Prophecy Fulfilment in Revelation; relative to the Old Testament Prophecies.

Floyd · Jun 2, 2014

DaDad said:
Hi Floyd,

I would argue that translations are inherently flawed because they are not the original text.

Take for example the Daniel 9 "seventy weeks", which most commentators assign as 7x70 = 490 years. The literal "weeks" text is NOT the concise Feminine text* (i.e., sheba) which would support the 7x70, but the INCONCISE Masculine text (shibiym) which CANNOT be 7x70. -- This would be analogous to grabbing a hat, coat, and gloves before going for a ride in a "cool" car. Who would make that mistake except an English novice.

Secondly, most translations contrive the seven and the sixty-two as though the author intended a duration of sixty-nine. However, Newton said this does "violence" to Scripture, -- and the RSV CORRECTLY presents the TRUE conveyance:

Dan. 9 (RSV)
25 Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time. 26 And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off,

Thus one should anticipate an anointed one after the seven, and a SECOND anointed one after the sixty-two.

But where one should be cognizant of these errors, one should equally follow the simple text:

Dan. 2
41 And as you saw the feet and toes partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom
45 ... the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver and the gold ... = 4,3,5,2,1 = FIVE

For if we can't grasp the simple, the difficult will be much more elusive.

* Per Edward Young, in agreement with Keit and Kliefoth, as cited in John Walvoord's "Daniel The Key To Prophetic Revelation".

With Best Regards,
DD

Thank you for that learned comment DD.
Floyd.

DaDad · Jun 2, 2014

Hi Floyd,

So if we follow the simple sequence given in this Chapter 2, we should arrive at:

1. Gold, Babylon
2. Silver, Medo/Persian
3. Bronze, Grecian
4. Iron, Roma
5. Clay, "divided"
6. Stone, Millennial
7. Heaven, Eternity

But these ARE NOT the seven heads / seven diadems, or the ten horns / ten diadems in Rev. 12 & Rev. 13 respectively.

To resolve each of these, one must delve into Chapter 7.

With Best Regards,
DD

Floyd · Jun 3, 2014

DaDad said:
Hi Floyd,

So if we follow the simple sequence given in this Chapter 2, we should arrive at:

1. Gold, Babylon
2. Silver, Medo/Persian
3. Bronze, Grecian
4. Iron, Roma
5. Clay, "divided"
6. Stone, Millennial
7. Heaven, Eternity

But these ARE NOT the seven heads / seven diadems, or the ten horns / ten diadems in Rev. 12 & Rev. 13 respectively.

To resolve each of these, one must delve into Chapter 7.

With Best Regards,
DD

I am about to order the ref. book you quoted above (John Walvoord's), and shall today be re-reading Dan.7, in prep. for our next comparison.
Regards Floyd.

DaDad · Jun 3, 2014

Hi Floyd,

Floyd said:
I am about to order the ref. book you quoted above (John Walvoord's), and shall today be re-reading Dan.7, in prep. for our next comparison.
Regards Floyd.

As you read Walvoord's book, please be aware that the VALUE is his citations of the various scholars. Walvoord himself apparently falls into the trap of feeling compelled to have an explanation when he has none. Thus he can only choose from the BEST False interpretation, rather than the CORRECT interpretation. -- Toward this, please be aware that the most insight comes in his study of Chapter 9, where Montgomery, Young, Kiet, Kliefoth, Mauro (who comes the closest, but still missed the mark), Scallinger, Newton, and the "great Catholic chronographers" cite the difficulties of this Chapter. And yet, where the problems are virtually insurmountable, Walvoord arrives to his (and in my mind, -- his alone) "correct" solution.

But Walvoord's book is not comprehensive, as it fails to perceive both in his evaluation and in his citations (among others), the significance of Daniel 1:21, for which Calvin* observes that Daniel was "broken", (haiah). And where Jesus was "broken" for us, (meaning death), so too Daniel died in the First year of King Cyrus. And unfortunately, where Calvin saw the significance of this passage, he like many other students of Scripture, discounted one verse (Dan. 1:21) in deference for another verse (Dan. 10:1), when the CORRECT solution would be to resolve BOTH to a mutual satisfaction.

And so, if where you are apparently unable to resolve verses 41 & 45 with the rest of Chapter, you might be interested in attempting 1:21 with 10:1. It's a simple solution, much like: What has four tires and files, -- a garbage truck. So give it a try.

* http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/calvin/cc24/cc24006.htm
-- Don't you LOVE the claim that the "expositors are puzzled"? Such a simple solution, and THEY CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT! --

With Best Regards,
DD

Floyd · Jun 3, 2014

DaDad said:
Hi Floyd,

As you read Walvoord's book, please be aware that the VALUE is his citations of the various scholars. Walvoord himself apparently falls into the trap of feeling compelled to have an explanation when he has none. Thus he can only choose from the BEST False interpretation, rather than the CORRECT interpretation. -- Toward this, please be aware that the most insight comes in his study of Chapter 9, where Montgomery, Young, Kiet, Kliefoth, Mauro (who comes the closest, but still missed the mark), Scallinger, Newton, and the "great Catholic chronographers" cite the difficulties of this Chapter. And yet, where the problems are virtually insurmountable, Walvoord arrives to his (and in my mind, -- his alone) "correct" solution.

But Walvoord's book is not comprehensive, as it fails to perceive both in his evaluation and in his citations (among others), the significance of Daniel 1:21, for which Calvin* observes that Daniel was "broken", (haiah). And where Jesus was "broken" for us, (meaning death), so too Daniel died in the First year of King Cyrus. And unfortunately, where Calvin saw the significance of this passage, he like many other students of Scripture, discounted one verse (Dan. 1:21) in deference for another verse (Dan. 10:1), when the CORRECT solution would be to resolve BOTH to a mutual satisfaction.

And so, if where you are apparently unable to resolve verses 41 & 45 with the rest of Chapter, you might be interested in attempting 1:21 with 10:1. It's a simple solution, much like: What has four tires and files, -- a garbage truck. So give it a try.

* http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/calvin/cc24/cc24006.htm
-- Don't you LOVE the claim that the "expositors are puzzled"? Such a simple solution, and THEY CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT! --

With Best Regards,
DD

OK; thanks for the puzzle DD.
Floyd.

DaDad · Jun 8, 2014

Hi Floyd,

DaDad said:
And so, if where you are apparently unable to resolve verses 41 & 45 with the rest of Chapter, you might be interested in attempting 1:21 with 10:1. It's a simple solution, much like: What has four tires and files, -- a garbage truck. So give it a try.

* http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/calvin/cc24/cc24006.htm
-- Don't you LOVE the claim that the "expositors are puzzled"? Such a simple solution, and THEY CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT! --

Floyd said:
OK; thanks for the puzzle DD.
Floyd.

Did you solve them yet?

With Best Regards,
DD

PS The solution to Dan. 2:41 & 45 first puzzle, is that there are FIVE world empires, for which the FIFTH is "divided" as evidenced by today's 3-superpowers.
The second puzzle is still waiting your solution.

Floyd · Jun 8, 2014

DaDad said:
Hi Floyd,

Did you solve them yet?

With Best Regards,
DD

PS The solution to Dan. 2:41 & 45 first puzzle, is that there are FIVE world empires, for which the FIFTH is "divided" as evidenced by today's 3-superpowers.
The second puzzle is still waiting your solution.

I am not going to comment on any of your interpretations, until I have read JWs book on Daniel.
Also; as you know, although there must be interaction between Israel and world powers; I don't as yet have any idea how that will be looking in the near future.
As I said to you before, I am convinced at present that the "prophetic area" (covered by the Dan.2 image) is important to understanding all prophecy relative to future event in that theatre.
I have been following your comments to Marcus O'Reillius re. his considerable work on this subject.
I don't understand why you seem to be so critical of his view, to which he has clearly put in much effort?
I think you will probably need to post your own work in rebuttal , to allow open comparison.
Floyd.

DaDad · Jun 8, 2014

Hi Floyd,

Floyd said:
I am not going to comment on any of your interpretations, until I have read JWs book on Daniel.

Please do not answer ANYONE on ANY SUBJECT, until you read Walvoord's book, and then Church's book, then Newton's book, and then Calvin's book, and then, and then, and then.

Floyd, if you can't take a clue and arrive to the TRUTH, then the Holy Spirit is not within you. Please ask GOD to reveal TRUTHs, -- not men.

So now, what is the solution to 1:21 where Daniel DIED in the First year of Cyrus, -- but was in the third year of Cyrus?!? (I.e., What has four tires and flies? A garbage truck.)

With Best Regards,
DD

RANDOR · Jun 8, 2014

Hey Floyd.............pssssssssssssssssssssssssssst............I know you know this...................but.......you need not to read any book.

I'm countin to 10 and you better get your ass up...1...2...3....4...5...6...7...8 HALLELUJAH

DaDad · Jun 8, 2014

Hey RANDOR,

RANDOR said:
.....you need not to read any book.

Good call. -- Now can you help Floyd answer the "puzzle"?

With Best Regards,
DD

RANDOR · Jun 8, 2014

What did I get myself into here................all I know it pertains to some book or books?

I don't know if this has anything to do with you guys conversation.........but here is my take on books......present..........and very past.
Actually...........this is also my take on scholars

I give no credence whats so ever to any man/woman/child who has written a book about God.....unless my spirit jumps for joy at their testimony first.

Man can write and write and write and write about God.......but have they met Him......and if by chance they write a book about the God I know personally then it is worth the read.

Same with scholars...........I've seen many on TV........ lets say...........telling me of their take on God, the bible, Jesus, The Holy Spirit.....and by gosh..........it isn't 20 minutes.............and I can tell they have never met Christ.

SAD they would rather study a God which does not want to be studied.............But Known.............Personally.

So................the books I do read........in which I just completed a book which came out in February.....

I can't wait to get a book on people who have met Christ......in their bathroom....church........laying in the gutter.....especially popular people......

Their testimonies.............how Jesus came to them and forgave them of their sins. Especially atheists....now that's fun to watch.
But all are popular to Christ.........

Floyd · Jun 9, 2014

Hi Floyd,

Floyd, on 09 Jun 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

Floyd said:
I am not going to comment on any of your interpretations, until I have read JWs book on Daniel.

Please do not answer ANYONE on ANY SUBJECT, until you read Walvoord's book, and then Church's book, then Newton's book, and then Calvin's book, and then, and then, and then.

This is a strange reply! You are the one who quoted and recommended these works! Clearly you have read them and some of your opinions have been shaped by them!
So; what's going on with you DD?

Floyd, if you can't take a clue and arrive to the TRUTH, then the Holy Spirit is not within you. Please ask GOD to reveal TRUTHs, -- not men.

Again; a strange reply; and also presumptuous! Only Almighty God knows the heart of a person! I am doubting your stability/balance in these comments!
You are a man yes? You suggested John Walvoord's book!?

So now, what is the solution to 1:21 where Daniel DIED in the First year of Cyrus, -- but was in the third year of Cyrus?!? (I.e., What has four tires and flies? A garbage truck.)

Again; what on earth are you saying? Dan.1:21 is far from saying what you state!?
Also; what has a garbage truck got to do with Scripture!!!???
I have got to rethink my opinion of your abilites!

Floyd.

RANDOR said:
What did I get myself into here................all I know it pertains to some book or books?

I don't know if this has anything to do with you guys conversation.........but here is my take on books......present..........and very past.
Actually...........this is also my take on scholars

I give no credence whats so ever to any man/woman/child who has written a book about God.....unless my spirit jumps for joy at their testimony first.

Man can write and write and write and write about God.......but have they met Him......and if by chance they write a book about the God I know personally then it is worth the read.

Same with scholars...........I've seen many on TV........ lets say...........telling me of their take on God, the bible, Jesus, The Holy Spirit.....and by gosh..........it isn't 20 minutes.............and I can tell they have never met Christ.

SAD they would rather study a God which does not want to be studied.............But Known.............Personally.

So................the books I do read........in which I just completed a book which came out in February.....

I can't wait to get a book on people who have met Christ......in their bathroom....church........laying in the gutter.....especially popular people......

Their testimonies.............how Jesus came to them and forgave them of their sins. Especially atheists....now that's fun to watch.
But all are popular to Christ.........

Randon; there is a book in print called "Far from Rome, Near to God".
This is about 50 RC Priests; men of considerable learning; who the Holy Spirit reached, they responded; and found Christ Jesus.
This a worthy and moving read!
Another is the account of David Ginsburg, a foremost Jewish scholar, who was considered the world top Jewish language expert in approx. 1870+.
This a brief on his life, but you can get more if you wish. Dr. David Ginsburg: (Hebrew scholar, Jewish academic, Jewish language scholar for the British Library, and Museum.)
Floyd.

DaDad · Jun 9, 2014

Hi Floyd,

Re: Don't Answer ANYONE until ...
Sorry, -- I was being facetious, and apparently that didn't come thru. The fact is, we need to take a clue, and either validate it or invalidate from our own research. We should NEVER blindly follow what others say. Thus Walvoord, Newton, Church, Calvin, and others cannot bring the full TRUTH of Scripture. We must ALL bring those TRUTHs to the banquet table, each per his/her own giftings.

Re: Daniel died in the First year of Cyrus ...
The English translations convey this premise, and Calvin provided the literal "haiah", which he asserted means "broken". And having this basis, the expositors cannot resolve exactly how Daniel DIED in the First year of Cyrus (Dan. 1:21), but is alive in the Third year of Cyrus (Dan. 10:1). So where the expositors are confused as to the solution, I would propose that BOTH are PERFECTLY CORRECT exactly as written. -- It's no different than a "riddle" where a garbage truck has four tires and flies.

As such, I sense that you may be frustrated in resolving what Dan. 2:41 & 45 says PLAINLY; and what Dan. 1:21 & 10:1 say obscurely. Perhaps not all people are meant to be detectives.

Hi RANDOR,

I an not aware of any "book" that has resolved Dan. 1:21 & 10:1 so that they're BOTH PERFECTLY CORRECT AS WRITTEN, -- Daniel DIED in the First year of Cyrus (per Dan. 1:21, "haiah"/"broken"); and Daniel was alive in the Third year of Cyrus (per Dan. 10:1). But there IS a solution where BOTH TEXTS are PERFECTLY CORRECT AS WRITTEN.

Daniel 1:21
And Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.

Daniel 10:1
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a word was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshaz′zar.

So if you can, -- PLEASE help explain to Floyd how was is that Daniel DIED in the First year of Cyrus; but was alive in the Third year of Cyrus.

With Best Regards,
DD

shturt678 · Jun 9, 2014

Thank you folks for caring!

Finally down to my paygrade,however will let brother RANDOR answer,

Old Jack

Retrobyter · Jun 9, 2014

Shalom, all!

SERIOUSLY?! This is what y'all do with your time?! Why not LEARN HEBREW and stop fooling around?!

Haayaah does NOT mean "broken!" It is the verb meaning "to exist!" If any of you has a translation of the Bible that says that Daniel DIED in the first year of Koresh (Cyrus), GET RID OF IT! Verse 21 goes with verse 20:

Daniel 1:18-21
18 When the time the king had set for them to be presented came, the chief officer presented them to N’vukhadnetzar; 19 and when the king spoke with them, none was found among all of them to compare with Dani’el, Hananyah, Misha’el and ‘Azaryah. So they entered the king’s service; 20 and in all matters requiring wisdom and understanding, whenever the king consulted them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and exorcists in his entire kingdom.

21 So Dani’el remained there until the first year of King Koresh.
CJB

Daniel 1:18-21
18 At the end of the time set by the king to bring them in, the chief official presented them to Nebuchadnezzar. 19 The king talked with them, and he found none equal to Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah; so they entered the king's service. 20 In every matter of wisdom and understanding about which the king questioned them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and enchanters in his whole kingdom.

21 And Daniel remained there until the first year of King Cyrus.
NIV

It was that he (Daniel) only existed until the first year of King Koresh; it's that he remained IN THIS POSITION OF THE KING'S SERVICE until the first year of King Cyrus! Later, Daniel was discovered to be a valuable asset to other kings, kings of Persia, as well! The text NEVER says that Dani'el DIED in Cyrus' first year! SHEESH! How dense can one get?!

DaDad · Jun 9, 2014

To All,

21. And Daniel continued even unto the first year of king Cyrus.
2l. Et fuit Daniel usque ad annum primum Cyri regis.

Expositors are puzzled with this verse, because, as we shall afterwards see, the Vision occurred to Daniel in the third year of Cyrus’s reign. Some explain the word היה, haiah, by to be “broken;” but this is by no means in accordance with the history. Their opinion is right who say that Daniel continued to the first year of the reign of Cyrus in the discharge of the prophetic office, although expositors do not openly say so; but I state openly what they say obscurely. For since he afterwards set out into Media, they say this change is denoted here. But we may understand the words better in the sense of Daniel’s flourishing among the Chaldeans and Assyrians, and being acknowledged as a celebrated Prophet; because he is known to have interpreted King Belshszzar’s vision, on the very night on which he was slain. The word here is simple and complete — he was — but it depends on the succeeding ones, since he always obtained the confidence and authority of a Prophet with the kings of Babylon. This, then, is the true sense. 99

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/calvin/cc24/cc24006.htm

Septuagint:
1:21 καὶ ἐγένετο Δανιηλ ἕως ἔτους ἑνὸς Κύρου τοῦ βασιλέως

BLUE LETTER BIBLE
Masoretic:
And Daniel h1840 דִּנִיֵּאל Daniye'l
continued even unto the first h259 אֶחָד 'echad
year h8141 שָׁנָה shaneh (in pl. only),
of king h4428 מֶלֶךְ melek
Cyrus. h3566 כּוֹרֶשׁ Kowresh

KJV
And Daniel continued even unto the first year of king Cyrus.

NKJV
Thus Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.

NLT
Daniel remained in the royal service until the first year of the reign of King Cyrus.fn

NIV
And Daniel remained there until the first year of King Cyrus.

ESV
And Daniel was there until the first year of King Cyrus.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Dan&c=1&t=KJV#s=t_conc_851021
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Dan&c=1&t=KJV#s=t_bibles_851021

Per the above, I cannot attribute how the "expositors" attributed the text "היה, "as 'to be “broken;'", but if "Retrobyter" wishes to infer that Daniel continued in his services PAST the First year of Cyrus, whereupon Daniel continued in another capacity, -- I would suggest that this presumption is faulty:

1. If this is so obvious to "Retrobyter" that anyone who can't perceive this "fact" is dense, then does "Retrobyter" accuse the expositors of incompetence? Certainly Calvin would have had ability to read Hebrew, and certainly Calvin's expositors certainly would have been as proficient if not more so than Calvin. So who is it that slanders Calvin and his expositors?!?

2. If "Retrobyter" wishes to presume additional responsibilities subsequent to the "first year of King Cyrus", then why does Dan. 10:1 suggest otherwise?

3. If Dan. 10:1 were written during Cyrus' dominion, then how is it that the presumed ~victorious Darius~ needed to be "strengthened"? Did the United States need strengthening in the post WWII era? Did Tiger Woods need strengthening after each of his golf titles? -- I would propose that the victor DOES NOT need strengthening, but the LOSER DOES:

Proverbs 31:6
Give strong drink to the one who is perishing, ...

4. If Daniel 10:1 were written during Cyrus' dominion, then exactly who are the "three more" and "fourth" referenced in Dan. 11:2? (Please note that history disagrees with the purported "biblical fulfillment".

5. The dictionary provides the example: They danced until dawn.
To presume that they continued dancing past dawn adds to the text, for which Revelation cautions against:

Rev. 22:18
I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,

So once again, is there a solution where Daniel 1:21 and 10:1 are PERFECTLY CORRECT AS WRITTEN?

With Best Regards,
DD

RANDOR · Jun 9, 2014

Honestly..men....with all do respect for everyone here..........This doesn't better my walk with Christ....tryin to figure out when, where, how, or if Daniel is even alive today...........

In hebrew or english

And that's my final answer............I'm pushin the red button

carry on............I'm out
<_______________________________________________________________________>

Hey RANDOR,

Actually, you're NOT EXCUSED:

Matthew 24:15(NKJV)
15 “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place” (whoever reads, let him understand),

If Jesus spoke these words, then you should ask yourself if YOU know best about what you do or don't need, -- or if JESUS knows best about what you do or don't need. As such, I would argue for the latter.

With Best Regards,
DD

RANDOR:::::::
I'm not excused................?.....bummer.........ok....I read the scritpure, but I seem to fail to understand what you're asking...end times?
And the....I know best or Jesus knows best.....don't understand that either... and the..what you do or don't need....don't get that question either.

I'm a little slow on things bare with me

I don't know what you want me to say.....................But..............I will say this...

JESUS KNOWS WHAT I NEED AND KNOWS WHAT I DO....AND DEFINITELY KNOWS WHAT I DON'T NEED.

DaDad · Jun 9, 2014

Hey RANDOR,

So here's the two verses in question, with the "contradiction" bolded:

Daniel 1:21
And Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.

Daniel 10:1
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a word was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshaz′zar.

I would propose that the above Scriptures are PERFECTLY CORRECT AS WRITTEN. So exactly how did Daniel DIE in the First year of Cyrus, and be ALIVE in the Third year of Cyrus? -- Once again it's riddle which is easily solved IN THE TEXT of the Scripture, so READ IT CAREFULLY!!! Do you see the solution??

... if not, maybe this will help:

Daniel 10:1
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a word was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshaz′zar.

Daniel 1:21
And Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.

... and believe it or not, this is a CLUE!!!

With Best Regards,
DD

RANDOR · Jun 9, 2014

But what is the point of this conversation............clue?.........

Daniel 10:1
In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a word was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshaz′zar.

Daniel 1:21
And Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.
Are ya hung up on this?

type O maybe.........
Riddle.............now that's one thing I've never been good at..............is riddles....
Please tell us the answer............I'm about to pee my pants

DaDad · Jun 9, 2014

Hi RANDOR,

RANDOR said:
type O maybe.........

When people can't figure stuff out, they always blame someone/something else. I said the solution (in the Text) is right before your eyes, and even provided you a clue as to the chronology. So now here's the solution:

Hitler invaded France on May 10, 1940. Prior to that date he was Hitler, Chancellor of Germany. After that date he was Chancellor Hitler.

Does THIS help?
DD

Prophecy Fulfilment in Revelation; relative to the Old Testament Prophecies.

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Member

Fishin Everyday

Member

Fishin Everyday

Active Member

Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Fishin Everyday

Member

Fishin Everyday

Member

Similar threads