- This topic has 649 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Gadam
Prophecy does not separate the Medes from the Persians
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.Please read my post with the verses I have quoted to understand Dan 8:20 with Dan 11:1-3. The merger of Medo-Persia is no where found in the history. The original texts contain Media as separate kingdom ruled by a fictitious king Darius as per Chap 5:30-31, 6, 9:1, Dan 11:1-2
Dan 11:
1 As for me, in the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up to support and strengthen him.
2 “Now I will announce the truth to you. Three more kings shall arise in Persia.
The above clearly shows us that Darius the Mede no where connected to Persia. Daniel 11 is the detailed interpretation of vision in chapter 8. This is clear how the editorial is made in Dan 8:20 which originally meant for kings of Persia only.
There is no mention of Rome in this book as a worldwide empire like Persia or Greece. The Jewish and Christian apologists simply speculate to include Rome as fourth by clubbing Medo-Persia as one kingdom. The so called God’s Kingdom by the Jewish saints never took place in the history as predicted by this writer. The rest are all speculations by the religionists.
Median dynasty
The list of Median rulers and their period of reign is compiled according to two sources. Firstly, Herodotus who calls them “kings” and associates them with the same family. Secondly, the Babylonian Chronicle which in “Gadd’s Chronicle on the Fall of Nineveh” gives its own list. A combined list stretching over 150 years is thus:Deioces (700–647 BC)
Phraortes (647–625 BC)
Scythian rule (624–597 BC)
Cyaxares (624–585 BC)
Astyages (585–549 BC)In Herodotus (book 1, chapters 95–130), Deioces is introduced as the founder of a centralised Median state. He had been known to the Median people as “a just and incorruptible man” and when asked by the Median people to solve their possible disputes he agreed and put forward the condition that they make him “king” and build a great city at Ecbatana as the capital of the Median state. Judging from the contemporary sources of the region and disregarding the account of Herodotus puts the formation of a unified Median state during the reign of Cyaxares or later.
The above historical records show that the book of Daniel gives the fictitious rule of Darius the unknown king of Media who had terminated the empire of Chaldeans in Chap 5.
Hi Gadam
Prophecy does not separate the Medes from the Persians
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.Thanks Berean.
It’s not worth reading gadam’s long posts that need Medo Persia to be two separate kingdoms. That is a complete waste of time.
Gadam, could you perhaps say in the opening paragraph if this idea of yours is required. That way I can ignore the post. And it will encourage me to read posts that do not require this as I know I will be wasting my time less.
Thanks in advance.
Gadam, history is incomplete. One of the reasons for this is because victors get to write it. The bear in Daniel’s vision was lopsided because one kingdom was stronger than the other. Daniel says that they both conquered Babylon and this could be explained by the idea that neither could have done it alone. But later as we see, the Persians were stronger and they would have written history to make them look better. Certainly in the historical records we see contradictions around this event, so there is no historical consensus, yet you reply 100% on this.
When studying the Book of Daniel I do not mix the records of men to take the book off into a direction that was unintended. So I won’t be swayed.
We often see claims that the Bible was wrong with this or that, but then archaeology proves these accusations wrong.
Be patient. Archaeology has much to uncover.
Gadam,
could you perhaps say in the opening paragraph if this idea of yours is required. That way I can ignore the post. And it will encourage me to read posts that do not require this as I know I will be wasting my time less.
Thanks in advance.
Hi Proclaimer,
Gadam writes in the style of Jodi, L-O-N-G winded speeches,
riddled with errors. I too just scroll past these type of posts.____________
God bless
Ed JHi Gadam,
Consider making one point, using just a few short paragraphs,
and I may actually read what you write, and even respond to it.____________
God bless
Ed JHi Gadam
Prophecy does not separate the Medes from the Persians
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.Yes, good job Berean!
Hi Proclaimer,
Gadam writes in the style of Jodi, L-O-N-G winded speeches,
riddled with errors. I too just scroll past these type of posts.Exactly. I also think long winded posts and documents can hide all kinds of lies and deceit. Let your yes be yes and no be no.
Exactly. I also think long winded posts and documents can hide all kinds of lies and deceit. Let your yes be yes and no be no.
You people are forgetting that this was the style of the Biblical writers especially the writers of Daniel and Revelation who could conceal many such things as you refer, in their ambiguous predictions. But at least the Danielic writer revealed the ex-eventu (past events) as predictions like the four great empires with names. Even then the Jewish and Christian apologists speculated over his so called predictions (past events) to suit their own great ideas.
This is what I was arguing against dear friends here.
You people are forgetting that this was the style of the Biblical writers especially the writers of Daniel and Revelation who could conceal many such things as you refer,
The Bible is not a discussion forum like Heaven Net.
Of course writings have their place. But if I had a discussion with you at a cafe, would you speak in that fashion?
Writings take a lot of time to consume and judge. For this reason I mostly do not bother with them in a forum setting. Further, addressing every point takes longer than the post you are addressing. And many will not read the reply due to its size. This also gives the illusion that your argument is solid because no one is offering a rebuttal.
A discussion is much more efficient when a post has one or two points. Easy to reply to and easy to read. Of course I am not saying you should never write or paste a whole essay, as they can be useful. But just don’t do it every time is my advice.
However, if you still prefer this style of communication, then there is a debate section that caters for this. Check out these debates for example. It usually took the format of an essay followed by reply that attempted to debunk multiple points and the main argument in the writing.
The Bible is not a discussion forum like Heaven Net.
Of course writings have their place. But if I had a discussion with you at a cafe, would you speak in that fashion?
Writings take a lot of time to consume and judge. For this reason I mostly do not bother with them in a forum setting. Further, addressing every point takes longer than the post you are addressing. And many will not read the reply due to its size. This also gives the illusion that your argument is solid because no one is offering a rebuttal.
Thanks for your suggestions and advice but without comments on the Biblical writings there is not much scope for debates here as the traditions are based on these writings only. Even the so called doctrines like Trinity, Preexistence, Messiah and endtime predictions all depend on these Biblical writings.
My style of comments are different because I see things skeptically. I do not take forgranted of these writings as sacred and supernatural as a fundamentalist. I see them as ancient texts which were written to suit their own audience and timeline.
I also bring critical arguments from the historical perspective than traditional religious perspective.
Thank you.
That’s fine gadam. But you can still do this in a simple and concise way.
Try putting up a heading 2 with a title that addresses your post.
Maybe one, two, three possibly four paragraphs.
Keep it focussed around the heading.
You will get a lot more engagement and it’s good for SEO too.
Who are the seven kings of Revelation 17?
Rev 17:
7 But the angel said to me, “Why are you so amazed? I will tell you the mystery of the woman, and of the beast with seven heads and ten horns that carries her. 8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to ascend from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the inhabitants of the earth, whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will be amazed when they see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come.
9 “This calls for a mind that has wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; also, they are seven kings, 10 of whom five have fallen, one is living, and the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain only a little while. 11 As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to destruction. 12 And the ten horns that you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they are to receive authority as kings for one hour, together with the beast. 13 These are united in yielding their power and authority to the beast; 14 they will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful.”
It’s taken for granted that (1) Revelation uses the Nero Redux/Redivivus legend, (2) the book was written in the 90s, and (3) six hundred sixty-six is gematria of the Greek for ‘Nero Caesar’ as well as ‘beast’. But can we know who the seven kings were meant to be?
they are seven kings, of whom five have fallen, one is living, and the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain for only a little while. As for the beast that was and is not, it is an eighth but it belongs to the seven, and it goes to destruction.
That John is attempting to outline a sequence of specific Roman emperors seems obvious. Daniel 11 does it with the kings of Syria and Egypt. Fourth Ezra 11-12 does it with the Roman emperors. If John is using the number ‘seven kings’ purely symbolically, it is not self-evident since he specifies which ones are dead or alive.
But no matter what order of emperors I compare this to, significant questions emerge.
Counting Julius Caesar as the first fits other ancient sources (4 Ezra, Suetonius, Sibylline Oracles, etc.), but inevitably puts the book’s origin in Vespasian’s rule at the latest (depending if we discount Galba, Otho, or Vitellius), which is too early. Beginning with Augustus puts us under Titus at the latest, but this is still too early for the book’s commonly accepted origin in the 90s.
Is there any consensus on (or at least a respected scholar arguing strongly for) specific identifications for the seven ‘kings’ in chapter 17?
Domitian is counted as Nero Redivivus. Julius Caesar was never an Emperor, so the seven Emperors are:
Augustus
Tiberius
Caligula
Claudius
Nero
Vespasian [skipping past Galba, Otho and Vitellius]
Titus
Domitian (who is really Nero resurrected).The “one who is not yet come” is Titus. The author is setting his prophecy during the reign of Vespasian, even though he was writing during the reign of Domitian. From Catholic Encycolopedia:
Tradition assigns the Apocalypse to the reign of Domitian. But according to the computation given above, the Seer himself assigns his work to the reign of Vespasian. For if this computation be correct, Vespasian is the emperor whom he designates as “the one that is”. To this objection, however, it may be answered that it was the custom of apocalyptic writers, e.g., of Daniel, Enoch, and the Sibylline books, to cast their visions into the form of prophecies and give them the appearance of being the work of an earlier date. No literary fraud was thereby intended. It was merely a peculiar style of writing adopted as suiting their subject. The Seer of the Apocalypse follows this practice. Though actually banished to Patmos in the reign of Domitian, after the destruction of Jerusalem, he wrote as if he had been there and seen his visions in the reign of Vespasian when the temple perhaps yet existed. Cf. 2:1-2.
Though there is uncertainty in the time of the writing of Revelation, I am not for the traditional Christian so called interpretation of the seven heads as seven world Empires starting from Egypt and including the Ottoman Empire as the seventh. The author’s main context was the seven Churches in the Asia and he himself was the sharer of the persecution and the kingdom. Rev 1:
9 I, John, your brother who share with you in Jesus the persecution and the kingdom and the patient endurance, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. 10 I was in the spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet 11 saying, “Write in a book what you see and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamum, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.”
I also consider the so called the predictions of the book belong to the First Century CE than to a distant future as many fundamentalist believe when I look at the very urgency of the timing of events that were going to take place in the near future to the writer. Rev 1:
3 Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and who keep what is written in it; for the time is near.
Rev 22:
6 And he said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true, for the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place.”
7 “See, I am coming soon! Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.”
So this ‘soon’ may not be for the next 2000 or 3000 years as the Christianity speculated to include all the future kingdoms like Ottoman, or some other modern kingdoms which were no where in the vicinity of the ancient books like Daniel and Revelation.
ADAM…….If you were transported in time as John was then, that part of the prophesy “would be soon”. To happen. , none of e your thinking to the time when that prophesy was to take place at the time John was given it.
I repeat , “it is totally “impossible”, to understand Rev 17, without realizing John was indeed transported in Time to the Day of the return of God almighty , starting just before Satan is released from the bottomless pit”.“No one”, can make what Revelations 17 say, without first understanding that . Trying to force the text to fit at the time John was given that prophesy is totally futile, that why there are thousand of different interpretations that exist today, they are “all” wrong , unless you get the “Timeline” right you or anyone else can never figure it out. IMO
Why not just try what I said for a change and see how things fall into place perfectly, move the timeline to right at the end of the thousand year reign of Jesus and the Saint’s , and see if you can make that fit. I think you may be surprised how it all does fit.
peace and love to you and yours Adam………..gene
: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; also, they are seven kings,
Mountains means kingdoms or empires. This has already been established. Move on if you can.
You can believe the 7 heads have no meaning if you want, but reality differs.
So this ‘soon’ may not be for the next 2000…
Soon for you might be 10 years. Soon for a child might be 3 hours. Soon for a dog might be 10 minutes. Soon for God might be 2000 years. A mere 2 days in his calendar.
But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.
Trying to apply a scientific value to ‘soon’ is a bit dumb. It’s a relative term that needs to be understood within God’s own timetable and context. God sees the bigger picture unlike us.
Trying to apply a scientific value to ‘soon’ is a bit dumb. It’s a relative term that needs to be understood within God’s own timetable and context. God sees the bigger picture unlike us.
So you are not for scientific value?
Mountains means kingdoms or empires. This has already been established. Move on if you can..
But you are deviating from what the writer meant on the words ‘heads’ and ‘mountains’ and that it self is the misconception on studying the ancient texts.
Rev 17:
9 “This calls for a mind that has wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; also, they are seven kings, 10 of whom five have fallen, one is living, and the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain only a little while.
Proclaimer……but if you understand John was indeed transported in time ( REV 1:10) by the Spirt. to the day of the Lord God, returning to this earth , as fitting into a 3 1/2 year time period , as in Rev 17, then it s indeed a short amount of time, from (that date) in time . That is what was meant by , “this is the mind that has wisdom” . Trying to make every thing fit at the date John was given the prophesy , doesn’t work, that is why no one has gotten it right yet. IMO
peace and love to you and yours………..gene
Gene,
what you build
is wrong from the start. Biblically prove this to be true. The Bible, the Word of God, is self-explanatory. John was not transported in a vision on the Lord’s Day, IF IT WAS TRUE, HE WOULD TALK ABOUT IT …. BUT IT IS NOT. IN REVELATION 1, we are in the introduction to the book , and there is no question of the day of the Lord, except that John is transported in the spirit, on the Sabbath day which is the day of the Lord.What John sees is Jesus in the middle of the 7 candlesticks which symbolize the 7 times of the church over the centuries, until his next coming.
[10] I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
[11] Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
[12] And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;
[13] And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle……etc
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
