Hi Proclaimer, I don’t know what is this (weight) lifting on Biblical texts. New Testament writers had lifted much from the Hebrew Bible to suit their agenda in this case the book of Revelation. This writer cleverly never quoted any writer of the Hebrew Bible but taken much from the book of Daniel.

Okay. Further proof for you that the heads w…[Read more]

It seems absurd to believe that it was lifted except for the kingdoms part.

Weird.

Is it worth addressing?

I think it defeats itself.

Is there any point?

But you agree that your two points in question are contradictory?

Adam.

If you make two points and they contradict, then obviously in the best case scenario, I have to debunk two points knowing that one is clearly wrong on the outset. Whereas, if you put forth the point that really bugs you, I can focus on one point and either double my effort or it would only require half my time. In short, it is hard spending…[Read more]

Coming to the book of Revelation yes it has taken genre and motifs of the book of Daniel but its visions are not quite equal to Danielic you can observe this when we study the Chapters 13 & 17.

If that is the case. Then are you going to drop the argument that kings don’t represent kingdoms?

So you are going to drop your argument that the writer of the Book of Revelation lifted the content from the Book of Daniel?

Please answer my previous post.

The Egypt, Assyria, Roman and the Ottoman Empires are no where visible in Danielic visions. Please see my post on Dan 11 for more details.

It doesn’t say anywhere that Daniel saw all the empires.

Many believe the empire he did see are:

Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome.

You can disagree. But disagreement…[Read more]

Now to your question.
I believe 7 is right.
7. Adam and Eve are man

I would have said the following:

• Eve is adam
• Eve is man
• Adam and Eve are adam
• Adam and Eve are man

Because adam and man are the same word and Both Adam and Eve are man as is each person too.

Are you man? Yes.

Are we both man? Yes.

Regardless, your answer shows that…[Read more]

Hi Proclaimer,

Jesus is God by nature.
I agree with that.
But what’s then the conclusion.
Listen to what Irenaeus also said:
“Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father.”
(Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1.10.1.)

Clearly we read from Irenaeus that there is one God who is the God of Jesus…[Read more]

So I take the internal insights written in these books and comment on them. I hope this will clear your misunderstanding on me. I tell you the book of Daniel is talking about Four Kingdoms in which there is no mention of Kingdom of Rome, of which many Jews and Christians misquote in their commentaries.

Seems like more absurdity. None of the other…[Read more]

Hi Proclaimer, don’t be so quick in judging others. Please have little patience for others which will be good for your health and spirituality.

I read the texts in their original context and interpret them according to their internal meaning. The book of Daniel especially chap 2, 7 & 8 talk about the Kingdoms because the internal (textual) i…

[Read more]

Sorry you are still in the dilemma of equating Danielic visions with those of Revelation. I  never denied the four Kingdoms of Dan 2 and 7 as these chapters talk of Kingdoms.

So if Daniel can be kingdoms despite saying that the golden head was a king, then apply the same rule to Revelation.

I should add that when these writers talk of theos, they are not always addressing theos in person, but sometimes nature. In English it is hard to see this difference. In Greek for example, the definite article is there whereas we capitalise the first letter. For example, Adam or adam.

But God and god doesn’t really work in English because we…[Read more]

@dannyd

Hey guys! and everyone else I didn’t mention,

Irenaeus wrote around AD 185 and mentions John 1:1 five times.
In one reference he comments, “‘and the Word was God,’ of course, for that which is begotten of God is God.”
Irenaeus understood Jesus as more than “a god” or a divine being of a sort.
He referred to Jesus as God.
Let me repeat wha…

[Read more]

Proclaim, The world will be amazed that the beast will reappear,  (except the faithful)

And I saw one of his heads as it were WOUNDED TO DEATH; and his deadly wound was HEALED: and ALL THE WORLD WONDERED AFTER THE BEAST. (Rev.13: 3)

Do you think Islam will bring about such a comeback?
I do not believe it, on the other hand, the Papacy is on all…

[Read more]

Only if your view is that the head of god had nothing to do with Babylon at all and was simply about Nebuchadnezzar only. I would understand your view but still wouldn’t agree with it.

So is this how you view it. That the golden head of the statue had nothing to do with Babylon the empire?

The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name.

The Beast of Revelation represents seven empires that ruled in succession in the area around the Great Sea, the Mediterranean. These seven empires are a historical…[Read more]

If you really feel the need to choose one king per kingdom, then that doesn’t change how many kingdoms there are.

If Nebuchadnezzar is the head of gold and he ruled Babylon as did many other kings, then do the same for the other empires. That still leaves seven empires. Unless you want to take the view that the other metals in the statue are 6…[Read more]

“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,

Exactly what I just said. Kings represent kingdoms. They are representative of their kingdom. Jesus is a king too. When you address a king, you are addressing the kingdom. When you want to engage with a kingdom, y…[Read more]