Re: Substantiating The Validity Of Bible Prophecy

Hello All,The whole end times thing I believe has been misinterpreted. There is a much more scholarly view called Partial Preterism that demonstrates that all the prophecies except the second coming itself, romans 11 and the conversion of the Jews, and the rapture have been fulfilled.The beast was Nero who was nicknamed the beast and whose name added up to 666 and in the latin texts 616. The prophecies refer to the end of the age not the end of time or the world. As the gentiles were being brought into the covenant and the Jews were about to be dispersed throughout the world and the temple taken away from them it was a Judgement against the Jews for rejecting the messiah and taking his blood on their hands. It explains why Jesus said that the apostles would see him come back before they went through all the towns and why some would not die before he came back...he did come back in Judgment in 70 AD and the fifth cycle of judgment of Deut 38 was fullfilled the diaspora. The verses stating to come back in the clouds with glory in Matthew was the same language used in warnings of coming judgement against Egypt and Babylon. In the beginning of Revelations John says that he is in the tribulation with you NOW and etc...
Google Gentry for his work on identifying the beast and David Chilton's two books, "The Great Tribulation" and especially "The Days of Vengeance" detail why the prophecies about the end times were already fulfilled except the second coming etc...I listed above. Sorry there will be no anti-christ who receives a mortal head wound and lives, 10 nation confederacy, the US isnt the beast.
The whore of Babylon in the city with 7 Hill was Jerusalem about to be judged, Nero was the last if the Ceasers in the bloodline and everyone thought that the Roman empire was dead when he killed himself (the beast with the mortal head wound) and Nero was only Caesar reigning for a little while etc... Sorry to burst your bubbles folks but now you have to worry about Christ coming like he promised...a thief in the night and we are to be ready for him NOW! so no man knows the day our hour for real!

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

The wording in Matthew 24 says he will return in the Clouds with Glory. These same words were used in the old testament to prophesy God coming in Judgement against Babylon and Egypt so it is prophesying a Judgement by Jesus against Jerusalem which is not the second coming of Christ as the conquering king to rule his kingdom. Hold on I'll get the website that has the books I mentioned where anyone can read what I believe is much better interpretation of eschatology. It's http://www.freebooks.com and the book in the prophecy section "The Days of Vengence" By Chilton gives a verse by verse exegesis of Revelations. The other shorter more condensed book by Chilton is 'The Great Tribulation' also on the website both to be read free!

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Ha! found you again Ringo!Again Ringo is Wrongo! I am not a pre-millennial dispensationalist but Hal Lindsey Identified Russia as Magog who was started by the man Gog who was Muslim!Sorry couldnt resist!

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

and You couldnt be more wrong. In another post you correctly told me that just because I asserted something didnt make it so and to back up what I said...your turn buddy. The truth is there are only a couple of biblical prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled.The book of Daniel is a good example. chapter 9 gives the prophecy: "Seventy sevens are determined for you holy city to finish the transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy. Know therefore and Understand That from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem Until Messiah the Prince, there shall be seven sevens and sixty two sevens; the street shall be built again, and the wall Even in Troublesome times. And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off but not for himself..."The command was given by Artexerxes to Nehemiah who was allowed to return to Jerusalem to rebuild it. Archeologists found the stone cylinder with the command on it. That started the countdown. the sevens are properly translated as years or weeks of years in Hebrew. Exactly 69 weeks of years later...to the day...Palm Sunday... Jesus was acknowledged as the Messiah in Jerusalem. And then 62 weeks later Jesus was crucified.Later in Daniel 11 Daniel describes the coming world kingdoms the same for the interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the statue. Daniel was written 606 BC but even if one late dates it they cannot get it later than the translation of the septuagint in 200 BC but it was obviously written before that. Anyway the statue of Nebechenezzar has Babylon, followed by the Medio-Persions followed by Greece then by Rome then the white stone cut without hands...the messiah. Daniel 11 describes each of the kingdoms coming accurately.No one can explain these prophecies...you can only try to late date Daniel only so far but it was written when it claims 606 BC.I throw down the gauntlet Brian show me a prophecy that is supposed to have come true that didnt.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

The prophecy of Gog is for the future...not in 'Zeke's' time. Duh!Anyway read my other post...I believe the 'end time' prophecies are really 'end of the age' prophecies fulfilled by 70 AD anyway. I was just poking fun at Ringo!

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

you're getting warmer.I think the most scholarly interpretation of end time prophecies (Partial Preterism) was that they were fulfilled in 70 AD when the temple was destroyed and the Jews were dispersed throughout the world. Matthew 24 and the like were prophesying this event IOP.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Except Revelations was written prior to 70 ADSee the Historian Gentry's work on this demonstrating the case at
http://www.freebooks.com in the prophecy section.But you were right the beast was Nero and the Roman empire. You finally got one right Jarhead! And you still have never responded to the prophecies of Daniel 2, 9 & 11 from the other thread that apply here as well.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

I didnt have time to get sources last night but gave the summary which I will now support.The only reason for doubting the 606 BC date of Daniel is a bias against prophecy even being possible which amounts to pre-defining it out of existence. Apriori methodology has two fallacies 1) Begging the question and 2) Circular reasoningHere is a good discussion of the scholarship:"A person believing that Daniel, or parts of the book, were written in the second century B.C.E. may of course believe in God and in divine inspiration just as much as one believing in a sixth century writing. But this is not the point! The important question is why scholars give the book of Daniel a second century dating. And here the question of divine inspiration is the principal one. The case was opened in the eighteenth century C.E. by the German scholar J. C. Dderlein, who claimed that Isaiah 40-66 must have been
written by a "second" Isaiah because it is impossible to predict the future. The same viewpoint regarding other prophecies, including Daniel, was adopted by many scholars following him, and this view is probably held by the majority of scholars today.In Daniel chapter 11 we find a written "history," In chapter 10 "Daniel" writes in the first person, and the account of chapter 11 starts with "the first year of Darius the Mede". The writer states (11:2) that he will tell what is going to happen in the future. And here is the crux. If a scholar should take the text at face value and accept the claim that it was written in the sixth century B.C.E. s/he has to accept that a detailed account of the future could be given a long time before the events. This
would be tantamount to accepting divine inspiration. But metaphysical
explanations are excluded in scientific research. Therefore, the claim of the text itself of a sixth century writing is rejected, and because the the last part of chapter 11 seems to give details of the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the scholarly consensus is that Daniel was written in the second century B.C.E. (some scholars would say that parts of it may have been written before, and that they may have been included in the second century work). A good way to test my claim that rejection of divine inspiration (detailed predictions of the future) is the basic reason for a second century dating, is to ask: How many scholars who date the book of Daniel to c. 160 B.C.E. are willing to consider the *possibility* that he "historical
account" of Daniel 11:1-20 were written in the sixth century C.E? I guess that almost all of them would a priori rule this out.>From a scholarly point of view the OT should be studied in its own right and not in light of the NT. However, from a descriptive point of view we note that Jesus` words (Matthew 24:15) regarding BDELUGMA ERHMWSEWS in Dan 11:31 (and 9:27; 12:11) refer to the future. So, some living in the first century C.E. did not agree with modern scholars regarding the application of the words of the last part of Daniel chapter 11 to Entiochos IV Epiphanes.Please note, that my arguments above are descriptive and not normative. I am not arguing in favor of a particular position, but I try to give an account of the model or paradigm that influence scholars. I do not criticize scholars who stick to the scientific principle of rejecting any metaphysical explanation. But an honest course would be to admit this, and as far as Daniel i concerned, to admit that the basic argument for a second century dating is the view that the future cannot be predicted.Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo"The basic premise of the scholars who reject the 606BC date for Daniel is that Daniel could not have predicted Antiochus Epiphanes so accurately before-hand so it must have been written after the Maccabeean revolt which is flawed methodology.However the internal evidence flies against this which I'll get to as well.Plus Brian...I challenged you to show one biblical prophecy that has failed and all you did was respond all of them...that is not a proper response...demonstrate one dont assert one. All biblical prophecies except the conversion of the Jews, rapture and second coming have been fulfilled...see the partial preterist view which is the most scholarly or I can explain it to you later.Edited by ReformedRob, : left out a question for Brian

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

The 95-96 date for Revelations has been refuted soundly by Gentry whose thorough book on the subject is at http://www.freebooks.com. I thought I gave this source prior. I'll review the actual args later not time now but anyone interested can review the book for free at this site

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

PaulKYou were right I meant chapter Daniel 7 not chapter 11. Thanks for the correction, however your assertion that Daniel does not mention Rome is wrong for Daniel Chapter 2:40 is rome as is Daniel 7:7; Daniel 2:36-40&44, "This is the dream, Now we will tell the interpretation of it before the king. You, O king are a king of kings. for the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, strength and flory; and whereever the children of men dwell, or the beasts of the field and the birds of the heaven, He has given them into your hand, and has made you a rule over them all--you are the head of gold. but after you shall arise another kingdom inferiour to yours; then another, a third kingdom of bronze, whiche shall rule over all the earth. And the fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes...And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdome shall not be left ot other people"; Daniel 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast dreadful and terrible, exceedingly strong it had huge iron teeth, it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns."so you had the Babylonian kingdom, gold, Medio-persion, silver, grecian, bronze and rome iron with the stone cut without hands setting up the kingdom of God coming during the time of the Roman empire which was Jesus "The Kingdom of God is amongst you"And the dating of Daniel is important to this thread because it establishes prophecy being given before hand as in Antiochus Epiphanes. It is a biased methodology based on aprior presuppostions and 2 logical fallacies to date Daniel after 200 BC. See my post to Brian which details this more.As well your assertion about the book of Daniel not being in the Septuagint According to the Jewish Encyclopedia Website it was included in the Septuagint:"The Septuagint.The oldest and most important of all the versions made by Jews is that called "The Septuagint" ("Interpretatio septuaginta virorum" or "seniorum"). It is a monument of the Greek spoken by the large and important Jewish community of Alexandria; not of classic Greek, nor even of the Hellenistic style affected by Alexandrian writers. If the account given by Aristeas be true, some traces of Palestinian influence should be found; but a study of the Egyptian papyri, which are abundant for this particular period, is said by both Mahaffy and Deissmann to show a very close similarity between the language they represent and that of the Septuagint, not to mention the Egyptian words already recognized by both Hody and Eichhorn. These papyri have in a measure reinstated Aristeas (about 200 B.C.) in the opinion of scholars. Upon his "Letter to Philocrates" the tradition as to the origin of the Septuagint rests. It is now believed that even though he may have been mistaken in some points, his facts in general are worthy of credence (Abrahams, in "Jew. Quart. Rev." xiv. 321). According to Aristeas, the Pentateuch was translated at the time of Philadelphus, the second Ptolemy (285-247 B.C.), which translation was encouraged by the king and welcomed by the Jews of Alexandria.
"...Being a composite work, the translation varies in the different books. In the Pentateuch, naturally, it adheres most closely to the original; in Job it varies therefrom most widely. In some books (e.g., Daniel) the influence of the Jewish Midrash is more apparent than in others." BIBLE TRANSLATIONS - JewishEncyclopedia.comYour date of 200 BC only applying to the Torah is in error. The Torah was translated to greek as shown around 285-247BC and the rest of the Septuagint including Daniel around 200 BC. Edited by ReformedRob, : Additl evidenceEdited by ReformedRob, : clarifying punctuation & spelling

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Here is a very good article that deals with the prophecies of Daniel and the proper dating.Dating of the Book of Daniel

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Paul K, First thanks for taking the time to review my source. That was cool of you but you first stated the translation of the Torah i.e. Pentatuch was 200 BC You changed from the date of the translation of the Torah (Pentatuch) to the date of Aristeas letter which is different And Aristeas gives the date of the translation of the Torah i.e. Pentatuch at 285-247 BC not 200 BC as you originally claimed
"According to Aristeas, the Pentateuch was translated at the time of Philadelphus, the second Ptolemy (285-247 B.C.),"
BIBLE TRANSLATIONS - JewishEncyclopedia.comthen you claim that Aristeas, is only talking about the Torah/Pentatuch which you have yet to prove. wrong again...Aristeas quoted Job which is not in the Torah/Pentatuch:
"Aristeas, the historian, quotes Job; a foot-note to the Greek Esther seems to show that that book was in circulation before the end of the second century B.C." BIBLE TRANSLATIONS - JewishEncyclopedia.comAnd you said: you arrived at this by your strip quote of the Jewish Encyclopedia which you quoted as following using the "..." The part you left out says all the books of the Old Testament were in the Septuagint and in COMMON USE 132 BC:
"It is not known when the other books of the Bible were rendered into Greek. The grandson of Ben Sira (132 B.C.), in the prologue to his translation of his grandfather's work, speaks of the "Law, Prophets, and the rest of the books" as being already current in his day" BIBLE TRANSLATIONS - JewishEncyclopedia.comBecause the Septuagint containing all the books of the Old Testament including Daniel were translated into the Septuagint and common use by 132 BC and because Aristeas letter in 200 BC is given credit that "the tradition as to the origin of the Septuagint rests" it is reasonable that the Septuagint containing Daniel was translated around 200 BC. That's why I have been saying around 200 BC in my posts as in the last line of my previous post And , I did not cite a christian apologetic source, I cited a source from the University of Oslo that discussed the biases of the methodology of those who late date Daniel only because his accuracy of events,...you missed that.What I did do was provide a website address for anyone that wanted to see a good summary article explaining the dating of Daniel. That doesnt make it biased because it is Christian...it would only be biased if the reasons it gave were flawed.Finally, it is clear that Daniel 2& 7 are talking about Rome as I will show and I challenge you to cite a reputable source that says otherwise. Here's why Daniel 2 & 7 include Rome. Daniel 2 is about four successive kingdoms of which Babylon is the first and Daniel 7 is about the same four kingdoms using animals as metaphors of which it is obvoius that the second animal is the Medo-Persian empire and Greece the third animal and kingdom making Rome necessarily the fourth. Daniel 8 again uses animals as metaphors which shows that Medo-Persia is regarded as only one kingdom, not two, because it is represented by one animal.Daniel 7:2-7, & 17 "Daniel spoke, saying, "I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the fours winds of heaven were stirring up the Great Sea. And four great beasts came up from the sea, each different from the other. The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings...And suddenly another beast, a second like a bear...After this I looked and there was another, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird. The Beast also had four heads and dominion was given to it...and behold, a fourth east, dreadful and terible exceedingly strong...It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns...'Those great beasts, which are four are four kings which arise out of the earth'"It is obvious that the 3rd beast, the leopard which is fast and mobile and it's four heads and four wings, is Alexanders army whose kingdom was divided up amongst his four generals upon his death. The second beast, the bear, is the Medo-Persians because of the great size and slowness of the Medo-Persian empire. The fourth beast is Rome as it succeeded the Grecian empire.This is made even more clear in Daniel 8:3-8&20-21, "Then I lifted my eyes and saw, and thre standing beside the river was a ram which had two horns, and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other and the higher one came up last...And as I was considering, suddenly a male goat came from the west and the goat ahad a notable horn between his eyes...I saw him confront the ram...and broke his two horns...Therefore the male goat grew very great but when he had become strong, the large horn was broken and in place of it four notable ones came up...The ram which you saw having the two horns they are the kings of Media and Persia. And the male goat is the kingdom of Greece. The large horn that is between its eyes is the first king. As for the broken horn and the four that stood up in its place, four kingdoms shall arise out of that nation but without its power."So it is easy to see that the parallelism. Four successive kingdoms in the statue and four beasts also four kingdoms with Babylon/Nebudchanezzar being the first; the Medo-Persion empire being the second represented by silver, the bear and ram with two horns, the second horn being greater (Darius-Cyrus); Greece the third represented by bronze, the leopard with four wings and heads who are Alexander and then his four generals; and the fourth kingdom Rome represented by iron and the beast with iron teeth. This is pretty much common knowledge PaulK and I would like to see your sources that say otherwise.ThanksEdited by ReformedRob, : spacing so it is easier to readEdited by ReformedRob, : No reason given.Edited by ReformedRob, : No reason given.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

You didn't? Explain this quote from your post to me then please That's you saying saying the Torah was translated into the Septuagint in 200 BC! No it doesnt. The main focus in Aristeas' letter is the Torah but
other books are included."The Letter Of Aristeas
R.H. Charles-Editor
Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1913"The Memorial of Demetrius to the great king. 'Since you have given me instructions, O king, that the books which are needed to complete your library should be collected together, and that those which are defective should be repaired, I have devoted myself with the utmost care to the fulfilment of your wishes, and I now have the following proposal to lay before you. The books of the law of the Jews (WITH SOME OTHERS) are absent from the library. They are written in the Hebrew characters and language and have been carelessly interpreted, and do not represent the original text as I am informed by those who know; for they have never had a king's care to protect them. It is necessary that these should be made accurate for your library since the law which they contain, in as much as it is of divine origin, is full of wisdom and free from all blemish...
"'King Ptolemy sends greeting and salutation to the High Priest Eleazar...I have determined that your law shall be translated from the Hebrew tongue which is in use amongst you into the Greek language, that these books may be added to the other royal books in my library." (emphasis mine)
The Letter Of AristeasAs for Furuli...I didnt know he was a Watch Tower apologist! Too bad, his analysis is correct but I'll have to find a different credible source for the same analysis.The methdology of apriori assigning Daniel after Antiochus Epipanes due to his accuracy begs the question that we are discussing, prophecy, and reasons in a circle. The Higher Critical school offers no real evidence for dating it that late, violating the internal claims, except for the natural only/apriori methodology.so we can agree then that Daniel was translated in the Septuagint after 285 BC and well enough before 132 BC as to be in common use right?And you didnt respond to the fact that the silver portion of the statue and the bear and the ram with 2 horns is the second of the four kingdoms making Greece/Alexander the 3rd kingdom, the bronze portion of the statue and the leopard and goat, making Rome the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2 & 7. Does that mean you concede the point?Edited by ReformedRob, : addtl quoteEdited by ReformedRob, : No reason given.Edited by ReformedRob, : No reason given.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

I am familiar with your view and dont like dividing with other christians over eschatology. It's just that after investigating all the option the partial-preterist view comes up with the best exegesis IMO. and IMO the preterist view that the beast is an empire and the man. It is Rome at the time and Nero. And is clearly says 666 is the number of a man which Nero Ceasar adds up to (and in the latin texts 616 which the latin for Nero Caesar adds up to as well).Nero was the last of the bloodline of the Caesars so when he was slain it was feared that Rome the empire was dead but it didnt die. The ten horns were the ten rulers of Rome.This view also explains difficulties such as Revelations when John said "I am your brother with you in the tribulation" and passages in Matthew where Jesus tells the apostles that they wont finish going through all the cities before they see him again and that some of them wont die until he returns. The fulfillment is that the Jews were judged for rejecting Christ and Jesus came 'in the clouds with power' which is the same language used in the old testament for judgements against Babylon and Egypt.The only time the term anti-christ is used is in I & II John but not in Revelations.The harlot of Babylon is Jerusalem who adopted false religions just as Babylon did and the seven hills are Jerusalem which does literally sit on seven hills.All this is my opinion of the most scholarly view. R.C. Sproul has a great book on this contrasting the views "The last days according to Jesus"Gentry has the identification of the beast in a book that can be read on http://www.freebooks.comDavid Chilton, the big daddy of Preterism also has two books that detail the analysis on freebooks.com

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"