Charlie744 Posted December 12, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 54 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,667 Content Per Day: 1.72 Reputation: 857 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/29/2020 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 12, 2023 32 minutes ago, douggg said: 21And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. 22Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. The four Diadochi founded four kingdoms. Daniel 8:9, out of one of them (one of the four kingdoms) the time of the end little horn will head (waxes strong - an expression that he has a strong army) south and east to the pleasant land - Israel. The little horn does not come from one of the four men, but from the territory of one of the four Diadochi kingdoms - namely Greece. Greece is the eastern most front tier of Greece. I believe your interpretation is perhaps one of the most widely accepted interpretations, however, I believe it had its genesis because of the need to have chapter 11 continue with the post Greek kingdom (11:5 onward. But chapter 11 has nothing to do with a pre- Roman kingdom (another subject). In 8:8, after the large horn was broken (Alexander), 4 “notable ones - not horns, came up TOWARDS the FOUR WINDS (they did not come out of the sea or the earth. God brought only 4 KINGDOMS out of the sea. These 4 Greek generals would not meet His definition of a “kingdom.” They were simply thrown out into the four winds (turmoil, confusion and instability after the death of Alexander). Also, they represented the 4 heads on the leopard in chapter 7 - they were always a part and included in the 3rd kingdom. The little horn comes out of the 4th kingdom (pagan Rome). In 8:9, days, “that out of one of them,” this means out of one of the 4 WINDS not “notable ones or the generals.” In 8:10-11, this little horn would grow up to the host of heaven and cast down some of the host and the stars… He even exhausted himself against the Prince of the host (God)…. This little horn is the papacy that came out of pagan Rome, not out of the sea or the earth. He would attack to the East, South and the GLORIOUS LAND. This does not mean physical Jerusalem or Israel - this means the place where God resides - he will claim to be god on earth, rise to the level of God. Only the papacy makes those claims- even though to today!! In chapter 8 there are only 3 times that Gabriel will define the “power” of these 3 horns - to ensure we focus on the “horns (powers),” and not at all the“kingdom” level: 8:4, 8:8 and 8:9 - great, very great and exceedingly great. This little horn (papacy) would meet all the demands and definitions of this little horn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diaste Posted December 13, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 14 Topic Count: 67 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,629 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,368 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/17/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted December 13, 2023 18 hours ago, douggg said: 21And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. 22Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. The four Diadochi founded four kingdoms. Daniel 8:9, out of one of them (one of the four kingdoms) the time of the end little horn will head (waxes strong - an expression that he has a strong army) south and east to the pleasant land - Israel. True. Not convinced about the wording above, "and east to the pleasant land". I don't see it worded that way in scripture. 18 hours ago, douggg said: The little horn does not come from one of the four men, but from the territory of one of the four Diadochi kingdoms - namely Greece. I can't say that for sure. Lineage can be a major factor. AE IV was the grandson of Seleucus I, the same AE IV that committed the abomination of desolation in 168 BC. Does the beast have to have a lineage? No. Does he have to arise from one of the Diadochi? Yes. The only example we have of the A of D was perpetrated by Seleucid progeny, from Mesopotamia. 18 hours ago, douggg said: Greece is the eastern most front tier of Greece. Could be in the middle. It's not required to be from the westernmost of the Diadochi. From Mesopotamia there is still South, East and West. South toward Egypt and Saudi Arabia, East toward Iran and Pakistan and the other 'Stans, west toward Israel and Jerusalem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diaste Posted December 13, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 14 Topic Count: 67 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,629 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,368 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/17/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted December 13, 2023 22 hours ago, Charlie744 said: Okay, so the metal man image shows Greece then Islam as the 4th kingdom? That is a period about 800 years… The image of the statue gives no identity except for Nebuchadnezzar as the head of gold, as interpreted. Sliver, Bronze and Iron follow but are not identified here. What does time have to do with it? Do you just like the shorter time span between Greece and when The Roman Empire rose to power? Rome certainly didn't immediately follow the Grecian empire. Rome wasn't more than thatched roofs and mud walls, and fighting for survival, in 330 BC. 22 hours ago, Charlie744 said: But that means there is nothing in your 4th kingdom that speaks to the prophecies of the coming Messiah, His death and resurrection, the setting up of His Kingdom, the demise of pagan Rome, the destruction of Jerusalem, …? Is that a criteria in Dan 2? All I see in Dan 2 about the King is: "As you watched, a stone was cut out,d but not by human hands. It struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay, and crushed them. 35Then the iron, clay, bronze, silver, and gold were shattered and became like chaff on the threshing floor in summer. The wind carried them away, and not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that had struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth." This is the coming rule of the King of kings. Next is the interpretation: "In the days of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will shatter all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, but will itself stand forever. 45And just as you saw a stone being cut out of the mountain without human hands, and it shattered the iron, bronze, clay, silver, and gold, so the great God has told the king what will happen in the future." And if we are staying in Dan 2 then you are correct, nothing in Dan 2 speaks to the prophecies of the coming Messiah, His death and resurrection, the demise of pagan Rome, the destruction of Jerusalem. All I see is the Lord's great victory over the kings of the earth and His everlasting kingdom. 22 hours ago, Charlie744 said: What kingdom was divided and what caused this division? Who or what are your toes? I think you relate this to the two divisions of Rome. I don't see that since there are no direct or indirect statement in support. As I look at history and the future prophecies there are a few clues allowing for the deduction it is Islam. Islam once was undiluted from 700-1400 AD. Islam has infiltrated many countries and I relate that to this: "As you saw the iron mixed with clay, so the peoplese will mix with one another, but will not hold together any more than iron mixes with clay." 22 hours ago, Charlie744 said: In verse 33, the 4th kingdom was composed of “partly IRON, partly CLAY.” Here in verse 41, it is composed of “partly CLAY, partly IRON.” What caused this change in the order and why? That's quite a stretch, imo. Partly sugar and partly water, and partly water and partly sugar, and water mixed with sugar and sugar mixed with water, is still sugar water, and in the same ratio. I think you are reaching here. It means nothing to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douggg Posted December 13, 2023 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,143 Content Per Day: 0.47 Reputation: 220 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/18/2011 Status: Offline Share Posted December 13, 2023 3 hours ago, Diaste said: Does the beast have to have a lineage? No. Does he have to arise from one of the Diadochi? Yes. The only example we have of the A of D was perpetrated by Seleucid progeny, from Mesopotamia. The beast king does have a lineage. Some where in his ancestry he will be descended from the Julio-Claudians. Revelation 17: 10And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. 11And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diaste Posted December 14, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 14 Topic Count: 67 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,629 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,368 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/17/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted December 14, 2023 19 hours ago, douggg said: The beast king does have a lineage. Some where in his ancestry he will be descended from the Julio-Claudians. Revelation 17: 10And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. 11And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. That doesn't really work. If this is prophesied circa 95 AD, then Domitian was emperor, the 11th or 12th Roman emperor. If this prophecy was given in 65 AD, as some suspect, the 8th king of the 7 is come and gone leaving dozens of prophecies unfulfilled. This also rejects the teaching of the OT prophecies concerning the origin of the little horn, which is from one of the four that arose after Greece, an origin which must be centered in Macedonia, Egypt, Asia Minor or Mesopotamia; none of which are Rome. Further, Dan 11 prophesies of the Wars of the Diadochi, right to the A of D committed by AE IV, a Syrian king and descendant of Seleucus I Nicator, Seleucus I being one of the four notable ones that arose from the fall of the Grecian kingdom. The prophecies of Daniel don't follow Rome, they follow the Wars of the Diadochi in general and it appears to me, the Mesopotamian rule of Seleucus to his progeny Antiochus IV Epiphanes in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts