Daniels 4 Beasts

[Davy]

I am sorry Davy, I should have quoted Jer. 31:31ff for you so that you could plainly see that I was referencing scripture, unless you do not hold that the Jer. 31:31ff is applicable any more. Strangely, many Christians quote these verses to justify their "New Covenant" theology without much understanding.

Why talk only about Jeremiah 31 when the prophecy I speak of was first mentioned in the Book of Hosea specific to the ten northern tribes of Israel, and not to Judah? Jeremiah 31 is about the time of Christ's future return and gathering of the 'believing' remnants of both the house of Judah and the house of Israel back to the promised lands, which has NOT happened yet.

But the prophecies in Hosea is about what God said He would do to them after He scattered them, which covers quite a bit of history. And then in final God also shows when He will redeem them. And Apostle Paul quoted from Hosea to Gentile Roman believers, showing The Gospel went to lost Israel and to the Gentiles, and both together became Christ's Church.

 

[Davy]

The antichrist is the final beast. The prince who is to come

If we can get Jay Ross, et al, to stop trying to hi-jack this thread, maybe we can continue this subject of the Book of Daniel and the 4 beasts.

Dan 9:26-27
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
KJV

I understand what you mean. I assume it is this -- To define that "he" of verse 27, we must go back to the last person spoken of in the 26th verse, and that is "the prince".

However, that phrase in green about that prince involved the Roman general Titus in 70 A.D. who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple.

Nevertheless, because those verse 27 events did NOT happen in 70 A.D. (per the Jewish historian Josephus), it means "the prince" indeed is still being used to represent the idea of the final Antichrist to come at the very end of this world.

 

[Davy]

Moving to revelation.

Who is this Little horn? Do we see him again spoken of in prophesy?

Beast of revelation, given to John .

Ch 13:
1. Had characteristics of all of daniels beasts (leopard, bear and Lion) and is itself the 4th beast
2. Given power by satan himself (son of perdition)
3. Was mortally wounded (lost his power) but was restored to life (Rome died, and even though many have tried to revive it, No one has succeeded, Satan will revive this power)
4. Spoke pompous words (blasphemies)
5. Given power for 42 months (3 ½ years)
6. Given power to persecute the saints of God
7. Power is greater than any previous empire. As it is worldwide in scope (every tribe, language and nation were given to his hand) how many more ways can God say worldwide, every human alive at this time will be under his power.

It's easy to get mixed up in Revelation 13 about the idea of the beast. Though it may seem like the Revelation 13:1-3 is pointing to a person, because of how it uses the pronoun "his", it's actually describing the 'beast kingdom' that is to have ten horns, seven heads, and ten crowns. The Book of Daniel gave the example of both a 'beast kingdom' idea, and a 'beast king' idea. Revelation 13 and 17 also does this. The 1st beast is the kingdom; the 2nd beast is the king. The deadly wound was upon one of the beast kingdom heads. Revelation 17 tells the 'seven heads' are seven mountains, meaning seven locations upon the earth. Thus the deadly wound that is healed was upon one of those seven locations in the past.

Going deeper...

This is what many miss from Revelation 12 about the beast kingdom. In Revelation 12:3-4 we are shown Satan's original rebellion when he drew a third of the angels to earth, and timed with it was a beast that had ten horns, seven heads, but only seven crowns. The one in Revelation 13 is to have ten crowns. Thus the 'deadly wound' in reality refers back to Satan's rebellion in the old world with that beast of seven crowns. By that deadly wound being healed, it is pointing to his future beast kingdom at the end of this world, with that head that suffered the deadly wound being healed. So where... on earth is that Revelation 13 beast kingdom to be established? Understand that, and you'll begin to understand what Satan did at his original rebellion in coveting God's Throne, and you'll also begin to understand where that deadly wound original was, and also where the "dragon" is going to setup his headquarters upon earth again for the very end of this world.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I understand, the confusion occurs because the confuses messages are written according thinking from a human perspective, not from God's perspective, and they are a stumbling block.



The GOD's wrath is only in the beginning. The worst is to come, henceforward. By the way, the Eternal punishment was determined to start in this current time, it is starting and will NEVER END, it is for ever and ever. The END is not yet, we are in the beginning of the sorrows, for now.

On the earth, the nations will be in anguish and perplexity...People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, ... Luke 21:v.25-26
Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the Kingdom of God is near. v.29

God will not withdraw/revoke His wrath, ...Job 9:v.13
John 3:v.35-36
35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.
36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him

I disagree, We have not even begun Gods wrath. But when we do the world will know it. As John said, the kings of the earth will cry out to the rocks to fall on them, for it is the time of the lords wrath and who can withstand it.

if anything, we are in the birth pangs, or the beginning of sorrows now.. as God protective hand is slowly removed

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The prophet to Ezekiel, a contemporary of Daniel, prophesied saying: And thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come, when iniquity shall have an end-Ez.21:v.25

Jeremiah 30:23-24
23 Behold, the whirlwind of the Lord goeth forth with fury, a continuing whirlwind: it shall fall with pain upon the head of the wicked.

24 The fierce anger of the Lord shall not return, until he hath done it, and until he have performed the intents of his heart: in the latter days ye shall consider it.

Dan 9: And the people of the prince who is to come
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;
But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering.
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,

Dan 2, 7 Rev 13, 17, 19 all speak of the time of the Gentile

When Christ returns he destroys the final gentile kingdom. It is gentile not Jewish.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

If we can get Jay Ross, et al, to stop trying to hi-jack this thread, maybe we can continue this subject of the Book of Daniel and the 4 beasts.

Dan 9:26-27
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
KJV

I understand what you mean. I assume it is this -- To define that "he" of verse 27, we must go back to the last person spoken of in the 26th verse, and that is "the prince".

However, that phrase in green about that prince involved the Roman general Titus in 70 A.D. who destroyed Jerusalem and the temple.

Nevertheless, because those verse 27 events did NOT happen in 70 A.D. (per the Jewish historian Josephus), it means "the prince" indeed is still being used to represent the idea of the final Antichrist to come at the very end of this world.

yes it is Titus in Green, But vs 26 does not mention him, It says the people of the prince to come. So more accurately it would be Titus and his armies.

The hard part I think for everyone is trying to imagine the small city of Rome becoming a worldwide empire again. I feel that way too. I do believe that when it happen. no one will have any doubt however.

I also think of even 100 years ago. Who would have thought little tiny Israel would be in their land again, and be talking about building a temple. Yet today here we are

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It's easy to get mixed up in Revelation 13 about the idea of the beast. Though it may seem like the Revelation 13:1-3 is pointing to a person, because of how it uses the pronoun "his", it's actually describing the 'beast kingdom' that is to have ten horns, seven heads, and ten crowns. The Book of Daniel gave the example of both a 'beast kingdom' idea, and a 'beast king' idea. Revelation 13 and 17 also does this. The 1st beast is the kingdom; the 2nd beast is the king. The deadly wound was upon one of the beast kingdom heads. Revelation 17 tells the 'seven heads' are seven mountains, meaning seven locations upon the earth. Thus the deadly wound that is healed was upon one of those seven locations in the past.

Going deeper...

This is what many miss from Revelation 12 about the beast kingdom. In Revelation 12:3-4 we are shown Satan's original rebellion when he drew a third of the angels to earth, and timed with it was a beast that had ten horns, seven heads, but only seven crowns. The one in Revelation 13 is to have ten crowns. Thus the 'deadly wound' in reality refers back to Satan's rebellion in the old world with that beast of seven crowns. By that deadly wound being healed, it is pointing to his future beast kingdom at the end of this world, with that head that suffered the deadly wound being healed. So where... on earth is that Revelation 13 beast kingdom to be established? Understand that, and you'll begin to understand what Satan did at his original rebellion in coveting God's Throne, and you'll also begin to understand where that deadly wound original was, and also where the "dragon" is going to setup his headquarters upon earth again for the very end of this world.

I think we need to remember the example in Dan 2. Where Daniel told King Neb he was the head of Gold. The kingdom was babylon, but the representative head is the king.

The same will be in rev 13. We are told the beast will go after Israel and she will be protected, so he will go after her offspring.

That beast is the kingdom

as for the crowns. I seem to remember remember the beast starts out as a 10 king kingdom. then one rises up and subdues 3, making it a 7 king kingdom. could this be it?

I have never seen it the way you speak but it is worth exploring..

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I know that some people are as thick as two bricks. I have been trying to not argue as to who is right if you had noticed from my posts, but you want to push that you have the credentials to claim that you are the only one who is right because you have 47 years of walking with the Lord. The problem is that you are not able to recognise whether a better understanding has been provided or not. That was why I had suggested that the unfolding prophetic timeline will eventually reveal the truth of the matter. But you keep coming back with your look at me, look at my understanding, I have been programmed how to thing and believe.

Let it go Ronny. I am an old dog with my own bone and I am happy with it. The readers of this forum are smart enough to know and discern who is probably right. As I previously state, we could both be wrong. Let us leave it at that for the time being.

Well you can be as presumptious as you want of me, but you are still batting 0 in trying to guess my motives.

And I guess I will never understand you rposition, for you just posted what you believe and then not post why. That is not the way of the Lord to His followers.

If you are happy with your bone, I am fine with that. So is it safe to assume, when you post, you just wish to post what you believe about something, but not to discuss it if some one disagrees and wants to know why you believe what you believe?

If that is the case, this will be my last response to you. I will understand your posts, if one disagrees, are not open to discussion.

BTW, I do not think I am the only one right because I have walked with the Lord for 47 years, you made a false presumption.
I believe strongly in all that I do believe! Even passionately. but I also know I could be wrong or partially wrong. Over those 47 years, as I have learned and grown, I have changed positions or made alterations to positions because a better biblical argument was presented.

 

[Davy]

yes it is Titus in Green, But vs 26 does not mention him, It says the people of the prince to come. So more accurately it would be Titus and his armies.

The hard part I think for everyone is trying to imagine the small city of Rome becoming a worldwide empire again. I feel that way too. I do believe that when it happen. no one will have any doubt however.

I also think of even 100 years ago. Who would have thought little tiny Israel would be in their land again, and be talking about building a temple. Yet today here we are

Because of the latter prophecy in that last phrase of verse 26, and the link of "the prince" with the "he" of verse 27, that tells me Titus represents a type for the final Antichrist also. The link to that "flood" of verse 26 is about the final Antichrist also...

Isa 59:19
19 So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and His glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.
KJV

Dan 11:21-22
21 And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.
22 And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.
KJV

Rev 12:15
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
KJV

In the Book of Isaiah, God uses the historical king of Assyria as a 'type' for the Antichrist coming in as a flood upon His people. God uses that coming in like a flood by the enemy quite a bit in the Old Testament prophets, so no wonder Lord Jesus used it also of how for the very end Satan will cast lies out of his mouth as a flood to deceive. That's why I see the Daniel 9:26 latter phrase, "and the end thereof shall be with a flood...", as a link to this flood metaphor about the final Antichrist at the end of this world.

 

[Davy]

I think we need to remember the example in Dan 2. Where Daniel told King Neb he was the head of Gold. The kingdom was babylon, but the representative head is the king.

The same will be in rev 13. We are told the beast will go after Israel and she will be protected, so he will go after her offspring.

That beast is the kingdom

Yes, but recall Daniel 4 about Nebuchadnezzar being made to live with the animals like a 'beast'. Thus the beast king concept is shown there also with him. Even Saddam Hussein's attempt to rebuild the city of Babylon, and his trying to hide in a hole in the ground when he was captured appears as a 'type' for what happened to the historical king of Babylon, difference being that Nebuchadnezzar came out of it and repented to God, and he was given to write Daniel 4.

In Revelation 17, we are given the example of kings over those historical beast kingdoms, and the "little horn" being pointed to there also.

as for the crowns. I seem to remember remember the beast starts out as a 10 king kingdom. then one rises up and subdues 3, making it a 7 king kingdom. could this be it?

I have never seen it the way you speak but it is worth exploring..

I've heard of that idea, but I cannot accept it because that beast system of Revelation 12:3-4 is being linked to the time of Satan's original rebellion because of drawing that third of the stars (angels). You might check out Ezekiel 28 and Ezekiel 31 which contain parables about Satan's original exalted status by God, and then his fall, with God using historical beast kings as types for Satan.

Further, the Daniel 7:24 example of the "little horn" (Antichrist) subduing three kings does not suggest defeating, but abasing, meaning they are still part of his kingdom but delegated to a lower status than the other seven kings. I see it pointing to a pyramid type political structure over the whole earth by the coming Antichrist.

 

[Jay Ross]

Well you can be as presumptuous as you want of me, but you are still batting 0 in trying to guess my motives.

And I guess I will never understand your position, for you just posted what you believe and then not post why. That is not the way of the Lord to His followers.

If you are happy with your bone, I am fine with that. So is it safe to assume, when you post, you just wish to post what you believe about something, but not to discuss it if some one disagrees and wants to know why you believe what you believe?

If that is the case, this will be my last response to you. I will understand your posts, if one disagrees, are not open to discussion.

BTW, I do not think I am the only one right because I have walked with the Lord for 47 years, you made a false presumption.
I believe strongly in all that I do believe! Even passionately. but I also know I could be wrong or partially wrong. Over those 47 years, as I have learned and grown, I have changed positions or made alterations to positions because a better biblical argument was presented.

My poor Ronny, I did post why I believed that “lə·ḏōr wā·ḏō·wr” should be understood as "an age plus an age" which actually represents two ages, i.e. around 2,000+ years, which defines a finite period of time. But you quoted to me what you had been programmed with from your "respected teachers/lecturers." You quoted your head knowledge and simply stated that I was wrong because of how you had been programmed to think.

I accepted that you are as thick as two bricks and that it was pointless arguing with one so knowledgeable/gullible.

"lə·‘ō·w·lām" indicates a finite time period where we are not able to comprehend when the end of this time period will be. However, many English translations have turned "lə·‘ō·w·lām" into an infinite period of time with their English translations reading thus: - "from generation to generation" or "endures to all generations" which are infinite expressions. As such the context of the original Hebrew text is lost.

Because you did not want to accept what I had posted and continually demanded that I respond scripturally to justify myself, I chose not to respond but suggested that we let the unfolding prophecy as to when Israel repents and is gathered again by God to Himself, confirm as to who was right. That was not acceptable to you or your arrogance. It seems that your laughing matter is depleted to the point where you cannot understand a very different point of view. You like the safety of occupying the same space as many others who are just as wrong as you.

Now can you let it go and be patient for another 22 or so years for the unfolding prophecy to inform everybody as to who might actually be right. You might even be lucky enough to live long enough to actually see the confirmation as to when Israel is gathered once again to the Lord with the Judgement of the kings of the earth at Armageddon. My chances of actually seeing the Armageddon judgement of the kings of the earth is slim to say the least and is more unlikely because of my age at that time.

 

[Earburner]

Because of the latter prophecy in that last phrase of verse 26, and the link of "the prince" with the "he" of verse 27, that tells me Titus represents a type for the final Antichrist also. InThe link to that "flood" of verse 26 is about the final Antichrist also...

Isa 59:19
19 So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and His glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.
KJV

Dan 11:21-22
21 And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.
22 And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.
KJV

Rev 12:15
15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
KJV

In the Book of Isaiah, God uses the historical king of Assyria as a 'type' for the Antichrist coming in as a flood upon His people. God uses that coming in like a flood by the enemy quite a bit in the Old Testament prophets, so no wonder Lord Jesus used it also of how for the very end Satan will cast lies out of his mouth as a flood to deceive. That's why I see the Daniel 9:26 latter phrase, "and the end thereof shall be with a flood...", as a link to this flood metaphor about the final Antichrist at the end of this world.

When you understand in the KJV, who it is, that is commanding the word "determine" in three places, in Daniel 9:24-27, then and only then will you understand which "he" is being spoken of in Daniel 9:27.
Your clue: John 5[39] Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

KJV Daniel 9[24] Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
[25] Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
[26] And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
[27] And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be
poured [out] upon** the desolate.
**Note: see Acts 10:45.

Questions: What six works of God, through the Messiah, were determined in verse 24?

Who are the recipients of them?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Yes, but recall Daniel 4 about Nebuchadnezzar being made to live with the animals like a 'beast'. Thus the beast king concept is shown there also with him. Even Saddam Hussein's attempt to rebuild the city of Babylon, and his trying to hide in a hole in the ground when he was captured appears as a 'type' for what happened to the historical king of Babylon, difference being that Nebuchadnezzar came out of it and repented to God, and he was given to write Daniel 4.

In Revelation 17, we are given the example of kings over those historical beast kingdoms, and the "little horn" being pointed to there also.



I've heard of that idea, but I cannot accept it because that beast system of Revelation 12:3-4 is being linked to the time of Satan's original rebellion because of drawing that third of the stars (angels). You might check out Ezekiel 28 and Ezekiel 31 which contain parables about Satan's original exalted status by God, and then his fall, with God using historical beast kings as types for Satan.

Further, the Daniel 7:24 example of the "little horn" (Antichrist) subduing three kings does not suggest defeating, but abasing, meaning they are still part of his kingdom but delegated to a lower status than the other seven kings. I see it pointing to a pyramid type political structure over the whole earth by the coming Antichrist.

Dan 2 still shows Nebuchadnezzar is the kingdom. In all instances, the kingdom is the leader.
revelation is a narrative. from the beginning to the end.

the woman with the 12 stars is the 12 children of Israel.

she gives birth to Christ

the beast is satan, Who attempts to prevent Jesus from doing what he came to do. yet he failed

the woman then goes to hiding where she is protected (this is yet future)

the rest is yet future.

Daniel 7 is talking about that future in which satan himself will enter the antichrist, the son of perdition, as the final beast empire of the gentiles who rule over Jerusalem. He will be defeated by Christ.

if you put everything in perspective it fits.

Dan 2, a basic understanding,

Dan 7 a deeper understanding with more detail.

Revelation then goes even deeper. each time giving us more bits of information about the same kingdoms and the same events.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

When you understand in the KJV, who it is, that is commanding the word "determine" in three places, in Daniel 9:24-27, then and only then will you understand which "he" is being spoken of in Daniel 9:27.
Your clue: John 5[39] Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

KJV Daniel 9[24] Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
[25] Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
[26] And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
[27] And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be
poured [out] upon** the desolate.
**Note: see Acts 10:45.

Questions: What six works of God, through the Messiah, were determined in verse 24?

Who are the recipients of them?

if I may, to find this we go to Daniels prayer, for which the answer of Gabriel was in response to.

Dan 9:
11 Yes, all Israel has transgressed Your law, and has departed so as not to obey Your voice; therefore the curse and the oath written in the Law of Moses the servant of God have been poured out on us, because we have sinned against Him. 12 And He has confirmed His words, which He spoke against us and against our judges who judged us, by bringing upon us a great disaster; for under the whole heaven such has never been done as what has been done to Jerusalem.

13 “As it is written in the Law of Moses, all this disaster has come upon us; yet we have not made our prayer before the Lord our God, that we might turn from our iniquities and understand Your truth. 14 Therefore the Lord has kept the disaster in mind, and brought it upon us; for the Lord our God is righteous in all the works which He does, though we have not obeyed His voice. 15 And now, O Lord our God, who brought Your people out of the land of Egypt with a mighty hand, and made Yourself a name, as it is this day—we have sinned, we have done wickedly!

16 “O Lord, according to all Your righteousness, I pray, let Your anger and Your fury be turned away from Your city Jerusalem, Your holy mountain; because for our sins, and for the iniquities of our fathers, Jerusalem and Your people are a reproach to all those around us. 17 Now therefore, our God, hear the prayer of Your servant, and his supplications, and for the Lord’s sake cause Your face to shine on Your sanctuary, which is desolate. 18 O my God, incline Your ear and hear; open Your eyes and see our desolations, and the city which is called by Your name; for we do not present our supplications before You because of our righteous deeds, but because of Your great mercies. 19 O Lord, hear! O Lord, forgive! O Lord, listen and act! Do not delay for Your own sake, my God, for Your city and Your people are called by Your name.”

 

[Davy]

Dan 2 still shows Nebuchadnezzar is the kingdom. In all instances, the kingdom is the leader.
revelation is a narrative. from the beginning to the end.

I don't see how that idea is supporting anything. Christ's Book of Revelation is not just a simple narrative, I don't know where you're getting that idea (from some preacher maybe?). It contains links to many events first written in the Old Testament prophets. That's one of the reasons it seems so different to many than the other New Testament Books, and that mainly because most don't study the Old Testament Books as much.

the woman with the 12 stars is the 12 children of Israel.

she gives birth to Christ

the beast is satan, Who attempts to prevent Jesus from doing what he came to do. yet he failed

the woman then goes to hiding where she is protected (this is yet future)

the rest is yet future.

From the rod of iron part Christ is to rule with in the future, that and forward is still future, I agree. Verses 1 thru 5 serve as a very condensed short summary of Bible history.

Daniel 7 is talking about that future in which satan himself will enter the antichrist, the son of perdition, as the final beast empire of the gentiles who rule over Jerusalem. He will be defeated by Christ.

if you put everything in perspective it fits.

I see more than that. I see Revelation 12:7-11 pointing directly to Satan and his angels coming to earth in person to reign in that future kingdom based at Jerusalem, and not through some flesh man. That is what is going to make the coming tribulation a time during this present world that has never been the likes before. The "son of perdition" title is actually a title for Satan himself, because only he and his angels have already been judged and sentenced to perish. Not even Judas, whom Jesus said was "a devil" and also called son of perdition, has been judged to perish in the lake of fire yet. God's GWT Judgment isn't until after... Christ's return, and after the end of the "thousand years" reign of Rev.20.

Dan 2, a basic understanding,

Dan 7 a deeper understanding with more detail.

Revelation then goes even deeper. each time giving us more bits of information about the same kingdoms and the same events.

Daniel 2 gives details about the very end also. It is a mistake to think that it's just a summary like Rev.12:1-5. It contains info that goes with Daniel 7 and with Revelation, just like the four Gospel Books each repeat events, yet each containing pieces of info different from each other. We are to take in the whole. And I strongly believe God made His Word this way, with pieces of the pie in different places, to see if we would read and study all of His Word.

 

[Timtofly]

Dan 9:26-27
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

The Prince is not the subject of the verb.

The people is the subject doing the verb destruction.

Of The Prince (to come) is the prepositional phrase describing who the people are. Since the Prince to come is Jesus Christ, it is His people who would and did allow the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.

"but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."

Jesus first came as Messiah, and He will come again as Prince. As Prince during the week of the 7th Trumpet, He will confirm the Atonement between God and all humanity. If all the redeemed have been accounted for, and the final harvest is complete, that is the end of the 70th week. The Millennium will start. The week will not be split, and no desolation will occur.

 

[Davy]

The Prince is not the subject of the verb.

The people is the subject doing the verb destruction.

Of The Prince (to come) is the prepositional phrase describing who the people are. Since the Prince to come is Jesus Christ, it is His people who would and did allow the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.

The idea is still there about "the prince" though, because he represents general Titus, his people would thus be represented by his Roman army.

And no, that is not about Jesus, because "Messiah the prince" is used to point to Jesus (Daniel 9:25). After we are told Messiah is 'cut off' in verse 26, He has nothing more to do with the next phrases that follow. So you should have posted that, but you chose to chop it off...

Dan 9:26
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
KJV

Only the blue part is about Jesus. The rest in green is about the Roman general Titus and his army destroying Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D. And the last phrase in brown is about the very end involving the final Antichrist. God is using "the prince" in green also to point to the final Antichrist.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

My poor Ronny, I did post why I believed that “lə·ḏōr wā·ḏō·wr” should be understood as "an age plus an age" which actually represents two ages, i.e. around 2,000+ years, which defines a finite period of time. But you quoted to me what you had been programmed with from your "respected teachers/lecturers." You quoted your head knowledge and simply stated that I was wrong because of how you had been programmed to think.

I accepted that you are as thick as two bricks and that it was pointless arguing with one so knowledgeable/gullible.

"lə·‘ō·w·lām" indicates a finite time period where we are not able to comprehend when the end of this time period will be. However, many English translations have turned "lə·‘ō·w·lām" into an infinite period of time with their English translations reading thus: - "from generation to generation" or "endures to all generations" which are infinite expressions. As such the context of the original Hebrew text is lost.

Because you did not want to accept what I had posted and continually demanded that I respond scripturally to justify myself, I chose not to respond but suggested that we let the unfolding prophecy as to when Israel repents and is gathered again by God to Himself, confirm as to who was right. That was not acceptable to you or your arrogance. It seems that your laughing matter is depleted to the point where you cannot understand a very different point of view. You like the safety of occupying the same space as many others who are just as wrong as you.

Now can you let it go and be patient for another 22 or so years for the unfolding prophecy to inform everybody as to who might actually be right. You might even be lucky enough to live long enough to actually see the confirmation as to when Israel is gathered once again to the Lord with the Judgement of the kings of the earth at Armageddon. My chances of actually seeing the Armageddon judgement of the kings of the earth is slim to say the least and is more unlikely because of my age at that time.

Well, you may have the last post as this will be my last. We disagree, but your sin of presumptuousness as to what my emotions are in my writing is base and demeaning to you. But to let you know my "programmers" as your ad-hominem alleges is native born Hebrew Speaker, that until He got saved was studying to be a patriarchal rebbe".

As He has no axe to grind or agenda to bear other than glorifying the Messiah, I take his word far over yours. Also three other native Hebrew speakers all say you are wrong. That is why I asked for you defense- YOu really suck at reading peoples emotions! I wll not repsond to you again.

 

[Timtofly]

The idea is still there about "the prince" though, because he represents general Titus, his people would thus be represented by his Roman army.

And no, that is not about Jesus, because "Messiah the prince" is used to point to Jesus (Daniel 9:25). After we are told Messiah is 'cut off' in verse 26, He has nothing more to do with the next phrases that follow. So you should have posted that, but you chose to chop it off...

Dan 9:26
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
KJV

Only the blue part is about Jesus. The rest in green is about the Roman general Titus and his army destroying Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D. And the last phrase in brown is about the very end involving the final Antichrist. God is using "the prince" in green also to point to the final Antichrist.

There is nothing in Daniel 9 about Rome, Romans, nor Roman Generals. You choose to insert private opinions into the text, where they do not belong. No Roman is the prince who died on the Cross as the Atonement Covenant.

I did not intentionally cut off anything. I did point out that Jesus is the Messiah, the Prince. He came the first time as Messiah. He will return as Prince of the earth, and take His rightful Throne in Jerusalem, after He, Jesus confirms the Atonement Covenant, which He, Jesus accomplished as Messiah.

Jesus has been cut off since 30AD. When the Second Coming happens, Christ will no longer be cut off, but will be the Prince. Especially the one who will come.

Jesus was cut of for the fulness of the Gentiles.

"And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:"

The reason why was never given by Gabriel. The colon ":" and the word "and" changed the subject. The reason was not just about "those people". The reason for the cut off was only explained in the NT as the fulness of the Gentiles and the setting aside of "those people" until the Prince returns.

History shows "those people" were "cut off" as well. Nor does what happened historically mean that Daniel 9:27 has been fulfilled. The implication that as Prince, Jesus Christ will confirm the Atonement Covenant at the Second Coming. Since the action of the prince is accomplished as one returning after being "cut off".

Those six things determined for Daniel's people does not obligate the text to include Romans nor Gentiles. Adding such opinions destroys the context. The Atonement of the Cross was the very thing that would accomplish those 6 things. All humanity is still waiting for the end of those 70 weeks.

 

[Earburner]

The idea is still there about "the prince" though, because he represents general Titus, his people would thus be represented by his Roman army.

And no, that is not about Jesus, because "Messiah the prince" is used to point to Jesus (Daniel 9:25). After we are told Messiah is 'cut off' in verse 26, He has nothing more to do with the next phrases that follow. So you should have posted that, but you chose to chop it off...

Dan 9:26
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
KJV

Only the blue part is about Jesus. The rest in green is about the Roman general Titus and his army destroying Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D. And the last phrase in brown is about the very end involving the final Antichrist. God is using "the prince" in green also to point to the final Antichrist.

Hi Davy,
I fully agree with your blue and green parts, but I don't agree with the brown part, and here is why:
1. In the Textus Receptus Greek text (TRG), the origin of the KJV Bible, one will never find the words "the" and "antichrist" put together anywhere.

However in the many newer translations, they all do manage to say or imply, that there is to come a singular man, they call "THE Antichrist". The reason for that is, the newer translations (including the JW-NWT), are from the Westcott & Hort Greek text (WHG). Both Greek texts, side by side, are worlds apart from each other for interpretations.

Now, referencing 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, the TRG is very clear on the KJV words "that Wicked". It is written in the TR Greek as "the wicked", which clearly allows the interpretation to be in the PLURAL, and not necessarily in the singular.
Now, since the context is in the plural, we are justified in reading it in the plural.

Also, to add insult to injury, the words: "that man of sin" also has the same problem. In the TRG, it is written: "the man of sin", which also allows it to be read in the plural, just as we do for the scripture: "the natural man".

Unfortunately, there really are those errors of translation in the KJV, but that doesn't justify full blown error by the newer translations of today, from a different Greek text. It most assuredly is NOT helping the misunderstanding, and is therefore is only compounding it.

So then, by making the necessary adjustments and justified corrections in the KJV, I firmly believe that there will never be a one man band, miracle man to come, called "The Antichrist".

Many of the churches are under misguidance, and it is primarily due to a complete misunderstanding of who the "little horn" was in Daniel, of whom shall never appear again.