2300 Evening-mornings of Daniel 8
- Thread starter samy
- Start date
-
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!
Maybe its just cant even follow where you are going from Daniel, to acts, to corithians, John, peter We are talking 2300 day to sacrafice to Gods holy temple (spirtual) to the sanctuary of the prince what are you trying to say and what connection or reason are using to make all these connections. Seems like scripture fishing hodge podge of verses to try to make some point that may be clear to you, but its not translating your going to have to pull it together in to some cohesiveness. Ill say one thing for you samy your more fun than a barrel of monkeys
Maybe if I answer you in smaller bites you wil get it. What part of the next two verses don't you understand to mean that the Christians Paul is speaking to are the temple of the Holy Spirit? “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" Then in Paul's letter to the Ephesians, we read in Chapter 2, versus 19 through 22,"Now, therefore, ye are no more strangers and sojourners, but fellow citizens with the Saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone, in whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord; in whom ye also are built together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." samy
I just this evening followed this thread. Very interesting. I enjoy these types of discussions. As for the 2,300 days, I too have done research looking into the question. I read on it in a dictionary of OT Theology and Exegesis (NIDOTTE) (Zondervan: Willem van Gemeren, ed.,) a highly-regarded reference work. The understanding appears to be that the Hebrew words for evening and morning have a range of applications, including literal 24 hour days, regular time periods and years. I also took a look at how the Reformers and Bible students in past centuries understood the term. Sir Isaac Newton, in his work, "Observations on the Book of Daniel," understands the term to mean 'years.' He described the 'day for a year' principle. As early as the twelfth century, Joachim of Floris, writing in 'Concordantiae' also referred to the day-year understanding of Biblical interpretation.Of course, that is only one possible schema. Treat it as a hypothesis. The next step would be to test the hypothesis. The beginning of the 2,300 day time period is stated to be the 'going forth of the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem.' That such is the beginning point it evident from at least two facts. First, Gabriel returned in Dan. 8 to explain the vision in ch. 7, which overwhelmed Daniel. Second, the Hebrew word 'chataq' means 'cut off from,' that is from the longer time period. The command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem is described in the book of Ezra. If we use that as a starting poing, testing the hypothesis, we find that the first section of the 2,300 day prophecy takes us to the life and sacrificial death of the Messiah. It appears from Daniel ch. 9 that God gave the Jews another chance after their exile. The angel said, '70 weeks are determined (cut off--chataq) for thy people . . .' Seventy times seven years. At the end of that time period, the Jews rejected God, and God broke off the natural branches and grafted in the Gentiles. They now had their chance, their day in the sun. At the completion of the 2,300 day time period, they, too would be judged.Which brings us to the meaning of the phrase, 'then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.' The cleansing of the sanctuary is described in Leviticus ch. 23. It occurred on the Day of Atonement. Throughout the year, a record was kept of the sins of the people, and their repentance. Each time a penitent sinner brought a sacrifice to die in his place, a record was kept, symbolized by the blood dashed on the sides of the altar or sprinkled in front of the veil of the Most Holy. The Bible states that the sanctuary needed to be 'cleansed' from the iniquities of the people of Israel. So, in the 2,300 day time prophecy, a record is kept of the acts and works of the people. At the end of the time, the sanctuary (this time the heavenly sanctuary, Heb. 9, 10) is to be cleansed or purified from the record of their sins and repentance. This takes place at the beginning of 'the time of the end,' after which prophetic time would be no more.Dave
You write, "The next step would be to test the hypothesis. The beginning of the 2,300 day time period is stated to be the 'going forth of the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem.' That such is the beginning point it evident from at least two facts. First, Gabriel returned in Dan. 8 to explain the vision in ch. 7, which overwhelmed Daniel." This step appears to be at the best arbitrary. In Daniel 8 the 2300 evening mo rnings begin with something quite other than the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem." Instead we see this difficult to interpret time period beginning with the removal of the continuity from the Prince and the throwing down fo his sanctuary, not the construction of it! samy
I would like to offer a different understanding concerning this vision. When the tribulation period begins, there will be much debate whether it has started or not. God has provided a secondary sign (a sign which will confirm the tribulation period has started) which will take place 255 days after the tribulation period begins. This sign is found in the vision of the two horned ram by Daniel. The details are found in the following verses.Dan 8: 13 Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to him, "How long will it take for the vision to be fulfilled—the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, the rebellion that causes desolation, and the surrender of the sanctuary and of the host that will be trampled underfoot?" 14 He said to me, "It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated."If you review the entire chapter of Daniel 8 you will see that events transpire as follows:1. The A/C downs “starry host” and tramples them underfoot2. The A/C desecrates the temples (the daily sacrifice, the rebellion that causes desolation, and the surrender of the sanctuary)3. The sanctuary(Temple) is reconsecrated....for a duration of 2300 days.According to the OT, the temple mount, if desecrated must be reconsecrated before sacrifices and worship can be started. At some time when the yet-to-be built Temple is being built the mount will have to be reconsecrated because it has been defiled for centuries. The minute the A/C steps in the holy place and proclaims himself God, the temple will again be defiled and will remain desecrated until the advent of Christ where Christ the High Priest will reconsecrate the mount again.This reconsecration of the sanctuary by Christ provides us with an endpoint of this 2300 day vision. And we know that the A/C will desecrate the temple 1263 ½ days before the advent of Christ. The significance of this vision is that the A/C will down “starry host” 2300 days before TDOL. And both the tribulation period and this vision of the 2300 days both end with TDOL.The tribulation period is supposed to be seven years in duration. 7 x 365 = 2555If you subtract 2300 days from the 2555 you have a difference of 255 days. So, if the tribulation period is seven years in duration then the “starry host” will be downed by the A/C 255 days after the start of the tribulation period. What or who the “starry host” are is a whole different topic.In Yehoshua,Guy Smith
I think there is something you are missing here. Notice carefully what is writtenan 821And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. 22Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. 23And 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. The goat (and the first horn) was to represent the king of Greece: none other than Alexander the Great. The broken horn was to represent the death of Alexander, and the kingdom passing to his four generals. Now, notice verse 23: "in the latter time of their kingdom..." Sorry guys, but this little horn is Antiochus, not the beast of Rev. 13. This is speaking of the cleansing of the temple, after Antiochus sacrificed the pig.Coop
an 821And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. 22Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. 23And 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. The goat (and the first horn) was to represent the king of Greece: none other than Alexander the Great. The broken horn was to represent the death of Alexander, and the kingdom passing to his four generals. Now, notice verse 23: "in the latter time of their kingdom..." Sorry guys, but this little horn is Antiochus, not the beast of Rev. 13. This is speaking of the cleansing of the temple, after Antiochus sacrificed the pig.CoopSorry coop, but the angel Gabriel said that the vision spoke of the time of the end, not the time of Antiochus, and the 2300 spoke evening-mornings spoke of many days (not years). samy
(samy;50255)
Sorry coop, but the angel Gabriel said that the vision spoke of the time of the end, not the time of Antiochus, and the 2300 spoke evening-mornings spoke of many days (not years). samy
Samy, I disagree. Let's look:17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision. 18 Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright. 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. 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. 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. 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. 26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days. 27 And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king's business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood it.There is no question that the first 14 verses are speaking of Antiochus Epiphanes. But lets examine these verses: The first statement is "at the time of the end shall be the vision." Now, the angel will amplify that and tell what he means. His next statement is "I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be." What is the indignation he is speaking about? Of course, the previous verses about Antiochus. so the "end" he is making reference to, is the end of the terror of Antiochus. He proves this further by what he says next:"20The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. 21And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king."Clearly he is speaking of the vison of the ram and the goat - not something 2500 years into the future. (It was future to them.) He goes on speaking of the major horn on the goat, "being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation" This is exactly what happened when Alexander died. So the angel is still speaking of ancient empires. Now we must "listen" very carefully:"23And 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. Again, this is speaking of the days of Antiochus. he came alone many years after the Selucid empire started at Alexander's death.The key is, "their kingdom" was totally defeated by Rome.However, that being said, these verses, 23-27, may well have a "double reference" and also refer to the beast of Revelation 13. The time frame of the 2300 days, in my opinion, was speaking of Antiochus. He desecrated the temple, and the temple was later cleansed.What do you make of the beasts of chapter 7? Are they a "repeat" of the empires of the great image - or are they all about the time yet future to us? Coop
Sorry coop, but the angel Gabriel said that the vision spoke of the time of the end, not the time of Antiochus, and the 2300 spoke evening-mornings spoke of many days (not years). samy
Samy, I disagree. Let's look:17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision. 18 Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright. 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. 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. 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. 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. 26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days. 27 And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; afterward I rose up, and did the king's business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood it.There is no question that the first 14 verses are speaking of Antiochus Epiphanes. But lets examine these verses: The first statement is "at the time of the end shall be the vision." Now, the angel will amplify that and tell what he means. His next statement is "I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be." What is the indignation he is speaking about? Of course, the previous verses about Antiochus. so the "end" he is making reference to, is the end of the terror of Antiochus. He proves this further by what he says next:"20The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. 21And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king."Clearly he is speaking of the vison of the ram and the goat - not something 2500 years into the future. (It was future to them.) He goes on speaking of the major horn on the goat, "being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation" This is exactly what happened when Alexander died. So the angel is still speaking of ancient empires. Now we must "listen" very carefully:"23And 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. Again, this is speaking of the days of Antiochus. he came alone many years after the Selucid empire started at Alexander's death.The key is, "their kingdom" was totally defeated by Rome.However, that being said, these verses, 23-27, may well have a "double reference" and also refer to the beast of Revelation 13. The time frame of the 2300 days, in my opinion, was speaking of Antiochus. He desecrated the temple, and the temple was later cleansed.What do you make of the beasts of chapter 7? Are they a "repeat" of the empires of the great image - or are they all about the time yet future to us? Coop
Hi Denver,I was reading this post and am confused by your comments. It soudns like you were reading samy to say that the church/people is the Prince. That's not what I read. What I read is that the church is the TEMPLE of the Prince who is Jesus. And this is clearly true in scripture, so what's wrong with his comments? I'm new here so just trying to understand...thanks!Liz(Denver;47292)
BULL.Plain and simple. Samy, you've take some real liberties with the Word in the past, but this is probably the most ridiculous thing I've heard you say yet. Isaiah 9:6There is only one Prince. I hope no one goes along with you on this trash. I've let some other things pass, because there are different interpretations of this and that, but this is absolutely ridiculous to even suggest that Prince stands for the people. You could make an argument if you really tried for the two witnesses, but not this. Quit misleading people with this nonsense.
BULL.Plain and simple. Samy, you've take some real liberties with the Word in the past, but this is probably the most ridiculous thing I've heard you say yet. Isaiah 9:6There is only one Prince. I hope no one goes along with you on this trash. I've let some other things pass, because there are different interpretations of this and that, but this is absolutely ridiculous to even suggest that Prince stands for the people. You could make an argument if you really tried for the two witnesses, but not this. Quit misleading people with this nonsense.
(samy;47170)
But because there are those who do not understand how to reconcile the plain sense of the creation account and the findings of science, the Genesis language stating a litereal six-day creation is redefined to mean something else.
I an not sure what you mean by this comment. Does this mean that you believe the literal 6 day creation account or not?For the rest of it it is very interesting and I am very much aware that all the other time sequences in Daniel give the 3 1/2 year account to the abomination of desolation and the war against the saints. The problem with your math is that the Greek also gives 42 months or 3 1/2 years which can not be misinterpreted. It is translated correctly. And while you are technically correct about the definition of the word sacrifice not being there it is included in the definition of the word daily.StrongsDailytâmîydtaw-meed'From an unused root meaning to stretch; properly continuance (as indefinite extension); but used only (attributively as adjective) constant (or adverbially constantly); elliptically the regular (daily) sacrifice: - alway (-s), continual (employment, -ly), daily, ([n-]) ever (-more), perpetual.I am not a scholar of the Hebrew language but I do know that context is very important in the definitions of words in that language. And I am pretty certain that those Hebrew scholars that did translate the Hebrew text of the Bible put either "sacrifice" or "burnt offering" in every single translation that I know of, including the spanish edition. (LBLA)Can you explain this?
But because there are those who do not understand how to reconcile the plain sense of the creation account and the findings of science, the Genesis language stating a litereal six-day creation is redefined to mean something else.
I an not sure what you mean by this comment. Does this mean that you believe the literal 6 day creation account or not?For the rest of it it is very interesting and I am very much aware that all the other time sequences in Daniel give the 3 1/2 year account to the abomination of desolation and the war against the saints. The problem with your math is that the Greek also gives 42 months or 3 1/2 years which can not be misinterpreted. It is translated correctly. And while you are technically correct about the definition of the word sacrifice not being there it is included in the definition of the word daily.StrongsDailytâmîydtaw-meed'From an unused root meaning to stretch; properly continuance (as indefinite extension); but used only (attributively as adjective) constant (or adverbially constantly); elliptically the regular (daily) sacrifice: - alway (-s), continual (employment, -ly), daily, ([n-]) ever (-more), perpetual.I am not a scholar of the Hebrew language but I do know that context is very important in the definitions of words in that language. And I am pretty certain that those Hebrew scholars that did translate the Hebrew text of the Bible put either "sacrifice" or "burnt offering" in every single translation that I know of, including the spanish edition. (LBLA)Can you explain this?
I believe in a six literal day creation and an old earth. Hebrew lexicons do not include the word sacrifice except by way of association. The word for sacrifice is used by Daniel in other places, but not here. I'll have to look them up for you. I just returned from being in the hospital and out of town. I'll post again later this evening. samy
and please note that every use of tamid is NOT with the word sacrifice. It is a VERY common word used with many different words. samy
Tamid is used a total of two times with any words that refer to sacrifice for certain--Num 4:16 an 29:6. It is used by itself in Daniel and assumed to mean daily sacrifice on the very thin evidence of the two usages in Numbers. The word for sacrifice, zebach, is used by Daniel only one time, and that is in Daniel 9:27 where we do not find the word tamid. The word Tamid is used no where else in the Bible with sacrifice, other than Numbers. Does this help? samy
(samy;51033)
Tamid is used a total of two times with any words that refer to sacrifice for certain--Num 4:16 an 29:6. It is used by itself in Daniel and assumed to mean daily sacrifice on the very thin evidence of the two usages in Numbers. The word for sacrifice, zebach, is used by Daniel only one time, and that is in Daniel 9:27 where we do not find the word tamid. The word Tamid is used no where else in the Bible with sacrifice, other than Numbers. Does this help? samy
First I am so glad that you have not been fooled by the lies of an old earth espoused by so many so called Christians. The old earth theory by intelligent design is trying to meld evolution lies with Bible truth. This can not be done without doing irreparable damage to the credibility of the Bible.RULE #1I have learned you can not interpret any prophecy unless that interpretation harmonizes with the other scriptures concerning the same time frame or prophecy.Harmonize, Harmonize, Harmonize. THEY HAVE TO HARMONIZE.I must be honest I believe that I have the better grasp on eschatology than anyone I have ever met. That is not bragging it simply is. I was arguing against a pretrib rapture before many of the people on the forum were born. Since 1983 I have spoke against this heretical teaching. I was arguing against it almost totally alone. Everyone seemed to believed the pretribulation heresy.I know the chronology of the last days. I know what the mark of the beast is. I have even studied the evil forces plans to implement the mark and many other things that were foretold by the Bible. They exactly coincide with Bibles prophecies except the part when they loose. We are very close to dealing with all that is written about the beast in Rev 13. Even at the door.The second thing I must be totally honest about is that the scripture in question has always puzzled me because of the time differences. But if you are correct then this scripture has to be talking about something other than the abomination of desolation. The abomination of desolation definitly speaks of taking away the sacrifice.Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.And that is in midweek. If we understand that week to be a week of years which is the only thing that makes sense if you harmonize it with all the other scriptures. The differences I find in these passages and the ones in Daniel chapters 11&12 are these. Chapter 11 deals with events leading up to the abomination of desolation and shortly after then chapter 12 seems to end the prophecy with the resurrection and Michael standing up for the 144,000 Jews. More harmonizing from Revelations. But chapter 8 speaks of cleansing the sanctuary. They all use the Hebrew word for desolation but chapter 8 doesn't use the word abomination. But they are obviously speaking of the same time frame because of how they end. So just maybe the cleansing of the sanctuary is the time frame for this passage and not the time framed outlined in 9:27 and . That being Dan 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Now lets take a closer look a the other scriptures that Jesus instructed us to look at. All those scriptures that Daniel used the phrase "abomination of desolation".Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. Sacrifice is definitely used in the first one.Dan 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. Dan 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. But these two use just the word daily or continual. But they all use the term abomination of desolation and they are all definitely speaking about the end time because the Lord personally defeats this king.So here is my conclusion so far.The reason Daniel did not use the word sacrifice is because he had already used in in chapter 9. The visions he had after that were a clarifying of all the visions he had experienced up till then. And the time frame given in the chapters after 9 were from the time frame of chapter 9 which was the making of the covenant and breaking it with the abomination of desolation. But chapter 8 went from when the abomination of desolation was set up until the sanctuary would be cleansed, which could be any time after the Lord returns to resurrect and catch away the saints. That just makes me think that the time between the abomination of desolation and the Lords return with the saints to rule of Rev 19 may be longer than first thought. Don't confuse the Lords return to resurrect and catch away the saints to heaven for the wedding supper and when he returns with them to rule. The Lord will not set foot on earth the first time. He will take the saints to heaven for the wedding supper. While that is happening the things associated with trumpets and vials of Revelations will be taking place on earth.The actual first resurrection of Rev 20:4-6 will happen in a matter of weeks after the abomination of desolation is set up. That much I am certain about. Definitely less than two months. Sorry it was so long.
Tamid is used a total of two times with any words that refer to sacrifice for certain--Num 4:16 an 29:6. It is used by itself in Daniel and assumed to mean daily sacrifice on the very thin evidence of the two usages in Numbers. The word for sacrifice, zebach, is used by Daniel only one time, and that is in Daniel 9:27 where we do not find the word tamid. The word Tamid is used no where else in the Bible with sacrifice, other than Numbers. Does this help? samy
First I am so glad that you have not been fooled by the lies of an old earth espoused by so many so called Christians. The old earth theory by intelligent design is trying to meld evolution lies with Bible truth. This can not be done without doing irreparable damage to the credibility of the Bible.RULE #1I have learned you can not interpret any prophecy unless that interpretation harmonizes with the other scriptures concerning the same time frame or prophecy.Harmonize, Harmonize, Harmonize. THEY HAVE TO HARMONIZE.I must be honest I believe that I have the better grasp on eschatology than anyone I have ever met. That is not bragging it simply is. I was arguing against a pretrib rapture before many of the people on the forum were born. Since 1983 I have spoke against this heretical teaching. I was arguing against it almost totally alone. Everyone seemed to believed the pretribulation heresy.I know the chronology of the last days. I know what the mark of the beast is. I have even studied the evil forces plans to implement the mark and many other things that were foretold by the Bible. They exactly coincide with Bibles prophecies except the part when they loose. We are very close to dealing with all that is written about the beast in Rev 13. Even at the door.The second thing I must be totally honest about is that the scripture in question has always puzzled me because of the time differences. But if you are correct then this scripture has to be talking about something other than the abomination of desolation. The abomination of desolation definitly speaks of taking away the sacrifice.Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.And that is in midweek. If we understand that week to be a week of years which is the only thing that makes sense if you harmonize it with all the other scriptures. The differences I find in these passages and the ones in Daniel chapters 11&12 are these. Chapter 11 deals with events leading up to the abomination of desolation and shortly after then chapter 12 seems to end the prophecy with the resurrection and Michael standing up for the 144,000 Jews. More harmonizing from Revelations. But chapter 8 speaks of cleansing the sanctuary. They all use the Hebrew word for desolation but chapter 8 doesn't use the word abomination. But they are obviously speaking of the same time frame because of how they end. So just maybe the cleansing of the sanctuary is the time frame for this passage and not the time framed outlined in 9:27 and . That being Dan 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Now lets take a closer look a the other scriptures that Jesus instructed us to look at. All those scriptures that Daniel used the phrase "abomination of desolation".Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. Sacrifice is definitely used in the first one.Dan 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. Dan 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. But these two use just the word daily or continual. But they all use the term abomination of desolation and they are all definitely speaking about the end time because the Lord personally defeats this king.So here is my conclusion so far.The reason Daniel did not use the word sacrifice is because he had already used in in chapter 9. The visions he had after that were a clarifying of all the visions he had experienced up till then. And the time frame given in the chapters after 9 were from the time frame of chapter 9 which was the making of the covenant and breaking it with the abomination of desolation. But chapter 8 went from when the abomination of desolation was set up until the sanctuary would be cleansed, which could be any time after the Lord returns to resurrect and catch away the saints. That just makes me think that the time between the abomination of desolation and the Lords return with the saints to rule of Rev 19 may be longer than first thought. Don't confuse the Lords return to resurrect and catch away the saints to heaven for the wedding supper and when he returns with them to rule. The Lord will not set foot on earth the first time. He will take the saints to heaven for the wedding supper. While that is happening the things associated with trumpets and vials of Revelations will be taking place on earth.The actual first resurrection of Rev 20:4-6 will happen in a matter of weeks after the abomination of desolation is set up. That much I am certain about. Definitely less than two months. Sorry it was so long.
To All,
Scripture is no a cafeteria, where one simply picks from the selection. Thus to simply postulate a ~fulfillment~ for the 2,300 without satisfying the Ram the HeGoat; the four lesser horns; the south/east/glorious-land; the one who understands riddles; etc, -- is simply foolishness.
So I would most strongly recommend that any interpretation start at the beginning, (in full context with the other prophetic chapters), and finish at the end.
BibleScribe
Scripture is no a cafeteria, where one simply picks from the selection. Thus to simply postulate a ~fulfillment~ for the 2,300 without satisfying the Ram the HeGoat; the four lesser horns; the south/east/glorious-land; the one who understands riddles; etc, -- is simply foolishness.
So I would most strongly recommend that any interpretation start at the beginning, (in full context with the other prophetic chapters), and finish at the end.
BibleScribe
The Hebrew word zebach, most often used for "sacrifice" in the OT, is not necessary in those Daniel Scriptures to know that's what it's referring to. And the reason is simple.
In Matthew 24 and Mark 13 our Lord Jesus referred back to the "abomination of desolation" event from the Book of Daniel, where in Daniel is mentioned the taking away of the daily (sacrifice) and the placing of the abomination that maketh desolate (Dan.11:31; 12:11).
There was no way for Christ's disciples there on the Mount of Olives to misinterpret the "abomination of desolation" event from the Book of Daniel, simply because... in 170 B.C. with one named Antiochus Epiphenes, he conquered Jerusalem, ended the daily sacrifices, went inside the temple and sacrificed swine and spread its broth around, and then setup an IDOL abomination in the temple for all to bow to, in honor of pagan Greek Zeus worship.
So the KJV translators were very correct in putting the word "sacrifice" in those passages in the Book of Daniel. It is... about the daily sacrifices under the Old Covenant temple worship system.
In Matthew 24 and Mark 13 our Lord Jesus referred back to the "abomination of desolation" event from the Book of Daniel, where in Daniel is mentioned the taking away of the daily (sacrifice) and the placing of the abomination that maketh desolate (Dan.11:31; 12:11).
There was no way for Christ's disciples there on the Mount of Olives to misinterpret the "abomination of desolation" event from the Book of Daniel, simply because... in 170 B.C. with one named Antiochus Epiphenes, he conquered Jerusalem, ended the daily sacrifices, went inside the temple and sacrificed swine and spread its broth around, and then setup an IDOL abomination in the temple for all to bow to, in honor of pagan Greek Zeus worship.
So the KJV translators were very correct in putting the word "sacrifice" in those passages in the Book of Daniel. It is... about the daily sacrifices under the Old Covenant temple worship system.
According to Daniel 12:4 & 9, the prophecies of Daniel are end-time, which I would argue is approximate to 1948. Thus what you presume, and what you assign is in contradiction with this guidance. And presuming the angel is correct, then that would make you .............
BibleScribe
revturmoil
New Member
That makes him what? A liar??? You are so full of snide accusations that I'm seriously considering leaving the forum.
Of course I have the option of putting you and popeye on ignore. But that would only hide your un-Christlike, snide, hideous and slanderous comments from me.
You and popeye calling Veteran and I a liar is an abomination.
Therefore I will follow suit.
There's no diffenrce between you and popeye. But there is only one difference between you two and that old dried out piece of white doggie dung on my front lawn.
And that is.........
That old dried out piece of white doggie dung on my front lawn......
Doesn't stink anymore!
Similar threads
