Daniel 2, 7 and 8 - Identifying the 3 actors

[Charlie744]

6 minutes ago, douggg said:

The Jewish people (Judaism) do exactly that - i.e. they consider the information in the Christian New Testament as fairy tales.

One of their main theologians, Rashi, has commentary in their bible verse by verse.   A person can access an English translation of the Tanach, with Rashi's commentary, at Chabad.org.

But does going by Daniel alone make the understanding of the contents accordingly - right?    That's the shortfall of taking that particular approach.     Different yes, but not right.

 

Great point... really!!! But until and if one is willing to try another approach one can never get to that conclusion. 

As I mentioned, I came into Daniel without any understanding of it... I read the interpretations of the scholars who have provided the currently “accepted interpretations and meanings” of Daniel and came away with a very clear realization THEY had many differences even between themselves. I believed they all came to many of their conclusions because they looked to Revelation to support their interpretations. 

I did not want to study Revelation to understand Daniel when everyone told me to study Daniel first before I attempted to learn Revelation. 

If I had mirrored their approach I would certainly be forced to accept their interpretations... but why take that approach if I had already noticed their discrepancies and incomplete understandings in both books (currently)?

Daniel is more than capable of speaking for itself without looking to a book written some 600 years later... but folks are simply content with reading and accepting what others have already written... and as you know, if you repeat something enough times, verbally or in writing and now certainly through today’s mediums, it is accepted as truth... 

But thanks for your thoughts, Charlie 

[Charlie744]

Well, I am not sure there may be enough interest within this site for folks to want to consider these 3 actors without looking to Revelation.  

However, I will try once again.. and perhaps take each actor one at a time and see if and when things / interpretations might go in this or that direction.

Daniel chapter 2 clearly identifies 4 separate kingdoms that will come upon the earth. The first 3 are identified for all to see and accept. There is no intermission or separations between any of the kingdoms shown in the metal man image. From our history books, we clearly see that the next kingdom after Greece is the beginning of the Roman Empire.  I am sure everyone student of ancient history will agree that there are many cases where kingdoms, powers have come and gone without an immediate new mega power to follow..... And this can be seen after the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, and any of the major empires / powers during the past 1000 years. That is the same situation we find between the 3rd and 4th kingdom..... there are groups or factions that will attempt to fill the power vacuum as the 4 generals of Alexander attempted to do..... but they certainly were never a kingdom or empire. They were just the areas remaining "mafia family" - large remaining group of thugs wanting their own world kingdom - never happened. 

The next true kingdom and empire was pagan Rome. They certainly met all the physical characteristics of the metal man image - iron, legs that could and would travel anywhere and everywhere to conquer. These legs had NO concern for other people - they were nothing more than powerful legs stamping down and crushing anyone in their way. No heart, no minding of anyone - just an iron crushing force that traveled everywhere on the known earth. 

We also know that NO kingdom or people CAN EVER LAST FOREVER - NOT EVEN THE US WILL.  But this will be the last kingdom on earth=  this is not a contradiction since this "beast" as it will be identified in  chapter 7 will now be shown as an animal that can not be represented by any animal on earth. It will be the final kingdom but it must have to change and alter its appearance throughout the next 2,ooo years. This "beast" will have all the evil /  nasty characteristics of the previous 3 previous animals but it will be even more vicious and diverse than their combined ferocity. 

Personally, I can not see any other entity besides pagan Rome to represent this 4th kingdom which will continue for some 600 years. 

So, if we just discuss the 4th kingdom that must come AFTER Greece and not look any further than the verses in Daniel, does anyone wish to weigh in?

PS. pagan Rome did come out oft he northern most territory of the post Alexander empire.

Hope to hear from you folks  - yea or nea! Charlie

 

 

 

[douggg]

35 minutes ago, Charlie744 said:

Well, I am not sure there may be enough interest within this site for folks to want to consider these 3 actors without looking to Revelation.  

However, I will try once again.. and perhaps take each actor one at a time and see if and when things / interpretations might go in this or that direction.

Daniel chapter 2 clearly identifies 4 separate kingdoms that will come upon the earth. The first 3 are identified for all to see and accept. There is no intermission or separations between any of the kingdoms shown in the metal man image. From our history books, we clearly see that the next kingdom after Greece is the beginning of the Roman Empire.  I am sure everyone student of ancient history will agree that there are many cases where kingdoms, powers have come and gone without an immediate new mega power to follow..... And this can be seen after the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, and any of the major empires / powers during the past 1000 years. That is the same situation we find between the 3rd and 4th kingdom..... there are groups or factions that will attempt to fill the power vacuum as the 4 generals of Alexander attempted to do..... but they certainly were never a kingdom or empire. They were just the areas remaining "mafia family" - large remaining group of thugs wanting their own world kingdom - never happened. 

The next true kingdom and empire was pagan Rome. They certainly met all the physical characteristics of the metal man image - iron, legs that could and would travel anywhere and everywhere to conquer. These legs had NO concern for other people - they were nothing more than powerful legs stamping down and crushing anyone in their way. No heart, no minding of anyone - just an iron crushing force that traveled everywhere on the known earth. 

We also know that NO kingdom or people CAN EVER LAST FOREVER - NOT EVEN THE US WILL.  But this will be the last kingdom on earth=  this is not a contradiction since this "beast" as it will be identified in  chapter 7 will now be shown as an animal that can not be represented by any animal on earth. It will be the final kingdom but it must have to change and alter its appearance throughout the next 2,ooo years. This "beast" will have all the evil /  nasty characteristics of the previous 3 previous animals but it will be even more vicious and diverse than their combined ferocity. 

Personally, I can not see any other entity besides pagan Rome to represent this 4th kingdom which will continue for some 600 years. 

So, if we just discuss the 4th kingdom that must come AFTER Greece and not look any further than the verses in Daniel, does anyone wish to weigh in?

PS. pagan Rome did come out oft he northern most territory of the post Alexander empire.

Hope to hear from you folks  - yea or nea! Charlie

 

 

 

Charlie, the little horn in Daniel 7 is the same little horn in Daniel 8.    king of fierce countenance in Daniel 8:23 = who's look more stout than his fellows in Daniel 7:20.

The vision of the little horn in Daniel 8 was said to be time of the end by Gabriel.   In Daniel 9:23, Gabriel again appeared to Daniel and told him "consider the vision"....

So we are dealing with the little horn in the time of the end - no longer ancient pagan rome.      But Roman Empire in the end times.

Please watch my video....

 

 

[Charlie744]

2 minutes ago, douggg said:

Charlie, the little horn in Daniel 7 is the same little horn in Daniel 8.    king of fierce countenance in Daniel 8:23 = who's look more stout than his fellows in Daniel 7:20.

The vision of the little horn in Daniel 8 was said to be time of the end by Gabriel.   In Daniel 9:23, Gabriel again appeared to Daniel and told him "consider the vision"....

So we are dealing with the little horn in the time of the end - no longer ancient pagan rome.      But Roman Empire in the end times.

Please watch my video....

 

 

Thank you Doug! I certainly will watch your video and I am sure I will learn from it!!!

 I agree that the little horn in 7 is the same as in 8. But before we move the the other 2 actors can you comment on the beast? Thank you again, Charlie 

[Diaste]

8 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

Personally, I can not see any other entity besides pagan Rome to represent this 4th kingdom which will continue for some 600 years. 

So, if we just discuss the 4th kingdom that must come AFTER Greece and not look any further than the verses in Daniel, does anyone wish to weigh in?

PS. pagan Rome did come out oft he northern most territory of the post Alexander empire.

Rome existed with a Senate as early as 500 BC. There were settlements in Italy started by Greeks as early as 750 BC; both are well before Cassander, and by 500 to 400 BC the Roman form of government was well established and the Roman empire was the power in the region having thrown off the Sabines and the Etruscans.

Before the death of Alexander Rome was well established as a power have been sacked, burned and rebuilt with a powerful military.

While there may be some Grecian or Macedonian influence on the Italian peninsula Rome was a power in it's own right before Alexander.

[WilliamL]

15 hours ago, Charlie744 said:

 I agree that the little horn in 7 is the same as in 8

Not so. The "tiny/diminuitive" horn (Antiochus Epiphanes) in Daniel 8 came from the 3rd beast, the Greek Empire, while the "little" horn in Daniel 7 is from the 4th beast/Roman Empire. These are two different words in the Hebrew for smallness.

[Charlie744]

57 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

Not so. The "tiny/diminuitive" horn (Antiochus Epiphanes) in Daniel 8 came from the 3rd beast, the Greek Empire, while the "little" horn in Daniel 7 is from the 4th beast/Roman Empire. These are two different words in the Hebrew for smallness.

Thanks William But I have to disagree here.

All 3 images, 2,7 & 8 are related and provide us with a progression between each kingdom and further characteristics for each kingdom as it moves through Daniel. 

AE is nothing more than a thug, a wannabe king who happens to come on the scene after a truly great king, Alexander passed on. He had nothing to add to Greece or the coming Roman Empire. He and others like Ptolemy were attempting to gain power over others after Alexander- between the last two kingdoms. He certainly mistreated the Jews and others and he was from one of the 4 territories but he amounted to a relatively unimportant military figure. 

Daniel 7 is primarily focused on the 4 kingdoms, while Daniel 8 focuses on the Kings  or ruling power. Same entity in both but different focus. 

We all know the Lord is King of Kings and Lord of Lords but this little horn coming out of the beast in 7 is the same as the ruler / power (self proclaimed king if you will) in 8. 

The 4th kingdom in 7 is clearly pagan Rome and out FROM it will ARISE the 10 horns and then the little horn. Then in Daniel 8 the symbols focus on the king or power or ruler only and this is the same little horn. The most important point here is that Daniel is moving from the purely physical kingdoms to the last kingdom that will BRING FORTH a king / power that will attempt to go against Hod Himself. This is the most important message in later chapters of Daniel- the 4th kingdom and the coming little horn is all about this power corrupting His Plan of Salvation. There will ALWAYS be wars and conflicts among men- ALWAYS, but the last few chapters of Daniel reveals the true conflict- those powers that ARISE out of the final kingdom that desire to be worshipped like God.. the little horn (papacy) declares he (pope) is God on earth, forgive sins, must be a RC to be saved- on and on! 

God is having Daniel show us the progression from man’s ruling kingdoms (first 3 without God) and then within the final kingdom we have His first coming, He provided us with His Plan of Salvation and also He reveals those powers / rulers that are against His Plan. In the last few chapters of Daniel we should no longer interpret the verses as we have been doing- matching or trying to identify actors like AE or others from our history books! He is giving us milk in the early chapters and meat in the last chapters - they are ALL about Him! 

PS. EVERYONE thinks they have largely been successful in matching AE or the Ptolemy ‘s and their respective conflicts to the verses in chapter 11. In reality, chapter 11 is a tremendous summary of the events that take place after the crucifixion and reveal what will and has indeed taken place to corrupt His Plan.. Remember, this book was not written to be a simple history book where we marvel at how God can see into the future... That has been done and so much more in the Scriptures before Daniel was written... this book is meant to reveal mankind running the world and treating others without the presence, acknowledgement and obedience and worship of God (first 3 kingdoms). But the 4th kingdom is where God enters the world and reveals Himself. Daniel is symbolic of the Jews where he attempts to introduce the One True God to the Gentile world (first 3 kingdoms) but is not accepted- despite ALL the miracles they themselves witnessed. It is necessary for God to come down Himself within this 4th kingdom.

He allows Daniel to reveal His coming, His crucifixion, His Plan and those things  (actors and events) that will arise over the following 2,000 years that will go against Him. We have the beast representing the world- all coming powers even more ferocious than any of the individual previous 3 kingdoms. It is not important they are named or identified- they ALL will try and conquer and kill and destroy in whatever new killing method of its time. So with the little horn who also does not have to be named- the papacy will have many popes and will also try and conquer in whatever methods available at their time.... but this power is a focusing not on worldly goods and services but on the authority over man’s beliefs, their worship, their souls. This is what Daniel is trying to reveal to us as he moves from chapter 1 to 12.... from the physical to the spiritual wars and conflicts. 

We continue to turn Daniel into a almost 12 chapter history book.

How can we possibly see His revelation when we can not identify the beast as pagan Rome and the little horn as the papacy... 

So once again, if anyone is interested in discussing each of the 3 separately without Revelation that would be great... Is the 4th kingdom or the “beast” pagan Rome? If not, why not and we can discuss! Charlie 

 

[Charlie744]

21 hours ago, douggg said:

The Jewish people (Judaism) do exactly that - i.e. they consider the information in the Christian New Testament as fairy tales.

One of their main theologians, Rashi, has commentary in their bible verse by verse.   A person can access an English translation of the Tanach, with Rashi's commentary, at Chabad.org.

But does going by Daniel alone make the understanding of the contents accordingly - right?    That's the shortfall of taking that particular approach.     Different yes, but not right.

______________________________________________________________

Speaking of letting go, one of the biggest impediments I think in regarding eschatology is the understanding of the Antichrist.

The person is the Antichrist, instead of and against Jesus the true Christ, only for the time he is perceived to be the messiah by the Jews, and has been anointed the King of Israel.

Mark 15:31-32,  "Christ the King of Israel"

 

 

 

 

Doug, if you do not mind would you please tell me who Daniel is speaking about in 9:24? Is “he” He or a he?

 Thank you, Charlie 

[douggg]

1 hour ago, Charlie744 said:

Doug, if you do not mind would you please tell me who Daniel is speaking about in 9:24? Is “he” He or a he?

 Thank you, Charlie 

Charlie, in the KJV, it does not have a "he" in the text.   But presuming the most Holy is the "he", and that Jesus sacrificed Himself for atonement of our sins, and iniquity, and when he returns brings in everlasting righteousness in the form of the kingdom of God to become the ruling kingdom over the kingdoms of this world, and that Jesus will destroy the little horn>Antichrist>beast person at His Return - then there is a "he" implied in the text.

 

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

He - Jesus.

The completion of the 70 weeks is Jesus's return - when the Jews, Jerusalem, say blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.   Matthew 23:39.

 

 

[Charlie744]

1 hour ago, douggg said:

Charlie, in the KJV, it does not have a "he" in the text.   But presuming the most Holy is the "he", and that Jesus sacrificed Himself for atonement of our sins, and iniquity, and when he returns brings in everlasting righteousness in the form of the kingdom of God to become the ruling kingdom over the kingdoms of this world, and that Jesus will destroy the little horn>Antichrist>beast person at His Return - then there is a "he" implied in the text.

 

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

He - Jesus.

The completion of the 70 weeks is Jesus's return - when the Jews, Jerusalem, say blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.   Matthew 23:39.

 

 

So sorry Doug, I meant 9:27 but I believe you realized that anyway.....and thanks!

So you do not find "he" as the AC who will make some covenant in the midst  of the last week of the 70 weeks... correct?

And while we are here, why don't you believe that the Messiah did not complete all 6 of these requirements? I believe He certainly did!

Also, why do you (and most others I should say) contend the last week in Daniel's last week did not continue right after the 69th week?  The Messiah arrived and was baptized exactly on the first day of the 70th week - He was crucified in the midst of that last week 3.5 years into the last week.

Daniel 9 speaks about the Messiah and His Mission =why He came and what He had to accomplish before He returned to the Father.  He did complete everything He revealed in Daniel and other books..... look forward to hearing back from you and the reason I am asking these questions is that they tie directly to the prophecies, actors and events in Daniel = chapters 9 to 12. Charlie