Christianity and the End Times

But of course this is a sham.Here's the prophecy about the fourth beast in Daniel 7:24 Here's Wikipedia on the Seleucid Empire on the first of your list, Heliodorus: Heliodorus murdered Seleucus but was never on the throne. The little horn of Daniel 7 follows ten KINGS, Heliodorus was never a king.Then we have Demetrius, second on your list, who even you admit fell outside the relevant time period. There were a number of kings named Demetrius but they all FOLLOWED Antiochus IV, after his death. So there was no Demetrius who was a king when Antiochus IV appeared, Again, the little horn of Daniel 7 follows ten kings, but Demetrius followed Antiochus. Note the bolded first line of the Wikipedia article: As for the infant son of Seleucus IV I couldn't find anything to suggest that he was ever on the throne and if he was it would have been after Antiochus Epiphanes.Once again: the little horn of Daniel 7 follows ten kings. That didn't happen with any of your three candidates for the uprooted kings of Daniel 7.Your claim is an absolute bust.Again I say, you must rescind your claim that the little horns of Daniel 7 and 8 are the same or there is no point in continuing the discussion.

duplicateEdited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

But of course this is a sham.

---

And that is just more of your false belittling of my points. Especially as you declared it impossible that both descriptions could fit the same man - even if you reject my explanation it is still pretty good.

quote:

---

Heliodorus murdered Seleucus but was never on the throne. The little horn of Daniel 7 follows ten KINGS, Heliodorus was never a king

---

That is what you get for relying on an article covering the entire history of the empire instead of looking at more detailed articles as well. wikipedia

quote:

---

Then we have Demetrius, second on your list, who even you admit fell outside the relevant time period.

---

Another of your strange misinterpretations. Demetrius managed to take the throne and rule later, but that is a side-note. He is on my list as the rightful heir of Seleucus IV and therefore with a claim to be king. A claim that Antiochus IV denied him. It is a viable interpretation. You may disagree but that is just opinion.

quote:

---

As for the infant son of Seleucus IV I couldn't find anything to suggest that he was ever on the throne and if he was it would have been after Antiochus Epiphanes

---

As I said - and you obviously ignored - young Antiochus was co-regent with Antiochus IV at the start of the latter’s reign. WikipediaYou really should remember that I do make the effort to get my facts right.

A claim to be king is not being king.However, I'll accept your interpretation and go on to other ways the two horns are not the same person.

quote:

---

A claim to be king is not being king.

---

Being the rightful king - as Demetrius was - seems close enough to me.And again, having a match this good is evidence that Antiochus is the person meant in Daniel 7.And thank you for living down to my prediction. It’s nice having the moral high ground.

I admit it is much better evidence than I thought possible for your claims. I have to concede that much and apologize for assuming you didn't have any.But it isn't good enough by the standards of scripture. Two of them are not reigning kings and the prophecy speaks of the little horn's arising among, or after, ten kings which certainly sound like established kings. Since in my scenario all this is yet future I can't answer it directly.To make the Seleucid empire into the fourth beast of Daneil 7 does destroy the pattern of the prophecies, which foresees four separate empires succeeding each other, and always puts the Seleucids under the images of Greece which is the third beast of Daniel 7.Also, you still haven't any reasonable timing to fit the seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel 9, and of course I continue to object that your messiahs are utterly inadequate to the tenor of the prophecies. Messiah the Prince has to be Jesus Christ, and the sixty-nine weeks does point to His time and not the time of the Maccabees.I'm still aiming to get the verses together that differentiate the two little horns and show that the prophecies continue far in the future, but that's going to take time especially since other things are interfering with my efforts.But again, I can't answer your claim about the ten kings as long as you insist on the meanings you insist on. I think they are wrong, that they don't fit the prophecy at all, but as long as you hold to those interpretations I can't answer it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

So let's apply marketing to Endtimes Christianity. We can agree that "end times" preaching has virtually always been with us. Can we also agree that everyone of us is, in fact, marketing an idea...an interpretation of what Christianity is all about?If so one could argue that end times Christianity is preached in order to market product--driven by the fear and uncertainty in this modern world. On the other hand, quite a few Christians...more than a mere cult...believe in a second coming. What do you make of it?Finally...the reason that I cling to the so-called dogma is that first of all I cannot believe that all of these people are either maliciously marketing an idea for profit nor that they are willfully ignorant. Granted they may be selling a book or two...(though some give them away) and the bottom line is the widespread
belief that Jesus will return and fix this thing once and for all.

Marketing "What's in it for me!" Christianity. "Let Jesus do it!"It's always attractive to sell "Let the other guy do it!" rather than "Looks like I have to do it!"And every single End Times product has been recalled.Edited by jar, : No reason given.

but you seem to make it out to be an either-or proposition. Jesus is not simply a cosmic bellhop---we all know that. And I do not see where mainstream Christianity teaches that He is, either.My problem with your belief is that you see Jesus as Once a great teacher.Or am I again misrepresenting you?AddbyEdit: When you were a kid you believed that God and your parents would help you. Do you still believe that God can help?(while admitting that there is no way to explain how?)

quote:

---

I remember on the drive home, all of us packed together in the car, mom and dad in the front seat and IIRC at the time, about 4 kids stuffed in the back, one of my parents asked me, Well, how do you feel now?
I think I can do what I need to do. I said, I know that you and GOD will help.

---

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

So how do you explain your belief that evey other belief and non-belief is wrong? After all, if this is a numbers game, those others outnumber you by an order of magnitude.Then of course you also admit that you only believe what you believe by an accident of birth.So how does all that reconcile Phat?

quote:

---

But it isn't good enough by the standards of scripture. Two of them are not reigning kings and the prophecy speaks of the little horn's arising among, or after, ten kings which certainly sound like established kings. Since in my scenario all this is yet future I can't answer it directly.

---

This seems a rather arbitrary criterion. It’s not in the text. The fact that three of the ten are uprooted by the eleventh rather suggests that they can’t have much of a reign.But then this is the standard that says that a series of four empires, the last destroyed by God can be a series of four empires plus several others which don’t get mentioned, where the fourth is destroyed by humans but somehow comes back hundreds of years later. But it can’t be a slightly series of four empires which fits the text equally well, and doesn’t have all the additions.It seems a rather flexible standard and apparently indistinguishable from Faith likes it.

quote:

---

To make the Seleucid empire into the fourth beast of Daneil 7 does destroy the pattern of the prophecies, which foresees four separate empires succeeding each other, and always puts the Seleucids under the images of Greece which is the third beast of Daniel 7.

---

That assumes that the empires are divided up the same way each time. Given the quite different imagery I don’t think that is guaranteed, the more so since Daniel 11 deals with the Ptolemies and the Seleucids as distinct kingdoms.

quote:

---

Also, you still haven't any reasonable timing to fit the seventy weeks prophecy of Daniel 9

---

However I have a reasonable explanation and by my assessment the weight of evidence supports it. I’m still waiting for a sensible explanation of how you can shoehorn in a gap of 2000 years.

quote:

---

and of course I continue to object that your messiahs are utterly inadequate to the tenor of the prophecies. Messiah the Prince has to be Jesus Christ, and the sixty-nine weeks does point to His time and not the time of the Maccabees.

---

In fact my two messiahs are remarkably good fits and it is just silly to deny it. Cyrus is a messiah and a prince and prominent in the Jews return to Jerusalem (and he gets quite a lot of mentions in scripture). Onaias III is prominent in the events leading up to the Maccabean revolt and is murdered shortly before events fitting with the seventieth week of Daniel 9.They are such good fits that they count as good evidence for my reading by any sensible standard. Your dismissal has no objective basis.

quote:

---

I'm still aiming to get the verses together that differentiate the two little horns and show that the prophecies continue far in the future, but that's going to take time especially since other things are interfering with my efforts.

---

So far I haven’t seen anything on either front worth considering.

I'll admit that this is a valid question.But who said that the truth is a lottery and that every chance is equally probable?Granted you will argue that I just so happen to believe that my belief is the winner.And is it not ironic that the followers are not measurably or noticeably any different than the rest of the people on the planet.I'll give you this point.The apologists would argue, however, that Christians are no better than anyone else and that despite our weakness, His strength shines through. We have yet to see a widespread demonstration, however.

I believe as I did then that I need to do it; Jesus or inspiration or parents can advise or teach or encourage but only I can do.

By inference, you did.You believe that your belief is the truth, but you also agree that you only believe what you believe by an accident of birth, so...

Finished. I may have to come back and do some mopping up though. Image of lion from Babylon
Biblical prophecy often includes distinctive differences and details to make it identifiable with the real situation but in this case all we got was "ten kings" with nothing to distinguish them from each other, so there is no justification for thinking they were anything but ten reigning kings. The different imagery nevertheless contains symbolism that identifies them as the same empire, which is what I want to demonstrate here:
(I'm including some biblical quotes as references to the different prophecies and their images at the bottom of the post)*

• The First Kingdom/Empire:
  1. Babylon in Daniel 2: We know the gold head of the statue in Daniel 2 is Babylon because Daniel says so to Nebuchadnezzer when he interprets his dream to him:
  ​
  Daniel 2:38 ...Thou art this head of gold.
  ​
  2. Babylon in Daniel 7: Daniel has a vision of four kingdoms in the form of four different beasts, the first being a lion with wings that becomes a man.
  ​
  Daniel 7:3 writes:

  ​

  The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
  ​
  PaulK disputes the lion, certainly the winged lion, as a symbol of Babylon. I'll just claim that the following three kingdoms in the images of of Daniel 2 and 7 are clearly the same, and the two of Daniel 8 the same as the second and third of those two visions as well, and Babylon is a major image in scripture (Consider "Mystery Babylon the Great" of Revelation) besides being the empire that captured Jerusalem and under which Daniel served through at least two kings.
  ​
  CONCLUSION: Babylon is the first kingdom/empire represented in the two prophecies: Two prophecies, two different images, first image represents Babylon in both prophetic visions.
  ​
• The Second Kingdom/Empire is identified in Daniel 2 as merely a kingdom that will follow Babylon. It is represented in the statue of Nebuchadnezzar's dream as the chest and arms of silver.
  And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee
  ​
  The second kingdom in Daniel 7: represented by a bear raised up on one side:
  ​
  Daniel7:4 writes:

  ​

  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 refers only to two kingdoms, but they are understood by evangelicalsw to represent the second and third kingdoms of the silver arms of the statue prophecy of Daniel 2 and the bear prophecy of Daniel 7: The first in this chapter is the second in the previous chapters:
  ​
  Daniel 8:3 writes:

  ​

  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....p
  ​
  Dan 8:20-21 writes:

  ​

  The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
  The ram is identified as the same kingdom as the bear in Daniel 7 and the silver arms of Daniel 2
  ​
  So the ram in Daniel 8 is now identified as the kingdom of the Medes and Persians, or Medo-Persia. Daniel served not only under two kings of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar, but under kings of Media and Persia, including the great Persian king Cyrus, which illustrates the same sequence as the first two images in the first two visions and focuses in on the second kingdom in Daniel 8. And besides its historical sequence, another way to identify that the second kingdom of the first two prophecies is Medo-Persia is by its twoness in each image: the two arms of the status, the bear raised up on one side, and the ram's horns one taller than the other, and in that image the taller one came up second, which reflects the historical fact that Persia was the stronger of the two kingdoms.
  ​
  CONCLUSION: Medo-Persia is the second kingdom/empire represented in the first two prophecies, the arms of the statue and the bear raised up on one side, and is the first of the two in the third prophetic vision of Daniel 8: the ram with one horn higher than the other.
  ​
• The Third Kingdom/Empire
  ​
  The third kingdom is briefly represented in the four kingdoms of the statue of Daniel 2:
  Daniel2:40 writes:

  ​

  and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.
  ​
  The third of the four animals of the vision in Daniel 7 has four wings and four heads:
  ​
  Daniel 7 writes:

  ​

  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: writes:

  ​

  And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
  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.
  ​
  We know from history that this first king of Greece is Alexander the Great. He was followed by his four generals who divided up his conquered lands among themselves.
  ​
  CONCLUSION: The third kingdom/empire of Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 is not named there but is named in Daniel 8 where it is represented by the goat that defeats the ram, the ram being identified as Medo-Persia. Its four horns that replace the one horn link it to the four wings and heads of the leopard in Daniel 7, and its following and defeating Medo-Persia which is clearly the second of the empires in Daniel 2 links all three together as Alexander's Greece. Daniel 8 identifies the four horns as the four Greek kingdoms into which it broke up after Alexander.
  ​
• The Fourth Kingdom/Empire This is represented by the legs and feet of the statue in Daniel 2, the legs being of iron and the feet and toes a mixture of iron and clay, identified as a mixture of weakness and strength.
  ​
  In Daniel 7 the fourth beast is called Great and Terrible and has teeth of iron, which links it to the iron of the legs of the statue, identifying it as the same empire. It does not appear again in the prophecies. Daniel 8 and 11-12 focus on two of the kingdoms that were formed after Alexander died.
  ​
  CONCLUSION The fourth kingdoms of Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 are the same because of the iron in both images.

================================
* BIBICAL REFERENCES (These are from Blue Letter Bible):1. Daniel 2: The statue in Nebechadnezzar's dream 2. Daniel 7: Daniel's vision of the four beasts during the reign of the Babylonian king Belshazzar: 3. Daneil 8 Daneil "in the third year of the reign of Belshazzar" now has a vision of two beasts Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.