That doesnt make much sense, how can the author not learn that no 7th syrian war had taken place yet learn the chronologically later event of the rebellion in persia yet somehow when he sits down and write he adds the syrian war that never happened as BEFORE the rebellion that is already going on in persia?
This chapter has nothing to do with Antiochus Iv. These verses are about events in the far future, known as the End Times. This Video is working from a very poor assumption that Daniel is not prophetic but only Historical. If you go with that line of thinking, you will have absurd results.
@@timnickerson5389 I also believe that this has nothing to do with Antiochus, but I am willing to listen to what the skeptics have to say about it, I either can believe the divine witness of Christ the lord when he said this was written by daniel the prophet (Mt 24:15) or those so called scholars who dont even believe in the possiblity of prophecies yet somehow claim to be Christians.
Question: who is it that’s speaking in all of Daniel 11 and the first Part of Daniel 12? Answer: by Daniel’s own account an Angelic being, who is giving him this narrative about future events. So your ongoing narrative about Daniel’s historical inaccuracies should instead be the Angelic being’s inaccuracies. Daniel himself said clearly,that he was confused by the information that is being given him. So in your videos have the decency to be honest with your audience when you’re making claims about biblical inaccuracies
@@alexyoung5472you can’t agree me and say what you have said about Daniel is your explanation of Daniel 11:40-45. You suggest, without any historical evidence, that Daniel has seen end time scenarios described by other prophets (Ezekiel & Isaiah) and has borrowed their end time narratives. That is a blatant mischaracterization of what is described in Daniel. He claims no understanding of what this Angelic being has told him so he has no reason to plagiarize the writings of another prophet.So you either believe that Daniel lied about the source of his revelation or your trying to cast doubt on the authenticity of scripture
@@jimlee6528 my original position on Daniel 11:40-45 was Roman era. I did post a recapitulation comment recently based on another commentator but then later I reverted back to the Roman era based on that Daniel 12 is a prophecy that can only occur during the early AD Roman era ending in 70 AD. It was late and I thus retract the recapitulation comment. I never said that Daniel used Isaiah or Ezekiel. My position is that Daniel was not a liar for he faithfully recorded what he was told. I disagree with SoC in that Daniel 11 was written in C2nd BC as this would mean chapters 10 and 12 was also. JimLee rather than be aggressive in your words why not simply frame your response to me as a question of clarification? e.g. "Hi Alex, Im curious how you can agree with me now when previously you said.."
@ Ok, your response puzzles me. Perhaps you should go back and listen to your rationale about what Daniel was thinking when he, according to you, pinned his narrative about the end times. You clearly, suggest that Daniel’s familiarity with the end time writings of Isaiah & Ezekiel, led him to come up with his view of the end times.The very suggestion that he(Daniel) would describe the revelation he received in the entire chapter 11 as coming from an angelic being and would then come up with an end time scenario pinned by other prophets, can’t be viewed as anything other than a lie. My issue, is you present,as if you have a mountain of evidence to prove your narratives and nothing could be further from the truth. I take serious the word of God, so I apologize for my aggression but you disparage the character of one of the most revered individuals in the Bible.
These verses are about the end times. Dan 11:40. You are in the wrong time in history.
That doesnt make much sense, how can the author not learn that no 7th syrian war had taken place yet learn the chronologically later event of the rebellion in persia yet somehow when he sits down and write he adds the syrian war that never happened as BEFORE the rebellion that is already going on in persia?
This chapter has nothing to do with Antiochus Iv. These verses are about events in the far future, known as the End Times. This Video is working from a very poor assumption that Daniel is not prophetic but only Historical. If you go with that line of thinking, you will have absurd results.
@@timnickerson5389 I also believe that this has nothing to do with Antiochus, but I am willing to listen to what the skeptics have to say about it, I either can believe the divine witness of Christ the lord when he said this was written by daniel the prophet (Mt 24:15) or those so called scholars who dont even believe in the possiblity of prophecies yet somehow claim to be Christians.
Kurimeo ahua
The gospel of pisi
1-6
Utube
Please do a video on the Ancient Near Eastern context of the "Valley of Travelers" that Gog's army will be swallowed up to
Question: who is it that’s speaking in all of Daniel 11 and the first
Part of Daniel 12? Answer: by Daniel’s own account an Angelic being, who is giving him this narrative about future events. So your ongoing narrative about Daniel’s historical inaccuracies should instead be the Angelic being’s inaccuracies. Daniel himself said clearly,that he was confused by the information that is being given him. So in your videos have the decency to be honest with your audience when you’re making claims about biblical inaccuracies
I agree as spoken/shown to him in Cyrus II Y3 (534 BC) and written down shortly thereafter.
@@alexyoung5472you can’t agree me and say what you have said about Daniel is your explanation of Daniel 11:40-45. You suggest, without any historical evidence, that Daniel has seen end time scenarios described by other prophets (Ezekiel & Isaiah) and has borrowed their end time narratives. That is a blatant mischaracterization of what is described in Daniel. He claims no understanding of what this Angelic being has told him so he has no reason to plagiarize the writings of another prophet.So you either believe that Daniel lied about the source of his revelation or your trying to cast doubt on the authenticity of scripture
@@jimlee6528 my original position on Daniel 11:40-45 was Roman era. I did post a recapitulation comment recently based on another commentator but then later I reverted back to the Roman era based on that Daniel 12 is a prophecy that can only occur during the early AD Roman era ending in 70 AD. It was late and I thus retract the recapitulation comment. I never said that Daniel used Isaiah or Ezekiel. My position is that Daniel was not a liar for he faithfully recorded what he was told. I disagree with SoC in that Daniel 11 was written in C2nd BC as this would mean chapters 10 and 12 was also. JimLee rather than be aggressive in your words why not simply frame your response to me as a question of clarification? e.g. "Hi Alex, Im curious how you can agree with me now when previously you said.."
@ Ok, your response puzzles me. Perhaps you should go back and listen to your rationale about what Daniel was thinking when he, according to you, pinned his narrative about the end times. You clearly, suggest that Daniel’s familiarity with the end time writings of Isaiah & Ezekiel, led him to come up with his view of the end times.The very suggestion that he(Daniel) would describe the revelation he received in the entire chapter 11 as coming from an angelic being and would then come up with an end time scenario pinned by other prophets, can’t be viewed as anything other than a lie. My issue, is you present,as if you have a mountain of evidence to prove your narratives and nothing could be further from the truth. I take serious the word of God, so I apologize for my aggression but you disparage the character of one of the most revered individuals in the Bible.
Dear me, a Bible-basher...