The Prophecy of the 70 weeks of Daniel

I think it is pretty obvious there are other explanations other than "Christ" or even "The Messiah". Other explanations, which do not require a supernatural occurence to happen, have been shown to you. You dismissed them out of hand.You made a certain claim.Justify your start date to the day. Justify your end date to the day, using scripture only. Prove that your start date and your end date are not arbitrary.For example, you made a claim of April 6, 32 as when Jesus supposedly came into Jerusualum. Prove it via scripture.You made the start date very exact. Prove it via scripture.

Historians have always considered Alexander's empire to be the Greek empire. Macedonia was an entity of the Greek empire.Paul, this is your MO, to accuse your counterparts of failing to respond. No matter what I say, you've always resorted to that bogus claim when you can't deliver. You do not debate in good faith.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

I agree the factor of prophesy is not prevalent anymore, and is replaced with science: both sustaining would be contradictory. Just as we could not survive w/o science today - the ancient people could not have survived w/o some means of a supre-natural facility.The error made generally is to tosss science against ancient sciences [like spells, sorcery, etc] - when both these facilities did not exist simultainiously, but they did independently of each other. Because the ancient science is seen as un-scientific today, it is eronously discarded as myth. The fact is, that ancient forms of science were not myth but followed by all groups of humanity, continiously for many 1000s of years; kings and parents bet their lives on this premise - even sacrificing their most cherished off-spring in its readings; this would not be the case if it yielded no results.The ancients were not stupid, but equally intelligent as of humanity today - they had a different vocab and other applicable factors impacting. In the middle-ages, millions [almost half of humanity] perished by the now commonplace set of illneses [flu, etc] - but this was not the case in ancient times. A phase occured where the old science did not apply - new virus' emerged only conquerable by new science; the old deseases would likewise not yield to today's science methods.This is controversial but not dismissable. In the future times, today's science will also become obsolete, because new paradigms would impact - and simultainiously, new facilities will emerge to counter it: else humanity could not have survived. Whether one wants to reject it or not, there are clear indicators our knowledge is proportional to its time comming, and any measure of advanced knowledge can act as a destruction for humanity. Pencilin was discovered by accident - in its most required instant and humanity would not have survived without this accident. The picture of a light clicking on in the mind has much reality: we think it is because of our genius, but it happens whether we want it to or not.

Yet Alex was Macedonian, and he exhibited polar different views from Greek Hellenism. Alex's greatest conquest may not be his wars, but that he pursued and initiated the first translation of the hebrew bible [The Septuagint']. He was assassinated for this, because it caused upheaval with the Hellenist priests, whose esteem greatly fell.Alex's actions caused the world to change to today's modern history: christianity was a direct result of the Septuagint, whereby the Greeks made it part of their own via the NT, when Judea was deemed dead after the Roman war of 70 CE. Some 90% of the NT premises are vested in the Greek religion. Connect the dots, and one Macedonian was the pivotal factor here.

quote:

---

Historians have always considered Alexander's empire to be the Greek empire. Macedonia was an entity of the Greek empire.

---

That isn't true. ALexander was King of Macedonia. That was his power base. Alexander's Empire has always been considered Macedonian for that obvious reason.And of course you're missing the point that you only credited Alexander with "saving Macedonia" and not with building the great empire that he did.

quote:

---

Paul, this is your MO, to accuse your counterparts of failing to respond. No matter what I say, you've always resorted to that bogus claim when you can't deliver. You do not debate in good faith.

---

Debating in good faith requires you to address my points. It does not require me to pretend that you have addressed them when you have not. Doing so would not be debating at all.I know what this is about. Your habit of asserting that the Flood would mess up all dating measures and then running away when asked to support it. I know that you don't like this fact being pointed out. But it's your fault for doing it. Just as it's your fault for bringing up the issue.

quote:

---

The legs, and toes cannot be welded into being the kingdom
that came before them. That is crystal clear.

​

And that's got nothing to do with what I'm saying. Can you stop begging the question.

---

If the order and content of the kingdom aspect of the prophesy has nothing to do with whatever you are sayimng, who cares?? Focus.

quote:

---

Of course neither of the possible messiah's I mentioned were cut off "in" Greece. THe important events happened right there in Jerusalem.

---

Must have missed that bit. Your thing here is to try to point to some other so called messiahs, I see. Pathetic.

quote:

---

It was, however raided and looted - doubtless with significant damage. And as I have pointed out, Daniel has the Temple in action after the "destruction".

---

Look, let's be clear here. Do you believe in God, and the bible or not?? I am getting a little tired of pussyfooting around with you. If you do, tell us if you think the prophesy is true and valid, and how you supposedly think it was fulfilled.If not, then, fine, let's take off the gloves here.

quote:

---

Rome, on the other hand, didn't destroy the Temple in the timescale you want. By your count the 70 weeks were up then. Nor did they errect the "abomination that causes desolation". Antiochus did that.

---

So you deny the 70 AD historical date. OK. That will requite proof. Got any??

quote:

---

Depends on how you want to define "comes from Greece". The Seleucid, Antiochus IV, is that prince.

---

Titus came from Greece by any standard?? Tell us about it.

quote:

---

Nor has that got anything to do with Daniel's prophecy. The only thing that is to follow the 4th Empire is the Kingdom of God.

---

Of course it does. There is a long period of time between the last week, and the 69th. The toes, by the way, I suppose you are considering part of the fourth kingdom? I read it as part of the same stuff as the fourth, but part different. Modern Europe, and the remnants of the Roman empire are really not what they used to be.

quote:

---

And present day Europe doesn't even come from Rome (it concludes significant territories that were never Roman, excludes important territories that were Roman, and lets not forget those people living in former Roman territories whose ancestors came from outside the Empire).

---

Not all of it, no, so?? But a lot of it was there.

quote:

---

No it wasn't. And if you'd read it you would know that.

---

Yes, it was. Guess we will disagree there.

quote:

---

21 "The shaggy goat represents the kingdom of Greece, and the large horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

​

22 "The broken horn and the four horns that arose in its place represent four kingdoms which will arise from his nation, although not with his power.

​

23"In the latter period of their rule,
When the transgressors have run their course,
A king will arise,
Insolent and skilled in intrigue.

​

The king referred to is to rise in the "latter part..." of the time of the four Hellenistic kingdoms that rose from Alexander's Empire. Those have come and gone. This prophecy cannot be fulfilled now or in our future, as you want to believe. The Bible contradicts you again.

---

Well, that really doesn't matter, because sometimes in a chapter, we launch into the future, or some such. So that is fine tuning, not something to be done on a pagan forum.I have heard some say that this bit refers to history, others, that it refers to future.Doesn't really matter. Maybe it is both! A dual fullfillment, in that it fit history, but that it could also refer to the last wicked king.Either way, nothing in there that will help you. The kingdoms are not really up for grabs, but well known, in the big picture. Absolutely.

quote:

---

Of course it's possible. The Bible is a collection of works, and despite the best efforts of the editors who selected the manuscripts it is not fully consistent. There's simply no requirement for Daniel to agree with other "End Time" prophecies - or anything wrong in pointing out that it does not.

---

False, you just get into the murky waters of how only so much can be understood by most people, the rest needs some spiritual sprinkling, to grasp.That is why I stick to the wonderful, simple facts here, that prove that the bible is God's word to man. No one could guess all the kingdoms of the earth, when Jesus would come, and be killed, and the sanctuary destroyed, etc etc etc. It follows a precise timetable, and we notice Jesus said, at one point, 'my time is not yet come'!! There was a reason. He came to fulfil scripture, and knew that the 69 weeks had to be fulfilled first. When He marched into Jerusalem on a donkey, He knew that would seal His fate. He came willingly, to be cut off, but not for Himself.

quote:

---

The legs, and toes cannot be welded into being the kingdom
that came before them. That is crystal clear.

​

And that's got nothing to do with what I'm saying. Can you stop begging the question.

---

If the order and content of the kingdom aspect of the prophesy has nothing to do with whatever you are sayimng, who cares?? Focus.

quote:

---

Of course neither of the possible messiah's I mentioned were cut off "in" Greece. THe important events happened right there in Jerusalem.

---

Must have missed that bit. Your thing here is to try to point to some other so called messiahs, I see. Pathetic.

quote:

---

It was, however raided and looted - doubtless with significant damage. And as I have pointed out, Daniel has the Temple in action after the "destruction".

---

Look, let's be clear here. Do you believe in God, and the bible or not?? I am getting a little tired of pussyfooting around with you. If you do, tell us if you think the prophesy is true and valid, and how you supposedly think it was fulfilled.If not, then, fine, let's take off the gloves here.

quote:

---

Rome, on the other hand, didn't destroy the Temple in the timescale you want. By your count the 70 weeks were up then. Nor did they errect the "abomination that causes desolation". Antiochus did that.

---

So you deny the 70 AD historical date. OK. That will requite proof. Got any??

quote:

---

Depends on how you want to define "comes from Greece". The Seleucid, Antiochus IV, is that prince.

---

Titus came from Greece by any standard?? Tell us about it.

quote:

---

Nor has that got anything to do with Daniel's prophecy. The only thing that is to follow the 4th Empire is the Kingdom of God.

---

Of course it does. There is a long period of time between the last week, and the 69th. The toes, by the way, I suppose you are considering part of the fourth kingdom? I read it as part of the same stuff as the fourth, but part different. Modern Europe, and the remnants of the Roman empire are really not what they used to be.

quote:

---

And present day Europe doesn't even come from Rome (it concludes significant territories that were never Roman, excludes important territories that were Roman, and lets not forget those people living in former Roman territories whose ancestors came from outside the Empire).

---

Not all of it, no, so?? But a lot of it was there.

quote:

---

No it wasn't. And if you'd read it you would know that.

---

Yes, it was. Guess we will disagree there.

quote:

---

21 "The shaggy goat represents the kingdom of Greece, and the large horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

​

22 "The broken horn and the four horns that arose in its place represent four kingdoms which will arise from his nation, although not with his power.

​

23"In the latter period of their rule,
When the transgressors have run their course,
A king will arise,
Insolent and skilled in intrigue.

​

The king referred to is to rise in the "latter part..." of the time of the four Hellenistic kingdoms that rose from Alexander's Empire. Those have come and gone. This prophecy cannot be fulfilled now or in our future, as you want to believe. The Bible contradicts you again.

---

Well, that really doesn't matter, because sometimes in a chapter, we launch into the future, or some such. So that is fine tuning, not something to be done on a pagan forum.I have heard some say that this bit refers to history, others, that it refers to future.Doesn't really matter. Maybe it is both! A dual fullfillment, in that it fit history, but that it could also refer to the last wicked king.Either way, nothing in there that will help you. The kingdoms are not really up for grabs, but well known, in the big picture. Absolutely.

quote:

---

Of course it's possible. The Bible is a collection of works, and despite the best efforts of the editors who selected the manuscripts it is not fully consistent. There's simply no requirement for Daniel to agree with other "End Time" prophecies - or anything wrong in pointing out that it does not.

---

False, you just get into the murky waters of how only so much can be understood by most people, the rest needs some spiritual sprinkling, to grasp.That is why I stick to the wonderful, simple facts here, that prove that the bible is God's word to man. No one could guess all the kingdoms of the earth, when Jesus would come, and be killed, and the sanctuary destroyed, etc etc etc. It follows a precise timetable, and we notice Jesus said, at one point, 'my time is not yet come'!! There was a reason. He came to fulfil scripture, and knew that the 69 weeks had to be fulfilled first. When He marched into Jerusalem on a donkey, He knew that would seal His fate. He came willingly, to be cut off, but not for Himself.

quote:

---

The legs, and toes cannot be welded into being the kingdom
that came before them. That is crystal clear.

​

And that's got nothing to do with what I'm saying. Can you stop begging the question.

---

If the order and content of the kingdom aspect of the prophesy has nothing to do with whatever you are sayimng, who cares?? Focus.

quote:

---

Of course neither of the possible messiah's I mentioned were cut off "in" Greece. THe important events happened right there in Jerusalem.

---

Must have missed that bit. Your thing here is to try to point to some other so called messiahs, I see. Pathetic.

quote:

---

It was, however raided and looted - doubtless with significant damage. And as I have pointed out, Daniel has the Temple in action after the "destruction".

---

Look, let's be clear here. Do you believe in God, and the bible or not?? I am getting a little tired of pussyfooting around with you. If you do, tell us if you think the prophesy is true and valid, and how you supposedly think it was fulfilled.If not, then, fine, let's take off the gloves here.

quote:

---

Rome, on the other hand, didn't destroy the Temple in the timescale you want. By your count the 70 weeks were up then. Nor did they errect the "abomination that causes desolation". Antiochus did that.

---

So you deny the 70 AD historical date. OK. That will requite proof. Got any??

quote:

---

Depends on how you want to define "comes from Greece". The Seleucid, Antiochus IV, is that prince.

---

Titus came from Greece by any standard?? Tell us about it.

quote:

---

Nor has that got anything to do with Daniel's prophecy. The only thing that is to follow the 4th Empire is the Kingdom of God.

---

Of course it does. There is a long period of time between the last week, and the 69th. The toes, by the way, I suppose you are considering part of the fourth kingdom? I read it as part of the same stuff as the fourth, but part different. Modern Europe, and the remnants of the Roman empire are really not what they used to be.

quote:

---

And present day Europe doesn't even come from Rome (it concludes significant territories that were never Roman, excludes important territories that were Roman, and lets not forget those people living in former Roman territories whose ancestors came from outside the Empire).

---

Not all of it, no, so?? But a lot of it was there.

quote:

---

No it wasn't. And if you'd read it you would know that.

---

Yes, it was. Guess we will disagree there.

quote:

---

21 "The shaggy goat represents the kingdom of Greece, and the large horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

​

22 "The broken horn and the four horns that arose in its place represent four kingdoms which will arise from his nation, although not with his power.

​

23"In the latter period of their rule,
When the transgressors have run their course,
A king will arise,
Insolent and skilled in intrigue.

​

The king referred to is to rise in the "latter part..." of the time of the four Hellenistic kingdoms that rose from Alexander's Empire. Those have come and gone. This prophecy cannot be fulfilled now or in our future, as you want to believe. The Bible contradicts you again.

---

Well, that really doesn't matter, because sometimes in a chapter, we launch into the future, or some such. So that is fine tuning, not something to be done on a pagan forum.I have heard some say that this bit refers to history, others, that it refers to future.Doesn't really matter. Maybe it is both! A dual fullfillment, in that it fit history, but that it could also refer to the last wicked king.Either way, nothing in there that will help you. The kingdoms are not really up for grabs, but well known, in the big picture. Absolutely.

quote:

---

Of course it's possible. The Bible is a collection of works, and despite the best efforts of the editors who selected the manuscripts it is not fully consistent. There's simply no requirement for Daniel to agree with other "End Time" prophecies - or anything wrong in pointing out that it does not.

---

False, you just get into the murky waters of how only so much can be understood by most people, the rest needs some spiritual sprinkling, to grasp.That is why I stick to the wonderful, simple facts here, that prove that the bible is God's word to man. No one could guess all the kingdoms of the earth, when Jesus would come, and be killed, and the sanctuary destroyed, etc etc etc. It follows a precise timetable, and we notice Jesus said, at one point, 'my time is not yet come'!! There was a reason. He came to fulfil scripture, and knew that the 69 weeks had to be fulfilled first. When He marched into Jerusalem on a donkey, He knew that would seal His fate. He came willingly, to be cut off, but not for Himself.

He came there, around a certain time. The year is known. The fact that it was somewhere near a certain Jeewish holiday is known. I do not need any day. Just the year. That is as far a a pagan forum needed to get into.

He came there, around a certain time. The year is known. The fact that it was somewhere near a certain Jeewish holiday is known. I do not need any day. Just the year. That is as far a a pagan forum needed to get into.

A lot of drooling nothing. Trying to slime the bible with the association to wizards, or some such rot.Try and address the issues.

A lot of drooling nothing. Trying to slime the bible with the association to wizards, or some such rot.Try and address the issues.

quote:

---

So you deny the 70 AD historical date. OK. That will requite proof. Got any??

​

Titus came from Greece by any standard?? Tell us about it.

---

Titus was the son of Vespasian - both rose to divine emperor, following Josephus' oracle prophesizing this. Titus destroted the temple, but failed in wining the surrender of the Judeans or their housing or worshipping roman dieties. Titus' father thus rejected the crown of victory in the celebrations in Rome - acknowledging it a hollow victory.The war between Rome and Judea is perhaps the most pivotal war in human history - two of today's largest religions would not have emerged had this war not occured. Nor would the term Palestine, the Al Aqsa or today's middle-east conflict have occured.

hello everyone,
I agree that Daniel must have been very special and likely had some divine assistance!! Or does anyone believe in such strong intuition and prescience that he did it all alone??God bless and have a worry free day!

---

vacation bible school

Did you read that ICANT. We're down from 1:10¹²⁰ to 1:10³. That's quite a drop.

---

KindlyThere is a spider by the water pipe.