Who is the Antichrist?

[Delvianna]

But this is a battle against God, not man

Not entirely. Think of the word "tribulation" for a second. This is a test/trial for the left behind to either accept God or reject him. It's one last cry with added pressure to either wake people up or they are forever lost. It's essentially the final show down between Satan and his attempt to pull man kind away from God, and God trying to wake everyone up with pressure.

 

[timothyu]

It's essentially the final show down between Satan and his attempt to pull man kind away from God

Then that is poor planning on his part for turning his forces against each other

 

[RandyPNW]

Randy, the little horn in Daniel 8 is time of the end. Daniel 8:17.

What is the "time of the end?" Is it the end of the present age, or is the term controlled by the context, which appears to be the time of God's judgment against Antiochus 4?

I think it is clearly about the context, in which the Greek Kingdom leads to the reign of Antiochus 4, who causes desolation, abuses the sanctuary, and persecutes the Jewish People. We are even given the time for this vision to be completed, referred to as "the time of the end"....

Dan 8.13 Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to him, “How long will it take for the vision to be fulfilled—the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, the rebellion that causes desolation, the surrender of the sanctuary and the trampling underfoot of the Lord’s people?" 14 He said to me, “It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated.”

This vision of the judgment of Antiochus 4 is being described together with its "end"....

Dan 8.16 And I heard a man’s voice from the Ulai calling, “Gabriel, tell this man the meaning of the vision.” 17 As he came near the place where I was standing, I was terrified and fell prostrate. “Son of man,” he said to me, “understand that the vision concerns the time of the end.”

Here it is clear that the context for the "time of the end" concerns the judgment that comes against the product of the Greek Kingdom, particularly with the reign of Antiochus 4...

Dan 8.19 He said: “I am going to tell you what will happen later in the time of wrath, because the vision concerns the appointed time of the end. 20 The two-horned ram that you saw represents the kings of Media and Persia. 21 The shaggy goat is the king of Greece, and the large horn between its eyes is the first king. 22 The four horns that replaced the one that was broken off represent four kingdoms that will emerge from his nation but will not have the same power.
23 “In the latter part of their reign, when rebels have become completely wicked, a fierce-looking king, a master of intrigue, will arise.

So, though this was still the "distant future" for Daniel, the context clearly concerns the 3rd Kingdom of Greece, and Antiochus 4, who will be destroyed by God....

Dan 8.Yet he will be destroyed, but not by human power.
26 “The vision of the evenings and mornings that has been given you is true, but seal up the vision, for it concerns the distant future.”

The "time of the end" is a common term applying in our use to the "endtimes," or the "last days." But in Daniel's time, the term applied in context to the end of Antiochus 4, as I've showed you.

I'm sure you've been shown this before? I'm not sure why you've not acknowledged it, unless you simply wish to assert your own opinion? Many scholars have recognized it as such. I think even a position you've rejected should be acknowledged, if given by recognized experts and biblical scholars.

 

[Douggg]

The "time of the end" is a common term applying in our use to the "endtimes," or the "last days." But in Daniel's time, the term applied in context to the end of Antiochus 4, as I've showed you.

Randy, the term "time of the end" corresponds to our use of the "endtimes", "latter days", "latter years".

In Daniel's time, it corresponded the same. Take a look at Daniel 12, when the abomination of desolation will take place.

In verse 7, we have that same time, times, half time as in Daniel 7:25. In verse 9, to take place in "the time of the end"

In my chart below, I took all of the end times time frames in the bible and listed them. If you will notice, there are repeats of several of them. Organizing is one of my personal traits.

Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?

9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

 

[jonojim1337]

It’s Isaac II Angelos, the fallen angel, who usurped the throne, was imprisoned for 8 years, and then released for a little while and ruled together with his son.

 

[RandyPNW]

Randy, the term "time of the end" corresponds to our use of the "endtimes", "latter days", "latter years".

You are arguing what you have yet to prove. On what basis do you proclaim that "their use" of "time of the end" is the same of "our use" of "time of the end?" In language, words and phrases can be exactly the same and yet be used differently, depending on the context.

Well, I just proved to you that the context was the Greek Kingdom, leading to Antiochus 4 and his Reign of Terror. The "time of the end" was the time when the Greek Kingdom would come to an end and when Antiochus 4 would come to an end, particularly in regard to the persecution of the Jewish People by Antiochus.

You just ignored everything I showed you about the context for this particular use of "time of the end." And then you flip to Dan 12, another chapter, and claim that the something there refers to the "time of the end," or the last days of this present age.

Quite frankly, I read it quite differently, and more in sync with what Dan 8 said. In Dan 12 we have two different prophecies being referred to. Daniel was confused about those two major prophecies and asked about them.

1) In Dan 12.7 Daniel is told that the 3.5 years, referred to in Dan 7, will be the "fulfillment" of the things just mentioned, which included the resurrection at the end of the age. That did indeed have to do with the end of the present age.
2) But in Dan 12.11-12 Daniel is told how long it will be before the Reign of Terror by Antiochus 4 will come to an end. It will be 1290 days, with an additional space of time before people in Israel actually hear the news.

These are two separate prophecies, one having to do with Antichrist's 1260 days, and the other having to do with Antiochus' 1290 days. We should not conflate them.

And neither one determines how "time of the end" would apply in Dan 8, where the context was the Reign of Antiochus. The "time of the end" there would refer to the time of the end of Antiochus.

In Daniel's time, it corresponded the same. Take a look at Daniel 12, when the abomination of desolation will take place.

In verse 7, we have that same time, times, half time as in Daniel 7:25. In verse 9, to take place in "the time of the end"

In my chart below, I took all of the end times time frames in the bible and listed them. If you will notice, there are repeats of several of them. Organizing is one of my personal traits.

Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?

9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

Again, "time of the end" is a phrase or term that applies in the particular context in which it is given. It is a literary fallacy to apply the same term the same way in different contexts.

The "time of the end" can refer to the time of the end of the age, when the resurrection takes place. Or, it can refer to the end of Antiochus' persecution of the Jewish People.

Dan 8 referred explicitly to Antiochus 4. You are not acknowledging that--just asserting your beliefs, regardless of the evidence.

Again, look at the following and try to deny that the "time of the end" would refer, in this context, to Antiochus 4....

Dan 8.13 Then I heard a holy one speaking, and another holy one said to him, “How long will it take for the vision to be fulfilled—the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, the rebellion that causes desolation, the surrender of the sanctuary and the trampling underfoot of the Lord’s people?" 14 He said to me, “It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated.”

Clearly, the context is speaking of a particular "vision." And this vision concerns Antiochus 4, who stoked a rebellion against orthodox Judaism, causing the Holy Place to be "violated," and the people of Israel persecuted and martyred.

The "time of the end" is explicitly concerned with that, even if in a different eschatological context the "time of the end" may refer to the end of the age. You simply ignored this and my post above, proving that "time of the end" involved this specific "vision" about Antiochus 4.

Any other use of "time of the end" in Dan 12 or elsewhere does not change this. It is the immediate context that determines how a word or phrase is being used.

 

[Douggg]

You are arguing what you have yet to prove. On what basis do you proclaim that "their use" of "time of the end" is the same of "our use" of "time of the end?" In language, words and phrases can be exactly the same and yet be used differently, depending on the context.

Well, I just proved to you that the context was the Greek Kingdom, leading to Antiochus 4 and his Reign of Terror. The "time of the end" was the time when the Greek Kingdom would come to an end and when Antiochus 4 would come to an end, particularly in regard to the persecution of the Jewish People by Antiochus.

You just ignored everything I showed you about the context for this particular use of "time of the end." And then you flip to Dan 12, another chapter, and claim that the something there refers to the "time of the end," or the last days of this present age.

Quite frankly, I read it quite differently, and more in sync with what Dan 8 said. In Dan 12 we have two different prophecies being referred to. Daniel was confused about those two major prophecies and asked about them.

1) In Dan 12.7 Daniel is told that the 3.5 years, referred to in Dan 7, will be the "fulfillment" of the things just mentioned, which included the resurrection at the end of the age. That did indeed have to do with the end of the present age.
2) But in Dan 12.11-12 Daniel is told how long it will be before the Reign of Terror by Antiochus 4 will come to an end. It will be 1290 days, with an additional space of time before people in Israel actually hear the news.

These are two separate prophecies, one having to do with Antichrist's 1260 days, and the other having to do with Antiochus' 1290 days. We should not conflate them.

And neither one determines how "time of the end" would apply in Dan 8, where the context was the Reign of Antiochus. The "time of the end" there would refer to the time of the end of Antiochus.

Again, "time of the end" is a phrase or term that applies in the particular context in which it is given. It is a literary fallacy to apply the same term the same way in different contexts.

The "time of the end" can refer to the time of the end of the age, when the resurrection takes place. Or, it can refer to the end of Antiochus' persecution of the Jewish People.

Dan 8 referred explicitly to Antiochus 4. You are not acknowledging that--just asserting your beliefs, regardless of the evidence.

Randy, this is the eschatology forum. What is the meaning of "eschatology" ?

 

[RandyPNW]

Randy, this is the eschatology forum. What is the meaning of "eschatology" ?

If you want to limit all biblical prophecy to eschatology then I suppose you don't want any discussion as to whether your interpretations *belong* in the eschatology forum? Go ahead and apply Jesus' 1st Coming to the 2nd Coming, and forbid anybody from questioning that "because it's the eschatology forum." Is that where you want to hide?

I'm very much interested in the eschatology of the Bible. But I need freedom to explain what prophecies belong to eschatology and what don't. Otherwise, only you get to decide what is acceptable as "eschatology" and what isn't.

I could easily say, for that matter, that use of your version of Dan 8 does *not* belong in an eschatology forum. Do you really want to go there?

 

[jonojim1337]

Maybe you should read who Isaac II Angelos replaced and what happened to this emperor.

It’s in the Bible.

 

[Douggg]

If you want to limit all biblical prophecy to eschatology then I suppose you don't want any discussion as to whether your interpretations *belong* in the eschatology forum? Go ahead and apply Jesus' 1st Coming to the 2nd Coming, and forbid anybody from questioning that "because it's the eschatology forum." Is that where you want to hide?

I'm very much interested in the eschatology of the Bible. But I need freedom to explain what prophecies belong to eschatology and what don't. Otherwise, only you get to decide what is acceptable as "eschatology" and what isn't.

I could easily say, for that matter, that use of your version of Dan 8 does *not* belong in an eschatology forum. Do you really want to go there?

Randy, the time of the end little horn person in Daniel 8 will stand up against the Princes of princes.

Daniel 8:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

The Prince of princes is Jesus. The little horn in his beast king stage will attempt to make war on Jesus at the end of the 7 years when Jesus returns.

Antiochus IV does not fit Daniel 8:25.

 

[RandyPNW]

Randy, the time of the end little horn person in Daniel 8 will stand up against the Princes of princes.

Daniel 8:25 And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

The Prince of princes is Jesus. The little horn in his beast king stage will attempt to make war on Jesus at the end of the 7 years when Jesus returns.

Antiochus IV does not fit Daniel 8:25.

I understand you think that Antiochus 4 does not fit Dan 8.25. But from my pov it easily fits. Not only does it fit, but it seems a required interpretation.

Dan 8.25 simply states that Antiochus 4 (in my view) opposes God, who is the "Prince of Princes." Specifically, I think it is a reference to God's Word, who later would come to be revealed as Jesus. The terms presents God as if He was above all princes in the time of Antiochus 4.

I've already shown you why I think Dan 8 is about the Greek Kingdom. I don't think there can be any question about that. Relying on the term "Prince of Princes" may seem relevant to you. But to me, it is not. It may theorized, but it simply doesn't fit in view of the direct identification with the Greek Kingdom.

Dan 8.19 He said: “I am going to tell you what will happen later in the time of wrath, because the vision concerns the appointed time of the end. 20 The two-horned ram that you saw represents the kings of Media and Persia. 21 The shaggy goat is the king of Greece, and the large horn between its eyes is the first king. 22 The four horns that replaced the one that was broken off represent four kingdoms that will emerge from his nation but will not have the same power.
23 “In the latter part of their reign, when rebels have become completely wicked, a fierce-looking king, a master of intrigue, will arise.

Please note that "in the time of wrath" is connected with the destruction of this "master of intrigue," which is evidently associated with Antiochus 4. This happens in the "latter part of their reign," ie in the last days of the 4 kingdoms emerging from Greece, prior to the rise of Rome, the final Kingdom.

 

[Douggg]

Dan 8.25 simply states that Antiochus 4 (in my view) opposes God, who is the "Prince of Princes." Specifically, I think it is a reference to God's Word, who later would come to be revealed as Jesus. The terms presents God as if He was above all princes in the time of Antiochus 4.

"stand up" in Daniel 8:25 is a phrase meaning makes war against. Antiochus IV did not attempt to make war against God.

And the term in Daniel 8:25 is Prince of princes.

So that is two items in Daniel 8 that eliminates Antiochus IV from being the little horn of Daniel 8.
1. time of the end
2. stands up against the Prince of princes.

Also the little horn of Daniel 8 is the same little horn of Daniel 7.

The 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 fits within the 7 years of Daniel 9:27. The animal sacrifices will begin again and 2300 days later Jesus will return.

I don't think we are going to agree on who the little horn in Daniel 8 is. So let's just agree to disagree ?

 

[jonojim1337]

Ah, well, I’m just gonna put it out here. The battle against God took place in 1185, when he was crucified. After that, and the sack of Constantinople (Jerusalem), the Empire was split into four parts, according to Wikipedia, but the dating is a bit off, to resurrect later, in Moscow (flight of Aeneas).

 

[RandyPNW]

"stand up" in Daniel 8:25 is a phrase meaning makes war against. Antiochus IV did not attempt to make war against God.

I understand you don't think Antiochus 4 made war against God. In my view, anybody who directly opposes the proper worship of God is "making war with God." The enemies of Israel in ancient times were viewed as "waging war against God."

Psalm 2.
1 Why do the nations conspire
and the peoples plot in vain?
2 The kings of the earth rise up
and the rulers band together
against the Lord and against his anointed, saying,
3 “Let us break their chains
and throw off their shackles.”

And the term in Daniel 8:25 is Prince of princes.

So that is two items in Daniel 8 that eliminates Antiochus IV from being the little horn of Daniel 8.
1. time of the end
2. stands up against the Prince of princes.

I've already showed you that there is a strong opinion among Bible scholars that Dan 8 is speaking of Antiochus 4, that "time of the end" is associated with a particular "vision" in which Antiochus rises only to be defeated by God. It was specifically said to be at the end period of 4 kings that arise after Alexander the Great in the Kingdom of Greece.

This could only be speaking of a "vision" of Antiochus 4, in my opinion. And it is, again, speaking of the last times of the Kingdom of Greece before the rise of Rome.

The Prince of Princes is a reference to God as Lord over all the princes of the time in which the Kingdom of Greece reigned. Later in the Scriptures, Jesus is referred to as King of Kings. Antiochus did not respect the lordship of God over his own rule, and fought against God by attacking His sanctuary and people.

Also the little horn of Daniel 8 is the same little horn of Daniel 7.

That is not inferred in Daniel. Use of "little horn" is determined by the context in which it is used. Dan 7 is, to me, obviously, an eschatological context.

Dan 8 is specifically said to involve the context of which I just spoke--the Kingdom of Greece and its branch into 4 distinct kingdoms. The "king of intrigue" would then be Antiochus 4, in my opinion and in the opinion of many Bible Scholars.

I'm not saying you have to agree with me. But I think you should acknowledge the arguments against your position, whether you agree or not. They are not seemingly as "off base" as you claim they are.

The 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 fits within the 7 years of Daniel 9:27. The animal sacrifices will begin again and 2300 days later Jesus will return.

As I said, the 1260 days in Revelation related to the 3.5 years of Dan 7, which is eschatological. The 1290 days of Dan 12 relate to the time in which Antiochus 4 reigned. It has been suggested that since Antiochus died before he got back to his military tent in Israel, it required more time (1335 days) for the news to get to Israel.

The 2300 days of Dan 8 relates to the entire period of the squabble over who was High Priest to the end of Antiochus' life. This was the view of Prophecy scholar J. Barton Payne.

I don't think we are going to agree on who the little horn in Daniel 8 is. So let's just agree to disagree ?

Yes, I don't believe in trying to convince somebody of something that must come by personal conviction. But we should argue a point if we think it is reasonable, to bring in all the information that may contribute to making decisions.

Thank you for your patience. Hopefully we understand our respective positions properly?

 

[RandyPNW]

Ah, well, I’m just gonna put it out here. The battle against God took place in 1185, when he was crucified. After that, and the sack of Constantinople (Jerusalem), the Empire was split into four parts, according to Wikipedia, but the dating is a bit off, to resurrect later, in Moscow (flight of Aeneas).

This doesn't make sense to me because the division into 4 parts was identified as ancient Greece. The 4 parts therefore had to include Syria and Egypt, who are prominently referred to in Dan 11.

 

[jonojim1337]

This doesn't make sense to me because the division into 4 parts was identified as ancient Greece. The 4 parts therefore had to include Syria and Egypt, who are prominently referred to in Dan 11.

Byzantine empire ‍

 

[RandyPNW]

Byzantine empire ‍♂️

I understand, but the time frame in Dan 8 begins with Alexander the Great and then separates into 4 kingdoms. That is not the Eastern branch of the Roman Empire, in my view.

 

[jonojim1337]

I understand, but the time frame in Dan 8 begins with Alexander the Great and then separates into 4 kingdoms. That is not the Eastern branch of the Roman Empire, in my view.

I thought we agreed this was at the time of Jesus, the prince of princes?

 

[RandyPNW]

I thought we agreed this was at the time of Jesus, the prince of princes?

Please site the post where I agreed with you, and I'll try to figure out what I said and what I meant?

 

[jonojim1337]

Please site the post where I agreed with you, and I'll try to figure out what I said and what I meant?

There was something about the prince of princes being cut off. In what context did this happen?