What are we really dealing with here?

[Harvest 1874]

Okay, fair enough. Had never heard of your group. Good to be informed, thanks. What it means that you are not JW is that one more false teaching I object to can be scratched from the list... The JW assertion that only JWs will be among the elite saved. However still disagree with you on the divinity of Christ. While ii agree there is no trinity, because the Son predated creation and was the means through whom the Father worked, then as a begotten Son he inherited the attributes of the Father... Divine attributes. Just as my son is human, then God's Son must be divine. Simple really. But the fact that He is a Son, is a denial of the trinity. No co equal or co eternal con substantial beings can be Father and son. Not are the Father and son simply roles they are playing for the sake of salvation. The trinity would suggest that because all 3 members are precisely equal in every respect, indivisible, and inherently God in their own right, then any one of them could have taken upon himself the role of Father, Son, or Spirit. Buy if one believes in the literal sonship of Jesus, then one cannot accept the trinity as taught by the creeds. They are incompatible.

It is suggested by some that we deny the divinity of Christ, this is wrong, we do not deny the divinity of our Lord. The question is, when did he become a divine being?, Was it at his creation or was it after his high exaltation following the successful completion of his ransom sacrifice in accordance with the Father's will?

The scriptures imply the latter, so no we don't deny the divinity of Christ (presently). We simply don't believe that he became a divine being until following his sacrifice, resurrection and ascension to the right hand of God.

As for the Trinity, this is a false doctrine which had its roots in paganism.

 

[bbyrd009]

She is clearly the wealthiest, most powerful, most important nation to have ever existed, and no other County matters at all, has any wealth, political influence.

i would say that the US is beholden to the same central bank as the rest of the world, isn't a nation anyway--certainly not one nation, we got like 20 nations or something here--and we're basically prolly using diff terms to describe the same understanding i guess. Thing is that countries are not nations, so this will cause probs with Scripture @ "nations" imo

 

[bbyrd009]

See, now your just reaching. Look, it's quite simple. God gave us scripture. Yes? If it comes from God, it must, logically, be true...yes? To say 'no', implies God is being less than absolutely truthful. So...that's a no-brainer.

i'm not disagreeing, although i don't think your logic will suffice here; but we'll see.
If it's "logically" true it should be pretty easy to post one, right
i've even avoided asking for a "doctrine" specifically so that you might feel free to post some other Absolute Truth that you got from Scripture.

 

[bbyrd009]

As for my 'specific' example. Feel free to mock my choice of words, but when confronted by an entire bible full of passages...yes, I chose to give you a 'specific' passage...as in...the passage covers an idea. I could have just given you 1 verse out if it, if you wanted "specific" specific, but that would have given 1/10 of an 'absolute truth', which would have been stupid, don't you think?

And then, you really think because the word "if" appears once in the passage, that suddenly it's not absolute truth anymore? Pu-lease! If you read it...carefully...you will notice that the "if" appears when it references us. When speaking of God, of Christ and of his nature, there is no "if". The only 'uncertainty' you could possibly find there is all down to human nature. "if" people stay in God. I'd say that was fairly accurate though, wouldn't you? Truthful, in fact? People are saved, "if" they stay in Christ. You, friend, have no leg to stand on...hence...you are reaching.

i dunno seems to me that Absolute Truths would be...quite a bit more succinct?
Most ppl consider them doctrines, not sure why you don't? Imo
"People are saved, "if" they stay in Christ." will work fine for now, i mean it isn't "grass is green," but it will do to show that your "Absolute Truth" has suddenly become very conditional, first off, right, so i guess we prolly have different definitions of AT here to begin with, but even within those confines
8But since we belong to the day, we must be serious and put the armor of faith and love on our chests, and put on a helmet of the hope of salvation.

argues against your position there, i guess. So much for that "Absolute Truth."
i guess we have differing definitions of "saved" too though,
but even ignoring that i can confidently say that
"people have a hope of salvation if they stay in Christ,"
and we won't even get into what "stay in Christ" might mean for now i guess.
who defines that

 

[bbyrd009]

As for my 'specific' example. Feel free to mock my choice of words

and sorry if it seemed i was doing that? i did not mean to do this, but just did not see a coherent "Absolute Truth" being referenced, so much as several different concepts, i stopped counting at seven. So maybe we need a common def of AT first,

"Absolute truth is something that is true at all times and in all places. It is something that is always true no matter what the circumstances. It is a fact that cannot be changed. For example, there are no round squares"

lemme know if you have any objections to this one, it's just the first thing i grabbed

you really think because the word "if" appears once in the passage, that suddenly it's not absolute truth anymore?

so yes, i was functioning under that understanding

 

[Phoneman777]

Who's Prophetic timeline? Because as far as I can see, there are several different interpretations when it comes to the Daniel passage that speaks of the "abomination of desolation". Yous is but one, and it definitely does not exclude all others. Your theory is supposition, nothing more. To claim it to be more, is claiming an authority you do not have.



I feel like I've done this dance before. The RCC has no 'claim' right or otherwise on Protestants who worship on Sunday. Yeesh. Get over it guys. We read the bible, we see it in the bible, we follow what we see in the bible.
The idea that it matters what the RCC "thinks" on this issue is nonsensical in the first place. You disagree with the RCC, we disagree with the RCC....so why on earth are we saying it matters what they are saying about this? We say they are wrong on a heap of things...guess what? They're wrong on this too!

Do you really think that as Protestant Churches we are locked into traditional ways of doing things and can never look back. You might want to say that the Protestant churches only worship on Sunday because that's what the RCC did, and was familiar to us. Whatever! Not only did we have the Reformation, but we have lots...and lots of people who read, and re-read scripture over and over. Who write theology books and examine topics just like this one. We don't just skate along on "mothers" coat tails.

And to be honest, if feels like you're basing all this on something that you cannot prove...that RCC = AC! And that the RCC thinks the church is above the bible, which I'm fairly sure they actually don't...that church tradition helps translate the bible, maybe, but above it? Nope, not sure about that one.



Mmmm...stretching, I think. You are missing, completely the point of "the Sabbath is made for man, not man for the Sabbath." If Jesus was saying what you are implying, he would have said: "The Sabbath is for all mankind, not just for the Jews."
Instead, he made a point of saying that the day is FOR us. We are not beholden to it. That is the natural understanding of the text, even if you make it "mankind" instead of "man". Especially if we look at the other passages as well.

Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. - Col 2:16-17

One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. - Rom 14:5-6a

At the very least, the evidence would suggest that in this issue, conscience is to be employed. That means being dogmatic about which day to worship on, and judging people based on your righteousness (worshiping on Sabbath), puts you back in those Pharisee shoes, with made up rules that are again, pushing more than the bible permits.


Oh, no! There is no way you can just dismiss the meaning of these verses like that! Well...I mean...obviously you can. But if you are going to so outrageously cheat and dismiss such clear, obvious passages, then I'm afraid I can't take much else you say seriously.
Really. You guys are giving me such an education. "How to explain away the obvious in 10 easy steps!"

Allow me to demonstrate what you've just done to Colossians 2.
See how it's talking about Jesus being the shadow? (which is is, that is true) That means this passage is about Jesus being Gods shadow! So that means he's not really God, being a shadow is just proof that he is less than God!

See what I did there? I picked something the passage was talking about...sure. But then I went all the way to Mars....your flavor Mars, but I thought that might make the point a little better.



Mmmm. But apparently, the "everlasting GOSPEL" allows for some wriggling when not outright stated from biblical passages. Some of the things you guys come out with. Not. In. The. Bible. So I'd say that perhaps my feelings on regards to trying to 'bag and tag' it all from the "Three Angels" message, might have been spot on.

To determine if our prophetic timeline is correct, simply go back to the beginning - the head of the image of Daniel 2. Either the Protestant Historicism timeline is correct, or the Jesuit Futurist/Preterist timeline is correct. Are you familiar with Historicism? Why is it that for over 300 years of church history, the church was more than certain they were using the correct timeline, but today when people have so many distractions at their fingertips that they hardly have time to even PRAY let alone study Scripture, they feel a need to question what men of old were so certain was true that they would gladly give their lives defending it?

 

[Naomi25]

ah, you don't think? imo this is likely bc America is run by a shadow kingdom, which is found in the Bible, but whether you buy that or not, the US is pretty obviously at least the head that is shown to the world of this kingdom imo.

Speculation, nothing more. On both points.

 

[Phoneman777]

Who's Prophetic timeline?

The prophetic timeline of Historicism- taught exclusively by Protestants for over 300 years. I think that alone warrants an investiagation of it

 

[Naomi25]

i would say that the US is beholden to the same central bank as the rest of the world, isn't a nation anyway--certainly not one nation, we got like 20 nations or something here--and we're basically prolly using diff terms to describe the same understanding i guess. Thing is that countries are not nations, so this will cause probs with Scripture @ "nations" imo

I am assuming that by 'nations' you mean nationalities....there being different nationalities within every Country?

And if you're going to start pulling things apart and say it's not "Countries" but 'nations', you make it almost impossible to pin down...which is good if you're trying to remain vague. It means you'll probably always get something right.

i'm not disagreeing, although i don't think your logic will suffice here; but we'll see.
If it's "logically" true it should be pretty easy to post one, right
i've even avoided asking for a "doctrine" specifically so that you might feel free to post some other Absolute Truth that you got from Scripture.

What on earth are you talking about? "Post one"? Are you not hearing me? Are you not hearing scripture itself? "All scripture is God breathed." ALL.
So...clearly the whole passage I put was too much for you. I'll break it down a bit.

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible"

How's that? Two truths. Jesus Christ is the image of God, and by him all things were created. The whole passage contains several more.

i dunno seems to me that Absolute Truths would be...quite a bit more succinct?
Most ppl consider them doctrines, not sure why you don't? Imo

What? God's truths need to be whittled down to catchy snatch phrases? Why? Where is the rule for that?
Doctrines are what we build from truths. From the two truths I pointed out above we can start to build the doctrine of the Trinity, Christ's divinity, his eternality, his presence at creation, his unity with the Father...and on and on. Just from those two...and that's only two truths that go into many more that make up those doctrines.

"People are saved, "if" they stay in Christ." will work fine for now, i mean it isn't "grass is green," but it will do to show that your "Absolute Truth" has suddenly become very conditional, first off,

No...what is 'conditional' in this text, is a persons salvational status based on their choices or behavior...if they do, or do not stay "in Christ". The fact that if they do not, they will not be saved....that fact does not change, and is therefore absolutely true. It only becomes 'conditional truth' in terms of what you are talking about if God changes HIS rules. If some, he will let into heaven without Christ, but some must have him.

right, so i guess we prolly have different definitions of AT here to begin with, but even within those confines
8But since we belong to the day, we must be serious and put the armor of faith and love on our chests, and put on a helmet of the hope of salvation.
argues against your position there, i guess. So much for that "Absolute Truth."

You are reading 'hope' here like it means 'wish'. "Put on the helmet of wishing for salvation". That is not what hope means in the context of the bible. Especially when we look at other passages that talk about our salvation.

having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust. - Acts 24:15

Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoiced in hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. - Rom 5:1-5

For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience. -Rom 8:24

Clearly biblical hope is more than just 'really wishing something will happen, but not confident it will'. Biblical 'hope' is a conviction of knowing, a faith in God that he WILL make his promises come to pass. What promises? Why....those we read in the bible...more truths. And we can know they are true, because he has promised us to make them happen...therefore we can wait with hope....just as it says.

So, sorry, this hardly argues against the bible speaking absolute truth. Not if you're reading it correctly. I mean...you're free to continue "wishing" if you choose, but that's choosing the poor cousin.

i guess we have differing definitions of "saved" too though,
but even ignoring that i can confidently say that
"people have a hope of salvation if they stay in Christ,"
and we won't even get into what "stay in Christ" might mean for now i guess.
who defines that

Again....is that a true statement or not? Are people only saved if they remain believers in Jesus Christ, who is The Way? Because it seems to me that is very true. If you turn away from God, reject Jesus and his sacrifice in our place...you do not have the hope of salvation. The bible is quite clear on it.

is something that is true at all times and in all places. It is something that is always true no matter what the circumstances. It is a fact that cannot be changed. For example, there are no round squares"

lemme know if you have any objections to this one, it's just the first thing i grabbed

so yes, i was functioning under that understanding

But how can you say something like this, when you change the meaning of passages? Like above, when you swapped the salvational status of a person, with God's statement of such. When you make such swaps, it is you, in fact, that takes away the core principle that something has to be foundationally true all the time. Because you've just said that God is saying that sometimes people 'can' be saved "in Jesus" and sometimes they 'can't'.

and sorry if it seemed i was doing that? i did not mean to do this, but just did not see a coherent "Absolute Truth" being referenced, so much as several different concepts, i stopped counting at seven. So maybe we need a common def of AT first,
"Absolute truth is something that is true at all times and in all places. It is something that is always true no matter what the circumstances. It is a fact that cannot be changed. For example, there are no round squares"

lemme know if you have any objections to this one, it's just the first thing i grabbed

I have no objections there, but I still see no problems, especially in regards to the passage I posted.
Look. You're objection to it being "absolute truth" seems to hinge on that tiny little "if"...although when read in context of the sentence we can (and have, I feel) argue that it does NOT mean what you think it means. But let's use an example.
If a Policeman was standing before someone who had a gun, and that gun was pointed at another person, and the Cop said, "If you pull that trigger, you are going to jail." Is that, or is that not, a true sentence?
And I know you could pick it to pieces by asking about intent, where the person got hit, juries...blah, blah, blah. That's not my point, so don't go there.
My point is simple. If that guy pulls the trigger, is it true that the Cop will cuff him and take him to lock up? Was what the Cop said, true? Seems to me it was. Even though it had an "if" in there, due to the choice that needed to be made by the guy with the gun. But it didn't change the essential truth that the Cop was living by, and sharing with the bad guy...."you pull that trigger, there will be consequences, and I'm letting you know."
God is telling us truth...his truth. "If" we remain in Jesus, then we have salvation. That is God's truth, his promise to us, something we can know to be true and faithful. You start tugging away at things like this, you better be prepared for the whole house of cards (all of God's promises) to come tumbling down. Do you really want that?

 

[Naomi25]

To determine if our prophetic timeline is correct, simply go back to the beginning - the head of the image of Daniel 2. Either the Protestant Historicism timeline is correct, or the Jesuit Futurist/Preterist timeline is correct. Are you familiar with Historicism? Why is it that for over 300 years of church history, the church was more than certain they were using the correct timeline, but today when people have so many distractions at their fingertips that they hardly have time to even PRAY let alone study Scripture, they feel a need to question what men of old were so certain was true that they would gladly give their lives defending it?

The timeline leads accurately to Jesus Christ and his sacrifice. Things get suitably...vague, after that. You get several different schools of thought on the 'left over' time that will see us to the AC. Some say that 'timeline' stopped until the end...and good luck knowing when that will start again. Some say all of the time between Christ's ascension and his return is a symbolic representation of that leftover time, in which case the AC could show up at any point. Others think that leftover time is not symbolic, but is still a long period of time that will just start clicking over at some point that heaven determines.
As you can see...many theories, all of them have scripture to back up their ideas. Some are clearly...I would say...better than others, but there are many godly men who hold to these different theories. Men who can count as well as you, can read their bible as well as you, and can pray like their life depends on it.

 

[brakelite]

@Naomi25 and anyone else who may be interested.....
The prophecies of Daniel are incredibly revealing. They are intricately detailed, providing specific information and points of character and events regarding the history of nations, beginning from Daniels time and unfolding throughout history and progressing throughout all generations right down to the close of time and the second coming. And the Antichrist is a prominent feature throughout. This is not an accident. God desires that we are thoroughly informed of the nature and character of the Antichrist. Let us take heed. I will begin with Daniel 2.

All of Daniels visions are built on the one previous. Each one is a magnification, or an enlargement of the one before. The vision of Nebuchadnezzar and Daniels explanation regarding the statue forms the foundation for all the subsequent visions. Once we establish the foundation, we must take care that our understanding of later visions is built on that foundation. Our conclusions and interpretations must not deviate nor contradict or we shall soon lose our way, and our understanding becomes darkened.

Daniel 2:31 ¶ Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.
32 This image’s head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,
33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.
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.

We have here a statue made of 5 different components. Gold, silver, bronze, iron, and a mixture of iron and clay. This statue was then completely destroyed by a rock ‘made without hands’, which became a mountain which filled the whole earth.No trace was found of the former materials. Nebuchadnezzar was so convicted by the Holy Spirit, he demanded his wise men (soothsayers and occultists for the most part) to give him the interpretation.Perhaps knowing their duplicity, he demanded they give him the dream also; whether Nebuchadnezzar had indeed forgotten the dream, or was testing them, I don’t know.Daniel was finally given the opportunity to give the interpretation.

36 This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.
37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.
39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.
40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.
41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.
42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.
43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.
44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain.

Four empires, beginning with the current administration, Babylon, who will dominate earth’s history. Each one closely followed by the next, the final one being changed and weakened although it lasts right up to the end. Note that there are no gaps, no time periods between each ruling empire. Throughout history it is possible to see the influences and lasting impressions that have been brought to even the present generation by these empires. History has thus far without equivocation confirmed the veracity of this vision.
Babylon is the only kingdom at that stage named, “thou art this head of gold”.
One very important thing we must take note of. When the rock destroys the statue,” it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold“. All the components are still there at the end!!! Even though the empires are long gone, there remains at the end a vestige, a remnant, a trace of the original within the final entity that is destroyed. We can see that remnant or vestige in the first beast of Revelation 13, an end-time composite of those former empires, the final manifestation of the Antichrist.
This is important, and I will discuss this important point a little later.

 

[Harvest 1874]

breaklite states: "All the components are still there at the end!!! Even though the empires are long gone, there remains at the end a vestige, a remnant, a trace of the original within the final entity that is destroyed. We can see that remnant or vestige in the first beast of Revelation 13, an end-time composite of those former empires, the final manifestation of the Antichrist. This is important, and I will discuss this important point a little later."

It is true that a part of each of the four universal empires still remains with us even today.

“I watched then because of the sound of the pompous words which the (Little) horn (Papacy) was speaking; I watched till the beast (the last beast of which the Papacy was a part) was slain, and its body destroyed and given to the burning flame. As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time." Dan 7:11, 12

 

[APAK]

@Naomi25 and anyone else who may be interested.....
The prophecies of Daniel are incredibly revealing. They are intricately detailed, providing specific information and points of character and events regarding the history of nations, beginning from Daniels time and unfolding throughout history and progressing throughout all generations right down to the close of time and the second coming. And the Antichrist is a prominent feature throughout. This is not an accident. God desires that we are thoroughly informed of the nature and character of the Antichrist. Let us take heed. I will begin with Daniel 2.

All of Daniels visions are built on the one previous. Each one is a magnification, or an enlargement of the one before. The vision of Nebuchadnezzar and Daniels explanation regarding the statue forms the foundation for all the subsequent visions. Once we establish the foundation, we must take care that our understanding of later visions is built on that foundation. Our conclusions and interpretations must not deviate nor contradict or we shall soon lose our way, and our understanding becomes darkened.

Daniel 2:31 ¶ Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.
32 This image’s head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,
33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.
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.

We have here a statue made of 5 different components. Gold, silver, bronze, iron, and a mixture of iron and clay. This statue was then completely destroyed by a rock ‘made without hands’, which became a mountain which filled the whole earth.No trace was found of the former materials. Nebuchadnezzar was so convicted by the Holy Spirit, he demanded his wise men (soothsayers and occultists for the most part) to give him the interpretation.Perhaps knowing their duplicity, he demanded they give him the dream also; whether Nebuchadnezzar had indeed forgotten the dream, or was testing them, I don’t know.Daniel was finally given the opportunity to give the interpretation.

36 This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.
37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.
39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.
40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.
41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.
42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.
43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.
44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain.

Four empires, beginning with the current administration, Babylon, who will dominate earth’s history. Each one closely followed by the next, the final one being changed and weakened although it lasts right up to the end. Note that there are no gaps, no time periods between each ruling empire. Throughout history it is possible to see the influences and lasting impressions that have been brought to even the present generation by these empires. History has thus far without equivocation confirmed the veracity of this vision.
Babylon is the only kingdom at that stage named, “thou art this head of gold”.
One very important thing we must take note of. When the rock destroys the statue,” it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold“. All the components are still there at the end!!! Even though the empires are long gone, there remains at the end a vestige, a remnant, a trace of the original within the final entity that is destroyed. We can see that remnant or vestige in the first beast of Revelation 13, an end-time composite of those former empires, the final manifestation of the Antichrist.
This is important, and I will discuss this important point a little later.

brakelite:

What about the feet - 10 toes teach? What/who do they represent (clay and iron) today?

 

[brakelite]

Daniel 2:28 But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these;

“In the latter days” is an idiomatic phrase meaning ‘in the future’. It is used in different contexts in Deut. 4:30, Gen.49:1, Num.24:14, Isa.2:2, Hos. 3:5, Ezek. 38:16. Most modern versions therefore translate the phrase as “in time to come”, or “in days to come”, or in later days”. From the historicist perspective, it can be concluded that the vision reaches from the time of Daniel and stretches far off into the future to the second advent of Christ symbolised by the stone kingdom when all previous kingdoms are destroyed and never again to be found .
Before we begin to focus on the prophecy itself of Daniel 2, I think now would be a good time to put my plug in for historicism, as opposed to futurism and preterism. John 13:19; Matt. 24:33 and Luke 21:28 provides the precedent and direction we must take to interpreting prophecy. We may look back into history, and it is there we see the rock-solid incontrovertible evidence that gives our faith and hopes a sure foundation. Thus the teachings of Jesus Himself supports a continuous view of prophecy. The church age isn’t a gap inserted in between two separate Jewish ages, nor is it a gap in prophecy. Just as the metals are joined together and the 4th kingdom is still present at the time of the second coming, so does history verify. There are a number of historicist scholars and expositers about, but the better known would the Seventh Day Adventist church, who’s understanding of prophecy to my mind is without equal in modern Christendom.
Were they the first? Did they invent this approach to sustain certain prophetic interpretations that popular theology rejected? No. Most commentators right from the early church recognised the 7 churches of Revelation 2 and 3 as successive phases of Christianity from the time of John to the consummation of all things.
The 7 seals also were recognised as reflecting successive phases of Christianity from John to the second coming. For example, Ambrose, Bishop of Havilburg writing in the 12 century said, “The white horse typifies the earliest state of spiritual gifts and the rider, Christ, with the bow of evangelical doctrine…the red horse is the next state of the church, red with the blood of martyrdom; from Stephen the protomartyr to the martyrs under Diocletian…the black horse depicts the church’s 3rd state, blackened after Constantine’s time with heresies…the pale horse signified the church’s 4th state; coloured with the hue of hypocrisy.” He said this state commenced from the beginning of the 5th century. This historicist view of the seals was the usual view of expositors down through the centuries.

The trumpets also were considered an historical overview of the rise and fall of secular kingdoms from the time of Christ to the future second advent. Scholars such as Daubuz, Mede, Jurieu, along with most all reformation protestants saw the trumpets 1-6 as depicting the desolations and fall of first the western empire of Rome and then the eastern. In 1802 Gulloway, in harmony with many others, viewed the first 4 trumpets as a picture of the Gothic invasions of the west, the 5th and 6th trumpets or the first 2 of the 3 ‘woes’, as depicting the invasions of the Saracens and the Turks in the east.

The prophecies of Daniel can be readily understood by using the historicist approach. Futurism and preterism both leave many unanswered questions, many unfulfilled details, and tend to make prophetic interpretation look more like guesswork and wishful thinking rather than the accurate study and strengthening of faith that it can be.
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.

 

[brakelite]

brakelite:

What about the feet - 10 toes teach? What/who do they represent (clay and iron) today?

I'll get to that in a later post bro. Patience, patience. Gotta lay the foundation first before we reach the roof.

 

[bbyrd009]

Speculation, nothing more. On both points.

hmm, you don't think the US is perceived as head of the current world empire?

 

[brakelite]

That said, let us settle on what nearly all Bible scholars agree as to what Daniel 2 represents. Notice that the interpretations made are not plucked out of thin air, but are based on scripture...line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, there a little...the Bible interpreting itself.
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, symbolized 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.

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.

Daniel 7 and 8 complement 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.)
It is to be noted that all the beasts are predatory, in keeping with the above symbolism. And the wings it can be assumed represent speed. (Deut. 28:49; Jer. 4:13; Habakkuk 1:6-9).
The wings were plucked from the lion, thus no longer was it the threat it formerly offered to her enemies. A man’s heart was given to it. Babylon in later years had become timorous, effeminate, and a pleasure-seeking society without discipline.

Daniel 7:5 And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.

Daniel 8:3 Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.
4 I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great.

Daniel 8:20 identifies the ram as being Medo-Persia, thus the ram and the bear represent the same power. The bear raised itself up on one side – indicating the more prominent role of the Medes at the beginning of their rise to power, the individual kings being Ahasuerus and his son, Darius.This is also represented by the two horns, with one coming up higher last.
Just as silver is inferior to gold, and the bear inferior to the lion, so was Medo-Persia inferior to Babylon in regards to wealth and brilliance of career. However, the area of conquest was greater than Babylon.
The ribs in the bear’s mouth represent the 3 provinces of Babylon that the Medes and Persians conquered: Lydia, Egypt, and Babylon. The ram pushed west, north, and south, precisely where the 3 above provinces were.
Cyrus was the Persian king that rose to prominence represented by the horn that rose up higher. It was Cyrus spoken of and named 150 years previously by Isaiah as the leader that would overthrow Babylon. (There are many parallels with Revelation and the drying up of the Euphrates thus cutting off Babylon’s support in the last days, just as Cyrus did to the literal city. This is spiritual Babylon, and the Euphrates is also figurative for the means of support that the people of the earth withhold (Rev.18)when made aware of her corruption.Rev. 16:12 . As Cyrus came from the east to conquer Babylon, so also will Christ come from the east as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.)

Daniel 7:6 After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.
Daniel 8:5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
6 And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power.
7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.
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.

The leopard represents Greece, and Alexander the Great is the first king, the ‘notable’ horn between the goat’s eyes.
As Babylon was noted for her speed of conquest, so Alexander even more so, hence the 4 wings. At the height of his power Alexander died, some say of alcohol poisoning, at the young age of about 30. The Grecian kingdom was then ruled briefly by Alexander’s brother and his 2 infant sons, but they were all soon murdered and after 22 years of warring and infighting among a number of generals who had all dispersed to various parts of the empire and assumed authority and declared themselves kings, the number was reduced to just 4, as depicted by the 4 heads of the leopard and the four horns of the goat. The generals were Cassander, Seleucus, Ptolemy, and Lysimachus.
It will be noted that as the ram (Medo-Persia) in Daniel 8:4 is shown to have become great, so the goat (Greece) in Daniel 8:8 ‘waxed very great’. In area conquered this was very true; Greece had overcome vastly more area than had the previous empire, however, just as the leopard is inferior to the bear, and bronze is inferior to silver, so the character of the empire was inferior to Medo-Persia. Paganism was developing among these empires and growing as they grew. Each empire also inherited certain traits, traditions, and practices from its predecessors. Thus each kingdom grew progressively worse morally and spiritually.

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.
2. The iron begins from the victory over the Greeks, and continues unbroken (albeit in another form) right to the end. Though mixed with miry clay, the iron is still there, albeit in a weakened state. 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.

 

[bbyrd009]

I am assuming that by 'nations' you mean nationalities....there being different nationalities within every Country?

well that would depend i guess on whether they seek to assimilate or remain a separate nation? But we have many recognized nations in the country USA, many even have treaties signed with the Gov etc. Black ppl are a separate nation for the most part, even if they want to assimilate, imo. But we could ignore the apartheid there and just consider "legit" nations too if you like

 

[bbyrd009]

And if you're going to start pulling things apart and say it's not "Countries" but 'nations', you make it almost impossible to pin down...which is good if you're trying to remain vague. It means you'll probably always get something right.

Naomi, i don't mind going on at length when prompted, ok, but at a certain point i would just offend by lecturing or something prolly? The diff in nations and countries is as obvious to me as the diff in earth and world, or tares and weeds, but everyone else is different i guess.

so, you say if "i" start pulling them apart, but see that men invented borders that create countries, and countries are not what the Bible talks about @ "nations." Lemme see if the "official" definitions might help; nope, they are conflated there too. So, all i can tell you is that they have been conflated to ppl for a reason, and i separate them because it is nations that are invoked in Scripture--bc countries are passing away, like they have in the recent past even, when those "countries" passed away, or changed their names or whatever, did the nations inside them all leave?

nations imply people, while countries imply leaders, kings, i guess. 1Sam8 is why we have countries now, instead of nations, most likely. so, there was a point here, let me go see what it was...next post

 

[brakelite]

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?

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 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.

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.

 

[brakelite]

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.

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.

Daniel 7:15 ¶ I Daniel was grieved in my spirit in the midst of my body, and the visions of my head troubled me.
16 I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.
17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.
18 But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.
19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet;
20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.
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.

Again we see that this horn endures until the second coming, but we also see more detail of it’s character and practice. Daniel was greatly concerned and approached the accompanying angel to inquire regarding the vision, particularly the little horn. Here is the angel’s reply.

23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.
24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
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.

So here is a summary of the characteristics that pertain specifically to the little horn.
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.

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.

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., so this must mean that the little horn was to arise to power sometime after 476 A. D.

4. The little horn was to pluck up three of the first [ten] horns by the roots (7:8). This means that these three nations would be uprooted from history. Daniel 7:20-21 explains that three of the first horns would fall before the little horn, and Daniel 7:24 tells us that the little horn would subdue three horns. In other words, three of the first ten nations would disappear from history!!

5. The little horn was to speak great words against the Most High (7:21, 25). Revelation 13:5 explains what these words would be, namely, blasphemy. And, What is blasphemy according to the Bible? It is when a merely human power claims to be God on earth and when it thinks it can exercise the prerogatives and functions of God (see, John 10:30-33; Mark 2:7).

6. The little horn was to be a persecuting power. This is stated in Daniel 7:21 and repeated in verse 25.

7. The little horn would think it could change God’s “times”, that is to say, God’s timetable of prophetic events. (Daniel 2:21). We shall see that the little horn invented a false system of prophetic interpretation to rival historicism.

8. The little horn would even have the audacity to THINK that it could change God’s holy law. (7:25).

9. The little horn would be different than the ten horns. It would be an amalgamation of church and state (7:24)

10. This power would govern for a time, times and half a time (7:25). This comes out to 42 months or 1260 days (see, Revelation 13:5-6; 12:6, 13-15). In Bible prophecy, literal days are symbolic of years, so this power was to govern for 1260 years .

11. The little horn had eyes like a man. In Bible Prophecy, eyes can be a symbol of wisdom (see, Ephesians 1:18; Revelation 5:6). Even today, an owl is a symbol of wisdom because of its large eyes. In other words, this power was to depend on human wisdom.