-Jay-

Folks -

This thread needs to cool off a bit. Since there aren't any of the normal BC&H mods on-line at the moment, I'm going to lock the thread and let them sort it out when they get here.

Sorry for any inconvenience.

regards,

NinJay
Mod @ Large

sugarhitman

In order to make Greece the 4th kingdom and Media the second, and Persia the third, critics are trying to seperate the Persions from the Medians, but in fact in relevance to his four kingdom vision, Daniel does not seperate the Medes from the Persians.


On the last day of Babylon's rule Daniel told the king that: "Your kingdom is DIVIDED and given to the Medes AND Persians." Babylon was divided between the Medes and Persians. A single monarchy cannot divide something between itself what is the point in that?


In ch. 8 Daniel sees a battle between a goat and a ram. Gabriel shows that these two animals represent two warring kingdoms. "The ram which you saw having two horns are the KINGS of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king." Here we see that the kings of Media and Persia are represented as two horns on ONE ANIMAL....the same kingdom.


In ch 6 the Medes and Persians have the same laws. " Now O king establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the LAW OF THE MEDES AND PERSIANS."


In the Book of Ezra we find "And there was found at Achmetha, in the palace that is in the PROVINCE OF THE MEDES a roll, and there was a record written." Ezra 6

The Medes and Persians divided up their provinces between themselves.


In chapter 8 of Daniel one of the horns of the ram (Medo-Persia) was "raised up higher than the other" which "the higher came up last" (Persia rosed up after Media becoming more powerful after Cyrus defeated his grandfather king of Media) shows that one of the powers was stronger than the other....which would be Persia. Now compare this to the second beast of Daniel 7:

"And behold another beast, a second, like a bear, and it RAISED UP ITSELF ON ONE SIDE...." This is Medo-Persia which the Persian side raised itself up uniting the Median and Persian kingdoms. This also coresponds to the silver of the image in ch. 2. Just as silver is inferior to gold, so too is the bear to the king of beasts...the lion.


Now take a look at this. In ch 8 the goat or Greece is seen dividing into four kingdoms. Now compare this to the THIRD beast of Daniel 7:

After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it FOUR wings of a fowl; and the beast had also FOUR HEADS and dominion was given to it." This is clearly Greece which became the four headed kingdom after the split between Alex's generals....Greece, Thrace, Egypt and Syria.


Medo-Persia is well represented as the silver chest and TWO arms of the image. Both the medians and persians conquered Babylon and divided that kingdom amongst themselves. So Medo-Persia is the second empire. Greece is clearly the third. Rome is the fourth.

Daniel foretold that immediatly following the death of the Messiah the "PEOPLE of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the Temple." Those people were the Romans. The Messiah had no relationship with the preceeding kingdoms only with the Romans. Rome became the greatest enemy to both Israel and Christianity....and those powers (European powers) will do likewise when their Global government is realized.



The prediction of the Roman Empire and it's divided powers proves the critics wrong, that this book was written after the prophecies in 200 something B.C. Because the rise of Rome and its division occured much later.....which shows that Daniel was for real. (And Daniel also predicted the coming of the Messiah, and His death and His ultimate victory over those who will oppose Him, His people and Israel). <wave>

Toto

You have been asked to stop overusing that waving smilie. Did you forget?

Sheshonq

How many of these threads will he be permitted to open and re-open? While leaving other threads unanswered?

sugarhitman

You want this closed because you have no answer. Anyway seeing that you dont like to show your sources, and act childishly, I will regard you as I do Johnny Skeptic...you will hence forth be ignored.

Sheshonq

No, I want you held accountable and forced to respond and stop ducking.

Your Encarta source doesn't even say what you claimed it does about the HRE anyhow - just another example of fundies not knowing what they are talking about.

Toto

I have cleared out some mess from the main thread, and this thread will be merged into it. Only one of the prophecy threads will be active at one time.

Toto

This will be reopened, since you can't stop talking about it.

Please review the rules. No personal insults.

Please avoid wasting time and bandwidth trying to force the burden of proof on someone else.

sugarhitman

Um so critics dont have to post sources to disprove what I said? He who claims that what I say isnt true and his version is....what source do you have that says otherwise? Both critics and "fundies" should post sources to back their views dont you think....moderater?

Sheshonq

No.
Critics don't have to prove your argument wrong.
You have to prove your argument *right*.

Burden of proof is not on the audience. Burden of proof is on the claimant. Stop running and start proving -- if you can, that is. Your Encarta citation failed to support you; got anything else?
:rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling: