A Reform-minded Seventh-day Adventist forum In our aim to exalt everything important, first and foremost, we seek to promote a clear understanding of Daniel, Revelation, the three angels' messages and the alpha and omega of apostasy.
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2002 7:56 am Post subject: Daniel 11:40-45
Historically, Daniel 11:40-45 has given interpreters fits. Dispensationalists apply these verses (and the rest of the second half of the chapter) to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, ignoring any contradictions that identification poses.
The language of this section seems to contradict the flow of Daniel's other prophecies. A direct reading of the identities and methods in this passage seems anachronistic, since the weapons are no longer used, and some of the entities no longer exist. This poses a problem for straightforward historical-grammatical exegesis.
What solution may be proposed that respects good methods of exegesis, while still recognizing these difficulties? _________________ Webmaster, The Bible Only
Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2002 11:33 am Post subject: The prophecies of Daniel contain anachronisms
Ted,
The difficulties you mention are real but that poses no problem for straightforward grammatical-historical exegesis. I suggest that we accept the prophecies to mean precisely what they seem to say. I know that God wants us to recognize the direct, straightforward and obvious meaning of His word.
The reluctance of the majority who refuse to read the text for what it says should not deter us. I say that we must accept the results of grammatical-historical exegesis regardless of whether or not we like the outcome. I view all the anachronisms as proof that Daniel’s prophecies are conditional as far as minor details are concerned. Consider this brief summary: The book of Daniel in a Nutshell.
Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2003 10:00 am Post subject: Daniel 11:40-45
I posted here previously and someone erased it. I would say that ther should be no problem with Daniel's vision where he described some antiquated war machines at the time of the end. We must remember that he was using verbage he was familiar with to describe things that had never seen before. I say he was describing the USA as the king of the north. In response to the massive attacks from Militant Islam on 9/11 we (USA) stormed like a whirlwind to Afghanistan and Iraq and overthrew their governments. I believe it is also important to mention that since 9/11 we have moved massive amounts of troops and equipment to virtually all the islamic countries in the region including: Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Djibouti, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Turkey, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, etc. I think its's safe to say whoever controls Mesopotamia/Babylon ( area of land surrounding the Tigris and Euphrates rivers ) can be called the king of the north. You can check the accuracy of my statement by going to militarycity.com and look under military deployments as far as deployments since 9/11. Before 9/11 the arabs briefly controlled Iraq/Mesopotamia. Before that Britain, the Ottoman Empire/Turkey, the arabs again, the romans, the greeks, Medo-Persia, and the Babylonians.
It is very unlikely that anything of yours was erased. I believe that the posts on this thread that were not specially addressing precise historical-grammatical exegesis were moved to a separate thread featuring interpretive, non historical-grammatical exegesis. See Guessing the Interpretation of Daniel 11:40-45.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
