Prophecy

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Prophecy

  • yes

    Votes: 5 100.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    5
E

EdisonTrent

Guest
#22
Daniel was told what the Ram was in verse20.......Media-Persia, which has ceased to exist.
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]
Daniel 8:20
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]

The two-horned ram that you saw represents the kings of Media and Persia.


[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Interesting for sure just wondering I have a ever moving mind accuse me, is it your view that in verse 8-20 that Media = Morning and Persia = evening.... if so why didn't Danial keep it a secret as instructed in verse 8-26
 

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
124
63
#23
What I find interesting is that in Dan.9:26,27 the people of the prince that will come and destroy the city and the sanctuary and make a covenant with many (if indeed it is the Jews spoken of), doesn't fit with the Romans.

When did Rome ever make a covenant with the Jews for 7years and then cause their sacrifices to cease 31/2 years into the 7years?, it never happened.
In Daniel 'covenant' always refers to God's covenant with His people. other Hebrew words are used for alliances and treaties. thus it is God or the Messiah who confirms covenant with God' s people. And this occurred when Jesus commenced His ministry
 
I

Is

Guest
#24
In Daniel 'covenant' always refers to God's covenant with His people. other Hebrew words are used for alliances and treaties. thus it is God or the Messiah who confirms covenant with God' s people. And this occurred when Jesus commenced His ministry
The antecedent of "he" in verse27 has to be the last person mentioned and that is "the prince that shall come" verse26, the one whose "people" had destroyed the city. The context in these verses seems to preclude any reference to the Messiah and can only be the Antichrist.
 
I

Is

Guest
#25
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]
Daniel 8:20
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]

The two-horned ram that you saw represents the kings of Media and Persia.

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Interesting for sure just wondering I have a ever moving mind accuse me, is it your view that in verse 8-20 that Media = Morning and Persia = evening.... if so why didn't Danial keep it a secret as instructed in verse 8-26
Sorry, I don't get what you mean since it wasn't kept a secret 8-26 because in 20 (That would be between 8&26) the interpretation is given to him.
 
E

EdisonTrent

Guest
#26
Sorry, I don't get what you mean since it wasn't kept a secret 8-26 because in 20 (That would be between 8&26) the interpretation is given to him.
In verse 8-26 after 8-20 says seal up the vision for its for a future time and it mentions morning and evening does scripture tell us that media and Persia are the morning and evening
 

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
124
63
#27
Originally Posted by valiant
In Daniel 'covenant' always refers to God's covenant with His people. other Hebrew words are used for alliances and treaties. thus it is God or the Messiah who confirms covenant with God' s people. And this occurred when Jesus commenced His ministry
The antecedent of "he" in verse27 has to be the last person mentioned and that is "the prince that shall come" verse26, the one whose "people" had destroyed the city. The context in these verses seems to preclude any reference to the Messiah and can only be the Antichrist.
Actually the antecedent to 'he' is 'the people'. In Hebrew the previous SUBJECT is usually the antecedent. It is rare to refer back to a genitive as an antecedent. The antecedent prior to the people is the Anointed one. But in Scripture God is often suddenly introduced as HE. Thus referring it to the coming prince would be the last resort.

And as either God or the Anointed One (or even the people of the coming prince if the prince is seen as the one already described as coming, the Messiah) would fit adequately. That is the most reasonable translation and interpretation.

As there are no good grounds at all for dividing up the seventy sevens, to refer it to the antichrist is simply not on. It is a measure of desperation used to fit a theory.
 
I

Is

Guest
#28
In verse 8-26 after 8-20 says seal up the vision for its for a future time and it mentions morning and evening does scripture tell us that media and Persia are the morning and evening
Don't know.
 
I

Is

Guest
#29
Actually the antecedent to 'he' is 'the people'. In Hebrew the previous SUBJECT is usually the antecedent. It is rare to refer back to a genitive as an antecedent. The antecedent prior to the people is the Anointed one. But in Scripture God is often suddenly introduced as HE. Thus referring it to the coming prince would be the last resort.

And as either God or the Anointed One (or even the people of the coming prince if the prince is seen as the one already described as coming, the Messiah) would fit adequately. That is the most reasonable translation and interpretation.

As there are no good grounds at all for dividing up the seventy sevens, to refer it to the antichrist is simply not on. It is a measure of desperation used to fit a theory.
Since the Messiah is cut off already, your saying the people of the Messiah destroyed the city?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

valiant

Senior Member
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
124
63
#30
Since the Messiah is cut off already, your saying the people of the Messiah destroyed the city?
Actually they did. Josephus said, 'the sedition destroyed the city, the Romans destroyed the sedition.' If you read his harrowing account you will discover that the murderous bands of Jews who had taken over the city fought and destroyed each other and brought the city to ruins. It is probable that they too set fire to the Temple to prevent its desecration by the Roman standards. And it was this destruction of the city which led to the cessation of sacrifices in the midst of the seventieth seven. But that doesn't suit what people want it to say. Why spoil a story with mere facts.

And this especially so as the prince is called nagid, which is almost always reference to a Jewish prince. Saul, David and Solomon nd Hezekiah were all called nagid.
 
Last edited:
Jan 7, 2015
6,057
78
0
#31
.....verse26, the one whose "people" had destroyed the city. The context in these verses seems to preclude any reference to the Messiah and can only be the Antichrist.
Also there is a clue to confirm the timing of events in Daniel 9:26 to Rev 12:13-16 in the flood mentioned. Here's and old post I made that shows this....

The flood in the days of Noah were also symbolic of another spiritual flood prophesied here in Daniel 9:26 “And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.”

When did the prince of this world come?
John 14:30; “Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.” John 12:31 "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out."


When did the spiritual flood start? Revelation 12:13-16; “And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth."

This fleeing into the wilderness has to with the Abomination of desolation and destruction of Jerusalem, which begins the tribulation period of the Jews and also the days of vengeance Jesus mentioned here.... Luke 21:20-22 "And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.[SUP]21 [/SUP]Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.[SUP]22 [/SUP]For these be the days of
vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled."


This is the spiritual flood of persecution and false doctrine by the Prince of this world that has been ongoing ever since Jesus was caught up unto God. But was all part of the judgments the Lord had proclaimed before hand in the prophets. And also in Luke 13:35 "Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord."

I believe this is the same flood waters the Lord spoke of in Isaiah 54:7-9; “For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee.In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer.For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.”
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#32
i don't believe in double fulfillment...from my experience the whole notion of 'dual fulfillment' just seems for the most part to be an excuse for futurists to predict future events from prophecies that were already fulfilled...
 
E

EdisonTrent

Guest
#33
Then it's safe to say that the two aren't about each other, unless it's written that morning is the same as media
and evening has the same meaning of Persia. Scripture doesn't flow from start to finish in order some verses are just placed in out of no where. My opinion either something was lost in between or something was left out.
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#34
The antecedent of "he" in verse27 has to be the last person mentioned and that is "the prince that shall come" verse26, the one whose "people" had destroyed the city. The context in these verses seems to preclude any reference to the Messiah and can only be the Antichrist.
actually since 'he' is the subject of the sentence...the antecedent of 'he' has to be the last person -who is the subject- of a previous sentence...so the antecedent is 'the messiah'...
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#35
Since the Messiah is cut off already, your saying the people of the Messiah destroyed the city?
'the messiah' is not the same person as 'the prince who is to come'
 
I

Is

Guest
#36
Actually they did. Josephus said, 'the sedition destroyed the city, the Romans destroyed the sedition.' If you read his harrowing account you will discover that the murderous bands of Jews who had taken over the city fought and destroyed each other and brought the city to ruins. It is probable that they too set fire to the Temple to prevent its desecration by the Roman standards. And it was this destruction of the city which led to the cessation of sacrifices in the midst of the seventieth seven. But that doesn't suit what people want it to say. Why spoil a story with mere facts.

And this especially so as the prince is called nagid, which is almost always reference to a Jewish prince. Saul, David and Solomon nd Hezekiah were all called nagid.
The Zealots were members of a first-century political movement among Judean Jews who sought to overthrow the occupying Roman government.

They weren't Jesus' people.They were obsessed with overthrowing the Romans, far from Jesus' outlook when he said, "render under Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and undo God the things that are Gods.

A second Jewish rebellion took place and was conquered by the Romans in 135.

Rabbi Akiva believed in the possibility that Simon bar Kokhba the leader of the rebellion could be the Jewish messiah.
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,396
113
#37
There are numerous dual prophecies found in the scripture....One is Joel and a partial fulfillment on the (50th) day in Acts!
 
I

Is

Guest
#38
'the messiah' is not the same person as 'the prince who is to come'
I asked valiant:
Since the Messiah is cut off already, your saying the people of the Messiah destroyed the city?
He said:
Actually they did. Josephus said, 'the sedition destroyed the city, the Romans destroyed the sedition.' If you read his harrowing account you will discover that the murderous bands of Jews who had taken over the city fought and destroyed each other and brought the city to ruins. It is probable that they too set fire to the Temple to prevent its desecration by the Roman standards. And it was this destruction of the city which led to the cessation of sacrifices in the midst of the seventieth seven. But that doesn't suit what people want it to say. Why spoil a story with mere facts.

And this especially so as the prince is called nagid, which is almost always reference to a Jewish prince. Saul, David and Solomon nd Hezekiah were all called nagid.
So that is valiants belief not mine.
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#39
I asked valiant:

He said:

So that is valiants belief not mine.
i don't agree with his interpretation of 'the people of the prince who is to come'...but i do agree with him that the messiah is the one who establishes the covenant...

i think the prince who is to come was a roman emperor...and then of course the people would be the romans...but the prince who is to come does not establish the covenant...the messiah does that...
 
I

Is

Guest
#40
actually since 'he' is the subject of the sentence...the antecedent of 'he' has to be the last person -who is the subject- of a previous sentence...so the antecedent is 'the messiah'...
No, it's "the prince that shall come" v.26