God's historic national rods of His wrath, discipline and purification of Israel and what that may portend.

[Marilyn C]

43 minutes ago, Jonathan Dane said:

Your interpretation effectively robs Daniel of a prophecy that was fulfilled in 70 A.D.

"And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war." (Daniel 9:26)

The "people of the prince" who destroyed the temple were the Romans in 70 A.D. 

There is no indication in all of Scripture whatsoever of a Muslim or even an Arab confederation "destroying the temple." In fact, I am aware of no Scripture that indicates the third (Tribulation) temple will be destoruyed at all. Yes, it will be desecrated by the Antichrist.

Ezekiel 38 and 39 depict a federation of Arab nations led by presumably Russia and Iran. But they are IMMEDIATELY wiped out by God in an instant.

Muslims destroying the temple is an invention out of whole cloth. There is not one verse that supports it.

And by the way, Zechariah 14:2 does NOT indicate that Jerusalem will be destroyed. Attacked? Yes. Destroyed? No.

`Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, to anoint the Most Holy.` (Dan. 9: 24)

And that certainly has not been completed for - your people and your holy city.

destroy - Heb. `shachath,` to decay, ruin, waste, destroy. 

Jerusalem has never been fully destroyed for there are still parts of the old Temple we can see today etc. 

Ez. 38 & 39 do NOT depict any Arab nation, it is only Persia,(Iran) that is Muslim. 

And BTW where are the scriptures for `Rome?` 

[Who me]

On 4/3/2024 at 7:38 PM, Jonathan Dane said:

So when Ezekiel says in ch. 36 and 37 that God will again restore the Israelites to their ancient homeland, never again to be uprooted, and that He (Christ) will rule again from the original city of Jerusalem along with King David, you agree with Ezekiel; he didn't prophecy falsely, correct?

God's promises are all conditional.

Moses read out to the people the blessings that would follow obedience, he also read out the consequences  of disobedience.

Yes if God's people.e had whole heartedly served God they would never leave their land.

Ultimately  that means believing  in Jesus.

[Jonathan Dane]

3 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Thank you for looking at each of the scriptures and commenting. Perhaps we can have a closer look at them.

Isa. 31: 5 & 8. The context is when the Lord and His angelic army –

`….come down to fight for Mount Zion and for its hill. Like flying birds about, so will the Lord of hosts defend Jerusalem. Defending He will also deliver it; passing over, He will preserve it. `

And that is at the end of the tribulation when the Lord passes over Mount Zion and lands on the Mount of Olives.

`For I will gather all the nations top battle against Jerusalem; the city shall be taken, the houses rifled, and the women ravished. Half of the city shall go into captivity, but the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

Then the Lord will go forth and fight against those nation, as He fights in the day of battle. And in the day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Jerusalem on the east.` (Zech. 14: 2 – 4)

 

Dan. 11: 35 – 45. So, we both agree that when Alexander the Great died his kingdom was divided between the four generals and the north region came under the Seleucid Dynasty which is the old Assyrian region. Daniel is directed in 11: 40 to jump two thousand years until the `Time of the End.`

`At the time of the end the king of the South shall attack him; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind…`

Thus, the King of the North is the region of the Assyrian`s power base at first.

And as you stated he is also called the king of Babylon. And that is where God`s word tells us that he sets up his headquarters. And did you know that the city of Babylon is being built again. Yes, the UN and the USA are rebuilding ancient Babylon again and have been for many years. It is a very popular tourist attraction.

 

Dan. 7: 8. The description of the terrifying beast fits Islam. Yes, it is a religion but it also is a Political force. The 10 horns are the 10 kings of Rev. 17: 12. They will be  –

-         Iraq, Syria & Jordan, (3)

-         Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Oman, Yemen, Saudi Arabia. (7)

They are waiting for their leader to arise to lead them.

 

Isa. 31: 5 & 8 - You assume those verses are a future prophecy. Now for a history lesson. 

32“Therefore thus says the LORD concerning the king of Assyria: He shall not come into this city or shoot an arrow there, or come before it with a shield or cast up a siege mound against it. 33By the way that he came, by the same he shall return, and he shall not come into this city, declares the LORD. 34For I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake and for the sake of my servant David.” 35And that night the angel of the LORD went out and struck down 185,000 in the camp of the Assyrians. And when people arose early in the morning, behold, these were all dead bodies. (2 Kings 19:32_35)

Dan. 11: 35 – 43 - I believe you said this was "the Ancient Assyrian Empire." It is not. The previous section depicts the empire of Greece centuries later, a much larger geographic area. 

I don't deny that this section refers to the time of the end. I exegete all related passages of Daniel in my book, including this one. There will be a time when Donald Trump will be in the role of the Antichrist. At such a time, he will be the target of both the King of the North and the South, as the verses below show.

Daniel 11:40-41 is translated like this in the NASB: 40“At the time of the end the king of the South shall attack him; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter the countries (the countries of the North and South), overwhelm them, and pass through. 41He shall also enter the Glorious Land, and many countries shall be overthrown; but these shall escape from his hand: Edom, Moab, and the prominent people of Ammon (the Northen countries).  42He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt (the Southern country) shall not escape. (Parenthesis added)

These verses depict a battle between the Kings of the North and South against the Antichrist. (John MacArthur confirms this interpretation in his study Bible, by the way.)

MC) "And did you know that the city of Babylon is being built again."

JD) Did you know that Donald Trump twice tried to build the tallest building in the world and that investors who saw Trump's model described it as the Tower of Babel? 
https://www.6sqft.com/trumps-flubs-the-donalds-three-failed-attempts-to-erect-the-worlds-tallest-building-in-nyc/

MC) Dan. 7: 8. The description of the terrifying beast fits Islam.

JD) Below is an excerpt from my book:

Antichrist a Muslim?

Another form of prophetic interpretation, Islamic End Time Theory, has been made recently popular by Joel Richardson’s 2012 book Mideast Beast. Richardson’s premise is tied to the final beast prophecy in Daniel chapter seven that describes the end-times kingdom under the Antichrist. According to Richardson, the fourth beast is an Islamic kingdom ruled by an Islamic Antichrist, considered by Muslims as the Mahdi. The strength of this view lies in its answer to the problem of radical Islamic terrorism, the goal of which is to create a one-world Islamic Kingdom organized under Sharia Law. As ISIS spreads its campaign of terror and torture across the Middle East, events, such as the beheading of saints, appear to parallel biblical prophecies.

Since the beginning of my studies of prophecy, I have wondered where Islam fits into biblical prophecy. Scripture lacks any detail of historical developments, as in the discovery of America or the religion of Islam. (Portions of Scripture, such as Isaiah 5:26-30 and Revelation 18, may refer to America but do not allow certainty.) Interpretation of Scripture requires careful avoidance of eisegesis—the imposition of an already-formed conclusion onto a text. Conversely, proper interpretation employs the use of exegesis, which draws the meaning from the text. Simply put, the meaning of a text must originate from its context and not attempt to support a pretext. While Scriptures may have multiple applications and even double fulfillment, a given passage only has one correct interpretation or meaning. Many thematic and conclusory elements in this book were drawn from a systematic study of several scriptural passages. Although a single text may not fully support a conclusion, it does not necessarily render the hermeneutic eisegesis.

I will concede that Radical Islam is a significant evil and a plague on society. But Islamic End Time Theory puts the cart before the horse, artificially imposing an Islamic narrative on a book whose paradigm is, in point of fact, Hebrew, something akin to amillennialists’ mistake of forcing a Gentile perspective onto the Bible.

Rise of the Little Horn has, as its purpose, the setting forth of a system of belief, rather than a refutation of other systems, which themselves may or may not have merit. Accordingly, I will only briefly list my reservations regarding Islamic End Time Theory.

•       Daniel’s visions are not of monotheistic, theocratic kingdoms. Yet, conversely, Islamic Sharia Law is both monotheistic and theocratic.

•       The ten-toed, or ten-horned kingdom, of Daniel clearly arises towards the end of the age, just prior to the return of Christ (see Daniel 2:42-44). Conversely, Islam has been around for centuries.

•       According to Daniel 2, the ten-pronged kingdom will arise from the same governments or territories which made up the ancient Roman Empire. Daniel 7 depicts these horns on the head of a Roman beast. Yet Islam did not come from the Roman Empire but from Arabia, most of which fell outside the Roman Empire. Currently, Europe is less than 10% Muslim.

•       According to Daniel 9:26, the people of the prince that shall come will destroy Jerusalem, an event which occurred in 70 A.D. at the hands of the Romans, hundreds of years before Islam even existed. The “prince that shall come” is the Antichrist, who will stem from a Revived Roman Empire, not Islam.

•       A Muslim Antichrist is untenable given Daniel 11:37’s assertion that he will not honor the gods (plural) of his fathers—Islam is monotheistic.

•       Suggesting that the Antichrist will come from an Islamic Kingdom begs the question: Which one? Islam does not have a single cohesive Islamic Kingdom. Most battles in the Middle East involve Muslims fighting Muslims.

•       In I John 2:19, the apostle John clearly states that antichrists are those who “went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us,” i.e., they are “pretend” (fake) Christians. The “us” in that passage refers to believers and the “they” to “make”-believers. Therefore, the Antichrist cannot be a Muslim (nor an unredeemed Jew, for that matter).

The above, notwithstanding, I do believe that Islam will play a significant role in the end times. Israel’s peace treaty with the Antichrist will seek to guarantee peace with her Muslim neighbors. Furthermore, Israel will be opposed by an alliance of Russian and Muslim nations in the War of Gog and Magog either prior to or near the onset of the Tribulation Period. This war is described in Ezekiel 38 and 39 and should not be confused with the battle by the same name described in Revelation 20, which occurs following Christ’s thousand-year reign—the millennium. In the former war, the Lord will intervene, decimating Russia’s armies along with the Islamic nations participating in the alliance. To what extent this permanently cripples Radical Islam remains to be seen.

(RISE OF THE LITTLE HORN, p. 257-258)


 

Edited April 5 by Jonathan Dane

[Jonathan Dane]

1 hour ago, Marilyn C said:

I don`t think you actually know what is ahead from God`s word.

 

 

 

 

You might be surprised by what I know.

[Jonathan Dane]

37 minutes ago, Who me said:

God's promises are all conditional.

Moses read out to the people the blessings that would follow obedience, he also read out the consequences  of disobedience.

Yes if God's people.e had whole heartedly served God they would never leave their land.

Ultimately  that means believing  in Jesus.

"God's promises are all conditional."

Absolutely 100% false.

"the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void."
(Gal. 3:17)

[RdJ]

2 hours ago, Who me said:

God's promises are all conditional.

Moses read out to the people the blessings that would follow obedience, he also read out the consequences  of disobedience.

Yes if God's people.e had whole heartedly served God they would never leave their land.

Ultimately  that means believing  in Jesus.

Yes but not when He promises something. This was a choice: if you obey God will bless. Had they accepted Jesus He would have stayed.

But Hosea in 2 days I will revive you and Ezekiel God revives Israel and Romans 11, that's not conditional.

For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own [f]opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be [g]saved, as it is written:

“The Deliverer will come out of Zion,
And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob;
27 For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”

In a way yes it is conditional. They have to repent, but they will and He already said that they will.

“And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn. In that day there shall be a great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning at Hadad Rimmon in the plain of Megiddo. And the land shall mourn, every family by itself
Zechariah 12:10‭-‬14 NKJV
https://bible.com/bible/114/zec.12.10-14.NKJV

 

If Israel in the end would still say nope to Jesus there would be no hope for us either. He does not come back unless Jerusalem says blessed He who comes.

 

[Jonathan Dane]

14 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

`Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, to anoint the Most Holy.` (Dan. 9: 24)

And that certainly has not been completed for - your people and your holy city.

destroy - Heb. `shachath,` to decay, ruin, waste, destroy. 

Jerusalem has never been fully destroyed for there are still parts of the old Temple we can see today etc. 

Ez. 38 & 39 do NOT depict any Arab nation, it is only Persia,(Iran) that is Muslim. 

And BTW where are the scriptures for `Rome?` 

Correct about Gog and Magog. (I ironically corrected that in my book revision.) However, my point had to do with Islam. I believe that many Muslims may come to faith in Christ after God miraculously intercedes on the side of Israel. (That may be hopeful speculation on my part.) That battle also may be the catalyst the Antichrist uses to step in to broker a covenant between Israel and her surrounding neighbors.

To suggest that Israel was not destroyed in 70 A.D. is ridiculous. That flies in the face of Jesus's prophecy that not one stone of the temple would be left standing. History tells us that the fire was so hot that the gold melted and poured down between the cracks of the stones. The Roman soldiers literally turned over every stone of the temple to get to the gold.

Saying that Jerusalem was not destroyed because the section of the wall was left standing is like saying that the World Trade Center was not destroyed because a section of the metal pilings was left standing. If that is the apologetic for Islamic End-time Theory, neither does it have more than a few tattered pilings left standing.

Daniel did not mention the "name" Rome. However 

- given that Rome came on the heels of and conquered the third beast, Greece

-given that Rome was more terrifying, powerful, and larger than its predecessors

- given that Rome both nailed Jesus to the cross and destroyed Israel in 70 AD

Rome is the natural deduction.

Edited April 5 by Jonathan Dane

[Charlie744]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Dane said:

Correct about Gog and Magog. (I ironically corrected that in my book revision.) However, my point had to do with Islam. I believe that many Muslims may come to faith in Christ after God miraculously intercedes on the side of Israel. (That may be hopeful speculation on my part.) That battle also may be the catalyst the Antichrist uses to step in to broker a covenant between Israel and her surrounding neighbors.

To suggest that Israel was not destroyed in 70 A.D. is ridiculous. That flies in the face of Jesus's prophecy that not one stone of the temple would be left standing. History tells us that the fire was so hot that the gold melted and poured down between the cracks of the stones. The Roman soldiers literally turned over every stone of the temple to get to the gold.

Saying that Jerusalem was not destroyed because the section of the wall was left standing is like saying that the World Trade Center was not destroyed because a section of the metal pilings was left standing. If that is the apologetic for Islamic End-time Theory, neither does it have more than a few tattered pilings left standing.

Daniel did not mention the "name" Rome. However 

- given that Rome came on the heels of and conquered the third beast, Greece

-given that Rome was more terrifying, powerful, and larger than its predecessors

- given that Rome both nailed Jesus to the cross and destroyed Israel in 70 AD

Rome is the natural deduction.

In chapter 2 the 4th kingdom is described as the iron legs and feet WITH some clay found within it. 
 

Then in chapter 7, not only do we see a different set of symbols for those same 4 kingdoms, but there has been some very significant changes that have taken place WITHIN THE 4th kingdom:

1) The 4th beast kingdom is now described as an “indescribable” animal,

2) A second transition or change to the chapter 2 4th kingdom is that there are 10 horns COMING OUT OF THE 4th kingdom,

3) A third transition or change to the chapter 2 4th kingdom is there is a “little horn” that has also come out of the 4th kingdom BUT it comes out AFTER the 10 horns,

4) What had caused these changes from chapter 2 to chapter 7? All 4 of the chapter 2 kingdoms have been given new symbols which reveal new attributes or characteristics for each, BUT the only kingdom that had been “broken apart” into these 3 separate sections is the 4th kingdom, 

   a) this is a direct result of the effect that 2:34 had on the 4th kingdom (only). The Stone (the Messiah) would only arrive in the early part of the 4th kingdom of pagan Rome. The Stone would strike the “feet”(not the toes) and break apart (not destroy) the iron feet (only- not the entire image). Despite everyone’s beliefs, 2:34 reflects Jesus striking the feet ONLY and separating or breaking apart the different elements found in the chapter 2 4th kingdom. 
 

    b) There were 3 components of the chapter 2 4th kingdom: the iron legs and feet that represented pagan Rome, the clay that was kept or held WITHIN the iron kingdom. The clay represented His people (the Jews that were essentially held captive within the 4th kingdom), and the 10 toes, that were also kept within the 4th kingdom BUT were somewhat autonomous- just like our toes are attached to our feet and can not be removed, these toes would also have some level of freedom or separateness from the feet. 
 

  c) At the time of the Messiah, the Jews expected their Messiah to arrive and conquer Rome and free His people and set up His earthly kingdom— like a King David like Messiah. But Jesus did not come to wage war or destroy but “to divide.” This is the important part of 2:34. It is not an end time event as is 2:35, but represents this “dividing” of the “feet” (components only) into these 3 separate elements now described in chapter 7. 
 

5) Consquently, as a result of this “dividing” of these 3 elements (the Cross), God would be able to select the “clay” that were found in the chapter 2 feet that would accept Him as their Messiah and go out into the Roman Empire to preach the Goid News. They would be described in verses 2:41-43 ad “pottery clay.” This Jews who would continue to reject Him even after His resurrection would be described as “ceramic” clay in these same verses because the “Potter” (God) could not use them to preach the Good News to the world- they were “too hardened” in their ways and thinking and would continue in their pre-cross Jewish faith. 
 

6) So, these events in chapter 2 are ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL to get right. Unless 2:34 and verses 2:41-43 as well as recognizing these major changes that would be described in chapter 7, most of Daniel will have its interpretations thrown far into the future and treated as “end time” events. AND THIS IS WHERE MOST OF TODAY’S SCHOLARLY, ACADEMICS AND THEOLOGIANS HAVE SENT THEIR INTERPRETATIONS. They do not have a chance of interpreting Daniel correctly. Most of Daniel is prophesying about His people and THEIR restoration to Jerusalem along with their pre-Babylonian way of life AND the coming Messiah- NOT END TIME EVENTS.

7) Once chapter 2 is properly interpreted, it will be clear to see that:

       a) since the “clay” and the “10 toes” were WITHIN THE IRON FEET OF THE 4th kingdom of pagan Rome BEFORE THE STONE (Messiah) struck the feet (cross), it means the “10 toes or 10 horns” in chapter 7, AND the little horn who also came out of the 4th kingdom beast in chapter 7 (but AFTER the 10 horns), WERE ALREADY IN EXISTENCE BEFORE THE CROSS.

    1) Meaning, the 10 toes in chapter 2, which are also described as the 10 horns in chapter 7 and the 10 kings in chapter 7, WERE IN EXISTENCE BEFORE THE CROSS and CAN NOT REPRESENT 10 kings that would come in the future (at ANYTIME IN THE FUTURE). They were BEFORE AND AFTER THE CROSS. 

8) Once the above is understood, then it will very clear how MOST of the verses found in the Hebrew chapters in Daniel speak, NOT ABOUT END TIMES AT ALL, but mostly about the time of the Messiah. 
 

So, regarding your earlier question as whether I could provide ANY scholars, academics or talented theologians that have offered this theory or set of interpretations, the answer is unequivocally NO- because they believe most of Daniel is end time prophecy (and it starts with 2:34). 

And it is no surprise that ALMOST all folks who have an interest in Daniel have or will read THEIR FUTURIST LIKE INTERPRETATIONS and consider them “gospel.”

If anyone were to take each verse found in chapters 2,7,8,9 10,11 and 12, and try to provide their interpretations THAT DO NOT CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER AND SPEAK AS ONE COMPLETE AND SEAMLESS PROPHECY ABOUT THE JEWS RESTORATION, THE 70 WEEKS PROPHECY, THE COMING OF THE MESSIAH (first advent), THE ARRIVAL OF THE LITTLE HORN WHI CAME OUT OF THE EARLY CHURCH (Gentiles), they would find that only God could weave such a wonderful story together. 
 

Today’s “accepted interpretations” can not do this… there are missing or unaddressed verses that can not or have not been interpreted, there are so many interpretations that are  inconsistent with each other, there are many single verse plucked out of the NT and OT that PURPORT to fill in those missing interpretations in Daniel. And the most egregious error that ALL COMMENTATORS have made is they have failed to look for the Messiah in these verses. 
 

This is just a small example aid the more that 35 to 50 NEW AND VERY DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS found in my commentary… it will take time for them to move through this very well constructed wall of interpretations based on their “end times” theories.

Edited April 5 by Michael37
Whitespace edited

[Marilyn C]

4 hours ago, Jonathan Dane said:

, neither does it have more than a few tattered pilings left standing.

Daniel did not mention the "name" Rome. However 

- given that Rome came on the heels of and conquered the third beast, Greece

-given that Rome was more terrifying, powerful, and larger than its predecessors

- given that Rome both nailed Jesus to the cross and destroyed Israel in 70 AD

Rome is the natural deduction.

Given that God judged the Roman government over 2,000 years ago, I think they are long dead.

As you have written a book I see you are not going to change your mind, so I will leave the `table.` 

regards, Marilyn.

[Jonathan Dane]

2 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Given that God judged the Roman government over 2,000 years ago, I think they are long dead.

As you have written a book I see you are not going to change your mind, so I will leave the `table.` 

regards, Marilyn.

...one you would do well to read.

Regards to you