The Destruction of Iran in the Last Days =Jeremiah 49

[Naomi25]

@Naomi25
The Little horn described as growing from the 4th beast of the Daniel 7 vision of the four beasts prophecy is universally identified by biblical scholarship as being the same entity as the man of sin... The Antichrist... First beast of revelation 13... Because all share contextually the same criteria... Same life span... Same chronology. Here are 11 specific characteristics of that little horn, many of which he shares with those other metaphorical presentations of this entity.
1. The little horn arises from the fourth beast (7:8). The fourth beast represents Rome, so the little horn must be a Roman power.

Ok...here's my first issue. You are building the foundation blocks of your whole idea on an assumption. You say that the forth beast is 'represents Rome'. You also say that the 4th beast is 'universally identified' as the AC. Now, while it is true that many scholars believe these things, scripture does not outright state it and it is an apocalyptic book. Being dogmatic on this and then stacking a whole theology on top of it is a little problematic.
Because, you're not just saying that the 4th beast 'likely' is the same as the first beast in Rev 13. You're not just saying that it is a 'good bet' that the 4th kingdom is Rome. You are stating it unequivocally and moving on from there, making every claim and judgement from those things. I simply cannot get behind any doctrine which, from its outset, makes an assumption based purely on what scripture does not say. I could discuss and maybe even support as solid and 'most likely' doctrines based upon that; but ...and I do hope you take this as an observation rather than accusation...it at times seems that the SDA begins on the presumption of 'Romes' guilt and then goes on to find guilt in every tiny or large, sin they present. I am not, in any way dismissing their faults or sins, but if any of us, or any of the religions or institutions...even the SDA, were to stand in judgement based, as we see here, on a presumption of initial guilt, then compounded by every little err or sin, then we too might find fingers being pointed towards us.

2. The little horn arises among the ten horns. The ten horns are the divisions of western Europe, so the little horn must arise in western Europe (7:8). Notice that these first two characteristics restrict the geographical location of the little horn to western Europe.

Again, certain claims are being made in 'certainties' that seem to come from assumptions.
'The ten horns are the divisions of western Europe'. The only possible way you can even look in that direction is because you've already landed their from your previous assumption. There is absolutely nothing in the text that demands or even suggests we look to "Western Europe" for it to be the 'ten horns'.
I am unaware of either characteristic that limits it to western Europe. The characteristics I see is that it is: terrible, dreadful, strong, iron teeth, it devours and breaks and stamps, it is different from the other beasts, it has eyes and a mouth like a man.
Nothing there suggests location, only fierceness and defiance towards God and a war-like nature towards the saints.
I will say this about the general locations given in the text in general...the one that the 'little horn' is to 'come out of'... The Medo-Persia Empire was not Europe. It went as far West as Turkey, South into Egypt, up across Iraq and into Persia. Babylon we know is in Iraq, and depending on what map you consult, generally had it's Empire follow a crescent around Iraq, up into Syria and then down into Israel. So...not Europe. The Greek Empire, under Alexander the Great covered more land, but they didn't seem to go West, into Italy or Europe. They headed East, they conquered Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and most of Iran, Israel and Egypt. The Roman Empire was the only one to venture into Europe, France, Belgium, parts of Britain. They had Greece, Turkey, Syria, Israel, Egypt and Iraq.
The interesting thing is, of course, that the Roman Empire really didn't cover what the other Empires did. There was some overlap around Turkey and Israel, but by and large, not really. To say that these nations draw our eyes to the same location, unless it is, perhaps, the center of Israel, is not a strong case, I would say. And it most certainly doesn't suggest that any sort of 'characteristics' point towards Europe.

3.The little horn rises after the ten horns (7:24). According to historians, the ten horns were complete in the year 476 A. D., this also being the commonly accepted date for the final dissolution of the western portion of the Roman Empire, so this must mean that the little horn was to arise to power sometime after 476 A. D.

I'm not sure, at this point, there's reason for me to push on, as most of my answers would follow. It seems to me that there's a bit of a 'house of cards' sort of situation happening here, mostly stemming around the fact that you believe, completely, that the RCC is what the bible just doesn't lay out for us.
Now, don't get me wrong...there can be good cases to make solid arguments from when scripture paints things in words, so to speak, strongly, but doesn't say them out front. Like the Trinity. When we look at all the evidence in scripture regarding God's nature, we can go 'this is clear and obvious'. However, I'm just not seeing that here. I see, sorry to be absolutely blunt, the fact that just saying that 'history proves it', doesn't make it so. I have not been presented any historical fact that in any way corroborates the claims. I have in no way received any historical claims to document the specific accusations that you say line up the RCC with the nature of AC. And here's the thing, if you want to be making accusations of this sort, it sort of lands on you to do more than say 'history proves it', or 'who else can fit these specifications?' Asking people these questions might get them thinking, but it in no way supports your case.
I do hope you don't see this as me attacking you. I do actually hold you in high esteem here. I just think to be honest in this conversation, especially in light of the weight of the accusations being tossed about, I need to be upfront about how I see this.

 

[Dave Watchman]

 

[brakelite]

First of all you are confusing what I have been posting, and underestimating what the scriptures actually reveal. First, from scripture...
The fourth beast of Daniel 7 is the Empire, whatever it may happen to be, which proceeds after Greece. We know that much. We also know, whatever Empire it is, that it is symbolised or represented by the iron legs of the statute of Daniel 2. We also know that the fourth beast, and the iron legs, both continue from whatever time they were established, all the way down to the second coming. We know this because the judgement of the Saints takes place during their lifetime, which judgement we understand as taking place immediately prior to the second coming. Not only is such a judgement a logical process to discern the sheep from the goats prior to the angels harvesting the earth, four times in Daniel the judgement is revealed, and not once after the second coming, and at least twice, prior to it.
We also know that at the second coming, the must remain some vestige of all four empires, because Daniel 2 tells us that when the Rock comes, Christ, He destroys all four beasts, at the same time scattering them to the wind. This brings to mind the first beast of Revelation 13,a composite of those same empires, which scripture declares is eventually thrown into the lake of fire to be destroyed.
Something else we know from scripture, is that the fourth beast has a number of horns which grow from its head. The angel informed Daniel that those horns represent Kings or kingdoms, which imagery would strongly suggest that out of that fourth Empire, would develop 10 separate distinct nations, with successive Kings ruling over them.
Now all those powers are pagan powers. Secular powers. Their conquering are to the four compass points, horizontally devouring their victims. I can say this because having grown from the 4th beast, they are still of the same nature as that beast, terrible, persecuting, powerful, and predatory. All this from scripture. No conjecture... No guesswork.
Then we are informed of a little horn that also grows out of that 4th Empire, and rips out three of those ten horns by the roots. This whatever power this 11th horn is, it destroys 3 of those former nations to such an extent that no trace is to be found except in history books. It is that little horn, not the 4th beast, that Bible commentators agree is the Antichrist. All the early church fathers recognised this... All the reformers recognised this... And most evangelicals today recognise this, although of course not all agree as to who it represents. But it's nature and description is parallel to the other symbolic representations of the same entity... The man of sin... Son of perditon... The first beast of Revelation 13.
But back to that 4th beast. In Daniel 8 we see two beasts described, but this time they are sanctuary animals, the goat and the ram, yet the angel informs us that they also represent the second and third empires... Medi Persia and Greece. After conquering Persia, we are told that the first horn was broken, and four others grew up in its stead. All historically literate Bible students agree that Greece was divided into four subsequent to the death Alexander the great. This of course was not accomplished peaceably... There were wars and assassinations and murders and betrayal... Still following the predatory nature of the beast from which they grew. But eventually, the middle east and Asia minor was divided into 4, then a few years later, into two.
But in Daniel 8, we are told in verse 4 that the ram, Meda Persia, waxed great in power. In verse 8 we are told that the goat became very great. Then we are informed of another power that grew which became exceeding great. We are not told that this final power grew from the head of the goat as the former horns had... This one we are told can from one of the four compass points... From one of the four winds as described in the previous verse... And this power we are informed grows exceeding great... Greater than either Persia or Greece... This power can only be that fourth beast... The iron legs... Because no greater power is described as ensuring to the time of the end. More later.

 

[Naomi25]

Hi brakelite...I am guessing this post is directed at me, but as you don't directly address me, it is just a guess, so forgive me if I'm wrong.

First of all you are confusing what I have been posting, and underestimating what the scriptures actually reveal. First, from scripture...
The fourth beast of Daniel 7 is the Empire, whatever it may happen to be, which proceeds after Greece. We know that much.

Well, no...no you don't "know" that much. You are assuming that the 3rd kingdom is Greece. It doesn't say. Nor does it say that the one following it is Rome. That assumption is based purely on the assumption that the one before it is Greece...This is my entire point. You are guessing. Assuming. From things that don't say it outright. And yet you have planted your flag on this hill with a fervor as if it had outright stated it and given you authority to repeat it.

And, as I said before, some of the other 'characteristics' you list as making it 'line up' to "fit" within the parameters you say will make it "only one option", doesn't actually line up. Rome doesn't, in point of fact, take over all the territory of the other kingdoms.

We also know, whatever Empire it is, that it is symbolised or represented by the iron legs of the statute of Daniel 2. We also know that the fourth beast, and the iron legs, both continue from whatever time they were established, all the way down to the second coming. We know this because the judgement of the Saints takes place during their lifetime, which judgement we understand as taking place immediately prior to the second coming.

I'm sorry...I'm not following you at all here. How do you determine that this 'fourth beast' kingdom continues to the end? Where does it speak about the 'judgement of the Saints' taking place during their lifetimes? I'm not seeing that anywhere in the passages.

Not only is such a judgement a logical process to discern the sheep from the goats prior to the angels harvesting the earth, four times in Daniel the judgement is revealed, and not once after the second coming, and at least twice, prior to it.

Again, it would be nice to see those verses laid out for me, please.

We also know that at the second coming, the must remain some vestige of all four empires, because Daniel 2 tells us that when the Rock comes, Christ, He destroys all four beasts, at the same time scattering them to the wind. This brings to mind the first beast of Revelation 13,a composite of those same empires, which scripture declares is eventually thrown into the lake of fire to be destroyed.

See, here, I think you're trying to take apocalyptic writings far too literally. Daniel 2 and 7 is a marching through history of Empires that are fundamentally 'anti-God'. Babylon? Well known city/empire for it. 'Prince of Persia'? Enemy of God! Rome was the 'modern day' equivalent to Babylon when the apostles were writing their epistles. When we get to Revelation and see a beast described who is a compilation of all the Daniel creatures, we are to know that this person or empire is the epitome of anti-God, anti-Christ. He is the Devil's champion, all that wicked men have worked towards from fall to end of the age.
I simply do not think we are meant to read these things and go 'right, there's going to be remnants of all these old empires still floating around hundreds of years later'.

Something else we know from scripture, is that the fourth beast has a number of horns which grow from its head. The angel informed Daniel that those horns represent Kings or kingdoms, which imagery would strongly suggest that out of that fourth Empire, would develop 10 separate distinct nations, with successive Kings ruling over them.
Now all those powers are pagan powers. Secular powers. Their conquering are to the four compass points, horizontally devouring their victims. I can say this because having grown from the 4th beast, they are still of the same nature as that beast, terrible, persecuting, powerful, and predatory. All this from scripture. No conjecture... No guesswork.

Except...you are still guessing, when it comes down to it. You are taking what IS known from scripture...that it is speaking of kings and kingdoms, that some will rise and others will fall, that they will be strong and crushing, etc. And then you, with the same amount of authority, place kingdom names into the spaces where scripture just doesn't speak into.
When you assume from the beginning that the first 3 beasts must be Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece, and that therefore the 4th must be Rome, and that therefore the 10 'mini' kingdoms rising from the 4th must come from Europe, you've got yourself a house of cards built on assumption, rather than biblical text. They might be very good assumptions, but, let's be completely honest, without biblical validation, they are just assumptions. And since there's only 3 passages that speak to this and they're all apocalyptic and don't really give us any more information, I can't see how you get past that.
So, just based on the biblical text and what I currently know and laid out of history for you before, I'd have to say a lot more work needs to be done before you have a slam dunk case. I mean...if you have any historical dates, times and persons to pull out, I'd say do it, but so far....

Then we are informed of a little horn that also grows out of that 4th Empire, and rips out three of those ten horns by the roots. This whatever power this 11th horn is, it destroys 3 of those former nations to such an extent that no trace is to be found except in history books. It is that little horn, not the 4th beast, that Bible commentators agree is the Antichrist. All the early church fathers recognised this... All the reformers recognised this... And most evangelicals today recognise this, although of course not all agree as to who it represents. But it's nature and description is parallel to the other symbolic representations of the same entity... The man of sin... Son of perditon... The first beast of Revelation 13.
But back to that 4th beast. In Daniel 8 we see two beasts described, but this time they are sanctuary animals, the goat and the ram, yet the angel informs us that they also represent the second and third empires... Medi Persia and Greece. After conquering Persia, we are told that the first horn was broken, and four others grew up in its stead. All historically literate Bible students agree that Greece was divided into four subsequent to the death Alexander the great. This of course was not accomplished peaceably... There were wars and assassinations and murders and betrayal... Still following the predatory nature of the beast from which they grew. But eventually, the middle east and Asia minor was divided into 4, then a few years later, into two.
But in Daniel 8, we are told in verse 4 that the ram, Meda Persia, waxed great in power. In verse 8 we are told that the goat became very great. Then we are informed of another power that grew which became exceeding great. We are not told that this final power grew from the head of the goat as the former horns had... This one we are told can from one of the four compass points... From one of the four winds as described in the previous verse... And this power we are informed grows exceeding great... Greater than either Persia or Greece... This power can only be that fourth beast... The iron legs... Because no greater power is described as ensuring to the time of the end. More later.

Ok...I think this is where we are. You keep pushing the bible passages and trying to make your case on how they fit together. The thing is...I am aware of the theory behind them. My point is how you are attempting to link all that to real life with, to my mind, almost no physical evidence. I haven't seen you present any hard evidence for any of these kingdoms being what they are supposed to be linked to in the text. I haven't seen anything that suggested the 4th must be Rome. I haven't seen anything that, as you say it must, fits it into the 'only' category that makes sense for western Europe to be the place for the ten nations to arise. If you want me to take your idea seriously, I need to see these correlations. I need you to plot out for me how history shows this next to and along side the biblical text. I don't think that is an unfair request.

 

[brakelite]

Well, no...no you don't "know" that much. You are assuming that the 3rd kingdom is Greece.

KJV Daniel 8
20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

There is no assumption that Greece superceded Meda Persia. No one has to force fit Greece into the prophecy. It meets the criteria, the history, and the time frame. There are 600 prophecies in the OT we believe speak of Jesus... How many name Him outright?

Rome doesn't, in point of fact, take over all the territory of the other kingdoms.

Didn't have to. The criteria as to Rome's strength and power was that it would grow exceeding great... That is greater than the preceding empires... Which no historian disputes. The fact that Rome doesn't cover the same territory is irrelevant, in fact almost positively in favour, as each Empire grow towards the West.
Antichrist, then (as the Fathers delight to call him), or the little horn, is to be sought among the ten kingdoms of the western Roman Empire. I say of the western Roman Empire, because that was properly the body of the fourth beast; Greece, and the countries which lay eastward of Italy belonged to the third beast; for the former beasts were still subsisting, though their dominion was taken away.
‘As concerning the rest of the beasts,’ saith Daniel, ‘they had their dominion taken away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.’ Daniel 7:12.
‘And therefore,’ as Sir Isaac Newton rightly infers, ‘all four beasts are still alive, though the dominion of the three first be taken away. The nations of Chaldea and Assyria are still the first beast. Those of Media and Persia are still the second beast. Those of Macedon, Greece and Thrace, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt, are still the third. And those of Europe, on this side of Greece, are still the fourth. Seeing therefore the body of the third beast is confined to the nations on this side the river Euphrates, and the body of the fourth beast is confined to the nations on this side of Greece; we are to look for all the four heads of the third beast among the nations on this side the river Euphrates; and for all the eleven horns of the fourth beast, among the nations on this side of Greece.”
(Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies, pp. 239, 240).

The above quote is also very pertinent to Revelation 13 and the beast that arises from the sea having all the composite parts of the beasts of Daniel. All four beasts are still alive in composite form of the Revelation beast, the antichrist. Notice also the steady progression in a westerly direction of each power. First Babylon, then Media/Persia, then Greece, then Rome and Europe. In Revelation 13 the beast of the sea being composite of all these, is followed by a new beast that rises from out of the earth. There are many who believe this power that rises chronologically after the European composite, is that power which lies further westward, namely America.

I'm sorry...I'm not following you at all here. How do you determine that this 'fourth beast' kingdom continues to the end? Where does it speak about the 'judgement of the Saints' taking place during their lifetimes? I'm not seeing that anywhere in the passages.

First, the iron if the 4th Empire is crushed at the second coming. In fact, the Bilal evidence is that all 4 empires are still there at the second coming, as explained above.
KJV Daniel 2
34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.
35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

First judgement... Note that Daniel was witnessing the judgement in vision when his attention was diverted by the voice of the little horn...
KJV Daniel 7
9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.

Second depiction of same judgement in same time frame...
KJV Daniel 7
21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;
22 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.

Third depiction... Same event...

KJV Daniel 7
25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.
27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

There is a fourth depiction I deliberately left out because it is more obscure and a deeper study required than we are indulging in here is needed to understand all the times and ramifications. But they are there. And those
Judgements are not execution of sentence... They are discerning the destinies of the Saints, as I said, dividing the sheep and goats prior to the second coming... The harvest.

See, here, I think you're trying to take apocalyptic writings far too literally. Daniel 2 and 7 is a marching through history of Empires that are fundamentally 'anti-God'. Babylon? Well known city/empire for it. 'Prince of Persia'? Enemy of God! Rome was the 'modern day' equivalent to Babylon when the apostles were writing their epistles. When we get to Revelation and see a beast described who is a compilation of all the Daniel creatures, we are to know that this person or empire is the epitome of anti-God, anti-Christ. He is the Devil's champion, all that wicked men have worked towards from fall to end of the age.
I simply do not think we are meant to read these things and go 'right, there's going to be remnants of all these old empires still floating around hundreds of years later'.

Why not? There are numerous books written detailing the sources and pagan roots of so many things we today take for granted, particularly with the RCC. but also in organisations like the UN and a variety of secret and not so secret societies the world over. The characteristics, literal and spiritual, of Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome, both pagan and papal, is in everything we do and touch... From our calendars to our numerical systems... Alphabets... Weights and measures... Philosophy... Religion... Language... And unless we come out, our entire worldview is affected by that which remains and it is soon to become a global religious system enforcing it's mark upon all.
It is real and it's all around us... Your own children are currently being educated by it.

If you want me to take your idea seriously, I need to see these correlations. I need you to plot out for me how history shows this next to and along side the biblical text. I don't think that is an unfair request.

See posts #55,56,57,58.

 

[Naomi25]

Sorry it's taken me a few days to get back to you brakelite. It's been a little busy for me.

There is no assumption that Greece superceded Meda Persia. No one has to force fit Greece into the prophecy. It meets the criteria, the history, and the time frame. There are 600 prophecies in the OT we believe speak of Jesus... How many name Him outright?

The difference with Christ is that he came, declared himself the fulfillment of those prophecies, and then provided evidence for all of his claims via his miracles and ultimately rising from the dead. I think you'll agree that is simply in another category all together.

Didn't have to. The criteria as to Rome's strength and power was that it would grow exceeding great... That is greater than the preceding empires... Which no historian disputes. The fact that Rome doesn't cover the same territory is irrelevant, in fact almost positively in favour, as each Empire grow towards the West.

Okay...I feel like things are starting to get far afield, and I just want to pull back and, I suppose, state, again, what I see as the main problems here, rather than replying to each point you bring up, which tends to see me wobbling off point.

The trickiness of this situation, for me, is that I don't believe you're all together wrong. But I don't believe you're all together correct, either. And the tension between it is problematic. Let me illustrate. The identification of the 4 beasts, or the statue...the assumption is that they are the Babylonian, Greece, Medo-Persian and Roman Empire. And, it's probably a good assumption. It's an assumption shared by many scholars. But it is, at base, an assumption. Probably correct, but not absolute. So, when you come along and state, with dogmatic certainty that the Papacy IS the Antichrist, based upon these assumptions, it's concerning.
You say that you look at the characteristics and find no other match, but characteristics, by nature, are broad. You seem to be taking these broad characteristics and locking them into a specific end conclusion with very little evidence to back these maneuvers up. It leaves me wondering very much if the text led you where you are, or where you are led you to read the text as you do. Because, forgive me, everyone knows how SDA feel about the RCC. Sometimes, as much as we try to avoid it, the bias of our upbringing or environment, can influence our opinions and attitudes.

Another issue where I see you being both right...and wrong, is...I can see in scripture the reference to the little horn being judged at the 'Judgement Seat' of the Ancient of Days. But that still leaves many questions and problems. You claim this 'little horn' must grow from ten kingdoms that come from Rome. Let's assume, for the moment, that it's so. However, there seems to be, to my mind, still work to be done to prove that this 'little horn', that apparently comes to be back then, is still around for the Judgement Seat. You say it is the RCC, but is it? Where is the biblical evidence or even historical evidence that links Rome, to the RCC? There is a great lot of both theological work and historical work you need to do here. Not to mention the idea that the other 4 kingdoms must still be, in some form, around for that day of judgement as well. I see the quote above you gave from Thomas Newton, thank you, but I must question his supposition that the kingdoms survive in the city states that are found within the boarders of the old Empires. Firstly, I find that a stretch, there's nothing to suggest a nation who's been thoroughly and totally conquered continues on just because all of her cities are not demolished or because it morphed into another nation. No...an Empire when it collapses, is done. Second, when we consider Dan 2:35 we see that these 'kingdoms' are "broken in pieces, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that not a trace of them could be found." That sounds rather final to me. How then, are we to find them at the last judgement. No...I think we are to look at it and understand that they (the kings and all within their kingdoms) will be judged at the last judgement, like every one else.

I...realize that I am pushing. But, it is, you must agree, an important issue. And when considering such weighty matters, you cannot...should not, expect people to just go by your say so. We will want careful historical proof that lines up with biblical texts, that we may weigh up carefully and prayerfully as we consider it. And while I respect you, I cannot take such a matter with just a 'nod' from you. I do require more.

See posts #55,56,57,58.

Thank you. I will go and check them out. Usually I am pressed for time, so I miss anything that isn't a direct reply or tagged with my name. Just so you know I'm not ignoring all your time laboured work!

 

[Naomi25]

The image of Daniel 2 sets the foundation for every subsequent vision and prophecy from Daniel to Revelation. What God has set down as His word in Daniel 2 cannot be altered to suit one’s false theories when it comes to studying Revelation. All subsequent prophecies are to be studied on the principle of ‘repeat and enlarge’. That is, once Daniel 2 is understood, any further consideration of later visions must be based on Daniel 2, only with the addition of further detail. Daniel 2 sets the scene, everything else must fit into what Daniel 2 has laid down as the bottom line.

Dan 12:4 says "But you Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, until the time of the end." Revelation is, or so most scholars agree, the 'unsealed revelation' that is being referred to here. Is it a case, then, of Daniel "setting the foundation"? Or should we not look at Revelation as Daniel more fully explained in the light of Christ? Both are undoubtedly important, but as those living with the full knowledge of Christ and his first coming; as those who have received the Revelation, we cannot, I think, allow prophecies that were admittedly spoken in a time of types and shadows, to steer our complete understanding.

That said, let us settle on what nearly all Bible scholars agree as to what Daniel 2 represents.
Daniel 2:30-45.
The head of gold is clearly identified as the kingdom of Babylon (626-539BC) in verse 38. From history we know that the other 3 kingdoms following Babylon were Media-Persia (539-331BC), Greece (331-168BC) , and Rome (168BC-476AD). Although the Roman empire ruled longer than the other 3 kingdoms put together, it was not succeeded by a fifth world power but was divided up into kingdoms of varying strength, symbolised by the feet of iron and clay, just as the prophecy predicted. These are the nations that make up modern Europe, nations that, to this day, exist as separate national political entities.

Okay..I get that the head of gold is Babylon. I get that it makes logical sense to list the kingdoms that came after it as the 3rd and 4th parts of the statue. But when we hit Rome, and how it fell and the way it's supposed to be the feet of iron and clay, and the part about 'intermarriage' making it weak? It starts to get...messy. Rome's demise wasn't straight forward. It split into two kingdoms and the Western kingdom fell in 476AD. The Eastern one continued for several centuries. So...which part are we saying produced the ten kingdoms? How do we just 'dismiss' the other half of the Empire? Is that legit, or just convenient? How do we look at the Eastern kingdom, which is the parts of the empire that surrounded Israel...the very nation many of Daniel's prophecy's centered around (Dan 9:24, 12:1), and declare that only the Western kingdom matters for our purposes? Where do we find Europe replacing the Middle East...Israel...in prophecy, in scripture? How do we justify drawing our focus away from where God has consistently pulled it for all of his word? These are questions that weigh on me, and I'm not pleased to just dismiss them without solid, biblical answers.

The Bible makes it plain that the stone represents Jesus Christ (Isa. 28:16; 1 Cor. 10:4; Luke 20:17,18.) Who at His second advent will destroy all the other kingdoms and establish an everlasting kingdom.

Actually, I would argue that Christ set up his kingdom at his first coming. "The kingdom of God is upon you". Like a mustard see, this kingdom grows in strength and size. And at his return it will be fully realized as he conquers the last enemy; death.

Daniel 7 and 8 compliment one another, and give added impetus and detail to Daniel 2. I will deal with both 7 and 8 together, in order to make it easier to see the parallels.
Daniel 7:3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.
4 The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings:….

Here is the first beast representing the first of 4 world empires, Babylon, as also revealed as the head of gold in Daniel 2. Another very sound principle when interpreting scripture, is to take all scripture language literally, unless there exists some good reason for supposing it to be figurative; and all that is figurative is to be interpreted by that which is literal. That the language here is symbolic is evident when considering verse 17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.
That the intention is to show kingdoms and not just individual kings is also evident by the appearance of beasts. Much as modern nations do today, U.S. the eagle; Russia the bear; N.Z. the Kiwi; Aust. the wallaby.etc. Verses 38 and 39 reveal that the first kingdom is Babylon, which rose to power through war and conquest. When Daniel mentioned in verse 2 the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea, this is symbolic language representing war and strife amongst nations. (Rev.17:15; Isaiah 17:12,13; Jer. 51:1; Jer. 25:32,33.)

Okay, see...I have a problem with all of this. You say that Daniel 2 and 7 clearly define the list of kingdoms like this: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome...with the 10 kingdoms coming out of Rome, and the "little horn" which is the anti-christ, coming out of those 10 kingdoms...or, out of three of them, to be exact.
But Chapter 8? Doesn't chapter 8 throw a huge spanner in your works? How do you get it all to fit with this in the mix? Chapter 8 tells us this: the ram is Medo-Persia, which is taken out by the Goat, which is Greece. Greece collapses into 4 lesser kingdoms...and we know this to be true...when Alexander the Great died, his 4 top Generals, Ptolemy, Cassander, Seleucus, and Antigones, divvied up his kingdom into four parts.
We are then told that out of these four kingdoms comes "the little horn". Whom you argue scholars world wide recognize as the Anti-Christ. So...it seems there is a mystery. Does this little horn come from the four kingdoms of 'once Greece'...or the ten kingdoms of 'once Rome'?

 

[brakelite]

Dan 12:4 says "But you Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, until the time of the end." Revelation is, or so most scholars agree, the 'unsealed revelation' that is being referred to here. Is it a case, then, of Daniel "setting the foundation"? Or should we not look at Revelation as Daniel more fully explained in the light of Christ? Both are undoubtedly important, but as those living with the full knowledge of Christ and his first coming; as those who have received the Revelation, we cannot, I think, allow prophecies that were admittedly spoken in a time of types and shadows, to steer our complete understanding.


Okay..I get that the head of gold is Babylon. I get that it makes logical sense to list the kingdoms that came after it as the 3rd and 4th parts of the statue. But when we hit Rome, and how it fell and the way it's supposed to be the feet of iron and clay, and the part about 'intermarriage' making it weak? It starts to get...messy. Rome's demise wasn't straight forward. It split into two kingdoms and the Western kingdom fell in 476AD. The Eastern one continued for several centuries. So...which part are we saying produced the ten kingdoms? How do we just 'dismiss' the other half of the Empire? Is that legit, or just convenient? How do we look at the Eastern kingdom, which is the parts of the empire that surrounded Israel...the very nation many of Daniel's prophecy's centered around (Dan 9:24, 12:1), and declare that only the Western kingdom matters for our purposes? Where do we find Europe replacing the Middle East...Israel...in prophecy, in scripture? How do we justify drawing our focus away from where God has consistently pulled it for all of his word? These are questions that weigh on me, and I'm not pleased to just dismiss them without solid, biblical answers.


Actually, I would argue that Christ set up his kingdom at his first coming. "The kingdom of God is upon you". Like a mustard see, this kingdom grows in strength and size. And at his return it will be fully realized as he conquers the last enemy; death.



Okay, see...I have a problem with all of this. You say that Daniel 2 and 7 clearly define the list of kingdoms like this: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome...with the 10 kingdoms coming out of Rome, and the "little horn" which is the anti-christ, coming out of those 10 kingdoms...or, out of three of them, to be exact.
But Chapter 8? Doesn't chapter 8 throw a huge spanner in your works? How do you get it all to fit with this in the mix? Chapter 8 tells us this: the ram is Medo-Persia, which is taken out by the Goat, which is Greece. Greece collapses into 4 lesser kingdoms...and we know this to be true...when Alexander the Great died, his 4 top Generals, Ptolemy, Cassander, Seleucus, and Antigones, divvied up his kingdom into four parts.
We are then told that out of these four kingdoms comes "the little horn". Whom you argue scholars world wide recognize as the Anti-Christ. So...it seems there is a mystery. Does this little horn come from the four kingdoms of 'once Greece'...or the ten kingdoms of 'once Rome'?

KJV Daniel 8
8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
9 And out of one of them (what "them"... Is it the horns, or is it the four winds, or compass points? If we say four horns, we must needs find a power that grew greater, exceedingly greater, than either of those four combined, even greater than Alexander in the context, so beginning little, we need to find a power in history that matches that criteria, which from its point of birth grew, removing Greece's dominance in the process, and set up an empire exceeding all that preceded it. And if your theory is correct, that God's kingdom was established at the first Advent, I have difficulty in harmonising anything, because the fifth kingdom, then, could not have been set up at Christ's first advent, because it is not to exist contemporaneously with earthly governments, but to succeed them. As the second kingdom succeeded the first, the third the second, and the fourth the third, by violence and overthrow, so the fifth succeeds the fourth. It does not exist at the same time with it. The fourth kingdom is first destroyed, the fragments are removed, the territory is cleared, and then the fifth is established as a succeeding kingdom in the order of time. In fact, the Rock totally pulverises everything of human political power to such an extent there remains no evidence if their ever having existed. Such was not the case when the church was established. I would even suggest there had barely been a time when the church had not been in subjection, in whole or in part, to secular authority. The remaining philosophical concepts of Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome, can still be found throughout society, even in the church.
The prophecy declares however the time is coming when no such influence or power will ever be heard of again. A new earth..a new heaven...a new City.
On another note. Don't search for literal prophetic cities in the NT. From the time of Christ, the literal City of Jerusalem have way too the spiritual Jerusalem/Israel, the church. So also did her enemies. Literal Babylon is now nothing but rubble, and will remain so, despite human attempts to rebuild it. Babylon the Great spoken of in Revelation is not a literal City... Not even Rome... It is a global spiritual power that opposes God's people. And many churches, will turn away from the truth and join her in persecuting the saints. They bring the harlots daughters. The final battle lines in the great drama between Christ and Satan are being played out by spiritual foes, spiritual Jerusalem and spiritual Babylon, not literal cities.
The 7 heads for example on the beast in Revelation represent a succession of earthly powers, 4 in the OT, LITERAL LOCAL EMPIRES AS PER THE PROPHECY, and in the NT,a further 3, global spiritual powers, enemies of Christ and His people. And each in their turn represented by beasts... The first beast of revelation 13 (Antichrist) ... The papacy. The second beast of revelation 13 (false prophet) that in the end speaks for the papal power and enforces the mark thus acting as the worlds policeman in bringing the world into submission to Rome... Apostate Protestantism... The USA. At the same time as the rising of the US, and the fall of the papacy at the end of the 18th century, we saw the birth and rise of the beast of Revelation11, representing the rust of atheism/communism. All beasts in the NT we spiritual global entities apparently vying for supremacy, but through esoteric secret societies were in fact joined at the hip as a union of church and state which final manifestation we will witness in the woman riding the beast.
Throughout history we have witnessed the same scenario. Satan using the powers of this world to destroy, confuse, and deceive God's people by establishing a rival kingdom to Christ. Starting in the garden, to the time of the flood when only Noah was found faithful. Then came Babel, the root of Babylon. Then a succession of Kings, empires, all designed by the enemy to first withstand and if possible prevent the coming of the Messiah, then when that failed, to destroy God's people. Hence why we look to Europe for the fulfillment of the fourth beast... Only Rome fits the criteria in both it's pagan and then papal stages as being the only power that warred so consistently and violently against God's people as well as filling the other criteria regarding blasphemy, changing God's laws, replacing Christ as priest, prophet, and king, counterfeiting and presuming godly attributes and authority. No other power on earth entered the temple of God, the church, presumed to speak God, forgive sin, have supreme authority over the word of God, open and shut heaven to whomsoever she decided was worthy, trample upon the truth of Christ's priesthood and set up a rival system of its own. How more perfectly fitting could a future individual enter a physical temple in Jerusalem and proclaim himself God, more than what the papacy has already done?

 

[Nancy]

Was wondering if any would not recognise my tongue in cheek perspective. That is the first time anyone has suggested in racist. Yay for new experiences... Makes life interesting.

As for your suggestion that I think America's leaders won't be cast down... Quite the opposite. I KNOW America's leaders will be cast down... And not just their leaders, but the nation. Yes, the Bible declares America has a role to play...a destiny to fulfill... But methinks you have no idea what that is and what it will lead to. Most Americans are so full of their own global self importance they cannot see how they are in fact working hand in glove with Antichrist.

I caught your tongue and cheek perspective, lol. I know you don't talk that way BL.

 

[Naomi25]

Before I deal with the horn of the goat, I’d like to briefly recap on something from the image of Daniel 2 and stress something that is very important.
What we know of the image is that there are just 4 kingdoms or empires from the beginning of Babylon to the second coming. These four are destroyed by the rock of Christ at His coming.
That means 2 things.
1. That in some form or another they are in existence today (all four!), and will be until Jesus comes.
How do I know this? By the beast that rises from the sea in Revelation 13. (And remember beasts are kingdoms). In this beast there is a remnant of each of the 4 beasts we see here in Daniel. And it is that particular beast that is destroyed and thrown into the lake of fire. This can be easily explained by the fact that the pagan belief system of Babylon was inherited by all the following powers, was developed further and will be perfected into a Christian counterfeit at the end that will deceive most of the world. But more on that later.

Yeah, see...I still don't think you can really prove, in any kind of logical semblance, the fact that these empires still exists in some form today, and will keep existing until the second coming. I mean, really? The Babylonian Empire is still here? In what sort of state? The fact that Iraq is still a city? So what? The fact that people still exist in the same populated places as they did thousands of years ago means nothing. Unless you can prove that culturally, legally or militarily these Empires still hold some sway on the area, there is no way you can make that a valid claim, and any attempt to do so is nothing more than a "Nostradamus" fake out: "there will be a plague in a city by the sea". Sure there will be. Either all Empires that have ever been still exist because people still dwell in these areas, and therefore prophecies of this sort are null and void and meaningless because that's what they're hanging on to determine if an 'empire will still exist', or, these empires will have to exist in some meaningful way, as I've laid out above, and I don't think you can prove that, because I don't think they continue on to this day. I think, as I've said before, because we're reading a symbolic book, it's more likely we're looking at imagery that tells us that AT the second coming, every empire, nation and city of man, will be wiped away. Remember in 1 Cor 15...he will deliver the Kingdom to the Father, after destroying every rule and authority and power. This is the image of the great stone Daniel is seeing. The stone is Christ, who inaugurated his Kingdom at his first coming. He will consummate it at his second coming.

2. The iron begins from the victory over the Greeks, and continues unbroken (albeit in another form) right to the end. In other words, there is no gap in history- no “revived” Roman empire that is yet to come. Rome is still with us today, there has never been any full or conclusive end to the Roman empire as yet.

Except, there is no Rome. Rome may not have been "conquered" in the traditional way...the Eastern kingdom, anyway...but it most certainly did fall. And it has been many centuries since anyone lived under "Pax Romana". And you have yet to prove in any way that the Roman Empire was succeeded in any legitimate way, by the Catholic Church.

To continue with the goat of Daniel 8. We have discovered that the goat represented Greece, that the great horn was it’s first king, Alexander, and that when he died , after some conflict and debate, 4 kings ruled in his stead.

8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

There are however a total of six horns that grow out of the he-goat , and it is to the 6th that we will now focus our attention.
This ‘little horn’ was to exceed the greatness of all the preceding horns. Media/Persia “became great” (Daniel 8:4); The he-goat itself was to wax “very great”, (Daniel 8:8), but this little horn was to grow and become “exceeding great”.( Daniel 8:9). It is claimed by many, in fact it has almost become standard belief in modern Christian thought, that Antiochus Epiphanes is represented by this little horn. This is based solely on his persecution of the Jews and the desecration of the temple, as is presumed to have taken place upon a reading of the ensuing verses. The problem however is that Antiochus does not meet the requirements of any other specific in the prophecy. (Some refer to him as being the fulfilment of the little horn that grows out of the fourth beast in Daniel 7 also.)
This is particularly popular with the preterist position, but to insist upon this understanding is to wrest the scripture from it’s historical setting, for an important point to note is that the 4th beast reaches to the end of time, and is destroyed at the second coming. The view that Antiochus is the little horn restricts the entire book of Daniel to the period of time before Christianity was established.

Let me in detail give my reasons why I believe Antiochus cannot be the little horn of Daniel 7.
a. Antiochus does not rise after 10 kings. He was the 8th king in the Syrian line of Seleucid kings. Besides, the prophecy calls for 10 kingdoms to exist contemporaneously, not successively.
b. Antiochus belonged to the 3rd empire (Greece) in actual historical sequence from Daniel’s time.
c. He was not ‘diverse’ from any other king.
d. He did not ‘pluck up’ 3 other kings.
e. He was not ‘stouter’ than his fellows. His father was known as Antiochus the Great, not Epiphanes.
f. He did not prevail until the end of time, the judgment.
g. The kingdom following was Rome, not the kingdom of the saints.

Reasons why Antiochus cannot be the little horn of Daniel 8.
a. Antiochus was not a horn in his own right. He was of the Seleucid line therefore was a part of one of the four.
b. He did not wax exceeding great. In fact his father was greater, but neither was as great as even Babylon or Media Persia, certainly no greater than Alexander. Yet the prophecy demands that the little horn be greater than any empire before it.
c. He does not fit the time periods. According to Maccabees 1:54,59, and 4:52 Antiochus suppressed the sacrifices exactly 3 years. This fits neither the 1260 days , (times time and half a time,) nor the 2300 days (evenings and mornings of Daniel 8:14). These figures do not compliment one another NOR do they meet the reign of Antiochus.
d. The 2300 days is prophetic. Using the day/year principle established elsewhere as being the standard and norm for interpreting prophetic time periods, it is a literal 2300 years.

Therefore,
And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.

can only refer to the empire of Rome, and thus is the Daniel 8 parallel to not just the 4th beast of Daniel 7…
7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.

… but also the iron legs of the statue of Daniel 2. See how each prophecy repeats and enlarges upon the preceding prophecy?

I'm sorry, but despite your obvious hard work, I still see Chapter 8 as problematic to the overall schema. The fact that "little horn" has, throughout both Daniel and Revelation, been the lodestone for the Anti-Christ, we're now to see it as an illusion to Rome, the 4th Beast, the 'legs of iron'? We're supposed to see that while the 'lesser kingdoms' of Medo-Persia and Greece gets their own 'strong' beasts of burdens, charging into the various directions they conquered, terrifying Rome, who ruled the known world for longer than any other Empire in the history of the world, gets a 'little horn'. More...it hijacks it off the Anit-Christ! Not to mention in the previous chapter the little horn came from the ten kingdoms which came from the 4th beast, but now it comes from the four horns which comes from single horn? It's a totally different picture. And the text outright tells you. Chapter 2 outright tells us that progression starts with Babylon...which is how you arrived at Rome for the 4th. If you're playing by the same game, when you come to Chapter 8, the little horn comes from Greece, not Rome. Moving to assuming the little horn must be Rome is bending your own rules and the natural way the text seems to flow in order to get that end result of Rome.

 

[Naomi25]

The dragon beast represents the Roman empire (168 B. C. – 476 A. D.). This empire came to be known as the “iron monarchy of Rome” (Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. 4, p. 161).

The Dragon beast? Are you referring to the second beast in Rev 13? The one that 'spoke like a dragon'? I would disagree here. Because in Revelation we clearly see that the dragon is Satan. And the first beast is given power by the dragon, as well as his throne and authority. The second beast 'speaks' like a dragon, so, I'd say he speaks out against God...he blasphemes.
Anyway...while most nations upon earth have anti-God attitudes, I don't think there is any real evidence to say that either of these has to be, or is, the Roman Empire.

The ten horns represent the ten kingdoms into which the Roman Empire was divided when it fell apart. These ten kingdoms, according to Edward
Gibbon, were: The Alemanni, the Franks, the Burgundians, the Vandals, the Suevi, the Visigoths, the Saxons, the Ostrogoths, the Lombards and the Heruli (see, M. H. Brown, The Sure Word of Prophecy, pp. 54, 55).
“The historian Machiavel, without the slightest reference to this prophecy, gives the following list of the nations which occupied the territory of the Western Empire at the time of the fall of Romulus Augustulus [476 A. D], the last emperor of Rome: The Lombards, the Franks, the Burgundians, the Ostrogoths, the Visigoths, the Vandals, the Heruli, the Sueves, the Huns, and
the Saxons: ten in all.” (H. Grattan Guinness, The Divine Program of the World’s History, p. 318).
Already in the fourth century, Jerome had spoken of the fragmentation of the Roman Empire in the following terms:
“Moreover the fourth kingdom, which plainly pertains to the Romans, is the iron which breaks in pieces and subdues all things. But its feet and toes are partly of iron and partly of clay, which at this time [note that Jerome was living when this was happening] is most plainly attested. For just as in its beginning nothing was stronger and more unyielding than the Roman Empire, so at the end of its affairs nothing is weaker.” (Jerome, Commentary on Daniel, comments on 2:40, column 504). In the days when Jerome lived, the Roman Empire was coming apart. The barbarian tribes from the north had descended upon the empire with a vengeance and broke it up into the nations which today constitute western Europe.

Mmmm. Here's the thing. Rather resoundingly, numbers are used symbolically in apocolyptic writings, especially Revelation. That doesn't, of course, mean that it cannot echo real numerical values of something, but primarily we see them being used to portray a deeper truth. For example, 7...7 is always used as the number of completion or perfection. Usually in the case of God, but it can be used in other cases to describe ultimate or complete control...as we see in the first beast. He has 7 heads...he has been given power and authority by the dragon over the kingdoms of the earth and everyone worshiped him, saying "who is like the beast?" But then we notice that he was "allowed" to exercise this authority for 42 months. That's 3 and 1/2 years. What's 3 and 1/2? Half of 7. And that represents? That his control might be complete while he has it, but God resoundingly cuts his reign short...his ultimate, perfect, air-tight kingdom...is not. It cannot ever reach the complete, perfection that God's Kingdom will, in which it will reign forever. A good example is Hitler. His reign was terrifying, and everyone living in Nazi Germany either lived in thrall or in fear. But how long did his "thousand year reich" last for? It fell far short of the perfection that madman strove for.
My point being this; the interpretation of Rev 13 does not, in any way, need to point us to Rome. And, if it does, perhaps only as a cautionary tale as a 'city of man as opposed to city of God' that we see represented throughout scripture by Babylon before it. Indeed, since the fall of Rome there have been hundreds of cities of man that opposed themselves to God. The call of Revelation, in large part, is to not be numbered among them when the King returns and judges them all.

Daniel 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.



Daniel 8:9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.
10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.

Remember, that the little horn in Daniel 8:9 is different from the little horn of Daniel 7:8. The one in Daniel 8:9 represents the empire of pagan Rome. It is the parallel symbol of the dragon beast with the ten horns and iron teeth that rises from the sea. However, in Daniel 8:10 can be seen a change in the practice of the little horn from being one that “waxed exceeding great” on a horizontal plane to one that then “waxed great” on a vertical plane. Rome at first operated as a secular pagan entity. But here we see a change in her nature to a religious entity in that she began to attack the things of God and spiritual truths that pertain to heaven.
The little horn of Daniel 7:8, which grows out of the Roman empire
amongst the former ten horns and uproots 3 of them, is also an entity which has aspirations of a more heavenly nature.

As I've mentioned before, I think there's a serious problem assuming that Chapter 2 and 7 are in line with Chapter 8. Because 8 seems to be saying something entirely different and to my way of reading it, you've just switched and jumped the way you interpret the various words and nations simply based on the fact that you need to squeeze Rome into the picture in Ch 8. So...if you could address that, that would be nice, thanks.

Daniel 7:9 ¶ I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.

We see here that the duration of this little horn does not end until the judgment. So it endures right up to the second coming, therefore is with us today. There are also much more written on this little horn. There is in fact more detail given concerning this horn than on any of the other beasts together. Thus it is abundantly clear that in His love and mercy God desires that we know who and what this entity is for it is clearly a threat to our spiritual welfare.

Yes, and I believe he has his apostles speak to the Church about such things in the NT when he told us that the spirit of Antichrist was already in the world...that many antichrist's had already come. Again, I believe that we are not looking at a preternaturally long lasting Empire that no one can actually see, or a man that lives that long. Or, even a Church denomination, one that has seen many of those 'antichrist' leaders at its head. I believe we are reading a prophecy about the ongoing state of the world, the state of mankind, how he sets himself up opposing God; in Cities, in institutions, in governments, in religions...in all sorts of things. The spirit of antichrist is not limited to just a single nation or denomination. Like the blessings of Israel has gone 'world-wide' to all gentiles in all nations, so too has the God opposing spirit. This is why in Revelation we see all nations gathered together against the Saints. It's a world-wide hatred of God and his people.

 

[Naomi25]

. And if your theory is correct, that God's kingdom was established at the first Advent, I have difficulty in harmonising anything, because the fifth kingdom, then, could not have been set up at Christ's first advent, because it is not to exist contemporaneously with earthly governments, but to succeed them.

Ah. And here, I believe, is perhaps our main source of contention. You attempt to harmonize everything according to your understanding of how Daniel fits together like puzzle pieces into actual history...and that includes fitting Christ and his coming into that already half built jigsaw.
I, however, look back on Daniel with my view already fixed by what I see Christ clearly saying about his kingdom. I don't feel the need to "harmonize" what Christ says and try and sort and fit it with history. I've kinda let Christ do that for me. And I know that sounds "holier than thou"ish, and I'm not attempting that at all. Consider my point of view for a second:

Jesus started his ministry saying that the kingdom of God was 'at hand'"

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.” -Mark 1:14–15

He continued his ministry with miracles, and when he cast out demons, he to told people:

But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house. -Matthew 12:28–29

He explained to his disciples that the kingdom came in 2 stages, it would start small, but grow to be large:

He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field. It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches.”
He told them another parable. “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened.” -Matthew 13:31–33

And finally, Paul taught that then Christ came again, AT his coming, the kingdom would be completed by the defeat of death and would be then handed over to the Father:

But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. -1 Corinthians 15:23–26

So...I absolutely see the Kingdom of God as having come when Christ did. I don't see it as a 'theory', but as a biblically provable fact. So, in light of that fact, it must, by necessity, change the way I look at things. When you add that to the fact that I also believe strongly in reading apocalyptic literature as it was written to be read, I just don't feel the need to squeeze history so perfectly between the lines like you are attempting to do. I don't think it works, and I don't think it's faithful to how those genres are written.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

Face it. Adventists have been teaching this scenario for 175 years. Their understanding since the 1850s and their unique eschatology has been consistent in all its major details, and it is the only perspective I know of that over such a long period of time that has looked more and more relevant as time progresses.

Face it. Adventists have been teaching this scenario for 175 years. Their understanding since the 1850s and their unique eschatology has been consistent in all its major details, and it is the only perspective I know of that over such a long period of time has looked more and more ----irrelevant as time progresses! The SDA WILL not see what they predicted IS COME DAILY REALITY observable best in SDAism most.

And SDA like dear Brakelite just will never believe their own eyes.

 

[GISMYS_7]

GISMYS SAYS=== HARASSING MODS. THROW LITTLE TEMPER TANTRUM SCREAMING BAN HIM!!! BAN HIM!! THEY DON'T BOTHER TO SAY WHAT
POST THEY DON'T LIKE THEY JUST SCREAM BAN HIM!! I HAVE BEEN BANNED MORE THAN ANY POSTER FOR THE LAST SIX
YEARS AND I POST MORE OF GOD'S WORD THAN ANY OTHER POSTER HERE TRYING TO HELP THE LOST HERE IS THERE A
CONNECTION?? GISMYS HAS POSTED 27343 POSTS AND THE TOOLS OF SATAN MODS GO CRAZY!!! WISE UP!!! TIME IS VERY
SHORT!! MUST YOU FACE GOD'S REBUKE AND EARLY JUDGMENT??
GISMYS

 

[historyb]

Clearly you deny prophecy or clearly, you doubt that is the time we are in???

No I doubt your guys idea of prophecy. :)