DANIEL STUDY

[TheDivineWatermark]

And from the time the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination of desolation set up, (refers to a state of things in Jerusalem. This would be a time of national distress.) there will be 1,290 days. Blessed is he who waits and reaches the end of the 1,335 days. But as for you, go on your way until the end (the end has to relate to the completion of the 1335 days). You will rest, and will arise to your inheritance at the end of the days.”

A few questions (if I may)... at least for the readers to ponder:

--in what way did Daniel "rest and stand in thy lot at the END of the DAYS" [the "days" referred to in that CONTEXT] in (supposedly) 164bc?

--when Jesus refers to "the abomination [SINGULAR] of desolation [SINGULAR] spoken of by Daniel the prophet," there are only TWO options from the text of Daniel that speak of this in the SINGULAR (and it isn't the one found in Dan9:27 [PLURAL], though somewhat related). The one in Dan11:31 speaks of A4E (past history); and the other is in Dan12:11 (in close proximity to the text speaking of Daniel "shall stand in thy lot at the END of the DAYS" context--not speaking of this re: Daniel in 164bc). How do you explain this?

--do you believe Dan12:6-7[1] is speaking of the same time-period [roughly 3.5 yrs] that Dan7:25,27 also speaks of? Are they the SAME time-slot? And if so, do you see the correlation of the wording between Dan7:22's "and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came when the saints possessed the kingdom" [with that of] the wording in Rev20:4a [distinct from v.4b] saying, "And I saw thrones, and they say upon them, and judgment was given unto them... [speaking specifically of those 'STILL-LIVING saints' at the time being spoken of here... 'AND...' this verse continues on another track concerning those saints who will have DIED under AC's rule...(now being 'resurrected' at the time being spoken of here)]"

--do you see any correspondence between the wording in Rev19:19,21/16:14-16/20:5 to that of the wording in Isaiah 24:21-22[23] re: "the kings of the earth upon the earth" (about which correlation I have made posts in the past, and which correlation also points toward "timing issues and chronology")?

--do you believe that when "the 12" were told by Jesus that they will "sit on 12 thrones, judgING the 12 tribes of Israel," that He was referring to "Israel" and their "future" (such as we see His disciples inquiring of Him about in Acts 1, after having spent some 40 days of Him speaking to them following His resurrection)?

--more... but this is enough for the moment = )

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^ EDIT typo: "and they sat upon them" (not "say upon them" )

 

[Nebuchadnezzer]

(God Of His Fathers) A Human Man, Hebrew/Jew, That Won't Desire Women.

Daniel 11:37KJV
37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.

Genesis 46:1KJV
1 And Israel took his journey with all that he had, and came to Beersheba, and offered sacrifices unto the God of his father Isaac.

Is not Abraham and Issac and Jacob our fathers and yet we are not Hebrew/Jew?
The popes most certainly claim Abraham and Issac and Jacob to be their fathers.
Ahhhh yes!

It appears that you also follow the Preterist (Historicist) reformed persuasion, nothing new

I believe what I see is 'new,' I mean how would you know unless you actually listened.

 

[iamsoandso]

Is not Abraham and Issac and Jacob our fathers and yet we are not Hebrew/Jew?
The popes most certainly claim Abraham and Issac and Jacob to be their fathers.
Ahhhh yes!


I believe what I see is 'new,' I mean how would you know unless you actually listened.

In post #76 he said this was a precursor to Revelation. There are other historical views, Historical pre-millenilism for instance which view the same events of history in their view. So until he resumes posting and progresses into Revelation's chapters whether this is anything new or not is still a mystery.

 

[oldhermit]

In post #76 he said this was a precursor to Revelation. There are other historical views, Historical pre-millenilism for instance which view the same events of history in their view. So until he resumes posting and progresses into Revelation's chapters whether this is anything new or not is still a mystery.

I'll try to start Rev tomorrow. I am trying to decide whether or not I want to begin with the dating of the book and other intro points. What do you think?

 

[iamsoandso]

I'll try to start Rev tomorrow. I am trying to decide whether or not I want to begin with the dating of the book and other intro points. What do you think?

If you consider what you've already posted about the horns/kings in aspect to Rev. 17:12 https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/17-12.htm then Revelation would be written before the first of the horns/kings were present. The problem would be Revelation 5 https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/5.htm in that in the text it speaks of the Lamb(Jesus) as having already been slain so it is after the OD/and the Crucifixion... And then afterwards in Revelation 17:8 https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/17-8.htm in that the beast that was shown to John was already in the pit and so if it is the head that received the deadly wound(Revelation 13) it had already received it's deadly wound prior to the Revelation being given. It's up to you though as to where you should begin so I will leave this up to you.