There is the difference between that which is prophecy, and that which is typology.
Once a prophecy has been literally fulfilled, it can not be fulfilled again. Therefore, both that which was prophetically spoken, and then was historically fulfilled, can only be used in typology, meaning "type and anti-type".
The 2300 day prophecy was literally fulfilled by Antiochus lV and Judas Maccabeus. That historical record is 1&2 Maccabees.
Can it be used in typology, that it should reveal Christ? Yes, to some degree, but not verbatim.
On the other hand, a literal and detailed Prophecy, such as the 2300 days, must be fulfilled verbatim, of which 1&2 Maccabees accurately "fleshes out" historically.
Yes, the key words you used: "type and shadow of things to come", from God's perspective, is for to enhance that which shall come.
But, that which does come, will not look exactly like the account given in "type and shadows". It can only be shown as a likeness to the actual, real event.
There is the difference between that which is prophecy, and that which is typology.
Once a prophecy has been literally fulfilled, it can not be fulfilled again. Therefore, both that which was prophetically spoken, and then was historically fulfilled, can only be used in typology, meaning "type and anti-type".
The 2300 day prophecy was literally fulfilled by Antiochus lV and Judas Maccabeus. That historical record is 1&2 Maccabees.
Can it be used in typology, that it should reveal Christ? Yes, to some degree, but not verbatim.
On the other hand, a literal and detailed Prophecy, such as the 2300 days, must be fulfilled verbatim, of which 1&2 Maccabees accurately "fleshes out" historically.
Yes, the key words you used: "type and shadow of things to come", from God's perspective, is for to enhance that which shall come.
But, that which does come, will not look exactly like the account given in "type and shadows". It can only be shown as a likeness to the actual, real event.
Thanks for your response. I understand that one of the most accepted interpretations for Chapter 11 includes characters like the Ptolemy’s, the Seleucid’s and even AE, but I didn’t believe I have seen AE being tied to 8:14. I think most interpretations consider this event to take place in the [still] future within the 7 year tribulation theory. But, as we know, there is little consensus to many of the most important prophecies in Daniel.
I have found that there is no mention, implied or expressed, for any actors or events that take place between the end of the 3rd kingdom of Greece and the 4th kingdom of pagan Rome.
Chapters 2 and 7 certainly establish the 4 and only 4 kingdoms that God will bring out of the earth or the sea. Each of the kingdoms should be viewed as separate kingdoms where God will identify the major actor and events within each kingdom before moving on to the next kingdom. Each kingdom has a specific mission to accomplish within God’s plan of restoration to bring His people and His city back from the Babylonian exile. Greece, the 3rd kingdom, headed by Alexander, had a definite purpose to fulfill and after he died, God would turn his kingdom over to the 4 generals. This marked the end of the 3rd kingdom. The 4th kingdom would be Rome (pagan Rome). It is within this kingdom where most of Daniel’s prophecies will occur.
In chapter 8, Gabriel will reveal the “Chazon” vision (long term vision) as well as the “Mareh” vision (short term vision), to Daniel. And, unlike Chapters 2 or 7, God will have us focus only on those entities (of the 4 kingdoms) that are referred to as “horns” (powers). He is now narrowing our attention to these 3 horns / powers only. They are identified in Chapter 8 as the 2 horns of Mede-Persia, the one large horn of Greece, and the “little horn” who will come to sit atop the 4th beast kingdom after pagan Rome is slain (7:11). Thus, Babylon and pagan Rome are excluded from discussion in Chapter 8. This is what is being discussed in verses 8:3-12.
Consequently, if I understand things correctly, there are 3 primary interpretations for verse 8:9:
1) I believe you may be interpreting this “horn” as AE, and / or,
2) Many are also interpreting this “horn” as some “anti-Christ” figure that comes at the end times, and / or,
3) This “little horn” of 8:9 is the coming “little horn” (papacy) that comes after pagan Rome is slain (7:11). This, of course, is my interpretation.
Therefore, I am saying that 8:9-12 reflects the coming little horn (papacy) that comes after the cross. These are the characteristics and decisions / activities the papacy will be associated with when they come to power.
Verse 8:13 is a question from Gabriel to God on the timing of when these certain things will take place.
But in verse 8:14, God does not answer Gabriel’s direct question. Instead, He tells Gabriel the time element for when the Sanctuary will be cleansed (in Chapter 9, Gabriel will give Daniel the 70 weeks of years prophecy which will speak of the restoration prophecy and the coming of the Messiah).
So, all of this is taking place and relevant WITHIN the 4th beast kingdom, not in the period BETWEEN the end of the 3rd kingdom of Greece (defined at the time of the 4 generals), and pagan Rome.
If I have presented this properly, I would kindly ask if you might tell me how 8:9-12 is speaking to AE. To me, he cannot meet the criteria within these verses at all. Only the little horn (papacy) will meet these criteria and also those found in Chapter 7.
Thanks so much and I look forward to your thoughts.
