- This topic has 302 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Further, it is common sense that the future gives you more insight and foresight as far as history goes.
A fool sees otherwise.
We need not fool anyone here. It’s good that you are giving importance to our common sense than religious revelations.
Thanks for understanding me.
Yet somehow you thought otherwise. Weird. Your statements keep missing the mark Adam. Perhaps if you lose the bias and actually listen to others, you might actually learn something.
No I don’t miss mark but try to cover the very aspect of the cause.
Let the truth win Adam. It’s not about you vs me. If I make a reasonable argument, then consider it. If I don’t, then reject it. I will do the same if you make a reasonable argument.
Yes that is a gentleman’s agreement.
The Fourth Kingdom of Daniel
The original texts of Daniel talk about the Fourth Kingdom as that of Greece as per the Chap 2,7,8 and 11. But most of the Jewish and Christian commentaries talk about Roman Empire as the Fourth Kingdom. Here is one such earliest example of Christian commentary;
Hippolytus’s Commentary on Daniel:
In Hippolytus’s Commentary on Daniel (composed in Rome, 204 CE), the motif of the four kingdoms of Daniel 2 and Daniel 7–8 plays a prominent role. In connection with this motif, the author develops a concept of the chronological sequence of historical events in time and at the end time, which bears interpretive fruit in different ways. This intense interest in time and the end time seems at first to be surprising, since Hippolytus repeatedly speaks out against calculations of the events of the end time because such things are expressions of unbelief (Dan. IV.5.6) and are expressions of unseemly impatience (Dan. IV.15.1; IV.22.1–4). In this essay, I explore this contradiction and illuminate it in light of the character of the work as a whole. Towards this goal, Hippolytus’s Commentary on Daniel will be presented first, and then his interpretations of Daniel’s concept of four world eras will be presented in the context of the entire work.
The Four Kingdoms of Daniel:
In the background of Hippolytus’s remarks stands a consistent concept of time and the end time, which he sketches with his interpretation of Daniel. This concept of time and end time will be reproduced here first before proceeding further.
Hippolytus draws a parallel relationship between the meaning of the four animals from Daniel 7–8 and the parts of the statue from Daniel 2 (Dan. IV.7.2–6). The hermeneutic key of his interpretation lies in a typological understanding of the passage: Hippolytus assumes that both the statue from Daniel 2, which was shown to Nebuchadnezzar, represents a “typological prediction of the kingdom of the whole world” (ἡ γὰρ εἰκὼν ἡ … δειχθεῖσα τῷ Ναβουχοδονόσορ τὸν τύπον περιεῖχεν τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ παντὸς κόσµου; Hipp. Dan. II.12.2) as well as the animals “in a model and image portray the kingdoms” (ἐν τύπῳ καὶ εἰκόνι δείκνυσιν τὰς ἐν τῷ κόσµῳ τούτῳ ἐπαναστάσας βασιλείας; Dan. IV.2.1).24
Daniel’s four world eras consist of the kingdoms of Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece, with the later decay of the Diadochian kingdoms which flows into God’s eschatological kingdom. Hippolytus is faced with the challenge that the contemporary world empire, that is, the Roman Empire, does not appear within the sequence of kingdoms which the editor of the book of Daniel had in view—on the basis of modern, historical-critical exegesis we know that the Roman Empire could not have been in view because the final redaction of the book of Daniel took place at the time of Antiochus Epiphanes IV, around 164 BCE. Hippolytus must, therefore, modify the intended meaning within the book of Daniel in order to adapt the statement to his contemporary circumstances. Probably in connection with the interpretations that emerged within Jewish and Christian spheres at the end of the 1st century CE, he substitutes Media as the second member with Persia, and puts Greece in the third position. By making this alteration, the fourth position is now free and can be occupied by the Roman Empire. For Hippolytus, Daniel’s prophecies extend all the way to the Roman Empire. The future—in contrast to his pretext—lets Hippolytus begin with the feet of the statue (Dan. II.12.2) or the ten horns of the terrible beast (Dan. IV.5–11). They predict the future disintegration of the Roman Empire at the end of the world (Dan.IV.5.3; 6.4; 7.5f.; cf. Dan. II.12.7). Following this disintegration will be the appearance of the Antichrist, prophesied by the little horn of the terrible beast (Dan. IV.5.3; 12.4). Hippolytus specifically interprets the stone, which was cut off from the mountain “without hands” (Dan 2:34–35), as Christ, who on the threshold of the eschaton “comes from the heavens” to destroy all earthly kingdoms and then establish the heavenly kingdom of the saints (Dan. II.13.1–3) link…https://brill.com/view/book/9789004443280/BP000015.xml
If you see the summary of the above commentary Hippolytus replaced the earlier interpretations by incorporating Roman Empire as the Fourth Empire of Daniel and by merging the Media with Persian Kingdom which became the Second and Greece became the Third.
To all……Rome, “was” the fourth “world ruling” empire, until 476 Ad, then came the “Fifth” That we now live in, next comes , The Sixth world ruling kingdom, the kingdom of Jesus Christ and the Saint’s, just that simple, and completely agrees with Rev 17.
Then after the Sixth, the one that John said “now “IS”, comes the Seventh, the revision of the Babylonian type of Kingdoms, to rule this earth for a short time. This starts to take place when Satan is released from the bottomless pit, at the end of the Sixth world ruling kingdom of Jesus and the Saint’s.So simple, for those who know the truth about Rev 17, and Dan 2. They both fit perfectly. For those who have eyes to see.
peace and love to you all and yours………gene
To all……Rome, “was” the fourth “world ruling” empire, until 476 Ad, then came the “Fifth” That we now live in, next comes , The Sixth world ruling kingdom, the kingdom of Jesus Christ and the Saint’s, just that simple, and completely agrees with Rev 17.
Then after the Sixth, the one that John said “now “IS”, comes the Seventh, the revision of the Babylonian type of Kingdoms, to rule this earth for a short time. This starts to take place when Satan is released from the bottomless pit, at the end of the Sixth world ruling kingdom of Jesus and the Saint’s.Hi brother Gene, Rome was no where in the vicinity of Danielic Four Kingdoms. It is the mere speculations of the Jews and Christianity. Your repeated claim of Sixth kingdom of Jesus is another misconception and is no where supported in the texts of the Bible. Please get good commentary on the book of Daniel and Revelation for better understanding these texts.
Thank you and peace to you…..Adam
Gadam
Rome was no where in the vicinity of Danielic Four Kingdoms. It is the mere speculations of the Jews and Christianity.
Rome was nowhere near the Four Kingdoms of Danielic. These are only the speculations of the Jews and of Christianity.
Really Gadam?
This is not what Daniel 9 says. The prophetic Messianic chapter, WHICH speaks also of the destruction of Jerusalem: the city and the temple BY THE ROMAN ARMIES (70AD)Daniel 9:26
And after sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off, (Jesus died on the cross) but not for himself: and the people of the prince who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end will be with a flood, and until the end of the war the desolations are determined.
What do you say about this Gadam?
To all……Rome, “was” the fourth “world ruling” empire, until 476 Ad,
Rome had two legs. The capital was moved to the east and it existed for another thousand years or so. The west divided into barbarian kingdoms and in time the countries of Europe. You see only the Western Roman Empire because your world view is western.
then came the “Fifth” That we now live in,
You cherry pick from kingdoms and the Western world is not even a kingdom. The empires are located around the great sea, but now you say the west is the next kingdom. There is no rhyme or reason to your speculations. It’s kind of funny to be honest reading your posts sometimes.
Know your history.
Hi brother Gene, Rome was no where in the vicinity of Danielic Four Kingdoms.
What are the 4 kingdoms then?
Surely history shows us the kingdoms that succeeded one another.
It’s really easy from our view point in history. You act like we are still living in Daniel’s time and looking into the future.
The past has already happened.
What does history show you.
What are the 4 kingdoms then?
Surely history shows us the kingdoms that succeeded one another.
It’s really easy from our view point in history. You act like we are still living in Daniel’s time and looking into the future.
The past has already happened.
What does history show you
Hi Proclaimer, thanks for your reply to my post. In fact we are debating on the texts of these ancient writings. So we have to go to the crux of their history and the background. The book of Daniel is a non-prophetical book in the Hebrew Bible and also a Pseudo writing as per the historians written during the Antiochian crisis in Second Century BCE (171-164). It is the first clear book on Apocalypse in the Hebrew Bible. We don’t find such numerology in other books of the Hebrew Bible. The major theme of the prophetical writings of the Hebrew Bible was the Messianic kingdom but not the Apocalypse. The predictions of this book differ much from the mainline prophetical books of the Hebrew Bible. I also find discrepancies in the sequence of the chapters in this book like Chap 9 & 11 and also doubt some interpolation of these two chapters by a later editorial. So I don’t take this book for granted for determining the future timeline, forget about our day and timeline.
Daniel 2 and 7 were talking about Four Kingdoms and the promised God’s Kingdom by his holy ones will be established after the Fourth Kingdom. So we need to identify the Fourth Kingdom as per this book for the climax of this Apocalyptic book.
I find the oldest and critical commentaries on Daniel name the four Kingdoms as Babylon, Media, Persia and Greece. The later commentaries of both Jewish & Christian combined Media & Persia to include Roman Empire as the Fourth. The reason for this was the so called Kingdom of holy ones did not take place after the long line of Greek Empire. The Jewish audience of Second Century BCE waited for the end of these Gentile dominions and for taking over of God’s dominion by his saints after the tragic Antiochene crisis. But it remained a dream for these people as the mighty Roman Empire put full stop to the flourishing Hasmonean dynasty. Now the Empire of Rome became the Fourth Kingdom of Daniel. Again the Jews of Jesus time expected the promised Messianic rule similar to Danielic Fifth Kingdom. But it remained another dream for those people as the Second Temple was destroyed by Roman armies in 70 CE and killed thousands of Jews.
During the First Century CE the Christianity placed itself in the shoes of Jewish people and called themselves as spiritual Israel which replaced the physical Israel. They started interpreting the Hebrew texts for themselves and waited for the end of the lengthy worldly Kingdom of Rome by the Parousia of Jesus with his glorious Kingdom which will have no end. This was the background for our another Apocalyptic book Revelation in the New Testament. Surprisingly Rome became Christian Kingdom during the rule of the famous Emperor Constantine the Great. Later Vatican formed it’s religious rule similar to the Jewish one. The history continued in its own way and it stands where we are now.
Sorry for the lengthy narration on these writings and history. So we need to debate on these Kingdoms mentioned in Daniel, the first Apocalyptic writing in the Hebrew Bible and their termination by the powerful unending promised God’s Kingdom by his holy ones.
Daniel 2 and 7 were talking about Four Kingdoms and the promised God’s Kingdom by his holy ones will be established after the Fourth Kingdom. So we need to identify the Fourth Kingdom as per this book for the climax of this Apocalyptic book.
Well as mentioned before, history does line up with the theory that probably most hold to and Revelation gives more detail.
Some people hold that Daniel’s four kingdoms were:
Babylon, Medo, Persia and Greece. Then the Christ. Yes this happened of course.
But I think this fits much better and the descriptions match the character of each kingdom if we look at the four historical empires:
Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome.
And Revelation includes these but in a wider context so you see all the successive kingdoms before and after:
Egypt – 3100 to 677 BC (Genesis 12:10)
Assyria – 677 to 626 BC (Genesis 2:14)
Babylon – 626 – 539 BC (Daniel 1:1)
Medo-Persia – 539 – 449 BC (Daniel 5:28)
Greecia – 449 – 146 BC (Daniel 10:20)
Rome – 146 BC-476 AD eastern leg / 1453 AD western leg or Byzantium (Daniel 9:26 & Romans 1-7)
Ottoman – 1453 – 1924 AD (Future empire when Revelation was written, but historical empire today)But your rebuttal seems be about the the end not happening after Rome. Fair enough. However, you need to look more closely. Rome has two legs in the statue. One leg the Western leg ended and split into 10 kings or thereabouts. The eastern leg continued for another millennia by which time the iron became mixed (arab). This in my interpretation is the Ottoman Empire which conquered the eastern leg of the Roman Empire and took it over. So Constantinople became Istanbul. This reign endured many centuries until the conclusion of WWI by which time the whole Beast came to an end and thus the end of the world would come soon.
But read Revelation because we know that the Beast that died will kick back into life. It talks of a mysterious eighth king to rise from the seventh or seven. This could be an Islamic Caliphate like the seventh, but we know from Revelation that the eighth king won’t last very long and then the end will come.
Whether this theory is correct or not, it ticks all the boxes. Yes it is possible to come up with a theory that ticks all the boxes but is still not correct. It is either correct, almost correct, or way off. And I would never state my life on this theory. It is the year 2021 and developments could take place to either change my mind on this or slightly alter what I think is a reasonable interpretation.
With that said, all I see you do is say the whole thing is rubbish. So this debate is probably a waste of time for you. But as usual, I keep the readers in mind when I reply. Otherwise I wouldn’t bother if it was only you and me that could read this.
From our perspective, we have the luxury of hindsight.
So let’s look at the successive empires.
Egypt – 3100 to 677 BC (Genesis 12:10)
Assyria – 677 to 626 BC (Genesis 2:14)
Babylon – 626 – 539 BC (Daniel 1:1)
Medo-Persia – 539 – 449 BC (Daniel 5:28)
Greecia – 449 – 146 BC (Daniel 10:20)
Rome – 146 BC-476 AD eastern leg / 1453 AD western leg or Byzantium (Daniel 9:26 & Romans 1-7)
Ottoman – 1453 – 1924 AD (Future empire when Revelation was written, but historical empire today)Does it fit Daniel and Revelation?
Yes it does. It fits tightly. No mental gymnastics required. You don’t have to force a circle into a square.
And Revelation includes these but in a wider context so you see all the successive kingdoms before and after:
Hi Proclaimer, thanks again for your patience in reading of my post and for the replies. Yes you can imagine any thing on these texts as there are plenty of material available on these books these days. But I request you to see the internal background and the insights given in these books. For example the first Kingdom of Daniel was identified by the writer as of Babylon. If the book of Revelation states about Seven Kingdoms as often quoted by you here then he should have given us some hints and about the beginning of these Kingdoms like the book of Daniel. What I find in Revelation is that the writer was not worried about identifying the Kingdom/ Kingdoms rather he was interested in the identifying the very Emperor with whom the final climax of the events take place and with which the texts are filled with in Chap 13, 17, 18 and 19. This is the reason why I take the heads of the beast as Kings than Kingdoms as mentioned in Rev 17:9-10. The urgency of the predictions like “Time is short” and “the things that are going to happen soon” , “do not seal up the prophecies” etc tell us the immediate future to the book than to a distant timeline.
So please identify the Kingdoms of Daniel and Revelation properly to apply them to our timeline if they really ever meant that way.
Thank you…..
But I request you to see the internal background and the insights given in these books. For example the first Kingdom of Daniel was identified by the writer as of Babylon.
You impose rules and expect that these rules must be adhered to. I do not think this is a smart strategy for analysing anything.
Time is a better judge and the number of heads indeed matches the number of kingdoms in sucession. Yes, if I had to chose a number out of 10, I could get lucky and guess it. But there is way more to Revelation than the number of heads that matches history.
You impose rules and expect that these rules must be adhered to. I do not think this is a smart strategy for analysing anything.
Sorry I am not here to impose any thing on anyone. I am only learning things by critically analysing instead of blindly following the traditional pattern. Please read my post clearly and comment before negating it. Here it is….
“But I request you to see the internal background and the insights given in these books. For example the first Kingdom of Daniel was identified by the writer as of Babylon. If the book of Revelation states about Seven Kingdoms as often quoted by you here then he should have given us some hints and about the beginning of these Kingdoms like the book of Daniel. What I find in Revelation is that the writer was not worried about identifying the Kingdom/ Kingdoms rather he was interested in identifying the very Emperor with whom the final climax of the events take place and with which the texts are filled with in Chap 13, 17, 18 and 19. This is the reason why I take the heads of the beast as Kings than Kingdoms as mentioned in Rev 17:9-10. The urgency of the predictions like “Time is short” and “the things that are going to happen soon” , “do not seal up the prophecies” etc tell us the immediate future to the book than to a distant timeline”.
Time is a better judge and the number of heads indeed matches the number of kingdoms in sucession. Yes, if I had to chose a number out of 10, I could get lucky and guess it. But there is way more to Revelation than the number of heads that matches history.
You are matching the heads with Kingdoms by pick and choose method than following the writer’s mind and views. I think we should drop this idea of counter arguments here and follow the topic “The Parousia of Jesus”
The Four Kingdoms of Daniel 2 and 7
The ‘four kingdoms’ of Daniel 2 and 7 are (I think) to be identified with Babylon, Media, Persia and Greece. The Greek empire is described in special detail because it had to immediately preceded before setting up the the kingdom of holy ones and especially it was the timeline of the actual writer of Daniel in Second Century BCE.
The destruction of the Greek empire was the first step in the process of setting up the kingdom of the holy ones, and it began in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. In fact the special sign that God had begun to destroy the fourth kingdom―and so begun the process of establishing the God’s kingdom ―was probably the death of Antiochus Epiphanes himself.
As I pointed out earlier, Daniel 11: 2 describes the first four powerful kings of Persia, from Cyrus to Xerxes, corresponding to the four heads of the third beast in chapter 7; and 11: 3-39 is a detailed description of the Greek empire from Alexander to Antiochus Epiphanes, corresponding to the specially important fourth kingdom. It was suggested that verses 40-43 are a description of the destruction of the Greek empire by Rome, corresponding to the destruction of the body of the fourth beast in Daniel 7: 11, 26. To be more precise, they describe the annexation of Syria by Scaurus and Pompey. It also suggested that verses 44 and 45 describe the unsuccessful campaign of Crassus against the Parthians in 54 BC.
In the previous verses ‘the king of the north’ has always been a Greek king of Syria. The words ‘at the time of the end’ (verse 40) indicate, however, that the identity of the king of the north has changed. Daniel has already shown that at the time of the end Greece will be destroyed, following the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, and that this will precede the coming of the kingdom of holy ones. Since this section follows a description of Antiochus Epiphanes, precedes a description of the God’s kingdom and is introduced by the words ‘at the time of the end’, we should expect it to concern the destruction of Greece. If we take it that it is describing this, it is reasonable to assume that the destroying ‘king of the north’ here is some new non-Greek character. In view of the fact that the description does not apply to any Greek king of Syria, but does apply perfectly to the nation which destroyed the Greek empire, one might say it is more than reasonable. The correct translation throughout the chapter should be a king of the north, not the king of the north. The phrase simply indicates a king to the north of Israel. The period of history between verses 39 and 40 is irrelevant and therefore not described (cf. the gap in time between Xerxes and Alexander, 11: 2, 3).
The final two verses of chapter 11, which describe the unsuccessful campaign of Crassus against the Parthians, are relevant for at least two reasons: (a) they show that the fourth kingdom was not the Roman empire, and (b) they explain how Daniel 7: 12 was fulfilled. They show that the fourth kingdom was not the Roman empire. Firstly, they draw attention to the fact that the Roman armies were not invincible. In this case Rome was badly defeated when still in her prime and her empire still expanding. Secondly, they draw attention to the fact that the Romans did not by any means tread down ‘the whole earth’. The Parthians ruled a very large part of the former Babylonian, Median, Persian and Greek empires, and in the context of the book of Daniel ‘the whole earth’ must surely include the area covered by those empires. The Roman empire was essentially an empire of the West, and Palestine lay right on its eastern border. All the land to the immediate east of Palestine (including Babylonia, Media and Persia) lay outside the Roman empire. Trajan did have some success against the Parthians many years after the time of Jesus and he incorporated part of their empire into the Roman empire; but his successor Hadrian immediately abandoned these conquests. Most of the Median empire and about half of the Persian and Greek empires were never at any time within the Roman empire. Media and Persia themselves were never within the empire.
This interpretation also does justice to the fact that the fourth kingdom is so detailed and accurate a picture of the Greek empire, that radical scholars believe the author lived during the time of that empire after the events had taken place. It also does justice to the visions of chapters 8, 11 and 12, where the Persian and Greek empires and Antiochus Epiphanes are described, the descriptions corresponding very closely indeed to those of the third and fourth kingdoms and the ‘little horn’ in chapters 2 and 7. In chapters 8, 11 and 12 Persia are mentioned only very briefly, whereas Greece and Antiochus Epiphanes are described in immense detail. Likewise, the fourth kingdom and its ‘little horn’ are described in far greater detail than the other kingdoms, and Daniel takes a special interest in them (7: 19, 20).
This interpretation also agrees with the way in which the Median origin of ‘Darius the Mede’ is emphasized (5: 31; 9: 1; 11: 1), and the way in which he is depicted as the successor of the kings of Babylon (I am not saying that the kingdom of Darius was the Median kingdom―I am merely suggesting that the book of Daniel uses Darius to get across the idea that Media was the second of the four world powers)…..(taken from the article by R. J. M. Gurney,).
Proclaimer……Kingdoms are just symbols of who has the predominate rule, not every little kingdom that exists within or without them, have the greater rule.
Babylonian type kingdoms are those who rule and govern their people like Babylon did, they are kingdoms which grew out of there predecessors. Which fits scriptures, because we know Satan rules in all the kingdoms of this world. So why wouldn’t they all have the same “type” of rule or governments. Even to this very day, Satan is the under pinning of all Babylonian type of rule on this earth. Nearly all Governments of this world today function the the same way, buy and sell for gain, usury type of rule. Even today , just as it was at the same time of the first Babylon kingdom a system of rule operated by, “greed” and “usury” the enslavement of human Souls”.
Daniel gave us the first Five , and showed us the Sixth Kingdom to come of Jesus Christ and the Saint’s which is soon to be here.
Rev 17, picks it up from there to the return of God the Father>
peace and love to you and yours……….gene
Will Ezekiel’s Temple Be Built?
This brings us to the visionary temple described in Ezekiel. Keep in mind that the so-called tribulation temple, as Christian Dispensationalists describe it, is not Ezekiel’s temple. Dispensationalists actually require that two temples must be built, one during the tribulation period and one during their version of the thousand years of Revelation 20. So even if Ezekiel’s temple is a literal stone temple that will be built, it’s not the temple of the tribulation period.
While John is told to measure the temple in Revelation 11:1, as has been noted, Ezekiel sees a vision of “a man … with a measuring rod in his hand” (40:3). Ezekiel might not measure the temple because it’s a vision. John can measure the temple because it’s still standing in Jerusalem. It should be noted that nowhere in the description of the temple described in Ezekiel is it ever said that it will be built. Ezekiel’s temple is an edifice that cannot be defiled (43:7–9). This temple seems to have been wholly efficacious for any who studied its description and measurement in relation to his sins (43:10–11). Like the plans that were given to Moses to build the tabernacle (Ex. 25:9, 40; Num. 8:4), Ezekiel is given plans to rebuild the altar. This makes perfect sense since rebuilding the altar takes place during a time when there is a Levitical priesthood (Ezek. 43:19) “of the sons of Zadok” (40:46; 43:19; 44:15; 48:11) and the need for animal sacrifices. The altar is to be built but there are on instructions to build the visionary temple: “And He said to me, ‘Son of man, thus says the Lord GOD, “These are the statutes for the altar on the day it is built, to offer burnt offerings on it and to sprinkle blood on it’ ” (Ezek. 43:18). The words “build” and “built” are not found anywhere in Ezekiel 40–43:1–12 in relation to the visionary temple. We should expect to find the Hebrew word for “pattern” (tavnyth) used if building this visionary temple was in view as it is, for example, in Exodus 25:9 and 1 Chronicles 28:11–19.
Christian Dispensationalists believe that Ezekiel’s temple is to be built in the future “during the earthly millennial kingdom.” If this is true, then why is there no mention of a temple in Revelation 20? In fact, Revelation 20 says nothing about Jesus reigning on the earth, David’s throne being set up and Jesus sitting on it, animal sacrifices, the reinstitution of circumcision, or anything related to Ezekiel’s temple….(taken from the book “10 Popular Prophecy Myths Exposed and Answered”)
Gadam
Christian Dispensationalists believe that Ezekiel’s temple is to be built in the future “during the earthly millennial kingdom.” If this is true, then why is there no mention of a temple in Revelation 20? In fact, Revelation 20 says nothing about Jesus reigning on the earth, David’s throne being set up and Jesus sitting on it, animal sacrifices, the reinstitution of circumcision, or anything related to Ezekiel’s temple….(taken from the book “10 Popular Prophecy Myths Exposed and Answered”)
Me
Dispensationalists have been deceived by Jesuit teachings, sad to say …
The true Temple is in HEAVEN WHERE JESUS STANDS AT THE RIGHT OF GOD AS SOVEREIGN SACRIFICATOR … (PRIEST)
Heb. 2
14] Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
[15] And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
[16] For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
[17] Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful HIGHT PRIEST in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
[18] For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succeed them that are tempted.Heb. 8
[1] Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
[2] A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.Heb. 10
[21] And having an HIGHT PRIEST over the house of God;
[22] Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
[23] Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)
[24] And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
