Chronological Summary of The End Times

tranquil said:

Daniel 8's 'daily sacrifice' and Daniel 9's 'daily sacrifice' are not the same Hebrew word. Daniel 8's 'daily sacrifice is H8548 'tamid'. All 3 mentions of 'daily sacrifice' in Dan 8 are that word, 'tamid'. Tamid means 'daily/ perpetual/ continual'. Tamid is also the word used in Dan 12:11's 1290 days.

That 'mighty angel' will 'swear an oath' and 'confirm the covenant' and break it in the middle of the Dan 9:27 years, causing the 'daily sacrifice' - animal sacrifices (the 'zebach'), to stop in Ezekiel's temple that they have built. (After the Ezek 39 Gog war appears to be over, then the temple will be rebuilt as described in Ezek 40-48.)

Click to expand...

I appreciate you sharing this with me, but I genuinely can't keep delving into separate areas of discussion. Needless to say, I don't prescribe to your reasoning. I'm of the belief that different words can be used to describe the same thing, although I know that this isn't always the case, depending on the context. In this particular instance, I don't believe the two separate Hebrew words used for the daily sacrifice denote two different historical contexts. This is because of the overall prevailing patterned language shared between the passages. Rather, I believe that, together, they offer a fuller picture of one historical event to take place in the future.

If you'd like to know my stance on how the locusts related to end-time prophecy, you're just going to have to read my article, The Great Tribulation and The Day of The Lord, as it's too much for me to get into here.

*I had to delete some of you text if this quote due to post word-count limits*

---

tranquil said:

The Rev 10 mighty angel is this angel from Dan 10 and 12, the 'man in linen':

The man in linen of Dan 10
4 On the twenty-fourth day of the first month, as I was standing on the bank of the great river, the Tigris, 5 I lifted up my eyes, and behold, there was a certain man dressed in linen, with a belt of fine gold from Uphaz around his waist. 6 His body was like beryl, his face like the brilliance of lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of polished bronze, and his voice like the sound of a multitude.Is the same ‘man in linen’ in Dan 12
5 Then I, Daniel, looked and saw two others standing there, one on this bank of the river and one on the opposite bank. 6 One of them said to the man dressed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, “How long until the fulfillment of these wonders?”7 And the man dressed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, raised his right hand and his left hand toward heaven, and I heard him swear by Him who lives forever, saying, “It will be for a time, and times, and half a time. When the power of the holy people has finally been shattered, all these things will be completed.”

Click to expand...

I'm aware of the connection of the mighty angel of Revelation 10 with the "man in linen" mentioned in Daniel. I'm not denying that, but this don't mean that the mighty angel isn't Jesus. Consequently, such a connection would just mean that the "man in linen" is also Jesus.

---

tranquil said:

Both are angels 'swearing an oath to heaven' after the occurrence of the abomination (Dan 11:31-39) and Rev 9:13-21, respectively. Both are in the context of 'time, times, half a time'/ 1260 days of the holy people (the 2 witnesses).

Rev 10 :1 Then I saw another mighty angel coming down from heaven, wrapped in a cloud, with a rainbow over his head, and his face was like the sun, and his legs like pillars of fire. 2 He had a little scroll open in his hand. And he set his right foot on the sea, and his left foot on the land, 3 and called out with a loud voice, like a lion roaring. When he called out, the seven thunders sounded. 4 And when the seven thunders had sounded, I was about to write, but I heard a voice from heaven saying, “Seal up what the seven thunders have said, and do not write it down.” 5 And the angel whom I saw standing on the sea and on the land raised his right hand to heaven 6 and swore by him who lives forever and ever, who created heaven and what is in it, the earth and what is in it, and the sea and what is in it, that there would be no more delay, 7 but that in the days of the trumpet call to be sounded by the seventh angel, the mystery of God would be fulfilled, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.

Click to expand...

The two passages you listed (Daniel 11:31-39 and Revelation 9:13-21) don't describe "angels 'swearing an oath to heaven' after the occurrence of the abomination".

The first passage is a part of an allegory about the end-times. If you want to know what exactly those verses are referring to you can find them here. Just scroll down to the allegory part where Daniel 11 is broken down verse-by-verse. The second one has to do with the sixth seal, which details what is happening right before Jesus returns. There was nothing mentioned about "swearing an oath to heaven" in either of these passages.

---

tranquil said:

If this mighty angel was Jesus, why isn't it identified as such? Why are his words sealed up and not revealed? (Rev 10:4)

There is something hidden about this angel with an implication that the ‘mystery would be revealed’ (verse 7) at the 7th Trumpet (1260 days later after the 2 witnesses testify for those days to finish out the 2nd woe/ end the 6th Trumpet and begin the 7th Trumpet). Why is the mystery revealed at the 7th Trumpet? Because this angel will break the covenant 1260 days later at the 7th Trumpet.

Click to expand...

You ask: if this this mighty angel is Jesus, why isn't he identified as such?" Yet, I just shared a color-coded proof to demonstrate that very fact. The mighty angel's words being sealed up doesn't mean he's not Jesus, it just means that they weren't meant for us to know before Jesus returns. You're equating the revealing of the Mystery of God with the breaking of the covenant, yet the text don't say that. It just says: "But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants the prophets."

Scriptures teaches us that this mystery is both the revelation of Jesus and the unveiling of what will happen in the end times, as denoted below:

The first verse tells us that the revelation of Jesus is the Mystery of God, while the second passage connotates that the end times are also a part of this Mystery. We can be sure that this is what Revelation 10:7 is talking about because both of these were prophesied by God's servants prophets.

---

tranquil said:

This angel swears an oath by heaven, earth, and the sea – Jesus explicitly says not to swear an oath by Heaven or earth, and that to do anything more is ‘from the evil one’. Here is Jesus talking:

Matthew 5:33 Again, you have heard that it was said to the ancients, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill your vows to the Lord.’ 34 But I tell you not to swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 or by the earth, for it is His footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 36 Nor should you swear by your head, for you cannot make a single hair white or black. 37 Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ Anything more comes from the evil one.
So, Jesus explicitly says, ‘Don’t swear by heaven or by earth,’ and then you have an angel coming down making an oath/ swearing by God, the heavens, the earth, and the sea. Why would Jesus say, ‘Don’t swear by heaven and earth,’ and then come down and swear by heaven and earth and the sea in Revelation 10 when Jesus just said that swearing by heaven, earth, and even more so also the sea (which fits the criteria of 'anything more than swearing by heaven and earth is from the evil one'!)?

Click to expand...

When Jesus tells us not to swear or make oaths in Matthew 5:33-37, he was giving us (imperfect/fallible humans) a command. It didn't apply to himself or God because they're one-and-the-same (i.e., perfect). This is why it's only proper for God to make oaths, because only He can make sure to follow though with them.

---

tranquil said:

Let's take what you say at face value (which I am not sure I agree with, but for argument's sake): only God is allowed to make oaths - that doesn't mean that only God makes oaths!

Hosea 10:4 They speak mere words; with false oaths they make covenants. So judgment springs up like poisonous weeds in the furrows of a field.
And by your reasoning, since only God is allowed to make oaths, the Daniel 9:27 covenant can only be made by God/ Jesus. In other words, Dan 9:27 would not/ cannot be about the 'antichrist' but only about Jesus.

And the Hebrews 6 verse is just saying, God can't swear by a higher authority, so He swears by himself. Fairly straightforward.

Click to expand...

Here is another way of putting it. When I say that only God can make oaths, I'm not saying only He is capable of making them. I'm saying that it is only morally permissible for Him to make them because He can be sure to follow though with them. We as humans are fallible and are prone to make errors. Not to mention, there are many things out of our control which can prevent us from following though with our word. So, this is why we need to be careful not to make an oath or swear. This doesn't mean the covenant made in Daniel 9:27 is made by God/Jesus. In fact, we know it wasn't because it will be broken, which is something God/Jesus wouldn't do.

---

On a side note, here's another confirmation that the mighty angel in Revelation 10 is Jesus. Looking back at the passage we're told that this mighty angel has a scroll, "which lay open in his hand," as demonstrated below:


Similarly, when we read of John's vision of the scroll in Revelation 5, we learn that only Jesus was worthy to open it, as demonstrated below:


So, when we read Revelation 10 and see that this mighty angel has a scroll, "which lay open in his hand," it's further clarification that this mighty angel is, in fact, Jesus himself.

Douggg said:

What translation are you copying and pasting that version of 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 from ?

Click to expand...

I primarily use the NIV translation when copy & pasting passages.

WilliamLhk said:

Incorrect. That is only a minor reason, part of a whole.

The primary reasons are that Daniel 8 and Daniel 7 describe two entirely different scenarios that take place at two entirely different eras in history.

But since most people have never put much if any time into learning about the historical period described in Daniel 8, they simply cannot understand that every event described therein was precisely fulfilled, in every detail, during the pre-Christian era of the kingdoms of Persia and Grecia.

Click to expand...

WilliamLhk said:

If you had seriously researched commentaries on Daniel 8, particularly older ones when Bible scholars were dedicated students of history, you would have learned that everything in Daniel 8 was fulfilled to the uttermost during the era of "the kings of Media and Persia." Dan. 8:20

Click to expand...

I am aware of the historical context you speak of. When I said:


it was with the understanding of the historical context you put behind it. I didn't need to say this because I told you that I read through you article. Having a conversation with you is incredibly scrupulous because you nitpick every word (or lack there of) and everything has to be literal. I see things more abstract than you, and just because I have come to a different conclusion than you doesn't mean I'm not serious or dedicated to my studies.

I'm aware of 1 and 2 Maccabees and how the history written throughout them has been correlated to be a fulfillment of the prophecies written throughout the book of Daniel. I came across these teachings when I was studying Daniel, and they were very compelling. But I found slight, yet important, inconsistencies with them when it came to correlating them to Scripture. Which is what led me to believe that much of what was being presented to me was incorrect. The greatest of these inconsistencies was that the book of Daniel repeatedly references the return of the Lord at the end of the world, as demonstrated below:




As a side note, I'm aware that Daniel 8:25 has been correlated to the Maccabean revolt, and that Antiochus IV Epiphanes is said to be the person spoken about in this verse because he later died from illness shortly after reclaiming the Jewish temple. I am also aware that Daniel 9:27 has also been correlated to the same historical context (and other historical contexts). But again I don't believe these, not just because the patterned language shared throughout Daniel suggests otherwise when their context is connected together but also because of Daniels repeated contextual references to the end of the world. When I read such-and-such person will be: "destroyed, but not by human power," or "until the end that is decreed is poured out on him," or "he will come to his end, and no one will help him," I interpret these texts to be a reference to the end of the world.

If you're interested in how I connect the patterned language seen throughout the book of Daniel and the historical contexts I connect the verses to, you can read my article on the prophecies recorded in the book of Daniel here: The Mystery of God Revealed. In it, I go over the historical components of the statue in Nebuchadnezzar's dream, connect patterned language seen throughout Daniel, and the go over the allegory of Daniel 11 verse-by-verse.