Who is the Little Horn of Daniel?

[Bobby Jo]

Secular and pagan history does not trump Scripture. ...

Either they both agree, or someone is lying. And in the case of Darius, the commentators LIE:

Dan. 9:1 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasu-e′rus, by birth a Mede, who became king over the realm of the Chalde′ans​

Darius was the LAST Babylonian King. When the nobles killed Belshazzar in the Feast, for not assembling an army to confront Cyrus; for not sending messengers out to hire mercenaries; for not preparing ANY defense, -- but instead holding a FEAST; they placed Darius as the new king. And when they sought to control him but were unable because Darius gave greater deference to Daniel, the nobles decided to get rid of Daniel. -- And we know how that turned out, when the nobles, their children, and their wives were thrown into the lions den.


Secondly, how is it that MacArthur had to be "strengthened" when the Japanese signed the surrender on the U.S.S. Missouri? And if not, they why did Darius have to be "strengthened" as the "Persian King" (not) who conquered the Babylonians (not)?!?

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

Yeah, perhaps the commentators should have obeyed the angel's instructions:

Daniel 12:4 But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.”
9 He said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end. ​

... but they didn't, and you believed their lies ...
Bobby Jo

 

[Enoch111]

... but they didn't, and you believed their lies ...
Bobby Jo

More baloney from Bobby Jo

 

[Bobby Jo]

More baloney from Bobby Jo

Good Job. No HISTORY; No SCRIPTURE; No CRITIQUE; -- but plenty of SLANDER.


I'm quite confident that Jesus will welcome you along with the Sadducees and Pharisees!
Bobby Jo

 

[quietthinker]

Cyrus we know because the Medo/Persian records are complete, -- but there is NO RECORD of your Darius in Medo/Persian history. Furthermore the first historical account of any dual-monarchy isn't until the Roman Empire:

44 - 31BC -- both Julius Caesar Octavianus Augustus or Octavian and Marcus Antonius (Marc Antony)​

So if what you assert is TRUE, then please provide your HISTORICAL citation. -- Please don't waste our time using a "commentator" who is willing to lie to protect his FALSE agenda.

World History[1] [2]

BC
539 - 530 Cyrus the Great
530 - 522 Cambyses
522 - 486 Darius I (Hystaspes)
486 - 465 Xerxes
465 - 423 Artaxerxes I
423 Xerxes II - few weeks
423 Sogdianus - six months
423 - 404 Darius II
404 - 359 Artaxerxes II
359 - 338 Artaxerxes III (Ochus)
338 Arses
338 - 330 Darius III (Codomanus)

[1] Huot, Jean-Louis, Persia I - From the Origins to the Achaemenids, World Publishing Co., NY, 1965-67, pp. 12, 153-156
[2] Durant, Will, “Story of Civilization: Part I,” Simon and Schuster, NY, 1954, pp 353-354, 381-382​

Bobby Jo

what is your point in regards to the OP?

 

[Bobby Jo]

what is your point in regards to the OP?

The current discussion is:

... Unless there is a teachable and prayerful attitude ...

... and whether you have what you depict, as evidenced by providing Historical evidence for your assertion that "The two horns of the ram are indeed the kings of Media and Persia", -- which you've thus far FAILED TO DO.


And as so many in in this Forum perform to, I guess the old saying "put up or shut up" is a waste of breath because EVERYONE makes unsubstantiated claims and assertions, but when challenged, they NEVER retract ANYTHING. Sure, like you just did, they attempt to change the subject, but in the end they continue posting their tripe.

I guess Jesus did the same thing, because ALL these people assert their "christianity" (small "c"), -- and I apparently am mistaken in thinking that Jesus had INTEGRITY.


Glad I'm not a "christian" (small "c") ...
Bobby Jo



PS Maybe you could find a "muppet" picture where all three COVER THEIR EYES!

Isaiah 6:9 And he said, “Go, and say to this people:
‘Hear and hear, but do not understand; see and see, but do not perceive.’
10 Make the heart of this people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.”​

 

[quietthinker]

The current discussion is:


... and whether you have what you depict, as evidenced by providing Historical evidence for your assertion that "The two horns of the ram are indeed the kings of Media and Persia", -- which you've thus far FAILED TO DO.


And as so many in in this Forum perform to, I guess the old saying "put up or shut up" is a waste of breath because EVERYONE makes unsubstantiated claims and assertions, but when challenged, they NEVER retract ANYTHING. Sure, like you just did, they attempt to change the subject, but in the end they continue posting their tripe.

I guess Jesus did the same thing, because ALL these people assert their "christianity" (small "c"), -- and I apparently am mistaken in thinking that Jesus had INTEGRITY.


Glad I'm not a "christian" (small "c") ...
Bobby Jo



PS Maybe you could find a "muppet" picture where all three COVER THEIR EYES!

Isaiah 6:9 And he said, “Go, and say to this people:
‘Hear and hear, but do not understand; see and see, but do not perceive.’
10 Make the heart of this people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.”​

As to changing the subject, it is you who have changed it and subsequently the discussion reveals you have grievances aplenty. I am sorry you have not found faith in God's Word and the hope that comes from trusting it.

 

[brakelite]

Either they both agree, or someone is lying. And in the case of Darius, the commentators LIE:

Dan. 9:1 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasu-e′rus, by birth a Mede, who became king over the realm of the Chalde′ans​

Darius was the LAST Babylonian King. When the nobles killed Belshazzar in the Feast, for not assembling an army to confront Cyrus; for not sending messengers out to hire mercenaries; for not preparing ANY defense, -- but instead holding a FEAST; they placed Darius as the new king. And when they sought to control him but were unable because Darius gave greater deference to Daniel, the nobles decided to get rid of Daniel. -- And we know how that turned out, when the nobles, their children, and their wives were thrown into the lions den.


Secondly, how is it that MacArthur had to be "strengthened" when the Japanese signed the surrender on the U.S.S. Missouri? And if not, they why did Darius have to be "strengthened" as the "Persian King" (not) who conquered the Babylonians (not)?!?

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

Yeah, perhaps the commentators should have obeyed the angel's instructions:

Daniel 12:4 But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.”
9 He said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end. ​

... but they didn't, and you believed their lies ...
Bobby Jo

According to Xenophon's Cyropaedia (1.5.2), Cyaxares II followed king Astyages to the throne of the Median Empire, and he was also the brother of Mandane, Cyrus the Great's mother (1.2.1, 1.4.7). He describes the Persian Cyrus as leading the campaign to conquer Babylon in 539 BC, while his uncle Cyaxares remained in Ecbatana.[1] Cyaxares was by then an old man,[2] and because Cyrus was in command of the campaign, the army came to regard Cyrus as king. After Cyrus invited Cyaxares to a palace he had prepared for him in Babylon, Cyaxares granted him his daughter (Cyrus’s first cousin) in marriage, with the Median kingdom as her dowry.[3] Cyaxares nominally reigned from Babylon as head of the Medo-Persian empire for two years until his death,[4] the real power being Cyrus'.[5] Upon the death of Cyaxares, the empire passed peaceably to Cyrus.
There are also some steles and tablets which confirm the above account...apart from of course the Bible which testifies to the amicable relationship between the Medes and Persians with the Median king first in power, and the Persian kings reigning subsequently. The 3 ribs in the bears mouth equate to the powers broken by the Meds in particular previous to the Babylonian campaign...Lydia, Egypt and Assyria.
The Darius spoken of in Daniel 9 obviously cannot be the same one as Daniel himself by this time was old, being at the end of the captivity. It is quite likely has is of the seed of the Medes through the marriage between Cyrus and his Median cousin, and their offspring.

 

[Taken]

Who is the Little Horn of Daniel? <--- OP

In Brief ~
I would say the little horn in Daniel is A Nation in League with Ten Nations, and out of ( ie A "little horn" ) ONE Nation within the Ten Nation League, will rise up ONE Leader, who will be Elevated to a WORLD Leader Position.

ABOUt the "Elevated PERSON"...
...A Native of ONE of the TEN Nations.
...Have a Title of prominence among the Ten.
...Be A World Stage Authoritarian.
...Be MORTALLY Wounded.
...Literally DIE from his Mortal Wounds.
...Spirit of satan, shall ENTER hia body.
...His BODY shall APPEAR to have recovered;
.......and Been Brought BACK TO LIFE.
...The World shall Witness the "Persons"
.......Death and Recovery.
...The "PERSON"...ie the BODY of a man;
.......the spirit of satan within the BODY;
.......SHALL begin PRONOUNCING and .......PROMOTING HIMSELF... "AS GOD".
... SUCH Person SHALL HAVE a PROMINENT
.......Religious "side-kick", a mouthpiece of
.......sorts, supporting and preaching;
.......THAT "that PERSON" sitting in ruling
.......POWER, "IS" in fact...GOD.

WHO is this PERSON?
Not Yet Revealed.

However SIGNS are being Revealed...

Nations forming Leagues.
Nations within the Leagues with Leaders with a prominent influential voice.
Prominent World Religious Leaders Strongly voicing Political Opinions.
Nations leaders Leaning and openness of support for A World Leader/ Order of World Government.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Bobby Jo]

As to changing the subject, ...

Yeah, you said you could cite the Daniel 8 Two Kings Of Media And Persia, -- and when you couldn't do it, you changed the subject.

If it were me, I would have said: Thanks for bringing the lies of the commentators to my attention. Next time I'll check other people's work before I believe them.

But that's not what you did, -- and maybe that's the difference between Intellectual Honesty vs Intellectual Dishonesty, or Maturity vs Immaturity.


Bobby Jo

 

[Bobby Jo]

According to Xenophon's Cyropaedia (1.5.2), Cyaxares II followed king Astyages to the throne of the Median Empire, and he was also the brother of Mandane, Cyrus the Great's mother (1.2.1, 1.4.7). He describes the Persian Cyrus as leading the campaign to conquer Babylon in 539 BC, while his uncle Cyaxares remained in Ecbatana.[1] Cyaxares was by then an old man,[2] and because Cyrus was in command of the campaign, the army came to regard Cyrus as king. After Cyrus invited Cyaxares to a palace he had prepared for him in Babylon, Cyaxares granted him his daughter (Cyrus’s first cousin) in marriage, with the Median kingdom as her dowry.[3] Cyaxares nominally reigned from Babylon as head of the Medo-Persian empire for two years until his death,[4] the real power being Cyrus'.[5] Upon the death of Cyaxares, the empire passed peaceably to Cyrus.
There are also some steles and tablets which confirm the above account...apart from of course the Bible which testifies to the amicable relationship between the Medes and Persians with the Median king first in power, and the Persian kings reigning subsequently. The 3 ribs in the bears mouth equate to the powers broken by the Meds in particular previous to the Babylonian campaign...Lydia, Egypt and Assyria.
The Darius spoken of in Daniel 9 obviously cannot be the same one as Daniel himself by this time was old, being at the end of the captivity. It is quite likely has is of the seed of the Medes through the marriage between Cyrus and his Median cousin, and their offspring.

Whew, I don't know where to begin, but let me try:

1. The Medo/Persian historical records are COMPLETE, and there NEVER WAS any dual reign during Cyrus' reign or any other Medo/Persian Ruler.

2. There is only ONE "Darius" cited in the Book of Daniel.

3. When the Medo/Persian army surrounded Babylon (with 90' tall walls, which could pass TWO chariots at the top of the wall), Belshazzar was murdered and Darius was made King, but no messengers could be set to the world's libraries BECAUSE THE CITY WAS SURROUNDED.

4. When Babylon was about to fall, Daniel stood to confirm and STRENGTHEN the same King DARIUS, whose fate was soon to be placed at the feet of Cyrus:

Dan. 11:1 And as for me, in the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up to confirm and strengthen him.​

5. The commentators are disobedient LIARS. If they were OBEDIENT, they would have obeyed the Angel's instructions in 12:4 & 9:

Dan. 12:4 But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.”
9 He said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end. ​

And if you DID have an accurate account, then I'm confident you could provide an outline of the:

Dan. 11:2 ... three more kings shall arise in Persia; and a fourth shall be far richer than all of them; and when he has become strong through his riches, he shall stir up all against the kingdom of Greece.​

... and for your reference:

World History [1] [2]
539 - 530 Cyrus the Great
530 - 522 Cambyses
522 - 486 Darius I (Hystaspes)
486 - 465 Xerxes
465 - 423 Artaxerxes I
423 Xerxes II - few weeks
423 Sogdianus - six months
423 - 404 Darius II
404 - 359 Artaxerxes II
359 - 338 Artaxerxes III (Ochus)
338 Arses
338 - 330 Darius III (Codomanus)

[1] Huot, Jean-Louis, Persia I - From the Origins to the Achaemenids, World Publishing Co., NY, 1965-67, pp. 12, 153-156
[2] Durant, Will, Story of Civilization: Part I, Simon and Schuster, NY, 1954, pp 353-354, 381-382​

Thanks,
BJ

 

[quietthinker]

Yeah, you said you could cite the Daniel 8 Two Kings Of Media And Persia, -- and when you couldn't do it, you changed the subject.

If it were me, I would have said: Thanks for bringing the lies of the commentators to my attention. Next time I'll check other people's work before I believe them.

But that's not what you did, -- and maybe that's the difference between Intellectual Honesty vs Intellectual Dishonesty, or Maturity vs Immaturity.


Bobby Jo

It appears you want others to say what you want them to say....fortunately I am not you.

Now, perhaps you can sidestep the unnecessary accusations, leave off with the smokescreens and address the OP of who is the little horn in Daniel

 

[Bobby Jo]

It appears you want others to say what you want them to say ...

Please "Google" the terms: Intellectual Honesty vs Intellectual Dishonesty, & Maturity vs Immaturity


Bobby Jo

 

[Enoch111]

Please "Google" the terms: Intellectual Honesty vs Intellectual Dishonesty, & Maturity vs Immaturity

Bobby Jo,

Ever since coming on to this forum, all you have been doing is attacking other posters and calling them names. It is time to stop this foolishness. Focus on the issues, and if you can't, move on. Quitethinker is not one to be accused of intellectual dishonesty or immaturity. But those tags would fit you to a T.

 

[Bobby Jo]

... Focus on the issues, ...

"quietthinker" made the assertion that the Daniel 8 Ram's two horns/kings are:

... Darius the Mede and Cyrus the Persian ...

... and when challenged to provide an Historical citation of the purported dual reign, he changed the subject. So if YOU want to provide an Historical citation, THEN PLEASE DO. Otherwise, please feel free to encourage him to defend his doctrine, exactly as I have already provided my defense, and provide it again as follows:

World History[1] [2]
BC
539 - 530 Cyrus the Great
530 - 522 Cambyses
522 - 486 Darius I (Hystaspes)
486 - 465 Xerxes
465 - 423 Artaxerxes I
423 Xerxes II - few weeks
423 Sogdianus - six months
423 - 404 Darius II
404 - 359 Artaxerxes II
359 - 338 Artaxerxes III (Ochus)
338 Arses
338 - 330 Darius III (Codomanus)

[1] Huot, Jean-Louis, Persia I - From the Origins to the Achaemenids, World Publishing Co., NY, 1965-67, pp. 12, 153-156
[2] Durant, Will, Story of Civilization: Part I, Simon and Schuster, NY, 1954, pp 353-354, 381-382​

However if you want people to post things that aren't true, then just keep posting!


Bobby Jo

 

[Bobby Jo]

... Focus on the issues...

@quietthinker

I see YOU decided to slander instead of responding to the "issues" at hand. (Some might call that hypocritical, -- similar to when Jesus called the Sadducees & Pharisees Hypocrites.) Is it because neither " @quietthinker " nor you have an Historical source for the Ram's two Media & Persian kings, which QT asserted belong to the Medo/Persian Empire under Cyrus the Great?

It seems awfully quiet all of a sudden ... yeah, from both of you ...



To All,
I think it's pretty clear when a "christian" (small "c") asserts a false doctrine and is challenged to provide any substantiation, that all of sudden they go "dark". Of course they'll come back with more slanders, -- but nothing to support their doctrines BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING to support what they assert.

It's actually EASY to debunk false doctrines. All you have to do is avoid "commentators" (virtually ALL of them have agendas) and simply follow the Deut 18 guidance to check whatever source (Scripture/Prophet) against History! But that's the EASY part. The HARDER part is discovering what ACTUALLY occurred (Historically) and how Scripture is FULFILLED.

A LOT of people are turned off of Bible Prophecy by the "legion" of False doctrines, mainly because that's where they leave it, -- unresolved. It takes some WORK to solve these puzzles, but they ARE solvable and they DO align both Scripture and History. But very few people are willing to put in the work:

Matt. 11:12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and men of violence take it by force. -- which is better rendered as: the kingdom of heaven is obtained by pursuit, and pursuers take it by ardent action.​

mommy, it's too hard ... I just want the commentators to amuse us -- ("a" means not; "muse" means think = not think),
Bobby Jo