Pseudo Messiah

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

revturmoil

New Member
Feb 26, 2011
816
11
0
69
New Hampshire's North Woods



You're not the first person I've conversed with which gets upset and starts acting like a little child when they're clearly proven wrong.

Much of what you've been pushing here is some truly wild and crazy unbiblical stuff, especially your idea about Saddam Hussein coming back from the dead to setup some middleast kingdom on earth.


As for your accusation of me being a globalist, you couldn't be farther away from the truth.

With your words, I'm really getting this image of a crying little boy in knickers jumping up down saying anything he can to try and get his way.

You're full of false accusations so smarten up!
Is that the best you can do??? You have done nothing to prove me wrong. You just have the need to build yourself up! Stop with the big man talk and confront the issues! Just stop acting like you're a big man because you're just coping out and acting like an ignorant idiot!! it's not too late to grow up either!

As far as Saddam goes, you will be in for a surprise. But I have no desire to explain anything to an idiot!
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
The Revived Roman Empire theory. It pretty much comes from the interpretation of Daniel 2 and Nebuchadnezzar's vision of the statue. The experts would like you to believe that the fourth kingdom is Rome or the RRE. But that can't be because of the word inferior that describes the second empire and the word mixed which describes the iron and clay.

I already debunked that misapplying of the words "inferior" and "mixed" in Daniel 2 in other posts.

Daniel 2 reveals the beast kingdoms after Babylon were less congealed and cohesive in power, which by the time one reads about the final one of ten toes of part iron and clay, that idea ought to be easy to understand. When the final beast comes, it will be so weak in cohesiveness that our Lord Jesus will only have to strike it upon its feet for the whole thing to come tumbling down.

The final beast of iron mixed with clay will be about it trying to support the weight of all the other beast kingdom types; the head of gold, the arms and breast of silver, the belly and thighs of brass, and the legs of iron. It will be very top heavy from all that weight above it, and ready to fall. And fall it will when Christ returns to strike it down.

Cohesiveness with the final beast kingdom in the last generation is really going to be a problem. It will literally be like trying to mix iron with clay. The two just aren't gonna' mix.
 

revturmoil

New Member
Feb 26, 2011
816
11
0
69
New Hampshire's North Woods
I already debunked that misapplying of the words "inferior" and "mixed" in Daniel 2 in other posts.


You have?! I'm not mis-applying the words, you just can't accept the fact that the words inferior and mixed debunks your theory!! I'm going by their true definition. You have done nothing to prove me wrong!

You disregard the scriptural evidence of Daniel 5:31 And Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about threescore and two years old.

See what that verse say's? Does it matter to you!!!

The bible doesn't quote Cyrus the Persian as taking Babylon.

Jeremiah 51:11 Make bright the arrows; gather the shields: the LORD hath raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes: for his device is against Babylon, to destroy it; because it is the vengeance of the LORD, the vengeance of his temple.

And you said you've debunked what???!!!

Are you still up for that bible lesson about the 2 Cyrus's, 3 Darius's, and 4 Antiochus's!

OH! And that little three letter word "ALL" that you think is so insignificant! Are you ready for the bible lesson on the word all, whole, every, earth, world, and nation? You really need it becuase you seem to think these things are insignificant!


Daniel 2 reveals the beast kingdoms after Babylon were less congealed and cohesive in power, which by the time one reads about the final one of ten toes of part iron and clay, that idea ought to be easy to understand.

I will never know how you come up with this. How do you fabricate that out of the text??? Each kingdom has it's own description and those descriptions only apply to that empire and nobody elses!
When the final beast comes, it will be so weak in cohesiveness that our Lord Jesus will only have to strike it upon its feet for the whole thing to come tumbling down.

I disagree but...What in the world does that have to do with who the inferior kingdom is?

The final beast of iron mixed with clay will be about it trying to support the weight of all the other beast kingdom types; the head of gold, the arms and breast of silver, the belly and thighs of brass, and the legs of iron. It will be very top heavy from all that weight above it, and ready to fall. And fall it will when Christ returns to strike it down.

Cohesiveness with the final beast kingdom in the last generation is really going to be a problem. It will literally be like trying to mix iron with clay. The two just aren't gonna' mix.

What are you trying to prove???
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
You have?! I'm not mis-applying the words, you just can't accept the fact that the words inferior and mixed debunks your theory!! I'm going by their true definition. You have done nothing to prove me wrong!

You disregard the scriptural evidence of Daniel 5:31
And Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about threescore and two years old.

See what that verse say's? Does it matter to you!!!

The bible doesn't quote Cyrus the Persian as taking Babylon.

Jeremiah 51:11 Make bright the arrows; gather the shields: the LORD hath raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes: for his device is against Babylon, to destroy it; because it is the vengeance of the LORD, the vengeance of his temple.

And you said you've debunked what???!!!

Are you still up for that bible lesson about the 2 Cyrus's, 3 Darius's, and 4 Antiochus's!

OH! And that little three letter word "ALL" that you think is so insignificant! Are you ready for the bible lesson on the word all, whole, every, earth, world, and nation? You really need it becuase you seem to think these things are insignificant!

I will never know how you come up with this. How do you fabricate that out of the text??? Each kingdom has it's own description and those descriptions only apply to that empire and nobody elses!

I disagree but...What in the world does that have to do with who the inferior kingdom is?

What are you trying to prove???




In 538 B.C., Cyrus II, "the great", took Babylon by diverting the Euphrates river, and entered the city of Babylon over a dry bed when the city was having a feast. That's what the following prophecies were about.

Isa 44:27-28
27 That saith to the deep, Be dry, and I will dry up thy rivers:
28 That saith of Cyrus, He is My shepherd, and shall perform all My pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, "Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, "Thy foundation shall be laid."
(KJV)


Isa 45:1-3
1 Thus saith the LORD to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut;
2 I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron:
3 And I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I, the LORD, Which call thee by thy name, am the God of Israel.
(KJV)


Herodotus also recorded that account of Cyrus entering Babylon after diverting the river. Darius was Cyrus' viceroy according to G. Rawlinson, which explains Dan.5:31 about Darius receiving the kingdom.

That's why this verse in Ezra shows the order of those rulers with Cyrus first, then Darius, then Artaxerxes.

Ezra 6:14
14 And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it, according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the commandment of Cyrus, and Darius, and Artaxerxes king of Persia.
(KJV)


Jer.51:11 is not proving your theory, since Cyrus had conquered Media around 559 B.C. (he took Babylon later in 538 B.C.). And I'm well aware of Antiochus I through IV.

Thus the second beast kingdom after Babylon per the Book of Daniel was Medo-Persia.

That is also the order shown Daniel in these verses...

Dan 11:2-3
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.
(KJV)

Alexander of Macedon came up against Persia around 330 B.C. and took it, with Grecia becoming the 3rd beast kingdom.


Dan 8:20-22
20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
(KJV)


Dan 10:20
20 Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.
(KJV)


Then after that, the Roman empire became the 4th world empire.

Your theory of moving the Media-Persia empire to the last and final beast kingdom doesn't work.

As for the Aramaic word ara (earth, low in the figurative) translated to "inferior" of Dan.2:39, you tried to use that to point away from the Media-Persia empire as the 2nd beast in order to serve your endtime theories about Islam. That doesn't work either. But that word can point to the history of span of rule over different peoples each successive beast kingdom had. The idea of iron mixed with clay supports that conclusion also.

 

revturmoil

New Member
Feb 26, 2011
816
11
0
69
New Hampshire's North Woods
In 538 B.C., Cyrus II, "the great", took Babylon by diverting the Euphrates river, and entered the city of Babylon over a dry bed when the city was having a feast. That's what the following prophecies were about.

That's secular history you're looking at. I already told you that there's no secular history on Darius the Mede and the bible is the historical authority on him. Some infamous bible scholars have fallen for the same thing because it fits their RRE theory. But then to accept that theory is contradictory to God's Word in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel 5:31 where it say's Darius the Mede's took Babylon. If you want to let secular history trump biblical history go ahead. I know what I believe and why I believe it on this one.

Isa 44:27-28
27 That saith to the deep, Be dry, and I will dry up thy rivers:
28 That saith of Cyrus, He is My shepherd, and shall perform all My pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, "Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, "Thy foundation shall be laid."
(KJV)
Nice try but Isaiah 44:28 has nothing to do with who took Babylon. That passage is about Cyrus being God's shepherd in liberating the Jews by allowing them to go back to their homeland and rebuilding Jerusalem and the temple. So you put secular history above biblical history, and you take Isaiah 44:28 out f context. NICE!

Isa 45:1-3
1 Thus saith the LORD to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut;
2 I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron:
3 And I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I, the LORD, Which call thee by thy name, am the God of Israel.
(KJV)
That prophecy is about Cyrus subdueing nations. But this has nothing to do with the overthrow of Babylon since that had already occured by Darius the Mede.. Again. Nice try but completely out of context.

Herodotus also recorded that account of Cyrus entering Babylon after diverting the river. Darius was Cyrus' viceroy according to G. Rawlinson, which explains Dan.5:31 about Darius receiving the kingdom.

That's why this verse in Ezra shows the order of those rulers with Cyrus first, then Darius, then Artaxerxes.

Ezra 6:14
14 And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the son of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it, according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the commandment of Cyrus, and Darius, and Artaxerxes king of Persia.
(KJV)

You should have posted verse 15. The temple was finished in the reign Darius who later became a vassal to his brother in law Cyrus. And refresh your knowledge about Herodotus on the Wiki link and you'll see what I mean about no secular history on Darius.

Ezra 15  And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king.

Jer.51:11 is not proving your theory, since Cyrus had conquered Media around 559 B.C. (he took Babylon later in 538 B.C.). And I'm well aware of Antiochus I through IV.
Jeremiah 51:11  Make bright the arrows; gather the shields: the LORD hath raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes: for his device is against Babylon, to destroy it; because it is the vengeance of the LORD, the vengeance of his temple.

Daniel 5:31  And Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about threescore and two years old.

Isaiah 13:17
"Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, ie.(Babylon)


I already explained the problems about Darius having very little secular history. So I believe the bible since there's other verses that support the Mede's taking out Babylon.

http://en.wikipedia..../Book_of_Daniel

Dan 11:2-3
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.
(KJV)

Dan 8:20-22
20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
(KJV)

Dan 10:20
20 Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.
(KJV)

Then after that, the Roman empire became the 4th world empire.

Do you realize that the verses you quoted all support my theory and debunk the Revived Roman Empire?

Let's see the little horn is said to come from Grecia.

The mighty king is said to come from Grecia.

The great horn and the king of fierce countenance comes from Grecia.

Your theory of moving the Media-Persia empire to the last and final beast kingdom doesn't work.

Pay attention! Nobody is doing that! I've been saying the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2 is Greece! Besides the scriptural evidence of the text plus the definition of the words Inferior i.e.=land inferiority, and mixed = an Arabian work against you.

As for the Aramaic word ara (earth, low in the figurative) translated to "inferior" of Dan.2:39, you tried to use that to point away from the Media-Persia empire as the 2nd beast in order to serve your endtime theories about Islam. That doesn't work either. But that word can point to the history of span of rule over different peoples each successive beast kingdom had. The idea of iron mixed with clay supports that conclusion also.


Sorry! Get it right!!! The word inferior is translated LAND! You're the one changing its meaning! Not me!

And an Arabian isn't a Roman!

In all the bible, can you quote one verse that points the finger at Rome in end time prophecy? You can't because there are none!




 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
Nelson's Bible Dictionary well sums it up Biblically about Cyrus.

----------------------------
CYRUS
[SIGH russ] (meaning unknown)-the powerful king of Persia (559-530 B.C.), sometimes called "Cyrus the Great," who allowed the Jewish captives to return to their homeland in Jerusalem after he led the Persians to become the dominant nation in the ancient world. Within 20 years after becoming king of Persia, Cyrus had conquered the Medes, Lydians, and Babylonians (549, 547, and 539 B.C., respectively). He is praised most highly, in the Old Testament, in Isa 44:28 and 45:1, where he is called God's "shepherd" and His "anointed."

Cyrus first appears in the Old Testament in connection with the release of the Jewish captives (taken in the Babylonian captivity of Judah), when he proclaimed their return from CAPTIVITY (2 Chron 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1-4). This restoration, which was highlighted by the rebuilding of the TEMPLE in Jerusalem, had been prophesied by Jeremiah (Jer 29:10-14; also see Isa 44:28). The Book of Ezra contains a number of reports on the progress of the work related to the decree of Cyrus (Ezra 3:7; 4:3,5; 5:13,14,17; 6:3,14). The only other references to Cyrus occur in Dan 1:21; 6:28; 10:1.

Cyrus was known in Persia as a wise and tolerant ruler. He was able to gain the goodwill of the varied ethnic and religious groups within his large empire, which extended from India to the western edge of Asia Minor (modern Turkey). The Old Testament describes him as chosen by the Lord God of Israel as the deliverer of His people. It was not that Cyrus became a follower of Israel's God; rather, he described himself as the one who received "all the kingdoms of the earth." He declared that God "commanded me to build Him a house at Jerusalem" (2 Chron 36:23). The famous Cyrus Cylinder containing records of Cyrus' reign, revealed that Babylon's chief god, Marduk, had accepted Cyrus as "righteous prince," and had appointed him ruler "over the whole world."

Ezra 6:1-12 gives some idea of the careful organization carried out by Cyrus in relation to the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. Its dimensions and the materials and supplies required are carefully described, along with the specification of severe penalties for anyone who would change his orders regarding its construction.

Cyrus' reign ended in 530 B.C., when he was killed in battle. His tomb still stands at Pasargadae in southwestern Iran. He was succeeded by his son, Cambyses II..
(from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Copyright (c)1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)
------------------------------


God called Cyrus as His shepherd, not Darius. I admit Darius was leagued with Cyrus (per Daniel) but God specifically called Cyrus like He said, and made Cyrus the head king over all the kingdoms.

2 Chr 36:23
23 Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth hath the LORD God of heaven given me; and He hath charged me to build Him an house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all His people? The LORD his God be with him, and let him go up.
(KJV)


Ezra 4:4-5
4 Then the people of the land weakened the hands of the people of Judah, and troubled them in building,
5 And hired counsellors against them, to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia.
(KJV)


Isa 45:1-4
1 Thus saith the LORD to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut;
2 I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron:
3 And I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I, the LORD, Which call thee by thy name, am the God of Israel.
4 For Jacob My servant's sake, and Israel Mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known Me.
(KJV)

Isa 44:27-28
27 That saith to the deep, Be dry, and I will dry up thy rivers:
28 That saith of Cyrus, He is My shepherd, and shall perform all My pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, "Thou shalt be built"; and to the temple, "Thy foundation shall be laid."
(KJV)


God declared that He called Cyrus to end Judah's 70 years Babylon captivity. He is specific with Cyrus, which as far as I'm concerned, is the way it is, regardless of what history from man has to say.

Darius is a name that means 'king', like the names Pharaoh or Casear. There was a Darius in this Cyrus' day also, and another later which I'm aware of that. But it was by Cyrus' decree for Judah to return to Jerusalem to rebuild. A later Darius of Ezra.4-6 would discover Cyrus' letter of decree for Jerusalem confirming that.

So no, I'm not just looking at secular history, though it would be stupid to not consider secular historians on matters of history also, since God's Word will always sort out what is true from secular history. In this case, God proclaimed Cyrus as His anointed and shepherd in conquering Babylon and freeing His people to go back to Jerusalem. Some secular history accounts align with that.
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
You should have posted verse 15. The temple was finished in the reign Darius who later became a vassal to his brother in law Cyrus. And refresh your knowledge about Herodotus on the Wiki link and you'll see what I mean about no secular history on Darius.

Ezra 15  And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the
sixth year of the reign of Darius the king.


In the Ezra 4-5 chapters, the Jews in Jerusalem who were being troubled when rebuilding in Jerusalem petitioned Darius about Cyrus' original decree to rebuild Jeursalem and the temple. In Ezra 6 Darius found Cyrus' letter and reaffirmed the command. This was a later Darius after Cyrus.


Jeremiah 51:11  Make bright the arrows; gather the shields: the LORD hath raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes: for his device is against Babylon, to destroy it; because it is the vengeance of the LORD, the vengeance of his temple.
Daniel 5:31  And Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about threescore and two years old.


And just prior to that is this verse you left out...

Dan 5:28
28 PERES; Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.
(KJV)



Isaiah 13:17
"Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, ie.(Babylon)


That still does not override Isaiah 44 & 45 about His calling Cyrus to take Babylon and free God's people, officially ending their 70 years captivity to Babylon.


I already explained the problems about Darius having very little secular history. So I believe the bible since there's other verses that support the Mede's taking out Babylon.

One problem is that there was more than one Darius (king). The other is that God used both the Persians and the Medes. But it was Cyrus that He specifically mentioned as His anointed and shepherd for freeing His people Judah from Babylon. Secularists that disagree with that are wrong. So actually, you're the one siding with secular history more than I by denying God's prophecy about His calling Cyrus to conquer Babylon with Cyrus issuing the first decree for Judah to return to Jerusalem.


Do you realize that the verses you quoted all support my theory and debunk the Revived Roman Empire?

Let's see the little horn is said to come from Grecia.

The mighty king is said to come from Grecia.

The great horn and the king of fierce countenance comes from Grecia.

Wrong. Look again at what I posted. Do you see the phrase "king of fierce countenance" in any of that below?

------------------
Dan 11:2-3
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.
(KJV)

Dan 8:20-22
20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
(KJV)

Dan 10:20
20 Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.
(KJV)

Then after that, the Roman empire became the 4th world empire.
------------------------


Note when that "king of fierce countenance" is mentioned. It is AFTER Alexander's Greek Empire "being broken" and "four kingdoms" come out it (Ptolemy, Seleucus, Cassander, and Lysimachus).

Dan 8:21-23
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
(KJV)


That "king of fierce countenance", "when the transgressors are come to the full", is about the last days...

Dan 8:24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
(KJV)

That's where the prophecy jumps to the end of this world, about the last battle of the Antichrist against our Lord Jesus and His army, for that fierce king will be broken "without hand", meaning not by man's hand, but by God's Hand direct. That is the one of Dan.11 and the "little horn" of Dan.7:8 and 8:9.

Dan 8:8-12
8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.
10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.
(KJV)

God gave a historical example of that, with Antiochus IV from the Seleucid kingdom (from Seleucus over the area of Syria). Antiochus IV conquered Jerusalem ("the pleasant land"), and desolated the insides of the temple and setup an idol to Zeus worship. He is the historical pattern for the final Antichrist and abomination of desolation in Jerusalem, an idol abomination being setup in another temple in Jerusalem in the last days.

The "little horn" example in Dan.7:8 confirms the ultimate timing of that little horn...

Dan 7:8-12
8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, Whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before Him: thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.
(KJV)

Out of the ten horns, another little horn comes up, and continues... until their thrones are cast down, and GOD's Judgment is set with the books opened. That's the Antichrist as that "little horn". Antiochus served as a sample, but died in Egypt, so not all the prophecy can be applied to Antiochus. The Caesars have died out and Christ's return is still expecting, so it's not them, but as samples only like Antiochus, for the Romans in 69 A.D. did do some events in Jerusalem like Antiochus did. The Reformers believed it was the pope after the Roman empire ended, but that can only have been just another sample of the prophecy, and not the real fulfillment that's still future to us, for a world beast empire is busy forming up again in our days.

But it's very probable that apostasy in Rome AND among Protestant Churches that are being deceived about the coming Antichrist might join to fit a revived Roman system, but I don't see Rome as the author of that. I don't really recognize the Revived-Roman Empire idea.


Pay attention! Nobody is doing that! I've been saying the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2 is Greece! Besides the scriptural evidence of the text plus the definition of the words Inferior i.e.=land inferiority, and mixed = an Arabian work against you.

And you think you've been paying attention? Ludicrous.

The 4th kingdom was NOT Alexander's Greece (3rd beast).

The 4th kingdom is defined by ten horns (Dan.7:7). The Roman Empire was a pattern for it, simply because the Roman Empire is what conquered the remnants of the 3rd beast Grecia. And that's a very strong argument in itself, since the Media-Persian empire (2nd) conquered the Babylon empire (1st), then the Macedonian empire (Grecia 3rd) conquered the Media-Persia empire (2nd). The four kingdoms after Alexander are far overshadowed by the Roman empire that came next and conquered them. It's a no-brainer that the Roman empire was the 4th, and diverse from all those before it.

But with the ten toes of part iron and clay, that's showing a 5th beast kingdom (5 separate pieces to the statue image of Dan.2), different than the Roman empire. The Roman empire is no more, and beast of part iron and clay is to be manifest when Christ's return happens, so what's left today, since Christ's return has yet to happen? In Dan.2, we're shown the final beast made up of ALL the image pieces TOGETHER in the days of Christ's return to smite it upon its ten toes.

That points to the final beast kingdom of our days =

1. Babylon empire
2. Media-Persia empire
3. Grecia empire
4. Roman empire
---------------------------------------
5th beast kingdom of ten toes of part iron and clay

(all pieces together, the head of gold, breast and arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, legs of iron, toes of part iron and clay trying to hold it all up) that agrees with Christ's Revelation that the final beast of Rev.13:1 is to cover all nations (per His definition in Rev.17:15). That's why Christ's servants can see the "one world government" system that is being formed over all nations today.

And what is the "one world government" system doing to the radical millitants among the Arab peoples? They are subduing them by force, for they cannot go against God's Will anymore than anyone else can.



In all the bible, can you quote one verse that points the finger at Rome in end time prophecy? You can't because there are none!

Does one really need to, especially since the Jews recorded the acts of the Romans upon their nation prior to Christ's first coming, and thereafter? Josephus would be a good starting place.



 

revturmoil

New Member
Feb 26, 2011
816
11
0
69
New Hampshire's North Woods
And just prior to that is this verse you left out...

Dan 5:28
28 PERES; Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.
(KJV)

There's no need to post that verse as the Medes and Persians were confederate.

Daniel 5:31 quotes Darius as the one who took Babylon...that's what I believe.

The kingdom was divided but it was Darius and the Medes who conquered it. Not Cyrus.

That still does not override Isaiah 44 & 45 about His calling Cyrus to take Babylon and free God's people, officially ending their 70 years captivity to Babylon.

Yes it does because Isaiah 44& 45 doesn't say that Cyrus took Babylon and if it did that would debunk the bible. Isaiah quotes that Cyrus would subdue the nations which are 14 total but Babylon isn't listed as one of them. That conquest is ascribed to Darius. And for your information the captivity didn't last for 70 years. It lasted between 66 and 67 years. But that's another point of contention.

31 And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.

One problem is that there was more than one Darius (king). The other is that God used both the Persians and the Medes. But it was Cyrus that He specifically mentioned as His anointed and shepherd for freeing His people Judah from Babylon. Secularists that disagree with that are wrong. So actually, you're the one siding with secular history more than I by denying God's prophecy about His calling Cyrus to conquer Babylon with Cyrus issuing the first decree for Judah to return to Jerusalem.

If I remember right, I'm the one who told you that there was more than one Darius and you disagreed with me.


I'm not siding with secular history because it's them who ascribe the conquest of Babylon to Cyrus. The reason for that is that there's no secular history on Darius and the secularist do as you do and that is disregard Daniel 5:31. That's because they don't consider the bible as historically authoritive. And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.

So if you can, quote that verse for me that ascribes the conquest of Babylon to Cyrus. You are 'adding' that in your interpretation because the bible doesn't say that. It only say's that he would subdue the nations. Darius took Babylon and occupied it for only a short time. (4-6 years)

I said,

The great horn and the king of fierce countenance comes from Grecia.

You said...

Wrong. Look again at what I posted. Do you see the phrase "king of fierce countenance" in any of that below?

------------------
Dan 11:2-3
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.
(KJV)

Dan 8:20-22
20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
(KJV)

Dan 10:20
20 Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.
(KJV)

Then after that, the Roman empire became the 4th world empire.
------------------------


Note when that "king of fierce countenance" is mentioned. It is AFTER Alexander's Greek Empire "being broken" and "four kingdoms" come out it (Ptolemy, Seleucus, Cassander, and Lysimachus).

Dan 8:21-23
21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.
22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
23 And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.
(KJV)


That "king of fierce countenance", "when the transgressors are come to the full", is about the last days...

Dan 8:24 And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people.
25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
(KJV)

Here you go adding Rome to this again. Of course the king of fierce countenance comes after Alexanders broken Empire.
Daniel 8:19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.

Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power.
And in the latter time of their kingdom, (which kingdoms?) ...The four that broke out from Alexanders Empire!

when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up.

The king of fierce countenance is said to come from the four kingdoms that broke from Alexanders Empire. The only reason you add Rome is because it debunks your theory! It seems to me that there will be four end time kingdoms that will emerge from the Arab world in the end. Those four are men tioned in Daniel 7 which are all end time kingdoms. Rome is excluded and that's why there's not one verse that points the finger to Rome. Your finger doesn't count!

The king of fierce countenance as well as the others clearly come from the geographical are of the Grecian Empire. If you want to add Rome to support your failed and debunked theory of the revived Roman Empire have at it. Atheist have actually used this blunder of the revived Roman Empire to debunk the bible!
The 'mighty king' is also said to come from the Grecian Empire!

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.
3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.



Dan 8:8-12
8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.
9 And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.
10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.
11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.
(KJV)

God gave a historical example of that, with Antiochus IV from the Seleucid kingdom (from Seleucus over the area of Syria). Antiochus IV conquered Jerusalem ("the pleasant land"), and desolated the insides of the temple and setup an idol to Zeus worship. He is the historical pattern for the final Antichrist and abomination of desolation in Jerusalem, an idol abomination being setup in another temple in Jerusalem in the last days.

The "little horn" example in Dan.7:8 confirms the ultimate timing of that little horn...

Dan 7:8-12
8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, Whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the pure wool: His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before Him: thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.
11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.
(KJV)

Out of the ten horns, another little horn comes up, and continues... until their thrones are cast down, and GOD's Judgment is set with the books opened. That's the Antichrist as that "little horn". Antiochus served as a sample, but died in Egypt, so not all the prophecy can be applied to Antiochus. The Caesars have died out and Christ's return is still expecting, so it's not them, but as samples only like Antiochus, for the Romans in 69 A.D. did do some events in Jerusalem like Antiochus did. The Reformers believed it was the pope after the Roman empire ended, but that can only have been just another sample of the prophecy, and not the real fulfillment that's still future to us, for a world beast empire is busy forming up again in our days.

The 'little horn' is said to come out of the root of Antiochus...which is a splinter of the Grecian Empire! NOT ROME!

But it's very probable that apostasy in Rome AND among Protestant Churches that are being deceived about the coming Antichrist might join to fit a revived Roman system, but I don't see Rome as the author of that. I don't really recognize the Revived-Roman Empire idea.

So why are you trying to support it by adding all the stuff that you are?

And you think you've been paying attention? Ludicrous.

And you think you're paying attention? You haven't got any of this right yet!

You still have to explain how the Persian Empire was 'inferior' to Babylon. The word inferior is 'ara'. So how was the Persian empire 'land inferior' to Babylon?

http://www.bluelette...ongs=H772&t=KJV

The 4th kingdom was NOT Alexander's Greece (3rd beast).

The 4th kingdom is defined by ten horns (Dan.7:7). The Roman Empire was a pattern for it, simply because the Roman Empire is what conquered the remnants of the 3rd beast Grecia. And that's a very strong argument in itself, since the Media-Persian empire (2nd) conquered the Babylon empire (1st), then the Macedonian empire (Grecia 3rd) conquered the Media-Persia empire (2nd). The four kingdoms after Alexander are far overshadowed by the Roman empire that came next and conquered them. It's a no-brainer that the Roman empire was the 4th, and diverse from all those before it.

Well if it's a no brainer explain to me how the word mixed which is 'arab' can infer a Roman when the word denotes an Arabian!
http://www.bluelette...ngs=H6151&t=KJV

(all pieces together, the head of gold, breast and arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, legs of iron, toes of part iron and clay trying to hold it all up) that agrees with Christ's Revelation that the final beast of Rev.13:1 is to cover all nations (per His definition in Rev.17:15). That's why Christ's servants can see the "one world government" system that is being formed over all nations today.

And what is the "one world government" system doing to the radical millitants among the Arab peoples? They are subduing them by force, for they cannot go against God's Will anymore than anyone else can.

What one world government? Like I said. Youu need to do a word study on the word 'all'. You seem to think the it's an insignificant word but it sure has done it's share in misleading you into believing in a one world government!

I said,

In all the bible, can you quote one verse that points the finger at Rome in end time prophecy? You can't because there are none!

You said,


Does one really need to, especially since the Jews recorded the acts of the Romans upon their nation prior to Christ's first coming, and thereafter? Josephus would be a good starting place.

So your view is that even though there's not one verse of prophecy that implicates Rome in end time prophecy you don't care?

Josephus actually supports my theory. And so do the words in the text. And so does Daniel 8 and 11!

From Wiki...
Another view has been more popular among Jewish scholars, at least as far back as Flavius Josephus, and has support from 20th century Biblical scholars such as John J. CollinsHYPERLINK \l "cite_note-3"[4] as well as conservative Christian scholars such as H. H. Rowley, Gurney, Lucas, and Walton.[5]HYPERLINK \l "cite_note-5"[6]HYPERLINK \l "cite_note-lucas-6"[7] The proposed sequence is:
  • The gold head - Babylon
  • The silver breast and arms - Media
  • The copper belly and thighs - Persia
  • The iron legs - Greece
  • The feet partly of iron and partly of molded clay - The Seleucids and the Ptolemies

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_2
Every verse of prophecy implicates Arab/Islamic countries in the end and you know those verses. Even though not one verse points the finger to Rome you still adhere to the false theory of a revived Roman Empire...and you say it's a no brainer and call me wrong and ludicrous!

Believe what you like. I know what I believe and why I believe it. In you case it's one simple word.

DENIAL!
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA


There's no need to post that verse as the Medes and Persians were confederate.

Daniel 5:31 quotes Darius as the one who took Babylon...that's what I believe.

The kingdom was divided but it was Darius and the Medes who conquered it. Not Cyrus.

Yes it does because Isaiah 44& 45 doesn't say that Cyrus took Babylon and if it did that would debunk the bible. Isaiah quotes that Cyrus would subdue the nations which are 14 total but Babylon isn't listed as one of them. That conquest is ascribed to Darius. And for your information the captivity didn't last for 70 years. It lasted between 66 and 67 years. But that's another point of contention.



What you're saying simply doesn't all jive with God's Word...

2 Chr 36:20-23
20 And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia:
21 To fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years.
22 Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the LORD spoken by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing, saying,
23 Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth hath the LORD God of heaven given me; and He hath charged me to build Him an house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all His people? The LORD his God be with him, and let him go up.
(KJV)


The following shows how Cyrus was who delivered Judah from the Babylon captivity to go back to Jerusalem...

Ezra 5:3-6:7
3 At the same time came to them Tatnai, governor on this side the river, and Shethar-boznai, and their companions, and said thus unto them, Who hath commanded you to build this house, and to make up this wall?
4 Then said we unto them after this manner, What are the names of the men that make this building?
5 But the eye of their God was upon the elders of the Jews, that they could not cause them to cease, till the matter came to Darius: and then they returned answer by letter concerning this matter.
6 The copy of the letter that Tatnai, governor on this side the river, and Shethar-boznai, and his companions the Apharsachites, which were on this side the river, sent unto Darius the king:
7 They sent a letter unto him, wherein was written thus; Unto Darius the king, all peace.
8 Be it known unto the king, that we went into the province of Judea, to the house of the great God, which is builded with great stones, and timber is laid in the walls, and this work goeth fast on, and prospereth in their hands.
9 Then asked we those elders, and said unto them thus, Who commanded you to build this house, and to make up these walls?
10 We asked their names also, to certify thee, that we might write the names of the men that were the chief of them.
11 And thus they returned us answer, saying, We are the servants of the God of heaven and earth, and build the house that was builded these many years ago, which a great king of Israel builded and set up.
12 But after that our fathers had provoked the God of heaven unto wrath, he gave them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, the Chaldean, who destroyed this house, and carried the people away into Babylon.
13 But in the first year of Cyrus the king of Babylon the same king Cyrus made a decree to build this house of God.
14 And the vessels also of gold and silver of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took out of the temple that was in Jerusalem, and brought them into the temple of Babylon, those did Cyrus the king take out of the temple of Babylon, and they were delivered unto one, whose name was Sheshbazzar, whom he had made governor;
15 And said unto him, Take these vessels, go, carry them into the temple that is in Jerusalem, and let the house of God be builded in his place.
16 Then came the same Sheshbazzar, and laid the foundation of the house of God which is in Jerusalem: and since that time even until now hath it been in building, and yet it is not finished.
17 Now therefore, if it seem good to the king, let there be search made in the king's treasure house, which is there at Babylon, whether it be so, that a decree was made of Cyrus the king to build this house of God at Jerusalem, and let the king send his pleasure to us concerning this matter.

CHAPTER 6

1 Then Darius the king made a decree, and search was made in the house of the rolls, where the treasures were laid up in Babylon.
2 And there was found at Achmetha, in the palace that is in the province of the Medes, a roll, and therein was a record thus written:
3 In the first year of Cyrus the king the same Cyrus the king made a decree concerning the house of God at Jerusalem, Let the house be builded, the place where they offered sacrifices, and let the foundations thereof be strongly laid; the height thereof threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof threescore cubits;
4 With three rows of great stones, and a row of new timber: and let the expences be given out of the king's house:
5 And also let the golden and silver vessels of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took forth out of the temple which is at Jerusalem, and brought unto Babylon, be restored, and brought again unto the temple which is at Jerusalem, every one to his place, and place them in the house of God.
6 Now therefore, Tatnai, governor beyond the river, Shethar-boznai, and your companions the Apharsachites, which are beyond the river, be ye far from thence:
7 Let the work of this house of God alone; let the governor of the Jews and the elders of the Jews build this house of God in his place.
(KJV)


Dan 6:28
28 So this Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, and in the reign of Cyrus the Persian.
(KJV)

I'm aware that the title "Darius" simply is another word for 'king'.