-
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!
I believe this event happened at Daniel 11:18:
Antiochus IV Epiphanes captured Cyprus (an island) and other areas. He kept going, but the 'reproach' was stopped by Laenas.
The next verse is when Antiochus IV Epiphanes falls off his chariot and dies:
The timeline offered by the mainstream "scholars" are all messed up. They are trying to associate the above verses with Antiochus III the Great. That is why they often say things like 'this explanation makes no sense' when you read their commentaries.
I am getting closer to concluding my Daniel 11 study. When it's finished, I will make a new thread and post my commentaries for every verse.
Basically, my conclusion will demonstrate that Daniel 11 is all past history. Moreover, it will prove that it foretold Jesus and the Crucifixion, something that most folks can't do with their interpretations.
The videos I posted in the OP are very close to being spot-on. Verse 20 is where Rome picks up as the new King of the North after the Medo-Persian Empire fizzled out.
I was looking into the 'Ships of Chittim' as being pirates, but the Battle of Actium turns out to be a much better fit:
This is great romantic stuff with Cleopatra, Mark Antony, Julius Caesar, Octavian Augustus and Pompey. It's Just like the movie:
It's absolutely epic history that everyone here seems to want to erase from Scripture.
Daniel 11:30 alludes to King Herod being installed, who forsakes the Holy Covenant and tries to kill Jesus after he is born.
Daniel 11:31 is a prophecy about King Herod:
It continues from there. Christians have no idea what they are reading.
Basically, my conclusion will demonstrate that Daniel 11 is all past history. Moreover, it will prove that it foretold Jesus and the Crucifixion, something that most folks can't do with their interpretations.
The videos I posted in the OP are very close to being spot-on. Verse 20 is where Rome picks up as the new King of the North after the Medo-Persian Empire fizzled out.
I was looking into the 'Ships of Chittim' as being pirates, but the Battle of Actium turns out to be a much better fit:
This is great romantic stuff with Cleopatra, Mark Antony, Julius Caesar, Octavian Augustus and Pompey. It's Just like the movie:
It's absolutely epic history that everyone here seems to want to erase from Scripture.
Daniel 11:30 alludes to King Herod being installed, who forsakes the Holy Covenant and tries to kill Jesus after he is born.
Daniel 11:31 is a prophecy about King Herod:
It continues from there. Christians have no idea what they are reading.
Put these two verses together:
The verses are about the Roman Caesars, and King Herod and his dynasty. The 'Prince of Princes' is Jesus of course. The 'indignation' is the Crucifixion.
King Herod was infamous for craft to prosper as he built all kinds of things. Heck, even the final Temple is called 'Herod's Temple'.
The verses are about the Roman Caesars, and King Herod and his dynasty. The 'Prince of Princes' is Jesus of course. The 'indignation' is the Crucifixion.
King Herod was infamous for craft to prosper as he built all kinds of things. Heck, even the final Temple is called 'Herod's Temple'.
If it's all history what's the significance of Dan 8.17,19,26, Dan 11.36, Dan 12.1,4,9,13 which mentions "the time of the end, the time of wrath, time of distress".
Maybe Dan 11 is all prophecy for the future "time of the end", where God is providing clues as to what will proceed prior to His coming.
Hi @Wish-it . Let's see what you got.
Here is the verse:
The phrase 'time of the end' in Daniel 8:17 is referring to the end of Daniels 70 week prophecy, not the end of the world. It covers a span of time ranging from the beginning of the Fourth Kingdom, with the reign of Julius Caesar, to Titus and destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
Here is the verse:
Daniel 8:19 is a little more specific. The 'indignation' is still the same time period, but the 'end of the indignation' is the Crucifixion itself with the destruction of Jerusalem coming a few decades later. The Crucifixion happens at an appointed time that was foretold in many verses in Daniel.
The Battle of Actium, in 11:30, is when the indignation time period begins:
It is around that time that King Herod is set up in Judea. That is who is being alluded to as 'forsaking the holy covenant'. In fact, King Herod and his dynasty is referred to in the very next verse:
Forces, i.e. King Herod, came from Octavian Augustus and Mark Antony. Herod's dynasty would go on to eventually pollute the Sanctuary of God, in other words crucify Jesus. The 'abomination that maketh desolate' was the Crucifixion. The daily sacrifice was no longer accepted after that point. Everything lines up perfectly.
The king in Daniel 11:36 is King Herod. His dynasty would prosper until the end of the indignation, i.e., until the Crucifixion and the 70AD siege.
I used to believe Daniel 12:1 was future, however I now believe it is just a continuation of chapter 11.
Daniel 12:2 is just referring to the small sample of people that were resurrected after Jesus died:
It is basically a 'preview' of the final two resurrections in our future.
Daniel 12:4 is about the end of the Old Testament and the words being 'sealed' as in no more words are going to be added. Daniel was one of the books of the OT. 'Knowledge increased' is about *THE* knowledge of the Old Testament and its prophecies, teachings, etc.
'The knowledge', as opposed to knowledge in general.
Yep, the end of Jerusalem and the Temple and the people of God who lived there at the time.
If we interpret Daniel 11 in that manner, then God basically flushed the Israelites and the Jews down the toilet centuries before Jesus even showed up. It does not make sense from a ton of standpoints and perspectives. Moreover, it is incredibly disrespectful to those who God considered a Holy Nation and Holy People at the time.
Here is the verse:
The phrase 'time of the end' in Daniel 8:17 is referring to the end of Daniels 70 week prophecy, not the end of the world. It covers a span of time ranging from the beginning of the Fourth Kingdom, with the reign of Julius Caesar, to Titus and destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
Here is the verse:
Daniel 8:19 is a little more specific. The 'indignation' is still the same time period, but the 'end of the indignation' is the Crucifixion itself with the destruction of Jerusalem coming a few decades later. The Crucifixion happens at an appointed time that was foretold in many verses in Daniel.
The Battle of Actium, in 11:30, is when the indignation time period begins:
It is around that time that King Herod is set up in Judea. That is who is being alluded to as 'forsaking the holy covenant'. In fact, King Herod and his dynasty is referred to in the very next verse:
Forces, i.e. King Herod, came from Octavian Augustus and Mark Antony. Herod's dynasty would go on to eventually pollute the Sanctuary of God, in other words crucify Jesus. The 'abomination that maketh desolate' was the Crucifixion. The daily sacrifice was no longer accepted after that point. Everything lines up perfectly.
The king in Daniel 11:36 is King Herod. His dynasty would prosper until the end of the indignation, i.e., until the Crucifixion and the 70AD siege.
I used to believe Daniel 12:1 was future, however I now believe it is just a continuation of chapter 11.
- Michael stand's up: He is always standing up in the Book of Daniel and ready to do battle. There is nothing unique about that.
- A time of trouble: Jacob's Trouble (Jeremiah 30:7).
- People shall be delivered: The finished work of the cross is just that. It is finished.
- Everyone written in the book: The book was written before the world began.
Daniel 12:2 is just referring to the small sample of people that were resurrected after Jesus died:
It is basically a 'preview' of the final two resurrections in our future.
Daniel 12:4 is about the end of the Old Testament and the words being 'sealed' as in no more words are going to be added. Daniel was one of the books of the OT. 'Knowledge increased' is about *THE* knowledge of the Old Testament and its prophecies, teachings, etc.
'The knowledge', as opposed to knowledge in general.
Yep, the end of Jerusalem and the Temple and the people of God who lived there at the time.
If we interpret Daniel 11 in that manner, then God basically flushed the Israelites and the Jews down the toilet centuries before Jesus even showed up. It does not make sense from a ton of standpoints and perspectives. Moreover, it is incredibly disrespectful to those who God considered a Holy Nation and Holy People at the time.
Thanks for your analysis, but as with many commentators on these passages, there seems to be an emphasis on historical fulfillment rather than future fulfillment. My considerations are more for future fulfillment. By placing prophecy in the historical past, reduces many from seeing what He is saying TODAY, to us now, and as a result dont see His plan. All I can suggest is to read it both ways to be sure the correct interpretation is applied for both then and now. NOW, seems pretty important, in my opinion.
Note. The expression ," the time of the end" could be broken down into differing periods, but we should also read the passages as if they are all discussing the same period of time, and that they could all be prophecy advice, not historical memoirs.
Note. The expression ," the time of the end" could be broken down into differing periods, but we should also read the passages as if they are all discussing the same period of time, and that they could all be prophecy advice, not historical memoirs.
Similar threads
