AD 70 to AD 622 – prophecy unfolding?

sovereigngrace · Feb 3, 2020

claninja said:
Correct, any specific names that I would assign to the horns would purely be speculation, as scripture doesn't define them as anything else but kings.

Now will you answer my question?

How many kingdoms, do you believe, there would be until the saints would possess the kingdom?

It would arrive during the 4th.

Christian Gedge · Feb 3, 2020

claninja said:
It seems that all theological beliefs play into the same stunt, some preterists believing the horns are kings of the roman empire, some futurists believe the 10 horns to be the european union, and some historicists believing the 10 horns to be 10 territories and/or kingdoms that came from the roman empire.

Touche!

claninja said:
I would argue all of these beliefs are pure speculation, as scripture doesn't exactly tell us.

True, but what we do know is that Daniel and Revelation use hyperbole rather liberally. Many translators would not be as strict as you are with 'kings' versus 'kingdoms'. Also, the early Church fathers expected ten kingdoms. I quoted Jerome but there are more.

claninja said:
As we can see per the NT, the kingdom of God was to come in the 1st century and the believers were to receive it in the 1st century. And this was clearly during the 4th earthly kingdom (rome).

Sure, the kingdom came when the Church began, like a brave entrance into a hostile world. But it has its grand finale when Christ returns, "and the saints of the most high receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, forever and ever!" That's how I understand it to be.

Christian Gedge · Feb 3, 2020

fwGod said:
A calendar does not indicate a changing of the times, it only keeps track of the days through each year.
The Islamic calendar doesn't do away with our American secular calendar.

Sure, but remember our calendar is based on the birth of Christ. Was Muhammad wanting to obscure that fact? 'Worth thinking about.

fwGod · Feb 3, 2020

Christian Gedge said:
Sure, but remember our calendar is based on the birth of Christ. Was Muhammad wanting to obscure that fact? 'Worth thinking about.

You are referring to the way that we keep our years. As done in earlier times.. saying "the year of our Lord" [insert year here].

Why Muhammad made an Islam calendar is purely your speculation, unless you've got an accurate quote from him saying that it was his sole purpose. But in that case, so what? .. him doing that doesn't achieve his purpose. Every Christian still has it marked on the American calendar. Every Christian still celebrates the day.. like Charlie Brown says, regardless of how commercial it has become.

grafted branch · Feb 3, 2020

Christian Gedge said:
I believe this predication was directly fulfilled when Mohammad forced his calendar into being, as a compulsory alternative to our Christian calendar, and as an alternative to the Jewish luni-solar one. Question: Do you have any other good theories for this ‘changing of the times’ prophecy?

Hi CG,

My view of Daniel 7:25 is that it is Satan himself that thinks to change times and laws. He does this when he tempts Jesus in Matthew 4. When Satan took Jesus to the high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world; he said to Jesus that he would give them to him if he would fall down and worship him. This was Satan’s attempt to change how and when the kingdoms of this world become Christ’s.

DavidPT · Feb 3, 2020

grafted branch said:
Hi CG,

My view of Daniel 7:25 is that it is Satan himself that thinks to change times and laws. He does this when he tempts Jesus in Matthew 4. When Satan took Jesus to the high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world; he said to Jesus that he would give them to him if he would fall down and worship him. This was Satan’s attempt to change how and when the kingdoms of this world become Christ’s.

Daniel 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

Surely the one meant here is the same one meant in the following, meaning the beast not the dragon.

Revelation 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

Clearly the dragon is meaning satan here, and that the dragon gave power unto the beast, thus satan can't be meant in Daniel 7:25, though Daniel 7:25 does involve satan according to Revelation 13:4. Yet it is not satan doing all of those things in Daniel 7:25, it is the beast that is. So I'm uncertain why you are trying to connect any of this with Matthew 4? Daniel 7:25 is meaning a much later time in history than Matthew 4.

claninja · Feb 3, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
It would arrive during the 4th.

I'm glad you agree it would arrive during the 4th kingdom. But that's not what I asked.

How many kingdoms, do you believe, would there be until the saints would possess the kingdom?

Unless do you believe the coming of the kingdom is synonymous with the saints inheriting the kingdom? Then my original question would be answered.

sovereigngrace · Feb 3, 2020

claninja said:
I'm glad you agree it would arrive during the 4th kingdom. But that's not what I asked.

How many kingdoms, do you believe, would there be until the saints would possess the kingdom?

Unless do you believe the coming of the kingdom is synonymous with the saints inheriting the kingdom? Then my original question would be answered.

The kingdom of Christ arose during the reign of the 4th Roman beast.

claninja · Feb 3, 2020

sovereigngrace said:
The kingdom of Christ arose during the reign of the 4th Roman beast.

Right we agree, but how many kingdoms would it be until the saints possessed this kingdom of Christ that arose?

Marilyn C · Feb 3, 2020

pasifika said:
Hello Marilyn,
The first beast was the kingdom who defeated Nebuchadnezza of Babylonian Daniel 2:30, so that could not be the British Empire...

Then how could the last beast tread Babylon and the Medes and Persians down? (Rev. 7:7)

Marilyn C · Feb 3, 2020

jgr said:
Jerome's exposition of the four kingdoms of Daniel 7, all historical.

. And as for the next statement, ". . .devouring and crushing, and pounding all the rest to pieces under his feet," this signifies that all nations have either been slain by the Romans or else have been subjected to tribute and servitude.

Hi jgr,

Thank you for all that interesting detail. History is good to look at and understand what has happened in the past. And amazingly God has told us that 5 World Rulers would arise. We know that 4 have and there is one forming. (Dan. 2)

As to Dan. 7 and the final beast there, glad to see you have included their interpretation of it treading down the others. Now they have not said that Rome trod down the Babylon rulership. Why? because the Babylon rulership was dealt with by God centuries before Roman rule.

We need to understand that God is judging the rulership of those kingdoms. Land and people will be there till the great white throne judgment. It is the rulership that God is judging and thus the 4th beast is NOT Rome for that has long ago been judged, as have Babylon, Medes & Persians and Greece. All those World Rulerships have been judged by God and are NO more.

Note those 4 beastly kingdom/Federations are in the time of the Lord setting up His rulership in Israel. They are contemporary to each other, although they came up one at a time. They are easily recognisable today and are all part of forming the final Gentile Global Government.

grafted branch · Feb 3, 2020

DavidPT said:
Daniel 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

Surely the one meant here is the same one meant in the following, meaning the beast not the dragon.

Revelation 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

Clearly the dragon is meaning satan here, and that the dragon gave power unto the beast, thus satan can't be meant in Daniel 7:25, though Daniel 7:25 does involve satan according to Revelation 13:4. Yet it is not satan doing all of those things in Daniel 7:25, it is the beast that is. So I'm uncertain why you are trying to connect any of this with Matthew 4? Daniel 7:25 is meaning a much later time in history than Matthew 4.

So my reasoning for thinking the beast in Daniel 7:25 is Satan has to do with when the kingdom is given to the people of the saints of the most high in verse 27; this reasoning has to do with when the millennium takes place.

If I’m not mistaken you have the view of a future 7 year tribulation with the millennium following it. Placing Daniel 7:25 into a future 7 year tribulation causes a significant problem, at least for me. That problem is this; when the peace treaty is signed by the Antichrist, a person would be able to count out the 7 years and determine when Christ is coming. This violates Matthew 24:36. If Matthew 24:22 is used to assert that the 7 years are shortened then the full seventy sevens in Daniel 9 won’t be fulfilled.

I’m not trying to deviate from the original post, but this problem of a future 7 year tribulation is a main reason for not placing Daniel 7:25 at a much later date.

If you disagree about this based solely on Revelation 13 that’s fine, I’m not trying to convince anyone of my view.

Marilyn C · Feb 3, 2020

claninja said:
I don't know, and any names of kings or kingdoms that I may associate with the 10 horns, will purely be speculation, as scripture does not define the exact names of the 10 horns. It only states they are kings.

Daniel 7:24 And the ten horns are ten kings who will rise from this kingdom.

They arise from the 4th kingdom, as stated by scripture.

Daniel 7:24 And the ten horns are ten kings who will rise from this kingdom.

How many kingdoms, do you believe, there would be until the saints would possess the kingdom?

Hi claninja,

Actually God`s word does tell us some of the 10 kings. The final global leader is called the `Assyrian.` (Isa. 31: 8) And that is the area of `Syria, Iraq & Jordan.` Those 3 nations have come on to the world scene in God`s appointed time. They will form the basis of the world leader`s power.

He will `pluck them out by the roots.` (Dan. 7: 7) This relates to how they were divided up by the British and French after WW1. A line was drawn in the `sand` so to speak and each power had control of them. These 3 nations desire have these influences taken away, roots plucked out.`

The other 7 kings are the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council & Yemen) All these will make the Islamic Federation. They will come together as the A/C rises in influence, power & authority.

Marilyn C · Feb 3, 2020

grafted branch said:
So my reasoning for thinking the beast in Daniel 7:25 is Satan has to do with when the kingdom is given to the people of the saints of the most high in verse 27; this reasoning has to do with when the millennium takes place.

If I’m not mistaken you have the view of a future 7 year tribulation with the millennium following it. Placing Daniel 7:25 into a future 7 year tribulation causes a significant problem, at least for me. That problem is this; when the peace treaty is signed by the Antichrist, a person would be able to count out the 7 years and determine when Christ is coming. This violates Matthew 24:36. If Matthew 24:22 is used to assert that the 7 years are shortened then the full seventy sevens in Daniel 9 won’t be fulfilled.

I’m not trying to deviate from the original post, but this problem of a future 7 year tribulation is a main reason for not placing Daniel 7:25 at a much later date.

If you disagree about this based solely on Revelation 13 that’s fine, I’m not trying to convince anyone of my view.

Hi grafted branch,

Hope you don`t mind me commenting on your post.

yes people could count, however we need to remember that they are in darkness as the Lord said. (1 Thess. 5: 4) Also the trib, is shortened by a month, but the 7 years of Daniel`s 70 weeks is a full 7 years.

The last `week` of Dan. `s 70th, has to do with Israel and their temple. It goes on to the cleansing of the temple, (Dan. 9: 24, 8: 13 & 14)

The tribulation has to do with God`s wrath upon the nations and that will be finished when the Lord returns, one month prior to 7 years, `cut short).

DavidPT · Feb 3, 2020

grafted branch said:
So my reasoning for thinking the beast in Daniel 7:25 is Satan has to do with when the kingdom is given to the people of the saints of the most high in verse 27; this reasoning has to do with when the millennium takes place.

If I’m not mistaken you have the view of a future 7 year tribulation with the millennium following it. Placing Daniel 7:25 into a future 7 year tribulation causes a significant problem, at least for me. That problem is this; when the peace treaty is signed by the Antichrist, a person would be able to count out the 7 years and determine when Christ is coming. This violates Matthew 24:36. If Matthew 24:22 is used to assert that the 7 years are shortened then the full seventy sevens in Daniel 9 won’t be fulfilled.

I’m not trying to deviate from the original post, but this problem of a future 7 year tribulation is a main reason for not placing Daniel 7:25 at a much later date.

If you disagree about this based solely on Revelation 13 that’s fine, I’m not trying to convince anyone of my view.

I'm interested in hearing some more of your thoughts on this, in regards to these things. Maybe a new thread is in order? Or maybe there is already a thread where this might fit into the discussion?

DavidPT · Feb 3, 2020

grafted branch said:
If Matthew 24:22 is used to assert that the 7 years are shortened then the full seventy sevens in Daniel 9 won’t be fulfilled.

First of all there is no such thing as a 7 year tribulation. The tribulation is only 3.5 years. It has always been meant to be 3.5 years. When the book of Daniel, in chapter 12 verse 7, speaking of this same great trib, says this of it---for a time, times, and an half---that is meaning 3.5 years according to Revelation chapters 11-13. As to it being cut short, that's not meaning cut short from 7 years to 3.5 years, the fact Daniel 12 already tells us it will be 3.5 years in length, so it has to be meaning if the 3.5 years were allowed to be continued indefinitely beyond 3.5 years, saints would eventually become extinct because the beast would manage to kill all of them off the face of the earth. The latter here being my guess.

pasifika · Feb 3, 2020

Marilyn C said:
Then how could the last beast tread Babylon and the Medes and Persians down? (Rev. 7:7)

Those are not the beasts describe in Daniel, all the 3 beasts in daniel are kingdoms arises from one nation,..

Daniel 7:4 tells us the first beast (lion) had some kind of "wound"..."....wings were torn off"

Daniel 8: 20, gives us a clue to look at history to confirm this chapter....and history tells us, Medes & Persia defeated Babylon then Greece defeated the Medes and Persia...
The first beast (kingdom ) created by the Medes &Persia is the Archaemenid empire (1st beast) this was first Persia kingdom to rule Babylon and was defeated by Alexander (Greece)....this is the "mortal wound" given to one of Persia kingdoms

Greece (seleucid empire ) was defeated by another Persia kingdom the "Parthian" Empire (2nd beast )

Parthian empire was defeated by another more stronger kingdom from Persia called "Sasanid empire" (3rd kingdom )

Sasanid empire of Persia was defeated Not by another kingdom But by a Religion..."Arab Muslims"
This is "iron" mixed with "clay" according to image in Nebuchadnezza...culture mixed with religion(Muslims )

grafted branch · Feb 3, 2020

DavidPT said:
I'm interested in hearing some more of your thoughts on this, in regards to these things. Maybe a new thread is in order? Or maybe there is already a thread where this might fit into the discussion?

Yes, perhaps a new thread about this would be good if you’d like to start one. I really don’t like to debate much, but I would like to consider what others think about this.

Marilyn C · Feb 3, 2020

pasifika said:
Those are not the beasts describe in Daniel, all the 3 beasts in daniel are kingdoms arises from one nation,..

Daniel 7:4 tells us the first beast (lion) had some kind of "wound"..."....wings were torn off"

Daniel 8: 20, gives us a clue to look at history to confirm this chapter....and history tells us, Medes & Persia defeated Babylon then Greece defeated the Medes and Persia...
The first beast (kingdom ) created by the Medes &Persia is the Archaemenid empire (1st beast) this was first Persia kingdom to rule Babylon and was defeated by Alexander (Greece)....this is the "mortal wound" given to one of Persia kingdoms

Greece (seleucid empire ) was defeated by another Persia kingdom the "Parthian" Empire (2nd beast )

Parthian empire was defeated by another more stronger kingdom from Persia called "Sasanid empire" (3rd kingdom )

Sasanid empire of Persia was defeated Not by another kingdom But by a Religion..."Arab Muslims"
This is "iron" mixed with "clay" according to image in Nebuchadnezza...culture mixed with religion(Muslims )

Hi pasifika,

Babylon was separate from Persia and the Medes, and separate from the later kingdoms, Greece and Rome. History reveals all that. I don`t see how you can say they come from one nation.

jgr · Feb 3, 2020

Andrewn said:
The first 3 beasts, Babylonian and Persian and Seleucid Empires, are humbled, but not destroyed like the fourth beast, Roman Empire. They were permitted to survive for a while as nations. Why, do you think, this is? Do you think they will have a renewed role in history?

For example, I notice that the area occupied by those empires overlap with the historical Islamic Empires / Caliphates. Also, they're included in the list of nations associated with Gog & Magog. Is this relevant or just by accident?

If this is relevant, it may mean that theories about the revival of the Roman Empire are wrong and that future wars and antichrist (s) would rather involve the Middle East region?

Who is the person referred to in post #63? Is it the Caliphate or the RCC?

The imperial western Roman empire was succeeded by the (un)holy Roman empire. The latter empire remains very much alive, but there are many of the true Church within it.

I am unable to discern any future role for the first three beasts from Scripture.

I am undecided regarding Gog and Magog.

Given Rome's historical prophetic significance, and its continued existence via the papal empire, I consider it to have continued prophetic significance, albeit to end with its ultimate demise.

Post #63 contains the commentary of three Reformers regarding the Roman papacy's fulfillment of Daniel 7:25.

AD 70 to AD 622 – prophecy unfolding?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Pre-tribulation.

Pre-tribulation.

Well-Known Member

Pre-tribulation.

Pre-tribulation.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Pre-tribulation.

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency