily found to be “historical “, for example, Nebuchadnezzar or the Medes-Persians or Alexander), I found I would revert back to trying to interpret upcoming verses once again in a historical manner.... I guess it is human nature to try and find these verses in our history books!

Anyway, my intention, once I complete 11 & 12 is to try and publish all the new interpretations in a book / commentary type reading... and, based on the responses from folks within this site, there will not be many subscribers to these new interpretations... but that is okay since I am certain the current and important issues in Daniel have been severally misinterpreted... we can all understand the metal man image or the furnace story and certainly the lions den ... but when we don’t have our history books that match up  closely with the “spiritual” and non-historical verses, we seem to stay with the historical approach and ignore those verses that don’t “fit”!

Best wishes, Charlie 

[Spock]

35 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Spock, I forgot to ask you a question....

Based on your last response, does this mean you have found that the verses UP TO 11:36 ARE speaking about the Messiah and NOT a historical figure such as AE or the Ptolemy rulers, etc.?

Perhaps you could provide s very quick summary of your interpretation for these verses? Thank you again, Charlie 

I thought 1-35 was a nice history lesson of what happened....nothing to do with end times, Jesus,  or the Beast.

[Charlie744]

Ok and thanks... I guess you mean a history lesson about folks in the 3rd kingdom- an AE or the Ptolemy rulers as opposed to speaking about those in the 4th kingdom?

Just wanted to be sure, Charlie 

 

[Spock]

34 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

 

The positive thing we have going in this conversation is that anytime I read chapter 9 it reads to me exactly how you see it.  So take your time, share your understanding, and if it agrees with the whole of scripture it won't be difficult to persuade me.  Like spock said, my problem arises with chapter 11 and attributing any of those things to the Lord.

Like you wingnut, I’ve been reevaluating Daniel 9 again. 
what has caused me to re-evaluate this passage is this....most of the commentators hit the pause button when either Jesus was baptized or when Jesus was crucified and of course the former leave out his 3.5 years of ministry and the latter may have their timeline incorrect if they follow Bishop Ussher’s calcualtions. He uses 445 BC as the starting point, but 457 BC may be the correct one. 
 

so, I’ve been looking at this again and considering is it possible the sacrifices ended at the crucifixion? Stuff like that. I still don’t know how Charlie can show us 11 is about Jesus, especially 36-45, but I’m listening.....what do I have to lose? And I’m always wanting to learn, especially knowing I don’t have all wisdom yet. Lol

spock