The question I asked was: Neb' s dream 603b.c.e. (Dan 2:1) >>>> present day 2024 603+2024=2,627 Who is the fierce looking king that comes to power but not by his own power? When does he get this said power? When is it and how is it that he will be broken but without human hand? [23 “And in the final part of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to a completion, a fierce-looking king who understands ambiguous sayings will stand up. 24 His power will become great, but not through his own power. He will bring ruin in an extraordinary way, and he will be successful and act effectively. He will bring mighty ones to ruin, also the people made up of the holy ones. 25 And by his cunning he will use deception to succeed; and in his heart he will exalt himself; and during a time of security he will bring many to ruin. He will even stand up against the Prince of princes, but he will be broken without human hand.]
I don't think either perspective is something that can be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt yet. You are saying so, just as much as Alvy is. Proof will have to come when the events play out in time. I believe the beast has existed since Egypt and that we are currently being ruled by the last head, the 7th. I can't prove that because there can be many interpretations besides that one, but to me it makes sense. Satan has used the beast as his physical authority over mankind for thousands of years. The dragon gives the beast its power and throne and authority, and the explanation given to John helps us understand how the devil has done this throughout the Empires that have existed within the scriptures. I feel like the angel in Revelation, who gives John the details of the beast, first gives him the immediate information regarding what happens in the 'Lords Day' in that the beast he saw goes into an abyss, but is getting ready to come out. That is explanation one. The angel then changes context from focusing on the 'lords day' to focusing on the history of the beast, this is explanation two. In this context of explaining the seven heads(verses 9-11), he is not discussing the beast as a whole like he did in the first, but rather he is discussing the seven individual heads. He is not discussing them in future tense, but rather as the beast currently exists. Because John exists during the 6th head in real life, the angel explains it to him from that timeframe. To me that makes perfect sense, is clear, and easy to understand. There have been many different empires like you said, but they did not exist in the text of scriptures. The seven headed beast is composed of Empires that exist within the bible. The only head that didn't exist at the time of the bible being written was the 7th. However, the 7th is easy to establish because it is the one that will collapse just prior to all hell breaking loose here on earth. Because the world is dominated by the Dollar which is soon coming to an end, we can easily surmise that the 7th head is the United States that receives the death stroke. I personally don't feel that the Anglo is part of that anymore, but I could be wrong.
I don't understand your question, sorry. To me, prophecies in Daniel and Revelation, although they share subject matter regarding the who, what, and when of the end times, they are still separate prophecies to be understood in their own unique way. For example the fourth terrible beast of Daniel, although it talks about beasts and horns and is concerned with who is ruling over mankind during its symbolic time on earth, is a separate prophecy than the beast with horns in Revelation. I feel like even though the two beasts may share certain elements, they must be looked at from different perspectives. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think prophecies were intended to be looked at from the same perspective as another prophecy even though they may share the same subject matter. Each one is specific to bring out certain information regarding events that are yet to occur. Your question highlights what I mean. Obviously when the beast goes into the abyss, all that it represents goes with it, including the horns. There is no longer a ruling world empire because it doesn't exist. When it comes out of the abyss and now exists as the eighth king, the horns come with it.
lol... And I answered... No... As soon as he is revealed at the apostasy, we'll know. You know, that whole 2Th 2 thing... When he's revealed, we'll know. The stone that strikes the image at its feet. Joshua
Okay so you tell me, in what year was Neb's 2nd year as king (Dan 2:1) and how many years has it been since that year until 2024c.e.? Okay, so you have the fierce looking king coming to his end when Jesus comes-Armageddon. Who is being referred to when it says, 'in the final part of their kingdom'? [23 “And in the final part of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to a completion, a fierce-looking king who understands ambiguous sayings will stand up. 24 His power will become great, but not through his own power. He will bring ruin in an extraordinary way, and he will be successful and act effectively. He will bring mighty ones to ruin, also the people made up of the holy ones. 25 And by his cunning he will use deception to succeed; and in his heart he will exalt himself; and during a time of security he will bring many to ruin. He will even stand up against the Prince of princes, but he will be broken without human hand.]
Shouldn't the speaker define their meaning? The natural reading must be the correct one unless you can prove the speaker does not mean what he says. The speaker says the 6th is, and the wild beast is not. If "is" isn't the same time period for both entities, one must prove that. It's not on the natural reading to prove anything. According to the angel, the wild beast "is not" at the same time the 6th "is." Again, if you say these two "is" (present tense) are not both present tense, that has to be proved. My reading does not need to be proved; it's the obvious natural reading. Weren't there other kingdoms before and after Egypt? The problem with that view is, there is no proof the angel changes any time period. If one is to read differen't time periods into the angels words, one is applying their own interetation. If one reads the words as they are, ever entitie in the text is current at the moment of the abyssing. It all takes place at once. Five nations go down at that moment, and the 6th remains. What makes you think the angel isn't talking about the heads as they currently exist in the time of the end? Rev 17 occurs in a stream of the end times. What if the angel means, "At this time, in the end, the beast will go down, the 6th remains, and the five fall," all at the same time. After all, that is what he says. Is it not easier to take the angel's words as said? The 6th is, and the beast is not. That means the beast has to go down while the 6th is alive. If you are to say this is not the case you have to explain away all of the paradoxes I have been throwing at Alvy that he will not answer. Why not? There were other nations before and after Egypt not included in the statue that are also mentioned in the Bible. For that matter, the US, Britain, and every other nation today are not mentioned in the Bible. Babylon exists in Revelation after we know it was destroyed. How come that head isn't seen as having a head with a deathstroke healed? Babylon was destroyed, but alive in the end times. Joshua
What does it matter? The middle of Nebbi's reign was 590 BCE, and 2520 years from that is 1929 CE and the Lateran Treaty and rebirth of the Holy See. There are 2520 years from the Tower of Babel to 325 CE and the Niciean Creed and the birth of the Holy See. So what? I didn't say that. You quoted Dan 4. The stone of God's kingdom destroys the statue, not the fierce beast. The fierce beast goes down when the wild beast goes into the abyss. The fierce beast is the KOTS that loses to the KOTN. That's well before the stone crushes the image. The fierce beast going down is not the stone hitting the statue. The other beasts survive the beast going down but not the stone hitting the statue. The beasts alive at that time, at the time of the events being spoken of. You know, the beasts that hand over their powers because they are all alive in the end. Joshua
Why do you spend such time giving dates and years that I did not ask for, instead just tell me the year/time I asked about. What year was Neb's 2nd year as king? How many years from that year to 2024? I cited Dan 8: [23 “And in the final part of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to a completion, a fierce-looking king who understands ambiguous sayings will stand up. 24 His power will become great, but not through his own power. He will bring ruin in an extraordinary way, and he will be successful and act effectively. He will bring mighty ones to ruin, also the people made up of the holy ones. 25 And by his cunning he will use deception to succeed; and in his heart he will exalt himself; and during a time of security he will bring many to ruin. He will even stand up against the Prince of princes, but he will be broken without human hand.] And asked: And your reply was: I will ask again, how is this king broken without human hand? And I will add, when does he stand up against the Prince of princes?
I give up, you tell me. You are talking about the wild beast 8th king. That is the statue the stone destroys. Again, your point?
I did tell you and asked if you agreed and you said no, so I said OKAY then you tell me the years. I said that 603b.c.e. was Neb's 2nd year as king, so that would be 2,627 years before 2024c.e. Do you agree with that? I am talking about the 'fierce-looking king' that is said stand up in the 'final part of their kingdom'. You said: So, which is it, is the fierce king the KOTS and is broken when he goes into the abyss as you believe? Or is the fierce king the 8th king and is broken when Jesus comes/stone crushes the image/beast thrown into fiery lake? [23 “And in the final part of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to a completion, a fierce-looking king who understands ambiguous sayings will stand up. 24 His power will become great, but not through his own power. He will bring ruin in an extraordinary way, and he will be successful and act effectively. He will bring mighty ones to ruin, also the people made up of the holy ones. 25 And by his cunning he will use deception to succeed; and in his heart he will exalt himself; and during a time of security he will bring many to ruin. He will even stand up against the Prince of princes, but he will be broken without human hand.] [34 You looked on until a stone was cut out, not by hands, and it struck the image on its feet of iron and of clay and crushed them. 35 At that time the iron, the clay, the copper, the silver, and the gold were, all together, crushed and became like the chaff from the summer threshing floor, and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them could be found. But the stone that struck the image became a large mountain, and it filled the whole earth.] [20 And the wild beast was caught, and along with it the false prophet that performed in front of it the signs with which he misled those who received the mark of the wild beast and those who worship its image. While still alive, they both were hurled into the fiery lake that burns with sulfur.]
We're using words that identify entities differently depending on the translation used. We are getting our wires crossed about who we're talking about because we're not identifying the entity by Scripture. In the original Hebrew, the fourth beast of Dan 7 is called the "dechal emthan" (dreadful, terrible) beast. That's the beast I thought you were talking about with the word "fierce," (as some translations use). But instead, you're talking about the entity in Dan 8.. That king in Dan 8 is called, "az" (mighty, strong, fierce) king. The "fierce" beast as you call it that stands up in Dan 8 is the beast in Rev 13 and the statue of Dan 2. Dan 8 discusses the time period in which it acts before and after the abyssing. Everything below is the beast acting before the abyss. "Out of one of them came a little horn, which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the glorious land. It grew great, even to the host of heaven. And some of the host and some of the stars it threw down to the ground and trampled on them. It became great, even as great as the Prince of the host. And the regular burnt offering was taken away from him, and the place of his sanctuary was overthrown. And a host will be given over to it together with the regular burnt offering because of transgression, and it will throw truth to the ground, and it will act and prosper." Dan 8:9-12 Then we pick it up again below, still in its form of Rev 13, (before abyssing). "And at the latter end of their kingdom, when the transgressors have reached their limit, a king of bold face, one who understands riddles, shall arise. His power shall be great—but not by his own power; and he shall cause fearful destruction and shall succeed in what he does, and destroy mighty men and the people who are the saints. By his cunning he shall make deceit prosper under his hand, and in his own mind he shall become great." Dan 8:23-25 Then, it discusses how it comes against the KOTS and then, after abyssing, rises up against the Lord. Then, it is broken by the stone of God's kingdom. "Without warning he shall destroy many. And he shall even rise up against the Prince of princes, and he shall be broken—but by no human hand." Dan 8:26 The little horn is the statue made up of all of the entities and beasts of Dan 2 and 7. The battle (besides the Greco-Persian War) was WW2 between the Axis and Allies. The Allies did "not touch the ground" as they flew in and bombed Germany, etc. The horn of the League is broken, and the US, Britain, Russia, and China rise. Out of one of them (the US), the little horn of the UN arises. The UN is the beast now with the Holy See as the deathstroke that was healed riding it (the woman). It's in this form it will come against the constant feature. It is now ready to set up the image of the beast. We are looking for the 666 next, not WW3. Joshua
What are you talking about, it is me that always supplies Scriptures when I say/ask something. I did so in #141 when I asked you about the fierce king. Anyway, what are you saying in all your talk while still talking about 666 and WW3 when I did not ask about that. Here: [23 “And in the final part of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to a completion, a fierce-looking king who understands ambiguous sayings will stand up. 24 His power will become great, but not through his own power. He will bring ruin in an extraordinary way, and he will be successful and act effectively. He will bring mighty ones to ruin, also the people made up of the holy ones. 25 And by his cunning he will use deception to succeed; and in his heart he will exalt himself; and during a time of security he will bring many to ruin. He will even stand up against the Prince of princes, but he will be broken without human hand.] Are you saying red is before abyss and blue after it comes out? And when you refer to abyssing, you mean WW3? Who is the fierce king when he stands up in red? Who is he when he stands up against Jesus in blue? And how about this:
Alvy, you do not speak for other people or direct them. People on this forum will answer however they like. If I want to answer by quoting Little Miss Riding Hood, that's my prerogative. No one is a mind reader. Why don't you get to your point instead of demanding others to answer your obscure questions exactly how you expect them to? I answered in the way I wished to answer your question. If you want to make your point already, then do so. Do you even have one? [23 “And in the final part of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to a completion, a fierce-looking king who understands ambiguous sayings will stand up. 24 His power will become great, but not through his own power. He will bring ruin in an extraordinary way, and he will be successful and act effectively. He will bring mighty ones to ruin, also the people made up of the holy ones. 25 And by his cunning he will use deception to succeed; and in his heart he will exalt himself; and during a time of security he will bring many to ruin.He will even stand up against the Prince of princes, but he will be broken without human hand.] Yes The UN. I clearly said that in my in-depth answer. The 8th king.
So, you are saying that when I asked this question, This is the way you wished to answer: You didn't wish to just say the year that was Neb's 2nd as king, which you still refuse to answer... And you didn't wish to say the years from Neb's 2nd kingship year to 2024, which you still refuse to state... Instead, you wished to give 3 years that have nothing to do with his 2nd kingship year... And wished to give a length of years 2 times... 590 BCE 1929 CE 325 CE 2520 years 2520 years And then when I give the info to what I am asking you and asked you if you agree, you won't even say if you do or not... 603b.c.e Neb's 2nd year>>>>>>>2,627 years to>>>>2024c.e.
Good; this provides another angle to the same story. Here we have the story start with Babylon, leaving the first two heads of the beast - Assyria and Egypt - out as irrelevant to it, and for us, apparently; hence, for all intents and purposes it might have been a 5 headed beast instead of a 7 headed beast that was shown to John for our benefit; just noticing - not blaming you for this state of affairs. Another complicating factor we now have to contend with is, that Babylon, the head of the image, but third head of the beast that John sees, also happens to be - with slight modification of nomenclature - the woman, that - according to the perceived interpretation of Re 13 and 17 - rides the 7 headed beast, meaning, she rides two horns - Assyria and Egypt - that preceded her existence, and then starts riding herself - Babylon the Great on top of the beast that has Babylon the world power as third head, no less; such are the implications of the perceived - as in 'common' - interpretation of this narrative, which ought to give rise to pause. So Jehovah gave Babylon the kingdom, might, strength and glory - and by implication also to the powers that followed it, as integral constituents of the statue, one would assume. But the 7 headed beast is said to be given its power, throne, and great authority by Satan, not Jehovah! So there is that. Perhaps these visions are meant the same way Christ's parables of the kingdom are each conveying only a single salient aspect for us to note, which is woven into a picture with several incidentals that are merely acting as props, but are not to be viewed as other than such, nor to have any function outside their individual story in comparison with the props of other stories about the kingdom of the heavens, as people are inclined to try and interpret such incidentals. Again, this is in contrast to the seven headed beast coming out of the abyss, where all the earth will be united in worshiping Satan and his kingdom beast - there will be no division, but global, united Devil worship here on earth - no brittleness or prevarication. Scripture is not making it easy for us. It seems like prophetic visions are only a shadow of the reality we are about to experience, but they certainly scared the living daylights out of Daniel and John - thanks a lot for sharing your nightmares with us, we shall reluctantly live them out for you, and tell you about it afterwards, lol. Yes, but remember, 'Jehovah's spirit direct organization' tells us that Satan can never organize the nations to come together and solve mankind's problems - something that only God's kingdom, which for 110 years, and counting, has been invisibly ruling the world behind the scenes, can do. Soon, now, the world will be ushered into the incoming 1914 kingdom, which JWs in their worldwide preaching work have been advertising since their founding, and that 'all the earth will follow with admiration,' except me, that snarky apostate, lol. Re 13:3 Harry
That is exactly correct, Alvy. The rules of communication are as such: You can ask a question, but that doesn't mean I have to answer. And you do not have the right to expect one from anyone other than your own child. I can respond or not. I can even respond with something that has nothing to do with what you're talking about. That's called FREE WILL. I can answer however I like, and you can like it or not; I don't care. And neither should you... No one can tell someone else what to say, what they are saying, or how to speak. If you don't like their answer, that's your problem. You do not have the right to interpret others' words, tell them how or what they should say, or define their words for them. You do the same thing with the Bible; you choose for yourself what others should or shouldn't be saying. The only thing you can do is speak for yourself. Why are you wasting time telling other people how to respond? All you can do is you. You don't have to like what anyone else says, nor do you have to care. No one can make you feel anything, you chose to. The greatest fallacy in human history is saying someone else made you feel the way you do; that's impossible. I don't think you had your glasses on when I said there are four psychology doctorates in my family. I'm pretty versed in how communication is supposed to work. I understood your question, and responded the way I wanted too. I don't have to answer at all or in any way you wish me to. The way I answered was the way I wanted to. You don't have to like it, but all you can do is you. If I ask my wife to answer a question, it's still up to her if she wants to answer or not. That's how our household works. Everyone has their own voice. No one gets to speak for the other, or tell someone else what they should or shouldn't say. No one assumes what the other person is saying, or twists their words. Only the speaker gets to define their meaning. That has nothing to do with being correct or not. But everyone in our household has free will to say whatever they want, whenever they want. I speak for me, and you speak for you. ---- I didn't see the importance of your question, nor did I think it mattered how many years there were to 2024. I answered with Babel to the Nicene Creed and Nebbi to the Lateran Treaty because I wanted to. If I wanted to use a calculator and answer, I could have, but guess what? I didn't care.... And I wasn't going to play your game, so I said, "Make your point." To be blunt, your question was beneath me... Because I'm not going to play your stupid game; I told you if you had a point to make, make it. You can't make anyone respond to you. I'll answer or not answer if I feel like it or not...lol I'll answer by singing Frank Sinatra songs if I wish...lol Whether my answers are on the subject or not (in your opinion) is my prerogative. And I gave you the option to get to the point. You clearly don't know how communication truly works. If you listen, maybe you can have a little better relationship with those around you. Joshua
Yea, I was completely patient while you ignored my question. (Which you still haven't answered) And my point was to ask what made you think you could continue asking questions without answering mine. Did I complain about the way you answered? You can answer or not, I don't care...lol
None of what you just said there applies. When you said this in post #47: I told you in #49 that I already explain it here: post #42 https://e-jw.org/index.php?threads/wild-beasts.4606/page-3#post-31229 Anyway, in your not answering about Neb's 2nd year as king, is an answer in itself. I am glad at this point that you won't answer.