Is The Book Of Daniel Wrong?

BibleScribe · Aug 5, 2011

... so if we assert that Darius is as Daniel 9:1 describes Darius being a Babylonian (Chaldean) King, and Daniel 11:1 shows this king in peril of his kingdom and life, (needed strengthening), then how is that that Chapter 6 apparently shows this last king of the Babylonian Empire as being Medo/Persian?

Clearly Daniel 6:15 cites this King Darius as obeying the law of the Medes and Persian. So where it might appear Darius is under the Medo/Persian empire, one should consider that Darius was of Median descent (Ref. Daniel 9:1). So where he was raised with certain social, moral, and legal obligations, it would seem that this Darius retained them throughout his life.

Secondly, where in Chapter 5 describes the Royal Feast which Belshazzar held during the siege of the city, it would seem probable that the nobles would have had great reservations regarding Belshazzar's leadership. Shouldn't he have been assembling a defense, summoning armies, sending messengers, and ensuring the survival of the empire? And lacking that initiative, would these nobles have struck down this son of Nabonidus, who had taken the armies to expand the kingdom? And having killed Belshazzar, would these same nobles have installed someone who might assuage the ambitions of Cyrus, -- a kinsman, a Mede?

But even having done all this, the Medo/Persian General Gobryas continued to divert the great Euphrates. And under Daniel's council, Darius opened the gates and the city fell. Thus:

Daniel 6:28
So this Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian.

BibleScribe

Templar81 · Aug 5, 2011

Daniel of the Old Testament and Daniel of the Septugent aren't the same and this is difficult for Catholics and Christians like myself who view the Apocrypha as canonical. So my Bible ahs 73 books.

BibleScribe · Aug 5, 2011

Hi Templar81,

I'm not sure if you've followed the history of ancient texts, but apparently some believe that there was an original text, which was translated into Greek as the "Septuagint", and then that original text was then lost to history. They then insist that the Jews used the Septuagint and re-translated that text back into Hebrew "Masoretic", which would make the Septuagint more authoritative than the Masoretic.

Fortunately the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, and both texts compared against that earliest record. And when analyzed, the researchers discovered that the Masoretic text is nearly identical to the Dead Sea Scrolls:

The Dead Sea Scrolls and Biblical Integrity
By Garry K. Brantley, M.A., M.DIV.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=357http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=357

The texts from Qumran proved to be word-for-word identical to our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The 5 percent of variation consisted primarily of obvious slips of the pen and spelling alterations (Archer, 1974, p. 25).

As such one should find significant confidence in the clear example of Daniel 9:24, where the Masoretic text provides to increments of seven and a second increment of sixty-two. However, the Septuagint combines these two increments as one value of ~seven and sixty-two~, which Newton correctly observed as a numbering used by no nation which does "violence" to Scripture.

However, the issue is whether Scripture defines this Darius the Mede as a Babylonian (Chaldean) King, or as a Medo/Persian King. And not only does Scripture provide a Babylonian premise, but History would appear to substantiate it. For where the city was surrounded, the Babylonian records were not shared with the world's libraries. And when the Medo/Persians entered the city, one of their agendas would be to destroy all thing Babylonian and establish all things Medo/Persian. Thus any records pertaining to this last Babylonian King were destroyed. However, it is equally important to appreciate that these early Medo/Persian records are complete. And there is no record of this Darius either as a reference to Gobryas, or to any other Medo/Persian authority.

And so we should find this account by Daniel absolutely correct in the chronology of Daniel 6:28, So this Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian.

BibleScribe

BibleScribe · Aug 8, 2011

To All,

Please allow the continued assessment of the 11th Chapter prophecy:

Daniel 11:1[sup]
1[/sup]"And as for me, in the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up to confirm and strengthen him.

Again in Daniel 11:1, Darius is the last Babylonian King, and the Medo/Persians have laid siege to the city and are working to divert the water supply (the river Euphrates). So although this Darius sees the eminent threat to his own future, he is strengthened.

Daniel 11;2
[sup]2[/sup]"And now I will show you the truth. Behold, three more kings shall arise in Persia, and a fourth shall be far richer than all of them. And when he has become strong through his riches, he shall stir up all against the kingdom of Greece.

In this continuing empire sequence, the first of three more which shall arise in Perisa, was the Medo/Persian under Cyrus the Great. The second of three which shall arise in Persia was the Grecian, who conquered the Medo/Persians. And of course the third which shall arise in Persia was the Roman, who exercised dominion over Persia.

However the fourth empire did NOT arise in Persia. This empire also apparently took some significant number of years to mature to existence. And knowing the Daniel 2:45 FIVE world empire sequence, we can verify those entities:

The one that is under Darius, -- Gold, Babylonian
The first of three, -- Siilver, Medo/Persian
The second of three, -- Bronze, Grecian
The third of three, -- Iron, Roman

The fourth, -- Clay, "divided"

Of course we know that the Roman Empire dissolved ~425-625 AD, and it took some ~1,400 years to ~1900s (... and when he has become strong ... ) to stir up all against "all the earth" (Ref. Post#14), which was fulfilled as WWI.

... and then verse 3-4 describes WWII:

Daniel 11:3-4
[sup]3[/sup]Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion and do as he wills. [sup]4[/sup]And as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken and divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not to his posterity, nor according to the authority with which he ruled, for his kingdom shall be plucked up and go to others besides these.

Is this not simple world history?

BibleScribe

revturmoil · Aug 8, 2011

BibleScribe said:
To All,

Please allow the continued assessment of the 11th Chapter prophecy:

Daniel 11:1[sup]
1[/sup]"And as for me, in the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up to confirm and strengthen him.

Again in Daniel 11:1, Darius is the last Babylonian King, and the Medo/Persians have laid siege to the city and are working to divert the water supply (the river Euphrates). So although this Darius sees the eminent threat to his own future, he is strengthened.

Daniel 11;2
[sup]2[/sup]"And now I will show you the truth. Behold, three more kings shall arise in Persia, and a fourth shall be far richer than all of them. And when he has become strong through his riches, he shall stir up all against the kingdom of Greece.

In this continuing empire sequence, the first of three more which shall arise in Perisa, was the Medo/Persian under Cyrus the Great. The second of three which shall arise in Persia was the Grecian, who conquered the Medo/Persians. And of course the third which shall arise in Persia was the Roman, who exercised dominion over Persia.

However the fourth empire did NOT arise in Persia. This empire also apparently took some significant number of years to mature to existence. And knowing the Daniel 2:45 FIVE world empire sequence, we can verify those entities:

The one that is under Darius, -- Gold, Babylonian
The first of three, -- Siilver, Medo/Persian
The second of three, -- Bronze, Grecian
The third of three, -- Iron, Roman

The fourth, -- Clay, "divided"

Of course we know that the Roman Empire dissolved ~425-625 AD, and it took some ~1,400 years to ~1900s (... and when he has become strong ... ) to stir up all against "all the earth" (Ref. Post#14), which was fulfilled as WWI.

... and then verse 3-4 describes WWII:

Daniel 11:3-4
[sup]3[/sup]Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion and do as he wills. [sup]4[/sup]And as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken and divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not to his posterity, nor according to the authority with which he ruled, for his kingdom shall be plucked up and go to others besides these.

Is this not simple world history?

BibleScribe

My guess is that you've been rolllng them either too fat or too thin.

I have to wonder how you come up with this stuff. Daniel 11:3-4 is talking about Alexander the Great and his splintered kingdom.

You talk big but are a dud.

That's a round that doesn't go off! OR...

dud/dəd/Noun1. A thing that fails to work properly or is otherwise unsatisfactory or worthless.2. An ineffectual person.

Daniel 11:2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.

"The realm of Grecia" did not extend into Europe/Germany!

revturmoil · Aug 8, 2011

BS said,

Again in Daniel
11:1, Darius is the last Babylonian King, and the Medo/Persians have
laid siege to the city and are working to divert the water supply (the river
Euphrates). So although this Darius sees the eminent threat to his own future,
he is strengthened.

That's incorrect. According to the book of Daniel Belshazzar was the last king of Babylon!

Daniel 5:30 ¶In that night was Belshazzar the king of the Chaldeans slain.
31 And Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about threescore and two years old.

Does the scriptural evidence matter to the Scribbler?

BibleScribe · Aug 8, 2011

kaoticprofit said:
...
Does the scriptural evidence matter to the Scribbler?

To All,

Please allow me to re-post what I provided in another Topic:

Please consider Matthew 7:15-19

[sup]15[/sup] “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. [sup]16[/sup] By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? [sup]17[/sup] Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. [sup]18[/sup] A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. [sup]19[/sup] Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. [sup]20[/sup] Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

BibleScribe

BibleScribe · Aug 9, 2011

To All,

Scripture says to be instant with a response, in season and out of season. And where some might have noted the challenge from Post #26 (along with slander), I indeed have provided such a defense in Post #21, (along with a response to the slander in Post #27).

Thus all thing are done decently and in order. (Ref. 1Cor. 14:40)

BibleScribe

Guestman · Aug 10, 2011

BibleScribe said:
To All,

Please be MOST AWARE that I find Scripture to be PERFECT. Thus if there is appears to be a disconnect between different passages and/or fulfillments, it is not the AUTHOR who needs "help", -- it's us!

So now I provide the dictionary definition of "until", and the following "suspect" passages:

un·til
–conjunction 1. up to the time that or when; till: He read until his guests arrived. 2. before (usually used in negative constructions): They did not come until the meeting was half over.
http://dictionary.re...om/browse/until

Daniel 1:21 (NKJV)
[sup]21[/sup] Thus Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.

Daniel 10:1 (NKJV)
[sup]1[/sup] In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a message was revealed to Daniel, ...

Using the dictionary definition as provided, it is safe to presume that Daniel DIED in the first year of King Cyrus. So what is the Biblically correct and logically defensible solution to 10:1? Or do those who seek to defame Christianity have a cause against the Bible?

If anyone chooses to respond, PLEASE to not attempt to re-define the meaning of "until" to suggest some added years. The dictionary is fine as it is! :lol:

BibleScribe

At Daniel 1, the young man Daniel (possibly a teenager), along with his three Hebrew companions, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, were brought to Babylon in 617 B.C.E. by king Nebuchadnezzar. King Nebuchadnezzar was determined to "teach them the writing and the tongue of the Chaldeans."(Dan 1:4) Furthermore, he wanted them to learn and practice the religion of the Babylonians, even giving them Babylonian names, such as Daniel being called Belteshazzar (after the Babylonian god Bel, Dan 1:7). Daniel (nor his three Hebrew companions) gave into Nebuchadnezzar's desire of changing them to the false Babylonish worship, of which the chief god was Marduk.

Daniel kept his integrity through the entire time period of the Babylonian world power, from his being taken to Babylon in 617 B.C.E. until Babylon's overthrow on the night of October 5/6, 539 B.C.E. Daniel thus maintained his loyalty to his God, Jehovah under Babylonian rule, for Daniel 1:21 says that "Daniel continued on until the first year of Cyrus the king." At that time, he did not die but was now under Medo-Persian rule, though perhaps at this time he was 100 years old, for Daniel 10:1 says that "in the third year of Cyrus the king of Persia there was a matter revealed to Daniel, whose name was called Bel·te·shaz´zar; and the matter was true."

Hence, down till the year 536 B.C.E.(or Cyrus third year ruling over Babylon), Daniel was still being used by the true God, Jehovah, to further write down more, concerning the "king of the north and king of the south" that is at Daniel 11. Most likely not long after writing the final inspired words, he died. However, before his death, the angel told Daniel: "And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of [the] end. Many will rove about, and the [true] knowledge will become abundant.”(Dan 12:4) Furthermore, the angel told him: "And as for you yourself, go toward the end; and you will rest ( or wait in the grave until God's appointed time to resurrect him during Jesus thousand year reign, Rev 20:13), but you will stand up for your lot at the end of the days.”(Dan 12:13)

BibleScribe · Aug 10, 2011

Guestman said:
... Daniel 10:1 says that "in the third year of Cyrus the king of Persia there was a matter revealed to Daniel, whose name was called Bel·te·shaz´zar; and the matter was true."

Hence, down till the year 536 B.C.E.(or Cyrus third year ruling over Babylon), Daniel was still being used...

Hi Guestman,

One of the rules in my opening post was that we use the terms as defined by the dictionary. And so long as the word "until" means what the dictionary says, then Daniel ceased to continue at some point in the first year of King Cyrus.

However, if you wish to redefine the word "until", then please contact all the dictionary publishers in the world, and advise them of your revision.

http://en.wikipedia....of_Bill_Clinton
... at the time he was questioned, Clinton said, "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the—if he—if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement".

But thanks for playing!

BibleScribe

BibleScribe · Aug 12, 2011

To All,

Daniel 1:21 (NKJV)
[sup]21[/sup] Thus Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.

Per the dictionary premise, please answer the following multiple choice questions:

1. The couple danced until dawn.
a. They quit dancing at midnight
b. They quit dancing at day break
c. They quit dancing at noon

2. Get off exit 286 and drive approx. 2 miles south until you see the Pizza Hut. We'll meet there.
a. They met three business before Pizza Hut
b. They met at Pizza Hut
c. They met three business after Pizza Hut

3. Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.
a. He worked until three years before King Cyrus.
b. He worked until the first year of King Cyrus.
c. He worked until the third year of King Cyrus.

Answers Below:

Answers: "b" is the correct response for ALL questions.

I hope you all scored 100%. But for those who gave answers other than "b", please find a dictionary.

BibleScribe

BibleScribe · Aug 15, 2011

BibleScribe said:
... and then verse 3-4 describes WWII:

Daniel 11:3-4
[sup]3[/sup]Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion and do as he wills. [sup]4[/sup]And as soon as he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken and divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not to his posterity, nor according to the authority with which he ruled, for his kingdom shall be plucked up and go to others besides these.

Is this not simple world history?

To All,

Many Christians are perplexed that Scripture is incomplete. Certainly if THEY were dictating significant world events to the prophet, THEY'D certainly include some reference to World War II and the Holocaust. But being convinced that there is no such provision, they think that maybe GOD was a little to distant in the affairs of men.

However, I would argue that GOD is intimately involved. And where some find Scripture incomplete, I would argue that they simply need to discover that provision. For it's not only present, it's held in full context with other world events, such that only a blind man could miss that foretelling.

Take for example the WWII event cited above. It's bracketed between WWI, and the post WWII United States global influence including the Marshal Plan. And to further expand that context, we should expect (and find) the Cold War, Korean War, Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam War, Vietnam War Protesters, Operation Phoenix, the Tet Offensive, etc., etc., etc.

And of course, regarding the Holocaust, the Prophetic Psalms provides those sad details for the year of 1944, and the years leading up to that murderous circumstance. But not to leave those portents bracketed, we should expect (and find) the acknowledgment of those who opened the concentration camp gates and also effected the annihilation of two Japanese cities.

But what avail is Scripture unless someone find those pearls.

BibleScribe

BibleScribe · Aug 16, 2011

To All,

Please allow the continued presentation of Daniel, Chapter 11.

Daniel 11:5
[sup]5[/sup]"Then the king of the south shall be strong, but one of his princes shall be stronger than he and shall rule, and his authority shall be a great authority.

Subsequent to WWI, the U.S. could have participated in international affairs, but she reverted to isolationism. Then upon the eve of WWII, she was drawn into assisting first England, and then war with both Japan and Germany. This nation had tremendous raw material resources and the manufacturing capacity to not only fight two wars, but to gain in strength in the process. But where the U.S. became stronger, England had to divest itself of colonies and promise long term military base leases on it's own soil to this ~strong prince~ United States.

But history tells us that the U.S. was not the only prince of the U.K. Others would certainly include Australia and Canada, and such colonies as India, South Africa, Hong Kong, etc. But there is no doubt that the premier mantle of majesty now rested upon the arisen United States of America.

BibleScribe

FHII · Aug 17, 2011

BibleScribe said:
To All,

Please be MOST AWARE that I find Scripture to be PERFECT. Thus if there is appears to be a disconnect between different passages and/or fulfillments, it is not the AUTHOR who needs "help", -- it's us!

BibleScribe

One thing I find interesting and refreshing about this thread is the above attitude towards a "contradiction". Biblescribe didn't immediately blame the Bible! He blamed himself, then asked for solutions and even worked through it himself. He may have already came up with the answer before he wrote the post (perhaps it was his intention to share his thoughts all along and compare them to see if they work with other possibilities). But it's good to see someone not blame the Bible, yet question his own understanding. I am fully persuaded that for every so called "contradiction" or error, there's an answer in the Bible. I wish more would take to this practice.

veteran · Aug 17, 2011

BibleScribe said:
To All,

Daniel 1:21 (NKJV)
[sup]21[/sup] Thus Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.

Per the dictionary premise, please answer the following multiple choice questions:

1. The couple danced until dawn.
a. They quit dancing at midnight
b. They quit dancing at day break
c. They quit dancing at noon

2. Get off exit 286 and drive approx. 2 miles south until you see the Pizza Hut. We'll meet there.
a. They met three business before Pizza Hut
b. They met at Pizza Hut
c. They met three business after Pizza Hut

3. Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.
a. He worked until three years before King Cyrus.
b. He worked until the first year of King Cyrus.
c. He worked until the third year of King Cyrus.

Answers Below:

Answers: "b" is the correct response for ALL questions.

I hope you all scored 100%. But for those who gave answers other than "b", please find a dictionary.

BibleScribe

Dan 1:21
21 And Daniel continued even unto the first year of king Cyrus.
(KJV)

Dan 10:1
1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.
(KJV)

Daniel made it to the 3rd year of king Cyrus, so we well know he wasn't dead then.

veteran · Aug 17, 2011

BibleScribe said:
To All,

Many Christians are perplexed that Scripture is incomplete. Certainly if THEY were dictating significant world events to the prophet, THEY'D certainly include some reference to World War II and the Holocaust. But being convinced that there is no such provision, they think that maybe GOD was a little to distant in the affairs of men.

However, I would argue that GOD is intimately involved. And where some find Scripture incomplete, I would argue that they simply need to discover that provision. For it's not only present, it's held in full context with other world events, such that only a blind man could miss that foretelling.

Take for example the WWII event cited above. It's bracketed between WWI, and the post WWII United States global influence including the Marshal Plan. And to further expand that context, we should expect (and find) the Cold War, Korean War, Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam War, Vietnam War Protesters, Operation Phoenix, the Tet Offensive, etc., etc., etc.

And of course, regarding the Holocaust, the Prophetic Psalms provides those sad details for the year of 1944, and the years leading up to that murderous circumstance. But not to leave those portents bracketed, we should expect (and find) the acknowledgment of those who opened the concentration camp gates and also effected the annihilation of two Japanese cities.

But what avail is Scripture unless someone find those pearls.

BibleScribe

There indeed is a 'blueprint' pattern in Dan.11 with the example of the king of the north and king of the south. The pattern began with Grecia...

Dan 11:2-4
2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.
3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.
(KJV)

If we follow the flow of verse 2 into verse 3, it's still about that 4th king of Persia.That 4th king of Persia had to have existed during the time when the Persians came upon Greece and ultimately failed to conquer it. That was a long... time away from WWII.

So I don't know what numerology you've been playing with, Bible codes junk or Hebrew Gematria or something. You'd have a hard time proving those Dan.11 verses are about WWI and WWII, etc.

7angels · Aug 17, 2011

sorry for the late response but in answer to you question daniel was still alive at the time of the 3rd reign of cyprus. it is just that the no longer held the position he once held. that position was given up during the reign the first reign of cyprus.

biblescribe says
Then we also know the figurative interpretation of "Greece" (Ref. Post #14) which is assigned the significance of "all the earth", and represents World War I. Equally, per Post #17 we should know that WWII is the next historical event which the angel identified.
i don't know if i agree with you on this point. i am rusty on my prophesy interpretations but this does not sound right. i need to do more research though to prove who is right.

biblescribe says
I'm not sure if you've followed the history of ancient texts, but apparently some believe that there was an original text, which was translated into Greek as the "Septuagint", and then that original text was then lost to history. They then insist that the Jews used the Septuagint and re-translated that text back into Hebrew "Masoretic", which would make the Septuagint more authoritative than the Masoretic.
Fortunately the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, and both texts compared against that earliest record. And when analyzed, the researchers discovered that the Masoretic text is nearly identical to the Dead Sea Scrolls:

this is exactly right which is why we need to have the Holy Spirit guide us while we study. most bibles with the exception of the king james and a few others are translated from the Septuagint. and since we no longer have the original bible but a copy of the original we cannot even go back and check the true meanings against the original.

BibleScribe · Aug 17, 2011

7angels said:
sorry for the late response but in answer to you question daniel was still alive at the time of the 3rd reign of cyprus. it is just that the no longer held the position he once held. that position was given up during the reign the first reign of cyprus.

biblescribe says
Then we also know the figurative interpretation of "Greece" (Ref. Post #14) which is assigned the significance of "all the earth", and represents World War I. Equally, per Post #17 we should know that WWII is the next historical event which the angel identified.
i don't know if i agree with you on this point. i am rusty on my prophesy interpretations but this does not sound right. i need to do more research though to prove who is right.

biblescribe says
I'm not sure if you've followed the history of ancient texts, but apparently some believe that there was an original text, which was translated into Greek as the "Septuagint", and then that original text was then lost to history. They then insist that the Jews used the Septuagint and re-translated that text back into Hebrew "Masoretic", which would make the Septuagint more authoritative than the Masoretic.
Fortunately the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, and both texts compared against that earliest record. And when analyzed, the researchers discovered that the Masoretic text is nearly identical to the Dead Sea Scrolls:

this is exactly right which is why we need to have the Holy Spirit guide us while we study. most bibles with the exception of the king james and a few others are translated from the Septuagint. and since we no longer have the original bible but a copy of the original we cannot even go back and check the true meanings against the original.

Hi 7angels,

Re: Daniel 1:21 vs Daniel 10:1
If Daniel was still operating in the third year of Cyus, (as opposed to the Daniel 1:21 "continued until the first year of King Cyrus") then Scripture would have attested to your supposition. However, Scripture contradicts your testimony, -- and sorry to say, but I believe Scripture.

However as provided in Post #8, this simple aspect is not some idle dispute, but rather a contribution to understanding the fullness of Daniel's prophecies.

Re: Daniel 2:39
Let me know what you arrive at!

Re: Septuagint vs Masoretic
It's important to recognize that the Dead Sea Scrolls provide validation and verification that the Masoretic script is accurate, and the Septuagint is NOT. But then again, our own confidence in GOD should expect that the Jews are given the responsibility of presenting GOD's Word throughout the ages, and they shall be able to preserve it. (Ref. Romans 14:4, ... for the Lord is able to make them stand.)

BibleScribe

veteran said:
There indeed is a 'blueprint' pattern in Dan.11 with the example of the king of the north and king of the south. The pattern began with Grecia...

Dan 11:2-4
2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.
3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.
4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.
(KJV)

If we follow the flow of verse 2 into verse 3, it's still about that 4th king of Persia.That 4th king of Persia had to have existed during the time when the Persians came upon Greece and ultimately failed to conquer it. That was a long... time away from WWII.
...

Hi Veteran,

If you're going to defend a doctrine which defies Daniel 12:4 & Daniel 12:9, then maybe you should start at the beginning, -- Daniel 11:1, and identify exactly who Darius the Mede is. But to jump into a succession of THIRTEEN Persian Kings (Ref. Post # 18) and simply assert that Daniel identified FOUR, defies Prophecy, History, and intelligence.

And the good thing about GOD is that HE is Intelligent, and we are created in HIS image. Thus you should have some intelligence, shouldn't you?

BibleScribe

BibleScribe · Aug 18, 2011

BibleScribe said:
To All,

Please allow the continued presentation of Daniel, Chapter 11.

Daniel 11:5
[sup]5[/sup]"Then the king of the south shall be strong, but one of his princes shall be stronger than he and shall rule, and his authority shall be a great authority.

Subsequent to WWI, the U.S. could have participated in international affairs, but she reverted to isolationism. Then upon the eve of WWII, she was drawn into assisting first England, and then war with both Japan and Germany. This nation had tremendous raw material resources and the manufacturing capacity to not only fight two wars, but to gain in strength in the process. But where the U.S. became stronger, England had to divest itself of colonies and promise long term military base leases on it's own soil to this ~strong prince~ United States.

But history tells us that the U.S. was not the only prince of the U.K. Others would certainly include Australia and Canada, and such colonies as India, South Africa, Hong Kong, etc. But there is no doubt that the premier mantle of majesty now rested upon the arisen United States of America.

BibleScribe

To All,

Please allow the continuation as follows:

Daniel 11:6
[sup]6[/sup]After some years they shall make an alliance, and the daughter of the king of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement. But she shall not retain the strength of her arm, and he and his arm shall not endure, but she shall be given up, and her attendants, he who fathered her, and he who supported her in those times.

The "daughter" Perspective
Please be aware that the book of Daniel cites the feminine gender in three instances: verses 6, 17, and 37. These must be understood in context with how "help-mates" perform roles in a State. Specifically, one should appreciate that where there is a Head of State, there are typically multiple agencies which contribute to an efficient and effective operation which may includes such agencies as the State Department, Military, Intelligence, Commerce, etc. As such, one should perceive these respective roles as performed accordingly, -- with the State Department in this verse 6 role, and yet others in the remaining verses.

Fulfillment
Two historical East/West circumstances presented themselves at the end of World War II. The first was the combined military push against Germany. On March 28, 1945, Eisenhower issued a “baffling” message which directed the Western allied forces to refocus their efforts away from Berlin and toward southern Germany. He also ordered the immediate (“either voluntarily or on request”[1]) concession of conquered German territory in accordance to the prearranged borders per the Yalta agreement. The implication of these decisions was to reign in the projection of allied forces in deference to the Soviet army, [2] -- “shall come to the king of the north to make peace”.

The second set of circumstance came in the form of post WWII alliances, pacts, and maneuverings which whirled through the departments of State of the world’s nations. One in particular, the Marshall Plan of 1945, designed “to place Europe on its feet economically, was deliberately presented as an offering to all European nations, whether Communist or not.”[3] The effect of this offer of assistance was perceived both as a helping hand, and as a suspicious expansionist move into the internal affairs of any participating nation. The result was that the Soviets walked out on the Paris talks. The Soviets then coerced Poland and Czechoslovakia into not applying for assistance.

It’s this last set of circumstances which Daniel is depicting in this description of the “daughter of the king of the south” and the subsequent dissolution of the attempts to make peace. This is the political climate known as the Cold War.

Initially this Cold War included suspicions from both sides resulting in Cominform and NATO, but hit full stride by 1950 when the Soviets connived a massive North Korean attack on South Korea. Events during the Cold War nearly brought the two powers to nuclear war, and was finally acknowledged as over in 1989, with the fall of the Berlin Wall.

[1] Kennedy, Paul, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, Random House, NY, 1987, p. 471

[2] IBID, pp. 467-472

[3] IBID, p. 376

BibleScribe

BibleScribe · Aug 19, 2011

BibleScribe said:
To All,

Please allow the continuation as follows:

Daniel 11:6
[sup]6[/sup]After some years they shall make an alliance, and the daughter of the king of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement. But she shall not retain the strength of her arm, and he and his arm shall not endure, but she shall be given up, and her attendants, he who fathered her, and he who supported her in those times.

...

To All,

Please forgive me for failing to provide the introduction to this "king of the north", and the assessment of how the south/north international designations are assigned:

KING OF THE SOUTH & KING OF THE NORTH -- A Discourse

DANIEL 11:5 “Then the king of the south shall be strong, but one of his princes shall be stronger than he and his dominion.”

This is the first of many citations referring to the “king of the south,” as opposed to Daniel’s later citations of a “king of the north.” In interpreting the significance of these two kings, I present the weight of comprehending Daniel’s target audience. Some might argue that “south” and “north” is with respect to Israel; yet others might interpret this as with respect to the equator. But I propose that Daniel’s discourse ‘to the nations’ is neither. There is nothing in this or any other context in the book of Daniel which makes it necessary to restrict the interpretation to these two scenarios. It is clearly arguable that one nation is simply further south, and the other is simply further north with respect to each other.

Given this context, these two nations prove to be the same two premier powerhouses that just came out of World War II -- the United States and the Soviet Union. We will find that these two nations also provide the central focus for the bulk of Daniel’s prophetic eleventh chapter. The historical and prophetic sequence of events culminate to the great apocalyptic climax at the end of the chapter.

BibleScribe

Is The Book Of Daniel Wrong?

Member

New Member

Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Member

Active Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads