Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Ben C Smith · 01-28-2008, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

I thought I had said that?!

(I meant Israel alone, not Israel and Michael.)

Quote:

The vision in Dan 7 is rich in tradition, based on the struggle between Baal and Yamm, in which the one like a son of man is a substitute for Baal and the ancient of days replaces El. The writer has made the effort, in rewriting the Baal/Yamm struggle, to put a lot into the figure of the one like a son of man, so I can't see that that effort peters out into a pure symbol.

You may have something there, but I am probably not qualified to judge it, since I do not know about Ba'al, Yamm, and El to the necessary degree of detail.

Quote:

As each of the visions deal fundamentally with the same issues -- just varying timeframes and specific interests --, and often the same basic personnel. The fourth vision features Michael as the prince of Israel who contends with the princes of Persia and Greece. The victorious one like a son of man seems to be doing exactly the same thing as Michael, which should indicate that they are the same.

So would you say that the other creatures also represent both the nation (Greece or what have you) and the angelic prince who contends on its behalf? If so, that would seem to answer my main objection (an aesthetic one), which was the apparent asymmetry between the son of man being overloaded, as it were, while the other creatures were just plain symbols.

Ben.

spin · 01-28-2008, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

I thought I had said that?!

(I meant Israel alone, not Israel and Michael.)

I still haven't got your meaning, but I was working thus:

entity (described) -> defends god's people against entities (described)
entity (named) -> defends god's people

It's a good chance that entity (described) = entity (named)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

As each of the visions deal fundamentally with the same issues -- just varying timeframes and specific interests --, and often the same basic personnel. The fourth vision features Michael as the prince of Israel who contends with the princes of Persia and Greece. The victorious one like a son of man seems to be doing exactly the same thing as Michael, which should indicate that they are the same.

So would you say that the other creatures also represent both the nation (Greece or what have you) and the angelic prince who contends on its behalf? If so, that would seem to answer my main objection (an aesthetic one), which was the apparent asymmetry between the son of man being overloaded, as it were, while the other creatures were just plain symbols.

Yes, this is how I looked at it. Assuming that the one like a panther represents Persia, it is the prince of Persia in 10:20.

spin

arnoldo · 01-28-2008, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by makerowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

I agree with you that Yeshua didn't fulfill all of the prophecies 2000 years ago. But I disagree with the "Da Vinci code" rubbish that Yeshua faked his death and had kids, etc,etc. I would respect you more if you just stated that it's all fiction and there never was a person who claimed to be the "Son of God" two thousand years ago.

Are you going to answer spin's posts about Daniel 11?

Quote:

DANIEL 11:2 "And now I will tell you the truth: Behold, three more kings will arise in Persia, and the fourth shall be far richer than them all; by his strength, through his riches, he shall stir up all against the realm of Greece." (NKJV)

Cyrus, king of Persia (c. 535 BCE).
(1) his son, Cambyses II (530-522 BCE);
(2) Gaumata the Magian
(3) the Persian Darius I (the Great – 522-486 BCE).
(4) Xerxes (486-465 BCE).

arnoldo · 01-28-2008, 05:18 PM

Quote:

DANIEL 11:3 "Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will." (NKJV)

5. Alexander the Great (356-323 BC)

arnoldo · 01-28-2008, 05:24 PM

Quote:

DANIEL 11:4 "And when he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken up and divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not among his posterity nor according to his dominion with which he ruled; for his kingdom shall be uprooted, even for others besides these." (NKJV)

5a. Cassander
5b. Lysimachus
5c. Seleucus I Nicator
5d. Ptolemy I Soter

Johnny Skeptic · 01-28-2008, 05:52 PM

Message to arnoldo: One of your problems is that you have not come up with any reasonable motive why God predicts the future. We can discuss this issue in a thread at http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=235305 at the MF&P Forum, in particular my post #89 that discusses prophecy.

makerowner · 01-28-2008, 05:58 PM

You don't have to repeat everything arnoldo, just say if you agree with spin's explanation of ch. 11. If there's any part you don't agree with, please explain why.

spin · 01-28-2008, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

DANIEL 11:4 "And when he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken up and divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not among his posterity nor according to his dominion with which he ruled; for his kingdom shall be uprooted, even for others besides these." (NKJV)

5a. Cassander
5b. Lysimachus
5c. Seleucus I Nicator
5d. Ptolemy I Soter

Well, that's some progress, arnoldo. It's good to see that much. Slow is better than no progress, so I won't try to rush you. I have given some Wiki links to aid you in finding other sources to check the data. You're at the stage of dealing with the king of the north and the king of the south, which occupies most of the chapter. Keep it up.

spin

Sheshonq · 01-28-2008, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

DANIEL 11:3 "Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will." (NKJV)

5. Alexander the Great (356-323 BC)

That fits a lot of kings. In fact, it's kinda the definition of a king.

When are you going to connect this back and prove it's the prophecy, as well as address spin's analysis?

You realize that we're watching you wiggle, right?

spin · 01-29-2008, 11:30 AM

Just bumping this thread. I don't want it to become a case of out of sight, out of mind. That would be too convenient. That would allow random comments about various parts of Daniel to continue, without any standard for evaluating the comments. Dan 11 provides enough clear evidence to be able to date its contents, including who the last king of the north is, the one who stops the temple's daily sacrifice, an event found in three of the four visions. This alignment allows us to basically understand all the visions.

So, we await arnoldo's, and anyone else's, progress on finding a better historical context for Dan 11 or accepting the one I've outlined and all it entails.

spin

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-28-2008, 05:52 PM	#276
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	Message to arnoldo: One of your problems is that you have not come up with any reasonable motive why God predicts the future. We can discuss this issue in a thread at http://iidb.infidels.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=235305 at the MF&P Forum, in particular my post #89 that discusses prophecy.

01-28-2008, 05:58 PM	#277
makerowner Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,962	You don't have to repeat everything arnoldo, just say if you agree with spin's explanation of ch. 11. If there's any part you don't agree with, please explain why.

01-29-2008, 11:30 AM	#280
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Just bumping this thread. I don't want it to become a case of out of sight, out of mind. That would be too convenient. That would allow random comments about various parts of Daniel to continue, without any standard for evaluating the comments. Dan 11 provides enough clear evidence to be able to date its contents, including who the last king of the north is, the one who stops the temple's daily sacrifice, an event found in three of the four visions. This alignment allows us to basically understand all the visions. So, we await arnoldo's, and anyone else's, progress on finding a better historical context for Dan 11 or accepting the one I've outlined and all it entails. spin

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.